Smeelious

I think this is another "Weapon of mass distraction" I also feel like while the gun control debate is a valid debate to have in the USA, it somewhat less valid in Canada....Valid maybe isn't the right word. "Pressing" is probably better.

Both The Star and The Globe tend to be left leaning papers...Nothing new there. Although I feel like the Globe is getting more centrist over time. Also, this election is killing me with the damned "You have already read your X amount of articles this month" I might have to break down and pay...for stuff on the internet!!

These numbers vary source to source, but generally 2.9-7.9% of GDP That doesn't include associated gains in manufacturing, etc. The Growth numbers tend to be higher, and that's where the hit in oil price is hurting more.

I'd feel really bad at this point if the NDP get reduced to a small handful of seats. Especially since I feel like there should be more parties represented in parliament, not less.

The Signal this morning has the Libs and Cons tied at 132 seats...Oh wouldn't that be interesting.

Well it doesn't...Except... With aid from the Liberals they could get TPP pushed through before being ousted.

I was surprised to not see Nippising-Temiskaming on that list...(you know the riding that the Tory won by 18 votes) But apparently the boundaries changed such that its not even an issue anymore...And that the Liberal (Rota) will win by a sound margin. Somehow, I think something weird will happen in that riding again.

I'm fairly sure that was true of the last election as well...then all hell broke loose

I've always wondered...Where is the moral outrage about Muslim men who can't wear their speedos to the beach?

via. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-grenier-polls-oct6-1.3258683

Actually, that's what I'm doing right now.

while still being functional...

This is probably the main reason why some form of partly list thing wouldn't work. You would be beholden to the party, and not to "Canadians". Also...what the heck is the "Party" anyway? Do we need a supreme court ruling that political parties deserve the same rights as citizens (ala Citizen's United)

Unless an extreme movement for strategic voting somehow works... And then it would be possible...that's the problem with FPTP

Things that can't be done: display partisan symbols or material inside or near a polling place, which may include the parking lot, grounds and sidewalk; display campaign literature or other material that could be taken as an indication of support for or opposition to the election of a candidate or a political party; and use or wear colours or emblems in the polling place that would identify your candidate or party. So I'd guess it would be illegal...if you were serious... http://www.elections.ca/content2.aspx?section=can&dir=cand/gui&document=index〈=e

Except....And I'll put this here as both and answer and explaination: Quebec.

Isn't that the whole point of an election?

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2015/10/04/why-stephen-harper-has-no-fear-of-strategic-voting-hepburn.html This one? It needs a giant "Citation(s) Needed" red stamp all over it. It does raise some good points about the "why" it doesn't work though. I *do* have a competent CPC candidate in my riding. He'll win without a doubt, and with good reason. I'm still not voting for him though. Especially in my riding I'd love to see the breakdown of candidate vs party

I think realistically most people are going to have to come to terms with Harper having done a reasonably good job. He honestly did. I still want Stéphane Dion back...His party torpedoed him so hard. Harper "managing" his caucus should only really bother Reformers, it led to more centrist policy and kept out the crazy...IMO.

I'd actually love to see stats on what % of votes were cast as strategic votes...I'd wager it would be low enough to be pointless in most ridings, and high enough in a very small number of ridings to make a difference

In that you can't remove fossil fuel from the equation. As such, the oil and gas industry will continue for a long, long time.

Ah. That graph suggests that 14.7% of current electrical generation is from gas. The energy I'm talking about is the amount of energy produced by combustion engines in motor vehicles, which would not be accounted for in that graph. Replacing all current combustion engines with electric engines would require the equivalent of 127 new nuclear plants. How that energy would be generated, and more importantly distributed is the key limiter in the adoption of all electric vehicles. Keep in mind that number is likely out of date, and the source is a lobbyist from the oil and gas sector.

What I was trying to say, is that replacing fuel altogether would require an additional 127 nuclear plants to be commissioned.

Anyone who thinks that electric cars will replace fuel powered cars in the near future is just plain kidding themselves. Last I knew, it would take something on the order of 127 Nuclear power plants to replace the power generated through fuel. And that's Ontario ALONE.

Conservative 145 Lib 125 NDP 66 Green 1 Bloq 1 Other 0 Something like this. The Conservatives have shown they are good at pulling the ridings that really matter, I expect the NDP to take a pounding as more and more people think that the libs will be the "Anyone but Harper" party