<strong>Title: </strong> <a href="/link.php?id=10895" target="_blank"> PM deluged with mail about Afghanistan</a> (click to view)
<strong>Category:</strong> <a href="/modules.php?name=News_Links&file=category&catid=1" target="_blank">Political</a>
<strong>Posted By: </strong> <a href="/modules.php?name=Your_Account&op=userinfo&username=Scape" target="_blank">Scape</a>
<strong>Date: </strong> 2006-08-07 13:53:13
<strong>Canadian</strong>
1000 letters and emails is a deluge? In a country of 32 million? and this from some 2 million letters and emails that reach the PM office each year........Even at 1000 a month that would be 0.6 % of the total. Quite the deluge.
In today's media it is. If you don't hate Harper, then you must hate freedom, Communist.
Nothing like orver reacting or exaggerating somthing that should be a non issue. So 2/3 of 1,453 makes 969 emails calling on removing troops over a 4 month period. That is 242 per month or approx. 8/day. If I got 8 people per day to support the mission and send emails would that counteract this invasion of non support? This is a non issue.
I mean realy, the CBC most likely gets more negative emails per day about hockey coverage.
By the way, I am not calling the Afgan. mission a non topic, just the number of emails received about it.
Star
Sun
This is a record in so far that it is over the 4 months span since Harper has been in power. The response on the mission in Kandahar by far eclipsed any other issue submitted to the PM's office. It is also important to note that written letters to MP's do have weight of 10 to 1. If one person is willing to write on the subject then you can bet 10 more are of similar mind and MP do use this as a valid measure of public response.
I don't see the eclipse here Scape. If the PM's office recieves 167000 letters and emails a month, how is 1000 eclipsing the other 166000? The number just dont add up. There can't be THAT many other issues that they are only getting 100 or 200 per.
There are over two million items each year on average submitted to the PMO. There are almost as many subjects but the cadence and the time span of the letters in this four month period is noteworthy in so far as it is denoting an issue of urgency to the general public that takes the time to write in person to the PMO.
This is not to say all letters received are flack, a great deal is in support but the volume of the debate has taken a notable upswing. This may bear fruit in the next election by shaping up in to a primary election issue.