Online Panel Blog

Pauline: Nik, Sarah, in my experience of covering elections, each one has a heartbeat, a way of unfolding that is unique — and that's part of the fascination. This election has arrhythmia!

Historically, campaigns have momentum in one direction or the other. Early on, the Conservatives were worried about peaking too soon. A couple of days ago, it looked like that was happening, with the Liberals beginning to rise and the Conservatives dropping.

But the turmoil in world markets has altogether changed the calculus. And if you factor in social networking and strategic voting, today it feels as if almost anything could happen. What do you think?

Nik: Polling aside, in trying to anticipate what will happen, a very simple rule of thumb hasn't let me down. Ask yourself who an election is about on the weekend before the vote and you can usually see who is in trouble.

In 2004. the closing days of the election were about the Harper Conservatives and they lost. In 2006 the closing days of the election were about the Martin Liberals and they lost.

The Conservatives need a strategy that will pivot the attention of voters to the Dion Liberals. I was a bit surprised not to see their advertising campaign launch with their platform.

Considering their war chest and campaign bricks and mortar, I expected a big push for the close.

My sense is that the Conservative campaign has had difficulties with the economy turning from a positive to a negative issue for them. In football terms, one could say they have a problem "reading the blitz."

| Link to this

Nik: As I write this, the TSX on Monday is down over 1,000 points, the Dow has plunged below 10,000 and the price of a barrel of oil is below $90.

At the beginning of the campaign, the initial Conservative support was partly due to the message that the Liberals would be a risky choice on the economy. The first Wall Street meltdown validated the Conservative message.

However, Harper has been firm in saying that the economic fundamentals in Canada are good and that the Conservative strategy of tax cuts set a strong foundation.

The challenge for him is that if the perception unfolds that Canada must be more proactive on the economy, this initial advantage may turn into a vulnerability.

When Canadians see wild fluctuations in the value of their RRSPs or the savings for their children's education fund, they get nervous. Looking south, it's clear that even the right-wing Bush administration is being proactive.

The opposition party leaders touched on this in the two debates.

In addition to the economy playing out as an issue, Tuesday's Conservative platform launch will be critical for their campaign.

Sarah: Given the current crisis, I think Harper has some significant challenges.

His social policies don't really mesh well with Canadian values, but he managed to do well in the past due to a healthy economy. Now it's all changing and the average person is feeling panicked, wondering if it was such a good idea to blow our surplus without strengthening jobs or Employment Insurance programs.

| Link to this

Sarah: Hi Pauline, Nik

I just finished watching the English leaders' debate without flipping to the vice-presidential debate, and I must admit my self-discipline was well rewarded. I found the debate interesting and illuminating. In particular, I though Elizabeth May was a terrific addition. Her responses were complex and I appreciated the historical context she provided on several occasions. I was hoping her presence would add depth to the debate and it definitely did.

There was a surprising amount of corroboration of ideas amongst the opposition. The biggest surprise for me though came when Layton, Dion, Duceppe and May all demanded greater protection for Canadian jobs and industries through a "made in Canada" policy. This flies in the face of all free trade agreements. Amazing.

In this debate all parties were leaning left, I'd even go so far to say that socialism was being reinvigorated. How many times was Sweden cited as an example of good economic management — at least two. Even Harper was doing everything he could to distance himself from American conservative policies. I'm interested in what you two have to say about this evening, but first I wanted to share my favourite lines of the night.

"Mr. Harper, where's your platform? Under your sweater?" Jack Layton, referring to the fact that the Conservatives have not released a platform.

| Link to this

Pauline: Sarah, Nik,

I have been on the ground in Quebec this weekend, speaking to a broad range of people, from artists to political operators and so-called "ordinary" people.

What I wanted to know was how a smooth Harper machine could have thrown such a gorgeously wrapped present to the Bloc Québécois as the $45-million cut to the arts and the prime minister's subsequent dismissive remarks about culture.

I was speculating that perhaps there was an element of vindictiveness to it — revenge for the arts community's outcry over Bill C-10, with its potential for censorship; sabotage for the Governor General's efforts to leave a legacy of placing the arts at the heart of Canadian life.

Well, apparently, it's somewhat simpler than that. I am told that Dmitri Soudas, the PMO's communications guru, was attending his mother's funeral in Greece when this particular discussion took place. That left the red-meat types in charge — and they thought this would be a great idea.

As you know, it's not playing well in most Quebec ridings. The Conservatives believe they will hold on to all their current Quebec seats, with the support of Mario Dumont's ADQ machine. But their gains are likely to be substantially slowed by the arts cuts and the controversy over sentences for youth crime.

For the first time, Quebec observers are talking about a "made-in-Canada" Conservative majority that owes very little to Quebec. That would be a very interesting scenario that few would have predicted just a few days ago.

| Link to this

Nik: Another interesting week on the campaign trail, the Conservatives continue to lead, no major gaffes but a few bumps on the road.

Earlier this week, the Liberals released their platform. Polling shows that there was neither an increase in Liberal support nor an improvement in the perceptions of Stéphane Dion.

Indeed, the day of the launch also featured Harper's tough on crime announcement. The outcome of the day? Tories up three points, Grits down three points.

It seems that regardless of what the Liberals do, they have not yet succeeded in moving the dial. The latest CPAC-Nanos tracking has the Liberals at historic lows in public support.

Of note, Harper's comments about culture does not seem to be playing well in Quebec. I've notice a bit of a slip in Conservative numbers in that province (though it could be a short-term occurrence).

Also, although Layton still remains ahead of Dion on many of the leadership measures, his talk about the coalition had a negative impact on his personal image in the short run, specifically on "vision."

| Link to this

Sarah: Hi Pauline, Nik,

What to talk about first? There are so many angles to play with here, the contrasts in the campaigns are beginning to show.

Both the NDP and the Liberals have come out with some bold proposals, from pharmaceutical subsidies to post-secondary debt relief and childcare. All of which will most definitely cost a pretty penny.

The Conservatives’ response? Take aim at fun-flavoured tobacco products and offer first-time homebuyers a tax credit of $750. I live in Vancouver, the average house here costs $700,000! I'd much rather see money put into creating affordable housing that includes co-ops — not just social housing. But alas, there's no money for real change.

The tax issue has become so huge for Canadians that we seem to be forgetting what they could potentially be paying for. When I consider that the average cost for daycare in B.C. is around $700 a month and the Universal Child Tax Credit is a mere $100, I scratch my head at those who think the Conservatives are helping the average Canadian.

Pauline: I think that it's certainly true that for a number of years now, parties on the so-called right of the spectrum have successfully framed the conversation around tax cuts. But I wonder whether that conversation is about to shift.

| Link to this

Nik: Week 1 of the campaign featured flying puffins, a Conservative staffer calling a network to discredit the father of a slain soldier and a rough start for the Liberal leader. Looking at the numbers, there were two significant take-aways from my perspective

First, support for the Bloc Québéecois is significantly dropping and all of the federalist parties are gaining at the expense of the BQ.

The latest CPAC-Nanos tracking in Quebec has a three-way statistical tie between the Bloc, the Conservatives and the Liberals. Likewise, NDP support is up in Quebec.

If this trend continues, the really big news in this election may be the decline of the Bloc and the resurgence of federalist parties in Quebec. A poor showing from the BQ would surely be a major setback for the sovereignty movement.

Second, in the past our political arena has been dominated by parties with strong regional bases: Liberals in Ontario, BQ in Quebec, Conservatives in the West.

I'm struck by the fact that the Conservatives and the Liberals are tied in both Ontario and Quebec at this point in the campaign. We may be entering a new phase where we have multiple federal parties that can justly claim national reach.

A world with a weakened BQ in the House of Commons and stronger national parties may actually be good news for our political system as political leaders have to lift themselves from former regional views to more of a national vision.

| Link to this

Pauline: Hi Sarah and Nik!

I've missed you since we left off this conversation back in the spring. Since we last talked, I've been in the U.S., Japan, Singapore and Indonesia, and I'm off to London and South Africa in the morning.

I've also spent time in Quebec, Ontario, Alberta and B.C. So I feel that I'm seeing Canada through a multi-faceted prism, in the full panoply of its beauty and its cruelty. I'm not loving everything I see.

I'm especially not loving the nastiness of this campaign, which is barely off the ground. We've already dealt with defecating birds, cheap attacks, low blows, strutting, preening, arrogance and mock humility. Yeesh!!!

On the other hand, the visceral reaction of Canadians to the exclusion of Elizabeth May from the leaders' debate made me proud: both the massive outcry (after all, what were all those men thinking?) and the speed of the backtracking.

It will be an immeasurably better show as a result! I don't know about you guys, but I think this is going to be a fascinating campaign. What do you think?

| Link to this

Sarah: Hi Pauline, Nik

While it's been difficult to stay focused on national politics when much of the world is in such apparent crisis, enough worrisome Canadian news has surfaced to make me think that while we can consider ourselves lucky to live in this country, we have plenty to be concerned about here as well.

Certainly our commitment to fairness, equality and democracy are wavering. I'm thinking of the federal government shutting down elements of the freedom of information database, its hands-off approach to Omar Khadr, the overzealous use of Tasers and the threats to close the safe-injection site Insite in Vancouver. Am I being paranoid or should we be worried?

Nik: I find the coincidental timing of events like these can incite feelings of concern in the public around certain issues and then things turn more to a "normal" cycle (if there ever is such a thing).

Beyond what you've identified, Sarah, I think the bigger factor driving unease today is the concern about jobs and the economy. Research shows that Canadians are increasingly worried about the strength of our economy. When they see the price of gas jump, fluctuations in the stock market and talk of a potential recession, they get "grumpy," so to speak.

We might at this time be in a psychological as opposed to a real recession but it has a huge impact on the public mood.

Comments (14)| Link to this

Pauline: Sarah/Nik,

I am mesmerized by the impact of the YouTube environment on the Bill Clinton legacy in the U.S. where he is being mocked for being out of date, not understanding the new media and butting in on his wife's campaign.

It is now possible to isolate anyone's weakest moment and give it disproportionate resonance worldwide, while ignoring the substance and spirit of what was actually said to a specific local audience. Politicians must perform under relentless conditions, constant pressure and chronic fatigue. I very much doubt that this makes for healthy, thoughtful democracy.

How do you see this playing out in the next Canadian election?

Nik: The YouTube phenomenon creates a new "wild west" for political operatives. What I've been noticing is that the campaigns push their mainstream ads and messages on broadcast television and then either directly or through friendly proxies put their hard-hitting and aggressive messaging on YouTube.

On the plus side, if you have a compelling or funny message it can be quite viral. Consider the Barak Obama "Yes we can" speech put to video. Within a day it reached over a million people.

Comments (2)| Link to this