Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

Testing the rhetoric

by Aaron Wherry on Wednesday, February 2, 2011 9:19am - 100 Comments

Abacus Data surveys responses to Conservative and Liberal rhetoric.

“Canada is stronger, prouder, and walking tall in the world. We are in safe hands with Stephen Harper. With so much at stake, why would we risk changing course.”

Agree 32%
Disagree 46%

“For five years, Stephen Harper hasn’t listened to Canadians. His priorities of $21-billion stealth fighters, super prisons, and tax breaks for big corporations are out of touch with the real needs of Canadian families: family care, pensions, learning and jobs.”

Agree 62%
Disagree 22%

More by Aaron Wherry

Emily

Well I'd go along with majority views on both those statements.

NorthernPoV

I do admire your dogged persistence in supporting all the right things but watch out:
46% is not a majority (except when suffering from our FPTP syndrome)

Emily

Meh…it just shows I'm mainstream in my views

excanuck

You would, of course, Emily.

Emily

Kindly stop trying to make me a Liberal….I'm not. I disagree with many of their policies.

However, fighter planes, big prisons and corporate tax breaks don't appeal to me either.

JP.

Emily, would you kindly express to us what you would like to see the government (and I don't mean a conservative government, I mean any government) do, without outlining the things you don't like about the current government.

Emily

We could have done so much in our boom years…

It was time to wack the debt, rebuild the crumbling infrastructure, get as many people as possible into universities, innovate thru R&D, back science to the hilt, invest for any future lean years, modernize the military, fix the GD environment, lower income taxes only, and by a chunk…and boost productivity that way, diversify the entire economy…grab the 21st century…

Instead…piddly ass things by both parties…in the boom and in the bust…

Small vision, small ambition, parochial poop….

mhiggins

Actually, on second thought, I agree with those of you who are pointing-out how bad this poll is. Pretty lame.

Orson Bean

So Emily, could you please list the many policies of the Liberals with which you disagree?

Or how about just a few, for starters?

I don't recall your ever doing anything on here except trash Harper and the Conservatives.

Emily

Well you don't even recall which party you prefer on a daily….sometimes an hourly basis…so I'm not surprised.

I don't agree with the Libs/Ignatieff on Afghanistan, the military/fighterplanes,being so chummy with the US, Israel, the tar sands, pot….and I doubt the elder care they're proposing is either useful or practical. Plus pensions have to be changed altogether….not just more bandaids applied.

Nor a whole variety of other things.

Orson Bean

Thanks for the info.

So I take it you want us out of Afghanistan pronto, like the NDP does? You want no fighterplanes purchased at all? You don't think the Liberals are sufficiently anti-American (I'd be curious to see what specifically you're getting at there)? You think the Liberals aren't sufficiently anti-Israel? And they're not sufficiently anti-tar sands? And you want pot to be legal rather than just decriminalized?

Gee, you sound like somebody who, umm, previously voted NDP . . .

Anyway, I'm glad to see we may agree on pot.
Emily

Yes, I want us out of Afghanistan pronto….we should have been out of there years ago when our initial job was over, but we got 'mission creep' instead.

No, we don't need fighterplanes….they became obsolete when ICBMs were invented. In fact the only thing we've used them for in eons was in the Balkans. These 'fighterplanes' are useless for the defence of Canada, and only for foreign ops. Mythical foreign ops at that.

Canada should be an honest broker in the ME….looking to find solutions, not so whole-heartedly on one side that we've now got a military alliance with Israel! An attack on Israel is NOT an attack on Canada….that's just absurd.

Oil sands are a mess, and need to be cleaned up….pretty much everyone on the planet knows that.

I don't think any drug should be illegal…that's also absurd. They all have their uses, and should be available through a doctor. Pot specifically should be sold in the local liquor store.

I wondered why you were being so offensive…..no, I've never voted NDP in my life nor would I.
Orson Bean

BTW Emily, who says you have to prefer a party? Lots of people are non-partisan and don't support any particular political party. As for me, I'm more or less a fiscal conservative social liberal, though any tag like that is reductionist. There is no federal political party that currently reflects my outlook on most issues, so why the hell should I throw my support behind a party that doesn't reflect my views?
Emily

I've said repeatedly that I'm an Independent, and don't support any party. In fact I'd prefer a new party…one for the 21st century…and without all the baggage.

Jeff Jedras

The thing to keep in mind with those numbers is Harper has that 32% all to himself, while Ignatieff, Layton, Duceppe and May all fight for that 62%.

The first set of numbers speak to Harper's inability to grow beyond his base and broaden his support to majority levels. The second set of numbers speak to the challenge of coalescing the anti-Harper sentiment, although it shows the opportunity is there.

Crit_Reasoning

Technically, the first set of numbers speaks to the way the first statement is written. The second set of numbers speaks to the way the second statement is written. One can't draw overly broad conclusions from a weighted online survey that includes a very limited test of two dissimilar examples of rhetoric.

madeyoulook

Although, even as written, exactly as written, it is disheartening to see that 62% of Canadians want our federal prime minister to be a better provincial premier.

Crit_Reasoning

It's funny how federal politicians exploit confusion about the division of powers in their rhetoric:

"The Prime Minister hasn't listened to Canadians. He wants to spend billions in areas of federal jurisdiction, like defence and federal penitentiaries, instead of areas of provincial jurisdiction, like education and health care!"
Thwim

Have you seen our provincial premiers?

Easy joke aside, I think there's an argument to be made that health care and education really shouldn't be left in the hands of provinces. If we are truly going to be a nation, why should I receive better care in St. John's than I do in Edmonton? Why should my courses in BC be non-transferable into Ottawa and vice versa? If we truly value having a mobile population, one that can freely move to take advantage of where employees are needed, then a national standard of these things makes sense.

ajb

One thing I notice about this poll: the anti-Harper passage is just plain better-written than the pro-Harper one. "Standing tall in the world?" It's full of fluff, while the anti-Harper passage is much more concrete and specific.
But overall, the results speak to the current situation pretty well: a government that, after five fairly uneventful years in power can only garner the support of about one in three Canadians, and an opposition that can't capitalize on the weakness and unpopularity of the government.

jonatwitan

This is an ongoing trend with Abacus. Despite nobly including a section on their website about the dangers of pollster bias and the importance of questions being worded fairly (http://abacusdata.ca/about/abacus-101-making-sense-of-polls/), we see nothing but sloppy and bias producing questions from them all the time. My favorite example remains this one: http://abacusdata.ca/2011/01/26/canadians-and-cor… – where the Opposition version of the story about what is really important is hard to disagree with.

Perhaps it could have said, off the top of my head: "Canada is focussed on lowering taxes, creating jobs, being tough on crime, and supporting the troops. Stephen Harper can be trusted to continue the course. With so much at stake, why risk changing course"

Again, off the top of my head. It at least has the virtue of providing specifics vs. specifics, and showing that the purchase of planes can be "spun" two different ways depending on who is doing the talking.

Crit_Reasoning

I agree. Abacus could have gotten very different results simply by choosing two different examples of rhetoric to compare. As it is, they're comparing apples to oranges, because the two statements aren't really comparable in terms of topic, tone, quality of writing, etc.
Richard_S_Argent

The last sentence of the "Conservative rhetoric" is pretty much a direct quote from the Harper Working Late ad.

(that appears to have been pulled off youtube but that I just saw on teevee)

jonatwitan

I don't disagree, which is why in the example off the top of my head above, I changed only the beginning, not the end. Was the "standing tall in the world" part from the teevee also?

Richard_S_Argent

Cain't rightly recall. If I see it on the teevee agin I'll surely let you know. :)
madeyoulook

People still watch teevee?
Richard_S_Argent

Just saw the ad again. And it absolutely says “Canada is stronger, prouder, and walking tall in the world." It's right before the commercial wraps up with "with so much at stake, why would we risk changing course.”

So the Conservative Rhetoric quote is fully pulled from that one ad.
ajb

Fair enough, then. I still think it's weak tea compared to the Liberal quote, but if Stephen Harper wants to walk tall, I say let him!
Looking at the pdf, it's interesting that the Tory statement only attracts the strong support of 12%, so even those that like it aren't exactly driven wild by it. Also interesting that 37% strongly agree with the Liberal position, but far fewer (in most surveys) actually support the Liberal party.

Mandatory Jedi

Wow…another anti-Harper blog, shocking.

Halo_Override

How many toilets do you have?

truthintoronto

That's just a lazy poll.

The so-called Conservative narrative is not a contrast statement.

The Liberal statement is a contrast statement.

Constrat statements will always win out over non-contrast statements.

When abbacus tests the Conservatives anti-Ignatieff message versus the Liberal's anti-Harper message — then we will have something worth talking about.

Selena

Harper is his own anti-Harper message

Crit_Reasoning

The Conservative statement tested in the poll was short, vague, and kind of cheesy, while the Liberal statement was lengthier, punchier and more specific.

Here's an example of the Conservative statement rewritten to be similar in style, tone and length to the Liberal statement:

"Under Stephen Harper's steady leadership, Canada is weathering the storm of the global economic crisis. Harper's Economic Action Plan helped create 400,000 jobs since July 2009 – the strongest job growth of any G7 country. With so much at stake, can we really afford a Ignatieff/NDP/Bloc Quebecois Coalition?"

vs.

"For five years, Stephen Harper hasn’t listened to Canadians. His priorities of $21-billion stealth fighters, super prisons, and tax breaks for big corporations are out of touch with the real needs of Canadian families: family care, pensions, learning and jobs.”

TimesArrow

I think someone[ stats can?] has a quibble or two about those job numbers.

jonatwitan

stats can?

Well, can they or can't they? Or do you want to share some more of the things that you "think"?

P.S. Georyboy is none other than George Strombolopolous. I highly commend his radio program to you.
TimesArrow

Ah thanks i thought it was him, but i didn't want to embarass myself by getting it completely wrong. Had no idea he was on radio – any similarity to his tv spot?
http://www.ndp.ca/press/reality-check-stephen-har…

http://accidentaldeliberations.blogspot.com The Jurist

The Conservative statement tested in the poll was also the punchline to the Cons' most prominent recent ad. So if the Cons' own ad campaign being blasted out to Canadians is "short, vague, and kind of cheesy", why should a pollster be putting in extra work trying to develop a better pitch for them (rather than testing their actual message)?

madeyoulook

Would that be why he has been serving so long as a minority-government prime minister?
Crit_Reasoning

Agreed, but I included "a Ignatieff/NDP/Bloc Coalition" because I pulled it directly from existing Conservative rhetoric, just as I pulled the other language in the rewritten version directly from Conservative rhetoric.

After all, the whole point is to test Liberal rhetoric against Conservative rhetoric. If I inserted my own rhetorical stylings, the comparison would be meaningless.

Ihttp://www.google.ca/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=%22a+Ignatieff/NDP/Bloc+Quebecois+Coalition%3F%22

http://twitter.com/HermanThind @HermanThind

Thing is, "Truth", the Liberal message is NOT anti-Harper – it is highlighting Harper's failed policies. The Conservative message is a personal attack on Ignatieff (where he lived, went to school, etc.). Canadians are worried about their bottom line – the Liberal message will resonate.

truthintoronto

Where exactly in the statement ..

"Canada is stronger, prouder, and walking tall in the world. We are in safe hands with Stephen Harper. With so much at stake, why would we risk changing course" …

…do you see a personal attack on Ignatieff? Quite frankly if the statement DID include an attack on Ignatieff, it would probably test better — that's my point.

Arturolexo

Test the rhetoric:

"Ignatief would be a better leader than Stephen Harper."

Agree: 12%
Disagree 88%

mhiggins

I don't think you understand what "test the rhetoric" means.

Arturolexo

I understand a chump when I see one. Ignatief. Loser.

TimesArrow

If we were electing our PM you might have a point.

peter

It's probably worthwhile to point out that Abacus focuses on "post-millenials" (born 1980 or later). Fortunately for the CPC they mostly don't vote. Fortunate for the rest of us as well, because most of us who grew up at some point repudiated the non-sense we were indoctrinated with by academics and the media in our youth, after we evolved the capacity think critically (with apologies to the usual suspects assembled here like barking seals for their trainer…you know who you are). In fact I would argue that the recent success of the CPC can be directly attributed to the "Trudeau generation" of boomers re-evaluating many of their beliefs about the role and competance of government in achieving "social justice". We were saddened to learn "our rich uncle in Ottawa" that proferred so many plumbs was actually stealing our money to give us gifts we didn't want, made by his well-paid pals who all seem to have better, indexed, pensions than us and make on average 25% more for doing less and get better holidays. As Frank Baum pointed out long ago, the "Great Oz" ain't all he's cracked up to be…and his bankers are worse.

mhiggins

So very bitter.
Emily

More worthwhile pointing out is that some boomers developed class envy….

peter

Nice to see you folks self-identifying, even using Marxist rhetoric, sort of proves my point. Twitter on dudes.

Emily

'Marxist rhetoric'…..peter is definitely a Con…no education.
mhiggins

That's neat what you did with the "self-identifying" thing followed immediately by the anti-Twitter culture war thing.

The enemy, he is different, and that is scary.

peter

If you are really looking for "the enemy" look to your assumptions about what is and is not "good" about government. and most especally look to your economic assumptions and your "cultural beliefs". Until most of hit about 40 and have families and responsibilities and more demands than cash or time we accept, as good, the "product" called "the just society". I don't see much that is "just" about condemning my children and grandchildren to poverty based on "UNSUSTAINABLE" economic nostrums that have finacially crippled us and made it impossible to extricate ourselves from the merry go round of boom and bust. Even though we have striped tooth paste and SUVs we are not really that much "smarter" than our forebearers. In fact, the McKnowledge displayed by most of the young people I know (many with graduate degrees) speaks to a poverty of curriculem and critical thinking in the post-secondary world that I find baffling. BTW not much of lasting value can be communicated in 168 characters
mhiggins

Right. I have no problem with anything you're saying here. It's how you're saying it. I hate it when people wrap otherwise intelligent politics in an identity package. It ruins the argument. That's why I made fun of your Marxist/Twitter rabble. You'll get nowhere by demonizing post-grads and Twitter users. Government is necessarily the place where the public comes together collectively to make progress, so there will always be a left and a hard-left, just as there will be a right and hard-right to correct the excesses of a ruling left. You're obviously disillusioned with liberalism, but the solution is not cutting off the left side of our political brains.

I also disagree that we have somehow condemned the next generation to poverty. I would like to see the proof for such alarmist claims.
peter

Look at the cumulative debt wracked up by the federal gov't, the provinces and the cities. Add to that the collective secured and unsecured debts of our citizens and the multitude of "unfunded liabilities" going forward and the assumptions decision makers include as asterisks in their plans. In my lay opinion that is the reason for the "carbon schemes" and the AGW "science"…to create a new "currency" that penalizes civilization and rewards "rustic"…and trust me the investment bank guys and the boys at the fed and Bank Of Canada won't be the ones paying the price or "going rustic". That's why they're inflating at the fed, deflation makes all the loans callable because the underlying assests the debts are based on fall in value and makes the loans "non-performing". Guess which neighbor we generate around 75% of our GDP from…or not?. You tell me what happens to the industrial economy of southern Ontario and quebec if the US economy grinds to a halt under the trillions of off the books liabilities it has added in just the past two years? Like I said, I fear for my kids' future.
mhiggins

That's really pessimistic. I think you're forgetting about the boom part of the boom-bust cycle. Your catastrophic scenario is predicated on the assumptions that there will be no more innovation and no more productivity gains in the global economy.

The future can't be a return to the past, guy. The boom-bust cycle is the bringer of creative destruction, and without creative destruction we would never make gains in our collective prosperity. The great collective Canadian challenge moving forward is to modernize the infrastructure in our country while simultaneously tackling the structural deficit. Yeah, we have a cash-flow problem, but if we wallow in it we'll never gain the collective will to invest in the very things that will eventually make us a competitive and productive society.
peter

Except for Keyensian paradox, that is the boomers are looking to retire and earn high investment yields form bonds and other safe vehicles, while the business community and the mainstream economists want and need low interest rates and a high velocity of money in the consumer market. We can not have both. Wishing or believing it is other than it is will not alter the problem. Historically, this type of situation does not tend to end well. Who knows, perhaps someone will pull a rabbit out of a hat and all will be well…I'm not so optimistic.

TimesArrow

Peter gets my vote for non sequturial[?] post of the thread – or is it most sloppily concoted strawman…no matter…what's the diff really?

peter

If you don't have the facts or the law blow smoke and put up grafitti. You must be a Green.

gottabesaid

Not to defend the poll — I don't like them much to begin with — but I think my fellow commenters are might be missing the comparison. They're comparing the Liberal narrative about Stephen Harper and his government and the Conservative narrative about Stephen Harper and his government.

Just a quibble. I don't put much stock in it to begin with.
Crit_Reasoning

I look forward to writing "RETURN TO SENDER" on the envelope when I receive it.
Halo_Override

"Reffudiated". Lexo left a couple of spare F's laying around and I hate to see them go to waste.
TimesArrow

Ok you got me – who's Georgy boy?
chet

You know things are tough for the Libs when their resident propandist has to scour for positive polling, only to come up with the ever respected and well known…. aba—who agian?

who, coincidentally on their report are proudly into….ahem "social responsibility" …or…what's another word for that? I believe it means being "progressive".
mhiggins

Those results reinforce just how ineffective Ignatieff's team has been in seizing the day. (Conversely, it shows how effective the Harper team has been at marginalizing Ignatieff's team in the eyes of Canadians.) I think most Canadians have Harper fatigue, but they see no alternative worth their support. Total bummer.

In other words: "We agree with you, Mr. Ignatieff, so get out there and find us a leader!"
David_M.

So both questions were about Harper and the message you get is how Ignatieff's team is ineffective and marginalized?
I'll need another coffee to connect those dots.
Out There

The proportion of people who agree or disagree with Stephen Harper is roughly the same as the proportion of people who voted for or against the Conservatives in the last election. The people who agree that Harper should be removed don't agree on who should replace him.

And this, and the fact that Canada uses a first-past-the-post system, is why Harper is Prime Minister in the first place.
tedbetts

I would agree but for the fact that if you changed the name of Stephen Harper to Paul Martin, you would have gotten the same results in the fall of 2005. And look where we are now.
mhiggins

Ha! I love these comment boards. I thought what I said was pretty obvious. Canadians clearly support the rhetoric of the Liberals, but they don't support the Liberals as an alternative to the government.

You must wipe the partisan Vaseline from your lenses, my man. Not every criticism of Ignatieff is a vote for Harper. The day the Conservatives are out of power can't come soon enough in my opinion.
hollinm

If the poll is an accurate reflection of what Canadians are thinking then it follows that the polls showing who Canadians would support in the next election clearly show that there is something wrong with the leader of the official opposition because with voting intention polls and leadership polls showing Ignatieff hardly on the radar screen it is a logical assumption to make. You may not like it but that is the only conclusion that can be drawn.
Thwim

I'd tend to agree with higgins here. With that kind of polling on their respective messages, the fact that polling on their electoral popularity is so different either says something about Mr. Ignatieff's ability to capitalize on the sentiment on Canadians, or about Mr. Harper's ability to prevent such capitalization.
Mike T.

I believe it was Abraham LIncoln who is attributed with saying "YOu can fool 32% of the people most of the time.." :)
Emily

Harper was heartily disliked 4 months before he became PM
Blue

The findings of a recent poll of commenters on Macleans.ca has just been released.
76% of the respondents have agreed with their follower, Aaron Wherry, that PM Harper and his Conservative Party are out to destroy the country.
Coincidentally, the methodology of this poll is similar to a recent Abacus poll.
The findings are also quite similar.
As far as being an accurate reflection of the opinion of Canadians toward their Conservative gov`t and the Liberal opposition, the Abacus poll should be given as much credibility as the MacLeans poll.
Richard_S_Argent

clever.
Blow Away

Face it: we're just not that into you. Or the PM. Or staying the course. Or being lied to, bullied, and treated like idiots. Now, get a real job, conbots.
Emily

Yes, everytime they get poll results they don't like, they blame the pollster. And anyone who publishes the poll.
Blue

My point is, I don`t trust the findings of a lot of polls and especially one like Abacus` where it seems the respondents had to be regular users of the internet.
There is a large percentage of folks out there, especially 50 and older, who are not regular users of the internet and these folks are often the ones who are most likely to vote and probably a large percentage vote Conservative.
So, of course, it is easy to encourage younger, regular users of the internet to slag the government, to click the mouse to sign a petition against prorogation, but try to get them to support a political party financially, let alone crawl out to the voting booth every 3 or 4 years.
hollinm

Of course nothing but anti Harper comments. The fact is if Canadians, as you are quick to remind us all the time, dislike Harper then why pray tell can't Ignatieff get any traction and the Libs haven't been able outpoll the Conservatives over the past five years. In fact the latest leadership poll shows Ignatieff behind Duceppe. That is not a recipe for winning an election. Looks like you are going to have to put up with Harper awhile longer Emily.

Can't wait to watch Ignatieff twist himself into a pretzel trying to get himself out of an election. Shades of Mr. Harper your time is up meme. He may be a smart fellow but he has the political skills of a gnat.
cmackie

lol Mike I totally agree about the 32%ers, also know as The Cult.
David_M.

There is plenty to criticize Ignatieff about. It just seemed me that the abacus poll was a reflection on Harper not the failings of liberal messaging (and fail they have).
Emily

Neither Cons nor Libs have had any traction for 5 years now hollinm. The country doesn't like the policies of either party.
mhiggins

This may be nitpicking, but the Liberals did out-poll the Conservatives on a couple of occasions in the last five years. I can't remember exactly when or under what circumstances, but I know it did happen. Ignatieff himself has never been popular. His peak popularity will likely occur at some point during the inevitable election campaign. I'm not sure how high that peak will be.
LdKitchenersOwn

I can't believe I'm defending Emily, but wasn't her point there that the public is fickle, and a politician being unpopular now means relatively little given how fast things can turn? After all, Paul Martin was going to DESTROY Stephen Harper right up until almost the moment that he didn't. Stephane Dion was supposed to have been a brilliant and invigorating choice for the Liberals. Chretien was seen as a disastrous pick early on.

I think Emily's point was simply that every politician is unpopular and has trouble getting traction… until they don't.
CAPS

They mostly all happened when Stéphane Dion was leader.
hollinm

Good luck with that. Sounds like wishful thinking. You may be right about the polling but I don't think so.

So you are saying that Canadians are going to have an epiphany during the campaign and begin to like him after watching him and his arrogant attitude for 36 straight days.
wilson

Comparing 'the only' positive CPC ad to the 'only' LPC ad, which is negative.
This proves attack ads work, and nothing more.

Compare the negative LPC ad to
'He didn't come back for you'….. 'tax and spend Liberals'
and see what you get.
hollinm

They don't like the Liberal policies and they sure don't like the Liberal leader. However as I told you before there are only two men who can become PM in the next election. My bets are on Harper.
mhiggins

But what if Harper is seen wearing a hair net? WHAT THEN?
TimesArrow

Interesting that you list financial support ahead of duty to vote.
lgarvin

But it is a comment on the Liberals. Even many conservative voters don't much like Stephen Harper, and still the opposition parties – the Liberals in particular – are wallowing around ineffectually.

Frankly, it seems a pretty pointless poll to me… Harper is a guy who's hard to like. But he seems to be pretty safe in his job right now.
TimesArrow

You compare it, most of us adults have better things to do.
DerekPearce

My bets are on Harper too– with another minority. A majority of the country dislikes him– but that majority is split between three other parties.
DerekPearce

Precisely. I made that point above and scrolling down see you made it first!
Blue

Not so interesting really—I simply worded it such because I believe it would take more effort for you to write a cheque to the LPC then to drive over to the polling booth.
hollinm

haaaaaaahaaaaahaaaa. That will be the day. However, Igantieff could be caught doing it as he is so desperate for attention these days.
James Connors

haaaaaaahaaaaahaaaa.
http://img4.allvoices.com/thumbs/event/609/480/60…
sourstud

It would probably be a lacy fish-net hair-stocking ordered online from Canada Post
JDot

Like spending all day a Macleans talking about them?
JDot

er' "on Macleans".
hollinm

We all know Ignatieff loves having his "junk" touched all day and now he loudly proclaims he loves lingerie. The man is turning into a fool. This is not what we expect from someone who thinks he should be PM of the country.