Monday, September 22, 2008

My gut still says a Tory majority

The general consesus among the punditry is that these Harris-Decima numbers are way off, that the Tories are not up 15 points over the Liberals. I suspect, though, these may turn out to be rather prophetic numbers.
Dion has been defined by the Tories. The public truly does see him as a wimp.
Ignatief might have won this election. Rae would have been creamed, tarred, sometimes unfairly, with all the crap the Tories could dig up from Rae's term in office. He would have got the last laugh, though, since there's no way the Harper "team" has the depth needed to handle this recession.
The election of 2012 will put the Liberals back in power. In some ways, they should be glad they're losing.
As for an NDP-Liberal coalition, the only way that can happen is if the Dippers and Liberals hold all the seats they have and the Bloc loses seats only to the Liberals or NDP, or if the Tories lose a whack of seats to the NDP. Otherwise, it's mathematically impossible. The tories won't lose seats in this election, and if the Bloc does lose some seats, it won't be to Dion and Layton.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

The pollsters, who remind me of the losers in high school, are now casting lots on the country's most important popularity contest. Unfortunately, this will be a popularity contest based on character assassination, smears and demagoguery, rather than sound policy. Without factoring in the future debates, where anything can happen, I would presently call an increased Tory minority. Ultimately, however I think your analysis is correct. Canada will return to Liberal hegemony after the economy turns south.

Ottawa Watch said...

My blood ran cold when I read the Globe and Mail lead story this morning saying the Tories were bringing in a different young offender cut-off age for Quebec. Surely the guy who wrote the Clarity Act could be going after Harper for dismantling federalism and, effectively, creating a dual-nation in this country. Yes, that might cost votes in Quebec, but who is standing up for Canada? And what, at this point, do the Liberals have to lose?

Anonymous said...

I was most disappointed by Dion's support of the Tory's "Quebec as a Nation" motion. While its might be a reality, just as how L'Acadie forms a nation, it need not be recognized by our deliberative assemblies. A country can be constituted by multiple nationalities and cultures, but it should be unified by singular citizenship and unified federal law.

Somebody needs to get up on a soapbox and explain that open federalism equates to sovereignty association and Dion is uniquely qualified to do that.

Ottawa Watch said...

That's really what it's about. Quebec gets a special criminal law because it's a nation? A distinct society? A country within the country?
This is very similar to the gradualist approach towards Irish independence in the 19th century, when Itish nationalist politicians skillfully used minority government situations to pry concessions out of Westminister.
Harper is either setting up two criminal codes or he's giving part of the responsibility for criminal law to the provinces, a clkear breach of the constitution.

Anonymous said...

Looks like Harper is promising to set up two criminal codes. I have a feeling that won't stand up to Supreme Court scrutiny when ultimately challenged. If Harper isn't a student of history, he should at least look at contemporary British politics. Devolution of power to the constituent countries in the UK has led to the unequal application of political power in the areas of health and welfare, along with the unequal application of taxation. Welsh and Scottish members at Westminster have the strange opportunity to vote on English health and welfare measures. It has also lead to the entrenchment of independence parties in Wales and Scotland. As far as I'm concerned, this is another example of how open federalism simply leads to national disunity and chaos in governance.

Anonymous said...

If the Liberals are at even 25% of the total vote, they are heading for a historic low in terms of attracting voters.
Worse than John Turner's 28% in 1984 and Mike Pearson 33% in 1958.
Deduct 20% from the Liberal's vote total in each riding and add 10% to the Conservative vote, there will be some interesting surprises.