Saturday, March 20, 2010

New Ipsos-Reid Poll: 6-pt Conservative Lead

Ipsos-Reid has a new poll out, but it doesn't have any breaking-news results.The Conservatives have a solid lead over the Liberals at 34%, but their lead has actually shrunk from eight points to six points since Ipsos-Reid's last poll taken at the end of February. They've dropped three points.

The Liberals have also dropped, but only one point. They are down to 28%. The New Democrats are up two to 18% (a very good result) while the Greens are up three to 10%.

In Ontario, the Liberals have lost four points but still lead with 36%, thanks to the Tories also losing four points to drop to 33%. The NDP is the net beneficiary, with a gain of four points to 19%.

In Quebec, the Bloc Québécois drops four points to 35%, but is still well ahead of the Liberals who have gained two points (27%). The Conservatives are up three to 20% and the NDP is steady at 11%.

The Tories continue to lead in British Columbia with 43%, a much better result than other pollsters have shown. The NDP follows with 22% and the Liberals are well behind with 17%. The Greens are at 16%.

In Atlantic Canada, the small sample size has led to an 18-point Tory drop and a 14-point NDP gain. Overall, the Liberals lead with 33%.

In Alberta, the same goes as the Tories pick up 15 points and are at 66%. The NDP drops seven.

In the Prairies, the Tories and NDP swap 13 points to the NDP's advantage, though the Conservatives still lead with 46%.

Thanks to extraordinary results west of Ontario, the Conservatives take 129 seats overall. They win 77 seats in the West, 37 in Ontario, 9 in Quebec, and 6 in Atlantic Canada.

The Liberals win 8 seats in the West, 51 in Ontario, 17 in Quebec, and 19 in Atlantic Canada for a total of 95.

The Bloc wins 47 seats in Quebec.

The NDP wins 10 seats in the West, 18 in Ontario, 2 in Quebec, and 7 in Atlantic Canada for a total of 37.

Ipsos-Reid showed a much larger gap in their February poll, unlike what most of the other pollsters were showing. Now that they show a smaller gap, larger than some of the other pollsters, we can't help but take this poll as a step backwards for the Conservatives. The only party that can be happy with these results is the NDP.

156 comments:

  1. Weird, EKOS had small Tory gains this week.

    I'm thinking the previous 8 point spread was probably a fluke and this poll is more of a correction then a Tory drop.

    A 6 point spread is definetly good news for the Conservatives.

    I'd say the message is to hold steady, don't panic, ignore the noise of gotcha headlines and focusing on passing legislation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. CS, if you want to respond to comments, please do so in the correct thread. I'd appreciate it if you deleted your comment and posted it in the right place. We're not going to have the same discussion in two threads.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks Volkov. Already saw it, saved up for a slow day.

    I appreciate it being pointed out, though, as I'm not everywhere at once. However, for future reference, Angus-Reid and EKOS email their poll results to me, so I never miss those.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 49 Steps,

    Is that so? I remember seeing a CBC archive video talking about that; how in order for any party to become government, they need to dominate only a handful of ridings along some sort of "line" that cuts through the province and Winnipeg. Must be true, because whenever I see a map of districts won in Manitoba elections, the south side of Winnipeg is either wholly orange or wholly blue, and in one case, wholly red.

    We'll see though, eh? It might be those votes in Winnipeg are concentrated along that line for the Tories.

    ReplyDelete
  7. To tell you the truth - much of what I see in this poll is close to what i think will actually happen when we have the next election.

    I expect the Tories to fade in Atlantic Canada and thanks to Helena Guergis - they may barely save their deposits in any of the four PEI seats.

    Quebec is about what I expect next time with Liberals gaining 2 or 3 very marginal BQ seats and Tories falling further.

    Ontario is about what I expect - Liberals back in a small lead and winning back 7 or 8 Tory seats.

    I also expect some small NDP gains in Man/Sask and the Liberals to remain out of the picture.

    As Eric has mentioned, the one thing I do not buy are the BC numbers - if only because they are so out of line with every single solitary other poll which shows major Tory losses there.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm sure everyone saw that ARG also just came out with a poll on provincial vote preferences in BC and the NDP leads Social Credit (sorry I mean the BC Liberals) 43-35

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Volkov,

    The Pc's used to dominate in the subarbs of Winnipeg.

    They hold a few seats, however in the last two Manitoba elections those seats, went NDP.

    It was a testament to the popularity of Gary Doer.

    People in Manitoba really liked him, and his style of governing.

    The red seat in Winiipeg, is River Heights. Liberal leader Dr. Jon Gerrard.

    God bless his soul, Dr. Gerrard, he keeps plugging away.

    With Doer now US ambassador, and Greg Selinger our new premier, things could be a little more competitive.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I think today Poll numbers are great compared to their Poll in Oct 11, 2008. Ipsos had the CPC 34% Lib 29%, NDP 18%, Bloc 9%, Green 8%. Ispos finished 4th in comparison to Angus for 2008 General Election Results.

    http://angusreidstrategies.com/uploads/pages/pdfs/2008.10.15_Election.pdf

    (34+3=37 CPC, 28-3=25 LPC, NDP N/C, Bloc 9+1=10%, Green 8-1=7%

    The Liberals will be trying to defend criticisms from all sides during a campaign.

    The lack of organization, experience will be very interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hey Volkov maybe the NDP lead is centered in the downtown areas.

    44 to 36 in the city seems like a big NDP lead but its possible some of the outlying areas are competitive if there is an NDP concentration in certain areas.

    According to Wiki there seems to be 26 rural districts that the PC would probably take most of with a 55 to 28 lead.

    There's 31 "Winnipeg" districts. PC currently have 4.

    So if they kept the 4 they have now and swept the rural areas they could win a slim majority.

    But more likely they'll need some of those seats. Not sure if the Ipsos definition of "Winnipeg" is the same as Wiki's though.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Shadow,

    The NDP strength in Winnipeg is not concentrated in just the downtown seats.

    It is pretty evenly distributed throughout Winnipeg.

    The PC party has absolutely no strength in North Winnipeg, and It's strength at the current time in south wiinipeg is pretty anemic.

    They are also not very competitive (at present) in Northern Manitoba.

    Unless the PC party can pick up a significant number of Winnipeg seats, it will be hard for them to form a government.

    They completely dominate rural Manitoba.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I gotta hand it to the Liberals, using abortion as a wedge issue is smart politics.

    It's a good issue for them, as Harper is a lot more exposed, then Iggy.

    Paul Wells has an interesting take on the PMs statement about it, in the house.

    My take is that Harper is keeping his head down, knowing that he's going to piss off some people.

    That won't bother me, as long as he makes the right decision in the end.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The NDP, as usual, want to spend a ton of money, on a completly useless commission about violence in sport.

    Way to take on the "important issues", in which the Feds should have no involvement.

    The NDP way.

    ReplyDelete
  18. AJR79 from a political standpoint I think the Liberals went too far with that motion to specifically include abortions.

    In politics you're never supposed to get involved if the other guy is shooting himself in the foot.

    When that story came out in the Catholic Register Iggy backed off on the foriegn abortions thing.

    Several pro-life Liberal MPs jumped on him too, expressing surprise and annoyance.

    Contraception is broadly popular, abortions not as much. Even if the split is 60-40 remember 40% is a majority gov't.


    It'll be interesting to see how the vote breaks down too. If the gov is whipped to oppose the bill and enough Liberals defect it may fail.

    That would be a stunning embarrasment for the Liberals.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Shadow,

    You may be right about the Liberals pushing to hard. It could backfire.

    Without risk, there is no reward, and I think this is a pretty good risk/benefit issue for them.

    Mr. Harper has a much more difficult time negotiating this ground, as the CPC is more divided then the Libs on this.

    The only way they can be really hurt by it if this is seen as a crass political ploy, with no substance.

    I think they are right on the substance, and are wise to push Harper, so that he has to choose...

    Remake Canadas foreign aid policy (and piss off folks like me), or continue with what Canada has been doing for 20 years or more. (and piss off the religious right)

    They know that there is a fundamental disconnect, in how these two factions view things like this, and are politically wise to highlight those differences.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Shadow and AR: It is a divide that exists in the LPC as well. Guys like Dan McTeague are right to lifers. Tom Wappell is one and there are several others. I know Wappell is no longer an MP but he may have some residual influence.

    Apparently polls show 60% of Canadians opposed to abortion but with a majority willing to give the women choice (Credit to Tom Walkom I believe). The issue could well backfire.

    I find it an issue of a desperate party that is so bankrupt of ideas or afraid to show them that they engage in trying the other parties base.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I'm getting the sense that poll results for the Atlantic Provinces have too much error in them to be even slightly useful. The last poll had the NDP at 17% there, this one has them at 32%. The last one had the Conservatives at 36%, this one has them at 21%. That's simply too big of a change to be explained by anything other than excessively small sample sizes by polling companies.

    ReplyDelete
  22. DL said:

    "the one thing I do not buy are the BC numbers - if only because they are so out of line with every single solitary other poll which shows major Tory losses there."
    -----------------------------------

    The sub-samples for BC in the national polls are always wonky.

    At the end of the day, you can expect the CPC to be roughly 40% or less, the NDP to be roughly 25% or more, the Liberals to be roughly 25% or less, and the Greens to be roughly 10% or less.

    You can always bank on that template.

    ReplyDelete
  23. AJR79 how is this tough for the CPC ?

    Harper said we wouldn't be paying for foreign abortions.

    I fully expect every member of the CPC to vote against the Liberal motion.


    In America many people who are pro-choice but personally opposed to abortion don't like it when tax payer money is used to pay for abortions.

    Obviously we have universal healthcare in Canada so we pay for them.

    But our universal healthcare doesn't extend beyond our borders or to foriegn nationals.

    Opposing tax payer funding of foriegn abortion would win the support of a lot of pro-choicers too !

    ReplyDelete
  24. Shadow and AR: It is a divide that exists in the LPC as well. Guys like Dan McTeague are right to lifers. Tom Wappell is one and there are several others. I know Wappell is no longer an MP but he may have some residual influence.

    Apparently polls show 60% of Canadians opposed to abortion but with a majority willing to give the women choice (Credit to Tom Walkom I believe). The issue could well backfire.

    I find it an issue of a desperate party that is so bankrupt of ideas or afraid to show them that they engage in trying the other parties base.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Hi Earl, Ignatieff was actually with Liberal MP John McKay, who is respected for his focus on international development, when he brought up the abortion issue.

    McKay happens to be pro-life and was utterly blind sided. They had just finished a roundtable on foriegn aid and the topic never came up.

    Since it didn't seem to come from caucus for Ignatieff it was likely a political directive from Peter Donolo.

    Classic American style wedge politics at its worst.

    Pretty shamefull stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Shadow,

    You're going to have to show me, where Harper said that.

    As Wells points out, he said there would be "no debate" about it.

    More likely, it's a loose "Cannon", saying things he shouldn't.

    We'll have to see next Tues., what the CPCs position really is.

    Wells also points out that we are a signatory to the Beijing Platform.

    "No debate" in my mind, is this status quo.

    If Harper wants to change it, he will have to say so clearly.

    Also, this is not about funding foreign abortions directly, but about direct funding to oraganizations that provide, or suggest family planning solutions.

    A Bush-type policy here, is poison for the CPC(IMO), and will not have pro-choicers jumping for joy.

    A tricky road to tread, and a test of who has more influence in the CPC.

    As Earl said, this ia a somwhat shallow tactic by the Libs, but I am watching closely, as I belive it will be reveal something about Harpers true loyalties, next week.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Shadow,

    If you will pardon my intrusion.

    "Classic American style wedge politics at it's worst.

    Pretty shameful stuff

    ????????

    Pot Kettle Black!!!

    ReplyDelete
  28. I personally hope the Liberals (and the NDP, BLOC) keep pushing the social issues.

    I want to "smoke out" all those right wing religious crack pots, who form a good chunk of the CPC base.

    ReplyDelete
  29. In all honesty, using a "wedge issue" isn't a "classic American tactic" - it's a tactic that has been used for centuries by every and all liberal democratic nation's parties, including Canada. And it's far from "shameful" - it's politik. That's how you play the game.

    Now, what is a shameful "classic American tactic" is the swath of attack ads that focus on calling people "unpatriotic" and "not Canadian/American" and whipping up such furor over the issue that supporters call for the guy to be either strung up or run out of the country.

    Showing zero respect for not only the democratic Opposition but attacking someone on a personal level like that is shameful.

    ReplyDelete
  30. What is also shameful is a refusal to admit that contraception is a legitimate preventative against unwanted pregnancy.

    What is also shameful is a refusal to admit that counselling third world women on ALL their options is also shameful.

    Religious crack pots

    Trying to impose their warped view on the world.

    Why are social conservatives such kill joys?

    Geez the thought of anybody having sex, just drives them up a wall.

    ReplyDelete
  31. "Now, what is a shameful "classic American tactic" is the swath of attack ads that focus on calling people "unpatriotic" and "not Canadian/American" and whipping up such furor over the issue that supporters call for the guy to be either strung up or run out of the country."

    Canadian Healthcare debate anyone? Climate change? Destroyers of canadian peacekeeping tradition??

    All sides are guilty, not just the tories.



    "I want to "smoke out" all those right wing religious crack pots, who form a good chunk of the CPC base."

    ... More good old left wing style tolerance.

    ReplyDelete
  32. "Trying to impose their warped view on the world."

    "...refusal to admit that counselling third world women on ALL their options..."

    Why is it your opinion of what their options are that should be counseled instead of someone elses??

    ReplyDelete
  33. Barcs,

    Obviously anyone and everyone of the parties have stepped in it. But, I'd like to note, that the Conservatives have done it quite a lot more. And I don't mean those nice old Progressive Conservatives - I mean the Reform Party/Canadian Alliance/CPC.

    If you ask anyone - anyone - they will tell you that Harper's gang from the old parties and the new have elevated dirty politics to a new level in this country, to the point where I'd almost consider going tit for tat just in order to keep up.

    That's not just a Liberal saying it either. Someone I know who has voted PC/Conservatives for his entire life and even served as a bagman up in Kenora says the same thing. The Harper Conservatives are using Republican smear tactics - and they're poisonous, not just to their opponents, but to democracy itself. It's horrifying how some people defend it.

    "Well others do it to! Look at climate change!" That ain't no bloody excuse! If you truly have a problem with it, you'd condone every single instance - not set up a strawman. For shame.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Barcs,

    The options, that save the most lives, should hold sway.

    The opinions of those who are uncomfortable with family planning as part of an intergrated stategy, to improve the health of women and children, should not.

    How many studies have you seen, that say family planning is not an important factor, in the health and well being, of those in the third world?

    Facts, reason, and results are what should matter.

    Not the sensitive sensibilities of the overly religious, or those who wish to pander to them.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Volkov,

    Harpers tactics, have not approached the dirty levels the Liberals used against him, when he was opposition leader.

    If the Liberals don't like how he operates, then they shouldn't have taught him so well.

    I didn't find the "Just visiting" ads very effective, but they don't even come close to "soldiers in the streets" or "you won't recognize Canada", as far as gutter politics go.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "Facts, reason, and results are what should matter."

    Don't member saying anything along the lines of what you seem to think I said Arj79.... but if you want my opinion, like you I am all about the cost/benefit ratio. Send the dollars to do the most they possibly can.

    ReplyDelete
  37. AJR79,

    As I said, all the parties have stepped in it. I won't defend those types of ads - but it doesn't mean that it condones Harper's use of the very same and at times more sadistic tactics.

    Liberals are bad - but Harper's PMO is worse. And don't get me started on the NDP. Some of those provincial parties are nasty as heck.

    ReplyDelete
  38. "That ain't no bloody excuse! If you truly have a problem with it, you'd condone every single instance - not set up a strawman. For shame."


    You still seem to think there is a mythical strawman that is perfect in everyones opinion to run the country perfectly. I don't. I see Harper, I see Iggy. Those are my choices. I think Harper is better than Iggy, I will vote that way. "Anybody but that guy".... seems to me that can only lead to poor options.


    I will also say it again for you volkov. Guns in the streets, hidden adgenda, religious right etc etc. The Conservatives beat the liberals when they are better at them at their own game. When the conservatives forget that game... they lose.

    ReplyDelete
  39. All you had to say Barcs as "I have no problem with personal attack ads," and we all would have gotten the point.

    ReplyDelete
  40. And to note, saying that the Conservatives have a "hidden agenda" isn't a personal attack - I'd put that more under a column of "policy attack," unless you harp on things like, "Harper is dishonest, etc." Saying that the other party may be hiding away some plans from the public that they don't wish them to know about isn't really "personal." But that's just my humble opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  41. "All you had to say Barcs as "I have no problem with personal attack ads," and we all would have gotten the point."

    I believe in defending ones self with atleast the fervor used against you.

    The thousands of personal attacks against Harper, against the Tories, against the Right of center...... I am not surprised/worried/angered that Harper, the tories, or the right of center people are not afraid to crack a few eggs and send some back. Maybe saddened... but it is about time that people from the reasonable portion of the right decided to defend themselves

    ReplyDelete
  42. Barcs,

    It seems that we are on the same page then.

    The reason I misunderstood your position is that you seemed to be taking 49 Steps to task, for saying that "counselling third world women on ALL their options" amounted to 49s personal opinion.

    I just wanted to point out that these options, are not just personal opinions, but fact based solutions, supported by evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Barcs,

    Big difference between "defending yourself" and pretty much hinting that an Opposition leaders should be run out of the country.

    Defend yourself, please - but don't give me the BS stuff about "they did it to us first!" when using personal attack ads that have nothing to do with defending yourself. Where's the right's principles? Where are the supporters standing up to defend the Conservative platform, without resorting to "Not a leader" and "Just visiting"? Do none of you have a moral backbone?

    ReplyDelete
  44. volkov... maybe one could attack policys then.. rather than making up policys, attributing them to the other side, then attacking them based on what is made up. hmmm??

    seems like an attack on the victims credibility and honor to me... what is more personal??

    ReplyDelete
  45. The fact is Barcs, the "hidden agenda" one usually is based on some facts and little-known policy arrangements. I mean, right now, you could attack the NDP for having a hidden socialist agenda, because they hide their constitution online which states their exact intents. It's a little known clause that the NDP doesn't publicize or talk about. 'Tis a hidden agenda.

    I don't know enough about the "hidden agenda" schemes of 2004 and 2000 and beyond to say whether or not it was a bald-faced lie or something closer to the truth, but if it was the latter, I won't condone it as "personal."

    ReplyDelete
  46. "Where's the right's principles? Where are the supporters standing up to defend the Conservative platform, without resorting to "Not a leader" and "Just visiting"? Do none of you have a moral backbone?"

    Like I said.... learned alot from Chretien about tactics. When the tories play the liberal game better... they win.... when they don't??? they lose.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Barcs,

    Again, a non-answer. You're compromising your own beliefs, if you truly are against these personal attacks. And if you aren't, well, come out and say it.

    ReplyDelete
  48. "You're compromising your own beliefs, if you truly are against these personal attacks. And if you aren't, well, come out and say it."

    IMO there are only 3 reasons to commit violence. Defense of onesself. Defense of ones family friends and associates, defense of others in need.

    You want to know my beliefs on personal attacks? they run along the same lines... Basically "only when other options don't exist to ensure the safety and security of the above persons"

    ReplyDelete
  49. Barcs,

    So what you're saying is, the Conservative Party has nothing within its large arsenal of policies and ideals and general proposals that can combat the Liberal Party, so you need to resort to personal attack ads?

    Come on man. Even I give Harper more credit than that.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Volkov my friend sometimes you have to play the game the way the opposition does. The Chretien Liberals opened the door with their secret agenda ads and subtle nods to journalists. I have no problem playing that game.

    If the Dems in the States learned to play the game the way the GOP does we would never have had the Bush train wreck. Sometimes you have to get down in the gutter with your opponent. I wish gutter politics didn't exist. I'd like elections to be about policy and leadership.

    Warren Kinsella said in his book about Canadian Politics that the PC ad on Chretien's face would have worked had they kept running it in 1993. I know I voted PC but was appalled by the ad and glad it was withdrawn.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Earl,

    I know that quite well, trust me. In the game of politics, nothing can really hold you back except whether or not its legal, 'cause that has more consequences than benefits if you're found out.

    But there does reach a point where you need to say, well, we're gotten this far in the dirty war, lets see if we can pull it back. Take McGuinty's 2003 campaign - absolutely beautifully positive, and a great comparison with the NDP and Eve's PCs. There reaches a point when fighting fire with fire becomes no longer beneficial or efficient; that's when you need to change the game.

    Now, wouldn't it be great if we could all sit down together and say, well, we don't want another dirty war, so lets all avoid the personal attacks? That's my kind of ideal - that's what I'd strive for. Doesn't mean it'll happen any time soon, but I'll work for it in the meantime.

    And thats why I keep asking Barcs whether or not he agrees with these attack ads. He says only in defense, essentially, or at least when you have nothing else to protect your welfare. That general means he's against it overall, except in pragmatic and defensive ways. Well, that's good - lets work on that. Let's see if we can avoid coming to that point.

    Does that not sound reasonable?

    ReplyDelete
  52. Johnny Quest: At the end of the day, you can expect the CPC to be roughly 40% or less, the NDP to be roughly 25% or more, the Liberals to be roughly 25% or less, and the Greens to be roughly 10% or less.

    I'd say those numbers are a bit out of date, and (as elsewhere) a moving target. From Éric's BC regional poll history, I'd put the Tories at 32% there and shrinking, the Grits at 27% and bouncing, the Dippers at 25% and steady and the Greens at 14% on a very slow climb. (No, those don't add up to 100%. With this level of accuracy, they shouldn't.) Others are welcome to debate the last percentage point or so, but the ranges are right.

    Of all the parties, the most radical change is the Tories'. They were at 40% half a year ago, but that was then. This is now.

    Of note, their decline started will before detainees and prorogation became hot-button issues. I have nowhere near the wisdom required to attribute it to a single definitive cause.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Volkov i'll say it.

    I have nothing against personal attacks or gutter politics.

    Everybody does it from every party. If they don't they lose.

    In fact this arguement you were making about Harper taking things to a brand new low is made about every decade or so.

    Go back a century and a bit to the days in politics when people handed out single page phamplets.

    They often had disgusting libelous statements that would never be allowed in today's politics.


    Calls for decorum and niceness are a partisan wedge issue meant to make one side look reasonable and the other side look like hooligans.

    ReplyDelete
  54. AJR79 i'd have to go back to Harper's exact words.

    Bev Oda was in the HOC and said that all options regarding contraception would be considered but foriegn abortion was definetly off the table.

    Cannon was the one who said family planning wasn't permitted because this was about saving lives.

    I think he was confusing family planning and abortion though and retracted the statement.

    He clarified that Bev Oda was responsible for the file and her words stand.


    How the policy will work out is that any NEW money that is announced won't be blanket funding for various organizations. It'll likely be earmarked for a specific non-abortion, non-contraceptive cause.

    You're indeed correct that old money continues to fund organizations that do abortion counselling.

    Although we may gradually see that money re-allocated too.

    It will be done by stealth, of course, becasue it would be stupid politics not to.

    If you feel the need to find a new party over this AJR79 you're welcome to.

    ReplyDelete
  55. "So what you're saying is, the Conservative Party has nothing within its large arsenal of policies and ideals and general proposals that can combat the Liberal Party, so you need to resort to personal attack ads?

    Come on man. Even I give Harper more credit than that."

    Nothing? nope. They have about the same policy tank as the Liberals, the NDP and others. But you should not be surprised if the tory attacks continue at least as long as we get things like wafergate or made up attacks on abortion policy gay rights etc....

    ReplyDelete
  56. Shadow,

    Re: Changing parties

    Oh, I know.

    The thought has crossed my mind, and I don't require any permission to do so.

    If Iggys gonna be bringing the National child care to the table, I won't be able to vote for him.

    If Harper pushes on this, then I always reserve the right to pencil in, ole Captain Canuck of the Rhino Party.

    I hear he's secular, and maybe even a real fiscal conservative.

    Two things that I value, where Harper may not fit the bill.

    ReplyDelete
  57. I love the rhino party (specially the old one). They crack me up :)

    They had one idea to build a screw auger from the prairies to port to transport all the grain and avoid the railroads.

    Among my other favorites were:
    -Providing higher education by building taller schools
    -Ending crime by abolishing all laws
    -Abolishing the environment because it's too hard to keep clean and it takes up so much space
    -Putting the national debt on Visa
    -Counting the Thousand Islands to see if the Americans have stolen any


    Bring back the rhino party :)

    ReplyDelete
  58. I'd like to just note, that if the CPC were to give a little on the social conservative issues, the public would cut us more slack on the fiscal ones.

    It may be that we don't have to go around buying peoples votes, with their own money, like a bunch of Liberals.

    A truly secular, fiscally conservative party, would make great gains in the centre IMO, sweep to majority, and fix some of the more pressing problems in this country.

    Taking the so-con route is a sure path to destruction, and will be a shame, as this country needs a big-tent conservative party.

    Wedging off some Catholic votes, will not make up for the losses they incur.

    Whichever path they choses, will determine mine.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Wow there are some tangentaly discusions that have absolutely nothing to do with the posted poll and Eric's analysis.



    The Headline at http://www.canada.com/news/Tories+Liberals+still+dead+heat+Poll/2703919/story.html

    is "Tories and Liberals still in dead heat: Poll"

    That is a bit of unusual spin. As was eric's saying that this was a bad poll for the CPC as it may show a trend for AGR. Might it not be that the last poll really was way out there as was the theory presented at the time?

    The total reported for the parties come to 90%. Are the other 10% undecided or just won't say?

    That would put CPC at 37.7% of the decided voters and Liberals at 31.1%.... getting into CPC Majority MOE

    ReplyDelete
  60. In other words... what we have now give or take a few seats.

    And erics projection from the poll is the same as what we have now. tories + any party = majority, any combination not including the tories requires all 3 other partys to cooperate (or cooperate by abstention) to pass a bill.


    I still don't know how that qualifies as a dead heat....

    ReplyDelete
  61. AJR79 I think you over estimate the number of secular fiscal conservatives.

    The libertarian crowd always polls lower then the more traditional conservatives. Being left on social issues is correlated with being left on economic issues.

    And you make the mistake of thinking you're the only one who can pencil in Rhino.

    Purifying the party of religious voters for a few more urban seats is a big gamble, especially if we lose some of the Prairie seats to social gospel NDP types or some of the large ethnic ridings.

    Remember immigrants aren't hostile to religion.

    Frankly I don't think your recipe is a good one for electoral successs.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Further its impossible to argue that Harper is not a fiscal conservative.

    He may not have a fiscally conservative RECORD but that's because he acts within the bounds of public opinion and a minority parliament.

    People like Andrew Coyne and Maxime Bernier are what Lenin used to call "useful idiots."

    They push the boundaries of what's considered acceptable mainstream public opinion to the right. But there advice shouldn't be taken literally - don't drink your own bathwater.

    Slow, careful, and considered action brings the public along.

    Getting impatient and demanding huge reductions in the size of government is not a recipe for success.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Shadow,

    I can live with some political expedience regarding fiscal matters.

    I'm sure you're no happier then I, at the size of the defict.

    I am not suggesting a "purge" of religious people. That is ridiculous.

    Local candidates can run on whatever agenda they like.

    What I am against, is the leader forming public policy, not on the basis of evidence, but religious pandering.

    Many religious people feel the same way.

    We'll agree, to disagree, on the best path to take, regarding the so-con agenda.

    I will tell you that this kind of thing aggravates the "hidden agenda" fears of the social moderates, big time.

    I don't know if you think that that is something that holds us from majority, but I do.

    Next week will be a test. I'm hopeful that Harper will pass.

    Time will tell.

    BTW, Most Canadians identify as socially moderate, and fiscally conservative.

    Take from that what you will.

    ReplyDelete
  64. AJR79 if your connection to the CPC is so tenous that foriegn abortions not being funded would prompt you to leave i'd suggest you start an Ayn Rand party.

    Harper has blocked any abortion bills from coming to the floor. It was CPC defections that prevented gay marriage from being re-opened.

    I'm not sure how much more secular he could get before people started staying home. Remember the CPC has the highest turnout, most loyal, most energized, and most giving members for a reason. A lot of that has to do with religious types.

    No I don't think the "hidden agenda" thing has any effect at this point. What keeps the CPC from a majority is the BQ taking 50 seats in Quebec. Mulroney never dealt with that.

    As for how Canadians identify i'm not surprised. Its part of the Canadian identity to claim to be a moderate, middle of the roader. The most rabid leftist and ardent righty would probably both claim to be moderates.

    And everybody likes small gov't until you start proposing cuts.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Quebec wants to drill for oil !!

    http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20100320/Gas_Quebec_100320/20100320?hub=Canada

    What an outrage! Dirty tar sands! Emmisions! Kyoto! Fossils fuels! GRRRR. Noooooo....

    (Seriously though the feds should greenlight this ASAP. It'll create jobs and maybe if Quebec had hydrocarbon resources they would stop attacking Alberta.

    God knows they defend their asbestos.)

    ReplyDelete
  66. AJR79 here is the Liberal motion. Still support it ?

    http://www.carolynbennett.ca/whatsNewPosting.cfm?ID=2722

    This line in particular is crass and damaging to our relations with America:

    "...the Canadian government should refrain from advancing the failed right-wing ideologies previously imposed by the George W. Bush administration in the United States..."

    ReplyDelete
  67. Hey Shadow if they put that forward I'm sending the CPC money. That stinks! Libel!

    ReplyDelete
  68. Again Shadow,

    "This is not about funding foreign abortions directly, but about direct funding to oraganizations that provide, or suggest family planning solutions."

    How many times do I have to say this?

    I've read the motion , and yes, I support it 100%.

    If you think badmouthing Bush will hurt relations with the present administration...

    I don't know what to say, but you're wrong.

    And it is exactly the Bush type policy, that I fear may happen.

    Is my relation to the party so "tenuos" that, if we start acting like a party of Bush GOPers, I'll jump ship?

    Yep, for sure.

    My principles only bend so far.

    I'm not saying this is make or break, but will it definately affect my thinking of what our party is.

    One decision like this may not be enough to drive me away, but if I see a pattern of it...

    Bye, Bye, with no apologies.

    No libertarian candidate runs in my riding, but I do have some measure of respect for the incumbents work ethic (a Dipper, Charlie Angus).

    I also know the Dippers won't form government, and that Angus is a lock anyway.

    It's not inconcievable that I could vote for him, if I felt it neccessary.

    If I were to just vote CPC no matter what they did, then I may as well park my brain, and my ethics, and become a full partisan cheerleader.

    Not likely.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Hey Earl,

    I don't see the Libel.

    It looks like a warning shot, across the bow, to me.

    I'm considerably calmer now, then when I thought that they would be putting the kybosh on condoms, and I'm thinking that Harper will find a way to keep everybody content. (if not happy)

    He's been pretty fair at it so far, so I'm gonna wait and see.

    He has earned the benefit of the doubt from me... for now.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Hey AR:

    While I don't like the policy that has been espoused until, now I also find the LPC references to the Bushies tainted. Sure if the policy remains the same it would resemble that of the Bushies. That said you don't put something like that in a Parliamentary motion. It's grandstanding.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Earl is right.

    Its beneath the dignity of parliament. This sort of game playing is an unnessecary partisan shot wrapped in a legitimate policy position.

    Its hard to take anyone seriously who supports such the motion as writen. AJR79 its one thing to agree with the substance behind the motion, but this kid stuff ? Really ?


    It should be noted that Canada's relations with the Americans often depend on Republican senators and congressmen.

    As much as Canadians may dislike him the Bush family has extensive political ties.

    Such a motion being adopted right before a global summit IS going to be percieved as offensive.

    "Canada condemns Bush abortion policy" are not the sort of headlines I want to see writen during the G8/G20.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Shadow and Earl,

    You sold me.

    The language is an over-reach, and I recind my earlier 100% endorsment.

    I'm still in a good 80 or 90% agreement thou.

    I don't mind the warning shot, and it keeps life interesting in Canadian politcs.

    As I said, I hope and expect Harper will smooth this over.

    Despite whats been said about our political culture, it's nowhere near as bad as Americian politics.

    ReplyDelete
  73. "If you think badmouthing Bush will hurt relations with the present administration...

    I don't know what to say, but you're wrong."

    Its not going to hurt with the Obama democrats. But on the other hand....his approval rating... is nearly as bad as Harpers. But atleast Harper is fighting in a 4 party system, In the states it isn't much more complicated that A or B.

    Watching the generic polls in the US.... I give the Obama democrats only a 40-60 in retaining control over the House. And maybe 60-40 in holding on to the senate.

    Obama is in real trouble... but he does still outpoll his party (and outpolls on the right wrong track by 20%. (thta's 60% wrong track, 33% right for those of you watching Harpers 45%)[source: pollster.com its an aggregator)

    .... so come November, it might not just be the democrats we are trying to make nice with. Best to benice to both sides now.

    ReplyDelete
  74. sorry, to clarify, his presidential approval ratings are approximately 20% better than the right track wrong track numbers (which are abysmal).

    ReplyDelete
  75. Barcs,

    I already said I was sold. The language of the motion should be changed.

    I still don't like the Bush/Harper comparisons either. I find them highly unfair.

    The condemnation of a "global gag rule", or something like it should stay.

    If they vote against it, as it is worded... I might not know what to think.

    I'd have to wait to see what they DO, at the G20.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Obama is in big trouble in November, I agree.

    I don't see him losing the House, or the Senste thou.

    He wasn't strong enough, quick enough on health care reform.

    I don't think very highly of his domestic policy (He's a sellout), but I do like his foreign policy.

    I don't mind Bush now.

    He's had the decency to stay gone, and I think he did alright, (for the circumstances), in his last couple of years as POTUS.

    I do think he will go down in history as a bad president, and is not popular even in some Republician circles.

    ReplyDelete
  77. I'm pretty sure this is true:

    "At a meeting with the African Union a week ago, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Leonard Edwards, and the Prime Minister’s personal representative, said that they will support the full package of Maternal Health for Africa and the summits. At a civil society meeting shortly after that, groups assembled were assured that the Canadian government would, again, support the complete package."

    What's up with the mixed messages?

    ReplyDelete
  78. The CPCs have been flipping more then an IHOP, these past couple of weeks.

    ReplyDelete
  79. AJR79 I think the distinction is between supporting something and funding it.

    My guess is that there will be component parts, groups of nations will have specific goals.

    For instance America provides antiretroviral drugs so babies aren't born with HIV.

    Canada provides iron pills so women don't die from their pregnancy blood loss.

    The initiative itself will no doubt include family planning. But the funding for it will come from other countries.

    Canada will sign off on and support the entire package.

    But funding we commit won't be going to family planning or abortion. It'll likely be something relatively simple, low cost, non-controversial and life saving.

    ReplyDelete
  80. As for flipping, I don't think there has ever been any actual policy shifts.

    Just poor messaging, especially from people discussing things they haven't been fully briefed on.

    ReplyDelete
  81. No of course there is no reversal.

    Just straight and honest conservative policy.

    Just like the funding cut to planned parenthood.

    See a pattern developing?

    Well I will tell conservatives straight up that there are a lot of catholics, who are pro choice and believe in contraception.

    I know of what I speak, because I was raised as one, and I reject all their nonsense.

    Conservatives like Shadow, and CS love free speech.

    When Kairos practiced theirs, and dared to criticize Israeli, policy they had their funding cut.

    One of their planned projects, had been to help women in the Congo who had been raped.

    That kind of fits in nicely with Steve's faux concern for poor women and children in the third world.

    Criticizing Israeli policy does not make you an anti semite, unless of course it happens to offend the conservatives. Then they do not believe in free speech.

    So I will tell the conservatives, to keep chasing those Catholic votes, and the votes of the religious crack pots.

    You will find yourself on the opposition benches.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Eric

    Interesting in a way that AR and Ekos both end up with the same number of seats for a Lib-NDP alliance though ??

    132

    Tories 129

    ReplyDelete
  83. I just have one question for the conservatives.

    Watching that self righteous b---d
    Lawrence Cannon, on how he knows best what to fund.

    Almost made me hurl.

    Exactly how many children has the esteemed Cannon given birth to?

    ReplyDelete
  84. 49 steps there is indeed a freedom of expression in the charter.

    I can't seem to find a "freedom of getting government money".

    Kairos is NOT a person and they are not entitled to their entitlements.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Shadow,

    Even you admit conservative policy must be advanced by stealth.

    You provide me with a font of information.

    You also provide me a great insight, into the inner workings of the CPC, braintrust.

    You very neatly display each and every day, why there are a lot of people who are uncomforable and uneasy with your party.

    You provide useful info as to why they should never be handed a majority

    As for Kairos, they are a group of churches, and religioud organizations trying to help the poor, and malnourished in the third world.

    Just exactly an organization the CPC should support.

    Your comments again show a lack of understanding, on this issue.

    Dare not criticize anything big bad Steve holds dear to his heart.

    Retributuion will be swift and brutal.

    One reason why he is completely unfit, and unqualified to hold the office he does.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Shadow,

    I am always amused when socialists demand we fund their socialist agenda indefinately.

    An elected Government is not allowed to defund NGO's - socialists.

    Free speech is only tolerated if it supports their socialist idealogy.

    It amuses me to no end, how democracy or free speech are easily cast away by the socialists to protect their own agenda.

    I have been comparing the problems with Greece and Quebec and how the culture of entitlement is going to have a serious consequence for their neighbours.

    Germany, Alberta, Ontario have been paying for the have-not countries, provinces for decades.

    Let's hope BC, AB, MB, Ontario put pressure to reduce equalization payments.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Shadow,

    Harper practices faux christianity.

    My understanding of it is that you help your fellow man regardless, of their religious background, race, or creed.

    He is a fanatical supporter of Israel based on his religious idealogy.

    Do not misunderstand me, I also support the state of Israel, and their right to exist.

    However with that being said, it is not anti semetic, to point out sometimes Israel is not always right.

    Which is what the Harperites do all the time.

    They even send out disgusting literature, out on this on which they were called on by Irwin Cottler.

    The sop of the Harperites it to attack and demean anyone personally if they dare disagree with them on anything.

    You can correct me if I am wrong.

    I did not realize Stephen Harper was god.

    When did that happen?

    ReplyDelete
  88. Hey CS you may know the bible better than I.

    Is there a passage where Jesus instructs his followers to:

    Form a government, increase taxes, redistribute the revenue to the poor around the world.


    I think I may have missed that part.

    But yeah, Harper is clearly a "faux Christian" for not following that bible passage that 49 steps hallucinated.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Shadow,

    My compliments.

    You are a master builder of STRAW MEN.

    You could give classes on the subject.

    You are an expert

    ReplyDelete
  90. Shadow,

    From your latest round of BS.

    You obviously have no understanding of the teachings of Jesus Christ.

    There is nothing wrong with that.

    I believe church and state should be separate.

    However the Harperites, sure like to throw their superior morals, and ethics around at everyone.

    Harper is the perfect example of why church and state should not mix.

    His fanatical idealogy, blinds him into thinking he knows what is best for everyone, and he is always right.

    He has sent a chill through religious organizations who are trying to do good work with his actions.

    His new found focus on third world women and children is a FARCE

    ReplyDelete
  91. Shadow,

    the latest religion I see from our socialists

    Ice Age Global Freezing, Global Warming,

    all wrapped under "social justice" code word for socialist transfer the wealth agenda.

    It is funny how they won't defend the only democratic state where women, men, all religion, openly gay lesbian rights are protected for rogue states like North Korea, Iran.

    Apparently Hamas has a great model of democracy and tolerance that socialists think we should inflict on society.

    Women rights in Saudia Arabia, Afghanistan?

    Where are the socialists protecting maternal health and children?

    ReplyDelete
  92. Shadow, Canadian Sense

    You do not know how thrilled I am that you two are on the same side.

    Keep it up boys

    I love your statements

    ReplyDelete
  93. Shadow,

    I see the opposition are unable to talk about the economy, deficit, ANYTHING Fiscal related because of their socialist agenda to raise our taxes to pay for "social justice".

    Hundreds of their friends are employed in the NGO's, boards who are now being defunded.

    The link with the NGO's and the opposition parties in providing cover for each other in NOT delivering progress is tragic.

    Under the CPC action on providing reserves clean drinking water is working, in the 13 dark years of the Liberals very few projects were completed.

    The Liberals preferred to take photos instead of concrete action.

    ReplyDelete
  94. BC Voice: The total reported for the parties come to 90%. Are the other 10% undecided or just won't say?

    They're Bloc.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Shadow: Is there a passage where Jesus instructs his followers to:

    Form a government, increase taxes, redistribute the revenue to the poor around the world.


    Luke 20:21-25?

    ReplyDelete
  96. "The sop of the Harperites it to attack and demean anyone personally if they dare disagree with them on anything."

    you are right 49, for example:


    "Shadow,
    My compliments.
    You are a master builder of STRAW MEN.
    You could give classes on the subject.
    You are an expert"


    "His fanatical idealogy, blinds him into thinking he knows what is best for everyone, and he is always right."

    "I did not realize Stephen Harper was god.
    When did that happen?"

    "Your comments again show a lack of understanding, on this issue.
    Dare not criticize anything big bad Steve holds dear to his heart.
    Retributuion will be swift and brutal."



    There are many more examples in this thread alone... about what you suggest others do,... and what you practice in relation to what you preach.

    It is exactly what CS is talkng about when he says: "Free speech is only tolerated if it supports their socialist idealogy."

    The left talks and talks about how they are so tolerant, how they are so compassionate.... but when push comes to shove and someone asks them to explain.... They attack and attack just as you claim Harper does. You are your own best example.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Gilles seems to be making quite a fool of himself.

    It's especially ironic, considering the majority Quebecer opinion during WW2 was, "Frances problem, not ours"

    ReplyDelete
  98. This is the third partner for coalition of the NDP-Liberals.

    Quebec has no future in Canada…the only worthy future for Québec is full and complete political liberty. And that’s called sovereignty.- Gilles Duceppe

    AJR79 already linked it.

    ReplyDelete
  99. I think if NDP + Liberal seats don't equal a majority we're not going to see a Liberal Prime Minister the next time around.

    ReplyDelete
  100. DL said

    "I expect the Tories to fade in Atlantic Canada and thanks to Helena Guergis - they may barely save their deposits in any of the four PEI seats."

    That is unlikely due to the local nature of Atlantic Canada politics. Politicians make mistakes all the time, but I doubt that it'll do much wrt to seat gains in PEI. Gail Shea will keep her seats, because PEI understands the value of having a cabinet minister. Quite frankly she is bringing home the bacon, wrt to federal dollars. Many people predict the Conservatives would lose the Colchester-Musquoitoboit Valley byelection, when in fact it was Shea and candidate Armstrong said to the constituents that an elected Conservative would bring them money for their harbour improvements and several projects. So when an election happens, and it looks like the CPC will win again, many Atlantic Canadians will want to have government members to bring home the bacon. This is why New Brunswick increased their seats from 3 to 6 out of 10 seats, I'd expect they may win one more, the Moncton seat. And West Nova turned Conservative, where only the South Shore is at risking of losing to the NDP due to Keddy's local (or lack of) popularity. In fact PEI may elect another one or two Conservatives, if they want to see a CPC majority government.

    ReplyDelete
  101. In the next election it will be clear that unless the Tories win a majority - they cannot stay in government. In other words there is about a 99% chance that there will be no Tory government after the next election. That makes a Tory backbencher from PEI WORTHLESS.

    ReplyDelete
  102. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Hi Northern Raven. Gail Shea will certainly stay.

    The Cardigan and Charlottetown seats are safe Liberal holds.

    The Malpeque could be interesting. Wayne Easter won by 4.9% last election.

    CPC support has increased in that riding during each of the last three elections.

    And in 2000 the PC + Alliance vote equalled 46.1% so there is still some room for growth from last years 39.4% CPC result.

    ReplyDelete
  104. If the Liberals/NDP have more seats than the conservatives, and decide they have no confidence in Harper.

    Harper has to rely on the BLOC for support on confidence motions, will he do the honourable thing and resign. After such strong anti separatist language.

    How about if the Liberals/NDP have more seats than the conservatives, what then?

    Does Harper go and try and make a coalition with the BLOC?

    Just wondering.

    ReplyDelete
  105. 49 Steps,

    I don't see how that secnerio would be much different, then it is now.

    Harper would continue as PM, and continue to beat the opposition over the head.

    From what I've seen of the opposition, I think they'd continue to take it, with a frown and a shrug,
    and come back asking for more.

    ReplyDelete
  106. I should qualify that last statement, by mentioning it would depend how far back the Libs are in the seat count.

    IMO

    ReplyDelete
  107. 49 steps you seem to be confused about something.

    Harper getting his way because of a weak opposition, from any party, isn't the same thing as a coalition.

    The Liberals proroguing themselves so the budget could pass isn't a Conservative-Liberal coalition.

    The Conservatives passing legislation with the NDP or BQ isn't a Conservative-Socialist-Seperatist coalition.

    A coalition is when a weak Liberal leader tries to take out Harper by making major policy concessions to the third and fourth parties.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Hey AJR79 that was a paritsan hit by 49 steps.

    He's pushed this line before, which is that if legislation passes with the support of another party or if the BQ or NDP is propping up the Conservatives its the same thing as a coalition.

    In his world a strong Harper getting his way is hypocritcal coaltion building.

    Weird.

    ReplyDelete
  109. AJR79/Shadow

    Are you two prepared to go to the polls over Harper not handing over unredacted documents as ordered by parliament.

    Would you like him to seek dissolution to escape a contempt of parliament charge.

    Do you think that will play well with the Canadian public?

    Remember accountable government.

    If you think Harper can get a majority under that scenario, really I wish I had some swamp land in Florida to sell.

    ReplyDelete
  110. 1)I am not sure what is funnier a socialist party supporter that ignores his party is rejected by over 80% since it's inception.

    2) The reality of the same party winning only 1/4 in November 2009.

    3)Voted confidence in the HARPER government this FALL.

    NDP courage a sight to behold!

    ReplyDelete
  111. Liberals are playing the "long game"

    code word we suck, have no chance of winning so we will make sure 29 Liberls don't show up to vote against the budget we don't support.

    Too funny.

    Instead of spending time on real issues they are forced to talk about aiport "Gone Wild" MP's

    Nik Nanos was right they need a scandal, nothing else has worked in winning back the support of Canadians.

    My prediction is 23% for the games and hope we get to test the impressive abortion agenda of the Liberals with votes ASAP.

    ReplyDelete
  112. An election over the detanee issue, would likely be welcomed by the Conservatives. Since no Canadian soldiers were involved with torture, then ultimately the plurality of the voting electorate will not care about this issue. I suspect it will be diffused somehow, and Harper will continue to govern.

    If an election was fought on this issue, Harper would likely retain a plurality of seats. But if the Liberals push this non-economic issue, they could lose seats. Based on the Gun-Registry Private members bill vote, which several NDP and Liberal Rural MPs voted with the Conservtaives, they know that many could lose their seats if the Conservatives push the gun registry issue during an election.

    As for Atlantic Canada I do NOT foresee much seat change, maybe one or seat changes at the most. The NDP would be most likely to gain in NL and NS.

    ReplyDelete
  113. 49 Steps,

    I don't recall anyone mentioning a Harper majority.

    The point was, that he doesn't need one.

    Shadow,

    You're right.

    I've noticed that before.

    It is weird.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Hey Northern Raven I don't know if you caught it but the NDP was way down in Nova Scotia on a provincial level.

    They're an extremely vertically integrated party so there could be a carry over of NDP losing support in NS federally.


    Newfoundland is the wildcard. Couple Tory MPs are talking about comebacks.

    ABC campgaign is over and done with.

    True peace and an endorsement from Danny Williams could be huge.

    The cost ? Canada selling its shares in Hibernia to Newfoundland. He's very interested apparently.

    ReplyDelete
  115. Hey Canadian Sense did you hear the new strategy ?

    Apparently Peter Donolo is convinced that Chretien won victory because of a very weak NDP party during the 90's.

    He wants to polarize the electorate on a left vs right, Iggy vs Harper basis.

    Dion tried pushing the party to the left and it was a disaster. This will be too.

    The abortion wedge issue is only the start. Afghan detainees. Global warming. Childcare.

    ReplyDelete
  116. "How about if the Liberals/NDP have more seats than the conservatives, what then?

    Does Harper go and try and make a coalition with the BLOC?"

    I am betting things will continue as they have the last 4 years in that situation. If the lib/ndp have more seats, but not a majority... and they form a 2 party coalition, they would still be beholden to either the bloc.. or the party they just took power from the tories. In that scenario it is really get support from either or... whereas Harper still only needs support from 1 of 3.

    ReplyDelete
  117. Shadow,

    1) Ignatieff was a great cheerleader for the Bush Doctrine -Empire Lite.
    2) Liberal motion attacking Republicans is an attack on all Americans. OBAMA beat McCain by 5% in popular support.
    3)Introducting Abortion has backfired, census, numerous studies confirm the majority don't share the socialists' view.
    4) An analysis of the immigrants and their religious views spells a significant problem for the Liberals in holding their last strongholds in Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal.
    4)I have joked he is a double agent and will help destroy the Liberal Party.
    5)Organization and Finances have NOT improved significantly.
    6)They are playing visiting existing ridings trying to save their furniture.
    7)Ignatieff personal numbers went south 50% faster than Dion.
    8)Dion was used as a scapegoat for serious structural problems that still exist.
    9)Rick Mercer has done the Imploder, Liberal GPS parodies.
    10)38 extra seats in 2012-2014 will end Bloc leverage.
    11) Strategic Counselling came in 7th in Polling 2008. Need I say more!

    ReplyDelete
  118. Shadow,

    I wonder if Donolo has realized, that there is a united right this time?

    If that's true, then the time will never be riper for Harper to charge in, and grab the centre.

    I hope he doesn't blow it.

    ReplyDelete
  119. White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer said President Obama will issue an executive order after the health care bill passes that reaffirms "longstanding restrictions" banning the use of federal funds on abortion. Those restrictions are known as the Hyde amendment, named after the late Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., who wrote the original ban.
    Looks like Demcrats don't agree with the socialists in Canada on funding abortion for the third world.
    At least the liberals will have China they can look to as a role model for state funded abortions!

    ReplyDelete
  120. Hey Shadow,

    "the NDP was way down in Nova Scotia on a provincial level"

    Yeah that is true, certainly wrt to the current MLA expense scandal and Dexter's budget deficit. But I suspect that if they present competence and a disciplined government (indifferent to their NDP ideologically), Dexter's approval's should rise. Unlike the hard core NDP he presents himself as a confident premier.

    Federally provincial seats do not translate into federal seats as shown in the CCMV bylection, where provincially the NDP took 4 of the 5 provincial seats, and got 2nd in the election. But with Peter Stoffer and Megan Leslie, the NDP have strong local candidates who I suspect could increase the number of fereal seats in the HRM, South Shore, and Cape Breton. Remember in the 1997 election the Liberals were shut out completely, and lost all their seats to the NDP and PC's. The NDP have base strength, and could do very well in next elections.

    Yeah, NL well that will be a tough one. When you look at the votes, except for Jack Harris' St. John's East, basically the winning Liberals vote did not increase (in many cases decreased), and the CPC vote completely stayed at home. That explained the 40% NL turnout in the past election. The feelings about the Atlantic Accord are still there, I suspect that the need for a cabinet minister will not persuad the electorate, and the CPC will be shut out again. Frankly they may not be able to win until Harper leaves, and McKay or some non-Western leads the CPC.

    Even if Harper sells the shares to Hibernia, it would be in NL interest to leverage the Fed to reopen the Churchill Falls deal. Which as I understand, they could force a new deal with Quebec. Though for the prize of 10 to 13 seats in Quebec, I doubt that no one wants to attempt that pandora's box.

    But those are all good thoughts!!!

    ReplyDelete
  121. CS,

    I was pretty good about not bringing this up today, but you started it.

    While the U.S may not directly fund foreign abortions(or domestic ones), their "global gag rule" has been reversed by Obama.

    This is what the Liberal motion is warning about.

    If you want to go down the GOP road on abortion rights, I'll warn you...

    You're in for a bumpy ride.

    Canada is not America.

    Paul Wells again, discussing how Canada now stacks up against the U.K, U.S, and E.U.

    ReplyDelete
  122. CS,

    Take a moment to reflect on Obamas position, on abortion.

    Now tell me if you think that executive order, is going to be what you would want.

    I'm thinking no, and I wouldn't be too excited about it yet, if I were you.

    ReplyDelete
  123. AJR79,

    I am not in the game of bashing the democrats, republican voters in the US.

    The Liberals love to attack our allies and neighbour.

    "Warning" noted.

    a)Socialists teaching us a lesson?

    Millions have died from the failed socialist experiments in Eastern Europe. Many fled to North America.

    I have ZERO interest in following the Liberal - China as the role model to follow on human rights or population control.

    Thanks again for the "warning".

    ReplyDelete
  124. I don't need to attack the Democrats or Repubican voters for validation of my views.

    29 Liberal MP ignored any changes to the budget that would risk an election.

    The NDP caved in Fall 2009 when the election drums were beating loud.

    Voters need a responsible alternative in the opposition. We don't have it.

    1) 10 Million savings on 10%
    2) Airport Gate
    3) Bloc tax AB for Quebec HST

    I am ZERO problem with consulting our fellow voters on the smear campaigns in QP.

    1) Redacted Documents fairytale spin by the socialists, separtists.

    It is simply a mistake to attack G.W. policies as backward, evil as the socialist regularly do in Canada while ignoring policies in China, Iran, Saudia Arabia record on maternal health and children.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Obama issuing an executive order on abortion is laughable.

    This is a guy who opposed the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

    Its a little known fact but babies sometimes survive an abortion, they are forcefully expelled before they can be dismembered.

    If viable doctors have a moral obligation to provide care for such a baby. Except it was standing practice for many years simply to let such babies die and not report the botched abortion.

    The Born Alive act put a stop to all that and had widespread support from almost everyone.

    Obama was so hardcore in his abortionist beliefs that he opposed the measure.

    ReplyDelete
  126. a hidden agenda of the scheme to preserve this chunk of the forest was to allow the WWF and its partners to share the selling of carbon credits worth $60 billion, to enable firms in the industrial world to carry on emitting CO2 just as before, more than a few eyebrows might be raised. The idea is that credits representing the CO2 locked into this particular area of jungle – so remote that it is not under any threat – should be sold on the international market, allowing thousands of companies in the developed world to buy their way out of having to restrict their carbon emissions.

    Here is the Cap & Trade NGO's with business and gov't at work!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7488629/WWF-hopes-to-find-60-billion-growing-on-trees.html

    ReplyDelete
  127. Shadow,

    If your interpretation of Obamas vote were accurate, then there would be 0% chance, that he would be POTUS now.

    I know you are familiar with the concepts of "poison pills", and "unclear language", yet you don't seem willing to add these nuances into you assesments of those you disagree with.

    I wonder why.

    ReplyDelete
  128. CS,

    I'm sure mainstream Canada is very concerned that the LPC is taking it's direction on human rights, and population control... from China.

    Maybe you should get a chalk board, and a talk show.

    Open all of our eyes to this communist plot.

    Also, Iran and Suadi Arabia have abortion laws that you would just LOVE.

    If you want to bring them here, then I've got a party for ya.

    Here's the only Canadian political party that is anti-choice

    ReplyDelete
  129. AJR79 this particular issue did indeed set Obama back in the polls.

    And the "unclear language" or "poison pill" defence is hard to reconcile with the fact that other pro-choice dems in the Illinois legislature voted for it.

    In the end Obama threw up a cloud of multiple defences, the campaigns moved on, and it was forgoten when the economic crash hit.

    Here is a column by Kathleen Parker, a writer for The Washington Post. This is probably about a fair minded description of the issue as you'll get:

    http://www.postwritersgroup.com/archives/park080822.htm

    Take away line:

    "It is probably fair to say that Obama does not favor infanticide, though his position on the Illinois bill was extreme even by pro-choice standards."

    ReplyDelete
  130. "Harper practices faux christianity."

    I certainly hope so. I don't want actual religion anywhere near my government.

    On the topic of this poll, this is a really high Green result for an Ipsos Reid poll. It's just one data point, but this could legitmately mean something.

    ReplyDelete
  131. It might be uncomfortable to admit the LPOC track record turning a blind eye to human right abuses and war crimes.

    Which country do the Liberas refer to as a model in spending on "Green Technology"? China

    When our Government, PM raises concerns about China, the LPOC rush to raise trade with China.

    Business first from the Party of Bay street.

    Can you link a single PRESS release for 1,000's from the LPOC ever rebuking China on anything.

    William Sampson ring a bell?
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/sampson/

    Prince Charles, not the Liberal government got him out.

    APEC Inquiry and use of rounding up students, strip searches, pepper spray by the Liberals?

    LPOC alleged CBC reporter was biased and wrote a leter to have him trasferred of APEC investigation.

    Who was the communications chief?

    Liberals did not want to offend a despot?

    ReplyDelete
  132. William Sampson was arrested and jailed in Saudi Arabia, not China.

    I guess CS has now revealed all the secrets of the LPOC.

    We are desperately trying to impose a totalitarian regime on Canada.

    We want to indoctrinate children, starting in nursery school, about all the glories of communism.

    The LPOC,is the party of the charter.

    Guess what we want to flush that, and take away everyone's rights.

    We want to have summary convictions, and bring back the death penalty.

    We want to introduce a one child per family law.

    If you have a female child, and do not want it, the LPOC gives you pewrmission to drown it.

    We want to turn Canada into China.

    I am glad the secret is out.

    Just think it took Canadian Sense to figure it all out.

    What is wrong with the rest of you?

    ReplyDelete
  133. The Party of Bay Street-Toronto has a track record. Since losing power in 2006 they have been unable to provide a credible alternative.

    The desperation of losing the last stronghold urban vote in Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal to other political parties is evident.

    Some prefer to scapegoat Dion with the 26.3%, other believe the trend from 2000 is not complete.

    An election will clear up the slide from 26% at the ballot.

    Sadly the Bay Street Party are doing everything in their power to avoid returning to the ballot box.

    Only one non-confidence vote since 2006 - LPT.

    80+ votes of confidence for CPC Agenda.

    Taunts and threats don't count!

    ReplyDelete
  134. Just one more thought.

    Stephen Harper did visit China, not too long ago.

    Business people in Canada were not happy with the CPC handling of the China file.

    Until Harper, came along Canada had a stellar reputation in China, going all the way back to Bethune, and Trudeau.

    Even the CPC now realizes, that you cannot treat a country with 1 billion people so disrespectfully.

    Whether you like it or not China is an economic powerhouse. Thats reality.

    You can open up more dialogue, with mutual respect, than idle threats such as the CPC was practicing.

    Harper even visited India, because he finally realizes the economic realities of the world.

    The future is India, and China.

    And just to be clear, the LPOC is the party of the charter.

    Funny because of that charter, and charter rights violations, Jaffer escaped some major prison time.

    The CPC is always complaining about the charter, but they just love it, when it helps them.

    Canadian Sense as always you put forward very reasoned and intelligent points. You have given me much to ponder.

    You sir are a credit to the CPC

    ReplyDelete
  135. http://www.dd-rd.ca/site

    Dec 2002

    Human rights are such a low priority that the Prime Minister recieves kudos simply for mentioning them in a speech! There is no sustained or stubstantive policy dialogue between human rights NGO's and the government on China.

    /_PDF/publications/globalization/canadaTradeHR-China.pdf

    Rights & Democracy Article on Liberals.

    Explains why Liberals are so busy defending Nortel Pensions and have little interest in human rights abuses in China.

    ReplyDelete
  136. Yes the LPOC is busy defending Nortel pensions.

    That probably means quite a bit to those workers, who are worried about their pensions.

    The LPOC is not standing up for human rights, and taking China to task.

    Thats funny.

    I thought Stephen Harper was the Prime Minister of Canada, is that not his job?

    CS you are always attacking Bay Street.

    When did the CPC become the Anti-business party?

    In case you haven't heard, we already have and anti-business party, it's called the NDP.

    All the ills of the world, are all the fault of the LPOC.

    LPOC caused hurricane Katrina. LPOC caused the tsunami in Haiti. LPOC caused the earthquake in Chile. LPOC caused the flash flooding in Madeira.LPOC was also responsible for the plague (even though there was no LPOC then, or even Canada)

    If anyone has a problem with anything you know who to blame everything everywhere is all the fault of the LPOC.

    That's OK I guess LPOC carries the burden of all the world's problems on their broad shoulders.

    ReplyDelete
  137. Ira: On the topic of this poll, this is a really high Green result for an Ipsos Reid poll. It's just one data point, but this could legitmately mean something.

    I'd stress the "one data point" here. Look at the noise in Éric's national polling trends.

    Having said that, the long-term Green trend is up. Also, at this stage every point for the Green Party is meaningful; the difference between no seats and the first seat is major.

    For this reason, the provincial trends in BC and Ontario are more important to Greens than the national trends because the first Green MP is most likely to come from one of those provinces. The Quebec numbers have been steadily climbing but that province doesn't lead the trend. The party sometimes polls third and has even polled second in Alberta, but any number of punchlines can follow that statement.

    Also, don't get me wrong: every Green vote in every riding is valuable and Greens are working hard in ridings with unbreakable incumbent locks. However, some votes have more impact than others under our system.

    ReplyDelete
  138. "LPOC caused hurricane Katrina. LPOC caused the tsunami in Haiti. LPOC caused the earthquake in Chile. LPOC caused the flash flooding in Madeira.LPOC was also responsible for the plague (even though there was no LPOC then, or even Canada)
    "

    Nice touch of sarcasm but you missed Jaffer and Guregis !! Obviously the fault of the LPOC !

    ReplyDelete
  139. It looks like the long game strategist can't face the reality voters don't trust Liberals.

    Pity.

    Unwilling to vote non-confidence in a minority parliament to protect the government they don't trust that keep passing their "neo-con" agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  140. Peter,

    Acoording to CS voters do not trust the Liberals.

    I guess the Canadian public has given a ringing endorsement of the CPC.

    CS never stays on point and never answers questions.

    I just want to know one simple answer when is the CPC going to hand over unredacted documents as ordered by parliament.

    Why try and hide behind the skirt of a "Retired Judge" who has no authority.

    Why doesn't Nicholson ask a sitting judge about the documents.

    You know why he doesn't?

    Because he know the answer he will get back.

    What is it with conservative cabinet ministers acting badly in airports?

    First Guergis, and now Blackburn.

    Just as an aside aren't you glad CS belongs to the CPC?

    ReplyDelete
  141. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  142. Liberal campaign they keep stalling!

    1) Airport rage, we love PEI
    2) "that guy" won't play nice
    3) We promise to restore any funding cuts in abortion in 3rd world
    4) National Daycare $ 5 B
    5) Kelowna $ 5 B
    6) QST payoffo $ 2 Billion
    7)Carbon Tax $ 10 Billion
    8)GST 2% $ 15 Billion

    A winning Campaign Platform strategy if I have ever seen one!

    ReplyDelete
  143. Liberal cabinet minister so drunk he wasn't let on a plane ?

    Wow. Ten times worse then Geurgis or Blackburn.

    An actual official incident with official ramifications.

    Hypocrisy is golden !

    ReplyDelete
  144. Shadow,

    Thank you for pointing that out.

    The difference being I do not excuse bad behaviour, like you do.

    As for hypocrisy being golden.

    Well I guess you would know.

    You practice it on a daily basis.

    ReplyDelete
  145. 49 steps your party has a record you can't run from.

    The same people who were in the past Liberal gov'ts are there today.

    Its not like a bunch of fresh faces.

    The airport behaviour of CPC cabinet ministers is far superior to that of LPC ministers.

    I certainly won't be supporting a Liberal next time around.

    Slogan: We fly drunk! We try and break the rules! One set of rules for us, another set for you!

    ReplyDelete
  146. Shadow,

    That statement was ridiculous.

    But since you were so kind to provide a slogan for the LPOC to run on, I will provide you with one for the CPC

    "Vote for us, we love to snort cocaine"

    "Vote for us, we throw our boots at secutity people in airports"

    "Vote for us, we try to bring tequila on planes, and the insist security personnel open it in fron of us, after it is confiscated"

    "Vote for us we cry over broken love affairs in a potato patch with a dog present"

    "Vote for us we have a cabinet minister who leaves NATO documents in his biker girlfriend's house"

    "Vote for us we think cancer is a "Sexy Issue"

    I could give you some more slogans, but out of respect and kindness towards yourself I will stop.

    Thank you for your advice

    ReplyDelete
  147. Shadow,

    Yes I guess the Liberals could alway's run on their record.

    Balanced budgets, and fiscal responsibility.

    Do you even remember what those are?

    How about the record of international respect, rather than scorn and ridicule.

    How about running on the record, of science over religion.

    How about the record of respecting Canadian institutions, and traditions.

    As for "old faces"

    Stacked up against the likes of Guergis, Van Loan, Flaherty, Baird,
    Toews, Bernier, Raitt, Lunn, Clement, (and various other losers)

    I think the LPOC looks OK

    I mean all the LPOC has is bank economists, medical doctors, consitutional scholars, lawyers, economists (Real Ones), professors,
    and various MPs representing all walks of Canadian life, and even a celebrated astronaut.

    I agree let us compare the two teams.

    I don't expect to receive an honest assessment from you.

    ReplyDelete
  148. Balanced budgets ?

    What on earth are you talking about 49 steps.

    If you're refering to how the Liberals cooked the books by downloading services to the provinces without a way to pay for them and raiding EI premium funds then I suggest you hang your head in shame.

    Our budgets were never truly balanced until Alberta came through for Canada with oil revenue.

    By that time the Liberals were already cooking up crazy ways to spend billions and billions.

    ReplyDelete
  149. 49 steps,

    Maybe they should run on their record of Adscam corruption, setting but not meeting their Kyoto targets, wasting taxpayer money on hair-brained pet projects like the long-gun registry, and lying their way to office with the Red book (3 friggin times)

    I think the Liberal past record, is a major reason why they are not in power today, and may not be for some time.

    That's an honest assesment.

    ReplyDelete
  150. 49 Steps,

    Almost forgot.

    As for Chretien representing Canada well on the world stage.

    Don't be ridiculous.

    How are his Chinese buisness intrests doing these days anyway?

    ReplyDelete
  151. The one of many problems with the track record of the Beer & Popcorn Liberal Party

    They insult stay at home parents, farmers, hunters from the rural community on a regular basis.

    The Pink Book Liberals like to rollout the same promises without costing the plans and introducing them into this minority parliament for debate.

    Payroll tax next year, alternative from the Liberals?

    Adult conversation from Liberals in four years in parliament from cheap seats?

    ReplyDelete
  152. Yes I guess harper is doing one bang up job on the world stage.

    Just think of all that respect he received in China.

    It almost makes me blush, to think of all the respect he received in Copenhagen, at the climate change conference.

    Just remember all the ridicule for missing a G20 photo in London, because he was in the bathroom (though he says he was in a conference)

    Just think of all the ridicule we are receiving in the European newspaper (Guardian being one), because we want to exclude family planning from our initiative, for the G8.

    Yes Mr. Stephen Harper is doing one swell job.

    ReplyDelete
  153. 49

    "Just think of all the ridicule we are receiving in the European newspaper (Guardian being one), because we want to exclude family planning from our initiative, for the G8."

    Give it up, this is nothing but a haven for CRAP trolls. You're wasting your time and effort.

    Go elsewhere

    ReplyDelete
  154. 49 steps if you want to hang your hat on the opinions of dictators and left wing crackpot newspapers go ahead.

    Canada under Harper has never had so much influence in Britain, France, Germany, Israel, and the United States.

    We've got the G8 eating out of our hands.

    ReplyDelete
  155. Shadow,

    Did you write that with a straight face?

    My friend you need a bigger shovel.

    And some better lines to recite.

    ReplyDelete

COMMENT MODERATION POLICY - Please be respectful when commenting. If choosing to remain anonymous, please sign your comment with some sort of pseudonym to avoid confusion. Please do not use any derogatory terms for fellow commenters, parties, or politicians. Inflammatory and overly partisan comments will not be posted. PLEASE KEEP DISCUSSION ON TOPIC.