Canadian Election

[Brisco Bold]

The Liberals or NDP? Because the Liberals have already started re-investing in the military.

Both, actually. And the Libs already did? Interesting. But I doubt they'll bring back military spending back to pre-93 levels.

[Kenshin]

The Tories, pre-Alliance takeover, were NOT like the Republicans.

Yes, they had a bunch of the same political ideals, but socially they've always meant to keep the Canadian ideals like health care and our general open-minded values. That's why they were called the "Progressive Conservative" party.

Now they're just called the "Conservative" party, which mirrors their shift to a sort of veiled christian-based value system and regressive social ideals.

Old PC members who bailed after the Alliance/PC merger, digusted by the sharp right turn, have a new "PC" party called the "Progressive Canadian" party. Right now it's in a very pathetic position, since they only formed it the other day, but maybe it'll build up its ranks again after people realize the new Conservatives are not so Canadian.

[Drewbacca]

Vote Liberals.

[Hero]

So there's no right that isn't so far right as the Tories?

Because I heard mention of the Marxist-Lenin party, the Communists, the Greens...sounds like a lot of left-alternatives. I know Libertarians are right, but if they're anything like ours, they're harder right than Conservatives, just without the religious element. And the Christian-Heritage...I doubt Kenshin would give me a good review of them. =p

Sounds like there's no place for the slight-rights to go. Do you think they'll vote left, or is there a left party that appeals to the centrists and fence-sitters?

[Kenshin]

The fringe parties are fringe parties. They have no chance of winning a seat.

The other left party is the NDP (New Democratic Party), and I'm voting for them. They have about 20% in the polls right now. The Greens are around 6%.

[Kenshin]

Oh, and here's an interesting article on how the Conservatives can "win, but not win":

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...query=clarkson

It's a complicated election, this time around.

[Psx]

Vote for the pot-smoking dominatrix!

[Hero]

I don't think parties that only have one cause can last out there.

The Marijuana party seems frivolous to me, and here with the Greens...I want to keep the environment in one peice, but Green members I've met tend to be...quite militant and zealous.

I didn't know Canada have provisions to basically overturn the decision of the voters (reading Kenshin's article). Call me crazy, but even if the Liberals voted Torie just to teach their party a lesson, then whatever trouble comes in the next 4 years is squarely on them. You ought to vote for what you want to vote for and be responsible for that decision.

*two cents*

[The Bastard]

Wonderful..... Just great!

The best case scenario is a minority government so nothing really retarded happens. Hopefully this occurs or we are fucked for the next 4 years. Guarenteed!

[Kenshin]

I didn't know Canada have provisions to basically overturn the decision of the voters (reading Kenshin's article).

It's not a provision to overturn the decision of the voters.

The way it works is that if no party wins a majority, and there is a small difference in won seats between front-runners, a coalition government is set up to avoid Commons from falling into bickering chaos.

The reason it is not overturning the decision of the voters is because the coalition, composed of parties of similar interest, would hold more than 50% of the seats, so therefore hold a majority. Remember that more people voted against the "winning" party than for it, but this also wouldn't prevent them from participating in a ruling coalition if a suitable partner is to be had.

The Governor General, the non-partisan representative of the Queen in Canada, is responsible for this action.


It's complicated, but commonplace in many democracies. Keeps things running in a system with more than two popular parties.