Coalition Deal To Topple Minority Tory Govt- [Update Parliament Prorogued until Jan]

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

Green Party backs coalition. May may get a senate seat.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../politics/home

How many of you who are outraged with this Coalition voted Green last election? The Green Party would have ceased to exist with Harper's proposed bill.

This is why Harper will NEVER win a majority in Canada. He will never win over the Ontarians who see him as too extreme.

And Green Party Leader Elizabeth May is endorsing the proposed coalition government and says she has spoken with Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion about the possibility of her being appointed to the Senate.

Elizabeth May is a hack, and anything she says or does in this goes immediately out the window. She's for sale, and her asking price is a Senate seat.

Next, there's going to be a "report" of the leader of the Marijuana party being offered a bag of dope for his support of the coalition.

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

Was Canada an undemocratic country before? Because it's not like this coalition option was put in place this year.

Also for all you Liberal fearmongers. What harm did the Liberal party who had a majority government for 8 years under Chretien do to Alberta?

Is that how we measure government success? Whether or not they harmed people? The reason no one in the west liked Chretien, in my view, was that he never made an attempt to include the entire country in its national politics. It was all Ontario all the time, and that's good reason for the West to be upset.

[ok, ok,....I get it]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

Was Canada an undemocratic country before? Because it's not like this coalition option was put in place this year.

Also for all you Liberal fearmongers. What harm did the Liberal party who had a majority government for 8 years under Chretien do to Alberta? (Besides give us that horrendous poster of Bronnconnier shaking Chretiens hand all over Calgary.)

no no you are right Alberta has always been looked after by the Liberals.....

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by troutman

54% > 38%

Why does it matter if Canadians were asked to vote on a coalition? It is implicit in our political system that this can happen.

Come on man.....NO one voted 54% for any party...no one. No matter how you want to spin it.

BUT...

Say you are right then I propose this once again as no one has responded since I first said it...



I propose there should be an election at the end of January and the NDP/Liberals/Bloc run a campaign based on creating a coalition, since I watched their leaders sit in front of the flags of all provinces and territories this afternoon and proclaim " it is in the best interests of Canada" that they do so.

Let the chips fall where they may after that. And should Harper fail to get a majority, he shoudl agree to resign and go to the backbench.


Sound fair...and democratic more than overthrowing a government on a budget proposal that hasn't even hit the vote process yet?

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by troutman

54% > 38%

Why does it matter if Canadians were asked to vote on a coalition? It is implicit in our political system that this can happen.

It's actually a pretty simple concept, and I know you're a smart guy so I don't need to explain it. I'm also aware of the concept of asking a question you already know the answer to, just to create an effect.

[FLAMESRULE]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

Green Party backs coalition. May may get a senate seat.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../politics/home

How many of you who are outraged with this Coalition voted Green last election? The Green Party would have ceased to exist with Harper's proposed bill.

This is why Harper will NEVER win a majority in Canada. He will never win over the Ontarians who see him as too extreme.

And that right there is why this is an undemocratic coup!!! She is a half wit politician who now "may" get a say in our democratic process. This is an embarrassment. If the Green cant raise their own funding, tough crap. This kind of fear mongering makes my blood boil...

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by ok, ok,....I get it

no no you are right Alberta has always been looked after by the Liberals.....

Well from the previous posts comparing Liberals to Stalin and to Nazi Germany, I would like to know after the NEP fiasco what the liberals have done to DESTROY Alberta?

Actuallly thinking about it. I'm much more concerned with Stelmach as my premier and Bronnconnier as my mayor then having resigning-in-May Dion as my prime minister.

[GreenTeaFrapp]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

This is why Harper will NEVER win a majority in Canada. He will never win over the Ontarians who see him as too extreme.

Considering Ontario elected more Conservatives then Liberals, you're wrong. No one is going to be winning any majorities until Quebec stops electing traitors.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

Green Party backs coalition. May may get a senate seat.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../politics/home

How many of you who are outraged with this Coalition voted Green last election? The Green Party would have ceased to exist with Harper's proposed bill.

This is why Harper will NEVER win a majority in Canada. He will never win over the Ontarians who see him as too extreme.

Oh good god that babbling idiot a Senator. Same old same old...handing out future influence to friends. Chretien negotiating this, martin, manley, McKenna and Romanow on the "economic council", May (close friend of Dion) getting a Senate seat....

Harper miscalculated sure but it wasn't like the update was going to be voted on then and there. There was time to massage it to get House support. And the Tories have taken things off the table and put other things on the table. Yes at the threat of losing power but that's what a minority is all about.

[habernac]

Anyone else find it just a little bit funny that none of this even warrants mention on a site like cnn.com? Hey, it's important news that Rosie O'Donnell's crappy new show got cancelled after one episode, but Canada who?

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by GreenTeaFrapp

Considering Ontario elected more Conservatives then Liberals, you're wrong. No one is going to be winning any majorities until Quebec stops electing traitors.

Chretien did it twice.

[Mccree]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I propose there should be an election at the end of January and the NDP/Liberals/Bloc run a campaign based on creating a coalition, since I watched their leaders sit in front of the flags of all provinces and territories this afternoon and proclaim " it is in the best interests of Canada" that they do so.

Let the chips fall where they may after that. And should Harper fail to get a majority, he shoudl agree to resign and go to the backbench.


Sound fair...and democratic more than overthrowing a government on a budget proposal that hasn't even hit the vote process yet?

You hit the nail on the head. Let them run as one party and let the chips fall where they may. If Harper loses fine but at least the people of CANADA made that choice.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by habernac

Anyone else find it just a little bit funny that none of this even warrants mention on a site like cnn.com? Hey, it's important news that Rosie O'Donnell's crappy new show got cancelled after one episode, but Canada who?

I think they're still pissed off that we haven't submitted our final vote count for the last Presidential Election.


...and big ups about the Rosie O'Washedup Show being canceled. That's awesome!

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by habernac

Anyone else find it just a little bit funny that none of this even warrants mention on a site like cnn.com? Hey, it's important news that Rosie O'Donnell's crappy new show got cancelled after one episode, but Canada who?

Rosie has a new show? Damn, I usually don't miss train wrecks.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Its an interesting strategy, and it might sharply reduce the seats that the NDP holds in the West which in theory could give the Conservatives the majority numbers that they want. but I would be more concerned if the Conservatives forced an election in this way that there might be severe backlash in Ontario and East.

I would prefer that the perception remained that the Troika forced this election.

I'm not sure that forcing an election is as good a strategy as Conservative supporters think it is. All it would take is for the Liberals and NDP to formalize their coalition as extending to the election, and Conservative gains become very difficult: if the Liberals were to run no candidates in ridings with NDP incumbents and vice versa, and they were to run only one candidate between them in other ridings, the conservatives could actually not only fail to gain seats but actually lose seats.

Certainly it would make all the Liberal-incumbent seats safe. In the NDP incumbent seats, it's a matter of whether more Liberal voters would go to the NDP/Liberal coalition, or CPC? Some seats will go one way, some will go the other. But there would also be the possibility of losing seats that a Conservative now holds with less than 42% of the vote. Using BC as a microcosm, I see three seats that the Conservatives could conceivably acquire, and three they could lose to a coalition candidate.

If the Conservatives are backed into a corner, calling an election is a fair gamble since they have nothing to lose, but the outcome of such an election is far from a sure thing.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by troutman

54% > 38%

Why does it matter if Canadians were asked to vote on a coalition? It is implicit in our political system that this can happen.

That is the point I was trying to make. If someone wants to exercise their right to vote, they should also realize that they have an obligation to learn how the system works and what their vote actually means and the implications it has. Saying that they were ignorant when they voted is no different than people who plead ignorance after they break the law. It's not a defense.

Maybe it's a failing in our education system... Do high schools still teach Canadian history and civics?

[Nancy]

Originally Posted by troutman

54% > 38%

Why does it matter if Canadians were asked to vote on a coalition? It is implicit in our political system that this can happen.

A coalition being formed where it involves the largest seatholder in the House of Commons, sure. A coalition of secondary seatholders, no way.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by octothorp

I'm not sure that forcing an election is as good a strategy as Conservative supporters think it is. All it would take is for the Liberals and NDP to formalize their coalition as extending to the election, and Conservative gains become very difficult: if the Liberals were to run no candidates in ridings with NDP incumbents and vice versa, and they were to run only one candidate between them in other ridings, the conservatives could actually not only fail to gain seats but actually lose seats.

Certainly it would make all the Liberal-incumbent seats safe. In the NDP incumbent seats, it's a matter of whether more Liberal voters would go to the NDP/Liberal coalition, or CPC? Some seats will go one way, some will go the other. But there would also be the possibility of losing seats that a Conservative now holds with less than 42% of the vote. Using BC as a microcosm, I see three seats that the Conservatives could conceivably acquire, and three they could lose to a coalition candidate.

If the Conservatives are backed into a corner, calling an election is a fair gamble since they have nothing to lose, but the outcome of such an election is far from a sure thing.

That sounds like vote-fixing. Definitely something I'd want to see in a democratic election.

[wpgflamesfan]

Originally Posted by octothorp

I'm not sure that forcing an election is as good a strategy as Conservative supporters think it is. All it would take is for the Liberals and NDP to formalize their coalition as extending to the election, and Conservative gains become very difficult: if the Liberals were to run no candidates in ridings with NDP incumbents and vice versa, and they were to run only one candidate between them in other ridings, the conservatives could actually not only fail to gain seats but actually lose seats.

Certainly it would make all the Liberal-incumbent seats safe. In the NDP incumbent seats, it's a matter of whether more Liberal voters would go to the NDP/Liberal coalition, or CPC? Some seats will go one way, some will go the other. But there would also be the possibility of losing seats that a Conservative now holds with less than 42% of the vote. Using BC as a microcosm, I see three seats that the Conservatives could conceivably acquire, and three they could lose to a coalition candidate.

If the Conservatives are backed into a corner, calling an election is a fair gamble since they have nothing to lose, but the outcome of such an election is far from a sure thing.

How can you claim that all the Liberal-incumbent seats would be safe?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by troutman

54% > 38%

Why does it matter if Canadians were asked to vote on a coalition? It is implicit in our political system that this can happen.

I do strongly disagree with you, unless your telling me that in the last election, the three parties were running under one banner, and they had a pre-disposed vote splitting strategy.

Out of that 54% percent that voted for the left party, what percentage of each would have no interest in voting for their party if they knew that their party was going to hop into bed with the Libs? the NDP? or the Bloc?

You could also turn it around and say that 74% of Canadians didn't vote for the Libs, 82% didn't vote for the NDp, 90% didn't vote of the block and only 42% didn't vote for the Conservatives.