babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

NDP in first place in Newfoundland

Stockholm
Offline
Joined: Sep 29 2002

 

 

There is an Environics poll out in the St. John's Telegram that the NDP is now in first place in Newfoundland both provincially and federally!

http://www.thetelegram.com/News/Local/2012-07-05/article-3023455/NDP-top...


Comments

David Young
Offline
Joined: Dec 9 2007

Great news, but since it's still 3 years until the federal and provincial elections, let's just wait and see if these levels of support stay up.

 


newfenian
Offline
Joined: Sep 19 2011

The value of this poll has little to do with any upcoming election, or whether or not the NDP's support increases, decreases or stabilizes in the future.

The value of the poll is that it tells us that the NDP are up now, and this is the first time in history that either wing of the party (federal or provincial) has been #1 in the province. The most important thing to take away from this is that the Liberal-Conservative monopoly on the province is not written in stone, and voters now know it.

As someone who has voted NDP in rural Newfoundland before it was cool, and where the NDP pulls in 8% or less, this is a pretty huge deal no matter what happens going forward.


Left Turn
Offline
Joined: Mar 28 2005

This suggests the formation of an electoral coalition between those who hate the tar sands, and those who miss their sons who work there.


PoliSciStudent
Offline
Joined: May 27 2012
I had doubts about the Environics poll, they were off last October, and it turn out that CRA, who have a good record, have the PCs down five to 44%, the NDP stable at 33% at the Liberals up four to 22% since thy polled in June. http://cra.ca/support-for-nl-pc-government-continues-to-erode/

Stockholm
Offline
Joined: Sep 29 2002

The Environics poll was done back in June right when the Newfoundland PCs were getting an avalanch of negative publicity over ending access to information and various other scandals...I think that by late August people calm down and there is a "reversion to the mean"....all that being said, even 33% for the NDP in NL is still an incredibly high number and Lorraine Michael is now only traling Dunderdale 37-31 as best Premier


PoliSciStudent
Offline
Joined: May 27 2012
Stockholm wrote:

The Environics poll was done back in June right when the Newfoundland PCs were getting an avalanch of negative publicity over ending access to information and various other scandals...I think that by late August people calm down and there is a "reversion to the mean"....all that being said, even 33% for the NDP in NL is still an incredibly high number and Lorraine Michael is now only traling Dunderdale 37-31 as best Premier

Environics also polled about federal intentions in the same poll, which likely played a role in the numbers. The NDP are still doing a great though in the province, if they could get a good leader they'd be on their way to forming the next government.

jerrym
Online
Joined: May 30 2009

PoliSciStudent wrote:
Stockholm wrote:

The Environics poll was done back in June right when the Newfoundland PCs were getting an avalanch of negative publicity over ending access to information and various other scandals...I think that by late August people calm down and there is a "reversion to the mean"....all that being said, even 33% for the NDP in NL is still an incredibly high number and Lorraine Michael is now only traling Dunderdale 37-31 as best Premier

Environics also polled about federal intentions in the same poll, which likely played a role in the numbers. The NDP are still doing a great though in the province, if they could get a good leader they'd be on their way to forming the next government.

Coming from outside the province, I have little knowledge of what is happening in detail in the province. Since Michael has achieved the highest number of NDP MLAs in the provinces history and has raised her ranking in this poll from 23% to 31%, what do you see as the problem with her leadership?

 


PoliSciStudent
Offline
Joined: May 27 2012
jerrym wrote:

PoliSciStudent wrote:
Stockholm wrote:

The Environics poll was done back in June right when the Newfoundland PCs were getting an avalanch of negative publicity over ending access to information and various other scandals...I think that by late August people calm down and there is a "reversion to the mean"....all that being said, even 33% for the NDP in NL is still an incredibly high number and Lorraine Michael is now only traling Dunderdale 37-31 as best Premier

Environics also polled about federal intentions in the same poll, which likely played a role in the numbers. The NDP are still doing a great though in the province, if they could get a good leader they'd be on their way to forming the next government.

Coming from outside the province, I have little knowledge of what is happening in detail in the province. Since Michael has achieved the highest number of NDP MLAs in the provinces history and has raised her ranking in this poll from 23% to 31%, what do you see as the problem with her leadership?

 

Well she is still below her party, though just barely now. I'm surprised that it's that high because in all honestly outside of New Democrats I've never heard anybody say something nice about her. Someone I know went to a luncheon she spoke at not long ago and they told me people didn't even pay attention when she spoke, they talked amongst themselves and ignored her. I'm also not a fan of her from a policy perspective, she's likely the most left wing NDP leader in Canada.

Ken Burch
Offline
Joined: Feb 26 2005

Gee...do you think she has "girl germs" too?

 


PoliSciStudent
Offline
Joined: May 27 2012
Ken Burch wrote:

Gee...do you think she has "girl germs" too?

 

What?

jerrym
Online
Joined: May 30 2009

PoliSciStudent wrote:
jerrym wrote:

PoliSciStudent wrote:
Stockholm wrote:

The Environics poll was done back in June right when the Newfoundland PCs were getting an avalanch of negative publicity over ending access to information and various other scandals...I think that by late August people calm down and there is a "reversion to the mean"....all that being said, even 33% for the NDP in NL is still an incredibly high number and Lorraine Michael is now only traling Dunderdale 37-31 as best Premier

Environics also polled about federal intentions in the same poll, which likely played a role in the numbers. The NDP are still doing a great though in the province, if they could get a good leader they'd be on their way to forming the next government.

Coming from outside the province, I have little knowledge of what is happening in detail in the province. Since Michael has achieved the highest number of NDP MLAs in the provinces history and has raised her ranking in this poll from 23% to 31%, what do you see as the problem with her leadership?

 

Well she is still below her party, though just barely now. I'm surprised that it's that high because in all honestly outside of New Democrats I've never heard anybody say something nice about her. Someone I know went to a luncheon she spoke at not long ago and they told me people didn't even pay attention when she spoke, they talked amongst themselves and ignored her. I'm also not a fan of her from a policy perspective, she's likely the most left wing NDP leader in Canada.

Someone must be listening and liking what she says in order for her to rise from 5% to 14% in June 2011 before the election (http://www.threehundredeight.com/2011/06/provincial-ndp-makes-gains-in-n... - "Lorraine Michael of the NDP's personal numbers are up nine points to 14%"), to 23% and now 31%.

Left-wing has become a pretty vague term. Heck, the Republicans call Obama a socialist left-winger. What policies specifically do you see as too left-wing with regard to Michael?

 


PoliSciStudent
Offline
Joined: May 27 2012
jerrym wrote:

PoliSciStudent wrote:
jerrym wrote:

PoliSciStudent wrote:
Stockholm wrote:

The Environics poll was done back in June right when the Newfoundland PCs were getting an avalanch of negative publicity over ending access to information and various other scandals...I think that by late August people calm down and there is a "reversion to the mean"....all that being said, even 33% for the NDP in NL is still an incredibly high number and Lorraine Michael is now only traling Dunderdale 37-31 as best Premier

Environics also polled about federal intentions in the same poll, which likely played a role in the numbers. The NDP are still doing a great though in the province, if they could get a good leader they'd be on their way to forming the next government.

Coming from outside the province, I have little knowledge of what is happening in detail in the province. Since Michael has achieved the highest number of NDP MLAs in the provinces history and has raised her ranking in this poll from 23% to 31%, what do you see as the problem with her leadership?

 

Well she is still below her party, though just barely now. I'm surprised that it's that high because in all honestly outside of New Democrats I've never heard anybody say something nice about her. Someone I know went to a luncheon she spoke at not long ago and they told me people didn't even pay attention when she spoke, they talked amongst themselves and ignored her. I'm also not a fan of her from a policy perspective, she's likely the most left wing NDP leader in Canada.

Someone must be listening and liking what she says in order for her to rise from 5% to 14% in June 2011 before the election (http://www.threehundredeight.com/2011/06/provincial-ndp-makes-gains-in-n... - "Lorraine Michael of the NDP's personal numbers are up nine points to 14%"), to 23% and now 31%.

Left-wing has become a pretty vague term. Heck, the Republicans call Obama a socialist left-winger. What policies specifically do you see as too left-wing with regard to Michael?

 

She's after making big headway. My problems with her are her thoughts on debt reduction. Due to the volatility of oil prices we've had several years where halfway through the year it has been announced we'll have higher surpluses. The current govt takes that and puts it on our debt, Michael has criticized this saying it should all be spent now. The government has said this helps future generations, which it does, while she says it should be spent on people now. I could understand if the government were putting through austerity budgets but they've been increasing spending at an uncontrollable level and investing in social programs. We spend more then any other province. During the last election she announced that she would go into the legislature and bring forth legislation that would break contracts we have with oil, and I guess mining, companies to increase royalities. While higher royalities are great the idea of breaking contracts that are 20+ years old is ridiculous, we would have been in court for years with some of the biggest countries in the world. I agree with affordable post-secondary education, but she wants it to be free. Something I know many agree with but I don't think it's great idea. There are also minor policies I found odd. Don't know if it was in this last platform or not but in 2007 she wanted to raise taxes on higher end cars, some jewelry, and fine furs. She wanted to give all seniors no matter what their income $250 to pay for snow clearing each year. She wanted to put in all day kindergarten, which I like, though she wanted to have it in place for this year and didn't even cost it out. There are also other issues I have. I find she is weak when it comes to making sure policies are affordable. I much prefer some of the NDP governments we've had in western Canada that embrace more of a third way agenda.

PoliSciStudent
Offline
Joined: May 27 2012
I guess I'll be heavily criticized now.

kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

PoliSciStudent wrote:

I guess I'll be heavily criticized now.

Nice passive aggressive behaviour. You seem to be working on the theory that the best defence is a good offense so when one puts their foot in mouth or on keyboard its best not to ponder the potential meaning of what one has spewed out but instead attack.  In your case I especially like the hit me please type of attack to deflect criticism.


newfenian
Offline
Joined: Sep 19 2011

PoliSciStudent wrote:
My problems with her are her thoughts on debt reduction. Due to the volatility of oil prices we've had several years where halfway through the year it has been announced we'll have higher surpluses. The current govt takes that and puts it on our debt, Michael has criticized this saying it should all be spent now. The government has said this helps future generations, which it does, while she says it should be spent on people now.

The last time the provincial PCs made a big dent into the provincial debt were in fiscal years 2006-2007 when they invested about 2 billion into unfunded liabilities from the teacher's pension plan, and in 2007-2008, reducing the provincial debt from about 12 billion to 8 billion. With Dunderdale, the provincial debt is increasing again - a lot - and it's now back to $9-10 billion mark.

The provincial Finance Minister Tom Marshall has tried to score points with a scared public by saying that all surpluses will go to paying down the debt, yet, because of the "volatility of the oil prices" you noted above, the province keeps going into deficit, negating any debt payments the province makes - actually, making them worse.

The real problem with Newfoundland and Labrador is that it has the highest household debt in Canada, something that could be fixed if the government were to invest in any of the dreaded social programs that the Liberals and PCs fear-monger about but Lorraine Michael prefers.

Actually there are a lot of other things the PCs (and previous Liberal governments) did and are doing that make and have made Newfoundland and Labrador's fiscal health and economic insecurity as bad as it is - even in these days of being a so-called "have" province.

PoliSciStudent wrote:
During the last election she announced that she would go into the legislature and bring forth legislation that would break contracts we have with oil, and I guess mining, companies to increase royalities.

No she didn't - but she should have.

What she said is that she would re-visit the MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) between the provincial government and the 4 multinationals behind the Hebron offshore oil development, and add a 3% surtax on profits from the oil.

The MOU is actually not a contract. And mining companies aren't involved.

And a 3% surtax are measly pennies compared to what the people of Newfoundland and Labrador actually deserve from their resources.

The Liberals and the PCs cried foul and defended corporate rights.

PoliSciStudent wrote:
While higher royalities are great the idea of breaking contracts that are 20+ years old is ridiculous, we would have been in court for years with some of the biggest countries in the world.

We might be talking about different things. What countries? What 20+ year old contracts?

The Hebron MOU is five years old (signed in 2007), and the oil isn't expected to flow until 2017 or at latest 2019.

PoliSciStudent wrote:
I agree with affordable post-secondary education, but she wants it to be free. Something I know many agree with but I don't think it's great idea.

It would actually help with the household debt issues that are the real debt issues.

It would also cost $70 million dollars which sounds like a lot but isn't. It would be less if the government limited a $0 tuition policy to residents of Newfoundland and Labrador.

If the provincial government were even remotely interested in dealing with household debt, student debt, or NL's unseemly and permanent 13-15% unemployment rate, then the debt the province has could be tackled easily.


jerrym
Online
Joined: May 30 2009

PoliSciStudent wrote:

She wanted to raise taxes on higher end cars, some jewelry, and fine furs. ... She wanted to put in all day kindergarten ... She would ... increase royalties.

 

 

It sounds like you would prefer Paul Ryans tax plan where Mitt Romney and other super-rich pay 0.82% income tax and no capital gains tax and can buy all the higher end cars, jewelry, and fine furs that they want, while the middle class pays the taxes that the rich don't pay and the middle and working classes, as well as the poor, get little or no social services. This has already going on for a long time. For example, during the 1990s, Chretien called in civil servants in the Revenue Department on Boxing Day (a Christmastime holiday when the media were not paying attention) to rewrite regulations that allowed the billionaire Bronfmans to avoid paying $950 million in taxes, which meant everyone else was paying the Bronfman's taxes. 

Even the BC Liberals (which has more federal Conservatives than federal Liberals) have introduced all-day kindergarten, as have some other provinces, because they recognize that early childhood education helps many students from falling behind and never catching up in an increasingly competitive world where education is not only critical to individual but societial success. Of course, postsecondary education is all but essential to obtaining a good job in a knowledge-based economy. You are also seem to be proposing that those that are poor be denied the opportunity to benefit not only themselves but their society when they cannot afford such an education. 

It is remarkable that despite all the "right-wing" criticism of taxes, the period of fastest economic growth in Canada, as well as the rest of the Western world, was the 30 years after World War II when income and capital gains tax rates were much higher and corporate taxes made up over 30% of all taxes, as opposed to less than 10% today. Royalty rates were usually higher during this period. However, evidence rather than cute sound bites has never been the strong point of right-wing commentators. 


jerrym
Online
Joined: May 30 2009

A MQO (MarketQuest Omnifacts) poll of Newfoundland and Labrador from January 21-27 finds the Progressive Conservatives at 36% and NDP at 35% in a statistical tie provincially. The Liberals trail at 28%. The NDP dominate in St. John's with 48% to the Cons 35% and the Libs 16%. Even outside St. John's the NDP is fairly competitive now with 28% compared to the Cons 37% and the Libs 34%. Obviously, this would result in a large gain in seats for the NDP if similar results occurred in the next election.

Eric Grenier's 308.com site notes that the CRA's last two polls (the last one in December found the Cons at 46% to the NDP's 31% and the Lib's 23%) are inconsistent with MQO and the a June 2012 Environics poll that showed the NDP at 38% with the Cons at 35% and the Libs at 26%.

Lorraine Michael continues to provide strong leadership to the Newfoundland NDP.

http://www.thetelegram.com/News/Local/2013-02-01/article-3168868/NDP,-PC...

http://www.thetelegram.com/News/Local/2012-07-05/article-3023455/NDP-top...

http://www.threehundredeight.com/

http://cra.ca/support-for-nl-pc-government-stable-remains-highest-in-atl...

 


janfromthebruce
Offline
Joined: Apr 24 2007

excellent news from the East coast.


David Young
Offline
Joined: Dec 9 2007

janfromthebruce wrote:

excellent news from the East coast.

Not only in Newfoundland, but the levels of support in P.E.I. and New Brunswick are reaching levels never seen before.

It looks like the seeds that Jack Harris, Herb Dickieson, and Elizabeth Weir planted in the 1990's are finally starting to show!

 


janfromthebruce
Offline
Joined: Apr 24 2007

I agree David.


felixr
Offline
Joined: May 6 2012

The NDP has enormous potential in the maritimes. If it can get serious and professional parties off the ground, the NDP's message can resonate. To your list of sowers, I would add Alexa McDonough. She broke the NDP through in the federal election of 1997. Her majority of seats in Nova Scotia was the basis for the eventual NDP sweep in 2009.


Ken Burch
Offline
Joined: Feb 26 2005

Then again, it's a related question as to whether the Nova Scotia NDP will slow or reverse NDP provincial growth across the Maritimes, after coming in and governing to the right of the Nova Scotia PC's on all but a few trivial side issues.


The NDP can only grow it if is always clear that electing a NDP government provincially or federally means a CLEAR and immediate change for the better.  If it always ends up being austerity with orange ties, then the story is over before it began.


felixr
Offline
Joined: May 6 2012

Ken Burch wrote:

Then again, it's a related question as to whether the Nova Scotia NDP will slow or reverse NDP provincial growth across the Maritimes, after coming in and governing to the right of the Nova Scotia PC's on all but a few trivial side issues.

Bears repeating. The NS Liberals are running well to the left of the NS NDP. Everytime I see Darrell Dexter speak it sounds like pure gibberish. Darrell Dexter is Bob Rae 2.0.


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005
Where's Gary Doer when we need him?

kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Unionist wrote:

Where's Gary Doer when we need him?

Selling bitumen in Washington.


Fidel
Offline
Joined: Apr 29 2004

Ken Burch wrote:

Then again, it's a related question as to whether the Nova Scotia NDP will slow or reverse NDP provincial growth across the Maritimes, after coming in and governing to the right of the Nova Scotia PC's on all but a few trivial side issues.

I think Nova Scotians were merely fed up with the old line party corruption, kick-back and graft scandals over the years in addition to the shitty economies.

And we still have shitty economies across Canada except where oil and gas extractions are subsidized by taxpayers since our two old line parties a the federal level sold the environment to Exxon-Imperial and the fossil fuel industry with CUSFTA and NAFTA.

Neoliberalism is how we roll in Canada since Ottawa drank that kool aid beginning with Brian Mulroney and Jean Chretien back in the 80's and 90's.  The rancid ideology in Ottawa has become cancerous and radiating across the country like an out of control tumor. Our corrupt stooges at the helm in Ottawa are continuing in the neoliberal tradition for feigning political impotence. Powerlessness to do anything in the way of "populism" is all in their heads.


Slumberjack
Offline
Joined: Aug 8 2005

But who knew before Darrell Dexter that the way to fight against neoliberalism was to not only carry its water, but to outperform them in the task?  Anyone thinking about voting for the NDP in NL and Labrador should seriously consider what sort of notes they're taking from Nova Scotia's example.


Fidel
Offline
Joined: Apr 29 2004

Slumberjack wrote:

But who knew before Darrell Dexter that the way to fight against neoliberalism was to not only carry its water, but to outperform them in the task? 

Who knew before Dexter? Harris and McGuinty. Ontario is now a bankrupt banana republic except colder, and that's the plan.

I think one would have to understand what a provincial government has the power to do and what it does not. Provincial governments have nil next to no ability to affect national economies or national program spending at the federal level.

You might as well ask questions like, What if Superman or Jesus Christ was premier of Nova Scotia? And the answer would be,

So what? Because unless they have control of the national purse strings and powers of federal taxation, then they have all the power and authority of colonial administrators whose day to day tasks are handed down to them by higher ups in the imperialist scheme of things. I think municipal governments have more control over local economies than Toronto is able to affect provincial economies.

I know, what if God was premier of Ontario? Would Ontario still be a bankrupt province lurching from one economic crisis to another and experiencing a net outmigration of young people looking for the possibility of living dignified lives elsewhere?


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

If God was Premier of Ontario there would be no debating the separate schools issue.  Personally I would prefer a goddess if we have to have a supernatural overseer.  That old guy with the white beard who wants to stone adulterers and witches and other nice people is really kind of creepy for me.


Ken Burch
Offline
Joined: Feb 26 2005

kropotkin1951 wrote:

If God was Premier of Ontario there would be no debating the separate schools issue.  Personally I would prefer a goddess if we have to have a supernatural overseer.  That old guy with the white beard who wants to stone adulterers and witches and other nice people is really kind of creepy for me.

Depends on WHICH God, though.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments