Coalition Destructing Already

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Well August I think you need to wait and see what happens. I think many Canadians will be surprised with what is about to transpire.

[wulf42]

The Liberals are in complete disarray, Layton looks foolish and Quebec is about to elect a federalist majority government. Some polls put the federal Conservatives at over 50%.

I heard on t.v. that Charest is expected to win hands down.........the sovereigntists are doing so much in fighting right now that they don't know what to do....lol

[August1991]

Well August I think you need to wait and see what happens. I think many Canadians will be surprised with what is about to transpire.

What is about to transpire is that Michael Ignatieff will become leader of the Liberal Party - but he may have to wait until May for that to happen. Under current Liberal rules, they must select a leader by choosing riding delegates which is a long, arduous process.

I suppose the Liberal executive could simply name Ignatieff as interim leader but I'm not sure Rae would accept that.

Anyway, Ignatieff has alot of work to do to clean up the mess within the Liberal Party. He'll have to start with party financing.

-----

The real story though is that there are a chunk of votes waiting in Quebec for any credible federal leader to take from the Bloc. Harper threw those votes away in the last election. Ignatieff has a very good chance now of getting them.

Offhand, I would say that Ignatieff will wait until the fall 2009 before making his moves on Sussex Drive.

[-VMG-]

Crime with illegal guns has gone up quite dramatically in larger urban areas in Canada lately.

I can presume that you advocate lifting sanctions on hand-gun ownership?

Crime with illegal guns is not usually directly related to the guns themselves. Most of it comes from gangs and organized crime, attempting to get a cash grab from selling drugs and pimping and other such things.

I don't believe that illegal guns are causing the crime themselves. So no, i would not advocate lifting sanctions on hand-gun ownership.

[kimmy]

What error?

The Liberals are in complete disarray, Layton looks foolish and Quebec is about to elect a federalist majority government. Some polls put the federal Conservatives at over 50%.

If this is an error, then Harper can only hope to make more such errors.

Harper has received almost a free pass in this fiasco, by virtue of being opposed by one of the most inept trios ever to cross paths. (If the coalition were a movie, it would be Joel Schumacher directing David Caruso in a Joe Esterhaus script...)

...but I don't think Harper can afford to provoke a similar crisis any time soon. Canadians have no further interest in this sort of nonsense, and while Dion has worn the blame this time around, Harper might wear it next time.

-k

[blueblood]

Harper has received almost a free pass in this fiasco, by virtue of being opposed by one of the most inept trios ever to cross paths. (If the coalition were a movie, it would be Joel Schumacher directing David Caruso in a Joe Esterhaus script...)

...but I don't think Harper can afford to provoke a similar crisis any time soon. Canadians have no further interest in this sort of nonsense, and while Dion has worn the blame this time around, Harper might wear it next time.

-k

All Harper has to do is keep up the pressure and rhetoric until January. If Harper can force an election in January he's laughing. Harper is extremely good at doing something and making it look like the oppositions fault. Harper can keep the crisis going. If we do get another election, I think it will be a tory majority just so this nonsense doesn't happen for some time.

[guyser]

Amsterdam's red light district which is exactly what you propose, they are shutting it all down!!

You are a drug user so why do you want to go to jail?

Oh, and your reading comprehension still sucks huh? Shutting it all down ? Of course they aren't , but you go to sleep and think that ok?

[jdobbin]

If Harper can force an election in January he's laughing.

He'll call one on his own even if he gets confidence. It will be up to the Governor General to accept an election or ask the Opposition if they can form a government.

If Harper brings it to a head like that, I don't know that he would survive in his own party.

[blueblood]

He'll call one on his own even if he gets confidence. It will be up to the Governor General to accept an election or ask the Opposition if they can form a government.

If Harper brings it to a head like that, I don't know that he would survive in his own party.

Harper is trying to force the GG's hand with public uproar, and so far it's working. I don't think the GG would grant coalition power when the country is in an uproar over this when there is an election alternative. Had the libs and NDP had more seats together themselves than the tories, I could see the GG granting that coalition power. They should have done the coalition in 06-07. This coalition however has the toxic stench of the BQ all over it.

You are right in fact. Harper will pay the price for this. Either right this year sometime or 2-3 years down the road in a majority gov't. He would be unelectable in future elections. I think tory brass is using Harper to get them a majority, after that, Harper being as controversial as he is would be too toxic to go into another election campaign. It'll be similar to what happened to Chretien.

[Nat]

What is about to transpire is that Michael Ignatieff will become leader of the Liberal Party - but he may have to wait until May for that to happen. Under current Liberal rules, they must select a leader by choosing riding delegates which is a long, arduous process.

I suppose the Liberal executive could simply name Ignatieff as interim leader but I'm not sure Rae would accept that.

Anyway, Ignatieff has alot of work to do to clean up the mess within the Liberal Party. He'll have to start with party financing.

-----

The real story though is that there are a chunk of votes waiting in Quebec for any credible federal leader to take from the Bloc. Harper threw those votes away in the last election. Ignatieff has a very good chance now of getting them.

Offhand, I would say that Ignatieff will wait until the fall 2009 before making his moves on Sussex Drive.

I agree I think we'll see an election the fall of 2009 and the federalist in Quecbec will give the Liberals the seats they need for to be government possibly a majority.

[jdobbin]

Harper is trying to force the GG's hand with public uproar, and so far it's working. I don't think the GG would grant coalition power when the country is in an uproar over this when there is an election alternative. Had the libs and NDP had more seats together themselves than the tories, I could see the GG granting that coalition power. They should have done the coalition in 06-07. This coalition however has the toxic stench of the BQ all over it.

There is also very little support for an election so take your pick at what influences she could call upon to make her decision. She could tell Harper to stop playing games and make it work if he acts like a donkey again too. What would he do: fire her? It would explode in his face if he did that since it would look like that all he wanted was an election.

You are right in fact. Harper will pay the price for this. Either right this year sometime or 2-3 years down the road in a majority gov't. He would be unelectable in future elections. I think tory brass is using Harper to get them a majority, after that, Harper being as controversial as he is would be too toxic to go into another election campaign. It'll be similar to what happened to Chretien.

If Ignatieff looks willing to compromise and Harper doesn't, the anger the Liberal felt for looking to become government could easily turn on Harper for trying not to make government work for his own quest for power.

[blueblood]

There is also very little support for an election so take your pick at what influences she could call upon to make her decision. She could tell Harper to stop playing games and make it work if he acts like a donkey again too. What would he do: fire her? It would explode in his face if he did that since it would look like that all he wanted was an election.

If Ignatieff looks willing to compromise and Harper doesn't, the anger the Liberal felt for looking to become government could easily turn on Harper for trying not to make government work for his own quest for power.

More support for an election than a coalition. Does the GG want piles and piles of demonstrators at Rideau Hall? Canada has a black eye on the international stage because of the coalition's games. Let the coalition run in an election and put this to rest once and for all. The GG would most certainly call an election. I don't think the GG wants to be the figurehead in something that would cause so much controversy. On CTV they said the GG was ready to resign over this. She is the figurehead in a democracy, I think in a democracy she'll say take your coalition and sell it to the people.

If Ignatieff doesn't pass the budget, Harper will paint him as not wanting to compromise and power hungry. Harper will suggest that if Ignatieff wants to be PM so bad, to take his platform to the people and see how they like it.

It's all about trying to sell who's quest for power is the most popular, so far Harper is in the lead. I don't see that changing for quite some time.

[jdobbin]

More support for an election than a coalition.

The numerous polls show less support for an election. Can you give me a citation where it was higher for an election?

Does the GG want piles and piles of demonstrators at Rideau Hall? Canada has a black eye on the international stage because of the coalition's games. Let the coalition run in an election and put this to rest once and for all. The GG would most certainly call an election. I don't think the GG wants to be the figurehead in something that would cause so much controversy. On CTV they said the GG was ready to resign over this. She is the figurehead in a democracy, I think in a democracy she'll say take your coalition and sell it to the people.

Give me a break on the black eye on the international front. Our system is one of the same ones that exist in numerous countries.

You are so certain what the Governor General will do and think partisan bullying will work on her.

If Ignatieff doesn't pass the budget, Harper will paint him as not wanting to compromise and power hungry. Harper will suggest that if Ignatieff wants to be PM so bad, to take his platform to the people and see how they like it.

If Harper stuffs his budget with poison like the economic statement like you seem to want him to, it will be he who looks uncompromising.

It's all about trying to sell who's quest for power is the most popular, so far Harper is in the lead. I don't see that changing for quite some time.

And your absolute, positively no chance of being wrong opinion that the Governor General will grant an election if Harper decides to act like an idiot again and gets defeated in a confidence vote.

[blueblood]

The numerous polls show less support for an election. Can you give me a citation where it was higher for an election?

Give me a break on the black eye on the international front. Our system is one of the same ones that exist in numerous countries.

You are so certain what the Governor General will do and think partisan bullying will work on her.

If Harper stuffs his budget with poison like the economic statement like you seem to want him to, it will be he who looks uncompromising.

And your absolute, positively no chance of being wrong opinion that the Governor General will grant an election if Harper decides to act like an idiot again and gets defeated in a confidence vote.

Visit My Website

By a more than 2:1 margin, Canadians call for another election if the choice faced by the Governor-General were between inviting Stephane Dion to form a government and hold a fresh general election weeks after the most recent one. That is the key finding from a national representative poll completed December 4, 2008.

No break on the black eye. Other countries are questioning our stability. I take it as a black eye and wouldn't be surprised if others did so.

Globe and mail

Flanagan figures so as well. Partisan bullying worked the last time, it can work again.

[White Doors]

Crime with illegal guns is not usually directly related to the guns themselves. Most of it comes from gangs and organized crime, attempting to get a cash grab from selling drugs and pimping and other such things.

I don't believe that illegal guns are causing the crime themselves. So no, i would not advocate lifting sanctions on hand-gun ownership.

So let me get this straight... in your mind, it's not the illegal guns that are the problem, so you want to keep them illegal?

How many times did you flunk Logic 101?

[-VMG-]

So let me get this straight... in your mind, it's not the illegal guns that are the problem, so you want to keep them illegal?

How many times did you flunk Logic 101?

Illegal guns are A problem.. but there are underlying issues. Organized crime use guns to protect their assets... their assets are drugs... and the drugs make them money... if we take away their money, they won't need their guns to protect their assets.

I don't think making illegal guns legal will help anything... if anything it will make random violent crimes worse.

[Argus]

Harper is a nasty sob.

What has Harper done Chretien has not or would not have done in the same circumstances? Or Trudeau, for that matter, or Martin? You don't get to the top without being ruthless. And if by some miracle you do, you sure as hell don't stay there long.

Ignatieff will call on the Martin Liberals or blue Liberals the majority of Liberals who want a moderate government that seeks a balance between economic and social needs to keep himself in power and if Harper does not watch it, Ignatieff will pull away from the Tories the Red Tories, the moderate wing of the Tories that have been repressed and basically under the tyranny of the Social Credit-Reform rump of the Tories who have kept them under control and shut up.

I'm guessing that, like Ignatieff, you haven't spent a lot of time in Canada, of late. So where are you calling in from? The far side of the planet? I've been saying for some time now that it's more like the Progressives swallowed the conservatives than the other way around. This government has been a centre left government, without ANY fiscally or socially conservative policies brought into being other than a few moderately tough on crime bills. Anyone who thinks Harper has been running a hard right government is so out to lunch on political terms as to be barely cognizant of what politics even are in Canada.

[wulf42]

Illegal guns are A problem.. but there are underlying issues. Organized crime use guns to protect their assets... their assets are drugs... and the drugs make them money... if we take away their money, they won't need their guns to protect their assets.

I don't think making illegal guns legal will help anything... if anything it will make random violent crimes worse.

So let me ask you.... do you think the gun registry is a good thing?

[Argus]

as for accusing the Liberals of being corupt and scandal ridden duh. Now look at the Tories Wolf. You better start looking. If you think you are dealing with moral virgins look again. Take a look at today's disclosures at how much money they are spending on "consulting" firms.

Nothing has changed. Its the same patronage b.s. being handed out. Don't kid yourself. Harper is repeating what Chretien did and his Ministers seem to have forgotten the Reform platform and have no problems wasting money on needless travel and junkets.

Every party that comes into power vows it will be different and then engages in the same corupt patronage b.s.

Patronage is not corrupt. Neither is it even morally wrong. What is corruption is when patronage turns to rewarding friends with something other than needed and reasonably priced services. Hiring consultants is not corruption or patranage. Hiring supporters for consulting jobs is patronage, but not corrupt. Hiring supporters who kick back money to your party and don't do any work - as was the case with the Liberals - is corrupt. There has been no sign of that sort of thing from this goverment. There has been no sign of Harper forcing a government bank to loan money to a business associate with a criminal record - or of him firing the man and sicking the police on him when he points out the money isn't being paid back. There is no sign of the tories appointing judges based on them giving the Tory party free legal services. Nor has there even been any sign that Harper is shipping half the govenrment to his riding. No huge agency moves as there was to Shawinigan, no fountains in the river, no warehouses converted to art galleries with the national gallery shipping in the art, etc. etc.

You don't like Harper cause he's not "nice" whatever the hell that mean? I like him because for a politician, he seems honest and competent. And that's more important to me than squishy, hand-wringer notions about him being "nice".

[madmax]

Patronage is not corrupt. Neither is it even morally wrong. What is corruption is when patronage turns to rewarding friends with something other than needed and reasonably priced services.

I am glad your patronage appointment is working out well for you.

[-VMG-]

So let me ask you.... do you think the gun registry is a good thing?

I think it is pointless... people already have their guns... and many won't even bother to register them... and it's not like the criminals are going to register their guns so whats the point...

Doesn't mean that handguns and assault rifles and the like should be legal.

[wulf42]

I think it is pointless... people already have their guns... and many won't even bother to register them... and it's not like the criminals are going to register their guns so whats the point...

Doesn't mean that handguns and assault rifles and the like should be legal.

WOW...........we actually agree on something!! I agree handguns and assault rifles should be banned!........but hunting rifles and shotguns should not.

Edited December 8, 2008 by wulf42

[madmax]

More support for an election than a coalition. Does the GG want piles and piles of demonstrators at Rideau Hall? Canada has a black eye on the international stage because of the coalition's games. Let the coalition run in an election and put this to rest once and for all. The GG would most certainly call an election. I don't think the GG wants to be the figurehead in something that would cause so much controversy. On CTV they said the GG was ready to resign over this. She is the figurehead in a democracy, I think in a democracy she'll say take your coalition and sell it to the people.

1) Don't kid yourself about support for an election.... It isn't there.....anymore then there was support for the last one. And 16% support for an election doesn't say a hell of alot. Regardless of what is said about the coalition. It is just a stupid Idea of CPC strategists and hacks. The same strategists and hacks that created the crises.

2) Canada has a black eye, because of the actions of the Prime Minister, first in creating the crises, and second, in having to suspend parliment to buy time to undo a confidence crises of his own making.

3) The GG .... you have a crystal ball, and know that she would ignore precedent? She did not with the Prime Ministers request, she is unlikely to deny any party the opportunity to govern if they have the support of the majority of the house.

4) If CTV is accurate and the GG did want to resign over this... then clearly it is because she couldn't do the job. However, she did, but that is no reason that a GG should threaten to quit, when asked to perform her duty. Unless she believes her only duty is to fly around the globe at taxpayers expense.

5) Coalitions are formed after elections not before. The LPC/NDP/BQ run their own separate campaigns during elections, and the circumstances after such election may not revolve around the need for a "coalition". Such as if the LPC received enough seats for a Majority they wouldn't consider forming an alliance/accord or coalition.

[Oleg Bach]

At least as mentioned before- Harpers pro-active and provocative actions got the opposition to show their true colours. That personal ambition and careerism is stronger in the opposition than the will to serve Canada as a united nation. They were willing to devide up the spoils in order to futher THEMSELVES...Canadians will never forget of forgive this indiscrete showing of the cards by Rae - Layton and their French conspirators. No one will ever trust these men again when it comes to the best interests of Canada as a united whole...never ....To even consider taking Paliment by force is to show that they in their hearts are willing to take us by force...brutal careerists that should never be respected again!

[capricorn]

5) Coalitions are formed after elections not before. The LPC/NDP/BQ run their own separate campaigns during elections, and the circumstances after such election may not revolve around the need for a "coalition". Such as if the LPC received enough seats for a Majority they wouldn't consider forming an alliance/accord or coalition.

Of course, there is always the possibility that the Liberals could win the next election. But the seed of the coalition has been planted in the minds of Canadians and the polls say the majority don't buy into the coalition. Let's suppose the government is defeated on January 26 and the GG drops the writ.

1. Do the Liberals have enough support among Canadians to win the next election?

This will be hard to tell until the Liberals have a new leader and the polls give us an indication.

2. Are voters willing to vote Liberal only to have the Liberals lose to another Conservative minority, then Liberals turn around and use the coalition to overturn the election results? This is the tricky part. My gut tells me that the electorate may not want to gamble that we will be right back to where we are now. My bet is that the electorate will stick with the Conservatives and give them a majority.

If the GG opts to turn government over to the coalition then all bets are off. I would think support for the coalition will not increase in the meantime and there will me more hell to pay down the road.