Would you support efforts to merge the Liberal party with the NDP?


Filed under:

Would you support efforts to merge the Liberal party with the NDP?

  1. Where’s the “No, and I don’t plan to vote for either?”

  2. I prefer “No, because I want the Conservatives to keep winning.”

  3. The certainly needed more options here. What if you want, or don’t want, them to get together, but vote for neither.
    That is why it seems like only 30% of people are conservative. I voted for one of the other options, even though I will vote neither Liberal or NDP.

  4. So we’re looking at a dedicated 35% for an amalgamated ‘left’ against a 30% dedicated right. 

    I can’t see any of the dedicated NDP going Conservative so that’s 53% left. 

    And the conservatives are not going to get all of the dedicated 17% Liberals. Let’s be really generous and give them 10%. I can’t see many Liberals voting for Harper.

    So we have a 63+% vote for an amalgamated not-Harper.

    And 30-something % is what Harper’s ruling the country with right now. 

    Canada is strongly to the left of Harper, and the vanity, pride, or whatever of the Liberals in refusing to join with the NDP is what’s put us on this slippery slope to Texas North.

    • Keep dreaming. No serious observer thinks that a united party would have the sum total support of both, let alone more. And if Harper is so hated by a vast majority, how’d he get more than 30% popular support last time?

      • Please re-read my post and work on your arithmetic.

        • Please understand your math is basically ridiculous.

          63%+ of the country will not vote for a single party. This may be hard to believe, but outside the echo chamber, a lot of people who didn’t vote Conservative and never will don’t actually loathe Harper so much they’ll be willing to vote for a single merged party.

          (Besides, any merger loses a third of the NDP to the Greens, or possibly the United Peoples’ Judean Front.)

          • Or is it the United Judean Peoples’ Front

      • That is the point, Harper and the AMALGAMATED Right/Extreme-Right (Conservatives = Progressive-Conservatives & Reform & Alliance parties) only received 30% popular suport. These “Conservative” parties (which were idealogically quite different from each other) were nearly wiped out, until they saw the need to “amalgamate” for the purpose of defeating the fractured majority.
        A vast MAJORITY of Canadians (70%) are AGAINST the RIGHT.
        Unfortunately these 70% of Canadians split their vote between different Centre and Centre-Left parties, thereby allowing a minority to grasp control excert their will over the majority.
        What worked for a divided Right with 30% will certainly work for a divided Centre with 70%.
        Loose a few Liberals, loose a few Democrats (add some Greens!), and you would still end up with twice  the popular support of the Canadian people that the “amalgamated” Right & Extreme-Right now have.
        A united Centre/Centre-Left would instantly become a large majority government.

        • Harper received 39.6% of the vote with a divided opposition.

          When people were polled in May on whether they were satisfied with a Harper majority or not, they preferred the Harper majority 46-41 — that reflects the mood of blue Liberals, etc.

          Uniting the centre-left makes sense for y’all, simply because, to paraphrase MacKay and Harper in 2003 when they united the right, your swords will be pointed at the Conservatives now, and not each other.  But you won’t walk into a large majority — you’ll have one side of two in a closely divided country.  A fighting chance, not a guaranteed win.

          I don’t think you’re quite ready to merge — whenever I tease my Dipper friends about it, they fulminate about creating a new Waffle — but the time for it will come.

  5. More retarded polls.  How about an article on how political parties are terrible?  If you believe in representative democracy you should HATE the idea of political parties.  Mind you most people don’t even how to spell oligarchy let alone know what it means.

    • Most people have no idea about the specifics of politics, just like no one knows the specifics about warehousing, or electronics. People look for brands to banner under, and so it is as well with political parties.

      if for example you were to go to a foreign nation, say in asia, and you were unfamiliar with food and health systems there, would you eat at a local eatery run by locals with local regulations (which are unknown to you) or would you hit up the McDonalds, fully knowing they have international standards which are more like what you have at home?
      You may not like McDonalds, and it probably isn’t your first choice, but its a better choice than possibly spending your vacation next to a toilet.

  6. The trouble with a two-party system, as the US has demonstrated, is that it’s really a one-party system in disguise — a system where both parties fight over the highest-donating constituencies, effecitvely rendering them almost indistinguishable from one another and ensuring only a small segment of the population has a voice.. 

    Anybody who cares about health care, pensions, the environment, and other things that make Canada livable should oppose any effort to render impotent the left by merging them with the centre.  The strength of the NDP for decades was that it put promoting progressive change ahead of getting into power.  The popularity of their proposals, like healthcare, forced the hands of the government in power to make them happen.  If the NDP slides to the centre, let’s hope another party rises up to take over its position on the left or we’re in deep doo doo.

    • many many Liberals have the same plat.forms as the NDP
      but in previous elections voted Liberal because they had a better chance to govern
      In the last election we changed our vote and we won’t go back to being Liberals. The party is toast, burnt toast.
      Too many o;d boys in the party lost us

  7. It appears I’m not the only one with this feedback, but where is the “I support another party” or “I don’t support socialists” option? Talk about skewing your poll…

    • what’s a socialist and …what’s a nonsocialist?

      • try a dictionary or an encyclopedia if you have trouble with English

        • i don’t support capitalists and cons

        • We fully know the definition of Socialist, what the problem seems to be, is that many have a demonized view of socialism.

          What society large usually preaches is that socialism is communism, this is not true. That socialism is dictatorial, this is also not true.Socialism is a separate system within our own capitalist system.

          Capitalism, is how we reward those in our system for their ingenuity, hard work, and trust.

          Socialism is how we reward society as a whole for the ingenuity and hard work of our whole society, recognizing that those at the top cannot exist without those at the bottom.

          Parliament is how we govern and use our system, in the name of the population at large.

          So there you go, figure it out.

          • Many have a negative view of socialism for good reason, not because it is communism, not because it is dictatorial, but because it is wrong, and it is detrimental to society.   Handing over free money is not a reward.  Confiscating that money from others is not a virtue.  Socialism corrodes society. Charity is a virtue, socialism is not. Welfare is not detrimental, but socialism is, as exemplified by Canada’s socialist health system that will eventually collapse.

  8. Where is the “No I would like the NDP to stay the NDP, because they make an excellent opposition and choice is a good thing?”
    What good would merging the NDP with the Librals bring about? The NDP makes an excellent opposition, that is their strongest position. They keep social justice matters at the forefront of the discussion. They are excellent “devils advocates”. The problem with the Librals is that they became to much like the Conservatives over the years.
    With polls as senseless as this one, why not ask “Do you think we should scrap all of the parties, merge them into one by party and call them the “Walmart politics party”?

  9. I’d’ve voted for “Yes, because I support a rationalized two-party system, but I don’t vote for either.”

    Alternatively, “No, because more infighting on the left amuses me.”

    • I like plurality. It is nice to have the Green Party or Natural Law Party to get a few seats just to shake everything up.

  10. NO..
    I think we should keep the left splitting the vote…
    I guess they take it for granted that Maclean’s readers are all Liberals or NDP
    or there would be a:
    NO I’ll just keep voting Conservative

  11. When the powers that be in Quebec threw the Bloc under the bus six months before the election and  called in Jack Layton for a chat, anybody with a lick of sense would know the fix was in. Obvious answer is to make Bob Rae the new leader of both parties and he can then oversee the merger. 

  12. It will never happen, the Liberals are too proud and will be gone within a few elections. The remaining voters will go to the cons or NDP.

  13. Looks like we are going to have three parties on the left instead of two. Great fun!

  14. Or four parties if you count the Greenies . . .

  15. These poll results highlight how this is takeover attempt by the Liberals, supported by most Liberals and a few so-called NDP members. The Liberals represent corporatist fascism just like the Conservatives, don’t let them take over the NDP. We need representation for the people, not for multinational corporations. 

  16. No, I don’t think merging would be a good idea.  Each party has different viewpoints and beliefs.

Sign in to comment.