New polling thread

I found out recently that one grandfather was a staunch supporter of the CCF in days gone by.  I also read recently a book by John Boyko of Lakefield, Ont., who described how the Conservatives and Liberals worked together with the Communist Party to kill the CCF.  No doubt I will get lots of bashing from various posters for that statement, but it was Boyko's perspective, and it does ring true with some things i've seen.  Apparently there had been a directive from Moscow that to uphold 'real socialism', pretenders like the CCF had to be squashed.  Unfortunately, attacks from the right and the far left were successful. 

Now we have people on this board debating whether the NDP should come out in defense of words like 'socialism' when most people in the country don't really know what it means.  In the past I've tried to say that those who are passionate about this should consider that it would be more useful for the causes they hold dear to work harder at articulating the specifics/directions of what good policy would look like. 

Upholding and clearly standing firm on directions in support of people and planet in the face of economic and ecological onslaught would seem to be a good approach in many provinces.

"Amyone can publish any poll any time between elections and there is absolutely no way to prove their so-called polling results are accurate. "

Far be it from me to try to defend Ipsos-Reid - but this is bullshit. You can't just go out and make up whatever numbers you want. That would be a criminal act called FRAUD. There are industry standards and there are laws etc... If Ipsos says they polled 1,000 Canadians by phone - then they did. and if they didn't, then call the police and ask them to launch an investigation.

People can take issue with methodologies such as the exact wording of the questions and what order they were asked in etc... but the notion that they just make up numbers out of thin air is ludicrous.

Those polls took place. People can debate the methodology of the technology that was used and people can debate the question wording. As it turned out those polls in Guelph were not all that off the mark. The NDP in come in a distant fourth and it was just about the strongest result for any Green candidate in the whole country.

Using "robocalls" is a perfectly acceptable way to conduct a poll. Ekos did it nationally in the last election and they were pretty accurate and it is now standard practice in the US - and the polls in the presidential election were very accurate. You can argue that local newspapers should have standards about what polls they choose to publicize - so complain to the Guelph Mercury about that.

But Ipsos is the world's largest public opinion research company and they have arrangements to have their polls published by respected media outlets (you may or may not like their editorials). There is not the slightest chance that they would take the risk to their reputation of fabricating polling numbers and never actually polling anyone at all.

If you have reason to believe that someone is committing FRAUD by publishing polling numbers that claim to be based on a telephone survey of 1,000 people when in fact they didn't poll anyone at all and it was all made up - then YES by all means call the police and tell them that you have reason to believe that fraud is being committed.

There is also a trade association for the market research industry called MRIA (Marketing Research and Intelligence Association) that tries to maintain quality control standards and practices in the industry. You can complain to them too, if you think that blatant fraud is being committed. But the evidence will have to be more than just "I don't believe these numbers, because none of my friends think that way".

Because social scientists, marketers, political parties, governments, the media and the general public have a desire to know and understand what people think about issues of the day and what peoples' motivations and values are etc...

But just think, if polling didn't exist, we would still have other ways of knowing what people think - we would all listen to talk radio call in shows and we would asume that the views expressed reflected what people thought!

The technology exists to survey people - s it is going to happen. YOu might as well ask, why does media exist? why does academia exist? why does the Internet exist?

<cough>  <cough>

http://www.robbinssceresearch.com/ 

I'm prepared to accept that there is a fine distinction between the Liberal and CPC platforms. However, when push came to shove on voting day, it was painfully evident that NDP Tom King was not our man. He ended up with only 6 out of 220 polls, versus Mike Nagy, the Green with almost 20% of polls (and a sweep of the nine polls on campus where Tom King teaches). Under those circumstances I was not prepared to effectively endorse the CPC's hamfisted interference in the local riding association when they removed the elected candidate, Brent Barr, to substitute Gloria Kovach -- the loser in the nomination contest. We had also had ample opportunity see just how far Gloria was prepared to stand for whatever principles she may have when, in the weeks coming up to the by-election, this 18-year, highly competent city councillor turned Council into a circus, using it as a megaphone for CPC hot button issues. She humiliated herself by trying to bamboozle a young reporter. Every word out of her mouth was a script. And, needless to say, she didn't show up for a single candidates meeting (maybe other than the one at the old folks home).

I was also not prepared to hand Harper this seat because I do believe that if and when that man and his cabal attain a majority, we will see more backsliding in four years than will ever be made up in my lifetime.

And you know what? I voted NDP for almost two decades straight, and never elected one single member.

So, laugh at me all you want, I guess.

I understand your reasoning.  I understand that Kovach became a straw puppet for the CPC.  I understand you not wanting to hand Harper this seat. 

The people who voted for Emerson for the same reasons.

The Guelph MP showed all the characteristics of a floor crosser. But even as an LPC MP he will be one to support the backsliding of both a Harper Government or a Liberal Government under Ignatieff. 

He is a Conservative with a red sweater.

What a bunch of poppycock. The "coalition" was more than acceptable to many Canadians. What was acting against it was not the BQ but the anti-Dion sentiment, which was a groundswell of antagonism which was widely supported here. Polls in the new year showed support for the coalition was around 50%. Notably this happened after Dion was given the boot.

Screw all this shilly-shallying double talke. Only the extreme right thought the BQ element was a problem, and guiding NDP policy views on the basis of what they think is like trying to sell porno mags to born again Christians.

Now I am not talking about anti-francophone sentiment when I say this, even though it was persent in these events, but when was the last time anyone pointed out that saying you would "not hire a black person to do a sales job" because "the public wouldn't like it" is just as racist as saying you wouldn't hire them because you don't trust black people?

The point is this: acting in accord with principles you don't agree with is just the same as supporting those principles. In other words saying the NDP should not have sought the support of the BQ because of the bad optics, is just the same as saying looking for the support of the BQ was wrong in principle. It is tacit support for principles which you would like to say you don't adhere to without the benefit of basic honesty.

 Its shere cowardice in the fact of prejudice in this case. The member representing the BQ are legitimate representatives of Canadian people, and as such have the same rights and responsibilities as other Canadian MP's.

 That is what "federalism" is about. Don't you get it?

Are you going to stand up for the rights of Quebec citizens to elect their own representatives, and have them respected or are you not?

Np. That was part of the drum roll that the dyed in the wool jingoists marched too. What sewered the optics among normal Canadians was the image of Dion as an embarassing bafoon.

I agree with Stock. This is the degree I think it is the reality:

I expect Harper will be soon back to pushing hard on the Liberals. Not to the degree and lack of finesse as with pushover Dion, but bask at soon nontheless.

When Dion was around- and equally important before Harper finaly got caught overplaying his hand in the Fall- they just hammered away almost without limit.

Now they are going to be sticking their finger into the wind at each possible conjucture, and calibrating the amount of push according to the read of the wind.

The Liberals financial situation is serious enough- and Team Iggy is going to need at least a year to begin to turn that around- so that pushing the Liberals into an election is a good thing for the Cons long game whether or not the Cons can come out of another election with any seat gains [and even if it has the likely enough prospect of losing them some seats].

But heres the caveat on that which I see for the Cons: they are unlikely to get a majority in the forseeable future. At a minimum, its not going to look good enough that they can bank on getting a majority. Which means, a coalition governemnt is a possible outcome of an election.

I think that if the read at the time is that an election outcome will most likely NOT produce an outcome with a combined majority for the NDP and the Liberals, then Harper will push with impunity. Because then the worst case scenario is a Coalition that includes another agreement with the Bloc. And that is a prospect that Harper Crew can safely figure will not happen again because it is so unpopular, or if it does happen will soon enough return the Cons to government. 

I think the Cons would also take some risk with the possibility of a straight up Lib/NDP majority coalition.... because of the likelihood it will fail or hand them golden opportunities.

But if the only likely outcome of an election besides them continuing to govern is another Lib/NDP/Bloc agreement, in that case Harper will fly right ahead.

Fine, ya'll go on determining NDP policy on the basis of Tory attack ads. Looks good on yah.

No one is suggesting "determining NDP policy on the basis of Tory attacks ads". But it would be nuts to just ignore and be unprepared for any future Tory attacks on this issue.

So, I say, No, NDP "policy" should not be determined on the basis of Tory attacks ads - and no one here is saying anything different. But YES, NDP communications and tactics have to be prepared for Tory attack ads. That is all anyone is saying.  

Really? Because I was getting the distinct impression people were saying that it was a mistake to form a coalition with the Bloc, ala "Personally, I believe an NDP-Liberal coalition is a politically saleable prospect provided it did not depend on the BQ."

Really? Where is the poll on that. I didnt talk to one person who raised it as an issue. The only thing was ever commented on was Dion.

 And if it is as you say, why did the coalitions approval rating start climbing after Dion was gone. It would still have depended on the Bloc's support.

 This is such a red herring, Even the NDP was pointing out that Harper's attacks upon forming  coalition with the Bloc were hypocritical since he had proposed basically the same thing. Where was the strong public outrage then? Nowhere. Nor did it happen this time.

It was fiction. A few Tory Stormtroopers picked up on the theme, but that was just so they could have some kind of quasi arguement against it.

Exactly, you are expecting to win their vote? Don't even bother.

I was surprised at the opposition to the BQ role from progressive (union) circles people I know.

Their issue cannot be reduced to bigotry- they were concened that a party that is not loyal to the institution should not have any control over it.

I think to dismiss the opposition as coming from only "Conservative storm troopers" is out of touch with what happened. The public discomfort was real.

The polls moved somewhat to be sure but other things were happening:

1) more desperation as the economy worsened;

2) it became less likely that the coalition was a real rather than theoretical prospect

3) some people likely became more aware of how limited the BQ's role was

Still the upward momentum was one, maybe two polls-- maybe accurate or not and still not overwhelming.

"Really? Because I was getting the distinct impression people were saying that it was a mistake to form a coalition with the Bloc, ala "Personally, I believe an NDP-Liberal coalition is a politically saleable prospect provided it did not depend on the BQ.""

You are mistaken. You were quoting someone else. Not me. I do agree though that a simple Liberal-NDP coalition that is NOT dependent on the BQ is an EASIER thing to sell than such a coalition that is dependent on the BQ. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't pursue the latter if the math after the next election leaves us no choice. The more parties you have in the coalition/agreement, the more there is for people to object to - so fewer parties is always better than more.

According to the polls support for the coalition did go up after Dion stepped out of the picture. But the percentage of Canadians favouring the coalition was still well below the sum of the vote of all the parties backing the coalition.Whether you like it or not - there are a lot of people, especially in western Canada who voted Liberal, NDP or Green who (wrongly in my opinion) are vulnerable to whipped into a frenzy about the role of the BQ in a coalition gov't. You can't just pretent that this sentiment doesn't exist and that nothing needs to be done to argue against it.

Unless the Liberals win a majority of their own, they may not have any choice in the matter of a coalition with the NDP. What if the NDP demands cabinet seats otherwise it will refuse to back a Liberal minority gov't?

 In some ways, the NDP is in a stronger position if the Liberals remain the second biggest party and then it becomes mandatory for the Liberals to get a more concrete agreement with the NDP if they are going to form a government.

I don't think its too likely to be like that. Stock and I were among the small handful around here who said that all things considered they thought Iggy would choose for th Coalition. Granted, no one said it was even close to definite or something like that.

I think Iggy will even be somewhat less likely to go for a Coalition after an election. The better the Libs do in the election, and/or the Cons look like they are in trouble, the more likely he'll sit tight and wait for them to self-destruct.

And who knows how likely any of that will be.

As to the chances that a Lib/NDP majority will look possible when there is a chance for an election: that would depend largely on the Bloc losing a lot of support [and looking to stay there this time], AND the Cons not being the major beneficiaries of that. Right now its not looking to me that anytime this year that will look like the most likely outcome in Quebec of an election.

Given the Libs financial situation, they are only going to push the button if they are confident they can come out of the election as government [without Bloc support]. There is certainly a possibility of that outcome. But I doubt its going to be likely to be what the Libs will need: that before triggering an election odds are best they will be government.

Which right-wing party try to form some kind of coalition with the Bloc a while back? Don't you think that if Harper tries to run anti-coalition ads in the next election, it could be bounced back to haunt him. Isn't this a bit or very hypocritical!

The Liberals are definitely the wild card in what is to come.

The Cons are firmly in the drivers seat, and to what degree they go back to governing as if they had a majority will change according to what they think can be expected of the Liberals.

And for the Liberals their finanical situation- specifically the albatross of their accumulated deficit- is their hard limit on choices. By no means the most important factor in their choices- but a pretty hard limit nonetheless.

If the next election is anytime less than a year from now [if not for longer even], the increased accumulated debt following the election means they will have to go into the election with confidence they will be governing after it. From government they can work a combination of changing the election financing rules and/or just making sure they don't fall quickly into another election.

For that minimum of a year until the Liberals can turn around their basic financial picture they simply cannot afford to go into an election that can have an outcome of Harper still in power and controlling when the next election is.

Since the Cons are unlikely to be able to get a majority in this short to medium time frame, then the Liberals know that the Coalition path is available to them following an election.

The Liberals could therefore choose to tip us into an election at any of the guaranteeed confidence votes- starting with one of their 'Harper report cards' coming up within a couple months.

But I'm pretty sure they will not choose an election at any time when the polls show it most or too likely Bloc support would be required for a Coalition government. Nor do I think they will choose an election where they have to work out a deal with the NDP with little more seat strength than they have now.

In other words: if Bloc could be required, then choosing an election is out of the question; if Liberals don't look to be safe expecting a seat gain of at least say 20, choosing an election still unlikely. And their financial situation seals that they will not go anyway even if it looks a bit iffy.

The Cons know this and are the flip side: there is still lots of room for them getting their way with legislation because the Liberals are on an even shorter rope financially than they were doing Dion's tenure. How aggressively the Cons push the legislative agenda back their direction will be an inverse of the Liberals electoral chances at that moment.

If the Liberals are looking strong enough in the polls [mostly the party internal polls and focus group testing] then Harper will not push them at all. At the other extreme- if the NDP and Liberals getting a combined majority looks unlikely- Harper will push his agenda aggressively and visibly cut Iggnatieff down to size.

I think that Team Iggy miscalculated with those 'Harper report cards'. Yes, they wanted some increased opportunities on being able to pull the plug on Harper if he is looking exposed. But they should have learned that confidence votes cut two ways for them [not to mention, so far only against them].

I don't know what idiot rocket scientist picked the first of those confidence votes for 2 months down the road. We never get big shifts in voter intentions in that time, so what we see know is what we'll see then. And what I see is lots of room for Harper pushing on the Liberals.

Harper might not choose to push hard or much when that vote comes up. But thats the best the Liberals can hope for. Hardly a recipe for the Liberals getting back in control of the agenda.

If Harper goes ahead and decides to push at the time of that vote, then he gets to already cut Iggy down to size.... setting up for defining the Liberals as being the same as what they have been.

I just now contradicted something I said only 12 hours ago: 

This would be what Team Iggy intends to do- the plan, such as it is.

I had earlier run the numbers on the Libs financial situation. And had thought generally about the implications, but not really applied it. For example to the question above.

The reality is that the Liberals would have to come out of an election surprisingly strong and Harper would have to be really totally on the ropes for Iggy to back off from forming a Coalition government and wait for the self destruction to hand the Libs the reigns of government without partners.

The latter is Iggy's and the Liberals painfully obvious preference. But unless Harpers edifice is showing unequivocal signs of utterly crumbling, after an election anytime in the next year [at least] the Liberals are going to have to assure there won't be another one for at least a year.

No one is going to campaign as future coalition partners. i fully expect Layton to run for PM again and if the question of a coalition arises he will say the same thing as Iggy - "after we see the makeup of the next Parliament the parties will meet and see what combination of parties can produce stable government".

Northreport, the poll does not say what you just wrote in your last paragraph, as it says the NDP is at 17%. ______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Those Quebec numbers are - to put it mildly - ABSURD. They might as well show the Communist Party getting 60% of the vote in Calgary!

This is not that 20th poll - this is someone in SC`s data analysis department making some gross error. The numbers they have in Quebec for the Liberals, Tories and NDP seem in line with what most other polls say regarding Quebec, but Quebec is the weakest place in canada for the Greens - they got almost no support there at all in the election and they are invisible. I suspect that Green support is about 20% lower than that poll says and BQ support is about 20% higher - which means that at the national level the Liberals, Tories and NDp are unchanged, but the Greens should be at about 8% not 13% and the BQ shoud be at about 10% not 5%.

I can`t believe that the Globe would even publish something so obviously wrong.

"I was surprised at the opposition to the BQ role from progressive (union) circles people I know.

Their issue cannot be reduced to bigotry- they were concened that a party that is not loyal to the institution should not have any control over it.

I think to dismiss the opposition as coming from only "Conservative storm troopers" is out of touch with what happened. The public discomfort was real."

Another aspect of that public discomfort was the calendar. The country had just gone through an election campaign, which the Tories had won, albeit a minority.
Like it or not, many people wanted them to get on with it, and saw the coaltion as a sleazy end run. Constitutional, but a surprise to many of the great unwashed who did not know this was even possible.
The Opposition, or more accurately the Libs and NDP, were fortunate that the GG turned down what Hrper undoubtedly asked for - an immediate election. He'd have won handily if she'd agreed.
Now... less certain, and more so as time passes.

I think the main issue was people don't even know how our political system in Canada works. There was a poll out where an embarassingly huge number of Canadians thought we elected our prime minister directly like the president of the United States. As such, the Conservatives were able to successfully paint the coalition alternative as illegitimate and upsetting the established order. Having the Bloc in the coalition didn't help the legitimacy question either. Most of what I ever hear people say about the Bloc Québécois is how they represent/are anglophone-hating, Canada-destroying separatists. What happened to the :rolleyes: smiley?

Agreed. Public opinion is an evolving thing and over time things can change.

I think the public is moving toward the idea of a coalition ousting the biggest party as being possible and there has been enough debate to make this more salable.

The involvement of a separatist party in a coalition has been discussed but not sold and I fear we have made no progress there. The fact that this party represents real people and their right to representation should not be curtailed simply because of the political will they expressed. There ought to be more of a discussion of political inclusiveness and maybe this will happen over time.  We eventually have to come to a time when all MPs are looked at equally with an equal right to participate fully in the national government. It is a point of fact that the BQ not only cannot on their own break up the country, they have not only a right to participate in national government as long as one exists, they have an obligation. This obligation comes in part from the place they take up and the democratic legitimacy of the elections that brought them.

I hope we will recognize this. 

I do not want to turn this into an Israel politics thread except to use that example of a country that has minority parties that have unacceptable positions who nonetheless are required to form a national government at times and have to set aside some objectives that come from  these positions to work with other parties through coalition building.

ottawaobserver...

Why would Harper agree to attack the party that has kept him in power by spliting the left? 

How does a withered ndp hep the cons electorally?

Nothing from Harper makes much sense anymore. if he was dumb enough to do that idiotic economic statement - he is also dumb enough to mishandle the NDP. I think that his strategic acument is highly overrated. The emperor has no clothes!!

The NDP lead the LPC across the 4 Western Provinces. It doesn't take but a minute movement for the NDP to lose that seat in ALB.

In my region and surrounding, the LPC activists have been engaged in a letter writing campaign trashing the NDP, who were there best buds in Nov.

The CPC need those NDP seats as bad as the LPC needs them.

The CPC need just a few seats, the LPC could win all NDP seats and still not reach Majority threshold.

It is very clear that the LPC have decided that the CPC are better partners to trash the NDP then were the GPC.

The CPC do not believe that the LPC can pull the plug because of their fiscal troubles, and the electorates not wanting to have an election.

The CPC are positioning for a majority they are likely to come short of, and the LPC are looking to stick it to the NDP like they did in 04 and tried to do in 06, and totally screwed up in 08.

The NDP needs to ride on policy, and Mr. Layton needs to shift gears or be stuck in the mud.  This is more difficult as the media appears to be on a campaign of Iggy praising and Jack Bashing, even though this budget, is a piece of SHIITE. 

Considering the NDP response to IGGY's support of the CPC did not appear orchestrated, and appeared as if they didn't see it coming, then they will make two mistakes, if they do not LOUDLY position themselves away from this garbage budget with good reason.

The irony is that people CANNOT understand why the NDP announced that they were against a budget before it came before them. NDP insiders know why, but PEOPLE don't and are unlikely to understand.

Yet, here are the two parties who created this monster, ready to blame the NDP for the contents of the budget.

I hear it on the street.

"Ignatieff is doing a good job by putting the government on notice, and it was the NDP who forced the government into this poorly designed budget, I won't vote for them next time".

Putting the government on notice. Yup, no teeth, no meaning, no content, but people lap it up.

There is NO splitting of the left. People are very naive to believe that there is a splitting of the left. Considering that there are people who vote NDP/CPC (ONLY), LPC/GPC (ONLY), LPC/NDP (ONLY), LPC/CPC (ONLY) and some GPC/NDP (ONLY),  suggests to me  that there is no LEFT splitting, but possible choices that depend upon the variables heading into any election campaign. One can argue that the REFORM party, while successful in crushing the Kim Campbell PCs, did as much damage to the NDP, as a choice to mark a ballot. People rejected, LPC, PC, and NDP, and went to Reform.

That is not lost upon the CPC.

Nor is it lost upon the LPC that the fear of the Reform and Alliance, became a rallying call for NDP voters to back the Liberals or face ... CUTS TO SOCIAL PROGRAMS AND HEALTH CARE :)

Both the CPC and LPC are looking at the MILLIONS of NDP votes, and are going to campaign to make the NDP look distasteful.

Peggy Nash on target. 

 ---------------------------------

It's been called a pizza Parliament, but what we have in Ottawa is more like a "pretzel Parliament."

A House full of parties who have tied themselves up into knots.

We have a doctrinaire, rigid, crusading neo-conservative government, busy implementing a big-spending, deficit-creating mess of half-measures, introduced at budget time in an act of political expediency. In every conceivable way, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has become what he has campaigned against his whole life......

Layton now needs to untie the NDP's own knot, and get back on the track that has so far tripled the NDP caucus and doubled its vote.

Here's what Mr. Layton needs to do.

First, he needs to go after the Conservative government with relentless determination.

This Conservative government, even with an application of theatre makeup courtesy of the Liberal leader, is out of step with our times. Canadians are looking enviously at the end of the sorry neo-con chapter south of the border.

They want a message of change and hope in our country as well. Mr. Layton needs to take up the opposition

------------------------------------------------------- 

The NDP currently only has two seats in the BC interior - Skeena-Bulkley Valley which is essentially unwinnable for the Tories because it has such a large First nations vote and because Nathan Cullen is a lock and BC Southern Interior which couuld go Tory if they won a landslide - but it went NDP by several thousand votes last time.

Don't forget a few Ontario NDP-to-Tory possibilities, among them Hamilton Mountain, London-Fanshawe, Welland...as well as the surreally close call for Tony Martin in the Soo, for whatever reason...

The Tories were wayyy behind the NDP in Hamilton-Mountain and London-Fanshawe and if they couldn't win those seats in 2008 when the Liberals were at an all-time low under Dion and when a whole chunk of treaditional Liberal voters went Tory - I don't see when they can ever win those seats in the future. The Tories have no where to go but down in Ontario after the Oct. '08 election.

Hate to say it but since all the NDP pickups last time were at the expense of a Liberal vote that probably hit the floor in '08, the NDP should expect a real battle in ridings like Sudbury and Welland and perhaps even '06 pickups like Trinity-Spadina and Hamilton East-Stoney Creek.

I'm glad to see Layton travelling to places like Quebec City, Fredericton, Fundy Royal, and Sarnia during the break, and Alex Atamanenko doing a tour through rural SW Ontario.  Nice to see we're not in "save the furniture" mode, regardless of what the MSM and Libloggers are writing these days, or what the headline numbers in the polls say.

I'm not saying the NDP is on a downward spiral, but since the NDP pickups in Ontario were at the expense of Liberals, they shouild expect real battles.  The North is a bit tricky - the Lib vote went way down, but now all these NDPers will have the advantage of incumbency.

I thought Olivia Chow was a total shoo-in in T-S last time with Dion at the helm.  Her margin of victory was the same as '06 - around 3500 votes. 

Yeah, and if Gerard Kennedy was able to beat Peggy Nash he'll be hard to dislodge.  Beaches-East York - maybe if Stephen Lewis decides to run (highly unlikely).

I'm not so sure about Quebec - the left in Quebec is mostly sovereigntist and votes Bloc.  Outremont I think is Mulcair's personal seat rather than an NDP seat.

Long thread - feel free to continue in a new one!