Harper To Launch Campaign On Monday...

[sir_springer]

Monday, January 12, 2004 at 6:30 PM

Lansdowne Park, Exhibit Hall

1015 Bank Street

Ottawa, Ontario

Free Admission

Look for a few surprize endorsements on Monday night.

Read this morning that Fortier, who ran against Clark in 1998 for the leadership, is on board with Harper, and one of his top guns in Quebec.

Suspect that Tom Long will be there.

Looking for at least 50 MPs to line up as well.

Will Stock show up? Bet he will.

Betting also that more than a few Ontario MLAs, past and present, from Big Blue will also be on hand, Baird for sure.

As for PC MPs...??? Now that would make it interesting, eh?

I expect Harper to come out of the chute with guns blazing.

Should be a good!

[dnsfurlan]

Just to let you know, they're not Ontario MLA's, they're Ontario MPP's.

Regarding Harper, I think his M.O. so far has been to ride under the radar and slowly exceed expectations.

I can see Martin having some kind of meltdown by eleciton night.

I can also see Layton unravelling at some point when performance and results actually matter.

[sir_springer]

Layton is little more than a curiousity right now.

A means for some people to tweek the Liberals by saying, "Hey! Smarten up or I'll vote for this clown. How'd ya like that, eh?"

The only time people vote in any numbers for the NDP is when they think that they have nothing to lose.

If Martin is perceived, by about 3 weeks into the election, as a given for a majority, then an unusual number of people may vote NDP on single issue grounds.

If, however, Harper and the CPC are perceived to be a real threat to Martin, then the NDP vote will collapse virtually over night.

If, as I suspect will happen, the vote polarizes between Martin and Harper, the NDP will get slaughtered in the ensuing stampede to the two camps on election day.

How unfortunate would that be, eh?

NOT!!!

Frankly, next to Harper kicking Martin's arse, nothing would do my heart more good than watching the NDP get the big shutout. My tolerance for this collection of bozos ran out years ago.

[Neal.F.]

The ideal scenario would be for the Dippers to get 17% of the vote, siphoning enough votes away from the Liberals to allow Conservatives (assuming Stronach is NOT the leader) to come up the middle, while not getting enough concentration of support to actually win seats of their own.

And it would be especially delightful to watch Svend Robinson get the long overdue defeat he so richlyu deserves. And Libby can go down with him.

I'd also like to see Jack O'Layton lose his bid for a seat, but it would be delicious to let Comartin and Masse hold their Windsor seats, since Paul Martin Sr. used to be the MP there.

[sir_springer]

Much of the that NDP support is spread wide and thinly.

20% of the vote captured Super Mario about 6 seats in Quebec.

NDP support tends to peter out considerably once people actually have to follow through in an election.

If they actually pull more than 12%, I'll be amazed.

Broadbent once actually was riding at 45% in midterm polling...but got 20% when it counted.

Here's how one might break down the electorate:

Out of 100 random people...

30 to 40 won't vote. (More on this later.)

8 will vote NDP come hell or highwater.

20 will vote Liberal.

20 will vote Conservative.

This leaves that segment of the electorate that will entertain change, about 20% to 30% of the electorate.

Few of these will ultimately entertain the NDP, except during an election in which the incumbant appears to be on safe ground, and change is not big on the minds of voters. Generally, unless a first term government really screws up big, they're pretty much a shoe in...and thus people feel freer to vote, some would say, their consciences on particular issues.

It's following second and third terms that change polarizes the electorate...and third parties get hammered.

That key element of the electorate...20 to 30 out of each 100 get to decide who will form the next government. Call them "swing" voters.

They are the targets of campaigns.

Now, that aside...

Last election we saw the lowest turnout in recent memory, about 60%.

These people, about 10 out of 100, stayed home, primarily because they were unmotivated to support the incumbant government, nor were they impressed enough with Stock Day. And key here is that they did NOT vote PC or NDP.

It is these people who, if they are motivated, can and will return into the mix, and ultimately could prove to be ball busters.

Ya see, the suggestion is that the combined vote of the CA and PCs could win about 30 seats in Ontario.

BUT...

That combined vote does not include this "10%" factor.

When you factor them into the bigger picture, prospects for the Liberals suddenly become considerably more iffy.

Because these people, who did not vote Liberal last time because of deep desire for change, are not bloody likely to this time, either.

But if they perceive the very real prospect for change now being available, f'rinstance, because the CA/PCs are no longer splitting votes, they could very jump back into the fray and tip the playing field.

If this next election sees a 70% + voter turnout, I would predict that the Liberals will go down to a stunning defeat.

Here is an example for you to illustrate my point:

Riding of Provencher, Manitoba.

1997 results:

Lib: 14,595

Ref: 12,798

PC: 5955

NDP: 3137

Total: 36,485

2000 results:

CA: 21,358

Lib: 14,419

PC: 2726

NDP: 1980

Total: 40,483

As we can see here, an additional 4000 voters turned out in 2000.

The Liberal vote (for the incumbant) remained static.

However, not only did polarization...because voters in that riding believed the CA had a real chance under Day...rip votes away from both the PCs and the NDP, it also motivated people to vote who did not in 1997.

About 10%.

The result of this additional 10% was that they virtually exclusively went to the party perceived to be capable of dumping the incumbant governing party.

Now...

If we home in on Ontario, we find that voter turnout in 2000 was only 58%.

Doing a quick scan of 2000 results in Ontario, if I factor in a 10% increase in voter turnout:

If the the Libs remains static, and CPC vote combines, and then we factor in this 10% heavily toward the CPC...

40 ridings immediately are up for grabs for the CPC.

If the NDP skims away 10% of Liberal support, the CPC gains even more...while the NDP gain virtually nothing.

Ya see?

In 2000, the mood for change was there. Stock dropped the ball in the last weeks of the election for whatever reasons. A great many voters became disillusioned and stayed home.

If Harper runs a good campaign, and thus appears credible, I think most of these voters will return to put their muscle behind the CPC in order to dump the Liberals, of whom they're simply sick and tired of hearing about...Martin or no Martin, makes no difference.

At best, Martin is looking at a minority government.

The CPC...under Harper...is capable of a minority government.

[Michael Hardner]

Such acrimony... come on, now we're all on the same team right ?

I'm sure Harper is capable of leading a minority government, but with 107 seats (under the old seat distribution) out of touch for him it's hard to see it happening. Y'all should hope for an NDP surge to 25% to help the CPC's chances.

I expect Harper to come out of the chute with guns blazing.

Should be a good!

Should be a good what ? Massacre ? I guess so. It doesn't look like anybody will have the juice to beat him and take the CPC leadership.

Will the Canadian people fall in love with Stephen Harper and vote him PM in 2004 ? Hmmmm....

Here are some keys to that happening:

1) Martin's public speaking hasn't seemed too confident of late. He stammers, he looks perplexed. This doesn't instill confidence in the voter.

2) The BIG scandal that broke on the west coast could come up with some major dirt in the PM's office.

3) The economy isn't doing that well.

4) If the big three parties are ALL new faces, why not choose Harper ? They voted for the devil they knew in Chretien - maybe they'll give Martin the pass this time just out of boredom with the Libs.

It still seems unlikely, but early on the CPC seems to still have things going their way...

[sir_springer]

I noted here months ago that Martin's style under pressure was remarkably lacking. I said then that he stammers and stutters, that he avoids eye contact, that he looks above his audience, and that he avoids controversy like the plague, unwilling to take a stand on anything, always looking for a soft landing.

Now this same thing is being noted by pundits as Martin finally has emerged from behind Chretien's skirts into the limelight.

His conversation with Peter Mansbridge was horrible. He was all over the bloody map on issues. He dodged questions, literally stumbled his way through all of it...and then looked pleased with himself when it was all over.

The illusion is crumbling...and not even all that subtly, either.

On the other hand...

Harper's demeanor and confidence in the limelight continues to grow almost exponentially. He is calm, assured, confident, non-evasive, and thoughtful. He knows of what he speaks and where he stands, and is unafraid to go wherever that leads him.

The contrasts between him and Martin are, and increasingly will become even more so, stark.

Here's something to think about:

All things are relative.

In the heat of an election, Martin's performance will be relative to Harper.

This reality was what ultimately caused Turner to crash and burn. On center stage, where he could be compared to Mulroney, he looked pathetic as he stumbled and stuttered and tripped over his own words.

And in that moment, his and Mulroney's political careers spun on the proverbial dime.

If there is one thing that damn few in the know doubt, it is that, within the context of debate, Stephen Harper can be, and usually is, in a word, devistating. There are few his match. His wealth of knowledge is at the tip of his tongue, he is sharp, he is quick as hell, and he is acutely articulate. And, most importantly, if he gets fired up, he gets even tougher and better.

Paul Martin is in for the fight of his life.