angrypenguin

ap, here's the link to watch online. http://ici.radio-canada.ca/tele I don't watch online so I hope it works for you. Thank you!

Read: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/09/10/controversial-australian-campaign-wizard-helping-harper-conservatives_n_8119574.html Campaign spokesperson Kory Teneycke refused to discuss campaign "staffing decisions" but confirmed Thursday that Crosby has been advising the party for a long time and is continuing to do so. He denied suggestions that Crosby has taken over the campaign or was recruited in a bid to turn around the party's sliding fortunes at the mid-point of the race to the Oct. 19 vote. It was unclear whether Crosby is working from Canada or abroad.

Where can I watch this online? (sorry not a cable guy). If anyone knows I'd be thankful! Precisely. I really felt stupid after the 2011 election because I didn't know why either. I'm comforted by this

I go to Japan once a month. I am well aware of their food habits. This analogy still does not work. Let's assume your premise is correct, which it isn't, but let's assume it's correct and that the Japanese's appetite for beef is one that has a higher standard and that Canada's current beef quality is worse. The Japanese look at what the Canadian industry offers. It's cheaper than their own Wagyu beef, but they go...nah, not interested. Doesn't meet our standards. NEXT.. Basically, under your premise, the Japanese will buy the cheapest quality beef that meets their needs. If Canadian beef isn't of that standard, even though it's cheaper, they won't buy it. If that means Canada will never be able to sell to Japan, the price of Canadian beef remains unchanged. If however, you take American beef and let's say it's the same quality, then if the American beef is cheaper, then the Canadian beef industry will be undercut. Again, the consumer always wins. A similar analogy is this. I'm a Mercedes guy. I'm into high end cars. Just because a Lexus is cheaper, doesn't mean that I buy a Lexus.

The polls don't seem to indicate a collapse, merely a decline. The Liberals seemed like they collapsed, but not sure why.

Does anyone remember why the NDP surged about 2 weeks out last federal election? I don't seem to recall why.

You're comparing apples to oranges here. Yes, of course Nordstrom, Neiman Marcus and Saks are successful. They provide premium products. But if I take the exact same handbag and put it at Nordstrom, and charge $500USD, and if I put it at NM for $800, provided it's the same item people will go to Nordstrom to buy it. If the Japanese can spend more on beef, if the two beefs are the same, why would the Japanese pay for vendor X's beef instead of vendor Y? e.g. they wouldn't.

Yes, and also because I really do think this is an awesome thing for my favorite country!

Huh? I was not referring to Signal in regards to the NDP surge. I was referring to the EKOS poll. http://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2015/10/conservatives-hold-lead-in-slightly-narrowed-race/ Take a look at the bottom chart.

6pm now delayed until 10pm. Sigh

The NDP surge for the last election happened around this time. Just saying, I would not discount them just yet.

I brought this up yesterday. http://voxpoplabs.com/the-signal-canada-2015/ Check out the comments. They have answered some of the questions we had on this very thread!! So we were talking about the poll methodology of that pollster. Here's their follow up! -- Thanks for your thoughts about the model and its potential problems. I address some of your concerns in turn below. In the model, there's actually no assumption of bias because the bias parameters are estimated from the data themselves (relative to the industry average), and, moreover, these parameters are not static: they are re-estimated each time a new poll is released. If there is no systematic difference in vote intention estimates between polling organizations, the bias parameters will all be roughly 0 for every pollster. With respect to the new ridings, Statistics Canada has taken data from the 2011 polling station results and transposed them to the new riding boundaries. Although this is less than ideal, it provides a decent approximation to where results will stand in the upcoming election. The loss and gain of incumbents can be modelled at the riding level, so one can account for the fact that an incumbent has stepped down who had previously enjoyed an incumbent bump in support. This bump will naturally be lost for his or her successor, which, again, can be modelled. The model only partially relies on past polling estimates as compared to past election results: I put a "prior" on the bias terms related to differences between the polls and the result in the past election(s), such that these biases are pulled toward zero. This is done because it's expected that pollsters will 1) modify their methods to generate better results, and 2) each election is only a single data point, with error of its own. Note that the alternative to this would be to assume that the polling industry average bias is zero _or_ that bias from previous elections will carry through fully to the upcoming election. The model we use is a compromise between these two extremes, essentially taking a weighted average of the assumption of 0 bias and of the estimates of bias using data from past election results and polls. I hope this clears up some of your concerns, but if you have any more questions please let us know! --

I don't give 2 cents for those in need. If you can't afford something it's not my problem. It's called entitlement when one thinks they deserve something.

So basically whore out our economy. I shake my head in disappointment.

It's called looking more deeply into the relationship.

You're ignoring the fact that every consumer wants to pay the least. How else do you think places like Walmart became so successful?

I remember reading it's the UN that would enforce the law. The countries that stone rape victims are not the ones I am referring to. France/UK as some examples do not stone their rape victims. Please try to be more sensible.

So that was back in 2011. What was the result?

This is a baseless accusation. If Lynton was running the campaign, he'd be in Canada. Lynton and the Conservatives go back 9 years, but he has never formally ran Harper's campaign. The only public knowledge of this is that the Conservatives have been working with him, but the only thing that we know is that the Conservatives and Lynton have phone calls on occasion to discuss polls, that's about it.

You do realize other countries already do this right? revoking citizenship for convicted terrorists? Australia is already looking at options to make someone stateless.

This makes absolutely no sense at all. If I can buy a rib eye from an American producer at $10/oz, and I can buy rib eye from a Japanese exporter for $8/oz, I'll buy from the Japanese exporter. How is this so difficult to understand? Or are you crying foul because the American producer can only product it at $2/oz more? Screw the American producer.

But they won't be willing to pay twice as much steak. What incentive do they have to not pay the least for whatever they want to buy. Same as for us.

Is it true that the 4pm EST announcement has been delayed to 6pm?

In what sense?

Why does it make a difference? Because international laws prohibit the government from making someone stateless. as I said before, it's not ideal, and I am for stripping someone who's only Canadian from their citizenship. As far as your comment about future PM's removing citizenship....remember, they have to be tried and convicted of terrorism first.