capricorn Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 the odds are heavily in their favor of getting a majority regardless of regional numbers. I'm no good with numbers but there will come a time when they won't need Quebec to reach the magic number. Probably thanks to vote rich Ontario. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 (edited) You are incorrect. There are also telephone polls, hydro polls and concrete polls. They aren't happy, those polls....especially the polls that show Ontario with the highest Conservative support next to Alberta. You forgot stripper poles, er polls. Edited March 2, 2011 by GostHacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posc Student Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 Regional results do matter when you have a party that garners huge numbers in several provinces like the Conservatives do. The Conservatives would likely win every seat in Alberta if they were at 50% so being at 64% only inflates their national number. Pollsters have said that they need about 42% to win a majority government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 (edited) All I know is that it seems like polling 1001 respondents across 10 provinces, if divided equally, would be roughly 100 people per province. I'm not thinking that's a big enough number to get any sort of reasonable assessment of how things will turn out on election day. Especially when you consider the way the FPTP system works. It is far from a foregone conclusions that the Conservatives will get a majority. The Liberals had majorities with the 42% threshold because they had more support in Quebec at the time than the Conservatives do now. Also, the Liberals never had the overwhelming support that the Conservatives have in Alberta, winning 80% or more of the votes in many ridings. Edited March 2, 2011 by cybercoma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinko Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 As a pinko I am concerned about the trend but having said that the only poll that counts is the one on election day. The key in any election is to motivate your base to get out and vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 "Hold your fire till you see the whites of their eyes..." Saves a LOT of ammunition and results in a high kill count... Works about the same in politics as it does in war... Many here seem to think it's over before the fat lady has even come to the stage... I HOPE Harper reads the "tea leaves" wrong again and calls a third meaningless election... Then, hopefully, we get 3 new leaders in TIME for the election after that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 Yah I know we wont have an election the Liberals are going to get the flu. However what would you say we are around 3 weeks before an election? Well this consider this a lesson for you because you clearly know nothing about Canadian politics. In 2008 3 weeks before an election this pollster had the NDP at 13% so I don't think they are worried. I think 308 said that these guys are often 3-5% off the NDP numbers for some reason. Rinse and repeat... Scariest two words in Canadian Politics - CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 That's your opinion - the scariest two words for me and many others are - A Liberal Majority - even worse an NDP Majority :lol: Harper will not 'call an election', meaningless or otherwise, it will be up to the opposition to vote for or against. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 In Ontario, the Tories stand at 45%, compared to 33% for the Liberals, 14% for the NDP, and 4% for the Green party. Those numbers indicate that the Tories could win Ontario. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 Since you're a LIBERTARIAN I'm hardly surprised that you're against so called "entitlements" (aka social benefits) like universal health care, child care, pension income supplements and the like...I am hardly a libertarian. I just don't like programs that don't work well.As for universal health care, there's little incentive on people's part to not see a doctor for every ache and pain. And lets face it, for lonely people doctors are a handy form of interaction, sometimes personable and intelligent, especially when free. As for child care, I'm not saying paid child care is always bad or always good. Sometimes the value added by having both parents working is not great enough to justify someone paying for child care and, lets face it, children do need their parents. This isn't Cuba. As for pensions, they're still built on a life expectancy of around 72-75. People are living and healthy far beyond that age. There's a limit to how much the younger people in the work force can afford, and economically someone has to pay for the pensions. I am not anti-program or a libertarian; I just want programs that aren't on a crash course to fail. Since the GST meant it was done on the backs of those least able to afford paying TAXES it's still sad that it was done in that manner... But at least it was done... I think the publicly floated theory behind the GST was that is was visible whereas the old Manufacturer's Sales Tax was hiddden. Personally, I'd be more in favor of basing almost all taxes on income, and extending that tax, albeit at low levels, to almost all citizens. That way, again, people could see that programs have a cost, but would be paid for based on ability to afford. Otherwise, it becomes a matter of two wolves and a sheep holding a democratic vote on what's for dinner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 And that the voters don't buy into the manufactured crisis.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 I don't like income taxes at all. I would prefer a tax on expenses not incomes. A transaction tax can be applied in a blind and revenue neutral manner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 (edited) I understand the statistics behind it and the margin of error but you cannot just cast aside the regional results when trying to predict one party getingt a majority or not. If you have two polls that give the Conservatives 42% it doesn't mean that both will result in the same majority government or if it will result in a minority government. You're only right with support lower than 40%. Once you get above that number things change. You see, first of all it is a given that even in a province like Alberta you are not going to win 100% of the votes! However, once polls are showing that you are going to take more than 40% of the entire country THEN you have to consider that actual population in a particular province! If polls show you strong in one region, like Alberta, then what's the total population of Alberta anyway. Even if you theoretically DID take 100% of the votes that's still not a huge portion of the total voter number of 40+% of the entire country. So strong support in that region is not going to represent the lion's share of your national support. You could make the claim that with polls showing 50+ support across the country but PEI shows 80% then you won't gain seats, since PEI would suck up most of your support. 80% of 140,000 people offering only a handful of seats just doesn't change much with 50% of the entire country. You'd be wrong, but you could make the claim! Pollsters and parties perfectly understand this. That's why they know that they have to enter into the 40+% national support area to have a practical chance at a majority government. They have already taken into account that the largest populations and number of seats are in Ontario and Quebec and that the Tories will take most of Alberta's seats. Less than 40% leaves things too "fuzzy". Edited March 2, 2011 by Wild Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 A potential tory majority would in the end be a good thing for the liberals. By the time the majority played out, canadians would be looking at change as it could potentially be 10 years of harper in office. I'd say the liberals have been caught bluffing. A part of me thinks liberal brass is wanting to blow the party up and go for a total rebuild. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 A potential tory majority would in the end be a good thing for the liberals. By the time the majority played out, canadians would be looking at change as it could potentially be 10 years of harper in office. I'd say the liberals have been caught bluffing. A part of me thinks liberal brass is wanting to blow the party up and go for a total rebuild. "You gotta be before you can do, and you've gotta do before you can have." - Zig Ziglar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 As a pinko I am concerned about the trend but having said that the only poll that counts is the one on election day. The key in any election is to motivate your base to get out and vote. And I'd say that the Tories have a very very motivated base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 And I'd say that the Tories have a very very motivated base. True, and at this point in TIME a very apathetic opposition... BUT! "It's not where you start but where you finish that counts." - unknown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 "You gotta be before you can do.... Doo bee doo bee doo - Frank Sinatra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 (edited) True, and at this point in TIME a very apathetic opposition... BUT! "It's not where you start but where you finish that counts." - unknown If the Tories engineer an election, I think the best the opposition can hope for is the status quo. I see very little likelihood of a Liberal minority (I think a Liberal majority is pretty much impossible). So we really have two strong possibilities; a Tory majority or another Tory minority. Even if we got a weaker Tory minority than we have now and the other three parties decided to rekindle their coalition plans, tradition states that the current Prime Minister gets first kick at the can, and Harper certainly can tell the GG that he can form a stable minority, since he's been doing just that for five years. Edited March 2, 2011 by ToadBrother Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 If the Tories engineer an election, I think the best the opposition can hope for is the status quo. I see very little likelihood of a Liberal minority (I think a Liberal majority is pretty much impossible). So we really have two strong possibilities; a Tory majority or another Tory minority. And a CPC minority might be something the Liberals could be happy with. I can just see the Liberal attack ads now: "With a minority government, the Conservatives were not half bad. But with a majority, they will be fully eeeeee-vil. Vote Liberal. We can't afford to go to Hell." Then it pans to a shot of Prime Minister Harper with crayon devil horns drawn in over one of his sweater vest photos (and the sweater vest is shaded in with some red and white stars and stripes) and finishes with Ignatieff with a halo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 I think the most likely scenario is the conservatives govern as a majority, knowing the opposition will not attempt suicide..the budget will pass and life will go on, as the conservatives continue with the most stable minority government in history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 I think the most likely scenario is the conservatives govern as a majority, knowing the opposition will not attempt suicide..the budget will pass and life will go on, as the conservatives continue with the most stable minority government in history. That's my opinion as well. I simply don't see a spring election. We've been this way before, with all the pundits swearing up and down that the high Tory numbers meant an election was right around the corner, but then the numbers come down, and no one wants to pull the switch. Quite frankly, despite my great dislike of Tory contempt for Parliament, I'm not at all unhappy with the current situation. I think we have the best possible government for the current economic climate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 If the Tories engineer an election, I think the best the opposition can hope for is the status quo. I see very little likelihood of a Liberal minority (I think a Liberal majority is pretty much impossible). So we really have two strong possibilities; a Tory majority or another Tory minority. Even if we got a weaker Tory minority than we have now and the other three parties decided to rekindle their coalition plans, tradition states that the current Prime Minister gets first kick at the can, and Harper certainly can tell the GG that he can form a stable minority, since he's been doing just that for five years. Said it before... Sayin' it again... Many here seem to think it's over before the fat lady has even come to the stage... I HOPE Harper reads the "tea leaves" wrong again and calls a third meaningless election... Then, hopefully, we get 3 new leaders in TIME for the election after that... ps - the Layton-Harper "coalition" may delay the election until next year but THAT is the only "coalition" we'll ever see... "Character is the ability to carry out a good resolution long after the excitement of the moment has passed." - Cavett Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fellowtraveller Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 I think the most likely scenario is the conservatives govern as a majority, knowing the opposition will not attempt suicide..the budget will pass and life will go on, as the conservatives continue with the most stable minority government in history. I think you meant 'govern as a minority' and that is looking more likely all the time. Harpers dream situation is to have any or all of the Opposition force an election on a budget nonconfidence motion. He'd end up with a majority or at worst another minority. What stops the Opposition is not the continuation Harper as PM, but other considerations. Of the three, the Bloc is the one with little or nothing to lose from an election. They will dominate Quebec again, and that reality lets them freewheel in Parliament. The Liberals have a big decision ahead with their leadership, they are surely asking the question 'can we ever win with Ignatieff?' and the answer to that is pretty obvious now. Do they wait until after giving Harper a majority, or let him carry on and try to replace the leader quickly and carry that momentum forward to an election? And who is in the wings that can beat Harper? The NDP also have some problems, their support seems to be dwindling and Layton will surely be in trouble without a strong showing, an increase in seats. He has had five years of opportunity with Harper and accomplished little in advancing the NDP brand, especially considering how weak the Liberals have been. Maybe he sees the chop coming and does not want a medicore showing at an election quite yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 I think you meant 'govern as a minority' No i meant majority. They can propose what they want knowing neither the NDP or Michael Ignatieff Liberals are willing to commit suicide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.