Mr. Harper is going to win.

[mikedavid00]

If the Liberals force an election in January they will be committing political suicide. The same thing was said after 2006 and that didn't happen either.

It's too bad the left didn't have you two for consultants, the CPC would be better off.

Remember that right before parliment was disolved there was heavy infighting to oust Dion from party insiders.

Rae had to have the task of doing that whole speech plagerism bit and I'm sure he's not happy with the Liberals for that. You can tell he wasn't happy about having to do it. I heard him on the radio on the CBC and he just wasn't that into it. They should have stuck that with someone like.. darn.. forget his name.. the detective young guy who always paints some conspiracy theory against the Conservatives. Or Ruby would have been a much better choice.

Sticking Rae with that bit was emberassing. There's a message behind everything

[Topaz]

Why should the cpc replace him? Just to appease you? You would never vote CPC no matter who the leader was.

Why replace him? If Harper can't win a MAJORITY against DION, the guy they call weak, no leadership, etc. how is he going to win against the next Lib leader who will be stronger?????? CPC??? the canadian progressive party? BUT I have twice for Mulroney. Would I vote for the conservative/alliance party, can't see it.

[Topaz]

If the Liberals force an election in January they will be committing political suicide. The same thing was said after 2006 and that didn't happen either.

It's too bad the left didn't have you two for consultants, the CPC would be better off.

So what happens with Harper's law of Oct.09 election?? Has it been changed to Oct.'12?

[nothinarian]

Who might determine the catalyst?

The Governor General might just ask the Opposition what they could do.

Doubtful - and it would take all three by the looks of things to cooperate in governing but we shall see this eve

[nothinarian]

Remember that right before parliment was disolved there was heavy infighting to oust Dion from party insiders.

Rae had to have the task of doing that whole speech plagerism bit and I'm sure he's not happy with the Liberals for that. You can tell he wasn't happy about having to do it. I heard him on the radio on the CBC and he just wasn't that into it. They should have stuck that with someone like.. darn.. forget his name.. the detective young guy who always paints some conspiracy theory against the Conservatives. Or Ruby would have been a much better choice.

Sticking Rae with that bit was emberassing. There's a message behind everything

Mark Holland

[lukin]

I don't get why a person like you insists on gun control. This issue has been hammered to death. CRIMINALS will not register their guns. You can ban handguns all you want, ciminals will still get them.

Lefties have no clue about the real world. i just shake my head.

Edited October 14, 2008 by lukin

[mikedavid00]

Mark Holland

Yes how could I forget.

He was the perfect one for the job. It fit his nitch very well.

I'm amazed they stuck that with Rae. I'm sure there was a message in that.

[myata]

That may be but I'd rather run over cost on justice and have safer streets then trying to counsel hardened violent offenders with a hug a thug mentality which they must be just laughing at.

One (safer streets) isn't consequent from the other (mandatory tough sentences). Fact: Canada already has one of the highest incarceration rates among the developed countries, and also higher violent crime rate than most. Anther fact: US has absolutely the highest rate of prison population per capita, and by far the highest rate of violent crime. "Get tough" strategy doesn't work in practice but it's an easy sell to a less sophisticated part of our electorate, which is looking for simple and fast solutions no matter how complex a problem may be.

[blueblood]

One (safer streets) isn't consequent from the other (mandatory tough sentences). Fact: Canada already has one of the highest incarceration rates among the developed countries, and also higher violent crime rate than most. Anther fact: US has absolutely the highest rate of prison population per capita, and by far the highest rate of violent crime. "Get tough" strategy doesn't work in practice but it's an easy sell to a less sophisticated part of our electorate, which is looking for simple and fast solutions no matter how complex a problem may be.

didn't the crime rate in cali take a drop?

[myata]

I don't know; is it a question (see above), or a statement?

[nothinarian]

Yes how could I forget.

He was the perfect one for the job. It fit his nitch very well.

I'm amazed they stuck that with Rae. I'm sure there was a message in that.

attack dog is what they needed and you are right - Rae didn't seem to be comfortable carrying the ball

I don't buy into your conspiracy on Rae but stranger things have happenned

[Argus]

One (safer streets) isn't consequent from the other (mandatory tough sentences). Fact: Canada already has one of the highest incarceration rates among the developed countries, and also higher violent crime rate than most. Anther fact: US has absolutely the highest rate of prison population per capita, and by far the highest rate of violent crime. "Get tough" strategy doesn't work in practice but it's an easy sell to a less sophisticated part of our electorate, which is looking for simple and fast solutions no matter how complex a problem may be.

The US get-tough is less successful than it might be - their crime rate is much reduced - because they have vast slums peopled by multiple generations of the underclass which are a breeding ground for drugs, violence and crime. Most of their long term offenders are drug and gang offenders. What most of us want is a get-tough on violent offender mentality.

You might think the get-tough message only works on the "less sophisticated" but I don't know anyone, liberal or otherwise, regardless of education, who disapproves of locking up violent people for long periods of time. What doesn't work is the bleeding-heart liberal approach which pretends that all people are victims of circumstances and can be reformed. Since that approach took root in the prison and court system crime has skyrocketed. I'm not aware of the stats for Canada but in the US 2/3rds of all offenders who get out of jail are rearrested not too long afterwards, leading to the revolving door which so infuriates ordinary people who are the victims of these criminals.

[stignasty]

Can we please try to stay on topic please?

Says the guy who has been on the forums for a day.

If you get someone to read it to you, you might be able to follow along.

[wolfd]

Harper will get a bigger minority gov't than he had going into this election. That's nowhere near a landslide.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Another minority.....

None of them smart enough to govern.

[normanchateau]

So what is next for the parties including the CPC?

Harper will do what he believes will win him a majority and he knows that means winning more seats in Quebec. Until late in the campaign, Harper's strategy was to throw billions of dollars at Quebec.

Here's an excerpt from a 2007 article describing Harper's 2007 and 2008 budget:

"Harper's budget last week gave a desperate Quebec Liberal Premier Jean Charest $700 million so that Quebec taxpayers could have a huge tax cut. And Harper promised more to come - $4.1 billion more to be precise, by next year.

The money for that pre-election graft was pickpocketed by Harper directly from the rest of Canada's wallets."

http://billtieleman.blogspot.com/2007/03/b...ote-buying.html

Harper's error was timing. He made the announcement in 2007 but shovelled the billions of dollars to Quebec in 2008. By election time, Quebecers had forgotten the announcement. Next time he'll make the announcement and call the election immediately after. Harper supporters will view this as a brilliant strategy as long as it achieves a majority government. Spending billions to bribe Quebecers is acceptable as long as it's done by the Conservatives. Harper did it in 2007. He'll do it again.