The point remains that you supported a non-centrist right winger, Stephen Harper, when you didn't like who was leading the Liberal party.
I am one of those rarely people who does not have a pavlovian response to a ballot and will actually consider all the platforms and vote for what I think is best for my community and my country.
Last time around, I considered Dion's Green Shift to be a dangerous proposal while the economy sat at the precipice of the recession....particularly given the fact that he was still trying to meet the Kyoto deadlines. I considered that to be far too onerous a proposal for our economy so I voted for Harper.
This time around, I am impressed by Ignatieff's poise and his intellect. I will wait for his platform. But thus far, his proposal on EI, his willingess to admit that taxes might have to go up, etc. all seem to point to a pragmatic man I could vote for. And despite the adds, I consider his 34 years outside Canada to be an asset. I am sick of politicians who have no perspective of what life's like outside Canada and who have no clue about what Canada's presence really is on the world stage. For once in 20 years, I'll be glad to have a Liberal leader decently experienced with issues of foreign policy, defence, human rights, etc.
Yet when I throw some ideas onto the discussion table you say I don't understand what I'm talking about?
You gave a rather superficial unite-the-left (or something to that effect) suggestion that poorly reflects the history and current political realities of this country. I critiqued it.
I still think the coalition idea is the best way to unite the left and centre-left and show Canada they can seriously govern while retaining separate party identities with slightly different philosophies.
We don't need formal coalitions which could do great damage to the Liberal brand. Pearson proved you can do a lot in a minority without a coalition.
Edit: I think it was interesting that you and hydrogen chose to react to my comments line-by-line, basically saying that I'm just ignorant and unknowing of the Canadian system, instead of making your own statements. I'm proud to engage in discussion with new ideas, and I was flattered that yet again people chose to take my comments on line-by-line in a reactionary way instead of giving their own opinion. It kind of solidifies my belief that the left and centre-left in Canada needs some fresh ideas.
1) That's just the way I prefer to respond to specific questions. Don't read anything into it.
2) Don't flatter yourself. Your ideas aren't new. We've thought of them before and our politicians and philosophers have been debating these and many other ideas since the inception of this country.
3) We aren't backwater hicks who need lessons from refugees of the great 2-party democracy to the south. And that too from practitioners of a system which at its core allows very little compromise...all executive power vested in one man. Now if you were coming from one of those countries notorious for coalitions in Europe or Asia, you might have some "fresh ideas".
I find it more than amusing that someone who backed Harper in the last election against the Liberals is sitting here telling me they understand what is the death of the Liberal party, or that Canada has some secret NDP silent majority that will magically come out because a coalition is forged.
Its downright hilarious! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
When your done LOLOLOLing, why don't you tell us how a formal alliance with the NDP will help the Liberal party get more votes?