Expect A Bit Of An Anti-American Election Campaign

Posted on Thursday, December 01 at 12:18 by jensonj
"All the indications are that Prime Minister [Paul Martin] will welcome the opportunity to take advantage of Canada's antipathy toward the Bush administration. The fact that he's been taking shots already in public places over softwood lumber indicates that we might be in for a little bit of an anti-American election," says Kim Nossal, head of political studies at Queen's University in Kingston, Ont. "And there is no Conservative who is going to defend the policies of the Bush administration. So Conservative leader Stephen Harper is going to have to fit negatively with Bush, but not with the United States necessarily." This fall, Mr. Martin began using strong rhetoric to warn that U.S. resistance to repaying illegal duties on softwood lumber from Canada undermines free trade. Foreign policy experts say the Liberals will reinforce the message on the campaign trail, hoping to appeal to the political left by underlining the party's key policy differences with U.S. President George W. Bush. Canada's refusal to join the U.S.-led war in Iraq in 2003 and Mr. Martin's recent decision to stay out of the American ballistic missile defence plan are considered leverage points for the Liberals. "It's a George Bush issue," says pollster Michael Marzolini, of Pollara Inc. "The Conservatives don't want to seem too close and too non-critical. And the Liberals tend to go overboard in being critical, trying to squeeze NDP voters by appealing to them." Mr. Marzolini expects the election to be the most "volatile" since free trade dominated the election debate in 1998. "The Liberal campaign looks like it's going to be another negative, demonizing one, and the Conservatives are going to be scandal-mongering." In the last election in 2004, the Conservatives proposed a "made in Canada" foreign policy and vowed to mend fences with the United States, including the appointment of an ambassador in Washington with Cabinet level standing. At the time, Mr. Harper was forced to defend comments he had made a year earlier that suggested he would have backed the U.S. effort to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein -- an unpopular move with the Canadian public. Mr. Harper later claimed that his statement was a call for moral support, not the contribution of military personnel. This time around, analysts say the Conservatives will be highly critical of the Liberals for poorly defending Canadian interests to the south. Meanwhile, the NDP will say they are troubled by Canada's deep integration with the United States, and vow to promote the nation's distinct identity on the world stage. http://www.embassymag.ca/html/index.php?display=story&full_path=/2005/november/30/election/ [Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on December 3, 2005]

Note: http://www.embassymag.c...

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:11 pm
    Thank you for this. It is clear and accurate. As someone who has just been accused of consorting with rapists on another thread (WTF???) just because I voted Liberal last year - BEFORE the Gomery report came out, I agree that this is obviously going to be an acrimonious campaign, full of ugly, sensational, and desperate tactics.

    After Gomery, I switched allegiance to the NDP. While universal public medical care and other social programs are paramount in my decision to vote, ALL of those concerns come second to electing a government that will 1: keep us out of the Bush War 2: get us out of NAFTA and 3: nurture trade relations with nations that will not give us the shaft as occurred with the softwood problem.

    I am surprised at the recent suggestion (I refuse to say promise) by Harper that he would lower the GST (marginally at best). Why not keep the GST and lower INCOME taxes: that way, Canadians will have more money from their incomes to spend but they will still be encouraged by the GST to be thoughtful consumers. Does anyone know if any party has considered this option?

    I just discovered this site this week and love reading the articles. It's so informative for Canadians. Thank you!

  2. Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:10 am
    Does the NDP want to abrogate NAFTA? They beat around the bush, maybe because if they campaigned on getting out of it, they would be branded as leftist extremists, out of touch with today's world, would run the economy to the ground.

  3. Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:46 am
    Regressive taxes, such as GST, take a larger percentage of income from low-income groups than from high-income groups.

    google "regressive tax"

  4. Fri Dec 02, 2005 2:31 am
    Well, I defiantly agree with you on get us out of NAFTA and nurturing trade relations with nations that will not give us the shaft as occurred with the softwood problem.

    Lets also remember that it was the Conservatives that screwed up National Health care, gave us the GST to replace the 13 billion dollar manufacturing tax and NAFTA to remove tariffs on the last 20% of Canada's trade with the U.S.

    The Liberals and Canada's Corporate Elites that have made money off the screw ups of the Conservatives, destroyed Canada's Military by following the U.S. whims and desires and gave the Provincial Primers the right to spend Health care dollars as they see fit because the Provinces could handle the money better then the Federal Government but have yet to saved any money at all nor improve health care for Canadians Provincially or Nationally.


    ---
    Perception is two thirds of what we perceive reality to be.

    Difficult decisions are a privilege of rank.

  5. Fri Dec 02, 2005 2:43 am
    >>I just discovered this site this week and love reading the articles. It's so informative for Canadians. Thank you!<<

    Welcome, you will go through all the human emotions reading the articles and the comments posted here that is a for sure.

    Most post with the sole intent of creating a clean and on-topic intellectual debate but some that like to remain anonymous and post to bash members and / or non-members purposely posting to incite anger.

    Enjoy.



    ---
    Perception is two thirds of what we perceive reality to be.

    Difficult decisions are a privilege of rank.

  6. Fri Dec 02, 2005 2:50 am
    I hadn't considered that thought. Thank you - it is a great point.

  7. Fri Dec 02, 2005 2:56 am
    I have read a number of articles and comments that I totally disagree with but what impresses me is the respectful overall tone here. Let's face it, regionalism is almost inevitable in a country as big as Canada. Look at the make-up of parliament. And yet, we all love our country and would rather put up WITH each other than not - because tolerance is a tie that binds.

    I love this country. Even the person with whom I had the disagreement over "Liberals = rapists" was reasonable and communicative with me and we found common ground. Only in Canada! Vive la difference.

  8. Fri Dec 02, 2005 3:51 am
    >>Harper was forced to defend comments he had made a year earlier that suggested he would have backed the U.S. effort to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein<<

    That in itself is why I would never vote for the man. It's hard to tell if he was just trying to cater to what he was thinking the public wanted to hear or if he realy believes Canada has to suport Bush's rampages. In either case he was wrong. I'm getting tired of politicians using the USA as a referance point in their campaign. We don't need the US as a gauge.

  9. Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:38 pm
    Obviously, the heavy-handed censoring of comments has an effect.

    If you had a more critical mind, you might start to wonder just what has been hidden... not all of it is vicious trollery (some of it is very funny) while pointing out the rabid, knee-jerk anti-americanism inherent in many of the comments of the registered users.

  10. Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:41 pm
    The historical advances made under sectoral agreements like the Auto Pact are clearly more in keeping with the Global context on multilateral trade that comprehensive agreements such as NAFTA.

    In light of trends around the Globe it appears the retrenchment into protectionism is gaining strength and the reality will be better for Nation States which engage in effective management of cross border trade before it exacts further damage.

    There is no sense in letting things slide as some suggest after the Softwood decisions have been so uniformly ignored by the USA. They are clearly going to continue to act in their own interests. Why Should the NDP or Canada not reciprocate in kind?

    The USA would stand to lose more at a time when it needs other countries. Bush's regime has offerred an opportunity to improve things through their stubborn refusal to engage sensibly.

    Get Real like the NDP apparently want to I say!

    TNM London

  11. Fri Dec 02, 2005 5:26 pm
    I think, the first fact that should be established is that opposing the actions of the present US government is not being "anti American".

    The first fact our American friends should establish is how a President appointed by a couple of Supreme Court judges and for the second time, very likely, by computerized voting machines controlled by special interests, can be in an way considered "democratic" ? Also what the actions of that reprehensible crew do to the reputation of the USA around the world? Apart from ruining the economy and the lives of tens of millions in their own country.

    I'm quite happy marking the ballots with an "X", knowing that they can be counted and recounted any number of times, and we'll have some kind of a government the same night.

    Which, I hope, will lead to the resignation of some guy by the name of Harper as the leader of whatever name that party will be using at that time.

    Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC.

  12. Fri Dec 02, 2005 6:43 pm
    Speaking of which, here's who Canada sucks up to hot and heavy as they "nurture trade relations with nations that will not give us the shaft as occurred with the softwood problem."<br />
    <br />
    <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/12/02/chinatorture-051202.html">http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/12/02/chinatorture-051202.html</a><br />
    <br />
    Two peas in a pod...(eh)...

  13. by avatar Jesse
    Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:18 pm
    You are obviously confused about how our moderation system works. All registered members are able to vote on comments, which means that the membership as a whole decides what should be hidden. Yes, some things are hidden that should not be, but you'll note that they are still present and available for the curious or critical-minded. And those same curious people are able to vote deserving comments back up if desired, so nothing is actually censored (except for the occassional post which is illegal under Canada's laws).

    This system is, in my humble opinion, representative of Canada; everyone has the right to free speech, but you have to take responsibility for what you say. Unfettered free speech is no good for anyone, in much the same way that unfettered capitalism (or socialism, or anything) is never a good thing. I believe they call this sort of thing "Checks and balances" in some countries.

    ---
    Your mantra has been your opinions are stifled due to their contrary nature, when they are actually stifled for being without perceivable foundation.

  14. Fri Dec 02, 2005 9:33 pm
    BaaaaAAaad...baaaaa....bbbbaaad the fleeced frozen flock of sheared sheeple bleated...and the bleat goes on (eh)...more on this...<br />
    <br />
    <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/051202/w120240.html">http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/051202/w120240.html</a><br />
    <br />
    Best trading partners ever for the frozen freaks from the Hate White North (eh)...



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news