User talk:Crypticbot

I am a bot. If you wish to speak to my operator, please do so at his talk page. Editing this talk page will cause me to immediately halt. (Alternately, you could block me, but I'd really rather you tried this first.)

You of all people should know that replacing articles with blank content is harmful to wikipedia--64.12.116.133 00:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mulroney

"A better candidate could have turned it around"... mmm, don't think so. Mulroney's legacy was the creation of the BQ and the Reform Party effectively destroying the Tory base. Jean Charest might have salavged more seats (say 20 or 30) but neither he nor any of the other would-be leaders could have done much better, certainly not well enough to actually win or keep the Liberals to a minority. Perhaps that's also Mulroney's third legacy, not allowing a strong successor to develop. Jim Stewart or Garth Turner wouldn't have done all that much better than Campbell - even one of the stronger cabinet ministers who decided not to run for leader like Perrin Beatty or Barbara McDougall couldn't have won that election. Maybe if Lucien Bouchard, who Mulroney had brought into politics, had stayed in the Tory fold and become leader but even that would have been a longshot.

Parties often have a bounce from leadership conventions, John Turner's Liberals, for instance, were in the lead when the 1984 election was called but few would say that another Liberal leader would have won in 1984 though there are a few who might have done better than he did. Chretien probably would have won twice as many seats as Turner. Even Trudeau, at the height of his unpopularity in 1984 (though still more popular than Mulroney would be in 1993) could have perhaps even won 100 seats. Homey 00:40, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]