Christian Conservative Christian "Independent"

I'm an evangelical Christian, member of the CPC, but presently & unjustly exiled to wander the political wilderness.
All opinions expressed here are solely my own.

Tuesday, October 06, 2009

Tories 41%, Liberals 28%

It stands to reason that when you're seeing number like this, you start to hear stories like this.

Please may it NOT be Ruby...

Labels: , ,


  • At Tue Oct 06, 09:47:00 a.m. EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Poor Ruby.

    When the party you're rumored to be crossing over to doesn't even want you, and when your own party is against your own bill, you know your days are numbered in this business.

    Smart move by the Tories to not make much hay of the Dhalla rumored crossing over story, which would make it ironic since the Tories were the ones who were feeding fire to the whole 'Nannygate' story.

    I guess after the Wajid Khan situation, everyone is becoming very cautious of ambitious South Asian politicians who are in it for themselves.

  • At Tue Oct 06, 09:51:00 a.m. EDT, Blogger fernstalbert said…

    Ruby Dhalla is keeping her options open - rigtht now with the Conseratives polling so high in Ontario, she is in danger of losing her seat. Why would the PM accept her as a floor-crosser? She is a liability not an asset. Besides, I'm sure there is a credible Conservative candidate in her riding who is working hard, doing the leg work and fundraising. Cheers.

  • At Tue Oct 06, 10:04:00 a.m. EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I'm not sure we'd really want Dhalla, as she brings a lot of baggage/scandal.

    And if supporting her pension bill was the price then we definitely don't want her.

  • At Tue Oct 06, 10:32:00 a.m. EDT, Anonymous Ron said…

    I think Harper is too smart to take a flake like Ruby into the Conservative caucus - he seems to be an excellent judge of character. Remember he stayed clear of Stronach and didn't seem to get along with her - the media blamed him but the reality (as we now know it) is she, also, was flake. Getting a Liberal to cross the floor would be a major coup BUT no Cabinet seat or other considerations --- if the person wants to cross for personal reasons then that is between her/him and the constituents - BUT no rewards - Liberals bought Stronach and Brisson with Cabinet seats - I didn't like it then and I won't like it now.

  • At Tue Oct 06, 11:08:00 a.m. EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    When you take into account the poor numbers for the tories in Quebec, this poll shows that they are at about 50% in the ROC!

    These defection stories have been swirling for a week now. The difference now is there is a name to one of them.

    It is also worth pointing out that Iggy has done a "shadow cabinet" shuffle and he has made Dhalla "new special advisor" for child poverty.

    Was this before or after she has said she wants out?

    What a bunch.

  • At Tue Oct 06, 11:31:00 a.m. EDT, Blogger Christian Conservative said…

    Absolutely Ron... no "enticements" whatsoever for crossing the floor. In fact, any such enticements are illegal, I think. (though I wonder how Martin got away with it...)

    If they cross the floor, it should be about serving their constituants first and foremost.

  • At Tue Oct 06, 01:02:00 p.m. EDT, Blogger maryT said…

    I think we would take Cotlier (sp) as he probably wont run again. Ruby, no way, Hedy absolutely not.

  • At Tue Oct 06, 02:40:00 p.m. EDT, Blogger Luke Coughey said…

    It is hard to believe that Iggy could have a lesser public opinion than Mr. Dion.

    If the Bloc and NDP were to form a new party, perhaps they could form an official opposition.

  • At Tue Oct 06, 07:20:00 p.m. EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Dear Ron:
    You left out David Emerson.

    Dear anyone reading:

    A few months ago, I saw a few minutes of a press conference, given by Arlen Specter, explaining why he was changing party affiliations from Republican to Democrat. I admired his honesty. If I recall correctly, he said that he did not want to become one of the many moderate Republicans who had to first face a tough and primary campaign against other more right-wing Republicans before the general election, because in such cases, those senators would spend too much money in the primary, and then lose the general election.

    It was about getting elected and staying elected. One cannot serve their constituents if they are not there (in congress/parliament).

    It helped that, over the years, his voting record had become more aligned with the Democrats than the Republicans.

    Moving back to the Canadian context, I wonder: If someone is "cabinet material" (perhaps they were in the cabinet in a previous government, or in line for a cabinet position while in opposition), is it fair/wise to deny them a cabinet position per se, if they change parties? (Assuming, of course, that they would be "cabinet material" regardless of party affiliation)? It seems one is better able to serve their constituents as a minister than as a back bencher. (Whether they do or not is another question entirely)

    I'm speaking generally, by the way. Not about Dhalla in particular.

    Here is Spector's press conference:

    My favourite part is at around 2:20-2:50

    His statement before questions is here:

    I love the youtube.



Post a Comment

<< Home