Latest Poll: Cons with 10 point lead

[Jersay]

SES Research May 9, 2006 PDF

Con 38

Lib 28

NDP 19

Bloc 9

Green 6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/40th_Canadian_federal_election#Opinion_Polls

So even with all the good things, that the COns have done :roll: they only have a 10 point lead. And with homosexuality issues and abortion issues popping up from the hard-core people who support them, because they can silence their Mps but not their core supporters, this should decline if these groups even more vocal.

And then we will all be happy under a NDP government. And if not, off to re-education camp.

 

[LittleRunningGag]

RE: Latest Poll: Cons wit

So even with all the good things, that the COns have done Rolling Eyes they only have a 10 point lead. And with homosexuality issues and abortion issues popping up from the hard-core people who support them, because they can silence their Mps but not their core supporters, this should decline if these groups even more vocal.

The same-sex mariage thing has been a serious part of their platform since before the election. They started off talking about it during the election, and they started off their term in office talking about it. How people can vote for that party is beyond me.

Whats worst is that people are going to be shocked and surprised when they propose a do-over on that vote. :roll:

 

[Jersay]

I think it would kill a lot of support for them since 66% of Canadians in a poll said they didn't want the issue reopened.

 

[bluealberta]

Heard on the news Wednesday a Decima Poll that showed the CPC at 40%, Libs at 28%, NDP......who cares.

Face it, folks, Harper is doing a fine job of doing what he said he would do. No hidden agenda, and people are actually finally starting to realize that all that crap was just left wing lies.

The best is yet to come, Harper majority next election.

 

[FiveParadox]

I don't think it's quite time to be heralding in a new era under the Conservative Party of Canada yet. Today, outside Parliament Hill, there was a demonstration of religious protesters, and Members of Parliament and Senators from the Conservative Party of Canada, to introduce legislation that would throw the House of Commons into another dreaded debate on the issue of restricting abortion.

Furthermore, the Senate now has legislation before it, which would restore the income tax reductions instituted by the previous Government of Canada¹ which, if passed, would quite likely receive the support of a majority in the Commons (while the Senate cannot introduce legislation that would appropriate or raise funds, there is historic precedent for the Senate to legislate to decrease funds).

Given the above, I would suggest that the Conservatives have not yet "made it over" the mountain to a majority at this time. However, I have been surprised, in a good way, that they have not acted in the extremes in which I had feared they would (to this point, at least).²

:!: Revision : (1) Corrected a formatting error. (2) Added a paragraph.

 

[JonB2004]

RE: Latest Poll: Cons wit

Harper does have a secret agenda, but he's saving it for when he has a majority government.

And as for Harper having a majority government. I can't wait for him to f*ck up Canada like Mulroney so we left-wingers can tell you right-wingers..........

I TOLD YOU SO!!!

 

[Grit86]

Face it, folks, Harper is doing a fine job of doing what he said he would do. No hidden agenda, and people are actually finally starting to realize that all that crap was just left wing lies.

I actually agree with you on this one.

What Paul Martin did during the campaign was very similar to what George Bush and his Republican cronies have been doing during their entire administration: demonizing the other party with scare-tactics and lies.

It's ironic that Martin was portraying himself as some kind of defender for minorities and diversity, since he was basically trying to mobilize dissent towards the Tories. Friggin' hypocrite.

 

[bluealberta]

Re: RE: Latest Poll: Cons with 10 point lead

I don't think it's quite time to be heralding in a new era under the Conservative Party of Canada yet. Today, outside Parliament Hill, there was a demonstration of religious protesters, and Members of Parliament and Senators from the Conservative Party of Canada, to introduce legislation that would throw the House of Commons into another dreaded debate on the issue of restricting abortion.

Furthermore, the Senate now has legislation before it, which would restore the income tax reductions instituted by the previous Government of Canada which, if passed, would quite likely receive the support of a majority in the Commons (while the Senate cannot introduce legislation that would appropriate or raise funds, there is historic precedent for the Senate to legislate to decrease funds).

I had not heard about the abortion thing. I am in agreement with Harper, that the government should not bring in legislation to restrict abortion.

But...........and I would like a serious answer.........

Should abortion be used as a birth control method? Before anyone jumps down my throat, I am not talking about a first time abortion, I think that no restrictions should be placed on any first time abortion. However, at what point does the government (you and me) quit paying for repeat abortions for the same individual? This does happen, and I have some mixed feelings about it. On one hand, I do not think we should restrict abortion, but on the other hand, I think we should limit the number of abortions for one individual. I will give anyone a break and an opportunity to correct a bad decision, or other cause of pregnancy, but should we pay for repeats?

 

[Grit86]

Re: RE: Latest Poll: Cons with 10 point lead

I don't think it's quite time to be heralding in a new era under the Conservative Party of Canada yet. Today, outside Parliament Hill, there was a demonstration of religious protesters, and Members of Parliament and Senators from the Conservative Party of Canada, to introduce legislation that would throw the House of Commons into another dreaded debate on the issue of restricting abortion.

Furthermore, the Senate now has legislation before it, which would restore the income tax reductions instituted by the previous Government of Canada which, if passed, would quite likely receive the support of a majority in the Commons (while the Senate cannot introduce legislation that would appropriate or raise funds, there is historic precedent for the Senate to legislate to decrease funds).

I had not heard about the abortion thing. I am in agreement with Harper, that the government should not bring in legislation to restrict abortion.

But...........and I would like a serious answer.........

Should abortion be used as a birth control method? Before anyone jumps down my throat, I am not talking about a first time abortion, I think that no restrictions should be placed on any first time abortion. However, at what point does the government (you and me) quit paying for repeat abortions for the same individual? This does happen, and I have some mixed feelings about it. On one hand, I do not think we should restrict abortion, but on the other hand, I think we should limit the number of abortions for one individual. I will give anyone a break and an opportunity to correct a bad decision, or other cause of pregnancy, but should we pay for repeats?

The government has no business to restrict abortion...period.

 

[bluealberta]

Re: RE: Latest Poll: Cons with 10 point lead

I don't think it's quite time to be heralding in a new era under the Conservative Party of Canada yet. Today, outside Parliament Hill, there was a demonstration of religious protesters, and Members of Parliament and Senators from the Conservative Party of Canada, to introduce legislation that would throw the House of Commons into another dreaded debate on the issue of restricting abortion.

Furthermore, the Senate now has legislation before it, which would restore the income tax reductions instituted by the previous Government of Canada which, if passed, would quite likely receive the support of a majority in the Commons (while the Senate cannot introduce legislation that would appropriate or raise funds, there is historic precedent for the Senate to legislate to decrease funds).

I had not heard about the abortion thing. I am in agreement with Harper, that the government should not bring in legislation to restrict abortion.

But...........and I would like a serious answer.........

Should abortion be used as a birth control method? Before anyone jumps down my throat, I am not talking about a first time abortion, I think that no restrictions should be placed on any first time abortion. However, at what point does the government (you and me) quit paying for repeat abortions for the same individual? This does happen, and I have some mixed feelings about it. On one hand, I do not think we should restrict abortion, but on the other hand, I think we should limit the number of abortions for one individual. I will give anyone a break and an opportunity to correct a bad decision, or other cause of pregnancy, but should we pay for repeats?

The government has no business to restrict abortion...period.

Well, hell, that's pretty definite. Okay, one in the absolutely no restrictions column.

 

[#juan]

If the Cons get an election before

the Libs elect a new leader, they might just get a small majority. I doubt it though, because I don't think the people want another election just yet. The party seen to cause another election will likely suffer at the polls.

Polls are also showing that the people don't unanimously support the mission in Afghanistan. People are not all happy about the softwood lunber deal. There are some issues that Harper has to deal with.

 

[FiveParadox]

Re: RE: Latest Poll: Cons with 10 point lead

Should abortion be used as a birth control method? Before anyone jumps down my throat, I am not talking about a first time abortion, I think that no restrictions should be placed on any first time abortion. However, at what point does the government (you and me) quit paying for repeat abortions for the same individual? This does happen, and I have some mixed feelings about it. On one hand, I do not think we should restrict abortion, but on the other hand, I think we should limit the number of abortions for one individual. I will give anyone a break and an opportunity to correct a bad decision, or other cause of pregnancy, but should we pay for repeats?

I am quite reluctant to enter into a debate on this topic, since it can often become heated, quite quickly, and without warning. However, with trepidation, I would offer a few comments on this subject: No, I do not think that abortion should be used as a method of birth control. However, for the Crown to attempt to ascertain which occurrences of pregnancy are legitimate accidents through no fault of the mother, and which were negligence on the part of the same, would be stepping into an authority under which I don't think that the Government of Canada, or any of its component parts, should be entering.

I would suggest that open access to abortion is the only method which respects everyone's rights and freedoms in relation to this issue: Those who agree with the idea of abortion can exercise a freedom of choice, or sorts, in using abortion where necessary; those who have conscientious objections, whether they be based in religion or otherwise, can have their rights respected by not requesting abortions. Canada is in the odd position of not having any in-force legislation pertaining to abortion, period, after the Supreme Court of Canada struck the related provisions from An Act respecting the Criminal Law (or, the Criminal Code of Canada), and I think that it would spell out certain disaster for the Conservative Party of Canada, were abortion legislation to come from the Government side of the House — whether or not it is officially endorsed by the Thirty-ninth Ministry.

 

[bluealberta]

Yeah, I hear you Five. Your points are exactly why this is such a hard subject for our politicians. I think that if the ordinary citizen, in a lot of cases, has mixed feelings, how do the parliamentarians deal with this.

Of course there are those on the far edges of this issue, those who say that there should be no abortions (which I totally disagree with), and those who should say there should be no limits (which I totally disagree with as well).

I am just not sure in a publicly funded health care service that every procedure all the time should be paid for. Especially on the issue of abortion. Surely there has to be a compromise somewhere between the none at all crowd and the any time, all the time crowd.

I also wish to make it clear that any abortion required due to rape or incest, to name two potential causes of pregnancy, should be performed if it is the wish of the individual. Just so we are clear on that issue.

 

[Grit86]

Well, I doubt abortions will ever reach epidemic proportions. I really don't think there's any worry about the coasts breaking the system or whatnot.

 

[Finder]

I think polls are extrmely usful. Yet if we were to take these poll figurers, it is easy to see progressive Canadians out number conservative Canadians, almost 3-1

 

[Kreskin]

Yeah, I hear you Five. Your points are exactly why this is such a hard subject for our politicians. I think that if the ordinary citizen, in a lot of cases, has mixed feelings, how do the parliamentarians deal with this.

Of course there are those on the far edges of this issue, those who say that there should be no abortions (which I totally disagree with), and those who should say there should be no limits (which I totally disagree with as well).

I am just not sure in a publicly funded health care service that every procedure all the time should be paid for. Especially on the issue of abortion. Surely there has to be a compromise somewhere between the none at all crowd and the any time, all the time crowd.

I also wish to make it clear that any abortion required due to rape or incest, to name two potential causes of pregnancy, should be performed if it is the wish of the individual. Just so we are clear on that issue.

The difficulty with legislating around abortion due to rape etc is who determines if a rape occured? It takes longer than the gestation period just to get a hearing in court.

Overall I do respect your position. It isn't one of forcing people to give birth, as the hardline right would like, but puts a limit on public resources provided to those who are out of control.