Wednesday, October 28, 2009

New Crop Poll: 14-pt BQ Lead

Le Soleil has the most complete report of a new CROP poll, taken between October 15 and October 25 and involving 1,000 Quebecers. Here are the results:

Bloc Quebecois - 37%
Liberals - 23%
Conservatives - 21%
New Democrats - 16%

The Green result is not listed, but 3% remains.

For CROP to give the Bloc such a good number and the Liberals such a bad number is very significant. At 23%, the Liberals are lower than Dion's 24% while the Conservatives are just about where they were in 2008. The Bloc is also only one point below their 2008 result, but the NDP is way up. That is a terrific result for them. This poll would give the Bloc 49 seats, the Liberals 15, the Conservatives nine, and the NDP two. In case you're wondering, 16% puts the NDP in a position to be able to keep Outremont and also take Gatineau.

Francophones voters, who make up the vast majority of seats in Quebec, choose the Bloc at 42%, followed by the Liberals and Conservatives at 20% apiece. In and around Quebec City, the area of Conservative strength, the Bloc nevertheless has a 35% to 32% lead. The NDP and Liberals at 15% and 14%, respectively, are not in the race. At 35%, the Bloc looks to be able to take back some of the seats they lost to the Conservatives in 2006.

When asked who would make the best Prime Minister, 26% chose Jack Layton, 25% chose Stephen Harper, and 20% chose Michael Ignatieff. Good results for Layton and even Harper. Not good for Ignatieff - though not horrible.

Quebec and Ontario Provincial Political Polls

We also have some provincial results from the CROP poll.

The Parti Quebecois is leading with 40%, followed closely by the Liberals at 39%. It is not often that the PQ is doing better than the BQ, which is actually a positive sign for the federal party. The ADQ follows with 8%, barely ahead of Quebec Solidaire and the Parti Vert with 6%.

The francophone vote leans heavily to the PQ, with 46%. The PLQ takes 33%. In Montreal, however, the Liberals have the lead, 45% to 35%. In Quebec City, the PQ is in front with 39%. The Liberals have 27% and the ADQ is competitive with 24%. In other words, virtually all of the province's ADQ support is in this region.

This poll would give the PQ 64 seats and a majority government. The PLQ would have 57 seats while the ADQ and QS would have two seats each.

Jean Charest is the favourite premier of 42%, with Marois having 33% support. Independence is at 35%, far below the combined score (46%) of the two sovereigntist parties.

Ipsos-Reid also has an Ontario provincial poll. The Liberals are leading with 39%, but the Progressive Conservatives are close behind at 36%. One wonders if this has more to do with what is going on at the federal level. The Ontario NDP has 16% and the Greens have 9%.

Environics also has an Ontario provincial poll, putting the Progressive Conservatives at 37%, the Liberals at 32%, the NDP at 19%, and the Greens at 11%.

If we average out the two polls taken over a comparable period of time, we get the Progressive Conservatives at 36.5%, the Liberals at 35.5%, the New Democrats at 17.5%, and the Greens at 10%.


  1. Environics also has an Ontario poll out showing the PCs leading. I don't think this has anything to do with what's going on federally. McGuinty has had a very bad few weeks with ministerial resignations, spending scandals and a ballooning deficit.

  2. Thanks DL. I'll add that to this post.

  3. Eric,

    i'm willing to celebrate an NDP win in Gatineau for no other reason than it will keep Steve Mackinnon out of the house of commons.

    Which Conservative riding is most vulnverable? You have them losing 1 of theirs.

  4. Have you visited the new site,, with a breakdown by province and riding, and the site prediction for results of next election. It also has Gatineau going NDP. But, it predicts 163 seats for PMSH, without lots of gains in Quebec. Other than AB, all our gains are mostly from the Libs.

  5. That would be rather simple:
    1. Gatineau goes from Bloc to NDP
    2. Portneuf-Jacque Carier from IND Andre Arthur to Bloc
    3. Beauport—Limoilou (in Quebec City) from Con to Bloc
    4. Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—
    Matapédia from Bloc to LIb (600 vote difference)

  6. Roberval-Lac-Saint-Jean was won by 1,436 votes, Beauport-Limoilou was won by 2,032 votes, Pontiac by 3,627 votes.

    All three would be at risk, and the Bloc will win back Arthur's seat.

  7. It OUGHT to be like taking from a baby for the Liberals to take Jeanne-LeBer and Ahuntsic from the BQ - but these days even that may be too difficult for them.

    I think we should start to speculate on what will happen in the Hochelaga byelection. I assume it will be a BQ hold, but I will be curious to see how strong a second the NDP manages to be and how weak a third the Liberals are and also if the Tories get fewer votes than the Green party there.

  8. From NNW:

    NNW INSIDER: Yet to be released Angus Reid poll
    Tories 40, Grits 26, NDP 17

  9. Compared to the last AR poll it would be Tories and Grits each down 1% and NDP up 1% (and I assume either BQ or the Greens up 1%).

  10. Dl,

    do you know something about the quality of the Hochelaga candidates we don't or was there a local poll done? These are the 08 results from pundits guide:

    BQ 22,720 49.7% MÉNARD, Réal

    Lib 9,442 20.7% DICAIRE, Diane

    NDP 6,600 14.4% ROCHELEAU, Jean-Claude

    Cons 4,201 9.2% LABBÉ, Luc

    Grn 1,946 4.3% LAROCHELLE, Philippe

    So why the prediction of the NDP moving to second and the Greens moving to fourth ??

  11. The NDP candidate Rocheleau ran last time but is campaigning very actively. He is head of the union representing oil refinery workers in the east end of Montreal. The NDP seems to be pouring in resources and layton has visited three times along with a parade of NDP MPs. A lot of BQ supporters are upset that Duceppe parachuted in a rightwing pro-business hack with no ties to the riding, while Rocheleau has lived there all his life.

    The Liberals have no campaign at all and I doubt if the candidate has even visited the riding. Yesterday, Ignatieff was in Montreal all day and never visited Hochelaga - I wonder why? The biggest claim to fame of the Liberal candidate is that he has an MBA from Harvard and speaks French so badly that his website initially said that he wanted to put his penis into the people of Hochelaga when he meant to say introduce himself.

    Need I say more?

  12. Dl,

    ok great info. But that doesn't explain the Con-Green switch you're predicting. The Conservative candidate is the wife of the '08 candidate, so why would she lose all his support? Or is there something about the Greens that has them surging? That's the part of your prediction that's not really making sense.

    P.S. - I'm annoyed at the NDP for running an all male ticket in the by-elections. Same with the Liberals. The Greens/Cons/BQ have gender balance.

    P.P.S. - I actually don't care, I just find it ironic coming after the release of the Liberal pink book and the past attacks Harper got for not running enough females.

  13. --- "The biggest claim to fame of the Liberal candidate is that he has an MBA from Harvard and speaks French so badly that his website initially said that he wanted to put his penis into the people of Hochelaga when he meant to say introduce himself."

    Link please!


    With regard to the Tories being in a race for last with the Greens - I'm just speculating on how little support there is for the far right in the heart of east end Montreal.

  15. DL I'd hardly call the CPC the far right. Nor would Jesse or Martin. They're far right, not the CPC.

  16. Dl,

    the Tory candidate runs a french school for blind kids, hardly the cold hearted far right stereotype you're indulging in...

    Regardless, you're going to retract your projection about the Greens beating out the Conservatives then ?

    The riding hasn't changed in a year so one would expect that the Conservative candidate would do as well as the last one, maybe experiencing a drop in support because of the anti-gov't nature of by-elections.

  17. I'll agree with DL here.

    My view from inside Ontario is that these numbers are McGuinty's own, and have little or nothing to do with the federal scene.

    It is interesting that Quebecers seem to prefer Layton (and Harper) over Iggy as best PM.

    This cannot bode well for the Liberals hopes in Quebec.

  18. AJR79,

    How's Tim Hudak doing as the new PC leader? His union busting stance sounds wonderful, as well as his plans to shut down the Ontario human rights tribunal. It would be great to see him win the next election.

  19. The only reason anyone is a Tory is because they are an unfeeling, cold-hearted person with a lot of hostility in their hearts. Why else affiliate with a party that only appeals to base feelings of resentment and greed.

    I lived through the Mike Harris years in Ontario and it was pure class warfare against the most vulnerable people in society. If the Tory candidate had her wish and there was a Tory-type government - you can be sure the first thing they would eliminate would be "frills" like schools for the blind - you can be sure that in the Harper heirarchy disabled people rank even lower than "spoiled artists going to galas"

  20. Earl wrote:

    "DL I'd hardly call the CPC the far right. Nor would Jesse or Martin. They're far right, not the CPC."

    I prefer to think of myself as radically pro-freedom.

  21. DL,

    "I lived through the Mike Harris years in Ontario and ... "

    I did too but I have a different assessment than you do.

    Despite your class warfare rhetoric, Mike Harris was no radical:

    - total government spending actually grew during his premiership (albeit much more slowly than under the Peterson-Rae years).
    - no meaningful privatizations were done, we still had government TV networks (in both English and French) and a government liquor monopoly, for examples
    - welfare rates were reduced but only to what they had been (adjusted for inflation) before the Peterson-Rae orgy of spending -- i.e. so that rates were comparable to during the "moderate" Bill Davis years

    Mike Harris was barely right of centre -- he only seemed right-wing compared to the spend-happy socialists who came before him before him.

  22. DL I lived through the Harris years and I was secondary school teacher. Harris did a lot of harm. He was a bad Premier. He was elected because the pendulum swung too far the other way (NDP) and because the Liberals, under Lynn McLeod imploded during the campaign. I voted for Harris the first time but not the second and not for Eves. Harris actually squeezed some administrative costs out of education that needed to be done. He cut far too much, too fast and left a province with a weakened education and medical system. He also spent little on infrastructure and McGuinty is still trying to clean up the mess. I don't see Harper and CPC in the same light at all though. SORRY! If they ever pull the kind of stuff that Harris pulled they'll lose my vote.

  23. Jesse wrote:

    "I prefer to think of myself as radically pro-freedom."

    I think of you as government for the rich, by the rich. The tyranny of money over democracy. Fortunately because we have a semblance of democracy it is unlikely we'll ever have to face what your kind of world would look like. It's not freedom but oppression of the many, by the few. That's it for now. I want to watch my Yankees win the first game of the WS.

  24. Sorry Earl and DL, I'm just not in the mood to respond to troll comments today.

  25. Earl,

    I didn't write the comment you responded to.

    I consider myself a full spectrum conservative who believes that free markets, free people, and small government are usually (thought not nessecarily always) the best public policy solutions.

  26. Jesse my apologies. We happen to have the same beliefs, just different definitions of what they mean.

  27. DL,

    Believe it or not most Conservatives actually believe that big government only hurts the vulnerable by causing higher taxes or inflation and crowding out private sector job creation.

    Quality of life over the last 250 hasn't improved because of anything government has or has not done.

    Its improved because of industrialization and innovation.

    The staples of life, food output, energy availability, advancement in medicine are all driven by the best and brightest amongst us.

    As the overall standard of living improves so does the wellbeing of the poor.

    Being poor in Canada today sure beats being poor in pre-industrial England.

    Compare that to being poor in the Soviet Union, where you have a system designed so gov't spending as a % of GDP is 100% or greater.

    Socialism has been a historical failure. Its so strange to see people still clinging to it.

  28. Socialism has not been a historical failure. Communism, yes, but not socialism. Europe is full of successful socialist countries. Canada's adoption of some socialist policies has made it successful as well.

    -- "Being poor in Canada today sure beats being poor in pre-industrial England."

    It also beats being poor in mid-19th century England, when government was small and the free market reigned supreme.

    The closer we get to examples of real libertarianism, the closer we get to utter failure.

  29. Jesse pure capitalism has been a failure as well. Circe 2007-08. I'd take issue with your assertion that government has done nothing to improve the lot of people. Industrialization created wealth but pure capitalism leads to the concentration of both wealth and power in fewer and fewer hands.

    One only need look at conditions in the great depression compared to this recession to see the difference government has made. Because there are automatic stabilizers built into the system which mitigate the effects of an economic downturn we didn't have a great depression this time. When the great depression began there was no EI, Medicare, OAS or CPP or even welfare. Each of these programs not only helps people survive downturns but ensures a steady flow of income to the populace that is almost entirely spent on consumables. In addition these consumables are more likely to be domestically produced than the average basket of goods. I don't begin to advocate socialism but the choice isn't between socialism or capitalism its between modified capitalism and modified capitalism. The question is the degree to which you want to modify capitalism. If we had pure capitalism there would be no government regulation of health and safety, in food, the workplace, pollution, etc. Our economy would be run by a few ultra powerful companies that would set up huge barriers to entry to actually prevent competition. That's what successful businesses do. It makes economic sense to prevent competition if you are in business.

  30. Eric,

    "Europe is full of successful socialist countries"

    Really? The Scandinavian model is the only thing that comes to mind when I think of a somehwat successful socialism and that's usually supported by massive oil wealth.

    Then it becomes a matter of how you define Socialism. The highest you get for marginal tax rates in Europe is the high 40's, low 50's. And gov't spending as a % of GDP doesn't usually go higher than 55% either.

    So if Communism is 100% i'd expect true Socialism to be a lot higher than than the 50's.

    I'd call what Europe has right now big government or bloated government but not true Socialism.

    Regardless, unemployment tends to be higher in European countries with bigger governments.

    And its my belief that a good job is the only sustainable standard of prosperity.

    P.S. - It would be interesting to hear some historical examples of "true libertarianism". Regardless, i'm an advocate of small government, not no government.

  31. The quality of comments here is becoming comparable to the ones on 538.

  32. Earl,

    You've probably got me mistaken with Martin again, he seems more of a pure capitalism type. As I just told Eric, i've never advocated such a thing.

    But 2007-2008 was NOT pure Capitalism. Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac in the US were gov't agencies facilitating the proliferation of subprime mortgages.

    Anyways, i'm fine with the current gov't stimulus program. Our debt to GDP ratio is low enough that we can afford it.

    I don't think these comparisons to the great depression are all that helpful, every economic configuration is different.

    And i'm not talking about cutting food inspectors and scrapping anti-trust laws.

    There's a lot of gov't to trim that's non-essential such as funding for political parties, funding for the arts, funding for CBC/Radio-Canada. Cutting foriegn aid.

  33. Hey Jesse I'm with you on that as well as funding for sports, and subsidies to business. I'd add to foreign aid though but use it much differently.

  34. "I don't see Harper and CPC in the same light at all though. SORRY! If they ever pull the kind of stuff that Harris pulled they'll lose my vote."

    If Harper had a majority he would go so far to the right so fast that he'd make Harris look like a Red Tory. The only reason Harper seems the least bit moderate is because his minority situation prevents him from doing all the things he really wants to do.

  35. DL,

    Harper and Harris are different levels of gov't and have different constitutionally defined responsibilities.

    Not everybody is up and down NDP. A lot of people actually like parties of different backgrounds for their province than their federal gov't so as to maintain a sort of balance.

  36. Stop equating capitalism and the free market.

    Capitalism only requires that the means of production be privately controlled. That still allows for all sorts of government intervention in the market, creating biases regulations to aid those who support specific political parties, or creating trade barriers as a means to transfer wealth around inside the country. This is basically how the United States works.

    A free market requires that people be free to trade with each other under fairly applied equal laws, so no one gets special treatment from the regulators, propping up their business at the expense of consumers (which is generally what subsidies do - hurt consumers).

    I (and I suspect Martin and Jesse) support the free market. That is entirely unlike the "capitalism" being attacked here.

  37. Ira,

    You're bang on. Another phrase for what you're describing is "crony capitalism".

    When China abandoned Communism for a Capitalist system they began a process that would create substantial new wealth and growth.

    However, because of political interference the people who benefited the most were members of the ruling class.

    When gov'ts start over regulating or taking too much control you see a proliferation of bribery, corruption, and crime.

    Earl likes to think of the gov't as a force for good, levelling the playing field and making it so the little guy can be treated fairly.

    However, gov'ts are ran by people and like people are capable of both and bad.

  38. Angus is out:

    I'd say that's a slim majority?

  39. No, I think that if that latest Angus Reid poll was correct, the Tories would NOT get a majority. According to that poll, they would lose a couple of seats in BC, lose about half their seats in Quebec, gain a couple on the Prairies and gain half a dozen in Ontario leaving them back where they are now. The fact that the Tory margin in Ontario was sliced from 16 points to 10 points makes a big difference.

  40. Eddie,

    How did you find this?

  41. The new Ekos poll is also online:

  42. You probably have to ask the person who maintains the Wikipedia page. I remember he/she posting here a short time ago. Somehow Angus Reid always finds its way onto the Wikipedia first. I only saw it there this afternoon.


COMMENT MODERATION POLICY - Please be respectful when commenting. If choosing to remain anonymous, please sign your comment with some sort of pseudonym to avoid confusion. Please do not use any derogatory terms for fellow commenters, parties, or politicians. Inflammatory and overly partisan comments will not be posted. PLEASE KEEP DISCUSSION ON TOPIC.