Voter results since 2000

Donaill · December 3, 2008

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Canada2008seats.PNG

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Parlinfo/Compilatio...sultsParty.aspx

Last Majority government was under Chretien, 2000.

Also check out other election maps. For those of you that want to make it seem like an east versus west thing. It isn't. Get over it. Tories do get voted in in the east. Ontario has a Concervative goverment, as does NB and Nf. It is just that the easts brand of concervatism is different than Albertas.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a...2006ridings.PNG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Can2004.PNG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Can2000.PNG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Can1997.PNG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Canadia...ar_vote_map.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Can1988-2.PNG

Looking at the elections results I would say that Mulrooney did much to divide the country. After he was tossed out I see the coniuous growth of the Reform party.

ToadBrother · December 3, 2008

Also check out other election maps. For those of you that want to make it seem like an east versus west thing. It isn't. Get over it. Tories do get voted in in the east. Ontario has a Concervative goverment, as does NB and Nf. It is just that the easts brand of concervatism is different than Albertas.

Of course it is. Historically the Conservative Party has always been something of a coalition. What happened after the electoral devastation after Mulroney's departure was a break of the Western-based social conservatives from the Progressive wing of the party.

No matter what anybody says, Harper is from the social conservative wing (I know he tried to look cuddly and friendly during the last election, with some genuinely creepy TV ads as a result), and therein lies the real danger for the Tories. If this embryonic divide that's forming becomes a fault line along the Progressive-Social Conservative lines, then the party is in deep doo-doo. If however, the divide is simply between MPs who think Harper was an antagonistic a##hole to the opposition and those who think Harper's some sort of wunderboy, then they'll be alright.

Thus far, from what I can see, the divide is more the latter, with possibly some surfacing but long-standing hard feelings from the likes of Stockwell Day. Let's remember here that Harper was named leader largely as part of the compromise that so the Alliance and the PCs roll into one another, and early on he proved to be a very gifted, if very aggressive and hard-nosed leader. He's won two back-to-back governments, this last one tantalizing close to a majority. But he's screwed it up, and I'm sure there are many Conservatives of both strains wondering if he's finally run out of political capital.

Donaill · December 3, 2008

Of course it is. Historically the Conservative Party has always been something of a coalition. What happened after the electoral devastation after Mulroney's departure was a break of the Western-based social conservatives from the Progressive wing of the party.
No matter what anybody says, Harper is from the social conservative wing (I know he tried to look cuddly and friendly during the last election, with some genuinely creepy TV ads as a result), and therein lies the real danger for the Tories. If this embryonic divide that's forming becomes a fault line along the Progressive-Social Conservative lines, then the party is in deep doo-doo. If however, the divide is simply between MPs who think Harper was an antagonistic a##hole to the opposition and those who think Harper's some sort of wunderboy, then they'll be alright.

Thus far, from what I can see, the divide is more the latter, with possibly some surfacing but long-standing hard feelings from the likes of Stockwell Day. Let's remember here that Harper was named leader largely as part of the compromise that so the Alliance and the PCs roll into one another, and early on he proved to be a very gifted, if very aggressive and hard-nosed leader. He's won two back-to-back governments, this last one tantalizing close to a majority. But he's screwed it up, and I'm sure there are many Conservatives of both strains wondering if he's finally run out of political capital.

Well said, well said. Bravo.

kimmy · December 3, 2008

Looking at the elections results I would say that Mulrooney did much to divide the country. After he was tossed out I see the coniuous growth of the Reform party.

After Trudeau, the Liberals were doomed in the west.

After Mulroney, the Progressive Conservatives were also doomed in the west.

The explosive growth of Reform in the west toward the end of Mulroney's time in office was because westerners no longer wanted anything to do with either of the old-line parties.

-k

Donaill · December 3, 2008

This is not the first time we have had such a divisive issue in canada. Tommy Douglas (Awesome as he was) had a very divisive idea. Joseph Howe, one of Nova Scotias greatest leaders, wanted to leave Confederation. At that time we were VERY wealthy in comparison to the rest of Canada. I imagine others can think of other events in Canadian history.

We will come through this. Meh... It seems like a big deal now. 15 years from now it will just be water under the bridge. After all it took the PC over 10 years to get people to even think about voting for them, after Mulrooney.