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

Election 2011

My suspicion is that, if the numbers hold up for two more weeks and the Conservatives have an increased minority, that - strategic flu - is exaclty what will happen. The Liberals will know that they, with only say 77 seats, the same as at dissolution, have no political right to try to seize power and that if they do try they will be punished for it at the polls. None of the parties, not even the BQ, will want to force another general election so it is likely that Harper, if he can get an increased minority (145-153 seats) will govern, for two years anyway, as though he has a majority.
 
In other news, today the Technoviking exercised his political right and voted.  He voted the same way he always does: by secret ballot.


"The Technoviking doesn't vote with an "x", the "x" votes with a Technoviking"



Get out and VOTE.
 
Technoviking said:
In other news, today the Technoviking exercised his political right and voted. 
  :orly:
Advance polls in Upper Canada, my riding anyway, aren't until 22, 23 and 25 April.
I can't believe we're making 'special conditions' for the Maritimes...again  ::)



;D
 
Either the Chief Electoral Officer made a special trip to the Infantry School to personally hand deliver a ballot to the TV, or he voted at the service poll. Your choice!
 
Some food for thought about the numbers of the latest polls according to Mr. Campbell;

As the university semesters have wound down, and exams are in full swing, more students are at home studying and available to answer the phone, vs. out doing the weekend usual. As well, most/all of the (very) left of centre students I know (There are a lot of them out there, especially back East) will tell absolutely anyone who's willing to listen just how much they hate Conservatives, and why we should all vote for the NDP, since they know what's best for everybody, just like them. Plus, Jack Layton never exhaled, which is pretty cool if you someone who probably has half a dozen bongs and pipes laying around their dorm room/apt.


 
Just found this little tidbit from Mr. Ignatieff's speech just prior to the vote on non confidence:

It is not just democracy that the House will be called upon to affirm this afternoon. The House should also affirm Canadians' hunger, nay their longing, for change. It is time to change Canada's direction. It is time to get us on the right path. After five years of Conservative government, it is time to say enough is enough. Enough of the politics of fear. Enough of the politics of division. Enough of the politics of personal destruction.

Source

I think that the indications are that Mr. Ignatieff was wrong.  Canadians are not "hungry for change".

The thing, though, about the polls is how they can even reasonably predict that person "A" will win seat "X", based on a percentage difference that is well within the margin of error.  Are their polls out that label certain ridings that fall within the percentage of error as "undecided" or "uncertain"?
 
Old Sweat said:
Either the Chief Electoral Officer made a special trip to the Infantry School to personally hand deliver a ballot to the TV, or he voted at the service poll. Your choice!
I think we all know that the Technoviking gets special treatment.


(Or is that he ought to get treatment for being "special"?) 

Either way, his vote was cast for the riding of Prince Edward - Hastings, firmly in Upper Canada's domain ;D
 
Technoviking said:
Just found this little tidbit from Mr. Ignatieff's speech just prior to the vote on non confidence:

Source

I think that the indications are that Mr. Ignatieff was wrong.  Canadians are not "hungry for change".

The thing, though, about the polls is how they can even reasonably predict that person "A" will win seat "X", based on a percentage difference that is well within the margin of error.  Are their polls out that label certain ridings that fall within the percentage of error as "undecided" or "uncertain"?

I find this site of interest if you are looking for info on the trend in a riding:

http://www.electionprediction.org/
 
Baden  Guy said:
I find this site of interest if you are looking for info on the trend in a riding:

http://www.electionprediction.org/
That's perfect.  Thank you!
 
NinerSix said:
Wow, 73 seats are too close to call.


If you apportion those 73 seats in accordance with the split of the decided seats the prediction is, roughly:*

BQ:      48 seats
Con:  151 seats
Lib:      76 seats
NDP:    33 seats


Which is pretty close to what ThreeHundredEight.com says:

11-04-18.PNG


Thus, it appears that the polling might be fairly consistent.


----------
* I say roughly because the BQ is not competing for all 73 uncontested seats so one has to develop a formula that accounts for the Bloc's "fair share" of the 22 seats that are too close to call in QC.
 
Re Voting:

Kirkhill has already voted as well.  And he got a Special Ballot to do it on - secret squirrel style.  Go down to your local Elections Canada office, as for the Special Ballot and they will give you a blank "write in" ballot.  Write the candidate's name and put it in an envelope, which you put in another envelope which you put in the ballot box.

And nobody guess which way I voted..... I want it to be a surprise.
 
Kirkhill said:
Re Voting:

Kirkhill has already voted as well.  And he got a Special Ballot to do it on - secret squirrel style.  Go down to your local Elections Canada office, as for the Special Ballot and they will give you a blank "write in" ballot.  Write the candidate's name and put it in an envelope, which you put in another envelope which you put in the ballot box.

And nobody guess which way I voted..... I want it to be a surprise.

yep.....works like a charm......
 
Kirkhill said:
Re Voting:

Kirkhill has already voted as well.  And he got a Special Ballot to do it on - secret squirrel style.  Go down to your local Elections Canada office, as for the Special Ballot and they will give you a blank "write in" ballot.  Write the candidate's name and put it in an envelope, which you put in another envelope which you put in the ballot box.

And nobody guess which way I voted..... I want it to be a surprise.
Technoviking doesn't run for office....office runs for the Technoviking!  Thanks for the vote ;D
 
Come on Kirkhill, it is well known you have been a rabid supporter of the Pirate Party.

After the local Pirate riding association promised rum, wenches and fist fulls of gold doubloons, I've been taking a much closer look at them as well.... ;)
 
Here's a burning question as yet unanswered during the campaign...

Where's Bob? His silence speaks volumes.
 
Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the Ottawa Citizen, is an article that puts a new, to me, 'spin' on the vote splitting/strategic voting debate – it is true that the NDP vote often collapses and many end up voting Liberal but only when the Liberals have a real chance at forming a government, according to Darrell Bricker of Ipsos Reid:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/decision-canada/Vote+splitting+likely+benefit+Tories+most/4637362/story.html
Divided, Harper stands: how the left-wing split could return the Conservatives to power.

By Tobi Cohen, Postmedia News

April 18, 2011

As NDP support continues to rise in the polls, will the left-wing vote splitting phenomenon be a serious game changer and prove to be a boon for the Tories in their quest for a majority?

While it's not unusual for the New Democrats to experience a surge during a campaign — Jack Layton often outperforms his competitors in the English-language debate, resulting in a spike — experts say it usually peters out come election day.

But there is a sense NDP voters, who often switch to the Liberals at the last minute, aren't going to do that this time.

Despite Michael Ignatieff's efforts to paint a vote for the NDP as a vote for Stephen Harper — something pollster Darrell Bricker said has been a Liberal strategy since the 2004 — things are different this election.

"It only works if the public actually perceives the Liberals as having a potential to stop the Tories," the Ipsos Reid president said in an interview.

"I don't know that that's actually correct this time."

He suggested the centrist party "abandoned" its right-wing supporters by "tacking left" in a bid to woo NDP votes, and since that's not working, the Liberals have been left on "a very narrow piece of ground to stand on."

Yet, with Liberal support stagnating and popular support for the NDP unlikely to translate into a significant number of additional seats, it seems Ignatieff's mantra could nonetheless, ring true.

"For the Tories to do well, the NDP has to do well," Bricker said.

"The Liberals and the NDP are basically fishing from the same pond. So, if the NDP is getting a greater share of that pond, it makes it more difficult for the Liberals to win seats.

"It also means the progressive vote splits and the Conservative vote, which is pretty solid, can come up the middle."

But Layton insists he's not the left's Preston Manning, poised to divide the vote and give Harper a seemingly endless reign.

In an interview with the CBC's Peter Mansbridge Monday night, Layton dismissed suggestions that he's no different from Manning, whose Reform Party divided the conservative vote and allowed former prime minister Jean Chretien's and his Liberal party to rule Parliament Hill for more than a decade.

"Our party is 50 years old. We have been there working for working families, bringing Medicare to Canada, bringing the Canada Pension Plan to Canada, often in minority government situations," he said.

"We have worked with other parties to get results. That was not what the Reform party was all about . . . and so we're a very different kind of animal."

The very idea that an NDP vote is a vote for the Tories frustrates New Democrats to no end.

"By now, you have heard some leaders say that you don't have a choice. That it always has to be same," Layton has repeated in his stump speeches.

"You and I know that's not true."

Campaign spokeswoman Kathleen Monk added Canadians do have a choice and that in many ridings, it's a race between the Conservatives and New Democrats as "more and more people are turning to Jack Layton as a positive alternative to Stephen Harper."

In Quebec, where the results of two recent polls put the NDP at the head of the pack among federalist parties with 26 per cent support, even Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe was showing signs of concern.

On Monday, he urged Quebecers not to be fooled by the fact that Layton — who was campaigning in Quebec City — happens to be a "nice guy."

"Some people are saying that when Layton gains, Harper laughs," Duceppe said during a rare moment in which he commented on the latest polls.

"If we want to stop the Harper majority, the only possibility is voting for the Bloc."

Concordia University political science professor Bruce Hicks agreed vote-splitting on the left will most certainly benefit the Tories outside Quebec where NDP support comes at the expense of the Liberal party.

He suggested NDP attack ads against the Liberals, only serve to reinforce that.

But he's less sure about who will benefit from the NDP surge in Quebec where the party has just one seat — it's first ever in a general election.

It's a province "very much split by region," he said, noting the Quebec City area tends to be right of centre while rural Quebec tends to vote Bloc. Meanwhile, the Island of Montreal, with its large anglophone population, tends to sway Liberal.

"Where it seems at this stage is that the New Democrats are simply taking a little bit from everywhere as opposed to surging in a particular area," he said.

He suggested the New Democrats are simply not strong enough to replace the Liberals as Canada's second party and that the only way for the left to defeat the Conservatives would be through some sort of power-sharing arrangement.

With files from Peggy Curran

© Copyright (c) Postmedia News


Caution: twenty plus years ago Bricker was Director of Public Opinion Research in Brian Mulroney's PMO so his thinking may be a bit wishful.
 
Another interesting bit of speculation, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the National Post  that touches some well known former DND people (Art Eggleton and Bob Fowler) and touches, through a Fowler remark, a keystone of Canadian (Conservative) foreign policy:

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/04/18/john-ivison-york-centre-key-battleground-between-tories-grits/
John Ivison: York Centre key battleground between Tories, Grits

John Ivison

Apr 18, 2011

On May 2, if Ken Dryden loses his seat, it will be a sign that Stephen Harper is well on his way to majority government. The hockey legend’s York Centre riding used to the safest Liberal seat in the city, routinely won by former Defence Minister Art Eggleton by more than 20,000 votes. Now, it’s the most vulnerable.

If York Centre turns blue, it will represent the Conservative Party’s return to the city of Toronto, where it hasn’t had a federal Tory MP inside the 416 telephone area code since 1988, when nine were elected to sit in the Mulroney government. It will also mark the end of Liberal dominance in a riding the party has held since 1958.

The former Montreal Canadiens goalie won by 11,000 votes in 2004 and 10,000 in 2006. But times change and he barely managed to eke out a 2,000 vote victory at the last election.

The knock on Mr. Dryden is that, while he enjoyed being a minister in the Paul Martin government, he is less enthusiastic about sitting in opposition. According to Hansard, he is in the bottom 10% of MPs when it comes to speaking in the House of Commons and he is at the top end of those missing votes. Even Liberals in the riding say they rarely see him.

This is in stark contrast to his Conservative rival, Mark Adler, a high-profile businessman who founded the Economic Club of Canada, and who has been working hard in the riding in which he was born and raised, and in which he still lives.

This is only part of the explanation for the relative decline in Liberal fortunes in York Centre. For one thing, almost all Liberal candidates saw their support dip in 2008, as a result of a lacklustre national campaign.

But the largest single factor boosting Conservative fortunes, and undermining Liberal fortunes, is the staunch support for Israel shown by the Harper government, in a riding where the Jewish population is more than 20% of voters. “It’s not an advantage,” admitted Mr. Dryden.

Former diplomat Robert Fowler has suggested that Canada’s foreign policy in the Middle East has been dictated by “the scramble to lock-up the Jewish vote” at home. Whatever the motivation, the impact has been tangible in ridings like York Centre and next door Eglinton-Lawrence.

At an all-candidate’s debate last week in a local synagogue, the subject of Israel dominated proceedings.

Mr. Adler, a rookie candidate, stuck to his talking points, which included repeated mentions of Stephen Harper’s track record of “standing shoulder to shoulder” with the state of Israel. He contrasted the Conservative government’s stance during Israel’s war with Hezbollah in 2006, with Michael Ignatieff’s condemnation of Israeli “war crimes” and compared Mr. Harper’s “values” with the Liberal leader’s “moral relativism.” Support of Israel cost Canada a seat on the United Nations Security Council, he said.

Mr. Adler is clearly a respected character in the community. He is a member of the synagogue where the debate was held and is the son of Holocaust survivor, “who came to Canada with a number on his arm, a shirt on his back and hope in his heart. He’d be proud of Stephen Harper.”

If that were the only ballot question, the game would be up for Mr. Dryden, who was left citing the Grits designation of Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist organizations as the case for the Liberal defence.

But, as Mr. Dryden put it, while the Jewish community feels very strongly about Israel, it also feels very strongly about Canada. When the questions turned to domestic matters, he was on firmer ground than his Conservative rival, who repeated the same pre-programmed lines time and again, like some kind of automated hotline.

There may be some legitimate questions about Mr. Dryden’s desire to return to Parliament if, as looks increasingly likely, the Liberals lose the election. He is 63 and is no fan of the antics that pass for debate in the House of Commons.

But there is no doubt about his passion and commitment when he is speaking in front of a small group about substantive issues.

He talked about the biggest difference between the two parties – “Harper is suspicious and fearful of the future. Liberals are hopeful and see the best in people. They are excited about the future,” he said. It sounds almost risibly naive but his belief in the role of the state to help Canadians endure “life’s bumps” seemed to make many in the crowd pause for thought.

When asked how the respective parties would support at-risk seniors, Mr. Adler said the Conservatives planned to boost the Guaranteed Income Supplement by $600 and had introduced a National Seniors’ Day.

“A National Seniors’ Day. Wow,” mocked Mr. Dryden, in perhaps his most animated moment of the night. “GIS was created under our government when I was Minister of Social Development.”

Noticeable by his absence at the debate was NDP candidate Nick Brownlee, a University of Toronto student (the Greens were there, but in the shape of a candidate from a neighbouring riding, not the York Centre candidate, Rosemary Frei.)

Mr. Brownlee said he hadn’t received word about the debate, since he was only fully registered on the ballot on the day it was held. He refuted allegations made by some in the Conservative camp that the NDP is not running a full campaign, in order to help ensure a Dryden victory. Yet, he acknowledged the party won’t have any signs up in the riding until this week.

The clever money at this point is on a Conservative win. But if a good number of the 4,481 votes the NDP won last time switch to the Liberals, the Tories may have to wait until the next election to break their 23-year winless streak in Toronto.

National Post



Right now Dryden still appears to have a fairly comfortable grip on York Centre:
  • Dryden leads Alder, the Tory, by 44.2% to 40.2% according to ThreeHundredEight.com; and
  • The The Election Prediction Project (Wilfred Laurier University) still has it in the Liberal column – not too close to call.

But it illustrates the tactical differences between the Conservatives and the other national parties: the Tories are running riding by riding campaigns, courting the ethnic vote here and and the anti-gun registry there while the Liberals and Dippers are running, essentially, national and leader-focused campaigns.

It is the latter aspect that puzzles me about the Liberals: prince Michael Ignatieff is, still, far and away the least popular 'leader' - running well below the low levels of popularity his weakened party enjoys. Why base the campaign on him? Why is he front and centre all the time, reminding Canadians that they really don't like (trust?) him?
 
The Good Grey Globe's Lawrence Martin is fairly well known for his staunch anti-Harper views but this column, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail, seems to have been written more in sorrow than in anger:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/this-campaigns-about-plodders-not-prophets/article1990109/
This campaign’s about plodders, not prophets

LAWRENCE MARTIN

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
Published Tuesday, Apr. 19, 2011

To look at Canadian history in the broad sweep is to see alternating patterns of visionary (so-called) and grinding leadership.

The first period featured the towering, expansively minded national figures of John A. Macdonald and Wilfrid Laurier. There followed more plodding but sometimes effective men – Robert Borden, R.B. Bennett, Mackenzie King and Louis St. Laurent. Then came a series of prime ministers who saw themselves as castle builders. John Diefenbaker, Pierre Trudeau and Brian Mulroney cowered at the thought of being custodians.

For the past two decades, the country has seen a return of the grinders. Jean Chrétien and Stephen Harper put their stock in stability and incrementalism. Not for them the hyperbole of other PMs, or even presidents such as Lyndon Johnson, who ventured to proclaim in 1964: “These are the most hopeful times since Christ was born in Bethlehem.”

One can debate which set of leaders has been better for this country – the plodders or the prophets. Big thinkers sometimes have blinkers. Mr. Diefenbaker set passions ablaze with his unhinged biblical incantations of 1958 that won him a record 208 seats. People strained to touch his coat. But he expired quickly. Mr. Trudeau dragged Canada out of its cultural backwater with his magnetic intellectual appeal. But expectations were too grand to be fulfilled. “Whatever happened to your Just Society?” a protester once complained to him. “Ask Jesus Christ,” Mr.Trudeau shot back. “He promised it first.”

Striking about today’s dynamic is less the run of the plodders than the degree of stagnation. There have been minority governments since 2004. For the past five years, the standings and the polls have barely changed. Governance has been given over to around-the-clock political infighting. No leader looks boldly to the future. We talk about the fiscal deficit. A bigger problem is the inspirational deficit, and it’s seldom been so high.

This is the void that Michael Ignatieff, while running a good campaign in certain respects, has been unable to fill. He hasn’t offered an alternative platform and vision alluring enough to light the imagination. He needed the advice that Henry Kissinger, then an academic, offered to campaigners for John Kennedy in his run against Richard Nixon in 1960: “We need someone who will bring about a big jump – not just an improvement of existing tendencies. … If all Kennedy does is to argue that he can manipulate the status quo better than Nixon, he is lost.”

With his recent exhortations to “Rise up, Canada,” the Liberal Leader seems to be getting it. He is showing passion, a feel for the country, a sense of its future. But it’s probably too late. Interviewing him before the campaign began, I was struck by his difficulty in laying out an inspiring vision of Canada. A person of his background, a man of letters, a seasoned communicator, should feast on such a question. But he finally settled on something about equality of opportunity. Hardly invigorating.

Mr. Ignatieff is advised by a lot of smart but cautious former Chrétien types, and his platform shows it. It’s full of pragmatic, old-time Liberal stuff. Didn’t he realize he was starting so far behind?

After being bested by an impressive Stephen Harper in the English-language debate, Mr. Ignatieff’s last-ditch effort is in resorting to what the Harper Conservatives have used for years – attack ads built on the politics of fear. That the Harper operatives, specialists in below-the-belt politics, are aghast at these ads and demanding they be pulled is hypocrisy of the highest order.

The Conservative campaign has offered the Liberals ample opportunity. Tory promises that won’t take effect for four years – and only if the budget is balanced – are hardly compelling. The campaign also has featured an unusual number of blunders. But in the absence of a more ambitious Liberal alternative, the effort appears to be enough to win, ensuring the continuance of the era of the grinders.

Now, I take issue with Martin's suggestion that St Laurent was a plodder and Trudeau a visionary. He seems to have forgotten that under St Laurent Canada became a “player” in the  modern world, he seems to have forgotten the St Lawrence Seaway, etc. St Laurent was a real intellectual, an internationally respected legal scholar and practitioner, one of the fathers of the UN and NATO. Trudeau was a ligthweight – a third rate human being upon whom a first rate education was wasted.

But I do share his general view: we do go through periods of “visionaries” and “plodders” and Harper, like Chrétien, is a plodder. (I suspect That Paul Martin might have been a visionary and some of us had high hopes for Ignatieff, but ...) I'm also not so sure the visionaries have been all that successful.
 
Back
Top