« Are there no "progressives" against this coalition? | Main | Well said »

I can only hope

for an election.

And I have sent an email to the Governor-General asking her for such an immediate election.

Comments (8)

What good would that do? It would cost a whole lot of money—and for what? Do you have reason to believe it would bring us anything significantly different from what the election a few weeks ago brought us? I don’t.

Also sent a letter to GG Jean asking for the same thing (not that she hasn’t already agreed to support the coalition of nincompoops). I have to say I am now so officially pissed about this I am actually considering taking out a membership in the Conservative Party (statist entity though it may be).

We don’t need an election. Together, the three opposition parties are speaking for more Canadians who voted in the last election than the Conservatives are. :-)

Seriously, though, this conforms with the 1985 Petersen precedent. Harper tried to form a government, and failed. Now it’s the Leader of the Opposition’s turn. If he can pass a throne speech, he’s prime minister.

We will save more than $300 million in the long-run if the coalition is defeated. And unless the coalition runs on a combined ticket they will be defeated by a Conservative majority. If I am wrong on that then the coalition with have the explicit, not back-door, support of the Canadian electorate.

Ian:

I for one welcome our new centrist-sepratist-socialist overlords. Seriously, I think this will be great fun to watch. If the coalition can get along for the 18 months their deal lasts I will be shocked.

Of course if Harper prorogues that would be fine too. No sitting government is just fine with me. In fact if we could reach some kind of complete and total deadlock that would be perfect!

Greg:

We will save more than $300 million in the long-run if the coalition is defeated. And unless the coalition runs on a combined ticket they will be defeated by a Conservative majority.

That might be true if it was a conservative majority. Unfortunately, it would be a Conservative majority and i have seen no evidence anywhere that suggests they are good economic managers.

lrC:

It would cost a whole lot of money

It’s a very small fraction of the price tag of what has been proposed by the “Coalition of the Willing to Spend” - so far. Sometimes it’s a good idea to pay for a CAA inspection and do a lien check before you buy the car.

Do you have reason to believe…I don’t.

I do. Voters know a lot of things today that were unknown, by omission or by statements in the other direction, then.

An election will keep things really simple, and it won’t take long. We’ll either get a Conservative majority, or the coalition will have a green light. We can all stop speculating about what we all intended last time around, when we voted without know that the Cons wanted to kneecap the opposition’s funding, or that the opposition parties were just playing shy when they downplayed discussion of coalitions. We can have a budget almost before Obama is sworn in, in time to coordinate with whatever the US is doing.

lrC:

Unfortunately, it would be a Conservative majority and i have seen no evidence anywhere that suggests they are good economic managers.

They’re piss-poor; that’s why all the articles have been written in the past few days summarizing how relatively healthy Canada’s economic markers are: pundits are amazed the economy has survived so well and are encouraging us to disregard that entirely and start sending massive economic signals to markets by opening up the federal taps.

Comments are closed for this post.

About

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on December 1, 2008 6:21 PM.

The previous post in this blog was Are there no "progressives" against this coalition?.

The next post in this blog is Well said.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.