Post Election Analysis...

First, I am rather pleased with my prediction:

% Vote: Libs got 37.6 - I predicted 37.5; PCs got 34.9 - I predicted 33; and the NDP got 23.2 and I predicted 24%

Seats: Libs got 53 - I predicted 58; PCs got 37 - I predicted 32; and the NDP got 17 and I predicted 17.

From my perspective, I was predicting a small majority for the Liberals and with their 53 seats they virtually have that and don't forget - there will be recounts, the Grits can appoint a non-lib Speaker, plus they can entice non-liberals over with Cabinet appointments etc.

So for all intents and purposes they squeaked a virtual majority.


My Analysis:

I had planned to go into this in some detail - reminding dear readers of the many gaffs and screw-ups on the part of McGuinty and company over the course of the last 8 years but for the most part, I have done that in Blogs leading up to last eve. Plus it would take a lot of room and more time than I have this morning.

So a few quick thoughts instead.

First, I cannot remember a more anemic campaign put on by Hudak and his Handlers and I go back quite a while.

Second, I do not believe McGuinty is a liar all the time; ...only when he opens his mouth.

Third, and surprising for most of you no doubt, I am glad McGuinty won.

I say that because by winning, Dalton McGuinty now has to face up to all his follies of his first two terms. Events around the world have overtaken him. He can no longer ignore the high Debt and Deficits that are tearing the Western World apart and that contagion will engulf Ontario over his new mandate.

He did nothing to prepare Ontario for this coming onslaught so it will be fun watching him squirm trying to react to forces now beyond his control.

And, poor olde Hudak did nothing to warrant facing these coming problems.

Plus I am sorry to say, he is not the man to deal with them in any event. He is Tory Lite when Tory Heavy is needed.

The sooner Hudak is gone from the picture the better.

That said, it would be justice to see him stay on and for him to face each day how wrong he was in fighting a lifeless Campaign. A Campaign that should have begun at the time he was appointed Leader but never took off.

That's it - Ontario got what it deserved and will soon reap the results.


As I see it...


'K.D. Galagher'

And My Election Prediction ...

Drum Roll Please.

In the last Provincial Election, the Liberals won 71 seats (42%); the PCs won 26 sts (26%) and the NDP won 10 sts (16.7%).


For Tomorrow's Election, I am thinking the Liberals will garner 37.5% of the vote; the PCs 33%; and the NDP 24% based on my reading of the numerous last minute polls.


Based on these numbers, the Liberals will get the most seats.

My breakdown:

1. Liberals ... 58*

2. Progressive Conservative ... 32

3. N.D.P. ... 17

*54 is needed for a Majority.

If my prediction is correct or nearly correct, it will mean another Majority Victory for McGuinty and his fellow Liberals.

His Third in a Row.

You must see the humour in this.

I will provide an analysis post Election on either Friday or more likely, over the course of the Weekend.

As I see it...

"K.D. Galagher'

Now I am beginning to think I have really lost it !!

What I do know is that the World has reached a cross-road in regard to financial and economic matters generally.

This, though, will present an opportunity for a major change in focus; more specifically, how we measure success.

Under the current regime - the one that has been with us since Adam Smith, we are focused on growth - bigger is better.

GDP numbers must grow each quarter or we deem ourselves to be in recession or worse - depression.

In pursuit of our drive for bigger and bigger GDP numbers, profits and the like, Governments spend like crazy, demand more productivity and impose greater immigration.

In response to this I say, what is wrong with Smaller? Or even the Status Quo? As long as our citizens are fulfilled in their day to day lives.

Let me be clear here, I am not for a moment turning my back on Capitalism for indeed it is the only proven, effective way to ensure quality products at as cheap a price as possible. It also treats individuals evenly, i.e. those who are prepared to work are rewarded and those who are not willing to work, do no succeed.

What I would like to see though is less reliance on over all growth - growth at all cost. Such an approach to me causes more damage than good - a Country like Canada is deemed to need massive immigration for fear we will lack needed workers in the years ahead. But that brings with it a host of problems that are not easily dealt with such as inner city crime, too much demand on our health care and social services. That is not to say that immigration is wrong - heck this country is made up of immigrants - the natives too, albeit they came here somewhat earlier. But Immigration for the sake of Immigration becomes a problem in itself.

In place of GDP analysis, I would like to see a Happiness/Contentment/Fulfillment (HCF) Measure developed.

A 'Put People First' approach that encourages an individual to do what he or she likes and / or is gifted in doing. Be that painting, writing, working with the elderly, our youth, kite making etc; in addition to the professions.

This would have to be done in the schools and in society to help our kids identify things they want to do in life - be it a plumber or a garbage collector. Or maybe a garbage collector who also collects scrap and in the end makes a fortune in recycling.

Included in this is to have the time to 'smell the roses' to get some real enjoyment out of life - it is too short a time to waste.

So instead of saying each quarter that the GDP rose or fell 1.5% we would say, the HCF rose or fell 1.5%.

This approach would hopefully get more people involved in life - off welfare, or off the business treadmill into something they get a kick out of.

It would mean lessening our expectations since the type of living I am referring to would not always bring in the big salaries. The Cost of Living would need to decline since that is one of the prime reasons why life has become so much of a chore for many of us - 2 wage earners per household earning more and more but less to show for it.

We don't need the big houses, the costly cars and all the bells and whistles, many of us can and should get by with less
and, by so doing, I believe we'd all be much happier.

Regardless of what is done - we as the Boomers are headed for some dramatic changes as we retire and grow older. There will be less younger folks around to care for us - even with massive immigration. We will have to attend to our own needs, the best we can. And we'll probably be better off for it.

We might just as well get started and work at improving our own HCF indexes.

'As I see it...

'K.D. Galagher'

And The Winner Is....

Andrea Horwath by a nose.




So say The Three Polls out since the Debate.




Angus Reid - Libs 33%; Tories 34%; and NDP 26%



Leger - Libs 32%; Tories 34% and NDP 29%



Nanos - Libs 37.7%; Tories 34.4% and NDP 25.5%




Average %: Liberals 34.23; PCs 34.13; and NDP 26.83.





Now those same three Pollsters, had pre-debate %'s as follows:




Angus Reid - Libs 32; Tories 36; and NDP 26



Leger - Libs 33; Tories 36; and NDP 26



Nanos - Libs 38.1; Tories 34.7; and NDP 24.3




Average %: Liberals 34.36; PCs 35.54; and NDP 25.43




Ergo dear reader, the NDP was the only Party to increase its support post debate - from 25.43 average to 26.83 average or 1.4%


Both the Liberals and the PCs dropped in their per centages - the Conservatives dropped the most, going from an average of 35.53 to 34.13 or a drop of 1.4%. Which may not seem like much but in this dead head election race, every point counts.


The Liberal drop was minuscule, going from an average of 34.36 prior to the Debate to 34.23 Post Debate, for a drop of only .13%.




What this tells me then is that the NDP won the Debate - the Conservatives lost the Debate and the Liberals were able to hold their own.


You may say with the margins of error etc that is all assumption on your part Galagher, and you'd be correct.


But at least my assumption is based upon something concrete and not just on pundits' analysis of how one candidate moved his hands nervously or another candidate's smile was weird.

Plus to limit the margin of error issue, I have averaged the three polls which should more or less eliminate that problem.


But the implications of these recent polls are telling, even if obvious.

That is to say, if an Election was held today, Ontario would elect an Minority Government, either Liberal or Tory with the NDP holding the balance of power.

But we still have a few days left so change in these numbers is still possible albeit unlikely.

My prediction on numbers - Wednesday night.

As I see it..

'K.D. Galagher'

The Question...

And My Answer.

The Question from a Reader:

Galagher, I would appreciate your thoughts on certain teacher advertisements currently on radio / t.v.

One, has to do with kids, in the Ontario Election, with an anti Tory bent and sponsored by the Ontario Teachers Federation.

The other by the Catholic English Teachers Federation promotes all day kindergarten with a positive Liberal bent.

"What really irks me most ..is the fact that we as taxpayers are paying the teachers' salaries and what makes it worse, we do not even have children in school".

The Reader goes on: "In my opinion, this is a classic job of money laundering as the teachers are using our tax dollars to support a political party".

"Is this correct Galagher"?

"Should Elections Ontario or the Province's A.G. look into this"?

And finally, "It is obvious to me that the current Liberal Government has put the OTF and the CETF up to this to save McGuinty a ton of advertising costs".

My Response:

Dear Reader, I did a Blog on this very subject recently and declared this action, on the part of the Teacher Unions and Public Service Unions generally, to be undemocratic.

But the chances of any body, such as Elections Ontario, looking into this are, I believe, nil.

They will simply argue it is a freedom of speech issue.

Which it certainly is not, given, asyou say, it is Taxpayer money being used to fund their self serving ads.

I have felt this way since the late 60s when legislation was first introduced to have Unions represent Government Employees. And when I say government employees I am not only referring to Teachers but to Bureaucrats Generally, and to Police, Fire, Nurses, Doctors, Armed Forces, NGOs, etc. etc. etc.

I say this because the two parties, in any labour agreement with public workers, are their Union and the Taxpayer. Sadly, one party to those agreements - the Taxpayer, is not at the table.

In theory of course taxpayers are supposed to be represented by their Elected Officials but in practice, those self same Politicians - be they Socialist, Liberal, or Conservative, tend to be more interested in labour peace and will pay for that peace via the Taxpayers' pockets , regardless of cost.

It is no wonder then that our debt and deficits continue to grow while Public Servants continue to reap the best pay, have the best working conditions, while all the time enjoying almost total job security to the envy of the private sector.

An analogy was used recently that stated with every Public Sector wage increase, those public workers are consuming their own limbs since, with each increase, the declining private sector is less and less able to fund their feast.

And dear reader, I do not see anyone voluntarily dealing with this issue. People are happy with their entitlements and Governments are content to keep the peace with their workers regardless of the cost to you know who.

But that said, the issue will most certainly get addressed - since as noted above, the Public Sector will soon run out of limbs, (head and body) too.

And, with incredible Government Debts and with the Western World succumbing to Financial Collapse, I do not think that this time will be long in coming.

As I saw it ...

'K.D. Galagher'

WHO WON TUESDAY NITE'S DEBATE...

To Quote Zhou Enlai, "it is too soon to tell".

Zhou Enlai was the right hand to China's Mao Zedong and in the eyes of many, held more power than his Chinese Leader.

His quote was in response to a question as to whether or not the French Revolution of 1789 was a success or not.

Thankfully, we will not have to wait that long to know who won Tuesday's Debate.

But First; my own impressions.

As a Debate, it was a bit of a bust. I'd rank it 5 out of 10.

I would also rank the three participants as follows: Horwath (7); Hudak (6); and McGuinty (5).

Each though came up a winner in their own must do.

Horwath won on the most likable.

Hudak won since he did better than was expected of him (bearing in mind that the bar had been placed quite low).

McGuinty won in that he had an undefendable record and yet came out of the contest still breathing.

In that, I agree with the majority of commentators that there 'Was No Knock Out Blow'.

But dear reader, the above matters not.

What counts here is did the Debate move the levels of Support.

And we will only know that when the first series of polls come out post debate.

Whether you or I thought so and so won - means zip if the viewer, for whatever reason, decides differently.

And, his or her decision may have nothing to do with what was actually said in the Debate itself. If could also be affected by what the candidates wore, how they appeared psychically ...and so on.

Their views can also be formed as a result of post debate media commentary and bear in mind that much of Canada's media, like that in the US, is left leaning.

The other key factor in all of this is the fact that the main two contenders going into the Debate were in a Dead Heat for Lead - 35% each. It will take little movement on the part of voters to break that open albeit even marginally.

So stay tuned - the polls out this weekend will give you the answer to the lead off question.

As I see it...

'K.D. Galagher'

You Have To See The Irony In Today's Headline..

'Germany must assume Administration of the European Union' !!

Is this not the same country that unleashed two wars in the last century resulting in nearly 100 million deaths in its unsuccessful attempts to gain control of the Continent?

And now, Europe is not only being handed to them, it is being foisted upon them since no other country in the Union has the financial wherewithal to deal with the ever growing financial crisis.

Had Hitler only been patient, he and his Nazis Gang could have had all of Europe without firing a single shot.

Indeed, Hitler's National Socialist Party, in contrast to Communism, was an Industrial Based Dictatorship. That is to say, Industry / Private Property was to be encouraged with a view to its dominating the whole of the European Economy. (Communism of course was based on the non-workable notion that property was to be owned in common by all. At the end of the day, the two styles of government were one and the same since all their citizens became subject to ruthless Dictatorship)

My father, my grandfather, and my great grandfather, all volunteered to fight the Father Land and if they were alive today would no doubt be shaking their heads.

But that's not the only irony.

Today, some 65 years after WWII, Germany is not so keen on assuming this responsibility.

And who can blame them.

Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, West Germany united with the Eastern Part of their country which had been under the control of Russia since the war.

East Germany was a financial basket case in much the same way Greece is today.

But Germany prevailed and successfully restored the financial health of its returned citizens.

But now, it is being asked to do the same with respect to Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Ireland and possibly France.

And while the Germans, post war, went about their ways in a prudent and industrious fashion, the countries noted above spent above their abilities' to pay and extended entitlements to ridiculous levels.

The fact is - the Task Today is Too Large for any one country to manage even one as successful as Germany.

Some, or all of these needy countries, are going to have be cut adrift and the whole concept of the European Union revisited.

As I See It...

'Galagher'