Coalition Government

[johhny]

Yeah, the whole thing smacks of treason, which can still be punished by death in Canada. I'm up for a civil war. I'll gladly take up arms against the incursion. Who is with me?

No offence but you would get your ass handed to you worse than Harper LOL!

[scribblet]

Yeah, the whole thing smacks of treason, which can still be punished by death in Canada. I'm up for a civil war. I'll gladly take up arms against the incursion. Who is with me?

Agreed, but not with taking up arms, there are protests being organized join them.

Who would have thought that we would be in the midst of an undemocratic coup, only in Canada - pity. A ship of fools run by 3 losers. Harper should prorogue parliament for 8 weeks then call an election.

[kuzadd]

god almighty, reading through this thread, and the responses of the Conservative supporters?

You would have thought the Conservatives had a majority government handed to them by the voters.

Just a reminder, they didn't. Despite your feelings about the Conservatives the simple fact is it was another minority government and the majority of voters didn't support them.

editted to add:

In fact, what the Conservatives had was a mandate that required them to cooperate with the other parties, that is what the votes decided.

The Conservatives forgot that, and decided to play partisan games to their own benefit, instead of governing the country. This is not what they were elected to do. Cooperation was key.

therefore, are the other parties not actually doing what Canadian wanted? Cooperating? :end of addition

This nonsense about the three parties and their spending?

Am I the only one that notes the conservatives have been happily spending?

300 million dollars for the latest, useless election? Just for starters.

Am I the only one that notes the conservatives are bailing the banks.?

And I hate to break it to you conservative party supporters, they would also have bailed the car companies. Why? If the US government bails the automakers, Canada under any government will follow suit.

Edited December 2, 2008 by kuzadd

[White Doors]

All the polls I have been aboe to see are VERY negative to this coalition of Losers.

I think Ignatief is going to get cold feet.

I hope the Coalition goes through, but I don't think it will now if Ignatief has anything to do with it.

He is cognizant of the fact that this will be the end of the Liberal Party as an effective National alternative.

[cybercoma]

If Harper's forthcoming anti-coalition campaign includes ads and speeches focusing on the 'scary'

Bloc, he risks a Quebec backlash that could eliminate remaining CPC seats in Quebec.

Except less than 50% of Quebeckers support separatism as is evidenced by the two referenda.

[cybercoma]

In fact, what the Conservatives had was a mandate that required them to cooperate with the other parties, that is what the votes decided.

The Conservatives forgot that, and decided to play partisan games to their own benefit, instead of governing the country. This is not what they were elected to do. Cooperation was key.

The other parties had absolutely no intention of working with the Conservative Party and this coup makes it obvious. The only people playing partisan games are Layton, Dion and Duceppe.

[scribblet]

The other parties had absolutely no intention of working with the Conservative Party and this coup makes it obvious. The only people playing partisan games are Layton, Dion and Duceppe.

Exactly, this was all planned prior to any budget or legislation. This has nothing to do with economics, it has everything to do with lust for power at any cost. COUPSCAM

[speaker]

I haven't seen any news of any serious talks about a coalition until the conservatives decided to try and take advantage of the country during the oppositions dis-array by making the country less democratic and less egalitarian.

I think it would be a good idea to abolish any funding for parties other than government funding. The only thing the coalition has to do to get my support is to bring in proportional representation.

I have also noted that our government, for a short time, was busy bailing out the banks. The record breaking profits every quarter for as long as I can remember banks.

Edited December 2, 2008 by speaker

[DrGreenthumb]

It's a vote on the economic update which has been made a confidence motion by the Liberal Party.

edited to remove qutoe

BS! The conservatives included a bunch of partisan crap in the bill intended to cripple the other parties, and arogantly made it a confidence motion.

Money bills are confidence motions anyway, the Liberals did not make this a confidence motion. Harper brought this all on himself.

[DrGreenthumb]

Not when it comes to running the country. If Quebequers want to be part of the team then they can vote for another party. But as long as they insist on sending seperatists they cannot expect to be part of any government.

Actually they CAN expect to be part of any government they elect MP's to. They ARE democratically elected, and ARE ALREADY a part of government, coalition or not. A lot of people voted ABC and that is what they want.

[madmax]

I'm becoming more convinced that a lot of people don't live in the real world...

That's the problem Bill. Although you have political views, you are not a party hack, even if your views are WILD. It troubles me to speak to politicians or hacks and they have no grasp of what is happening in the real world. It couldn't be more clear then watching this fiasco, the spin, counterspin, etc.

PS you did know I was jerking your chain on the ETR Right

[Argus]

Government and law are inseperable; odd, then, that laws and customs are important to know when analysing this affair. Or, are you trying to say they're not? That, instead, ignorance and emotional reaction to the denial of imaginary entitlements should rule the day?

Laws and customs are actually two entirely different things. If you examine the writings of the pundits in various newspapers and magazines, and on TV all of them quite candidly admit the whole thing is technically legal and yet they say it goes against custom, against tradition, and is not the way Canadians expect governments to change. Randal Denley probably put it the most succintly in the Citizen.

Three of the least credible men in Canadian politics are about to seize control of our government in a virtual coup that is perfectly legal, and perfectly wrong. Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen

Denley, btw, was harshly critical of Harper over the last few days, as were the rest of the pundits. In fact, all of them blame him for his arrogance and stupidity in bringing this about. But now all of them have turned to condemning the opposition for being power mad, calling this, basically, an illegitimate way to take power which goes against tradition - legal or not. Unpopular men rejected resoundingly by the people ought not to be ale to become Prime Minister based on a loophole. None of them think it's right, and none of them think anything good will come of it.

Edited December 2, 2008 by Argus

[August1991]

300 million dollars for the latest, useless election? Just for starters.

Two decimal places separate $30 billion from $300 million but I'm surprised no one has realized, according to the logic of the NDP, that an election is not "wasted money" - it's just another "stimulus package".

With an election, we put $300 million in the hands of ordinary Canadians across Canada and ask them to do a few paper work tasks.

How can one advocate a "stimulus package" and then claim that an election is a waste of money?

Edited December 2, 2008 by August1991

[Argus]

It was conservative to spend other people's money too.

I am hoping that we see measured responses due to the financial advisers that the three parties have lined up.

I am betting we are going to see money sprayed about through fire hoses. And that a year or so from now we're going to start seeing outrageous items in the media about how millions and tens of millions went to golf course refurbishment and paving roads to nowhere in ministers' ridings, and funding research into the mating habit of butterflies granted to ministers' girlfriends and brother in laws. The last Liberal infrastructure project was a huge pork barrel waste, and this one looks like it's going to be far larger, and with far fewer controls on who gets the money and how it's spent.

The good thing, from the perspective of the three blind mice, is that the Liberal leader will be the one carrying the can for that come next election - and that won't even be Dion! Rae and Iggy might think they can divorce themselves from responsibility, but even as pretend ministers (they'll get the paycheques but won't be doing any work because they'll be on the road campaigning) they are going to be held responsible.

[madmax]

Harper should prorogue parliament for 8 weeks then call an election.

Why should Harper hide with his tail between his legs for 8 weeks? Why should we wait 8 weeks for an election? How does ANY of those TWO options make things better for Canada. Perhaps, Harper should

1) Resign and let someone else lead the CPC.

2) Hand over government to the coalition with dignity and approach the GG in order to avoid another unnecessary election.

I see no benefit to the economy, for Prime Minister Harper to pull a DION and turtle for 8 weeks.

Anyone seen Revenge of the Nerds? Priceless.

[Argus]

If Harper's forthcoming anti-coalition campaign includes ads and speeches focusing on the 'scary'

Bloc, he risks a Quebec backlash that could eliminate remaining CPC seats in Quebec.

If it works he won't need it. There are 50 Liberal and NDP seats in Ontario alone which will be up for grabs, not to mention those folks out east who are unlikely to welcome a BQ dominated federal government.

[g_bambino]

Laws and customs are actually two entirely different things. If you examine the writings of the pundits in various newspapers and magazines, and on TV all of them quite candidly admit the whole thing is technically legal and yet they say it goes against custom, against tradition, and is not the way Canadians expect governments to change. Randal Denley probably put it the most succintly in the Citizen.

Three of the least credible men in Canadian politics are about to seize control of our government in a virtual coup that is perfectly legal, and perfectly wrong. Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen

Denley, btw, was harshly critical of Harper, as were the rest of the pundits. In fact, all of them blame him for his arrogance and stupidity in bringing this about. But now all of them condemn the opposition, as well, calling this, basically, an illegitimate way to take power which goes against tradition - legal or not. Unpopular men rejected resoundingly by the people ought not to be ale to become Prime Minister based on a loophole. None of them think it's right, and none of them think anything good will come of it.

I'm sure those pundits hold their opinions like anyone on this board. But, while I freely admit coalition governments have no precedent here, they've happened in other countries to which our system is nearly identical. People say that the Liberals and NDP didn't campaign on a coalition; but, while true, it's an irrelevant point: how could one predict the outcome of the election so as to know any coalition would be a necessary option? As Australians and Brits are as equally unable to predict the future than we are, their coalition governments must have emerged after the election that preceeded them, meaning the electorate knew about the cooperative move no more than we were previously aware of this present one. If precedent in other countries is often used as support for doing something here, why is this case different; especially when there's precedent in the country who's traditions are those on which almost all of ours are based?

[madmax]

Harper should prorogue parliament for 8 weeks then call an election.

Why should Harper hide with his tail between his legs for 8 weeks? Why should we wait 8 weeks for an election? How does ANY of those TWO options make things better for Canada. Perhaps, Harper should

1) Resign and let someone else lead the CPC.

2) Hand over government to the coalition with dignity and approach the GG in order to avoid another unnecessary election.

I see no benefit to the economy, for Prime Minister Harper to pull a DION and turtle for 8 weeks.

Anyone seen Revenge of the Nerds? Priceless.

[madmax]

The other parties had absolutely no intention of working with the Conservative Party and this coup makes it obvious. The only people playing partisan games are Layton, Dion and Duceppe.

[Argus]

Two of three parties know that a huge deficit will not go well for them. They will have to do a measured approach.

The BQ won't care about federal deficits, and those who support the NDP really don't care anywhere near as much about that sort of thing than most people. No it will be YOUR supporters who will be angered at high deficits. And you are going to be the bitch for the BQ and NDP. You will have to do whatever you're told.

There was a lot of compromise going on in that room.

And they'll last until one of them decides they can do better, or pushes the others over the brink. How reliable is Duceppe going to be? Or Layton, for that matter. One of the comments I read the other day quotes Harper once saying "You always know where you stand with Jack. You know he'll always let you down." That seems to suggest Layton doesn't always live up to his end of bargains.

They all decided Harper must die.

Duceppe has little to lose. Neither does Layton, really. Dion has nothing to lose either. Your party on the other hand, will be massacred if this thing ends in a train wreck. And don't expect any compassion from smiling Jack as he blames it all on the LPC, or Duceppe, as he returns triumphantly to Quebec to scoop up more Liberal party seats.

[madmax]

Two decimal places separate $30 billion from $300 million but I'm surprised no one has realized, according to the logic of the NDP, that an election is not "wasted money" - it's just another "stimulus package".

With an election, we put $300 million in the hands of ordinary Canadians across Canada and ask them to do a few paper work tasks.

How can one advocate a "stimulus package" and then claim that an election is a waste of money?

An election is a "stimulus package"?

I don't like to use this emoticon, but I have had to use it twice in a row when normally solid posters, start stretching and grasping for straws.

In the meantime. 69 votes, coalition forces in the lead. Harper still stronger then any other leadership choice. DION gets bump, leads Iggy after announcement. Jack and Duceppe get small bounce. RAE is in dudsville.

Liberals are rallying around Dion, sad sad sad.

Edited December 2, 2008 by madmax

[August1991]

An election is a "stimulus package"?

I don't like to use this emoticon, but I have had to use it twice in a row when normally solid posters, start stretching and grasping for straws.

Well, what in your mind is a "stimulus package"? Is it not when the government takes money from some taxpayers and gives it to other people?

What do you think the NDP, the Bloc and the Liberals have in mind?

[Argus]

It will be binded to last 18 months MINIMUM.

And you know this because politicians never change their minds, never break promises, never go back on their word, and neither the NDP nor the BQ will try to abuse their positions of power. Okay. Nice to have faith. Do you believe in Santa, too?

BTW, what happens if Iggy wins the leadership? He is considerably to the right of Dion, and will not likely agree on much of anything Layton or Duceppe want. How's that going to go over with the other two amigos?

[Argus]

That is what I say about Harper and is ill considered update.

And you were right. So what was your point again?

I see this as perhaps bad for the Tories in the short term, perhaps very, very bad for the Liberals in in the medium to long term. And certainly bad for the country - not that has ever been a consideration for you guys, of course.

[Argus]

And now, he's telling him how the house actually works and how its supposed to work, interrupting all of Clements talking points. Now he's doing the same thing when it comes to the talking points on the Bloc and him calling them illegitimate. Now hes telling him that that attitude is probably what cost them seats in Quebec. It was hilarious.

So what you're saying is the CBC guy wasn't so much interviewing Clement at all as brow-beating him, and not letting him talk, but instead giving his own opinion on everything. Have I got that right?