Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Saskatchewan Provincial Poll

Thanks to commenter Barcs for pointing out this Saskatchewan provincial poll to me. It was taken between October 29 and November 2, involving 801 Saskatchewanians. The result (portioning out the undecideds and non-respondents):

Saskatchewan Party - 61.7%
New Democrats - 21.2%
Greens - 5.2%
Liberals - 3.9%

In the 2007 provincial election, the Saskatchewan Party took 50.9% of the vote, so they've made some gains. The NDP took 37.2%, so that is a big loss for them. The Liberals had 9.4%, so that is also a big loss. There isn't any major regional variation, except in Regina where the NDP is more competitive. The Saskatchewan Party is more or less the provincial version of the Conservatives, so while not critical or even all that indicative, it is a good sign for the Tories. Again, the provincial/federal divide is significant as it is in all provinces, but that is certainly not good news for the federal NDP and Liberals.

To give you an idea of how it compares, here are the 2008 election results in Saskatchewan:

Conservatives - 53.7%
New Democrats - 25.6%
Liberals - 14.9%
Greens - 5.6%

I enjoy these provincial polls, since we don't see a lot of them. When the next federal election finally happens, I intend to then look at the next likely provincial election and try to project that, as well as keeping a watch over the federal scene.


  1. The Sigma poll actually has the NDP at 26% not 21% and your chart shows

  2. I don't think this is the same poll.

  3. Provincial Parties who are in the lead often will end up polling 60%. Look at all 4 Atlantic provinces, as well as places like here in Saskatchewan. When election time rolls around that 60% gets reduced to 50%-60%, which still spells a clear majority.

  4. This is largely an indication of what a great job Brad Wall and his government are doing running Saskatchewan. They're making up for decades of stagnation with unstoppable economic growth.

    Also, when you're the only jurisdiction in the developed world that managed to avoid a global recession, you're going to look pretty good.

  5. It is a very bad poll for the NDP.. they have not scored less than 35% since almost 30 years before they changed from the CCF to the NDP... In 1938 they scored 19%.

    That is 70 years that their base core vote has been considered to be 35%. Calvert nearly reached that with 37%.

    Brad wall has done an exceptional job of running the province. and the polls show it. The sask party has absorbed nearly all the past tory and liberal support. Tho there are still supporters of both out there.

    The NDP on the other hand elected a new leader this year, that has been all but invisible except for a few statements that have not gone over well with alot of voters. There are many who believe it was the wrong leader even within the party. He is seen as on the right side of the NDP, and returned from an Alberta oilpatch job which he left the deputy premiers job for.

  6. It's kind of astonishing that a party in a democratic environment can open up such an enormous lead in an essentially two-party situation.

    Yet... it seems to happen often in provinces with large oil deposits; Alberta, (though not as much right now) Newfoundland, and now Saskatchewan.

  7. That's a good point, Kevin. That suggests that one party is grossly misreading the public.

    Though Alberta might be a poor example. From 1997-2008 it was really a one-party system. The other parties were effectively rudderless.

  8. Kevin,

    My guess is one party is shooting themselves in the foot with reflexive partisanship.

    A gov't says: Ok, let's develop these resources full force.

    The opposition says: Wrong! Too many environmental and social costs.

    The public looks at it and says: We don't want to be poor, this is a no brainer, resource wealth it is.

    And there you have it, the formula for a massive lead in the polls.

  9. Kevin..

    you mean like the oil rich province of BC in 2001 with a difference of 57-21??

    how about oil rich PEI in 2000 was 25% different... or 93 where it was 15% different but 31-1 seats. 89 where it was 30 seats to 2??

    maybe oil rich New Brunswick where the margin has bounced between 15 and 30% for the 90's.

    Its funny, but Nova Scotia is really the only consistent 3 party province, the rest tend to 2 party races with the odd election year where a 3rd party is competitive.

  10. Provinces don't have the kind of regional differences that make it difficult for one or two parties to dominate.

  11. To an extent they do Eric, Saskatchewan for example is split right down the middle.

    The cities and their high concentration of union people (especially regina as the poll notes) tend to vote for the left. The rural areas, that have been largely ignored and even damaged by the NDP (closing hospitals, closing government offices, roads, etc) tend to vote for the more right saskparty.

    In years that are good for the NDP the saskparty is largely not competitive in the cities. In years that are good for the saskparty, the rural areas are a wasteland for the NDP.

  12. Well, I guess it's not that unusual then.


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.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.