Friday, December 23, 2005

Warning Signs

I'm not sure how much I'll post over the next week, so this is pretty much an open thread - throw any thoughts on the campaign so far or predictions for the second half in the comments section.

However, I will say this. Even though the polls aren't moving, the Liberals should be worried. Canadians want change and the electorate is volatile. The Conservatives have laid out their policy for everyone to see, inoculating them against the "hidden agenda" attacks. Harper has raised himself to Martin's level on the SES poll, even if his party still trails. The Conservative and BQ support is seen to be the most "locked in", while 20% of Canadians are undecided and many are willing to change their vote.

Add it all up, and it's still too close to call. Which means we're in for a fun January.

posted by calgarygrit at 8:47 p.m.

37 Comments:

  • Actually.. if you check out Martin's scores in today's SES Poll (which has the Libs up 10, I might remind everyone)Martin's leadership score shot up to 88 for some reason, while Harper's dropped to 62.

    By Blogger Oxford County Liberals, at 9:24 p.m.  

  • The Conservatives were not able to capitalize on a 'brief' Liberal weakness. But the weakness isn't gone, the numbers have just changed. In an analysis in my blog today I point out that the Conservatives cannot win unless the Liberal vote collapses in B.C.

    By Blogger Blogger, at 9:49 p.m.  

  • st: watch out for the new ipsos.

    tht: Brief weakness? They're channeling Payette, Campbell, and Day. Add in chicken man chasing Jr. around Quebec and today's story and 2005 closes with a Liberal trifecta:

    Beer and Popcorn
    Chicken Man
    Holocaust Memorial

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:09 p.m.  

  • actually, it is a brief period of Liberal weakness - on a geologic scale.

    By Blogger Tarkwell Robotico, at 11:09 p.m.  

  • Hey YYC: Leger has em up by 8.
    :)

    By Blogger Oxford County Liberals, at 11:29 p.m.  

  • What portion of people hang up?

    That's you problem.

    By Blogger Tarkwell Robotico, at 11:44 p.m.  

  • ST: hard of hearing?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:16 a.m.  

  • What percentage of calls are people shopping, at Christmas parties ect.?

    A huge number. Thus, either Christmas absence breaks exactly evenly between Libs and CPC voters, or its skewing the results. The latter is obviously the correct answer.

    Recall the U.S. presidential elections where Dems were overrepresented in weekend polls. Magnify that here, and there's the disconnect between what appears to be happening in terms of a drop in Lib support and what the polls are showing.

    Watch the Libs plummet in four days.

    Cheers.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:26 a.m.  

  • There is little agreement on the Liberal number day to day or poll to poll. ipsos now has a 1 pt lead.

    But here's the real story: The CPC number has been very flat around 30 across all polls.

    If the CPC stay flat through to the 3rd week of January the Libs win. If it punches up close to 35, the CPC win.

    meanwhile lib & cpc crackheads will get excited about every swing in the margin.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:33 a.m.  

  • chester: sorry to lump you in with the crackheads but there it is. start watching the cpc number. it's flat so far. and the ses isn't all that much off on the cpc number.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:36 a.m.  

  • The CPC hasn't really been "flat". They've been shopping and visiting.

    Also, combine the "desire for change" numbers with the high undecideds and consider whether they will break for the Libs. Given such a big undecided number, the actual percentage break towards the CPC need only be small for it to have a dramatic effect.

    Rest easy yyc, the Libs are toast.

    The slide starts in four days, but really becomes stark in six.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:38 a.m.  

  • anon: It's been flat around 30 the first half of the campaign. I expect the next 2 weeks to show a rise, but that's only my opinion. btw ipsos was 32 today.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:58 a.m.  

  • I've had a few scotches so maybe this will be a bit incoherent, and maybe CG was being sarcastic with the citation of the "want change" story in this post, but... I don't understand why people make such a big deal of these "Canadians want change" poll numbers. In any region, take the sum of all non-Liberal supporters and compare it to the percentage who "want change". For the most part, the match is close; in the national picture, it's spot on -- 33% support the Liberals, 33% don't want change. So the Prairies and Quebec "screaming for change", as CTV so poignantly put it, is what we already know: that those places support the Conservatives and Bloc, respectively. So why are people trying to read so much extra information from different questions that tell us exactly the same thing?

    By Blogger Dale, at 3:50 a.m.  

  • Either way its neck and neck, and the West will determine the winner as I have blogged about. It will be a minority government either way, now will the NDP come out as kingmakers thats the question.

    Merry Christmas and Happy Chanukkah
    and Happy HolyDays

    By Blogger EUGENE PLAWIUK, at 7:31 a.m.  

  • The underrepresentation of conservatives in the Christmas polling samples are going to make the Liberal thump all the sweeter.

    I suspect that the Libs have internals that confirm their dire straights, but even so, giving them a bit of hope and then yanking it away will be sweet.

    Chester's right. The Libs numbers will start to reflect reality (plummet) shortly after Christmas.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:22 a.m.  

  • Umm, why do you think Conservatives are more likely to be visiting and shopping than grits or dippers? Might be, but I don't see why the holidays would systematically bias the polls against the tories.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:02 p.m.  

  • Here's my guess for what is coming:

    See Sheila Copps in the Sun today. The real story behind those 'cheap' ads by the CPC is that they were hoarding their huge warchest for Phase II of the campaing. According to Copps, the LPC is 33 million in debt. The CPC is not.

    My prediction for phase II: It will be an air war. The CPC is armed to the hilt. The LPC is not. We are going to see a 'shock and awe' strategy from the CPC covering the airwaves. The LPC will only be able to afford spots at 4:30 am.

    Just a prediction.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:04 p.m.  

  • Another reason to vote Conservative.

    The Liberals, who are proven thieves and liars, also are $33,000,000 in the glue.

    On the other hand, the CPC are debt free.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:15 p.m.  

  • Merry Christmas!

    By Blogger Mark Richard Francis, at 12:30 p.m.  

  • Today's Ipsos has it 32-31, but the Gregg poll (which has been kind to the Tories so far), has the Libs comfortably ahead.

    As for Sheila's article, there is no way the LPC is 33 million dollars in debt. That said, obviously the Tories are in better financial shape and should do well in the ad war.

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 12:39 p.m.  

  • Groovy,

    for the same reasons that Dems are are consistently overrepresented in weekend polling in the U.S.

    I could go into specifics but I think you can figure out the dynamic.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:27 p.m.  

  • CG, can you explain why the Libs can't be 33mill in debt? Are they mis-reporting their legally obligated financials, or are you implying that the government agency in charge is lying? Given Sheila's research and questions, those appear to be the only two options.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:28 p.m.  

  • 33 millions dollar in debt can be easily wiped out.. with the coming referendum crisis in Quebec, a re-elected Paul Martin government will have to restart the sponsorship program.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:31 p.m.  

  • I might have to start a blog soon, or something. But until then, yelling semi-coherently in CG's threads will have to do.


    I think a lot of people, the media, the bloggers, the guys on the street -- really need to start paying attention more to margins of error. For more political polls, it ends up being about 3%.

    Now, I'm sure you all know, sure, margin of error, polls aren't accurate, whatever, but I don't think we (all of us talking about the campaign) really incorporate it into what we actually say.

    The Libs and Tories have been tied, i.e., it's been statistically impossible to determine the winner, for nearly every poll I've seen. The fine print is important!

    The leadership numbers are pretty interesting, though.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:43 p.m.  

  • "G" is correct. I talked to some Tory officials and the media is going to be Carpet bombed with a Tory Marketing campaign that is going to blow the pants off what the Liberals have planned. The tories have hired THE best marketing/campaign planning team money can buy. Expect the Lib's to be in a state of 'shock & awe' come Jan 3, when the real election ad's start. And for those of you who thought the cheap Tory ad's weren't part of a larger strategy: ha ha, wait till you see whats coming Jan 3.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:17 p.m.  

  • I hope you're right, anonymous. It's been depressing watching the tories run quite a solid campaign, but still not gain any traction in the polls. Paul Martin needs a little "shock and awe" treatment to knock him off his perch.

    Matt

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:08 p.m.  

  • The LPC was debt free a few months after Martin took over (over very close to it). While I'm sure they went into a bit of debt during the 2004 campaign, 33 million in debt is a huge number for a political party...especially during an election campaign.

    While I'm sure it's possible, I tend to think it's merely an accounting glitch (maybe it doesn't count the tax payback revenue or something). If the LPC was that much in debt then, yes, they'd definitely be in tough shape.

    The Greg poll was odd but...most people don't follow the election that closely. So people who plan to vote Liberal would probably assume they'd run the best campaign.

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 6:22 p.m.  

  • I don't understand all this talk of the CPC out-spending everyone else... there are election laws that prevent any party from spending more than X dollars... I doubt we'll see anything way different... unless the CPC somehow spent way less than they were allowed last time.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:49 p.m.  

  • Andrew: I agree. I'm trying to figure out where the advantage is since each party gets 1.75 of the vote and the max can be around 18 million per party. The difference will be topped off wiht a loan, so it shouldnt matter who has the most money as they all will be equal.

    Then I read this on CTV:

    "But the Christmas gaiety will likely be short lived. Both the Conservatives and the New Democrats expect the Liberal Party to unleash a $25-million barrage of negative television advertising soon."

    25 Million? If this is true, the Lib's advertising campaign costs 7 mill more than the limit, and thats not including other expenses such as travel, wages, etc.

    If anyone could explain this, it would be greatly appreciated.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:15 p.m.  

  • So is this new marketing team for the CPC going to be as hard-hitting and effective as the last marketing team which spearheaded those awe-inspiring commercials for the Tories?

    Oh, and to the people 'predicting' the results of the polls soon to come: Why are you spending your time on a blog when your amazing powers of prediction can be used to serve so many other useful purposes?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:51 a.m.  

  • Can you advertise with an unlimited budget through third party PACs? e.g. Something called "Friends of the Liberal Party of Canada" (or whatever), for instance, can spend 100 jillion dollars legally...?

    That may answer the question.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:00 a.m.  

  • There seems to be a lot of false bravado on the part of the Conservative supporters here. Perhaps it’s simply a determined act of wishful thinking on their part, but much of it is unsubstantiated by the poll numbers so far. As for the assertions that the CPC is going steamroll the Liberals with a massive “shock and awe” advertising campaign starting in the New Year, well if they’re anything like the last bunch of tripe, a better choice of words might be “shockingly awful.”

    By Blogger Red Tory, at 7:23 a.m.  

  • "Can you advertise with an unlimited budget through third party PACs? e.g. Something called "Friends of the Liberal Party of Canada" (or whatever), for instance, can spend 100 jillion dollars legally...?

    That may answer the question."

    You're thinking of the US... in Canada the gov pretty much killed 3rd party advertising a few years ago... I think there is a cap of like $3K per riding or something tiny... which is why a lot of 3rd party groups have registered themselves as political parties... who can spend a lot more.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:00 p.m.  

  • Election funding: I don't believe there are any limits on how much a party can spend, only on how much they can receive from CORPORATE donors. The Libs can borrow as much as a bank is willing to lend (although one wonders what the LPC uses for collateral . . . ). The CPC have received piles more donations from non-corporate sources, ie :the grass roots", and so can spend more. The 18.5 million being quoted is wrong on a few fronts, first because it is the amount they receive from their % of vote, not the limit they can spend. It is also not even as lower vote total means lower subsidy, so by that thinking the Libs would have an unfair advantage this time because they got more votes last time. And lastly, I believe local EDAs have different funding rules than the National Party.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:06 p.m.  

  • The limit for parties this year is $0.70 per voter which tranlates into $18.2 million as a party cap this year. Canadidates are limited to around $70,000 per.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:25 p.m.  

  • http://weblogs.macleans.ca/paulwells/

    Conservative compares Olive Chow to a dog? Calls Jack Layton and Asshole, says candidates look "gay"? Nope, it's a major Liberal player on Paul Martin's Ontario campaign team.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:17 p.m.  

  • I wonder if it's safe to assume that Scott Brison will leave the Liberal Party now that Board member Mike Klander is a gay bashing homophobe? Didn't think so.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:34 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home