Liberal-New Democrat Alliance to Topple Harper

[MadX]

I was wonder how many Liberal and NDP supporters would support a temporary coalition of the two parties for the 2015 election to topple Harper. They could split the ridings in half and only run NDP candidates in one half and Liberal in the other. I'd support that measure. It would guarantee that Harper would be voted out of office because 60 per cent of Canadians oppose Harper. We have a poll regarding this question on our forum at antiharper.com. Feel free to join, its free, and vote in the poll.

http://www.antiharper.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=39

[Moonlight Graham]

Splitting the ridings like that would never happen. Why not just unite the left-wing parties (likely also not happen)?

NDP and Liberals will likely each be in too strong of a position to do this, they both have the big prize in mind. If the election was held now it's doubtful the CPC would get a majority, so the left-wings parties could unite and form a minority coalition at worst.

Edited May 8, 2013 by Moonlight Graham

[MadX]

Splitting the ridings like that would never happen. Why not just unite the left-wing parties (likely also not happen)?

This would only be a temporary measure to unseat Harper. I one term Liberal-NDP coalition government. I truly think that this may be in the best interest of the country. Why should Harper have a minority government with 40 per cent of the vote.

[Moonlight Graham]

This would only be a temporary measure to unseat Harper. I one term Liberal-NDP coalition government. I truly think that this may be in the best interest of the country. Why should Harper have a minority government with 40 per cent of the vote.

See my edited first post above.

It would guarantee that Harper would be voted out of office because 60 per cent of Canadians oppose Harper.

True. But on the other hand, a higher percentage don't support the NDP or the Liberals. I think I'd concentrate on making the electoral process more accurately distributed.

[guyser]

I truly think that this may be in the best interest of the country. Why should Harper have a minority government with 40 per cent of the vote.

How about the worst idea ? Govern by committee

Let the Parties win or lose on their stance.

[MadX]

How about the worst idea ? Govern by committee

Let the Parties win or lose on their stance.

Normally I'd agree with you and I don't support a permanent merger of the parties, they are too different for that. I do think that Harper is so radical and so dangerous though that its in the best interest of the country to vote him out and vote splitting is what let him get a majority government. The Liberals and NDP are closer to each other in policy then either is to the Conservatives.

[scribblet]

The Liberals are getting close to the 'prize', not likely they would agree to this. They should stand and run on their own merits or actually unite the left.

[eyeball]

What happened to the Liberal-New Democrat-Green Alliance to reform our electoral and parliamentary system? Canada's conservatives had their shot at reform and failed on all counts. When do Canada's un-conservative parties get theirs?

Simply toppling Harper sounds like emptying out the shit-bucket and kicking it down the road when we really need to upgrade to a sewage treatment plant.

[Boges]

Election reform hasn't really been proposed by either the Liberals or NDP.

[TimG]

I do think that Harper is so radical and so dangerous though that its in the best interest of the country to vote him out and vote splitting is what let him get a majority government.

You would be wrong to assume that Liberal voters share your harper degrangment syndrome. I suspect that many of the votes the Liberals are picking up now are coming from people who don't hate harper but are looking for a change.

[Boges]

You would be wrong to assume that Liberal voters share your harper degrangment syndrome. I suspect that many of the votes the Liberals are picking up now are coming from people who don't hate harper but are looking for a change.

Thinking that NDP and Liberal votes are more comparable to CPC and Liberal votes are a fallacy.

[g_bambino]

It would guarantee that Harper would be voted out of office because 60 per cent of Canadians oppose Harper.

Where's the guarantee of that? It doesn't matter what percentage of the overall voting populace thinks of Harper now; in an election, it's who wins in each riding that matters, and there's nothing to say the Conservative candidate wouldn't win against that one NDP or Liberal opponent he or she faces.

[DFCaper]

I always thought of the Liberals being closer to the CPC than the NDP. They sound different, but govern the same. The NDP faithful are so far left that they share little with the Liberals.

I do not like Harper and will definitely never vote for him again, but he has not been that bad of a PM. I certainly don't like how he operates, but most of what he appoplished has been good.

With most Liberal voters I know, they would likely split evenly if they needed to chose between the CPC and NDP.

[g_bambino]

This would only be a temporary measure to unseat Harper. I one term Liberal-NDP coalition government. I truly think that this may be in the best interest of the country. Why should Harper have a minority government with 40 per cent of the vote.

And how long would that "term" be? Would the marriage last four years? And then, in the succeeding election, the NDP and Liberals run against each other and a Liberal government could be installed with the same or similar percentage of votes as the Conservatives got in the last election and then... Oh, but would that be okay because, you know, it's not Harper?

[Lenny_Bruce]

The problem I have with unite the right or unite the left, is the endgame is black and white dualistic politics without choice like in the States. Two parties to choose from, many of which people don't like to begin with.

I'd prefer progressive electoral systems like exist in Australia, and Europe for example, where vote splitting is not a problem, and the demos actually gets representation instead of being led by a minority of the population in the Canadian system which is currently functioning as an oligarchy, (rule of the few) rather than as a democracy (rule by the people) by definition.

[Moonbox]

Simply toppling Harper sounds like emptying out the shit-bucket and kicking it down the road when we really need to upgrade to a sewage treatment plant.[/size]

Although I don't seem to agree with eyeball very often, I have to say I'm totally with him on this. It's almost tragic that after 35 years of divisive politics and/or corporate croneyism (let's face it, there's been almost no noticeable differences between Mulroney, Chretien, Martin and Harper) we're going to end up with more of the same BS with Trudeau steering the ship. With smart candidates like Garneau and Martha Hall Findlay in the running, it's pretty pathetic that Canadians chose the dumbest, least qualified and most divisive candidate among them -- all on the merits of a name and a pretty smile.

Edited May 8, 2013 by Moonbox

[Fletch 27]

Well, Its how a democracy works and how many other "Majorities" have happened in the past..

Your seeing an "Alliance" now in Ontario between the Ontario Liberals and NDP... Where the Liberals are throwing MILLIONS at the NDP just to stay in power. Is that what you would like to see Federally? The bribery of one party onto another with YOUR dollars? Are you pleased with the great successes this recent budget the NDP propped will reveal? 41Million for "Music" in DT Toronto in an NDP riding?

I, and hundreds of thousands are "A-OK" with Steven Harper... These "alliance" tactics" should be outlawed

I was wonder how many Liberal and NDP supporters would support a temporary coalition of the two parties for the 2015 election to topple Harper. They could split the ridings in half and only run NDP candidates in one half and Liberal in the other. I'd support that measure. It would guarantee that Harper would be voted out of office because 60 per cent of Canadians oppose Harper. We have a poll regarding this question on our forum at antiharper.com. Feel free to join, its free, and vote in the poll.

http://www.antiharper.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=39

[Lenny_Bruce]

Qualitatively I think Chretien was way better than the other ones listed and deserves to be in a different category altogether. I agree though, that all of them including Chretien were guilty of letting the free market corporatists get what they wanted without being in the best interests of Canada.

[Accountability Now]

It would guarantee that Harper would be voted out of office because 60 per cent of Canadians oppose Harper.

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't most PM's usually have 40% of the vote (ie 60% opposition). A quick google search shows Wikipedia saying that Chretien had 41.24% in 93, 38.46% in 97, 40.85% in 2000, and Martin had 36.73% in 2004. So all these Liberal governments had approximately 60% of the voters opposing them too.

Is it fair to say that using the popular vote as you mention above is not a fair assement of whether they should be our leader or not? I have to believe the only way we will see a popular vote higher than 50% is if it were a two party system. Or if Don Cherry ran for PM...kidding.

[g_bambino]

Your seeing an "Alliance" now in Ontario between the Ontario Liberals and NDP... Where the Liberals are throwing MILLIONS at the NDP just to stay in power. Is that what you would like to see Federally? The bribery of one party onto another with YOUR dollars? Are you pleased with the great successes this recent budget the NDP propped will reveal? 41Million for "Music" in DT Toronto in an NDP riding?

I, and hundreds of thousands are "A-OK" with Steven Harper... These "alliance" tactics" should be outlawed

Uh, do you recall how the Conservative government retained the confidence of the House of Commons between 2005 and 2011? If you and hundreds of thousands are "A-OK" with Harper, you must all be "A-OK" with his budgets' spending of money at the behest of the Liberal and NDP majority in the House of Commons on whose support the Conservative government relied in order to stay in office, just like the situation for the Liberal government in Ontario today. You can't outlaw minority government.

[Fletch 27]

You omitted one little thing.... And its understandable how such a tiny thing could slip your mind but,, Let me remind you about the greatest recession ever witnessed throughout the world.. I know how its easy to forget..

Yes Sir, Hundreds of thousands are A-OK with Canada position now compared to the rest of the world..... And Lets now forget, who was in the drivers seat....

Uh, do you recall how the Conservative government retained the confidence of the House of Commons between 2005 and 2011? If you and hundreds of thousands are "A-OK" with Harper, you must all be "A-OK" with his budgets' spending of money at the behest of the Liberal and NDP majority in the House of Commons on whose support the Conservative government relied in order to stay in office, just like the situation for the Liberal government in Ontario today. You can't outlaw minority government.

Edited May 8, 2013 by Fletch 27

[guyser]

You omitted one little thing.... And its understandable how such a tiny thing could slip your mind but,, Let me remind you about the greatest recession ever witnessed throughout the world.. I know how its easy to forget..

Yes Sir, Hundreds of thousands are A-OK with Canada position now compared to the rest of the world..... And Lets now forget, who was in the drivers seat....

IOW....My conservatives have a reason , none of the others dont.

Gotcha....cool story bro,

You also forget that Harper tried the coalition shtuff when in opposition.

More of 'my guys are good' huh?

[Moonbox]

Is it fair to say that using the popular vote as you mention above is not a fair assement of whether they should be our leader or not? I have to believe the only way we will see a popular vote higher than 50% is if it were a two party system.

It's not fair to say at all. We're a federation. Each region elects a representative so that we get a fair representation of the needs of vastly different areas and people.

The people who complain about this are usually just frustrated because their candidate loses or they don't understand the system.

[Accountability Now]

It's not fair to say at all. We're a federation. Each region elects a representative so that we get a fair representation of the needs of vastly different areas and people.

The people who complain about this are usually just frustrated because their candidate loses or they don't understand the system.

Isn't that what I said? ie. using the popular vote is NOT a fair assessment.

[margrace]

Yes we certainly need to change the system, but how do we know there will be another election, Harper doesn't have to call one unless he wants to does he?