• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The 2008 Canadian Election- Merged Thread

Old Sweat said:
...
The sign of panic during an economic downturn is probably the show stopper. Was it in the 2000 campaign that a coup by Martin to usurp power from Chretien failed, or was that only a rumour? The economy was doing a lot better back then.

I still don't think it is going to happen, but one can only hope.


That was waaaaay back when Liberal and discipline could be used in the same sentence.

I think Dion and the Green Shaft Shift are about all the gifts the Liberals will give to us Tories this year. We must be thankful for small, weak mercies.

Meanwhile: a majority means that Harper must gain seats in Ontario and Québec. The seats he can reasonably hope to win in Ontario are Liberal seats - Ignatieff would help the Liberals there; the ones he must get in Québec belong to the BQ - Ignatieff did well in QC, as I recall.

That means Harper must run two quite distinct campaigns. Dion continues to help him in both.

I’m guessing that the Conservatives may get a seat or two more in BC but the real big green shift will be from the Liberals to the NDP and Greens. I’m also guessing that the Conservatives will be lucky to hold their own in Atlantic Canada: down one or two in NF, maybe up one or two in the other provinces.

So, 25 to 30 ‘new’ Conservative seats needed – almost all  Ontario and Québec. For this week, anyway, the economy is probably the only issue. And economic worries tend to make (perceived) good leaders even more popular.

And, on that note, excuse me, please, while I hide under my bed as the markets open on Bay and Wall Streets!  :crybaby:
 
And, on that note, excuse me, please, while I hide under my bed as the markets open on Bay and Wall Streets! 

By the end of today a lot of people will think the income trust decision was mild.....the markets will be all over this news from the weekend
 
I have some sympathy for Lawrence Martin’s view in his latest column which is reproduced here under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080912.wcomartin15/BNStory/politics/?query=
Stephen Harper: the tactics, the leadership (Part 1)

LAWRENCE MARTIN

From Monday's Globe and Mail
September 15, 2008 at 12:45 AM EDT

When we think of great leaders, certain characteristics come to mind. We think of a capacity to inspire, to define and chart the direction of the country. We think of political figures with personal magnetism and oratorical skills. We think of civility and honouring democratic principles - of someone who stands above the fray.

On Stephen Harper's list of strengths none of the above are particularly apparent. He's more sullen than charismatic, he's a wooden speaker, he doesn't take to talk of visions or great national endeavours and no one would call his command style of governance refreshingly democratic. He's more interested in maiming political opponents than pursuing high ideals.

Nor has this Prime Minister been able, as great leaders are, to post an achievement of high significance. He's had some modest successes. Nothing outstanding.

But while batting low in so many of the criteria, the Conservative leader has somehow developed the aura of being an impressive leader. It's an interesting interpretation.


Mr. Harper's attributes are as a great tactician, a high-quality manager. Add his imposing intelligence, the absolute clarity of mind. Keeping score, you might say he ranks high on two great-leadership components, low on the other four. He's also decisive, but decisiveness is no barometer of great leadership. What counts is the quality of the decisions. George W. Bush has been decisive. Our longest-serving PM, Mackenzie King, was remarkably indecisive. A procrastinator.

Much of the Harper leadership reputation results from his having no strong opponent and from opinion polls on leadership that, the pollsters concede, are biased toward any incumbent PM.

Entering the campaign, Mr. Harper wanted to build on his leadership advantage by showing a new side. With a quick overhaul, he would knock over one of his negatives, the image of him as a sinister, overly partisan operator. Ads showed a soft, caring family man - which, in fact, he is - and a benign and understanding human being. On top of this, came a new openness and chumminess with the media. Having run a closed shop, he was now sitting down at breakfast with reporters for roundtable chats.

But just as he was putting up the new image, he was undercut by a series of missteps, small things that in campaigns become big things. The tasteless puffin-bird advertisement spoke to the lack of class his attack dog office has often shown. His having to reverse himself on the Green Party debate decision spoke to his closed governing style. The over-hyped bit about an aide's e-mail on the motivations of the father of a fallen soldier spoke to his government's penchant for reducing everything to naked political self-interest.

All this was hardly in keeping with the impressive leader image. The old maxim about reaping what you sow was taking its toll. It wasn't supposed to be the Harper campaign tripping over itself in Week 1. That was the advance Liberal script.

On top of the little incidents, other troubling aspects of the Harper leadership style were on display. Following his statement that he would not be attacking opponents, he engaged in wild fear-mongering, saying the Opposition Leader's Green Shift would plunge the country into recession and even endanger national unity. Trying to attract votes in Quebec, Mr. Harper played politics with the re-announcement of the Afghan withdrawal deadline. He said categorically that the Liberal Leader would raise the GST - a completely false assertion. His office attacked Stéphane Dion's use of a carbon-spewing airplane, forgetting to mention that the Dion office was purchasing carbon offsets to more than compensate - meaning the Harper campaign, which wasn't doing this, was the pollution culprit.

Some of the Prime Minister's work was no doubt tactically shrewd - that leadership quality he possesses in abundance - and may well pay off. But anyone hoping to see a new elevated style of leadership from the soft-blue sweater guy was not getting it. His office is still under the political direction of the dirt-throwing Doug Finley. A specialist in low-road politics, he has played on the PM's instincts for the same.

Great leaders uplift the spirit of the country. Great tacticians are capable of the same. Mr. Harper has an impressive, big mind. If he doesn't win a majority it will be because too often it operates - as is evidenced so far in this campaign - in small ways.

I think, in stating his six attributes of political leaders, Martin is forgetting his history but that’s a small quibble. I agree that most of us wish that our leaders could possess “a capacity to inspire, to define and chart the direction of the country.” We would like to think we could have “political figures with personal magnetism and oratorical skills.” We want leaders to display “civility” and to honour democratic principles. But it is too much, even for Martin, to expect any political to be “someone who stands above the fray.” No Churchill, no Roosevelt, not even a Jefferson or a Pitt would come anywhere nar Martin’s idealized list, but, we can wish ...

He is correct, however, in suggesting that Harper is parlaying Canadians respect for his focus (pigheadedness for some Canadians) and tactical shrewdness (lying and cheating if you’re Celine Stéphane Dion) into a reputation for leadership.

I wish there could be political leaders of the type Lawrence Martin imagines; there aren’t; there never have been – especially not in Canada. Maybe we got close, 60 years ago – at least M. St Laurent was civil and had a capacity to chart a clear course for the country; he was a pretty thoroughgoing democrat and not a poor orator, either; but he was never stood “above the fray” and nor can any political leader – not one who wants to last beyond coffee break, anyway.


 
Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Globe and Mail, is Part 2 of “ Stephen Harper: the tactics, the leadership”:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080912.wcotories15/BNStory/politics
Stephen Harper: the tactics, the leadership (Part 2)

BOB PLAMONDON

From Monday's Globe and Mail
September 15, 2008 at 12:46 AM EDT

Stephen Harper entered Canada's 40th general election by softening his rough edges and promising sensible government. Yet his opponents continue to speak of his hidden agenda. The truth is, Mr. Harper does have a hidden agenda. But it is pragmatic, not ideological. Having learned the lessons of history, he is positioning the Tory party not to win just this election but many others to come. By leading a centrist government that is in touch with the hearts and minds of ordinary Canadians, Mr. Harper intends to achieve a dynasty not seen in Tory circles since Sir John A. Macdonald.

It took quite a transformation for Mr. Harper to come to this place. As an MP's assistant in 1986, he was a right-wing ideologue who lacked empathy for Quebec's nationalist aspirations or the plight of disadvantaged regions. However, after witnessing Jean Chrétien win three majorities, Mr. Harper set out to build a broad centrist conservative coalition by turning his Alliance party "into a permanent professional political institution that [voters] can dedicate their loyalty to on an ongoing basis." Then he agreed to any and all terms put on the table by Peter MacKay so long as Canada was left with one united Conservative party.

But even when united, the Tory party has faced more than its fair share of election disasters. The reality is that Tory governments have largely been interregnums between Liberal administrations. Indeed, Mr. Harper would have to hold the office of prime minister until he is 77 before the Tory party could claim electoral equality. Sir John gave the party a rousing start, winning six of Canada's first seven elections, by treating Quebec with respect, pursuing a national vision and by governing with a moderate hand. Most other Tory prime ministers have overspent their political capital and were rewarded for their zeal with extended time in opposition.

Mr. Harper has learned from history and has hoarded his political capital. Except for the income trust decision, he has cleverly navigated sensitive issues such as Canada's role in Afghanistan, same-sex marriage and the Québécois as a nation. He has taken a firm grip on the political centre, choosing to advance conservative-minded policies only to the extent they resonate with main street Canada. He never talks in terms if ideology, right-wing or otherwise; and he has redefined the political centre, not in terms of socialist and capitalist extremes, but as a place of moderation that represents the values of law-abiding, hard-working Canadian families.

He is using the current fractious political dynamic to advantage. While vote splitting has often worked against the Tories, today, a centrist Conservative movement crowds out its opponents. It would probably be enough for Mr. Harper to occupy the centre so long as the NDP and Liberals are sharing the left, but with Elizabeth May and the Greens thrown into the mix, he has a decent shot at a majority government.

With or without Mr. Dion, so long as the left remains divided and the Tories govern from the centre, Mr. Harper has a shot at delivering a Tory dynasty. Mr. Harper's record as Prime Minister, and the promises he is making in this campaign, suggests this is something Canadians need not fear. Mr. Harper is committed to leading a competent ministry that will implement only those conservative ideas embraced by mainstream Canada. But by dampening expectations of a majority, he risks reinforcing his opponent's message that the nation needs protection from the Tories. He erred in the 2006 election when he told Canadians a Liberal-minded judiciary and civil service would limit his authority. Tories should campaign now to give comfort over what a Tory majority would accomplish.

Mr. Harper's transformation is that he wants to win more than he wants to have the textbook answer to policy issues. We have to look no further than his policy of reducing the GST over income tax cuts to prove the point. Whether genuine or not, his conversion on climate change, embracing of Quebec nationalism and his new-found love of regional development programs demonstrate that he is serious about holding power. His attachment is not to right-wing think tanks, the elite, the wealthy or the powerful; it is to ordinary Canadians.

Mr. Harper may not inspire with vision, will never possess the charisma of John Diefenbaker and is unlikely to out-campaign Brian Mulroney. But as a strategist, he is in league with Macdonald. His pragmatic, centrist and cleverly hidden agenda is to win election after election. He may well take the party to heights not seen since the days of Sir John A.

Bob Plamondon is author of Full Circle: Death and Resurrection in Canadian Conservative Politics.

He’s got it! He’s used his secret decoder ring and he’s nailed the hidden agenda™: Harper wants to make the Conservatives into a “middle of the road,” Canadian political party – albeit  a wee bit 'right of centre.’

Canada is a cautious, centrist country, Canadians are cautious, centrist folks, a successful political party must also be centrist.

The smart right wingers, like Stephen Harper, know that is the best they are ever going to get. The dumb ones may form socially conservative movements on the fringes, à la the Greens, but Harper aims to force the Liberals and NDP into a generation long fight to the death for the large ‘left of centre’ position while he commands his own chosen (large enough) ground and wins election after election.

 
Thucydides said:
Quebec farmers are not the only ones:

http://prairietory.blogspot.com/2008/09/corporate-welfare-belly-up-bar.html

Imagine the tax cut the CPC could deliver if they acted like real Conservatives and ended corporate welfare. Injecting $19+ billion dollars into the productive economy with a tax cut like this would certainly take the edge off any real or potential economic downturn as well.

Sorry but I have to take issue with the golden concept that tax cuts are inherently efficient.  If you're dealing with a closed ecomony and money is trapped within borders, I'm with you....individuals will always use their funds more efficiently than government will...However in a globalized trading system where competitors are intentionally devaluing their currencies and not allowing reciprocal trade access, tax cuts in Canada often provide little more than indirect transfer of wealth to China as we purchase Chinese-made HDTV's, iPods and other miscellaneous crap.  Bottom Line:  Pay down the debt first.  We shouldn't have a debt in the first place and the fact we still spend upwards of $40 billion per year on interest servicing (even with record low interest rates) is pathetic.  Then as the debt is retired, continue to work towards reciprocal trade access (or begin applying barriers of our own) with those nations currently employing unfair trade practices (China, Japan, South Korea).  Then as the debt is eliminated and on a more even playing field THEN provide tax cuts. 


Matthew.  :salute:

P.S.  Count me onboard with the "Elminate the supply side controls on agricultural products" BS.  Complete and utter rip-off of taxpayers.
 
Harper is “on message” according to this article, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080915.welxnmarkets0915/BNStory/politics/home
Harper unfazed by market crisis
Dion accuses Conservative Leader of leading Canada's economy to a performance that lags even the troubled U.S.

BRIAN LAGHI AND CAMPBELL CLARK

Globe and Mail Update
September 15, 2008 at 12:35 PM EDT

OTTAWA and ST. JOHN'S — Stephen Harper says Canada has survived the worst of the financial crisis that is gripping the United States and predicted yesterday that the fears of a recession are in the past.

“I don't think the atmosphere should turn to one of complete doom and gloom,” Mr. Harper told reporters this morning as he kicked off the second week of the Conservative Party's re-election campaign.

“My own belief is if we were gong to have some kind of big crash or recession, we probably would have had it by now.”

The Prime Minister said that, although there are significant problems in the United States, its economy is still resilient and not in recession.

“I wouldn't throw in the towel on any of this quite yet,” he said. “My own belief is if we were going to have some kind of big crash or recession, we probably would have had it by now.”

Mr. Harper has pitched his party as the best-placed to handle turbulent economic waters, particularly in opposition to Stéphane Dion's Green Shift, which includes a tax on carbon. However, his declaration that the fears of a recession are behind the country may somewhat undercut that argument.

Nonethelessss, Mr. Harper used the U.S. financial crisis to argue that the ideas of his opponents are unworkable in the current climate.

“This is not a time for wild experiments and new taxes or grand new spending schemes,” he said. “Governments must be able to act with prudence during a difficult economic time.”

Mr. Dion shot back by suggesting Mr. Harper has been a rudderless economic manager who spent on election-minded gimmicks but led Canada's economy to a performance that lags even the troubled U.S.

Mr. Harper has called for a stay-the-course economic plan for uncertain times, but Mr. Dion said the Liberal “Green Shift” would cut taxes on areas that would stimulate the economy – incomes, savings, and business profits.

“The difficulties in the United States are something that we worry about. But still, they are outperforming the economy of Canada today. Their first six months [of 2008] have been better than ours in terms of economic growth.”

“Mr. Harper did nothing to prepare Canada [for] that. Nothing to invest in the productivity of our economy. Made bad choices regarding the way he spent – he spent more than any other government before him, but he built nothing,” Mr. Dion said.

He said Canadian economic growth was slower than that in the U.S., and other G8 countries, in the first six months of 2008, and that Canada lost more jobs in July than in any month since 1991, when Brian Mulroney was prime minister.

He added later: “And what is the plan of Stephen Harper, anyway? It's the same mistakes that have been done under Mulroney. He spent a lot, he has no direction, and we are close to deficit and close to a recession.”

Mr. Harper has built his campaign around an argument that he is a steady hand for managing the economy, and that Mr. Dion's so-called Green Shift is a risky venture for uncertain times.

Mr. Dion, however, rebutted that it is a plan that would stimulate the economy, cutting taxes in the right places, and weaning the Canadian economy from over-reliance on fossil fuels.

“What is the main problem that the world has today? It's energy costs. And it will grow. It's not something that will disappear. So if you have a strategy to make this country more energy efficient…you will increase the profitability of our economy, and its productivity. And it will create green jobs,” the Liberal leader said.

Before making his remarks, Mr. Harper announced a spending promise worth $147-million that would allow self-employed Canadians the opportunity to access maternity and parental benefits enjoyed by other wage earners who pay into the EI system.

“Ironically, self-employed Canadians who are successful and who create jobs must pay into the EI system on behalf on their employees, but cannot access those benefits themselves,” Mr. Harper said. “This is not right.”

Currently, self-employed Canadians cannot contribute to the Employment Insurance scheme and, thus, are not eligible to receive maternity benefits that other employees who do pay into the fund enjoy. Those Canadians eligible for maternity benefits and want to remove themselves from the work force to stay home with their newborns can receive a year's worth of benefits at around 60 per cent of their salary.

There are currently 2.6. million Canadians who work for themselves in the country.

The program would be funded by premium payments. It is another in a series of tangible announcements that the Conservative began making during the last election. They include notions like help for apprentices, GST cuts and other pledges.

Asked if announcement was an effort to attract female voters, Mr. Harper said it was a policy to respond to a real need.

In St. John's, Newfoundland, Mr. Dion unveiled a $250-million proposal for funding refits of fishing boats to make them more energy efficient, and argued that using less fuel will save them more as diesel-fuel costs rise than Mr. Harper's proposal to cut diesel taxes by two cents a litre in four years.

The same approach will make Canadian businesses more competitive, especially if corporate and personal taxes are cut, fuelling savings and investment, he argued.

“We need to cut taxes on the productive activities – on our income, savings, investments. On the investments the fishermen need to do to have good vessels – we need to cut taxes on that. And we need to shift it to pollution. And then it will be good for the economy because you will cut taxes on productive activities. It will be good for the environment because you out a price on pollution. As long as it is free, it will be difficult to reduce it,” he said.

“And it will be good for the people, because we Liberals will cut taxes especially for middle and low-income Canadians. A family that is living with $20,000, they will receive $2400 of tax credits from the government.”

Mr. Dion continues to be dogged by criticisms, even from within his own party, that his plan is not getting through to voters, who don't understand it and fear it's just another tax.

Yesterday, as he campaigned in St. John's, John Efford, the federal natural resources minister in Paul Martin's Liberal government, said most Newfoundlanders don't get it, and are wary about being taxed more.

“I can tell you the average person on the street doesn't understand the carbon tax,” he told reporters.

Mr. Dion, however, insisted that it is good economics – and that Mr. Harper has focused on election-minded tidbits to attract voters. He didn't specify what he was referring to, although Mr. Harper has brought in a series of narrowly-targeted tax credits he promised in the 2005-06 campaign, for tradespeople's tools, kids sports programs, and bus passes.

“Stephen Harper is only concerned about the next day, the next poll, to show gimmicks to buy your vote for the next election. Never he's concerned about the next generation,” Mr. Dion said.


Investors and economists are like small children in the family car, all saying, “Are we there yet?” There is the so-called “bottom” – the point where the precipitous decline in stock values ends, “bottoms out,” and a rise (back towards 15,000) starts. Harper hopes the “bottom” will arrive, or may appear to have arrived, sometime next week, maybe even the week after.

But consider the clarity of the message.

Here’s Harper (in 66 of his own words):

• “I wouldn't throw in the towel on any of this [economic bad news] quite yet”

• “My own belief is if we were going to have some kind of big crash or recession, we probably would have had it by now”

• “This is not a time for wild experiments and new taxes or grand new spending schemes” and

• “Governments must be able to act with prudence during a difficult economic time.”

Here’s Dion (in 137 of his own words):

• “What is the main problem that the world has today? It's energy costs. And it will grow. It's not something that will disappear. So if you have a strategy to make this country more energy efficient…you will increase the profitability of our economy, and its productivity. And it will create green jobs” and

• “We need to cut taxes on the productive activities – on our income, savings, investments. On the investments the fishermen need to do to have good vessels – we need to cut taxes on that. And we need to shift it to pollution. And then it will be good for the economy because you will cut taxes on productive activities. It will be good for the environment because you out a price on pollution. As long as it is free, it will be difficult to reduce it.”

Listeners and readers ‘got’ Harper’s message on the first pass. I’ll bet Dion’s audience is trying to figure out what he thought he was saying. Even when Dion is talking good sense he buggers up the ‘delivery.’

 
It is only peripheral, perhaps, but Marion Dewar, former mayor of Ottawa and long time NDP leader died today. She was very popular and respected here in Ottawa - even amongst those who disagreed with the NDP's policies.

Her son, Paul Dewar is the sitting (NDP) MP for Ottawa Centre (my riding). He is popular and, arguably, a good constituency MP.

Even though the Conservatives are running a very credible candidate against him, Paul Dewar will be hard to beat and he will get a bit of a sympathy 'bounce.'

Mr. Dewar has my personal sympathy for the loss of his mother: a fine woman and a good public servant - in the best sense of that word; but he will not get my vote.
 
More polling data>

Harris-Decima says “Conservative Lead Narrows” but with a margin of error of ±2.6% the headline could, equally well read “No change over four days” or, even “Tory lead widens.”

It is only the first week of a five week campaign but Canadians' intentions seem remarkably static: another Conservative minority - maybe with a bit bigger or better seat distribution, for the Tories, than the current one.

 
One issue here is that although Canada has a large trade surplus due to it's high volume and value of commodity goods the relative productivity of workers to produce  that good is low.  As you move up the secondary, tertiery.. manufacturing process you are able to take advantage of increased mechanization/robotics in lieu of workers and increase the overall value of your end product and provide a more efficent economy.

This is an area where the US is kicking our butts and as long as we are a hewer of wood and bearer of water we will never become the feudal lord supervising it all. 

Unfortunately given the cost of setting up such facilities, labour shortages and lack of infrastructure this dream is a long ways away. 

But some starting points...

1) Twin the transcanada highway to a modern, high speed standard for it's entire length.  Add in cell phone towers to fill in communication gaps.  This helps nationally increase the rate of goods trafficing and communication.  Why I can't call out through large portions of Northern Ontario and the Prairies is beyond me...no wonder people fly or go via the US.
2) Build at least 1, preferably 2 large scale pipelines running east/west through Canada for the purpose of fossil fuel transportation.  This reduces dependency on US refinery production while adding value to canadian production.
3) A common securities regulator so as Canadians we can invest in a company that doesn't have to maintain different books for each jurisdiction they operate in.  Currently the incentive is there to stay in a single juridiction just for accounting purposes.  The merger of the TSX and Montreal Stock Exchanges recently might help this.
4) EI should be adjusted annually so that premiums = payouts from previous year.  No more, no less.  Overcharging employers for employee benifits is not conductive
5) A national infrastructure plan should be made and updated annually with projects most likely to contribute to the overall gain of Canada's economy funded first.  Prime examples...Prince Rupert Port, a second Windsor/Detroit bridge, increased ferry service to Newfoundland.  This needs to be public on how the decision was made and posted for all to see. 
6) Kill some of the reality shows on CBC and instead increase the exposure of shows like "Dragon's Den" where new inovators compete in order to get new ideas put into production.  Start putting CEO's from Canadian buisnesses and politicians on there and force them to think of positive changes.  CBC already loses money so losing more won't hurt if we have a national forum brainstorming for national improvements.
7) Revise the tax structure to a flat tax format for all corperations with investments into the company directly chargeable against profits.  Quit taxing incoming equipment...we'll get more from more efficent profitable companies and employees long term than we do on a $3 million metal press once.

Anywho...rant over.
 
Dion qould have a much better chance if he reduced his message to this:

“We need to cut taxes on the productive activities – on our income, savings, investments."

Oh, wait, that is the Conservative platform. All we need is assurance Prime Minister Harper will actually follow through (with spending and broad based tax cuts), and things will look much better in the long term.
 
I will have to disagree with you here Matthew. While tax cuts will have second and third order effects outside of the country in a globalized economy, they are still the fastest and most efficient means of energizing the economy, which will (given prudent fiscal management) provide the revenues required to pay down the debt.

The real problem is that tax cuts do energize the economy, but there is little or no corresponding pressure for politicians to limit spending (and great institutional pressure to increase it). The Harris government is an excellent example. Their tax cuts increased economic activity and thus revenues by a fairly large amount, which was funneled into increased government spending rather than debt reduction, creating a reserve fund similar to the Alberta Heritage Fund or other "productive" activities.

ForesterAB, I'll take your point 7. The rest will either require huge subsidies which the market will not make up (if the market was there, it would already have happened), or goes against too many entrenched institutional interests to get passed. As for point 6, why stop at the reality shows? Just eliminate the CBC and reap an annual $1 billion tax savings.
 
And still more polling:

Nanos confirms the Harris-Decima conclusions – with the a higher ±3.2% margin of error: the Tories are losing a bit of ground, they have fallen back into minority territory, and the Liberals are gaining a bit – not in too much danger of losing official opposition status to Smilin’ Jack Layton..

The biggest shift, for both, is in Atlantic Canada; maybe Danny Williams’ ABC is working and maybe it has legs. But, with margins of error like ±10.3% or ±6.6% it is difficult to say anything for certain.

 
The CPC is probably hoping, and I think they will, gain many more than 10 more seats in Quebec.

Now is not the time for them to count their chickens, but I suspect that even with losses in the Maritimes, they are slated for a small majority...
 
Thucydides said:
ForesterAB, I'll take your point 7. The rest will either require huge subsidies which the market will not make up (if the market was there, it would already have happened), or goes against too many entrenched institutional interests to get passed. As for point 6, why stop at the reality shows? Just eliminate the CBC and reap an annual $1 billion tax savings.

And contract out "Dragon's Den" and it's ilk to CTV....still cheaper.
 
I suspect the Conservatives are actually glad to be back in minority territory - until the very last moment.

For a majority they need something like:

20 in BC - a gain of two, just possible given some three way (Green/Liberal/NDP) splits;
28 in AB - no change;
23 in SK/MB - a gain of three, difficult but possible;
52 in ON - a big gain of 11 but, once again, difficult but possible with some three way splits;
24 in QC - another big gain of 14, once again difficult but possible; and
7 in Atlantic Canada - no change, but still difficult and still possible.

Big ON and QC gains are the key but they need some small gains out West and they need to hold the line down East, too.
 
E.R. Campbell said:
And still more polling:

Nanos confirms the Harris-Decima conclusions – with the a higher ±3.2% margin of error: the Tories are losing a bit of ground, they have fallen back into minority territory, and the Liberals are gaining a bit – not in too much danger of losing official opposition status to Smilin’ Jack Layton..

The biggest shift, for both, is in Atlantic Canada; maybe Danny Williams’ ABC is working and maybe it has legs. But, with margins of error like ±10.3% or ±6.6% it is difficult to say anything for certain.

I don't pay too much attention to polls, as they have proven to be misleading. If memory serves, did not the Liberals have a large lead in the polls, just prior to Brian Mulroney's Conservatives being elected to a majority government?
 
Rodahn said:
... did not the Liberals have a large lead in the polls, just prior to Brian Mulroney's Conservatives being elected to a majority government?

Possibly, I don't recall; but polling is a fairly well established technique and it has improved since 1984. Some pollsters, Nanos being one, have pretty fair track records.
 
There is a problem with polls in that the respondent is under no obligation to tell the pollster the truth. The US elections of 200 and 2004 had polls and even exit polls at variance to the actual result allegedly because of this (no other statistical or mathematical explanation seems to fit), and we may be seeing something like this going on as well.

This can even be wargamed to a certain extent: one can imagine party supporters being instructed to give misleading answers to the polls for maskirovka and mislead their opponents. The only poll that counts is the one you cast your ballot in; the rest is fill for the newscast and chattering classes.
 
Big ON and QC gains are the key but they need some small gains out West and they need to hold the line down East, too.

www.electionprediction.org  is showing that the Conservatives are likely to take two of the three Northern Ridings (not Yukon- the other two), based on the strength of the two candidates there.

It ain't much, but every little bit helps, right?
 
SeaKingTacco said:
www.electionprediction.org  is showing that the Conservatives are likely to take two of the three Northern Ridings (not Yukon- the other two), based on the strength of the two candidates there.

It ain't much, but every little bit helps, right?

It sure does!

Four weeks to go.

 
Back
Top