Conservatives To Slash Federal Funding of Political Parties [Update-CPC backs down]

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Like it or not, Canadians HAVE given the Conservatives a very CLEAR mandate over the last two elections.

The mandate given to the Conservatives is one that represents less than the majority of the total seats available, but still the most seats as compared to any other party.

What this specifically means is that in passing any sort of governance, they will need to the support of at least one opposition party. This is very important to understand, they can't govern the country without flexibility. The last minority government lasted for more than 2 and a half years as the Liberals primarily supported most of the Conservative initiatives (when they didn't they worked together to come up with a compromise). We only got into another election because finally the compromises could not be reached and I would suggest that the Conservatives had thought they could reach a majority and decided to stop building consensus.

The people have spoken and said keep governing like you did and build consensus.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

If there's an election, the Conservatives will get their majority and it will be a landslide like this country has never seen before.

Think that might be a bit of a stretch.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Dan02

Think that might be a bit of a stretch.

I don't think it is. Now that the truth is out about just how greedy the Liberals, Separatists and NDP are.

As an aside, does anyone care to explain why the Separatists are allowed National Party status in this country?

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

Originally Posted by FanIn80

I don't think it is. Now that the truth is out about just how greedy the Liberals, Separatists and NDP are.

As an aside, does anyone care to explain why the Separatists are allowed National Party status in this country?

I can't explain it, but is sure does f$%k me off!

[metallicat]

Even better though, is I want to see how the Liberals and NDP explain getting into bed with a separatist party to the electorate. I do not EVER want to see the CPC going that route.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Just because it doesn't affect the number of seats doesn't make it completely meaningless.

Popular vote doesn't "mean anything" in the U.S. either, but it is often used to gauge the strength of a mandate. Not that hard to understand. More people didn't vote for Harper than voted for him. These things matter, whether you like it or not.

You're misunderstood. The only people who voted for Stephen Harper live in Calgary Southwest. The rest of the country voted for the candidates in their Electoral District.

While it can be argued that they are in line with one another, a vote for a Liberal candidate does not equal a vote against Stephen Harper. Especially if it is a strong Liberal candidate.

Yes, the same can be said for all party leaders.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Two elections in a row proves your post is incorrect.

"Most Canadians" did NOT vote for the Conservatives.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by SebC

"Most Canadians" did NOT vote for the Conservatives.

I don't think anyone is saying that. The heart of the debate here is differing opinions on how strong of a mandate a minority government really has.

[C_Rush]

Originally Posted by SebC

"Most Canadians" did NOT vote for the Conservatives.

True, but they did receive more of the vote than any single other party, which you can't just toss aside either.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by C_Rush

True, but they did receive more of the vote than any single other party, which you can't just toss aside either.

Which has more to do with how many parties are in which segments of the political spectrum than to do with what voters really want, the median (and probably also the average) Canadian voter is a liberal. Vote splitting is a huge factor in our system, which is why whilst I don't support rep-by-pop, I do believe we should have an automatic run-off system at the riding level.

[C_Rush]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Oh wow. Sour grapes much? I really don't know what to say to this. My mom is an NDP supporter and Campaign manager, and there's a couple NDPers who post here soooo I'll give you a chance to edit your post and leave a very nice apology before flaming back.

Blaster, I'm an NDP supporter and voted for our encumbent (who lost by 2,000 votes to the Conservative candidate), but I don't feel the party (or Layton) are being true to the Canadian voters here. We didn't win in the election, so take the lumps and move on. Don't disenfranchise the 38% of Canadians who voted Conservative.

[C_Rush]

Originally Posted by SebC

Which has more to do with how many parties are in which segments of the political spectrum than to do with what voters really want, the median (and probably also the average) Canadian voter is a liberal. Vote splitting is a huge factor in our system, which is why whilst I don't support rep-by-pop, I do believe we should have an automatic run-off system at the riding level.

I wouldn't pretend to know "what voters really want"; 38% voted Conservative, so that seems pretty clear. What do you mean by the average Canadian voter is a "liberal"? (just want clarification as to what you mean by that term).

[metallicat]

Originally Posted by SebC

Which has more to do with how many parties are in which segments of the political spectrum than to do with what voters really want, the median (and probably also the average) Canadian voter is a liberal. Vote splitting is a huge factor in our system, which is why whilst I don't support rep-by-pop, I do believe we should have an automatic run-off system at the riding level.

So then why don't they unite the left?

[Calgaryborn]

I don't see the justification to throw out a government who just recieved a mandate from the Canadian people if their behaviour is consistent with what they promised the electorate. It has been. The gist of their platform was to keep a handle on spending as best as they could in these times. They really didn't promise much more than that.

Neither of the other three parties presented a vision for change that appealed to anywhere near the number of voters as the Conservatives did. Joining together will give them a majority of seats but, one with no mandate from the Canadian people.

[Ford Prefect]

According to the National Post, it sounds like Ignatieff isn't onside with the coalition plan and may have enough Liberal caucus support to scuttle it.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...sn-t-game.aspx

A person close to Mr. Ignatieff said that any deal with the Bloc Québécois and NDP struck by Mr. Dion would be a “poison chalice” for the next leader. He said that Mr. Ignatieff has the support of more than 50 of the 77 Liberal MPs, so the success or failure of a coalition proposition will depend on how the leadership candidate views any deal.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

You're misunderstood. The only people who voted for Stephen Harper live in Calgary Southwest. The rest of the country voted for the candidates in their Electoral District.

While it can be argued that they are in line with one another, a vote for a Liberal candidate does not equal a vote against Stephen Harper. Especially if it is a strong Liberal candidate.

Yes, the same can be said for all party leaders.

Yeah, I understand how the parliamentary system works. Thanks for the explanation, but I've been around the block a couple of times.

But in reality, most voters know very little about their local candidates. A liberal voter who supports Stephen Harper would be the exception, not the rule. I didn't vote Liberal this year--because of Stephane Dion. Nothing to do with the local candidate that I actually would have been voting for.

The fact is, percentage of popular vote is a pretty fair measure of "mandate"--but if you don't like that one, how about this: a minority of seats in parliament, in spite of a fractured, disorganized and underfunded opposition. That spells F-A-I-L in any political environment, and anyone but the most dyed-in-the-wool conservative partisan will agree with that. If you can't win a majority against this crew, you can never win a majority--and in that sense, it's pretty clear that Canadians actually rejected Harper, in the sense that he got about the same number of votes as he received 2 years ago. He gained seats, mostly due to vote-splitting between the NDP and the Liberals, not because he created legions of new conservative voters. He wanted a majority, and he got the best opportunity any leader could ask for under which to create one. He failed.

That creates a certain political reality, and either Harper has failed to recognize it or he's a very deep strategic thinker who's setting some sort of nefarious political trap. My money is on the former.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

According to the National Post, it sounds like Ignatieff isn't onside with the coalition plan and may have enough Liberal caucus support to scuttle it.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...sn-t-game.aspx

Interesting--that's the escape valve, I guess. Ignatieff may come out of this as the only winner (other than Duceppe).

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

According to the National Post, it sounds like Ignatieff isn't onside with the coalition plan and may have enough Liberal caucus support to scuttle it.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...sn-t-game.aspx

My respect just went up a notch for Ignatieff.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

My respect just went up a notch for Ignatieff.

Me too--but more importantly, it opens a back door for Harper to get out of this with his power (if not his dignity) intact--and he can do it by approaching the "Ignatieff wing" of the Liberal party. There will be concessions, but my guess is they're more palatable than moving into another official residence.

[metallicat]

I have thought for a long time that Ignatieff will be the next Liberal leader. The bad thing about that for me, is that he is also probably the one to lead that party back to power at some point.

I hope he does scuttle this coalition though.