Sunday, May 22, 2011

The Tory big Tent

This analysis should make lefties cry.
PunditsGuide gives a great summary of the conference. While lefty hack susan delacourt ( who is probably still weeping over her party's relegation to third place) desperately spins.

WATERLOO—Prime Minister Stephen Harper is building a Conservative coalition in Canada that will probably be more enduring than Brian Mulroney’s conservatism of the 1980s, according to Ipsos pollster Darrell Bricker.

Bricker, delivering his election analysis to a Canadian political scientists’ convention last week, said he believes Harper’s brand of conservatism is built on a stronger base than Mulroney’s.

The big difference, says Bricker, is that Mulroney built his Conservative party out of regional grievances, while Harper is forming a Conservative party around individual voters’ values.

“The interesting thing about what happened in this (May 2) election . . . is that they actually put together a values-based national coalition of Tories — the first time we’ve had it in this country,” Bricker said at a luncheon session of the Canadian Political Science Association, which held its annual meeting at Wilfrid Laurier University last week.

Bricker, who worked in the Prime Minister’s Office during Mulroney’s reign, said Conservatives were united in the 1980s largely around their disaffection with Liberal rule. The West, outraged over the Liberals’ national energy program, came together with Quebec, aggrieved over Pierre Trudeau’s patriation of the Constitution.

But according to Bricker, Harper is building his Conservative base on stronger stuff.

5 comments:

been around the block said...

Let me get this straight: Susan-every-day's-a-bad-hair-day Delacourt says that a recent survey, with results discussed at a conference at Sir Wilfrid Laurier a few days ago, reveals that the Conservatives' win among immigrants isn't all it's cracked up to be.

Huh?

Toronto, acknowledged to be the most multicultural city anywhere, let alone in Canada, returned an unprecedented number of Conservative candidates, especially in the 905 areas, home to a great many "ethnic" groups.

It's credible that there's still a lot more work to be done among immigrant groups, to clarify that Conservative values are, actually, much closer to their faith and family values than the Liberal$' are. To gloat, however, as Delacourt does, “that while Conservatives aren’t necessarily losing with new Canadians, they’re not winning either — yet,” seems churlish, seeing as the CPC just won with a huge majority.

Delacourt seems to hold out hope of the Liberal$ using the immigrant vote to win in the future – especially as it doesn't appear that Jason Kenney's supposed gains in this community are as big as they appear to be. My advice to both Delacourt and Liberal$ is: Don't hold your breath. Attend to your own house and get it in order before plotting to sally forth to (re)plunder the immigrant vote. Reform, and eventual victory at the polls for the Liberal$, has to begin at home, rebuilding from the ground up.

Anonymous said...

Angus Reid published a poll during the campaign that indicated that among "self-identified" Catholics who attended services, the proportion that intended to vote Tory in 2011 had increased to 59% from 38% in 2004. While still lower than the proportion of self-identified that were voting Tory, the increase supports the interpretation that the "winning coalition" is increasingly based on common shared "values". The levels of support between the various groups do not have to be equal, it is the growth that is crucial.

robins111 said...

This was being discussed in other sites and what the consensus seems to be, is that Sour Susan and the gaggle, feels danger from a political movement that is based on values. Values that apparently they don't share.

max said...

This snippet from the punditsguide article makes me snicker:
"The CBC Vote Compass vote intention data actually predicted the final seat results very well, but the authors didn’t believe the seat-counts and applied a correction> – which wound up making their final projection less accurate."

So the accurate, unbiased Vote Compass produced results the authors didn't like. And the authors put in their own numbers because, well... why? Nice one..

It's good too see tax dollars at work making solid objective analysis. Thanks CBC. Please keep correcting facts and figures that you don't believe. I know you have my best interests in mind.

been around the block said...

max: "So the accurate, unbiased Vote Compass produced results the authors didn't like. And the authors put in their own numbers because, well...Why?"

Why? Because that's the way the left-lib CBC has always done it. In the over 30 years I've been monitoring the Mother Corpse, it's always done this way. 'Don't like the way things are going, certain ideas/values are popular with the peasants but we don't like them? Then, spin the news to fit the CBC narrative. I'm-Peter-Mansbridge-and-you're-not and co. have been very adept at doing this.

Then, you hire an ombudsman who's in your camp -- or better/worse yet, who used to work at the CBC ... ta da! Vince Carlin -- and you make sure that Canadians have no idea what's really going on in their country. All we get to see is the doctored Wizard-of-Oz scenario.

Thank God for the blogosphere. Light is shining in the darkness! Thanks, Dr. Roy!

I Support Lord Black