The by-elections: This turd won't polish either -

The by-elections: This turd won’t polish either

Paul Wells on margins and vote swings


On a night like this, I always kick off by saying: by-election results are meaningless!

Let us now parse their meaning. With thanks to University of Calgary political scientist Paul Fairie, here are the aggregate vote swings across the four federal ridings that held by-elections on Monday:

The NDP gained vote share in Toronto Centre and lost elsewhere, especially in Provencher and Brandon-Souris, where the memory of that noted prairie populist Jack Layton fades. The Conservatives lost vote share in all four ridings. The Liberals gained vote share in all four seats. The best news for the Conservatives is either Provencher, where Conservative Ted Falk’s 28-point margin was the weakest for the party in that seat in 13 years; or Bourassa, where the party lost “only” 4.3 points of voter support, to finish fourth with fewer than 1,000 votes.

Brandon-Souris? A 21-point decline in Conservative vote and a 38-point gain for the Liberals, who ran an anonymous parachute candidate of very uncertain quality against a Conservative campaign personally spearheaded by Jenni Byrne, the Conservatives’ 2011 national campaign manager.

The riding results are less clear-cut: the Liberals hold two seats and the Conservatives hold two seats. Status quo. On the swings, though, the governing Conservatives had the worst night of any major party, the Liberals the best. If results in a general election showed less than half the Conservative-Liberal swing we saw tonight, the Conservatives would lose many Ontario seats, including Joe Oliver’s.

Since February, Stephen Harper has had one job: sort the Senate mess and give his government an image of renewed energy and purpose. He accepted his chief of staff’s resignation, then jumped into a time machine and fired him. He shuffled his cabinet (“Our renewed agenda will have new faces to bring it forward“). He delivered the longest throne speech in 20 years, a hockey book, a set of internal staff reassignments, a trade deal with Europe, a massive national clandestine radio ad campaign aimed at the best Achilles’ heel his advisors could find on Justin Trudeau, a Conservative policy convention on home turf with the most draconian media restrictions any such event has had in the history of the country, a new question-period homonculus, and some tunes. This is the result. In Brandon-Souris a 39-point Conservative advance on May 2, 2011 shrank to nearly zero last night. Harper cannot survive many more such triumphs.


The by-elections: This turd won’t polish either

  1. He’ll say it’s great and shows that Canadians blah blah blah.
    In other words, nothing will change.

    • Who is “he”?

      • Did you read the above piece by Wells?

        • I think next time they’d better actually show a picture of Harper polishing something.

    • these mean nothing lol

  2. Plus, relentless daily pounding from media on the Senate scandal. As byelections go, I’d say he did fine.

    • Well, I hope he and others in his camp continues to think there’s nothing wrong and everything’s hunky-dorey.

    • And of course you didn’t think he was getting pounded by the media before February.

      • Maybe by you. Certainly not by Coyne.

        • only read Well’s a handful of times…assumed he was conservative. You don’t think so?

          • What would make you assume that?

        • Stephen Harper’s foreign takeover policy no longer just murky, but totally incoherent” (Dec. 7, 2012)

        • Andrew Coyne: Bill C-38 shows us how far Parliament has fallen” (April 30, 2012)

        • Seriously? Coyne has been as harsh a critic of this government as anyone.

          People mistake Coyne and Wells for conservatives sometimes because they actually do write negative stories about the Liberals from time to time. Sadly, that’s enough to stand out from the pack.

          If anyone has spent any time reading this blog over the last 6-12 months and come away with the impression that Wells is a conservative partisan, they have a serious reading comprehension problem.

          • And here comes john, with his “they are all out to get us” paranoid conspiracy theory. When all else fails, blame the media.

          • Who are Benjamin Levin and Senator Kenny, Gayle?

          • Both stories have been covered by Macleans. Investigations are currently ongoing and I’m sure we will hear more about them as things become publicly available.
            If you think something is being covered up here, please fill me in on what the media has overlooked.

          • Irrelevant to this discussion Andy. If you actually cannot distinguish the actions of individual senators from the collective actions of the PM and his PMO, I can’t help you.

          • If you don’t think Coyne is a conservative (not Conservative), you’re pretty out of touch with Canadian politics.

      • So, Rolf Dinsdale “… the son of Walter Dinsdale, the former MP for Brandon-Souris (Progressive Conservative) for 31 years.” … also the grandson of George Dinsdale, former mayor of Brandon and brother of Greg Dinsdale, Progressive Conservative candidate for Brandon East in 1995 and 2003.” is your “anonymous parachute candidate of very uncertain quality”??

        Why, it’s as though this random upstart were plucked from a local beer parlour on a moment’s notice!

        • Rolf is very well known and a rock star (no pun intended) in Brandon. Everybody loves Walter.

          • Rolph is a loser who had to try to lie about his resume on his biography. He’ll be back in Toronto by the end of end of the week, and completely forget about Brandon-Souris.

          • If only Rick Omen would forget about producing stupid comments

          • He blatantly lied about his work history on his official campaign biography. He has Warren Kinsella calling him a close personal friend. He just lost an election.

            Is that not the definition of a loser?

          • Since when was lieing a problem to the Harper Conservatives or their water carriers? Harper lied from day one and you and yours rewarded him with a majority government.

          • Rick Omen is mad about somebody making up work history? RICK OMEN?? mR. HA-HA-FOOLED-YOU-i-DON’T-REALLY-WORK-FOR-A-WELL-KNOWN-BANK himself?

          • A) I never claimed to be a “real” person. In fact all you idiots thought I was real until I told you myself that it was all a sham.

            B) I didn’t run for office.

            C) Is Patchouli your real name? Where do you work? Can we see your resume?

            D) Good to see you Liberals can’t argue a point without resorting to personal attacks. So much for that “no negative politics” and “science and evidence” crap, eh?

            E) Your Liberal loser still lost, like all Liberal losers.

          • On point A) only. Don’t lie any more than you already have… You admitted that you are a fraud after you were caught.

          • And on point C) only: FFS, Onan, you are responding to GMFD so why the hell would you ask him/her if real name is Patchouli?

          • I never claimed to be a “real” person. In fact all you idiots thought I was real until I told you myself that it was all a sham.

            The fact that you’re not a real person explains a lot actually.

          • You’re right. There’s absolutely nothing creepy about going out of your way to create a false id when you don’t have to.

          • But obviously I did have to, because you clowns here started cyber-stalking my fake persona. The only ones being creepy are you Liberals trying to look up who my employer is and where I lived because I disagree with your “politics”.

          • Nope…not me anyway. Why would i even bother?

            But obviously…yep! It is even more obviouser now then it was before you clarified it. Thx for that.

          • Your name linked to Rack Nine. And then Pat Martin re lawsuit.
            And you wonder why there was curiosity.

          • So, the Tories just had their worst result in 13 years, and the Liberals their best result in 60, in a riding in which the Liberals ran a lying loser from Toronto.

            Imagine if the Liberals ran an honest person from Manitoba!

            ETA: To be clear,they’d almost certainly still lose, but it’s nonetheless a worrying trend for the Tories.

            There have been 22 elections in Brandon-Souris over the last 60 years, and the conservatives won 21 of them. It’s a virtually unwinnable seat for the Liberals, who only won it one time in a year in which the Reform Party and the PCs split 52% of the vote 30/22. Last night, the Liberals came within 400 votes of winning it, after running a bowler hat-wearing, former puck rocker, who apparently lied on his resume. Against a local campaign run for the Tories by their former national campaign director. That may be the best any Liberal could ever conceivably do in Brandon-Souris (as it’s the best a Liberal HAS ever done in Brandon-Souris, by share of the vote). So, if the Liberals can do that well with a flawed candidate in an unwinnable riding, what might that say about what they could do in a riding that’s actually in play?

          • No honest person from Manitoba would ever run as a Liberal.

          • Well, bullet dodged for the CPC then, I guess.

          • Must be the funniest remark you’ve made so far. It’s a refreshing change.

          • I dare you to walk into Byrne’s office and say that. You should at least where a wet suit.

          • It doesn’t bode well for the Conservatives, no. However, a single data point is not a trend. And there were many factors involved in this near-upset that may not be there in the next (by)election.

          • If he’s really THAT bad, what does it say about the CPC candidate who almost lost to him? (Or, perhaps more to the point, about the party that pushed him onto voters when the local riding association wanted someone else?)

          • If the local riding association really wanted somebody else, they should have made sure this person filed his nomination papers on time

          • So a loser almost beat your guy? And Claudia’s on your team…

        • All I was doing was quoting the version of Dinsdale’s biography that the Conservatives left in the tens of thousands on Brandon doorsteps. If you want to credit the notion that the dissolute son of a longtime MP constitutes an unstoppable political force, as you gear up for battle against a guy named Trudeau, go right ahead, I guess.

          • If you want to credit the notion that the dissolute son of a longtime MP constitutes an unstoppable political force…

            No I wouldn’t want to mow your lawn.

          • Take the name “Trudeau” away from him, and he’d just be another unqualified lackey pining for office. Can you imagine someone like Justin(e) sitting down with world leaders to talk about disarmement, or trade deals?
            Picture it:
            Vladimir Putin: ” Canada does not have a rightful claim to the North, as it it largely uninhabited. We have planted our flag on the ocean bed, and Mother Russia will soon begin exploring for resources”
            Justin (everyone has to call him Justin) : “When I was younger, I was a leader in Katimavik, we sent young people around the world to help people”
            Angela Merkel “The fall of the Euro is to be slowed by fiscal management, and debt agreements on borrowing for debtor nations with too generous welfare packages”
            Justin: “I really like your hair, Angela. May I call you Angela? My dad was Pierre Trudeau”
            Obama: “We need to ensure the Keystone pipeline is safe before we allow it on our territory”
            Justin: “Barack my friend, have you ever tried BC Bud? Frankly, it’s the ONLY good thing ever to come from the West”
            Yeah…he’d make one hell of a Prime Minister. I don’t expect any hard questions for Trudea by any Canadian media other than the SUNTV folks.

          • Fun game.

            Harper to Putin:

            Death awaits on silent wings
            to spill your blood on the arctic ice!

            To Obama:

            Years of working in a mail room and having to ask permission for bathroom breaks taught me one thing: Don’t take “no” for an answer!

          • Actually, I think he could only manage a few weeks in a mail room before he went running back to university…but your post is funny nonetheless.

          • Uhuh…’yep nurse Ratchet, we got a real bad case of the underestimation tremors here. Best wheel in the laughing gas again. It’s the only thing that seems to calm em down.’

          • LOL

          • Thats very elaborate and well thought out strawman you’ve whipped up there J Halifax. Now come out of the Reform echo chamber for a while and try thinking for yourself. Don’t ask Stevie Harpo to speak for you- he doesnt need another sock puppet- he’s run out of hands.

          • vindicator….if you ever saw Trudeau speak without notes….you’d see that to which I refer.
            the guy’s an airhead with pretty hair and nice teeth. That’s all there is to him. He got his dad’s name….but his mothers’ brain. Luck of the draw.

          • I don’t understand this “Justine” thing. Isn’t invoking the feminine as a derogatory quality profoundly sexist?

          • Yes, and homophobic. Some of the devotees seem to roll this way for some strange reason.

          • No, I stick the “e” on the end because I’ve seen a couple of video’s he’s posted on the web. The Lisp stands out, and it is a reflection of how he sounds when he’s speaking French.
            English: JUS-TIN !
            French : Jzoos-teh’
            Sort of like every other comment he makes. They just don’t match what he says in either official language.

          • I think Canadians are smart enough to support their own interests. So, why are urban voters going Liberal and rural voters staying conservative. (full disclosure I am a rural conservative in Provencher).

          • I’m curious to know – did you vote for Toews in 2011, because I have a hard time figuring out how anybody could?

          • Who did you vote for? I have a hard time figuring out the BC vote?

          • I voted for Elizabeth May, after strategically voting for the the Libs or NDP depending on who the candidate was – in order to try to defeat Gary Lunn. He was nothing but a yes man, and didn’t realize he was supposed to be representing the riding not the Reform/Alliance or Conservative party.

      • The Liberals threw everything they had at Brandon-Souris in a byelection in which they had that luxury – with the Forum poll wind at their back – and still lost. What’s going to happen in these types of seats in a general election, with Justin and entourage nowhere to be seen?

        • A Forum poll appears to be about as scientific as disemboweling a chicken, so I wouldn’t put too much weight on that.

          Having said that, a strong second is still second and I don’t think I’d be calling it a win. Perhaps an encouraging loss?

          • An encouraging loss for LPC, but perhaps a telling win for CPC.

          • Well put!

          • apparently the media put a lot of stock in that poll. to them it was a preordained Liberal Victory

        • The Liberals threw everything they had at Brandon-Souris in a byelection in which they had that luxury – with the Forum poll wind at their back – and still lost.

          That entire comment could be argued in the opposite direction.

          The Tory campaign in Brandon-Souris was run by their former national campaign director. Conservatives had previously won 21 of the 22 elections held in Brandon-Souris over the last 60 years, only losing ONCE, in an election in which the Reform Party and the PCs split 52% of the vote 30/22. Yet, the Liberals, fronted by a bowler hat-wearing, former punk rocker who apparently lied on his resume had their best result in the history of the riding, and came within 400 votes of winning.

          As for that ridiculous Forum poll, it’s every bit as likely that it drove down the Liberal vote as that it drove down the Tory vote. There’s a lot less incentive to go out and vote (for either side) if you believe a poll that says that a candidate’s 8 point lead just turned in to a 29 point lead days before the election.

        • “These types of seats” — the ones the Conservatives carried by 39 points in the last general — will be hard for other parties to take away. And there are, indeed, dozens of them. Well, a couple dozen.

          I hadn’t heard that the Liberal leader plans to be “nowhere to be seen” at the next election. It’ll have the virtue of surprise, and probably help keep expenses down.

          Let me pause from this dinner of straw men to note that I meant what I wrote at the end of the post. Harper can’t survive many more triumphs like this. If he can come up with a different kind of triumph, He’ll be fine. Unlike all y’all, I’m not prescient.

          • You may have misunderstood – the Liberals threw resources at this seat – including considerable face time by their much heralded leader – that won’t be available to them in any seat during a general election. It’s the “past performance does not predict future results” problem, and it’s why I don’t have the same takeaway from the results as you do.

            I’m not the one being prescient – I haven’t made any predictions or offered any analysis. I have no opinion on the next general, because it’s simply too far away and we don’t know how world events will unfold.

            I’m simply interpreting the results differently, with the added advantage of having some good sources on the ground in Brandon who are familiar with the local political dynamics that have escaped national media.

          • Then there’s the fact that Harper personally took up the torch in Brandon-Souris – something sitting PMs never do during by-elections – and still barely eked out a victory.
            So the Liberals weren’t the only ones throwing everything they had at this riding.

          • The next election will the Con candidate have Harper writing a letter, cutting ribbons nearby and Jenni Byrne on site?

          • Geez….in my hurry to reply to some commentators on this site…I failed to actually point out that I agreed with Paul’s assessment.
            Sorry Paul….I thought your article was spot – on.
            Harper needs to up his game if he wants to win next time around.

      • Let’s recap:

        9 months of “Duffy” in the media, wherein no money was stolen from taxpayers; but expense claims were abused. Conservative staffer paid from his own pocket so taxpayers won’t get screwed. Every station, every night, day after day…after day, the relentless pounding away on the Senate; even though no taxpayers were screwed over.
        Now Compare:

        Liberal Senator Mac Harb – two lines in a couple of papers, even though Harb was clearly engaged in Fraud specifically designed to bilk taxpayers. He wisely resigned his seat in the Senate to avoid the reality that if still in the Senate, and found guilty of his crimes, he would lose his pension.

        Liberal MP Judy Sgro – clearly engaged in fraud to misappropriate 100’s of thousands of dollars of taxpayers money by claiming the residence she was living in was a rental, when in fact it was owned by her kids. It’s comical to see Trudeau stand up and castigate the Conservatives, with this crook sitting beside him.

        Senator Colin Kenney – apparently couldn’t keep his hands to himself, or his pants zipped up – three lines in the paper, and barely a mention on the CBC. Trudeau knew this BEFORE he had his “ladies night” so at least you know why Colin wasn’t invited to attend with him.

        Yep…no double standards here.

        Just fess up already. Anyone who is paying attention knows clearly that the media in Canada has a strong Libeal bias. Only the most disaffected idiots don’t see it, and few admit it. We get it… don’t like Harper.

        But ask yourself this.

        Do you really think someone like Harper would steal from you for personnal gain? Now ask yourself the same question about the Liberal party. We already know the answer to that one….but the media does’nt like this angle, as they would rather have Liberal thieves in charge, and not a Conservative.

        I’m sure many will deny the Liberal bias, but as the saying goes, “Even a fish doesn’t know it’s wet”…..which basically explains the refusal to admit the bias.

        Lastly, why the NDP doesn’t really have a hope in hell of forming Government: People who don’t like Harper, would rather vote for the Liberals, as the millions of dollars bound to be stolen, would still be far less damaging than the billions of dollars piss ed away by NDP policies.

        • Halifax, in brief:

          Allegations of fraud, bribery, and obstruction of justice in the highest offices of government are OK, because “no money was stolen from taxpayers”. And, anyway, the other guys do stuff, too.

          • Fraud, bribery and ,i>breach of trust.

            But the whole idea of a “recap” is to avoid mentioning unimportant details like that.

          • Allegations of theft and sexual assault. Of course in one case it isn’t allegations given that one of the former Lib senators is actually serving time in jail.

          • You seem to be totally fine with letting the Liberals get away with it, since you seem to be accusing only Conservatives of misspending senate money, even though Liberal Mac Harb owed more than any of the Conservatives.

            Oh, and you seem to be totally fine with Justin Trudeau covering up allegations of sexual harassment against one of his Liberal senators.

            Funny that.

          • Wrong on every count.

            I didn’t accuse the Cons of “misspending senate money.” I alleged that the PMO is involved in fraud, bribery, and obstruction of justice (or, in common parlance, a “cover-up”).

            Regarding Harb, if he is, as appears to be the case on the evidence so far, guilty of fraud, I hope he pays serious consequences.

            I have yet to see persuasive evidence that Trudeau has been “covering up” alleged sexual offenses by Kenny, much of whose predatory behaviour seems to have long predated Trudeau’s political career (indeed, perhaps his adulthood). However, I remain open to that possibility. Again, if Kenny is convicted, I hope the creep experiences the full weight of the law.

            See, the difference between you and me is that I have a non-partisan view of unethical conduct.

            Funny that.

          • So you honestly believe that no one read an email to JT but that they filed it anyway without having read it. Hmmm. However, that doesn’t make JT office inept? JT makes gaffe’s and that doesn’t make JT less intelligent? Kenny is accused of sexual misconduct by more than one woman and you will wait until he is convicted. Are you waiting until Wallin and Brazeau are convicted as well or have you already passed judgment on them? You will keep your mind open to JT’s involvement in a cover up but have seen no “persuasive evidence.” Have you seen persuasive evidence of Harper’s involvement in a cover up or do you need any evidence to make your mind up that he is involved?

          • What, exactly, does the statement, “…I remain open to that possibility” mean to you?

            You will please note that, in all these cases, whether Liberal or Con, I have used the word alleged or the appearance of guilt.

            So, yes, I am waiting until Wallin and Brazeau are convicted. And Duffy. And Harb. And Kenny. And Wright. And Harper.

            You, on the other hand, would seem prefer quick vigilante justice over due process. I’m glad you’re apparently in health care, not justice.

          • Hey, when I voiced spoke in favor of letting the investigation decide, I was mowed over by the disdain and mockery of the Liberal supporters on here calling me “crazy”. I learned pretty quickly that there is no one saying the “Cons” are innocent until proven guilty but there are a whole lot of people ignoring the fact that any Liberals have been involved in the scandals period. Further, every day there is constant talk that Harper knew something and if he didn’t he is inept. Meanwhile, JT’s office supposedly loses an email that must have been opened in order to file it and yet that explanation is swallowed without a whisper of the same incredulous doubt that is swirling around Harper. Of course I am shocked by the hypocrisy. This is the same Liberal party that was chased out of office because of adscam 7 short years ago and now they are pure as the driven snow according to their supporters. Even the journalists on the site aren’t doing editorials devoted to the latest scandal and I am sorry but sexual assault allegations are more serious than bribery especially if it has been ongoing for years. I cannot believe you would say I shouldn’t work in the justice system. At least I am concerned that the women who were victimized get justice.

          • Nice rant but why are you taking this all out on me? I’ve been yapping on these comment boards ad nauseam about the lack of presumption of innocence and the complete abandonment of due process. When I’ve argued that the senators were (apparently at the behest of the PMO) being railroaded all too expeditiously out of the Senate, I’ve been attacked for defending entitlement. I’m not, I’m defending everyone’s right to a forum in which they can answer the charges against them.

            What we appear to be getting, instead, is wholesale corruption, cover-up, and utter disregard for anything resembling justice.

          • I apologize if I misunderstood you and I do apologize for the rant. I too am very frustrated with the entire debacle.

          • Meanwhile, JT’s office supposedly loses an email that must have been opened in order to file it …
            Not necessarily. You can set up email rules that sort incoming messages by their subject line and shunt them into folders. Or you can do so manually based on subject line. As someone who gets dozens to hundreds of email per day, I do this with a lot of routine stuff that doesn’t appear urgent. Some of it never gets opened. I would imagine JT’s inbox dwarfs mine; he’d almost certainly have some process like that in place.
            As to the Senators from both parties: If they did it then they deserve what they get – but that whole suspension nonsense was a desperate move to try to take the Senators out of the spotlight.
            The individual Senators who allegedly broke the rules (and possibly the law) are by and large guilty all on their own. Duffy so far seems to be the only special case where the PMO seemingly stuck its nose in where it didn’t belong and has threatened the reputation of both the PMO and the PM as a consequence.
            I personally find it hard to believe the PM didn’t know what was going on – but even if he didn’t, he has made it clear from his time in opposition up to his recent sending ministers to committee to answer for underlings that the Minister is ultimately responsible. Apparently, though, except when he’s Stephen Harper.

          • So you are saying that JT’s staff is just funneling his emails into folders related to the subject line and not reading all of them. I find that pretty difficult to believe. After all, a person could miss a lot of emails donating campaign funds that way. I worked in an executive office of a corporation. There were 6 secretaries opening the mail in just that office. JT likely has several people opening his emails so nothing gets missed. It was likely filed away on purpose…plausible deniability.
            Oh, I have no doubt, any person believes someone at the top should be accountable until they get to the top. I am sure JT thinks it is easy to be PM and run an office of 170 people smoothly, knowing what every person is up to. I wonder now that this email was misfiled, if he is as confident in this abilities to keep his finger on the pulse of everything that happens in his office.
            As for the suspension of the senators, I disagree that it was a “desperate move to get them out of the spotlight.” Rather, it was a desperate move to appear to be punishing them and getting them off of the taxpayer payroll. The Canadian public wanted them out and Stephen Harper wanted to be seen as acting on getting them out. He made a mistake in appointing them and he wanted to be seen to be fixing the mistake. I know you find it hard to believe anything good about Harper and anything bad about JT. That is how it works. The CONS are guilty until proven innocent and the Libs are just innocent.

          • Sorry HI, I’m not the partisan hack you seem to think I am.

            I don’t buy Harper not knowing what was happening with Duffy because it was a high-profile issue being handled by his Chief of Staff – not some anonymous underling.

            Though we phrase it differently, we are more or less on the same page as to Harper’s / the CPC’s motive for the kangaroo court to boot the three Senators.

            I also think that, if the PMO had simply disowned Duffy instead of trying their “nothing to see here” plot to deceive, Harper would have only suffered a news cycle’s embarrassment over having selected such a loser. (Assuming the Duffster isn’t still holding back a genuinely salacious trump card.)

            My being anti-CPC doesn’t make me a Liberal Uber Alles type. I wanted Garneau as leader and I’m not blind to the fact that JT can sometimes (OK; often) come off as a lightweight. But the idea he’d try to cover up for a senator after seeing the mess Harper got himself into for the very same thing? That would require Ford levels of stupidity. So without more evidence, I’m inclined to believe the version the Libs have presented so far. Show me evidence to the contrary and I’ll join you in attacking JT on this.

          • Now you’re an expert in office correspondence. Obviously this expertise predates computers and email. A busy office these days triages ( I know from your other expertise you know what that means), It’s not not hard to imagine that all politicians are getting flooded with emailes with Senate Reform in the subject space. There is something a little odd about someone with a complaint of sexual harassment complaining about it via an email marked Senate Reform. If it had happened to me I would have found a more direct way to complain – wouldn’t you – seriously?

          • Given the thousands of emails they must have gotten on topics like “Senate Reform” it is not at all implausible that it was shunted into a folder for later review by a low-level flunky and maybe a form-letter response (have gotten a few of those myself on various issues). Doesn’t make them look overly organized or good on the follow-through, but it hardly ranks up there with active attempts at bribery and deception.
            Mind you, I’m willing to reconsider that if evidence comes out that Trudeau or one of his senior aides deliberately tried to bury the problem by paying the woman off. You know, like Wright/Duffy…

          • You know, one hour before you posted this, someone on another thread posted a comment that points out the flaws in your little theory here. I cannot help but notice rather than address that post you came running over here to spout the same drivel regarding the unread email.

            That says a lot about you.

          • I am sorry Gayle, I don’t know what you are talking about. I usually respond to everyone’s comments that are directed at me. Some people are definitely more pleasant than others….they don’t call me a drunk or insane, a bad parent or a terrible nurse so naturally I tend to prefer to debate with them. Sometimes I do rant and I am not above apologizing for that but I do take exception when someone calls me a liar or a crackpot. You obviously have a right to your opinion which you seem to “spout” quite often and although some of us might privately think it is “drivel”, we are usually more mannerly than to say it to you. However, obviously you appreciate a more direct approach so I will keep that in mind.

          • No, the recap was that it is the right thing to nail the PM but please nail everyone else equally. Should the PM in waiting be the next PM if he is no more ethical than the one you are trying to kick out?

          • What’s the relevance of your hypothetical?

          • The relevance lenny is that the Liberals have as many senators enmeshed in scandal as the Cons do and now there is the fact that an email was sent to JT months ago reporting the behavior of one senator and get the email was supposedly misfiled or was it really just a case of hiding it so JT would also have plausible deniability? What is it lenny? Are the libs as bad as the Cons? Is JT inept at running his office or is he lying about the email being misfiled?

          • I’ve always assumed you argued in bad faith, but if you really believe the evidence at this point suggests the Harper-led Conservatives and the Trudeau-led Liberals are the ethical equivalent, I’m gonna go with kook.
            If the Liberals are lying, and the email wasn’t titled “senate reform” I’m sure we’ll find out about it soon enough – the complainant has simply to produce it.
            But let’s indulge your kookery for a moment and pretend the two Senators Trudeau inherited have made him the ethical equivalent of Harper vis-a-vis the 3 Harper-appointed Conservative Senators.
            Who then, are Trudeau’s Doug Carson, Dean Del Mastro, Doug Finley, Irving Gerstein, Nigel Wright, Shelley Glover, Peter Penashue, and Carolyn Stewart-Olsen(not a complete list, I admit)?

          • Well lenny, you know how assuming makes an a** out of you… Anyhow, it doesn’t really matter what the email was entitled because in order to file it, the office staff had to open it. What they are suggesting is they filed it, without reading it. So either the staff is incompetent and Trudeau doesn’t have control of his staff (ala Harper….I didn’t know what Wright was doing with Duffy) or the staff is lying and they filed it to protect Justin (ala plausible deniability….Sargeant Schultz…I know nothing! ) They can’t claim he didn’t get the email because the sender has the record that his office got it so they are going with the misfiling story which funnily enough everyone is swallowing without the outrage they are showing Harper over his claim to have no knowledge of the Wright-Duffy deal. When Harper claims to know nothing, he is an idiot. When Trudeau claims the same thing….wow, it is an understandable clerical error. Go figure.
            Further, lenny your ability to count is in question. It isn’t two Liberal senators that have recently been embroiled in scandal it is three. One is currently serving jail time. Then there is Mac Harb and our newest and biggest star, the alleged perpetrator of sexual crimes against women, Mr. Kenny. So the Libs are neck and neck with the CONS on alleged dirty senators. There is likely no way I could come up with a list of current Libs in the HOC to match your list of CONS that offend YOU. To be fair lenny, there are almost 5 times more CONS than Libs in the HOC. Given that the Libs are the third place party, I don’t even know who most of them are. I would be thrilled if Mr. Trudeau were a brilliant man and became a great PM. Canada needs a good government. I hope he gets smarter in the next two years. I really hope that Ms. Freeland is not right about Canada. She claims that Canada has a problem in that poorly qualified people get into jobs because their fathers did the job before them and not because they are intelligent or earn the job based on hard work and merit. I sincerely hope she wasn’t referring to her new boss, JT.

          • I move email into folders all the time without opening it. If I were to have a day when I received, oh I don’t know, 20 thousand emails or so, I would probably do that and get back to it later.

            I feel bad for this woman, but I cannot for the life of me understand why she decided to make this complaint by email, and then call that email “Senate Reform”. Now of course maybe she didn’t do that, and as Lenny says all she has to do is produce the email to establish that (though I have not heard she is denying she did so), but if she did it was very unwise. It is a serious allegation and she should have done it in person.

            There are sexual assault centres out there that provide support for victims and they could have helped her with this.

          • Gee Gayle, are you receiving campaign contributions? Do you have staff assigned to the specific purpose of opening your email?

          • I actually do have staff who review email, but I don’t have enough who can read 20 thousand emails in one day, and I most certainly do not have staff whose only job is to review my email for me. Somehow I doubt that the leader of the third party in the house has even one such staff member, let alone several.

            Try again.

          • Gayle,
            Maybe this woman would have gone to a sexual assault centre, but unfortuntately, the closest one to her was cut off to the public as Justin was giving a speech there at the time. She didn’t have the $350 entrance fee to hear the great boy speak.

          • Wow. You win the prize for the most hilarious post ever.

          • Glad to see you think Justin Trudeau avoiding to help this woman is so funny.
            I suspect Trudeau and his Lib minions were just trying to cover this up until AFTER the byeelections.
            Tell me Gayle, when you went to Justin’s “Ladies Night” did you bring up the issue of sexual harrasment, or were you too caught up in his hair to address real issues?

          • Just when I thought you hit the funniest post ever, you post this one.

            By the way, since you seem to misunderstand, it is funny because I am laughing at you, not with you.

          • “…because in order to file it, the office staff had to open it.”

            Uh, time to familiarize yourself with the wonderful world of personal computing.

            ” When Harper claims to know nothing, he is an idiot. When Trudeau claims the same thing….wow, it is an understandable clerical error. Go figure.”

            I see. It’s so hard to distinguish between knowledge of an issue that was a top priority in the PMO, and knowledge of one of hundreds or thousands of daily emails. Well, let’s just call it a draw.

            ” So the Libs are neck and neck with the CONS on alleged dirty senators.”

            Allrighty. 3 Senators personally appointed by Harper on the same day, and 3 Liberal senators – one gone from office before Trudeau even ran for Leader and another appointed when Trudeau was 12 years old, and none appointed by Trudeau. Hmmmm, let’s see….another wash.
            Oh darn, we forgot Gerstein, Finley and Olsen. But, you had probably already forgotten that the former two were principals in the in and out scheme. And when Harper found out about it he…uhhh….yeah.
            No need to worry that the Liberals have less MPs. We can limit ourselves to Del Mastro, Glover, Bezan and Penashues’ election conduct – I’m pretty sure the Liberals run just as many candidates as the Conservatives. At least when Harper found out about Del Mastro 2 years ago he…made him a parliamentary secretary.

            Ah well, looks like it’s all even-steven.

          • lenny, do you really believe that Trudeau’s office is filing emails without opening them? Do you think that they are chancing missing out on possible campaign donations and future donors? If you believe that, you are a ripe dupe for purchasing a big chunk of Florida swamp land.
            As for Libs and the senate. What difference does it make how long they have been sitting in the upper chamber? The fact is that Trudeau sees no reason to reform it. The point I made was that there areas many dirty Libs as there are Cons. The parties are almost indistinguishable. Justin arrived but the chronically corrupt didn’t pick up and leave.
            As for your discussion of election misconduct, the Libs were using robocalls inappropriately during the 2011 election campaign as well. Bob Rae complained about McKay using the helicopters for fishing trips and then it was disclosed that during Rae’s time as premier of Ontario he used the OPP helicopters to transport himself to his cottage in northern Ontario on the weekends. You are right, it is rather close to even.

          • Of course they are filing emails without opening them. Do you really think every single email ever sent to a politician is actually read? (If that is true then I have a bone to pick with Linda Duncan, who has yet to answer that email I sent a couple years ago, but I digress…). In fact, aside from the email Duncan ignored, every email I sent to the NDP had a form letter reply – usually that reply had nothing to do with the content of the email. It was clear to me they did not read it, and in fact were responding to what was in the subject line. If they actually did read it, they are rude because they did not acknowledge my issue. Given that I live in Duncan’s riding, and actually worked for her, I would have thought I would have received better service. But again, I digress.

            I repeat – according to what we know so far, the email was titled “Senate Reform”, not “I want to report that a Liberal senator is sexually harassing me”.

          • If you want the Liberals to open your email and actaully read what you have to say, then the subject line must read “Donation”

          • The better question is: Do you really believe political offices don’t use software filters and read reading every email they receive?

            I don’t think you do.

            ” The point I made was that there areas many dirty Libs as there are Cons.”

            No, actually. You claimed Trudeau’s ethical record was no better than Harper’s. But no matter. You haven’t provided evidence to support the point you’re now claiming to have been making.
            Where are the Liberal counterparts to those Conservatives I listed? (btw – I hadn’t even mentioned robocalls or MacKay)

          • do you really believe that Trudeau’s office is filing emails without opening them?

            Yes. Several of us who actually receive reams of email on a daily basis have explained to you over and over again how this is quite plausible.

            Have you ever sent an email to a politician? On a topic that generates high volumes, you’re lucky to get a form email. If you do get a genuine response addressing your concerns, it may still be weeks after your initial email (long enough that I’ve sometimes forgotten the subject I emailed about).

            You’re fixated on this the way Francien gets. Time to move on; this dead horse has been flogged enough.

            Do you think that they are chancing missing out on possible campaign donations and future donors?

            No one sends a donation via email. Even if they tried, it wouldn’t be via an email with a subject line of “Senate Reform.” Nothing to miss.

          • There are only two things I had hoped you would get out of this Keith: #1: Is that you look at things differently when they involve your own political party (you are more willing to accept the plausibility of excuses they make for lost communication); #2: That you are far more concerned with the concept of innocent until proven guilty when it involves your political party than another party you don’t like.
            Something really struck me yesterday when Gayle kept referring to the alleged sexual assault as “misbehaving”. These comment threads are no longer enjoyable for me. I am sorry, I am not a Francien. It sickens me that people could make excuses for the party they vote for. It has been pleasant conversing with you Keith.

          • What you hoped was that Keith would accept your false equivalency. Waving your hands and saying, “x is no different than y” doesn’t make it so.

          • lenny… free…..what you think and what I think is inconsequential….wishing that isn’t so doesn’t make a difference. Let it go…..I have. I am moving on and I am a happier person for my decision to do so. Be happy lenny. I intend to be.

          • The difference is Trudeau’s explanation is plausible while Harper’s is not. Harper (or his close confidants and most trusted staff) actively engaged in unethical and potentially illegal behaviour and it seems pretty clear we have yet to see all the dirt. The missing email looks to be just that. If evidence turns up to show the Liberals tried to cover up the complaint, then they will deserve whatever comes their way.

            As to the senator and his behaviour, I doubt we have heard the last of that and I hope that, like Wallin, Brazeau and Harb, if guilty I hope he is appropriately punished.

            Each of these senators, if guilty, brought their grief upon themselves and while embarrassing for their respective parties, unless it can be shown that their party active supported and endorsed their wrongdoing, it doesn’t really reflect back on the party.

            The bizarre circus that is the Duffy / Wright affair, however, is another story. It looks increasingly like there was a lot of unethical (at minimum) behaviour in an attempt to hide what Duffy had done. Why go through all that when just letting him be hoist on his own petard would have been cleaner and simpler?

            Do I enjoy seeing the CPC squirm whenever they get caught with their hands in the cookie jar? Yes – because it shows clearly the difference between what they say and what they do. The frequency with which it happens implies there’s an entire culture of entitlement and lack of ethics, and so I hope each time that it is the wake-up call that lets the party faithful see them for what they are. That doesn’t mean I would ignore such behaviour by another party.

            The missing email is nowhere near the PMO mess. When you try to blow it up to that level you lose credibility. It’s that simple.

        • To recap your recap: It doesn’t matter how many fancy pants rules Harper breaks, long as he steals less money then the lieberals. [ note he isn’t bothered about incompetent wastage, or partisan promotion on the public dime – just what looks like theft]
          I think the cons are on to something here. Harper’s needlessly denying himself a lot of fun. Really, he ought to let his hair down…do some crack, maybe get wasted on the wknd …make a video or two with some more fun buddies then he’ll find in the pmo.

          • Um, Mac Harb was on the hook for the most expenses of all the crooked senators.

            And Mac Harb is a life-long Liberal.

          • Mudslinging about the transgressions of others doesn’t diminish or justify the current misconduct of the PMO. Especially in defense of the party who promised to put an end to such behaviour.

          • Well, when Harper did try to put an end to it by ordering Duffy to pay back the expenses….he was accused of a cover-up.
            The reality is, the cover-up consisted of people in his office trying to pay Duffy’s expenses without Harper finding out about it. when Harper found out….he fired them.
            Pretty clear frankly.

          • Before Nigel Wright bribed Mike Duffy, the CPC in the person of Irving Gerstien, was preparing to do the same. Why has he not been fired?

          • So far, Harper’s only been “accused” in the same judicially inconsequential “court of public opinion” that accused so many of the other transgressors you listed above, so there may be a certain fairness at play there.

            Otherwise, I’ll buy your construction of events, pending convictions. So, we’re left with allegations that many of his own most senior staff conspired to provide an illegal inducement to a member of parliament, then attempted to cover it up.

            And we’re being asked to believe that the man who is reputed to be the most controlling, micromanaging PM in the country’s history remained outside the loop.

            So, on the evidence so far, he has either assembled a highly unethical collection of aides (whom he has yet to sanction, other than Wright) or he knowingly abetted their behaviour.

            Take your pick.

          • And Mac Harb should be punished. Your point?

          • Which is the main reason the Canadian Media largely ignored it. If he were a Conservative…the CBC would have folks going through his garbage.

          • Uh, lads? Harb is under investigation by the RCMP and is likely to be charged with fraud. That information was made available in an ITO just the same as the Duffy/Wright information. Harb & Duffy are not just in similar circumstances, they are in exactly the same circumstances. This information brought to you by the media.

            Perhaps the reason you’re not hearing as much about it is because no-one in the Prime Minister’s Office was involved in trying to hide this information from the public. Ya think?

          • I think it has less to do with the PMO, and more to do with Party affiliation.

          • After 9 months of contiuous coverage this is the best you can come up with? Harper isn’t accused of stealing anything, and frankly, even some CBC commentators admit that “stealing or lying isn’t in Harper’s DNA”
            If Harper is guilty of anything, it is appointing someone like Duffy to the Senate in the first place.
            Right now, the only thing we know Harper has done, is order Duffy to re-pay the taxpayers. I know this is hard for a Liberal to fathom, but it happens to be true. Some politicians DON’t steal….but those who do, are most likely to be Liberals. (See Quebec politics……any level)

          • You think Harper doesn’t lie? I got some real nice swamp land up here you might be interested in investing in.

    • Did fine??

      Other than that Mrs. Lincoln how did you like the play?

    • Of course, that must be it. Harper is not responsible for the senate mess, it is the media’s fault for reporting on it.

      Remember when conservatives were all about personal responsibility?

      Good times. good times.

      • He’s learning from the best: the ex-Mayor of Toronto.

  3. This made me laugh.

    “He accepted his chief of staff’s resignation, then jumped into a time machine and fired him.”

    • Well, when you ask someone to resign and they resign, it really is a distinction without a difference, but agreed that it was a great line.

      • I don’t think this boils down a simple matter of semantics. Agreed that firings often come in the form of demanded resignations, but in this case we have Harper claiming to have waited too long to accept Wright’s resignation (that was the version of events in May, at any rate). If he had demanded a resignation from Wright, why would he then proceed to mull it over for four days?

        forgot the link!

        • “If he had demanded a resignation from Wright, why would he then proceed to mull it over for four days?”

          To give Nigel time to get the cheque delivered to Duffy’s house[ the one on PEI] The post is shocking there, so i hear. They should have couriered it eh.

          jeez, how does Harper keep all those threads together. You got to hand it to him. Just how does he keep all those balls and knives and chain saws in the air at once?

          • If Harper is still playing chess, it’s at a level I can no longer comprehend.

          • Of course you can’t comprehend, earthling.

          • I don’t know if it is actually possible to play chess while juggling knives and honking your big blue nose.

      • Hmm, but if there is no difference, then why did Harper change the line in the first place — he must think there is some kind of difference…

      • Well, Harper did go out of his way to say what an honourable man Wright was, that Wright did what he thought was best for Canadians, and that he reluctantly accepted his resignation.

        To hear him speak today, you’d think that the PM’s immediate reaction was, BURN THE WITCH!!!

  4. harper will continue to split the middle – left like chrétien split the right – far right before him.

    • Except Harper never split the middle-left.. the Liberals just imploded. Chretien’s change to campaign financing hobbled the Liberal party just as adscam was hitting the mainstream. And they might have even survived that were it not for Chretien’s hand-picked RCMP chief releasing Goodale’s name in connection with an investigation into income trusts — something which even the RCMP admits was “not in keeping with past practices”

      Dion’s anti-sovereigntist leanings hurt him a bit throughout Quebec, his English hurt him throughout Ontario, and CTV sealed the coffin with their broadcast of Dion’s out-takes, followed up by Duffy rebroadcasting them, for which Duffy received a Senate seat and CTV received an official condemnation from the independent Canadian Broadcast Standards Council, and were required to run notices and apologies about that behavior.

      Ignatieff, smart man though he may be, simply had no idea how to be a politician. He turned his back on his own signature in a party already plagued with trust difficulties, and let his image be defined to the public in general by CPC advertisements (admitted, given the party’s finances, he may not have had a lot of choice, but not even an attempt was made). Many Liberal voters, seeing the writing on the wall, switched to what seemed in the last couple of days to possibly be a viable alternative to turf the CPC–the NDP.

      On the other side of the coin, to Harper’s credit, he held the two factions of the right and far-right together through strong party discipline. His anti-democratic actions and flat out lies were often excused by a Canadian public willing to cut some slack for the minority government that seemed to be embattled from the Liberal-NDP coalition, and also given extra lee-way from the disparate elements of the party because the minority status was a good excuse for these interest groups not getting the things they wanted.

      Now, however, there’s been a significant change. The first is of course, the new Liberal leader, who seems to have taken the CPC’s attempt at defining him and repurposed it to his own ends. The whole “not experienced enough” meme he’s managed to transpose into “fresh ideas”. Their attacks at how he’s just a pretty face or good hair he seems to be translating into “all they have against me are childish insults”. How well this will work out come election time remains to be seen, and depends a lot on just how much substance he can demonstrate he actually has during the campaign in 2015.

      The second, and I believe more significant change, is that the CPC is no longer a minority government. The elements of the party that were willing to hold their tongues before are getting restless. The CPC can’t get as much traction with the argument that the other parties are preventing action when it’s the CPC that has majority power. Similarly, the voters who were cutting them slack before as the embattled minority government I think are getting annoyed that the same type of dirty politics that was being played then is still being played now when there’s no reason for it to be.

      • Thwim, even Don Drummond admitted that he heard about the income trusts thing before the markets closed that day from “senior Liberals”. He specifically mentioned strategists from Ottawa. It was on a Kathy Tomlinson whistleblower piece. How is that possible?

        Update. Found a transcript of the Tomlinson piece. I don’t see how anyone can read this and conclude that the Liberals were not somehow involved in the insider trading that resulted.

        • Wow. And if I said there was no involvement at all by the Liberals, you’d have some sort of point.

          As it is, you’re pointless.

    • I dunno, Dinsdale came within spitting distance of taking Brandon-Souris, and his gains over what the Liberals got in 2011 came from the CPC and NDP point for point and at a pretty even split.

  5. The outcome, while a bit sour for the Conservatives, confirms that down and dirty negative attack politics saved the day. You can expect things to get much nastier for the next federal election as we slide ever further into the morass of US style politics.
    Will we see flyers of unsavoury pedophilia types smoking dope and thanking Justin Trudeau for enabling them with legalized reefer madness and wussy talk of “root causes?” I have no doubt we will.

    Will Justin Trudeau be able to win and keep his pledge of running a “positive” campaign?

      • Rathgeber isn’t a “party insider”, he was kicked out of the party and his own riding association has disowned him because he’s actively trying to elect a Liberal government.

        But sure, call him a “party insider” if you want to.

        • Kicked out? He resigned. But then CPC types have a hard time distinguishing between resignations and firings these days…

          • Jus wach thet boy! He shure kin polish thet turd eh!

    • Funny how you deride “US style politics” while the Liberal Party of Canada is taking all of it’s political advice from US Democrats. Maybe tell Justin Trudeau to stop with the American style-politics and hire some Canadian advisers.

      • You want a cup of tea with your party?

  6. This comment was deleted.

    • Yeah Manitoba isn’t the west, you have to be nominated by a second generation member of the Oilmen’s club to be the real west. Vegancouver isn’t the west, obviously, or the Island (c’mon!) and after the Conservatives lose the urban seats in Saskatchewan next federal election they won’t be the west either. More Alberta manifest destiny firewall claptrap.

    • And childish insults are all the cons have to excuse their loss.

    • Slamming vets now?

    • I guess the maclean’s editors[ Wells doesn’t write his own tittles, or does he?]
      should have written: this turd wont polish in crayon, just for you.

  7. Mr. Trudeau has a long way to go before convincing me to vote for him (a VERY long way) or his party but I must say I’m impressed the Grits jumped to 40+% from 5 (five?!) in the last election.

    • Damn you and your immunity to his flowing locks. What more do you want from LPC, you scoundrel?

      • Just a wee bit of gravitas. The lisp throws me off every time too. I think he’d make a great Minister for Youth or something to that effect, but I want someone with some real life experience and achievement to be MY Prime Minister.

        I can’t see myself voting for any of the major party leaders right now (and to that extent, the local talent in Peterborough is rather depressing starting with Dean ‘I’m heading to the Big House’ DelMastro.

        Jason Kenney seems intriguing and if the CPC continues to toss out the fake ‘conservatives’ like DelMastro, Poilievre, Toews, Anders et al, and continue to disappoint Ford Nation types on this board (I’m looking at YOU Rick Omen and Francien) then I can see myself voting for them.

        • Agree with you on Kenney. As far as I am concerned he can take over the CPC leadership any time he wants it.

          • Mutiny!

          • Arrrr.

          • I think he only looks good due to the contrast with those around him. He’s smarter than Peter McKay, better mannered than John Baird and more trustworthy than Stephen Harper… but all of that is true of my border collie and I would not put him forward as a candidate either.

          • And he can shoot foul shots better than Dwight Howard.

          • That is a backward compliment because the Kcm2’s dog could probably shoot foul shots better than Dwight Howard.

          • I realize that if I try to explain that I meant that ironically it only points to the failure of my own joke, but yes “superman” is currently clanking back iron more often than he is scoring from the free throw line.

          • lol

            Border collies is awful smart you know. Our old one[ actually Sammy was a part karelian bear dog +?] would never fetch if he could get you to do it for him[ bit like Harper really]
            I often wondered which one of us was really higher on the gene tree.

          • Take your partisan blinders off. Baird is an excellent MP. If he chooses to run for the next leadership, he is easily among the frontrunners, if not the outright favourite. He’s handled every portfolio he’s been handed very skillfully. He will be a formidable opponent.

          • “Baird is an excellent MP.”

            Indeed he is. I don’t doubt he’d be a top-tier candidate. However I’d be shocked if he actually ran. His reputation to date is as a loyal lieutenant, happy to receive his marching orders and execute them effectively. I have zero clue what John Baird believes in independent of whatever his political leaders tell him to. This stands in contrast to Kenney, McKay, Raitt, perhaps even Prentice – people who I think this board could discuss and guess what their policy platforms might look like.

          • I think it would be cool to have a gay Prime Minister though.

          • He’s a blowhard and a buffoon. His screechy posturing on Iran is purely idiotic. We have no standing and no influence but – by god – nobody is gonna hate those shifty Iranians more than John (look-at-me) Baird. He’s like a teenage girl with his Burn Book. Gawd, it’s mortifying.

        • Funny thing, but politics is essentially a popularity contest, but we like it too if you don’t contradict yourself 3 times in any given speech.[ that’s what passes for gravitas in today’s world]
          If we held a people’s election free of party interference C.Hadfield would win by a landslide on both fronts.[ it helps he’s a better and more authentic musician then Harper also]

          IMPO JT is still at least 5 years out from being ready for PM in a sane world. But we don’t live in one, and another round or two of Harper majorities would mortally wound this country in terms of basic respect for democratic norms. So, if your like me you’ll tolerate the curls and wince at the gaffes, at least if your a liberal.

          I’m not sure if you’ll like what JK will bring to the table if Harper didn’t cut it for you. Maybe more respect for process, maybe more open dialogue with Canadians of all political stripes, maybe less partisanship? I just wouldn’t bet the farm on it.
          As for Mulcair? I really don’t know what to think. He might be ok, he might actually be Harper with more testosterone and whiskers.

          • French citizen Mulcair would be appalling. His positions on national unity issues vis-a-vis Quebec are basically identical to the Bloc’s. More, he wants to extend the discriminatory and restrictive provisions of Bill 101 into the federal sphere in Quebec.

            He does not deserve the vote of any loyal Canadian.

          • Completely identical except on the very point of their reason d’etre, sovreignty.

          • So he claims. But many of his MPs have strong separatist ties, and he consistently supports separatist positions on every major question related to the national unity debate. His treacherous attack on the Clarity Act, for example.

            I repeat: he does not deserve the vote of any loyal Canadian.

    • Luckily JT has two years to work on it. All he has to do is keep his thoughts from rolling uncensored out of his brain and through his lips…..

  8. Interesting to read the Newswatch round-up today. Every media pundit and expert is on there trying to justify their previous dire predictions of Tory disaster in the face of the fact that all remains the same. Sure the vote count is down, as it usually is for a governing party in by-elections. All the frothing at the mouth by the media though should be reserved for the pollsters. As usual the Ottawa Parliamentary Press Gallery bubble crowd has been sadly misled by them and yet the media still keep printing the tired old stories of their predictions and results. I can’t wait to watch the moaning and groaning and gnashing of teeth again tonight on Martin and Soloman’s shows. Or the justifications that will surely follow as night follows day by the polling firms.

    • You might not see it on TV, but make no mistake: there is gnashing of Conservative teeth and post-mortem meetings going on behind the scenes today.

  9. If Harper hasn’t improved from this by 2015, he’s going to get thumped, absolutely.

    But two holds among the epic media sh**storm of the last few weeks? I’ll take it.

  10. the Liberals, who ran an anonymous parachute candidate of very uncertain quality…

    That’s simply not true Paul. Dinsdale would be just another anonymous Liberal parachute candidate, IF his father hadn’t been the ridings MP for may years back in the day. The name is very familiar in Brandon-Souris.

    Sound familiar? A politician who’s only qualifications for the job is the fact that his father used to have that job?

    • Sounds like Stephen Harper. No qualifications except being a political hack.

      • Um, Stephen Harper’s been Prime Minister for 7 years. That’s not a qualification?

        • And if you check with Loraine she will tell you that Stephen Harper`s father Valter Harper was Prime Minister for several years back in the day.

        • it wasn’t 7 years ago.

          • In fairness to NotRick, 7 years ago he was saying that Harper was totally unqualified.


    • Wells was referencing the conservative spin…. From Harper’s letter: “Larry was born in Southwest Manitoba and has lived there his entire life. Larry has been a farmer, a community leader, and a representative of Southwestern Manitoba for decades. On the other hand, his Liberal opponent only moved back a few months ago to run in this by-election.”

      But anyway, if we agree with your theory that Dinsdale made huge gains for the Libs on the basis of everyone knowing his daddy, does that mean Trudeau stands to do very well in 2015? Or is Brandon-Souris just an unusually Liberal-friendly riding?

      • The difference between Trudeau and Dinsdale is that Dinsdale’s dad was liked. Trudeau’s dad, not so much. He was the most divisive PM this country has ever had.

        • There was a time when you couldn’t find anyone who would admit to voting for Trudeau Sr., which made his victories puzzling. :) But agreed about his western reputation. How then, could Jr. have a candidate do so well?

          • Because of the candidate’s last name, and because apparently many Conservative’s were upset with the CPC for, you know, following the nomination rules that were set out well in advance.

            Doesn’t help that the media continued to perpetrate the lie that the nomination was somehow stolen, even though they all knew damn well that that wasn’t the case at all.

          • Do you have links to stories in the media asserting that the nomination process was rigged? (and not just one, and not some minor columnist – evidence of a sustained “stolen” narrative that would have realistically and unfairly hurt the CPC candidate). The only reports I saw reflected claims made by both sides in the dispute.

          • Go read the Winnipeg Free Press. They’re still making that claim.

          • “Larry Maguire, a former MLA, has been dogged by a divisive nomination fight….”

            Seems like a fair description to me. You disagree?

        • Alberta didn’t like him, but Alberta doesn’t matter in the next Federal election. Our steadfast refusal to vote for any party but the conservatives essentially makes us irrelevant.

          Now Ontario, on the other hand.. they quite liked JT’s dad.. and they’re the ones who put the CPC into power several years ago.. they’re also the ones who’ll take them out.

  11. For more success the Liberals will need to keep Justin scripted and under careful control. He is very weak when he is allowed to ad lib.

    • Aren’t most politicians? Besides, I’d actually prefer to hear what someone really thinks than their buttoned -down, trotted out talking points agreed by committee.

    • You do realize that Harper is tightly scripted as well, right? He never takes questions from anyone but plants, much less enter a room containing people not pre-cleared as loyal partisans.

    • Sure, and we can look forward to another election in 2015 where Conservative candidates duck out the back door to escape reporters, refuse to participate in local debates, or talk to anyone other than party members at fund raisers. Great for democracy!

  12. I’m less interested in the result than the fact that Forum Poll for Brandon Souris had the CPC losing by 29 but they ended up winning. Media outlets share the blame with the polling firms when they report on ridiculous polls

    • Everyone I read suggested se take the polls with a grain of salt, and that in any event, the CPC had more feet on the ground and a better “get out the vote” as a result.

  13. Polling numbers seem to be very off track. What is happening to polling Cos?

    • It’s fun to kick them around, but people have cell phones (which polling companies DO CALL) and filter their calls.

      Response rates are way down, and sometimes are a little skewed. So funny things can happen on polls that wouldn’t have happened ten years ago.

      • Also, turnouts were very low, which can make polling tricky. I’m sure half the people who said they would definitely vote in the byelections (who told the pollsters so) never got around to it.

        • There are also only 19 telephones in Brandon-Souris, and six of them are on the same party line. Phone-owners tend to be elitist liberal voters, the same types that have electricity in the barn AS WELL as the house. That’s what skewed the numbers. :)

          [If anyone wants to lash out at me for some good natured ribbing of rural folk, remember how the guy in Provencher handled the bullying of gay kids stuff first]

          • “I’m just kidding… but those ignorant folks deserve whatever they get… but they won’t get it from me… cause I’m good natured.”

  14. Trudeau is playing this smart. Governments defeat themselves. What he needs to do is connect with Canadians (he is) and set himself up as the alternative.

    And this is what happens – voters turned to the liberals in droves last night.

    • Gee Gayle the hyperbole is rolling off your fingers today. Voters didn’t turn to anyone ‘in droves” because the turnout for voting was abysmal as usual. The Liberals hung on to the two seats they had and the Cons did the same. Despite the over-the-top media coverage of the Con senate scandal, the status quo was maintained. Break out the champagne and celebrate…..another senator has been kicked out of a party caucus, this time it is the Libs and the charge is alleged sexual assault. Yah, let’s celebrate. JT’s office supposedly lost the original email alerting him of the man’s criminal misconduct. Yah, let’s celebrate!

      • Hi

        The term “voter”means a person who votes. As in, the people who came out to vote last night, the ones who turned to liberals.

        I hope that helps.

        • Can a handful of something be described as turning toward something in droves?

          • No, but I do not consider tens of thousands of voters to be a “handful”. Maybe you and I have a different perception of “math”.

          • get a real job shill

    • I agree.
      As long as Justin keeps his mouth shut, he will remain popular.

  15. Here’s a link to Barry McGuire’s flyer:

    A punk band? With a raunchy name and offensive song titles?!!!! We’ve barely gotten over that Miley Gaga abomination, and now this? Somebody fetch me a lemonade and escort me to the shade of a magnolia tree to recover…

    Between that and the “reefer madness” attacks that would have seemed mildly hyperbolic in the 1950s, I can only assume that Conservative polling shows that scared grannies are the key to electoral success.

    • The way demographics are going, they may well be.

    • I can only assume that Conservative polling shows that scared grannies are the key to electoral success.

      I give up…I was trying to provide a link to a photo that accompanied an article or opinion piece from about 3 weeks ago, the recent CPC convention in particular. The photo showed three or four front row delegates, plus a few more in the second row, chatting with each other as they waited for the next event or speaker or whatever. The average age of those delegates was……old. I had this sneaking suspicion that the photographer had intentionally skulked around for HOURS, trying to get just the right photo to confirm the image of the CPC as a party of grumpy, old white folks…

  16. So what were voter turnout numbers like?

  17. Glad to see the Liberal vote go up in all 4 ridings. Justin Trudeau worked hard on the campaign trail to develop a message and connect with voters. I didn’t think it was possible for Trudeau and the Liberals to compete with Harper in Conservative strongholds in Western Canada, but they managed to do so. Well done.

    • Rebecca, you really need to clear up this identity thing.

      • Rent a partisan?

  18. Well, I`m shocked.
    I was told by the Winnipeg Free Press that the Liberals had a 29 % point lead over the Conservatives in the Brandon riding the day before the By-Election.
    Then I wake up this morning and read that the Conservatives have won the riding but Justin is the real winner.
    Now, I`m confused.
    And if I`m confused then just imagine how Justin must feel.

    I think I know what is happening and I`m not too happy with the way the media and their friends in the polling business are trying to manipulate Dreamy Justin and his affected simplistic nature.
    You see, when these ” scientific” polls are taken to determine people`s preference the calls made are all in-office calls. They just call themselves or other polling firms or friends in the media, or the local drama club, or the snowboard hill, or maybe Justin himself.

    I don`t appreciate this and you know it`s going to be very confusing to Justin when it`s all explained to him.

  19. The Trudeau Liberals are all class: “As of 12:35 tonite, Rolf Dinsdale did not show up at the Larry Maguire HQ to concede. The NDP candidate did. Not cool.”

    Dinsdale remained a no show.

    • I’ve never heard of someone showing up in person to concede. I understand phone calls are the norm. I realize CPC supporters construct narratives with little connection to reality, but is this actually a thing?

      • The NDP candidate did.

        • Strange and small argument. Oh well, you work with what you got. So, I take it the CPC losers showed up to concede in Bourassa and TorCentre in person? Because you wouldn’t argue something so stupid otherwise, right?

          • Ouch.

          • There was a Con candidate in TorCen?

  20. I don’t think “an anonymous parachute candidate” accurately describes a candidate who, you know, won a contested nomination.

  21. Vote splitting by the Liberals, NDP and Green candidate elected the Conservative in Brandon. If an online primary election were held a week or so before the election and the people wo were not voting Conservativeknew what the likely result was before election day, the result might have been different. Small polling samples that had the Liberal ahead
    were not valid. Indeed the Conservatives used the same playbook in 2011 when they announced on the Friday before that a majority was out of reach and the elections was lost, which stampeded people back to them at the last minute. Voters do not need the major party leaders to co-operate, because they have proven time and time again that they
    simply will not and they all believe they can have their own five year majority dictatorship. All voters really need is a good idea of the outcome before election day and they will fix our broken democracy themselves.

    • Sorry, but what vote splitting? I thought the ndp vote went south in both MN districts.[ don’t know if the greens were even a factor?]

      • Conservative – Larry Maguire – 12,205 – 44.1%
        Liberal – Rolf Dinsdale – 11,814 – 42.7%
        NDP – Cory Szczepanski – 2,037 – 7.4
        Green Party – David Michael Neufeld – 1,354 – 4.9%
        Libertarian – Frank William James Godon – 271 – 1.0%

        One third of the Green vote alone going Liberal would have defeated the Conservative in Brandon-Souris, who won the seat by less than 400 votes and 1.4% of the vote. Even if you add the 1% the Libertarian got, the right wing vote was 45% and the centre-left vote was 55%.

        • It’s always the same thing. When the Liberals won the Brandon-Souris riding it was because the Conservatives/Reform split the vote.

          Personally, I wish we had run-off voting. That would produce a much more accurate representation of people’s will in Parliament.

        • It’s quite obvious the vote-splitting between the CPC, NDP and Greens made the race closer than it should have been and gave Dinsdale a chance.

      • I didn’t know the NDP were running candidates in Minnesota.

        • oops MB…you learn something every day. Know the one for North west territories do you, without looking it up as i just had to.

  22. Is Juniour Trudeau the turd that won’t polish? Shiny pony visited Brandon Souris 3 times, but still lost, so the only thing he increased was HIS CARBON FOOTPRINT. Mainstream left-lib media types like yourself did a full court press to help Juniour, but in the end, the Tories kept what they had, and lost where they had no reasonable chance of winning. Is it possible that Trudeaumania exsists primarily in the minds of liberal scribes like yourself, Pauly? Can we surmise that many Canadians are not enamoured with Juniour’s plans to impose a Carbon Tax in the name of the Global Warming Hoax which would cripple our economy and send energy costs soaring for no sane purpose? One thing is certain, your bias is ingrained and you will continue to unabashedly bash Harper while granting Juniour Trudeau a never ending lapdance.

    • You are skating on thin ice, and also not able to spell junior, no matter how many times you type it.

      • Can’t argue with a guy called inarguably…where do these cons get all those lovely self ironic handles?

    • Pauly!..the unabashedly bashing Trudeau lap dancer….that’s going to smart a bit Wells? lol

      A few creative insults can help to relieve the tedium. I have a feeling that one will stay with you for a bit.

  23. Wow. Every single headline on Bourque and NationalNewswatch for 2 weeks has been prototypical Cdn MSM. ie. The usual wishful thinking and hoping headlines envisioning miniTrudeauMania2 beginning with the sweep of all 4 byelections! Oh well. Didn’t matter. It’s a big win anyway. Canadian Media? Pffffft.

  24. But I should(we all should) add my great big thank yous to the Canadian Media for turning Prime Minister Harper into the Teflon man who shall rule as long as he wants.
    Two decades of crying Wolf extremism has Canadians looking at any MSM headline about PM Harper and chuckling about how he handles the Canadian Media. Just like any other sane person would treat a gaggle of teenage girls.

    • Er, he generally doesn’t talk to the national media. Maybe there’s a lesson there?
      There’s never a guarantee, but i find it helps to at least give someone the option of liking you before you retire to the sulkers corner.

      • I think he’s learned through years of bitter experience that the MSM is no friend of his, or his party’s.

        • Gee, i wonder why?

  25. I’m as guilty of this as Wells is, but why not wait until someone who actually knows something about the local political scene weighs in? Heresy, I know.

    Brandon columnist Deveryn Ross is supposed to have an analysis out tomorrow.

    • Timing is everything and by tomorrow, everyone will be back to talking about the PMO Wright/PM/Duffy scandal. Also: do you really compare your partisan spinning on the byelections to Paul Wells’s professional analysis via the media outlet for which he works? Because if you do, you are truly over-reaching and self-delusional.

      • This was posted to the wrong person…

        • Yes. And she’s no Paul Wells. No matter how hard she tries.

          • You should probably source that.

          • Hahaha.

        • No, who is she.

          • small dead animals

          • Interesting. Thx for the info. Obviously I am very ill-informed. I thought she might be a taxidermist. Hahaha!

      • No, I didn’t actually. I generally like Wells’ stuff when I run across it (which admittedly, isn’t very often). However, thanks for the personal insult, it certainly adds legitimacy to your argument.

        • Hey consider yourself lucky. She hasn’t accused you of being a drunk yet or the mother of children who are substance abusers due to your poor skills as a parent. Something to look forward to perhaps.

    • Brandon columnist Deveryn Ross was the Liberal riding association president for years. And he’s also a convicted felon (like so many former Liberals).

      What a great source of information!

      • “And he’s also a convicted felon (like so many former Liberals).”
        And like so many close associates of Harper. Shouldn’t throw stones when you live in glass houses Dick.

      • Thanks for that, now I’m curious…

  26. “He accepted his chief of staff’s resignation, then jumped into a time machine and fired him.”

    lol That was fun. But don’t go there again Wells, please! The thought of SH having access to a time machine is not really funny at all…unless you happen to think history could generally use a bit of revision anyway.
    I’m imagining Harper’s reaction to reading Paul’s list.
    PM: ‘Hmmm, he has a point. Maybe i should have laid off the Cash? A little more Paul and less Lennon next time perhaps? Maybe a new line on shiny pony?

    ” Not enough judgement to prefer beatles to…”what kind of crap does he listen to?…Jenni got a job for you… Yes right now! Wha’dya mean your busy and why bother?’

    This guy wont change a thing. He doesn’t know how.Even loyal Cons must be sneaking peeks at Jason wondering if the bugger can even hum a tune.

  27. Wells and the rest of the CBCCTVStarPostMedia party tried their best to lie, distort and subvert democracy with their BS push polls, and outlandish ‘reporting’….but as per usual, their best isn’t good enough…I guess Mulroney was right when he said that the problem is not with the leadership, it’s with the followship….bwhaaaaaaa

    • Just because you believe something to be true doesn’t make it true. Why does everyone on the right assume media bias if the media doesn’t quote verbatim the talking points the CPC hands out?

  28. “Brandon-Souris? A 21-point decline in Conservative vote and a 38-point
    gain for the Liberals, who ran an anonymous parachute candidate of very
    uncertain quality against a Conservative campaign personally spearheaded
    by Jenni Byrne, the Conservatives’ 2011 national campaign manager.”

    That is a blatant lie,Mr.Wells,I am disappointed in you.I know you are a personal friend of Trudeau, but that statement is SO untruthful, you should be ashamed.

    The LPC candidate is the Son of long time Conservative MP Walter Dinsdale who represented Brandon-Souris from 1951 to 1982. Hardly an unknown.

    This is a new low in journalism,even for McLean’s.

    • A new low in journalism? Hyperbole much?

      Dinsdale is indeed a bit of a parachute candidate. You can argue semantics about being known/unknown since he himself is not really known, but his father is well-known. But to describe it as a “new low in journalism” seems to be just resorting to hysterics.

      • Certainly Mr. Dinsdale’s name would be very recognizable in the area and name recognition is huge. Imagine if a son of Peter Lougheed ran in Alberta.

        • Well yes, but you could still argue that Lougheed’s son was relatively unknown unless he had done something to make a name for himself. That’s why it becomes more an argument of semantics, and not “a blatant lie” and “a new low in journalism” as user damorris describes it.

          • I don’t think it is a new low in journalism but someone who has name recognition through his father and then was joined on the campaign trail by Trudeau 3 times isn’t exactly an unknown commodity. It would be like Peter Lougheed’s son who has none of his own accomplishments being joined by Danielle Smith (Wildrose) on the campaign trail. Is there any doubt he would do well? Not in my opinion. Look how JT is doing and he had none of his own accomplishments.

    • damorris: Don’t ever waste your time reading a Milton poem. Wells was referencing the Conservative’s characterization of Dinsdale (“he only moved here to get elected…”). And Swift didn’t really mean we should eat babies.

      • The ironing is delicious.

    • How many times does it have to be pointed out that Wells is working from the Con messaging?

    • That may all be true; but I gather that Mr Wells is quoting the Conservative party’s own description of him.

  29. Perhaps an analysis of how these results compare to all by election swings against the governing party (standard) for the past 30 years would have been more helpful. The orange wave is receding, (we knew that). Trudeau is popular when he doesn’t open his mouth and say anything or have to debate, (we knew that). BY elections always go against the governing party, (we knew that). And Brandon Souris had internal issues with the conservative candidate along with name recognition for the Liberal Candidate from his long time Conservative MP father. (we knew that).

    What else this by-election says is really reading chicken entrails. At the height of the senate scandal (which upsets Conservatives more than Liberals), and without Stephan Harper campaigning, which he is extremely good at, I think it was a win for the Conservatives on many levels. The Liberals certainly did well and held seats they should have. Did they do any better than other by-elections in the past 30 years??? Show us some real analysis.

    • Stephen Harper was campaigning, wasn’t he? He sent out a letter asking the constituents to return a Conservative MP.

      • Justin Trudeau personally visited the riding 3 times. So, no, Stephen Harper wasn’t campaigning, and Mr. Trudeau certainly didn’t have to debate him.

        • Wait.. because Mr. Trudeau visited the riding, Mr. Harper wasn’t campaigning? The hell kind of logic is that?

        • Oh, come on. How does sending a letter not count as campaigning?

  30. The Liberal’s gains in Manitoba are due in a large part to the decrease in popularity of the NDP. Recent polls have Premier Selinger’s popularity at 26 percent the second lowest for a Premier in all of Canada. The NDP have traditionally done worse in rural areas, they are basically a party of Winnipeg. But, I say let the Liberals believe it is all about Justin, certainly Justin believes it is all about Justin.

    • This is the official talking point, I take it – you didn’t lose any Con votes?

    • About half of the Liberal gain was from NDP losses. The other half was from Conservative losses.

      Basically, not only are the Conservatives losing popularity, but now with Justin Trudeau it looks like more voters are turning to the Liberals to be their non-CPC voting choice. Mulcair is good in Parliament but I don’t think he really resonates with voters like Layton did. Ignatieff was pretty bad, and Trudeau has much more appeal.

      I expect the same trend to happen in the next election: large vote losses by the CPC, moderate losses of votes for the NDP, and very large vote gains for the Liberals. I don’t know if they will form a government, but at the very least the Liberals should be a very significant presence federally once again, and will at least be official opposition if not the government.

      • My God, a balanced, fair, reasonable post. Someone should flag this. Or maybe you should get the steak knives.

  31. inkless plus clueless equals wells, oh that McL would be wellsless

  32. This turd won’t polish either

    Calling Kyle Rove…

  33. I wonder if it is possible that the Liberals in B-S were indeed up for a landslide victory until the last weekend, i.e., the Harper letter and the anti-pot campaigning turned it around for the Conservatives at the last minute. I reckon Jenni Byrne was in B-S less to save a lost seat but more to experiment with themes for the 2015 general election. B-S represented a riding with a lot of advance hype about a major Liberal win. What better situation to see what works and what doesn’t to counteract that kind of enthusiasm? I reckon we will be hearing a lot more about Trudeau and marijuana legalization from the Conservatives from now until 2015.
    The other take-away from the Manitoba byelections besides the Liberal renaissance was the fall of the NDP. Maybe voters are mad at Selinger NDP government’s raising of the provincial sales tax to pay for flood mitigation. In Manitoba, NDP = higher taxes. Maybe Mulcair suffered for this.

  34. Yes, but then you factor in that Justin is supposed to be in the honeymoon period with the voter and has only held onto two seats. His win in Toronto Centre was achieved by Chrystia Freeland winning 49% of 36% of the voters who turned out. Come on. This is bad news for Justin. Harper has been on the scene for nearly eight years and held his two seats. If Trudeaumania II was going on there would have been a higher voter turnout and Trudeau would have taken more seats. So basically one year in the leadership role and Justin is basically treading water.

    • Nice try. There were only two non-Liberal seats available for the taking; both were staunch Conservative ridings. Yet the Liberals made large gains in both (coming very close to the Conservatives in one) – a fair amount of the growth of support at Conservative expense.

      Hardly “treading water”. But then, as has been shown time & again, Conservatives aren’t good at math.

      • Brandon-Souris was Liberal in the 1990’s. This isn’t a staunch conservative riding. Trudeau should have taken it. The fact he didn’t shows that he isn’t making the big inroads he should be. Governing parties always get spanked during by elections. This was more a tap on the wrist.

        • It went Liberal exactly once – back when Kim Campbell’s PCs were decimated. Even then, Liberal only won because conservative votes were split between PC and Reform.

          Must be hard maintaining your balance when you set that thing on 78 RPM.

          • Must be hard for you to realize Justin isn’t the wunderkind you thought you had.

          • Never thought he was; I was hoping for Garneau. Hoping he surrounds himself with a solid team and offers up sound policy before election time. But that has nothing to do with the fact that his numbers in Brandon-Souris were the best ever posted by a Liberal, by a good bit – including that split-vote win. Spin all you want – the numbers clearly show slipping CPC support and growing Liberal support, even in what has traditionally been staunchly conservative areas. All the close races last time may well be ripe for plucking from the CPC come 2015.

          • You can spin it your way. What I see is a brand new leader who couldn’t motivate more than 18% of the rock bed solid Liberal riding of Toronto Centre to get out of bed and vote.

  35. Elsewhere I wrote that these results (and the strong performance in Calgary Centre) are good news for the Liberals, suggesting they when they actually campaign for the support of westerners, they can do quite well.

    At the same time, this phenomena may suggest a problem with Trudeau-mania 2.0. The increase in Liberal support is greatest in areas where Liberal support was initially lowest. Following threehundredeight’s polling averages, here is the change in support by region…
    BC: 13.4 -> 33 (+19.6)
    AB: 9.3 -> 25 (+15.7)
    SK/MB: 12.6 -> 35 (+22.4)
    ON: 25.3 -> 37 (+11.7)
    QC: 14.2 -> 32 (+17.8)

    That’s problematic because it is not seat efficient, nor is it campaign efficient. The Liberals are in a dogfight for first in every region of the country (except Alberta). They would win far more seats if the same share of the vote were more concentrated in a few regions. For instance, the “orange crush” won the NDP many seats because it was concentrated in Quebec.

    It also poses a challenge because the Liberals will have to craft a platform and build a campaign team that can campaign everywhere. In contrast, the NDP need only play for votes in BC and Quebec, the Conservatives in SK/MB, Ontario and BC. Given strict limits on election financing, that is a strategic disadvantage for the Liberals.

    I’m not saying that Trudeaumeania is a bad thing for the Liberals, only that the headline polling numbers (19 -> 35) aren’t as good as they seem.

  36. I listened to the TVO debate with the four in Toronto Center. Two came across as raving lunatics, and it seemed the Conservative strategy was to sit and let the NDP and Liberals beat each other and come up the middle. Didn’t work, and I don’t think it will work in the next general.

    • I think the Conservatives fully realize that TO Centre is not a winnable riding for them, end of story. But if the Libs and Dippers want to club each other over the head like a Flintstones boxing match, I’m sure the Conservatives are happy to watch that. Besides which, you never know when Linda McQuaig might say or propose something really entertaining, like suggesting that all rich people should be put in concentration camps.

  37. the real story is how the liberals blew a 29 point lead!!!!

    • Wow. Tell us that story. What was the turning point do you think? That the day of the election voters suddenly realized the LPC was lead by Trudeau and not Harper?

    • It’s called incompetent pollsters. Most media outlets were dismissing the poll as they reported it.

  38. I guess Jughead must have a BS machine then, eh? The kind where you only win the seats already won for you by Iggy, and this is proof of your ‘incredible night’. I will give team media credit for one thing though, at least no one claimed to have tingles going up there leg when Jughead speaks.

  39. I’m kind of hoping Inkless that you’ll do a balanced piece about what’s going on in the media over all this. Even you must have noticed all the piling on by the pundits today, embarrassed about how wrong they all were and their continued hope that by promoting Trudeau and the Libs, they’ll get a horse race they can all write about. Sadly for them, if you look at the newspaper and other media roundups across the country, the whole event caused hardly a blip outside of the Ottawa Press Gallery, its subsidiaries in TO and of course amongst the political junkies. They are all as predictable as the Pollsters are not.

  40. If only there was an actual “conservative” party to vote for in Canada.

  41. Liberals gaining vote share…lol… and going no where.