Higher poll results signal danger. The reason I say this is that this kind of position happens rarely and if you blow an opportunity, you don't get another in a while. The last election we could have won was in 1988 - 17 years ago. It was the first such opportunity in our party's history. It was blown because of a misreading of what Canadians wanted to hear and an attempt to run a comfortable campaign in the wrong environment. In that election, we let the Liberals campaign on our issues and come from behind us to a second place showing that let Mulroney have a second term (we ran on a platform of Ed being a nice guy -- more or less). The saddest thing was that Canadians actually were in line with our positions and it was a failure to run from them that killed us. We let the Free Trade issue be a Liberal issue. Anyway, opportunities blown do not return quickly, that is the lesson. I smell a new opportunity and this time we need to make it work. Otherwise the next one could be in 2022!!! It is not clear that if we blow this we will be able to continue to build. Politics is not like that.

The NDP has been higher in the polls than this but not within this kind of dynamic.
Both the Liberals and the Conservatives have never had -- at the same time -- as high of one certain number: the number who would not consider voting for them. This is happening at the same time as that number is likely the lowest it has been for the NDP since Broadbent was leader. In fact this might be the critical improvement condition for the NDP to break out of the 30-40 seat ceiling we have had traditionally. People do not want to choose between the right-wing radical Conservatives and the dishonest Liberals. A safe NDP is a better bet- so we need to look safe. (That is the campaign we need to run on although safe does not mean abandoning principles because that does not look safe -- it looks untrustworthy.)

When Broadbent had the high numbers the dynamic was different. The Liberals did not have a large number that would not consider them. They just had failed to give a reason to vote Liberal in a while and we had shown a reason to vote NDP. The Liberals woke up before the election and everything changed. Since the Liberals have now, instead of a lack of goodwill, a lot of ill-will toward their brand, a recovery for them would be more difficult. With a new leader, they also cannot use a leadership change to fix problems. Any strong Liberal would be tainted anyway.

Also, in part thanks to our previous recent leaders, the NDP while battered, actually developped a Canada-wide base that Layton is now growing. This may be the first poll to show the NDP solidly in double digits in absolutely every province! This is also happening for a new NDP leader with a lot of gas in the tank. In the past, popularity only happened for NDP leaders at the end of their cycle. This is all very good and unprecedented.

Apart from the apparent comfort many Canadians have with a much larger NDP (not necessarily government), due to the scandal many, many will not vote Liberal. At the same time (completely unprecidented), the Conservatives cannot pick up the vote because they have marginalized themselves by dropping the PC brand and the appearance of a middle-of-the-road political centre. They remain out of touch with too many Canadians. This leaves the NDP as a contender to being the only real electible alternative to the Liberals, a claim the Conservatives were able to make for a long time. It can be argued that the NDP is now considered less "radical" or away from the mainstream than the Conservative party by a majority of Canadians. this has never happened before. Our opportunity is coming from the tactical errors made by the PC and Reform branches set years ago more than Liberals screw ups. Scandal and unpopularity happens to all parties from time to time, but the Conservative family 15 years ago sowed the seeds for that party being incapable of capitalizing on the next Liberal disaster. This is the real reason why we have a minority government now. If the Conservatives had not blown it by marginalizing themselves, we would have a PC government today similar to Mulroneys.

Any Liberals that could bolt to the Conservatives may already have done so in the last election -- for the rest the gap is too great. Now most new losses will have to go NDP (outside Quebec) because these come from Liberals that would sooner not vote at all than vote Conservative.

If we were in an election this dynamic couldn't be better. Although there are concerns:

1) a "fear the NDP" campaign from the Liberals. The Liberals could write off their Conservative losses and campaign against the NDP. for the Liberals this is their best strategy. This is the vote that would be easiest to bring back. Arguably this is also where most of their vote has gone outside Quebec (since the Conservatives are not polling better than they ever have). Further, the Liberals need a term in opposition and if the Conservatives put them there, they can come back. If the NDP put them there, they could become dead meat. This strategy for the Liberals could work or it could make the problem worse for them and perhaps even elect Layton. Still it is the only card they can play now. A "Fear of the Conservatives" would only help the NDP right now, leaving us with the critical mass to win 3-way races with Liberals holding just enough vote to allow us to slip by the conservative.
2) the whole thing could blow over. Canadians actually are very confortable with the Liberals -- it is a long habit difficult to break, almost as bad as smoking. It is one thing to tell a pollster that you are mad at the Liberals and send a message of anger. It is another thing to gamble what you most are comfortable with for something you may consider risky. Actually, it may even be a good ad to run -- likening voting for the old line parties as an addiction that is bad for you.
3) The NDP MUST deliver a platform well thought out and responsible. A bad platform or campaign would sink the party. At these heights our vote is softer and slippage can gain momentum taking us below where we were before. It is crucial that this platform work and there are no mistakes. No mistakes means not aggravating our base as well as attracting attention for being too far away from most Canadians policy wise. This is easier than it sounds because many Canadains are closer to us than they realize. More than anythign I think it is a trust issue.

Canadians are ever so slightly to the right of the NDP. I actually don't think by very much (less than they know). I think the NDP should consider carefully the policies that are non-negotiable. Some policies cannot be played with because we are a party with guiding principles. Other policies can be slowed or back-burnered -- for now and moved on when we can get Canadians to move toward us on them. It is better to have a cautious NDP able to win than a permanent opposition voice. If we do not show that we can govern -- Harper will get a chance to destroy the fabric of the nation. I do not believe we need to sell our soul to win government and I think we can produce a winning platform in touch with Canadians that does not look like a Liberal platform. It is easy to drive a wedge between the Conservatives and the Canadians who would consider voting for us. Apart from the scandal, we need to drive a wedge between Liberal policies and those same Canadians. this should deal with principles not just Liberal broken promises. Our approach to unity is different, our foreign policy is also different. Our Kyoto plan is more locally based with more smaller workable solutions than grand plans. Our healthcare and technology platform must be fleshed out and not appear to be just Liberals in a hurry spending more. We have to show more direction differences than the amount we will spend on things. A campaign them could be in part putting the "New" back in New Democrats -- or rejustifying that. We need to redefine our "New" way seperating us from old 1950s thinking without seperating us from being a socialist party. Yes this can be done. It does mean a strong agenda on technology and science and a new approach to global trade -- other than wishing the topic will go away. We need to explain exactly how we will handle trade and economic issues.

This must be done extremely carefully, if we look like we will sell our soul to get elected we won't be trusted. But we need to look like we are listening and responsible. Our agenda needs to be guided by a combination of what is practical, palatable for most Canadians and our core principles. If we pretend that we are something else to get elected nobody will trust us. (I keep saying this for a reason and my repetition is not by accident.)

Another example of NDP leadership could be to float ideas for financing cities from a source other than property tax. This is a tax on housing. This would be popular with small business, builders, tenants, and homeowners. It is wrong to finance an entire level of government on a housing tax and then pretend that we can do nothign with a housing crisis in our streets. It is stupid to develop affordable housing policies when it is this single policy of supporting our cities on housing that makes housing unaffordable. I would suggest that we could largely scrap most "housing" programs with a move towards a municipal income tax. The alternative, we can explain to Canadians is either misery or "socialized housing" that Canadians do not want to see. This type of approach could impress because it would also take the pressure off rising welfare rates and provincial economic problems. Much of the welfare budget of provinces is to pay for housing. 20% of housing costs go to property tax. If you get rid of property tax (with legislation to ensure that housing prices drop) we are talkign about a significant raise for all people on social assistance at no cost to the province.

If we make the right calls on policy and campaigning, we could end up with a minority government.

It is possible with these poll results that the Liberals could get fewer seats than the NDP without the Conservatives getting enough to govern. If that happened, Layton could approach the BQ and the Liberals to join in a government. If we can put down a good budget, Canadians could see a popular NDP federal budget for the first time. Even if the BQ or Liberals bring down the NDP government after that, there could be enough juice to strengthen the NDP vote to a stronger position.

We all know what a a screw up would do. Just ask Bob Rae. The good news is, unlike Rae, we would be getting a government that is not broke and with enough money to actually float an NDP agenda.

As I said above -- this is a long shot. It will take an amazing platform, campaign, election timing and a lot of luck.

One other thing that could help dramatically: Layton has to run a national campaign team. The last election was too centred just around him. He needs to look more like a leader than an impressive lone wolf. He should pick is regional leiutenants quickly and have them take the risk out of their local campaigns to make national appearances. This would be done in part through advertising that sacrifices nothing. I want to see them in national rather than just local advertising. Let us show Quebec that we will put NDP leaders from that province ont he national stage that can make them proud. Ducasse needs to be part of the national campaign. It actually will help rather than hurt him towards getting his own seat anyway. It will also help heal Liberal damage to unity for Canadians to see politicians from Quebec that can inspire. Right now this is a big problem. The BQ does not leave Canadians out of Quebec comfortable given its separatist position. There is a void on this score -- we need to fill it and show some Canadian leadership from Quebec.

The media like underdogs and they like a race -- good for rating and business. To pull this off the NDP would have to pull off a media darling campaign. A popular figure for the NDP that is francophone from Quebec will help.

We have to make the people that want to paint us as scary look silly. To do so a well-costed, well thought-out program playing to party principles and avoiding overreaching on goodwill would mean everything.

Here is to hoping! Let us rise to the challenge.

In the short term, Layton must look prime-ministerial. He must not look too opportunistic (probably we should not be the one to move the non-confidence vote although we can vote for it). And he must start to reassure Canadians that the sky will not fall with an NDP government. We need to show that business has a place in an NDP victory. We must assure our suppoters that this place will not be a sellout of our principles. We must not look Liberal and we must not look scary.

And, yes, I think we can do all that. I am not betting on seats yet but I believe the opportunity is there. I think rather than fill this discussion board up with meaningless seat projections, we should fill it with ideas as to how to capitalize on our incredible opportunity. Once the election is called then we can return to the sport of guessing at seats.

I propose an ad campaign along the lines of "Spring Cleaning Time" — it's time to clean house! Roll up those sleeves and scrub out the grime, and built-up crud.., and show it as a team clean-up effort, with a lot of willing hands.

quote:

---

If you get rid of property tax (with legislation to ensure that housing prices drop) we are talkign about a significant raise for all people on social assistance at no cost to the province.

---

Canadians by and large are afraid of Stephen Harper. They would rather elect a corrupt Liberal party than risk their charter rights to the likes of Harper and his band of religious zealots. They also know a Harper government would have had Canadians dying n Iraq and spending billions on the insanity of missile defence.

So why don't they vote NDP? One is fear. People don't want to split the vote and risk a conservative candidate winning. The second is that on many issues the NDP has failed to clearly define some impoertant policies from the Liberals.

For the second issue, the NDP must move a little more left arguing that under the NDP Canada will exceed its expectations on Kyoto. That the NDP will open its arms to foreign trained family doctors who want to work in Canada. That the NDP will make Canada the most modern, efficent peace keeping force on the planet in order to persue Canada's international role in peacemaking and diplomacy. That the NDP will persue a national industrial policy to promote Canadian jobs and exports and that Canada will become a leader in developing clean fuel technologies as opposed to a licensee. And finally, that all of Canada's regulatory agencies will be overhauled to ensure they promote and protect the public interest.

I am a member of the socialist hordes.

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
I am a member of the socialist hordes.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
that has always been my favourite slogan.

---

My favourite slogan has always been a bumper sticker I saw a few years ago:

But the word "socialism" scares alot of people much like "Christian wingnut zealots" scares alot of people.

All I'm saying is to be a credible national party we should not be threatening but look safe and ready to govern ... which the NDP is.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leuca:
... the proof is the proof is the proof and when it is proven it is proven.

---

You sound like Donald Rumsfeld and make about as much sense. Maybe that is the point.

The Unknown

As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don't know
We don't know.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sock puppet:
One caveat: I'd be careful here. Most families' equity is wrapped up in their home. They consider it only right that its value should only grow.

We made the same kind of mistake (and I would say to a lesser degree than this) with the inheritance tax last time around.

---

I agree, this is a sensitive area for a lot of young working families who have sacrificed a lot to buy a home. In many cases they have paid in excess of what the home is probably worth, and we really don't want make ourselves a target for their unmet financial expectations.

Secondly, people care about taxes. If we are too chicken to speak about them during an election we don't deserve to be elected any more than Kim Campbell did.

We need a more progressive tax system with the lowest bracket above the cost of living. We need to stop taxing housing to the point where it is barely affordable. We need to stop using the GST as a means of extracting a tax from people poorer than we would dare go after them using an income tax. People need a tax system simple enough that it is accountible. In exchange for the money we pay in tax we need to get an annual report for our nation saying where the money went last year. That report needs to be in a summary form so we can read it within a few minutes while we do our taxes and it should come with the form. This is basic accountibility and the lack of it is a greater scandal than Gomery will discuss.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Privateer:

Also, I agree too we should know now to shut-up about any kind of taxes during an election campaign.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sock puppet:
I'd agree that we want to avoid specifics about taxes, but we can't avoid the topic altogether. The goal is to avoid being boxed in, and stick to promises of balanced budgets and fiscal responsibility.

---

Please let's not be gutless. That's the Liberal's job.
Let us think through our policies enough that we are not too afraid to provide detail.

It would be better to have fewer solid proposals well thought out then a basket of meaningless crap. If we offer a basket of junk then we don't justify our existence as a different party. Personally I think we tend to offer too much generally and have too few clear policies that people can remember. In the last election only policy wonks could come up with three NDP policies. We had too many and most of them were vague or not well thought out.

An example was the misguided idea to just drop everyone off the tax roles earning under $15,000. Trouble is they forgot that this removed the favourable tax treatment we gave seniors, the disabled and care-givers. PLEASE lets not do that high-school level trash again. This time if we are over 20% in the polls people will pay attention and we won't be able to get away with garbage like that.

Fewer, better policies with enough detail that at least we know that they will work.

If we haven't got the guts to do that we should save ourselves a lot of time and get red cards with big Ls on them.

Just imagine what Douglas would have said to people who would avoid being direct about details or avoid topics people care about. People do not elect cowards. There is no short cut around solid policy -- thought out, detailed and costed.

[ 15 April 2005: Message edited by: Sean in Ottawa ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean in Ottawa:
[QB]I don't get these statements: How on earth does taking the tax off housing devalue housing? It just makes it more affordable but not through devaluation.
/QB]

---

Well, please explain this further:

quote:

---

(with legislation to ensure that housing prices drop)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mary123:

You sound like Donald Rumsfeld and make about as much sense. Maybe that is the point.

The Unknown

As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don't know
We don't know.

-Donald Rumsfeld on Feb. 12, 2002, Department of Defense news briefing

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Privateer:
[QB][/QB]

---

I am very sorry I should have been more specific. When I am speaking about housing affordability and homelessness I am referring to rentals not the purchase of homes. It is a little known fact that roughly 20% of all rent is in fact property tax. If properties were not taxed then rents should drop by 20% without either reducing the value or the income to landlords. Some provinces including Ontario already have legislation that requires any property tax reductions to be reflected in rent directly with the municipality making the notices direct to tenants.

For homeowners, while not at all affecting the value of properties, dropping the tax would reduce the cost of ownership as well and encourage more people to own their homes. It would also stimulate as a result of that, spending on housing and of course all that goes in and with it. Housing construction is an economic activity that creates a high number of well-paying jobs at the local level. This wold serve to stimulate the economy in areas we need: including softwood lumber.

The more affordable housing is, the better and more stable an investment as well.

This one is a winner. Modern cities cannot be run on a tax on housing anymore.

quote:

---

This one is a winner.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sock puppet:
Could be, except that it seems to step into provincial jurisdiction, so it could also be a minefield...

---

So is the ENTIRE cities agenda. The feds can offer to collect a municipal tax on their form just like they do for many provinces. Also the provinces have already demanded that the feds come to the table to deal with the City financing issue. I'd say we have an engraved invitation. this one also can be done with negotiation and allow for provincial op-out.

1) Taxes are the price you pay for civilization and you get what you pay for. Hands up everybody who has never bought something cheap and found out it didn't work.

2) Corporate Canada freeloads. We will roll back the tax cuts.

In the current federal situation the first would not really be at the top of the agenda since the surplus situation argues against it (very different in Ontario and BC). It would be the backdrop to address the fear of socialist hordes.

Like, say:

Hit the CPC and Libs on taxes - cite the Fraser Institute numbers for personal income tax, then the national rates for corporations from Revenue Canada. It makes for a rather brutal comparison (51% to 24% IIRC, somewhere in that range - there's a sizable gap). Remind people that both the CPC and Liberals have always lowered corporate taxes long before individual ones, yet corporations benefit more than the individual from universal healthcare and public education. You make 50k, the company profits 500k - why shouldn't they pay their fair share for the things your tax dollars pay for?

Don't over-use, but don't forget the impact Tommy Douglas had. Don't forget to mention that there was a Manning who was quite opposed to it. Something along the lines of "...the Tommy Douglas inspired universal healthcare system..." might work well. Healthcare and Education tend to be important issues to Canadians, so don't be afraid to talk about them and flog the CPC and Libs on it. Check out PISA 2000 and 2003 - you're in for a pleasant surprise when it comes to the public education system in Canada. It could easily be used to show how effective public systems are. Then mention the Liberal failure on early child care/education.

Don't let anyone play the religious card exclusively - bear in mind I'm not Christian. Don't be afraid to demonize the radical anti-christian right in the US - I suspect it would be a very effective tactic. I caught an interesting tidbit on the Daily Show a while back about how the bible had quite a bit to say about poverty, and I know ol' Tommy had a few choice words about how it was hard to pray when you spent all your time worrying about your health. Just because someone invokes a religious text doesn't mean that the message isn't worthwhile, but don't focus exclusively on one religion.

Don't forget the military. Point out how unreliable Conservative and Liberal governments in Canada have been at providing for the DND, but how important the DND is for ensuring Canadian Sovereignty and bringing Canadian values to the places in the world that need things like equality, rule of law, etc. via peacekeepers - play on Bono's words to PMPM. Have a solid plan to enhance the role of Canada's military.

The specter of fiscal responsibility is one that still plagues the NDP - for right or wrong. Focus on ways to address this issue. For every "Well, the NDP would spend/nationalize their way to success..." rant out of the mouths of the CPC and Libs, the NDP should be able to rattle of a list of 10 times the Libs and Cons have done just that. Don't forget to rub a little Gomery in the wounds of the Liberals.

Do something about the whole "The NDP are a party of communists." rant that comes out of the far right. "This is how they want you to see us (insert picture of eastern europe under the USSR). This is how we are (insert picture of Saskatchewan)." Don't focus much on the US/Bush, but make a few good shots about how the Libs and Cons want to lead Canada down the path of giving up our sovereign rights as a nation to US interests.

Abortion shouldn't be an issue unless someone else brings it up, then fucking dog-pile them on it. With a smile. Ditto with SSM, but don't forget to mention how unreliable the Liberals are on the subject. Compliment the CPC on their determination to deny "its the stupid" charter rights to Canadians. The environment is another plank the NDP shouldn't really focus on as it is one of their strengths. Same with electoral reform - I'm a very strong supporter of PR - bring it up, but don't dilly-dally about it much. "We want all Canadian votes to matter, not just the ones the Libs and Cons want."

And that shouldn't mean making farmers rich throughtax subsidies or inflated prices but by helping farmers turn their farms into profitable enterprises with a future for them and one thier children will want to inherit.

A big piece of the platform must be enticing farmers to go green.

Also, urbam and rural NDP'ers should form councils to educate each other on each other's issues.

As much as urban Canadians must learn the negative impact of New Zealand apples and Chilean green peppers in grocery store carts, rural Canadians must know the impact of their choices to visit a Wal-Mart instead of a downtown or independent merchant.

Anyway, it would display the sort of sign you'll find in any supermarket like so....

Liberal Party of Canada - (4) days without a scandal.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Duane Haave:
No federal party can promise to do anything about property tax, except to make it deductible for income tax purposes. The power to collect property taxes is delegated by provincial governments to municipal governments and school boards, and this power is reserved to the provinces by Canada's constitution.

---

Actually it is not so simple. Section 92 (2) reserves "direct" taxation for provincial purposes. That may be more specific than property tax collected by municipalities. Section 92 (8) reserves Municipal institutions but not specifically the funding or taxation of them.
Section 91 (3) reserves the raising of money by any mode or taxation to the Feds (far more general than the very specific reservation of direct taxation for provincial purpose for the provinces).
Anything not covered defaults to the feds not the provinces Section 91 (29).

Ther is the issue of the spending power and equalization also in the federal domain. This means if the feds provide the cash they can enter into provincial domain (this is how national medicare was introduced and how daycare may yet be.

Any real alternative to the housing tax (property tax) would almost certainly fall into federal purvue unless it is a direct grant from the province or collected by them.

The province has the power to do away with property taxes through their control of the municipal institutions although they may be limited in terms of what they can provide as alternatives. The feds, if they supply the cash, through their spending power can create a program to replace the tax and even outlaw it as a condition. this means they also can get rid of the housing tax on their own if they chose.

Practically speaking the provinces cannot dump the tax on their own because too many of the alternatives lie in federal domain. Since the province is the main beneficiary after the municipalities themselves, the feds would nto want to bother without provincial involvement.

To this end it seems clear that, just like the more general "cities agenda" the only real approach would be a negotiation between the municipalities (federation of municipalities) the provincial government and the federal government. It is the feds however who would have to provide the leadership as a practical matter in order to have a common approach coast to coast to coast and because they are the only ones with the fiscal framework and more general spending and taxing power. without the provinces and the municipalities at the table, the feds can't get much done. But the fact is they have been at the table waiting for the feds to explore all manner of solutions for some time. Martin as joined them lately but so far I think the suggestions have been late and paltry.

Interesting analysis and I trust you have read several of my postings on this topic. Detailed party policy may be good for the wonks, but the average Canadian voter will be making their voting decision on one issue -- government corruption because the corrupt Liberal government will be defeated on that issue.

The Canadian voter's decision process will go something like this.

The Liberals are corrupt and not worthy to govern.
I want another party to be the government.
Who looks like they are ready to be the prime minister.
Do I like the guy.
I will/will not vote for that party.

Both Layton and Harper have negatives. Layton is a strong leader of a weak party. Harper is an uninspiring leader in the party which is currently the only option to the Liberals. For the NDP to improve substantially they must do at least 2 things.

1 - Field a slate of solid candidates who are not only school teachers/university lecturers, union types and social extremists of the left.

2 - Totally decimate the Liberals on the issue of their corruption and NDP ethical government. By doing this the NDP can avoid getting bogged down trying to explain complicated issues that will not resonate with the voter in this election.

Obviously nobody believes that Layton and the NDP will form the next government regardless of the polls. There is no conceivable way for the NDP as the 4th party to suddenly jump into first place. What the NDP must do is establish themselves as the Official Opposition party and then they will have earned the right to be considered as a Canadian government.

The Liberal criminals will attempt to spook Canadians away from both the NDP and CPC and they will try to disassociate themselves from their past scandals. They will do this with the help of their media stooges, who will paint the CPC as scary extremists, and the NDP as a flawed socialist idea. It will be interesting to see if the Liberals have any political capital left with their past faithful supporters. The polls indicate they are moving to the NDP.

Again I must repeat, the NDP must destroy the Liberal Beast and replace them as the centre-left option for Canadian voters. If the Liberals manage to survive as the second or third party in Parliament, the NDP will again be relegated to 4th place and get squeezed out in any future election where Canadian voters polarize between the Liberals and CPC.

This is it folks. It can be the best or worst of times for the NDP and it all depend on destroying the Liberals, who cannot be considered a political party, only a criminal organization. If the NDP again end up behind the Liberals, CPC or BQ, they will sink back to their rump status or even get wiped out if the Liberals are successful at winning back the soft left Canadian voter.

I say "anybody but the Liberals" and NDP FIRST.

[ 16 April 2005: Message edited by: CdnPolSci ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by capebretoner:
new poll on ctv news:
canada
cons 36% +6
libs 27%
ndp 15% -4

ontario
cons 39% +7
libs 33% -1
ndp 17% -2

---

I could say a lot about that poll, but let me just say this: FUCK and those 36% that are going to vote for Harper Fuck them too. And the media can go to ______. I highly doubt that the conservatives would be as high as they are if they are this high if the media hadn't annointed the reformatories the next government this week

Now......remember during the U.S. Election, I needed to be talked off jumping off the bridge? Well....I'm in big need this time. Isn't 36% enough for the conservatives to have a highly functional minority if 37% was enough for the Liberals. And doesn't conservative percentage support equal more seats as opposed to the liberal percentage support since the liberal vote is all centered urbanly?

Somebody please tell me I am wrong. Also, 36% is getting into majority territory isn't it? I found an evironics poll back in 2004 where the Liberals were at 39% and the pollsters said that was a position that the Liberals could easily form a majority with.

I'm rambling....but if this poll is right...say it's the final election day result......I have reason to panic don't I?

Also what the hell is with the 15% for the NDP.

Also, the Liberal support is the same in the CTV poll as it was on Monday but CPC support is up 5 points. So there is some type of mass NDP exodus to the CPC? Where else could that jump come from? It's propesterous to think NDP voters are going to the CPC.

Maybe this is a bad poll?

[ 16 April 2005: Message edited by: Rob8305 ]

[ 16 April 2005: Message edited by: Rob8305 ]

[ 16 April 2005: Message edited by: Rob8305 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Papal_Bull:
It's a CTV poll. It has as much honest research and reality as applying my Halo 2 score to these sorts of things.

---

There are a stink load of working class rural canadians that have their natural home in the NDP, but won't vote NDP, not with Jack Layton's stated positions.

Showing that the party is not monolithic will allow some people to vote for the candidate, even if they may not 100% agree with the party. Showcase that the NDP is the only grassroots party left, now that CPC policy is dictated from head office like the Liberals'.

Gun control is a vote loser, and has nothing to do with NDP core values.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Papal_Bull:
Because every single poll that is conducted has sample biases and other problems. Since there is such bias (nearly 40% out of thin air when all other polls have indicated nowhere near that range?) I have my reservations for it. Additionally, they probably only had a small group to poll, and if they didn't space it out over various groups (ie, immigrants, "rich"-"poor") the entire thing could be tossed off. I'm probably just being too optimistic here, but I've noticed that CTV almost always sensationalizes numbers whenever I catch my mum watching the 11 o'clock news.

---

True. And what will be will be, I guess. If we survived Mulroney, I guess we can survive Haper (although Mulroney did lead to a nearly 50% yes vote in the 1995 referendum)......anyway.......

BTW, here's an interesting snidbit from CTV. BTW, what is that right wing nut Robert Fife doing as CTV Bureau Chief in Ottawa and what happened to Craig Oliver???

"At a minimum these numbers mean if an election were held tomorrow we could quite clearly have a Tory minority government," says Ipsos-Reid President Darrell Bricker. "If the Liberals fall further then I think we are talking about a Tory majority."

The polls also show that, overwhelmingly, Canadians do not want an election now. But Harper appears ready to gamble that voters will take out their anger out on Martin and not him.

"The real issue is, I have to prop up on this government on a day to day basis," Harper said. "At what point, simply on a moral and political basis, can I no longer justify doing that?"

Harper's first opportunity to bring down the government is April 20, but senior Tories say he's not likely to act until May for an election in late June, just before Canadians start their summer holidays.

On the west coast, Martin made his own campaign-like stop, touring Vancouver's waterfront with the mayor, then making the first in a series of announcements regarding the sharing of gas taxes with the provinces.

Martin was making his second visit to the province in the last few weeks.

Meanwhile, CTV Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife says that senior Liberals are considering a pre-emptive move against vote of non-confidence. They are tossing around the idea that Martin might go to Governor General Adrienne Clarkson, requesting that she ask the Conservatives to form the government, without an election. The Liberals, then, would back a Harper minority government.

Asked about this prospect Friday, Harper sounded dubious. "That would be feasible only under extraordinary circumstances," he told reporters.

quote:

---

The Tories' popularity rose six percentage points from April 8 to April 12, climbing to 36 per cent support among decided voters from 30 per cent. The Liberals, meanwhile, stagnated at 27 per cent and the New Democrats' popularity fell from 19 per cent to 15 per cent.

---

Globeandmail new poll

BTW sorry I called you pansies. Really I love you.

Not.

(Just kidding. You can take a joke, can't you?)

(Pansies)

(Another joke there.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jughead:
Moderators! S/he used the "F-Word"! Please ban her/him and then tell me comforting egalitarian stories and share muffin recipes with me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jughead:
Moderators! S/he used the "F-Word"! Please ban her/him and then tell me comforting egalitarian stories and share muffin recipes with me.

---

And then the Conservative numbers are pretty strange too. They're either at 29% or 36%?

These numbers may be within the margin of error -- but some of them clearly aren't. And the swings are illogical. Like why would the Bloc be down to 41% in Quebec..RANDOMLY? (Yet another example of the pointlessness of small regional samples in a national poll).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Privateer:
How about this one: CTV wants an election because it makes money since more people watch the news. It seemed for a moment there that the numbers might make the Conservatives think twice about pulling the plug. So now CTV quickly brings out numbers that make the Conservatives want an election not for political reasons but just to make money.

---

i agree completely, and said as much over here.

that canadians don't want an election is garbage. the libs don't want an election because they'll lose seats, and the government. the cons don't want an election because they have no money. the ndp should want an election, but have bought into "the people don't want an election", and "the party that brings about an election will be reprimanded by the people, because the people don't want an election".

i say canadians do want an election. i do. and the media does too. they couldn't be seen as too eager to push for one, but they benefit from extra coverage and interest. i think the woo has begun (media nudging the cons).

[atrocious (sp?) spelling]

[ 16 April 2005: Message edited by: unmaladroit ]

I bet Harper is begging Layton to table a Non-confidence Motion. Together in an election they would obliterate the Liberal Beast for at least the next 15 years. Layton would propel the NDP to Official Opposition Party status, at least !

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
This is all starting to bring back bad memories for me of the pressure cooker atmosphere of last May and June and then again September and October (US election) when there was a poll a day and the stress was almost killing me. Sometimes you get three polls in a day and you are alternately despondent, then on cloud nine, then just nervous. I could really use a break from politics and not have an election until fall. I need a breather from it all. Another thing that is starting to remind me of last year is how the support for the Liberals seems set in stone but there seems to be a lot of bouncing around between the Conservatives and the NDP.

I can't help but feel that we are overreacting to everything right now. Wait a few weeks and then see what people are saying.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Privateer:
How about this one: CTV wants an election because it makes money since more people watch the news. It seemed for a moment there that the numbers might make the Conservatives think twice about pulling the plug. So now CTV quickly brings out numbers that make the Conservatives want an election not for political reasons but just to make money.

---

Nice as far as conspiracy theories go, but in fact election coverage costs the networks a lot of money and doesn't pay off in news ratings.

quote:

---

I'm surprise nobody else on this forum did not come up with this winning NDP strategy, except me.

---

Chances are the Liberals will benefit from a Conservative nutbar going coocoo for coacoa puffs and saying something stupid that offends all Canadians AGAIN. They can't resist trying to put women "in their place", pointing out how everything like chestnuts are lazy and a communist plot. Conservative trolls on this forum prove my point.

Layton must navigate through this mess.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CdnPolSci:
I'm surprise nobody else on this forum did not come up with this winning NDP strategy, except me.

---

maybe not this forum - but over here yesterday i stated this:

quote:

---

take a chance jack. throw the bums out, take credit for it, campaign honestly, and watch canadians appreciate the fresh approach.

[by campaign honestly i mean: the libs and cons are going to be wrestling in mud, they'll be throwing so much at each other. the public will not take seriously any accusation that "the ndp brought down the gov't - it's their fault we have another election. harrumph." stay clean, don't sling cowpies, be above it. there is one distinct advantage the ndp have over the other 2 parties - they haven't been in power. wouldn't it be nice if the years of political corruption by the cons and grits were finally noticed by the majority of the population, and they were willing to do something about it?]

---

i like your ideas cdnpolsci. as a poli sci afficionado, you'd know that the masses, the public, are commonly referred to as the "beast". maybe you could think of a better name for the liberals?

There are a lot of seats in Atlantic Canada and Ontario that are going to stay Liberal come hell or high water, and in the unlikely event they didn't, would go Conservative.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
Because its a LOSING strategy and you are a hardcore Conservative supporter who is only here to act as an "agent provocateur" giving the worst possible to advice to the NDP to the benefit of the Consrvatives.

---

Well if you as a Liberal-loving troll says so then you must be right.

quote:

---

Originally posted by RealityBites:
Moreover, if the Conservatives win the next election, the NDP will NOT be the official opposition. In all likelyhood they will remain the fourth party, even if they double their seat count.

There are a lot of seats in Atlantic Canada and Ontario that are going to stay Liberal come hell or high water, and in the unlikely event they didn't, would go Conservative.

If the Conservative win lots of seats the Bloc is the opposition. If they don't do so well, the Liberals are. No matter what, the NDP comes fourth.

---

Now this is the Voice of Defeatism that makes the NDP the winner it is. Or is it the remnants of "anybody but the Conservatives" mentality that has relegated the NDP to 4th place in this Parliament.

"We are going to lose again fellow NDPers so let's make sure the CPC does not become the next government ! The Liberal criminals have been good for Canada and we should just try to have a Liberal minority government with the NDP holding the balance of power Then everything will again be hunkydory in Canada."

Dream on !!!!!

However, since you emphatically and convincingly proclaim that "the NDP will NOT (ever) be the official opposition", then you must obviously be right. And yes you are numerically correct to advise us that if the NDP only doubles their seat count they will still be in 4th place. Thank you for enlightening us.

Seems like the Liberal trolls have brainwashed everybody here to the inevitability of NDP political stagnation forever. This is obviously due to the "anybody but the Conservatives" mentality that has overwhelmed this NDP forum, and plays directly into the hands of the Liberal criminals.

(Liberal-loving troll strategy -- Let's demoralize the NDP supporters so they are happy in 4th place. LOL. )

Well I for one do not buy into that defeatist attitude promulgated by Liberal-loving trolls and I will continue to promote a "NDP FIRST" strategy which means the utter destruction of the Liberal Beast.

It's gonna happen folk, so please have faith. Jack will go for the jugular because he wants to destroy the Liberal Beast and elevate the NDP from it's rump existence. Believe it.

Edit - Now we are told by Liberal-loving trolls that "This is not a NDP forum... ", so we must behave accordingly, or else?!

[ 16 April 2005: Message edited by: CdnPolSci ]

I sympathize with you in your situation and congratulate you for deciding to vote NDP and not Liberal. We need more people like you in Canada.

What I ask myself is what is the cause of this injustice? We have only had Liberal governments in recent history, (except for that disasterous Mulroney), from Trudeau to Martin.

Surely you must lay the responsibility of the Liberals and Mulroney PCs for the problems. Another disturbing factor is that for the last 30 plus years we have been only governed by political parties who were lead by prime ministers from Quebec.

In future elections we have the choice of Layton and Harper for prime minister. Unfortunately the polls tell us that it will be Harper before Layton, but as long as the NDP can replace the Liberals as the only honest and legitimate left of centre we can hold more power in Parliament. That alone is worth it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boom Boom:
With four parties in the House of Commons (5 if you count the Greens), it's going to be really, really difficult for any one party to get a clear majority. The best I can hope for is a strong NDP holding the balance of power, although realistically it'll again be the BQ holding the balance. But Canada needs a strong NDP to keep the feet to the fire of whatever party does become the government.

---

If the BQ hold the balance of power over a CPC government, what will happen? If the BQ hold the balance of power over another Liberal government, what will happen?

If the NDP hold the balance of power over a CPC government, what will happen? Also over another Liberal government?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
The last time the Conservatives were in power under Mulroney, the scale of corruption was so extreme tnat it makes the current sponsorship scandal look totally insignificant.

The Conservatives don't really give a damn about corruption, it just pisses them off that Liberals are getting their palms greased instead of Conservatives!

---

Thank you for providing us with your non-sequitor followed up by a straw man argument. Your Liberal-loving sentiments are surfacing so beautifully that I hate to even bother mentioning them to the forum.

The conservatives will make the this scandal seem like a petty offence.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CdnPolSci:

If the BQ hold the balance of power over a CPC government, what will happen? If the BQ hold the balance of power over another Liberal government, what will happen?

If the NDP hold the balance of power over a CPC government, what will happen? Also over another Liberal government?

I would like to hear from you what you think will happen in these possible scenarios. Thanks.

---

Yup. Our only alternative is to elect 200 conservatives and give them a majority government.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cartman:

Oh yeah, Skdadl? Can I get that muffin recipe from you now?

---

Well, Cartman, my favourite, as you know, is your actual basic garden-variety blueberry muffin recipe, but I've already posted that one so many times.

For something a little more adventuresome, people might want to try these Carrot Cupcakes with White Chocolate Cream Cheese Icing.

edited to add : I support socialism i do not support neo-liberals in any form - we can bleed this country to death slowly (liberals) or we can bleed the country to death slightly quicker- If the purpose of the ndp is to do nothing other than help the liberals stop the conservatives than i see no purpose for this party to continue existing.

that being said I think that the cons are fair game specifically in the west.

read this sucker..
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050416.wlayton16/BNStory/Front

[ 17 April 2005: Message edited by: davidt ]

Those of us who've never voted Liberal and never will often find it hard to understand the thinking process that lead people to vote Liberal last year. You seem to suggest that it is a lack of critical thinking that leads people to vote Liberal.

quote:

---

I support socialism i do not support neo-liberals in any form

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:

If you want "socialism" don't expect it from the NDP. The NDP hasn't really been "socialist" since about the late 50s. The NDp could be best described as a socially radical, left, small "l" liberal party, with some vestigial ties to organziaed labour. When the NDP forms provincial governments it is basically like being governed by the leftwing of the Liberal party with a few bones tossed to organized labour.

---

Well that's a good thing, seems to me. If you all want the NDP to get more votes, even for the $1.75 each, then this small "l" liberal party needs to have another more socialist party behind them, so they appear more mainstream.
In any case, I would like to make a request???
My daughter has come up this wknd. to help me learn more about using this PC, so perhaps until I do, someone can start a new thread about what I need educating about. (BTW, daughter is voting NDP, how did that happen? She's only been in Toronto for 3 months. Boyfriend voting Con., don't think this 2.5 relationship will make it thru fall) I need some education re: Is Public Health Care Sustainable? Because I have a feeling Martin is going to give oodles of money to prov's and appease the public. Help me out here please.

We all know that the above is true, except for a couple of details:

-The electorate, more often than not, is neither thoughtful nor well-informed. We forget this, because our friends and colleagues are often keen political observers, but the majority of the electorate simply has better things to do with their time and barely distinguishes between the parties. Certainly when it comes to personal integrity NOT throwing mud does not allow you to stand out as a politician (or does so only in rare instances).

-Mud works. Harper is the devil incarnate in the minds of much of the electorate. That is thanks to the liberal mud machine (oh, and his very real views on abortion, same sex marriage...) Martin is incapable of taking a decision (thank you tories.) Layton is a used car salesman whose ideas can't be taken seriously (well, he is rather enthusiastic).

quote:

---

Well that's a good thing, seems to me.

---

by the way im what i call a canadian style socialist - i don't think that the gov should run bed and breakfasts but i do believe in a mixed economy with heavy government support.

[ 17 April 2005: Message edited by: davidt ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boom Boom:
I take *all* political posts here with a huge grain of salt, including my own.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
This is not an "NDP forum" it is a progressive forum. There are a preponderance of progressive people and policies in the NDP. There are some (not enough) progressive policies and people in the Liberal Party. There are ZERO in the Conservative Party.

---

This is a very good spin on the realities of the situation, I like it a lot. Many of my friends are strong Liberals and what you have said puts it all into perspective.