There is a large amount of drama circulating over Stephen Harper and Paul Martin’s opposing standpoints over relations with the US government during this 2006 Canadian Election Campaign. On one hand, the Harper and Layton camps are blasting at Martin, accusing him of posturing, while Paul Martin’s groups continues to dig at Harper about his past actions and opinions.
The US government has also jumped into the fray, accusing Martin of playing to the anti-US sentiment to win the election.
Even the American media can’t resist writing about the election, the Washington Times has an article dated Dec. 12 that presents Harper as George W. Bush’s dream candidate.
So what does it all mean to me? Well obviously any sort of conservative candidate is the desired outcome for the Bush government - being conservative themselves. But the Washington Times article does have some merit - and unfortunately very valid points. What they fail to consider is that a Stephen Harper victory may not mean much more than a change in figurehead of a minority government, leading us back into another political stalemate. The NDP will side with Liberals on votes and back we go to square one.
As for Paul Martin, I personally believe that he is posturing - his handlers have no doubt indicated to him that expressing some anti-US sentiment could be a way to swing some undeicded voters.
This is a dangerous game to play - the US being our largest trade partner and closest neighbour. I understand that a percentage of those in our country that are against the Bush government, but recall that the reign of any government is temporary - but national strain can last forever. Any sort of anti-US sentiment being expressed (Towards the government or not) can also cause disdain US populous, and then ANY elected party could hold a grudge that we might not shake off.
Very informative post. I agree with you completely.
Comment by Jack — January 1, 2006 @ 4:12 am