Mark H.

The more I read about this deal, the more it fits with rural ridings being strong CPC supporters. Harpers already upset some of his support base by taking away the wheat board's monopoly. Whether or not the pay out for dairy farmers is warranted (the wheat board issue is debatable) the CPC simply could not afford to upset their support base again.

NDP vote splitting helped the CPC last time - no such luck this time

Yes, I'm not sure why compensation is required at this point. Mind you, farmers make up a good chunk of Harper's support base, with most rural ridings being a Conservative slam dunk. That's just my own theory though.

Supply management is great for those farmers that have quotas. Not everyone paid for them - most were inherited when the system was put into place. The concerns raised here are all valid. It's just a matter of time till supply management is gone. To the majority that inherited their quota, this shouldn't matter. But there is a growing number of producers who have purchased quota over the years, spending millions of dollars. Those people should be compensated, but will they?

What happened to NDP? Mulcair saying he'd block that trade deal really helped their cause. /sarcasm Most unionized industries are heavily dependant on exports. What on earth was he thinking?

While they are not directly connected, they both came about the same way. Conservatives are racists and hate muslims. Here is your proof. I never said that, nor would I ever. But the hijab issue is a despicable thing to raise as an election wedge issue.

The hijab issue is not necessarily connected to the refugee issue. The hijab issue should not even be an issue - people are identified before they swear the citizenship oath.

If nothing else, it's going to be the most interesting election we've had in years

Best step away from the Mike's Hard, son.

It's not an unheard of political strategy, but to do it based on that particular issue is despicable.

You keep quoting the phrase 'vast majority of Canadians.' Some links to support that would be good.

I dare say there's more relevance here than you'll find in most of the leaders' debates.

Okay, so let's say one views the niqab as a symbol of oppression. If they allow it, the concern would be that judges might also allow some people to beat their wives - or some other extreme action. That's where the reasonable limits clause applies. A niqab is reasonable, obviously beatings are not, regardless of what anyone's personal beliefs are.

What pisses me off is Harper will spend millions of tax-payers money fighting this in the courts. It's a non-issue, so stop wasting my frickin' money!!! No problem - he can just take some of the 15 billion from the Saudi arms deal. But never mind all that, we're still protected from terrorism and Comrade Harper is always right. The fact that this is an election issue that is actually shifting the polls is disturbing to say the least.

Since when do a few polls represent the vast majority of Canadians?

Oh it's silly all right - but somehow its been spun into an election issue. Two women. And all the have to do is swear the oath to a female official. Why is this even news?

We farm, here's my take on the wheat board: 1. It handled only spring wheat and little bit of malting barley. All other crops were marketed without the aid of a board. Canola, winter wheat, oats, beans et al 2. The board existed only in the prairie provinces, all other farmers were exempt from the act. 3. Australia had removed their wheat board with very few Ill effects 4. The wheat board didn't actually own any infrastructure. Because they had a monopoly, they didn't have to; no one else could touch spring wheat. 5. Farmers with some entrepreneurial spirit (eg. a flour mill) had to sell their wheat to the board and then buy it back. The wheat never actually left their farm.

Sold the wheat board? The wheat board never even had any infrastructure

Where does one find parlour coffee?

This morning I heard the president of the CBC say they provide fair and unbiased election coverage. Just to be clear, my vote is undecided at this point. But I must have been in a different universe when said coverage occurred

After the Civic election i dont quite trust polls as much. Well the polls thus far have said it's pretty much a 3 way tie so anything can happen. I'd trust that to be honest. Chances are between now and election day there is going to be one thing that is the tipping point giving a party the win. The 2011 majority was not predicted by the polls

There is plenty of blame to be placed on both sides. To say that Israel is either the 'good guy' or the 'bad guy' is over-simplifying the situation.

Rebel blogger eh - I could think of some 'choicer' adjectives. The refugee crisis is a side show? Maybe the rebel blogger should move there - and then decide. Harper will reduce the size of government? In which universe? We've been hearing that promise since '06 - it hasn't happened. The best Harper will do is win a minority. That's clear - and the reasons are well founded.

Like, Denmark scored a TD on a hitch last year. Like you know, it's bound to work again some day, really,

Capital Punishment does not save money. Evidence proves, absolutely certain, if there are one or two mistakes along the way - those things don't fit together, you can't have it both ways.