Oh geez, alisea, as if there aren't enough worm cans around here.
Marritimarr is right, he didn't say anything about cap and trade versus carbon tax [nor anyone else I think in these threads on NS]. "Don't get him going on that" I sez to myself.
Too late, the Mixmaster is flying away.
Hodgepodge being one of those authentic old Maritime standards.
Carbon pricing methods aren't in this election at all. When I manage to digest the rest of the spiel I'll comment.
Nova Scotia Election Campaign- more discussion still
Sat, 2009-05-30 15:05
#52
Sat, 2009-05-30 15:20
#53
Marritimarr
remind: Blah blah blah blah :rolleyes: he basically did not sya a thing about it then, just mentioned it in the "context" of it all.
In politics it's pretty much the default to sequence your comments so as to imply causality without actually committing to an analysis.
Most people who actually watched the debate would conclude, given that McNeil mentioned a very slim tax cut and then immediately and vehemently mentioned a clunky bureaucracy he intended to cut, that he meant that he would pay for the former by eliminating the latter. Like removing a toll from a bridge or roadway by simply removing the toll booths, so you no longer have to pay toll booth operators, nor idle traffic waiting at booths. He didn't lay out a dollars-gained-and-lost argument in that debate, no, nor is it easy to imagine that it would pay for the whole cut he later promised. But by sequencing the statements as he did, he was clearly and deliberating inviting the audience to infer cutting red tape and other efficiencies of not having gas price regulation, paid for at least some of the cut.
So if you're looking for something to attack McNeil on, sorry, he's actually too clever a politician to be caught committing to numbers i a debate. All three leave that to the back room boys.
Sat, 2009-05-30 15:40
#54
remind
na, marritimar, the NDP supporters do not get away with reading in, so neither do you!
Sat, 2009-05-30 15:43
#55
Marritimarr
KenS: Marritimarr is right, he didn't say anything about cap and trade versus carbon tax
Actually I did make mention of carbon charges and suggested that I could support either a carbon tax, even a restricted one on just coal, or a cap and trade system that was honestly run, but I don't see any way to conclude that I compared the two approaches until I was essentially challenged to.
It's a complex issue. There was a debate on green tax shifting at the St. Lawrence Forum that had audio up for a while, that I used to point people to, forum.stlc,com, doesn't seem to be there any more. Four pretty heavy political, business, NGO hitters (for Canada) in that debate. The impression I had was that rational centrists liked explicit carbon charges, and ideological zealots of both the dirty old industrial left and nature-is-free-and-will-clean-up-after-us lunatic right did not. 19th and 20th century political ideology lived in a fantasy world that was not crowded and the only question about industrial development was how to split up the benefits of it. That's not our world today. It's not a coincidence that the Greens rose even in dirty self-deluding Canada, and that its longstandng rulers the Liberals got green religion so quickly.
We could talk about Dion or Campbell or Charest's or McCain's or Kyoto, but a lot of these debates of last year have moved on. For 2009-2016 we are just going to have to adopt the Obama scheme, and then whatever global scheme they come up with at Copenhagen. In a weak global economy ecological protectionism (charging import tariffs for bad practices you do yourself without charging domestic players) is an easy sell - the only way around it is uniform global rules at least at borders. Jeff Rubin, former CIBC chief economist, says flatly that carbon tariffs on imports are inevitable - we'll pay for the carbon content of Chinese industrial products at the dollar store, where it might add oh a nickel or a dime to the price. Whoop dee doo... Let's do it right now. Given these cheap items are often sold all at one price, the difference between five or fifteen cents of carbon charges is huge - low-carbon replacements could have *huge* profit margins (like ten cents more!) and literally wipe out high-carbon competitors.
Domestically, governments could tax things, especially those they already tax and regulate, and pay the carbon charges on behalf of the consumer, but, ultimately, they'll participate in global carbon markets like anyone else.
With that working, we can set similar charges for other ecological damage to biodiversity, so your cheap coffee goes from a plus-five-per-cent margin in the supermarket to minus-one-per-cent and is eradicated from the marketplace in favour of shade-grown stuff (social justice can't be dealt with that way, no objective indicators, but people will also pay a premium voluntarily for "fair trade", so standard trusted labels for these practices should probably be used instead of taxes and tariffs).
KenS: Carbon pricing methods aren't in this election at all.
Not by that name, but Dexter's HST-off-electricity and McNeil's gasoline tax cut and MacDonald's attack on "the NDP carbon tax" are all clearly about carbon pricing. An honest summary of the carbon footprint implications of the avowed policies of all parties, similar to a cost accounting or a full ecological footprint or GPI/well-being analysis, would be worth having. Anyone know of such an analysis?
Anyone care to lobby for a hundred grand or something to pay Amory Lovins to analyze NS energy and transport and taxation policies?
Sat, 2009-05-30 16:00
#56
Marritimarr
remind: na, marritimar, the NDP supporters do not get away with reading in, so neither do you!
Everything less rigorous than an academic paper in the hard sciences involves "reading in". Politicians are experts at reframing, using metaphors and proximity and sequencing and analogies already in the listener's mind to induce a causal conclusion, and so on. Their supporters, who are inclined to grant them benefit of the doubt, will call this "obvious", while their detractors, will call this a "fallacy". It isn't a particularly useful approach to politics to examine quotes or claims as if they were intended to be logical axioms in the sense of Philosophy 101.
Media figures are important because they focus the challenge to all this muck. Good interviewers, like Jim Nunn for instance, who challenge assumptions directly and clearly and usually up front in the interview, create the maximum amount of time for a reasoned response. Such interviewers and journalists are rare and precious and we are sure going to miss Jim Nunn when he's gone after this race.
Bad interviewers, like Peter Mansbridge, who pander to the assumptions of whoever they're interviewing and never offer any challenge to their assumptions, just pander to dominant assumptions. In fairness to Mansbridge, he's beholden to public funders in Canada while internatioal figures don't have to accept his interview. It's sad to watch the decline of journalism on TV, which is the only medium that the politicians can't refuse to appear on. Interviewers whose bosses break their promises, like Steve Murphy, really ought to quit and go work for someone with more integrity. It's fair to demand logical rigour of an interviewer, because they get to prepare the questions. But the politician they corner does deserve an opportunity to clarify at some deeper level of rigour what they really believe about causal relationships or costing or implications of a policy change. Turning one quote into a whole attack ad campaign is really detrimental to the rational conduct of politics. And yes there is such a thing.
Which brings us to whole-platform analysis. Platforms are important because they're "nailable" documents of what the party really believes and promises, that have had adequate preparation and can be torn apart like an opposing lawyer's brief, without mercy. A rigorous platform doesn't tell us what the party will do in office so much as telling us whether they are capable of presenting a plan that is coherent at all.
Sat, 2009-05-30 16:06
#57
Platforms are important because they're "nailable" documents of what the party really believes and promises, that have had adequate preparation and can be torn apart like an opposing lawyer's brief
So why is it possible for Ontario Liberal government to break well over 50 election promises since 2003 and then win another phony majority in 2007? The NDP has been tearing them down on a regular basis since 2003 and yet Pinocchio's Party is still popular with 22% of registered voters propping them up in 2007.
Sat, 2009-05-30 16:58
#58
Marritimarr
Damn right energy policy is a can of worms. Now that it's open, let's close it once and for all. Amory Lovins explained why "negawatts" are the core energy strategy of any modern economy, 20 years ago.
http://www.ccnr.org/amory.html
20 years ago. Fair warning. Politicians who don't understand that conservation >> any new generation, must be quickly removed. We can't afford such stupidity.
What's changed in 20 years? We have radically better communications technology to manage all our power use for maximum efficiency end to end, far better means of storing it so that baseline sources (hydro, nuclear, geothermal, eventually tidal) that run all the time can be used to avoid use at peak times, and we can pay for the deployment of this by anticipating and fixing problems before the customer sees them at all.
As Michael Powell, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, told BusinessWeek a few years ago: “Think about it… if every electrical plug becomes a broadband port, that would be huge.”
http://asmarterplanet.com/blog/2009/02/guest-blog-rural-americas-key-to-...
Huge for competitors without that advantage, who'd be wiped out in every industry more advanced than clear cut logging or coal mining.
Heavy pressure on NS Power is necessary and appropriate if only because they are leaving this province in a backward, vulnerable state. More quotes from that same post:
Cullman Electric Cooperative [has] partnered with IBM and International Broadband Electric Communications, Inc. (IBEC) of Huntsville, Alabama, to turn our lines and poles into a research facility. IBM and IBEC’s knowledge of BPL technology is joining forces with our experience and expertise as an electric utility to validate two distinct BPL applications.
The first is distribution system security through video surveillance. IBEC’s equipment is consistently sending real-time video of a stretch of power line and our headquarters back to a designated central monitoring facility. This could prove invaluable as our industry moves toward more stringent security regulations, allowing us to forego considerable costs by using existing infrastructure to transmit video.
The second application is broadband Internet service to locations within our system. I am pleased to report that several of our members are involved in this pilot, and that they are successfully uploading and downloading data through an ‘always-on’ Internet connection via an electrical outlet.
There are still other applications of this technology to explore. Cullman Electric Cooperative could one day monitor and control our remote equipment through BPL. This technology could also allow us to read our meters remotely.
Another exciting possibility is a wireless network that would allow any customer with a password to access the Internet from any location that was near a power line — in their home or office, on the road or on a park bench.
Studies estimate that 37 percent of Americans live in areas that most likely will never be served by broadband service via cable or DSL. I believe our customers should be able to enjoy the benefits of rural life without being left behind in terms of technology. BPL may well be the means whereby public power companies once again take bold steps — just like we did 70 years ago — to bring the power of technology to rural America and thereby change people’s lives for the better.
Other power utilities are bypassing the Motorola Canopy non-broadband dead end and gaining some major advantages by doing it: http://blog.ds2.es/ds2blog/2009/04/ibec-and-ibm-bring-smart-grid-technol...
The CEO of the Washington Island electrical co-operative says:
"Because of the terrain of the island [and the tree cover] both Motorola Canopy and satellite can have difficulty providing reliable service.
Right now IBM is providing some Smart Grid technology, [...] Automatic Meter Reading through BPL, and also we are going to have some sensing equipment that is going to be put on the line, which is going to be able to tell us, load, voltage, current, distance to fault, some very nice SCADA-type information that would be very difficult for us to have otherwise."
Closer to home, we've got NB Power already doing its grid monitoring with a network Aliant XWave put up, NL Hydro already offering phone and data service to its customers. http://xwave.com/key_industries/industry.aspx?IdKey=7&IdPage=89 (look at the case studies listed).
The real weaknesses of the MacDonald PCs are being slack on NS Power, having no plan for power-integrated broadband whatsoever even though it is demonstrably more universal, effective and conservation-enabling than fixed wireless for areas very similar to rural NS (such as heavily forested Wisconsin islands), and no ability to coordinate power, transport and communications and tax policy for a modern economy. Taxing coal power was probably the *smartest* thing they did. At least the Liberals are generally aware of the grid issue, but it boggles the imagination to see the NDP nonsense that passes for policy in these domains. Do they *ever* listen to *anyone* in rural NS? Their own MLAs, like Conrad in Queens, have great proposals that the NDP brass ignores. Their own friends, the Ecology Action Centre for instance, propose excellent development plans for rural regions like the South Shore, and we don't hear a peep from Dexter about any of these options. It may well be that the NDP intend to do all this in office, but, they could not do it without breaking all their other promises. You could not for instance radically expand telehealth without taking a few bucks here and there from thinly spread ERs and so on - shifting to a new model of health or development takes courage. Without that courage, we're pretty much doomed to backwater status.
Imagine stupidity. Imagine political parties and leaders, even bureaucrats, who aren't aware even of what's going on in NB or NL. Imagine your kids moving to Alabama - or outport Newfoundland! - to work for some high-tech company that can't set up here. Imagine paying NS Power to send out trucks and guys at double time and a half to look at your transformer from the ground, maybe more than once, as you and your neighbours freeze in the dark. While your cousins in New Brunswick see someone go up on a pole once in a while and get reports of even the slightest shorts or extra ohms on their power bill with advice on how to eliminate them. Now imagine Nova Scotia 2012, with no tax on coal power, a grid too stupid to accomodate electric cars while gas prices go nuts again, 1.5 mbps wireless that doesn't work in fog or through trees (hey that's ok we'll cut them down and sell them to pay for more coal!), rural people still paying fifty bucks a month for satellite TV instead of putting that into the power grid or more efficient appliances. Conserving consumers paying taxes to fund wind power boondoggles instead of to fund more conservation. It's a joke. Nova Scotia could be on a path to being the most backward place on the continent, after leading in so many areas. It's similar to the way Ontario went from prosperous to becoming the new "have-not" rust belt, now being bypassed by Great Lakes states that have got a President who understands smart power grids, understands national broadband.
Imagine stupidity. Just imagine. It's as curable as obesity, if you actually care. As you stare into the fat self-satisfied face of stupidity, be aware that by not punching it, you are doing harm to everything and everyone you care about. No matter what party that face is from.
Make no mistake, this Nova Scotia election could well be as suicidal as the 1995 Ontario election or the 2006 federal election. Or worse. Maybe as bad as the 2000 US election. Imagine.
I'd say forget parties and just vote for whatever MLA understands the above. We're going to make infrastructure decisions in the next few years that will set us on a permanent path to prosperity or disaster, and a minority dominated by rational people from all parties is needed. Not a majority government pandering to its mindless base and fulltime staff insiders.
Sat, 2009-05-30 17:48
#59
...this is one of many ridings the NDP is running a serious and resourced local campaign for the very first time. This was an obvious place to do it- but others would surprise people as not looking very likely to go NDP.
The reactions from the Fage and Hunter camps at the May 21 All Candidates Forum told the story on this. They're poopin' themselves over having to run against an active NDP. The candidate couldn't be a better match for an effort like this either. Eager, honest, open to ideas from, and working with, the party in developing good policy even during a campaign. He fought for the gas-tax harmonization issue and used some solid research to get the backing from the central campaign to go ahead with it. And as it turns out, it's been the key to handicapping the Liberal campaign. He's also fielded Rodney's surprise policy announcement on the new elementary school like a pro.
On the numbers:
It was 14.65% for the NDP in 2006 with a paper candidate and little in the way of a campaign (although I'm told the candidate was effective in Candidate Forums). Based on the support already identified in the riding, including from the sign and canvass campaign it's safe to say that that percentage will double at the very least. However, a glance at the numbers from 2006 shows that turnout is a major problem in Cumberland North. The Tories manage to get their vote out successfully and if they do manage to win this seat it will be because of their experience doing that. NDP suppporters tend to stay home because of safe seat malaise. But Brian's been very visible and his supporters are excited about his chances, making them more likely to vote.
Some links to check out from the local daily, including poll results from their onlne poll (which was IP filtered to block multiple votes--trust me, I tried):
http://amherstdaily.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx (the May 29 Front page, will change after May 31)
http://www.amherstdaily.com/index.cfm?sid=255635&sc=58 (print article was accompanied by a warm picture of Dexter hugging a reformed Tory the candidate found on the canvass)
http://www.amherstdaily.com/index.cfm?sid=255636&sc=58 (favourable review of Alexa's visit with warming picture)
http://www.amherstdaily.com/index.cfm?sid=253364&sc=58 (the article announcing Brian's gas tax policy, print version featured shot of candidate and gas station owner near the pumps)
http://www.amherstdaily.com/index.cfm?sid=255122&sc=61 (Editorial in which the paper endorses Brian's plan)
http://www.amherstdaily.com/index.cfm?pid=873 (Online poll archive. Notice the strong numbers even before the campaign started. This was also before the campaign began sending out action alerts to go vote)
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/1123735.html (bit of buzz on the gas tax thing. Liberal candidate identifies the losing strategy by offering no alternative to motorists buying gas in NB)
Sat, 2009-05-30 19:09
#60
Marritimarr
Fidel, it's always possible in a first-past-the-post system to win a false majority by lying. The Ontario NDP is not an option because of how it handled power in the Rae days - sadly it never disavowed the public sector union "leaders" who brought Ontario Mike Harris and arguably brought Stephen Harper to power also by building a constituency in formerly "red Tory" Bill Davis Ontario for right wing lunacy.
The Toronto media pretends to be a national voice, they pay pitifully little attention to provincial and major municipal /regional issues. We are *very* lucky in Nova Scotia to have the nearly full attention of three major TV networks in Halifax, plus lots of other local media, for only a million people. We are also very lucky to have in Atlantic Canada four Premiers and many more legislators paying attention than a resident of say Toronto who (for about the same number of citizens in Atlantic Canada as a whole) has far less access to their fellow citizens' ears, a powerless Mayor directly elected but with only symbolic powers, and a total of under 100 (45 municipal, 22 provincial, 22 federal) representatives.
National Post just published an editorial asking David Miller to consider taking over the Green Party of Ontario. Maybe he should take a membership, to send a message to the other parties, but Jane Jacobs (who supported Miller for Mayor) may have been right that it was time to break up Ontario into several more manageable units, with full provincial powers for Toronto and for Northern Ontario too.
Sat, 2009-05-30 20:13
#61
Damn right energy policy is a can of worms. Now that it's open, let's close it once and for all.
[Etcetera.]
Your conceit is boundless. Thank you for laying down the word for us.
A couple times now I have said I'm going to respond to a piece of what you say- a specific instance of your recurring themes.
But then you go on and on and on, looping around all over the place, mashing up nonsense and disjointed facts.
Life is too short.
Sat, 2009-05-30 21:22
#62
Also AWOL: democraticSPACE (though I suppose a certain Babble contingent has excommunicated Greg Morrow by now, which is why *that* site hasn't been raised)Pffft, he rendered himself pointless and non-credible through his own deceit
And yet within a Babble context at least a year ago plus plus, Morrow would have been the election-prediction pick for technological reasons et al, while Milton Chan would have been dismissed as a Liberal hack running an obsolete dilletante's apparatus...
Sat, 2009-05-30 21:51
#63
Politics aside, it's just a real shame that the only non-blog site predicting is nodice, and they've dropped the ball. Skipping not only the second CRA poll from May 21, but also the novainsights poll from this past week as opportunities to adjust their projection.
The vacuum has meant that guys like me are stuck trolling for opportunities to babble and offer up info, and that a silly site like hubdub is seeing fantatsic traffic.
Makes me wonder how viable Milton's project would be if we in the martimes were just as unreliable during a federal campaign.
Maybe we should consider depriving him of our insight until he makes good on this faux pas...
Sat, 2009-05-30 21:59
#64
Damn right energy policy is a can of worms. Now that it's open, let's close it once and for all.
[Body of post that 'lays it all out'.] ...closing of post:
Imagine stupidity. Just imagine. It's as curable as obesity, if you actually care. As you stare into the fat self-satisfied face of stupidity, be aware that by not punching it, you are doing harm to everything and everyone you care about. No matter what party that face is from.
Make no mistake, this Nova Scotia election could well be as suicidal as the 1995 Ontario election or the 2006 federal election. Or worse. Maybe as bad as the 2000 US election. Imagine.
I'd say forget parties and just vote for whatever MLA understands the above. We're going to make infrastructure decisions in the next few years that will set us on a permanent path to prosperity or disaster, and a minority dominated by rational people from all parties is needed. Not a majority government pandering to its mindless base and fulltime staff insiders.
Let me suggest a little reality check for you.
Let alone identify some MLAs who fit your bill- find any 5 individuals [other than personal friends] who 'understand' the body of that post after reading it- ie, can accurately summarise it for you, and think its a good starting point.
Sat, 2009-05-30 23:32
#65
Fidel, it's always possible in a first-past-the-post system to win a false majority by lying. The Ontario NDP is not an option because of how it handled power in the Rae days - sadly it never disavowed the public sector union "leaders" who brought Ontario Mike Harris and arguably brought Stephen Harper to power also by building a constituency in formerly "red Tory" Bill Davis Ontario for right wing lunacy.
I thought Rae's NDP handled the reins of power well considering the nation-wide recession at the time. Our provincial economic growth rate was second to none by '93-'94, and there was money spent in parts of thirdworld Northern Ontario for the first time in decades.
Ontario has traditionally been a conservative province for about 50 consecutive years with a few Liberal Party interludes in between. Successive conservative governments were popular for their policies of public ownership of hydroelectric power, and what was the backbone of our prosperous cold war era economic expansion.
And it's been a fight for phony majority power since the 1980s. Bob Rae's NDP winning election in 1990 was a fluke and one of the phoniest majority governments in recent history. Tories and Liberals kept pretty quiet about that.
There isnt much the NDP could have done then to win over the greying support base of old line party voters in this province. It will take even more economic decline, decay and rot to occur in Ontario before people in this province decide that a clean sweep of the two old line party politics in Toronto is in order. People change when crises of one sort or another pushes society to a precipice. I think we're close to the precipice in Ontario and the rest of Canada. The time is ripe for labour unions and civil society groups to push for change at both levels of government.
Sun, 2009-05-31 00:12
#66
It may well be true that there aren't five babble/rabble readers who 'understand' the body of that post after reading it- ie, can accurately summarise it. Not my problem. I am sure there are five MLA candidates who do, and I don't care what party they're from.I'm just looking for them. Not for you. They're relevant, as they'll be sitting on the legislative committee. You're not. Thankfully.
I suggested as a reality check you find any 5 individuals- anywhere- who can accurately summarise what you said. I wasn't challenging you to find 5 here on this board.
But if you think its likely that there are not 5 babblers who would, then the obvious question is what are you doing here?
And just out of curiousity- anybody who has tried it knows that it is difficult to have a discussion of any depth with a candidate from any party. Not surprisingly, as they need to talk to as many people as they can. Now unlike other folks, candidates are practiced at sounding like they agree with people. But they can't just accurately summarise something like what you speilled out, and cap it off with 'sounds good'.
So leaving aside my doubts that you can make yourself suffiently clear to any 5 people, do you expect to quiz these likely candidates, or are you going to do what most of us do and decide on the basis of their recorded words that you can find?
Sun, 2009-05-31 01:01
#67
Marritimarr
A couple times now I have said I'm going to respond to a piece of what you say- a specific instance of your recurring themes.
But then you go on and on and on, looping around all over the place, mashing up nonsense and disjointed facts.
The nonsense and disjointed claims (not "facts") provided by you and your friends is your own problem. While it's possible to address your extremely confused belief systems and respond with realistic scenarios and alternative directions, I don't expect you to understand that since your entire vocabulary of discussing power, transport and communications policy is wrong, based on ideological (false) premises.
I've provided more than enough credible sources and evidence with direct links to same (here's another good source on broadband and power grids, very heavily referenced and full of numbers http://policywiki.theglobeandmail.com/tiki-index.php?page=BPL+and+smart+... ). Any diligent person capable of reading and judging credibility on technical topics could use those to educate themselves, if they care. But if your overall comprehension of the constraints, business cases, forms of reasoning and policy tradeoffs characteristic of these fields is so poor (thanks to your poor tutors or poor choice of sources to believe, or plain laziness) that is also not my problem. It's your job, not mine, to learn such basics before you enter a policy debate. And certainly before arguing with someone who has done this homework.
It may well be true that there aren't five babble/rabble readers who "'understand' the body of that post after reading it- ie, can accurately summarise it." Again not my problem. I am sure there are five MLA candidates who do, and I don't care what party they're from. As for friends, those that don't understand usually read what I point them to, and educate themselves on the matter before trying to debate it, or find alternate sources and contrasting opinions and ask me to respond to those so they can make up their own minds. As all reasonable people do.
I'm just looking for such reasonable people, some of whom are running for office. Not for those who simply want to look smart and post non-responses without their own evidence. MLAs who do their homework are relevant as they'll be sitting on the legislative committee. You're not relevant until you do that same homework. Taking a policy research or bureaucratic job in this field without doing all of the same homework is not just unethical, it's theft of tax funds. There are plenty of citizens doing that homework right now without being paid.
Let's hope a few of them show up at the public meetings, and get some incompetents fired, no matter who wins this June 9th election.
Sun, 2009-05-31 01:10
#68
Marritimarr
I thought Rae's NDP handled the reins of power well considering the nation-wide recession at the time. Our provincial economic growth rate was second to none by '93-'94, and there was money spent in parts of thirdworld Northern Ontario for the first time in decades.
No disagreement. But the problem was the public sector unions that resisted Rae actually implementing longstanding NDP policy to support job sharing in tough times to avoid layoffs. The private sector unions correctly pushed for this, Rae correctly went along, and then the public sector unions told their members to stay home in the 1995 election - resulting in Mike Harris and permanent job cuts in the public service. The Ontario NDP isn't coming back because it has never ejected the public sector unions and the conflicted staff. Bob Rae called the NDP "a lobby group against the private sector" in interviews when he was seeking the Liberal leadership.
It will take even more economic decline, decay and rot to occur in Ontario before people in this province decide that a clean sweep of the two old line party politics in Toronto is in order.
No doubt. But the NDP isn't going to be doing that job. The 40% or so of the party that voted to dissolve the NDP in 2001 may well have been right, only a complete rebuild of it could possibly work to gain power federally, or even it seems now in any large province.
Sun, 2009-05-31 01:24
#69
I think the two old line parties will remain in power federally and continue monopolizing power in the largest provinces for some time to come, and for as long as they are able to fend off pro-democracy groups calling for an update to our obsolete electoral systems across Canada. Federally I think people are beginning to take notice of how the Liberals are propping up the conservatives. If we ever win advanced democracy in Canada, the Liberal Party will be relegated to third or even fourth party status. An honest third place party at best. Voters in Europe and Scandinavia figured out long ago that Liberals are just another conservative party and therefore a political redundancy.
Sun, 2009-05-31 01:27
#70
Marritimarr
...do you expect to quiz these likely candidates, or are you going to do what most of us do and decide on the basis of their recorded words that you can find?
Their responses to important surveys like that from GPI Atlantic would be worth reading.
On energy specifically it would be enough to see that they do not turn a question about energy conservation or home automation or the potential to transform the economy with better communications into some excuse to make stupid noises about "renewable energy" or a narrow pandering comment about making windmills or solar panels in Nova Scotia. Such failures only demonstrate their attachment to supply-side economics and their incapability of leading an economy that is about doing more with less, dematerializing products into services, and radically reducing waste. If I could only give them one thing to read, it'd be this: http://natcap.org
But if you think its likely that there are not 5 babblers who would, then the obvious question is what are you doing here?
Because I might be wrong? Fancy admitting that, on rabble. But in the far more likely case that I'm right, it's to find the four. Or three. If we're all very lucky, then one who is actually in Nova Scotia may read this thread. It may never happen. But it would be unfair indeed to criticize any of you policy pretenders without having offered all this extremely valuable advice that your parties and your governments pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to poorly reproduce.
You can probably turn this thread into a fulltime staff job each, if you actually bother to read all the links above. You're welcome to those jobs. Try to do them well. Just don't be too sad or surprised or angry if people who did do that homework show up and cost you that job.
"Conceit"? That's more a characteristic of those who don't do the homework, don't explain the principles or assert contradictory ones, don't provide the sources and evidence, talk nice to you so you don't challenge them, don't give you any specific errors to correct in your thesis, and so on. The usual name for people who patiently explain difficult issues to those they have no particular reason to respect, and who get the best out of you by challenging your ignorance, is "teacher". And you're welcome.
Over and out.
Sun, 2009-05-31 02:43
#71
"The private sector unions correctly pushed for this, Rae correctly went along, and then the public sector unions told their members to stay home in the 1995 election - resulting in Mike Harris and permanent job cuts in the public service."
You have now exposed yourself as someone who knows absolutely ZILCH about Ontario politics. First of all public sectors unions never told their members to stay home in the 1995 election. Second of all, the NDP was already extremely unpopular and facing certain defeat long before the social contract was announced - the election was already a foregone conclusion. Third of all, even if you make the extreme leap of fait that every single solitary member of a public service union voted Conservative in 1995 in order to punish the NDP (which is absurd) - public sector union members are not a large enough proportion of the electorate to have changed the outcome of that election.
Sun, 2009-05-31 08:35
#72
I see the inevitable thread drift is upon us once again.
Am I the only one willing to put my predictions about the out-come of the election here?
As of May 29th, my predictions were NDP 17, P.C. 9, Liberal 9, Too Close To Call 17.
Stay tuned!
Sun, 2009-05-31 08:38
#73
"Conceit"? That's more a characteristic of those who don't do the homework, don't explain the principles or assert contradictory ones, don't provide the sources and evidence, talk nice to you so you don't challenge them, don't give you any specific errors to correct in your thesis, and so on. The usual name for people who patiently explain difficult issues to those they have no particular reason to respect, and who get the best out of you by challenging your ignorance, is "teacher". And you're welcome.
Maybe someday you will learn the difference between teaching and lecturing.
And even 'lecturer' does not imply someone on a rant(s).
Sun, 2009-05-31 10:55
#74
Annnd...to bring it back to the NS election...Rae is coming to Halifax to boost the Libs. Convoluted way for the Liberal party to remind NS voters of 90-95 Ontario? Or genuine troop rallying?
Sun, 2009-05-31 11:35
#75
I think this must be for thr troops. Rae is genuinely popular in the Liberal party, and more so among NS Libs. And he's a very good speaker. And he wants to keep his face and mane out there- you just never know...
My guess would be that they don't even really try to use him to get public attention- but I don't know where he's appearing or how much mainstreating he is doing.
As to predicticions David, I don't think calling one third of the seats too close to call really counts as a prediction. But I've no interest in making one either. [Haven't even done so to myself, though I might go there at least.]
I'm going to attach some probability estimates to your list and see what ranges I come up with.
Sun, 2009-05-31 11:58
#76
remind
And yet within a Babble context at least a year ago plus plus, Morrow would have been the election-prediction pick for technological reasons et al, while Milton Chan would have been dismissed as a Liberal hack running an obsolete dilletante's apparatus...
Didn't know Milton Chan pretended to be other than what he is, in order to play political intereference during an election?
Sun, 2009-05-31 12:32
#77
Continued from previous post!
RURAL NOVA SCOTIA (26 SEATS)
RIDING 2006 2009
ANNAPOLIS LIB LIB
ANTIGONISH PC PC
ARGYLE LIB LIB
CHESTER-ST. MARGARET'S PC TCTC
CLARE LIB LIB
COLCHESTER-MUSQUODOBOIT VALLEY PC PC
COLCHESTER NORTH PC PC
CUMBERLAND NORTH PC TCTC
CUMBERLAND SOUTH PC PC
DIGBY-ANNAPOLIS LIB LIB
GUYSBOROUGH-SHEET HARBOUR PC NDP
HANTS EAST NDP NDP
HANTS WEST PC TCTC
KINGS NORTH PC PC
KINGS SOUTH PC TCTC
KINGS WEST LIB LIB
LUNENBURG PC TCTC
LUNENBURG WEST PC TCTC
PICTOU CENTRE PC PC
PICTOU EAST NDP TCTC
PICTOU WEST NDP NDP
QUEENS NDP TCTC
SHELBURNE NDP TCTC
TRURO-BIBLE HILL PC TCTC
YARMOUTH PC PC
CORRECTION: I should have included WAVERLEY-FALL RIVER-BEAVER BANK in with HALIFAX METRO AREA
WAVERLEY-FALL RIVER-BEAVER BANK NDP TCTC
RESULTS: NDP - 17
PC - 9
LIB - 9
TCTC - 17
Stay tuned!
NDP
ARGYLE LIB LIB
As a long time political junkie, but newish to Nova Scotia, I was intruiged by this. I checked the stats,
and did find that Argyle is a PC riding, not Liberal - Chris D'Etremont's riding.
Other than that, it looks as if someone who knows something has made some reasonable predictions.
I read through many of the posts about the election. I'll be posting some thoughts separately later.
Sun, 2009-05-31 12:43
#78
My probability stab:
NDP PC LIB
FAIRLY SURE SEATS 19 8 8
LEANING FAIRLY STRONG 4 3 3
TOO CLOSE TO CALL 7 of which 1 is PC/LIB and the rest are PC/NDP
Among those "Fairly Sure Seats" I would rate the NDP and PC having an equal chance of losing 1 or 2 to an upset. [NDP has twice as many, but higher proportion rock solid.] I see the Liberals having less chance of losing any of their 8.
In the "Leaning Fairly Strong" 10 seats I see the PCs being in second for 5, and the Libs and NDP with 2 each. [plus 1 three way race]
Counter-intutive as it may seem, based on that I think the PCs having an edge for second place.
CRA poll is out tommorow morning. But it sure looks like the NDP is in close range of a majority, but odds somewhat against getting the 27 seats. It would take a HUGE shift for someone to overtake the NDP.
Even if the PCs are slightly ahead of the Libs in the race for second, it is not remotely possible they could pull off such a surge, while I would not rate it completely unlikely for that to happen to the Liberals somehow.
As unlikely as that outcome seems, I keep in mind my sense that a large part of the people saying they are decided for the NDP are relatively soft.
Sun, 2009-05-31 13:36
#79
I've not posted much on Babble because the discussions have been too general and often highjacked by non left wing activists. I'm hoping we can keep this directed for awhile. The possibility of us making a difference is so clear.... let's do it, folks!
OK, so it would be nice to think that the polls are right, and we'll win. However, as we all know, the mood can shift drastically the last few days. I'd like to discuss how to use this forum to solidify the vote leaning our way, especially in the 'too close to call' ridings. Can we 'keep talking' so we alert fellow activists and see if we can develop winning strategies, and implement them in our various riding activities?
I live in rural mainland, and am working on two campaigns - one, my local one, the other a 'tctc'. Both places I'm hearing about 'roads roads roads'. I'm delighted that our policy of doubling the repair budget is having a positive effect when I'm making my calls. I'm hearing' that's good', and 'I'm voting NDP THIS TIME' - clearly new voters who have decided to give us a chance. Fabulous! However, I'm concerned that there is no clear vision from the other party workers about 'where after' the potholes are filled? - i.e., public transportation focus, or simply being fiscally accountable when twinning the 100 highways? Thoughts? Comments?
I was worried about Saturday's Herald headlines about the 'national union website' shows they are controlling 'the election' - yeah, as if unions previously hadn't channeled wonderful resources before - with no major wins until now. Felt like a real attempt to bring us back into that 'red scare' fear that I thought the Herald had left behind. And Darryl doing his best to support that by torpedoing a principled policy on the Micheline bill. However, todays lead article about the senior home support supplement being 'scare mongering' and incorrect was somewhat of an improvement. However, one had to read past the fold line, and front page to read that our policy is sound. Comments? Thoughts??
Over to fellow east coast babblers....
Sun, 2009-05-31 14:29
#80
I also tended to think the Herald had left behind the scare mongering. But there was that headline: lead story front page.
But I really don't think it has bite. And [seperately], as to the story itself, for those who actually read it, yes it does print mad dog whats Micel Sansom fulminating about the red hordes descending.. there was plenty of text about this being solely the contacting of CUPE members. Its really, really tame compared to what we used to get.
Hardly even a pale echo of the 1999 election 'NDP's hidden agenda'... when you could smell smoke and trouble as soon as the meme came out.
Sun, 2009-05-31 15:58
#81
I watched the ATV news yesterday and, at every break (it seemed) there was an anti-NDP ad running. The Tories are back to running the RiskyNDP ads (The NDP: A risk we can't afford) with a gloom-filled voice announcing a nightmarish future if the NDP are elected.
And the Liberal ads -- abandoning Stephen McNeil's vow to avoid attacking other parties -- shows him looking into the camera offering a solemn warning about what could happen under an NDP government.
The coming week will be a real challenge as everything but the kitchen sink -- and maybe the kitchen sink! -- will be thrown at the NDP, from all directions.
Sun, 2009-05-31 16:00
#82
So what are the issues that focusing on would lead to stronger NDP vote? A few months ago I thought all we could do was have some PC's move to the Liberals, and we'd 'go up the middle', but clearly the comments Don Mills, the pollster made about rural mainland no longer 'owned' by the PCs is true. Previously everyone said the NDP had gone as far afield as possible - Fortress Halifax, and little pieces here and there, but nothing else. It does sound like Rodney has done us a huge favour. Or should I say Heather Foley Melvin by busing in voters for Rodney during the leadership - otherwise, there'd have been a creditable leader, and we'd not be looking at a win.
Sun, 2009-05-31 16:13
#83
I don't question the challenge for the NDP and its prospects in the election.
But I can't quite wrap my head around how this is supposed to work for the Libs and PCs seperately.
I can see it somewhat more for the PCs- because they are in a lot of 2 way races with the NDP. But even there, they can't beleive they have a chance to stay in government, and being the Opposition or the third party is a big difference here, so slamming the NDP may do just as much to push them towards 3rd place as anything.
I can more see how it works for the Liberals, where MacNeill is putting himself forth as the alternative for people who either always were oppossed to the NDP, or are jumpy in that direction. But even then, I'm not really sure how the messaging is supposed to work, in practice.
There is also a possibility that as long as Darell keeps looking steady, seeing the ad 'sandwich' might just reinforce leaners opinions that Dexter must be the one. But thats really speculation.
Bottom line- however much the ads might not work for each party like they want, and even may largely slide right off the NDP, with voters not highly committed the ads do seem to pose a serious challenge for the final week.
Interesting to see if the CRA poll coming out tomorrow has any questions that dif a little deeper than the usual simple statement about confidence in the different leaders.
Sun, 2009-05-31 16:16
#84
My goof on the Argyle riding, that should be:
ARGYLE PC PC
Which makes my early predictions:
NDP - 17
P.C. - 10
LIBERAL - 8
T.C.T.C. - 17
I just got back from canvassing a poll north of Highway 103 here in the Lunenburg riding, which voted solidly P.C. in 2006, but the number of people who have either taken NDP signs or are telling the canvassers that it's time for a change (to the NDP) is little short of remarkable.
Stay tuned!
Sun, 2009-05-31 16:24
#85
Rodney is a gift that keeps giving. But that obsures how this is not, and was not under Hamm either, a talented outfit. They did what was obvious, and when the shelf life on that is up, and you can't figure out what to do next....
They would have needed a real whiz to save themselves. Not only did they not have one, they just didn't/dont have the conditions for fostering one. The only talented politician and leader outside the NDP in the last 15 years has been Danny Graham. And despite those talents, even if he had not been compelled to leave politics, its questionable if he could have saved the Liberal Party from itself. The PCs weren't in the dumps, so they could cruise with less going into the tank... but they had no one to save them.
Which is not to say that no talent outfits couldn't still blunder in and win the day. But the fact they are like that is part of the reason the NSNDP has been able to slowly gain in running against the decidedly unfriendly grain.
Sun, 2009-05-31 16:25
#86
I'd like to discuss how to use this forum to solidify the vote leaning our way, especially in the 'too close to call' ridings. Can we 'keep talking' so we alert fellow activists and see if we can develop winning strategies, and implement them in our various riding activities?
Alright, as I've said in my post above, there's momentum in Cumberland North. Brian Skabar has hit a home run with the announcement of gas tax harmonization near the NB border. This message will win I think, if it's kept Front of Mind. An Action Alert if you live in Cumberland County at all: Write Letters to the Editor praising Skabar's policy. The Amherst Daily News, The Amherst Citizen and the CH. As well, the Cumberland North CBC forum could use a bit of a push, it's kinda stagnated, as has the CH's.
If there's any with free time the Skabar campaign is at 902.660.3446. Talk to friends who live in the Amherst/Pugwash area or anywhere along the Cumberland Sunrise Trail.
For those in the immdediate are, there is an All Candidates Forum in Pugwash on Wed June 3 at 7pm at the Catholic Church Hall. Show up to support Brian!
Sun, 2009-05-31 17:06
#87
Yes, the Ernie Fage issue is wonderful.
So good to hear about south shore people coming round.
The ads, yes, negative works. But, my sense is so many are anti- Rodney that the traditional PC vote MAY stay at home, or move, as indicated previously, to the Liberals. I had many conversations with traditional PC's who said they liked the local candidate, but a vote for them was a vote for Rodney, and they hated that, - they stayed 'uncommitted', but I feel strongly they wouldn't say such negatives about 'their party' if they could be swayed back to voting. So, any chance the Liberals could steal this one? According to our guy above, no, but what can we do to keep the unsure voters home? Pray for rain or snow?
Just talked to my neighbour who is a local for life, and he really thought it was the ATV for kids that did it for many. If so, then if we get 'undecideds' on the phone, then reminding them of the twofold vacuity of that issue - the decision to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars just after they'd turned down the cancer drug for a less amount, and that Rodney stated he didn't know - which he should have.
Sun, 2009-05-31 17:41
#88
Negative ads don't always work. They have to fall on fertile ground. And this is definitely one of those cases where it is questionable that it is the case.
Compare this to the negative ads about Iggy. Those are part of a larger strategy, and they have at least a very good chance of playing the 'set-up' role they are designed for.
These negative ads are one offs by people who don't know what else to do, and are definitely not set-ups for some larger strategy.
That doesn't mean they won't have some modest actual bite, but deadly and dangerous these are not.
Sun, 2009-05-31 17:45
#89
A 'local for life'.
Interesting turn of phrase. I both like it and find it amusing. Unintentionaly ironic I guess.
Or maybe only ironic to me. Living in a place where not just some neighbours, but virtually everyone for many miles around is born and raised here... except for myself, who married in. [Surrounded, even in my own family.]
Sun, 2009-05-31 18:10
#90
And yet within a Babble context at least a year ago plus plus, Morrow would have been the election-prediction pick for technological reasons et al, while Milton Chan would have been dismissed as a Liberal hack running an obsolete dilletante's apparatus...Didn't know Milton Chan pretended to be other than what he is, in order to play political intereference during an election?
Well, if one were to still accuse him of being "I'm Always Right" and his sock puppets. (But that's water under the barrel now--at least, until the next election.)
Sun, 2009-05-31 22:29
#91
I love the front-page article in today's Chronicle Herald that talks about the NDP's plans for seniors, and below it there is lettering that says 'Opposition Parties react to NDP plan'.
That, plus the article from a few days ago that referred to Rodney MacDonald as 'former Premier'!
I guess the Chronicle Herald has already called the election for the NDP!
Stay tuned!
Mon, 2009-06-01 06:01
#92
NEWS FLASH!
A C.B.C.-commissioned poll shows the NDP headed for a possible majority government in Nova Scotia!
www.cbc.ca/canada/nsvotes2009/story/2009/05/31ns-poll-ndp.html
NOW watch the Liberals and Conservatives start slinging the mud in desperation!
Stay tuned!
Mon, 2009-06-01 06:41
#93
I'm kind of in shock at those numbers. We're looking at majority government with those numbers. Holy sh*t! 
Mon, 2009-06-01 07:36
#94
The 44% of decided voters is an increase from 37% in the CRA poll before the election was called. And in line with the 45% of the new outfit that was released last week, and I was skeptical of.
The Liberals and PCs are still within the margin of error of each other.
From that CBC article linked:
When compared with a CRA poll conducted earlier this month, support for the NDP has risen sharply to 44 per cent from 37 per cent ."I think that there's a point of what I call capitulation in the province that said: 'You know something, we tried the other two parties for a long time. Now it's maybe time to give the NDP a chance,' " Mills said.
The text of the story is pretty much word for word what has been playing on the local radio news a few times this morning.
Mon, 2009-06-01 08:29
#95
Those numbers are encouraging. But ... there's still a week of hard work to go. The very best thing anyone can do is call their local campaign HQ and find the hours in the coming week to volunteer. We need to identify our supporters and make sure they get out on E-day. That's what it all comes down to!
Mon, 2009-06-01 08:40
#96
Yes, the Liberals are really continuing to work on this smear:
Liberals: What will NDP owe union leaders?
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/1125110.html
"It brings into question, quite frankly, what is the payday?" McNeil said at a campaign stop at Seaview Park in Halifax. "Why are they so vocally supporting a New Democratic government and what is it that Mr. Dexter's going to owe them at the end of this day?"
NDP campaign director Matt Hebb said he didn't know why the Liberals would be worried about how an organization communicates internally with its members. He said the complaint is a sign the Liberal campaign is struggling.
"I think that Mr. McNeil, while on the one hand has been sort of claiming to be running a high-road campaign, you know, on the other hand is busy launching attacks like this," he said.
Mr. McNeil said the complaint is consistent with his past commitment to stay on the high road.
"Absolutely. That's our job - you just ask the question," he said. "We'll respect the ruling she makes."
You have to be here to know how many times MacNeill said it was going to be the high road only.
"You just ask the question." Right.
And they absolutely know that the CEO will rule that CUPE was withing the rules and that it is not an election expense. Referring it to her is just a ploy.
Mon, 2009-06-01 08:51
#97
In 1999 the NS Tories won a majority with 39% of the vote compared to the NDP and Liberals getting around 30% each. If the NDP gets 44% and the Tories and Liberals are both in the mid-20s - then we are talking not just majority government, but LANDSLIDE majority government.
Mon, 2009-06-01 11:04
#98
The key is to stay on the offensive at this point.
Mon, 2009-06-01 16:20
#99
JaneyCanuck
I am afraid to post my predictions this time, scared to jinx a victory!!!
Mon, 2009-06-01 16:21
#100
JaneyCanuck
But I like David's - they sound about where I am at though I think a few of the too close are NDP.
Mon, 2009-06-01 17:12
#101
As this thread is getting long, and we'll probably need to start another one (Ken?), I'm going to start a separate thread for Nova Scotia election predictions.
Everyone is welcome to have some fun and make their own predictions!