NDP Make Big Move in Latest EKOS Poll

[jacee]

And that position will change once they've received their first Federal majority mandate.............

That'll be soon, so we'll see.

.

[Bob Macadoo]

And that position will change once they've received their first Federal majority mandate.............

.....you mean like open & transparent?

You know who makes the worst supervisor at work? The dogf**ker who gets promoted to improve production. He then believes everyone must be a laze-about like him and proceeds to alienate everyone sniffing for loafers.

[BC_chick]

The first NDP tv ad is about to air.

The Cons & Libs have been running campaign ads for a year.soaring-in-polls-ndp-tv-ad-features-thomas-mulcairLast week, a CROP poll of federal voting intentions in Quebec showed that Mulcair has his party where Jack Layton took it in the Orange Wave of the 2011 federal election. Layton scored 42.9% of the popular vote in 2011. Last week, Mulcairs NDP was at 42% in Quebec.

A national poll from EKOS released Friday had Mulcairs NDP at 29.6% compared to 28.1% for Stephen Harpers Conservatives and 26.1% for Justin Trudeaus Liberals.

I'm thinking Canadians are ready for a real change, and see Mulcair as more viable than the other two.

.

Other than his staunch support of Israel, I like Mulcair. At the end of the day, this is Canada, not Israel so I will probably support the NDP this round too. I was LPC until 2011 and I don't see them winning me back any time soon.

[Civis Romanus sum]

Other than his staunch support of Israel, I like Mulcair. At the end of the day, this is Canada, not Israel so I will probably support the NDP this round too. I was LPC until 2011 and I don't see them winning me back any time soon.

The problem with Mulcair is he's promising everyone everything and has no money to pay for any of it.

[Derek 2.0]

That'll be soon, so we'll see.

.

I doubt it very much......But as I said before, when the polls far from indicated anything remote, I still do expect the NDP to remain the Official Opposition to a returning Harper Majority Government this Fall.

[jacee]

Oh well.

Others differ:

It wasnt all critiques. Not only did Mulroney repeatedly praise Trudeau, but also

NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair, calling him the best opposition leader since John Diefenbaker.

/brian_mulroney_gives_stephen_harper_piece_of_his_mind

[eyeball]

I doubt it very much......But as I said before, when the polls far from indicated anything remote, I still do expect the NDP to remain the Official Opposition to a returning Harper Majority Government this Fall.

John Ivison: Tories may be considering nuclear option the Libs and NDP can’t match — lowering the GST

Match it? Blow it out of the water by scrapping income taxes for working people and increasing income taxes and the GST on rich filthy people.

[Derek 2.0]

Match it? Blow it out of the water by scrapping income taxes for working people and increasing income taxes and the GST on rich filthy people.

Riiiiight......and that will sound just as crazy as anything both the Liberals and NDP will offer in rebuttal to the ~34-35+ % voters that will return the Tories back to Ottawa with a Majority this Fall........Once this (and several other items) are announced in the coming weeks and months, feel free to start the unite the Left threads for 2019

[eyeball]

Nothing crazy at all about eliminating income taxes and using consumption taxes to fund government.

Neither is taxing wealthier people at a higher rate.

[PIK]

Mulciar is in the position to offer anything he wants, that is how the NDP works. Watch the alberta NDP change their colours, when they realize their policies will be failures also. And trudeau, anyone that would vote for him, will need their head examined. Like it or not , if you like your life style harper is the only way to go.

[cybercoma]

Mulciar is in the position to offer anything he wants, that is how the NDP works. Watch the alberta NDP change their colours, when they realize their policies will be failures also.

Except the NDP's policies have balanced more budgets per year in power than any other power, while the Conservatives actually have the highest deficit to GDP ratio amongst federal governments. Tell us again how disastrous NDP policies are compared to Conservatives.

[Keepitsimple]

.......... while the Conservatives actually have the highest deficit to GDP ratio amongst federal governments........

How about explaining what you mean? Compared to other countries? Compared to previous Canadian governments? If you have a link, that would be helpful but I don't expect one. Here's a little history from a previous post:

Pierre Trudeau was PM from 1968 to 1985 with one "blink of an eye" interlude. He single-handedly took Canada's debt from virtually nothing to over $200 billion by the time he left - bloating government and leaving a structural deficit that continued to mount up debt. Mulroney couldn't tame the deficit/debt in his first two majorities and neither could Chretien in his first. While it's true that Chretien and Martin eventually balanced the budget in a future mandate, critics still question the wisdom of their methods.

That said, Debt should be seen through the lens of our GDP and the ability to finance debt - the debt to GDP ratio. Our economy has been expanding and Canada is in relatively good shape at this point - countries would die to have a ratio as strong as Canada's. As long as the economy keeps growing, our debt becomes less of a priority - with continued balanced budgets and no craziness on interest rates.

* Figure in brackets is Debt - adjusted for inflation

Debt % of GDP GDP

1962 14.8 (113.8) 33.0% 44.9

1971 20.3 (116.6) 20.6 98.4

1981 91.9 (219.1) 25.5% 60.5

1991 377.7 (557.7) 55.1% 685.4

1997 562.9 (765.1) 63.8% 882.7

2002 511.9 (620.3) 44.4% 1,152.9

2008 457.6 (493.3) 31.4% 1,453.6

2009 463.7 (495.1) 32.8% 1,413.3

2010 519.1 (543.4) 35.5% 1,458.8

2011 551.4 (561.0) 36.9% 1,495.7

2012 583.6 (588.8) 38.3% 1,521.3

2013 602.4 33.0% 1,825.0

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_public_debt

[cybercoma]

You can see how Conservatives have consistently raised the debt over the last 50+ years here.



Here's a chart from the Federal Department of Finance's report on the different parties and how well they balance the budget.



You can see that the NDP has had more years in surplus as a proportion of their time at the helm than even the Conservatives.

So you can stop peddling those lies about how the NDP are poor fiscal managers. By the only metric that seems to count to Conservatives (balancing the books), they're more conservative and better fiscal managers than the CPC themselves.

[Michael Hardner]

Can we have a cite for the last image ?

[Topaz]

Many time the NDP have said in the House they are good managers and the Tories don't seem to deny it . No one really knows who will win but watching the Tories come out after Justin, they are really scared!!! So scared that Harper is even talking about CPP and a couple years ago, he said he wouldn't change it!! No party can stay in power for ever and this could be there time for Canadians to show them the door.

[Ash74]

Nothing crazy at all about eliminating income taxes and using consumption taxes to fund government.

Neither is taxing wealthier people at a higher rate.

So you do want an income tax but only for the rich? Define rich? I have seen some pretty strange ideas what rich is to the Liberals and NDP

I agree that a consumption tax is a better way to go. Less bureaucracy.

[cybercoma]

Can we have a cite for the last image ?

The Federal Department of Finance. You can sift through the figures at the following link, but they are summarized in the table: http://www.fin.gc.ca/pub/frt-trf/index-eng.asp

[cybercoma]

So you do want an income tax but only for the rich? Define rich? I have seen some pretty strange ideas what rich is to the Liberals and NDP

I agree that a consumption tax is a better way to go. Less bureaucracy.

Strange idea that take into account crazy things like quintiles or the median income or poverty line.

[Keepitsimple]

Strange idea that take into account crazy things like quintiles or the median income or poverty line.

You mean the Low Income Cutoff that Stats Canada specifically warns against using it as a barometer for poverty?

[cybercoma]

You mean the Low Income Cutoff that Stats Canada specifically warns against using it as a barometer for poverty?

Do you actually think LICO determines whether or not you're "middle class"? How simple do we have to keep it, Keepitsimple?

[Keepitsimple]

Do you actually think LICO determines whether or not you're "middle class"? How simple do we have to keep it, Keepitsimple?

It means very little - and certainly has absolutely nothing to do with middle class. Not sure what you were thinking there. It's simply an arbitrary number that I think best exemplifies those who might be economically challenged. That said, personal circumstances create different needs and economic pressures. My mother is on her own in Montreal with an income of about $16,000 - still lives on her own in an apartment - and does very well. Those who would use the LICO as an indicator of "poverty" are just facilitating the "poverty industry" agenda. There's a big difference between poverty and being economically challenged. Not having a place to live is poverty. Not putting food on the table is poverty. Not having clothes to wear is poverty. Not being able to save is not poverty. Not being able to have all the cable channels is not poverty. Not having a cell phone is not poverty.

Edited May 29, 2015 by Keepitsimple

[cybercoma]

Personal circumstances have very little meaning when it comes to defining middle class. That's some tired garbage wealthy people make up to explain away their wealth. It doesn't matter if you have no money left after paying for your half a million dollar home, 3 cars, 2 vacations that year, your child's education, support your wife, etc. Just because you've spent all your money doesn't mean that you aren't middle class or even upper class. If you earn more money than 80% of the population, I'm sorry, but you're wealthy. By what measure? By the measure of what everyone earns.

[Bryan]

Personal circumstances have very little meaning when it comes to defining middle class.

It's the only meaning that really matters. Wealth is your net, not your gross. If you don't get to keep it, it's not a relevant number.

[eyeball]

So you do want an income tax but only for the rich? Define rich? I have seen some pretty strange ideas what rich is to the Liberals and NDP

I agree that a consumption tax is a better way to go. Less bureaucracy.

Better for the environment too if it encourages people to demand better-quality longer-lasting things that save them money.

Rich is when you can afford a lobbyist. Powerful is when you can afford a politician.

[cybercoma]

It's the only meaning that really matters. Wealth is your net, not your gross. If you don't get to keep it, it's not a relevant number.

This is a stupid argument on so many levels.