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

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Why would you say that...are those 20% all going to vote one way or the other, but along the same party lines?

I dont get this.

My reasoning is that if the Conservatives who had 37% of the popular vote could get say >10% of the "extra" voter turnout, it could give them enough ridings to have a majority. Even if that 20% followed the same trend as the other 59% that voted, the Conservatives would have had increased their lead, which given past election results, still may have given them enough ridings for a majority. It's certainly not a sure thing, but it would have helped.

At the very least it would be more representative.

[metallicat]

A poll on the Global National website has 87% of the people voting that we are NOT better served with a coalition.

[photon]

Not only can you not have a pony...



Help us Obama, you're our only hope.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by flylock shox

I'm not sure it would be as bad as many people think. I imagine that's the prevailing opinion in blue-soaked Alberta, but don't forget that the Conservatives have not yet earned the trust of the rest of the country: how else to you explain their failure to earn a majority when their main opposition was so clearly floundering?

The fact that there are four viable parties in federal politics.

If not for the PC-Reform split, it's quite possible that we would have been in minority positions at times since 1997.

[Jade]

Originally Posted by flylock shox

If they never said it, they didn't lie about it.

And given the way the coalition only seems to just now be falling into place, there wouldn't have been anything for them to say anyway. Politicians of different parties work with and against each other behind the scenes all the time. It's called politics. But they usually only come out and say what they've been working on when the work is done.

Plus, they could hardly come out with a coalition until they knew the results of the new election. Campaigning on a platform of "we know Harper's going to win anyway" would have been a bit defeatist don't you think?

Wait so campaigning against a coalition in the election leading up to forming one was not lying? Liberal logic really does elude me sometimes. I'm going to need an explination on that one.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Jade

Wait so campaigning against a coalition in the election leading up to forming one was not lying? Liberal logic really does elude me sometimes. I'm going to need an explination on that one.

Its pretty hard to get bent out of shape over a politician lying. It's not like there are any that are immune to the phenomenom.

[Jade]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Its pretty hard to get bent out of shape over a politician lying. It's not like there are any that are immune to the phenomenom.

And while I completly agree with that statement, there are degrees. Somehow I think that leaving out the planned coup d'etat on the government is a fair bit worse than most lies we get.

[flylock shox]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The fact that there are four viable parties in federal politics.

If not for the PC-Reform split, it's quite possible that we would have been in minority positions at times since 1997.

You think so? I'm surprised.

My take on it is that the Conservatives have thus far done a solid job with their minority governments, and are the only party that has its house in sufficient order to govern at the moment. I think a statistical majority of Canadians would agree with me on this.

But for some reason, despite this, they can't get a majority mandate. Why is that? I think it's because lots of Canadians like the Conservatives, but only if they have a minority. They simply don't trust them with power. Whether there is good reason not to trust them is an open question, but their proposal to slash political funding provided at least some evidence that they are not to be trusted. So, those Canadians who like them but don't trust them will likely vote strategically next time around.

I suppose part of the difference between us is that I only see 2 viable parties because I define the term "viable" to mean "capable of forming the government" as opposed to "capable of participating effectively in government."

[flylock shox]

Originally Posted by Jade

Wait so campaigning against a coalition in the election leading up to forming one was not lying? Liberal logic really does elude me sometimes. I'm going to need an explination on that one.

All I said was that if they didn't say it they didn't lie about it.

If they did say it, then it's entirely possible they were lying.

I would see no problem, however, with campaigning on the basis of there not being a coalition, but then forming a coalition when the need arose subsequently. That would simply be adaptation.

[Tron_fdc]

You know what, if you put 3 different parties together to form a coalition, how hard is it going to be to bring THEM down? Seriously; you have a socialist, a seperatist, and a left of center party getting into bed, and it's not going to take very long for them to start fighting amongst themselves.

This may very well blow up in their faces a few months down the road.

[rubecube]

I don't get the NDP and Liberal supporters who don't see this as anything other than an assault on democracy. How the hell do you now tell anyone that voting is important?

[metallicat]

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=51442165364

Join it...not that it will do any good.

[Jade]

Originally Posted by flylock shox

All I said was that if they didn't say it they didn't lie about it.

If they did say it, then it's entirely possible they were lying.

I would see no problem, however, with campaigning on the basis of there not being a coalition, but then forming a coalition when the need arose subsequently. That would simply be adaptation.

I said they didn't campaign that they would do so, which they should have to give canadians the choice in the elections. Turns out they said they wouldn't.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../politics/home

They can't use the 'and then the need arose later' claim, because they haven't given other options the chance. Said they wouldn't do it, and yet already have one in place before the government can do anything to cause it. For all the 'conservatives have a hidden agenda' fearmongering the liberals do, they are the only ones who seem to have one.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by Tron_fdc

You know what, if you put 3 different parties together to form a coalition, how hard is it going to be to bring THEM down? Seriously; you have a socialist, a seperatist, and a left of center party getting into bed, and it's not going to take very long for them to start fighting amongst themselves.

This may very well blow up in their faces a few months down the road.

Thats exactly it. Everyone here is predicting the end of Canada but that is such a huge over exaggeration.

Plus i'm not very happy that Dion is going to get a chance to be PM. First time ever I did not vote Liberal in the Federal election.

[Hack&Lube]

We just need internet elections. National referendums at a mouse click. Instant results! No millions wasted.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I don't get the NDP and Liberal supporters who don't see this as anything other than an assault on democracy. How the hell do you now tell anyone that voting is important?

Just curious, but did you just find out today that coalitions were a possibility with our system? It's always been this way so I don't see why people are so shocked about it. I wonder if the backlash was this bad when Borden and Laurier formed their coalition in 1917? I believe there have also been coalitions in provincial parliament in the past.

It's not an assault on democracy. In the parliamentary system, parties can combine their seats and form mixed governments. Actually, if every government contained some kind of coalition, it would probably be more democratic as more people from all over the spectrum would have their voices heard.

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I don't get the NDP and Liberal supporters who don't see this as anything other than an assault on democracy. How the hell do you now tell anyone that voting is important?

I'll let Leader of the Opposition Stephen Harper answer that question.

Harper: We'll support the government on issues if it's essential to the country but our primary responsibility is not to prop up the government, our responsibility is to provide an opposition and an alternative government for Parliament and for Canadians. What the government has to do, if it wants to govern for any length of time, is it must appeal primarily to the third parties in the House of Commons to get them to support it.

http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/harper.html

[metallicat]

More people voted Conservative this past election, how are they being represented right now?

[flylock shox]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Just curious, but did you just find out today that coalitions were a possibility with our system? It's always been this way so I don't see why people are so shocked about it. I wonder if the backlash was this bad when Borden and Laurier formed their coalition in 1917? I believe there have also been coalitions in provincial parliament in the past.

It's not an assault on democracy. In the parliamentary system, parties can combine their seats and form mixed governments. Actually, if every government contained some kind of coalition, it would probably me more democratic as more people from all over the spectrum would have their voices heard.

Thank you for that.

That's what I've been trying to say.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

Thats exactly it. Everyone here is predicting the end of Canada but that is such a huge over exaggeration.

Plus i'm not very happy that Dion is going to get a chance to be PM. First time ever I did not vote Liberal in the Federal election.

Agreed.

Typically, coalitions are not formed with the idea that they will not last long. They usually just form in times of crisis in order to pass certain measures that are seen as important. For example, the Borden/Laurier coalition was formed so that they could pass conscription during WWI. After the war, the coalition fell.