Canadian Politics Thread

Why do I imagine the actual results will be considerably less exciting?

dare to dream with us, mr. shit

Even if I believed those poll numbers (which I don't), I still don't see how they translate into NDP seats. What does it matter if Tory support in the Prairies drops from 60% to 50%? They'll still win nearly every seat there.

The national numbers are skewed by the numbers from Quebec, and everywhere else in the country the Tories are the clear plurality choice. Is Quebec really having a Bob Rae 1990 moment, where they're sick of elections, sick of voting for the usual parties and want to vote for the New Guys (which btw is the dumbest possible reason for changing one's vote and is exactly how we ended up with the Tories defeating the Liberals in the first place five years ago)?

everywhere else in the country the Tories are the clear plurality choice

The EKOS regionals show the CPC in third place in Atlantic Canada. Otherwise, you're right, though. I have no idea where that seat projection comes from. Quebec, BC, and blue-collar Ontario, I guess? 100 seats sounds like fantasy, however.

EKOS has been an outlier throughout this campaign, always showing the CPC lower and the NDP and Liberals higher than other pollsters.

Nanos may well be more realistic.

On the Nanos poll they are way ahead in Atlantic Canada, so yeah, I have no idea what to make of such a big difference between the two. EKOS shows that the NDP basically tripled its support in Atlantic Canada in the past ten days, which seems far outside the realm of believability IMO.

i don't think it's fair to say that the Conservatives were voted into power simply because Canadians wanted "the new guy". i could literally say that about any change in vote or gov't if you're going to apply it there.

and EKOS always seems to have the Cons behind what other polls peg them at. no idea why.
right now for seat projections i'm looking at threehundredeight.

wooo - they just updated their projections and have dropped the cons from 151 to 146!

xpost I disagree, a lot of people voted against the Liberals, not *for* the other parties, in 2004 and 2006. It's one thing to vote Conservative because you think they have the best platform for running the country, and other thing to not vote for the Liberals because they should be punished for doing such and such when they were in power.

I didn't know about threehundredeight ... interesting that for all the talk about the NDP "leading" in Quebec, they're projected to take only six seats.

And their current seat projection shows that the new parliament will look ... almost exactly the same as the previous one! Shocking, I know.

so you're saying in the recent "orange surge" people aren't voting *for* the NDP, they're voting against the Conservatives (or the bloc in Quebec)?

I'm saying they're bored of elections and bored of hearing the same rhetoric over and over again from the same parties, so they're like "screw it, let's try something new and vote for the NDP instead".

ah ya. i see your point.

Chantal Hebert made a valid point, I thought. The war in Afghanistan is most unpopular in Quebec: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/979022--hebert-why-quebec-is-loving-jack-leaving-gilles

Duceppe behaving like a raving lunatic might also have something to do with it.

i'm pretty sure these polls are 99% fairy dust, but i do wonder how well canadian polls measure likely voter turnout. turnout was so low, especially among young people, that even a relatively small increase could make a big difference and screw with these projection models. and it does seems like (based mostly on fb), people are much more engaged in this election than they were in 2008.

otoh, i was out of the country for the 2008 election. does it seem like people care more this time around?

the polls showing a minority PM Layton, that is

Reality Check made some really good points about the unreliability of polling in this day and age: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/realitycheck/2011/04/polling-and-the-ndp-surge.html

I'm not sure if more people care or not, dblake... I'm much more involved this time so I feel like they might but that probably just reflects my own experience.

The fact that there is some sort of NDP surge, regardless of which poll you look at, does suggest that people are taking an interest, right?

that quebec article is really interesting

Ugh: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/story/2011/04/26/cv-election-constitution-042611.html

"We have a quarter of our population who have never signed the Constitution."

A blatantly false statement.

Does anyone still need more proof that Layton is a dumbass??

he could be a drooling, hockey-helmet-clad kindergarten dropout for all i care. of the three big federal leaders he's the only one who didn't want us going into Iraq.

Holy shit, breaking Angus Reid numbers: Cons at 35, NDP 30 and 22 for Libs

9 minutes ago: http://twitter.com/#!/RobertFife

And I guess this means people do care more this time?: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/story/2011/04/26/cv-election-advance-polls.html

I'm looking forward to the outcome in Calgary Centre-North, one of my former ridings. Prentice left this year, leaving it open to a newbie Conservative candidate, who's been criticised for not showing up at 2 of 3 recent public forums. The Liberal candidate is a good guy (he was one of my uni profs) and seems to be getting some positive responses (the area has a lot of students, the rest is a weird patchwork of high-income communities, low-income communities, and hip/yuppie/regenerative communities)... Tories will probably still take the seat but hopefully they at least lose a chunk of their votes. Prentice seemed pretty popular with constituents and I doubt M1chelle R3mpel can match it.

Ha, love that the signs behind Jack are all "We Can Do This" - a bit more Thomas the Tank Engine than Obama, maybe?

http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/photos/2011/04/27/hi-jack-layton-ndp-852-cp-00577146-4col.jpg

Whoops, "The Little Engine that Could", not Thomas, obviously. But the point still stands...on the level of inspirational slogans it's a bit watery.

"we promise to see what we can do"

OK, this shocked me:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/982823--two-bloc-members-endorse-ndp?bn=1

Woah.

I'm not sure if I've ever not voted Liberal in 30 years. I may have voted NDP once or twice, many years ago--I really can't remember. I'm somewhat on the fence heading into Monday. Part of me feels like I'd be jumping on a bandwagon, but Ignatieff has not been impressive. Strategically, it might be a bad move to jump on that bandwagon. I don't know.

cosign on that 'woah', Simon.

xpost I'm not sure we should read too much into that letter (I haven't even read the whole thing, just the newspaper report) but it's so full of weird logic holes and contradictions that I have no idea what to make of it

Clemenza - it's not a presidential election. I don't think there's ever been a provincial OR federal party leader that I really liked.

I've liked a few: Trudeau a bunch, Ed Broadbent seemed like an affable enough guy, and I even kind of liked Clark. Chretien was a little more rah-rah than what I generally gravitate towards, but otherwise I liked him too. Provincially, I don't remember anyone in particular.

Anyway, you're assuming I'm saying that Ignatieff has not been impressive for reasons of personal appeal. He hasn't been impressive in any regard--and his attacks on Layton the past week have seemed panicky and shrill. (And yes: that's politics.)

NDP with a comfortable lead in Quebec City!: http://www.cyberpresse.ca/le-soleil/dossiers/elections-federales/201104/28/01-4394426-sondage-crop-le-soleil-vague-neodemocrate-sur-la-capitale-nationale.php

At this point, clemenza, it's hard to say whether voting Liberal is even a strategic move...

Agreed. That's the decision I have to make over the weekend.

The Liberal platform looked good on paper but I ultimately just couldn't convince myself that they were all that sincere about it - or much of anything - given their Commons track record, Ignatieff's debate performance, and the way their campaign went after the first couple of weeks. Based on that and especially based on the local candidates, I voted for and volunteered with the NDP.

I'm not sure we should read too much into that letter (I haven't even read the whole thing, just the newspaper report) but it's so full of weird logic holes and contradictions that I have no idea what to make of it

It seems pretty logical to me, depending on how you look at things. A federal party can't call a referendum. It needs to come from a provincial government: The BQ has dominated QC's federal representation for nearly 20 years without achieving anything much for the separatist cause. So, in practice, the BQ has been functioning as a progressive/leftist party that advocates for QC. And it makes sense then to throw your support behind a national party that could do the same.

it's weird, no matter what, for a person in a competitive party to endorse another. it's not even a *candidate* they're cheering for - it's just another party. that's beating them.

even Joe Clark's endorsement of Paul Martin made some sense. this is very wtf. i wonder if they'll be booted from the party since they've basically just said it's irrelevant.

anyways. looking forward to monday. will be wearing orange to work!

it's weird, no matter what, for a person in a competitive party to endorse another.

Yeah, totally, sure. What's ironic is that I remembered how earlier in the campaign, an NDP candidate in the London area made a big show of resigning and throwing his support behind the Liberals since at that time, they were the most likely party to beat the CPC. (Along vaguely related lines, I sometimes wonder how Bob Rae is feeling these days.)

will be wearing orange to work!

Ha, that's strictly verboten for a DRO!

I worked at the polls a few years ago and made damn sure I was dressed in all grey & white & black despite having a mostly colourful wardrobe at the time, I can tell you for sure that there were people working there who were clad, hat to shoes, in royal blue -- was kind of tempted to call somebody on the fuckers.

wow, apparently layton has once received a massage. stay classy, harper

I laughed out loud at this attempted 'scandal'. (I'm still blaming the Sun and not Harper for now...)

it's weird, no matter what, for a person in a competitive party to endorse another. it's not even a *candidate* they're cheering for - it's just another party. that's beating them.

They are not members of a competing party; they are members of the Bloc Quebecois, not the Parti Quebecois. These are two different entities, with different leadership, platforms and strategies.

haha oh wait holy shit i got confused and muddled and am totally wrong

that IS weird
!!

What a ridiculous story--this pretty much clinches it for me. I guess people sat on it in the improbable event that they'd need something at the last minute. I sincerely hope it blows up in their faces. (And am resigned to the fact that it probably won't.)

Shocking how many people I know are genuinely *outraged* by this. The only way it blows up in their faces is if the push on the story gets firmly linked to the CPC.