2012 Predictions

1. The PCs will be defeated in Alberta.

The PCs have had their 3 decade run. They're bereft of any new ideas. They've drifted into moderate political limbo so much that their wishy-washiness is eerily resembling the Federal Liberal Party.

In Alberta, political change seldom happens. But when it does it comes quick.

My bet is on the Wildrose Alliance winning government come May 31st.

2. Jean Charest wins another term.

Jean Charest's best before date passed last winter. The Quebec people know it. He's been in denial since... birth? His inability to recognize when the gig is up is starting to seem Chretienesque.

Yet his opposition is divided. He has no clear opponent. The PQ is in shambles.

The people of Quebec I believe are at a crossroads. There is a demographic crisis exploding in the province - it isn't having enough babies and yet it's welfare state is European in ambition. The population is very old, and there is an apprehension against mass scale immigration. The end result is mass scale erosion of Quebec's society, culture and an economy not keeping pace with the rest.

I firmly believe that this is facilitating the volatility we have seen in La Belle Province for years now. I expect it to culminate in the devastation of the PQ and the rise of another party as an alternative.

3. We will not have an Ontario Election in 2012.

I don't believe either of the provincial opposition parties are prepared to reface voters in 2012. Financially their base has been taped out by both a federal election and a provincial election in 2011.

Further, their is no impending challenge to Hudak or Howarth in their respective leadership roles.

The federal NDP is engaged in a serious leadership convention which will decide the fate of the Progressive movement in this country like nothing in the past half century. Provincial distractions, as Howarth I'm sure knows, can be a dangerous thing under those circumstances.

4. Peggy Nash wins the NDP leadership.

Mulclair is untrusted by the NDP brass. He hasn't had time to organize the Quebec base that would normally be his. I expect his candidacy has always been a measure to increase his standing within the party first and foremost.

Brian Topp I believe has failed to make a connection with the NDP base. He also has no seat. Without any parliamentary experience behind him, and an inability to debate well, he will find it difficult to compete with Mulclair. He also carries the baggage of being part of the ill-fated liberal-NDP-separatist "coalition."

Peggy Nash on the other hand has come from a union background, and as a former party president has those connections to make her palpable to the NDP establishment. She also has relatively low levels of baggage. My bet is with the NDP's preferential ballot she will emergence in front as everybody's second choice.

5. Romney will be the Republican Presidential Candidate.

The Republican Party has never been more in disarray. The level of division is amazing. No dominant candidates have emerged as front runners in the race. Romney, being the only consistent candidate polling wise, barely registers at 25%.

He'll win the nomination - because the other candidates are seen as far worse by either the GOP base or the establishment or both. Although I would expect Congressman Ron Paul to surprise many and further expose the heavy divisions percolating through the GOP these days. A win by him in Iowa or more states needs to be seen as what it is - a protest vote against the GOP establishment.

6. Obama will still be President of the United States.

Unfortunately for the US, Obama will win. Romney, bruised an bloodied from one of the most divided and scarring nominations, will be unable financially or organizationally to compete. Republicans won't unite with Romney. Obama will sail to re-election having one of the worst economic records in history.

But that's nothing to fret over for true Conservatives.

It's amazed me to watch the GOP having mental breakdowns over the fact that such notable Conservatives as Paul Ryan and Gov Chritie took a pass at the GOP nomination. Paul Ryan is more, and has acted more as a leader than Obama. So has Governor Christie. Ironically, young politicians will little power are having more influence in DC than old experienced politicians like Barak Obama.

I expect what will seem like defeat at first will turn into something else. Obama will be re-elected, but with a Congress firmly opposed to his agenda. There will be no taxing the rich. There will be no gross expansion of the state. There will be gridlock. And gridlock in government can sometimes be healthy.

Meanwhile principled Conservatives like Paul Ryan and others will emerge to challenge the status quo. It may not seem like it - but an Obama victory may manage to do the impossible: unite the GOP and keep Big Government in check.

Now I Disclaim Everything

Predictions are fun. They are also profoundly stupid. The concept that anyone can predict the outcomes of events depending on the individual choices of millions of people deserves to be ridiculed for the fantasy that it is.

Either people make successful predictions by making them so vague they have no way of loosing, or they make them so extravagant that when they do get one right it is noticed and the other barrage of wrong ones are forgotten.

Yet last year I did make some noticeably good calls. McGuinty is still Premier (Despite what the polls said would happen). There was an election going on in April as I predicted. Brad Wall is still Premier. But the NDP still rains in Manitoba. A 75% success rate can't be just luck can it?

Three years of predictions: 2009, 2010 and 2011.

Sesame Street Socialism

It aint easy being green:
'A “food insecure” Muppet is helping to promote a national “Food for Thought” campaign that teaches poor families to seek out nutritious food and to eat on the taxpayers’ tab.


“What ‘Food For Thought’ does is remind people that eating healthy now gives them a good health outcome in the long term. So the folks you’re looking at up here, the programs that they represent, what ‘Food For Thought’ does is really a deficit reduction strategy, and we hope policymakers will take notice of that,” Greenaway said.

Greenaway didn't elaborate further on how this would work towards deficit reduction.(link)

First it was Obamacare, then Employment Insurance... pretty soon fighting obesity will be a 'deficit reduction strategy.' So will National Day Care, and just about any other top-down government-run program Progressives can dream up.

Calling anything you like a 'deficit reduction strategy' has now become one of those trendy political tag-lines politicians use over and over and over and over and over... until finally it gets so bad everyone has a vomit moment and suddenly the political world moves on...

I can still remember when calling something a 'deficit' was trendy. Does anyone still remember the 'Democratic Deficit?' What about the 'Infrastructure Deficit?' You see that was back when fighting deficits was seen as a something everyone could agree with - anyone would have to be nuts to argue against eliminating a deficit wouldn't they?

Really though is there anything nowadays that isn't a 'deficit reduction strategy?'

I've reached my 'vomit moment' how 'bout you?