Author
|
Topic: Byelections called for Fairview and Burrard
|
Politics101
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8962
|
posted 01 October 2008 02:53 PM
By-elections have been called for Wednesday Oct 29, 2008 for the two vacant Vancouver ridings - Fairview and Burrard.Here's a link to the story: http://www.mytelus.com/ncp_news/article.en.do?pn=regional/british_columbia&articleID=3007215 I thought the call might becoming because Arthur Griffiths has opened a campaign office in the Davie Village and when I stuck my head in the storefront the other day they were pretty sure the announcement would be coming any day - well today is the day. I will miss the final part of the campaign as I will be out of the country and will have to rely on the internet to get the results.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Politics101
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8962
|
posted 01 October 2008 03:22 PM
Don't believe that the NDP member has resigned his seat - not sure why he didn't but I don't believe he is required to.Gregor chose to resign his - Lorne I believe because he is running federally had to resign his. Both of these by-elections will be held under the current boundaries and then next May the Burrard riding is split in two so you could have a scenario that Arthur wins the by-election and then runs in the new West End riding in May and loses in the general election as the Burrard riding with its large Liberal vote in Yaletown makes it competitive for the Liberals while the West End is a stronger NDP.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 01 October 2008 09:48 PM
quote: Originally posted by Politics101: I believe it is Spencer Herbert who is at present a Vision party parks board member.Spencer is gay which will help him with a portion of the gay vote in the riding.
Herbert was actually elected on the COPE ticket, not Vision. IIRC, Vision didn't run candidates for Parks Board in 2005. I knew Herbert was a candidate for the nomination for the new Vancouver-West End riding in the upcoming 2009 general election, but has he been nominated to run in the existing Vancouver-Burrard riding in the by-election? I would like to think that LGBTQ people don't base their vote on a candidate's sexual orientation. In any event, it didn't exactly help Tim Stevenson in 2005, did it? On that point, here's a great map that shows the poll-by-poll breakdown in Burrard. Basically the NDP did very well in the West End (the Burrard-Robson-Denman-Davie quadrangle) and got slaughtered in Yaletown, Coal Harbour, and the north side of False Creek. What is clear from this map is that the new Vancouver-West End seat should be a slam-dunk for the NDP, while Vancouver-False Creek will be equally safe for the Liberals. I'd give the edge to the NDP in the Burrard by-election given the narrowness of Mayencourt's victory in 2005 and the fact that the current climate seems to favour the NDP. The Liberal dominance of the 'owner-occupier' demographic, which is more likely to vote, means that the strength of the NDP's GOTV operation will be key. [ 01 October 2008: Message edited by: ghoris ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Politics101
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8962
|
posted 02 October 2008 06:27 AM
Ghoris - that assessment about the 2005 results is fine but remember where most of the population growth has been. It is in Yaletown and Coal Harbour which if it comes out to vote gives Arthur a slight edge - I remember that in 2005 when I worked but didn't live in the riding that some of my NDP friends who couldn't stand Tim for a variety of reasons voted for Lorne and also some Liberal friends who couldn't stand Lorne voted for Tim.Name recognition always help in short campaigns so Arthur may have a slight edge there as well. He already has his election signs on a storefront on Granville Mall. During Davie days last month both of these candidates had booths and both were fairly busy but Arthur had a lot of Seniors talking to him - probably know his mother. The NDP always does a better job of cross-marketing their candidates so they will use the current federal campaign to promote Spencer.
quote: As I recall he is also married to a former cheerleader 20 years his junior
Why should this matter?
From: Vancouver | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Treetop
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9699
|
posted 02 October 2008 09:22 AM
I believe the Vancouver-Burrard NDP nomination meeting is this Sunday. Spencer is the only declared candidate. "Herbert was actually elected on the COPE ticket, not Vision. IIRC, Vision didn't run candidates for Parks Board in 2005." That is correct. He is currently a COPE Parks Board Commissioner.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474
|
posted 02 October 2008 02:26 PM
A few points.1) Will Sterk say she's running here "because she needs to get into the house?" Because at best (for her) I could see her being a spoiler to the NDP holding the riding, and at worst (for her) I could see her getting her ass handed to her ala Adrianne Carr in Surrey-Panorama Ridge circa 2004. Though to be fair maybe this is a profile boosting exercise. But frankly, being the leader of a third provincial party isn't going to get you much of a profile regardless of what you do. I suppose a Greeny will point out London-North Centre to me, but I think the parallels are questionable. 2) She's probably going to say she wants to provide the residents with effective representation. But this is debatable, seeing as she comes from across the sea. I mean it's one thing to live a riding or two over. But she doesn't even live in the Vancouver, let alone Metro Vancouver, let alone the mainland. Parachuting may not completely damage her candidacy. And urbanites don't necessarily mind parachuting to an extent. And yep, 1996-2005 MLA Gary Collins was originally a parachute candidate in 1996. But for one he had a much higher profile as a high-ranking Liberal opposition critic, two the riding was more Liberal friendly at the time as it extended further south and west, and three he was still in the Metro Vancouver. Seriously. Esquimalt?!? WTF. One of the reasons I think parachuting will hurt Sterk is because of the Canada Line issue. The lack of sensitivity the Liberals have shown the locals have hurt them, but will she have the credibility to appeal to the locals on the issue, seeing as there is no discernible way she could've "shared our pain" as it were? 3) Speaking of the spoiler thing, is that really what this is all about? Seeing as the Greens, and Liberals are the two pro-Carbon Tax parties, maybe this is some sort of a way to get back at the NDP for opposing the policy. I suspect she's going to hammer the NDP on this. And even though this may be one of the better ridings (say vis a vis Prince George-Mount Robson or something) to be pro-Carbon Tax on, I suspect it's still unpopular to a majority here. 4) Though to be fair this was one of the better Green results from 2001, they still got their asses handed to them in 2005. So I guess we'll see how much of the 2005 vote was purely a pro-Gregor vote, how much of it was a pro-NDP or anti-Liberal vote. But considering how the environment, while still an important issue, is probably not one of the top tier issues for this campaign that will probably help depress the Green vote.
From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 02 October 2008 04:07 PM
quote: Originally posted by Politics101: Doesn't Alexa Mcdonaugh of the NDP also come from a family with inherited wealth - isn't here father a well to do Nova Scotian.
Was. Lloyd Shaw (1914-1993) was the first national reasearch director of the CCF, Provincial Secretary of the Nova Scotia wing until 1949, and was a four-time CCF candidate in 1945, 1948, 1949 and 1974. He was also heir to the L.E. Shaw Ltd. brickmaking firm, now the Shaw Group, and became its President and CEO following World War II. [Edited to fix links.] [ 03 October 2008: Message edited by: ghoris ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Daniel Grice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7985
|
posted 02 October 2008 11:24 PM
Wow. First of all these by-elections will be unpredictable. Shoved between the federal and municipal, it is hard to tell what voter turnout will be and how voter fatigue will affect them.These by-election cannot be compared to the Surrey one a few years ago for the Greens. Fairview is the home to many Greens who voted for Gregor in 2005. We will get a strong result and will suffer from 0 need for strategic voting. It will be the first chance for Vancouver voters to have a clear conscious vote in awhile. Right now, the NDP's anti-carbon tax stand may be popular in some areas in BC, but it is more likely to hurt them in Vancouver. The NDP also does not have any star candidates in either of the races.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474
|
posted 03 October 2008 07:12 PM
quote: Is it not traditional for a party leader to run in the first available by-election? Lets face it - if she didn't run in one of the two available ridings the question would be "why not".As a former Vancouver -Fairview resident who has voted both NDP and Green in past elections I expect Sterk to do well in V-F. I can assure you that the various conspiracy theories such as "the Greens were created just to screw the NDP up" are a crock. We live in a multi party world. The Greens are now a player in that multi-party world.
I think she has the potential to do well. But I think she also has the potential to bomb. And, since we're throwing out credentials, as a current resident of Vancouver-Fairview I can assure you that the Canadaline issue is pretty massive in the riding, which is why I think it's odd that a non-resident (and about as big of a parachute candidate you could find) would run here. As for tradition, Stockholm pointed that out. But I'd just add that at times it's better to forgo tradition for the sake of expediency. For instance, Carole James didn't want to take the chance she'd embarrass herself being a massive parachute candidate by running in Surrey, so she didn't. Whereas Gordon Campbell didn't see it as a problem, as he was running in a by-election (Vancouver-Quilchena) that was all of one riding over. Another example of a leader who stayed out of the house, is Layton who just waited until the general election so he could try to get into his own riding. All in all, I find find it unseemly to run in a place that isn't even remotely your own community that you plan on abandoning within a few months anyways. But it's well with in her right.
From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474
|
posted 04 October 2008 01:57 AM
While I'd still say it's unseemly, even if it is traditional, there's a slight bit of sense to it for those guys as those were traditional Tory or Liberal ridings. For Clark and Mulroney, those ridings would've elected Tories if they ran the dog from Blues Clues and ditto for Chretien had they decided to run Clifford. So in that sense there could be criticism, but they'd get elected so it would all be worth it for them. For a third, or weak party, there's a lot more risk which explains why neither McDonaugh or Layton ran in the nearest available byelection. They weren't as deluded to think they could win in any old riding. I think there's maybe two provincial ridings the Greens could conceivably win in this political environment, and they ain't these two. If the NDP goes back into the crapper ala Glen Clark/Ujjal Dosanjh, this would be a second place riding but by a loss of thirty or so points (to the Liberals). This is going to infuriate certain Greesters who don't live in a reality based world, but the fact of the matter is that Sterk is going to loose. Maybe she'll spoil it for Jenn McGinn, but that's really not what a true player in a multi-party world can hope for as a "best case scenario."
From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Politics101
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8962
|
posted 15 October 2008 03:45 PM
In a short campaign name recognition and get out the vote are two keys - and here the verdict might be mixed.Griffiths name is well known from his sport and businesses while Herbert has some exposure from being on the Parks Board. As for GOTV - slight edge to the NDP who are usually better at it but Arthur will probably do well with the Seniors vote and they generally tend to vote while Spencer might have a little more difficulty getting the younger votes to vote. I do agree with Dr Conway that in the general election next May the results could be reversed but incumbents usually have a slight edge + if Arthur were to win and go into cabinet that is usually considered a plus in an election as well.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 15 October 2008 04:43 PM
quote: Originally posted by Politics101: In a short campaign name recognition and get out the vote are two keys - and here the verdict might be mixed.Griffiths name is well known from his sport and businesses while Herbert has some exposure from being on the Parks Board. As for GOTV - slight edge to the NDP who are usually better at it but Arthur will probably do well with the Seniors vote and they generally tend to vote while Spencer might have a little more difficulty getting the younger votes to vote. I do agree with Dr Conway that in the general election next May the results could be reversed but incumbents usually have a slight edge + if Arthur were to win and go into cabinet that is usually considered a plus in an election as well.
Name recognition: unfortunately, I have to give the edge to Griffiths here. I don't think more than about 10% of the voters could name the members of the Park Board. GOTV: the NDP usually has a superior 'machine' but obviously the Liberals have been no slouches the last couple elections. I think the key factor is the point you made - Herbert's support will come overwhelmingly from younger renters who are a) less likely to vote at the best of times and b) are probably clueless that there's even a by-election. Griffiths' support will come overwhelmingly from older owner-occupier voters who are more likely to vote. This natural advantage for the Liberals can be overcome with a good machine but is it possible to put one together in the wake of the federal campaign? The other factor is the generic party label - are people more likely to opt for the NDP label right now or the Liberal label? Probably a slight advantage to the NDP here as governments typically tend not to fare well in by-elections. All that said, at the end of the day what happens in the by-election is pretty much moot because there is virtually no chance of Griffiths getting elected on the new boundaries in Vancouver-West End in the general in May. [ 15 October 2008: Message edited by: ghoris ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Centrist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5422
|
posted 15 October 2008 06:06 PM
quote: Originally posted by ghoris: All that said, at the end of the day what happens in the by-election is pretty much moot
Interesting that the two by-elections fall almost within the boundary of Vancouver Centre. But I have to emphasize that it's important for the New Democrats to win both ridings otherwise NDP momentum could become deflated heading into next May's vote, especially with Vancouver-Fairview. I can't ever recall an incumbent BC government taking away an opposition seat in a by-election.
From: BC | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 16 October 2008 01:03 PM
Maybe, but I just don't see it. Let's say he wins and gets immediately appointed to cabinet. He has, for all intents and purposes, six months to sell himself to the electorate. Not a lot of time to do much of anything. Even if he was given free reign to dole out the goodies, I give the voters of the West End a little more credit - I think they would see through such transparent last-ditch attempts to buy their votes. And in any event, if it looks like the Liberals are going down, they will want an NDP member, not a Liberal.He won't run in False Creek because the Liberals have already nominated former Cancer Foundation CEO Mary McNeil to run there. (BC political junkies may recall that she ran for the Tory nomination for the Quadra by-election but lost to Deborah Meredith.) Just to clarify my above post, my comments about the by-elections being moot referred to Burrard only. I completely agree that if the NDP loses the Fairview by-election it will be a real struggle to regain the seat in the general.
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Politics101
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8962
|
posted 18 October 2008 05:24 PM
Looks like the Marijuana Party is serious in this riding - they were out campaigning at English Bay this afternoon - they were handling out campaign literature but when I asked for a some free samples they claimed not to have any.Spencer was canvassing in Davie Village and getting a fairly good reception from the passing masses. He answered my question about the redevelopment of St Paul's and I gave him a couple of ideas of where some people might be sheltered during the winter.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 19 October 2008 09:20 AM
quote: Originally posted by Politics101:Spencer was canvassing in Davie Village and getting a fairly good reception from the passing masses. He answered my question about the redevelopment of St Paul's and I gave him a couple of ideas of where some people might be sheltered during the winter.
If you don't mind my asking, what was the question about St. Paul's and what was the response? I did get a fairly slick, expensive-looking piece of Spencer Herbert literature in the mail Thursday along with my voters card. It was very well done and did a good job of selling him as a good representative for the riding. Still nothing from Griffiths, which is surprising because I live in Yaletown and people like me are supposed to be his 'base'.
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
citygrrrl
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15659
|
posted 19 October 2008 04:01 PM
Well it sounds like Spencer's position on St Paul's is similar to the former MLA and likely the current BC Liberal candidate as well. So I suppose a lot of hay will be made about Spencer being a renter and therefore a claimed ability to see rnetal issues more clearly then his opponent ( although he just recently moved into the riding as a renter and I can't really agree that being a renter from a well heeled Kerrisdale family gives one any more ability to see the solutions then a non-renter from a well heeled Point Grey family)Oh and as for Dr Conway- just ignore his obsessions- the guy didn't even know a byelection had been called- obviously not a heavyweight when it comes to the issues or anything substantive so let him froth away in the corner.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Politics101
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8962
|
posted 25 October 2008 08:30 AM
Well - the NDP feel that they will win both of them and the Liberals believe that they will win both of them - Fairview was NDP and Burrard was Liberal prior to the by-election.I can only comment on Burrard as that is the one that I live in and are working on. Because of the makeup of the riding both parties have there strengths - the NDP in the West End and among Seniors and the Liberals in Coal Harbour and Yaletown - because most of the growth in is those two areas the Liberals feel that they have a slight advantage. I think the party that does the best job in getting out the vote will win and it could be close. While the boundaries aren't totally the same as Vancouver Center federally - the combined Fry/Mayencourt vote was over 60% in the recent federal election. The voting at the advance poll has been steady the last three days and concludes today. I don't have access to what the advance poll #'s were back in 2005 so I can't tell if there is more interest or not. All of the candidates are main streeting - because the ridings is almost entirely apartments and condos it is very hard to go door to door so other methods need to be used to get the attention of the voter.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138
|
posted 25 October 2008 08:58 AM
quote: While the boundaries aren't totally the same as Vancouver Center federally - the combined Fry/Mayencourt vote was over 60% in the recent federal election.
Why is that relevent - there are undoubtedly a vast number of "Hedy Fry federal Liberal voters" who hate Gordon Campbell and everything he and his BC Liberal/Social Credit/federal Tory/Reform Party represents and who will vote NDP provincially. [ 25 October 2008: Message edited by: Stockholm ]
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
asterix
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2419
|
posted 25 October 2008 09:22 AM
For what it's worth, the Burrard situation in 2005 was that the NDP's Tim Stevenson ultimately won the ballots that were cast and counted on election day by a margin of 17 votes, but when the absentee and advance ballots were counted two weeks later, they tipped the balance to Mayencourt by a margin of 18 votes. As a result, there was a judicial recount -- and the final certified total gave it to Mayencourt by an 11-vote margin.And before the Mayencourt era, the riding's MLAs were both New Democrats: Emery Barnes from 1991-1996 and Stevenson from 1996-2001 Obviously it would be unwise to underestimate the Liberal vote in Burrard, but it's not at all a safe seat for the Campbell clan. [ 25 October 2008: Message edited by: asterix ]
From: deep inside the caverns of my mind | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 26 October 2008 12:21 AM
Mr. Grice has pretty much summed it up. I will be absolutely floored if voter turnout in either seat cracks 20%.As an aside, I got some literature from Griffiths the other day. You'd think he was running for the Green Party. Even the BC Liberal logo was green! No pictures of him with Campbell (no surprise). Downplaying the Liberal brand while playing up Griffiths' biography and some of the highlights of the government record. Professional looking, but not quite as well-put-together as Herbert's. Lots of text-probably more than most voters will read. As far as I'm concerned, this by-election is a complete farce. Nobody cares and nobody is paying any attention. Frankly, why should they? The next election is scant months away and the spring sitting of the legislature will be the usual pre-election 'phony war' charade. From a personal standpoint, I live in Yaletown, so no matter who wins the by-election, they won't be on the ballot here in May, so I am having a hard time getting excited about it.
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Daniel Grice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7985
|
posted 26 October 2008 04:07 AM
Yeah, I saw Arthur's brochure. Completely in green. I saw him at the library at a debate, and he's pretty energetic. His claim to green fame is that he helped establish the globe conference.Also, GC announced that their will be a fall sitting after all, so the position should actually be relevant. I wouldn't bet money on this race. People may vote Green as a guilt free protest. People may vote for Griffiths and the doctor because of name recognition. People may vote NDP if they can run a GOTV. Unless the Greens somehow win, this by-election will mean very little. It is so low key, that it cannot be taken as a litmus test for the general election. Uck. voter participation is at an all time low. Lets hope Obama wins in the US and their voter turnout goes up., perhaps it will trickle down into Canadian politics.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Politics101
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8962
|
posted 26 October 2008 07:44 AM
I wonder if Dan would like to comment on the fact that a former leader of the BC Greens has openly endorsed Arthur and the Campbell Liberals in this campaign.As for turn out - there was a steady stream of people at both advance polling locations over the past 4 days - somewhere about 1500 at Sunset Towers in the West End which is where I was stationed - don't know how this compares with 2005 - perhaps someone has that information. Ghoris - I am like you - I will be in the new False Creek riding next May but personally I consider voting to be one of the fundamental rights of a democracy and I therefore voted in this by-election.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Centrist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5422
|
posted 26 October 2008 08:41 AM
quote: Originally posted by Politics101: As for turn out - there was a steady stream of people at both advance polling locations over the past 4 days - somewhere about 1500 at Sunset Towers in the West End
Just checked the advance polling figures for 2005, and the Sunset Towers polling division had 2,029 advance votes (the other polling division being Roundhouse Community Centre.) Looks to be not too bad an advance turn-out.
From: BC | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Treetop
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9699
|
posted 26 October 2008 03:26 PM
A friend of mine who was recently on the Vancouver-Burrard BC Liberal riding association bluntly told me a couple of nights ago that "Arthur is going to win". It was interesting. There was no doubt in his mind. He also told me he ran in to the BCL riding association president, who assured him the same. Apparently they feel that Griffith is just too high profile, and with (the lack of) vote turn out benefiting the BCL, they cannot loose. It came off as extremely arrogant to me. I see Spencer out on the street mainstreeting practically every single day. I don't see Arthur very often. Maybe he spends most of his time in Yaletown?
From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Treetop
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9699
|
posted 26 October 2008 03:52 PM
quote: Originally posted by Politics101: Both candidates are out main streeting and both are concentrating on their areas of strength - Spencer - west of Burrard and Arthur - east of Burrard - in a short by-election it is important to get your supporters out to vote and this is best done by concentrating on the areas where you have the most support.
Yes, I agree. It's important that each candidate make sure the voters in their areas of strengh know that we are having a by-election.
I just figured i'd see more of Arthur considering his campaign office is on Davie. (West of Burrard)
From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 27 October 2008 12:43 PM
quote: A friend of mine who was recently on the Vancouver-Burrard BC Liberal riding association bluntly told me a couple of nights ago that "Arthur is going to win". It was interesting. There was no doubt in his mind. He also told me he ran in to the BCL riding association president, who assured him the same. Apparently they feel that Griffith is just too high profile, and with (the lack of) vote turn out benefiting the BCL, they cannot loose.It came off as extremely arrogant to me.
Those BC Libs may as well savour the possibility of victory now, because even if Griffiths pulls off a win on Wednesday, he's going to get his clock cleaned in the general in May. I think it's quite likely that we will have a reverse of the outcome in the last general election - with the NDP taking Burrard and the Liberals taking Fairview. In other words, a wash. [ 27 October 2008: Message edited by: ghoris ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
skarredmunkey
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11117
|
posted 29 October 2008 10:24 AM
Wow, ghoris, I didn't realize that I touched a nerve. The only thing I apologize for is missing the fact that the BC Liberals have already nominated someone in False Creek. I've been following this thread quite thoroughly but apparently not enough.But I am far less concerned about your young urban professional feelings, your pocketbook, or the propensity of your well-to-do neighbours and friends to vote for rightwing and reactionary parties. You know and I know that there is little to no chance that people downtown will be represented by a New Democrat so long as Yaletown and Coal Harbour are booming. And if you think that it has anything to do with my pleasant remarks, and nothing to do with the fact that they are just going to vote in their own economic self-interests, then you're kidding yourself.
From: Vancouver Centre | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 29 October 2008 11:43 AM
I disagree. Fairview is a much wealthier, much more 'yuppie' seat than Burrard, and it elected an NDP MLA.Consider that the average household income in Fairview is $62,337, while it is $48,910 in Burrard. Fairview has more owner-occupiers (37%) than Burrard (25%). (You know how those evil yuppies love lording their mortgages over everyone.) The homes in Fairview are bigger, too, 4.4 rooms on average compared to 3.5 in Burrard. And horror of horrors, Fairview has tons of yuppies! The top 8 occupations are clerical; professionals in sciences; teachers and professors; professionals in business; judges, lawyers, psychologists and social workers; specialist managers, professionals in art and culture; and technical employees in art and culture. (By comparison, Burrard's top 8 are clerical; professionals in sciences; sales and services; specialist managers; professionals in business; professionals in art and culture; other managers; admin and regulatory.) How could a seat like Fairview, which by your logic is chock-full of evil rich yuppie assholes who will only ever vote Liberal, possibly elect an NDP MLA, while the poor denizens of Burrard were stuck with a Liberal? Maybe the problem is that the NDP doesn't even bother to campaign outside of the Burrard-Davie-Robson-Denman quadrangle. Maybe the problem is that some people in the NDP have openly disdainful attitudes of people who live in Yaletown and Coal Harbour (see above). Maybe the problem is that the NDP decided to run a boring retread candidate in 2005. No, it must be that the evil rich yuppies who live in Yaletown will never ever consider voting NDP, unlike the noble and good (and even richer) yuppies of Fairview. I'm actually not that personally offended by your attitude. I am annoyed that some people have apparently learned nothing from the 2005 debacle in Vancouver-Burrard, and continue to have this short-sighted attitude that Yaletown and Coal Harbour should be written off for all time. [ 29 October 2008: Message edited by: ghoris ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901
|
posted 29 October 2008 01:08 PM
I take it in Vancouver there is a divide within the middle classes between the so-called "new class" of academics, social workers, people in arts and culture, etc. that would be more likely to lean NDP (though they may be tempted to vote Green as well) than other groups like various professionals in business, lawyers, etc. that tend to be more politically conservative. If it weren't for the "new class" types Gordon Campbell would win by much bigger margins in his riding of Point Grey than he actually does. I don't know how this plays out in terms of the difference in the NDP vote in Fairview and Burrard. [ 29 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]
From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Centrist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5422
|
posted 29 October 2008 01:40 PM
On the positive side of things, the NDP will win both seats. Prominent BC political journalists Keith Baldrey of Global BC and Vaughn Palmer of the Vancouver Sun have also stated the same.The last time a BC government won a by-election was almost 27 years ago in 1981. And 15 years before that in 1966. That will certainly give the BC NDP a shot in the arm!
From: BC | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 29 October 2008 08:42 PM
quote: The Greens are in low single digits in both!
Not surprising. I've always considered the BC Green Party to be a bit of a parking vote. I think their hardcore support, the people that will come out and vote in a by-election, will be less than 10%. Hopefully this is a sign that former disgruntled NDP voters who went Green in 2001 have now drifted back to the NDP. In Burrard the Greens are currently in a neck-and-neck race for third with the fringe BC Conservative Party. Herbert has opened up about a 300-vote lead with a little under 25% of the votes counted. In Fairview, the Liberals are now in the lead. [ 29 October 2008: Message edited by: ghoris ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adam T
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4631
|
posted 29 October 2008 08:52 PM
Hrmm, the website crashed.I'll bet when it comes back up the Liberals win. Banana dictator Gordon Campbell. Just remember, if you're visiting him for dinner and you bring the after dinner apartif of cake, make sure it's an assortment.
From: Richmond B.C | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Adam T
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4631
|
posted 29 October 2008 08:54 PM
I think it's back up.Anybody here see Bananas? "He brings cake and he doesn't even bring an assortment? Kill him!"
From: Richmond B.C | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 29 October 2008 09:07 PM
quote: VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) - Around 100,000 voters in Vancouver were eligible to vote today in two Provincial byelections. Polls have now closed. The leaders in early voting: (numbers are unofficial) New Democrat Herbert Spencer leads with 2428 votes in Vancouver Burrard compared to Liberal Arthur Griffiths' 1321 votes. In Vancouver-Fairview Jenn McGinn of the NDP has 4049 votes, while Liberal candidate Dr. Margaret MacDiarmid has just over 3500 votes with 100 polls reporting.
Those both look like wins to me! [ 29 October 2008: Message edited by: ghoris ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Centrist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5422
|
posted 29 October 2008 09:07 PM
Actually try News1130 listen live... that's the only thing that I can think of.This sucks big time. http://www.news1130.com/
From: BC | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138
|
posted 29 October 2008 09:26 PM
If it hurts in one riding and helps in the other 82 - I'll take that.Jane Sterk seems set to bomb just like Adriane Carr when she stupidly ran in the Surrey-Panorama Ridge byelection six months before the 2005 election and got a derisory 6% of the vote. Its about time that the media stopped taking the BC Green Party seriously and relegated them to the same status as the Marijuana Party.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 29 October 2008 09:28 PM
quote: Its also nice to see the BC Green party get totally humiliated. At what point do the networks decide that its time to uninvite the Green leader from any leader's debate - they have never even come close to winning a seat and in these byelections they are barely ahead of the Marijuana Party.
I don't disagree but look at all the gnashing of teeth and rending of garments that happened in the federal arena over this issue. The BC leaders debates have always had at least three participants for a number of years. I think the 1996 debate might have even had four - I think both Gordon Wilson and the then-leader of BC Reform (I think it was Jack Weisgerber) participated along with Campbell and Clark. For whatever reason, in Canada we tend to shirk away from one-on-one leader's debates, even if the third party is basically a fringe party that has no sitting members, and no realistic prospect of winning significant support (eg the New Brunswick NDP, the Manitoba Liberals, the Saskatchewan Liberals, the PEI NDP). [ 29 October 2008: Message edited by: ghoris ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Centrist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5422
|
posted 29 October 2008 09:30 PM
From News1130:New Democrat Herbert Spencer leads with 5700 votes in Vancouver Burrard compared to Liberal Arthur Griffiths' 4127 votes. In Vancouver-Fairview Jenn McGinn of the NDP has 4488 votes, while Liberal candidate Dr. Margaret MacDiarmid has just over 3985 votes.
From: BC | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Adam T
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4631
|
posted 29 October 2008 09:31 PM
I think how the carbon tax plays out remains to be seen.I don't think Carole James' "I'll axe the tax but keep the tax cuts" will be seen as very credible. Anyway, update New Democrat Herbert Spencer leads with 5700 votes in Vancouver Burrard compared to Liberal Arthur Griffiths' 4127 votes. In Vancouver-Fairview Jenn McGinn of the NDP has 4488 votes, while Liberal candidate Dr. Margaret MacDiarmid has just over 3985 votes.
From: Richmond B.C | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 29 October 2008 09:34 PM
News 1130 now has the following numbers: quote: The leaders in early voting: (numbers are unofficial, courtesy of Canadian Press)New Democrat Herbert Spencer leads with 5700 votes in Vancouver Burrard compared to Liberal Arthur Griffiths' 4127 votes. In Vancouver-Fairview Jenn McGinn of the NDP has 4488 votes, while Liberal candidate Dr. Margaret MacDiarmid has just over 3985 votes.
A higher turnout in Burrard than I would have expected (assuming these are close to the final numbers).
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
NorthReport
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15337
|
posted 29 October 2008 10:12 PM
I suppose that's why the NDP are winning 2 seats tonite, the first time BCers have had an opportunity to vote on the issue.Bad nite for Gordo http://www.straight.com/article-168709/bad-night-gordo-jenn-mcginn-opens-wider-lead-vancouverfairview quote: Originally posted by Adam T: [QB]I think how the carbon tax plays out remains to be seen.I don't think Carole James' "I'll axe the tax but keep the tax cuts" will be seen as very credible. Anyway, update New Democrat Herbert Spencer leads with 5700 votes in Vancouver Burrard compared to Liberal Arthur Griffiths' 4127 votes. In Vancouver-Fairview Jenn McGinn of the NDP has 4488 votes, while Liberal candidate Dr. Margaret MacDiarmid has just over 3985 votes.[/Q]
From: From sea to sea to sea | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
NorthReport
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15337
|
posted 29 October 2008 10:29 PM
Yea Vancity!It's a wrap. Like the environment is s big issue with voters. Un-huh!
From: From sea to sea to sea | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 29 October 2008 11:09 PM
Barring some absolutely bizzare distribution of votes, the fact that Griffiths lost by almost 2000 votes and nearly 15 percent on the more Liberal-friendly existing boundaries means he has no chance of getting elected in the new West End seat.I think that with a strong candidate and some real effort, Vancouver-False Creek could even be in play for the NDP in May, especially if Campbell continues his downward spiral in the polls. [ 29 October 2008: Message edited by: ghoris ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 30 October 2008 12:57 AM
quote: Originally posted by Stockholm:
Each of those parties have actually won seats at various times. If they include the Green leader in a leaders debate this time, it will be the third time in a row that they get included despite never winning a single seat - EVER. Enough is enough. I notice that the BC Conservative Party ran in both byelections and got only slightly fewer votes than the Greens - why not invite their leader to the next debate and remind dissaffected rightwing people that they have an alternative to the BC Liberals!
Again, I don't disagree, but the trend in B.C. in the last few decades has been to err on the side of including more parties as opposed to just the two contenders for government. You mention the BC Conservative Party - if I recall correctly, the leader of the previous incarnation (then known as 'Unity BC') did participate in the leader's debate in 2001 but it didn't help them much as they collected a pitiful 3% of the vote. They have since gone through many leadership changes and upheavals - I suspect the reason they weren't invited back in 2005 was because, for lack of a better term, the party simply did not have its shit together. Running only one candidate (the leader) certainly didn't help matters. Again, for whatever reason in Canada we cling to this notion that we have a multi-party system in every province, even in cases where it's for all intents and purposes a two-party system (eg B.C., Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick, PEI, Newfoundland) or even a one-party system (Alberta). I for one would not be surprised if the 2009 leaders debate included the Liberals, the NDP, the Greens and the Conservatives. [ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: ghoris ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Centrist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5422
|
posted 30 October 2008 01:28 AM
quote: Originally posted by ghoris: I think that with a strong candidate and some real effort, Vancouver-False Creek could even be in play for the NDP in May, especially if Campbell continues his downward spiral in the polls.
You're usually a pretty reasonable analyst, but I think that you may be stretching it a bit. Gordo's Point-Grey seat would likely be lost first before that were to happen and we would also be in government. More importantly, don't forget that voter turnout for both seats was in the low 20's range, the lowest I've ever seen. Global BC at 5 pm reported that the North False Creek/Yaletown poll stations were deserted all day long and it didn't look good for the Libs. As for opinion polls, I haven't seen a Mustel poll for almost 5 months. Where are they? In any event, let's savor the victories!
From: BC | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474
|
posted 30 October 2008 01:58 AM
Woot, woot. Two victories. Though it's rather obvious to say this, but the NDP is going to need to be careful to get more voters out if they want to keep these seats come next election. Obviously by-election turnout is always terrible, and this by-election was unique since it was sandwiched by the federal and municipal elections, but Fairview will probably require at least 13,000 votes to hold, West-End at least 12,000 and False Creek at least 11,000. That's assuming that turnout doesn't fall from 2005. But if it does, and this has nothing to do with partisanship, maybe mandatory voting (with a ballot option of "none of the above") ought to be considered.[ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: Vansterdam Kid ]
From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Centrist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5422
|
posted 30 October 2008 02:20 AM
Ghoris, admittedly my previous comments were based upon the 2005 lopsided poll results in NFC/Yaletown that the Libs garnered as shown by the accompanying colour-coded riding map, which I believe you have previously posted.http://bc2009.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/vancouver-burrard.gif Anyway, it's been too long in terms of the last Mustel poll. I've been awaiting one for ages in order to get a better sense of the BC electorate.
From: BC | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|