not tell us how we are supposed to react or predict how we will react ... and worse yet, tell an elected official how he should reacted based on polls that haven't been taken
This reaction, based on Nanos advising Harper to act swiftly on Lukiwski, to counter-act any potential damage to the Conservative brand:
"The prime minister needs to deal with this issue directly and try to put it behind him as soon as possible," Nanos said. "I think the prime minister has to personally say, 'I don't accept these comments, I repudiate them and it's not part of the party or the government or where its mind is at on a lot of these issues right now."
"If the Prime Minister is not forthright and he doesn't take things head on, I think the opposition is going to pounce. If he deals with this swiftly and directly, then there's not going to be a lot to poke at."
The Nanos recommendation is based on this:
Nanos said mainstream Canadians have been uncomfortable with social conservative attitudes on issues like sexual orientation.
Nanos also said that this issue wouldn't hurt the Conservatives with their base, but it could raise red flags with target voters. Our little BT friend, who immediately lumps Nanos into the communist conspiracy to usurp the Conservatives, fails to see the statements for what they are- good advice. All Nanos is saying here, based on his research, there is a latent unease with the Conservatives, this story feeds a negative impression, which could cost him with the electorate.
Funny, I don't remember any outrage when Nanos suggested possible Liberal erosion because of the abstaining strategy. No, then Nanos was bang on I'm sure, feel free to tell us "how we might react".
Anyways, in the end, Harper did nothing.