The PGIB sent me their Leadership Poll news release and results breakdown. This is where they are saying it is a three horse race from a “PIGB poll of 600 Alberta PC Party members…over a three week period in Calgary, Edmonton, Central and Southern Alberta.” The other fact they tout is this is a poll where PC Party members only were being polled. That is a good thing - but they did it so badly they destroy any data supported evidence for their conclusion. They may be right but this "poll" is no proof of it. Duh!
There are some serious credibility problems with these poll results, some of which have already been pointed out, like the randomness of the inputs with no northern Alberta input, how can you be conclusive? The other irony is they say in the news release their poll is “statistically significant at 19 times out of 20” but fail to mention the margin error. Duh!
Statistics, questionnaire design, data collection and results analysis is part art and part science but it is a professional activity that “ought not to be tried at home” by amateurs, especially amateurs with an agenda! People like the PGIB ought not to be doing this because it is misleading and pure political misdirection unless they are not serious about their credibility as an organization’s reputation involved in political lobbying – apparently one of their core activities. Duh!
I would be interested in seeing where they got the list of names came from to do the PGIB survey. If it was names only from their own membership list (which I suspect) that also taints the results, given that they are an Alliance based, social conservative organization that would not therefore reach the full range of Progressive Conservative members. It also excludes those Albertans who intend to become PC Party members to participate in the Leadership. These people are not represented in their data inputs either. Duh!
This is at best described as a crude political tactic or cheap trickery. It is not a poll. If it uses PGIB members who say they are also PC Party members but that is validated through the PC Party membership list the premise of their survey is even more unfounded. The Undecided and refused to answer numbers are very high too and are in themselves sufficient to challenge the conclusion they reached even if the methodology itself was not so amateurish...which it is. Duh!
Thirdly they asked the wrong question: “Are you currently a member of the Alberta Progressive Conservative Party?” That question is insufficient because it ignores those who intend to buy memberships between now and Dec 2 in the one person one vote system. And how come it took 3 weeks to gather the data? Do they not think opinions vary dramatically over such a long data collection period and the results are invalid as a result? Or am I giving this charade too much credit. Duh!
This is a very laughable and sad situation at the same time. Emmanuel Kant is giggling in his grave where people like Chandler, a poster boy for the far right, proving to be practically post modern personal examples out to prove that their political ends is justifiable using whatever means necessary - all in the name of winning and at all costs.
This is a dramatic example of the kind of society and polity we will have in Alberta if either Oberg or Morton gets to govern. What kind of Alberta will it be with these kind of people and organizations setting the agenda and providing the "values" perspectives about the future of Alberta.
Thx Craig Chandler and the PBIB for this “disclosure.” To the rest of us - Be Afraid! Be Very Afraid!
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
New Poll of PC Members Sees Three-Way Tie
Apparently a new Poll is out - can't track it down yet but QR77 Radio in Calgary is commenting on it:
CALGARY/AM770CHQR - A Calgary-based business and taxpayer group has released results of a survey showing a virtual three way tie for the lead in the Alberta Tory leadership race.The Progressive Group for Independent Business shows Lyle Oberg and Ted Morton each with 17 percent support among Tory party members who plan to vote in the election.Jim Dinning is close behind at 16 per cent.The PGIB says it did its own survey out of frustration that other surveys polled Albertans who were not tory party members or even planning to vote in the leadership race.
This group is a right wing business/lobbying organization run by Craig Chandler former federal Conservative leadership candidate with a strong social conservative personal perspective. So small surprise they "find" Morton in the lead of a tight 3 way race. What is apparently good about this poll is it asks if you are a party member or intend to become one. It is those people who will count in the end and make the real difference in the final results.
Wonder how many were undecided in the PGIB poll. That undecided number has been growing with each new poll and was high as 40% in the recent Leger Poll. The front runners support has been fallling off from the early September polls but the pack in the back have not been breaking out either.
Once I get the detailed results, the questions and the methodology I will share it with you.
CALGARY/AM770CHQR - A Calgary-based business and taxpayer group has released results of a survey showing a virtual three way tie for the lead in the Alberta Tory leadership race.The Progressive Group for Independent Business shows Lyle Oberg and Ted Morton each with 17 percent support among Tory party members who plan to vote in the election.Jim Dinning is close behind at 16 per cent.The PGIB says it did its own survey out of frustration that other surveys polled Albertans who were not tory party members or even planning to vote in the leadership race.
This group is a right wing business/lobbying organization run by Craig Chandler former federal Conservative leadership candidate with a strong social conservative personal perspective. So small surprise they "find" Morton in the lead of a tight 3 way race. What is apparently good about this poll is it asks if you are a party member or intend to become one. It is those people who will count in the end and make the real difference in the final results.
Wonder how many were undecided in the PGIB poll. That undecided number has been growing with each new poll and was high as 40% in the recent Leger Poll. The front runners support has been fallling off from the early September polls but the pack in the back have not been breaking out either.
Once I get the detailed results, the questions and the methodology I will share it with you.
Monday, October 09, 2006
Eats Shoots and Leaves
Got an email today from a person I know and respect and presume is working on the Dinning campaign. She wanted to clarify the disclosure commitment from Dinning and noting the punctuation error in the Globe piece I quoted. The Globe quote on Dinning I referenced was:
"He has said his campaign will voluntarily follow provincial election rules, and disclose all donors after the election. Mr. Dinning's campaign also will not accept anonymous donations or money from any individual or corporation that totals more than $30,000."
The email clarification stated:
"Hey, cute interpretation of the reporter’s punctuation or lack thereof. For the record, it’s no donations over 30K. And no anonymous donations. So we’ll publish your name even if you keep that penny and only give $29,999.99."
If one inserted a COMMA in the Globe quote after the word donations you get an entirely different meaning from the Globe story and the one that I expect Dinning intended. The second sentence in the quote would then read "Mr. Dinning's campaign also will not accept anonymous donations, or money from any individual or corporation that totals more than $30,000."
Reminds me of the great example that I like to use from time to time, mostly to make a communications point. Do you agree with the statment "A woman without her man is nothing." Not many agree and no women in my experience . Now do you agree with the statement "A woman: without her man is nothing." Almost unanimous female agreement in my experience. Minor punctuation change big meaning shift.
Fun eh? Dangerous too! Just ask any political speech writer.
"He has said his campaign will voluntarily follow provincial election rules, and disclose all donors after the election. Mr. Dinning's campaign also will not accept anonymous donations or money from any individual or corporation that totals more than $30,000."
The email clarification stated:
"Hey, cute interpretation of the reporter’s punctuation or lack thereof. For the record, it’s no donations over 30K. And no anonymous donations. So we’ll publish your name even if you keep that penny and only give $29,999.99."
If one inserted a COMMA in the Globe quote after the word donations you get an entirely different meaning from the Globe story and the one that I expect Dinning intended. The second sentence in the quote would then read "Mr. Dinning's campaign also will not accept anonymous donations, or money from any individual or corporation that totals more than $30,000."
Reminds me of the great example that I like to use from time to time, mostly to make a communications point. Do you agree with the statment "A woman without her man is nothing." Not many agree and no women in my experience . Now do you agree with the statement "A woman: without her man is nothing." Almost unanimous female agreement in my experience. Minor punctuation change big meaning shift.
Fun eh? Dangerous too! Just ask any political speech writer.
Nondisclosure is a Betrayal of the Public's Trust
I have just had my fears about who is behind the Ted Morton Campaign confirmed. Today's Globe and Mail story has the telling quote that donor information is just too strategic to let people know about. Here is what a Morton campaign organizer is reported to have said:
“It's a strategic thing. That gives too much away,” Sam Armstrong, a campaign organizer for leadership hopeful Ted Morton, explained when asked why his camp has decided that it won't disclose names of contributors.
Obviously we will not get to know the Morton donors and ignorance is not bliss...especially in this case. My instincts tell me he is afraid to reveal his donors because they are an array of extremists groups that would scare us away from him. Remember how "scary" Harper was in the 2004 election when the religious far right was visible and vocal in supporting him? They kept quiet in the 2006 election and Harper was less scary. Harper became the temporary PM but his revival of the CPC anti social agenda and recent mean spriited grant cutting is starting to scare us all over again.
To be fair, Morton is not the only concern. I think we citizens have cause for concern about every candidate and the facts about their campaign contributors. Since there are no rules it is a chance for some candidates to raise the ethical bar of disclosure and challange the others to do the same.
We have to wonder if Dinning has too much money ($3m estimated and not denied) and is it collected from a few powerful forces so that he can effectively buy the leadership. Here is what the G&M says about Dinning's donors:
"He has said his campaign will voluntarily follow provincial election rules, and disclose all donors after the election. Mr. Dinning's campaign also will not accept anonymous donations or money from any individual or corporation that totals more than $30,000."
That $30K plus level of anonymity does not reassure me. So for a kicker of $29,999.99 I can stay off the radar screen. Can my kids and numbered companies under my control do the same thing? Too Volpe-esque for my liking. Just because you can do something clever to support Jim does not mean you ought to do it. That reliance on elites is the nature of the uncertainty about how Dinning will govern - for the benefit of the anonymous elites or the rest of us schmucks.
Oberg is already over the ethical line - just not the legal line - with his cozy "long term relationship" with certain trade union bosses and their top down membership "giveaway" tactics. That says everything we need to know about how he will govern. Top down, special deals for friends of long term relationships and what ever means that are available but only to the ends that Oberg personally identifies. Kind of like George W Bush don't you think? I can't help but wonder who will be the "Alberta Haliburton" - overcharging us for infrastructure projects with an exclusive inside "bidding" track in an Oberg government.
Norris' disclosure underscored fears of is he his "own" man or is he an "owned" by the 100 or so "clients" cum donors who are "buying" Norris' "consulting services." Who will he be "working for" as Premier - us or them? We citizens should not have to be asking ourselves that question! Again doing something indirectly you can't do directly shows a penchant for situational ethics - a real shortcoming and brings into question about how he would govern.
Others are very late into the game like Stelmach and Hancock because they played by the rules and timing that Premier Klein set out. That respect for the Party and the Klein leadership has hurt them and now they have to play catch up in the campaign fund raising function. That is no excuse however for not disclosing donors!
Others are either vanity candidates or issues based with no intention of winning just positioning or proselytizing. Who supports them dollar-wise is of less interest but the duty to disclosure demands are still the same.
Disclosure is more than information. It goes to the very character of the candidates. I think those who deny to disclose, display disrespect for the duty to disclose by being obtuse about it or those who are simply too naive about the consequences all need to feared as leadership hopefuls.
Nondisclosue is not justified as just clever politics and acceptable because it is simply playing by the nonexistant "rules." It is a betrayal of the public's trust and ought to be enough to disqualify anyone as a serious candidate worthy of such high office.
“It's a strategic thing. That gives too much away,” Sam Armstrong, a campaign organizer for leadership hopeful Ted Morton, explained when asked why his camp has decided that it won't disclose names of contributors.
Obviously we will not get to know the Morton donors and ignorance is not bliss...especially in this case. My instincts tell me he is afraid to reveal his donors because they are an array of extremists groups that would scare us away from him. Remember how "scary" Harper was in the 2004 election when the religious far right was visible and vocal in supporting him? They kept quiet in the 2006 election and Harper was less scary. Harper became the temporary PM but his revival of the CPC anti social agenda and recent mean spriited grant cutting is starting to scare us all over again.
To be fair, Morton is not the only concern. I think we citizens have cause for concern about every candidate and the facts about their campaign contributors. Since there are no rules it is a chance for some candidates to raise the ethical bar of disclosure and challange the others to do the same.
We have to wonder if Dinning has too much money ($3m estimated and not denied) and is it collected from a few powerful forces so that he can effectively buy the leadership. Here is what the G&M says about Dinning's donors:
"He has said his campaign will voluntarily follow provincial election rules, and disclose all donors after the election. Mr. Dinning's campaign also will not accept anonymous donations or money from any individual or corporation that totals more than $30,000."
That $30K plus level of anonymity does not reassure me. So for a kicker of $29,999.99 I can stay off the radar screen. Can my kids and numbered companies under my control do the same thing? Too Volpe-esque for my liking. Just because you can do something clever to support Jim does not mean you ought to do it. That reliance on elites is the nature of the uncertainty about how Dinning will govern - for the benefit of the anonymous elites or the rest of us schmucks.
Oberg is already over the ethical line - just not the legal line - with his cozy "long term relationship" with certain trade union bosses and their top down membership "giveaway" tactics. That says everything we need to know about how he will govern. Top down, special deals for friends of long term relationships and what ever means that are available but only to the ends that Oberg personally identifies. Kind of like George W Bush don't you think? I can't help but wonder who will be the "Alberta Haliburton" - overcharging us for infrastructure projects with an exclusive inside "bidding" track in an Oberg government.
Norris' disclosure underscored fears of is he his "own" man or is he an "owned" by the 100 or so "clients" cum donors who are "buying" Norris' "consulting services." Who will he be "working for" as Premier - us or them? We citizens should not have to be asking ourselves that question! Again doing something indirectly you can't do directly shows a penchant for situational ethics - a real shortcoming and brings into question about how he would govern.
Others are very late into the game like Stelmach and Hancock because they played by the rules and timing that Premier Klein set out. That respect for the Party and the Klein leadership has hurt them and now they have to play catch up in the campaign fund raising function. That is no excuse however for not disclosing donors!
Others are either vanity candidates or issues based with no intention of winning just positioning or proselytizing. Who supports them dollar-wise is of less interest but the duty to disclosure demands are still the same.
Disclosure is more than information. It goes to the very character of the candidates. I think those who deny to disclose, display disrespect for the duty to disclose by being obtuse about it or those who are simply too naive about the consequences all need to feared as leadership hopefuls.
Nondisclosue is not justified as just clever politics and acceptable because it is simply playing by the nonexistant "rules." It is a betrayal of the public's trust and ought to be enough to disqualify anyone as a serious candidate worthy of such high office.
Sunday, October 08, 2006
Thank You - Arts on the Avenue
This is Thanksgiving so you will not be surprised that you will not be reading my usual politically oriented post.
We Albertans live abundant lives, not all of us but that is true for most of us. We have lots to be thankful for. Yesterday I had little time to reflect on Thanksgiving but I did on this Sunday morning. I have all of the ususal thoughts of giving thanks but yesterday was special and filled me with feelings of hope and optimism - as well as for giving thanks.
Yesterday in a small part of Edmonton along 118 Ave (“The Ave”), bordering the north side of the city core, a minor miracle happened. A locally produced one day eclectic arts festival happened…Arts on the Avenue. It brought together dancers, painters actors, musicians and artisans to show their talents and to make a statement. That statement was about the rejuvenation of a community that has, euphemistically speaking; “seen better days.”
There is an abundance of Cultural Creatives that live in The Ave area. They were joined by other artists who have recently befriended The Ave and who also caught the spirit of the place - especially yesterday. They came from around the city with their friends and families and spent the day to enjoy, to perform, to participate and to celebrate. What they created was a connection amongst themselves and they reaffirmed the sense of community on The Ave. What they enabled, experienced and expressed was the creative power of art and culture to renew the sense of hope in a community.
I was there for the day as part of our work at Cambridge Strategies Inc. for the City of Edmonton on the revitalization of the 118 Ave from NAIT to Northlands. It felt so much like my experience in the early days of The Fringe…I was there too. I remember well the feeling in Old Strathcona and on Whyte Avenue at the time of Alberta’s 75th Anniversary celebrations. We enabled a few actors, on very short notice, to essentially perform audition pieces to small audiences. We knew then “we were really on to something.” That early effort quickly morphed into the Edmonton International Fringe Festival. That event grew and then morphed into a North American wide Fringe Festival movement that thrives today.
I felt that feeling that “we are really on to something” again yesterday at Arts on the Avenue. Yesterday was authentic and eclectic with a well produced and very professional line up of talent. In that way it was much more than the early Fringe days. It was genuine, energetic and unpretentious and just brimming with talent and potential. In that way it was totally aligned with the early Fringe Festival days.
Volunteers are tough to find in the overly committed and complex life styles we seem to live these days. But they came out of there homes yesterday and did all the Joe Jobs with a smile and got caught up in the sense of what was happening. That added to the rays of hope that the Arts on the Avenue brought to all those who worked on it so hard, and against such odds, to make this happen.
So on a day that started out cold and grey and drizzling, that evolved, emerging as a sunny crisp fall afternoon. It ended with a clear night sky and a full moon. Everyone gathered around a huge bon fire to warm the body. They were good people working together and accomplishing much that warmed the heart. To warm the soul they enjoyed an outdoor concert by Captain Tractor, who merely had to walk across the neighbourhood park to perform.
There is meaning here. The people who made this event happen are tired today and there is still clean up and lots to do. But they know that yesterday was the start of something good. Something very positive happened yesterday on 118 Avenue. Something that augers well for the future of The Ave and the neighbouring communities as a place to work, live and raise a family. They too are “really on to something!” Thanks to the people of Arts on the Avenue for letting me be part of it.
We Albertans live abundant lives, not all of us but that is true for most of us. We have lots to be thankful for. Yesterday I had little time to reflect on Thanksgiving but I did on this Sunday morning. I have all of the ususal thoughts of giving thanks but yesterday was special and filled me with feelings of hope and optimism - as well as for giving thanks.
Yesterday in a small part of Edmonton along 118 Ave (“The Ave”), bordering the north side of the city core, a minor miracle happened. A locally produced one day eclectic arts festival happened…Arts on the Avenue. It brought together dancers, painters actors, musicians and artisans to show their talents and to make a statement. That statement was about the rejuvenation of a community that has, euphemistically speaking; “seen better days.”
There is an abundance of Cultural Creatives that live in The Ave area. They were joined by other artists who have recently befriended The Ave and who also caught the spirit of the place - especially yesterday. They came from around the city with their friends and families and spent the day to enjoy, to perform, to participate and to celebrate. What they created was a connection amongst themselves and they reaffirmed the sense of community on The Ave. What they enabled, experienced and expressed was the creative power of art and culture to renew the sense of hope in a community.
I was there for the day as part of our work at Cambridge Strategies Inc. for the City of Edmonton on the revitalization of the 118 Ave from NAIT to Northlands. It felt so much like my experience in the early days of The Fringe…I was there too. I remember well the feeling in Old Strathcona and on Whyte Avenue at the time of Alberta’s 75th Anniversary celebrations. We enabled a few actors, on very short notice, to essentially perform audition pieces to small audiences. We knew then “we were really on to something.” That early effort quickly morphed into the Edmonton International Fringe Festival. That event grew and then morphed into a North American wide Fringe Festival movement that thrives today.
I felt that feeling that “we are really on to something” again yesterday at Arts on the Avenue. Yesterday was authentic and eclectic with a well produced and very professional line up of talent. In that way it was much more than the early Fringe days. It was genuine, energetic and unpretentious and just brimming with talent and potential. In that way it was totally aligned with the early Fringe Festival days.
Volunteers are tough to find in the overly committed and complex life styles we seem to live these days. But they came out of there homes yesterday and did all the Joe Jobs with a smile and got caught up in the sense of what was happening. That added to the rays of hope that the Arts on the Avenue brought to all those who worked on it so hard, and against such odds, to make this happen.
So on a day that started out cold and grey and drizzling, that evolved, emerging as a sunny crisp fall afternoon. It ended with a clear night sky and a full moon. Everyone gathered around a huge bon fire to warm the body. They were good people working together and accomplishing much that warmed the heart. To warm the soul they enjoyed an outdoor concert by Captain Tractor, who merely had to walk across the neighbourhood park to perform.
There is meaning here. The people who made this event happen are tired today and there is still clean up and lots to do. But they know that yesterday was the start of something good. Something very positive happened yesterday on 118 Avenue. Something that augers well for the future of The Ave and the neighbouring communities as a place to work, live and raise a family. They too are “really on to something!” Thanks to the people of Arts on the Avenue for letting me be part of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)