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   » Will Lib support shift to NDP in time to prevent Con Majority?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Will Lib support shift to NDP in time to prevent Con Majority?
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 16 June 2004 09:12 PM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It is obvious that Paul Martin did not do what he needed to do during the two leadership debates.

It appears we are going to be facing either a Conservative minority or Conservative majority government?

Macleans, albeit unscientific, poll is showing that Jack Layton won the English leadership debate:

Daily Poll
In your opinion, who won the national leader's debate?

Gilles Duceppe 4%
Stephen Harper 26%
Jack Layton 39%
Paul Martin 18%
No clear winner 13%

Why do you think all those Liberal supportive media outlets are trying to belittle Jack?

All the signs are showing trouble ahead for the Liberals.

It seems to me that the only way we are going to prevent a Conservative majority, is for voters to shift to a campaign with momentum, the Jack Layton New Democrats.

[ 17 June 2004: Message edited by: leftcoastguy ]


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 16 June 2004 09:25 PM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
John Reynolds, Conservative campaign Co-Chair, just said on CPAC that Liberal backbenchers who are hostile to Martin will work with the Conservatives.

All the more reason for progressive Liberal supporters to now join and support the Jack Layton New Democrats.

[ 17 June 2004: Message edited by: leftcoastguy ]


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 16 June 2004 09:37 PM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Brad Lavigne, the New Democrats spokesperson, presently on CPAC, just said that Mr Martin is incorrect about what his number one priority is. Lavigne said that Mr Martin's number one priority is debt reduction, not healthcare like PM Martin has been preaching, and Lavigne had the financial data to back up his statement.

Bead Lavigne is an effective spokesperson for the New Democrats.

[ 16 June 2004: Message edited by: leftcoastguy ]


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 16 June 2004 10:29 PM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Lastest trend says the Liberals will win 1 seat in BC (V. South).

Liberal insiders are now saying their vote strength has dropped to less than 20% in BC.

The chickens are coming home to roost for PM Martin.

The story of the campaign has been the collapse of the Paul Martin campaign.

How many right wing parties do we need in Ottawa?

Now who do you want holding Harper's feet to the fire?:

An old, soon to be replaced, party leader like Paul Martin, or a young energetic leader like Jack Layton?


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Sinistral
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6087

posted 16 June 2004 10:48 PM      Profile for Sinistral        Edit/Delete Post
leftcoastguy, do you think that the Liberals could end up as the fourth place party with not enough seats to have official party status? Who would be the official opposition? Duceppe or Layton? Is it a possibility?
From: Ontario | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jesse Hoffman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4903

posted 16 June 2004 10:52 PM      Profile for Jesse Hoffman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
leftcoastguy, do you think that the Liberals could end up as the fourth place party with not enough seats to have official party status? Who would be the official opposition? Duceppe or Layton? Is it a possibility?

If that were to happen, than I think it would be Layton. It's not really a possible scenario though. Theroritically the Liberals could end up in fourth with about 40 seats, but it would take a massive collapse in support that probably wouldn't happen, in that case they would be the fourth party. Again, the second scenario I think is possible, but very unlikely.


From: Peterborough, Ontario | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 16 June 2004 11:22 PM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sinistral....... it is possibile that Le Bloc and the New Democrats will come in ahead of the Liberals.

I don't think the Liberals will lose Official Opposition status, however voters have a herd mentalitiy, and in politics things can change very quickly. Watch for one of the two leaders (Cons & Libs) to start to break away from the other. If the Conservatives start to pull ahead, the Liberals could quickly go into freefall.

The Harper Conservatives and the Layton New Democrats appear to have the momentum.

I heard Harper today saying: "Where I come from that is a kick-back", refering to Liberal problems. That is going to resonate with voters.

[ 16 June 2004: Message edited by: leftcoastguy ]


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 16 June 2004 11:53 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Don't be too sure. It has been tight between the Liberals and Conservatives for the last two weeks and it may well stay that way. The closer we get to election day, the more voter preferences turn to cement.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 17 June 2004 12:03 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Stockholm.......who said anything about being sure.

The Liberals though, if what I have heard about what is happening to their campaign in BC is anyway near accurate, might be in serious trouble across the country. I just am not aware of what is going on elsewhere.


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 June 2004 12:11 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I hope you are right about the Liberals tumbling in BC since I think that is good for the NDP. BUT, for the last three weeks I keep hearing anecdotal stories about how the Liberals are going to get wiped off the map in BC, but then every province-wide poll keeps showing a three-way race with Liberal support in the high 20s (ie: enough to win about half a dozen seats)

So what gives, how can the Liberals be doing that badly in BC when every single poll in the province gives them respectable levels of support?


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Northern54
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5325

posted 17 June 2004 12:48 AM      Profile for Northern54     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What I am hoping... Here in Yellowknife (perhaps the same as elsewhere?), we're still having a lot of people telling us they are not voting Liberal but not saying who they are voting for (this is the most common response we are getting from people -- almost no issues are being brought up at the door otherwise). I am suspicious that lots of former Liberal supporters are not going to go to the polls. Perhaps, they might come out and vote NDP or Conservative, but of that I'm not sure. There is a definite Liberal vote here but they are not identifying themselves (in large numbers) as such to our canvassers (and they weren't shy about doing so in past elections). How are these voters being reported in polling results?
From: Yellowknife | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
David Orchard Supporter
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6001

posted 17 June 2004 12:54 AM      Profile for David Orchard Supporter     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
okay help me out people, let's say the conservatives elect 140 MP's well short of the majority but more than than the Liberals at 130 and the NDP would elect 16, then are we going to have a minority conservative government or a Liberal/NDP coalition government? how is that going to be decided?
Thanks for the info!

From: Alberta | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 17 June 2004 12:56 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Governor general must turn to Martin if minority win in federal vote

Not sure if it would be a coalition government, but Martin gets first kick at the can. This will enrage Conservatives.

[ 17 June 2004: Message edited by: leftcoastguy ]


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 June 2004 01:33 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
There is a definite Liberal vote here but they are not identifying themselves (in large numbers) as such to our canvassers (and they weren't shy about doing so in past elections). How are these voters being reported in polling results?

I suspect that people might be a bit more forthcoming about their vote intentions to a stranger over the phone than to a face to face canvasser for a party.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Tackaberry
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 487

posted 17 June 2004 02:11 AM      Profile for Tackaberry   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think the Libs will rebound on election night a bit.
From: Tokyo | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Centrist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5422

posted 17 June 2004 02:25 AM      Profile for Centrist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by leftcoastguy:
Lastest trend says the Liberals will win 1 seat in BC (V. South).

Liberal insiders are now saying their vote strength has dropped to less than 20% in BC.


Between watching the 6:00 o'clock news and flicking to Moe Sihota and Norm Spector, I also heard that comment by guest Brad Zubyck.

That comment was to the effect that he spoke with a BC Con strategist who told him that the Libs will only hold one seat - Van South.

To me that comment is doubtful and is equivalent to someone saying that the Greens will pick up a BC seat.

The Libs will hold at least Richmond, Van-Quadra, and Van South.

The Cons will definately not elect anyone from the City of Vancouver.


From: BC | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 17 June 2004 03:37 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I am not so sure.

I don't think they would have mentioned it if there wasn't something in the wind. They also mentioned that they expect the Liberal support to drop off in BC in the late stages of the campaign.

What about Outremont?

Big trouble for Martin's Quebec star

[ 17 June 2004: Message edited by: leftcoastguy ]


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 17 June 2004 03:44 AM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If Liberal support goes below a certain level in BC it will be hard to hold anything. Their support exists in both NDP and Conservative lead ridings. They could get a lot of votes and come second to the NDP with Cons in third in NDP ridings and second to Cons with NDP third in Con ridings.

I have believed the polls indicating that the Libs have a lot of support in BC but I think the distribution of that support couold not be worse.

The good thing may be that the Libs may start to like proportional representation more once this campaign is over. I think there is a good possibility that the Libs for the first time in a while will get fewer seats than their proportion of votes. Only in Atlantic Canada will their distribution of votes be efficient.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Centrist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5422

posted 17 June 2004 04:30 AM      Profile for Centrist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Sean in Ottawa:

I have believed the polls indicating that the Libs have a lot of support in BC but I think the distribution of that support couold not be worse.

The latest Ipsos-Reid poll of BC residents released on June 12 had the following sub-regional results for Vancouver, Burnaby, New West, North Shore:

Lib - 34
NDP - 28
Con - 19

Burnaby and New Westminster are likely Lib wastelands with the exception of pockets in North Vancouver.

In other words, the Lib vote is likely concentrated in the City of Vancouver to a greater degree.

In a similar fashion, a poll result in another thread had the Libs leading marginally in Victoria.

The Libs only prospects are in the City of Vancouver, Richmond, Victoria, and perhaps a Surrey seat. That's it - the urban core areas.


From: BC | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
LukeVanc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2735

posted 17 June 2004 05:48 AM      Profile for LukeVanc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Agreed that the Liberals will at the very least keep Van-Quadra and Van-South. I think Richmond Centre is not as big a guarantee, although Raymond Chan seems willing to say anything to get re-elected. The Liberals will also be competitive in North Van, Tri Cities, New West-Coq, East Richmond-Delta, and the four Surrey ridings. That is where Liberal support is concentrated, in the suburbs. They'll take at least one of these suburban seats.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 17 June 2004 07:04 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Liberal supporters better wake up and smell the roses.

Voters' opinions on Martin worsen after debates, polls show

quote:
Canadian voters' response to the political leaders debates was interpreted yesterday as confirming Liberal Leader Paul Martin's "negative momentum" -- and, in the view of one academic expert on public opinion, meant the election campaign is now over.


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 17 June 2004 07:54 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Harper predicts majority
quote:
Conservative Leader Stephen Harper is talking publicly about winning a majority government, but even if he falls short, he may be able to count on the separatist Bloc Québécois to keep him in power.

While both Harper and Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe say publicly they would never come together in a formal alliance, several Bloc officials told the Star yesterday there is plenty of room for the Conservative leader to manoeuvre to enlist the Quebec party's support.

Bloc vice-president Hélène Alarie said the survival of a Conservative minority government would depend on how Harper deals with the issues, case by case.

"That will be for them to decide," she said.

Last week's Toronto Star/EKOS poll shows the Conservatives ahead in support from decided voters, and the two debates this week did little to change that, political pundits declared yesterday.

Campaigning in Niagara Falls yesterday, Harper said only the Conservatives can win the 155 seats necessary for a majority in the 308-seat House of Commons on June 28.

"There are no safe seats anywhere for the Liberals any more. Not in Atlantic Canada, not in the West, pas au Quebec, not in Ontario and not in the Niagara region," he told about 400 cheering supporters at a noon rally. "We're rolling out of these debates, we're rolling across the country."

"We're headed towards a national majority and I think we're getting closer to that all the time," Harper said.


If we are going to contain this blue tide to a minority, the progressive forces in Canada are going to have to unify behind Jack Layton and the New Democrats, the only one who has the momentum and credibility. I don't think many of us want to see a blue majority.

[ 17 June 2004: Message edited by: leftcoastguy ]


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Guêpe
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4757

posted 17 June 2004 08:07 AM      Profile for Guêpe   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I hope you are right about the Liberals tumbling in BC since I think that is good for the NDP. BUT, for the last three weeks I keep hearing anecdotal stories about how the Liberals are going to get wiped off the map in BC, but then every province-wide poll keeps showing a three-way race with Liberal support in the high 20s (ie: enough to win about half a dozen seats)

Agreeded - also, with the new media blackout lifted that could play a difference in BC - could play to our disadvantage if its close out east...


From: Ottawa | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 June 2004 08:16 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
For the zillionth time, the news media black out is IRRELEVANT! If you live in BC (or anywhere else), the only results you can be exposed to beforte you vote yourself are from Atlantic Canada. There are only 32 seats at stake there and they will probably go mostly Liberal anyways. It would be different if people in BC knew how Quebec and Ontario voted before casting their ballots, but just knowing Atlantic really doesn't tell anyone anything.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Guêpe
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4757

posted 17 June 2004 08:21 AM      Profile for Guêpe   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
For the zillionth time, the news media black out is IRRELEVANT! If you live in BC (or anywhere else), the only results you can be exposed to beforte you vote yourself are from Atlantic Canada. There are only 32 seats at stake there and they will probably go mostly Liberal anyways. It would be different if people in BC knew how Quebec and Ontario voted before casting their ballots, but just knowing Atlantic really doesn't tell anyone anything.

I disagree - Depending on how Atlantic Canada falls that COULD have an effect. If there were any sweeps, if it were a horse race...etc. But let's just agreed to disagree on this.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 17 June 2004 09:56 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Alberta Tories hit road to slay Liberals

Full Court Press!


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Aric H
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5815

posted 17 June 2004 06:03 PM      Profile for Aric H     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I can't find the numbers right now to see how there could be a conservative majority of 155. I think it is out of reach. It does however look like we are heading towards a conservative minority, although it is still possible to end up with a liberal minority.
From: Canada | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 June 2004 06:12 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Does it really matter who gets more seats in a minority situation, the Liberals or the Conservatives? If the Liberals want to try to govern either with NDP support alone or with NDP and BQ support, they can do so as the incumbent government. That is the parliamentary precedent
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
LukeVanc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2735

posted 17 June 2004 07:02 PM      Profile for LukeVanc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I know it might sound ridiculous, but I think for the good of he country the Bloc would not cooperate with the Conservatives. I think the PR tactic they are employing right now, saying that they may cooperate on various pieces of legislation, is strategic in nature and will not be a reality in the event of a Con minority situation.

Since the Bloc will end up with at least 50 seats the Conservatives clearly cannot obtain 155 seats. 103 seats between the NDP and the Liberals? We're already 2/3rds the way through the campaign, the NDP is getting decent media coverage, and the Liberals are still tied with the Cons in the polls. It just isn't happning. I doubt the Cons would even hit the 100 seat mark in this scenario.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Aric H
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5815

posted 17 June 2004 07:04 PM      Profile for Aric H     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The irony for the NDP is that with Jack working hard to bring down Martin, the NDP is going to end up with a greater presence in the Parliament after this election, but it may miss having the balance of power since instead of a Liberal minority government it will have a Conservative minority government in its place.
From: Canada | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Erik Pool
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6137

posted 17 June 2004 07:33 PM      Profile for Erik Pool     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by LukeVanc:
I know it might sound ridiculous, but I think for the good of he country the Bloc would not cooperate with the Conservatives.


You were right the first time!

The Bloc and the Conservatives face a single enemy, the Liberals. They will, if given the numbers by the voters, cooperate fully to seize power and put away the Liberals.

The Conservatives in particular are imagining that the only reason Martin called this election is because there are bigger, more expensive scandals ready to break. So the Conservatives figure if they can be sworn in as the Ministry, they can crack open the Govt file cabinets and all kinds of grease and sludge will come oozing out. Then the public, so goes there gameplan theory, will eventually be more disgusted with the defeated Liberals than with the Conservative-Separatist alliance.

Of course, what the Conservatives don't know is that the sponsorship scandal was not the tip of some huge iceberg, it was just an isolated incident. There isn't some big pile of juicy stuff waiting to be exposed.


From: Burnaby, BC | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
tyoung
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3885

posted 17 June 2004 09:12 PM      Profile for tyoung        Edit/Delete Post
Suddenly, it's all about a Conservative majority. I think this is mostly Canwest-Global generated hysteria. The headline in the Victoria Times-Colonist blathered about Harper "setting his sights" on majority. Many of the above articles are CNS sources. I don't think they have the legs, personally, but with the kind of media support they seem to be getting, who knows? The same yellow rag I mention above headlined its business section with a big scare story about how Kyoto will drive up the price of oil, which helps no one but Harper.

Other thoughts on whether this Conservative majority frenzy originates in fact, or is it just a product of Canwest's official smoke-filled room?

[ 17 June 2004: Message edited by: tyoung ]


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 17 June 2004 09:36 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Other thoughts on whether this Conservative majority frenzy originates in fact, or is it just a product of Canwest's official smoke-filled room?

My money's on the smoke-filled room.

I'm too lazy to do a lot of number-crunching right now, and lack the particular knowledge anyway. But I know of no majority government in Canadian history that didn't include a significant number of seats in Québec. Even Diefenbaker managed it in 1958, and that was with help from the Union Nationale.

If we assume Reform will get no or very few seats in Quebec, they'd need to get 155 out of 233 non-Quebec seats. I just don't see it. They'd need to take virtually all of Ontario, for example, which seems unlikely.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 June 2004 10:01 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Probably the best comparison is with the 1979 election. I believe that the Tories were about 6 seats short of a majority with 135 seats (they needed 142). I think they won 3 or 4 seats in Quebec, plus they took about two thirds of the seats in Atlantic Canada, all of Alberta, 10 in Sask. 19 in BC (out of 28) and 5 in MB. I think they took about 60% of the Ontario seats.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 17 June 2004 10:13 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by 'lance:
If we assume Reform will get no or very few seats in Quebec, they'd need to get 155 out of 233 non-Quebec seats. I just don't see it. They'd need to take virtually all of Ontario, for example, which seems unlikely.

This is what I cling to, 'lance. Thanks for writing that. I think I'll print out a few copies and put one on the fridge, one on my office wall at work, one on my computer desk at home...


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 17 June 2004 10:16 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jesse Hoffman:
Theroritically the Liberals could end up in fourth with about 40 seats, but it would take a massive collapse in support that probably wouldn't happen, in that case they would be the fourth party.

True. Then again, no one expected the decimation of the Regressive Conservatives in 1993 either.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mel Skiller
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5448

posted 17 June 2004 10:45 PM      Profile for Mel Skiller     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Acutally, when I predicted they would win 12 seats in 1993 people thought I was nuts. I was surprised by two seats, but the Libs haven't done anything near as bad as Kim Campbell's campaign. I have to think that the Libs and NDP can win at least 80 seats between them in English Canada. That stops the Con majority.

I liked this election a lot more when we could laugh at the Liberals losing huge numbers of seats without worrying about Harper.

[ 17 June 2004: Message edited by: Mel Skiller ]

[ 17 June 2004: Message edited by: Mel Skiller ]


From: toronto | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Centrist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5422

posted 18 June 2004 12:26 AM      Profile for Centrist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
Probably the best comparison is with the 1979 election. I believe that the Tories were about 6 seats short of a majority with 135 seats (they needed 142).

The Tories also had some kinship politically with the roughly 6 or so Social Creditiste members elected at that time in Quebec.

From my recollection, the Social Creditistes abstained from the Tories money bill involving the contemplated 7 and 1/2 cents per litre gas tax.

Today, the Bloc, however, has some kinship politically with the NDP, which provides for an entirely different political dynamic.


From: BC | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 June 2004 12:36 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
From my recollection, the Social Creditistes abstained from the Tories money bill involving the contemplated 7 and 1/2 cents per litre gas tax.


Uh-no, as you may recall the Joe Clark government lasted only 8 months. The thinking was that the 5 Socreds would back the government, but they voted against the budget with the gas tax and that caused the new election in February 1980 in which of course Trudeau made his comeback. Social Credit was wiped out.

That's what happens when you have a minority and you foolishly try to "govern as if you have a majority".


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 18 June 2004 12:42 AM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The thinking was that the 5 Socreds would back the government, but they voted against the budget with the gas tax and that caused the new election in February 1980 in which of course Trudeau made his comeback.

If I remember right from my last viewing of The Champions, a bizarre aspect of that little episode was that the Creditistes, not knowing whether they should support the Tories or vote to bring down the government, phoned up the PQ cabinet in Quebec City to get advice.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Aric H
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5815

posted 18 June 2004 01:02 AM      Profile for Aric H     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by 'lance:

If I remember right from my last viewing of The Champions, a bizarre aspect of that little episode was that the Creditistes, not knowing whether they should support the Tories or vote to bring down the government, phoned up the PQ cabinet in Quebec City to get advice.


CORRECT. And just to finish the above paragraph, they couldn't get verification of what to do and so they abstained from the vote, leading to the defeat of the budget.


From: Canada | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 18 June 2004 01:56 AM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
At no point in this election have the CP concerned me, and I'm surprised that other people continue to be worried.

Conditions will never be any better for these jokers than they are right now. They managed to avoid a policy convention, so that their dirty laundry could be shuffled out of sight. They have run a flawless campaign, given the limits of what they can and can't admit to. The Liberals are a shuffling corpse of a party tainted by scandal and arrogance, led by a bumbling corporate twit that impresses nobody, and their campaign has been a comedy of errors. And as well, the scandals that are plauging the Liberals are scandals of government waste, which is a conservative talking point, leaving them by far the best situated to gain from it. Unsurprisingly, an overwhelming majority of Canadians say that it is time for a change.

Yet in spite of all this, they can't seem to do any better in the polls than a statistical tie, and still haven't reached the combined vote of the Alliance and PC parties from the last election. All the planets are aligned in their favour, and this is the best they can do. The facts are inescapable. The public don't trust this party and don't want them in government. If they had even a smidgen of the political juice they need to take power, they would have been leaving the Liberals in the dust long, long ago, but it ain't there and nothing's going to give it to them.

This was their big shot to hoodwink Canada, and they've failed, plain and simple. There's nowhere for them to go but down.


From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Aric H
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5815

posted 18 June 2004 02:05 AM      Profile for Aric H     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Interesting comment there Jacob Two Two (I read that book when I was a kid btw ). The "story" of the election so far as the media sees it is that the Conservative party has been "successful", but you are correct that this is paradoxical. Despite the fact that the Liberals have been in power for a decade and have a major scandal on their hands, the Conservatives still can't attain a commanding lead. Therefore, a Conservative minority government is both a success and a failure at the same time - something which many in the media and the Conservative party don't realize - but some here do.
From: Canada | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 18 June 2004 02:17 AM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
A lot of the CPC vote, particularly in the West, is a protest vote. Well, what happens when they're the government? Uh-oh!
From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 18 June 2004 02:35 AM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
As well, I don't think that the Liberals are going to hand the government over to the CP, no matter what kind of mess they're in, unless they have even worse political instincts than I credit them with (which is always possible. They've certainly been impressing me with their incompetence throughout the campaign).

The reason is that it would be the final nail in their coffin. The only thing keeping this party alive is the public's mistrust of the CP, and if the country votes strategically to keep the Cons out, only to have the Liberals hand it to them anyway, they will never forgive them. It would be suicide.

No matter how cluster-fucked they are, they will be obliged to attempt a run at government or lose everything.


From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  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