Hicksey Posted September 10, 2006 Report Posted September 10, 2006 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??? This is just funny ... politicians are partisans by trade. Everything they do is clearly affected by their partisanship. Without fail, their first priority is re-election. It stands to reason that finding out how high support for their campaign principles really was would help guide them. Considering that support was at 70% it did tell them that support for their main promises ran almost DOUBLE what the election results showed. You people hate Harper so bad you will make something out of nothing just to get out the Harper=Scary message. If I didn't think better of it, I'd think you were a grass-roots Liberal. Quote "If in passing, you never encounter anything that offends you, you are not living in a free society." - Rt. Hon. Kim Campbell - “In many respects, the government needs fewer rules, but rules that are consistently applied.” - Sheila Fraser, Former Auditor General.
gerryhatrick Posted September 10, 2006 Author Report Posted September 10, 2006 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.... It's interesting. When faced with any subject about CPC wrongdoing all their supporters can do is harken back to the Liberals. Quite funny, actually. Quote Conservative Party of Canada taking image advice from US Republican pollster: http://allpoliticsnow.com
Hicksey Posted September 10, 2006 Report Posted September 10, 2006 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.... It's interesting. When faced with any subject about CPC wrongdoing all their supporters can do is harken back to the Liberals. Quite funny, actually. Gerry, I was all over it when the CPC appointed Fortier and when Emerson crossed the aisle and was named to Harper's cabinet because they HAD done something wrong. Here, they have not. You might have a point here if Harper had come anywhere close to a majority, but he did not. And considering the simmering fire still in peoples' minds about Adscam (one I'll readily admit that the CPC, NDP and BQ fanned fervently during the entire election cycle) Harper had to know moving forward if his policies really had support. For all we knew he got elected mostly because of the anger over Adscam. To effectively govern moving forward and have any chance of being re-elected he needed to know exactly how popular -- or unpopular -- his five priorities were. You're creating a scandal where there isn't one. Quote "If in passing, you never encounter anything that offends you, you are not living in a free society." - Rt. Hon. Kim Campbell - “In many respects, the government needs fewer rules, but rules that are consistently applied.” - Sheila Fraser, Former Auditor General.
sharkman Posted September 10, 2006 Report Posted September 10, 2006 Actually, his attempt at scandalizing has failed once again. Everybody around here knows he can only sing one song, and we're gettin' tired of the screeching noises. Quote
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 10, 2006 Report Posted September 10, 2006 It's interesting. When faced with any subject about CPC wrongdoing all their supporters can do is harken back to the Liberals. Quite funny, actually. Bravo Gerry! Your attempt at debating the issue lasted one post. We are making progress, maybe the next time can be two posts.... Actually, his attempt at scandalizing has failed once again. Everybody around here knows he can only sing one song, and we're gettin' tired of the screeching noises. Yes we are Sharkman. Yes we are. Quote Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country. Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen
Shakeyhands Posted September 10, 2006 Report Posted September 10, 2006 clearly Harper said however that he wasn't going to do this sort of thing, I think you guys called it governing by wet finger in the air.. no? Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
gerryhatrick Posted September 10, 2006 Author Report Posted September 10, 2006 clearly Harper said however that he wasn't going to do this sort of thing, I think you guys called it governing by wet finger in the air.. no? Exactly. That is the bottom line. Quote Conservative Party of Canada taking image advice from US Republican pollster: http://allpoliticsnow.com
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 11, 2006 Report Posted September 11, 2006 Actually, his attempt at scandalizing has failed once again. Everybody around here knows he can only sing one song, and we're gettin' tired of the screeching noises. Exactly sharkman. The last two posts added nothing to this thread, so I'll take the time to congratulate you for your post. Quote Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country. Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen
gc1765 Posted September 11, 2006 Report Posted September 11, 2006 For all those who tend to defend the Conservatives, ask yourself this question: How would I feel if it were the Liberals who were doing the same thing. I'm guessing if it were the Liberals who had done this, a lot of people would be condemning them for it, but when the Conservatives do it it's OK. If you want an objective, non-partisan, view of the subject try that little trick. Would you feel the same way if the liberals had done this or would you feel differently? P.S. It works both ways. If you are a leftie, next time the Liberals screw up, ask yourself how you would feel if it were the Conservative who had screwed up. Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 11, 2006 Report Posted September 11, 2006 For all those who tend to defend the Conservatives, ask yourself this question: How would I feel if it were the Liberals who were doing the same thing. I'm guessing if it were the Liberals who had done this, a lot of people would be condemning them for it, but when the Conservatives do it it's OK. If you want an objective, non-partisan, view of the subject try that little trick. Would you feel the same way if the liberals had done this or would you feel differently?P.S. It works both ways. If you are a leftie, next time the Liberals screw up, ask yourself how you would feel if it were the Conservative who had screwed up. Let's look at the differences in *screw-ups*. The Conservatives polled people to see if they agreed with the five priorities and used that information to plan the actual implementation. Some Conservatives supported the use of the money in question to as a legitimate use of taxpayer money. In the sponsorship program a judge found that the Liberals divereted over $1.1 million of government money for work which was NEVER performed. There is a difference... Quote Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country. Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen
gc1765 Posted September 11, 2006 Report Posted September 11, 2006 For all those who tend to defend the Conservatives, ask yourself this question: How would I feel if it were the Liberals who were doing the same thing. I'm guessing if it were the Liberals who had done this, a lot of people would be condemning them for it, but when the Conservatives do it it's OK. If you want an objective, non-partisan, view of the subject try that little trick. Would you feel the same way if the liberals had done this or would you feel differently? P.S. It works both ways. If you are a leftie, next time the Liberals screw up, ask yourself how you would feel if it were the Conservative who had screwed up. Let's look at the differences in *screw-ups*. The Conservatives polled people to see if they agreed with the five priorities and used that information to plan the actual implementation. Some Conservatives supported the use of the money in question to as a legitimate use of taxpayer money. In the sponsorship program a judge found that the Liberals divereted over $1.1 million of government money for work which was NEVER performed. There is a difference... I don't understand why you are changing the subject. Yes, I agree that sponsorship scandal was worse and I criticize those responsible for it. But just because the liberals screwed up in the past, does that mean it's OK for the conservatives to screw up? Getting back to the subject, how would you feel if the Liberals had used $85,000 to conduct polls? Would you think, oh well at least it's not as bad as the sponsorship scandal? Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 11, 2006 Report Posted September 11, 2006 I don't understand why you are changing the subject. Yes, I agree that sponsorship scandal was worse and I criticize those responsible for it. But just because the liberals screwed up in the past, does that mean it's OK for the conservatives to screw up? Getting back to the subject, how would you feel if the Liberals had used $85,000 to conduct polls? Would you think, oh well at least it's not as bad as the sponsorship scandal? The Liberals did use government money to conduct polls. It is a justified use of government money to try and gauge public opinion before implementing a major policy. It just shows how much the Harper haters are grasping at straws in trying to tear down the govenment. Are you saying that you took offence to everytime the Liberals paid pollsters to gauge public opinion when the pollster actually did the work they paid for? Quote Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country. Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen
jbg Posted September 11, 2006 Report Posted September 11, 2006 Let's look at the differences in *screw-ups*. The Conservatives polled people to see if they agreed with the five priorities and used that information to plan the actual implementation. Some Conservatives supported the use of the money in question to as a legitimate use of taxpayer money.In the sponsorship program a judge found that the Liberals divereted over $1.1 million of government money for work which was NEVER performed. There is a difference... Excellent two points. A third and you get a hat-trick. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
gerryhatrick Posted September 11, 2006 Author Report Posted September 11, 2006 I don't understand why you are changing the subject. Yes, I agree that sponsorship scandal was worse and I criticize those responsible for it. But just because the liberals screwed up in the past, does that mean it's OK for the conservatives to screw up? Getting back to the subject, how would you feel if the Liberals had used $85,000 to conduct polls? Would you think, oh well at least it's not as bad as the sponsorship scandal? The Liberals did use government money to conduct polls. It is a justified use of government money to try and gauge public opinion before implementing a major policy. It just shows how much the Harper haters are grasping at straws in trying to tear down the govenment. When did the Liberals perform such an obviously partisan poll? Cite one example. Deal with the topic as it's presented...polling shortly after an election on the very platform they were just elected on. What was the point? When did the Liberals do that? And gc1765 makes a good point that any polling Liberals did was criticized by the right as "leading by polling" or some such thing. Were you defending the Liberals while that rhetoric was ongoing, I wonder? Did you call them "Martin haters"? Quote Conservative Party of Canada taking image advice from US Republican pollster: http://allpoliticsnow.com
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 11, 2006 Report Posted September 11, 2006 When did the Liberals perform such an obviously partisan poll? Cite one example.Deal with the topic as it's presented...polling shortly after an election on the very platform they were just elected on. What was the point? When did the Liberals do that? And gc1765 makes a good point that any polling Liberals did was criticized by the right as "leading by polling" or some such thing. Were you defending the Liberals while that rhetoric was ongoing, I wonder? Did you call them "Martin haters"? When did *the right* use the term "leading by polling"? Cite one example. Can't defend somebody from an accusation that I never saw. I'm taking your constant avoidance of the issue to mean that you really don't believe there is a significant difference between a PMO list of questions askers in a scrum and a press conference. Quote Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country. Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen
gc1765 Posted September 11, 2006 Report Posted September 11, 2006 The Liberals did use government money to conduct polls. It is a justified use of government money to try and gauge public opinion before implementing a major policy.It just shows how much the Harper haters are grasping at straws in trying to tear down the govenment. Are you saying that you took offence to everytime the Liberals paid pollsters to gauge public opinion when the pollster actually did the work they paid for? Nope, I'm not criticizing the conservatives OR the liberals for conducting public opinion polls. I was just pointing out that some people are blinded by partisanship to the extent that they would condemn one party for certain actions while defending the party they support for the same actions. If you don't mind the liberals paying money for such a thing, then you are not guilty of that. But I'm willing to bet there are people on this forum who would condemn the liberals if they had done the same thing, while defending the conservatives. Just trying to keep those people honest. If a party conducts public opinion polls to guide their policy in such a way as to reflect the wishes of Canadians, I have no problem with that. I am curious though, did this poll ask Canadians what priorities the government should focus on if they disagree with the 5 priorities? If Canadians agree with the priorities, then the government knows it is on the right track (though the election probably should have done that) and can proceed with confidence. However, what if many Canadians disagree? How would their opinions help to change government policy? If they had asked the people who disagree with the priorities what the priorities SHOULD be, that would make more sense to me. Also, the part about asking Canadians if they trust the government seems like a waste to me. How is that going to help the Conservatives make better policy? Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
gerryhatrick Posted September 11, 2006 Author Report Posted September 11, 2006 I'm taking your constant avoidance of the issue to mean that you really don't believe there is a significant difference between a PMO list of questions askers in a scrum and a press conference. That's right RB, there's no difference between a press conference and a scrum. I'm satisfied I handed you your a$$ on a platter over the matter, which is why you're now playing your games over it. Look on the bright side, you learned something about current events today. Quote Conservative Party of Canada taking image advice from US Republican pollster: http://allpoliticsnow.com
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 11, 2006 Report Posted September 11, 2006 That's right RB, there's no difference between a press conference and a scrum.I'm satisfied I handed you your a$$ on a platter over the matter, which is why you're now playing your games over it. Look on the bright side, you learned something about current events today. To repeat. I'm taking your constant avoidance of the issue to mean that you really don't believe there is a significant difference between a PMO list of questions askers in a scrum and a press conference. Quote Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country. Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen
gerryhatrick Posted September 11, 2006 Author Report Posted September 11, 2006 You're in the wrong topic about the issue and I have not avoided it. Everyone makes mistakes, but pls. take it back to the correct topic. Rules....as I'm sure you know. Quote Conservative Party of Canada taking image advice from US Republican pollster: http://allpoliticsnow.com
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 11, 2006 Report Posted September 11, 2006 Nope, I'm not criticizing the conservatives OR the liberals for conducting public opinion polls. But this is from your original post in this thread.... WHY ARE WE PAYING FOR WHAT IS CLEARLY PARTISAN POLLING??? Kinda seems like criticism to me. Or am I too obtuse to see the subtley of what you were asking? Quote Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country. Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen
gc1765 Posted September 11, 2006 Report Posted September 11, 2006 Nope, I'm not criticizing the conservatives OR the liberals for conducting public opinion polls. But this is from your original post in this thread.... WHY ARE WE PAYING FOR WHAT IS CLEARLY PARTISAN POLLING??? Kinda seems like criticism to me. Or am I too obtuse to see the subtley of what you were asking? Ummm, I think you are getting me and gerryhatrick confused... Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 11, 2006 Report Posted September 11, 2006 Ummm, I think you are getting me and gerryhatrick confused... My mistake. Please accept my apologies. Quote Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country. Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen
gc1765 Posted September 11, 2006 Report Posted September 11, 2006 Ummm, I think you are getting me and gerryhatrick confused... My mistake. Please accept my apologies. Apology accepted. Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
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.