Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Canadian Political Free-for-All -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (3186)	11/3/2003 6:06:29 PM
From: SofaSpud	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 37495

I guess I'm thinking that Albertans have proved unmarketable, so it really has to be someone from elsewhere. Ontarians are more open-minded about this stuff than Quebecers -- they'd vote for someone from the Maritimes if they had to. The bottom line, though, is that even if the parties merge they start of with a disadvantage -- the last 10 years in the wilderness. They compound the disadvantage if they elect Harper as leader, at least in the minds of those for whom an Albertan, no matter how bright, is unacceptable. And they'd be nuts to elect a nobody from Alberta like Prentice, or even the very pedigreed Lee Richardson. The 2004 election is not about winning (for anyone other than Martin). It's about the best possible showing. Regardless who the leader is, Quebec is off the radar screen, so growth comes down to Ontario. It seems to me that a credible candidate from Ontario, even with Harris/Eves baggage, is likely to do better than anyone from Alberta. Please convince me I'm wrong. This line of reasoning is not consistent with national unity. I'm just trying to balance pragmatism and cynicism.