Post by gregrox on Apr 21, 2009 13:59:38 GMT -5
I stumbled across this article a few days ago while researching a project and at first I thought the idea that a sports team could influence an election was pretty silly. But I read the article and I have to admit it makes sense. And then I thought that the idea that sports might influence politics might interest a few of you. It also makes me curious if other places experience this sort of thing.
Everybody knows what the big story is in British Columbia right now -- and it's not the provincial election.
Who do you think has the higher job-approval rating at the moment: Gordon Campbell or Roberto Luongo? Carole James or Alex Burrows?
Heck, even the Vancouver Canucks' water boy would probably draw a bigger crowd than Jane Sterk. (She's the leader of the Green Party, by the way.)
Face it: The Canucks' playoff drive is what most people are focused on, and the two main political parties know it. Strategists in the Liberal and NDP war rooms are both trying to cut through the hockey hype and connect with distracted voters. It's still early in the campaign, of course, when people are less likely to be paying full attention. Many don't start thinking about an election until the campaign is half-over, anyway.
But think about this: What if the Canucks beat the St. Louis Blues and advance to the second round of the playoffs? What if they win the conference? What if they go all the way?
If that happens, the whole province is going to go progressively more insane. If people are tuned out of this election now, just imagine if Stanley Cup fever really starts to take hold.
Sources in both parties say they're still calculating how the "Canucks Effect" might impact the campaign.
Both claim not to be worried about it, but I detected a note of concern from the Liberals.
Why? Because Canucksmania could build to the point where people are so tuned out of the election they might not to bother to vote on May 12. And a low voter turnout just might benefit James and the NDP.
"NDP supporters are a bit more fired up and motivated to actually go to the polls and vote," Hamish Marshall, research director at the Angus Reid Strategies polling company, told me yesterday.
"The Canucks could create a distraction from the campaign and that could mean less-motivated voters won't show up."
Every recent poll has shown the Liberals with a significant lead over the NDP, but the most recent Angus Reid survey took a separate poll among people who said they are "absolutely certain to vote."
"Then it becomes a much closer race -- just a two-point lead for the Liberals," Marshall said. "Certainly hockey could play a part of that."
Campbell seems to realize the level of puck delirium out there, choosing to speak in extended Canucks metaphors on the campaign trail yesterday by saying electing the NDP would be like benching the team's best players.
"It's like saying to the Canucks . . . 'We're going to get rid of the Sedin twins and we're not going to have Kesler, we're not going to have Burrows. And by the way, let's make sure we don't have Willie Mitchell either. And then take away Luongo and go win the Stanley Cup.
"That ain't going to happen in British Columbia, because we're going to elect a B.C. Liberal government."
What's he going to do next? Put on a Canucks sweater and paint his face blue? Campbell will just have to accept the fact that as long as the Canucks are in the hunt for the Cup, British Columbians won't be hanging on his every word.
Consider: The Liberals are much more popular among men than women, the polls suggest. Men are also bigger hockey fans than women, surveys show. Put them together and an epidemic of playoff-obsessed guys tuning out of the election campaign doesn't bode well for Campbell.
The bottom line: Carole James might want to consider changing the NDP's campaign slogan from "Take Back Your B.C." to "Go Canucks Go!"
Who do you think has the higher job-approval rating at the moment: Gordon Campbell or Roberto Luongo? Carole James or Alex Burrows?
Heck, even the Vancouver Canucks' water boy would probably draw a bigger crowd than Jane Sterk. (She's the leader of the Green Party, by the way.)
Face it: The Canucks' playoff drive is what most people are focused on, and the two main political parties know it. Strategists in the Liberal and NDP war rooms are both trying to cut through the hockey hype and connect with distracted voters. It's still early in the campaign, of course, when people are less likely to be paying full attention. Many don't start thinking about an election until the campaign is half-over, anyway.
But think about this: What if the Canucks beat the St. Louis Blues and advance to the second round of the playoffs? What if they win the conference? What if they go all the way?
If that happens, the whole province is going to go progressively more insane. If people are tuned out of this election now, just imagine if Stanley Cup fever really starts to take hold.
Sources in both parties say they're still calculating how the "Canucks Effect" might impact the campaign.
Both claim not to be worried about it, but I detected a note of concern from the Liberals.
Why? Because Canucksmania could build to the point where people are so tuned out of the election they might not to bother to vote on May 12. And a low voter turnout just might benefit James and the NDP.
"NDP supporters are a bit more fired up and motivated to actually go to the polls and vote," Hamish Marshall, research director at the Angus Reid Strategies polling company, told me yesterday.
"The Canucks could create a distraction from the campaign and that could mean less-motivated voters won't show up."
Every recent poll has shown the Liberals with a significant lead over the NDP, but the most recent Angus Reid survey took a separate poll among people who said they are "absolutely certain to vote."
"Then it becomes a much closer race -- just a two-point lead for the Liberals," Marshall said. "Certainly hockey could play a part of that."
Campbell seems to realize the level of puck delirium out there, choosing to speak in extended Canucks metaphors on the campaign trail yesterday by saying electing the NDP would be like benching the team's best players.
"It's like saying to the Canucks . . . 'We're going to get rid of the Sedin twins and we're not going to have Kesler, we're not going to have Burrows. And by the way, let's make sure we don't have Willie Mitchell either. And then take away Luongo and go win the Stanley Cup.
"That ain't going to happen in British Columbia, because we're going to elect a B.C. Liberal government."
What's he going to do next? Put on a Canucks sweater and paint his face blue? Campbell will just have to accept the fact that as long as the Canucks are in the hunt for the Cup, British Columbians won't be hanging on his every word.
Consider: The Liberals are much more popular among men than women, the polls suggest. Men are also bigger hockey fans than women, surveys show. Put them together and an epidemic of playoff-obsessed guys tuning out of the election campaign doesn't bode well for Campbell.
The bottom line: Carole James might want to consider changing the NDP's campaign slogan from "Take Back Your B.C." to "Go Canucks Go!"
