Friday, October 31

Pathetic

Policy Frog is dead on.

Can anyone give me a reason that the NDP are getting so involved with the flight attendents departure as opposed to say most of the other companies that have made moves out of the province?

Other than the union angle? 

Thursday, October 30

Stephen Fletcher Is At Rideau Hall

As usual, I completely missed a cabinet promotion.  Congrats on his getting the call.  Wonder which portfolio it will be....

Wednesday, October 29

Just Throwing This Out There, But...

When a union membership overwhelmingly votes against the advice of the union leadership, shouldn't that also automatically trigger a vote to see if decertification should take place?

That said, it'll be nice to read the Freep again at The Falafel Place this weekend.  The Globe & Mail just wasn't the same despite being meatier, better written, more thought provoking and more tailored to my reading tastes in topics and commentary....

Wait a minute.

Elmwood Gossip That Won't Go Away

If Scott Smith really is in the process of moving to Winnipeg to contest Elmwood and return to cabinet, I'm never going to hear enough about it from my friend Mike out in Brandon who's been on this like stink before it became the population rumour de jour recently.

"This is not a normal situation."

You're right Curtis.  It's not a normal situation.

Normally when the global community goes to pot, Manitoba doesn't have record low employment, record home prices, low interest rates, record population growth and over ten years of balanced budgets going for it before the trouble hits.

In fact, the last time we faced real trouble - say that early 90's recession - that was exactly the time that governments tightened their belts and really got the books in shape.  And what was the result of that foolishness?  Only the most prosperous economic stability in post-war Manitoban history.

You can't be seriously telling us that deficits can be logically argued for when the country is still only 50-50 to even experience a recession.  (By the way, I still like my chances in our wager better than yours...Wanna double down?)

Are you really telling me that Manitoba - at a time of record spending and record population growth - really needs to spend its way out of,....what's the problem again?  It's not unemployment, because we're at near record lows.  Not home foreclosures, because while the overheated market is slowing down, it's not stopping yet.  So what are we spending ourselves out of again right now?

Oh yeah.  Government spending and federal transfers not growing faster enough to match that record spending growth.  (Completely doubled annually over the NDP's term.  Has Manitoba really seen its government services doubled?)

Seriously Curtis?  The problem here is the government not spending enough?

*****************

PS for Finance Minister Brown: As a fun little exercise, I challenge you to rustle up the estimates book for any portfolio of your choosing.  Any one of them.  Give me one week to go through it and find at least 5% of that portfolio's expenditures where a cut could be made on a one or two year basis to ride out the economy woes we're in right now and avoid deficit financing. 

Here's where it'll really be fun.  I'll even make you the judge of our game.

That's right.  If you feel I didn't find the 5%, I'll buy dinner at a reasonable establishment. (No $20 potatoes at 529 Wellington).  If you feel that I'd found 5% that you'd have a tough time putting a higher priority on than on avoiding a deficit, you're buying my eats.

Sounds pretty easy to me Curtis.  Wanna try?

Tuesday, October 28

Canwest Global Stock

Finished the day at $0.88/share.  I'm going to do a little bit of research, but I'm sorely tempted to throw $500 at them and then wait about five years or so.  Worst case scenario, the company starts selling off assets to ease the debt load, because I cannot imagine a "going out of business" plot.

My hunch is that it is artificially low at the moment by at least a dollar or two.  That's a growth rate I'm willing to gamble on.

Guess it's time to start my online portfolio.

Cabinet Guesswork VII - Someone Else's Thoughts

I swear I though about Ablonczy to Health before I read this link.

Agreed with Akin on his "Probables" and "Probably Left Outs".

Cabinet Guesswork VI

Thought about it over the weekend and realized that one commentor was correct, no way Diane Ablonczy goes to Environment as that post is likely headed to an Ontario MP. 

But what about Health? 

Tony Clement can then shuffle into Environment, while John Baird moves to Public Safety.

(In an unrelated to these move, I'm liking Chuck Strahl to Transportation.)

Deficit Talk

The Hack's Fifth Rule Of Politics:

"Any government could cut up to 10% of its spending overnight and 99.99% of their population would never notice the difference."

If Jim Flaherty and the Tories run a deficit, they deserve to be booted from office in the next election for sheer gutlessness.  Let's suppose that they determine that we're headed to a $5 billion deficit....The federal budget was expected to spend $150 billion this year...You telling me they cannot find the political courage to cut 3.3% of the spending?
 
I'm actually not a raging rightwinger on deficits.  My belief is that a four or five year rolling budget wouldn't be the worst idea from a practical sense, however I just do not trust politicians - yours truly eventually included one day.  The last decade and a half have been marked by a distinct lack of political courage and conviction amongst our leadership class and pols no longer appear to have the restraint to make the right decision in the face of criticism.

This is why deficits are a problem that should not be returned to the mainstream.  While it is great to say, "Spend in the bad times, save in the good," history has shown us that too few pols are willing to remember the second part.

Monday, October 27

While Waiting For The Light To Change At Kenaston And Corydon...

As seen on the back window of a car:

MAKE MONEY FROM HOME
I Show You How I'm Doing It Too
[insert website here referencing "250K plans"]

The car was a 90's Volvo 850.  Nothing special.

Cabinet Guesswork V

Maxime Bernier....In or out?

The way the Julie Coullaird book is flopping and the plurality of votes Bernier received suggests that maybe he could go back into the cabinet in a small role and not too much abuse would be heaped upon the party.  The Prime Minister still doesn't have a great deal of Quebec MPs to work with in the first place, so an argument could be made that any experience will be good experience.

The cons are that he's a flake (I think it's safe to say that this has been properly sussed out), he's only been in the penalty box for a handful of months and that putting him back in will cause the media and punditry and opposition to go into a tizzy and if it's one thing the Tories have shown poor skills at, it's managing the tizzies to prevent them from spiralling into real problems.
 
While I have a wager outstanding that Bernier will be returning to a Stephen Harper cabinet at some point, my hunch is that it won't be on this rotation. 
 
Bernier will be made to wait for a mid-term shuffle as the Prime Minister sends a message that while the public have not read Madam Coullaird's memoir, he has and does not appreciate the comments Bernier made to her about the Prime Minister's style or his weight. 

Because My Readers Are Smarter...(Usually)...Help Decide My Machine

I am an on-the-wagon gamer. My last system was a N64 and I haven't purchased a computer game since Baldur's Gate II in 2001 or 2002ish.

I walked away from gaming, and for the most part, have never looked back.

Until now.

Rock Band is bringing me back. I had been getting teased by its fun potential for months and months and the announcement that AC/DC was coming put it over the top. I'm getting the game and that means buying a system for the first time in years to play it.

My original instinct was to get a Wii, because there are other Wii games that I would play and I'm a Nintendo boy going back to Super Mario Brothers. But alas, I'm told the Rock Band downloadable content is insufficient with the Wii and I'd be choked about missing that from the package, so onto X-Box360 or a Playstation 3.

So which of the two would you get?
I'm told the X-Box is cheaper, but PS3 includes a Blue-Ray player. I need a new DVD player, but I won't have a high-def tv for at least another year or so at the earliest. I wasn't going to buy other games, however Fallout 3 is likely going to drag me back into it. Mayhaps Diablo III next year as well.

But outside of those three, which would be more than enough to keep me busy, I am not going to be buying other games. This is essentially a Rock Band only system.

What should I buy?

To Rick B. & My Provincial Tory Friends...

I still believe he's not so foolish as to go forward with a deficit, however Premier Gary Doer does appear to be softening the ground to either: A) blame the federal government for shorting on transfers, or B) deficit-financing.

My hunch is that there is some major polling in the field to gauge the public support/opposition to deficits and knowing that political memories are short and that the Premier and NDP have skirted several other potential trouble spots, so it is quite possible that that the Premier feels far enough away from 2011 that he can deficit finance and get away with it publicly.

He's probably right.

So Tories, our goal is to make sure that he wears the bone-headed decision - and honestly, any Canadian government planning on deficit financing is being bone-headed as there is still plenty of government expenditures that could be looked at first - and to make sure Manitobans know what we would do differently.

Next month Finance Minister Greg Sellinger is going to deliver an economic update for Manitoba, something never done before as far as I know.  Before that time, the Tories need to come up with a chart of spending programs that they would be willing to cut to avoid deficits.

Be prepared for whatever the government plans on throwing at us.  Deficit of $50 million?  Well, here's where we would find the money.  $200 million?  Ah yes, here, here and here.

I'd do one up to $500 million.  (And if you don't believe that there is $500 million in government financing that is of questionable use or questionable value anyways, well, then you need to ask yourself if you are a member of the right party.)

Because the fact is, should Gary Doer allow Sellinger to run a deficit, the first thing Hugh McFadyen will be asked after he criticizes the move will be, "And what would you do differently?"

For once in the last nine years, can we please be prepared for that question in advance and sound like we know what we're doing?

We all know that the funding can be found if people make the choice to find it.
 
Yours in spirit-crushing, money-loving, people-hating Toryism,
 
The Hack

Friday, October 24

Screw Michael! Send Pam!

Or at least Dwight, who seems to have a Winnipeg-appropriate personality.
 
 

WINNIPEG - The city of Winnipeg is getting ready for its close-up.

The Manitoba capital is being featured on an upcoming episode of the television show "The Office" when Steve Carell's cringe-inducing character visits on a business trip.

Writers for the show - which is set in Scranton, Penn. - said they chose Winnipeg because it struck the right balance "between exotic and obscure."

The show was filmed in Los Angeles but got four shipments of local props from Winnipeg's tourism bureau, including local beer and Old Dutch potato chips.

The US Election Achieves Ludicrious Speed

[link]

Cabinet Guesswork Part IV

Some quick thoughts on existing cabinet ministers...First, those staying put:

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Industry Minister Jim Prentice, House Leader Peter Van Loan, Public Works Minister Christian Paradis, International Cooperation (!!!!) Minister Bev Oda, Defence Minister Peter Mackay, Senate Leader Marjory Lebreton, Labour Minister Jean-Pierre Blackburn (though he'll lose the Quebec Development Fund), Justice Minister Rob Nicholson, probably Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz (oh yeah, you heard me)

Notables likely moving to something new:

Tony Clement, Rona Ambrose, Diane Ablonczy, Gary Lunn, Chuck Strahl, Diane Finley, John Baird, Lawrence Cannon, Josee Verner, James Moore

On the outs:

Gordon O'Conner, Helena Guergis (yes, I'm buying into the media hustle on this one), Greg Thompson, maybe Gerry Ritz (though I still believe the PM will stay the course with him)

The Definition Of Insanity Is Doing The Same Thing Over And Over Again...

If you haven't been able to tell from my writing lately, last week's election results have certainly turned me more hawkish regarding Quebec and its role within federation. 
 
I've been willing to support moves such as fiscal imbalance transfers for a problem I didn't believe existed and the nation resolution to grant a status recognition that was hardly merited.  My belief was that the symbolism would go a long way towards wooing Quebecois over to the federalist party (The Tories) and further punish and drive the Bloc towards smaller caucuses and hopefully, if all had gone well, towards the end of their run.

We've seen how well those big gestures went over.  Run over by the small politics of the 2% arts cuts and tougher youth justice measures.  Went against the "soul of Quebec", they said.

Fine.

It is time to adopt a harder line towards our Quebecois cousins.  I'm not suggesting punitive measures, but I would like to see the federal gov't stop protecting Quebec sacred cows and stop running interference on their behalf.

Asbestos is a great place to start.
 
As we near next month's Conservative convention, I find myself thinking back to the first CPC convention that took place in Montreal in 2005.  By all accounts, it was a tremendous success.  Delegates from each of the former parties - Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservatives - greeted each other as the long lost friends they were.  There was a sense of excitement in the air, as 2004's election showed us that Paul Martin was hardly the juggernaut he was portrayed to be even two years previous. Belinda Stronach was still a Tory and throwing swanky parties complete with glowing cocktails and performing Cochranes.  As in tory-blue martinis and Tom Cochrane playing on stage in an acoustic set that got the whole room singing along.  Just before the Tory Tory Dance Dance Party began.  Complete with Monte Solberg helping lead said dance party.  
 
Good times.

(Quite honestly, it's a bit of a shame that Winnipeg has to follow Montreal.  Bad enough our sleepy burg needs to match one of North America's truly great party cities, but we also have the joy of a rather subdued outting this time with the major policy and constitutional battles and even the "new car smell" of the party behind us.)

That said, there were still a number of skirmishes to go along with the revelry - wouldn't be a convention if there wasn't - and one of the small fires I happened to be present for took place in a policy breakout session when asbestos came up.  If I am remembering correctly, the original draft policy document did not contain any asbestos support provisions and the well-organized Quebec delegation led by Senator Pierre Claude Nolin had placed a resolution into the debate asking the party to endorse asbestos-mining in Quebec.  The reason they were so pro-asbestos?  Don Martin explains:
 
The sad truth is asbestos continues to be a sacred cow to governments because the lone surviving mine with its 700 jobs is located in the one-industry Quebec town of Thetford Mines.

I stumbled into the room during the middle of this debate, as the Quebec delegates pleaded passionately that the resolution was needed to win over support in the province, other delegates argued that asbestos mining had become anachronistic and was no longer an acceptable practice.

The motion was narrowly defeated in the breakout session, thus preventing it from moving on to the plenary session for full convention delegation votes.  This caused hand-wringing amongst the french delegates, some even suggesting that the resolution was a make or break issue for the party and themselves.  (There were many "This is my line!" statements that weekend.  Everyone recall the infamous Peter Mackay/Scott Reid showboating?)

As occurred a few times during the convention, rules were conveniently and diplomatically interpreted and somehow the asbestos motion returned zombie-like from the dead during the plenary and if my groggy-headed memory of that Saturday morning remains correct, it narrowly passed and become official party policy.
Fast-forward to today: It is time for the party to revisit that decision and encourage the government to change the country's asbestos policy.  There is plenty of evidence that Canadian asbestos is responsible for foreign illnesses when it is being used improperly in overseas construction.  In the end, the industry does not produce enough of a net benefit to outweigh the moral costs.

Now here is the biggest problem: Thetford Mines is located in a Tory riding.  Minister Christian Paradis is their MP.  Would shutting down the mine - even over a four or five year period - lose him enough support that the Bloc would suddenly retake the riding?  He has carried an eight-thousand vote plurality in each the 2008 and 2006 elections.  I'd like to know if the numbers have been crunched on this.

Because in the end, a logical person just can no longer support the asbestos industry in good consciousness.  We belong to a party with a cabinet minister himself plagues with asbestos-related disease. 
 
Quebec continues to hold asbestos mining as a symbolic issue and it must be handled carefully, but Quebec has also shown its back to the Tory attempts to reach out, and eventually doing the right thing needs to trump politics. 

Thursday, October 23

Beyonce, The First Paragraph Of The Story Should Be A Warning To You

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – Just like the "Seinfeld" episode where George wanted everyone to call him "T-Bone," Beyonce Knowles would like to be known by a bold new name.

The R&B singer has christened herself "Sasha Fierce" for her new double album, "I Am ... Sasha Fierce," due in U.S. stores on November 18, and has released a lengthy justification for the comical moniker.

"I have someone else that takes over when it's time for me to work and when I'm on stage, this alter ego that I've created that kind of protects me and who I really am," the former Destiny's Child frontwoman said in a statement.

"Sasha Fierce is the fun, more sensual, more aggressive, more outspoken side and more glamorous side that comes out when I'm working and when I'm on the stage."

Yeah, this feels like a Koko to me.

Cabinet Guesswork Part III

I'm expecting Treasury Board President Vic Toews to remain in place as TBP and as Manitoba minister.  People expecting the Prime Minister to throw Vic under a bus have not been paying close enough attention to the PM's MO.  He values competence and Vic brings that in spades.  Some personal decisions may have caused Minister Toews some personal anxiety, but nothing he has done leads to party grief on the national scene, so Vic stays put.

Currently Manitoba has a couple of Parliamentary Secretaries (Fletcher - Health, Bruinooge - Indian Affairs & Northern Development) to go with.  There is much speculation that the Prime Minister will bring the female rookies (Glover, Hoeppner) into the mix with a cabinet spot, however I do not expect there to be much expansion to the size of cabinet (maybe a handful of spots only), so Manitoba is stuck with a major and a minor at best. 

Here's how's I think it's played:  Minister Toews retains his position and his title.  Rod Bruinooge gets elevated to a secretary of state position.  Both lady rookies become Parliamentary Secretaries with the unspoken agreement amongst everyone being that this is Vic's last go-round and that the female who shows the most promise skips ahead of Mr. Bruinooge to become the face of government in Manitoba as Manitoba Minister, even if neither cabinet minister (the lucky woman or Rod) attains a portfolio with the significance of Treasury Board.

Conservative Convention November 13th - 15th

Was informed this morning that the party is going to recognize me as a credentialed blogger.  
 
This gets me into the room, which is a good thing, because I will not be a delegate for Winnipeg South Centre.
 
This fact should be embarrassing for the riding association - not because yours truly isn't going to be a delegate for them, but because the riding is not sending a full slate of twelve delegates to a hometown convention.  For a riding that was considered a prospective pick-up in last week's election, the inability to organize a full slate of delegates prior to the DSM is ridiculous.

Wednesday, October 22

Cabinet Guesswork Part II

With talk about a potential Canada-EU common market agreement coming together, I think it is safe to suggest that International Trade will continue to be a front-line portfolio within the Harper cabinet.

I believe it is time to make a new star within cabinet and my hunch is that the Prime Minister might just trust this person to take it on:
 

She has strong Toronto connections; she has experience with international trade barriers, tariffs and procedures; she is a woman (let's face it, the Harper cabinet has taken knocks for not elevating women to top-end portfolios*); and she has more than enough experience as a manager after her time with the Toronto Port authority.
 
I've read up a bit about Lisa Raitt and believe she has potential to become a tremendous asset for the party.  My hope is that the Prime Minister feels the same way.
 
 
* - I also expect Diane Ablonczy to take over Monte Solberg's Human Resources & Immigration posting if Jason Kenney does not.  If Kenney does, then possibly look for Diane at Environment, moving Minister Baird to another portfolio needing attention from a trusted Harper ally.

Tuesday, October 21

"She's a damnsite smarter than you."

imagined scene from two years ago...

Liz,..er, ahem, Elizabeth May: Hey Hack, I'm thinking about running against Peter Mackay in Central Nova. What do you think about that?

The Hack: You want to lose the Green Party's best chance to get an MP?

Elizabeth May: Of course not, but I just feel the need to run in Nova Scotia and I don't want to run against the Liberal in Cape Breton where I grew up.

The Hack: Why do you care who you beat? The goal for you and your party is to grow, right?

Elizabeth May: That's correct.

The Hack: And the best way to grow is to win a seat and establish your legitimacy and firm up your claims for attention as more than a fringe movement, right?

Elizabeth May: Uh-huh.

The Hack: Because let's face it, right now the party is basically a parking spot for most of the people voting Green. They don't know much about the party outside of the name association with the environmental movement, they are ticked at the other parties and they like cheering for scrappy underdogs like most Canadians always do.

Elizabeth May: Now hold on a minute. I don't think it's fair to say that Canadians don't know much about us...

The Hack: Do they know your positions on NAFTA and privatization within health care? These are only amongst the most important issues when it comes to Canada's economy and social service.

Elizabeth May: Really now. Most Canadians don't like what NAFTA has wrought...

The Hack: *interjecting* Tell that to our export sector in Ontario.

Elizabeth May:...And most Canadians want us to remove all private medicine from our health care system.

The Hack: You trumpeting that line of hooey in British Columbia or Quebec, where your environmental position might actually gain steam amongst a population already used to voting for third parties?

Elizabeth May: ...

The Hack: Thought so. But back to Central Nova...Why would you want to lose? Peter Mackay has been a big shooter within the Tories since 1997. His old man held the riding for years and years before that. In fact, outside of the one historic 1993 election when it voted Liberal, the riding has been Tory forever.

Further, you do not have any historic claims to the riding. And there's almost no Green Party traction in the riding, as represented by the 671 votes or 1.6% of the votes poor ole David Orton got for the party in the last election.

Once again Ms. May, why in the hell would you waste your time and hurt the party by running a suicide mission here instead of Cape Breton where you grew up, an Ottawa riding where you live, or your absolute best option, London North Centre, where your strong 2006 by-election 2nd place finish behind a brand new Liberal MP, who won during a period when the Liberals were full of potential going into their leadership convention and whose short period of time in office means that he is unlikely to have really cemented his incumbent status?

Elizabeth May: Because I don't want to defeat Liberals.

The Hack: Why not?

Elizabeth May: They support similar causes as I do.

The Hack: All due respect ma'am, but you aren't the leader of a cause. You're the leader of a party and because of that, there are thousands of honest-to-Pete Green supporters and hundreds of Green candidates counting on you to do your best for the party because right now the party trumps the cause...

Elizabeth May: We can't give up our principles for the party!

The Hack: Ma'am, you are the leader of the Greens and not a member of the Liberals or NDP because you don't believe that they are properly protecting the environment, right?

Elizabeth May: Well, there are other reasons, but yes, that's a fair statement.

The Hack: Then accept that in order to champion your cause, you'd better be damned well prepared to do what's best for the party and what's best is not protecting Liberal MPs, it's getting yourself elected! With even a single seat, you will find that your party's profile will grow, your credibility on the issues will surge and the party will stand to gain tremendously going into the election after next. You have to realize ma'am that this isn't a one-election fight or even a two-election fight, but an on-going battle to grow and expand the base of your party. Are you honestly prepared to do what's right for the party and the cause? Because if not, quit now and let Dave Chernushenko take over what Jim Harris has started. If you get in front of the Green parade without showing the leadership decisions required, you will hurt the party's growth potential and turn it into a punchline at a time in history when what it needs most is credibility.

Ms. May, are you ready to do the right thing as leader?

Elizabeth May: I'm running against Peter.

The Hack: We're done here.




**************

Encore-For-The-Commenter:
"You come off like a sexist jerk (e.g., why the diminutive 'Liz')." If you read my blog long enough, you'll notice I shorten a lot of names or use nicknames from time to time. Just as Iggy, Pete (Mackay), Stock, PVL, Dithers, Beaker, Bernie (Lord), Danny Millions, Grinnin' Gary (Doer), Eddie (Stelmach) and The Chin can all attest.

It is not because she is a woman that I hold Elizabeth May's feet to the fire. That would be ridiculous.

I dismiss her rather easily because for a political leader, her political decisions and instincts make it so very easy and if you find I'm cutting a little too close on them, maybe you should ask yourself which one of us - Ms. May or myself - was proven correct last week.

Don't forget, this is a position I've held for awhile now. In fact, for your enjoyment I Googled up this February 2007 post:

The Greens still don't belong at the debates in their currently accepted format. (And if someone gives me two to one odds on a $25 wager, I'll take the Greens getting zero seats in the election. Think about that....The entire field vs. zero.)

And just to proven that I didn't always think of her as a joke... (notice the name I used)

[answering what we could assume about a recent poll] That Elizabeth May will continue to build on her momentum. (Right up until it runs out on E-day when the Green vote splits all across the land and no little Greenies get to go to Ottawa. You watch, it'll happen.)

Reader, if you are disappointed for May and the Green party, I suggest you turn your focus to the forces at work within your party and not waste time getting choked at the guys like me throwing spitballs from the back of the room.

No matter how good our aim may be.

*******

One More Time: Also, if you or anyone else is wondering why I spent so much time on the Green Party in this campaign as opposed to the other mainstream parties, it is because I'm not a fan of rushing them out as a mainstream party. I have little doubt that there will be Green MPs one day, but I want to see the party earn those victories.

And right now, they have just not earned it yet.

And I'm not alone in my position on this matter. Here's Jeffery Simpson from an online discussion the other day:
I mean it was silly -- and I regret that I supported it at the time -- for the leader of a party that had 4.5 per cent of the vote last time to be given equal time with the prime minister whose party had 36 per cent of the vote, or the Liberal leader who had 30 per cent.

It was silly. And no one can tell me that Elizabeth May's presence added anything but a fourth voice of dissent to the debates. She didn't champion a single new policy from the others (though she let slip her position on private medicine, though only when pressed on it). Some pundit made the point on debate night, but she did not present an argument as to why you should vote Green, only why you should not vote for the Tories and to a much lesser extent, the other two leftwing parties.

And we now see just how strong her "debate bump" was.... My hunch is that very little of her 2% growth came from those nights.

Anyhow, now I'm dwelling, but to come back to the central point, Ms. May screwed up this election. Enough people are calling out Stephane Dion for his errors, but not enough are calling her out yet - though credit to those who have like the creator of www.emaygoaway.com before it disappeared and former leadership hopeful David Chernusenko did.

And with that, I'm spent.

Cabinet Guesswork Part I

Over the next few days, I'm going to try and piece together players with portfolios.  Might not go as in depth as my 2006 prediction post that ended up linked to Small Dead Animals and Andrew Coyne's blog, however, I'll still try to cover off at least half the new faces/new places I expect there to be.
 
In all the talk about who replaces David Emerson as Foreign Affairs Minister, I have yet to see this name emerge, but the more I think about it, the more sense it makes...

What about Minister Stockwell Day?

He's already shown competence with his files, he's bilingual, his current portfolio (Public Safety) is a natural companion to some extent - especially when he is dealing with his US counterpart.  I believe the punditry would agree with my assessment and blowback would be minimal.

 

Monday, October 20

Winnipeg Harvest And The Free Press Staffers

If the strike was in month two, instead of week two, Harvest donations going towards strikers would sit better with me.

The drum beats of a potential strike were heard for months in the lead up to last Monday's beginning.  If any employee wasn't preparing for at least a couple of weeks of strike action, then they were being foolish.

And we all know that many of Harvest's clients are not in their situation due to foolishness.

So like I said, the donations aren't particularly sitting well with me this afternoon. 
 
* * * * * * * * *
 
Update: Further, what do the donations this early into the strike say to Free Press management - long time supporters of Winnipeg Harvest efforts?  Or any employer facing a strike action for that matter, now that we learn that Winnipeg Harvest often supports striking staff?

Again, in a long strike, my heart softens to those staff that have exhausted their preparations.   However, these donations were given out in Week One.... 

Because The Liberals Are Looking For Proven Winners...

Only one of these columnists gets it right.
 
 
There is only one woman who could give the political alpha males that can barely wait for Stéphane Dion to make his resignation official today to pounce on the Liberal leadership a real run for their (borrowed) money, and it is Green party Leader Elizabeth May.

Her entry in the Liberal race would be one of the best things that could happen to both parties...

 

Jeffery Simpson:

The Liberals will need a leader who can speak (in both official languages) intelligently about the economy, someone who knows how to run things should the country sour on the Harper Conservatives, an orator who can inspire, and one who is open to new ideas that might put the party back into the discourse in the wide swaths of Canada where the party has almost disappeared.


Can I help make Liz May - Liberal Leader happen?  Please?  I'll even cut a modest cheque if it can assist the cause.  The Loony Tunes theme is playing in my head right now...~Oh what fun we'll have...~

 

Sunday, October 19

Something To Consider Before You Handicap The Liberal Leadership

If the convention stays in Vancouver*, a big factor in who wins will be who manages the biggest subsidy for the travel requirements of their delegates from the East.  BC will have a decent delegation as usual, but you have to believe that the majority will be arriving from east of Lake Superior and Vancouver's not a cheap flight.

Saturday, October 18

The Next One

The last fourty-eight hours, I've been saying that only John Manley and one other guy really scare me. 

The other guy, as described by Paul Tuns here, is probably the front-runner:

The idea of [Bob] Rae as Liberal leader is not as crazy as it sounds. I know many Tories who are eager to face a Rae-led Liberal team in the next election but that is a mistake. Rae is articulate and passionate, he can provide a hopeful vision for the future, and he knows how politics works. He wouldn't pull a hissy-fit and not talk to the Liberal pollster for ten months if he disagreed with the pollster's advice. He wouldn't wait until the eve of the election call to have a campaign plane ready. He wouldn't highlight his leadership rivals as part of the Liberal team, giving them a platform to build their profiles and reputations. He wouldn't fire the people with two and three decades of Parliamentary experience and bring in his own people -- actually he would, but those people have two and three decades of political experience themselves. Politics isn't for amateurs, and Rae has been doing it for a long time. Dion was a cabinet minister for a decade and didn't seem to pick up how Ottawa works.

Thursday, October 16

Dan, Email Me

Thanks again for coming out today.  I think people enjoyed it.

Tuesday, October 14

Quick Hits:

- Ignore Loser #1 from yesterday.  Harper's the big winner.  It's a huge victory.

- Ignore the pundits saying that it's a loss for Harper (I'm looking at you Keith Boag). 

- Quebec is a disappointment, but not the end of the world either. 

- Only three Liberals west of the Manitoba/Ontario border.  When do the "Are They A National Party?" stories begin?

- Paul Tuns has some great observations during his live blog.

- Now is the time to go drinking.

Wanna Play An Interesting Bet Tonight?

Convince somebody to give you 5-1 on Elmwood Transcona.  When you get it, lay down a ten and thank me later.

Quickie Election Day Thoughts, Opinions & Predictions

I was discussing the election with a friend last night and made the following comment:

"All we're doing is shaking up the Etch-A-Sketch. We're going to do it all again in 2010."

That's where we are with this election. Nothing major is going to change. I'll admit I'm tired tonight and not up for a long epic post on some of the impacts of the election - and believe me, there's much to study here, lessons to be learned.

In short:

- Only one winner - Gilles Duceppe. He'd be wise to consider leaving on top. Can't say yet if he will or not.

- Loser #4 - Jack Layton. Will still likely try to claim a victory out of the campaign, however he's not really going to make up a lot of ground on the Liberals, and won't even be able to overtake the Bloc for third place. When the NDP cannot make up serious ground during what has to be considered a "perfect storm" for them, I would have to believe this will lead to some soul-searching.

- Loser #3 - Stephane Dion. He's not going to lose as badly as we thought, but he's still losing seats, losing votes and losing ground. Especially in the strongest growing region of Western Canada. The Liberals are going to be in a pinch however. The late surge is going to result in just enough non-losses that Dion might even have an argument for another go-round. This will mean that Liberals have at least eight months to a year of ackwardness and anonymous backbiting quotes and otherwise unpleasantness ahead of them. And what's worse, is that in the end, he'll likely get another election which will just make the fighting such a huge waste of time.

- Loser #2 - Elizabeth May. She'll spin it as a victory when they receive about 7% of the votes, but she's made bad decisions during her tenure as Green Party Leader, be they on riding choice, platform, cozying up to Dion. It will be interesting to see how she accepts the results and what direction both she and the party choose to proceed on.

- Loser #1 - Stephen Harper. His mistakes (gala comment, stock purchasing comments), the party's mistakes (did the war room score even one single victory to make up for their errors?) and just plain bad luck with the economic situation. I've got one buddy who swears he's going to announce a resignation on Tuesday night, but I disagree. He'll take his lumps. Make some fundamental changes along the way, and aim for one more chance for a majority. If he ends up with a third minority in 2010, then I see him walking away.

Yes, you read that right. We're going to go back to the polls in 2010. The only difference between spring or fall that year will be whether we see a historic attempt at a true coallition government. Heck, spring of 2011 might even be possible if that does come about.

Anyhow, for some predictions, I've got the Tories up about twelve, overcoming loses in Quebec and Newfoundland with gains in New Brunswick, BC, PEI (one only, but still important) and Nunavut. The rest of the ten come from Ontario.

There's a very real chance that the Tory vote will be much stronger than it looked last week. Should that happen, maybe a gain of twenty seats is possible. Early signs tomorrow that such a situation is coming about will be if the PEI seat emerges, Fabian Manning holds on to a Newfoundland seat and Gerald Keddy holds his Nova Scotia seat.

Interesting races worth watching:

The three mentioned above, former Senator Fortier, Justin Trudeau's, Peggy Nash over Gerald Kennedy, Lisa Raitt over Garth Turner (which finally means Halton will have a cabinet minister), Ralph Goodale's riding, Rahim Jaffer's (at least for the first half hour), Gary Lunn, Donna Cadman and Hedy Fry (fingers crossed).

As far as Manitoba, I stand by the early going predictions.

Sunday, October 12

UBC Election Market Final Update

I took a bath buying into the Tory Majority at the exact wrong time.  Dropped down from $20 up to $35 down at the worst time.  Switched the position and rode it back up.  Also bought into the Liberal Plurality cheap and made a few off of it.  I'm sitting at $15 up and have the following major positions:

Liberal Plurality: 200 shares at approximately $10.  (Pays $200 if they form government.  $0 if they don't.  Don't expect them to win, but the odds are good enough to try.)
 
Tory Majority: 150 shares at approximately $14.  (Pays $150 if they form government.  $0 otherwise.  Again, this is a odds play, though if it hits $20 tomorrow, I might take the money.)

Minority Gov't (Either party): 194 shares at approximately $175 dollars.  I was going to sell if the shares neared $0.95/share this weekend, but it's clear they won't.  There's about 10% of growth left in the stock, so I'll probably hold until E-night now.  If it's a minority, the extra $19 bucks offsets some of the long shots.  If a majority does hit, the longshot offsets the loss here.

From a purely financial standpoint, a Liberal minority would pay me off rather well this election.


Overall thoughts on the market...Not bad, but there just wasn't enough movement in this election to really make any real loot.  I made a little off the Greens early, but lost out when the Tories dropped in the last ten days.  (Never would have predicted it quite honestly.)

Oh well, I'll be putting another couple hundred in to play when the next one happens in spring 2010.

"Isn't This Exactly What Those Opposing Her Debate Entry Argued She'd Do?" Redux

Headline:  Greens should consider NDP or Liberals in tight races, says May

Paul Wells is also on it.  Read the comments.

So once again real Green members - and how many times do I have to do this before you stop asking me why I give your leader and party a hard time in this election? - once again, I say to you:  Figure out what you want to be when this election is over.  A political party or a debate club and popular vote-parking stall?

Because you'll notice that NDP and Bloc leaders have never once told their voters to pick another party to support.  There's a reason for that.

And to Elizabeth May, if you want to run as leader of the Greens again, maybe pay attention to the fact that you now lead a party and have a responsibility to hundreds (maybe even thousands) of true party members that expect you to look out for their best interests.

Winning your seat and encouraging as many voters as possible to vote Green (thus adding to your party's subsidy) would have been a good place to start for them.

Friday, October 10

It's Not Like Anything Truly Newsworthy Was Going To Happen Next Week Anyhow

In one of the more obvious developments in town, sounds like the Winnipeg Free Press starts striking on Monday.

A strike website is getting set up by staff. When I receive the URL, I'll forward it along.

Update: And there it is.

Thursday, October 9

When Jeffrey Simpson's Quebec Position Is Beginning To Sound Like A Western Reformer Circa 1993, You Know This Issue Has Potential For Trouble

 
...What crippled their [Conservatives] hopes was the retreat of francophone Quebeckers into the comfortable embrace of the Bloc. That party has been the choice of francophone Quebeckers since the 1993 election. In five consecutive elections, the Bloc has won the largest number of Quebec seats, and will do so again next week.

By voting Bloc, many francophones have fundamentally altered their view of how to pursue their interests. They no longer see Canada as a federation or a country, but rather as an entity from which to extract benefits while making a minimalist contribution to the country's governance. [emphasis added - h.]

Quebec has become, for federal political purposes, largely a demandeur society rather than a participating one, with voters secure that their provincial government will always be demanding, comforted that any federal government will pay attention to their interests, and possessed of an opposition party that speaks only to and for their interests.

Request

If anyone notices an article where Stephane Dion or Jack Layton was asked about their portfolios and investment strategies - especially if they were asked about pulling money out or putting more in - please pass them on in the comments section.

I haven't spotted any yet, but those would have to be reasonable questions to present to them considering their current line of attack.  Right?

If You Read Only One Link This Weekend...

...Make it Coyne. (This includes friends and readers who get paid to express their opinions regarding things political.)

Is a 35% drop in the stock market (from its June peak) a crisis in itself? No it is not. The stock market does not owe you a living. It's down 35% from four months ago, but it was up 50% in the three years before that (see chart). The present "crisis" has taken prices on the TSE all the way back to where they were in the dark days of 2005 — when they had just finished climbing 50% in two years. Think back to that time. You were rich! You were happy! You were counting your money!

Maybe you should have sold then. But you didn't, because you wanted more. Now you're paying the price. You've given up three years of gains. But you're still up 50% from where you were five years ago. And, if you're sensible, you'll make up for not selling then by buying now. Those who were on the buy side on October 19, 1987 made a killing in the months that followed.

Not willing to risk it? Fine. Just sit tight. Worried about your retirement? If you're anywhere under 55, you'll be fine. You don't need the money for 10 or 15 years. Stocks will have more than recouped their losses by then (at a compound annual growth rate of 5%, you double your money every 14 years). If you're over 55 — what are you doing in the stock market?

This bears emphasis: If you're old enough to be worried about your stocks, you're too old to own them. Stocks earn more in the long term, because they're riskier in the short term. You should be heavily in stocks when you're young, because you're not going to need the money any time soon. But you should be gradually shifting into safer investments — bonds, T-bills — as you get older. By the time you're of retirement age, they should be only a small part of your portfolio. That's not complicated. It doesn't take a PhD or a high-powered investment adviser. It's just common sense.




Wednesday, October 8

Stephane Dion On The National

Mr. Dion just told Peter that had we brought in the Green Shift ten years ago, we wouldn't be losing manufacturing jobs today.

Question:

1) Does he believe that statement? (If so, is this someone we want setting the economic direction of the country?)
2) Or does he think we'll believe that statement? (If so, what does that tell you for his respect of the country?)



"Okay Mr. Smart-Ass Blogger...Prove It!" Update: A brave nameless soul weighs in about my statements regarding societal and historical changes in manufacturing sectors of developed countries:

It's not enough to claim one knows something, it is imperative to demonstrate it.

Not in this corner of the yell-o-sphere buddy boy! My soapbox, my stats, and if you don't like it, feel free to ask for a refund.


...


Ah, who am I kidding? I like the fighty.

I was challenged about Denmark and Sweden, with the suggestion that their Green Shifts haven't changed their manufacturing sectors. Kyle hedged himself by also saying, "...And it just isn't the export of goods, it is the sales of services of how to manage your green economy."

This is a hedge, because I wasn't calling out Mr. Dion regarding service jobs. No, those could very well go up. In fact, I would bet on it.

But Mr. Dion is saying that manufacturing wouldn't be losing jobs and quite honestly, that would be bucking a number of historical trends, both here and elsewhere. But back to Denmark and Sweden. (And let's ignore that they are essentially small countries compared to Canada, both in size and population.)

Denmark - Nothing says retention like negative growth in 7 of the last 14 years. Heck, throw out their two big years (10.76%/1994)(8.18%/1997), and that leaves an average growth rate of - wait for it - negative 0.7% annually since 1991!

Now before I go breaking my arm patting myself on the back too hard, Sweden doesn't have the numbers to back me up. The Swedes have had only one down year (-2.1%/2000) and an average growth rate of a very respectable 7.3%. That merits a little more research.

I do note - with some glee - this section from the Swedish Institute fact sheet of 2006 [pdf]:
To improve the functioning of the economy, during the 1980s Sweden initiated the deregulation of many sectors. This began with the financial service market but continued with most transportation markets, the electricity market etc. In portions of what was previously a public sector monopoly (for example schools and health-care), there are now some opportunities for private and cooperative activities. Other important structural reforms include stricter competition rules, an expenditure ceiling for the public sector, an independent Riksbank (Swedish central bank) plus Sweden's membership first in the European Economic Area (EEA) and then from 1995 in the EU.

Betcha that's not the Sweden the Canadian left thinks it's trumpeting, eh? Anyhow, I'll revisit Sweden another night, because right now I'm damned curious.

Anyhow, if you look at overall manufacturing growth worldwide, you notice that most of the name's at the top of the list don't tend to be developed nations. And that you have to go down the list to find most of the nations that Canada likes to compare herself to.

Again, no one is claiming that the manufacturing sector is disappearing. Just that it's importance as a portion of Canadian GDP is going to continue diminishing as a percentage of Canadian growth and wealth. That's just following development trends. And even within manufacturing, there is going to be significant shifting from time to time.

For Dion to suggest or even hint that somehow the Green Plan - or any plan for that matter - can prevent job losses in manufacturing is wrong. So again, that leaves me to ask:

Does he know he's wrong?

Does he care that he's wrong?



Early Plug

Next week, a couple of days after the election, Winnipeg Free Press political reporter/columnist/whateverthehellhiscardcallshim Dan Lett is going to be speaking at a luncheon and giving his analysis of the election results. The host of the lunch?

The Conservative Club of Manitoba.

Heh. Believe me, I'm sure there's at least a few people making the "WTF?" cartoon head shaking noise. Despite his best judgement, Dan accepted our invitation, so now I invite you all to come out and hear what he has to say.

Date: Thursday, October 16th
Time: 12:00 noon
Place: The Norwood.

You don't have to vote Tory to come out. The Club is not directly affiliated with the party at either level - though you can guess our leanings. Still, come on out anyways.

Those that are interested, please email me for arrangements. We can take your money at the door, but need to get a head count to tell the hotel how much roast beef to cook up. I promise that the meal is always good and tickets are only $20. I'm going to ensure we're done by 1:00pm.

What better way to spend your lunch?

I'm Kinda Digging The New NDP Ads

Sure they rip off UPS ads, but still.

Monday, October 6

The Problem With Gimmick Promises

Even when they don't work, you remain stuck with them:

Harper is to release his party's platform tomorrow. It will not contain any major new initiatives, but will tally up promises made to date, the largest of which has been a $600 million cut in the excise tax on diesel fuel.
 
I would defy any Tory to find me more than a fraction of a fraction of voters that even remember this promise, least of all voting on it.  Probably a few truckers.   Maybe some farmers.  Even a couple of fishers.

The promise clearly didn't become the talking piece wedge that Tory strategists had hoped for and now this lousy 2-cents/litre diesel tax cut is going to be the largest cost item in the platform.

That's....unfortunate.  Besides being bad policy on the environment*, I just cannot believe that it will result in meaningful reductions on the price of goods or travel.
 
 
* - My hunch is that Prime Minister Harper will determine that this - in tandem with the economy surprisingly enough - was his Achilles Heel and that he can no longer try to limp by it on a press release policy.  I wonder if we don't see someone like James Moore installed as the new environment minister, with the Prime Minister's blessing to pursue a far more aggressive policy than the one currently being implemented. 

Friday, October 3

Just To Repeat The Point...

There are at least 100,001, if not 1,000,001 Canadians, who could have sat in tonight and "looked like they belonged".  Doing well in and of itself is not a high enough threshold for Liz May's attendance this evening.

She's still not beating Peter Mackay.  And her party's still going to be shut out on E-day.

Do I Have A Glove Print On My Cheek?

Curtis makes a point.

Thursday, October 2

The Debate

Watched Canada's with the exception of two channel flips for all of a minute apiece.  Catching up right now with CNN's repeat.

I've been emailing and posting on a message board all night, so I'm tired and only going to give the Coles Notes here.

Overall:

- Liked the format.  Rex Murphy makes a good argument against it, but generally, I found the format allowed for more discussion and less posturing line-regurgitation.

- May did well.  But the only thing she brought up that the other three didn't was her stance regarding private clinics in health care.  (And NAFTA opposition to a lesser extent.)  Both of those positions should be required reading for anyone still promoting the fallacy of the Greens being "Tories with an environmental heart".

- Still, being able to elegantly fillet Harper at times is not reason enough to merit inclusion.

- Wait, just thought of another uniquely Green position.   Income Tax Splitting.  I like this policy.  Greg Staples likes this policy.  I'm a little surprised that Stephen Harper hasn't liked it more.

- The debate also reminded me why I am scared witless of Gilles/Jack/Elizabeth economics.  Seriously, it must be nice to know you can say whatever because you won't actually have to bring into force your policies.  There is an honesty-disconnect regarding some of these positions.  There has to be.  Duceppe, Layton and May have shown enough intellectual savvy to know otherwise.

- I'm amazed that 2% of arts cuts merit a strong section of the debate and non-Afghanistan foreign policy merits none.  China policy?  Russia policy?  EU-trade market?  Darfur?   None of these have any importance compared to subsidization of writers and artists.  Seriously?

- Seriously?

- Jack tried too hard on his "lines".

- Lizzie with Harper's speech from years ago.  Has there ever been a "Debate Surprise" that was the same two elections in a row?

- Dion was okay.  Okay wasn't going to be enough tonight for him.

- Finally, Harper took the most heat during the economic segment.  Considering he asked for an expanded section, that's just an indictment of Harper.  I know he's correct on many of his economic claims (the big one he's off on being the GST cut impact), however "Stay The Course" doesn't play as well politically as "I'm going to do something, even if that something is more harmful than helpful."  Otherwise, he held his own well, and took a good group slapdown of the opposition leaders when he called them out on their economic policies.

- I lied.  FINALLY, this is the first post where I begin my championing of the "Let's Draft Andrew Coyne When Harper Is Finally Done!" campaign.  The guy is principled, articulate and overall likable.  I'd go hard core to bat for that guy if he actually ran for office.  
 
- No.  Not that "hard core".

I'm Calling It

No majority.  Tonight - and tomorrow - will sink it in.

Tories tap out around 148 seats.  Maybe even 145.

More in the morning if I get a chance.  In the meantime, check out this cool Wells' post.

Having A Prof From Dawson's College Ask About Gun Control Is Not Setting Up A Debate

It's framing it.

I wasn't the only one to notice:

9:51 PM Andrew Coyne - Should we negotiate with the Taliban? The questions are ALL framed from the left…

By the way, the Maclean's Live Blog was well worth the read and you even glean a few nuggets out of it as well. I'd head over and spend fifteen minutes with it. For example, another gem from my favorite crank Coyne:

9:54 PM Andrew Coyne - So we’ve got one party that favours record levels of spending, pulling out of Afghanistan, pandering to Quebec nationalism, flirting with deficits, handouts to large corporations, etc.
9:55 PM Andrew Coyne - And we ‘ve got FOUR parties to its left!!

Wednesday, October 1

Encouraging Voter Turnout

Watching a story on the CTV News about lower voter turnout and all this hand wringing over how to get young people to vote (most because they don't know what's going on) and I just start to wonder...

...Are we really that worse off that people who can't be bothered to read a newspaper or surf a few websites aren't turning out to vote?

We already ask very little of a voter ("Show up!") and some still find that too much a bother to perform a civic duty.  Maybe that's their way of  telling us how contributing their vote is going to be.

Purchased From The Bargain Bin

Stopped Out At McNally Robinson tonight. Found the following cheap:

1) P.J. O'Rouke on The Wealth Of Nations by P.J. O'Rouke - Like this isn't in my wheelhouse.

2) Fear And Loathing: The Strange And Terrible Saga Of Hunter S. Thompson by Paul Perry - The man intrigues me.

3) Blue Gold: The Fight to Stop the Corporate Theft of the World's Water by Maude Barlow & Tony Clarke - Figure I've got enough linking me to the issue that I'm now tied to it when I run. So it's time to dig in and start really analyzing the arguments against. Who knows? Maybe I'll even be convinced.

4) Planet Simpson: How A Cartoon Masterpiece Defined A Generation by Chris Turner - I've already spent thousands of hours of my life watching, quoting and discussing the show. Time for new material.

Visiting A Time When Searches For "Paris Hilton" Only Found You The Hotel

Visit Google from 2001.


Playing Around Update: Check out the search for "Canadian Blog".

Smoking In Cars with Kids, Handheld Texting While Driving, Manditory Booster Seats

This is the legislative agenda of a party that has no idea where it wants to take a province and only cares about not rocking the boat.

The province deserves better.

Debating Debates (Again)

Regular readers know I tend to read Mary Agnes Welch stories with a small chip on my shoulder because I find just a little too much opinion leeching into her news pieces and that the overall tone tends to be just a little too cynical for my liking. This could just be my perspective, but it is what it is.

So I mean it sincerely when I say that I thought she was pretty fair this morning which discussed Tories avoiding the local debate.

Yeah, Conservatives are not going to most forums, debates, town halls, whatever. We need to take our lumps and I thought MAW's was appropriate and not an over-the-top clubbing that it could have been.

Now, that said, I'm going to defend the Tories for choosing not to participate in all of them. And I say that as someone who has attended far more of them than the average joe.

"Hypocrite!!!" you shout at me. "How can you rail about the ineffectiveness of the national debates, but pooh-pooh the local ones?"

"%@#*in' Tory."

Now yes, the two opinions do appear contradictory, but hear me out on this.

First, take the percentage of voters who attend these debates and are still looking to make up their minds is small. Tiny in comparison to population of the riding at large. For the evening spent at one of these debates, a candidate might potentially reach an entire poll at the door, speaking with three or four dozen residents. That one-on-one time is invaluable to leaving a favourable impression, which is about the best you can do when less than one-in-four voters is basing their vote on you.
Secondly, many of these debates are not that well run. While I personally enjoy sparring with those out to get me, eventually it does wear on a candidate - especially when you look at the crowd and know that most in attendence is either your partisan or your opponent's partisan and not the neighbour from down the block out to hear a debate on the issues. When the mics can be stacked with nothing but leading questions - and remember, I've been the guy responsible in the past for stacking them - it becomes a turkey shoot and not a meaningful debate.
Thirdly, and whether I like it or not this is the case, most party candidates don't have a great depth of knowledge or thought on most issues. They might have one or two areas they excel in, but most of the time, it just comes back to party messaging and everyone can get that from materials and the national leaders debate.

Finally, some groups who never show respect the parties shouldn't be too surprised that the parties maybe don't find their debate high on their "To Do" list. (Student unions, I'm looking at you!) The presidents of UWSU on UMSU can cry "Tories Hate Students!" all they want, but it won't change two things: 1) said presidents don't represent nearly the number of students they claim to represent, and 2) how many times does a party have to be slapped in the face by a group before it finally gets to say, "Thanks, but no thanks."
Now some people feel that each and every debate invite should be accepted, no matter what the circumstances. "Take your lumps if you think you won't get a fair hearing!"

Yeah...No. Why? Just 'cuz?

In today's day and age, the local debate that the community comes out to see is becoming a bit of an anachorism. You can attend every debate and still only reach a couple hundred voters, of which, only 50 were ever really up in the air. During campaigns, especially short campaigns, a candidate simply cannot give up that much time. Most candidates are more than accessible if people have questions on the issues. Any voter who calls a campaign office with a question will often receive a call from the candidate back. (At least I can speak for our candidates.) A debate isn't required to get those answers to the voter.
I also think that it is telling that the people who defend and enjoy the local debates the most are those who are already set in their support and just want to see candidates squirm and try to dodge barbs.

Anyhow, I would recommend that one of the groups take the lead and begin organizing one large, well publicized and well run debate. One where everyone knows that it is "the debate" of the election and a few hundred people come out to watch - including the casual attendees, because yes, there still are a few of them at all the other debates and you do want to reach them if you can.

Any group who organizes such a debate will likely find that candidates not only attend, but they look forward to attending.

Links