David Emerson crosses floor to the Tories

[FurnaceFace]

I'd go with something along these lines for the cartoon:



caption: "No, I'm not black, I'm midnight blue!"

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Hard for anyone to say they didn't see something like this coming.

Within two weeks of the election?

I'd say it will shock the shorts off everyone.

Is there any other precedent for it?

The list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ssed_the_floor

Cowperson

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by transplant99

In both instances, I blame the person, not the party that gained them.

Clearly the party offered him a cabinet position to cross, so I don't see how they go free in your mind.

But regardless, this is an action that the Liberals got blasted for (i.e. "bribery") and was used as proof that they needed to be kicked out, and yet the party that was supposed to return integrity to Canadian politics does the exact same thing before they've even warmed their seats.

It's yet another nail in the coffin of the argument that we have one party that is morally superior and therefore more "worthy" of governing.

[Shawnski]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Within two weeks of the election?

I'd say it will shock the shorts off everyone.

It was discussed here on Election night, CP.

Originally Posted by Transplant99

I really wonder if there may not be a deal or two made in the next couple days to have a couple Lib MP's cross the floor.

Considering the seat totals for all parties, it was politically prudent to garner at least one floor crosser.

Edit, and in that thread, not one person that I can see posted a comment of disagreement.....

[PYroMaNiaC]

Originally Posted by Mike F

Clearly the party offered him a cabinet position to cross, so I don't see how they go free in your mind.

Actually, on CBC this morning at the swearing in, it was stated that he asked if he could cross. Harper probably gratefully accepted because he needed some more experience in his cabinet, but he didn't coerce him or wine and dine him to cross either.

Agree though. There needs to be a bi-election. Vancouver deserves it. If the people still vote Liberal, well then, they get no representation in Cabinet.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by PYroMaNiaC

Actually, on CBC this morning at the swearing in, it was stated that he asked if he could cross. Harper probably gratefully accepted because he needed some more experience in his cabinet, but he didn't coerce him or wine and dine him to cross either.

Agree though. There needs to be a bi-election. Vancouver deserves it. If the people still vote Liberal, well then, they get no representation in Cabinet.

I would be way more upset with Harper if he did NOT allow Emerson to cross after asking since him being on the Conservative side means Parliament will run a lot smoother now simply because of where the votes stack up.

It's also nice to have an MP from Vancouver overseeing the 2010 Olympics, isn't it?

[Vulcan]

I gotta say that an NDP- Conservative alliance [as suggested] strikes me as kind of unholy and ten years ago would have been unbelievable.

As for Emerson crossing, it's just good politics as far as Harper is concerned. Spare me all the outraged reactions from people who actually believe politics can be a moral occupation.

People who vote unthinkingly along party lines are suffering a huge awakening. I like to check out the candidate myself and follow party lines secondly. I've ended up voting for five different parties doing this. If the party can't provide a decent candidate [ie Enders] it's a reflection on the party.

[FurnaceFace]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Considering the seat totals for all parties, it was politically prudent to garner at least one floor crosser.

Couldn't agree more. If you take this position then you must have been ok with Boolinda crossing then. Oh...wait...I have a sense you wouldn't have liked that...well then I'm not sure how the cases are different. If it's politically prudent for one party to gain enough seats, it's got to be the same for the other parties as well.

It's politics and this type of this will always happen. Should it happen though if you are trying to stand as the white knight in the face of corruption. Does this not leave a bad taste and a question mark? Does this not allow everyone who said "Hidden agenda" a few weeks ago to point their finger and say "SEE!!!! It's happening!!!"?

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by FurnaceFace

Couldn't agree more. If you take this position then you must have been ok with Boolinda crossing then. Oh...wait...I have a sense you wouldn't have liked that...well then I'm not sure how the cases are different. If it's politically prudent for one party to gain enough seats, it's got to be the same for the other parties as well.

It's politics and this type of this will always happen. Should it happen though if you are trying to stand as the white knight in the face of corruption. Does this not leave a bad taste and a question mark? Does this not allow everyone who said "Hidden agenda" a few weeks ago to point their finger and say "SEE!!!! It's happening!!!"?

It's prudent in this case because they needed this to gain a majority when voting with the NDP. They can now align with any other party and have a majority. With Belinda, it wasn't necessary for the Liberals to have one more seat to get that support.

[Shawnski]

Hey Furnace, perhaps you missed my previous post...

Personally, I am not impressed, and concur with most posts here (yes, including the "power slut whore" ones!!)

[FireFly]

Forgot to add that something has happened since the election as well that may have caused this.... The terms of that guy's severance package were released. For the life of me, I can't remember who that was now.

[Incinerator]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

People who contributed to his campaign should be able to sue him for fraud. Seriously. This is very, very . . . . fraudulent. In fact, the Liberal party should be able to sue him for fraudulent use of their monies as well.

It would be interesting to see a court draw a line between "normal" political activity and fraud.

If he was the one doing the soliciting and pushing to come over, then the weight of this falls on himself . . . . . you're not going to turn down a freebie if you're the Conservatives.

If the Conservatives were out actively soliciting this and offering deals then the hypocrisy charge will be well earned.

Really, this guy should be wacked in every newspaper and on every television station and on every radio station call-in show.

It's disgusting.

Cowperson

I concur, it's beyond disgusting. I hope this guy and Belinda and whoever else is gonna do something like this next get run over by a bus--the campaign bus of their original party.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

I hate floor crossing alltogether.
If someone want's to leave their party fine, but as most folks will agree, the MP should either have to resign and face a bi-election, or sit as an independant and not be able to get a cabinate seat out of it.

As most people here probably know, I'm definately a conservative supporter, and I don't like this any more than when Belinda did it. Is it beneficial to my party? Sure, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by FireFly

It's prudent in this case because they needed this to gain a majority when voting with the NDP. They can now align with any other party and have a majority. With Belinda, it wasn't necessary for the Liberals to have one more seat to get that support.

That must be a hell of a big box of straws you keep reaching into.

They both switched sides to gain power. Despite a couple minor differences, it's the same thing.

[FlamesAddiction]

What a power whore!! At least Stronach was a long-time dissenter about certain issues within the Conservative party before she defected.

Actually, I don't really care. It's politics - that's just the way it is. It's crooked and underhanded, and it's exactly why most of the good folks here are better than the people we elect.

I just hope this wasn't part of what Harper had in mind when he wanted "cleaner" government. By that I mean; the end of sneaky moves like this one.

[Shawnski]

Interesting perspective from the Vancouver Sun on this....

All the hue and cry over floor-crossing Liberal David Emerson and unelected, soon-to-be-senator Michael Fortier vaulting straight onto the Tory front bench merely drives home the point.

"This seems to be a clear nod toward quite a pragmatic, centrist style of government," said Allan Tupper, a political scientist at the University of British Columbia.

Put another way, the old grassroots Reform party is dead, dead, dead.

With just three Alberta ministers - and as many from Ontario (nine) as all four western provinces combined - Harper has rejected playing up the old West Wants In slogan.

In fact, with western Liberal MPs having held the finance, health, industry and deputy prime minister jobs under the former Paul Martin government, David Taras of the University of Calgary argues that real cabinet influence has actually shifted east.

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/na...1df7d4&k=52829

[PYroMaNiaC]

The shift has to be to the East doesn't it? If Harper wants to retain power in the next election, he'll have to give more sway to the East. He has to show them that he's not scary, and will give thought to Eastern ideas. That doesn't mean he'll abandon his western roots. Although time will tell.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

That must be a hell of a big box of straws you keep reaching into.

They both switched sides to gain power. Despite a couple minor differences, it's the same thing.

Lol. I was speaking as to why the Conservatives would allow such a thing to happen, not why the MP in particular did this. Certainly, both Belinda and David switched to gain power, but why would the Conservatives allow such a thing when they said 'they would have to carefully consider such a move'? (Note they did not actually say they would never allow it, rather they would carefully consider it.) My response to that is that one extra seat allows them to form a coalition with any of the other parties instead of restricting them to two. In the case of the Liberals allowing Belinda in, they did not need her support, nor did they need to give her a Cabinet seat for support in an area where they were lacking. From the governing party's perspective, they are indeed to completely different circumstances.

Perhaps your anger over this matter has caused you to fail to realize I have neither applauded or condoned this action as of yet. I'm not grasping straws, I'm offering possible explainations. If I were the Conservative leader, and I were one seat short of being able to form coalitions with any one party, I would certainly consider the possibility of allowing a defector into my party as well. Especially one with the credentials of Emerson. Does that make it right? I haven't said one way or the other. I'm not in Harper's head or Emersons so i can't say what thought processes went into this decision.

[Zarathustra]

This is hilarious. We need to get some of those Stephen Harper and Peter MacKay quotes from when Stronach crossed the floor.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Mike F

Clearly the party offered him a cabinet position to cross, so I don't see how they go free in your mind.

But regardless, this is an action that the Liberals got blasted for (i.e. "bribery") and was used as proof that they needed to be kicked out, and yet the party that was supposed to return integrity to Canadian politics does the exact same thing before they've even warmed their seats.

It's yet another nail in the coffin of the argument that we have one party that is morally superior and therefore more "worthy" of governing.

When the Tories are caught defrauding taxpayers of their money for the party's personal gain, or the party right up to the Prime Minister comes under investigation into dozens of scandals, then you will have a point.

You can use this incident to further a partisan attack of your own, but one black mark does not put Harper and the Conservatives anywhere close to the wanton criminal acts of the Liberals.