Wednesday, January 27, 2010

CROP Poll: Confirms Coalition Parties Get No Satisfaction

Nowadays 37 % of the Natives of Quebec feel themselves satisfied with the government Harper, 1 % less than in October. No significant movement either on the side of the malcontents, who pass from 58 to 59 %. This reading is out of place in comparison with the campaign which leads PLC everywhere to the country to report the decision of Stephen Harper to prorogue parliamentary session in House of Commons. From the point of view of voting intentions, news is not better for PLC. The effect of the arrival of Michael Ignatieff in orders seems to have evaporated. If elections had taken place this week, the Liberals would have been 24 % of suffrages in Quebec - the same score as with Stephane Dion on the last elections, in October, 2008. The conservatives, them, would have harvested 21 % of polls, same score since September, 2009.-Crop Poll

Don't put away those NDP, Anti-war signs yet! Keep trying, see you in March!


Ted Betts said...

So almost two thirds of Quebecers are not happy with the direction of the government and the Liberals are the leading federalist alternative in Quebec... and you declare a Conservative victory?

That's like saying the Leafs are the best because they've won a third of their games.

Do they win the Cup every year in your world?

CanadianSense said...

Ted when did I declare a Poll as a victory?

The Polls that matter are called elections.

Are you going to ask me again why the "select Polls" you like more than the election results from 2000-2008?

Sorry Ted the analysis is in the Liberals are in a world of hurt in 2010-2011.

The finances are in rough shape. The organization appears to have their nominations caught up!

They have muzzled their leader and any adult conversation in 2009.

The Plan of waiting five days before the writ is dropped and to mimic the CPC is going to be the not improve the structural long term trendlines.

The pictures and graphs I have already linked.

The Studies of key demographics gone (McGill Study) is available online.

Ted I have zero interest in having a pointless conversation going in circles.

You have your version of FACTS and prefer to exclude data that destroys your thesis.

My thesis is based on ALL the data and the FACTS speak for themselves.

Your party is reduced to a few large cities, 77 seats, possibly unable to make payroll.

In a few weeks, we will see how successful the Liberals were in getting more Canadians in contributing to your party.

Ted Betts said...

You are at least right about one single thing CS, both in your world and the real world. Your arguments are indeed pointless.

I just love how you think Canadians must be voting for Harper in the next election because in the last election, in 2008, fewer of them voted for Harper than voted for Harper in 2008.

Harper is working on one of the weakest, thinnest mandates in Canadian history with only 22% of eligible voters supporting him. The majority of Canadians reject him and reject him again, now three times the majority have very clearly rejected him.

The Liberals have been in need of renewal and restrengthening for a long time. They've been weak and broke and leaderless. And still Canadians do not turn to Harper but they reject him.

Now, we have a united party, with 7X the number of donors, almost caught up to the Conservatives in fundraising with over double what we raised in 2008 (which was an election year), 5X the number of party members, no debt, a leader who is polling right now better than Harper was in the fall of 2005.

And a governing party that is plummeting in the polls and is so out of touch with Canadians that they blew a 15% lead, not once but twice.

Add to that the fact the media doesn't seem to be full on promoting Harper day and night with glowing uncritical reports anymore, that they are finally not buying the Conservative spin, and have somewhat stopped their endless criticisms of the Liberals and Ignatieff, and we even have a slightly fairer chance of getting our message out.

2010 is starting out very well for Canadians as they try to take their democracy back. It is also starting out well for the Liberals. Now, if they can just marry up those two it will be a great year.

CanadianSense said...


In what universe do you have a substantial increase in donors?

United Party, lol ask Dennis Coderre or Janine Krieber.

Shocking NO links again.

Your donor list 7x?
Are these brown envelopes donors?

Elections Canada does NOT have any record of a large increase of contributors, where are you getting your list?

Did you contact Walt Disney, a Quebec PR agency?

Unless you can back them up from a public site that is verifiable your numbers are FALSE.

Ted your forgot to use the trademark slogans

See here for talking points

Ted Betts said...

I really can't believe I spend any time responding to you when you are so clearly disconnected with the real world. Do you ever read a newspaper, CS?

Here are some facts for you:

# of Liberal donors
2008 - 30,890 [Full year]
2009 - 52,896 [9 mths]

$ Liberal raised
2008 - 5,811,492 [Full year]
2009 - $7,922,119 [9 months]

In 2008, the Conservatives had raised about 4X the Liberals, about $15 million. As at Q3, the Conservatives were a few million ahead.

The funny thing is, you already knew that, didn't you. So you either have sive for a brain or you really are living on a different planet, one called Denial.

You can have your own opinion CS (and your own magic calendar), but you can't have your own facts.

CanadianSense said...

Ted one of us is reading the data incorrectly.

Liberals raised in QTR 3 TOTAL
I will post a picture in the update.

Ted Betts said...

CS: that is for Q3 only. You need to add the other two quarters to get the total to the end of Q3, i.e. 17,810 + 19,487 + 15,599. Same with the dollars.

CanadianSense said...


It is funny how we both are missing each others attempt to pick the right "cherry"

I am comparing Q3 of 2008 vs 2009

Dion vs Iffy.
Next came the Liberals, who posted $1.9M from 17,810 contributors giving an average of $109.17 each.

Iffy was brought in partly to fix the fundraising?

He has NOT done a great job fixing it. Whe else to you think Rossi and so many staff have left from summer to Fall?

CanadianSense said...

Ted here is the table I created comparing Dion to Iffy. Iffy added roughly 2k new contributors in Q3 only.

Ted Betts said...

You aren't seriously comparing Q3 in 2008 to Q3 in 2009 are you? Because that would be seriously silly. An election to a rebuilding year? Come on, CS, even you are smarter than that.

Under Iggy, fundraising dollars have more than doubled Dion's even though he had an election.

Party membership was about 25-000 to 30,000 in November 2008. Last week it was announced party membership at the end of the year was just over 210,000.

Not that Dion is anything to compare against, but if you are, then you need to be honest about it.

CanadianSense said...


I did NOT blame Dion for NOT growing the finances too slowly.

I did NOT throw Dion under the bus for failing to win any seats in a by election.

I did NOT ask for his resignation for losing the General Election in 2008.

Janine Kreieber noted the leader needed time to rebuild and was NOT given it for various reasons.

They included his lack of fundraising prowess, his dismal showing in by elections and a general elections.

She was NOT happy how Jean Chretien got pushed out by Paul Martin's Liberals.

Many pundits from all stripes noted how the Liberals eat their own and punish those who do not bend over at the feet the leader.


I am comparing how the liberal leaders have become disposable.

How many liberals have been at the helm to regroup and rebuild the alleged natural governing party.

Ted the FACTS and studies from McGill back up what the election results have demostrated since 2000.

The sizable gap is GONE, the key demographics visible minorites, Catholics have left the liberals years ago and have NO reason to return.
Another Pink book release, another staged photo op to decry closed doors without checking to see if they were won't cut it.

The CROP Poll shows a 1% shift from Sept 2008. That means within the MOE.

In Montreal only 300 people bothered to show up. In all of Canada under 20k bothered to show up after weeks of a full court press from the media, and all the coalition parties organizing the rallies.

The pro-coalition rallies were bigger, which means less partisans from your coalition are bothered to SHOW UP.

Ted Betts said...

Holy crap. I just checked your chart and you are. You are comparing Ignatieff in Q3 2009 to Dion during an election in Q3 2008. Soooo funny.

And Iggy still beat him. Iggy's lowest month, Dion's highest month ever during an election and Iggy still beat him... and that is your evidence that the Liberals are "in decline".

Heck, by that token of comparison, Harper is in serious decline because, while the Liberal donor $ and # results are better year-over-year, Harper's numbers are quite down - almost $2M less and 7,000 fewer donors! 'Course, I don't argue that because that would be stupid to compare his numbers to an election.

Why am I wasting my time here??? You can't have a rational discussion with someone who is irrational.

I am leaving your world now CS. For good.

CanadianSense said...


Say hello to Walt!

Goodluck with your cherry picking of facts.

You did not refute the FACTS that I presented verified with link from public sites.

All those staff and leadership changes with the LPOC are normal and have NOTHING to do with losses in support at the official Polls.

The reliance of over 60% of the Political Party subsidy was NOT the REAL reason for the coalition.

Okey dokey!

Anonymous said...

Hey Ted. You are a liberal leftist correct? I got a question for you. Leftist's always believe they take the high road in terms of social engineering and administration of society correct? Then explain this: how come everytime you start to lose you want to change the rules again? I mean how can you have civilization if you change the rules every time they do not suit your advantage? I think they call this totalitarianism and even debauchery myself. (real conservative)