ottawaobserver
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 15981
Joined: Feb 24 2008

remind wrote:

"Different villages" oo?

We should talk about how many stayed home in North Island, Nanaimo, and Kamloops then perhaps?

OK, I'll bite.

In the case of Vancouver Island North and Nanaimo-Alberni, the NDP raw vote stayed constant or slipped a very tiny bit, while the Conservative raw vote increased, and the Liberals' fell bigtime.  The Greens picked up some of that falling Liberal vote (more so in Nanaimo-Alberni where John Fryer was running), but most of the rest stayed home or went Conservative.  Turnout in both cases was down 3 percentage points (a small drop compared to many parts of Ontario).

In Kamloops, the NDP raw vote actually increased along with the Conservatives, and the Liberal vote (which is usually much higher in Kamloops than anywhere else in the Interior) again dropped substantially, half going to the Conservatives 3/4s of the rest going to the NDP and 1/4 going Green.  Turnout was not down in this case.  The NDP was 10 percentage points (just under 6,000 votes) behind the Conservatives.

So, to answer the question, the NDP missed winning these seats NOT because its vote stayed home, but because it was unsuccessful in winning over disaffected Liberals.  I can't believe Dana's video had nothing to do with that.


Dana's NDP Convention Report By: Dana Larsen (105 replies) August 25, 2009 - 2:54am
  • Coyote wrote: Extreme By: Unionist (Aug 25 2009 - 6:11pm)
  • I think all people should be By: kropotkin1951 (Aug 25 2009 - 6:10pm)
  • Ken Burch wrote: And is that By: Pogo (Aug 25 2009 - 6:09pm)
  • I was talking about the By: Ken Burch (Aug 25 2009 - 6:03pm)
  • Honestly, Coyote, whatever By: Catchfire (Aug 25 2009 - 6:00pm)
  • Extreme hostility? From By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 5:54pm)
  • As an outsider, I'd have to By: Ken Burch (Aug 25 2009 - 5:51pm)
  • Dana, I have no clue how you By: Unionist (Aug 25 2009 - 5:41pm)
  • Dana, thank you for your By: ennir (Aug 25 2009 - 4:36pm)
  • Re: Dana's NDP Convention Report By: Dana Larsen (Aug 25 2009 - 3:14pm)
  • I've watched COPS a couple By: Polunatic2 (Aug 25 2009 - 1:52pm)
  • He states that he was not By: remind (Aug 25 2009 - 1:49pm)
  • You seriously think it is By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 1:39pm)
  • Quote:I know this much: I By: Dana Larsen (Aug 25 2009 - 1:30pm)
  • M. Spector wrote: Some By: Unionist (Aug 25 2009 - 1:25pm)
  • Dana explaining the videos By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 12:56pm)
  • Have you looked at his By: remind (Aug 25 2009 - 12:40pm)
  • I am singling out for By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 12:13pm)
  • You are obviously singling By: M. Spector (Aug 25 2009 - 12:06pm)
  • I think it is obvious that By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 11:34am)
  • But you haven't explained By: M. Spector (Aug 25 2009 - 11:12am)
  • I'm saying that I would want By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 11:04am)
  • Are you suggesting that Dana By: M. Spector (Aug 25 2009 - 10:53am)
  • SO not what i meant. I mean By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 10:44am)
  • Coyote wrote: I know this By: M. Spector (Aug 25 2009 - 10:37am)
  • Dana Larsen wrote:The NDP is By: M. Spector (Aug 25 2009 - 10:35am)
  • I know this much: I would By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 10:33am)
  • Brad Lavigne By: M. Spector (Aug 25 2009 - 10:26am)
  • Thanks for the report Dana, By: remind (Aug 25 2009 - 10:16am)
  • thanks Unionist - what I By: janfromthebruce (Aug 25 2009 - 9:55am)
  • The snipets of debate I By: Caissa (Aug 25 2009 - 8:34am)
  • Quote:13. A motion may be By: Unionist (Aug 25 2009 - 8:26am)
  • And to be the "devil's By: janfromthebruce (Aug 25 2009 - 8:05am)
  • Thank you so much for this By: Unionist (Aug 25 2009 - 7:36am)
  • Re: Dana's NDP Convention Report By: Dana Larsen (Aug 25 2009 - 3:16am)