I can't believe a judge is even looking at this

Actually, I can believe that a judge is looking at the issue of whether Mr. Harper broke his fixed election law.

The simple answer here is "no" though. In fact, it's easy to judge the simple answer because of the fact that Democracy Watch isn't even arguing on the letter of the law, they're arguing the spirit of the law. That's a big determinant that you're arguing from the wrong side when you can't argue factually rather than spiritually in the case.

Now, I do agree with them that the law is there to stop a prime minister from prematurely calling an election. By setting the fixed election date, this also removes one of Democracy Watch's proposals - that being that there should be a 60-90 day cooling off period before an election writ is dropped.

My question for Democracy Watch is whether they would argue as vehemently if the opposition parties were to force the Prime Minister to the Governor General before the next fixed election date? Would that violate the spirit of the law as well?