Canadian Political Polls

[Michael Bluth]

Well, then I can hope that Harper will return to his ol' firewalling self with the majority he's aiming at. But he's not getting my vote based on this performance in this little minority government buyout that he's doing right now.

Somehow I feel I'll be as disatisfied 4 years from the beginning of said majority.

Geoff, do you somehow feel better telling the board ad nauseum Harper isn't Conservative enough for you?

Do take a look at the Firewall Letter and find what Harper could do as Prime Minister that he hasn't done yet?

[jdobbin]

Important note, the CPC support is lower in Alberta, meaning it's higher elsewhere. They can drop all they want in Alberta without consequence. I'd look at accurate polling numbers in Quebec and Ontario to determine the difference.... if any such numbers existed.

Based on the small number sample from Ontario, the Liberals have again taken the lead in Ontario. The BQ's lead has slipped in Quebec to the Tories, the Liberals have stayed the same.

[Canadian Blue]

It looks like the Conservatives are just barely ahead of the Bloc in Quebec. This is good news, and hopefully we'll see the Bloc head into oblivion.

[geoffrey]

Geoff, do you somehow feel better telling the board ad nauseum Harper isn't Conservative enough for you?

You have no problem justifying everything he does ad nauseum regardless if it was part of the platform you supported or the polar opposite. You still don't recognize that Harper is leading one of the largest spending increase governments in Canadian history.

What exactly has Harper done that the Liberals couldn't have?

Do take a look at the Firewall Letter and find what Harper could do as Prime Minister that he hasn't done yet?

From the spirit of the letter, Harper is making it quite clear that he believes in less involvement outside of the Federal governments constiutional responsibilities, and for smaller government. So far he's become the most involved PM in provincial affairs (building a commuter train in Toronto for example, among many incursions) and is doubling inflation with his spending increases.

Nothing he's done is really conservative... perhaps cutting all that crap initially, but that was what, $30 million. Nothing compared to the new spending.

[Michael Bluth]

You still don't recognize that Harper is leading one of the largest spending increase governments in Canadian history.

As a percentage of GNP? Definitely not. You know how false it is to use absolute dollars in these discussions. Let's compare this Goverment to Trudeau's of the mid-70s.

From the spirit of the letter, Harper is making it quite clear that he believes in less involvement outside of the Federal governments constiutional responsibilities, and for smaller government. So far he's become the most involved PM in provincial affairs (building a commuter train in Toronto for example, among many incursions) and is doubling inflation with his spending increases.

So now it's not what was written in the letter, but the *spirit* of the letter ... as you define it. Guess that's the only way you can defend your argument.

Doubling inflation? Do show. And do remember to extract the effect of the large jump in oil prices from any calculations.

It's not what Harper has done that the Liberals couldn't do that is important.

It's what Harper has done that the Liberals didn't do that is important.

[geoffrey]

As a percentage of GNP? Definitely not. You know how false it is to use absolute dollars in these discussions. Let's compare this Goverment to Trudeau's of the mid-70s.

I said one of the leading. Chretien increased spending more in 2000-2001. I can't find reliable figures on Trudeau, but I'm sure spending was climbing nicely there too (operating spending is different than financing though... alot of Trudeaus money troubles and the debt he passed on was caused by double digit interest rates).

I'll try to find an operational spending comparison between the previous governments so we can do a comparison, but that's going to take some research.

Doubling inflation? Do show. And do remember to extract the effect of the large jump in oil prices from any calculations.

http://www.taxpayer.com/main/news.php?news_id=2515

http://www.canadianeconomy.gc.ca/english/e...y/inflation.cfm

The large jump in oil prices works against that calcuation, inflation and economic growth not including oil is very very small. The CPC spent ~7.9% more in 2006-2007 then in 2005-2006. Inflation was 1.85% between March 1, 06 and February 28, 2007. Unfortunately the data for March '07 isn't available, so the year is offset by one month, the difference would be marginal to nothing.

So some basic math will tell you that the conservatives increased spending in their first year of office by 4.27 times inflation. That's certainly not the attitude that I voted for.

You might have an argument for a lower number if you look at government spending as a percentage of GDP, but I disagree with this methodology. It's ridiculous from my perspective to justify increased Federal spending by having richer individuals and businesses. The cost of goods only went up 1.85%... any additional spending by the government is expansion.

It's not what Harper has done that the Liberals couldn't do that is important.

It's what Harper has done that the Liberals didn't do that is important.

And that's why neither get my vote. The conservatives are spending crazed sellouts, and the Liberals are an unprincipled group of wanna-be European socialists. None of those options really appeal to much to me.

[Michael Bluth]

And that's why neither get my vote. The conservatives are spending crazed sellouts, and the Liberals are an unprincipled group of wanna-be European socialists. None of those options really appeal to much to me.

That brings about the bigger question.

If you have a real interest in politics, which you obviously do, how can you not reconcile yourself to the fact that no party is ever going to appeal 100% to you?

Your views just aren't in synch with enough Canadians to warrant a party that is going to make you happy *and* have a realistic shot of attaining power. Ever.

We have heard *ad nauseum* how the Conservatives aren't getting your vote. (Yes, I do defend the Conservatives but I have never said they are perfect.) That is the nature of this board though. You appear to be giving more fuel to the fire of the Liberal supporters here.

About the deficit and spending figures, Trudeau never ran an operating surplus. The deficit grew in large party to his over spending.

[Figleaf]

About the deficit and spending figures, Trudeau never ran an operating surplus. The deficit grew in large party to his over spending.

True, though incomplete. The existence of a persistent spending deficit can be attributed to Trudeau's time. However it is important to remember (1) deficit spending had not yet proven to be the problem it later became and was endorsed to some extent by leading economists of the day; (2) Trudeau's deficit spending actually went to worthwhile things for the most part, such as Transcanada Hwy, accessible universities, medicare and some enhanced social justice; and (3) the deficit left by Trudeau was DOUBLED by Mulroney (with nothing to show for it and without the excuse that anyone thought it would be okay).

[jbg]

Well, then I can hope that Harper will return to his ol' firewalling self with the majority he's aiming at. But he's not getting my vote based on this performance in this little minority government buyout that he's doing right now.

Somehow I feel I'll be as disatisfied 4 years from the beginning of said majority.

Again, I don't live in a Parliamentary country. But isn't there something to the view that Harper was chosen indirectly (as all PM's are) and also with a very small margin? Doesn't this limit the extent to which he currently has a mandate, or even permission, to make radical changes? Someone who garners 37% of the vote simply does not, it seems to me, have much of a mandate to make changes. Maybe a mandate to lean into the wind a bit, make the argument for changes, and seek a majority to do so.

In our country, one could argue that Kennedy, Clinton, Bush Jr. and Nixon's slim first-term victory meant that they did not get much of a mandate to make major changes in the US's system. At the very least, the mid-term elections act as a referendum on further changes.

In any democracy, the personal views of the person who, as a practical matter, is governing (a PM is not a head of state) cannot totally trump what the temper of the times demands. Chretien and Trudeau, from what I gather, ruled in a more dictatorial manner, and to some extent destroyed their parties and their reputations.

[ScottSA]

That brings about the bigger question.

If you have a real interest in politics, which you obviously do, how can you not reconcile yourself to the fact that no party is ever going to appeal 100% to you?

That's really the relevant question. If the CPC is not conservative enough, who are you going to vote for? The Marijuana Party? I maen, sure there are other options, but they are throaway votes or worse. I was even considering voting for a western seperatist party, and even started to help organize it until I got an email I wasn't supposed to get all about how a Jewish plot is afoot with those "kosher" labels on food. I just don't have time to start rebutting all that nonsense...the polynewbies of the world are always louder and more entrenched in myth than normal folk are, so it's pointless.

[geoffrey]

If you have a real interest in politics, which you obviously do, how can you not reconcile yourself to the fact that no party is ever going to appeal 100% to you?

50% appeal would do. Actually any fiscally conservative party at all would do right now. None exist in Canada.

Your views just aren't in synch with enough Canadians to warrant a party that is going to make you happy *and* have a realistic shot of attaining power. Ever.

They were in synch with the 20% that voted Reform and the 25% that voted for the Alliance. They are overwelmingly in synch with the 46.8% of Albertans that voted PC provincially.

A compromise party is only good as long as they are more of what you believe in than what your voting against. I voted against huge spending increases and increases in Federal power. What did I get?

We have heard *ad nauseum* how the Conservatives aren't getting your vote. (Yes, I do defend the Conservatives but I have never said they are perfect.) That is the nature of this board though. You appear to be giving more fuel to the fire of the Liberal supporters here.

About the deficit and spending figures, Trudeau never ran an operating surplus. The deficit grew in large party to his over spending.

I don't disagree about Trudeau. I also wouldn't vote for Trudeau. The reason the CPC isn't running a deficit is because they are raking in massive increases in income tax.

Here are our fiscal liberals disguised as conservatives:

Before Finance Minister Jim Flaherty set to work spending on government programs in this week's budget, he had an underlying surplus of $14.1-billion, the budget documents show. That's double the estimate made just three months ago in the federal fiscal update.

Source

Exactly what we were critical of the Liberals for doing. Way to go Jimmy.

Ottawa will see as much as $73.2-million in annual tax revenue drained from its coffers as a result of 11 trust takeovers since the trust levy was announced on Halloween last year, calculates Sandy McIntyre, a senior vice-president at Sentry Select Capital Corp.

Source

The act first, think later approach to deal making. Since there now is very little evidence that the tax on trusts did anything but hurt revenues, the economy and productivity, I really wonder who got the backroom benefit from that policy reversal.

Income tax revenues have been skyrocketing. Really, what, if ANYTHING, is conservative?

Again, I don't live in a Parliamentary country. But isn't there something to the view that Harper was chosen indirectly (as all PM's are) and also with a very small margin? Doesn't this limit the extent to which he currently has a mandate, or even permission, to make radical changes? Someone who garners 37% of the vote simply does not, it seems to me, have much of a mandate to make changes. Maybe a mandate to lean into the wind a bit, make the argument for changes, and seek a majority to do so.

Nonsense. We've only had a handful of popular vote majorities in our history. Mulroney, Diefenbaker and King. Harper doesn't have a big mandate right now, considering he doesn't even have a majority of the seats, but he's responsible for the choices he makes for the party.

In any democracy, the personal views of the person who, as a practical matter, is governing (a PM is not a head of state) cannot totally trump what the temper of the times demands. Chretien and Trudeau, from what I gather, ruled in a more dictatorial manner, and to some extent destroyed their parties and their reputations.

Why do the current times demand massive spending?

[jbg]

That's really the relevant question. If the CPC is not conservative enough, who are you going to vote for? The Marijuana Party? I maen, sure there are other options, but they are throaway votes or worse. I was even considering voting for a western seperatist party, and even started to help organize it until I got an email I wasn't supposed to get all about how a Jewish plot is afoot with those "kosher" labels on food. I just don't have time to start rebutting all that nonsense...the polynewbies of the world are always louder and more entrenched in myth than normal folk are, so it's pointless.

Ditto in US with Pat Buchanan and H. Ross Perot.

[madmax]

I am interested in anyone coming up with the first poll after the Dion-May anti-agression pact.

[ScottSA]

I am interested in anyone coming up with the first poll after the Dion-May anti-agression pact.

I'd be more interested in seeing a poll after the relationship has some time to fester and GP candidates have time to say a bunch of ridiculous things.

[LastViking]

I'd be more interested in seeing a poll after the relationship has some time to fester and GP candidates have time to say a bunch of ridiculous things.

In the meantime, the evaporation of the Liberal Leadership bounce (to 143 Seats) can be seen at TrendLines Federal & Prov'l Riding Projections. Current polls indicate that the Conservatives would attain 140 MP's, several short of the 155 req'd for a majority...

[Charles Anthony]

In the meantime, the evaporation of the Liberal Leadership bounce (to 143 Seats) can be seen at TrendLines Federal & Prov'l Riding Projections. Current polls indicate that the Conservatives would attain 140 MP's, several short of the 155 req'd for a majority...

The projections on that website are more than a year old. There is also very little information on that website that suggests how those projections were made.

[jdobbin]

Latest Decima poll.

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national...7a545e4&k=65429

A new poll by Decima Research suggests Tory support was back at 34 per cent nationally, far short of the majority stratosphere and two points below where the Conservatives were on election day in January 2006. The Liberals polled 31 per cent nationally, while the NDP got 15 per cent, the Green party 11, and the Bloc Quebecois, seven.

The survey - one of many that suggest a volatile electorate yawing under current events - follows a series of polls over the past month that indicated Tory fortunes were riding a post-budget updraft.

Decima CEO Bruce Anderson said Tuesday the Harper Conservatives have a history of public momentum followed by sudden stalls, stretching through the federal elections of 2004 and 2006.

Doesn't look like Dion has taken any hit from the deal with May.

[betsy]

Doesn't look like Dion has taken any hit from the deal with May.

The Virginia shooting had taken the center stage for two days now. MDuffy Live had taken a backseat, giving way to live conferences and updates in Virginia.

Most probably triggered back the gun-registry fever. Lots of talks about guns.

Let's wait and see when things get back to normal.

[jdobbin]

The Virginia shooting had taken the center stage for two days now. MDuffy Live had taken a backseat, giving way to live conferences and updates in Virginia.

Most probably triggered back the gun-registry fever. Lots of talks about guns.

Let's wait and see when things get back to normal.

This poll was completed before the shooting. It would have taken into account the Dion/May deal as far timing went.

[blueblood]

The Virginia shooting had taken the center stage for two days now. MDuffy Live had taken a backseat, giving way to live conferences and updates in Virginia.

Most probably triggered back the gun-registry fever. Lots of talks about guns.

Let's wait and see when things get back to normal.

This poll was completed before the shooting. It would have taken into account the Dion/May deal as far timing went.

Those polls are more volatile than a tank of anhydrous ammonia, up down up down. no wonder harper wants to wait a long time.

[jdobbin]

Those polls are more volatile than a tank of anhydrous ammonia, up down up down. no wonder harper wants to wait a long time.

I have no idea if he is holding off. I guess we'll know if he calls a bye-election. Still, it could be this week or next depending on if he thinks that the polling numbers are the best for him right now.

[blueblood]

Those polls are more volatile than a tank of anhydrous ammonia, up down up down. no wonder harper wants to wait a long time.

I have no idea if he is holding off. I guess we'll know if he calls a bye-election. Still, it could be this week or next depending on if he thinks that the polling numbers are the best for him right now.

Remember, Harper is known for his stragical prowess, he knows what he is doing, mark my words he'll wait till spring of 09 to call an election.

[jdobbin]

Remember, Harper is known for his stragical prowess, he knows what he is doing, mark my words he'll wait till spring of 09 to call an election.

If he has that long. Right now he controls the timing because he has the lead in the polls. By fall that could change and the Opposition might want to pull the plug.

[blueblood]

Remember, Harper is known for his stragical prowess, he knows what he is doing, mark my words he'll wait till spring of 09 to call an election.

If he has that long. Right now he controls the timing because he has the lead in the polls. By fall that could change and the Opposition might want to pull the plug.

The longer Harper has in office, the better it is for him, people are getting more and more comfortable with him. he knows what he's doing.

[jdobbin]

The longer Harper has in office, the better it is for him, people are getting more and more comfortable with him. he knows what he's doing.

If that was the case, his polling numbers would be higher.