theWatcher

Some Poll numbers from: Liberals Strengthen Voter Support as Paul Martin Takes up the Reins Paul Martin's early honeymoon with Canadians is clearly benefiting his party. The Federal Liberals have increased their electoral support since October, and is now the choice of more than half (51%) of decided voters if an election were held today (up from 46% in October). This represents the strongest level of support enjoyed by the governing party since 1994. The newly-merged Conservative Party of Canada is now clearly in second place with 24 percent of decided voters, but it has not managed to retain all of the supporters from the two old parties from which it has formed, much less attract new voters from the Liberals. In October, 27 percent of decided voters indicated they would vote for either the Canadian Alliance (14%) or the Progressive Conservative (13%) parties. 24% Ontario, 17% Toronto The New Democratic Party occupies third place with 15 percent support, unchanged from October, and essentially the same since 2002. One in ten (11%) eligible voters remain undecided on which party they might support were an election held today. In both Ontario and Toronto the NDP is at 14%, they are at 31% in Manitoba and 20% in Sask and 23% in BC. The wording suggests this is a Liberal backed poll...

Ezra was the person nominated for the Calgary seat that wouldn't step down after Harper was nominated leader of the CA. He's very bright, its a shame he is not running in another seat.

Some points to ponder... Will NDP supporters think they stand a chance this election and ACTUALLY VOTE NDP instead of strategically voting Liberal? Will Ed Broadbent totally outclass and out politic Layton? What does an NDP vote get you that a Liberal vote wouldn't? If Canadians are really really really peaved at the Liberals, who are they going to vote for to get rid of them?

Lets see if Martin will do the right thing and eliminate the EI overpayments which was used to give him all of those nice surpluses.

Neal F. Does your crystal ball really show 2 liberals in Alberta? Sigh. Kilgour is my MP and all my friends laugh at me for having a Liberal representing me. I was hoping the merger might expunge both of them. Anything else after that is just gravy for me.

Mr. Klein has been miffed ever since his buddy Harris decided not to run. He is certainly entitled to his opinion. But one person's opinion does not a leader make. This is the same man who staggers into homeless shelters dead drunk and yells at the folks to go get a job while throwing coins at them. So I would not be too troubled by a lack of endorsement from him.

Lets see now.... Other than writing most of the original policies and procedures for the reform party. And being acknowledged as the original author of the Clarity act which Chretien "borrowed" and is credited as one of the main reasons that the threat of separation is gone. And initiating the fight to repeal the Liberals election gag laws and getting sued and having the law repealed 4 times? Thereby allowing Canadians to speak their minds during elections. And re-uniting a fragmented party that was going down for the final count and about to tear itself apart. And co-authoring a reunification of two political parties that have split the vote for the last 10 years allowing the Liberals to come up the middle and take everything. Something that none of the previous leaders have ever been able to accomplish. Not bad for an "ordinary hack".

You probably shouldn't be comparing people to Hitler until they have gassed a few million people and invaded half a dozen countries. Picking a random trait that hitler had in common is not the best way to present a point. Harper left because he had issues with the leader (Manning). What you call a "hissy fit" others would call doing the honourable thing and resigning, because he had too many conflicts with Manning. One could also say it was sour grapes on Mannings part. This is the same Manning who waffled on moving into Stornoway? Who alienated the entire province of Quebec right? The same Manning who destroyed the Reform party to create a new party named C.C.R.A.P.? And created this new party for what purpose? He knew the PC's weren't going to join. All it did was get him bounced from the job because everyone was angry that he folded the party for nothing and sacrificed many of the parties principles in order to try to become the ruling party.

Statistics are so easy to manipulate or interpret so its hard to be accurate I think. Is crime really going down, or are people just reporting it less, or are judges just convicting less? I have been a college instructor for the past 20 years and I certainly don't "feel" safer now than i did 20 years ago. Three times in the past year I was certain that I was going to be assaulted and it was only through luck that it didn't happen. I also had a student who would bring in a 10 inch knife and lay it down on his desk. Any time anything was said that the student didn't like he would pick it up and start playing with it. We couldn't ban him from class because some beaurocrat came up with the ruling that knives were dangerous only if they were bigger than 12 inches, so it was perfectly fine for him to bring in a 10 inch knife and wield it in class. This same student later assaulted the President of the school with the same knife and the police had to be called in. A year later he applied to my program, the Program Head rejected him, so he sued the institute and won because apparently the police had lost their records somehow, or there was no record of a conviction. So he came back and yes, he brought the knife into school everyday he attended. I did not feel "safe" teaching him, thats for sure. Vandals regularily destroy and or steal from dozens to hundreds of cars at a time. This past year 2 kids cut the tires and broke the windows on about 200 cars in my neighbourhood. One of their fathers had to turn them in. Now is that going to be reported as 1 crime or 200? Two houses near me have been pumped full of bullets and in other locations 3 people were killed in the past 2 years in suspected gang/drug violence, all within about 3 blocks from my house. About a year ago someone carried a lawn gnome onto an overhead walkway on the freeway near my parents house and cut a hole in the fencing and dropped it onto a passing school bus killing the driver. A customized automotive stereo shop near my house had been broken into 3 times in the past year so the owner started sleeping in his shop at night because his insurance rates had risen so high. 3 vandals drove a vehicle right into his shop crashing through the front door and literally destroying his business. He shot and hit one or more of them and was was ultimately charged, but none of the 3 vandals were charged due to lack of evidence. I don't have any proof but my feeling is that violent crimes are up, while many of the lesser crimes aren't even being bothered to be reported any longer.

I would say that MArtin is indeed left wing. Just ask him if he supports decriminalizing pot, or approves of Same Sex Marriage. If anything he is a right leaning Liberal, but still very much a liberal.

Pellaken most NDPers are already saying they will switch their vote to the Liberals to combat the blue horde if a merger happens, and the better the Conservatives are doing the more NDPers will switch their vote. So the better the Conservatives do, the smaller the NDP will get....

I guess there won't be an NDP party after the next election if the merger goes through then.... That's a wonderful way to support your party, keep up the great job. If enough of your brethren feel that way your party is going to dissapear.

We Canadians are such a fickle lot. Face it, there is no "perfect" candidate. Is Harper to be skewered forever for making one statement that even some Maritimers admit is half true? He says ONE THING and is "tainted" forever? We demand our leaders to be so totally bland that they offend no none. Then when we get a bland non offensive one, we complain that he is not "The One". What a load of rubbish. A few points convinced me about Harper. He has never lied to me, or to Canadians. He says something, and then goes ahead and does it. He doesn't make excuses or push it off on someone else, he just does it. He doesn't "study" everything to death with "comittees" and "panels". He doesn't make deals that go against his principles and turn around and laugh at the other party for being stupid, and trick people with weasel words. He is willing to admit when he makes mistakes and is willing to own up to it, something that most politicans are unable to do. Everyone has been known to make a mistake right? He singlehandedly unified the Alliance during a very stressful time. Most everyone had given up on them, and he put a team together that could take a good run at the Liberals even without a merger. He eliminated the DORC's and quit the infighting and put everyone in the party on a positive note and prepared them to fight the next election, and handicapped the 5th party leader to such a point that he stepped down. My litmus test for determining if someone is going to be an effective leader is pretty simple, On a range of issues if the prospective leader says they will do something, will you believe them? Harper chased Mackay around the country he was so determined he would make a deal. Peter was looking around every corner, and double checking the washrooms before using them to make sure Harper wasn't there. Mackay? Trust factor? Believability? Um, sorry. Prentice? Who the heck is this guy? What has he ever done? I didn't follow the PC leadership at all so I have no idea about this guy whatsoever. No offence to him, but I have nothing to say about him, positive or negative. I couldn't pick him out off a crowd if my life depended on it, and have never even heard him speak on the news or radio. I don't know what he believes in, or his qualifications. But I can guarantee you one thing. He wouldn't be able to even find the MP's washroom in parliament hill. I don't want a green rookie leading my party. Martin would take him apart so easily. The leader has to have some sort of experience on the job. You don't hire someone off the street to run your company because he is a nice guy. If Prentice really wants to eventually become a leader he should run as an MP first and get some experience, and let people evaluate his skills. Day is a perfect example of someone that had experience at the Provincial level, and being an extreme rookie Federally. Yes, I believe that there should be valid competition to make the leadership run more validating but there are precious few at the calibre required. Don Mazankowski would be the closest to Harper, but he's probably enjoying his retirement and is 69 I think? I trust Harper. I know that his Maritime comments were meant to say that he was not in favour of regional subsides and that all regions should be treated the same. And if problems exist for employment those problems exist in more than one area of the country and should be dealt with appropriately. I want to see youth employment programs of one nature or another for ALL Candian youths, not just maritime or Quebec or Ontario, etc... His "firewall" comments were made as an Albertan citizen that who are getting worked over by Ottawa and his comments are equally valid for each and every province in Canada. I don't like seeing Nova Scotia or Newfoundland getting screwed by Ottawa either. The provinces need to somehow protect themselves by all the plundering that the feds are currently doing. So I wish you luck in finding a candidate that is better prepared, more experienced, more exciting, and who can be "The One" for you. My votes on Harper.

Would you vote for a PM who only spoke French?

So you are going to reward them by voting for them again? How in the world could ANY of the other parties be any worse? No wonder those idiots stay in power.

The index this is measured on comprises of many different categories some of which might have been influenced by 9/11. But many of the categories have not. Bribery, corruption, graft are all measured in different areas to make this rating. Canada could never hit #1 next year on this test. Not as long as the Liberals are in power. In fact we've probably been lowered with all the recent revelations about the hunting lodge that all of the Liberals love to stay at for free.

Polls right now are not going to be too helpful because of all the uncertainty and change going on. Many people still believe for instance, that the merger will still fall through, numbers after December 12 will be more realistic. I saw an interesting poll that showed that the Conservative party would get more liberal votes then they would end up losing (from red tories going to the liberals) So its a net gain in votes after a merger. But a merger will accomplish one thing that the pollsters don't seem to be too focused on at the moment. And that is to create a single unified alternative that is viable in all areas of the country. Even with a spread as large as 10 points Canadians will realize that yes there is a chance to punt the bozo's out of office and a 10 point swing is trivial to make up during an election campaign. In fact if I was a Liberal I would be worried about how small of a lead that they actually have. Once Martin has to actually open his mouth and say something I don't see his fortunes rising, he has promised everything to everybody and will have to start delivering on those promises some time soon. And the fact that the red tory faction have gone so rabid over fighting the merger gives me a warm fuzzy feeling in my heart and a renewed hope that we can accomplish great things with the new party. And if the merger falls through the PC's are toast. The "no" faction will be out for Mackay's head and/or leaving to join the Liberals. The "yes" faction will probably make the merger happen anyways by joining the Alliance. I don't see any possible way for them to recover from a no vote. I wonder if those who are so vehemently against this have considered that fact or has all thought and reasoning left them as they stubbornly drag everything down. Do they hate the Alliance so much that they would kill their own party rather than merge. It's sad really.

Paul Martin has yet to open his mouth. It's incredible that someone can become the Prime Minister of our country without having said one word of any substance. So much has been promised that no one could possibly deliver, and Chretien has poisoned him big time. That along with all the wastage, and his private interests, but the one that personally bother me the most... Setting up private corporations? ran by the liberals with Canadian tax dollars and not having to be accountable with the money. This one reeks so badly that it invalidates anything he says he will do. And he was the man who set them up.

Thats not what the Americans think ...

How about this theory. What if Mackay's principles are to just gain power and keep power? It would explain the Orchard deal. Say whatever it takes to become leader. Attempting to make a merger with CA appeases the right hand side of his party, and not actually merging appeases the left hand side of his party. Then he puts enough conditions on the merger deal so that if it actually goes ahead he's got a pretty good shot at winning it. No merger, he's the leader. Merger on his terms and he still has a pretty good shot at being the leader. Any terms less than the ones that will give him a shot at being the new leader and he simply says no. Mackay's statement that he can show that he is bargaining in good faith by having agreed to drop the name "progressive" from the party is the dumbest thing i have heard in politics in quite a while.

Pellaken I think some of your numbers could use a little editting, or maybe its just me. The BC and Quebec numbers look off, doesn't it show NDP vote rising to 40% in BC on a combined vote? And A Conservative vote dropping to 7% in Quebec? Maybe I am just slow today...

The biggest problem with the delegate selection process is that there are many many ridings with 0 members from either parties. And this riding becomes equivelent to a riding that has say 5,000 members. So you can cancel out opponents populated ridings by finding a solitary breathing body to vote for you. Theoretically you could get 75 people in Quebec to represent 75 ridings, and 300,000 in Alberta representing 34? Harpers counter proposal was to apply some sort of weighting so that you had to have at least 100 members in a riding or you would be penalized by some percentage. I don't think CA members would approve of a totally delegated selection, remember that the leaders making the proposal have to get each party to ratify the deal.

I don't know if the Liberals are Pompous or that they truly believe they are the natural ruling party.

My opinion all along is that Mr Harper is trying to make a deal and Mr. Mackay is having meetings to see if they should have a meeting to make a plan to make a deal. Now who is really trying to make a deal, and who is just trying to save face?