Bryan

I can't see it. Not yet anyway. The LPC brand still has enough true believers that even if it does shank to nothing, it will still take several more elections. Liberal core supporters are different than for other parties (IMO), in that they support the name and the logo more than any specific policy direction.

No, that is precisely what the purpose of it is.

Another 39% of Canadians were happy enough with the job he was doing that they didn't feel the need to vote against him either.

Because it benefits the whole community.

Yes. Seriously bad optics, but yes, he could do that. The military never consults parliament. Opposition leaders may (or may not) be briefed on any deployments, but the house has no say. The PM sends them. Anything it could (or could not) do before. They are still the government, nothing has changed in that respect. Technically. In practice, he does what he’s “advised” by the PM.

Having people maintain their homes is good for the entire country. Any policy that encourages that is good policy.

And yet it has happened before.

No kidding! You just might be the most centrist person on these boards! Middle of the Road Derek! edit: Whoops! HAL just rode right down the stripe!

It does seem logical that would be the case, but that is not how our system works.

Only if the PM relinquishes it. He's still the PM until he does so, even if he loses the election. He can even advise the GG that he intends to try to continue to govern anyway.

Not even then. Even if a sitting PM loses an election, he/she STILL is the PM. The power is not taken from him, he willingly yields to the will of the people and hands it over.

Conservative: 74% Libertarian: 69% Christian Heritage: 33% Liberal: 19% Bloc Quebecois 10% Green 5% NDP 4% Communist 2%

The Prime Minister remains the Prime Minister until the next one takes over. At no point is "no one in charge". In addition, the Crown also always remains. If the Prime Minister is unable to perform his or her duties, the Governor General and/or the Queen can also make decisions (there would have to be a serious crisis for that to happen). As previously mentioned, the House gets dissolved when the writ is dropped, but the Senate does not. The business of the government doesn't stop either. Key Ministers are often still on the job and working on government business during a campaign.

If someone makes conversation, and the other person looks for a reason to be upset about something, the second person in that scenario is the only one acting like a jerk. They are the ones being confrontational. They are the ones sabotaging the conversation by being ridiculous. At that point, I wouldn't care if I had a conversation with them anymore, because I'm talking to someone who values drama over content. If someone did use the word "negro" in conversation, you're probably talking to someone who is 80 years old. What good would it do to get into an argument with an old man over the semantics of ever-changing racial terminology? As for "You People", that's the same issue as "where are you from". EVERYBODY is "you people" to somebody. In Cuba, all Canadians are "you people". In the kickboxing class at my gym, all the jiu-jitsu practitioners are "you people". To left-wingers, conservatives are "you people". To car drivers, cyclists are "you people". If that's a conversation stopper to someone, that's just more drama.

That fake conversation that you just made up? No, not very intelligent at all.

No. There is no actual fund. No money was "moved".

There is no actual fund. It's a buffer that finance ministers customarily built into their budgets. All the smaller contingency means is Joe Oliver gave himself less margin for error than previous finance ministers have. It certainly is possible that he should have given himself more room, but saying that he took anything out of any fund is categorically false.

Right. Because all black people are incapable of intelligent discussion, and will assault anyone who disagrees with them.

He should know, but he still hasn't explained where the substantial extra costs are incurred. What specifically needs to cost $100 million + more? The same number of houses need to be enumerated, the same number of polling stations need to be rented for the same number of voting opportunities. Who is needed for 80 days, and what will they be doing? The enumerators do not need extra time, the returning officers don't need extra time.

His base does get it, and they like it. People vote for Harper because he does things like this, it's what they want him to do.

Rebates for the election expenses I get, but why would any other expense be higher? The same polls will be open the same number of times, the same enumeration gets done, so the rents and the staffing costs will be identical. Where do the other costs come in?

Harper has already agreed to five debates, more than any other PM has ever done. Why should he do more?

Yup, exactly what you were already told.

Waldo, what you posted confirms exactly what Smallc just told you. The only "contingency" is the buffer that was deliberately calculated for in the budget -- there is no rainy day fund sitting there and there never has been.

The only thing "unfair" about our current tax structure is how much more in taxes people with higher incomes pay. The entire system is heavily weighted in favour of people with lower incomes. Now more than ever before.