07.08.2015 02:00 PM

In which I handicap the federal race for Charles Adler

…and I even get to cite Gene Simmons of KISS as a source of wisdom! Right here.

He also says I am “one of the most interesting commentators on Earth,” with which I agree.


  1. Phil L says:

    I agree!

  2. gyor says:

    So you honestly think that the key issues for this election are going to be security and the Seperatism, instead of the failing economy, massive corruption, and the deseperate need for reform. Short of a Major successful Terror attack IN CANADA, or polls saying support for seperation is at 51% these will not be major factors in the election, because they are not what is top of mind. The Economy, Democracy, and Corruption are.

  3. Ronald O'Dowd says:


    Good interview! Now to pick a few bones: first, the Clarity Act is a flawed and ineffective legal instrument because it does not define a margin of victory in percentage terms. Fatal, my friend. Secondly, you can only get Canadians lathered up about 50% + 1 if the PQ are in power and a referendum is actually on the horizon.

    Finally, Harper will lose because it’s a matter of personal dislike and irritation with Harper. It isn’t the Harper government that’s in the sights of potential voters, it’s Harper himself. Incredibly hard to reverse that trend when most people are clearly sick of you personally.

    • Ridiculosity says:


      Well said, Mr. O’Dowd.

    • Matt says:

      Are you under the impression people liked Harper the previous 9 years?

      People have always disliked, hell outright despised Harper, yet he added more seats for the CPC every election since 2004.

      I’ve lost count how many times and how many issues and “scandals” were supposed to be “the end” for Harper.

      He’s still here.

      • Ronald O'Dowd says:


        Sorry for the tardy response. I would say and have believed since 2011 that it’s not what you’ve got that counts — rather, it’s how you use it. I thought Harper would remain relatively centrist after the government experience of 2006 and 2008. But he chose to do otherwise…which makes me think that the soft CPC support decided to peel off after the hard-right turn. In my book, a major tactical error by this Prime Minister which fostered Conservative alienation on the margins.

    • terry quinn says:

      per the SCOC:On August 20, 1998, the Supreme Court answered, concluding that Quebec cannot secede unilaterally under Canadian or international law. However, the Government of Canada would have to enter into negotiations with the Quebec government if Quebeckers expressed a clear will to secede. It confirmed that the Parliament of Canada had the power to determine whether or not a referendum question was clear enough to trigger such negotiations. The Constitution of Canada would remain in effect until terms of secession were agreed to by all parties involved, through an amendment to the Constitution, which needs the consent of the federal Parliament and every province.[1] These terms would have to respect principles of democracy; minority and individual rights as outlined in the Canadian constitution.[7]

      it does leave silent what the clear majority should be but clearly 50 plus 1 won’t meet the conditions set out. Duceppe will be labeling Mulcair a pandering wannabe because he doesn’t buy into the Sherbrooke declaration. Duceppe will be awake for this election

  4. Ron MacDonough says:

    I have to say, I don’t often agree with all of Warren’s opinions but I full heartedly agree with his assessment on Tom Mulcair and the NDP. There is way too much baggage in camp Dipper to survive the mudslinging coming there way. The Liberals and Conservatives are constantly at each others jugulars and are reasonably battle scarred to survive more attacks. The NDP is completely out of their element as a party going into this election on top of the polls and they won’t be able to reconcile their stances on Quebec and nationalists without being taken to task by the public.

    Its early July and these constant polls are as about as useful to anyone at this time as a snowblower. Wait until the writ has dropped and see what happens when cute comments are made about Greece’s economic state and how they’re situation is somehow desirable or suggesting someone can just push DELETE on a keyboard and make the Senate go away without opening the Constitution –which is opening pandoras box in itself; every little thing will be magnified and scrutinized.

    In my opinion, Canadians will realize they have two options: sticking with Harper’s version of a hyper-partisan and one-man controlled government where MP’s are increasingly irrelevant or voting in a government consisting of high calibre, strong and vibrant MP’s that can actually contribute to the process of governance and have their opinions valued. And I can assure you, on an ideological measure, Mulcair and Harper differ little to their approach to government –“you’re either with me or against me”.

    Pardon my overt partisanship.

    • Brammer says:

      –”you’re either with me or against me”… and that differs from Trudeau how? (abortion, candidate selection, etc.)

      Tom and Justin are infinitely more likable than Harper, but do you really think Trudeau is going to become a warm embracing consensus builder if he achieves power? Methinks not.

    • billg says:

      “where mp’s are increasingly irrelevant”…..seems to me PET had some nasty things to say about mp’s a long time ago, but, hey, if you would like to think this is a new thing have at it.
      The most successful governments are one man shows, so to speak, so, I’m not sure why left leaning partisans think that it hurts Mr Harper to be seen as a steely eyed Al Pacino prick because it doesn’t.
      And it also seems to me that if Mr Chretien hadn’t of had his fill of politics by the time team Martin had a head of steam you Liberals could possibly still be in power, instead, its been 12 years of “vanilla, lets discuss this with a blue ribbon committee” leadership.
      This current government is tired, its out of ideas and it lacks vision, 10 years of governing will do that.
      The question to me is, when did Liberals become so soft and unreliable that the NDP would look to be a more capable alternative to Conservatism?
      The dislike for Stephen Harper to me is strange, but, I cant help thinking how his style of leadership would win Liberals majority after majority.

  5. Fan590 says:

    Excellent chat.

    Warren and Charles really work well together. It makes for great radio.

    The only problem is it was too short. Anyone want to join me in writing in to the producers and suggest a regular Charles/Warren ‘election chat’ show each week?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.