Nanos Leadership Index: Harper still strong (Nanos Poll Completed February 8th, 2010)

I repeat what I have said before and that is Harper will likely get a small majority, the Liberals will likely get a leadership convention and the NDP will likely get Official Opposition. "WHAT IS THE ALTERNATIVE" is still a very valid question. The Government of Canada will continue at a new low for participatory democracy.

Now here is a thought. If the far right and the right of centre can combine to form what is currently called the Conservatives, who still appear as lacking majority appeal, why could this not happen for the centre and the left of centre ??????? Canada would tend to have two major national parties which would be good for governance and stability----something we have not seen in the land for almost a decade.

[updated Mon Feb 15 03:44:23 -0500 2010]

I know I'm repeating this ad nauseum but I don't place leadership as a requirement for a politician. As a result I would have to answer " none of them".

My vote will go the the first politician who says to the people.

"I am not a leader. I am a follower. I'll seek out the majority of opinions on any policy and I will do the wishes of the majority, unless of it's an opinion that's contrary to my personal convictions. In that case, I'd resign."
That alone would inspire me to vote for him/her.

There is no question that Harper is the least trustworthy of all them. He lies and insults us constantly. I don't trust anyone who willingly and deliberately lies to me.

Harper is not competent. He makes too many mistakes. A competent politician in his position could easily get a majority. Four years and still no closer and still saying and doing the wrong things. Things that undermine respect for or trust in his government.

Ignatieff doesn't reveal the competence required for a PM.

The others are not tested enough to show how competent they might be.

Harper has no vision of Canada that I would want to live in. In fact only Elizabeth May has a vision that resonates with me.

[updated Mon Feb 15 07:55:11 -0500 2010]

Well Nick, why do you say "Layton has momentarily surpassed Ignatieff". Momentarily? Does this reflect an establishment status quoi thinking pattern. I might suggest that Harper is momentarily leading Layton, but that would simply reflect my thinking that Layton is the best.

[updated Mon Feb 15 10:29:41 -0500 2010]

- Harper Leadership Index ??? - It's Time For Nanos to Recalibrate

The Nanos 'Leadership Index' is Very Misleading to say the least.

Harper's numbers are entirely explained by assuming a core of die-hard supporters of around 33%. How about some Demographics Nanos - that would be interesting.

And, these days with Harper's true extreme right wing 'colours' starting to bulge out over the Hype, they have to be die-hard, indeed, to still support him, despite the damage to Canadian Democracy.

The actual results of the Poll results Nanos is basing his 'Leadeship Index' (see:
nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-W10-T411E.pdf
are as follows:

The Best PM
Stephen Harper: 32.0% (-2.8)
- within the 33% point - considering margin of error (3.1 percentage points, plus or minus, 19 times out of 20) - 1/3 of Canadians like him as PM??? what's he doing running this country

The most trustworthy leader
Stephen Harper: 25.0% (-4.3)
- definitely down from the 33% point -even considering margin of error- and rightfully so, give Harper's abuse of his Office and attack on Canadian Democracy

The most competent leader
Stephen Harper: 33.6% (-1.7)
- within the 33% point - considering margin of error - there's that die-hard 33% manifesting itself!

The leader with the best vision for Canada#s future
Stephen Harper: 26.8% (-3.2)
- definitely down from the 33% point - even considering margin of error- and rightfully so - yeh, Harper's vision for most of his public life is to tear Canada asunder, apparently some people like that, or don't understand what Harper is really all about

A break down by Province would be very interesting (although I suspect that the result can be easily predicted) and perhaps Nanos would be courteous enough to provide that for us.

These number are actually down from the last time (and Harper index is down 10%) as one would expect (at least there are some die-hards that are taking a serious second thought at what Harper is doing).

To have any meaning whatsoever, any "Leadership Index' for Harper ought to be how many points away from the 33% point.

All you non-Haperites that don't take the 33% core of die-hard support for Harper seriously do so at your own peril.

Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html

[updated Mon Feb 15 13:13:29 -0500 2010]

this is bizarre. iggy is actually up in most categories, but layton is way up. i'm usually pretty good at reading polls - while i'm often controversial, i'm usually eventually proven right - but i'm not certain how to interpret this relative to all of the polls that have them neck-to-neck. i have three suggestions.

1) tinfoil hat approach. no further comment.
2) it's a temporary swing to layton due to his health concerns. i'm not convinced as those that don't support the ndp explicitly tend to oppose them firmly.
3) what it demonstrates is that canadians are eager to turf harper and are even eager to vote liberal in order to do it but still have reservations about ignatieff.

if that's the case, harper should be worried because the scenario should sound familiar. those of us with memories remember that harper initially became prime minister under similar circumstances; canadians were eager to ditch martin and were even eager to vote conservative to do so but were not eager to vote for harper. of course, they did.

i've always had reservations about the leadership index because i've never been able to observe or even fathom a causal relation between voter intent and...what would you call it? opinion about the party leaders? the whole concept is directly contradictory to the way our parliamentary system is constructed, which is local, local, local and when it's not local it's primarily partisan. outside of the five ridings where the leaders are running, the connection just strikes me as specious.

i wouldn't take this too seriously as even if it's totally accurate that doesn't mean it will have any effect on voting intent. i wouldn't take that one poll that had liberal support at 37% too seriously either, or at least not yet.

[updated Mon Feb 15 14:18:14 -0500 2010]

"Going" Conservative...

To pull, or not to pull, that is the Conservative question! I'll bet you dollars to donuts that the next two polls will be instrumental in determining whether the Harper government pulls the table right out from under itself.

IMHO, if the polls stay basically where they are with the exception of Environics, my guess would be no. But if Environics becomes a trend of two or three -- perhaps the Prime Minister may decide to roll the dice reasoning that it won't get any better than this anytime soon. He also knows that the fall, or even worse 2011, will be both unforeseen economic domino time à la European Union not to mention next year's budget courtesy of your local dentist!

Just when we thought politics was predictable...the sands of electoral time may be about to shift once again.

[updated Mon Feb 15 15:33:16 -0500 2010]

Canadian Press-Harris/Decima.

CPC: 32%

LPC: 30%

NDP: 16%

GP: 10%

BQ: 41% in Quebec.

[updated Tue Feb 16 14:26:46 -0500 2010]

RonaldoDowd, Hollinm

I had written earlier about there being two sides to the coin and that sometimes when the coin is flipped it lands on its edge and that usually means interesting times and this is interesting and one has to wonder why it is not playing on the news cycle 24/7 see number 2.

Globe and mail; Published on Monday, Feb. 15, 2010 6:50PM EST Last updated on Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2010 3:20AM EST, Margaret Wente.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-science-isnt-settled-now-what/article1469050/

1) Even Phil Jones, the man at the centre of Climategate, seems to take the third position.
2) But in a weekend BBC interview, he dropped a bombshell. He acknowledged there's been no statistically significant warming since 1995.
3) Hello? When other people say that, they're called deniers.
4) He also said (contrary to everything we've been told) that the debate is not over.
5) “I don't believe the vast majority of climate scientists think this. This is not my view.
6) There is still much that needs to be undertaken to reduce uncertainties, not just for the future, but for the [distant] past as well.”
7) So much for the science being settled. Now what?

Now what? well that is a good question for other side now.

[updated Tue Feb 16 14:29:20 -0500 2010]

Ekos, Nanos, Harris Decima, Angus Reid are showing one trend and one other polling Company is showing another - has the question been answered.

http://www.visioncritical.com/2010/02/conservatives-keep-four-point-lead-over-liberals-at-the-Voting Intention

Across the country, 34 per cent of decided voters (+1 since late January) would cast a ballot for the Conservative candidate in their riding if a new federal election took place today.

The Liberal Party is second with 30 per cent (+1), four points ahead of the proportion of the vote that the party received in the October 2008 federal election.

The New Democratic Party (NDP) is third with 18 per cent (-1), followed by the Bloc Québécois with nine per cent (-1), and the Green Party with eight per cent (+1).

Regional Breakdowns

The Tories remain the most popular party in Alberta (62%) and Manitoba and Saskatchewan (48%).

In British Columbia, the governing party is holding on to the top spot (36%), with the NDP (30%) maintaining its edge over the Liberals (26%).

In Ontario, a tight race continues. The Tories (37%) are barely ahead of the Grits (35%), followed by the NDP with 17 per cent and the Greens at 11 per cent.

In Quebec, the Bloc is first with 35 per cent (-7), followed by the Liberals with 28 per cent (+2), the NDP with 14 per cent (=), and the Conservatives also with 14 per cent (+3).
start-of-olympic-break/

[updated Tue Feb 16 14:48:18 -0500 2010]

In previous posts, I had written in response to others on the board that their contention that the SCoC had ruled that the Conservatives were violating Khadr civil and human rights was not factually correct.

In addition, that the SCoC had ruled that the previous Liberal Governments were responsible for the violation of Khadr civil and human rights.(see points 3, 5, 6 and 7)

As the court had ruled that if the evidence from those torture sessions were used against Khadr, it would be seen by the court that the Conservative Government would be seen to be violating Khadr rights as well.

It would now appear that the Conservative Government is now addressing that issue and seeking assurances from the Americans that the evidence assembled under the Liberal watch will not be used against Khadr in a court of law.
r
CBC - http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/02/16/nicholson-khadr016.html

1) Ottawa wants assurances that the United States will not use evidence obtained by Canadian officials in their interviews with accused terrorist Omar Khadr in any future prosecution against him.

2) The official request was made in a diplomatic note to the U.S. government Tuesday, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said in a statement.

3) It refers to interviews that Canadian agents and officials conducted with Khadr in 2003 and 2004 in Guantanamo Bay, knowing he had been repeatedly deprived of sleep, and passed the information on to U.S. officials.

4) The statement is the federal government's first response to a Jan. 29 Supreme Court of Canada ruling on Khadr's repatriation to Canada.

5) The top court agreed Canadian officials violated Khadr's human rights in their participation in his U.S. detention and that he continues to be threatened by the effect of those violations.

Globe and Mail - http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-asks-us-to-omit-evidence-in-khadr-case/article1470621/

6) The evidence that is the subject of the letter was gleaned in interrogations with Mr. Khadr in 2003 and 2004 that the court deemed illegal, and that could be used against him in U.S. proceedings.

7) In its 9-0 ruling, the court also denounced the government's participation in the interrogation and U.S. officials' use of sleep deprivation to weaken the prisoner, who was 15 at the time.

[updated Wed Feb 17 09:33:52 -0500 2010]

So here, we find yet another example of how the Liberals balanced the budget, ran a surplus, and paid down the debt.

Part One -Move $52.0 Billion dollars from the fund that the employed paid into support themselves if they became unemployed into other programs so that the Liberals would not have to pay out the money collected.

Part Two - Move $30.0 Billion dollars from the fund that the employee paid into for their pension to support themselves when they retired and watch the Liberals move the money into other programs so that the Liberals would not have to pay out the money collected.

The total is now at $82.0 just how much money did they redirect.

National Post - Day, federal unions to meet over pension cuts - Kathryn May, Canwest News Service Published: Wednesday, February 17, 2010

1) The unions also learned this week they are going back to court over the $30-billion surplus in the federal pension fund that the Liberals used in 1999 to help offset the deficit.

2) The unions lost their original lawsuit in a bid to force the government to return the $30-billion surplus to the plan. It won leave to appeal that decision and the appeal will be heard in Toronto on April 19-21.

[updated Wed Feb 17 11:02:08 -0500 2010]