Canadian PM Mike Harris

With a POD of 2002, have Mike Harris elected Prime Minister of Canada. Bonus if it's before 2006, Double Bonus if he wins a majority, triple bonus if Jean Chretien remains Liberal leader and is defeated by Harris. Harris must lead the CPC, not the PC Party.
 
No.

No.

No.

F--k no.

Bloody h--l mother of God no.

Harris gets way too much credit for things, and he made plenty enough screwups. He's better than his predecessor (Bob Rae) and successor (Dalton McGuinty), but that ain't saying much, and I don't think we want that guy leading the country. Him leading Ontario was bad enough, thank you.
 
No.

No.

No.

F--k no.

Bloody h--l mother of God no.

Harris gets way too much credit for things, and he made plenty enough screwups. He's better than his predecessor (Bob Rae) and successor (Dalton McGuinty), but that ain't saying much, and I don't think we want that guy leading the country. Him leading Ontario was bad enough, thank you.

As an alternative, why not have it be Canadian PM Gordon Campbell, with a POD between 1999 and 2002?
 
Because that's not the OP. I also knew TM would react in precisely this manner. Perhaps the next thread should be "PM Preston Manning." :p If someone answers the OP well enough, I just might write a mini-TL on a Harris PMship.
 
Because that's not the OP. I also knew TM would react in precisely this manner. Perhaps the next thread should be "PM Preston Manning." :p If someone answers the OP well enough, I just might write a mini-TL on a Harris PMship.

Well to get rid of Chretien, you'd need a perfect storm: A major scandal that directly implicates Chretien in criminal/highly unethical action; A 'united right' (or at least one that isn't engaging in fratricidal behaviour); A resurgent NDP; And a competent opposition leader.

Here's an attempt:

Say Adscam hits full force in 2001 or 2002 coupled with something similar to the alleged inside trading on imcome trusts that resulted in an RCMP investigation of the Finance Minister in the middle of the 2006 election campaign. Having Martin also be accused of corruption will make things even better for the Tory Alliance. Combine this with angry Liberal MPs who weren't connected to Adscam yet are going to be the ones who pay for it, and with the feud between Chretien and Martin, and the Liberal party rips itself apart at the worst possible time.

Follow this with an opportunistic reunion of the Tories and the Canadian Alliance. The Tory backroom smells Liberal blood and dumps Clark. The Alliance backroom/grassroots does the same to Day. The now reunited Conservative Alliance pretty much begs Harris to become their leader, and unlike OTL, he accepts, mostly due to the fact that the CA has a real chance at victory in the forthcoming election.

The NDP has been slowly recovering from the repeated thrashings they took throughout the '90s. Jack Layton is an inspiring though risky choice as leader, but when (super)Adscam blows, Layton seizes the opportunity to carve chunks out of the Liberal party's base support. Support for the NDP slowly but surely rises back to where it was in the late 1980s.

For the BQ, Adscam is like Christams come early, only better. After years of slow erosion, support for the BQ rises back to levels unseen since the 1993 election. The only worry the BQ has is that Tory support was also on the rise, mostly in rural ridings near Quebec City and in those in Quebec City itself.

As the last federal election was in November of 2000, Chretien does not have to call another one until 2005. Holding off turns out to be a fatal mistake. Had Chretien called an election immediately, he might have survived as the opposition was still in disarray at the time. Instead he gave the Tories and the NDP more than three years to get their act together. The 2005 election in marked as being one of the dirtiest in Canadian history. And when it is over, the result is on par with 1984 or 1993. Chretien's government is thrashed, not just defeated.

In 2000 the Liberals won 172 seats. In 2005 they've won a mere 35. Even 1984 wasn't this bad. Not a single Liberal MP is reelected in the province of Quebec. Both Jean Chretien and Paul Martin have gone down to a humiliating defeat.

In 2000 the NDP had won 13 seats. In 2005 they've won 45, including two in Montreal.

In 2000 the BQ had won 38 seats. In 2005 they've won 57. In a perverse twist, the BQ has become the "Loyal Opposition" for the second time in their decade and a half of existence.

In 2000 the Canadian Alliance won 66 seats and the PCs won 12. Going into the election the combined party had held 84 seats, including several they'd picked up in by-elections in 2003 and 2004. When the dust settles ofter the 2005 campaign, the united Tories have nearly doubled that, winning 164 of the 301 seats in parliament. Sixteen of their seats come from Quebec, where Tory candidates have defeated 14 BQ and two Liberal MPs.

Even as the last votes are being counted in Alberta and British Columbia, Mike Harris is celebrating his unprecedented victory. Before him, not one of Canada's Prime Ministers had first been Premier of a province. Tories of all stripes are celebrating their first real victory in more than a decade.

Liberals are too stunned to respond, not really able to comprehend what just happened.

The NDP feel that they've won a great victory, even if "Chainsaw Mike" is now PM. In the eyes of the NDP and the activists who support it, Mike Harris reactionary as he is, isn't a crook. They can live with him, especially if he finishes gutting the Liberal party and thus leaves the NDP as the only credible, national alternative to the Tories.

The BQ (and the PQ in Quebec City) are optimistically counting down the days until the next sovereignty referendum, to be held not long after Jean Charest and the LPQ lose an election in Quebec.
 
^ Very good, I must admit. But then again, I absolutely loathe the morons behind Adscam even more than I despise Harris, and I would imagine that a hardhead like Harris would be better than a crook like Chretien. Though the prospect of such a Liberal destruction and knowing Harris, he'd probably stand by and stay out of a Quebec referendum, which could well mean a sovereignty victory, though Harris and the Alliance guys would give Quebec eight kinds of hell in negotiations.
 
I don't think there'd be another sovereignty referendum. To beat Charest, the PQ needs a leader other than Landry or Boisclair. They need la Reine d'Ile Bizard, who's most qualified, most experienced and on the party's centre-left economically, and a etapiste rather than a pur-et-dur. I don't like Marois, but I respect her. Ever since '95 the PQ has reverted to its inter-referendum role as the provincial NDP, with the occasional sabre-rattling on language to rally the base.
 
I don't think there'd be another sovereignty referendum. To beat Charest, the PQ needs a leader other than Landry or Boisclair. They need la Reine d'Ile Bizard, who's most qualified, most experienced and on the party's centre-left economically, and a etapiste rather than a pur-et-dur. I don't like Marois, but I respect her. Ever since '95 the PQ has reverted to its inter-referendum role as the provincial NDP, with the occasional sabre-rattling on language to rally the base.

Well, I did say that they were being optimistic.

Now, given the circumstances of his election (quasi-ASB, but then real life can be just that too), how does a Harris Tory government affect the country? And what would the overseas reaction look like, even if it is only a ten second mention in a newscast?
 
The difference is that Harris was a populist at heart, unlike Harper- a regular Blue Tory/Thatcherite. That was a fundamental difference that led to their going separate paths after 1997. But on ideological fundamentals, no difference. Harris is much less interested in foreign affairs than Harper is. He'd also need a strong Quebec lieutenant- which means recruiting Harper's OTL Quebec team, who are the best available.
 
The difference is that Harris was a populist at heart, unlike Harper- a regular Blue Tory/Thatcherite. That was a fundamental difference that led to their going separate paths after 1997. But on ideological fundamentals, no difference. Harris is much less interested in foreign affairs than Harper is. He'd also need a strong Quebec lieutenant- which means recruiting Harper's OTL Quebec team, who are the best available.

Harris would also have to be careful to not get himself in hot water. Harper learned the hard way to watch his mouth when he's dealing with social issues, something which Harris repeatedly struggled to learn, particularly his "get those f--king Indians out of that f--king park" during the Ipperwash mess.
 
True that, as we saw with crime/culture in '08. That's what cost us our majority. It was a 905 pitch that broke 450's window.
 
Top