Canadian Federal Conservatives may trigger another election

[Enigma]

I don't care which way this government is going but one thing that really pisses me off is whenever I hear on CBC Radio of guests or people calling in bashing the Tories saying that 62-63% of the voters did not want them to govern. WTF!?! Are the people that dense? The Tories may only have about 38% of the votes but that is more than the other parties! I mean over 70% of the voters did not want the Liberals to govern, over 80% did not want the NDP, over 90% did not want the Bloc to govern, yet people choose to ignore that and instead go after the party that has the most seats than the other parties.

This "crisis" has idiocy all around it, perpetuated by all parties. It is like all of the leaders are fighting control of a sinking ship (economic crisis).

Other than the 63% garbage I find this whole brouhaha amusing. Dion and Layton were smarting over the election and are ever so eager to topple the Tories and brought up excuses upon excuses over why they wanted to topple the Tories and Harper gave them the excuse. Mind you, even if Harper didn't provoke the other parties with that economic update and was all nicey nice, Dion\Layton still would have formed the coalition and would have given some other bullshit excuse to topple Harper. This is a power grab through and through and you cannot say that it isn't. The U.S. politics (with the electing of Obama)is getting their shit together while Canada is tripping over itself.

[TheKwas]

Did you read the thread or are you just retarded?

[Enigma]

Did you read the thread or are you just retarded?

No I didn't actually. I mean I read the first page when it started but stopped. When I heard on the radio some of the crap from CBC I decided to make my opinion and instead of slogging through the pages, I just put in my two cents.

[Ryan Thunder]

I believe the manner in which the coalition is taking office doesn't make sense in a system where the political party with the most votes is put in charge.

So, you effectively said: "In our system, this coalition doesn't make sense", which is more than just stating a partisan opinion (an example of that would be "I don't like the NDP and Liberals working togeather because I hate the NDP more than I hate the Conservatives"), it's an interpretation of our democratic system which is simply incorrect any way you slice it. The fact that your still toeing your way around this misinterpretation just further illustrates the fact you're extremely dense.

Something doesn't have to make sense for it to be legal.

[Fiji_Fury]

Mind you, even if Harper didn't provoke the other parties with that economic update and was all nicey nice, Dion\Layton still would have formed the coalition and would have given some other bullshit excuse to topple Harper.

What you offer is speculation. The reality is that Harper used an economic update announcement in parliament to outline almost no actions on addressing the "great crisis" of the world while simultaneously ignoring all of the opposition party suggestions to do so, AND pissing all over the parties in a partisan funding attack while threatening to take away government employee strike rights. Not a single damn part of those partisan attacks would have helped the economy or created jobs, which is exactly why I (and others) call them partisan. Harper's record of "working with" the other parties is terrible and his trustworthiness when it comes to parliament is weak. And you can cut it a number of different ways but the fact is that only 38% of Canadians voted for the Conservative party and Harper holds a minority of seats in the house of commons.

Don't try to pretend that there's something wrong with the opposition parties seeking to enforce accountability on the government by threatening to topple it. That's part of their job.

[Fiji_Fury]

Er... sorry. Previous post quotes Enigma.

[Enigma]

Mind you, even if Harper didn't provoke the other parties with that economic update and was all nicey nice, Dion\Layton still would have formed the coalition and would have given some other bullshit excuse to topple Harper.

What you offer is speculation. The reality is that Harper used an economic update announcement in parliament to outline almost no actions on addressing the "great crisis" of the world while simultaneously ignoring all of the opposition party suggestions to do so, AND pissing all over the parties in a partisan funding attack while threatening to take away government employee strike rights. Not a single damn part of those partisan attacks would have helped the economy or created jobs, which is exactly why I (and others) call them partisan. Harper's record of "working with" the other parties is terrible and his trustworthiness when it comes to parliament is weak. And you can cut it a number of different ways but the fact is that only 38% of Canadians voted for the Conservative party and Harper holds a minority of seats in the house of commons.

Don't try to pretend that there's something wrong with the opposition parties seeking to enforce accountability on the government by threatening to topple it. That's part of their job.

I'm not say that it is wrong what the opposition is doing, in fact if I didn't make myself clear before, I do not care for either side.

Also this is a power grab. First the opposition was angry at what Harper did in the economic update. Harper later backed down and retracted the offensive parts of the update. Then the coalition said that it wasn't that but it was because Harper didn't bring out a stimulus package. Harper states that it will be brought up in the budget and the coalition said it take too long. I heard on CBC, a NDPer and a Liberal both saying that they would bring in a budget detailing the economic stimulus package before the Jan 27 yet when pressed on it, both of them pretty much said that it take until the end of next month to bring out a stimulus package. If it wasn't a power grab then the opposition could have amended the budget to suit their views as they collectively hold the majority of the seats without they themselves provoking Harper into proroguing parliament.

I just find it funny. Everyone there has been fling crap at each other, embarrassing the whole country with their shenanigans.

[Next of Kin]

Also this is a power grab.

I like how you posted earlier that the Conservatives had the largest slice of the pie in terms of the commons and therefore have mandate the govern. Are you sure that you shouldn't be spouting the "power is supposed to be earned" mantra that the right has been repeating over and over. So what that they have 38% of the house. The coalition had more and thus had more of a legitimate claim to rule than the conservatives. If you think that is dense then I suggest you move to the states as we have a parliamentary system where coalitions are free to form and dissolve on a whim. In 2004, Harper and the conservative douches saw fit to rally with the Bloc and the NDP to try and take down the Martin Liberals. Face it, you are going to see powerplays of some kind or another when a minority gov't is in charge.

[Enigma]

Also this is a power grab.

I like how you posted earlier that the Conservatives had the largest slice of the pie in terms of the commons and therefore have mandate the govern. Are you sure that you shouldn't be spouting the "power is supposed to be earned" mantra that the right has been repeating over and over. So what that they have 38% of the house. The coalition had more and thus had more of a legitimate claim to rule than the conservatives. If you think that is dense then I suggest you move to the states as we have a parliamentary system where coalitions are free to form and dissolve on a whim. In 2004, Harper and the conservative douches saw fit to rally with the Bloc and the NDP to try and take down the Martin Liberals. Face it, you are going to see powerplays of some kind or another when a minority gov't is in charge.

I don't give a shit who is in power. My stance is the same if this was the Liberal ruling or if it was the NDP or the Marijuana party. Also I did not say that the Tories have a mandate to govern. I find it hypocritical that others claim that the majority did not want the Tories to govern when even themselves fall into that same category. No one can use the election results to say that the other party wasn't voted to govern when all parties are in the same boat.

I am not calling the coalition dense nor did I say so. I consider all parties actions to be childish and idiotic and wish that all sides would plainly speak the truth rather than hide behind bullshit.

BTW, I will soon be moving to the U.S.(just need to save more money first).

[Phantasee]

I'm not really overly concerned with who's running the show over in Ottawa, but I am concerned about giving the Bloc so much power. Fuck the seperatists, they shouldn't be allowed to get any kind of hold on real power.

Also, I heard Elizabeth May (of the Green Party that has never won a seat, and who ran against Peter Mackay in his own riding) is going to get a spot in the Senate?

Hilarious.

[Ryan Thunder]

I'm not really overly concerned with who's running the show over in Ottawa, but I am concerned about giving the Bloc so much power. Fuck the seperatists, they shouldn't be allowed to get any kind of hold on real power.

Also, I heard Elizabeth May (of the Green Party that has never won a seat, and who ran against Peter Mackay in his own riding) is going to get a spot in the Senate?

Hilarious.

I hope you aren't serious.

[Phantasee]

I'm not really overly concerned with who's running the show over in Ottawa, but I am concerned about giving the Bloc so much power. Fuck the seperatists, they shouldn't be allowed to get any kind of hold on real power.

Also, I heard Elizabeth May (of the Green Party that has never won a seat, and who ran against Peter Mackay in his own riding) is going to get a spot in the Senate?

Hilarious.

I hope you aren't serious.

I'm very serious. I learned this at an anti-Coalition rally I went to on Thursday. I got interviewed by a couple news channels, because I looked a little more interesting than all the pale-faces there. My reason for being there? "My friend invited me to come hang out...and I hate the Bloc?"

[LaCroix]

I stumbled into a 63%-rally today. Not very impressive, some 200 people besides the skating place, but nice to see democracy being lived.

Can you explain to someone who has grown up in a linear-democratic european country (1 person= 1 vote, 1% = 1%), why there can be a party in power with holding only 38% of the votes? To me, it makes no sense. Every gouvernment without at least 50% of seats ( =50% of votes) is not able to rule, exept for using floating alliances to pass their things. They would get a no-confidence vote within days or weeks.

Why is it so strange that a coalition is formed and boots out the biggest party? Thats rather normal in europe. Parties form coalitions and grab power.

[Ryan Thunder]

I learned this at an anti-Coalition rally I went to on Thursday.

No offense or anything, but that just makes me immediately suspicious. Have you heard it anywhere else?

[SCRawl]

I learned this at an anti-Coalition rally I went to on Thursday.

No offense or anything, but that just makes me immediately suspicious. Have you heard it anywhere else?

I've read about it elsewhere, but I'd hoped that it was just a rumour. It seems like an odd choice to me.

[Next of Kin]

Please read the thread folks. The talk about the Bloc gaining power plus the Senate seat going to the green party has been mentioned and is just speculatory bullshit. The fact that it was spouted over an anti-coalition bullhorn does not make it true. Sheesh! What else was mentioned at the rally!?! Was Harper going to ask George W. Bush to invade Canada and install a neo-con puppet regime with Rush Limbaugh as the Grand Poobah!?!

[SCRawl]

Was Harper going to ask George W. Bush to invade Canada and install a neo-con puppet regime with Rush Limbaugh as the Grand Poobah!?!

Hey, he still has over a month in power. Don't give them any ideas.

[TheKwas]

I believe the manner in which the coalition is taking office doesn't make sense in a system where the political party with the most votes is put in charge.

So, you effectively said: "In our system, this coalition doesn't make sense", which is more than just stating a partisan opinion (an example of that would be "I don't like the NDP and Liberals working togeather because I hate the NDP more than I hate the Conservatives"), it's an interpretation of our democratic system which is simply incorrect any way you slice it. The fact that your still toeing your way around this misinterpretation just further illustrates the fact you're extremely dense.

Something doesn't have to make sense for it to be legal.

We're not even talking about it being legal, you haven't addressed any of the arguments stating that this is how Parliaments are supposed to work, and why it makes sense for Parliaments to work in this way. Perhaps you can make the argument that the Parliamentary system doesn't make sense to you, but that's very different from saying this coalition doesn't make sense in the Parliamentary system.

Can you explain to someone who has grown up in a linear-democratic european country (1 person= 1 vote, 1% = 1%), why there can be a party in power with holding only 38% of the votes? To me, it makes no sense. Every gouvernment without at least 50% of seats ( =50% of votes) is not able to rule, exept for using floating alliances to pass their things. They would get a no-confidence vote within days or weeks.

I agree that it makes no sense, but historically Canada has had only a few minority governments where a single party hasn't gotten 50% of the seats (the first-past-the-post system tends to split the vote between two major parties), and at the times where there has been minority governments, the 3rd and 4th parties were too ideologically different from each other to seriously consider forming a coalition. This time, however, with the economic crisis, the Conservative heavy-handed ruling, and there being no emphasis on separatism within the Bloc, all the left-wing parties have enough in common to form a coalition.

Canadians, simply put, are not used to coalition governments, so many are uneasy with the prospect.


One good thing that I hope can come out of this coalition (I doubt they will dethrone Harper after the prorouge, given the public's reaction), is that it gives Canadians more exposure to the idea of a Coalition, and perhaps next election the parties will openly admit and even run on the idea that they may co-operate in a coalition government.

[Enigma]

Well to get a majority of the seats in the House of Commons, a party only needs about 40% of the votes. It would be a curbstomp if a party received over 50% of the votes.

[Ryan Thunder]

Perhaps you can make the argument that the Parliamentary system doesn't make sense to you, but that's very different from saying this coalition doesn't make sense in the Parliamentary system.

Gah. I'll go with that, as it's rather evidently the case.

[Ryan Thunder]

Why is Ignatieff, who has spent less than a decade in Canada, now the leader of the Opposition?

What happened to that other guy, the one who was actually part of the Liberal party for a while and not some lousy import?

[Enigma]

Why is Ignatieff, who has spent less than a decade in Canada, now the leader of the Opposition?

What happened to that other guy, the one who was actually part of the Liberal party for a while and not some lousy import?

Because Rae threw a hissy fit because the party wasn't arsed to let everyone vote for the part leader and that he knew he was going to lose. It is going to be interesting to see how this pans out and see how hard the Tories are going to slam him in the attack ads.

[Ryan Thunder]

Why is Ignatieff, who has spent less than a decade in Canada, now the leader of the Opposition?

What happened to that other guy, the one who was actually part of the Liberal party for a while and not some lousy import?

Because Rae threw a hissy fit because the party wasn't arsed to let everyone vote for the part leader and that he knew he was going to lose. It is going to be interesting to see how this pans out and see how hard the Tories are going to slam him in the attack ads.

Oh, shit, no, not him. I'm from Ontario, I'm sure you understand my animosity towards the man. They're lucky he didn't get the job.

There were two good candidates when they ran the last leadership race, I thought, Dion and some other guy. Am I imagining this?

[TheKwas]

Why is Ignatieff, who has spent less than a decade in Canada, now the leader of the Opposition?

What happened to that other guy, the one who was actually part of the Liberal party for a while and not some lousy import?

Because Rae threw a hissy fit because the party wasn't arsed to let everyone vote for the part leader and that he knew he was going to lose. It is going to be interesting to see how this pans out and see how hard the Tories are going to slam him in the attack ads.

Oh, shit, no, not him. I'm from Ontario, I'm sure you understand my animosity towards the man. They're lucky he didn't get the job.

There were two good candidates when they ran the last leadership race, I thought, Dion and some other guy. Am I imagining this?

Without going into a big rant as to why Rae did everything right during his term as premier and it shouldn't be seen as a liability, both Ignatieff and Rae were front runners last leadership race with Dion coming up the middle at the very end.

[SCRawl]

There were two good candidates when they ran the last leadership race, I thought, Dion and some other guy. Am I imagining this?

There was Ken Dryden, former Montreal Canadiens Hall of Fame goaltender, former Toronto Maple Leafs President, and a pretty sharp fellow. He was dropped on the second ballot, IIRC, without endorsing another candidate.

There was also Gerard Kennedy, the former Minister of Education for Ontario, who essentially got Dion elected at the last Liberal leadership convention. I don't know if you recall how it went down, but on (I think) the third ballot, Dion and Kennedy were 3-4 to Iggy/Rae's 1-2. Kennedy would almost certainly have been dropped from the next ballot, so he and Dion put their pact into action: Kennedy dropped out, and endorsed Dion. The rumour was that Dion would have done the same if circumstances had gone the other way, but I don't know if that's been confirmed.

(Martha Hall-Findlay also ran, but she was out on the first ballot. I'm not as familiar with her background.)