Ontario Budget 2014 -- Election

[Bob Macadoo]

I heard on the news the debates are starting next week and sadly Hudak can't come, he didn't have enough time to change plans to go up to Northern Ontario. Does he think he can skip because the polls are in his favour or he rather watch the other two and take notes for the next one, not a good decision, in my view.

Maybe Hudak has learned if he just hides for a couple weeks he's guaranteed to win.

[Big Guy]

Maybe Hudak has learned if he just hides for a couple weeks he's guaranteed to win.

That looks like sound advice for politicians. I remember when John Tory was way ahead and a shoo-in as the next Premier - then he opened his mouth about public funding for private schools. The rest is history.

Now Hudak sits in the background watching the Liberals self destruct but then decides to open his mouth about increasing class sizes, getting rid of 100,000 civil servants and POOF! it is now a horse race.

These folks should learn to smile, wave and keep quiet!

[Boges]

Honesty seems to be election suicide. Paring back 100,000 public service positions over 4 years doesn't sound so draconian but admitting he'll do it can now be made seem like the day after being elected Hudak will immediately fire 100,000 people.

[Mighty AC]

Election suicide would be far preferable to dismembering education though. When thousands of educational support workers are let go it doesn't just hurt the learning disabled and low functioning students. When struggling kids, plus all those with behaviour issues are in regular classrooms full time, everyone is dragged down. If Hudak actually wants to save money without doing irreparable damage to Ontario students he should plan to stop publicly funding a separate education system for one religion.

[Boges]

Election suicide would be far preferable to dismembering education though. When thousands of educational support workers are let go it doesn't just hurt the learning disabled and low functioning students. When struggling kids, plus all those with behaviour issues are in regular classrooms full time, everyone is dragged down. If Hudak actually wants to save money without doing irreparable damage to Ontario students he should plan to stop publicly funding a separate education system for one religion.

Here's the thing about government organizations though. There's never enough money. Education funding is at an all time high and teacher to student ratio is very low. . .

Yet for some reason, we see stories like this.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/ontario-schools-sending-special-ed-kids-home/article18295333/

About half of Ontario’s school principals have asked parents to keep their child at home because they could not accommodate their special education needs, says a new report that sheds light on how budget constraints have affected students with learning disabilities.

The findings, which were compiled by People for Education and based on a survey of about 1,300 school leaders from across Ontario, comes as the province adopts a new funding model that observers hope will alleviate some of the financial pressures in special education.

Perhaps the education should focus more money on special ed and less on Daycare for 5 year olds and allowing tenured teachers who are already receiving their pensions from supply teaching.

[Boges]

Ipsos Reid released a poll last night that said the Tories lead has narrowed. Forum has the Liberals with a huge lead and all the other polls released has a really close race.

According to that 308 site and the Abacus poll released earlier this week the Tories do see a huge lead in "Likely" voters. That means there are a lot of Liberals that might not even show up on voting day.

Also the Ipsos-Reid poll shows that the NDP have had a resurgence.

http://www.threehundredeight.com/

[cybercoma]

You'll see Conservative polls use 'likely voters' because it skews the weights towards older voters, who make up most of the PC base. Likely voters are determined by asking questions about past voting behaviours and how closely someone is following the election. Older Canadians are more likely to respond positively to these questions. The poll was also conducted entirely online, which is problematic for a number of reasons and this is why I don't care for Abacus much. It's also likely why their numbers are so different from others who use a combination of landline and cellphone surveying.

Edited May 24, 2014 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

What's really interesting about the Abacus poll that Eric points out is how they broke down the electorate. Looking at their swing numbers:

Liberal-NDP: 21%

NDP-PC: 12%

Liberal-PC: 10%

3-party: 13%

It's interesting that there's 2% more swing voters between the NDP and PC than there is between the Liberals and PC. The Liberal-NDP swing is obvious though.

[CPCFTW]

What's really interesting about the Abacus poll that Eric points out is how they broke down the electorate. Looking at their swing numbers:

Liberal-NDP: 21%

NDP-PC: 12%

Liberal-PC: 10%

3-party: 13%

It's interesting that there's 2% more swing voters between the NDP and PC than there is between the Liberals and PC. The Liberal-NDP swing is obvious though.

Yes it's interesting in that it completely discredits the movement behind Brigette Pape and her similar like-minded lefties who claimed that Harper shouldn't be PM because the "left" received a majority of the vote. The movement insisted that the NDP and Liberals all voted against Harper so he didn't deserve to be PM. Everyone with half a brain insisted that an NDP or Liberal voter would not have automatically voted for the other "left" party, but that didn't stop the hivemind lefties from insisting Harper's mandate was illegitimate. Seems like it's pretty evident that Brigette was wrong.

Our views are not represented by our political system. How else could we have a government that 60 per cent of the people voted against? A broken system is what has left us with a Conservative government ready to spend billions on fighter jets we don’t need, to pollute the environment we want protected, to degrade a health-care system we want improved, and to cut social programs and public sector jobs we value. As a page, I witnessed one irresponsible bill after another pass through the Senate, and wanted to scream “Stop.”

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/2011/06/08/why_i_did_it_senate_page_explains_her_throne_speech_protest.html

[cybercoma]

What are you talking about? NDP and Liberal voters are more than twice as likely to vote for the other party than the PCs. This is also cross sectional data, a snapshot at this moment in the Ontario election. So it doesn't speak to the broader tendencies or any tendencies over time. And in any case this is provincial politics, so it has nothing to do with Harper Conservatives or the federal parties.

Edited May 24, 2014 by cybercoma

[Michael Hardner]

You'll see Conservative polls use 'likely voters' because it skews the weights towards older voters, who make up most of the PC base. Likely voters are determined by asking questions about past voting behaviours and how closely someone is following the election. Older Canadians are more likely to respond positively to these questions. The poll was also conducted entirely online, which is problematic for a number of reasons and this is why I don't care for Abacus much. It's also likely why their numbers are so different from others who use a combination of landline and cellphone surveying.

I'm glad somebody smart is paying attention to the pollsters. Your post made me think about the polling and it struck me that this is the SECOND ontario election that is post-facebook, post-smartphone-saturated... which to me means that we *should* be at the point where the successful pollsters from the last election should be able to mostly repeat their methods. The previous election was 2007 so there should have been a big adjustment from that election to 2011, but for this election I'd guess pollsters can just modify their approach slightly. As such, this blog says abacus and forum did the best in 2011, and ipsos did the poorest. Abacus and forum show the race close, or with the liberals in the lead.

http://blogs.canoe.ca/davidakin/politics/abacus-forum-did-best-with-ontario-election-polls-ipsos-did-poorest/

The latest revelation is that hard core NDP supporters are protesting the NDP's move rightward, which seems to be bumping them in the polls perhaps ? Meanwhile the middle of the road liberals are going left and the 'progressive' conservatives are making an honest bid for strong medicine for our mushrooming deficit.

It seems to me that the party branding is starting to loosen more than a little, and we're seeing a broader set of possibilities from all three parties. Not a bad thing for me. What do you think ?

[cybercoma]

Honestly, I'm not following the Ontario election very closely. I'm more interested in polling methodologies.

Abacus's use of likely voters is good because even though it skews in favour of older voters, older voters are more likely to show up on election day. Voters that are more engage in the election are more likely to show up on election day. That means their numbers are more likely to be closest to correct on election day.

What I don't like about what they do is online polling. Yes it's a post-landline, post-facebook society, but not entirely. There's a number of methodological problems that need to be considered and addressed with online polling. For instance, access to internet. There's certain common demographic characteristics about those who have access to the internet. Mostly wealthier and younger people. They can get a representative sample, but the standard errors around certain representatives will be much larger than others. They need to be very careful to account for this. Also, they contact respondents via email. They're not allowed to send unsolicited emails though, so I would like to see where they draw their sample. That's not clear and I can't find much information about it online (although I haven't looked very hard either).

As for party branding loosening, we see this with elections all the time. It's not that the brands are loosening, but that we're in a period where politicians campaign to the opinion polls. IMO, this is the sleaziest time in history for politicians, elections, and campaigns. Rather than taking a stance and allowing the vote to be a referendum on your party positions, the parties now use used car salesmen weasel techniques to obfuscate their platforms and pander to everyone by telling them what they want to hear. Many people are intelligent enough to see through that BS, but the majority of people aren't. More to the point, there's proven psychological motivations that work as sales techniques. In short, I don't believe parties should be in the business of selling themselves. They should be presenting themselves and letting people make a clear decision. I don't believe there's any practical way of addressing that issue though.

[Michael Hardner]

There's a number of methodological problems that need to be considered and addressed with online polling. For instance, access to internet.

From my university stats classes, I recall that such problems can fade over time. Is internet access really something that signifies wealth and youth these days ? I remember the case study of the US "Dewey Defeats Truman" election, which if I recall had used telephone polling at a time when telephones were only owned by wealthier people. Eventually phones (land lines) were universally enough used - maybe we're there with the web now, especially email ?

It's not that the brands are loosening, but that we're in a period where politicians campaign to the opinion polls. IMO, this is the sleaziest time in history for politicians, elections, and campaigns.

One man's sleazy is another man's flexible, though. I get what you're saying but when the NDP goes to the right of the Liberals, doesn't that set a new benchmark for ... uh ... flexisleaze ?

Rather than taking a stance and allowing the vote to be a referendum on your party positions, the parties now use used car salesmen weasel techniques to obfuscate their platforms and pander to everyone by telling them what they want to hear.

Oh, ok - we're saying the same thing. I'm just saying it's a loosening of the brand and you're saying it's political opportunism/sleaziness.

In short, I don't believe parties should be in the business of selling themselves. They should be presenting themselves and letting people make a clear decision. I don't believe there's any practical way of addressing that issue though.

Well, this may be the final death of old-style politics then. I won't vote for Hudak but I will commend him on presenting the facts on what he plans to do, and letting people make the clear decision. As much as I am a middle-of-the-road voter, I really despise how the Liberals govern by polls, I have much more admiration for vision, even if it's not a vision I can follow.

[cybercoma]

The methods aren't that simple, MH. It depends on how the contact the sample and find them. If they have certain characteristics that are biased, then it will bias the results. It's just something that needs to be considered. It's like the Dewey issue. Most people have Internet, but even amongst those with the net are vastly different skill sets. This can affect who responds and who doesn't. The people left may not accurately represent the general population. They may have certain common characteristics, while those missed may have different characteristics, even though they will all vote. It's just something that needs to be understood.

About parties, I think it's more insidious then moving. My argument is that they're not being clear. They sell themselves to the public in whatever way the public wants to hear,while governing another way. It's different than outright lies; it's more a marketing thing. Think of watching a movie trailer, then being disappointed with the movie because the trailer wasn't an accurate depiction. The trailer is the campaigns these days. The way they govern is the actual movie. I would like to see trailers that accurately represent the movies, so I can make an informed choice about what I'm going to see and be satisfied with my decision. I don't want to get to the movies only to feel cheated because the trailer panted the movie in a very different light. I don't think this is particular to any party and I hate it. That's why I sport Trudeau with the abortion thing because at least he's saying, "this is exactly what you get with the LPC."

[CPCFTW]

What are you talking about? NDP and Liberal voters are more than twice as likely to vote for the other party than the PCs. This is also cross sectional data, a snapshot at this moment in the Ontario election. So it doesn't speak to the broader tendencies or any tendencies over time. And in any case this is provincial politics, so it has nothing to do with Harper Conservatives or the federal parties.

Harper got 40% of the vote. This "snapshot" shows that it's not a stretch to assume 1/6th of the remaining 60% would have voted for the CPC as a 2nd choice... leading to over 50% support of Harper. So it was unfair of the lefties led by Brigette Depape to attempt to undermine the democratically elected government. A lot of lefties seem to act like democracy only works if it elects who they want in power... if not then the system is broken and we have to occupy parks and throw faeces at police officers!

[Mighty AC]

Here's the thing about government organizations though. There's never enough money. Education funding is at an all time high and teacher to student ratio is very low. . .

Yet for some reason, we see stories like this. [story about students being asked to stay home]

...

Perhaps the education should focus more money on special ed and less on Daycare for 5 year olds and allowing tenured teachers who are already receiving their pensions from supply teaching.

It's amazing to see the frequency of violent special needs and behaviour problem kids in schools. Some kids can be very normal, docile students but then encounter their particular trigger and they blow. I've seen kids punching, kicking, choking, biting, scratching teachers, admin staff and other students over seemingly nothing at all. Some of the kids throw chairs, desks, equipment, etc. at other students. I've had colleagues who teach kids that get angry and then just urinate or defecate on the classroom floor. The safety of the rest of the class has to come first so these kids do have to be removed and isolated at times. One last resort strategy is a modified day, where students only attend school for a short period of time and then go home. If they handle the shortened day, they work up to longer and longer periods at school until they can handle the normal schedule.

Anyway, under a Hudak regime, these kids will not receive the special help they require. Even worse they will be will be in regular classrooms where they will monopolize teacher time, robbing the rest, of what Tim vows will be larger classes, from instructional time. It's a lose, lose situation for everyone involved.

As for your comment about retired teachers still acting as occasional teachers, I'm indifferent. They don't get paid anymore than young substitutes and they have far more experience, so from and education and classroom management perspective they are generally better for the students. From a union or fairness perspective, they are robbing job opportunities from young teachers who could use the income.

Edited May 25, 2014 by Mighty AC

[cybercoma]

Anyone know why Hudak is ducking the other leaders in the debates?

[Boges]

Anyone know why Hudak is ducking the other leaders in the debates?

Scheduling conflict.

It's just a debate for Northern Issue. Hudak's needs to focus Suburban Toronto/GTA.

The Liberals cancelling the rail-link up there and waffling on the Ring of Fire development "should" make them unelectable up North.

[cybercoma]

There's no scheduling conflict. When your campaigning you make the debates, unelectable in that area or not. He wants to be Premier of the province, then he will need to govern for the entire province not just the GTA. Showing complete disregard for the North is entirely irresponsible and more to the point undemocratic.

[Boges]

There's no scheduling conflict. When your campaigning you make the debates, unelectable in that area or not. He wants to be Premier of the province, then he will need to govern for the entire province not just the GTA. Showing complete disregard for the North is entirely irresponsible and more to the point undemocratic.

Why isn't there a suburban debate? A Niagara Region Debate? A Bordertown Debate? A Toronto only Debate?

Why does a certain region feel the need for its own debate? I understand their needs are different but I can't get worked up over this.

Do they have different debates for regions of the nations in Federal campaigns? You get English and French, that's it. You could have Federal debates for the 5 specific regions of the country (East, Quebec, Ontario, West and North) but they don't.

I looked to see a visual representation of the political clout of the North

It's kind of like the CPC and Quebec. You just have to cut your losses and ignore certain parts of the region you're trying to elected in. The North is a PC wasteland.

[Boges]

Apparently Dalton didn't show up for the debate in 2011.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/05/24/tim_hudaks_debate_boycott_disrespects_democracy_cohn.html

It's a decent strategy for the PCs actually.

The suggested motives for a PC boycott? Hudak has written off northern seats. He wants to prop up the faltering campaign of NDP Leader Andrea Horwath by giving her a clear shot at the Liberals’ Kathleen Wynne (Tories benefit in many ridings when New Democrats peel away Liberal votes). And he wants these two rivals to damage each other while he emerges unscathed.

Blah Blah Undemocratic. I don't understand why there's a Northern debate anyway.

Edited May 26, 2014 by Boges

[cybercoma]

As a matter of fact they do have regional debates in the federal campaign. And it's because of Hudak's reaction to Dalton not showing up that I'm even bringing up his absence in the first place.

Edited May 26, 2014 by cybercoma

[Mighty AC]

Interesting article about Hudak's Bazillion Jobs plan. It seems that half of the jobs will be created by measures the Liberals already have in place and the other half is complete BS. Tim seems to think that corporate tax cuts will create jobs..unfortunately economists don't agree. Throw in the fact that he has to eliminate 100,000 education, health and social service jobs to pay for those cuts and this dude is bad news.

His job creation strategy is based heavily on the notion that cutting corporate taxes causes businesses to create jobs a theory that relies, according to Nobel-Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman, on the confidence fairy. Its a striking comment on how far to the right the mainstream media has drifted that Hudaks plan is being treated somewhat seriously.

http://www.ipolitics.ca/2014/05/14/a-million-jobs-heck-why-not-a-zillion/

[Boges]

Throw in the fact that he has to eliminate 100,000 education, health and social service jobs to pay for those cuts and this dude is bad news.

No Wynne is bad news. Anyone who thinks the current level of the public service is reasonable is delusional. I don't notice a marked improvement in my government in the last 11 years, but the price of government has skyrocketed.

And Wynne has said she doesn't plan to make efficiencies anywhere. So her pledge to balance the budget is, quite frankly, another Liberal lie.

[jacee]

Mighty AC, on 27 May 2014 - 11:32 PM, said:Throw in the fact that he has to eliminate 100,000 education, health and social service jobs to pay for those cuts and this dude is bad news.

No Wynne is bad news. Anyone who thinks the current level of the public service is reasonable is delusional. I don't notice a marked improvement in my government in the last 11 years, but the price of government has skyrocketed.

And Wynne has said she doesn't plan to make efficiencies anywhere. So her pledge to balance the budget is, quite frankly, another Liberal lie.

STOP! You're both right!

Hudak and Wynne are both bad news!

There's a better choice.

.