As for the seat count on election night, I feel it's going to be tight. Unlike Belinda, who I think is going to lose by a large margin because of the slippery slope argument that if you change sides for political expediency, to what end does it come?

Posted by: Chris from Victoria, BC at January 20, 2006 05:34 PM

---

Not a problem. There will be no MPs named "Belinda Stronach" after Monday.

Posted by: LookingIn at January 20, 2006 05:35 PM

---

Don't worry, Angry. Harper will have a healthy majority and then some. And the best check and balance for a majority conservative government are none other than the conservative (both small "c" and voting) populace themselves.

Brian Mulroney blew it by not being a pragmatic conservative. So he went out with the old Progressive Conservative bath water thanks to the conservative minded people who are the best watchers and defenders of what it means to be conservative (i.e prgamatic like me, or traditionalist, religious, etc. like others). No one speaks more loudly and favorably of the democratic process than conservatives

Posted by: Schwarze Tulpe at January 20, 2006 05:39 PM

---

I think it is simple...if lieberals want to slither over to the Conservatives, hold a by-election and let the taxpayers decide if they are willing to allow it.

As for belinda= she crawled into bed with very dirty people and contracted a disease.

Posted by: Boar-Axe at January 20, 2006 05:43 PM

---

I'm sure there are a few Liberal back benchers who wouldn't hesitate in a blink of an eye to change horses.

Would they mind being relegated to the back bench? Sure. Would they be helpful or a dead weight? Good question. My question is, where were they in the last election when it 'appeared' the Conservatives would win, or cross the floor in the non-confidence vote, meaning the other direction than Belinduh...

Now, not to rain on the parade, if Harper & Co. don't win big time on Monday night, I think as a nation we will just be threading(?) water till the Liberals flush out Martin and a few zombies - then Ontario will jump back into the arms of the "loving Liberals".

(Hack, cough, puke...sorry, my keyboard had a fit trying to put those two words together)

With a Conservative minority, Mr. Harper et al will be stuck in the mud, because at every corner, in every government department and supreme court setting they will be opposed by trained Liberal seal placements.

Seeing many Lib appointee's enjoy the 'good life', they will be very protective of any grandiose ideas of change as well as their flunkies, watch for non-confidence votes all over the place - shades of Joe who.

One thing that still bugs me - how come the Conservatives haven't addressed the EI overpayments or raising the personal exemption levels on our income taxes?

While a GST 1% reduction is great, it only works when you have money to spend...

cheers
tom

Posted by: tomax at January 20, 2006 05:48 PM

---

I think that 152 scenario is the best case - far better than what you see on the UBC election market which shows it very very close.

Worst case is Liberals get 10 or 15 fewer seats than the Tories and refuse to give up power. (Liberal) Tony Ianno's team has said:

"A similar scenario [refering to David Peterson doing the same thing in 1985] could happen in Ottawa...Our British Parliamentary system would allow such a scenario to not just unfold but also to succeed."

Looking at that worst case and at what the Liberals are thinking of doing, the idea of the Tories pushed into majority territory with a Doc Martin or Scott Brison crossing the floor is nothing.

Posted by: Robert in Toronto at January 20, 2006 05:48 PM

---

Sure if Liberals want to change parties and sit with the winners. Let them.

But, no cabinet posts, no sweet committee appointments. No payoffs. that looks bad...

Because you know the liberals whould bitch and whine about it, and the media would pick it up... "see! they're just like the other bums!"

Posted by: Curtis at January 20, 2006 05:50 PM

---

What I'm looking forward to is the first sitting of Parliament with either a Conservative minority or majority.

Even though Paul Martin might resign after the Liberals are defeated Sunday night, I'm sure he'll stay on as party leader, sort of like how Ernie Eves did for the Tories after the 2003 election defeat in Ontario.

Won't it be a sight?

Imagine how humiliating it's going to be for Martin to stand and rise as "Oppostion Leader" (lmao) and say, "Mr, Speaker, I'd like to ask the prime minister..."

To adrress someone else as prime minister surely will be a humiliating experience for Martin.

And just imagine Harper standing up and reply and beginning with "Well, well, well," looking over at poor Paul.

At that point, all the Conservative MP's will rise, clap, bang their desks and laugh at poor paul.

Yep, I can't wait!

Posted by: Jimmy at January 20, 2006 05:52 PM

---

What is this "1985" nonsense?

After the 1985 election the Conservatives were in a minority. Miller met the Legislature, which he was fully entitled to do. His government was defeated on the Throne Speech and the Lieutenant-Governor called on Peterson to form a government, which had a majority with the support of the Needippers.

If the Libranos retain power, they're Miller, not Peterson. Or King in 1925 (puke).

Posted by: Jim Whyte at January 20, 2006 05:56 PM

---

"Now go further, and say they win 152 seats, just three shy of a majority."

It seems rare that anywhere near the full 300+ members show up to vote, the exceptions being the budget and throne speech, so on a day to day basis I think he can manage fine with 152. The difference between 152 and, say, 156 may not be as pronounced as I had thought; while on paper 156 looks much better in practice you never know who will get become ill, etc. It takes a lot of organization and effort to shoehorn a bloc of 150 MPs into the house one way or the other.

Stephen Harper has been kicking around for 20 years; when he says he'll manage on an issue by issue basis keep in mind that even his biggest opponents agree he is a straight shooter. It just doesn't seem in his character to go shopping for turncoat Liberals, so if it does come down to the CPC winning 152 seats I don't see him wooing disaffected Liberals.

Posted by: Anonalogue at January 20, 2006 06:01 PM

---

I only wish to point out that the polls have consistantly shown a 60 to 65% desire for change.
Doing those numbers should do away with any minority questions.
If 60% cast their vote for change the only combination that fits is Conservative 40% NDP 20%.
Do the math, we should not see anything but a majority.

Posted by: Terry at January 20, 2006 06:05 PM

---

Sorry - I have the same respect for a Lib crossing as a Conservative crossing ... absolutely none. In this case there should be little need to defect if free votes are allowed ... let every member be judged by those that voted them in.

Posted by: ural at January 20, 2006 06:07 PM

---

If the Tories win a near majority, they can gain one seat by offering the support of their caucus to Peter Milliken should he reoffer as Speaker.

Posted by: fjm at January 20, 2006 06:28 PM

---

I agree, we do not need defectors. Look where it got Miss BS and Beam Me Up Scottie! It is a good thing that they left before the election call and their true colors exposed. If a person is elected on a party policy and they are that unhappy they should have to sit as an independent until a by-election could be held.

Posted by: MaryM at January 20, 2006 06:30 PM

---

How about some double agents? Maybe Dr. Keith Martin might change his mind? He was a Reformer until he became a Liberal. He might see the error of his ways if he manages to get re-elected.

If I were Harper, I would be reluctant to accept anyone who crosses the floor and I certainly wouldn't reward them with a cabinet post like PMPM rewarded Belinda.

Posted by: Mac at January 20, 2006 06:39 PM

---

i am very glad you gave us this supposition steve. it is abhorent to even conceive of us being as dirty and undemocratic as the libelists in a matter of democracy. we will obviously never allow for this type of seat juggling. if you want to vote for a bill then vote your confidence from whatever seat you are in. if your party is so polluted in scandal and corruption we won't necessarily entertain your collusive deal. we know the libelists for who they are. don't forget this fact. we will respect the will of the people in a democratically elected and constitutionally conforming body of honest, upstanding individuals who ran and won on principles not seen for a decade or more. if we sink to the level of corruption that they lived their weasel lives we might as well not have come.

Posted by: Ottawa Core at January 20, 2006 06:44 PM

---

It's not about a member changing his mind ... it's about the voters that voted him/her changing theirs. What gives them the right if I hired them to be the gardener to decide they want to be the cook?

Posted by: ural at January 20, 2006 06:52 PM

---

One thing that will be haunting the Liebrals is their debt.
From what I have heard on Charles Adler's show.....they may well be up to $50,000,000.00 in debt. No way in hell will they be able to run another election within the next few years. Besides who would want to take over the reins with that kind of debt??
Oh....wait a minute.....what about those trusts they have been hoarding money into???!!!!

Posted by: GL1800 at January 20, 2006 06:55 PM

---

Universal Newsreel 1948
As the 1948 Winter Olympics draw to a close in Switzerland, the ski slopes see some
... In a startling upset, President Harry S. Truman wins re-election. ...
www.aptnlibrary.com/Universal_Newsreel_1948.htm - 24k -

Posted by: maz2 at January 20, 2006 07:01 PM

---

maz2,

If your suggesting that we will go back a half a century in democracy if the Libs win - I agree.

Posted by: ural at January 20, 2006 07:07 PM

---

Let's not divide the pie before we get it.
On another subject, the knives are out for Jack.
The NDP rank-and-file is angry at their brilliant
leader, they blame him for thrusting Harper on the nation. Jack is idolized as demi-god the CBC media, but at his flock's union-hall the long knives are ready for the night of the 23rd.
We may hear him shout "a tu Buzzus" while the CAW-NDP political strategist inserts the knife into Jack's soft back section.

Posted by: sonya ng at January 20, 2006 07:12 PM

---

MaryM is right, we don't need turncoats in the party, and I very much doubt that Mr. Harper would allow a turncoat to sit as a Conservative without holding a byelection. Anyone is welcome, of course, to leave the Fiberal Farty and sit as an independent.

Posted by: Jon at January 20, 2006 07:15 PM

---

MaryM, ural, Ottawa Core, Analogue, eervybody is right and it illustartes my point. Harper, if he doesn't know it already, should be aware that his harshest critic is the right minded elctorate. He has boundaries we have set upon him. No other party leadership faces such scrutiny at the base level.

Don't worry be happy. Everything is in the bag. And I am not jinksing us by saying that.

Posted by: Schwarze Tulpe at January 20, 2006 07:22 PM

---

"I only wish to point out that the polls have consistantly shown a 60 to 65% desire for change."

Not to mention a majority of respondents desire a majority government.

Posted by: patrick at January 20, 2006 07:38 PM

---

I for one would like to see the liberal party disintegrate, centre-rights could join the conservatives and the rest can join the NDP.
We need to have a proper split along the lines of Left and Right...
It's been along time comming and I welcome it.

Posted by: at January 20, 2006 07:42 PM

---

Schwarze Tulpe,

How right you are. The other voters expect nothing and that's what they'll get if their parties make it.

Posted by: ural at January 20, 2006 07:48 PM

---

Oh...and no fakes
No, Scott Brysons, Ken Drydens we don't want any
socialists pretending to be something they're NOT...

Posted by: william wylie Ajax,Ont. at January 20, 2006 07:50 PM

---

I think the idea of telling them to sit as independents is a good one. Welcoming them in on good behaviour is not. The one thing they would not have is approval at the local level. If they want in after a period of time, fine - get the constituency association to hold a nominating meeting for the next election. If the now-independent MP wins that nomination, they will be allowed into the Tory caucus. Until then, no dice.

Posted by: Patrick at January 20, 2006 07:56 PM

---

Come on people, hate to be a wet blanket here, but you know Ontarions will be flocking back to the Libs. They are buying every last bit of sleaze that has come from Martin's mouth the last few days. He knows that and that's why he sounds like a stuck record lately.

Wouldn't surprise me if the Libs squeak back in.

My faith in this country will have disintegrated.

Posted by: Soccermom at January 20, 2006 08:34 PM

---

I thought that this thing was over, but alas,, it would appear that I was wrong, this could be alot closer then we think. Can see along nite of sitting up watching Duffy on Monday nite.

P.S. The comment by McKay in N.S is just what he says it it.. a down home way of saying,, mind your own business.

Posted by: Ken at January 20, 2006 08:48 PM

---

I don't know. Some people are stupid. The mainstream media are biased. But the Liberals are going to be in the hospital for years with self-inflicted wounds.

Take a look at the Broadbent press conference at http://tinyurl.com/cj9pc.

Listen to Jennifer Ditchburn of CBC and her "unbiased" questions. Listen to the rest of the media. And yet the Conservatives are ahead.

Thank you, Paul Martin, for showing your true colours.

Posted by: patrick at January 20, 2006 09:06 PM

---

Hey, Steve, what's with the ban on ctv's website name? ctv dot ca? It comes back as "questionable content".

Posted by: patrick at January 20, 2006 09:08 PM

---

In the west - we always get told what happened after it over. Somebody please start an Ontario separatist movement ... the rest of Canada will support you.

Posted by: ural at January 20, 2006 09:09 PM

---

"STOP THE PRESSES!" Are the Liberals Going to Stuff Ballot Boxes?

Posted by: Chris from Victoria, BC at January 20, 2006 09:13 PM

---

Sorry to go off topic, but I just saw a CBC tv report out of Victoria in which they said flat out that the "carefully scripted" Tory campaign has made it difficult for voters to learn the dangerous right-wing social views of cpc candidates. They then went on to trot out random quotes from CPC candidates. Nothing about Liberal candidates at all. The CBC is not even trying to appear unbiased any more. Have the people that work there no professional pride or integrity at all?

Posted by: Spike at January 20, 2006 09:14 PM

---

I just came back from a Harper rally in Oshawa... I have not seen such an energetic political event in a long time in Canada. People from all walks of life, parents, kids veterans...
It was heartening to see and you could feel the energy in the room. I think something is afoot here in terms of a fundamental (sorry to use Martin's favorite word) change in Canadian politics. I will be very surprised if there is not a majority on Monday night. Harper was confident and energized, and the crowd was lapping it up. It took us almost an hour to get out of the parking lot... cars were lined up for over a kilometre along the road leading up to the hall where the speech was being held... It was much more than I expected... I feel good things for Monday...

Posted by: Todd from Whitby at January 20, 2006 09:28 PM

---

Harper made it clear in the spring (i.e. Pat O'Brien) that he would not welcome someone from another party. Period. They could sit as independents & if they wanted to throw their hat in the ring next election for CPC, they could go through the nomination process.

C'mon Angry, have you forgotten why the gov't fell already? Dirty tricks on their side are equally dirty if done by us.

Posted by: Candace at January 20, 2006 09:50 PM

---

Todd,

I reaally hope so. I doubt the West or Quebec will wait again while Ontario gets it's right.

Posted by: ural at January 20, 2006 09:55 PM

---

I heard the gap in the polls are quickly closing between the CPC and Liberals.
I dont think we should get out the party favors and start pouring the champaigne just yet.

Posted by: at January 20, 2006 10:01 PM

---

Spike, it's the CBC for god sakes. What do you expect?

Posted by: pgs at January 20, 2006 10:05 PM

---

Spike,

As it relates to CBC bias, it's clear they're shilling for the Liberals in desperation, especially in these dying last days of the campaign, and they're doing so by the most insidious of means ... bias by omission.

On tonight's The NATIONAL, Paul Hunter said that, according to Paul Martin, Stephen Harper would stack the Supreme Court with socially conservative judges.

Paul Hunter, who, like Neil McDonald, is famous for his "but wait just a second," interuptions, correcting and interpreting statements made on record by Stephen Harper, did no such thing with Martin's claim.

Hunter did not point out that it is impossible for Harper to "stack the Supreme Court" with socially conservative judges because there is only one appointment over the next 7 YEARS - something that would prevent Harper from doing such a thing, even with a majority government.

There was no clarification on this FACT by Hunter, nor was there any "Reality Check" follow up.

Harper himself made the point earlier that there's only one appointment over the next 7 years - something omitted from the CBC's report.

What is CBC's defense for this type of dishonest reporting?

Is it that a) it's NOT true that there's only ONE Supreme Court appointment over the next 7 years, thus making it IMPOSSIBLE for Harper to "stack the court"; or b) that providing clarification on this issue for it's viewers is not necessary just 3 days before we cast a ballot?

It's one of the two. There's no third excuse for this type of bias reporting.

Posted by: Rick at January 20, 2006 10:07 PM

---

Will anyone here object to me moving from Ontario to Alberta if the Libs squeak one out? Please dont hold it against me...

Posted by: Todd from Whitby at January 20, 2006 10:09 PM

---

Paul has many viewpoints on the abortion issue, if you want to hear them all at the same time, ask him:

Mr. Martin, you seem to be advocating full and free access to abortion? Would you put no conditions on abortion and allow even late term procedures?

How does he respond to that question? Would he say he DOES favour some forms of abortion?

He's not being clear.

Posted by: NDH at January 20, 2006 10:34 PM

---

Martin just amazes me. This ass is so stupid he thinks all of Canada is to stupid to see through him and maurices scam called kyoto. If Toronto sends these thieving liars back to govern the separation of the west will become our number 1 priority. As this dud screams the weekend away about Harpers agenda we all should remember the agenda that has been foisted on this once proud country since the communist trudeau right up to this shill for the demarais

Posted by: bartinsky at January 20, 2006 10:44 PM

---

Hey Todd, I was at the same rally with my wide and two boys. We stood up on the stage at the back (which itself was pleasantly odd - my 10 yr old said "I thought we would be down there and he would be up here!"). My wife was the one who kept starting up the "Harper! Harper! chants, until the 'official' young cheerleader group caught on....

Anyway, the General Sikorski Hall was packed to the rafters - I estimate 600 to 700 there, counting those jammed in the outer lobby and all around. There was no more room.

It was a good speech - Harper's voice is showing the strain now, but he was up to the challenge, and I found him to be quite impressive.

Posted by: CERDIP at January 20, 2006 10:48 PM

---

I hope its ok for me to post this URL. Read the story about the put-down of Alberta, and setting one part of Canada against another. This PM is so desperate and unethical, he will do and say anything, and I fear the easily-swayed and uninformed will vote for this Crime Minister once again.
http://calgarygrit.blogspot.com/

Posted by: blue hair at January 20, 2006 11:09 PM

---

Harper won't have to recruit Liberal MPs to cross the floor. A few will be kicked out of the party after the election. They will get the heave ho either when they vote for traditional marriage legislation or for Harper's good news budget. The Liberals are going to move to the Left. First order of business, purge the social conservatives from the party.

Angry, just look next door in Scarborough for a few likely candidates.

Posted by: PlaidShirt at January 20, 2006 11:22 PM

---

People, chillax with the CBC/CTV/MSM stuff already. Obviously, what they want is a minority gov't - enough of a change to shake things up, make the "Natural Governing Party" get its act together, get "good ideas" (from their POV) up from the NDP, and then put things back to "normal". But it's gone too far -- this "minority government" they hoped to create has (they feel) become more of a "Frankenstein monster" and gotten out of their control, so they're trying to spin the CPC again. However, the last week or so was a nice change, you got to see what it was like for the Canadian MSM to seriously beat up on the Liberal Party and ease waaaaaay off on the Conservatives. I hope you enjoyed it, 'cause it ain't coming back.

As Warren Kinsella said, "if it takes a Conservative majority, so be it". Key word(s) there being, "IF", not "so be it". Big difference.

Posted by: Meg Q at January 20, 2006 11:51 PM

---

A couple of random comments here.
Jimmy, I hate to ruin your fantasy of Paul Martin's humiliating day in parliment as "Leader of the Opposition", but there are 2 reasons that won't come true.
1) That would be Leader of the Opposition Jack! Layton
2) You're not allowed to have a seat in pariment when you lose in your riding...

And Todd, you're quite welcome in Alberta. We welcome anyone who is willing to work.

Posted by: Another Sean at January 20, 2006 11:57 PM

---

As per the previous elections I expect the liberals to come out with one outrages lie after another for the next two days. No one believes the crap but it gives the liberal voter the excuse he needs to allow himself to look in the mirror Tuesday morning.

Posted by: socket at January 21, 2006 12:32 AM

---

ON THE NEWS, in the last election Ralph Klein was asked what he thought about an Anne's win. He said - "Anne's a great lady, I like her."

The media man asked, "What about Laurie Hawn"? Ralph goes, "Who? Laurie Hawn? Don't know her".

Hawn is not impressed with Ralph K.

Birds of a feather, guess uncle Ralph is eating crow...

Posted by: tomax at January 21, 2006 12:50 AM

---

Todd from Whitby & CERDIP... I was at the rally in Mississauga this morning, and I felt the same kind of energy and enthusiasm that you felt in Oshawa. Harper's speech was great... targeted, on message and passionate. I have all the confidence in the world that he will be an excellent Prime Minister.

As for the topic of this post... I doubt Harper would entertain such offers from Liberal candidates to cross the floor. If for no other reason than the optics would be just horrific.

Posted by: Jason M at January 21, 2006 01:14 AM

---

Todd, I moved from Ontario to Alberta back in 86. Best move I ever made! The people out here are by far the friendliest I have ever met. It's beautiful and it's clean!
Employment opportunities are abundant!
However I should warn you, the Alberta Seperatist Movement will probably be in full force should the Liberals squeeze in a victory this election.

Posted by: at January 21, 2006 01:47 AM

---

I live in a small town in Southwestern Ontario. If the Lieberals come anywhere close to winning this thing I would like the ROC to separate from Toronto!

Posted by: Terry at January 21, 2006 08:29 AM

---

Should the Conservatives enter with a slim majority or an almost-majority, they would be wise to appoint a Liberal as speaker. Maybe even Paul Martin - he would be obliged by tradition to vote with the Conservatives on ties. Talk about rubbing your face in it!

Posted by: Convert Man at January 21, 2006 11:07 AM

---

Putting a liberal in the speakers seat would be a very dangerous thing to do.

Its clear that after the 'non confidence' vote that wasnt a 'non confidence' vote back in may (may?) that the liberals have no respect for the traditions of parliment.

Putting a liberal in the speakers seat would only give him a chance to pull the rug out from under you....

Do you know the story about the Frog and the Scorpion?

One day a scorpion needed to cross the nile river. So he's looking for some sticks or something to float accross on, when along comes a frog. The scorpion says to the frog, "I need to get to the other side, can I ride to the side on your back?"

The wise frog "no way - your a scorpion, you'd sting me, and I'll die"

The scorpion says "I wont sting you, I would drown"

This arguement convinces the frog, and they pack up, and he swims out into the river...until about half way, and the scorpion stings the frog... The frog outraged by the betrayl, asks " what did you do that for? now your going to die too"

and the scorpion says "I know, I couldnt help myself, Iam a scorpion."

Dont trust people to change thier basic nature, just because its convienent for you....

Posted by: Curtis at January 21, 2006 01:35 PM

---

Just returned from a fast visit to relatives in Etobicoke (Centre & South/Lakeshore), to Vancouver Island.

Came back disheartened... everyone there is brow-beaten into the concept that "All politicians are the same", and "Harper would be just like that crook Mulrooney". One guy earnestly tried to tell me that Harper wanted to implant identity chips sub-dermally to track everyone...

Watched the CBC set-up with Mansbridge & Harper, where Stephen was GREAT!!! At the end, the hand-picked audience of Liberal sympathizers & sycophants tried to catch him out to reveal his "hidden agenda", but he simply blew them away with calmness, sincerity & honest conversation.
The Commie Broadcasting Company had set up Harper for a fall, and he completely blew them away!

Posted by: Alienated at January 21, 2006 01:57 PM

---