10.10.2012 10:05 PM

Lib-Dem cooperation: That was then, this is now (updated)

Before, it was time to “start looking at that.”

Now, it isn’t “interesting.”

Get that?

Me neither. I’m sure it will all be explained to us.


UPDATE: In Jane’s story, here, it seems he had a bit of a down day, yesterday. He should remember that one Liberal’s “divisiveness and navel-gazing” can be another Liberal’s “having a bona fide opinion.” LeBlanc’s right, however: if people don’t run, they don’t run. It’s not the responsibility of the front-runner to recruit them.


  1. !o! says:

    Why a merger? Why not joint nominations in key ridings that let both parties maintain their autonomy?

    • Michael says:

      Without getting into a lot of long detail, there is presently no mechanism in Canadian election law to allow joint nominations.

      • !o! says:

        Sure, but practically speaking, couldn’t a party just decline to run a candidate in a riding?

        • GFMD says:

          If about a dozen candidates from each of the NDP and LPC withdraw for “personal reasons” in close ridings about 10 days before the election, that would probably work out the best.

          • Gary says:

            Actually, close of nominations is 21 days before the election at 2p.m. local time. If you don’t withdraw by 5 p.m. the same day then your name will be on the ballot.

        • Ronald O'Dowd says:


          Common sense. Nope, means that won’t happen. You know how boys behave when it becomes a question as to who happens to have the longest one…

  2. G Betts says:

    The real story, and the one that Trudeau should start working into his talking points and quick, is the mergers of the Cons and PQ. Canadian’s do understand existential threats.

  3. MCBellecourt says:

    The term I read in the article was *merger*. Speaking for myself and myself only, I can see his point. He did say that the Liberal Party was “a pragmatic party of the center” and that “ideas would be taken from the left or the right if they work”.

    I can see his point, but I do agree that there will be *cooperation* needed between the parties in some form.

    Dammit, you know, from my corner of the country, there is validity in both arguments–to merge or not to merge. I look at the U.S., and I see two parties, one in power, spending millions and too much time on campaigns and too little time spent in Congress working together to better their country for their citizens…then on the other side of it I see the split vote on the saner side of Canadian politics needing to be addressed.

    I would definitely favour some sort of coalition effort to oust Harper (if needed), but each party retaining its identity for when Canada finally heals. I know, I know, there are other parties, but the big three will probably alway dominate the House. Elizabeth May is the only MP from the Greens (and bless her heart, she works her ass off), but a merger has the potential of turning Canada into the Great American Clusterphuque Part Deux.

    We can only wait and see, Warren, it’s still early. JT will need to discuss more specifics as time goes on, and he will if he’s smart. And, there are the other candidates.

    I think right now, it’s more intro optics…”hi, I’m Justin, this is who I am” optics… Substance to come later, stay tuned…. (?

    I continue to hope…

  4. Christian says:

    “It is politics as usual that is making people incredibly cynical.”

    Isn’t rejecting the idea of a merger or co-operation out of hand the “politics as usual” (on the progressive side of the spectrum I note the NDP are just as guilty here) that has handed Harper win after win? As Warren notes in his link, Tudeau used to think so. Now he’s giving us recycled Ignatieff-isms like this:

    “The NDP is an ideological party of the left and the Conservatives are an ideological party of the right. We’re a pragmatic centrist party that is ready to take from the left or the right, depending on what actually works”.

    And so the status quo of progressives beating on each other continues.

    Somewhere, Stephen Harper is grinning (shudder).

    • Bluegreenblogger says:

      “The NDP is an ideological party of the left and the Conservatives are an ideological party of the right. We’re a pragmatic centrist party that is ready to take from the left or the right, depending on what actually works”.

      And that is precisely why I will be supporting the Liberal Party for the foreseeable future. I refuse to believe that a plurality of Canadians is beyond the immediate reach of a pragmatic centrist party. If Canadians truly are beyond caring about what works, then we are screwed no matter who wins any given election

  5. Anne Peterson says:

    If the NDP are such economic illiterates can you explain the success of Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Germany, Holland. This is never mentioned by anyone in North America, either commentator or journalist. It’s like part of their brains are missing. It’s like the mass denial about what the west is really doing in the Middle East and has done in Africa and South America. A foolish way to live, in denail. It won’t work in the long run.

    • Tired of it All says:

      Ms. Peterson, unfortunately your question is moot. You have a wild mix in there, from heavily socialized democracies (Sweden, Finland, Denmark) with very small, albeit motivated and progressive populations. They are also in very confined geographic spaces where a variety of high-value, pan-Euorpean collaborative economic policies unerpin their economies out of necessity (and not in competition with each other or at least complementary to each other. I give you a very small, crude sample: Norway: boats and oil; Netherlands: Tidal tech, medical and pharma; Denmark: wind, consumer goods (Lego, anyone?), ocean tech; Sweden: arms, cars, information communciations tech (Ericsson, to name an obvious one); Finland: med tech, ICT and heavy industry (Nokia). Also, at least two make more petro-bucks than they know what to do with (Norway and the Dutch). Just check out Norway’s sovereign wealth fund. It is an astounding global financial actor, all based on petroleum revenues.

  6. Jordan says:

    The Liberals may not have much hope on the leadership front.

  7. Dan says:

    I agree this is one of the most cynical parts of politics. Plenty of times, a political partisan will back off from an idea they believe in because they need to make a stronger contrast with their opponents. Every party does it (and Liberals do it out of both sides of their mouth). And this won’t be the last time.

  8. james curran says:

    At the end of the day, Canadians wanna have $14 left on their debit card after paying their rent to treat their kids to a pizza. They couldn’t give a flying fuck about a merger. And that is my advice to my friend Justin. Stick to the facts Jack. And merger ain’t one of them.

    Obviously said reporter is testing the waters for Harper’s Hacks to bring back their scary “coalition” crap again.

    • Michael Reintjes says:

      “Obviously said reporter is testing the waters for Harper’s Hacks to bring back their scary “coalition” crap again.”….which kind of reminds me of ‘SOLDIERS…IN OUR STREETS…..WITH GUNS”…… sorry I couldn’t resist..

  9. Anne Peterson says:

    Those Norse countries are social democracies and the NDP are social democrats. And what about Gary Doer in Manitoba and Allan Blakeney in Saskatchewan. Two of the best provincial governments Canada has ever seen. Contrast them with Grant Devine’s conservative government which ended up with several cabinet ministers in the hoose gow because they were such crooks.

    You have no idea what kind of government Muclair’s NDP would be, but we all have an idea what kind of government Harper’s conservatives are. They are smelling to high heaven. If only we could pretend the election fraud and the lies haven’t happened, eh.

  10. Lance says:

    “Again”? Why would they need to “bring it back” when the idea is never really gone completely?

  11. Brad says:

    I don’t think Canadians want a merger, they just want a strong Liberal party, well those inclined to vote that way. I don’t really want them to merge but when
    I see crap like this, I am firmly in the anyone but Harper camp.


  12. Predictable says:

    I’m a cowardly douchebag.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *