SirSpanky Posted August 18, 2005 Report Share Posted August 18, 2005 Remember this man has little real power. He is not nearly in so difficult a position as Harper and Martin. Any smart move he makes is just gravy, and any move he misses is just overshadowed by the big boys. He could be great, but as far as my opinion goes, he hasn't proved anything yet. Extremely likeable guy though; far more than the others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowDuck Posted August 18, 2005 Report Share Posted August 18, 2005 I don't find him "likeable" at all. He was a disgrace during the party leader debates prior to the last election - always trying to talk over everyone else. He came of as unprofessional, dogmatic and a little childish. Much better in parliment though. Pretty much the only grownup on the playground during the last session. Got a hell of a lot of his election platform put through, despite having so few seats. Really brilliant management of the situation. Glad I voted for him. Not sure I would want him in the PMO, but he sure as heck is a positive influence on the legislative process at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted August 18, 2005 Report Share Posted August 18, 2005 I've lost confidence in Harper...He isn't doing any good for the party, he is too much of a bean counter than a leader. He would be good as an MP in a powerful position (finance or something). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirror Posted August 18, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 18, 2005 Remember this man has little real power. He is not nearly in so difficult a position as Harper and Martin. Any smart move he makes is just gravy, and any move he misses is just overshadowed by the big boys. He could be great, but as far as my opinion goes, he hasn't proved anything yet. Extremely likeable guy though; far more than the others. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I must have missed that. What kind of power does Harper have again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirSpanky Posted August 18, 2005 Report Share Posted August 18, 2005 He doesn't, save more media attention. I just said Layton's in an easier position as the 3rd place leader. Also Harper is alot higher profile as the "alternative" to Martin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
err Posted August 20, 2005 Report Share Posted August 20, 2005 He doesn't, save more media attention. I just said Layton's in an easier position as the 3rd place leader. Also Harper is alot higher profile as the "alternative" to Martin. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Don't underestimate him... It would be foolish, considering the budget we just witnessed. Remember, Tommy Douglas was in third place... and he got us all health care.... No small feat.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoop Posted August 20, 2005 Report Share Posted August 20, 2005 Don't underestimate him... It would be foolish, considering the budget we just witnessed. Remember, Tommy Douglas was in third place... and he got us all health care.... No small feat.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Let's consider what Layton has done in this parliament. After the election he said that his caucus would only support the Liberal government instituted democratic reform including proportional representation. Yet he caves and totally gives in merely to for a one-time outlay of 4-5 Billion on social spending that the Liberals have reneged on. Methinks Mr. Layton's momentum is illusory. With tempers having cooled down over the summer people are re-examining the leaders. Could some votes be termporarily parked with Layton, who was pretty much out of the spotlight during the non-confidence vote? A vote that left all the main actors bloodied... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirror Posted August 20, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 20, 2005 NDP's Layton calls for gas price investigation NDP leader Jack Layton is calling for an investigation into the price of gas.Layton, who was in Montreal Saturday, accused oil companies of being responsible for the escalating cost of gasoline. Layton is demanding that the government launch an inquiry to determine whether or not multinational oil companies are colluding with each other. He also reminded reporters that his party proposed a bill in the House of Commons asking that a permanent commission be established to deal with energy prices. I think this suggestion is going to strike a chord amogst the average Canadian who must really be impacted by these rising energy prices. I know for myself just the cost of getting to and from work seems like it has doubled for the price of gasoline. So of couse I am going to ensure that I am compensated for this by my employer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
err Posted August 20, 2005 Report Share Posted August 20, 2005 Let's consider what Layton has done in this parliament. After the election he said that his caucus would only support the Liberal government instituted democratic reform including proportional representation. Yet he caves and totally gives in merely to for a one-time outlay of 4-5 Billion on social spending that the Liberals have reneged on. Caves in... who caved in... Mr. Martin had to delay a big tax break for corp Canada and help Canadian citizens... I can see why you conservatives are against that.... But it was a good reflection of the souls of the three parties....Conservatives - down with the poor... lets join the USA in IRAQ Liberals - Talk socialist before election, govern conservative when in NDP - Priorities are citizens of Canada.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirror Posted August 21, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 Blue turns green when Layton talks Eco talk excites some sovereignists. In Montreal, he calls for oil industry inquiry and says NDP is greener than the Greens New Democratic leader Jack Layton may be Canada's best hope for keeping the country together, judging by the reaction of several young Quebecers. "If Canada were run by Jack Layton, I wouldn't be a sovereignist," said Olivier Bouchard-Lamontagne, 24, moments after hearing Layton speak in Montreal yesterday. "We are hearing more of this reaction as people come to know the new NDP, if you will, the NDP led by a Quebecer," Layton commented in an interview after. This is quite remarkable. Young Quebecers are stating that if Layton were our national leader they would consider dropping their push for sovereignty. Layton is a big environmentalist not having owned a car for the past 15 or more years. Apparently he bicycles to and from work and everywhere else when he has the opportunity to do so. He is quite the role model for young people particularly for who care about our fragile planet and our environment. He walks the talk. No wonder more and more Canadians are connecting with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
err Posted August 21, 2005 Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 Excellent post mirror..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoop Posted August 21, 2005 Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 This is quite remarkable. Young Quebecers are stating that if Layton were our national leader they would consider dropping their push for sovereignty. No wonder more and more Canadians are connecting with him. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The NDs have lost 4 points in Quebec from the previous SES poll. (That would be the poll you tout in your signature, so that means you do believe it's validity, doesn't it?) So they are losing support in a poll you are advertisng yet you ignore it to talk about the overwhelming evidence provided by the reaction of several young Quebeckers. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
err Posted August 21, 2005 Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 This is quite remarkable. Young Quebecers are stating that if Layton were our national leader they would consider dropping their push for sovereignty. No wonder more and more Canadians are connecting with him. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The NDs have lost 4 points in Quebec from the previous SES poll. (That would be the poll you tout in your signature, so that means you do believe it's validity, doesn't it?) I'll have to agree, the liberal party has surged a bit in Quebec over the past few months, and yes, the polls show that the NDP has dropped from 15 to 11%... That's where your conservatives were four months ago. Funny thing though, because your conservatives have dropped 7% (to 4%) since then, and have less than half of the support that the NDP has in Quebec... So they are losing support in a poll you are advertisng yet you ignore it to talk about the overwhelming evidence provided by the reaction of several young Quebeckers. That poll shows a very interesting graph as well.... Where only one party has had a (pretty much) constant growth in popularity over the past three years. The Liberals' trend is downward, and the Conservative trend is downward.SES Research Poll Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoop Posted August 21, 2005 Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 That poll shows a very interesting graph as well.... Where only one party has had a (pretty much) constant growth in popularity over the past three years. The Liberals' trend is downward, and the Conservative trend is downward. That's a very convenient analysis of a very misleading graph. It gives no indication of what is considered "Conservative" support up to 03Q4 (i.e. the approximate time of the merger.) Is it PC plus Alliance combined? Don't know the answer but can't really draw many 'trend' conclusions without knowing the answer - unless the conclusion you draw fits aone's pre-conceived agenda. The Conservatives biggest spike in the past two years was on election day. The only poll that really counts. The downward trend for the Conservatives only manifests itself because of this most recent SES result. Looking at the results up to 05Q2 you see a much more solid 30 percent vote for the CPC. But thanks for trying.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
err Posted August 21, 2005 Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 That poll shows a very interesting graph as well.... Where only one party has had a (pretty much) constant growth in popularity over the past three years. The Liberals' trend is downward, and the Conservative trend is downward.That's a very convenient analysis of a very misleading graph. Funny how the SES poll data is good when it serves your point... and not otherwise...The downward trend for the Conservatives only manifests itself because of this most recent SES result. Looking at the results up to 05Q2 you see a much more solid 30 percent vote for the CPC. And now they're at 4%... If my calculator is correct, they've lost 87% of their support since then..... wow.... Thanks for pointing this out..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirror Posted August 21, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 I have just been looking at the SES polling chart showing results from when they started polling in 2002 to 2005: Party/2002/Today/% Change Lib / 49% / 39% / Down 20.4% Con / 35% / 25% / Down 28.6% NDP / 10% / 19% / Up 90% This is really quite staggering when one analyses these results. The Layton New Democrats are about to converge with the Conservatives. Incredible turnaround for the NDP since Layton has become leader. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoop Posted August 21, 2005 Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF CANADA DIDN'T EXIST IN 2002 !!!!! Answer the question, yet again what did SES consider to be the "Conservatives" in 2002? Nice try though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
err Posted August 21, 2005 Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF CANADA DIDN'T EXIST IN 2002 !!!!!Answer the question, yet again what did SES consider to be the "Conservatives" in 2002? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And hopefully IT WONT EXIST IN 2006 !!!!!! But seriously, the party keeps having to morph into something that it thinks can survive.... I think the SES poll has taken that into consideration, and ignored all of the name changes.... but they just added up the redneck right-wing players.... (Sorry, I should have said "extreme right-wing players", because Paul Martin fits into the "right-wing player" group...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoop Posted August 21, 2005 Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 I think the SES poll has taken that into consideration, and ignored all of the name changes.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I think the poll is pretty tough to analyze for historic trends before the founding of the CPC without answering that question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted August 21, 2005 Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 Lib / 49% / 39% / Down 20.4% Con / 35% / 25% / Down 28.6% NDP / 10% / 19% / Up 90% Calculating %change for numbers that are already percentages is blatantly deceptive. For starters we see that 20% of the voters moved away from the conservatives (whoever they are) and only 9% went to the NDP. Where did the other 11% go? The BQ and the Greens? Second, these nation figures don't mean much since NDP support is mostly in cities and will not translate into the same number of seats that the Conservatives can get with their rural base. In other words, to have a chance at winning the same number of seats the NDP would have to be several points ahead of the conservatives in the polls. Lastly, each NDP seat takes a seat away from the Liberals (except in some ridings in Saskatchewan and BC) which means that a Conservative majority government will be much more likely as 3-way splits in the 907 area deliver the seats to the Conservatives (this is exactly what happened in Saskatoon in 2004). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoop Posted August 21, 2005 Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 Calculating %change for numbers that are already percentages is blatantly deceptive. For starters we see that 20% of the voters moved away from the conservatives (whoever they are) and only 9% went to the NDP. Where did the other 11% go? The BQ and the Greens? Second, these nation figures don't mean much since NDP support is mostly in cities and will not translate into the same number of seats that the Conservatives can get with their rural base. In other words, to have a chance at winning the same number of seats the NDP would have to be several points ahead of the conservatives in the polls. Lastly, each NDP seat takes a seat away from the Liberals (except in some ridings in Saskatchewan and BC) which means that a Conservative majority government will be much more likely as 3-way splits in the 907 area deliver the seats to the Conservatives (this is exactly what happened in Saskatoon in 2004). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sparhawk, valid points but not worth the effort. Mirror is just trying to get a rise out of you and it worked. Harper could win a majority and Mirror would be posting about the Conservatives in freefall. (You do remember that Decima poll that he hasn't mentioned again because it doesn't confirm his baiting activity.) Greg has made a general post about "bad behaviour" in the forums, but it isn't being applied equally. Mirror continues to start fights on the boards, call names and get away with it. That is the price we have to pay for the privilege of being on these boards. Constant bullying, name calling and harrassment by Mirror. He is above reproach, can call people names and tell them to shut up without public rebuke by Greg. As the old saying goes "the best way to deal with a pest is to ignore them." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirror Posted August 21, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF CANADA DIDN'T EXIST IN 2002 !!!!!Answer the question, yet again what did SES consider to be the "Conservatives" in 2002? Nice try though... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I thought that is pretty obvious. Isn't it the Alliance and/or Reform, whatever it was called, and the PCs combined? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.