Forecast: The Layton led NDP will become the Official Opposition after the next election

The NDP has now won between 3 and 10 seats in Quebec?   When did THAT happen?

Official opposition in a majority government doesn't mean much. Official opposition in a minority government doesn't mean much if you act like the current OO. I'll be astonished the day I see enlightened legislation and policies passed.

JKR wrote:

 Some people are optimistic that Harper will have a huge majority government as it would mean the decimation of the dreaded Liberals.

 They figure "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Oh goody, under that scenario, the NDP might be able to squeeze out concessions to set up soup kitchens once Harper gets rid of all social safety nets and kills what's left of the manufacturing industry.

Hebert: Ignatief, Rae Help Harper

http://www.thestar.com/article/891850--hebert-ignatief-rae-help-harper-w...

"they have jointly managed the singular achievement of giving Harper the elbow room he needed to change tack on Afghanistan in a way that is bound to please both NATO and the Conservative party base while making the Liberals more vulnerable to Bloc Quebecois and NDP attacks on both Afghanistan and parliamentary accountability in the next election."

Quote:

It is the New Democrats who have taken the largest step forward.

According to the rolling average poll you pointed to from the Globe,

Quote:

 Jack Layton’s team has gained half-a-point and now has the support of 16.1 per cent of Canadians... The New Democrats, meanwhile, would win 30 seats, down one from the last projection.

Hate to rain on the parade but I don't quite see how this data proves that the Liberals are now road kill and that NDP will be the official opposition. Last week's EKOS poll put the NDP at a two-year high of 19.3% (which undoubtedly helped them get to a 16.1% average) and might be a better poll with which to engage in wishful thinking. 

what action are you referring to? (is there some?)

and what kind of stuff you looking for?

I mean... you are looking over in this corner... and that seems interesting in its own right, but dont know why...

I'll say one thing.  The events of the last week are actually playing very well into the NDP's hands. We've been handed Afghanistan as an issue again, on very high moral ground and with the Liberals totally split, and now the Senate has killed the NDP's Climate Change Bill on 2nd reading, without even a committee hearing, and the Liberals and Conservatives are arguing about who's at fault.

Layton was on fire in question period today, and is giving 'em hell, while sounding more and more like the Prime Minister we ought to have had.

BTW, a big shout-out to Nikki Ashton today too, who spoke out passionately for her community of Thompson, which has just been completely shafted by Vale SA, and Jack Harris and Paul Dewar who kept up the pressure on Afghanistan.

There are some really good strong issues there to run on, and I felt really really proud of our caucus today.

Cueball wrote:

Plenty of time to amalgamate the center parties in Canada.

Too late, they've been busy propping up the Reformatories since 2006. What's the Liberal Party record at now for pro-Harper confidence votes? And look where it's gotten them - deadlocked in the polls with Canada's other conservative party. Canadians can't tell the diff.

Liberal, Tory, it's the same old story.

ottawaobserver wrote:

I'll say one thing.  The events of the last week are actually playing very well into the NDP's hands. We've been handed Afghanistan as an issue again, on very high moral ground and with the Liberals totally split, and now the Senate has killed the NDP's Climate Change Bill on 2nd reading, without even a committee hearing, and the Liberals and Conservatives are arguing about who's at fault.

Layton was on fire in question period today, and is giving 'em hell, while sounding more and more like the Prime Minister we ought to have had.

BTW, a big shout-out to Nikki Ashton today too, who spoke out passionately for her community of Thompson, which has just been completely shafted by Vale SA, and Jack Harris and Paul Dewar who kept up the pressure on Afghanistan.

There are some really good strong issues there to run on, and I felt really really proud of our caucus today.

Well put, and thank you.

I was over at Rabble.ca and just dropped by to read the headlines here - the title of this thread intrigued me, as I just read this article.

excerpt:

With these national levels of support, the Conservatives are projected to win 127 seats, down two seats from the last projection and down 15 from their present standing in the House of Commons. The Liberals are projected to win 98 seats, three more than two weeks ago and 22 more than they currently hold. The New Democrats, meanwhile, would win 30 seats, down one from the last projection.

More importantly, the Liberals and New Democrats could combine for a total of 128 seats, one more than Prime Minister Stephen Harper's party is projected to win.

GREAT to see you Boom Boom.  :)

GO NDP!

Hey boom boom, lovely to see you, have missed you.

Yep she does RP. :D

And I see some people are still trying to contend the NDP are not demanding a pull out of the military, and are  trying to blow smoke about the civilian contingent to rebuild. Seems people forget the promise that was made to Afghanistan when NATO entered, supposedly to find Bin Laden, and that was it.

I predict due to a recored low voter turnout next time Jack will be moving into Stornaway and Harper will get a bare bones majority. The libs will lose most of their seats in BC to the cons. Hedy Fry's may be the only safe one in the city of Vancouver, yet I would not be surprised if it went con or NDP either.

NorthReport wrote:

Now that is both a given and an attempt at fear-mongering. The Cons will get re-elected with another minority, but what will be most interesting facet of the next election is how far down the Liberal slide is going to be.

Just remember that most of the Liberals marginal ridings would go to the Conservatives. The Liberals won 25 seats by less than 10%-the Conservatives were 2nd in 20 of them (NDP 4, BQ 1). The scenario where the Liberal vote collapses & Harper doesn't get a majority is a complete fantasy.

Official opposition for the NDP is highly unlikely.  A coalition afterwards, beyond the defacto Conservative-Liberal one we have now, involving the NDP seems well within possibility.

There are a lot of seats in play where the NDP has the potential to unseat sitting Conservatives (even where the NDP was third last time) in southwestern Ontario thanks to anger over the McGuinty government, but Liberals will never, ever admit that so expect more stupid-ass strategic voting crappola.

The NDP should move non-confidence in the government on the issue of not even debating a bill duly passed by a majority in the House.

If they did and the vote succeeded then the election would be fought over Con hypocrisy, the loss of democratic institutions co-opted by Harper and many trust issues related to him. That would be a campaign I'd like to see. If the opposition won't bring Harper down on this -- there will never be a better issue and there will be no reason to assume that they will have the guts to do it.

As well, an important point I made in the thread about the bill is here we have the government a product of the House in opposition to the House which is the only thing giving the government any legitimacy. If the House can't slap him down for this, we have a dictatorship-- and one in place because the opposition does not have the guts to dislodge it and the people don't demonstrate their opposition. Harper is only as powerful as we have let him become. Here is an issue the Cons would lose on and likely we won't ever get to find out for sure.

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

If the House can't slap him down for this, we have a dictatorship-- and one in place because the opposition does not have the guts to dislodge it and the people don't demonstrate their opposition. Harper is only as powerful as we have let him become. Here is an issue the Cons would lose on and likely we won't ever get to find out for sure.

You think anyone cares about this procedural issue?

You think this is worse than Harper publicly violating legislation (C-288) on the same topic - legislation which actually achieved royal assent?

You think this latest crime is worse, in the eyes of Canadians, than Harper proroguing Parliament in order to stop a non-confidence vote and a majority coalition from taking power? Even then, the Liberals ran screaming when faced with the prospect of something radically democratic taking place... And the whole "prorogue" movement, which inspired and mobilized millions, was dropped by all opposition parties because they had no clue what to do with it.

You think the Liberals and NDP and Bloc would ally and bring down Harper over the defeat of C-311 - probably the first time Harper did something legal in his life?

My answer would be "no" on all counts. People care about issues of substance. Like protecting the environment - not how an environmental bill gets squelched. Like getting out of Afghanistan - not whether Parliament gets to have a phoney boring predictable debate and equally predictable vote on the issue.

Unionist wrote:

My answer would be "no" on all counts. People care about issues of substance.... Like getting out of Afghanistan - not whether Parliament gets to have a phoney boring predictable debate and equally predictable vote on the issue.

Nobody here has argued debating whether there be a vote instead of getting out of Afghanistan.

You- and others here- have decided that they are mutually exclusive, in practice if not period. That if we spend any time agitating about broken promises to have a vote, it will detract from agitating about getting out.

Someone should do a hard number tally of the number of jobs lost under Harper's rule. For some reason, job losses have been getting barely any media attention except for selective sound bites here and there or else macro level economic analysis that reduces the casualties to percentages.

Procedural issues do not have traction and will not move people to vote. Loss of lives (war), jobs (economy) and safe living conditions (environment) have more traction.