The Coalition Strikes!!!
- Thread starter Colpy
- Start date
"I Know some people don't like it. It's a loss of national sovereignty but it is a simple reality."
Stephen Harper
Stephen Harper
Exactly....I did NOT bring up the subject of Quebec separation in the next mandate: you did. It was not a road I wanted to go galloping down, but I (foolishly) followed your lead.
Now, the point of the matter is, after all this distraction, is that the PQ will (by all indications) be in power in Quebec, the BQ in Ottawa (in a coalition) and the weak Count in the PM's seat. A disaster, in the LONG run, as both will work against anything that would lessen their own influence....
Give Harper a majority.
"I Know some people don't like it. It's a loss of national sovereignty but it is a simple reality."
Stephen Harper
hmmmm....I no longer wear glasses............cataract surgery
I'm not at all bald, I shave my head.
I have a moustache.
While a little over weight, (at 5'11" and 220 lbs) I do 105 push ups (in three sets) and twenty sit ups every day.......my chest has not slid down on to my belt yet.
And there are no guns in the pic.
What could it possibly have to do with me????
BTW, you should learn the difference between political and economic sovereignty.
You thought that was you? How cute. I'm flattered.hmmmm....I no longer wear glasses............cataract surgery
I'm not at all bald, I shave my head.
I have a moustache.
While a little over weight, (at 5'11" and 220 lbs) I do 105 push ups (in three sets) and twenty sit ups every day.......my chest has not slid down on to my belt yet.
And there are no guns in the pic.
What could it possibly have to do with me????
BTW, you should learn the difference between political and economic sovereignty.
We don't have political sovereignty. Where the hell did you get that idea?
"a loss of national sovereignty"
It is interesting to note that the Harper government like any minority government in Canada always required a coalition of people to pass a bill in the house. That is how our government works, 308 MP's getting down to the business of doing the greater good for their fellow Canadians and their constituents. Campaigning is for election time, not for the in session period. No one cares the a NDP members vote in the house represents 90,000 NDP voter compared to a Harper MP's representing only just 30,000 Conservative voices. A vote is a vote and 50% plus one wins the day. That is how it is to work. A coalition of common thought passes bills for the people. Harper has not been too good at this because of poor leadership skills. He compensates with strategy but it is getting old and predictable now. With all the problems that we have got ourselves into the last few years it will certainly take smarter people to get us out of these problems than got us into them.
.
.
The Conservative minority only needed 12 extra votes to pass a bill. They could shop among the opposition parties for support, as they only needed one out of the three to vote with them to pass anything.
If (as is expected) the Conservatives get 150 seats in the new Parliament, it will require all three of the losing parties together to pass a bill. NDP/Lib is fine, as they are pretty well identical anyway. Unfortunately, this situation allows the BQ to literally hold thegov't hostage.....and they will. Over and over.
NOT good for Canada.
As for "A coalition of common thought passes bills for the people. Harper has not been too good at this because of poor leadership skills.", that is BS. Harper has held the two longest election to election minority governments in the history of Canada.........that in itself makes him a master of compromise.
What you might call a coalition on an issue by issue basis, so to speak.
I love the fear that Harper has managed to attach to 'coalition'. After he was done trying his version, of course. Now it's a scary thing. Funny as hell, quite frankly.
That is BS also Colpy. If the opposition is weak, and Harper survives, that doesn't necessitate that it was because Harper has strong leadership skills. In fact it's somewhat the opposite, when I hear so many people saying they will plug their noses while voting for Harper's party.
For the 318th time at least, I don't give a **** who proposes a coalition that includes the Bloc officially or unofficially, it is bloody close to sedition.
For the 318th time at leat, if Ignatieff and Layton combined get enough seats to take a majority.......sobeit. Their coalition would be completely adequate.
For the 23rd time at least, if the Bloc, the NDP and Harper had combined against Paul Martin's minority, they could have thrown him out and taken over any time.....they did not. No coalition.
RIGHT.
Separatism is dead.
Uh huh.
PQ’s Pauline Marois wins massive confidence vote | Posted | National Post
Enough spoon-feeding....I'll let you do your own research on how close the BQ and PQ are.........
If the Harper government has some good MP's there would be no reason to let the BQ hold any one to ransom in a Liberal minority situation. That is just fear mongering. I'm not sure that approach will always work for the Conservatives. A strong Conservative majority will probably cause internal damage to that party as they get some thinking members down to Ottawa. Unless they hand picked more follower type candidates again.
"Follower types"
This from the guy that couldn't comprehend my disinterest in the fact that the majority of people disagree with me.
Right.
What I find interesting is all the fear mongering going on about a coalition but when someone mentions Harper's dictatorial leadership style, these same conservatives start screaming about "fear mongering". Seems that policies always take a back seat to fear mongering in the elections lately. Perhaps it is because libs and cons have nothing of substance to bring to the table.
Colpy, a good chunk of Harpers cabinet has quit. The next group he has to choose from will no doubt be lame. He really does need some new blood in there, but that would lead to him being tossed out of what he believes is HIS party. It is not, it is another party of the people. It most certainly is quite a delicate balancing act for him. Just like the post-turtle.
I think the war you talk of to the south is the one where over a half million people died to get people, mostly black some civil rights as individuals. Some Right-Wing lawyers then used a little disaster capitalism to take advantage of those peoples sacrifice. With a few strokes of the pen they got a group of people, 'a corporation' , those same rights as a person. This insulated them from liability and increased there ability to do as they wish, even though no one is personally responsible for any wrong doing. Sounds Conservative to me.
I think the war you talk of to the south is the one where over a half million people died to get people, mostly black some civil rights as individuals. Some Right-Wing lawyers then used a little disaster capitalism to take advantage of those peoples sacrifice. With a few strokes of the pen they got a group of people, 'a corporation' , those same rights as a person. This insulated them from liability and increased there ability to do as they wish, even though no one is personally responsible for any wrong doing. Sounds Conservative to me.
That was Harper's main message until the other parties started bringing up his own desire when he was the Opposition to go to the GG with an alternative. Harper harped about the harm that would come from that, and the instability that would cause. When he was clearly contemplating the same thing, given the chance to do so.
I took Cliffy's post to be directed at the membership here.
I agree with your analysis though.