Paul Martin says Rae Ignatieff rivalry won't divide Liberal party
Former prime minister Paul Martin says he's confident the Liberal party will emerge united despite sparring between its two principal leadership hopefuls.
Martin, whose own acrimonious relationship with former prime minister Jean Chretien eventually drove him from his post as finance minister, says front-runners Michael Ignatieff and Bob Rae won't divide the party.
He says the Liberal party has learned its lesson and he's sure that once the new leader is chosen the party will be united.
Memories of past confrontations surfaced last week when Rae boycotted the party's closed-door, all-candidates' forum because chief rival Ignatieff wouldn't agree to lift the veil of secrecy.
That was the first public spat between candidates vying to replace Stephane Dion as leader after a disastrous defeat in last month's election.
It disappointed many in the party, who had hoped to avoid the kind of sniping that characterized the hard-fought campaign in which Dion came up the middle to win as a compromise candidate in the 2006 leadership race.
Neither Rae nor Ignatieff could take a clear majority last time around.
On Monday, Martin said all the candidates were ``outstanding'' but declined to endorse any one of them, saying he will remain a spectator.
New Brunswick's Dominic LeBlanc is also up for the party's top job.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Irony
From Canadian Press:
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Lest We Forget
I'll be heading out soon to a local Remembrance Day ceremony, I hope you're doing the same.
A few things to think about:
A few things to think about:
- 28% of all eligible Canadians fought in World War I
- 36% of all eligible Canadians fought in World War II
- almost all of these were volunteers
- would you put your life on the line to help our neighbour, let alone an idea, to survive?
- would you like to live under a Nazi dictatorship?
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Obama wins
At 9:11 p.m. Atlantic standard time, based on the NBC and ABC calls* in the state of Pennsylvania, I am prepared to call the election for Senator Obama of Illinois.
I do not foresee a scenario where Senator McCain of Arizona can lose xxx and win a majority of electoral votes.
* - CNN and CBS still haven't called it, but I am unconvinced that McCain can win without Pennsylvania.
I do not foresee a scenario where Senator McCain of Arizona can lose xxx and win a majority of electoral votes.
* - CNN and CBS still haven't called it, but I am unconvinced that McCain can win without Pennsylvania.
A bit tight
A little tighter than I expected in the early results, but time will tell. CBS is calling New Hampshire for Obama which makes a McCain win very difficult. He would have to sweep the remaining seven of my eight swing states and pick up Nevada.
Monday, November 03, 2008
Tomorrow's watching guide tonight!
Quite interestingly there are four swing states whose polls close early. The results in these states, which close at 8 p.m. Atlantic time, could predict the election. They are:
If Obama wins either North Carolina or Florida, he has almost certainly won the election. If he wins them both, he has won the election, probably in a landslide.
If McCain holds those two southern states and wins one of New Hampshire and Virginia, he has a small chance to win. If he wins all four stay tuned for a long night.
My read of the map shows Obama with 266 electoral votes in the bag, meaning McCain has to win all of the states in play (8 by my reading) to win the election.
Here is my take of the map:
McCain is likely to win some of these states, particularly West Virginia and to a lesser extent Indiana, Missouri and North Carolina. However, he must win them all to win the election.
It is also possible that Obama may win some of the states coloured red but, should he win any of them, he'll likely win all of the swing states as well and be headed to a landslide in the neighbourhood of 400 electoral votes.
It is also possible that McCain may win some of the states coloured blue, i.e. Nevada and Virginia (and if his campaign schedule is to be believed and the polls discarded Iowa). However, if he wins any of those states, I will expect him to have run the table with these and they'll be gravy.
- New Hampshire
- Virginia
- North Carolina
- Florida
If Obama wins either North Carolina or Florida, he has almost certainly won the election. If he wins them both, he has won the election, probably in a landslide.
If McCain holds those two southern states and wins one of New Hampshire and Virginia, he has a small chance to win. If he wins all four stay tuned for a long night.
My read of the map shows Obama with 266 electoral votes in the bag, meaning McCain has to win all of the states in play (8 by my reading) to win the election.
Here is my take of the map:
McCain is likely to win some of these states, particularly West Virginia and to a lesser extent Indiana, Missouri and North Carolina. However, he must win them all to win the election.
It is also possible that Obama may win some of the states coloured red but, should he win any of them, he'll likely win all of the swing states as well and be headed to a landslide in the neighbourhood of 400 electoral votes.
It is also possible that McCain may win some of the states coloured blue, i.e. Nevada and Virginia (and if his campaign schedule is to be believed and the polls discarded Iowa). However, if he wins any of those states, I will expect him to have run the table with these and they'll be gravy.
Sunday, November 02, 2008
U.S. election prediction
Back in April, I drew up six potential electoral maps. These were my predictions for the likely, best and worst case scenarios in McCain-Clinton and McCain-Obama match ups.
As I mentioned in my post the other day, McCain has badly fumbled the campaign and I forsee the best case scenario coming for Barack Obama.
My April scenario for Obama included him picking up Alaska in the best case, which is not going to happen thanks to Palin being on the ticket. So rather than the 325-213 win I thought would be his best case, I'll make it 322-216.
Obama will hold all Kerry states plus pick up: Colorado, Iowa, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio and Virginia.
As I mentioned in my post the other day, McCain has badly fumbled the campaign and I forsee the best case scenario coming for Barack Obama.
My April scenario for Obama included him picking up Alaska in the best case, which is not going to happen thanks to Palin being on the ticket. So rather than the 325-213 win I thought would be his best case, I'll make it 322-216.
Obama will hold all Kerry states plus pick up: Colorado, Iowa, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio and Virginia.
Friday, October 31, 2008
The death of anonymous posting
I have avoided this for over two years, but today I have turned off anonymous comments. I try to reply to every substantive comment made on this blog but there is no fun in having to respond to nonsense.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Grasping defeat from the jaws of victory
For much of the political year, I've been indicating why I thought John McCain was going to win the presidential election. I have been accused of being a far-right conservative and a racist for doing so. This has caused me a great deal of pause.
It is unfortunate that so many people caught up by Obama's very impressive rhetorical ability have become unable to see past the hype and imagine that there would be anyone, anywhere who would oppose him for any legitimate reasons.
It is also unfortunate that people would be so caught up in Obamamania that they couldn't see the difference between looking at a political situation impartially and commenting on what one thought would happen, and support for the outcome one predicted.
Obama has many gifts and many flaws, just like any candidate (or any person for that matter). Based on the history of recent U.S. elections, and the country's right-leaning nature, I believed that Obama was unlikely to be elected. I have never seen race as a major issue in the contest because race would only affect voting preferences of significant numbers of people in states the Democrats were unlikely to win anyway.
However, John McCain has done his best to lose this race. As a friend of mine once said in refernece to John Tory's loss to Dalton McGuinty in 2007, he seems to have grasped defeat from the jaws of victory.
Nate Silver's brilliant site fivethirtyeight.com says McCain has a 3.3% chance of victory. I remain convinced that Americans will have a hard time voting for a liberal with a thin record so I would say it is more like a 20% chance, but still not very likely.
McCain's people, all but admitting defeat, are trying to blame the loss on the financial crisis and the weak Republican brand thanks to the Bush years. They forget however that at one time the media was willing to give McCain the benefit of the doubt, he was branded as a maverick beholden to no party, started the summer with higher favourability ratings than Obama and led in polls as recently as late September. George Bush and Wall Street did not lose this election for McCain, McCain did.
McCain's support of immigration reform could have bought him unprecedented support among Hispanics. Instead, he looks likely to get far less votes there than Bush did in either 2000 or 2004. This is but one example where he made a huge strategic error. This would have locked Nevada and New Mexico into his column and put California into the single digits forcing Obama to spend big money there to keep that Democratic-must-win-state blue. McCain did backtrack on his position during the primary, but after he locked it up, without flip-flopping, he could have easily stated a position that honoured his record and appealed to Hispanics.
On March 4, McCain wrapped up the nomination. On March 5, he should have been in Southern California announcing his immigration and border security platform. With Arnold Schwarzenegger and Mike Huckabee at his side (both supporters of immigration reform, one an independent figure and one popular with the base) he should have said:
"Over the past year, this country has had a profound debate on the question of immigration and border security. I have been in the middle of this debate and I have crossed party lines to try to find a solution. My friends, I was the first to admit during the primary campaign that the proposal put forward by myself and others become unsaleable. It was not what Americans wanted and during the primary, I said if it came back to the Senate I would vote against it because I must reflect the will of the people. What Americans have told me is, though they are compassionate, they also have legitimate concerns about their economic and personal security so long as our borders are not secure. If elected, I will ask the Congress to pass the Comprehensive Immigration and Border Security Reform Act. This law would incorporate the best of our bill from last June but would also ensure that while we treated those people who have come to this country to seek opportunity and the American dream with respect, we would make sure that no one else ever entered this country illegally."
With that, he would have regained credibility among the immigration reform lobby without going back on his statements during the primary.
Then he should have set out to tour around 10 or so Democratic states that he could win under some scenario, including several more visits to California. This would have put the scare into Democrats who were already fretting their long primary.
Some of these activities may have scared the base, and something would have had to have been done to counter-balance that. One of the big mistakes McCain made was that he wasted all kinds of time in the spring trying to make up with the base and then he announced a base-inspiring vice-presidential pick. He should have done one or the other, not both. A big centrist maverick tour of Democratic states could have put him solidly in the lead in polls by the time the Democratic primary wrapped up. He then could have followed it by picking a base vice-presidential candidate, such as Sarah Palin who, I think, if handled differently, could have inspired the base (as she has) without damaging McCain's credibility. But this should have been in June or early July, with the campaign doing a week or two of setting the tone for the vice-presidential pick.
The next big mistake made by the McCain campaign has been their abrasive relationship with the media. The media, which McCain himself used to call his "base", feel betrayed. Moreover, the restrictive, scripted campaign regimen that has been imposed on him has not been to his liking and it has made him grumpy which has help paint a very unhelpful caricature. There is a great web-editorial on ABC News that talks about how far the media has turned against McCain, check it out.
Is McCain going to win? Very unlikely. Could he have won? Very easily. Whose fault is it? The McCain campaign.
It is unfortunate that so many people caught up by Obama's very impressive rhetorical ability have become unable to see past the hype and imagine that there would be anyone, anywhere who would oppose him for any legitimate reasons.
It is also unfortunate that people would be so caught up in Obamamania that they couldn't see the difference between looking at a political situation impartially and commenting on what one thought would happen, and support for the outcome one predicted.
Obama has many gifts and many flaws, just like any candidate (or any person for that matter). Based on the history of recent U.S. elections, and the country's right-leaning nature, I believed that Obama was unlikely to be elected. I have never seen race as a major issue in the contest because race would only affect voting preferences of significant numbers of people in states the Democrats were unlikely to win anyway.
However, John McCain has done his best to lose this race. As a friend of mine once said in refernece to John Tory's loss to Dalton McGuinty in 2007, he seems to have grasped defeat from the jaws of victory.
Nate Silver's brilliant site fivethirtyeight.com says McCain has a 3.3% chance of victory. I remain convinced that Americans will have a hard time voting for a liberal with a thin record so I would say it is more like a 20% chance, but still not very likely.
McCain's people, all but admitting defeat, are trying to blame the loss on the financial crisis and the weak Republican brand thanks to the Bush years. They forget however that at one time the media was willing to give McCain the benefit of the doubt, he was branded as a maverick beholden to no party, started the summer with higher favourability ratings than Obama and led in polls as recently as late September. George Bush and Wall Street did not lose this election for McCain, McCain did.
McCain's support of immigration reform could have bought him unprecedented support among Hispanics. Instead, he looks likely to get far less votes there than Bush did in either 2000 or 2004. This is but one example where he made a huge strategic error. This would have locked Nevada and New Mexico into his column and put California into the single digits forcing Obama to spend big money there to keep that Democratic-must-win-state blue. McCain did backtrack on his position during the primary, but after he locked it up, without flip-flopping, he could have easily stated a position that honoured his record and appealed to Hispanics.
On March 4, McCain wrapped up the nomination. On March 5, he should have been in Southern California announcing his immigration and border security platform. With Arnold Schwarzenegger and Mike Huckabee at his side (both supporters of immigration reform, one an independent figure and one popular with the base) he should have said:
"Over the past year, this country has had a profound debate on the question of immigration and border security. I have been in the middle of this debate and I have crossed party lines to try to find a solution. My friends, I was the first to admit during the primary campaign that the proposal put forward by myself and others become unsaleable. It was not what Americans wanted and during the primary, I said if it came back to the Senate I would vote against it because I must reflect the will of the people. What Americans have told me is, though they are compassionate, they also have legitimate concerns about their economic and personal security so long as our borders are not secure. If elected, I will ask the Congress to pass the Comprehensive Immigration and Border Security Reform Act. This law would incorporate the best of our bill from last June but would also ensure that while we treated those people who have come to this country to seek opportunity and the American dream with respect, we would make sure that no one else ever entered this country illegally."
With that, he would have regained credibility among the immigration reform lobby without going back on his statements during the primary.
Then he should have set out to tour around 10 or so Democratic states that he could win under some scenario, including several more visits to California. This would have put the scare into Democrats who were already fretting their long primary.
Some of these activities may have scared the base, and something would have had to have been done to counter-balance that. One of the big mistakes McCain made was that he wasted all kinds of time in the spring trying to make up with the base and then he announced a base-inspiring vice-presidential pick. He should have done one or the other, not both. A big centrist maverick tour of Democratic states could have put him solidly in the lead in polls by the time the Democratic primary wrapped up. He then could have followed it by picking a base vice-presidential candidate, such as Sarah Palin who, I think, if handled differently, could have inspired the base (as she has) without damaging McCain's credibility. But this should have been in June or early July, with the campaign doing a week or two of setting the tone for the vice-presidential pick.
The next big mistake made by the McCain campaign has been their abrasive relationship with the media. The media, which McCain himself used to call his "base", feel betrayed. Moreover, the restrictive, scripted campaign regimen that has been imposed on him has not been to his liking and it has made him grumpy which has help paint a very unhelpful caricature. There is a great web-editorial on ABC News that talks about how far the media has turned against McCain, check it out.
Is McCain going to win? Very unlikely. Could he have won? Very easily. Whose fault is it? The McCain campaign.
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
McCain's TSN turning point?
Tonight Barack Obama and John McCain meet for their second debate. After Sarah Palin's better-than-expected debate performance last week, the Republican ticket has started to move back up in the polls.
The format of tonight's debate is a town-hall meeting. McCain is an expert at these, very comfortable and well experienced in them. Obama prefers a more structured/professional format.
If McCain can pull off a good night tonight, he will appear to be more in touch with regular people and could shift the momentum of the race. This could be the TSN turning point folks...
The format of tonight's debate is a town-hall meeting. McCain is an expert at these, very comfortable and well experienced in them. Obama prefers a more structured/professional format.
If McCain can pull off a good night tonight, he will appear to be more in touch with regular people and could shift the momentum of the race. This could be the TSN turning point folks...
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Hot Rod
Riding projection update
After talking it over with some folks and watching the coverage, I am now convinced that Rodney Weston will be a strong candidate for the Conservatives in Saint John. He has been campaigning quite effectively against the Liberal Green Shift plan, which would impose a carbon tax. Weston's argument is that the choice is between a new refinery and new jobs or a carbon tax and no new jobs.
The CBC the other day did a streeter and the folks they talked to were unanimously against the Liberals. Green Shift may be enough to shift the 4% away from Paul Zed that would give the Tories a win.
I am moving this from a leans Liberal hold to leans Conservative gain.
After talking it over with some folks and watching the coverage, I am now convinced that Rodney Weston will be a strong candidate for the Conservatives in Saint John. He has been campaigning quite effectively against the Liberal Green Shift plan, which would impose a carbon tax. Weston's argument is that the choice is between a new refinery and new jobs or a carbon tax and no new jobs.The CBC the other day did a streeter and the folks they talked to were unanimously against the Liberals. Green Shift may be enough to shift the 4% away from Paul Zed that would give the Tories a win.
I am moving this from a leans Liberal hold to leans Conservative gain.
Monday, September 08, 2008
A new election blog...
NB taxpayer and I are teaming up for the 40th general election. You can find our musings at New Brunswickers Paint the Political Picture - a bit of a play on our historical name, "The Picture Province".
My first entry is my previously promised Atlantic Ridings to Watch.
My first entry is my previously promised Atlantic Ridings to Watch.
Sunday, September 07, 2008
And we're off!
The election has been called and the leaders have been making their first appeals on TV.
Stephen Harper was good both in speech and questions. He has also lost a lot of weight! His campaign would seem to be focussed on the government's record and leadership. No surprise there. The press in both his and Dion's question sessions seemed very focussed on the use of "family man" in Harper's commercials. He had a decent answer, saying he isn't arguing that others aren't family men but his advisors have pointed out that Canadians don't know him as a father, etc and it is worthwhile to inform people of that side of his persona.
Stéphane Dion used a teleprompter for his speech and the result was to show a stark difference between his ability in English when reading a speech and when answering unrehersed questions. I am not sure it would be wise for the Liberals to have him use a teleprompter in the future except when giving speeches where questions will not follow. Dion has boiled his "three pillars: economic prosperity, social justice and sustainability" down to the catchier "richer, fairer and greener Canada". Dion said "I am as nationalistic as Gilles Duceppe" which could come back to haunt him in an attack ad.
Gilles Duceppe had the same appeal as usual (only we will stand up for Quebec!) but the meat was a bit light because of the nationalistic things Harper's government has done ("nation within a nation", UNESCO, etc). Duceppe reminded people of Harper's 2003 support of the Iraq War which may be a wise approach for him to take.
Neither CTV nor CBC cut to Jack Layton has he began his remarks, CBC didn't even acknowledge that he existed while CTV showed him in a side box but did not cut to him. I am not sure why this was, I expect we will soon learn as the NDP complains. I left to write this post and am not sure if they cut to him or if they will cut to Elizabeth May.
Riding Watch
Two high profile Conservative candidates have been announced in New Brunswick. Former cabinet minister and Lord chief of staff Rodney Weston will run in Saint John while Downtown Moncton CEO and former Lord riding assistant Daniel Allain will run in Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe. Preliminarily, I am not totally sure what to make of these.
In Saint John, Paul Zed only won by four points (43% to 39%) in 2006, but Weston, while well regarded by the political class in Fredericton and by the media, was defeated in his attempt for re-election in 2003 despite representing a conservative riding. Weston is from rural Saint John County and his old riding (Saint John-Fundy) only includes a small part of the city. I am not sure how well he would play in the city proper and the higher-end suburbs. I'll keep an eye on this but this may actually be to Zed's benefit.
In Moncton, having a fluently bilingual individual with a record of public service inside and outside of politics may be formidable. The difference between Bradshaw in 2004 and Murphy in 2006 was 11% (59% vs. 48%). Allain certainly faces an uphill battle but this is interesting enough for me to move the riding from safe Liberal to leans Liberal.
In the next few days I will do a less detailed round-up of Atlantic ridings.
Stephen Harper was good both in speech and questions. He has also lost a lot of weight! His campaign would seem to be focussed on the government's record and leadership. No surprise there. The press in both his and Dion's question sessions seemed very focussed on the use of "family man" in Harper's commercials. He had a decent answer, saying he isn't arguing that others aren't family men but his advisors have pointed out that Canadians don't know him as a father, etc and it is worthwhile to inform people of that side of his persona.
Stéphane Dion used a teleprompter for his speech and the result was to show a stark difference between his ability in English when reading a speech and when answering unrehersed questions. I am not sure it would be wise for the Liberals to have him use a teleprompter in the future except when giving speeches where questions will not follow. Dion has boiled his "three pillars: economic prosperity, social justice and sustainability" down to the catchier "richer, fairer and greener Canada". Dion said "I am as nationalistic as Gilles Duceppe" which could come back to haunt him in an attack ad.
Gilles Duceppe had the same appeal as usual (only we will stand up for Quebec!) but the meat was a bit light because of the nationalistic things Harper's government has done ("nation within a nation", UNESCO, etc). Duceppe reminded people of Harper's 2003 support of the Iraq War which may be a wise approach for him to take.
Neither CTV nor CBC cut to Jack Layton has he began his remarks, CBC didn't even acknowledge that he existed while CTV showed him in a side box but did not cut to him. I am not sure why this was, I expect we will soon learn as the NDP complains. I left to write this post and am not sure if they cut to him or if they will cut to Elizabeth May.
Riding Watch
Two high profile Conservative candidates have been announced in New Brunswick. Former cabinet minister and Lord chief of staff Rodney Weston will run in Saint John while Downtown Moncton CEO and former Lord riding assistant Daniel Allain will run in Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe. Preliminarily, I am not totally sure what to make of these.
In Saint John, Paul Zed only won by four points (43% to 39%) in 2006, but Weston, while well regarded by the political class in Fredericton and by the media, was defeated in his attempt for re-election in 2003 despite representing a conservative riding. Weston is from rural Saint John County and his old riding (Saint John-Fundy) only includes a small part of the city. I am not sure how well he would play in the city proper and the higher-end suburbs. I'll keep an eye on this but this may actually be to Zed's benefit.
In Moncton, having a fluently bilingual individual with a record of public service inside and outside of politics may be formidable. The difference between Bradshaw in 2004 and Murphy in 2006 was 11% (59% vs. 48%). Allain certainly faces an uphill battle but this is interesting enough for me to move the riding from safe Liberal to leans Liberal.
In the next few days I will do a less detailed round-up of Atlantic ridings.
Monday, September 01, 2008
A brief look at the federal ridings
Back in August 2006, this site got started with coverage of the provincial election. Things really got rolling with my post, the ironically named, a brief look at the ridings which I continually updated throughout the campaign before making a final prediction.
It is beyond my level of free time, ability and interest to do something similar for all of Canada's 308 ridings. But, though I have gotten somewhat away from commenting on local politics, I just can't resist doing something similar for New Brunswick's 10 federal ridings.
So, here is my non-partisan evaluation of the lay of the land, in alphabetical order:
Acadie—Bathurst - currently NDP
So the preliminary count is:
Conservative 5 (+2)
3 safe + 2 lean
Liberal 4 (-2)
3 safe + 1 lean
NDP 1 (n/c)
1 safe + 0 lean
UPDATE:
Sept. 7: CPC 5 (3+2), Lib 4 (2+2), NDP 1 (1+0)
Sept. 10: CPC 6 (3+3), Lib 3 (2+1), NDP 1 (1+0)
Am I missing something? Am I out to lunch?
Please set me straight either in the comments or at nbpolitico@gmail.com.
It is beyond my level of free time, ability and interest to do something similar for all of Canada's 308 ridings. But, though I have gotten somewhat away from commenting on local politics, I just can't resist doing something similar for New Brunswick's 10 federal ridings.
So, here is my non-partisan evaluation of the lay of the land, in alphabetical order:
Acadie—Bathurst - currently NDP
When Yvon Godin upset Doug Young in this riding in 1997 many people, including yours truly, believed it was a one-time fluke. Godin's three successful re-elections (two against heavyweights) has proved me quite wrong. This is an easy call: safe NDP.Beausejour - currently Liberal
In 1984, Brian Mulroney swept every seat in New Brunswick except for this one. Though I often hear chattering about whether or not Dominic LeBlanc pays enough attention to the little things and the Conservatives have not yet announced their candidate, this should be a safe Liberal seat.Fredericton - currently Liberal *incumbent retiring
This should be one of the more interesting races in the province. A Liberal seat since 1993, and a solid Conservative seat for 4 decades before that, this is the only open seat in the province, with the retirement of former minister Andy Scott. The Liberals have nominated airport CEO David Innes and the Conservatives have nominated PC MLA and former provincial minister Keith Ashfield. Both candidates are "boring old white guys."Fundy—Royal - currently Conservative
Ashfield represents a provincial riding which lies almost entirely in New Brunswick Southwest, though its largest community (New Maryland) is in this federal riding and Ashfield himself hails from Lincoln. He is a long time party guy (ran unsuccessfully in 1991 before winning in 1999, 2003 and 2006) and knows how things are done. He has been campaigning almost full time since being nominated.
Innes is more of a political neophyte, and has not been able to devote as much time to campaigning as Ashfield has, due to a busy day job.
The outcome of the election could depend on whether left-wing voters vote NDP or stay home (a likely Conservative win) or vote Liberal. Andy Scott survived some tough races in 1997 and 2000 thanks in large part to low NDP votes and a split right-wing vote. The latter will not be a factor in 2006, the former remains a question. The NDP vote in the past four elections has been 21%, 17%, 7% and 13%. If the NDP stays in the 20s, it will be hard, though not impossible, for the Liberals to win.
The NDP does not currently have a candidate, the one they had previously nominated stepped down and endorsed Innes the day he was nominated. Notwithstanding that, I will very tentatively class this as leans Conservative.
The only thing to dispute about this riding is whether it is the safest Conservative seat in Atlantic Canada or if New Brunswick Southwest is. Safe Conservative.Madawaska—Restigouche - currently Liberal
This is something of a bellweather - both of its predecessors (Madawaska-Victoria and Restigouche-Chaleur) tended to go with the government. In 2006, the current incarnation missed that, but just by a hair. We'll be seeing a re-match between incumbent Liberal J.C. D'Amours and 1980s-era provinicial minister Jean-Pierre Ouellet.Miramichi - currently Liberal
The popular NDP candidate, Rodolphe Martin, is not running this time. Normally that would be good news for the Liberals but Martin's votes came from blue collar forestry workers who are just as likely (or maybe more likely) to go to Ouellet as they are to D'Amours. I would say this seat leans Conservative.
This is a fairly safe Liberal seat. Charlie Hubbard had reason to worry earlier in the cycle when the Conservatives had nominated well known and well liked businessman Bill Tozer. Tozer has since stepped down and, barring another remarkable candidate, the seat should stay safely Liberal.Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe - currently Liberal
Although former mayor Brian Murphy doesn't have quite the stranglehold his predecessor Claudette Bradshaw had here, it is hard to see this riding being painted any colour other than red on election day. To hedge, the Conservatives have not yet named a candidate, but it likely doesn't matter except in terms of margin. Safe Liberal. Moved to leans Liberal on September 7.New Brunswick Southwest - currently Conservative
The only thing to dispute about this riding is whether it is the safest Conservative seat in Atlantic Canada or if Fundy—Royal is. Safe Conservative.Saint John - currently Liberal
Who was the quote, "the reports of my death are greatly exagerated," attributed to? If you said Paul Zed, I wouldn't be surprised. Many pundits wrote Zed off for dead in 2004 and 2006 but he won both times. Margaret-Ann Blaney or Trevor Holder could be game changers but, for now, this seat seems to lean Liberal. Changed to leans Conservative on September 10.Tobique—Mactaquac - currently Conservative
Though this seat went Conservative by only 336 votes in 2006, it shouldn't be too much trouble for Mike Allen to hold on. This is a solidly "small c" conservative riding, giving the combined forces of the PCs and the Reformers over 60% in both 1997 and 2000. Once wrestled away from the Liberals, it is hard to imagine this seat returning to them any time in the near future. To make matters worse, the Liberals had a candidate nominated for nearly a year but he has since stepped down (this past winter) and no new candidate has been nominated. Safe Conservative.
So the preliminary count is:Conservative 5 (+2)
3 safe + 2 lean
Liberal 4 (-2)
3 safe + 1 lean
NDP 1 (n/c)
1 safe + 0 lean
UPDATE:
Sept. 7: CPC 5 (3+2), Lib 4 (2+2), NDP 1 (1+0)
Sept. 10: CPC 6 (3+3), Lib 3 (2+1), NDP 1 (1+0)
Am I missing something? Am I out to lunch?
Please set me straight either in the comments or at nbpolitico@gmail.com.
Friday, August 29, 2008
I was right?
When I went out on a limb on Tuesday and suggested Sarah Palin would make sense as McCain's vp pick, I was expecting to be wrong, as usual.
It seems I was right. Who thought it possible.
I think Palin is a brilliant pick for McCain. As I said on Tuesday:
First, Sarah Palin is running for vice president, while Obama is running for president. There should be a higher threshold for the latter, but I think that the argument could be made that Palin is nearly as experienced as Obama.
Obama has no experience as a chief executive of any arm of government. Most of Palin's experience is at the executive level. The Obama campaign is mocking that she represented a community of 5-7 thousand people (it grew substantially during her tenure), but Obama's folks should note she led that community, not just represented it, while Obama's experience comes largely from being the non-executive representative of a Senate district with about 60,000 people. When one is discussing the leadership of a country of 300,000,000 people the difference between 6,000 and 60,000 is minute.
So let's do a little bit of a blow-by-blow comparison.
From 1992-1996, Palin was a non-executive member of town council, Obama had no political experience
From 1997-2004, Palin was the chief executive of her town, ran unsuccessfully for lieutenant governor and served for two years as Ethics Commissioner on the state utility regulator, Obama was a non-executive member of the Illinois Senate and ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. House of representatives
From 2005-2008, Palin continued as chief executive of her town until becoming governor in December 2006 where she has served since, Obama was a non-executive member of the U.S. Senate and after two years ran essentially full-time for president
It seems I was right. Who thought it possible.
I think Palin is a brilliant pick for McCain. As I said on Tuesday:
In addition to the candidates I've named as possibilities for the spot, I'd like to add Sarah Palin, the governor of Alaska. A lot may depend on the result of today's primary where the state's Lieutenant Governor, and Palin protogé, is running against the incumbent Republican for the right to run for the U.S. House of Representatives. Palin may be reluctant to accept the veep nomination if it means both her and Sean Parnell are running for national office which would mean, in the event they both won, control of the state would be handed back to the corrupt wing of the Alaska Republican Party she has recently defeated for control (UPDATE: This may not be as big of a concern, Palin's attorney general would succeed as governor, though this individual would arguably be more vulnerable than Palin or Parnell and the idea of both running for national office would still be a concern).According to Jonathan Martin, the Obama people are already mocking her lack of experience. But, I think the Obama campaign might want to note an old proverb about glass houses.
Palin is a strong candidate in a lot of ways. She is a reformer who has beaten down the corruption in Alaska which is so severe it would make most of the dirty tricksters in Washington blush. She is an outsider which will help provide credibility to McCain's argument that he would change how things are done. She is a woman who could help McCain make further inroads into the alienated Clinton voter and who has a compelling life story. The religious right would be totally energized by her candidacy and might turn out in similar-to-2004-numbers for a mother of five who is ardently pro-life.
If the Obama campaign or other Democrats want to criticize her for being inexperienced, McCain can say "I've served my country my whole life, first in the Navy, then in the House and then in the Senate. I want to be your president because I have always put my country first and through my experience, I think I can continue to do that as your president. Senator Obama, an outsider without a lot of experience, is criticizing Governor Palin's experience. Her experience is that of having battled corruption her whole time in public life and as serving as chief executive of a state. Senator Obama's experience consists of giving a popular speech in 2002, getting elected to the Senate in a race that was virtually non-contetested and after a year of few notable accomplishments there announcing his candidacy for president."
McCain's people will ask which is better - a change candidate without the experience to lead who needs to pick a Washington insider as his running mate in order to be sure he can govern or a change candidate with decades of service to country who is able to pick a less experienced running-mate, who has more experience (they could argue) than Obama, who can bring a real outsiders perspective to the West Wing.
First, Sarah Palin is running for vice president, while Obama is running for president. There should be a higher threshold for the latter, but I think that the argument could be made that Palin is nearly as experienced as Obama.
Obama has no experience as a chief executive of any arm of government. Most of Palin's experience is at the executive level. The Obama campaign is mocking that she represented a community of 5-7 thousand people (it grew substantially during her tenure), but Obama's folks should note she led that community, not just represented it, while Obama's experience comes largely from being the non-executive representative of a Senate district with about 60,000 people. When one is discussing the leadership of a country of 300,000,000 people the difference between 6,000 and 60,000 is minute.
So let's do a little bit of a blow-by-blow comparison.
From 1992-1996, Palin was a non-executive member of town council, Obama had no political experience
From 1997-2004, Palin was the chief executive of her town, ran unsuccessfully for lieutenant governor and served for two years as Ethics Commissioner on the state utility regulator, Obama was a non-executive member of the Illinois Senate and ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. House of representatives
From 2005-2008, Palin continued as chief executive of her town until becoming governor in December 2006 where she has served since, Obama was a non-executive member of the U.S. Senate and after two years ran essentially full-time for president
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Oops, I did it again
No surprise here folks, I got a prediction wrong. Though I had a good chance to nuance, I instead opted to double-down on my May prediction that there was no way Obama would pick Biden. As I often say at this stage, while wiping the egg away, my predictions are biased in terms of what I think would make the most sense and I have a hard time predicting that someone will make the wrong choice.
As potentially the biggest fan of Joe Biden in the world (or at least in Canada), it pains me to reiterate that I think he was a bone-headed choice for Obama. McCain launched within hours an ad using Biden against Obama. There is lots more roll around to do a series of ads. A candidate with Biden's strengths who didn't run against Obama and wasn't as tied to today's Washington (i.e. Sam Nunn) would have made more sense to me. It would have brought nearly as much to the ticket without doing collateral damage. However, in the end, I think the wisest choice would have been to double-down on change with Kathleen Sebelius.
The Obama campaign thought otherwise, and time will tell whether it works out for them.
In the coming days McCain will make his choice. I'll open myself up for another big fall: I think his floating the idea of Ridge or Lieberman (pro-choicers) is meant to show to the general electorate that he is not close-minded on that question and would not disqualify someone simply on those grounds, and will say so when he makes his announcement. However, in the end he won't actually choose a pro-choice candidate so as to keep the base behind him.
In addition to the candidates I've named as possibilities for the spot, I'd like to add Sarah Palin, the governor of Alaska. A lot may depend on the result of today's primary where the state's Lieutenant Governor, and Palin protogé, is running against the incumbent Republican for the right to run for the U.S. House of Representatives. Palin may be reluctant to accept the veep nomination if it means both her and Sean Parnell are running for national office which would mean, in the event they both won, control of the state would be handed back to the corrupt wing of the Alaska Republican Party she has recently defeated for control (UPDATE: This may not be as big of a concern, Palin's attorney general would succeed as governor, though this individual would arguably be more vulnerable than Palin or Parnell and the idea of both running for national office would still be a concern).
Palin is a strong candidate in a lot of ways. She is a reformer who has beaten down the corruption in Alaska which is so severe it would make most of the dirty tricksters in Washington blush. She is an outsider which will help provide credibility to McCain's argument that he would change how things are done. She is a woman who could help McCain make further inroads into the alienated Clinton voter and who has a compelling life story. The religious right would be totally energized by her candidacy and might turn out in similar-to-2004-numbers for a mother of five who is ardently pro-life.
If the Obama campaign or other Democrats want to criticize her for being inexperienced, McCain can say "I've served my country my whole life, first in the Navy, then in the House and then in the Senate. I want to be your president because I have always put my country first and through my experience, I think I can continue to do that as your president. Senator Obama, an outsider without a lot of experience, is criticizing Governor Palin's experience. Her experience is that of having battled corruption her whole time in public life and as serving as chief executive of a state. Senator Obama's experience consists of giving a popular speech in 2002, getting elected to the Senate in a race that was virtually non-contetested and after a year of few notable accomplishments there announcing his candidacy for president."
McCain's people will ask which is better - a change candidate without the experience to lead who needs to pick a Washington insider as his running mate in order to be sure he can govern or a change candidate with decades of service to country who is able to pick a less experienced running-mate, who has more experience (they could argue) than Obama, who can bring a real outsiders perspective to the West Wing.
I'll slot her into my list and slightly re-jig it. Rob Portman's star has faded somewhat and I think McCain is more apt to pick some like Palin or South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford - people who can help him take some ownership of the change message through McCain's record on reform / anti-corruption-and-pork-barrelling.
1. Sanford (raised from third)
2. Huntsman (no change)
3. Palin (new addition)
4. Portman (bumped from first)
5. Dole (bumped from fourth)
6. Watts (bumped from fifth)
7. Jindal (bumped from sixth)
As potentially the biggest fan of Joe Biden in the world (or at least in Canada), it pains me to reiterate that I think he was a bone-headed choice for Obama. McCain launched within hours an ad using Biden against Obama. There is lots more roll around to do a series of ads. A candidate with Biden's strengths who didn't run against Obama and wasn't as tied to today's Washington (i.e. Sam Nunn) would have made more sense to me. It would have brought nearly as much to the ticket without doing collateral damage. However, in the end, I think the wisest choice would have been to double-down on change with Kathleen Sebelius.
The Obama campaign thought otherwise, and time will tell whether it works out for them.
In the coming days McCain will make his choice. I'll open myself up for another big fall: I think his floating the idea of Ridge or Lieberman (pro-choicers) is meant to show to the general electorate that he is not close-minded on that question and would not disqualify someone simply on those grounds, and will say so when he makes his announcement. However, in the end he won't actually choose a pro-choice candidate so as to keep the base behind him.
In addition to the candidates I've named as possibilities for the spot, I'd like to add Sarah Palin, the governor of Alaska. A lot may depend on the result of today's primary where the state's Lieutenant Governor, and Palin protogé, is running against the incumbent Republican for the right to run for the U.S. House of Representatives. Palin may be reluctant to accept the veep nomination if it means both her and Sean Parnell are running for national office which would mean, in the event they both won, control of the state would be handed back to the corrupt wing of the Alaska Republican Party she has recently defeated for control (UPDATE: This may not be as big of a concern, Palin's attorney general would succeed as governor, though this individual would arguably be more vulnerable than Palin or Parnell and the idea of both running for national office would still be a concern).
Palin is a strong candidate in a lot of ways. She is a reformer who has beaten down the corruption in Alaska which is so severe it would make most of the dirty tricksters in Washington blush. She is an outsider which will help provide credibility to McCain's argument that he would change how things are done. She is a woman who could help McCain make further inroads into the alienated Clinton voter and who has a compelling life story. The religious right would be totally energized by her candidacy and might turn out in similar-to-2004-numbers for a mother of five who is ardently pro-life.
If the Obama campaign or other Democrats want to criticize her for being inexperienced, McCain can say "I've served my country my whole life, first in the Navy, then in the House and then in the Senate. I want to be your president because I have always put my country first and through my experience, I think I can continue to do that as your president. Senator Obama, an outsider without a lot of experience, is criticizing Governor Palin's experience. Her experience is that of having battled corruption her whole time in public life and as serving as chief executive of a state. Senator Obama's experience consists of giving a popular speech in 2002, getting elected to the Senate in a race that was virtually non-contetested and after a year of few notable accomplishments there announcing his candidacy for president."
McCain's people will ask which is better - a change candidate without the experience to lead who needs to pick a Washington insider as his running mate in order to be sure he can govern or a change candidate with decades of service to country who is able to pick a less experienced running-mate, who has more experience (they could argue) than Obama, who can bring a real outsiders perspective to the West Wing.
I'll slot her into my list and slightly re-jig it. Rob Portman's star has faded somewhat and I think McCain is more apt to pick some like Palin or South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford - people who can help him take some ownership of the change message through McCain's record on reform / anti-corruption-and-pork-barrelling.
1. Sanford (raised from third)
2. Huntsman (no change)
3. Palin (new addition)
4. Portman (bumped from first)
5. Dole (bumped from fourth)
6. Watts (bumped from fifth)
7. Jindal (bumped from sixth)
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
VEEP!
So we're getting really close now. I am still confident on my lists posted ages ago. I posted McCain's veep possibilities back in February and Obama's in May, though I amended them slightly in early July. The only subsequent change is that Edwards should be, for obvious reasons, struck from the Obama list.
It looks like Obama will announce his pick tomorrow morning and McCain will on his birthday on August 29.
My top ranked pick since July 7 (and previously #2 pick), Kathleen Sebelius, has seen her name drop off of the radar but I do think she has a strong shot at being the pick. This thinking was reinforced by this tip I received today:
Anyone that reads this blog, knows that it is no secret that I am a HUGE fan of Joe Biden. Unfortunately though, despite the hype, I don't think Biden is a likely pick. As I wrote in May:
It looks like Obama will announce his pick tomorrow morning and McCain will on his birthday on August 29.
My top ranked pick since July 7 (and previously #2 pick), Kathleen Sebelius, has seen her name drop off of the radar but I do think she has a strong shot at being the pick. This thinking was reinforced by this tip I received today:
OBAMA WILL PICK SEBELIUSWhat About Biden?
Text msg/email announcement at 7 a.m. Eastern, Wednesday.
Event in Wichita, Kansas at 8 a.m. local (9 a.m. Eastern). Wichita is the birthplace of Obama's mother.
Obama and Sebelius will then fly to Virginia for an event at 11:30 a.m. and proceed on a tour of red states that may swing to Obama including Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, Missouri, Colorado.
Anyone that reads this blog, knows that it is no secret that I am a HUGE fan of Joe Biden. Unfortunately though, despite the hype, I don't think Biden is a likely pick. As I wrote in May:
Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE)In any event, exciting political times these next few months. I'll try to ramp my posts back up to cover it.
I am a big fan of Joe Biden. I think he would have been an excellent presidential candidate this year but his campaign was DOA. Those who argue Biden would make a good VP candidate for Obama cite his many years of experience. He was elected to the Senate in 1972 before turning the required-to-serve-age of 30. He was considered to be almost certainly the Secretary of State had John Kerry won in 2004. He has served as chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee and currenly serves as chair of the Foreign Relations Committee. His plan to bring peace to Iraq has been lauded and was endorsed by a bipartisan super majority of the Senate. Some have even suggested, sort of sarcastically, that Obama needs a racist as a running mate and that Biden fits that bill from his comments about Obama when Biden entered the presidential race.
However, I don't think Biden is the right guy for Obama. Though he needs someone with experience, he needs it in the form of someone who can also be credibly billed as a "Washington outsider". Obama's whole campaign, particularly when postured against McCain, is that McCain has served in the Senate too long and is out of touch with America. Biden has served almost twice as long as McCain, so his candidacy would make no sense.
Monday, July 07, 2008
Obama veep update 2
NBTaxpayer's pick, and my 4th ranked pick, Jim Webb has withdrawn his name from consideration.
So, to update, here is my current list:
1. Katherine Sebelius (moved up one due to Clark being dropped down)
2. Sam Nunn (moved up one due to Clark being dropped down)
3. Wes Clark (dropped from 1st)
4. Howard Dean (new addition)
5. Lincoln Chafee (no change)
6. John Edwards (no change)
7. Hillary Clinton (no change)
8. Blanche Lincoln (no change)
9. Evan Bayh (no change)
So, to update, here is my current list:
1. Katherine Sebelius (moved up one due to Clark being dropped down)
2. Sam Nunn (moved up one due to Clark being dropped down)
3. Wes Clark (dropped from 1st)
4. Howard Dean (new addition)
5. Lincoln Chafee (no change)
6. John Edwards (no change)
7. Hillary Clinton (no change)
8. Blanche Lincoln (no change)
9. Evan Bayh (no change)
Thursday, July 03, 2008
Wednesday, July 02, 2008
Obama veep update
Back in May, I wrote about my thoughts for the Obama veepstakes. The most likely candidate in my view was Wes Clark, who has probably knocked himself down the ladder a bit over the past few days making sensible but politically incorrect statements about John McCain's military service vis-à-vis qualifications for the presidency. Though some argue it may help him.
In my view, it hurts him a bit, but Clark is still a compelling vice-presidential choice for Obama. I would move him down from the number 1 slot to 3rd or 4th (behind Nunn or Webb).
This is however a name I didn't consider before that I should throw in there.
Howard Dean
This sounds very irrational at first glance, but Howard Dean is a lot different than the caricature that has been drawn by the media.
Dean governed Vermont as a moderate and the Progressive Party grew stronger under his tenure due to his weakness on the left. Did you know that was endorsed eight times by the national rifle association? He also said he wanted to be the candidate for "guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks". This could be helpful in the Mountain West where gun control is the one thing holding Obama back and in the winnable states in the South (Virginia primarily but also North Carolina, Arkansas, Florida).
He was also a fiscal conservative who insisted on balanced budgets. Anti-pork much in the same vein as McCain.
He is an outsider and reformer which fits Obama's message and has already been vetted by the national media. He and Obama share a 50-state competitiveness goal for the Democratic Party.
Dean could be a real outlier in the veepstakes. Watch for it.
In my view, it hurts him a bit, but Clark is still a compelling vice-presidential choice for Obama. I would move him down from the number 1 slot to 3rd or 4th (behind Nunn or Webb).
This is however a name I didn't consider before that I should throw in there.
Howard Dean
This sounds very irrational at first glance, but Howard Dean is a lot different than the caricature that has been drawn by the media.
Dean governed Vermont as a moderate and the Progressive Party grew stronger under his tenure due to his weakness on the left. Did you know that was endorsed eight times by the national rifle association? He also said he wanted to be the candidate for "guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks". This could be helpful in the Mountain West where gun control is the one thing holding Obama back and in the winnable states in the South (Virginia primarily but also North Carolina, Arkansas, Florida).
He was also a fiscal conservative who insisted on balanced budgets. Anti-pork much in the same vein as McCain.
He is an outsider and reformer which fits Obama's message and has already been vetted by the national media. He and Obama share a 50-state competitiveness goal for the Democratic Party.
Dean could be a real outlier in the veepstakes. Watch for it.
Friday, June 06, 2008
Morons
I am a little flabbergasted at the short-sightedness of the CBC on potentially dropping the Hockey Night in Canada theme apparently due to an inability to afford it (h/t Kits via Spink About It)
The last time CBC tried to drop an icon because of budgetary concerns there was chaos. No offense Ron, but I think the HNIC theme is even more iconic than you. Watch out CBC, trouble is a comin'.
The last time CBC tried to drop an icon because of budgetary concerns there was chaos. No offense Ron, but I think the HNIC theme is even more iconic than you. Watch out CBC, trouble is a comin'.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
