Nova Scotia Election

Well, as always, Nova Scotia offered up some very interesting election night results last night.

The PCs pulled off another minority government. It's the third minority government in four elections.

Overall, I would say that the NDP had the best overall campaign. It was tightly run with a clear, concise and focused message. The PC campaign was also strong, although the result was not as positive as they probably had hoped.

The big failure was the Liberals. Clearly, Francis Mackenzie has to go. He couldn't even win his own seat and the party dropped in popular support.

It had been mentioned earlier that there may be a polarization occuring in NS politics between the NDP and PC party - a clear urban-rural divide. I would tend to agree with that accessment. Although, an exception exists.

Look at the riding of Queens near the South Shore. A fairly rural riding. Here, the Liberals did not field a candidate and the NDP took the seat by less than 100 votes. In this case, the lack of a Liberal candidate clearly helped the NDP since Queens has been a Tory riding for many many years.

Therefore, left-of-centre parties can win in rural NS if there is only one option available. In the future, there may be an argument for a joining of the NDP and Liberals in strategy in some parts of NS - similar to what the Liberals and National Party do in Australia.

Either way - the NDP has proven it can win a large number of votes in the province and its hold on Metro seems unbreakable at this point.

TD Bank Executives Bundle Political Donations

The G&M reports today that executives at TD Bank bundled personal political contributions and donated to both the Conservative and Liberal Party.

This method, which was used extensively by GW Bush during the 2004 election (the first after the Bi-Partisan Campaign Finance Reform bill came into effect) to raise money.

It is a very good way to overcome the new rules, but unless the TD Bank released this info, no one would have known that this was done.

In the US, contributors are required to disclose their profession and the company or organization they work for. I think that the Chief Electoral Officer in Canada will have to consider such a move as well in the future.

Paul Wells on Dryden

Paul Wells did a recap of the debate on Saturday. Here's his take on Dryden's performance...

Ken Dryden has been forced, by the sheer weight of his slab-like, builders-of-Stonehenge speaking style, to become pithy, because otherwise he just won't get anything said in 90 seconds. So he was very good on the limitations of Harper's ruthlessly pragmatic electoral strategies (if some group or segment of the population isn't needed for his majority, "write 'em off"). And he gives every issue a sort of epic significance that is, very often, hogwash (farmers offer "more than food and fibre"; equalization is more than numbers; everything is deeper than what you petty mortals believe it to be) — but which is still often quite moving. I'm not at all sure what kind of public administrator Ken Dryden would be ("Wait! Don't shut that abandoned government warehouse down! Don't you understand that it's more than a warehouse? Don't you see it has dreams inside?..."), but I have no doubt he sings at frequencies only Liberals can hear, and I expect him to grow his support after a very haphazard start.

I agree with a lot of that. For me - the question remains - who has the best chance to rebuild the Liberal Party from a pratical political perspective ? - funding, organization, attention.

Liberal Fundraising Woes to Continue...

Bill Curry in the Globe and Mail today writes about the potential woes the Liberals will facing under the even harsher election financing restrictions in the Accountability Act.

The next election will be fought with this new law in effect ($1,000 donation limit, no corporate or union donations to party of candidate). This once again highlights in the importance of electing a candidate that can not only beat Stephen Harper in the air (ideas. vision etc) but also on the ground (raising money, and drawing people out to events).

I revert back to a previous post I made regarding Ken Dryden:

What's the problem - The Liberals cannot raise small amounts of money from Canadians. Clearly the Conservatives have a huge advantage on us, while the NDP is also doing better among small donors (double the number of contributors). So, when I look to a leadership candidate who will be able to get the party back into fighting shape, money, as always, talks.

Ask yourself, which of the 11 candidates can go into rural Saskatchewan, Manitoba or Alberta and draw a crowd out larger than say 30 or 40 people? Bob Rae? - Maybe in rural Ontario, but that is just to throw eggs at him. Michael Ignatieff? - Highly doubtful - he's too much like John Kerry. Stephane Dion - most likely, NO.

So when I look at Ken Dryden - with his unbeatable name recognition and personal appeal - I say this man can be a cash cow for the Liberals in an era of tight personal contribution limits and no corporate or union donations. It is time for the Liberal Party to become a mass party, appealing to thousands of Canadians. And for mainly that reason - I will be supporting him.

That was then - and I am more convinced that despite some of his disadvantages - Ken Dryden is the best choice for the Liberals now if they want to win the next election. If the party is satisfied to sit it out for 6-8 more years, then Iggie, Kennedy or Dion will do. If they want to sit it out for the nest 8 to 12 years, then elect Bob Rae.

Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics...(Was the 2004 election stolen?)

I noticed a number of bloggers referencing the Rolling Stone article by Robert Kennedy Jr. about whether the 2004 presidential election was stolen. While I believe it probably was, Mystery Pollster breaks down his arguments.

Statistics can be easy skewed to a person's opinion. His blog makes it clear that the arguments in the article may not be all true.