nbguyca

This is one of the rudest posts I have read.

Why would he, he has too much to lose.

There was no reason for anyone not to know what to bring for id at the polls. That's a cop-out.

Show me a party that doesn't talk about being successful in an election campaign? Who would vote for a party that says we have no chance of winning? The Liberals didn't elect Dion because they thought anyone could win. Dion was the compromise candidate. Ignatieff and Rae were the front runners and Dion snuck up the middle.

and why would you say that?

The Conservatives won roughly 56% of the seats outside of Quebec. THat is not an overwhelming majority. As long as the Conservatives form a minority government, people will not truly believe that Harper is a moderate with no hidden agenda. He doesn't control the entire agenda in a minority government.

Last time I checked, Quebec was still part of the country and they are free to vote however they like, same as everyone else. I do agree that majorities will be very hard to come buy as long as you have a party like the BQ. But even if you assigned seats by popular vote, he still would not have a majority.

harper's plan: Dion's plan: They seem very similar to me.

Where was this plan during the election? It is amazing that he can develop a plan not even 24 hours after the election. He truly is an amzing guy.

Then why no majority?

She makes a good point. This was Harper's 3rd kick at the can and he still can't get a majority. That has to raise some questions for the Conservatives.

One name - Brian Mulroney.

I don't think that is shocking news to anyone.

I agree that Wikipedia is a terriible source but dominated by the far-left??? Anyone can post on Wikipedia and they certainly not all from the far left.

I'm suspicious of all them. They have all been caught with their hands in the cookie jar and the Conservatives are no different than the Liberals. What suspicions am I raising? The thread was started because the Conservatives won't answer any questions; it had nothing to do where parties got their money. As for your last comment, grow up.

Thank you for answering the question. I was trying to figure out why you poosted what you did because it had nothing to do with the original question. I have listened to many Conservative candidates in this election and none will give a straight answer about what they will do if elected. Hell, they haven't even released an election platform yet and there is only a week left in the campaign. Everytime a question has been asked, they simply start talking about how bad the Liberals are. Just like Harper did during the debate.

You still haven't answered the question. Corporations always donated to both parties and yes I know that the legislation now makes that difficult. (But we have all scene with this election call that there is always a way around legislation.) I don't understand what this has to do with the conservative strategy to simply avoid all the questions and blame everything on another party. Why did you bring it up?

Well said. That is why I think these things are a complete waste ot time. The people that watch them are the people that have already made up their mind. Debates don't change anyone's opinion.

Sorry maybe I should have said, "Are you saying corporate Canada never donated to the PCs, Alliance, Reform, Conservative Party of Canada or whatever you want to call them?

Are you saying corporate Canada dosn't donate to the Conservatives?

Economists opinions are biased by their only belief system. They construct their policies based on the idealogy that they favour and this creates the wide variety in opinions on how to fix or run the economy. A mathematician, an accountant, and an economist are being interviewed for a job. During each interview, the interviewer asks the question, “What is 2 + 2?” The mathematician states confidently, “4.” The accountant states confidently, “4.” The economist gets up from his seat and quickly closes the door, look all around the room and quietly whispers to the interviewer, “What would you like it to be?”

I'm not talking about just in the debate, it is their whole campaign. They have nothing to offer the general public and the only reason for having this election is so Harper can take advantage of a fractured Liberal party.

The thing about economists is that you can always find one to tell you what you want to hear.

I don't think that is an option. I believe you should always vote. If you are not happy with the options, spoil the ballot.

If you win a debate by not answering questions, then Harper was clearly the winner. These debates are a useless waste of time. They will not change the minds of the people who actually watch.