Canadian Political Polls

[jdobbin]

So they basically want criminals out of prison quicker, no matter how many violent crimes they've committed.

Uh, nope.

No, I was simply pointing out the idiocy of your comment which was the Tories would support abortion if it meant reductions in crime. My point was that you support abortion because you want fewer unwanted children in Canada.

I haven't said anything of the sort. I've said it is a health issue and not a criminal one.

Which simply shows that the Liberals were to weak kneed to say they morally supported the US.

They did say that. They just said Canada wold not participate in the invasion.

Hahahahahaha...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/j...unals-on-trial/

It seems the tribunals have targetted Jewish newspapers for hate speech, so I doubt support is that strong.

That's where you'd be wrong.

They've never stated they would consult Alberta when it came to who represents them in the Senate, and usually the Liberals for obvious reasons tell the western provinces to fuck off and let Ontario choose who represents them.

There's that belligerent tone that we've come to see too often if these forums. The Liberals have said no such thing.

Yes, elected is the keyword. If I have to choose between someone who is elected and accountable or someone who isn't, I'll always choose the former.

It is why I think the Senate should be abolished. I don't think we need another layer of government in Canada.

Probably because it forces the more populous regions to compromise with other provinces. It's unfortunate, but you have to understand that to some people they prefer an elected body that forces compromise for the regions.

There has been quite a few stand-offs rather than compromise.

Difference being that he cuts taxes, that is unlike the Liberals who want to put a tax on pretty well every product in Canada and create a more "progressive" tax system which punishes people for working harder.

The first thing Harper did in office was raise income taxes.

The difference being that the Liberals will make side deals with other provinces, except for Alberta as they don't have a chance of winning any seats there.

Another fiction.

Actually they aren't, can you please tell me when all our regulatory bodies were privatized. Either way it seems that your fears are based more on assumptions and fear than anything else.

The Tories have backed away from their initial intent after this listeria outbreak.

Yes, and we're all gratified that the current crop of Liberals such as yourself want to tax working Canadian's to help fund pet projects like universal daycare and pump more and more money into crappy artwork.

The anti-daycare stance of the Conservative is another reason why some Canadians will not support them.

The anti-arts stance is another.

Well it is a big tent party, it's just that since your extremely partisan and will vote Liberal no matter what, I doubt you'd ever support a different party.

I was going to say the same thing about partisan Conservatives who wouldn't want the majority of Liberals anyways.

As well you seem to be opposed to any discussion on hot button issues, so I'm not sure how anybody is supposed to convince someone who is close minded.

Can't recall where I was opposed to anything but please do keep personalizing.

[jdobbin]

As well Jdobbin, when it comes to the question of abortion the CPC has no policy on it, and their are currently prominent pro-choice MP's. Harper himself was known to be pro-choice when he was a Reform MP, so I doubt he'll really hoping for recriminalization.

However I'm tiring of people who always have knee jerk reactions when it comes to abortion, and will refuse to listen to any argument that contradicts their view. Currently most European nations have some restrictions on abortion, and a majority of Canadian's support some restrictions. To say that because their are pro-lifers in the CPC, it automatically means they'll outlaw it is absurd.

Harper is pro-choice? Do you ave a cite?

I believe abortion is a health issue. It isn't a knee jerk reaction. It is a position. Some Conservatives seem to want to criminalize aspects of it.

Not even the Republican Party was able to do that with all the years they controlled the levers of power in Washington.

They didn't have the numbers in the Supreme Court.

[Canadian Blue]

Uh, nope.

So the Liberals are for the three strikes rule, they just don't want violent criminals who have committed more than three offences to serve their time in prison.

I haven't said anything of the sort. I've said it is a health issue and not a criminal one.

Not really, it's more or less based on the fact that some individuals believe a child would be a nuisance and want it to be "evicted."

That's where you'd be wrong.

So you're saying that people can't be targetted by HRC's for making unpopular speech.

There's that belligerent tone that we've come to see too often if these forums. The Liberals have said no such thing.

No, the Liberals just tell Albertans that they should have no say who represents them in the Senate, and that they should learn to give more money to the federal government to pay for daycare in Toronto as that part of the country voted Liberal.

The first thing Harper did in office was raise income taxes.

By how much exactly, I believe taxes in general were lowered in the country.

Another fiction.

You've been saying that often, and then go on to say that Harper wants to make all abortion in Canada illegal, bring in the death penalty, and repeal gay marriage. It seems that you have a this pleasent fiction which thinks the only savior for Canada is Stephane Dion.

The Tories have backed away from their initial intent after this listeria outbreak.

Probably because their never was an intent to get the government completely out of food testing.

The anti-daycare stance of the Conservative is another reason why some Canadians will not support them.

The anti-arts stance is another.

It's not really anti-arts, more or less I don't like the idea of paying people to go vacation in Cuba. Especially someone like Avi Lewis.

As for being anti-daycare, I think they're simply opposed to using taxpayer money to fund daycare. Their position was the correct one which was it should be up to individual parents how to spend their money.

I was going to say the same thing about partisan Conservatives who wouldn't want the majority of Liberals anyways.

So you fully admit that you aren't fiscally conservative, correct? I don't see how someone who supports taxing Canadians further to make way for government spending on increasing the bureaucracy in Ottawa is fiscally conservative.

Harper is pro-choice? Do you ave a cite?

It's common knowledge that one of the reasons Harper left the Reform Party was due to its social conservatism. An unbiased political observer would recognize this.

I believe abortion is a health issue. It isn't a knee jerk reaction. It is a position.

You don't think abortion has anything to deal with the question of when human life begins.

They didn't have the numbers in the Supreme Court.

Actually the Republicans have been known to talk greatly about supporting traditional values and then paying lip service to the base.

[Canadian Blue]

As for being a partisan hack, I wouldn't say that. I simply see Harper as better than all the alternatives. I'd prefer it if Harper were to make further cuts to the arts and the public service. However I won't vote for the Liberals as I don't like the idea of a massive federal bureaucracy attempting to tell all the citizens of Canada how they should live their lives. Not to mention the Liberal Party and their open ignorance towards members of the military and law enforcement.

[jdobbin]

So the Liberals are for the three strikes rule, they just don't want violent criminals who have committed more than three offences to serve their time in prison.

The Liberals never took that stand of violent offenders.

Not really, it's more or less based on the fact that some individuals believe a child would be a nuisance and want it to be "evicted."

That is your opinion.

So you're saying that people can't be targetted by HRC's for making unpopular speech.

I've stated the Supreme Court has made it far clearer what free speech is.

No, the Liberals just tell Albertans that they should have no say who represents them in the Senate, and that they should learn to give more money to the federal government to pay for daycare in Toronto as that part of the country voted Liberal.

That is not what happened at all nor was it anything any Liberal said.

By how much exactly, I believe taxes in general were lowered in the country.

He raised income taxes by a half percentage to pay for his GST cut. This is all well documented. You can read what the CTF said about the tax cuts. They complained bitterly that the Tories didn't even come close to matching Martin's tax cuts for two budgets.

You've been saying that often, and then go on to say that Harper wants to make all abortion in Canada illegal, bring in the death penalty, and repeal gay marriage. It seems that you have a this pleasent fiction which thinks the only savior for Canada is Stephane Dion.

I didn't say anything of the sort. I said that Harper was not going to make legislation on abortion a priority but he did allow private member's bills to come forward that could re-criminalize aspects of abortion. He nipped the first one headed to a vote because he believed it would look bad for the government just prior to an election. As far as when Harper gets a majority, I don't doubt that he will be under a lot of pressure to re-visit the same sex marriage issue.

Probably because their never was an intent to get the government completely out of food testing.

I think that is what the documents seemed to suggest.

It's not really anti-arts, more or less I don't like the idea of paying people to go vacation in Cuba. Especially someone like Avi Lewis.

It was a scattergun approach that hit a lot of artists such as some of the premiere ballet companies and the like.

As for being anti-daycare, I think they're simply opposed to using taxpayer money to fund daycare. Their position was the correct one which was it should be up to individual parents how to spend their money.

And not produce any daycare spaces as promised.

So you fully admit that you aren't fiscally conservative, correct? I don't see how someone who supports taxing Canadians further to make way for government spending on increasing the bureaucracy in Ottawa is fiscally conservative.

I'm a fiscal conservative and the Liberals have delivered on tax cuts and spending cuts. No matter how many times the Tories say that isn't true, it is true.

The Liberal environment plans is as much tax cuts as it is a carbon tax. It is more of a fixed cost than the Tory cap and trade idea which will raise gas prices 40 cents a litre.

It's common knowledge that one of the reasons Harper left the Reform Party was due to its social conservatism. An unbiased political observer would recognize this.

A citation would help.

You don't think abortion has anything to deal with the question of when human life begins.

I don't think it is a legal issue nor do I think it should be criminalized. As far as I'm concerned, the legal recognition of a separate human being with all the rights thereof begins at birth. Until then, it is an issue of health. Few women or doctors perform abortions in the third trimester and even then it is generally a matter of health rather. The vast majority of abortions happen in the first trimester with the number decreasing very rapidly thereafter.

I've already stated I believed a human life begins when brain activity begins and ends. I believe human rights begin at birth because I don't think a fetus' rights should supersede that of the mother's.

Actually the Republicans have been known to talk greatly about supporting traditional values and then paying lip service to the base.

We'll see if they win and get the number of Supremes they want. Roe v Wade could be dead.

Edited September 7, 2008 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

As for being a partisan hack, I wouldn't say that.

There is nothing wrong with being partisan. It is a bit different that a party spokesman.

I certainly am not that. I say openly that the Liberals will lose large in this election based on the trend seen so far.

There has been quite a lot written about how Harper wants the Liberals destroyed completely as a functioning party. I believe there might be some truth to that and I believe that could happen.

I suspect that some in the Conservative party would not mind a simple two party dynamic especially if it was the NDP or Greens who were the other choice.

[jbg]

There's that belligerent tone that we've come to see too often if these forums. The Liberals have said no such thing.

The Salmon Arm (one finger) salute?

[Canadian Blue]

I'm a fiscal conservative and the Liberals have delivered on tax cuts and spending cuts. No matter how many times the Tories say that isn't true, it is true.

Not anymore though, as you yourself stated the Liberals are going to use the carbon tax to punish those in the upper income bracket to help redistribute the wealth.

Whether you like it or not you're not fiscally conservative, and I doubt many fiscal conservatives would support a strong interventionist government as the Liberals seem to support. Hell even your star candidate Justin Trudeau made the absurd claim that capitalism would be our downfall.

I've stated the Supreme Court has made it far clearer what free speech is.

Is that why Mark Steyn and Macleans are forced to appear before human rights commissions, be forced to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal bills, while the federal government pays all of the bills for Elmasry?

Whether you like it or not this country has gone on a dangerous road when it comes to restricting freedom of speech, and I unfortunately take the libertarian approach that you must defend the freedom of speech for people whom you despise.

The Liberals never took that stand of violent offenders.

So what was the stand of the Liberals, and why did they block bills aimed at getting tougher on violent criminals.

That is not what happened at all nor was it anything any Liberal said.

Wasn't the former Liberal ethic "screw the west, we'll take the rest."

I said that Harper was not going to make legislation on abortion a priority but he did allow private member's bills to come forward that could re-criminalize aspects of abortion.

Then are you arguing that we shouldn't allow any debate in the house of commons on abortion. That doesn't seem to be respecting the rights of the individual MP's.

I think that is what the documents seemed to suggest.

What documents?

And not produce any daycare spaces as promised.

That's one promise I'm glad he broke because daycare shouldn't be, nor has it been a federal responsiblity. Parents are responsible for raising children, not a federal bureaucrat.

I've already stated I believed a human life begins when brain activity begins and ends. I believe human rights begin at birth because I don't think a fetus' rights should supersede that of the mother's.

Then the argument that a fetus is a seperate entity even at conception shouldn't even be heard in Canada, and at a minimum any arguments thereof should be quashed as many left wing universities are attempting to do.

[jdobbin]

Not anymore though, as you yourself stated the Liberals are going to use the carbon tax to punish those in the upper income bracket to help redistribute the wealth.

Where did I say that?

Whether you like it or not you're not fiscally conservative, and I doubt many fiscal conservatives would support a strong interventionist government as the Liberals seem to support. Hell even your star candidate Justin Trudeau made the absurd claim that capitalism would be our downfall.

I certainly know a big spending Tory government when I see it.

Is that why Mark Steyn and Macleans are forced to appear before human rights commissions, be forced to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal bills, while the federal government pays all of the bills for Elmasry?

Whether you like it or not this country has gone on a dangerous road when it comes to restricting freedom of speech, and I unfortunately take the libertarian approach that you must defend the freedom of speech for people whom you despise.

As I said, I support what the Supreme Court decision was. It eminently wise.

So what was the stand of the Liberals, and why did they block bills aimed at getting tougher on violent criminals.

Why did the Tories say no amendments at all? It was to play partisan politics.

Wasn't the former Liberal ethic "screw the west, we'll take the rest."

One Liberal said that. A whole host of Tories have stated idiotic things as well. Seems to remember what a certain Tory PM said about eastern Canada before he became PM.

Then are you arguing that we shouldn't allow any debate in the house of commons on abortion. That doesn't seem to be respecting the rights of the individual MP's.

I didn't say any debate couldn't happen. It was the Tories who pulled the private member's bill, remember? I said the majority of Liberals would not likely support re-criminalization of abortion.

What documents?

The ones that got a food inspector fired. It has been all over the news.

That's one promise I'm glad he broke because daycare shouldn't be, nor has it been a federal responsiblity. Parents are responsible for raising children, not a federal bureaucrat.

Bureaucrats weren't raising kids. We have been over this debate before. I have no problem if Harper states he is against daycare. He certainly should stop promising he is creating dayscare spaces when he is not.

Then the argument that a fetus is a seperate entity even at conception shouldn't even be heard in Canada, and at a minimum any arguments thereof should be quashed as many left wing universities are attempting to do.

I just stated my views. I have no idea about what the rest of what you said means in regards to abortion and the criminal code.

[Canadian Blue]

Where did I say that?

Correction a Liberal MP stated it.

I certainly know a big spending Tory government when I see it.

and I know an even bigger spending Liberal government when I see it. That is obvious considering the fact that the rising star of the Liberal Party Justin Trudeau has stated that capitalism will be our downfall. For some reason I foresee a much more interventionist and statist stance from the Liberals in the future.

Why did the Tories say no amendments at all? It was to play partisan politics.

After all, only Tories play partisan politics. That is as compared to the Liberals who merely argue that Canadian soldiers allow women to be raped in Afghanistan and that the Tories are secretly part of a conspiracy with the Republicans to destroy Canada.

One Liberal said that. A whole host of Tories have stated idiotic things as well. Seems to remember what a certain Tory PM said about eastern Canada before he became PM.

The difference being that one stated the Atlantic provinces should learn how to become more economically self sufficient, while the other stated that the east should steal wealth from the west. I consider that a big difference.

I didn't say any debate couldn't happen. It was the Tories who pulled the private member's bill, remember? I said the majority of Liberals would not likely support re-criminalization of abortion.

That has always been the case, even with the Mulroney Progressive Conservatives.

The ones that got a food inspector fired. It has been all over the news.

Can you give me a source. Especially since it seems the current government will likely bring forward criminal charges against those responsible for the outbreak.

Bureaucrats weren't raising kids. We have been over this debate before. I have no problem if Harper states he is against daycare. He certainly should stop promising he is creating dayscare spaces when he is not.

Actually, bureaucrats would be raising kids as the federal government would take daycare as a federal responsibility.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Trudeau is right. Look at the impending fall of the US economy and the rise of the European hybrid system to see the reality of the facts. Communism does work either, but a combination of social programs and private enterprise does in fact provide greater net benefit to the citizen. Look at European healthcare and compare it to ours.

Watch out for Trudeau, he is like Panasonic, slightly ahead of his time.

[jdobbin]

and I know an even bigger spending Liberal government when I see it. That is obvious considering the fact that the rising star of the Liberal Party Justin Trudeau has stated that capitalism will be our downfall. For some reason I foresee a much more interventionist and statist stance from the Liberals in the future.

The evidence from the last two governments was that the biggest cuts in spending and the biggest cuts in taxes cam from Liberals.

After all, only Tories play partisan politics. That is as compared to the Liberals who merely argue that Canadian soldiers allow women to be raped in Afghanistan and that the Tories are secretly part of a conspiracy with the Republicans to destroy Canada.

Or Harper saying in previous campaign that the Liberals were associated with pedophiles. Over the top gutter politics.

The difference being that one stated the Atlantic provinces should learn how to become more economically self sufficient, while the other stated that the east should steal wealth from the west. I consider that a big difference.

Probably why the eastern provinces distrust and dislike Harper. Most of them figure that Harper broke a promise.

That has always been the case, even with the Mulroney Progressive Conservatives.

This isn't the PCs as I have been reminded of quite often.

Can you give me a source. Especially since it seems the current government will likely bring forward criminal charges against those responsible for the outbreak.

It was posted in the Listeria thread and talked about at length .

http://canadianpress.google.com/article/AL...8yAAGcJOeLk4IgA

Word of the Conservatives' plan leaked last month following reports the Canadian Food Inspection Agency fired one of its biologists for sending a secret cabinet document to his union.

Actually, bureaucrats would be raising kids as the federal government would take daycare as a federal responsibility.

Untrue. The provincial/federal agreement left daycares a provincial responsibility and the provinces left it to various daycare providers to build spaces.

The Tories ended those agreements and those agreements even according to Solberg were responsible for building spaces. The Tory plan to have private businesses build spaces failed completely.

[Canadian Blue]

Trudeau is right. Look at the impending fall of the US economy and the rise of the European hybrid system to see the reality of the facts. Communism does work either, but a combination of social programs and private enterprise does in fact provide greater net benefit to the citizen. Look at European healthcare and compare it to ours.

Watch out for Trudeau, he is like Panasonic, slightly ahead of his time.

No thanks, I'd rather follow New Zealand than France when it comes to economic policy. As well I highly doubt Trudeau would be in favour of allowing any private enterprise in healthcare, as that would be too "capitalist."

The evidence from the last two governments was that the biggest cuts in spending and the biggest cuts in taxes cam from Liberals.

More or less because they were forced to break their promises when it came to cutting the GST, and abided by NAFTA which was a Tory creation. Now correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't a certain Liberal Party opposed to free trade back in the day.

As for the tax cut, it came right before the 2000 election, and was obviously done to take the thunder out from the Canadian Alliance.

It was posted in the Listeria thread and talked about at length .

http://canadianpress.google.com/article/AL...8yAAGcJOeLk4IgA

First of all the Listeria outbreak happened despite the government inspections agency presence. Second I tend to agree with what the food safety expert argues at the lower portion of the article.

But food-safety expert Doug Powell said companies are likely to diligently inspect their products since no one wants a recall associated with their name.

Powell, of the Food Safety Network at Kansas State University, said governments are "not the be-all and end-all of food safety knowledge."

"Government's there to set some standards and some level of accountability," he said.

"The supply chain, from farm right through to retailer or restaurant often have far higher standards than government minimal standards."

[Jerry J. Fortin]

You can FOLLOW whom so ever you choose, however, personally I think that would be a mistake.

Canada could lead, but that would take balls and brains, something lacking within our system. We are a nation of FOLLOWERS, not leaders. It is why we elect weak leaders, we are afraid of strong ones.

[blueblood]

You can FOLLOW whom so ever you choose, however, personally I think that would be a mistake.

Canada could lead, but that would take balls and brains, something lacking within our system. We are a nation of FOLLOWERS, not leaders. It is why we elect weak leaders, we are afraid of strong ones.

Yes Harper is a weak leader, he not only has complete obidience of his caucus, he told China where to go during the olympics, to name a few.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Then support him if that is what you want. I will not, nor will I say he is the right leader for our country. He doesn't even keep his promise not to call an election until 2009. I will take politicians one promise at a time and then call them liars when they break their promises. Harper is a liar.

[blueblood]

Then support him if that is what you want. I will not, nor will I say he is the right leader for our country. He doesn't even keep his promise not to call an election until 2009. I will take politicians one promise at a time and then call them liars when they break their promises. Harper is a liar.

looks like they are all liars, that being said harper kept a lot of his

[jdobbin]

More or less because they were forced to break their promises when it came to cutting the GST, and abided by NAFTA which was a Tory creation. Now correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't a certain Liberal Party opposed to free trade back in the day.

The expanded NAFTA was all Liberal work.

I've already said that the GST promise was one of the stupidest promises the Liberals ever made. Sort of like Harper's promise never to end the income trusts, don't you think?

In any event, the Liberals had a majority and there was very little pressure that the Opposition exerted through most of that time. The Liberals cut spending and taxes even when the deficit ended.

As for the tax cut, it came right before the 2000 election, and was obviously done to take the thunder out from the Canadian Alliance.

The biggest tax cuts came when Martin was prime minister.

First of all the Listeria outbreak happened despite the government inspections agency presence. Second I tend to agree with what the food safety expert argues at the lower portion of the article.

Generally good companies care about good safety. The problem is that the government still requires oversight because it is too often a conflict for diligent employees to report safety problems.

[jdobbin]

Latest poll from Strategic Counsel.

Massive majority indicated for the Tories.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...me=election2008

In all three provinces, the Conservatives had a significant lead in the key ridings, with the most support in B.C. battleground ridings. The Green Party has also made gains (percentage-point change from 2006 election in brackets):

* Conservatives: 45 per cent (+10)

* Liberals: 25 per cent (-8)

* New Democrats: 17 per cent (-10)

* Green Party: 13 per cent (+8)

The Ontario battleground ridings show similar results, with the Liberals and New Democrats again bleeding votes to the Conservatives and Greens. But the Greens have made the most significant improvement in support, passing the NDP (percentage-point change from 2006 election in brackets):

* Conservatives: 41 per cent (+4)

* Liberals: 29 per cent (-10)

* Green Party: 17 per cent (+12)

* New Democrats: 13 per cent (-6)

In Quebec, the battleground ridings favour the Conservatives over the Bloc, while the Liberals have only fallen slightly (percentage-point change from 2006 election in brackets):

* Conservatives: 32 per cent (+9)

* Bloc Quebecois: 28 per cent (-9)

* Liberals: 24 per cent (-4)

* New Democrats: 11 (+3)

* Green Party: 5 (+1)

[normanchateau]

Harper himself was known to be pro-choice when he was a Reform MP, so I doubt he'll really hoping for recriminalization.

Here's an interview with Harper in 2006:

Newman: On the issue of abortion, will you pledge that there will be no legislation on abortion, there will never be a free vote in Parliament on that issue?

Harper: Never is a long time. What I'm saying is I have no desire to see that issue debated in the near future. We're saying very clear in our platform we're not going to support or initiate abortion legislation and frankly I don't want this Parliament to have an abortion debate.

Newman: So to be clear, you support a woman's right to choose?

Harper: I've always said my views on the abortion issue are complex, I don't fall into any of the neat polar extremes on this issue.

Newman: Explain them then if they are complex.

Harper: No, I don't need to because I'm not proceeding with an abortion agenda.

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=...33-277b9108da61

In other words, Harper refuses to state where he stands on abortion and won't introduce anti-abortion legislation in the short term.

[blueblood]

Here's an interview with Harper in 2006:

Newman: On the issue of abortion, will you pledge that there will be no legislation on abortion, there will never be a free vote in Parliament on that issue?

Harper: Never is a long time. What I'm saying is I have no desire to see that issue debated in the near future. We're saying very clear in our platform we're not going to support or initiate abortion legislation and frankly I don't want this Parliament to have an abortion debate.

Newman: So to be clear, you support a woman's right to choose?

Harper: I've always said my views on the abortion issue are complex, I don't fall into any of the neat polar extremes on this issue.

Newman: Explain them then if they are complex.

Harper: No, I don't need to because I'm not proceeding with an abortion agenda.

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=...33-277b9108da61

In other words, Harper refuses to state where he stands on abortion and won't introduce anti-abortion legislation in the short term.

He's not wanting to open a can of worms, that's just smart. Let's ask Jack Layton his stance on communism while we're at it.

[normanchateau]

He's not wanting to open a can of worms, that's just smart.

What's especially smart is Harper's refusal to state his personal views. That way his supporters can believe whatever they want to believe. Moderates think he's one of them. So do social conservatives and religious nuts.

[jbg]

What's especially smart is Harper's refusal to state his personal views. That way his supporters can believe whatever they want to believe. Moderates think he's one of them. So do social conservatives and religious nuts.

Given Canada's makeup are his views even relevant? A change in abortion laws is most unlikely.

[blueblood]

What's especially smart is Harper's refusal to state his personal views. That way his supporters can believe whatever they want to believe. Moderates think he's one of them. So do social conservatives and religious nuts.

Honestly, this hidden agenda stuff just doesn't fly with Canadians anymore, it didn't fly in 06 when it booted the Libs out of power and it won't fly now. To suggest that is wandering into tinfoil hat and listening to toaster territory. If that's the best the opposition strategists can do, it's tory majority.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Election time again, how wonderful. Its time for the sheep to pick which wolf will hide amongst us. The left one or right one, the black one or the white one it doesn't really matter which one actually wins the election because there isn't one single group of partisans that has the balls and the brains to make a difference to citizens.

No party is advocating abolishing income taxes, so we will continue to be taxed into to our graves. No party is advocating cutting the bureaucracy of federal government so we have no hope of reducing the burden of income tax. No party is advocating constitutional reform so we will not be able to change the senate and at least get some value from it. No party is advocating doing anything that would benefit citizens without costing them money. So what good are these partisan groups anyway?