March 23, 2009


#50 Irony

This is from a recent post from the blog "we move to canada" (a.k.a. expert-level white people) calling for George W. Bush to be indicted for "war crimes." Emphasis mine:
I've been reluctant to post this, but I need to get past my cynicism, and follow my own advice. Don't weigh the odds of positive outcome before taking action, because you don't know what the future holds. Just take action. Change starts with a movement, and all movements start with a dream.

Wasn't that also Bush's philosophy? :)

(I tried pointing this out in the comments section of the blog, but apparently it didn't pass moderation.)

Labels: , ,

December 08, 2008


So, about that 62% majority...

Will they be changing their name to the "49% minority?"

(h/t SDA)

Labels: , ,

March 07, 2008


Put your motion where your mouth is

Well, the Liberals sure are going after the Conservatives on the Chuck Cadman controversy. Unfortunately for them, they missed their chance to vote down the government over the budget...

But wait, they've got an opposition day coming up! They can use it to bring down the government! After all, if their claims about Cadman are true, it would definitely help them in the resulting election campaign.

So, how much do Stephane Dion and the Liberals believe their own claims about Conservative bribery?


(h/t: Paul Wells)

Labels: , ,

April 12, 2007


Elizabeth May decides to prop up Dion... not running a Green Party candidate against him.

Labels: , ,

November 30, 2006


The Liberals should remain leaderless

(I wrote most of this post a couple weeks ago, and figured I'd better post it before the convention is over and done with...)

A fun exerpt from the SES poll results on how the different candidates would affect votes
A victory by Michael Ignatieff would make me:
...more likely to vote Liberal: 16%
...less likely to vote Liberal: 20%

A victory by Bob Rae would make me:
...more likely to vote Liberal: 20%
...less likely to vote Liberal: 24%

A victory by Stephane Dion would make me:
...more likely to vote Liberal: 14%
...less likely to vote Liberal: 23%

A victory by Gerard Kennedy would make me:
...more likely to vote Liberal: 12%
...less likely to vote Liberal: 21%
Note that every candidate has a higher negative effect than his positive one. Therefore, the obvious conclusion is that the Liberal Party will be better off if they never choose a leader at all. :)

Seriously though, this is a good example of how an leadership race tends to boost a party's poll numbers above what any individual candidate could receive. The supporters of each party each believe their guy can/will win, so their support for the party overall is firm. After a winner is declared, however, many supporters of the losing candidates are likely to leave. For example, a win by Ignatieff would drive the most left-wing Liberals to the NDP, while a Rae victory would drive away... well, pretty much anyone who set foot in Ontario between 1990 and 1995.

The artificial boost from having multiple potential leaders, combined with the extra media attention from the race and upcoming convention, have boosted the Liberals' poll numbers over the past few months. Once the reality of leading the Opposition sets in, I suspect those support levels will drop.

Labels: ,

December 01, 2005


More good news for the Conservatives

Kim Campbell has predicted that they'll lose.

Labels: ,

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?