babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » NDP Federal Seat Gains

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: NDP Federal Seat Gains
Political Junkie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8382

posted 16 April 2005 01:19 AM      Profile for Political Junkie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have taken the time to compile a list of the 37 ridings most likely to fall in the NDP's favour if a 2005 election were to occur. Ridings where the difference was greater than 5000 votes were disregarded. All of this assumes that the majority of NDP gains will come from the sinking Liberal Party in each riding. As it is impossible to predict the level of upset the residents of a given riding will have toward the Liberal Party, the greater the vote gap to fill, the less possible it is to call it.

A ranking system has been incorporated relative to the probability that each riding will go to the NDP based on the results from the June election of 2004. If exactly a 1000+ vote margin for example, the riding is given to the rank of greater probability.

***** 0-500

**** 500-1000

*** 1000-2000

** 2000-3000

* 3000-5000

As an estimate, I have called all ridings requiring a deviation of less than 1250+ vote gains as being plausibly safe for the NDP. Everything else is up in the air. Here they are:

British Columbia

Victoria
NDP needs 1150+ votes to take it.
Rank: ***

Vancouver Kingsway
NDP needs 1000+ votes to take it.
Rank: ****

Vancouver Centre
NDP needs 2150+ votes to take it.
Rank: **

Newton-North Delta
NDP needs 1500+ votes to take it.
Rank: ***

Nanaimo-Alberni
NDP needs 2000+ votes to take it.
Rank: ***

Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca
NDP needs 1500+ votes to take it.
Rank: ***

South Interior
NDP needs 340+ votes to take it.
Rank: *****

Vancouver Island North (My riding)
NDP needs 250+ votes to take it.
Rank: *****

New Westminster-Coquitlam
NDP needs 50+ votes to take it.
Rank: *****

Vancouver South
NDP needs 4090+ votes to take it.
Rank: *


Saskatchewan

Palliser
NDP needs 150+ votes to take it.
Rank: *****

Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre
NDP needs 2000+ votes to take it.
Rank: ***

Regina-Qu'Appelle
NDP needs 500+ votes to take it.
Rank: *****

Saskatoon-Humboldt
NDP needs 250+ votes to take it.
Rank: *****

Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar
NDP needs 1000+ votes to take it.
Rank: ****


Manitoba

Selkirk-Interlake
NDP needs 4500+ votes to take it.
Rank: *

Kildonan-St. Paul
NDP needs 2750+ votes to take it.
Rank: ****


Ontario

London-Fanshawe (Regardless of the O'Brien factor)
NDP needs 1600+ votes to take it.
Rank: ***

Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing
NDP needs 1600+ votes to take it.
Rank: ***

Hamilton East-Stoney Creek
NDP needs 470+ votes to take it.
Rank: *****

Hamilton Mountain
NDP needs 400+ votes to take it.
Rank: *****

Davenport
NDP needs 2790+ votes to take it.
Rank: **

Sudbury
NDP needs 3000+ votes to take it.
Rank: **

Nickle Belt
NDP needs 1620+ votes to take it.
Rank: ***

Kenora
NDP needs 500+ votes to take it.
Rank: *****

Oshawa.
NDP needs 250+ votes to take it.
Rank: *****

Parkdale-High Park
NDP needs 1800+ votes to take it.
Rank: ***

Thunder Bay-Rainy River
NDP needs 1750+ votes to take it.
Rank: ***

Trinity-Spadina
NDP needs 400+ votes to take it.
Rank: *****

Welland
NDP needs 2500+ votes to take it.
Rank: **

Beaches-East York
NDP needs 3675+ votes to take it.
Rank: *


Yukon
NDP needs 1260+ votes to take it.
Rank: ***


Northwest Territories

Western Arctic
NDP needs 50+ votes to take it.
Rank: *****


New Brunswick

Madawaska-Restigouche
NDP needs 2670+ votes to take it.
Rank: **


Nova Scotia

Dartmouth-Cole Harbour
NDP needs 2020+ votes to take it.
Rank: **

Halifax West
NDP needs 4000+ votes to take it.
Rank: *

Sydney-Victoria
NDP needs 4550+ votes to take it.
Rank: *

That being said, the NDP would gain 12 seats bringing them to a total of 31 in the House.

Feel free to comment; input is always appreciated.

[ 16 April 2005: Message edited by: Political Junkie ]


From: BC, Canada | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 16 April 2005 07:39 AM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post
Hey PJ. The work you did on this is much appreciated. I'm just not sure what your basis is for 12 seats - is it just the ones with 5 stars, or did you use any other criteria?
From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Political Junkie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8382

posted 16 April 2005 04:32 PM      Profile for Political Junkie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Just the ones with 5 stars as of now RB. I felt that any riding with less than a 500 vote margin to close ought to be given to the NDP straight up. Such regions would require little more than average campaign attention to influence the votes of a few hundred and sway them toward the NDP cause.
From: BC, Canada | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 16 April 2005 06:16 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Of course in real life, it is never that straightforward. I can almost guarantee that the NDp will NOT win at least one of the seats that were lost by less than 1000 votes last time, but WILL win a seat that was lost last time by a much wider margin.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 16 April 2005 06:20 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Absolutely - this is not a zero-sum game. We will take a seat that surprises absolutely everybody, making us all think we're on the road to fame and glory, then go and lose something like Burnaby-Douglas or Halifax - that's the way it goes.
From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
NP
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 226

posted 16 April 2005 10:38 PM      Profile for NP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Political Junkie:

Saskatoon-Humboldt
NDP needs 250+ votes to take it.
Rank: *****


Keep in mind the only way the NDP will take that seat with 250+ extra votes is if Jim Pankiw once again runs as an independent and takes 20%+ of the vote. If that doesn't occur, we'd need an extra 6000 or so votes to win.


From: The city that rhymes with fun | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 16 April 2005 11:31 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'd be putting Saskatoon-Humboldt in with the likes of Edmonton-Strathcona. We've got a chance there, but not a great one - say a B or C category target.

[ 16 April 2005: Message edited by: Screaming Lord Byron ]


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 17 April 2005 01:38 AM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Having gone over the two most western provinces, this is how I see it.

New Westminster-Coquitlam requires only a 0.07% swing to take. Given that most polls have shown a further CPC decline and a rise in NDP fortunes, we should be able to unseat Forseth - I'd predict a gain here.

Vancouver Island North needs a 0.46% swing. There's a sizeable Liberal vote in the riding (21.46%), and we should be able to take enough of that, even without considering the Liberal drop in the polls, to take the seat away from a pretty low-key MP - another gain.

Southern Interior - much like the other two, needs a small swing (0.75%) to take it away from another pretty low-key Tory. We should be able to take this.

Victoria - Only a 1.3% swing needed here to take out David Anderson. Clearly Anderson has some popular vote in the riding, but a 1.3% cushion for a man whose career is largely behind him is probably not enough. Another likely pick-up.

Vancouver Kingsway - 1.6% swing needed. Emerson is of course, rather high-profile - usually that would be an asset for re-election. In this election, he may well find that a millstone. If the NDP run Ian Waddell again, or a similar high-profile name, it's a win.

These five I would consider our safest bets. After this things get decidedly tougher. Still - these five would take the NDP to 10 seats from BC.

Newton-North Delta.
Like the other seat represented by the Gurwal family team, this was a three-way marginal in 2004. Expectations will be for the Liberal vote to fall back, but it is not clear as to which of the other two parties will benefit the most. The NDP only needs a 1.8% swing to unseat Gurmant Grewal, but with the party coming in third last year behind a Liberal candidate who garnered 31.55% of the vote, this is not a sure thing.

Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca.
It would take a 2.4% swing to unseat Keith Martin, but the man does appear to be mystifyingly popular. Whether that personal vote can transcend a Liberal tailspin will determine whether this otherwise likely NDP win actually goes in that direction.

Dewdney-Alouette.
Only requires a 2.9% swing against a low-key Tory to return this seat to the fold. If anything, it may be easier to pick up than either of the two above.

Nanaimo-Alberni.
Traditional NDP territory combined with another low-key CPC MP make this prime pick-up territory if the party has a good night. There may be some knock-on effect from the safe NDP seat next door. Requires a 3.4% swing.

Vancouver Centre.
We always predict that Hedy Fry will lose her seat, but yet she remains. Why, God why?
Still, if the Grits go down hard, Hedy does to. Needs 4%.

Fleetwood-Port Kells.
Much like Newton-North Delta, a sizeable Liberal vote stands between the NDP and victory. It would take a 4% swing to unseat Nina Grewal, depending on how well she has performed in her first year in the house.

Beyond these ones, there are more outside chances in ridings such as Kamloops-Thompson, Port Moody-Westwood-Port Coquitlam and Saanich-Gulf Islands, but those are definitely uphill battles.

As far as Alberta goes, the NDP should be able to ease into a solid second place in Edmonton Strathcona, push back up in Edmonton East and attempt to overtake the Liberals in such ridings as Calgary Centre North, Calgary East and Medicine Hat.


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
NP
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 226

posted 17 April 2005 12:24 PM      Profile for NP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Screaming Lord Byron:
I'd be putting Saskatoon-Humboldt in with the likes of Edmonton-Strathcona. We've got a chance there, but not a great one - say a B or C category target.

[ 16 April 2005: Message edited by: Screaming Lord Byron ]


Personally, I would put Prince Albert and Churchill River Missinipi etc. ahead of Sask-Humboldt.

Even if we took 100% of the Liberal vote there, we'd still be behind the Conservatives. Sask-Humboldt is about as winnable as Blackstrap.


From: The city that rhymes with fun | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 April 2005 12:39 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But the NDP won Saskatoon-Humboldt many times in the 80s and only lost there by 250 votes in 1997 and holds almost all the provincial seats that make up the federal seat (even came wiithin 100 votes of winning Humboldt). Surely with the right candidate, it shoudl be as winnable as any other urban seat in Saskatchewan?
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
pebbles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6400

posted 17 April 2005 02:28 PM      Profile for pebbles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The NDP's support for the current electoral map of Saskatchewan, lumping in NDP- and Liberal-leaning central city areas of Saskatoon and Regina with bedrock Reform/Alliance/Conservative areas of outlying countryside, has to rank as among the stupidest, stupidest, stupidest things that the party has ever done.

Way to go, giving Harper a bye in 5 or 6 of SK's 14 ridings.


From: Canada | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
BrianJA
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8821

posted 17 April 2005 03:48 PM      Profile for BrianJA     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Dartmouth-Cole Harbour is going to be a tough one to win; I accept that. But my riding association is ready for it. Whether I run, or somebody else does, we're going to give Savage a run for it.

I heard rumours that Svend was going to try and seek the NDP nomination for Vancouver Centre.


From: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 17 April 2005 04:33 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by BrianJA:
I heard rumours that Svend was going to try and seek the NDP nomination for Vancouver Centre.

That was mentioned on Question Period today.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 April 2005 06:46 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Dartmouth-Cole Harbour is going to be a tough one to win;

Why should it be tough to win? It went NDP twice, it elects a full slate of NDpers provincially, since June 2004 Liberal support has been falling and NDP support rising.

Why is this seat not in the bag for us?


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
NP
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 226

posted 17 April 2005 08:05 PM      Profile for NP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
But the NDP won Saskatoon-Humboldt many times in the 80s and only lost there by 250 votes in 1997 and holds almost all the provincial seats that make up the federal seat (even came wiithin 100 votes of winning Humboldt). Surely with the right candidate, it shoudl be as winnable as any other urban seat in Saskatchewan?

Not convinced. Remember, not only did Jim Pankiw win a fifth of the vote as an independent federally, he also beat the established "NDP" mayoral candidate, Jim Madden, the year before.

As far as the provincial seats go, two of Saskatoon's urban MLAs are SaskParty (Morgan and Cheveldayoff), and of course ALL of the rural portion is SP.

I just don't see how we can win the seat now, given the fact that we couldn't pull 25% of the vote.

I would rather see us run Nettie Wiebe in Saskatoon Rosetown-Biggar, which is not only her home riding, but also has much better west side territory for us.


From: The city that rhymes with fun | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
NP
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 226

posted 17 April 2005 08:09 PM      Profile for NP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
For that matter, based on the 1997 results, Wascana should also be a target - our pop vote was 28% vs. 32 in Sask-Humboldt.
From: The city that rhymes with fun | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 April 2005 08:16 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Can we necessarily assume that all of the Pankiw vote would go back to the Conservatives? Sometimes these renegade independents take away NDP protest votes as well. It is clear to me that had that Chuck Cadman in Surrey BC not run as an independent, the NDP probably would have won the seat. A lot of people like the idea of voting for an independent.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
kingblake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3453

posted 17 April 2005 08:25 PM      Profile for kingblake     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I thought I heard in passing that Nettie was running in SRB this time 'round. I could be completely wrong, and in retrospect I should've paid more attention/ asked if it's wise to be switching ridings, but I didn't.
From: In Regina, the land of Exotica | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 17 April 2005 11:05 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Nettie has, or will soon, put her name in for Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar. Don Kossick has his name again in Blackstrap, and there's another man thinking about there as well (can't recall the name). There are three possible candidates in Saskatoon-Humboldt, all very good from what I've heard, but only one has declared as yet: Tony Linner (disclosure: I am quite close to Tony). No one has as yet declared in Saskatoon-Wanuskewin.
From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Northern54
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5325

posted 17 April 2005 11:12 PM      Profile for Northern54     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think that we should not count out too many ridings this election. In a quickly called election, there will be a Liberal meltdown in some parts of the country and if the NDP can show itself to be a reasonable contender in those places, we could garner lots of votes in "undreamed" of ridings. I think "candidates" are really important and that we should try as best as we can to get well-known (locally) candidates as in a Liberal meltdown, there will be a tendency for ex-Liberals to vote for who they perceive to be the best candidate (very little party loyalty).
From: Yellowknife | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
BrianJA
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8821

posted 17 April 2005 11:12 PM      Profile for BrianJA     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:

Why should it be tough to win? It went NDP twice, it elects a full slate of NDpers provincially, since June 2004 Liberal support has been falling and NDP support rising.

Why is this seat not in the bag for us?


Dartmouth-Cole Harbour is held by a somewhat-popular incumbent right now. It won't be extremely hard, but it'll be a challenge.

If I win the nomination, I'd like to think I can beat him, but I accept that it won't be easy.


From: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
CdnPolSci
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8800

posted 17 April 2005 11:33 PM      Profile for CdnPolSci     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The next election will be very chaotic. Old traditional voting patterns will vanish because the electorate will become highly agitated. That is why Layton and the NDP must be very pro-active in creating voter movement towards the NDP.

If the CPC can create a tsunami dynamic to public opinion about Liberal corruption, they may be swept to an unexpectedly large victory. Old loyalties and past beliefs will be overwhelmed by the anger unleased by Canadians against the Liberal criminals.

It may happen that Canadians will make their voting decision solely based on the issue of government corruption and want a change for the sake of change.

With these strong feelings influencing the Canadian election psyche, it may be futile to try to attack another party on social or fiscal issues. The voters may turn a deaf ear on that confusing crap and turn against anybody who peddles it.

Whose credibility is rising currently according to the polls? Harper is rising while Martin is plummeting. Layton is stagnant because he has not yet made his full move on the Liberal Beast.

Canadians currently only recognize Harper as the alternative to Martin. Layton is a non-player so he must carefully pick his battles so that the NDP national strategy peaks during the election. Layton will go after the wounded Liberal prey to optimize his results so as to win as many Liberal seats as possible. For Layton to attack the stronger Harper that will be futile and unproductive in a short 4 week campaign.

There can be no strategic voting to favour the Liberal candidates because each Liberal MP left standing is just another nail in the NDP's coffin. The Liberal Beast must be destroyed. Believe it.

[ 17 April 2005: Message edited by: CdnPolSci ]


From: Canada | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 April 2005 12:01 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Have you created a macro on your PC so you can keep posting these identical long screeds? We have all heard your garbage a million times. Why don't you try not posting until you actually have something new to say.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 18 April 2005 12:14 AM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Don't be counting chickens. We need to focus on preparing a good campaign.

It is not even clear that we will make gains.

Opinion polls do not agree on us being up much above last year's support. there was one really nice poll but more other ones did not bring good news.

Further, the dynamics vary. In some areas we are runnign against a conservative who could possible gain more Liberal defectors than we will and still beat us. Some of those losing margins could even grow -- even with our vote increasing.

More importantly, we saw a major shift in the closing days of the last campaign where I believe we lost several seats that had been in our grasp.

Also don't write off the Liberals. Martin has a little more experience campaigning for PM as well. The control the government agenda and have a fair bit of money. Canadians may not like the idea of the government being brought down either a factor that could help the Liberals. Also without having to vote, Canadains can express disapproval in a poll. But in an election they probably will chose whichever party they believe will benefit them most. Depending on how the campaign goes, that could still be the Liberals.

Many Canadians think both the NDP and the Conservatives are scary. Even voters in Quebec may not reward the BQ with that many more seats when they have a chance to really think about it. Some areas wher eit is just us agains tthe Liberals some may vote Liberal just out of fear of a conservative victory trying to give the Liberals the most seats. the there is the media and I think they are heavily biased against us.

To make gains the NDP will have to deliver a substantive policy package and a very, very clever campaign. Until I see that, I am making no bets either way.

I actually do not think that this is a good time for the NDP to go to the polls. It may actually be better later in the fall. That would give more time to have the scandal details sink in. It would give a chance for Canadains to rethink whether they want to give the Conservatives a government. Actually, I think in that sober thought period we might actually be in a better position to take some of those western seats we hope to from the conservatives and still a reasonable shot at some urban seats where we are running against Liberals. Also, if a minority last longer Canadians may be satisfied with the idea of another minority. If Canadians feel that they want the stability of a majority then we could be in trouble.

We need to show a minority works. Also for us it would be better to see the Conservatives a bit weaker rahter than the Liberals right now. If the Conservatives were weaker we might be abel to the balance of power and contribute to a really functional minority. From that position we may be able to build more over a longer period so that we could wipe the Liberals in the following election.

I am personally concerned about a Conservative victory for a few reasons: Obviously the damage they would do to our country, but also the opportunity they would give the Liberals to lick their wounds from us. A period in opposition to the Conservatives would allow the Liberals back as the alternate government.

I don't think we should bring down the government at all. As I said before, I would suggest that the NDP either put clothes pins on their noses and support the Liberals in a motion or avoid the vote altogether.

Another point, if we go to the polls now the election would be fought on corruption, and that would help Harper. If we wait we could run on a failed Liberal record with respect to our issues which would benefit us. A bad Kyoto plan, poor national daycare plan, unfair taxation, dithering with respect to foreign and defence policy. That could be a better basis for an election. the scandal issue won't go away either it would be helpful in the background but not so loud that it would cloud people's minds to the reality of what a Prime Minister Harper would mean.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
kingblake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3453

posted 18 April 2005 12:15 AM      Profile for kingblake     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
[response to Stock] I was wondering the exact same thing. I suppose one could find out, should one decide to read all of his/her posts from start to finish, but I think that price is too high.

[ 18 April 2005: Message edited by: kingblake ]


From: In Regina, the land of Exotica | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 April 2005 12:30 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Good post Sean. You are very right, its easy to overreact to a couple of polls and headlines this week, but by next week we may all be focused on something else. "A week in politics is a long time". The Liberals still have one big advantge and that is that despite this silly "scandal" many people still regtard them as "safe", "experienced", "moderate", etc... and they don't really disagree with any of the actual government policies.

Right now you ask people how they would vote and the sub-text of the question is "Do you think the Liberals should be punished for the sponsorship scandal?" On Election day, the question is "Which party do I want making policies and passing laws for the country?"


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
CdnPolSci
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8800

posted 18 April 2005 02:14 AM      Profile for CdnPolSci     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Can it Stockholm. All you do on this forum is spend 80% of your time flaming me and the other 20% sucking the Liberals. Get a life that is meaningful or cease and decease.
From: Canada | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 18 April 2005 02:26 AM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by CdnPolSci:
Can it Stockholm. All you do on this forum is spend 80% of your time flaming me and the other 20% sucking the Liberals. Get a life that is meaningful or cease and decease.

Cease and desist that's cease and desist.
Hey you forgot to call him a "Liberal-Loving troll".

Notice CdnPolSci has nothing new to add tonight because he has not yet received the Daily CPC Official Press Release yet.

Ok your turn.


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
CdnPolSci
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8800

posted 18 April 2005 02:27 AM      Profile for CdnPolSci     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sean in Ottawa

You have presented many interesting scenarios for NDP strategy. Do you have any concern that if the election is delayed to the Fall and before the Gomery report is tabled, that the Liberals may have time to build an effective firewall around themselves?

My concern about presenting NDP policy to angry voters is that they will not want to listen to us, and will have made their voting decision only on the basis of existing Liberal government corruption and no more?

Attempting to sell sensible NDP policy when the voter is emotionally distraught is a tough sell because that will just load their minds with more confusion. The voter just wants to rectify the corruption in government and does not want another election this or next year for sure !!!

Trying to push doctrinaire NDP and even CPC whacknut policy may be futile given the chaotic state of the overall electorate. That is why claims of hidden agendas and urging strategic voting will not fly in the next election.

In any case we may be prognosticating a bit too early because more Gomery revelations may force the resignation of Martin and the Liberal government who will seek forgiveness and another clear mandate from Canadian voters. No use waiting if things are going to get worse and they undoubtedly will for the Liberal Beast.

[ 18 April 2005: Message edited by: CdnPolSci ]


From: Canada | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
kingblake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3453

posted 18 April 2005 02:32 AM      Profile for kingblake     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by CdnPolSci:
Can it Stockholm. All you do on this forum is spend 80% of your time flaming me and the other 20% sucking the Liberals. Get a life that is meaningful or cease and decease.
Yes, we certainly hate spamming one-trick ponies, don't we?

From: In Regina, the land of Exotica | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
CdnPolSci
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8800

posted 18 April 2005 02:33 AM      Profile for CdnPolSci     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by mary123:

Cease and desist that's cease and desist.

Ok your turn.


You are one dense dummy. No I meant "cease and decease" and if you can't get it then just shut up and stop making a fool of yourself.

I am actually feeling pity for you now.

Say goodnight Gracie, or mary


From: Canada | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 18 April 2005 02:38 AM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
More generic cut and paste crap from our resident fake NDP'er CdnPolSci.

The best strategy to counter misinformation that
CdnPolSci (a fake NDP supporter) is to put real NDP strategy right under his drivel.
Real not fake NDP policy.


Eight Commitments


*Create opportunities and jobs in a green and prosperous economy.


*Improve public health care with innovation – not privatization.


*Invest in cities and communities through clean water, housing and transit.

*Expand access to post-secondary education.


*Make life more affordable and secure – starting with protecting pensions, removing GST from family essentials and expanding childcare.


*Strengthen Canada's independent voice for peace, human rights and fair trade on the world stage.


*Restore integrity and accountability in government.


*Balance the budget.

The platform (pdf).

The costing


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
CdnPolSci
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8800

posted 18 April 2005 02:49 AM      Profile for CdnPolSci     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
yyaawwnn

(no more drivel please the thread is getting tattered with your garbage)


From: Canada | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 18 April 2005 02:49 AM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by CdnPolSci:
yyaawwnn

(no more drivel please the thread is getting tattered with your garbage)


And CdnPolSci has the gall and arrogance to 'yawn' at Official NDP policy and call it 'drivel'.

Figures. CPC Official Party Policy is the only platform he/she is interested in.

[ 18 April 2005: Message edited by: mary123 ]


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 18 April 2005 08:33 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by mary123:
And CdnPolSci has the gall and arrogance to 'yawn' at Official NDP policy and call it 'drivel'.

Figures. CPC Official Party Policy is the only platform he/she is interested in.


You are absolutely correct mary123. CPC shill of course, one can tell by the word usage.

Liberal Beast = spawn of satan if not satan's party

cease and decease = get thee behind me satan or in the name of Jesus go into complete and absolute dissolution forevermore.

If you let them ramble long enough they always slip and let a fundamentalist code word/phrase out unconsciously.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 April 2005 09:53 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Attempting to sell sensible NDP policy when the voter is emotionally distraught

I see, now the Canadain voters are "emotionally distraught"? What are the symtoms are all Canadians having collective insomnia and all needing Prozac to get over their "shock" over the "explosive" revelations of the Gomery Commission?


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 18 April 2005 10:21 AM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by CdnPolSci:
Get a life that is meaningful or cease and decease.

The CPC party hack's attempt at humour.

Would you say 'cease and decease' if I were a foetus or called Terry Schiavo?

Wishing someone death is alright as long as they are able-bodied and political foes of yours.
More hypocrisy from fake NDP'er called CdnPolSci.


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
CdnPolSci
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8800

posted 18 April 2005 10:59 AM      Profile for CdnPolSci     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Actually I voted for the Cretch Liberals and now I must atone for my transgressions against Canada by voting NDP. I am doing my best to rectify the corruption and criminality imposed on Canada by the Liberal crooks.

Quebec and the West want to separate from Canada.

Our international image has been tarnished by Liberal third world corruptton.

The Liberals are no longer a principled political party.

The Liberals are corrupted by long term power and have become no better than a criminal organization

The NDP has the opportunity to rise and become a major player in Canadian politics.

The NDP must help destroy the Liberal Beast together with the BQ and CPC for the sake of Canada.

The NDP must aspire and prepare to govern Canada in the near future.

That is briefly my position and those who oppose the emergence of the NDP and the destruction of the Liberal Beast are quite obviously Liberal-loving trolls.

Everybody on this fine forum know who you are by your rabid attacks and oppostion to me and the NDP. I stand with Jack. You promote Mr. Dithers. You are not true NDPers and only throw sand in people's eyes to stop the NDP from being a Canadian government. That's so obvious.


From: Canada | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
island empire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8064

posted 19 April 2005 05:24 PM      Profile for island empire     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
wow, you're still at it? i honestly can't believe you spend your time on here harrassing everyone.

here i was hoping to read about... federal seat gains, and then i notice 2/3 of the thread is another canadian poli sci special. i'm surprised they haven't disconnected your account.

by the way, i've lived in the west my whole life, and i've never met anyone who wants to separate. this is the genre of facile generalization typical of conservatives: just scrub the nuance away, it'll only hurt you.


From: montréal, canada | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 19 April 2005 06:27 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by mary123:

The CPC party hack's attempt at humour.

Would you say 'cease and decease' if I were a foetus or called Terry Schiavo?

Wishing someone death is alright as long as they are able-bodied and political foes of yours.
More hypocrisy from fake NDP'er called CdnPolSci.


No, unfourtunately it is not a CPC party hack's attempt at humour, it is really the wording these people use against someone who they believe has the spirit of satan upon them. Cdnpolisci, was saving you from satans presence so you could see the way of truth. For real.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
MasterDebator
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8643

posted 20 April 2005 03:30 AM      Profile for MasterDebator        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Sean in Ottawa:
|I don't think we should bring down the government at all. As I said before, I would suggest that the NDP either put clothes pins on their noses and support the Liberals in a motion or avoid the vote altogether.

Another point, if we go to the polls now the election would be fought on corruption, and that would help Harper. If we wait we could run on a failed Liberal record


Sean, I just wanted to be clear on what you're recommending. Are you saying that the NDP should not vote non-confidence right now, or not ever? In the second part you seem to be saying we should go for an election in the Fall, and I agree with that.


From: Goose Country Road, Prince George, BC | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 20 April 2005 05:25 AM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't think that the NDP should go now at all.

I am not sure that the NDP should force an election in the fall either. This would depend on two things: 1) our levels of support at that time partly in relation to the Cons as well as the Liberals. 2) the trigger would have to be a good reason that we can run on in an election. We can't pull the plug or asist with pulling the plug unless we have a ready explanation.

It may be better haning on till next Spring even. Also I am not sure when the Gomery commission will be odne. I think we should try to keep things cool unil it is done then perhaps run on our solutions to that. But by then we better have some strong new accountibility proposals to go with our criticisms. We need to show HOW we would do things differently.

By that time the SSM bill should be all done, the Liberals Daycare and Environmental policies finally a matter of record.

I also do not think it is the right thing to do anyway (bring down the government). Martin did have a mandate to get the results from Gomery and I think this needs to be done.

In the meantime we can be building a base in more ridings and preparing for an election.

Sorry I can't be clearer. I do not support voting down the government now and unless there is a good reason not in the fall either. But of course a good reason may come up.

Most of all let us SHOW canadians that we are the constructive ones while the Liberals and Cons just shred each other.

I liked the strength of Layton's comments in saying he would not bring down the government now together with his anger as a Canadian. This is the right tone. It is statesmanlike and Prime-Ministerial whent he others are not.

We should through this mess start proposing clear policies dealing with these issues and not talk election. Let us propose the legislation to account: this actually can even include PR but also powers for the auditor general and greater accountibility directly to the voters. We also have to make the point that the Conservatives would through right wing policies also channel billions to their friends.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Policywonk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8139

posted 20 April 2005 05:23 PM      Profile for Policywonk     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I have taken the time to compile a list of the 37 ridings most likely to fall in the NDP's favour if a 2005 election were to occur. Ridings where the difference was greater than 5000 votes were disregarded. All of this assumes that the majority of NDP gains will come from the sinking Liberal Party in each riding. As it is impossible to predict the level of upset the residents of a given riding will have toward the Liberal Party, the greater the vote gap to fill, the less possible it is to call it.

I'm surprised no-one picked up on this, but using absolute vote differences is a bad idea given the small population of some ridings like those in PEI and the territories in particular (due to the constitutional requirement that the number of seats in the House of Commons can't be less than the number of Senate seats in the province or territory. Percentage differences would have been a much better idea.
Thus Halifax West and Beaches-East York would be better prospects than Yukon, based on the relative margin of defeat from the last election alone. Personally, I think eliminating ridings where we have little chance would be more useful (less than 10% of the vote and no organization on the ground), particularly in a volatile situation. However, I expect Yukon will be a reasonably close three way fight based on past history (Louise Hardy in 1997 benefited immensely from vote splitting on the right).


From: Edmonton | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca