Election 2011

[ModlrMike]

Prince Michael Ignatieff appears to have put paid to the coalition issue, according to this article, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ignatieff-rules-out-coalition/article1958015/

I say “appears” because I expect the Conservatives to do whatever they can to tell Canadians that a Liberal/BQ/NDP alliance is only a step away. Plus, of course, after a Conservative minority government is installed and has had a few weeks to fumble function there is nothing in that bare statement to say that the coalition idea cannot be reborn.

He said exactly the same thing last time too. Kept that promise didn't he?

 

[Edward Campbell]

More, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from ThreeHundredEight.com, related to five just released polls:

SATURDAY, MARCH 26, 2011
Three polls, best Liberal and Tory outcomes

There has been a flurry of polls over the last two days, with new releases by EKOS, Léger Marketing, Angus-Reid, CROP, and Probe Research. I will cover them all in detail in Monday's poll summary, but for now I'd like to look at the best seat outcomes the Liberals and Conservatives could draw from the results of the three national polls.

Similar to my monthly best and worst case scenarios, this exercise takes the best regional results for each party in each of these three polls, and mashes them together. Doing so results in the Conservatives taking in about 42% of the vote in their best case scenario, while the Liberals take about 29% in theirs.

Clearly, these three polls were not particularly good for the Liberals when they cannot top 30% in a best-case-scenario. I haven't plugged the numbers into the projection model yet, but we can probably expect them to be down on Monday morning.

In any case, when we put the best results of these two parties together, we get the following seat projections:

The legend may be a bit confusing at first sight:
The top graph is the "best" for the Conservatives (160 seats vs. only 61 for the Liberals) and
the lower is best for the Liberals (they get 87 seats and the Tories only get 141).
The colours remain the same Blue for Conservatives, Light blue = BQ, Red = Liberals and Orange = NDP.

It becomes quickly apparent that none of these three polls, even when we take the best results from each of them, are as good for the Tories as this week's individual Ipsos Reid poll. Nevertheless, the Conservatives still have the potential to win 160 seats, with 70 of them coming in the four western provinces, 61 in Ontario, 11 in Quebec, and 17 in Atlantic Canada.

This actually serves to caution the Conservatives a little. This is a best-case-scenario result, and included a 15-point lead for the party in Ontario and a 16-point lead in Atlantic Canada. And yet they are only five seats over the majority-mark, and both the Bloc and NDP remain strong.

When we look at the Liberals, they do not fare nearly as well. With all of the best regional results of these three polls, the Liberals still only win 87 seats (16 in the West, 37 in Ontario, 14 in Quebec, and 19 in Atlantic Canada). While that is a gain of 10 over their standing at dissolution, it would change very little.

But none of these polls were very good for the Liberals. This scenario has the party with a tiny lead in Atlantic Canada, tied with the NDP in Quebec, and trailing the Conservatives in Ontario. It includes the unlikely mark of 32% in Alberta, better than either their results in British Columbia or the Prairies.

Obviously, the Liberals are gunning for a government in this election. But it will be considered an especially catastrophic failure if the Conservatives win a majority for themselves. At this point, it appears that the Liberals do have it in their power to prevent that from happening, which is as much of a silver lining as the last days of pre-campaign polling will allow.

I doubt this "good news” for the Conservatives can hold but it makes kicking the campaign off very, very difficult for the Liberals; it may make them desperate to do something big, soon.

Here are links to the EKOS, Léger and Angus Reid polls.

 

[a_majoor]

Perhaps the best thing for the CPC to do is ask Canadians why the opposition triggered another election when the presumptive outcomes are not very different from what exists today? Constantly asking what the opposition hoped to gain and what is different about today compared to all the other opportunities to trigger a vote of non confidence (and a constant reminder of the $300 million cost of an election) may do far more to shift the polls than "He didn't come back for you" (clever as that ad is).

It will also shift attention to all the opposition parties rather than making this a "Steve vs Iggy" cage match. While I have little confidence in the legacy media to look at the broad picture, the growth of the blogosphere should raise these sorts of questions in quite a few more minds. We really do need to break the current situation open and generate new ideas.

 

[RangerRay]

I agree. It seems to me that the taxpayers are shelling out $300,000,000 so that the Liberals can have a leadership campaign.  Very lame.

 

[ModlrMike]

An interesting tool for analyzing one's voting preference:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/votecompass/


Like all surveys, I'm sure there's built in bias, but it's an interesting exercise just the same.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Hey- that was alot of fun!

 

[Edward Campbell]

Hey- that was alot of fun!

Yep, and you'll never guess where I ended up ...  :nod:

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I have some idea, Edward.

 

[wannabe SF member]

Here's something I've been asking myself for a while. If the conservatives get their majority, do you think they'll go further with defense budget increases than what was just presented for the last budget?

 

[Infanteer]

Probably not - getting the fiscal house in order will be a priority.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Here's something I've been asking myself for a while. If the conservatives get their majority, do you think they'll go further with defense budget increases than what was just presented for the last budget?

I think you would be thinking rather wishfully.

While Stephen Harper, unlike some of his recent predecessors, is not anti-military and is, probably, not inclined to see DND take a disproportionate share of the deficit elimination burden, my sense is that majority or minority there will be some budget cutting. If he gets a majority then, I expect that the cuts, while painful, will be partially offset by additional allotments in the Supplementary Estimates when necessary.

I think Stephen Harper has an agenda - I suspect that he does want to change the political landscape in some quite fundamental ways. He is, I believe, pretty committed to the "night watchman" philosophy of government that John Ibbitson alluded to in a post I made a couple of days ago.

That means, as Infanteer suggests, getting our fiscal house in order by cutting expenditures without increasing e.g. the HST: partially by vacating some areas of "shared" jurisdiction, like healthcare, and, thereby, forcing the provincial government to make the hard and unpopular choices about multi-tiered healthcare. He probably supports a "just strong enough" military that can be used to enhance Canada's international reputation and defend our sovereignty in the Arctic but i think you would be wrong to expect that a Harper majority would mean "good times" for DND and the CF.



Edit: punctuation  :-[

 

[SeaKingTacco]

He probably supports a "just strong enough" military that can be used to enhance Canada's international reputation and defend our sovereignty in the Arctic but i think you would be wrong to expect that a Harper majority would mean "good times' for DND and the CF.

Of course, one must compare that with the alternatives.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Of course, one must compare that with the alternatives.

Yes, indeed, any or all of which would mean more decades of darkness© for DND and the CF.

 

[Edward Campbell]

More data, this time reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the Ottawa Citizen, based on a March 2011 Ipsos Reid poll:

Source: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Health+care+issue+Canadians+Election+poll/4510093/story.html

It looks like a long, uphill battle for Prince Michael Ignatieff. That poor, immigrant boy is going to need all the backbone they were supposed to instill at Upper Canada College, Canada's elite and über-expensive boarding school. And his "issue" (Honesty/Trustworthiness) doesn't seem to be Canadians' top issue, either.

But the fears of a coalition are evident: check out Prince Michael's hidden agenda score - nearly half of Canadians think he has a coalition hidden up his sleeve.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Rather telling that the hottest issue in a Federal election, Healthcare, is actually a Provincial responsibility...

 

[Hawk]

I've been in here time and again spouting about how I hate polls and pollsters, having worked for a couple. I took the one on the cbc site, and rather enjoyed doing it! If the poll questions are right in front of you, you can read them slowly and think about the answer, unlike doing the same poll over the phone with a fast talking, rehersed pollster. (Those will, incidently, be the same questions worded exactly the same when Ipsos Ried calls your house.) The hidden bias comes in with the way the pollster emphasizes the words, and in the script they're capitalized or underlined so the kid knows how to bias the poll. This way, you read it for yourself. It came down clearly on the side I favour.

As for Iggy's hidden agenda - of course he has one. He'll form any coalition it takes!

Hawk

 

[ModlrMike]

The first polls out certainly look good for the Torries, but six weeks is a long time. I wager Mr Harper will emulate his previous approach of one announcement per day. The problem for Mr Ignatieff now is that the Liberals have no real platform other than "evil Harper = George Bush".

 

[Edward Campbell]

An earlier projection, in the Globe and Mail but from ThreeHundredEight.com's Éric Grenier, gave the "best" and "worse" case scenarios as:

Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/startings-points-for-each-party-in-2011-election/article1958462/?from=1958461

Most recently ThreeHundredEight.com predicted, based on "start of the campaign" polls:

Source: ThreeHundredEight.com


It looks to me that, as the campaign opens, the Tories have a credible shot at a majority (around 165+/- seats) or, at worst, a reduced minority (around 135+/- seats). I expect the Liberals and NDP and the media to make much of the potential "Harper majority" to try to frighten voters away from the Conservatives and encourage "strategic" voting - but this time both the Liberals and the NDP will be fishing in each other's waters.

 

[Jed]

I really appreciate the diagram showing the seats in the Commons. If the Bloc Best and Worst seats were indicated as well, it would also illustrate a possible Coalition seat arrangement.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Count the BQ as 50+/-.

In my guesstimation: if the Liberal do their best (95+/-) it must coincide with the NDP doing almost their worst (25+/-). Let's say it's 95 Liberals + 25 NDP that's 120 seats, allow 50 for the BQ and that means the Tories are going to have 135+ (there may be a couple of independents) - they will be called upon to form a government. The three opposition parties can defeat that Conservative government and the GG can, probably should if the defeat comes early, ask Prince Michael Ignatieff to form a coalition and try to earn the confidence of the HoC, but the only way a Liberal/NDP coalition can govern is with active BQ support and I repeat: Canadians will not stand for the BQ "calling the tunes," not even from the sidelines.