Seats in Parliament as of the dissolution for the election, according to Wikipedia:
Cons - Libs - Bloc - NDP - Green - Ind
127----95----48-----30------1------3
Current prediction from democraticSPACE.com:
Cons - Libs - Bloc - NDP - Green - Ind
130----92----49-----35------0------2
If this is the final result (and it won't be), is there a winner? Does Harper keep on keepin' on? Does Dion remain, on the strength of his comeback? Does Layton trumpet his gains while decrying the electoral system (I would)? Does Elizabeth May have anything to add to the conversation? And who are these independents?
Prediction from the UBC Election Stock Market (as of 11:15am Thursday the 9th):
Cons - Libs - Bloc - NDP - Green - Ind
128----90----46-----41------0------3
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Was I wrong? aka Federal polling V
"2008 federal election: In the space of a few years, the once fragmented right returns to power while the once natural governing party is is reduced to one of three parties on the fragmented left."
This was my cheeky little line about the 2008 election before it was over. I just saw some numbers that seem to indicate that the Liberals have rebounded and today I read for the first (and possibly only) time that the Conservatives may lose seats this election. Is that possible? I don't have the wherewithal to research the various close ridings, but these come to mind: The Bloc is again in first in the polls in Quebec. The Liberals are back on top in Ontario. The NDP are swinging for the fences in BC.
Edit: I just read an Accidental Deliberations post that tried to work out why the Conservatives' election strategy isn't going so well and why they might not be able to re-focus their strategy. Very interesting. They may not have room to move on the economy, which is now front and centre.
This was my cheeky little line about the 2008 election before it was over. I just saw some numbers that seem to indicate that the Liberals have rebounded and today I read for the first (and possibly only) time that the Conservatives may lose seats this election. Is that possible? I don't have the wherewithal to research the various close ridings, but these come to mind: The Bloc is again in first in the polls in Quebec. The Liberals are back on top in Ontario. The NDP are swinging for the fences in BC.
Edit: I just read an Accidental Deliberations post that tried to work out why the Conservatives' election strategy isn't going so well and why they might not be able to re-focus their strategy. Very interesting. They may not have room to move on the economy, which is now front and centre.
Mini election prediction
I'm only going to predict a few ridings, and some aren't that difficult to call, so this is a bit of a waste of your time and mine, but I have to get my feet wet sometime.
Libby Davies cakewalks in Vancouver East: margin: 11500 votes
Dawn Black will hold onto New West-Coq-Port Moody: 1800 votes
Bill Siksay will win a squeaker in Burnaby-Douglas: 500 votes
Wendy Yuan will win Vancouver-Kingsway: 2500 votes*
Peter Julian is safe in New West-whatever it's called: 4500 votes
Joyce Murray takes Vancouver-Quadra: not as close as some think, 3300 votes
And Vancouver-Centre? Good luck. I have a feeling Hedy Fry will finally lose, but that feeling isn't solid. Is her time up? Do new residents forget her work in 80s? Will Michael Byers draw out the young and idealistic lefty votes? How much of a spoiler will Adriane Carr play? I'm going out on a limb and picking Byers by 350 votes.
Edit: Hedy Fry by 1700 votes. I just don't see Mayencourt stealing many votes from Hedy, and I get the feeling that the Byers campaign isn't going as well as hoped.
*pure guesswork. I've heard Don Davies is doing well, but I have a gut feeling the Liberals will take this.
Libby Davies cakewalks in Vancouver East: margin: 11500 votes
Dawn Black will hold onto New West-Coq-Port Moody: 1800 votes
Bill Siksay will win a squeaker in Burnaby-Douglas: 500 votes
Wendy Yuan will win Vancouver-Kingsway: 2500 votes*
Peter Julian is safe in New West-whatever it's called: 4500 votes
Joyce Murray takes Vancouver-Quadra: not as close as some think, 3300 votes
And Vancouver-Centre? Good luck. I have a feeling Hedy Fry will finally lose, but that feeling isn't solid. Is her time up? Do new residents forget her work in 80s? Will Michael Byers draw out the young and idealistic lefty votes? How much of a spoiler will Adriane Carr play? I'm going out on a limb and picking Byers by 350 votes.
Edit: Hedy Fry by 1700 votes. I just don't see Mayencourt stealing many votes from Hedy, and I get the feeling that the Byers campaign isn't going as well as hoped.
*pure guesswork. I've heard Don Davies is doing well, but I have a gut feeling the Liberals will take this.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Conservatives involved in sex trade!!
I just listened to two of the Conservative attack ads aimed at Dion. Heard this little gem, a reproduction of a message left by a Conservative woman:
"I'll tell you what I can't afford: Dion."
Can she afford other men? Do Conservative men and women comparison shop for sex? Is this the tip of the Conservative sex trade iceberg? Inquiring minds want to know.
"I'll tell you what I can't afford: Dion."
Can she afford other men? Do Conservative men and women comparison shop for sex? Is this the tip of the Conservative sex trade iceberg? Inquiring minds want to know.
Federal leadership debate
I'm watching the English debate streamed on CBC (it keeps re-setting, which is annoying). I tried the CTV site but nothing would load. I've watched about a third, and my impressions so far:
Harper held his ground, but only barely. He appeared at a loss when confronted about his investment spending (they've invested in the forestry and the automotive sectors?). He also wanted to be very clear, as he repeated frequently. He's been between jobs, and knows how hard it is for Canadians in danger of losing their jobs... really? And he can't seem to avoid his little smirk.
Dion's English was difficult, but he spoke with conviction. He forcefully defended the carbon tax, pulling out numbers of tax savings for lower-income Canadians. He attempted to carve out the middle economic ground, a phenomenon that would have been hard to imagine even a few years ago.
Layton had great lines (Where's the platform? Under the sweater?) and stood up for Canada's working families. His jibes at the Liberals should be worked into their campaign. The NDP, unfortunately for them, aren't a regional party, so a few points gained in the polls won't necessarily translate into an increase in seats.
May surprised me in two ways: demanding support for the pulp-and-paper sector (what?) and throwing economic numbers around comfortably. I can't see the Greens getting more than one seat, and even that is doubtful.
Duceppe reminds me of an alien. I really enjoy his almost disinterested engagement in the English language debate.
Regarding the environment: Harper has nothing. His record is ridiculous, and everyone seems to agree.
For a great commentary on the debate, see the Tyee's Blog-O-Rama.
Harper held his ground, but only barely. He appeared at a loss when confronted about his investment spending (they've invested in the forestry and the automotive sectors?). He also wanted to be very clear, as he repeated frequently. He's been between jobs, and knows how hard it is for Canadians in danger of losing their jobs... really? And he can't seem to avoid his little smirk.
Dion's English was difficult, but he spoke with conviction. He forcefully defended the carbon tax, pulling out numbers of tax savings for lower-income Canadians. He attempted to carve out the middle economic ground, a phenomenon that would have been hard to imagine even a few years ago.
Layton had great lines (Where's the platform? Under the sweater?) and stood up for Canada's working families. His jibes at the Liberals should be worked into their campaign. The NDP, unfortunately for them, aren't a regional party, so a few points gained in the polls won't necessarily translate into an increase in seats.
May surprised me in two ways: demanding support for the pulp-and-paper sector (what?) and throwing economic numbers around comfortably. I can't see the Greens getting more than one seat, and even that is doubtful.
Duceppe reminds me of an alien. I really enjoy his almost disinterested engagement in the English language debate.
Regarding the environment: Harper has nothing. His record is ridiculous, and everyone seems to agree.
For a great commentary on the debate, see the Tyee's Blog-O-Rama.
Could there be a Batman without a Joker?
This passage from The Crossing by Cormac McCarthy got me thinking*:
"He understood what the priest could not. That what we seek is the worthy adversary. For we strike out to fall flailing through demons of wire and crepe and we long for something of substance to oppose us. Something to contain us or to stay our hand. Otherwise there were no boundaries to our own being and we too must extend our claims until we lose definition. Until we must be swallowed up at last by the very void to which we wished to stand opposed."
Not sure what I concluded. There's something in there about politics and fanatics and activists and framing debates, but it's not a coherent thought yet. Someone with a better sense of Canadian political history could make something of this, I think, though our federal leaders seem to rotate rather than reappear.
*and directly related to the title of this post: I just re-read The Dark Knight Returns, one of the best pieces of comic literature. A psychiatrist posits that Batman is actually responsible for all the deaths caused by his enemies, that Batman is manifesting the evil acts, perhaps to fulfill some latent psychotic drive within himself.
"He understood what the priest could not. That what we seek is the worthy adversary. For we strike out to fall flailing through demons of wire and crepe and we long for something of substance to oppose us. Something to contain us or to stay our hand. Otherwise there were no boundaries to our own being and we too must extend our claims until we lose definition. Until we must be swallowed up at last by the very void to which we wished to stand opposed."
Not sure what I concluded. There's something in there about politics and fanatics and activists and framing debates, but it's not a coherent thought yet. Someone with a better sense of Canadian political history could make something of this, I think, though our federal leaders seem to rotate rather than reappear.
*and directly related to the title of this post: I just re-read The Dark Knight Returns, one of the best pieces of comic literature. A psychiatrist posits that Batman is actually responsible for all the deaths caused by his enemies, that Batman is manifesting the evil acts, perhaps to fulfill some latent psychotic drive within himself.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Liberals just hoping to hold ground
This has been coming for a while. Senior Liberals are now saying that just holding onto what they have (95 seats) will be a challenge. Dion's leadership is under serious fire, and hope is partly resting on the leaders debates. What should he do? Three strategists gave their answers to the Globe. This sums up my feelings on the topic: "Not everyone can be a good leader."
Let's say the Liberals lose seats, maybe only 10 (seems likely). How long does Stephane Dion last as leader? I would think they would need a review before parliament sits in February. Can they hold one in November? What about January?
Let's say the Liberals lose seats, maybe only 10 (seems likely). How long does Stephane Dion last as leader? I would think they would need a review before parliament sits in February. Can they hold one in November? What about January?
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Top Ten moments in Canadian politics (in my political lifetime)
Everyone has their top ten lists. Here's one of mine: Top ten moments in Canadian politics. This list isn't necessarily the most pivotal or controversial, and it only begins when I started to really pay attention to Canadian politics. So, here they are*, in chronological order:
1. Federal election, 1993: The Liberals sweep to power, reducing the once-dominant Conservatives to a mere two seats on the back of Brian Mulroney's personal approval ratings (low, I've heard) and a poor campaign by Kim Campbell.
2. The Delgamuukw decision, 1995: Forever changes Canada's relationship with our aboriginal population.
3. No to separation, 1995: The No side squeaks out a narrow victory in the 1995 Quebec separation referendum. I watched the results and actually wished I was in Montreal.
4. Jean Chretien grapples with protestor in Quebec, 1996: Can't help but like the guy for that.
5. Reform Party reinvents itself, 2000: as CCRAP, the Canadian Conservative Reform Alliance party. How do you spell shortsighted? They quickly changed the order of the words in their name to avoid the CRAP moniker.
6. Pierre Trudeau dies, 2000: Love him or hate him, he shaped federal politics more than anyone in the past 40 years. And Fidel Castro was a pallbearer.
7. Jean Chretien keeps Canada out of the second Iraq war, 2003: We narrowly avoid the worst and most useless military engagement since Viet Nam.
8. Martinites oust Jean Chretien, 2003: Eventually leading to the mess they're in now.
9. Jean Chretien shows his balls to the Gomery commission, 2005: His collection of golf balls, that is.
10. 2008 federal election: In the space of a few years, the once fragmented right returns to power while the once natural governing party is is reduced to one of three parties on the fragmented left.
*This is a work in progress, as new events pop into my head.
1. Federal election, 1993: The Liberals sweep to power, reducing the once-dominant Conservatives to a mere two seats on the back of Brian Mulroney's personal approval ratings (low, I've heard) and a poor campaign by Kim Campbell.
2. The Delgamuukw decision, 1995: Forever changes Canada's relationship with our aboriginal population.
3. No to separation, 1995: The No side squeaks out a narrow victory in the 1995 Quebec separation referendum. I watched the results and actually wished I was in Montreal.
4. Jean Chretien grapples with protestor in Quebec, 1996: Can't help but like the guy for that.
5. Reform Party reinvents itself, 2000: as CCRAP, the Canadian Conservative Reform Alliance party. How do you spell shortsighted? They quickly changed the order of the words in their name to avoid the CRAP moniker.
6. Pierre Trudeau dies, 2000: Love him or hate him, he shaped federal politics more than anyone in the past 40 years. And Fidel Castro was a pallbearer.
7. Jean Chretien keeps Canada out of the second Iraq war, 2003: We narrowly avoid the worst and most useless military engagement since Viet Nam.
8. Martinites oust Jean Chretien, 2003: Eventually leading to the mess they're in now.
9. Jean Chretien shows his balls to the Gomery commission, 2005: His collection of golf balls, that is.
10. 2008 federal election: In the space of a few years, the once fragmented right returns to power while the once natural governing party is is reduced to one of three parties on the fragmented left.
*This is a work in progress, as new events pop into my head.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Votes first
"McCain failed miserably in his first executive decision, that of putting America in safe hands should anything happen to his decrepit ass. He has put the country in the hands of a dreadfully ill prepared and weak politician for the sake of a vote... basically, his own line about "country first" is total bullshit.... it's votes first nothing else; what a patriot!"
I just read this on a football site I belong to. I hadn't thought of that angle at all. An interesting point, one that many McCain supporters will find easy to dismiss by pointing to all her executive experience.
I'll remind everyone that a short while ago Sarah Palin wondered what is it exactly that the V-P does every day. And that her executive experience was as mayor of a town of 7,000.* (Thanks, Bill Maher.)
*and as Governor of Alaska, I know.
I just read this on a football site I belong to. I hadn't thought of that angle at all. An interesting point, one that many McCain supporters will find easy to dismiss by pointing to all her executive experience.
I'll remind everyone that a short while ago Sarah Palin wondered what is it exactly that the V-P does every day. And that her executive experience was as mayor of a town of 7,000.* (Thanks, Bill Maher.)
*and as Governor of Alaska, I know.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Tax and spend Democrats?
I was just clicking through some Wikipedia pages about US federal spending* and found this little gem:
1978-2005:
Party of President---Fed. Spending----Fed. Debt-----GDP
--------------------------Increase--------Increase---Increase
Democrat-----------------9.9%------------4.2%------12.6%
Republican--------------12.1%-----------36.4%------10.7%
Now, I know that there are mitigating factors, and in absolute terms both Reagan and Bush Sr. did decrease spending in one of their years in charge (two years out of twelve), but the numbers are pretty strong, especially the Debt Increase percentages. In Reagan's first term the federal debt increased a whopping 49%, in his second 40%. Spending has increased 18.9% under the current Bush regime.
*searching for some facts to back up my claim that Republicans haven't reduced spending in the past 50 years, a reply to someone who simplistically claimed that Democrats tax and spend and Republicans decrease taxes, spending and government.
1978-2005:
Party of President---Fed. Spending----Fed. Debt-----GDP
--------------------------Increase--------Increase---Increase
Democrat-----------------9.9%------------4.2%------12.6%
Republican--------------12.1%-----------36.4%------10.7%
Now, I know that there are mitigating factors, and in absolute terms both Reagan and Bush Sr. did decrease spending in one of their years in charge (two years out of twelve), but the numbers are pretty strong, especially the Debt Increase percentages. In Reagan's first term the federal debt increased a whopping 49%, in his second 40%. Spending has increased 18.9% under the current Bush regime.
*searching for some facts to back up my claim that Republicans haven't reduced spending in the past 50 years, a reply to someone who simplistically claimed that Democrats tax and spend and Republicans decrease taxes, spending and government.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
