I doubt that the NDP will get much more than 5-6 seats in SK, ricky. Believe me, I've been told all about the history of the CCF and NDP by my cousin's hubby, and it would be cool if they could dominate the state again, but it seems unlikely.

There's a band wagon effect Dan. If the count comes in from Quebec, and the NDP look to be dominating, the polls are still open in Saskatchewan for a couple of hours...It'll push the young voters to turn out. (Well, thats my theory and I'm stiicking with it) .
BTW we have some ridicuolous laws about not reporting, including tweating, election results before the polls close. In the past, the televison and radio coverage didn't start in your area till the polls closed. Often people in BC and Alberta would turn on the tv and discover it didn't matter how they voted....
So, its likely that hundreds of people will break that law out of spite. Younger people usually.

I wonder if Harper's turn about to attack Layton and his party will work as well as it did against Ignatieff?

Liberal Coin Ad

Well, the Conservatives and the Liberals have both trained their guns on the surging NDP. The Liberal ad with Harper and Layton on two sides of the same coin seems rather silly. I don’t think that Canadians will be convinced that Stephen Harper and Jack Layton are both similar insofar as they are “career politicians.” I think the misguided advert may actually draw attention to Mr. Igantieff’s inexperience. For me, the ad draws attention back to Mr. Layton’s statement at the English language debate (my favourite moment of the campaign thus far.)

Will it look more like fear of losing or nastiness than the behaviour of a man who should be given a safe and secure majority?

Conservative “Ambition” Ad

The Conservative ad about NDP ambition seems to be a copy of their opening salvo against Mr. Ignatieff just re-run against Mr. Layton. The ad, in its own way, actually reminds me of Mark Antony’s speech. The noble Brutus hath told you Caesar was ambitious.

Certainly, Mr. Layton’s assertion that he is running for Prime Minister seemed ambitious during the last election and at the beginning of this election as well. Yet, as the polls suggest that this is becoming evermore a possibility, it seems peculiar that the Conservative ad should focus on ambition.

Rather than prompting concern at the NDP’s ambition, it causes me to question the credibility of the authors of such a message. The words And Brutus is an honourable man seem to repeat themselves, questioning with each repetition the validity of the Conservatives’ accusations.

If he doesn't make a net gain in seats, will he (and ME) concede that he's lost the election?

If the Conservatives lose seats in the House of Commons it means that they lose seats in the House of Commons. This is not, in my mind, the equivalent of losing the election. If the Conservatives win more seats than any other single party in Parliament then they have won the election. Assuredly, failing to make a net gain or even enduring a net loss will be disappointing for the Conservatives and will undoubtedly suggest that they have either failed to broaden their support and have been given a less wholesome mandate from the Canadian population. If this were the case—that the Conservatives were returned to Parliament with a weaker mandate than before—then I would definitely say that the party should revise its policies (and, perhaps more importantly, its approach to policy making.)

Harper can count on his base now, and just a bit more. His base is 30%. The Conservatives, in previous incarnations, have rarely fallen below that number.

Indeed, Mr. Harper is very popular amongst his base and I’m not sure if the NDP will be able to make inroads into the Conservative base population just as yet (not in the same way that the Conservatives are making advances on the Liberal base at any rate.) Nevertheless, with the Mr. Harper asserting that abortion will not be debated during his premiership, some members of the socially conservative base are deeply disillusioned and may not vote at all or even vote against the Conservatives.

I don’t think that this will happen in large enough numbers for the Conservative base to suddenly dissolve, but it may be worth mentioning that the second choice for many social conservatives is actually the NDP.

It would be cool if they could dominate the state again, but it seems unlikely.

On the national level, I’m hoping to see the NDP increase their seats in Parliament, become leaders of the official opposition and even form the government. I don't think that the last one--forming the government--is very likely, but we'll see over the course of the next few days what happens with the numbers.

To clarify, with regards to forming government, I think that if the NDP won more seats than any other single party in the House then they are entitled to form the government. If this were the situation and the Conservatives were in opposition, and brought down the NDP government on a confidence motion in an effort to form a coalition with the Liberals and govern for themselves, I’d think this to be equally illegitimate (even though it is constitutionally sound) as the NDP or Liberals forming a coalition government if the Conservatives win the election.

BTW we have some ridicuolous laws about not reporting, including tweating, election results before the polls close.

Why is that ridiculous ? Seems pretty sensible to me.

Indeed, Sass. A simple way to enforce it would be to delay counts in the East until the polls close in the West. The US has the same problem.

sass

Why is that ridiculous ? Seems pretty sensible to me.

Because in this day and age its unenforcable. (And it makes some presumptions about voting influences that seem patronizing.)

Polls closing and opening at the same time is difficult in Canada. In Newfoundland when its Noon in BC ii 7:30AM
For concurrent polls, lets say in Newfoundland polls open from Noon to 9:30Pm
would be open in 11:30, 10:30, 9:30 8:30 and 7:30AM as you work across the country. And close as early as 5:30 PM in BC.
If we had half the day off legally i suppose it could work. But that kind of exatitude doesn't treat the eastern or western populations the same way as the central provinces. Indeed it may terribly inconvenience them.

You could solve the problem by simply delaying the count in the eastern provinces.

sass

You could solve the problem by simply delaying the count in the eastern provinces

.
Having worked as a poll captain, this again might not work.
Once the doors are closed and the last voter walks out, counting at the poll commences.
The unofficial count is done and agreed to, and the ballot boxes are sealed and taken away by the returning officer. Before he leaves, every poll capatain has called their results in to the field office of their candidate....It would take a great deal of security to keep numbers from getting out.

Do we delay the counting? That is deny the poll workers the right to commence counting until as much as 3 and a half hours after the last ballot has been cast??? In Newf they simply sit around for 4 and half hours watching the box? They can't start counting till 1:30 in the morning?
It seems pretty convoluted and inconvenient.

It wouldn't have to be that bad. How long does a count normally last, a few hours ? The count in Newf could begin a few hours before the polls close in BC.

Article 329 of the Canada Elections Act reads as follows:

PREMATURE TRANSMISSION
Prohibition — premature transmission of results
329. No person shall transmit the result or purported result of the vote in an electoral district to the public in another electoral district before the close of all of the polling stations in that other electoral district.

Implementing the Canada Elections Act
I’m not familiar with the application of the Canada Elections Act, but here is my understanding from briefly reading some of the clauses. Results are tabulated in ridings after the polls close and may be disclosed to constituents. However, the results of the riding where polls have closed may not be transmitted to ridings where polls are still open. So, to draw on Rickyp’s example: Polls in Newfoundland, having closed, could announce their results to people in Newfoundland (and other places where the polls have closed) but couldn’t, let’s say, disclose the results to people in British Columbia (or other places where the polls are open.) Is that essentially how the law has been implemented?


Michael Geist's View
Michael Geist, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, makes a case similar to the one Rickyp is advancing regarding both the inconvenience of the current laws in addition to the difficulty in enforcing such laws in light of the emergence of new social media.

Some Further Thoughts
I’m not fully convinced by this argument. In order to implement the law, he contends that Twitter and other forms of social media would have to be restricted so as to prevent the results of the elections being transmitted on a national level. This, of course, raises concerns regarding freedom of expression and whatnot.

Nevertheless, as Sassenach pointed out, the implementation of the Canada Elections Act does not necessarily involve restricting social media. As an alternative, it could involve delaying the ballot counting. Even if the Atlantic Provinces began tabulating the votes a few hours before the polls close in BC, it would likely ensure that results were not announced before all the polls had closed across the country.

Now, of course, this may be an inconvenience. However, is it an inconvenience we are unwilling to bear for the sake of democratic principles?
Let’s look at the seats allocated to the provinces and territories:

Alberta 28
British Columbia 36
Manitoba 14
New Brunswick 10
Newfoundland and Labrador 7
Northwest Territories 1
Nova Scotia 11
Nunavut 1
Ontario 106
Prince Edward Island 4
Quebec 75
Saskatchewan 14
Yukon 1
TOTAL 308

When just Quebec and Ontario have voted, there are enough seats there to form a Majority Government. That could either dissolution voters in the West who may be voting for a different party. Additionally, it could influence voters to strengthen an opposition party to ensure that the government is, while a majority, still challenged (somewhat) in the House.

All in all, disclosing results before the polls have closed has the potential to influence voters. Voters casting ballots in BC are assessing issues (ie. Parliamentary Configuration) with information that voters in PEI didn’t have access to, and I think the asymmetry of information is fundamentally unfair.

rickyp wrote:Do we delay the counting?

yes. It's not js hard as you think

In Newf they simply sit around for 4 and half hours watching the box? They can't start counting till 1:30 in the morning?
It seems pretty convoluted and inconvenient.

No, it's actually very simple. Think for more than one second, I'm sure it'll come to you

Here is an interesting article from the Toronto Star regarding the transmission of election results before the closing of polls: Posting election results to Twitter, Facebook may be illegal

sass

How long does a count normally last, a few hours ?

I remember calling my polls results in 20 minutes after the poll closed. And my contact at the campaign headquaters already had enough results in to know we'd lost the election.So that was a party i didn't attend.
Dividing into 4 or 5 piles and counting isn't time consuming.

Moving to electronic voting may make the delay of reporting possible...
But we aren't there yet, here. One problem is that the voting procedure must be nationally uniform, and in Nunavut its pretty difficult to plan for electronic balloting at many of their very remote polls. .

I voted in the advance poll this week and it took 45 minutess. Unusally time consuming because its pretty much still manual, and when done at one poll amalgamating 12 polls you've got a returning officer shuffling bewtween 12 different poll rosters and occassionally witnessing declarations and idnentifications, to ensure a non-regiastered voter is indeed qualified to vote.

magister

If the Conservatives win more seats than any other single party in Parliament then they have won the election.

Stephen Harper has done a good job of confusing some Canadians about our constitution and system of governance. remember parouging parliament in order to avoid the notion of a Liberal/NDP coalition? ?
Somehow along the line he seemed to want to deligitimize the notion that Parliament provides a government with the authority to govern ...not the electorate directly.
The notion that any party that can find the support of sufficient members within the house has the authority to govern shouldn't be presented as strange or foreign to our way of governance. You are too young to remember that the most effective governments we've had in Canada have been minority governments.

Perhaps the one thing, as a Martin Liberal, that I would like to see if Jack does manage to eventually form a minority government is voting on proportional representation. I realize it would mean a perpetual minority situation but I'm not sure the ability to compromise is a weakness. The inability to compromise, ala Mr. Harper, leads to brittle governments that quickly reach a ceiling of support. Both within Parliament, and eventually with the electorate.
The other thing is the end of the Bloc.... probably a final nail in the coffin of the separatistes...