Replies

But yes, if the two socialist groups in Canada put aside whatever "differences" they have and agree to a "coalition" government against Harper's Conservatives, they should have a majority.

If I was the Governor-General I wouldn't allow the Bloc Quebecious to be part of this scheme though, simply because it's a regional separatist party. If they want to be part of a ruling national government, they'd have to run candidates in every province and drop the party plank calling for Quebec to secede from Canada. Until that time, it's illogical to have a regional party from one providence (that's dedicated to leaving Canada and forming their own country) in charge of making decisions for all Canadians.

I think Harper got a majority in the first place by merging the "Progressive Conservative Party of Canada" with the "Reform Party of Canada" anyway. So if the Liberals and NPD want to merge into a single entity and get a majority with their combined seats in Parliament, they can do so.... but can they remain separate parties and agree to a "coalition" government? That's the million dollar question.

The problem here is that, by Canadian standards, the Liberals are the “moderate” party, with some deviation, of course (although well to the left of what you and I would tolerate as acceptable. Nazis like Trudeau pushed the margin off the horizon). The PC was for a long time, scarcely far afield from the Liberals. Only the NDP regards itself as proudly Socialist. But with the NDP and Liberals attempting an alliance, the Liberals are tossing out their last claims to being a “centrist” party. This is so audacious and odious a power grab only weeks after the Canadian people reaffirmed a plurality Tory government. Steppie Dion was thoroughly rejected, and this is the Frog’s way of giving the finger to Canadians. I hope it blows up spectacularly in his face. This may actually be a big gift to Harper’s Tories for the long run.

BTW, I was reading up back in the late ‘50s/early ‘60s when a PC gov’t had a plurality under Diefenbaker. The Libs under Lester Pearson audaciously “demanded” Diefenbaker hand over the gov’t to them... yeah, just HAND it over. Diefenbaker told Lester what he could do with himself. It got the Libs tagged with the “arrogant” label for a long time and the PCers held on for 5 years after he called for a snap election in ‘58.

I never understood Canada and England's 3-party system. In both countries, 2 out of the 3 parties are left-wing (Canada: Liberal & NDP, England: Labor & Liberal Democrats) In theory the conservatives should always win nationally since left-wing minded voters are splitting their votes among two parties (sadly, this doesn't seem to result in a victory for the Conservative Party) But yes, if the two socialist groups in Canada put aside whatever "differences" they have and agree to a "coalition" government against Harper's Conservatives, they should have a majority. If I was the Governor-General I wouldn't allow the Bloc Quebecious to be part of this scheme though, simply because it's a regional separatist party. If they want to be part of a ruling national government, they'd have to run candidates in every province and drop the party plank calling for Quebec to secede from Canada. Until that time, it's illogical to have a regional party from one providence (that's dedicated to leaving Canada and forming their own country) in charge of making decisions for all Canadians. I think Harper got a majority in the first place by merging the "Progressive Conservative Party of Canada" with the "Reform Party of Canada" anyway. So if the Liberals and NPD want to merge into a single entity and get a majority with their combined seats in Parliament, they can do so.... but can they remain separate parties and agree to a "coalition" government? That's the million dollar question.

Note the CPC has more MP's than the Liberals and NDP combined.

LOl ...that merging of the Reform (conservatives -Western Canada) and the PC's (progressive conservatives LOL = Liberals) was 66 seats Reform and 12 seats PC's.