Canadian Political Polls

[Canadian Blue]

Actually, you'd be surprised at how many conservatives I have met who have said their second choice would be the Green Party.

[jdobbin]

Where?

The bye-election vote for one showed Tory support go to the Greens in London.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/11/27/...yelections.html

[August1991]

Maybe if they pulled the BQ out of the English debate - which they should - and the NDP out of the French debate , you'd have room for the Greens.

That makes sense to pull the BQ out of the English debate. (It also makes sense to take the NDP out of the French debate but that ain't gonna happen.)

[Only in Canada would one find an election campaign TV debate with a leader whom most voters can't vote for.]

The point is that Harper has an interest in bolstering the Green and NDP vote at the expense of the Liberals. That's the only way he'll win a majority unless the Tory numbers improve and stay improved.

The problem, as others have noted, is that as soon as it looks likely that Harper might form a majority, the anti-Harper voters leave the NDP and Greens and go Liberal. That's what would happen in a campaign and why the polls here are not entirely accurate.

The likelihood of another minority government is great.

[Michael Bluth]

The bye-election vote for one showed Tory support go to the Greens in London.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/11/27/...yelections.html

All three mainstream parties, Liberals, NDP and CPC lost support to the Greens.

The Conservatives lost the the *least* support of the three.

Try again...

[jbg]

Alberta will remain a one party state for as long as I'm alive. I don't see that changing.

Landslide Annie?

[jdobbin]

All three mainstream parties, Liberals, NDP and CPC lost support to the Greens.

The Conservatives lost the the *least* support of the three.

Try again...

I said all three parties have lost support to the Greens. I was countering what seemed like an argument that Conservatives hadn't lost any support to that party.

Try again...

[jdobbin]

Landslide Annie?

One exception to the rule and probably never again. I see Conservatives governments in Alberta forever and ever. I don't even know why any other party bothers to run.

[geoffrey]

One exception to the rule and probably never again. I see Conservatives governments in Alberta forever and ever. I don't even know why any other party bothers to run.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. You'll see a change when our standard of living starts decreasing. Until then, we know better than to change things when we're at the top of the game.

Provincially, we've got Kevin Taft who's writing books about how stupid Albertans are for not voting for him. Then Brian Mason, Mr. NDP, who's really funny to listen to because he'd be a conservative in any other province with what he says. Then there's the Alberta Alliance for the real deal conservatives in the South.

What choice is there? Neither of these parties have people in place if they ever were to win, and they won't. They are completely unconnected with the way things work. We all see that. We don't want incompetent crazies in charge.

The PC's in Alberta are the ultimate big tent. The poor vote PC, the rich vote PC, immigrants and non-immigrants, the employed and the very few unemployed. PC MP's are elected in some of the poorest ridings in the province, and the richest. They are by far the more successful party ever in the history of Canada.

The Liberals federally have definitely made the Alberta bed they sleep in. Look at when Dion released his mouthpeice Mark Holland on the province. Do you really think we're going to elect members from a party with those attitudes towards us? Not a chance. And the NDP just sit way too ideologically distant from Albertans, we don't want bigger government nationalising everything we've got. If your not selling a pro-business free enterprise agenda, your not getting anyone elected here ever, bottom line.

There will be a time though when some alternative is elected here. Wait until an economic slowdown, maybe over a decade away, but then we'll start going 'oh well, not much to lose now, let's swtich things up and get some new blood going.'

[Michael Bluth]

The provincial Liberals came damned close, by Alberta standards, in 1993.

If their leader at the time, Laurence Decore, hadn't gotten sick and could have run in 1997 it would have been competitive.

Decore had a great reputation as a fiscal manager from his time as Mayor of Edmonton and would have been close. Alas the Liberals got stuck with that chump, sorry I mean Senator, Grant Mitchell...

[jbg]

Landslide Annie?

One exception to the rule and probably never again. I see Conservatives governments in Alberta forever and ever. I don't even know why any other party bothers to run.

Liberals led through early 1930's, then Social Credit, then Progressive Conservative after roughly 1967 or 1972. They go through successive one-party periods, but being around may pay off for an opposition party; they may bet a 45 year stint as one-party rulers.

[jdobbin]

Liberals led through early 1930's, then Social Credit, then Progressive Conservative after roughly 1967 or 1972. They go through successive one-party periods, but being around may pay off for an opposition party; they may bet a 45 year stint as one-party rulers.

I don't see any change in my lifetime. In the last Conservative leadership race, other political parties saw it as advantageous to take out a membership in the party to vote for the leader they thought the least worrisome.

[jdobbin]

The provincial Liberals came damned close, by Alberta standards, in 1993.

If their leader at the time, Laurence Decore, hadn't gotten sick and could have run in 1997 it would have been competitive.

Decore had a great reputation as a fiscal manager from his time as Mayor of Edmonton and would have been close. Alas the Liberals got stuck with that chump, sorry I mean Senator, Grant Mitchell...

One close call doesn't make for a change in one party government. As I said, I don't see a change in my lifetime.

[jdobbin]

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. You'll see a change when our standard of living starts decreasing. Until then, we know better than to change things when we're at the top of the game.

I agree. No one credible is likely to stand up and run in Alberta under those circumstances. Even an excellent opposition is not going to change that. I think you'll see more people from unions, other parties and other walks of life take out a Conservative membership just so they can can some modicum of influence on their province.

[jbg]

I agree. No one credible is likely to stand up and run in Alberta under those circumstances. Even an excellent opposition is not going to change that. I think you'll see more people from unions, other parties and other walks of life take out a Conservative membership just so they can can some modicum of influence on their province.

Almost the way Japanese politics works?

[jdobbin]

Almost the way Japanese politics works?

The LDP has factions that function as parties within a party. They also have limitations within their own party as to how long someone stays at the top.

The Conservatives of Alberta have no factions nor do they limitations.

[Michael Bluth]

The LDP has factions that function as parties within a party. They also have limitations within their own party as to how long someone stays at the top.

The Conservatives of Alberta have no factions nor do they limitations.

I would actually argue that there are factions in a sense in the Alberta PCs.

You could them the Calgary hard core faction - represented by Ted Morton.

The Calgary progressive faction - represented by Jim Dinning.

The small town faction. definitely leaning to the right and

The Edmonton faction. progressive

The latter two factions worked together to get Stelmach elected as leader.

As much as the analogy between Alberta and the LDP fits you forget one key point. It has only been 11 years since a non-LDP party leader was Prime Minister.

The provincial PCs came to power here in 1971.

[jdobbin]

I would actually argue that there are factions in a sense in the Alberta PCs.

You could them the Calgary hard core faction - represented by Ted Morton.

The Calgary progressive faction - represented by Jim Dinning.

The small town faction. definitely leaning to the right and

The Edmonton faction. progressive

The latter two factions worked together to get Stelmach elected as leader.

As much as the analogy between Alberta and the LDP fits you forget one key point. It has only been 11 years since a non-LDP party leader was Prime Minister.

The provincial PCs came to power here in 1971.

Factions have their own leadership contests within the party. That is not what happens in the PCs. Does Morton raise money for his faction? Do they elect him as leader of their faction? No. It isn't the same as Japan.

As far as the one year blip where the Recruit scandal got them booted in 1993, by 1994, they were pulling the strings again and by 1996, they had a majority. I can remember the controversy well after living in Japan for many years.

Alberta is likely to go even longer than that. No change for as many years as I can see ahead.

[Michael Bluth]

Factions have their own leadership contests within the party. That is not what happens in the PCs. Does Morton raise money for his faction? Do they elect him as leader of their faction? No. It isn't the same as Japan.

As far as the one year blip where the Recruit scandal got them booted in 1993, by 1994, they were pulling the strings again and by 1996, they had a majority. I can remember the controversy well after living in Japan for many years.

Alberta is likely to go even longer than that. No change for as many years as I can see ahead.

The factions don't have leadership contests in Japan. The factions don't officially exist. They are unofficially named after their leader for a reason. When the leader resigns or gets forced out the faction ceases to exist.

The fundraising done for members of the faction is akin to a Ted Morton appearing at a fundraiser for a friendly MLA.

The recruit scandal lead to the Prime Ministership of Morihiro Hosokawa in August of 1993. The LDP was part of the ruling coaltion of Tsutomou Hata which began in April of 1994, but Hata wasn't a member of the LDP. Then the LDP coalition lost again in June of 1994 until Ryutaro Hashimoto regained control in January of 1996.

What level of the JLPT have you passed? Moshi anata ha Nihon no seiji o wakaru kono bun ha yomiyasui to omou imasu, ne...

[jdobbin]

The factions don't have leadership contests in Japan. The factions don't officially exist. They are unofficially named after their leader for a reason. When the leader resigns or gets forced out the faction ceases to exist.

The fundraising done for members of the faction is akin to a Ted Morton appearing at a fundraiser for a friendly MLA.

The recruit scandal lead to the Prime Ministership of Morihiro Hosokawa in August of 1993. The LDP was part of the ruling coaltion of Tsutomou Hata which began in April of 1994, but Hata wasn't a member of the LDP. Then the LDP coalition lost again in June of 1994 until Ryutaro Hashimoto regained control in January of 1996.

What level of the JLPT have you passed? Moshi anata ha Nihon no seiji o wakaru kono bun ha yomiyasui to omou imasu, ne...

The factions do have leadership races. I ought to know. I saw it happen in my time in Japan. They are not public but it does happen. They also have internal fundraising for their faction members. It isn't like Morton having a fundraising event for a friendly MLA. The faction has caucus meetings. It has policies. It has unelected members. Members of the Kaifu faction met in a resort, elected who among them would do what and decided on policies they would pursue.

I never took a test on my Japanese language ability. I was able to read easy kanji in a newspaper. I got by on my conversational Japanese and lectured at Tsuru University where I met many political science students who told me how it was and pointed me to the literature on the subject.

[Michael Bluth]

The factions do have leadership races. I ought to know. I saw it happen in my time in Japan. They are not public but it does happen. They also have internal fundraising for their faction members. It isn't like Morton having a fundraising event for a friendly MLA. The faction has caucus meetings. It has policies. It has unelected members. Members of the Kaifu faction met in a resort, elected who among them would do what and decided on policies they would pursue.

I never took a test on my Japanese language ability. I was able to read easy kanji in a newspaper. I got by on my conversational Japanese and lectured at Tsuru University where I met many political science students who told me how it was and pointed me to the literature on the subject.

To the other posters here I apologize. I tried to take this to PMs. Jdobbin somehow felt empowered to send a reply arguing his point then block me. Very interesting, but here is a response to his uninformed post and the last PM he sent me, so my response only really makes sense if you can read that PM.

The factions all take part in the LDP caucus meetings.

You tried to appeal to your "lecturing" at a Japanese university and having lived there as some claim to higher knowledge. Did this lecturing involve anything other than a good ESL gig? What subject?

If you really cared less about the language skills you should have said that instead of being able to read *easy* kanji in the newspaper. Quantify easy Kanji? 20? 30? 100? Now you are appealing to your wife being born in England as higher knowledge of British politics?

The fundraising in Japan is so completely different from fundraising here that the best analogy truly is to an influential figure in a party appearing at functions here.

Many people have made the argument that the Liberals in the Chretien/Martin days acted like two parties within the party. Some riding associations were controlled by the Martin faction and some were controlled by the Chretien faction. The different factions held regular meetings, as well as attending the joint caucus.

Here is some background information that supports everything I am saying. Did any of your Japanese poli sci. students point you to these sources? Wouldn't have been much use if they pointed you to sources in Japanese. (Better than your 'recollections' I am afraid to say.) Open your mind, you might learn something.

The Enigma of Japanese Power - Karel von Wolferen.

Regime Shit (Comparative Dynamics of the Japanese Political Economy) - TJ Pempel

Japan's Postwar Party Politics - Masaru Kohno

The Logic of Japanese Politics - Gerald L. Curtis

[jdobbin]

To the other posters here I apologize. I tried to take this to PMs. Jdobbin somehow felt empowered to send a reply arguing his point then block me. Very interesting, but here is a response to his uninformed post and the last PM he sent me, so my response only really makes sense if you can read that PM.

The factions all take part in the LDP caucus meetings.

You tried to appeal to your "lecturing" at a Japanese university and having lived there as some claim to higher knowledge. Did this lecturing involve anything other than a good ESL gig? What subject?

If you really cared less about the language skills you should have said that instead of being able to read *easy* kanji in the newspaper. Quantify easy Kanji? 20? 30? 100? Now you are appealing to your wife being born in England as higher knowledge of British politics?

The fundraising in Japan is so completely different from fundraising here that the best analogy truly is to an influential figure in a party appearing at functions here.

Many people have made the argument that the Liberals in the Chretien/Martin days acted like two parties within the party. Some riding associations were controlled by the Martin faction and some were controlled by the Chretien faction. The different factions held regular meetings, as well as attending the joint caucus.

Here is some background information that supports everything I am saying. Did any of your Japanese poli sci. students point you to these sources? Wouldn't have been much use if they pointed you to sources in Japanese. (Better than your 'recollections' I am afraid to say.) Open your mind, you might learn something.

The Enigma of Japanese Power - Karel von Wolferen.

Regime Shit (Comparative Dynamics of the Japanese Political Economy) - TJ Pempel

Japan's Postwar Party Politics - Masaru Kohno

The Logic of Japanese Politics - Gerald L. Curtis

I didn't want to have anything to do with your "pissing match" Japanese PMs anymore. I found it needlessly confrontational. I never admitted to a stronger knowledge of the Japanese language than yourself and never challenged you on the subject. It just doesn't matter to me nor does it prove anything. My lecturing at Tsuru University on comparative political systems was based on my experience as a former candidate in Canada which some people here already know about. As such, I had the chance to talk with parliamentarians, government workers and academics on the subject. It was many of the Japanese who tried to convince me about how their system was different.

I have read many of the books on Japanese political systems out there including some of the biographies of influential Japanese politicians. You are the one who mentioned British politics and I think I can defer to my wife or her family on whether the same type of factions exist in that country as they do in Japan. They don't in their opinion.

The multi-seat Diet means that the LDP runs against itself in the elections or rather faction and against faction. Canada and Britain may have challenges in the nomination process but since there is no multi-seat ridings, you don't see factions running against each other. And while there are variations of pay and support for members of Parliament in Canada and Britain, neither is structured so that pay is inadequate to run day to day operations and that the party has to pay that cost. In Japan, the factions raise money for basic operations of their members. Also, elite bureaucrats can and have been associated with factions and briefed them separately from the rest of the party or even Parliament.

I don't find the systems to be comparable on these levels. Nor are those factions so entrenched into the system as they are in Japan.

In the mean time, feel free to respond to this. I just won't be following your posts anymore. I've found you to be rather rude and you seem to be a little angry for no reason whatsoever. I was certainly open to hearing your thoughts on the matter but as soon I see words like "pissing match" in a response, I just don't want to hear anymore.

[madmax]

To the other posters here I apologize. I tried to take this to PMs. Jdobbin somehow felt empowered to send a reply arguing his point then block me. Very interesting, but here is a response to his uninformed post and the last PM he sent me, so my response only really makes sense if you can read that PM.

Things that are done in PM should remain in PM. You have apologized, but there really wasn't a point on which to continue this thread. The conversation had drifted off topic. It clearly belonged in PMs. Just because the next PM action isn't one you approve of, it is still a Private Affair, and really, none of my business. Now it is public and I feel it is my business.

Of course your reply doesn't make complete sense to us readers. We don't have the whole conversation, and it is not for our consumption, but for yours.

So, I hope that people use the PM feature for their Private affairs and conversations and keep them out of the Public Arena.

That's my opinion.

[Michael Bluth]

Now it is public and I feel it is my business.

Of course your reply doesn't make complete sense to us readers. We don't have the whole conversation, and it is not for our consumption, but for yours.

So, I hope that people use the PM feature for their Private affairs and conversations and keep them out of the Public Arena.

That's my opinion.

Max, I appreciate your opinion. However, jdobbin has cut me off. I tried to move it to PMs. Got in the last word on the thread. Fine it would have ended there. But he put me in my place on PMs and cut me off. Then proceeded to need the last word again here.

I would gladly have kept to PMs had I not been cut off. But he has left me no option.

I've found you to be rather rude and you seem to be a little angry for no reason whatsoever. I was certainly open to hearing your thoughts on the matter but as soon I see words like "pissing match" in a response, I just don't want to hear anymore.

To be fair, I used the term "pissing match" in the following context. "I don't want to get into a pissing match." Why did that lead to you not wanting to hear anymore?

You found me to be rude? I dared to question your word and you tried to put me in my place. In fairness to the other posters here I moved it to PMs. You got in the last word on PMs and blocked me. You got in the last post here and now won't be following my posts?

I just won't be following your posts anymore. I've found you to be rather rude and you seem to be a little angry for no reason whatsoever.

I never cut you off. I never publicly announced I won't follow your posts. But I'm the rude one?

[jdobbin]

Mystery man status still high for Harper after one year.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/st...df-24b731872c07

Stephen Harper, we hardly know ye.

Indeed, a new Ipsos-Reid survey conducted for CanWest/Global Television says that after more than a year in power, 65 per cent of Canadians say they do not feel they know Harper better as a person than when he became prime minister.

"He is a mystery wrapped inside an enigma, wrapped inside a riddle," is how Darrell Bricker, president of the polling firm, portrayed Canadians' view of Harper.

I'm sure Dion is not much higher that Harper in people knowing him. However, you'd think after one year the numbers wouldn't be so high.

[jdobbin]

Liberals stop bleeding. Tories still up in polls.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

iberals have stopped bleeding potential votes and are within five points of the Conservatives, according to the latest poll. But Stephen Harper has made strong gains in Quebec.

The Strategic Counsel conducted the survey between March 10-13 for CTV News and The Globe and Mail.

When respondents were asked who they would vote for today, the results showed little difference from about a month ago (percentage-point change from a Feb. 15-18 poll in brackets):

* Liberals: 31 per cent (+ 2)

* Conservatives: 36 per cent (+ 2)

* NDP: 15 per cent (+ 1)

* Bloc Quebecois: 9 (- 2)

* Green Party: 10 (- 2)

Sample size still makes it difficult to get a handle on Quebec and Ontario.