Canadian weirdness - Trudeau may not have to step down if he doesn't want to, even if he loses

Whelp, Canadians may be screwed next federal election..

Just watched this video, very well done if I might say so..



In it, it was pointed out something I didn't know...

If Trudeau loses, he doesn't have to resign... As long as he can form a minority with other parties that total more than the next highest party, he can keep on going..

Gawd... I hate politics sooo much.

The Tory party did a similar thing under Harper I believe. It’s not a totally new thing or necessarily a dictatorial power grab by Trudeau.

Minority governments happen from time to time in Parliamentary systems like Canada.

In fact you could say they happen in the US as well for all the times the President’s party doesn’t have a majority in Congress. Essentially it’s the same thing.

Nothing but corruption and contempt for the people , call me shocked.

a reply to: gspat

If Trudeau loses, he doesn't have to resign... As long as he can form a minority with other parties that total more than the next highest party, he can keep on going..

Coalition governments are quite common , there's a good chance the UK will have one next year with a Labour / Lib Dem coalition on the cards.

Our last coalition was in 2010 when the Conservatives teamed up with uneasy bed fellows the Lib Dems so they could take power from the Labour party and form a government , Benjamin Netanyahu relies on them to keep his hold on power but as his country shows they can be unstable and lead to fresh elections when they collapse.

a reply to: gortex

All uk elections return coalitions, the conservatives are an alliance of conservatives & liberal unionists, the libdems are liberals and social democrats, the labour party is labour and coop party.. the conservatives on their own would not be able to win an election as we see in scotland, ireland and wales where they stand alone..

as for framing the 2010 alliance as uneasy for the libdems, the main liberal party collapsed and split in 1923 to give labour their first taste in power after liberals dominating uk politics for the previous 100 years but the other half kept the tories in office for much of the last 100 years..

we are repeating 1923/24 shift with the imminent collapse of liberalism that'll wipe out the conservative party. the libdems at 11 seats represents to starmer what the dup did to May, ie a locked up parliament incapable of action with no one party getting a mandate to govern, or another party to be a real king maker.. the libdems mifght still be between 30 and 50 seats if they'd fought student truition than a referendum on PR,. cleansin g the party of all those who supported brexit has compounded issues for them..

Starmers sticking point to a clean sweep is he has not won over the liberal unionists as thatcher, blair and johnson did.. and joining the us Democrats intersectional culture war is risking what chances labour had of winning, indeed he risks either labour remaining a corbyn or a May like parties at this point..a situation that appears to be replicated in trudeau's canada..

there is still lots to play for with upto 50% of voters (UK) feeling politically homeless especially as labour look no different to the cons and the cons no different to labour.. those are big enough numbers to propel a breakthrough party into office as it did labour under ramsey macdonald in 1924.

the question is if those holding the purse strings to the next elections war chests decide to spend that to get a new coalition into office there is a chance for the SDP/Reform alliance who plan to fight all seats in the next election..

however we spin it whoever wins a coalition rules in Westminster.

a reply to: gspat

doesn't mean he'll be able to govern.. look at theresa may.. she relied on the dup to remain..

ironically she had a massive lead to lose and lose it she did..

it feels like we are at the 100 year pivot for liberalism where i loses meaning, momentum and moral high ground.

originally posted by: ancientlight
Nothing but corruption and contempt for the people , call me shocked.

Different countries have different systems, Canada’s isn’t even that unique in the grand scheme of things.

We’re talking about a hypothetical scenario from a YouTube video, that doesn’t necessarily translate to corruption and contempt, because it hasn’t happened.

If it did happen, I’m sure many would be upset. And if the shoe was on the other foot, I’d be willing to bet the same people complaining now would be fantasizing about that outcome and defending the possibility.

This is governance, which is implied imperfect because it’s human:

a reply to: gspat

We don't have that problem in the US. We only have one effective political party, it controls the elections and everything else at the Federal Level.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Just wanted to point out that it has already happened.

The current Liberal government is a minority with a coalition formed with the traitorous NDP's.

a reply to: MykeNukem

A bit different in that scenario though eh? His party still beat out the conservatives for amount of seats, they just didn’t get to the 170 mark to have a majority on their own.

For what it’s worth, he’s probably the worst leaders in the west, so I feel for ya, just had to point that out.

But that’s probably pretty common for multiparty nations, and even in the US with a two party country.

On a good day the republicans and democrats only have about 30% each. Independents make up about 40% on average but are at about 44% right now at high.