Federal polling - April 25 (2)

In the EKOS poll, Vancouver NDP support is actually slightly lower than across BC. This means additional seats around PG, Kamloops and the Kootenays. Oh and a sweep of Vancouver Island except Saanich-The Islands.

Basement Dweller wrote:

In the EKOS poll, Vancouver NDP support is actually slightly lower than across BC. This means additional seats around PG, Kamloops and the Kootenays. Oh and a sweep of Vancouver Island except Saanich-The Islands.

That makes sense.  For some reason, Vancouver has always been the area of B.C. where Liberal support survives when it dies out everywhere else in the province.  You'd think that, as the big city, that wouldn't be the case, but there it is, for some reason.

Ok when I run this I get:

Cons 129

NDP 91

Lib 67

BQ 21

Before you ream me about the Liberals being too high-- make sure you look at the regionals carefully.

Some snapshots for Liberals

PEI  -- up 1

NS -- even (lose 1 to NDP take West Nova from Cons)

NB -- pick up 2 from Cons

QC -- down 9

ON -- down 6 -- but hang on in many splits where they had very high before

BC -- pick up 1 with dropping Cons (NDP pickups coming from Cons)

That said if the NDP continue to increase only slightly the Liberals will lose a half dozen BC alone but these numbers do not show that presently.

This is one poll a snapshot-- however it shows one clear result: Layton moving to 24 Sussex unless Liberals back Harper.

 

How about Fundy Royal or Random Burin St Georges? Any chance the NDP could show a pulse on PEI?

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Policywonk -- not sure what you mean as obvious other possibilities should these numbers hold out-- I'd consider Central Nova one.

And that would be sweet!!!!!

I am in the middle of running this poll through the system I have and I'll see what it gives me-- I think some will be surprised by the number of Liberals I think will hang on or gain in some strange splits-- will be back in a few minutes I hope with my numbers of this poll.

The ones we were already contending in, like South-Shore-St Margarets and St. John's South-Mount Pearl, plus our incumbents. Would it be possible to pick up Saint John and one or both of the Cape Breton ridings for example, or perhaps Dartmouth-Cole Harbour? It would be nice to see MacKay defeated, but I think other pick-ups are more likely.

Ken Burch wrote:

Basement Dweller wrote:

In the EKOS poll, Vancouver NDP support is actually slightly lower than across BC. This means additional seats around PG, Kamloops and the Kootenays. Oh and a sweep of Vancouver Island except Saanich-The Islands.

That makes sense.  For some reason, Vancouver has always been the area of B.C. where Liberal support survives when it dies out everywhere else in the province.  You'd think that, as the big city, that wouldn't be the case, but there it is, for some reason.

The federal Liberals in BC have been the professional class.  In the past they have had an abundance of young lawyers with lots of time on their hands to run election campaigns.  The ones I know are real small "l" liberals and they have in the past been the backbone of the election machines in many of the ridings.  As I and others have said the federal Liberals out here have always had national unity as a priority. They saw the Liberal party as the bastion of left federalism in Quebec so they wanted to send Western MP's to a governing party in Ottawa to offset the braying donkeys from the Reform party.  

This result is very dangerous for the Liberals:

If they join Cons they are screwed in the next eleciton

If they join coalition with NDP they will likely lose some members to join Cons or sit outside splitting the party

The Liberals would find it almost impossible to keep their party in one piece.

The NDP has a good candidate in Fundy Royal but how far can the party rise there? They finished well-back of the Conservative incumbent and the Liberals were heading towards "lose your deposit" country. Btw, this is another riding where the NDP wins Conservative votes, just look at the 2000 results and compare them to 2004 or 2006.

Now don't feel sorry for Ignatieff. The person who is really crying and desperate here is Harper. Here is why:

If Layton forms a government and keeps a promise to bring in PR-- the radical right will never govern Canada again. The Cons will have to lean way out to the centre just to share power.

Harper will wake up hoping Prime Minister Layton won't live up to that promise. He went in to politics to advance a far right agenda that might get a fairly permanent screwing.

Layton of course may have little choice -- I think there is an underlying agreement here that Greens will vote heavily for the NDP for this policy alone.

The saddest leader after this election won't be E-May who will have won no seats in this election but because of PR would get one in the next election. No, it will be Harper, ironically the guy with the most seats, whose party may never govern again as it is currently configured.

For the Cons to Govern, they may well be forced into a merger with a rump of Liberals left over and a move to the political Centre.

Layton may not have just changed this election -- he may change the next century.

That, should make Harper Cry.

A Liberal-led coalition would not do this but a Layton-led one just might..

I think you will be able to say you heard it here on Rabble first.

http://www.environics.ca/news-and-insights

This is the environics that people have been referring to in the other thread I think. It looks as though it is dated though. The latest EKOS is April 22-24 and environics April 18-21.

 

Vis a vis PEI, remember, you only need 6000 votes to win in a three-way race (say in Charlottetown).

Centrist wrote:

A large sample Ipsos poll for Metro Vancouver (with change from 2008 election):

Con: 42% (-1%)

NDP: 29% (+5%)

Lib: 23% (-1%)

Green: 6% (-3%)

Their analyst was saying 6-8 seats for the NDP in Vancouver.

Surrey North is a given so that takes us to six.

Beyond that, it could be one or two of:

Newton-North Delta

Vancouver Centre

PM-MR-Mission

I can't imagine anything else.

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Hi Garth,

To answer your question:

44. Subject to sections 41 and 42, Parliament may exclusively make laws amending the Constitution of Canada in relation to executive government of Canada or the Senate and House of Commons.

A simple Act of parliament should do it.

It will require the support of the BQ and some Liberals or Cons.

No guarantee the votes would be there.

However, I don't think any constitutional amendment is required as the method of elections is not a Constitutional matter as it does nto affect the representation of the provinces etc.

The NDP would have to seperate this from eliminating the Senate as that would require a Constitutional amendment -- better just to make it elected and leave it as is.

I guess the more immediate question is what to do if the Senate were to defeat or hold up legislation passed by an NDP government or NDP-lead coalition government. Would Jack appoint senators like Mulroney did under section 26 to pass the GST in order to negate the Conservative majority, given the position to abolish the Senate? And who would be the Government Leader in the Senate?  Maybe questions for next week when we find out what the House of Commons will look like.

Electing the Senate would give it far more credibility (possibly too much) given that we have a parliamentary system rather than a  Presidential system with a separate Executive branch. A Senate elected by PR would be a check on a majority FPTP government though.

Basement Dweller wrote:

Centrist wrote:

A large sample Ipsos poll for Metro Vancouver (with change from 2008 election):

Con: 42% (-1%)

NDP: 29% (+5%)

Lib: 23% (-1%)

Green: 6% (-3%)

Their analyst was saying 6-8 seats for the NDP in Vancouver.

Surrey North is a given so that takes us to six.

Beyond that, it could be one or two of:

Newton-North Delta

Vancouver Centre

PM-MR-Mission

I can't imagine anything else.

 

Normally Vancouver Centre would be very much in play - but it sounds like the NDP ended up nominating a weak last minute candidate so it will probably go to Hedy Fry again. Pity since Van Centre would be very winnable on paper.

dp

ah poor Charlie

 

Life, the universe, everything wrote:

Here's how some of this polling data shakes out in one riding - Huron-Bruce

 

On Sunday Charlie Bagnato launched a series of bizarre, unprompted twitter attacks on the NDP candidate - Grant Robertson.

 

Bagnato accused Robertson of lacking in integrity amongst other things.  Which is almost funny, if it wasn't so offensive, for anyone who has ever spent time with Robertson.  He is about as straight a shooter as they come.   I once heard someone describe him as too honest to get elected.   Anyway it seems Baganto took exception to having his record examined, by callers, to a radio show and Robertson adding some concerns he had had to address with Bagnato in the past that the callers were referencing.   Robertson was civil, respectful, but was clear that a person's record is an indicator of what they might do as an MP. If you listen to Bagnato he seems to think he was the best mayor in history, when in reality he was a divisive figure in his own municiplaity and was roundly disliked on Bruce County Council.  He lost his mayors job in a landslide against him.

 

This lashing out tells me that the Liberal campaign is tanking in Huron-Bruce and that Bagnato is looking for someone to blame. The question now will be whether or not enough voters switch to the NDP to help defeat the Conservatives.

 

You can see the sorry story here - I would screen capture, but I don't actually know how to do it.

 

 

http://twitter.com/#!/LiberalCandidat

 

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

I used to be against an elected Senate for just that reason that it would compete for legitimacy with the House. I came around because a clear jurisdiction would be fine and this legitimacy thing is less of a deal when you have coalitions and minorities.

I think that would be tricky for the NDP. Better to change the appointment system right off and take the politics out of it. NDP will have to take the high road on many things if they want to get re-elected.

What kind of non-political appointment system would be feasible?

hatfield wrote:

is there any indication of how Toronto ridings are looking? Specifically, im wondering about Parkdale-High Park and Davenport. In Davenport, I have to say basd on lawn signs its going to be very close, but I'd love to see if any riding polls have been done. 

Many people I talk to (in Toronto) still judge the NDP from their memory of the Rae government.  Even though Jack is from Toronto, I haven't felt the Big Mo in TO.

Sad given that the same people that hold Rae responsible for the economy at the time let Harper off the hook for the recession. Clear double standard. You may not like Rae but it is important people understand the context of the Rae government if they want to bring it up now:

1) global recession

2) Free Trade adjustment crisis with whole industries being put out of business

3) Massive cuts to transfer payments from Ottawa damaging provincial revenues

4) Not only no stimulus but massive federal program cuts

5) A huge consumer tax increase through the GST

6) The Ontario had just lost court cases related to FN land claims and pay equity-- costing billions and NDP did not want those people to have to wait longer.

7) The Liberals had hidden a massive deficit that was only fully apparent after the election.

8) The propaganda worked overtime -- signs saying "taxed off at Bob Rae" went up before the NDP's first budget to try to make people associate the Federal GST brought in by Federal Conservatives with the Provincial NDP. Enough people were unsophisticated enough to buy it

These are the contexts people judging the Rae government need to know.

 

Yes Rae was still arrogant

The NDP made mistakes.

The NDP did not do everything they promised.

But the above context meant the government did not have even a remote hope of being successful even had they done everything perfectly and even if Rae had been a perfect magician.

The NDP did get people mad but they were not in the least responsible for the situation in the economy.

 

I really don't see that -- Selkirk the Cons had 60+% Dauphin 56+% Brandon 51+% Leads of over 30%.

I think the Toronto media is the most hostile in the country and spreads lies and opinion framed as news. Why look further?