Congrats to Justin Trudeau
Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 11:16 pm
and well done Canada to send a strong message to him, while maintaining our progressive views.
He doesn't have a majority though. He's going to have to form a coalition.a1mamacat wrote:and well done Canada to send a strong message to him, while maintaining our progressive views.
Incorrect. The minority will have to tread lightly on many issues, but doesn't need a coalition. They will just not be able to ram through any changes without taking into consideration the views of the other parties. That was the message we sent.Bob Juch wrote:He doesn't have a majority though. He's going to have to form a coalition.a1mamacat wrote:and well done Canada to send a strong message to him, while maintaining our progressive views.
Would you mind elaborating? I will confess to a lack of knowledge about precisely how Canada's parliamentary system works, and I am curious. Can the other parties "gang up" and end the government via some sort of vote of no confidence? --Boba1mamacat wrote:Incorrect. The minority will have to tread lightly on many issues, but doesn't need a coalition. They will just not be able to ram through any changes without taking into consideration the views of the other parties. That was the message we sent.Bob Juch wrote:He doesn't have a majority though. He's going to have to form a coalition.a1mamacat wrote:and well done Canada to send a strong message to him, while maintaining our progressive views.
Yes, they could. The total number of seats is 338, and the Liberals won 157. So if two or more of the other parties voted as a block, they could force a non confidence motion. That would be unlikely for a couple of years, as two of the other parties visions align with the Liberals right now.Bob78164 wrote:Would you mind elaborating? I will confess to a lack of knowledge about precisely how Canada's parliamentary system works, and I am curious. Can the other parties "gang up" and end the government via some sort of vote of no confidence? --Boba1mamacat wrote:Incorrect. The minority will have to tread lightly on many issues, but doesn't need a coalition. They will just not be able to ram through any changes without taking into consideration the views of the other parties. That was the message we sent.Bob Juch wrote: He doesn't have a majority though. He's going to have to form a coalition.
I guess I'm not understanding the difference between the state of affairs that you're describing and a coalition to form a government. Would you mind educating me? --Boba1mamacat wrote:Yes, they could. The total number of seats is 338, and the Liberals won 157. So if two or more of the other parties voted as a block, they could force a non confidence motion. That would be unlikely for a couple of years, as two of the other parties visions align with the Liberals right now.Bob78164 wrote:Would you mind elaborating? I will confess to a lack of knowledge about precisely how Canada's parliamentary system works, and I am curious. Can the other parties "gang up" and end the government via some sort of vote of no confidence? --Boba1mamacat wrote:
Incorrect. The minority will have to tread lightly on many issues, but doesn't need a coalition. They will just not be able to ram through any changes without taking into consideration the views of the other parties. That was the message we sent.
In a coalition, the minority government would make an arrangement with one of the other parties holding a balance of power. This could include naming some of the third party members to cabinet posts, or committees. It is more formal than simply the third party and the minority agreeing to support each other in votes.Bob78164 wrote:I guess I'm not understanding the difference between the state of affairs that you're describing and a coalition to form a government. Would you mind educating me? --Boba1mamacat wrote:Yes, they could. The total number of seats is 338, and the Liberals won 157. So if two or more of the other parties voted as a block, they could force a non confidence motion. That would be unlikely for a couple of years, as two of the other parties visions align with the Liberals right now.Bob78164 wrote:Would you mind elaborating? I will confess to a lack of knowledge about precisely how Canada's parliamentary system works, and I am curious. Can the other parties "gang up" and end the government via some sort of vote of no confidence? --Bob
Thanks. I learned something today. --Boba1mamacat wrote:In a coalition, the minority government would make an arrangement with one of the other parties holding a balance of power. This could include naming some of the third party members to cabinet posts, or committees. It is more formal than simply the third party and the minority agreeing to support each other in votes.Bob78164 wrote:I guess I'm not understanding the difference between the state of affairs that you're describing and a coalition to form a government. Would you mind educating me? --Boba1mamacat wrote:
Yes, they could. The total number of seats is 338, and the Liberals won 157. So if two or more of the other parties voted as a block, they could force a non confidence motion. That would be unlikely for a couple of years, as two of the other parties visions align with the Liberals right now.
Who actually cares?Bob78164 wrote:Thanks. I learned something today. --Boba1mamacat wrote:In a coalition, the minority government would make an arrangement with one of the other parties holding a balance of power. This could include naming some of the third party members to cabinet posts, or committees. It is more formal than simply the third party and the minority agreeing to support each other in votes.Bob78164 wrote:I guess I'm not understanding the difference between the state of affairs that you're describing and a coalition to form a government. Would you mind educating me? --Bob
That I learned something? I thought it was polite to thank Saucy for taking the time to satisfy my curiosity by letting her know that her efforts made a difference.Beebs52 wrote:Who actually cares?Bob78164 wrote:Thanks. I learned something today. --Boba1mamacat wrote:
In a coalition, the minority government would make an arrangement with one of the other parties holding a balance of power. This could include naming some of the third party members to cabinet posts, or committees. It is more formal than simply the third party and the minority agreeing to support each other in votes.
Again blahblablahBob78164 wrote:That I learned something? I thought it was polite to thank Saucy for taking the time to satisfy my curiosity by letting her know that her efforts made a difference.Beebs52 wrote:Who actually cares?Bob78164 wrote:Thanks. I learned something today. --Bob
About the government of Canada? Most Canadians, I would hope, and a fair number of people here as well. --Bob
You dissin me or Bob?Beebs52 wrote:Who actually cares?Bob78164 wrote:Thanks. I learned something today. --Boba1mamacat wrote:
In a coalition, the minority government would make an arrangement with one of the other parties holding a balance of power. This could include naming some of the third party members to cabinet posts, or committees. It is more formal than simply the third party and the minority agreeing to support each other in votes.
No one is forcing you to read our exchange. --BobBeebs52 wrote:Again blahblablahBob78164 wrote:That I learned something? I thought it was polite to thank Saucy for taking the time to satisfy my curiosity by letting her know that her efforts made a difference.Beebs52 wrote:
Who actually cares?
About the government of Canada? Most Canadians, I would hope, and a fair number of people here as well. --Bob
Botha1mamacat wrote:You dissin me or Bob?Beebs52 wrote:Who actually cares?Bob78164 wrote:Thanks. I learned something today. --Bob
So who pee'd in your Corn Flakes today? I know you get all hoity toity with the Bobs, but I don't recall doing anything to set you off?Beebs52 wrote:Botha1mamacat wrote:You dissin me or Bob?Beebs52 wrote:
Who actually cares?
You're right. As I said who cares. Gotta watch Astros.a1mamacat wrote:So who pee'd in your Corn Flakes today? I know you get all hoity toity with the Bobs, but I don't recall doing anything to set you off?Beebs52 wrote:Botha1mamacat wrote:
You dissin me or Bob?
Plus you do your own crud about the pres, conservatives, and whatever so, Deal.Beebs52 wrote:You're right. As I said who cares. Gotta watch Astros.a1mamacat wrote:So who pee'd in your Corn Flakes today? I know you get all hoity toity with the Bobs, but I don't recall doing anything to set you off?Beebs52 wrote:
Both
Ahh, but I do it because I DO care. Now if you had gone after the Blackface/brownface sheit, we could have had some fun, or not because I think he should be smacked upside his head about it. All I was doing was explaining procedures that Bob asked about. Like me asking several years ago about how the electoral college works.Beebs52 wrote:Plus you do your own crud about the pres, conservatives, and whatever so, Deal.Beebs52 wrote:You're right. As I said who cares. Gotta watch Astros.a1mamacat wrote:
So who pee'd in your Corn Flakes today? I know you get all hoity toity with the Bobs, but I don't recall doing anything to set you off?
No. Sadlya1mamacat wrote:Ahh, but I do it because I DO care. Now if you had gone after the Blackface/brownface sheit, we could have had some fun, or not because I think he should be smacked upside his head about it. All I was doing was explaining procedures that Bob asked about. Like me asking several years ago about how the electoral college works.Beebs52 wrote:Plus you do your own crud about the pres, conservatives, and whatever so, Deal.Beebs52 wrote: You're right. As I said who cares. Gotta watch Astros.
Well okay then, bless your heart anyway...Beebs52 wrote:No. Sadlya1mamacat wrote:Ahh, but I do it because I DO care. Now if you had gone after the Blackface/brownface sheit, we could have had some fun, or not because I think he should be smacked upside his head about it. All I was doing was explaining procedures that Bob asked about. Like me asking several years ago about how the electoral college works.Beebs52 wrote: Plus you do your own crud about the pres, conservatives, and whatever so, Deal.
Amen Sister!Beebs52 wrote:I have to watch Astros. But here's the thing. Don't know anyone who did any sort of blackface in the day. And I'm 67. Regardless, maybe he was drunk. Who knows. No one normal did that, but, we all did shit in the day. Thank god for no phones.
Bless all our hearts.a1mamacat wrote:Amen Sister!Beebs52 wrote:I have to watch Astros. But here's the thing. Don't know anyone who did any sort of blackface in the day. And I'm 67. Regardless, maybe he was drunk. Who knows. No one normal did that, but, we all did shit in the day. Thank god for no phones.
He was stupid and did stupid things. I know that I was on occasion, dressed in a fringed dress with pigtails, and facepaint, and am so glad that no photographic record remains.
I think he is on his last "mulligan" and any further revelations will see him ousted.
Remember she's a member of the "America First, we don't give a shit about the rest of the world party."a1mamacat wrote:So who pee'd in your Corn Flakes today? I know you get all hoity toity with the Bobs, but I don't recall doing anything to set you off?Beebs52 wrote:Botha1mamacat wrote:
You dissin me or Bob?