$85,000 government poll to rate CPC policy popularity

[gerryhatrick]

After winning election, $85K government poll rated Tory policy popularity

Allan Woods, CanWest News Service

Published: Tuesday, September 05, 2006

OTTAWA - The Conservative government paid $85,446 just weeks after winning the federal election for an exhaustive public-opinion poll that critics say was unnecessary and appears designed to produce favourable partisan results rather than sound public policy.

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/politics...2da&k=41892

Focus groups (see "Harper hires polling firm to guide his path on environment" topic) revealed, and now expensive polling PAID FOR BY CANADIANS performed shortly after the election to find out if his five priorities are popular or not?

Harper didn't take long to lose his way on the whole accountability and corruption thing.

WHY ARE WE PAYING FOR WHAT IS CLEARLY PARTISAN POLLING???

[sharkman]

Hey pegger, keep digging. When you can find billions and billions lost, wasted and used as payola, you might have something worth starting a thread over. $85 thousand and change? I'm impressed they spent so little.

[gerryhatrick]

Hey pegger, keep digging. When you can find billions and billions lost, wasted and used as payola,

Billions and billions? Was it that much? My, how a few months can serve to distort reality for some!!

In any case, at some point the unrelated actions of others will not serve to excuse current actions.

Are you comfortable with this poll and it's cost? If you are honest you would admit that it was poorly advised. Even the staunchly Conservative Canadian Taxpayers Federation has critisized this sh#t.

[geoffrey]

Ya it's bad. Fire a couple of Health Canada paper pushers and were even.

[Canuck E Stan]

Are you comfortable with this poll and it's cost?

No I'm not, they should have had this group doing it.

Why hire a pollster for a one shot poll,put them on the payroll full time like the Liberals do.

[sharkman]

Hey pegger, keep digging. When you can find billions and billions lost, wasted and used as payola,

Billions and billions? Was it that much? My, how a few months can serve to distort reality for some!!

In any case, at some point the unrelated actions of others will not serve to excuse current actions.

Are you comfortable with this poll and it's cost? If you are honest you would admit that it was poorly advised. Even the staunchly Conservative Canadian Taxpayers Federation has critisized this sh#t.

So, what's up, pegger? You're almost respectful in your disagreement with me, but then in your private message to me you use terms like "mental retardation". Are you getting a little unstable or are you just trying to get around the name calling rule here at our forum? Either way, it's in rather poor taste, but nothing I'm not surprised about coming from you.

To address your above comments, I was honest the first time and am impressed they did a poll for 85 grand. If the Liberals had done this, you'd be all over the forum with the good news.

[gerryhatrick]

Hey pegger, keep digging. When you can find billions and billions lost, wasted and used as payola,

Billions and billions? Was it that much? My, how a few months can serve to distort reality for some!!

In any case, at some point the unrelated actions of others will not serve to excuse current actions.

Are you comfortable with this poll and it's cost? If you are honest you would admit that it was poorly advised. Even the staunchly Conservative Canadian Taxpayers Federation has critisized this sh#t.

So, what's up, pegger? You're almost respectful in your disagreement with me, but then in your private message to me you use terms like "mental retardation". Are you getting a little unstable or are you just trying to get around the name calling rule here at our forum? Either way, it's in rather poor taste, but nothing I'm not surprised about coming from you.

Please, post my entire PM to you then. Give us a laugh before you're banned for engaging in something you were previously warned about.

[watching&waiting]

gerryhatrick whare do you get off talking about getting someone banned? You are one of the biggest trouble makers on this site and you purposefully post things in a derrogatory manner and then try to belittle people who show you your errors. While it is nice to have a site that posts all sides to an argument, your posts just do not ring as being fair sided but rather more of malicious intent against all things Harper.

You know that just because you have a right to hold any opinion you may have, it does not mean you have to share that with everyone all the time. It makes me wonder just how I can put any weight to anything you say, because it seems that you are closed minded to any arguments you are given in return.

[Ricki Bobbi]

gerryhatrick whare do you get off talking about getting someone banned? You are one of the biggest trouble makers on this site and you purposefully post things in a derrogatory manner and then try to belittle people who show you your errors. While it is nice to have a site that posts all sides to an argument, your posts just do not ring as being fair sided but rather more of malicious intent against all things Harper.

You know that just because you have a right to hold any opinion you may have, it does not mean you have to share that with everyone all the time. It makes me wonder just how I can put any weight to anything you say, because it seems that you are closed minded to any arguments you are given in return.

Great points W&W.

Don't get too worked up about it though. The rules of the forum don't really apply to everybody.

When you see behaviour like that just use the ignore function!

[gerryhatrick]

It has been claimed elsewhere that this topic is a "hat trick", which is a hockey term for three goals. In case anyone didn't know that, the poster called it a "three-peet" as well.

In fact this is the first and only time this topic has been posted. It might appear like a duplicate since there are other topics about other partisan polling by the CPC paid for with taxpayer money.

thx.

[jbg]

Focus groups (see "Harper hires polling firm to guide his path on environment" topic) revealed, and now expensive polling PAID FOR BY CANADIANS performed shortly after the election to find out if his five priorities are popular or not?

Harper didn't take long to lose his way on the whole accountability and corruption thing.

WHY ARE WE PAYING FOR WHAT IS CLEARLY PARTISAN POLLING???

It has been claimed elsewhere that this topic is a "hat trick", which is a hockey term for three goals. In case anyone didn't know that, the poster called it a "three-peet" as well.

In fact this is the first and only time this topic has been posted. It might appear like a duplicate since there are other topics about other partisan polling by the CPC paid for with taxpayer money.

thx.

Seems awfully similar. Out of curiousity, no insult intended, what are your other interests in life besides Stephen Harper?

[Ricki Bobbi]

Seems awfully similar. Out of curiousity, no insult intended, what are your other interests in life besides Stephen Harper?

Brilliant!

Makes me wonder how somebody can devote time and effort to attack another person and trying to make them look bad.

I wonder if their is any personal bad blood?

[gerryhatrick]

Focus groups (see "Harper hires polling firm to guide his path on environment" topic) revealed, and now expensive polling PAID FOR BY CANADIANS performed shortly after the election to find out if his five priorities are popular or not?

Harper didn't take long to lose his way on the whole accountability and corruption thing.

WHY ARE WE PAYING FOR WHAT IS CLEARLY PARTISAN POLLING???

It has been claimed elsewhere that this topic is a "hat trick", which is a hockey term for three goals. In case anyone didn't know that, the poster called it a "three-peet" as well.

In fact this is the first and only time this topic has been posted. It might appear like a duplicate since there are other topics about other partisan polling by the CPC paid for with taxpayer money.

thx.

Seems awfully similar.

What seems "awfully similar"?

You're making no sense.

[Ricki Bobbi]

What seems "awfully similar"?

You're making no sense.

The two separate posts seem awfully similar to me as well.

This would be the rule that *doesn't* apply in this case.

NO CROSS-POSTING

Cross posting is defined as posting the same information in more then one forum on the Internet. It is also considered cross posting if you post the same information in different areas of these forums. If you want to propose a new topic, find the appropriate category and only post once. All cross-posts will be deleted without warning.

[gerryhatrick]

What seems "awfully similar"?

You're making no sense.

The two separate posts seem awfully similar to me as well.

This would be the rule that *doesn't* apply in this case.

NO CROSS-POSTING

Cross posting is defined as posting the same information in more then one forum on the Internet. It is also considered cross posting if you post the same information in different areas of these forums. If you want to propose a new topic, find the appropriate category and only post once. All cross-posts will be deleted without warning.

Stop trolling RB.

If you think this post is the same as another, report it. Your contant quoting of rules that aren't being broken is a little immature. But we both know it's just your little baiting routine.

My critisism of Harper is "hate" to you, and it makes you very upset...that's obvious. You can take the opportunity to develop some more maturity, your choice.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Stop trolling RB.

If you think this post is the same as another, report it. Your contant quoting of rules that aren't being broken is a little immature. But we both know it's just your little baiting routine.

My critisism of Harper is "hate" to you, and it makes you very upset...that's obvious. You can take the opportunity to develop some more maturity, your choice.

It would be criticism if you were open to any debate on the issue. You aren't. You hate Harper. Nothing he does is good enough for you. Nothing he could ever do is good enough for you.

Is there some reason why you would expect me to do what you order?

Seems like the pot calling the kettle black on the maturity front...

[gerryhatrick]

It would be criticism if you were open to any debate on the issue. You aren't. You hate Harper.

Au contraire, let's debate the issue. You're not interested in debate though....you're interested in baiting and trolling and accusing others of "hate".

You go first. Say something in support of this government of Canada paid for $85,000 poll, if that's your position.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Au contraire, let's debate the issue. You're not interested in debate though....you're interested in baiting and trolling and accusing others of "hate".

You go first. Say something in support of this government of Canada paid for $85,000 poll, if that's your position.

OK, let's start with the duplicitious thread title.

It was government policy not CPC policy they were asking about. Do you understand the nuanced difference?

The five priorities have been the focus of the Government in their eight months in power. They wanted to see how people felt about them and made tweaks as necesary after finding out public opinon on them. Shouldn't the government actually try and implement policies that are as a close a fit to what the public wants as practicable?

[gerryhatrick]

It was government policy not CPC policy they were asking about. Do you understand the nuanced difference?

A VERY nuanced difference, since just a few weeks earlier they were the five priorities for the CPC. But OK, since the CPC is the government at the time of polling then yes, the polling was on government policy.

Why waste $85,000 on a poll about the five priorities that they were just elected on though?

They wanted to see how people felt about them and made tweaks as necesary after finding out public opinon on them.

Tweaks? You mean like dropping the wait times guarantee? You think people polled weren't intersted in that one?

[Michael Hardner]

Why waste $85,000 on a poll about the five priorities that they were just elected on though?

Gerry - If you concede that the poll was done as a legitimate query on government business, then there really is no complaint here. $85K is a small amount of expenditure, and is a worthwhile check to verify that Canadians were behind these initiatives.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Gerry - If you concede that the poll was done as a legitimate query on government business, then there really is no complaint here. $85K is a small amount of expenditure, and is a worthwhile check to verify that Canadians were behind these initiatives.

Thank you Michael.

Now to address Gerry's change of topic.

The patient wait-times guarantee hasn't been dropped just because it hasn't been accomplished yet.

[gerryhatrick]

Gerry - If you concede that the poll was done as a legitimate query on government business, then there really is no complaint here.

But I don't concede that. I concede they were the government when they conducted the poll, but it was clearly a partisan poll.

As is said in the Montreal Gazette:

There is always a thin line between legitimate government polling to better-tailor public programs and polls that serve the political needs of the party in power. But polling right after a national election to gauge support for an election platform voters passed judgment on weeks earlier is clearly a political and partisan act.

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news...70-09d5b0908d11

That's pretty much how it looks.

RB wanted to make the point that the polling was done by the Government of Canada, which it was. That hardly means it's legitimate polling.

[geoffrey]

Oh well, I'd rather have a govenrment that hides under rocks, ignores the views of Canadians, that sort of thing. Polling them seems rather stupid, I mean, why bother with what people want?

[gerryhatrick]

Oh well, I'd rather have a govenrment that hides under rocks, ignores the views of Canadians, that sort of thing. Polling them seems rather stupid, I mean, why bother with what people want?

Indeed, polling them on your election issues shortly after you won the election does seem quite stupid. And partisan. Good call.

[geoffrey]

Oh well, I'd rather have a govenrment that hides under rocks, ignores the views of Canadians, that sort of thing. Polling them seems rather stupid, I mean, why bother with what people want?

Indeed, polling them on your election issues shortly after you won the election does seem quite stupid. And partisan. Good call.

Ok, back to the Liberal days of government by downtown Toronto types. Homosexuals, warehouse daycare and anti-Americanism can lead the agenda of the day again!! Now that's real Canadian values, you don't need a poll for that surely?

I mean, all this focus on reducing violent crime, a softwood lumber agreement that the Liberals could never accomplish and an accountability act to protect taxpayer dollars. All very foolish. Why aren't we talking about all the oppressed queers and raising gasoline taxes (Ignatieff's goal)? That's what Canadians really want right gerry? Maybe they should poll, obviously in your view the CPC is way off.