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

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.

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! 

The excerpt below is from a rather lengthy post written by a perplexed and frustrated Green Party member (me).

Help!

I just have to wonder how often Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party of Canada, can be misconstrued in the media. Is it a concerted effort by ALL media types deliberately to distort her meaning or is there something about what May is saying which makes her position, at minimum, ambiguous? I mean this question seriously.

A few hours ago, the GPC issued yet another press release about May’s stance on strategic voting. I’ve lost count of how many there have been.

So, the Kingston Whig Standard supposedly took a oujai board to Sir John A. MacDonald’s grave and asked for some election predictions.

 I can’t find it online, and didn’t actually read the article (yes, they printed this, it wasn’t just a drunken journalistic escapade), but a reporter told me today that good ol’ John A. predicted 4 Green ridings. They had their eyes closed, they didn’t touch it, and John. A. predicted 4 Green ridings.

I can tell you now, I think two of them will be Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound and Guelph. Central Nova has a shot, Vancouver Centre has a shot, West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country has a shot. There could be a ton of flukes and a ton of students who aren’t counted in polls (because its still illegal to poll cell phones, thank God) who could give surprise results if they actually get themselves out to the polls.

But John A. says four… it’s probably more than DemocraticSpace will give us.

I spent a good part of today and yesterday running errands in my downtown neighbourhood. On both occasions the only canvassing I saw was for the Greens. In both instances it was a pair of Green supporters. It’s all rather low key.

And low key is the way I would capture this entire campaign. Dunno what it’s like elsewhere in Soviet Canuckistan, but out here there’s alot of election fatigue. Going back to 2004

• 2004 Federal election
• 2004 Municipal election
• 2005 Provincial election
• 2006 Federal election
• 2008 Federal election (Oct)
• 2008 Provincial by-election (Oct)
• 2008 Municipal election (Nov)
• 2009 Provincial election (May)

So here in Vancouver’s West End that’ll be 8 elections in 5 years–and 3 in a period of about 6 weeks this year. Even for us political nerds it’s hard to get too enervated by it all.

At the ballot box those sentiments could pan out in a number of ways. Many fence sitters might decide to stay home instead. Some will snark vote: either vote for the Tories to give someone a majority and to get some peace, or do the Anything But Harper schtick and try to support the local candidate best positioned to keep the Cons out. And there’s always the FYou vote, which in BC was NDP for a long time, then Reform/Alliance, but now seems splintered between the Dippers and Greens. Though I expect a lot of Greens will split towards the Liberal or New Democrat who can win in their consituency.

Vancouver Centre–OK I’ll call it. Michael Byers squeaks out a <1, 000 vote plurality over Hedy.

Unless she romps it again….

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.

I went to North Vancouver’s all candidates meeting on Wednesday night and was left with a few impressions (side note: there’s a prediction on the winner of this – and several other – ridings at the end).

 1. Compared to the 2006 debate at the same venue, the crowd was incredibly respectful. Despite being marginally pro-Saxton (though from my vantage point I may not have been able to gauge audience reaction entirely accurately), there was only one moment of heckling, which was over before the debate was 5 minutes old.

2. Don Bell knows what plays and what doesn’t in the riding. Bell is an old pro, probably running his last campaign, who is putting up a heck of a fight in a right leaning riding. He can come off as awkward from time to time double checking his policy notes and stumbling over his words. However, the answers he does provide (including the best joke of the night) show an inherent knowledge of North Vancouver’s electorate. Don Bell knows North Vancouver and North Vancouver knows Don Bell.

3. All the subtleties that Don Bell knows about North Vancouver, Andrew Saxton doesn’t. He’s a new comer, it shows and North Vancouver doesn’t like newcomers – just ask Warren Kinsella. He was awkward, caught in contradictions once or twice and really fell off the wagon towards the end of the night as his jokes fell flat and his short, pointed answers, turned into meandering forays into a party platform he wasn’t entirely familiar with and a defensive answer about missing debates and failing to fill out questionnaires. Saxton has the potential to do well. He may win this election, but in a few more years he’ll be a much better candidate with a much better understanding of North Vancouver’s fussy electorate. Let’s hope that the local Conservatives don’t eat their own and give Mr. Saxton a second chance should he require one.

4. Jim Stephenson was not nearly as good as he was in 2006, but was still a pleasure to watch. A great understanding of his party’s platform and a very engaging style proved him to be the most likable candidate on stage. Perhaps resigned to a third place finish, the most interesting moments of the night were the little bones he kept throwing the Liberals.

5. I’m looking very much forward to the NDP candidates next film – he fought the good fight. He had nothing to lose and it showed, still good for him to show up. In 2006 the NDP candidate missed this debate because she was recovering from exhaustion in hospital. The Libertarian candidate, well, she sure didn’t hold back (and good on the audience for respecting her for that).

 6. This debate reminded me of why Don Bell won this riding in 2004 and 2006, and why he’s going to be the victor on October 14th, that’s right I’m calling it. Don Bell, North Vancouver – Liberal HOLD, but not by much.

7. While I’m here, I’ll also make a few more calls: West Vancouver – Sunshine Coast -STSC, oh the anticipation….John Weston, Conservative PICKUP by a country mile, but not a majority. Vancouver Centre…Hedy Fry Liberal HOLD, with a reasonable plurality – 2-4th may be seperated by no more than a point.

 If anything comes up in the next few days I’ll be back…

Fait étonnant, c’est un Gilles Duceppe visiblement agacé des attaques que subit Stéphane Dion à propos de la qualité de son anglais, qui s’est porté à la défense de ce dernier. Qualifiant la sortie de Stephen Haper à l’endroit du chef du Parti libéral de « coup bas », M. Duceppe est d’avis que les commentaires du genre n’ont pas leur place en campagne électorale. Selon le chef du Bloc québécois, plusieurs leaders politiques éprouvent des difficultés à s’exprimer dans les deux langues officielles.

Bonjour my friend, how are you mon ami ?

Il faut avouer que le bilinguisme des chefs des cinq principaux partis politiques varie énormément d’un à l’autre. Et si le français de Jack Layton est de loin supérieur à celui d’Elizabeth May, il est permis de s’étonner des propos de Stephen Harper dont le français est relativement du même calibre que l’anglais de Stéphane Dion.

Toujours selon Gilles Duceppe, « M. Dion fait des efforts pour parler en anglais et je pense qu’il a progressé. On demande beaucoup plus aux francophones de bien parler anglais qu’aux anglophones de bien parler français. Il y a deux poids, deux mesures. »

À ce propos, il est indéniable que le bilinguisme canadien n’existe que sur papier. En effet, selon Statistique Canada (chiffres de 2007), seulement 17% des Canadiens sont bilingues. Or, cette donnée masque le véritable écart qui existe entre le Québec et le ROC. En effet, si l’on fait exception du Nouveau-Brunswick où il atteint 33,4% – principalement en raison de la population acadienne –, le taux de bilinguisme est beaucoup moins reluisant dans le ROC, où il varie de 4 à 12%, qu’au Québec où il atteint 40,6%.

Baignant dans une Amérique en grande majorité anglophone, il est généralement admis que les Québécois d’origine francophone ont tout à gagner à maîtriser l’anglais.

Cela dit, en ce qui a trait au « bilinguisme canadien », ces derniers n’ont pas de leçons à recevoir de CTV, de Stephen Harper, ni même de l’ensemble ROC.

We finally have our first election poll for Saskatchewan (no longer just “the west”). I’m not generally one to go by individual poll results, so take these with a grain of salt. However, since they are all we have, lets look at them a little closer. The poll, conducted by News Talk 650/Angus Reid, questioned 800 voters from across the province. The results (+/- 3.5%, 19 out 20 times):

Conservatives: 40%
NDP: 35%
Liberals: 17%
Greens: 7%
Undecided: 28%

Interestingly, in opposite fashion to the national trends of the past week, Dion’s approval ratings are extremely low in the province, even lower than Elizabeth May. Stephen Harper is thought to make the best PM of the bunch, with Jack Layton having the highest approal rating. In 2006 the split was 49/25, the Liberal 2006 total was not reported but was higher than the current 17%.

A little speculation, again with a huge grain of salt. The NDP are serious challengers in 3 ridings, Palliser, Regina-Qu’Appelle and Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar. In 2006, the Conservatives enjoyed  leads of 6.5%/9%/10% over the New Democrats in SRB, R-Q, and Palliser. Assuming that these provincial trends breakdown evenly amongst these ridings it suggests that Nettie Wiebe in SRB has a decent chance of overcoming her 1,919 vote deficeit from 2006. It also means that Janice Bernier might be closer than expected for the New Democrats in Regina Qu’Appelle and that Liberal support may collapse enough to give Don Mitchell a chance in a relatively tight three-way race in Palliser.

Additionally, these numbers suggest that in most of the ridings with a major urban portion (Saskatoon-Wanuskewin, Saskatoon-Humboldt, Blackstrap, Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre, and Prince Albert), where the NDP finished second or a close third, that the New Democrat campaigns could enjoy significant gains on the Tory incumbents while pulling away from the Liberals.

For the Liberals, I don’t think this means Goodale is in trouble in Wascana, as his closest competitor is a Conservative candidate and King Ralph has consistently bucked provincial trends. A poll conducted by the Regina-Leader Post in Wascana, conducted between Oct 3 and 7th and interviewing 801 voters (3.4%, 19 out 20 times), gives the following breakdown of decided voters:

Goodale (Lib): 51.4
Hunter (Con): 34.3
Moore (NDP): 11.1
Wooldridge (GP): 3.2

If these number hold true, it would suggest that my analyses of Wascana and Ralph bucking the provincial trends (yet again) were not far off the mark. Some further analyses by Murray Mandryk. However, in DMCR it could mean that despite having a strong organizer like Orchard running, the Liberals may not have enough to overcome Conservative incumbent Rob Clarke, with some support swinging to the NDP instead

Anyhow, as a politics addict I couldn’t resist a little speculation on a one-off poll. So take it with a grain of salt, disagree if you want, I am always open to different interpretations of the numbers.

_________

cross-posted on my blog.

Whatever the result on Tuesday, this election continues the downward spiral of political discourse in Canada. Gone are the days of big ideas like Medicare, Just Society and Free Trade, where debate raged on the merits of the programs, and criticism of leaders was based on their actions, not their personality, physical quirks or “spin”character assassination. While in the past politicians may have disagreed on policy, and even disliked each other, they at least appeared to respect each other enough to be civil in public and when conducting the business of government. Partisanship is one thing, vitriol quite another.

Now politics and elections have degenerated to personal attacks and characterizations of leaders intentions, and sloganeering, with little substantive discussion of policies or ideas. As a result, respect no longer exists between opponents, the willingness to compromise is not evident, and therefore the government ceases to function effectively. Its no longer business, its personal. Why has this happened and what are the consequences?

We have not only imported negative campaigning from the US, but have taken to focusing on “the leader”. Except we are not electing a president, we are electing a party/team to run a government. No question the leader is important, but not to the exclusion of everything else. So we hear too much about Harper, Dion, Layton and May, which supports an environment for personal attacks, than we do about party policies and teams (Only the Liberals tried this for a short time when things were not going well). Combined with negative campaigning, where the focus is simply to attack your opponent as opposed to proposing solutions of your own, emotion is trumping reason, and the soundbite is trumping real information.

The consequences are 1) party leaders who have been denigrated to such an extent that all suffer from a lack of wide spread public respect and trust. As a result, many self-respecting individuals with ability decline to seek public office 2) voter apathy with 35% of the population not voting (although an unrepresentative electoral system also hurts)       3) 40% of the voters in Quebec have declined to participate in the governing of Canada by supporting the Bloc whose primary goal is to breakup the country 4) a media focused on the horserace (who is winning or losing) and trying to “even things out” to keep the race going, instead of critically evaluating  and communicating party policies to the public. This leads to soundbites and spin, as opposed to ideas.

The only way to stop this negativity is for voters to demand better. We need to encourage positive behavior from all participants (including the media) and challenge them when they do not meet our expectations and do their job. And I mean challenge all of them, those we support as well as those we don’t. The sooner we return civility and respect to our politics, the sooner we focus on ideas and not personalities, the better our country will be in the end.

Announcement from the CNW Group, October 8th. Just came up on my Google News Reader a couple of hours ago.

Les Holloway, CAW Atlantic Canada Area Director, announced today that the union is throwing its support behind Green Party leader Elizabeth May, in the Central Nova riding….

“It is critical that we do not re-elect a Harper Conservative government that will continue with its failed right-wing policies which have already cost our country hundreds of thousands of good paying manufacturing jobs,” said Holloway.

Holloway stated, “This ideology that you give everybody their taxes back, cut government spending to do it by deregulating everything and let the market take care of itself has cost us dearly in both life and economic well being, and it has indeed put us on the same course as the United States.”

“Elizabeth May is an extremely intelligent and articulate woman and will do us proud as a Member of Parliament for Central Nova. She cares about what this unbalanced economy is doing to residents of Nova Scotia and elsewhere,” said Holloway….

That’s got to be a valuable endorsement!

I wrote this back on Sept.15.

“ La Presse (newspaper in Montreal) has questioned if deal between Dion and May not to run opposing candidates in each others’ ridings is only part of deal for strategic voting across the country. ”

 Now May has made it official by calling on Greens to vote Liberal. Regretably, this hurts the Green brand by making it a “wing” of the Liberal party, and therefore irrelevant and illegitimate as an independent party. Good luck getting into the next debate. Will Green voters listen to May and vote tactically this election for her first choice, the Liberals? Or will they vote with conviction for Green, then deal with May after the election?

Tactically, May did much to build the Greens into a legitimate force. Strategically, she has put the first nail into the Green Party’s coffin. This is a bad thing not only for the Green Party but for our democracy.

La lutte dans le comté est toujours bien engagée et plus serrée que dans d’autres régions du Québec. Par contre, Greg a retiré le “?” pour le remplacé par un logo du Bloc dans ses dernières prédictions. Le Bloc était favori au départ un peu partout dans l’est du Québec sauf que la vague conservatrice menaçait sérieusement. Les ratés de la campagne conservatrice en fin de course redonne le peu qu’il manquait au bloquistes pour vraiment l’emporter un peu partout dans l’est, de Kamouraska jusqu’à Gaspé et incluant la Côte-Nord. La remontée des libéraux dans la dernière semaine est cependant à surveiller de près, car comme mentionné plus tôt, je suis certain que les libéraux auront un meilleur score ici que dans l’ensemble du Québec à cause de la candidate locale.

Messages des candidats juste avant que les électeurs arrêtent leur vote:

NANCY CHAREST, PARTI LIBÉRAL
– A promis un projet fédéral porteur dans chacune des 4 MRC (ex: rénovation des installations portuaires à St-Anne-des-Monts, prêt sans intérêt pour un projet éolien communautaire dans la Mitis)
- Sondage interne du parti donne les libéraux gagnants le 7 oct.(!)
- Support du célèbre général Roméo Dallaire
- Long bilan personnel d’implication politique et de réalisations dans la région, implication récente dans l’industrie éolienne
- Elle vante les mérites du plan économique et environnemental du PLC pour les familles de la région

JÉRÔME LANDRY, PARTI CONSERVATEUR
- Souhaite mettre en place un programme de valorisation des produits forestiers et de développement des énergies alternatives
- Vante le futur programme de développement économique du PCC qui avantagerait les régions défavorisées
- Insiste sur le fait que les électeurs seront gagnants d’avoir enfin un député efficace, travaillant au sein du parti qui est au pouvoir
- Long bilan personnel d’implication environnementale et économique dans la région

JEAN-YVES ROY, BLOC QUÉBÉCOIS
- Il va tenter d’obtenir du gouvernement un programme de soutient de revenu pour les personnes agées qui perdent leur emploi
- Insiste sur le fait qu’il faut bloquer l’arrivée d’un gouvernement conservateur majoritaire; freiner l’idéologie du parti qui ne nous ressemble pas et protéger nos acquis sociaux qui seraient en péril sous les conservateurs selon M. Roy

LOUIS DRAINVILLE, PARTI VERT
- Prône l’achat local et une agriculture équilibrée, humaine, auto-suffisante pour la Gaspésie
- Mentionne qu’une gaspésie aux politiques vertes attirerait les jeunes et les investisseurs
- Biologiste et agronome originaire de Lanaudière, implication personnelle en énergies renouvelables (éolien surtout) et agronomie dans notre région

JULIE DEMERS, NPD
- Malheureusement invisible dans la campagne. La candidate du NPD semble être originaire de la Saskatchewan et habite présentement à Montréal.

LILIANE POTVIN
- Malheureusement invisible dans la campagne.

VISIBILITÉ GÉNÉRALE
Personnellement, j’habite Baie-des-Sables et je témoigne en tant que tel:

Débat = Annulé à cause de l’absence de J-Y Roy (Bloc). Extrêmement décevant, on dirait que M.Roy confirme l’idée circulant qu’il n’est pas très très présent sur le territoire…
Pancartes = Bloc et Conservateur
Téléphone pour sortir le vote = Bloc
Pamphlets explicatifs = Bloc, Vert, Libéral
Invitation à rencontrer le candidat pour discussion = Libéral
Visites à domicile = Aucune
Sites web = Tous sauf la candidate indépendante (sites étoffés = Libéral et Conservateur)

Below is a chart of how the democraticSPACE projected vote totals in Edmonton-Strathcona have changed between September 25th and October 8th. The graph displays averages of democraticSPACE’s projected ranges.

With this current situation in mind, here are the things each of the four main parties will have to achieve in order to call this election a success.

The Conservatives:

The Conservatives have to keep their seat. That’s really all. In the end it doesn’t really matter whether their vote total goes up or down or stays the same as long as incumbent Rahim Jaffer stays in Parliament for a fifth term.

How likely are they to get their wish? Well, at the moment, the democraticSPACE projections do favour them, but only slightly. If NDP candidate Linda Duncan can cut only a few points out of the Liberal vote, she can win. This is going to be a tough battle, and an impossible race to call. Still, the odds are in the Conservatives’ favour, as is history.

The New Democrats:

In the 2006 election, just massively increasing the vote for the New Democrats was enough to call it a success. This time is different–this time they need to take the seat from the Conservatives. Anything less is a massive defeat, even if they increase their vote percentage enough to only lose by a few votes.

What’s their likelihood of success? Well, they’re clearly the underdogs in this race, but the softness of the Liberal vote is the wild card. The Liberals for Linda blog has been getting plenty of coverage in the local media, and Duncan has scored endorsements from the likes of former Liberal candidate Steven Leard and Liberal blogger daveberta. Plus, the Duncan team is both hungry for a win and willing to work for it–just as an example, they recently sent out a team of more than a hundred volunteers to canvass more than 5000 houses in the Tory-bluest part of the riding in a single afternoon. Don’t count them out yet.

The Liberals:

They can’t win, but to call this election a success, they need to recover from the 2006 election’s eleven-point drop in their vote. Maintaining their vote wouldn’t quite cut it–they really do need to recover some ground in order to have achieved something for their party in this election.

Are they likely to achieve this? In a word: no. Now that Edmonton-Strathcona has been reported as a close two-way race between the Conservatives and the NDP everywhere from the National Post to the Edmonton Journal and the Edmonton Sun to CBC radio, Anybody But Conservative voters in the riding pretty much all know the score. The Liberal candidate has been publicly asked to step down at an all-candidates’ forum, and her anti-NDP brochures are being panned by the media. Whether enough of the Liberal vote migrates to the NDP to achieve a Duncan win is still an open question, but one thing is certain: the Edmonton-Strathcona Liberals will suffer further losses in this election.

The Greens:

Like the Liberals, they can’t win. But in the 2006 election, Edmonton-Strathcona was the only riding in Alberta where the Green vote actually decreased. So in order to call this election a success, they need to reverse that trend and increase their percentage of the vote.

What is their likelihood of success? Pretty good, actually. In fact, I’d say that of each of the four parties, the Greens are the most likely to walk away from this election happy.  The fact that NDP candidate Duncan is a well-known environmentalist will almost certainly still prevent the Green surge we’ll see in the rest of the province, but the Green vote is soaring across the country right now, and it would surprise me a great deal if they didn’t gain at least a little bit of ground in Edmonton-Strathcona.

Further reading:
Edmonton-Strathcona: a snapshot
Edmonton-Strathcona: the Conservatives
Edmonton-Strathcona: the New Democrats
Edmonton-Strathcona: the Liberals
Edmonton-Strathcona: the Greens

I had a Dr.’s appointment in Kerrisdale this afternoon. My journey from work (1st and Boundary) to West Boulevard took me along Broadway, up Nanaimo, across 33rd–must of it the Vancouver Kingsway riding (VK).

VK is of course the riding of David Emerson. Paul Martin convinced Emerson to run for the Grits. Once Martin went down to Harper in 2006, Emerson went from “Stephen Harper is teh evil” to “sure dude, I’ll totally be your minister.” Many in the riding were choked about this–and still are.

So you’d think there’d be little support for the Tories in VK, right? Well if signs are…a sign of anything, there’s a lot of Blue (Cons.) in that there riding. There’s also a lot of Orange (NDP) and Red (Lib.). A lot of each. Here’s a bit on each candidate:

Salomon Rayek is a businessman who runs an import/export business.

Wendy Yuan is the CEO of Bradley Pacific.

Don Davies is a lawyer specializing in human and worker rights.

Doug Warkentin is a researcher engineer and environmental entrepreneur.

I found the rich swarths of colour profoundly moving. If only every riding was as engaged!