BC Election - May, 2013

[Stingray2004]

Since we are less than 6 months away from the May, 2013 provincial election, I thought that it might be apropos to open up a thread regarding discussion of same.

In that vein, today's new Ipsos-Reid public opinion poll of BC provincial voting intentions:

1. NDP - 48% (-1%)
2. Liberal - 35% (+3%)
3. BCCP - 9% (-3%)
4. Green - 7% (+1%)

We have a 13-point spread with the NDP having peaked, the Libs trending upward, the BCCP trending downward, and the Greens remaining flat.

As for leader approval ratings:

Christy Clark: 34% approve, 59% disapprove;
Adrian Dix: 53% approve, 34% disapprove;
John Cummins 13% approve, 51% disapprove;

Do the Liberals still have a chance? Perhaps, based upon these additional Ipsos findings:

1. 20% are still undecided (they would already likely be supporting the NDP if that was the case);

2. 59% believe that the economy is in very good/good shape v. 38% who believe that economy is in poor/very poor shape; (Only 25% of BC'ers in an Ipsos poll believed the economy was in good shape when the NDP lost government in May, 2001);

3. Province headed in right direction - 46% v. 42% believing it's headed in wrong direction;

http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-polls/p...e.aspx?id=5915

They say that a week is an eternity in politics and we have under 6 months to go before e-day. As an aside, at the commencement of the Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec ~4-week election campaigns many/most pundits wrote-off the Alberta PC's, the Ontario Liberals and the Quebec Liberals, based upon polling data, to their obvious chagrin.

Gonna be an interesting next 6 months.

[Jebby]

What kind of idiot votes NDP?

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Jebby

What kind of idiot votes NDP?

I don't like the NDP, but you're an idiot if you blindly vote against them.

[GeeCee]

Originally Posted by Jebby

What kind of idiot votes NDP?

What kind of idiot votes for Ron Paul?

[BodomReaper]

Originally Posted by Jebby

What kind of idiot votes NDP?

While I often ponder the same question myself, political threads do have a nasty tendency to turn into clusterf*cks even without this type of posting. For the sake of everyone here, let's try to keep the level of discussion here just a few notches above CTV online comments, shall we?

Just add a few points to the list in the (excellent) OP:
- I believe this is now the 4th consecutive poll in which the Liberals have gained support. If the Conservatives keep heading downwards (likely as long as Cummins is trying to run things), the Liberals can probably pick up another 4-5% just from them.
- The Greens' performance in the federal by-elections shows that the NDP would be foolish to discount them as a threat. It will be interesting to see if they can transfer their federal momentum to the provincial level without the Elizabeth May factor - the NDP's vociferous opposition to the carbon tax and muddled position on LNG can only help the Greens in this regard.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Jebby

What kind of idiot votes NDP?

What kind of idiot votes for a governing party just called out by the Auditor General for understating the provincial deficit by $1/4 of a billion:

BC's auditor general says the deficit in this province is much higher than what was reported in July. The 2011/2012 summary financial statements showed $1.84 billion but John Doyle says it's actually $520 million more....

[easy as pie]

yeah, in a small province like bc, $520 million bucks is a lot to try to cover up. incompetence or deceit, it's hard to decide which is worse for a government in power since 2001.

as for the lpbc rise in recent polls, look no further than the collapse of the cpbc, which is sort of a shame. anyway, i'd wonder if there was an example anywhere in canada when a party (here, the ndp) held such a large and durable lead (a couple years now) and then went on not to form government. they're coming, boys.

[phesto]

Originally Posted by easy as pie

anyway, i'd wonder if there was an example anywhere in canada when a party (here, the ndp) held such a large and durable lead (a couple years now) and then went on not to form government. they're coming, boys.

Last week on CKNW they mentioned that where a provincial opposition party held a lead of 15% or greater in the polls at 6 months prior to an election, that party had gone on to win 19 of 20 elections. They didn't cite the example of where the governing party came back to win...in any event, I don't see the Liberals with CC coming back.

[ckkelley]

The BC Liberals have all the hallmarks of a government de-electing itself. I believe the turning point was the botched introduction of the HST. Christy Clark has been unable to bring things back after the anger that Gordon Campbell had wrought and it seems clear that their time in government is nigh.

To this day I wonder why no one in the Premier's office considered the perception among the public of introducing the HST in such a manner. Perhaps the Premier's office had nothing but yes-men....

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by ckkelley

The BC Liberals have all the hallmarks of a government de-electing itself. I believe the turning point was the botched introduction of the HST. Christy Clark has been unable to bring things back after the anger that Gordon Campbell had wrought and it seems clear that their time in government is nigh.

To this day I wonder why no one in the Premier's office considered the perception among the public of introducing the HST in such a manner. Perhaps the Premier's office had nothing but yes-men....

Actually I think they over-estimated the ability of the voting public to think rationally, and under-estimated the desire of people to punish politicians.

Polls have shown that most people thought the HST was a good idea, but being lied to in it's introduction was the sticking point. It really is a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I don't think they should have even let it go to referendum. It wasn't legally binding. You only have to look to California to see what happens when you let people vote on any tax initiatives.

Since CC has been running the show the results have been 50/50. Under normal circumstances I'd call that a win, but she started way behind, and I don't see them catching up prior to May.

The wildcard is really Dix. He's gained by being mostly silent, which is good for him, but he'll have to start taking some sort of position prior to May 2013... or maybe I'm underestimating the intelligence of voters, and they'll simply vote for the guy who isn't Clark...

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by whatnext

What kind of idiot votes for a governing party just called out by the Auditor General for understating the provincial deficit by $1/4 of a billion:

An all-too-familiar pattern that occurred when Dix's NDP were in power. How many times was the deficit $1B bigger than forecast on the NDP's watch? That party was eventually penalized by the public, but it took two elections for that to happen. I wonder if this will really affect the Liberals. I think there are other issues plaguing the Liberals this time. Since 2008 it has become "normal" for deficits to exist and to grow, virtually all governments have them, unlike in the 90's when the B.C. NDP was the outlier and most jurisdictions were thriving.

[queetz@home]

I am kinda dreading the return of the BC NDP on May. The memories of the horrible 90s is still fresh on my mind, and now is simply not a good time for it either given the economic uncertainty all over. Christy maybe a goofball, but she is simply the lesser of two evils.

Its pretty obvious who I will vote for, but I think the best we can do right now is hope that Adrian Dix won't be the evil monster that we all believe that he is. That he will actually not make stupid decisions based on ideology, and actually be rationale. That he does not bite the hand that ultimately feeds us, and do not implement Earth scorch policies on existing government projects out of spite.

Its a long shot, but one can dream, right? After all, why do we even buy lottery tickets if we are incapable of hoping for the best despite the odds stacked against us....

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by easy as pie

as for the lpbc rise in recent polls, look no further than the collapse of the cpbc, which is sort of a shame. anyway, i'd wonder if there was an example anywhere in canada when a party (here, the ndp) held such a large and durable lead (a couple years now) and then went on not to form government.

Just look ay BC as an example:

1. May, 1983 Election:

The Socreds were embroiled in numerous well-publicized scandals (the dirty tricks affair) for years, Premier Bennett Jr. was very unpopular, Barrett's NDP was leading opinion polls for years leading up to the May, 1983 election. On the date the '83 election was called the NDP held a commanding public opinion lead, numerous people interviewed on the then BCTV News Hours (archive) stated that they had abandoned the Socreds in favour of the NDP, etc.

A slam dunk NDP win?

Nada. During, the 28-day campaign, Barrett and his MLA wannabes made some statements that spooked voters. What happened? Socred landslide win and Barrett resigned.

2. October, 1986 Election:

Again, the post May-1983 massive restraint program resulted in massive upheaval and anger at the Bennett gov't, Bennett was very unpopular as usual, the NDP was leading public opinion polls for years. Same old same old.

Bennett then resigned and Vander Zalm became Socred leader (bad choice IMHO). In any event, during the October, 1986 election campaign the Socreds surged to an unprecedented high 50% support level and the NDP slam dunk win became another Socred landslide.

3. October, 1991 Election:

The Socreds had been disintegrating under Vander Zalm (with his social conservative views and conflicts of interest), some Socreds sat as independents, the NDP won 6 straight by-elections in strong Socred seats, the NDP was leading opinion polls for years and Harcourt was a moderate.

After the leader's debate, the Gordon Wilson Liberals surged - BCTV daily tracking polls showed them leading narrowly, even NDP internal polling showed the Liberals ahead. In fact, the NDP was so worried that they called a press conference attacking Gordon Wilson, his candidates, and Liberal policies, which blunted the surge. Later, NDP strategists confirmed that had the election campaign continued for another week, the Gordon Wilson Liberals would have won.

4. May, 1996 Election:

With many scandals, financial upheavals, etc. the NDP was regularly polling in 3rd place after the Liberals and Reform. Harcourt resigned and Glen Clark became leader. Only during the course of the election campaign did the NDP surge enough and with luck the riding splits went the NDP's way even though the Liberals garnered a slightly higher level of the popular vote. For years, the Liberals were expected to win that election.

Just look next door to Alberta's 2012 provincial election and some public opinion polls prior to the election:

1. Abacus Data (March 28): Wild Rose - 43%/ PC - 31%
2. Forum Research (April 9): WR - 43%/ PC-31%
3. Think HQ Public Affairs (April 10): WR - 43%/ PC 29%
4. Abacus Data (April 11): WR - 46%/ PC 29%

That's just a sample. What happened? Massive PC landslide with the PC's at 44% to 34% for WR. Who woulda thunk?!

Caveat emptor.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by phesto

Last week on CKNW they mentioned that where a provincial opposition party held a lead of 15% or greater in the polls at 6 months prior to an election, that party had gone on to win 19 of 20 elections. They didn't cite the example of where the governing party came back to win...in any event, I don't see the Liberals with CC coming back.

You are referring to Eric Grenier and his blogspot 308. He basically just utilized the last Angus Reid Strategies opinion poll and inputted those results into his analysis. Not very useful IMHO.

The same Grenier also predicted that the NDP would win the recent Victoria by-election in a "landslide". In fact, the Greens were leading for most of election night (as the results came in) and only the advance polls put the NDP over the top. The NDP was apparently quite spooked about the outcome.

Grenier based his Victoria by-election prediction based upon 2 Forum Research opinion polls conducted before and after the writ period, which showed the NDP at a steady 47% with the Greens way back at 20% and 25% respectively.

Instead of 47%, the NDP received 37%, only a few points ahead of the Greens.

Again caveat emptor. Most political journalists won't touch Forum Research opinion polls in BC because they have a poor track record and they use IVR technology. And most of the BC provincial public opinion polls released over the past 2 years have been from either Forum Research (only been around for ~2 years) and Angus Reid Strategies (been around for ~4 years).

OTOH, the 2 polling firms that have a very long track record in BC - Mustel and Ipsos (over 20 years) have only released polls infrequently, which is kinda disappointing as they have always had a much better snapshot of BC public opinion. They are akin to what CROP and Leger are to Quebec polling.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by whatnext

What kind of idiot votes for a governing party just called out by the Auditor General for understating the provincial deficit by $1/4 of a billion

BC utilizes what is called GAAP accounting rules (since ~2002), which are actually more transparent than most other provinces' accounting standards. For example, if BC received $4 billion in oil/natural gas land sale rights in a singular year, the gov't books cannot show that revenue incurred for the same fiscal year. It has to be spread out over the either 5 or 10 year terms of the drilling licences/land rights. IOW, it is mostly deferred revenue at ~$400 million/annum.

OTOH, both Alberta and Saskatchewan do/would book that $4 billion in the same fiscal year making their financial statements look rosier.

I do know that BC's Auditor-General has disagreed with BC's Comptroller-General for several years over how natural gas tax credits should be treated, how TIC should be treated, etc.

So we have 2 independent accountants/ professionals who view the accounting treatment of these financial matters differently.

Do you really believe that any NDP government would agree with Doyle's view in order to make their deficit under GAAP rules higher? Doubtful.

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Actually I think they over-estimated the ability of the voting public to think rationally, and under-estimated the desire of people to punish politicians.

Polls have shown that most people thought the HST was a good idea, but being lied to in it's introduction was the sticking point. It really is a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I don't think they should have even let it go to referendum. It wasn't legally binding. You only have to look to California to see what happens when you let people vote on any tax initiatives.

Since CC has been running the show the results have been 50/50. Under normal circumstances I'd call that a win, but she started way behind, and I don't see them catching up prior to May.

The wildcard is really Dix. He's gained by being mostly silent, which is good for him, but he'll have to start taking some sort of position prior to May 2013... or maybe I'm underestimating the intelligence of voters, and they'll simply vote for the guy who isn't Clark...

I'd agree with most of this. IMO, in the last campaign, the Libs backed the NDP into an untenable position with the carbon tax and used it to good advantage. That forced dichotomy came back to bite them when they inctroduced the HST with little consultation. I suspect that was done to keep up with ontario, but Gordo overplayed his hand.

IMO the HST is a more efficient tax that likely would have a lasting impact with improving general revenue with limited drag to business. IMO the move back to the PST will have lasting ramifications to the economy that both the libs and NDP see (film will especially hit hard, but light manufacturing and tech will be hit as well). I have a funny feeling that the libs will campaign in may to bring it back the HST and turn the election into another referrendum on the HST. If not, IMO it will be almost like a 'poison pill' that will louse up a future (NDP) government's ability to raise funds, control the deficit, grow the economy and pay for social programs, unless the NDP move to an HST as well. If they do, i suspect there will be less stomach for another "fightHST" campaign.

Unfortunately, right now for both sides, i see a dearth of policy. CC and the libs cannot expect to win by having a strategy of no new policy/status quo, and dix and the NDP have a good chance of winning by not saying anything.

If the HST makes a reappearance in the spring election, you heard it here first.

[ckkelley]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Actually I think they over-estimated the ability of the voting public to think rationally, and under-estimated the desire of people to punish politicians.

Polls have shown that most people thought the HST was a good idea, but being lied to in it's introduction was the sticking point. It really is a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I don't think they should have even let it go to referendum. It wasn't legally binding. You only have to look to California to see what happens when you let people vote on any tax initiatives.

Since CC has been running the show the results have been 50/50. Under normal circumstances I'd call that a win, but she started way behind, and I don't see them catching up prior to May.

The wildcard is really Dix. He's gained by being mostly silent, which is good for him, but he'll have to start taking some sort of position prior to May 2013... or maybe I'm underestimating the intelligence of voters, and they'll simply vote for the guy who isn't Clark...

I don't think they had much of a choice regarding the HST referendum, I'm sure they had visions of historic recall campaigns in the front of their minds. The fatal error I believe was Gordon Campbell setting the referendum threshold of approval @a simple majority rather than the 60% as set out in law.

[dleung]

Originally Posted by Jebby

What kind of idiot votes NDP?

The 47%

[Stingray2004]

Andrew Weaver, star BC Green Party candidate for the Vancouver Island riding of Oak-Bay Gordon Head, has just confirmed that ex-NDP candidate and NDP party insider Michael Byers asked him to step aside for the NDP candidate and even dangled a future deputy environment minister post as a carrot. That's a political no-no.

BC Green party candidate claims NDP tried to get him to bow out
VANCOUVER/CKNW (AM980)
Shane Woodford
12/12/2012

The BC Green party candidate for Oak Bay Gordon Head has taken to Twitter claiming the NDP tried to get him to step aside.

Andrew Weaver, one of Canada's top climate change scientists, says the NDP's Michael Byers phoned him up asking him to step aside.

Weaver on Twitter then says Byers offered him a deputy minister of environment spot, if the NDP win the spring provincial election, if he were to bow out.

On the social media platform Weaver insinuates Byers, on behalf of the NDP, said the party was worried about Green support in the riding detracting from NDP votes.

The leader of the BC Green party is backing up her candidate in Oak Bay Gordon Head as he makes allegations the NDP tried to get him to step aside.

Jane Sterk says Andrew Weaver told her about the phone call from the NDP's Michael Byers.

"Yes I was aware of it my recollection is around September around the nomination process time."

While some NDP insiders take to twitter to say Byers is not a provincial party guy and has no power to make deals, Sterk agrees, sort of.

"I would imagine that, that is true if you want plausible deniability you don't have your front line people make these kind of suggestions."

She calls the move the difficult part of politics.

"People try and manipulate the system and believe there should be no Green party I guess is the bottom line."

Sterk is also worried other potential green candidates will also be targeted.

"Well I think that as we become more competitive and they start to worry about us they will use strategies like this to try and prevent our candidates or discourage our candidates from running competitive campaigns."

Below are tweets from BC Green party candidate in Oak Bay Gordon Head who tweets as @AJWVictoriaBC as he tweets to NDP insider David Schreck who tweets as @StrategicThghts

'You never answered my question? Why did a senior NDPer ask me to step aside from the Green nomination in OBGH. Do u know?'

'I was phoned up by Michael Byers. He said the provincial NDP would like me to step aside.'

'.@StrategicThghts I said I was running for the Greens not against the NDP or Liberals.'

'@StrategicThghts And then he talked about NDP potentially offering me Deputy Minister of Environment.'

'NDP insider calls me up and asks me to step down as Green candidate in OBGH. Talks about party being worried about Green support.'

'Talks about other ways I could be effective in an NDP government. Dangles the idea of my being Deputy Minister of the Environment'

http://www.cknw.com/news/vancouver/s...spx?ID=1840598

[allan_kuan]

Well it doesn't seem to have caused an outrage, however unethical that was.

I don't know what to say really. BC politics is just begging for a new centrist voice that can get away from both parties' baggage of the past, and yet none really exists as of this point.