Conservative lead narrows in election race (Canada)

[Freddie Stubbs]

OTTAWA (Reuters) - The opposition Conservatives saw their lead over the ruling Liberals narrow to just under 6 percentage points in the runup to Monday's general election, a poll published on Thursday shows.

The EKOS Research Associates poll showed the Conservatives dropping to 35.1 percent popular support from 36.9 percent the day before, with support for the Liberals rising to 29.3 percent from 27.2 percent.

Fourteen percent of respondents remained undecided.

The poll of 839 people surveyed from January 16 to January 18 has a margin of error of 3.4 percentage points.

more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060119/wl_canada_nm/canada_politics_poll_col

[noahmijo]

1. I gotta ask are the conservatives in Canada like the neo-cons?

I'm wondering if a consevative in canada is more old school and not the same as the radical right wing kook installments we have here in the states.

I recall an old Canadian friend even once tell me that conservatives in Canada are only a little bit more conservative probably than our democrats here.

Not that I want Canada to stop its course of progressive politics, just wondering if a conservative power takeover would really spell the same doom for Canadians like it has for Americans.

[sasha031]

3. not these guys

they are not conservative

[Darth_Kitten]

16. Not all conservatives here are extremists...

People in my family have voted Conservative but they tend to be turned off by the Stephen Harpers/Ralph Klein.

What scares me is how secretive they have been as to their cultural agenda.

A traditional Progressive Conservative person is not somebody I would normally have many issues with, it's the former Reform members in the party which tend to turn me off. :(

[applegrove]

25. Yep but Harper cannot say that he would put the Nova Scotia conservative

MP named Peter Mckay in any particular position in Cabinet. He will not say that. Peter Mckay is the face (and was the leader) of the old Conservative party (Progressive Conservatives)... what remained of the conservative party after Mulrooney which joined with the neocon Reform Party of Canada .. to form a new party - initially called the Conservative Reform Alliance Party.. aka CRAP.. which was quickly changed to something else when they figure out their new moniker .

Peter McKay is the face of the old Conservative Party and the face of the alliance between the two. He is also a favourite of the Atlantic Canadians (his father was a long time MP). So for Harper to not even be able to say he would put the man he has sat beside in the house of commons, Peter Mckay in an important position like deputy minister.. seeing as how the two parties joined.. it is really telling.

Harper quickly started to talk like a neocon at the end - when he thought he had momentum and a majority - so that he could do what Bush did and say "I told you so" and start with neocon reforms and drowning the small "L" liberals (80% of the country) in the bathtub. Remember those vague mentions of "activist judges" Bush made? Well now Bush can say "shut up I was elected on that". Why Bush said it. Harper was trying to do the same.

Asshole!

[Lisa]

29. and also, some of the old PC's (especially the "Red Tories") ....

.... are very upset that McKay proceeded with the merger even after he'd apparently reassured them that this wouldn't happen (or that at least, some decisionmaking powers for the new party would be kept in Central and Atlantic Canada, so the Reform wing in the West wouldn't be calling all the shots). David Orchard, in particular, tried to protest.

Agree with you on the "talk like a neocon" part. Whenever this new bunch are feeling confident, they start to say certain things ... so I suspect that this is their "true" face which would emerge if they are handed a majority.

[applegrove]

30. Yes - and they have to slip the truth out - otherwise they cannot

play the "we were elected on that" card and shut up massive opposition.

[sasha031]

2. I would be shocked to see Canadians vote in neocons

relieved to see they are losing steam

[Darth_Kitten]

17. They peaked at 37-38 percent...

couldn't see them getting any more support. :)

[MrPrax]

4. Great...

Now Canadians can go back to the 'worst case' scenario of a Tory minority gov't :eyes:

[Spazito]

6. LOL!

The undecided/strategic voter will decide this election as they did the last and, sadly for your party, they tend to lean to the Liberals when push comes to shove.

[MrPrax]

7. Truth Hurts...

I don't have a party...don't care and there is no undecided this time...there will ONLY be Liberals and NDPers switching back and forth...meaningless in most ridings, dangerous in those 'special' few.

But hey...don't let any lapsed NDPers get in the way of your leadership campaign, I am sure the Liberal Party of Canada will provide you a new leader (Mike who lived in Boston for the last 20 years or Frank fresh from Carlyle) shortly and so you can 'refresh' your bookmarks. ;-)

Hey is Allan Rock still kicking around?

Where is an Axworthy when you need one?
Now Lloyd was a guy that could sell the 'liberal' schtick--oh yeah Chris, former NDPer, is fighting for his life in Saskatoon at the moment.

(Let's hope that the undecided voters there don't out 'clever' themselves strategically and vote in a Tory like lastyear) LOL

[Spazito]

9. A Tory? Only one Tory and I should be concerned, roflmao

I find it delicious you claim you don't have a party while defending the 'Tories' (btw, that is a term that no longer applies, it has become archaic and belongs only in the history books) and attempting, poorly, to tar and feather those who dare to criticize them.

If you, as you say, "don't care", why the angst over who wins at all? I believe there is an expression that fits here and that would be, paraphrasing Shakespeare:

Thou dost protest too much, me thinks.

[MrPrax]

11. Oh yer just annoyed...

your party's losing.

And there you guy's go again...if you disagree with Liberals, you must defending Tories? huh...oh man

Even reasonably pointing out Martin is NOT going to get rid of the Notwithstanding clause and he, in saying so, is kinda pathetic, is likely to cost him votes as anything Harper is likely to do.

One bonehead play after another and still their numbers climbed back up...good...

the poll numbers are up for the Liberals, so it will probably be a Tory minority...thus my original comment about making light of the 'unthinkable', which up until last Christmas, wasn't even contemplated, let alone a majority Tory gov't.

And oh, Mr. Sensitive!!!...I type tory coz it's quicker...PCs would be even more efficient, less honest...how about I go back to CRAP (conservative-alliance-reform-party). :hug:

[Spazito]

12. LOL, I don't belong to any party, am voting NDP as I am one of

those strategic voters that will decide the election and voting NDP means the faux Cons are VERY, very likely to lose this riding. If they don't lose this riding, it will prove that the faux Cons believe in criminal behavior being rewarded because the faux Con candidate has been charged with criminal acts.

The Liberals were never part of the equation here, had they been or had the Greens been in play to take the riding away from the faux Cons, I would have voted for them instead.

CRAP would be the most accurate, imo, but didn't catch fire for some reason, lol!

[Spazito]

5. This is looking like a re-do from the last election

The same hype and then the pull back by the media. I don't know why they don't just change the date on their articles and re-publish them, it would save them ink, lol.

Canadians have just recently started paying serious attention to the election and when that happens they remember their concerns about the faux Cons. Just as in the last election, it will be the strategic/undecided voters that will decide this election as they did the last. Here is an article about that group of voters:


Poll shows undecided voters more likely to go Grit
Sun. Jan. 8 2006 6:17 PM ET

OTTAWA — Uncommitted voters outside Quebec, who could determine the outcome of the close-fought federal election, were more likely to ultimately support the Liberals than the Conservatives, a new poll suggests.

The Decima Research online voter-tracking study found uncommitted voters in English Canada were less preoccupied than average with scandal and less likely to want change _ all of which augurs well for Prime Minister Paul Martin's party.

snip

Those torn between the Liberals and NDP were more likely to be female, aged 35-54 and members of a visible minority. They tended to think the Liberals were the best choice to govern and that Martin was the best choice for prime minister. However, they also tended to think the NDP had the best approach to issues they care about most.

At the time of the survey, they were leaning 52 to 36 per cent toward the Liberals.

more

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060103/decima_poll_060108/20060108?s_name=election2006&no_ads=

[Kellanved]

8. How is the NDP doing?

And what are the possible coalitions?

[Endangered Specie]

10. Forget them... VOTE BLOC

:sarcasm: :evilgrin:

[NorthernSpy]

13. much of Quebec will do just that, thanks...

Why the sarcasm? The Bloc is a legitimate social-democratic party.

Anyhow, the Bloc does not run candidates outside of Quebec, so most Canadians have no opportunity to vote for them even if they wanted to.

[iverglas]

15. it's something you have to know about

much of Quebec will do just that, thanks...

You're welcome, but in fact the Bloc is looking at losing a lot of seats.

Why the sarcasm? The Bloc is a legitimate social-democratic party.

Interesting theory. So was the Parti québécois ... once. Once actually in government, of course, it looked a little different. Much as many national-liberation movements tend to do once the indigenous élite gets hold of them.

Since the Bloc's sole focus is at the federal level, and since it does not seek / will never achieve government status at that level ... well, we'll never know. What it might be called is a never have to put its money where its mouth is party.

Anyway, to answer your question.

http://torontosun.com/News/Election/2006/01/19/1401368-sun.html
(not my favourite source, but the news is actually a little stale to be finding via google news)

Buzz urges Canadians to vote for the Bloc to stop a Tory majority

STRATHROY, Ont. -- Prime Minister Paul Martin spent a critical campaign day on the defensive after influential union ally Buzz Hargrove urged Canadians to do anything, including vote for the Bloc Quebecois, to stop a majority Conservative government.

Buzz Hargrove is the president of the Canadian Auto Workers union. His first bizarre trick was to go on stage with Paul Martin and urge his flock to abandon the NDP and vote Liberal.

Latest news:

http://www.cnw.ca/fr/releases/archive/January2006/18/c3685.html
thanks to Minstrel Boy in Canada forum for link --
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=190&topic_id=10474&mesg_id=10529

Poll Result: CAW's support of Liberals drive voters to the Conservatives

Thanks also to Minstrel Boy for this link to a good opinion piece on strategic voting, which is the single most important factor in many constituencies and which anybody looking in from a non-multi-party system isn't generally familiar with:
http://www.nowtoronto.com/issues/2006-01-19/news_feature.php

The Liberals snorf up NDP votes by crying "bogeyman"! When I was an NDP candidate in which the Conservative candidate had had 30% of the vote to the Liberals' 50% and my 20% in the previous election, people repeatedly told me they'd like to vote for me but had to vote Liberal to defeat the Tory. And that's actually why a couple of Conservatives won in the last election in places that the NDP would have taken, and where the Liberals had no hope, had the Liberals not succeeded in scaring off the few votes that the NDP lost by.

Anyhow, I trust that this explains your failure to get the sarcasm.

[applegrove]

26. Yup. For separatists - the Quebec separatists keep electing good

eggs as their leaders. A few cads. But mostly very decent people. So that Quebecers really are forced to vote the issue... do I want separation or not.

[Darth_Kitten]

18. VOTE Marxist-Leninist

:evilgrin: :sarcasm:

[Minstrel Boy]

19. Ah, my first vote.

Every other vote has gone NDP, but I retain a certain fondness for the doctrinaire marginalization of my youth.

FYI, a Marxist Leninist commercial.

[iverglas]

21. heh

The world is lucky that the voting age wasn't lowered to 18 until the year I turned 21.

;)

[Darth_Kitten]

24. LOL...well there you go!

:D

[daleo]

14. This is pretty much in line with SES/CPAC daily tracking

Which was 37 to 31 with 15% undecided. Strategic Counsel (Globe and Mail) is way out of line.

On edit - the right wing propaganda will be thick and furious this weekend.

[f-bush]

20. Good

[iverglas]

22. and Harper snatches a minority from the jaws of majority?

Nothing like an unprovoked attack on Canadian judges to not amuse the electorate.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060119/martin_harper_new_060119/20060119?s_name=election2006

Harper recently said Liberal-appointed judges, civil servants and senators would keep a Tory government -- even a majority -- in check.

Martin jumped on the comments, and claimed Harper wants to stack the courts with hard-core social conservatives.

"Why are the courts his opponent? Because they want to defend the Charter of Rights. Because they stand between him and absolute power and I'm not kidding," said Martin at an Oshawa, Ont. campaign rally on Thursday.

The comments represent one of the first major gaffes Harper has made in an almost perfect campaign. He's been put on the defensive by the attack.

Surveys have shown that the courts are Canadians' overwhelming first choice when it comes to whom they most trust to protect their Charter rights.

I think this one beats out Martin's bizarre announcement that he would repeal the notwithstanding clause of the Charter.

(Briefly, on that one -- the courts have held, and Canadians appear to very much agree, that our Constitution *is* "a living tree". As it stands, it reflects the 18th-century notions of liberties to which our southern neighbours are so wedded, and the later "generation" of equality/minority rights that are our own trademark. Where it falls short is on the third generation of rights -- social/solidarity rights. Things like the right to health care. And -- keeping in mind that I speak theoretically, and not to any particular political conjuncture -- the clause of the Constitution that preserves Parliament's supremacy when it comes to political choices like the universality and exclusivity of important social programs is arguably an essential tool to allow Canadian society to continue to progress toward one in which its members are not only free and equal, but also healthy, educated, well nourished and decently housed.)

Harper just doesn't seem to have been able to keep his ugly ideological undergarments and his petty vindictiveness from showing for even the length of an election campaign. Any votes lost by him over this would likely go to Martin at this point, but oh well.

I'm still hoping for a Liberal+NDP plurality with Bloc support to bring down any Conservative minority govt we might get, when the time is ripe, and then get the confidence of the House for the Liberals to govern. (I've said how the present GG would obviously not be seen as having any legitimate authority to make that decision, but on reflection, I'd think that the confidence of the House would provide the authority needed.) If you can't get what you want, I'll settle for exciting times.

[iverglas]

23. the Globe and Mail might think so

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060120.wxelexnanalysis20/BNStory/Front

Take, for example, Mr. Harper's announcement earlier this week that a Liberal-dominated Senate, Supreme Court and civil service would serve as a check on his government were he to win a majority. The comments were supposed to ease anxieties.

Instead, they brought a focus on the fact that Mr. Harper might head to Parliament with intentions to change the way the Supreme Court is appointed. But the concerns are less about judicial activism than they are about the resurrection of Reform grievances over the West's exclusion from power.

... Mr. Harper's suggestion this week that some judges are social activists opens the door for Liberal Leader Paul Martin to ask what Mr. Harper has in mind. Would he, for example, pack the court to overturn certain civil rights? Will the civil service be remade?

"It reinforces the idea that a Tory majority is to be feared and gets him back into the chippy old conspiracy-theory frame," said a Tory supporter who asked not to be identified. "The (notion that) the system and everybody in it is rigged against him."

Why would it need to be, when he's so adept at shooting himself in his own foot?

[Minstrel Boy]

27. Here are the latest numbers from EKOS:

compiled yesterday (Jan 19), published in today's Toronto Star:

"A new tracking survey by EKOS Research Associations done yesterday for the Star and La Presse found the Tories at 37.4 per cent support nationally, the Liberals at 27.3 per cent, the NDP at 20.8 per cent, the Bloc Québécois at 10.1 per cent and the Green party at 3.9. There were 835 people surveyed yesterday, and the poll's margin of error is 3.4 percentage points."

Those aren't numbers for a Conservative majority. And NDP numbers close to 21% look good to me.

[iverglas]

28. what I completely fail to get about these polls

What the hell is the point of including Bloc numbers in national breakdowns??

The results are so horribly skewed -- both for Quebec and for the rest of Canada -- that they're virtually meaningless.

ALL of the Bloc's 10% is in Quebec. So obviously the total of the other parties' numbers there are lower than in the rest of Canada -- and the total of their numbers in the rest of Canada is higher than those breakdowns show.

How the other parties' numbers break down in Quebec is of some considerable significance, and how the other parties' numbers break down in the rest of Canada is the only thing of any significance there.

Of course, the whole popular-vote breakdown isn't particularly useful, especially in a multi-party system, anyhow, but this specific aspect of it makes me crazy.

It doesn't help me to know what proportion of the popular vote the Bloc has in Quebec when I'm looking for an idea of how things are going to go in Canada (which, we will all understand, includes Quebec). Apples and bloody oranges.

[zann725]

31. Are they usng "pollsters," and in Elect., U.S.-funded "voting machines"

and pollsters?

[Idioteque]

32. Ballets in Canada are hand counted. :) n/t