Federal Election Polls

[capricorn]

Today Ignatieff's interview with Mansbridge and Rae's interview on Sun TV play right into Harper's campaign coalition narrative. Oh I know, coalitions are legit yada yada but the reality is now laid bare for Canadian voters to ponder. Let's see how this translates in the polls over the next couple of days. My sense is that the Conservative numbers go up as a result.

[ToadBrother]

The NPD rise in Quebec in not a fantasy as the La presse reporter who was just on Power Play stated.

And I agree with TB Layton will negotiate with everyone and go with whoever gives him the best deal.

Layton's statements over the last day or so have shown that he's leaving all his options open. We've still got a ways to go, but if this continues, I have to say that he's run the smartest campaign of any of them. He showed his skills in both debates, he's just been kicking ass on the hustings. Iggy started off on the wrong foot and has been hopping down the track on the other ever since. Harper, well, he's running a disciplined campaign, but you've got to imagine that, with the Tories third kick at the can here, that if they're going to stall out once more in the mid to high 30s that they're going to be seriously figuring out whether this is an irreparable electoral ceiling or if the leadership is at fault. We know Duceppe is pretty damned freaked out by the potential of an NDP breakthrough.

[ToadBrother]

Today Ignatieff's interview with Mansbridge and Rae's interview on Sun TV play right into Harper's campaign coalition narrative. Oh I know, coalitions are legit yada yada but the reality is now laid bare for Canadian voters to ponder. Let's see how this translates in the polls over the next couple of days. My sense is that the Conservative numbers go up as a result.

I have my doubts that it will.

[cybercoma]

The unfortunate catch-22 for the Liberals is that they are a historical party. Coalescing with the NDP would be looked down upon by an aging population, many of whom still see the Liberals as the "natural" governing party and do not believe the NDP has a place in the House. I feel they would pay dearly at the polls, but those people would not vote for the Conservatives nor the NDP. We might find ourselves with an even greater number of people staying home during the subsequent election.

The other things that could happen is the Liberals vote with the Conservatives to prop up their government, keeping Jack Layton out of power. However, in this case those Liberals that absolutely oppose supporting the Conservatives will be pushed away from voting for them.

I don't see the Liberals making it out of this election alive. They will need to seriously need to retool their party. The party needs to be entirely purged and rebuilt.

[cybercoma]

Here's another thing that makes Layton more palatable to many Canadians. He's open to ideas. He's open to working with everyone. He's leaving his options open for anything.

Ignatieff first says he will not form a coalition. Now he says he will. People don't care for your rigid ideological stances. Yes they want strong leadership, but for most Canadians that means someone that's open, co-operative and receptive to new ideas. Layton fits that bill and Ignatieff doesn't.

bad bad bad all around. I had such high hopes for Ignatieff years ago too. I think he allowed the "handlers" to control too much of his message.

[capricorn]

bad bad bad all around. I had such high hopes for Ignatieff years ago too.

Me too. I like and respect Ignatieff as a person but he just isn't cut out for politics. I mean, what are his handlers to do if Canadians don't warm to him as a potential PM?

[Harry]

Today Ignatieff's interview with Mansbridge and Rae's interview on Sun TV play right into Harper's campaign coalition narrative. Oh I know, coalitions are legit yada yada but the reality is now laid bare for Canadian voters to ponder. Let's see how this translates in the polls over the next couple of days. My sense is that the Conservative numbers go up as a result.

I doubt that as Ignatieff said quite clearly "no coalition".

[ToadBrother]

I doubt that as Ignatieff said quite clearly "no coalition".

I doubt it because I don't think "coalition" is the scary word it was two years ago. I never thought it was, and I think the Tories did a masterful job of pushing Iggy to espouse a position that will now either weaken his potential to form a government or make him into a lying hypocrite. Iggy should have shown some leadership and told the Canadian public the realities of the situation, for better and for worse. Instead he allowed himself to be manipulated.

[capricorn]

I doubt that as Ignatieff said quite clearly "no coalition".

"A coalition if necessary, but not necessarily a coalition".

On Sunday, he described his position as “coalition if necessary, but not necessarily coalition.” (The formulation is a paraphrase of Liberal Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King’s declaration during the Second World War that his position on how to meet the nation’s military manpower needs was “conscription if necessary, but not necessarily conscription.”)

http://blog.jameslaxer.com/2008/12/michael-ignatieff-coalition-if.html

[ToadBrother]

"A coalition if necessary, but not necessarily a coalition".

Which was a sensible position. Why he let himself be knocked down from it is beyond me.

Edited April 19, 2011 by ToadBrother

[Harry]

Today Ignatieff's interview with Mansbridge and Rae's interview on Sun TV play right into Harper's campaign coalition narrative. Oh I know, coalitions are legit yada yada but the reality is now laid bare for Canadian voters to ponder. Let's see how this translates in the polls over the next couple of days. My sense is that the Conservative numbers go up as a result.

.

Harper has tried to poison the idea of working together in a hung Parliament. The coalition attempt in 2008 is basically the same as what Harper tried in 2004 when he was in opposition and there are 2 witnesses to prove it. The more it gets discussed however, and the more Canadians understand that coalitions, etc., are the most normal of things the 'loser' minority Harper government may well end up being the ones who pay the price for their BS on May 2.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Canadian_parliamentary_dispute

Agreement with the BQ and the NDPTwo months after the federal election, Stephen Harper privately met with Bloc Québécois leader Gilles Duceppe and New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton in a Montreal hotel.[78] On September 9, 2004, the three signed a letter addressed to then-Governor General Adrienne Clarkson, stating,

We respectfully point out that the opposition parties, who together constitute a majority in the House, have been in close consultation. We believe that, should a request for dissolution arise, this should give you cause, as constitutional practice has determined, to consult the opposition leaders and consider all of your options before exercising your constitutional authority.[78]

On the same day the letter was written, the three party leaders held a joint press conference at which they expressed their intent to co-operate on changing parliamentary rules, and to request that the Governor General consult with them before deciding to call an election.[79] At the news conference, Harper said "It is the Parliament that's supposed to run the country, not just the largest party and the single leader of that party. That's a criticism I've had and that we've had and that most Canadians have had for a long, long time now so this is an opportunity to start to change that." However, at the time, Harper and the two other opposition leaders denied trying to form a coalition government.[78] Harper said, "This is not a coalition, but this is a co-operative effort."[79]

One month later, on October 4, Mike Duffy, now a Conservative senator (appointed by Harper), said "It is possible that you could change prime minister without having an election," and that some Conservatives wanted Harper to temporarily become prime minister without holding an election. The next day Layton walked out on talks with Harper and Duceppe, accusing them of trying to replace Paul Martin with Harper as prime minister. Both Bloc and Conservative officials denied Layton's accusations.[78]

On March 26, 2011, Duceppe stated that Harper had tried to form a coalition government with the Bloc and NDP in response to Harper's allegations that the Liberals may form a coalition with the Bloc and the NDP.[80]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_harper

Edited April 19, 2011 by Harry

[capricorn]

.

Harper has tried to poison the idea of working together in a hung Parliament.

I don't deny that. In his rhetoric he played the "separatist" card to appeal to the anti-Bloc feeling in the ROC. He's a politician and politicians want to WIN. No big surprise.

[cybercoma]

I've got a crazy idea. Why doesn't Harper temper his damn message and form a coalition with another party so he can stay in power?

[capricorn]

I have just received a call from Nanos to answer an election survey. This is the first time ever, in my entire life. I thought these polling companies were just a figment of my imagination. All of a sudden I feel impotent...er I mean...important.

[capricorn]

Why doesn't Harper temper his damn message and form a coalition with another party so he can stay in power?

Out of his sense of fair play?

[cybercoma]

I have just received a call from Nanos to answer an election survey. This is the first time ever, in my entire life. I thought these polling companies were just a figment of my imagination. All of a sudden I feel impotent...er I mean...important.

I've been contacted by Harris Decima. They asked a number of political questions, but they were also asking about the then new airport security rules as well. It took about 20 minutes for all the questions, but it was interesting.

[capricorn]

I've been contacted by Harris Decima. They asked a number of political questions, but they were also asking about the then new airport security rules as well. It took about 20 minutes for all the questions, but it was interesting.

The survey questions took only 10 minutes max.

The pollster asked me about my preferred party and second choice. I answered NDP and Liberal. Asked to rate the leaders, I voted for Jack in every category.

[August1991]

Today Ignatieff's interview with Mansbridge and Rae's interview on Sun TV play right into Harper's campaign coalition narrative. Oh I know, coalitions are legit yada yada but the reality is now laid bare for Canadian voters to ponder. Let's see how this translates in the polls over the next couple of days. My sense is that the Conservative numbers go up as a result.

The Tory numbers don't have to go up much - these Lib/NDP numbers suggest terrible splits where a Conservative will get through. The Libs and NDP are now fishing in the same anti-Harper pool.

The whole spectre of a coalition was designed to make soft-Liberal, NDP supporters to feel emboldened and vote NDP. At the same time, talk of coalition splits off the centrist-Liberals who want nothing to do with Layton.

----

All of the discussion above, based on one Angus Reid poll that puts the Libs and NDP equal, is premature in the extreme. The NDP is not going to surpass the Liberals in seat totals. The NDP will be very lucky to win three seats in Quebec.

Keep in mind that the Greens have a popular vote equal to the Bloc while the Greens elect no one while the Bloc gets around 50 seats. It's all about vote concentration.

[August1991]

I doubt it because I don't think "coalition" is the scary word it was two years ago.

It's very effective for two groups: NDP supporters who vote Liberal because they don't want Harper, and for centrist Liberals who want nothing to do with Layton.

Harper's majority will be based on thoughts that Layton could get close to power. More people fear Layton than fear Harper.

This campaign started and will end with the word "coalition" on every one's lips.

This is how coalitions in Europe work: two parties with similar yet different ideas get a set of votes each.

My first instinct is to say: if it works so well, why are European politics in such a mess?

In FPTP parliaments, coalitions are the exception not the rule.

----

Redaing through the thread above, one can almost see the glee on the faces of Radical Leftists as they dream of getting power through some strange coalition with Ignatieff and the Bloc.

It is precisely the sight of this glee/enthusiasm that will push many centrist Liberals to vote Tory on 2 May.

Edited April 20, 2011 by August1991

[Harry]

In your Conservative dreams.

As Layton has now pulled the NDP even with the Liberals according to the latest AR poll (37%, 25%, 25%), and the NDP is the one party presently with positive momentum in the campaign, the NDP is now the biggest threat to a Tory majority.

Edited April 20, 2011 by Harry

[bush_cheney2004]

Mr. Ignatieff gets some more attention from the wrong country:

Prestige abroad hurts Ignatieff

[Harry]

That actually reflects badly on Canada - we can thank Harper for that.

[punked]

That article is so full of holes and poor research I wouldn't put any thought into it.

[August1991]

That actually reflects badly on Canada - we can thank Harper for that.

On the contrary, it reflects well on Canadians.

Canadians have formed their own opinion Ignatieff, independently of what (certain) foreigners may say or think.

Harry, you may be impressed with NPR and Harvard, but most Canadians are not. I would prefer to live in a society where fellow citizens have a healthy scepticism of people who claim to be experts.

[bush_cheney2004]

...Harry, you may be impressed with NPR and Harvard, but most Canadians are not. I would prefer to live in a society where fellow citizens have a healthy scepticism of people who claim to be experts.

Hmmmm....seems you should be a paid consultant for Ignatieff and the Grits.