Saskatchewan Provincial Election - Nov 7 / 11
The ad promising more medi clinics saying to enjoy the boom you need to be healthy is pretty good ..especially when you realize it was the NDP that made it all happen..The Saskatchewan party has been riding on the shirt tails of what the NDP has created...and they are loving it. I just don't trust them to keep it that way.. I can see if they are re elected how they will rip the province blind....as they are conservatives.
The only thing the Sask party is saying is Dwaine called Brad names years ago..that's all they can dig up? I'm old enough to know ..beware of right wing parties baring gifts ..like tuition funding...Devine had the same program and fixed it all after he got it that all other loans were at higher than normal interest rates and they didn't pussy foot around with legal action either...they used there own govt lawyers to go after student loans ..cleaning out bank accounts with garnishee orders ..Beware people of Saskatchewan to any party associated with Devine or the conservatives ...BEWARE..and don't listen to Gromley.....
Remember all those Devine conservative faces that appeared out of nowhere the day after the Sask party won..I do..they had to hide them from the public for Petes sake ..think of that! What does that tell you?
Then the awards dinner for the man that destroyed the province by making it bankrupt recieving medals and plaques ..Give me a break! That was a guy so ideological he destroyed the province because he believed the only way to destroy socialism was to bankrupt it..Dahhh
So he said at a speech in New York where we seen the US pull off the same garbage and boy are they paying.....this is the kind of political crap the Sask party looks up at....that and peeing on the graves of socialists ...yep don't ya all remember the sask party party tape..
Funny the same day that story came out I met a fella who was going to Afghansitan to fight in the war...he was saying his main motivation was because he heard the taliban desecrated the graves of the dead! Guess what buddy you don't have to go to Afghanistan to find slime like that ....the people of Saskatchewan elected it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0eQgUpkJ1Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ns8LD5Q8ecc
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/story/2011/10/19/sk-lingenfel...
That's a pretty hefty hit piece on Lingenfelter and I think the party should try and turn it around to make Wall look unprincipled, otherwise the message might stick.
When Link ran for the SK NDP leadership I knew he had worked as a VP for an Alberta oil company but it was only during this election that I became aware of the fact that his title was that of VP for Government Relations.
For those unacquainted with corporate doublespeak, this is the word that is used nowadays for corporate lobbyists. So basically, Link was the senior government influence peddler for an Alberta energy firm. HOW did this guy ever become leader of the SK NDP???
It begs the question:
If your party is thirty-seven points ahead in the polls, why would you bother doing attack ads on the opposition leader? Is it even possible to blow a lead like that during a five week election campaign?
Possible, yes. Probable, no. Presumably the SaskParty has seen something in their internal numbers that has them concerned. That, or Kinsella's moonlighting.
Running this kind of dum-dum ad can only hurt the party behind it, and help the victim. Link's not perfect, but he doesn't deserve this kind of hit piece.
It begs the question:
If your party is thirty-seven points ahead in the polls, why would you bother doing attack ads on the opposition leader? Is it even possible to blow a lead like that during a five week election campaign?
Because reducing the NDP to a rump group of a few MLA's will ensure a better chance of winning the election after this one. Allowing the NDP any breathing space is not in the long term interests of the Sask. Party. The bigger the hole the NDP falls into in the election the longer it will take them to dig their way out.
Yorkton SaskParty candidate raises the tone. Why do conservatives in SK have to be so goddamn predictable?
Then again, from what I've heard the biggest thing Wall has going for him is that the NDP is led by Lingenfelter - who by all accounts has been a bit of a flop as leader. If the NDP holds its own and doesn't get wiped out in this election "Linc" might decide that being leader of the opposition indefinitely is better than being unemployed and might want to stick around. On the other hand if the NDP is decimated, Linc would quickly quit or be deposed and just about ANYONE the Sask NDP chose to replace him would have the potential of being more formidable in 2015.
If the Sask party makes itself unpopular - the NDP will be a threat whether it has 8 seats or 18. In 1982 the NDP was reduced to just 8 seats in the Grant Devine landslide, four years later in 1986 the NDP came within a hair of regaining power and making Devine a one term premier.
It begs the question:
If your party is thirty-seven points ahead in the polls, why would you bother doing attack ads on the opposition leader? Is it even possible to blow a lead like that during a five week election campaign?
Because reducing the NDP to a rump group of a few MLA's will ensure a better chance of winning the election after this one. Allowing the NDP any breathing space is not in the long term interests of the Sask. Party. The bigger the hole the NDP falls into in the election the longer it will take them to dig their way out.
Is it his previous job title or his present policies which interest you?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/story/2011/10/19/sk-lingenfel...
That's a pretty hefty hit piece on Lingenfelter and I think the party should try and turn it around to make Wall look unprincipled, otherwise the message might stick.
When Link ran for the SK NDP leadership I knew he had worked as a VP for an Alberta oil company but it was only during this election that I became aware of the fact that his title was that of VP for Government Relations.
For those unacquainted with corporate doublespeak, this is the word that is used nowadays for corporate lobbyists. So basically, Link was the senior government influence peddler for an Alberta energy firm. HOW did this guy ever become leader of the SK NDP???
If the Sask party makes itself unpopular - the NDP will be a threat whether it has 8 seats or 18. In 1982 the NDP was reduced to just 8 seats in the Grant Devine landslide, four years later in 1986 the NDP came within a hair of regaining power and making Devine a one term premier.
And that was all before the 1991 election, where an orange hurricane ran through the province, and Romanow captured 55 seats. If the Liberal vote had been weaker than it was, then even more PCers would have been tossed out. After that, and the scandal over expenses, the PC party imploded, ganged up with some Liberals, and became the Stop-the-NDP Party (sorry, the SaskParty). The SK NDP has been weak at times, but it has resiliency, and could spring back to stage a surprise in 2015. Wall's been spending much more than he's taking in, and if potash royalties tank or even stumble, he'll be caught with his pants down. The SaskParty empire is one built on sand. A puff of wind in the right (or left) direction, and it crumbles.
Then again, from what I've heard the biggest thing Wall has going for him is that the NDP is led by Lingenfelter - who by all accounts has been a bit of a flop as leader.
Stockholm, you just criticized an NDP leader. Are you sure you're feeling alright?
1986 vs 1991 for Sask PC vs NDP is like 1996 vs 2001 for BC NDP vs Lib. The latter date making up for the cheated-out-of-victoryness of the former date...
Then again, from what I've heard the biggest thing Wall has going for him is that the NDP is led by Lingenfelter - who by all accounts has been a bit of a flop as leader.Stockholm, you just criticized an NDP leader. Are you sure you're feeling alright?
Actually I've criticized lots of NDP leaders. I was never that wild about Howard Hampton and thought Frances Lankin would have been better. I thought he was a bit of a turn-off to the Ontario voters. I also made no secret of the fact that i thought Alexa MacDonough was kind of useless and that all she did was drone on and on like a wind up toy - "health care, health care, more money, more money"
Went out doorknocking yesterday and the mood wasn't so bad. But I predict low voter turnout.
I've also been out canvassing. From my gopher's-eye level, the SK NDP will do badly, but not as badly as everyone expects. A hard core of 15 MLAs will survive, 20 if we're lucky. That's much, much better than 1982, for example, when the SK NDP got its ass kicked.
The political tradition in SK, going back over 70 years, is for the Liberals/PCs/SaskParty to make such a mess of things and spend like drunken sailors, and the CCF/NDP to then troop in with dustpans and brooms to tidy up the mess. Just when they've fixed up the worst of the damage, and made the province's finances somewhat respectable again, they get turfed because the Liberals/PCs/SaskParty promise sunshine and lollipops. At least it's predictable.
I've also been out canvassing. From my gopher's-eye level, the SK NDP will do badly, but not as badly as everyone expects. A hard core of 15 MLAs will survive, 20 if we're lucky. That's much, much better than 1982, for example, when the SK NDP got its ass kicked.
Would that be enough to force the Weak Link out of politics one way or the other? There is a good reason why the NDP is taking the focus away from him.
It should be remembered that the 2007 seat count disguised what was actually a worse defeat than 1982.
1982
PCs - 54.07% - 55/64 seats (86% of seats)
NDP - 37.64% - 9/64 seats (14% of seats.
2007
SP - 50.92% - 38/58 seats (66% of seats)
NDP - 37.24% - 20/58 seats (34% of seats)
Granted the SaskParty didn't do quite as well in 07 as the PCs did in 82, but the NDP actually got a lower percentage of the popular vote. It is almost unprecedented in a FPTP system for the opposition party's seat count to so closely resemble its percentage of the popular vote. Unfortunately, this bit of dumb luck has blinded some people to the reality of what a drubbing 07 really was.
I have to admit, Edmund, it causes me concern when people talk about the last 70 years as though the pattern you rightly outline will inevitably continue. While I think it is comforting, I think far too many New Democrats have looked to it as an excuse to avoid a serious root and branch renewal of the party.
One of the things I like about the current campaign is that the NDP is actually talking about some ideas and have cast aside the absolutely stupid campaign narrative that failed in 99, 03 and 07. "OMG the Saskies are scary" isn't a platform and we should have dropped it after the first failure in 99. I'll give Lnk that - he hasn't repeated the most stupid aspect of the last three elections. (Frankly, we'd spent a decade so overselling that "Saskies are scary" meme that Brad Wall would have had to have started biting off the heads of puppies on live TV in order to live up to our rhetorical overkill. The vacuity of the previous three campaigns actually gave him cover over the last four years.)
By no means is the SNDP dead or even on its deathbed, but we need to stop kidding ourselves that past success is the guarantee of future success. It really didn't pan out for Michael Ignatieff. The part has some issues to deal with once we're through this campaign and how we choose to deal with them (or not) will determine whether or not we're competitive in 2015.
Well, the NDP should count its blessings that the electorate's more urban/rural polarized than in 1982. Otherwise, we'd be looking at a PEI-type everyone-else-to-one result...
We are also lucky that the Liberals are so moribund in Saskatchewan that there is zero chance of the NDP being overtaken by any other party. At least there is no competition on the opposition side.
1986 vs 1991 for Sask PC vs NDP is like 1996 vs 2001 for BC NDP vs Lib. The latter date making up for the cheated-out-of-victoryness of the former date...
Indeed the FPTP system unfairly gave both the BC NDP and Devine a majority with less percentage of votes than the opposition. In both cases it seemed to magnify the discontent with dumb decisions. The BC NDP in 2001 running under a "liberal" leader got less than 22% of the vote. In both provinces the party of the elite just changed vehicles. The NDP doesn't periodically shed its skin so it carries all the baggage from every government ever elected. The right wing parties in Sask. and BC don't carry the Conservative and Socred scandals even if behind the scenes you see the same political movers and shakers and corporate backers.
We are also lucky that the Liberals are so moribund in Saskatchewan that there is zero chance of the NDP being overtaken by any other party. At least there is no competition on the opposition side.
The Liberals may be worse than moribund. They are running only eight candidates, and virtually al Liberal resources will go into the longshot race in The Battlefords in hope of having their leader elected.
Add to that the fact that their leader is an idiot - which is a significant blessing to the NDP. Ryan Bater has chosen to position the Liberals to the RIGHT of the Saskatchewan Party - choosing the shoulder over the middle of the road. Conceivably, had he chosen to occupy the ideological turf most Liberals try t claim, he might have been eating into soft NDP support. Instead, he's killed off Saskatchewan's oldest political party.
Biggest mistake the Liberals made was getting rid of Lynda Haverstock as leader. She was freaking amazing (still is, actually). But the old boys couldn't have a pretty woman in charge. Assholes.
While I'd agree that sexism played its part in the downfall of Lynda Haverstock, I think it was more an issue of the old boys club who had been running the LIberal Party out of their law offices for the previous 20 years weren't prepared to share the prospect of electoral success. It was all well and good that an outsider had (temporarily) returned the Liberals to credibility, but they couldn't have said outsider continue to run the party with the prospect of controlling the levers of patronage in play.
IOW, I think it would have played out much the same if it had been Lionel Haverstock. The only difference is that the notional Lionel Haverstock might have been invited to join the old boys club.
Biggest mistake the Liberals made was getting rid of Lynda Haverstock as leader. She was freaking amazing (still is, actually). But the old boys couldn't have a pretty woman in charge. Assholes.
How did this happen exactly? For those completely unfamiliar with this aspect of Saskatchewan political history but are interested, where can we get a background?
I knew the Liberals weren't running in my neck of the woods (Saskatoon Silver Springs), but I had no idea it was that bad. Eight candidates? Even the Greens are fielding more people.
Haverstock was the sort of leader the SK Liberals fluked into, rather than actively sought out and cultivated. The 1995 election can be seen as a last stand of a party that once could count on running the province. Ever since some of the caucus bolted to form the SK Party with PC MLAs, the party has been in a death spiral. Has a provincial Liberal party ever folded? The SK Liberal party would surely be a prime candidate for the political burial ground, right along side the SK PC party.
The fact that the SK Liberal party homepage is a minor variation on the federal Liberal one (and bringing you only federal news) testifies to their almost-vertical descent in fortunes.
1. Lynda Haverstock took over the leadership of the Saskatchewan Liberal Association in the late 80s after haveing been courted by both the Conservatives and New Democrats as a potential candidate. She had a good narrative (single teenaged mom made good, by then a psycholgist specializing in farm stress). In the 1991 election that swept the Conservatives from office, Lynda was responsible for the NDP's only loss, defeating Peter Prebble in Saskatoon Greystone. In 1995, she led the Liberals to official opposition with 11 seats to the PC's five. Before the House even convened, she was overthrown in a caucus revolt led by ex-NDP MLA Glen McPherson and with the support of the Liberal old boys. She sat as an independent until the 1999 election and watched from the sidelines as the Liberal Party collapsed further, with one Liberal MLA crossing to the NDP (Belanger), four joining the PC remnant as the Saskatchewan Party (Krawetz, Bjornrud, Draude and Gantefor) and ne sitting as an independent for a time before aligning with the SP (Arlene Jule). Dr. Haverstock was subsequently appointed Lieutenant Governor and now serves as CEO for Tourism Saskatchewan.
2. There is a Liberal candidate in Saskatoon Silver Springs, Rob Stoesz.
3. You may have the link to the Liberal Party of Canada (Saskatchewan) (http://saskatchewan.liberal.ca/) as opposed to the Saskatchewan Liberal Party (http://saskliberals.ca/)
We are also lucky that the Liberals are so moribund in Saskatchewan that there is zero chance of the NDP being overtaken by any other party. At least there is no competition on the opposition side.
The Liberals may be worse than moribund. They are running only eight candidates, and virtually al Liberal resources will go into the longshot race in The Battlefords in hope of having their leader elected.
Add to that the fact that their leader is an idiot - which is a significant blessing to the NDP. Ryan Bater has chosen to position the Liberals to the RIGHT of the Saskatchewan Party - choosing the shoulder over the middle of the road. Conceivably, had he chosen to occupy the ideological turf most Liberals try t claim, he might have been eating into soft NDP support. Instead, he's killed off Saskatchewan's oldest political party.
I wouldn't say he is an idiot. He sounds like he will be a threat in Battlefords. He is taking a libertarian type stance, right on economic, left on social, same as the federal libs will do since their mushy middle has been co-opted by the Tories and NDP.
Thanks for the corrections, Malcolm.
Huh. I missed Rod Stoesz. That brings them up to nine candidates.
Lynda Haverstock took over the leadership of the Saskatchewan Liberal Association in the late 80s after haveing been courted by both the Conservatives and New Democrats as a potential candidate. She had a good narrative (single teenaged mom made good, by then a psycholgist specializing in farm stress). In the 1991 election that swept the Conservatives from office, Lynda was responsible for the NDP's only loss, defeating Peter Prebble in Saskatoon Greystone. In 1995, she led the Liberals to official opposition with 11 seats to the PC's five. Before the House even convened, she was overthrown in a caucus revolt led by ex-NDP MLA Glen McPherson and with the support of the Liberal old boys. She sat as an independent until the 1999 election and watched from the sidelines as the Liberal Party collapsed further, with one Liberal MLA crossing to the NDP (Belanger), four joining the PC remnant as the Saskatchewan Party (Krawetz, Bjornrud, Draude and Gantefor) and ne sitting as an independent for a time before aligning with the SP (Arlene Jule).
So she led the party to its best ever showing in 20 years and that's the thanks she got? I dare say, her decision to run as a Liberal sounds principled, given how she could have easily been elected under the NDP banner had she so chosen.
Lingenfelter is hammering Wall. Totally won the debate. Wall seemed unusually timid.
1. I think it is, at the very least, counterintuitive for Bater to run the Liberals as the riht wing alternatve to the Saskies. The Liberals don't have the cred to pull it off, and there is virtually no room to run. Had he run to the centre (ie, to the left of the Saskies but the right of the NDP) there would have been a very real possibility of eroding the SaskParty and significantly eating into NDP support. It may be that he's highly principled - in which case I have to reassess my conviction that the last Liberal with principles was Chubby Power.
2. My count of eight included Stoesz. Of course, that was me counting from the Elections Saskatchewan list which seems to have come down from the site.
3. Had the Liberals not self-destructed, I think it is quite likely that Haverstock would have become Premier in 1999. Krawetz, Draude, Gantefor and Bjornrud probably all put their Cabinet appointments off by eight years.
2. My count of eight included Stoesz. Of course, that was me counting from the Elections Saskatchewan list which seems to have come down from the site.
The SK Liberal Party has nine candidates on its website. And Elections Saskatchewan has the same nine candidates here.
Had the Liberals not self-destructed, I think it is quite likely that Haverstock would have become Premier in 1999. Krawetz, Draude, Gantefor and Bjornrud probably all put their Cabinet appointments off by eight years.
What impact would that have had on Saskatchewan politics? We can safely assume that the PCs would have continued to langusih in the wilderness. Would those voting patterns be repeated at the federal level? What style of government would a hypothetical Premier Haverstock run? Would it have been a centrist government, or tacked more to the right like their provincial cousins in BC and Quebec? Would the NDP be in better shape now after having been forced to undergo a renewal process and be in good shape this election to either form the government, or would it be near the end of a successful first term and have a good likelihood of being re-elected?
1. Edmund, I obviously miscounted yesterday. Tx.
2. Curious to speculate, Ari. A Haverstock win in 99 might well have set SK politics as a contest between the moderate left and the moderate right rather than the moderate left and the generally hard right. Lynda did have her weaknesses as a leader as well, so she might well have self-destructed as leader of the opposition. One well placed Liberal of my acquaintance said that LG was the best possible job for her, since she got to be a princess.
Lynda Haverstock took over the leadership of the Saskatchewan Liberal Association in the late 80s after haveing been courted by both the Conservatives and New Democrats as a potential candidate. She had a good narrative (single teenaged mom made good, by then a psycholgist specializing in farm stress). In the 1991 election that swept the Conservatives from office, Lynda was responsible for the NDP's only loss, defeating Peter Prebble in Saskatoon Greystone. In 1995, she led the Liberals to official opposition with 11 seats to the PC's five. Before the House even convened, she was overthrown in a caucus revolt led by ex-NDP MLA Glen McPherson and with the support of the Liberal old boys. She sat as an independent until the 1999 election and watched from the sidelines as the Liberal Party collapsed further, with one Liberal MLA crossing to the NDP (Belanger), four joining the PC remnant as the Saskatchewan Party (Krawetz, Bjornrud, Draude and Gantefor) and ne sitting as an independent for a time before aligning with the SP (Arlene Jule).So she led the party to its best ever showing in 20 years and that's the thanks she got? I dare say, her decision to run as a Liberal sounds principled, given how she could have easily been elected under the NDP banner had she so chosen.
I think her decision to go with the Liberals was principled. And there is no doubt in my mind that it was sexism that led to the caucus revolt that took her out of the leadership. My father was a long-time Liberal party member - he was so furious at what happened that it was the end of his support for them. The idea that she would have faced anywhere near the opposition to her leadership if she had been male is ludicrous.
I won't for a second dispute that sexism was a significant part of what happened to Lynda Haverstock at the hands of the Liberal old boys. There was a vicious pettiness to it that probably wouldn't have been there if she hadn't been a woman. But I also think that, once the Liberals looked like they had a shot at power, the old boys would have overthrown whatever placeholder (as they saw it) happened to hold the leader's chair, regardless of sex or anything else. Yes, it likely would have been less vicious had it been Lionel Haverstock - but I still think Lionel would have been overthrown too.
On the debate:
I think Link was uncomfortable in the early stages, but he really warmed up as it wore on. He came out swinging on the potash royalties, and sounded extraordinarily reasonable by changing the rate from a nickel in the dollar to a dime. His line about how the CEO of PCS is making $100 million a year, and could give some of that up, was especially well-done. Wall sounded like he's always sounded: a smooth, soft-voiced apologist for big business who wants to asset-strip the province.
Lingenfelter could have been better, but he could have been a heck of a lot worse. He landed some punches, and drew some blood. Not enough, but some. I loved Link alluding to Wall was connected the Devine government without even mentioning his name, and how Wall didn't touch that allegation with a bargepole.
The CBC in BC this morning said no one one. The only station carrying it in BC was Sun and I have not tuned in to them yet and have no intention to any more than I would tune in to Fox TV.
So what do the Sask. folk think, did Link impress enough to get a boast in the polls?
There was no "knockout punch." Link started off stiff and got better. Wall started out glib and stayed glib. Link was more substantive.
Wondering if Link won simply by showing up and holding his own--by the sound of things, there wasn't a "Bob Skelly 1986" circumstance...
Who knows what people are thinking? Sometimes I wonder if this province even has a pulse.
A Sask poll!
http://www.insightrix.com/?action=d7_article_viewer_view_article&Join_ID=353893
Looks bad:
SaskParty - 60%
NDP - 33%
Greens - 3%
Liberals - 2.8%(i didn't even want to mention this, but it made me laugh)
BUT... since Nov09 the NDP have gained 10% and the SaskParty have lost 6%; to me its looking like MAN in reverse; the Saskies will win the rural lands with a dash of urban ridings (might even lose some if the NDP can concentrate/get out the vote) while the NDP wins in the cities. Would a held-on result be enough for Link to stay on as leader? Those of us here thought Link did a decent job in the debate but only 14% thought he won... but 32% thought they were about the same, i think that can be seen as some thing good. What is positive here is that almost half support the NDP's Royalty review so it looks like keeping on track with a policy based election might just save the farm.
Insightrix polling has never actually been tested against a general election - nor, really, against anyone else's polling - so who really knows what this poll is worth.
That said, IF this poll is accurate, then the NDP vote has eroded from 2007 (which was already our lowest popular vote since 1938) while the erosion of the Liberal vote has gone to the SaskParty as well. The 3% for the Liberals is a complete chimera since they are only running candidates in only 9/58 of the constituencies - which suggests an actual Liberal vote of less than one half of one percent.
There are no regional breakdowns, however past performance suggests enormous SaskParty majortiies in most rural seats, which leaves some opportunity for the NDP in the cities. However, if these numbers are accurate, that would suggest that five to nine urban seats would be vulnerable.
All that said, this poll is significantly better than the last poll published (by another company whose name escapes me right now, which had never released a SK poll before).
And, as Pundits Guide is quick to remind us, riding by riding calculations based on a standard swing are notoriously unreliable. (I'm astonished that the hack who runs 308dotcom has managed to hoodwink so many people with his junk analysis.)
The death of the SK NDP, if it has been reported by anyone, has been greatly exaggerated. I have a feeling that the positive campaign that the party has been fighting will pay dividends in places. Not enough, certainly, but some. Comparing and contrasting their ads with the SaskParty's is voyaging from politeness, optimism, and reason, to some twisted version of Republican-lite.
I'd say we're looking at mid-30s in terms of numbers. Not great, but the urban/rural split will mean that the SaskParty will heap up huge majorities in the rural areas; while the NDP holds on to its redoubts in Saskatoon and Regina, and lives to fight another day.
While a boom might well persist in Saskatchewan, the SaskParty's continued mismanagement of the province's finances should/ought to catch up with it (I found it particularly rich of the SaskParty to accuse the NDP of fiscal management).
I have no doubt the SNDP will live to fight another day. But if the NDP only achieves in the mid-30s of the popular vote, that is still our lowest popular vote since 1938 (18.73) when we didn't even run a full slate (31/52). With the collapse of the Liberals, that means a popular vote split in the order of 60-35, which would be slightly more than three points down for the NDP and almost eight points up for the SaskParty. A mid-30s popular vote means the loss of seats (the first time in the party`s history it would have lost seats after a term in opposition).
I have no doubt the SNDP will live to fight another day. But if the NDP only achieves in the mid-30s of the popular vote, that is still our lowest popular vote since 1938 (18.73) when we didn't even run a full slate (31/52). With the collapse of the Liberals, that means a popular vote split in the order of 60-35, which would be slightly more than three points down for the NDP and almost eight points up for the SaskParty. A mid-30s popular vote means the loss of seats (the first time in the party`s history it would have lost seats after a term in opposition).
It seems that it is following in the BC mould. In BC the NDP only once went way below its base level but its normal base is less than 50% so it seldom wins elections. And like in Saskatchewan the Harcourt NDP and the Clark government spent enormous amounts of political capital balancing the books after Socred mismanagement. They got nothing in return after pissing off many of their natural allies with cuts and freezes on necessary social programs. No matter the sacrifices real people made the MSM and the BC Liberals still talk about the NDP fiscal mismanagement and over spending when the auditors reports show they ran the most fiscally responsible government since WAC Bennett. The current government that is up to its ears in red ink and signing off the books P3 deals as fast as they can still tries to use that line against the NDP.
I do like Dix's response. When asked about a BC Liberal on-line attack ad trying to show he personally orchestrated the Clark years he just said, "they must be really desperate."
Even if Wall and the SK PArty win big I don't think it means people trust or like them. I just think people in this province are the farthest thing from revolutionary in the whole damn country. They truly believe that if a government stands up to big business than the jobs will go away. I mean sure it is possible but are we just supposed to let Potash Corp walk all over us?
@ knownothing
I wouldn't say that people here don't stand up. They certainly got up in arms over the proposed BHP Billiton deal, even though that same line about losing jobs was used in that case.
The fact that Wall was able to fool people into thinking he was defending Saskatchewan resources as if it were a crown corporation, and stand up to the prime minister, is a testament to how great a politician he can be when he is on his game. It was a great piece of political theatre - expecially great because it was a complete pack of lies.
Of course now that it is a case of PotashCorp paying a fair share after the province and shareholders saved their hides, he is singing a completely different tune.
There are other lines Wall knows he cannot openly cross - yet - although he would dearly love to.
Funny that he should make his first mis-step on the decision to bring schools back after Labour Day, making the announcement at a tourism event, and before saying anything to the school divisions,
Of course, the purpose of the schools announcement was to distract attention from the Potash Corp 3d quarter report. Even the Insightrix polling says the NDP's policy of a royalty review is more popular that the Wall position.