Coalition Destructing Already

[Oleg Bach]

IF the GG - turns it all over to the coaltion. Then we will know that the order comes from a lofty place and not Canada - and that globalism has taken grip and control of our home and nation. Harper must know this...I just hope that he has been orchestrating this whole crisis all along - If not - we are in real trouble and you can say not just bye bye to Harper but goodbye to Canada as we know it....fish head soup for all...yummy...with a doze of free medication to help us forget that we lost our home....our nation.

[madmax]

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.

I don't have a crystal ball. I have no knowledge that the GG would not install the will of the house as Majority to avoid an unnecessary election from a government which performed for a total of a few weeks active in the house. I see no reason for the GG to call an election because the CPC wants one, even though they put parliment on a 7 week holiday rather then govern. I will follow through with the rest of what you say, pretending that the desires of conservative hacks is greater then that of the house, historical precedent and the desire of the public to not have an election.....

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

Not unless the CPC force one. Then anything can happen. I never underestimate the will of Canadians to punish when really mad. And they are mad. But if I take the view of the spinners, hacks and strategists, I would say the LPC of today would be reduced to a couple seats in BC. And lose a few in Ontario, but not many. The LPC would not have enough support to "win" an election.

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

A new leader is only going to prevent them from a total meltdown. A small bump in the polls but no major change in seats would occur from a change of LPC leadership followed by an election.

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.

First basic instinct would suggest/support your position. However, the LPC will fight the election like it is their last dying breath, which they should, because it would probably be their last dying breath if they didn't fight. The other thing, is how effective will the CPC propoganda be, if they get tagged for the purposeful defeat of the government in order to seek a larger mandate. Going to the well twice, may not get the intended results.

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.

And this is the scenario I fully expect. That if Harper orchestrates his own defeat, the GG will have to follow the will of parliment, install the coalition, and let them govern. And yes, there could well be hell to pay down the road.

And because this is the most likely scenario, it is the reason that Harper took a vacation from his problems. And those problems won't go away, if the vote doesn't pass.

There is no logical reason to suggest, hey, we governed for 6 weeks, took 7 weeks off, we haven't passed one piece of legislation, and we had asked the GG for an election to govern better then we were, and now we are a pathetic useless bunch of losers. So, could we do it again, for another 300 Million, and another 8 more weeks of delay and then, if it all works out good......well, then its another 6 weeks before parliment gets running after that, and we can maybe pass our first piece of legislation in 8 to 12 weeks,so we are looking at late May/June for our solution to the economic crises.

Sounds good to me.

[Oleg Bach]

Two good decisions made and two good passing of legislation might be all we really need - better two good ones than a flurry of hap hazzard bad ones...quality not quantity.....All we need passed right now is a sound economic plan to ensure our survival for a couple of years..then we should be in the clear....Parliment does to much talking and personal posing....they could pass two good bills and take a leap with a pay cut...maybe they could sit at home and actually think of something good. Most bills are passed with little thought to the long term consequences.

[blueblood]

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.

1) My compas poll says that a ratio of 2:1 Canadians prefer an election to a coalition. It's a brilliant idea/suggestion of CPC hacks, the country thinks your little coalition is a giant crock of shit. And the looney left didn't contribute to this crisis...

2) Canada has a black eye because some self serving leftards want power and are too big of cowards to go to the electorate. That to me constitutes a black eye. And the issue is "but, they're going to cut my funding" - cry me a river and raise your money yourselves instead of raiding taxpayers.

3) The GG wouldn't in her right mind allow this seperatist gong show to govern with so much of the country in an uproar. Her name and reputation would be smeared for an eternity. Simple logic says that the easier way out is an election.

4) The GG is worried about public opinion just like any sane person. She made the right call and is a better person for it. She'll make the right call the next time.

5) Did you vote for a Liberal candidate? Do you want Stephane Dion as PM? If their coalition is such a great idea they can take it to the people and do the strategic voting thing. Unless they are scared of being laughed out of office. Look it. Canadians hate this coalition with every fibre of their being. Whether an election takes place in January or when this coalition eventually falls apart is irrelevant. The leftist party has to justify taking power without the voters endorsing this coalition. Not to mention the tories running attack ads non-stop. Does the left want to take their licks now or later? Either way the tories will win a majority.

[Oleg Bach]

Go to the voter when they voter has habitually and historically rejected you? Not a smart move - better to use intrigue and sneak in and sit in the throne....Maybe no one will notice that the Canadian throne was stolen so Layton thinks - that's because he THINKS Canadians are stupid...I don't like someone underestimating my intelligence and attempting to control me....Layton and Dion insulted intelligent Canadians - but that does not matter to them who believe that most Canadains are stupid and can be fooled - rule number one - never underestimate anyone - and rule to - never underestimate everybody.

[jdobbin]

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.

And here is a poll takes at the same time that says only 16% want another election.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/04/...ament-poll.html

Twenty-eight per cent said they wanted a Liberal-NDP coalition, with the support of the Bloc Québécois, to replace the government in the next few weeks, while 16 per cent said they wanted another election within the next few weeks.

The Ekos poll was a pretty huge sample.

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

Baloney on the world questioning thing our stability. U.S. Ambassador Wilkins said he wasn't even sure it was worth mentioning when he was interviewed last week.

As for the bullying, Harper's can try that but Ignatieff won't be afraid to vote no if Harper acts like an ass again.

[Oleg Bach]

Maybe it's time to fully embrace Quebec and be loyal to the province- not just pander with language rights and terms of distinction, telling the province how very very good it is - The PEOPLE of Quebec are happy to be in the family - It's the ambitious ones seeking personal empire who stir up the crap...just wish that the leaders of the Block would start to think of the people - Tell me how Quebec would benefit to be seperate? It's impossible - the only ones that will benefit are a few greedy old gangsters...time for them to wake up and do what is right for Quecbec - and not empoverish the province so a few can live like big shots. The people are good but they have been stirred up by men that are akin to greedy Muslim Molahs.

[capricorn]

I see no reason for the GG to call an election because the CPC wants one, even though they put parliment on a 7 week holiday rather then govern. I will follow through with the rest of what you say, pretending that the desires of conservative hacks is greater then that of the house, historical precedent and the desire of the public to not have an election.....

The public may be more in tune with conservative hacks than you think. Have you seen this?

Fifty-six percent of those polled by Ipsos Reid said they would rather go to another election, even though one was just held, rather than let the coalition govern.

http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/i...544803420081205

The LPC would not have enough support to "win" an election.

Agreed.

Going to the well twice, may not get the intended results.

Under normal circumstances, that would hold. But we are in uncharted waters so to speak. A lot hinges on how Ignatieff approaches the coalition question when he becomes leader and going into an election.

That if Harper orchestrates his own defeat,

It makes no difference what's in the budget, IMO the opposition will vote it down.

the GG will have to follow the will of parliment, install the coalition, and let them govern.

The GG may consider the will of the people as well as what she and her advisors think is best for the country. How tight is her non-partisan hat?

And because this is the most likely scenario, it is the reason that Harper took a vacation from his problems. And those problems won't go away, if the vote doesn't pass.

Actually, one of the reasons for the time out might have been to gauge public sentiment. In the process, everyone takes a breather. Judging from the hoopla around the Liberal leadership, I bet Liberals welcomed the breathing space as a consequence of the prorogue.

There is no logical reason to suggest, hey, we governed for 6 weeks, took 7 weeks off, we haven't passed one piece of legislation, and we had asked the GG for an election to govern better then we were, and now we are a pathetic useless bunch of losers. So, could we do it again, for another 300 Million, and another 8 more weeks of delay and then, if it all works out good......

Harper has not asked for an election. This will come when the opposition votes down the Janurary 26 budget, then the ball's in the GG's court.

well, then its another 6 weeks before parliment gets running after that, and we can maybe pass our first piece of legislation in 8 to 12 weeks,so we are looking at late May/June for our solution to the economic crises.

The prorogue adds just one week to what would have been the scheduled Christmas break. I doubt that one week would have resulted in anything substantive in the House. A sudden shift to a coalition government would not have done anything to fast track initiatives to address the economy. In fact, the process would have been delayed. Same applies if the coalition takes government or we go to an election. All told, we're in a no win situation while the economy flounders.

[ToadBrother]

Maybe it's time to fully embrace Quebec and be loyal to the province- not just pander with language rights and terms of distinction, telling the province how very very good it is - The PEOPLE of Quebec are happy to be in the family - It's the ambitious ones seeking personal empire who stir up the crap...just wish that the leaders of the Block would start to think of the people - Tell me how Quebec would benefit to be seperate? It's impossible - the only ones that will benefit are a few greedy old gangsters...time for them to wake up and do what is right for Quecbec - and not empoverish the province so a few can live like big shots. The people are good but they have been stirred up by men that are akin to greedy Muslim Molahs.

The Liberals just won a majority in Quebec. Why people keep thinking that because Quebecers vote Bloc they want to separate is beyond me. The Bloc, particularly in the political climate that has dominated since the early 1990s, is seen as doing a pretty good job (we'll see how this coalition business changes things, but I doubt they'll change it much). How, in a fundamental way, is the Bloc any different than Reform was? Reform, until Manning smelled the chance of forming a government, was pretty hard line of Quebec and generally defined itself as a Western-based party. That had to be dumped for the shotgun marriage to the PCs, but still the Bloc is a regional party much as Reform was in its day.

Charest's victory should tell us that the Quebecois are, like any smart group of voters, tempering a federal party dedicated to one thing with a provincial party dedicated to the other. Vive la difference.

[ToadBrother]

The prorogue adds just one week to what would have been the scheduled Christmas break. I doubt that one week would have resulted in anything substantive in the House. A sudden shift to a coalition government would not have done anything to fast track initiatives to address the economy. In fact, the process would have been delayed. Same applies if the coalition takes government or we go to an election. All told, we're in a no win situation while the economy flounders.

I'd hardly label the proroguement of Parliament simply an extended vacation. While I intensely dislike this unholy coalition and agree with the Conservatives that we shouldn't be throwing money to the wind right now, what Harper did could set an incredibly terrible precedent, allowing a government facing defeat in the House to stall it, possibly for much longer than six or seven weeks. I hope, in due course, the GG makes it clear one way or another that the justification was not simply to allow the Conservatives to escape the will of Parliament.

[BC Viking]

I'd hardly label the proroguement of Parliament simply an extended vacation. While I intensely dislike this unholy coalition and agree with the Conservatives that we shouldn't be throwing money to the wind right now, what Harper did could set an incredibly terrible precedent, allowing a government facing defeat in the House to stall it, possibly for much longer than six or seven weeks. I hope, in due course, the GG makes it clear one way or another that the justification was not simply to allow the Conservatives to escape the will of Parliament.

I personally feel that the GG granted Harper proroguement in order to deflect 'partisan' accusations. Now when she denies Harpers's request for yet another election, that would likely have the same result as the last two, her ass is covered so to speak. Fiddling and burning continues until the Jan 26th non- confidence vote, then the coallition can get to work dousing the flames and orchastrating a sweeter economic tune.

[capricorn]

I'd hardly label the proroguement of Parliament simply an extended vacation.

Call it what you want. The fact remains the prorogue has the effect of extending the Christmas break by one week.

I hope, in due course, the GG makes it clear one way or another that the justification was not simply to allow the Conservatives to escape the will of Parliament.

Maybe she did when they had their tête a tête. We don't know the reasons Harper presented to her to substantiate his request. Obviously, she bought into his plan. True, her acceptance of his advice to prorogue may set a precedent. The question is, how likely is it that the circumstances such as they are will be repeated in the years to come?

[ToadBrother]

Call it what you want. The fact remains the prorogue has the effect of extending the Christmas break by one week.

That's rather like saying that a ten-car pile up isn't that much different than a red light, because both stop traffic.

Maybe she did when they had their tête a tête. We don't know the reasons Harper presented to her to substantiate his request. Obviously, she bought into his plan. True, her acceptance of his advice to prorogue may set a precedent. The question is, how likely is it that the circumstances such as they are will be repeated in the years to come?

If the current polls don't hold and we return to the levels of support the parties enjoyed prior to last week, far too dangerously common. It could very well have the effect of encouraging a sitting minority government to be irresponsible in its dealings with opposition parties, knowing full well they can dash off to the GG and put the pause button on (and let's remember, a proroguement can go on much longer than a month and a half). My hunch is that the GG took the PM's advice in part because it realistically only represented only a week extension, and even another government couldn't realistically hope to make any substantial moves at this time of year.

What Harper did wasn't a good thing. It may very well be the least bad thing that he could have done, but it was ultimately a self-serving measure not meant to benefit anybody but his own party. The coalition, of course, means that the same accusation can quite fairly be leveled at the Opposition parties, so we're back to what I feel, there are no heroes in Parliament right now.

[ToadBrother]

I personally feel that the GG granted Harper proroguement in order to deflect 'partisan' accusations. Now when she denies Harpers's request for yet another election, that would likely have the same result as the last two, her ass is covered so to speak. Fiddling and burning continues until the Jan 26th non- confidence vote, then the coallition can get to work dousing the flames and orchastrating a sweeter economic tune.

She did it because to reject the advice of Her Prime Minister would be an extraordinary event, and something that has happened in Westminster parliaments only a couple of times in the last century, and in each case is still hotly debated by historians and constitutional experts.

Edited December 9, 2008 by ToadBrother