Why have the Liberals traditionally been the most successful

[Nate]

I was just taking a look at Canadian Political History and I am curious on your opinions as to why the Liberals have dominated Canadian Politics opposed to the Conservatives who seem to serve a term or two only to get pushed out by another long run Liberal Governement.

[margrace]

Here is my hypothosis, Canada is basically a slighty left of centre country. We look to Europe, where our ancestors came from and we look to the US who are generally our good friends, not their goverment but their people. So we try to take the best from both areas.

Most Canadians are proud of their country, but we also do not usually flaunt it. Lately howsever it appears that if another country tries to push us we will push back.

We gradually freed ourselves of colonial rule and whether it is a popular notion or not, colonial rule was exemplified by the Conservative party (Family Compact) . There were several rebellions in Canada, one of which was against this group.

Every once in a while a person or group come up with the notion that we are being taken to the cleaners for want of a better description by our socialist type programs. They want their money and they don't want to share it. This seems to strike a cord with enough of the electorate that they buy into the propoganda. That is until they find out that what these types really want is to do away with the middle class.

This is a very simplistic view but I think it helps to explain our forays into Conservative type governments.

Edited December 5, 2007 by margrace

[White Doors]

This is a very simplistic view

agreed 100%

[margrace]

agreed 100%

So what is your take on this, easy to be sarcastic.

[Wild Bill]

Here is my hypothosis, Canada is basically a slighty left of centre country. We look to Europe, where our ancestors came from and we look to the US who are generally our good friends, not their goverment but their people. So we try to take the best from both areas.

Most Canadians are proud of their country, but we also do not usually flaunt it. Lately howsever it appears that if another country tries to push us we will push back.

We gradually freed ourselves of colonial rule and whether it is a popular notion or not, colonial rule was exemplified by the Conservative party (Family Compact) . There were several rebellions in Canada, one of which was against this group.

Every once in a while a person or group come up with the notion that we are being taken to the cleaners for want of a better description by our socialist type programs. They want their money and they don't want to share it. This seems to strike a cord with enough of the electorate that they buy into the propoganda. That is until they find out that what these types really want is to do away with the middle class.

This is a very simplistic view but I think it helps to explain our forays into Conservative type governments.

I agree, a bit simplistic. Have you considered that most of those social programs that "take us to the cleaners" came from the Liberal Party? Note that most of these programs were noble in intent. They just were implemented in a bonehead, wasteful fashion since success was never measured by how well the program helped the people but by how well it helped the Liberals get their votes!

Did you consider that historically much of the Conservative vote came from the "middle" class? Also, poor and hardworking farmers. The Liberals have always been strong in cities. They've always been "also-rans" in rural areas, except for the Maritimes once Liberal "regional disparity programs" became the only way a lot of them could feed their kids. Somehow, over all these years those programs have never gotten very many of those Maritimers off the "dole". The programs seemed to really have been designed to keep them stuck and dependent on government support. Only off-shore oil has given any hope and the Liberals can't take credit for the oil being there.

As for colonialism, wasn't Sir John A MacDonald a Tory? And please, enough of these references to British heritage patriotism being somehow "colonial". I'm proud of my British heritage and have never felt any less an independent Canadian! This whole idea is a relatively recent outgrowth of multi-culturalism, where our original core culture has been hell-bent on repudiating its own heritage in favour of that of anyone else!

No, the reason the Liberals have most often been in power is because they've always been willing to give the people what they want before what they actually need! To paraphrase Bill Gairdner, the Liberals have always offered prostitute type services instead of that of a good wife. Of course they've been more attractive more often at the polls! Also, since we've never had a Senate that could represent us by regions the political power has always been in the cities. The Libs have been very good at getting the city vote, usually at the expense of the rest of the country, which simply does not have enough political power to defend itself.

Now for the first time in years we see what's happened to the Liberals when their top backroom boys of Warren Kinsella calibre bail on someone like Stephane Dion. The top elite of the Liberal party knew full well that after the Quebec reaction to Adscam and the backlash in the rest of the country, along with a united alternative with the Conservatives, they were going to be out of power for at least one election, if not two. None of them wanted to lead or work for a party that would be in opposition. So Dion is a caretaker and he's not getting their help. After he's gone there will be more distance from "the bad old days" of Martin and Chretien. The big guns will come out and play again and the Liberals will again be an effective force.

The big question will be what the Tories do in the meantime. Every day that Harper seems to be running a sensible style of government is another day when the old Liberal tactics of smearing the Conservatives as "Scary-Boo!" fade out some more. By the time Dion gets through caving with confidence votes because he's scared of an election the Tories may be so well entrenched that the Libs will have to fight for votes like they never have before.

We live in interesting times.

[M.Dancer]

Big Tent.

The Liberals were able to capture the high ground in the middle. The encompassed fiscal pragmatism and social democracy, neither being too extreme to aliante the wings. As well, continuing the old Conservative tradition of bringing in Quebec Federalists ala George E Cartier which when it works, brings the lion share of Quebec.

[Beavis]

The Liberals suck! Bunch of corrupt asswipes. He!He!He!

[DrGreenthumb]

Here's my take on why we screw up and elect a conservative goverment every so often. Under a con government we have very few very rich people who are in charge and who make decisions that benefit themselves to the detriment of all the rest of us. The people don't like that very much so we vote in a Liberal government. Slowly the Liberal government puts policies in place that make it easier for the poor to work their way up the financial ladder and become middle to upper class. The difference between rich and poor gets less and less until we have a lot more wealthy Canadians. We still have some poor people, but the vast majority have improved their financial status under Liberal policies until they can be considered middle class. They are earning more and have more money to save and have more assets. Now this is where GREED starts to corrupt these people, who forget that they were once poor and they start to despise the very Liberal policies that helped them to exit poverty and become successful. Now that they are part of the group that has money they don't want to give anything back to help the next generation of Canadians get a hand up. It makes them feel better to know that they are more well off than others. This GREED motivates people to vote in a Con government. This also explains why most of the Conservative voters are OLD, wealthy white people, whose families have already been here at least a generation, and have benefited from Liberal policies enough to become wealthy.

This GREED motivates enough of the new Liberal created middle class voters to vote conservative, and then the richest of these wealthy Canadians are allowed to pillage and rape the rest of Canada until our economy is in shambles, and this continues until enough of us are poor enough to outnumber the wealthyand middle class and we again elect a Liberal majority. Then with the disaster of the conservatives fresh in our mind we keep electing Liberals until they have sufficiently rebuilt our country and economy, which can take a long time when it has been so screwed up by the cons. When enough of us have once again become wealthy under Liberal policies, the GREED will take over and we will once again make the mistake of electing conservatives.

Its a sad endless cycle.

[Topaz]

I think we need to define the differences between the "Conservatives" and the" Progressive Conservatives???" Peter McKay came from the PC's and today he's Conservative, so how has he changed? Or has he? Better question is, the former Alliance members, how have they changed in their way of thinking? Do they think like a Alliance or do they think as a Conservative and why would they drop their thinking of the Alliance party did, was it wrong in thinking like a Alliance? I don't understand how a party can go from Alliance party way of thinking to a Conservative way of thinking anf yet Harper has said they are differnt from the former PC/s. How? Besides the way they answer in question period!

[Beavis]

If we elected the liberals continuously we would have socialism. Socialism has been a disaster. If you remove all the conservatives like in USSR for example, you do not create an ideal society. The cons are essential for maintaining the balance.

[Michael Bluth]

The premise of this post is the simplistic view.

Canadian political history at the Federal level can be divided into three distinct phases.

(I'll ignore the different party names and use Conservative for all precursors to the current party.)

1867 to 1921 was definitely dominated by the Conservatives.

20 years of Liberal rule. 34 years of Conservative rule.

Then the tide shifted.

1922 to 1983 was absolutely dominated by the Liberals

50 years of Liberal rule. 12 years of Conservative rule.

Then the tide shifted again.

1984 to 2007 has been pretty even.

12 years of Liberal rule. 11 years of Conservative rule.

If Harper makes it to the fixed election date than the Conservatives will have passed the Liberals for this most recent period in Canadian history.

So over the length of Canadian history it's not a matter of Liberal domination. It is merely a period of dominance, that ended 25 years ago.

[no queenslave]

Here's my take on why we screw up and elect a conservative goverment every so often. Under a con government we have very few very rich people who are in charge and who make decisions that benefit themselves to the detriment of all the rest of us. The people don't like that very much so we vote in a Liberal government. Slowly the Liberal government puts policies in place that make it easier for the poor to work their way up the financial ladder and become middle to upper class. The difference between rich and poor gets less and less until we have a lot more wealthy Canadians. We still have some poor people, but the vast majority have improved their financial status under Liberal policies until they can be considered middle class. They are earning more and have more money to save and have more assets. Now this is where GREED starts to corrupt these people, who forget that they were once poor and they start to despise the very Liberal policies that helped them to exit poverty and become successful. Now that they are part of the group that has money they don't want to give anything back to help the next generation of Canadians get a hand up. It makes them feel better to know that they are more well off than others. This GREED motivates people to vote in a Con government. This also explains why most of the Conservative voters are OLD, wealthy white people, whose families have already been here at least a generation, and have benefited from Liberal policies enough to become wealthy.

This GREED motsounds like a very poor explination. ivates enough of the new Liberal created middle class voters to vote conservative, and then the richest of these wealthy Canadians are allowed to pillage and rape the rest of Canada until our economy is in shambles, and this continues until enough of us are poor enough to outnumber the wealthyand middle class and we again elect a Liberal majority. Then with the disaster of the conservatives fresh in our mind we keep electing Liberals until they have sufficiently rebuilt our country and economy, which can take a long time when it has been so screwed up by the cons. When enough of us have once again become wealthy under Liberal policies, the GREED will take over and we will once again make the mistake of electing conservatives.

Its a sad endless cycle.

sounds like a very poor explanation. the reason is because the liberals are better liers; they promise you more and deliver less.. They take more in taxes ;and give some services back and use the rest for bribes and corruption. how is your golf course doing?.

What you want to check is how many times the majority of politicians in government were from Quebec; which wants to separate; demonstrating they are against colonial rule.

Quebec politicians have been in control of government in the vast majority of the time ; liberal or concervative government ; excluding Defenbaker's government.

Edited December 5, 2007 by no queenslave

[Beavis]

Liberal policies of making everyone "equal" basically screws the people that work hard to support the system and rewards the ones that do little or nothing. Hard-working people eventually get sick of being "equal" and vote for the Conservatives. This ends the Liberal reign.

[Nate]

I was debating with a friend and he the following statement, What do you think?

"The Liberals were successful because they were a coalition of power that stood for nothing. The Conservatives a party of principle and paid the price."

[Canuck E Stan]

I was debating with a friend and he the following statement, What do you think?

"The Liberals were successful because they were a coalition of power that stood for nothing. The Conservatives a party of principle and paid the price."

Perfect!

[mikedavid00]

I was just taking a look at Canadian Political History and I am curious on your opinions as to why the Liberals have dominated Canadian Politics opposed to the Conservatives who seem to serve a term or two only to get pushed out by another long run Liberal Governement.

Oh that's an easy one.

The Liberals have acheived their success by splitting up a country of people into minorities through the use of veroius 'tools', once our country become balkanized, they then pander to these minority groups for victory.

A lot of this was unplanned, but the political success was evident. And that's why they've been succesful. Depeneding on how you look at it, the Liberals 'won' the last election. That's how I see it. Every balkanized area voted Liberal.

The Americans are just beginning to figure this out also. That's why you see Mexican immigration continuing and all the benefits illegals recieve.

The only way to stop this is to give the vote to the 'real contributors' of our country; the private tax payer. That most likely exclused the majority of people on this site and the very owners of this site. All these people are ultimately living off my tax dollars and don't contribute into our system.

[mikedavid00]

Here is my hypothosis, Canada is basically a slighty left of centre country. We look to Europe, where our ancestors came from and we look to the US who are generally our good friends, not their goverment but their people. So we try to take the best from both areas.

You are living on another planet.

The only people that voted Liberal last election where visible minority ridings and some French ridings.

[mikedavid00]

Liberal policies of making everyone "equal" basically screws the people that work hard to support the system and rewards the ones that do little or nothing. Hard-working people eventually get sick of being "equal" and vote for the Conservatives. This ends the Liberal reign.

I agree.

But ridings will change Liberal the more immigrants spread out further into rural areas. The numbers prove it.

[Keepitsimple]

Funny thing about the "immigrant vote" going to the Liberals by default.....in general, immigrants are almost exclusively Conservative by nature. The first generation of immigrants just haven't been able to get over the brain-washing that the Liberals gave them over the last 15 or so years. When a majority government is constantly accusing a devided right of being intolerant of peoples rights and liberty, its easy to see how they would continue to vote for the party that let them in. Many of our "new" immigrants are not so new anymore. They are also not stupid. More and more, they are starting to see through the power hungry veneer of the rudderless Liberals and are willing to at least consider the Conservatives.....and the more thay kick the tires, the more that they see that they have a lot in common - families, justice, less government - these are Conservative values - but they also just happen to be immigrant values. Second generation immigrants, when they reach voting age, will have a clear conscience in choosing a party. My bets are on Conservatives being able to slowly turn the immigrant ship around and dock it in a harbour that is more in tune with their conservative nature. Time will tell.

[Michael Bluth]

My bets are on Conservatives being able to slowly turn the immigrant ship around and dock it in a harbour that is more in tune with their conservative nature. Time will tell.

That's a good call.

Start with the more entrepreneurial immigrant groups, a la the more conservative Cuban-Americans.

Doing so could really change the electoral calculus in this country.

[guyser]

The only people that voted ........

Who did you vote for?

Oh, sorry I forgot.The rain.

[M.Dancer]

Blame it on the rain that was falling, falling

Blame it on the stars that did shine at night

Whatever you do don't put the blame on you

Blame it on the rain yeah yeah

[guyser]

Blame it on the rain that was falling, falling

Blame it on the stars that did shine at night

Whatever you do don't put the blame on you

Blame it on the rain yeah yeah

Fab or Rob?

[Michael Bluth]

Fab or Rob?

Fabian Manning and Rob Anders?

[M.Dancer]

Fab or Rob?

Oh just Fab Thank you......