Kageshima

That's wrong to assume. Many parts of BC, Manitoba, and Ontario are pretty conservative. Alberta is very conservative. The provincial NDP won because they had a good campaign, voters were frustrated at the PCs, and the vote of the Right was split between the Wildrose and the Progressive Conservatives, while the vote of the Left rallied behind them. Given the way they're despised by many here right now, I sort of doubt they'll get another mandate. This was further affirmed by the fact that, while the Liberals made some minor ground here federally, the vast majority of the province was still painted blue.

In my view, if the CPC wants to achieve success in the next election, they're going to need to elect a leader that will steer them more towards the center instead of push them further right. They need to disassociate themselves with the kind of politics that defined Harper's terms in power, and what ultimately got the voters to give him the boot. They're going to have to convince voters that they've changed in order to regain the red Tory vote and perhaps steal a bit of blue Grits. Unfortunately for them it doesn't look like many of the potential candidates seem to hold that kind of view. While Jean Charest and Brad Wall would have my (relative) support, it remains to be seen whether either will even run (which in Wall's case is highly unlikely, since he seems to be a man of his words), much less receive the support of the reform-dominated CPC base. If the CPC elects more and more hardline rightists I think their electoral fortunes in the near-to-mid future may be dim. It is in the best interests of the party to get someone who is able to nab some centrist votes and redefine their image in the wake of what will probably be a nomination process dominated by an identity crisis.

Worth noting is that the Nanos is increasing it's sample size as we get closer to the 19th: Interestingly enough the increase of sample size didn't change their results by much.

Because debates actually give both sides a say instead of a partisan video praising Harper and bashing everyone who opposes him...

How so? Look at the Liberal website. There are loads of policies that back those claims that the Liberals will improve accountability and openness. Anything on the Conservative side? Yeah, I didn't think so.

I fully expect Mulcair to win his own riding, but those Signal numbers are just odd. Makes me question the validity of the site (granted, I'd like it to be valid since I'm a Liberal supporter and it's currently predicting that the Liberals will win). Maybe it's just a black sheep riding, or maybe many of the riding predictions on the Signal are inaccurate.

So I was checking the Signal today and noticed something very odd about it's predictions for Quebec. Apparently the Liberals are leading in Outremont. In case you don't know, that's Mulcair's riding. wut

No one has the lead because of the statistical tie, so they technically have lost the lead. The lead belongs to nobody. It's tight. That's not a stretch.

*sigh* You're really starting to annoy me. Can we all agree that just because some person posts bullshit, it doesn't suddenly become valid for someone else to post bullshit? It was a pretty obvious lie that basically everyone called you out for, and now you're somehow proud of it. Just... just no. ____________ About the poll, the difference between the Libs and the Cons was less than 10 people, so I wouldn't point to it as a clear indication of any lead really. They're both within margin of error in IPSOS, while in Nanos Liberals have held a consistent lead outside margin of error. From the recent poll data overall I think it's safe to say that the Liberals are in a better position at the moment.

This is seriously one of the most retarded campaign promises that any party has made. If it's illegal, call 911, don't make another tax-funded line just for the sake of promoting yourselves. The name sounds downright racist and ignorant as hell.

No sign of Nanos reversing to show the Angus/EKOS results. I hope this trend continues! I bet you the Conservatives stance on "barbaric cultural practices" will backfire on them. It's one thing to be against the niqab, but the name of that resolution sounds plain and simply racist.

The latest Nanos had them at 4th, behind the bloc. Quebec won't be a difference maker for the cons.

Agreed. If BC stays the way it is or continues to move in the direction of the Liberals, this is HUGE for Trudeau, as it has been discussed multiple times before that BC could very well be the province that ultimately decides who wins the election. Being a bigger competitor there is of utmost importance to all 3 parties.

Au contraire. After 10 years of Harper it's pretty clear to most Canadians that the worst thing for us right now would be to give him another mandate. The mentality among these voters is that they want to vote for the party most likely to replace the conservatives, and the Libs and NDP are battling it out to be that party. It's not like these people don't have any preferences besides being against Harper, it's that they understand the fact that if they split the vote by voting for a candidate in their riding that won't likely win then it makes it easier for Harper to form another government. ~~~ On the topic of the OP- Corruption is always going to be in every government of every stripe, to varying degrees. That much is true. But that doesn't make it okay, and that shouldn't justify you voting for it. In my opinion, decentralizing the PMO and make the Senate nonpartisan will have a bigger impact on lessening government corruption then any 'new blood' ever will. That's why I'm leaning more towards the Liberals on this one.

Nanos for Wednesday, September 30th Liberals & Conservatives in a dead heat, with the Liberals gaining points in support most likely due to the fact that some progressive swing voters are jumping ship from the third-place NDP. From CTV: The latest numbers show: 32.2 per cent supported the Liberals as their top choice 32.1 per cent picked the Conservatives as their top choice 26.3 per cent chose the NDP The race for top choice in B.C. intensified in the latest poll, with support for the NDP and the Conservatives taking a dip, while the Liberals saw a surge in their numbers. In B.C., support for the NDP was at 31.9 per cent, with the Conservatives in second at 30.4 per cent and the Liberals in third with 29.5 per cent. The Liberals gained 6.6 percentage points over Tuesday's numbers, while the NDP dropped 4.8 per cent and the Conservatives dipped by 2.8 per cent. The NDP continued to see their lead soften in Quebec, where the Liberals and the Bloc Quebecois each made modest gains. The Bloc Quebecois have now passed the Conservatives as the third-most preferred choice for voters in Quebec. The Liberals hold a marginal advantage over the Conservatives in Ontario, with the NDP trailing in third. The Conservatives remain the top choice in the Prairies, and the Liberals hold a comfortable lead in Atlantic Canada.

Wow, some very deep arguments made there. While I certainly respect your opinion I cannot help but argue that both of those statements are fairly flawed. Running deficits has multiple economic benefits, and if it's an idea that's big enough to even be considered it's definitely got some merit to it, besides just being something that sounds odd. Let's not forget that Harper has ran many deficits as well. As far as I'm concerned, if you're going to run a deficit to create stimulus, making a plan in advance is pretty important. The second statement contains no remote factual evidence to back up your claim. If you're going to say really subjective things like that at least try to bring up examples or reasons to support it. On the provincial NDP, I pretty much agree. The royalty review was needed though, the government has been loosing out on a lot of revenue in the past few decades and updating the system was a good idea. Is it the most ideal time to do so? Definitely not. But the money for supporting the public sector has got to come out of somewhere. I also get why many people are worried about the federal NDP though. They're trying way too hard to cater to the east, so even if some NDPers get elected in Edmonton Alberta's concerns will basically be forgotten. It was a smart move by Notley to not associate herself with the federal NDP. Concerning Trudeau, though, you got to remember that JT is not PET. Even though he defended him at the debate, mostly for the Charter of Rights and bilingualism, Trudeau has so far shown that he is willing to represent the concerns of Albertans even though he probably won't win many seats here. You got to admit, for a progressive leader, that's a good character trait to have. Clear.

I really don't think so. For most people, especially those that aren't politically savy, it's not about what you're voting for, it's about who you're voting for. People want to make that personal connection, they want to think "He/She's the one." While it's arguable who won if you're analyzing the policies and the arguments that were raised and zingers that were delivered, I think Trudeau gave off a much better 'vibe' in this debate than he ever did before. Compared to Mulcair, who looked at times nervous and awkward, Trudeau probably reeled in the support of more progressive swing voters, which is way more important for the Liberals than somehow convincing more Conservatives to vote for them. The PET comment probably appealed to more people than it repelled. So at least on a personal level for the Liberals, the debate was a success. Whether JT, or anyone else "won" or "lost" the debate is up for question, until we see this next week's polls (which aren't necessarily a reflection of who voters think won/lost the debate either).

Curious, what in your mind is the damage the other two would cause? As a more progressive Albertan myself, I have a unique perspective on what's good and what's bad for Alberta. I understand people being worried about some of the more aggressive, anti-oil NDP & Green policies, but it seems the Liberals have a pretty balanced approach. In the Globe debate Trudeau almost seemed like more of a development advocate than Harper was. What people outside of Alberta don't realize is that our jobs, our economy, our livelihoods are currently dependent on oil, and that is why so much of Alberta is so blue, because many people view Harper as the best defender of that sector. Then again, maybe I'm wrong and the damage you're talking about isn't economy-related (which let's be honest, if it's about Alberta, it's usually about Oil & Gas).