Saturday, January 30, 2010

Projection: CPC 136, LPC 92, BQ 50, NDP 30

A new projection shows the Conservatives losing and the Liberals gaining.The Tories drop two seats to 136 and 0.6 points to 34.9%. The Liberals have gained two seats to 92 and 0.4 points to 28.6%. The NDP is down 0.1 points and the Greens are up 0.1 points.

This is one of the largest Liberal gains we've seen in some time. And once the older polls are aged next month, we could see them make some serious gains.

The Conservatives are losing ground in every part of the country. Their seats losses come in the Prairies (where they are also down 0.3 points) and Ontario (down a massive 0.7 points). They've dropped 1.1 points in Alberta, 0.4 points in British Columbia, 0.3 points in Quebec and the North, and 0.1 points in Atlantic Canada. In short, it was a bad two weeks for them.

The Liberals made some important gains in some parts of the country, but are stable elsewhere. Their seat gains came in the Prairies (down 0.1 points, however) and Ontario (up 0.5 points). They also gained 0.4 points in Alberta, 0.2 points in British Columbia, and 0.1 points in Quebec, Atlantic Canada and the North. A decent month for them, but they have yet to take full advantage of Conservative losses.

The Bloc Quebecois was steady, losing only 0.1 points and maintaining their 50 seats.

The NDP did not have a good two weeks, but it wasn't bad either. They had a big gain of 0.5 points in Quebec and also won 0.2 points in the Prairies. They're stable in Atlantic Canada and the North, but are down 0.1 points in Ontario, 0.2 points in British Columbia, and 0.3 points in Alberta.

The Greens made a 0.5 point gain in Alberta but also a 0.3 point loss in Quebec. They're up 0.2 points in British Columbia.

Assuming the trends stay where they are for another month or so, we could easily see the Liberals back over 100 seats by the end of February. In a way, this new political reality demonstrates why it is not a good idea to throw out old polls in the projection. They act as rudders, steering the projection away from snap changes in the mood of the electorate.


  1. Hmm I wonder how the talk of Liberals reversing the GST cuts will play ?

    According to economists the 2% reduction created 162,000 new jobs and helped us during this recession. That's a lot of jobs to kill if they raise the GST.

    (Infometrica's modelling).

  2. According to economists, the 2% GST reduction has helped create a structural deficit.

  3. The structural deficit thing just got a little more unlikely yesterday with the release of better than expected GDP growth numbers.

    Economists looking at the number said we may be set to outperform the BOC's projections. And, of course, Finance always low balls revenue, taking an average of BOC and private sector forcasters and including a built in fiscal cushion.

    Its way too early to tell (we'll know more a year from now) but its possible there isn't a structural deficit at all.

    But even under the most grim scenarios (Kevin Page) if you look inside the numbers, hold rate of spending increase to the 2% inflation target (tough, unpopular, but doable) and end ALL stimulus the deficit dissapears five years out.

    Page has cooked the books a little. His projections doveline with his prefered policy outcome (raising the GST), which is highly suspect and very Liberal in a partisan sense.

    He assumes chunks of stimulus do not end, there are no controls over public sector compensation, and a normal rate of spending growth.

    Only then do you actually get a structural deficit.

  4. Shadow there isn't one major economist in the country who thought cutting the GST was good policy.The only economist who thought it was a good idea was Stephen Harper and we all know what a great practicing economist he is. The tories have completely blown the fiscal framework of the country, and no matter what you say you can't defend that.

  5. Actually the liberals are trying to have an intelligent dialogue on how we are going to dig ourselves out of a mountain of tory debt. Kind of fascinating they inherited a 13 billion surplus and blew that and then some before the recession even hit. Kind of reminds me of Mulroney didn't he leave a 42 billion deficit his las year in office. Liberals have to do mop up again when they get back into office. I don't know about anybody else but I am sick and tired of tory fisacl mismanagement.

  6. Tories inherited an oil boom is what happened. From Alberta. From a PC government.

    I'm not sure what on earth you mean by:

    "there isn't one major economist in the country who thought cutting the GST was good policy."

    Whether they thought it was a good idea at the time or not it turned out to be a godsend.

    It created jobs and had a stimulative effect during the recession. Interestingly one of Britain's responses to the recession was to slash its own GST.

  7. Shadow seems to be a Tory troll?? Otherwise why would he try to spin the quoting of virtually all economists? It may have created a few jobs but the cost to the country has been horrendous !!

  8. Shadow i sometimes wonder what planet you live on. The facts are the facts. There isn't one major economist in Canada who thought cutting the GST was good policy. The GST cut was all about politics and not solid financial monetary policy. If you think having a 60 billion dollar deficit is a godsend heaven help us all. It just goes to show you that there are still people out there that would willingly follow Harper off a cliff. Thankfully his act is wearing thin. All he has done for the last 4 years is live off the good financial record of Paul Martin. As i said before and i will say again Harper is the biggest fraud this country has ever seen. Any way he has 2 records to be proud of having appointed the most senators of anyone, and the biggest deficit in Canadian history. No matter what you say shadow the facts are the facts and you can't change them.

  9. Peter thankfully there are some people who can see the damage Harper has done to Canada. There is no hope for Shadow. Harper could stick a knife into Michael Ignatieff and shadow would blame Ignatieff for running into it.

  10. 162,000 is more than just a few jobs. Its something like a .5% reduction in unemployment I believe.

    In terms of stimulus, which is what the NDP/Liberals have been demanding more and more of during this period, its as good a method of any at pumping money into the economy.

    BTW Isn't it a bit rich to call for more spending and yet complain about the deficit ?

    I mean, isn't it actually completely and utterly contradictory ?

  11. Shadow when are you going to stop blaming the liberals and the NDP for all of Stephen Harper's short comings. For god's sake he is the prime minister of this country and has been for 4 years. He is the one who said no deficit and no recession. The way the world was in recession I know Canada could not have escaped that. My point is with better fiscal management for the last 4 years deficit probably, but much smaller than what it is forecast to be now. Harper is not a good fiscal manager, and in my book barey an able leader.

  12. Hey Anon I just want to correct you on some things.

    "There isn't one major economist in Canada who thought cutting the GST was good policy."

    That's a dubious talking point. There's only 10 or so major economists in this country to begin with. And in academic circles there is a debate over consumption taxes.

    Also these same economists were calling for deep cuts to income taxes, so the revenue would have been lost either way.

    "The GST cut was all about politics and not solid financial monetary policy."

    Monetary policy is what the BOC (Bank of Canada) does. It deals with money supply, yields on bonds, overnight lending rates. That sort of thing.

    You mean to say "fiscal policy" which is what the finance minister does. Taxes and spending.

    "the biggest deficit in Canadian history."

    In absolute dollars yes, but that's a measure nobody uses. Debt to GDP is the prefered metric and using it shows that we're actually running a slightly smaller deficit than in the early 90's.

  13. Shadow I will tell you again, Stephen Harper is the biggest failure as a prime minister this country has ever had. One needs only look to our international reputuation with him at the helm. Do I need to elaborate on that to you. Did you see him in Davos? Getting dressed down by the President of Mexico and South Africa, and the prime minister of Spain. Harper even argued with the president of France. To see Harper abroad at international conferences is to be truly embarassed to be Canadian

  14. This comment has been removed by the author.

  15. Shadow as for cutting the GST both Don Drummond and John Mccallum said it was a stupid idea. I think i will put there record as economists up against Stephen Harper's any day of the week.

  16. Davos?

    You mean were Harper got the very rare and special honour guard of jet fighters to escort him out of Swiss airspace ?

    I doubt you heard about it in the media but it was an honour for which all Canadians should be thankful and proud.

    BTW nobody got a "dressing down". The panel was a lively back and forth.

    There are over 100 such panels at Davos. Its what the audience wants to see, some real debate and discussion.

    When people bring up opposing points it helps enlarge the debate, it isn't an attack on one side or the other.

    Are you familiar with Hegalian dialectic ?

    Reconciling opposing points creates new, more sophisticated understandings.

  17. Getting back to the new projection. We are now at CPC 136 and Lib/NDP 122 - as old polls from the fall get dropped and the new reality of the Tory support being in the low 30s gets factored in - its only a matter of weeks before the Liberal/NDP projected seat count passes the CPC seat count. Its my firm belief that the key number in the next election will be whether Liberal+NDP is larger than CPC alone. If it is then I think we will see an immediate vote after the election to dump the Tories and the faction with the largest number of seats (ie: the two federalist opposition parties) will take power. Then we can all stand over the toilet bowl and and wave "bye-bye" as a brown turd named "Harper" gets flushed away into the sewers.

  18. Stephen Harper is a climate change denier and the whole world knows it.International respect for Canada has gone down since his tenure as prime minister. You can try and spin it any way you like Shadow Stephen Harper is and always will be an embarassement to this country.

  19. DL you are probably right. I can see a scenario playing out like in 1993 that the Canadian population is so desperate to get rid of Harper that there will be a meltdown of NDP and green support. People who want to see the back of Harper will be smart enough to vote strategically to get rid of him. I mean the shadows of the world are a lost cause, but they will be the ones crying after the next election.

  20. Hey DL there are two firewalls put in place to stop your plan.

    1) There will be a new GG in place soon. Harper will make sure to appoint someone who is anti-coalition.

    2) The Tory senate majority would block the budget of a coalition and force them back to the polls.

    If Tories have a plurality of seats and yet are voted down a "do over" election is NOT out of the question.

    One in which the parties would need to campaign openly as a coalition.

  21. Shadow that is the latest ridiculous statement to come out of you and god knows there have been plenty. Are you suggesting that the GG should be political. A minority parliament can only function with the confidence of the house. Stephen Harper does not have the majority in the house the opposition does ergo they could quite properly form a government.The only reason Harper is still there is that he just wasn't man enough in 08 to face the house and lose a non confidence vote. Prorogation of parliament has never been allowed to escape a non confidence vote.

  22. "2) The Tory senate majority would block the budget of a coalition and force them back to the polls."

    The senate is not allowed to vote down money bill. PERIOD. In fact they can really only ever delay legislation - not kill it.

  23. DL the senate can ammend the heck of out a budget and tie it up in committee. It would be a heck of a fight.

    If it drags on long enough the gov't starts to run out of money and certainly cannot enact any new spending programs.

    The GG would have to issue temporary warrants and may just dissolve parliament to solve the mess.

    (And yes, I do think the next GG will be a political appointee. Of course, a stealth one.)

  24. Shadow you almost seem to be relishing a constitutional crisis, whether it be bad for Canada or not. The tories seem to want to bomb every bridge just as long as they can stay in office.

  25. Anon the only constitutional crisis is trying to assemble a coalition without telling the voters first.

    If Iggy says "hey we might do a coalition depending on how many seats we get" then there won't be a problem.

    But denying it like Stephane Dion did and then turning around and trying to assemble a coalition is an outrage.

    If Iggy is honest, doesn't lie to the voters, and lets them have their say then there won't be a problem.

    One way or another the voters will get to cast judgement on the coalition though. No way this thing is allowed to sneak through without a BIG fight.

  26. Shadow the way the tories are trending now I don't think a coalition will even be a factor. I think Harper has damaged himself to the point of even talking about a majority government for him is laughable. I can't see things getting any better for him. I guess his reputation as a master strategist is blown to hell as well

  27. Shadow once you get a reputation as a schemer and a devious manipulator, it's pretty hard to shake. All the piano playing and blue sweaters in the world are not going to help Harper out of this jam. My only remaining question is this: How long will the tory caucus remain faithful to Harper when they see that he is one of the biggest factors in some of them losing their seats. Interesting times ahead indeed

  28. Anon a week is a lifetime in politics. Three months ago the Conservatives were sitting at 40 and the Liberals at 25.

    A successful olympics, good international meetings this summer, and unemployment gradually coming down all seem like things that could improve Harper's numbers.

    Steady as she goes. The Tories are very disciplined. Nobody is jumping ship.

  29. Shadow you like most tories believe that the Canadian people can't walk and chew gum at the same time. Harper tried to use all the incredible suffering going on in Haiti to his own advantage and that didn't work, which just goes to show you that nothing is beneath Stephen Harper. Shadow the veil has dropped nobody believes Harper anymore. A successful olympics is not going to change that. Stephen Harper is trying to use the olympics but most people know he had f k all to do with bringing them to Canada. Keep thinking the Canadian people are stupid, and see how far that gets you. Most of us have a greater attention span than that of a 2 year old

  30. Shadow, I like you, really, and I understand the need for eternal optimism too - I mean, I'm a Liberal. If I didn't have my optimism, I'd have nothing.

    But nothing short of Ignatieff coming out and saying that he likes to flambe kittens will help Harper recover his numbers to what they were during the fall. He might retain a small lead, but there will no longer be any 40's. He is now tainted, again, by his own actions. Harper might be a brilliant man, but at times he makes some really stupid decisions that cost him a lot: the child pornography statement near the end of the 2004 campaign; the arts funding cuts and late platform of the 2008 campaign; the attempt to go for the jugular that sparked the coalition; and now this prorogation. All cost him dearly in some way, and there was never much out there that helped him recover unless it was a screw up on the part of his opponents.

  31. volkov you are completely correct. Harper has a reputation as a manipulator and a devious schemer, and nothing is going to change that. If Stephen Harper could not get a majority in 08 running against the green shift and dion to think he could ever get one now is completely ridiculoud. The vast majority of the Canadian people do not like or trust Stephen Harper. They never have and they never will. All the spinning by the shadows of the world is not going to change that. The tories need a new leader ASAP if they have any hope of even salvaging a minority government.

  32. Volkov I really don't think there will be any 40's anytime soon either. Harper rarely ever stays at that number anyway.

    But Harper doesn't need 40 for a majority. He needs his '08 numbers + money advantage + organizational advantage + strong candidates.

    Or he needs his '08 numbers + those new BC/AB/ONT seats.

    Or he could just stay with a minority forever. Nothing wrong with that. Tories prefer gridlock to an active, left wing gov't.

  33. Shadow, he won't get the same numbers again. Harper only got those numbers because no one bothered to come out and vote - I don't think that is going to happen again. Prorogation screwed him because it actually gave ammunition to not only the Opposition, but to their supporters and the ones who are indifferent; and if they come out to vote, they aren't going to vote for Harper.

    Just remember something: though the majority of polls say Harper is the best Prime Minister, most of them still reflect the feeling that there needs to be a change in government. There are simply no viable alternatives at the moment; Iggy is either disappointing or still to vague, and Layton will never rise above fourth-party status. If Iggy does shape up though, and he appears to be doing that, Harper is done for.

  34. Volkov I can tell you right now that if the economy roars back to life (which it seems to be doing according to those impressive GDP numbers) then all bets are off.

    If people are back to work the "throw the bums out" attitude quickly dissapears.

  35. Shadow I admire you for being a true believer in your cause. It takes a true believer to believe Harper can win again. As a liberal i hope they keep Harper. I just think with a new moderate leader the tories would be a formidable force, with harper no. Harper has damaged himself to the point that he has lost the trust and faith of the Canadian people, and once that is gone it's pretty hard to get back. Harper's reputation will be the thing that bites him in the end

  36. Except people aren't back to work. This is a jobless recovery. It will take months and a lot of government direction and vision before employment comes chugging back to life. 2010 is a year for recovery, sure, but that recovery will not be quick and it will certainly not be painless. Most people only project Canada's economy to grow by a modest, but still meager for us, 2%. And that will be jobless.

  37. Besides, Canadians have a funny way to changing governments: they do it either when someone gets arrogant, or when they feel confident for a regime change. In all honesty, an economy roaring back to life is probably a bad thing for the Harper government: because once the economy becomes stable again, voters will feel confident that giving someone else the reigns of power won't screw them up.

  38. When people stop and reflect over the tory front bench vs the liberal front bench I think that will give them some pause. I think Harper fatigue is setting in across Canada. I think people are tired of all Harper's games, and rabid partisanship. The naming of 5senators yesterday wasn't exactly the best timing in the world

  39. Shadow: 1) There will be a new GG in place soon. Harper will make sure to appoint someone who is anti-coalition.

    Governors-General have some latitude in specific situations. However, the most partisan GG must still allow a leader who can demonstrate the confidence of the House to attempt to form a government.

    2) The Tory senate majority would block the budget of a coalition and force them back to the polls.

    Ummm... no. The chamber of Sober Second Thought can delay a bill or propose modifications. (For example, the Senate fixed some references to non-existent sections of a recent bill.) The Senate cannot jam up the gears of parliament entirely. Also, don't expect senators from the Progressive Conservative era to willfully smash the institution of parliament. Senators can be admirably independent on matters of principle.

    This country runs on the basis of the House of Commons, Senate, judiciary and public service all being independent institutions. It's a good arrangement. It's been badly damaged in recent years, but not broken.

    The quoted comment was obviously a troll, but do many Conservatives really see a centralized, authoritarian government as good for Canadians or even good for conservatives, whether social or fiscal?

  40. Stephen Harper would do just about anything to hang on to power. The tories said Ignatieff was just in it for himself, I guess that argument has been lain bare. My question is this: what attack ads can Harper come up with now. I really hope he runs some, because that will explode in his own crotch as well.

  41. John, Anon, stop this troll bussinesss.

    I put forward serious arguements backed up by facts. You may disagree with my opinions but lets try to maintain a polite tone.

    Address the arguements, not the person putting them forward.

  42. Volkov check the news. 2% growth in 2010 has been blown out of the water. The latest GDP news from America/Canada are a real game changer.

    The BOC had forecasted 3.3% growth for the fourth quarter of '09.

    Turns out its at least 4% (at an annualized rate).

    If this holds and we see a 4% rate of growth on a go forward basis that would almost certainly add jobs and erase the structural deficit.

    BTW a bad economy helps Harper and a good one hurts him ?

    C'mon, that's just silly.

    The next big issue will be the debt. Shrinking gov't versus raising taxes.

    Its a good fight to have.

  43. Shadow I never said anything against you personally, and I am sorry if you took it that way. My point being was if Harper was to run attack ads now excuse me they would blow up in his face. The silliness of the argument that Ignatieff was just in it for himself has now been lain bare. An attack ad now on Harper's part now would just reinforce a negative perception most people have of him.

  44. I wouldn't put too much stock in everything the BOC says. And 4% growth still isn't enough to create the kind of jobs you're expecting to be created - that would take a lot more. I don't want to go into detail, but most of the jobs that have been shed are the ones that are getting to be irreplaceable unless the government does something - aka. the manufacturing jobs.

    And yes, a bad economy does help Harper, and a good one does hurt him. It all depends how Harper handles it; he nearly had a close call in 2008 with his ignore-it-and-it-will-go-away attitude, but he came back because of a weak Opposition plan and some recognition of what was going to occur. Canadians prefer stability over major change during times of crisis. Harper embodied that stability, while Dion, with all the good intentions he had in mind, embodied change during a time when it wasn't wanted.

    Now fast forward in the future, when the economy is a little more stable. People are more open to new ideas then, than they are during crises. This has been noted in quite a lot of provincial and federal elections; Saskatchewan 2007, New Brunswick 2006, PEI 2007, Federal 1957, etc. Its a lot more complicated than I'm making it, but in times of stability, people are more willing to give someone a chance, rather than stick with the status quo.

  45. Volkov your'e also ignoring the fact that in the current political landscape how much better can it get for the tories. I mean the afghan detainee issue hasn't gone away, and most canadians allready think that their government is lieing to them. I mean when those embarassing revelations come out it will not look too good for the government. The massive deficit must be a really bitter pill to swallow for most fiscal conservatives. I think transfers to the provinces will have to be slashed and that will not go down to well, and also given the fact that Harper just isn't wearing well anymore, I would say that it is an uphill climb for re-election

  46. Hey guys I think we've argued this one to a standstill!

    We'll just have to wait and watch what the polls do.

    I'd just caution that you don't count your chickens before they hatch.

  47. No one is counting chickens Shadow. I just think in the current political enviroment the tories are facing an uphill climb. Your right let's wait and see. My prediction for Ekos next week Liberals up a bit, tories stable, NDP stable, Bloc stable, greens down a bit. There it is for what it's worth

  48. Does anybody know when Nik Nanos is coming out with a poll. His polls are always so accurate. It would be kind of interesting to see his numbers. This is for you Shadow I wish the tories well.

  49. Nanos?

    Eric gives him a 0.62 weighting versus the most trusted Angus Reid at 1.50.

    Nanos gives the Liberals a +2.5% bonus, +5% in Quebec. He leans -1% for the Conservatives.

    With that kind of bias (house effect, not intentional) i'm sure we'd see him showing the Liberals ahead by a point or two.

  50. I always thought Angus Reid, and Ipsos Reid weren't very good pollsters. Which company has Darell Bricker, and wasn't he a liberal party pollster at one time? It just seems to me that these 2 companies really slant toward the conservatives. As for any poll done for Canwest Global or the national Post forget it

  51. Shadow I would like a really honest opinion from you OK Last election when Mike Duffy ran the clips with Stephane Dion struggling with a question do you think that was fair. After all didn't they promise not to do that? Didn't that cross a journalistic ethical boundary? Rember honest opinion not just because you were happ it helped the conservatives.

  52. In journalism whenever there is a question between airing something and not airing something their ethical standards come down on the side of full disclosure and let the public decide for themselves.

    My understanding is that they filmed a segment and then a Liberal staffer saw how poorly it went, approached a producer and asked him to do Dion a favour and not air the piece.

    It was wrong of CTV to give out such assurances. But it would also have been wrong not to air the footage.

    And two wrongs don't make a right. So on a personal level that Liberal staffer was burnt but Dion had no right to ask the media hold things back.

    Anyways, that's my two cents.

    CTV tends to be a bit trashy/gossipy. Stories that Tories didn't like include waftergate and washroomgate!

  53. Shadow I still think that when you give your word on something you should honour that word. CTV went out of their way to trash Dion. I mean he struggles with English it's not his first language. I also didn't like when Teneyke and Harper went out of their way to jump on this as evidence that Dion was an idiot. Maybe the liberals wouldn't have won that election but they sure wouldn't have lost it as badly as they did. Mike Duffy got his reward which I think is a shame. There are so many more deserving canadians from all political parties who would be more deserving of a senate seat than him. Joe Clark quickly springs to mind

  54. Anon the abilty to speak and understand both official languages is part of the job of PM.

    A CTV empoyee made a promise they never should have. That doesn't mean the viewing public should suffer.

    And all journalists are biased in some fashion. Duffy's replacement Tom Clark seems to tow a Liberal line.

    But isn't that all the more reason why we should have an elected senate ?

    If Hudak beats McGuinty and Ontario starts electing senators that'll be a pretty big deal.

    Ontario, Alberta, Sask, and Manitoba could prove to be a critical mass.

  55. Shadow I think an elected senate would be a terrible thing. Competing houses and all that. I lean towards senate abolition. I know speaking both languages is a must for PM but come on be honest Harper's french isn't that great and I don't see that being held against him. I can't speak for Ontario or Alberta just where im from (manitoba) trust me my province is nothing like Saskatchewan, Alberta, or Ontario. We have very diversified opinions here. Winnipeg is a very friendly city towards the NDP while rural Manitoba is solid tory blue.

  56. Shadow: I put forward serious arguements backed up by facts. You may disagree with my opinions but lets try to maintain a polite tone.

    Address the arguements, not the person putting them forward.

    My apologies. It was an honest mistake on my part; I really interpreted your statement as a troll, or at least a poke. I couldn't believe that it was meant to be taken at face value.

    Given your clarification that you meant your statement seriously I will amend my question to:

    Do many Conservatives really see a centralized, authoritarian government as good for Canadians or even good for conservatives, whether social or fiscal?

  57. John thanks for your answer regarding SGI I have always thought that Gary Lunn was an extremely poor representative. If Elizabeth May defeats him I won't be shedding any tears.

  58. John you're describing the nature of our system.

    I know various policy nags say Harper is the worst ever but this is all run of the mill Chretien stuff.

    So the answer to your question is that i'd rather someone I trust running that system, someone who will use the power to impliment conservative ideology, then a Liberal gov't.

  59. Shadow chretien hasn't been Prime Minister for 7 years. Do you really believe Harper is running government based on conservative idealogy? Harper is just doing whatever is politically expedient for him. That my good sir is just another reun of the mill typical politician

  60. Anon, conservative policy applied within the contraints of reality.

    People complain about the deficit but when compared to where we would have been if we listened to the Liberals/NDP its way better.

    *Harper paid down the debt by 40 billion during good times for which he was criticized by the NDP and Liberals.

    *Harper resisted calls for big social spending like daycare, fighting global warming, and Kelowna accords.

    *Harper resisted calls for stimulus in the fall of '08 and instead put together a structured two year plan. The NDP and Liberals demanded MORE MORE MORE spending but he refused.

    Even if the NDP and Liberals had kept all the job killing taxes that Harper cut they'd still be running a much, much larger deficit.

    Which is why any criticism of Harper on the deficit from NDP or Liberal partisans is laughable and hypocritical.

  61. Shadow me thinks ye doth protest too much. Stop blaming the liberals and the NDP for Harper's short comings as a leader. I think the liberal government more than proved it's fiscal responsibility. As for raising taxes don't make me laugh we are about to be hit with a 13 billion payroll tax increase courtesy of Harper/Flaherty now there's a job killer. I will take the record of the liberal government over the record of Stephen Harper any day of the week. Stephen Harper is a liar a coward and 1 pathetic excuse for a prime minister. Do you remember the "a conservative government will never tax income trusts" Why don't you ask some senior citizens how much of a raise they got in their January pension cheques. The days of Stephen Harper are thankfully coming to an end, and they can't come fast enough for me. If the conservatives want to even salvage their minority they better get a new leader ASAP

  62. I forgot a few things shadow, like Harper using our military as props to announce the purchase of some new military armament a few months ago, which has now been cancelled. His constant use of patriotism and the flag if anyone dares to question the great emperor's Afghanistan policy. The conservative front bench are the rudest, most ill informed uneducated, scoundrels in Canadian history. I will put Bob Rae, Michael Ignatieff, Martha Hall Findley, Irwin Cottler, Ralph Goodale,Kirsty Duncan, Carolyn Bennett etc etc etc up against Harper's band of uneducated hill-billy rubes at any time.

  63. I'm expecting some pithy response from you shadow, to try and tell me how great the conservatives really are. Even most political commentators and observors agree that Harper has a very weak front bench. It's not that I mind a conservative government, but I really object to a reform/alliance government masquerading as conservatives..If Harper was really free to enact his twisted platform most Canadians would be appalled. Thankfully Canadians having been willing to take Harper off his leash. Harper is the kind of politician who should be kept on a short leash at all times preferably muzzled to

  64. Anon, I do serious analysis not partisan sparring. Hyperbolic language and name dropping does not constitute an arguement so much as saying "Liberals are great!! Its self evident! Why don't you agre!!"

    Obviously the fiscal program of the 90's is different than the fiscal program of Dion and Ignatieff.

    One key difference is there is no EI fund to illegally steal from. A recent supreme court ruling made it clear that the 60 billion theft was unacceptable and outlawed that behaviour in the future.

    Hence the need for EI premium increases to reconstitute the EI surplus. So that's a little rich complaining about payroll tax increases.

  65. Just to be clear Anon, the Liberals did not balance the budget in the 90's so much as steal from that fund and downgrade services to the provinces and municipalities, forcing them to do the hardwork of finding savings.

    Passing the buck and breaking the bank are NOT examples of sound fiscal management.

  66. well shadow about what I expected. I guess iv'e been told. Canada was a financial basket case when Chretien/Martin came in and sure tough measures had to be implemented to get the financial house in order, but it was put in order. Canadians did a lot of sacrificing during those years. It's a shame that the conservatives will be undoing all that. And you do everything but sing from the roof tops about your admiration for all things conservative. If Canadians ask themselves if they are better off now than 4 years ago the answer is no. All your spinning can not erase the sorry track record of this government. It seems to me conservatives can't give credit where credit is due and that includes you Shadow.

  67. Shadow it isn't name dropping to point out the vast amount of talent the liberals have in their caucus. As i said even most political commentators and observors agree on that, and there is nothing wrong with pointing out the weakness of the conservative caucus. I will take off my partisan hat and objectively look at both caucuses. Can you honestly say the conservatives have a more talented causcus. I bet you will

  68. Anon Conservatives did not create a synchonized global recession, nor did the Liberals create the tech boom in the 90's that allowed them and Bill Clinton to balance the budget.

    You seem to be under the mistaken impression that the fiscal situation is created by the government. The fiscal situation is, in fact, created by economic factors largely outside our borders. Taxes and spending have a marginal effect around the edges.

    Regardless, it was just yesterday that people were singing the praises of Lawrence Cannon on CTV's Power Play.

    Other ministers like citizenship and immigration minister Jason Kenney are leaps and bounds above that unethical, Romanian stripper importer Judy Sgro.

    And the law and order team is far superior.

    Plus the treasury board and finance minister didn't have that whole SPONSORSHIP SCANDAL thing going on.

  69. Shadow yes i am aware of the very great love the tories have for their "Law and Order" agenda, so much so that they prorogued parliament so all that died on the order paper. As for a tech boom allright wasn't Jim Flaherty finance minister of Ontario when that was going on? Did he ever balance the books there? Yes indeed Lisa Raitt and Maxine Bernier, are truly 2 of the brightest stars in the Harper universe. Now that the "LIBERAL DOMINATED SENATE" is no longer an issue my oh my who will the tories blame now for all their short-comings? As i said before conservatives can never give credit where credit is due. As for the endorsement of CTV the conservative television network, whose love for all things conservative, is very well known, I would expect nothing less out of them.

  70. Shadow said:

    Anon the only constitutional crisis is trying to assemble a coalition without telling the voters first.

    Which is total bullshit!! It's done all the time in other Parliamentary Govt's. It's been done here under Pearson. Get a life you Tory Troll !!

  71. Shadow, the people strongly against reversing the GST cuts were never going to vote for the Liberals anyways. All it did was unify the grassroots and maybe win over a few older and more centrist New Democrat and Blocquistes. Polls and economists found income tax cuts for low to middle income Canadians, the one's the Tories reversed, were better.

    A poll also found that 70% of Canadians would support higher taxes if the money was spend on infrastructure.

    In addition, additional deficit spending is not a problem when the economy and inflation is near stagnant, unlike when Chretien took power, when interest rates had just been skyhigh to fight inflation and economy was strong.

  72. Éric, I know the seats won't be redistributed until after the 2011 census data is in, I am curious what the new seat distribution will be and how it affect the parties involved and their policy and tactics?

    Will it give an advantage to the Tories, thanks to Alberta and the Tory-Grit swing voters in the 905, or will suburban growth in Montreal and BC just make the redistribution rather meaningless. Will such a change create a new focus on "suburban issues", like infrastructure and the technology sector?

    Interesting to note Ignatieff's Campus Tour might be a long-term strategy for this. University educated young people today can't afford to live downtown anymore, in a few years, they will move to battleground suburban ridings.

  73. Was cutting the Gst really the best fisacl policy for Canada.?

  74. Does anybody think Stephen Harper's new focus on Women and children living in poverty in the third world genuine?

  75. Shadow love how you defend your point of view, even if it's completely wrong.

  76. I'd like to know more about redistricting too (not sure if that's the correct Canadian term).

    My understanding is that spring 2011 is the next census and that the new districts will be ready to go during any election spring 2013 and after.

    That's an automatic process that happens anyway. I'm not sure how it meshes with the bill Harper introduced to give BC, Alberta, and Ontario more seats.

    I should go see if there's a write up from the parliamentary research library.

  77. Shadow what are your thoughts on how Ignatieff's university tour strategy went.

    Do you believe it was a good strategy?

    How can Harper counter all this negative publicity?

  78. I doubt Ignatieff's university tour got him any new votes but its good for him in the sense that it restored his confidence.

    Back at Christmas there were reports he might go back to Harvard, that friends worried about him suffering a bout of depression even.

    Now that he's back in the game and has a new team he certainly has gotten a second wind. Lets see if it can last.

    As for Harper I don't think he will do anything to counter the negative press.

    Sometimes you just ride out a bad stretch instead of fighting it.

    The team will probably continue with public consultations, daily press releases, funding announcements, policy briefings, etc etc and just look like they are working hard.

  79. Shadow that all sounds good, but Harper seems to have an incredible knack for self sabotage.

    He just seems determined to blow it at every turn. Once he starts knocking on the door of majority BOOM

    I think Mr. Harper needs a new team of advisors. Even then who knows I really believe he blew it big this time.

    Recovery? maybe but I don't think he will ever again reach the highs he did in the fall.

  80. Anon why would Harper need new advisors?

    If he could go back and redo the prorogation decision he'd make the same one again today.

    Everyone knew he'd take a hit. He decided to spend the political capital anyways to get control of the senate and get rid of the detainee issue.

    Having control of the senate opens so many doors. I really believe 8 year term limits will get passed this year!

    Bob Fife doesn't believe it, figures the old PC guys will sabatoge it or some Harper appointees who have gotten comfortable.

    But as Tom Flanigan pointed out today, he can always ask the Queen for 8 more senators if need be.

  81. get rid of the detainee issue.
    Finally some honesty.

  82. Shadow I don't believe prorogation was worth the hit Harper took.

    Like it or not it just reinforced a negative view most people have of him.

    I believe any talk now of a majority government is completely out the window.

    People were just looking for a reason to flee back to the liberals, which Harper provided.

    Harper is brilliant in so many ways, and so non brilliant in so many others.

    As for the senate, that could have been taken control of, without the terrible price Harper will pay for prorogation.

    Believe me I never thought that prorogation would be a big issue with people, but it is. Where I go to university,my friends who are not really politically minded know all about prorogation, and it really ticks them off. Multiply that into the general population at large, and i still believe it was a hugh tactical error.

  83. Hey Anon, taking control of the senate required prorogation.

    Its a bit arcane but right now the opposition has a majority on the committees. Every election or prorogation the committees are restruck and reflect the party standing in the committee of the whole.

    Unless you control the committees you really don't control the senate.

    BTW I wouldn't write Harper off. That's a mistake. People were just as angry at Ignatieff last fall.

    Comments like this were typical:

    "That American jerk wants an election NOW?? During the worst recession since WW2! Tell him to go back to Harvard!"

    Eventually people forget, move on, and anger subsidies.

  84. The difference being Shadow, is that Stephen Harper is a very divisive Prime Minister. I'm not trying to say that in a demeaning manner, but you really seem to love or hate the guy.

    Prorogation in a lot of people's minds just reinforced that view.

    My great fear is that if an anti Harper view really starts to set in, we will see a collapse of NDP and green suuport, which just about makes it impossible for Harper to win.

  85. Every leader is divisive after awhile, especially in a multiparty system.

    I honestly don't think we're going to have an election this year at all.

    I think spring 2011 with the Liberals campaigning against Harper's budget cuts.

  86. 1. Harper - Smart man, good PM, unique ability to sabatoge his own cause.

    2. GST - When the GST was introduced it was acknowledged to be a regressive tax. GST rebates only scratched the surface. Sales taxes are little different from flat taxes since we all spend. The willingness to raise the GST one percentage point reflects, IMO, the wisdom of Canadians who suffer every day with bad roads and poor transportation alternatives. We know that our roads, bridges and the rest of our infrastructure is rotting around us.

    3. Prorogation - An issue made popular by an unfriendly media. Again this is a result of Harper shooting himself in the foot. There have been 105 prorogations in 146 years of partiament.

    4. The Afghan detainee issue - whatever dirt there is covers both the Liberals and Conservatives. The Liberals were warned about the issue of detainee abuse as early as 2002. Further, I wonder if this is a Canadian problem. After we hand the detainees over to the Afghan government we lose control over their fate. While Canada should not condone torture and should attempt to dissuade the Afgans from using same, in the end we have only those tools to use. We simply don't have any options. The sooner we leave the better.

    5. The deficit - neither the LPC or CP will admit that tax increases are needed. There is vitually nothing to distinguish their policies on returning Canada to surplus. All of the opposition parties wanted more spending when the government ran surpluses. They all wanted the the government run a large deficit in 2009. Iggy is on record as calling for more stimulus while at the same time condemning the deficit. The duration and deepness and the current recession was not forseen by many and certainly not the the opposition. Harper has handled it as well as anyone would have.

    6. Shadows idea of firewalls is ludiricous. We do not want our GG politized!

    7. Harper will resurrect the coalition idea in the next election. I agree with Harper that if people do not return a CPC majority we are leaving ourselves open for a coalition. The LPC and NDP should have the courage of their convictions and campaign as a coalition if they indeed intend to form one. There was no coalition when when Pearson was PM.

    Politics can change in a week or a month. Don't count your chickens yet.

  87. Earl this prorogation left a nasty smell for the following reason:

    to quote the economist "it reeks of naked self interest"

    I agree on tax increases, and I wish we could have an intelligent debate in the country without one side or another trying to take advantage of one party or another ideas on how to get out of deficit.

    Coalition, not sure on that one, I think the Canadian public passed judgement on that one.

    I am of the genuine belief that every federal party needs new leadership.

    We nedd less partianship, less bickering , less political self interest, and more co-operation, and putting the voters first. Will it happen? Probably when pigs can fly.

    And please I don't mind responses to my comment, but please be respectful.

    Please remember at the end of the day whether we be Conservatives, Liberals, NDPers, Greens, or nothing at all were all canadians.

    Please set an example for our politicians.

  88. Anon: Agree with all your statements except prorogation. Will have to agree to disagree on that one. I hope I have always been respectful on here. I have at times felt disrespected by Jesse, Shadow but that's not the way I operate.

  89. Earl hopefully we can set a new tone.

    When you have to resort to name calling and insults, that just proves you have no intelligent argument.

    Shadow, I'm new here and you seem to be a regular, so i hope we can always have respectful debate.

  90. Shadow I was just re-reading some of your commentary, where you talked about Tom Flanagan.

    Didn't he do some damage to the conservatives a few weeks ago when he admitted prorogation was just a ruse to shut down the Afghan deatainee issue?

    I honestly wouldn't put too much stock in Bob Fife.

    Remember all the talking heads said prorogation was no big deal.

    My favourite political panel is the one on CBC with Scott Reid and Jamie Watt.

    The most annoying political panel is the At Issue panel on CBC.

  91. The elimination of the surplus was entirely the function of the minority parliament. Minorities always overspend - that's one of the primary features of minorities - so we can't blame Harper for that.

    Cutting the GST was lousy policy, though it was rety good politics. I suspect it was an attempt to distance Harper from both Chrétien and Mulroney. I do support any and all tax cuts, but cutting income taxes or business taxes would have made a lot more sense.

    And there's no such thing as a structural deficit without setting some sort of arbitrary bar of what services the government has to provide and how much money they have to spend doing it. Eliminating deficits should always come through program cuts. Always. In the words of Stephen Harper: "There is no public policy problem to which to proper response is higher taxes."

    A Harper majority would elimiate that deficit in a single year. And they'd cut taxes.

  92. Ira I couldn't agree more.

    Is the CBC REALLY an essential service the government must provide ?


    There's a billion every year right there.

  93. And what about the premium Montreal pays for construction projections because of the mob monopoly?

    Or the over compensated members of federal, provincial, and municipal gov'ts because of powerful and influential unions?

    There's always waste, fraud, and abuse in the system.

    I wish we could all agree to make an honest effort to try and reduce spending before always jumping to the conclusion that taxes need to be raised !

  94. Anon

    No I don't find Stphen Harpers's new focus on women and children to be sincere.

    It does seem a little phoney to me.

    Hate to sound harsh, have to call it like I see it.

  95. Hey there seems to be two Anons with very different opinions. It would help if one or both of you chose a tag. Use the name/url button and type something in, there's no registration or anything and it just takes a second.

    As for women and childen, its actually pregnant women and children under five, the goal being to reduce infant mortality.

    Harper's background is as a fiscal Conservative but don't forget he's an evangelical Christian.

    Regardless, who could possibly NOT support helping babies ?

    Saying Harper is insincere about helping babies is rather extreme.

    C'mon guys, he's not a monster!

  96. Shadow

    I'll think about a tag.

    It's very laudable to help third world women and children. I congratulate the government on that.

    I just think the right thing is being done for the wrong reason.

    I'm not a rabid partisan. I just call things the way I see them.

    No matter what party it is.

  97. Shadow

    As for the CBC, I can't say I agree entirely with you.

    I know CBC bashing is quite fashionable these days.

    They are mandated to provide service across the country in both official languages. They do provide service in some areas of the country, that are not serviced by the private broadcasters.

    I know they cost 1 billion a year, but in my book it is not money wasted.

    I actually enjoy CBC radio. I like to listen to intelligent dialogue. Some of the private radio stations talk shows are nothing but bark fests, for the conservative/liberal/NDP. Charles Adler for example.

    We will probably have to agree to disagree on this subject. Would like to know your thoughts though.

  98. Stephen Harper - The prime-minister who has appointed the most senators in the history of Canada.

    The more you know...

  99. Whose this 'Shadow' troll? We all know the cons are paying people to post comments like shadow does constantly, I just figured they wouldn't be filled with such nonsense.

    There's being ignorant about the facts, and then there are people like Shadow who simply make them up as they go.

    Shadow, you do nothing but disrupt actual debate in this country with your nonsense. Every single thing you say is nothing but a cut-and-paste from the PMO talking points. You are utterly useless.

  100. Stephen Harper: The gift that keeps on giving


    What a pathetic excuse for a leader. I wouldn't put Harper in charge of a hot dog stand.

    I just wish he would go back to Alberta and find the rock he crawled out from under.

  101. Frank

    you're going to have to do a lot better than that if you're not to be dismissed as a TROLL who's trying to scare off people with different views points instead of engaging them in real dialogue.

    1) Cons pay people to post comments? Really? Do you have ANY factual evidence to back this up?

    2) Please find somewhere where I have made something up and provide evidence that shows I am wrong. If not it would appear you are the one who is ignorant about the facts and making things up.

    3) Please show me where i've been disrupting debate. On the contrary i'd say i've been engaged in a substantive back and forth with people of all opinions.

    4) Please show me these PMO talking points and how they dovetail with my comments.

    In reality the PMO wouldn't touch half the things I say with a ten foot poll. Abolish the CBC? Lol, yeah right, that'll be a PMO talking point NEVER.

    "You are utterly useless."

    Now you're just being rude.

    If you hadn't just been smacked down and utterly discredited i'd warn against damaging your arguements by using unfortunate language.

    However, I doubt you could any further damage yourself so such warnings are completely unnessecary.

  102. Shadow:

    Your'e calling Frank rude? I don't know you seem to do a pretty good job of that your self.

    You don't address the point Frank brings up. You are nothing but a tory partisan hack.

    You don't debate you just push the tory party line. You see absoulutely nothing else.

    I do admire you Shadow for one thing. You do cloak yourself in the cloak of righteousness, which is what all conservative right wing whack jobs do.

    You are nothing but the Anne Coulter of Canada.

  103. Hey Anon ok let's talk CBC.

    I agree that its important to have radio and television signals in both official languages across the country.

    However, it can be done for far far less than 1 billion.

    In fact it would quite honestly be cheaper to just buy people satelite serivce!

    As for liking some of the programming, if there is an audience my guess is that it would be snapped up by private broadcasters fairly quickly.

    And remember, there is still a generous system of tax credits and subsidies to develop Canadian content across all platforms. Eliminating one of many middle men doesn't change that, in fact having an inefficient, bulky competitor that eats up market space out of the way would probably provide more content and more options in the long run.

  104. Hey Anon its extremely bad form to criticize people's behaviour without getting a tag name.

    And I think I addressed each and every single one of Frank's point one by one.

    BTW there is nothing wrong with having a consistent, principled, right wing view point.

    Nor is there anything wrong with being a Liberal like yourself or Volkov or a Dipper like DL.

    I prefer to engage with people, debate them on the issues, and avoid criticizing them for having a different world view.

    Having different opinions shouldn't be discouraged!

  105. Please people let's be respectful;

    We may not agree with one another,but that doesn't make the person with a different opinion wrong.

    Shadow agree to disagree on CBC

  106. Well Shadow so much for your for your high minded debate.

    I wondered how long it would take you to resort to name calling.

    Conservatives can dish it out, but they sure can't take it in kind. You are just one example of that.

    As for Stephen Harper being a christian.

    Attacking people, lieing, filthy language, character assasination, cowardness, yes yes yes all sound like good christian values to me.

    George Bush was another wonderful example of solid christian behaviour.

    Clean up your own dirt pile before attacking others.

  107. Ok Anon enough is enough.

    Let's drop it and move on.

    Frank's comment was an attack on me without ANY relevence to this topic or any other political topic.

    I felt entitled to respond to it and to your attempt to pile on.

    (BTW not sure where I was "dishing it out". If you could point out where I was making personal attacks prior to Frank's statement that would be helpful)

    But i'm not in the habit of getting into protracted debates on people's character or behaviour.

    I really do prefer to talk about the issues!

    And I hope you do too, even though you disagree with me.

  108. Shadow:

    You are the one brought up Stephen Harpers's faith as a motivation for his help towards third world women and children.

    I believe we should be motivated to do the right thing being christian or not.

    Religion and politics should be kept separate at all times. Religion is supposed to be pure, where as politics is not.

    I can see the terrible mess United States is in and that republican party does nothing but mix up religion with politics.

    The worst despots and scoundrels, in history can always justify everything they do in the name of religion.

    Stephen Harper seems to be cut from that same cloth. People like him can always throw stones at others, while imagining themselves to be so pure and ethical.

    Canadians are not like Americans that way. We can tell the difference between true altruism, and phoney political stunts for partisan gain

  109. Anon I was actually refering to where you called me "rude", a "tory paritsan hack", "Anne Coulter", said I had abandonded "high minded debate", accused me of "name calling", and finally said I was an example of someone who could "dish it out" but "can't take it in kind.

    All that for bringing up the fact that Stephen Harper is an evangelical Christian as a possible motivation for why he wants to help reduce infant mortality ?

    OK how about this because he is a family man with two children of his own ?

    Or because EVERYONE who's remotely human supports helping dying babies ?

    CIDA has been diffuse and ineffective.

    Focusing it on a single region (Americas) and a single issue (infant morality) allows us to make a real, measurable impact on the world.

    People who follow the Tory government know this has shift in aid strategy has been underway for quite awhile now.

  110. Shadow:

    I encourage you to watch Power Play , and see what Gerry Caplan had to say about our government's approach.

    He also had some interesting things to say about Bev Oda. I know he is an NDPer, but he is also an expert in this field. I have great respect for him.

    There are a lot of NGO's that disagree with the government's approach.

    I still believe Harper uses religion as a crutch for his behaviour.

    He has been in office for 4 years and this is the first peep we have heard out of him about this subject.

    The other Anon said the government was doing the right thing for the wrong reason.

    Harper is sliding in the polls with women voters. I guess this is as good a strategy as any for him.

    I know he has 2 beautiful children,
    and a gorgeous wife. I also know from the 08 election he just couldn't bring himself to call Stephane Dion a "family man" The only reason being Stephane Dion has an adopted daughter.

    We will not agree on this subject, as I believe everything Harper does has a political motivation. I'm sorry that is just the reputation he has.

    As I said we should alway's be motivated to do the right thing being christian or not.

  111. I really do think it would assist things if the "Anonymous" option was removed as it seems there are 5 or more people using it to post comments here and it really does become difficult to follow or respond to a specific person.

  112. Peter Desbarats speaks out comparing Afghanistan to Somalia:

    Seems to make the current Liberal bunch look like a shade sanctimonious.

  113. Anon the country with one of the highest infant morality rates in the world (like top 3) is Afghanistan.

    Given that its our single largest foriegn aid recipient there is nothing unusual about the issue being a priority.

    As for Gerry Caplan he's a little all over the place.

    Right after Haiti he lamented its history and hoped there would be long term help for the country.

    Then last week he complained that the Harper government is shifting its attention from Africa to the Americas.

    Well Haiti is our number 2 recpient of foriegn aid. Focusing our aid on a single region is a lot better than a scattershot approach.

    Anyways, Bev Oda's mandate from the PM as minister of international cooperation is to bring accountability to CIDA by focusing on real, measurable progress, getting rid of the scattershot approach by working in less countries, and focus in on a couple of issues.

    This issue is one she has chosen. Harper is a good man and gave it the greenlight.

    To say it has to do with women voters is just silly.

    As Carol Taylor pointed out, these things take months and months of preparation and study. Harper didn't slide in the polls until a month ago.

    That's probably the most cynical interpretation of public policy i've ever heard.

  114. Frank is a good example of someone who wishes to disrupt actual debate in this country, and who uses no facts on which to base his hateful opinions.
    (utterly useless... really?)

    Keep fighting the good fight Shadow.

    You make push your POV in a rather stident way, but you stand head and shoulders above the name calling of the "enlightened ones" on the other side.

    Lefties like Frank will call the kettle black all day long, but never examine their own statements.

    For the Anon who chose to pile on after:

    Try reading the posts, and determine who is being uncivil, before launching in your own bout of name calling.
    (Ann Coulter? Whats next...Hitler?)

    Any resonable, objective person can look and see who resorts to name-calling, and who doesn't.

  115. Anne Coulter IS HITLER!!!!!

  116. AJR79: Cheap political potshots.

    Why don't you and Shadow go over to the blogging tories and stay there.

  117. Milo i'm sorry to hear you're uncomfortable hearing from people with different points of view.

  118. Everybody, calm the hell down. Sheesh.

  119. There is too much over the top debate here, from all sides.

    Is there anything wrong with trying to be reasonable?

    Insults, and talking down to people, are just plain childish.

    Condescencion, is another thing I notice here.

    You people all remind me of the house of commons. Everybody needs a time out for offensive behaviour.

  120. I don't care for the name calling at all. However Shadow brings some of it on himself. He seldom says things in a way that indicates others have valid points or thoughts. He says instead, " Let me show/tell you where you are wrong". In politics there are seldom right or wrong points of view. There are differences. Some posters write as if theirs is the only truth. One can be quite principled yet take into account that others might have a reasonable point of view. There is nothing to be gained in a discussion but rancor when one party writes from the point of view that he/she is superior. That's a major part of the problem here.

  121. Earl very well said.

    If only everybody on this site could act in such a responsible adult manner.

    Shadow you do seem to have a habit of talking down to people. I can tell by your postings that you are intelligent. Use that intelligence to engage people, not try and awe them with your wit.

    Disagreements are normal with politics. What may seem silly to you may be perfectly sensible to another.

    Try and act like adults.

  122. Some people have the notion that hyperbole passes for rational political discussion.

    There are many ways to get your point across without resorting to such demeaning behaviour.

    I'm glad somebody pointed that out.

  123. I am so glad that shadow got called on his behaviour.

    One can rarely say anyhing to him, without him coming back at you, to tell you how wrong or how silly you are, or how your knowledge of an issue, just isn't as superior as his.

    He decries all the partisan behaviour, but does nothing but engage it it himself.

    I hope he will be a little more thoughtful and sensitive to other people's feelings.

  124. A couple of salient points on the G.S.T cuts, have not been addressed on this thread:

    1. It was an election promise that was made, and kept.

    2. They made it easier for Ontario and B.C to harmonize. This will do more to improve the Canadian economy then any stimulus.

    What does Don Drummond think about the H.S.T?

    Find out here

  125. Katherine, Jason and Brenda I don't think the problem is just Shadow. Stephen Harper is not the anti Christ. People come on here and call Harper all sorts of names. Do those of us with a Conservative bent call Iggy or Layton those kinds of names? No. If we are to have good conversations it means good faith on all sides.

  126. Earl I never said anything about Shadow.

    My comment was meant to address
    the discussion from all sides.

    Your right rational political discussion, requires good faith from all sides.

    Whatever your political stripe, you should not treat somebody who has a different opinion than yourself as an "Enemy"

    I think that is to often the case here.

    No I do not believe Stephen Harper to be the anti christ, and it is wrong for people to say that.

    Conservatives, Liberals, NDPers, Greens, and non affiliated people all have different points of views, and that should be respected.

  127. Apparently there is a Harris Decima poll just out as follows

    Liberals 32

    Tories 32

  128. Jason, my mistake. Agree with all you said.

  129. I'm told the details of the HD poll will be up on their site within 24 hours, so I will wait for that.

  130. That HD result is entirely in keeping with the patterns we started to see in January.

    The Liberals are coming up, and the Conservatives are holding station.

  131. Eric apparently if you go to Warren Kinsella's website you will find all the info there.

    Hope that helps.

    Harris Decima has a tie.

  132. Not complete but not nothing:

  133. Thanks smidgin, will post about it momentarily.


COMMENT MODERATION POLICY - Please be respectful when commenting. If choosing to remain anonymous, please sign your comment with some sort of pseudonym to avoid confusion. Please do not use any derogatory terms for fellow commenters, parties, or politicians. Inflammatory and overly partisan comments will not be posted. PLEASE KEEP DISCUSSION ON TOPIC.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.