Will a PC Party led by Doug Ford reduce the Liberals to non-party status in 2018?

47 posts / 0 new
Last post
Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture
Will a PC Party led by Doug Ford reduce the Liberals to non-party status in 2018?

The most recent polling trends, in the run-up to the PC leadership vote, have put the NDP ahead of the Liberals in the polls(though both have been well behind the PC's in terms of the support that party held WITHOUT a leader).

Given those polling trends;

Given that Doug Ford has scored a disputed "victory" in the Ontario PC race.

Given that the majority of Ontario voters would not want Doug Ford leading a majority PC government;

Given that the Liberals under Kathleen Wynne are now a totally discredited, if not hated government that has no chance of regaining trust or popularity among the electorate between now and polling day, and no chance whatsoever of convincing voters that they are a genuinely progressive party after all;

Is it not strongly possible, or perhaps even likely, that this year it will be the Ontario NDP that is seen as the only party that can save Ontario from the prospect of Doug Ford(if he has won the leadership), doing unto the entire province what his brother did to Toronto, and that it will be the Liberals that are squeezed into third-place and perhaps even into the loss of official party status?

 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

I would love it if this worked out in favour of the NDP.  That's where I'll be marking my 'X' when the time comes.

But:

Quote:
Given that the Liberals under Kathleen Wynne are now a totally discredited, if not hated government that has no chance of regaining trust or popularity among the electorate between now and polling day, and no chance whatsoever of convincing voters that they are a genuinely progressive party after all;

If we discount the sins of the father visited upon the sons, what's the big thing everyone should hate Wynne for, other than being too left to be a proper Conservative and too right to be a proper Progressive?  What should Ontarians be most angry at?

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Mr. Magoo wrote:

I would love it if this worked out in favour of the NDP.  That's where I'll be marking my 'X' when the time comes.

But:

Quote:
Given that the Liberals under Kathleen Wynne are now a totally discredited, if not hated government that has no chance of regaining trust or popularity among the electorate between now and polling day, and no chance whatsoever of convincing voters that they are a genuinely progressive party after all;

If we discount the sins of the father visited upon the sons, what's the big thing everyone should hate Wynne for, other than being too left to be a proper Conservative and too right to be a proper Progressive?  What should Ontarians be most angry at?

  The sell-off of Ontario Hydro.  Whatever else she may have done, that decision broke trust.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

​(self-delete.  dupe post).

mark_alfred

The Libs and NDP are polling about equal.  Two polls had the NDP ahead by a bit and a recent one had the Liberals ahead by a bit.  But, I do think the NDP have a chance to emerge as the main rival to the PC.  I think the NDP should ignore the Libs and focus on Ford and the PCs, presenting an exciting new vision for Ontario while instilling fear about Ford's vision.  Spending time on the Libs is a waste of time.  No one else needs convincing.  It's a change election, and the PCs are the competition.

Sean in Ottawa

Ken Burch wrote:

Mr. Magoo wrote:

I would love it if this worked out in favour of the NDP.  That's where I'll be marking my 'X' when the time comes.

But:

Quote:
Given that the Liberals under Kathleen Wynne are now a totally discredited, if not hated government that has no chance of regaining trust or popularity among the electorate between now and polling day, and no chance whatsoever of convincing voters that they are a genuinely progressive party after all;

If we discount the sins of the father visited upon the sons, what's the big thing everyone should hate Wynne for, other than being too left to be a proper Conservative and too right to be a proper Progressive?  What should Ontarians be most angry at?

  The sell-off of Ontario Hydro.  Whatever else she may have done, that decision broke trust.

And we are back to the amnesia comments though-- this process was started byt the PCs. The Liberals and Conservatives tag-teamed the wrecking of energy policy in Ontario.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Mr. Magoo wrote:

I would love it if this worked out in favour of the NDP.  That's where I'll be marking my 'X' when the time comes.

But:

Quote:
Given that the Liberals under Kathleen Wynne are now a totally discredited, if not hated government that has no chance of regaining trust or popularity among the electorate between now and polling day, and no chance whatsoever of convincing voters that they are a genuinely progressive party after all;

If we discount the sins of the father visited upon the sons, what's the big thing everyone should hate Wynne for, other than being too left to be a proper Conservative and too right to be a proper Progressive?  What should Ontarians be most angry at?

  The sell-off of Ontario Hydro.  Whatever else she may have done, that decision broke trust.

And we are back to the amnesia comments though-- this process was started byt the PCs. The Liberals and Conservatives tag-teamed the wrecking of energy policy in Ontario.

The fact that the PC's started it(which the ONDP can also use against THEM in this campaign) doesn't mean that the Liberals had no alternative but to carry it forward.  They could have stopped it.  They chose not to.  They chose to be "more of the same".

Sean in Ottawa

Ken Burch wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Mr. Magoo wrote:

I would love it if this worked out in favour of the NDP.  That's where I'll be marking my 'X' when the time comes.

But:

Quote:
Given that the Liberals under Kathleen Wynne are now a totally discredited, if not hated government that has no chance of regaining trust or popularity among the electorate between now and polling day, and no chance whatsoever of convincing voters that they are a genuinely progressive party after all;

If we discount the sins of the father visited upon the sons, what's the big thing everyone should hate Wynne for, other than being too left to be a proper Conservative and too right to be a proper Progressive?  What should Ontarians be most angry at?

  The sell-off of Ontario Hydro.  Whatever else she may have done, that decision broke trust.

And we are back to the amnesia comments though-- this process was started byt the PCs. The Liberals and Conservatives tag-teamed the wrecking of energy policy in Ontario.

The fact that the PC's started it(which the ONDP can also use against THEM in this campaign) doesn't mean that the Liberals had no alternative but to carry it forward.  They could have stopped it.  They chose not to.  They chose to be "more of the same".

I agree -- but it is important not to let the Conservatives away with this.

Unionist

Will an ONDP led by Andrea Horwath reduce the ONDP to non-party status in 2018?

Pondering

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
 I agree -- but it is important not to let the Conservatives away with this.

Yes, it's an important point. I usually find the "liberals tories same ol story" chant counter-productive but in this case there is a very specific choice, the selling off of Ontario Hydro, that links the two on an issue that is important to the public. This being a change election makes that significant. 

wage zombie

None of the parties will be reduced to non-party status in 2018.  The Libs have enough safe seats in Toronto that there is no risk of this.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

wage zombie wrote:

None of the parties will be reduced to non-party status in 2018.  The Libs have enough safe seats in Toronto that there is no risk of this.

Not if this poll, which was linked in another thread, is correct. Here is the result for Toronto:

PC 36%
NDP 31%
Lib 22%
Other 11% 

That result would be disastrous for the Libs, and things could still get worse.

Sean in Ottawa

Michael Moriarity wrote:

wage zombie wrote:

None of the parties will be reduced to non-party status in 2018.  The Libs have enough safe seats in Toronto that there is no risk of this.

Not if this poll, which was linked in another thread, is correct. Here is the result for Toronto:

PC 36%
NDP 31%
Lib 22%
Other 11% 

That result would be disastrous for the Libs, and things could still get worse.

I read a poll with the federal NDP at 14% as well. You have to remember the 19 times out of twenty part.

Also the campaign has not started.

It would be unusual for any party to lose party status but it can happen.

I think it is unlikely now. I also think that either the Liberals or the NDP could shoot up at the expense of the other and it is too early to tell which right now. The polls, seen in the aggregate, give no reason for confidence  predicting which one. The election of Ford as leader is going to lead to some flux that may settle down in a few days. I think we can wait.

Please consider this theory that I have put here in the past: Polls outside of elections measure not real support but enthusiasm. Most peopledo not answer polls. Most will not invest the time in a poll outside of elections (The refusal rate  is in the high 90%s). So what you are measuring rather than support is the exitement of the base.

It is not a surprise that the Liberals may be a little down in the enthusiasm department. It is to be expected that Ford will pump up the case and may be less appealing to those outside of it. NDP supporters are hopeful and I think recent polls reflect that.

It is possible that Liberals will fail to generate anything -- they are a tired government with tremendous ill-will from the people. As a result things could bear out as more people join the conversation. But it is also possible that Ford will not be able to add to present support levels as more people enter the conversation and his support could go down as a percentage of the whole. The NDP if they have some momentum could maintain and improve on good numbers.

However, it would be wise to recognize what these polls mean as snapshots in the moment: Right now they reflect the people willing to invest some time into doing a poll.

You may remember that I challenged the representativeness of the polls over Trump as well. Now we could see the same phenomenon here if Ford decided to attack the media. Any party who attacks the media will be under-represented in polls from media organizations. I believe that Trump still is underpolling as a core group of supporters woudl rather curse at the media than do a poll for them.  The problem is that the US is polarized such that Trump friendly pollsters will likely get hung up on by democrats and mainstream media pollsters by Trump supporters. You might have to start averaging pairs of these polls to get a more representative total sample. This has not happened in Ontario as yet but it could. For now it is self selecting based on present enthusiasm for politics right now.

jerrym

Will a PC Party led by Doug Ford reduce the Liberals to non-party status in 2018?

Not if the MSM can help make this the typical 2 horse LIb/Con race and largely ignore the existence of the NDP. On February 18th I posted the following on Patrick Brown's re-entry to the Ontario PC race and the NDP national  convention. 

This morning CBC News Network covered the NDP national convention for 1 minute 50 seconds, of which only 23 seconds involved commentary by an NDPer at the convention. The rest of the time (1 minute 27 seconds) was reporter commentary about the problems the NDP face. 

Immediatley following this, there was 19 minutes and 53 seconds of coverage of alleged sexual abuser Patrick Brown at a leadership rally with devoted followers continually applauding him, that was meant to propel him back into the Ontario PC race. The entire time involved Brown proclaiming why he should be the PC leader again, with no commentary provided by CBC.

This was the case despite the fact the reporting was done on the National News network and that the NDP convention was a National convention while Patrick Brown's return to the race, whatever you think of it, involved, only one province.

Yesterday, was much the same during CBC and CTV coverage of the Ontario leadership convention. Despite being dumb enough to listen to the 90% of coverage, the CBC when it talked about the election essentially described the race as between the Liberals and Cons, barely mentioning the existence of the NDP despite the fact that the last three polls have the Liberals and NDP in a statistical tie within the margin of error and the NDP actually ahead in two of these three polls. I watched the CBC about 80% of the time. While I admit that my watching of CT V coverage was far less, I did not even hear the words NDP mentioned there.

On CTV there were two PCers accompanying the host, while on the CBC there were two PCers and CBC pollster Eric Grenier, with all of them seeing the race as a Lib/Con race. 

The NDP will have to force its way into the media with a bold set of policies. While Andrea Horvath has the advantage of being the most popular leader and the further advantage of " 81 per cent of residents polled said they believe it is time for another party to take over." (https://globalnews.ca/news/3927628/ontario-election-2018-ipsos-poll/), that alone will not be enough, despite the fact this is a change election.

If she can make it a NDP/Con race, she has a chance of winning, but she needs to be visible in the media through raising major issues that reflect on solutions to affordability during the campaign, as was done in BC,  and also have a good debate. 

Incidentally, part of the campaign should involve the environment, as the following poll suggests.

​A new poll from Forum Research shows that crucial Tory-leaning voters — the people the party most needs to reach and to get on board before the June 7 election — are looking for a party that has a credible plan to address climate change.

The poll, conducted on behalf of Canadians for Clean Prosperity (an organization that looks for market-based solutions to environmental problems), finds that while carbon pricing is distinctly unpopular among core Progressive Conservative voters, nearly half of those who are leaning blue (but are not yet decided) for the next election say they support or strongly support a price on carbon, even if that means higher prices for consumers.

“It’s been controversial, between cap-and-trade and the carbon tax,” says Lorne Bozinoff, president of Forum Research. “But the public seems pretty on-board with this stuff, but that’s not what you’ve been hearing.”

Of those same “somewhat likely” Tory voters, 55 per cent say Ontario should be doing more to combat climate change.

The results are surprising, given the state of the Progressive Conservative leadership race. All four remaining candidates — Doug Ford, Christine Elliott, Caroline Mulroney, and Tanya Granic Allen — have pledged to dismantle the current cap-and-trade system, built by the provincial Liberals, and to oppose any federal carbon tax that the Trudeau government would seek to replace it with.

The federal budget, unveiled this week, formally set a deadline for the provinces and territories to tell Ottawa whether they’d rather impose their own carbon price or have the feds do it for them (that deadline is March 31, the end of the fiscal year). Ontario, which has already set a price on carbon, is likely to tell Ottawa that it’s got things covered, though the next provincial government could change things. Indeed, the Tories are promising to.

Bozinoff says that’s a mistake: “It’s easy to say you’re in favour of everything if there’s no cost to it. What’s really critical is so many people who are saying, yes, even if it makes things more expensive, I support a price on carbon.”

Mark Cameron, executive director of Canadians for Clean Prosperity, says the results of the Forum poll show that while hostility to a carbon price may win a candidate the Tory leadership, it won’t win the PCs a government.

“That core support, that 34 per cent or so that’s opposed to a carbon tax, is roughly what the Tories keep getting in every election. In the last majority government, they won 45 per cent. This is the difference between winning the 29 seats they always get and forming government,” Cameron says.

https://tvo.org/article/current-affairs/the-next-ontario/nearly-half-of-...

Attacking the Cons both on their so-called "strength", fiscal responsibility, and climate change can be done with this issue. Doing away with cap and trade will blow an enormous hole in the budget, a hole that the Cons had no answer for during the leadership campaign. With so many Ontarians recognizing that climate change is here, a platform that addresses this issue and affordability could help the NDP win. 

Mighty Middle

From 2015 Federal Election

So according to that logic, the Liberals have over 50 seats, they only need 13 to defeat Doug Ford. Wheras the NDP has 18 seats and needs about 45 seats to defeat the Liberals and Ford

 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Mr. Magoo wrote:

I would love it if this worked out in favour of the NDP.  That's where I'll be marking my 'X' when the time comes.

But:

Quote:
Given that the Liberals under Kathleen Wynne are now a totally discredited, if not hated government that has no chance of regaining trust or popularity among the electorate between now and polling day, and no chance whatsoever of convincing voters that they are a genuinely progressive party after all;

If we discount the sins of the father visited upon the sons, what's the big thing everyone should hate Wynne for, other than being too left to be a proper Conservative and too right to be a proper Progressive?  What should Ontarians be most angry at?

  The sell-off of Ontario Hydro.  Whatever else she may have done, that decision broke trust.

And we are back to the amnesia comments though-- this process was started byt the PCs. The Liberals and Conservatives tag-teamed the wrecking of energy policy in Ontario.

The fact that the PC's started it(which the ONDP can also use against THEM in this campaign) doesn't mean that the Liberals had no alternative but to carry it forward.  They could have stopped it.  They chose not to.  They chose to be "more of the same".

I agree -- but it is important not to let the Conservatives away with this.

The way to stop that is to run a "birds of a feather" campaign against BOTH of the old parties...you can even make it a "birds of a feather-and both birds are vultures" campaign now that Doug Ford seems to have sort of won the PC leadership.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Mighty Middle wrote:

From 2015 Federal Election

So according to that logic, the Liberals have over 50 seats, they only need 13 to defeat Doug Ford. Wheras the NDP has 18 seats and needs about 45 seats to defeat the Liberals and Ford

 

You do realize that virtually none of the NDP supporters on this board thought Mulcair ran a GOOD campaign, right?  And you're observation there also totally discredits the "only the Liberals can stop the PC's" argument, since they clearly have no chance of gaining enough support in the next two months, after years of massive unpopularity, to present themselves as a party that can still win.

Mighty Middle

Ken Burch wrote:

You do realize that virtually none of the NDP supporters on this board thought Mulcair ran a GOOD campaign, right?  And you're observation there also totally discredits the "only the Liberals can stop the PC's" argument, since they clearly have no chance of gaining enough support in the next two months, after years of massive unpopularity, to present themselves as a party that can still win.

If that is the case then why did all the NDP candidates spout that talking point? Saying

Incumbency matters! Peggy Nash (now working in the ONDP war room) said the same thing

https://twitter.com/PeggyNashNDP/status/652953273423560704/photo/1

Even Jagmeet Singh said the same thing when he campaigned for Mulcair

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQvB5E7l2Ww

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Mighty Middle wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

You do realize that virtually none of the NDP supporters on this board thought Mulcair ran a GOOD campaign, right?  And you're observation there also totally discredits the "only the Liberals can stop the PC's" argument, since they clearly have no chance of gaining enough support in the next two months, after years of massive unpopularity, to present themselves as a party that can still win.

If that is the case then why did all the NDP candidates spout that talking point? Saying

Incumbency matters! Peggy Nash (now working in the ONDP war room) said the same thing

https://twitter.com/PeggyNashNDP/status/652953273423560704/photo/1

Even Jagmeet Singh said the same thing when he campaigned for Mulcair

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQvB5E7l2Ww

And nobody here on Babble actually thought that strategy was going to work...folks here were arguing that the party should focus on differentiating itself from the Liberals and on campaigning FOR CHANGE, rather than on the useless strategy of trying to look "safe".  

Again, what happened with Mulcair in 2015 is proof that that the OLP can't make massive gains at the ONDP's expense by claiming to be the only non-PC party that can win.

The strategy you are defening doesn't work when the "incumbent" administration is hopelessly behind in the polls and has no possible chance of persuading progressive voters that it's progressive after all-it's sell-off of Hydro at bargain-basement prices makes that impossible, as does the OLP's refusal to raise taxes on the rich.

And yes, the NDP candidates used that line in the 2015 election...that's how campaigns work, candidates in major parties "stay on message" these days.  And if it didn't work for the federal NDP then, it won't work for the OLP now.  Face it, MM, the voters are turning against BOTH of the old parties.

Mighty Middle

Nobody here objected to the slogan from 2015 "Only the NDP can defeat Stephen Harper Conservative Party"

As Peggy Nash said "The thought that the third party would leap over and form government wasn’t anything anyone expected,”

http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/how-the-ndps-orange-wave-turned-to...

Pondering

Mighty Middle wrote:

Nobody here objected to the slogan from 2015 "Only the NDP can defeat Stephen Harper Conservative Party"

As Peggy Nasg said "The thought that the third party would leap over and form government wasn’t anything anyone expected,”

http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/how-the-ndps-orange-wave-turned-to...

Yes people here did say it was a stupid ploy. The NDP chose that strategy in 2015 so the candidates had to go with it. Those were the talking points. The Liberals had there changing of the guard. Now so has the NDP. The next generation is taking control. 

So that was then, this is now. 

Aside from that a tactic can be good one election and bad for another depending on the specifics of who is running and public sentiment. 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Mighty Middle wrote:

Nobody here objected to the slogan from 2015 "Only the NDP can defeat Stephen Harper Conservative Party"

As Peggy Nasg said "The thought that the third party would leap over and form government wasn’t anything anyone expected,”

http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/how-the-ndps-orange-wave-turned-to...

Not true.  A lot of us pointed out that saying things like that was not going to be enough to actually elect an NDP government...or even to make sure the party held its ground.  The general consensus in the last days of the race, when NDP support was plummeting across the country, was that that phrase was, in fact, delusional.

 

NorthReport

Ken, with all due respect, these approach unfortunately will only alienate voters away from the the NDP which I don't believe is your goal. 

Mighty Middle

I think maybe the candidates & the NDP really bought the "Only 35 more seats" strategy, because as Peggy Nash said no one in the NDP could really believe the Liberals could win over 150 seats and leap-frog over the NDP to win the election.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Mighty Middle wrote:

I think maybe the candidates & the NDP really bought the "Only 35 more seats" strategy, because as Peggy Nash said no one in the NDP could really believe the Liberals could win over 150 seats and leap-frog over the NDP to win the election.

You can't assume the candidates bought the slogan just because they said it.   They were essentially forced to say it.  And obviously the party rank-and-file can't be assumed to have bought into it, since they were given no say in whether it would be used or not.

​The only person who truly bought into it was Mulcair himself.

It's not as though the fact that Mulcair insisted on making that the slogan somehow implicates the entire party in its stupidity.

And what you seem to be missing is that the result proves that it's not worth ANY party doing it.  It NDP politicians(basing their assumptions on the consensus of the opinion polls at the START of the campaign) were surprised that the Liberals made a freakish comeback, than we can equall assume Ontario Liberal politicians would not expect that the ONDP could slipstream past them in exactly the same way.

Why are you doubling down so hard on the Mulcair thing from 2015, anyway?  The unexpexted NDP collapse that year is actually a demonstration that an Ontario Liberal collapse is a real possibility here.

The point is that, in this Ontario election, nothing that anyone thought was a safe assumption a few months ago is in any way safe now...therefore, an "only the Liberals can stop Ford" campaign is no more a sure bet than the mistake Mulcair made in 2015, when he put "safety" above actually presenting his party as different.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

NorthReport wrote:

Ken, with all due respect, these approach unfortunately will only alienate voters away from the the NDP which I don't believe is your goal. 

Which aspect of my approach?  My argument that the ONDP should base its campaign on talking about how UNLIKE the Liberals they are, or my thread title here(a title which was meant as a somewhat sarcastic response to another poster's thread that gloated about the prospects of the Liberals wiping out the ONDP by running a "stop Ford" campaign?

Sean in Ottawa

Ken Burch wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

Ken, with all due respect, these approach unfortunately will only alienate voters away from the the NDP which I don't believe is your goal. 

Which aspect of my approach?  My argument that the ONDP should base its campaign on talking about how UNLIKE the Liberals they are, or my thread title here(a title which was meant as a somewhat sarcastic response to another poster's thread that gloated about the prospects of the Liberals wiping out the ONDP by running a "stop Ford" campaign?

I think that when the NDP say they cannot distinguish between the Liberals and Conservatives, their potential voters conclude that the NDP is blind or lying.

I am fine pointing out what they have in common or their damage to the public one after the other. However, the argument has been terrible since Harper and Harris took over. The Conservatives lurched to the right openign up some real daylight between them and the Liberals. The comment that they are just the same really was true at times (not always) about the old PC federal party. It has made the NDP a laughing stock ever since whenever they have used it.

The premise is actually damaging to the NDP: It suggests that if the NDP is wrong about there being no difference, then there is no justification not to vote Liberal. A Better strategy is to acknowledge that there is a difference but that they are both bad options.

Like just becuase amputation of both your legs is not as bad as being stoned to death does not make a good case for needless amputation.

I get annoyed when I see the same ridiculous argument here as well as a number of people use it. I think making this argument (of there being no difference) when the conservatives are as out there as they have been these last few years, destroys all credibility.

Instead ask why take a least bad option when you have a better one?

As well the Liberals often promise NDP policies that the Conservatives would never promise. It is better to point out that the Liberals cannot be trusted to do them than to pretend that the two parties are the same.

As I have said before -- the Conservatives often promise to screw you and they tell the truth when making that promise. The Liberals promise to help you and are often lying.  Sometimes the Liberals actually do help a bit and sometimes rather than help they actually screw you. More often, they just talk. That is actually a big difference. The population often is open to seeing this but then gets turned off when the NDP says it cannot see any difference at all.

Singh gave a more nuanced view in response to the budget and looked far more credible. He praised a couple initiatives and criticized others. The NDP has to look less partisan in all comments and more balance and honest. This can allow them to leap over the other parties. they also have to remember their more left populist roots and deliver on key life changing policies.

 

brookmere

My argument that the ONDP should base its campaign on talking about how UNLIKE the Liberals they are

Well this is unlike Wynne's, which left out the "Ford Nation" suckup, but I don't care much for the difference.

Congratulations to the Conservatives on electing their new leader, and to Doug Ford on a successful race. Wishing them well.

https://twitter.com/Kathleen_Wynne/status/972870072908828672

jerrym

Latest poll results from Forum on March 11:

%: Cons 44      NDP 27       Lib 23

Estimated # of Seats: Cons 84    NDP 29     Lib 11

Half of Ontarians Disapprove of Doug Ford as PC leader

Half say they're less likely to vote PC in the next election

Toronto, March 11th – In a random sampling of public opinion taken by The Forum PollTM among 923 Ontario voters, half (48%) say they disapprove of Doug Ford as leader of the Ontario Progressive Conservatives. One-third (36%) say they approve of his leadership, while one-sixth (16%) say they do not know.  ...

Half (BTM2: 48%) say they are less likely to vote PC in the next election with Doug Ford as leader, with most of those (41%) saying they are much less likely to do so.

2 in 10 (TOP2: 20%) say they are more likely to vote PC in the next election because of the election of Doug Ford as leader, with one sixth (15%) doing so strongly.

One-quarter (26%) say they are neither more likely nor less likely to vote PC because of Doug Ford. Few say they are unsure.  ...

Amongst those decided an leaning, if an election were held today, the PCs would secure (44%) of the vote. The NDP would secure a quarter (27%) and the Liberals would secure a quarter (23%).

Few would support the Greens (5%) or another party (2%). ...

The PCs would win 84 seats, while the NDP would serve as official opposition with 29. The Liberals would secure 11. 

http://poll.forumresearch.com/data/ff056a23-8212-4b53-9163-8110bcca3cddD...

 

 

wage zombie

brookmere wrote:

Well this is unlike Wynne's, which left out the "Ford Nation" suckup, but I don't care much for the difference.

You realize that @fordnation is Doug Ford's twitter handle, right?

brookmere

wage zombie wrote:
You realize that @fordnation is Doug Ford's twitter handle, right?

I didn't, but that's no excuse for Horvath to use it. The idea that the followers of a party or politician comprise a "nation" is offensive on a number of levels.

Sean in Ottawa

brookmere wrote:

wage zombie wrote:
You realize that @fordnation is Doug Ford's twitter handle, right?

I didn't, but that's no excuse for Horvath to use it. The idea that the followers of a party or politician comprise a "nation" is offensive on a number of levels.

Do you use twitter? At all?

It is based on indexing and conversations. You don't get to call people by anything other than their handles and be effective at all.

Anyone who understands who twitter works would not blame someone for using a twitter handle to speak to or about another person. That's ridiculous.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
The idea that the followers of a party or politician comprise a "nation" is offensive on a number of levels.

Aren't we talking about an individual, and his choice of Twitter handle?

Knowing how Twitter works, what other @name should she have used in order to tweet to him? 

To put it another way, if someone's e-mail address is "theOneTrueGod@hotmail.com", and you find that offensive, what other e-mail address should you use when sending him an e-mail?

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

wage zombie wrote:

brookmere wrote:

Well this is unlike Wynne's, which left out the "Ford Nation" suckup, but I don't care much for the difference.

You realize that @fordnation is Doug Ford's twitter handle, right?

And that it's common for party leaders to congratulate the victors of OTHER party leadership contests, simply out of common courtesy?

Doug Woodard

Remember this?

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/globe-investigation-the-for...

I wonder if any of the sources for that article are still around and willing to talk.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Doug Woodard wrote:

Remember this?

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/globe-investigation-the-for...

I wonder if any of the sources for that article are still around and willing to talk.

That would kill anyone's political career once upon a time. Nowadays,especially if said person has a (C) or (R) next to their name,they can do no wrong. Clearly 'Ford Nation' is still alive where it should have been buried in the abyss of oblivion like pet rocks and Ayn Rand novels.

It fascinates me that a politician,especially of So-Con variety,can survive such crushing facts. I always figured I had too much baggage and skeletons for public office. I was wrong. Mind you I have no magic 'C' to put next to my name.

brookmere

Mr. Magoo wrote:
Knowing how Twitter works, what other @name should she have used in order to tweet to him

She included the PC Party of Ontario which is adequate for a pro forma congratulation. No need to include the personal fan club of this berserker. Here comes the first shot already:

https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/03/12/pc-leader-doug-ford-promises-to-scrap-the-liberals-sex-ed-curriculum.html

 

cco

alan smithee wrote:

It fascinates me that a politician,especially of So-Con variety,can survive such crushing facts. I always figured I had too much baggage and skeletons for public office. I was wrong. Mind you I have no magic 'C' to put next to my name.

People had similar reactions to the popularity of Donald Trump and Roy Moore in the Bible Belt. Their mistake: Taking "social conservatives" at face value, as self-described deeply moral people. As I said in the Moore thread, for social conservatives (and their fraternal twins, racial conservatives), there's no sin that can't be forgiven, as long as you hate the right things.

robbie_dee

Is there any way we could have just one thread to discuss Doug Ford's impact on the upcoming Ontario provincial election? If not just one thread on the upcoming election itself? I find the thread title for this and the other one unnecessarily inflammatory and almost certainly wrong. Doug Ford and the Conservatives may well win the election but they're probably not going to win 100+ seats and reduce the other parties below official status.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

As the author of this thread, I'm willing to accept it being locked if the thread it was started in response to is locked as well.  I never actually thought the Liberals would lose official party status...my point was that it was simply arrogance for Liberal supporters to demand-as the other thread did by implication-that ONDP supporters simply hand over most of their votes to the OLP, as if that was "owed" to stop the Scourge of Doug.

And I think this thread has shown that, if the present polling trends hold up-and there's no reason to think they won't- that line of argument could come back to bite the OLP big-time, so people using the "you HAVE to" argument have to be aware of the Law of Unintended Consequences.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

It seems to me that the only way to stop Doug Ford in Ontario is to vote NDP

robbie_dee

Ken Burch wrote:

As the author of this thread, I'm willing to accept it being locked if the thread it was started in response to is locked as well.  I never actually thought the Liberals would lose official party status...my point was that it was simply arrogance for Liberal supporters to demand-as the other thread did by implication-that ONDP supporters simply hand over most of their votes to the OLP, as if that was "owed" to stop the Scourge of Doug.

And I think this thread has shown that, if the present polling trends hold up-and there's no reason to think they won't- that line of argument could come back to bite the OLP big-time, so people using the "you HAVE to" argument have to be aware of the Law of Unintended Consequences.

Yeah, I kind of figured that was what you were doing. There is also a thread going titled, appropriately enough: Ontario election, June 7, 2018. That would seem a good fit?

wage zombie

 I didn't mean to start a pile on, just didn't want Horwath to get mistakenly blamed for something inconsequential.  Many of us don't use twitter.

ctrl190

We're in new territory with Ford Nation.

Case in point: How does Ford support in large Toronto Community Housing clusters play out in ridings like Toronto Centre or Spadina Fort York. Do they chip away more Liberal votes or NDP votes? Or does Ford reach out to constituencies who wouldn't have voted had Ford not been on the ballot?

Like the Democratic Party in 2016, I think the Ontario Liberals could become the party of the professional urban class. Similar to Clinton winning the Upper East Side, Orange County and NW Virgina, I can see a scenario where the Ontario Liberals get relegated to as few as 10-15 seats. These seats will be overwhelmingly professional, urbane, with many 30 and 40 somethings in fields like tech and healthcare. Think downtown Toronto, some ridings in Peel, Halton, KW and some ridings Ottawa. These are communities that are affluent with solid community structures and social and economic stability.

However, if you can't afford a home, if your kids are swimming in student debt, you are working check-to-check, and life seems to be getting harder, Ford becomes a sort of savior. 

I'm pretty confident the NDP will be the Official Opposition come June, probably in the 20-30 seat range against a majority Ford government. However, Horwath will be no match for Ford.  He's easy to understand for the average voter, and he can point to a million scapegoats. And unlike Trump, he appeals particularly to newcomers.

Lastly, this poll-by-poll map of the 2014 mayoral election shows you just so how screwed the Liberals are in Toronto. Since Ford's election, the Liberals can add at least 10 new ridings to the 'likely lose' category, and that doesn't include the potential NDP pick ups in Beaches-East York or Davenport.

https://globalnews.ca/news/1647117/poll-level-maps-show-torontos-election-in-extreme-detail/

 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
She included the PC Party of Ontario which is adequate for a pro forma congratulation.

I believe those were #hashtags.

Quote:
No need to include the personal fan club of this berserker.

As was pointed out, that's his Twitter handle.  No matter what the individual letters spell out, responses sent to that handle do not "go out" to his "fan club".

Not to further confuse you, but had she tweeted with the hashtag #FordNation then it WOULD go out to all of Ford's supporters who follow or search that hashtag on Twitter.

Sean in Ottawa

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
She included the PC Party of Ontario which is adequate for a pro forma congratulation.

I believe those were #hashtags.

Quote:
No need to include the personal fan club of this berserker.

As was pointed out, that's his Twitter handle.  No matter what the individual letters spell out, responses sent to that handle do not "go out" to his "fan club".

Not to further confuse you, but had she tweeted with the hashtag #FordNation then it WOULD go out to all of Ford's supporters who follow or search that hashtag on Twitter.

A lot of hand wringing from a comment by someone who does not understand twitter and how it works.

Yes, you are right.

NorthReport

I guess we know the answer to this thread now!