17 October 2011

Politics, polls and news media #nlpoli

For the past 65 years,  public opinion polls have been an integral feature of news media reports on politics and elections.

The reasons are pretty simple to understand.  Most public opinion polls are conducted by professional firms using scientific methods.  As such, they are considered to be inherently impartial, accurate and fair representations of what the public thinks about candidates and parties. 

The firms that poll during an election are usually independent of the political parties.  This gives the news media a source of independent information about the campaign.  Polls, especially ones exclusive to the news organization, can give the media outlets a direction for coverage.

When news media commission polls, they also gain a marketing boost.  Don’t discount the business imperative in news.  Tom Rosenstiel is executive director of the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism.  Rosenstiel began a 2005 article on political polling and news media by recounting a meeting at the Los Angeles Times in 1991 to plan coverage of the 1992 election.

“Polls are a form of marketing for news organizations,”  Rosenstiel wrote. “Every time a Los Angeles Times poll is referred to in other media, the paper is getting invaluable positive marketing for its name and credibility.”

Presenting information in an entertaining way has always been a part of news. Poll results typically come in a form that lends itself to an horse-race story format.  That injects some energy into what might otherwise be a dull story of numbers.  .

Reporters usually have an easy time summing up a poll report.  That’s an increasingly important factor in newsrooms operating on tight budgets and facing heavy demands for content.

Rosenstiel marked that pressure in 2005 as a key feature of modern newsrooms.  But in truth, the need to produce news stories quickly has always been a feature of news media for some time now, especially electronic media. Political scientist Everett Carl Ladd wrote in 1980:

For the most part, the press… must work quickly to do its mandated job.  This observation obviously applies a somewhat less to magazines than to the daily newspaper or the nightly television news broadcast, but it holds generally. The story must be promptly brought to the audience.

What’s changed more recently is the increased demand for content as smaller numbers of news organizations produce material for print, radio, television and the Internet, sometimes from the same newsroom.  Often this is simply the repackaging of material, as Rosenthiel noted.  And that makes apparently simple stuff – like reporting a horserace poll – that much more attractive.  if the news organization commissions a poll of its own and delves into more than just the “who’s on first” question, they can generate new content for days.

Controversy

None of the media’s use of polls is has come without controversy. 

In the run-up to the spring general election, the seemingly wide variation in poll results generated news stories about the reliability of polling.

At a conference on the May federal election, people representing eight polling firms debated the impact of polls on the election.  Opinions varied – as they did – on what impact poll reporting had on the public.  According to a Canadian Press story, Frank Graves of Ekos Research said that post-election polling found that Canadians didn’t believe poll reporting affected the outcome of the election

Environics' Kevin Neuman was doubtful.

"People may say that (polls) don't influence, but it would influence the media and how the media cover the story and frame the story," he said, adding that the CROP poll "may have completely changed the media coverage."

In the recent Ontario general election, some pollsters complained about the publication of polls from different sources, often without any apparent concern for their accuracy.

“We are distorting our democracy, confusing voters and destroying what should be a source of truth in election campaigns — the unbiased, truly scientific public-opinion polls,” wrote Darrell Bricker and John Wright of Ipsos Reid.

Bricker said most research firms are accurate. But some are “so ridiculously inaccurate” he wonders how they got into the business. And elections bring out the carpetbaggers or those trying out untested, and dubious, methodology.

Still, the biggest question for him is not research firms. “I have to ask the question, what are the media thinking?

Closer to home, Corporate Research Associates’ Don Mills complained in the Telegram on Saturday about the accuracy of some polling released during the recent provincial election campaign. MQO released two polls during the campaign that relied on a combination of telephone polling plus online surveys:

“There’s a lot of people who say online research is just as good as telephone research. That has not been proven to be true and we have recent examples in Atlantic Canada where a competitor of ours has used an online methodology and have not got it within the margin of error they quoted,” he said.

“They are not even supposed to quote margin of error in online polls.”

Industry critics

Not all pollsters are as enthusiastic about the proliferation of polls and the increasingly close relationship between the media and opinion research firms.

In April, Allan Gregg – perhaps the country’s most famous researcher – and Frank Graves of Ekos spoke out in an article by Canadian Press.

There’s broad consensus among pollsters that proliferating political polls suffer from a combination of methodological problems, commercial pressures and an unhealthy relationship with the media.

Start with the methodological morass.

“The dirty little secret of the polling business . . . is that our ability to yield results accurately from samples that reflect the total population has probably never been worse in the 30 to 35 years that the discipline has been active in Canada,” says veteran pollster Allan Gregg, chairman of Harris-Decima which provides political polling for The Canadian Press.

The increased use of cell phones and changing lifestyles have made traditional telephone surveys less reliable, according to Gregg.  Online polling may produce more reliable results in some instances but not in others.

Still, according to Gregg, polling firms are producing margin of error calculations “as if we’re generating perfect samples and we are not anymore.” 

Pollsters continue to generate horse race polls for their marketing value, according to both Gregg and Andre Turcotte, a pollster and communications professor quoted in Joan Bryden’s Canadian Press story from April.

Turcotte says political polls for the media are “not research anymore” so much as marketing and promotional tools. Because they’re not paid, pollsters don’t put much care into the quality of the product, often throwing a couple of questions about party preference into the middle of an omnibus survey on other subjects which could taint results.

And there’s no way to hold pollsters accountable for producing shoddy results since, until there’s an actual election, there’s no way to gauge their accuracy.

Not surprisingly, the association representing polling firms disagrees.  The Market Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA) took out a full page ad in newspaper’s across Canada when the polling controversy first sprang up in February.  The ad affirmed the association’s “confidence in the results of our polling and the value that we provide to Canadians.”

Politics, polls and the media

The 2011 provincial general election in Newfoundland and Labrador brought with it both an unprecedented number of horse race polls and a certain level of controversy.

In the second part of this series – on Tuesday -  we’ll take a look at the polls, the polling firms, what they reported, and what the polls measured.

- srbp -

The Series:

Related:

16 October 2011

Cheap power for Nova Scotians #nlpoli

No, this is not about the official policy of both the Conservatives and new Democratic Parties in Newfoundland and labrador, although both parties have that as their major energy goal in the near future.

Rather, it’s a report in the Chronicle Herald this weekend that a coalition of environmental groups in Nova Scotia wants Nova Scotia Power to buy cheap power from Hydro-Quebec so the province can stop burning coal sooner rather than later.

"Quebec power is immediately available and the Newfoundland and Labrador project is an idea," Neal Livingston with Black River Hydro Ltd. said Friday, referring to the Muskrat Falls megaproject.

Because Quebec hydro is readily available, it’s "an opportunity for Nova Scotia to get off coal burning quickly," he said.

The story quotes independent energy analyst Tom Adams.  regular readers will recognise his name.  Adams said that HQ’s average revenue from exports to the US this past summer was 6.5 cents per kilowatt hour.  The average American wholesale price was 4.9 cents a kilowatt hour.

Electricity is cheap, in other words, Hydro-Quebec has more than enough and – as the story notes, HQ could wheel the power to Nova Scotia through New Brunswick.

The Nova Scotians also raised the need for an independent review in Nova Scotia of the Muskrat falls project:

Brendan Vogel with the Ecology Action Centre echoed her concerns, saying the province needs an independent analysis of the Lower Churchill Falls development, which includes the Muskrat Falls project.

"We need an arms-length analysis that thoroughly scrutinizes the benefits of the Churchill project for ratepayers," he said. "The cost-effectiveness of this project needs to be weighed against the other options on the table."

- srbp -

Whither the Liberals #nlpoli

[revised and edited 4:45 PM]

The tale is not told in the view of columnists  - Stephen Maher, Chantal Hebert and Susan Delacourt - who try to link a series of different events into one explanation.

The tale is told in the comment of one long-time Liberal who bumped into another in St. John’s recently.

The Liberal Party doesn’t speak to me any more, said one.

Exactly, exclaimed the other.

The Liberal Party may have won six seats in last Tuesday’s general election but it stands at an historic low.  Only 11% of the electorate in Newfoundland and Labrador voted Liberal on Tuesday.

Voters in Newfoundland and Labrador looking for something other than the ruling Conservatives opted for the New Democrats last Tuesday and they did so in record numbers.

They did it in St. John’s for the most part but also in Burin-Placentia West,  Labrador West and The Straits-White Bay North. 

While the New Democrat resurgence is a subject for another day, the key thing for this post is which party voters chose last Tuesday and it was not the party that dominated politics in this province for so much of the post-Confederation period.

The reason is simple:  the Liberal Party does not speak to them any more.

A decade or so ago, the dominant voices in the party shifted to an increasingly rural focus on the party.  The Blame Canada commission with its pile of old axes reground was symptomatic of the shift.  So too was the resurgence of make-work as a core government policy for rural parts of the province and the transfer of government offices to major centres outside Capital City.

In this most recent election, ruralism took centre stage in the party’s platform.  And the leader the party executive chose overwhelming was not just committed to the ruralist agenda: he started out the election by loudly proclaiming his fierce “nationalist” sentiment.

Some may blame the Liberal fortunes on the last-minute change of leadership.  Others will focus on the impact of what appeared to be the most ineptly run campaign in provincial political history. 

Both had their part to play but both the campaign and the focus were already in train before the executive board picked Kevin Aylward.  And, if anything, Aylward did not apparently want to shift the dominant internal party trends so much as reinforce them

Aylward is scarcely any different from Yvonne Jones who fixated on the idea that building a Stunnel to Labrador was the winning party policy.  Party insiders fought to keep it out of her convention speech and her Facebook posting during the campaign was nothing more than a last-ditch effort to push the stunnedest of stunned ideas.

Beyond the ruralist core, the Liberal Party simply does not know what it stands for. 

In the last election, the party became the nothing more than a political sideshow.  There were plenty of contortionists: cast-offs from other parties abounded.  There was a star of the open line shows.  A perennial favourite of the political fringes stage-mothered a couple of her current charges through their political appearances on the ballot rather than run herself.  A few students came along for good measure as did staffers hounded relentlessly until they agreed to be names on ballots at their own expense.

The only thing missing was the sword swallower.

The Liberal party does not speak to anyone, anymore.

The people running the party seem to have no desire to speak to anyone other than themselves out there on the tattered edges of the provincial political landscape.

They are so far out in the political woods, they’d have to come in to hunt.

What’s worse, though, is that they seem to have lost the desire to hunt.

You can see that in the party after the election.

The leader disappeared.

The party president popped up to do a couple of interviews about the latest leadership crisis.

But while political life carried on, and issues and targets abounded, the party fell completely silent.  Shameful comments by the Premier about the legislature went unchallenged by Liberals. 

They said nothing about anything that truly mattered in the province and in the stuff that mattered only to the people involved in the party, they said little.

The Liberal party no longer speaks to the people of the province.

And, as it seems, the party doesn’t even speak to itself any more either.  Maybe the few of them still out in the political woods need to take heed of that. 

The rest of us [in the province] already have.

- srbp -

15 October 2011

An excess of chutzpah: pollster attacks colleagues over methods, accuracy #nlpoli

Corporate Research Associates president Don Mills is criticising his professional colleagues for their use of online surveys to conduct opinion polling.

CRA uses telephone surveys. In two election polls released in September, MQO reportedly used a combination of telephone and online surveys to prepare it’s results. Environics used an online method and Telelink used telephone surveys.

According to the Telegram:

An in-depth poll by CRA conducted for The Telegram came closest to election night results, Mills said.

The Telegram noted:

CRA, using a telephone poll based on a sample size of 800, predicted 59.5 per cent support for the PCs among decided voters, 24.7 per cent for the NDP and 15.8 per cent for the Liberals.

The actual election results were 56.1 per cent for the PCs; 24.6 for the NDP; and 19.1 per cent for the Liberals — a total difference of 6.8 per cent from the poll prediction.

The only problem is that claim isn’t true.

Like all of the opinion polls released during the campaign, Mills and CRA polled eligible voters.  They did not report screening for voters only nor indicate any method by which they determined whether those opinions they surveyed related to people who would vote only.

By surveying all eligible voters, Mills and CRA should have reported all their responses, including those who indicated they would not vote or had no opinion.

That’s what the Telegram did in it’s front page story on Thursday.  The numbers cited in the Telegram on Saturday disregard some responses and therefore  present a distorted and misleading impression of what CRA’s polling found.

Here’s what the Telly reported compared to the actual reported vote result on Tuesday as a share of eligible vote:

Telegram
Sept 30 - Oct 3

Actual Vote Oct 11

CRA Apparent Error*

       

PC

44

32

+ 12

LIB

12

11

+ 1

NDP

18

14

+ 4

UND/Will not vote

26

42

- 16

Note:  The figures do not add to 100% everywhere due to an apparent minor rounding or typographical error in the results as reported by the Telegram.  SRBP adjusted the UND by one percentage point from what the Telegram reported.  When SRBP contacted the Telegram for more information on the poll, the newspaper management refused to discuss the results at all beyond what was in the published stories.

Even allowing for that one percentage point, the published CRA results are significantly different from the actual result.

SRBP compared most of the polls in a pre-election post.

Compared to CRA, MQO** was off by about the same proportions using its hybrid method. CRA was off by the same country mile in 2007.

Environics was closer to the final actual result than either of those two.

Of all surveys released during the campaign, Telelink came closest to the actual result, just as they did in 2007.

SRBP will have more on the polls in the recent general election in a series starting on Monday.

We’ll look at:

  • the polls themselves, what they reported and how they reported it,
  • compare the poll findings with the actual results,
  • tackle the comments by Liberal leader Kevin Aylward,
  • look at poll reporting standards in the news media and in the polling industry, and
  • and look at the way the local media used polls in the past two elections.

- srbp -

Related: 

  • Comparing polls”  By Horizon Research, a New Zealand opinion research firm that uses online polling.  Horizon questions the validity of discounting upwards of 30% or more of responses when reporting survey results.
  • Two wrongs and you get a news story”  discusses the way CRA’s reporting of decideds produces a misleading impression, in this case from 2009, of an increase in support for one party when it actually declined.
  • CRA has been known to engage in controversial practices, like releasing a poll just before a by-election vote, significantly ahead of its usual schedule for releasing its omnibus for that quarter.

*  Apparent error refers to the discrepancy between the CRA poll result reported by the Telegram on the front page of its Thursday edition compared to the actual vote result. 

All polls contain error. Researchers strive to reduce known and possible sources of error. 

** Edit to correct the comparison.

Election Week Traffic #nlpoli

The ballots are in and counted.

People are still trying to grasp the enormity of what happened

Next week, SRBP will have a series on polls during the election.   We’ll look at the polls themselves, compare their findings with the actual results, tackle the comments by Liberal leader Kevin Aylward, and look at the way the local media used polls.

If that isn’t enough for the election junkies out there, we’ll also turn attention to some of the issues connected to the historic low turn-out in last week’s general election.

We’ll take a closer look at the NDP and Liberal campaigns and the seats they won plus there’ll be the usual collection of comments about and observations on public life in the province.

There’s always lots to chew over at SRBP.

In the meantime, to keep you going, here are the top 10 stories SRBP readers were poring over last week:

  1. Here’s what an opposition party looks like
  2. Globe and Shitemail
  3. The Morning After the Night Before
  4. Williams set to offer comms director plum patronage job
  5. The way not to change
  6. She can’t handle the truth
  7. Whom the gods destroy
  8. Motivation and demotivation
  9. A house divided
  10. What does sanction really mean?

- srbp -

14 October 2011

She can’t handle the truth #nlpoli

Premier Kathy Dunderdale is like her benefactor, Danny Williams.  neither liked the province’s legislature where they could be held to public account for their actions.

So they have treated the legislature  - and by extension the people of Newfoundland and Labrador  - with contempt.

Dunderdale told CBC:

Most of my issues are around the quality of debate and the research and the fact that you can pretty well get up in the house of assembly and say whatever it is you like. You don't have to be concerned with truth.

Kathy Dunderdale should stop projecting her own behaviour on others.

As noted in this corner before, Kathy Dunderdale has a problem.

Kathy Dunderdale says things that are not true.

She says things that are at odds with the facts.

She says things in a way that suggests she does not understand the issue or the explanation she is trying to give.

Kathy Dunderdale does not look like she knows what she is talking about, sometimes.

She gets caught out on these occasions and it must be embarrassing for her.

However, the failing is entirely hers.

Kathy Dunderdale does not like the legislature because it shows up her numerous shortcomings.

 

- srbp -

13 October 2011

What does sanction really mean?

Here’s what Kathy Dunderdale told CBC’s David Cochrane about Muskrat Falls:

"We're looking at sanction, at the earliest at this point in time, would be in the spring and the house will be in session before we sanction Muskrat Falls," said Dunderdale.

That’s an interesting timeline.

It’s way beyond when it was supposed to happen, as labradore pointed out on Wednesday. The whole thing was supposed to sanctioned in 2009 and up and running by 2015.

Now project sanction won’t happen until the second quarter of 2012, at the earliest.

So if you’ve been following this along, the Lower Churchill is costing millions with tons of design and engineering work started.  The thing is rolling along through review after study and yet no one has approved the project yet.

That’s what sanction is, right?

Approval to go ahead and do something.

Bit late by next spring, it would seem.

If nothing else, Dunderdale is supposed to have an agreement with Emera no later than November 30 or the term sheet Danny signed as he ran from the Premier’s Office last fall goes up in a puff of pixie dust.

That would mean the project should be ready to launch.

And by that time, Nalcor would pretty much have the approval to launch or they’d be so far along in the process stopping wouldn't really be much of an option.

So what would the “debate” in the House mean?

Not very much at all.

In reality, Muskrat Falls is already “sanctioned” in all but name only.  All that’s left to come is the huge bills and the monstrous political fallout.

- srbp -

The fine art of cabinet making #nlpoli

One of these people will replace Shawn Skinner as Capital City’s man in cabinet:

  • Tom Osborne
  • John Dinn
  • Dan Crummell

- srbp -

Some Day the Sun Will Shine: Oil and the End of Newfoundland History #nlpoli

Some Day the Sun Will Shine: Oil and the End of Newfoundland History
Time: 8 p.m.-10 p.m.
Location: Hampton Hall, Marine Institute, Ridge Road
Description: The Newfoundland Historical Society will hold a free public lecture. This month's lecturer will be Dr. Jerry Bannister. Refreshments to follow. Parking is free and everyone is welcome to attend!

Sponsor: Newfoundland Historical Society

Originally from Newfoundland and Labrador, Bannister is associate professor of history at Dalhousie University.  
- srbp -

The way not to change #nlpoli

Kevin Aylward did a yeoman service to his party by stepping in and leading it through a tough time.

He didn’t add anything to the seat tally. 

Anyone who claims otherwise is full of shite. Those seats came from the hard work of the individuals running in each of them plus, in one case, the marvels of the internal combustion engine.

Now Aylward finds himself a leader without a seat in the legislature.

The political gods have a fine sense of humour.

Not to worry. 

There’s not much point in Kevin hanging about. Even if your humble e-scribbler had not already suggested that convention dictates he go,  Kevin is facing the advice of one of his old caucus mates.

Chris Decker told listeners to a CBC radio call-in show that Kevin needs to go:

For one thing, Decker said, the Liberals would lose Opposition status, as they would then be tied with the NDP at five seats each.

As well, Decker said, Tuesday's election showed that the Liberals cannot count on voters in any particular district.

Former cabinet minister John Efford chimed in and suggested the party should hold a leadership convention so that Kevin or John himself or anyone else who wanted it can have a go at the job.

Tuesday night proved to be a “holy f***, that was close” moment for the people running the Liberal Party and for people, like John Efford, who want to run the party. 

Now that the danger has passed they want to get right back to the old ways of doing business that put the party in his current sorry state.

The party needs to change.

A credible political party cannot afford to have a repeat of recent history including the way Jones left the job a few weeks ago and the board picked her replacement.

Change means things have to be different.  More of the same is not an option.  Change also means that so many people within the party will have to give up the traditional Liberal Party delusion that some saviour, some messiah will appear and make all the problems go away.

The party also can’t afford to try and recycle someone – whether Aylward, Efford or Jones – even on a temporary basis.  temporary has a tendency to become permanent, especially when the shock of a near death experience wears off.

That would be the way not to change.

And if people want the Liberal Party to survive, change is the only choice left.

- srbp -

12 October 2011

Here’s what an opposition party looks like #nlpoli

The Conservatives won’t open the House of Assembly until the spring.

Former Tory Premier Tom Rideout thinks it’s a bad idea, according to CBC:

"The government is an incumbent government. It has plenty of legislation on the books and ready, I'm sure, for the legislature. I think it's a sign that in Danny's case and, again, unfortunately in Kathy's case, that they're not house of assembly people," said Rideout.

Rideout said he loved life in the house of assembly, but he said Dunderdale and Williams see it as a "necessary evil."

CBC quotes NDP leader Lorraine Michael in their story online:

“I think its irresponsible. You know, Danny Williams did the same thing in 2007 and I just see Kathy Dunderdale carrying on the same arrogant way of dealing with opposition in the house," she said Tuesday, after the NDP won five districts in the provincial election.

That’s what an opposition party should sound like.

- srbp -

Globe and Shitemail #nlpoli

"Orange wave credited with slimming Tory majority", the headline on the Globe story proclaims.  The lede is just as bad

An "orange wave" is being credited with toppling a cabinet minister in St. John's, as the impact of the NDP's federal breakthrough continues to ripple across the country.

We never do find out who is doing the crediting throughout Oliver Moore's  thin account of recent political events. Perhaps it was someone at the bar.  Safari journalists are evidently no better at avoiding superficial observations than the locals who were pushing the race for second place theme.

- srbp -

The Morning After the Night Before #nlvotes #nlpoli

The story of the night is the loss of two cabinet ministers and the Premier’s parliamentary assistant in gains by the New Democrats in St. John’s and by the Liberals in Torngat Mountains.

This – coupled with the fights in seats across the province – was the real story of the election.  The conventional media stuck with the  bullshit “race for second place” theme right up until the last of their coverage on election night.

Natural resources minister Shawn Skinner went down to defeat in St. John’s Centre, losing to New Democrat Gerry Rogers.  Skinner was a key player in the Dunderdale cabinet holding down one of the more important portfolios.  That didn’t matter.

Aboriginal affairs minister Patty Pottle lost her seat in Torngat Mountains to Liberal randy Edmonds.

In St. John’s North, New Democrat Party president Dale Kirby pounded Bob Ridgley. This one in particular stands out.  Ridgley is part of the Osborne-Ridgley dynasty that had a stranglehold on three St. John’s seats.  Ridgley was parliamentary assistant to first Danny Williams and then Kathy Dunderdale.

Seat counts based on opinion polls of questionable accuracy turned out to be a mug’s game of the first order.  What was supposed to be 43 Tories, four New Democrats and two Liberals, turned out to be 37 Tories, six Grits and five Dippers.

At some point people will put seat projection artists right next to the psychic astrologers election forecasters in their news line-up.

This is a record low turn-out, beating Danny Williams’ record set in 2007.  Preliminary numbers for Tuesday night put the turn-out at 58.3% of eligible voters.

Just to put 2011 in context, here’s a chart showing the party shares of eligible vote since 1949.

eligible vote 1949

The Tories just got re-elected with the smallest share of eligible vote of any government formed since 1949.  They beat the Tories’ 1975 previous low score of 33% by one point.

For those who missed it, NTV/Telelink put the don’t know/will not vote at 42% in its election poll.  That works out to 58% turnout.  Bang-on.  Some of the other polls had the same category as low as 18%. 

The Tories wound up with 32% of the eligible vote.  NTV had it down as 35%.  Liberals got 11%, while NTV had them at 7.4%.  NTV had the NDP at 15%.  They got 14%.

NTV/Telelink is  - consistently - the most accurate political poll done in the province bar none.  SRBP will do a detailed comparison of the polls and the results in another post.

While all three political parties will likely swap out their leaders before the next election, the Liberals are the ones with an immediate leadership problem

Caretaker Kevin Aylward lost his seat.  He could carry on but common sense and convention would tell him to go.  The Liberals need to change their leader and their executive board sooner rather than later in order to start the massive rebuilding effort ahead of them.

This election showed there is still life in the party, despite the gaffe-riddled campaign at the provincial level. The Liberals can’t afford to waste time.  Preparation for the next election has to start today.

The New Democrat leadership will pose some interesting choices for the party.  Expect Dale Kirby to be a leading contender based in no small measure on the profile he will likely win once the House opens in the spring.  He may not be the best choice, but he will be a leading contender.

The other thing the Dippers have to figure out is when to say goodbye to Lorraine and usher in the new era.

Part of the NDP calculation will depend on how fast the Tories dump Kathy Dunderdale. She was an interim leader who decided to stay.  The party lost big in its bedrock and had fights in plenty of other seats.

Much like the 1999 election heralded the beginning of the Liberal end, the 2011 could be the turning point for the ruling Tories.  If they continue to coast – with or without Dunderdale - they will be facing an even stronger NDP assault.  If the Liberals get their act together, the combination of Liberal and NDP attacks could end the Conservative dynasty.

The Tories need to change.  The only problem is that a change before the fourth year of their mandate will trigger an election.  They might not be ready for another election so soon after the current one, especially with a raft of members ready to retire.

- srbp -

11 October 2011

Belated September Traffic #nlpoli

In the rush of the uber-exciting election, your humble e-scribbler forgot to post the September stat porn list.

Consider this your bit of exciting information during an otherwise dull voting day.

  1. Williams set to offer comms director plum patronage job
  2. Classical gas
  3. The first big political story of the campaign
  4. Dateline:  Desperation, Newfoundland
  5. Dippers on point for first CBC election political panel
  6. New Poll.  New Result.
  7. The Hebron Give-Away
  8. Advertising group has Tory, Nalcor ties
  9. RCMP investigating SNC Lavalin officials over corruption allegations
  10. To you with affection from Danny

- srbp -

A house divided #nlpoli #nlvotes

In the west end of St. John’s, one house shows the drama of the struggle between the forces of Blue and the forces of Orange for control of Capital City.

housedivided

The first candidate who came to the door canvassing for votes turned out to be Paul Boundridge.

You won the lottery, or words to that effect greeted him as the woman of the house flung open the door.

She explained that – despite the fact it was the Thursday before polling day - he’d been the first of the three candidates to knock on her door.  So he was getting her vote.

Job done?

Not quite.

The subject of a sign for the front lawn popped up from one or the other.

The neighbourhood is bare of signs, incidentally.

Da byes in orange had one in the car so their newest supporter was happy to have them put it up, pdq.

For good measure, she called her husband, a Big Friggin’ Tory, to tell him the news. 

She wanted to make sure he didn’t come home, fly into a rage, and toss the sign on the neighbour’s lawn.

Or worse.

So he called John Dinn’s headquarters and had them race over to stick one of their signs next to the other one.

And on the Monday before the official voting day, there stood the two signs as you see them in the picture. 

How will the election turn out?

Well, so far the election is exactly what everyone didn’t expect. 

One of the three leaders people assumed would be running this time last year is long gone.  The other gave up the leader job, although she could have it back in a day or two if her replacement doesn’t win his seat.

There all sorts of seats projections out there.

We’ll all know the details by tonight.  Remember all the projections though and see which ones, if any came close to being right. 

And as a last note, for those of you with Rogers, tune into Out of the Fog for the election coverage.  You can catch your humble e-scribbler doing something other than scribbling.

- srbp -

10 October 2011

Motivation and demotivation #nlpoli #nlvotes

“Complacency is your greatest enemy in an election,” Progressive Conservative Leader Kathy Dunderdale said Sunday.

“When it's hard to motivate people to become engaged to get out and to cast their ballot, then you have a concern about that.”

That’s a quote CBC used out as part of a story that focuses, curiously enough, on how one political leader and only one political leader is responding to an issue in the election:  lack of apparent voter interest.

The story casts Kathy Dunderdale in the role of impartial election commentator not as the leader of a political party who is – quite obviously – failing to motivate people to vote for her and her fellow Tories.

The story also mentions poll results to make sure no one forgets what election reporting is really all about.  There at the post… yada yada yada

Dunderdale’s not alone. All three leaders have that problem – failing to inspire voters positively -  but it varies from party to party.

Dunderdale is the one whose inability to find any energy in  her campaign stands in stark contrast to her slogan.

Now when news media do this sort of reporting, there’s no giant conspiracy.  It’s just a sign of how much reporting in this province has become an adjunct of the political system.

The political story of the parties struggling against voter disinterest or the Tories and Dippers fighting in St,. John’s is is part of the real story of this election and, right up until the end,  CBC and every other news media outlet in the province has ignored it.

Why are people so unmoved by the politicians?  And if they are moved, at least in St. John’s, why is it to move from the Tories to the NDP?

Fascinating stuff.

But you’ll never find it in the conventional media.

There it’s all horse races and Kathy Dunderdale and others with an interest in the campaign framing their stories for themselves.

- srbp -

Whom the gods destroy #nlpoli #nlvotes

There's letters seal'd, and my two schoolfellows,
Whom I will trust as I will adders fang'd—
They bear the mandate, they must sweep my way
And marshal me to knavery. Let it work;
For 'tis the sport to have the enginer
Hoist with his own petard, an't shall go hard
But I will delve one yard below their mines
And blow them at the moon.

For the past seven years the Tory political staffers masquerading  online as a variety of real people have liked to push the theme that the New Democrats should form the official opposition in preference to the Liberals.

Danny Williams , you may recall who that is, used to compliment Lorraine Michael on her performance and her questions in a way that was by no means smarmy, condescending and appearing to be insincere.

He and his friends slagged Liberals – especially Yvonne Jones – at the drop of a hat.

The Tories even agreed among themselves, backed by the supposedly impartial Speaker of the House of Assembly, to give extra cash to the NDP caucus and to deny the Liberals of funds recommended by an independent commission.

They did this in the mistaken belief that fostering a fight between the opposition parties would allow their beloved benefactors [and party] to stay in power.

If the trends in this election hold true, their clever little political plot has already come back to roger them in ways they did not see coming.

And they richly deserve both the shock and the shaft. 

“Hoist with his own petard” are the words Shakespeare wrote for Hamlet.  A petard is another word for a bomb intended.

A few centuries later own goal is a word you’ll still hear military engineers talk about them.  Except this time they call them “own goals.”

You’ll find own goals in other places too, like when any crafty plan backfires.

Own goals are the way the universe reacts to over-weaning and undeserved arrogance.

Own goals are Fate’s reward for douchebags.

The New Democrats are giving the Conservatives a hard run in their supposedly safe homes in St. John’s. 

Tom Osborne, of the Osborne-Ridgley dynasty, is fighting hard against a sharp young New Democrat named Keith Dunne in St. John’s South. He is a former health minister.

Ed Buckingham has represented the uber-Tory seat of St. John’s East.  He replaced John  Ottenheimer as the representative for a seat that has previously sent such ardent Townie Tories as Witch0hunt Willie Marshall in to battle with the evil Liberals.  Buckingham’s got a fight on his hands from gasoline guru George Murphy.

Over in St. John’s North,  Bob Ridgley is having a hard time just like his nephew in St. John’s South.  Among other things, Ridgley is apparently facing the ire of public sector pensioners whom the Tories poked needlessly in the eye early on in the campaign.  Bob’s under pressure from New Democrat party president Dale Kirby.

And in St. John’s Centre, New Democrat Gerry Rogers is threatening to cut short the political career of natural resources minister Shawn Skinner.  That struggle contains the stuff of Greek theatre, bringing together, as it would appear, the breast cancer scandal  - the second biggest political controversy since 2003 – with the Conservatives’ entry in the campaign to supplant the 1969 Churchill Falls contract as the public reference point for political disaster.

Since the late 1990s, the Tories have used their old guaranteed seats in St. John’s as the base from which to stage their comeback.  They’ve had an unassailable lock on the seats in the metro area since 2003.  The Tories evidently figured this time would be the same.

But something happened that no one seems to have expected.

Sure the polls showed a marked drop in Tory support starting in early 2010.  The former Tory enthusiasts just seemed to disappear off the political polling landscape.

Where they went didn’t show up until later on.  New Democrat support didn’t really pick up until May 2010.  What appeared to be a temporary bump from the federal election turned out to be something more.

What the provincial Conservatives missed along the way is that in the St. John’s area their supporters bleed to the New Democrats.  So anything that builds the New Democrats weakens the Tories, not the Grits. 

If the Tories imagined the NDP could not organize its way to anything beyond what they had already, then the Tories figured wrongly.

As the Tories talked up the need to keep a member on the government side, they seem to have forgotten that in St. John’s, the old patronage lines don’t work.  They don’t work because they don’t matter.

Townie members of the House of Assembly don’t deliver pork to their constituents.  They have precious little to do with the majority of their constituents whose needs for fire trucks and road paving come from municipal government rather than their provincial politician. 

Townie voters can elect an opposition member to the legislature and not feel a single pang of retribution. 

Townie voters are also public servants in large numbers.  Tom Marshall’s dismissal of retired public servants in the talk of giving them a modest raise in benefits may well have resonated with the majority of public servants who are getting ever closer to retirement age. 

When the Tory platform promises included a set of crossed fingers – we’ll deliver the promises of more cash only if we don’t need to cut spending – that likely sent a second uncomfortable chill up the spines of civil servants everywhere.

Safe to vote for an opposition politician and given plenty of reasons to do so.

Sweet, eh?

Regardless of what happens on Tuesday, regardless of how many seats the New Democrat win and regardless of whether they form the opposition or not,  this election marks a shift in provincial politics.

The Tories got a big scare. 

The New Democrats got a big boost.

What happens next is what matters. 

At age 68, New Democrat leader Lorraine Michael is likely to step down before 2015.  The party’s new energy will drive more interest in the job and the party than usual. They will get lots of media coverage and the chance to showcase their new energy for the entire province.

The new leader and the New Democrats already have genuine new energy.  They will stand in stark contrast to the Conservatives.

The Tories will face a leadership fight delayed from Williams’ departure. Kathy Dunderdale was only supposed to stay for a while.  Now she plans to stick around for two terms.  The oldest person ever elected Premier plans to hang on until she is the second oldest person to retire from the job. 

That may cause tension within the caucus, especially if there are other potential leaders who put their ambitions aside for what they thought was a short time. 

Political pressures coming out of the election or internal divisions from tough governing choices could add other tensions.

The party platform is already starved of new ideas.  It is in autopilot.

And then there are the other Tories who planned to retire but who hung on for the good of the party through one more election.  They will go sooner rather than later.

And so the Tories will face by-elections.

Those by-elections will not be as easy as they used to be.

Political parties in Newfoundland and Labrador aren’t good at refreshing themselves while they are in power.  Then tend to coast rather than move off in a genuinely new direction that aligns with voter moods.

The inevitable result is that they get tossed.

The only reason political parties last as long as they do – 17 years for the Tories the first time, 14 years for the Liberals the second time – is that the other guys never get their act together.

That might be changing.

Whom they gods would destroy, they first make proud.

- srbp -

09 October 2011

The Folly of Linear Thinking #nlpoli

New Brunswick’s David Campbell has an interesting post about the folly of believing that things go in straight lines.

Like say, oil prices have been going up for a while now and will only go up in the future.

And therefore a hugely expensive electricity project makes sense because oil surely will always cost way more than it does now on a go forward basis.

Really it’s just a variation on part of the logic behind the 1969 Churchill Falls contract and the lack of an escalator clause.  If you can’t imagine the price of something going in one direction, you’ll bet on things going the other way.

It’s the same as assuming that oil prices will always be higher than a certain amount – say US$50  - and pegging extra cash to that number.

There are lots of examples of linear thinking out there: assume the future will look like today.

And it’s usually the best way to make a gigantic mistake.

- srbp -

Tories in hard fight in Sin Jawns seats #nlpoli #nlvotes

The whole race for second place media meme  - bullshit that it always was - masked a very serious battle that’s been going on since the election started between the Conservatives and New Democrats.

You can tell it is serious because the media are starting to report it.

And what they are reporting is stuff like Kathy Dunderdale in a scrum with reporters as she campaigned in St. John’s for some of the Tory candidates who are having a really hard time.

Now Kath couldn’t acknowledge what’s really going on so she blamed on the Liberals.  What’s going on is that all those people who were voting Tory in St. John’s are abandoning the Tory party and heading for the New Democrats.  Since early 2010,  Tory support has dropped 27 percentage points.  Since May, that support has apparently been finding a happy home with the New Democrats.

Your humble e-scribbler thought the local Tories had a tighter grip on their voters provincially than they do.  The signs, though, have been unmistakeable for a week or more and the opinion polls – all conducted up to October 3 – confirm the growing NDP vote in the metro region.

The other big problem the Tories are having is interesting the people who would vote for them to actually get to the polls. Unmotivated Tory voters and the ones that are motivated are voting for someone else.

Ouch.

That just makes the NDP surge all the more problematic for the Tories. Dunderdale tried once again this weekend to encourage people to vote.

There’s a picture of Dunderdale accompanying that CBC story where she’s whining about Liberals, incidentally, with Kathy standing next to St. John’s East candidate Ed Buckingham.   Dunderdale looks like she needs to get out for a few more runs to restore her energy level to the magical new levels she’s supposedly found.

For another clue of the battle going on around Capital City, consider that long-time Tory Doc O’Keefe is out beating the streets for his old Tory buddy Shawn Skinner in St. John’s Centre. Earlier in the week, Doc wasn’t giving any clue he would be hitting the streets for his old pals. By the end of the week the local Tories are announcing that Doc’s coming in to the fight.

All of this is part of the two front war the Tories have been waging.  The other front is for the most part a battle against the Liberals in parts of the province outside the northeast Avalon. 

In a post some of you might have missed, the always insightful labradore used the advance poll turn-outs last week to show how the Tories appear to be deploying their forces.  The fights in St. John’s are heavy enough that the Tories have had to deploy forces they sent in 2007 to wind Liberal seats in rural Newfoundland into their heartland in St. John’s in order to hang on.

- srbp -

08 October 2011

Pre-Thanksgiving Traffic #nlpoli #nlvotes

T’was the week before voting and all through the province everyone was looking forward to a feed of turkey on the weekend.

And before they headed off for the feed, they took the time during the week to read these posts, making them the 10 most-read posts at ye olde e-scribbles:

  1. Telelink releases campaigns only independent poll  (As it turned out, Environics released one later in the week)
  2. Muskrat Falls support plummets:  poll
  3. What if they gave an election and nobody came?
  4. Environics releases second indy poll of the campaign
  5. The Imaginary Centre of an Imaginary Universe
  6. The Revolutionary Years
  7. The Placeholder Election Revisited
  8. Do debates matter?  Part Deux and The Mug’s Game
  9. CBC torques poll coverage
  10. Political Advertising

- srbp -