Canadian Election Tread (part deux)

[notyoueither]

Reality check.

On May 14, the Conservatives were at 24% nationally. In Ontario the Liberals had 49% to the Conservatives 26%. Seat prediction? Liberal majority with 171 to 175 seats and Conservatives whipped with 56 to 60 seats.

By June 14 the terrain has changed dramatically. Dropping like a rock, the Liberals are facing the possibility of less than 100 seats (reported by Craig Oliver of CTV based on Liberal 'sources'). The words majority and Conservative are being used in the same sentences in more than one report on the mood of the electorate.

A June 10 poll put the Liberals at 32% nationally and dropping to the Conservatives 31%. Due to regional bias, the seat projections are 114 to 118 Conservative to 104 to 108 Liberal.

Meanwhile, between May 14 and June 10, the NDP have gone from 15% with 17 to 21 seats to 16% with 21 to 25 seats.

Massive NDP gains? 1% in support? 4 seats? Compared to 7% and 58 seats for the Conservatives.

Give Harper more of this 'doing badly' and he may just bury Martin deeper than Campbell!

[notyoueither]

The Real Question

Seat predictions according to Ipsos-Reid as of June 10 (with rounding and acknowledgement to KH).
Conservatives: 115
Liberals: 105
Bloc: 55
NDP: 31
Green/Other: 2

Give the NDP all the hard to predict scraps so that their total will go down by about 10 seats from there to be spread among the Conservatives, Liberals and Bloc.

Now, the real issue. Govern that country, please. I'd love for someone to tell me how it could be done when a budget would require 155 votes.

[Tingkai]

This shows the problem with reporting national poll results.

The national polls show the Libs and the Conservatives neck and neck at about 32%. But in Ontario, the Liberals still are polling at 40% compared to the Conservatives at 35%.

In BC, the Conservatives have about a 5 per cent lead, but that could be enough to take most of the seats in BC.

Outside of Alta and Quebec, NDP support ranges from 20% to 30%.


The Liberals have lost a lot of ground in Quebec, but in the rest of the country, they're not down that much compared to 2000.

The national numbers don't reflect what's really happening in the country.

[joncha]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Seat predictions according to Ipsos-Reid as of June 10 (with rounding and acknowledgement to KH).
Conservatives: 115
Liberals: 105
Bloc: 55
NDP: 31
Green/Other: 2

Give the NDP all the hard to predict scraps so that their total will go down by about 10 seats from there to be spread among the Conservatives, Liberals and Bloc.

Now, the real issue. Govern that country, please. I'd love for someone to tell me how it could be done when a budget would require 155 votes.

That looks like a very possible outcome...

As for governing, there's a few possibilities:

1. the much-ballyhooed Conservative-Bloc Coalition
2. "Grand Coalition" of the Liberals and Conservatives, to shut the Bloc out
3. Conservative minority relying on issue-by-issue outside support
4. Liberal (or Liberal-NDP) relying on the same
5. Harper calls a snap election to get a full mandate

I'm leaning more and more towards #5.

[notyoueither]

Second Question

The only mathematically workable coalition that could possibly come about would be a Conservative-NDP one, if enough more votes shift and the Liberals slip below 95 or so.

Is it that unthinkable?

Would the politicians put aside the rhetoric for long enough to obey the will of the people of Canada and attempt to govern the country without bothering us for another vote for at least a couple of years?

The way I see it, the NDP are in a tight spot (so are the Bloc). They will have to support any government that offers reasonable policies and budgets, or they will have to risk devastation in the normal rebound election from minority when Canadians make it clear that Ottawa should **** off and stop bothering them with the dramatics by returning a majority after a defeated minority.

It would not be easy for the Conservatives either. Policies would obviously have to be compromised, no matter who they sought out as partner for budget votes and confidence motions. Could the NDP be worse than the Bloc? Even Layton wants balanced bugets.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by joncha


That looks like a very possible outcome...

As for governing, there's a few possibilities:

1. the much-ballyhooed Conservative-Bloc Coalition
2. "Grand Coalition" of the Liberals and Conservatives, to shut the Bloc out
3. Conservative minority relying on issue-by-issue outside support
4. Liberal (or Liberal-NDP) relying on the same
5. Harper calls a snap election to get a full mandate

I'm leaning more and more towards #5.

#5 is suicide for him if he is perceived to be the one bringing it on.

It is the poison pill of Parliament. You're stuck in a room with others you loathe, and you have the power to dissolve the situation and ask for a remaking. Odds are your seats get remade into a majority for the guys seen as innocent.

[Tingkai]

Re: Second Question

Originally posted by notyoueither
It would not be easy for the Conservatives either. Policies would obviously have to be compromised, no matter who they sought out as partner for budget votes and confidence motions. Could the NDP be worse than the Bloc? Even Layton wants balanced bugets.

But the Conservatives do not believe in balanced budgets.

Besides, the Conseravatives and NDP are too far apart on medicare, gay marriages, abortion, military spending multiculturalism, and so on.

[joncha]

Originally posted by notyoueither


#5 is suicide for him if he is perceived to be the one bringing it on.

It is the poison pill of Parliament. You're stuck in a room with others you loathe, and you have the power to dissolve the situation and ask for a remaking. Odds are your seats get remade into a majority for the guys seen as innocent.

Not necessarily. It's how the Socreds got in power in BC, and they stayed in for, what, 30 years?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Tingkai
This shows the problem with reporting national poll results.

The national polls show the Libs and the Conservatives neck and neck at about 32%. But in Ontario, the Liberals still are polling at 40% compared to the Conservatives at 35%.

In BC, the Conservatives have about a 5 per cent lead, but that could be enough to take most of the seats in BC.

Outside of Alta and Quebec, NDP support ranges from 20% to 30%.


The Liberals have lost a lot of ground in Quebec, but in the rest of the country, they're not down that much compared to 2000.

The national numbers don't reflect what's really happening in the country.

20 to 30% doesn't get you seats when the highest bad guy gets at least 32% of the vote in each riding.

Oh, and Liberals are down in Ontario, while the Conservatives will not be split this time. Combine that with the prospect of Quebec saying they don't need no steenkin' ministers, and the Liberals are done for.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by joncha


Not necessarily. It's how the Socreds got in power in BC, and they stayed in for, what, 30 years?

I'm talking about federal, Jon. I could whip out some good 'ol Alberta references, but they wouldn't be too helpful.

[notyoueither]

Re: Re: Second Question

Originally posted by Tingkai


But the Conservatives do not believe in balanced budgets.

Besides, the Conseravatives and NDP are too far apart on medicare, gay marriages, abortion, military spending multiculturalism, and so on.

So you scare.

The Conservatives as a party have zero plans to bring up abortion. Maybe some Conservative MPs would vote for the next bill proposed by a Liberal back bencher though.

Gay marriage is a large divide, but I'm not sure the NDP want to court disaster on it. Harper says free vote for Conservatives. There will be some who vote to accept the SCoC position. Meanwhile the NDP would be free to use the jack boots on their own MPs and whip them into line to join the Bolc and Liberal whipped puppies to defeat any motion that is offensive. Honestly, this issue has to be one of the most dishonest that Harper's opponents could throw at him. Unless, of course, the NDP and Liberals are afraid of how their own MPs might vote.

Spending is the political excersize that makes the whole thing important. The NDP wants 3 billion for health care? Fine, give $1 billion to the forces. Many members of both parties would willingly agree to all of it. 155 vote 'yeah' and it sails through. The danger is in any side getting greedy. Force the vote to fail, and risk the wrath of the voters who do not really want these campaigns every 12 or 24 months. Fail to try to find a middle ground and get wiped out.

[cinch]

I really think the Cons could come to terms with the NDP on most issues, the big exception being Health Care.

Abortion would not be challenged and gay marriage would likely be allowed to pass (maybe). Military spending would be supported by both. Multiculturalism: also a non-issue.

But health care... The rub reveals itself.

[Tingkai]

Re: Re: Re: Second Question

Harper wants to have his cake and eat it. He wants to ban abortion, but he'll get some no-name backbencher to lead the charge while he sits back and says "Wasn't me" He'll do the same thing with gay marriage: hide in the backroom while others lead the attack. Harper obviously doesn't have the courage to stand by his convictions.

On medicare, the NDP want to improve it and make sure everyone gets equal and proper treatment. The Conservatives want to create a special system for people with money to spare.

On the military, there's no way the NDP will support Harper's crazy plans to buy himself some big toys.

On multiculturalism, the NDP believe that this is a fundamental strength of our country and a fact that cannot be ignored. The Conservatives will cut funding to programmes that do fit their image of Canada, which means funding for bagpipe bands and European opera, but not for Carribana and dragon boat racing.

[notyoueither]

You're as full of lies as Martin is, Tingkai. Can you too attribute the statements of backbenchers to Harper? Come on, you know you want to... Come on, 'Harper says...'.

Harper said 'free votes'. Now tell me, how does he get Mckay and the others to vote for a bill that is being voted on without party discipline?

On medicare, everyone wants to improve it. Duh! We all, and our children, have to use it.

On the military, you yourself admit they need more money. Give up the helicopter carrier crap. An opposition leader is not being advised by DND. Policies will change when civil servants meet the rhetoric, and especially in a minority situation.

Multiculturalism isn't even an issue, except maybe in your mind. What about their proposal to speed up credentials for immigrant professionals, hmmmm? What about multiculturalism is really important, and do you have any facts to back up the latest attempted scare?

[Tingkai]

Everytime Harper is faced with a difficult issue, he does the "free vote" routine. That's not leadership.

We need a leader like Jack Layton who acknowledges the world has changed, not someone who is still fighting the Cold War.

We need a fiscally responsible leader like Layton, not someone who claims he can cut taxes, increase spending and still balance the budget.

We need a leader with the courage to look past petty politics, someone like Layton who went into Tory country and said, yes, the conservative in Calgary have shown what can be done with wind turbines. Layton is giving credit where credit is due and saying this is a good idea for all of Canada.

Canada has been damaged for far too long by the old Conservative-Liberal political battles. It's time for a change. We need someone with positive ideas who will lead the country forward instead of politicians bent on repeating the mistakes of the past.