2018 Polls

630 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport

Ipsos Reid and Angus Reid appears to be in a league of their own when it comes to accurate polling results. Any politically connected pollster can publish any polling results they want and some do. The only thing these pollsters have to remember is to bring their polling results in line with the credible pollsters just before the vote. But for the entire period between elections, there is no way of verifying a pollster’s results. And for Quebec polling CROP is the gold standard.

R.E.Wood

Abacus:

Liberals 36%, Conservatives 33%, NDP 18%.

http://abacusdata.ca/liberal-support-sags-as-pms-image-softens-his-india...

josh

Leger: LPC and CPC tied at 38.  NDP at 14.  In Quebec, LPC 41 CPC 22 NDP 16 Bloc 12.

https://mobile.twitter.com/EricGrenierCBC/status/972519157550985219

josh
NorthReport

As one can readily see Leger and Forum polling let’s just say leaves a lot to be desired and anyone hint hint CBC who uses their data well  let’s just repeat the fairly obvious garbage in = garbage out

NorthReport

So the NDP at 19.3% in the latest poll are holding their own in the 19-20% range at least with the credible pollsters.

SocialJustice101

Leger is not a credible pollster??

JKR

SocialJustice101 wrote:

Leger is not a credible pollster??

Not when they state that the NDP is at 14%.

NorthReport

No they are not

SocialJustice101 wrote:

Leger is not a credible pollster??

NorthReport

According to Nanos today  The Trudeau Liberals have the lowest amount of support since October, 2017

JKR

NorthReport wrote:

According to Nanos today  The Trudeau Liberals have the lowest amount of support since October, 2017

 

Wow!!! Not much has changed in 5 months!!!!

Sean in Ottawa

NorthReport wrote:

According to Nanos today  The Trudeau Liberals have the lowest amount of support since October, 2017

 

Link???

NorthReport

Wikipedia

Sean in Ottawa

NorthReport wrote:

Wikipedia

That's not normally how we do things here with teaser ,messages and go get it yourself comments. If you want to reference a poll that came out today, it is more polite to give the numbers or a link.

And it is not there. The last poll is dated March 9. This is the 15th.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_in_the_43rd_Canadian_feder...

NR -- we may agree on a lot of things but I am rather fed up with your posting tactics of opening new threads too often, naming threads such that people have to open them to find out what it is about, and clickbait posts without the data behind them or having to look for something that may not even be there. Why on earth do you think all this is okay?

Also if you look at the graph on the Nanos site, you can see that this latest poll is not the lowest. Even your Wiki shows that this is not the case -- the number was slightly lower on October 13 and again the 20, 2017. They have also been near this number in many polls.

http://www.nanos.co/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Political-Package-2018-03...

progressive17 progressive17's picture

The wikipedia page of the Canadian polls shows you the data points as well as the continuous line graph of the moving averages. 

The degree of the scattering of the data points tell you about the volatility of the vote. The other question is whether a quantity is going above or sinking below its 200-day and 50-day moving averages. If it is continually popping above, there could be a breakout to the upside, and vice-versa. It is markets drivel, but I think some of it works in analyzing poll data when trying to predict the behaviour of large groups with various (and ideally conflicting) positions.

I cannot observe enough variance in the polls to determine that there has been any material change, although I know anecdotally some of the renegade Tory vote that went Liberal (because they didn't like the way Harper wanted to screw with their pensions and a general sense the government had to turn the taps on) seems to have gone back. Trudeau rubs right-wingers the wrong way, both in an intergenerational sense because of the last name, and because of his policies on inexpensive social issues such as LGBTQA++, gender parity at the top level, etc. Considering many Conservatives are misogynistic, racist, religiously bigoted, and homo- and transphobic, Trudeau is fuelling them with rage with almost every move he makes. The more virulent this hatred, the more polarizing is the politics, which is the death knell for centrist neoliberal Liberal parties all over the world. "we are the LGBTQA++-friendly carbuncle on the ass of neoliberalism! Vote for us, and we will do neoliberal deals which would make Tories blush, and prop the Tories up whenever necessary."

Sectioning out groups who have called for attention is necessary as they have been victims of injustice, however dividing society into these groups and making cynical decisions based on which will bring you the best plurality is a tradition going through Harper and straight back to Mussolini.

This is all an opportunity for the NDP, but my social media cohort keep asking why they aren't out there more. The NDP might complain about debt and a lack of money as the reason for their failure to put on a show, however they should consider that if a few Russian kids having fun on their computers can make a global splash as they have of late, they might consider using technology as a force multiplier in getting out ideas, encouraging conversation, and rousting the vote. Things like #metoo and #stopharper have worked well.

Traditionally, 20% for the NDP should be nothing to write home about. It should be the absolute bedrock. Once the NDP start going north of 20%, it is hard for Tweedle-Dee or Tweedle-Dumber to claim they have any kind of a mandate, and tends to cause said old-line parties to adopt progressive policy and have to bargain with the NDP. In this way, the NDP has traditionally punched well above its weight.

"If you want to vote against the Conservative Party, you can vote Liberal. But if you want to vote against Conservatism itself, you can't vote Liberal. If you vote Liberal, the Liberal government will screw it up so much that Liberal supporters will elect the Conservatives after them anyway."

"But Mike Harris followed Bob Rae".
"That is because Bob Rae is a Liberal. The 407 was originally his deal."
 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

I wouldn't write off the Liberals so fast. The Conservatives lasted almost 10 years with one of the most despised leaders in Canadian history. Harper has been gone 3 years. Most people's attention spans sre greater than that of a fly. Much too early to open the champagne bottles,that is if you are waiting for a Conservative majority again just 5 years after Harper.

Talking about polarizing Canadians,the Tories are the kings of polarization. I think,just for an example,Scheer's announcement that a Conservative government would recognize Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel and the party's evident lock step support of Donald Trump will turn off most Canadians save their core base who'd support them as unconditionally as Donald Trump's loyal groupies and sycophants.

Personally,I give Canadians more credit than making an about face this early. And give the Cons the keys too the country this quick after the Harper experiment.

Call me an optimist. But this is coming from a dyed in the wool pessimist.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

progressive17 wrote:

The wikipedia page of the Canadian polls shows you the data points as well as the continuous line graph of the moving averages. 

The degree of the scattering of the data points tell you about the volatility of the vote. The other question is whether a quantity is going above or sinking below its 200-day and 50-day moving averages. If it is continually popping above, there could be a breakout to the upside, and vice-versa. It is markets drivel, but I think some of it works in analyzing poll data when trying to predict the behaviour of large groups with various (and ideally conflicting) positions.

I cannot observe enough variance in the polls to determine that there has been any material change, although I know anecdotally some of the renegade Tory vote that went Liberal (because they didn't like the way Harper wanted to screw with their pensions and a general sense the government had to turn the taps on) seems to have gone back. Trudeau rubs right-wingers the wrong way, both in an intergenerational sense because of the last name, and because of his policies on inexpensive social issues such as LGBTQA++, gender parity at the top level, etc. Considering many Conservatives are misogynistic, racist, religiously bigoted, and homo- and transphobic, Trudeau is fuelling them with rage with almost every move he makes. The more virulent this hatred, the more polarizing is the politics, which is the death knell for centrist neoliberal Liberal parties all over the world. "we are the LGBTQA++-friendly carbuncle on the ass of neoliberalism! Vote for us, and we will do neoliberal deals which would make Tories blush, and prop the Tories up whenever necessary."

Sectioning out groups who have called for attention is necessary as they have been victims of injustice, however dividing society into these groups and making cynical decisions based on which will bring you the best plurality is a tradition going through Harper and straight back to Mussolini.

This is all an opportunity for the NDP, but my social media cohort keep asking why they aren't out there more. The NDP might complain about debt and a lack of money as the reason for their failure to put on a show, however they should consider that if a few Russian kids having fun on their computers can make a global splash as they have of late, they might consider using technology as a force multiplier in getting out ideas, encouraging conversation, and rousting the vote. Things like #metoo and #stopharper have worked well.

Traditionally, 20% for the NDP should be nothing to write home about. It should be the absolute bedrock. Once the NDP start going north of 20%, it is hard for Tweedle-Dee or Tweedle-Dumber to claim they have any kind of a mandate, and tends to cause said old-line parties to adopt progressive policy and have to bargain with the NDP. In this way, the NDP has traditionally punched well above its weight.

"If you want to vote against the Conservative Party, you can vote Liberal. But if you want to vote against Conservatism itself, you can't vote Liberal. If you vote Liberal, the Liberal government will screw it up so much that Liberal supporters will elect the Conservatives after them anyway."

"But Mike Harris followed Bob Rae".
"That is because Bob Rae is a Liberal. The 407 was originally his deal."
 

Actually, lack of money doesn't really hold up as an excuse for social media.  The NDP HAS a YouTube page, A Facebook page, and many other social media connections already.  It costs nothing to post on any of those.  You just need to bring in volunteers to do it.  It probably still just comes down to the party bureaucracy's usual fear of connecting with grassroots activism.

SocialJustice101

The news coverage has been unreasonably bullyish against Trudeau.  From the Summer Jobs Program to his India trip.   The movement in the polls certainly reflects it.     Will see if it stands or it's just an echo of the media coverage.

Cody87

SocialJustice101 wrote:

The news coverage has been unreasonably bullyish against Trudeau.  From the Summer Jobs Program to his India trip.   The movement in the polls certainly reflects it.     Will see if it stands or it's just an echo of the media coverage.

And now the mistakes with the Belgians.

Mobo2000

Really liked this part of the above post.  The friendly carbuncle made me laugh pretty hard.

Progressive17:

"we are the LGBTQA++-friendly carbuncle on the ass of neoliberalism! Vote for us, and we will do neoliberal deals which would make Tories blush, and prop the Tories up whenever necessary."

Sectioning out groups who have called for attention is necessary as they have been victims of injustice, however dividing society into these groups and making cynical decisions based on which will bring you the best plurality is a tradition going through Harper and straight back to Mussolini."

SocialJustice101

I can't believe that in 2018 anyone is implying that supporting gay rights costs votes.   Even conservative parties in the UK , Germany and Australia support gay equality nowadays, including marriage. 

Cody87

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_in_the_43rd_Canadian_feder...

Angus Reid

http://angusreid.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/2018.03.19_Federal_Schee...

LPC 30%

CPC 40%

NDP 19%

According to this poll, Trudeau's net approval rating is -16%, and even 30% of Liberal voters in 2015 now disapprove of Trudeau. Scheer and Singh's net approval ratings are both close to even (Scheer +4, Singh -7), with ~30% undecided for each.

Now it's not just Forum.

NorthReport

Thanks Cody

Angus Reid is one of the very few credible pollsters in Canada as many of the other pollsters are just there as a front for a political party, and that is one of the reasons why we often see new pollsters crop up just before an election

To get a sense of trends it is often more useful to compare previous polls with same pollsters rather than comparing one pollster against another pollster

Now lets take a look at Angus Reid

Party / Oct 4 / Oct 12 / Mar 15 / Difference

NDP / 14% / 18% / 19% /  Up 5%

Libs / 37% / 35% / 30% / Down 7%

Cons / 36% / 35% / 40% / Up 4%

Grns / 8% / 6% / 6% / Down 2%

Yes the Cons have gained but we can also see that there had been a significant shift in support for the NDP who have gained 12% on the Liberals in the last 6 months

No need wonder why there had been such a vicious assault on Singh by the Liberals and their media cronies, eh! 

 

 

josh
SocialJustice101

Nanos is the only live phone poll and thus is the most credible.   Angus Reid is done through on-line surveys. 

Sean in Ottawa

NorthReport wrote:

Thanks Cody

Angus Reid is one of the very few credible pollsters in Canada as many of the other pollsters are just there as a front for a political party, and that is one of the reasons why we often see new pollsters crop up just before an election

To get a sense of trends it is often more useful to compare previous polls with same pollsters rather than comparing one pollster against another pollster

Now lets take a look at Angus Reid

Party / Oct 4 / Oct 12 / Mar 15 / Difference

NDP / 14% / 18% / 19% /  Up 5%

Libs / 37% / 35% / 30% / Down 7%

Cons / 36% / 35% / 40% / Up 4%

Grns / 8% / 6% / 6% / Down 2%

Yes the Cons have gained but we can also see that there had been a significant shift in support for the NDP who have gained 12% on the Liberals in the last 6 months

No need wonder why there had been such a vicious assault on Singh by the Liberals and their media cronies, eh! 

 

 

A bit of cherry picking there. Most other pollsters and the aggregate give a much different story:

The NDP is around the same support levels it has been in for about a year which was a recovery from the real lows seen in the year after the election when the Liberals were at their peak. It also returns the NDP to the electoral level that it was unhappy with at the end of the last election.

More serious, however, is where the other parties now are. It is understandable to see the NDP suffer when the Liberals are around 50% in the polls. It is a significant problem to see the Liberals decline by 15-20% and have the majority of that support go Conservative, even as they field a lacklustre candidate on their side. The fact is the Liberals are tumbling and the NDP is picking up crumbs. It is a serious thing when the Liberals and Conservatives trade support and this does not come down to the NDP - it show the NDP is being rejected rather than merely suffering becuase another party is so popular.

I cannot see why anyone, other than a blind partisan, would take comfort in these polls. The Liberals, for their part, are not in a panic at the NDP support -- in fact they are likely delighted that the NDP is not also falling to the Conservatives as they are. The NDP holding on, without being much of a threat, if anything, is a bright spot for the other parties -- especially the Liberals. It is also a bright spot, for them, that the NDP are so deluded as to take comfort from the poor levels of support they had at the end of the last election. It means, to them, that even NDP members consider the party back where it belongs.

What the NDP has to internalize here, is that the party cannot afford to run after meaningless moral victories but must look at the real facts -- there is a lot of volatility in politics right now and the NDP is barely relevant. If the party wants to make a change they have to do it now or they risk being out of the discussion when the election happens. Trying to feel better due to one pollster putting the NDP right was it was last time, is not the answer.

The NDP needs a real dump of all the people who celebrate the party not being the first choice of some 80% of Canadians. They have two good choices -- vie for power representing their principles rather than hiding from them accepting nothing less than success, or fold up the politics, become a lobby group and merge into the Broadbent institute -- give up looking for power.

I, for one, find celebrating defeat and rejection a tiresome NDP trait. This is why I consider myself non-partisan now and do not have a membership in that party. Yes I may hope for them and vote for them but they need to earn support by being a contender and not being happy completeting the race miles behind the winners. No more medals for participation. Canadian society, the environment, social justice deserve nothing less. I want the NDP to be VERY unhappy until they are leading and not accept crumbs and moral BS victories. For starters they need to really understand and explain why Liberal voters are abandonning Trudeau to go Conservative. Some of these voters formerly supported Layton.

Then we can talk.

WWWTT

It actually doesn’t matter what anyone says about the NDP right now. Just a couple weeks ago, half the posters here on this site thought Justin was going to skip and whistle into a second majority blindfolded with one hand tied behind his back. And the way it looks now, if this polling trend continues, Justin will be riding the liberals back to third place!

If getting the NDP back into opposition means a conservative government, sorry liberals but it’s better for Canada the NDP has a bigger voice than the liberals in the house. 

JKR

WWWTT wrote:

It actually doesn’t matter what anyone says about the NDP right now. Just a couple weeks ago, half the posters here on this site thought Justin was going to skip and whistle into a second majority blindfolded with one hand tied behind his back. And the way it looks now, if this polling trend continues, Justin will be riding the liberals back to third place!

If getting the NDP back into opposition means a conservative government, sorry liberals but it’s better for Canada the NDP has a bigger voice than the liberals in the house. 

How does Canada benefit from Conservative governments? For instance, if the Conservatives had had there way our retirement age would now be moving back two whole years to 67. Would that have been good for Canadians even if an NDP official opposition was given the privileged position to complain about it the most in Parliament?

SocialJustice101

What are the achievements of the NDP Official Opposition  2011-2015?

NorthReport
alan smithee alan smithee's picture

WWWTT wrote:

If getting the NDP back into opposition means a conservative government, sorry liberals but it’s better for Canada the NDP has a bigger voice than the liberals in the house. 

We'd be better off with a Conservative government? You truly are daft.

And this is the reason I've been walking away from the NDP. What leftist in their right mind would rather have a Conservative government?

I've brought this out in the past and I was told I was wrong. Well,as it turns out I was right.

It's embarrassing and shameful and it also makes NO SENSE. The logic is missing a chromosome,it's actually demented.

My support of the NDP is coming to an end.

ETA... The Liberals IF they lose the next election are DEFINITELY not going to finish 3rd. The NDP will continue to have no voice and we'd be stuck with Sheer and his social conservative agenda.

Yeah,so brilliant idea,Buckwheat.

R.E.Wood

WWWTT wrote:

It actually doesn’t matter what anyone says about the NDP right now. Just a couple weeks ago, half the posters here on this site thought Justin was going to skip and whistle into a second majority blindfolded with one hand tied behind his back. And the way it looks now, if this polling trend continues, Justin will be riding the liberals back to third place!

If getting the NDP back into opposition means a conservative government, sorry liberals but it’s better for Canada the NDP has a bigger voice than the liberals in the house. 

Jumping into the chorus of rational voices to say that this is one of the most bass-ackwards thought processes I've ever heard. To say a Con government is better for Canada than a Lib government (but only if the NDP gets to be Official Opposition) defies reality. Your blind hatred for all-things-Liberal has fritzed-out your logic circuits. You've stated this position before (at least I think it was you, WWWTT) - perhaps you're just doing it to rile people up? Are you laughing on your end of the interwebs? Either way, it's the common-sense-denying hyper-partisans like you that make me tired of this forum.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

R.E.Wood wrote:

WWWTT wrote:

It actually doesn’t matter what anyone says about the NDP right now. Just a couple weeks ago, half the posters here on this site thought Justin was going to skip and whistle into a second majority blindfolded with one hand tied behind his back. And the way it looks now, if this polling trend continues, Justin will be riding the liberals back to third place!

If getting the NDP back into opposition means a conservative government, sorry liberals but it’s better for Canada the NDP has a bigger voice than the liberals in the house. 

Jumping into the chorus of rational voices to say that this is one of the most bass-ackwards thought processes I've ever heard. To say a Con government is better for Canada than a Lib government (but only if the NDP gets to be Official Opposition) defies reality. Your blind hatred for all-things-Liberal has fritzed-out your logic circuits. You've stated this position before (at least I think it was you, WWWTT) - perhaps you're just doing it to rile people up? Are you laughing on your end of the interwebs? Either way, it's the common-sense-denying hyper-partisans like you that make me tired of this forum.

I am very grateful that SOMEONE at babble is on the same page as me. To prefer a Conservative government strips you of any left wing progressive credentials--full stop.

You also said it really well, R.E. , thank you.

cco

Without taking a poll, I'd venture to say the vast majority of posters on this board -- certainly the vast majority of actual people involved in the NDP I've met -- don't prefer Conservative governments to Liberal ones. It's easier to debate Conservatives (who honestly promise Conservative policies) than Liberals (who promise NDP policies and implement Conservative policies), but that doesn't mean it's better to live under their reign.

NorthReport

Bingo!

Thanks cco

cco wrote:

Without taking a poll, I'd venture to say the vast majority of posters on this board -- certainly the vast majority of actual people involved in the NDP I've met -- don't prefer Conservative governments to Liberal ones. It's easier to debate Conservatives (who honestly promise Conservative policies) than Liberals (who promise NDP policies and implement Conservative policies), but that doesn't mean it's better to live under their reign.

Sean in Ottawa

It is possible to have opinions that include:

1) The Liberals are in the way of real change due to bait and switch policies and that they target left voters. Effectively the Liberals must be beaten to get a real progressive government

2) The NDP has to behave as if it is in charge of its own destiny and not blame other parties or the media (the above point can be overpowered with the NDP operating well). Failing to do this, the party lacks the ability to see itself and face the challenges that it must address.

3) The Conservatives and Liberals are not the same parties and the there are significant differences between them although at times they back similar policies and represent similar interests.

4) Strategic voting works poorly and sells future potential for, at best, a marginal impact today. It can also backfire.

5) The Conservatives used to be a more centrist party, that was much closer to the Liberal party, but they have not been that in the last generation. They are now more dangerously right wing and pose a threat to the country and vulnerable people any time they get power.

6) The Liberals are bad and helping them strips potential to achieve anything significant in the long run.

7) The Conservatives are worse.

It is possible to believe all these things at once and I think many progressive voters do -- if not most. This is what causes the difficulty and controversy in supporting Liberals in the short term. Many of us recognize a conflict between short and longer term and a recognition that the Liberals are not our answer. the choice between avoiding greater pain from the Conservatives now and preserving the strength to have greater gain from a more left party is a difficult one.

There is not really a right answer but a matter of opinion and judgment. I know this is emotional and difficult for people to grasp but we have to respect these differences in judgment because they are responses to a very difficult and closely-matched conflict. That opinion and judgment guides each voter in each election and the choices are frequently painful.

The fact is that assuming that the Conservatives are no worse than the Liberals in the present is wishful thinking contradicted by experience. To assume that there is no cost to abandoning the NDP to support the Liberals in the present is also wishful thinking contradicted by experience. We may disagree as to which has the highest price. As people here know, I tend to look at the longer term costs, but this is not to celebrate Conservative victories or to fail to recognize the disaster any Conservative victory poses. I disagree with any propaganda saying the Conservative and Liberals are the same -- as well as the dualistic simplicity of suggesting that a difference between them make either the Liberals a viable or acceptable choice.

There is another factor: governments operate in perpetual fear. What they fear is the opposition and that is a key attribute of the Westminister parliamentary model which highlights a shadow government debating with the present one. As such, the government is partly the complexion of parliament.

A Liberal government across from a Conservative government can effectively be worse than a Conservative one across from a strong NDP opposition. Ironically, since the Liberals are left in opposition and more right in government, a Conservative government in fear of a strong Liberal and NDP opposition can at times be more moderate than a Liberal government facing a right wing opposition (even though the Conservatives by nature are worse). When the Liberals are in power the opposition lacks their strength at opposing the very policies that they end up implementing. This was a fact we saw in 1995 when the Martin government slashed many programs that the Conservatives would not have dared to cut, due to the Liberal and NDP opposition. At that time the NDP had lost party status.

Experience tells us that in threat of a Liberal or Conservative government, the priority is to preserve NDP party status since the loss of it is a crisis for a generation. Knowing the NDP has party status and considering both the danger of strategic voting and the realities in the individual riding, many people make decisions about preserving NDP strength and growing that, or blocking an immediate Conservative government. Most NDP supporters understand that just as the Conservatives are much worse than the Liberals the Liberals are also much worse than the NDP (at least to us).

Apart from that people measure candidates and policies against trust in the parties. Many of us do not trust the Liberals to implement what they promise.

To suggest this is either the simplistic block the Conservatives at all cost or to vote NDP at all cost is to live in some kind of partisan bubble or deep denial.

I have always voted NDP, but I will not pretend that these issues do not concern me or that I might not think differently in a Liberal riding that I considered really could go Conservative but that would be close enough that my vote could make a difference. In that case I would have to evaluate all these issues and regardless of which answer I came up with, I would still deserve the respect of the community of progressive people. I am thankful that I have never been presented with such a choice. I think many people here who attack strategic voters live in ridings either so safely Conservative that voting other than NDP would make no difference or so safely not Conservative that the Conservatives are not a significant threat. I know this due to the statistics of which ridings really are in play.

A little respect for the people in these difficult situations really ought to exist along with a recognition that a minor difference in a perception of facts could weight to different decisions between two people who are essentially 99% on the same page.

 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

NorthReport wrote:

Bingo!

Thanks cco

cco wrote:

Without taking a poll, I'd venture to say the vast majority of posters on this board -- certainly the vast majority of actual people involved in the NDP I've met -- don't prefer Conservative governments to Liberal ones. It's easier to debate Conservatives (who honestly promise Conservative policies) than Liberals (who promise NDP policies and implement Conservative policies), but that doesn't mean it's better to live under their reign.

What's the use of easier debating ​when the Cons do not work at all with the opposition.

At least with the Liberals, the NDP has more power in the sense that it's more likely the Liberals would adopt NDP ideas where the Cons wouldn't -- ever.

There is a fundamental difference. It's just hyper-partisans can't accept it because it's outside their bubble.

JKR

cco wrote:

Without taking a poll, I'd venture to say the vast majority of posters on this board -- certainly the vast majority of actual people involved in the NDP I've met -- don't prefer Conservative governments to Liberal ones. It's easier to debate Conservatives (who honestly promise Conservative policies) than Liberals (who promise NDP policies and implement Conservative policies), but that doesn't mean it's better to live under their reign.

One reason many left of centre people support the federal Liberals is because Liberal federal governments have implemented many NDP type policies over the years from Medicare to the National Child Benefit. Another reason is that the federal NDP is hardly ever, if ever, in position to win a false FPTP "majority" government while the Liberals and Conservatives most often are in position to win a false FPTP government. Given Canada's federal political culture, a federal NDP government may not be a realistic possibility, so many on the left support and vote for the Liberals even though the Liberals put a lot of water in the wine of left of centre voters.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

It is possible to have opinions that include:

1) The Liberals are in the way of real change due to bait and switch policies and that they target left voters. Effectively the Liberals must be beaten to get a real progressive government

2) The NDP has to behave as if it is in charge of its own destiny and not blame other parties or the media (the above point can be overpowered with the NDP operating well). Failing to do this, the party lacks the ability to see itself and face the challenges that it must address.

3) The Conservatives and Liberals are not the same parties and the there are significant differences between them although at times they back similar policies and represent similar interests.

4) Strategic voting works poorly and sells future potential for, at best, a marginal impact today. It can also backfire.

5) The Conservatives used to be a more centrist party, that was much closer to the Liberal party, but they have not been that in the last generation. They are now more dangerously right wing and pose a threat to the country and vulnerable people any time they get power.

6) The Liberals are bad and helping them strips potential to achieve anything significant in the long run.

7) The Conservatives are worse.

It is possible to believe all these things at once and I think many progressive voters do -- if not most. This is what causes the difficulty and controversy in supporting Liberals in the short term. Many of us recognize a conflict between short and longer term and a recognition that the Liberals are not our answer. the choice between avoiding greater pain from the Conservatives now and preserving the strength to have greater gain from a more left party is a difficult one.

There is not really a right answer but a matter of opinion and judgment. I know this is emotional and difficult for people to grasp but we have to respect these differences in judgment because they are responses to a very difficult and closely-matched conflict. That opinion and judgment guides each voter in each election and the choices are frequently painful.

The fact is that assuming that the Conservatives are no worse than the Liberals in the present is wishful thinking contradicted by experience. To assume that there is no cost to abandoning the NDP to support the Liberals in the present is also wishful thinking contradicted by experience. We may disagree as to which has the highest price. As people here know, I tend to look at the longer term costs, but this is not to celebrate Conservative victories or to fail to recognize the disaster any Conservative victory poses. I disagree with any propaganda saying the Conservative and Liberals are the same -- as well as the dualistic simplicity of suggesting that a difference between them make either the Liberals a viable or acceptable choice.

There is another factor: governments operate in perpetual fear. What they fear is the opposition and that is a key attribute of the Westminister parliamentary model which highlights a shadow government debating with the present one. As such, the government is partly the complexion of parliament.

A Liberal government across from a Conservative government can effectively be worse than a Conservative one across from a strong NDP opposition. Ironically, since the Liberals are left in opposition and more right in government, a Conservative government in fear of a strong Liberal and NDP opposition can at times be more moderate than a Liberal government facing a right wing opposition (even though the Conservatives by nature are worse). When the Liberals are in power the opposition lacks their strength at opposing the very policies that they end up implementing. This was a fact we saw in 1995 when the Martin government slashed many programs that the Conservatives would not have dared to cut, due to the Liberal and NDP opposition. At that time the NDP had lost party status.

Experience tells us that in threat of a Liberal or Conservative government, the priority is to preserve NDP party status since the loss of it is a crisis for a generation. Knowing the NDP has party status and considering both the danger of strategic voting and the realities in the individual riding, many people make decisions about preserving NDP strength and growing that, or blocking an immediate Conservative government. Most NDP supporters understand that just as the Conservatives are much worse than the Liberals the Liberals are also much worse than the NDP (at least to us).

Apart from that people measure candidates and policies against trust in the parties. Many of us do not trust the Liberals to implement what they promise.

To suggest this is either the simplistic block the Conservatives at all cost or to vote NDP at all cost is to live in some kind of partisan bubble or deep denial.

I have always voted NDP, but I will not pretend that these issues do not concern me or that I might not think differently in a Liberal riding that I considered really could go Conservative but that would be close enough that my vote could make a difference. In that case I would have to evaluate all these issues and regardless of which answer I came up with, I would still deserve the respect of the community of progressive people. I am thankful that I have never been presented with such a choice. I think many people here who attack strategic voters live in ridings either so safely Conservative that voting other than NDP would make no difference or so safely not Conservative that the Conservatives are not a significant threat. I know this due to the statistics of which ridings really are in play.

A little respect for the people in these difficult situations really ought to exist along with a recognition that a minor difference in a perception of facts could weight to different decisions between two people who are essentially 99% on the same page.

 

I agree with 2 disagreements.

First,I'd have to have a full frontal lobotomy to vote Conservative. Ideologically speaking we're as different as an apple and a turd. In a swing riding scenario,I'd vote Liberal if it meant stopping the Conservatives. Remember,Harper has been gone only 3 years. Hasn't everybody learned their lesson with his 10 year tenure? It appears Scheer is worse and it's clear the party is modeling themselves after the Trump Republican party. This is unacceptable,IMHO. I'd rather an onion ring take over Parliament before the Cons.

Secondly,I don't believe you can claim to be progressive and vote Conservative at the same time. It's just not ideologically possible.

I understand that most people here hate the Liberals but they are following through with some of their promises. And I'm happy to get SOME of the policies I'd like to see passed rather than NONE. A Conservative gvernment is the biggestt threat to any forward progression. They'd like to bring back the 1940's or 50's -- fuck that.

But we are all spinning our wheels if we spend all our energy on hating the Liberals. I'd rather read about how we (as a country) can lift the NDP from 19-20% support to something relevant like 30%.

This place has been a forum for trashing the Liberals,going back to when I first started visiting this site. And that was with a Tory government in Ottawa.

The Tories were a plausible party before Mulroney. And they've become much,much worse after Mulroney. If this was 1979 and we were talking about the Joe Clark Progressive Conservatives,this would spark a much different conversation. 

The Liberal bashing reminds me of right wingers in the States bashing Obama..even today and he's been out of power for going on 2 years. It becomes silly and pathological after a while,I understand why some,like myself,get tired of it after a while.

I'm sure the majority of us here consider ourselves progressive. Therefore,we're on the same team. But once you start cheerleading the Conservatives,I'm afraid your street cred as a progressive is dead.

Pondering

The only really horrible outcome would be if the Conservatives won a majority which I don't see happening. If the Coservatives are a minority they can be overthrown by the Liberals and the NDP. The Liberals would not want to do it but they would expose themselves in a different way than before by supporting regressive Conservative legislation because Trudeau has fully embraced and spent a lot of time developing his "progressive" image. We have the example of BC to look to. 

Assuming an NDP win isn't in the cards a Liberal minority with the NDP holding the balance of power would be great. 

NorthReport

Actually it's just that people appreciate honesty as opposed to being deceived.

alan smithee wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

Bingo!

Thanks cco

cco wrote:

Without taking a poll, I'd venture to say the vast majority of posters on this board -- certainly the vast majority of actual people involved in the NDP I've met -- don't prefer Conservative governments to Liberal ones. It's easier to debate Conservatives (who honestly promise Conservative policies) than Liberals (who promise NDP policies and implement Conservative policies), but that doesn't mean it's better to live under their reign.

What's the use of easier debating ​when the Cons do not work at all with the opposition.

At least with the Liberals, the NDP has more power in the sense that it's more likely the Liberals would adopt NDP ideas where the Cons wouldn't -- ever.

There is a fundamental difference. It's just hyper-partisans can't accept it because it's outside their bubble.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

NorthReport wrote:

Actually it's just that people appreciate honesty as opposed to being deceived.

alan smithee wrote:

 

When speaking for ' people'  you should speak for yourself. Not the first time you defended the Cons,probably not the last.

As for 'honesty' and Conservative it's sort of like how stupidity has a certain charm but ignorance doesn't.

Or like respecting someone robbing you blind as long as they're 'honest' about it.

Basically,you just proved the hyper-partisan faction of babble. Good for you.

WWWTT

Give yourselves a big pat on the back everybody! Because you're ALL guilty of thread drift!

The last time anyone posted anything about polls was my comment 78, but for some reason it was something else other than the liberals slipping in the polls in my comment that's got the liberal hackers little voices in your heads crancked to 11. Or who knows maybe it was a combination? It's kinda of like when the liberals are elected to power, you never really know what's coming down the pipe so who knows?

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Give yourselves a big pat on the back everybody! Because you're ALL guilty of thread drift!

Threads are like conversations at a cocktail party.  They can start with "seen any good movies lately" and end with a heated argument over "blood diamonds".

The only babblers who whine about basic thread drift tend to be those babblers who rilly, rilly, rilly want to only discuss this one thing (that the thread drift ruined!  Ruined!!!)

JKR

Pondering wrote:

The only really horrible outcome would be if the Conservatives won a majority which I don't see happening.

History seems to show that the Conservatives could win a majority by just opening up a lead of 5 or more percentage points even if they are well under 40% of the vote. This is one reason why we should have electoral reform - governments should represent the majority of the voters.

WWWTT

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
Give yourselves a big pat on the back everybody! Because you're ALL guilty of thread drift!

Threads are like conversations at a cocktail party.  They can start with "seen any good movies lately" and end with a heated argument over "blood diamonds".

The only babblers who whine about basic thread drift tend to be those babblers who rilly, rilly, rilly want to only discuss this one thing (that the thread drift ruined!  Ruined!!!)

Ya that makes no sense at all!! (warning more thread drift)

If you want to talk about movies or disco rollerblade, goto that thread, or start one. How freekin hard is that?

This thread is about polls in 2018. I came to this thread today because I saw 14 new comments since last time and the first thing that popped into my mind was that there must have been some serious new polls out to stir up so many new comments. But no, no freekin way! It was all about a side comment I made about the liberal poll numbers slipping.

Now had someone suggest I start a thread about a random side comment I made, or even took it upon themeselves to do so, then that's reasonable and all the power to that poster.

Keep in mind that it can be frustrating to the reader AND posters when people are discussing unrelated topics comment after comment after comment.

Sean in Ottawa

alan smithee wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

It is possible to have opinions that include:

1) The Liberals are in the way of real change due to bait and switch policies and that they target left voters. Effectively the Liberals must be beaten to get a real progressive government

2) The NDP has to behave as if it is in charge of its own destiny and not blame other parties or the media (the above point can be overpowered with the NDP operating well). Failing to do this, the party lacks the ability to see itself and face the challenges that it must address.

3) The Conservatives and Liberals are not the same parties and the there are significant differences between them although at times they back similar policies and represent similar interests.

4) Strategic voting works poorly and sells future potential for, at best, a marginal impact today. It can also backfire.

5) The Conservatives used to be a more centrist party, that was much closer to the Liberal party, but they have not been that in the last generation. They are now more dangerously right wing and pose a threat to the country and vulnerable people any time they get power.

6) The Liberals are bad and helping them strips potential to achieve anything significant in the long run.

7) The Conservatives are worse.

It is possible to believe all these things at once and I think many progressive voters do -- if not most. This is what causes the difficulty and controversy in supporting Liberals in the short term. Many of us recognize a conflict between short and longer term and a recognition that the Liberals are not our answer. the choice between avoiding greater pain from the Conservatives now and preserving the strength to have greater gain from a more left party is a difficult one.

There is not really a right answer but a matter of opinion and judgment. I know this is emotional and difficult for people to grasp but we have to respect these differences in judgment because they are responses to a very difficult and closely-matched conflict. That opinion and judgment guides each voter in each election and the choices are frequently painful.

The fact is that assuming that the Conservatives are no worse than the Liberals in the present is wishful thinking contradicted by experience. To assume that there is no cost to abandoning the NDP to support the Liberals in the present is also wishful thinking contradicted by experience. We may disagree as to which has the highest price. As people here know, I tend to look at the longer term costs, but this is not to celebrate Conservative victories or to fail to recognize the disaster any Conservative victory poses. I disagree with any propaganda saying the Conservative and Liberals are the same -- as well as the dualistic simplicity of suggesting that a difference between them make either the Liberals a viable or acceptable choice.

There is another factor: governments operate in perpetual fear. What they fear is the opposition and that is a key attribute of the Westminister parliamentary model which highlights a shadow government debating with the present one. As such, the government is partly the complexion of parliament.

A Liberal government across from a Conservative government can effectively be worse than a Conservative one across from a strong NDP opposition. Ironically, since the Liberals are left in opposition and more right in government, a Conservative government in fear of a strong Liberal and NDP opposition can at times be more moderate than a Liberal government facing a right wing opposition (even though the Conservatives by nature are worse). When the Liberals are in power the opposition lacks their strength at opposing the very policies that they end up implementing. This was a fact we saw in 1995 when the Martin government slashed many programs that the Conservatives would not have dared to cut, due to the Liberal and NDP opposition. At that time the NDP had lost party status.

Experience tells us that in threat of a Liberal or Conservative government, the priority is to preserve NDP party status since the loss of it is a crisis for a generation. Knowing the NDP has party status and considering both the danger of strategic voting and the realities in the individual riding, many people make decisions about preserving NDP strength and growing that, or blocking an immediate Conservative government. Most NDP supporters understand that just as the Conservatives are much worse than the Liberals the Liberals are also much worse than the NDP (at least to us).

Apart from that people measure candidates and policies against trust in the parties. Many of us do not trust the Liberals to implement what they promise.

To suggest this is either the simplistic block the Conservatives at all cost or to vote NDP at all cost is to live in some kind of partisan bubble or deep denial.

I have always voted NDP, but I will not pretend that these issues do not concern me or that I might not think differently in a Liberal riding that I considered really could go Conservative but that would be close enough that my vote could make a difference. In that case I would have to evaluate all these issues and regardless of which answer I came up with, I would still deserve the respect of the community of progressive people. I am thankful that I have never been presented with such a choice. I think many people here who attack strategic voters live in ridings either so safely Conservative that voting other than NDP would make no difference or so safely not Conservative that the Conservatives are not a significant threat. I know this due to the statistics of which ridings really are in play.

A little respect for the people in these difficult situations really ought to exist along with a recognition that a minor difference in a perception of facts could weight to different decisions between two people who are essentially 99% on the same page.

 

I agree with 2 disagreements.

First,I'd have to have a full frontal lobotomy to vote Conservative. Ideologically speaking we're as different as an apple and a turd. In a swing riding scenario,I'd vote Liberal if it meant stopping the Conservatives. Remember,Harper has been gone only 3 years. Hasn't everybody learned their lesson with his 10 year tenure? It appears Scheer is worse and it's clear the party is modeling themselves after the Trump Republican party. This is unacceptable,IMHO. I'd rather an onion ring take over Parliament before the Cons.

Secondly,I don't believe you can claim to be progressive and vote Conservative at the same time. It's just not ideologically possible.

I understand that most people here hate the Liberals but they are following through with some of their promises. And I'm happy to get SOME of the policies I'd like to see passed rather than NONE. A Conservative gvernment is the biggestt threat to any forward progression. They'd like to bring back the 1940's or 50's -- fuck that.

But we are all spinning our wheels if we spend all our energy on hating the Liberals. I'd rather read about how we (as a country) can lift the NDP from 19-20% support to something relevant like 30%.

This place has been a forum for trashing the Liberals,going back to when I first started visiting this site. And that was with a Tory government in Ottawa.

The Tories were a plausible party before Mulroney. And they've become much,much worse after Mulroney. If this was 1979 and we were talking about the Joe Clark Progressive Conservatives,this would spark a much different conversation. 

The Liberal bashing reminds me of right wingers in the States bashing Obama..even today and he's been out of power for going on 2 years. It becomes silly and pathological after a while,I understand why some,like myself,get tired of it after a while.

I'm sure the majority of us here consider ourselves progressive. Therefore,we're on the same team. But once you start cheerleading the Conservatives,I'm afraid your street cred as a progressive is dead.

I am utterly confused by your stated disagreements: On 1 where did I suggest any merit in voting Conservative? I merely stated that there are times when support for the NDP may be more urgent than blocking the conservatives-- that is not the same as voting conservative.

Then you say, as a disagreement that voting conservative is not a progressive. Again where did I say it was. I looked for a typo and could not find one.

And no, it is not cheerleading for the conservatives to place a higher priority on voting NDP than blocking a conservative government. Those are two voting concerns and voting NDP is never a vote to support the conservatives or cheerleading for them. I think this is somethign Liberals want people to think but it is quite false.

Pondering

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
Those are two voting concerns and voting NDP is never a vote to support the conservatives or cheerleading for them. I think this is somethign Liberals want people to think but it is quite false.

The NDP was singing that song in 2015 not the Liberals. One person here does not represent "the Liberals".  Other than that I agree with you. Voting for the NDP or the Greens etc. is not a vote for the Conservatives. 

Voting strategically is a personal choice made at the riding level based on the local contest. 

It is only the threat of losing votes to the NDP that pushs the Liberals to the left. We need the NDP to exist and for them to exist they need votes. That is what gets them influence.

If the Liberals are afraid of losing votes to the NDP they will just have to move farther left. It isn't up to NDP supporters to desert the party on behalf of the Liberals. 

The Liberals current lackluster numbers are not attributable to the NDP. The Liberals brought it on themselves. They probably don't care too much because they have a basket of goodies coming for Election 2019.

Scheer will defeat himself. Voters are just flirting to give the Liberals a slap on the wrist. 

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

Scheer will defeat himself. Voters are just flirting to give the Liberals a slap on the wrist. 

Scary to read stuff like this. Please don't make such predictions -- usually they are wrong these days -- look at the predictions made in the last couple years.

I am sure there are a few people here who could write the narrative for a Scheer victory. The Trudeau government, like any government is fragile: an economic reversal, a NAFTA failure, a scandal... The election is a long way yet.

After Harper, I was done thinking, "oh this guy is an idiot" or "too extreme" to be elected. I thought Harper was the perfect conservative: someone without a chance of being elected. Trump just reinforced that point.

There is a wide range of results still possible for the NDP from numbers that would make this board happy to quite depressed.

There is nobody intelligent enough to predict the result becuase there is not enough data yet.

Consider each of the parties have a really good reason to do well:

Liberals: Trudeau could land a NAFTA deal amid low expectations, recover and connect again with many people. He could get another minority. He could also fail on a number of fronts and end up around where he is now or lower. I have observed from the start that Trudeau's government is weaker than it looks because it depended so much on people who rarely vote. If theya re not inspired again, which is hard to do, the Trudeau has to gain support he did not have last time when he was all things to all people.

Conservatives: Scheer might not have to do all that much to exceed Harper who was disliked by even a lot of Conservatives. Depending on the economy and a few other things, the Conservatives could do fairly well. I think they are less likely to get the most seats than the Liberals but there are scenarios where that could happen. I do not see a majority at this point but if events are extreme it is possible.

NDP: The NDP support is probably spread thinner than ever. With a slight bump this could return a lot of seats or even leave the party struggling for party status. If you remember 1993, you can see that 16% can deliver just two seats and 19% can deliver 52. Just think: 26 times the seats on a 3% difference. If the Liebrals are mired then the NDP may make gains but if the Liebrals recover things will be difficult. Quebec could shut out the NDP or reward them with an increase -- perhaps due to splits depending on what happens to the other parties.

Greens: They are certainly a variable. They could lose support or take enough support in BC to deny gains the NDP is counting on.

Just don't say that anyone cannot be elected.....

NorthReport

Stephen Harper became prime minister because the Liberals had a Conservative leader in Paul Martin who put his own companies offshore to avoid Canadian taxes, Canadian Labour Laws, and Canadian Environmental Laws. And some of the NDP ads attacking the Liberals during the election campaign were quite effective as well. Now some folks, call them Liberals, will blame the NDP for Harper’s win, instead of looking in the mirror and realizing that by making Paul Martin the face of the Liberals, Liberals are to blame for choosing such a dud for Liberal Leader. 

Pages