2011 Canadian Election Thread

[peter12]

The hardcore Liberal partisans on this board love to talk up how ugly the Conservatives have made politics, and I agree, Harper has been very tiring in many respects (The Harper Government moniker, especially), yet there is a disturbing collective selective memory loss when it comes to the thuggish years of the Chretien syndicate.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

My guess is that Ignatieff is under intense pressure from the senior liberal Cabal to throw the dice on an election, that the Liberal's have waited long enough. I just can't see them doing anything but losing seats.

...

We know that the Liberal's are fairly disgruntled by Ignatieff's leadership, this seems like a really expensive way to effect a leadership revolt and I'm batsh$t surprised that Ignatieff who is a very smart man is willingly putting his head on the chopping block unless he wants to go.

Hit the nail on the head here, IMO. This is about the Liberal powers hanging Ignatief out to dry so they can use it as an excuse to turf him and "change".

Sure has a lot more sizzle than having him step down mid-term. Harper would eat them alive.

Sadly, it'll cost 8 zeros...

[Sylvanfan]

I guess Ignatief got word that he could go back to Harvard when he loses this election.

Elections used to mean something because you didn't have one every 2 or 3 years. This is just getting stupid.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

I guess Ignatief got word that he could go back to Harvard when he loses this election.

Elections used to mean something because you didn't have one every 2 or 3 years. This is just getting stupid.

I'm actually surprised this minority government lasted as long as it did!

[killer_carlson]

because I'm too lazy to look it up myself, has there been a longer consecutive reign for a minority status than Harper has put together?

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Elections used to mean something because you didn't have one every 2 or 3 years. This is just getting stupid.

This is the new reality of Canadian politics. It's unlikely any party can win a majority, so unless we start entertaining the idea of coalition governments (like every other countries with a parliamentary system), we're going to see nothing but unstable minorities and elections every two years.

As a slightly left-leaning moderate, I'm not sure what scenario scares me more: a Harper majority or a coalition government with Jack Layton and the NDP in a position of real power.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

because I'm too lazy to look it up myself, has there been a longer consecutive reign for a minority status than Harper has put together?

I remember Lester B. Pearson having two consecutive minorities lasting 2 or 3 years each. Don't know if there are any other before that.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

because I'm too lazy to look it up myself, has there been a longer consecutive reign for a minority status than Harper has put together?

Maybe the Liberal minority governments under Lester Pearson in the 60's?

[Edit]
Beaten by GirlySports!

[Dion]

Would you vote for this guy?

[CaptainCrunch]

I would vote for the Joker if he offered to show us a magic trick on the political leadership of this country.

[TylerSVT]

Im surprised by the amount of Liberals on this board.

Plain and simple the conservative government has saved our economic ass and has put us in an excellent position for future success. You cant argue with results. that right there is the ace that trumps all the other cards.

Not a liberal fan, never have been, they give to those who dont need it and usually run the government into the ground.

[CaptainCrunch]

I do have to give credit to previous liberal governments because they did put some excellent banking policies in place that protected us during the recession.

However that was then, I think this current group of Liberals is literally the gang that can't shoot straight.

[Yeah_Baby]

I always liked Ignatieff as an academic.

[killer_carlson]

I'm terrified that should the Liberals get in, they'll hand fiscal influence to an ndp in Bob Rae. It would ruin us forever.

[CaptainCrunch]

Sometimes Academics just don't work well in the real world.

I think Ignatieff has found that.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by TylerSVT

Im surprised by the amount of Liberals on this board.

Plain and simple the conservative government has saved our economic ass and has put us in an excellent position for future success. You cant argue with results. that right there is the ace that trumps all the other cards.

Not a liberal fan, never have been, they give to those who dont need it and usually run the government into the ground.

You say you can't argue with results, but you're choosing to ignore the good work done during the Chretien/Martin years where our economy was very strong, the budget was balanced, the federal debt was being paid down, personal and corporate taxes were reduced, and they put in place (as CaptainCrunch noted above) strong banking legislation that largely protected Canada from many of the problems that plagued the US financial industry during the recession.

I know it's not popular in Alberta to say anything positive about the Liberals because of a bad government policy from 30 years ago enacted by politicians who are now either retired or dead, but you have to give credit where it's due. The previous Liberal government did a great job with the economy and budget, work that has mostly been continued by Harper's team (I give him a pass for putting us into deficit spending again because of the recession).

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I know it's not popular in Alberta to say anything positive about the Liberals because of a bad government policy from 30 years ago enacted by politicians who are now either retired or dead, but you have to give credit where it's due. The previous Liberal government did a great job with the economy and budget, work that has mostly been continued by Harper's team (I give him a pass for putting us into deficit spending again because of the recession).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponsorship_Scandal

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

You say you can't argue with results, but you're choosing to ignore the good work done during the Chretien/Martin years where our economy was very strong, the budget was balanced, the federal debt was being paid down, personal and corporate taxes were reduced, and they put in place (as CaptainCrunch noted above) strong banking legislation that largely protected Canada from many of the problems that plagued the US financial industry during the recession.

I know it's not popular in Alberta to say anything positive about the Liberals because of a bad government policy from 30 years ago enacted by politicians who are now either retired or dead, but you have to give credit where it's due. The previous Liberal government did a great job with the economy and budget, work that has mostly been continued by Harper's team (I give him a pass for putting us into deficit spending again because of the recession).

Except it didn't end thirty years ago. I remember Chretien bitching that Albertan's didn't think right.

I also remember his arrogance when he flew over Alberta during a campaign and couldn't be bothered to stop in this province.

I remember when he decided to punish Calgary by moving our military base to Edmonton because we didn't vote in his candidates.

The Liberal's after the NEP and the back lash from that decided that we weren't going to vote for them so we weren't worth the effort, which is a horrible attitude to have for a supposed party of national interest.

And I give the Liberal's lots of credit for their banking programs, but I think that we exaggerate a bit on their budgets. Yes they balanced them, but they did it on the back or transfer payments, the pension, and healthcare which is now pretty much in a death spiral.

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Sometimes Academics just don't work well in the real world.

I think Ignatieff has found that.

I'm torn. I like the idea of having intelligent people run the country, but academia is such a bubble.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Each province receives a percentage of the seats in parliament in direct proportion to its population -- that's the exact opposite of being skewed. You may not like it, but that doesn't make it "skewed and broken".

Currently a few provinces are either slightly over- or under-represented because electoral districts have not been redrawn recently to reflect population data from the latest census. Alberta, BC, and Ontario have a few seats less than they should; Quebec is the only province with exactly the right amount of seats that their population mandates.

No they do not. The Atlantic provinces are totally skewed to have way too many seats for their population. And you can never take those seats away from them unless you amend the Senate, hence amend the Constituion. At present, no province can have fewer seats in the House of Commons than they have Senate seats. And currently the Atlantic provinces have 6 Senate seats, resulting in way too many MP's for their actual population.

And because each province can not have fewer MP seats than Senate seats, you can not address this in the future simply by redrawing boundary lines for each Constituency. In this case, the Constitution has to be amended.