Sarah: Hi Pauline, Nik,

What to talk about first? There are so many angles to play with here, the contrasts in the campaigns are beginning to show.

Both the NDP and the Liberals have come out with some bold proposals, from pharmaceutical subsidies to post-secondary debt relief and childcare. All of which will most definitely cost a pretty penny.

The Conservatives’ response? Take aim at fun-flavoured tobacco products and offer first-time homebuyers a tax credit of $750. I live in Vancouver, the average house here costs $700,000! I'd much rather see money put into creating affordable housing that includes co-ops — not just social housing. But alas, there's no money for real change.

The tax issue has become so huge for Canadians that we seem to be forgetting what they could potentially be paying for. When I consider that the average cost for daycare in B.C. is around $700 a month and the Universal Child Tax Credit is a mere $100, I scratch my head at those who think the Conservatives are helping the average Canadian.

Pauline: I think that it's certainly true that for a number of years now, parties on the so-called right of the spectrum have successfully framed the conversation around tax cuts. But I wonder whether that conversation is about to shift.

If the meltdown of global financial markets continues, many people will be very worried about losing their life savings. They will be worried about the value of their houses, their jobs and their children's future. Right now, there is a strong perception that Stephen Harper's decisiveness is an advantage in times of uncertainty, and clearly, discomfort with Stéphane Dion's ability to take charge. But Harper's advantage could be a double-edged sword, if his policies are too closely associated with the Bush administration's ideology, style and mishandling of the U.S. economy.

In times of such great uncertainty, people look to their governments for regulatory protection. In the middle of a global financial meltdown, will it look wise to have scrapped most of Canada's surplus and government's relatively painless capacity to raise that money through GST receipts? Is it possible that relatively narrow constituencies with which the Harper government has had very adversarial relationships — or who have simply been ignored — might prove to be more influential than this very clever electoral team has calculated? Will the opposition parties, and the Liberals in particular, be able to capitalize on this opportunity?

That's what will be very interesting to watch over the next three weeks or so — and the high number of "soft" voters that you have identified in your polling, Nik, adds to the potential volatility of the mix despite the relatively steady numbers for the Conservatives.

Nik: Maybe we are just in a natural cycle, so to speak, for an election campaign. I find that at the beginning of an election, many campaigns undertake low-risk initiatives because they are operationally ramping up and do not want to make a mistake. This is certainly the case for the Conservatives. It seems they are quite focused and tactically looking to move from day to day without making a mistake and getting their message out.

Pauline, your comment about the global financial meltdown could lead to a bigger, vision-type clash of ideas between the parties on the role of government. If this big vision debate unfolded, it would be interesting. I expect there would be very different views from the parties on a full range of issues. The Harper vision seems to be driven by an overall view of less government — hence, self-oversight by industry of food inspections and not having the government active on issues like healthcare, which is a provincial responsibility. The NDP are a clear counterpoint to the laissez-faire government model while the Liberals try to straddle both worlds.

A debate on the role and responsibility of the federal government and the future of Canada would likely yield a more feisty and content-oriented election that would seem important and relevant to Canadians. Answers to this big question would likely engage voters on a series of issues: what is the role of government in job creation, food safety, the environment, healthcare, encouraging innovation and research and development.

Pauline: As a general rule of thumb, I assume that campaigns do not necessarily turn out as expected. This is true when you look at the popular wisdom going in compared to the actual election outcome. I find that how a leader responds to the unexpected is more telling than the planned activities and strategies of a campaign.

Sarah: Well the listeria outbreak could very well turn out to be a Walkerton in this election, particularly given Ritz's captured comments. Seventeen people dead is a serious indication of the dangers of deregulation. I've been wondering why the opposition parties didn't exit the gates with this issue. But perhaps it's too late.

With the NDP and Greens gaining in the polls, it's clear there are some large ideological divides in Canada. But Dion needs help in this campaign. He seems so desperate to defend himself that he's unable to go on the attack. When he became leader of the Liberal party he played up his team, but aside from a brief appearance from Bob Rae we haven't seen the team at play. Ignatieff is supposed to be with Dion today and I hope he has his gloves off, because the Liberals need to start scrapping.

Nik: The inappropriate comments by Ritz on listeria are not helpful to the
Conservatives and run counter to their strategy of appealing to female voters who may be concerned with the overall tone of the Harper government.

Pauline: Scrappiness doesn't come naturally to Stéphane Dion, although he had a reputation for strong-willed stubbornness and driving positions aligned with his convictions when he was an academic and a cabinet minister in the Chrétien and Martin governments. The Conservatives' relentless attacks on Dion's character and fitness to be a leader have taken their toll: I don't think we are seeing the real Stéphane Dion, or whether that can ever happen now. It's very late in the game. These larger events do open up the potential for all four opposition leaders to make gains. But it would take a lot of momentum to stop Stephen Harper from sliding up the middle.

I don't know about you, Sarah, but the nasty and uncharming tone set by the Harper government bothers me a lot. And it has definitely overshadowed some genuine accomplishments by Canada's longest-serving minority government.

Nik: Pauline, I think many Canadians share your view. They recognize the accomplishments of the government and the competence of Stephen Harper but just can't put their finger on why they feel a little uneasy about the thought of a majority Harper government. However, election outcomes have much to do with performance in the campaign (for the leader and the party). I'm sure Harper and the Tories are betting on a better overall performance to put them over the top.

Sarah: There are lots of issues that are still emerging in this campaign that may swing voters. The $22 billion dollar bill for the mission in Afghanistan should cause some problems for the Conservatives. But it all depends on the response of the other parties. While I agree with both of you that Canadians are tired of nastiness, at some point the opposition leaders need to step aside from promoting their own parties and focus instead on Conservative overspending and the deficit that we are indeed facing.