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

[Bobblehead]

I think the CPC got around 10 seats in Quebec the last election, and with the anti-Quebec rhetoric around this issue, I think they lose most of those in the next election. Where can the CPC make up those lost seats plus the extra they need for a majority?

[malcolmk14]

Originally Posted by Gozer

That's the first thing I've heard that have me thinking this isn't a total disaster for the Liberal party.

You missed when I said it 250 posts and over 6 hours ago?

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...61#post1545361

[vicphoenix13]

Originally Posted by SeeGeeWhy

Yes, but if it would have worked, the move may have caused the Liberals (and perhaps the NDP) into bankruptcy - forcing them to dissolve!

No, the move backfires either way. Say Harper bankrupts the Liberals and NDP by abolishing funding for political parties from the government. What do you think happens next? Its obvious the next step would be for the NDP and Liberals to merge into one united left-wing party. Thus, Harper would have created an monster opposition party.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I think the CPC got around 10 seats in Quebec the last election, and with the anti-Quebec rhetoric around this issue, I think they lose most of those in the next election. Where can the CPC make up those lost seats plus the extra they need for a majority?

B.C. and Ontario.

[GreatWhiteEbola]

Originally Posted by Flame On

Irellevant.

Thank you for your input, I think you meant:

ir⋅rel⋅e⋅vant   /ɪˈrɛləvənt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [i-rel-uh-vuhnt] Show IPA Pronunciation

–adjective 1.not relevant; not applicable or pertinent: His lectures often stray to interesting but irrelevant subjects. 2.Law. (of evidence) having no probative value upon any issue in the case.


What is it about my comment that you feel is irrelevant?

The retention of status quo, enabling a chance to save our country? Imagine Dion as Prime Minister? Laughable, least popular Liberal in history!

The least democratic choice for the GG, is to install a seperatist coalition?

My ballot not having a coalition choice?

Keep the above definition in mind when contemplating your responce.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by vicphoenix13

No, the move backfires either way. Say Harper bankrupts the Liberals and NDP by abolishing funding for political parties from the government. What do you think happens next? Its obvious the next step would be for the NDP and Liberals to merge into one united left-wing party. Thus, Harper would have created an monster opposition party.

Agreed. Harper created this mess. The coalition definitely responded in the most disgusting way imaginable but Harper practically goaded them into it with some of his proposals.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

If the coalition decides to go forward with their plans, the best thing Ignatief could do would find 12 other Liberal MP's to vote it down. This would show Canadians thats not all Liberals are out to "destroy" the country.

Wishful thinking on your part. I doubt this has a snowball chance in hell of ever happening. They may not show up for the vote, but chances are very slim to none that they would actually vote against their own party.... especially Ignatief who wants to become the new leader.

The best thing that Igantief can do is try to break up the coalition even before they get a chance to vote, and also to try and move up the leadership convention to get rid of Dion asap.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by rubecube

B.C. and Ontario.

I think they harmed their chances in Ont, but I guess that remains to be seen. I also don't think Ont. wants to vote for Dion. I could see Layton coming up through the middle - another 3rd choice gainer.

I don't think the CPC will increase their seat count in Ontario anymore with Harper as the leader.

Pure guess, but that is my feeling.

[malcolmk14]

Does anyone really think Stephen Harper, about as meticulously calculating as you can get in politics, hasn't carefully planned all of this out?

I'll stick to my position that Harper saw this coming, knew exactly how it would play out, and took the lowest-risk possible route to destroying the Liberals and getting his way.

Call him self-serving, call him an ideologe, but you certainly can't call him an idiot.

[old-fart]

Perhaps not, but Dion and Layton have definitely hurt their chances by getting into bed with the separatists in a blatant power grab. If you don't think that will be played up in an election campaign, you're only fooling yourself. This idiotic move by Dion could be the final nail in the Liberals coffin.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by vicphoenix13

No, the move backfires either way. Say Harper bankrupts the Liberals and NDP by abolishing funding for political parties from the government. What do you think happens next? Its obvious the next step would be for the NDP and Liberals to merge into one united left-wing party. Thus, Harper would have created an monster opposition party.

Wouldn't happen.

Liberals and NDP are different beasts. Liberals are centrists and chase the votes. NDP (on the federal level) are to the left.

They were pushed together in this case due to the political funding issue and the union issue, but I doubt the coalition would have been formed voluntarily otherwise.

[flylock shox]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I think the CPC got around 10 seats in Quebec the last election, and with the anti-Quebec rhetoric around this issue, I think they lose most of those in the next election. Where can the CPC make up those lost seats plus the extra they need for a majority?

Another interesting issue.

From what I can tell, this whole thing has really ticked off people in Alberta in Saskatchewan, but the Conservatives can't gain any ground in those provinces anyway, so all that anger will go for nought if another election is held soon. Harper's comments have alienated people in Quebec, so I think the Conservatives can expect to lose a few seats in that province, with the BQ being the major benefactor. I don't see the actions of the NDP and Liberals allowing them to gain strength, and unless they run as a coalition they'll still be splitting the votes of the left leaning. However, it would seem that lots of people in central Canada find the actions of the coalition no more offensive than some of the Conservatives' budget proposals (or Harper himself), so I wouldn't expect the Liberals/NDP to lose much ground in Ontario either.

Basically, it seems to me that another election could well impose another minority Conservative government. Assuming, of course, there isn't a leadership change within the Liberal party and a formal coalition with the NDP going into a new election. That would throw everything out of whack. As might a change in the Conservative leadership.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Phaneuf3

Best for the conservatives != best for the country.
If the government falls and another election brings in another unstable government, they've done far more damage to the economy than any stimulus package (yes, even one crafted by Jack Layton) could fix for a long time.

I disagree. I don't think another minority government would result in more damage to the economy.
Besides, if Harper failed to win a majority on his third kick at the cat, I believe he would step down as leader of the Conservatives, and I suspect that the eventual new leader would be McKay who would be much more palletable to a lot more Canadians.

After that, we'd have a showdown between Ignatief and McKay and your guess is as good as mine at to who would win that one.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Does anyone really think Stephen Harper, about as meticulously calculating as you can get in politics, hasn't carefully planned all of this out?

I'll stick to my position that Harper saw this coming, knew exactly how it would play out, and took the lowest-risk possible route to destroying the Liberals and getting his way.

Call him self-serving, call him an ideologe, but you certainly can't call him an idiot.

You would think he would have won a majority govt last election. Isnt' that a safer strategy?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Does anyone really think Stephen Harper, about as meticulously calculating as you can get in politics, hasn't carefully planned all of this out?

I'll stick to my position that Harper saw this coming, knew exactly how it would play out, and took the lowest-risk possible route to destroying the Liberals and getting his way.

Call him self-serving, call him an ideologe, but you certainly can't call him an idiot.

I think Harper called the election when he did because he probably figured that because of having a recent election that the Liberals would not be prepared to vote against him in a confidence matter, and he really wanted to sneak in his no-strike and anti-pay equity measures before the new year so that he could work that into the new budget.

He miscalculated big time and hopefully realizes that a minority government CAN'T rule like a majority ever. It was very sneaky and underhanded, but in a more subtle way than the Liberal and NDP were by trying to form a coalition.

[llama64]

Originally Posted by GreatWhiteEbola

Status quo is retained, nothing has changed, an appropriate comprimise must be sought with this time. The least democratic choice is allowing a coalition to form government. My ballot didn't have a check box for coalition.

This is where I maintain that people aren't understanding how our government works.

Every single MP is elected. You do not vote for your Prime Minister. You vote for your MP. Those words next to "Conservative Party" are the MP's name... We do not, should not and never ever will vote specifically for a party. If you personally vote this way, that doesn't change the mechanics of the system and you shouldn't be shocked when it behaves differently then you thought it would.

If the Liberals and the NDP unite into a single party, that's a perfectly fair and democratic option. If that uniting leads to a house majority, that's still democratic, as every seat represents a defined group of Canadians.

How is this so hard for people to understand? This was taught in High School for crying out loud. If you want to vote directly for your executive, become an American citizen.

All Harper (and the GG) have done is delay action. Honestly, does anyone believe the Liberals and NDP are going to act in anything resembling a concilliative fashion? No... they will simply topple the government in January and force the GG to make a descision then. And the amount of anti-Bloc crap coming out of the Conservatives for the past week has done nothing to help sway their opinion of the whole mess.

Remember, the Liberals, NDP and the Bloc have to play nice with eachother for them to even hold onto power. If they fail, we're back at yet another election, more weeks of non-government during a turbulent period, and more wasted money.

Harper screwed up big time. If Conservatives are angry, they should be calling for his head.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I think they harmed their chances in Ont, but I guess that remains to be seen. I also don't think Ont. wants to vote for Dion. I could see Layton coming up through the middle - another 3rd choice gainer.

I don't think the CPC will increase their seat count in Ontario anymore with Harper as the leader.

Pure guess, but that is my feeling.

If the Leger Marketing poll in today's Sun is any indication, I don't think that Harper is risking much in Ontario.

While the province is virtually split on whether an election or a coalition is preferable, Ontario is as concerned as the rest of Canada over the inclusion of the separatists, and holds the most confidence in the Conservatives as the choice to lead Canada through these economic times.

It was notable that in the poll, 33% of Canadians said the Conservatives were the best choice to lead us, but only 19% said the coalition. The Liberals alone got 14%.

So it comes down to the fact that nobody in Canada actually believes this coalition is good for the economy, and clearly, 62% of Canadians do not support this coalition.

So why are these hypocrites continuing to try and pass their selfish intentions off as "what's best for Canadians"? We don't believe them when they say that, and that includes Ontarians.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Does anyone really think Stephen Harper, about as meticulously calculating as you can get in politics, hasn't carefully planned all of this out?

I'll stick to my position that Harper saw this coming, knew exactly how it would play out, and took the lowest-risk possible route to destroying the Liberals and getting his way.

Call him self-serving, call him an ideologe, but you certainly can't call him an idiot.

I just thought that he had bullied the opposition all through the previous session, and he saw a time when Dion was a lame duck, the Liberals didn't have any money, there had just been an election that had been called early and it would be political suicide to force another election, no one would do anything that would appear to be "joining" with the BQ, and he would attach these measures on what was being called a response to the economic crisis.

He thought it would be almost impossible for the opposition to be able to coordinate and attempt to trigger an election no one wanted, let alone form a coalition.

He was wrong. No one is saying he is an idiot, he just misread this situation.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I think the CPC got around 10 seats in Quebec the last election, and with the anti-Quebec rhetoric around this issue, I think they lose most of those in the next election. Where can the CPC make up those lost seats plus the extra they need for a majority?

Originally Posted by flylock shox

From what I can tell, this whole thing has really ticked off people in Alberta in Saskatchewan, but the Conservatives can't gain any ground in those provinces anyway, so all that anger will go for nought if another election is held soon.

Just to tie these two points together- talking to people in Manitoba it would appear that a lot of people are angry at the Liberals/NDP over this whole matter. Manitoba is an oddity in that they tend to vote either NDP or PC- and the Liberals sometimes get in as the 3rd party up the middle. This might strengthen Manitoba and perhaps NW Ontario.

I can't see the CPC losing too much of English Montreal, so with Manitoba making up what is lost in PQ, it may be a wash.

And I have to think that some of those close ridings in Ontario would swing CPC after all of this.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Does anyone really think Stephen Harper, about as meticulously calculating as you can get in politics, hasn't carefully planned all of this out?

I'll stick to my position that Harper saw this coming, knew exactly how it would play out, and took the lowest-risk possible route to destroying the Liberals and getting his way.

Call him self-serving, call him an ideologe, but you certainly can't call him an idiot.

I think you need to read this article.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/0..._crisis_harper

From the article:

One source says Harper responded bluntly: "We misjudged the reaction of the opposition."

One MP said Harper then delivered an emotional speech in which he took the blame for what was happening: "(The funding cut) was a caucus decision. But I'm the leader and this is my responsibility."