Your link overlooks the weighting done to a modern poll. To compensate for inability to reach certain groups, the main polls are weighted by demographic numbers such as age. So if 20% of the population is of a particular age group, but only 10% of respondents were, they weight up the numbers so that those 10% of the responses make up 20% of the result. In this regard, it makes perfect sense that including or not including the portion of the population that is cell phone only is of no real consequence.
Might work better as a senate mechanism than for the commons. Have the professional politicians do the drafting of legislation and whatnot. Have randomly selected citizens subject to the constraint of 'appropriate' regional representation responsible for sober second thought.
Have you paid a plumber recently? 100k seems low.
Well quite clearly they ARE going the wrong way, if they were going the right way they wouldn't be hemorrhaging votes. Failing to build/maintain the base is part of that wrong way. Making decisions about what the key planks of your platform are going to be IS probably another part of fixing the direction, but it should be based on this new/re-energised base, because if they don't have input into the process, how can they feel they're part of it? Where does a leader fit into all this? Somewhere between those two steps i would think. There should be some idea of where the party wants to head before picking a new leader probably. But at some point the leader needs to be there to become a rallying point.
Do Torontonians like Torontonians? I don't think ragging on Toronto is limited to CPC supporters. And I do believe they stuck to calling the Quebec government corrupt for the most part, not Quebecers.
The fact the coalition couldn't survive the month of prorogation is actually the strongest evidence that it was a good thing for the government of canada. Tempers were hot, rash decisions were made, the canadian public was incensed at the proposal, a month off to let cooler heads prevail was a good thing. This is not to say coalitions are illegitimate. It is to say THAT coalition was a bad idea.
To add to the thoughts of choosing an ideology, when you're a party in opposition you have to give the voters some impression of what it is that you stand for. Your position on the issues doesn't have to conform to 'center', 'left', or 'right', but on each issue it does need to be consistent. You can't, for example, spend half of question period screaming about insufficient stimulus spending, and then spend the next half screaming about wasteful spending running up the deficit. They both may be valid perspectives, but you do need to pick one of them and stick with it or the public has no idea where you stand on the issue.
When it comes to a ground up rebuild, this usually means working on expanding the base at the roots, one of the best counters i can think of to a negative campaign is thousands of party members on the ground that can talk to friends/coworkers and change their minds. This means getting involved with existing local groups, and founding your own. Listening to what they have to say, and convincing them that they're heard and have a say in your party, that when you win, they win.
He's saying picking a woman because it looks good is a terrible idea. There's no problem with a woman leader if it's the right candidate for the job. At the moment the liberals have far deeper problems than their leadership though, keeping Ignatieff on as an out-of-caucus leader would not have been a bad idea in my opinion. He'd have a lot more time to help with the root building, going around and talking to community groups/universities and setting up a fresh young organisation capable of being a real presence again in 10 years.
That article seems to back up cats more than you. The nominees were put forth by the universities, in a fair manner, it just happened their candidates, based largely on seniority, were all men. I'm sure 20, 30 years from now it'll be tilted the opposite way where they're mostly women as almost every university program takes more women than men now.
These sorts of grants are solely merit based, as they should be. Affirmative action is not the answer.
Reading May's speech reminded me a lot of what i liked about the Green Party... That is everything but the environmental part of their platform. Might need to start throwing my vote their way.
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Ruckus