Canadian Political Polls

[wyly]

I'm not saying the poll isn't informative, I'm saying it's presently useless for the purposes of producing an election. And so far we have no evidence that the Tories won't bounce back from it. They've been this close to flipping with the Liberals before and have somehow managed to beat back up and gain a few point lead before.

assuming this poll is accurate, I don't recall harper being this low before...even with a slight increase it'll likely be a reduced minority for Harper and very likely the end of his reign as PM...and very good odds that a coalition will be formed...

[ToadBrother]

assuming this poll is accurate, I don't recall harper being this low before...even with a slight increase it'll likely be a reduced minority for Harper and very likely the end of his reign as PM...and very good odds that a coalition will be formed...

I think you need to see whether or not this poll sticks. It's telling, but you can read too much into it. Wake me up if the Tories are still polling this way when the Fall session begins. If they are, then you may be right. But I simply don't put that much stock in a mid-summer poll all by itself.

[capricorn]

I suppose, if you want to be technical, he said he'd put the breaks on this particular purchase arrangement.

OK Smallc. That's a good compromise on where he stands.

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff says he'd put a $16-billion, sole-sourced contract to build a new generation of Fighter jets on hold if he's elected Prime Minister.

http://filmifi.com/gossip/Ignatieff-pledges-to-review-16B-jet-contract-3028110.html

I think what the Liberals would like is, if they are elected, they would cancel the present Conservative purchase process and start a new tendering process. In that way, down the road they could claim they made the purchase happen. Politically, that's a good move.

[Topaz]

The voters who will take out Harper's government in the next election are the voters who don't vote.IF and only IF they do get out there and vote than either the Libs or the NDP could have a minority government Why you asked??? Canadians in certain section of this country are still hurting and even though the Tories lengthen the time on EI, more people are off now and are probably on welfare or had to move to find work and I'm sure they aren't too happy about that. Then, they see the size of the deficit by the Tories, and yet they keep spending and spending. They are out of touch with the average Canadian and hopefully these voters will get out and vote the next election.

[Mr.Canada]

The voters who will take out Harper's government in the next election are the voters who don't vote.IF and only IF they do get out there and vote than either the Libs or the NDP could have a minority government Why you asked??? Canadians in certain section of this country are still hurting and even though the Tories lengthen the time on EI, more people are off now and are probably on welfare or had to move to find work and I'm sure they aren't too happy about that. Then, they see the size of the deficit by the Tories, and yet they keep spending and spending. They are out of touch with the average Canadian and hopefully these voters will get out and vote the next election.

I think it's a bit too naive to of you to believe that the 35-40% of people who didn't or don't vote would vote for the Libs or the NDP or some other left wing party.

[ToadBrother]

I think it's a bit too naive to of you to believe that the 35-40% of people who didn't or don't vote would vote for the Libs or the NDP or some other left wing party.

It's even more naive to believe that 35-40% of Canadians are dedicated right wing voters. The proof is in the pudding. If the Tories had 40% support, they'd have a majority.

[Jack Weber]

It's even more naive to believe that 35-40% of Canadians are dedicated right wing voters. The proof is in the pudding. If the Tories had 40% support, they'd have a majority.

Remember who you're dealing with when it comes to naivite...

This is the same guy who advocates for a Francoesque Fascist dictatorship in this country....

[Bonam]

It's even more naive to believe that 35-40% of Canadians are dedicated right wing voters. The proof is in the pudding. If the Tories had 40% support, they'd have a majority.

I think if anything the apathetic voters probably form a similar spectrum to the more energetic voters. If turnout increased, I'd expect we'd still see a conservative minority.

[Mansour Mohammed Jaffa]

Liberals or conservatives? What does it matter, both are weak. Who are the liberals to liberate, what are the conservatives to conserve? Accept Islam in your hearts and elect an Islamist party. Much like Europe, you should soften your path towards becoming an Islamic republic.

[eyeball]

proportional rep?

Okay. A coalition would suit me fine too. Heck, I'd even settle for an assassination.

Edited August 7, 2010 by eyeball

[wyly]

Okay. A coalition would suit me fine too. Heck, I'd even settle for an assassination.

a coalition that as part of it's working agreement would work toward a PR system...I can't think of anything more democratic or Canadian as a multiple party government governing through consensus and compromise...

[eyeball]

a coalition that as part of it's working agreement would work toward a PR system

...I can't think of anything more democratic or Canadian as a multiple party government governing through consensus and compromise...

I'd like to see a coalition build on the prospect of giving the public a bigger crack at democracy and start a public debate on making more use of things like referenda and citizen assemblies to help move things along.

I think a coalition that did that would score a lot of points with the public. I mean, who the hell is going to want to look hard on democracy?

Speaking of which weren't things like referenda and citizen assemblies what the base of the Conservative party expected when they reformed the right?

Edited August 8, 2010 by eyeball

[nicky10013]

I'd like to see a coalition build on the prospect of giving the public a bigger crack at democracy and start a public debate on making more use of things like referenda and citizen assemblies to help move things along.

I think a coalition that did that would score a lot of points with the public. I mean, who the hell is going to want to look hard on democracy?

Speaking of which weren't things like referenda and citizen assemblies what the base of the Conservative party expected when they reformed the right?

I think that's a really bad idea. If you have citizens assemblies and referenda, A) no one will attend and you take power away from parliament. Democracy is about REPRESENTING the citizen, and not just following the whim of populism. OUr democracy elects members to make the best decisions THEY know on behalf of the constitutency and not just where the public is at a certain time. The other side of it was to have an office where the member could deal with federal issues at a local level. The main thing constituency offices deal with are immigration issues.

[Mr.Canada]

It's even more naive to believe that 35-40% of Canadians are dedicated right wing voters. The proof is in the pudding. If the Tories had 40% support, they'd have a majority.

I insinuated no such thing. It would be a mix of coarse. Push to make voting mandatory like in Australia and we'll see if whose right on this one. Otherwise this bit is really a waste of time.

I'd like to see a coalition build on the prospect of giving the public a bigger crack at democracy and start a public debate on making more use of things like referenda and citizen assemblies to help move things along.

I think a coalition that did that would score a lot of points with the public. I mean, who the hell is going to want to look hard on democracy?

Speaking of which weren't things like referenda and citizen assemblies what the base of the Conservative party expected when they reformed the right?

If we had a referendum on face veils in Canada today, tomorrow they'd be banned across the country. You sure you'd like to go to this?

I like it mind you. I want to see populist ideas shape laws in Canada. I'm all for it.

Edited August 8, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[Jack Weber]

Back to the populist crapola again,Mr.Falange???

Given up on Franco Fascism for a while?

Edited August 8, 2010 by Jack Weber

[Jack Weber]

As with political watchers and pundits, the Conservatives are well aware that the biggest impediment to a majority government is the Bloc Quebecois.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/coming-to-terms-with-minority-government/article1190248/

If the Conservatives win another minority, they may decide to dump Harper but it will not be because he failed to secure a majority. It will be for some other reason.

Maybe...

I would guess then it's because he no longer satisfied the ideological whims of the Refor...er...Conservative base?

[eyeball]

If we had a referendum on face veils in Canada today, tomorrow they'd be banned across the country. You sure you'd like to go to this?

I like it mind you. I want to see populist ideas shape laws in Canada. I'm all for it.

I guess this is why no speed limit autobahns will never work in Canada. Too many people are just too immature to use them responsibly.

As I've said before, referenda and assemblies are not something that need to be binding in every case and they should never be used for trivial crap like veils or anything else that impacts minority or individual rights.

[nicky10013]

I guess this is why no speed limit autobahns will never work in Canada. Too many people are just too immature to use them responsibly.

As I've said before, referenda and assemblies are not something that need to be binding in every case and they should never be used for trivial crap like veils or anything else that impacts minority or individual rights.

How can you have a non-binding referendum? Isn't that just a colossal waste of money?

[bloodyminded]

Liberals or conservatives? What does it matter, both are weak. Who are the liberals to liberate, what are the conservatives to conserve? Accept Islam in your hearts and elect an Islamist party.

Can't. Busy.

[PIK]

So we are doing just fine here in canada and the left wants to be more like europe, broke and no end in sight. I just don't get it.

[nicky10013]

So we are doing just fine here in canada and the left wants to be more like europe, broke and no end in sight. I just don't get it.

What's wrong with trying to emulate what Germany is doing? Or the nordic country. I think it would be good for you to look up on what "Europe" actually is and you'll find that the EU contains countries not named Greece, Italy and Spain.

[ToadBrother]

Okay. A coalition would suit me fine too. Heck, I'd even settle for an assassination.

I don't think "outsider" defines someone like you. Maybe "malcontented nutball".

[ToadBrother]

How can you have a non-binding referendum? Isn't that just a colossal waste of money?

Eyeball is full of all sorts of bizarre ideas. He and Myata (who seems to have disappeared since the great forum meltdown) are full of them. I think they have a collection of nutty "democratic" notions. In large part it seems they are these kinds of malcontents because they haven't accepted one of the key notions of democracy, that if you're side or view loses, you're supposed to lose gracefully. They just want to figure out ways to rejig the system so they're desires (no matter how poorly thought out or self-serving) are automatically made the only choice.

[nicky10013]

Eyeball is full of all sorts of bizarre ideas. He and Myata (who seems to have disappeared since the great forum meltdown) are full of them. I think they have a collection of nutty "democratic" notions. In large part it seems they are these kinds of malcontents because they haven't accepted one of the key notions of democracy, that if you're side or view loses, you're supposed to lose gracefully. They just want to figure out ways to rejig the system so they're desires (no matter how poorly thought out or self-serving) are automatically made the only choice.

Yep. I put them in with the people who want an elected senate. They're in love with the notion of more "democracy" but don't understand the implications of their actions.

[ToadBrother]

Yep. I put them in with the people who want an elected senate. They're in love with the notion of more "democracy" but don't understand the implications of their actions.

I don't necessarily see the problem with an elected senate, per se, though I don't think the current one is malfunctioning all that badly. Certainly the US gets along pretty well with one.

But you do hit one point on the head, and that's that any major reform, and heck even minor reforms, have to be carefully considered. The Westminster System may in parts be clunky, but even the clunky bits evolved for a reason, and while I admire some of the facets of other systems, that I don't see them as being radical improvements. No system should remain static, but those who demand enormous reforms sometimes look to be throwing out the baby with the bathwater. In some cases, the reforms needed aren't even in the right place. Myata, for instance, has advocated going to a PR system with party lists, despite the fact that he/she seems to feel that political parties are problematic, and doesn't seem to realize that party list PR systems in fact only further entrench party control.

Let's ponder the elected Senate. Creating a Triple-E Senate that emulated in greater degree the US system does indeed have potential downsides. Australia discovered that in 1975 with the Australian Constitutional Crisis. Because Westminster Parliaments have a very different kind of division of powers than the US, attempts to map the US upper house to a Westminster Upper House does raise the possibility of instability. I have been in the past an advocate of Triple-E senates, but now that we've entered a phase of minority governments, I'm wondering if such a Senate might be a disaster.

Edited August 9, 2010 by ToadBrother