As most suspected, Liberal incumbent Peter Milliken was re-elected to a seventh term last night over rivals Brian Abrams (Conservative), Rick Downes (NDP), and Eric Walton (Green). The surprise of the evening, however, was how close the race was. While Milliken still won by a somewhat comfortable margin of over 3,500 votes and 6.5%, this is still far removed from the over 12,000 votes and nearly 20% margin he won by in 2006, which many thought was an off-year for him.

This can be credited to a few things:

1) The strong Abrams Campaign: Abrams’ campaign was strong right out of the gate and had been active since January getting his name out there and attending events. I had the chance to see him on two occasions during this election, and it’s clear he is also quite impressive in person. He had a strong presence by winning the sign war, a billboard and radio campaign, and occasional media coverage (though some was pretty harsh as well).

2) The demographics of Kingston: Although Kingston has leaned Liberal for quite some time, there are demographics that trend towards the Conservatives. Lots of protestant suburban voters, seniors, military voters, rural voters and high-net-worth retirees all trend towards the Conservatives, especially in this election. This should account for much of the switch from Liberal to CPC.

3) Milliken himself: Milliken has taken quite a beating in the media, and more importantly in the coffeeshops, with his musings about not serving a full term if not given the speaker’s position again. He has claimed in the media that it was “misinformation”, but in my humble opinion, Milliken was given every opportunity to say outright “I WILL serve a full term” and never said it outright. This appears to have been a factor.

So what does the future hold for this riding? I can’t imagine Milliken will be the Speaker again. He was given the Speaker’s position because the CPC numbers in the 120’s made them concerned about losing the one vote and still being able to pass legislation with the support of the NDP. With 143 seats, this won’t be a factor anymore, and if the Conservatives are intent on governing with a stronger mandate (and one day a majority), they’ll need a Conservative member as Speaker. This will put the heat on Milliken and test whether he really was after only the Speaker’s chair or not.

As for Abrams, his strong showing positions him very well for another run. Whether it will be a byelection when Milliken retires, or as part of another likely election in the next couple of years, he will most certainly be a candidate again and must be considered a likely frontrunner if Milliken isn’t on the Grit ticket.

After 20 years, Kingston politics may have just entered the ‘exciting’ category once again.

PS – full disclosure, I voted for the Greens’ Eric Walton.

Thirty-seven days and about $300 million later, Canadians awake to a “new” government in Ottawa. The Conservatives under Prime Minister Stephen Harper have built on their previous minority position and added a substantial number of seats, just a tad short of a majority. The Liberals, meanwhile, have seen the biggest decline in support in at least twenty years, placing Liberal leader Stéphane Dion’s head squarely and firmly on the chopping block. The Greens have failed yet again to elect a single MP, which will shut them out of the televised leaders’ debates no matter how loudly leader Elizabeth May screams to push her way in again. The NDP has gained a good number of seats, but despite party leader Jack Layton’s determination to replace Mr. Harper, it is quite obvious now that there is a ceiling to how far the federal NDP can go in Canada.

While the election may have produced a result that is only slightly different from the last parliament, there have been some interesting developments at riding level. Trudeau scion Justin won his seat in Montréal under the Liberal banner, and is already being traded on the rumour mill as a potential leadership candidate to follow in his famous father’s footsteps. Garth Turner, a former Conservative, then Liberal, MP, has been defeated in his Ontario riding – too bad for his constituents, but certainly a boon for the fans of his blog, as Mr. Turner will now be a free agent who can speak his mind without any fetters imposed by party discipline.
(more…)

I predict the following electoral outcomes in northeastern Ontario tonight:

1 Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing: This will be one of the closest races in the region. Carol Hughes of the NDP by a nose.

2 Nickel Belt: Another close race but the NDP’s Claude Gravelle will take it at the end of a long night.

3 Nipissing-Timiskaming:  An easy win for Anthony Rota with Conservative Sinicrope a relatively distant second.

4 Parry Sound-Muskoka:  The closest race in the country last time should see Conservative Tony Clement waltz to victory.

5 Sault Ste. Marie:  Tony Martin of the NDP appears to be a shoe-in in the Sault although not without a challenge.

6 Sudbury:  Diane Marleau of the Liberals is likely to hold this seat but it will be a lot tighter than an incumbent should have to face.

7 Timmins-James Bay:  An easy win for Charlie Angus who appears to be making this into an NDP stronghold.

Totals:  CPC: 1 seat; LPC: 2 seats; NDP: 4 seats; GPC: 0 seats

It is widely believed that all 28 ridings in Alberta will go to the Conservatives, but there are two ridings that might switch to a different couleur.

The first one is Calgary Northeast. This riding, which used to belong to Art Hanger, who is retiring from politics, is the scene of conservative infighting between the official Conservative candidate, Devinder Shory, and an independent conservative contender, Roger Richard. The battle between them has been anything but benign, with injunctions and other legal threats being traded liberally.

This could result in the same split of the vote on the right in this riding that was also instrumental in allowing the Liberals three majority governments under Jean Chrétien when the right was divided into Tories and Reform.

It’s a story as old as time: when two are engaged in battle like this, it is usually a third that comes up the middle and takes the prize – in this case, Liberal candidate Sanam Kang, for example. But the riding may also go to the Green Party candidate or the NDP. The only thing that the two conservative candidates have going for them is that the candidates of the other parties don’t seem too capable or promising, which may limit voters’ choices to Shory and Richard.

The other riding that warrants close attention is Edmonton-Strathcona. Here, the Tory incumbent is facing off against a strong NDP candidate, Linda Duncan. Duncan has enjoyed great momentum, as documented by Liberals4Linda, a blog of Liberals who have decided to endorse and vote for Duncan.

There is no real threat to Conservatives in any of the other 26 ridings, which will be won by the Conservatives by five-digit margins – as usual – including, unfortunately, Calgary West, where the always-absent and abrasive Conservative incumbent should have been removed from office a long time ago. So, in Calgary West, people’s hopes are that Jennifer Pollock can pull it off and restore democracy in the riding at long last.

I’ll stay out of the predictions game outside of my province. So since everyone and their Mom is posting on this, lets cut to the chase:

Battleford-Llyodminster:
Winner: Gerry Ritz (CON)

Blackstrap:
Winner: Lynne Yelich (CON)

Cypress Hills-Grassland:
Winner: David Anderson (CON)

Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River:
Winner: Rob Clarke (CON)

Palliser:
Winner: Ray Boughen (CON)

Prince Albert:
Winner: Randy Hoback (CON)

Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre:
Winner: Tom Lukiwski (CON)

Regina-Qu’Appelle:
Winner: Janice Bernier (NDP)

Saskatoon-Humboldt:
Winner: Brad Trost (CON)

Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar:
Winner: Nettie Wiebe (NDP)

Saskatoon-Wanuskewin:
Winner: Maurice Vellacott (CON)

Souris-Moose Mountain:
Winner: Ed Komarnicki (CON)

Wascana:
Winner: Ralph Goodale (LIB)

Yorkton-Melville:
Winner: Garry Breitkreuz (CON)

The squeakers will be in Palliser, Regina-Qu’Appelle, and Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar. Given the strength of the New Democrat candidates in all three ridings (all of whom have been on the hustings since early 2007) and the upswing in NDP support province-wide, I don’t think I’m going out on too far of a limb in calling for victories in 2 of the 3 ridings.

Goodale will easily retain his seat in Wascana, but I just don’t see Orchard pulling it out up in DMCR.

The NDP will finish a strong second in Palliser, Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre, Saskatoon-Humboldt, Saskatoon-Wanuskewin, Blackstrap, and Prince Albert, putting some distance between themselves and the Liberal candidates.

The Conservative support is rock solid outside of the main urban centres, and while they might see a slight drop in their overall percentages, they will still win handily over their competitors.

The final tally: CON 11, NDP 2, LIB 1.

Nationally, I’ll deal in generalities:
- The Conservatives will win an increased minority government
- The Liberals will win seats numbering in the low 90s
- The New Democrats will break 40 seats increase their seat total (35-40)
- The BQ will take 1 or 2 of the existing Conservative seats in Quebec
- The Green Party will not win a seat
- All the leaders will win their seats, except Elizabeth May who will finish a close 3rd.

What a difference a couple of seats might make!

Greg Morrow’s latest forecast – 126 seats for theHarper Conservatives and 128 for the Liberals and NDP combined — sets up some interesting possibilities. Let’s suppose, as Greg predicdts, that the election gives the Liberals and the NDP more seats than the Tories.

First, Stephen Harper’s failure to significantly improve his party’s position would put his long-term leadership under a cloud. He almost quit in a hissy fit after the 2004 vote. The knives could be out — except that Harper’s kept such a tight grip on his erratic crew that he’s really got no rival at this point.

Second, all the pronouncements of a Liberal wipe-out will have proven vastly overstated. Ninety-two seats isn’t that far off the 95 the Liberals held when Parliament was dissolved. Dion’s performance in the last two weeks of the campaign will have earned him another shot at 24 Sussex.

Third, Jack Layton’s “I’m running for Prime Minister” is taking him down a long road, judging from the miniscule progress he’ll have made (six more seats according to Greg).

What effect will a combined Liberal-NDP edge over the Conservatives have on the next parliament? As I’ve written before, that’s all it took in Ontario in 1985 for David Peterson to oust the front-running Conservatives under Frank Miller.

The Liberals and the NDP also won more seats than the Tories in 2006. But with Paul Martin’s resignation, there was no taste for an accord with the NDP.

Now, with two-thirds of Canadians having voted for a candidate other than a Conservative, Dion and Layton will have a responsibility to consider how their two parties together could best serve Canada in this time of economic crisis.

Both will know full well that even with a free hand, the change in the economy means they’d not be in a position to fulfill their election commitments. This would force Layton to tone down his spending plans, and Dion to reflect on his Green Shift priorities. Factor in these considerations and you have two parties that could work together in a “Crisis Coalition.”

What other choice would Dion have? He cerrtainly wouldn’t want another election right away. How long could he survive by allowing Conservative legislation to go through unchallenged?

In a House of five parties (or four and maybe one Green and a couple of independents), a Liberal-NDP fusion, accord or call it what you want, would still be a minority.

There’s only one issue that greatly separates the Bloc from the Libs and the Dippers — separation. But even Duceppe admits that’s not on the table.

On culture, social justice, Afghanistan, healthcare, economic security — there’s very little difference. Gilles Duceppe wiill have no hunger for another election. He may well have run for the last time.

A Liberal-NDP “Crisis Coalition,” supported by a two-year commitment from the Bloc to let the pair govern, no longer looks as far-fetched as a couple of weeks ago.

What a difference a couple of seats might make!

www.wildaboutwriting.com

The Calgary Herald has been tracking opinion through one of its online forums:

Of the 17 people who firmed up how they’re going to vote in the last week of the campaign, 41 per cent picked the Greens, 24 per cent are headed to the NDP, and 18 per cent plan to back the Conservatives. The Greens are also the top choice for 34 voters who haven’t yet made up their minds. Stephane Dion’s Liberals, however, trail all parties among the survey’s decided and undecided voters.

That poll, of course is anything but scientific and representative, but it’s quite interesting all the same. It may, however, reveal traces of a very general trend. Then again, it’s not really news that Liberals finish dead last in Alberta, particularly in Calgary.

Nothing has happened in my own riding of Prince Edward hastings to change the Outcome I predicted back in the beginning. Daryl Kramp will continue to be the MP on the other side of 9:00 tomorrow night.

On the national scale, I have worked up a riding by riding set of predictions that I have based on several sources: National trends past and present, individual candidates, other prediction sites, anticipated veter turnouts and information I have received from people on the ground.

I am, at this point, going to predict a Tory minority government, but will say that a majority is not out of reach though unlikely.

The seat breakdown looks something like this:

Conservative: 147
Liberal: 87
Bloc (Grrr..) 44
NDP: 28
Ind 2 (Andre Arthur in Portneuf-jacques cartier, and Bill Casey in Colchester-Cumberland)

For full riding by riding breakdown, please visit http://libertystorch.blogspot.com . I may make some further updates as the final poll dumps come in.

If I’m off, I think it might be in Quebec where my own personal bias against the Bloc Quebecois whom I loathe with every fibre of my being has probably crept in , causing me to mix in my hope that the Tories will hold the ridings they have, and that the Libs will take back some they lost with as much objectvity as I could muster. Hoping for low Bloquiste turnout.

As the politicians make their final pleas for our votes, let’s remember that no matter who wins tomorrow life goes on. Canada will still be the greatest country in the world as long as we vote with conviction for our candidate and party of choice. Happy Thanksgiving! 

Predicted winner – Conservative

In 2004, Liberal MP Paul Zed was effective in getting the message out to voters that they should have a Member of Parliament who was in government. He picked up the seat by about 3500 votes. In ’06 he went back in but his lead shrunk to about 1500 votes.

In this election, it’s almost a foregone conclusion that the Conservatives will be back in power, it’s just a matter of whether they have a majority or a minority. With former PC MLA Rodney Weston carrying the Conservative banner, people may decide they want to have an MP on the government side.

Paul Zed has been regarded as a decent MP for the area but the Liberals carbon tax proposal hasn’t exactly been embraced with open arms in this area where energy and the Irvings are dominant players. The Green Shift promises to chew in to any lead Zed once enjoyed.

X-Factor – Saint Johners have no problem not voting for government. In 1993, when the Progressive Conservatives were decimated, Saint John was one of two ridings in the country that voted in a PC (although it was Elsie Wayne who probably could have run for the Rhino Party and won the seat) and kept it Tory for two more elections when Liberal majorities reigned.

Crossposted – Spink About It

Below is my final chart of how the democraticSPACE projected vote totals in Edmonton-Strathcona have changed over time (between September 25th and October 12th). The graph displays averages of democraticSPACE’s projected ranges.  According to these averages, the Conservatives are currently projected as one point ahead of the NDP, but the democraticSPACE projection model doesn’t take potential strategic voting into account.

I’m glad I’m not in the position–as the real masterminds behind democraticSPACE are–of having to make a prediction about this race. It’s simply not possible this time. I admit to having access to a bit more data than democraticSPACE has, but even so, I wouldn’t hazard a guess. I will say that I can foresee anything from a rather more marginal win than usual for Conservative candidate Rahim Jaffer (if the progressive strategic vote for NDP candidate Linda Duncan turns out to be weak or non-existent) to a comfortable win for Duncan (if the Liberal vote collapses into the single digits). Both of those scenarios are possible. More likely than either one, though, is one of the various nail-biter scenarios in between. At this point it all comes down to three factors: 1) how well the Tories are able to get out their vote, 2) how well the NDP is able to get out its vote, and the most important and yet least controllable factor: 3) just how strong the Anybody But the Conservatives movement is in the riding–i.e., how willing the Liberal and Green voters are to switch their votes to oust a Tory.

It’s already been said by the Ottawa Citizen, the CBC, the Calgary Herald, and the National Post, but to say that this is a riding to watch is a massive understatement. And for all those denizens of the riding who are sick of your vote not counting, well, just consider this election a rare gift.  Because oh boy does it count this time.

Further reading:
Edmonton-Strathcona: a snapshot
Winners and losers in Edmonton-Strathcona
Edmonton-Strathcona: the Conservatives
Edmonton-Strathcona: the New Democrats
Edmonton-Strathcona: the Liberals
Edmonton-Strathcona: the Greens

Quoi de mieux pour Jack Layton qu’un passage à l’émission « Tout le monde en parle » pour bien conclure sa campagne au Québec. Troisième et dernier chef à se présenter à l’émission après Gilles Duceppe et Stéphane Dion (Stephen Harper a quant à lui décliné l’invitation à cinq reprises) M. Layton en a profité pour souligner quelques-unes des propositions de son parti. Le retrait des troupes canadiennes de l’Afghanistan, l’abolition des baisses d’impôt aux entreprises et son projet de bourse du carbone – servant à taxer les grands pollueurs plutôt que les familles comme le proposent les libéraux, selon lui – furent les principales propositions qu’il a développées.

Présente sur le plateau, la journaliste politique Emmanuelle Latraverse en a profité pour lui demander s’il était ouvert à former un gouvernement de coalition avec Stéphane Dion. Le chef du NPD a déclaré qu’il préférait attendre les résultats de l’élection. En réponse à la journaliste qui lui a alors fait remarquer qu’il lui faudrait multiplier les sièges pour remplacer le premier ministre actuel, M. Layton a alors ajouté « Tout le monde dit aux gens qu’on ne peut pas faire les choses. J’ai écouté ça pendant toute ma vie. C’est une attitude défaitiste et moi je n’accepte pas cette approche de la vie. » Il s’agit effectivement d’une mauvaise attitude dont les Canadiens devront se défaire s’ils veulent mettre fin bipartisme et ne plus être condamnés à choisir le moindre de deux maux.

Questionnée à son tour par Guy A. Lepage sur la course, Emmanuelle Latraverse a affirmé qu’elle croyait que les conservateurs ont perdu tout espoir de faire des gains au Québec et qu’ils pourraient également perdre plusieurs circonscriptions dans la province.

Un peu plus tôt dans la journée, le chef du Nouveau Parti démocratique a maintenu que son caucus québécois pourrait compter des membres de plus suite aux élections du 14 octobre. À Montréal entre autres, les candidats Daniel Breton, dans Jeanne-Le Ber, et Anne Lagacé-Dowson, dans Westmount-Ville-Marie, ont selon lui « de bonnes chances de remporter leur circonscription. »  Accompagnant son chef au Marché Atwater, cette dernière a soutenu pour sa part qu’elle sentait que l’électorat penchait désormais en faveur des néo-démocrates. « Les gens savent que nous sommes le seul parti à tenir un véritable discours progressiste. »

Dans un rassemblement au Club Soda plus tard en soirée, le chef du NPD a dit qu’il privilégiait un fédéralisme flexible et asymétrique qui respecterait les champs de compétence du gouvernement québécois. Il s’en est pris par la suite aux chefs des autres partis de l’opposition en les accusant de s’opposer à M. Harper au Québec tout en le soutenant au Parlement. « Gilles Duceppe a voté pour deux budgets de Stephen Harper qui ont laissé les familles de côté en donnant des milliards aux banques et aux pétrolières On ne peut pas se présenter contre Stephen Harper au Québec et le soutenir à Ottawa. », a-t-il lancé à l’endroit du chef bloquiste. M. Layton a rappelé du même souffle que le Stéphane Dion avait lui aussi appuyé Stephen Harper pas moins de 43 fois (sic) au Parlement. « Si vous ne pouvez pas faire votre travail comme chef de l’opposition, vous ne pouvez certainement pas faire le travail d’un premier ministre. », a-t-il conclu.

Predicted winner – Conservative

Tobique-Mactaquac stretches from outside the city of Fredericton to just north of the bilingual Town of Grand Falls. Conservative MP Mike Allen won this seat in the 2006 election by a mere 250 or so votes over Liberal Andy Savoy. Savoy himself had first taken the seat from the Progressive Conservatives in 2000 by a mere 150 votes although he increased his vote considerably in 2004 thanks in part to a local riding controversy over who would carry the Conservative banner in the riding.

This time Savoy isn’t running in favour of Stanley teacher Sally McGrath who is largely an unknown in much of the riding. Allen has had two and a half years to establish his name throughout the vast riding (not to mention this being his fourth election). Expect him to win this riding and increase his vote.

X-Factor – The NDP and Greens are relatively weak in this riding, more so than in other N.B. ridings. This is a riding where strategic voting if it were utilized heavily could give the Liberals the seat.

Crossposted – Spink About It

Pauvre Gilles Duceppe…

Le chef bloquiste semble être victime du mauvais sort lorsqu’il visite des marchés publics.

Fin septembre, le candidat libéral de Papineau, Justin Trudeau est tombé par hasard sur la tournée dominicale de Duceppe au marché Jean-Talon, accompagnée de sa candidate Vivianne Barbot. Scène complètement surréaliste s’il en est une.

Puis ce matin, c’est au tour de Luc Harvey, député sortant de Louis-Hébert, de faire un détour par le marché public de Sainte-Foy, où le chef du Bloc se trouvait, pour aller réclamer le bilan de la présence bloquiste à Ottawa. Duceppe, qui peutavoir la mèche courte parfois, ne s’est pas caché pour lâcher un ” c’est un imbécile ” à sa garde rapprochée, mais suffisamment fort pour que plusieurs médias soulèvent l’anecdote.

Appelons les choses par leur nom : Luc Harvey n’est pas un imbécile. Luc Harvey est nerveux, excessivement nerveux depuis que les sondages démontrent qu’il est maintenant derrière le candidat bloquiste Pascal-Pierre Paillé. Et il a agi comme un imbécile en allant crier au Marché.

M. Harvey ne bénéficie pas d’un surplus de confiance de la part de ses commettants. Prenez par exemple ses démêlés avec le fisc (commentaire de François Bourque ici) ou encore son attitude condescendante dans un débat contre son adversaire du Bloc québécois plus tôt cette semaine. Son numéro d’aujourd’hui ne devrait pas l’aider.

Michel Hébert chronique là-dessus en mentionnant notamment que M. Harvey dit être passé là par hasard. Ben oui…

Faisant campagne au Québec en fin de semaine, Stephen Harper a déclaré aux journalistes qu’il n’avait rien de nouveau à dire aux Québécois, mais qu’il allait plutôt insister sur l’importance du choix que ces derniers auront à faire mardi prochain. En moins de 100 mots, M. Harper résume de façon très concrète la situation au Québec, mais du même souffle, nous permet également de déceler ce qui cloche avec sa propre vision. Décortiquons :

« Il y a trois choix au Québec, mais cela revient comme ailleurs à deux choix véritables. Le Bloc va continuer à être un critique efficace, mais à la fin il ne pourra rien changer. »

Harper aura beau marteler ce clou aussi souvent qu’il le veut, les Québécois se souviennent que l’élection de 74 députés libéraux fédéraux au Québec en 1980 n’a pas empêché le rapatriement de la Constitution. Ils se souviennent également qu’aux dernières élections, ils ont dû être représentés par Michael Fortier, alors que ce celui-ci n’avait même pas été élu. Deux faits parmi tant d’autres qui justifient l’appui inconditionnel de nombreux Québécois au Bloc.

« Or, les Québécois, qui sont des gens pragmatiques, devront choisir entre mon parti qui leur offre un fédéralisme conforme à leurs aspirations et le fédéralisme centralisateur de Stéphane Dion. »

Voilà où le bât blesse. Le fédéralisme offert par les conservateurs n’est justement pas conforme aux aspirations des Québécois. Certes, il s’en approche – et il ne faut surtout pas minimiser ce pas dans la bonne direction –, mais cette prétention révèle à quel point Stephen Harper, malgré toute sa compétence et sa sincère volonté à comprendre le Québec, est victime d’avoir avoir de mauvaises antennes chez nous.

« Les Québécois ne veulent pas de la conception du fédéralisme de Stéphane Dion. »

C’est un fait que la vision extrêmement centralisatrice de Stéphane Dion va à l’encontre de la volonté de la grande majorité des Québécois. Hormis le 5% des fédéralistes dont le cœur bat à la vue du portrait de la reine sur le billet de 20$ et le 20% des souverainistes qui n’auraient pas été satisfaits par Meech, le Québec compte environ 75% de nationalistes qui souhaitent simplement que le Québec puisse avancer sans les entraves fédérales habituelles; soit via une souveraineté en partenariat avec le Canada ou soit un fédéralisme le plus asymétrique possible.

Le jour où un parti politique fédéral comprendra cela, il remportera facilement une majorité de sièges au Québec; ce qui ne s’est pas produit depuis la fondation du Bloc québécois.

Reste que Stephen Harper a raison sur le point le plus important : les Québécois sont des gens pragmatiques et ne demandent qu’à faire un choix. Encore faut-il qu’on leur fasse une offre à la hauteur de leurs aspirations.

There’s an excellent money-for-dummies article out today, written by an Associated Press writer, which explains a basic economic fundamental in plain terms. Once you understand that basic principle and begin extrapolating from it, you soon realize the broader implications for “ordinary Canadians” of Stephen Harper’s “great buying opportunities.”

On a beaucoup parlé de la campagne libérale, de ses ratés et de son chef mais si la lecture des sondages est exacte, le grand perdant de cette élection devrait être le chef conservateur Stephen Harper.

Comprenons-nous bien : la performance de l’actuel premier ministre, quoique très ordinaire depuis le débat des chefs, n’est pas catastrophique. Dans la moyenne pour être exact. Mais ce n’est pas là-dessus qu’il sera jugé.

Les conservateurs, comme la majorité des mouvements de droite, veulent des résultats. Les coupures aux subventions dans le domaine culturel et dans le développement économique des régions sont des exemples bien réels de cette idéologie politique. Si le retour sur l’investissement n’est pas bon, on coupe ou on remodèle le programme. La logique peut tenir.

Stephen Harper a décidé d’utiliser un des échappatoires de sa propre loi sur les élections à date fixe pour se lancer dans une campagne électorale qui n’avait pour but que d’aller chercher les sièges manquants à une majorité conservatrice. L’opportunisme politique avec un grand O, quoique le seul reproche qu’on puisse lui faire est d’avoir voilé sciemment l’esprit de la loi qu’il a mis en place.

Le résultat net, en date d’aujourd’hui, est que le Parti conservateur a fragilisé sa place à la Chambre des Communes. Après avoir créé de toutes pièces le personnage de Stéphane Dion, il a laissé les autres partis redéfinir son image. Il les a même aidés, par exemple avec sa position face à la situation économique mondiale. On ne se donne pas de chances lorsqu’on dit aux Canadiens d’investir dans la Bourse, alors que ceux-ci ne cherchent qu’à se faire rassurer. Pas plus qu’en présentant une plate-forme électorale (qui, malgré certains bons côtés, avait plutôt l’air d’un plan B fabriqué à la va-vite)… après le vote par anticipation.

Que feront les militants conservateurs après l’élection? Attendons les résultats, mais Stephen Harper devra répondre de ses actes. Si le résultat net de l’élection est le retour à la case départ, c’est que le premier ministre aura échoué son plus gros test politique.

Predicted winner – Conservative

Ridings don’t come much bluer than this one. Only once has this riding gone Liberal and that was in 1993 when Progressive Conservatives dropped faster than Sarah Palin “g’s”.
The one Liberal to hold the seat, Paul Zed had to go to another riding to reach his aspirations of going back to Parliament. Conservative Rob Moore has this one lock, stock and barrel.

X-Factor – Nada. Some diehard Liberal supporters say strategic voting might change the tide, but it wouldn’t be enough.

Crossposted – Spink About It

Depuis hier DemocraticSPACE prévoit sept Bloquistes sur 7 pour le “nord du Québec”. Surprenant. Même Lebel de Roberval, le dernier qui semblait solide, prend le bord.

J’ai pas l’impression que Jean-Pierre Blackburn ne va pouvoir s’en remettre lui non-plus, même avec sa promesse de 1 000 jobs et plus dans une prison futur à Larouche, même avec un beau gymnase tout neuf et tout aussi futur pour le Cégep de Jonquière, annoncé en grande pompe, hier en mettant de côté les “partenaires” péquistes et syndicales. Chantale est encore à une majorité absolue de plus de 50%, bien au delà de la marge d’erreur.

Trop de tout au local, je crois. Et pas assez de ce qui compte au nationale! On dirait que c’est la campagne fédérale du Parti Conservateur, qui les avaient porté au pouvoir il y a deux ans et qui est en train de les renvoyer à la maison. Que d’erreurs du point de vue du Saguenay et du Québec. C’est ce que les analystes disent dans la région depuis quelques jours. Entendu à la piscine du Cégep par un non spécialiste en science politique:”ça me fait de la peine pour monsieur Blackburn que je respecte, mais son chef ne l’a vraiment pas”.

Chris Warkentin, the incumbent MP for Peace River, was never the local Conservative party’s first pick for MP, even if he was former MP Charlie Penson’s pick.  At least, as I’ve mentioned before, his nomination raised enough ire within the party that in the last election, Grande Prairie town councillor Bill Given took him on as an independent, in large part because he didn’t get a chance to try for the nomination himself.  Given’s Conservative support helped him come in second in the last election, Warkentin’s closest competition by far with around 9800 votes.  Of course, compared to Warkentin’s almost 28,000 votes it wasn’t a close race whatsover.  (Incidentally, this election Given says he’s voting Green, an interesting choice since the Greens received only 2% of the vote last time, and have a very small, if dedicated, core group running their campaign.  Green candidate Jennifer Villebrun, however, has done well at forums and is both well-spoken and upbeat, and will likely get a boost from the popularity of leader Elizabeth May.) But what will happen to all of those disaffected and largely Conservative voters who voted for Given?  That’s 9800 voters who already broke with a long tradition of voting Conservative in the Peace River riding once in the past.  Will they mark their “x” by Warkentin’s name now, despite their dissatisfaction with him, out of party loyalty?  Or will they seek another alternative in this election?  Perhaps like Given, those voters will turn to the Greens, with their fiscal conservatism.  Or might they even turn to the NDP, third place after Given in the last election?

There are some other factors to consider too.  The nuclear issue continues to polarize the riding.  In Valleyview, a Conservative bastion where in my experience to be progressive was almost to be spit upon in the past, audience members at the recent forum stood up and called out to Warkentin to “take a stand, take a stand” on the proposed nuclear power plant, frustrated with his continued waffling (Warkentin has stead-fastedly refused to take a position on nuclear, saying either that it’s a provincial issue or that he has no personal opinion, and carefully saying nothing about his party’s support for nuclear energy in general).  If Warkentin said he supported nuclear, there are any number of people who would agree.  There are also those who would refuse to vote for him as a result.  But trying to straddle the fence doesn’t seems to be earning Warkentin any points, if the Valleyview forum was any indication.

 Another factor is Warkentin’s group of core supporters at the Peace River Bible Institute in Sexsmith.  They were out in force at the 2006 election forum in Grande Prairie, having travelled out together in several identical white vans to ask questions of candidates like why the government allowed nudity in art.  Yet they were conspiciously absent at the most Grande Prairie forum in this election (while nuclear protestors were there and asking questions).  It could be that the Bible College crowd doesn’t feel Warkentin needs any more extra help, now that he’s an incumbent and sure to win. Or could it be that they are upset with Warkentin for not doing more on their key issues, abortion and gay marriage? After all, it has been tough lately for Warkentin to walk this line as well.  His religious beliefs clearly include a personal opposition to abortion and gay marriage, and if you press him personally, as I did after the Peace River forum, he will admit to having personal views to that effect.  But he hasn’t said so flat out while campaigning, and his religious supporters expect him to do actually something about it.

 It’s not that Warkentin hasn’t tried.  He has raised the issues in the House of Commons, memorably trying to focus on the alleged damage gay marriage does to children (his cries of “what about the children” were subsequently dubbed “the Lovejoy factor” by the Upper Canadian blog), and supporting a crime bill, C-484 (the Unborn Victims of Crime Act), that might have reopened the abortion debate by giving special status to the life of an unborn child as a victim.  Which seems like a good point to note that Dr. Henry Morgentaler received the Order of Canada today for his role in making abortion legal in Canada, an award Warkentin also opposed.

 But Warkentin was dealt a blow when the Conservative Justice Minister dropped C-484 in August, right before the election.  The cynical, or the realistic, might say that the Harper government was afraid of being called anti-abortion during the election, a dangerous political position when polls consistently show Canadians remain supportive of legal abortion.  Warkentin was one of the few MPs who vowed to carry forward the bill despite his own government’s refusal to support it.  But with Harper and his spokesperson continuing to say another Conservative government will not support private members bills on abortion, does Warkentin really have a chance?  And will his statements in the House be enough for his religious supporters, or are they becoming frustrated with what, to them, may seem like a lot of talk and very little action, and a lack of support from Harper?

 There is one last change in the riding since the last election, and that is the introduction of candidates for two parties that have never had a presence before, the Canadian Action Party (CAP) and the Libertarians.  The votes they will draw will likely be small, but there is no question Peace River residents have more choice than ever before on their ballots.

 All of this may add up to a more interesting election result than expected, or it may amount to nothing more than a little more mild grumbling as people obediently mark their “x” for the Conservatives as they always have.  Fortunately, we’re only one long weekend away from finding out.