Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Angus-Reid poll brings us back two years

A new Angus-Reid poll gives each of the parties the exact same level of national support that they had at the end of the 2008 federal election. But a few regional differences would result in a marginally different House of Commons.Compared to Angus-Reid's last poll conducted at the end of October, the Conservatives have gained only one point, and now lead with 38%. The Liberals are unchanged at 26%, while the New Democrats are down one to 18%.

The Bloc Québécois is steady at 10%, while the Greens are up one to 7%.

UPDATE: Note, Angus-Reid reports a margin of error of 3.1. As they use an online panel, it is, according to organizations like the AAPOR, inappropriate to report a margin of error. I'll quote the American Association of Public Opinion Research on this:

AAPOR considers it harmful to include statements about the theoretical calculation of sampling error in descriptions of such studies, especially when those statements mislead the reader into thinking that the survey is based on a probability sample of the full target population. The harm comes from the inferences that the margin of sampling error estimates can be interpreted like those of probability sample surveys.

While it is the same situation in the top line numbers as in 2008, the regional breakdowns do show some shifts. Oddly enough, it seems to be a shift of Conservative support from West to East.

In Ontario, the Tories are up three points and lead with 44%. The Liberals are down one to 31%, while the NDP is down three to 16%. The Greens are up one to 8%. These results do echo some of the recent polls we've seen.

In Quebec, the Bloc is steady at 39%, while their opponents are all below 20%. The Liberals lead the pack with 19%, down five. They are followed closely by the Conservatives at 18% (+2) and the New Democrats at 17% (+3).

The Conservatives lead in British Columbia with 39%, up seven points from the last poll. The NDP is down seven to 30%, the Liberals are down three to 25%, and the Greens are down four points to 4%.

In Atlantic Canada, the Conservatives have jumped 12 points and lead with 41%. While normally this would be the result of a mere statistical anomaly, this isn't the first time that we've seen the Tories in front in Atlantic Canada. The Liberals are down five points here, and trail with 38%. The NDP is down four to 17%.

The Conservatives are down 12 points in Alberta, but still lead with 50%. The Liberals are riding very high at 22%, up six.

In the Prairies, the Tories are down 19 points to 51%, followed by the Liberals at 24% (+14) and the NDP at 22% (+7).

With this poll, the Conservatives would win 18 seats in British Columbia, 26 in Alberta, 22 in the Prairies, 64 in Ontario, seven in Quebec, and 11 in Atlantic Canada for a total of 149, up 13 from Angus-Reid's last poll. Short of a majority. I've said it once and I'll say it again: no majority without Quebec.

The Liberals would win seven seats in British Columbia, two in Alberta, four in the Prairies, 30 in Ontario, 13 in Quebec, and 19 in Atlantic Canada for a total of 77, down three.

The Bloc would win 53 seats in Quebec, unchanged from Angus-Reid's last poll.

The New Democrats would win 11 seats in British Columbia, none in Alberta, two in the Prairies, 12 in Ontario, two in Quebec, and two in Atlantic Canada for a total of 29, down 10 seats.

Clearly, the Conservative gain has come at the expense of the New Democrats. Being only six seats short of a majority would not be a bad position for Stephen Harper, and certainly one that would not mean the end of his leadership.

Speaking of which, Angus-Reid asked respondents whether the leaders of the various parties should be changed. Of his own supporters, Stephen Harper received the green light from 79% of Conservatives, compared to 14% who would like to see him go.

Jack Layton had a similar result, with 80% saying he should stay and only 9% of New Democrats saying it was time for a change.

Elizabeth May received the support of 64% of her voters, while Gilles Duceppe did the best of all with 86% saying he should stay as leader of the Bloc Québécois.

The worst performer was Michael Ignatieff. Only 38% of Liberal voters said he should remain leader of the party, compared to 46% who said it was time for him to go.

The bad news doesn't end there for Ignatieff. Only 14% of Canadians approve of his performance, compared to 47% who disapprove. That is a widening of the gap by six points compared to Angus-Reid's last poll. For Harper the numbers were 26% approval and 47% disapproval, not good either and an increase in the gap of three points. Jack Layton had the best result, with 25% approving and only 34% disapproving, though that did widen the gap by five points.

Angus-Reid also asked people to attach character traits to the four leaders in the House of Commons. Leaving aside those traits that have seen only a minor variation since the end of October (<5 points), we see a very bleak picture for the Liberal leader. The traits that grew by a significant amount for Stephen Harper were "efficient" and "strong", and for Jack Layton they were "compassionate", "strong", and "intelligent". The one trait to increase for Gilles Duceppe was "intelligent".

But for Ignatieff those that saw a big increase were "arrogant", "inefficient", "weak", "boring", and "out of touch". The one trait that had a large decrease was "intelligent".

While it is just a poll, the combination of factors makes this one of the worst ones I've seen for the Liberals recently. It argues that Michael Ignatieff has taken the party no further than Stéphane Dion did in 2008, and his leadership numbers are heading in the wrong direction. Poll-wise, it has been a very bad week for the Liberal leader.


  1. FWIW, one thing that has to be troubling to the Liberals is that the latest cycle of polls keeps showing them gaining ground in the one area where it is very unlikely to yield much in the way of additional seats - Alberta!

  2. These numbers could produce a very narrow CPC majority.

    I'm thinking of factors like some Liberal retirements ex. Keith Martin and Peter Milliken, new star candidates for the Tories, the "Ford effect" in the GTA, and the long gun wedge issue.

  3. Keith Martin's seat has NDP written all over it. Peter Miliken's seat in Kingston is full of educated people who Harper keeps shitting on. As for the long gun registry - well we had a byelection in Dauphin and the Tory vote dropped 5% and the NDP vote went up 10% - hard to see much evidence that of that issue making much difference.

  4. Eric,

    Unless you're REALLY comfortable with the precision of your prediction methodology, I wouldn't be ruling out a Tory majority yet.

    For example, I've suggested that the Tories can plausibly be expected to do better out East than your seat predictions indicate. It is, for example, somewhat odd that the Tories seem to be doing significantly better (and the Liberals significantly worse) there than they did in 2008, and yet they only gain one seat. I'd suggest that that may be a legacy of the ABC campaign in NFLD in 2008 and the uniform swing assumption of your prediction methodology (that's not a criticism, I know that without province or riding level data, that's the only reasonable assumption you can make). If you assume that the the gain in Tory support has been even across the Atlantic provinces, then, yes, you wouldn't expect the Tories to pick up many seats (since, the new votes would be spread out across ridings they won last time and ridings they lost big in last time). On the other hand if, as is more plausible, the gain in Tory support out East has come about largely because they've regained their previous level of support in Newfoundland (quite plausibly, in light of recent dealings between Newfoundland and the feds), than you might expect to see larger gains for them there (I don't think, for example, that it would be unreasonable for them to recover the 3 seats they won in 2006 - in light of the generally stronger position of the Tories out East).

    The same issue, obviously, applies with respect to Ontario. I think that that your prediction of 64 seats for the Tories is plausible. But, equally, with those polling numbers, I could see the Tories winning 70+ seats in Ontario. Consider that the current numbers for the Tories and Liberals are nearly identical (with the parties reversed) to the election results in 2004, when the Liberals won 75 seats in Ontario.

    Obviously, one can squabble over the exact numbers, but the point of the exercise is that while your prediction of 149 seats for the Tories is probably a reasonable approximation of how they'll do (and, in fairness, I don't think you've ever suggested otherwise), but with that number, I don't think you can rule out the possibility that the Tories could eke out a majority despite a weak presence in Quebec.

  5. I disagree with the statement about no majority without quebec. You made that statement assuming Atlantic figures from a while back, but Tory growth suggests they have a strong upside possibility in that region. Look at the Alberta and Prairie numbers and their weakness in the AR poll... if those are an anomaly and they rebound while maintaining the numbers in the east (and assuming they keep the 7 projected seats in Quebec) they could easily pick up the 6 seats needed to get a majority without any pick-up in Quebec. Of course if they lose those 7 seats it becomes nearly impossible again.

  6. Carl,

    Of course, my own projections are subject to the poll's MOE and my own model's MOE. Nevertheless, I just don't see it in the cards without some growth in Quebec or the maintenance of their 11 seats there.

    Sure, at 149 they could eke out a majority with a few wins here and there. But I'd argue that they are nearing their ceiling, and that with their current vote pattern these 149 seats might be pushing it to the max.

    As to Atlantic Canada, my model doesn't use uniform swing, so the ABC campaign in Newfoundland & Labrador doesn't play as big a part in my projections as you'd expect.

  7. Even with no ABC campaign from Danny Williams - the Tories will be hard-pressed to gain much ground in Newfoundland. Incumbents tend to get well established in that province and become very hard to beat. Of the three seats the Tories lost - one - St. John's East went to Jack Harris of the NDP with him getting 73 PERCENT of the vote and he has been very high profile ever since. The Liberal in St. John's West seems to establishing herself as well. The Tories might have a shot at regaining Avalon - but the rest of the province is all super-safe Liberal seats.

  8. Dl are you joking ?

    The CPC came within a hair of winning Keith Martin's seat in '08. NDP was back in third by a fair margin.

    Long time incumbent Peter Milliken, the speaker of the house!, won by only 6%. Harper is up in Ontario. This is going CPC.

    "As for the long gun registry ... Dauphin"

    Two words to silence the crazy NDP spin on this one:


  9. Eric,

    I wasn't thinking so much about MOE (I agree, we have to take the numbers at face value), so much as the possibility that for a given level of support the model might imperfectly reflect the actual results. In the absence of detailed regional or riding data, (which doesn't exist), it's hard to translate province (or supra-provincial regional data) in riding specific results and expect them to be right on.

    I'm curious about your methodology for allocating votes in the Atlantic provinces, if you don't use a uniform swing. I mean, we never get province-level data, so how do you apportion gains amongst different provinces, if you don't just say: "well, they're up by 5%, so +5% for them in each riding"?

    In any event, this isn't an exact science(and to your credit, you don't pretend that it is) and the model, while a helpful tool, has to be complimented by subjective judgement calls. I'll put it to you this way, even the best seat prediction for the Tories in 2008 (Ekos) was off by 7 seats (and let's face it, that's actually a pretty good prediction - within 5% of the actual result) and others were off by considerably more. The same was true of the 2006 results If even the best prediction can be off by 5% (and I think your prediction models are probably pretty good, given the time you devote to them - out of curiousity, have you ever tried to back test the model, by using polling data from previous elections to see how closely it would have replicated the actual results in that election), it's hard to catagorically rule out, on this polling data, a Tory majority.

  10. Carl,

    My model is based on comparing current levels of support to historical results. So, I use the historical results for all of Atlantic Canada to come to my conclusions.

    I have not back-tested the model. I did do a back-test of the model during the New Brunswick election, and would do the same if a federal election fell on our laps.

    But I'm working towards having a projection model ready for individual ridings before the next federal election. When that model is complete I will test it.

  11. these numbers take us back 2 years....BUT

    What has changed since the last election and how will it drive the next election campaign.

    1) The Liberals have appointed a new leader that is very unpopular. That simple fact Ignatieff was appointed is an incredible desperate move. It has taken a long while but the press and his party are finally turning on him.... think Stockwell Day style

    2) The Liberals have replaced most of the background staff with Chretien advisors that are a constant reminder of adscam and aren't near as smart as they thought they were when they faced down a divided Conservative movement.

    3) The Liberals have formally signed a coalition agreement with the NDP and Bloc for the sole purpose of grabbing power from a near majority government

    4) The Liberals do not have any policy. The Liberals owned Green house gas/carbon tax issue in 2008 which was the most important issue according to the polls.

    5) The CPC has shown to be able to get through this generational economic meltdown better than anyone else in the world. Unemployment in 2010 is the same as it was when Chretien finally resigned
    6)Mr. Ignatieff's trial campaign this summer was a miserable failure. He couldn't attract crowds larger than 200 and averaged 87 people per event. He and the party have shown how inadequately they are prepared for an election campaign.

    7) The Harper government has established itself as the most scandal free high integrity government since Pearson. The constant "scandals" brought forth by the media and the Liberals and their absolute inability to have something real gives the CPC not only integrity but the appearance of integrity.

    8) The constant bickering and dysfunctional committees has made the Canadian people clearly want a stable majority government.
    9) People would prefer Harper as PM by a 2 to 1 ratio over Ignatieff.

    So Eric I both agree and disagree on whether a majority can be had without Quebec.

    The CPC will win 155 seats outside of Quebec, but the politically astute people of Quebec will see this coming and elect more than 12 CPC MPs to have a voice at the cabinet table.

  12. I've updated the post with information about Angus-Reid's methodology. I generally don't talk enough about methodology, but that will change.

  13. I can tell everyone right now that unless the Conservatives get some big candidate in NL they will not win a seat, and the CPC doesn't have any candidates here right now. There is no love between the CPC and the PC's and that was why they suffered so much last election, they were unable to raise money or get volunteers. Like DL said out of the 3 seats that would be in play two of them are held by high-profile opposition critics. Siobhan Coady is arguably one of the high-profile woman in the Liberal Party and Jack Harris is also one of the more high-profile Dippers.(anyone see him on 22 minutes last night?)

    Did you see the last Atlantic Canadian polls by Corporate Research? 92% of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians approved of the performance of Williams' governement.

  14. Its interesting that in general online surveys seem to almost always have the Tories (and to a lesser extent the NDP) a bit higher than do traditional phone surveys. The Liberals tend to get their worst polling results in online surveys my ARG or Abacus or Leger. I don't know who is more or less accurate - but its just something i have observed.

  15. Progressive Tory,

    The Atlantic polls will be the subject of Monday's Globe and Mail article.

  16. Eric Said:

    "My model is based on comparing current levels of support to historical results. So, I use the historical results for all of Atlantic Canada to come to my conclusions."

    But isn't that sensitive to the ABC campaign in 2008? In your model, as I understand it, the recent polls would show a uniform increase in support accross all ridings in Atlantic Canada. But if the Tory "growth" in Atlantic Canada is laregely just regaining the votes they lost in NFLD in 2008, they would have a lower increase in votes in ridings they currently control, and a larger increase in ridings they controlled (or were competitive in) in 2006, but where shut out from in 2008.

    I mean, let's jsut sanity check the model. Doesn't something strike you as a little bit off about the following facts coupled with the following predictions: (1) The Tories increase their vote in Atlantic Canada by 12%, the Liberals gain 3% (and the Tories leadfrog over them), and (2) the net result is that the Tories gain 1 seat and the Liberals gain 2.

    I'll freely admit that you can get some weird results with FPTP voting, but to get 2/3rds of the seats in a region based on 1/3rd of the votes, when another party gets more than 40% of the votes is odd even by the standards of a FPTP system. It might be possible, sure, but only under exceedingly unlikely circumstances (say, one premier running an anybody b.

  17. This poll is just the starting point for any next election ... and the election campaign will change the numbers up or down. It's unlikely they will stay the same.

    Harper has unequivocally stated that the next election will determine if Canadians want a stable majority Conservative gov't, or an unstable majority Coalition gov't.

    A vote for the Liberals and NDP will be tantamount to supporting another Coalition under the thumb of the anti-Canada BQ separatists who will be blackmailing the Coalition for more Billion$$$ for Quebec.

    If Canadians want the Parliament to be held hostage by Quebec separatist, they should vote Liberal and NDP ... plain and simple.

  18. PT you should know Harper has plenty of goodies that Newfoundland wants.

    Williams wants money for sub sea cables, for future phases of lower churchill develoment, and for a below market value sale of federal shares in Hibernia.

    Fabian Manning can take back Avalon.

    Tim Powers can take St. John's South – Mount Pearl.

    Rick Hillier can take back St. John's East.

    Danny Williams could take anywhere.

    (Don't be surprised if he likes the notion of being a federal cabinet minister.)

  19. PT: "Like DL said out of the 3 seats that would be in play two of them are held by high-profile opposition critics. Siobhan Coady is arguably one of the high-profile woman in the Liberal Party and Jack Harris is also one of the more high-profile Dippers.(anyone see him on 22 minutes last night?)"

    I hear what you and DL are saying, but something has to give. The Tories have (according to most of the recent polls) made significant gains in Atlantic Canada (i.e., depending on the poll gains of between 20-40% (i.e 6-12 percentage points) from their 2008 election results). Indeed, the latest polls show the Tories having made significant gains over their Atlantic results in 2006 (when they won 3 seats in NFLD). Those gains have to come from somewhere.

    I mean, look, let's look at the 2006 results. In that year, the Tories won 32% (while the Liberals took 39%) of the vote in Atlantic Canada and 9 seats in total(3 seats in Nfld) against 20 for the Liberals. Now we're looking at the Tories at 41% and the Liberals at 38, and you're telling me the net change is +2 seats for the Tories and -1 for the Liberals? Something about that doesn't compute.

  20. Carl,

    The model also takes into account results in 2004 and 2006, so the ABC campaign doesn't influence it completely.

    The Tories have a projection ceiling of 12 seats in Atlantic Canada, as they won 10 in 2008 and were only with 10% in two other races.

  21. A new side to Shelly Glover:

    More enlightened than I would have thought.

  22. Eric,

    Well the earlier election results would certainly diminish the effect of the ABC campaign, though I seem to recall that they are given a lower weighting (and maybe I'm wrong) so the ABC campaign (and its huge impact in NFLD) would still have a material impact.

    For example, if you used the 2006 election as your base, the current numbers would have the Tories holding 4 seats in NFLD. That's a hefty swing.

  23. Earl the respected Metis police woman Shelly Glover, whom you've previously dismissed as a punk, got kicked out of her abusive home by her alcoholic father as a young teen when she got pregnant.

    She lived on the streets until a group of french nuns helped her get an education.

    Its not a "new" side of Shelly Glover. Its always been there if you take the time to look and do some research.

    I think she knows a fair bit about people's struggles in life - she can relate.

  24. Eric a 12 seat projection ceiling in Atlantic Canada is way off.

    I'm guessing Brian Murphy and Wayne Easter are your two picks up??

    But there are others that could switch.

    There's 2 ridings in Nova Scotia that the CPC wasn't even close to winning in '08 and are targeting with star candidates:

    We've all seen what popular stars can do in the recent by-elections.

    Other CPC targets:

    Jean-Claude D'Amours is seen as vulnerable in NB, with a poor 2006 showing.

    Avalon could easily go CPC again, Fabian Manning is almost 100% certain to run again.

    If Peter Stoffer resigns that riding could be competitive.

    A CPC ceiling for Atlantic Canada should be 2 PEI, 4 Newfoundland (depending who runs), 7 NS (if Stoffer runs for mayor, if current mayor declares for CPC), and 8 New Brunswick.

    So between 15 to 21.

  25. My ceilings are simple: the best performance in the last three elections, plus all the seats in the province or region where the party was within 10%.

    Nevertheless, at 41% the Conservatives did not hit their ceiling in this poll.

  26. Shadow,

    If Rick Hillier wanted into politics now he'd most likely decide to become Premier of NL then possibly a federal Cabinet Minister.

    As for Tim Powers while he'd definitely be a good candidate for the Conservatives he is still not very well known around here like he is in Ottawa. He would have his work cut out for him against Siobhan Coady.

    Danny Williams is not going to run to just be a federal cabinet minister when he can stay in NL rmaking millions of dollars. What would be the benefit?


    I hear what you're saying about the numbers being up, there are 3 other provinces in the region though, but I am telling you that while their numbers may be up without help from the PC's the CPC will be screwed. I am involved with the PC's there is no love between us and the CPC and unless something big changes there will be little support given to the CPC's in the next election. Especially to the likes of Fabian Manning who is pretty much hated within the party.

  27. btw: The idea of Danny Williams running in St. John's East is absurd for another reason. He and Jack Harris are close personal friends and former law partners. Williams more or less had his machine work for Harris.

    I suspect that Williams wants to get out of politics for a while (if not forever) so its silly to speculate about the next election.

    Speaking of Atlantic Canada, let's also keep an eye out for what might happen to Peter McKay. If he quits as is rumoured, then Central Nova immediately becomes a prime NDP target (and Elizabeth May can have a tantrum over picking the wrong riding again)

  28. Obs

    "If Canadians want the Parliament to be held hostage by Quebec separatist, they should vote Liberal and NDP ... plain and simple."

    Now that, given the BQ track record for sensible Govt, sounds like a real winner to me.

  29. I guess nothing from Ekos today...

  30. "Danny Williams is not going to run to just be a federal cabinet minister when he can stay in NL making millions of dollars. What would be the benefit?"

    1. What was the benefit of being premier?

    2. He already has millions... if it was all about making money he wouldn't have become premier (And donated his salary).

    3. If that traitor joined the CPC as a cabinet minister... I wouldn't be supporting that party in any way ever again.

  31. Serious question:

    Can anyone make millions in Newfoundland ?

    I'm assuming he'll need to move to a big city to do so.

    I heard he just wanted to be a lawyer again for awhile.

    That sort of retirement usually dosen't last long when you have the political bug.

  32. Regarding the AAPOR warning, one should consider two important qualifications:

    1) All citations of MOE start with the _assumption_ that the sample is random.

    MOE never takes into account any potential problems with how the sample is constructed; it is purely a mathematical model that answers: "IF subset A of larger population B is truly a random sample, THEN how confident can we be that the narrower answers are close to those of the larger population?"

    Telephone pollsters are subject to many of the same limitations as Angus, including one that AAPOR cites: self selection. (A telephone pollster cannot FORCE you to answer.)

    2) The AAPOR is issuing a blanket caution against online polls. But there are online polls and online polls. Some, where there is no sampling controlling (and sometimes multiple voting is possible) are highly unreliable.

    But Angus performs normal demographic sample construction to ensure that is asking the correct number of people of each sex, age and income level.

    In other words, while Angus' methodology may reasonably be subject to discussion and debate, I would argue that the MOE "warning" printed here is overkill.

  33. Eric I see PMSH is going to Sydney NS tommorow.

    Maybe to make an announcement on dredging the harbour with his new star candidate ?

    You might need to re-think your ceiling after all.

    Clearly the Harper strategists think they have a shot in more seats than just the easy 12.

    And they're rarely wrong about things like this.

  34. My understanding is that there is nothing wrong with Angus-Reid's methodology. They've actually been one of the better pollsters over the last two years. The problem is that they listed the MOE as if it was a random sample, which they always do.

    Léger Marketing uses a similar system and does not list an MOE. They explain in their reports why that is the case.

    Ipsos-Reid, which uses an online panel for some polls, mentions what the MOE would be with a random sample of the same size, but they also list the other error factors, something that the AAPOR says pollsters who use an opt-in panel should do.

    I haven't seen an actual CROP report in ages, only media reports, but their website also covers this issue in detail, while Abacus also makes a mention that their MOE is based on a comparable random sample.

    Angus-Reid does none of this, as far as I can tell, and there is nothing about it on their website.

  35. Hello, does anybody know what happened to the promised Ekos poll?

  36. 35-24-20-10 Abacus - 11 point lead
    38-31-17-10 Nanos - 7 point lead
    38-26-18-10 AR ...- 12 point lead
    33.7-29.2-14.4-10.4-9.8 Ekos - 4.5 point lead

    One of these things is not like the other.... ??

    Was the extra 8-10 hours before release today to "correct computer problems" again?? I think they need some less correcting next week.

  37. "Hello, does anybody know what happened to the promised Ekos poll?"

    It's out now

  38. The EKOS poll just came out.

    There are some odd numbers in it though. In a number of provinces, the top-line number for the Tories is less than the number you would expect based on the components of that number (for example, in Ontario and the Atlantic provinces, the Tories are apparently more popular amongst men and women, seprately, then they are amongst men and woman combined).

    The reverse is true in those provinces for the Liberals. For example, the top line number for the Liberals out east is 58%. That's implausible in its own right, but more so when you see that Liberal support is at 42% amongst men and 42% amongst woman. Unless the East Coast has a large transgendered population that votes overwelmingly Liberal (and which Ekos fails to report individually), something doesn't add up there.

  39. Even 149 will keep the ball rolling for now. A redistribution will happen in 2013 even without C-12 which will just make it larger. 3 in BC, 2 in Alberta and 5 in Ontario goes mostly Conservative and gives a majority with just the Quebec city part of Quebec.

  40. Thx for the ekos link Carl

    Even stranger is that the CPC beat the Liberals in every Urban area except Montreal.

    That includes Toronto, Ottawa, Calgary and Vancouver.

  41. "Even stranger is that the CPC beat the Liberals in every Urban area except Montreal.

    That includes Toronto, Ottawa, Calgary and Vancouver."

    That's not too strange, since those are the metropolitain areas of Toronto, Ottawa, Calgary and Vancouver (as opposed to the city proper), and I think the Tories won Ottawa, Calgary and Vancouver (i.e., 11 of the 20 seats in the GVA) in the 2008 election. As for Toronto, those polling numbers would include the GTA around Toronto, and while the Liberals held a number of those seats in 2008, some were quite close, and it's very possible that a number of them will fall to the Tories next time out (a-la-Vaughn)

  42. RE: Shelly Glover's vote

    Since I have been one to call down Glover in previous threads on this site, I think I should give the woman her due here.

    This seems to be a vote based on principle, against the vast majority of her party. She is more formidible then I thought.

    I wouldn't count her as a social liberal yet thou. This vote may have been a one off due to her years in sex crimes, where she must have seen violence against trans-sexuals.

    Either way this is a feather in her cap IMO, but may be a millstone around her neck in other Conservative circles. She'll get her fair chance with me.

    I think Shadow should stop comparing her to Sarah Palin, as I do not see her having the empathy required to make such a strong stand against her party. It's a disservice to Mrs.Glover, who is a lot more worldly then Palin.

    You should check out Sarah shooting the caribou on her reality show. She missed like 6 or 7 times, and the caribou never ran at the gunshots. Any one who has ever hunted moose can see what a fake she is. What a phoney.

  43. AJR79 last comment got lost in the ether, sorry for the delay in responding.

    Shelly Glover likely is a social liberal, i've heard she's pro-choice. (Somewhat dissapointing.)

    As for Palin, I didn't bring her up you just did. But Palin has also taken stances at odds with her party on gay rights.

    And her scope was off in that video clip. When she had a proper gun she got it on the first shot.

    What she was hunting has the intelligence of a cow, its not uncommon for them to just freeze or ignore loud noises.

    C'mon AJR79 I expected you to be a bit more rational than to buy into some Palin doesn't really hunt conspiracy theory.


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.