Canadian Election?

[North Shore]

Well, with the arrival of the budget today, is there going to be an election this spring?

Put me on the record as saying 'yes' - and it's going to be a complete waste of time and money (to the tune of ~$300M of OUR TAX DOLLARS!! ) as people don't trust the Conservatives enough to give them a majority, nor the Liberals either... so we'll end up with a Parliament that is roughly the same composition as now.

[Hedley]

we'll end up with a Parliament that is roughly the same composition as now

The conservatives are hoping for a majority, but I dunno.

I can understand why the Liberals want to call an election, though. This will be Iggy's last stand. After the Liberals lose badly in the next election, the party then has a mandate to replace him with (they hope) a better leader, and the sooner the better.

The Bloc and NDP, as usual, are so far out there as to be pretty much irrelevant, except as king maker to the minority government.

Anyways, as a taxpayer, I somewhat resent the Liberals spending $300M of our money to replace their leader, regardless of how badly they need to do it.

[Guido]

Well, with the arrival of the budget today, is there going to be an election this spring?

Put me on the record as saying 'yes' - and it's going to be a complete waste of time and money (to the tune of ~$300M of OUR TAX DOLLARS!! ) as people don't trust the Conservatives enough to give them a majority, nor the Liberals either... so we'll end up with a Parliament that is roughly the same composition as now.

Well, there is always the possibility that a coalition could form the government... now that we have a governor general who actually knows a thing or two about the constitution. Though, I suppose Harper et al. would paint majority rule as undemocratic again... It works in Europe, but could never work here, right?

[yyz monkey]

I can understand why the Liberals want to call an election, though. This will be Iggy's last stand. After the Liberals lose badly in the next election, the party then has a mandate to replace him with (they hope) a better leader, and the sooner the better.

Harper's in the same boat. He fails to win a majority (and he will) and just watch how quickly the knives come out.

[Hedley]

Looks like the budget is going to fail. The lefties here must be very proud that we're about to piss away $300M on a totally useless election. Again.

[yyz monkey]

Looks like the budget is going to fail. The lefties here must be very proud that we're about to piss away $300M on a totally useless election. Again.

Takes two to tango & the Cons score a consistent F when it comes to the 'Works well with others' section. They want an election and the budget was engineered to bring one about.

[Hedley]

the budget was engineered to bring one about

(snort) Can I translate that from lefty-speak?

they refused to be extorted by the lefties into an even bigger deficit

As a taxpayer, I like a smaller deficit. You probably don't even know what a deficit is, let alone debt, or even the difference between the two. Lefties simply don't care about fiscal responsibility. See Obama/Pelosi.

You probably don't care, but I don't think this very reasonable budget is a good reason to bring down the government and piss away $300M on another useless election.

What's $300M to a lefty? They all think money grows on trees, and it's just sitting there waiting for the plucking.

[niss]

What's $300M to a lefty? They all think money grows on trees, and it's just sitting there waiting for the plucking.

$300M < $12B

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/briefs/a ... %20billion

[yyz monkey]

As a taxpayer, I like a smaller deficit. You probably don't even know what a deficit is, let alone debt, or even the difference between the two. Lefties simply don't care about fiscal responsibility. See Obama/Pelosi.

As a taxpayer, I like a smaller deficit as well. Please detail for us how Harper's plan to cut corporate taxes will help reduce the deficit. Please also detail for us how cutting the GST was fiscally responsible?

You probably don't care, but I don't think this very reasonable budget is a good reason to bring down the government and piss away $300M on another useless election.

If it helps oust "The Harper Government" and place us back under the governance of the Government of Canada (when did Harper become a country unto himself?), I don't think we'd be pissing away money.

What's $300M to a lefty?

To this one, it's 1% of $30 Billion - or the cost of the fighter jet purchase that the Cons are trying to ram down our throats without putting it out for tender.

[yyz monkey]

You probably don't even know what a deficit is, let alone debt, or even the difference between the two.

Deficit - the difference between revenue & spending - like the structural deficit we currently enjoy thanks to "The Harper Government" spending more than they're taking in (and how is that fiscally responsible?).

Debt - the money that we owe - which is growing thanks to the above (and how is that fiscally responsible?)

Harper painted himself as a fiscally responsible conservative, and we've had five years to see that he doesn't know squat about that - just how to be a populist politician who's in way over his head.

[niss]

What's $300M to a lefty? They all think money grows on trees, and it's just sitting there waiting for the plucking.

$300M is also dick to a Righty apparently, as if your short term memory permits it was 2008 when Harper decided to ask the GG for an election "just 'cause". Or is it only ok when Harper does it?

[cdnpilot77]

You probably don't even know what a deficit is, let alone debt, or even the difference between the two.

Deficit - the difference between revenue & spending - like the structural deficit we currently enjoy thanks to "The Harper Government" spending more than they're taking in (and how is that fiscally responsible?).

Debt - the money that we owe - which is growing thanks to the above (and how is that fiscally responsible?)

Harper painted himself as a fiscally responsible conservative, and we've had five years to see that he doesn't know squat about that - just how to be a populist politician who's in way over his head.

Do you think that would have been better had the BIG government NDP/Liberal/Bloc coalition or any one of those individual parties been in power, throwing money mindlessly at corrupt and broken social policies? Look how well that ideal has fared in the US

[Brewguy]

How quickly the 'Right Wingers' forget (or choose to ignore), that it was a "Lefty" government (Liberal) who ran balanced budgets and paid off a whopping chunk of national debt. And they did so by cutting government services too ... which doesn't sound like a very 'lefty' thing to do.

After the Liberals formed the government (in 1993), Martin was chosen as Minister of Finance by Prime Minister Chrétien, and appointed by Governor General Raymond Hnatyshyn. At the time, Canada had one of the highest annual deficits of the G7 countries. As finance minister, Martin erased a $42 billion deficit, recorded five consecutive budget surpluses, and paid down $36 billion of national debt.

During his tenure as finance minister Martin was responsible for lowering Canada's debt-to-GDP ratio from a peak of seventy per cent to about fifty per cent in the mid-1990s.

I wonder, who was it that the Libs inherited that $42 billion deficit from .... oh, that's right. It was from a Conservative (Right Winger) government. And what has happened to our national finances since the Conservatives came back in in 2006 under Harper? Oh, that's right, deficit budgets and skyrocketing debt. But at least they've opened up the purse strings a bit to spend on government programs (Hmm, that sounds kind of 'lefty', doesn't it?)

Now, I'm not fanboy of the Liberals or the NDP either. If it wasn't for the fact that I live in Ontario, and nobody here runs for them, I'd vote for the Bloc.

I typically vote based on the local candidate, rather than for a specific party or leader. I have no loyalty to any specific party. I've voted both Liberal and Conservative in the past, but never NDP (they're a little too far out there). I've also voted for opposite parties (i.e. Federal Libs and Provincial Cons) in the same period of time, and vice-versa.

This time around, it's going to be really tough to decide who to vote for, because the whole damn lot of them are shite. I think it's time to take a look at the local Green candidate, and see just how hippie granola they are. Although I voted for him last time, I don't think I could bare to vote our Justice Minister (Rob Nicolson is our local incumbent) back in after how his government has acted.

[iflyforpie]

Is the Rhino Party running?

[cdnpilot77]

Ah, but Brew, the 90's were very different times and the Economies of the world are very different. Given the scope of the worlds problems, I would say we have faired VERY well to "only" be out $40B. $1.3Trillion (with a T) is where our counterparts to the south stand. With 10 times the population of Canada, but 40times the deficit, I think we did OK. This while not drastically reducing the social prgrams instilled by the lefties (and in Many cases increasing drastically). There was no way to satisfy the coalition and we are going to find ourselves in the exact same position $300million dollars lighter and voting for a budget again. The only thing different is that Canadians might get fed up with the left wing political games in Canada and put a majority conservative government in which I dont think helps us either. What ever happened to the idea of having the election every 5yrs? Too many games!

[Hedley]

we are going to find ourselves in the exact same position $300million dollars lighter

Exactly! I know the lefties don't care, but $300M is a hefty chunk of change to blow on something completely useless.

Harper isn't going to get a majority. We're going to be back with almost the exact same party representation in Parliament that we have right now.

You might as well take that $300M as cash, put it in a pile in front of Parliament, and light it on fire, for all it's going to accomplish.

The Obama/Pelosi's of the world are so depressing.

[Canuck223]

we'll end up with a Parliament that is roughly the same composition as now

The conservatives are hoping for a majority, but I dunno.

I can understand why the Liberals want to call an election, though. This will be Iggy's last stand. After the Liberals lose badly in the next election, the party then has a mandate to replace him with (they hope) a better leader, and the sooner the better.

The Bloc and NDP, as usual, are so far out there as to be pretty much irrelevant, except as king maker to the minority government.

Anyways, as a taxpayer, I somewhat resent the Liberals spending $300M of our money to replace their leader, regardless of how badly they need to do it.

I tend to agree.

I figure at the end of days, the Conservatives will pick up a few more ridings mostly at the expense of the Liberals. The Liberals may poach a few marginal NDP ridings, possibly enough to match losses to the Conservatives. I suspect the big losers will be the NDP. While I think Jack is a douche, he has probably done as good a job of flying the NDP banner as anyone could.

The big question in my mind is what, if any, movement will happen in Quebec.

[xsbank]

Don't you guys remember that when this recession started, Harper refused to provide any money for "stimulus" spending and the Liberals said that if the Cons did not spend our way out of the recession they would seek a coalition government? So Harper caved and spent the money, sending sacks of cash to useless car makers and other twits, while the other parties howled THAT IT WASN'T ENOUGH! Now we have a deficit and you guys are blaming the Cons? Riiigght...

This is a Liberal deficit, engineered by the f8cking Thief Party and backed by all the rest of those useless clowns, the Bloc-heads and the Dippers. The Liberal party under Pierre Trudeau did almost 40 years of damage to our economy and the rest of the bozos since, if they weren't stealing like Chretien or Mulroney, they were keeping their businesses offshore like Martin to screw us out of taxes that the rest of us pay and messed about with the economy in their spare time.

Now they spend 300 mil just to rearrange the chairs in that day-care they call Parliament. J.F.C!

[Hedley]

Opposition vows to bring down minority government

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/O ... story.html

$300M wasted. I personally would have preferred it to be spent on medical equipment or schools, but the lefties want to spend it on an election which will not result in any significant electoral change.

Doesn't that fail a basic cost/benefit analysis? Oh, I'm sorry, too rational. Too right-wing. Got that.

Ignatieff, for his part, said he's "dying" to make his case to Canadians in an election campaign

Why you lefties keep voting for these idiots, I have no idea.

Next time you lefties are waiting (and waiting, and waiting) for medical treatment, remember how YOU chose to spend your money.

[niss]

Where was your anger against Righties for forcing an election last time?

[Giveitago]

Well, with the arrival of the budget today, is there going to be an election this spring?

Put me on the record as saying 'yes' - and it's going to be a complete waste of time and money (to the tune of ~$300M of OUR TAX DOLLARS!! ) as people don't trust the Conservatives enough to give them a majority, nor the Liberals either... so we'll end up with a Parliament that is roughly the same composition as now.

Well, there is always the possibility that a coalition could form the government... now that we have a governor general who actually knows a thing or two about the constitution. Though, I suppose Harper et al. would paint majority rule as undemocratic again... It works in Europe, but could never work here, right?

Of course to actually be ok with this you would have to be ok with a coalition with a party (Bloc) that has a final end game of the break up of the country and has no interest whatsoever of what is good for Canada as a whole. Only interested in what Quebec can get from Canada. That is the achilles heel of this argument in this particular scenario.

However, this may be perfectly fine for you. I know it's not to me.

[yyz monkey]

Of course to actually be ok with this you would have to be ok with a coalition with a party (Bloc) that has a final end game of the break up of the country and has no interest whatsoever of what is good for Canada as a whole. Only interested in what Quebec can get from Canada. That is the achilles heel of this argument in this particular scenario.

However, this may be perfectly fine for you. I know it's not to me.

You mean like our current PM sought back in 2004?

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news ... 71da334f6f

But roll back the tape to September 2004, just a little more than two months after Canadians elected a minority Liberal government. Then-opposition leader Harper appeared at a news conference with Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe -- you know, the guy who wants to destroy the country -- and NDP leader Jack Layton to announce that the three of them had conspired -- sorry, agreed -- on a list of demands that would give them a larger role in governing.

"The agreement that we are announcing today will profoundly alter the operation of the House of Commons in ways that opposition parties have been demanding for years," Harper told reporters.

The three opposition leaders also wrote to then governor-general Adrienne Clarkson urging her to "consider all of your options before exercising your constitutional authority" in the event the Martin government lost a confidence vote.

[kevind]

A coalition would be fine if it includes the election "winner". Any coalition that does not include the party with the most seats is just the losers taking power that the voters did not think they earned.

If it was hockey, the Flames and Oilers could combine their teams, and their points and be the first seed in the playoffs

[Giveitago]

Of course to actually be ok with this you would have to be ok with a coalition with a party (Bloc) that has a final end game of the break up of the country and has no interest whatsoever of what is good for Canada as a whole. Only interested in what Quebec can get from Canada. That is the achilles heel of this argument in this particular scenario.

However, this may be perfectly fine for you. I know it's not to me.

You mean like our current PM sought back in 2004?

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news ... 71da334f6f

But roll back the tape to September 2004, just a little more than two months after Canadians elected a minority Liberal government. Then-opposition leader Harper appeared at a news conference with Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe -- you know, the guy who wants to destroy the country -- and NDP leader Jack Layton to announce that the three of them had conspired -- sorry, agreed -- on a list of demands that would give them a larger role in governing.

"The agreement that we are announcing today will profoundly alter the operation of the House of Commons in ways that opposition parties have been demanding for years," Harper told reporters.

The three opposition leaders also wrote to then governor-general Adrienne Clarkson urging her to "consider all of your options before exercising your constitutional authority" in the event the Martin government lost a confidence vote.

Yes, exactly like that. It was not acceptable then any more than it is acceptable now.

However, to be fair, that litle "idea" never got any further. I think the PC's thought that one over and realized that a "deal with the devil" DOES IN FACT mean that one has to sign off on your soul. The latest coalition "attempt" actually materialized, and would have succeeded if not for some political manouvering on the part of the goverment. Wether you agree with the method of the manouvering or not this "Coalition" was massively against the will of the public but the leaders had gotten a whiff of power, and in reckless pursuit of that power, choose not to listen to what the majority of Canadians were saying on the matter. I think Canada truly sidestepped a bullet on that one. This time, I'm not so sure we can. This election has Coalition with the Bloc written all over it.

[niss]

A coalition would be fine if it includes the election "winner". Any coalition that does not include the party with the most seats is just the losers taking power that the voters did not think they earned.

Um, no it isn't.