Quite happy, on this occassion, to say that I was wrong. Big time wrong. Retardedly wrong.

The best part is that Harper has no move he can really make. Call another election? The Governor General would be more or less obligated by precedent to laugh in his face. Dissolve parliament until January? That will only pause the inevitable, as well as secure him a rather dreary place in political history.

He made too many enemies and not nearly enough friends. The only regrettable thing about this is that, since May lost her seat, she couldn't be a part of it. Ah well.

This is what really gets my fist pumping. Obama and Harper would not have gotten along, whereas I think Obama and Team Rock'n'Roll will get along famously. Tighter international relations are really necessary right now, considering the knife edge on which the world presently rests.

Answer: Your vote essentially goes toward seating an MP for the party you voted for.

No, it didn't. Do you even understand what happened?

Obviously not.

Harper had a minority government. That means that he did not get a majority of the seats; if he had, a Coalition would not have mattered. As it so happens, combined, the Liberals, NDP and Bloc had more votes than the Conservatives. Canada may have been split on which liberal-leaning party to vote for, but it still wanted a liberal party more than it wanted a Conservative one.

No, it does not, and I'll thank you to stop perpetuating nonsense.

Do the math yourself. Take a look at how many of the seats the Coalition represents and how many of the seats the Conservatives represent. Which is larger?

And why would you complain about all of the power it hands a 3rd, non-elected, party? I thought it was you harping along not so long ago about how wonderful it was that the Supreme Court was really the body in charge of the country?

...Did yu even see the proposed Conservative 'plan'? Take money away from the parties. Yup. Instead of having an even, publicly funded race, we can have one run by lobbyists just like in the States! Oh, joy!

The Conservatives had no plan (aside maybe from praying to their deity), and the only reason we've likely performed so well in the west is the Oil Sands work. I'm curious - how many times have you been to Alberta, again? Did you just somehow 'miss' all of the fun stuff here like the abject racism (Calgary & Edmonton being somewhat of the exception), anti-semitism, anti-environmentalism, roadside preachings and insidious problems with the natives?

That is the place Harper comes from. I live, literally, just a few houses away from the damn man's home now that I'm in Calgary, and given that i've lived in Alberta my entire life, I know most of the local 'lore' regarding the Harpers. They are fundamentalist to the core, and you don't have to swallow that uncozy truth for your precious Blues if you don't want, but those are hazardous blinders to put on.

Did it ever strike you as slightly odd that Harper would've sent that formal letter of apology to Dubya downstairs after we simply said, "No, we're not interested in going to Iraq."

It doesn't spark the question in your mind as to what would've happened a few years back if we'd have had the Conservatives in power rather than the Liberals?

In the end the rest of Canada wanted a conservative party in charge, even if it was a minority, they did not want liberals (as they lost seats) down to 77, the bloq was not put in charge, they had 49 and the NDP was not put in charge, they have 37, so yes Canadians did put the conservatives in charge like it or not (personally I don't care for any of the parties at all). However 143 seats where given to the conservatives, they had a strong minority government, however this is the decision of the people, the people did not vote for a liberal/NDP/PQ government. No the concept that Canadians gave power the conservatives goes out the door with what the liberals, PQ and NDP are doing and pretty much what's the point of voting if this is going to happen. If Canada voted conservative then let them lead, after all the people get the government they voted for, like it or not.

For the record Kevin, in case you haven't bothered reading anything I have ever posted, I am not a fan of the Conservatives, nor the liberals or the NDP or the Green party or the PQ. I rather go with whoever has the better plan. So far, to date, the conservatives have to this point had the better plan so far, however the NDP and the Liberals, sorry their plans not that good at all, especially the NDP their economic plans just won't work.

As for the supreme court jab, sorry, again please do bother reading my posts, they are in charge in regards to constitutional changes. Especially in regards to what we were talking about regarding gay marriages. The government cannot do what it pleases in regards to the constitution as the Supreme court of Canada can over turn any changes to it.

As for what if's, don't care for what if's the conservatives where in power, I care what is happening now. The people gave the conservatives more seats then the Liberals, the NDP and the PQ each individually because they did not what them in charge, they gave the conservatives 143 so that they would be in charge. I highly doubt you can find me enough Canadians that say this is what they voted for, for a coalition government.

It's fairly simple: Stephan Dion, Jack Layton and Guilles Duceppe have decided to work together, and their parties have effectively 'combined' into a gestalt entity to toss Stephen out of power, since he refuses to play nice and has decided to demonstrate his arrogance by introduce no-confidence provisioned bills to the house on a whim (likely so he could continue kicking-around the idea that Dion is 'such a coward').

The combined seats of the cooperating Bloc, NDP and Liberals will easily defeat the no confidence bill, resulting in Harper being found to no longer have the confidence of th House (which he clearly, legitimately, does not have. If he did, the other parties would not have agreed to work together) and the coalition replacing them in power.

EDIT: Oh, also - The Coalition will operate (with Dion as PM) for 18 months, after which time the agreement will expire and the parties will go their separate ways again. Presumably another election will be called (hopefully, this whole situation will drive more voter turnout. Is anyone else aware that our last election had about the poorest turnout... well, ever? Sad)

Funny the plan involves selling 2.3 billion in government assets, cuting 2 billion in cuts, specifically in salary controls for public servants as well as MPs and senators. for the rest http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1001234 hmm a little bit of research kevin does wonders. I would still like to see a better plan at this moment, because NDP did not have a better plan at all, and the liberals, well sorry it wasn't a better plan either, and so far none of them have presented a better economic plan, all they have said is that they want to take over. If the people of Canada wanted the Liberals in charge then they would have given them more seats, not taken away seats.

As well I would not agree with this if the liberals or any other party where in charge either and the tories to do a coalition to take the party that was given the majority of seats over the other parties (again liberals did not vote for NDP or PQ, nor did the NDP's or PQ voters vote for the others). As well for the record there really wasn't much to vote for, as it was pretty much all childish fighting among all the parties during the election (personally I think that was the reason for a low voter turn out) however I cannot see this being a good choice for the liberals or NDP as they are willing to get in bed with the PQ, and I don't think voters overall will respond with joy on this one. From what I have been hearing, and reading (people in ontario and so far those that I have spoke with here in Alberta) they are not happy with this coalition thing, they have the same view that I do, tories were given more seats than the other parties individually, they were put in charge, albeit with  minority government, the liberals were not put in charge nor were the NDP or PQ. Plus voters did not vote for a coalition.

Are we to sit idly by while our parliament is suspended so that Stephen Harper can keep his job for another month?  Are those Canadians who didn't vote for the Conservatives, which is a majority of Canadians, to sit back while Harper harangues the Governor General to prorogue parliament and then in all likelihood call an election when a viable alternative in a coalition government (which is not unprecedented and has nothing to do with what people voted for) could be instated to get parliament working and to get legislation passed that satisfies most Canadians?

The only other option would be for Mr. Harper to step down.  I would expect, at that time, that his entire cabinet would step down.  The only way the Conservatives can conseivably stay in government without calling another election (not that that guarantees anyone in particular a government right now) or indefinitely proroguing and blocking parliament would be to present Canadians with a new Prime Minister and cabinet who are willing to work with parliament to get something done.  The longer the Conservatives put this off, however, the less likely it is that anyone will see this as a graceful move and an acceptance of defeat.

I don't agree with what harper is going to do most likely to stay in power, suspend parliment, I say another election and hopefully we (as a country) can elect a goverment with majority and stop with all this childish stupid behavior from all the parties, maybe have an election that focuses on the issues and the economic plans from all the parties and not all the mud slinging childish antics of the previous election.....although I don't have high hopes of that.

Another election is not an ideal, or at this point as I see it, an acceptable alternative to a coalition.  In fact, the coalition is the very opposite of 'childish stupid behaviour'; otherwise enemies are working together with the best interests of their constituents and Canadians in mind.  They have put their difference behind them to unite for a time so that this country may work.  There is no more noble an endeavour in parliament than such a coalition and you broad branding and insistence on sterotyped labelling is exactly the kind of behaviour that is maintained in a parliament not so united.  That is, a parliament wherein Stephen Harper is Prime Minister.

I'm not a big fan of the GGs decision, but I think it might make sense in the long term. I would bet she made some kind of deal with Harper where he gets the prorogue right now, but if he can't get the support needed by Jan. 26, then she's not calling another election.

Well, they can, I believe, take him down during the throne speech, but I can't think of a single instance where it's happened.  I'll have to do some research.

I really do wonder what Jean's thinking was here.  I'm inclined toward the idea that she's cut Harper a break so that he can try to fix things (hahahahahaha!), but what are Harper's options once parliament resumes?  I can see only three.  1. Get defeated→election or coalition.  2. Preemptive election.  3. Step down.

Oh, and he's fucked himself bad in Quebec so if there is an election, he's just lost himself those seats he gained.  He's made an art of alientating Canadians and making his enemy look (though they actually are) not only better than himself wholly, but more comptetent and adult.

This is the most pathetic politics, I think, ever played.  If we look up sore looser, we're sure to find a redirection to Stephen Harper, the Prime Minister of Canada who wouldn't admit defeat.