The_Squid Posted October 6, 2014 Report Share Posted October 6, 2014 (First post, w00t) Altogether, I think it would be an improvement, and a very likely result after the 2015 election. I remain skeptical of Trudeau's capability as a potential Prime Minister, but that's what the campaign will be about. As it stands, I will park my vote with Mulcair, as he has consistently impressed me with his performance in the House. What I think Canada really needs is electoral reform to get rid of these idiotic majority governments. Welcome to the forum. Best 1st post ever! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solastalgia Posted October 6, 2014 Report Share Posted October 6, 2014 Welcome to the forum. Best 1st post ever! Thank you! I have been involved in forums before, but hopefully I'll stick around here, it seems cozy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted October 6, 2014 Report Share Posted October 6, 2014 (First post, w00t) Altogether, I think it would be an improvement, and a very likely result after the 2015 election. I remain skeptical of Trudeau's capability as a potential Prime Minister, but that's what the campaign will be about. As it stands, I will park my vote with Mulcair, as he has consistently impressed me with his performance in the House. What I think Canada really needs is electoral reform to get rid of these idiotic majority governments. Good, a vote for mulcair is a vote for harper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted October 6, 2014 Report Share Posted October 6, 2014 Brad wall is not Stephen Harper...although Trudeau's Iraq comments will turn many (including me) off. No, Wall is more popular and I say again: SK will not want to change anything next federal election and risk what has been so very long in coming: jobs and general prosperity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solastalgia Posted October 6, 2014 Report Share Posted October 6, 2014 (edited) Good, a vote for mulcair is a vote for harper. No, hun, a vote for the NDP is a vote for the NDP. =] Edited October 6, 2014 by Solastalgia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 6, 2014 Report Share Posted October 6, 2014 (edited) No, Wall is more popular and I say again: SK will not want to change anything next federal election and risk what has been so very long in coming: jobs and general prosperity Nobody wants to mess with that. Canada is going in the right direction yet harper is very not popular. Edited October 6, 2014 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted October 8, 2014 Report Share Posted October 8, 2014 Nobody wants to mess with that. Canada is going in the right direction yet harper is very not popular. Canada's hardly going in the right direction. The middle class continues to shrink while the lower class expands and the upper class gets wealthier. All of this has been accomplished through a recession and fairly anemic economic growth. Something is not right. The problem here, as you and I have discussed many times, is finding someone to vote for that will make things better rather than worse. I'll take the status quo over worse, but I'd take better over the status quo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 8, 2014 Report Share Posted October 8, 2014 Canada has the richest middle class in the world. Every country has similar problems. Overall, Canada is doing very well in a comparative sense, and polls on country direction show that the majority of the population agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 I've been thinking about this for a while now. Like most of you I've been wondering what the Canadian political landscape might look like after the 2015 Canadian Federal Election. I think a Trudeau/Mulcair coalition of sorts would be great. Both parties share similar ideologies and can work together. I would rather see a minority government with the NDP and Liberal making a coalition against the Conservatives. A minority government is very different from a coalition. A coalition brings often dueling parties into the government. The problem with them is that the people who voted for say the Liberals did not bargain for an NDP govenrment, and vice versa. A minority government that usually qucklly gives way to fresh elections (though not in the 2006-8 case or the Pearson governments) is better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 Canada has the richest middle class in the world. based on what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 A minority government is very different from a coalition. A coalition brings often dueling parties into the government. The problem with them is that the people who voted for say the Liberals did not bargain for an NDP govenrment, and vice versa. A minority government that usually qucklly gives way to fresh elections (though not in the 2006-8 case or the Pearson governments) is better. no - depends on whether the (formal) coalition is formed pre-or-post election. A post-election formed coaltion is, typically, more stable than a minority government... less likelihood for non-confidence votes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 no - depends on whether the (formal) coalition is formed pre-or-post election. A post-election formed coaltion is, typically, more stable than a minority government... less likelihood for non-confidence votes. It may be more stable but it's not what people voted for. That's why in Europe "wall to wall" coalitions, or those involving the major right and left parties, are considered undemocratic. A post-election coalition in Canada also deprives Liberal or NDP voters the choice to vote for one, or the other, party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 It may be more stable but it's not what people voted for. That's why in Europe "wall to wall" coalitions, or those involving the major right and left parties, are considered undemocratic. A post-election coalition in Canada also deprives Liberal or NDP voters the choice to vote for one, or the other, party. nonsense! European coaltions are a model of working collaboration... they're formed on contractual agreements committing the coalition government to a specific legislative agenda. They work... they've been shown to work well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 nonsense! European coaltions are a model of working collaboration... they're formed on contractual agreements committing the coalition government to a specific legislative agenda. They work... they've been shown to work well.They work great for the politicians whose employment is thereby ensured, I'll agree. For the voters who are effectively deprived of any choice while going through the mechanics of voting, not so much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 A minority government is very different from a coalition. A coalition brings often dueling parties into the government. The problem with them is that the people who voted for say the Liberals did not bargain for an NDP govenrment, and vice versa. A minority government that usually qucklly gives way to fresh elections (though not in the 2006-8 case or the Pearson governments) is better. 60% didn't vote for a Harper government either.... What's the difference? No one knows what they are going to get when they vote. There are rules established for this sort of thing and it is perfectly normal and valid in our political system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 60% didn't vote for a Harper government either.... What's the difference? No one knows what they are going to get when they vote. There are rules established for this sort of thing and it is perfectly normal and valid in our political system.The "rules" established by tradition generally bar coalitions. The Borden coalition is about the only one I can think of; and look what damage that did to an hope of Anglophone/Francophone unity. Maybe there never was real hope of that but Laurier seemed to be on the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 There are rules established for this sort of thing and it is perfectly normal and valid in our political system. of course that didn't stop Harper Conservatives from going ballistic and declaring a as an affront to democracy... effectively launching a national media campaign that included MPs going back to their ridings to demonize "those who would steal your vote... steal your democracy"! "undemocratic seizure of power" "Such an illegimate government would be a catastrophe for our democracy, our unity and our economy" "the NDP and Liberals have entered into an "unholy alliance" with the Bloc Quebecois - a party that is here in Ottawa for no other reason than to destroy the country we all love." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 The "rules" established by tradition generally bar coalitions Absolutely incorrect. Coalitions are not barred in any way precedent or otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 Absolutely incorrect. Coalitions are not barred in any way precedent or otherwise.Besides Borden has Canada ever had one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 Besides Borden has Canada ever had one? It doesn't matter. Just because it hasn't yet happened doesn't mean it's "barred" (your word). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 It doesn't matter. Just because it hasn't yet happened doesn't mean it's "barred" (your word).Maybe an imprecise word but much Canadian and British constitutional content is based upon tradition. Britain is now using a coalition, one of the first since wartime. Canada's only coalition has been in time of war. Does that tell you anything? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 That they're uncommon? It doesn't mean that they're barred. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 Maybe an imprecise word but much Canadian and British constitutional content is based upon tradition. Britain is now using a coalition, one of the first since wartime. Canada's only coalition has been in time of war. Does that tell you anything? That they're uncommon? It doesn't mean that they're barred. And that consensus building is important during wars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 And that consensus building is important during wars.My point is that coalitions are just not used often in single-member FPTP systems. Nor should they be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 My point is that coalitions are just not used often in single-member FPTP systems. Nor should they be. coaltions are, quite obviously, allowed within a Westminister Parliamentary system... again, they offer more stability than might associate with a strictly non-formal coalition that constitutes a minority government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.