2004 Democratic Primary

[angus]

1280x1024.

[English]

I was watching Question Period on CTV, between visits to the U.S., the G8, and the actions taken here lately, it is possible that the election will not be held until June. If I were Martin I'd find the big issue, like Gay Marriage, run on it, Gay marriage would hurt the NDP, but help the conservatives, so who knows. What should be the Liberal's big issue?

Siege40

I read somewhere that about 60%  of Canadians were in favour of gay marriage. Is that not true? I didn't think social issues were really important in Canada (apart from Alberta).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The NDP is strongest in Western Canada

[Siege40]

The NDP are a national party, that creates problems cause they have no base from which to build, the Conservatives have the West, the Bloc has Quebec, and the Liberals usually get Ontario and the Maritimes, not a lot of room for the NDP to operate. If they get some sort of hardcore support they can grow.

Siege40

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The NDP are a national party, that creates problems cause they have no base from which to build, the Conservatives have the West, the Bloc has Quebec, and the Liberals usually get Ontario and the Maritimes, not a lot of room for the NDP to operate. If they get some sort of hardcore support they can grow.

Siege40

The NDP *do* have a base in Saskatchewan, Manitoba and BC (although most of the BC base defected to Reform-ism in the early '90's... they are coming back)... but nothing on the scale of Alberta...
The NDP's problem in much of Canada is that they are not seen as a national party (due to their weakness in Quebec).
If they can get back to their old levels of support in BC and Ontario... while maintaining the support gained in the Maritimes in 1997... who knows...

[volk1]

1024 x 768

[Canadian observer]

Will we ever get an Election this spring in Canada? Chances seem to be getting remote day by day from what I read on the Radio-Canada website (The French Canadian CBC).

For those who may hardly understand French I put an English translation on my own at the end of the post.

http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/Index/nouvelles/200404/07/012-martin-elections-rb.shtml

You must be logged in to read this quote.

From Radio-Canada
Not a Spring, but a Fall Election?

Updated on Wednesday, April 7, 2004, 4:57PM.

A declaration from Canada's Prime Minister, Paul Martin, seems to confirm rumours that the next general election expected [this season] might be rescheduled in fall.

Answering a question from a journalist during a press conference held in Rimouski, Quebec, the Prime Minister said: "I decided a long time ago that the most important thing for us is governing. And that's what we're doing. The meeting with President Bush [to be held on April 30] fits in this vision. About the election, we'll have one at the time we declare one as such."

Journalists saw in the PM's answer a sign that he would consider to declare an election in the fall, although he had never hidden his wish to declare an election as soon as possible.

Such unexpected turn may result from the apparent stagnation of support given to the federal Liberals among Quebec voters, which followed the presentation of the Auditor General's report on the federal sponsorship program [in February].

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Is he hoping for the Adgate thingy to wear off?

[Canadian observer]

Is he hoping for the Adgate thingy to wear off?

I can fairly guess that the sponsorship scandal hinges on Martin's election prospects more than Liberal hacks would publicly admit. Remember that the original plan for the LPC was to make *gains* (i.e. get 40 seats or more) in Quebec in order to offset losses in Ontario to the Conservatives. The recent unexpected swing in Quebec polls may stand for seven to eight months, based on two swings I witnessed (e.g., the ADQ up-and-down in 2002, and the Charest effect in 1998). If Martin declares an election this fall, his gamble may be that he could beat the Bloc while he lets the CPC regain some organizational strength.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

One of the interesting things about this election is that both the LPC and the CPC are looking for gains in province x (Quebec/Ontario) to ofset probable losses in province y (Ontario/BC).
Has this ever happend before?

[Michael Z]

800x600.

[Kevinstat]

I've noticed that www.electionprediction.com uses the new ridings for predicting the coming Canadian Federal Election.  It may be that they have information to suggest that Martin, hoping for the sponsorship scandal to die down, will not drop the writ until August 25 or later, and having people make predictions for both the old and new ridings would be very confusing.  Parties have already started chosing nominees for the election (presumably for the new ridings) though, which makes me wonder if it isn't set in stone that the new ridings will be used for the next election, whenever it is called and held.  Can somebody confirm one way or the other if it is certain that the new ridings will be used?  And if not, can someone tell me if the parties are choosing nominees for the old ridings, the new ridings, both, or if it varies from party to party and riding to riding?

Sincerely,

Kevin Lamoreau

I'm not sure, but I think an amendment to the Federal Election Laws has been passed by Parliament.  This amendment permits the enforcement of a new riding map 6 months after its creation (instead of one year in the former law).  Hence, the new electoral map is in place today (no April fool here)

I just verified that the coming election will definately be held using the new districts.  According to http://www.elections.ca/content.asp?section=cir&document=index&dir=rep&lang=e&textonly=false , "The 2003 Representation Order comes into force upon the first dissolution of Parliament that occurs after April 1, 2004."  I thought I had checked that very page after Canadian Observer let me know about the aleged ammendment to the Federal Election Laws (which was actually on April 1), so perhaps that page wasn't updated until after that date.  Thank you to Al and Canadian Observer for attempting to answer my question.

Sincerely,

Kevin Lamoreau

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I just verified that the coming election will definately be held using the new districts.  According to http://www.elections.ca/content.asp?section=cir&document=index&dir=rep&lang=e&textonly=false , "The 2003 Representation Order comes into force upon the first dissolution of Parliament that occurs after April 1, 2004."  I thought I had checked that very page after Canadian Observer let me know about the aleged ammendment to the Federal Election Laws (which was actually on April 1), so perhaps that page wasn't updated until after that date.  Thank you to Al and Canadian Observer for attempting to answer my question.

Sincerely,

Kevin Lamoreau

Useful

[Siege40]

Martin was a fool for not calling an election immediately after getting the Liberal Leadership, agreed?

Siege40

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Martin was a fool for not calling an election immediately after getting the Liberal Leadership, agreed?

Siege40

Had he done so, the new ridings would not have been used... which would have really pissed off people out West...
And what if the the sponsership scandel had broken half walf through the campaign?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Jobless claims dive to a 3-year low
 
Claims for unemployment insurance falls by 14,000 to 328,000, lowest since Jan. 13, 2001.
 
The Labor Department's four-week moving average of new claims, which irons out weekly fluctuations, declined 3,250 last week to 336,750 -- the lowest since 335,750 in the week of Nov. 25, 2000.

http://money.cnn.com/2004/04/08/news/economy/jobless.reut/index.htm

[angus]

Jobless claims dive to a 3-year low
 
Claims for unemployment insurance falls by 14,000 to 328,000, lowest since Jan. 13, 2001.
 
The Labor Department's four-week moving average of new claims, which irons out weekly fluctuations, declined 3,250 last week to 336,750 -- the lowest since 335,750 in the week of Nov. 25, 2000.

http://money.cnn.com/2004/04/08/news/economy/jobless.reut/index.htm

yes, I was way off on that one.  we all were.  good thing too.  it may take a week or so for this to show up in Bush approval ratings.

[opebo]

Interesting detail - 22 states have increased employment since Bush took office.  The biggest increases were in - Florida  (219,900), Nevada (77,900), Arizona (74,100), and Virginia (57,600).  Which suggests all four should go Bush.

Got this from national review, but they got it from bls.gov
http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_comment/kaza200404080826.asp

[Lunar]

Interesting detail - 22 states have increased employment since Bush took office.  The biggest increases were in - Florida  (219,900), Nevada (77,900), Arizona (74,100), and Virginia (57,600).  Which suggests all four should go Bush.

Interesting.  That does give him an advantage if he spins it right.

Also, what are the highest in terms of percentage of population?  Gaining 100,000 jobs in North Dakota is more significant than 120k in California.

[opebo]

Interesting detail - 22 states have increased employment since Bush took office.  The biggest increases were in - Florida  (219,900), Nevada (77,900), Arizona (74,100), and Virginia (57,600).  Which suggests all four should go Bush.

Interesting.  That does give him an advantage if he spins it right.

Also, what are the highest in terms of percentage of population?  Gaining 100,000 jobs in North Dakota is more significant than 120k in California.

I don't know - you'ld have to sift through bls.gov in a pretty time-consuming way.  But I do think that the employment figures generally confirm the idea that Bush's fate will come down to primarily Ohio, and secondarily Pennsylvania/West Virginia.

[classical liberal]

People talk about new claims but what about old claims that get renewed?  Those seem to me to be the most influential on the outcome of the election.

[classical liberal]

Also, how many new people entered th job market in the time since Bush took office.  Even if not a single job was lost, the unemployment rate would still grow if no new jobs were created.

[opebo]

Also, how many new people entered th job market in the time since Bush took office.  Even if not a single job was lost, the unemployment rate would still grow if no new jobs were created.

We were talking about theincrease in the total number of people working - the increase in Employment.

[classical liberal]

I was just raising a few points into the discussion.

[Canadian observer]

One of the interesting things about this election is that both the LPC and the CPC are looking for gains in province x (Quebec/Ontario) to ofset probable losses in province y (Ontario/BC).
Has this ever happend before?

Interesting question ...

During most of the 20th Century until 1984, the federal Liberals had a lock on all ridings, except the very very very and still very few conservatives who managed to win a seat.  The most notable example of the (I can't really use "these" as this would amount to a grammatical mistake) conservative as such is Roch Lasalle, who was the lone PC MP for Joliette in the 70's and 80's.

History may see the province as a special case. For more than 3 or 4 generations, from the late 19th century until 1984, Quebec continually gave nearly all its seats to the Liberals. Ontarians have a long way to go if they'd like to beat Quebec on that record eh... The exceptions were 1958 and 1911. Such Liberal hegemony had saved the party's skin in many elections, especially those that put them in minority. The most startling instance is in 1972, when Trudeau got in minority. The LPC won 109 seats, while the PC had 107. One may notice that more than 60 of the seats won by Trudeau that year were from Quebec.

For the PC, when we compare his 1984 and 1988 victories, we can see a strategy indirectly. In 1988, the PC won more seats in Quebec than in '84, while there were losses in BC and Ontario. The '88 campaign was centred on the Free Trade Agreement with the US, which was highly supported in Quebec.  Free Trade encountered stronger opposition in BC and Ontario.

For Paul Martin, the task is daunting in Quebec.  Especially in these times marked by the Sponsorship scandal. No federal Liberal leader managed to win a marority of the seats in Quebec since 1980, although Chrétien nearly succeed in 2000.