Quote:
|
^ great. It's that kind of "root for the ordinary guy" that has the US very close to electing Sarah Palin as the VP. Be careful what you wish for...
|
the Free Press INSIDERS (which I'm a part of) shows Glover in St. B taking a even furhter lead.
In the swing riding of St. Boniface, where Conservative challenger Shelly Glover has led consistently since the first Insiders poll in early September, incumbent Liberal Ray Simard has now dropped to 26 per cent of decided Insider voters, down 13 points from his 2006 election tally. Glover leads with 57 per cent. |
Quote:
Much the same way that whenever there is a CFL poll on cfl.ca or tsn.ca, the Rider's always win it. I would also argue, to counter any possible point that one may reply with, that to gage the way a riding may swing based on the number of volunteers (or election signs for that matter) is an extremely flimsy gage of public opinion. I think that the St. B riding will probably feature the narrowest plurality of the Manitoba riding in this election... which is a nice segway into my next post... |
My updated Manitoba riding predictions...
All Winnipeg incumbents win (and every riding has an incumbent), so no change for the city. As I just said, St.B will be extremely close, but I give it to Simard for the reason that the Lib's support is not as noticeable as that of the Cons. Also, don't underestimate how the slight downturn in the Con's polling numbers also exists in MB's swing ridings. Further, the Harper/Con's attack on culture and the arts will be more relevant an issue in St.B than any other MB riding (Harper said something to the effect that artists are "like spoiled children" and also generalized them all as being into "expensive gala events"). Is this true? Yeah, in most cases... but you don't say it. I shouldn't have to point out that one of the key strategies for maintaining Franco-Canadian culture is through the arts, music, etc. Outside of Winnipeg, the only thing that may change is Churchill, but I'm beginning to think that Tina Keeper will hold on for a win. To sum it all up, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Manitoba has no changes, whatsoever, int he MPs we send to Ottawa for the next Parliament. |
we all have the right to an opinion and my opinion is that you are wrong about the St. B riding. The Franco-Canadians will conitnue to support Martin (oops I mean DION) and his liberals....HOWEVER look at the election boundries. They extend way out past Old St. B and into Southdale, Windsor Park, Island Lakes, Royalwood. These are not "real" french neighbourhoods. The Cons came close last election and they were running a "male ex-businessman". Now they are running a Female Cop, big diference and the audience in these neighbourhoods like it. This is my opinion and I'm not a paid Cons supporter.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
As such, I believe the same of the specific neighborhoods that you have mentioned (Southdale, Windsor Park, Island Lakes, Royalwood). We will probably see in these areas in terms of % of the vote that we do nationally. While the Cons will finish ahead in those specific areas, the Libs will garner roughly 30% of the vote in these areas. The NDP, maybe around 20%. However, the Lib voter turnout in the traditional St.B will be what will tip the scales. They will have roughly 50% in this zone, where most of the population in the riding is (IIRC). On the flip-side, the Cons only receive 40-46% in Southdale, Windsor Park, Island Lakes, Royalwood. But, who knows? This is, as you pointed out, a newly redesigned riding, and neighborhoods change and can defy popular wisdom. Either way, this will probably be the most interesting riding to watch on election night. |
I don't believe those boundries have changed for a few elections. However Island Lakes, Royalwood have simply expanded.
|
I know on the provincial election for Jack Reimer, there was some strong NDP support out in Island lakes and Royal wood, so I think its alot closer then the most recent polls show.
Just because its an affluent neighborhood doesn't mean its conservative. I know there is a correlation between the two, but I don't think that Island lakes and Royal wood can be blanketed as being conservative. Southdale on the other hand I think is a safer bet to call conservative, while Windor park is a toss up. Although I hope to be pleasently surprised on election night and see Shelly Glover win it. |
Here's a website, maintained by a Politics prof at SFU. It summarizes all federal political polls that are released during this campaign. You can also look at province-specific polls of federal politics.
http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/elections/polls.html Also, National: http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/elections/polls.html#NATIONAL And, Man/Sask: http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/elections/...nal.html#SK-MB Looks like the Cons peaked early, and are falling back to earth... much like what happened in '04 and '06 (my condolences to a lot of you guys!). One reason for this (in '06 and '08), IMO, is that when people hear or think of the "M" word ("Majority") related to Cons based on their polling numbers, they get scared and plans for strategic voting takes place. Heck, even some who earlier identified as a Con voter may switch - they're comfortable with Harper only in a minority parliament. |
Quote:
There are probably more of them then we will ever know. It's just that center-left politics is hard to get 'excited' about, hence the lack of lawn signs. Certainly the politics of the NDP, Greens and Conservatives attract a lot more people of an ideological bent; who I’m guessing would be more inclined to publicly display their support. As I write this, I'm reminded of the last election in Kildonan-St.Paul when Terry Duguid went toe-to-toe with Joy Smith, and all this when there was hardly a Liberal lawn sign to be seen. |
There's plenty of Anita Neville signage in Winnipeg South Centre. I think it just has more to do with the riding. In St. Boniface, it is loaded with signs of red and blue. In the Winnipeg South riding there are precious few signs.
Certainly being a Liberal (Centre-left) is as much of an ideological bent as being a Conservative (Centre-right). |
Quote:
|
Back in the Provincial election, a local news website put up an online poll, and someone from Niagara Falls tricked the site to vote Liberal about 1000 times. The main editor caught it and wrote a big thing about vote tampering online. The best polls are the national ones conducted by big polling firms but they never break the polling down by riding because the sample sizes would be too big. Sometimes news outlets will pay them to do a local poll but those aren't common.
|
Quote:
The Libs take from both ends of the mainstream spectrum, and true ‘ideologist’ don’t compromise. |
I understand the argument, I'm just having difficulty buying it on a practical level. Is this to say that Liberal support is largely passive? That nobody is ideological Liberal, they are simply not ideologically Conservative or New Democrat, and therefore are Liberal?
It seems somewhat strange to me. Not implausible, just difficult to grasp. I'm sure there are many passive Conservative supporters. I know many Conservative voters who don't wave the party towel ever, nor even keep close tabs on the political situation, but will passively vote Conservative at nearly every turn. I guess my statement would be, why can't you be ideologically Liberal? Many people I know have some views that line up right down the middle of the field. Wouldn't that make them ideologically Liberal (at least in the pre-Dion days, and perhaps in the present as well?)? Now, don't get me wrong, I do think the right wing is much more dedicated to their cause in a holistic sense than is the left wing. That is to say that Conservative supporters (largely) tend to tie themselves very closely to the Conservative party. No question. Nonetheless, I still think that the most successful political brand perhaps in the Western world, that being the Liberal Party of Canada, couldn't have achieved such lofty levels of prevalence, on little more than a large, predominantly passive following. My point being, even Liberal's have an ideological bent. I don't think you can tether people to a party without an ideological bent. Perhaps I'm missing something. Interesting debate though. |
Liberals are centrists, and people never consider centrists as ideologues.
|
people which people,,,That's like saying Atheists aren't ideological just because they don't believe in one god or another.
Believing in a centrist ideology such as the liberal ideology, does not mean you can't be passionate about that belief. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:59 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.