The Conservative/Harper problem.

[Visionseeker]

Even the most rabid of the PM’s supporters must recognize that he isn’t making much by way of inroads beyond his electoral support at the last election.

No matter how much their main opposition seems to falter, no matter how many polls suggest that Canadians would be somewhat comfortable with a Conservative majority, poll after poll (excluding the conservative shrill: Ipsos) fail to place the Conservatives higher than the mid-thirties in support.

Why is that? What is it about either Stephen Harper or the Conservative brand that holds them back? For that matter, what is the demographic profile of Conservative support and how can they broaden it?

Harper and the Conservatives score low with women and lower still with youth. They struggle in urban and suburban environments yet seem to score well in national polls. How?

The Conservative vote is what one would characterize as an inefficient vote if not for our electoral map disproportionately favouring rural voters. Their support base is largely constituted with white males over 50 and rural demographics closely associated with family farms, religious affinity and generally monochromatic communities.

What do the Conservatives need to do to get over the top? How can they broaden their tent? Who must they appeal to?

Edited October 23, 2007 by Visionseeker

[Michael Bluth]

Even the most rabid of the PM’s supporters must recognize that he isn’t making much by way of inroads beyond his electoral support at the last election.

No matter how much their main opposition seems to falter, no matter how many polls suggest that Canadians would be somewhat comfortable with a Conservative majority, poll after poll (excluding the conservative shrill: Ipsos) fail to place the Conservatives higher than the mid-thirties in support.

I'll avoid the Ipsos thing while making other points. Still the premise of the rest of your argument is pretty weak.

1. The term is 'shill' not shrill.

2. Placing too much interest in historical numbers. Mid-30s with the second place party more than ten points behind and a potentially viable fourth opposition party would lead to a Conservative majority next election.

3. The Conservatives have been consistently holding their base.

Back to Ipsos. They were 1.7% high on the CPC vote last election. Not sure how that is shilling for the Conservatives. But it is well within industry norms for polling.

Even the most rabid of CPC haters must recognize that the Conservatives are in a far stronger position now than they were at any point during the last election.

[Visionseeker]

I'll avoid the Ipsos thing while making other points. Still the premise of the rest of your argument is pretty weak.

1. The term is 'shill' not shrill.

2. Placing too much interest in historical numbers. Mid-30s with the second place party more than ten points behind and a potentially viable fourth opposition party would lead to a Conservative majority next election.

3. The Conservatives have been consistently holding their base.

Back to Ipsos. They were 1.7% high on the CPC vote last election. Not sure how that is shilling for the Conservatives. But it is well within industry norms for polling.

Even the most rabid of CPC haters must recognize that the Conservatives are in a far stronger position now than they were at any point during the last election.

Ipsos predicted a Conservative majority on the eve of the last contest. Also, their numbers since have consistently placed the Conservatives well above what various other polling agencies produced. In fact, laughably so. I don't place my faith in any polling firm, but I ignore Ipsos for their consistently poor record.

As for shrill/shill, I blame speel-check .

The Conservatives are most certainly holding their base. The point of my post was to ask what they need to do to go beyond it.

[Michael Bluth]

Ipsos predicted a Conservative majority on the eve of the last contest.

No they didn't. Link

They predicted a much stronger Conservative minority than they ended up with. But they still predicted a minority.

Seat Projection Model: Conservatives 143-147, Liberals 59-63, NDP 39-43, And Bloc Quebecois 59-63

Pesky thing those facts.

[margrace]

No they didn't. Link

They predicted a much stronger Conservative minority than they ended up with. But they still predicted a minority.

Pesky thing those facts.

So what are your general thoughts on the Conservatives or do you just one to take one little imaterial item and start an argument

[Michael Bluth]

So what are your general thoughts on the Conservatives or do you just one to take one little imaterial item and start an argument

I posted my thoughts.

You sure you aren't the one trying to start an argument? Which you could have done before your last post. If so please feel free to comment on the substance of my thoughts.

Here they are again.

The original poster placed too much interest in historical numbers. Mid-30s with the second place party more than ten points behind and a potentially viable fourth opposition party would lead to a Conservative majority next election. Do you disagree?

The Conservatives have been consistently holding their base. Even the most rabid of CPC haters must recognize that the Conservatives are in a far stronger position now than they were at any point during the last election

[old_bold&cold]

First off the CPC are in the 40's not 36's. Also the fact that Harper now enjoys 60% of the people would be comfortable with a CPC majority, is a really a positive for Harper. The fact that Harper did engineer part of the problems the Liberals are melting down with, is just icing on the cake. The crys that Harper is not governing like he has a minority, from the Liberals, are just stupid. He could never pass anything with out majority support, and he has past pretty much everything he tried. And due to senate blocking, he is passing it again. Amazing how he can do that while being a minority goverment. He is governing like he hasa majority, only if he has that, and by the way things get past, I guess he was right now wasn't he?

Harper is very good at looking at an objective and then setting up the methods and levers to attain that objective, which is why this minority government has worked. The people do not care that the Liberal are melting down, and for many they see it as just desserts. That will show up soon with even higher polling numbers for Harper, and a steep decline in Liberal numbers, as righfully so. As Dion is incoherrent to the vast majority of Canadians, and has little to no leadership qualities. His backing off calling an election this fall, means he has credibilty on any issue, not even his beloved Kyoto, that he never did anything to achieve all the time he was environment minster. Face it Harper has 3 opponents and the Bloc his main opponent is try hard to find a crack to work up the french voters again, but they are pretty happy with the present government, and will be supportting them enmass if an election were called. Then there is Jack Layton who has taken his party so far left, that only the staunchest lefty's will vote for him. Then there is May, who really is much like Dion but better optics. She would be happy to see one seat, and if two came she would probably faint. And yes last palce and still going down is Dion. The great Liberal hope for the party. He can not do much of anything because of all the knives that are sticking out his back. Asc for any platform he may have, it will be way too little and way too late. He is toast and is well done, to almost black. Time to see if throwing it out is not the best way to go.

Harpers problem? I do not see any for now, as it all seems to be laid out for what is coming in the months ahead.

[Topaz]

You forget one thing, voters have eyes and ears and they don't forget how this government started off with refusing to lower the flag for the fallen soldiers, the interst income lie, the lie on paper to NFLD, to Saskatchewan, the probablity of paying off a guy so someone else could run in his place, of course the PM can't be sued because he's the PM. Just the way that Harper handles his group and they way they act in question period, this isn't the way the Canadian gov't should act. Harper has always refuse to support anything that would harm the oil industry in Alberta, even if it hurts the people breathing the air. How many cancers are we going to see in people in about 10 years time?? Where would Harper be if the The Bloc never existed?? As far as I'm concerned, Harper does what good for Harper first, then he'll think about the rest of us.

[M.Dancer]

Where would Harper be if the The Bloc never existed??

In an Majority

[godzilla]

Even the most rabid of the PM�s supporters must recognize that he isn�t making much by way of inroads beyond his electoral support at the last election.

No matter how much their main opposition seems to falter, no matter how many polls suggest that Canadians would be somewhat comfortable with a Conservative majority, poll after poll (excluding the conservative shrill: Ipsos) fail to place the Conservatives higher than the mid-thirties in support.

Why is that? What is it about either Stephen Harper or the Conservative brand that holds them back? For that matter, what is the demographic profile of Conservative support and how can they broaden it?

Harper and the Conservatives score low with women and lower still with youth. They struggle in urban and suburban environments yet seem to score well in national polls. How?

The Conservative vote is what one would characterize as an inefficient vote if not for our electoral map disproportionately favouring rural voters. Their support base is largely constituted with white males over 50 and rural demographics closely associated with family farms, religious affinity and generally monochromatic communities.

What do the Conservatives need to do to get over the top? How can they broaden their tent? Who must they appeal to?

great post!

you've negelected to mention that the conservative party is also supported by corporate canadians. i'd like to see a similar one that discusses how the conservative party is so good at raising money compared to other parties and exactly _where_ that money comes from.

[Wilber]

You forget one thing, voters have eyes and ears and they don't forget how this government started off with refusing to lower the flag for the fallen soldiers, the interst income lie, the lie on paper to NFLD, to Saskatchewan, the probablity of paying off a guy so someone else could run in his place, of course the PM can't be sued because he's the PM. Just the way that Harper handles his group and they way they act in question period, this isn't the way the Canadian gov't should act. Harper has always refuse to support anything that would harm the oil industry in Alberta, even if it hurts the people breathing the air. How many cancers are we going to see in people in about 10 years time?? Where would Harper be if the The Bloc never existed?? As far as I'm concerned, Harper does what good for Harper first, then he'll think about the rest of us.

Yes they will.

Harper has done and is doing more to return our military to respectability than any PM in living memory.

He should be criticized over his election promise on income trusts but there are few who would argue that getting rid of them wasn't necessary.

Most Canadians outside the Maritimes believe provinces should not get special deals when it comes to equalization so I doubt that will hurt him anywhere else. On the contrary, it may help him in the rest of Canada.

Perhaps people should think about what their lives would be like if there was no nasty oil before they insist on shooting their mouths off.

The Conservatives have 11 seats in Quebec and the Liberals 12. If you divide up the Bloc's seats between them using the same ratio, the Conservatives would have 149 seats and the Liberals 121. The Conservatives would be 6 seats short of a majority. It would still be up to the Liberals to force an election, they just wouldn't have the luxury of voting against the government whenever the Bloc supports it. In other words, exactly where they are now with the Bloc voting against the throne speach.

[noahbody]

Harper has always refuse to support anything that would harm the oil industry in Alberta, even if it hurts the people breathing the air.

Give some specifics please.

I think it's correct to say he refuses to support anything that will recklessly harm the oil industry, but that's only wise.

[Michael Bluth]

you've negelected to mention that the conservative party is also supported by corporate canadians. i'd like to see a similar one that discusses how the conservative party is so good at raising money compared to other parties and exactly _where_ that money comes from.

The Conservatives are so good at raising money from individuals because Conservative supporters give money to the party. Simplistic? Yes, but that's the way it is. Direct mail efforts, emails, phone calls. Conservative supporters respond to that.

The Liberals used to be really good at raising money from corporations. When the new stricter limits on corporate donations were put into place it really hurt the Liberals. I think Chretien did it to stick it to Paul Martin. Too bad the Liberals still haven't figured it out.

Not quite sure what a 'corporate Canadian' is. Perhaps you could propose a law that gives different levels of citizenship based on whether or not you consider a person 'corporate'.

[old_bold&cold]

You forget one thing, voters have eyes and ears and they don't forget how this government started off with refusing to lower the flag for the fallen soldiers, the interst income lie, the lie on paper to NFLD, to Saskatchewan, the probablity of paying off a guy so someone else could run in his place, of course the PM can't be sued because he's the PM.

First off you do not lower the flag for deaths in a war zone, as it would never be seen at full mast.As for the Income trust goes, it was seen easily by any and all people who followed it, that it was going to have to be taxed, as Canada's largest corporations and many smaller ones were going to tax shelter themselves at the cost to the tax payers. So Harper did this for the common folk, who out number all the rest when push comes to shove. He did the fiscally responsible thing for the time he was in. The voters will remember this I hope. Harpers supposed lie to Newfoundland is not a lie, it was a choice and they could either have the old formula or the new formual. It was the greed of the provinces that wanted the best of both without the rest. Harper did as what the common voters would have asked for, and stood his ground with the provinces. There comes a time to draw the line, and the voters yes will remember that. So much so they relected NFL PC's to a vast majority. Federally they could not do much worse then last time so only can go up now can it. The paying off a guy so someone could run in his place? I think you are mixed up there. Unless you are talking about the mayor of Ottawa, and no payoff and nothing was ever done or promised by the government or its ministers.

Just the way that Harper handles his group and they way they act in question period, this isn't the way the Canadian gov't should act. Harper has always refuse to support anything that would harm the oil industry in Alberta, even if it hurts the people breathing the air. How many cancers are we going to see in people in about 10 years time??

I think the Harper government handle themselves with more dignity then the other parties in the HOC. It is the rabid screaming of the Liberals who is more in keeping with a bullying attitude, They still can not adjust to not having power. As for Harper hurting the oil Industry goes, why do you want to hurt them? They are very good tax paying corporations and employ a vast section of out population. Without them we would be a much poorer nation. You also have directed this with the province in Alberta, and since the oil industry is mostly in the north, whose air is it that we are doing so much harm to there. Yes, the oil industry has played a big part in global emmissions, but they are also the first ones to have spent money on cleaner systems and cleaner air voluntarily. You seen bent on it having to be forced until it hurts them. May I suggest some councilling in this area. How many cancers are we going to see 10 years from now? Well that is a hard one as we will successfully treat many cancers and we will probaly see a rise in others, but it can be due to many things not just air pollution. Hell dishsoap caused many birth deffects and cacers then air pollution did, and we banned phosphates in detergents after that, and stil more defects came from other chemicals etc. I will say that yes there are cancers and deaths from air pollutions. But we had these for many years before this and the cancers are just showing greater numbers now. So is it that we are weaker then the people of the mid fiffties and sixties, or are we breathing more polluted air. We have banned leaded gas and cleaned up most coal burning facilities and we even have made the water in our lakes better then it was during the fifties and sixties. So why are we not seeing the numbers drop? Could it be that these areas thay we are cleaning up so studiously, might not be the areas that are causing all these new cancers. It make one think .

Where would Harper be if the The Bloc never existed?? As far as I'm concerned, Harper does what good for Harper first, then he'll think about the rest of us.

If the Boc was not there then the CPC would have had a majority government. remember that the bloc was born out of the betrayal of Bouchard who was a PC and its members were mostly PC. So if they never did exist you would have not had this minority government. Harper does what he feels the people support, and if you doubt that, then you have to believe that every party in the goverment has for the last 20 months, all voted to pass things that the people did not want. Harper can only pass things which he has majority support for. It is just too bad that the LIberals only want things that the people do not want. May be you should go back and show me the things Harper has done that people will not support, as this last buch is liberal mudslinging at it lowest.

[godzilla]

The Conservatives are so good at raising money from individuals because Conservative supporters give money to the party. Simplistic? Yes, but that's the way it is. Direct mail efforts, emails, phone calls. Conservative supporters respond to that.

The Liberals used to be really good at raising money from corporations. When the new stricter limits on corporate donations were put into place it really hurt the Liberals. I think Chretien did it to stick it to Paul Martin. Too bad the Liberals still haven't figured it out.

Not quite sure what a 'corporate Canadian' is. Perhaps you could propose a law that gives different levels of citizenship based on whether or not you consider a person 'corporate'.

do a search on my previous posts re 'corproate canadian'. i know these people... because i am one! all of my income is generated as a shareholder. again, read my posts... if you are a t4'd canadian then you are getting shafted!

your answer is far too simplistic for me to believe! yeah, and the republicans are supported by little grandmothers too!

Edited October 23, 2007 by godzilla

[Michael Bluth]

your answer is far too simplistic for me to believe! yeah, and the republicans are supported by little grandmothers too!

Simplistic or not, the truth is the truth.

Financial returns are at www.elections.ca

[jbg]

The crys that Harper is not governing like he has a minority, from the Liberals, are just stupid. He could never pass anything with out majority support, and he has past pretty much everything he tried. And due to senate blocking, he is passing it again. Amazing how he can do that while being a minority goverment. He is governing like he hasa majority, only if he has that, and by the way things get past, I guess he was right now wasn't he?

If VisionSeeker were right, Dion would not be so solicitous of Canadians' alleged distaste for the polls. He'd be in favor of Canadians' "right to choose" and would have harpooned the Government on the Throne Speech.

[Visionseeker]

If VisionSeeker were right, Dion would not be so solicitous of Canadians' alleged distaste for the polls. He'd be in favor of Canadians' "right to choose" and would have harpooned the Government on the Throne Speech.

Well, no.

It is one thing to have an opponent in political inertia, it is quite another to claim momentum for an election. As much as Harper stalls, Dion remains in the starting blocks himself.

I said it before and I'll say it again, the Liberals do not want an election until 2008.

[Michael Bluth]

Well, no.

It is one thing to have an opponent in political inertia, it is quite another to claim momentum for an election. As much as Harper stalls, Dion remains in the starting blocks himself.

I said it before and I'll say it again, the Liberals do not want an election until 2008.

Then maybe they should tone down the rhetoric.

Claiming how terrible the Conservatives are and finding a way to support everything they do is pretty weak.

[Shakeyhands]

Then maybe they should tone down the rhetoric.

Claiming how terrible the Conservatives are and finding a way to support everything they do is pretty weak.

The rhetoric? I think its being handled pretty well by the Liberals, most of the conservative platform has looked pretty familiar anyway. Once something really objectionable comes down the pipe, things will be much different, and it will be back on the Gov't. I think we all may be a little surprised.

Oh wait... I suppose they are just Harper haters too... right

[old_bold&cold]

I am a CPC supporter and yes that kind of makes me then a Harper supporter as well. It does notm necesscitate though, that I am a Liberal hater, as that is something that the Liberal party has to do themselves to give me reasons to hate what they stand for. I must admit though that they have done that job quite easily, because it is not only their lack of respect for the political system, but their complete inability, to understand that the Canadian people want and expect better forom their elected officials.

Take a look at Question period in the HoC. The Liberals are too entrenched to try and make Harper look bad, that they never ask any reasonable questions of the government on the issues of today, that the Canadian people want answers to. They leave that up to the NDP or Block to stand for the people. That in itself would be reason enough for the voters to hate them. It is no wonder they fear having to face the voters and then will do anything to not have to do that yet.

Yes the CPC are sitting pretty and today they will give a budget update that will give all kinds of tax breaks and even a reduction in the GST. The voters want thi, and yes it will play directly to them. That is what has Dion in a snit, because it does not do what he wants it to do. But then again he as the official opposition should by now have figured out thta being in opposition is not about getting to do things your party wants, bu to represent what the will of the voters are. That is why he can not turn the liberal party around, because they still do not know what their position should be. They can only see being in power, and nothing else. That is why they are where they are now.

[Michael Bluth]

I think its being handled pretty well by the Liberals, most of the conservative platform has looked pretty familiar anyway. Once something really objectionable comes down the pipe, things will be much different, and it will be back on the Gov't. I think we all may be a little surprised.

The government is stealing our platform?

Sounds familiar, sorta like the opposition whining in the darkest of the Chretien years. All the better for Harper winning a majority in the next election.

[Topaz]

First off you do not lower the flag for deaths in a war zone, as it would never be seen at full mast.As for the Income trust goes, it was seen easily by any and all people who followed it, that it was going to have to be taxed, as Canada's largest corporations and many smaller ones were going to tax shelter themselves at the cost to the tax payers. So Harper did this for the common folk, who out number all the rest when push comes to shove. He did the fiscally responsible thing for the time he was in. The voters will remember this I hope. Harpers supposed lie to Newfoundland is not a lie, it was a choice and they could either have the old formula or the new formual. It was the greed of the provinces that wanted the best of both without the rest. Harper did as what the common voters would have asked for, and stood his ground with the provinces. There comes a time to draw the line, and the voters yes will remember that. So much so they relected NFL PC's to a vast majority. Federally they could not do much worse then last time so only can go up now can it. The paying off a guy so someone could run in his place? I think you are mixed up there. Unless you are talking about the mayor of Ottawa, and no payoff and nothing was ever done or promised by the government or its ministers.

I think the Harper government handle themselves with more dignity then the other parties in the HOC. It is the rabid screaming of the Liberals who is more in keeping with a bullying attitude, They still can not adjust to not having power. As for Harper hurting the oil Industry goes, why do you want to hurt them? They are very good tax paying corporations and employ a vast section of out population. Without them we would be a much poorer nation. You also have directed this with the province in Alberta, and since the oil industry is mostly in the north, whose air is it that we are doing so much harm to there. Yes, the oil industry has played a big part in global emmissions, but they are also the first ones to have spent money on cleaner systems and cleaner air voluntarily. You seen bent on it having to be forced until it hurts them. May I suggest some councilling in this area. How many cancers are we going to see 10 years from now? Well that is a hard one as we will successfully treat many cancers and we will probaly see a rise in others, but it can be due to many things not just air pollution. Hell dishsoap caused many birth deffects and cacers then air pollution did, and we banned phosphates in detergents after that, and stil more defects came from other chemicals etc. I will say that yes there are cancers and deaths from air pollutions. But we had these for many years before this and the cancers are just showing greater numbers now. So is it that we are weaker then the people of the mid fiffties and sixties, or are we breathing more polluted air. We have banned leaded gas and cleaned up most coal burning facilities and we even have made the water in our lakes better then it was during the fifties and sixties. So why are we not seeing the numbers drop? Could it be that these areas thay we are cleaning up so studiously, might not be the areas that are causing all these new cancers. It make one think .

If the Boc was not there then the CPC would have had a majority government. remember that the bloc was born out of the betrayal of Bouchard who was a PC and its members were mostly PC. So if they never did exist you would have not had this minority government. Harper does what he feels the people support, and if you doubt that, then you have to believe that every party in the goverment has for the last 20 months, all voted to pass things that the people did not want. Harper can only pass things which he has majority support for. It is just too bad that the LIberals only want things that the people do not want. May be you should go back and show me the things Harper has done that people will not support, as this last buch is liberal mudslinging at it lowest.

Cold, I gotta ask you a question. In the US, when Bush became President he setup computer jocks that monitored chatroom. e-mail , forums etc. Tell me, by any chance do the Cons have the same setup in their big media headquarters and are you part of it?

[jbg]

Cold, I gotta ask you a question. In the US, when Bush became President he setup computer jocks that monitored chatroom. e-mail , forums etc. Tell me, by any chance do the Cons have the same setup in their big media headquarters and are you part of it?

Why shouldn't a politician listen to what's going on on the Internet? Are you saying they should only pay attention to MSM?

[Fortunata]

No surprise Harper’s PCs can’t gain our trust

These should be heady days for the Conservatives. They are governing the country at a time when the economy is going gangbusters and Canadians are feeling good about themselves and their country.

Plus, their main opposition party looks increasingly scared and weak with every vote they abstain from participating in.

So, why then are the Conservatives unable to make any headway in their popularity with the public?

...

I think it’s because the Conservative party can’t help occasionally demonstrating that its values are way out of whack with most Canadians. Take this week for example.

The government should have been able to spend the whole week basking in the glory of its popular tax cuts and the sight of Stephane Dion criticizing those cuts yet refusing to vote against them.

But then on Thursday, it comes out that Canada will no longer advocate for clemency on behalf of Canadians convicted of murder in the United States and sentenced to death. This reverses what had been Canadian policy since the 1970s and pursued by Liberal and Progressive Conservative governments alike.

...

All this is enough to make Canadians wonder if our government just doesn’t want to stand up to the U.S. or if it demonstrates that the Conservatives are actually in favour of the death penalty.

http://www.bclocalnews.com/okanagan_similk...n/11002871.html

I can't imagine they'll ever get women's votes like this. Or the immigrant vote - a lot of immigrants know only too well what it's like not to have positive support from their government.