Quote:
Originally Posted by kn
A couple of interesting things I heard on QR77:
* the PCs had internal polling on Sunday that showed them in majority territory; judging by the number of calls I received on Sunday and Monday, I'm guessing the WR had similar information
* the Wildrose spin is that the NDP/Lib vote is down 99k and it all went to the PCs so strategic voting worked
* Vitor Marciano commented that at one campaign stop, Danielle announced an ethical violation from a backbench PC MLA to which the media did not ask a single question, instead focusing on the two wingnuts. Back on the bus, when asked about why the media didn't ask questions, the response was "well, we all know they're crooked; my editor is more interested in you guys since you're poised to form government." Not one article was written about this "ethical violation" and apparently the WR was sitting on a few others that never saw the light of day. They decided to try and switch the focus back on their five main platform planks.
* Marciano concluded they lost because of Huntsperger-Leech.
|
Here's what I don't get about this one. If the PCs became the "leftist" party the Wildrose made them out to be, perhaps then people gravitated to them and actually voted in support rather than a strategic vote against the Wildrose?