Elections Rumour

Ricki Bobbi · September 3, 2006

Against a leaderless, rudderless Liberal party, they should be in majority territory.

Why?

jdobbin · September 3, 2006

Why?

Because it is unlikely going to get better than it is now.

Ricki Bobbi · September 3, 2006

Here's why it will get better.

This reminds me of last summer. Everybody saying how the Conservatives should be doing better while they took the summer to work the grassroots and lay the foundation for the victory last January.

Of course the Liberals are going to dominate the headlines, and get the coinciding boost in the polls, due to the leadership race being the only real game in Ottawa at the moment.

But you go ahead and convince yourself these polls are bad news for the Conservatives. Wait until the Liberals have a leader to put to the test. Then we'll see how close the Conservatives are to a majority.

The only realistic winners are Iggy and Dion. Iggy is a Stockwell Day waiting to happen in terms of media and Dion isn't too well thought of in Quebec and his weak English will hurt in the rest of Canada.

Any actual thought behind why you think it won't get better for the Conservatives?

jdobbin · September 3, 2006

Any actual thought behind why you think it won't get better for the Conservatives?

Afghanistan.

Ricki Bobbi · September 3, 2006

Any actual thought behind why you think it won't get better for the Conservatives?

Afghanistan.

That's good to hear.

Simplistic, arrogant Liberals yet again over-confident with no real clue.

Why couldn't the Conservatives win in 2006? One-word answer ... Harper.

Why can't we win a majority next election? One-word answer ... Afghanistan.

But, it isn't top of mind to most people. For those who will cast their vote on that issue alone, the events in Afghanistan haven't changed their vote intnention.

There are a lot of reasons why we will win a majority in the post I made above.

Keep up the arrogance though. That's the surest route to a Conservative majority.

Natural Governing Party ... BAH!

geoffrey · September 3, 2006

Afghanistan doesn't affect my day to dad life. Tax cuts do. I'll vote for the party that gives me more on the second.

(I support the Afghan mission anyways)

That's why the Liberals won't be in power for a long time, they struggle to gain every little special interest group's support... and they lose the bigger picture. The average Canadian doesn't care about gay rights, Hezbollah, Hamas, AIDS, Afghanistan, Iraq, American trade relations, ect. ect..

The average Canadian cares that his or her family is better off then the year before. I see that in the CPC through direct results... tax cuts, getting criminals off our streets, ect. ect.. These have real impacts in day to day life. If they legal gay marriage or give more money to corrupt regimes to fight AIDS in Africa, that doesn't really change anything for me. Most Canadians are like me, they want to see results for themselves, their family and their community.

You don't get that from any left of centre party in Canada.

jdobbin · September 3, 2006

Afghanistan doesn't affect my day to dad life. Tax cuts do. I'll vote for the party that gives me more on the second.
(I support the Afghan mission anyways)

The Liberal income tax cuts were better than the Tory GST cut by a long shot.

And Afghanistan might not have affected your personal life but it is affecting how people think of Conservatives. The polls have shown that all summer. This why things might be as good as they get if Afghanistan proves to be a problem long term.

Americans supported Iraq for a long time too. That isn't the case now.

Ricki Bobbi · September 3, 2006

The Liberal income tax cuts were better than the Tory GST cut by a long shot.
And Afghanistan might not have affected your personal life but it is affecting how people think of Conservatives. The polls have shown that all summer. This why things might be as good as they get if Afghanistan proves to be a problem long term.

Americans supported Iraq for a long time too. That isn't the case now.

Let's take a look at this assertion. Here is a link with the 12 polls released from the start of June until now (about the middle of the page).

10 of the 12 have Conservative support in the range of 36 to 39%. We got 36.3% of the vote in January.

So how exactly are the polls showing how Afghanistan is affecting the way people think about the Conservatives?

It appears to me the electorate didn't think the Liberal tax cuts were the better choice in January.

jdobbin · September 3, 2006

Let's take a look at this assertion. Here is a link with the 12 polls released from the start of June until now (about the middle of the page).
10 of the 12 have Conservative support in the range of 36 to 39%. We got 36.3% of the vote in January.

So how exactly are the polls showing how Afghanistan is affecting the way people think about the Conservatives?

It appears to me the electorate didn't think the Liberal tax cuts were the better choice in January.

Those aren't polls asking about Afghanistan.

There are polls have been showing Canadian feelings on the war and those are the ones the Tories are concerned about. This past week, they have combined the polls on Afghanistan and on the election prospects. It has shown that it is now affecting support in places where Tories need to win.

You think Afghanistan will be meaningless in the next election?

geoffrey · September 3, 2006

I'd take either tax cut myself, they are very comparable. But realistically, the GST did benefit the poor more.

The Liberals would have already imposed a Carbon Tax which would have very real impacts on my life being in Saud... I mean Alberta. Things like this are those taxes that you don't see with the Liberals, but would have major impacts on my standard of living. Same with the corporate tax cut, that benefited me as well... benefitted all Canadians.

There is only one taxpayer in Canada (believe it or not, corporations don't really pay tax, that cost is paid by you and your portfolio), the CPC cut more taxes overall and aren't going to impose the Carbon Tax.

jdobbin · September 3, 2006

I'd take either tax cut myself, they are very comparable. But realistically, the GST did benefit the poor more.

That's not what non partisan experts said. The links have been put up time and time again.

Ricki Bobbi · September 3, 2006

Those aren't polls asking about Afghanistan.
There are polls have been showing Canadian feelings on the war and those are the ones the Tories are concerned about. This past week, they have combined the polls on Afghanistan and on the election prospects. It has shown that it is now affecting support in places where Tories need to win.

You think Afghanistan will be meaningless in the next election?

Feel free to link to these mythical polls if you want. Strange how the issue isn't effecting the vote intention numbers. :lol:

Far too early too tell if Afghanistan will be an issue in the next election. Many things could happen in the interim.

Afghanistan being an issue in the next election will have a whole lot to do with who wins the Liberal leadership.

If Ignatieff wins Afghanistan becomes a winning issue for the Conservatives, so the Liberals won't bring it up.

Aghanistan becomes an issue in the next election is the Lbierals wet dream. If that is all you are pinning your hopes on, thanks. Makes the path to a majority that much easier.

A three-way fight between the Libs, NDP and Greens over Aghanistan opponents leaves a lot of people with no choice but the Conservatives.

jdobbin · September 3, 2006

Feel free to link to these mythical polls if you want. Strange how the issue isn't effecting the vote intention numbers.
Far too early too tell if Afghanistan will be an issue in the next election. Many things could happen in the interim.

Afghanistan being an issue in the next election will have a whole lot to do with who wins the Liberal leadership.

If Ignatieff wins Afghanistan becomes a winning issue for the Conservatives, so the Liberals won't bring it up.

Aghanistan becomes an issue in the next election is the Lbierals wet dream. If that is all you are pinning your hopes on, thanks. Makes the path to a majority that much easier.

A three-way fight between the Libs, NDP and Greens over Aghanistan opponents leaves a lot of people with no choice but the Conservatives.

Here is one link on the mythical polls.

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/art...98&lb=brusc

And opinion has already gone against it in Quebec to the extent that there is very little room for growth in the Conservative vote.

I have no idea who will win the Liberal leadership. How Ignatieff voted will definitely matter but it doesn't mean that if the Liberals don't bring it up that it won't be an issue.

There were a lot of people here hankering for an election this fall. That enthusiam has disappeared. There has been no growth in the Conservative support to warrant a majority.

The fact that they have not been able to capitalize on the Liberals in their prolonged leadership campaign is telling.

If the Tories want to run on Afghanistan, there will have to be a lot of improvement there in the next year.

Ricki Bobbi · September 3, 2006

Here is one link on the mythical polls.
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/art...98&lb=brusc

And opinion has already gone against it in Quebec to the extent that there is very little room for growth in the Conservative vote.

I have no idea who will win the Liberal leadership. How Ignatieff voted will definitely matter but it doesn't mean that if the Liberals don't bring it up that it won't be an issue.

There were a lot of people here hankering for an election this fall. That enthusiam has disappeared. There has been no growth in the Conservative support to warrant a majority.

The fact that they have not been able to capitalize on the Liberals in their prolonged leadership campaign is telling.

If the Tories want to run on Afghanistan, there will have to be a lot of improvement there in the next year.

The Tories won't run on Afghanistan. They will run on their record as a government, propose policies and explain how they will govern with a majority. The Liberals can *attack* *attack* *attack* all they want this time. *Scary* *scary* *scary* didn't work in January and *Afghanistan* *Afghanistan* *Afghanistan* won't work next spring.

Great poll. 57% of the respondents in Canada support the issue. That doesn't leave enough opposition to make a viable issue in the election. One party representing the view of a majority of Canadians with four others fighting over a minority of the voters? Seems good for the Conservatives.

Yet again, show the polls for Quebec. The Conservatives only got 25% of the vote in La Belle Provence. There would have to be at least 70% opposition to the mission for the issue to cap Conservative growth in Quebec.

It's much more than just how Ignatieff voted. It's the statments, and writing, he has done on the issue. He has been one of the strongest supporters of the mission in the Liberal caucus. If he backtracks ... ditherer. If he stays the course ... no issue for the CPC. (The Greens and NDP would take far more votes from the Liberals than the Conservatives on this issue.) Win-win for the Conservatives.

The Conservatives do not want an election here this fall. But convince yourself about the *hankering* for a fall election.

Parties are naturally expected to *gain* support during a leadership campaign because they get so much more media coverage. Why do you think other parties should gain support while the Liberals are getting tons of free media over their leadership race?

Doesn't really matter. You keep avoiding the question because you can't come up with an answer. Don't worry. A Conservative majority truly will be a good thing for Canada, and it is a lot easier to rage against the machine than to support your party while in power. :lol:

jdobbin · September 3, 2006

Doesn't really matter. You keep avoiding the question because you can't come up with an answer. Don't worry. A Conservative majority truly will be a good thing for Canada, and it is a lot easier to rage against the machine than to support your party while in power.

The Liberals are barely mentioning Afghanistan. It comes up all on its own in the polls.

And the poll I showed you was just the beginning of the spring. The one earlier in this thread shows how much support has slipped since then.

And you asked a question?

This thread was about about rumours that an election was a possibility soon. It really doesn't seem likely. Show me where the gains will be. Can't win any more seats in Alberta.

geoffrey · September 3, 2006

This thread was about about rumours that an election was a possibility soon. It really doesn't seem likely. Show me where the gains will be. Can't win any more seats in Alberta.

Correct, there are no gains to be made right now, except maybe in the Maritimes... but that's merely a few seats.

August1991 · September 3, 2006

The Liberal income tax cuts were better than the Tory GST cut by a long shot.

There is a world of difference between a promised tax cut and seeing 6% on every receipt.

And Afghanistan might not have affected your personal life but it is affecting how people think of Conservatives. The polls have shown that all summer. This why things might be as good as they get if Afghanistan proves to be a problem long term.

Summer is a slow news time, and the Israeli incursion in Lebanon dominated the news. Many Canadians would prefer not to hear about war and Harper has not been shy to take a position.

Dobbin, I'm not saying the Tories are high in the polls or even extremely popular. They're not. But I'd wait until the fall session got underway before drawing any conclusions.

Also, I don't think there was any intention to have a fall election. Harper certainly is focussed on winning a majority and I suspect that at the moment, Harper believes the best way to do that is to go as long as possible as a minority.

Ricki Bobbi · September 3, 2006

The Liberals are barely mentioning Afghanistan. It comes up all on its own in the polls.

Afghanistan will be an issue in the next election because it comes up in polls about Afghanistan? You already admitted it isn't coming up in general voter intention polls.

And the poll I showed you was just the beginning of the spring. The one earlier in this thread shows how much support has slipped since then.

And you asked a question?

Yes, and I will repeat it. Conventional political wisdom holds that a party will gain popular support during a leadership campaign because of the extra media coverage they get. This means that the Liberals should be gaining support at the expense of the other national parties. Yet have argued repeatedly that it is a bad sign for the Conservatives that they are only *maintaining* their level of support since the election during the Liberal leadership race. What have you seen, or what makes you have this opinion?

This thread was about about rumours that an election was a possibility soon. It really doesn't seem likely. Show me where the gains will be. Can't win any more seats in Alberta.

From earlier in the thread.

The Conservatives are up slightly in both Ontario and Quebec but nohting much. No more than a total of a 10 seat swing in the best case scenario. Using this week's SES poll.
There are some interesting thing happening in the Maritimes. The Conservatives lead the Liberals by 8% in the region. Considering the Liberals won the popular vote in all four provinces in January it has to make you wonder if things are going right for Harper et. al.

Conservative support in Quebec may be *wavering* but it is still stronger than it was in January.

If there were another election in 2006 the Conservatives would probably win a stronger minority as a best case scenario. Harper is on a mission for a majority government, thus no election this year

Answered all your questions. Good luck supporting the Liberals. Only five or six more years in opposition, unelss MacKay can pull of a win after Harper retires. :lol:

jdobbin · September 3, 2006

Correct, there are no gains to be made right now, except maybe in the Maritimes... but that's merely a few seats.

Possible there but enough for a majority?

jdobbin · September 3, 2006

There is a world of difference between a promised tax cut and seeing 6% on every receipt.
Summer is a slow news time, and the Israeli incursion in Lebanon dominated the news. Many Canadians would prefer not to hear about war and Harper has not been shy to take a position.

Dobbin, I'm not saying the Tories are high in the polls or even extremely popular. They're not. But I'd wait until the fall session got underway before drawing any conclusions.

Also, I don't think there was any intention to have a fall election. Harper certainly is focussed on winning a majority and I suspect that at the moment, Harper believes the best way to do that is to go as long as possible as a minority.

The tax cut that the Liberals had already passed was reversed on July 1 of this year. According to the taxpayer's federation, it meant a yearly increase of $67.50. The GST cut was funded through this reversal and there was also an employment tax credit. That means nothing to a senior who doesn't get that credit or is in a city that doesn't pass on the GST reduction like Toronto and Calgary.

Many seniors groups are starting to feel the sting now.

And this was hardly a slow summer news year. Harper himself said that he never thought his prime ministership would be so centered on foreign policy.

I think Bush said the same thing.

In 10 weeks, Bush risks losing the House and the Senate.

jdobbin · September 3, 2006

Answered all your questions. Good luck supporting the Liberals. Only five or six more years in opposition, unelss MacKay can pull of a win after Harper retires.

I have no idea who I will be supporting in the next election. I just know that I don't like GST cuts and prefer income tax cuts. I've said that Afghanistan poses a risk to whoever is in power. If the Liberals suddenly won a snap election and were in a minority situation, they could easily lose again because the Canadian public is very fickle on Afghanistan. There is very little trust or understanding about what is happening over there.

You seem to think it will be irrelevant.

There were lots of Americans who thought Iraq would be irrelevant. This year it will probably make a huge difference politically in Washington.

Ricki Bobbi · September 3, 2006

In your selective editing of my quote you *accidentally* cut off the next part where I said I wan't sure if it was enough for a majority and said for that reason I believed there wouldn't be an election in 2006.

To *repeat* the question you have ignored three times. Why do you think the Conservatives should be gaining support during the middle of the Liberal leadership race given all the free media the Liberals (mainly Ignatieff) are getting?

Correct, there are no gains to be made right now, except maybe in the Maritimes... but that's merely a few seats.

Possible there but enough for a majority?

jdobbin · September 3, 2006

In your selective editing of my quote you *accidentally* cut off the next part where I said I wan't sure if it was enough for a majority and said for that reason I believed there wouldn't be an election in 2006.
To *repeat* the question you have ignored three times. Why do you think the Conservatives should be gaining support during the middle of the Liberal leadership race given all the free media the Liberals (mainly Ignatieff) are getting?

Because there will be one leader and one platform instead of the mish mash that exists now. The Conservatives were expected to be in a much better position than they are now. Harper himself said he never expected to be so involved on foreign policy all summer.

Summer is when Ottawa hangs the "Gone Fishin'" sign up and MPs go home to their ridings. Most times the government gets a boost simply from not having Parliament in session.

And the race has been a yawner. It certainly hasn't helped the Liberals thus far.

You think polls remain static just because you think the Liberals are supported by all the media?

geoffrey · September 3, 2006

The Liberals (and therefore Conservative) success depends completely on what leader gets elected... any of the current choices is likely big time failure for the Liberals, with Ignatieff as the only possible positive candidate.

Rae might be able to take some NDP support, but he'll quickly lose the big corporate vote that the Liberals traditionally get. Alot of money leaves with that, and it's not something the cash strapped Liberals can afford right now when they are being out-fundraised by the conservatives 3:1 in dollars and 5:1 in financial supporters.

August1991 · September 3, 2006

The tax cut that the Liberals had already passed was reversed on July 1 of this year. According to the taxpayer's federation, it meant a yearly increase of $67.50. The GST cut was funded through this reversal and there was also an employment tax credit. That means nothing to a senior who doesn't get that credit or is in a city that doesn't pass on the GST reduction like Toronto and Calgary.
Many seniors groups are starting to feel the sting now.

Yeah but...

Overall, the Tory budget meant lower taxes and a chunk of money for parents with young kids. But let's not argue about taxes here.

Harper promised to cut the GST and give $100/month to kids and then he did it - in a very visible way. The Liberals have been making promises about GST and other taxes, about child care programmes for years.

This is not economics. It's about credibility. Nowadays, the Liberals come across as slick lawyers/marketing people who promise you alot and then when you look at the end result, somehow the picture has changed.