It appears the voters of Canada have spoken and in doing so, have chosen a Conservative government. What's interesting about this election is that the voters in Canada's three largest cities have all rejected Conservatism and chosen to continue to support the old guard Liberal establishment.
I'm sure there are many reasons why this has happened. How could a population of suave, sophisticated, urbane and cosmopolitan citizens choose a government of Neanderthal hayseeds? Urban voters have shown that they prefer a much more nuanced government, a government familiar with root causes and able to meet the needs of the needy, a government that assures the stability of the status quo. and to Torontonians, Montrealers and Vancouverites, that's a Liberal government.
Judging from some of the comments made by ordinary urban Canadians in letters to the editors to some of Canada's larger dailies, the Liberal attack ads were extremely effective in our three largest cities. However, they also offered a window into the soul of urban Canadians and how they see their country. One Torontonian, in a letter to the editor wrote that "we remember Mike Harries too well to let you foist a predominantly rural/suburban male agenda on a cosmopolitan country like Canada." It makes me wonder if this guy has ever been outside of Toronto. I think the predominant problem with urban voters is that they have come to believe that they are the centre of the universe.
Canada has a land mass of nearly 10,000,000 square kilometers of which less than 10% is urban in nature. Our population is just over 32,000,000 people of which less than 1/3 live in the Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver Census Metropolitain areas (CMa). and while we like to pride ourselves in being inclusive and tolerant, we are arguably the most exclusive and intolerant society after Iran. The writer of the letter to the editor quoted above exemplifies this lack of tolerance and betrays a conceit that is unique to Liberal voters.
Liberal voters seem to believe that their view is the only acceptable Canadian view and that any other view has no legitimate place in the body politic. In other words, if you aren't in favour of a nanny state and believe in self-reliance rather than the welfare cheque, then you have a "predominantly rural/suburban male agenda." Presumably that's bad.
Urban voters appear to be so urbane and nuanced that they are even okay with crimes committed by those who govern them. It seems to be perfectly okay with cosmopolitan Canadians for their government officials to lie to them and make promises they have no intention of keeping. (See Ontario and Dalton McGuinty's 230 broken election promises.) It even appears okay with them to have their government steal from them. (see adscam) But by golly, they draw the line at politicians who keep their promises (see Ontario's Mike Harris) or politicians who have the temerity to have moral qualms over things like abortion or the family. However, the last straw is politicians who believe in God! How can good, cosmopolitan urban sophisticates tolerate such subversive views in their politicians? Clearly that is unacceptable in "a cosmopolitan country like Canada."
I wonder how they feel about voter fraud? My guess is it's okay, so long as the fraud benefits leftist politicians. My colleague Judi McLeod's exposé last week about official Elections Canada ballots being distributed to over 3,000 schools across Canada, the results of which were sent to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) by a secret code on election day, sure seems ominous to me. This particularly in light of the fact that the actual election results in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal were so far out of kilter with Ipsos Reid and other polls, while election results for the rest of Canada stayed in line with these polls. add to that the fact that the likes of Maude Barlow in conjunction with the CBC spearheaded the whole thing and I'm given to wonder just how much of the election results in these three cities was "helped".
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement