Day Three: Coalitions and conversation

As the election we didn't expect/knew was coming all the time (team 2012/2011, respectively) moves into Day Three,  two general things to watch:

The coalition thing: Judging from the conversation on Twitter on Day 2, this  business about coalition prospects  is annoying. Some are annoyed by its dominance of political debate. Some are annoyed by the things being said, on all sides. Some are annoyed by the memories of 2008 that Harper has dredged up. Some are annoyed that a perfectly acceptable part of parliamentary democracy is being sullied by politics. Some are annoyed that they seem to have entered a conversation halfway through it, and don't get the private-school-debating points that seem to be in play. 

Quick answer to all those who are annoyed: You have an absolute right  to be annoyed, and as long as you keep being riled up, it will stay on the political agenda. Politicians reward emotion with more emotion. It's better than apathy.  Anger's an easy thing to whip up. Optimism is  a little more difficult. Speaking as a journalist, I'd love a happy, hopeful issue to cover, and suggestions on what would maintain your abiding interest, minus the anger,  would be most useful. 

I will say, however, to all those who argue that this coalition stuff is irrelevant: first, if the Prime Minister decides to hammer at it on every occasion, we're going to cover it. (Yes, that is another way of saying, childishly, "he started it.") Second, this whole business of coalitions is getting reporters into the terrain of discussing political lies, character and the ability to work with others. These are not insubstantial matters in politics, or life, for that matter. They are about political culture. We can talk to you about a three-percentage-point shaving of corporate taxes, but we like to think you care about the culture of politics too. (As an aside, it's actually amusing to watch people trying to turn this into an abstraction. If you lived around human beings, you get the issue: no one wants to admit weakness. You're not going to find a politician entertaining the prospect that he (no she among the leaders) might not get the win he  wants. 

The Twitter campaign: This isn't scientific, but my email inbox tells me that this election is attracting all kinds of new, Twitter converts. I welcome you all to the debate there, which I can report -- for the most part -- is civil, fun and addictive. People are talking, good laughs are rewarded, and nastiness is kept to the fringe. (Unlike blogs, in that  nastiness terrain, which may be an interesting phenomenon, worth exploring.)

Had you been on Twitter yesterday, you would have seen some good-natured fun about Jason Kenney accidentally typing that Brampton candidate Parm Gill had a good work "ethnic." (I think Kenney has deleted the tweet.) You would have seen Bob Fife, of CTV, reporting that Harper told folks he "could live on sausage." You would have seen Ignatieff's wife, Zsuzsanna, posing with a puppy for a picture or bagels being handed out aboard the bus. This is also what political life is all about. Welcome, sincerely, to our world. You will find it hard not to like all the people in it. 

If you are a political junkie, sign up to Twitter, download Tweetdeck and set the columns (that plus sign at the top of the screen) to search for #cdnpoli or #elxn41. Watch the conversation and take part. I promise you that from this quarter, you'll get a respectful hearing. 

That's where we are on Day Three. If you're here at this blog, you probably are interested in politics. So plunge right in. Let's keep it civil and respectful, and we'll try to reward your interest.  

Comments

[Darwin O'Connor]

"Let's keep it civil and respectful, and we'll try to reward your interest."

With prompt moderation?

[W.B.]

I was wondering if Harper would want to take this coalition issues into the debates where he will face Layton and Duceppe in person calling him a liar. Could be quite a dustup.

[Sara-Anne Peterson]

Harper established the School of Energy and the Environment at the University of Calgary with a government gift of 15,000,000 dollars then appointed Mr. Carson its head. Then Mr. Carson became his own on call mouth piece with a big sounding title to flog his policies.

He does this sort of thing with the military issues. Establish a think tank with our money to persuade us. Name someone who supports his ideas to head it then send him out to lobby the press.

Where is our media. Why aren't they covering this sort of thing instead of endless coalition talk?

[MacJack]

I am watching CPAC with some incredulity as it airs a press conference held on Sept 9, 2004 featuring Stephen Harper, Gilles Duceppe and Jack Layton. It clearly features an attempt by parties who did not win an election to effectively govern as a coalition, by dictating priorities, programs, budget, appointments, etc It is damning in the extreme. Led by Stephen Harper, it clearly documents an effort to governing byundermining the party who won the majority of seats.

This event predates the letter sent to the GG raised by M. Duceppe by some months. This letter makes it clear that if the government fell there were options, aka ask us to govern vs going to the election. If it walks like a duck......

[MacJack]

Correction:

The letter was sent in August and this press conference was held in December. Seems even more damning to me.

[Darwin O'Connor]

Here is a question for Mr. Ignatieff: "Your position is that you would accept a Conservative government if they got the most seats and you reject working with the Bloc. That implies that you believe that the Bloc is worse then the Conservatives. What is the basis for this belief?"

[Aldous Smith]

So if Harper hums the Mickey Mouse club theme song to himself while crossing the road, you are going to report that too? I guess I'm naive. I thought reporters and newspaper editors went for substantial news. That would be quite important in a democracy, during an election. SUrely the Harper paranoia/coalition issue has already used up its fuel, at least for intelligent people. So maybe your continued coverage indicates that you think your readers are not too intelligent? Or are you just that cynical that you will report anything that you can massage into some attention-getting headline? Please, inhale some ethics and give us some meaningful reporting. You look crass, and opportunist.

[daveM]

The tweets are great.....!

[John J]

The Common Sense Revolution is finally going nationwide. Harper along with Jim Flaherty, John Baird and Tony Clement (all former ministers in the Mike Harris conservative government in Ontario) have finally decided they're at the "now-or-never.....nothing to lose......no-turning-back" point in their ideologic careers. They are now full throttle, gunning for a majority. http://harpergovernmentelection.blogspot.com/