Will there be a Fall 2007 election?

[jbg]

What is so wrong with pointing out to another poster that he is in violation of the rules?

This kind of dispute should be taken to the PM system. No one is interested in who can spew more vitrial, and it has nothing to do with the topic of this thread: Will there be a Fall 2007 election?

My view is that the PM system is better equipped for this kind of discussion. I just ask that the two or three posters in this mixup, posters that seem to have good points to make (unlike some who come here merely to spill hate), make those points and worry less about where the exact verbiage comes from. If indeed it comes from a party website, I doubt they mind having their ideas spread. Clearly, I agree with WV's points more than I do gc1765's or jdobbin's. However, I am more inclined to read and be swayed by posts on an interesting subject matter, than I am debates over the fine points of web bulletin board posting.

[Michael Bluth]

I am just curious why other posters decided to jump all over you for simply reminding another poster of the rules.

gc, three reasons.

1. dobbin "jumped all over" West Viking for opposing his views and used the rules as a pretext. Besides dobbin accused WV of 'plagiarising' even though WV posted the name of the publication, author and publication date along with the full text of the article. (For that Corbella piece from the Sun.) There may well be an infraction, but it isn't plagiarism.

2. Here is dobbin's response:

I suspect you have gotten it all down from the Conservative talking points site. If that is true and you have quoted the whole thing, it is a violation of forum rules and you can be banned for it.

The last part of the response wasn't simply reminding anything. It was a threat and went far past the power of any individual poster.

3. JBG said it best.

If it really is just about the rules confine it to PMs. Alas, it wasn't just about the rules. It was about dobbin trying to assert authority over this board. Doesn't even have any power in cyberspace. Quite humourous really.

----Tangent Over----

I do find it interesting how many people chose fall of 2008 or later.

If we make it past the spring of next year we will go on October 19th 2009. Once we are within twelve months of the fixed date for the election it will definitely be a negative issue for any party that tries to force an early election.

[jdobbin]

How do you know that WestViking is a Conservative? For all you know he might be a fellow "dipper" like me.

You're right. I don't know if he is a Conservative. I do know that he copies and pastes his replies from a Conservative website. Or do you disagree that he did that?

[White Doors]

Jesus Dobbin..

Your pathetic whining has ruined another thread. congratulations.

[jdobbin]

This kind of dispute should be taken to the PM system. No one is interested in who can spew more vitrial, and it has nothing to do with the topic of this thread: Will there be a Fall 2007 election?

My view is that the PM system is better equipped for this kind of discussion. I just ask that the two or three posters in this mixup, posters that seem to have good points to make (unlike some who come here merely to spill hate), make those points and worry less about where the exact verbiage comes from. If indeed it comes from a party website, I doubt they mind having their ideas spread. Clearly, I agree with WV's points more than I do gc1765's or jdobbin's. However, I am more inclined to read and be swayed by posts on an interesting subject matter, than I am debates over the fine points of web bulletin board posting.

I asked for citation for what seemed to be someone else's writing. The forum rules are to protect the owners of the site from copyright violation.

Too bad we have no lawyers who are aware of what that is.

I know that you feel you need to defend your fellow NDPer WV but why do you feel he ought to be exempt from copying and pasting material in their entirety when others are also reminded of it in other threads?

I have no desire to use the PM system with some people. It just encourages some with stalker-like behaviour to PM at every single post to harass.

[jdobbin]

Jesus Dobbin..

Your pathetic whining has ruined another thread. congratulations.

Feel free to go elsewhere.

Pathetic is copying and pasting material in their entirety from another site and pretending it is your own work.

[gc1765]

I find it ironic that the people who are complaining about taking it to PM never actually take their own disputes to PM...

[Michael Bluth]

I find it ironic that the people who are complaining about taking it to PM never actually take their own disputes to PM...

Ironic in the Alanis Morrissette misunderstanding of the term?

If you want to PM me, feel free.

Jesus Dobbin..

Your pathetic whining has ruined another thread. congratulations.

Well said sir. Well said.

[jdobbin]

I find it ironic that the people who are complaining about taking it to PM never actually take their own disputes to PM...

Some who have used PMs act just as belligerent or harrass with repeated PMs after every message. Ricki is a fine example of that. Thank goodness he isn't around anymore.

In keeping with the thread title, after the latest poll from Decima, I don't think Harper will not want to have an election with Atlantic Canada still up in arms. Saskatchewan is also upset with equalization. That's a lot of provinces angry.

If Harper can keep the BQ happy, they will keep him around. Afterall, the BQ isn't worried about ever taking high office in Canada. Their success is measured by what they can get for Quebec.

[gc1765]

I don't think we'll see a fall 2007 election, but that really depends on the Bloc. I don't think Harper can engineer his own defeat (even if he wanted to) without looking like a hypocrite on the fixed election dates issue.

[Michael Bluth]

I don't think we'll see a fall 2007 election, but that really depends on the Bloc. I don't think Harper can engineer his own defeat (even if he wanted to) without looking like a hypocrite on the fixed election dates issue.

It depends on a lot more than just the bloc.

Given that Milliken has set the precedent that it is the role of the speaker to keep the Government in power when possible then the Conservatives are still in a favourable position.

It will still take all three opposition parties to agree to defeat the Government.

That could change depending on the by-elections when they happen.

Engineering his own defeat?

Wouldn't be that difficult. Don't think he wants to do it.

In the fall he submits a bill that allows Canada to reach the Kyoto targets, with the attached spending. Pledging to do so would plunge the Government into historically high deficits for the next five years.

Then watches as his members, plus some Liberals and a few Bloquistes vote with him to defeat his Government.

Hypocritical? Not at all. The Conservatives have been "forced" to meet the Kyoto targets. They feel the steps necessary to meet Kyoto are bad for Canadians so they won't do it.

That's about the only scenario in which I can see the Conservatives not lasting until October 2009.

[gc1765]

Engineering his own defeat?

Wouldn't be that difficult. Don't think he wants to do it.

I don't think so either...unless of course the polls show he is in majority territory.

In the fall he submits a bill that allows Canada to reach the Kyoto targets, with the attached spending. Pledging to do so would plunge the Government into historically high deficits for the next five years.

Then watches as his members, plus some Liberals and a few Bloquistes vote with him to defeat his Government.

If the majority of MPs support Kyoto, why would they vote against it?

That's about the only scenario in which I can see the Conservatives not lasting until October 2009.

The only scenario I can think of is the Bloc says "Give more money to Quebec" and Harper says "no"...assuming of course that the Liberals are doing well in the polls. The NDP? They oppose everything.

[Michael Bluth]

If the majority of MPs support Kyoto, why would they vote against it?

Basically, perceived political advantage to forcing an early election.

Opposition MPs will argue the Conservative's Kyoto target plan is no good.

If the winds are blowing the right way, enough of them might vote against the bill because of the tactics proposed for meeting the Kyoto targets.

[gc1765]

Basically, perceived political advantage to forcing an early election.

Opposition MPs will argue the Conservative's Kyoto target plan is no good.

If the winds are blowing the right way, enough of them might vote against the bill because of the tactics proposed for meeting the Kyoto targets.

If it's the Conservative's plan, then I can't see the Conservatives voting against their own plan. That wouldn't make much sense.

[Michael Bluth]

If it's the Conservative's plan, then I can't see the Conservatives voting against their own plan. That wouldn't make much sense.

Fair enough. But what if instead of voting against the bill a number of Conservative MPs were unable to attend the vote?

Not saying it's gonna happen. Just throwing out a what if.

[gc1765]

Fair enough. But what if instead of voting against the bill a number of Conservative MPs were unable to attend the vote?

Not saying it's gonna happen. Just throwing out a what if.

Well, let's see. These numbers are rough estimates, but assuming that there is no "pairing":

Liberals + NDP = approx. 129 seats

Conservatives + Bloc = approx. 173 seats.

That means 44 out of 124 Conservative members would have to be absent, and I think that big of an absence would be noticed. It's possible, but I'd say it's highly unlikely.

[Michael Bluth]

Well, let's see. These numbers are rough estimates, but assuming that there is no "pairing":

Liberals + NDP = approx. 129 seats

Conservatives + Bloc = approx. 173 seats.

That means 44 out of 124 Conservative members would have to be absent, and I think that big of an absence would be noticed. It's possible, but I'd say it's highly unlikely.

Why are you assuming the bloc votes with the Conservatives?

What if some of the opposition parties allow free votes?

[gc1765]

Why are you assuming the bloc votes with the Conservatives?

What if some of the opposition parties allow free votes?

Because the Bloc will pretty much side with the Conservatives on any matter of confidence, since the Conservatives have promised to address the "fiscal imbalance". If I remember correctly, Duceppe has already said as much. I think that, given the choice between the environment and the "fiscal imbalance", the Bloc will choose the "fiscal imbalance". Hence why I think it depends a lot on the Bloc.

...but if the Bloc does have a free vote and votes against the Conservatives, it's just as likely that the Liberals or NDP will have a free vote and vote with the Conservatives.

[Michael Bluth]

Because the Bloc will pretty much side with the Conservatives on any matter of confidence, since the Conservatives have promised to address the "fiscal imbalance". If I remember correctly, Duceppe has already said as much. I think that, given the choice between the environment and the "fiscal imbalance", the Bloc will choose the "fiscal imbalance". Hence why I think it depends a lot on the Bloc.

...but if the Bloc does have a free vote and votes against the Conservatives, it's just as likely that the Liberals or NDP will have a free vote and vote with the Conservatives.

Yes, my scenario isn't likely. But it is plausible.

It's win-win for the Conservatives. If there isn't an election it means they can put in the package they want for Kyoto.

[jdobbin]

I am sure when the next election does come, people will be asking with leader said this:

"Leaving a party and defecting to the other side for 30 pieces of silver is part of corruption."

Or this:

"People are boarding up their houses and moving away. How dare . . . the government stand up and try to pit rich parts of the country against Newfoundland and Labrador and play some kind of envy among the provinces?"

Or this:

"I’ve always believed that cabinet positions should only be filled from the ranks of elected parliamentarians."

Oh yes, it is Harper the flip flopper.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/844638.html

Can't wait to see him in the ads that will be made up on these items.

[WestViking]

I wonder what influence Dion's candidate quota system plays in this:

Corrigan will take 'bizarre' rejection to Dion

By CHIP MARTIN, SUN MEDIA

LONDON FREE PRESS

Sat, June 30, 2007

Upset at what he calls his "bizarre" rejection as a Liberal nomination candidate, Ed Corrigan is complaining to federal leader Stephane Dion.

Meanwhile, a nomination meeting in London-Fanshawe riding has been set for July 14 and the contest is among three women candidates.

**********************************************************************

Are we to conclude this is another Liberal 'white males need not apply' program?

Edited July 1, 2007 by Charles Anthony

[jdobbin]

I wonder what influence Dion's candidate quota system plays in this:

Corrigan will take 'bizarre' rejection to Dion

By CHIP MARTIN, SUN MEDIA

LONDON FREE PRESS

Sat, June 30, 2007

The posting of the full article isn't allowed under forum rules. A link and the highlighted area of the article using the quote unquote feature is sufficient.

[Michael Bluth]

Good post WV.

Shows the problems with quotas.

If a party has a goal of gender equality amongst their candidates there are a lot better was of going about it then stopping qualified men from running.

[Michael Bluth]

I attempted to start a similar thread on this topic, but it was shut down because this thread exists.

So here is my OP on that thread to get back to the original topic.

The current minority Government will become the fourth longest minority Government in Canadian history early in the fall, assuming that Harper doesn't recall Parliament in the next month and lose a vote of no confidence. (Link)

Technically the Government is still the sixth longest minority Government in Canadian history. Even if an election were called today it would become the fifth longest before a vote were actually held.

Due to the fixed election date legislation it cannot surpass the first and second longest minority Governments. If the next election is held after September 2008 the current Government passes Pearson's second minority and becomes the third longest. But will it make it to third longest?

I think it will. Canadians don't really want another election anytime soon. As October 19th, 2009 draws closer it will become increasingly more difficult for the opposition, or the Government, to force an early election.

[August1991]

Due to the fixed election date legislation it cannot surpass the first and second longest minority Governments. If the next election is held after September 2008 the current Government passes Pearson's second minority and becomes the third longest. But will it make it to third longest?

I think it will. Canadians don't really want another election anytime soon. As October 19th, 2009 draws closer it will become increasingly more difficult for the opposition, or the Government, to force an early election.

For the record, here are Canada's past minority governments:

William Lyon Mackenzie King 14th Liberal 1921 – 1925 3 years and 326 days

William Lyon Mackenzie King 16th Liberal 1926 – 1930 3 years and 317 days

Lester B. Pearson 27th Liberal 1965 – 1968 2 years and 229 days

Pierre Trudeau 29th Liberal 1972 – 1974 1 year and 221 days

Lester B. Pearson 26th Liberal 1963 – 1965 1 year and 182 days

As of today, Stephen Harper's government is at 1 year and 152 days so it's a certainty now that it will last longer than Trudeau's minority and Pearson's first minority.

Bluth, you ask the key question - will Harper beat Pearson's second minority for longevity?

It is hard to read Harper. He seems to keep a few surprises deliberately in store. So, I wouldn't be surprised if we had an election in the fall 2007 or the spring 2008.

Previously, I thought that every day Harper was in power, it brought him one day closer to a majority. Harper needed time to show people that he could govern. He has done that in spades. He has been a calm and steady PM.

There is no marginal value in this strategy any more. If Harper senses that he can arrange an election, then he'll go for it knowing that Canadians are now comfortable with him as PM.

Last point. To survive without a tacit coalition, minority governments require adept, flexible leadership. Harper has demonstarted this and this fact won't be lost on many voters. Harper knows this. I think the polls now are not an accurate indicator of what the final votes in an election will be.

According to the Toronto media, Harper is supposed to be a thin-skinned, mini-dictator. He's not a people person. And yet Harper will have led one of the longest minority governments in Canadian history.

I think the Toronto media has read this guy wrong.