2018 Polls

645 posts / 0 new
Last post
cco

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
Half of the population have absolutely zero after paying mortgages, rent, food, bills, and taxes. Working for nothing is slavery.

Didn't you just say they had "mortgages, rent, food, bills and taxes"?

As those single-digit millionaires living in Toronto and Vancouver regularly remind us, even a million dollars isn't very much after you spend it all.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

On mortgages, rent, food, bills and taxes?

Evidently it's even worse.  It's SLAVERY.

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:

No one is saying these polls are necessarily inaccurate, but when 6 of the 7 most recent polls are all from the same pollster, it is possible that the polling results could be skewed, and if they were, this pollster could be giving Canadians a false impression. Some pollster’s results in the US are skewed on purpose so why would there not be a possibility of it being done in Canada. But the defensiveness of some people around this subject can make one wonder.

Of course it's possible but that can be taken into account. We can also make an educated guess based on current events and decades of polling information. We know where they are weak and where they are strong. They acknowledge their margin of error. It isn't an exact science. 

Lets take the poll claiming that the majority of BC residents support the pipeline. That it is an Angus Reid online poll of their forum members means there is no official margin of error, but even if it were a Nanos poll I would remain sceptical. My perception of the people of BC is that they value their territory as greatly as Quebec does and are equally possessive of it. I think generally speaking Canadians feel more entitled to protect their immediate environment. The anti-public-smoking restrictions has increased our recognition of our right to protect ourselves from polutants. It doesn't make sense to me that the majority would support the pipeline. Polls are just one factor to consider and we know they are extremely volatile. They are just a snapshot. That doesn't make them useless. 

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Yup, you got nothing left over after shelter, food, bills and taxes. No savings. No goodies. No college education for your kids. No holidays. No cottage. No camp. No beer. But there is a free swim for 35 minutes!

"All I do is just get by"

No future. Slavery. Better dead than this. Slaves to the boss. Slaves to the landlord. Slaves to the food monopolies. Slaves to the banks. Slaves to the communications monopolies. Slaves to the government, who rule and regulate us and make us fill out endless forms so they can know where we go, what we do. Slaves to people sitting in their easy chairs telling us what to think, and not letting us speak for ourselves. And nothing left over. Absolutely nothing. Load your 3,000 kg for $14 every hour. No talking at work.

Why don't you get a job in any aspect of the motion of physical goods, and the motion of basic financial commodities like credit cards, home loans, mortgages, investment accounts, lines of credit. Or work in a call centre for the communications monopolies.  All done now by call centres. Dial your 70 numbers for your $14, and you better close 3 deals an hour as well or you are out. Oh you did 17 last week? You got to do 20 this week or you are fired. Or work in retail. You don't know what it is like, and you don't want to.

NorthReport

Must be a slow news day today as there is no Nanos poll out for Liberals to salivate over

SocialJustice101

Well, kudos to you for being so non-partisan.

Sean in Ottawa

Iteresting conversation upthread about identifying specific ideologies and how they vote.

I think that it forgets to account for a large number of people without any identifiable ideology or the thought to vote in a coherent value-based vision.

SocialJustice101

Pollsters know full well that a large portion of the population is not at all ideological/political. 

Cons exploit it masterfully with misinformation on legitimacy of coalitions, taxes, party leaders, etc.

Also while the NDP and Libs boast their progressive credentials, the Cons make an extra effort to SELL their point of view, catering to the low information voter. 

progressive17 progressive17's picture

People don't want ideology. They want action.

Pondering

Yes to both previous posts but I would add there is little reason to be more than a low information voter because there is so little to choose from. 

SocialJustice101

Do you have any ideas not covered by the major parties?

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Do you think people like being called "low information voters"? They get lots of information all the time. They are bombarded with it constantly, just like you and I.

They just don't care about the information some people seem to want them to believe. OR, they may be too busy trying to make ends meet to even care. After all, they have mouths to feed. 

It is much easier to get flies with honey than with vinegar. If you think you have "more information" than a whole bunch of people, it implies you carry a certain sense of intellectual superiority over them.

And THAT is EXACTLY why they are voting to piss you off.

SocialJustice101

If they can't name their current provincial or federal minister of finance, wouldn't you say they are low information voters, regardless of what they like to be called?

My point was that the NDP and the Liberals should reach out better to such voters.   Even progressive ideas need to be sold, not merely announced.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Why should they care about the names of politicians? To them they are all bloodsuckers anyway. Poly = Greek for Many. Tics = English for bloodsuckers. Politics = many bloodsuckers.

I know a lot of the political names, because I find this stuff interests me, and I used to have some experience in politics as a foot soldier. But a lot of people out there could not care less, and they find it extremely boring. Watch a hockey game or a movie. Go for a coffee with your friends. Fix up the house if you have got one. Listen to some tunes. Get wasted. 

I assure you most people would rather watch paint dry than listen to people talking about politics.

All they know about politicians is the tax deductions on their paycheques.

Pondering

progressive17 wrote:

Why should they care about the names of politicians? To them they are all bloodsuckers anyway. Poly = Greek for Many. Tics = English for bloodsuckers. Politics = many bloodsuckers.

I know a lot of the political names, because I find this stuff interests me, and I used to have some experience in politics as a foot soldier. But a lot of people out there could not care less, and they find it extremely boring. Watch a hockey game or a movie. Go for a coffee with your friends. Fix up the house if you have got one. Listen to some tunes. Get wasted. 

I assure you most people would rather watch paint dry than listen to people talking about politics.

All they know about politicians is the tax deductions on their paycheques.

Correct. That is why Social Justice is saying the left has to find a better way of reaching those voters. Disrespecting them is not a good way. Referring to them as "low information" is not suggesting we use that terminology. We have to acknowledge that low information voters are not stupid. They check in during campaign periods because the choices are so simplistic. Last election, Harper/Trudeau/Mulcair. This election Trudeau/Scheer/Singh. By the time election day rolls around the choice will be obvious no matter where you lie on the political spectrum. There will be no more than three deciding issues. 

  1. The Economy. Who can run it? Has Trudeau done a "good enough" job? If not could Scheer or Singh do any better?
  2. Perks. Who will improve services or put money in my pocket?
  3. Specialty issues, (Transmountain, the environment, First Nations, etc.)

No indepth knowledge required. No need to know who the foreign minister or finance minister is. 

R.E.Wood

It's Mainstreet, so take it with a pinch of salt, but it's a new poll so it should be mentioned here (despite what NR will say):

Liberals 40.4% (+0.1% since January),

Conservatives 37.1% (+2.6%).

NDP  11.9% (-1.2%)

Green Party  5.9% (-1.8%).

https://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/trudeau-liberals-maintain-narrow-lead-...

NorthReport

So does this mean all those Nanos polls are BS?

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

The Liberals 0.1% really means they haven't gained or lost ground. Their numbers are static and 40% is majority numbers.

What's really of concern is the NDP losing some ground while the Conservatives have gained some ground.

The NDP really needs to take a page out of the Liberal's strategy last election. This means a dominate online presence,rallies selling a progresssive message. And boots on the ground. Knock on doors. Every door,even if that door gets slammed in your face.

A little less than 2% but leads and losses are gained and lost with the slightest of margins. This is our shitty and undemocratic election system, It has to change. The Liberals  didn't deliver on PR and won't The Conservatives definitely won't introduce PR . The question then becomes,if in the case of an NDP majority would they deliver on PR promise. It's really hard to say because they never been in that position. When I look at current and past NDP provincial govenments and how they govern (ed) I become very skeptical. Would an NDP govenment really be any different than a Liberal government? I'd really like to find out. So my advice to the NDP is get your act together,get out there and be very aggressive. Stay on message and be relatable to Joe Q Public.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

NorthReport wrote:

So does this mean all those Nanos polls are BS?

I love how yoou cherry pick polls. Anything showing a Liberal lead is bullshit in your little world. Your little partisan bubble.

Pondering

alan smithee wrote:
The NDP really needs to take a page out of the Liberal's strategy last election. This means a dominate online presence,rallies selling a progresssive message. And boots on the ground. Knock on doors. Every door,even if that door gets slammed in your face.

That isn't what the Liberals did. The Liberals laid low right up until the election period was announced with the exception of commenting on major events. Trudeau spent the pre-election period quietly building the Liberal machine. I agree the NDP should do the same. 

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Good old fashioned Canadian racism. Pure and simple.

Pondering

progressive17 wrote:

Good old fashioned Canadian racism. Pure and simple.

What is? Did you put this in the wrong thread?

SocialJustice101

NDP at 11.9%?   Looking at that Mainstreet poll, NR should be praising Nanos. 

Have we ever seen Libs at 40%, and Cons at 37%?  Not in recent memory. 

Mainstreet is the automated calls pollster who was off by more than 20 points in the Calgary election.

NorthReport

So which pollster is correct?

alan smithee wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

So does this mean all those Nanos polls are BS?

I love how yoou cherry pick polls. Anything showing a Liberal lead is bullshit in your little world. Your little partisan bubble.

SocialJustice101

Look at each pollster's track record and polling methodology.   It's very self-evident.

NorthReport

This is a perfect example of the BS of the polling industry

These 2 polls are not within the margins of error so either pollsters have no idea what they are doing or probably more accurately they know exactly what they are doing and are shading the truth.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Pondering wrote:

progressive17 wrote:

Good old fashioned Canadian racism. Pure and simple.

What is? Did you put this in the wrong thread?

No. It is why Singh is down to 11%. He is not white.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

NorthReport wrote:

So which pollster is correct?

alan smithee wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

So does this mean all those Nanos polls are BS?

I love how yoou cherry pick polls. Anything showing a Liberal lead is bullshit in your little world. Your little partisan bubble.

Whichever polls you agree with,of course. Whichever is convenient to your opinion.

SocialJustice101

NR switched from cherry-picking polls to dismissing them all as partisan propaganda machines.   Oh, the irony.

Based on past evidence, namely the Calgary Mayoral election, Mainstreet polling methodology is highly questionable, to put it mildly.    

NorthReport

But their polls are given widespread media coverage whenever they are released

That’s quite the defence of the polling industry

At the present time Mainstreet is probably closer to where Canadians are, but regardless not one of us has  anyway of knowing for sure

I do however think progressive17 was on to something 

SocialJustice101

So you like the Mainstreet Research poll which has the NDP at 11.9%, as long as the Cons are within 3% of the Liberals?    And that's from a polling company which was absolutely discredited in the past.  

Are you sure you're an NDP supporter?

 

NorthReport

All you are doing is  confirming that the polling industry is based on junk science.

SocialJustice101 wrote:

So you like the Mainstreet Research poll which has the NDP at 11.9%, as long as the Cons are within 3% of the Liberals?    And that's from a polling company which was absolutely discredited in the past.  

Are you sure you're an NDP supporter?

 

SocialJustice101

The polling industry is not a single unit.   Some pollsters do high quality work, while others resort to much cheaper and less scientific polling methods.   Consider their track record to determine which pollsters are credible and which are not.

You still haven't explained why you are cheering for the Cons, while saying you're an NDP supporter.

 

NorthReport

You are a little late to the party.

It's an ole Liberal tactic tried many times before here - if you can't win the argument accuse the poster of something  he/she isn't. Fill your boots!

SocialJustice101 wrote:

The polling industry is not a single unit.   Some pollsters do high quality work, while others resort to much cheaper and less scientific polling methods.   Consider their track record to determine which pollsters are credible and which are not.

You still haven't explained why you are cheering for the Cons, while saying you're an NDP supporter.

 

SocialJustice101

I've been pretty open about my support for the Liberals, although I have voted for both the NDP and the Liberals in the past.    Why don't you come out of the closet?

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Liberals. I won't be voting Conservative, but I seriously doubt I will vote Liberal ever again, now I live in Quebec. Maybe someone could start up the Slaves Party. I would vote for that. Spartacus.

NorthReport

You are beginning to sound very much like another poster who so discredited himself with such nonsense, that he got run out of here by the moderators, and had to come back posting under a different handle. As a matter of fact he has changed his handle several times. 

Anyway I'm tired of this silliness. 

Yea, we get it, you are a big fan of the polling industry. and I think polls are primarily designed to manipulate voters.  

Nuff said.

SocialJustice101 wrote:

I've been pretty open about my support for the Liberals, although I have voted for both the NDP and the Liberals in the past.    Why don't you come out of the closet?

SocialJustice101

North Report, you keep saying polls are nonsense, except when they have the Cons within striking distance of government.   Most of your time here is spent posting negative media headlines about the Liberals, never the Conservatives.   Yet you supposedly support Jagmeet Singh and the NDP.  Perhaps the mods should look into your situation.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Grow up. Quit using threats you can't enforce. Quit deciding what is right or wrong. You are partisans. So how could you even have any concept of it? If MegB wants to nuke someone, that is her call. I try very carefully to be careful about what I say. Small-minded people choose on their own accord to be offended, because they never care to consider the wider context. They are in their tunnel vision, which my former acquaintance the late Robert Anton Wilson wrote so eloquently about.  All hail Discordia!

SocialJustice101

Partisans for which parties?  If someone is intentionally misrepresenting themselves in order to spam the forum with certain media headlines, is that something that should be encouraged here?

JKR

Pondering wrote:

alan smithee wrote:
The NDP really needs to take a page out of the Liberal's strategy last election. This means a dominate online presence,rallies selling a progresssive message. And boots on the ground. Knock on doors. Every door,even if that door gets slammed in your face.

That isn't what the Liberals did. The Liberals laid low right up until the election period was announced with the exception of commenting on major events. Trudeau spent the pre-election period quietly building the Liberal machine. I agree the NDP should do the same. 

It seems to me the Liberals shot into first place when Trudeau became their leader and stayed in first place for two years up until shortly before the 2015 election. I think the Conservatives were never in majority territory after Trudeau became leader. The Conservatives tried to bury Trudeau under a huge negative ad campaign before the 2015 election but that strategy failed once the election started and all parties were on equal financial ground. I think Trudeau is a well liked majour Canadian celebrity and that's given the Liberals an advantage for five years and counting. And the Conservatives no longer have the ability to run an unopposed majour negative ad campaign against a Liberal leader like they ran against Dion and Ignatieff.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

You are only accusing him of misrepresenting himself, although only he can know in his heart he is doing that or not. You are making accusations based on facts you cannot prove. So it seems you have to explain your behaviour more than him, at this juncture.

Maybe he changes his mind a lot, and every person has the right to do that. 

He doesn't seem to scum anyone out, although he tends to pollute threads with stuff for other threads which have already been open, and duplicate threads. That does tend to be a bit annoying, for some especially.  In some cases this causes derailment of a thread, which is hence closed. They are quite good at that. But who knows, maybe they have decided that the benefit of reading the articles is more than the cost of cleaning things up a bit. I mean if you read all that stuff, it might make your head spin for a while. Nothing wrong with that! Seems to me he is pounding the web looking for answers. Nothing wrong with that either. Sounds like good work to me.

In the months I have been here, I can't see he has done anything remotely bannable. And if he had, he would have been dealt with quite competently.

Maybe he wants to strike fear in Liberal and NDP hearts about Conservative advances, and try to get them off their asses and out there knocking on doors. Maybe because he thinks you will not lift a finger he wants to see you squirm. Maybe he thinks the Tories will rake off enough votes from the Liberals to let the NDP squeak through, although I am afraid the odds of that happening seem somewhat long.

I find the articles he posts to be interesting, at times. He is trying to be a curator. And if he has a political slant or what you consider to be an agenda, don't you? After all you claim to be a Liberal, and many of us consider that to be vile. 

His comments about the oil industry are consistent with what a lot of us here think. As a Liberal supporter, you seem to be up to your neck in the oily goo.

Many people in this country want to see the complete extermination of the Liberal Party, and they will go to extreme lengths to see it happens. If you are a Liberal, suck it up.

SocialJustice101

The proof is all over this forum in writing.   Notice how NR never directly mentions the Conservatives, as if they don't even even exist?   Is that normal for a progressive?  And he keeps talking about voter manipulation while posting endless anti-Liberal headlines himself.    As for the anti-pipeline comments, golly gee that's one big issue where the Libs/NDP diverge, so why not hammer it home if you want more vote splitting.

Pondering

JKR wrote:
  It seems to me the Liberals shot into first place when Trudeau became their leader and stayed in first place for two years up until shortly before the 2015 election. I think the Conservatives were never in majority territory after Trudeau became leader. The Conservatives tried to bury Trudeau under a huge negative ad campaign before the 2015 election but that strategy failed once the election started and all parties were on equal financial ground. I think Trudeau is a well liked majour Canadian celebrity and that's given the Liberals an advantage for five years and counting.

He shot to first place based purely on his name. As the years went by with no policy the attacks worked. He was in third place when the election began. Harper and Mulcair both took first place at different times during the campaign or shortly before. Trudeau didn't turn it around with money. Expectations were so low that when he didn't blow the first debate he was considered to have won it. His support started to rise. His breakthrough was promising to run a deficit. 

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Social Justice 101 seems to indicate that we should go to university and study Social Justice 101. Are you saying we know nothing about Social Justice? 

I may not be everyone's idea of a progressive, but I sure want to progress away from our current existential condition in a way that does the most good for the most people.

It is like when capitalist mouthpieces say you should take economics 101, when there is no evidence in experimental psychology for "enlightened self-interest".

Maybe he hates the Conservatives and cannot even bear to type the word.

What would you know about being a progressive? Or are you saying your idea of progression does not include me? Or anyone else here? You support the capitalist Liberal Party which has been in bed with the oil industry since at least WW2. That is not progressive. It is capitalist, and very destructive to water. The amount of water they waste to pump that tar is obscene. Plus the threat to the water in the places it is piped through.

Oil is a significant material difference in the position between most who might have been called on the "Left" in the past and the Liberals. For many, this is going to be the only issue they vote on. You played a nice game with the indigenous people, and you stabbed their backs. Those northern ridings were a big part of what put you over the top in 2015.

If you want a little fear in your life, read the agenda of the First Nations Peoples' Party, and it looks like it may be coming back.

So that counts you out, because everyone sees Liberals are trying to play both sides. 

Many people have long since realized that they will not get fooled again by the vote splitting argument. All they wind up with is you.

They just want to see the Liberal Party gone. I will not be happy to see Doug Ford win, but I will be ecstatic to see the Liberals completely crushed and humiliated. It is what they deserve. I hope the same for them in Quebec, and here we have some decent alternatives worth considering. Unfortunately it may mean something like Doug Ford here.

For some, away from you to the Conservative Party (where Liberals have been flocking in huge numbers in Ontario) and for others, to the NDP, or not. If you want to rescue the Liberal Party's fortunes, you need to con the Liberals who left you to come back.

If you look at the numbers, the NDP is down to bedrock support, and they are there because of their principles, a concept a Liberal would know nothing about. There is nothing in that base for you, so give it up.

And as for "ideological consistency" we have unabashed Conservatives and oil promoters on this site who make their cases strongly, and most of the time with respect.

So suck it up, Liberal. It seems they allow a diversity of opinions here, which you do not seem to. First you want to define as an ideological label "progressive" and then you want to decide who is in it and who is not. I think many of us have had enough of this. That is not your call. Everyone has the right to self-identify with anything, if you ever went to university in the last 30 years.

I do not care one iota what anyone thinks of me here, as it seems that many of them are not worth knowing anyway. However so long as I am here I will do my best to speak about difficult issues in as respectable and respectful manner as possible.

Remember, the old saying goes, if you want a slave, bring a gift. If you want a dog, bring a whip. If you want to know what it is like to be a slave, get a job with slaves. Anything under $14 an hour will do. Try to live on that, and tell me what it is like. Maybe it will radicalize you and make you quit supporting the Liberal Party.

Spartacus

SocialJustice101

Social Justice 101 is directed at right-wingers and apolitical, not at progressive posters in this forum.   For the record, I am not a member of any political party and I strongly support electoral reform.   I consider myself a practical progressive.  I am the kind of voter that the NDP needs to convince.  The biggest problem with the NDP is vote inefficiency.  They could not even hold the Cons to a minority with 30% of the popular vote in 2011. 

JKR

SocialJustice101 wrote:

The proof is all over this forum in writing.   Notice how NR never directly mentions the Conservatives, as if they don't even even exist?   Is that normal for a progressive?  And he keeps talking about voter manipulation while posting endless anti-Liberal headlines himself.    As for the anti-pipeline comments, golly gee that's one big issue where the Libs/NDP diverge, so why not hammer it home if you want more vote splitting.

I think some posts and posters here support the Conservatives, inadvertently or otherwise.

NorthReport

I hope you Liberals enjoy talking to each other.

SocialJustice101

Some posters here openly support the Cons and that's fine.  The problem is when somebody pretends to be an NDP supporter in order to spam the forums with certain media headlines.

NorthReport

Stop trolling

SocialJustice101 wrote:

Some posters here openly support the Cons and that's fine.  The problem is when somebody pretends to be an NDP supporter in order to spam the forums with certain media headlines.

Pages

Topic locked