Vision vs Division

I would classify the Ignatieff speech framing as shrewd. While the immediate focus centers around the fact the Liberals have changed their parliamentary strategy, I was struck by the themes Ignatieff developed that look to be the cornerstone of any coming campaign.

The big question, we hear over and over to justify an election- what's the ballot question? Interestingly, there was no ballot question last year, but Stephen Harper's relentless repetitive machine created one and it quickly became acceptable as cause. Ignatieff used a similar tactic today, and it was echoed by all his surrogates. The Liberal justification will be a question of Canada's future.

It is VERY smart for Ignatieff to set a voluntary benchmark, in this case 2017, our 150th anniversary. I've argued before about "5 year plans" and such, this idea fulfills the need to plot a course for the future. In doing so, the Liberals position themselves as the party with a VISION, a characterization that can't be understated, as Canadians wonder about future prosperity. This thrust also allows for a very strong contrast with the Conservatives, who prefer to manage, rather than inspire or set ambitious goals. The Liberals have stepped on the HOPE messaging, without an overt comparison, but it has the potential to appeal in the same way, obvious non-similarities ASIDE. So long as keep repeating ad nauseum, this ballot question will come into focus, it will be our theme.

Ignatieff kept referring to "four years" when he spoke about the Conservatives. I don't think this was by accident, the Liberals are clearly trying to blunt the recent election argument by pulling back and making this a verdict on a much longer tenure in government. Ignatieff used the words often, and they were sprinkled throughout the speech. The intent was obvious, and again it was shrewd.

Ignatieff didn't lay out a platform in this speech, but there is no question he hinted at the policies Liberals will present to the country. Quite passionate on Canadians abroad, aborginal issues, technological advances and innovation in the name of reshaping our economy, etc, etc. Again, not down to the nuts and bolts just yet, but plenty to send signals and give the Liberals some edges.

I had high expectations that this week would turn out to be a good one for the Liberal Party. With the summer lull ended, the boring narratives can fade, if the Liberals use this caucus retreat to change the channel and present strength. What we see, the Liberals have actually been quite busy this summer preparing the ground. A massive ad buy is in the can and ready to go, which speaks to a newfound prowess. We just announced that party membership has exceeded the extremely ambitious 100000 benchmark, announced only a few months ago. A sense that the majority of candidates are almost in place, associations and wings ready. Upbeat MP's, an upbeat leader, coffers full and still filling, it all congeals to give a pretty strong presentation. It's light years ahead of anything I've seen under the Liberal banner since I joined this party.

I think we've set a great tone heading into the fall session. Vision vs division.

Pats On The Head

It's nice to see some "blowback" directed Harper's way over what amounts to an obnoxious Senate appointment in Jacques Demers. Such an overt attempt to curry favor with Quebecers is made even more offensive when you digest Demers "qualifications". It's nice to see the Quebec media pointing a critical eye:

So, to make the case for Senate reform, Harper settled for demonstrating that under the present system, a prime minister can appoint a human being who might not be able to read well enough to understand what he'll be voting on.

With admirable candour, Jacques Demers, who dropped out of school after Grade 8 and was functionally illiterate until four years ago, admitted that he doesn't follow politics and knew nothing about his new job...

But Harper's appointment of Demers, and the latter's acceptance of it, might have backfired against both.

A common reaction to the news in this province was stunned, incredulous silence, followed by "You're kidding," and then some variation on: "Don't get me wrong, I think Jacques Demers is a hell of a guy - but a senator? A Conservative senator?"

Such is the affection for Demers that commentators generally criticized Harper for making the appointment, but not Demers for accepting it. It was as though Demers was too naïve and politically inexperienced to realize that Harper was using him.

But editorial cartoons weren't so kind, poking fun at Demers' former illiteracy. An especially cruel one in Le Devoir showed him holding a "guide for the perfect Canadian senator" open and upside down, while the Canadiens' goggle-eyed mascot Youppi exclaimed: "Wow! Does this mean I have a chance of being named a senator?"

I applaud Jacques Demers for being so open about his literacy struggles and making a valiant attempt to overcome. It's for that reason that I kept my concerns on this issue private up until now. However, when you factor in Demers quotes about having to now start following federal politics, you are left with an overall impression of a man simply not qualified to sit in the Senate. Not only will Demers not be able to read government bills and presentations, he won't know what the hell they're on about anyways. Not even the most tertiary of understanding, Demers admits to being oblivious to the issues that will dominate his days. Harper said he wanted Senators that will support his agenda, but apparently Demers doesn't even know what the agenda is. Baffling.

This was always an overt pandering exercise, but Harper has been too cute by half here. Quebecers aren't sheep, and they know well when politicians are attempting to manipulate them for partisan gain. For many reasons, this appointment should blow up in Harper's face. It demonstrates just how little respect he has for Quebecers, how little sophistication he sees.

As an aside, the Canadiens blow bad and Mike Komisarek should really shine in a Maple Leafs uniform.

Gentle Jabs

Great quote by Ignatieff today, taking a gentle jab at the media disconnect:

"I'm surprised to see you all, you disappeared on me this summer"

While Ignatieff logged tens of thousands of miles in 8 provinces and terrorities this summer, he was criticized by sedentary scribes for not getting "out there". Most people didn't know this, because nobody bothered to tell them. Instead, it was much more productive to lazily pen from a desk in Ottawa a narrative, that was outdated about a week after it started. I found this dynamic most telling when a Liberal leader, for the first time in YEARS, did an extensive tour in the Bloc heartland. I could think of multiple angles from which to write a piece, what that meant in terms of changing dynamics and offensive thinking, but alas no mention from the same press corp that criticized.

Anyways, it's nice to see everybody back and invigorated for the fall season. There's one irrefutable fact, judging by the "coverage" this summer, the critics took a hell of a lot more time "off" than the one being critiqued.

Music To My Ears

And, I'm sure I'm not alone:

With that in mind, the Liberals are expected to start trying to regain some traction with a massive ad campaign — with a rumoured price tag of $2-million — after Labour Day. Insiders say the campaign is aimed at helping voters, for whom Mr. Ignatieff remains somewhat of a cipher, to get to know the leader and what he stands for.

According to Mr. Goodale, Liberals hope to use the fall to expand on the theme that — unlike Harper's “petty partisan negativity” — Mr. Ignatieff has an inspirational dream of turning Canadians into the best educated, healthiest, most productive, innovative and entrepreneurial people “on the face of the earth” by 2017, the 150th anniversary of Confederation.

That's a sizeable chunk of change, and it speaks to a party that it's in relatively good shape. I like the optics of this ad buy, because it demonstrates to all that the Liberals are no longer broke and at a decided disadvantage- we have the capacity to, and can present our own message. This ad campaign projects confidence, a sideline to the themes, it translates to a party that actually looks ready.

Those secondary optics aside, it's nice to see that the decision has been made to be proactive in defining Ignatieff. There's no question his image has been hurt of late, but he's still largely a blank slate, we need to fill in some of the void with our own narrative.

Lot of talk about regaining "traction", the timing of this effort couldn't be better. On top of that, a positive presentation is a nice contrast to the gutter the Conservatives thrive on. Good stuff.

If You Say So

The Prime Minister, on putting country ahead of his own self interest:

"My main preoccupation is not my personal image, but rather the country's higher interests.”

Truth Hurts

If former Reform MP Myron Thompson happens by, might I recommend you keep the defibrillator handy while viewing:




All hail the king:

New Angus Reid Poll

The latest AR poll shows the Conservatives opening up a minor lead over the Liberals:

The survey conducted Aug. 25 and 26, shows that 34 per cent of decided voters - up 1 percentage point from July - would vote for the Conservatives compared to 30 per cent for the Liberals, down 4 percentage points since July. The NDP is third with 18 per cent, up 2 percentage points, followed by the Greens with nine per cent or up 2 points and the Bloc Québécois with eight per cent or down 2 points. The Greens are leading the BQ for the first time this year.

It's been month since the last AR poll, so slight movement but something to consider. Of note, their poll two weeks prior had shown a 3% Con lead, prior to that a 6% lead. Probably the most telling data, that explains the change:

Harper's personal popularity has taken off with 27 per cent of Canadians preferring him as prime minister compared to 17 per cent for Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff. Layton is third with 12 per cent. In vote rich Ontario Harper leads Ignatieff by 13 points.

"Taken off" doesn't quite translate, since Harper is basically where he's always been of late. What is different, Ignatieff has tailed off. Ignatieff has taken a pounding in the press of late, which explains his downward trend. As well, Ignatieff's momentum score has steadly worsened since the "honeymoon". With the summer lull over, the hope is that Ignatieff can re-establish himself. These numbers suggest he needs to, Ignatieff is no longer the draw he was a few months ago.

In Ontario, a statistical tie, Liberals 37%, Conservatives 35%, Greens 15%, NDP 13%. The last AR poll gave the Liberals a six point edge. Again, Ignatieff trails Harper badly in Ontario, whereas he was tied or better in previous samples. It does appear, taking all the polls into consideration, that the Liberal lead in Ontario has virtually vanished. Statistical ties won't do it for the Liberals, if they have any hope in an election. This said, the potential is there to regain a wide lead, the campaign will obviously determine.

In Quebec, Liberals and Bloc tied at 33%, Conservatives at 16%. Last poll the Bloc had a 38% to 34% lead, Conservatives at 13%. A relatively good result for the Liberals here, the minor erosion we've seen elsewhere isn't evident.

With the NDP placing fourth in Ontario, one might wonder why they've gained nationally. AR gives the NDP a very strong results in high MOE regions, second in Atlantic Canada and British Columbia.

Here's what the general vibe and polls tell me. The Liberals are essentially entering the fall session stone cold, with little identity or messaging that's attractive. Ignatieff needs traction (which I suspect he will get, simply as a function of Parliamentary realities) and "flesh" that changes this developing negative narrative. Not panic, but pro-active.

Sound Strategy

Predictable reaction coming from the usual sources, as the Liberals telegraph their fall strategy. That irrelevance aside, because a general yawn was heard throughout the land, I agree with the direction wholeheartedly. One caveat, I do have a concern with being so public about the after EI part, rarely do parties lay out scenarios so overtly. That said, the thought process is a very "adult" approach.

Since this EI panel began, I've never really seen it as an election trigger, despite securing this opposition day. Over the last few months, it's become increasingly clear that Canadians don't see it as one either- there is not a vocal groundswell. A pretty sketchy proposition for the Liberals to use this debate as the catalyst for an election. Because of this fairly objective fact, it's nice to see us redirecting focus away.

To the wider point, coming off a summer break and then suddenly thrusting the country into an election probably isn't an example of "maximizing your potential". This logic put forth by Smith and Goodale is sound. Harper's relatively "clean" at the moment, he hasn't been battered, subjected to much, no real interest or focus (they don't call it a "break" for nothing). There is wisdom in thinking a few weeks after Parliament resumes, a return to tertiary interest from the public, will provide more favorable conditions for a possible election. Bloody them up a bit first, then see where we are. It's still a fall option, but on balance, equating the unknowns, waiting until October to decide, looks more attractive.

This hasn't been a great summer for the Liberals, which isn't necessarily surprising, nor does that verdict necessitate blame. Getting traction in the summer is a herculian effort for an opposition party, always has been, almost a theorem at this point. Couple that with a "last time we saw you" flavor from June, and we're clearly stalled in the polls, with no obvious booster available. In other words, we're probably not heading into this September opposition day with much wind in our sails. This simple reality provides further logically backing to the supposed strategy. We need to recapture some momentum and/or put the government on the defensive again. This may be maddening to some, but it shouldn't be, because it's a wise consideration.

I still want to go this fall, for a myriad of reasons. However, if I'm choosing between a "cold" call immediately, or a try and "build up a lather" approach, I think I'll take the latter in this instance, without tremendous reservation.

Bizarre Polling

What, you mean we have another poll that doesn't confirm that Ipsos sample that has everyone "buzzing"?. Shocking:

Conservatives – 32.6 (-0.2)
Liberals – 30.9 (+0.7)
NDP – 15.7 (-1.4)
Green – 11.3 (+0.3)
BQ – 9.5 (+0.8) (37.1) (+2.1)
Undecided – 15.1 (-0.7)

Funny, that EKOS actually shows a slight narrowing, a statistical tie.

What's Left?

On the heels of maybe the most obnoxious set of Senate appointments in recent memory, interesting to hear more "feedback" on that other CORNERSTONE Conservative principle- the "open and transparent" government:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservatives have failed to boost government transparency, despite pledging years ago to improve Canadians' access to public information, says the retired Quebec judge who oversaw an inquiry into the federal sponsorship scandal.

Enlarge Photo David SmithJohn Gomery "The current government ran for election in 2006 on a platform promising integrity, accountability and transparency," John Gomery said in a speech on Wednesday.

"On the transparency issue, its promises have simply not been fulfilled.

"I do think the record of the current government is very bad," he later told reporters. "I think, frankly, the government needs to be criticized for that."

Not so-so, not more needs to be done, not bad, but VERY BAD. In other words, a complete and utter repudiation of the supposed core tenet. We remember well, the pius white knights who would transform Ottawa after years of dirty Liberal rule- make it open to Canadians, make it transparent, no secrecy. Surely it must pain the faithful to know that in practice, the Harper government has ruled with a Stalinist grip, access to information has stalled, at every turn obstruction and delay.

I'm curious, what's left for the principled Conservatives? Not much it seems, the odor of overt hypocrisy is simply PUNGENT.

Move Over Duff

Mike Duffy's status as chief Conservative HACK in the Senate might be in danger.

A real class act.

Idle Thought

I keep reading this sentiment in comments around online sites and the media, that goes something like this:

"With one of the worst economic downturns in history, it's pretty bad that the Libs can only manage to be tied in the polls with the Conservatives. The Liberals should be way ahead."

Obviously, this argument comes from the conventional wisdom that the opposition should be able to capitalize during economic challenges. History would tend to support this thesis.

I'm wondering then, if it's a fair criticism of the Liberals, because it would seem like a pattern exists throughout Canada, not exclusively a statement on the federal party. Why is that McGuinty is riding high in the polls, without the slightest hint of erosion? Why haven't the NDP and PC's capitalized? Ground zero on the economic front and the incumbent doesn't suffer? Surprising, to say the least. Why is that Charest's popularity is almost unprecendented in Quebec, what with this seismic economic downturn? Why hasn't the PQ capitalized? How did Gordon Campbell manage to get another majority, with an election right smack in the middle of the worst of it? Why didn't the NDP capitalize? In other words, why does it appear that incumbents aren't really suffering at all, why are they defying history?

Seems to me, that part of the equation here that might be unique- Canadians have largely bought into the perception that this recesssion is an imported downturn, a global problem that has nothing to do with Canada in particular. That explains why various incumbents aren't "wearing it" in the traditional sense, and maybe why it's a bit erroneous to copy and paste historic analogies. As a matter of fact, the federal Liberals don't appear terribly unique at all, relative to other oppositions in Canada.

New Quebec Poll

The latest Crop Quebec poll shows some erosion in Liberal support, relative to past results:

Bloc 31% (31%)
Libs 30% (35%)
NDP 18% (17%)
Cons 17% (13%)

Still not a terrible result for the Liberals, tied with the Bloc, but relatively poor. This poll tends to confirm other findings, that have shown a marginal erosion in Liberal support over the past few months, now hovering around 30%.

A very good result for the NDP. Of all the parties, their % seems to have the most fluctuation, comparing poll to poll. Everyone else tends to be in the same ballpark, between pollsters, but the NDP tally goes anywhere from single digits to this high teen result. As a result, I still see this percentage has a touch high, but I'm sure my NDP friends would say this is the most reliable pollster, so...

A pretty good number for the Cons, relative to prior results. All the pollsters seem to show some slight evidence of a minor rebound for the Cons, still low but better than the dismal trend seen prior.

In the Quebec City region, it's quite competitive:

Bloc 30%
Libs 24%
Cons 23%

Cut To The Chase

Interesting piece, with rabid Conservatives raising the spectre of a coalition, Ignatieff trying to "rewrite history".

In the back and forth, I'm reminded of one simple fact that pierces the linguistic haze:

IF IGNATIEFF WANTED A COALITION, HE WOULD ALREADY BE PRIME MINISTER.

Couldn't have been closer when you think about it. Sitting right there, in his power hungry, ambitious lap, and yet...

Yes history, a useful and telling tool.

Layton/Harper Transcript

Much confusion about this meeting between Harper and Layton. I've secured a tape of the phone conversations that led up to this meeting today, which should clear things up:

Harper: Hi Jack.

Layton: Hi Stephen

Harper: I just checked my call history and saw this number but no message.

Layton: Hmmm, wasn't me. One of our staff was messing with the phones earlier, maybe he inadvertently dialed your number.

Harper: Oh okay, just checking.

Layton: Cheers, see you on the campaign trail, or maybe not.

Hang up. Five minutes later.

Harper: Hi Jack.

Layton: Stephen.

Harper: When I called earlier about that call you didn't make, you said "maybe not" about an election. What did you mean?

Layton: I don't recall saying that, we're ready to go and "turf you guys".

Harper: Oh okay, I must have misunderstood. We're ready too, but we don't want an election.

Layton: We're so ready, the coffers are full. You guys are a scourge that needs to be replaced.

Harper: Okay, if that's how you feel.

Hang up. Three minutes later.

Layton: Hi Stephen

Harper: Jack

Layton: Just curious, when you say you don't want an election, what do you mean?

Harper: Well we're ready, I can smell a majority to be frank.

Layton: Oh okay, because you know nobody wants an election, even though we're roaring to go anytime.

Harper: I keep saying that, nobody wants an election.

Layton: Well hey, since we agree on that, maybe we should meet.

Harper: Meet? Oh, is that why you called earlier?

Layton: I didn't call.

Harper: Yes, your staffer. And, I only called because I thought I missed your call. Anyways.

Layton: You know, we need to "make parliament work".

Harper: We do you know we do.

Layton: Okay, let's get together to see if we can find some common ground.

Harper: Okay, you call me later to set up a time.

Layton: Why don't you call me when it's convenient.

Harper: Okay, I'll wait to hear from you.

Layton: Looking forward to your call.

Hang up.

I couldn't get the final conversation, but they must have worked out the details.

Speaking of DUDS

Earlier this week, Conservative cheerleader Ian MacDonald offered up some more bird cage liner (very absorbent). Criticizing Ignatieff for playing it safe:

He has also been campaigning in safe Liberal ridings, such as Sydney in Cape Breton. A leader's summer tour is supposed to focus on competitive seats.

When I read it, I knew it was bull, but frankly I didn't want to waste the time detailing the ignorance. However, David Akin has a detailed examination of the leader's summer tours, titled On summer tours, Harper on defence, Iggy on offence?. A good read, just the facts please.

DUD is right, but luckily some columnists are rarely subjected to the same scrutiny as their PREY. Oh well, the buggie is happy.

On Election Readiness

There is no question, that the lack of election readiness in 2008 really cost the Liberals. Clearly caught flat footed out the gate, the first days, not to mention the preamble were squandered, which set a very negative tone that haunted. That's why, timing aside, it's nice to hear a quiet confidence coming from Liberal ranks that we will be ready this time:

Michael Ignatieff's Liberals are stepping up their election readiness, preparing attack ads against the Harper Conservatives...

The Liberal Leader has already posed for campaign pictures at his official residence, Stornoway. And as many as 40 candidates out of a possible 75 in Quebec will be nominated by Labour Day.

Senator David Smith, one of the co-chairs of the national campaign, says the Liberals are in “good shape” in the rest of Canada as well with the bulk of the 233 other candidates ready to go by mid-September.

But Albina Guarnieri, a senior Ontario Liberal MP who chairs Mr. Ignatieff's early-morning strategy group when the House is sitting, says the summer really isn't the time to do that. No one is really paying attention.

She says Mr. Ignatieff will begin soon to “showcase his ideas and he'll make his case.”

Of course, the now typical "where's he been" from Rona, I mean Jane, but the rest of the piece actually suggests what he's been up to- getting a platform together and preparing for an election. With the summer lull ending, all this lazy criticism will fade if the Liberals appear confident and capable. Appearing "ready" is clear part of the psychological equation, because we know well how any hint of weakness will be seized upon.

We're starting to get a sense of messaging, by all accounts a great deal of work is going into this platform, in many ways were poised to finally create a compelling narrative. Let's put it this day, you'd much rather have the media beating up on during the summer, than when it really counts come fall. "We've got our shit together", coffers full, ads already in the hopper, a thick red book, ready on the ground, you give the appearance of a credible government in waiting. If anyone doubts this, just look at the opposite situation last year, how the perceived "shaky" prepardness fed itself into a not ready for prime time narrative.

A small part of the puzzle, but maybe not when you consider the importance of optics.

Conservatives Fade

It looks like the Conservatives prolonged surge in the polls has ended:

OTTAWA _ A new poll suggests the Conservatives and Liberals remain locked in a dead heat amid rumblings of a possible fall election. The Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey put the parties in a statistical tie, with 32 per cent support for the Liberals and 31 per cent for the Tories. The NDP were at 16 per cent, the Greens at 11, and the Bloc Quebecois at nine. The numbers have barely budged throughout the summer, a period in which voters are typically disengaged. Some Liberals have been pushing for an autumn election while the Tories have been trashing the idea, saying it would hurt the economic recovery. The survey of just over 2,000 respondents was conducted Aug. 13-23 and is considered accurate to within 2.2 percentage points 19 times in 20.

No internals yet, will update later.

I must say, I absolutely LOVE the timing of this poll, on the heels of that stench released yesterday. The "numbers have barely budged", reaffirming what everyone else has concluded. The fact HD gives the Liberals a lead, even if it's statistically irrelevant, is simply delicious on the heels of the Ipsos TURD.

UPDATE

Poll internals:

Harris Decima replicates recent Ontario results, Libs hovering around 40%, ahead of the Cons, NDP in trouble:

The Liberals lead in Ontario by six points with the NDP struggling in popular support in the province. The Liberals hold 40%, followed by 34% for the Conservatives, 13% for the NDP and 10% for the Greens.

Quebec shows a weakening Lib vote, and a very poor score for the Cons:

The BQ remains in front in Quebec with 37%, followed by 28% for the Liberals, 12% for the
Conservatives, 11% for the NDP and 10% for the Greens.

Might be a tad low for the Cons, other findings have shown a slight uptick. There's no question the Lib vote has sagged in the province, but it's fluid.

HD also replicates a pretty firm trend in Atlantic Canada, Libs out front:

In Atlantic Canada, the Liberals continue to maintain an advantage. Here the Liberals lead with 38%, followed by the NDP with 32%, the Conservatives 23% and the Greens with 5%

Kind of a goofy result for British Columbia, even with the relative manageable margin of error (two week sample):

The Conservatives lead with 28%, followed by the NDP with 26%, the Greens 24% and the Liberals with 20%.

That Green number is an "eye popper". Very low scores for the Cons and Libs, relative to other recent polls.

Ignatieff Interview

With the summer lull winding down, I've been quite curious what narratives the Liberals will push heading into the fall session. This Ignatieff interview gives some very superficial insight on what might lie ahead.

It's important for the Liberals to pivot off the pre-occupation with criticizing the issues in the immediate, and start to articulate a vision. The "down the road" narrative, which I think will be a key argument if we are to have a fall election. EI can be used as the backdrop to reinforce another theme (which Ignatieff speaks to), that being you can't co-operate with these guys, they are an obstacle to stability and good government. However, EI isn't an election winner, the discussion will surround who has a plan to deal with the deficit, who has a plan to reshape our economy to compete in the global economy. The Conservatives are quite vulnerable on this front, because they are more managers than planners, very little in the way of forward thinking that speaks in a cohesive fashion:

What is the vision to help the restructuring of our economy after the recession? Is zero. So that's the problem I have. I am at a government that does not work. What should I do? Keep it alive because people do not want an election? Or bring it down and say what I really thinks of me, that is to say that we deserve better than that. I'm thinking. "

I can't stress enough the importance of the word "vision" here. We crave that, we desire something to get behind that speaks to a better tomorrow. It's cheesy on one hand, but if Ignatieff is armed with a comprehensive plan, that brings all facets together, towards a singular goal, it will and can fly. I don't doubt the messenger in this case, but he needs the substance. Conservatives don't do vision, they do tear downs, they react to liberalism, they manage like Canada is a giant Walmart. We can occupy this ground and it's a winner.

I like the response on the coalition question:

"I'm not against political arrangements between parties to run a minority Parliament. I am ready to negotiate with other parties to advance legislative proposals. But beware, I always spoke arrangements, no coalition. "

There is a central argument here, a contradiction in the Con logic that we can use to push back. Harper can speak of coalitions and he WILL in the campaign. However, on a common sense level Canadians understand that co-operation between parties is required, in fact it's one of their chief beefs with politics as a whole. We attack Harper's inability to work with others, a potent criticism, with ample examples. Beside that argument, this idea of "arrangements" isn't something to be feared, because it simply acknowledges a practicality that people are well aware of. Reject a formal coalition, push the idea of co-operation concurrently, and you neuter their attacks while positioning yourself as the only one that get this "mess in Ottawa" to work. I'd even throw in a few jabs at the Cons, tell Harper he's welcome in PM Ignatieff's office anytime to discuss "arrangements".

I also like the characterization as "arrogant", this push for a majority from the Conservatives. The laundry list of problems at the moment, and this government thinks they deserve a stronger mandate. Labelling you opponent as arrogant, and somewhat detached because of it, is a strong "buzzword".

Just snippets, nothing terribly substantive yet, but I'm encouraged by the language I hear.

WACKY

Here's the rumored Ipsos poll for CANWEST, that shows just an enormous lead for the Conservatives:

The Conservatives now command 39% in support among decided voters, compared with 28% for the Liberals, according to the survey, conducted exclusively for Canwest News Service and Global National by Ipsos Reid. Since the last Ipsos poll two months ago, the Tories have climbed five percentage points, while the Grits have slumped seven points.

The NDP stand in third at 14% of the vote, up one point; followed by the Green party at 10%, up two points.

That's right, suddenly the Conservatives have opened up an astonishing 11% lead. Two months without a Canwest poll, the first time I can remember since I started blogging, then coincidentally in the field just as Harper does his most high profile photo op of the summer. The timing aside, interesting that we get this PREDICTED thesis from NP:

a trend that could dampen speculation of a fall election.

How convenient for the Conservatives.

It will be fascinating to see how the media reacts to this poll, if they have the basic sense to look with a critical eye. All you have to do is look at these Ontario results:

the Conservatives now lead the Liberals in vote-rich Ontario by 43% to 31%.

If you average out the last batch of polling, generally the Liberals have had the lead, consistently hovering around 40%, Conservatives mid 30's. As a matter of fact, there hasn't been one poll since the coalition that has given the Conservatives anywhere near this kind of lead. If there was ever a "19 times out of 20" proposition, this polling is the posterchild for that statistical anomaly. Averaging the last batch of polls, this result is 16% offside, staggering by any measure.

Ipsos also pegs Conservative support in Quebec at 20%, the first pollster to do so since a one off poll in January.

Ipsos also asks a series of questions, comparing the two leaders. While Harper leads on these questions, the gap really isn't that pronounced, or noticeably different from other findings. An opposition leader rarely outpaces a sitting PM, so I actually see these numbers as a decent base for Ignatieff prior a campaign:

The poll suggests Ignatieff is having trouble gaining traction on key issues. Asked which leader is best qualified to "improve the national economy," 48% chose Harper, compared with 40% for Ignatieff. The prime minister also leads Ignatieff on "managing Canada's finances" (49% to 37%), and "representing Canada's interests in world affairs" (48% to 41%). The only issue on which Ignatieff leads is "protecting the environment" (45% to 41%).

Not a herculian gap by any means, and given the party support numbers, almost surprising that the gap isn't large.


Conclusion. Don't draw any conclusions from this dud.