15 10 13	SC 24.137.123.177
Mainstreet poll for the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting finds the Tories and Liberals at 41/23 among all voters, and 48/28 amongst decided voters. 16% undecided. http://www.friends.ca/files/PDF/Mainstreet-Report-15oct13.pdf I'm a little surprised they polled this riding, as I really didn't see many people talking about it as potentially competitive.
	15 10 10	R.O. 24.146.23.226
This riding is new and not existed before under current boundaries . although David Sweet has been an mp since 2006 . it borders city of Hamilton ridings but is a very rural riding when compared to others in region. Its likely to stay conservative.
	15 10 08	Kyle H 24.141.189.144
This is a curious riding, and I love it. Its a mix of growing suburban and exurban communities with nearly-untouched rural landscape surrounding it, and it seemingly when deep Conservative blue in 2011, seemingly reinforcing the rural portion of the riding as the dominate one. But it isn't! More people live in Waterdown and the Mud St/Red Hill area than in the rest of the riding, and you can throw in communities like Mount Hope and Binbrook as well given their growing-commuter-town nature. They're areas that either went heavily or were close fights by thee provincial Liberals and NDP in 2014, which shows that there is room for growth in the district should one of those party candidates break out from the other - the question is whether one of them can. If not, then Sweet will walk away with a vote split win, but there is still time yet and the federal trends seem to be leaning a certain way at this point... so I'd give it a TCTC until next week, we'll see where we are by then. Also, on the gerrymandering claims - I don't think so. Its an odd riding, sure, but far from one purposefully gerrymandered, its just a victim of geography; it unites the more extant Hamilton communities into one district because otherwise they'll imbalance the other ridings, but that isn't the fault of the redistricting commission that they bend around the city. They're too big and too fast growing to put with their immediate neighbours, so why not unite them? Especially since they're all within one city anyway. Besides, if you're going to claim gerrymandering, please explain to me why the gerrymanderers decided to protect a barely-recognizable Con backbencher, but no one else?
	15 08 17	Craig Hubley 24.142.57.88
Despite the rising NDP as the challenger 308 still calls this 80% likely to go Con. I repeat that the riding was gerrymandered and re Prairie cities, the NDP and Liberal vote in those cities was already so profoundly cut up among most-suburban-and-rural ridings that to create 2 or 3 sure-to-fall seats was better than to create 6 that we'd end up calling too-close-to-call. Of the 30 new seats, 2011 polls mapped into them predicted 22 Con wins. 22 of 30 new seats falling to a party that had only 39.6% of the vote. Onus is on those who claim the new seats were fair to prove it wasn't gerrymandering when you see > 2/3 of the seats going to a party with < 2/5 of popular vote!
	15 06 21	A.S. 99.233.100.50
Also re the accusations of 'gerrymandering', it isn't as if the constituent parts of FlamGlan are *that* psychologically disconnected, either, especially now that they're under a common mega-municipal umbrella--it's only the odd pinched part around Ancaster that makes it seem otherwise. So, now it looks like the kind of seat David Sweet should have held all along (*him* representing *McMaster*?!? Ewwww). But keep in mind that even *this* may not be enough to ward off threat to the Tories, given all the nodes of growing subdivision that remain (Waterdown, Glancaster, Mount Hope, Binbrook, and above all the whole Heritage Park/Mt Albion zone)--and to reinforce the point, in the 'Glanbrook' part, provincially speaking, none other than leader Tim Hudak was held to a three-way fight in 2014! (It's the 'Niagara West' part that held his seat for him.)
	15 06 09	GV 99.241.86.176
Mr Hubley's overblown rhetoric doesn't do this site any credit. The riding boundaries may not be elegant, but if memory serves, NDP MPs like Christopherson testified in favour of this boundary proposal. And the claim lacks merit in any case; creating a super-safe Tory seat (which this undoubtedly is) tends to minimize, not maximize, the number of CPC seats in the region.
	15 04 05	Stevo 78.203.102.215
Yeah sure Craig. If the Conservatives had any power in determining riding boundaries and were so interested in gerrymandering, why did they allow the urban/rural redistricting in Saskatchewan which more or less ensures at least 2-3 Conservative defeats in that province? Easy easy win in Flamborough.
	15 03 28	Monkey 174.114.31.13
Unlike the other Hamilton riding, this is largely made up of the rural portions so the Tories should easily hold this one.
	15 03 25	Craig Hubley 71.7.138.32
This new riding has been so criminally rigged that it should be challenged in court. It's not possible to explain its gerrymandered configuration other than as an intent to create a safe Conservative seat. Two ends of Hamilton in one riding... smacks of US federal House district gerrymandering. Easy hold for the party that benefits from the rigging.
	15 03 24	ML 69.77.168.131
This newly created and unusually shaped riding wreaks of gerrymandering as it unites two very strong conservative constituencies on opposite ends of the Hamilton-Burlington region. This is prime David Sweet/CPC turf.
	15 03 22	Dr. Bear 66.49.210.99
Things don't get more conservative than this riding. The parts of Hamilton that allowed the Conservatives to win (or hope to win) any other GHA riding have been condensed into one solid CPC win.