Canada vs Duffy vs PMO

[PIK]

#214 Harper knew. But who cares the Donahue part is where the action is. Watch Gerry throw his wife and son under the bus now.

[On Guard for Thee]

You still have time to scamper back to post 209 and change that 62% to 2%.

Perhaps you should scamper around and get a handle on the news. There are ample opportunities as pointed out in 199. If those people didnt think we were following it, they wouldnt be either.

[cybercoma]

Call me a masochist but as a Centrist I'm interested in the view from the Left. No sense just criticizing if you're not willing to listen. Listen, research, evaluate, opine.

Centrist? The only person on this forum more partisan than you is PIK.

[cybercoma]

Probably. Google the company principals and report back on the their backgrounds. I have no faith at all in companies doing phone surveys anyway, which is what Forum does for your link. If they are choosing at random, they likely are calling landlines. I know only a few people who would answer any phone call from a polling company, and they are hardly representative of average Canadians.

In any case, Mainstreet Technologies is a Liberal operation. Period..

The major researchers haven't been calling just landlines in years. It's usually a mixture of both landlines and cellphones.

[Keepitsimple]

Centrist? The only person on this forum more partisan than you is PIK.

You only see what you want to see. As I've mentioned several times - I voted for Trudeau the Elder and Chretien and if Marc Garneau was leader of the Liberals I would give them strong consideration them this time around. And yes, I've agreed with a lot of the basic philosophies of Harper lately. All told, I'd say that makes me pretty Centric - and leaning a bit to the right at this point in time. How versatile is your voting history? I think you only consider me partisan because you are so far to the Left.

[cybercoma]

I don't care how you vote. Your opinions and views on this forum put you squarely in the unapologetic Conservative partisan camp.

[ToadBrother]

You only see what you want to see. As I've mentioned several times - I voted for Trudeau the Elder and Chretien and if Marc Garneau was leader of the Liberals I would give them strong consideration them this time around. And yes, I've agreed with a lot of the basic philosophies of Harper lately. All told, I'd say that makes me pretty Centric - and leaning a bit to the right at this point in time. How versatile is your voting history? I think you only consider me partisan because you are so far to the Left.

I'm curious. I'm leaning towards the Conservatives more on the international front, because I think domestically his government has been quite frankly mediocre. But do you see any risk to having the same party in power for more than a decade? My view is that at some point near or at eight years, governments begin to falter in obvious and non-obvious ways, and re-electing the Tories means the next term will likely be far less productive than this term. It's one thing that troubles me and may yet cause me to change my mind. Democracy is not well-served by allowing parties to pretend that they have some special right to their position in power. Every governing party needs time in the wilderness to get rid of the cruft, and the Tories have a lot of cruft, a good portion of the Cabinet could probably stay home and no one would notice.

[Keepitsimple]

I'm curious. I'm leaning towards the Conservatives more on the international front, because I think domestically his government has been quite frankly mediocre. But do you see any risk to having the same party in power for more than a decade? My view is that at some point near or at eight years, governments begin to falter in obvious and non-obvious ways, and re-electing the Tories means the next term will likely be far less productive than this term. It's one thing that troubles me and may yet cause me to change my mind. Democracy is not well-served by allowing parties to pretend that they have some special right to their position in power. Every governing party needs time in the wilderness to get rid of the cruft, and the Tories have a lot of cruft, a good portion of the Cabinet could probably stay home and no one would notice.

Really good question and I agree there are risks with the same government for too long. Renewal is often good. Sometimes a Party can be renewed from within - with new blood that comes in through the electoral process - and old blood leaves. But more often, the bums get thrown out. To answer your question though, the first rule of government should be to "do no harm". Here in Ontario, we've been cursed with exactly the opposite - McGunity/Wynne have saddled us with debt, deficits and boondoggles that will drown us for decades. I believe the Harper government is still in a position to carry on that domestic "mediocrity" and do no harm. There's lots of talent on the benches that has not been in the spotlight - and an election is here to bring in new blood. If he's fortunate enough to get in, I think the wily old Harper with craft a surprisingly strong cabinet as part of the renewal. There is just too much risk with Trudeau's complete inability to grasp the issues and provide leadership to the country. As I said - if it was Marc Garneau, things would be a lot different but as of this minute, do no harm wins the day for me. The devil you know.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Keepitsimple

[ToadBrother]

Really good question and I agree there are risks with the same government for too long. Renewal is often good. Sometimes a Party can be renewed from within - with new blood that comes in through the electoral process - and old blood leaves. But more often, the bums get thrown out. To answer your question though, the first rule of government should be to "do no harm". Here in Ontario, we've been cursed with exactly the opposite - McGunity/Wynne have saddled us with debt, deficits and boondoggles that will drown us for decades. I believe the Harper government is still in a position to carry on that domestic "mediocrity" and do no harm. There's lots of talent on the benches that has not been in the spotlight - and an election is here to bring in new blood. If he's fortunate enough to get in, I think the wily old Harper with craft a surprisingly strong cabinet as part of the renewal. There is just too much risk with Trudeau's complete inability to grasp the issues and provide leadership to the country. As I said - if it was Marc Garneau, things would be a lot different but as of this minute, do no harm wins the day for me. The devil you know.

Frankly, the risks I see have little to do with domestic issues. All three parties are crowding the center so heavily it's getting hard to see the difference. As to new talent, what's the point when the PMO's steady drift to become a sort of cabinet-above-cabinet seems unstoppable. Yes, I'm aware that Harper didn't start this, and isn't that much worse than Chretien, but the fact is that if the head is getting senile, does it matter if the body has new abs?

As I said, I don't think Harper is that crafty, I think he's lucky, and as far as PM's go, he's been lackluster, much of his talent being spent on party management. I don't think it would be the worst thing that happened if his party won another term with he as PM, but neither do I think, domestically, it would be the worst thing if he lost. For me, the issues are geopolitical. I deeply distrust the Liberals and NDP when it comes to issues like ISIS and Russia.

[overthere]

The major researchers haven't been calling just landlines in years. It's usually a mixture of both landlines and cellphones.

and who answers their phones from unknown numbers on call display, or from those that identify themselves as polling firms?

My ancient mother and..... nobody else I know.

[guyser]

and who answers their phones from unknown numbers on call display, or from those that identify themselves as polling firms?

My ancient mother and..... nobody else I know.

Have to say, I do answer those calls to my landline.

So theres two.....FWIW.

[overthere]

That means that one of the respondents to those polls has mild dementia, and the other is strongly partisan and may or may not also have mild dementia.

So much for random.

[Keepitsimple]

As to new talent, what's the point when the PMO's steady drift to become a sort of cabinet-above-cabinet seems unstoppable. Yes, I'm aware that Harper didn't start this, and isn't that much worse than Chretien, but the fact is that if the head is getting senile, does it matter if the body has new abs?

I hear you and I don't like it either......but here's a thought on the PMO. Because of Trudeau's inability to grasp issues and let's face it, so far an absence of any real leadership skills - the power and influence of the PMO and/or backroom people will be even greater. That's what I fear most about the Liberals with Trudeau as the leader - it's hard to tell who's pulling the strings and what strings they'll pull.

[ToadBrother]

I hear you and I don't like it either......but here's a thought on the PMO. Because of Trudeau's inability to grasp issues and let's face it, so far an absence of any real leadership skills - the power and influence of the PMO and/or backroom people will be even greater. That's what I fear most about the Liberals with Trudeau as the leader - it's hard to tell who's pulling the strings and what strings they'll pull.

I'm not sure that a weakwilled strongman is in fact a worst option than a strongwilled one. Neither am I convinced Trudeau is an idiot. Inexperienced, to be sure, but not much worse than when Harper became leader of the Alliance. I don't really buy into the Tories' "shiny pony" anti-Trudeau meme. And, as I said, it's almost certain that domestic policies will be so similar that it may be hard to tell the difference, save around the edges. I might even vote Liberal, if they and the NDP didn't have such absurd views on foreign threats like ISIS.

I think governments need defeating, and I think letting a government run over a decade is simply asking for an increasingly bad government. Look at the horror story that the Alberta PCs are becoming. Renewal is absolutely essential to democracy, more important in some ways than short term economic concerns. Vote Tory in 2015, and expect an absolutely awful government by 2019.

[overthere]

Renewal is absolutely essential to democracy,

How is that working out for you in Ontario? Financially?

[ToadBrother]

How is that working out for you in Ontario? Financially?

I don't live in Ontario, I live in BC, where I very much think the BC Liberals are showing all the sides of "government dementia". It's still largely the same cadre of senior ministers, lead by Rich Coleman, who run the government, while, so far as I can see, the Premier is little more than figurehead.

As to Ontario, I don't see that the Liberals were rewarded for their evil ways so much as the Ontario Conservatives were punished for another bad leader.

[Keepitsimple]

I'm not sure that a weakwilled strongman is in fact a worst option than a strongwilled one. Neither am I convinced Trudeau is an idiot. Inexperienced, to be sure, but not much worse than when Harper became leader of the Alliance. I don't really buy into the Tories' "shiny pony" anti-Trudeau meme. And, as I said, it's almost certain that domestic policies will be so similar that it may be hard to tell the difference, save around the edges. I might even vote Liberal, if they and the NDP didn't have such absurd views on foreign threats like ISIS.

I think governments need defeating, and I think letting a government run over a decade is simply asking for an increasingly bad government. Look at the horror story that the Alberta PCs are becoming. Renewal is absolutely essential to democracy, more important in some ways than short term economic concerns. Vote Tory in 2015, and expect an absolutely awful government by 2019.

Valid concerns. Lots to think about for you I guess. I have a bit more faith but I think the fact that I would have given serious consideration to the Liberals if they had Marc Garneau as leader - that tells you that I share some of your concerns. I guess we'll just have to keep paying attention and for many potential Liberal voters, they'll be waiting for Trudeau to demonstrate some compelling leadership and an effective alternative.

[cybercoma]

and who answers their phones from unknown numbers on call display, or from those that identify themselves as polling firms?

My ancient mother and..... nobody else I know.

The results are then weighted based on demographics. It's as reliable as it can be.

[overthere]

It's as reliable as it can be.

and it has been unreliable pretty often.

It relies on people looking at their call display and taking a call from a polling firm.

How do you weight that?

[Michael Hardner]

and it has been unreliable pretty often.

It relies on people looking at their call display and taking a call from a polling firm.

How do you weight that?

It's called non-response, and in a properly done poll this should be reported too.

I would submit that firms that were accurate in the past 3 years or so should be the ones we follow more closely moving forward.

[overthere]

It's called non-response, and in a properly done poll this should be reported too.

I would submit that firms that were accurate in the past 3 years or so should be the ones we follow more closely moving forward.

That does not answer the question of how it is weighted, and exactly how you account for the very numerous people who vote but don't want to waste time by getting themselves on a call list?

I simply don't believe any corporate claims that polling firms don't return over and over to people that answer their phones when they know it's a polling firm.

Wouldn't non-response refer to people who answer and refuse to participate?.

[Michael Hardner]

That does not answer the question of how it is weighted,

Ok, right. Well actually, I think there are two different issues:

non-response, which should NOT be weighted and should just be reported alongside the results

weighting, which is likely a proprietary secret

There are enough factors at play here that mean, to me, the overall approach needs to mature. For now, I'd go with whatever companies were right last time around.

and exactly how you account for the very numerous people who vote but don't want to waste time by getting themselves on a call list?

The poll should actually attempt to do random sampling of all voters. From about the 1960s to the cellphone era, telephone books were perfect randomizers and so this was practically taken care of. Pollsters got lazy and you ended up with certain groups underrepresented in land-lines.

This actually has a precedent, somewhat, in the famous DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN headline. The pollsters at that time also assumed that telephone polling was random when it was not.

I simply don't believe any corporate claims that polling firms don't return over and over to people that answer their phones when they know it's a polling firm.

You have to keep in mind that they make money by being accurate, not just by predicting anything at all.

Wouldn't non-response refer to people who answer and refuse to participate?.

It should be both, I think.

[overthere]

For now, I'd go with whatever companies were right last time around.

They ere all wrong, and badly, in Alberta last time.

BC too I believe.

I think that polls are now mostly just a political tool. The results are more or less purchased in advance.

[WWWTT]

Deleted!

Edited April 30, 2015 by WWWTT

[On Guard for Thee]

Bayne says he needs 3 to 6 weeks more for this case to be properly heard. Do the math. Worst thing Harper could have imagined.