Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 5868
Reputation: 187.7Reputation: 187.7
votes: 19
Location: The World

PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2012 10:18 am    Post subject: Has Mulcair Hurt the NDP? Reply with quote

I read a commentary this morning that Mulcair's first few weeks of leader couldn't have been scripted better by the LPC or CPC.

Mulcair in a word has declared war on Western Canada;
A similar tact which was taken by Pierre Trudeau, however when Trudeau was doing it Quebec had 74 seats to Ontario's 88 to Western Canada's 68.

Now Quebec will have 78, Ontario 121, and Western Canada with 104.

In a nutshell; Quebec's relevance in forming a majority government has decreased by a huge factor whereas Western Canada's has grown.

After Mulcair's election the CPC found itself trailing within the MoE of the NDP nationally, and the LPC returned largely to a sub 20 polling range.

However since the Oilsands issues we have scene a single poll released with the Tories returning to first with 37 and the NDP in second with 35 and the LPC at 19.

The largest swing in this poll seems to be exclusively British Columbia which almost on its own has valued the Tories 3% nationally over the last IR poll.

While the need for the NDP to maintain its support in Quebec is paramount, has Mulcair harmed the growth outside of Quebec and Toronto proper that Jack had worked hard to build?
machiavelli





Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Posts: 352
Reputation: 66.5
votes: 5

PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2012 1:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NDP, "NO DEVELOPMENT PARTY" ADVOCATING A NEW CARBON TAX

Comrade Mulcair is relying on his beloved, archaic, oversimplified, and extremely flawed Marxist economics to advocate for a job slaughtering, and economy butchering price on carbon (carbon tax) which of course, as any sane person knows, would drastically injure the economy and could very easily drive it into a depression.

The NDP (No Development Party) leader's incomprehension of the economy is based on Marx's design for a "planned economy" where all sectors are manipulated according to the needs of the state as perceived by the elites. This simplistic analysis fails to understand that additional variables, other than the functioning of one sector of the economy, determine the value of the Canadian dollar. Sane people understand that some of these are international variables, and also that variables other than the dollar's value will effect the different sectors.

Mulcair should be advised that he is not the Opposition Leader of Cuba or North Korea, but of Canada which has a somewhat modified version of a free economy; call it a mixed economy, but one where consumers driven markets are somewhat free to determine which sector will be "up" any given time, and a realistic understanding that other sectors will not match the performance of the higher preforming sectors. Any sane person with a realistic perceptive of the economy realizes that sectors go up, and eventually come down, as other sectors go up.

The up and down movement of different sectors, and their effects on each other, is not a disease; its intrinsic of a viable free-market economy and must not be manipulated in any economy expected to produce a high standard of living.
Pissedoff





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 224
Reputation: 86.9Reputation: 86.9
votes: 2
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 9:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If Kinsella thinks it is bad it must be bad

Angry Tom messenger of his own destruction

BY WARREN KINSELLA ,QMI AGENCY

http://www.ottawasun.com/2012/.....estruction
palomino_pony





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 538
Reputation: 60.9
votes: 3
Location: Lower Mainland, BC

PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pissedoff wrote:
If Kinsella thinks it is bad it must be bad


Bad for the Liberals. Make no mistake, these are calculated comments supplant the BQ and bleed support from Liberal's left flank.

The West (and most of BC) will never wildly support the NDP, so Mulclair is pulling a page out of Trudeau's and Chretien's playbook. With the pending seat redistribution and the fact that student protesters largely don't vote, this will be harder to accomplish.
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 5868
Reputation: 187.7Reputation: 187.7
votes: 19
Location: The World

PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2012 8:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I tend to agree with you PP,
What's odd is that if I were to pick the most likely area for any degree of NDP growth outside of Toronto and Quebec, I would have said that BC may have been a spot to add a half dozen seats or so,

However over the course of the last month Mulcair has alienated Northern Ontario where they secured 6 of 10 seats on election day, and finished second in 3 of the 4 ridings they lost with this idiocy over the LGR and in the process cost themselves Bruce Hyer,

Now Mulcair has taken aim at a region where his support was hardly bedrock, 5 of his BC ridings were won over the CPC with > 2000 votes, 3 of them by > 1000.

What was shocking about the Abacus poll from this weekend was the "Rest of Canada" numbers which factors in popular support without Quebec's numbers and the CPC is leading 43% to 34% over the NDP.

Mulcair is doing what he can to make Quebec his kingdom, but he will need more then their 78 seats if he wants to ever lead Canada, the NDP seems to becoming the BQ.
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 5868
Reputation: 187.7Reputation: 187.7
votes: 19
Location: The World

PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2012 11:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pissedoff wrote:
If Kinsella thinks it is bad it must be bad

Angry Tom messenger of his own destruction

BY WARREN KINSELLA ,QMI AGENCY

http://www.ottawasun.com/2012/.....estruction


Maybe I am reading between the lines, but Mulcair's self-destruction in the west opens a few doors for the Liberals to re-secure some of their former seats in BC.

That I would imagine would be a good thing in Kinsella's eyes
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1

  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Has Mulcair Hurt the NDP?

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB