Liberal Democratic Party of Canada

[Barts]

The Canadian conservatives were only able to form a government after the Reform Party and the Progressive Conservative Party united. The Liberals, under Chretien, maintained majorities because the "right" was split between two parties.

Is it time now for the "left" to form one party to regain power? If the Liberals and New Democratic Party formed a new party, perhaps the Liberal Democratic Party, would that unification of the left mean a return to power for left of centre, progressive government? Perhaps the Greens would participate, but apart from the environmental polices they tend toward small "c" conservative policies.

[scribblet]

I doubt it would work, is there any talk of it anywhere ?

[M.Dancer]

Is it time now for the "left" to form one party to regain power? If the Liberals and New Democratic Party formed a new party, perhaps the Liberal Democratic Party, would that unification of the left mean a return to power for left of centre, progressive government? Perhaps the Greens would participate, but apart from the environmental polices they tend toward small "c" conservative policies.

If the Liberals eveer want to govern again they will have to remember they are not a party of the left but of the centre.

85% of Canadians regularly reject the leftwing NDP and 95% have rejected the Fringe Greens...roping the liberal fortunes to those two parties would be like tieing them to a heavy anchor.

Once this election is over and the Liberals have shed themselves of this sheep in sheeps clothing, they can rebuild and reclaim the centre.

[gc1765]

I don't see it happening.

A merger between the NDP and greens would make more sense.

[cybercoma]

I don't think it would happen because the Liberals aren't necessarily a left of center party. In a country where federal politics is dominated by regional segregation (eg. Conservatives in the west and Block in Quebec), The Liberals have been pragmatic about their message, shaping it to collect support from different areas of the country. They're not necessarily ideologues forcing their message on the public, instead they pander to the electorate in order to preserve their power. The NDP and The Greens would have to shift dramatically to the center of the spectrum to even have a working relationship with The Liberals.

For that matter, I think it's important to note that The Conservative Party, whose center of power is in the west, has done a pretty good job of extending its reach with Stephen Harper. Censoring his MPs, although controversial, has allowed them to get the appropriate message across to the voters, so that people slowly stop seeing them as The Western Party.

Although power is centralized within the party, I think their ideas of decentralizing power in Ottawa should play a key role in gathering more votes in Quebec. The Bloc is after all a faction of the old Mulroney Conservatives and with the topic of secession slowly losing steam, I think the idea of a Quebec nation, distinct but united with Canada will gain favour and we'll start seeing people support a federal party again. The party that makes the most sense to support is the one that is going to make the most effort to allow the provinces more freedom and I think The Conservatives are the only answer for that.

The question once again will be how many seats The Conservatives and The Liberals each get in Quebec.

As a side note, here in Fredericton, The Liberal incumbent is stepping out of politics. Taking Andy Scott's place with The Liberals is David Innes, a civil engineer who is President and CEO of The Fredericton Airport Authority. Running against him for The Conservatives is Keith Ashfield, a former MLA for NB that was the Minister of Natural Resources from 2003-2006. He is also heavily involved with the school boards in NB.

The votes in the past have been close, but not slim, however, I have a feeling The Liberals may lose this riding this time around.

[eyeball]

Should the Liberals, NDP, and Greens form a left of centre party.

Yes. Without proportional representation I see little alternative for the 60% of us who oppose submitting to the dictatorship of a 40% minority of authoritarian right-wing religous zealots.

The existance of a center feels like a myth, especially in our FPTP system.

Edited September 17, 2008 by eyeball

[cybercoma]

Yes. Without proportional representation I see little alternative for the 60% of us who oppose submitting to the dictatorship of a 40% minority of authoritarian right-wing religous zealots.

The existance of a center feels like a myth, especially in our FPTP system.

Who are these religious zealots you're talking about? Stephen Harper and The Conservatives have yet to push social-conservative ideology on the electorate and for good reason. Canadians won't stand for social conservatism, so a party that pushes a social conservative agenda won't stay in power, consequently The Conservative Party should avoid social conservatism if it wants to stay in power.

[jdobbin]

Is it time now for the "left" to form one party to regain power? If the Liberals and New Democratic Party formed a new party, perhaps the Liberal Democratic Party, would that unification of the left mean a return to power for left of centre, progressive government? Perhaps the Greens would participate, but apart from the environmental polices they tend toward small "c" conservative policies.

The NDP and Greens will probably try to get Liberals to cross the floor to them (even though the NDP have in the past been against floorcrossing).

The decimation of the Liberals in the election probably means talk of a merger will be unnecessary. The remaining Opposition parties can fight over what is left of the Liberals. Of course they should keep in mind that just as many Liberals will just go over to the government side.

At the moment, the Liberals look to be a casualty as they have been in Saskatchewan and Manitoba. A footnote to history, perhaps.

[M.Dancer]

The NDP and Greens will probably try to get Liberals to cross the floor to them (even though the NDP have in the past been against floorcrossing).

The decimation of the Liberals in the election probably means talk of a merger will be unnecessary. The remaining Opposition parties can fight over what is left of the Liberals. Of course they should keep in mind that just as many Liberals will just go over to the government side.

At the moment, the Liberals look to be a casualty as they have been in Saskatchewan and Manitoba. A footnote to history, perhaps.

The Liberals have been delt serious blows before....Mulroney's majorities come to mind....talk of their demise is premature and is a border line scare tactic.

[August1991]

The Canadian conservatives were only able to form a government after the Reform Party and the Progressive Conservative Party united. The Liberals, under Chretien, maintained majorities because the "right" was split between two parties.

Is it time now for the "left" to form one party to regain power? If the Liberals and New Democratic Party formed a new party, perhaps the Liberal Democratic Party, would that unification of the left mean a return to power for left of centre, progressive government? Perhaps the Greens would participate, but apart from the environmental polices they tend toward small "c" conservative policies.

It has always been a source of amusement to me that the Left typically wants to restrict choice (for example, people are not free to choose schools or health care) yet the Left itself is incapable of denyiing choice to itself.

Leftist voters have a choice in which party to support but I don't have a choice in my health care decisions or in where to send my children for schooling.

Barts, you want to restrict the choices of NDP, Green and Liberal voters. As a Leftist, at least you are consistent.

Edited September 17, 2008 by August1991

[DrGreenthumb]

Yes. Without proportional representation I see little alternative for the 60% of us who oppose submitting to the dictatorship of a 40% minority of authoritarian right-wing religous zealots.

The existance of a center feels like a myth, especially in our FPTP system.

Ummm sure Jack Layton should be the leader since he's already viewed as the best leader of the centre-left parties by Canadians, we could call it the NEW Democratic party. I'm just kinding....sorta! Actually I was thinking of emailing Jack and suggesting that he work with some Liberals , even announce that an NDP cabinet would include some prominent Liberals, and Even a green MP if they can elect one. Show Canada that an NDP government WOULD be able to function properly in the house of commons because the NDP will be much more open to co-operation with the other parties than the aggressive, bullying style of government that Mr Harper exlempified.

I think it would actually inspire a new faith in Canadian politicians if Jack Layton ran a minority government, we CAN have a minority government that co-operates and gets the business of governning done. The conservatives have already squandered the huge surplus that Canada had because of the good economic practices of the Liberals, the Liberal party has a lot of good members. Some bad apples have been used by the conservatives to smear the entire party which is just more Tory mudslinging. The Liberal party has been very good to Canadians, historically. The Conservatives screw up the economy every time they aare in power. I sincerely hope my countrymen don't buy this bunk about needing Harper to lead us out of the ecomomic crisis that HIS policies created. He inherited the largest federal surplus in our history and he blew it all already, lining the pockets of his big oil buddies and CEO's in the process, and putting thousands of Canadians out of their jobs. The conservatives don't even think us working people deserve to make a basic minimum living wage of at least 10 dollars an hour for our sweat. Meanwhile the bank CEO makes more on the first hour of the first day of the year than we make all year! They get to charge us a dollar at the bank machine every time we take out our money? Everybody should try and elect a jack Layton MINORITY government this time, the NDP will do a lot more to help the "average joe " in this country than anyone else, by taking on some of these big companies and restricting the outrageous fees and interest they are charging us.

Jack also has some great ideas about making med school cheaper for Canadian kids, so that we start raising enough of our own doctors that there is no longer a shortage. Let the students sign a contract with the federal government that they will work at least 10 years in Canada in the public system and then Canada will not charge them for their education. Under this plan dedication to studies and aptitude would determine who becomes a doctor instead of just whose parents can afford medschool.

The policies of the NDP and Liberals work to make it easier for hardworking everyday people start from scratch and become more wealthy if they work hard. Also when the left governs it is easier to work less but still be able to "get by" and enjoy day to day life. Conservative policy works to protect "established wealth". In other words the gap between the very wealthy and everyone else grows by leaps and bounds when conservatives govern. These people have benefited from the social and economic policies of the left and were able to aquire wealth, but they are greedy and do not want to contribute to the next generation of Canadians who should be able to enjoy the same benefits and easier path to the middle class that was offered to the now wealthy. The conservatives have practically bankrupt Canada after inheriting the huge surplus that they COMPLAINED about the Liberals having. The Conservatives have blown Canada's nest egg. If we are in for economic tough times, it is Harpers fault. We need to defeat Harper before he can do any more damage to what was a very robust ecomomy when he came to power.

Edited September 17, 2008 by DrGreenthumb

[jdobbin]

Barts, you want to restrict the choices of NDP, Green and Liberal voters. As a Leftist, at least you are consistent.

And the right wing solution to merge into one party. That doesn't restrict choice?

[Keepitsimple]

The Canadian conservatives were only able to form a government after the Reform Party and the Progressive Conservative Party united. The Liberals, under Chretien, maintained majorities because the "right" was split between two parties.

Is it time now for the "left" to form one party to regain power? If the Liberals and New Democratic Party formed a new party, perhaps the Liberal Democratic Party, would that unification of the left mean a return to power for left of centre, progressive government? Perhaps the Greens would participate, but apart from the environmental polices they tend toward small "c" conservative policies.

No.....like the Right had to do, I think the Liberals and other Left parties need to walk in the wilderness for 10-15 years to create a compelling reason and proper motivation to unite. Unification should be done on policy and principle - not political expediency.

[jdobbin]

No.....like the Right had to do, I think the Liberals and other Left parties need to walk in the wilderness for 10-15 years to create a compelling reason and proper motivation to unite. Unification should be done on policy and principle - not political expediency.

The Liberals are unlikely to do any walking except to other parties or it will become a small rump of a party like we have seen in places like Manitoba.

Edited September 17, 2008 by jdobbin

[kengs333]

85% of Canadians regularly reject the leftwing NDP and 95% have rejected the Fringe Greens...roping the liberal fortunes to those two parties would be like tieing them to a heavy anchor.

"Fringe" as in the TV series? Or did you mean "fringe"?

The Greens may eventually become the left-of-centre alternative to the Liberals, but I doubt that the Liberals would ever consider merging. Out of pride, they will continue to exist and hang on as a minor party, a relic of a bygone era.

[August1991]

And the right wing solution to merge into one party. That doesn't restrict choice?

Yes, it does.

So, there we have the irony. The Right generally proposes free choice in markets but restricts the choice politically whereas, the Left restricts free choice in market decisions but offers it politically.

Anyway, dobbin, I'll agree that the Liberals are not really Leftists. The Liberals have no firm ideology or any principles other than pragmatism and getting and holding power. As Trudeau once said, the Liberals are the party of the radical middle.

The Liberals have been delt serious blows before....Mulroney's majorities come to mind....talk of their demise is premature and is a border line scare tactic.

You noticed that too, Morris. I wondered whether Dobbin was rrying out a new Liberal strategy, akin to appealing to the sympathy vote or passive-agresive behaviour.

"The Liberals will disappear! Do Canadians really want such a Canada? A Canada where Neocon Harper is a dictator?"

-----

Changing government power is a nerve-wrenching experience. Only sophisticated, mature democracies manage it. Most countries "prefer" dictatorships because it avoids the issue of transferring power.

Well, if the Tories win a majority, Canada will be well on its way to being a two party democracy. Since 1984, the Libs and the Tories have traded 24 Sussex. It looks like this process will continue. The Liberals will eventually clean up their act, raise some money, choose a new leader and then maybe in 10 years or so, they'll get back into 24 Sussex.

In all this, what is new is that Canada's regional divide is increasing blurred. Mulroney made it possible for Quebecers to vote Tory and Harper has picked up where Mulroney left off. It's still fragile but this is a huge change in Canada's political history.

[kengs333]

The Liberals have been delt serious blows before....Mulroney's majorities come to mind....talk of their demise is premature and is a border line scare tactic.

Not really. The PCs are effectively dead and buried, usurped by the Reform/CA, so the Liberals are no less immune to being eradicated. Of course none of the parties on the left have the fraticidal desire to destroy their rival like the Reform/CA did. That was nasty, indeed. Sadly, this is the party that may now form a majority. To bad they discarded all those quaint notions about democratic reform and made the transition to quasi-fascism.

[jdobbin]

Yes, it does.

So, there we have the irony. The Right generally proposes free choice in markets but restricts the choice politically whereas, the Left restricts free choice in market decisions but offers it politically.

Anyway, dobbin, I'll agree that the Liberals are not really Leftists. The Liberals have no firm ideology or any principles other than pragmatism and getting and holding power. As Trudeau once said, the Liberals are the party of the radical middle.

I suppose if you believe a centrist view is no firm ideology then you would be correct. However, I believe it is an ideology and a principle.

You noticed that too, Morris. I wondered whether Dobbin was rrying out a new Liberal strategy, akin to appealing to the sympathy vote or passive-agresive behaviour.

"The Liberals will disappear! Do Canadians really want such a Canada? A Canada where Neocon Harper is a dictator?"

I think I have been quite clear that I don't think that argument will sway anyone. Nor have I have said anything about Harper in the hyperpartisan way that you have described. Why do you feel you need to do it?

I believe I am the only one saying the Liberals are headed for a massive defeat. Do you know anyone else? Anyone? You think it is a Liberal strategy? Where have you seen it used?

The Liberal brand used to be strong in Saskatchewan and Manitoba. They hang on by their teeth in those provinces. In Alberta, the provincial Liberal brand is as weak as the federal brand. In B.C. and Quebec, the Liberal brand is associated with a right of center political movement. In the Martimes, the Liberal brand is crushed on the provincial level in Newfoundland, third place in Nova Scotia, tiny in PEI and only strong in New Brunswick.

The only place where the Liberal brand is strong provincially with a generally centrist political party is in Ontario.

So am I exaggerating? Wrong? Who am I looking to convince? Certainly no one here as I doubt anyone is still indecisive about who to vote for unless they are voting strategically. For the general public, I am not so sure a strategic vote is going to work. I don't think the fear campaign will work.

Perhaps you should take what I say objectively. You say the Liberal are bankrupt ideologically and philosophically. I say they are bankrupt financially and organizationally. And yet you say it will somehow survive? How? You say the issue of national unity no longer exists. It has been a mainstay of Liberal strength almost from the beginning.

Timing is everything. I think byelections might have kept the result for the Liberals from being as bad it seems to look. Each session of Parliament kept the Liberals close but in the interim, they got no better organizationally or financially. They also didn't have the philosophical debate they needed on the direction the party needed to take for the future. Instead, we saw a fight over leadership that just never really ended.

Changing government power is a nerve-wrenching experience. Only sophisticated, mature democracies manage it. Most countries "prefer" dictatorships because it avoids the issue of transferring power.

Well, if the Tories win a majority, Canada will be well on its way to being a two party democracy. Since 1984, the Libs and the Tories have traded 24 Sussex. It looks like this process will continue. The Liberals will eventually clean up their act, raise some money, choose a new leader and then maybe in 10 years or so, they'll get back into 24 Sussex.

I think you are being optimistic.

The dynamics have changed. Money is not easy for the Liberals to get. The problems with the Liberals are so deep seated that they are likely to go bankrupt before they even begin a new session of Parliament.

In all this, what is new is that Canada's regional divide is increasing blurred. Mulroney made it possible for Quebecers to vote Tory and Harper has picked up where Mulroney left off. It's still fragile but this is a huge change in Canada's political history.

You are correct. And he looks to make gains in areas of Ontario as well.

Edited September 17, 2008 by jdobbin

[M.Dancer]

Not really. The PCs are effectively dead and buried, usurped by the Reform/CA, so the Liberals are no less immune to being eradicated. Of course none of the parties on the left have the fraticidal desire to destroy their rival like the Reform/CA did. That was nasty, indeed. Sadly, this is the party that may now form a majority. To bad they discarded all those quaint notions about democratic reform and made the transition to quasi-fascism.

That is true of the PCs because in the wings there stood a viable energetic alternative. There is no alternative to the Liberal Party so consequently they cannot be replaced.

[M.Dancer]

"Fringe" as in the TV series? Or did you mean "fringe"?

The Greens may eventually become the left-of-centre alternative to the Liberals, but I doubt that the Liberals would ever consider merging. Out of pride, they will continue to exist and hang on as a minor party, a relic of a bygone era.

At 9% in the polls and likely to only produce 6% on election day, the Fringe Greens are not even the left of centre alternative to the perpetually 16% NDP. What's more, the Greens aren't left of centre. Not with the sweeping welfare programs and tax increases that they have in mind.

[Bryan]

I suppose if you believe a centrist view is no firm ideology then you would be correct. However, I believe it is an ideology and a principle.

What is the ideology?

"Stand for nothing. Fall for anything." ?!?

That is true of the PCs because in the wings there stood a viable energetic alternative. There is no alternative to the Liberal Party so consequently they cannot be replaced.

Don't forget that the collaspe of the PCs was two things at once: a huge voter shift to the Liberals and a mass defection to a brand new party. There is no reason that a new centrist party could not be created to fill that gap in the same grassroots manner that Reform started.

Certainly, the Liberals will not be reduced to 2 seats or anything like that, so they will still effectlively exist, even if broke. A new party could be formed in time for the next election, after which the Liberals could then disband if they chose to/had to.

Then again, ifs are just that. I'm well aware that the Liberals are in rough shape internally right now, but I'm not convinced that they are in as bad condition as Dobbin is trying so hard to convince us of.

[M.Dancer]

There is no reason that a new centrist party could not be created to fill that gap in the same grassroots manner that Reform started.

Certainly, the Liberals will not be reduced to 2 seats or anything like that, so they will still effectlively exist, even if broke. A new party could be formed in time for the next election, after which the Liberals could then disband if they chose to/had to.

except there is no reason to form a new party, the old one simply needs a purgative. The Liberals must move away from the left, re-establish the confidence of industry and business and work on re-gaining the trust of voters who since the scandals are shy of Liberal promises.

[cybercoma]

There is no reason that a new centrist party could not be created to fill that gap in the same grassroots manner that Reform started.

I'm not sure I understand the simile here. The Reform Party was the western faction of Mulroney's PCs. Their raison d'etre was ideological, they did not want to work with the Quebec faction (The Bloc Quebecois) and Mulroney could no longer hold it all together.

Canadian politics has become divided regionally. Those regions don't want to work with each other, they're all just battling for a larger piece of the pie. I think the first-past-the-post system is partly responsible for this, so how would a centrist party form? What piece of the map would they control that would ensure they get seats in our first-past-the-post system?

[cybercoma]

except there is no reason to form a new party, the old one simply needs a purgative. The Liberals must move away from the left, re-establish the confidence of industry and business and work on re-gaining the trust of voters who since the scandals are shy of Liberal promises.

Let's be honest... having Dion for a leader is probably the biggest factor affecting their electability.

[jdobbin]

What is the ideology?

"Stand for nothing. Fall for anything." ?!?

I think it is Liberal ideology is a centrist belief of fiscal conservatism, social liberalism as well as a strong sense of federalism. I don't think the present Conservativism aren't as strong in three of those areas whereas the NDP is strong in two but very poor in the remaining. I'm sure most will know where I think the NDP is particularly weak in.

Don't forget that the collaspe of the PCs was two things at once: a huge voter shift to the Liberals and a mass defection to a brand new party. There is no reason that a new centrist party could not be created to fill that gap in the same grassroots manner that Reform started.

I think you mean two parties calved off: the Bloc (primarily more exclusively PCs) and the Reform party.

The Liberals are not a party that was calved off into pieces. The CCF/NDP started off a separate movement. Some in these forums have tried to indicate the party was formed of old Liberals but that isn't true in the least.

The Greens have primarily drawn their leadership from old PCs in the last couple of elections. Their supporters are usually people who have voted for every party and are not a direct split off the Liberal party.

It is possible that a centrist party might re-emerge. I doubt it is the NDP unless their leadership drags them to the center. We have seen that strength in leadership only a few times. Romanow and Doer dragged their parties to the center but neither were centrists. Both men can be seen through the prism of populism.

In present Manitoba, a lot of the votes goes to Doer the populist. The way he governs is risk adverse. It often involves reacting to the winds of change. It has been a successful formula. It remains to be seen if it can withstand a change in leadership or circumstances that buffet Doer's popularity.

Certainly, the Liberals will not be reduced to 2 seats or anything like that, so they will still effectlively exist, even if broke. A new party could be formed in time for the next election, after which the Liberals could then disband if they chose to/had to.

Then again, ifs are just that. I'm well aware that the Liberals are in rough shape internally right now, but I'm not convinced that they are in as bad condition as Dobbin is trying so hard to convince us of.

All I can point to is what we have seen played out in the prairie provinces. There is eventually a tipping point in the first part the post system where seats start tumbling like dominoes.