Littlefinger

No, you can get a health card and driver's license if you are a landed immigrant/permanent resident. If what the posters were saying above is correct, then the poll clerks were either not properly trained or were not following directions. This is somewhat disturbing, especially for ridings with close races...

Actually, that's not correct. If you did not receive a voter card, you need to show that you are both a citizen(passport or citizenship card) and a resident of that riding (new health card, driver's license, a recent bill).

Jennie, the "63" you heard was not a percentage of support. It was the projection of the number of seats the Liberals would win, based on having 44% support.

That SES poll was conducted before Tory's backtracking. It will be very curious to see what effect Tory's so-called new stance will have on the electorate. For his part, I guess he had nothing to lose, so why not try a Hail Mary pass.

This is a bit of a tangent, but speaks badly of John Tory nonetheless. Tory was supposed to be at an all-candidates debate on Goldhawk Live, the local call-in politics show on Rogers Cable. I was looking forward to this because he's up against Kathleen Wynne, a well-respected education minister and he's in for a far tougher fight than he probably imagined. He had confirmed with Dale Goldhawk, the host, that he would be present. The show starts at 9pm and there's no sign of Tory and no word from his campaign office. Goldhawk is a little peeved, stating that Tory had confirmed and he didn't know why Tory wasn't there. For the entire next hour, there is no explanation and no appearance. Either Tory's local campaign is incompetent or the man simply doesn't care that much about representing the local community. Perhaps it's a bit of both. Either way, in such a close race in Don Valley West, Tory's absenteeism can be used against him. This is one riding to follow closely.

In that case, all you need to do is to not vote for the Green Party. They're the only ones proposing to end funding for Catholic schools. Politically, it's just not possible. Both the Liberals and the NDP know this. In fact, Tory knows it too. He just thought he could get some of the immigrant vote and it's blowing up in his face.

From this article: http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...wal-050812.html Tory critics pounced on the tapes, accusing the Liberals of trying to entice an MP to change a vote – which would be a criminal offence. It would seem that in fact, it is the Liberals who have been cleared.

Libertarian Guard, Under Section VI: Section 91 Powers of the Parliament 26. Marriage and Divorce Section 92 Exclusive Powers of Provincial Legislatures 12. The Solemnization of MArriage in the Province In short, the federal government has the jurisdiction to change the definition of marriage. The province is responsible for witnessing, recording, etc, the marriage.

I presume then that if the budget had been defeated, Harper would have argued that its defeat had no legitimacy because Bloc votes are illegitimate and the majority of Canadians outside Quebec didn't want an election?

I mistyped the figures of the EKOS poll and I can only edit the posts within, not the topic title itself. Can you please correct 38.7 to 34.7? Thanks.

Ooops, sorry, that was a typo. I really did mean to type in 34.7...

The truth comes out - Grewal lied in his attempt to entrap the Liberals. http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...wel-050519.html The man who acted as a go-between for Conservative member of Parliament Gurmant Grewal and federal Liberals during recent talks about crossing the floor confirms a Liberal minister's claim that Grewal initiated the negotiations. Conservative MP Gurmant Grewal leaves a news conference in Ottawa Wednesday May 18, 2005. (CP photo) Sudesh Kalia has told CBC News that Health Minister Ujjal Dosanjh told the truth when he said the Liberals did not approach Grewal about helping the Liberals by abstaining from a key budget vote. Kalia, who says he is a friend of both Grewal and Dosanjh, told CBC reporter Eric Sorensen that Grewal definitely made the first approach. He also said Grewal had been talking about crossing the floor to the Liberals for "a couple of years."

Here's a new EKOS poll from May 19, one that has a much larger sample size than the Compas one. http://www.ekos.ca/admin/articles/19May2005Background.pdf A summary can be found here: http://www.ekos.ca/admin/articles/19May2005PressRelease.pdf

She realized she would never be the Conservative leader because Harper told her so? Have the Conservatives abandoned the quaint notion of voting for a leader altogether? She would never be PM as a Conservative because she is unlikely to win its leadership, but she has a better chance of that than becoming Liberal leader. Leadership ambitions are not the reason for her joining the Liberals. I wonder why it is so hard for some people to accept her words at face value. It's been quite clear for some time that she's been uncomfortable with the Conservative direction and agenda. She realized she was closer to being a Liberal than a Conservative and therefore made the logical choice to join the party that better suited her.

I find it amusing that so many conservatives are accusing Stronach of abandoning her principles for pure ambition. Joining a party that may yet fall in two days is not the best way to realize one's ambition. The Liberals may very well lose the next election. Stronach knows all this and chose to leave the Conservatives anyway. It actually takes a principled stand for her to say that she cannot continue to support the path of the Conservatives and that she is sticking to her principles, even if the result is that she is a minister for only two days.

Hmmm. I don't think you're making observations at all. I think you are making comments directed against the new party. Boy, you really must be scared. It didn't take you half a day to try to put in your two cents worth. Dnsfurlan, I AM making observations! I'm observing that the new party has a long way to go before it is viable. It took you even less to praise it to the heavens. Springer, Having Harper as leader of the new party would guarantee a Liberal landslide. If it is perceived in any way that this is a CA takeover of the Tories, only Martin will benefit. The most visible way to create this perception is to have Harper as the leader of the new party.

Dnsfurlan, I just thought I'd rain on your parade a little bit. No need to listen to me though. There are plenty of pundits and politicians doing that already. And I am watching from afar - I'm not joining either party, or the new one for that matter. That doesn't mean I can't make observations from afar.

Sorry, you've got the wrong soldier. I'm more than happy to let you guys sort out your own mess. Who's scared? The new party faces a monumental taks in getting the PC membership to ratify in the first place. Even if it does, it will have only a few months to choose a leader and pick its policies. God forbid that you should choose a leader that is clearly identified with only one of the former parties, because the internal bickering will be a sight to behold. The only contenders who are not clearly identified with either one are the Ontario PCs that were just swept out of office. If this party ever does get off the ground, after bleeding away all the Red Tories, if it gains any strength, then the Liberals will only have to fight one flank, by playing the "only the Liberals can stop the conservatives card" to the left. If you are an Ontario Liberal right now, life is good.

I've got to tell you though, it's a great feeling now that we can co-operate with eachother and focus all our criticisms on the Liberals. You'll have to convince the members of both parties of that first. There are already grumblings of discontent on both sides. It'll certainly be interesting to watch from afar. I am far from convinced that all the swords are now pointed solely at the Liberals.

I don't know if the Liberals are Pompous or that they truly believe they are the natural ruling party. Well, until the right proves otherwise, what's a good Liberal to think?

Shouldn't someone have raised some concerns over this guy's ability to run the province of Ontario? Don't Ontarians deserve something more than a media consultant makeover and a press who hasn't held him to any serious scrutiny? The difference is that Eves HAS a record in office, and most voters seem to agree that it is a bad one. The incumbent always has to defend his or her record; the challenger never does. McGuinty will not be put to the same scrutiny until he has a record he is running on - ie the next election.

It would strike fear in the hearts of the Liberals. I'm not sure I understand why; I'm certainly not afraid, whether the merger can be pulled off or not.

lets see what happens tomarrow morning! These are PRELIMINARY discussions! Each party still has to ask its members to vote on any proposal satisfactory to both parties, which based on the fact that many CA members share sir_springer's view, remains highly unlikely.

Lost, The CA introduced a motion in the House today reaffirming the traditional definition of marriage. It was narrowly defeated by a vote of 137-132.

Oh certainly, the Post is not as right-wing as it once was. I am just disputing dnsfurlan's claim that liberals never complained about conservative media bias and hence that is evidence of its lack thereof, because they clearly have in the past.