The Conservative "Target"

The Conservatives like giving out baseless targets when it comes to almost anything. They like to tell us things like the budget will be balanced by 2015 even though the PMO budget office says that it ain't going to happen. Then put on top of that billions more to corporate tax cuts and billions more in prison spending. When it comes to the environment the Conservatives make there baseless targets a joke. In 2006 they had one target that wasn't even close to Kyoto or anything else that countries were committing, then he changed that target and made it worse. And then changed it again and made it even worse. The sad fact is that the Conservatives under there current policy will not reach there lousy target and of course must reduce there target again. Now our Conservative government is setting out a target that by 2020 90% of Canadian electricity will come from non polluting resources. Environment Canada says that they won't even reach that target by 2030.  Can't wait to see how they are going to blame the Liberals on this one. Another one of there baseless target is that they will phase out coal plants in 45 years. Germany is phasing them out in the next decade, and they have less renewable spaces then us and more people. We our like the lazy child in school who continues to do nothing while everyone else does something.

Environmental groups said at a press conference Thursday the proposed regulations are too "weak" and will do very little to move Canada towards its greenhouse gas emissions targets.

 "The government has committed to having 90 per cent of electricity from non-emitting sources by 2020. But Environment Canada shows the government won't reach that even by 2030 with these regulations," said Dale Marshall from the David Suzuki Foundation.

 Bennett says the vast majority of comments urge the government to completely phase out coal fired plants in Canada within the next 15 years. The proposed regulations say that coal plants won't be phased out for another 45 years.

Historic change for Quebec.

Since confederation Quebec has always held it's fair share if not even more political power in the house of commons. Now for the first time in history Quebec will have fewer seats in the house of commons. The Conservatives go figure are abandoning there promise to give the province equal representation. Now I can't say that this isn't fair considering Alberta, BC and Ontario will be much more underrepresented then Quebec will, but it still shows that our parliament isn't following since confederation Rep by Pop. For Quebec this will be new to have less political power. Now will this effect the Quebec vote? Well considering only hard core separatist are going to be fighting very hard against this, while more NDP Quebers will be somewhat furriest I think it will be a win for both of them, but mostly for the Bloc. Since the Bloc need some fire I think this one is it at least for the next month if not a part of a Bloc platform in time for the next election. The NDP might scream and rant, but in all they will probably put this issue in a few weeks in the back of there heads. So it's somewhat of a moral booster, but for the Bloc this might be the fuel they are going to try and run on for some time.

Conservative Champions of Wasting Time

Heckling has returned to the House of Commons with a bang. Once again, politicians of all parties engage in this enormously hilarious act! According to Liberal MP Rodger Cuzner, Deepak Obhrai said Mr. Speaker six times in a 30 second period. This allows him to use up his allotted time so he doesn't say anything important. But, it's also quite funny to watch.

It's horrible. Absolutely horrible for transparency and responsibility to the people and Parliament. Yet, this goes back years and years, deep into Canadian history. While it would be great if MPs were nice to each other, this would require a culture change and it simply will not happen. So, sit down and enjoy the wonderful back-and-forth of the House of Commons.Deepak 

Obhrai is one of the worst offenders, according to the opposition. 

Frustrated MPs say the parliamentary secretary to the Foreign Affairs Minister throws in a few “Mr. Speakers” and other set phrases to eat up his allotted 35-second answers to purposely avoid saying anything substantial in Question Period.

Read more at the Globe and Mail.

What Waste!

The Conservatives are planning to eliminate the long gun registry very soon. ironic enough the public safety minister Vic Toews is saying that he is proud his government is eliminating the long gun registry. It's ironic that the minister that is suppose to try and keep people safe is saying he is proud to abolish a program that has been proven to save lives. Police say that the registry is effective, but still our public safety minister isn't listening to the people that keep us safe. The most silly part is these statements.

"That waste is finally coming to an end,"


"The long-gun registry is not gun control, and because of that it is an ineffective and a waste of taxpayers hard-earned dollars,"


the First quote is by our public safety minister who saying that it's a waste to the long gun registry. But apparently not a waste to blow billions more dollars on noncompetitive fighter jets purchases.the second is done by another Tory MP. The silly part of this quote is the end, because a part of the bill will not only scrap the long gun registry , but will abolish all records. That is a waste. They could have simply eliminated the registry and kept the files. What is the point of eliminating the files. The reason is, because this government is going to waste the millions of dollars and time that it took to make those records over the years into the gunners, and of course making the job of cleaning the Tory mess harder. Don't you just love there policies!


This government is really getting on my nerves with fiances. It continues to babel over a few million in spending every year and calling it fiscal responsibility, and doesn't even mention the billions it's wasting on fighter jets, prisons and corporate tax giveaways.  

read more here

Why do the Habs Suck?

Why are the Habs losing? It seems just like yesterday when they nearly beat the Bruins in seven. Yet the answer goes back before that. Before, the Canadiens were losing horribly, shut out of three games in a row before scoring. Their passes were not working, battles were being lost and they simply could not score. They seemed uncoordinated and out of sync. I feel that the problem wasn't completely solved back then and it is not now either. To win, they must get together and play as a team. We'll see if that happens tonight against the Maple Leafs.

9-9-9 plan means MORE TAXES!

A new study shows what the 9-9-9 plan actually does. This study shows who will benefit and who will not benefit in this tax plan. Under the current policy there is no sales tax. Under this plan there will be a 9% G.S.T , but supposedly the extra tax will be off set by creating a flat 9% income tax. Under this plan there will be a 9% sales tax on everything people buy. Under this study the average tax payment per person in the U.S will be 1,200 dollars lower. So is this plan really going to reduce tax payments to people. Yes some will benefit . So who are they? They are the rich go figure. As I stated just a few days ago, people who are rich will benefit and middle income and poor will not. So people who make more than 1 million a year in income will have there tax burden reduced by 581,000 dollars. People who make between half a million to a million will pay 80,000 dollars less every year. the next two tax brackets will have there taxes reduced two, But every single person making less than 100 k will have to pay more in taxes so that the rich in the country pay over half a million dollars less in taxes. In fact the federal tax rate on the people making more than a million dollars in income would be the lowest tax rate of any other bracket. While the people in the lowest tax bracket will have not only above average tax rates, but will also be the people having there tax rate increase by the most. Under this plan about 82% of Americans will pay more in taxes to give the top 18% a tax brake. But in reality the top 5% will get the most of the money from middle income and poor Americans. So yes the Rich pay less while the poor pay more and the middle class pay more. And by the way this plan will increase the deficit by 300 billion in one year.

So in summery taxing consumers to hurt the economy more, so that rich CEO's pay less money and have more in the bank. Will defiantly solve the economic problems of the U.S. This plan isn't going to help anybody except the rich and even them are going to have long term problems, because the rich need the poor to survive.

If you need some thing more visual click on this graph

A Rich Tax!

The U.S needs to look at ways to reduce the deficit without harming many Americans . An easy way is to tax the rich! Eliminating the Bush Tax cuts of the rich and putting a new 5.6% surcharge on millionaires will bring in a lot of revenue without big economic damages. Now the U.S is going to have to balance the budget by having to make tough decisions. Cutting around the edges in spending and taxing the rich more is a good start, but won't solve the U.S fiscal crisis. But we shouldn't completely disregard these simple ideas that do the less damage. In Canada we should also look at increasing taxes on the rich in order to try and make our fiscal house in order. In Canada we should implement a U.S style death where when people die they pay a 35% tax on there estate on everything over the value of 5 million, but a U.S style system of a death tax has so many lousy deductions that some rich people who would only be effected on this would pay little to nothing. It could bring in about 3 billion dollars in Canada and hurt no one to be quite honest. When countries look at balancing budget's they should start with the easy taxes on the rich. It barely effects the economy and brings in a lot of revenue. Granted never enough to fully solve the problem, but it does help the fiscal situation. Unfortunately the Republicans down south would rather see medicare destroyed then have the rich pay a single penny. The U.S  needs to increase taxes first on the rich and go from there, but the Republicans want the pain should start on the poor and should never dare to go up to the rich, because they create jobs, while poor people don't. Even though poor people are a bigger chunk of the population and create more jobs because they spend there money while Rich people don't spend there money, and are a very small part of the population.

Harper support unequal provinces.

Because Harper promised that Qubec's will not be under represented in the house of commons other provinces are going to suffer. Ontario instead of getting 18 new seats will only get 13 seats. Meaning that Ontario will have in total 119 seats, but that is less than the 124 it was going to get. BC and Alberta will still get the same seats they were expected to get. Interesting why Does Harper still give the same amount of seats to Alberta and BC, but not Ontario. Well if you do the math any new Alberta seat are going to be tory strongholds, and in BC the Conservatives have a good chance of winning new seats there. While in Ontario Harper might suspect that over the long run new Alberta and BC seats are going to have a good chance going blue while new Ontario seats (a bunch in Toronto) might not be so prone in the future to vote Conservative. Which is why Ontario is going to be hit in a new revised deal. In fact with these new seats Ontario will be the most underrepresented province in Canada. BC and Alberta would be almost completely represented for the time being and Quebec would practically be dead on.

So while Qubecers get fair representation Ontario, and in the long run still BC and Alberta will be under represented. How is that Fair? Harper isn't trying to make the provinces completely fair. I understand it's very had to open the constitutions and take away seats from smaller provinces, but the fact is why promise Quebec to have fair representation and Make Ontario pay for it. It isn't fair. I am a quebecer and I say it is un fair that we get o be properly represented and Ontario doesn't.

Put a Train on the Champlain

The Harper government has promised to rebuild the Champlain Bridge of Montreal which is a very good move. The infrastructure of Montreal falling apart and that bridge is necessary to the transportation needs of the city. But, when infrastructure must be rebuilt, it gives us a golden opportunity to build it smartly and sustainably.

The new Champlain bridge will have a reserved lane for public transit, it just hasn't been decided what mode. Quebec is studying putting a train on the Champlain bridge. This would be a good idea, to have LRT that can run on the surface downtown and have priority on the bridge. LRT has much more capacity than buses and is a much more attractive option than buses. The Champlain bridge is an example of how to implement the tram-train in Montreal.

MONTREAL - Quebec is working on a plan to put a train on the new Champlain Bridge, part of a 13-kilometre transit system that would link Longueuil and downtown Montreal. 

But it’s unclear who would foot the bill – hundreds of millions of dollars – or even if the train will ever be built

Read more at the Gazette.

Build HSR Now!

The newest study on high speed rail dating from an ancient January has been released. The findings are no surprise. Just like the other four studies done over the years this one supports building high speed rail along the Quebec City-Windsor corridor. We have the technology, Bombardier is a Canadian company and nothing is stopping us but politicians in Ottawa. We should build it and now.

QUEBEC — A study into the feasibility of a high-speed train link in the Windsor-Quebec City corridor shows the project could benefit the entire Canadian economy. 

The report conducted by the EcoTrain consortium — grouping Dessau, MMM Group, KPMG, Wilbur Smith & Associates, and Deutsche Bahn International — was released Monday by High Speed Rail Canada, an advocacy group which promotes the service.

Read more: http://www.canada.com/business/Study+says+high+speed+train+could+benefit+Canadian+economy/5561938/story.html#ixzz1b5tTyASx

Would a Tea Party President Help the democrats?

Now some would go off and think the question doesn't make sense, but think about it. If the Tea Party was in charge what would happen. Well the President would waver Obamacare which would rally the Democratic base. The Republicans president would veto any bill that has more spending. Which means that since we know cutting spending and decreasing taxes on the rich which they (Republican candidates) are all prepared to do doesn't really help the economy. Especially there plan for Medicare that will bring no support from the older voters. Cuts to the environment would get the environmentalist fired up, and cuts into education and making it less government funded as well with lower assistance for people wanting to go to university would get the youth more angry at the Republicans. What I am saying is maybe dating the bad terrible boy friend just once enough to make us swear him off forever?

Time heals many wounds just look at the 2008 results who would have known the Republicans would rebound so quickly. The only problem is that they would create a big mess even worse than Bush. The only path the U.S should take in 2012 is Democratic, because allowing the Republicans to win so the Dems could re grab everything in 4 years won't solve the problems that will happen in 4 years of Tea party rule. What I am trying to say is anyone in the U.S thinking of not voting or voting Republican so they can mess up things so America will swear them off forever. It won't work. Or anyone thinking that if the Republicans get in office the Dems over a two midterm and a general election get the House, Senate and white house with very strong majorities so they can pass what they wanted to pass is also wrong. Let's not be fooled by the bad boyfriend that he is are only option. Obama although nowhere near perfect is the best out of the worse for now at least.

Cains 9-9-9 plan

I decided to refute Cains 9-9-9 plan considering he is apparently now a rising star. Mr Cain has been screaming about 9-9-9 for quite some time , but is it really going to do what he says it does. First let's see the logic behind it. Cain would reduce the Corporate tax rate from 50% to 9%. That's a 41% decrease mostly for multinationals who don't even pay the 50%, because of loopholes, but it will reduce revenue from the Business section. Then he will create a flat Income tax. Meaning everyone pays the same tax no matter how rich or how poor. The income tax bracket is 9%. Biggest winners here will be the Rich who only pay 35% will now get a 26% decrease in taxes while the poor who pay 15% will have a 6%. That sounds fair right! So how will he pay for the loads of cash he is giving to already extremely profitable business, and reduce the tax rates of the rich to the lowest it has ever been. Well Cain suggest a G.S.T will do the fix. A 9% G.S.T! So who will that hurt. Well people who buy things! Consumers the one's that drive the economy. The G.S.T tends to attacks the poor and middle class. The economic policy means. That the middle class pay more in taxes while the rich pay less. So the consumers have less money and the poor have more. Yep that will fix the inequality in pay. The top 500 earners in the U.S make more money then the bottom 50%.Think of it even though the income tax is being reduced the G.S.T is being created and taking any money the middle class would get and take even more. The Rich would pay much less in taxes and the G.S.T would only take some profits away. Cain even admitted that the 9-9-9 plan would make difficulties for people.

 "Some people will pay more. But most people will pay less," 


he has that a bit backwards. The top 10% will pay less while the bottom 90% will pay more. The sad part about it is, because of all the money this plan will give to the rich. this plan will actually reduce revenue by 200 billion. How is that going to solve the deficit. How is not taxing the rich going to help reduce the deficit? How is taxing consumers and increasing the deficit going to solve the problem in America.

Quebec to be Represented in Parliament?

Representation by Population Brown's idea way back to even before confederation. In Canada we are not quite there at total representation. In Canada some Provinces are massively over represented while others aren't. Harper is going to give 30 new seats to the fastest growing provinces of Canada to make things more fair. The only problem is what will happen to the representation of the other provinces. Well Ontario, Alberta and BC will go up. While all the other provinces will go down. meaning that the Atlantic used to hold about 10% of the seats and about 7% of the population. With now 30 new seats the Atlantic will hold about 9.5% of the seats. Still over represented! The parries will also have less influence. They have about 9% of the seats and have 6.7% of the population with this new deal they will have about 8% of the seats. Again over represented!
What about Quebec though? Well under this deal we would get 22.2% of the seats and have 23% of the population. Harper might though give La belle province a few seats like he promised in his platform.

So Is Ontario, BC and Alberta really getting a good deal here? Ontario will have 18 more seats giving it 124 seats now. Ontario holds about 38.5% of the population and would get under this new deal 36.7% of the seats. BC holds about 13% of the population and under this deal it would get 13.0% of the seats.  In Alberta they have 10.4% of the population and would get 9.8% of the seats . Alberta, Ontario would still be under represented under this deal and if Quebec got more seats so would BC. So is this deal really helping out the provinces be more represented not even close! It is a little repair, but the way the demographics are going Alberta, BC and Ontario are going to need more soon. Our system isn't completely Rep by Pop and I don't think Quebec should get more seats if Alberta and Ontario and even BC are going to suffer for it.

Rick Mercer Thank You

Rick Mercer has outdone himself now. He ranted about the money the Finance minister is spending to try and cut government spending. 20 million dollars to find out how to cut spending. 90,000 dollars a day!

Rick Mercer is right Martin balanced a 43 billion dollar structural deficit in 4 years. Harper has taken the 13 billion Martin left him and brought us into deficit even before the recession. Better than giving Martin a call like Rick suggested. Why don't we kick out Harper and get back to the fiscal responsibility of the Liberal party.

What Cuts?

The Conservatives are planning to find 4 billion in permanent cuts to try and balance the budget. The Only problem is do we see these cuts in the deficit? No the way this government works with finances the deficit isn't going to get better. First the Corporate tax cuts that they are reducing again is going to cost billions more than 4 billion. Add that with the Billions the Harper government is giving Quebec (even though we really need a bridge) this government isn't at all fiscally responsible for cutting spending. Because like the Republicans in the U.S yes cuts do help cutting the deficit, but the right is fixated on cutting taxes and assume that it is free. If you cut 1$ in taxes and cut 1$ in spending guess what the deficit ain't changing. What would have been fiscally responsible of the Conservatives would be to cut more than they reduce in corporate taxes and maybe not cut corporate taxes! considering they are already low enough. We can save 10 billion in catastrophe spendign not passing Harper's stupid "on crime bill." The Conservatives are bad with money and they always disproportionally put the deficit on the poor. 4 years from now the Conservatives will be saying the reason there is a deficit is, because of too much money on social programs. Even though this government is cutting social programs left and right, and will be for the next 4 years. If this is all Harper has planned to balance the budget there will be a deficit in 4 years and it will be, because of reckless spending on useless prisons, fighter jets and Corporate tax cuts. So the question I have for Harper is what cuts are you really making to the deficit?

Sarah Palin Not Running!

What a week in politics. I have to say with the provincial elections and the 5 billion dollar Champlain deal it seems wired talking about U.S politics again. But yes Palin isn't running for president. With months and years of speculation you almost thought for sure she is running, but it seems the rogue governor is beholding to no one. She makes her own decisions all the time. It will be interesting now 10% of the people in the polls still said they would vote for her if they could, But what does this mean? Well Bachman might get a leg up, but the way her campaign is going she if she doesn't get some good weeks she will lose bad. For now at least it seems it's going to be Romney vs. Perry. Bachman is going to really need to catch the Palin vote to get a good chance to win. So now it seems we have the make up for our Republican nomination. All the contenders that we thought would run aren't and the one's that are seem like they're sticking. So Chirstie (the man Republicans are so in love with still want him to run even though he has done everything to say no except buying a posters on every highway saying "I am not running") is out, Palin is out. No more big speculations are left the race for the Republican nomination is on!

It will also be interesting watching who Palin or Chirstie will endorse, and how long it will take. One thing I think will happen is 1 year from now Christie will be speculated to be #1 for the VP spot no matter who wins in this current field with maybe the exception of Ron Paul.

Who Won in Ontario?

Last night was exciting to watch! The Liberals were up and down the majority level for hours, but it turned out that the Liberals have no majority status anymore in Queens park. So who won Ontario well the Liberals did win a minority government, and I think considering that they won the province that was just a month ago prepared to kick out the Liberals and create a new PC majority government I think the Liberals did great in this campaign. The PC grabbed 12 seats and did better than expected in the vote count so they are winners only because they managed to keep Mcguinty out of a majority, but considering PC were unable to win against the Liberals who were polling really low just a month ago I think this isn't that much of a win. The NDP had a bit of a disappointing night. They grabbed 7 more seats and 7% more votes than last time. They were expected to get in the mid 20's on votes, but even more importantly they were expected to more than double there seat count from 2007 (7).

So to recap
Winners (with a grain of salt)
Liberals: for regaining a third term in power with a strong Minority
PC: for grabbing a good amount of seats and putting the Liberals in majority, but not able to get there on governments like the governments polls said they would.
NDP: grabbing more seats and now having the most seats they have has in decades, but not able to break Ontario the way they were expected to early in the campaign and the day before the end. 

But I think that this has been a relatively good week for the Liberals. Winning another majority government in PEI and another strong government in Ontario. We had  a disappointing show in Manitoba, but all in all you can't complain much for all the great wins we had this week. And just one more thing a Liberal majority in Ontario is just one by-election away!

Ontario Has a choice

Ontario on October 6th has a choice they can vote for Hudack who will hurt health care in the province. Hudack will be a sell out to Harper in 2014 on the health accord. Hudack would cancel corporation deals that are going to create thousands of jobs. Hudack would eliminate the Green energy policies that would create more clean energy for Ontario. The Liberal party of Ontario has done good choices for Ontario. They simplified the tax code by creating the HST, and over ten years the HST will create 591,000 jobs. The Liberal party is on the right track to making the energy grid of the province more green. David Suzuki even supports his green plan. The Liberal party of Ontario won't sell out to Harper in 2014. The Liberal party of Ontario has done a good job creating jobs in the province. This year Ontario created more jobs then the rest of Canada combined. The Liberal party is going to reduce tuition by 30%. What have the NDP proposed? they are like the Republicans of the U.S always voting no, and just waiting for power. The NDP voted against the stimulus that has created many jobs in Ontario. The NDP you would think support Green jobs, but they are going to cut Green jobs. David Suzuki says her plan is more about getting political power than doing what's right. On October 6th Ontario has a choice. They can go with the Job killing agenda of Hudack,the Job killing agenda of Horwath or the Job creating record of Dalton Mcguinty. Ontario can go with Hudack's non priced budget or the fiscal responsibility Mcguinty is proposing of eliminating the deficit. Ontario can chose the NDP and PC terrible plan for the environment, or we can go with the plan David Suzuki calls "An example to the rest of the world." Ontario has a choice and the polls show they might chose what is the best for the province.

Canada #1

Canada was proclaimed #1 place for business in the world by Forbes. It mentions how Canada has faced the recession very well compared to the U.S and Europe. This of course thanks to the regulations the Liberals put on companies to make sure they would be solid in a worse case scenario. The magazine also mentions the HST which simplifies the tax code and takes taxes off manufacturing. Unfortunately B.C took it back. It didn't just look at taxes on business it looked at

11 areas in 134 countries, including property rights, innovation, taxes, tech, corruption, personal, trade and monetary freedoms, red tape, investor protection and the performance of stocks.

So as you can see the Corporate tax cuts weren't the only reasons Canada became number one. So it seems considering Canada is #1 place for business it only makes sense that we start looking to improve other things in our country.  So continuing to cut Corporate taxes is silly considering there are many other things to do with that money. Our Country has an enormous lead when it comes to taxes compared to are trading partners. So if we increase the Corporate taxes to balance the budget it seems it will have little effect on our rating. As it seems we are already number one. I think balancing the budget can help business in the long run, because cutting Corporate taxes that we can't afford to cut will only mean higher taxes on people or Companies later on which will effect business. In order for Canada to ensure the business community that there taxes don't go up we must cut taxes that we know we can afford. The Liberal party proved this as it cut the Corporate tax rate from one of the highest in the world to now one of the most competitive in North America and the G8. The Corporate tax rate needs to go back to 18% so we can balance the budget then after we have a surplus like the Liberals we will cut the Corporate taxes. Cutting them now gives business false hope.

Read more here

Harper Thanks!

I definitely am no Conservatives, but I give credit where credit is due. Stephen Harper and the Conservative party is definitely not the best for the country, but thanks to Harper the Conservatives will tomorrow announce that they will put a plan to replace the aging bridge. It will cost about 1 billion to rebuild a new bridge. I and the Mayor and most Montrealers think this is overdue. We need a new bridge and we need it now. The money that went to try and repair the Champlain bridge was pointless. So I won't say this very often, but thank you Harper for something Montreal really needs.

Who Won PEI?

Yesterday PEI had an election where they re-elected the Liberal government. The Liberals got 22 and the PC got 5 seats. No some would claim that since the PC won more seats they did relatively well in the election. The fact of the matter is that the PC lost 2 seats in there traditional stronghold of rural PEI. They gained 3 seats. One by a landslide and 2 by 30 votes each. If there were recounts in these riding the Liberal could pick up two more seats and get 24-3. Therefor the PC have 1 less riding then they had in 2007. Even if the Liberals grab no extra seats the fact that the only gains the PC made were won by just a few 10 votes is sad. .This proves that these riding can easily change sides within the day. Also consider that the PC got less votes this time than last time around again proves they really didn't win any more support. The PC I think lost this election, but they did to be fair do somewhat better than expected not being completely swiped out of the province. The Liberals are the clear winners I believe. In a re-election where governing parties as we now politically have a harder time getting elected the Liberal lost one seat and 1.5%. Not bad.  I consider that a win. The Greens and NDP both picked up some more support in this election. The Greens still a proving to get more votes than the NDP.

to recap
Winners in this election: Liberals for getting another solid majority
Losers: PC for barely growing in this election
Small victories: Green for gaining 1% more in the province and for still placing 3rd in the vote count , and the NDP for gaining 1% also like the Greens

Elections almost here!

Today is October 3rd and the first big test's for all the political parties on the provincial stage. First up is today in PEI. It seems that the Liberals will grab this province, but the question is will they be able to fully eliminate the Conservatives out of office. The Conservatives only need one seat in the province to be considered an official party, another test will be is the Green's in the province can grow there numbers, and if the NDP can get more votes than the Greens in the province. In 2007 the Greens got 3% and the NDP got 2%.Also today is the territorial election in NWT, but there is no provincial Liberals, Conservatives or NDP in the province. So hard to read anything from that election about federal politics, but I will still be watching it.

 On October 4th the day after those two elections Manitoba will be having it's election. It seems that it could be tied in votes. The last to polls had both NDP and PC very close to each other, but that doesn't seem to matter , because it seems that the NDP are going to get a majority government either way. I say the test here for the NDP isn't to win a majority government which it looks like it's going to get, but whether it can still get more votes province wide than the PC. For us I say are test is to try and get the same support if not grow from last election and keep the current seats we have. It doesn't seem we have much to gain here. If the Greens get the 4% they are polled it will be a win for them considering last time they got 1%.

Then it's the big prize of Ontario. The test for the Liberals is to maintain a majority government. Right now they are polling quite even with the PC, but in seats the projections have the Liberals at the border of a majority. The PC test will be if they can get more votes than the Liberals, and more importantly if they can put the Liberals down to a minority, but it won't matter I don't think the NDP will prop Hudack. The NDP there big test is today. in no other election are they going to make more gains. Last time they got 10 seats right now if they can get the 25% of the vote like they gor in the federal election just some month ago they will prove that there power hasn't diminished quite yet.

It seems the Tories aren't going to win anything. In PEI it looks like they will be swept away. In Manitoba they might get the exact same as the last time around. In Ontario what seemed to be a slam duck for them is now a big major upset by the Liberals. It seems all the incumbents will get another chance at the bat.