This in no way meant to sound bad, rather a post from a "typical American"
and I live only an hour from the border...

I read most of these postings, I looked up a few news stories, I'm trying to follow this election but I think this is terribly boring and have zero interest. I expect Canadians to be excited and amped up, good for you, you should be. But from a lame American perspective it's a big yawn. And look at the complete lack of postings from you brothers south of the border ...nothing. This is no slam against Canada but rather one against America, we should care, we should follow your election but even in our news, it's a complete non-event. (and that's sad really)

Isn't Canada just a suburb of the US?

(Humor intended, nothing hurtful, please)

Coming from a border state, I would have to agree with Tom on this. This is very little interest at all in the US about this election. There should be, and the Americans are the one's to blame.

Perhaps if Canada did as much in the world as the US there would be more interest. I don't know, but just a guess. I don't mean this as a bash on Canada. They do some great things. It appears there is more interest in Britain's elections.

Why do people think that is?

I don't think you'll find many people round the world who give a damn about the Canadian elections Tom. Granted, Americans are much closer to Canada, but that doesn't mean you should be excited about elections there, not really. It's not like I pay close attention to the Irish elections, and I'm pretty sure our Aussie brethren aren't on tenterhooks when New Zealand goes to the polls. Fact is that very little which happens in Canadian politics is likely to affect you, whereas what happens in America does tend to affect the rest of the world. This is why you keep finding all these foreigners who take an interest in your politics while you know next to nothing about ours.

Oh, I know that's the case of course. But I live a freaking HOUR away, Brad lives about the same (on the other side of the country) and we just have ZERO interest. No bash on Canada, I'm bashing ourselves! You could blame the media for not covering it one tiny little itty bitty bit I suppose, but I am an hour away, I have plenty of folks I talk to daily here on Redscape not to mention business, I enjoy politics and world matters and I too just don't care in the least, I'm bashing the US and myself as well.

Sass - you clearly are not as much of an election geek as I am. The last Irish election was fascinating. I always follow the elections in Kiwi and Oz and Canada as well as the US. When I see an election has happened somewhere, or is about to, I can't help myself but check out the lie of the land and the trends etc.

But yeah, I guess that normal people don't bother so much. Mind you, America does have a reputation for having very little interest in what happens beyond their borders. I suppose that there's enough going on in the USA politically that makes Canada look quite quaint. Sure, the Canadian election has been triggered by a budget debate, but it's nowhere near as hysterical as that in the USA. You don't have someone who is toying with the candidacy for the top job associating themselves with wacko conspiracists (as Trump is with the birthers, and now the 'Obama-never-went-to-X-college' nuts), you don't have a Senator resigning over the payment of $100,000 in hush money to a girl he allegedly had an affair with (Ensign), or one who's still in place after what appears to be a clear cut case of tax (and other) fraud (Rangel), you don't have people getting hysterical about where Harper goes to church...

Oh, for a time when people followed US elections like they do Canadian . . .

Cooperation is two way Master. Harper has promised to bring in exactly the same budget that was defeated to cause th4e election. If he has the same or fewer seats in the new house, that would seem to be rather confrontational and counter productive. So if he proceeds and is defeated who isn't "cooperating?"

NDP Forming Government
Even a minority government, following an election, has a window of opportunity to force legislation through the House. This, of course, is not enshrined in the constitution, but it stems from the very nature of the circumstance. The election produced a winner who has the duty of governing.

Procedurally, the current election was not triggered over the budged but because the government was found in contempt of parliament. It isn’t really a surprise if the Conservatives bring in the same budget before the House. For the most part they have campaigned on the budget and the other partiers are aware of this. So if the Conservatives were to be re-elected and attempt to implement the budget that the people voted for – vicariously, of course – then to defeat the government on the budget would seem as though the opposition is obstructing the economic recovery of the country, a position that no political party wants to find themselves in.

Assuming that the NPD form the official opposition and the Conservatives have a strengthened minority, I think it would be difficult for them to resist a budget shortly after the election. It would seem like a power grab if the NDP tried for form government without being elected to the office, and their gains would possibly dissipate if Parliament were again dissolved.

What I’m saying is that if the Conservatives win the election and the other parties form an arrangement (as would be necessary) to topple the government within the first 100 days, the optics of this coup (constitutional though it may be) are hardly favourable.

An NDP government, supported by the Liberals and the Bloc, would be, in my opinion, worse for the NDP than being leaders of the official opposition. The Liberals as a junior partner in a coalition (if indeed they agree to this in the first place) would be seeking an opportunity to topple the NDP government in order to reassert their once unshakable hold on the Prime Minister’s Office. An NDP led coalition would not only look bad in the way it was achieved but also would have some internal concerns.

All this would simply add lustre to the Conservative offer of stability. Bearing that in mind, it would be better for the NDP to serve four years or so as leaders of the opposition (If they were elected as such) and then challenge the government rather than aiming to move from fourth to first place in one shot.

danivon wrote:5% would be a marginal in a normal year. Looks like this isn't 'normal', and so the ground may shift enough to move things further away. If the polls are an indication, then it may be that the Conservatives gain from the Liberals but lose to the NDP. It may also be in some places that local variations produce extreme swings. But looking at the bare facts as you've presented them won't tell us much.

The CBC At Issue Panel discuss the shifting political landscape. I enjoy the discussions of the At Issue Panel, and this one is particularly interesting.

Magister, remember that the Tories are currently between 35% and 40% in the polls. Despite the fact that that they may win plurality of the seats, they are opossed by almost 60% of the electorate.
You're right that the goivenrment fell from the contempt of parliament vote, but the budget would have lost too.
The NDP, should they finish second will be chomping at the bit to defeat the Tories. Whether they garner the support of the Liberals and Bloc ...that may be in doubt. If the exact same budget is tabled, its unlikely that the Liberals could support the budget, and they probably wouldn't mind supporting a minority NDP gov whilst they find a new leader and reorganize.
And the Bloc? Now wouldn't that be funny, a rump of the Bloc holding the minority Tories in power?
It might happen. Harper would have to send a lot Quebecs way....

ME - surely if the opposition are in a position to block the budget, it means that the people didn't vote for the Conservatives to have the mandate to pass it?

And it all looked so boring a couple of weeks ago!

I thought that this election was going to be somewhat boring as well, but as May 2 draws closer and closer it seems to get mor and more interesting.

What is your favourite moment of the 2011 Election campaign thus far?

A comment which I found the most memorable was Mr. Layton's statement on Mr. Igantieff's attendance in Parliament during the English language debate.

And the Bloc? Now wouldn't that be funny, a rump of the Bloc holding the minority Tories in power?

That would be really interesting.

ME - surely if the opposition are in a position to block the budget, it means that the people didn't vote for the Conservatives to have the mandate to pass it?

Assuredly, the opposition are in a position to block the budget. However, the question is will they block the budget--as they are entitled to do--when the consequences of another election or an NDP led coalition are clearly not what the people desire or directly voted for.

The NDP, should they finish second will be chomping at the bit to defeat the Tories.

NDP Defeating Conservatives on Budget
I’m not sure I agree with the notion that the NDP would be eager to defeat the Conservatives right after an election.

Now, of course, for the government to fall and be replaced without an election is perfectly consistent with our laws and the NDP are perfectly entitled to follow such a course. Nevertheless, there is an understandable disjuncture between what can be done and what ought to be done.

For the NDP, if they gain the required number of seats, it will be their first time as leaders of the opposition. To attempt to catapult the party into government would make them seem power-hungry. The NDP, I think, would have a far better run at the PMO if they spend time in opposition, showcase their ability to form policy and serve as an alternative to the Conservatives rather than attempting, in effect, to seize power through toppling the government.

NDP in the Polls
The latest poll from Forum Research has the Conservatives at 34% and the NDP at 31%. I haven't been able to access the polling data directly. Could this election really be developing into an NDP-Conservative race?

ME - if there's a hung parliament and the Conservatives are still in the minority, it would be hard to argue that they had a further mandate to rule. Especially if they lose any seats. You may think it's a bit rough for the NDP to be the leaders of a replacement government, but would people also not feel it's a bit power-hungry for the Tories to seek to rule along despite still not actually having a majority?

If they are on 35%, it sounds like it would be hard for them to get more seats than they already have. A lot depends on the splits in the opposition vote, but still, it's hardly a mandate. Taking it for granted that the Tories should stay in government is what Tories do, I guess, but it's not exactly humble.

Based on this possible outcome http://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2 ... l-27-2011/

Con 131
NDP 92
Lib 63
BQ 21
Ind 1

which has been derived from recent polls, there would be a very interesting situation. Harper would still lead the largest party, but would have seen their support fall. The NDP and Liberals could form a government with a slim majority and the NDP would be the major partner. Harper would not have a clear mandate for his budget, so even if he did try to form a minority government, it would be certain to fall unless he makes changes.

I also looked at the marginal seats (which only list up to 15 targets for each party on wikipedia, so won’t show what most of the NDP gains would be), using recent polling averages. It looks to me like the Conservatives can gain a handful from the Liberals with a small swing. The Liberals may get one from the Bloq. The NDP seem to gain from all three of the other parties (27 from the Bloq, 15 from the Conservatives and 12 from the Liberals using a combination of my guesses and the above outcome). It would be interesting to see what happens in my cousin’s neck of the woods (Saskatchewan province), where the NDP are in second place in most seats but have no MPs. I know her in-laws are hoping to turn Regina orange.

Still, polls can be inaccurate, and a surge in polling doesn’t always turn out to happen on the ground (1988 saw the NDP fall back, 2010 saw the UK Liberal Democrats shoot up from about 22% to around 30% in the polls, only to slide back in the last few days and record 24% of the vote). It seems to me that if the NDP slip back a bit, a lot of these putative seat gains disappear.

I wonder if Harper's turn about to attack Layton and his party will work as well as it did against Ignatieff? Will it look more like fear of losing or nastiness than the behaviour of a man who should be given a safe and secure majority? If he doesn't make a net gain in seats, will he (and ME) concede that he's lost the election?

danivon

I wonder if Harper's turn about to attack Layton and his party will work as well as it did against Ignatieff

Won't work at all. Its way too late.
Layton is liked because he has almost a full ounce, no more, of charisma. Neither Harper nor Iggie have any. At all.
Harper can count on his base now, and just a bit more. His base is 30%. The Conservatives, in previous incarnations, have rarely fallen below that number.
A few years ago, some of the Liberal grey beards, including Jean Chretien , suggested that it was time for the Liberals and NDP to merge... What we may get out of this election is a plan to merge and a coalition government.
When Harper campaigned so ferociously against coalition government he didn't figure on the typical Canadian's response to compromise. "Its a good thing". Without the Bloc as a part of the "coalition" it will be welcomed by many.
Turn out will be crucial .Many of the projected NDP votes are young, 18-34. And they are the least likely to actually make it to the polls. On the other hand, if the young smell real change....
Saskatchewan, the birthplace of medicare and the predecessor to the NDP (The CCF) will be mostly orange at the end of election night.