Liberals will move to topple Conservative Gov't

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

If I remember right, he WAS on the way to a majority when he found himself campaigning in a very sudden, dramatic and decidedly unexpected global economic free fall . . . . .

You don't remember right. His polling average never went above 38%, and if you eliminate outliers he had a solid minority government well in hand both before and after the "economic free fall."

Dion's liberals, on the other hand, dropped precipitously in September (at the start of said "free fall" and never again broke 30%.

If you look at the numbers, the economic freefall hurt Dion a lot more than Harper. It may well have caused some soft liberals to ask themselves (and rightfully so in my view) whether Dion was the man to steer the ship in a crisis.

http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/elections/polls.html

[Sylvanfan]

Yeah, winning an election when the country is on the verge to hit one of the worst economic downturns in 60 years is like spending $25,000 to win $10,000. Sure you won, but in reality you lost.

I look foward to yet another minority government from an indescisive divided population.

I suspect the Liberals feel this might be their chance to take advantage of recession ravaged Western Canadians. I might finally be inspired enough to show up and vote against them. This recession has been brutal enough, I don't want them prolonging it, or finding a way to create another one thats worse after this one ends.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by FFR

I was just copying what CTV had has their article title when I posted the thread. It's changed since I posted the article.

But in any case - the article now clearly states that he cannot support the government any longer and will be putting forth a non-confidence motion to force an election. Is that not toppling the government? Especially considering that the NDP and Bloc have long been saying that they would support the Liberal's in a non confidence motion? I don't think that it's really a threat anymore.

Oh sorry, it's not your fault then, it's the hacks at CTV.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by 4X4

The number I always hear is $300 million. Maybe I listen to QR77 too much?

A quick google search of random political sites shows the number to be around $300 million as well.

2004 = $277 million
2006 = $270 million.

So this will be almost 900 million over a 4 year period.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Yeah, winning an election when the country is on the verge to hit one of the worst economic downturns in 60 years is like spending $25,000 to win $10,000. Sure you won, but in reality you lost.

I look foward to yet another minority government from an indescisive divided population.

I suspect the Liberals feel this might be their chance to take advantage of recession ravaged Western Canadians. I might finally be inspired enough to show up and vote against them. This recession has been brutal enough, I don't want them prolonging it, or finding a way to create another one thats worse after this one ends.

Because recessions are partisan?

Let's not get silly here. The Liberals will claim that the Tories caused the recession. This is stupid and false. The Tories will claim that the Grits would have made it worse, or that they will prolong it. This is also stupid and false. But it's also how politics works during a recession.

In reality, neither party is in possession of a magic wand with which to instantly end the global recession and put us all on the road to prosperity. Governments are a bit player in this stuff--they're a BIG bit player, but they're as beholden to the ebb and flow of the global economy as the rest of us are.

The rest is fearmongering--from both sides. Don't fall for it.

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

The Tories will claim that the Grits would have made it worse, or that they will prolong it. This is also stupid and false. But it's also how politics works during a recession.

You don't know that the grits wouldn't have made it worse or that they won't prolong the recession. Nobody can know that. The only person that knows that is maybe bizzaro-world super man and he isn't talking.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by nik-

A quick google search of random political sites shows the number to be around $300 million as well.

2004 = $277 million
2006 = $270 million.

So this will be almost 900 million over a 4 year period.

Is that number the total amount spent on the election (including private money spent by the candidates/parties for signage, advertising, etc.) or only the amount spent by Elections Canada?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Is that number the total amount spent on the election (including private money spent by the candidates/parties for signage, advertising, etc.) or only the amount spent by Elections Canada?

I don't know, that was just a quick search because I'm lazy

[CaptainCrunch]

When I'm Prime Minister there will be a new law. If you topple a government in mid term, if you lose the election, then the winning leader gets to execute you in whatever manner pleases him, plus the execution will be shown on PPV which should cover the election costs.

It will certainly add some interest and intrigue to elections and I bet that more people will vote.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Because recessions are partisan?

Let's not get silly here. The Liberals will claim that the Tories caused the recession. This is stupid and false. The Tories will claim that the Grits would have made it worse, or that they will prolong it. This is also stupid and false. But it's also how politics works during a recession.

In reality, neither party is in possession of a magic wand with which to instantly end the global recession and put us all on the road to prosperity. Governments are a bit player in this stuff--they're a BIG bit player, but they're as beholden to the ebb and flow of the global economy as the rest of us are.

The rest is fearmongering--from both sides. Don't fall for it.

I just wish Canada would get off the fence and declare a winner and a loser. I'm sick of Federal Elections because this is like the 8th fricken election in a decade. That is a waste of money. It's to a point where it's like I'll sit this election out because there will be another one next spring.

Maybe Canada will get headlines internationally for becoming civilized democracy's own gong show. Don't like communism....move to Canada they have an election every year.

[Pastiche]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

When I'm Prime Minister there will be a new law. If you topple a government in mid term, if you lose the election, then the winning leader gets to execute you in whatever manner pleases him, plus the execution will be shown on PPV which should cover the election costs.

It will certainly add some interest and intrigue to elections and I bet that more people will vote.

Good luck winning the Supreme Court challenge.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

If I remember right, he WAS on the way to a majority when he found himself campaigning in a very sudden, dramatic and decidedly unexpected global economic free fall . . . . .

In that sense, we might say he was particularly crafty in staying in power at all because something like that has been good enough, rightly or wrongly, to kill many a government before his.

Cowperson

Thats basically missing the point though. First the economy was in virtual free fall and Harper said that it was fundamentally strong. That probably cost him some votes as the sotck market crashed.

But the point that really cost him a majority was the cultural issue in Quebec. For that he has no other party to blame but his own and his own poor policy decision there. Many pundits believe that right there was the difference maker between a majority and a minority government.

[Pastiche]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

I just wish Canada would get off the fence and declare a winner and a loser. I'm sick of Federal Elections because this is like the 8th fricken election in a decade. That is a waste of money. It's to a point where it's like I'll sit this election out because there will be another one next spring.

See my posts explaining why we are where we are vis a vis minority-majority.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Pastiche

Good luck winning the Supreme Court challenge.

Governor Tarkin: The Supreme Court will no longer be of any concern to us. I have just received word that Prime Minister Crunch has dissolved the Court permanently. The last remnants of democracy have been swept away.
General Tagge: But that's impossible. How will the Prime Minister maintain control of the constitution?
Governor Tarkin: The regional governors now have direct control over the consitution. Fear will keep the provinces in line. Fear of this battle station

[Hack&Lube]

How about the people vote that instead of spending $900 million over 4 years for elections, that they spend a billion dollars over 4 years on healthcare!!!

[GirlySports]

I think the Liberals have spent more time today bashing the NDP than bashing Harper.

[LChoy]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I think the Liberals have spent more time today bashing the NDP than bashing Harper.

Maybe they're warming up, like a pre-season game

[EddyBeers]

If Harper would have adhered to his fixed election promise, we would be having an election right now in any event. Unfortunately, he could not adhere to his own legislation and called an election for narrow, partisan purposes a year ago.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/...rper-dion.html

"The Conservatives had set Oct. 19, 2009, as the date for the next federal election. However, the prime minister has recently suggested he is ready to pull the plug on his current minority government."

If anything, Steve and the gang should be happy there is going to be an election, it can get us close to back on schedule with his fixed election date legislation

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I think the Liberals have spent more time today bashing the NDP than bashing Harper.

I would speculate that herein lies their strategy. My thoughts are that the Liberals are gambling that the NDP will keep the Conservatives afloat. The NDP will likely gain some concessions from the Conservatives and claim that they are listening to the people by avoiding an election. The NDP cannot really afford an election right now even moreso than the other parties as I would argue that they have the most to lose.

The Liberals can use this to their advantage when eventually a non-confidence motion would pass likely in the Spring. I think that the Liberals wanted to show for political reasons that they will not support the Conservatives any more as they have shown to be weakened under the leadership of Dion and partially under Ignatieff.

Canadian politics

[Pastiche]

This strategy is divorced from reality.