Debater
rabble-rouser-machine
Member: 17472
Joined: Apr 17 2009

remind wrote:

... it is obvious the NDP killed it themselves, and they won't be actioning it anytime soon.

Oh well, it will be sweet to see the NDP back down to 12 or less seats.

Well this post will be a bit different - normally I have to point out when you are underestimating Liberal strength, but this time I have to point it out about the NDP.  Do you really think that the NDP is going to be reduced to only 12 seats?  There is little danger of that happening in the next election, and certainly not because of Dana Larsen who 99% of people haven't heard of.  You may have decided not to vote NDP because of it, but it's not going to be something that effects many other voters other than those on this thread.  Stockholm is right.

The NDP may lose some seats in the next election to the Liberals and a few to the Conservatives, but to suggest that they are going to collapse back to pre-2004 levels of support is not realistic.


Investigation into treatment of Dana Larson and the marijuana resolution needed By: Darwin OConnor (114 replies) August 27, 2009 - 1:05pm
  • The issue here is not BC or By: MUN Prof. (Aug 28 2009 - 3:42pm)
  • remind wrote: If heroin By: Sineed (Aug 28 2009 - 3:39pm)
  • melovesproles wrote: I wish By: Slumberjack (Aug 28 2009 - 3:30pm)
  • Quote:Yes, as we have seen, By: melovesproles (Aug 28 2009 - 3:26pm)
  • But Mexico is also building By: pcml (Aug 28 2009 - 3:24pm)
  • Mexico apparently did an By: Snert (Aug 28 2009 - 3:00pm)
  • Dana, I agree that it is a By: remind (Aug 28 2009 - 2:55pm)
  • edit just not worth the By: Bookish Agrarian (Aug 28 2009 - 2:49pm)
  • Quote: Larsen and his gang By: Dana Larsen (Aug 28 2009 - 2:40pm)
  • ... it is obvious the NDP By: remind (Aug 28 2009 - 2:34pm)
  • Sineed wrote: And crack By: ocsi (Aug 28 2009 - 2:17pm)
  • MUN Prof. wrote: Yes, as we By: Sineed (Aug 28 2009 - 2:12pm)
  • To clarify, I never said By: ottawaobserver (Aug 28 2009 - 1:45pm)
  • Yes, as we have seen, single By: MUN Prof. (Aug 28 2009 - 1:40pm)
  • I have not been here for a By: pcml (Aug 28 2009 - 1:07pm)
  • Stockholm wrote: And the By: Darwin OConnor (Aug 28 2009 - 12:50pm)
  • Regulation and strict By: ocsi (Aug 28 2009 - 12:48pm)
  • Stockholm wrote: Darwin By: mahara (Aug 28 2009 - 12:42pm)
  • Stockholm wrote:   As has By: ocsi (Aug 28 2009 - 12:39pm)
  • Maybe they weren't being By: Stockholm (Aug 28 2009 - 10:51am)
  • How could they have given By: Darwin OConnor (Aug 28 2009 - 10:36am)
  • Darwin OConnor wrote: SSM By: Stockholm (Aug 28 2009 - 10:36am)
  • Darwin OConnor wrote: Even By: Sineed (Aug 28 2009 - 10:27am)
  • SSM was unpopular in Canada By: Darwin OConnor (Aug 28 2009 - 10:11am)
  • Actually, I've never met By: Stockholm (Aug 28 2009 - 10:00am)
  • Me too, Boom Boom (nice to By: Sineed (Aug 28 2009 - 9:47am)
  • I agree Dana was treated By: Boom Boom (Aug 27 2009 - 6:43pm)
  • ...just like in the BC By: Stockholm (Aug 27 2009 - 6:38pm)
  • I think the Green party is By: melovesproles (Aug 27 2009 - 6:31pm)
  • Daniel, I'd like to see what By: Stockholm (Aug 27 2009 - 5:33pm)
  • MUN Prof. wrote: How about a By: kropotkin1951 (Aug 27 2009 - 5:23pm)
  • How about a Royal By: MUN Prof. (Aug 27 2009 - 2:58pm)
  • There was no filibuster, By: sandpiper (Aug 27 2009 - 2:56pm)
  • I highly doubt there was By: madmax (Aug 27 2009 - 2:51pm)
  • You may want to add to it By: Daniel Grice (Aug 27 2009 - 1:10pm)