UofGPolitico

Exactly. People forget the united right under the Conservatives in their first election (2004) got a vote share that was 8 points off the combined Alliance/PC vote in 2000. People underestimate how much of the Liberal base are right-leaning Blue Liberals. Many of them (predominantly in Ontario) ran to Harper last year out of fear the NDP may actually form a government. NDP/Liberals merge, most of those voters will stay with the Conservatives.

Exactly. People forget the united right under the Conservatives in their first election (2004) got a vote share that was 7 points off the combined Alliance/PC vote in 2000. People underestimate how much of the Liberal base are right-leaning Blue Liberals. Many of them (predominantly in Ontario) ran to Harper last year out of fear the NDP may actually form a government. NDP/Liberals merge, most of those voters will stay with the Conservatives.

People like you, even if EC and RCMP clear the Conservatives, will still think they are guilty me thinks.

The Liberals really when it is all said and done care about one thing, power, but on their terms. Think if Martin had have won say 3-5 more seats in 2004? He most likely would have made some sort of arrangement with Jack Layton and the NDP and could have governed as a majority. Its amazing how things have unfolded.

If Rae does get the permanent leadership, merger talks could be more likely I suppose. He has always seemed very open to the idea, more so than most of the Liberal elite. I just don't see that party caving so easily. There is still alot of the old guard (Martinites) left that would most likely defect to the Conservatives or quit politics if that happened. If they were in the driver's seat, it would be more likely as they would see it as an easy way to win back power. The Liberals gain nothing if they merge now with a 100+ seat NDP opposition.

The Liberals I think are destined to take one more crack at an election before merger talks become serious again. They will want to be in the driver's seat (aka official opposition) if a merger is to occur. The NDP's hold on official opposition is shall we say questionable and the Liberals are not naive to that. They know they could easily form official opposition next time.

Yeah, most polls have him polling at 12% I thought?

Given this hubbub about using American polling firms, and the story today that 14 Conservative MPs used a firm that is heavily tied to the US Republican Party, I think one thing that should be written into the Elections Act is banning the use of firms/companies outside of Canada for electioneering purposes. For once I will agree with Liberal Carolyn Bennett who was quoted in the Star today as saying using foreign companies makes it much harder to investigate transgressions. They are Canadian elections being decided by Canadian voters. Election activities then should only be conducted by Canadian actors.

In fundraising, but I was under the impression in terms of voting intention Nash was 2nd? According to most polls made public.

The Topp camp had to go somewhere when they realized he was not the wagon to get hitched too. Makes perfect sense to me.

If the opposition can do its job and mobilize these forces that are anti-Harper and anti-Conservative, it should.

You could be right, I could be right. Time will tell. I am not discounting the 30% per say, its just the majority of the NDP's increases in both seats and popular vote came within Quebec. The Quebec wave notwithstanding, the NDP would have only seen marginal increases and certainly would not have become the official opposition. The truth is the Quebec wave is not yet fully understood by anyone, and will take subsequent elections to fully understand it. I believe I have alluded to that. And one final point, I don't think I've ever made a claim of being unbiased, but I've never openly professed my support for any political party either. I do not hold a membership to any political party and never have. I will identify myself as a centre-right voter who has voted both Liberal and Conservative in the past. I believe in a socially progressive Canada, but we must balance that with smart and realistic economic policies.

No, because voters in Quebec voted in a bloc like they always did and fell in love with Jack Layton. Current polls suggest the NDP would only win a handful of seats. People didn't all of the sudden become enamored with NDP policies. Yes, the NDP does have values that seem in line with many Quebecors, but one election does not establish that is why they voted en mass for them. The rest of the country only elected 6 more New Democrats outside of Quebec. See my first point, and even if that is the case, they still need to secure at least a million more of those voters to win goverment. It happens all the time. The party membership elects a leader, who by viture gets en endorsement of his or her value set even if there are slight shifts from the historical value set that party holds. Of course Muclair can't change the party wholesale, but he can certainly make changes to strike a better balance between the labour old guard forces in that party and attracting the political centre any party in this country needs in order to govern. Well, so far there hasn't been enough mobilization of these forces to elect an NDP government. I don't doubt there are people out there that are having a tough time, I don't doubt that at all. If the problem were as dire though as some would suggest, the NDP would be in government now wouldn't they? Maybe the fault then lies in the party for not effectively mobilizing that electorate then?

I would argue that is because people were not adequately educated on what exactly the system meant and what its benefits were. That is the common slam against those systems, they are hard to understand. I supported it and was disappointed it was rejected in such a fashion. You'd think the 63% or so of Ontarians who DID NOT support a Rae government would have looked more closely at it

If the NDP wants government, some of its values will need to be set aside, which is why I say Muclair is probably the best choice if government is truly the intention. Canadian voters will never elect a pro-labour and anti-corporation government, they just won't. There is a growing income-equality divide, yes, but still the majority of Canadians still make enough money to live comfortably (that is if they spend wisely).

I "Like" Elizabeth May on facebook and she is speaking at a rally on Parliament Hill tomorrow. Whether the Conservatives are guilty of anything or not, the pressure is for sure building.

I written many papers in university advocating for some type of PR system in this country as I think our strong regionalism coupled with our vast geography warrants it. When most majority governments can get elected with 40% or even less, something is out of whack. PR system would also make coalitions seem much more legitimate (even though they technically are legitimate now) in the eyes of the electorate because they would become necessary. Even though I've been labeled a "tory partisan" by another user on here, I am all for this type of change which would in fact not be beneficial at all to the Conservatives. It would actually render their current party from probably ever forming a government as there is no real ideological partner present. It would force all parties to be open to negotiation.

Well, I am not a tory partisan, but no one is forcing you to read mine or anyone's posts so whatever.

He's been mentioned quite alot in this thread as a possible successor of the Conservative leadership.

Some have had that feeling about other high profile Conservative ministers too.....

I said to a lesser extent.

LOL, exactly.

She referred to Charlottetown as a "hell hole".

The Commissioners of both the RCMP and Elections Canada are addressed in the letter though and listed under the "Send To"?

Directly sent to the Commissioner of Elections Canada? 37,000 hmmmm