It could be a ‘bloodbath for the Liberals’ if polls hold up until next election, say political strategists and insiders

[CdnFox]

https://www.hilltimes.com/story/2023/12/11/if-the-current-conservative-polling-numbers-hold-up-until-the-next-election-itll-be-a-bloodbath-for-the-liberals-say-political-strategists-and-insiders/405506/

“It’s going to be a bloodbath. It’d be worse than 2011 [that year’s federal election] for the Liberals,” said Dan Robertson, a former senior Conservative strategist in the 2021 and 2011 election campaigns who now works as a senior adviser of Focaldata. “We’re looking at 1984 seat counts, not 2011.”

In the 1984 election, Brian Mulroney’s Progressive Conservatives won 211 of the 280 seats in the House of Commons. In the 2011 election, the Conservatives under Stephen Harper won a majority government by carrying 166 of the 307 seats.

 

 

Obviously the election is a ways off.  Getting closer tho, less than two years left at most. And the fact is if jagmeet isn't a completely selfish bugger and cares about his party he'll have to pull out of the deal well in advance of that.

And elections matter, campaigns matter and they make a difference.
 

But that can go the other way too, and the libs could be "kim campbelled" if the cpc really gets the wind in it's sails and pp runs a solid election.

 

at the end of the day tho, it's HARD to maintain this kind of momentum for 2 years,  can PP do it? He's been a bit of a genus so far but is he out of new tricks to win the people over with?

 

[PIK]

Be a bloodbath for the Trudeau party.  Hopefully the lib party will find itself again in the next 8 or so yrs.

[WestCanMan]

Honestly it's not good to have no opposition imo, but the MSM is to blame for this. They sheltered Trudeau and let him get away with too much, now the hatred is too widespread. 

[CdnFox]

25 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Honestly it's not good to have no opposition imo, but the MSM is to blame for this. They sheltered Trudeau and let him get away with too much, now the hatred is too widespread. 

Exactly.

What will be interesting is what happens to the ndp  If they crash too and PP wins a huge majority i'm sure we will once again hear talk of merger.  Although honestly - i think that would push a fair number to the right as the party would have to stay on the left at that point.

The smartest thing the libs and their supporters could have done is take the L with Erin and hold him to a minority, then elect a new leader and go for a reset and win a majority the next time out.  But the media really backed trudeau in that election and he squeaked out another minority.

 

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

The smartest thing the libs and their supporters could have done is take the L with Erin and hold him to a minority, then elect a new leader and go for a reset and win a majority the next time out.  But the media really backed trudeau in that election and he squeaked out another minority.

Do you think the Libs will turf la turd if he loses big this time?

I can't imagine His Egoness letting go of the party leadership voluntarily, but I guess that no matter how it goes down, that will be the story. 

I can see Trudeau making a play for the upcoming "Emperor of the One-Word Gov't". God help us if he wins. Canada will be royally pounded. 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Do you think the Libs will turf la turd if he loses big this time?

I can't imagine His Egoness letting go of the party leadership voluntarily, but I guess that no matter how it goes down, that will be the story. 

I can see Trudeau making a play for the upcoming "Emperor of the One-Word Gov't". God help us if he wins. Canada will be royally pounded. 

I think if he loses by 1 seat he's gone.  The liberals have a very serious tradition about that, rarely broken. As chretien said when they asked him about why they were getting rid of paul martin,  "He didn't win".

His only shot would be if he held them to a minority and was able to form gov't with the help of the ndp. Even if the cpc gets the most votes, if it's a minority then two other parties can form gov't as a coalition of some sort if they combined equal a majority.  Dion tried to put that together if you'll recall and couldn't.

I think most of his people wish he was gone now.

[Queenmandy85]

Mr. Poilievre and the CPC seem to have plateaued at 204 to 208 seats. That might be due to the fact they are pretty much at the ceiling. It will be interesting to see if they can sustain that level as they begin to pivot over the next 18 months. 

[August1991]

Trudeau Jnr was elected in September 2021 but with a minority government.

In an agreement, the federal NDP agreed to support the federal Liberals - not a coalition.

====

I reckon that these federal Liberals will stay in power as long as they can. Trudeau Snr in 1979 did. 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, August1991 said:

Trudeau Jnr was elected in September 2021 but with a minority government.

In an agreement, the federal NDP agreed to support the federal Liberals - not a coalition.

====

I reckon that these federal Liberals will stay in power as long as they can. Trudeau Snr in 1979 did. 

Its a coalition.  Sometimes jokingly referred to as the non-coalition coalition. While a ways and means agreement isn't formally a coalition in the traditional sense this one absolutely has behaved like one and is for all intents and purposes. Jaggers is a well heeled lapdog for justin at this point.

[August1991]

11 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Its a coalition.

It's not. No NDP member has a seat at cabinet.

(Imagine if Trudeau Jnr made Singh his finance or foreign affairs minister - it could happen! - then, it would be a coalition.)

====

Harper passed a law to set federal election dates. It's nonsense.

By tradition, a government exists by parliamentary confidence vote. After five years or so, no government has confidence. The GG dissolves parliament, calls an election.

Edited December 13, 2023 by August1991

[August1991]

After the 1979 federal election, if Clark had made Fabien Roy a cabinet minister, Canada would be different today.

But then, Clark would have screwed it up anyway. 

[CdnFox]

8 minutes ago, August1991 said:

It's not. No NDP member has a seat at cabinet.

It is. I realize that english is your second language and  your knowledge of our govt is slender at best, but go read what i wrote again a little more slowly and see if you get it this time.

 

Quote

Harper passed a law to set federal election dates. It's nonsense.

Why is it nonsense?

Quote

By tradition, a government exists by parliamentary confidence vote. After five years or so, no government has confidence. The GG dissolves parliament, calls an election.

That could not be more untrue.  Our constitution limits terms to about 5 years.  That IS the fixed election date, we've always had one.  However, a majority gov't could CHOOSE to call it early and most did. It has nothing to do with the confidence of the house in such cases.

If it's a minority gov't, which until recently has been very rare, then a vote of confidence can be held - but no, in a majority there's no confidence vote, the gov't sets the election date and it has to be on or before the date required by the constitution.

And every parliament sets that date so it wasn't that "harper passed a law', justin also agreed to the law.

Read a book pls.

[August1991]

32 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

....

Our constitution limits terms to about 5 years.  That IS the fixed election date, we've always had one.

...

Our constitution, such as it is (once a British law, the BNA Act amended), makes no reference to five years.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Harper invented/passed the four year idea. If tested, I suspect our Supreme Court would over turn Harper's law.

====

By tradition, the GG dissolves parliament before five years or when a government loses a "confidence vote". 

We had a general election in July 1974. Our next was May 1979. It happens.

====

For those curious, Laurier lost to Borden in Sept 1911. We later had a coalition government until the awful conscription election of Dec 1917. 

Edited December 13, 2023 by August1991

[CdnFox]

26 minutes ago, August1991 said:

Our constitution, such as it is (once a British law, the BNA Act amended), makes no reference to five years.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

You are wrong. I would refer you to the updated charter of rights and freedoms which forms part of our constitution.

Maximum duration of legislative bodies

• 4 (1) No House of Commons and no legislative assembly shall continue for longer than five years from the date fixed for the return of the writs of a general election of its members.End note ⁽⁸²⁾

• Marginal note:Continuation in special circumstances

  (2) In time of real or apprehended war, invasion or insurrection, a House of Commons may be continued by Parliament and a legislative assembly may be continued by the legislature beyond five years if such continuation is not opposed by the votes of more than one-third of the members of the House of Commons or the legislative assembly, as the case may be.End note ⁽⁸³⁾

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-12.html

So yes - it must be held 5 years after the last election. Or earlier if the party in power asks for parliament to be disolved and the GG agrees, which barring very unusual circumstances they always do.

Quote

Harper invented/passed the four year idea. If tested, I suspect our Supreme Court would over turn Harper's law.

Both of those statements are completely untrue.  And the law has already been examined - as long as it passes a majority vote in the house which they do EVERY TIME THERE"S AN ELECTION then its perfectly legal.

Having said that any gov't with a majority vote can set the law aside.

You have ZERO idea what you're talking about and at this point you're just embarassing yourself.

[August1991]

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You are wrong. I would refer you to the updated charter of rights and freedoms which forms part of our constitution.

....

I'm wrong. You are correct. I stand corrected.

[Jack9000]

only good thing  might come out of it is a ndp liberal merger when they relize PP is even worse then harper by  his 4th year and just a donald trump wanna be lol.  bring on the #NEWDEMOCRATICLIBERALS party . only if the ndp have more seats then the liberals at the time though.

Edited December 13, 2023 by Jack9000

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, Jack9000 said:

only good thing  might come out of it is a ndp liberal merger when they relize PP is even worse then harper by  his 4th year and just a donald trump wanna be lol.  bring on the #NEWDEMOCRATICLIBERALS party . only if the ndp have more seats then the liberals at the time though.

It's extremely unlikely for several reasons.

1 - people often pretend the ndp and the libs are basically the same thing but they're not. Not at all.  That's why there is an NDP.  And while SOME of their members might cross over once in a while to try to stop the CPC from winning (which never works and winds up just making sure the libs lose fewer seats at the dips expense) the fact is that they're not really compatible.  if they WERE to merge it would push a lot of blue liberals into the CPC camp and a number of ndp into the green or other alternate camps.  It wouldn't be effective.

2 - It would take at least 2 elections for the libs to admit they can't win on their own, probably more like 3.

3 - the libs HATE sharing power. Their hard liners won't like the idea of letting a bunch of outsiders in who will suddenly get to have an opinion. There's no way they'd go for it.

So what's more likely is that the libs will lose the next election as well, and then look for a victory in the 3rd after pp's had 2 terms.

The thing is, they're really starved for talent and the people who hate the libs the most these days is the kids - they'll still remember all that 10 years from now while they're still coping with the fallout the libs left behind.  So the third term will be the real fight and only if they lose THAT one will the libs start to panic.

[Moonlight Graham]

14 hours ago, August1991 said:

Trudeau Jnr was elected in September 2021 but with a minority government.

In an agreement, the federal NDP agreed to support the federal Liberals - not a coalition.

====

I reckon that these federal Liberals will stay in power as long as they can. Trudeau Snr in 1979 did. 

The Titanic is sinking and every Liberal MP is wrapping their arms and legs around the railing to hold on as long as they can before they hit the water.

Unfortunately I'm not too confident in the CPC even if they're an improvement.  I think Canada is in trouble regardless of party, due to corruption.  The country was sold down the river a long time ago.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Moonlight Graham said:

The Titanic is sinking and every Liberal MP is wrapping their arms and legs around the railing to hold on as long as they can before they hit the water.

Unfortunately I'm not too confident in the CPC even if they're an improvement.  I think Canada is in trouble regardless of party, due to corruption.  The country was sold down the river a long time ago.

The problem isn't even corruption - you can deal with that effectively enough in short order if you want to and we've seen that before.

The problem is the state we're in, and while not ALL of it is justin's fault his choices have made it far far worse, and the simple truth is that even a very comptetent gov't is not going to be able to make all those problems go away in one or even 2 terms.

Our housing issues for example - even if we could double production tomorrow it would take half a decade to catch up with our short fall and there's zero chance of us doubling it right away. if PP does everything right we MAY be building enough homes by the end of his first term but then we'll just be starting to catch up. It'll be at least another 5 years after that before we're remotely close to caught up and probably more like 10.

Productivity is going to be a brutal fight - the unions will fight it every step of the way. We've sunk so low there that it's not funny and we're still losing ground. That isn't going to change overnight and it totally affects quality of life.

He can make things better - and put things on the road to recovery - but the damage right now is SO deep that it will be VERY hard to fix everything in a couple of terms.

 

[PIK]

4 hours ago, Jack9000 said:

only good thing  might come out of it is a ndp liberal merger when they relize PP is even worse then harper by  his 4th year and just a donald trump wanna be lol.  bring on the #NEWDEMOCRATICLIBERALS party . only if the ndp have more seats then the liberals at the time though.

Harper will go down as one of the best PMs we ever had. JT the worse. If Harper was in power right now, we wouldn't be the laughing stock of the world right now. And one thing is for sure,under Harper we wouldn't be supporting Hamas.

Edited December 13, 2023 by PIK

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, PIK said:

Harper will go down as one of the best PMs we ever had. JT the worse. If Harper was in power right now, we wouldn't be the laughing stock of the world right now. And one thing is for sure,under Harper we wouldn't be supporting Hamas.

Very true.  Harper was extremely gifted as a leader. His very innovative policies got us through a world economic recession that was absolutely horrible for everyone else but was so mild for us most people didn't realize we were having one - and then laid out a 5 year plan to get back to balanced budgets and then hit it year after year - and he did it all without cutting transfers to the provinces or radically cutting services or any of that.  We did a tonne of new  trade deals and when other countries treated us badly he got in their face and they backed off.

I'm hoping against hope that PP will be harper v2 and we can actually make some real headway and correct some of the disaster justin is leaving behind. I know it's not possible to get it all fixed even in two terms but maybe we can get a major running start.

[Nefarious Banana]

1 hour ago, Jack9000 said:

only good thing  might come out of it is a ndp liberal merger when they relize PP is even worse then harper by  his 4th year and just a donald trump wanna be lol.  bring on the #NEWDEMOCRATICLIBERALS party . only if the ndp have more seats then the liberals at the time though.

Eight months of pogey/dole . . . . yeah, you should fear a responsible federal government.

[Gaétan]

On 12/11/2023 at 1:53 PM, CdnFox said:

In the 1984 election, Brian Mulroney’s Progressive Conservatives won 211 of the 280 seats in the House of Commons. In the 2011 election, the Conservatives under Stephen Harper won a majority government by carrying 166 of the 307 seats.

 

 

 

 

 

And the people noticed they shouldn't vote for them and they elected the liberals again, this time we should try the NDP or the Green Party to not do the same mistake again.

Edited December 13, 2023 by Gaétan

[Legato]

3 minutes ago, Gaétan said:

And the people notice they shouldn't vote for them and they elected the liberals again, this time we should try the NDP or the Green Party to not do the same mistake again.

Do you have a frying pan?

[Army Guy]

7 hours ago, Jack9000 said:

only good thing  might come out of it is a ndp liberal merger when they relize PP is even worse then harper by  his 4th year and just a donald trump wanna be lol.  bring on the #NEWDEMOCRATICLIBERALS party . only if the ndp have more seats then the liberals at the time though.

The problem with that is your Assuming PP rule is going to be shitty...however the Liberal /NDP rule is already written in history no assuming anything it is all shitty...

Canada can not afford another NDP liberal coalition....it's not going to happen, once justin is gone Liberals will not want to have anything to do with the NDP...besides the way the polls are going NDP will be stronger than the liberals to start with...