Coalition Government?

[Birdy]

I'm not talking about a majority government, i'm talking about a majority of the votes and a majority of the seats, in contrast to other parties.

Edit to add: better yet, I think you were taking the context of my majority to mean the popular vote, majority government. But i'm just talking the simple definition of majority here.

Edited September 26, 2008 by Guest

[Kanada Kev]

Majority Government:

http://canadaonline.about.com/od/elections/g/majority.htm

Definition: In Canada, the party which wins the most seats in a general election forms the government. If the party wins more than half of the seats in the House of Commons or legislative assembly, then the party forms a majority government. A majority government can pass legislation and maintain the confidence of the House of Commons or legislative assembly to stay in power much more easily than a minority government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majority_government

In the Westminster System, there is a majority government when the governing party enjoys an absolute majority of seats in the legislature or parliament. This is as opposed to a minority government, where even the largest party wins only a plurality of seats and thus must constantly bargain for support from other parties in order to pass legislation and avoid being defeated on motions of no confidence.

The term "majority government" may also be used for a stable coalition of two or more parties to form an absolute majority. One example of such an electoral coalition is in Australia, where the Liberal and National Parties have run as an electoral bloc for decades.

[Kanada Kev]

In 2006 the Cons were 31 seats short of a majority, no?

[Birdy]

Please see above post.

[SaggyBalls]

in contrast to other parties?

Birdy, the majority of Canadians don't want Conservatives as their major party.

That being said, the majority of Canadians don't want any of the parties to be in charge.

We'll see after this election if this trend continues, and if it does the only viable option to get anything to work best will be for coalitions to form.

Look at the Bloc Quebecois:

What's their purpose in supporting the nation of Canada? Their existence in itself is entirely supportive of coalition government ideal, as they're really just a tool for other parties to align with for stronger voting.

If we had an 'ontario has more people than any other province' party I bet they'd take more seats than the bloc and ndp combined. What real good would they be to Canada as a whole?

they'd support our upcoming coalition government on certain votes.

the whole idea that green/lib/ndp would band together as a new coalition and become something other than what they were voted in for is silly. It's not so black and white. Some votes would lean this way, some would lean that way. If anything it would mean that the conservatives wouldn't have the pull they had before and each party would stand much better on their own merits.

More individual initiatives would see the light of day and much more would be accomplished.

To boil it down to partisan politics and policy does a real injustice to Canadian voters and comparing voter ignorance to political accomplishment isn't fair to anyone.

[Birdy]

Partisan politics has it's problems, but I pretty much disagree with everything you just said here other than:

That being said, the majority of Canadians don't want any of the parties to be in charge.

Exactly. Let me break this down in the simplest terms I can cuz I think i've failed in all other terms to explain it.

Hypothetical population model of a town with 100 people:

Caucasian - 37

Chinese - 21

Italian 19

Amerindian - 17

African - 16

Who is the majority here?

If the Conservative government is elected as a minority government, Canadians are indicating they support the Conservatives enough, but not enough for them to govern with a majority. Based on our political model, they are hoping the Opposition party and other MPs will do their job and act as the Opposition to hold them accountable. That is the result of this vote.

Coalitions - bad news, for many reasons. Most of which you can find through google.

[SaggyBalls]

Who's in the majority?

Birdy, you're still failing to explain your point with this model, because you didn't break it down by male/female as that's the only way to see who's in majority. I think it's safer to be sexist than racist.

there is no majority in your model. So then it would have to be examined by other models.

'mostly' and 'majority' are different.

If say, whitey had all the jobs in town and took advantage of all of his workers unfortunate advantage of being in the MORE EXCEEDING minority then it would be safe to say that the employees should form a labour union to ensure they have a voice and work to common goals.

[Birdy]

I quit!

[SaggyBalls]

Quitters never win.

Surrender to the flow.

Our government has worked quite a bit like a coalition government but just hasn't said they were working as a coalition specifically.

I don't see how it would work here but i also see how it could and I think it would have to be on an issue by issue basis.

[phishtaper]

no, dont quit birdy. i enjoy these discussions and you have the guts to challenge the majority view here

but on this point, we are just spinning wheels. yes, in your race example, i dont think its altogether problematic to use the term 'majority' to describe white numbers. that said though, its just not the conventional use of the term when it comes to voter preference/behaviour. language is dynamic and perhaps some commentators are now beginning to use majority to describe 36% support, i just havent seen it.

it's complicated because in our first past the post system a party can win a majority of seats without garnering a majority of votes. structurally, a third of voters can elect a true majority of seats.

but lets get past semantics and get back to the idea of the second and third place parties forming a coalition to gain control of parliament over the first place party. in this case, i do not think it would amount to a violation of the 'will of the people' because more voters supported 2nd and 3rd place parties than those who supported the 1st place party. the question is, 'how effectively can that coalition govern?' ... i suggest - in theory - it could govern pretty well. as to whether these particular politicians could get along well enough to govern, well, thats another question altogether. i'd like to think they could at least try.

[hamilton]

Just change "majority" to "plurality" and we can get on to more substantial discussions. This has turned into an argument over definitions - which, as an English language nerd, I find interesting but is pointless in the larger context of what is being discussed here.

Carry on.

[Birdy]

Thank you Hamilton and Phishtaper... i wasn't quitting, just giving up on the discussion of what i meant when i said 'majority'. But you get it now, so all's good.

Libertarianism, in theory, works pretty well. Communism, in theory, works pretty well. That's all!

[SaggyBalls]

In theory, communism works well.

In practive, socialist democracy is what stuck here.

the only hardline thing about our society is capitalism...and in some places, religion.

I really wish we were in a position that Libertatianism could work. We would need the infrastructure and self-sustaining economy, communities, and agriculture that the Greens are in support of.

the most libertarian party seems to be the Progressive Canadians.

These Red Tories have a refreshing approach to the right, and if we are going to see more minority governments ahead of us they would be entirely necessary to flesh out the right wing and bridge the left and right, working with the Greens, Liberals, and hopefully in a few elections from now, the Canadian Action Party.

HARPER BELIEVES IN...

Personal Aggrandizement

Autonomous Provinces

Free Markets

Smaller Government

Tax Cuts (Help the Rich)

Immediate Profits For Some

Resisting Environmental Program Challenges

Closer Links To The U.S.A.

Privatization of Government Programs (i.e. Use Your Credit Cards)

Private Ownership of Infrastructure

P.C. PARTY STANDS FOR...

Prosperity For All

Stronger Canada

Fair Markets

Efficient Government

Efficient Taxation (Create Wealth)

Sustainability For All

Accepting Environmental Program Challenges

Broader World Links

National Funding of Government Programs (i.e. Use Your Health Card)

Public Ownership of Infrastructure