NDP Prostitution
- Thread starter maude
- Start date
The reason that the parties get public funding is because the Libs changed the rules a while ago to prevent corporations and unions from dominating the funding of political parties. Pretty good idea.
The Conservatives, however, are much better at fundraising, mostly by holding rallies for rich and/or religious folks. The other parties suck at fundraising, mostly because they don't have much of a hook (or the smarts) to bring in the bucks from individuals (a la Obama).
Harper would be doing the exact same thing if the roles were reversed, and not only would it be his RIGHT, but it would also be his DUTY! He wouldn't be doing his job as an opposition leader if he wasn't putting forward an alternative to lead the country. If the Governor General is not going to allow another election, the only other choice is to hand power over to the opposition. They would be foolish not to be ready with an alternative government in place. And, of course people are upset, they are upset because they have never seen this before, and when something happens that is new to people they are a little apprehensive, but it is also part of our parliamentary democracy. As well, I have never agreed, or understood why a separatist party has been part of the Canadian parliament for so many years? But they are, and they have just as much right to be involved in the power broking in our country as any other party. I don't like it, but you can't have it both ways.
An interesting tidbit that was on the news... apparently Harper courted the Bloc during the Martin years, in an effort to bring down that government. Pot? Kettle? Black?
Now onto a more interesting question, is the coalition actually a stable enough entity to form government? My gut inclination is that the GG will decide that such a binding of such disparate outlooks will more than likely result in the creation of an unstable government... so unable to govern as it is probably going to be crippled by infighting.
Liberal and NDP supporters must be horrified at the allegiance with the Bloc. In fact, G. Duceppe has only signed on with the coalition government for a single year, which would put him in a bargaining position at that time if the coalition managed to survive that long. I imagine he'd use that power to renegotiate his position in the coalition (or otherwise advance Bloc interests beyond what he's mentioned so far).
Thoughts?
Now onto a more interesting question, is the coalition actually a stable enough entity to form government? My gut inclination is that the GG will decide that such a binding of such disparate outlooks will more than likely result in the creation of an unstable government... so unable to govern as it is probably going to be crippled by infighting.
Liberal and NDP supporters must be horrified at the allegiance with the Bloc. In fact, G. Duceppe has only signed on with the coalition government for a single year, which would put him in a bargaining position at that time if the coalition managed to survive that long. I imagine he'd use that power to renegotiate his position in the coalition (or otherwise advance Bloc interests beyond what he's mentioned so far).
Thoughts?
Very simply, the Conservative party (or whatever it's calling itself these days) got 37.6% of the popular vote and 46% of the seats in the house. The Bloc had 10% of the popular vote, but 16% of the seats in the house. The Liberals, 26% of the popular vote, 24% of the seats in the house. The NDP got 18%, and 12% of the seats in the house.
SOURCE.
As you can see, the house of commons, for a lot of reasons, is not true representation by population, as the greens got 6.8% and they didn't even get a seat.
As a result of the conservatives NOT holding a majority of the seats in the house, they MUST work with the other parties to pass legislation. If the rest of the members of the house of commons got together to vote against the conservatives, even without the coalition, their motions including confidence votes, would not pass. This is essentially what is happening here... but the benefit of a coalition forming is that there's no new election to run, and theoretically no disruption in power.
Remember, at the end of the day, the country keeps running. The government employees do most of the heavy lifting anyway, the elected reps just guide it along.
SOURCE.
As you can see, the house of commons, for a lot of reasons, is not true representation by population, as the greens got 6.8% and they didn't even get a seat.
As a result of the conservatives NOT holding a majority of the seats in the house, they MUST work with the other parties to pass legislation. If the rest of the members of the house of commons got together to vote against the conservatives, even without the coalition, their motions including confidence votes, would not pass. This is essentially what is happening here... but the benefit of a coalition forming is that there's no new election to run, and theoretically no disruption in power.
Remember, at the end of the day, the country keeps running. The government employees do most of the heavy lifting anyway, the elected reps just guide it along.
So, we have coup in Canada. In my opinion, Harper should not be the PM. He's copying what Bush does. But actually people don't want that!!!
One thing that we want a minority government is to pressure the party to work really really really hard to pass the bills. This is what I call increase competition. They should change the system to make 2/3 of the "yes" votes of all the members in order to pass the bill. There's no way for Canada to get out of the third country category.
NDP is in favour of legalizing or decriminalizing prostitution.
Conservatives would all lock us up, especially the pooners.
I am for NDP.
Conservatives would all lock us up, especially the pooners.
I am for NDP.
I too am mystified as to how a party with no representation in the rest of Canada can be given "official party" status in the House of Commons.
The Real Question is . . .
We all know that the NDP is just a lighter shade of red . . . always has been for years.
What did the Lib/NDP offer for their support? How much will it cost us?
We all know that the NDP is just a lighter shade of red . . . always has been for years.
I don't think this really matters. They could run a candidate in each riding in Canada. Lose all the ones not in Quebec. Everything would be the same.
They would probably get a few hundred protest votes in each riding outside quebec too.....what are those worth $1.95 each......
The good news we finally have a two-party system for our next election . . . the Coalition Party vs the Conservatives. With that mixed conglomertion that the Coalition Party presents, trying to be all things to all voters much like the party of destiny ... should be interesting outcome . . .
Of course . . . the co-leaders of the Coalition Party . . .
Curly, Larry and Moe Signing Agreement-Birth of Coalition Party
Curly, Larry and Moe Signing Agreement-Birth of Coalition Party
Curly, Larry and Moe . . .
Last edited:
He got the most votes from a skewed voting system based on old rules designed to favour particular provinces over an actual representational vote.
I think Harper should step down and perhaps Peter Mckay should step up... at least, it would be better for the Conservatives.
I think Harper should step down and perhaps Peter Mckay should step up... at least, it would be better for the Conservatives.
yes, but as they say, it was skewed for everybody...He got the most votes from a skewed voting system based on old rules designed to favour particular provinces over an actual representational vote.
I think Harper should step down and perhaps Peter Mckay should step up... at least, it would be better for the Conservatives.
everybody who voted was entitled to vote for whomever they wanted...
bottom line is they got the most votes...
I agree.
The other 65% of the popular vote was spread among the three coalition parties. The Conservative party received the greatest percentage of the popular vote so the Canadian people chose them to govern by rejecting the platforms of the other three parties. If the government falls on a vote of non-confidence, another election should be held.
My guess is that the Canadian people are so fed up with this mess that they would "punish" the coalition parties by giving the Conservatives a huge majority.
bootyman69
Forget the Greens. No one will vote for them in the next election.
The BQ will decimate any previous vote the Cons had in Quebec due to dimwit Harper's vocal indiscretions, and therefore Cons cannot form a majority.
What would happen if the middle-left and left united in the same fashion the right did some years back?
Presumably the result would be more middle-left philosophy than left as the resulting party understands that is where the votes in an election would go. Would they have the plurality of votes in a federal election since their combined vote would no longer be split?
Since BQ is basically leftish, would a united federal left gain votes from BQ in Quebec and thereby have a shot at a Commons majority?
In BC, provincial politics goes from middle-right (Lib) to middle-left (NDP). Right now provincial polls favour the NDP.
What would happen in BC federally if the overall left united into a middle-left and vote splitting ended?
The BQ will decimate any previous vote the Cons had in Quebec due to dimwit Harper's vocal indiscretions, and therefore Cons cannot form a majority.
What would happen if the middle-left and left united in the same fashion the right did some years back?
Presumably the result would be more middle-left philosophy than left as the resulting party understands that is where the votes in an election would go. Would they have the plurality of votes in a federal election since their combined vote would no longer be split?
Since BQ is basically leftish, would a united federal left gain votes from BQ in Quebec and thereby have a shot at a Commons majority?
In BC, provincial politics goes from middle-right (Lib) to middle-left (NDP). Right now provincial polls favour the NDP.
What would happen in BC federally if the overall left united into a middle-left and vote splitting ended?
Geez, I hope not ...
Let's not forget how the NDP took BC from a have to a have not province in just ten short years under Harcourt, Clark and company. Even Jim Pattison moved business interests out of the province to AB and there is no more loyal British Columbian than Pattison!
However, I might settle for a one or two seat majority so that the BC Liberals have time to dump Campbell and his carbon tax plan . . .
Let's not forget how the NDP took BC from a have to a have not province in just ten short years under Harcourt, Clark and company.
Even Jim Pattison moved business interests out of the province to AB and there is no more loyal British Columbian than Pattison! However, I might settle for a one or two seat majority so that the BC Liberals have time to dump Campbell and his carbon tax plan . . .
Last edited:
