Election Talk (5)

106 posts / 0 new
Last post
Life, the unive...

I predict that the Liberals will melt, (I just don't believe people will see Iggy and go- boy he sure represents me)  but in a lot of ridings outside of the GTA that will benefit the NDP, not the Conservatives.  You need to start looking big picture and past the Toronto-centric media.

thorin_bane

LOL I predict some people have been looking through orange coloured glasses. Even as an NDP supporter it is unlikely the libs will 'melt' Harper has to much mud this time and I just don't see canadians willing to give the NDP a test run. They will go back to comfy liberals or abstain. I doubt harper keeps the seats he has. 5 weeks from now people will see what a shit pile we have had for 5 years. Harper had no platform last time and this one looks thinner. I think the death of the liberals as some are predicting is far too soon. And I say this as a dipper. Sorry folks, it just ain't going to happen no matter how crap iggy is-unless he does something truly stupid on the campaign trail-  I mean really stupid. The con attack ads will backfire otherwise.

KenS

Boom Boom wrote:

Someone else said the Libs will dismiss the NDP as nobodies who can not form a government, the NDP will run to take seats from the Liberals, and the Cons will get their majority.

Sad.

People beleive the myths that are consistent with what they thought they knew.

Fact: the NDP is close in over twice as many seats where the main opponent is the Conservatives versus the main opponent being the Libs.

Now, how hard is it for the punditry to know that?

Jacob Two-Two

I agree, thorin. The Liberals won't excite anyone, but there'll still be plenty of people voting for them just to stop the Cons. I think they'll pick up a bit from the Dion debacle, and the Cons will drop a bit as swing voters get increasingly uncomfortable with them in the midst of non-stop attacks from the opposition.

Krago

KenS wrote:

Boom Boom wrote:

Someone else said the Libs will dismiss the NDP as nobodies who can not form a government, the NDP will run to take seats from the Liberals, and the Cons will get their majority.

Sad.
People beleive the myths that are consistent with what they thought they knew.
Fact: the NDP is close in over twice as many seats where the main opponent is the Conservatives versus the main opponent being the Libs.
Now, how hard is it for the punditry to know that?

NDP margin of loss (2008 election plus by-elections):

  • Under 5% - 6 seats - Cons (4), Lib (1), BQ (1)
  • Under 10% - 12 seats - Cons (6), Lib (5), BQ (1)
  • Under 15% - 21 seats - Cons (10), Lib (10), BQ (1)
  • Under 20% - 32 seats - Cons (16), Lib (14), BQ (2)

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Still don't know exactly when the government will fall. Could be Thursday night or Friday at the earliest.

NorthReport

Thanks Krago - and it looks quite promising for the NDP.

Rob8305

I'm hoping for an election on my birthday, May 9th. Harper losing power would be the best present ever. Incidentally, my Canucks will be playing playoff hockey that night too, Wonder if the CBC will toss election night coverage over board for the playoffs. Haha.

NorthReport

Cullen says government could fall by Friday

 

http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/118474799.html

David Young

Looks like I planned right when I booked a week's vacation off the week of March 28th to April 1st.

I'll be canvassing with South Shore-St. Margaret's NDP candidate Gordon Earle, and getting ready to make history by electing the first-ever New Democrat in S.S.S.M.!

Bring it on!!

 

Life, the unive...

thorin_bane wrote:

LOL I predict some people have been looking through orange coloured glasses. Even as an NDP supporter it is unlikely the libs will 'melt' Harper has to much mud this time and I just don't see canadians willing to give the NDP a test run. They will go back to comfy liberals or abstain. I doubt harper keeps the seats he has. 5 weeks from now people will see what a shit pile we have had for 5 years. Harper had no platform last time and this one looks thinner. I think the death of the liberals as some are predicting is far too soon. And I say this as a dipper. Sorry folks, it just ain't going to happen no matter how crap iggy is-unless he does something truly stupid on the campaign trail-  I mean really stupid. The con attack ads will backfire otherwise.

melt is not destroyed.  For the Liberals a melt would be 10ish seats.    That is well within possibility

And for the record I am not a New Democrat - although I am strongly supporting my local candidate because he is the kind of person we need in the House and will also be the campaign working hard to defeat the Conservatives while the local Liberal will be playing defense the whole time.

NorthReport

Quote:
Tory 'fig leaf' veiled attempt to 'force' election," NDP contends

 

The Conservatives knew exactly what they were doing when they offered a "fig leaf" they knew fell far short of what the NDP was asking for, the party's finance critic said Tuesday, adding the government is trying to "force an election."

 

About 10 minutes into Tuesday's budget lock-up, Tory MP Ted Menzies - the parliamentary secretary to Finance Minister Jim Flaherty - tried to lobby NDP finance critic Thomas Mulcair with a laundry list of goodies, something party staffers say is extremely unusual on budget day.

 

In an interview, Mulcair said an enthusiastic Menzies highlighted a number of items he thought would be "of interest" to the New Democrats but kept adding, as if "forced" to do so, that the budget wasn't open to amendments.

 

Mulcair said that the attempt fell short, arguing that the budget contained nothing about the Canada Pension Plan, inadequate support for health care and a Guaranteed Income Supplement improvement less than half the $700 million the NDP sought to ensure no senior fell below the poverty line.

 

"This is the same Stephen Harper who has never accepted that he has a minority mandate, that he was called upon to work with the other parties," he said.

 

"It's always the same Stephen Harper," added Mulcair. "My way or the highway. Well guess what? Now we get to show him the highway."

 

The lone opposition party that can claim it's never supported a Harper budget had insisted it was prepared to do that had there been better support for seniors, health care and retirees.

 

 

http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/Tory+leaf+veiled+attempt+force+election+contends/4486520/story.html [/quote]

Centrist

Just got my first ever polling call. Computerized. Took 10 seconds.... "Which party would you vote for if a federal election called today". Press 1 for Liberal, Press 2 for Con....... So I pressed 5 for BQ. Tongue out They identified themselves as Clearview Research. Never heard of 'em before.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Are you in Quebec?  I'd love to see the pollster's face if he called from Ontario and you stated you support the BQ. I'd love to mess with pollsters.Laughing

Rob8305

Boom Boom wrote:

Are you in Quebec?  I'd love to see the pollster's face if he called from Ontario and you stated you support the BQ. I'd love to mess with pollsters.Laughing

Wouldn't yoou want to help contribute to getting accurate poll data out there though that way we don't panic over polls that are flawed anyway.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Polls are for dogs to pee on.

NorthReport

Hummm.....

 

US firm

 

http://www.clearviewresearch.com/

 

Centrist wrote:

Just got my first ever polling call. Computerized. Took 10 seconds.... "Which party would you vote for if a federal election called today". Press 1 for Liberal, Press 2 for Con....... So I pressed 5 for BQ. Tongue out They identified themselves as Clearview Research. Never heard of 'em before.

takeitslowly

 

none of the parties seem to care about the underemployed.. yes, help old people, and students, but what about people who just need a fucking full time job? as usual, no help for us.

 

thats why people dont vote, cuz none of that tax , home renovation , retirement shit matter to the people whose only concerns right now is a full time stable job so we can pay our bills. Second career program? havent even gotten my first one.  Not voting!

Rob8305

I was polled by Ekos/CBC tonight but wasn't home for the call. Too bad-Would have loved to have answered. They are giving away $500 to a lucky winner among their respondents pool. So, they will have a major poll out soon for sure. It was an automated poll.

NorthReport

For Layton, Conservative concessions didn't add up

 

Hours before he made a fateful decision that is destined to plunge Canada into an election, Jack Layton made a crucial phone call.

Sitting in his sixth-floor Parliament Hill office with chief of staff Anne McGrath, the NDP Leader called his key advisers to ensure they could be ready to embark on an election campaign in 24 hours.

 

---------------- 

Mr. Mulcair suggested the paucity of money for seniors was what clinched it for the NDP, comparing the money the Tories had committed in previous budgets for business tax cuts to what was delivered for older Canadians Tuesday.

"To see they had $10 for corporate tax reductions for every $1 they had for seniors ... there are still going to be hundreds of thousands of seniors in one of the richest countries in the world living below the poverty line, that's inadmissible as far as we're concerned," Mr. Mulcair said.

 

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/for-layton-conservative-con...

NorthReport

I'm appalled by Ken Georgetti's brain-dead behaviour today. He needs to go ASAP.
 
 

Quote:
 
Canadian Labour Congress's Ken Georgetti urged parties to consider budget carefully. He called the increase in the Guaranteed Income Supplement is a "win for every senior."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/03/22/pol-budget-reax.html

Rob8305

What are the things to watch for early in the campaign btw to tell whether or not Harper is racing towards a majority or either the Libs/NDP are having a breakout performance.  How will we know?

Lens Solution

Rob8305 wrote:

What are the things to watch for early in the campaign btw to tell whether or not Harper is racing towards a majority or either the Libs/NDP are having a breakout performance.  How will we know?

Well, probably from the polling data and the sense of who has the momentum during the first couple of weeks.  It's important to start strong, but sometimes things can change. 

In 2008, Harper seemed to have a good start to the campaign and appeared to be heading towards a majority and then part-way through he made the nasty comments about artists and it changed the whole campaign.  His numbers in Quebec collapsed and what could have been a majority became a minority.

JKR

NorthReport wrote:

Quote:

"This is the same Stephen Harper who has never accepted that he has a minority mandate, that he was called upon to work with the other parties," he said.

"It's always the same Stephen Harper," added Mulcair. "My way or the highway. Well guess what? Now we get to show him the highway."

http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/Tory+leaf+veiled+attempt+force+election+contends/4486520/story.html [/quote]

 

Watching the news on tv tonight it occurred to me that after years of getting bullied by Harper, a lot of politicians hate Harper personally. There's been a lot of hard hitting politics in the past but Chretien and Manning were civil to each other, and so were Broadbent, Mulroney and Turner, and also, Trudeau, Clark, and Broadbent. You'd have to go way back to the days of Diefenbaker to find anything resembling the current visceral hatred between a PM and the opposition and I don't think the level of animosity when Dief was PM was anywhere near as bad as it is now.

This sentiment that Harper is genetically incapable of working with others was echoed over and over again by a lot of politicians I saw on tv this evening, including Layton, Ignatieff, Duceppe, Libby Davies, etc.... Someone described Harper as being "pathologically partisan."

If people start getting an idea how Harper pathologically bullies others, this election could see the Conservatives lose a lot of support.

NorthReport

What if we ended up after this coming election with the same situation as we have today in Parliament. Does that mean Harper automatically gets first kick at the can again or could a united opposition moving quickly after the election do something to prevent that.

 

A little history lesson is good once in a while to remind of us who actually did what and who we can trust and who we cannot trust. It's quite an informative read, with lots of the specific details on the website.

 

2008-2009 Canadian parliamentary dispute

 

The 2008-2009 Canadian parliamentary dispute was a political dispute in the 40th Canadian Parliament. It was triggered by the expressed intention of the opposition parties in the House of Commons to defeat, by a motion of non-confidence, the minority government formed by the Conservative Party six weeks earlier, following the 40th general election on October 14, 2008.

The intention to vote non-confidence arose from the government's fiscal update, which was presented to the Commons on November 27, 2008. It included several provisions that were rejected by the opposition parties. Though the government later withdrew several contentious elements, the Liberal Party and New Democratic Party reached an accord to form a minority coalition government, with the Bloc Québécois agreeing to provide support on confidence issues and, therefore, enabling a majority in the Commons. On December 4, 2008, Governor General Michaëlle Jean (the viceregal representative of Queen Elizabeth II, the country's head of state) granted the request of Prime Minister Stephen Harper (the head of government) to prorogue parliament until January 26, 2009, ending the first session of the 40th parliament and thereby delaying a possible change in government.[1]

After the prorogation, the Liberals underwent a change in leadership and distanced themselves from the coalition, while the NDP and Bloc remained committed to the agreement to bring down the government. The Conservative government's budget, unveiled on January 27, 2009, largely met the demands of the Liberals who agreed to support it with an amendment to the budget motion.[2]

---------------------

Liberal party reaction

After the Governor General prorogued parliament, there were questions within the Liberal Party regarding the future of Dion's leadership and the coalition. In a caucus meeting held the same day of the prorogation, Dion was criticized for sacrificing the party's federalist principles; for disallowing dissent once the coalition accord was presented to caucus; and for the amateur, out-of-focus video of his address to the nation which undermined public support for the coalition.[95][96] Former deputy prime minister John Manley asked that Dion resign immediately, saying it was incomprehensible that the public would accept Dion as prime minister after rejecting him a few weeks earlier in the general election. Manley also said that a leader was needed "whose first job is to rebuild the Liberal party rather than leading a coalition with the NDP."

Michael Ignatieff
Bob Rae

Michael Ignatieff
Bob Rae

Several other insiders advocated moving up the date of the party leadership vote, rather than have Dion remain leader for either a potential election or coalition, while leadership contenders Michael Ignatieff and Bob Rae both agreed that Dion had to quit immediately.[94] Dion initially scheduled his resignation for the party's leadership convention in May 2009, but on December 8, 2008, he announced that he would step down upon the selection of his successor.[97]

Bob Rae, who helped to persuade the Liberal caucus of the power-sharing deal,[98] took over as the coalition's spokesman and planned to travel throughout the country to promote the coalition. By contrast, Michael Ignatieff, the frontrunner to succeed Dion, was said to be uncomfortable with the idea of sharing power with the NDP and receiving committed support from the Bloc Québécois. Ignatieff said that there would be a "coalition if necessary, but not necessarily a coalition," noting that the coalition served a useful purpose by keeping the Conservatives in check,[99] but warned that the Liberals should look over the budget before deciding.[100][101][102][103] After the withdrawal of his two rivals,[104][105] Ignatieff was left as the sole declared leadership candidate, so he was appointed interim leader, and his position was ratified at the May 2009 convention.[106]

[edit] Resolution

On December 12, Ignatieff met with Harper to discuss the budget, with their spokesmen describing it as a "cordial" meeting.[107] Layton and Duceppe remained committed to ousting the Harper government,[108][109] pledging that the NDP would vote against the Conservative budget regardless of what it contained.[110] Layton urged Ignatieff's Liberals to topple the Conservatives before the shelf life of the coalition expired; constitutional experts said that four months after the last election, if the government fell, the Governor General would likely grant the Prime Minister's request to dissolve parliament instead of inviting the coalition.[111]

On January 28, 2009, the Liberals agreed to support the budget as long as it included regular accountability reports, and the Conservatives accepted this amendment. This ended the possibility of the coalition, so Layton said "Today we have learned that you can't trust Mr. Ignatieff to oppose Mr. Harper. If you oppose Mr. Harper and you want a new government, I urge you to support the NDP."

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932009_Canadian_parliamentary_di...

Lens Solution

Even the Calgary Herald is willing to offer some criticism of Harper:

 

Editorial: Harper is in danger of squandering greatness

 

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Editorial+Harper+danger+squandering+gr...

NorthReport

The NDP has never voted to support a Harper budget

 

Why a defeated budget helps Harper's hunt for a majority

 

There is another scenario, in which the Liberals gain enough seats to come within spitting distance - which is what they would be tempted to do - of the Conservatives. In that case, the swift defeat of a Harper government on its Throne Speech - no proroguing allowed in that situation - could see Mr. Ignatieff become prime minister, supported either formally or informally by the NDP.

In that instance, Mr. Layton would hold more influence over the governing agenda than any NDP leader since David Lewis, who kept Pierre Trudeau's Liberal government alive from 1972 to 1974. The NDP could even become part of a coalition government.

The Conservatives will invoke the C-word endlessly; the Liberals will flee from it; Mr. Layton will offer his trademark coy smile.

But other than some kind of clear Conservative victory, a coalition is as likely a scenario as any other.

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/john-ibbitson/why-a-defeate...

Hurtin Albertan

Well, with any luck Harper will cost the Cons another chance at a majority gov't with some ill thought out statement about halfway through the election campaign.

Fidel

The conservatives don't really enjoy minority rule. It's not their style to compromise and work with other parties. IOW's, democracy is not their way. Dictatorial rule is what they want with a false majority and are willing to take a gamble that the phony majority machine will churn one out for them. And stranger things have happened with our wonky, obsolete and mathematically absurd electoral system in the past for sure. They are tired of all the hard work since 2006 with actually having to consider what the other parties have to say in Parliament. I think the ReformaTories are done. Hard work is not what they are good at.

JKR

NorthReport wrote:

What if we ended up after this coming election with the same situation as we have today in Parliament. Does that mean Harper automatically gets first kick at the can again or could a united opposition moving quickly after the election do something to prevent that.

As the ongoing Prime Minister, Harper would have the right to present a Throne Speech to Parliament.

However, in practice, if leaders of opposition parties get together and negotiate a deal that has the backing of a majority of the House of Commons, Harper would have to immediately submit his resignation to the Governor General.

The lesson from '08 is - once a government passes their Throne Speech, they have the confidence of the House. Once a government passes their Throne Speech the public perceives them as their rightful government that has taken their rightful position via a democratic election.

The parties should understand that their window of opportunity to replace the government is the period between the election and the passing of the Throne Speech. They should understand that once they pass the Government's Throne Speech the government can then only be replaced through another election. Trying to do otherwise is too contentious. That's why the attempt to replace Harper in '08 failed. It was not seen as being a legitimate change of power by most Canadians.

In most countries a party is not given a blank cheque if they don't have a majority. In most countries, when no party wins a majority, the parties engage in post-election negotiations to ensure that the new government has sufficient support to ensure stable government. That didn't happen in November '08 and because of that Canada has experienced the most unstable and illegitimate government in its history. Never has a minority government been held together for years and years on the basis of preventing an unwanted election that could deliver a false FPTP majority to the government. (If we had PR/fair voting there's no way a Prime Minister like Harper could bully the opposition through the fear of giving the bullying government a false FPTP majority via public anger over an unwanted election).

I'm sure the politicians will not be stupid enough to return to this preverse state of affairs. One way or another, the next government will have the formal backing of the majority of MP's in the House of Commons. And because Harper has burnt all his bridges, if he cannot get a majority, he's out.

NorthReport

One thing I'll say about Layton is that he can spot bullshit like the budget proposal today a mile away.
Good on Jack to wait until it was actually presented in the House before forcefully stomping on it.

NDPP

MPs Accepted 99 Lobbyist Paid International Trips Last Year

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/accepted+lobbyist+paid+international+t...

"MPs accepted more all-expenses paid trips to Taiwan and Israel than any other destination last year...Democracy Watch Co-ordinater Duff Conacher said MPs who accept these trips 'taint' all parliamentarians. 'These are propaganda trips where one private interest group is trying to change the minds of MPs by giving them a huge gift as part of their influence peddling,' he said.

NDP MP Paul Dewar accepted $23,082 in travel fares to give a speech at an international forum on development in Doha. The sponsored travel list shows the Canada - Israel Committee took 11 MPs to Israel last year..."

and in exchange for your generosity Israel,  you can starve those Gaza bastards, steal their land, lock em up, smash their homes,  bomb the shit out of them and we won't say a word, vote against you or allow BDS at our Universities...Shalom!

NorthReport

That is your interpretation however I beg to differ. Read this article and it clearly shows Ignatieff, with a little help from John Manley, is the reason we do not have a coalition government today.

And the polling that took place at that time is well documented as well.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932009_Canadian_parliamentary_di...

JKR wrote:

The lesson from '08 is - once a government passes their Throne Speech, they have the confidence of the House. Once a government passes their Throne Speech the public perceives them as their rightful government that has taken their rightful position via a democratic election.

The parties should understand that their window of opportunity to replace the government is the period between the election and the passing of the Throne Speech. They should understand that once they pass the Government's Throne Speech the government can then only be replaced through another election. Trying to do otherwise is too contentious. That's why the attempt to replace Harper in '08 failed. It was not seen as being a legitimate change of power by most Canadians.

Lens Solution

Disgusting Conservative attack piece by John Ivison.  This time he has really outdone himself:

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/03/22/john-ivison-to-jack-layton-from-...

Slumberjack

wage zombie wrote:
I wouldn't have pegged you as someone who pays much attention to serious contenders.

I would, if there were.  You believe Jack Layton is a serious contender to the status quo?

Slumberjack

N.Beltov wrote:

Slumberjack wrote:
The term 'communist' has never recovered from the days of Stalin and Mao.  The systems they controlled were nothing more than one of forms that capitalism takes.

Actually, false.

That is useful to remember when faced with the typical kneejerk and pathological anti-communism ... the purpose of which seems to be to silence communist-like ideas during election time.

Dictatorial and genocidal rule is a legitimate form of communism?  And when it was all said and done in the Russian context, the oligarchy took private control of what it had already controlled supposedly in the name of the people.  China is far down that path as well.  As to the last part... it deserves at least a chuckle.

Stockholm

Lens Solution wrote:

Disgusting Conservative attack piece by John Ivison.  This time he has really outdone himself:

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/03/22/john-ivison-to-jack-layton-from-...

 

Don't be too hard on Ivison, the poor guy was so sure there would be no election that he apparently booked and paid for a very expensive non-refundable golf holiday in Scotland in April. Now, thanks to Jack, he has to cancel.

Hell hath no wrath like a pundit proved wrong!

NorthReport
N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Less so yourself, Slumberjack, but we have plenty of comments from regular babblers the point of which seems to be to silence views on the left. The fact that election time is precisely when as wide a range of views ought to be debated is lost on such people. It's a habitual and tiresome refrain and is worth ridiculing here on THIS left wing website at least ... for obvious reasons. 

I can understand why you might have no sympathy to such a point of view.

Slumberjack

There's several lines of thought that could potentially make their presence known here NB.  These include the standard right wing analysis of course, the typical factional discourse of the left, and then there is one which suggests that a leftist/socialist type movement that spends most of its time reconciling itself to center and center right sensitivities is not really a movement of the left at all, because it has had to abandon so many people along the way to state its case.

NorthReport

Waiting for Harper to speak, & Layton will be after

 

Laughing

 

kady: I feel like we've been cheated out of a half day of speculating wildly over what the NDP will do. #hw [via Twitter]

KenS

[1] Speaking to empirical facts, the NDP, or social democratic parties in general, have not abandoned their consituencies.

[2] The 'abandoned' are actually those leftward. And more precisely, they feel abandoned.

[3] The abandoned referr incessantly to how the NDP has gone downhill, and how it at least used to be better. But they did not like the NDP then any better.

KenS

Then there is the questions of whether said reconciling to the centre exists.

Question:

"People abandoned along the way" is alleged to be 'the people being spoken for,' the 'constituencies' or however exactly you want to characterise it.

But the actual concrete fact of 'abandonment' is entirely on lines of ideological orientation. Whatever the problems of identifying 'left', we know there is more left and less left.... whether or not we can precisely identify the lines. And the people being 'abanodoned' or feeling left behind at any rate, are the more leftward.

There is a consensus agreement that the whole spectrum- including social democratic parties- has shifted to the right. Despite significant disagrrement of what was really going on in those earlier days, there is enough agreement that the NDP for example has scaled back what it advocates.

So the question is: back in the good old days, or at least the better ones, were there any fewer leftward people decrying how pathetically anemic the NDP was for what it offered?

Life, the unive...

They would and did say the exact same things about JS Woodsworth, Tommy Douglas, David Lewis.  Its all there in the history if you look.

Slumberjack

So it has been going downhill for some time then, and we've finally reached the bottom?

NorthReport

Have the Liberals written off Brampton-Springdale?

 

 

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/958802--ruby-dhalla-s-family-seeks-t...

NorthReport

Absolute BS.

 

The reason it was not in the budget is that Harper wants to use it during the election campaign. It's a done deal.

 

Deal on tax compensation unlikely for Quebec during election: Tories

 

 

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/breakingnews/charest-says-quebec...

Lens Solution

Stockholm wrote:

Lens Solution wrote:

Disgusting Conservative attack piece by John Ivison.  This time he has really outdone himself:

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/03/22/john-ivison-to-jack-layton-from-...

 

Don't be too hard on Ivison, the poor guy was so sure there would be no election that he apparently booked and paid for a very expensive non-refundable golf holiday in Scotland in April. Now, thanks to Jack, he has to cancel.

Hell hath no wrath like a pundit proved wrong!

The guy isn't even pretending to be objective anymore.  It's obvious he's a Con supporter.  And he describes the NDP as having an "irrational hatred" of the Conservatives and goes on to predict that the NDP will lose a lot of seats in this election.

JKR

Harper likely does not want to be seen giving a huge multi billion dollar gift to Quebec in the middle of an election. He probably does not want to take the chance of losing many seats in places like Ontario, BC, the Atlantic region and the Prairies in order to protect a few seats in Quebec.

If the Reform party were still around, they'd be busy making ads with Harper and his Quebec MP's wearing Quebec Nordiques jerseys.

KenS

The abandoned saw themeselves at the bottom.

But then things got worse.

See thread on time travel. Stop the machine anywhere in the last half century, and that is something you can count on being the same.

Pages

Topic locked