NationStates Jolt Archive

Now I have a question: whenever Democrats lose in the US they threaten to run away to Canada. But where do Liberals run away to? :(

Now I have a question: whenever Democrats lose in the US they threaten to run away to Canada. But where do Liberals run away to? :(
I'd say they have to stay and take the defeat like men, but we're talking Canadian Liberals, here.

Um...Greenland?

One seat for the greens, that's pretty interesting.

Very happy to know right wing partys are still powerful in the world.

NDP is doing fairly well. A nice seat increase, and they are going to be fairly necessary in the following government.

NDP is doing fairly well. A nice seat increase, and they are going to be fairly necessary in the following government.
Actually, they'll be totally useless. The NDP + CPC seat count is now one less than a majority.

Two quick questions from someone who has no credible knowledge of the Canadian electorial process.

CBC's opening statement in their report on the results said, "Liberal Leader Paul Martin announced early Tuesday morning that he will step down as leader, after Canadians elected a Tory minority government and ended a 12-year reign of Liberal rule."

Does this mean that Paul Martin had a choice in the matter? I am not quite sure I understand this method of announcing election results. Instead of the relevant information such as "so and so wins election" it sould like it is declairing a loser who has to decide if he intends to leave or not. Am I missing something?

My other question is, what exactly is a "riding"?

Thanks for your patience of the ignorant (me).

Two quick questions from someone who has no credible knowledge of the Canadian electorial process.

CBC's opening statement in their report on the results said, "Liberal Leader Paul Martin announced early Tuesday morning that he will step down as leader, after Canadians elected a Tory minority government and ended a 12-year reign of Liberal rule."

Does this mean that Paul Martin had a choice in the matter? I am not quite sure I understand this method of announcing election results. Instead of the relevant information such as "so and so wins election" it sould like it is declairing a loser who has to decide if he intends to leave or not. Am I missing something?

My other question is, what exactly is a "riding"?

Thanks for your patience of the ignorant (me).

As far as Martin leaving: the general consensus was that if he'd screws up again (ie. there's a Conservative minority or majority) he'll be more or less forced to resign by the organization of own party.

A riding is the area represented by an MP.

Aye, the NDP has a nice boost. It may or may not be enough to take much power, but it's a nice start to build up from. If we keep getting stronger, we'll have a more reliable balance of power to offer in future minorites (which are likely.)

Still, I'm convinced that Harper (with his belief in decentralization and empowering the provinces) will end up in league with the Bloc, rather than the NDP.

Actually, they'll be totally useless. The NDP + CPC seat count is now one less than a majority.That's the same position they were in with the Liberals in 2004. And they weren't useless then.

Two quick questions from someone who has no credible knowledge of the Canadian electorial process.

CBC's opening statement in their report on the results said, "Liberal Leader Paul Martin announced early Tuesday morning that he will step down as leader, after Canadians elected a Tory minority government and ended a 12-year reign of Liberal rule."

Does this mean that Paul Martin had a choice in the matter? I am not quite sure I understand this method of announcing election results. Instead of the relevant information such as "so and so wins election" it sould like it is declairing a loser who has to decide if he intends to leave or not. Am I missing something?

My other question is, what exactly is a "riding"?

Thanks for your patience of the ignorant (me).
A riding is an electoral district.

Paul Martin isn't just stepping down from being Prime Minister - he's also stepping down as leader of the Liberal party. While it was expected that he would step down if he lost (and the same for Harper), it is not a foregone conclusion that a party leader will step down (from his position as party leader) if his party loses an election - especially since he still won his seat. (As far as I can tell, US parties don't really have positions equivalent to party leaders, so it's not really comparable.) So, Paul Martin basically had 3 positions in the Liberal party - he was Prime Minister, he was party leader, and he was MP for his riding. Now he has lost the race for Prime Minister, stepped down from his position as party leader, but won his seat, so he's still a Member of Parliament.

Clear as mud, right?

And so it begins. Harper’s Conservative party is ready to head up a Minority Government. A lot of people think that this means a coming Apocalypse for the good people of Canada, but it just isn’t going to happen. The Conservative Party is going to have a tough time with a minority government opposed by the Liberals, NDP, and Bloc. They have to get consensus from the other parties to pass most of their business.

What they can do is have a few free votes on contentious matters like Gay Marriage, the Death Penalty, and Abortion. The religious right in the rural ridings that form the backbone of the Conservative party will ask for nothing less. It remains to be seen whether the Conservative minority government will last long enough to carry this agenda out. The bloated gun registration system will be in the sights of the Conservatives too. A lot of Canadians won’t be sorry to see it go, but moving against it will earn the ire of the other parties.

The notwithstanding clause of the Canadian Constitution if used could trigger a vote of non-confidence against the government. With a minority, Harper cannot afford to rule as a king. The supreme court judges were appointed by the Liberals and without a Canadian Pat Robertson to publicly pray to God to kill them to make room for new Conservative appointments, any chance of reversing the socially progressive moves by previous governments will be blocked at the legal level.

The unelected Senate, a political dinosaur left over from the days of the House of Lords, is stacked with Liberals over their long tenure in power. The only way around them will be to stuff their own people into the Senate and reform the whole mess. Without doing that the Senate will delay everything Harper attempts to accomplish, even if he manages to get a deal done with the NDP or more likely the Bloc.

The real shocker will come when members of the Conservative government begin to open their mouths on the public record. During this election and even in the last one, the Conservative party was under a gag order not to talk publicly. This was because anytime potential parliamentarians opened their yap they lost votes, after scaring Canadians with their extreme views. It’s one of the reasons that the Conservatives won no ridings in Vancouver, Toronto, or Montreal (Canada’s three biggest cities). When the grass roots candidates and preacher candidates start strutting their stuff in Ottawa, it will be only a matter of time before the Conservative government scares Canadians so badly that they dump these Reform party members in Conservative clothing.

Meanwhile, the paper shredders should be running non-stop in Ottawa and in federal offices across Canada, as the Liberals attempt to destroy all evidence that could result in criminal charges. If Gomery and key witnesses of the sponsorship scandal could be put in the shredder, you can be assured that the Liberals would do it. Hard drives are going to be destroyed in earnest, since there are so many hired technicians by incoming parties to salvage erased files. Political hacks in cushy federal jobs will be purged like there’s no tomorrow.

Don’t worry though. The Conservative party might scare people, but barring a miracle they won’t be around for a very long time in government. The scariest scenario is the Conservatives joining up with the Bloc to dissolve the Federal government into a token level of government and transferring all of the power to their masters in Alberta and Quebec. That’s what you should be scared about.

The Bruce

Actually, they'll be totally useless. The NDP + CPC seat count is now one less than a majority.
Yes but the LPC+NDP>CPC. Even if the NDP+CPC had enough seats for the majority, would they be able to agree on anything?

A riding is an electoral district.

Paul Martin isn't just stepping down from being Prime Minister - he's also stepping down as leader of the Liberal party. While it was expected that he would step down if he lost (and the same for Harper), it is not a foregone conclusion that a party leader will step down (from his position as party leader) if his party loses an election - especially since he still won his seat. (As far as I can tell, US parties don't really have positions equivalent to party leaders, so it's not really comparable.) So, Paul Martin basically had 3 positions in the Liberal party - he was Prime Minister, he was party leader, and he was MP for his riding. Now he has lost the race for Prime Minister, stepped down from his position as party leader, but won his seat, so he's still a Member of Parliament.

Clear as mud, right?

No actually it is now crystal clear. I appreciate it greatly. American parites do have party leaders, however I don't think in the same context and sometimes the title has little to do with leading anything other than the scrap iron drive.
Thanks again.

The closest thing to a party leader in US politics would be the House Majority and Minority Leaders and the Senate Majority and Minority Leaders. They are the ones who have to get their caucuses in line. The Chairmen really only raise money.

That's the same position they were in with the Liberals in 2004. And they weren't useless then.
They slightly modified the budget last time. That's it.

I predict that the Tories will borrow right-leaning Liberals to get the votes they need while the party is still scrambling to find a new leader.

Just as I predicted, the Liberals lose the election in Canada. I knew it would happen after last election.

If you really want proof that our education system sucks, just look at the ontario voters who went liberal.

I'm happy that the conservatives won but the government is going to be so unstable and weak. Harper is going to be spending most of his time cleaning up and I doubt he would be able to get rid of the stupid programs like gun registry.

One seat for the greens, that's pretty interesting.
Well, someone voted the way they wanted to, instead of voting Liberal.

Canada City']If you really want proof that our education system sucks, just look at the ontario voters who went liberal.


And Conservatives claim that it's the Liberals who resort to personal attacks....


I'm happy that the conservatives won but the government is going to be so unstable and weak. Harper is going to be spending most of his time cleaning up and I doubt he would be able to get rid of the stupid programs like gun registry.



No, Harper is going to be spending most of his time keeping the more radical members of his caucus in check in order to have a chance to solidfy his position in the next election.

Canadians gave Harper a chance to prove that his party IS close enough to mainstream opinion to warrant a more complete mandate in the future. It is both an opportunity and a challenge as he now has to live up to that claim. All those MPs that he muzzled from speaking to the press have the muzzles off now and due to the strength of the old Reformers in the party there WILL be an expectation that a good number of them will be rewarded with Cabinet spots.

36% of Canada decided to give Harper a chance. This is not indicitive of a radical swing in mainstream thought given that a clear majority of Canadians voted for parties to the left of his position. Indeed, the voters who fled the Liberals split almost exactly between heading to the NDP and Conservatives, which I think clearly demonstrates their position as holding down the Canadian political center.

No, this is a rope Stephen got. And now we'll see if he uses it to tie the country together, or hangs himself with it.

Martin paid for the sins of Chretien with no credit given for trying to oust King Jean when it became clear that Jean was the voice of complacency. No, he got both ends of the shit stick on that one. Blamed for causing some fracturing of the party for trying to get the party out from under King Jean's cabal, and simultaenously blamed for everything King Jean did anyway. Frankly, I think Canada lost an opportunity to have a pretty good leader in Paul.

The biggest losers last night?

1) Leyton. He thinks he won by picking up seats, but many of the votes (and ridings) are only borrowed from the Liberals. And although having a bigger caucus looks good, the numbers don't add up for him anymore as he cannot on his own give a victory to Harper to swing a vote. Last time around there were four independants to make up the difference. This time there is only one.

2) Duceppe. Support for his party slid to under 50% for the first time in a while, proving that when push came to shove in Quebec many of them looked to the federalist parties that reflected their views. This was NOT good news for him as it demonstrates that some of his past support were effectively protest votes against the other parties. And it showed in his speech as he was the only leader classless enough to still be tossing around campaign attack buzzphrases to denigrate his opponents. The other three all spoke with the proper respect due after a hard-fought battle.


No, Gilles came out looking almost as classless as you did with your opening sentance.

Almost.

Hate to say it, but I'm jealous of your government, in a way. I mean, here in the US, according to polls, Bush has roughly the support the Conservative party got in the election--36% according to ARG yesterday--and yet the President's party (also with approval ratings in the 30's) holds almost supreme power. In your country, the Conservatives will be forced to compromise or they'll be out on the street again. Here in the US, conservatives run everything even though when people are polled on individual issues, the conservatives lose handily quite often.

I'm kind of looking forward to Harper finding out he can't keep all those election promises (does the guy have NO idea how government works?).

Two quick questions from someone who has no credible knowledge of the Canadian electorial process.

CBC's opening statement in their report on the results said, "Liberal Leader Paul Martin announced early Tuesday morning that he will step down as leader, after Canadians elected a Tory minority government and ended a 12-year reign of Liberal rule."

Does this mean that Paul Martin had a choice in the matter? I am not quite sure I understand this method of announcing election results. Instead of the relevant information such as "so and so wins election" it sould like it is declairing a loser who has to decide if he intends to leave or not. Am I missing something?

My other question is, what exactly is a "riding"?

Thanks for your patience of the ignorant (me).
Yes, he did not have to step down as leader of the Liberal party; he chooses to, for the good of the party.

A riding is an electoral division.

(Oops, others already answered.)

They slightly modified the budget last time. That's it.

I predict that the Tories will borrow right-leaning Liberals to get the votes they need while the party is still scrambling to find a new leader.

It was the NDP who saved the government and then brought it down. By slightly modifying the budget they were able to include the majority of the campaign promises, that they promised in the election of 2004.

Also, i agree with you that some liberals will vote on some issues alongside the Conservatives.

Canadians were tired of the Liberals but weren't yet ready to trust the Conservatives. In the last election they kind of said "ok, Liberal party, we're giving you a chance to shape up," and they didn't shape up.

That the Conservatives don't have a majority is also telling, Canadians aren't too sure about them either. They want them to go in, fix the corruption, take down the system of complacency created after 12 years of Liberal rule, but that's pretty much it. No sweeping social changes, please.

It's not really something to worry about. Conservatives in Canada are as far right as the Democrats in the US are far left. That is, not really that much.

I was very happily surprised by the participation of new Canadians, both as voters and as candidates, at least in Toronto.

Well, someone voted the way they wanted to, instead of voting Liberal.
Or Conservative. A lot of people would like to vote NDP, but can't bring themselves to do so.

That the Conservatives don't have a majority is also telling, Canadians aren't too sure about them either. They want them to go in, fix the corruption, take down the system of complacency created after 12 years of Liberal rule, but that's pretty much it. No sweeping social changes, please.
The thing is, there is no guarantee they don't bring with them as much corruption as was there. The government is made of humans, no matter which party they belong to.

Yes, he did not have to step down as leader of the Liberal party; he chooses to, for the good of the party.


Yes... chooses. I think he'd have had "help" making that choice if he didn't, to be honest.

Anyways, I agree with The Nazz. The idea of losing the confidence of the house and still governing seems kind of strange. (But, then again, so does our electoral system, where almost a fifth of popular support gets the NDP barely more than a tenth of the seats.)

Yes... chooses. I think he'd have had "help" making that choice if he didn't, to be honest.
But he wouldn't have chosen not to, it's not in his character.

Know what's weird, though? the percentage support for the Greens was higher in Alberta than in any other province. That's bizarre.

Originally Posted by Korrithor
Now I have a question: whenever Democrats lose in the US they threaten to run away to Canada. But where do Liberals run away to?

I'd say they have to stay and take the defeat like men, but we're talking Canadian Liberals, here.


OUCH..!! :) <snicker-snicker-snicker..>

Naw,.. they'll just run to the nearest "mommie" figure and assume the fetal
position until they can get their nerve back and redefine their label (though
not their thinking) into something more palatable.

..much as the "Democrats" are fending off the "liberal" label at the moment in
the US.

Do you hosers,.. sorry,.. GUYS (non-sexist-version) have Democrats? :)

If so, can the Liberals use your label please, they seem to have soiled theirs?


-Iakeo

Know what's weird, though? the percentage support for the Greens was higher in Alberta than in any other province. That's bizarre.
Not if you live here. Klein's term is soon to be over, you see, and it was his popularity that won support for conservatives, not their policies.

OUCH..!! :) <snicker-snicker-snicker..>

Naw,.. they'll just run to the nearest "mommie" figure and assume the fetal
position until they can get their nerve back and redefine their label (though
not their thinking) into something more palatable.

..much as the "Democrats" are fending off the "liberal" label at the moment in
the US.

Do you hosers,.. sorry,.. GUYS (non-sexist-version) have Democrats? :)

If so, can the Liberals use your label please, they seem to have soiled theirs?


-Iakeo
We have a party with the label "Democrats", yes; though they are social-democrats, so very unlike those in the US.

Know what's weird, though? the percentage support for the Greens was higher in Alberta than in any other province. That's bizarre.

Not especially. In Alberta, people want a socially liberal option without voting for the NDP or Liberals. The Greens are fiscally quite right wing, it turns out. They may well be a good fit for Alberta, oil or no oil.

Not if you live here. Klein's term is soon to be over, you see, and it was his popularity that won support for conservatives, not their policies.

I do live here.

We have a party with the label "Democrats", yes; though they are social-democrats, so very unlike those in the US.
The closest thing to a US democrat in Canada I think would be a Red-Tory. Where have they all gone by the way? :confused:

The closest thing to a US democrat in Canada I think would be a Red-Tory. Where have they all gone by the way? :confused:
We're still here, just kind of confused as to what to do now. I mean, our party just won, but I think we might have sold our souls to the devil to get that win.

We have a party with the label "Democrats", yes; though they are social-democrats, so very unlike those in the US.

So,.. do you think that your "Democrats" would mind if the Liberals
expropratied their name?

My guess is they would, and would fight back. Our Democrats don't mind
letting ANY band of misanthropes into their ranks, as long as they're anti-
republican, and not ACTUALLY having sex with livestock (at the moment) in
chambers or out in public.

..thus,.. WHY our Democrats are the party of whores that they are. QED.

( Not that the Republicans aren't whorish to a lesser extent, which they ARE,
but "rightist" whores smell better and spread less disease. )

(( Yes,.. it IS a function of our 2 [only] party system. And it's WHY we have
a 2 party system. The wackos HAVE to find a place in one party or the other,
and they have enormous pressure put on them to moderate by the party
that "accepts" them, which we find a very good characteristic of the
system. ))

(( The reason the "wackos" [minor parties] don't like our 2 party system is
precisely because of this "squelching" characteristic. ))


-Iakeo