No coalition in 2004: Harper, Duceppe and Layton

Harper, Duceppe and Layton are very clear that there was no coalition in 2004.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Harper
• Duceppe
• Layton
• News
• election
• ndp
• bloc
• bq
• conservative
• cpc

[IncendiaryAmmoOfLove]

I thought Harper was lying until now. Fucking Ducppe

[fatoni698]

@skeetergreen Hmm, three current examples in similar countries of coalitions INCLUDING the most popular party: Britain, New Zealand, Australia. I am sure you can find some exception to the rule, as there always is, but almost always the party that wins the most seats is part of the coalition. And yes, if you are going to accuse him of lying and actually intending to form a coalition, you need proof. With ignatieff there is proof because the coalition agreement they made in 2008 is still valid..

[spiritfilled111]

the TRUTH is shown :)

[Xelection2]

@LiberalFail how do you figure that? Of course it wasn't a true coalition, Mr. Harper would never share his power. A true coalition requires letting the other parties have actual cabinet seats that have a say in policy decisions. We all know Mr. Harper doesn't play well with others, ergo his assertion that if he came in second and the GG offered him the chance to form the government, he said NO. He'd rather subject us all to yet another election than work with the other parties.

[gavrilo2007]

All true, but then again, the historical record is ALSO clear: there was no coalition with the BLOC in 2008 either. if we're going to stick to the facts and accept what is the historical record, then there was NEVER a coalition with the BLOC. Despite the fact that the Cons and Harperites repeatedly raise the threat of a BLOC coalition.

[benelfreako]

A coalition means all parties involved get ministries. That was the plan in 2008 between the NDP and Liberals, with the Bloc giving its support and therefore granting them with the confidence of the House.

In 2004, NDP and CP were not going to form a coalition, and the conservative alone would form a government, but the objective was the same: TO MAKE STEPHEN HARPER PRIME MINISTER EVEN IF HIS PARTY FINSHED SECOND, exactly what they're trying to demonize now.

[philacoudre]

@jessicahhop yep... :S

[imN0Ttheone]

@BoredomCorner Why must you interject yourself into everyone else's conversation ? What is it about you left wing parasites that sit at home collecting government cheques that makes you think working people care what you have to say ?

[1curieux]

Only Conservatives are stupid enough to believe 2004 was not the same as a coalition. It's just like saying: "It's not separation, it's sovereignty."

Anything but the Reformatories please!

They formed a government with 20% of the possible vote and believe they can run the country as they please, throwing us back into an election everytime they feel they can get a few more seats; we can easily kick them out.

[raccoonarenoisy]

@MisterFusion113 How about you explain this difference?

[MisterFusion113]

@raccoonarenoisy Do you really not understand the difference or are you just a Liberal party hardliner?

[BoredomCorner]

@imN0Ttheone And what makes you think he collects a government cheque?

Actually here's a better question: why do Harper's supporters, think that making random accusations is going to convince anyone to vote for them? It only makes the ReformaTories look like idiots.