Canadian by-elections
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:53:29 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Canadian by-elections
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9]
Author Topic: Canadian by-elections  (Read 26037 times)
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,977
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #200 on: September 19, 2007, 08:56:37 PM »

No way the Greens are at 15% in Quebec, the by-elections were clear evidence of that fact.
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #201 on: September 19, 2007, 09:05:02 PM »
« Edited: September 19, 2007, 09:07:49 PM by Verily »

No way the Greens are at 15% in Quebec, the by-elections were clear evidence of that fact.

The by-elections saw a huge squeeze on them in Outremont from the NDP and invisible campaigns in Roberval and Saint-Hyacinthe; they're not much to go on for performance in Quebec. (Similar is true of the Liberals outside Outremont and the Conservatives in Outremont.)

Would you, for example, call the Christchurch by-election in 1993 in Britain evidence that Labour were about to be destroyed in the 1997 election?
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #202 on: September 19, 2007, 09:39:32 PM »

No way the Greens are at 15% in Quebec, the by-elections were clear evidence of that fact.

The by-elections saw a huge squeeze on them in Outremont from the NDP and invisible campaigns in Roberval and Saint-Hyacinthe; they're not much to go on for performance in Quebec. (Similar is true of the Liberals outside Outremont and the Conservatives in Outremont.)

Would you, for example, call the Christchurch by-election in 1993 in Britain evidence that Labour were about to be destroyed in the 1997 election?

No, but it might be good evidence of the tactical voting that would be the additional kick to the Conservative Crotch in 1997
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #203 on: September 19, 2007, 09:42:50 PM »

No way the Greens are at 15% in Quebec, the by-elections were clear evidence of that fact.

The by-elections saw a huge squeeze on them in Outremont from the NDP and invisible campaigns in Roberval and Saint-Hyacinthe; they're not much to go on for performance in Quebec. (Similar is true of the Liberals outside Outremont and the Conservatives in Outremont.)

Would you, for example, call the Christchurch by-election in 1993 in Britain evidence that Labour were about to be destroyed in the 1997 election?

No, but it might be good evidence of the tactical voting that would be the additional kick to the Conservative Crotch in 1997

Which is sort of the point, although, unlike Labour tactical voters in Britain in 1993, Green tactical voters in Canada would probably split more or less evenly between the NDP and Liberals (though Mulcair's green credentials and green campaign probably won him most of the Green votes in this case).
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,977
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #204 on: September 19, 2007, 09:57:01 PM »

Ok, if you think the Greens are going to get 15% or hell even half of that in Quebec in the next election, so be it. I am willing to put $100 down that says they won't.

It's a widely known fact the Greens always do better in polls than they will in an election. You will see this on October 10th as well.
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #205 on: September 19, 2007, 10:15:00 PM »

Ok, if you think the Greens are going to get 15% or hell even half of that in Quebec in the next election, so be it. I am willing to put $100 down that says they won't.

It's a widely known fact the Greens always do better in polls than they will in an election. You will see this on October 10th as well.

This wasn't the case in 2004 or 2006 when it came down to polls shortly before election day, and even polls long before the election only averaged their score to about 1% above the result, which ould be accounted for simply by Greens voting tactically in close seats.

I don't think the Greens will get 15% in Quebec, but your logic is shaky and colored by partisanship.
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,977
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #206 on: September 19, 2007, 10:35:02 PM »

Ok, if you think the Greens are going to get 15% or hell even half of that in Quebec in the next election, so be it. I am willing to put $100 down that says they won't.

It's a widely known fact the Greens always do better in polls than they will in an election. You will see this on October 10th as well.

This wasn't the case in 2004 or 2006 when it came down to polls shortly before election day, and even polls long before the election only averaged their score to about 1% above the result, which ould be accounted for simply by Greens voting tactically in close seats.

I don't think the Greens will get 15% in Quebec, but your logic is shaky and colored by partisanship.

Almost every poll showed the Greens ahead of what they actually got, granted it was usually just a point or two, but that's a lot when you are only polling 5-6%. Now, I suppose a lot of the problem the Greens had from the by-election was because Green voters are apathetic and dont bother to vote in them. We same the same thing happen in the provincial by-elections last year.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #207 on: September 20, 2007, 05:45:27 AM »

No way the Greens are at 15% in Quebec, the by-elections were clear evidence of that fact.

The by-elections saw a huge squeeze on them in Outremont from the NDP and invisible campaigns in Roberval and Saint-Hyacinthe; they're not much to go on for performance in Quebec. (Similar is true of the Liberals outside Outremont and the Conservatives in Outremont.)

Would you, for example, call the Christchurch by-election in 1993 in Britain evidence that Labour were about to be destroyed in the 1997 election?

No, but it might be good evidence of the tactical voting that would be the additional kick to the Conservative Crotch in 1997

Which is sort of the point, although, unlike Labour tactical voters in Britain in 1993, Green tactical voters in Canada would probably split more or less evenly between the NDP and Liberals (though Mulcair's green credentials and green campaign probably won him most of the Green votes in this case).
Ah, but on these figures tactically refraining from voting green makes sense virtually everywhere except in rural Alberta.
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #208 on: September 20, 2007, 08:50:54 AM »

No way the Greens are at 15% in Quebec, the by-elections were clear evidence of that fact.

The by-elections saw a huge squeeze on them in Outremont from the NDP and invisible campaigns in Roberval and Saint-Hyacinthe; they're not much to go on for performance in Quebec. (Similar is true of the Liberals outside Outremont and the Conservatives in Outremont.)

Would you, for example, call the Christchurch by-election in 1993 in Britain evidence that Labour were about to be destroyed in the 1997 election?

No, but it might be good evidence of the tactical voting that would be the additional kick to the Conservative Crotch in 1997

Which is sort of the point, although, unlike Labour tactical voters in Britain in 1993, Green tactical voters in Canada would probably split more or less evenly between the NDP and Liberals (though Mulcair's green credentials and green campaign probably won him most of the Green votes in this case).
Ah, but on these figures tactically refraining from voting green makes sense virtually everywhere except in rural Alberta.

Only if your seat was reasonably close last time. Think about, say, Vancouver Centre. Tactical vote? I think not.
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,977
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #209 on: September 20, 2007, 04:10:11 PM »

No way the Greens are at 15% in Quebec, the by-elections were clear evidence of that fact.

The by-elections saw a huge squeeze on them in Outremont from the NDP and invisible campaigns in Roberval and Saint-Hyacinthe; they're not much to go on for performance in Quebec. (Similar is true of the Liberals outside Outremont and the Conservatives in Outremont.)

Would you, for example, call the Christchurch by-election in 1993 in Britain evidence that Labour were about to be destroyed in the 1997 election?

No, but it might be good evidence of the tactical voting that would be the additional kick to the Conservative Crotch in 1997

Which is sort of the point, although, unlike Labour tactical voters in Britain in 1993, Green tactical voters in Canada would probably split more or less evenly between the NDP and Liberals (though Mulcair's green credentials and green campaign probably won him most of the Green votes in this case).
Ah, but on these figures tactically refraining from voting green makes sense virtually everywhere except in rural Alberta.

Only if your seat was reasonably close last time. Think about, say, Vancouver Centre. Tactical vote? I think not.

I dont know, Vancouver Centre could have gone NDP had they nominated someone who didn't admit to stealing a ring for is gay lover Smiley
Logged
Hash
Hashemite
Moderator
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,401
Colombia


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #210 on: September 20, 2007, 04:14:00 PM »

Yay for that great poll, the Green vote is very high and that's great. Of course it won't be 14-15% on election day but polling that high is good news. And finally the Bloc goes down. A dream come true.

Apart from Outremont where the poll for the Greens was 8%, the poll showed 4% in both others, and the vote there was actually a max. 2 points off (within MOE?)
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #211 on: September 20, 2007, 05:59:19 PM »
« Edited: September 20, 2007, 06:01:04 PM by Verily »

No way the Greens are at 15% in Quebec, the by-elections were clear evidence of that fact.

The by-elections saw a huge squeeze on them in Outremont from the NDP and invisible campaigns in Roberval and Saint-Hyacinthe; they're not much to go on for performance in Quebec. (Similar is true of the Liberals outside Outremont and the Conservatives in Outremont.)

Would you, for example, call the Christchurch by-election in 1993 in Britain evidence that Labour were about to be destroyed in the 1997 election?

No, but it might be good evidence of the tactical voting that would be the additional kick to the Conservative Crotch in 1997

Which is sort of the point, although, unlike Labour tactical voters in Britain in 1993, Green tactical voters in Canada would probably split more or less evenly between the NDP and Liberals (though Mulcair's green credentials and green campaign probably won him most of the Green votes in this case).
Ah, but on these figures tactically refraining from voting green makes sense virtually everywhere except in rural Alberta.

Only if your seat was reasonably close last time. Think about, say, Vancouver Centre. Tactical vote? I think not.

I dont know, Vancouver Centre could have gone NDP had they nominated someone who didn't admit to stealing a ring for is gay lover Smiley

Svend Robinson didn't exactly help the NDP, but Vancouver Centre is certainly not voting NDP any time soon. (I also mention Vancouver Centre because Adrianne Carr is running there for the Greens, though I think she probably would have been better off running in her home Sunshine Coast district, which ironically is a swing district.)
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #212 on: September 22, 2007, 09:20:33 PM »

An election looks increasingly likely. Duceppe is threatening to vote against the throne speech--and of course the NDP and Conservatives would love to call Duceppe's bluff.

http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5iMnvALC0z2VR4O3vzQVKZ64MDZqw
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,977
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #213 on: September 22, 2007, 09:47:27 PM »

I think the Liberals will have no choice but to support the throne speech.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.044 seconds with 11 queries.