Canada’s opposition parties decided not to support Stephen Harper’s Conservative Party, so Canada will hold a federal election in early May 2011. But should the opposition parties have called an election? Not according to the latest poll.
From the liberal Ottawa Citizen.
Excerpt:
Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservatives begin an election campaign this weekend far ahead of their political rivals in public favour and would be poised to win a “comfortable” majority if Canadians cast their votes now, a new poll has found.
The national survey, conducted exclusively for Postmedia News and Global National, reveals that voter support is declining for the opposition Liberals who have put forward a non-confidence motion that will lead to the defeat of the Conservative government in the House of Commons Friday afternoon.
The March 22-23 poll by Ipsos Reid found that public support remains solid for the Tories despite recent opposition attempts to draw attention to such controversies as the government’s treatment of Parliament and revelations that an ex-senior aide to Harper lobbied a department to get funds for his fiance, a former escort.
The Conservatives are now supported by 43 per cent of decided voters — up by three points from two weeks ago.
Just as important, the Tories now have a widening 19-point lead over the Liberals led by Michael Ignatieff.
[…]”The Tories are starting this election campaign in a better place than they have started the last three campaigns,” Ipsos Reid president Darrell Bricker said in an interview Thursday. “With 43 per cent, they’re probably quite comfortably in majority territory.”At dissolution of Parliament, the Tories will have 143 seats. They need to win just 12 more — to reach the 155-seat mark — to get a majority government.Bricker said the problem for the Liberals is that their efforts to discredit the Tories on ethics are going nowhere.[…]According to the poll, the Tories have opened up a commanding lead in vote-rich Ontario. In that key battleground, the Conservatives stand at 46 per cent, compared to 30 per cent for the Liberals, 16 per cent for the NDP and eight per cent for the Greens.
In Quebec, the Tories appear poised to easily hang on to their seats. While the Bloc would receive 41 per cent of the vote, the Conservatives (25 per cent) have moved into second position, followed by the Liberals (18 per cent), the NDP (13 per cent) and the Greens (three per cent).
In another key battleground — British Columbia — the Conservatives (50 per cent) hold a solid lead over the Liberals (22 per cent), with the NDP (20 per cent) not far behind. The Greens (seven per cent) trail.
[…]In Alberta, the Tories stand at 54 per cent support, while the Liberals have 23 per cent, the NDP have 17 per cent and the Green party has five per cent.In Saskatchewan/Manitoba, the Tories are ahead at 66 per cent, while the Liberals have 18 per cent and NDP has 13 per cent.
In the Atlantic region, the Tories are at 41 per cent, followed by the Liberals at 28 per cent, the NDP at 20 per cent, and the Greens at 11 per cent.
Just to refresh you, the Liberals are the socialist party, and the NDP are the communist party, and the Bloc is the French communist party. The conservatives are strong on defense and fiscal issues, and they do have some good social conservatives like Maurice Vellacott and Rob Anders. The Conservatives do understand the need for strong families, low unemployment rates and low taxes as a support for social conservatism, but there is not much they can do about that while they are still a minority party. That could all change with this election, and you might see some common sense reforms to strengthen marriage (reform divorce laws and custody laws), and have some restrictions on abortion, like the kind that the state Republican parties pass.
For example, you might finally see moderate reforms like parental consent or born alive infant protection or a bill to make coerced abortion a prosecutable offense or more ultrasounds in hospitals or tax deductions for adoptions. This would be in addition to all the wonderful military and economic laws they could pass if they were a majority: a helicopter carrier, new guided-missile frigates, new safe nuclear reactors, lower minimum wage rates to raise the employment rate, free trade deals (e.g. – with Singapore, India, South Korea, Ukraine, Georgia and the Baltic nations), employer payroll tax cuts to encourage hiring of more employees, vouchers for school choice so parents could choose schools, lower corporate tax rates to encourage businesses to move to Canada, a national right-to-work law so workers wouldn’t have to join a union, dismantle the long gun registry to encourage self-defense of homes and property, abolish all Human Rights Commissions and Human Rights Tribunals, privatize CBC, Canada Post and other Crown corporations to make them more balanced politically and more responsive to consumers, double the child tax credit for married couples to encourage married couples to have children, and put in income splitting for married couples to allow mothers to stay home for a couple of years with new kids, etc. At least they could ask the Canadian people what they want and try to put in common sense reforms that support working families.
The election is set for May 2011. I cannot believe that the Conservatives are more popular in Saskatchewan than in Alberta. Alberta used to be the conservative headquarters of Canada, with Calgary at the center. Now I am not so sure what to think.
WINTERY KNIGHT 
Side note: May 2,2011 is the Federal election date. That Canadians will get out and vote so that PM Harper will win his majority – Please pray!
“I cannot believe that the Conservatives are more popular in Saskatchewan than in Alberta. Alberta used to be the conservative headquarters of Canada, with Calgary at the center. Now I am not so sure what to think”.
Mainly the two Premiers doing, I think: Sask’s does-wonders-go-getter, Brad Wall, and Alberta’s do-nothing-stick-in-mud-snail, Ed Stelmach, are the reason for the switch in interprovincial Conservative leaning…. Hopefully, Alberta’s upcoming provincial election (this fall) and Stelmach’s resignation will work to correct this…
Also I’m believing more and more that one of the idiosyncrasies of Canada is that, in terms of voting, the actual leaning of most, or at least very many, is normally based on platform first, regardless of political party. Although that didn’t apply in Stelmach’s case; he had no platform, no plan whatsoever. He’s not even a conservative but only posed as one (in the exact sense that Liberals infiltrate by taking out Conservative memberships) and the powers that be at the time manipulated his way in…. Right now Albertans are disillusioned and in limbo.
LikeLike
Liberals are socialist? Don’t tell that to actually existing socialists! Look, I gather that you don’t like the Liberals, or anyone to the left of Mark Steyn, but throwing around inaccurate labels is just wrong.
LikeLike
Don’t the Liberals support socialized medicine? Socialized medicine is the biggest scheme for redistributing wealth there is. Don’t the liberals support Crown corporations? Don’t the liberals support universal day care? Don’t the liberals support banning firearms nationwide? What do you call that? I call that socialism.
LikeLike
Well, to be fair, the Conservatives support socialized medicine as well. However, most Conservatives are open to a private system working along the public system.
LikeLike
How does banning fire arms = socialism?
Does banning broccoli = socialism as well?
LikeLike
Because when a person cannot defend himself AND HIS FAMILY from criminals, the state is the one who has the responsibility. Hence, socialism. Which is why libertarian capitalists like Cato Institute make legal firearm ownership a pillar of their platform. Socialism is anti-liberty, and firearm ownership is pro-liberty.
LikeLike
Perhaps I’m a bit confused. When precisely did the liberals decide to ban guns? I know they support the long gun registry, which I do not. But I’ve never actually heard of them banning guns.
I mean, Canada has had controls on civilian use of firearms since confederation. I don’t see why it’s such a big issue. I don’t mind registering my gun. I don’t mind laws restricted ownership of high-capacity magazines, limiting handguns to ten rounds and all semi-automatic centrefire rifles to 5.
I think you’re just a little too geared up over this. And to be honest it kind of puts me off wanting to read your opinion.
LikeLike
Read:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20051202/elxn_gunban_realitycheck_051208/20051208?s_name=election2006&no_ads=
If you are pro-criminal, and anti-family, then this blog is not for you.
This is my view:
http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/01/gun-controls-twisted-outcome
LikeLike
Don’t the Liberals support socialized medicine?
yup
More govt and all that, and they really mean it as long as none of it goes towards defence.
LikeLike
Yes, because either I agree with you or I must love criminals and do my best to destroy families. You can make your point just as clearly without creating false dichotomies.
I read your top link. Thank you. :)
But, “handguns have accounted for roughly two-thirds of gun-related murders ” doesn’t that concern you?
I thought United Mothers Opposing Violence Everywhere (UMOVE) made an excellent point “You never hear about a drive-by knifing”
While I don’t agree with an outright ban on guns I’m all for regulation.
I don’t see how gun regulation would be a bad thing. While yes, most gun crimes usually involve guns that are illegal or stolen firearms anyways. How could regulation and storage/transportation/display etc. guidelines for legally owned guns be a bad thing?
LikeLike
If you support the banning of firearms, as in the UK gun ban, then you support the doubling of violent crime rates. Those are the facts. What more can I say?
When individual states liberalize their gun control laws to allow concealed carry, the violent crime rates went down:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37245
That’s talking about research published by the University of Chicago. This is the third edition of the book.
Those are the facts.
LikeLike
Different things work on different people. What I have found is that the lame postmodern relativists cringe at my approach, but they will not respond to facts anyway. I do a lot better with the atheists who like stark contrasts and snark. I once invited a particle physicist to lecture at my company and the atheists who knew the kalam argument well literally were laughing at the other atheists who were shot down in their lame criticisms of the Big Bang theory and the fine-tuning. What atheists respect is arrogance. That’s why they like Hitchens. Sometimes it is good to be arrogant – confident – and to bring the facts and drive your opponent into the ground. Leave no doubt.
Think of Elijah on Mount Carmel. Snark. Leave no doubt.
LikeLike
WK, I agree with you on gun ownership for law abiding citizens. It’s not like criminal types care about laws anyway, finicky regulation simply results in a dangerous imbalance of armed criminals and disarmed law abiding citizens. The stats on crime reduction when gun laws are liberalized are telling. Guns aren’t the problem. Criminals and murderous people are.
And I think that banning broccoli would be socialism actually. Who is the state to tell me what vegetables I may or may not eat?
WK makes his point a little abrasively, but what he means is that, however good your intentions may be, supporting gun control effectually supports crime.
LikeLike
Yes, and I linked to evidence, too. Which is probably what makes me snarky.
LikeLike
WK> There is no if about it. I do not support the ban of firearms.
Mary> Thank you for replying to my comment about regulation. (I have no problem with snark, I suppose I just don’t like capitalized sections of writing. Unless WK is actually Owen Meany, I really don’t see the need to shout.)
The link you sent me said that the UK had a higher rate of crime for everything except murder and rape. So that’s theft and non-sexual assault I’m assuming. To be honest I’d much rather be roughed up or stolen from than be raped or murdered. To me the UK is still ahead.
Keep in mind that there are always many contributing factors to such claims. Such as population increase and other social factors. The UK has 254.7 people per square kilometer, The US has 33.7 people per square kilometer and Canada only 3.41.
Anyways, I won’t be able to check back on your comments for a day or two but I look forward to all of them. :)
LikeLike
The link says that following the gun ban of 1997, violent crime doubled in the next FOUR years. DOUBLED. And then the John Lott research shows that more legal firearm ownership reduces crime rates.
From the Reason article:
And from the John Lott book:
LikeLike
The billions are free right?
That the murder rate has gone up 24% is of no concern.
that a whole 2% of illegal activities are carried out with registered weapons who cares
billions spent on a 2% solution.
spend spend spend…..
Must make the government grow.
LikeLike
“Just to refresh you, the Liberals are the socialist party, and the NDP are the communist party, and the Bloc is the French communist party.”
Hahaha! that’s a great description, don’t forget the greens!
LikeLike
Very interesting comments, and civil, too. We’re all Canadians pulling together for the common good.
I think the Prime Minister should be given a majority because of Canada’s Economic Hero, Jim Flaherty, who was vigilant with the banking institutions, and is a calm sort of guy we need to look after our finances. He wasn’t given enough time when he was the Ontario finance minister, but this time he has proven himself and is recognized by the world as first class. You know, we can’t enjoy our freedoms the way each of us want to if we don’t have a good economy. So, please, let’s give the government an opportunity. They’ve proven themselves, so far, and we sure don’t need to risk getting tax increases. By the way, the costs of the F35 jet etc, were told to the opposition, but they didn’t want to believe it, It didn’y fit in with their desire to bring dowm the government. I saw Question Period and saw that myself every day. Corporate taxes? Even former deputy Prime Minister under Paul Marti, Johm Manley just said we need corporate tax cuts to attract new corporations, and they paid half of the total tax revenue in 2010. So, let’s just take it easy, don’t panic, the best is yet to come after the election.
Have a great Spring and Summer, everyone!
Larry
LikeLike
Since when is giving a government more power better for the people ? Idiots ..People are so stupid falling for the same line over and over..Learn to read between the lines pal
LikeLike
Yesterday,the 19th.was a terrible day for Micheqal Ignatieff and the Liberals.
Any Liberals I know are major pissed at Iggy…and embarrassed!
That converts to Conservative votes!
Even Liberals don’t want this twit running Canada!
Now,if they could just gag him until election day…..
LikeLike