This is not governing - it is just cheap political gamesmanship. Harper government putting a PC logo on a federal government cheque is not proper. Can we ever come to trust these guys to do what is best for Canada and not just politrical power. Sure it was a "ceremonial" grant cheque because the real thing would never be allowed by the administration.
Come Mr. Prime Minister, these are tough times. Think about us as a country as you go about the nation spending borrowed money that future generations will have to repay for years. This is not just your public relations stunt platform, it is about the viability and ability of the country to survive the worst recession in 70 years.
Who in their right minds can trust this bunch when they constantly pull such stupid and insipid pranks?
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Obama and the Problematic Prize
My friend David Kilgour published this piece in the Washington Post last week. I picked it up on The Mark News site, where I contribute a thought or two on occasion.
David does a short and precise analysis of the context surrounding President Obama's winning of the Nobel Peace Prize. He questions the the wisdom of the award and even more so, its acceptance.
Obama has done a great job of undoing much of the hate and harm inherent in the former Bush administration. His commitment to a bi-partisan solution to issues like healthcare reform have mistakenly assumed a rational Republican response. Criticism of Obama's policy accomplishments after only 9 months in office are premature at best.
Repubicans are stuck in the adversarial model of politics. The don't want the best policy or even a good policy, they only want to win the political argument about the policy. The power Obama holds in control of the White House, the Senate and the House. This will soon result in President Obama exerting some pure political muscle to make things happen.
Coddling conservatives for consensus is past. President Obama can silence his critics by flexing his political power to serve the purposes for which he was elected in the first place.
David does a short and precise analysis of the context surrounding President Obama's winning of the Nobel Peace Prize. He questions the the wisdom of the award and even more so, its acceptance.
Obama has done a great job of undoing much of the hate and harm inherent in the former Bush administration. His commitment to a bi-partisan solution to issues like healthcare reform have mistakenly assumed a rational Republican response. Criticism of Obama's policy accomplishments after only 9 months in office are premature at best.
Repubicans are stuck in the adversarial model of politics. The don't want the best policy or even a good policy, they only want to win the political argument about the policy. The power Obama holds in control of the White House, the Senate and the House. This will soon result in President Obama exerting some pure political muscle to make things happen.
Coddling conservatives for consensus is past. President Obama can silence his critics by flexing his political power to serve the purposes for which he was elected in the first place.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Today the WAP is Far From a Serious Threat to Stelmach, but Tomorrow?
I have been following the media on the class project poll on Albertan's voter intentions now, over two years in advance of a practical reality of an actual election. Some perspective needs to be put on all this. First, the results are meaningless in any practical sense of measuing voter intention when voters don't intend to vote when the question is asked. What the polls does say, is the obvious, Albertans are tiring of what they are seeing as the ineptness of the Stelmach governance approach.
So what! The media coverage of the Glenmore by election, the pending Wildrose leadership vote and speculation on the outcome add a publicity presence that amplifies voter attention. But that is a far cry from settling voter intention when there is no election in the offing. Take the results of such polls as good gossip fodder but not much more.
This poll, and its results, could use a bit more scrutiny than the MSM has had the time, space or inclination to give it. I found the results very interesting, especially if you go beyond the sound bite level of analysis. The methodology in the study says they took the sample of 1,201. The admittedly deemed some sample numbers by "statistically weighted where necessary to even better reflect the demographic distribuion of the Alberta population." This means where the sample size for gender, for example, was not reflective of the population in a region the researchers took the small unrepresentative sample size they had and apparently boosted its relative impact to make it look like it was reflective of the actual gender distribution of 50/50. Why not do the job right and stay sampling in the region until you got a real gender balance outcome?
Here is what I mean. If in the north region they had 200 participants but 150 of them were male, they would take the data from the 50 females and enhance the impact of that number say 3 times to equal the male data. Hardly an accurate take on what may be happening in hte minds of females in the region. They also don't tell us exactly where they did the weighting, how much they "weight in" and what was the base data results they artificially amplified. Nor to they tell us the sample size in all the regional results nor the margin or error to be attributed to those results.
I would also like to know the wording of all the questions, and the order they asked them in and how many people were called but refused to answers. If they had to make 10,000 calls to get 1200 to participate we have a very high degree of self-selection happening and the randomness is weaker.
I don't offer this criticism only on this poll but on all polls. The professionals make the same mistakes and the results are misleading and meaningless in the same ways.
Now lets look at those results. The media reports are focused on "decided voters" but you have to wonder how one becomes a "decided voter" when there is no practical possibility of a pending election. Also the results said 957 of 1115 participants had already made up their minds about the next election. A stretch at best. With 14% saying they were "Undecided" and we know 60% of Albertan did not even vote last time it is hard to reconcile the high percentage of "decided" voters to these realities.
Therefore I think the more interesting and reliable numbers are in the All Respondents findings. The second most popular option there is a combination of Undecideds (14.2%) and Other Parties (7.3), which is larger than the Wildrose support. The "decided" results show that, for now, the WAP is a parking lot for disgruntled PC supporters.
The regional breakdown is even more interesting, but I have suspicions about its reliability for reasons already stated and it is not clear if the results reported are on All Participants or just "Decided" voters. I think it is only on the "Decided" voter because the overall bar graph is based on the "Decided" voters but it is far from clear. I also wonder where the "statistacal weighting" was applied, why, how much and on what base data.
That aside the rural north and south PC support is holding rather well in the 45% range. WAP is the "threat" but it is not much of a threat at the 24% level. Stelmach has not much to worry about in his country support if these results are accurate. But the mainly rural caucus tht leads the Stelmach inner circle are spooked by these results for sure.
The real political story from this poll is in the big cities. We are told constantly in the media and in conversations that Calgary does not like Premier Stelmach. Well compared to Edmonton, they sure do. He has 38% support in Calgary but only 31% support in Edmonton. Calgary has decided the political threat to Stelmach should be the WAP at 27%. In Edmonton disgruntled citizens feel the Liberals should be the threat at 27.5%. The PCs and Liberals are essentially tied in Edmonton with these numbers being within the margin of error. The WAP trails the NDP in Edmonton and that is the place in Alberta where change and flux of political fortunes are being played out. Edmonton, not Calgary, is the political caldrun of a yearning for change based on these numbers.
The WAP is a political force but this poll is precious little proof of its power. Premier Stelmach is in trouble with Albertans but the drama has just begun and the story is far from being told. Read these opinion polls like you would poetry. It is more about the imgination and imagery they induce than the facts they prove.
So what! The media coverage of the Glenmore by election, the pending Wildrose leadership vote and speculation on the outcome add a publicity presence that amplifies voter attention. But that is a far cry from settling voter intention when there is no election in the offing. Take the results of such polls as good gossip fodder but not much more.
This poll, and its results, could use a bit more scrutiny than the MSM has had the time, space or inclination to give it. I found the results very interesting, especially if you go beyond the sound bite level of analysis. The methodology in the study says they took the sample of 1,201. The admittedly deemed some sample numbers by "statistically weighted where necessary to even better reflect the demographic distribuion of the Alberta population." This means where the sample size for gender, for example, was not reflective of the population in a region the researchers took the small unrepresentative sample size they had and apparently boosted its relative impact to make it look like it was reflective of the actual gender distribution of 50/50. Why not do the job right and stay sampling in the region until you got a real gender balance outcome?
Here is what I mean. If in the north region they had 200 participants but 150 of them were male, they would take the data from the 50 females and enhance the impact of that number say 3 times to equal the male data. Hardly an accurate take on what may be happening in hte minds of females in the region. They also don't tell us exactly where they did the weighting, how much they "weight in" and what was the base data results they artificially amplified. Nor to they tell us the sample size in all the regional results nor the margin or error to be attributed to those results.
I would also like to know the wording of all the questions, and the order they asked them in and how many people were called but refused to answers. If they had to make 10,000 calls to get 1200 to participate we have a very high degree of self-selection happening and the randomness is weaker.
I don't offer this criticism only on this poll but on all polls. The professionals make the same mistakes and the results are misleading and meaningless in the same ways.
Now lets look at those results. The media reports are focused on "decided voters" but you have to wonder how one becomes a "decided voter" when there is no practical possibility of a pending election. Also the results said 957 of 1115 participants had already made up their minds about the next election. A stretch at best. With 14% saying they were "Undecided" and we know 60% of Albertan did not even vote last time it is hard to reconcile the high percentage of "decided" voters to these realities.
Therefore I think the more interesting and reliable numbers are in the All Respondents findings. The second most popular option there is a combination of Undecideds (14.2%) and Other Parties (7.3), which is larger than the Wildrose support. The "decided" results show that, for now, the WAP is a parking lot for disgruntled PC supporters.
The regional breakdown is even more interesting, but I have suspicions about its reliability for reasons already stated and it is not clear if the results reported are on All Participants or just "Decided" voters. I think it is only on the "Decided" voter because the overall bar graph is based on the "Decided" voters but it is far from clear. I also wonder where the "statistacal weighting" was applied, why, how much and on what base data.
That aside the rural north and south PC support is holding rather well in the 45% range. WAP is the "threat" but it is not much of a threat at the 24% level. Stelmach has not much to worry about in his country support if these results are accurate. But the mainly rural caucus tht leads the Stelmach inner circle are spooked by these results for sure.
The real political story from this poll is in the big cities. We are told constantly in the media and in conversations that Calgary does not like Premier Stelmach. Well compared to Edmonton, they sure do. He has 38% support in Calgary but only 31% support in Edmonton. Calgary has decided the political threat to Stelmach should be the WAP at 27%. In Edmonton disgruntled citizens feel the Liberals should be the threat at 27.5%. The PCs and Liberals are essentially tied in Edmonton with these numbers being within the margin of error. The WAP trails the NDP in Edmonton and that is the place in Alberta where change and flux of political fortunes are being played out. Edmonton, not Calgary, is the political caldrun of a yearning for change based on these numbers.
The WAP is a political force but this poll is precious little proof of its power. Premier Stelmach is in trouble with Albertans but the drama has just begun and the story is far from being told. Read these opinion polls like you would poetry. It is more about the imgination and imagery they induce than the facts they prove.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Reprehensible Greenwash on CO2 Emissions!
I am on a holiday in Hawaii but all of my surfing has been on the Net. I could not let this extreme example of greenwash go by without sharing. http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2009/10/09/plants_need_co2/index.html?source=newsletter
And now out of Bangkok we hear Saudi Arabia complaining that they need economic support if climate change legislation passes? Spare me! Quit using oil profits to fund terrorists is a place to start revising your economy.
And now out of Bangkok we hear Saudi Arabia complaining that they need economic support if climate change legislation passes? Spare me! Quit using oil profits to fund terrorists is a place to start revising your economy.
Sunday, October 04, 2009
Albertans Want to be Proud of Their Oilsands Development
Here is the link to RebootAlberta where I posted the text of the Commentary I wrote and taped for CBC Radio earlier last week. It will be broadcast on CBC Radio One Edmonton AM program at 8:15 a.m. Give it a listen if you have your radio ears on at that time and place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)