Polling Thread - Iggy Honeymoon Deathwatch

112 posts / 0 new

Last post

Sat, 2009-06-20 11:13

ottawaobserver

Latest CROP poll (June 2009) "The honeymoon is over for Ignatieff in Québec":

Lib - 35% (+ 3 pts over May)
BQ - 31% (- 5 pts)
NDP - 17% (+ 5 pts) "a surprising jump"
Cons - 13% (- 2 pts)

Amongst Francophones:

BQ - 36%
Lib - 30%
NDP - 17% "now firmly ahead of the Conservatives"
Cons - 12%

Best Prime Minister:

Ignatieff - 35% (- 4 pts again this month)
Layton - 24% (no details)
Harper - 14% (- 1 pt since last month)

Dissatisfaction with the government:

Dissatisfied - 62% (- 3 pts since May)
Satisfied - 34% (+ 2 pts)

No full details yet, but will post when they arrive.

Sat, 2009-06-20 11:42

Stockholm

I will yield to you since you posted first. I guess the 17% for the NDP might be a bit of a surprise in Quebec since its hard to think of anything that's happened in the last month that would explain it - but I won't look a gifthorse in the mouth!

Sat, 2009-06-20 11:43

remind

No wonder Coyne was in a snit the other night against the Bloc and NDP. But still what in hell do Quebekers see in the Liberals at all?

Sat, 2009-06-20 12:00

ottawaobserver

Stockholm, it looks like it might have come from the Bloc since it's likely the Liberal gains came from the Conservative drop. Anyway, it could be a monthly hiccup, so we'll just have to see what develops. Can't hate the trend, though!

Remind, I think there's residual support there, especially amongst the allophones.

Sat, 2009-06-20 12:08

Stockholm

I agree that the NDP gains seem to be coming from the BQ - I just don't know what would explain that - its not as if the NDP has done anything particularly high profile in Quebec in the last month or that the BQ has done anything to cause itself to suddenly lose popularity (unless there is something going on Quebec that I'm not aware of)

Sat, 2009-06-20 12:56

ottawaobserver

I'm not sure what "the polls say", either, but I'm sure the "experts" on that will surface soon enough ;-)

Sat, 2009-06-20 13:20

remind

Oh stock, nothing going on in PQ?

NDP calls for reversal of Minister's decision

Thu 18 Jun 2009

Closure of cod fishery in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence

OTTAWA – Yvon Godin, the Member for Acadie-Bathurst, and Peter Stoffer, NDP Fisheries Critic, are calling for the reversal of the decision by Fisheries and Oceans Minister Gail Shea to close the cod fishery in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence. This decision is a serious threat to fishers in Quebec and the Maritimes.

“We and the fishers call upon the Minister to reconsider her decision immediately. The Minister has caused trouble without taking any long-term measures to rebuild the cod stock. Worse still, she has not taken any measures to help fishers,” pointed out MP Godin.

“Last year the Minister of Fisheries at the time was thinking of closing the cod fishery, but he did not do it. This year the government has radically changed course without warning, after fishers have invested thousands of dollars in equipment. Unfortunately it is the fishers who are now paying the price for the minister’s poor management. For some fishers, this announcement is catastrophic: it will ruin them,” charged MP Stoffer.

The MPs are also calling upon the Minister to meet with fishers as soon as possible to reach an agreement. “The Minister refused the fishers’ offers to collaborate during the decision-making process and now the fishers are questioning the evaluations used as the basis for the decision. Why did the Minister make this decision alone? When will she understand the importance of collaboration? She must reverse her decision immediately and engage in dialogue,” concluded the MPs.

http://www.ndp.ca/press/ndp-calls-for-reversal-ministers-decision
New Democrat Task Force on the Economic Recovery comes to Montreal

Mon 20 Apr 2009

OTTAWA – The New Democrat Task Force on the Economic Recovery comes to Montreal this Tuesday. Nathan Cullen, co-chair of the task force, will be meeting with groups working in the renewable energy sector – the key to tomorrow’s green economy.

“It is amazing the responses that people across Canada are having to this task force,” said Cullen. “People realize that the old system that got us into this mess isn’t the way out. They are excited by the possibilities of the new Green Economy.”

http://recovery.ndp.ca/node/192

Canadians speak out about economic crisis

Tue 16 Jun 2009

New Democrats release findings of task forces on middle class and economic recovery

OTTAWA – Middle-class Canadians are suffering in this economic crisis and they are looking to the government to help foster new economic opportunities, says a pair of new reports released by New Democrats today.

“We spent the spring listening to Canadians from every segment of the economy,” said New Democrat Deputy Leader Thomas Mulcair. “What we heard was that people are not looking for the short-term solutions offered by the Harper government. They want real investment to ensure that Canada is at the forefront of the economy of the future.”

http://recovery.ndp.ca/node/212

The Middle Class Recession task force had Mulcair as co chair, and the meeting in PQ on it and the credit card relief Bill, and the Bill on EI reform for new mothers.

Sat, 2009-06-20 13:40

bekayne

New Ipsos poll out (sample of 1000):

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Commons+vote+averts+unwanted+summer+election+Canadians+desire+head+polls+survey+finds/1716101/story.html

Their Quebec numbers are:

Bloc 38

Lib 33

Con 16

NDP 7

Green 4

Sat, 2009-06-20 13:43

Stockholm

That's a national poll of 1,000 - meaning that in Quebec they probably have about 240.

Sat, 2009-06-20 15:48

#10

Debater

Sat, 2009-06-20 15:48

#11

Debater

ottawaobserver wrote:

Latest CROP poll (June 2009) "The honeymoon is over for Ignatieff in Québec":

Lib - 35% (+ 3 pts over May)
BQ - 31% (- 5 pts)
NDP - 17% (+ 5 pts) "a surprising jump"
Cons - 13% (- 2 pts)

Amongst Francophones:

BQ - 36%
Lib - 30%
NDP - 17% "now firmly ahead of the Conservatives"
Cons - 12%

The poll numbers look good for the Liberals in Quebec - they have gone up and the BQ have gone down. According to this poll the Liberals are leading the BQ in Quebec, and are close behind in the Francophone vote.

The title is a bit of an exaggeration I think.

Sat, 2009-06-20 15:52

#12

Stockholm

Of course if this poll was correct and the NDP actually did get 17% in Quebec, Mulcair would be unbeatable and it sounds like beating him is all the Liberals care about in Quebec.

Sat, 2009-06-20 15:55

#13

ottawaobserver

I knew the experts would show up eventually. Thank goodness nothing is wrong with the world.

Sat, 2009-06-20 16:01

#14

Debater

Stockholm wrote:

Of course if this poll was correct and the NDP actually did get 17% in Quebec, Mulcair would be unbeatable and it sounds like beating him is all the Liberals care about in Quebec.

Unbeatable? I thought we weren't supposed to make predictions like that here.

As for Mulcair, he is still in danger. Because of Mulcair's split with the Charest government, he is not very popular with them, and Denis Coderre may have some of Charest's people wanting to help him defeat Mulcair in the next election. Mulcair and the NDP are also taking some heat from the Anglo press in Montreal right now for the NDP's support of Bill 101. He may lose Anglo votes in Outremont as a result.

Sat, 2009-06-20 16:31

#15

Stockholm

I didn't make a prediction. I said that IF this poll was correct and the NDP got 17% in Quebec in the next election, Mulcair would be as safe as a church.

Who cares what Charest's people think of Mulcair? They tried to beat in the byelection and in the last election and flopped both times. As for Bill 101, its been around for 30 years and none of the parties oppose it. Charest has a majority government, i don't see him repealing it. In any case, the vast majority of the votes that Mulcair gets are from former BQ voters and so as long as the NDP keeps gaining at the expense of the BQ, he has nothing to worry about. Of course the Liberals seem to be gaining from the Tories in Quebec, but in Outremont, the Tory vote was so low to begin with that there just isn't much to squeeze.

Charest is not terribly popular these days, the fact that Mulcair had a falling out with him helped make him even more popular.

Sat, 2009-06-20 16:43

#16

-=+=-

Stockholm wrote:

I agree that the NDP gains seem to be coming from the BQ - I just don't know what would explain that - its not as if the NDP has done anything particularly high profile in Quebec in the last month or that the BQ has done anything to cause itself to suddenly lose popularity (unless there is something going on Quebec that I'm not aware of)

Jacques Parizeau was in the news last week, musing about creating "a crisis" to achieve sovereignty. Maybe that sent some progressive nationalists, who are tired of that approach, over to the NDP.

Sat, 2009-06-20 16:46

#17

Coyote

17% for the NDP in Quebec is almost absurd (NOT complaining); it also equals a lot of votes which will not unfortunately not elect members. Still, I'll take it for now!

Sat, 2009-06-20 16:50

#18

Stockholm

I guess we have always known that if the BQ fades in Quebec, the NDP is likely to be a major beneficiary. It could have happened last October, but then Harper's culture cuts etc... cause the whole election in Quebec to turn back to issues of language, culture and identity all of which are soft lobs to the BQ. In the next election if no wedge issues like that pop up, the BQ could continue its decline and the NDP could benefit.

...and 17% is not "absurd" for the NDP in Quebec, they were regularly polling at about that level in 2008 before the BQ took off after making culture cuts a big issue etc...IF (I repeat IF) the NDP actually did rise from 12% to 17% in Quebec, it would almost certainly mean a few more seats - hard to say where, but Gatineau would be the lowest hanging fruit

Sat, 2009-06-20 22:04

#19

Debater

Stockholm wrote:

I didn't make a prediction. I said that IF this poll was correct and the NDP got 17% in Quebec in the next election, Mulcair would be as safe as a church.

Who cares what Charest's people think of Mulcair? They tried to beat in the byelection and in the last election and flopped both times. As for Bill 101, its been around for 30 years and none of the parties oppose it. Charest has a majority government, i don't see him repealing it. In any case, the vast majority of the votes that Mulcair gets are from former BQ voters and so as long as the NDP keeps gaining at the expense of the BQ, he has nothing to worry about. Of course the Liberals seem to be gaining from the Tories in Quebec, but in Outremont, the Tory vote was so low to begin with that there just isn't much to squeeze.

Charest is not terribly popular these days, the fact that Mulcair had a falling out with him helped make him even more popular.

Why would he be safe? You'd have to know where the NDP support would be coming from. Unless there is an increase in Outremont, it won't be of much help to Mulcair if it is spread out all over Quebec.

As for Charest, the provincial Liberals and federal Liberals were not co-operating in the previous 2 elections, they are now that Ignatieff is popular in QC. The provincial Liberals were embarrassed to be associated with the Federal liberals until recently.

And the point about Bill 101 is not about supporting Bill 101 in general, it's about supporting additional provisions. The NDP just voted with the BQ to increase the scope of Bill 101 to federal institutions - it was the only party which did so.

Btw, the Liberals are taking votes from both the Tories and the BQ.

Sat, 2009-06-20 22:09

#20

Stockholm

A rising tide raises all ships. Anyways, both the Liberals and NDP are apparently making gains in Quebec. Somehow, I suspect that the NDP gains are more likely to be coming from the BQ than from the Tories.

Sat, 2009-06-20 22:49

#21

Hunky_Monkey

Someone should email this poll with a big smiley face to Hebert

Sat, 2009-06-20 23:23

#22

remind

There is no proof that the Liberals are taking votes from the Bloc, nice fabrication.

Just about as good as the BS on Bill 101

Quote:
NDP MP Thomas Mulcair, seeking re-election in Outremont, voted for the motion and insists it's all about the right to work in French.

"We had no intention of supporting the part that touches the Official Languages Act," Mulcair insisted.

But the NDP wanted Bill 101's right-to-work-in-French apply, "unless English is necessary to accomplish your job." Mulcair at the time spoke with Official Languages Commissioner Graham Fraser about the bill, who told him he preferred the Official Languages Act not be amended.

"We had no intention of supporting the part (of the bill) that touches the Official Languages Act," Mulcair said.

"What we voted for is to have the thing studied," he said, citing his speech in the House where he said: "We want to find out what this is about and come to a final decision with regard to the dispositions of Bill C-482." Peter Deslauriers, the NDP candidate in Notre Dame de Grâce-Lachine, supports his party's position and accused Jennings of "trying to inflame language wars." Anne Lagacé Dowson, the NDP candidate in Westmount- Ville Marie, who was not in politics at the time the bill was debated, said it made sense to support the Bloc "to quell the language ardour of Quebec nationalists." "It also didn't make sense to preclude a guy getting a promotion if he doesn't speak English in Rimouski, where there is no English to speak of." Dowson said the language debate "is passé, and that's good in terms of dealing with real issues." "I'm not in favour of anyone's language rights being denied, English or French," Dowson said.

This would narrow employment opportunities for bilingual anglophones here, Jennings is telling voters.

So who are these bilingual anglophones who want to keep themselves employeed at the expense of the francophones that apparently the Liberals and Cons are pitting against one another?

Quote:
For Jennings, 57, the idea of having Bill 101 apply to federal institutions in Quebec was unacceptable.

“I was able to [say no] because I knew that for people in my riding,...and the Jewish community, and other communities, Bill 101 is anathema… for a variety of reasons,” she said.

“So I felt I had your support – that you had my back – to make sure that nothing went into those agreements… that would be detrimental to our communities.”

*here she is speaking to the reporter of the Canadian Jewish News and what interesting commentary it is.

The proposed change to the province’s French language law would have allowed employees of federally regulated companies, including post offices and banks, to conduct business in French only.

So debator, are you trying to say, when you say that Mulcair is in trouble in Outremount, that the Jewish community in Outremount, that supported Mulcair, is upset because of the NDP's support of looking at the language laws, in respect to the ability to work in mother tongue?

Because apparently Marlene Jennings believes so, as according to her, it could/would cause them to have competition for lucrative jobs that apparently they currently have a lock on, being bilingual for the most part.

Personally, I think it is a terrible way for Ms Jennings to portray the PQ Jewish community, as I would think that the Quebec Jewish community would not be that self absorbed, nor would they be silly enough, IMV, not to see it could/would become a wedge issue on separation. I am sure they are fully aware that if separation occurs, their bilingualism means sfa for the job market they currently command.

Here is another viewpoint on this issue that pretty much states the shenanignas the Liberals and Cons are up to dennouncing the NDP and Bloc.

Quote:
NDP Support Rights of Workers to work in Mother Tongue (Bill C-307)

It seems Renee Germain should review the conservative talking/spin points she receives from the central party war room.
If Sudburians (and Renee Germain) want to know about the real meaning of bill 307, I urge them to go to this following site:

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/redirector.aspx?RefererUrl=Publ...

There they can read about the bill, and find out exactly what it entails - and that in fact, it does represent the interests of Sudburians, francophone and anglophone alike.

So what does this bill actually recommend?

It says that francophones in Quebec should have the right to speak their mother tongue at their workplace, in federally regulated companies covered by the Canada Labour Code such as banks, airports, telecommunications companies and Canada Post.
To be clear, this is NOT about government services, because services provided directly by federal departments must already be in both official languages.

Employees within federal departments are entitled to use their mother tongue. Is that really an attack on minority language rights?

The bill (if it had passed) would have extended the provincial charter of the french language, which currently applies to all workplaces under provincial jurisdiction, to workplaces under federal jurisdiction.

What Renee forgot, is that the Charter of the French Language(or bill 101 as some still call it) mandates that french shall be a workplace language in Quebec. Unlike what Renee writes, the bill would do nothing to ban other languages – it simply says that French has to be there.

Does Renee, and her conservative message suppliers now believe that we should return to the days when English is the only language of banking and insurance (Two of the larger federally regulated workplaces) in Quebec?

Does Renee know that this colonial attitude was one of the major underlying reasons that the Quiet revolution took place? That the workplace language issue is still the major issure driving seperatism?

Perhaps she does, and that is precisely why this fear-mongering is taking place, to divide Canadians.

What is more-there is also no evidence that franco-ontarians have ever suffered since bill 101 was brought in.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to say that standing up for the rights of workers to work in their OWN languages, (francophone workers at that!) IS in the better interests of the ridings Gravelle and Thibeault represent-ridings that have strong FRANCOPHONE populations?

Indeed we get a glimmer of more truth buried in a NP article:

Quote:
The Bloc and the NDP said the legislation was meant to address cases where employees are not allowed to read collective agreements or file complaints in French, or when they would be forced to speak the language of a unilingual English-speaking boss, even though it might not be part of their job description.

The NDP's Quebec lieutenant Thomas Mulcair said his party ... is prepared to introduce its own legislation next fall that will propose changes to the federal labour code to add new protections for French-speaking workers in the province.

So it would appear that the Liberals and the Cons are again co-operating to try and make a wedge within PQ anglophone and francophone communities, and create a colonialist mentality, fools that they are. And Ms Jennings basically caste, selfish and self absorbed, aspersions upon the Quebec Jewish community, which really, IMV, drives even deeper wedges between Quecbekers.

Sat, 2009-06-20 23:50

#23

Debater

Here is The Gazette editorial from earlier this month that criticises the NDP and Mulcair that I referred to above - I didn't invent it:

http://www2.canada.com/montrealgazette/features/viewpoints/story.html?id...

And btw, the Liberals are taking votes from the BQ in Quebec - it actually started on election night on October 14th if you check the ridings and the commentary by the analysts. I don't appreciate being told that I'm fabricating things when what I say is true and can be proven if you actually look at the results riding by riding. You can start with Papineau.

Sat, 2009-06-20 23:52

#24

Lord Palmerston

Quote:
the Jewish community in Outremount, that supported Mulcair

[url=http://www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15570&It... so sure about that.[/url]

Quote:
In Outremont, the turnout at advance polls – just over 2,200 – one of the lowest in the province, suggests the chassidic community of about 10,000 did not vote in large numbers.

Then again, they felt no reason to vote against Mulcair.

Sun, 2009-06-21 00:04

#25

Debater

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Quote:
the Jewish community in Outremount, that supported Mulcair

[url=http://www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15570&It... so sure about that.[/url]

Quote:
In Outremont, the turnout at advance polls – just over 2,200 – one of the lowest in the province, suggests the chassidic community of about 10,000 did not vote in large numbers.

Then again, they felt no reason to vote against Mulcair.

I think you are right Lord P that Mulcair's support in the Jewish community is being exaggerated a bit by some people here. The fact that a lot of them did not vote for or against him may indicate that some of them were not motivated to vote Liberal as they did historically because of Dion's leadership and other issues. Dion's by-election candidate, Jocelyn Coulon, was very controversial in the Jewish community and the effect of that may have lasted until the general election.

Some of the Jews in Outremont who sat out the last election may be motivated to vote Liberal again if the next Liberal candidate is more appealing.

Sun, 2009-06-21 02:29

#26

Coyote

Notice the part where he's won, twice? God Libs have gotta HATE that. just like you.

Sun, 2009-06-21 07:52

#27

adma

Debater wrote:

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Quote:
the Jewish community in Outremount, that supported Mulcair

[url=http://www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15570&It... so sure about that.[/url]

Quote:
In Outremont, the turnout at advance polls – just over 2,200 – one of the lowest in the province, suggests the chassidic community of about 10,000 did not vote in large numbers.

Then again, they felt no reason to vote against Mulcair.

I think you are right Lord P that Mulcair's support in the Jewish community is being exaggerated a bit by some people here. The fact that a lot of them did not vote for or against him may indicate that some of them were not motivated to vote Liberal as they did historically because of Dion's leadership and other issues. Dion's by-election candidate, Jocelyn Coulon, was very controversial in the Jewish community and the effect of that may have lasted until the general election.

Some of the Jews in Outremont who sat out the last election may be motivated to vote Liberal again if the next Liberal candidate is more appealing.

Though an interesting thing about the advance-poll turnout in Outremont is that the Tories finished with 21%, and 25% in the "Special Voting Rules" category (where they were only 8 votes below the Liberals!)--twice the E-day percentage.

A similar likely advance-poll "Chassidic bump" can be observed in seats like Mount-Royal (where the Tories got 43% in the advance polls!) and Pierrefonds-Dollard.

Sun, 2009-06-21 09:31

#28

remind

Debater wrote:
Here is The Gazette editorial from earlier this month that criticises the NDP and Mulcair that I referred to above - I didn't invent it:

Um, that is a newspaper article criticizing the NDP, a Canwest newspaper at that, playing their usual political interference games with spurious accusations geared only to falsely skew perceptions, and apparently they too are trying to create wedges amongst anglophones and francophones, with their eighth to a quarter truths.

I illuminated above what the Bill ammendments were actually about, but it is obviously too much to expect the Liberals and CPC, along with Canwest, to uphold ALL workers rights, both english and french. Indeed Jennings bascially states she is all for keeping bilingual jobs locked into a specific demographic, so the Liberals can get their votes.

Quote:
And btw, the Liberals are taking votes from the BQ in Quebec - it actually started on election night on October 14th if you check the ridings and the commentary by the analysts. I don't appreciate being told that I'm fabricating things when what I say is true and can be proven if you actually look at the results riding by riding. You can start with Papineau.

No, it is not up to us to provide proof of your assertations, it is up to you to provide proof. You did not. You made a blanket opinion statements, As such, I can only go by what the polls in this thread show, and they do not show what you state.

Having said that though, I was calling BS on your characterization of Bill 101 amendments by the Bloc and NDP. Hence my posting proof that it was not how YOU characterized it.

Sun, 2009-06-21 13:43

#29

Debater

1. Forget the silly stuff about Canwest. There is no conspiracy. It is an editorial by The Gazette, Montreal's largest English newspaper, criticising the NDP and Thomas Mulcair for their support of increasing the scope of Bill 101. The point is that Mulcair now has a number of people in Montreal who will be against him in the next election.

2. And it is not my job to constantly provide long lists of ridings and explanations for people who don't understand the numbers or who don't want to look at election results. If you look at riding results from October, you will see the BQ vote fell in a number of ridings and the Liberal vote went up - that means the Liberals took votes from the BQ. It's as simple as that.

Sun, 2009-06-21 13:52

#30

Stockholm

BTW debater - there is no news in this. Canwest had a flurry of articles attacking the NDP over this issue in the Montreal papers before and during the last federal election campaign and it didn't stop Mulcair from winning last October so why would it be any different now. In any case, if in fact the Liberals have hopes of taking votes away from the BQ, you may find that Mr. Ignatieff suddenly gets a gets of laryngitis when asked about where he stands on the right of workers in areas under federal jurisdiction to work in the language of their choice.

Sun, 2009-06-21 13:56

#31

Coyote

Right. Just as is it is your job to spin in the best possible light for the Liberal Party; like the NDP sweeping Nova Scotia, and you desperately trying to change the subject to the Liberal leader winning his seat and being a "rising star" .

I have no problem with you or anyone else being a Liberal. The Liberal Party has a long tradition in this country. It's not surprising that people would support the Liberal Party, and decide to post with that in mind. I just wish you would acknowledge your bias, as I and many others on this board do in favour of the NDP.

Sun, 2009-06-21 13:56

#32

ottawaobserver

Debater wrote:

If you look at riding results from October, you will see the BQ vote fell in a number of ridings and the Liberal vote went up - that means the Liberals took votes from the BQ.

Just on the logical face of that, it means no such thing unless you're talking about a 2-party system. The Liberal vote might have risen at the expense of the Conservatives while the Bloc vote might have fallen due to the NDP. So, yes, you have to look at the seats, and also look at the raw vote as much as the percent swings since one party's supporters might have been more likely to stay home than others.

I did some number crunching, and 56 / 75 Quebec seats saw the Liberal percent of the vote rise and Bloc vote fall in 2008. Many of them were the very safest Liberal seats (St-Leonard, Honore-Mercier), some were in seats that the NDP also did well in (Westmount VM, Hull Aylmer), and some were 9 of the 10 seats held by the Conservatives presently.

However, the vast majority were seats the Bloc holds by huge margins. The exceptions are several seats that have come up in discussions here already: Haute-Gaspesie, Saint-Lambert, Brome-Missisquoi, Laval and Alfred-Pellan.

Sun, 2009-06-21 14:54

#33

remind

Debater wrote:
1. Forget the silly stuff about Canwest. There is no conspiracy.

You can shove that ridicule propaganda up your nose. I am fully aware of Canwest's bias and it isn't silly, nor a conspiracy theory. In fact, you make yourself look silly for denying it and trying to ridicule me.

Quote:
It is an editorial by The Gazette, Montreal's largest English newspaper, criticising the NDP and Thomas Mulcair for their support of increasing the scope of Bill 101. The point is that Mulcair now has a number of people in Montreal who will be against him in the next election.

What the hell are you on about? I posted several links above indicating that Bill 101 was an issue BEFORE the last election, and Mulcair still got in. And nothing has changed now that the Bill was defeated, way back in April even. It is just another typical BS ploy by Canwest to manufacture consent/dissent, and create wedges.

Quote:
2. And it is not my job to constantly provide long lists of ridings and explanations for people who don't understand the numbers or who don't want to look at election results. If you look at riding results from October, you will see the BQ vote fell in a number of ridings and the Liberal vote went up - that means the Liberals took votes from the BQ. It's as simple as that.

You made a statement, it is up to you to prove it, or suck up comments that you are off base with your musings. As for my not understanding the numbers, or am lazy ridicule, you can shove that too.

Sun, 2009-06-21 16:09

#34

Debater

ottawaobserver wrote:

Debater wrote:

If you look at riding results from October, you will see the BQ vote fell in a number of ridings and the Liberal vote went up - that means the Liberals took votes from the BQ.

Just on the logical face of that, it means no such thing unless you're talking about a 2-party system. The Liberal vote might have risen at the expense of the Conservatives while the Bloc vote might have fallen due to the NDP. So, yes, you have to look at the seats, and also look at the raw vote as much as the percent swings since one party's supporters might have been more likely to stay home than others.

I did some number crunching, and 56 / 75 Quebec seats saw the Liberal percent of the vote rise and Bloc vote fall in 2008. Many of them were the very safest Liberal seats (St-Leonard, Honore-Mercier), some were in seats that the NDP also did well in (Westmount VM, Hull Aylmer), and some were 9 of the 10 seats held by the Conservatives presently.

However, the vast majority were seats the Bloc holds by huge margins. The exceptions are several seats that have come up in discussions here already: Haute-Gaspesie, Saint-Lambert, Brome-Missisquoi, Laval and Alfred-Pellan.

1. I understand your point about a 2 party system versus one with 4 parties - that is absolutely correct. One can't necessarily assume that because one party rose and another went down that one party's voters went to the other. However, it can be determined when you look at all 4 parties results in a riding and measure who went up and down amongst all 4. In certain ridings some of the BQ vote went to the Liberals, and this can be seen in a riding like Papineau for example. It is also something that was commented on by the analysts on election night - it was stated that the drop in the BQ support resulted in some votes going to the Liberals.

2. I'm impressed with the fact that you actually looked at the numbers riding by riding. I did that myself recently and that's why I know a lot of the increases and decreases in the QC ridings. I hope other posters do the same. They key point is that which you mentioned - the BQ went down in many of the ridings in QC, and the Liberals went up. That of course results from the fact that the BQ dropped from 42% in QC in 2006 to 38% in 2008 while the Liberal vote went up. The Liberals took votes from more than one party -both the Conservatives and the BQ.

3. That is what worries the BQ - they lost ground in QC in the last election while the Liberals gained ground. The Liberals also gained ground in Francophone ridings, even under Dion. The important thing is not to track exactly where all the vote comes from, but the fact that a Liberal revival started and a BQ slide began.

Sun, 2009-06-21 17:38

#35

remind

Now debator, you have identified 1 riding where the Liberals took from the Bloc, and what riding is that? Ah...it is Justin Trudeau's riding.

However, when one looks at the numbers, one can see that your star candidate took, at most, 1% of the Bloc vote in Papineau. And of course this is actiually the only riding that the Liberals picked back up from their 2006 losses, and I won't even go into their 2004 15 seat loss.

Let's also look at another oversight by you, that Papineau 2006 was the first Bloc win there.

As such, it is quite the spin you are putting on, with your statement that the Liberals took from the Bloc, yep, they sure did, a whooping 1%, with a gold plated star candidate, no less. :rolleyes: Won't even bother breaking down the other ridings, if that is your best shot.

The reality is, if you want to talk gains % wise from 2006 to 2008, overall, the NDP had the largest % gain at 4.7%, while the Liberals only gained 3%,

And sure enough, the Bloc dropped 4%, but the CPC dropped 2.9%, while the GP dropped .5%, and other droped .2%.

Thus...it would be safer, and more truthfull, to say, in the broad way that you are doing without a riding by riding breakdown, that:

"the NDP took 4% from the Bloc, .4% from the GP, the .2% other vote and also gained an additional new .1%, while the Liberals took 2.9% from the CPC and .1% from the GP."

And given the ABC push that they received, along with EMay's campaigning for them, they might not even had their gold plated star candidate make his win, nor gained the 3% they did. Oh, and of course there was the whole Harper arts alienation thing going on too, which caused the 2.9% jump to the Liberals from the CPC.

The Bloc lost less ground in the 2008 election getting 49, than they did in 2006, when they dropped to 51 seats from the 2004 election all time high of 54. And their all time high seat loss was 6 from 1997's 44 to 2000's 38.

So... somehow I doubt very much that the Bloc is worried about anything in respect to the Liberals, nor about losing any seats.

But hey, do continue on telling us how the Liberals are in "revival" and indicating they have the Bloc afraid and against the wall, you might actually be able to convince yourself soon, by doing so..but you won't be able to convince others here I suspect. As the reality is, the Liberal's 2008 1 seat "revival" came at the expense of the CPC and GP, and only because of mitigating factors.

Sun, 2009-06-21 18:01

#36

Coyote

What the hell was harper THINKING with the arts stuff? dumb, dumb politics.

Sun, 2009-06-21 18:28

#37

ottawaobserver

No-one who has watched Michael Ignatieff this past week is worried anymore. As a leader he is supposed to be his party's chief strategist, and the man clearly doesn't know what he is doing in that regard.

Let's see how the Libs do in the next 3 by-elections, and then we'll talk again.

Sun, 2009-06-21 18:36

#38

remind

Well coyote, perhaps Harper had to play to his reform base, at some point, to keep their votes, he had done little enough before to appease them and this was a double or even a triple shot, and it only cost him 2.9% in PQ.

One could probably look at several ridings to see where this no tax payer funding of culture, moral majority and perhaps anti-Quebec sentiment policy might have actually caused the CPC to hold, or gain a seat.

Or one could just chalk it up to echo chamber advisers, or him listening to himself too much. :D

Sun, 2009-06-21 19:19

#39

remind

ottawaobserver wrote:
No-one who has watched Michael Ignatieff this past week is worried anymore. As a leader he is supposed to be his party's chief strategist, and the man clearly doesn't know what he is doing in that regard.

Well are you sure lots of people were worried before? As I most certainly wasn't.

Dion, democratically beat him at the leadership convention and the only way Iggy could get power was to be appointed after taking the backroom knives out. So he starts off already being a loser, and then compounds his status as a loser, by accepting the leadership appointment, as opposed to facing an election from party ranks.

He then gives up the chance to be PM, which indicates just how big a loser he is, and then goes on to form basically a coalition government with the much hated Harper government, thereby chucking the gains the Liberals made with the ABC campaign into the garbage. Not that Dion did not do the same mind you, to those who wanted anyone but the Cons, but at least Dion was elected to his position, while Iggy is working from an ad hoc positon.

And finally, as his last act of the session Iggy abandons, not only the 100's of thousands of Canadians who have, and will soon, become unemployed, but the RoC as well, by not telling the truth about Harper's failing economic stimulus plans and packages.

So I guess we got AWC, as opposed to ABC.

Sun, 2009-06-21 23:39

#40

adma

remind wrote:
But hey, do continue on telling us how the Liberals are in "revival" and indicating they have the Bloc afraid and against the wall, you might actually be able to convince yourself soon, by doing so..but you won't be able to convince others here I suspect. As the reality is, the Liberal's 2008 1 seat "revival" came at the expense of the CPC and GP, and only because of mitigating factors.

Two seat revival; remember that the Grits also regained Brossard-La Prairie (though that was only confirmed through a recount).

Whether or not it was at the expense of the Bloc, one must admit that there were the rudiments of a Liberal polling revival in '08; and I suspect some of it was because Dion managed to salvage a smidgen of good will in his debate performances--then again, after the catastrophe of '06, a quasi-correction might have been unavoidable. But it definitely doesn't look bad for next time around, optics-wise, for the Liberals to now be sitting upon a flock of recovered second place finishes.

Mentioned in this thread's predecessor as Liberal-targetable was Vaudreuil-Soulanges; now, there's an interesting anomaly in which one cannot simply extrapolate Liberal potential from '08 results, because of the Michael Fortier factor. Sans Fortier, it's absolutely on radar.

Mon, 2009-06-22 00:37

#41

Debater

remind wrote:

Now debator, you have identified 1 riding where the Liberals took from the Bloc, and what riding is that? Ah...it is Justin Trudeau's riding.

However, when one looks at the numbers, one can see that your star candidate took, at most, 1% of the Bloc vote in Papineau. And of course this is actiually the only riding that the Liberals picked back up from their 2006 losses, and I won't even go into their 2004 15 seat loss.

Let's also look at another oversight by you, that Papineau 2006 was the first Bloc win there.

As such, it is quite the spin you are putting on, with your statement that the Liberals took from the Bloc, yep, they sure did, a whooping 1%, with a gold plated star candidate, no less. :rolleyes: Won't even bother breaking down the other ridings, if that is your best shot.

The reality is, if you want to talk gains % wise from 2006 to 2008, overall, the NDP had the largest % gain at 4.7%, while the Liberals only gained 3%,

And sure enough, the Bloc dropped 4%, but the CPC dropped 2.9%, while the GP dropped .5%, and other droped .2%.

Thus...it would be safer, and more truthfull, to say, in the broad way that you are doing without a riding by riding breakdown, that:

"the NDP took 4% from the Bloc, .4% from the GP, the .2% other vote and also gained an additional new .1%, while the Liberals took 2.9% from the CPC and .1% from the GP."

And given the ABC push that they received, along with EMay's campaigning for them, they might not even had their gold plated star candidate make his win, nor gained the 3% they did. Oh, and of course there was the whole Harper arts alienation thing going on too, which caused the 2.9% jump to the Liberals from the CPC.

The Bloc lost less ground in the 2008 election getting 49, than they did in 2006, when they dropped to 51 seats from the 2004 election all time high of 54. And their all time high seat loss was 6 from 1997's 44 to 2000's 38.

So... somehow I doubt very much that the Bloc is worried about anything in respect to the Liberals, nor about losing any seats.

But hey, do continue on telling us how the Liberals are in "revival" and indicating they have the Bloc afraid and against the wall, you might actually be able to convince yourself soon, by doing so..but you won't be able to convince others here I suspect. As the reality is, the Liberal's 2008 1 seat "revival" came at the expense of the CPC and GP, and only because of mitigating factors.

I think I've said enough about this subject for now. You seem to want to intensely deny the fact that the Liberals took some BQ votes in the last election. Why I don't know. It doesn't bother me if you aren't convinced.

The BQ is definitely worried about the Liberals - not sure why you are saying otherwise. They have been targetting the Liberals and Ignatieff for the past several months for that reason.

The Liberals took 2 seats from the BQ in October when they had little money and organization and were low in the polls. The also came close to taking away about a half a dozen others.

If you want to predict that the BQ isn't going to lose much to the Liberals next time, that's up to you.

Speaking of Quebec, I'm heading down there tomorrow for a few days actually.

Mon, 2009-06-22 09:36

#42

remind

LOL, I see you do not like being exposed for Liberal propaganda talk.

And I am not denying they took "some" votes, I am stating that you are over blowing, by a significant margin, a Liberal "revival" and their having the Bloc against the wall.

By your notion of the Bloc being worried about the Libs because they are targetting the Liberals, then your attack of the Bloc and your over blown "revival" of the Libs at the Bloc expense, indicates that the Liberals are worried about the Bloc, perhaps more than the Bloc are about the Liberals.

The Bloc have been targeting the Liberals, because the Liberals have done sfa as opposition. In fact, they are not opposition, they are coalition with the CPC. So the real opposition, the Bloc and the NDP, are doing their job, attacking the Con and Liberal coalition government for failing Canadians.

It amazes me that the Liberals can kick, those who voted for them under the premises of ABC, in the face, and think nothing of it and still expect people to vote for them, en masse.

Mon, 2009-06-22 09:52

#43

Uncle John

Polls between elections are more or less meaningless. The only poll which counts is the one on election day.

Tue, 2009-06-23 17:05

#44

gantenbein

Uncle John wrote:

Polls between elections are more or less meaningless. The only poll which counts is the one on election day.

Then what on earth caused you to navigate to a polling thread?

Wed, 2009-06-24 21:14

#45

Stockholm

Angus Reid just released a new poll and lo and behold the Liberals have dropped a bit over the last two weeks and the NDP gained another point to 18% (so much for all the pundits squawking like vultures about us losing ground!

http://www.angusreidstrategies.com/uploads/pages/pdfs/2009.06.24_Politic...

Wed, 2009-06-24 21:25

#46

ottawaobserver

Actually some of the Liberal bloggers are starting to wring their hands a little over the past two polls, but they're reassuring themselves that it's all a blip and that on average they're doing better than under Dion, and they just have to keep being Liberals and everything will be fine, fine, I tell you ....

Thu, 2009-06-25 01:36

#47

thorin_bane

20% for the NDP in Ontario for that poll but only 8% in quebec... If the quebec portion was closer to the crop poll we would probably be over the 20 % mark. Atlantic canada was 34% nice bump after dexters election.

Thu, 2009-06-25 08:49

#48

josh

New EKOS poll:

National federal vote intention

Conservatives: 34.8 per cent.
Liberals: 32.6 per cent.
NDP: 14.3 per cent.
Green: 9.3 per cent.
BQ: 9 per cent.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/06/24/ekos-poll-voter-intention-cons...

Thu, 2009-06-25 08:58

#49

ocsi

Angus Reid has the NDP at 18%.

Thu, 2009-06-25 10:39

#50

Stockholm

If you average it out the NDP is at about 16% which is nothing to brag about but is also about where the party typically stands between elections - esp. when you have a circus on Parliament Hill where 100% of the attention is on whether or not Harper and Iggy can cook up a face saving way to avoid a snap election. In fact the NDP was polling lower nationally at this time last year than it is now - and yet the 2008 election was quite successful.

Given that we aren't in a campaign right now, the most interesting thing to look at in the polls is not so much the horse race numbers and as some of the underlying patterns. Ignatieff is the only new leader among the four. For the most part people have formed an opinion about Harper, Layton and Duceppe - but Iggy is the new unknown quantity and one thing I'm noticing in all the polls is that over the last few weeks, his DISapproval numbers seem to rising steadily. I've been convinced from the start that the more Canadians saw of Ignatieff, the less they would like.

Thu, 2009-06-25 14:12

#51

Sean in Ottawa

If you consider body language, way of speaking and expressions-- which is one of the few things individuals can relate to with TV personalities Ignatief comes off as arrogant, aloof and not very kind. Personality-wise he looks very similar to Harper. That can't be good. In some respects this is not that bad right now but the dynamics in a debate which will be held before the next election will underline this. If Layton can remain a little less earnest, less taken by trivial matters, and less opportunistic looking this could be an advantage for him.

The argument that 60% did not want an election and this explains the drop in Liberal support defies logic-- Most, if not all, Conservative and BQ supporters don't want an election-- this means that an overwhealming number of those who support the opposition actually do and it may be Ignatief's backing down that cost him support rather than his threat.

Can't see those wishing they had EI enthusiastic about Ignatief's weak promise that we can do something later, maybe.

Polling Thread - Iggy Honeymoon Deathwatch

Pages