Edited on Fri Nov-18-05 07:39 PM by V. Kid
..., but your talk about the ideology of Canadians is irrelevent. Do I think most people are extremists? No, of course no it's not even something I was discussing so I don't know what your point is in relating polling history and how the Liberals are nice and fuzzy? Which btw, I disagree with, but won't get into as its not really the point I wished to make. I think people vote for whomever presents themselves as reasonable during the situation at hand, whether or not they actually are reasonable though isn't particularly important.
In any case
what I'm refering to is malaise and political positioning for the next election. People thought Paul Martin was going to be a saviour, he was riding at around 50% in the polls before he took over for Jean Chretien, and he scared the right so much in the country that he forced them to "unite" (1 + 1 = 1.2

), but with the sponsership scandal it simply re-enforced the view of those 60% - 65% who wouldn't vote Liberal into the anti-Liberal camp by being dissapointed by the Liberals and Paul Martin. The Liberals will not get a majority this time, and it will be difficult for them to improve on the 136 seat total, because people are tired with them, but they haven't coalesced to the point of supporting one party capable of defeating them. Because so many people
do vote based on a "lesser of two evils" approach, and don't consider local dynamics, the NDP isn't going to win next time, but I already know this so I don't really know what your point is. Do I think the sponsership scandal will be the main issue that the Bloc, and Conservatives want it to be? No, its boring outside of Quebec.
Do I think Health Care will be a major issue? Yes. Now there will be a lot of naive people, or cynical people, who will say I geuss I have to vote Liberal. But these people are hard to disloge anyways. What the NDP was doing, even though it was difficult and somewhat awkward, was point out that the Liberals are not going to be doing anything to protect it by rejecting a weak offer. The Liberals will say yes we are protecting it, and the NDP is proposing un-workable strategies, but it's not important for the NDP to worry about what the Liberals are going to say in that regard, as obviously the Liberals are trying to gain votes for themselves. What the NDP is trying to do is prevent too many of their current supporters in the 18-22% range from bleeding to the Liberals by pointing out how useless the Liberals are. The NDP needs an easy wedge issue, that seems reasonable, and since the Liberals are the incumbents, time isn't on their side in being able to continiously use their old tricks. So while the Liberals will say "strategically vote", the NDP is trying to counter that, and people will only strategically vote so many times. None of the parties are in it to help each other per say, and I know your not saying this, but I find it corny that so many people are saying that they essentially should be just to keep out the EVIL *shrill scream* Conservatives out of power. Besides, the Conservatives are stupid, they do a good enough job of that themselves -- just take a look at what they do in opposition, that should be easy, and they can't even do that...so they aren't going to win.
BTW, its not so much that I disagree with everything that your saying, and I'm not trying to sound like a dick, I just wanted to make sure I was at least somewhat clear, as I realize my last post was a little garbled with typos and spelling errors (although I'm never a good speller and often don't care about spell checking

).