Random-Burin-St. Georges: a quick look at the results

 Random-Burin-St. Georges is a relatively new seat resulting from re-apportionment before the 2004 election.

However, the seat continues to trend as a decidedly Liberal seat, carrying on the trend pre-2004.

The 2008 result is not the one to look at closely here.  rather we need to look at 2006. 

That was the year the Provincial Conservatives threw their political weight behind the federal Conservative party.

The Blue team ran a staunch Provincial Conservative closely associated with the Premier. 

She had campaigned relentlessly between 2004 and 2006 against the incumbent, largely by using a refugee family's plight in a church basement as a rod with which to beat the incumbent and his party.

It apparently escaped her notice that the party she ran for had a policy diametrically opposed to her own stated position on this issue. In the end, her campaign was also caught up in the in-out scheme even though, as these results show, Random-Burin-St. Georges was not a lost cause for the Blue team.

The New Democrats ran a candidate from outside the riding in that election.  Not surprisingly, she fared considerably worse than the popular fisheries activist the NDP had run in 2004.

In that race, the Conservatives appear to have pulled voters who had voted NDP in 2004 and added a few thousand more besides.  The Liberal candidate - Bill Matthews - also increased his vote share.  Overall, turnout in the riding increased by slightly less than 4,000  voters.

What we don't see here is a collapse of the Conservative vote.  Rather, in 2008, it sank back to what essentially appears to be its core. The New Democrat vote declined by 3244 but did not slip back to its 2006 level.  The Liberal vote declined by 1100 votes.

Overall, it would appear that the New Democrats in 2008 had picked up some soft vote that in 2006 had gone to the Conservatives.  The bulk of the 2006 Conservative vote stayed home.

More than in some others, the vote pattern in this riding may have been affected by the remittance labour force from the Burin Peninsula currently working in Alberta. Without more detailed analysis it is difficult to know how much of this vote pool actually turned out and if it did, how it voted.

Even though the 2006 incumbent did not seek re-election, this is not a riding that was affected by Family Feud as obviously as in the three ridings on the Avalon peninsula.

It is interesting to speculate, though, what might have happened had the Provincial Conservatives taken an entirely different approach in 2008.

-srbp-

Friday Follies: a round-up of the week's odds and ends

1.  Pete didn't get the memo:  Peter MacKay apparently didn't hear about the kiss-and-make-up comments from his boss the Prime Minister and Danny Williams over this whole Family Feud thingy.  Speaking with the Chronicle Herald, the guy touted as being minister responsible for Newfoundland and Labrador laid it on the line:

“I think he’s just cooling his jets until his next blow-up," said Mr. MacKay. “He’s got a mercurial personality and all indications are that the next time that the wind changes or he feels offended, he’ll go off like a mad hatter again."

Mr. MacKay, who will likely end up as Newfoundland and La­brador’s representative at federal cabinet, said the premier of Newfoundland and Labrador “has lost the plot."

“It did become so irrational and personally vindictive on the part of a Conservative premier," he said.

Ermmm.

It wasn't the Mad Hatter that went about shouting "Off with her head."

2.  That's so 1960s:  Also in the Chronicle Herald, the accumulated wisdom of a few of Halifax's advertising geniuses.  Like, for instance, Don Veinish from Cossette Atlantic:

Danny Williams’s ABC campaign sure seemed to work, but I have to plead ignorance on whether it involved advertising or not.

Thanks for paying attention, Donny.

Then again, you just about prove the point you made:

People these days are exposed to the best of everything in the communications arena, including advertising. OK-ish ad efforts aren’t OK because they don’t meet the standard and tend to be disregarded or entirely disdained. Bottom line: If advertising had made much of a difference, there would be a difference today. There isn’t.

Speaking of not meeting the standard and tending to be disregarded, wonder how Don would feel about the idea of a billboard on the Gardiner? 

3.  Dons and Peelers:  Turns out that both some local bands of bobbies as well as Oxford University (as well as 11 other universities and assorted government entities) were stunned enough to squirrel away money in Icelandic banks.

4. Suck AND Blow:  New Labour starts to look a lot like old Conservatives, right down to the complete absence of logic:

[Culture (!!!???) secretary Andy] Burnham said that the "online challenge" had resulted in two dangerous tendencies emerging.

Firstly he criticized the burgeoning tendency in television to mimic the user-generated, "here's my blog" feel of much of the Internet, particularly in current affairs and news.

"The Internet as a whole is an excellent source of casual opinion," he said. "TV is where people often look for expert or authoritative opinion."

The second reaction to the rise of the Internet has been a "tendency towards safety first and the tried-and-tested, and way from innovation, risk-taking and new talent", he argued.

So on the one hand television is tending toward innovation, risk-taking and new talent by aping the Internet but at the same time, television is tending away from innovation, risk-taking and new talent.

The only challenge here would seem to come for Andy when thought is involved in his activities. [h/t to Guido Fawkes]

5. Blow and Suck:  Also from Guido, the story of a pollster in a conflict of interest.  Speaking of conflict of interest, thank heavens no pollsters in eastern Canada would do work for government and at the same time release poll results without disclosing that government had helped fund the poll on local politicians' popularity or lack thereof. 

Like say upwards of four times a year?

Nah.

Could never happen.

6.  Blown away?  A google blog search for "danny williams + intimidation" turned up two links to a blog by Paul Russell from Newfoundland and Labrador called Life, Writing and Everything Else.

They contained two references to alleged political intimidation.

Click on the link and you'll find that...

wait for it...

 

 

 

 

 

The blog's gone.

Suddenly.

Not just the posts.

The whole blog.

Hmmm.

Now it's not like he violated the broadcast prohibitions under the Canada Elections Act like at least one local blog did on Tuesday night.

Even if that were the case, the worst that could happen would be a fine.

A big fine.

But not death to the entire operation.

Nope.

Paul Russell, if you're out there, drop us a line and let us know what happened to your blog and those posts.

After all, they're just allegations and as long as they are labeled as such and unless and until someone brings forward evidence to back up the claims, no one should have a problem with it.

-srbp-

Avalon: a quick look at the results

If there ever was a campaign which showed the power of negative campaigning, it's Avalon.

From a time well before the writ dropped, incumbent Conservative Fabian Manning received countless vicious personal attacks.

That includes a reference to Manning as a "traitor" by no less than Premier Danny Williams. That savage rhetoric continued throughout the campaign from many quarters, including from a strong supporter of the Andrews and Harris campaigns.

Liberal Scott Andrews, the only serious competitor piled on relentlessly, lightening up only for the last week or two.

That didn't mean the attacks stopped since the Family Feud deployed at least three cabinet ministers to the area north of the Trans-Canada Highway to work their persuasive magic on local Provincial Conservatives.

Through all that, Manning did phenomenally better than his colleagues in the St. John's ridings. In St. John's East, the Conservatives captured only 20% of the vote from 2006.  In St. John's South-Mount Pearl, 26% of the vote held.

In Avalon, Manning held on to about 60% of his vote from 2006.  Still and all, he lost 7590 votes.

Interestingly enough, the drop in voter turn out and the increased vote for Green, Liberal and New Democrat candidates totals 7582.  That's not likely a coincidence.

What's noticeable in Avalon is that the lost votes didn't migrate to another party. They appear to have just stayed home in large numbers.

Scott Andrews increased the Liberal vote by 4%, or 548 votes. 

The largest jump in votes for any candidate was in the New Democrat column which saw a 70% jump (2343 votes). If those votes came from disgruntled Provincial Conservatives, the attractiveness of New Democrats would largely be defined by one quality:  they aren't Liberals. The same quality likely had a strong influence on Blue voter choice in the St. John's ridings for those who came out to vote.

-srbp-

St. John's East: a quick look at the results

Jack Harris was the beneficiary of a double whammy on Tuesday.

First of all, Danny Williams' former law partner profited from the near total collapse of the Conservative vote as a result of the Family feud.

Well known Provincial Conservative Ed Buckingham's appearance at Jack's campaign launch foretold a considerable movement of Blue to Orange.

It was no accident.

Provincial cabinet ministers supported Harris publicly.  Even without turning out at Jack's headquarters, they could easily mobilise their own teams to drive votes to the polls for Harris.

Second of all, Harris profited from the  collapse of the Liberal vote, attributable almost entirely to Walter Noel's candidacy. While less dramatic than the Conservative drop, the Liberal candidate shed over 9000 votes all of which appear to have moved to the New Democrats on their own.

In some media interviews Harris pointed to an increased voter turnout in the riding, as if that showed some ground swell of support for his candidacy beyond the Family Feud effect.

Horse hockey.

The increase in turnout from 2006 was 875, a mere 2% jump.

The tale of the electoral tape in St. John's East is easy to see. Add the NDP 2006 number to the difference in votes for the Liberals and Conservatives.  You'll find yourself close as can be to Harris' vote count.

Early commentary suggested that Harris' win and the strong showing of former Independent editor Ryan Cleary in St. John's South-Mount Pearl marked some radical new age for the province's New Democrats:

“I think one of the stories of this election is the real dawning of a new day for the NDP in this province,” said [Memorial University political science professor Christopher] Dunn. “It really has firm urban roots here now.”

In fact, the NDP’s Ryan Cleary was neck in neck with Liberal Siobhan Coady in St. John’s South-Mount Pearl for most of the night, before Coady pulled away taking the seat by 1,047 votes, a mere three per cent difference in the popular vote between the two.

“It also shows the NDP is becoming very serious about its choice of candidates. When they run candidates with high profiles, they do very well,” continued Dunn who called Harris a “force to be reckoned with.”

That's not the case if one assesses where the vote came from.

In both St. John's East and St. John's South-Mount Pearl, the surge in New Democrat votes came predominantly from Provincial Conservatives.  Of Harris' total vote, about half came from the Provincial Conservatives. Another political alignment will rob the NDP of that support just as easily as it was delivered.

One point doesn't make a trend, but another kind will burst a few bubbles.

Pop!

-srbp-

St. John's South-Mount Pearl: a quick look at the results

The Family Feud had a pretty clear impact on the vote result in St. John's South-Mount Pearl.

The difference between the Conservative vote in 2006 and the Conservative vote in 2008 is the increase in Liberal and New Democrat vote, a smattering of votes for the other candidates and a large group (almost 3,000) that apparently didn't vote.

These would be almost entirely Provincial Conservatives who were constrained in their choices by activities within their own normal political camp.

The New Democrats were primary beneficiary of the Feud with an increased vote of 5810.  Some 2927 didn't vote, apparently.  The Liberal vote share increased by 2635.

Overall turnout was slightly above that of 2004 - when there was another spat within the Conservative party - but the total count of eligible voters increased as well from 2004 to 2008.

Liberal and New Democratic vote share did not change appreciably from 2004 to 2006.  The increase in Conservative vote in 2006, compared to 2004, can be attributed to a suppression that resulted from internal problems between the Provincial and federal Conservatives.  In 2006, the Provincial Conservatives supported their federal brethren openly.

-srbp-

The NL election summary

1.  Since 1949, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have typically voted in the majority anything but Conservative in federal elections.  Biggest thing to remember, but every single one of the media types and most of the local pundits just got lost in the Family Feud hype.  It spilled over into national reporting which was - for the most part - facile.

2.  The biggest impact of the Family Feud in 2008 was to bleed the federal Conservatives of candidates, money and volunteers.  It also suppressed the Conservative vote since Provincial Conservatives typically vote for their federal cousins.

Take a look at the results.  Turn outs are down.  The people who didn't vote are mostly Blue people.

The Conservatives got a taste of the Feud in 2004 when the Provincial Conservatives didn't turn out in any numbers for their friends.  There was no organized campaign, but there was a chill.

3.  St. John's East.  Jack Harris profited from picking up some of the Blue vote but his real surge came from the near total collapse of the Liberal vote. That wasn't ABC.  That was ABW.

4.  Avalon.  A couple of big changes in the last two weeks helped to really make the difference. 

First, Scott Andrews toned down the shrill rhetoric and started to sound like a member of parliament. He started to sound like someone to vote for instead of a guy picking up votes against someone else.  That seems to have had its biggest impact in the part of the riding north of the Trans Canada Highway which, for the most part, has tended to vote Red in federal elections.

Andrews was working hard anyway but as he started to sound more like the guy most of us know, it looks like he shifted votes.

Second, the Provincial Conservatives deployed some of their cabinet ministers and workers to twist arms. Whether that pulled votes to Andrews or suppressed Blue votes, the result was the same.

5.  St. John's South-Mount Pearl.  Midway through the election, poll results showed the Liberals and New Democrats holding onto their vote shares from the past two elections. The Blue votes sat in the undecided category.

At the polls, the Blues came out in a split between Orange and Red, with both picking up nearly equal shares.  Incumbency has its advantages if they can be understood and used effectively.

6.  Random-Burin-St. Georges.  Not a seat that figured in most people's "Watch" list since it's usually gone Red, but the story here is one of an experienced campaigner who worked hard to get the nomination and then to win the seat.  Judy Foote is a former provincial cabinet minister and someone to watch for in the months ahead.  She's tough and savvy and the two Liberal newbies would do well to watch closely what Judy does.

7.  The future.  The lesson of this election is that a divided Blue team leaves the field open. If the Conservatives can heal the rift, then the next federal election could turn out quite differently. Given the seat counts, Provincial Conservatives could have wielded gigantic  - maybe even unprecedented  - influence if they'd turned out for their friends and looked to turn more seats Blue.  They have a machine and they could have used it for niceness, at least for Conservatives.

Instead, they opted to cut throats. 

That might be too much for their brethren to forgive.  Then again, the game theorists in Ottawa might realize that even confined to a single province, the Blue Machine is a better friend than enemy, at least for other Blue people.

If the rift heals, then the next election could have vastly different results.

Jack Harris will have a time facing the likes of Beth Marshall in St. John's East.   Siobhan Coady will face someone like Tom Osborne who comes backed with a family clan that dominates the metro St. John's Conservative scene.

In Avalon, we might expect Fabian Manning to try a comeback.  He'll get some kind of reward for his loyalty.  Depending on what it is, he could be spending the next few months working hard to win back the seat he held until tonight.

The votes might be counted in seven sits, but this fight ain't over yet.

-srbp-

Pattern Behaviour 2: Spot the Pitcher Plants

Provincial Conservatives love to astroturf. In fact they've had this latest astroturf run planned for some time.

They love to call radio programs and make comments in support of their leader, usually following talking points that are astonishingly similar.  It's supposed to appear like a giant groundswell of support for their leader's cause du jour;  some of it - like the insistence they aren't coached - gets kinda funny.

Within the past 24 to 48 hours, the number of Pitcher Plants has jumped dramatically. The ABC Astroturf is in full bloom.

You can tell them a mile away:

1. They make repeated reference to "Premier Williams", pledge their support for him and praise him in the stereotypical pitcher plant fashion.  Most people don't have a need to do that;  Provincial Conservatives evidently do.
2. They make repeated references to the need to "stand up for your province".  A recurring theme among Provincial Conservatives is that the province consists of one mass whose interests are identical and who must act in a corporate fashion under the leadership of a single individual in order to achieve victory over external forces.  That's the foundation of Provincial Conservative politics since at least 2003.
3. They've been making repeated attacks on Fabian Manning.  Again, that hasn't been a common feature of the call-in shows to date.  Tonight it's all Fabe, all the time.  Despite the efforts to claim otherwise - nothing could be further from the truth - there's been a great deal of Family Feud energy directed to defeating Manning.
• Dead give-away:  they all make reference to the same episode, namely Manning sitting next to Harper in the House.  They describe this episode suing similar terms and typically misrepresent what happened in the same way their Leader did originally. People who aren't Provincial Conservatives don't need elaborate rationales to vote against Conservatives.
• Second dead give-away:  they praise any politician who has sided with their beloved "Premier Williams", usually referring to the individual as having acted in the best interests of his or her constituents.  To provincial Conservatives, their leader's decisions and the interest of the entire province are synonymous. (See Indicator 2 above)
4. They take great care to distinguish between Conservatives and the Provincial Conservatives, which they insist on calling Progressive.  Only Provincial Conservatives need to make that distinction for some reason.  Liberals and New Democrats don't care.
5. They turn up online making comments from behind a pseudonym.  In classic Provincial Conservative fashion, everything is about their leader. Note that the two comments here are from individuals who have a well-established pattern of behaviour presenting exactly the same kinds of comments offered here.  They didn't comment on the original post at all, suggesting that they weren't yet mobilized to start astroturfing.

-srbp-

Pattern behaviour

Faced with the prospect he can't deliver his consistently stated goal of ensuring no Conservatives are elected in Newfoundland and Labrador, Danny Williams shifted the goals of his Family Feud and completely reinvented what it was all about.

He did it a few weeks ago.

He repeated the completely rejigged goal of his ABC campaign and CBC is reporting the shift.

No one should be surprised.

It's part of the pattern.

-srbp-

CTV caves in face of ABC campaign

From Danny Williams comments on a voice of the cabinet minister call-in show on Sunday evening:

A couple of weeks ago when they were out in Harbour Grace, or Grace Harbour, as the Prime Minister referred the community to, you know, there was something came out of that whereby spokespeople for the Conservatives and for Mr. Manning came out and said that businesses were being threatened, that contracts were being threatened, that if people didn't vote ABC that our government was going to do something to them. CTV reported that and CTV actually had to retract that publicly on their network when it was found that those claims were unsubstantiated.

The original story is linked from this Bond Papers post: "Family Feud?  Try blood feud."

Let's see if CTV and Bob Fife want to comment on this.

-srbp-

Trevor's duck and cover explained

Trevor Taylor, part-time substitute fisheries minister in the Provincial Conservative government has been busily ducking a looming issue in the fisheries world.  In a system already grossly overstocked with processing capacity, Taylor's department has a recommendation under consideration to add a few more licenses.

The local CBC fisheries broadcast has been trying desperately to get Taylor on the air.

He's been unavailable.

Apparently, Trevor's been too busy campaigning against Fabian Manning, not in his free time or anything mind you but during the day time  - normal government working hours - when one might expect he could have found a few hours to devote to his custodial responsibilities in the fish department.

Seems Trevor has been joined on the hustings by attorney general Jerome Kennedy and intergovernmental affairs genius Tom Hedderson. 

You will recall Hedderson as the guy writing letters to Ottawa last June lobbying on a decision that was made...18 months earlier.

Trevor sees no problem with this carrying on partisan family fights during daylight hours.

Trevor also decided on Monday to issue a news release criticizing the federal government for a deal giving 1500 tonnes of yellowtail flounder from Canada's NAFO allocation to the Americans.

But sure Trevor and the boys are supporting the ABC campaign, you say.

Yes, sez your humble e-scribbler, but don't forget the real motivation for all these cabinet ministers to join in the Family Feud.

There's a big cabinet shuffle coming very shortly.  Being seen out there hammering away at The Boss' favourite cause is much better for the old career path than spending time doing other things, like say the job you get paid to do.

Oh.  That's right. 

Trevor did find time in his hectic hectoring schedule to call the Fisheries Broadcast and do an interview.

But that was after one of his predecessors outed him on the Family Feud thing.

-srbp-

Wishin' and hopin' and spewin' and sprayin'

Undoubtedly, Scott Andrews campaign took great heart this past week for stories running on CBC and in the Telegram about Fabian Manning and his expense accounts in the House of Assembly.

The race looks tight, according to an NTV/Telelink poll and those two stories might well look like the kind of ammunition needed to push Andrews into the lead.

They might.

But then again, they might not.

Here's why.

Firstly, the race in Avalon appears tight according to the NTV/Telelink poll.  Given the relatively high undecided  - 40% of respondents - it might look like pulling Andrews in front is within grasp. 

However, the undecideds are likely made up of a huge number of Fabe fans who are right now either uncomfortable in saying who they will vote for or who genuinely are hung up about whether or not to vote.

Those people are necessarily winnable for the Andrews cause.

But they have to be won.

And that leads us to the second point:  Andrews hasn't done anything to woo the undecideds. 

Thus far, Andrews has run a flame-thrower of a campaign built almost entirely on attacks straight at Manning.  Andrews has sucked the ABC tit harder than a cabinet minister looking for a new job in the upcoming shuffle.  He's not getting any milk out though because the Family Feud nipple spews only bile.  It's all negative, all the time.

The Family Feud gives nothing to which a voter can attach.

Take a listen to the Morning Show's candidate forum last Thursday and you'll see the point. [Part 1 and Part 2] 

Andrews spent way too much time slicing into Manning personally in a high pitched and grating way.  Who the heck could stand to listen to that for more than a few seconds?

The answer is no one and in the case of Morning Show listeners no one other than the handful of partisan loyalists and the masochists who just take anything political they can get regardless of what it is.

The rest of us would rather have been chained naked at Cape Spear with seagulls plucking out our eyeballs all the while enduring Slim Whitman's greatest hits at top volume rather than sit through one more second of Thursday's racket.

Take a look at Andrews' campaign website.  Look as hard as you want  and you will be hard pressed to find one single reason why anyone should vote for Andrews and the Liberal Party. There are plenty.  Andrews just isn't intent, apparently, on letting on what they are.

Third, if you look at the Manning stories, you have a hard time finding something to get really annoyed at.  In a case where the benchmarks were set by Tom Rideout and Walter Noel, Fabian Manning's handful of travel claims is hardly worth talking about. On top of that he paid back the secret bonus cash.

You don't have to like what Fabian did, but he is by far nowhere near the worst of the bunch, even if you take aside those facing criminal charges. Hey, it's not like even one of Andrews' staunchest supporters hasn't been known to change his mind completely on House of Assembly spending once the local Family head has pronounced on the matter.

How the heck will a Manning supporter react?

Even if Andrews wants to get indignant about Manning's spending, the story is still framed as what not to do.  The Connie vote is suppressed enough;  you can't suppress it more without risking post-traumatic stress disorder up and down the shore.  What's missing is the stuff to pull voters in Andrews' direction.

So far he and his team haven't shown any signs of figuring that out.

Now, their hammering might work.

The odds are against it.  No amount of wishing and hoping based on spewing and spraying has worked very well yet anywhere else.

-srbp-

Now will someone start reporting it correctly?

The ABC campaign is a Family Feud.

The Provincial Conservatives are sticking it to their federal brothers and sisters.

That's it.

That's all of it.

-srbp-

A tight race in Avalon? Dream on, baby

NTV and Telelink released a poll on Tuesday on the race in the federal riding of Avalon.

NTV touted it as showing a tight race, with the Conservative incumbent and Liberal challenger separated by only the margin of error for the poll.

Take a look at the undecided in the poll and you can forget about tight races.

39.9%

Yes, 40 percent of the people surveyed said they were undecided. That's 15 percentage points higher than Fabian Manning got and he's in the lead;  his nearest challenger - Liberal Scott Andrews - racked up something around 21%.

Then look at the satisfaction number for the incumbent, Fabian Manning.  Fifty-one percent said they were satisfied with his performance as member of parliament.

Then recall that Fabian Manning has been on the receiving end of a huge amount of attention as the only incumbent Conservative running in this election. The entire rhetorical weight of the Family Feud sat on his shoulders at one time and even though the Premier has backed off somewhat, there's evidently no love loss between the two.

And everyone knows that.

With all the anything but Conservative messaging out there, anyone who has made a clear choice shouldn't feel the least problem in telling the world that they intend to vote Liberal, New Democrat or even that they won't vote.

The large undecided vote in Avalon is most likely comprised of a large group of Manning voters who are simply uncomfortable with saying publicly what they could reasonably perceive as being an unpopular choice.  In some instances, they might even think that expressing their choice that might invite even more pressure against their guy than he's already felt.

Here's another clue:  when asked about the impact of the ABC campaign on their choice, people who selected a non-Conservative choice (i.e. the Liberals and New Democrats) overwhelmingly indicated (66%) that ABC had no impact on their choice.

That leads your humble e-scribbler to conclude that those Grit and Dipper votes were pretty much shored up any way.

Now it is entirely possible that the 40% undecided contains a huge number of people who just won't vote. That still likely works more in Manning's favour than against him.

As a last point, note that Telelink doesn't probe undecideds to determine any leanings or why they are undecided.  That means any detailed analysis  - including this post - is difficult and any comments are conjecture.

Still, you'd have to believe an awful lot of things to believe that the race in Avalon is actually tight.

-srbp-

What's update, Doc?

Conservative Doc O'Keefe, the St. John's mayor, wasn't trying to avoid politicizing a portion of the meeting at city hall on Monday night as your humble e-scribbler originally thought.

Turns out the loyal Connie and some of his fellow councilors  - also long-time Connies of the federal and provincial variety - were trying to make a political attack on the Liberal Party's Green Shift.

They were doing so by pretending to be concerned about the cost of the Liberals' environmental policy to taxpayers on things like public transit.

Yes, the boys who helped bring you the Coombs-Wells Memorial Money Pit, a.k.a St. John's Sports and Entertainment and the Mile One Stadium,  have developed a sudden, overwhelming concern for the taxpayer's bank balance.

Let's just take a second while you catch your breath and stop laughing.

Someone may have to get Nan a wee medicinal dram.  The shock of finding out Keith Coombs, Art Puddister and Doc O'Keefe don't want to piss her pension cheque down the nearest toilet is likely to give her the vapours.

According to O'Keefe, city staff figure the Green Shift will cost the city an extra $800,000 in 2012.

To put that in perspective, the annual city budget is currently over $175 million.  Over the past two years O'Keefe and his fellows at city hall boosted the subsidy to the Mile One money pit by more than double the extra 800K.

In making his nakedly partisan attack on the Green Shift, O'Keefe ignored the other aspects of the Liberal plan including federal cash for improvements to public infrastructure, public transit and energy efficiency for homes and buildings.

To really put this in perspective, O'Keefe is one of the crew that agitated for the government gasoline price fixing scheme currently screwing citizens of the province.

His sudden concern for taxpayers is a bit of a stretch.

Councilor Tom Hann - bless his heart - pointed that out to O'Keefe.  The former provincial Liberal candidate went a little gaga by dragging in the Connie Family feud but on the Green Shift part, Hann was spot on.

"I don't think we need to get into the political posturizing [sic]. I'm trying to keep this non-political," O'Keefe said.

Pull the other one, it's got bells on, Doc.

The surest way to cut down greenhouse gases in this city would be to find a way to silence the likes of Coombs, O'Keefe, Puddister and some of the others at city hall. 

Sadly, that isn't likely to happen any time soon, let alone soon enough.

-srbp-

 

 

Surreality Check, SJSMP version

Courtesy of CBC's St. John's Morning Show:

1.  Revanchism Redux.  NL First candidate Greg Byrne - who has been known to back a certain revanchist provincial first minister sans doubt - expresses amazement to a CBC reporter that people follow a certain other first minister unquestioningly.

Bryne apparently has never looked in a mirror.

Byrne is pushing many completely foolish ideas about Equalization and Confederation as part of his campaign.

2.  Meanwhile at Tammany on Gower.... Tom Hann, a St. John's city councilor who was once a federal Liberal riding president in St. John's South-Mount Pearl used a moment at St. John's city council to campaign for the Family Feud.

That's the Conservative family feud, for those who missed it.

Conservative mayor Doc O'Keefe attempted to cut Hann off with an admonition that council was trying to avoid the current federal campaign.  Something about trying not to bring politics into things, something clearly not motivating Conservative O'Keefe whatsoever in his comments.

Hann denied he was campaigning.

Then Hann stated his support for the campaign.

-srbp-

Nothing could be further from the truth

Hands up anyone who recalls a little spat between the parliamentary press gallery and the Prime Minister's Office over who gets to decide who asks questions during a prime ministerial newser?

Anyone?

Didn't think so.

One of the things Stephen Harper can add to his list of accomplishments is taking the cajones from reporters in the Ottawa press gallery.

The crowd that prided themselves on supposedly liking their meat raw and freshly stripped from the hide of an unsuspecting politician are now dutifully chowing down on whatever scraps their PMO handlers toss them.

Like the whole Daddy Steve series of photo opportunities.

Or the photo gracing the front online page of the Globe this nearly last weekend of the campaign.

It shows the PM in front of a couple of signs held aloft by what appear to be adolescent women.

The signs read "I have a crush on Harper".

Does this not strike anyone as bizarre, in the extreme?

Let's leave aside for a moment the fact the young women appear to be holding the signs carefully so that the photographer they are evidently aware of cannot catch their faces.

When was the last time you can recall a political leader stirring the loins of young women or men in this country spontaneously?

Anyone?

Exactly.  And in this instance, it is clearly nothing more than an organized event, a complete contrivance.

The Conservative Party campaign is so hermetically sealed that a young woman from a television show with her credentials intact is hustled from the room and slapped in handcuffs.  There are many media events where the Prime Minister simply does not take questions.This is not an environment for spontaneity or sarcastic protests. 

Nope.

These sign holders - with their perfect cut out letters and oddly matching design layout - were very likely officially approved participants in the photo op.

What we are looking at here is a fabrication.

They are like the stories of Harper at his high school reunion or with a family, especially babies.

They are to news coverage what those e-mails abut Viagra and some Nigerian bank official with bags of American cash are to your e-mail inbox:

Spam.

However, the taming the gallery goes considerably further than just the odd stunt photo passing as something real. People die from tainted meat.  The agriculture minister discusses the issue on a conference call with government officials and places the handling of the crisis in both a partisan (wrong enough) and a personally partisan context (even wronger).

Reporters pen apologias that make the PMO press wranglers drool in envy, they could never have written stuff that aped sincerity so well.  News rooms, we are told, are places of dark humour.  Just like cabinet ministers' offices. Reporters and editors all deal with such weighty, difficult issues on a daily basis they resort to gallows humour to help them get through.  We must forgive Gerry Ritz for he is just human like the rest of us. 

Apparently, unlike Wayne Easter or the 17 dead and their families who are not part of the circle of people hefting the weight of the world on their shoulders..

And that young woman, slapped in cuffs?  She was from the entertainment side of things and after all, it was - as one report called it - a lighter moment on the tour.  No sarcasm in sight on that one, either.

The Conservatives run television ads which contain false information.  Not a peep of comment, certainly not the torrent with which it should be met when any political party resorts to blatant falsehood as a core part of its campaign.

Then there's the puffin poop.  The smudge of guano vanishes and news reporters trumpet the very wise apology offered by the campaign and wag fingers at the naughty staffers who supposedly slipped off the leash.

In such a tightly control campaign?  Gimme a break.

And the vicious personal attack site on which the guano was now gone?  Absolutely intact and free to continue presenting its officially sanction tripe, ignored by virtually all of the news media.  Its message  - a savage attack on a national party leader's character - survived the contrived apology built around fake bird crap.

The lightweight, the superficial reporting of this election campaign strikes all media forms, public and private. The early gaffes by the Conservative party and its multi-million dollar war room went largely unreported except in a couple of small corners, while the problems in the Liberal campaign, both real and many more imaginary, were front page news.  They continue to be. Whether its the news spaces or the blog spaces, there's an unmistakable tone to the coverage and that tone is light.

It seems to go a bit beyond the normal advantage that goes with incumbency.  There seems to be a certain active collaboration, an apparent willful blindness to the obvious on the part of many news outlets.

That likely sounds awfully familiar to voters in Newfoundland and Labrador.

They saw just Friday past the announcement of yet another investigation into computer security in the provincial government's system; reported straight up with no context,  like say the last time a security breach occurred and the release was turned into its own form of luncheon meat, prepackaged for easier eating by overworked reporters.

Or the "historic" "deal" with the Labrador Innu on Churchill Falls and the Lower Churchill:

CBC:  Instead of taking a direct ownership position, though, the Innu Nation has elected to take an equivalent royalty, which will amount to five per cent of net project revenue.

Globe:  The Innu will get royalties from the new project and, as part of the same agreement announced Friday, will receive millions in compensation for losses suffered in the 1960s when the Upper Churchill project flooded their lands. They also have secured varying rights to 27,000 square miles of land, with legal title to about one-fifth of that.

The same sort of thing is in included in other national and local coverage.

A 20 minute read of the actual agreement shows something else. A trip to the memory hole turns up something else on top of that.

Even old stuff, stuff that long ago was shown to be distorted, misleading and in some aspects downright false reappears in something purporting to be a "reality" check.

The quiet demise of the Family Feud goes unnoticed, even though early reports talked it up as the hottest thing this side of Sarah Palin.

If the polls hold and the Conservatives are re-elected with a strengthened minority or even a majority, odds are that more of the surreal coverage Canadians have seen during the campaign will be commonplace. That's certainly been the case in this neck of the woods under a Provincial Conservative government.

There will undoubtedly be times when it comes to news coverage that Canadians will find themselves falling back on a line that - odds are  - the federal Conservative leader will be using quite a bit, if the pattern holds: 

Nothing could be further from the truth.

-srbp-

Maybe next time we can make s'mores

Walter Noel is becoming something of a legend as a political pyromaniac.

He's seems intent on constantly setting fire to himself or, to be accurate, the smoldering remains of his political reputation.

His staunch defense of spending his constituency cash on gifts of perfume, crystal and clothing serves as gasoline which Noel insists on pouring over himself throughout this campaign.

He'll happily splash anyone else within reach, as well, as he did this week with both his opponent Jack Harris and his fellow Liberal candidate Judy Foote. Those two have been able to douse any fires with simple, straightforward explanations. 

The problem for Noel - and the flamethrower he brings to his self-roasting  - is his repeated excuse that his spending was within the rules and approved by the "highest officials of the House of Assembly."

Sure, Walter. 

We already know the "rules" were all but non-existent and one of those "highest" officials is currently facing criminal charges.

Noel has even gone so far as to claim his bone-headed actions in defended the misspending are brave or some such bit of silliness.

Well, the flames were barely fading from his latest round of bravery when the Telegram dutifully reminded everyone in the Saturday edition that Noel managed to blow an entire year's worth of public money in a single six month spree between April and October 2003. The genesis of this latest story was a news release Noel issued defending himself on the whole issue which itself resulted from some other media story generated by yet another brave defence by Noel

Amazing.

Noel's top expense that year was advertising: $3,261. He spent nearly $2,950 on over 50 restaurant and food claims - an average of about two per week. Brochures cost Noel just over $2,000; donations, nearly $1,800 more. Noel was also reimbursed for $1,367 in alcohol-only purchases at liquor stores.

Bear in mind that at the time Noel was a provincial cabinet minister with access to another sizeable expense account. We can only wait for the juicy revelations that come from the Telegram's investigation of that spending as well.

In itself, the spending is something voters might possibly have been able to get over in time.  Noel's repeated use of what amounts to easily refutable excuses - the "highest officials" crap - calls into question his judgment.

And his vehemence doesn't just make one a little uncomfortable. 

Coupled with his ludicrous plan to study building a tunnel to Bell Island, his unsubstantiated claims about his part in the 2004/05 offshore transfer deal, his pseudo-separatist dalliances, and his ranting about the "socialist" hordes in the New Democratic Party and their overspending way, his repeated defence of his own overspending suggests Noel is completely out of touch with anything vaguely resembling reality, political or otherwise.

Three things follow from all this:

First, the Liberal Party in Newfoundland and Labrador needs to tighten up its candidate vetting process and candidate selection process.  Big time.

Second, Noel's political future is deader than dead to the point that his vote count in this federal election might wind up being barely above his 1974 first effort.  Incidentally, that's when he ran on behalf of the "socialist" hordes.

Third,  Noel's only political value to this race - and it is sad to see it happen - is to give the only bit of light entertainment to a race otherwise made boring now that Danny Williams has abandoned his Family Feud campaign entirely.

If Noel wants to keep setting his own political ass on fire, there's not much any of us can do except sit back and shake our heads.

Oh, yes.

And maybe next time we can make s'mores.

That's about the only way Noel's candidacy can be said to have contributed anything to the current election.

-srbp-

The problem with being known, ABC version

1.  MUN political science professor Alex Marland, a former comms director in the Williams administration, pointed out to voice of the cabinet minister that the majority of Canadians aren't paying any attention to the Family Feud.

2.  Meanwhile, the Premier is still waiting for answers from the Liberals and Conservatives to his begging letter to Ottawa. Williams wanted a response by September 26 to his eight page list of cash demands from the federal government.  So far, Jack Layton is the only federal leader to reply.  Elizabeth May of the Green Party didn't get a letter.

Maybe there's a problem with being known.

-srbp-

"A" but "C" except before seal

Danny Williams may like to claim Stephen Harper is a kitten-eating lizard from outer space but when push came to shove last week, Williams gave up the chance to campaign against a key Harper minister in Nova Scotia.

Williams chief publicity agent responded via Blackberry (that's pretty much how she deals with everyone, apparently) to a Green Party request telling them that Williams wouldn't campaign with Elizabeth May against Peter MacKay "in large part due" to the Green Party stance on the seal hunt.

Huh? What about getting rid of Stephen Harper? What about spreading the word about how Steve and his minions will destroy the country? 

Geez, from the amount of time spent discussing this ABC Family Feud thingy you'd believe it trumped just about anything else.

Apparently, not.

Apparently, seal-bashing is that much more important than opposing pure evil. 

Or largely more important.

Or maybe the real reason is less about seals and more about the politics of the whole Family Feud.

Firstly, the ABC campaign is really just a family affair;  it's a gripe one bunch of Conservatives have about another bunch.

Secondly, it's a negative thing.  As such, the rhetoric will centre on why people should vote against one federal party but there is absolutely nothing in it to explain what people should vote for.

Thirdly, and related to that, Danny Williams would have a hard time justifying spending time on the ground campaigning for one federal candidate against another federal candidate.  There's an unwritten rule in Canadian politics that federal politicians and parties don't inject themselves directly in a federal campaign and vice versa.  If Danny Williams takes to the campaign trail actively working against a federal party, he'd be inviting retaliation the next time he goes to the polls.

That's no small issue, especially in a small province like Newfoundland and Labrador. Having screwed over the federal Liberals and now the federal Conservatives, Williams would be running a huge political gamble that they wouldn't look for some payback in 2011 or whenever Williams calls a vote again.

And make no mistake:  it wouldn't be about punishing either the province as a whole or the party Williams leads. Any intervention by federal parties would every bit as personal as Williams' attacks.  There's a good reason why Williams pulled back from focusing on Fabian Manning, the only incumbent Conservative and the one most likely to hang on to his seat.

Fourthly, the unwillingness to campaign actively for a candidate can be traced back to the polls. Initial polls show that after two years of ABC rhetoric 30-odd percent of voters in Newfoundland and Labrador intend to vote for the federal Conservatives in this election.

As much as some people would like you to believe the two parties are completely different, they aren't.  That 30-odd percent is entirely made up of the core that in provincial elections votes with the Provincial Conservatives.  Depending on which poll you want to look at, that percentage makes up a half or three quarters of Williams' core vote. If those people are immune to his ministrations at the outset, the only way to suppress them or swing them would be with a campaign that ultimately would have runs the risk of opening up severe cracks within Williams' own party.

The federal Conservatives have already pressed on that sore spot several times.  Williams himself gave some credence to it when he responded to a claim by Loyola Hearn about fissures in the provincial Tory caucus by demanding loyalty declarations from his 43 caucus mates.  Other politicians would have sloughed off the Hearn claim.  Williams' actions left the clear impression there was a concern over caucus solidarity.

Think about it for a second. Danny Williams already redefined the objectives for his ABC campaign and he did so - fairly obviously - in the face of public opinion polls that shows he likely won't even be able to deliver a goose egg to the Conservatives in his own province, as he consistently used to claim as the goal.  If he is unlikely to deliver a goose egg in his own province, any effort to unseat incumbent Conservatives elsewhere in the country would only serve to weaken his political position later on. Better to haul back now than have to face the jibes and taunts later on.

And look, fifthly, it's not like Williams ever considered Elizabeth May important enough to bother with before.  She may be a national party leader in the leaders' debate but Danny didn't send her a begging letter.  Odds were against him hitting the doorsteps on her behalf now.

If not of that was persuasive, there's a sixth good reason why Danny Williams won't be spending much time on the hustings outside Newfoundland and Labrador. There are major issues on the public agenda right now in Newfoundland and Labrador. Huge ones.  Ones that typically turn up at the top of polls about what weighs on voters' minds.  There is simply no political value for Danny Williams to spend four or five weeks knocking doors and giving speeches across the country when the job he was elected to door appears to be left untended. As much as it might be possible to run the place and campaign simultaneously, the public perception  - especially in light of the polls and the likelihood of success - make that an even more risky venture than any of the others alone.

Put it together in a package and the whole idea of an active ABC campaign just becomes too dangerous a political proposition.

So Danny won't help Elizabeth May, in large part due to the seal hunt.

If that helps you sleep at night, go ahead and believe it.

-srbp-

Family Feud, world of wonder version

Only two short years ago, Provincial Conservatives were lining up to get their picture taken with a Conservative brother running for re-election for what turned out to be the last time.

This ad - paid for by the federal Conservatives - appeared in the Telegram in early December 2005.

The guy seated on the far right of the picture is Loyola Sullivan, the finance minister at the time.  He quit federal politics not long after this picture only to take up a job with the federal Conservatives.

The guy behind him is former speaker Harvey Hodder.  He retired before the 2007 provincial election.

Immediately to Loyola Hearn's right is Sheila Osborne, part of the Osborne-Ridgley political machine.

The guy standing right behind Loyola Hearn - with that great big grin on his face - is Bob Ridgley, brother of Sheila. You will recall him as the Conservative who supported Belinda Stronach for leader even though, by his own words, he thought she was "shallow as a saucer".

Bob is now Danny Williams' parliamentary assistant.

The other two guys are - left to right - Shawn Skinner and Dave Denine. Skinner is the provincial human resources cabinet minister and Denine is looking after municipal affairs.

You'll recall Skinner was taken to the woodshed by Danny Williams for going off the ABC message track.  He was made to apologize publicly for his transgression.

Denine's had a few problems of his own, but never for doing something that went against orders from the top.

Interesting picture that, if only because it makes you wonder when they line up behind a candidate if they really do it out of personal choice or if they have been directed by some authority or other.

Makes you wonder that if they lend you support do they expect a quid pro quo, a back scratch in return.

Makes you wonder what happens if you don't do what they (or the authority doing the directing) wants.

Of course, it makes you wonder too if one of these is Loyola's mole.

-srbp-