The Shotgun Blog

« B.C. Liberal 'compromise' | Main | Pro-life in the banlieue »

Tuesday, May 27, 2008

Canadians would like to see Obama become President

A new poll by Angus Reid Strategies has found that Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are more popular among Canadians than Republican presidential candidate John McCain. And between Obama and Clinton, Obama is the clear favourite.

Here are the key findings:

» 43% want Barack Obama to win the U.S. presidential election, 29% choose Hillary Rodham Clinton, 12% pick John McCain

» Favourable views: Obama 66%, Americans in General 62%, Rodham Clinton 56%, McCain 29%. U.S. Government 22%, George W. Bush 10%

» Bill Clinton seen as Canada's greatest friend in the White House since 1969 (31%); George W. Bush regarded as Canada's worst friend (48%).

You can get the complete results here:

Download angus_reid_presidential_candidates.pdf

Posted by Matthew Johnston on May 27, 2008 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e5528254b98833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Canadians would like to see Obama become President:

Comments

So George Bush has the same approval rating IN CANADA as Stephane Dion.

Stephane Dion is as disliked in Canada as George Bush is.

Nice.

Posted by: john g | 2008-05-27 12:44:01 PM

When Canadians have a vote in the US presidential election polls like these might be of value, until that day comes they are worthless. I'll bet Zebulon Punk can't wait for Obama to become president.

Posted by: The Stig | 2008-05-27 12:59:46 PM

Not the least flattering for Canadians, it shows how far we have fallen.

Posted by: Alain | 2008-05-27 1:21:41 PM

There are still large numbers of Canadians who fawn in orgasmic delight at the mere mention of the fascist Trudeau, completely blind to the grievous and long term damage he inflicted on this country.

Even in light of the Bernier affair, these same mindless minions shriek for the return of the thieving liberals and the return of their totalitarian one party fascist state.

Canadians quite frankly are a joke when it comes to politics, and until they show any sign of maturity on the subject can hardly be taken seriously.

Posted by: deepblue | 2008-05-27 1:21:58 PM

This is a paraphrase from a story told by Mark Steyn. A Canadian, eager to share the distinctiveness of "da Canadian values," started a conversation with an American friend by saying, "You know, the difference between Canada and the United States is..."

Before he could continue, his American colleague interrupted:

"The difference between Canada and the United States is that no one in the United States cares about the difference between Canada and the United States."

Seems appropriate, somehow.

Posted by: Chris | 2008-05-27 1:23:38 PM

Exactly Chris,

It simply goes to my point, how can any clear thinking person think that heralding an idiot like Trudeau, as some sort of hero, while watching him preside over the downfall of a once great country, turning it into one of the most pathetic nanny states the western world has ever seen all the while deluding ourselves how great we are, can go unnoticed.

There is the old saying, their not laughing with you, they are laughing at you.

Posted by: deepblue | 2008-05-27 1:34:06 PM

Deepblue,

With all due respect I have to say, after considering your last post, that:

1. I find the average Canadians to be much more informed on National and International politics than the average American. I'm maybe wrong on that but if so, I have to put the blame on any Americans and Canadians I've met and had a discussion with throughout my life.

2. The American people have never been so inclined to vote in an election than this one and the principal and only reason for it is that they feel responsible for the mess the present administration was. Under George W. Bush, the size of the Government has greatly increased, their freedom and liberties have diminished, the costs of life have gone crazy and their international image is the worst ever.

So before saying Canadians or Americans wish for a more "fascist regime" down south, please note that most people are precisely fed up from the present one and that's precisely why they clearly wish for a change. Obama being the answer or not.

Personally, I firmly believe Ron Paul was their last hope but clearly, the lobbyists and unfair & unbalanced Medias did not.

Posted by: Marc | 2008-05-27 1:56:40 PM

Sounds like the anti-Obama bloggers in Canada have failed.

Posted by: Pattern Recognition | 2008-05-27 2:40:05 PM

Be careful what you wish for. Obama will be like other presidents on US-Canada relations = he'll have other competing issues with which to deal. Fortunately, he won't change much at all except ambassadors.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-27 2:50:19 PM

I find Americans uninformed about Canada, but Canadians (especially Ontarians) horribly ignorant and bigoted about the US. What a pity - you people don't deserve such a great neighbor. It's the best that the world has to offer, yet you treat them like garbage. Albertans, fortunately, have a clearer sense of where their priorities lie. Ontario has become a costly and embarrassing liability to Canada.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-27 2:52:25 PM

Sounds like the anti-Obama bloggers in Canada have failed.
Posted by: Pattern Recognition | 27-May-08 2:40:05 PM

I'm sure that tonight CNN will run the story "Canadians would like to see Obama become President" at which point Clinton will pull out the the race and McCain will concede.

Posted by: The Stig | 2008-05-27 2:56:27 PM

"I'm sure that tonight CNN will run the story "Canadians would like to see Obama become President" at which point Clinton will pull out the the race and McCain will concede."

I sincerly doubt it.
They are already too busy with another foreign lobby.

Posted by: Marc | 2008-05-27 3:11:06 PM

Ontario has become a costly and embarrassing liability to Canada.
Posted by: Zebulon Punk | 27-May-08 2:52:25 PM

Does Ontario has a former premier serving time for mail fraud, bribery and obstruction of justice? Though were you live in the Banana Republic of Alabama the former governor (Don Siegelman) is serving time for those crimes. Geez, if you move to the US only an a**hole would move to Alabama.

Posted by: The Stig | 2008-05-27 3:48:39 PM

I am not surprised. Canadians have been brainwashed in socialism since Trudeau became PM.
It has become institutional and is considered "de rigeur" to be anti-American. Obama, being a left-wingnut and a minority to boot, appeals to the superficial mind-set of these so-called progressive Canadians.
Take note Canadians. Americans do not care one whit what goes on in Canada and you can bet your boots that Obama is not your friend.

Posted by: gerry | 2008-05-27 3:51:04 PM

Gerry said:

"Take note Canadians. Americans do not care one whit what goes on in Canada and you can bet your boots that Obama is not your friend."

Half right and half wrong. It is true that Americans don't care what happens in Canada. Nothing exciting ever happens there. Moreover, since Canada's entire economy is tied to the US, they know very well that Canada won't be going far.

On the other hand, the President of the US is a friend to the Canadian people because the US is Canada's best friend, regardless of party and despite the carelessness, cruelty and incompetence of the Trudeau regime.

"Does Ontario has a former premier serving time for mail fraud, bribery and obstruction of justice?"

At least Siegelman was caught. In Ontario they re-elect their criminals.

"Geez, if you move to the US only an a**hole would move to Alabama."

It's actually very pleasant down here. One winter down here and you'd be hooked. No snow to shovel. Even the summer, though quite hot, is very nice. I'm not leaving.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-27 4:06:29 PM

"Moreover, since Canada's entire economy is tied to the US, they know very well that Canada won't be going far."

They need Canada more than Canada (necessarily) needs the US, now with manufacturing pretty much dying in Ontario (a fact that has you probably smirking day in day out).

39 out of 50 US States have Canada as their top market for exports and another eight States Canada is in the top three, think those States would like to see their market disappear?

Actually Canada as a whole is a bigger market than the entire EU for Canada, and there are only 32 Million people here vs. 400 Million in the EU. To put a real number on it, 22.5% of all US exports end up in Canada, how much would that hurt the US if Canada would "walk away"?

In return only around 20 - 23% of Canda's GDP is raised by dealing with the United States. Sure, wouldn't be nice if suddenly that would fall away, but I suspect this is mainly with the South Western Ontario manufacturers, guess they'd have to look for new customers.

Posted by: Snowrunner | 2008-05-27 5:10:20 PM

Oops, between looking up numbers and typing me made a mistake:

"than the entire EU for Canada,"

Should have read:

"than the entire EU for the United States"

My bad.

And as for the numbers I put out, check Statistic Canada's Website, the numbers are all there.

Posted by: Snowrunner | 2008-05-27 5:12:17 PM

Well, hopefully we can make Canadians happy and elect Barack Obama!

Posted by: Paul, Obama Blog | 2008-05-27 5:43:38 PM

Canada does not have the option of "walking away". No one does - you play the cards you're given. What I don't see is anyone seeing the obvious truth: the US is the best neighbor anyone could possibly ask for.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-27 5:57:19 PM

"What I don't see is anyone seeing the obvious truth"

That's because YOU're the sucker.

Posted by: Marc | 2008-05-27 6:09:01 PM

I hope the stig will remember

Southern man don't need him around anyhow...

I hear Lynyrd Skynyrd is playing a few concerts. A guy who used to work for me saw them in NYC last year. You a fan Zeb? I'd love to visit Alabama.

Posted by: dp | 2008-05-27 6:29:46 PM

No not a fan, but I know the song. Quite popular down here as you might expect.

"Sweet Home Alabama" provoked the best line in the movie "Con Air"

Define irony: a bunch of idiots dancing around on a plane to a song made famous by a band that died in a plane crash.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-27 6:50:43 PM

Did you know that the lead singer died because he didn't have his seat belt fastened? They knew they were going down, and he got up to shake hands with everybody. Now that's macho!

They must build'em tough down there. Look at Butterbean.

Posted by: dp | 2008-05-27 6:55:06 PM

I did not know that. If memory serves, he had a death wish anyway.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-27 7:25:57 PM

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 27-May-08 5:57:19 PM

Sure, on six months notice, go away from NAFTA, get rid of all the stupid clauses the Conservatives signed us up for and get a fair price for Goods and Services and sell to whomever Canada pleases, be it the US, the EU, China, Russia or whatnot.

NAFTA (from the POV of Canada) isn't fair trade it's extortion.

Posted by: Snowrunner | 2008-05-27 8:27:56 PM

Not. Going. To. Happen.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-27 8:56:17 PM

Not. Going. To. Happen.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 27-May-08 8:56:17 PM

Of course not, there aren't any Leaders in Canada, not in the political parties nor in the business community.

Welcome to the Colony of Canada.

Posted by: Snowrunner | 2008-05-28 9:40:15 AM

I rarely visit this blog anymore. I did today and saw the familiar Zebulon Pike and Snowrunner chat-room in full swing.

How boring is that!

As long as I am here .... Obama is a commie piece of shit who will do the USA what Trudeau did to Canada. He will be assassinated if he is actually elected president.

That will be a good thing. It will send out the message that America doesn't intend to become a Communist Country.

Posted by: John V | 2008-05-28 9:53:30 AM

If such leaders did exist, where would they lead us?

Had anyone considered that the US was the promised land, the one place that could provide for Canada's every possible need?

Colony? bah! Only one seeing just the negative consequences would say that.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-28 9:53:32 AM

Had anyone considered that the US was the promised land, the one place that could provide for Canada's every possible need?

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 28-May-08 9:53:32 AM

What is this promise? And what could the US offer Canada that it needs? Leadership? The constitution? A market to dump goods into (the last one clearly would jive well with the Colony remark of mine).

-----------------

Colony? bah! Only one seeing just the negative consequences would say that.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 28-May-08 9:53:32 AM

So what are the positive consequences for Canada since FTA and NAFTA came into effect? By the numbers I have seen the numbers went south for the average Canadian, though there are more people at the top.

And IF Canada is now so much better off, why did you leave?

Posted by: Snowrunner | 2008-05-28 10:25:03 AM

I don't see anyone suffering because of FTA and NAFTA. Alberta's never done better. Ontario still does quite well despite overpricing itself. The others continue to prosper too - even longtime backwaters Saskatchewan and Newfoundland. Energy makes up most of that prosperity, but so long as the US buys it at world prices, no harm done.

It's not as if these energy products can be shipped to Europe or Asia!

Why did I move to the US? Opportunity, like the millions of Canadians who come south on a temporary or permanent basis every year. The Canadian dream, it seems, is to become an American.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-28 10:52:02 AM

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 28-May-08 10:52:02 AM

You do know that the royality payments in AB are lower than they are in pretty much any other developed part of the world (e.g. Norway or the UK).

Also, most of these oil companies are foreign owned, either outright (Imperal Oil --> Exxon) or the shares are mainly traded in NY or London, which means all these hefty oil profits don't stay in the country but flow out. All that remains are the wages being paid to the workers. While the public (read Province) is stuck with paying of the expansion of the public infrastructure to support the "economic boom".

--------------

It's not as if these energy products can be shipped to Europe or Asia!

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 28-May-08 10:52:02 AM

Gee, how is oil out of the middle east only ending up in the US and Canada if there is this huge water way in between that prevents the shipment of this kind of stuf.... Someone should invent a ship that could carry these kinds of materials.... Maybe they can call it an oil tanker?

------------------

Why did I move to the US? Opportunity, like the millions of Canadians who come south on a temporary or permanent basis every year. The Canadian dream, it seems, is to become an American.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 28-May-08 10:52:02 AM

"Millions of Canadians"? The highest number of Canadians living in the US was in the 1930s with 1.31 Million. Since then the numbers have dropped by 2000 only 678.000 Canadians have lived in the US and int he last 20 years the number of people emigrating Canada has fallen by a quarter.

So I am not quite sure where you get your millions of Canadians from, but the numbers just don't add up.

BTW, in 2006 10,942 US citizens immigrated to Canada, guess those be all the socialists.

Check the StatsCan website, it makes for really interesting reading.

Posted by: Snowrunner | 2008-05-28 11:46:27 AM

"Canadians would like to see Obama become President"

Sniff, sniff.

Bullshit!

Posted by: 2x4 | 2008-05-28 3:28:36 PM

"You do know that the royality payments in AB are lower than they are in pretty much any other developed part of the world (e.g. Norway or the UK)."

Posted by: Snowrunner | 28-May-08 11:46:27 AM

Albertans benefit a great deal in ways other than royalty payments. We actually bleed off more from oil company bottom lines than those other places. We've set up huge industries with the aid of government regulation that do not exist in any of those other places.

Our safety industry has created thousands of jobs. Most of the regulations are home grown, and bleed anywhere from 1% to 5% off bottom lines. The environmental industry probably bleeds off another 5% to 10%. I'm pulling these numbers out of the air based on my experience with contractor invoices, so if someone wants to dispute them I won't argue. Suffice to say the numbers are very high. Alberta also requires a very thorough land survey for all leases. That doesn't happen in any US oilfield. Subtract another 5%. Land owners get very healthy rent for surface land use. Much, much more than the actual value of the land. Reclamation is extremely extensive and expensive. Knock of another 5%. All this was made possible by gov. regulations and the establishment of the resource conservation board.

The beauty of these "royalties" is they go directly to Albertans, not gov. coffers. I and many others have done very well anticipating requirements for compliance with gov. regulations.

Saskatchewan doesn't have nearly the same level of regulatory expense. That's one of the main reasons it's busier there than in AB. The higher cost of doing business in AB is starting to hurt the very people who conspired to cash in on the regulations.

And that's all I've got to say about that.

Posted by: dp | 2008-05-28 7:29:40 PM

Posted by: dp | 28-May-08 7:29:40 PM

I wasn't comparing to the US, I was refering to places like the UK and Norway.

As for "bleeding off the bottom line" you think either of these places is less regulated than the AB? They are probably have more of these cost as well.

As for all of Alberta benefitting, who is building the necessary (public) infrastructure like roads etc. if the tax dollars aren't there for it?

What about people not connected to the oilpatch (e.g. Farmers) how are they benefitting from the boom outside of already being concerned about their water?

Sure, if you think the Government should stay the way out and the only thing Alberta is count on are the tar sands, go for it, but I am not sure that this would turn Alberta in a place even you want to live.

Posted by: Snowrunner | 2008-05-28 8:34:29 PM

The UK and Norway may be regulated, but the cost all goes to the governments. And by the way, Alberta is more pro-active in its regulations than any of them.

There's plenty left over for the gov. AB roads are in pretty good shape. Rural municipalities are making a killing off oilfield activities. If they piss it against the wall, who's fault is that?

A whole lot of farmers are getting windfall profits from surface leases. They get at least 10 times the true value of the leased land, They get to farm a good portion of the land even as they collect rent, and they get the land back when the lease is finished. They also get to collect rent on crown land that they have agricultural leases on. In Sask. they don't get a penny for leased land. And the thousands of miles of road improvements save farmers a whole lot of travel time to their fields.

I didn't say I want the gov out. What I mean to say is the gov. of AB has done a reasonable job of keeping revenues in the province. We don't need to pressure them to push for an Alaska style royalty structure.

Posted by: dp | 2008-05-28 8:57:06 PM

To be clear, Sask farmers don't collect surface lease payments from oil companies for land they have under agricultural lease from the crown.

Posted by: dp | 2008-05-28 9:09:19 PM

dp,

do you think the revenue will continue forever? Or do you thnk one day this bonanza will be over? Wouldn't it be prudent then by the AB Government to put something into the saving account and invest some right now for the future of the province?

My thinking here goes along the lines of a Fund as the Norwegian Government has set it up, people in Norway get a percent of the interest that this fund produces every year and the other half is used to fund public projects.

Posted by: Snowrunner | 2008-05-28 9:10:10 PM

I'm not sure the AB gov is competent to manage a savings fund. The Heritage fund was supposed to be the answer to the inevitable end of the oil era. Anybody seen it lately?

I'd like to see more incentives for investment in new technologies, and maybe some manufacturing. With the high cost of transportation, maybe we could compete with China after all. I don't know if an increase in royalties is necessary to accomplish this. If so, then let's get it over with. We might as well find out right now if the oil companies plan to follow through with their threats.

Posted by: dp | 2008-05-28 9:23:32 PM

Yes Canada is interested in American"s election and first off ditch the poll, not a reliable source for comment.

Why Canadians like me would not vote for Obama but for Hilary. USA housing colapse was not just a American problem cause there were outside feeders.
Many of your people lost your homes,healthcare should be for all Americans, you should have good jobs and good education oppertunities for your children. Your voices matter more than you give yourself credit. Hilary is what America and the world needs. Already Canada seeks to have one security regulator.
Hilary stands for responsibility to build, responsibility to the fututre, responsibility to provide. So America be responsibile to democracy and go out and vote because everyone one of you matter.

Posted by: Canada's Twin#1 | 2008-05-29 2:31:11 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

The Shotgun Blog

Tuesday, May 27, 2008

Canadians would like to see Obama become President

TrackBack

Comments