westcoast99

The talks have not collapsed. MacKay is urging the talks to continue and Loyola Hearn says it is now Harper who is not putting forth the effort to merge the parties.

You're right Greg. But here's something else to remember, Robert Stanfield made the jump to federal politics from being the Premier of Nova Scotia. While he didn't win the 1968 election, in 1972 he was narrowly defeated in the closest election ever. 109 seats for Trudeau's Grits. 107 seats for Stanfield's Tories. Besides, there's always room to make history.

If I were to narrow it down to who I think will take a run at the job: Mike Harris Bernard Lord Jim Prentice Brian Pallister Stephen Harper I think Peter MacKay knows that he is still very young and will most likely have a shot at the PMO under a United Conservative party in the future.

No, I don't see the purpose...?

But a new approach today from MacKay, saying that he wants to work to achieve an agreement with the Alliance.

He endorsed Prentice at the Tory convention and has been quoted as saying "If we're going to defeat the Liberals, we need co-operation among the right very quickly."

Tory MPs against a merger with the Alliance:

On Newsworld Morning, CBC's Ottawa correspondent brought up names for the Leader of the could be-Conservative party. Bernard Lord will be interviewed later today, as the reporter said "he has expressed interest in the leadership of a united party". Jim Prentice could be a candidate, perhaps Stephen Harper, but the one everyone's talking about at this point is former Ontario Premier Mike Harris. We'll see. I'd like to see Lord run for the leadership, but is it really likely? He just won a second majority government in NB in June.

Harper says he expects a merger proposal to occur by the end of the day, to the Progressive Conservatives. MacKay says a deal will only come with the agreement of his caucus. Harper says Alliance-Tory deal very near

Harris would be a good choice, he's a sharp politician.

They had a convention, but not with delegates. It was a 1 member 1 vote system where PC members voted at local headquarters for the person of their choice. It was very unorganized with very low voter turnout. I like the delegated convention the PCs had federally.

I fail to see why MacKay would be talking to the press about the process of "choosing the next leader of the new party" (as he said in the video report) if there was not plans for a merger.

Where did you hear this? If true, it's a great day for democracy in Canada. Hope you're right.

Fiscally conservative, Socially progressive. The answer is clear, Ryan. www.pcparty.ca Join the PCs.

Let's hope it happens in time for the next election.

MacKay has more parliamentary experience than Harper.

What do you expect us to say? That's not very specific. Examples please?

Aw well, that's unfortunate Rob.

I recently wrote a letter to Peter MacKay calling on him to merge our party with the Canadian Alliance to forge a national alternative which appeals to all Canadians. I encourage supporters to do likewise

Not just doing what's popular in a poll one day, and changing that with the next poll.

Immediately throwing away 25% of the popular vote is not the recipe for success for a political party. It would be very divisive if someone was elected with 1 or 2% support in the second largest province.

AF, Right. They have moved to the centre. Right of Centre is where Conservatives federally and provincially need to be. We don't need a far right party in Canada. Slightly right of centre is appealing to most Canadians. Mulroney was right of centre, and he had great success.

You forgot MacKay on your list.

McKenzie might make a run at the leadership of a United Conservative Party, but he doesn't speak French. That immediately makes his potential bid divisive.

I voted for Charest