Centerpiece

Why not negotiate the sunset clause instead of dismissing it outright. I could live with a 10 year sunset clause. Or perhaps include an agreed method of evaluating the Trade Balance so that if the balance is plus or minus 10% (or whatever) - it triggers a review. Perhaps both. Point is - negotiate to address the concern - whatever that may be.

I think Wynne has outsmarted herself and sounded the Death Knell for Liberal Party status. It would seem that most of the "soft" Liberal voters have already moved to the NDP - if they come out to vote. That leaves mostly hard-core Liberals who vote Liberal and nothing else. With Wynne saying she has no chance to win, I'd wager that a fair number of these voters will just stay home - making it even more difficult to win the required 8 seats. Call it demoralizing or just being poor losers - but it's a fact of the human psyche.....with no chance to win, why bother?

Now you're talkin'. They're working on "truck size" thorium reactors that can provide power to smaller communities up to 20,000 people. Thorium does away with most, if not all of the drawbacks of Uranium. I suppose it's possible this breakthrough will fall under the radar because of it's clear ability to eat into the oil market. But then again - maybe that's just a far-fetched conspiracy theory - tin foil stuff.

There\s a lot of BS being spewed about "far" Right (Nationalist/Authoritarian) and far Left (Communism and worse). There is no evidence of either in Canada. Russian President Putin comes close on the Right and Fidel Castro was on the Left. Canada has never drifted much from the traditional center. Any reference to the "far" Left or Right has no relevance whatsoever in Canada - other than passing references to anarchists and eco-nuts.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the other poll aggregator - Brian Baguet (BB). I'm certainly not a CBC fan but I think Grenier has done a good job of smoothing out the peaks and valleys with his aggregation formulas. BB had two major complaints about Grenier/CBC and I believe both complaints have major flaws. 1) CBC gives more weight to recent polls while BB gives equal weight to all polls in a week. That misses the swings that occur with significant campaign "happenings" like debates or major news revelations.. 2) CBC gave more weight to the most recent Forum poll. That's because it had a much larger sampling. CBC gives more weight to larger samplings. It seems BB does not.

You're a little late to the party. That's why we're trying to build a coastal pipeline - to get our oil to a market other than the US. As for Nuclear - we used to be a leader with our Candu reactor technology but we've fallen behind others and besides, the same eco-nuts would kick up a stink.

It'll be interesting to watch. If they are true to form, the eco-nuts will be out in force with their "civil disobedience". If Trudeau allows them to stall the project, he will pay a big price come election day. It's Canadians who own the pipeline now - not Liberals - and we expect the government to uphold the rule of law and do what they said they'd do on behalf of Canadians - and that's to build the pipeline. It's a mess of their own making. They will lose more votes if they don't build it than if they do. No more pussy footing around. Interesting indeed.

Let's not forget Bill C-49 - the Oil Tanker Moratorium......instead of examining each project on a case by case basis, Trudeau has used his heavy handed approach to directly thwart and future coastal oil projects - in addition to the onerous Impact Assessment process. Talk about sending a message to the industry: Link: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-oil-tanker-ban-passes-commons-1.4655077

Since we're talking Canadian politics, what are you actually trying to say about the real world of Canadian Conservatives and Liberals? For example, are you calling all business owners crooks and criminals? Is Ronald McDonald House a front for the mafia? You're missing the main point of democracy which for our purposes, is usually entrusted by the people to groups of people that we refer to as political parties. It seems to go unsaid that a major responsibility is to minimize the potential rough edges of otherwise unrestrained Capitalism. But lets not forget that even the old-fashioned "barter system" was a form of capitalism - you were a crook at your own peril. Let's put some definitions to your little diatribe - but I regret that I can't find a definition for "Right-wing morality" - or Left-wing for that matter. Capitalism: an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. Sociopath: a person with a psychopathic personality whose behavior is antisocial, often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

Will they lose votes? I think there's a real danger. BC has three viable Federal parties. I think it's fair to say that the Liberals won a fair number of seats with their eco promises. Many of the sizable number of enviro-voters took a flier on the Liberals and could easily revert back to the NDP or even the Greens. That also has the potential to have the Conservatives win some seats with the split on the Left. I heard a pundit from Quebec say that there might be a small backlash because Quebecers are sensitive to the Feds encroaching on Provincial juristiction. One could argue that they are not - but the feeling of Federal "heavy-handedness" doesn't play well in Quebec. Gilles Duceppe used to call it "Father Knows Best". In Ontario, it might feed the continued narrative of deficits and debt - especially if Ford wins and Ontario's books are found to be worse than thought. Fair or not, the Liberal brand would take an even bigger hit.

Stop being suckers - that's how you get it built. Enough is enough. You will never satisfy the eco-nuts - you'll never get their approval. As I explained, if they are not in the pocket of US interests, they are so full of self-righteous, save-the-world naivete that they can't see the forest for the trees.

Far too simple and leads to the polarization of views as perpetuated by the CBC and The Star - and often evident on this board. Socialist programs championed by the Left have to be paid for with Capitalist dollars earned on the Right - both are needed but they have to work in a symbiotic relationship - not an antagonistic one. Conservative and traditional Liberal parties have always managed to straddle the line without veering too far off center. It's why we have Blue Liberals and Red Tories - the fiscally responsible swing voters who move back and forth based on policy, leadership and their perceived needs of the province/country when they cast their vote. The Ontario NDP don't understand - or refuse to accept that symbiotic relationship at all. The Wynne Liberals have abandoned that traditional principle in their raw lust to cling to power.

It's those legal and political parameters from this government that got us here in the first place - and has now sent a signal to the world that it is virtually impossible to get our natural resources out of the ground and shipped to global markets. First, they changed the rules on the environmental review process - a process which had already been successfully completed by Kinder Morgan. That process is in itself, so onerous and subjective that it will scare off investment. Then they came up with Bill C-48 - the oil tanker moratorium, now in the senate - which virtually guarantees that no further coastal shipping projects can be built. An oil project - in the national interest, following a route that's been viable for 65 years can't be built? We're being played for suckers - duped by US funded money to keep out resources in the ground while the US forges ahead and are now an oil exporter. As Obama boasted: "This administration has built enough pipeline to circle the globe - and then some". Our wild-eyed, naive eco-nuts have been duped by US Big Oil into making Canada the Sucker Nation. Remember all the "protests" in the US over the XL Pipeline - a pipeline to funnel Canadian oil to Tidewater? Where was all the outrage over the Obama pipeline boasting?

Here's the actual CBC Poll Tracker..... https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/onvotes/poll-tracker/

If you're from Manitoba, you should know the answer. There is virtually no Liberal presence in your province - and the NDP has filled that Centrist/Left gap. For all intents and purposes they are a traditional Liberal party. As you said, they are pragmatic - not at all like the far left, socialist Ontario NDP - or the nouveau-Left Liberals. Rachel Notley? Similar to Manitoba, there is virtually no Liberal presence so she can tack somewhat near the center. John Horgan? Let's not go there. So really - there is no modern equivalent of what a far left NDP party would do to a province - or the country (other than the Bob Rae gang). And don't kid yourself - they are far Left. With Wynne's Liberals already having moved left of traditional Liberals, Horwath is clearly on the Leftist Ledge. It's not funny.

They "help" people when they can use other peoples' money. Helps to explain why Conservatives in the US give a lot more to charity than Liberals do. A lot more. Probably the same in Canada. https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html

As Horwath said "you're catchin' on". But in all seriousness, that is the key point. The lesser evil if you wish.

You never really knew about Wynne - remember Sousa last April boasting how they were balancing the budget this year, next year and the one after......? And what do we have one year later - endless deficits and more debt. Harwath? The NDP ideology should tell you all you need to know. How about Trudeau - remember those "modest" deficits and balanced budgets? So no - we don't know what Ford will actually do - but his whole mantra, his entire personna has always been about fiscal responsibility so unless he is an absolute liar like Trudeau, I don't think we have to worry about runaway spending. At this stage of the Global/National/Provincial economy, I'd rather err on the side of someone who at least has aspirations to rein in spending and eventually balance the budget. While we're on the economy - that's the dark-horse in the race - the business community will without fail. react negatively to the NDP and lukewarm at best to the Liberals. A Conservative win could very likely give a little nudge to the economy. They provide the biggest potential upside to increasing government revenues through their positive messaging. All my opinion of course - and all remains to be seen.

No.

I think there's enough fiscally responsible Liberals and swing voters who can hold their nose and vote for Ford. With Trudeau's unending deficits and accumulating debt putting fiscal responsibility in the spotlight, it's a watershed moment for fiscal sanity. Ford is the only one who is committed to getting to a balanced budget in his first term. To those who actually care about the future, it's perfectly clear that an NDP government would send us into a vicious cycle of deficits and more debt - followed by the inevitable downgraded credit rating creating more deficits and debt. And guess what comes along next? Another Mike Harris to clean up the mess - because the only sure thing about large deficits and massive debt is that one day the bill has to be paid......and it's paid with huge layoffs, cuts in services and increased taxes.

Iraq was a mess - no doubt..........but what false stories are you taking about? I think you are re-writing history to suit your needs. It was pretty well accepted that Saddam had WMD. That's why the UN made continuous formal resolutions to have Saddam let inspectors come in and verify. He ignored every one of them. Why would he do so if he didn't have them? As it turns out - the reason was simple - the guy was an idiot. The US then looked for UN authorization for a coalition to go into Iraq to seek out the WMD. The UN waffled and eventually, the US said they would formalize a coalition and go into Iraq. Saddam still wouldn't budge and neither did the UN. And then it started. All of this unfolded openly right in front of our eyes. Was it the right decision? Hindsight is great, isn't it? It COULD have been the right decision if they had followed a different plan after running over the Iraqi army. But that's not what transpired - and we still have the remnants of the eventual disaster to this day.

The timeliness, if not quality of Healthcare is suffering right across Canada......and yet we have parties that want to offer "free" Pharmacare and Dental Care - and still no money to pay for either. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. I mean, who WOULDN'T want these things - but only when we can afford to pay for them. Socialist programs have to be paid for with Capitalist dollars - both are needed but they have to work in a symbiotic relationship - not an antagonistic one. Conservative and traditional Liberal parties get it. The NDP don't understand that at all - and the Trudeau/Wynne Liberals are simply an abomination.

Don't even go there in this thread........

Have you not heard of the Ring of Fire? Billions in untapped minerals. It's been talked about for eons but the Liberals have done nothing to remove the obstacles that prevent the roads and infrastructure from being built. Who else but "millionaire" companies would take the risk to invest hundreds of millions in getting it up and running - especially with all the environmental and First Nations roadblocks. Just another example of how it's almost impossible for resource-rich Canada to prosper. Is the NDP the answer? Hardly.

You're mostly right - because there are usually three sides to every story - especially in politics. The truth lies somewhere between the CNN slagging and the Fox cheer leading. For substance, I would lean just a bit in favour of FOX - only because of the very real hatred of "everything Trump" that emanates from the Left - exemplified daily by CNN. In any event, Canadians should recognize the "three sides" issue and give FOX and CNN equal billing in their evaluation of US politics.