A mule would be an improvement...

Babble on.

Jay Random has a well-written post up from the weekend about the prospects for a federal election, and why it may be a good idea not only from a principled point of view - lumping the Atlantic Accord in with Kyoto is typical Liberal garbage - but from a practical one as well:

Actually, these [poll] numbers are a disaster for Emperor Dithers and his party, and would probably produce a Conservative minority government if they held up on election day. Why? Oddly enough, because the Liberals are the only political party with support in every province of Canada.
...
In other words, the Grits are trailing the Bloc in Quebec, and trailing the Conservatives in the rest of the country.

Once he gets through the intriguing speculation about poll results in our FPTP electoral system (it's like reading tea leaves, or gazing into the ether: fun, but hardly a science), JR branches off into a lecture about compromise in the Dominion, and produces this little gem of an analogy:

Canadians keep thinking that Compromise is the highest of all political virtues. It isn't. As a general rule, it's nowhere near as high as Minding Your Own Business. A saddlehorse is a fine and useful animal, and so is a pack donkey. But if you try to make a compromise between them, the best you can get is a mule, which is a poor substitute for either. And if you're not careful how you arrive at your compromise, you'll end up with a hinny, which is no use to anyone.

The Liberal Party has built its hegemony by promising the country a mule. It has done untold damage by delivering a hinny instead. Why not decentralize the works, and let each province choose a horse or a donkey, as it prefers? And if some provinces deliberately choose a hinny, at least the rest of us won't have to suffer for their mistake.

Consider that argument too, when you follow the advice proffered at Occam's Carbuncle, and think about electing an admittedly flawed Conservative government.

Babble off.