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

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by CrONoS


If I was him, I would return to University Of Montreal, far away from t.v.

He already gassed it.

He gambled on an alliance with a forth-rate party for electoral victory.

Now he is crying about the consequences when he lost. Big time lost.

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by CrONoS


Yes, we are going to vote in one week.

Liberal are pretty high in polls. They are going to take all the seat from the right populist ADQ in Quebec City, and maybe take the majority. Will depends on how people are feeling after the debates that we had earlier this week.

But mainly people are going to vote liberal, just because they are fedup with elections. We had a provincial elections in 2007 (if i'm right)

Yeah, I remember voting in that one. I'm out of the province atm, but I doubt they desperately need my vote in Westmount-Saint Louis.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by notyoueither

The only way the Conservatives are overthrown is with Bloq support.

Do you have any idea how much poison would be involved in ROC if the Bloq were any part of defeating a government, or worse propping up a coalition?

Depends how the spin goes.

I like the idea of removing the subsidy as well but this move is pure Harper - POLITICAL.

I'll take a Conservative defeat any way it happens. :desire:

[Flubber]

I hereby propose the formation of the "NO more elections party"-- I belive the ideology should be compelling and we should be able to get 40% of canadians to join up immediately. The platform is simple-- you join this party to say that if ANYONE forces another election in less than x years, all the members park their vote with the no elections party. If this government runs at least x years, all the members can return to their regular affiliations

I could nominate Rick Mercer as the leader-- he's pretty good at mocking politicians and would probably be fun in question period

If this movement caught on and was wisespread EVERY party would know that they would lose seats in an election and would therefore avoid one like the plague and perhaps actually try to govern

[Wezil]

I can proudly say I voted "None of the above" in the last vote. Clearly the only sensible approach.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wezil
I can proudly say I voted "None of the above" in the last vote. Clearly the only sensible approach.

The sensible approach is to not vote at all, not to waste government time and money doing nothing.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Wezil




I'll take a Conservative defeat any way it happens. :desire:

Well at least you are open-minded .

I'm more a "let the people we elected try to govern" type. We have had two elections with similar results and I would think that another election right now would merely waste money and not accomplish much. Whether the Conservatives govern or some coalition . . . I don't really care as long as someone takes control and actually tries to make sense out of the mix of parties that make up our government

But I'm with NYE in that I cannot see how the Liberals/NDP could work with the Bloc for long-- I can just see the political ads that that scenario would generate

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Flubber



Well at least you are open-minded .

I despise them all and the rigged system they play in.

I'm more a "let the people we elected try to govern" type. We have had two elections with similar results and I would think that another election right now would merely waste money and not accomplish much. Whether the Conservatives govern or some coalition . . . I don't really care as long as someone takes control and actually tries to make sense out of the mix of parties that make up our government

Again, this is the essence of the problem I have with Harper. I am not opposed to what he wants to do just how he does it. Harper was extremely critical of Martin for running a minority government as if it was a majority and not cooperating with the opposition (the ones more "people elected" than the conservatives btw).

But I'm with NYE in that I cannot see how the Liberals/NDP could work with the Bloc for long-- I can just see the political ads that that scenario would generate

It will depend on the spin this takes. I have no doubt how it will spin in Alberta...

We just finished a nation election campaign wherein this idea of cutting political subsidies was NOT MENTIONED (provide me a cite if I am wrong) yet it is one of the first things the Conservatives want to do upon returning to Ottawa.

I see Harper's analysis as this:

a) The Opposition will back down and accept the cuts thereby leaving the Conservatives open to a big win against bankrupt opposition in the next vote

or

b) The Opposition will force an election on the issue and the Conservatives will win big on the issue of entitlements

or

c) The Opposition will form some sort of coalition and fail spectacularly leading to a big Conservative win in the next vote


All of these examples speak to political opportunism by Harper at a time when the nation has other priorities. This would not be favourable spin on the issue for Conservatives.

[Asher]

I have to completely disagree with the fearmongers on how this is the end of the world for democracy, the other parties, etc.

They just need to raise money. It's not hard, the NDP is doing it pretty well actually. They just need to make it easier to donate.

I wouldn't even know HOW to donate money to the Liberals or NDP, so how do they expect to get donations?

I really don't care about the timing, I'm just happy to see the subsidies on the way out. It was a waste of money.

Even then, with the new media world, you don't need massive budgets to have your say. I think too many people are stuck in the 20th century where the only way to get a message across was buying up TV/radio ads. People don't even watch TV ads any more or listen to the radio.

[Wezil]

They should have made it part of their campaign. It's a good policy, too bad there is absolutely no mandate for it.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wezil
They should have made it part of their campaign. It's a good policy, too bad there is absolutely no mandate for it.

You seem to operate under the assumption that parties can and should only do what they talk about during a campaign, and nothing more. That's not how it works, or should work.

[Wezil]

Introducing legislation immediately following an election to strip up to 2/3 of the funding of the opposition when NO MENTION of it was made during the election campaign is crass political opportunism. Period.

You (and Harper) seem to operate under the assumption a minority government can do whatever the hell it pleases.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Asher

The sensible approach is to not vote at all, not to waste government time and money doing nothing.

They count you as apathetic. They count me as pissed off.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wezil
Introducing legislation immediately following an election to strip up to 2/3 of the funding of the opposition when NO MENTION of it was made during the election campaign is crass political opportunism. Period.

You (and Harper) seem to operate under the assumption a minority government can do whatever the hell it pleases.

They can do whatever the hell it pleases. If they lose a confidence vote, so be it. You seem to think what they're doing is against the rules, it's not.

I'm not sure why you think there's this formal set of rules (if you do anything in the first X months of office, it needs to have been in your election platform?), because they do not exist.

The government in power -- the Harper governmnet -- can do whatever it wants to within the laws of this country. You didn't know that?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wezil


They count you as apathetic. They count me as pissed off.

I voted. And I didn't vote like a child who is throwing a tantrum.