i really don't think this is likely. but, let's suppose it happens. and, let's even look at existing numbers that (i think naively) suggest harper gets around 130 seats, the ndp around 120 seats and the liberals with almost all of the rest of them.
trudeau has recently indicated that the liberal party will only whip it's votes under three circumstances. the first is planks in the party platform, presuming they win (which is now unlikely). the second is confidence issues. the third is charter issues.
confidence issues would include a speech from the throne. but, it's stipulated that this applies to a liberal government.
now, it may be sort of silly to go pouring over a liberal election promise and looking for loopholes that they could use to get out of it without technically breaking it. but, the broad idea here is that trudeau has committed to open votes as a part of his campaign. and, he's likely to be keen to demonstrate that he means it.
i think that this is the way out of this: trudeau will allow a free vote on the throne speech. well, a "free vote". there'll be just enough so it passes.
propping up the ndp would be strategic suicide for the liberals. this will NOT happen. and, people planning on voting for the liberals thinking it will should think again.
http://ipolitics.ca/2015/08/17/a-harper-minority-would-have-options-all-of-them-terrible/
Kendall
But both Mulcair and Justin have rejected a coalition government and that should be the signal for leftist Red Grit Liberals to vote NDP .... and the Blue Grit Liberals to vote Conservative to Stop Mulcair .....
deathtokoalas
that's not how either voting bloc thinks. people don't vote based on fear. that's the conservative talking point. right-leaning liberals vote liberal because they're not conservatives. and left-leaning liberals, however rare they may be nowadays, have specific reasons that they don't vote for the ndp.
here's an example.
suppose you're a gay dude making 500,000/year in a gta suburb. you're about as liberal as you can get on social issues - do as you wish, harm none. you're into science-based policy, 'cause you're smart. you're an atheist. but you're also a fiscal conservative, and you think you're overtaxed.
this is what a right-leaning liberal looks like. they're liberals on everything except taxes. and, in a pinch, they're probably more likely to vote for mulcair than harper - and may even be tempted to by mulcair promising to not raise their taxes.
the swing on the right is a red tory swing, and almost always swing towards the liberals rather than away from it. that's why the liberals were in power for the entirety of the last century and the conservatives weren't.
the other side of the spectrum is a little more fluid, because those stark defining points don't exist.
but, the fact is that harper walked into his job as conservative party leader with 38%. he hasn't bested it. he's not going to swing right-leaning liberals. he hasn't, yet. he won't in the future....
conversely, trudeau's red tory shtick may very well be tory enough to break through the harper fatigue and cut deeper into the conservative base than we've seen in a while. that's their strategy. the problem is that it's mathematically and strategically stupid, because it's just going to sweep mulcair in on the other side.
so, i need to be clear: i think the liberals will best their 2011 numbers by a good margin. but, it will be at a 10 point loss to the ndp and a 15 pick up from the conservatives - which will put them second place across the country, and win them almost no seats.
i think the results will look something like this:
ndp: ~37% - majority
conservatives: ~30% - opposition
liberals: ~27% - lose party status
nobody ever said that fptp was fair.
it'll be a while before i state that with any conviction, though.
a 2% swing would be dramatic.