Canada's Opposition Parties Vow to Bring Down Government, 1 month into its term...

[Ben Kenobi]

Bosh:

The dynamics change if you have only two viable choices.

The Liberals really need to sit down and ask themselves if they want to create that world again.

In a world with no liberals, and the current conservative party, they will lose, even with the grand coalition.

You can't point and say that the Cons got only 37 percent while the grand coalition has 56 percent. Like I said, 1+1+1 isn't going to equal 3, and the biggest loser, ironically, is the biggest vote getter.

The Liberals have 24 percent of Canada's electorate. Even with the grand coalition there, if 10 percent leaves, then the conservatives have 47 and the coalition has 46, and they lose.

[Bosh]

Originally posted by Asher

The Liberals have.

Hmmm *looks up results of 2004 election*

Good point But I think that this is because a good number of people who would vote NDP/Green/etc. in a PR system vote(d) strategically for Liberals in ridings where the only candidates that have any chance are the Liberals and the Conservatives.

On the other hand, I really don't think that there's many people who'd vote strategically for the Conservatives if their party of choice doesn't have a shot, except for a few far-right nut bars that aren't as big numerically as the contingent of left of center people who don't much like the Liberals.

The dynamics change if you have only two viable choices.

The Liberals really need to sit down and ask themselves if they want to create that world again.

In a world with no liberals, and the current conservative party, they will lose, even with the grand coalition.

You can't point and say that the Cons got only 37 percent while the grand coalition has 56 percent. Like I said, 1+1+1 isn't going to equal 3, and the biggest loser, ironically, is the biggest vote getter.

The Liberals have 24 percent of Canada's electorate. Even with the grand coalition there, if 10 percent leaves, then the conservatives have 47 and the coalition has 46, and they lose.

Um, what? If Canada only had two parties (center-left and center-right) the Conservatives would be absolutely annihilated unless they were a good bit more centrist than today.

Basically right now the ratio of left seats : left votes is much lower than the ratio of right seats : right votes. This just isn't sustainable in the long term.

[Dinner]

Alright folks. We wait for the civil war to start then we blitz for the oil fields.

BTW I didn't even know prorogue was a word.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Asher

The Liberals have.

The Liberals have broader support (they stand a reasonable chance of winning in more ridings) than the Conservatives do. If the Conservatives want to win with 37% of the vote then they need to win by smaller margins in Alberta and move some of those votes to places where they need them.

[CrONoS]

I'm very angry right now at how the conservatives are managing communication and crisis, this is since the beginning of 2008 election.

At the beginnings of the 2008 election the conservatives were predicted to win a majority of seat, but because of their OWN fault, by the worst communication campaign I have ever witness, they screwed up, royally, their campaign in Quebec.

I'm really angry about all this **** And now, if the GG (Queen) accept this coalition... I'm going to burn car and riot!

[CrONoS]

For God sake, the Queen would choose our government... THE QUEEN!

:wiglaf:

[CrONoS]

And I just want to say, that I didn't read any of the political posts. So maybe I missed something.

But our economic thread jacking was really MUCH MORE interesting, than this political nonsense!

[Bosh]

Um, isn't letting the people who form the majority of Parliament getting the choose who the government is kind of the whole point of Parliamentary government?

[CrONoS]

Originally posted by Bosh
Um, isn't letting the people who form the majority of Parliament getting the choose who the government the whole point of Parliamentary government?

Whatever if this is the point.

Because this is not the rules in which we voted in, one month earlier. The conservatives win, so unless, the Court or the government itself resign (in going to election), there is no ****ing way that a coalition would have the legitimacy to govern me.

[CrONoS]

Even constitutionalists doubt of the legality/legitimacy of a coalition government appointed by the Queen.

[Bosh]

Originally posted by CrONoS


Whatever if this is the point.

Because this is not the rules in which we voted in, one month earlier. The conservatives win, so unless, the Court or the government itself resign (in going to election), there is no ****ing way that a coalition would have the legitimacy to govern me.

Which rules?

The coalition (with the support the of the Bloc) has easily the majority of both the popular vote and the seats. I'm really having a hard time seeing what is so strange about these. These kind of coalition swaps happen all the time in other parliamentary systems like the ones in continental Europe.

[CrONoS]

Originally posted by Bosh


Which rules?

The coalition (with the support the of the Bloc) has easily the majority of both the popular vote and the seats. I'm really having a hard time seeing what is so strange about these. These kind of coalition swaps happen all the time in other parliamentary systems like the ones in continental Europe.

Do you have a Queen?

Do you have our constitution?

Man, this is how our rules, law, constitution are fixed. That's it...

If they want the power, we should go in election and they have the possibility to that! But they don't want to... they just want to be appointed by the Queen. And I doubt it would happen. I really doubt it, it would be an extraordinary act...

You understand, that a coalition couldn't take the power if they are not going into an election...

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Bosh:

The dynamics change if you have only two viable choices.

The Liberals really need to sit down and ask themselves if they want to create that world again.

In a world with no liberals, and the current conservative party, they will lose, even with the grand coalition.

You can't point and say that the Cons got only 37 percent while the grand coalition has 56 percent. Like I said, 1+1+1 isn't going to equal 3, and the biggest loser, ironically, is the biggest vote getter.

The Liberals have 24 percent of Canada's electorate. Even with the grand coalition there, if 10 percent leaves, then the conservatives have 47 and the coalition has 46, and they lose.

But what 10% would defect to the Cons?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Bosh
Um, isn't letting the people who form the majority of Parliament getting the choose who the government is kind of the whole point of Parliamentary government?

You act like this is the government Canadians want or even think they have.

Canada, technically, is a Parliamentary government which is headed up by the Queen. We don't really look at it that way.

Canada, like the US, in a de facto sense, votes for the Prime Minister and the Party they want to lead. That's the mindset of Canadians, and how the VAST majority vote. In Canada, in the de facto sense, the leader of the largest party forms the government. We're used to this, we like this, we think it's fine.

It's absolutely a kick to the nuts for democracy to have to crawl to the QUEEN or her representative and have the ball in THEIR court how our government is run, even if we just had our election a month ago.

I don't care for the excuse "that's how it is". It's wrong, it needs to change, and for the most part people have left that part alone because it's a dangerous precedent. I'm hoping, after this fiasco, it does change. I'm also hoping the Canadian public has a severe backlash against the Liberals for this naked power grab.

It's unlikely, but the best thing right now would be for the GG to call another election. I'd be willing to bet the Liberals slip.

[Ramo]

Do you have a Queen?

Do you have our constitution?

Man, this is how our rules, law, constitution are fixed. That's it...

Um. You're stating that there's actual law stating that the government must be include the party with a plurality of seats?