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

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » AngusReid huge sample CPC 40/Libs 26/NDP 15/BQ 10/G 8

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: AngusReid huge sample CPC 40/Libs 26/NDP 15/BQ 10/G 8
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 01 March 2007 06:48 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
http://tinyurl.com/ywztj5

The sample size here is over 3,000 yielding some very juicy regional/provincial breaks.

These numbers don't totally shock me since Dion has had a few bad weeks and the CPC has been more on track.

My observations are as follows:

The Conservatives still have a lot of wasted votes in Alberta and rural Man/Sask (Ralph Goodale and the Liberal and NDP seats in Winnipeg are probably unloseable for the incumbents).

The Conservatives could gain a seat or two in Atlantic, but nothing major. At 23% the 3 NDP seats there are rock-solid.

The Conservatives are still stalled in Quebec - though that could change if Charest wins and if the BQ starts to seriously fade in the aftermath. The Dion honeymoon is over.

The Conservatives could win back some suburban Vancouver seats from the Libs and a couple of seats they narrowly lost to the NDP last time in BC. If nothing changes between now and the next election, BC would be one place where the NDP would be at risk of losing some (ie: 3 or 4) seats - but that is a big "if".

Ontario would be a real wild card. The NDP is down 2% from the election, but the Liberals are down 8% and the none of the NDP-held seats in Ontario are vulnerable to a Conservative surge. But if the popular vote in Ontario actually went 42% to 32% for the Tories, they could gain 20 seats from the Liberals and the NDP could gain a couple of narrowly lost seats from last time - esp. in the north.

At 8% nationally (probably still an overestimate) and no area of strength, the chances of the so-called Green Party winning any seats is about 1 in a million.

Of course if there started to be a consensus in the polls showing something like this, mark my words, the Liberals, NDP and esp, the BQ will contort themselves like acrobats to find a way NOT to bring down the government and Harper's window of opportunity could pass. By Fall or by Spring 2008 events could intervene that start to send Toryt support tumbling.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rob8305
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6298

posted 01 March 2007 07:01 PM      Profile for Rob8305     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think we're starting to see just how disastrous Stephane Dion's leadership will truly be for the Liberals. I remember thinking that December weekend that the Liberals were throwing away any chance at forming the next government. Dion's surge in the polls immediately afterwards made me question my stance somewhat but now I have gone back to my first impression.

Now, can anyone explain to me why the most successful political party in Canadian history would pass up their opportunity to win the next election by electing this man as their leader? I guess a simple answer might simply be that the Kennedy/Dion coalition was just too much to defeat but still Rae and Ignatieff could have united somehow to stop a Dion victory.


From: Montrose | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 01 March 2007 07:10 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
the Kennedy/Dion coalition was just too much to defeat but still Rae and Ignatieff could have united somehow to stop a Dion victory.

Theoretically they could have, but there is the small detail that Rae and Ignatieff fought a vicious campaign against each other and hate each others guts - so that was never going to happen.

Things could still get a lot worse for Dion. Most Canadians haven't been exposed to his incomprehensible English yet and on the campaign trail, Layton has a lot of charisma and is a big asset to the NDP. We could yet see the CPC gaining ground but falling short of a majority and the gap between the NDP and the Liberals in House narrowing.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Joel_Goldenberg
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5647

posted 01 March 2007 07:18 PM      Profile for Joel_Goldenberg        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:

Most Canadians haven't been exposed to his incomprehensible English yet...

I disagree, having interviewed him numerous times. His accent is a little stilted, but he makes himself easily understood.


From: Montreal | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Radioactive Westerner
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4432

posted 01 March 2007 07:27 PM      Profile for Radioactive Westerner     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Few people voted "for" Dion. Most voted "against" Iggy and Rae.

The Quebec election will play a big part in the next Federal campaign, I agree.

Harper is deceptive, there will be a suprise in the upcoming budget, he always has one.

After all the lastest musings about not being able to afford income splitting I would not be suprised if it is indeed included in the new budget, and a further 1% GST reduction as well. Something that joe average voter can see and understand....


From: Edmonton | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 01 March 2007 07:33 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I disagree, having interviewed him numerous times. His accent is a little stilted, but he makes himself easily understood.

I have heard that he isn't so bad in one on one settings but in the House and speaking in front of a crowd he is not clear and not at all charismatic.

When Dion first one, i dubbed him a "Liberal Robert Stanfield" and people ridiculed me for it. Now they admit i was right.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 01 March 2007 08:04 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Nice to see Babblers gloating over the possibility of a Harper majority. If only the Liberals had elected a more media friendly leader like Ignatieff or Rae instead, ya.
From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 01 March 2007 08:14 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm gloating about the Liberals being in free-fall. I will gloat even more when the Conservatives also go into the free-fall and the NDP is the beneficiary of both free-falls.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 01 March 2007 08:42 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Then I'm afraid you're just dreaming Stockholm. The only ones benefitting are the CPC and the Greens, the NDP has yet to surpass twenty percent under Layton. I don't see any reason to think this will change either, one Harper majority and Everyone left of Godzilla will rush over and give the Liberals another three majorities, maybe with someone more openly conservative in charge. I see the stock markets are looking shaky again though, so maybe a good healthy market "correction" can shake up the middleclasses in ways that lefties can't.
From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 01 March 2007 09:04 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The 80-odd percent of Canadians who only pay attention to politics for about 5 minutes a week, probably find Harper a lot LESS scary now then they did a year ago. The Liberals cried wolf once too often and now people look at the Harper gov't and what do they see? a GST cut, big increases in government spending, a federalist government in Quebec about to be re-elected against all odds, any attempt to roll-back SSM foiled once and for all, a continuation of Liberal policy in Afghanistan etc...possible cancellation of a Liberal promise on child care that might never have happened anyways - so there is not much for the average person to be all that upset about. That is not to say that a Conservative majority wouldn't do a lot of damage - but people tend to base their opinions on what they actually see in front of them. If paul Martin had ever won a majority he would have unleashed a rightwing reign of terror of his own.

[ 01 March 2007: Message edited by: Stockholm ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 01 March 2007 09:18 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
The 80-odd percent of Canadians who only pay attention to politics for about 5 minutes a week, probably find Harper a lot LESS scary now then they did a year ago.

That's why its of the utmost importance that you stop making it appear that the NDP is filled with arrogant elitist egg-heads who think Canadians are stupid.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Policywonk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8139

posted 01 March 2007 09:25 PM      Profile for Policywonk     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
the NDP has yet to surpass twenty percent under Layton.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong, but it doesn't matter much.


From: Edmonton | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 01 March 2007 09:45 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:

That's why its of the utmost importance that you stop making it appear that the NDP is filled with arrogant elitist egg-heads who think Canadians are stupid.


But what if Elizabeth May is Right Cueball?? =8)

(slightly over twenty percent PolicyWonk, you're right, but only a Slightly and only a couple shining moments. The bottom line's solidified again but going nowhere. The NDp will rise again if their leadership wakes up, but meantime my first loyalty is to what I see as the best longterm interests of Canada. Sorry, but we're on the frontlines until the corporatists are sent back to the barber shops, beerhalls and used car lots where they naturally belong...)


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
sgm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5468

posted 01 March 2007 11:18 PM      Profile for sgm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm a bit confused here.

On page 3 of the pdf to which Stockholm links, the breakdown in the chart gives the NDP 15% in total support, while the text on page 2 puts the NDP at 14%.

I know it's only one point's worth of difference, but I'm wondering why it's there.


From: I have welcomed the dawn from the fields of Saskatchewan | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
clockwork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 690

posted 01 March 2007 11:52 PM      Profile for clockwork     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Maybe the NDP got 14.49% the rest of the parties also got under x.49% of the vote. The tables add to 100% so maybe the NDP with the greatest .x percent got bumped up while the others were rounded down.

ex:
Con 40.1
Lib 26.1
NDP 14.49
BlQ 10.1
GRN 8.1
OTH 1.11

In this example you should round down the NDP in the chart and footnote it with an explanation that the totals wouldn't add up to 100 because of rounding. Maybe the Chart Guy rounded the NDP up so he wouldn't need the footnote. The Copy Guy properly rounded down.

This is a slightly facetious theory. But I live in a slightly facetious world.

The PDF gives a contact email. Ask him.

Contact: Ed Morawski, President and COO,
ed.morawski@angus-reid.com

You never know.

edited: what would be even cooler (although this may not elicit a response either, but much more worth it) is to ask him for the raw vote counts for the tables listed in the PDF. You might still not get a response but maybe he'll mistake you for a student and give you something. That something may let you tablulate the exact percentages yourself and you'll gett to see whether any other party was bumped up or down.

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: clockwork ]


From: Pokaroo! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
KenS
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1174

posted 02 March 2007 04:03 AM      Profile for KenS     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Stockholm:

quote:
Of course if there started to be a consensus in the polls showing something like this, mark my words, the Liberals, NDP and esp, the BQ will contort themselves like acrobats to find a way NOT to bring down the government and Harper's window of opportunity could pass. By Fall or by Spring 2008 events could intervene that start to send Toryt support tumbling.

I can't see that the opposition parties will have to contort themselves.

Given that there is a stronger and stronger consensus that there is no grounds for an election, it will be difficult for the government to engineer their own defeat. In the present conditions they cannot be straining to do that.

And arring a truly miraculous recovery of the PQ, the Bloc won't even require a payoff or excuse to support the Budget and stave off an election. [The coming surrender made easier for them since the Budget will be full of goodies for Quebec.]

I think Harper and Company are intent on rolling out a continuous command-the-ground performance. When you are on a roll, governing as if there is an election is a good way of keeping the opposition in its place.

The coming Budget isn't going to be a make or break affair [a la Paul Martin: throw everything remotely possible in there].

There will only be income splitting for couples AND another point off the GST if that leaves room for another major tax cut to be announced at the next point an election becomes a possibility- Fall or Budget 2008.


By the way- here's an idea that surprised me, but I am inclined to accept.

The thought is that the Liberal planners have already conceded the next election to Harper. Partly because Canadian voters generally do not vote against governments that have only had one term [and there is no indication that the Harper government will be one of those different cases].

So the thought is that the Liberals are putting their prime energy into positioning viz the NDP, not in relation to the Tories.

The goal being to hammer the NDP bad enough in the coming election so that they don't have them for competition in the following election. [Layton gone, NDP off balance, etc.]

Then the Liberals would be free to not only govern from the right, but also to fight an election from the right.... Harper being a more serious foe making it more difficult for them what worked for them in the past or recycling election platforms of left-leaning promises they 'hadn't got around to yet'.

I am personally disinclined to attribute these kind of motives to any party. But I had been mystified by the positioning the Liberals have been taking- it seemed incredibly inept.

So it makes sense to me.


From: Minasville, NS | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 02 March 2007 04:18 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:

When Dion first one, i dubbed him a "Liberal Robert Stanfield" and people ridiculed me for it. Now they admit i was right.


You're a regular Kreskin. And without even an election by which to make that judgment.

What this, and the Decima poll, tell me is that Harper's effort to "presidentialize" the election by "demonizing" Dion is bearing fruit. Helped along by the frontrunning media (a redundancy if there ever was one) perpetuating the story line and spin. However, there similar results a couple of weeks before the last election, and the Cons ended up with only 125 seats. And SES, which has the best track record by far, hasn't weighed in yet.

What this also shows is that the NDP has not benefitted from the Liberal drop. Its numbers, which nudged 20% in the pre-election polls last time, are closer to 10% this time.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
KenS
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1174

posted 02 March 2007 04:19 AM      Profile for KenS     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Further on that thought that the Liberals are putting all their energy into positioning against the NDP rather than against Harper.

Dion confirmed yesterday that the Liberals are looking at bringing in carbon taxes.

This is absolutely insane if you are focused on beating Harper.

Insane because it is unecessary.

The first step is to bring in hard caps on GHG emissions. Carbon taxes are a tool for making that possible- but also a position with big immediate political costs.

So if you don't want to be drawn into battles you can't win you keep the focus on regulations.

So this would be a suicidal position if you are focused on competing with Harper. [And doubly crazy since up till now the Liberals refused to talk about concrete regulatory action, wanting to stick with the essentially symbolic posturing of 'affirming Kyoto'. Apparently, having themselves disposed of that club over Harper with the Rodriguez Bill, they've decided to skip right over the regulatory issues and jump to the really explosive issue of carbon taxes.]

But championing carbon taxes does make sense if your primary competitive focus at the moment is the NDP [and possibly the Greens].


From: Minasville, NS | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 02 March 2007 04:31 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Cons in majority territory. Holy cow!
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
KenS
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1174

posted 02 March 2007 04:34 AM      Profile for KenS     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Josh:

quote:
What this, and the Decima poll, tell me is that Harper's effort to "presidentialize" the election by "demonizing" Dion is bearing fruit.

Well yes, but you have to ask about Dion's role in all this.

Its Harper that gets demonized. The attacks on Dion is that he is a weak leader. [Using the word 'demonizing' isn't just a gratuitous- it actually throws off understanding what is happening.]

And you can't chalk so much of it up to media.

It's almost like Dion is a willing accomplice. I know that isn't literally true.

It's not just prtrayal- he doesn't seem to really care. He comes across as cavalier.

And with the Liberals as a whole: it all seems to be positioning. Whether its the government or the NDP, they don't ever seem to be taking anyone on.

Even in Dion's occassional passionate grandstanding- such as around the Rodriguez Bill and Kyoto in general- he seems to be just staking a position... not talking to anybody in particular.


From: Minasville, NS | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 02 March 2007 04:56 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
As for Dion's English capabilities (or lack thereof) CTV's Robert Fife gave an example the other night on Duffy: after one of his speeches, the reporters gathered around and played back the tape of Dion speaking several times to try and figure out what he said. They eventually gave up.

I've mentioned this before: I am very hard of hearing, and I rely on TV closed captioning. The CC operators are forced to guess what Dion says, because they can't comprehend him at all. Do an experiement: when Dion is speaking on TV, turn on your TV closed captioning; then you will see for yourselves what I am talking about.


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
KenS
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1174

posted 02 March 2007 04:58 AM      Profile for KenS     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Boom Boom:

quote:
The Cons in majority territory. Holy cow!

I suggest you take a powder on this.

The Consrvatives getting a majority is, and for some time will remain, a possibility. But an unlikley one.

Likely or not: life goes on.

You and a lot of other people seem to rotate your whole world around minute movements of the thermometer that registers how much of a possibility it is.

How likely it is, or how realistic your fears are or are not... write a little note for yourself.

"The Liberal Party itself does not care whether or not Harper gets a majority in the next election."

Certainly, they don't want Harper to get a majority. But it isn't their primary concern.

Not only not their primary concern- not even close.

Their concern is when and how they unseat Harper.

No political gamer/particpants or observers has yet seen any reason to expect that the next govt will be a Harper majority. [Another Harper minority continuing to be by a considerable amount the greatest probability.]

But IF that ever becomes the more likely possibility, the Liberal party will do nothing to try to arrest it... not their issue. They will just absorb into their ongoing calulations as to when and how they return to power.


From: Minasville, NS | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 02 March 2007 05:10 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm more or less resigned to the fact that, regardless of whom I vote for, the bastards will get in.

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: Boom Boom ]


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mercy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13853

posted 02 March 2007 05:21 AM      Profile for Mercy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Rob8305:
Now, can anyone explain to me why the most successful political party in Canadian history would pass up their opportunity to win the next election by electing this man as their leader? I guess a simple answer might simply be that the Kennedy/Dion coalition was just too much to defeat but still Rae and Ignatieff could have united somehow to stop a Dion victory.
Why would you assume that Ignatieff (whose leadership campaign exploded in a series of embarassing gaffes) or Rae (probably the least popular Ontario Premier in recent memory) would be doing any better?

You think the ads targetting DION hit hard? Think of what the Tories would have done with Rae.


From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 02 March 2007 05:46 AM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't even want to go there.
From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
marzo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12096

posted 02 March 2007 05:47 AM      Profile for marzo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It would probably be in the Liberal party's self-interest to enroll Dion in English tutorials emphasizing pronunciation, accent and correct sentence structure. When some people, including interpreters for the hearing-impaired, find him difficult to understand then he has a serious problem.
From: toronto | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 02 March 2007 05:52 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yup.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Olly
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3401

posted 02 March 2007 06:13 AM      Profile for Olly     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I have heard that he isn't so bad in one on one settings but in the House and speaking in front of a crowd he is not clear and not at all charismatic.

Dion spoke at the Toronto City Summit lunch on Tuesday, and I thought he was really good, both in clarity and content. He got an excellent reception from the crowd as well.


From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 02 March 2007 06:18 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Maybe he's spooked by TV cameras, then?
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Palamedes
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13677

posted 02 March 2007 06:21 AM      Profile for Palamedes        Edit/Delete Post
I think each of those three has a troubling history that the Conservatives could have exposed. Kennedy is less vulnerable that way, simply because he has a fairly short, powerless career in politics, and is unpublished.

However, history is not the only factor. You also have to be aware of the individual's ability. And so far, we have seen very little ability from Dion. We have seen no fiery speeches, no new poicy.

All he seems interested in doing is criticizing the Conservatives and re-hashing policies that have been circulating for some time based on what the polls are saying.

The problem with the Liberal party is not that they don't have vision. The problem is that their vision starts and stops with them getting power.

They need someone with steadfast convictions to fight for something that he/she believes in - regardless of what the polls might say - as opposed to a series of meek power-hungry ditherers who only show emotion when advised to by their political handlers.


From: Toronto | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Parkdale High Park
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11667

posted 02 March 2007 06:47 AM      Profile for Parkdale High Park     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Entering the regional numbers in a swing model:

BC
CPC: 26
LPC: 4
NDP: 6

AB
CPC: 28

SK/MB
CPC: 27
LPC: 1

ON
CPC: 65
LPC: 29
NDP: 12

PQ
LPC: 16
CPC: 10
BQ: 48
Ind: 1

ATL
CPC: 13
LPC: 16
NDP 3

Total
CPC: 169
LPC: 66
NDP: 21
BQ: 48
Ind: 1


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 02 March 2007 06:48 AM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I think each of those three has a troubling history that the Conservatives could have exposed.
Haper's troubling history with the anti-democratic reactionary right NCC for some reason remains unmentionable in the mainstream media.

From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Parkdale High Park
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11667

posted 02 March 2007 06:54 AM      Profile for Parkdale High Park     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by josh:

You're a regular Kreskin. And without even an election by which to make that judgment.

What this, and the Decima poll, tell me is that Harper's effort to "presidentialize" the election by "demonizing" Dion is bearing fruit...


First of all, the last three elections have featured a considerable amount of negative attacks on the challenger.

Secondly, I would posit that the Liberal bounce in late-campaign the last two elections had a lot to do with familiarity - something that now works against them. Stockholm has a good point, I think, about how the average Canadian probably doesn't think Harper is scary.

The real question is whether moderately right wing Canadians think Harper is scary (the people that make the difference between 36% and 40% in an election). I would suspect that they don't - and votes like the recent one on anti-terror measures doesn't help. John Manley Liberals are people Dion needs.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
KenS
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1174

posted 02 March 2007 07:02 AM      Profile for KenS     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Entering the regional numbers in a swing model:

SK/MB
CPC: 27
LPC: 1

Huh?

Where have the numbers changed enough to take out the 3 Winnipeg NDP MP's?

And with Blaikie and Martin at least [Judy W-L's riding I have no familiarity with]... that the CPC gains the seats??? coming from 3rd place, even distant third???

Yes I know, a model doesn't make riding by riding predictions. But how do you account for the size of vote shifts that would be required to move Blaikie and Martin's seats to the CPC... which would require a massive regional collapse of the Liberal vote.


From: Minasville, NS | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 March 2007 07:15 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think that one of the weaknesses of a pure seat projection model that makes no allowances for factors like incumbency and riding history, is that you can get some bizarre projections that totally defy credibility. There is no way that Ralph Goodale is going to lose to a Conservative and there is no way that the Conservatives will EVER be competitive in Churchill, Elmwood-Transcona, Winnipeg North or Winnipeg Centre. I'm extremely sceptical about the Liberals losing St. Boniface or Winnipeg South Centre either.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 02 March 2007 07:17 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Rob8305:
can anyone explain to me why the most successful political party in Canadian history would pass up their opportunity to win the next election by electing this man as their leader?

Since these are the best political organizers in Canada, I have to assume they had concluded both Ignatieff and Rae would have been even worse.
quote:
Originally posted by Radioactive Westerner:
Few people voted "for" Dion. Most voted "against" Iggy and Rae.

Yep.
quote:
Originally posted by Mercy:
Why would you assume that Ignatieff (whose leadership campaign exploded in a series of embarassing gaffes) or Rae (probably the least popular Ontario Premier in recent memory) would be doing any better?

You think the ads targetting DION hit hard? Think of what the Tories would have done with Rae.



Exactly.

From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
West Coast Greeny
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6874

posted 02 March 2007 09:42 AM      Profile for West Coast Greeny     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'd call this "oh fuck" territory.

The thing with Dion is that, he seems to make a good leader (I think), but a terrible spokesman. That's partly why Iggy gets so much face time in QP.

The liberals and Dion are looking less credible, the NDP are stagnant, and the separatist movement is tanking. By default, only two parties can benefit, the Cons and the Greens.


From: Ewe of eh. | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 02 March 2007 11:49 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Apparently, there is a reason for the large sample size, and that is because it "seems" it was a ON LINE poll. I am looking for concrete evidence of this, as if it was, it has about as much credibility as any one that is in a online media source. That is NONE.
From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 02 March 2007 12:38 PM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Where did you hear this? If true, it would put the nail in the coffin of my opinion of Angus Reid as a pollster. That's incredibly irresponsible.
From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
KenS
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1174

posted 02 March 2007 12:52 PM      Profile for KenS     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Rushing to conclusions here.

And not only whether it is an on line poll in the first place.

But if it is, the methodology would be nothing like media on line polls.

IE, same as telephone polls: you have to make sure you actually poll a cross section, rather than polling who responds.


From: Minasville, NS | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
KenS
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1174

posted 02 March 2007 12:58 PM      Profile for KenS     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
By the way, anybody know about the time stamps on the posts?

It says all times Pacific, but it is Alaska Time they are on.

Has it always been like this.

[Watch for grizzlies.]


From: Minasville, NS | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 02 March 2007 01:06 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jacob Two-Two:
Where did you hear this? If true, it would put the nail in the coffin of my opinion of Angus Reid as a pollster. That's incredibly irresponsible.

Well, I heard it at another forum, and then I just found the link at the top of the page to the angus reid documents and found this:

quote:
From February 20 to 27, 2007, Angus Reid Strategies conducted an online survey among a
randomly selected, representative sample of 3,189 Canadian decided voters. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure a sample representative of the entire adult population of Canada. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

Now, what do they mean an on line survey? Do they mean as part of those that they have registered there to do so? Or just the on going and differing online polls they have their on the front page. Because I have been answering polls online there for awhile and linked one to here about Afghanistan.

And I am suspecting that this is what it actually was, as they say they weighted the results; "according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure a sample representative of the entire adult population of Canada."

Apparently, they did NOT know who was responding, nor the demographic profile of the responder. So, it was not a part of their polling questions and itseems it may not have been from those registered with them granting random polling access either.

It has been my limited experience that you have disclose sex, education etc, to be a part of their system, as I have had to disclose such things to both Ipsos and Angus when I sign up for a year, as willing to be polled randomly. though I have not done so now for a couple of years.

Maybe I will go register and see what is up these days with registration criteria.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 02 March 2007 01:22 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Methodology: Online interviews with 3,189 Canadian adults, conducted from Feb. 20 to Feb. 27, 2007. Margin of error is 1.9 per cent.

From this website.

Which was linked to by bigcitylib, with a discussion there.


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 02 March 2007 01:33 PM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
But if it is, the methodology would be nothing like media on line polls.

IE, same as telephone polls: you have to make sure you actually poll a cross section, rather than polling who responds.


Oh, I know it wouldn't be as bad as that, but even discounting the possibility of hacking and meddling, wouldn't any online poll, no matter how well-constructed, automatically de-select everyone who doesn't use the internet? I know we're a very plugged-in nation, but not so plugged-in that we can just toss out everyone who doesn't go online and call a poll representative. Think of all the seniors and poor people this discounts.

I call bullshit on this, big time. But like I said, it's just the final nail. I haven't found Angus to be terribly reliable for a while now.


From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Parkdale High Park
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11667

posted 02 March 2007 01:49 PM      Profile for Parkdale High Park     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by KenS:

And with Blaikie and Martin at least [Judy W-L's riding I have no familiarity with]... that the CPC gains the seats??? coming from 3rd place, even distant third???


Obviously a swing model doesn't take into account some factors - for instance if you put Quebec into one of these last election, it had Martin losing in Lasalle-Emard (if you assumed that Conservative gains came largely from the Liberals, you could have the Tories win in some Montreal ridings).

The voter migration matrix assumes voter shifts are uniform, which is wrong. Nonetheless it may imply that formerly safe seats are no longer safe.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 02 March 2007 02:00 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Have registered with Angus Reid forums, the part of Angus Reid, who do the online polls, they require age above 18 designation and province choices so far. So, it is an easily freepable process either if you/someone are watching daily or know in advance what is being asked.

But the questions being asked in this poll are definitely politcal/social choices,

oh wait, I just came across an abortion one and should it be illegal or not and in the same category they are asking about whether governments should address the prosperity gap, and now one about SSM.

Now one about the rich should have better access to health care, national identity cards, one on religion and the part it plays in your life, then one about whether everyone benefits if business makes profits or not.

IMV, they are looking for politcal strategies it appears. Both provincially and federally. And for those interested in abortion and SSM being raised again as a national topic you really might want to respond.

For those interested they are also asking:

Slips in one about flight usage for personal and business, guess that tells them possible income ranges?

Then it asks how intested you are, in both current affairs and politics.

Then one about technology items you own. Followed by how adept with technology you are 5 choice examples.

Then it asks about what you have done for the last 12 moths with 6 choices of things online.

Asks about perscription drugs usage and
goes into a couple of consumer choices

Now it asks gender and all the other demographics too, oops I misclicked that I identify with Asia somehow, oh oh.

Then it asks about your personal interest categories and rates them.

Finally, it asks you your name and email address,
and you can get paid uo to 1500 bucks.

https://www.angusreidforum.com


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 02 March 2007 02:00 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Greg Weston on Newman's show a few minutes ago said SES will release a new poll that shows the Cons really growing in Quebec.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mercy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13853

posted 02 March 2007 02:09 PM      Profile for Mercy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If Charest wins the election and the ADQ comes second then Harper's sitting pretty in Quebec.

And if Harper's sitting pretty in Quebec then Harper's sitting pretty in Ontario - since he's stolen the Liberals best issue: "fighting the separatists"


From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 02 March 2007 08:54 PM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't know. Do you really think it's that simple? I doubt many Ontarians are voting Liberal because of that.
From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Parkdale High Park
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11667

posted 03 March 2007 04:33 PM      Profile for Parkdale High Park     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Maybe the Greens and NDP should merge (or, in a more feasible and mutually agreable scenario, the NDP and Greens could not compete against eachother in particular ridings - dividing up the electoral map). I was playing around with the polling numbers. This is what they would look like if you put Green and NDP numbers together:

ONT
CPC: 63
LPC: 25
NDP/G: 18

ATL
CPC: 10
LPC: 14
NDP/G: 8

AB
CPC: 28

SKMB
CPC: 25
NDP/G: 3

PQ
CPC: 10
BQ: 48
LPC: 16

BC
NDP/G: 11
LPC: 4
CPC: 21

Total
LPC: 59
NDP/G: 40
BQ: 48
CPC: 157


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 03 March 2007 04:49 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It makes no sense to put NDP and GPC numbers together, because the Greens are not a progressive party, and any such merger would kill off NDP support entirely, with probably a new party of the left emerging. I really don't see the Greens and NDP together.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mercy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13853

posted 03 March 2007 04:52 PM      Profile for Mercy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jacob Two-Two:
I don't know. Do you really think it's that simple? I doubt many Ontarians are voting Liberal because of that.
I think the threat of Quebec separatism looms large in Ontarians minds and when separatist forces are on the rise the federal party that is best able to "fight the separatists" does much better.

The fascinating thing about the 2005-6 election is that the Liberals assumed, by default, that they would be that party - and in the end they weren't. They sent Paul Martin out to bluster at Duceppe and talk about saving Canada. You may recall the very staged and pre-meditated attack at the Leader's debate. Or the disastrous challenge to debate Duceppe on "every street corner". When Duceppe accepted the challenge Martin famously declined.

Stephen Harper, of course, benefited from these sad theatrics - particularly when he agreed to have the debate that Martin declined. More generally, his narrative resonated in Quebec: the Liberals wanted separatists to win so they would have a foil instead of a partner. Harper schmoozed Charest and promised him the flexible federalism he wanted. In exchange, Charest began to say nice things about Harper. Then Harper started gaining in Quebec. As news of that gain spread to Ontario his support began to grow there. Obviously there were other factors but the fact that Harper was seen as someone with support "across the country" helped enormously.

In the coming Quebec election the person who would obviously benefit from a Charest win is Harper. It would prove his brand of federalism is working, that the Bloc is in decline, and that the Dion Liberals are irrelevant. The person who would benefit from a Boisclair win is Dion. He could tour English Canada denouncing separatists and promising to save Canada - and do so credibly since he himself is a Quebecker. Chretien and Trudeau played these games with huge success since the rise of the sovereignty movement. It's no coincidence that the only time the Tories were in power federally the PQ was out of power in Quebec.

As an aside, I'll note that until the New Democrats make a breakthrough in Quebec, the people of Ontario won't elect them federally. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of Quebec's socialists, social democrats and trade unionists are sovereigntists - and the NDP is federalist. The further you go west the more federalist it is. It's a big problem.


From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Malcolm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5168

posted 03 March 2007 09:03 PM      Profile for Malcolm   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
Apparently, there is a reason for the large sample size, and that is because it "seems" it was a ON LINE poll. I am looking for concrete evidence of this, as if it was, it has about as much credibility as any one that is in a online media source. That is NONE.

You should try using all the facts.

This was not an online poll - in the sense of the online polls run by media outlests where an entire3ly self-selecting sample call all their friends, neighbours, copartisans and participants in online communities to go in and 'freep" the result.

It is an online poll in the sense that it contacts respondents online and conducts the interview in a fashion comparable to a poll done by telephone. Without knowing the details of their methodology, they will also do something to account for any variation in demographics - ie, if a particular demographic is over-represented, factoring the results to balance that out.

Like any methodology, it introduces possibilities of bias - for example, poor people are less likely to own a computer. Computer owners might be, on average, more politically literate than non computer owners. Whatever.

It is still a new way of doing polls, But you've jumped the track trying to compare it to the "today's question" type polls on the Toronto Sun site.


From: Regina, SK | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 03 March 2007 09:12 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No, I do not agree, you register to become part of their forums, then you go do poll/polls, like the big one that is linked above. You can go back daily and participate in the polls they have at the forum. They can also email you to come participate in a poll.

Easily freepable, just a call to go register and take part again like the one linked above.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 03 March 2007 09:33 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think we should keep in mind that neither of the big money campaign parties won more than 24 percent of the eligible vote last year. That's not saying much for their legacies in Ottawa after more than a hundred years. I think Canadian voters want to know more about the NDP.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Parkdale High Park
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11667

posted 04 March 2007 08:40 AM      Profile for Parkdale High Park     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Boom Boom:
It makes no sense to put NDP and GPC numbers together, because the Greens are not a progressive party, and any such merger would kill off NDP support entirely, with probably a new party of the left emerging. I really don't see the Greens and NDP together.

Nobody that supports the Green Party, and I mean nobody, considers themselves to be voting for a conservative party, except maybe the old leader of the party. Think about London North Centre - who lost support from a strong Green challenge? The NDP in spades, and - this may seem counter-intuitive, since they didn't seem to lose support - the Liberals. Remember that the Tories were down in the polls when the by-election was held, and the Liberals were up from their 2006 results. Losses to the Green Party, however, bled away some of those gains.

Unfortunately we may have to wait for the release of the next Canadian Electoral Survey. Suffice it to say that most voters do not know what a regressive tax is, and don't understand why the Green Party is terrible for the poor (because the party's base is made up of left wing upper middle class yuppies).


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 04 March 2007 08:47 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You've made my point, that it makes no sense to put the GPC and the NDP together.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 04 March 2007 10:55 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
No, I do not agree, you register to become part of their forums, then you go do poll/polls, like the big one that is linked above. You can go back daily and participate in the polls they have at the forum. They can also email you to come participate in a poll.
Easily freepable, just a call to go register and take part again like the one linked above

You are DEAD WRONG. On-line polls such as the one by Angus Reid DO NOT conduct a survey based on people who take it upon themselves to register. These polls are NOT "freepable". What they do is they they buy samples of hundreds of thousands of personal e-mail addresses that have been compiled by many, many, many independent sources. They may also ask people who have responded to random telephone surveys over the years if they would be willing to ever do a survey on line and if they say yes, they are asked for their e-mail address.

I'm not saying that an on-line poll is perfect. But neither is a telephone survey since many people only have cell phones and many people never answer the phone unless their call display says it is from someone they know etc... Also, with an on-line survey, you can get about triple the sample size at almost no extra cost and the field period can be more compressed, so that is also a point in its favour.

On-line surveys were used extensively in the last US and UK elections and they tended to yield results that were within a point or two of telephone surveys.

Some have also argued that given that only about 65% of Canadians over the age of 18 vote in federal elections, for the most part the people who are most likely to be excluded from on-line surveys are also the people who are most likely to be non-voters.

"Rogue polls" will happen, but some of the worst examples (ie: the Strategic Council poll just before the last BC election that gave the BC Liberals a 16% lead or the polls jus6t before the last federal election giving the CPC a double digit lead over the Liberals) - were polls done by telephone!!


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Farmpunk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12955

posted 04 March 2007 10:59 AM      Profile for Farmpunk     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't think the LNC by-election is a good example to use. That was Liz May's coming out party. Had the Greens went with a regular candidate, he\she would have been stomped into single digit percentage status, likely below the support shown in this poll.
From: SW Ontario | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 04 March 2007 02:45 PM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
for the most part the people who are most likely to be excluded from on-line surveys are also the people who are most likely to be non-voters.

That is definitely not true. The rich/poor divide may reflect this (then again, it may not), but the age element is the inverse of what you're claiming.

Old people vote much more consistently than young people do, but young people are far more plugged-in than the elderly. This poll is flawed from its inception.


From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 04 March 2007 04:16 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If that is the case then, if anything, this poll showing a 40-26 Conservative lead would be UNDERestimating Conservative support since Tory support tends to be HIGHEST among the elderly and LOWEST among the young!!!

If in fact young people are the most wired and the lderly are the least wired then you would expect a poll that excludes the Unwrired would tend to exclude a disprortionate number of the kinds of people who are most likely to vote Conservative!


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 04 March 2007 04:21 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah but look at all the rightwing nasties infesting various forums; they probably freeped the poll and got their American buddies at FR to freep it too.
From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 04 March 2007 04:30 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It has only been explained about 100 times that a random sample poll that randomly contacts people through their e-mail address is no more "freepable" than is a telephone survey.

If you think its so easy to "freep" an Angus Reid random survey conducted on-line, then why don't you try to freep the next one yourself and try to see if you can get it to give the NDP 40% of the vote!!!


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 04 March 2007 04:38 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:

It has only been explained about 100 times that a random sample poll that randomly contacts people through their e-mail address is no more "freepable" than is a telephone survey.


But what about people who don't have e-mail addresses but have telephones. I think it's fair to say that there's at least a few. And I think it's also fair to say that those who don't have e-mail addresses probably are either older or poorer. Therefore, regardless of who "huge" the sample is, they're fishing in a smaller, wealthier and younger, pool.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 04 March 2007 05:26 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm not denying that there are potential skews in an on-line survey. But there are also possible skews in a telephone survey. what about all the people who only have cell-phones and no land line? What about people who have very active social lives and tend to almost never be home to answer the phone? What about people with call-display?

One thing about having a sample size of 3,000 is that it can give you a lot more flexibility in terms of being able to weight the data to reflect the characteristics of the Canadian population.

So, yes, there are some possible skewing factors, BUT that doesn't make a poll 100% worthless just because it was done on-line. Nobody ever said that polling was a perfect science, but I will file this poll away with all the others and take them all into consideration when I speculate on where the parties stand right now.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 04 March 2007 05:38 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
How many people just hangup on them or make up some excuse like, gotta walk the dog ?. I know I would. Sorry, I'd rather stick pins in my eyes sooner than give the two old line parties any kind of strategic advantage. Take your chances at the polls, morons. Jeez, they've got FPTP and all that money to campaign with, and they want reassurances that they'll win another phoney majority. What's the matter, don't they trust the 60-64.9 percent of Canadian voters to vote the right way anymore ?.

[ 04 March 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 04 March 2007 05:43 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
How many people just hangup on them or make up some excuse like, gotta walk the dog ?.

There is no reason to believe that those who refuse to take part in polls are anymore likely to be Liberal, Conservative, NDP or BQ voters. In fact there have been studies of "non-respondents" - their views tend to be identical to those who respond.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 04 March 2007 05:53 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So you're saying that voter participation rates in Canada did not take a nosedive after our two old line parties basically lied about FTA-GST-NAFTA on the election campaign trails ?.

Next you'll be telling us that those millions of Canadians who decide to wash their hair instead of casting a ballot are really just so satisfied with Canadians politics that they can't be bothered. Go on luv, vote f'me while you're there will ya ?. I don't think so.

I think there are tens and tens of thousands of Canadians who are absolutely disillusioned with our two old line parties in Canada. Ask any poor slob on the street what they think about Canadian politicians. They won't know who Jack is, but just a few of them will tell us our governments are corrupt and on the take.

And if anybody knows anyone still looking for work today, tell them they'd better hustle now because the conservatives won't be looking for favourable opinion polls one they win a phoney majority and put the kibosh to the economy.

[ 04 March 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 04 March 2007 06:04 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Next you'll be telling us that those millions of Canadians who decide to wash their hair instead of casting a ballot are really just so satisfied with Canadians politics that they can't be bothered.

Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. Well actually I think its a mix, some people don't vote because they are content and don't follow politics and don't think it affects them. Some are cynical and think all politicians are the same etc...

Interestingly, by far the highest turn out rates in Canada are consistently in PEI!! A province where 95% of the votes cast are for the virtually identical Liberal and PC parties. There is LESS ideological choice in PEI than anywhere else in Canada and yet the Islanders all troop out to the polls en masse!!

Incidentally, Australia has compulsory voting and 90% turn-out rates and they just keep right on re-electing John Howard and his wretched rightwing government over and over and over and over again!

[ 04 March 2007: Message edited by: Stockholm ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 04 March 2007 06:13 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But they vote labour for territorial/provincial governments by what I understand. And don't they have preferential voting in Australia?

And New Zealand has higher turnouts than Canada and voted labour last time and time before. I know, I know, but they voted labour jts.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
AlbertaForever
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12366

posted 04 March 2007 07:02 PM      Profile for AlbertaForever        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Boom Boom:
I'm more or less resigned to the fact that, regardless of whom I vote for, the bastards will get in.

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: Boom Boom ]



Don't worry about it, it could be worse the liberals or NDP could get in.


From: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. " WSC | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 04 March 2007 07:08 PM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Good first post.

So I'm starting the pool for this one. Dibs on gone with his fifth post.

Losers donate a 5er to rabble.ca

Who's in?


From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
AlbertaForever
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12366

posted 04 March 2007 07:13 PM      Profile for AlbertaForever        Edit/Delete Post
No sense of fun come on, you lefties entertain me.
From: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. " WSC | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 04 March 2007 07:36 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Lard Tunderin' Jeezus:Good first post.

So I'm starting the pool for this one. Dibs on gone with his fifth post.

Losers donate a 5er to rabble.ca

Who's in?


Na, seems like he is the chicken shit type of posting drive by smears just like his master Harper does in QP.

And they somehow think they are superior and morally wonderful. Ass hats.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
AlbertaForever
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12366

posted 04 March 2007 07:39 PM      Profile for AlbertaForever        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by remind:

Na, seems like he is the chicken shit type of posting drive by smears just like his master Harper does in QP.

And they somehow think they are superior and morally wonderful. Ass hats.


Really where is the smear?

I see a smear, and I didn't post it.


From: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. " WSC | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 04 March 2007 07:44 PM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Okay, that's 5. We can lose him any time now.
From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
AlbertaForever
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12366

posted 04 March 2007 07:46 PM      Profile for AlbertaForever        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Lard Tunderin' Jeezus:
Okay, that's 5. We can lose him any time now.

Do you not tolerate any dissention come on, my best friend is a marxist, we have great conversations.

[ 04 March 2007: Message edited by: AlbertaForever ]


From: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. " WSC | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 04 March 2007 08:10 PM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Being a marxist doesn't mean anything about anybody. Your best friend might also be an idiot, like you seem to be.

You're not a dissenter. If you were, I'd welcome you, but you're not. You're a guy who flew into a thread and posted

quote:
Don't worry about it, it could be worse the liberals or NDP could get in.

As a response to

quote:
I'm more or less resigned to the fact that, regardless of whom I vote for, the bastards will get in.

Totally clueless to the fact that this was responding to the perceptive point that stopping the Conservatives is not truely the main concern of the Liberal party, and hence they're not your allies, to which Boom Boom answered that he realised that the bastards always win no matter who you vote for because they're all bastards. So your little "dig" doesn't even make sense. It was a contextless, uninformed provocative jab designed to irritate. What do they call people who make those again? Oh yeah, troll!

If you don't want everyone rooting for you to be tossed, try making a contribution to the discussion, if you do, then that's what you'll get.


From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 04 March 2007 08:22 PM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If that is the case then, if anything, this poll showing a 40-26 Conservative lead would be UNDERestimating Conservative support since Tory support tends to be HIGHEST among the elderly and LOWEST among the young!!!

That might be the case. I'm not actually disputing the results of the poll, and I'm certainly not accusing them of shilling for the Conservatives. These might be the actual numbers, but their methodology has intentionally reduced the representative nature of the poll. There are large definable demographics that are being de-selected by using this method.

To do this rather experimental move without a lot of testing and a disclaimer of the results seem to me very irresponsible for a polling company. Combined with the fact that they have been increasingly unreliable for accurate results in recent years, it just makes me throw in the towel. I'm ready to discount most of their releases by this point. There are plenty of other polling companies that strike me as more trustworthy.


From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474

posted 04 March 2007 08:31 PM      Profile for Vansterdam Kid   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Look, I can post like I'm AlbertaForever too.

Boobs. Boobies. Ta-tas. Etc...

Carry on.


From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
AlbertaForever
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12366

posted 04 March 2007 08:38 PM      Profile for AlbertaForever        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jacob Two-Two:
Being a marxist doesn't mean anything about anybody. Your best friend might also be an idiot, like you seem to be.

You're not a dissenter. If you were, I'd welcome you, but you're not. You're a guy who flew into a thread and posted

Totally clueless to the fact that this was responding to the perceptive point that stopping the Conservatives is not truely the main concern of the Liberal party, and hence they're not your allies, to which Boom Boom answered that he realised that the bastards always win no matter who you vote for because they're all bastards. So your little "dig" doesn't even make sense. It was a contextless, uninformed provocative jab designed to irritate. What do they call people who make those again? Oh yeah, troll!

If you don't want everyone rooting for you to be tossed, try making a contribution to the discussion, if you do, then that's what you'll get.


Boy aren't you the friendly sort.

It was a fun way to interject into the conversation, designed to get a response, to talk about the ideologies of the parties involved in the polls, instead I see just how welcoming some of you are. But if you aren't up for this well it shows just how close minded you are. As for the bit about my friend, its nice to see that anybody who has a differing opinion is an idiot. You completely write that person off before you even begin to understand why they may have that leaning.


From: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. " WSC | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
AlbertaForever
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12366

posted 04 March 2007 08:52 PM      Profile for AlbertaForever        Edit/Delete Post
BTW all of these polls really don't matter, depending on how the questions are skewed,and how the information is gathered effects the out come of the poll. Most of these polls may show some kind of trend, but really there is only one poll that matters, and that is the one that is conducted on an election day.
From: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. " WSC | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 04 March 2007 10:02 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
You are DEAD WRONG. On-line polls such as the one by Angus Reid DO NOT conduct a survey based on people who take it upon themselves to register. These polls are NOT "freepable". What they do is they they buy samples of hundreds of thousands of personal e-mail addresses that have been compiled by many, many, many independent sources.

No, in fact I am not, and no that is not what they do.

If you would've paid attention on the other thread about this, or even have gone to angus reid forums you would have saw, that you register then participate, they can email you and ask you to respond or you can go there everyday and do the polls they have once registered. And yes we did get people registering to answer a very long political poll, so the results coming from it will be skewed.

Your CPC support is showing through again. Ranting that the 40% has to be correct and all.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 05 March 2007 12:14 AM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
As for the bit about my friend, its nice to see that anybody who has a differing opinion is an idiot.

See what I mean? You were trying to prove how open minded you were by saying you're friends with a marxist. I pointed out that being a marxist doesn't mean you guys don't have a lot in common, and hence, your great conversations might have nothing to do with your alleged open-mindedness. For instance, I hypothesised that he might be an idiot as you seem to be, based on the fact that you couldn't understand the simple comments you chose to reply too in your first post. I wasn't saying that he was an idiot because he was a marxist, or even that he was an idiot at all. I speculated that he might be, since you are. It was actually you I was insulting, not him. Predictably, you didn't understand me.

Stick around if you want, but I'd advise you brush up on that reading comprehension if you expect anyone to take you seriously. Anyway, that's enough for you. I'm wasting my time talking to you to make you understand why talking to you is a waste of time.


From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 05 March 2007 04:30 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Your CPC support is showing through again. Ranting that the 40% has to be correct and all.

I'm not saying that the 40% "has" to be correct at all. I'm saying maybe its right maybe its wrong - we will never know since Canada had no election in the last week of February of 2007 to prove it one way or another. and if a telephone poll had the CPC at 40% I would also maybe its right or maybe its wrong.

But if you REALLY think that its sooo easy to manipulate a random on-line survey, then why don't you go ahead and create 10,000 fake e-mail addresses and try to "skew" the next one and see if you can make it predict an NDP majority government???


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
minkepants
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13708

posted 05 March 2007 10:31 AM      Profile for minkepants     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Na, seems like he is the chicken shit type of posting drive by smears just like his master Harper does in QP.

And they somehow think they are superior and morally wonderful. Ass hats.


I'm sure Alberta is here to be provocative, but is that prohibited? He/ She is probably a Tory, but if i'm not mistaken the invitation line says "from Harper harpies..." Right? So that's not prohibited, right?

but it's ok to swear and name call pre-emptively, right?

So how long does one have to post here exactly before they can post any kind of slur (I've seen 'Nazi' used like it was nothing) with impunity without worrying about the mods? Is it a tenure thing?

[ 05 March 2007: Message edited by: minkepants ]


From: Scarborough | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 05 March 2007 10:49 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by minkepants:
I'm sure Alberta is here to be provocative, but is that prohibited? He/ She is probably a Tory, but if i'm not mistaken the invitation line says "from Harper harpies..." Right? So that's not prohibited, right?

Provocative = trolling

Trolling is prohibited

quote:
but it's ok to swear and name call pre-emptively, right?

Nothing pre-emptive about it.

quote:
So how long does one have to post here exactly before they can post any kind of slur (I've seen 'Nazi' used like it was nothing) with impunity without worrying about the mods? Is it a tenure thing?

Your example of "nazi" is out of context so who knows what you mean, or what was meant.

But yes, posting history is a factor in the moderators decisions.

There is a difference between calling a spade a spade, as opposed to slurrs.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
minkepants
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13708

posted 05 March 2007 10:52 AM      Profile for minkepants     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You swore and name called before Alberta did anything of the kind.
From: Scarborough | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 05 March 2007 11:25 AM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You clearly lack any kind of troll-dar.
From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 05 March 2007 11:26 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by minkepants:
You swore and name called before Alberta did anything of the kind.

Oh please he was blatently trolling, and so what if I swore? Using ass hat to describe Harper and his apologists is hardly swearing or even name calling.

From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 05 March 2007 11:55 AM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, people around here throw insults. We get on each others nerves, and we sometimes intentionally provoke, but we do all this inside the framework of legitimate discussion. No matter who it is, if this sort of thing is all you're bringing to the board, you will eventually get tossed.

If you take the opportunity of your first couple of posts to say "Ha ha. Liberals and NDP suck! You lefties amuse me!" then that tossing will happen a lot sooner.


From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
minkepants
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13708

posted 05 March 2007 12:00 PM      Profile for minkepants     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
You agree to avoid personal insults, attacks and mischievous antagonism (otherwise known as trolling). You will not post material that is inaccurate, abusive, vulgar

You made personal attacks which were antagonistic without provocation in a vulgar fashion. At most Alberta hinted that he was a Tory, which is not in itself provocative, and is, ergo, not banned.


From: Scarborough | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 05 March 2007 12:03 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
miinkepants, if you have a complaint, please e-mail a moderator instead of derailing half a thread over it. Thanks.

You too, LTJ and remind. If you're wondering why this thread went to hell, take a look at who started it. Maybe AlbertaForever is a right-wing troll, but he isn't responsible for your response.

[ 05 March 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
minkepants
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13708

posted 05 March 2007 12:07 PM      Profile for minkepants     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That seems fair. Sorry for thread drift.

[ 05 March 2007: Message edited by: minkepants ]


From: Scarborough | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 05 March 2007 12:09 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
[Oh, you edited it out. Well, never mind then.]

This thread is long enough.

[ 05 March 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

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

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca