Smeelious

I think we'd be better off with four parties left, center-left, center-right, right...go to STV...profit?

It's a truth universally acknowledged that governments that are in power too long become corrupt, or lazy, or both. Then what happens? People get annoyed enough to vote for the NDP in Alberta. Anyway, having any one party in power too long is bad, Especially with the joke that is the Senate.

Yup. Whatever the reason more people voting is a good thing.

"Anyone But Not-Harper"?

Micheal Chong.

Probably this. Undoubtedly it backfired. Too bad JT didn't come out and say that it isn't easy to make priorities. They did need a way to say "Hey look this guy is just running on the legacy of his father" without actually invoking the legacy of his father. JT himself had to run on the legacy of his father without actually invoking his father. (He did so once, and the polls went nuts.) Primarily I think that the Liberal party has actually agreed to support this candidate, instead of constant infighting that has been present in the Liberal party since JC retired. The result, coupled with the country generally being sick of Harper's Conservatives, is what we are seeing: The Liberals resurgent. I think the Conservatives are in for a bit of a headache over the next few years while trying to find the right candidate to replace Harper. Honestly I don't see anyone able to fill his shoes.

Yesterday was a stat...I think it was said earlier in this thread that they weren't polling yesterday, hence no poll. Frankly I think they should have spent the money on the overtime.

There was a steady stream of people when I went to vote today. I wish there was more...advertising? that today was a voting day. I think most people would assume that you couldn't vote on a stat, and yet... I suppose that wouldn't create fair elections..... On the whole Strat vs How You feel vote, Honestly people should vote for the party they want, if the strategic vote isn't someone you want.

Links? Based on everything I've looked up in the last 5 minutes I have no choice but to call cow dung.

I do think it'll be higher this year, but yeah..

If the Conservatives win the most seats and the NDP props up the Liberals to form government...This would likely be true, and would most likely force an election the second the revised voting whatevers where in place. My concern with this is how long it would take. Would a minority government actually last long enough to put this through? I"m not sure what process would have to occur to change how the election works. I guess that's a research project for this afternoon. It's not a confidence issue, but the government can say yea or nae. If the requirement of the NDP propping up the liberals is to nix the TPP we have an issue.

I thought this sort of thing was a no-no during the actual campaign..

No, he said he wouldn't be PM in that case...Which is ...obvious...Mansbridge dropped the ball on that line of questioning.

That one shows the NDP support in QC lower than both CPC and LPC...yarr.

You are giving too much credit to leaders that really haven't proved they could accomplish something like this. Also, with the way the current polls are going, the Liberals have Zero incentive to change the voting system. Now...If by some miracle....The Liberals and the Conservatives are tied in seats...Lizzy May could become the Electoral Hero we Deserve. Another thing...before the voting system gets changed we will likely have another FPTP election as a referendum on changing the voting system anyway. Especially with the seat numbers being so close.

Well, coalition governments keep getting proposed in Canada but they don't materialize. What incentive would the NDP have for propping up the Liberals, other than nominal agreements on some issues. Also, TPP is a wedge issue between the Liberals and the NDP. What happens when the Liberals and the Conservatives vote for it, and the NDP against if the Conservatives have more seats? Would nixing the TPP be a requirement of NDP cooperation in a coalition? The conservatives won't prop up a liberal government. The NDP won't be able to form the government as things are now. To say that the Conservatives have no chance of forming government is just being obtuse. If they have the most seats, they will try. The liberals and the conservatives do have common ground (not as much as the liberals/NDP but still) The questions are: Will the conservatives be willing to give up enough to gain the liberal support they need?; Will the NDP demand too much of the Libersals to prop them up? Nobody will want an election too quickly. I'd guess if the conservatives do get the most seats, they will form the government for 6 months anyway

It's a crappy job. It doesn't help that the Republicans are fractured right now. Sure, you could be third in line to the throne as it were, but you still have to try to get things done in an atmosphere of "We do nothing". I'm trying to imagine a parallel scenario, and I'm coming up blank.

Popular vote has been kinda steady this week actually. The only place the Liberals have to take from is the NDP in Quebec at this point. I actually don't think we'll see much change in the popular vote

Huh? Where is that projection coming from?

The way things are going, it's not too far from reality at this point.

The popular vote is mostly unchanged, but the liberals gained a few seats overnight

I'm curious how this will bode for Bernie....(I've ignored US politics lately, Our election has actually been interesting..) Quite a few (TYT, notably) were saying that the chance of the NDP winning federally in Canada was a large push away from the norm (Like Bernie), and how this is becoming a large trend even worldwide away from the "establishment". The house always wins I suppose. Also, bring back Dion...actually, replace May with Dion, and Replace Mulcair with May....ooooh....

What kind of reasonable, considered nonsense is this?! I demand more...outrage?

That is a whole lot of sketchy.

Given that signal this morning is showing that the liberals will form the government, and that the conservatives will have a higher % of the popular vote... Can we agree that election reform shouldn't just be an issue for "progressives"?