[Newsbot]

Filibuster Cartoons
Title: Doomed marriage (click to view)
Date: June 12, 2010
The Ottawa gossip mill has been in override this week over rumors of alleged merger talks between the Liberal Party and the NDP. With the two-party coalition government idea having failed so spectacularly in 2008, some insiders have apparently concluded that it would be more palatable to voters if Canada's two left-wing parties just merged outright, in a less ambiguous, permanent coalition. Strategically, it makes a lot of sense as well, with many lefties being aware that the merger of Canada's two right-wing parties in 2003 was a key turning point in Prime Minister Harper's rise to power.

Of course, other party insiders are saying this is just a lot of myopic nonsense, and that the Liberals and NDP are way too different to even contemplate merging. Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff denounced the idea quite theatrically the other day, calling it "completely ridiculous" and NDP Leader Jack Layton offered similarly dismissive comments.

The main reason for opposition to a merger among the Liberal/NDP party leadership — as opposed to the party rank and file, who are more open-minded on the proposal — seems to be more around party brand than ideology. The proud Liberal Party elites tend to think that their party is far too "historic" to be cheapened with a merger, while the NDP people worry about losing their party's anti-establishment "edge" by merging with the most pro-establishment party of all. In terms of actual governing philosophy, however, it's hard to argue that there would be any sort of significant policy disputes capable of derailing the marriage. After all, if the two were ready to form a coalition government a year and a half ago then clearly a lot of common ground exists.

By the way! I know a lot of you want to comment on cartoons, but don't want to go through all the bother of registering on the forum. Well now you can also comment on cartoons via Facebook, with the new Filibuster facebook group thing. Come join it! I'm trying desperately to get more than 100 fans so the other, cooler comics stop teasing me. http://www.facebook.com/FilibusterCartoons

[Psudo]

Pretty funny comic, although I find Jack Layton's chest to be a little disturbing.

It's kinda strange, as an American, to try to relate to this situation. Even if you ignore ideological differences, we just don't have a third party large enough to make any kind of merger relevant. Not to mention the third-party "Go ahead, throw your vote away!" mentality we foster.

It's funny that the NDP considers itself anti-establishment. A political party cannot be anti-establishment and win. If it wins, it is the establishment. It's kinda like a promise not to be successful.

Finally, I completely resent you giving me a valid reason to sign up for Facebook and Twitter and such. You're destroying my anti-establishment "edge!"

[JJ]

You totally should, Psudo. The comic already got seven comments on Facebook!

[ShepherdsDog]

That maniacal gleam in Jack's eye is getting brighter...too bad he isn't.

[Psudo]

I love Filibuster Cartoons. I hate Facebook. But do I love Filibuster more than I hate Facebook? That's a tough one... I'll have to sleep on it.

[Kjorteo]

I've been on Facebook for a while now, so this is a natural good thing for me.

[Quantum_Wizard]

Psudo wrote:

It's funny that the NDP considers itself anti-establishment. A political party cannot be anti-establishment and win. If it wins, it is the establishment. It's kinda like a promise not to be successful.

Maybe they are only anti-current-establishment. On the other hand, one could use that label for any political party not currently in power.

[Kjorteo]

I can certainly think of at least a few American Republicans who are acting like they would rather complain about the Government than govern.

[Psudo]

90%+ of any nation's citizenry would rather complain about the government than govern.

[CKASlacker]

Quantum_Wizard wrote:

Psudo wrote:

It's funny that the NDP considers itself anti-establishment. A political party cannot be anti-establishment and win. If it wins, it is the establishment. It's kinda like a promise not to be successful.

Maybe they are only anti-current-establishment. On the other hand, one could use that label for any political party not currently in power.

Bob Rae's NDP got elected in Ontario in 1990. His "joke" at the time was to pretend on his first day to walk across to the official opposition side of the floor, as opposed to the government, thereby implying that he (and his party) were more used to the anti-establishment rather than governing.

The NDP's term ended in unspectacular fashion, with the NDP losing the support in the end of their most stalwart backers, labour unions. Ontario in a provincial sense swung from left to right-wing with the election of Mike Harris and his Common Sense revolution in 1995.

While the NDP has been more successful in the Prairies, the Bob Rae government in Ontario is generally seen as a disaster -- I can't imagine them getting another chance to govern Canada's most populous province anytime soon, so maybe they are better on the "anti-establishment" side.

[Quantum_Wizard]

Psudo wrote:

90%+ of any nation's citizenry would rather complain about the government than govern.

But for politicians this is different, since their job is to govern.