Feb. 28 - Just when you think it's the last word on something ... according to
The survey shows 54% oppose Canadian participation in the shield and 36% support it. But while opposing the shield itself, many respondents support the principles behind its creation.
For example, 56% said Canada should help protect North America against missiles, while 53% said it cannot be an independent country if it relies on the United States for protection.
Furthermore, 53% of those surveyed believe Canada needs to protect its cities because the country does have enemies and only 30% give credence to the argument that increased military spending will provoke others to attack Canada.
[...]
There is also a dwindling belief the United States would help defend Canada against an international attack, the poll suggests.
In April, 1998, 32% of respondents said they had "a lot of confidence" the Americans would protect Canada. By April, 2003, the percentage who gave the same answer fell to 19% and in the new poll, the number stands at 13%.
Only in Quebec is the opposition to missile defence unshakeable, according to the COMPAS poll. In that province, respondents reject the program by a ratio of three to one. Mr. Winn [COMPAS president Conrad Winn] suggested Quebec has a long history of opposing military programs, dating back to the Boer War.
It's hardly a secret that polls are notoriously susceptible to manipulation, but this does seem to indicate that Martin and Harper could have raised the question to the people of Canada - and Parliament - before rushing to end the, uh,
.
1
Those are interesting results. I was dismayed, however, to read this line at the bottom of the article:
"COMPAS surveyed 508 individuals across Canada on Feb. 25 and 26. The results are considered accurate within 4.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20."
That survey group is shamefully small. That means the actual figure opposing the missile shield could be 59% or 49%. Newspapers are getting so sloppy (and cheap) with their surveys.
Posted by: Darren at February 28, 2005 05:15 PM (9aklK)
2
So I've been banned?
I can't post anything longer than a paragraph it seems, so I guess my time here is over.
I'm glad I can leave with a victory in my column...
Posted by: No one's Mother at February 28, 2005 06:09 PM (Ojo2r)
3
Awesome... It worked...
I'll make one last response to MikeM's trying to call me a holocaust denier.
No, as Noam Chomsky does, I defend the rights of holocaust deniers to say what they will. Nobody believes them and in showing their stupidity, they actually reinforce the more truthful argument.
That's Liberalism. It's right there in Mill, circa 19th century.
This is why I defend the right of you and Debbye to say your stupid stuff, because it really just makes the other side look more right.
Chow...
Posted by: No one's mother at February 28, 2005 06:11 PM (Ojo2r)
4
Friend, no one has been banned. The warning was over the choice of names, not content. I have changed the name to one more generic and less abusive, however. If you have trouble posting it probably was due to a word that was banned by the spam-busters, a bug that irritates all of us only slightly less than spam-bots.
You're right, Darren, to point to the small poll sample, but does it really matter? Poll questions are often designed and presented to get the desired results anyway which is even sadder commentary on those who place great store by polls (Nielsen ratings, anyone?)
"Statistical difference" alone should teach us to be wary of polls.
Posted by: Debbye at February 28, 2005 07:28 PM (y200q)
5
Oops, that should be "statistical significance."
Posted by: Debbye at February 28, 2005 07:30 PM (y200q)
6
Talking point of the day among the right-wingers seems to be this Compass poll. Which basically says that the majority of Canadians oppose BMD but support defending their country, and participating in the defense of North America.
Supports the government's decision on BMD, I'd say. Canadians want real measures, not half-baked boondoggles like BMD.
Posted by: Malika at March 01, 2005 12:28 PM (8gDR+)
7
Meh, the poll tells me little besides reinforcing the age-old truth that people are more likely to agree with abstract ("defend North America") than concrete ("support the NMD deployment") principles.
What I found fascinating was the result that the number of Canadians who had "a lot of confidence" the US would defend Canada dropped to 13%. Under precisely which circumstances is the USA supposed to be entertaining thoughts of *not* defending Canada? Excepting missile defense, of course, where we've just been told not to.
Posted by: SparcVark at March 01, 2005 06:36 PM (X7hb0)
8
Canadians seem to "oppose it in practice, support it in principle."
That quote reeks of the same B.S. that Sen. Kerry tried to feed us with "voted for it before he voted against it".
Posted by: Michael at March 07, 2005 07:49 PM (BQ8wu)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
