Liberals in Trouble?
I know of recent the polls are not looking too great for the Liberals and many Tories are gloating about the Liberals being in free-fall. I say not so fast. The decima poll that showed the two tied, also showed a large number of NDP supporters would switch to the Liberals if a Tory victory looks possible. In addition as in the past, the Liberals fall when people get angry, but when people have time to think through what a Conservative victory would mean the Liberals always re-bound. The Liberals have been in far worse shape than they are now and they still always come back, so I still think they will win a good size minority government, at least 120 seats (-10 in Ontario, -10 in Quebec +5 in BC) and if they can turn things around maybe as high as 140 seats (-5 Quebec, +5 Ontario, +5 BC). Anyways I thought I would comment on the recent controversies and give my advice for how the Liberals can win the election.
Mike Klander's blog where he compared Olivia Chow to a Chow-Chow dog was completely unacceptable. I will not defend what is defenceless, but let me say that there are 500,000 Liberal members so to tar a whole party with a negative brush for the work of a few bad apples is insulting to the many honest and hard-working Liberals who part in hours of work to help the party. David Emerson's saying was a bit over the top, but I should remind everyone, it was his wife, not him who originally made the joke and his wife happens to be Chinese, so, so much for him being a racist. Hopefully this won't cost him his seat since it would be a real shame to lose a cabinet minister who has done so much for BC. I should also remind all Chinese voters that it is the Liberal Party who has been supportive of more immigration, the Liberal Party who introduced the Charter of Rights and Freedoms that protects minority rights. While the Conservatives may claim they are champions of minority rights, that was the former Progressive Conservatives who were swallowed up by the far right wing Reform Party that has a strong racist element in it. It was Sharon Hayes who was a strong Harper backer that claimed Chinese doctors encourage eating human feces as part of their diet. Betty Granger who talked about the Asian Invasion was a big Harper backer when he ran for leader of the Canadian Alliance. Stephen Harper once even said that "west of Winnipeg the only ridings that vote Liberal are ridings made up of recent Asian immigrants or people from Eastern Canada. They live in ghettoes and are not integrated into Western Canadian society". Brian Mulroney and Joe Clark were both champions of minority rights, but the party they ran no longer exists, instead it is the party of Preston Manning and Stockwell Day who were anything but tolerant of people different than themselves. This may be controversial what I have posted, but I believe all those planning to vote Conservative have the right to know the past of some of their important players before voting.
The second big issue is the RCMP investigating the Income Trust leak. I will start off by saying I fully support Ralph Goodale and believe he is innocent. While it is normal for a cabinet minister to step down when under investigation, this is not normal circumstances. Ralph Goodale is merely a caretaker, but really cannot do much during the writ period. After the election is over, if the Liberals lose, he is out of cabinet automatically unless a coalition government is formed, but that is a different story. If the Liberals win again, hopefully by the time Paul Martin appoints his new cabinet, this will be cleared up, but if not Ralph Goodale probably should be dropped from cabinet until cleared up. I personally don't believe he did anything wrong since politicians always give the media advanced warning when they are going to make an important announcement. Investing in the stock market is about speculating on the future so if the finance minister says he has an important announcement on the eve of an election, wouldn't it be logical to guess that it would be about not taxing income trusts. I don't see this as insider trading, but rather smart investing. Still it is probably better to get the RCMP to investigate so the whole issue so it is cleared up rather than have the cloud hanging over us even after the election. I've always seen Ralph Goodale as one of the more honest members so I am confident he is not guilty of any wrongdoing. I am also confident if someone in the finance department did leak insider information, they will be punished accordingly. Hopefully this clears things up for anyone who was initially planning to go Liberal, but is now thinking of going Conservative.
As for the Liberals, there are two things they need to do to win, talk about their record and continue to hammer Stephen Harper on his past controversial statements. Some say negative ads won't work two times in a row; after all it worked for Mike Harris in 1999, but not for Ernie Eves in 2003. The difference here is they tried to portray Dalton McGuinty as being a weak leader, so this was believable in 1999 when he was an unknown, but not in 2003 when he was a known figure. If the Liberals do over the top ads that they have nothing to back it up with, then yes it will backfire. But if they use actual quotes of Stephen Harper, and believe me there are many, Stephen Harper will have no choice but to go on the defensive. Either he will admit to those quotes, which will prove he is too extreme to be prime-minister or he will deny them showing he is untrustworthy, or he will say his views have changed, showing he is unreliable since how do we know then he won't flip-flop again. My advice run a 30 second ad flashing up several controversial quotes from Harper. On the positive side, focus on the Liberal record, especially the economy. People don't throw out governments generally when the economy is doing well, so if you show people the economy is doing well, taxes are down, eight consecutive balanced budgets, lowest unemployment in 30 years, low interest rates meaning more home owners than ever before, this should work. When people can see the results in their own lives of government policies working well, they will vote to re-elect them. Avoid health care and crime as those issues the Liberal record is not as good on as the economy. As Warren Kinsella (even though I know he dislikes Martin) once said back when advising Chretien, when a topic you are weak on comes up, click, change the channel. On Canada-US relations, this can be used since Bush is very unpopular in Canada so the more they can do to connect Harper to Bush, the better their chances are. Improving Canada-US relations may be what Canadians want, but most Canadians see Bush not Martin as the problem and believe they cannot be improved until Bush leaves the White House, so worry about improving them in 2009, not now.
Predictions: Lib 120-140 seats, Con 80-105 seats, BQ 55-65 seats, NDP 15-30 seats.
Mike Klander's blog where he compared Olivia Chow to a Chow-Chow dog was completely unacceptable. I will not defend what is defenceless, but let me say that there are 500,000 Liberal members so to tar a whole party with a negative brush for the work of a few bad apples is insulting to the many honest and hard-working Liberals who part in hours of work to help the party. David Emerson's saying was a bit over the top, but I should remind everyone, it was his wife, not him who originally made the joke and his wife happens to be Chinese, so, so much for him being a racist. Hopefully this won't cost him his seat since it would be a real shame to lose a cabinet minister who has done so much for BC. I should also remind all Chinese voters that it is the Liberal Party who has been supportive of more immigration, the Liberal Party who introduced the Charter of Rights and Freedoms that protects minority rights. While the Conservatives may claim they are champions of minority rights, that was the former Progressive Conservatives who were swallowed up by the far right wing Reform Party that has a strong racist element in it. It was Sharon Hayes who was a strong Harper backer that claimed Chinese doctors encourage eating human feces as part of their diet. Betty Granger who talked about the Asian Invasion was a big Harper backer when he ran for leader of the Canadian Alliance. Stephen Harper once even said that "west of Winnipeg the only ridings that vote Liberal are ridings made up of recent Asian immigrants or people from Eastern Canada. They live in ghettoes and are not integrated into Western Canadian society". Brian Mulroney and Joe Clark were both champions of minority rights, but the party they ran no longer exists, instead it is the party of Preston Manning and Stockwell Day who were anything but tolerant of people different than themselves. This may be controversial what I have posted, but I believe all those planning to vote Conservative have the right to know the past of some of their important players before voting.
The second big issue is the RCMP investigating the Income Trust leak. I will start off by saying I fully support Ralph Goodale and believe he is innocent. While it is normal for a cabinet minister to step down when under investigation, this is not normal circumstances. Ralph Goodale is merely a caretaker, but really cannot do much during the writ period. After the election is over, if the Liberals lose, he is out of cabinet automatically unless a coalition government is formed, but that is a different story. If the Liberals win again, hopefully by the time Paul Martin appoints his new cabinet, this will be cleared up, but if not Ralph Goodale probably should be dropped from cabinet until cleared up. I personally don't believe he did anything wrong since politicians always give the media advanced warning when they are going to make an important announcement. Investing in the stock market is about speculating on the future so if the finance minister says he has an important announcement on the eve of an election, wouldn't it be logical to guess that it would be about not taxing income trusts. I don't see this as insider trading, but rather smart investing. Still it is probably better to get the RCMP to investigate so the whole issue so it is cleared up rather than have the cloud hanging over us even after the election. I've always seen Ralph Goodale as one of the more honest members so I am confident he is not guilty of any wrongdoing. I am also confident if someone in the finance department did leak insider information, they will be punished accordingly. Hopefully this clears things up for anyone who was initially planning to go Liberal, but is now thinking of going Conservative.
As for the Liberals, there are two things they need to do to win, talk about their record and continue to hammer Stephen Harper on his past controversial statements. Some say negative ads won't work two times in a row; after all it worked for Mike Harris in 1999, but not for Ernie Eves in 2003. The difference here is they tried to portray Dalton McGuinty as being a weak leader, so this was believable in 1999 when he was an unknown, but not in 2003 when he was a known figure. If the Liberals do over the top ads that they have nothing to back it up with, then yes it will backfire. But if they use actual quotes of Stephen Harper, and believe me there are many, Stephen Harper will have no choice but to go on the defensive. Either he will admit to those quotes, which will prove he is too extreme to be prime-minister or he will deny them showing he is untrustworthy, or he will say his views have changed, showing he is unreliable since how do we know then he won't flip-flop again. My advice run a 30 second ad flashing up several controversial quotes from Harper. On the positive side, focus on the Liberal record, especially the economy. People don't throw out governments generally when the economy is doing well, so if you show people the economy is doing well, taxes are down, eight consecutive balanced budgets, lowest unemployment in 30 years, low interest rates meaning more home owners than ever before, this should work. When people can see the results in their own lives of government policies working well, they will vote to re-elect them. Avoid health care and crime as those issues the Liberal record is not as good on as the economy. As Warren Kinsella (even though I know he dislikes Martin) once said back when advising Chretien, when a topic you are weak on comes up, click, change the channel. On Canada-US relations, this can be used since Bush is very unpopular in Canada so the more they can do to connect Harper to Bush, the better their chances are. Improving Canada-US relations may be what Canadians want, but most Canadians see Bush not Martin as the problem and believe they cannot be improved until Bush leaves the White House, so worry about improving them in 2009, not now.
Predictions: Lib 120-140 seats, Con 80-105 seats, BQ 55-65 seats, NDP 15-30 seats.
posted by Monkey Loves to Fight at 4:44 PM
37 Comments:
Now you can add hypocrisy to the long list of Liberal traits you've picked up on, Miles. Reading your latest attempts at prognosticating and analysis would be comical if it wasn't so sadly indicative of the logic of Liberal Kool Aid drinkers.
Case in point - you say that people shouldn't judge the entire Liberal party for the words of "a few bad apples" but then go on to cite examples of a few bad apples (e.g. Betty Granger) as reason for people not to vote Conservative! Hypocrisy thy name is Miles Lunn indeed.
As for your message to Chinese Canadians, you forgot to remind them that it was the Liberal Party who introduced the racist and truly despicable Head Tax in the early 1900s. It is the same Liberal Party that refuses to apologize or discuss redress today. You may ignore this, Miles, but many thousands of voters will not.
Keep up your advice to the Liberal Party, Miles - it's solid stuff!
There's a lot wrong with your analysis (for instance the dynamic is completely different than the last election), but here's a biggie:
This is not a sudden spike for the CPC.
In most polls there has been a fairly steady decline (rise) in Lib (CPC) support.
For instance this latest Ipsos Reid poll, they showed a slight lib lead before christmas, and now a slight CPC lead.
Decima showed a strong Lib lead awhile ago, and then less of a lead, and now a tie.
This does look knee jerk, this looks like a steady shift.
Take a look at Kim Cambell's numbers. Not saying Martin will be as decimated, but there's a eerie similarity.
The next week is critical. If the numbers continue to fall for the Libs in this fashion (slow steady decline) it will be very hard for them to recover.
What must be particularily troubling for team Martin is Harpers momentum in Quebec. Many federalists in Quebec choose the Libs as they were the only alternative. If the CPC starts to look legit (which I suggest they are) that could spell big trouble.
The only thing that amazes me about the Liberal Party is that there is anyone out there who is still daft enough to vote for it.
They steal your money and give it to their friends (Gomery Shawinigate et al) They increase your taxes (Massive CPP increases & sliding tax brackets to name just two)They promise on a stack of Bibles to do away with the nasty GST and then do nothing but live off the money it rakes in. Cancel much needed helicopters only to buy them at twice the cost years later and after the Sea Kings dropped out of the sky they were so old. Reduce our military to a world joke (we have to borrow planes from the Russians as we can't move our own troops & equipment around). Buy crap submarines that the British navy wouldn't sail in and tell us they got a bargain!!! Spend 2 Billion on a gun registry designed to curb gun violence which demonstrably does not work.
If there really is anyone out there who would vote for them all I can say is you must have more than a few screws loose in your brain box. Ah yes I forgot the great performance of the economy under Mr. Martin. I think any fool could do that running a country sitting on oil reserves many times larger than Saudi Arabia at a time of record high oil prices. Go figure. But populations get the Government they deserve.
If you want to have more of your money stolen and Canada continue to be the laughing stock of the Western world (can't even defend our own borders without the US military) then carry on Vote Martin and see this Great Country of Canada become a suburb of the US. All I ask of Government is honesty - a feature alarmingly absent in the Liberals.
They rule by deceit and deception.
How could any one with an ounce of sense vote for more of that.
Malcolm
Joel McLaughlin, the Liberals may have been racist in 1900, but they have changed since, but the Reform Party was largely made up of racists. As I said in my post, the current Conservative Party is the Reform party III, not the Progressive Conservatives. You yourself were a former Progressive Conservative who were like the Liberals are party close to the centre, not an extreme party. Besides Joel - you wanted Bush to win in the United States, whereas I despise Bush and I am horrified at what has happened in the United States. I for one what no part of it. The neo-conservative movement in the United States has no place in my country and I will as a proud Canadian fight to stop the Americanization of this great country.
Biff - You may be right or wrong, but I think there is still a lot of paranoia about Stephen Harper. According to the decima poll that showed them nearly tied, it did warn a significant portion of those who planned to vote NDP would switch to the Liberals if a Tory victory looked likely so if the Tories stay in the lead expect the NDP vote to collapse to block a Tory government.
Malcolm - I thought things through carefully and the fact you cannot understand why anyone would go Liberal probably explains why Canadians aren't buying your argument. Canadians ideologically are close to the centre and aren't interested in seeing the radical right government we have south of the border.
- Gomery and Shawnigate - that was Chretien, he is gone. My I remind you Martin was exonerated by Gomery
- They have cut taxes recently, not increased them. They increased them back in the 90s to balanced the budget. Just look to the US where Bush gave massive tax cuts to the very rich and they now have a massive deficit, thank God we have had better management in Canada.
- I agree we need a stronger military, but to defend Canada, not to fight in American Imperialist wars as Harper and his gang want. We are not the World's laughing stock, in fact many people around the world look to Canada as a model. The American right may hate Canada, but so what, I don't like their views so I really don't give a damn what the American neo-cons think of Canada. Many liberal minded Americans are shocked at what their country has become and admire Canada's ability to stand up to the Bush administration.
- We have a smaller military because we aren't so hated by the rest of the World like the United States is because we don't go around attacking other nations for economic gain.
To all of you, I can think just fine and no I don't condone corruption, but I would rather have a government waste my money on paying off their political friends than on killing Iraqis or spending money on court fights to take away minority rights. The fact you guys are all getty nasty just shows that the Conservatives are a bunch of angry Canadians who need to stay in opposition. Our country isn't perfect, but I am very proud of our country and feel we have a great future. If you hate Canada so much, go live in the United States.
Check this out guys: http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20051229/ELXN_poll_060101/20060101?s_name=election2006&no_ads=
This explains exactly why the Liberals will win no matter what happens.
Miles Lunn: George Bush sucks, I hate neocons, the Reform Party was full of racists, the world hates Americans, YEEEEEEAAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHH
Miles Lunn, 5 seconds later: Boy those Conservatives are an angry bunch! Good thing we Liberals are rational, calm, and altogether reasonable.
Joel - I dislike Bush because of the many policies he has adopted - should I list a few for you here
- The Patriot Act which allows government to spy on people without a warrant
- Deliberately lying about the threat Iraq posed in order to justify an unneccessary war.
- Through his ambassadors, threatening to punish countries that don't toe the US line
- Turing a $300 billion surplus into a $500 billion deficit
Yeah some great president, uh huh?
I don't hate all neo-cons as persons, I just hate their political views. Some are probably very nice people who I could easily sit down and have a beer with as long as politics wasn't brought up.
The Reform Party wasn't solely a racist party, but they did attract quite a few and because their grassroots orientated (which may sound good, but doesn't work) the party couldn't stop extremist from hijacking certain riding associations. All I was pointing out is even if the Liberals a hundred years ago were racist, those people are all dead today, while the racists from the Reform Party are still around and many are active in the Conservatives.
This is not my opinion, this is a fact. Check the polls out on attitudes towards Americans globally. And if you think Americans are liked so much try traveling abroad with an American flag sown on your backpack and let me know if you don't have a black eye by the end of the day.
Certainly some Conservatives on this forum are an angry bunch. There is nothing wrong with wanting to do things differently, but arguing Canada is going to Hell and always bashing our country is certainly not the type of people who I want running the government.
There are some Liberal idiots, I would say Scott Reid is one, but on the whole I have find that people furthest from the centre tend to be the most aggressive and just start shouting at you when you disagree with them. This also applies to people on the far left as I have well experienced when being active in student politics. I find centrist voters or people close to the centre are more open minded to different views and are at least understanding if you think differently. I have generally not found this to be the case with people on the far right or far left. Now considering you supported Belinda Stronach for Conservative leader and Scott Brison for the Progressive Conservative leader, you obviously seem to like to choose moderate leaders. Hopefully the next leader of the Conservatives will share similar values and beliefs to those two.
You did it again Miles. You said neocon. I thought you were going to try and restrain such slurs. That record is definately overplayed.
So much for tilting centre right as your blog title states. Thatcher, Regan Neocans to the enth degree. Were they not your hero's at one time?
Racist you say. I happen to be a lilly white Judeo christian conservative and date a non white person who is also going to vote conservative.
I really resent the implication that I or anyone else is racist by the mere fact they are conservative supporters.
Speaking of high jacking riding associations that is exactly what happened at Herb Dhaliwals riding is it not? Not overtaken by Neanderthals, but by unscrupulous Martin loyalists.
To the anonymous supporters - I think Margaret Thatcher was the right leader for the right time since the Labour Party had swung Britain so far to the left, they needed someone on the right to turn the country around. Also she stuck solely to economic issues, not on social issues. As for Ronald Reagan he was a bit further to the right than I am, but at least on the Cold War file he used threats rather than actual military action as Bush has. His economic policies, although probably better than his Democrat opponents, weren't all that great as he still ran a massive deficit.
I am not saying anyone who votes Conservative is racist. I am simply pointing out that when it comes to minority rights, the Liberal record is far superior than the Reform/Alliance/Conservative record. I don't think Harper is a racist, but the Reform Party which dominates the Conservatives did attract many racist and generally turned a blind eye on racism even if Preston Manning, Stockwell Day, and Stephen Harper weren't racist themselves.
What happened at Herb Dhaliwal's riding association was certainly wrong. But we have seen the same things in Conservative riding associations where the religious fundamentalist empty out the churches to nominate their candidate. Examples of this are Ajax-Pickering - Rondo Thomas, Richmond - Darrel Reid, South Surrey-White Rock-Cloverdale in 2004 - Russ Hiebert, Simcoe North in 2004 - Peter Stock (at least this time around they choose a more moderate candidate), Halifax - Andrew House and there probably several more. When Randy Kamp won his nomination several of the board members argued that former PCs had no place in the new party and that all the candidates and the leader had to come from the Reform Party side, i.e. proving this was a takeover not a merger.
Yes, Miles, it has happened to both sides; however, it has happened to the Liberals more than once. Perhaps the most significant case of religious nomination voting occurred in the Liberal nomination of Missisauga-Erindale, when the Liberal backed by both Carolyn Parrish and the Liberal Party lost to a guy named Omar Alghabra. It was believed that Alghabra said he wanted to restore Islam faith in politics. While this story was covered pretty well, I can assure you, replace the word "Muslim" with "Christian" and "Liberal" with "Conservative", and it would be front page news.
As for the merger being the third reincarnation of the Reform Party,I don't buy that, I'm sorry. Many moderate PCs, such as Jim Prentice and Gerald Keddy, are still around, and many more are running in this election. And just because an MP used to be with the Reform/Alliance, it doesn't make him a right-wing extremist. There are many ex-Reform/Alliance types, such as James Moore, Monte Solberg, Chuck Strahl, Gary Lunn and some others, who have fairly moderate views, and are anything but extremist. Yes, we do have some extremist, more right-wing types in the party; however, notice how people like Cheryl Gallant, Myron Thompson and Randy White were relegated to the backbenches, whereas, the shadow cabinet was made up of former PCs and moderate Reformer/Alliance types. This just sends me the message that Harper will relegate the more extreme voices of his caucus to the backbenches.
I look forward to a future blog posting by Miles denouncing the hawkish, pro-Bush, tortrue-approving, neoconservative war monger Michael Ignatieff, Liberal candidate in Etobicoke-Lakeshore.
If you want to make domestic American issues somehow part of this campaign, Miles, you can't ignore the fact that apparently Mr. Ignatieff's views, which are far more 'extreme' than anything Stephen Harper has said on the public record, apparently do not disqualify him from running as part of Paul Martin's team.
I look forward to either a post denouncing Ignatieff in a similar fashion or a complete retraction of your vicious slander and misrepresentation of Stephen Harper and his views.
Based on your lack of response to my strongest challenges to your warped world view thus far (particularly the well grounded charges of hypocrisy), I won't be waiting with bated breath for an actual response that addresses these glaring inconsistencies in your office.
That last line should read glaring inconsistencies in your argument.
Ah silly silly Miles,
What a wonderful New Years Present for the Tories (and a nice lump of coal to the Feb Libs and Miles)
EVERY major poll shows the Libs in big big trouble.
The below polls are all very recent, and are taken around about Dec 28-Jan 1.
The Ipsos poll (which is one of the most recent of the below 4) shows the Tories up a point. SES shows a tie and Strategic Counsel and Decima show the Libs leading by only 2 points (which means the Tories win, as their vote is more efficient).
The Ontario numbers are all very good for the Tories and they show various leads, ties and a small deficit for the Tories. The best are the Ipsos which has the tories 5 points up and the SES which has a 40 point tie.
The BC numbers are positive but unclear, likley due to small sample sizes. Ipsos shows a tight 3 way race with the 1st place libs up only 6 points on the 3rd place tories, however, Strategic Counsel shows a massive tory lead in BC with 40 points to the tories compared with 31 for the libs and 25 for the NDP. The real tory number i imagine is somewhere between 40 and 28 points.
In any case these polls are a great trend and it shows slow and steady growth for the Tories who have been trailing for the entire start of the campaign.
I strongly disagree with Miles that the Lib's upcoming neg attack ads against the Tories will cause the soft NDP vote to run towards the Liberals.
Both the Tories and the NDP will be focusing their guns on the Liberals to make sure that this does not come to pass.
I think these 4 polls are just the begining of slow and steady growth for the Tories.
This is perhaps the turning point in the campaign and hopefully the beginning of the end for Paul Martin's Liberal reign.
Cheers
Rick S.
The poll info is below:
Ipsos-Reid [National]: 33(Con); 32(Libs); 18(NDP); 12(Bloc); 5(Gr)
Ipsos-Reid [BC]: 28(Con); 33(Libs); 34(NDP); 5(Gr)
Ipsos-Reid [Ont]: 38(Con); 33(Libs); 19(NDP); 5(Gr)
www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/10435
SES[National]: 35(Con); 35(Libs); 14(NDP); 13(Bloc); 4(Gr)
SES[Ont]: 40(Con); 40(Libs); 15(NDP); 5(Gr)
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/10436
Strategic Counsel[National]: 31(Con); 33(Libs); 17(NDP); 14(Bloc); 5(Gr)
Strategic Counsel[BC]: 40(Con); 31(Libs); 25(NDP); 5(Gr)
Strategic Counsel[Ont]: 32(Con); 38(Libs); 22(NDP); 6(Gr)
www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/10437
Decima[National]: 30(Con); 32(Libs); 18(NDP); 14(Bloc);
www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/10414
Rick S. - I agree with your current analysis on Ontario however according to a decima poll a quarter of NDP supporters said they would switch to the Liberals if a Tory win looked likely. For example, Ernie Eves got 35% in Ontario in 2003, yet only got 24 seats, so with the Tories at 36-40% in Ontario now, I suspect the NDP vote will fall enough to ensure the Liberals win at least 60 seats in Ontario, although I will admit that the Tories are likely to gain more than they will lose in Ontario.
In BC, I agree that the Tories probably lie somewhere between 28% and 40%, however lets remember their numbers are strongest in the Interior, while weaker in Vancouver Island and even weaker in the Lower Mainland. Even though I predicted Liberal gains in BC, if you check my earlier prediction, they were all in the Lower Mainland. Outside the Lower Mainland, the only Tory ridings I can see them losing are Vancouver Island North and British Columbia Southern Interior, both to the Dippers.
My point was based on past times when they've surged ahead, the Liberals have always re-bounded so if you believe in the idea of history repeating itself, then the Liberals will recover. More than anything while more people are comfortable with Stephen Harper, close to 60% still believe he is too extreme to even run a minority government, off course a similar number although a bit lower believe the Liberals are too corrupt to be re-elected.
Joel - Michael Ignatieff did support the war out of principle since he thought Saddam needed to be removed. I don't agree with him, but the Liberals are a big tent party that welcomes diverse views. I've always said that on pretty much any issue, you will find at least one Liberal who disagrees with the party line. The important thing here is Paul Martin opposes the War in Iraq and strongly disagrees with the Bush administration and the vast majority of Liberal candidates including all 36 here in BC, believe the war was a mistake and are strong opponents like myself of the Bush administration.
As for Stephen Harper - he was quotes back in 2003 saying in the House of Commons that Canada should never again turn its back on the United States and Britain. I have a real problem with this since as a sovereign nation we must make our decisions based on our values not theirs, as in the Americans, although this could apply to the British too, but I don't think they will be dumb enough to follow Bush into his next war.
BC Tory - you do have some good points, but I checked up the story on the Liberal candidate Omar Alghebra in Mississauga-Erindale and this was a rumour by the Coptic Christian association who lated apologized. It is true one of the riding association members said this, but not Omar Alghebra. Besides I could really care less about people like Tom Wappel, Dan McTeague, Paul Szabo, and Paul Steckle and I am glad Pat O'Brien is gone.
As for the Tories, you are right Jim Prentice and Gerald Keddy along with many other former PCs are running, however none of them are part of Harper's inner circle. Harper is only keeping them for window dressing, while they are staying behind in the hopes the next leader is more moderate. If you are an MP, you take a lot of heat for jumping parties, so I totally respect their decision to stay behind and work within the party. However, as an individual voter I can switch parties as often as I feel like. As for the Alliance ones - I agree with you on James Moore. Chuck Strahl is actually pretty right wing, but at least he has enough sense to know his socially conservative views will never sell nationally, something many others in the party don't. Monte Solberg is okay as finance minister, but I still find his views on social issues quite extreme. With Gary Lunn, I think they same could be said. I fact my mom was saying when she mentions her last name which like myself also happens to be Lunn, she gets dirty looks by many people who ask her if she is related to Gary Lunn. Off course she tells them she isn't or at least not this Gary Lunn, I do have an uncle called Garry Lunn, but he is dentist not a politician. Gary Lunn's views on the Iraq war are extreme in my view since he is not for the war out of principle, but rather said we should always follow the Americans on all foreign policy. This is unacceptable in my opinion. We need to distance ourselves from the United States, not get closer. I am not being anti-American, but we are different and I want us to remain different.
Miles, your hypocrisy shines through yet again. Apparently the Liberal Party is a "big tent" party but you seem to have no time for people with perfectly legitimate views on social issues that diverge from your own.
The intolerance of competing views that you espouse on your blog is unfortunately all too commonplace in the Liberal Party. If the Liberals were a truly a party that welcomed all views, you and your fellow party members wouldn't be viciously attacking opinions on sensitive social issues that happen to be held by not only some Conservatives but also some Liberals and some New Democrats.
Your personal attacks on people like Gary Lunn and Monte Solberg are outrageous. Who are you to say that someone holds a view "out of principle" while someone else holds a view for some other reason? How absolutely absurd. Do you have a crystal ball that can read the minds of politicians to ascertain their motives?
Joel - I don't have a problem with people holding social conservative views, but I do have a problem with people who wish to impose their moral values on others. In a free democratic and tolerant society, one can hold socially conservative views, but has no right to impose them on others. That is why we have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to stop this. The problem with the social conservatives from the Reform/Alliance side of the Conservatives who dominate the party is they would impose their moral values on others and those with socially liberal views would not have the right to exercise their views. Just because same sex couples have the right to marry or a woman has the right to have an abortion, doesn't mean one must have one. Those who oppose same-sex marriage and abortion have every right to refuse to get married to a same-sex couple or play any role in a same-sex wedding just as those who oppose abortion have every right not to get one. If the so-cons take control, same-sex couples won't be able to get married even if they want to. A woman wishing to get an abortion won't be able to do so without risk going to jail and we will be back to the days where women were dying due to getting abortions in back alleys. There is a fundamental difference here. The Liberal plan allows both social liberals and social conservatives to freely act on their views, while the social conservative plan would deny right to social liberals. You yourself supported Scott Brison for the PC leadership race and Belinda Stronach for the Tories so perhaps you should ask why those two are both uncomfortable running under Stephen Harper. I suspect your values may be more in-line with the Liberals, then again you wanted to see George W. Bush get re-elected which seems somewhat hypocritical to me when his values are the exact opposite of the people you supported for PC leadership race and Conservative leadership race.
Miles, Miles,
The trend is continuing SES 36 Cons, 33 Libs, 15 NDP, 13 BQ, 4 Gr.
In Ont the Harper is actually leading! 39 Cons, 38 Libs, 16 NDP, 7 Gr.
Check out the happy numbers at http://www.sesresearch.com/election/SES%20CPAC%20January%203%202006E.pdf
Soon you'll have to change you captions under the Martin and Harper pictures on your web page.
Looks like 19 days untill PM Harper and unemployed Martin.
Looks like I'll be collecting on our side bets!
Which are:
1. Rick bets Tories will win more seats than the Liberals. - $10
2. Rick bets Joyce will not come in second place. - $10
3. Rick bets Sheila Orr (L) does not come in second or first place in Saanich - $10
4. Rick bets Keith Martin (L) does not win in Esq - $10
5. Miles bets Robin Baird (Cons) comes in 3rd place in Victoria - $10
6. Rick bets that the Tories re-take North Van - $10
7. Rick bets that the Tories hold on to West Van - $10
8. Miles bets that the Conservatives won't win Surrey North (Cadman's riding) - $10
I'm pretty confident on all of the above except for #8.
How about a few more for fun, for our standard $10 each?
*9. Rick bets Gary Lunn wins his seat. $10
*10. Rick bets Dr. Lunney (Nanaimo-Alberni) wins his seat. $10
*11. Rick bets John Duncan (Van Island North) wins his seat. $10
*12. Rick bets tories retake Skeena. $10
*13. Rick bets Nina Grewal wins her seat. $10
*14. Rick bets Russ Heibert (S. Surry/White Rock) wins his seat. $10
*15. Rick bets James Moore wins his seat. $10
*16. Rick bets that Tony Forgasso (sp?) (Con in Van Centre) gets at least 20% of the vote. $10
*17. Rick bets that the tories at least get double the seats than the liberals get in BC. $10
*18. Rick bets that the Tories pick up at least 10 seats in Ont. $10.
*19. Rick bets that Paul Forseth (Coq/New West) comes in at least in 2nd place (i.e. not 3rd). $10
What do you think of the above possible bets and do you have any others you wish to try and make?
Cheers
Rick S
9. I still think Gary Lunn will narrowly win, but I would bet $10 that he won't get above 35%.
10. I think Nanaimo-Alberni leans Conservative although an NDP upset is possible, so no bet here.
11. Vancouver Island North - I think John Duncan will lose his seat to the Dippers, so I'll take this one.
12. Skeena-Bulkley Valley could go Tory, but considering this riding has a large First Nations community and the Liberals took most of the polls on Indian Reserves and the Queen Charlottes with a First Nations candidate while this time they have a white candidate, I think the NDP will pick up enough Liberal votes to compensate for any Tory gains. I'll take this one too.
13. All three parties have a legitimate shot at taking Fleetwood-Port Kells although I think Nina Grewal will lose because of the Grewal scandal, so while I won't bet on either the Liberals or NDP, I will take the bet Nina Grewal loses her seat.
14. Unfortunately I think Russ Hiebert will narrowly win, but I don't think it is a done deal. He is strong in the Eastern part of the riding, while the Western part of the riding which has had the most growth went Liberal last time around. I would say 60% chance of Russ Hiebert's re-election, 40% chance he loses, so no bet.
15. James Moore has enough personal popularity that him along with John Cummins will win regardless of how well the Tories do in the Lower Mainland. No bet here, but I believe Jon Kingsbury will do better than Kwangyul Peck did last time around. Also we've got a moderate Tory running against a right-leaning liberal as a side note.
16. Vancouver Centre - I live in this riding and despite the fact Tony Fogarassy is pretty moderate and is running a good campaign, almost everyone I talk to is terrified of the Tories even those normally on the right. I won't take the 20% bet, but if you are willing to go for 25%, then yes.
17. I don't think the Tories will take double the Liberal seats, but until the second debates, I don't want to bet on this one. There haven't been any large enough samples since the income trust issue come on, so we'll have to see here. Come back after the second debates and maybe I'll consider this one.
18. I think 10 new seats for the Tories in Ontario is quite possible, although not 20 seats. Miles will take a bet that the Tories will win less than 44 seats in Ontario so this means a net gain of 20 seats not 20 individual ridings they pick-up since they could lose seats too.
19. In New Westminster-Coquitlam, I won't take this bet since any of the three parties could win, any of three could come in second, and any of three could come in third. Right now, the polls show the Liberals with a slight lead here, followed by the NDP and then the Tories. However, the Tories tend to be better at getting their supporters out than Liberal supporters.
And here are a few more I propose
Tories won't win any additional seats in Atlantic Canada.
Tories will win fewer than 22 seats in British Columbia
Liberals will gain at least one seat in Manitoba (Churchill and Kildonan-St. Paul are the most likely), they currently hold three.
Tories will be shut out of Quebec again.
Each of these are for $10.
Miles
You're a moonbat.
Get a life.
Brian Lemon - Your are complete idiot. If all you guys can do is insult people who do support your opinions, then no wonder so many Canadians are rightfully terrified of you guys getting into power.
Miles,
While it may be premature, the end is in sight for the Martinite Fed Libs!
The newest Strategic Counsel numbers are more modest, but show a 32% tie between the Tories and Libs, with NDP at 17% Bq 13% Gp 6%. In Ontario it's good too with Libs: 37%, Cons: 34%, NDP: 21%, Greens: 8%.
But the knockout potential comes from Ekos (which like SES and Strategic Counsel, will start to do daily polling until Jan 23). Con 36.2% Lib 30.4% Ndp 17.9% Bq 10.4% Gp 4.7%. Ouch! Awesome for the Tories. But the regional numbers are really nifty:
Ont: Liberals 38.5%, Cons 35.3%, NDP 21.1%, Gr 4.5%; Que: BQ: 43.8, Libs 21.9%, Cons 20.2%, NDP 9.8%, Gr 3.5%; B.C.: Cons 46.5%, NDP 23.7%, Libs 23.4% (though margin of error is high 7% with sample of 200)
It is amazing that the Tories and Libs are in a statistical tie in Que! And more than 20% higher than the Libs and NDP in BC!
The trend is so bad for the Liberals that Harper has overtaken Prime Minister Paul Martin — 28 per cent to 25 per cent — as the leader respondents say is doing the best job of articulating a positive vision for Canada.
But hey it is still early going with 2.5 weeks to go. But I bet the Liberals would rather have the numbers the tories do right now! The trend is very good. If the Liberals can’t turn their numbers around next week after the debate they are in deep deep trouble and will get really desperate and go very crazy hard negative against Harper which could easily backfire in their faces ala 1993 when the PCs were really desperate and made a lot of mistakes in their ad war that killed that party.
But back to our friendly bets.
Since I don’t want to take too much of your money I will take most of the bets you suggest just to be a good sport.
Thus hear are the bets we’ve agreed to and both accepted:
1. Rick bets Tories will win more seats than the Liberals. - $10
2. Rick bets Joyce will not come in second place. - $10
3. Rick bets Sheila Orr (L) does not come in second or first place in Saanich - $10
4. Rick bets Keith Martin (L) does not win in Esq - $10
5. Miles bets Robin Baird (Cons) comes in 3rd place in Victoria - $10
6. Rick bets that the Tories re-take North Van - $10
7. Rick bets that the Tories hold on to West Van - $10
8. Miles bets that the Conservatives won't win Surrey North (Cadman's riding) - $10
9. Miles bets that Gary Lunn won’t get more than 35%- $10
10. Rick bets John Duncan (Van Island North) wins his seat. $10
11. Rick bets Tories retake Skeena. $10
12. Rick bets Nina Grewal wins her seat. $10
13. Rick bets that Tony Fogarassy (Con in Van Centre) gets at least 25% of the vote. $10
14. Miles bets that the Tories won't win any additional seats in Atlantic Canada. $10
15. Miles bets that the Tories will win fewer than 22 seats in British Columbia. $10
16. Miles bets that the Liberals will have a net gain of at least one seat in Manitoba . $10
17. Miles bets that the Tories will get 0 seats in Quebec. $10
I will propose one more bet:
*18. Rick bets that the Tories will win at least 40 seats in Ontario. $10
The tories currently hold 23 (won 24 in 2004 but Barbie flipped to the dark side). So that would be a net gain of 17 seats.
For fun (and to take on some more risky bets) how about these two:
*19. Rick bets Paul Forseth wins his seat.
*20. Rick bets Joyce Murray comes in 3rd place.
On a side note I am 50% + confident in all the above bets except for 8, 10, 11, 15, 17, 19
Let me know if you accept the additional bets or have some more of your own.
Cheers
Rick
Prediction:
1. Harper wins a minority.
2. Martin is loses leadership of LPC.
3. Miles Lunn still keeps up rant against Harper.
A Warren Kinsella you are not.
Rick - I'll take your last three. Considering how many bets we've made I think there is virtually no chance of either of us winning on every bet, so we'll see what the net results are.
Anonymous, I don't think Harper will win a minority, although the current polls would say he will, but lets remember the current polls are essentially the same as they were at this point in the last campaign. The Liberals have just began their campaign, while the Tories are close to running out of new ideas. I think the strategy of saving everything until the end is far more effective, then doing it early on.
2. Martin will resign if he loses the election, but he won't, so he will stay on the job. Although I would be surprised if he is still prime-minister by 2012 simply because of his age. It is really too bad Chretien didn't step down in 2000 since Martin could done some really good things.
3. I will stop doing my anti-Harper rants the day he steps down as leader of the CPC.
I am no Warren Kinsella, but just as Warren Kinsella is a liberal in exile, I am a conservative in exile.
My best guess is that Miles will warm up to Harper about six months or so into his first minority government.
He might get caught up in the nitty gritty of the Liberal Civil War if Martin puts himself ahead of his party and refuses to step down. And I'm all but certain that he will refuse.
But I think it won't take all that long for the paranoia about Harper to dissipate once he's in the PM's chair.
Liberals in Trouble?
Short answer: Yes
Somewhat longer answer: 2 criminal investigations
Brandon - don't count on me coming over to Tories six months into Harper's mandate. I have every reason to believe he will run a moderate government if leading a minority government knowing full well none of his extreme policies would pass. He will do this hoping enough people will become comfortable with him to give him a majority government at which point he would adopt his hidden agenda. If you want to bring me back to the Tories I have set out my conditions and I will set them out here again: Chose someone from the Progressive Conservative side of the party. If the leader in the next election comes from the Reform/Alliance side, I will stay with the Liberal plain and simple.
Are the Liberals in trouble? For the short term yes, long term NO. I would argue that the Tories will start to get cocky and lose it as they did last time around.
Quoting Miles:
Michael Ignatieff did support the war out of principle since he thought Saddam needed to be removed. I don't agree with him, but the Liberals are a big tent party that welcomes diverse views.
Miles, Miles, Miles ...just listen to yourself.
You've become the perfect Liberal.
Big tent is perfect for the Liberals but equals racist or scary for the Conservatives.
What is truly scarey is the Liberal notion that rules and standards are for Liberals to make and set for others not actually have to live by themselves!
Very sad.
Anonymous - I don't mind if a party has a few supporters of the Iraq war. I do mind if the overwhelming majority of party members support the Iraq war and their reasons for supporting it are simply because they believe Canada must blindly follow the United States no matter what it does. At least Michael Ignatieff recognizes we are a sovereign nation and we should make decisions based on what we believe is right rather than blindly following any one country.
But isn't Michael Ignatieff being touted as a succssor to Paul Martin by Liberal insiders? And don't you just love the democratic way he won the nomination?
But I forgot, it's perfectly okay when Liberals do that. Afterall, they and not we know what's best.
Could you tell us, by the way, what those Canadian troops were doing in Iraq, under American command during the war if Paul Martin and the Liberals were keeping us out? (Oh yes, we were there my friend.)
And, our Iriquois-class destroyer in the Gulf, what was it doing again? The one with the state of the art defense systems?
The Liberal record, and especially Paul Martin's, on support of questionable U.S. foreign escapades is the dictionary definition of two-faced - say one thing while doing another.
Please carry on. The more you write - the more you help the Conservatives.
Michael Ignatieff maybe a future successor, but I will worry about that when that happens. As for parachuting candidates in, I fully support this for all parties including the Conservatives. It is how you get high quality candidates to run and it ultimately helps the parties nationally. Considering that MPs generally toe the party line anyways once elected, I don't see what is wrong with parachuting ones in.
Yes we did have a few exchange soldiers in Iraq, which was a mistake in my view, but the principle is we disagreed with the decision to go to Iraq. Not being in the military myself I am not sure of how easy it is to pull out of exchanges. Besides Harper also supports the exchange troops staying there. Only Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe want them pulled out, but I cannot vote for Gilles Duceppe and I disagree with Jack Layton strongly on his economic policies.
Post a Comment
<< Home