The cost of getting rid of Stephen Harper is simply too high a price to pay, Liberals are saying.
Over here, Liberal MP Scott Brison makes the case:
"Whether it makes sense to have a $350-million election at a time when we are facing economic uncertainty and are teetering on the abyss of a deficit, whether it would make sense to have a $350-million election that the polls indicate really won’t have a big effect on the political landscape, is an important (question)."
Depending on which part of the country you live in, you should have by now received a leaflet from Stephane Dion informing you that Liberal MPs "have been working tirelessly to provide Canadians with a strong and principled alternative to Stephen Harper's ultra-right wing Conservative government."
Liberals want you to know that they are violently opposed to "Harper's ultra-right wing Conservative government" -- but if it comes right down to it, yeah, no, it's not worth the equivalent of $15 a voter to replace Harper.
It's better to have Harper extend a $5 billion war in Afghanistan (with the help of "strong and principled" Liberals) and blow $50 billion on corporate tax cuts instead of child care (with the help of "strong and principled" Liberals) than to spend money on something as frivolous as an election.
And Liberals call themselves an alternative? Really?
When it comes to producing fiction, the Dion Liberals are now more prolific than Stephen King.