Friday, September 4, 2015

2015 Federal Election Link Round-up, Week 5

Let's take a look at the on-going campaign with a wider focus. Below are the un-adjusted averages of the polls conducted so far in the campaign, by week. I'll update Week 4 numbers as more come in.

Week 1: NDP 34.7% CPC 29.6% LPC 26.8% BQ 4.6% GPC 4.0%
Week 2: NDP 31.8% CPC 29.8% LPC 27.5% GPC 5.4% BQ 4.6%
Week 3: NDP 32.7% CPC 29.4% LPC 28.0% GPC 5.1% BQ 3.9%
Week 4: NDP 33.9% CPC 28.4% LPC 27.9% GPC 5.0% BQ 3.8%

Any trends yet? The NDP seems to be going back and forth, while the Liberals are better off now than they were at the start of the campaign. The Conservatives could be slipping, while the Bloc seems to be.

Saturday, September 5, 2015

- A few polls this morning. One from Forum (still looking strange, but less strange than the last one) and the other from Léger. I've updated the Poll Tracker with these new numbers, and my analysis of the EKOS poll's effects on the Poll Tracker that was posted on the CBC last night will be updated shortly with this new information. I'll also try to have the riding projections updated later today.

- I was on The House this morning, talking about Battleground Montreal.

- Hier, sur Phare Ouest au Colombie-Britannique (après la musique!).

Friday, September 4, 2015

- EKOS is out, and shows the NDP down. The Poll Tracker has been updated with it. An analysis will follow shortly on the CBC.

- Another quiet day! But we wait with bated breath for the poll from EKOS that is supposed to come out today. In the meantime, I've updated the By-Election Barometer with the results of last night's vote in Calgary-Foothills and Simcoe North, as well as the new forecasts for the ridings of René-Lévesque and Whitby-Oshawa.

Thursday, September 3, 2015

- I've profiled Edmonton Centre as today's riding to watch. Will it be a three-way race? An NDP victory to mirror the provincial win in May? Or will the Conservatives benefit from a split of the vote?

- Quiet day on the polling front, though there are some interesting numbers from Abacus Data here at Maclean's. Trudeau leads on fun, Harper on running a country and a business. But Harper's lead on those issues was not as large over Mulcair as he would like it to be, and Mulcair was up on things like giving career advice or negotiating a contract.

Wednesday, September 2, 2015

- The latest episode of the Pollcast is out. This week, I'm joined by Bill Curry of The Globe and Mail and Josh Wingrove of Bloomberg - two journalists who know their stuff on the economy. So we talked about the economy and its impact on this campaign.

- I spoke with Prince George CBC radio about the importance of B.C. in the election.

- For the first time in a long time, British Columbia could be the decisive province in this election. I broke down the numbers in my column for the CBC today.

- Mainstreet has a poll concentrating on the island of Montreal today. Nothing too surprising. Close race between the NDP and Liberals overall, but NDP way ahead among francophones and the Liberals way ahead among anglophones.

Tuesday, September 1, 2015

- The Poll Tracker was updated earlier today, and the riding projections are now updated to match.

- Provincial politics alert: the Angus Reid Institute is out with its quarterly assessment of the approval ratings of Canada's premiers. Nothing really striking. Brad Wall and Rachel Notley are the only ones with a net positive rating. Kathleen Wynne, who has been the premier the most present in the federal campaign so far, is a net -29.

- The Polls Panel debuted on Power and Politics last night. Rosemary Barton moderated a panel that included me, Dimitri Pantazapoulos of Maple Leaf Strategies, and David Coletto of Abacus Data. It will be a regular weekly segment. Check it out here.

- Nanos is out with its latest four-week sample (his last one before going to a nightly tracking poll?). Must have been a lot of movement in either the latest week or the week that was dropped off the poll to move the Conservatives from first to third.

- In case you missed it yesterday, check out the riding profile I did for Kenora yesterday.

Monday, August 31, 2015

- Throughout the campaign, I'll be taking a close look at some of the ridings projected to go down to the wire. Today's profile is of the northwestern Ontario riding of Kenora.

- Here's my analysis of the latest numbers. I took a deeper look at some of the interesting findings in Innovative's new poll.

- The By-Election Barometer has been updated, with the additions of Fabre and Saint-Henri-Sainte-Anne in Quebec. Both are forecast to be Strong PLQ holds.

- The Poll Tracker has been updated, along with the riding projections.

- Two polls out over the last few days, a massive report from the Innovative Research Group published over the weekend and a brand new poll from Abacus Data this morning. Both are showing the same close race.

- This weekend on The House, we talked about the economy and the polls.

132 comments:

  1. Éric, Check out your columns for the Greens and the Bloc... A little imp has doen some mischief.

    ReplyDelete
  2. unless you're keeping them in order of results, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  3. All parties have candidates who cant declare or actively campaign until after Labour day , due to statutes or union contracts - another reason why a long campaign has made for quiet campaigns in many ridings.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The only reason to have an early election call was for Harper to get out in front of the Duffy trial.

    The weakest parties were compelled by their respective circumstances to expend some powder whilst the two stronger parties have been very conservative (sorry, Tom) in this regard. This is about to change.

    May's voice has dropped a tone. A shot at gravitas, perhaps? Justin's is almost as low. The window for both is about to close as the big boys get ready to rumble.

    In any case, the paring is done: Harper and May are the most dangerous for the country, so we all have to count on Tom and Justin to do as well as they can without splitting the anti-Harper-May vote. I get the horrible feeling that Greens numbers benefit from those who're frustrated---with little real understanding why---that Tom and Justin haven't formed a coalition yet, and not so much that they're really green Green.

    May, recently campaigning out here in BC, has been disingenuous with her interpretation of balance-of-power prospects (swears Greens don't split votes)---but of course, when she's preaching to the converted, she's confident a significant number think we already have proportional representation. At least that's how she talks.

    The whole shootin' match gonna look different in about a week-and-a-half. Can't wait.

    PS: never heard so much talk about strategic voting as I have this time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Calling your stance on the Greens condescending may be putting it mildly. Your fear is that the Liberals and NDP are splitting "anti-Harper-May vote?" I don't see how May factors into that at all, this is just anti Harper...

      Delete
    2. Though, if Harper had to have a coalition with anyone, my first choice would be May. Or Duceppe.

      But I'd prefer a majority.

      Delete
    3. What nonsense! A clean healthy environment is dangerous for the country? I guess you Dippers know that the NDP can't win on their policies so they must use scare tactics!

      Delete
    4. Also for your reference Mr. Donaldson: Who're is a rather unpleasant word used to describe some women. It is not a contraction for "who are"!

      Delete
    5. If you don't like vote splitting, then I presume you favour electoral system reform.

      Delete
    6. Pete, amusing as your comment might be, the term "whore" is not confined to women.

      Delete
  5. Statistical Noise or real movement?

    Hard to tell as oscillations look within MOE or a whisker more.

    That said, a 1% shift in Ontario can swing several seats.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And if you look at week 1 and week 4 the NDP have risen by 0.1 !!

      In other words no change.

      Delete
  6. Poll tracker link is broken (cbcnew.ca rather than cbcnews.ca) and redirects to a junk site.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Lac St Louis on Montreal island (West Island) is not going to be an 81% liberal win. There were 2000 votes between the Liberal and NDP last time and another 2000 votes between NDP and Conservative. What ever your method is,( I suspect you are extrapolating national averages ) this one is too close to call. As there are only 7 Liberal MPs from Quebec , all Liberal held ridings are precious and bear closer scrutiny than national tendencies provide.The NDP have a good chance to take this one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With the Liberals polling well above their 2011 election result, and doing that in every region, it's hard to justify a Liberal loss.

      Delete
    2. I think the 81% states the probability of a Liberal victory not the margin of a Liberal victory! Eric posts his methodology it may be worth while having a look.

      Delete
    3. Thanks for the tip.- I did read it over. I stand corrected on that. Talking with neighbours and friends - thou not a scientific survey - indicates that some voters in this riding are switching to the NDP and the NDP need a majority in the house.

      Delete
  8. Hey, Eric, I don't suppose you could use a darker orange for the NDP numbers, could you? The orange you have now is almost yellow, and it's not enough contrast against a white background, which makes it hard to read. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Darker orange for the NDP; so that explains their shift to the centre .... :)

      Delete
  9. If you compare within house instead of just assuming all pollsters have the same house bias, there trend seems clear to me...


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_in_the_Canadian_federal_election,_2015

    Abacus: CPC +1, NDP -4, LPC +2
    EKOS: CPC -2, NDP -2, LPC +2.5
    Forum: CPC -5, NDP +1, LPC +5
    Ipsos: CPC -2, NDP = , LPC +2
    Nanos: CPC -1, NDP -1.3, LPC +1.3

    CPC 4 out of 5 houses in the field more than once say down since start of campaign.

    NDP 2 say up, 2 say down, 1 says about the same.

    All 5 polling firms say the LPC is rising.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Éric,

      Looks like it amounts to overkill with the Justin Not Ready ads. They reached the saturation point and have lost their value as regards impact on potential voters. Big strategic error by the CPC that could likely cost Harper the election. They started too early and ran too long. They've become a yawn.

      Delete
    2. It would be ironic, if Mulcair were to win a majority because of Conservative attack ads against the Liberals. In a two-way race, attack ads are strategically smart. In a three-way race, they might just upset the divide between the other options.

      Delete
    3. That's an interesting point.

      Negative ads tend to drive down voter turnout for a attacked party. The attacking party typically sees no changes at all.

      But in a three-party race, do those votes stay home, or do they go somewhere else?

      I wonder if the CPC strategy was to push the Liberals out of the race, and once it was a 2-way race change their messaging to deal with the NDP.

      Delete
    4. So far, the only race between the Liberals and Conservatives has been for second place. Conservative attack ads directed against Trudeau have no bearing on the current frontrunner - the NDP, so they wouldn't be costing either the Liberals or the Conservatives a win.

      Delete
    5. You're ignoring their opportunity costs, chimurenga. Running those ads prevents the CPC from running other ads, and those other ads might have had a more useful effect.

      That said, I'm not willing to call this election, yet. If the CPC manages to win, their strategists will look like geniuses.

      Delete
    6. Late to comment sorry, but the Conservatives pounding down the liberals, leaving the NDP untouched has the effect of forcing the Liberals to fend off the NDP, instead of merely attack the CPC. It has the effect of having them blow powder against themselves.

      Delete
    7. "It would be ironic, if Mulcair were to win a majority because of Conservative attack ads against the Liberals."

      I do not believe that would deeply upset Harper; his objective is to keep the Liberals in third place. Over time they would then fade from relevance in Canada.

      Delete
    8. Paul Harper's objective, and he has stated it many, many times, is to destroy the Liberal Party. So the attack ads against Justin are just some of the latest stuff of assault !!

      Delete
  10. Eric, just to let you know. Although you have been updating the poll on the CBC Polltracker it still says the
    last time it was updated was August 28/15.

    Glen

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That refers to the final date of polling. Check out the top of the Poll Tracker, it shows the update date.

      Delete
  11. Re: New Ridings & Confusion

    It hadn't occurred to me before now, but the new ridings and general lack of incumbents will make the prohibition of advertising by Elections Canada even more effective at suppressing voter turnout.

    If people don't know how to vote, they're less likely to vote.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anyone have a sense of why the Greens jumped so much between week 1 and 2? Is it just a product of who was polling or did the debate have an impact or was it something else?

    ReplyDelete
  13. I don't know how many of you saw last mights Power And Politics show? But the explosion by Chris Alexander against Rosie Barton was really, really a disaster !!

    And tody we find out Alexander has suspended his re-election campaign to rush back to Ottawa and try to fix some of the real screw ups his Dept, Immigration, has caused. In particular that photo circulated worldwide of a dead 3 yr old boy in the surf off Turkey. And guess who had rejected the boys application to come to Canada from Syria ??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The so-called refugee crisis, I think, feeds into the CPC's ISIS narrative. These people are only refugees because their region is being destroyed by terrorists.

      The CPC can spin this. They haven't, yet, which troubles me, but I think they can.

      Delete
    2. Chris Alexander was back tonight as Rosie's first guest > She just "killed" him!! And the real attempt to spin has hit a brick wall as we find out from today's Guardian that Russian troops are in Syria fighting for Assad !!

      Fighting ISIS or Assad only produces more refugees !! Better to focus on getting those currently in that state out of harms way. Not fighting to produce more !!

      Delete
    3. Except that's not true at all. There was no application and they were on their way to Sweden.

      Delete
    4. The bulk of the Syrian refugees are from the Assad civil war, not ISIS. Stop reading from Harpers talking points. Bombing ISIS will not stop this.

      Delete
    5. Yes, CIC gives the option to "voluntarily withdraw" an application before they reject it, and you save the bulk of the application fee. I know people that have had their application lost by CIC, and their tracking is very haphazard.

      Delete
    6. If not for ISIS, the Assad civil war would be over by now.

      Delete
    7. I find this story extremely irritating, because the media ran with a bunch of details that turned out not to be true.

      They didn't apply to come to Canada. Canada didn't then offer them knee-jerk citizenship. None of that happened.

      So why did the media report it?

      Delete
    8. The story is global and about the humanizing of the 2600+ deaths of migrants/refugees that have died in 2015 trying to enter Europe.

      There was a plan for them to come to Canada, but due to the complexity of our system it hadn't happened. CIC needs to be better funded and overhauled.

      Delete
    9. People I don't know die every day. I'm not more concerned about these people just because I've seen them on television.

      Delete
    10. Its that uncaring attitude that has cost Harper the election. He is tanking.

      Delete
    11. I would rather he fail sounding intelligent than win being an idiot.

      That uncaring attitude produces better results. Compassion without competence doesn't help anyone.

      Delete
    12. Luckily, we can have leaders that are capable of being both compassionate and competent. Harper is a lot less wooden nowadays, but compassion has never been his strong suit.

      Delete
  14. There is a very real possibility that the picture of that dead little boy washed up alone on the beach will be associated with the Harper Government. If that's the case, their campaign is derailed and destroyed beyond any comprehension.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If that happens I will be so disappointed in Canadians, because it has nothing at all to do with relevance issues of governance.

      There are legitimate reasons to dislike the Harper government. This is not one of them.

      Delete
    2. Except the made up story looks very bad on the NDP and Liberals who circulated false information and not the Tories.

      Delete
    3. It's not a made up story. The photo was real and a child died. If the response from the Conservatives - or their supporters - was that this was "made up" they'll come away from this worse regardless of the narrative not being the same as what was originally said. This is why regardless of what happens I think the Conservatives are screwed.

      Delete
    4. Which part is made up? That the boy is dead? That a NDP MP hand delivered the refugee application in March? Or that CIC denied the applicable in June as it was "too complicated"?

      At the very least, this should serve as a prompt for how obfuscated and subjective our immigration system is, but doesn't have to be. My wife and step-daughter are currently immigrating under the family plan, and I sponsored a refugee from Iran back in 2004. You put together your best package and mail it to Mississauga; you wait a month and then they send you an email saying they received it; you wait another month and they say you can be a sponsor; then they send the application to the source country and it takes between 10 to 36 months longer to be approved, all the while having no inclination of what to expect.

      Delete
    5. The part that the family was trying to get to Canada. They were trying to get to Sweden. And the part that they had applied for refugee status and had been denied. There was no application. Essentially any connection to Canada or the immigration Minister was completely made up.

      Delete
    6. @ shoshana ...

      Please read the BBC - World News (Sept. 4/2015) about ' The story of the Alan Kurdis Family '.

      The Kurdis family application was rejected by
      this government in June 2015.

      The Kurdis family did set out for Canada; a family member was attempting to arrange a private(family) sponsorship.

      In June, Conservative Minister for Immigration - Christopher Alexander - did receive a hand-delivered Letter from an NDP Member of Parliament, requesting the Minister review and help the Kurdis family.

      There was no reply from Immigration Minister Chris Alexander.

      Will you please cite the source you used for your version of the details you have asserted here ?

      Out of respect for the Kurdis Family tragedy will you please correct any/all mis-statements you may have made, inadvertantly, while defending this government's action/inaction ?

      Delete
    7. NO application was ever rejected for this family, and no application was ever made. The father stated they were trying to go to Sweden. Why don't you stop the political spin over a dead child.

      Delete
    8. Okay.

      What is your source, please?

      Delete
    9. It doesn't matter either way. Harper looks awful with his stingy quotas and war mongering attitude.

      Delete
    10. I agree with Fresh Orange. These responses are anything but sympathetic to the loss the Kurdis family is facing and I think you owe them an apology. If these are the talking points that Conservative Party Central is sending out to its supporters, they can expect to maintain the third place finish that polls are beginning to echo now.

      Delete
    11. The facts always matter, Jimmy.

      Delete
  15. As someone on the ground in Edmonton Centre this race will be interesting to watch because it pits 'momentum' (NDP, riding provincial victory) versus preparation (Liberal campaign identifying voters for more than a year with candidate in place). If it is a close race the year-long preparation will probably put the Liberals over the top.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I just remembered there are byelections today.

    That's exciting!

    ReplyDelete
  17. I'm dying for a new poll to come out! lol. I just have this feeling that Liberals are eventually going to top a poll. If they start topping multiple polls and the media reports the Liberals in the lead, we could start seeing some ABC voters switching their vote back from NDP.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In which case, you can enjoy all the economic policies of the Conservatives, but legitimated with progressive spin. We've been down that road too many times.

      Delete
    2. This election is nutty. I'm betting if the Cons drop to 3rd for a few polls in a row we start seeing Greens grow as it becomes 'safe' to vote Green without fear of 'splitting the vote'. I am so sick of hearing that Greens split the vote when it is obvious if the Libs & NDP worked even a tiny bit together (run weak candidates when the other has a strong one for example, rather than a battle royale in places the Cons can sneak up and win like in Kenora) they could make more of a difference than any efforts by Green voters.

      Delete
    3. The Liberals and the NDP are not interchangeable. Why would a social democratic party collaborate with a corporatist party (and vice versa)? They do not share common ground. Even the social programmes that former (distantly former) Liberal governments have been praised for simply took those policies from the NDP and watered them down.

      Delete
    4. Basically the Libs & NDP both keep telling Green voters to 'stop splitting the vote'. My point is the vote split is more Lib/NDP than Green/anyone as Greens have yet to reach 10% overall in an election while the NDP had over 10% in all but 2 ridings last time. So no question if there is a split to allow Harper to win it is an NDP/Liberal issue, not a Green one.

      Delete
    5. Your point is a fair one, I was just responding to this phrase : " if the Libs & NDP worked even a tiny bit together"... There's no basis for them to work together, nor should there be. The Liberals and the Conservatives have far more in common than the Liberals and NDP do. Even on social issues the Liberals have lagged far behind the NDP (for example, as late as the 1980s numerous and prominent Liberal MPs were openly anti-choice, whereas as choice had long been a key plank in the NDP platform). As for economic issues, the Liberals are an establishment, business party.

      Delete
    6. No argument on how the Libs are more like the Cons and the NDP is more how the Libs used to be. The Greens are moving into the old NDP role of being the soul of Parliament. The ones you look to for ethical decisions instead of 'how do I win overall' decisions.

      Delete
  18. In your By-election Barometer Track Record image, I think you've used two different colours for Wildrose.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you might be mixing it up with the Sask Party.

      Delete
    2. No, but I wasn't considering that the colours might look different because they were surrounded by different colours.

      Delete
  19. I’ve noticed a string of polls having the NDP slipping, but that doesn’t seem to be having any kind of pronounced effect on your aggregated data. Everyone’s more or less the same as before. Is there a reason for this? I find it odd that polls showing a reduction in the gap between the parties isn’t manifesting itself here. The NDP’s 4 point lead being shown here seems a bit inflated to me.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Why is it when the NDP is polling high, like 5+% over the second and 9+% over third place it's a close three way race; but when the NDP drops 3 points in one poll it suddenly the NDP are loosing their comfortable lead?

    Not targeting you Eric, just frustrated at the optics that the MSM presents with the NDP. When we're up (for three months), all the news is how we're in the tightest race in history and it anyone's election, but a drop in one poll and suddenly it's, the NDP are in free fall.

    gerrr!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think, for me, it is because the seat count is still close.

      Delete
    2. Because 18-30 year olds don't vote in the same proportion as their census data would suggest and the vote is concentrated In Quebec. In reality, the NDP would probably place 3rd, if an election were held today with a voter turnout model that actually reflected voter turnout and not a census.

      Delete
    3. Most polls, in fact, now show if an election were held today, it is the CPC that would be third in both popular vote and seats. That includes the aggregate. Harper is doing very badly.

      Delete
    4. shoshana, you should actually read the polls, rather than presuming you know what they say. The NDP has been polling in first or second in most polls in all age groups - their vote isn't concentrated in youth the way it has been in the past. And the NDP has been polling in first place or second in every region of the country, so their vote is not "concentrated in Quebec".

      Delete
  21. Latest Forum poll has CPC in distant third with 24%.

    NDP 36 and Libs 32

    The CPC campaign so far has been a complete disaster. There will be more bad economic news and the Carson trial. Perhaps even Wallin charges. I think this is where the election is heading.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those forum polls have been complete outlier's from the rest of the pack. Either they are catching something no one else is or they are completely out to lunch.

      Delete
    2. It's unreasonable to say they are "out to lunch" when they are capturing the same trend as other pollsters. Their methodology may produce different raw numbers, but the trend is consistent - the Conservatives are down to third place, the Liberals are up to second and the NDP are bobbing along not much different from where they were before.

      Delete
  22. It doesn't seem to matter which pollster you look at the numbers never even come close?? Sure margin of error but really ????

    ReplyDelete
  23. 308 Poll Tracker aggregate has CPC in third now also. Harper is tanking and the support is going to the Liberals.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the Cons stay in 3rd for long I expect to see Green support start to climb as people begin to feel safe to vote as they want since if Harper is in 3rd he'll have no chance to form government. It'll be interesting to see what the Cons do with that massive war chest if they keep dropping and the ads don't work.

      Delete
  24. Globe and Mail Leger poll out today

    "The New Democratic Party has the support of 31 per cent of respondents at the national level, ahead of the Liberals at 30 per cent and Stephen Harper’s Conservative Party at 28 per cent. However, Mr. Léger said the Liberals have picked up one point a week during the campaign, closing the gap with the NDP nationally."

    ReplyDelete
  25. The podcasts are a great addition this campaign for us political junkies. Great job, Eric!

    The results in AB and BC will be interesting to watch in terms of modeling: Eric is much more generous than I am with the Liberals, probably because geometric swing implies a much more efficient Liberal vote in those areas than arithmetic swing. As a result of that, my less aggressive discounting of older polls, and an adjustment I make to try taking into account voter turnout, I still have the Tories marginally ahead.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Eric, as Jimmy noted, the FORUM poll, again, seems wildly optimistic about the demise of the CPC compared to every one else, what in there methodology gets this result?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wildly optimistic? Even the Nanos tracking is showing the Tories in third. One can question the numbers Forum is putting out but the move to third is consistent among multiple polls.

      Delete
    2. True but there is a big difference between the other polls which show them as a competitive 2nd/3rd and Forum which shows them as a Rump party with implausible numbers in Ontario. Forum clearly has something going on in it's samples, it's either catching something that no one else is, or is more likely they are just junk polls.

      Delete
    3. It's hard to call the Forum polls "junk" when they are showing a trend consistent with other polls. Truthfully, the only people I've come across who outright dismiss these polls are the ones who are having a difficult time digesting the strong desire for a change of government and it being reflected in the current third place showing of the Conservatives.

      Delete
    4. They aren't showing a trend consistent with other polls. Everyone else shows the CPC losing maybe 1-2 points, and in a competitive second or third place. With the margin between all the parties to be about 4-7 points. Forum has shown the NDP at 40% two weeks ago and 17 points up on the CPC. This week they still had the CPC 4 points lower than anyone else has.

      Truthfully the only people I've come across that don't outright dimiss these polls are the ones that have a hard time digesting the strong Conservative base that exists and have no desire to vote for two parties consistently trying to outflank one another on the left which is being reflected by the current competitive 2nd or 3rd place standing of the Conservatives in all but the Forum polls.

      Delete
    5. This isn't about Forum. It's about a consistent downward trend for the Conservatives across multiple polls. I'm afraid your partisan bias is showing, DouglasEdward. You guys really need to be supplied with new talking points.

      Delete
    6. But....if there is a downward trend it is only of 2 points or so. There has been ever so slight movement so far in the polling. It is very close and often the differences between parties if within the margin of error.

      Delete
    7. The Nanos poll (is it a proper poll, or their tracking?) shows similar numbers to Forum, so can we put this whole issue to rest finally? The Conservatives are in third.

      Delete
    8. It's funny how when the CPC was at 28.3% and LPC was at 26.9% on the poll tracker, none of the conservatives on here were saying the LPC were a competitive 2nd or 3rd place, yet now the CPC is at 26.9% and LPC is at 30.2%.

      You have to go back to August 10 to have a bigger gap between second and third.

      Delete
    9. As best anyone can tell, they're having a very hard time digesting the reality of the campaign they have had so far. The Bubble will do that, I suppose.

      Delete
  27. The updated Poll Tracker shows LPC mini spikes in BC and ON at the expense of the CPC and a resulting big ON seat swing to the LPC.

    NDP looks flat in PT by comparison. Mulcair's balanced budget promise may be coming across as typical unachievable politician election promise. Trudeau's proposed deficits for infrastructure economic stimulus may have better appeal.

    Next week's numbers will reflect the influence of the tragic photo of the drowned boy with Canadian relatives trying to get them to Canada and the so far wooden response of the CPC. Perhaps if they donned sackcloth and ashes and flew planes to Turkey to pick up refugees, they could beg forgiveness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is an outright fabrication which I am surprised passed moderation here.

      Delete
    2. No darren it's very close to both the media view and the general public view. Looks like Harper fubarred again ?

      Delete
    3. It's going to be interesting to see how the public reacts to candidates urinating in homeowner's cups and mocking the mentally ill while the knowledge of the Kurdi family tragedy is still fresh in their mind. Party talking points are going to have a hard time dismissing those as "fabrications" or "lies" the same way they are with the tragic story of a family's death - which I must say, is the definition of poor taste and absolutely despicable!

      Delete
    4. I am very, very curious how the mess in Syria will affect things as Harper coming out and saying that his solution is more military, which is opposite of what most seem to say/think/feel. He basically is pushing to his base and hoping that he'll get well over 50% to show up and vote while the Libs & NDP get sub 50% showing up to the polls.

      Delete
    5. Éric,

      With the CPC in third, Harper has no choice but to gamble on red. His judgment, or lack thereof, will either make or permanently derail their campaign.

      He has to go nuclear negative and if they go too far, it's John Tory and Kim Campbell from 1993, all over again. Are they finished? Maybe.

      Delete
    6. The solution is more military. The ideal solution to the refugee crisis is that these people no longer need to flee, and can maybe go home if they want.

      Delete
    7. Ira for Heaven's sake !! More military equals more slaughter . Because this is a CIVIL war not an Islamic insurgency plus it has been going on for four years. Get your facts right !!

      Delete
    8. More military rarely is the solution. The more the West is directly involved, the more radicalized the Middle East becomes. Canada should be concentrating on our historic role as peace-keepers and providing security in the border regions, so that people believe there is a viable alternative to ISIS control.

      This whole situation is a by-product of military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan.

      Delete
    9. Ideally they would be free and not have to worry about various factions fighting but this is the real world, not a fantasy one. No matter how much military we send in the fighting will continue. The US or Russia could solve it as both have the power (military and financial) to change things.

      Sadly our current PM doesn't seem to 'get it'. He thinks more bombs will sell to the Canadian public but early returns are not in his favour.

      Delete
    10. Historic role as peacekeepers? So you're choosing to define history only as the period from Pearson-Chrétien (and even Chrétien was behind one of our most successful combat missions - in Bosnia - where we went in as peacekeepers but then MADE peace by completely ignoring our UN orders).

      Canada's "historic" role as peacekeepers lasted 30 years.

      What do you think Peacekeepers would do in Syria right now? Peacekeepers are just war fighters with different objectives, but they're still soldiers, and soldiers are tools used to kill people and blow stuff up. That's what soldiers are for. We don't want to have to use them, but sometimes we do.

      Before ISIS came along and destabilised the region, Assad was losing that war. The civil war would be done by now if not for ISIS. And now ISIS, which as far as I can tell is a doomsday cult, controls a large area and isn't likely to negotiate with anyone.

      Delete
    11. "This whole situation is a by-product of military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan."

      No argument there. The idiotic borders drawn by the British, combined with the US overthrow of the democratically elected Iranian government in 1953 started a terrible cascade effect.

      But I don't see how humanitarian aid and peacekeepers would help. My first choice would be to build a wall around the region and let them sort it out themselves.

      We shouldn't be there. But nor should they be driving all their people away. I'm disinclined to let them.

      Delete
    12. John what everybody ignores and it is very important is the amount that Russia is involved in the Syria war. Russia has troops in Syria fighting in support of Assad!! Now after 4 years of Civil War this is a really bad development. Note Isis would like to get involved but are barely on the fringe. So Harper is, as usual, full of shite !!

      Delete
    13. Militarially, I would define our history in four blocks: 1867-1899 Foundational Period; 1900-1955 Boer War/WWI/WWII/Korea (Closest to UK); 1956-1993 Peacekeepers; 1994-2015 Modern Period (Closest to US). Of these four, the Peacekeeper era is where Canada had the most global respect.

      The difference between fighting a war and keeping the peace is the scope and role of the mission. Yes, Peacekeepers kill and fight, but they do that to protect the civilians. A war of agression (against ISIS) means taking out the enemy is the priority.

      One of my two best friends is a Captian in the Canadian Armed Forces. He is more than a tool, and he is capable of much more than just blowing stuff up. I agree that sometimes violence is the only response possible, but there is so much more we could be doing.

      ISIS is a splinter group from Al-Quida, and now the two groups are in a global competition to say who is the more radical and should be the voice of extreme Islam. Saying the Assad Civil War would be done by now if not for ISIS, is like saying Harper would be PM again now if not for the NDP and LPC, they are part of the story. One reason ISIS controls a large area is because they are giving people safety and security that they didn't have in the months and years prior. People will put up with a lot if they can just live their lives.


      Humanitarian aid and peacekeepers would help some of the 4 million displaced people. A wall would do little, but if your first choice is to let the sort it out themselves, that we shouldn't be there, why do you support more military action?

      Delete
    14. Harper's position is that the refugees are being caused by the military conflict, and the way to help the refugees is to end the military conflict.

      I have no particular need or interest in helping the refugees (we have immigration rules - let's use them), but if we're going to help them let's look at the root cause - the military conflict.

      Why treat symptoms when we can treat the disease?

      Delete
    15. And if you could end the military conflict tomorrow, I'd agree, but these are real people with real suffering in the meantime.

      Our immigration rules have changed immensely under Harper, and it a bureaucratic nightmare. It currently takes about seven weeks for CIC to open a new immigration application and send a receipt email/letter.

      Why ignore the symptoms when the disease may never subside?

      Delete
    16. There's suffering all over. We don't seem to be bending over backward to help other groups.

      Why should Syrians get special treatment?

      If you think we should change our immigration policies generally, suggest that. But I'm not going to accept a knee-jerk reaction to a well-marketed crisis.

      Delete
    17. I have repeatedly suggested that we can do more just by changing the rules. For example, the financial requirement to sponsor a pre-approved refugee claim is a minimum of 5,000 in a chequing account for a minimum of 6 months.

      The Syrians shouldn't get special treatment, we should reform the system to that is choking off our ability to respond to this crisis. It's taken this well-documented crisis to raise awareness of the issue.

      Delete
    18. Is that a bad requirement? Would not having it be better?

      Why?

      My goal isn't to accept more people. My goal isn't to accept fewer people. My goal is to accept the people we want to accept and reject those we don't, and do so quickly.

      Delete
    19. It’s one example of the burden of proof in submitting an application. In general, it means there is a six month period of getting everything organized before an application can be submitted. So all the fundraising going on now means that maybe someone can be sponsored next year.

      I agree that the system should be independent of the quantity, but there is no capacity in the system to respond to bulges in the quantity of applications. There is nothing done quickly by the CIC.

      Delete
    20. I think we should be indifferent to bulges in the quantity of applications. We set immigration targets based on our needs.

      The system, as it is, is too slow and too expensive to administer. It makes it harder to import skilled workers. These are my concerns. My concerns are economic, not humanitarian.

      Delete
    21. Actually, that's not how the system actually works. They set staffing levels based on the targeted processing levels. If we are indifferent to bulges, we effectively are banning immigration from problematic regions.

      You are now separating "economic" immigrants from everyone else. Which do you prefer, equal access for all, or preferred access for skilled workers?

      Economically, it makes more sense to allow family members to be reunited rather than having the continual outflow of remittance. We are great at importing skilled workers, but very poor at allowing those skilled workers to work in their field of study.

      Delete
  28. It appears the Forum polls were on to something.

    Nanos poll shows devastating poll numbers for Harper. CPC is distant third at 26% down 5 points -NDP 33% Libs 31%.

    Harper is down drastically and firmly in third as best PM

    ReplyDelete
  29. @ Ira ...

    Quote -
    ' The solution is more military. '
    - Ira and PM Harper

    Sincerely, please explain how this can be good.

    What would people have to return to except a completely bombed-out country and the misery this devastation carries with it ?

    What could possibly be [I]deal or [r]ational about this, dear [a]gent ?

    ('WAR. What is it good for ? Absolutely nothing !' )

    *Peace, dear agent.

    (Pass it on to the PM and his troops...
    ...before October 19th.)
    ...
    Pass it on to the PM, before Octo



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm indifferent the misery. I want an efficient solution to the refugee problem, and simply accepting refugees doesn't do anything to address the causes of the crisis.

      Delete
    2. I'm going to guess that you are a third or more generation Canadian. Simply sending more military forces doesn't do anything to address the immediate needs of the crisis. Did you read any of General Hiller's suggestions on how we can do both?

      Delete
    3. Can we send them back after the crisis is over?

      I want to apply our regular immigration rules to everyone equally. So any refugees who are accepted outside those rules need to be kept separate somehow so we can run them through the system later, or send them back if they don't want to apply.

      What is the point of having immigration rules if these people aren't governed by them?

      Delete
    4. Many refugees do return to their country of origin if/when the conditions at home change. Our current immigration rules don't apply equally to all applicants, so there is nothing stopping a new catagory being created. In general, this would be a long-term temporary resident visa, similar to the parental super-visa (5 years, multiple entry, maximum 6 months at any time) with a few adjustments.

      We can change the rules to better reflect the reality of the world, rather than letting people die while they struggle to cut through needless red tape.

      Delete
    5. How well do we track them once they're here? Germany has a great system for that, but it works because the German government knows where everyone lives all of the time (you have to inform the government when you move). We need to find a way not to lose these people.

      Sure, let's change the rules. But I want those rules to apply universally. That the system is unfair (has multiple categories) now is not a reason to keep it unfair.

      Delete
    6. While I am in favour of a completely revamped system, it doesn’t mean we can’t make incremental changes to make it more fair than it currently is. As an analogy, if I object to tax credits in general and prefer a simplified tax code with a higher “tax-free” level, that doesn’t mean that reducing/enhancing income splitting isn’t worth doing.

      We can have immediate action with a band-aide solution, while working towards systematic reform.

      As for tracking in Canada, CBSA does keep track of people as best they can on their budget, but enforcement generally only falls to Category A and B offenders, those that entered Canada under false pretenses and with a criminal record of violence/sexual offenses. In addition, they issue warrants for the arrest and deportation of people that violate their Record of Entry, but need to be detained for another offense.

      With more resources, the CBSA could do much better.

      Delete
    7. We know where every single cow was born. We should be able to track refugees.

      Delete
    8. There are a lot more controls on the free-movement of cattle than people. CBSA doesn't have the resources, authority, or infrastructure for wholesale monitoring of the immigrant population. I can't think of anything short of microchipping people on entry/birth that would be reasonably effective.

      Delete

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.