My net election gains prediction:

South Interior (Con to NDP)
Fleetwood (Con to NDP)
Newton (Con to NDP)
Richmond (Possible Lib to Con)
Surrey North (Indy to NDP)
New West (Con to NDP)
North Van (Lib to Con)
Kingsway (Lib to NDP)
Esquimalt (Poss Lib to NDP)
Nanaimo (Pos Con to NDP)
Island North (COn to NDP)
Victoria (Lib to NDP)

Dangrice: "North Van (Lib to Con)"

Thank you for so saying it so well. That is why I will change my vote from NDP last time to Liberal this time. I don't want Focus on the Family to be representing me in Ottawa.

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary...81526-4938r.htm

Check out the link, just like rebel said, you want BUSH running Canada vote Stevie, the most extreme right winger the west has ever seen. Don't get sucked in to this corruption crap. The conservatives not corrupt, go read the book
On The Take. BC is going NDP so vote NDP whereever possible

dangrice predictions:

May I suggest a very close run again in West Vancouver (Con to Lib)... but very, very, close

If someone asked me if I loved Canada, and I'm not a mushy kind of guy, I would say YES, YOUR DAMN RIGHT I DO which is why I hope nobody votes for that reptilian bush apologist, harper.
His love is for neo-con policies, gated communities and a certain domanatrix from central Alberta with a scorchin', flabby white a$$ lashin' cat o' nine tails!!
WWWTTTHHHHHHHCCCCCCCCCHHHHHHHHHHIIIII

We just have to keep reminding Canadians at all Candidates meetings or where ever, that a
Steven Harper Majority puts us in Iraq and rolls back Kyoto and gives us a BUSH style
government, always bring up BUSH when speaking about Harper , make it stick. Canadians
when polled showed 85% disapproval ratings for BUSH, like I said keep it out their that
Harper has made no clear policy platform and leans towards a US style system.

Campbell and his gang will not officially endorse anyone in the federal election. First of all, he would endorse Harper. He can't do this as he is supposed to be a Liberal. Secondly, if he did endorse Harper, he would cost the conservatives a lot of votes here in BC, as so many hate Campbell.

Harper is simply following the same electioneering plan as Campbell and other conservatives. Lie, appear as being reasonable, tell the public what they want to hear, and presto, you're in. Then it is time to start the slash and burn to public programs and hand over tax dollars to corporate donaters. Remember, Mulroney assured us that he was not for NAFTA, and then promptly turned around on this issue once elected.

Right on crh, flashback to that scumbag Mulroney singing Irish Eyes with Reagan the war criminal. Just imagine Harper riding around in the pick up at the BUSH Crawford ranch. Makes my stomach churn, like I said keep bring up the military and social issues and out the kooks.

Gordo and his crew threw a big party last year for the federal conservatives!! It's no secret with whom their true alliance lies.
H is at his most creepy, and that says a lot, when he feigns an air of reason and balance. Ha!! I've seen better acting from ronald reagan.
p.s.- for humorless, robotic right wing types my last comment was joke by the way.

well I can't argue against dangrice.com's predictions so far, but I should correct one error...

"Nanaimo (Pos Con to NDP)"

First, Nanaimo-Cowichan is already NDP. Perhaps its 'nanaimo-alberni' thats being refered to?

My bet is..
NDP 15
Con 12
Liberal 9

Whether federal or municipal, in any election the NDP will be opposing not only other political parties, but a mainstream media that, with its slimy polls and owner/editorial bias, invariably gets the governments it wants.

In the past, no doubt spooked by the power of that media, I've noticed a reticence on behalf of the party to speak out on the abuse of that power.

In the face of a large, gullible, reading and tv-watching public, if ever there was a time to speak up without mealymouthed commentary on this matter, it is now.

As vile a form of censorship can be censoring oneself.

No way pkelly,

NDP 15
Lib 12
Con 9

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051207/wl_canada_nm/canada_politics_poll_col

the last federal election i voted for the communist. not because i'm a communist but because i listened to them all and he seemed to be the only one who believed in what he was saying.

all the other candidates seemed to be more interested in their own career. i knew the communist didn't have a chance but i'd rather vote for someone i respect than trained monkey that can only read from a carefully prepared script.

my prediction:

communists: 0

but they have a good chance of getting my vote.

billy pilgrim,

What a pity that all did not follow that rule instead of, as so many do, vote for who the media tells them is going to win.

skeptikool opines:

It would be a pity if all followed that rule; most of us don't rely on the media to tell us who is going to win in our community. Instead, we rely on our local knowledge -- who are neighbors are, and what values predominate -- to cast our votes strategically.

I'm not happy about voting thus, but our FPTP system dictates such behavior.

Stuart...

SES poll in the 2004 election was by far the worst offender when it came to accurately predicting the outcome of the election. Its numbers are so skewed and fuzzy that its impossible to conclude anything from their poll.
With margins of errors in the regions that range from 5.4% to 10.1%, the only glimmer of reality that SES might indicate is a trend...nothing more.
And if trends are any indication, then SES probaby verifies my prediction more than anything else.
Since they started their 2005/6 daily tracking poll, it has shown a consistent slide of the conservatives and a steady gain of the NDP, and a steady gain of the Liberals.
Conservatives are not the populist Reform party of 1993/97.
I stand by my prediction. I'd be prepared to suggest that the Conservatives would be *lucky* to keep 12 seats in BC actually, but I'll leave my numbers as they are.

pkelly,

fair point , polls suck.

And are only useful for strippers and other
poll dancers. aka Ron Erwin

US reporters always complain about the Bush Admin being the most secretive gov't in American history - Harper would be even worse I'm sure. I heard the reporters saying nobody gets near him when he's on the road. Reporters and staff travel in one bus and he travels in his own bus - probably so he can keep calls to his American neocon advisers private and of course he has to have his make-up done. Really! I've heard that said before about his full makeup. If you watch when giving a speech you can see the lightner makeup cleverly applied under he eyes as his natural coloring has a lot of dark coloring around his eyes - common in people like him but his handlers try to hide it - part of the big coverup.

I was at The Laurel Point in Victoria last Saturday. The occasion was a rally for Steven Harper. I met him, what a nice honest man.
I shook his hand and exchanged greetings. He wasn't wearing any make-up, and he came in ONE bus, with all reporters and his handlers on that ONE bus. I saw him get off, I saw him get on.
I didn't notice ant FBI or CIA or any security whatsoever.
It amazes me how much trouble that I got into when I said that if you could imagine Jack Layton with one of those leather police hats on and how much he would look like a porn star, I was vilified for making personal attacks on the man.
Compared to the drivel I see here about Steven Harper, it was nothing.
What if Mr. Harper was black ? Would you still have the nerve to ridicule him ?
I doubt you cowards would.
If he was jewish, you would have no problem.
You are all Christian hating bigots.
But no worries, you only make your side look STUPID.

"but a mainstream media that, with its slimy polls and owner/editorial bias, invariably gets the governments it wants."

Now, why is it that when the mainstream media shows a bias to one side or the other, they are slimy etc etc etc. But yet this very site is financially dependant on the BC Federation of Labour, thus has a huge bias in its reporting views. But that is just hunky dorey. There is some metaphor about gooses and ganders that is very appropriate here.

At least the mainstream media pays it's own way. The very, very left leaning CBC simply picks our pockets whenever the kitty gets a bit low.

Ron Erwin, WTF?!

How does your original insults of Jack Layton as a porn star make all non-conservative voters "..all Christian hating bigots" ??

One personal attack on one side does NOT justify a personal attack on the other from the other side.
You were clearly wrong in your Layton/porn-star comments, but those tossing equivalent personal attacks against Harper (or Martin for that matter) are JUST AS WRONG.

As a non-conservative voter, I'll take your comments as directed at me personally...now you have alleged that I am a Christian hating bigot.

Well my friend, I take my Christian faith very seriously, and your comments are a personal insult to me. If you had any ingrity, you would apologise. *if*...

As this campaign has unfolded so far, I actually was impressed by Harper and Layton. Both have stayed on message and avoided personal attacks. I might not agree with Harper, but I can respect his views - even if I have no plans to vote for his party.

In future, please do not confuse criticisms of the conservative platform as personal attacks on Harper. That is not the case at all. Most people would find Harper as a decent fellow in person, just as they would Layton.

I eagerly await your apology for your personal attack on me.

I agree with Skeptikool, Billy Pilgrim. You've got principles and, you've got guts, man. Indeedy, whoever one votes for, and I don't really care where on the spectrum, we need more who vote like that. Which is why my grudging respect for some Wingnuts even. However much I disagree with them, and I sure as hell do, at least they have an analysis and vote according to it. This opportunistic strategic voting shitt is just that :-)

Oh my , juskatladude says

"Now, why is it that when the mainstream media shows a bias to one side or the other, they are slimy etc etc etc. But yet this very site is financially dependant on the BC Federation of Labor, thus has a huge bias in its reporting views."

Your suck a flawed individual I don't know where to start. Okay I'll and break it down for you.

1) Your not a clever man, David Beers has admitted getting money from the BC Fed openly in the media , it's not a secret. Honestly , do you think money falls from the sky,

2) Everything is bias depending on who's saying it, it's up to an individual to find the truth and search for answers, I wish the world was a different place but hey money talks. I wish the news put our interest in front off financial ones but they don't and allot of folks are to lazy to go looking.

3) Bias is determined not by the money but by the content. The tyee unlike the MSM puts out articles by progressives and right wingers also. David Burner self admitted BC Liberal supporter and NDP hater and Will McMartin is a political consultant who has been affiliated with the Conservative, Social Credit and BC Reform parties both are frequent contributors to the tyee .

So the Tyee puts out articles on the issues, it you feel they are bias then good for you, but if your honest you would see the Tyee is more democratic that most MSM sources who are beholden to big money and power. I wonder how many critical articles you were able to post about the Van Sun or CanWest or Global TV, I'm betting the tyee is the only medium you have a critical voice on.

4) To compare the MSM and the Tyee is obscene, we have a few massive media conglomerates controlling the entire spectrum and you want to pick on the Tyee, the reason I feel for this is that allot of folks have never heard the other side in a meaningful way, don't be scared , embrace media democracy, I know it has been a long time coming but open your mind.

5) The MSM is not self sustaining , we the tax payer built the network and the lines that they are enriching themselves with and filling the air with right wing propaganda , we should demand more public air waves from these pimps. I know their is a army of right wing Waco's trying to block and discredit independent media but it's not working as the truth is breaking threw, get used to it.

juskatladude,

What Stuart said.

Get back under your rock with your wacked out shitt. The Tyees bias at least allows for and lets in everyone uncensored, even your wacked out self. If that much freedom is bias, bring on more bias.

I admit my bias. You wack jobs have yours no less and need to 'fess up to it.

I remember seeing an American news anchor being interviewed by Johnny Carson once. Carson asked him about his personal experiences with Ronald Reagan. The anchor replied that he thought Reagan was one of the nicest men he ever met, that if Reagan met someone in trouble he was probably one of the first who would "give the shirt off his back to help." Then the anchor added, "Of course, he would also probably be in the process of signing into law legislation that would take the troubled man's grandmother off Medicaid."

The point is, "nice" doesn't cut it. It may attract the votes of the unwary, who mistake a nice, friendly demeanour with some sort of guarantee of benevolence. No such luck. Harper may be the "nicest" man in the world, but I won't support his policies and I won't vote for him.

Coyote feels:

OK, Coyote, let me give my situation. My current MP is Conservative. In the last election, we were well into the early hours of the morning before he was declared a winner over the Liberal candidate. I have no reason to believe that things will be different this time around, as the personalities are the same.

I can vote for my preferred party and deny the Liberals my vote. That - and a few hundred others doing the same thing - will surely give the Conservatives the victory. I have no great love for the Liberals, but I like them a whole lot better than Harper's gang. Why is voting strategically in my riding sh*t?

As long as we don't have proportional representation, strategic voting will be a fact of life in Canadia. And as long as we don't have PR, the NDP will continue getting three times as much popular support then they get seats in Parliament.

My first preference is the NDP but if I lived in a riding where the Liberals and Conservatives were the frontrunners, I'd definitely vote Liberal.

Grub should vote his analysis and his conscience. I know enough about him from here, to respect him and his decision.

I have a different view, which is that shitt happens, and I've just about had it with this "trapped" voting position the public and the left is in. It's approaching time for it to end. (See my post in the Harper and the X factor, under Mair's byline.)

I don't expect an easy sell here, or any kudos, but I think it is time to break from those we vote for, merely because they are the lesser evil-, or we're still going to be here, in an even worse Wingnut World another century from now, singing God Bless Amerika.

If you think Layton and the Blairites offer the best of all possible worlds, and are satisfied with that, you should vote for them. If you are not, and I am not, then let the cards fall where they may. Almost 40% of the population already doesn't vote.

My view is that it is time to get on with changing the system, instead of perpetuating it. I've had it up to my tonsils where the sun doesn't shine, going along with this FPTP, the lesser of all evils, strategic voting trap the left and others who want real change are in.

I've got no disrespect for grub or any others who think like him. I just think it is time to begin moving on here, and dealing with the shitt as it comes at us.We have to make a break here sooner or later anyway, is my view. You want folks to think a little deeper and change their loyalties? Let them feel the full weight of their choices a little more up close and personal.

The most outstanding part of the recent German elections, which everyone seems to have missed, is not the Conservative-SPD Alliance, a mirror image of the Liberal-NDP Alliance, but the emergence of an alternative left (18%??) in the electoral outcome, that the SPD could have allied itself with, but chose instead an alliance with the Conservative Christian Democrats.

Think about it.

And it's not that we need an alliance between the NDP and either the Liberals or Conservatives, but that you know they would choose either one of them over an alliance with a serious movement of "the left". Time for those with more radical left values and a desire for a more "socially transformative" outcome here, to begin to move on and build another choice besides, like I say, this "strategic voting shitt".

My view. And I feel increasingly comfortable with it.

I'm 67 today. :-) Time for a change.

Coyote:

I applaud your view.

Some time ago, during the early days of Preston and the Reform movement I supported them very uneasily. Preston himself, and many of the wackos who comprised the Reform party, were not my cup of tea, but "reform" of the Canadian system (EEE Senate) resonated with my values.

Well, EEE has gone the way of the Doodoo bird and I guess, as Coyote says, we'll have to look for other reforms. FPTP, doesn't cut it anymore.

"strategic voting" is a self defeating concept.
The ONLY strategy for voting is to vote for the candidate and party that you want to win...period.
If you vote for a party that you don't like very much to prevent the party you hate from doing well, then you'll get representation you have little confidence in.
If you want your party to win, then go help them. Show up, take a lawn sign, donate cash, help on the phones, convince people to join you in the cause too.
Strategic Voting as a concept was invented by Buzz Hargrove and it lead directly to the re-election of Mike Harris in Ontario. Strategic Voting is a device of the Liberals. Since they have no policies of their own, using the fear card, they spook people into voting for them out of fear of another party.
Not this time. Liberals are FAR too corrupt to get my vote or ANYONE that I know of that has voted for them in the past.

pkelly recommends:

That would be pointless in my community; akin to bashing my head against a wall.

If I were to expend the energy you recommend, then I'd rather put it towards something like electoral reform and some form of PR -- as Coyote recommends -- so that my vote will be meaningful and so that strategic voting truly becomes a thing of the past.

I'm with you, grub. I've voted NDP forever, but I really don't want to live in a Canada with Stephen Harper as Prime Minister. I'm definitely voting Liberal this time because I don't see how allowing Harper to squeak by will, as Coyote claims, "change the system." There's another dimension to Coyote's position against strategic voting and that's the suggestion that there COULD be a situation in which even HE would consider voting strategically. Imagine a developement in which an even far more right-wing type than Stephen Harper were running as head of the Conservatives. Say a floor-crossed Michael Ignatieff, for instance who claims to be a liberal but basically worships the ideals of the New American Century). I happen to think he's a very dangerous man. Would I be wrong to oppose someone like that by voting in a way that would help to ensure that his party didn't win? Am I wrong to believe that Coyote can easily imagine a scenario in which he would vote for the lesser of two evils? I wonder if most of life isn't about choosing the least evil way to go anyway. I think it's a matter of personal choice. I happen to think this is the time to let go of ideologically-based voting. There is a HUGE amount at stake. Someone else might believe that this is the wrong time. Remember Solomon's counsel (or the Byrds) in Ecclesiastes: There is a time for everything.

Grub, I appreciate that your ballot choice would be a long shot to win the seat. But if you, and others that abandon the strategic voting idea, vote for the party you want to win, then the powerbrokers of that party will see its increasing share of support there and target it accordingly for next time - instead of writing it off. More resources, stronger candidates could put that seat in play for the next election instead of resigning one's self to the notion of 'oh, we won't win anyway, so I'll vote for the next fella in the party that I hate a little less than the party I REALLY hate.'
Until we have PR voting, or mixed PR, we still have the FPTP instead and we have to make the best of it.
The only meaningless vote is one that is never cast at all. I have far too much respect for those who fought and died for my right to vote than to stay at home on election day.
I have gone down to the voting station knowing in my heart that the candidate I was voting for had little chance of winning, but I voted for him nonetheless.

Truman Green.

And you are right, Truman, for whom I also have much respect. There are no absolutes in life, or very bloody few, save that there are no absolutes, no matter how far you go out on the politcal extremeties, either right or left. :-)

And there certainly are likely situations which could occur, where I would consider voting strategically, on a case by case basis. Indeed I have done so for the better part of my adult life voted NDP for precisely those perceived reasons. But which I am forced to conclude, after this long time, has largely been for naught, even where the NDP actually came to power. And especially since the late 70s to early 80s, regardless of that strategic voting practice, often with NDP assistance/collaboration, the drift to the ever more extreme programmatic neo-conservative right has continued apace.

It has turned out to be, other than perhaps slowing the process down somewhat, an ineffective and naive practice on my part, I have concluded. Which is to where I think we have all arrived at in this election, where everyone who has in fact been engaged in the practice of so-called "strategic voting" for the last 30-40 years can actually point to it as having not produced any serious or concrete results, insofar as turning around the "right neocon drift" goes, let alone having in any significant way produced a "socially progressive and transformative" result upon status quo capitalism.

For me, the answer is likewise a clear and resounding negative.

With my conclusion being that, from here on, in order for that to re-occur, my engaging as a matter of course in strategic voting, I would almost certainly have to see an absolute "fascist" worst case scenario in the cards. Period. Or I would have to see some strategic option that I could actually feel or intellectually conclude, would produce a significant progressive or socially transformative outcome upon status quo capitalism.

I do not seriously see any of this here, in this election, though there is in my analysis a continuing drift towards fascism, but which has no less or more existed for the last 30-40 years of capitalism, under my strategic voting practice, in favour of the NDP. It has not been significantly mitigated.

So short of a sudden and serious worsening of the situation, I will move on to the position I have outlined to grub and others, in the conviction that a break with that "strategic" practice is of a greater likelihood to bring matters more quickly to a head, at least, and result in the emergence of more socially challenging movements. Assuming, of course, and being the fly in the ointment I concede, that it can and does become a more widespread practice, as it has been anyway with voter participation rates, and result over time in new movement creation and outcome possibilities.

On the NDP part especially, there is too much presumption that they have the entire progressive and radical community captured, by these strategic voting provisions. So they can flirt with the right and the status quo exactly as much as they please, with impunity.

Which too needs to be shaken up.

So unless I see a candidate or policy platform which actually convinces me that he/she or it is calculated to turn this current neoconservative period around and begin a serious process of transforming capitalism and significantly democratizing its economic and political underpinnings, I will simply not vote or otherwise give my personal legitimacy thereby to "The System".

And who said one need get less radical, but more conservative, as we get older. (And no, I do not do it for its own sake. :-)

'I've voted NDP forever, but I really don't want to live in a Canada with Stephen Harper as Prime Minister. I'm definitely voting Liberal this time because I don't see how allowing Harper to squeak by...' there's a typical ndper for you. negative, destructive, pessimistic, and no principles. just vote to beat the other guy. no wonder they'll never hold power.

Coyote says:

Ah, Coyote, your words and the fact that I've just finished watching the documentary "The Take" about worker power in Argentina, makes me want to break out in song --

Do you hear the people sing?
Singing a song of angry men?
It is the music of a people
Who will not be slaves again!
When the beating of your heart
Echoes the beating of the drums
There is a life about to start
When tomorrow comes! - Les Miserables

The latest polls for BC are Reform-Conservative 34%, Liberal 32% and NDP 24% which will, yet again, mean a lot of finger-point and blaming on election night on the leftie side. For all the noise lefties make, they sure are not very able to form govermnents.

Federally it is 39% Liberal, 27% Reform and 16% NDP.

In Quebec, Reform gets only 9% and the NDP 7%. The Liberals are at 32% which I find surprising.

At these numbers, look to see more Liberal seats, fewer PC and even fewer NDP. I predict 16 NDP seats or so. Certainly there will be no breakthrough. I wonder why the NDP cannot change themselves to be more attractive to voters?

This poll was done by Leger marketing:

http://legermarketing.com/documents/spclm/051208ENG.pdf

This link is also excellent and shows some very intersting trends:

http://www.nodice.ca/elections/canada/polls.php

Pkelly "Perhaps its 'nanaimo-alberni' thats being refered to?" - Yep.

Grub -- "May I suggest a very close run again in West Vancouver (Con to Lib)... but very, very, close." Thats another tough one. Both of the North Shore ridings are fair game. West Van has Blair Wilson running again who has name recognition, although this blunted because the NDP is running a Wilson as well. Its also tough to say whether Reynolds was an asset or a liability as he spent nearly the entire last campaign outside of his riding as CPC election chair.

Anyways, my predictions were based on perceived switches in the electorate. Individual candidates can throw the balance in a tight race.

I think the general change in BC from 2004:
•populist/rejection voters including the island and suburbs will go from Tory to Dippers en mass. (In 2004, they were ready to swallow Harper to dump the liberals but the NDP is a viable option now) However, Tories will still maintain eastern suburbs and much of interior.

•NDP will maintain most of its voter core as long as the Tory's trail in the polls and gain some soft left who voted strategically. (A vote for the NDP is a vote for the CPC only works if the polls favour the CPC)

•liberals will loose a bit of soft right on sponsorship, but will gain equivalent votes back from those rejecting Tory social conservatism and electioneering. (This will be the CPC's biggest undoing. What I do in the privacy of my own home is none of their business. Just as what they do in the privacy of their own churches, should be kept out of government.)

Working Man: Can you stop calling them reform. The reform platform was created to push reform of our democratic institutions and to cut government waste. However, it was populist and based on the concept of one member one vote, which was easily subverted.

stuart

Thanks but that link didn't work - try this one

http://washingtontimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20051201-081526-4938r

This is about Bush's new best friend.

stuart

Thanks but that link didn't work - try this one

http://washingtontimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20051201-081526-4938r

This is about Bush's new best friend.

"Your suck a flawed individual I don't know where to start."

Oh my, Stuart. I believe you were trying to say "You're such a flawed individual....". Hey if you are going to take my intelligence to task, at least ask your mom to check you grammar and spelling first.

As I have stated here before, I enjoy reading the articles in this site although agreeing with few of them. The reporters offer generally well written editorials on relevant issues. Obviously they are aware of who is paying their way so they write accordingly, much as you see the mainstream media doing. The threads that follow are usually nothing short of stand-up comedy, resplendent with self-appointed guardians of all things social.

In case you missed it there Stuart, my point is that you should be able to read a point of view from a source which does not support your own views and be able to discern whether it is reasonable or not. I do that on this site constantly. But to simply write off all of Canada's media shows a basic flaw in your intelligence, or perhaps lack thereof.

My advice to you is move out of your parents basement, go get a trade or some education and get your life started. It is never too late there buddy. Writing opinions on this site does not constitute a profession!!

Working Man, We have been through this before, it's The Conservative Party of Canada, you Liberal hack.
And Paul Martin is Cretans protege.
Sorry S. Green, you didn't deserve my tirade.
But, watch out for Working Man, he is a Liberal hack, big time.
Yes this site is biased, I realize it, it cannot be denied by anyone. But I still enjoy being able to get so close to the thoughts of left wing people. And of course, died in the wool Liberal Party of Canada supporters like Working Man.

Ron Erwin insists:

And more's the pity. When they were the Reform Party (ignoring for a moment all the nutbars that were members of the party -- and likely still are) they actually stood for something meaningful and useful; reform of the Canadian political process.

Yes Grub, it is interesting to watch the democratizing processes at work in Argentina.Indeed, with the US Empire preoccupied in Iraq, the whole of Latin America is showing signs of movement to take advantage of the situation.

I think we will have a somewhat different model of social and economic change that we will need to develop here, given our own unique history and level of social, economic and political development, and proximity and importance to The Empire, but there is also likely to be much that is very similar to what we see happening in Venesuala and elsewhere in Latin America.

Indeed, there is a very interesting worker's power movement emerging in Latin America, especially I believe it is in Argentina, which has simply been taking over and running to a cooperative model, various business and economic plants, which otherwise especially foreign (US) capital have been buying up and then shutting down. They have been actually seizing these operations, taking them over, and refusing to allow the facilities to be stripped of critical equipment-, and then developing democratized and co-operative business models to run them themselves.

Most interesting.

To which it is possibly, in the unfolding future, to be very useful to watch and pay attention.

To every action there is an opposite and equal reaction. It is the actual favour, difficult as it is to believe, which the neoconazis are performing for us. :-)

Coyote

If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend the documentary I referred to above: "The Take" by Naomi Klein and Avi Lewis.

Mr. Hegel I presume? I tend to prefer incremental evolution over revolution; but at some point one's blood does begin to boil.

Â*
Green party an alluring enigma
Dec.Â*9, 2005. Toronto Star.
CAROL GOAR

For many voters, the Green party is like a still-wrapped gift. What lies beneath the environmentally friendly packaging is an appealing enigma.

For those willing to endorse any alternative to the mainstream political parties, that might be enough of a reason to vote Green.

But for electors who want to cast an informed ballot, its policies and principles need to be examined.

Party leader Jim Harris, agrees. He fought hard to be included in next week's televised leaders' debates, but failed to convince the organizers that Canada's fifth party — which won 4.3 per cent of the vote in last year's election — is ready for prime time.

A two-hour verbal slugfest is probably the wrong forum to explain the Green party's platform anyway. The trouble is there aren't many others.

Here, then, is a brief look at the new player on Canada's political scene.

The Green party doesn't fit comfortably anywhere on the right-left spectrum. Its environmental policies are progressive. It advocates a sharp increase in gasoline taxes, a $10-a-tonne levy on coal and a heavy investment in wind power.

But its economic policies are conservative. It would shrink the federal public service and cut taxes on personal income, corporate profits and investment.

Most of its other policies are too vague to judge. It aims to reduce poverty, but it hasn't said how. It proposes to restore democratic accountability but, apart from advocating proportional representation, has offered few specifics. It says it will address Canada's fiscal imbalance, but has provided no details. It claims to be the only party focusing on disease prevention but hasn't explained how it would pay for this expansion of health care.

The party's leader is a 44-year-old management consultant and motivational speaker born and raised in Toronto. Harris was a member of the Progressive Conservative party as a student at Queen's University but switched to the fledgling Green party in 1987.

Harris was successful in his second leadership bid in 2003. But a rift remains between the "deep greens" in B.C. and their Ontario cousins.

Electorally, Harris has been by far the most successful of the party's eight leaders. Its share of the popular vote increased from 0.81 per cent in the 2000 election to 4.3 per cent in 2004.

In the current race, the Greens hope to double that and make their parliamentary breakthrough. They're fielding a full state of 308 candidates. They have a staff of 20 and a budget of $1 million, thanks to public subsidies they received under former prime minister Jean Chrétien's election financing law.

It is unlikely that Harris himself will be elected. He is running in Beaches East York, a riding that has traditionally see-sawed between the Liberals and New Democrats. Both parties have strong candidates in this contest. Liberal Maria Minna is the four-term incumbent. New Democrat Marilyn Churley has represented the east end of Toronto municipally and provincially for 17 years.

But the leader of the Greens is familiar with suicide missions. Last time, he ran in Toronto-Danforth, where NDP leader Jack Layton was challenging Liberal veteran Dennis Mills. Harris got just 2,575 votes out of 48,169 cast.

The party's best prospects are in southern B.C. In the last election, it won 17 per cent of the vote in Saanich-Gulf Islands, 12 per cent in Victoria and 10 per cent in West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast.

There is still a lot to unwrap about the Green party.

It is an intriguing mix of tree huggers, moderate Tories and eco-capitalists but it's not clear whether it will gel. Its leader is a seasoned performer, but its platform is missing a few planks. Its image is more benign than its history.

The Greens give voters a way to repudiate the parties they know, as long as they're willing to place their faith in one they don't know.

Last time the corporate media reported a now infamous poll in which the conservatives, on the eve of the election, had a 13 point lead.
I believe that poll, under closer scrutiny, was seen to be significantly skewed to elicit favorable conservative responses.
This time they may change their strategy to indicate a wide liberal advantage so to lull non-conservative voters into a false sense of security. DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE!
If your in a riding where the conservatives won narrowly over the liberals and the NDP and Greens were significantly behind I urge you to vote liberal(the lesser of two evils).
If on the other hand, your riding is a toss up, then vote NDP. Just a few more seats in a liberal minority and we will hold the balance of power.
But by all means VOTE.
And DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE!

Excellent piece, BC Mary. Very useful.

I see The Globe and Mail, front page this morning, is indicating a "reduced Liberal minority government" as most likely, but a swing of as much as 2% could result in a "minority" Conservative government.

Clearly, minority governments for the forseeable future, is the likely governance model of the country. Which if nothing else, denies corporate interest a government with a complete free hand to continue the neo-conservative policies, under either Liberal or Conservative, of the post 70s period to here. A good thing, I think, and a desirable temporary arrangement.

I'm not sure I'd even want to see a majority NDP government come out of this period-, though we very well could, sooner or later.

In any case, a "sehr interresant" period emerging, no doubt.

Thanks for the piece on the Greens though, Mary.

Many happy returns of your birth day, Coyote. Long may you reek (well, you know what I mean).

Now, the biggest surprise in this election is learning about that Triple E Doo-Doo Bird. I want one of them. I want him to sit above Stephen Harper every day -- especially on Coyote's birthday. Stockwell Day gets to push the broom.

BC Mary on the Green party:

It would do the environment a great deal of good if the Green supporters in West Vancouver-Sunshine were to vote in such a way as to deny John Reynolds the abilty to further pollute the eco-system. Oh, and by the way, if we look into Reynold's past -- like his stock market dealings -- do we think all would be squeaky clean?

I don't know the answer; I'm just posing a question.

Given that the Conservatives will like to focus on the Liberal's corruption (quite correct to do so), I wonder if Reynolds will lead the charge or if he'll stay quiet on that issue lest VSE ghosts come calling.

Enjoying reading all these fine, interesting comments.

As far as the three main contenders for the top job go...

When asked the simple question, "Do you love Canada?" Mr. Harper can only shift his feet uncomfortably and gag on the answer. Gagging on the words I love you, in any relationship, is always a bad sign...it's always straight downhill from there. :-)

Then there's Mr. Martin who suddenly wants to jump up and down on the couch and proclaim his love a la Tom Cruise. This is just plain icky... we know you're toying with us, Paul.

And Mr. Layton, pleeease.... just say something with strong feeling, that's what we really want. A little passion for this country we call home. Make a move on us...you are just way too damn shy and reticent in declaring anything.

Other than that I have nothing to add... I've baked my heart out this week, my brain has turned to meringue and marzipan... and I've sampled way too much cookie dough... to the point that the only thing I've pondered deeply of late is "Why is it that cookie dough always taste better than the actual cookie?"

So I have nothing more to add to the discussion except, along with BC Mary, here's wishing you a very Happy Birthday, Coyote. If I could vote for you, I would. How can a country go wrong with a man who can make his own bread?

...long may you ride. :-)

lynn, that was hilarious. Happy birthday, Coyote.

Yes, Lynn, brilliant. :-) And, a very happy birthday, Coyote. :-)

Alles Gute zu Gerburtztag, Coyote

(sorry if my spelling is off, I'm rusty)

grub: Reynolds isn't running in West Van. John Weston, who was Smokey Smiths nephew or something is. He seems more of a fiscal conservative, but its often hard to tell from bios alone. Anyone else acquainted with him?

Fun riding for the name game. We have a Weston and Two Wilsons. Followed by a Zimmerman for the Green party. At least the Marxists are running a J to even out the alphabet.

My predictions:
Newton-North Delta: Cons. to Lib
Fleetwood Port Kells: Remains Cons
New Westminster: Cons. to NDP?
Vanc. Kingsway: Lib to NDP?
Victoria: Lib to NDP
Nanaimo: remains Cons.

I'll just make a few short comments. For Newton-North Delta, many readers should know that Sukh Dhaliwal is the ONLY Sikh candidate remaining in this riding with Grewal gone. Unlike Chinese Canadians, most Sikh voters will only vote for a candidate of their own origin. cons. Phil Eidswick has a low profile here while the NDP's Nancy Clegg is a strong candidate who will appeal to blue collar voters here. But she faces the same ethnic dilemma I mentioned. In Newton North Delta, Sikhs comprise c.40%-45% of the population; so Liberal Sukh should win it for the Liberals unfortunately.

In Fleetwood Port Kells, this riding covers most of the Provincial Liberal base of support in Surrey in the 2005 June elections and Nina has a strong edge here--especially in conservative leaning parts of Fleetwood and Cloverdale/Clayton.
In New West, Cons. Paul Forseth is in a tough 3 way fight with the NDP and Liberals and a small NDP increase in support will certainly tip it to the NDP. However, there is an "X" factor: during the bitter Telus strike Forseth came out to picket every day with the Telus workers in the outdoors. he could still cling to the riding if he wins the 'respect' vote from blue collar voters for his actions here.

A small NDP increase in support should tip Vanc. Kingsway and Victoria to the NDP. In Victoria, the Liberal candidate's name--David Mulroney--tends to hurt the Liberal cause to the NDP's benefit. I make no firm predictions on Vanc. Centre but I suspect that it will stay with Lib. Hedy Frey rather than go to the NDP's Svend Robinson because Svend is originally from Burnaby, not Vancouver and 2)most voters still remember Svend's very recent conviction for theft. So, Svend has a credibility deficit to overcome--and not much time to do it. The large gay population here doesn't necessarily benefit Svend because Hedy certainly has her own supporters in this community.

Finally, in Nanaimo, the Conservatives won strong support in the northern Nanaimo and Nanaimo-Parksville area of the Island which helped Provincial Liberal Ron Cantelon get elected to Victoria. So, I can see Cons. James Lunney holding his riding, But I can't comment on Vanc. Island North--I know nothing about it.

As I have repeatedly stated, the Liberals are the only political party that has recognised and acted on the demographic changes that have occured in Canada in the last ten years. This is why they will continue to rule. They have always reacted to changes in the electorate.

The latest polls show that the Liberals are taking support away from the NDP:

12/08/05
LIB 41 CON26 BQ18 NDP11 GRN4

According to a friend of mine in the Liberal Party, they are shooting for 43% and the majority government to go with it. They are also focusing on New Canadians as the main aim of their campaign. That aside, they will keep working until they form a majority government again.

Adolf Harper's rants about restricting the rights of gay people has also had a bad effect on urban voters, who really decide things in elections.

OK, 67.002-year old Coyote, here's the complete Scottish toast to your long and happy life (I think):

[/QUOTE

Sshhhyite.

I thought maybe you were taking a dig at the ineffectiveness eh me deodorant, Mary. :-) The first thing I did was take a sniff of my armpit. :-)

"Lang may ye reek!"

Indeed!

Thank ye all for your kind words. You know that I hold "99.9%" of you in the highest regards :-), and with great affection. (That .1% even, serve at least a useful purpose here, by way of reminding us what working and progressive folk are up against. :-)

By the by, check out the story on A11 of today's Sun. 9 Just as a demonstration/ example, on the heels of events here, in France and Germany, of the universality of experience the entire working class is going through now within "advanced" neoconservative capitalism-, even while the economy "so-called" booms officially.

Mrs. Coyote has me down to put up the Winter Solstice tree this afternoon. Bah, humbug!

And further by the by, my Solstice fruit cake is looking and smelling phenomenal. For the last few weeks, since I made it, every Sunday I sprinkle it with 3-4 tablespoons of Brandy, then reseal it.

I'm essentially a weak man, in some regards, and the temptation to nibble at it is becoming overwhelming. :-)

And that Brandy does have a tendency to evaporate from the bottle rather severely. :-) Mrs. Coyote has even remarked on it.

Indeed, I thought her tone was rather accusatory, and took some umbrage to it.

Fabian, Newton is a tricky one and could go either way. While you may have a point on the ethnic vote, both North Delta and Newton went heavily NDP provincially. And last election was a pure 3 way split, with the grits,torys, and dips all within a thousand votes.

So yer Coyote hame ain't free frae care? Bummer. Never mind: a Joyous Solstice to all therein.

'They are also focusing on New Canadians as the main aim of their campaign.' is this news to you working man? the libs have played the special interest group game since trudeau the quisling figured it out. they're shameless. this week's announcement of a handgun ban proved that they will go to great lengths to get re-elected, even if it means treating canadians like they're fools.

In response to Fabian's comments regarding Vancouver Island North, I think this is a very likely win for the NDP. Catherine Bell, the current and past candidate, lost by 400 and change last time. This time, the Liberals are running a much lower profile candidate, and I get the feeling they are not much interested in investing a lot of energy here. Certainly last minute warnings to vote Liberal to avoid Harper wil have no traction this time, as the Liberal candidate last time finished a distant third.

The Greens will maintain their core, but they will lose votes this time around. Their candidate does not have the profile that their previous candidate did, either within or outside the party itself.

John Duncan, an underachiever by any standard, will be lucky to maintain his votes from last time. I do not see much chance for growth, excepting, perhaps, the continuing influx of Conservative retirees from Alberta.

On a different note, I am curious, Elliot, as to why you have labelled PET a "Quisling." My dictionary's definition of Quisling is "a traitor who aids an occupying force: collaborator." Surely this description applies much better to Stephen Harper.

Now, ain't that the bloody truth. All you Wingnut Yankee ass kissers here and wannabes, all come with "Quisling" branded on your foreheads.

Even we macho coyotes get pussy whipped from time to time. :-D Sometimes we even love it.

dangrice informs:

Perhaps, with Reynolds gone, Blair Wilson and the Liberals might get in. [here's hoping, in this particular case, that the Green votes wanes a bit].

Black:

Say it ain't so! Albertans? Conservative Albertan in my beloved Vancouver island North? Where in hell are they settling? Isn't the OK Valley good enough for them? Haven't they done enough damage spoiling Kelowna?

But seriously, Where in hell ARE they settling?

grub,

I know they are buying up houses and property like crazy here, all throughout the mid-northern interior. They're the ones who look and talk like Texans, driving the big four wheel drive Dodge RAM pickup trucks.

Scribbled shithouse poem by some anonymous poet, seen scribbled on a construction porta potti wall. (Kootney Loop on Hastings St, Vancouver.)

Here I sit, gruntin' and hurtin'
Giving birth to another Albertan.

Lots of good Albertans, I'm damned sure, but as the recent and bitter meatpacking plant strike evidenced, lots of redneck mentality, racist, anti-union Yankee wannabes too. (Thinking Swervin' Erwin here.) The Neoconazi Heartland in the West.

Best thing that could happen for the country, including Albertans, is that the oil that draws them so close to, and makes them so prized by The Empire, just simply got all sucked out. It'd bring them and many of the rest of us back down to earth and the real world.

As it is, they swagger about the country like the US military I used to see in Asia and the rest of the world, convinced they were Gods gift to the planet-, when all they were really, was the result of the riches of a continent they forcibly stole from the Native inhabitants. (Helped convince me the Communists had it right at that time.)

Chickens do come home to roost eventually however. They are for the Yanks in Iraq and Afghanistan (us too), and they will in good time for Albertans.

You are one seriously angry person.

I have to take issue with the bigoted comments against Alberta. It's so unfounded. Yes they are a conservative bunch. They are also people that respect hard work and expect to be rewarded, not robbed.
The lazy way of thinking of their success is to think that the oil has made it easy for a blind squirrel to find nuts.
This isn't so,when I was in grade four in 1961, we took a whole year course called 'petroleum', imagine that. We visited lab's, drilling rigs, oilfield supply companies and The University of Alberta ( a great institution leading the way in medical research )
There was nobody in Canada that knew much about how to develop this resource. We found friends in Texas and Oklahoma who moved to Alberta and became our friends and partners.
Infrastructure was forged ahead. We got all we could get done before the era of eco-frauds and oboriginal inteference.
Now we are where we are, it's kinda like the storyof the ant and the grasshopper. You lazy, misguided, liberal Canadians wasted decades naval gazing and now you want to put us down as a bunch of redneck hillbillies ?
You tried to rob us with the Liberal National Energy Policy, you are now trying to disarm us.
Alberta has more culture in thier small fingernail than BC has in it's whole body.
It's the heart of Canada, and soon, maybe not this election, but soon will be the leaders of this country.
And there is nobody friendlier and more hospititab than Albertans ( except maybe texans )
There is no Provincial Tax, the best educated students in the country and most opportunities anywhere in Canada.
Try anything funny on us and you will be sorry.
We are only humoring you, we don't want or need your Liberal shite. Especially the likes of that Lieral hack, working man.

Sorry, Ron, Alberta was colonized and they are not your friends, but your masters. Which is sad because Alberta at one time did have some original thinkers.

Yes, and on our dime. You don't think Alta paid for that infrastructure on its own do you? No, the Canadian taxpayers did. And they also bailed you out when you were virtually bankrupt during the depressing and bailed on your debt.

Ron, your believing the lies your colonizers are telling you. It's not your fellow countrymen who you need to direct your ire towards.

you're...

Alberta did have some real originality, but its been obliterated by the Texan culture. So sad. Stand up for your country, Ron.

I am standing up for MY country. We have not been colonized, we have friends and partners that you don't have. You put them down, whenever you get a chance. Who are your friends and partners ? The LIberal elite from Ontario, what have they done for you lately ?
Or is it the Toronto NDP. Oh what flaky friends you have.
It will happen. The new elite will be the Conservative elite from Alberta, and there is not much you are able to do about it.
Just lie back and enjoy it. Having money in your pocket will be a new thing for you, but you will enjoy helping you and your family with it. Instead of supporting the lavish lifestyle of some Ottawa CUPE worker.

You're dreaming, Ron.

Unless you are in the top 2 percent of Canada's wealthy you will end up losing.

Good points, redrivergirl.

Yeah, just lie back and enjoy it...you've revealingly defined the issue, ronnie baby.... so you know what those words make Amerika, don't you?

.... and even more than that you know what your words make that Conservative elite you are so fond of? It makes them the best damn pimps in the business... stupid wannabees but real good at what they do...pimps and quislings....that's the Conservative elite for you.

Edmonton Journal, April 26, 2005:

"major oilsands projects pay a minimum (royalty) rate of one per cent of grosss revenues until the costs for the project have been earned back."

Response by a writer in The Tradesman:

"So essentially these oil sands companies are getting their projects built with money that would otherwise be going into the province's general revenues that could be used for health care, education, and infrastructure improvement what could be considered taxpayer's money.

So the taxpayers of this province are paying for those projects. And these oil companies are getting their plants built for free.

Once the project is paid back- by taxpayer's money- it doesn't stop there, "After that the royalty rates jump to 25 percent, minus operating costs. So now the taxpayers get to pay for the operating costs as well. To summarize, these plants are built for these companies for free and they get to run them for free all paid for by the taxpayers of this province. While their children are crammed into ill-equipped classrooms, our health care system is systematically dismantled in the name of cost saving, and the working poor get to shop at the food bank and Value Village."

How does a cheque for $1,200.00 a year to a mother, or the raising of personal exemptions from $1,000.00 to $2,500.00 for seniors, a 2% reduction in GST vs. a tax cut that will not help the poor that don't pay income tax anyway, a $500.00 deduction for tradesman to get started, money for cancer, affect only the top 2% of the richest Canadians?
The only thing causing me to lose sleep is liberalism.

Two more predictions:
I hope someone can make a response to my predictions. I forgot to mention that Surrey North(late Independent Chuck Cadman's riding) will definitely go NDP under Penny Priddy. While I personally have Conservative leanings, I did vote for her in the 1996 provincial election when she held Surrey-Newton because I respected her. She is one of the most popular and respected figures in Surrey; the fact that the Provincial NDP took 60% of the vote in Whalley/Surrey North means that this one is a certain NDP gain.

On Vanc. Island North, I should have said that the race there will be a real battle; in the June 2005 Provincial election, the NDP candidate barely edged out the incumbent Liberal MLA there. There is a near parity of support between the Liberals and NDP. Since John Duncan has been a long serving incumbent in that riding, the race there should be close. I suspect the side with the best election machine will win. Finally, the race between Don Bell and Cindy Silver will be interesting in North Vancouver--both candidates worship at the same church. While Don Bell was a popular mayor of N. Van, Cindy Silver is very telegenic, unlike Randy White. It may be too close to call on election day.

My current BC standings after January 23 are as follows:
Cons: 20 (-2) 2 seats lost to NDP
Lib: 5 (-2) 2 seats lost to NDP
NDP: 9 (+4)
I wonder if Anyone has any response to my predictions? Just note that my predictions are not fixed in stone. As an aside, while I have some Conservative leanings, I have once voted Liberal Federally and NDP provincially (Priddy in 1996(, I am a realist. (I know for instance that the local Conservative in my riding of Newton North Delta--Phil Eidswick--is behind the Eight ball in terms of profile and perhaps support compared to Sukh Dhaliwal and Nacy Clegg.)
With kind Regards.

Correction:
That would be NDP 10 seats in BC counting independent Chuck Cadman's riding of Surrey North. I suspect Jack Layton wil be quite happy with his performance here.

$500 for tradesmen? Should we deduct that from the school fees to trade school that have increased? Also I still wonder about the $300 million of taxpayers money that it will cost to feed the fat ego of Steven Harper in this election.

Ron defends Alberta:

No, Ron, that's the ONLY way of thinking about it!

Grub , I don't know what you do to jusify your existense. But you are obviously not convinced that the seeds of the Alberta success story is about a spirit that does not exist eleswhere.
You will eventously be on side.
That is if you ever want to own a summer cotage, or something like that.
I think that Albertan people , with their diversity, Ukrains's. , Hutteriest;s, Amish, Roman Catholic, Unided , Indian, protosant upbrinnings, will be the chosen ones.

No numerical predictions yet, but I think the Liberals are poised to do a lot better in the lower mainland than in recent years. New wins may be:
- Surrey Centre, from C
- Burnaby-Douglas, from ND
- New West-Coq., from C
- Burnaby-New West, from ND
- West Van-Sunshine, from C

This is because the Cons. vote in the lower mainland seems to be tanking. Those voters won't vote for Layton. That'll be enough to wipe out the NDP marginals in New West and Burnaby.

Grub,

I am not sure about points north, but the Comox Valley has become a popular retirement area for Albertans. Direct flights from Alberta have made the valley a quick and convenient destination.

Martin,

I would be very surprised to see the Liberals maintain all the seats they have in BC, let alone add to their tally.

Fabian,

When you say that there is near parity of support between the Liberals and the NDP in Vancouver Island North, I assume that you mean provincially. Support for the federal Liberals is much lower than support for either the NDP or the Conservatives. the Liberals will be lucky to clear 10,000 votes here.

Black: of course much can happen over the next few weeks, but if you look at the recent Mustel poll for BC, the Libs have gained 9 points since the 2004 election, and the NDP has gained 6. So doing the math, and all these seats fall to the Libs. But time will tell, and there's miles to go before we sleep.

Martin, federally politics don't slide across the spectrum.

Conservative votes can and do bypass the Liberals and go straight for the NDP. It the same concept that happened when the Reform party swept traditional NDP ridings. Western discontent spans party lines.

Hi Ron Irwin

Re your tale of meeting Harper no make-up and one bus.

Did you see the interview of the National Post reporter on the busload of reporters travelling with the Harper campaign complaining about restricted access and frustrated because they get hardly any access to Harper. That was on tv "Qestion Period" and was the second time I have heard those complaints plus the makeup thing - the shadow concealer is plain as day with the turn of the head and lights if you are observant.
So I'm wondering what you were smokin' 3 days ago when you made the comments about the bus and the nice honest man - do you mean the nice honest man that along with Peter Mckay betrayed David Orchard in front of the whole country, then showed his mean-spirited nature in refusing to allow the former PC leadership candidate (Orchard) anywhere near the party, or refund $70,000 the PC's owed Orchard since his leadership bid.
Or do you mean that nice man that betrayed Belinda Stronach by endorsing her opponent in her riding - something the Party Leader should not do - when Fisheries Minister John Cummins (a popular and very knowledgable Fisheries Minister) sent him a letter criticizing him for doing that and asked if this was an example of the way he would lead the party, your nice man vindictively relegated Mr Cummins to the back bench when he had everybody's respect and more knowledge about the fisheries in his little fingernail than his replacement. A copy of the letter was published.
Then of course there was the traitorous acts of traipsing around the U.S. talking against Canada and OUR ELECTED LEADER's decision to not participacte in their pre-emptive invasion of a sovereign country, then have the GALL along with Stockwell Day to write an article in the Washington Post talking against the country he wants to take power over? Its beyond contemptable behaviour and makes me furious everytime I think of it and believe me I won't forget it and neither should anybody who loves their country!

One more prediction, in a tight race Svend Robinson will take over Vancouver Center from Hedy Fry, He has allot of support in the area.

Don't worry Rebel, folks like Ron Erwin are vital for organizing the progressive vote, just shake the bushes and make more like him show up. The Alberta and US wannabies are always good to bring out the progressive vote,
just keep talking about progressive social issues , women's and gay rights etc. Talk about the military at every corner etc.
Start an email campaign to certain MLA's, aka Stockwell and pretty much anyone in Alberta telling them how wrong headed they are, wait for the nasty emails back and forward them to the media. Like I have said before get busy
spreading the word and showing off to the public who these kooks are.

Their was a radio debate on the weekend Bell vs. Silver in North Van. It was quite amusing how Silver slipped and slided over the heath care issue trying to say she wanted more private clinics in a non threatening way. And she kept talking about how the Liberals were trying to scare people of a US styles system. Bell answered in a clear and precise voice, well you see its not fear is the clear fact that many conservatives idolize the US weather it be military and Iraq, their heath care, environment policies etc. This is not fear is just well know,

Well Silver went nuts , I love folks who get so mad when they hear the truth. She walked right into Bells trap.

rebel and stuart, you are boring. You keep repeating youselves. Is this all we are going to here from you for the next 6 weeks, that Harper is the Devil ?
He is a normal guy, running for a middle of the road party, don't try to exaggerate.
Your Toronto NDP Party is the one with all the nut case followers. So give us a break.

Harper is a shameless hypocrit. It's a matter of public record that he reviles so-called socialist contstructs like our healthcare system and yet here he is, everyday, doling out no-end of promises.
Like mr. burns what he is really offering (if you read between the lines which you always must) is a keg of beer in trade for our metaphorical dental plan. Nice try harper.
Too bad you were'nt born 30 years earlier as Robert Altmean could've penned you in for the role of frank burns.

Whew, hard to know where to start. little ronnie erwin has emerged from his cave to enlighten us once again. little ronnie writes:

"And there is nobody friendlier and more hospititab than Albertans ( except maybe texans )"

Yah little ronnie, real friendly folks those Texans. They have executed more than twice a many people as any other state. And also have executed children in violation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. And further, they have executed the mentally ill and the retarded, in violation of at least three United Nations resolutions.

Your friendly folk in Texas also rank 46th out of the 50 states for funding of treatment of the mentally ill, including (or more correctly, not including) funding for treatment of the mentally ill in prisons. Although I guess we should applaud Texas for somehow finding the money to spend an average of $2.3 million to have someone sentenced to death.

But lets leave all that and examine little ronnie's warm, inclusive social instincts:

"I think that Albertan people , with their diversity, Ukrains's. , Hutteriest;s, Amish, Roman Catholic, Unided , Indian, protosant upbrinnings, will be the chosen ones."

But, there is a problem. little ronnie also writes, in the same thread:

"Infrastructure was forged ahead. We got all we could get done before the era of eco-frauds and oboriginal inteference."

I won't bother to remind readers of little ronnies take on the deaths in custody issue in BC. His take on aborginal title interfering with drilling for oil says enough.

And the coup de grace is this; little ronnie is in full flying denial in regard to the real reason for the financial status of Alberta:

"The lazy way of thinking of their success is to think that the oil has made it easy for a blind squirrel to find nuts."

Sorry little ronnie, that is exactly the reason Albertans claim fiscal competency. What is truly regrettable is that the wealth is not used for the benefit of all Albertans. In fact, it is hard to quantify how mean spiritied your social thinking really is, when the revuenues are available. Frightening to think what may occur when the oil is gone.

The real little ronnie has exposed himself once again.

On the thread, it is much to early to prognosticate. The early claptrap is meaningless. The only question I have at this point is this: who the H E double hockey sticks dreamed up the phony interview ads that Harper has in full rotation on the boob tube? They are painful to watch and do nothing to humanize him. He looks shell shocked and shifty. Keep him far from real people, like the handling of George Bush. Every time his handlers attempt to engage some real life interaction, it looks forces and phony.

Black is right about my point on Vanc. Island North. I meant to say that there is a parity of support between the Provincial Liberals/Federal Conservatives and the NDP here. The party with the best election machine will win the riding.

On Vancouver Centre, I must just warn you all that one mustn't prematurely write off Hedy Fry. The ridings demographics have changed and are become more Upper Middle Class to Wealthy; most of these new residents --especially those in Coal Harbour definitely won't vote NDP. They helped Sam Sullivan win in Coal Harbour this November and if it wasn't for their support in June, Lorne Mayerncourt would be out of a job in June. Many people outside of her riding say that anyone is better than Hedy and I concur but the voters there keep sending her back to power election after election despite her infamous burning crosses remark. As for Svend, he wasn't given much time to rehabilitate himself after his conviction for theft and people may not be willing to mark an 'X' beside his name just yet. So, you have 2 deeply flawed candidates while the Conservatives are a non-factor here. I pity the voters of Vancouver Centre who have to chose between Svend and Hedy--but my gut says it will be Hedy at present.

Speaking of our favourite neo-con, Randy White, who is now officially retired and not running in Abbotsford, who is running in his place for that seat? Any chance of seeing a change in that riding, away from the Cons?

No chance, Mr. Faulkner. Abbotsford, like Langley with Trinity Western University, is part of the socially conservative 'Bible Belt' of BC and the population there strongly vote Conservative. Liberal candidates have no chance of winning here--only in the GVRD area, Vancouver Island and Skeena--and maybe in the Kootenays.

No chance for the Libs in the West Kootenays (Southern Interior) I think it will go NDP this time, unless Harper's campaign gets better(which is not out of the question). It was a super close race last time. The new Conservative candidate sounds like an ambitious nutbar. He was published arguing for the elimination of all corporate taxes, the removal of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and a monetary union with the United States. Yah, like that will go over well in Nelson. I don't see his native Trail much liking it either. You can read it here:

http://www.asprimeminister.com/english/atstake-book/body/library/book_1998/body/26_zeisman_e.htm

I will be ashamed if it goes conservative again.

hey wally-boy; are you still blathering on about nothing. try getting a job maybe. give you something to do with your time.

Hey Elliot , better then being a FT Troll, It's hard to believe folks like you exist, sorry get back to your FOX news or CanWest paper.

righto stuey-boy. power to the people man.

I come onto this stream to congratulate the commentators in general on the high level of their discussion and for the excellent prognostication throughout the diverse posts.
Alas one fatal exception scars the landscape, scurrilous name calling.Alas, our friend, and fellow human being, Ron Erwin or Ron Irvin of Victoria, when he writes to the corporate media of Victoria, not Alberta.
A probable daignosisis,is paranoid schizoprhenicn,which does not constute name e calling of the good man,it simply describes his apparent state of mind. Even with his health problem it takes some audacity to denegrate Christians, who do not vote Conservative.
Hello! Ron, visit your psychiatrisat and get a dose of dopamine inhibitor.You are clearly experiencing a delusion that our God is a right wing extremist. Try reading the red letters in the Bible Ron. As well check out what James writes about. We really all, particualrly professing sinners like you and me, must curb our tongues. We love you Ron, really! and if anyone out there thinks mental illness cannot strike anyone we know, look in a mirror. Jack loves you too Ron, not in any carnal pornographic way, but in the biblical sense. We forgive you your slander as good Christian's are instructed to do. Check it out, its in The
Book.Look after your bretheren Ron, do not aide and abet their fleecing. May God Bless you and everyone.

A secondary reason I jumped in tonight, was my joy in reading Billy Pilgrims view on voting. While, I would never support a communist, I laughed with glee at Billy's reason and experienced an apprecation for his wisdom. Mostly, I am pleased that he voted. I doubt anyone on this site will not vote, but I find it deplorable that people in a democracy ("Duh nobody's worth voting for") will abrogate their voting right on the ground that they do not like any of the parties,regardless of the hopelessness of their candidate/party.I fyou dont like anyone run your self. This is why Canada continues to throw the Conservatives and Liberals in and out like two bull calves, one greedily sucking, the other bawling for his turn at the spigot. Thank goodness the trend is breaking down with minority governments. And Lord be praised! for elections. There is no such thing as an unecesary elections, nor can ther be too many. If leaders lead even a disparate House will follow. Good on ya Billy, go with your head and heart regardless. As for me and my house I will vote for the folks who I believe will do the least damage to the working man. Not the singular as in our stream's "working" man but working men and women, including Christians and "independents". Whether we vote or not, someone will win the confidence (hopefully a minority) to govern in a democracy, even as imperfect a one as we have.

My apologies for such atrocious editing. See Ron apologiies do not hurt anyone.

I come onto this stream to congratulate the commentators in general on the high level of their discussion and for the excellent prognostication throughout the diverse posts.
Alas one fatal exception scars the landscape, scurrilous name calling. Alas, our friend, and fellow human being, Ron Erwin or Ron Irvin of Victoria, when he writes to the corporate media of Victoria, not Alberta.
A probable diagnosis’s, is paranoid schizophrenia, which does not constitute name calling of the good man, it simply describes his apparent state of mind. Even with his health problem it takes some audacity to denigrate Christians, who do not vote Conservative.
Hello! Ron, visit your psychiatrist and get a dose of dopamine inhibitor. You are clearly experiencing a delusion that our God is a right wing extremist. Try reading the red letters in the Bible Ron. As well check out what James writes about. We really all, particularly professing sinners like you and me, must curb our tongues. We love you Ron, really! And if anyone out there thinks mental illness cannot strike anyone we know, look in a mirror. Jack loves you too Ron, not in any carnal pornographic way, but in the biblical sense. We forgive you your slander as good Christian's are instructed to do. Check it out, it’s in The
Book. Look after your brethren Ron, do not aide and abet their fleecing. May God Bless you and everyone.

A secondary reason I jumped in tonight was my joy in reading Billy Pilgrims view on voting. While, I would never support a communist, I laughed with glee at Billy's reason and experienced an appreciation for his wisdom. Mostly, I am pleased that he voted. I doubt anyone on this site will not vote, but I find it deplorable that people in a democracy ("Duh nobody's worth voting for") will abrogate their voting right on the ground that they do not like any of the parties, regardless of the hopelessness of their candidate/party. If you don’t like anyone run your self. This is why Canada continues to throw the Conservatives and Liberals in and out like two bull calves, one greedily sucking, the other bawling for his turn at the spigot. Thank goodness the trend is breaking down with minority governments. And Lord be praised! for elections. There is no such thing as unnecessary elections, nor can there be too many. If leaders lead even a disparate House will follow. Good on yaw Billy, go with your head and heart regardless. As for me and my house I will vote for the folks who I believe will do the least damage to the working man. Not the singular as in our stream's "working" man but working men and women, including Christians and "independents". Whether we vote or not, someone will win the confidence (hopefully a minority) to govern in a democracy, even as imperfect a one as we have.