Poll shows that with mayoral candidate NPA tied with Vision

Post by Mike Klassen in


Olympic Village, Oct. 2009
Vision's mishandling of the Olympic Village (as seen in Oct. '09) has hurt their re-election chances

In this morning's Globe and Mail, City Hall watcher Frances Bula reports that Mayor Gregor Robertson's negatives are skyrocketing and if an election were held today he would be in a dead heat with an NPA opponent. As we have discussed before, when the NPA gets a candidate to run against Vision the parties are virtually neck and neck, according to a recent poll by Justason Marketing.

This follows on the heels of pro-Vision commentator Allen Garr admitting that the NPA were serious contenders for the crown in 2011 in his most recent column.

According to the Justason poll, Mayor Gregor Robertson's mishandling of the Olympic Village file is one of voter's main concerns about his leadership. His negative approval ratings went from 30% in August rising up to 60% in November. The Justason poll finds that 45% of decided voters would support Vision Vancouver and 30%, NPA. A statistical tie is evident only in a hypothetical test of an undeclared mayoral candidate.

In addition, the poll finds that if Coun. Suzanne Anton were to run against Robertson, she would be within 3 points of the sitting Mayor, which is a virtual tie.

The most important factor revealed in the Justason poll is that the momentum is clearly on the NPA's side, with Vision in a free fall.

As we have stated here before, the Olympic Village curse is catching up with Vision Vancouver. It took down the previous two governments and could take down a third.

This poll is an invitation for someone to finally throw their hat into the ring for the NPA, knowing that they stand a fighting chance of getting elected in 2011.

- post by Mike


Am I really the only one who thinks this is crazy? The NPA doesn't even have a person at the helm and people are saying they'd vote for them...It's lunacy!

@boowho It kind of speaks to how much people dislike Vision Vancouver and their elected officials doesn't it. Voters are just itching to get to the polls and let Robertson know what they think of his wingnutty council.

There will be a lot of vision politicians in tears on election night. "How did this happen to us" says Heather Deal. "This just can't be" says Tim Stevenson. "How did COPE get completely wiped out" says David Cadman. "But I wanted to tear down the viaducts" says Geoff Meggs.

Oh, it will be sweet to watch it all unfold. Meanwhile, the silent visionista politicians continue to plod along and let their mayor destroy the party. What a bunch or morons.

This coverage of my firm's poll is misleading. The Justason poll finds that 45% of decided voters would support Vision Vancouver and 30%, NPA. A statistical tie is evident only in a hypothetical test of an undeclared mayoral candidate.

Thank you, Barb. I've updated the title of this post, and included your comment regarding the numbers. We *did* say that the tie would result if the NPA ran a candidate against Vision.

This is only meaningful if the NPA has a candidate for mayor and a platform. So far they have neither. I am looking forward to seeing who the NPA will run and what the platform will be. Then we can start having a meaningful debate. Given the NPA's performance to date I would not be too quick to count my chickens Tim, they may be coming to your own backyard. And the current council is not as nutty as the previous NPA council and its stupid deals around the CASINO and Olympic Village (why does no one dig into the casino and the deals around it). If the NPA runs someone associated with its old crowd of cronies they will find it difficult to get elected. They may as well run Gordon Campbell.

Thank you.

Tim, your post exemplifies my point. So it will be sweet to watch Vision fall...ok...then what? What's the alternative?

Steven, thanks for all those Vision talking points. We get that you believe what Vision says over what others might. To be fair to yourself you really should look into decisions made around the Olympic Village during Larry Campbell's COPE/Vision council, such as creating a new ODP and layering on social amenities. You should also ask why Vision delayed announcing their decision on social housing until AFTER the Olympics, causing an 8-month delay. Then there is Gregor's "train wreck" comments...

Vision's refusal to "own" the Olympic Village as an issue and to blame others is something voters have grown tired of, and it will hurt their re-election chances as a result.

I have never had much interest in Civic Politics until now. Normally mayors come and go with little or no impact on our city and our lives. This mayor Robertson, however, has made me realize that I must get out and do my part to vote him out. We just can't afford to have another 3 years of this guy pulling our city into a downward spiral. He (Gregor) will go down in history as a terrible experiment or just a very bad dream.


Same question, so you tear him down...ok...then what?

Hey Boo, why don't you answer your own questions for a change. Any answer provided to you will simply be met with more of the usual from you: Non sequiturs and deflection.


I've already stated I think this whole system needs to be chucked. But I'm not the one crying out with glee at the thought of voting out this mayor so for those that are, what's the alternative?

I don't usually have much in common with the Vision posters here, but they're right on one thing. The candidates matter. If NPA thinks that running a handpicked slate of party loyalists will be enough to win back city hall, they're in for a rough ride. If they go with well-known, moderate, electable candidates, then it will be easy.

Vision's fatal mistake as a council was to mistake their victory as a mandate for an exclusive environmental agenda. The people of Vancouver elected them because they promised better economic stewardship in the wake of the Olympic Village "scandal" they created. If they were better handlers of economic matters, the voters might have been more forgiving over the flaky excesses of the mayor.

I'd be interested to hear your opinion boohoo. Do you have one???

With regards to what George? I think my posts in this thread have made my opinion on this topic clear--have they not?

No you never have, always deflection that is why I and others ask...I love it when you play naive....
You whine a great deal and try to stir the pot but you never contribute a darn thing....


Whining again? Come on...

It is a question asked to those who have been calling for gregor's head. I am not one of those people and I've explained why. What more do you want from me?

I note no one has answered my question though.

No one answers you because we are tired of your whining. We want to hear your opinion....


Stop making this about me. It's a question posed to those who rail against vision. I am not one, so I cannot answer that. If you have a question you'd like me to answer, fire away.

Hey boo,
Keep in mind that Vision really didn't have much of a platform in 2008 until Raymond Louie stole one off George Chow's desk.
Up until then, Gregor's only platform was that he vowed to pay to use the Skytrain (in the future).

I don't think anyone will argue that people are more likely to come out and vote against who they don't like than they are to vote for someone they are pretty neutral on.

50% disapproval on many issues is a huge problem for Vision and they know it. Agitating the media by obfuscating the FOI rules is not going to help them either.

And it's not as if Sam Sullivan was predicted to win against Jim Green. Green was the incumbent for a hugely popular mayor. Sure, Green probably had more votes if not for the James Green saga, but it's not as if it wasn't razor close.

More and more people are realizing that Vision is not just NDP-light. You can't have union flunkies and radical environmentalist running the show behind the scenes and pass yourself off as centrist for very long.

And make no mistake that Christy Clark will be back if she doesn't win the premier's chair. She would turn Gregor into a punching bag.

How come BC politics always comes down to the swinging pendulum? Where one party screws up so badly that they are completely kicked out and the other party gets an overwhelming majority that leads to more abuse of power on the other spectrum. I seriously hope that the next civic election (and provincial election) will bring change, but only enough to have a balanced council. More importantly, I hope it brings enough change that the civic workers will no longer be political pawns.


I wasn't in town, but I don't doubt the same wave of 'not them' was what swept vision into government. But frankly, so what. Here we are now, and the question is (and should/could have been posed then) with all the energy going into tearing down the mayor/vision, what replaces them/him? It seems a pretty important question yet I can't get one straight answer...

Boohoo, I am definitely one of the chorus of people who speak out against your constant deflection and conversation mining.

So here's the alternative. The NPA is in the process of selecting a mayoral candidate. Make no mistake, they will field a candidate, and despite all the hatred towards Gregor and Vision/Cope that candidate will have to have a valid platform.

I think the key things the next slate of NPA candidates will have to drive home is NOT only THAT they are not Vision/Cope, but HOW they will be different. What measures will be taken to ensure they are not just the same ol' politicians wearing different clothes.

I doubt the Olympic Village will be a campaign platform issue, because that boat has already sailed and now we have to pick up the pieces and move on. The Village will only be a negative to Vision and not a direct positive for any other party.

I believe the Freedom of Information issue will be a strong campaign platform. A return to the non-partisan city hall we were used to before Gregor's arrival. A city hall that is more concerned with the efficient delivery of services and not political games.

I believe there also needs to be a set of parameters on the "trial" bike lanes. The winning party should make quantifiable results a priority. If the lanes are actually a benefit to safety or are bringing more cyclists into the city, then they should stay. If they're just taking up space with no objective improvement in transportation, then they need to go and the city should focus on other important transportation problems. The downtown streetcar program is one that comes to mind.

And of course first and foremost, we must account for the $20-million shortfall this year and figure out a way to make that up. I highly doubt cutting services is the correct approach, but raising taxes is also not very appealing. What is the happy medium between the two. Are there any other ways out of the situation?

Those are just a few of my "then what's"... Now it's your turn boohoo. If the NPA fumbles the ball and loses the election, what are your "then whats"? What's your 'Vision' for Vancouver with another 4 years of Gregor?

Here we are now, and the question is (and should/could have been posed then) with all the energy going into tearing down the mayor/vision, what replaces them/him? It seems a pretty important question...could you give me your opinion?


All of those are good ideas, there are many more. But as I've stated, I think the system is broken. I don't think it matters if it's the NPA or vision or some other party--the 'us vs them' mentality will dominate. I suppose I'm pessimistic with regards to this, but I've seen absolutely nothing to show me it will be different.

So what's my 'then what'? Status quo. Some other blog site will pop up nit-picking everything NPA does. There will be baseless accusations, some valid accusations, some ridiculous questions, some valid ones, and they'll all get lost in the yelling, just as we are seeing now. Each side will dig their heels in and launch attacks of 'socialist!' 'fascist!' 'eco-nazi!' 'capitalist pig!' or whatever ridiculous insult they can come up with.

All the while, the candidates, the people we're actually voting for, will float along on their parties boat, not responsible for anything other than towing the line.

As incredible as it may seem to those who continually accuse me of being some vision spy--I hope they lose. I hope the NPA loses. I hope anyone who enters this election on the platform of supporting party x rather than supporting policy/idea y loses. I don't want a bunch of sheep at the helm.


I couldn't disagree more. We are not living in the United States, we don't generally have a "corrupt" political system with special interests seeping into every pore. Yes, we can always do better, yes we should have very strong Freedom of information and conflict of interest legislation in place, but I feel VERY lucky to live in Canada, and am generally proud of the way our political system operates.

THAT BEING SAID...this is the primary reason I can't stand Vision. I see an ideologically driven group with ties to organizations that are, at best, questionable. Secret meetings, secret backers, politicization of the bureaucracy, stifling of information...and cult like ties with discussion of a "500 year plan" to reorganize society. THAT SCARES ME...and is the exact opposite of the type of government I want, or I think we deserve.

I want fiscal responsibility, I want pragmatic decisions, I want a mayor who wants open discussion/debate, who wants engineers to play devils advocate and question decisions. I want someone who has looked at the transportation needs, growth needs, development needs of our communities and makes decisions based on stats and facts and what's best for the community, and doesn't base their decision on personal views or a particular bias to one form of transportation or another. I want a mayor who's honestly going to look at the homeless problem and make decisions that don't benefit a developer or follow a party line, but that makes the most sense for the realities of the situation.

I don't think any of this is too much to ask for, and in general, while I haven't loved many of our past mayors, MANY of the points above were at least respected by them. I don't, however, feel that Vision is respecting any of these points.

The days of the left/right dichotomy should be behind us...we deserve a government that is looking to provide balance and responsible government, NOT ideology.


You start by saying you couldn't disagree more and then conclude with basically what I'm saying....lol

In addition, the poll finds that if Coun. Suzanne Anton were to run against Robertson, she would be within 3 points of the sitting Mayor, which is a virtual tie.

She is not electable as Mayor. Vision would eat her for lunch and dinner.

What did it for me was when she changed her vote overnight on the bike lanes. Although I never really was a fan of hers I was embarrassed for her. That is the mark of a desperate, phony and clueless politician.

Not to mention the fact that an NPA mayor has to get councilors elected to support him or her and she really doesn't have the ability to do that.

She will have to work hard to get elected in her current position next time around.

The NPA needs someone new and fresh who sounds like they have new ideas. With her is the same old thing with a bit different spin.

This is about much more than the Olympic Village. Quite frankly I don't have the time right now to go down the litany of boneheaded decisions this clown has made since we foolishly elected him to be our mayor. Gregor's gotta go!

Check out BCWineLover.com!

Paid Advertisement

Paid Advertisement