Federal Election: started March 21, 2015

All I know is that when Nathan Cullen and Joyce Murray were running for the leaderships of their parties, they both advocated running joint nominations

Even Elizabeth May pipped in and joined Joyce in a few interviews to try to spread the gospel.

Both parties should have worked together to make that happen.

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

The only reason there is any confusion over this point is because people like Debater have a vested interest in sowing said confusion. Sadly, the media has a lot of people like Debater in it.

So even though Sean disagrees with you and even though the press articles also disprove what you are saying, you are still intent on maintaining your false assertions and blaming me and the press for having a "vested interest in sowing said confusion"?

Can't you see how partisan you are?  Can't you see how blinded you are by your slavish devotion to Mulcair & the NDP talking points?  Even some of the NDPers here like Sean are able to see the flaws in your reasoning.

The bottom line is that Mulcair said he was against working with the Liberals in any way.  If it's the case that inside his own head he was hoping to leave a loophole through legalese and weasel words, then that proves what I said earlier - that Mulcair is just as much a political opportunist as you accuse Trudeau of being.

An ordinary person, listening to Mulcair, would have come away with the understanding that he was against cooperation.  Why not just admit that Mulcair flip-flopped and changed his position?  It makes sense that he said what he did at the time.  He didn't want to look close to the Liberals, and they were behind in the polls anyway.

However, when the Trudeau Liberals overtook him the following year, be began to gradually change his tune, leading to his present position.

Now, as much as I dislike you, and your constant attempt to malign me, I am still open to working with you & other NDPers down the road.  I still think Mulcair is an opportunist & a flip-flopper, but I think he's correct to begin thinking about some sort of arrangement between the Liberals & the NDP.  Because let's face it, neither party is likely to win enough seats on their own to beat the Conservatives.

I don't think the Liberals can afford to believe that they are destined to return to power.  They can't afford to ignore the possibility of working with the NDP.  At this point in time the Liberals do not have sufficient support to govern on their own.  Nor does the NDP.  I think Justin Trudeau needs to open the door to cooperation with the NDP like Mulcair is doing.  It risks alienating non-Conservative voters when a leader is stubborn on this point.  And I am going to pass along my thoughts to Gerald Butts when I talk to him this week.

Debater wrote:

And I am going to pass along my thoughts to Gerald Butts when I talk to him this week.

Gérard Deltell quitte la CAQ pour les conservateurs

Le député caquiste de Chauveau, Gérard Deltell, annoncera mardi qu'il quitte la CAQ pour faire le saut en politique fédérale avec le Parti conservateur aux prochaines élections, a appris Radio-Canada. Il sera candidat à l'investiture dans la circonscription fédérale de Louis-Saint-Laurent, à Québec.

http://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/Politique/2015/04/06/003-gerard-del...

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Harper was too arrogant to resign last summer or fall when he should have. He is bringing his party into an election where his removal will become the most significant issue of the campaign. He may win but the risk he is taking, chance of loss, is increased due to his tenure. He is now his party's biggest problem.

It is clear Harper cannot win a clean campaign. It is not clear that he can even get away with a dirty one. A win by Harper is defined as more seats than the Liberals and NDP combined. This is the case due to his actions. He has put those two parties with a gun to their heads forcing them to govern if they are able to becuase their supporters hate Harper so much that they would destroy their own parties rather than accept a deal that would keep Harper in power if it can be avoided.

If Harper had resigned Trudeau could have allowed the next conservative leader a chance but if it is Harper, Trudeau would be inclined personally to defeat him even if his policies might not be different. Trudeau's supporters and even MPs would split badly if the Liberals picked Harper over the hated NDP. The NDP would not want to support a Trudeau government if the NDP came in third but they would be forced to just as the Liberals would be forced to accepting Mulcair as PM should the NDP get more seats than they and the combination exceed 170. there will not be enough time for the Conservatives to wipe the stain of Harper in the period between the election and the crafting of a government.

Is there a chance that if Harper wins a plurality but not a majority, he could work out a deal with the Liberals to vote through a throne speech on the condition that he resigns?

Isn't it due to the Senate that we don't have an abortion law?

 Of course he supports her having a spot at the debates, he's hoping she'll take his! :-) 

Victoriaville Mayor Alain Rayes to run for Conservatives in Richmond-Arthabaska

Apr 9 2015

VICTORIAVILLE, Que. - The federal Tories have landed themselves another high-profile candidate in Quebec.

A Conservative source tells The Canadian Press that Victoriaville Mayor Alain Rayes will announce his candidacy on Monday.

Rayes has been mayor of the central Quebec municipality since 2009 and will seek nomination in Richmond-Arthabaska.

---

http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2015/04/09/quebec-mayor-alain-rayes-to-...

Yeah, very cute, Nicky!  You always manage to play word games with every post.

I was obviously referring to what Elizabeth May said in the article above about how Justin wants his daughter to see a woman leader in the debates so it's not just an Old Boy's Club.

That's why I asked whether Mulcair agrees with Trudeau & May on the significance of having a woman leader in the debates.  Women voters will be paying attention to Mulcair's decision, I'm sure.

What a bunch of baloney.

Trudeau hasn't failed to "support a debate on Women's issues".  That debate participation hasn't been decided yet.

So far Mulcair has "failed" to support Elizabeth May's inclusion in the main Leaders Debate. So now Mulcair is "slithering around" by agreeing to be in a debate which fewer people will watch and hoping people don't notice his lack of support for Elizabeth May in the Leaders Debate, which more people watch and which is more important.  Mulciar doesn't want May in the regular Leaders Debate, and it is patently obvious.

As I just demonstrated above, two can play at this game of posturing around the debates.

Why don't we wait and see what the leaders decide about the debates?

We also don't know what the all-powerful "Broadast Consortium" has decided yet.

So we're operating in the dark.

Mulcair hasn't done any posturing.

He said that he would be at the leaders debate if Harper was there, and that he would welcome a debate on Women's Issues. Two pretty plain statements.

Trudeau, however, has promoted including May in the leader's debate on feminist grounds, but will not state if he will be willing to be in a debate solely on women's issues. What gives?

 Oh this should be fun, Harper and Trudeau are likely dreading this election for different reasons, and I have no doubt that Mulcair is rooting for Racheal.

 Oh this should be fun, Harper and Trudeau are likely dreading this election for different reasons, and I have no doubt that Mulcair is rooting for Racheal.

The Liberal-Conservative party will do whatever it can to serve the interests of the rich. It currently has two heads, the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party, but if their combined vote goes under 55%, there will be calls for a merger.

Evidence does not show that the Liberals will do anything to change anything. The Liberals will prop up Harper, and have been in collusion with Harper since the days of Paul Martin. The only chance for change is an NDP majority government.

Brachina wrote:

 I worry it could help Trudeau, but changing the channel from Mulcair's substance vs. Trudeau lack of it, and Trudeau may gain support from the Tories.(and yes I see that as a bad thing, not because I support Harper, but because it would just encourage those fools who think Trudeau is they're salvation from rightwing politics).

It seems to me as though it is some NDP supporters who portray the NDP as Canada's salvation. I doubt many people consider Trudeau a salvation from right wing politics or anything else.