A pretext of this coup was that the country was

[Wild Bill]

kimmy, the Bloc is not going to be part of this government either. You are misrepresenting.

I

You are mistaken. In a minority, one party still has the most seats. To displace them requires a deal with two or more other parties who's combined seat count will exceed that of the first party.

The Liberals and the NDP have nowhere near enough seats to outdo the Tories. They only have enough if they include the Bloc.

Period. End of story.

[Argus]

Ok, stop right there. From what I have observed, the right has a monopoly on anger the majority of the time.

Disdain is not an emotion.

[Wild Bill]

A real poll.

Well, if you've got a better one showing high support for the coalition I'd love to see the link!

Still, it's early...

[Argus]

CityTV in Toronto did a similar one with similar results about 60 to 40 against the coalition.

And that's in squishy pink left Toronto.

I know a few very strong Liberal supporters, including one who regularly taunts me about the Tories, and they are shaking their heads with disbelief over this. They do NOT want to see a coallition with Layton and Duceppe.

[BC_chick]

That's because the left attracts emotional people.

I hear this often. I've wondered to myself if it's because the 'left' tends to be more compromising in their views than the 'right' and you guys are mistakenly taking the "I think xyz" as an emotion just because it has the word 'think' in it. For example, I try (key word) to always state my views as subjectively as possible in order to acknowledge that the other side has valid points too and that neither of us hold a monopoly on truth.

Yet even when I think I could not have been any more diplomatic in my argument, there's resistance, and I'm "wrong" as far as they're concerned.

IMO any argument that starts off on the premise of being 100% correct is flawed to the core.

It's not emotion to negotiate subjectivity, and it's certainly not reason to be dogmatic.

Oh, and this is beyond my observation, studies back up my assertion that conservatives see the world more black and white than liberals do.

Edited December 3, 2008 by BC_chick

[Slim MacSquinty]

And the internet does tend to attract the most stable and courteous people, he he.

[BC_chick]

Well, if you've got a better one showing high support for the coalition I'd love to see the link!

Still, it's early...

I wouldn't be surprised either way if the poll was accurate or not, that's why I've been googling it to see what people are saying, I really can't tell... but internet polls usually aren't that accurate. Smallc has a point.

[Michael Hardner]

Argus,

I agree that Harper seems to call forward an undeserved stream of venom from those on the left. I am (nominally) centre-left and I don't understand it myself. The only thing I can see to compare to it is the venom that comes from the right against the left.

You can see both flavours of irrational knee-jerk spittoon kickers all over this board. If we focus on the facts, eventually we'll come to see that the stereotypes don't exist, and the positions we hold need data to be defensible in an argument.

As for this coalition government - I have never voted conservative. Not once. And I think this is a bad idea. I would be surprised if this move was popular.

[William Ashley]

It is legal and more democratic than the current government. Get over and stop destabalizing the economy.

Bring on the coalition, and let Canada have a couple stable years run the course. 2010 is better than every few weeks in terms of the hundreds of millions it will cost in the way the electoral system currently works.

SHAME ON THE CONSERVATIVES FOR CAUSING INSABILITY AND SPREADING LIES!

SHAME ON HARPER FOR ABUSE OF POWER!

SHAME ON BOTH OF THEM FOR DECEIVING THE PEOPLE FOR THEIRS AND ONLY THEIR GAIN!!!

Edited December 3, 2008 by William Ashley

[myata]

As for this coalition government - I have never voted conservative. Not once. And I think this is a bad idea. I would be surprised if this move was popular.

Popular or not - what would be a "good idea" though, with the guy who just can't seem to understand (pathologically?) the notions of cooperation and non partisan leadership? Let him get his way, with bullying and pusing around, as we have seen on a gazzilion and one occasion over the last years, as if he's a crowned king or like? The trick with the coalition will only work once. If Harper sees that it's an empty threat, he'll be back to his usual routine, pushing, pressing and shoving in no time at all.

For better, or worse, the truth is simple: the folks cannot govern in a responsible manner, putting the interests of the country before their own, so they cannot govern. We have to live with the best of what we have left. As heard on some political panel: no one party has won this election; all are in minority. To achieve anything, governing party has to cooperate with at least one opposition party. Harper has shown that he cannot cooperate. He can't have anything done in this House. He's out. Next.

[Alta4ever]

Popular or not - what would be a "good idea" though, with the guy who just can't seem to understand (pathologically?) the notions of cooperation and non partisan leadership? Let him get his way, with bullying and pusing around, as we have seen on a gazzilion and one occasion over the last years, as if he's a crowned king or like? The trick with the coalition will only work once. If Harper sees that it's an empty threat, he'll be back to his usual routine, pushing, pressing and shoving in no time at all.

For better, or worse, the truth is simple: the folks cannot govern in a responsible manner, putting the interests of the country before their own, so they cannot govern. We have to live with the best of what we have left. As heard on some political panel: no one party has won this election; all are in minority. To achieve anything, governing party has to cooperate with at least one opposition party. Harper has shown that he cannot cooperate. He can't have anything done in this House. He's out. Next.

You are one to talk this is all about putting the interests of three men ahead of Canadians. You should be very ashamed of this. This will destroy Canada.

[Oleg Bach]

Laytons primal and out dated philosophy is one based in the concept that social engineering is a good idea and that they know how to create a better society. Change is personal as is free will - I will not have the will of Layton forced on me and my friends and family - they are mine - not his! I am not part of his communal dream - I operate in the private sphere and am entitled to my privacy - with out privacy a person or family can not focus and accomplish good and great things. NDPism has the habit of harrassing those in the private sector - big or small - there are poor men like me in the private sector - so it's not just about money - It's about human dignity and personal freedom.

[myata]

You are one to talk this is all about putting the interests of three men ahead of Canadians. You should be very ashamed of this. This will destroy Canada.

By far it won't. It is the normal democratic process: a politician who does not have the confidence of the Parliament has to go. It's the Conservatives themselves who are trying to create an existential crisis out of the fact that their leader is simply not up to the level of responsibility and political skill required by the situation. Only shows their real prize in this game, stick to power at all cost and no matter what, no, definitely not the benefit and well being of Canada.

[fellowtraveller]

Harper's intention was to destroy the Liberals before the next election. Period. His hyperpartisan style focused obsessively on how to do this. That was his miscalculation. The coalition for the Liberals is survival to get the time the party needs to get a leader and reorganize.

There was no way that Harper wanted the Liberals to get a new leader and policy platform for the next election. No way. And that isn't hatred in saying that. It is knowing how he plays the game of politics.

Looks like Harper miscalculated, the Liberals will destroy themselves without his assistance.

Looks like the Liberals are in a gong show now instead of an orderly choice of new leader. Gonna blame Harper for that too? All the Libs had to do was roll over and play dead as they did for a couple of years and their survival was assured. But... they know they are Gods choice to lead us, and failed to note that Canada did not get that memo.

[blueblood]

Looks like Harper miscalculated, the Liberals will destroy themselves without his assistance.

Looks like the Liberals are in a gong show now instead of an orderly choice of new leader. Gonna blame Harper for that too? All the Libs had to do was roll over and play dead as they did for a couple of years and their survival was assured. But... they know they are Gods choice to lead us, and failed to note that Canada did not get that memo.

He's actually right. The difference between me and him is that I actually support Harper's actions and he obviously does not.

[eyeball]

The words liberal or socialist causes right wing people to spit

Right wing spit usually makes me want to puke.

[eyeball]

My problem with the socialists is their general economic malfeasance and habit of social engineering, and the Liberals - here in Canada - their self serving nature, dishonesty, and smug sense of moral superiority. But generally when I see right wingers decrying the Liberals or NDP it's based on a belief that their policies are unworkable.

My problem with conservatives is their general economic malfeasance and habit of moral engineering. Generally when I see right wingers spitting on everyone else it's because conservatives believe their own policies are infallible. Its not so much the spit as the way they spit that really bugs me.

When I see the left howling about the conservatives it often assumes a moral tone,

That's funny, when I howl about the conservatives its usually about their tone of moral superiority.

Edited December 6, 2008 by eyeball

[jdobbin]

All the Libs had to do was roll over and play dead as they did for a couple of years and their survival was assured.

You think Harper was going to let that happen? It isn't in his DNA. He can't allow for a possibility that the Liberal party will exist.

As far the Liberals destroying themselves, I'd say they are looking at extracting the element that was probably the biggest factor holding them back.

[Poli-Sci Student]

There are at least two axes of political ideology.

There's social permissiveness (or lack thereof), and there's economic permissiveness (or lack thereof).

I hate seeing things bandied about between the "Right" and the "Left", as though these were the only two choices.

The Conservatives tend to lean towards more economic permissiveness and less social permissiveness. This is Tory, and not unexpected. They tend to argue in favour of Business and against issues like Same Sex Marriage.

The NDP tends to be more socially permissive and less economically permissive. The Liberals (ideally) would be permissive in both categories.

The NDP and the Liberals are both on the "left", but they go about it in different ways.

The left/right dichotomy is oversimplified, sorry.