nicky10013

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/liberals-trumpet-unbelievable-campaign-fundraising-gains/article1965110/ Obviously the message Ignatieff is putting out is resonating more than people thought. Even more than I thought. The question remains how long will it last.

Tell that to the people who have those jobs.

Actually, that globe article said the exact opposite. It's sad when you have to repeat Tory talking points just to spite the Liberals. That original notion came from the Tory war room and was quickly repudiated by the G&M.

So, suspending parliament to avoid a confidence motion isn't by any means necessary?

OK, so you're against Jack Layton raising the corporate tax rates back up? I believe Mr. Layton is promising that as well. As for actual corporate tax rates, it doesn't create more business. There is absolutely no proof that cutting those taxes goes to creating more jobs.

I absolutely would. Every summer while I was in university, I wouldn't be able to sleep due to worry because finding summer jobs could be difficult in my area. It made me sick wondering where my money would come from for tuition. I just barely made it a couple years in a row. Anything that makes school cheaper, I vote for.

Are you daft? I said I just got out of school and understand how hard it is for students. That and considering students are the immediate future of this country, why not help them out? Investing in education makes us all more competitve. Are you really so selfish that in terms of government policy you'll only vote for what helps you directly?

At least it is a start. You're going to end up voting for a guy that has only released policy that would come into effect not after this election but the NEXT election. This helps real people now. Helping students isn't a "sexy" issue but it's one that really helps people out.

Yeah, that's exactly what everyone heard because everyone who heard it isn't in denial. Harper himself today said he was only talking about a coalition of "right wing parties." So, what would be so wrong in his mind with the NDP and Liberal parties forming a coalition because they're left wing parties? Oh, that's right, because in 2004, he was trying to steal power by any means necessary, and now he's trying to hold onto power by any means necessary. Some leader.

Great idea to start out. I think it should be expanded to things like trade training as well, but this is definitely a good start. I just got out of school so I understand TBs frustration that it wasn't available sooner. However, I know what students go through to get that cash and even at just 4 grand, it's definitely welcome. There is no better investment for society in terms of social problems and the economy in general than to invest in education. By every indicator, having a university degree helps you everywhere. If the CPC had introduced this instead of the Liberals, I would vote for them. Great policy.

Stephen Harper wasn't the Prime Minister when he wrote the letter. He was in the exact same position Ignatieff is right now.

.Yeah, see, no it hasn't. If it was prorogation why would the GG need to consult with the other parties? Prorogation is a request made to the GG by the PM. Harper wasn't the PM. It also specifically mentions the government losing the confidence of the house. When that happens, there is either a coalition or an election. It doesn't say coalition but it absolutely can't be a prorogation. Considering it pertains specifically to disolution, the only thing it can really be about is a coalition. To think anything otherwise is to be wilfully blind. Ignatieff had a bad "first day" on Friday, but Harper's has had an absolutely dreadful weekend. To admit anything less is denial.

If it's constitutional convention, how could she deny the request? Who knows, right? Except for the fact that he is in fact going to seek out a coalition, right? Every ounce of common sense says no, yet people still continue to believe. How, I'll never understand.

Wow. Speaking of desperate, the National Post's headline is "You Rock, Steve." I guess when it's this bad this early, you've got to thrown any journalistic convention to the wind.

That's your argument. However, Stephen Harper thinks it's perfectly legitimate to bring down a Sitting PM after 2 years to form a coalition. His letter says so. So I ask again, if Ignatieff is SO hell bent on forming a coalition, why hasn't he tried it by now? What exactly is it he's waiting for?

Why would Harper in 2004 suggest the GG prorogue parliament? What good would a suspension of parliament be to the opposition? It would've given Martin breathing room - in essence, it would've done exactly what the suspension did for Harper in 2008. Are Conservatives really in this much denial regarding that letter? I bet you guys can't believe that this issue is hurting Harper much worse than it is Ignatieff. Liberals desperate? The Liberals couldn't ask for a better way to start this campaign. Harper is on the defensive having had what is obviously his entire campaign narrative undermined in 2 days. Ignatieff has put the coalition behind him, but the more Harper brings it up, the more they throw the letter of 2004 at him. That, and the Bloc and the NDP are doing all the dirty work by calling him a liar while Ignatieff gets to stay above the fray. The Liberals are going to have some bad days too, but it's been good so far and the denial here is hilarious. In 2 days, the media have already nicknamed Harper's plane "Scaremong-air." Have fun with that.

I agree with you, after what Ignatieff said entering into any coalition would be a deathknell. However, if it's THAT obvious to both you and I, what makes you think the Liberals would be stupid enough to do it? The fact that it's so bone jarringly stupid is reason enough. I'd put money on no coalition. If Ignatieff was SO hell bent on having a coalition, why do it now? Why didn't he ask the GG after the government just fell to "consider" her options? There's no sense behind the coalition boogeyman - just a leader of a party who thinks all Canadians are stupid - and, well, his section of supporters that prove, in terms of some segment of the population, he's right.

Wow. Talk about an attempt to deflect away from how horrible the coalition talking point is going for Harper. He's been tarred by the press all weekend by this and it's only going to get worse if he keeps denying the 2004 letter, which he will because he can never admit when he's wrong. In any case, this thread is a lie. The so called "deal" is actually an attempt to ouster Trudeau in Papineau. The Bloc are going to run a soft campaign in Outremont to help out Mulcair in Outremont as Couchon has a really good shot of winning the seat. The NDP are going to run a soft campaign in Papineau to help the Bloc defeaut Trudeau. So, why in gods name would the Liberals join an agreement meant to beat 2 different Liberal candidates? Absolutely ridiculous.

Hahahahaha wow, someone is in denial.

So what you're saying is that the government is supreme over parliament. Ah...

According to CBC just now, Ignatieff made an official statement this morning saying no coalition.

I'm not speaking for others, but the 2008 coalition wasn't meant to scare. It was definitely meant to take power. My only point was that Ignatieff was never a supporter of the coalition and I've personally heard him say he wouldn't support a coalition. He just doesn't want to get caught in an ugly soundbyte.

I personally think it's rather sad that CPC supporters have to go to UK papers to get good press.

Now, people are saying he wasn't clear. He was clear. He was abundantly clear. Ignatieff is smarter than to fall into the trap. He literally said if you vote NDP, you get the CPC. Now, if they voted NDP and get CPC, doesn't that say it right there he won't work with the NDP to topple the CPC? He's not answering the question the way reporter wants because it's a lose lose question and it's a soundbyte for the rest of the campaign. If he answers that coalitions are legal, even if he prefaces it with the fact that he won't enter into one with the NDP, the CPC will isolate that clip and run ad after ad with that clip in it. If he answers that is illegal, the CPC runs ad after ad of him contradicting himself with past statements. At least he took the time to answer questions. Answer me this: how many questions did Harper answer this morning? I wonder how hard the media will be with him.

So, you'd rather have a party that's in contempt of parliament now over one that you believe had contempt of parliament years ago and whose members you accuse are long gone? Really? Just admit you're a conservative partisan and will vote conservative no matter what. That's a better reason than the one you gave.