babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » election 2006   » From 3rd to 1st: could it happen again?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: From 3rd to 1st: could it happen again?
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052

posted 07 June 2004 02:03 PM      Profile for Albireo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
* Ontario, 1990: Liberal Premier David Peterson is way up in the polls and calls an early election. The voters turn on him but aren't willing to hand the shop back to the Conservatives. The NDP storms out of 3rd place and wins a majority.

* Ontario, 1995: The Liberals under Lynn Macleod are overwhelming favourites to win, over an unpopular NDP government. When the Liberal vote falters, it is the 3rd place Conservatives under Mike Harris who vault up to victory in the last few weeks of the campaign.

* Toronto mayoralty, 2003: With no incumbent, the clear frontrunner is Barbara Hall, a moderate Liberal-friendly former NDPer who is thought to have a lock on the Centre-left vote. She is challenged on the right by John Tory, who is at around 10% in the polls, as is former MP John Nunziata and Councillor David Miller. Hall's cautious campaign fails to inspire, and when her vote collapses the vast majority of it goes to Miller, who sprints to victory over Tory, with Hall finishing a poor 3rd.

Sorry about the Ontario-centric examples here, but there are probably similar cases elsewhere in Canada. This is NOT the way most elections play out, but it does happen: Going into the campaign there is a clear front-runner, often (but not always) the incumbent. Yet there is an undercurrent of dissatisfaction or anger, or perhaps just a sense that the front-runner is lacklustre or unappealing. When the frontrunner collapses during the campaign, voters turn not to the "obvious" alternative but instead lift an appealing "3rd-stringer" to victory.

Is it possible that this scenario could happen this month, in this federal election, with the Layton NDP surging to win the most seats (but almost certainly not a majority)? A few of the elements could be there: polls show that the NDP is the most popular 2nd choice. If the Liberals REALLY collapse, huge chunks of their support could go to the NDP. Harper and the Conservatives could be the main beneficiary of a Liberal collapse, but they DO scare a lot of people, and they could be peaking too soon, drawing close scrutiny that will reveal their many flaws. Layton has the potential to do extremely well in the debate, giving the NDP a surge of momentum with less than 2 weeks to go until the vote.

Unlikely, to be sure. But is it possible?

[ 07 June 2004: Message edited by: albireo ]


From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 07 June 2004 02:11 PM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Actually not really. In the other examples you gave, the third party had a respectable organization and vote base in most seats.

This time we do not have that. However, don't be discouraged, this parliament if it is a minority may not last long. Buidling from a good result here the very next time could see something like you suggest. But everything would have to go well both times...


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Tim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3145

posted 07 June 2004 02:16 PM      Profile for Tim     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
In Ontario before the 1990 election, wasn't the NDP actually the official opposition?
From: Paris of the Prairies | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Privateer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3446

posted 07 June 2004 02:25 PM      Profile for Privateer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And than there's the 1999 election in Nova Scotia. Weak incumbent government, stumbling Official Opposition, and out of nowhere the Tories surge from the low-20s into a majority government.
From: Haligonia | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341

posted 07 June 2004 02:31 PM      Profile for James        Edit/Delete Post
I believe that it is, though unlikely, a possibility. I disaggree with your hypoyhesis that the Nukecons would be the main beneficiaries of a complete Liberal collapse. Any former Libs who think that they could stomach Harper have already gone there. And let's not forget that 25% of the Liberals present 30% is in Quebec, where it does us no harm.

Actually, there are pundits on other, non cheerleader sites who are musing about the same possibility.


From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
snowstormcanuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4495

posted 07 June 2004 03:16 PM      Profile for snowstormcanuck        Edit/Delete Post
Tim, you're correct. The NDP in the 34th Parliament of Ontario were the Official Opposition. I believe they were also second in the polls.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
John_D
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5620

posted 07 June 2004 03:28 PM      Profile for John_D     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The 1998 Nova Scotia election is probably a better example of this specific phenomenon than 1999, especially since it involved an NDP surge. The Tories in 99 started in third place, but it was a very strong third place (14 of 52 seats). The NDP in 98 made a historic breakthrough and won seats we never would have considered winning before.

Another example might be the BC election that saw the Socreds destroyed. The Liberals, with no historic strength, vaulted to official opposition because for anyone on the moderate centre-right, the Socreds were hated and the NDP not an option. Something like that could happen here, but I think it is more likely to yield official opposition and 60-70 seats as a best case scenario than government itself.


From: Workin' 9 to 2 in the 902. | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 07 June 2004 03:32 PM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Official opposition would be interesting. Coaltion and a change of electoral system would actually be preferable.

We might surge in an election or two, but to really get and keep a place in opposition or government over the long-term we will need electoral reform.


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
natas
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4211

posted 07 June 2004 03:39 PM      Profile for natas   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I know that in 1990 the NDP guy in Lincoln got elected strictly on the general public mood swing - not, believe me, based on organizational strength in the riding. Nor was this necessarily a good thing - Ron Hansen was not one of the great Members of Provincial Parliament.
From: Vineland Station, Ontario | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Guêpe
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4757

posted 07 June 2004 04:04 PM      Profile for Guêpe   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by natas:
I know that in 1990 the NDP guy in Lincoln got elected strictly on the general public mood swing - not, believe me, based on organizational strength in the riding. Nor was this necessarily a good thing - Ron Hansen was not one of the great Members of Provincial Parliament.

I still think the greatest hinderence to us is having a big orange sweep is that our ressources are extremely concentrated. Now all in all I think that's a good thing in trying to get 50 MP's into the House, but seeing as we're concentrating on 50 and don't have strong organizations behind a 155 I can't see us sweeping into gov't.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341

posted 07 June 2004 04:05 PM      Profile for James        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by John_D:
..... but I think it is more likely to yield official opposition and 60-70 seats as a best case scenario than government itself.


With that scenario, you would have the Bloc and the Libs also in the low 60 high 50 seat range, leaving about 115 to the Cons; well short of a majority. The G.G. would then 1st invite P.M.P.M. to attempt to form a government; even if his party was 4th place in seat count. Would he ? Could he ? (obviously he would need the support of 2 other parties to do so)

Presuming that he declined or failed, then Harper gets next shot at it. My bet is that the Liberals, knowing that an immediate new election would demolish them, would back Harper long enough to do a leadership change. N.D.P. would be official opposition, and would have the limelight for attacking the extremes of the Cons and deriding the Libs for supporting the government.

Not at all a bad position to be in.


From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Scott Piatkowski
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1299

posted 07 June 2004 04:14 PM      Profile for Scott Piatkowski   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Perhaps the Reformatories could make a deal with the Liberals to prop up their minority. I always said that the right would never be truly united until the Liberals were brought into the coalition.
From: Kitchener-Waterloo | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Kevin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3645

posted 07 June 2004 04:17 PM      Profile for Kevin   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is what I see happening in either case - Liberals or Cons winning a minority. I foretell ( ) a merging of the Libs and Cons to form the Liberal Conservative Party just to keep the NDP out.

Hasn't Martin already said no to an NDP coalition?


From: Simon Fraser University | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341

posted 07 June 2004 05:36 PM      Profile for James        Edit/Delete Post
Kevin,

You don't need a coalition to form a minority government. All you have to to do is advise the Governor General that you believe that you can "command the confidence of the House".

You don't need anything in writing; and there is no vote taken on it unless some member requests one. It is unlikely that Martin would so advise, because his own rump of a caucus would have already told him that he did not even have their confidence. In that circumstance, the Liberals would be far more likely to prop up the Cons until they had time to pick a new leader.


From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca