Don Cherry word cloud from Rob Ford swearing-in
Kid Kodak, kaptured: “hilariously overwritten”
Abacus? Who? Isn’t that a kid’s toy you count with, or something?
That was my initial reaction when I heard about the firm that came up with this doozy:
I was skeptical for a few reasons. One, I hadn’t heard of Abacus before. Two, it was a bit out of whack with what others have been reporting in recent months. Three – if true – it means we are heading into a Spring election, but nobody’s body language (currently) suggests that is in any way possible. Four, if the NDP is that close to the federal Liberals – and, frankly, after Bob Rae’s disastrous Afghanistan decision, I wouldn’t be surprised to see our left-flank vote collapse – we could be seeing the beginning of some truly historic changes at the federal level. Five, the Liberal Party of Canada slipping below 25 per cent – the lowest of the low – is a full-on, five-alarm disaster.
However, as my Sun Media colleague David Akin has reported, Abacus is no bucket shop (despite the fact that they are seemingly fronted by Doogie Howser, Pollster). Abacus is affiliated with Summa, which is one of the most reputable G.R. shops in the country (and, full disclosure, with which my own firm has happily worked in the past). Messrs. Powers, Armour et al. are top-notch, and serious players, to boot. So Abacus, by extension, needs to be taken seriously.
The numbers themselves are, as I say, a bit inconsistent with recent voter intention surveys. But, as the brainy Calgary Grit points out in his regular poll round-up (in which he includes Abacus as the “new kid on the block,” and which I only noticed just now) they’re not so inconsistent as you might think. Add a little to the blue side, trim a little off the red side, and: presto! Unmitigated disaster (from my perspective, anyway).
The fact that Nanos was postulating something similar on Monday does little to improve my now-gloomy holiday mood. In his expert view (but for different reasons), a majority is indeed within Harper’s reach.
Yikes.
The solution? Well, it’s not getting rid of the leader, for starters. The moment such a move is made in earnest, the Reformatories will concoct a pretext for an immediate election. Ignatieff has earned the right to lead the party in the next election, notwithstanding what I (and many others) think about his senior staff’s acumen, or the total absence of a ballot question. Or policy. Or, or.
So what to do? What dost thou thinkest, gentle readers? Is there a ballot question – or a strategy – left that the federal Liberals can grasp onto? Something that will forestall Armageddon, or even (somehow) carve out a minority government?
Comments are open.
In today’s Sun: move East, young voter
Says Matthew Mendelsohn, director of the Mowat Centre: “Our research finds that compared to similar federations, Canada is now way (out) of step internationally in violating the principle of voter equality.”
The three guys who had or have seats in the three fastest-growing provinces are Messrs. Harper, Ignatieff and Layton. You’d think they’d be working overtime to fix this problem, because they potentially have the most to gain. Most of those new seats would go to them.
But, um, no.”
Power and Politics, Dec. 6: The all-WikiLeaks edition
What documents should be disclosed, when, and by whom? What’s a free press, and what’s a reckless media?
The question I struggle with – and not in the abstract, either – is this: if a political opponent, or a media person started digging around around in your personal medical records, or your family’s past, or some divorce files, or whatever, would you be mollified by their pious claims that people have a “right to know”? Or would you be outraged enough to want to sue them until their teeth bleed, or worse, to protect those you love?
Interesting questions. I suspect we’ll be coming back to them, in the WikiWeeks ahead.
Monte falls asleep as I attempt to demonstrate how to tackle Mr. Assange. Linkage at 1:45 or something.
It’s almost 5:00
I may have an interesting announcement to make on CBC’s Power and Politics tonight.
Twenty-one years ago today
Fourteen reasons we need gun control in this country:
- Geneviève Bergeron (born 1968), civil engineering student
- Hélène Colgan (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
- Nathalie Croteau (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
- Barbara Daigneault (born 1967), mechanical engineering student
- Anne-Marie Edward (born 1968), chemical engineering student
- Maud Haviernick (born 1960), materials engineering student
- Maryse Laganière (born 1964), budget clerk in the École Polytechnique’s finance department
- Maryse Leclair (born 1966), materials engineering student
- Anne-Marie Lemay (born 1967), mechanical engineering student
- Sonia Pelletier (born 1961), mechanical engineering student
- Michèle Richard (born 1968), materials engineering student
- Annie St-Arneault (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
- Annie Turcotte (born 1969), materials engineering student
- Barbara Klucznik-Widajewicz (born 1958), nursing student
The grassy knoll in Winnipeg North
“If they lost all three, the knives would have been out,” the Conservative said. Another told The Hill Times in an earlier interview after the byelections: “We’re happy Iggy is staying.”
Get that? Clear? They wanted to lose, because by losing, they end up winning, despite the fact that they lost, badly. Understood?
In other news, we have obtained an exclusive photograph of a Senior Conservative Party strategist, hard at work in the party’s war room bunker: