Latest Polling Data

The best that could happen to Canada would be this:

A (strong) Tory minority government and a strengthened NDP. In fact, if current trends continue, and the Libs manage to drop a few more bombs in the next two weeks, it is well within reach that the NDP may become the second strongest party, with the Libs edged into third place.

You're from Alberta. I can't think of anything else to add.

I think you missed the point George W bush-Harper made.. I enjoy the PC apartheid. Thanks to the Conservatives for leaving me no option but to vote Liberal... Hey PC's get a decent/descent Leader!!!!

Funny how that Strategic Council poll is the one that juts out most to the right.

We out here in Lotusland had our own experience with this StratCoun 'tendency' during our last provincial election.

.

RossK - Good to see you again. There will be a post upcoming on the point you raise.

Hey, will this upcoming post help calm that "Oh-crap-Here-Comes-a-Conservative-Government" feeling I'm experiencing?

Rob - After today? No effen way. Martin is not only an incompetent Prime Minister but Stockwell Day's federal election campaign was well run compared to what Martin and his court jesters have done. The Liberals had an outside chance to win a majority when this campaign started and they have done everything short of offering to pay his moving expenses to 24 Sussex to hand it to Harper.

Fortunately I don't feel his pain because my disaffection with the Liberal Party started when Pierre Trudeau was leader. However my contempt for Martin will undoubtedly continue to grow as a result of the pain his incompetence has and will continue to inflict on the country.

Great Mahigan.

Looking forward to it.

I'm assuming you have other examples?

We need a change. I don't like seeing our standing in the world in enviroment, health care, foriegn aid , etc dropping every year. Our economy is good but that is not the only thing in making a good country.

Ontario_Larry - I agree with your concerns but I sure hope you aren't expecting those improvements in our standing in environment, health care and foreign aid to be coming from a Conservative government. That would be the government of lower environmental standards, more expensive health care and less foreign aid.

Hi Larry & Mahigan;

I don,t know either of you, but I still have a question to ask: How could electing a CPC minority Gov. be any worse than the migraine headache weve had for the past 17 mths.????? Not much I think. At least something might be accomplished , that Mr. Dithers could not do. You can not have an effective Gov. when everyone else,s prioritys become your own on a monthly basis the way Mr. Dithers does. Good Ridance I Say, and about time to.

Thank You

Gerry

Gerry - On strictly practical terms there is no reason to assume that a minority Conservative government would be any less dysfunctional than the previous government. The only reason it might be more functional is simply that, if we have to put up with another election campaign a year from now, voters would be looking for politicians, lamp posts and someone having a sale on rope.

Keep in mind this is a liberal blog not a Liberal blog. There is no sympathy for the Liberal Party among the three of us who post here or most of the commentors. There is also no sympathy for the Conservative Party among the three of us.

I once said, during a fit of extreme cynicism, that there isn't a politician on the planet who wouldn't come out in favour of compulsory cancer if he thought it would get him another term in office. That hasn't happened yet but Martin and Harper have both come out in support of compulsory Alzheimer's disease. Martin wants us to forget what his party has done to Canada and Harper wants us to forget what he has said his party would do to Canada.

Martin has proved that he is incompetent to run the country. Harper is a lifelong political extremist who wants us to believe that he has evolved into a moderate in the last year. I believe the only thing that has evolved about Harper is his ability to keep his mouth shut about what he really believes and wants to do.

I don't believe either of these men is fit to govern this country especially with a majority. That is why I support doing what ever it takes to keep them from gaining any more the the most minimum amount of control. And that is why I advocate sending as many NDP and Green Party candidates as possible to Ottawa. A dysfunctional minority government, as bad as it is, is better than a functional government of crooks and liars or closet extremist liars.

A CPC minority would be worse, because neither the Liberals nor the NDP would want to work with them. That leaves the bloc, which is social democratic, and thus the only way that the CPC could get their socially conservative (or economically regressive) policies in place is if they heavily devolved power to the provinces, like the BQ wants.

While more power in the hands of provincial governments may seem nice to, say, a Calgarian, it doesn't do squat for national unity.

As an additional seat-projection resource, you might want to look at Barry Kay's numbers over at http://info.wlu.ca/lispop/lispop.htm. He's a little lazy wrt timeliness these days, but in elections past, he's been bang on. FWIW.

I have to agree with mahigan's assessment - send more New Democrats to Ottawa. Greens should vote strategically for the only party apart from their own which has endorsed proportional representation electoral reform - thus increasing the chances that some Greens may eventually be elected.
As Greg Morrow says on his excellent website democraticSPACE (linked above):
"Strategic voting is Canada’s dirty little secret. Strategic voting is where people vote for their second choice candidate to ensure a lower ranked candidate does not win. Strategic voting is a bit like talking to your kids about sex. You don’t want to talk about it for fear of putting ideas into their heads, but if you don’t then they might endanger themselves if they don’t do it safely. Strategic voting is the same — nobody wants to talk about it, but if you don’t then people will vote strategically where it does make sense or where it stands no chance of having an impact. It is best to be informed - and this guide is an attempt to do that.

It is important to note that democraticSPACE.com does not endorse strategic voting - we prefer exploring an element of proportionality in our electoral process so that citizens can vote their conscience and be assured parliament will reflect how Canadians vote. But it happens whether we like it or not. Please see “Making Every Vote Count: Towards Fair Representation in the Canadian Parliament” (756kb PDF) for a discussion paper on reforming our electoral process.

In the meantime, check out the strategic voting guide to see if your riding is or is not one in which strategic voting might make a difference."
'Nuff said!

A quick note:
P,O & GG just got a well-earned plug on CBC Newsworld's 'Saturday Report'. You should be seeing your hit rate climb! :-)

Thanks Doug. Sorry I missed it. We've been putting in a lot of time here for guys who have day jobs/businesses/families to deal with. I don't think any of us will be sorry to see the end of this election campaign.

And thanks for covering Greg Morrow's strategic voting info for us. It's what our friend swopa over at Needlenose calls a 'target rich blogging environment' these days. For every one we post another three or four hit the to do list.

mahigan, this will be re-broadcast Sunday, Jan.15th @ 4AM CST - got a videorecorder? ;-)

Sunday night the 15th.....

Looks to me like things are stabilizing.

I'm sure there will be a screaming headline story, front page, above the fold, Big Al-assisted push from Fast Eddie G. tomorrow on how (notso)Little Stephen* has peaked too soon.

Right?

_____
see image: snowball, throwing.

.

Posting from the North shore of Lake Ontario I hope all who read this will agree that the first-past-the-post system has to go. It is what gives the Bloc undeserved weight in our Parliament. Without the FPTP system the Bloc would be a splinter party and as it would become ignored in federal politics it would wither on the vine. Rep-by-pop is the only system that would be good for national unity as it would allow parties to develop that address the issues of interest to dis-affected voters who have become non-voters and also the issues of non-voters who have never voted as there were no parties that were of interest to them. The problem is that Canada's elite might be afraid that the transparent brokerage that would occur after a rep-by-pop election would expose what now goes on behind closed doors in the backrooms of the major parties. Obviously transparency is good for democracy, so now we have a second good reason to establish a RBP system. If Stephen Harper is serious about establishing a small c conservative governing tradition then the best place is to start with an overhaul of our FPTP system in conjunction with the NDP who also have a stake in seeing this reform. National unity and transparency on political brokerage, what more can we want?
Cheers,

Tues Jan 17th, Way Late......

Well, well, hard to look at those numbers on the Jan 16th tracking polls and not conclude that perhaps the Harpoon has peaked to Soon.

(the Strat Coun data excepted; which has been discussed before quite often seems to be a rightsided outlier)

A dumb Yankee question:

Putting aside the emotional distastefulness of it, why is strategic voting in a Canadian federal election at all controversial? In any riding where your preferred party is competitive, you'll of course decline to be buffaloed by strategic voting scaremongers/snake oil salesmen.

If on the other hand you know your preferred party has no hope in that riding, why on earth wouldn't you vote strategically? Until you get Proportional Representation, why pretend that you have it? As a Yankee, I can't say I really understand parliamentary politics, but it seems to me that it makes little sense to worry about your party's national aggregate vote when there's a chance that strategic voting will lead to an alignment of seats in the House of Commons that will give your party a meaningful say in policy.

I'm frankly cringing at the media coverage a Harper majority will engender in the U.S. It'll be bad enough if he forms a minority government.

It's controversial because Members of Parliament are much more bound to their parties than Congresscritters are. This reduces pork by eliminating the sale of votes, but it also makes having the elections be ostensibly about the local candidates really silly. People don't care about who gets to be their "representative" -- it's not like the "representative" can do all that much -- they care about who gets to be Prime Minister.

There's also the issue of funding. Parties in Canada will receive government funding based on the number of votes they receive; the NDP does NOT want to see any of that funding go to another party, especially when the rules governing campaign donations are becoming increasingly strict. As a result, they will never openly endorse the kind of strategic voting that opponenets of the Conservatives are advocating.

DeWitt - Leo and Rob pretty much covered it. I had a much longer answer written but I don't think it"s necessary to post. Other than to agree with your last point. Bill O'Reilly would be even more insufferable if the CPC won - especially a majority. You would probably get even more appearances by Rachel "The Stalker" Marsden. Treat of the week every time.

The one other aspect that hadn't been mentioned is that there is this tendency by the Liberals--and, to be fair, many voters--to equate strategic voting with voting Liberal. This doesn't make much sense in, say, BC ridings that are Conservative/NDP races, but it still happens, and still costs the NDP seats.

It's too bad, though, as properly-implemented strategic voting would lead to what the NDP so desperately wants- a Liberal/NDP coalition.

Demosthenes - Abolutely correct. This is the reason I strongly urge anyone contemplating voting strategically to check out Greg Morrow's guides at democraticSpace. There is a strategic voting guide for supporters of each party. Strategic voting may be a good thing done right but it's a wasted vote if it isn't.

You can get a nifty graphic from www.pollingreport.ca showing how the numbers have changed.

Interesting seat projections from DemocraticSpace tonight. If those were to pan out, the Conservatives would have a choice of having a bare majority of 1 with the NDP, or a strengthened position by asking the separatists to support them. I dont think I'd be too far off the mark to say that the Canadian public wouldnt be too happy with them if they chose the Bloc.

Jack can play hardball here if he gets this scenario.. he can demand key planks of his platform be implemented for his support (ie Proportional Representation) and if the Tories refuse.. he can go screaming to the media and the public that the Tories have decided to jump in bed with the BQ.

Harper is not a man to make commitments without keeping them. Don't expect him to sell out the country to protect himself or his personal interrests!
God Bless Canada!

Hi Mahigan, AND were is Tim,

Sorry I havnt bn around. Bit of a flu I think. It looks like ive missed a whole bunch of things.

Is everyone in this site Pro NDP or did I just Missinterpret it. I for one will not be voting for Mr. NDP. He commes off as being way too smoothe. And as for Mr. Dithers, Well i cant c any help coming there either. How long do u have 2 b the Prime minister of a country B 4 u have 2 make a decision about somrthing. When everything u hearand c becomes a "PRIORITY"; How much can u really do.

I Say: Give Harper a chance. He CAN'T Possibly b any worse than a prime minister who is so politically correct as Martin , as to B totally ineffectual. Martin has been digging his own grave. Isnt it time we layed him 2 rest.
gerry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is expensive to keep criminals behind bars. In excess of 100 Grand a year! In prison they(criminals) can do no harm to society...which(society) has the priority of protecting itself...QED. If we spent the 2 billion dollars used on the ineffective gun registry instead on imprisonment, we could have used the money to incarcerate dangerous offenders for some 20,000 man years!
A gun nor a car nor a knife ever killed anyone...it takes a person!

During the first referendum many companies moved their head offices out of Quebec and into anglo canada. Quebec has a second rate economy. If they did eventually separate democratically, they would not successfully launch an independant currency(economy is too weak).
When Alberta separates after this election, it's strong economic fundamentals will easily support Independant Currency notes! They can do it! Basket case Quebec cannot, it's a matter of culture.

I see the ranters have come to the site in the after-hours.

To answer the 1 half-serious inquiry, I believe Pogge supports the Green Party (correct me if I am wrong)... I'm not as sure about his contributing writers however.

We were just discussing the fact that the NDP has some chance of again being the supporting coalition.. how does that make the site Pro-NDP?

You'll want to correct your Leger info - you've got the Liberals and Conservatives results reversed.

Yeah, I just noticed that too... are you trying to goad somebody over at SC?

I believe Pogge supports the Green Party (correct me if I am wrong)

Gladly. ;-)

I'm voting NDP as I did in the last federal election. The Dipper in my riding has an excellent chance of winning and unseating a Conservative incumbent. He came very close last time. The Liberal is a distant third.

Thanks for picking up my error. That's what you get for rushing. Although, even with the error, it was probably as accurate as some of what has been coming out of the Strategic Counsel lately:-)

Sorry, I did'nt mean to imply that the site was NDP. I was trying to point out that it was leaning very much to the left, from most of the comments I read. Perhaps this was'nt happening: But it sure looked like it.

It now looks like a Harper MINORITY G'ovt. I can't see that as being bad for the country in general. MUCH better than a Lib. Min Gov. How many more BILLIONS of dollars can we afford to lose?

If Harper et al have a minority Gov't, What do u think might be the best scenario for the opposition? Appreciate an answer.

Gerry

Sorry, I did'nt mean to imply that the site was NDP. I was trying to point out that it was leaning very much to the left, from most of the comments I read. Perhaps this was'nt happening: But it sure looked like it.

It now looks like a Harper MINORITY G'ovt. I can't see that as being bad for the country in general. MUCH better than a Lib. Min Gov. How many more BILLIONS of dollars can we afford to lose?

If Harper et al have a minority Gov't, What do u think might be the best scenario for the opposition? Appreciate an answer.

Gerry

I've been looking at CPAC 4 the last 2 hrs. PM Martin looks like a deer caught in the headlights of an oncoming Harper Express Train. What do u people think? I can't remember any leader looking that stunned since Turner! I believe He may have made a Megga Mistake by assuming that Harper would self implode like he did last time out! And ALL Liberals being as smug as they usually are, were caught TOTALLY Unaware.

PM Martin has now become a "Talking Head" more than anything else. There is no policy: There is only anti Stephen Harper "RANT". This will probably do Jack & Gilles some good.

Jack and Giles went up the Hill and the Liberals came Tumbling After.

Said they with a grin, with a true north spin
and a bit too much of the laughter,

Stephen Harper will take a hit with the rake

The wood in His Head like a Rafter

Speaking of polls, here's a right purty graph from Wikipedia's site re: Canadian Election polling that amalgemates them all!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CombinedPolls18Jan.jpg

btw - I note Greg Morrow over at democraticSPACE has just placed my riding (Vancouver Centre) on his Conservative strategic voting list. Things are about to get _real_ interesting in the heart of Terminal City! Here we gooooo...

Gerry - As I believe I have told you before this is a progessive blog. Aside from the usual collection of trolls, you are not likely to find too many Conservatives hanging around here. Or all that many Liberals either. There is no best case scenario for anything with a Conservative any kind of government in place. The worst case scenario, and a likely one, is a deal between the Conservatives and the Bloc to dismantle the country.

Hey, CHECK THIS OUT! It’s a ‘Godfather’ spoof election video: www.thejackproblem.ca that just got released.

It’s not your typical TV political ad – very funny and creative. Let me know what you all think…

This election has become about empowerment and Democratic choice. Does Paul Martin know what's best or do the Canadian people know? If the country is to remain together it will be the people who decide. Bullying and autocratic the Liberal Fascist Regime cannot keep us within Confederation! Canadians are not sheep! Top Down Government erodes Democracy and encourages scandal and coruption and alienates all Canadians as we have seen. Power from the bottom up, that is democracy...may the best argument win!
Do we need more wastful government programs that do not work? More bottomless pits of ineffective spending? Health care is a prime example. I have gone 20 years without a family doctor. We substidise the actual cost of a University education by 75% with our taxes. We pay over $200,000 per gaduate doctor to invest in his First World training to watch him take our investment to practice in the United States where he can make more money. Enrole in an American Institution to experience the real cost of higher education.
We subsidise Universities beause we consider them public institutions. Instead of producing needed science and engineering grads our system promotes equally, Politcal Science, English, History and other degrees that serve only qualify grads to work at Tim Hortons! It's not that they offer these programs as much as they are overly expressed in our graduates and are far from what the economy is demanding! If grads were more responsible for the costs of their development then maybe they'd make more sensibe choices about there course of studies. When things are free or at least cheap, they are not always appreciated!
I want my tax dollars to be spent effectively and I would prefer more money in my pocket than to have it wasted on programs that are ineffective and bottomless and wasteful.
I am not rich, I struggle to pay my bills and and my taxes and eek out a megre living. What do I get, who am I? Who Speaks for me?

Top Down Government erodes Democracy and encourages scandal and coruption and alienates all Canadians as we have seen. Power from the bottom up, that is democracy.

Mr. Harper is not a man who readily changes his views and it has long been his conviction that he has a duty to reshape Canada regardless of what its citizens want. When he joined the Reform Party in the late 1980s he demonstrated his scorn for the so-called "grass roots" of the party, telling a reporter that policies coming from the "bottom-up" were "simple and low quality."

The lowest common denominator, as I am convinced is what Martin's mindless fear mongering appeals to is indeed bottm up and of low quality in terms of argument. Flash an irrate image of Martin speeling rhetoric and mindless cleiche's and there is no doubt that a certain number and quality(low) of voters find his phoney and hollow passion compelling because they accept his theatrics and hyperbole as apposed to a thoughtful and deliberate consideration of the problems facing themselves and Canada! A population I might add incapable of and so out of touch with reality that their positions are incompatable with there own physical, economic and political survival. There goes my tax dollars! Martin is playing to them as they are entitled to a vote(who else has he got besides the brain-dead)! Thinking, thoughtful individuals accept that we need systemic change. If not only to halt poor ethics in government, but to increase our standard of living. Working harder and longer than ever before...what am I getting for it?...Health care? I Still have no family doctor? I thought that health care was what made our system better? I more than pay for medical insurance in my taxes. A freind lived n the States for a number of years, he paid $3 grand a year for private insurane! I pay much more than that in my taxes and I get JACK SQUATT!
So much for a major government programs. I just can't wait to see how bad National child care is going to rip-off the tax payer! The first major social program in a generation....sad that they can't even make the old ones work befor starting another. Another black hole, another failedprogram of waste!

The only consolation left to us now is that after 12 years of Liberal abuse and missmanagement and waste that it looks like people who take governance seriously will finally hold positions of responibility with integritty in this country!
God Bless Canada!

It's certainly going to be interesting.

I wonder which realization will hit the moderate, small "l" voters first.

Probably when they pay next years taxes and find out how small the child care money is. Maybe even sooner than that, when they find out how meaningless 1% is on a typical grocery shop. Maybe when the Conservatives declare that now they've had a better look at the books that the so calld fiscal imbalance isn't that great after all and furthermore they won't be raising transfer payments for provinces that don't promise in writing that the money won't go to social programs.

It'll be something.

A 1% deduction in GST sounds great to me! 2% is even twice as good! Add 2% up over a year and it's significant. Of course the Liberals PROMISED to eliminate the GST entirely in an election platform(The Red Book), do ou want a cheap promise or a realistic change?
Its funny that Harper's says his child care proposals cannot possibly cover the total cost of every child in Canada(it's not affordable), yet the Liberals National program insists it will, and at twice the cost of Harper's program!
....you sure are gullible, especiall giv3en the Liberals track record...have you ever read Machiavelli?

I'm glad you think two bits off a $25 grocery bill is a big deal Robert. I'm sure in 5 years when it's 50 cents off a $25 gocery bill you'll think it's twice as big a deal - unless of course groceries are more expensive due to rising fuel costs for the growers and shippers in Harper's pocket in which case it'll be only one and a third as big a deal. Or so.

Yeah, it's real funny that Harper's program is just a cash handout. They can be cancelled at almost a moments notice. The Liberals, for all their idiocy at least proposed a child care *program*, a social infrastructure project, a fixture. You can't cancel fixtures as easily as a mail out. Cash giveaways can vanish overnight. Harper's worked hard to make in the span of his career to make several of them vanish. Like the eerily similar baby bonus program he was so proud of helping eliminate. How long do you think it'll take him to decide this weeny little taxable benefit amounting to a few hundred dollars a year to a family of two working parents to be unaffordable too?

I feel sorry for you.

Sorry Dana, but you are an adult( i only assume) and before an adult decides to have children inside or outside of marriage, they should consider if children are affordable. People have brains better than that of rabbits, as i have come to understand! The various tax cuts to people with children and the additional help Harper is proposing is generous without making someone else entirely responsible for raising your children for you! Give me a break. The Quebec plan is in serious deficit and Martin's plan is 1/2 the cost of the CPC plan. Martin pledges his will pay for every child in Canada and Harper's plan at twice the cost, admitts it will not provide daycare for every child! You tell me who is more credible!

On this question credibility isn't the question as far as I'm concerned. The question is effectiveness and national economic competiveness.

You probably don't care about academic studies of the effect of early childhood learning on lifelong learning habits and socialization or of how reliable, affordable, accessible spaces liberates parents from concern allowing them to focus more of their creativity on their careers, being a dedicated conservative and all, so I won't bother citing them.

But, please, feel free to enjoy your 25 cents.

I don't know what studies you are referring to but the ones that I have read say that expert daycare producs no better results than hiring your grandmother as a babysitter as far as early development is concerned!

Dana...you go head and liberate your creativity, just don't do it on my back!

Robert, with all due disrespect, the only thing I'm ever likely to do on your back is piss.

You are all class!

Dana,
After talking to you I understand why communist China aborts and sterilizes it's population! Maybe you and Martin wold get along well in China. Martin can make all your decisins for you, you may require his supervision!

Lawks! It didn't take much to break Robert's paper-thin skin and expose his Alliance-esque rhetoric. Say what you will about China's One Child Policy, but everyone who's bothered to do their own research will know that in China: (1) sex-selective abortion is illegal; (2) couples who violate the policy are fined, not forced to abort; (3) sterilization does not factor into it at all.

Given that Robert has gone on record as comparing low-income mothers to rabbits (see post dated January 22, 2006 08:58 PM), I don't think he has any moral ground on which to stand.

The difference between Martin's plan and Harper's pay-out is just that: _Martin has a plan_ whereas Harper thinks he can solve any problem by throwing enough money at (or out of) it. If Robert has issues with his elected government making decisions for him, perhaps he should consider voting for his local libertarian instead. As already witnessed south of the border, the brand of conservatism Harper practices does not stand for small government, despite any claim to the contrary.

Ornithoptera,

Dana apparently wants things and from a socialist point of view she thinks she is entittled to them(Communist Russia failed if only because it was a philosophy that was not congruent with human nature). People are not motivated when others will recieve the same compensaton no matter how well they perform! Why should I put in more hours at work when I amgoing to recieve the exact same consideration as the slacker down the hall? There is no competition or reward. The problem with the current redistributve system is that it does not reward thrift or indepndance or hard work at the geomtrically increased amount of effort that it reqires. The great thing about Harper's ideals are not that they are new, or radical or revolutionary. The great thng about Harper is that he actually believes in emocracy and has singly stokes the fires of democratic disourse! People are becomming aware of and engaginging in ideas!

Ornithoptera,
A rabbit has an average life expectancy of much less than a year. They breed like rabbits.If rabbits could teach there offspring with fundmental life skills and how to make resposible choices, then maybe we wouldn't have such a problem with rabbits. Low income single mother rabbits in particular are largely responsible for the high crime rate. They also are at the front of the line to sapping taxpayers dollars. I am a taxpayer and as such Ornithoptera, I am entittle to an opinion as to where my money goes! And so I doe hae a right as anunwilling rabbit supporter to express my resentment of rabbits! I don't mind paying a tax, but call a spade a spade and it's a rabbit tax.

I can not truly believe what i am hearing from DANA and Ornithopetra.

How Indoctinncated have they become in the SWITCH & BAIT routine of the Liberal Party of Canada. PROMISE EVERYTHING to GET POWER and then turn around and "NOT DELIVER"> These people must trully be children in the Political Scheme of things. The Political Wasteland. The People Liberals DEPEND on to spread the Social Agenda started by thier HERO NDP man, pierre.

Daycare will end up being just as messed up as the medicare system in Canada, AND it will probably cost us even more. YOU want chrildren, RAISE them by yourself, like your Granny and Poppy did. They turned out way better then. At least they could look after themselves without having to rely on government handouts. WE DO NOT NEED A BIG SOCIALIST BROTHER (GOVERNMENT) to look after us if we decide to look after ourselves.

Thank You
Gerry