LPC Campaign Co-Chair Advises TransCanada

[poochy]

I am.

I'm also aware that the person that has run the most corrupt government in Canadian history, with his party cheating in each of the last 3 elections, is standing on the podium by himself. Because even his past PM's have abandoned him.

So you are capable of making this up, but not really aware of anything.

[Vancouver King]

The situation is extremely volatile and I'm concerned the Conservatives will be able to use this to get back in. It's exactly their style.

You can't be serious. We are 3 days out and Tories have zero chance at forming gov't. What can happen is Liberal momentum will push into majority territory - an outcome nearly as bad as a Tory re-election, as this prominent resignation so vividly demonstrates.

Craig Oliver of CTV just reported overnight polling suggests this conflict of interest ('pigs at the trough') issue might be having a blunt effect on the Liberal surge - a sure sign the election gods, at least, have the public interest in mind.

Contrast that to Harper's 10 year scumbag gov't and Trudeau's unforgiveable mistake of hiring an oil industry lobbyist as his national campaign co-chair.

Join the late effort to apply brakes to the Liberal surge.

Edited October 16, 2015 by Vancouver King

[ToadBrother]

Join the late effort to apply brakes to the Liberal surge.

We can only hope. This next Parliament is our best chance at electoral reform, but you can be sure that if the Liberals had a majority, they'd do everything in their power to keep the system that allowed them to achieve it.

[ReeferMadness]

You can't be serious. We are 3 days out and Tories have zero chance at forming gov't. What can happen is Liberal momentum will push into majority territory - an outcome nearly as bad as a Tory re-election, as this prominent resignation so vividly demonstrates.

I'm dead serious. This election isn't over - according to polltracker, the Conservatives are up almost a point overnight. And Conservative vote is more "efficient" (code for the fact that the voting system favors them more than other parties). I think Liberal vote would need to top 40% to put them in majority territory and I don't see it. Nor do I think the Liberals are nearly as bad.

Contrast that to Harper's 10 year scumbag gov't and Trudeau's unforgiveable mistake of hiring an oil industry lobbyist as his national campaign co-chair.

It's not been determined that he's a lobbyist but even if he is, I'm sure a full list of who is on what campaign would make for interesting reason. Everyone (even the candidates) have other interests.

[eyeball]

I'm more incensed by people who steal elections than people who steal money.

Given the stakes and how getting away with the former would facilitate the latter I can't disagree with this sentiment at all.

Stealing power should definitely be considered the greater crime.

[WestCanMan]

I'm asking a good question. Right now, all we have is a juicy allegation. Who benefits from the leaked memo and what is their role in this? The Conservatives have an impressive track record in election cheating so forgive me if I'd like to understand their role (if any) in this.

How many candidates have been dismissed across all parties for relatively trivial past comments? They were dismissed the minute any newsworthy information came up so that the party didn't spend its time defending them. This is no different. He's out because he was a distraction. I'm in no position to judge whether what he did was a minor indiscretion or corrupt behavior - and neither is anyone else. There is no information.

You answered those questions with a combination of lies and accusations. Are you an elected MP?

[ReeferMadness]

We can only hope. This next Parliament is our best chance at electoral reform, but you can be sure that if the Liberals had a majority, they'd do everything in their power to keep the system that allowed them to achieve it.

I don't see a majority being realistic. The maximum poll number I've seen is 37% and I don't think that's enough. They're likely to wind up with 130-140 seats.

[On Guard for Thee]

I don't see a majority being realistic. The maximum poll number I've seen is 37% and I don't think that's enough. They're likely to wind up with 130-140 seats.

Poll Tracker has them at 135 just now which hasn't changed much. This Trans Canada thing hasn't had, nor is it likely to have, any significant effect. A bit of bad PR that could only give a slight boost to the NDP since Harper can't spout off about it to any effect with Bruce Carson on trial.

[Vancouver King]

I don't see a majority being realistic. The maximum poll number I've seen is 37% and I don't think that's enough. They're likely to wind up with 130-140 seats.

A surging party with 140 seats is a very possible 170 seat party in 3 days.

Not pushing back now risks a Liberal majority not in the public interest.

[ReeferMadness]

A surging party with 140 seats is a very possible 170 seat party in 3 days.

Not pushing back now risks a Liberal majority not in the public interest.

It's not impossible but I think it's a lower risk than the Conservatives making a comeback.

[WestCanMan]

[url=http://www.torontosun

I am.

I'm also aware that the person that has run the most corrupt government in Canadian history, with his party cheating in each of the last 3 elections, is standing on the podium by himself. Because even his past PM's have abandoned him.

Are you saying that overspending on an election campaign is as bad as the things that Cretien did reefermadness? You're comparing apples and oranges.

Trudeau is crying that the Harper govt is too fixated on the oil sector and in the background his top aides are paving the way for lobbyists from that sector.

[cybercoma]

The bigger thing diminishing the effect of TransCanada is that 3.6 million out of somewhere in the neighbourhood of 13-14 million voters have already cast ballots.

Edited October 16, 2015 by cybercoma

[ToadBrother]

The bigger thing diminishing the effect of TransCanada is that 3.6 million out of somewhere in the neighbourhood of 13-14 million voters have already cast ballots.

I think the biggest thing is that the electorate decided a couple of weeks ago that the Tories had to go. At that point, anything short of video showing Trudeau receiving bribes or eating babies is going to fall flat. I honestly doubt the Gagnier affair will cost the Liberals any significant number of votes, because, really, this election isn't about Trudeau at all, it's about Harper. This is the referendum on the Conservative government, and as a number of commentators, particular John Ivison at the National Post, have determined is that the voters want change. Whether it's because they think the Tories have been in power long enough, or as I suspect, they well and truly, even conservative voters, dislike the way Harper governs.

It has nothing to do with policies at all. In fact, I'd be hard pressed to look at an election where policies meant less than this one. This is about the electorate, even in some Tory strongholds, saying "We want someone else." Full stop.

This is why the Tories were such fools for not showing Harper the door 18 months ago. We can talk about how overawed the Tories are, as ReeferMadness does, and I agree that's a factor, but whatever the reason, the party let its fixation on Harper drive them into a wall. The signs were all there a year and a half ago the Harper needed to go, but instead they just drove that bus right over the cliff.

[ReeferMadness]

A more balanced (and less hyperventilating) look at the Gagnier affair.

The mistakes in this affair were probably more political than legal.

In a rather interesting twist, the code also declares that "when a federal election is called, members of Parliament cease to be public office holders." Only the prime minister, senators, cabinet ministers and their staff retain their status as designated public office holders during a campaign.

And why Gagnier didn't wait until after election to offer his advice to his client TransCanada is bit of a mystery. He is no political neophyte and must have understood how bad the optics would be if the emails were leaked.

Edited October 16, 2015 by ReeferMadness

[blueblood]

I think the biggest thing is that the electorate decided a couple of weeks ago that the Tories had to go. At that point, anything short of video showing Trudeau receiving bribes or eating babies is going to fall flat. I honestly doubt the Gagnier affair will cost the Liberals any significant number of votes, because, really, this election isn't about Trudeau at all, it's about Harper. This is the referendum on the Conservative government, and as a number of commentators, particular John Ivison at the National Post, have determined is that the voters want change. Whether it's because they think the Tories have been in power long enough, or as I suspect, they well and truly, even conservative voters, dislike the way Harper governs.

It has nothing to do with policies at all. In fact, I'd be hard pressed to look at an election where policies meant less than this one. This is about the electorate, even in some Tory strongholds, saying "We want someone else." Full stop.

This is why the Tories were such fools for not showing Harper the door 18 months ago. We can talk about how overawed the Tories are, as ReeferMadness does, and I agree that's a factor, but whatever the reason, the party let its fixation on Harper drive them into a wall. The signs were all there a year and a half ago the Harper needed to go, but instead they just drove that bus right over the cliff.

The signs were there when high ranking tories jumped ship prior to the election. I think they tried showing him the door and were stymied by harpers side of the caucus. The senior tories leaving have been in the game for a while and knew the writing was on the wall.

[ToadBrother]

The signs were there when high ranking tories jumped ship prior to the election. I think they tried showing him the door and were stymied by harpers side of the caucus. The senior tories leaving have been in the game for a while and knew the writing was on the wall.

Then I think a defeat will be good for the Tories. I don't buy into all the nonsense that the party will cleave in two. I don't think anyone wants a return to the ye olden days when the vote split between Reform and the remnants of the PCs allowed the Liberals to march up the middle.

Unless, of course, we do end up with a new electoral system prior to the next election. In that case, I think it might be advantageous for the Tories to split into two; a progressive party and a conservative party. This would be particularly sensible in any kind of ranked voting system.

[Vancouver King]

The bigger thing diminishing the effect of TransCanada is that 3.6 million out of somewhere in the neighbourhood of 13-14 million voters have already cast ballots.

That is quite true - those votes have not been influenced by the Gagnier issue. Of greater concern to those not wanting a Liberal majority - does the astonishing size of this advance poll portend disaster for Harper and, by extension, another factor favoring a Liberal majority?

[ToadBrother]

That is quite true - those votes have not been influenced by the Gagnier issue. Of greater concern to those not wanting a Liberal majority - does the astonishing size of this advance poll portend disaster for Harper and, by extension, another factor favoring a Liberal majority?

I still don't see a majority in the cards. I could be wrong, and maybe in the last few days the electorate will decide to go whole-hog, but I still think we'll see a 130-140 seat Liberal minority.

[The_Squid]

Then I think a defeat will be good for the Tories. I don't buy into all the nonsense that the party will cleave in two. I don't think anyone wants a return to the ye olden days when the vote split between Reform and the remnants of the PCs allowed the Liberals to march up the middle.

Unless, of course, we do end up with a new electoral system prior to the next election. In that case, I think it might be advantageous for the Tories to split into two; a progressive party and a conservative party. This would be particularly sensible in any kind of ranked voting system.

If the social conservative wing of the party (the less pragmatic bunch) gets a leader and pushes a socially conservative agenda, I think a split could happen under those circumstances.

[ReeferMadness]

The signs were there when high ranking tories jumped ship prior to the election. I think they tried showing him the door and were stymied by harpers side of the caucus. The senior tories leaving have been in the game for a while and knew the writing was on the wall.

I think it's more likely that they thought the Conservatives were likely not to win another majority and they were getting off the ship before it went down. After branding themselves after 1 guy for 10 years, how do you suddenly say "hey we've got a whole team here"?

[ToadBrother]

If the social conservative wing of the party (the less pragmatic bunch) gets a leader and pushes a socially conservative agenda, I think a split could happen under those circumstances.

A similar thing was predicted in BC after Gordon Campbell resigned as leader of the BC Liberals. The BC Liberals are, like the Federal Conservatives, a coalition between fiscal conservatives (we call them Free Enterprise in BC) and social conservatives. The two groups had been in a coalition for decades as the Social Credit Party, but when that party melted down, a similar phenomena as the Progressive Conservative meltdown happened; the fiscal conservatives went to the BC Liberals and the rest either stuck with the remnants of the Socreds, or the BC Reform party, and the real hard right Bible thumpers went to parties like the Family Party. In the end they united because the alternative was perpetual BC NDP rule, and they did so largely under Gordon Campbell.

But a party that has tasted victory isn't likely to easily allow its more wayward fringe elements to break it apart. They'll elect a relative moderate, the more hard right elements will have to accept that recreating the Reform Party will not win them back the precious Ontario seats.

[blueblood]

I think it's more likely that they thought the Conservatives were likely not to win another majority and they were getting off the ship before it went down. After branding themselves after 1 guy for 10 years, how do you suddenly say "hey we've got a whole team here"?

Perception isnt necessarily reality, you know that. Theres always been the team.

[blueblood]

Then I think a defeat will be good for the Tories. I don't buy into all the nonsense that the party will cleave in two. I don't think anyone wants a return to the ye olden days when the vote split between Reform and the remnants of the PCs allowed the Liberals to march up the middle.

Unless, of course, we do end up with a new electoral system prior to the next election. In that case, I think it might be advantageous for the Tories to split into two; a progressive party and a conservative party. This would be particularly sensible in any kind of ranked voting system.

The party wont cleave in two, but usually youll have like in the lpc for example the chretienites and the martinites. The party didnt cleave in two, but there was a battle over the party's future.

Picking a new leader typically brings out the worst in the party behind closed doors.

[Smallc]

The bigger thing diminishing the effect of TransCanada is that 3.6 million out of somewhere in the neighbourhood of 13-14 million voters have already cast ballots.

More than that when special ballots and mail in ballots are included. Probably north of 4 million. When I turned in my supplies at the closest elections Canada office, there were 5 people in line for special ballots.

[ToadBrother]

The party wont cleave in two, but usually youll have like in the lpc for example the chretienites and the martinites. The party didnt cleave in two, but there was a battle over the party's future.

Picking a new leader typically brings out the worst in the party behind closed doors.

So maybe the first post-Harper leader isn't the Prime Minister in waiting. The Liberals have experienced that twice in the last ten years. It's not abnormal, though not comforting if you're hoping the Tories will be in fighting form for the next election.