Turning Back Harper
To deny Tories a majority, how best to vote?
Cartoon by Ingrid Rice.
The steady decline of voter turnout means that Canada is now governed by a political party chosen by fewer than one in four eligible voters. The combination of these and other factors effectively disenfranchises 75 per cent of the population.
And that is what Stephen Harper is counting on to squeeze out a majority government with as little as 35 per cent of the votes.
This is not what democracy should look like.
But in the short term -- the very short term of 36 days -- that is what we are faced with.
What if you are an activist who is terrified and depressed at the prospect of a majority government that would allow Stephen Harper to carry out a fulsome Conservative agenda? For you, there seem to be few effective ways to engage.
The fact of Canadian electoral politics is that once the election is called, those not directly involved in party electioneering are turned into spectators. That may be the root of the media's tendency to frame elections as a game. For most Canadians that is exactly how it must appear. And even for most who do get engaged, the process itself is apolitical. Yes, you are free to place "remember to vote" signs on people's doors. But it's hard not to get the feeling that by the time the election is called, it's too late to do anything substantive to affect the outcome.
50 key seats
In fact, of course, what actually happens in this next five weeks is extremely important and deadly serious.
Everyone who can get out of bed in the morning needs to be involved -- and needs to be both principled in their political activity and ruthlessly practical at the same time. That's not an easy task. As people who care deeply about their country, we are taught implicitly to vote for the party that most closely resembles our set of beliefs and convictions. Except that in most of the seats across the country, the outcomes are already decided.
According to number crunchers in the parties, there are fewer than 50 seats where there are real contests. This is where it will be decided whether or not Stephen Harper, a prime minister who disparages his own country, is re-elected.
If there was some super-computer that extrapolated and assessed all our individual values, aspirations, beliefs and convictions and determined the outcome, Harper would have been in history's dustbin already. Two thirds of Canadians consistently express their solid support for all the things that Harper will eliminate if he gets the opportunity. But there isn't such a computer, and without proportional representation, our valiant efforts at voting our principles are undermined or rendered neutral by a crude system designed to favour incumbents and lower expectations of what is possible.
Indeed, it can be argued that the multi-party system was designed to ensure that genuine democracy, measured by outcomes for ordinary people, could never be achieved. From that perspective it has been extraordinarily successful.
Does strategic voting make sense?
But if voting strictly on the basis of your convictions has been rendered ineffective, what about so-called strategic voting? As much as many people want to drive a stake through the heart of this ugly political beast, it will keep coming back to life every time there is an election until we somehow get proportional representation. The critical, practical flaw in strategic voting is that it assumes perfect knowledge of the history of each riding on the part of voters being asked to follow it.
But there is no such thing as perfect knowledge. For example, as happened last time, people will vote Liberal in an NDP riding to stop the Conservatives -- even though in that riding the Conservatives have absolutely no chance of getting elected. In the worst case scenario, strategic voting can actually have the exact opposite effect: taking votes away from the candidate most able to defeat a Conservative, allowing the Conservative to win.
Yet to be effective, strategic voting need only happen in those relatively small number of swing ridings where the results are not already known. If a campaign could persuade thousands of voters in those 50 ridings to vote strategically, countering the perverse nature of our electoral system, it could determine the outcome of the election.
That's principled politics, too, and in terms of actually saving the country, it trumps the lambs-to-the-slaughter strategy of voting your values as if it mattered. Let's not for a moment forget who we are up against -- a politician committed to continuing the dismantling of decades of social progress and facilitating the de facto annexation of Canada by the U.S. A ruthlessly practical response is needed to counter a ruthless Stephen Harper.
The NDP's new message
What does the NDP have to offer this time around? A quick look at Jack Layton's starting gate speech shows some strengths and weaknesses. Two changes could qualify as almost historic; The NDP are talking about the economy. And they are almost exclusively attacking Harper leaving the Liberals alone. These are major departures and welcome changes from the past. Dion is already weak -- attacks by the NDP could be politically fatal and almost ensure a Harper victory.
The NDP has historically avoided talking economics because pollsters tell them they aren't trusted on the economy, a self-fulfilling prophecy that has played out for three decades. Attacking corporate tax cuts and introducing green industrial development is a breakthrough for a federal election. Medicare is another key theme but regrettably the NDP have all but abandoned the Afghan conflict and the militarization of Canadian culture -- presumably because the "support our troops" framing of the Conservatives is too difficult to reverse.
Also, they have chosen a cheap populist theme, attacking cell phone, bank and credit-card charges instead of hammering the Conservatives on their dangerous, right-wing deregulation agenda -- even though people are still dying as a result of Harper's "self-regulation" changes to food safety. He's done the same to airline safety.
Greens: How mainstream?
How about the Greens? Elizabeth May's recent embrace of Blair Wilson, a rejected and controversial Liberal MP from the Lower Mainland, as the party's first Member of Parliament should remind us that the most important quality of any politician is judgement. And on this one, May comes out looking too much like an opportunist. The former Liberal was apparently rejected by the party because of public family disputes, a tendency to litigate and more than one business failure. Just a few weeks ago, he was talking about rejoining the Liberals and, according to media reports, threatened to run as an independent. When the Liberals refused to budge, he went Green.
And on the basis of catching this questionable fish May claims: "This is indeed historic...We are a party whose ideas and policies are now in the mainstream of the public debate." That's a stretch. Blair Wilson was not elected as a Green, and given the questions about his reliability he will almost certainly disappear politically on Oct 14th having never sat as a Green member of Parliament. His likely contribution: he will lose but garner enough votes to elect John Weston, the Conservative who lost by only 1,000 votes last time.
In addition, the party had to expel a B.C. candidate because of past anti-Semitic remarks, suggesting the Greens don't vet their candidates seriously. The Greens are not a genuinely national party yet. In many parts of the country they have virtually no riding associations (they have nominated just 115 candidates) but put up virtual candidates to scoop the federal election financing money.
Dion's all-too-familiar Grits
While May has been effective in attacking Harper on a number of fronts, she still insists on breaking a principle she held to for many years: that the Green Party should not be trying to elect members but should be forcing other parties to adopt a green agenda. Unlike the Greens in the U.S., who have a policy of not running against Democrats where they have a chance of winning, May and her party are fielding a complete slate, once again risking electing Harper Conservatives. That's high risk politics of the worst kind. And they will still not elect a single member.
Harper must be defeated and that won't happen if the Liberals do substantially worse than last time. That's just a blunt fact of political life in this election.
But it's easy to forget what happened when the whole country demonized Brian Mulroney and neglected to see the Liberals for what they were and are: a party of Bay Street. Finance Minister Paul Martin's policies did more damage to the social policy infrastructure and the standard of living of Canadians than anything Mulroney did. As a result, we are still trying to catch up to the real wage level of 1982 and Medicare is threatened like never before.
Dion's affection for the environment aside, the same big business gang still runs the Liberal Party and they will ultimately run any Liberal government, too.
Related Tyee stories:
- Strange bedfellows: Stephen Harper and Carole James
Blogged in The Hook - President Stephen Harper
Is he governing for Canada, or just Alberta? - Change Our Vote System! Leave it Alone! Change Our Vote System! Leave it Alone!
A Green and an NDPer debate Euro-style elections. Good for British Columbia?
![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
DPL
09-09-2008
Havn't missed an election
Havn't missed an election since 1951.
Being in the military we got to vote in some strange places, but vote we did.
If the left wants to drop Harper, get off yuur collective behinds and vote. No great strategies required. I've been stuck with Dief the Chief, Joe who couldn't count or swim, Lying Brian who is still taking money from us. and recently Harper and Company. The ever increasing body count in a impossible to win war might hit him somewhat. Folks that don't vote shouldn't bitch, but they will anyway. So let the expensive commercials roll out for us. Saw a handout in our mailroom today from the cons.( Using MP's free mailing privileges. "Don't give these guys a free ride" was the heading showing some kid in a hoody doing something illegal.I guess the idea was to throw him in the jail and throw away the key.A few days ago it was some other MP's passing out little gems about wheat and crime. Don't give Harper a free ride either. My choice locally is my present MP. She works hard for all of us in the little town of Victoria and if there is any sanity in local voters she will keep on doing that job for years to come.
doggone
09-09-2008
So where is the strategy?
Murray:
I came here assuming there would be some understandable advice regarding how to vote in the (very short) term.
We are V.I citizens and by the time our votes are counted the whole buckshee is over. Who cares what the actual "West" of this country votes? Ocassionally Alberta has had small small input but B.C. is totally off the map.
I have only one vote.
I find Harper to be a wretched, ugly useless fellow living by economic rules about 45 years old.
What say?
ME2
09-09-2008
Doggone
What say?
Rule One: Anybody but Harper
Rule Two: Tell all your friends why.
Word-of-mouth is the very best campaigning tool there is. Beats even the media.
realisticman
10-09-2008
doggone
After years of Liberal government in Ottawa the value of western Canada's voters votes only became less, as populations grew but seats in the House didn't. Voting for the Conservatives is probably the best way for your western vote to stand a chance of mattering. The Conservatives have/are sending a team to New Zealand to study the proportional system there. There have been other musings:
http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/esy/esy_ca
One may not like the idea of voting Conservative but in the long view it's the way to perhaps securing more value in our western votes. Were the Conservatives to gain a majority and move forward with proportional representation then future Canadian Parliaments could look forward to more diversification and the traditional Liberal eastern power lock could be gone forever. Just because the population increases in the west does not automatically mean than there are new seats in the House for those citizens. Prince Edward Island has 135,000 residents and due to tradition, 4 members in the House. That's 1 MP for around 33,000 residents. By contrast Vancouver Kingsway has roughly 120,000 residents and one MP. Based on PEI it should have 4. That would make the West more important and your vote, doggone, would be more valuable. The Liberals traditional power base is in Québec and southern Ontario and they certainly couldn't care about giving the west the new seats in the House that are deserved.
Same applies to the Senate.
Interesting reading here:
http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/bd/bdy/bdy_ca/
uncle
10-09-2008
Sad state but
It is a sad state of affairs but we here in BC don't matter when it comes to voting. All the parties put their time and money into Ontario and Quebec because that is where the votes are. I think we here in the Interior have become even more disenfranchised because we get it both Federally and Provincially. If you're not on the Lower Mainland, you don't matter. My MP is going for his sixth term and I can't think for the life of me anything he has done that stands out except parrott the party line.
G West
10-09-2008
Voting for Harper is never the right idea
This is a country - Newfoundland is as much a part of it as Vancouver Island...I've seen no indications (other than the re-warmed soup of a Preston Manning elected senate) that Pee Wee the sweater king has any real plans for all out proportional representation.
Western hegemony is no more palatable than central hegemony. Especially when it is led by an American at the centre of whose philosophy is a racist attitude toward First Nations.
When little Stephen puts a real democratic plank in his platform, and cuts the umbilical cord to Tom Flanagan and continentalism, we'll talk.
Van Isle
10-09-2008
If one wants to see how
If one wants to see how scarey the CONS are, check out Bills C-51 and C-52 that they introduced this spring. Read it, and I'll guarantee that you'll want to crap your pants.
sanamark
10-09-2008
Layton
Yesterday, I saw on the television that Jack Layton is trying to get a elected as a majority government.
Well, with his "cheap populist theme" it seems a done deal that he is on his way to 24 Sussex.
It is all so horribly pathetic and pedantic, like grown adults haven't already decided from whom they are going to vote. I can't wait until mid-November when I can watch the evening news again without turning it off in two minutes.
freebear
10-09-2008
Anything but
I live in Vancouver Island North riding, where the NDP squeaked out a win last election over the Conservative candidate (around 600 vote difference).
While I think ultimately any government is tied to big business (tarsands to Bay Street), I do not want a majority government led by a Bush/Chenney wannabe!
I will vote NDP again (not enough of a green vote in a resource/retiree dependent economy riding) and hopefully the Conservative carpetbagger will not be elected and contribute to a Conservative majority government.
So if you can mark an 'X' to put the brakes on Harper's Conservatives, you are my kind of people!
kootenay
10-09-2008
Kootenay NDP/Conservative Race
Here in the Kootenay’s we elected an NDP representative last election. The Conservative candidate crashed and burned before voting day and practically handed the election to the NDP. The Liberals have never fielded a strong candidate and this time around they haven’t even announced who will be running for them.
Voting in our district is simple, either Conservative or NDP, nothing too strategic about that. If Harper wins a majority government, it will only be so by one or two seats.
For that reason, I see our district as a must win for the Conservatives, and apparently our local Conservative candidate does too judging by the number of signs he has posted beside the highway. My vote will be for the NDP, I believe a Conservative majority would be a disaster for our country.
deeby
10-09-2008
It's a no-brainer for me...
...living in Vancouver East.
Libby has put up such consistent numbers in the last few elections, it seems obvious that any other centre-left vote would result in a dangerous split, and I'm very happy with her personally.
My decision is easy. OTOH, if I lived elsewhere I'd be looking for the strongest candidate following ME2's rule #1 above. Possibly a Green, possibly even a Liberal (holds nose ;-)
rangergord
10-09-2008
Just Say No to Harper
I am voting for the NDP imperfect as they are. Really want proportional representation. My vote will be drowned by a sea of morons voting for conservative Jay Hill.
bpither1
10-09-2008
We rank 109th in Voter Participation
Since I'll be out of the country as of September 21st I voted on Monday by visiting the Elections Canada office which is located in every riding. One piece of photo ID with an address and know the name of your candidate since I had to write this name on an empty ballot.
No one has an excuse not to vote AND GET INFORMED!
I have sent emails to everyone in my address book so do the same!
I am seriously worried about a Harper majority government and how this will further erode the abysmal social fabric of this country. In the last budget there was hardly any dollars for the homeless - and food banks are everywhere for the working poor - but during the past year plenty of ready cash was pumped into the banking sector as a consequence of subprime greed.
Whatever happened to the resolve to combat poverty in this country?
verso
10-09-2008
...
I'll vote for whomever has the best chance of beating the Conservative candidate in my ridding...
BTW, the editorial cartoon by Rice is brilliant!
lynn
10-09-2008
tell-tale signs
In this article Murray Dobbin refers to Stephen Harper as:
And Dobbin is right.
It's a shocking truth to take in, actually.
An uancceptable truth for any country to live with.
I mean what kind of masochistic tendency in a nation would allow this?
(To put this in terms our neo-con corporate guys could relate to:
What would you think of a head CEO who disparaged his own company? Would you buy shares in such a company?)
Surely for a leader to disparge his own country it's an ominous sign of what vast betrayals lie ahead.
And as the Reformatories ads cross over into The Twilight Zone in their attempt to sell a kinder, gentler, version of Stephen Harper.... as Mr. Rogers ....or is it a very strange take on our own Canadian Mr. Dress-Up? - anyway, Harper somehow manages to make a simple smile appear as a tic, and very twitchy one at that.
So while the Reformatories got the wardrobe and costume department out, trying to look and sound less lethal it's always good to remember this bit from the Marci MacDonald article "The Man Behind Stephen Harper":
realisticman
10-09-2008
GWest; Quote: Especially
GWest;
Care to elaborate on this borderline stab?
lynn
Please tell how and quote if you can?
G West
10-09-2008
Borderline - hardly
I'm talking about professor Flanagan - as the post clearly pointed out.
As for his attitudes toward First Nations - I think that's pretty obvious.
I can't believe you're new to this, but here's a refresher:
http://www.walrusmagazine.ca/articles/the-man-behind-stephen-harper-tom-flanagan/
I'll let Lynn respond on her own...
Perhaps you remember this, as an immigrant, you might want to keep it in mind:
(Harper) refer(ed) to new Canadians as “people who live in ghettoes and who are not integrated into western Canadian society.”
We also know what he thinks of people from Atlantic Canada. Did you miss the story in the Globe about what Danny Williams had to say about Sweater vest Steve?
"Stephen Harper was attacked from within the conservative family yesterday when Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams launched an aggressive ad campaign warning Canadians not to trust the Prime Minister to keep his word."
Sounds like sage advice to me.....
lynn
10-09-2008
Harper said:
"
(Stephen Harper, National Post, December 8, 2000)
lynn
10-09-2008
Harper said:
lynn
10-09-2008
Harper said:
[Y]our country, and particularly your conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world.
It may not be true, but it's legendary that if you're like all Americans, you know almost nothing except for your own country. Which makes you probably knowledgeable about one more country than most Canadians.
[S]ome basic facts about Canada that are relevant to my talk... Canada is a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term, and very proud of it.
In terms of the unemployed... don't feel particularly bad for many of these people. They don't feel bad about it themselves, as long as they're receiving generous social assistance and unemployment insurance.
Dr Alexander
11-09-2008
There is being Smart, and there is being Savvy
Steven Harper is smarter than all of us, he tells us that all the time. After all, he is the foremost Canadian hockey history buff (Canada's-Hockey-Historian-in-chief) and with that, he knows Canadians better than anyone.
That being said, Steve is smart but he does not have savvy. The ducks may be lined up, the stars properly aligned in the sky, and the entrails saged as being a sign of it being the right thing and the right time to do something.
This works well for things you can control. The citizenry can be controlled only so much. It is the "uncontrollable" part of a citizen that a savvy person can grasp and respond to. Harper is a control freak and does not exhibit the savvy required. I don't think any of the other candidates have it also, however, Harper's lack will mean that most likely we will have a minority government which will limit Harper's damage and allow the other political parties to assess their leadership.
I mean, lets face it, Harper was so smart, he implemented a 6 am press conference regime so as to beat the candidates to the daily punch and have reporters field questions to them as they opened their own press conferences and these questions would be responses to what Harper said.
Steve forgot there were time zones in Canada.
Perhaps, if Steven Harper gets the chance, he will declare time zones to be an affront to business and will pass a bill to abolish time zones (except for Newfoundland and Labrador where he will maintain a 30 min difference to spite Danny Williams).
G West
11-09-2008
Maybe not so smart
Not only did he forget about time zones, he seems to have forgotten this is a very 'regional' country.
Atlantic Canada remembers Harper's slights and it isn't just Newfoundland Danny that's decided to ignore the man in the sweater this go round.
Some very interesting results in this early poll:
http://angusreidstrategies.com/uploads/pages/pdfs/2008.09.10_FedRace.pdf
The overall Conservative lead is heavily skewed by the PCs dominance in the 3 prairie provinces. The NDP is now at 21%, only 3% behind the Libs and the Greens are only at 7%.
When you look at BC you find the NDP and Cons are tied in BC and the NDP is ahead of the Libs in Quebec!
Ontario is interesting because the anti-fascist vote may well coalesce around either the Libs or NDP as the campaign goes on.
Pee Wee was obviously hoping to come up the middle in central Canada - but the economy is working against him there.
This could really get interesting....
Frank
11-09-2008
October-November
I've loved this time of year since I was a kid because I get hockey and CFL football at the same time.
This year I get the Cdn and US elections as well. Great days to be a sports fan.
And although the Canucks suck this year the Riders and NDP are doing well.
Good times
Frank
11-09-2008
NDP support in BC doubles
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080911.BCELECTIONPOLL11/TPStory/National
Libs are up in Ontario too according to this one
wacqueline
11-09-2008
Thanks for this.
Great piece, Murray. This is the kind of article I love to read in the Tyee because I can't find it anywhere else. Keep it up!
Luke Skywalker
11-09-2008
Canada's Creme De La Creme Federal Pollster...
Nanos (formerly SES) Research was considered Canada's best political party preference federal pollster during the 2004 and 2006 Canadian elections.
They predicted each party's final standing within .1%... yes that was 1/10 of 1% of the actual result. That's unheard of in opinion polling.
In any event, they have again begun their three-day tracking polls (adding 400 new interviews and dropping 400 interviews each night with a 1,200 sample size.)
And today's first Nanos poll of the election:
Conservative Party 37% (+4)
Liberal Party 32% (-3)
NDP 13% (-4)
BQ 9% (+1)
Green Party 9% (+2)
politico
11-09-2008
Doggone
Strategy?
Well, in Saanich - Gulf Islands the snap election derailed the effort of many individuals and groups that were forwarding the notion of a pre-election election amongst the opposition parties in order to send one candidate to the official election to defeat the 34% minority that support the incumbent Gary Lunn.
The Shun Lunn campaign has retooled and are seeking input on three options:
1) endorse the strongest candidate
2) ndp members campaign to stand down West
3) strategic vote campaign (ABC)
The pre-election had great potential to change the landscape of this riding and empower the voters.
Now it is up to the candidates to try and overcome their partisan bias, put down the kool-aid and do what is right for the environment as well as the country and defeat this regressive conservative cabinet minister.
Go here for details:
http://members.shaw.ca/shunlunn/
Luke Skywalker
11-09-2008
Frank...
Like the last two elections in 2004 and 2006, numerous pollsters will publish numerous opinion polls on a weekly basis. To name a few... Ipsos, Strategic Counsel, Nanos, ARS, Ekos, Compas, Environics.
Be careful of the smaller regional numbers in the sub-samples, particularly Quebec and the track records of these pollsters.
For getting a good grip on the political scene, nationally, your best bet is Nanos and then Ipsos.
For Quebec it's CROP and then Leger.
For BC (both provincially and federally) it's Mustel and then Ipsos.
They will all release polls during the campaign and remember it's very early on in the game.
Be prepared for a yo-yo... er roller coaster ride in terms of the numbers of my own personal pollster preferences... notwithstanding wonky numbers published by the other pollsters at the same time.
But it's still alotta fun!
Frank
11-09-2008
Luke
Luke, did not Ekos poll about 3 times the number of people that Nanos polled?
Anyway, I never take a single poll as the truth of God, even the old Pepsi taste test seemed biased and one-sided.
At this stage of the game most people probably are just coming to learn there's an election on and are thinking they'll vote for Obama or that nice Alaskan lady that reminds them of Queen Thatcher.
What I look for at this point is opening trends, not the numbers themselves.
Frank
11-09-2008
And
As for the Globe-CTV poll its sample size was also a bit bigger than the Nanos one but was concentrated only in the 45 so-called battleground ridings and not the full 308. So on a per-capita basis that's a pretty large sample.
Luke Skywalker
11-09-2008
Frank...
Nanos polls 1,200 (400 every night for the campaign duration). Ya don't need to poll more than 1,000 nationally for margin of error purposes.
One of Germany's leading pollsters (~80 million pop.) also only utilizes a 1,000 to 1,500 sample size.
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/dimap.htm
You are right. Trends are paramount. But accurate numbers are also paramount in terms of political prognostication.
Frank
11-09-2008
Luke
Ekos polled 3,000.
CTV-Globe polled 1,350 in just 45 ridings.
I don't think you can get accuracy in the numbers at this point, like I said, too many people simply aren't engaged/interested/aware yet.
I'm glad Lizzie May is in the debate, and as much as I like Duceppe I can't understand why he's in the english debate.
Luke Skywalker
11-09-2008
Frank...
Yeah the Strategic Counsel tracking poll... interesting stuff.
Ya have to look at the provincial sample size and it's shrinking over time. Now only around ~400 in BC but still a good sample.
Never been a fan of SC though, over the last two federal elections, due to the actual numbers being off. And a political party does not virtually "double" its vote in a short couple of days with no apparent reason like the NDP here in BC. It's unheard of and doesn't make much sense.
SC also had a bad rap in the last BC provincial election here in BC in 2005, although they are probably not utilizing the same methodology here.
http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2005/05/17/GlobeDefense/
As for some tracking polls, remember the BCTV daily tracking poll during the BC 1991 provincial election???
The trend and final numbers showed a Gordon Wilson Liberal win. The actual result had the NDP 10 percentage points ahead.
Caveat emptor.
Frank
11-09-2008
Hmm
Actually I do recall BCTV a day or two or three in front of the vote predicting that Gordon Wilson was coming up fast.
I figured it was a right-wing wink-wink thing to alert everyone to vote Wilson instead of that nice lady Socred.
Luke Skywalker
11-09-2008
Frank...
I knew your ol' noggin' would come around. ;)
It's was my first taste of "tracking polls". Some, like Nanos, are excellent, but BCTV employed a somewhat rogue pollster back then.
Just attempted to google it up:
http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:HnnQ92BmplQJ:oldfraser.lexi.net/publications/onbalance/1991/4-7/+BCTV+%221991%22+tracking+poll&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=ca
Even someone right here on the Tyee posted about same in 2005, but got the facts slightly wrong in terms of the "Socreds" leading or "competitive" [actually dead last] as opposed to the Liberals.
This poll debate takes me back to 1991, for those who remember that far back. BCTV had hired an intried rogue polling firm to provide them with daily tracking poll data to feed Tony Parson’s nightly news. Right up ’till the end, BCTV’s polling data showed the Socreds were competitive - even though their vote had long since collapsed.
http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:3JLRtE41kKwJ:thetyee.ca/electioncentral/2005/05/14/divergent-polls-suggest-volitile-election/+BCTV+%221991%22+tracking+poll&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=ca
G West
12-09-2008
My prediction
The Liberals are going to be looking for a new leader to bring them back from the wilderness - Gerard Kennedy will be on the job - so will Mark Marissen
nightbloom
12-09-2008
On the earlier thread on
On the earlier thread on political blogs I lamented that Chantal Hebert didn't have one. Well, apparently she now does as of August 27 of this year: http://blogues.lactualite.com/hebert/
Is a 'blogue' a blog? Looks like one, talks like one...Good excuse to brush up on my french. She has the sharpest political nose in Canada journalism (imho).
Frank
12-09-2008
CKNW
So the boys and girls at CKNW are sending out "Breaking News" that a new poll is predicting the Cons getting a majority gov't.
With 37%? Uh-huh. Especially when their vote is inefficient as they're getting huge support in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba which won't translate into more seats.
Ignoring the 190% support on the prairies where there's very few seats they already don't have, they're polling
34% in BC
39% in Ontario
25% in Quebec
31% in the Maritimes
There's no majority in those numbers I'm afraid. Much as CKNW would like to believe otherwise.
If the Greens run a strong campaign they could siphon off enough Liberal votes to help the Tories but that's a big "if". So far it hasn't happened.
Luke Skywalker
12-09-2008
Frank...
Hmmmmmmm....
Right now, I can smell the Conservatives being on the cusp of majority territory.
The Nanos/Ipsos/Mustel numbers in the last week of the campaign will provide me with providing an exact seat outcome.
What will happen, however:
Conservatives: Net seat pickups in BC, Ontario (outer 905 belt), and rural Quebec.
Liberals: Net seat losses in BC and Ontario;
NDP: Net seat losses in BC and Ontario;
Greens: NADA
34% in BC
39% in Ontario
25% in Quebec
31% in the Maritimes
These numbers are useless and are from a sub-sample from one of the national polls.
Those numbers are as useless as the BC sub-sample released by Harris Decima today:
Conservatives: 45%
NDP: 22%
Liberals: 20%
Greens: 11%
Don't pay much attention to 'em.
Frank
12-09-2008
Luke
The point is, CKNW seems moments away from being the first to declare a Conservative majority on the basis of the Decima poll.
Your prediction is noted
bikechick
12-09-2008
Populist scheme or something more?
Frankly, I don't see Layton's plans as being "populist". He is merely taking back power from corporations which have been given free reign for too long. The NDP stand on decent policy structures. Their platform is all encompassing, and this one section of ideas is merely something that has been a long time coming.
If capitalism is going to insist on public investment, then the public has a right to insist on them capping their prices.
Luke Skywalker
12-09-2008
Frank... the Numbers
Two reliable (in terms of track record) federal snapshots released today:
Nanos Research:
Conservative Party 38%
Liberal Party 31%
NDP 14%
BQ 9%
Green Party 9%
Ipsos:
Conservative Party 38%
Liberal Party 29%
NDP 13%
BQ 8%
Green Party 11%
Overall fairly uniform results. But check Ipsos' regional sub-sample for BC:
C: 44%
L: 28%
G: 15%
NDP: 14%
Now that is wayyyyyy out of wack. Both you and I anecdotally know that the NDP is in 2nd place in BC, just above the Liberals.
That's why it's always important to be careful of the regional figures... for many reasons ... small regional sample sizes, oversampling in some areas, pollster's track records, etc.
Having said that Ipsos will release very good "BC only" polls near the end of the campaign.
Frank
12-09-2008
Luke
Those Liberal numbers look higher than I would have expected. I hardly see or hear anything positive about them this week.
Yet, if you remove Alta and Sask from the equation (and their very lopsided Con numbers) Nanos is basically saying they're in a dead heat with the Cons everywhere else. That doesn't smell right although who am I to say they're wrong.
Why is that?
Luke Skywalker
12-09-2008
Frank...
You can say that about all three of the major parties. Harper and his three campaign gaffes and opposition to May in the debate, Layton poked fun at trying to be Obama when he was out here in BC and his opposition to May in the dabte.
Most voters don't pay much attention anyway. The only REAL political winner this week was Green leader May with her wide media exposure resulting in Harper and Layton backing down on the debate matter.
Liberals ahead in the Maritimes and population rich Ontario. Cons ahead in Prairies and second place in Quebec (it's all about the regional differences).
Both Ipsos and Mustel always produce "BC only" federal preference polls during the campaign and that's the best and most accurate snapshot of BC.
Forget about all of the national pollsters BC sub-samples.
Luke Skywalker
12-09-2008
Frank...
The polls. Which pollster and whose sub sample size? :)
Liberals are dominant in the Maritimes with the CPC in 2nd place overall. The NDP only has strength in Nova Scotia.
http://www.cra.ca/en/home/Newsroom/SupportForFederalConservativesIsUpSignificantlyinN.aspx
Again the Liberals are dominant in the City of Toronto and the suburban 905 belt. Still alot of angst about the CPC out there in terms of western-based Reform turned CPC. Just ain't the old PC party.
That said, the Liberals are generally ahead overall in Ontario. Right now.
Frank
12-09-2008
Luke
Where are you getting Libs ahead of Cons in Ontario?
Since the big Ekos poll says Cons lead them 39 to 33. Not that I'm saying Ekos is perfect, just that whose word are you taking instead?
Luke Skywalker
12-09-2008
Frank...
Since the big Ekos poll says Cons lead them 39 to 33. Not that I'm saying Ekos is perfect, just that whose word are you taking instead?
Nanos (CPAC) and Ipsos regional sub-samples show the Liberals ahead of the CPC in Ontario.
But I digress.
Frank
12-09-2008
Luke
Well according to your polls the NDP is pretty much last.
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=291859f0-e115-4677-925d-12d7df7d94e9
In which case I will happily welcome a Harper majority.
G West
13-09-2008
Polls
The remarks in the story currently up at the Hook, on the subject of polls, are well worth reading, repeating and remebering:
http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Election-Central/2008/09/12/PollCaution/
As Professor Pilon says:
A few small changes to the federal election act would ensure political polls are better reported, said University of Victoria political science professor Dennis Pilon.
When people report polls they should be required to say who paid for the survey, what were the exact questions and in what order were they asked, he said.
“That stuff is critical for us to know whether we're being manipulated,” said Pilon. “Polling is about trying to create the result you want. That's why millions of dollars are spent on it.”
Polls affect the public in various ways, he said. If people feel an election is already decided, they might not bother to vote. If they feel their first choice isn't popular, they might stay home on voting day. There's also the “winner affect” where some will want to vote for the person they feel is most likely to win.
“That's where all this polling crap starts to become very important,” said Pilon. “There are so many problems with using polling to try to gage what people think.”
As the campaign gets going people will hear a lot of polling numbers, he said. “People should ignore them.”
Frank
13-09-2008
On the bright side
Since the loss of the free-trade election of 1988 many people have given up on Canada. About 10% of the populace stopped voting immediately after that year and have never come back.
So we now have about 1/3 of Canadians not participating in the process. Add to that the fact that only about 15% of the ridings are actually in play and the fact that after an election the wishes of the voters are ignored by the PMO and you can't blame people for not becoming engaged. What would be the point?
Canada badly needs a new electoral system.
realisticman
13-09-2008
“People should ignore them.”
You can, if you like, but I'm not going to ignore them Dennis. I seriously doubt whether any published poll result will change the way I'm going to vote. It's always a good idea to see who commissioned any poll and if you're really interested look deeper and seek more details. In a democracy we have the privilege of knowing what our fellow citizens are thinking regarding government policies. Polls also tell our politicians whether they're the right track, or not.
***
Here's another one:
The NDP and Green party made modest gains at the Liberals' expense, ending the week at 16 per cent and 10 per cent respectively.
Frank
13-09-2008
Clarification
Actually the numbers are slightly different than I suggested. The elections of 1984 and 1988 turned out 75% of the populace.
In the succeeding elections we dropped to 70%, 67% and 65%, then 61% and then back up to 65%.
But the point is, after 1988 there's obviously been more disengagement.