Newfoundlander

Well then you can say they don't necessarily support heterosexual marriage too. They have a "neutral" position on it. What are the other parties official positions?

I don't really know what you said, you seem to struggle writing down your backward ideas. As well, when you have a policy in your platform saying that you don't think LGBT should marry it doesn't help to attract them, even if they like your other policies. There are also lots and lots of people who are not LGBT who are turned off by such a policy. As was pointed out by a columnist we've had gay cabinet ministers, Harper's had key staff who are gay. One of the men who wants to be president of the party is gay.

Polls conducted over the last few years has shown 70% of the general public support same sex marriage so the party is pretty much onside with the overall public.

Because all LGBT think alike?

What? Care to clarify?

I wasn't talking about Harper. I was talking about Trudeau, and it was a comparison of the enthusiasm him and Trump have been able to create.

He still did it. He tapped into a certain segment of the population, just like Trump has. Not everyone in the US infatuated with Trump.

Trudeau managed to create a lot of enthusiasm without going to the level Trump did.

The NDP don't have a leader and it doesn't seem likely they'll have a Quebecker leading them in the future. His past is a problem. As for Chong I think he's the most credible underdog in the race. He may not have a big following within the party but that's where expanding the party comes into play, as Patrick Brown did in Ontario.

Why don't they have a chance?

Bernier having his launch today and Chong announcing Monday.

Nathan Cullen started in the basement of support as well and in a few months managed to pull off a strong third place in the NDP leadership race. In some polls Chong has polled similar numbers to Maxime Bernier, Tony Clement, Kellie Leitch and Lisa Raitt, all of whom should have much more name recognition.

Michael Chong is expected to enter the race next week. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/michael-chong-conservative-leadership-campaign-1.3575128

He made a big deal? He gave his response to a journalist. We'll find out in a few weeks if the rules will change to allow her to run or not but I don't see her running.

There's really no suspicion, she's ruled it out time and time again. There are people pushing for her to run, but at this point she's not allowed to run and continues to say she's not interested. I have yet to see any reports that suggest she's considering it.

Anyways, why are we still talking about this?

Just because some in caucus think she should be able to run (and some want ti support her if she does) and some think the rules should stay as they are doesn't necessarily mean there is infighting. Of course Tony Clement would be opposed to her being able to enter the race, as he stated. They might be fighting but there's no evidence of that as of yet. You can disagree on issues without fighting.

Seeing she continues to rule out a bid I doubt there'll be much infighting over this.

Anyways....

He had started to reconsider whether he would enter before Rae completely ruled out running. And as of now Rona is being drafted when there's only two long shot candidates in the race. I don't think many believed Trudeau wouldn't actually enter anyway.

Kinda like those drafting Bob Rae when Trudeau was the alternative.

He has the least integrity?

Andrew Scheer considering a run.

None of this answers my question really but I'm sick of you trying to explain all of this.