babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
Glad you are still here Gaian.
And yes we should add long term care to my list above.
I do think that additional investment in LTC would in fact save as much as it would cost.
Note to those who believe in formulating policy and strategy according to public opinion polls:
30% of Ontarians support the NDP.
37% of Ontarians oppose the wage freeze.
Even the most crass, calculating opportunist can jettison every trace of political principle and every sense of what is right and what is wrong, and still be able to figure out that the NDP has nothing to lose by opposing the wage freeze.
I guess there aren't as many crass, calculating opportunists in the party as you might have thought.
I doubt another election will be necessary, just as every bargaining committee doubts a strike will be necessary. But you can't bargain well without a strike mandate. Should we all be giving Andrea a mandate to call an election if necessary?
The last poll was Hudak 34, McGuinty 30, Horwath 30. The last election was Hudak 35.4%, McGuinty 37.6%, Horwath 22.7%. I'd say we can bargain hard.
Hello, Dalton, is that you?
You're saying voters are going to reward Tim Hudak for forcing an election and punish Andrea Horwath for doing the same thing.
Give your head a shake.
The 30% in Ontario is the federal NDP-- not the level of support of the provincial NDP. Let's at least remember that.
Uhm, even if those are the right numbers, you get that the reason the NDP has moved up, and Consevatives down is EXACTLY because the Pcs have come out and said they are voting down the budget no matter what and the NDP has instead said they are willing to try to find comprimises and avoid an election if possible, right? The movement is because they followed the exact opposite of the PC strategy you and others were calling the NDP to follow. If you are looking for an argument to undermine your argument you just found the perfect one.
OK-- my mistake-- ther eis a poll showing the *provincial* NDP at 30%.
It is a forum research poll. Shows Libs at 30% and PCs at 34%--
Seats: PC 42; Lib 35; NDP 30. Majority 55. (Frankly I think that interpreting seat counts is usually wrong and tends to exaggerate the support of incumbants-- if both the Cons and the NDP went up the chance of a majority PC government would be greater.
Hard to say what would happen in a campaign or what the final result would be. The PCs have a lot more money than the NDP.
It is also just one poll.
You conveniently ignore the fact that at least 7% of the voters out there are opposed to the wage freeze but do not support the NDP. By voting in the Legislature to make a wage freeze unanimous, the NDP will be missing out on a chance to enlist the support of those 7%.
Read what Wilf Day said at #46 above.
And that's just the crass, calculating, opportunistic argument.
The real reason the NDP should fight the austerity budget is because it's the right thing to do! It just happens to be popular, to boot.
Uhm, again you get that by your numbers 63% presumably support the wage freeze. You also get that you can't assume that all of the NDP vote is against a wage freeze, or that all of the support for the PCs and Liberals support a wage freeze, particularly within the Liberal cohort. Statistics don't work the way you are trying to make them work. They just don't. So your 7% number is virtually meaningless statistically to suggest any kind of support for anything. And again you are ignoring that what is moving NDP numbers seems to be the willingness to find compromise and avoid an election less than 6 months after the last one.
A wage freeze, with all the hurt out here, it is abslotely not a given that those at the bottom of the economic ladder would support the NDP in an election at all. Not at all. Think about all the teachers that voted for Mike Harris. I know lots and lots of them who did, even the 2nd time around.
Please read this thread before you go making things up. Look at Wilf's post at #46 above. The poll says the support for a wage freeze is 47%, and 16% are undecided.
We have two parties in Ontario that support the wage freeze. If they share the 47% and the NDP gets the 37% who oppose the wage freeze, and a proportional amount of the undecided vote, how is that bad for the NDP?
I don't think that's an unreasonable assumption to make, but even if you're right, there is obviously room for movement of voters from one party to another during an election campaign on the issue of austerity. For example, if 100,000 public service workers voted Conservative in the last election and are now facing a wage freeze under either a Liberal or a Conservative government, what greater opportunity could there be for the NDP to win them away than by being the only party in the race supporting their right to collective bargaining and opposing a legislated wage freeze and pension cutback?
Or are you prepared to give up entirely on ever being able to change voters' minds? If you're not, then the best time to make them change their minds is when it's demonstrably in their own material interest to do so.
Well, you don't know that. The poll was conducted less than 24 hours after the budget was announced, and at that point the NDP was far from clear as to whether it would support the budget or not. It could just as well be that people are starting to realize that the NDP is the only one of the three parties that could possibly put up a fight against the austerity agenda (even though it is now apparent that the party has no heart for such a fight). Remember, there are millions of people who will be adversely affected by it.
That thought obviously terrorizes you far more than it does me. Those hard-core Conservative teachers you mention are already in Tim Hudak's camp and voted for him last election. There are thousands more teachers who voted Liberal or Conservative out of naiveté, or habit, or didn't vote at all, but whose minds are going to be focused pretty quickly by the reality of having their salaries frozen by McGuinty. Buyers' remorse will set in. Who will earn their votes?
Funny how I seem to be the one who sees a positive opportunity for the ONDP, while the perennial party-boosters are suddenly overcome with doom and gloom at the thought of millions of Ontarians starting to look for a party that won't make them pay for the tax cuts and bailouts for the rich!
I"m not a perennial party booster. I only joined the NDP for the federal leadership race. But folks like you can't seem to get that if you say something positive, or call out untruths you aren't some kind of sell out or uncritical in our support. Your assumption of stupidity and lack of thought by anyone who disagrees with you is constant, but somehow if you reflect that mirror back at you it is a transgression in babble moderation land. I have supported the NDP in the last couple of elections, but that is based on my local candidate. I helped form the Greens in Ontario after returning from Europe what seems like a lifetime ago now, which I guess it actually was. Then I watched them be taken over by pro-market Tories with composters. I am not a big fan of the NDP on many issues, including their kool aid drinking anti-environmental support for the GEA- an issue that means the NDP won't win a single seat in rural Ontario by the way. But to me they have become the best of a bad lot. That's hardly party boosting.
You have this simplistic view of how stats work and how most people out here in 3D land are viewing the world these days. It really isn't worth trying to convince the unconvinciable. Thankfully much clearer thinking heads than all of us seem to devising NDP strategy.
Don't write out the Libs yet. The contentious labour proposals aren't in the budget. The NDP will probably strike a deal over the budget which will also probably increase their support. Dalton will later force the hands of the PCs by introducing the wage freezes separately. The PCs will have to support the government on the wage freezes and any back to work legislation in order to maintain credibility as well, conservatives.
M. Spector can you dial it back a little? I am interested in what you have to say but your comments are getting in the way of your arguments. If you are trying to win people over to your conclusion you are going about it the wrong way. I can be moved by sound argument but will dig in when insulted or dismissed-- I am far from the only person here like that.
I think a lot of people see an opportunity here and don't want to squander it with bad timing. You don't have to agree but at least respect that this opinion exists.
Also these are opinions. Just because they are made up does not make them invalid.
Why not address what is being said? How do you think we would win what would be a referendum on public service unions when their position is not only unpopular but inspiring jealousy?
Why are we not trying to move the people first and then have them vote second? The most positive poll we have shows us at 30% with Hudak at 42%. Why do you think we can change that going into an election with fewer incumbents, less money and on the side of an issue where the public is against us?
To me calling a vote now is defeatist. This is what you do when you can't come up with a plan to change the direction of the public conversation. Otherwise why wouldn't you do that and then call the vote under more favorable circumstances?
I agree we should have a bottom line-- we discussed that -- the most vulnerable and some money for long term care. Then a year from now let's force an election on the issue of health care instead of fighting it now over the wages of public servants.
If I were a public servant I'd be terrified of going now because a loss now would mean Hudak and an even worse situation.
The public service unions in Ontario have some very bright communications people-- let's work with them over the next few months and change this dynamic and then hold an election on health care with this neutralized.
Ontario Federation of Labour
The OFL is bluffing. Sid Ryan's relations with the ONDP leadership has broken down. This is Sid's usual blustering. The ONDP convention in Hamilton from April 13th-15th has the potential to become poisonous. OFL & ONDP leaderships would rather engage in factional bickering than address the serious issues facing Ontario.
I like this a lot. If you're going to run a push-poll, these are the kind of questions a pro-worker party should ask.
Better yet, do it in a real poll by a real polling organization, and then publish the results.
Yes it is about the choices you make with what you have.
Of course you need to ask yourself as well what having an election right now means.
The most interesting part of the Globe article is the part where they describe the absolutely intransigent stance the Liberals are setting up. They won't consider spending one additional penny. They won't consider raising taxes. They won't consider anything that will postpone their phony timetable for ending the deficit.
Don't hold your breath waiting for any meaningful outcome from the negotiations.
Meanwhile, Horwath's plan to use her "opinion poll" to sell Ontarians on the need to jump on the austerity bandwagon to avoid upsetting the 1 percent seems not to be working out quite the way she envisioned it. It seems a lot of people are telling her she can't vote for the budget and has to force an election: