A What If: Liberal Democratic Party in Election 2011

[August1991]

The following post (scroll down) in another forum provides an interesting map based on the hypothesis of combining New Democrat and Liberal votes in the past election. Final result?

Lib Dem 187

CPC 120

Green 1

The provincial breakdowns are interesting: BC LDP 19, CPC 15 and Ontario LDP 61, CPC 45.

Now, it's an heroic assumption to imagine that all Liberal voters would vote for a new Liberal Democratic party but even with some leakage to the Conservatives, it is likely that a united party would still have formed a majority and defeated Harper.

Edited May 12, 2011 by August1991

[Peter F]

what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?

--Mark in the bible somewhere

Saruman: We must join with Him, Gandalf. We must join with Sauron. It would be wise, my friend.

-- inspired by a madmax post

Edited May 12, 2011 by Peter F

[Triple M]

I guess it depends if this party is seen more as the NDP or if people see it closer to the liberal party. In this election we've seen blue liberals move over into the CPC camp especially in the GTA/Toronto and we could of potentially seen more of that if this Lib/Dem party was seen as More NDP than Liberal.

On the other hand how would it impact this party in regions where the NDP are strong but the Liberals have a damaged brand???

Would Quebecers/Westerners vote for a party that had a connection to the Liberal party????

Finally how many left to far left voters would feel betrayed by such a party and move one to some other brand of left wing party????

With all that being said I really think there is no better way to ensure a long string of Tory majorities better than a united left wing party. Especially if they don't come together for some time yet.

[TimG]

Now, it's an heroic assumption to imagine that all Liberal voters would vote for a new Liberal Democratic party but even with some leakage to the Conservatives, it is likely that a united party would still have formed a majority and defeated Harper.

An assumption renders all such calculations irrelevant. 50% is the most a combined party can expect. The rest would stay at home or vote conservative. Edited May 12, 2011 by TimG

[cybercoma]

It makes sense, since contrary to what TimG believes, the majority of Canadians vote for left-wing parties. If the left were united, they would almost certainly claim a majority.

[TimG]

It makes sense, since contrary to what TimG believes, the majority of Canadians vote for left-wing parties. If the left were united, they would almost certainly claim a majority.

The Liberals are NOT left wing. They are party of the center with a reputation for campaigning from the left but governing from the right. The claim that the majority of canadians vote for 'left wing' parties is nothing but self serving spin.

[Jack Weber]

I guess it depends if this party is seen more as the NDP or if people see it closer to the liberal party. In this election we've seen blue liberals move over into the CPC camp especially in the GTA/Toronto and we could of potentially seen more of that if this Lib/Dem party was seen as More NDP than Liberal.

On the other hand how would it impact this party in regions where the NDP are strong but the Liberals have a damaged brand???

Would Quebecers/Westerners vote for a party that had a connection to the Liberal party????

Finally how many left to far left voters would feel betrayed by such a party and move one to some other brand of left wing party????

With all that being said I really think there is no better way to ensure a long string of Tory majorities better than a united left wing party. Especially if they don't come together for some time yet.

You know...

Alot of these were the concerns heared when the CCRAPpers and the Progressive Conservatives merged.In 5 + years they now have a majority.

Have they shed SOME of their more extreme Reform roots?

Yes...They had to to become electable.

How many far left voters would leave an almagamted Liber/NDP party??

You mean the Communists and Socialists who already don't like the direction of the NDP???All 1% of the Bev Meslo types?

The real question is how many of the old Trudeau Liberals who are'nt terribly happy with the direction of the Paul Martin Liberals would say enough is enough and move to an amalgamated party?In fact,it might have just the moderating effect that is needed by getting rid of the left wing,rabbla.ca kook brigade and bringing this potential party closer to the centre...

An interesting side note from last week...On Power and Politics on Friday afternoon,Rob Russo brought up a potential outcome of last weeks election being that Layton and the NDP might be in the process of rebuilding the old Pierre Trudeau electoral coalition,with Quebec being its base of power.I found it slightly dubious as we don't know what Layton's "winning conditions" are yet,but,it's food for thought...

[Evening Star]

I just don't agree that the Liberals are a left-wing party or that most of their voters vote for them on those grounds, at least for the last 20 years. They are certainly not a labour party. If anything, the Chretien/Martin Liberals were probably the most fiscally conservative government we'd had in decades. (The Fraser Institute recommends the 1995 budget as a model for deficit reduction in fact. Tom Flanagan has even accused them of stealing Reform's economic policy ideas.) I think Tim is right.

Some other points are made in this editorial: http://thechronicleherald.ca/Editorials/1242591.html

If the Liberals really are a sincerely left-leaning party who have more in common with the NDP than with the Conservatives, I would be completely in favour of co-operation between the parties, as opposed to merger - embracing the idea of a coalition, not aggressively contesting strategic seats that are held by the other party (e.g. Edmonton-Strathcona, Outremont). Somehow the Liberals had no interest in this. Why do you think this was the case, if they are both left-wing parties?

Of course, as I've said before and as prominent NDP members have also stated, any Liberals who want a 'united left' are free to join the most currently prominent left-wing party, that forms the Official Opposition. Why does it not seem that many are interested in doing this?

--

(xpost to cybercoma)

Edited May 12, 2011 by Evening Star

[Evening Star]

You know...

Alot of these were the concerns heared when the CCRAPpers and the Progressive Conservatives merged.In 5 + years they now have a majority.

Have they shed SOME of their more extreme Reform roots?

Yes...They had to to become electable.

How many far left voters would leave an almagamted Liber/NDP party??

You mean the Communists and Socialists who already don't like the direction of the NDP???All 1% of the Bev Meslo types?

How much further to the centre would this party shift though? If it moved any further right than, say, Gary Doer's NDP, I would think the NDP's union and activist base may well prefer to form another social democratic party again.

Edited May 12, 2011 by Evening Star

[Triple M]

You know...

Alot of these were the concerns heared when the CCRAPpers and the Progressive Conservatives merged.In 5 + years they now have a majority.

Have they shed SOME of their more extreme Reform roots?

Yes...They had to to become electable.

How many far left voters would leave an almagamted Liber/NDP party??

You mean the Communists and Socialists who already don't like the direction of the NDP???All 1% of the Bev Meslo types?

The real question is how many of the old Trudeau Liberals who are'nt terribly happy with the direction of the Paul Martin Liberals would say enough is enough and move to an amalgamated party?In fact,it might have just the moderating effect that is needed by getting rid of the left wing,rabbla.ca kook brigade and bringing this potential party closer to the centre...

An interesting side note from last week...On Power and Politics on Friday afternoon,Rob Russo brought up a potential outcome of last weeks election being that Layton and the NDP might be in the process of rebuilding the old Pierre Trudeau electoral coalition,with Quebec being its base of power.I found it slightly dubious as we don't know what Layton's "winning conditions" are yet,but,it's food for thought...

That is an interesting point, it would be interesting to see if the NDP can be seen as the party that is the best suited to keep the country together.

[Tilter]

I'd like to see the libs & NDP get together as it would give the voters a 2 party system and the voters would know exactly what they were voting for.

In my riding we had about 6 candidates but I imagine that the % was about .00001% for the hairballs like the New Christian Democratic old time reform & hallucination bible thumping party (or whatever) including the Commies, Greens (not a big hit in Hamilton whereas it should be) & the Kill the Windmills party. I offered Lib Dem, the CPC & the Green the election would have made more sense and still had the sam,e result as the NDP is popular in the riding.

[Evening Star]

Here's the thing, though, and I wanted to say something about this on the "Liberalism" thread too - I actually agree with many of the criticisms people have about the NDP: They can be too beholden to unions; They don't always seem to have a clear plan for wealth generation as opposed to redistribution, even compared to Nordic social democrats; Their policies regarding Quebec do concern me; They don't always seem to have as great a sense as the Liberals on how to support research and innovation. I would actually prefer my 'Platonic ideal' of the Liberal Party to the existing NDP: basically, a Liberal Party that actually believed in the platform they just ran on and seemed to genuinely stand for social liberal principles. So maybe this is what an ideal 'Liberal Democratic' party would be. However, I have little faith that the actually existing Liberal Party and actually existing NDP could effectively merge into this party. (And the reality of the LPC seems pretty far removed from this, although it could change.) I would almost expect that it would be more likely for the NDP to shift in this direction (unless they actually turn into some kind of monster focused on reopening the Constitution.)

Edited May 12, 2011 by Evening Star

[madmax]

what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?

--Mark in the bible somewhere

Saruman: We must join with Him, Gandalf. We must join with Sauron. It would be wise, my friend.

-- inspired by a madmax post

[Scotty]

It makes sense, since contrary to what TimG believes, the majority of Canadians vote for left-wing parties. If the left were united, they would almost certainly claim a majority.

Do they? Harper, a man with no charisma who just came through a recession got 40% of the vote, despite the 'scary-scary' still making a lot of people apprehensive.

What are people going to use for 'scary-scary' after four years of him in a majority government? And if the economy improves, which it probably will, do you really think it improbable he could get over 50%? Now imagine the Conservatives with a leader who was a better speaker, and who had some charisma...

[Posc Student]

I'd say Harper would have gotten at least 45% of the vote.

[Topaz]

I don't think it would work.In the Conservatives case, Harper started out as a reform and now people say he 's more PC and there aren't that many REformers left in the party, they have left when Harper turned back to PC. So, if the NDP and Libs joined, soon Libs would out number NDP and then you have the NDP back being the NDP with its own party. There's too many small differences that would break the parties. Stay with 3 major parties. The Libs will be back, better than ever.

[Smallc]

The following post (scroll down) in another forum provides an interesting map

You visit there too, huh? Guess who I am.

[PIK]

Some interesting posts ,from before the election.

[cybercoma]

Disagreeing that the Liberals are on the Left is silly. The Conservatives are pretty close to the centre themselves. The Liberals are definitely left of centre.

[fellowtraveller]

The Cons won by a concerted effort to move to the middle, which took twenty years.

A Lib/NDP merger could do the same in less time but there is a big fly in the ointment. The Libs of course will do or say anything to get back in the drivers seat, but in that merger they have lost the right to control the terms or process of merger. The NDP have the final say, and there is a very powerful group within the party that will not abandon the far left prnciples that have forever kept them from national power. I think they would have to actually purge that group to effect a merger with the Libs. Would that resulting weaker merger then be strong enough to defeat Harper? That of course assumes Harper does not defeat hinself in the next few years.

A big unknown in all this is the economy. It is quite possible it will get much worse and soon, which will work in the favour of NDP/Libs.

[noahbody]

Alot of these were the concerns heared when the CCRAPpers and the Progressive Conservatives merged.In 5 + years they now have a majority.

Have they shed SOME of their more extreme Reform roots?

Which policies did you find extreme? Fabrications from the media don't count. There were a few people they had to weed out like Randy White who was a lighting rod for bashing, but the NDP has this problem too with Ms. Vegas and some separatists.

How many far left voters would leave an almagamted Liber/NDP party??

Far left voters wouldn't lead but many Liberal would vote Conservative, especially now that they no longer have to fear the boogeyman.

[CPCFTW]

By the time the next election rolls around, the economy rebounds, and the "tyrannical conservative majority" has been proven to be responsible and pragmatic, I think Harper could be looking at close to 50% of the vote.

Other than that, the premise of this thread is retarded. It's sad that the left actually believes this kind of stuff. You have to be extremely detached from reality to come up with something like this.

Almost every liberal voter I know would never vote for the NDP. The recent election is proof of that, the cons gained 600k votes and libs lost 800k from 2007. Where do you suppose most of the conservative gains came from?

Most liberal voters think of the political spectrum as something like this:

....................Cons...Center...Libs................NDP...Soviet Union

I don't know where they would place the "Liberal Democrat" party, but you can be sure that such a party won't be receiving 100% of liberal votes.

[Argus]

It makes sense, since contrary to what TimG believes, the majority of Canadians vote for left-wing parties. If the left were united, they would almost certainly claim a majority.

The Liberals draw support by being a middle of the road party which veers a little to the left. A united party would either veer too far to the left for the comfort of mainstream voters, and lose them, or stay too close to the centre and lose the more left wing voters to the Green, or some new left wing party which is bound to emerge.

[Saipan]

I don't think it would work.In the Conservatives case, Harper started out as a reform and now people say he 's more PC and there aren't that many REformers left in the party

Most ARE Reformers. As always. The few PCs like Clark or Orchard are gone. Real conservatives split just temporarily to two parties. Now just one again.

[Saipan]

A What If: Liberal Democratic Party in Election 2011

Means more seats for conservatives.