Latest Polling Thread - February 11, 2012

111 posts / 0 new
Last post
Brachina

So the NDP is first in Alantic Canada, Quebec, and BC, second in Ontario and the Praires, that's awesome.

lil.Tommy

I know thats a huge Margin of error for SASK/MAN at 7% but wow those numbers are close! 38%Con vs 34%NDP looking good, but why such a small sample there? usually its the praries are atlantic that have small samples but here the atlantic got a good number SASK/MAN are outliers in the margin or error.

I'd love to see inter-provincial regional numbers (makes it easier to play with seat numbers) so we could see in say Edmonton or SW ON or Lower mainland BC what the numbers are, where the parties in each province are killing it. but the margin of error might be huge too.

NorthReport

I have a question for the Globe and Mail and CTV - why is your pollster Nik Nanos hiding under a rock while his beloved Cons are crumbling and tanking and the hated NDP are rising in public support?

Policywonk

I think the Conservatives are feeling the heat from the Robocall scandal, OAS, and the Child Pornographer's language. If the Robocall scandal has any more legs, the Conservatives probably won't be recovering anytime soon.

 

Stockholm

Why keep calling it the "robocall scandal" when many of the calls were not by robocall but by real live human beings calling from Thunder Bay? I think the scandal gets trivilaized when its referred to as "robocon". Why not call it what it is ELECTORAL FRAUD

Policywonk

First or second in every region. An election on these numbers would give us a plurality of seats I think, as much of the Conservative vote would be wasted in Alberta. The Ontario numbers are good too.

clambake

Curious - What was the context behind the NDP's brief surge to the top in the 80's under Broadbent?

NorthReport

Agreed!!!

Let's tar and feather these criminal creeps with every brush available.

Stockholm wrote:

Why keep calling it the "robocall scandal" when many of the calls were not by robocall but by real live human beings calling from Thunder Bay? I think the scandal gets trivilaized when its referred to as "robocon". Why not call it what it is ELECTORAL FRAUD

Stockholm

clambake wrote:

Curious - What was the context behind the NDP's brief surge to the top in the 80's under Broadbent?

A few things:

The Liberals had collapsed as a result of Trudeau through the constitution and Turner being a flop.

Quebec had gone massive for Mulroney and the PCs but he had become very unpopular very quickly

The BQ had not been created yet so there was literally no where for even the most hard-core sovereignists to park their votes

Broadbent became a bit of a folk hero for speaking French like Chretien spoke English...and he began to fill the vacuum.

Lou Arab Lou Arab's picture

Idealistic Pragmatist wrote:

Ippurigakko wrote:

Alberta cons is down to 53% from 66% last election and ndp 20% from 16%

Yeah, some of the other numbers in the poll are admittedly more impressive, but the NDP at 20% in Alberta makes my heart race! If that number is actually correct and we're at 20% province-wide, I can only imagine what the numbers must look like in Edmonton. Laughing

My thoughts exactly!

And these numbers can't be anything but good for the Alberta NDP going into a provincial election campaign in a few weeks.

Debater

Stockholm wrote:

There is a new poll from Ekos for the first time in a year. It shows that the Tories are way down from a year ago and within the margin of error of the NDP

CPC - 31.5%

NDP - 29.2%

Libs - 21.7%

BQ - 6.0% (25% in Quebec)

as usual with Ekos they drastically overestimate support for Green (8.3%) and Other (3.3%) - this is almost 12%. in the 2011 election Green and Other barely got over 4% nationwide.

The NDP numbers are stellar everywhere...leading in BC and Atlantic, strong second in Ontario and Man/Sask (its that TURMEL-MANIA!)...they have the NDP leading in Quebec at 28% - but no one is really picking up the slack...the BQ, Liberals, Tories, Greens and "Other"s are each up a couple of points from May. Its worth noting that if the NDP was still at 42% in Quebec, it would be in first place nationally!

 

http://www.ekospolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/full_report_march_2_2012.pdf

If the Cons have dropped by 8 points, from 39 to 31, I'm wondering where all their support is going since the NDP is still at 29 in this poll and the Liberals are only up to 22.  I would have thought the Liberals would be higher or that the NDP would be higher.

What will be interesting to see is what polls taken after the impact of Robo-gate show.  This poll was largely taken before the recent Conservative scandals.  Will they go down further?  I'll start believing that Harper is beatable when the Cons actually drop below the NDP and the Libs. So far they have always managed to remain ahead.

The problem is also that there is now a majority.  Unlike in the past, we in the Opposition can't pull the plug on the government.  Harper can wait several years before calling an election and try to wait out the scandal until his numbers go back up.

Threads

Debater: the "missing" points can be attributed, in some order, to: the Bloc, the Greens, the Other vote, and rounding error.

Debater

True, but we need more polling data taken after the full effect of Robo-gate to determine accurate levels of support.

What I find interesting is that usually on this board EKOS gets slammed for being a biased pollster.  Now this poll is being held up as the gold standard.  Wink

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Debater, you can rationalize anything. You are truly amazing.

Debater

AC, why not just agree with me when a point I make is accurate?  There is a history of EKOS being accused of being pro-Liberal on this board.

You don't always have to disagree just for the sake of it, do you?

Anyway, Happy Friday.  Smile

JKR

Debater wrote:

If the Cons have dropped by 8 points, from 39 to 31, I'm wondering where all their support is going since the NDP is still at 29 in this poll and the Liberals are only up to 22.  I would have thought the Liberals would be higher or that the NDP would be higher.

The Cons are down by  8.1
The NDP is down by 1.4

The BQ is even

The Greens are up by 4.4 
The Libs are up by 2.8
"Other" is up by 2.9

 

Since Ekos's "likely voter" poll was more accurate in the last election than their regular poll, it's probably worthwhile to look at the "likely voter" numbers too.

EKOS - Likely Voters

CON:  32.1 - Down 7.5 from 2011 Election
NDP: 28.9 - Down 1.7
LIB: 22.3 - Up 3,2
GRN: 7.6 - Up 3.7
BQ:  6.1 - Up 0.1
Other: 3.0 - Up 2.6

 

These EKOS polling numbers would most likely give the NDP a small minority government and end the Conservatives reign but than again, for the last 5 years, between elections, polls have often shown the Conservatives with these kinds of weak numbers, in the low 30's, but the Conservatives have so far always managed to gain the few percentage points they need to hold onto power.

Debater

With these numbers, the Cons would win a minority.  It's unlikely the NDP would win a minority.

Remember also that as long as NDP numbers remain strong in Ontario, it helps the Cons.  This will be a big point of contention here, but the increase in the NDP vote in the last election, particularly in Ontario, is what gave the Cons their majority.  Huge numbers of Liberal seats fell to the Conservatives because of an increase in the NDP vote.  As Chantal Hébert once said, the NDP are Liberal-vote killers in Ontario.  When you vote NDP in Ontario, you're helping the Cons.

In most recent polls the Liberals are ahead of the NDP in Ontario, and I hope it stays that way.  If we are to take away Conservative seats in Ontario and take away their majority, we need to regain Liberal seats in Ontario.  And the best way to do that is by reducing the NDP vote.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

No, the best thing to do is for Libs to start voting NDP and stop fighting the inevitable. The sooner you guys fold, the sooner the Tories will go away.

NorthReport

Spin it any way you want. With these numbers the NDP is statistically tied for 1st place with the Cons.

Stockholm

Debater wrote:

With these numbers, the Cons would win a minority.  It's unlikely the NDP would win a minority.

Thanks for letting the cat out of the bag that in a minority situation, the third place Liberals will happily prop up Harper rather than help the NDP take power. This is important information. It tells us loud and clear if you want to get rid of Harper - DO NOT VOTE LIBERAL.

Debater

That's not what I said, Stockholm.  You are putting words in my mouth.  I didn't say ANYTHING about propping anyone up or coalitions in Parliament.

I was pointing out what Andrew Coyne and others have said - in the final days of the 2011 election, many Blue Liberals left the Liberal camp and voted Conservative to block the NDP.  There is a fear of the NDP getting too high, particularly in Ontario.  This is a problem for both the NDP and the Liberals.  If anti-NDP voters start voting Conservative, it increases Con support.

Policywonk

Stockholm wrote:

clambake wrote:

Curious - What was the context behind the NDP's brief surge to the top in the 80's under Broadbent?

A few things:

The Liberals had collapsed as a result of Trudeau through the constitution and Turner being a flop.

Quebec had gone massive for Mulroney and the PCs but he had become very unpopular very quickly

The BQ had not been created yet so there was literally no where for even the most hard-core sovereignists to park their votes

Broadbent became a bit of a folk hero for speaking French like Chretien spoke English...and he began to fill the vacuum.

If Broadbent spoke French like Chretien spoke English he would have been much more than a bystander in the French debates. Mulroney won the '88 election by dividing the opposition on so-called "free trade". Quebecois parked their votes with the NDP, but then went back to the Conservatives (support for the FTA was relatively high in Quebec). The NDP surged to the top again in early 1990, but that was under a different Leader.

JKR

Debater wrote:

With these numbers, the Cons would win a minority.  It's unlikely the NDP would win a minority.

So these numbers would put the Liberals in the role of king makers.  In such a situation I would think the Liberals would choose to end the Conservatives reign. If they didn't, they would have to pay the long term consequences for elongating the Conservatives' term.

iancosh

Debater wrote:

 

I was pointing out what Andrew Coyne and others have said - in the final days of the 2011 election, many Blue Liberals left the Liberal camp and voted Conservative to block the NDP.  There is a fear of the NDP getting too high, particularly in Ontario.

 

A fear that was stoked by Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff. So much for "rise up Canada".

Policywonk

Debater wrote:

That's not what I said, Stockholm.  You are putting words in my mouth.  I didn't say ANYTHING about propping anyone up or coalitions in Parliament.

I was pointing out what Andrew Coyne and others have said - in the final days of the 2011 election, many Blue Liberals left the Liberal camp and voted Conservative to block the NDP.  There is a fear of the NDP getting too high, particularly in Ontario.  This is a problem for both the NDP and the Liberals.  If anti-NDP voters start voting Conservative, it increases Con support.

This makes little sense in many constituencies, as blue Liberals voting Conservative doesn't change the NDP vote. There is also something to be said for Liberal voters voting NDP to ensure Conservatives don't get elected. It all depends on who the main challenger is, and that wasn't always clear.

janfromthebruce

I'm with Stock on this one. The strategic vote for a progressive gov't is NDP - that's it.

JKR

Debater wrote:

I was pointing out what Andrew Coyne and others have said - in the final days of the 2011 election, many Blue Liberals left the Liberal camp and voted Conservative to block the NDP.  There is a fear of the NDP getting too high, particularly in Ontario.  This is a problem for both the NDP and the Liberals.  If anti-NDP voters start voting Conservative, it increases Con support.

And Red Liberals won't vote NDP to keep the Conservatives from winning? Are Red Liberals more loyal to the Liberals than Blue Liberals?

This conundrum is one of the reasons why Cullen and many others are supporting the idea of joint nominations in key ridings for one election in order to establish fair voting / PR to end the FPTP insanity that has too many voters voting strategically against their least favorite party instead of for their favorite party.

Lou Arab Lou Arab's picture

Debater wrote:

What I find interesting is that usually on this board EKOS gets slammed for being a biased pollster.  Now this poll is being held up as the gold standard.  Wink

Who's calling this the gold standard?

Perhaps EKOS is still over polling the Liberals. Tongue out

 

JKR

janfromthebruce wrote:

I'm with Stock on this one. The strategic vote for a progressive gov't is NDP - that's it.

And it's important to remember that there are electoral systems that don't foster strategic voting.

After decades of critisizing strategic voting, can the NDP credibly ask people to vote strategically for them? On the other hand, the NDP could say: "vote strategically for us this time and we'll establish PR so no one has to ever vote strategically again."

Debater

JKR wrote:

Debater wrote:

I was pointing out what Andrew Coyne and others have said - in the final days of the 2011 election, many Blue Liberals left the Liberal camp and voted Conservative to block the NDP.  There is a fear of the NDP getting too high, particularly in Ontario.  This is a problem for both the NDP and the Liberals.  If anti-NDP voters start voting Conservative, it increases Con support.

And Red Liberals won't vote NDP to keep the Conservatives from winning? Are Red Liberals more loyal to the Liberals than Blue Liberals?

This conundrum is one of the reasons why Cullen and many others are supporting the idea of joint nominations in key ridings for one election in order to establish fair voting / PR to end the FPTP insanity that has too many voters voting strategically against their least favorite party instead of for their favorite party.

Yes, I think some of what you say is true.

Some people above just assume that all Liberals are going to move over to the NDP, but they won't.  Some of them don't want to ever support the NDP - some of them are Blue Liberals, or Red Tories who don't like the new Conservatives or the NDP etc.  

As Andrew Coyne and others have said, we can't just add the Liberals and NDP together and assume that 1 & 1 is 2.  It will end up being 1.5.  It's similar with the situation on the right.  The right has not completely united.  The new Conservative party STILL hasn't reached the support levels of the old PC party, particularly in Quebec.  It's still a struggle for them just to get to 40% and there are places in the country, most obviously Montreal, where they used to be able to win seats and in which they no longer are.

 

Policywonk

Debater wrote:

JKR wrote:

Debater wrote:

I was pointing out what Andrew Coyne and others have said - in the final days of the 2011 election, many Blue Liberals left the Liberal camp and voted Conservative to block the NDP.  There is a fear of the NDP getting too high, particularly in Ontario.  This is a problem for both the NDP and the Liberals.  If anti-NDP voters start voting Conservative, it increases Con support.

And Red Liberals won't vote NDP to keep the Conservatives from winning? Are Red Liberals more loyal to the Liberals than Blue Liberals?

This conundrum is one of the reasons why Cullen and many others are supporting the idea of joint nominations in key ridings for one election in order to establish fair voting / PR to end the FPTP insanity that has too many voters voting strategically against their least favorite party instead of for their favorite party.

Yes, I think some of what you say is true.

Some people above just assume that all Liberals are going to move over to the NDP, but they won't.  Some of them don't want to ever support the NDP - some of them are Blue Liberals, or Red Tories who don't like the new Conservatives or the NDP etc.  

As Andrew Coyne and others have said, we can't just add the Liberals and NDP together and assume that 1 & 1 is 2.  It will end up being 1.5.  It's similar with the situation on the right.  The right has not completely united.  The new Conservative party STILL hasn't reached the support levels of the old PC party, particularly in Quebec.  It's still a struggle for them just to get to 40% and there are places in the country, most obviously Montreal, where they used to be able to win seats and in which they no longer are.

The Conservatives will struggle for a long time to regain support in Quebec to Mulroney levels. Aside from the Diefenbaker landslide, the only times they swept Quebec since maybe as far back as the Louis Riel execution were when Mulroney was leader.

iancosh

JKR wrote:

janfromthebruce wrote:

I'm with Stock on this one. The strategic vote for a progressive gov't is NDP - that's it.

And it's important to remember that there are electoral systems that don't foster strategic voting.

After decades of critisizing strategic voting, can the NDP credibly ask people to vote strategically for them? On the other hand, the NDP could say: "vote strategically for us this time and we'll establish PR so no one has to ever vote strategically again."

+1

bekayne

Here's how the numbers compare to the last Ekos poll:

http://www.ekos.com/admin/articles/FG-2012-01-12.pdf

All voters, then likely voters:

Con      +0.1    -4.6

NDP      -0.3    +1.1

Lib        -3.1    +0.4

BQ        -0.7    -0.6

Green   +2.2    +2.1

 

janfromthebruce

I am not one to assume that individuals who have voted Liberal will automatically vote NDP. I just believe that individuals should vote for the party they want representing them rather than their 2nd choice. Historically the Liberals have used "strategic voting" as a way to keep the NDP in 3rd place. Interestingly, the NDP is the 2nd choice for Liberals, Greens and Conservatives (cons who despise libs).

In my riding, if there was not an NDP candidate to vote for or work for, I would not vote - period. Just couldn't bring myself to vote for a liberal as I did that years ago, based on the assumption that libs were somewhat progressive - turned out we had a right of centre lib guy who liked to send out Christmas cards with him and his family sporting guns - peace on earth - lol. So never again, I say.

Debater

Policywonk wrote:

Debater wrote:

JKR wrote:

Debater wrote:

I was pointing out what Andrew Coyne and others have said - in the final days of the 2011 election, many Blue Liberals left the Liberal camp and voted Conservative to block the NDP.  There is a fear of the NDP getting too high, particularly in Ontario.  This is a problem for both the NDP and the Liberals.  If anti-NDP voters start voting Conservative, it increases Con support.

And Red Liberals won't vote NDP to keep the Conservatives from winning? Are Red Liberals more loyal to the Liberals than Blue Liberals?

This conundrum is one of the reasons why Cullen and many others are supporting the idea of joint nominations in key ridings for one election in order to establish fair voting / PR to end the FPTP insanity that has too many voters voting strategically against their least favorite party instead of for their favorite party.

Yes, I think some of what you say is true.

Some people above just assume that all Liberals are going to move over to the NDP, but they won't.  Some of them don't want to ever support the NDP - some of them are Blue Liberals, or Red Tories who don't like the new Conservatives or the NDP etc.  

As Andrew Coyne and others have said, we can't just add the Liberals and NDP together and assume that 1 & 1 is 2.  It will end up being 1.5.  It's similar with the situation on the right.  The right has not completely united.  The new Conservative party STILL hasn't reached the support levels of the old PC party, particularly in Quebec.  It's still a struggle for them just to get to 40% and there are places in the country, most obviously Montreal, where they used to be able to win seats and in which they no longer are.

The Conservatives will struggle for a long time to regain support in Quebec to Mulroney levels. Aside from the Diefenbaker landslide, the only times they swept Quebec since maybe as far back as the Louis Riel execution were when Mulroney was leader.

The problem for the Liberals and the NDP is, the Conservatives may no longer need Quebec.  That's one of the things the last election may have shown.  As long as the Conservatives can win large numbers of seats in Ontario, Harper has shown he can ignore Quebec and still win.

adma

Debater wrote:
The problem for the Liberals and the NDP is, the Conservatives may no longer need Quebec.  That's one of the things the last election may have shown.  As long as the Conservatives can win large numbers of seats in Ontario, Harper has shown he can ignore Quebec and still win.

 

But you're speaking of the Cons as if their numbers were still in the high 30s or low 40s.  Regardless of where that vote is going--a 31% share is pretty ominously low...

philwalkerp

Regarding Southern Ontario voters jumping ship from the Liberals to the Cons in the dying days of the last election, to block the NDP:

 

Debater wrote:

There is a fear of the NDP getting too high, particularly in Ontario.  This is a problem for both the NDP and the Liberals.

 

No, that's a problem for Ontario.

How's that Harper Majority workin out for ya?

philwalkerp

JKR wrote:

janfromthebruce wrote:

I'm with Stock on this one. The strategic vote for a progressive gov't is NDP - that's it.

And it's important to remember that there are electoral systems that don't foster strategic voting.

After decades of critisizing strategic voting, can the NDP credibly ask people to vote strategically for them? On the other hand, the NDP could say: "vote strategically for us this time and we'll establish PR so no one has to ever vote strategically again."

 

If I could give this comment upvotes and likes, you'd have all of them in the universe. This is the one thing an NDP government must do, or may we be banished to wander the political wilderness as the 3rd party forevermore.

Policywonk

adma wrote:

Debater wrote:
The problem for the Liberals and the NDP is, the Conservatives may no longer need Quebec.  That's one of the things the last election may have shown.  As long as the Conservatives can win large numbers of seats in Ontario, Harper has shown he can ignore Quebec and still win.

 

But you're speaking of the Cons as if their numbers were still in the high 30s or low 40s.  Regardless of where that vote is going--a 31% share is pretty ominously low...

Ominously for the Conservatives.

NorthReport

This poll showing that the NDP is continuing to move in the direction of forming government
is certainly going to shake up things big time in Ottawa

Myles Carroll

I ran the UBC Election Forecaster on the numbers from the new EKOS poll province by province and came up with the following breakdown in a 308 seat House:

Conservative - 120

New Democrat - 102

Liberal - 66

Bloc - 19

Green - 1

I had to play around with the numbers a bit and use my own judgment on a few tight races so obviously someone else might come up with slightly different overall numbers.  Overall, the NDP lost a fair number of its seats in Quebec (-23) at the expense of the Liberals, Tories, and especially the Bloc, but made up for the losses through balanced gains in all other regions of the country.  The Liberals won back a lot of seats from the Tories in Ontario.  Although I was beholden to the methodology and regional groupings used by EKOS, the numbers suggested that the NDP vote is actually efficient in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, and inefficient in Atlantic Canada, which suggests that it will be easier to make a breakthrough in the Prairies than in the Maritimes.

I can post numbers for other provinces if anyone is interested.  What jumped out at me when I did this bit of research is that it challenges the binary notion that many, including myself at times, have hinted at, that the NDP will either maintain a dominant status in Quebec, or get wiped off of the electoral map completely.  I think that recent polling trends suggest that some of the orange wave has rescinded, but Quebecers have their grievances with each of the other three parties, and appear unlikely to embrace any one of them in the near future.  No party other than the NDP has polled above 30 percent since last May, for example.  Of course, all of that could change, like it did last May for the NDP.  But in the past; in 1984, 1993, and 2011, when Quebecers have dumped their incumbents en masse, there has been both a clear reason to vote against the incumbent party and to vote for the new party to which they turned.

Debater

adma wrote:

Debater wrote:
The problem for the Liberals and the NDP is, the Conservatives may no longer need Quebec.  That's one of the things the last election may have shown.  As long as the Conservatives can win large numbers of seats in Ontario, Harper has shown he can ignore Quebec and still win.

 

But you're speaking of the Cons as if their numbers were still in the high 30s or low 40s.  Regardless of where that vote is going--a 31% share is pretty ominously low...

That's correct for this poll.  But we need to see more polling since Robo-Con to confirm the EKOS numbers and see where the Cons are.  And as someone above said, the Cons have had numbers fall into the low 30's before and always manage to bounce back by the time of an election.  And the challenge the Opposition parties now face is that we can't pull the plug on this government since Harper now has a majority.  So he can wait several years before the next election.  Who knows what the polls will be years from now.

One other challenge the Opposition parties face is having to spend extra resources in the next election on 30 new ridings.  The addition of these new ridings could work to the advantage of the Conservatives since they have the biggest amount of $$ and organization, so we've got a lot of factors to think about.

Anyway, according to Rob Russo, Kady O'Malley & Greg Weston on CBC today, the Cons are looking forward to the 2-week Easter break coming up in a couple of weeks since they think the Robo-Con scandal will die down while Parliament is on vacation.  Hopefully voters won't forget Robo-Con for a while.

Aristotleded24

Debater wrote:

Policywonk wrote:

Debater wrote:

JKR wrote:

Debater wrote:

I was pointing out what Andrew Coyne and others have said - in the final days of the 2011 election, many Blue Liberals left the Liberal camp and voted Conservative to block the NDP.  There is a fear of the NDP getting too high, particularly in Ontario.  This is a problem for both the NDP and the Liberals.  If anti-NDP voters start voting Conservative, it increases Con support.

And Red Liberals won't vote NDP to keep the Conservatives from winning? Are Red Liberals more loyal to the Liberals than Blue Liberals?

This conundrum is one of the reasons why Cullen and many others are supporting the idea of joint nominations in key ridings for one election in order to establish fair voting / PR to end the FPTP insanity that has too many voters voting strategically against their least favorite party instead of for their favorite party.

Yes, I think some of what you say is true.

Some people above just assume that all Liberals are going to move over to the NDP, but they won't.  Some of them don't want to ever support the NDP - some of them are Blue Liberals, or Red Tories who don't like the new Conservatives or the NDP etc.  

As Andrew Coyne and others have said, we can't just add the Liberals and NDP together and assume that 1 & 1 is 2.  It will end up being 1.5.  It's similar with the situation on the right.  The right has not completely united.  The new Conservative party STILL hasn't reached the support levels of the old PC party, particularly in Quebec.  It's still a struggle for them just to get to 40% and there are places in the country, most obviously Montreal, where they used to be able to win seats and in which they no longer are.

The Conservatives will struggle for a long time to regain support in Quebec to Mulroney levels. Aside from the Diefenbaker landslide, the only times they swept Quebec since maybe as far back as the Louis Riel execution were when Mulroney was leader.

The problem for the Liberals and the NDP is, the Conservatives may no longer need Quebec.  That's one of the things the last election may have shown.  As long as the Conservatives can win large numbers of seats in Ontario, Harper has shown he can ignore Quebec and still win.

Not if Harper loses Western Canada, and only the NDP can defeat Conservatives there.

Debater

I agree that in the large majority of ridings in Western Canada the NDP is the best choice to beat the Conservatives.  I have no problem saying so since I can be objective about that.

What I'd like to know is, does the NDP realize that in most of Ontario, particularly the GTA/905, the Liberals are the best-positioned to beat the Cons?  The Liberals hold most of the GTA seats provincially, and have done so for the last 3 provincial elections.

One day someone may have to sit both parties down as Nathan Cullen is hinting and realize that the parties may have to agree to co-operate in certain parts of the country by not running candidates against one another in the regions whether the other is stronger.

David Young

Debater wrote:

What I'd like to know is, does the NDP realize that in most of Ontario, particularly the GTA/905, the Liberals are the best-positioned to beat the Cons?  The Liberals hold most of the GTA seats provincially, and have done so for the last 3 provincial elections.

What conceit!

Debater must think that voters are sheep, to be led to the ballot box and they're keep voting the same way election after election.

I'm beginning to think that Debater fears that a great deal of voters in Ontario may be in the process of dumping the Liberals, ala Quebec, for different parties, and will continue to do so, having lost the 'Blue Liberal' votes to the Conservatives, and now that the NDP is the clear alternative, the 'Red Liberal' votes will change and vote NDP instead.

It's called democracy, Debater.

If the population wishes to change it's voting patterns, they have every right (if not duty) to do so.

 

Debater

I think you missed the point, David.

I'd suggest listening to some of Nathan Cullen's suggestions for inter-party co-operation.  

It's something both the Liberals and NDP may have to consider after 2015 if the Cons win again.

David Young

Debater wrote:

It's something both the Liberals and NDP may have to consider after 2015 if the Cons win again.

Debater, you sound like someone asking a hockey fan, 'Well, who do you want to win the Stanley Cup if your team doesn't?'

I want my team to win the Stanley Cup; I don't speculate about who might win it if my favorite team should be eliminated from the playoffs.  That's the defeatist way of thinking.  So you can keep thinking that way all you want.

My team has my confidence that they will come out on top after the next election.

Cullen will be last on my ballot.  I'll put Romeo ahead of him if it's possible.

 

contrarianna

Endless atavistic hockey sweater political tribalism:

Quote:

When you're a Jet,
You're a Jet all the way
From your first cigarette
To your last dyin' day.

When you're a Jet,
If the spit hits the fan,
You got brothers around,
You're a family man!

You're never alone,
You're never disconnected!
You're home with your own:
When company's expected,
You're well protected!
....

---Wesit Side Story

Canada? I've heard of it

[Edited]

Aristotleded24

Debater wrote:
I agree that in the large majority of ridings in Western Canada the NDP is the best choice to beat the Conservatives.  I have no problem saying so since I can be objective about that.

What I'd like to know is, does the NDP realize that in most of Ontario, particularly the GTA/905, the Liberals are the best-positioned to beat the Cons?  The Liberals hold most of the GTA seats provincially, and have done so for the last 3 provincial elections.

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/myelection/ridings/113/]Do you mean ridings like Bramalea-Gore-Malton?[/url]

Idealistic Prag... Idealistic Pragmatist's picture

double post

Pages

Topic locked