Sunday, October 18, 2015

2015 Federal Election Link Round-up: Week 11

The final week is finally here!

Sunday, October 18, 2015

- The Poll Tracker and riding projections have been updated for the last time in this campaign (*sniff*). I'll have a detailed breakdown of the final projection up on this site soon.

- The Poll Tracker and riding projections have been updated (at 7:27 PM ET).

- My final Poll Tracker analysis for the CBC in this campaign, in which I go over the broad strokes of what to expect tonight.

- The Poll Tracker and riding projections have been updated (at 12:45 PM ET). I'll update throughout the day if new polls emerge, and post my final projection late tonight.

Saturday, October 17, 2015

- An extra-long, extra-good episode of the Pollcast, the last before the election! Joining me is Chris Hall, who has an encyclopedic knowledge of the races in this campaign, and Christian Bourque of Léger, who has been a favourite of ours on the podcast. Don't forget to subscribe here, the post-election episode will be one you won't want to miss.

- The Poll Tracker and riding projections have been updated. But a note about those. Throughout this campaign, the projections on this site have been quoted by many as if they were actual polls. They are not, as I have made explicitly clear. They are estimates based on province-wide trends and, when available, riding polls. They are not an aggregation of polls done within a riding, as a public poll has not been conducted in most ridings. That is the case with Outremont, which is currently projected to go Liberal by a whisker.

Understand this: there have been no public polls in Outremont, so we do not know for certain if Thomas Mulcair is in any trouble or not. What the projection says is this: if the NDP's support in Quebec decreases by a uniform proportion throughout the province, and if Thomas Mulcair is unable to withstand those trends to a greater extent than the average party leader in his situation, then he might be in tough in his own riding. Those are big assumptions. What the projections suggest is that Outremont is a riding to watch, and one the Liberals could theoretically pick up. The projections do not suggest that Mulcair is actually trailing in his riding.

The same applies to every single riding projection, and I urge people to use them as a rough guide to the race, rather than a precise measurement of actual support.

- My final regional spotlight is on the GTA, minus the T.

- A did a round-up of the electoral map with Chris Hall on The House this morning.

- A last look at the polls on the polling panel with Dimitri Pantazopoulos and Shachi Kurl.

- The latest polls are all showing a Liberal lead, but it is either a relatively narrow one that the Tories might close on turnout (Angus Reid Institute, EKOS) or it is a wide one that gives a strong indication of the Liberals winning a minority, or possible majority, government (Nanos, Léger, Mainstreet).

- Poll Tracker update and an episode of the Pollcast coming today!

Friday, October 16, 2015

- The Poll Tracker and riding projections have been updated.

- Nanos, EKOS, and Forum this morning and yesterday afternoon, as well as some Mainstreet riding polls from Alberta and British Columbia. Nanos and EKOS showing a Conservative uptick, but Forum isn't.

- I was on Metro Morning yesterday talking about the state of the race in Toronto, and projections more generally.

Thursday, October 15, 2015

- The Poll Tracker and riding projections have been updated.

- National polls yesterday afternoon and this morning show the Liberals still in a good spot, with Nanos continuing to show the party with the momentum. EKOS has the Liberals and Tories down with the NDP up, though their NDP score puts them on par with other pollsters. There have also been a smattering of riding polls, which I'm having trouble keeping track of. So I suggest you peruse this exhaustive list from now until Monday.

- I was on Power and Politics yesterday talking about British Columbia.

Wednesday, October 14, 2015

- Sorry for the lack of updates today! In the meantime, you can check out my analysis of British Columbia. Back to normal (or as close as I can get to it here in Trawna) tomorrow!

- You can also take a look at this. I think the guinea pigs are an electoral reform option nobody is talking about, but they should be.

Tuesday, October 13, 2015

- The Poll Tracker and riding projections have been updated. It was either update at the end of the day today, or not update until Thursday, due to scheduling issues tomorrow. I don't think that would have went over well.

- I took a look at where the polls were a week out in 2011, and what (if anything) we can draw from that in 2015.

- No national polls this morning! Woe be upon us. The best we have is a poll in Chicoutimi–Le Fjord, showing the NDP in a better position than expected in the projections. It will be added for the next update.

- Don't freak out, but there may be no Poll Tracker update until Thursday. No polls today with which to update, and I will probably not have time tomorrow to squeeze an update in. I apologize in advance if that is the case.

Monday, October 12, 2015

- The Poll Tracker and riding projections have been updated.

- Happy Thanksgiving! Which, according to pundits like me, is the time when you are legally mandated to argue politics with your family.

- A few polls over the last few days, despite the holiday weekend. Nanos is showing a very wide Liberal lead, as is Forum. EKOS is showing a much closer race, however. And it is differentiated from the other polls in having the New Democrats very low, at just 19%.

- My latest regional look, which went up on Saturday, was at the regions of Quebec, or Quebec outside the Greater Montreal. When I initially planned my schedule of regional looks, I had made certain to put Quebec near the end of the list just in case. That turned out to be a good idea.

263 comments:

  1. The momentum of this election is starting to remind me very much of the Provincial ones in Ontario and Alberta. You can feel something big is happening out there, that things are starting to change, and the polls are starting to reflect it. And if you go to a Liberal rally, it's become a love in of something bigger than the campaign, just like what happened with Notley and the NDP. I'm even starting to see the exact same excuses from Conservatives like "The polls are wrong", "it's just an aberration from last week", and "People won't come out to vote for them". Did they come out to vote in Ontario and Alberta when there was a huge feeling of change to "boot the (Conservative) bums out"? I think the Liberals are starting to have a good chance at a strong majority, especially when you look at he polls in Ontario. .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm old enough to remember to the 1st election with Trudeau the Elder. You can add his 1st campaign to the observations regarding Mss. Wynne and Notley and "something big" afoot. When the person and the timing are right "The Force" is with them.

      Delete
    2. "I think the Liberals are starting to have a good chance at a strong majority"

      That is possible, but I think it would require an NDP collapse.

      Of course, it would be interesting to see if either a Trudeau or Mulcair majority resulted in either of them actually following through on their promise for electoral reform. So far the evidence from Alberta suggests that those with a majority suddenly aren't so keen on such changes ....

      Delete
    3. I don't think a Liberal Majority is possible right now either, BUT we have seen surprised before so I suppose anything is possible.

      What the Liberals need to get up to those sort of numbers is a larger bump in Quebec. They've gone up in Quebec, but they're not back to Chretien levels yet. The Francophone press says Trudeau did have a good appearance on Tout Le Monde En Parle last night, so we'll have to see whether it translates into Liberal gains outside Montreal.

      That's what would make the difference for the Liberals.

      Delete
    4. Feels like the BC election where Adrien Dix became premiere to me, but hey.

      Delete
  2. So if I pick and choose from various of the polls, I can claim my prediction from a week ago was correct: Forum on the 9th reported the Liberals at 37%; Angus, also on the 9th, had the CPC at 33%; EKOS on the 10th had the NDP at 19%, which is high teens.

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. In a 2-party race, making your opponent look bad helps you by default. In a 3-way or 4-way race, negative ads and wedge issues can work in unpredictable ways, not always in the favour of the party using them. Where the Conservatives' re-election chances depended on the NDP and Liberals splitting the anti-Conservative vote almost exactly evenly, the niqab wedge issue worked too well against the NDP, effectively driving it out of contention and thereby making the Liberals the default anti-Conservative vote. History will likely see a Liberal victory as a rejection of the Conservatives' wedge issues, which will be ironic in that the reality will be the opposite.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am not sure your analysis is accurate. The Liberals gained in Ontario where the niqab is hardly an issue. Liberal gain in Quebec is marginal, the NDP fall benefited mostly the Bloc and CPC. I think there was a great number of undecided/strategic voters for whom ousting CPC was more important than the success of their favorite party. That vote starts to coalesce around the Liberals because, in my opinion, Liberals simply ran a better campaign. Mulcair borrowed some of the arrogant and condescending discourse of the Conservatives when it came to dealing with Trudeau, and that didn't sit well with many progressive voters.

      Delete
    2. Not sure this is true. In Quebec, the NDP fall benefited mostly the Bloc and CPC, and in Ontario, where the Liberals gained, the niqab is hardly an issue.

      Delete
    3. "the niqab wedge issue worked too well against the NDP, effectively driving it out of contention and thereby making the Liberals the default anti-Conservative vote."

      Which is really odd given that Trudeau has essentially the same position as Mulcair on the issue. Funny how politics works.

      I wouldn't want to bet on how history views things, though I am sure that politicians will put their spin on how they want history to view things.

      Delete
    4. The NDP is not in trouble because of the niqab.

      The NDP is in trouble because Mulcair has run a poor campaign. He had already fallen to 3rd in Ontario before the 1st French debate and before Harper/Duceppe brought up the niqab issue.

      Delete
    5. Markus
      I agree entirely. Although it may pain partisans to admit it, the current state of the campaign owes something to the underlying desire of the electorate for change, the lack of any issue upon which the Conservatives could persuade non-core voters to vote for them, and the actual campaigns the parties have run. The Liberals have simply run the best campaign, based on results, and based on the enthusiasm of prospective Liberal voters. The NDP were the default progressive choice, but as you say, Mulcair's condescending dismissal of Trudeau, opting out of debates, pledge to balance the budget, overly studied presentation and lack of excitement in the platform made the entire NDP campaign seem like a dreary and irrelevant exercise.
      All of the various issues that might have helped the Liberals did so only because they also helped themselves. Otherwise Mulcair would have benefited from rejection of the niqab issue.

      Delete
    6. My reading of the polls is that the Liberals gained in Ontario because the NDP fell nationally, and so centre-left voters found the Liberals to be the only realistic option for a change of government.
      The NDP fell in national polls after losing soft nationalist support in Quebec on the niqab issue.
      I'm not sure the NDP ran a particularly "bad" campaign -- they were tied for first throughout.

      Delete
    7. I think that the niqab did in fact play a role. In early September, every party was stuck at 30% (give or take) once the NDP started falling in Quebec, their overall poll numbers tumbled. (They were in the high 40's there.) This created a snowball effect in so much that once it fell below that 30% it just kept falling country wide.

      Delete
  4. Perhaps the slip in NDP numbers is related to what may be perceived as a desperate swinging right (promised 4 balanced budgets; a nearly impossible promise) and left (opposing the TPP before reading it).

    Perhaps the slip in Conservative numbers is related to overplaying the niquab ban; with some time to think maybe Canadians see it as a bit to far from who we want to be) and fear (go slow on refugees because there may be terrorists among them [who ever suggested we should throw the doors wide open?]).

    Perhaps the Liberal rise is related to an underlying tone of hope, willingness to deal with deteriorating infrastructure (confirmed by many NGOs; engineers, architects, etc) and a sense of community more in keeping with who we want to be. And, like his Dad, his vitality and zest can't help but attract.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe you're correct and maybe the general voter is just tired of Stephen Harper but I just can't see Justin Trudeau at a G7 or G20 meeting. He may have "vitality and zest" but it takes more than that to mingle with the likes of Angela Merkel and David Cameron. Much of the media (especially the Winnipeg Free Press!) is doing what it can to discredit the Conservative Party.

      Delete
    2. I think the NDP decline was triggered by Mulcair's poor handling of the niqab issue, but then became substantive because of his swing left, which lost him that massive centrist vote which was willing to consider the NDP when they were centrist, but not willing to do so when they swung left.

      The CPC definitely overplayed the niqab issue by bringing in the 1-800-snitch-on-your-neighbour line. It's one thing to oppose face covering in the citizenship ceremony; it's quite another to rat out your neighbour based on personal prejudices.

      Delete
    3. "No More Deficits" reminds me of Lucy always promising to hold the football this time. Politicians since time immemorial have been promising the exact same thing and just about every time failing to deliver. Mulcair lept into the "how many times have we heard politicians promise this?" penalty box and locked himself inside.

      All of us run deficits when we buy a house, but we benefit for decades as we pay down the mortgage. Same applies to infrastructure.

      Harper has been shrinking the economy and Mulcair promises to continue on Harper's course.

      That leaves one leader with a plan to grow the economy.

      It seems the niqab issue has peaked as the CPC QC seat projection has dropped to 11 from 14 (earlier 5), but BQ has picked up 3 seats in the projection.

      The big story is the LPC pulling away in ON. If that holds it's a big win for the LPC.

      Delete
    4. @George: "All of us run deficits when we buy a house, but we benefit for decades as we pay down the mortgage. Same applies to infrastructure. "

      Incorrect. Debt for infrastructure is not counted toward the deficit. This is why the Ontario Liberals were able to claim a $12.5 billion deficit in a year when the Ontario debt increase by over $35 billion.

      Delete
    5. Tjalle,
      You may be right in your estimation of Trudeau's abilities but you should bear in mind two things:

      a) There's absolutely no reason to believe you're right, and plenty of reasons not to. Trudeau has won progressively great victories in a difficult riding that was held by a popular Bloc MP, where his name is not a positive but a negative. He turned around a moribund Liberal party, rebuilt the fundraising, injected enthusiasm and energy, surrounded himself with sharp people, and attracted quality candidates. Lastly, he has run a great campaign, performed much better on the hustings than his competition, and outperformed everyone at the debates, where he supposedly would get a win by showing up with his pants on. He and his advisers put together the kind of platform that is attracting Liberals, ex-PCs and NDPers. All of that is plenty of reason to suspect he'd manage to hold his own.

      b) Harper has been so condescending and pedantic with politicians everywhere, that he already has a well-deserved reputation as a big-talker and nothing else. How having him at negotiating tables helps I don't know.

      You might want to check some of your assumptions.

      Delete
  5. We had our Thanksgiving dinner yesterday, and we discussed the Niqab. After bringing up the fact that we have several Christian religions , that either puts the wife in servitude, or have barbaric practices such as shunnings, most of the conservatives (older crowd at the table) came around; after they realize they can't selectively apply the charter. I believe the same thing is happening around the country, and you will see the liberals moving closer to majority territory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder what the Shafia daughters would think about this topic?

      Delete
    2. We can selectively apply the charter. That's what the Notwithstanding Clause is for.

      Moreover, I don't see how we need to. The Citizenship Act requires that an applicant "be seen" to say the oath. You can't do that with a veil.

      But that doesn't mean we can't provide a private room staffed only by women. Then the applicant cold unveil long enough to take the oath without violating her religious obligations (as stupid as I think religion is).

      Delete
    3. I can imagine what they would think about the veil, but I have a better question to ask.

      How would they feel about people calling a hotline dedicated to helping those in their situation a "snitch line"?

      I find it difficult to believe that anyone who chooses such rhetoric has any understanding at all about what happened to the Shafia sisters.

      Delete
    4. Since I've now chimed in I feel obligated to state my opinion of the veil during Citizenship ceremonies, even though is so insignificant as to make me feel like I'm stooping.

      I despise the niqab as a symbol of the systematic oppression of women across the globe. That being said I do not support the government telling people how to dress.

      As far as I can tell the woman who won that court case is not oppressed by any stretch of the imagination.

      My larger concern is that those women who settle here understand, and be told in no uncertain terms, that they are truly free to take it off if they choose, and that they will be protected and supported if they do so.

      I would hope that we can all agree on that last point, or cultural relativism has hopelessly warped our morals beyond all recognition.

      Delete
    5. "that doesn't mean we can't provide a private room staffed only by women."

      Why only by women? That doesn't demonstrate any respect, or even equality, toward men.

      @AJR79: I grew up in Europe; there is a reason I call it a snitch line. People who have actual crimes to report can readily call the police. If it isn't a crime, it doesn't need to be reported.

      As for people wearing what they choose, I presume you would be fine then if someone came to the citizenship ceremony wearing a KKK outfit, or an ISIS flag, or an imitation suicide vest. After all, it is their choice, right.

      Delete
    6. I presume you know that the police and childrens services investigated the Shafia family several times and were reluctant to intervene right?

      That is why you are so carelessly invoking them to make a political point, right? You can read my comment below to Ira for rationale as to why this hotline might not be such a bad idea.

      There are specialized staff to investigate child abuse, why not have staff who know how to deal specifically with the certain difficulties that can arise between parents and children who come from much different cultures and expectations than we have in Canada?

      At the very least to dismiss such a thing as a "snitch line" is childish rather than "grown up". You gonna call people "rats" next? This is not a school yard.

      I let the rhetoric slide until you brought up the Shafia sisters to make a small point about the veil. You are clearly double talking to suit your own beliefs.

      As for me I am consistent. A person should be allowed to wear whatever garment they choose when becoming a citizen. Would you rather drive a neo-nazis or terrorists belief underground so that it is hidden, or have them put it on display for all to see and know what they are? I'll choose the latter and err on the big boy side of not telling people what to wear, especially for such a brief time. It is a ridiculous issue.

      Delete
    7. This is a really poor and false equivalency. Crosses, Kippas, Hijabs, or Niqabs are all objects connected with faith, some people may find that their faith requires them to wear such items whenever in public, other interpretations and denominations of the same faith may not. Because citizenship ceremonies allow for the greatest allowance of religious articles to be worn all of the above listed garments and adornments may be present, and the court has ruled in favor of religious freedom. Your equivalency is really off and I am not even sure how you can compare say a person of strong christian faith, that they believe requires them to openly show a cross, to an ISIS flag, or a fake suicide vest....you must understand how bad of an argument this really is...

      Delete
  6. While it certainly looks as if this is now Justin Trudeau and the Liberals to lose, a cautionary tale.

    Historically, EVERY pollster has got it wrong one time or another, including Nanos, Forum and EKOS. (My own, local experience with Forum makes me pretty much ignore their numbers.) It seems, though, in a study by others, the most accurate over the past four elections has been Angus Reid. Their early October poll - the last I'm aware of - had it very close with the Cons 3 points ahead of the Libs.

    If we are to believe Nanos , Forum and Leger, Harper and the Conservatives are stalled at 28-31%. They failed in their strategy of making the election about security, "values" and pocketbook versus the overwhelming national desire for change. Seems change won out. And, correspondingly, the Liberals have opened a huge lead in Ontario where it's likely even the Minister of Finance, Joe Oliver, will be shown the door. (Finance Ministers aren't easy to knock off). Plus, according to Leger, while still concentrated on the Island of Montreal, the Liberal vote is beginning to "seep" into its suburbs. If that does happen in large enough numbers their Quebec seat count rises dramatically and, combined with their expected Ontario windfall, a majority Liberal government is not out of the question.

    On the other hand, if we believe EKOS and Angus Reid, the Conservatives remain 3-5% ahead of the Liberals and there has been little, if any, movement, since the election was called nearly 72 days ago.

    So take your pick: A new Liberal government - maybe even a majority if all the leaning cards fall in that direction. Or, a Conservative small minority government. Someone is right. Someone is wrong.

    After the results are known, some polling companies should to honourable thing and close shop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wait until at least Thursday to even think about polls. It was a holiday weekend. Look at what happened after Labour Day. Then, look at support across age categories.

      Delete
    2. A Conservative minority government is nearly impossible. (Maybe if they expelled Harper it might be possible) Mainly for reasons noted below: Harper has actively alienated so many people that the other four party leaders have as their top priority "Get rid of Harper".

      So the possibilities are a Liberal majority government, or a Liberal minority government with NDP support, or possibly a Liberal-NDP coalition, or if there's a sudden shift, a minority NDP government with Liberal support.

      There is an outside chance of a Harper majority government but I just don't see it happening unless Harper commits election fraud or something (which is not out of the question, since it IS Harper).

      Delete
  7. Eric, thank you for your the continued fine analysis. Wishing you and your family a Happy Thanksgiving. Going to venture out to join the throng in Advance Voting today in victoria. All the best & Only 7 days to go.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I am sensing that Harper is losing very badly. He is sounding like an incumbent who knows he is losing badly and is desperate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure he's losing "badly". But the behaviour of the CPC campaign leads me to believe that they (The CPC) believe they are behind. Things like pivoting the campaign narrative, proppy campaign rallies, playing defense in ridings they held at dissolution. etc. etc. They're not acting like they think they're the frontrunner.


      Delete
    2. I agree. As I mentioned before one can read the state of each campaign from their actions. Both the NDP and the CPC are changing strategies and message over the last week quite rapidly while the LPC is steady as she goes. This tells us what their internal polling is telling each one of the leaders.

      The CPC continues to remind people how much money the LPC is spending in infrastructure, in spite of the fact that many people are in favour of it.

      Delete
    3. @JF: I think they realize they are behind; I don't think they realize there is absolutely nothing they can do about it at this stage.

      Delete
  9. So many people are against Harper for one or more of the many things which have occurred under his watch. The Conservatives get hit from so many directions from so many different groups that they really have no chance of keeping up with it. Diplomats, federal scientists, academics, anti-TPPer's, anti-C51er's, veterans, et cetera. The number of people that have a visceral reaction to Harper has just gotten bigger, and more vocal as time goes on. The breaking of the logjam has given the Liberals an opportunity to breakaway, and they are doing it. Strategic ABC voters will swing enough ridings to push the Conservative seat count even further south.

    We have one week left, and I expect the dirtiest ads of the campaign to hit the airwaves. Fortunately, many Canadians have started to firm up their views, and those who have voted in an advanced poll will be unaffected by these last minute propaganda efforts.

    As an ABC voter - who voted in an advanced poll - I am looking forward to seeing a new government on October 20th.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "So many people are against Harper for one or more of the many things which have occurred under his watch."

      Indeed, this has been a curious election. The CPC chose not to listen to the electorate from 2011 till now. At this stage, even back in the spring, there is nothing they can do to change the inevitable since their word on fixing their mistakes wouldn't be trusted even if it were offered. I have never seen a government so out of touch for so long that actually thought it might get reelected.

      Delete
    2. The CPC didn't even govern is a way that might have retained their long-tie supporters.

      My first summer job (1993) was working for the party. I was on the board of a Reform Party riding association in 1998. My first full-time job was working for the party. I worked 84 hours weeks during the creation of the Canadian Alliance and the subsequent leadership race.

      I'm exactly the sort of voter they should be able to count on. But when they finally got the majority we always wanted them to have, they spent money like the NDP and controlled society like Republicans. That's just about the worst of all possible worlds.

      I don't know what they were thinking. From 2011 onward, I have no idea whom they were trying to please.

      Delete
    3. Hi Ira,

      Just curious as to what you mean by the "controlling society comment". I consider myself a rather staunch social libertarian (and a Reddish Tory to boot), and I can't figure it out.

      Is it C-51, or some other thing as well?

      Delete
    4. @Ira: you've captured my feelings more or less precisely.

      @AJR79: Kill the long-form census because it is too intrusive but then introduce the massively more intrusive C-51; massively complicate the tax system with vast quantities of micro-tax credits, requiring lots of paper work and implying micromanagement of people's decisions. Just lower the damned taxes already and stop trying to manipulate behaviour through taxation (if you really want to support public transit, work with the local public transit authorities directly, rather than this crazy tax-rebate scheme); Bill C-36: sure it doesn't matter to the vast majority of Canadians, but it reflects how they run things: people can't be trusted to make their own choices. Honestly: you'd think you were being run by an uber-nanny-state government.

      Delete
    5. Ira: Harper was blatantly copying the US Republican Party. They also have been known for massive deficit spending since Ronald Reagan, in addition to micromanaging people's personal lives. There's also a very strong and consistent element of *fraud* and *criminality* in the US Republican Party, which has also been copied by Harper (remember he was almost charged with contempt of Parliament for good reason).

      Here, viewing things from the US, I used to say positive things about the Progressive Conservative Party. The Reform Party I disagreed with but was genuine. But the Conservative Party of Canada was taken over by a group of fascistic hucksters and frauds, just like the Republican Party of the US. I think it's taking a while for the former PC and Reform voters to realize that, but at least you're quicker on the uptake than Republican voters in the US!

      Delete
    6. Working through the tax system is a perfectly valid way to achieve goals. I guess in your view spending massive money outright on huge new social programs is not invasive, but boutique tax cuts are? How laughable.

      If that is the best you can come up with I'd say you are a long way from painting the CPC with a Republican brush.

      For the record I like the long form census, but it is not driving my vote in any way. There are bigger fish to fry. C-51 as far as I can tell is inline with what other advanced Western democracies already have in place, and to be honest I'm pretty sure they were doing everything in it already. Better to have it codified. Is has small aspects that I question, and is not perfect, but itis certainly no Patriot Act. Not. Even. Close.

      Delete
    7. @AJR79 - I was referring to their social conservatism and preference for conformity. Harper is arguing that the niqab is bad. I would understand if he went full France and declared all visible declarations of faith bad, but he's not doing that.

      Delete
    8. @ Paul A.S. Ward - I don't think those tax credits are intended to manipulate society as much as they're targeted at specific populations that the CPC thinks can swing ridings in their favour. The CPC really does approach these elections as 338 local elections, rather than a national campaign.

      Delete
  10. I think the politics of fear has truly back-fired on Harper and the Conservatives. The niqab issue is a fine example. While it played well in Quebec it became disgusting and too much for the rest of Canada.
    Add to that the story that the reason there was a sudden big drop in refugees from Syria earlier this year
    because the PMO was apparently picking only religious
    minorities (meaning Christians) to come to Canada and people I think started to feel really sick about Harper and supporting him.
    Did little Aylan Kurdi drown on that beach in Turkey because his family belonged to the wrong religion?

    The spread between the Liberals and Conservatives continues to grow, from just 1 or 2 percentage points to now almost 7%. The Liberals are moving closer to
    a majority government and that momentum is likely to continue.
    People are finally opening their eyes and seeing where the Harper government has really taken us and it is not a pretty place.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "the PMO was apparently picking only religious
      minorities (meaning Christians)"

      I don't think Ismailis are Christian ...

      "Did little Aylan Kurdi drown on that beach in Turkey because his family belonged to the wrong religion?"

      No. He drowned because his father chose to leave a safe location in Turkey to risk crossing the sea in an open craft without life jackets.

      Delete
    2. Although I am not in favour of showing favouritism to a specific religious group, I see this more as identifying religious minorities that don't stand a change in a ISIL caliphate. Yazidis and Christians certainly fall into that category. No need to cite any references; googling "Yazidi" or "Yasidi" generates enough URLs to make one's blood curdle.

      Delete
    3. If hat were true, then they should have just stated so, instead of handing over the files to the PMO political staffers, where they do not belong under any honest government with integrity and honesty.

      The question is........ why have political staffers choose the refugees in secrecy if they had nothing to hide. At best here is a serious breach of rules here.

      Delete
    4. I know people who support Harper's position on the niqab, but won't vote for him because of the hotline.

      Seriously, how is that hotline helpful? The specific examples he cited (sexual slavery and honour killings) are already crimes. We have a hotline for those - it's called 911.

      Delete
    5. Hi again Ira,

      You really know such people? To me it seems bizarre to turf a PM based on the hotline issue.

      I can't say for sure that this hotline is a good idea, but I can see why it might be somewhat useful.

      Police have a difficult job. It can be made even more difficult when dealing with different cultures. There is often a reluctance to intervene lest they be perceived as bigoted.

      The utility of having this type of hotline and specialized staff follows from this premise. As to whether it is worth the expense? I will leave that question open.

      Delete
    6. Crimestoppers performs that function already. The snitch line is a confusing duplicate. Besides, it smacks of McCarthyism.

      I wonder how many vegans would call the snitch line about the barbaric cultural practice of eating meat? How about circumcision? Talking with your mouth full or chewing with your mouth open?

      It's a boondoggle waiting to happen.

      Delete
    7. @Ed: I'm pretty sure ratting out your neighbour would have been considered a "barbaric cultural practice" in England when I was growing up.

      Delete
    8. Circumcision is the only example you give that is even close to valid. The other two are just silly "holocaust on your plate" type trolling. You know they are not at all similar to what is being talked about.

      The circumcision point is well taken though. I still think it a far cry from what is being talked about, but it is at least in the ballpark. I will not try to defend the practice, but there are medical benefits to circumcision of males, where female circumcision is more properly labeled mutilation. There is still quite a stark difference. You are attempting to minimize abhorrent practices by comparing them with much smaller things. It's not really helpful, and is a lame attempt IMHO to obfuscate the real issue under discussion.

      There are real challenges when dealing with newer Canadians and some of the cultural practices they bring with them, most especially with how they treat women. Why does admitting this always pain the PC crowd so much? Why the blind spot in your liberalism?

      Delete
    9. @AJR: I wasn't trying to come up with valid uses of the hotline. If I were, I'd be bringing up the polygamy in Mission, BC or something like that. I was merely showing how the hotline could be abused and so not have the effect it was supposed to have. Moreover, the Crimestoppers line already covers all the so-called valid reasons.

      Canada is a country of immigrants. Always has been. Everyone from the Japanese to Ukranian to Haitian, etc, etc, have their own cultural practices. I don't see how this is suddenly so different in 2015 that it requires a special hotline.

      There is plenty of spousal abuse and other mistreatment of women going on with so-called "old-stock Canadians" as well as newcomers. I don't think you need to single out newer Canadians here. Empowerment of women and eliminating abuse of women should be a societal goal. It doesn't require a cultural component.

      If a woman chooses to wear a niqab, a burka, a hijab, a nun's habit, whatever cultural/religious garb of preference, it should be her choice and shouldn't be attacked like happened in Toronto. If she chooses not to wear the niqab, it is likewise her choice and she shouldn't suffer any ramifications of that choice either.

      Delete
    10. @AJR79 The extremely limited benefits of male circumcision do not outweigh the mutilation of infants.

      I'd be happy to report my neighbours for that.

      Delete
  11. I sit here out west and have an ABC attitude towards voting this time, BUT there are elements of the plans of the other 2 main contenders that I am not in favour of....

    Guess I will have to hold my nose on V-Day

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Strategically, as an ABC voter, you should check the polls for your riding and vote for whichever non-Tory candidate is leading.

      Delete
  12. Éric,

    I thought the Liberals would win a majority for quite some time. And yet I can't understand why I feel uncertain about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If it helps, note that the Liberals seem to be leading among Canadians 55+. Those are the people who always vote.

      If we make the heavy-handed assumption that people 55+ vote twice and people under 30 don't vote, the Liberal lead gets bigger, not smaller.

      Delete
  13. Some thoughts on the campaign

    1) People are overestimating the impact of the niqab. The fall of the NDP in Quebec started before the niqab issue. I think Mulcair failed to close the deal, and people started pulling back, towards the party they came from, some BQ, some LPC some CPC.

    2) In terms of the CPC campaign, regardless if they win or lose

    a) it was a mistake to start running the "just not ready" campaign over a year ago. First, you don't get to call a player a rookie for more than a year. Second, in as much as it succeeded it managed to lower the expectations on JT, so when he managed to sound decent in the debates he looked better than he would have had the "not ready" campaign never ran.

    b) it was a mistake to open the expenditure taps just before calling the election. Conservatives all over the world have a (often unwarranted) reputation for fiscal probity. Be that as it may, they lost it by announcing so many pork barrel politics just before the election. Several billions worth if I remember correctly.

    c) See above, this makes it harder to attack Trudeau for his spending plans

    d) Not a single positive ad from the CPC. Even the latest ads, which have a more positive tone are still throwing jabs at Trudeau's deficit spending. This also presumes people are not in favour of infrastructure spending, because if they, like me, are in favor of it reminding me that he intends to invest in that is actually a positive thing. Thanks for the free ad CPC.

    3) Mulcair was too duplicitous in his dealing of Quebec and his 50+1 was a loser in English Canada. He didn't have to go there. Quebec had nowhere else to go with the BQ dead. Just avoid the issue altogether.

    4) Trudeau ran a very good campaign, he seems to have place his early gaffes well in the past and came across as someone brave by taking the deficit position. After some missteps with ISIS and C-51 he finally found his voice and carved a niche for his position.

    5) If the polls continue to be close I expect record turnout since people will feel that their vote may make a difference.

    We have a week to go and anything can happen, so I'm not ready to call anything for anyone just yet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Something I only realized last night. Harper is attacking himself with the Justin ads. Because he thinks that since he and he alone is the Conservative Party all other leaders are the same. They aren't and we all know that Justin is the leader but the party behind him has significant strength and integrity and experience to govern sans Justin. So Harper has attacked the wrong target !

      Delete
    2. Infrastructure spending doesn't really help the economy. If we want to help the economy, we need to invest in production. Infrastructure is mostly just a make-work project, unless you're actively building infrastructure that directly contributes to production.

      Delete
    3. Then why was the Liberal Party doing so badly prior to Justin becoming leader?

      The CPC thinks that Justin is the reason for current Liberal popularity. They can look at history and see the steadily declining fortunes for the party through the last 5 elections. People lay the Liberal performance in 2008 and 2011 at the feet of Dion and Ignatieff, but those results were exactly on the trendline established by Chrétien and Martin.

      So the CPC sees a new Liberal leader, and at the same time a reversal of Liberal fortunes. Is it any surprise that they think the two are related?

      You speak to the significant strength and integrity and experience behind him - why didn't that seem to matter in 2004 and 2006 and 2008 and 2011?

      Delete
    4. Ira don't be an idiot. It's called "Time For A Change" !! Familiar with that idea ??

      Delete
    5. Liberal woes are likely a combination, of leader, not connecting with the public, and platform, equally not connecting with the public. The exact amount of each likely varies depending on who you are asking. Not sure if any polling has been done on why the Liberal party ran poor campaigns and voters didn't vote for them

      Delete
    6. Ira writes: Infrastructure spending doesn't really help the economy...unless you're actively building infrastructure that directly contributes to production.

      How's that for a tautology: Infrastructure is no good except when is good.

      Okay, We can agree on that. On a similar note have you noticed that things are wet except when they are not? :)

      Delete
    7. I can understand the argument that the jobs of building infrastructure don't help the economy, though I'm not sure I agree, but I don't see how you can argue that building infrastructure isn't good for the economy.

      Where would this country be without the railroads, the airports, the sewers, the hospitals and the high speed internet backbone? Some infrastructure spending (road widening, for instance) is a waste of money, but as our existing facilities age and need maintenance, and our population continues to grow, we need more of all of these things to support our economy.

      Delete
    8. It is debatable on how much infrastructure spending is needed to stimulate an economy though. Obviously we also equally need to just maintain our current infrastructure and that has also been problematic, welcome to Winnipeg, home of everything crumbling!....does not sound good. But...PolStats I found the above post quite funny.

      Delete
    9. Peter - that would then suggest that the reason for Liberal strength now is CPC unpopularity. That means the underlying weakness of the Liberal brand might still be there, and the CPC is trying to exploit that.

      Remember, negative ads are designed to drive down voter turnout, not change anyone's mind.

      Delete
  14. I think the voting issue is going to come back and haunt the Conservatives big time. It took me well over an hour to vote this week-end, when it took me just a few minutes every other election. I was going to ask about it to the polling staff, but they were nearly in tears so many people were complaining. It may not have been the Conservatives intention, but this new voting law is starting to look like an American Republican voter suppression law, that's happening all over The States. That's just not at all a good image for the Conservatives to have in the last week of the election.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ridiculous. Nothing has really changed. Early voting has always been more onerous and workers are not as experienced. (the job happens every 4 or 5 years) There is more than one list to cross out for early voting and no express lane.

      Delete
    2. Sorry, Shoshana what you're saying is not true. I also had trouble. I have early voted in every election for the last 16 years, and I too waited a long time. There's now one line, when every other election there were two. When I asked I was told it were the new procedures. Also I had to drive 15 minutes to my new polling station? Ridiculous. It's not right what's going on.

      Delete
    3. And it took us 5 minutes at the advance polls; does my anecdote trump your anecdote, or can we maybe stop generalizing based on individual experiences?

      Delete
    4. The polling station locations have nothing to do with the sitting government, though. That's just Elections Canada not finding adequate venues in the newly drawn ridings.

      There are dozens of rules they need to follow when establishing a polling station, and there might not be a venue in the area that meets those criteria.

      Which is why some voters in Edmonton are being asked to drive out of the city to vote in the town of Devon.

      Delete
    5. Harper's voting law was explicitly copied from the US Republican voter suppression laws. It was deliberate and quite blatant.

      Thankfully Canadians seem to be mad as hell about it and turning out in much larger numbers to fight it.

      Delete
    6. Exactly neroden. It's incredible how many conservative propagandists online I'm seeing trying to justify it. There was no problem of voter fraud, and yet these laws were enacted to dissuade the people from voting, the type of people who probably wouldn't vote Conservative. It's just sickening and un-Canadian to discriminate an entire group like this when there wasn't a problem to begin with. I can't believe this is obvious Tea Party Republican idea is happening in Canada, and the Conservatives would have the gall to do this. I think they're going to pay for this at the polls. This law is just wrong.

      Delete
    7. I'm sorry showing government issued id to vote is not unreasonable. That is the major change in the elections act. And you can still have someone vouch for you.

      In fact, you can show up on election day to vote, not be on the list, be covered from head to foot with no id and someone with id who lives in that riding can vouch for your identity and residence and you can vote.

      Anyone who calls that voter suppression is deranged. It's just a totally absurd claim.

      As far as voting locations, training, balloting, and staffing issues that is all elections Canada which is completely non partisan.

      Ludicrous accusations just make your other claims seem suspect. But yes we all know by now that if it rains its all a part of Harper's Machiavellian plan and if it doesn't rain it's all a part of Harper's Machiavellian plan. And then the non deranged tune you out.

      Delete
  15. Waiting for my daily Nanos fix this morning, however it has not been released yet. They must have polled yesterday to keep consistency with the data set; but they must have given everybody else a deserved day off.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I get the Globe and Mail feed and no sign of it. I suspect they skipped yesterday as it was a holiday. Check the CTV website to.

      Delete
    2. They might have skipped a day. Nothing wrong with that.

      It would slightly diminish the value of this 3-day set, but not much.

      Delete
  16. Something is going on !!

    "Around 2.4 million Canadians have voted so far in advance polls, representing a 16 per cent increase over the three advance polling days in the 2011 federal election, says Elections Canada."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One thing the commentators did say is that the idea of weekend voting seems to work very well, Very common in Europe apparently and when you think about it more people have free time on weekends ??

      Delete
    2. Is 16% a lot? Legit question... I don't know what the standard variation in advance voting is on a election by election basis.

      Delete
    3. Lets hope. Regardless of who wins or loses we all win when more people get engaged and vote. No matter what Harper's braintrust thinks.

      Delete
    4. Latest Election Canada numbers??

      3.6 million voted over the weekend !! Incredible amount more than 2011 !!

      Delete
    5. I wouldn't necessarily read too much into the 16% increase. For starters, there were four advance voting days this time, where there were only three in 2011. On a simple model, one would have expected a 1/3 increase in voting based on the extra day.

      Delete
    6. My bad; it seems the increase was 71% in total, which is substantial even allowing for the extra day.

      Delete
  17. I'm still predicting a record low voter turnout.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think it will be low, but its not going to be up by any huge amount either, maybe a few points. You may be right though, I was just speaking to someone this morning who was commenting how few election signs they have seen. I drove across the country not too long ago and the most signs I saw were in Maple Ridge, by far. other than that it was next to none. I have received no phone calls from any parties or pollsters. I usually do. No one has come to my door, not one sign in my riding. I voted the other day and there was no scrutineers or party representatives at the polls. And I live in a contested up in the air riding. Just anecdotal but as much as pollsters are saying this is a high engagement election, I just don't see it.

      Delete
    2. It has been the relative trend

      Delete
    3. Elections Canada just announced that advanced voting was up 71% over the last election.

      Delete
    4. Shoshana, ridings differ. There are far more Conservative and Liberal signs in our riding than I've ever seen in past (and I watch this very closely). When a single party has $100-150 worth of signs and stakes at just one ho-hum intersection, you know they're pulling out all the stops. Those two candidates have highly leveraged the $21,000 or so of their supporters' money the need to spend their full $210,000 limits. (The rest comes back to the riding association after the election or to their supporters at tax time, courtesy of us taxpayers.)

      Greens can't play the sign silliness game and be true to their principles and the NDP has kept their signs to a sane level as well. However, both those parties are fully engaged in less egregious ways.

      Every candidate and their teams have done heavy canvassing. All campaigns will be using their parties' GOTV systems to the max (although I can only definitively speak for one party on that point) and identified voters *will* be getting calls next Monday.

      Most candidates have been to all all-candidates events. Even the Conservative has been to a majority of them (which is new here).

      I've also seen more earned media (print, radio and TV) from all candidates than I've seen in any election I can recall.

      The push is on from four sides.

      The turnout in this riding at least will be up compared to 2011. Substantially up. And for the record, it's a swing riding for the first time in many years.

      Delete
    5. Can't be compared Polstats. they added an extra day that also happens to be a non work weekday for most people. For the first three days, which can be compared also the same days of the holiday weekend, voter turnout up 16% raw numbers but voting pop is up 5% so only up by about 10% as a percentage of voter turnout.

      Delete
    6. Advanced voters are engaged voters, and engaged voters seem to be really engaged this time.

      But I'm not at all confident that extends to voters generally. People all across the political spectrum are commenting on how deeply flawed all three major parties (and leaders) are.

      Delete
  18. With the average from October 11th (tenth week), my model shows:

    125 CPC (-8)
    118 LPC (+16)
    85 NDP (-10)
    9 BQ (+2)
    1 GPC (even)

    By region, it gives:

    Altantic
    22 LPC (-1)
    6 CPC (even)
    4 NDP (+1)

    Québec
    39 NDP (-9)
    21 LPC (+7)
    9 CPC (even)
    9 BQ (+2)

    Ontario
    55 LPC (+9)
    47 CPC (-8)
    19 NDP (-1)

    Prairies (even)
    16 CPC
    6 LPC
    6 NDP

    Alberta
    28 CPC (-2)
    4 LPC (+1)
    2 NDP (+1)

    British Columbia
    19 CPC (+2)
    14 NDP (-2)
    8 LPC (even)
    1 GPC (even)

    Territories (even)
    2 LPC
    1 NDP

    ReplyDelete
  19. But Peter, the voting population has increased since 2011 by 5% so really its only an 11% increase in voter turnout and given the emphasis placed on early voting in both Canada and the US, one can hardly draw any political conclusions from that.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Eric does Nanos give an age breakdown for support? Ekos is pointing this out as a real concern for the Liberal numbers, as their over 40% support among those under 34 is countered by the 48% support for the Conservatives among those over 65. Who is more likely to vote?

    Also because they use more than one method of polling they are reporting significant differences in response for IVR and liver caller results.

    Support by age category may be a very big deal at the ballot box.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The new EKOS poll tonight shows the Conservative advantage in those age categories has decreased over the past week and that the Liberals have gained ground and are now ahead in the 50-64 group.

      Delete
    2. Innovative says the Liberals lead the 55+ group.

      The polls are still really muddy. We probably don't know as much as we think we do.

      Delete
  21. Looks like all the pollsters are lining up with a big Liberal lead. IPSOS and EKOS are in line with Nanos now.

    The ABH vote is gathering steam . Harper is in serious trouble.

    ReplyDelete
  22. FYI for those of you popping corks over Thanksgiving weekend polls:

    From Eric's reflections on the 2013 BC election,
    "The model did about as well as it could considering how different the election's results were to the final polls of the campaign. The model is not capable of second-guessing the polls to the extent that it could have predicted an eight-point NDP lead turning into a five-point Liberal win."

    That's a 13 point swing at the ballot box folks in favour of the further right and incumbent governing party.

    (and we have more online panels this time weighing in than ever before)

    Just sayin'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd be cautious about comparing Provincial Elections to Federal Elections.

      There are some huge differences between them. It's much less likely for the polls to be as far off Federally as they have been Provincially.

      Provincial polls only focus on one province (naturally) whereas Federal polls are across the whole country.

      So whereas it's possible to be off for one province, it's much less likely to be off for all the provinces across the country.

      Delete
    2. All the polls are aligning with Nanos. Harper is in deep trouble and he knows it. The apocalyptic talk from Harper about Trudeau is classic desperation mode from bad internal polling numbers.

      Dream of a big CPC comeback on the last day if it makes you sleep at night, but Harper is in very deep trouble with 5 days left.

      Just sayin'


      Delete
    3. Much as you clearly keep hoping for a renewed CPC gov't, I don't think either Mulcair or Trudeau are in any way comparable to Adrian Dix.

      Delete
    4. First, you came here posting, how some polls like Nanos were wrong, over valued but EKOS was right...now all you have left is that all polls are wrong. I get that you are a partisan but this is why a lot of people dislike what partisans post about none of it is a legit analysis. Sure....the polls can be wrong, they could be at the start but be honest about why you are saying that now.

      Delete
    5. Shoshana, the polls in BC showed a major swing momentum, and then when the NDP's Dix came out against the so called "southern gateway" pipeline no matter what the science or the economics has to say, he lost the union vote. The polls were right, but then Adrian Dix made a HUGE blunder trying to siphon off Green votes, which instead backfired when the union vote evaporated.

      Delete
    6. FYI, the federal Liberals have the momentum and have made no such blunder. If anything they will win more seats than the polls show (barring a major blunder over the the next couple of days).

      Delete
    7. "the federal Liberals have the momentum and have made no such blunder."

      had made no such blunder; then the Gagnier event happened and to listen to Trudeau trying to handle it he was stumbling all over the map with umm's and err's that I was quite surprised. This of course occurred after the Liberals initially tried to minimize the whole thing. The result was a huge reminder to anyone paying attention of what the Liberal party was in the 90's and early 2000's. How significant the effect of this is remains to be seen. I seriously doubt it would lead to a CPC majority, or even a CPC minority, but it might well result in a hit to the LPC leaving a minority where a majority might have occurred.

      Delete
  23. Has there been a riding poll for Calgary-Heritage?

    ReplyDelete
  24. From a few months ago, but pertinent and interesting...

    http://m.thetyee.ca/News/2015/04/07/Should-We-Trust-Election-Polls/#.Vh2WkeZM6Ho

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When wanting to figure out whether polls are accurate, the best thing to do is look at the actions of the leaders & the parties.

      Where are they campaigning? Are they on the defensive or on the offensive? Which leader or party are they going after?

      If you look at where Trudeau is this week, he appears to be moving into rural Ontario, ridings in Quebec that the Libs haven't held for several elections and other non-Liberal territory.

      Meanwhile, Harper appears on the defensive and being confined to areas the Cons won in 2011 in Etobicoke, Waterloo, etc. As Robert Fife asked him last night, why aren't you campaigning in ridings held by your opponents?

      So while we can never know for sure if the polls are accurate, the behaviour of the leaders this week seems to indicate that the Liberals have the momentum and the Conservatives are on the decline.

      Delete
  25. Éric,

    I remember in 2013 when the Liberals were leading not only nation-wide but also in Quebec, you mentioned that the seat projection for Quebec may have been awarding more seats to the NDP than would probably happen because the voting intentions were likely spread out more than the model suggested.

    Is this still the case with the current Liberal lead, and if so are you doing anything to account for that?

    ReplyDelete
  26. A very frustrating election here in Thunder Bay. The NDP is now using 'strategic voting' as an argument. Even though the Cons are now fighting hard to save their current seats (even cabinet ministers seats) they are claiming their internal polls (that they won't release) say they are neck in neck with the Cons here even though the Cons have only a handful of signs and few ads running while Greens (Bruce Hyer) has nearly more signs than the other 3 combined (almost all on lawns) plus the Liberals have more signs than the NDP plus a much stronger candidate than the NDP as far as local strength goes. It is a major insult to the intelligence of everyone. Much like their Trudeau is losing his own seat poll and in BC where they are trying to fear monger on Vancouver Island where the Cons have as much chance of winning as the Libertarians.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting. They are in my riding as well - but they are actually the strategic choice here.

      I hope that they are not using this in ridings where they are not the strategic choice - but it might explain a lot of desperate NDP people utterly convinced that the NDP is ahead and that only they can beat Harper. They are all spouting a weird set of numbers "NDP needs 34 to win, liberals 100" (current seats? idk) that they seem to be getting from Mulcair.

      So it seems there is a lot of misinformation out there about how to strategically vote.

      Delete
    2. Here in Thunder Bay there is no need for strategic voting. The Cons didn't even give any cash to their local candidates (this is well known in local political circles as one of the candidates was ranting about it at a public event on the sidelines). Local party polling has the Cons under 10% but that hasn't stopped the NDP from doing ads saying it is a two way race between them and the Cons on YouTube & Facebook. Both Liberals and Greens are furious over this as we don't mind fighting on issues or even some misleading statements but to outright lie to voters is irritating.

      Delete
    3. " Much like their Trudeau is losing his own seat poll"

      Yeah, the NDP has lost some credibility in this election with progressive voters for some of the win at all cost tricks they have pulled.

      It has looked like they are more interested in beating the Libs than the Cons, and that's not what progressives want to see.

      Delete
  27. Nanos, Ipsos, Forum all 6-7 point lead for Liberals. EKOS has 4.5 point lead with Liberals surging.

    Liberals surging 5 days before E-Day is terrible news for Harper. His campaign has been a terrible disaster.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "His campaign has been a terrible disaster."

      No; well, maybe, but not the point; his last four years as PM have been a terrible disaster and have driven away a significant fraction of people who liked the idea of a smaller gov't, lower taxes, etc. His campaign pretty much didn't matter because he chose to ignore too many people who voted for him in 2011.

      (What's even more hilarious is that he still has no clue that boutique tax credits are a double-edged sword: that sliver of the voting population you want to target with them is just as tiny when you are arguing that people's taxes will go up under the Liberals or NDP: sorry, Harper, but for the most part my taxes will b totally unaffected by the end of all those boutique tax credits ....)

      Delete
    2. Paul's right. It's not the campaign. The campaign hasn't really affected his or his party's numbers at all. The CPC continues to poll at about 31%

      Delete
  28. DAILY TRACKING FROM NANOS RESEARCH

    Nik Nanos: “Liberals have seven point lead in closing week of campaign.”

    > Conservatives: 29.2 per cent (down 2.9 from last week)

    > NDP: 24.5 per cent (down 1.5 from last week)

    > Liberals: 36.1 per cent (up 1.8 from last week)

    > Green: 4.3 per cent (down 0.3 from last week)

    > Bloc: 5.2 per cent (up 0.1 from last week)

    Nanos conducts daily tracking for The Globe and Mail and CTV. A three-day rolling sample of 1,200 Canadians are contacted through phone (cell and landline). The margin of error is 2.8 points.

    ReplyDelete
  29. EKOS voter ceilings

    Libs 52.9

    NDP 42.3

    CPC 39.7

    Harper will not even get close to majority. These are also dismal numbers for him.

    ReplyDelete
  30. The NDP numbers are flattening out. It looks like 20% might be their floor, and that's terrific news for them.

    Look at past elections, and see that 20% was generally a really good NDP result. If they've established a new baseline that puts them in contention for official opposition on a regular basis, that changes Canadian politics considerably.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I suspect even at 20% this will be viewed as a loss for the NDP...potentially going back to 3rd place....not going to allow Muclair to keep his job....suspect he resigns on election night with this kind of result.

      Delete
    2. Possibly, but unless FPTP changes, I think this will be a short-term issue; FPTP inherently pushes people into a two-party choice.

      Delete
    3. I think they might have done better with a different candidate. I have always been NDP and found him off-putting and discomfiting.

      Delete
    4. "I have always been NDP"

      Which is why, not to be mean about it, you _don't_ matter to the NDP (or at least, you don't matter that much). To reach government, they needed to get people who have not traditionally voted NDP to vote for the NDP. That requires shifting positions to something more centrist. This is what Layton understood, but apparently too many long-time NDPers either don't understand or don't care about.

      Delete
    5. I see the point you are making, Paul, I just don't agree with it. Layton held the core and brought in new people - but Mulcair dragged the party too far right and lost the core. I know you disagree with this and you are certainly free to.

      But I am not a blind adherent type, so I am not one of those people who can be counted on - I vote for whoever represents my views and up til Mulcair, that was NDP. But I had/have problems with him as a leader.

      In the end, we could both be wrong about Mulcair's downfall, and, leaving left/right out of it, the problems stem from him as a leader and candidate, judged on personal qualities like conviction and sincerity.

      Delete
  31. So, go figure, what's going to sink Harper is that he's ticked off *absolutely everyone else*. He still could get the most seats, but the chances of him winning an outright majority are slim to none, and because he's alienated everyone else, he can't run a minority government.

    The leaders of all four other parties have sworn that they won't permit a Harper minority government. That's something pretty unusual, but given Harper's Contempt of Parliament, not entirely surprising.

    ReplyDelete
  32. FYI after stating that the live interview part of the poll favours the Liberals (aka shy Tory effect) EKOS did not live poll over the Thanksgiving weekend.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Another day, another batch of negative ads from the CPC on Trudeau, including one scraping the bottom of the barrel accusing Trudeau of wanting to open brothels. Harper famously said he would never do a "physical deformity" ad like Kim Campbell did. At the rate he is going, he'll be there in another three days.

    I'm still amazed that they just can seem to find a reason why to give Harper another four years other than "Trudeau is young". Ouch. This really shows how much he ignored the public perception of his actions. What was needed was less pork barrel projects announced a week before the election and more nation building projects started a year before so you could point at those and say "elect me for more of the same".

    What are nation building projects called you ask? Infrastructure. Heard that word elsewhere?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "accusing Trudeau of wanting to open brothels"

      Mmmmm. Gov't-funded brothels. Part of medicare, under the need for good mental health, I'm sure. I look forward to having one near me. I assume they take OHIP cards .... :)

      Delete
    2. Harper does seem to be trying very hard to lower his numbers. These low life antics and trotting out the Fords are making him a laughingstock. Worst campaign ever.

      Delete
    3. I almost want to repost this post elsewhere, it makes such a good point. LOL.

      Delete
    4. Campbell's ad wasn't about Chrétien's deformity. It came across that way, but that's not the impression the ad was supposed to give.

      Perception does not equal reality.

      Delete
    5. Ira: predictable response. The ad starts with a close up of Chretien's face and the question "Is this a prime minister". Of course a CPC supporter like you would try to use equivocation to excuse this ad, but the voters aren't stupid. They understood the underhanded comment right away and your efforts to excuse are in vain. Even one Stephen Harper criticized the ad.

      Delete
    6. @Ira: if it comes to it, Campbell's ad was having the desired effect; frankly, while I didn't like it, I thought pulling it was incredibly stupid, since Campbell had already paid the price for having such a negative ad, she might as well at least hope to gain more benefit from running it.

      Delete
    7. This presumes (1) there was any benefit to be gained and (2) there was no further priced to be paid if you kept on running it as people got madder.

      I believe that last ten seats for the PCs were lost by that ad, and if it had continued running, Elsie Wayne would have been toast too, thus reducing the size of their caucus by 50%

      Delete
    8. Were there any gains to be had? had the entire price for such ad already been paid? In my opinion the answers are No and No, hence pulling it was the smart thing to do. The PCs never recovered from the double whammy of Mulroney and that ad.

      Delete
  34. I disagree with Eric's Wednesday analysis that BC's 3-way race will determine who - Trudeau or Harper - get the most seats.

    First. Rather than a 3-way race I see BC as a series of two-ways. Depending on the region the battle is between the Conservatives and the NDP or the Conservatives and the Liberals. If heightened strategic voting happens on the coast the likely beneficiaries are the Liberals and NDP - since depending on the riding the bulk of the progressive vote will easily drift to the one most likely to defeat the Conservative.

    Secondly. If Quebec is "moving" like Leger 's recent poll/analysis indicates Trudeau's Liberals stand to do much better than most currently believe. If that movement around Montreal happens, combined with their expected windfall in Ontario, the Liberals will be looking at BC, not to see if they have the most seats, but if they have a majority.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Who gets the most seats" between the Liberals and Conservatives is irrelevant in any case. A Conservative majority is not in the cards at this late date. A plurality nets them nothing.

      "Who gets the most seats" between the Liberals and NDP used to be the key question. Absent publication of pictures showing Trudeau boiling babies in oil (his corner-store brothels serving weed to teenagers in niqabs don't count), that too is now settled. "Prime Minister Justin Trudeau." Get used to it, for at least the next two years or so.

      The biggest unresolved question at this point is whither the Greens. We won't know that until the Vancouver Island returns are in. Éric allows the possibility of a second Green seat there, but I believe his model seriously underestimates the power of focussed resources within a polling area. The Threehunredeight forecast didn't predict Saanich--Gulf Islands in 2011, and we're seeing the same approach scaled up in 2015.

      This shortcoming is quite understandable; there's no obvious way to measure or model campaign focus based only on polling data and generally available information such as incumbency. At some point, the line between more precise modelling and a thumb on the scale begins to blur. If there's a strong Green showing when the seats are counted, though, this will be a challenge for Éric to face in the next election.

      Or maybe not; if we've gone beyond first-past-the-post by then, all existing models will be obsolete. Be strong, Sisyphus Grenier.

      Delete
    2. "Absent publication of pictures showing Trudeau boiling babies in oil "

      Does Liberal insiders engaged in scandal-worthy lobbying _before_ they've even got elected count? It's hard to tell if that news will percolate to the voting population or not, but for those it does reach, I suspect there will be a strong whiff of "oh, no; clearly this is the same old corrupt Liberals" which might well shift the numbers.

      Delete
    3. That's not true. A plurality gains them resolve. Their supports will be livid if the CPC wins the most seats and doesn't get to form government. They can use that next time around.

      But if the Liberals win the most seats, the CPC loses that tool.

      Delete
    4. Paul A.S. Ward, it's pretty obvious that the reason the attack on the Liberal campaign co-chair was made is because the other parties are losing.

      It's not great news for the Liberals, but it's not a big scandal. Dan Gagnier is a pretty minor player who most people have never heard of.

      Delete
    5. I don't see the Liberals winning a Majority unless there is a further burst of big support going into this final weekend.

      That's just too many seats to pick up in one election unless there is a MAJOR wave.

      Delete
    6. @Craig "Dan Gagnier is a pretty minor player"

      Err, the Liberal's campaign co-chair is "a pretty minor player"? Pardon my saying so, but that's Liberal spin at its finest!

      Delete
  35. Nanos today has Libs with nearly 8 point lead on the CPC.

    ABH is destroting Harper.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again, explain to me how ABH is making Harper's numbers go down.

      Delete
    2. A lot of ABH is imploding because they really meant, "Anyone but Harper, so long as it is NDP" Since it isn't, they (the ABC people, not the party) are using their platforms to telling people they are winning and trashing Trudeau.

      I hate when Harper is right about something but he seems to be right about this - for a lot of NDP people, it seems they never meant ABC, they actually would rather he get in than vote strategically.

      Delete
  36. DAILY TRACKING FROM NANOS RESEARCH

    Nik Nanos: “Liberals hit an election high - largely at expense of the NDP.”

    > Conservatives: 29.4 per cent (down 2.2 from last week)

    > NDP: 23.7 per cent (down 0.5 from last week)

    > Liberals: 37.1 per cent (up 3.6 from last week)

    > Green: 4.3 per cent (down 0.3 from last week)

    > Bloc: 5.0 per cent (down 0.6 from last week)

    Nanos conducts daily tracking for The Globe and Mail and CTV. A three-day rolling sample of 1,200 Canadians are contacted through phone (cell and landline). The margin of error is 2.8 points.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. New Forum poll has Liberals leading everywhere except Alberta, where the Libs have 31% of the vote. Seats will be lost in Alberta.

      Delete
    2. Forum says 30% of voters are voting strategically. ABH is the end of Harper.

      Delete
  37. So Eric, any chance that the Baseball games are skewing polls? Do you know what time the poll calls go out? I know the games affect shopping. People don't shop when big games are on. Do they answer phones?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How would it skew polls? Unless you were specifically looking for the views of baseball fans it's not relevant.

      Delete
  38. SO there is a baseball game on Monday. This will affect voter turnout. Which way I am not sure, but wow there is no way that will not be a factor. And it being a Toronto game one assumes regions around Toronto will be affected the most but luckily the game doesn't happen until 7 pm but if it's in Kansas City tbd that could be 6 pm Toronto time. OUCH!

    Regardless of who you support that's just not good for our democracy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The game starts at 8PM eastern time. 7PM central.

      Delete
    2. I think it's pretty disgraceful how important sports seem to be in our society.

      They take away much too much attention from other more important things.

      One of the reasons I hate sports!

      Delete
    3. "They take away much too much attention from other more important things."

      Who, precisely, gets to determine what is important and what isn't important?

      Delete
  39. Ok so I've worked elections and other than older people and super keeners who come right away (and they probably voted already in advance polls this time) most people come in the late afternoon or evening. The ball game is going to wipe out voter turnout across the country. Dear lord yesterday's win just made GOTV about 100 times harder.

    The ball game starts at 6 or 7 EST, do the math, 3 or 4 pm Pacific time etc.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, the game time is after 8pm and closer to 8:30 after ceremonies. Shoshana, you are sound so desperate for the Conservatives to win, that you're now hoping in any way a low turnout. You posted on the same subject three straight times and you're now reporting false start times for the ball game. My gosh. Sorry, but it won't work. A) People who watch the game will be reminded many times about the election B) Many of those are media savvy, and will actually make sure they vote before the game c) Even with 6 million watching, 29 million are not. But keep that desperation alive! You really are starting to sound like Albertan far right wingers during the provincial election., and we saw how that turned out.

      Delete
    2. Particularly in Toronto.

      Delete
    3. Gonna be bad for the CPC. They are more likely to be baseball fans.

      It will be very hard for them to close the 30 seat gap the Liberals now have on the CPC.

      Delete
    4. The baseball game starts at 8:07pm EDT nominally. I say nominally because there are always pre-game ceremonies, anthems and ceremonial first pitch, introducing all the players from both teams, etc.

      I would wager that first pitch is around 8:35, perhaps later. This means the game would affect the last hour of voting from Alberta to Quebec and the last hour and a half in BC. Moreover, being baseball, the first 3 innings aren't the really tense innings that could keep people in their seats.

      I'd wager that the ball game has a negligible effect on voter turnout. Perhaps a bit more in Toronto but I really don't think it will have as much effect as you expect.

      Though it does suggest that putting polling stations next to sports bars might not be a bad idea. :)

      Delete
    5. Game starts at 8 pm eastern Not a big issue. Voters have all day to vote. More a problem for elections results coverage than voting. Expect a huge turn out to get rid of Harper.

      Delete
    6. Really Jimmy? Conservatives are more likely to be baseball fans?

      I expect any impact to be regional, so it will likely have little effect on actual races. But it might depress total votes from Toronto, skewing the national vote percentage numbers.

      Delete
    7. When I visit mlb.com, the start-time for the Blue Jays game is listed as 7:00pm. I'm no sports fan, so for all I know this is some pre-game show start time or something.

      Apparently, nine million Canadians tuned in to the last game, so I would expect that it will have some impact on turnout. Fifty thousand people will be in the stands, and however many more at Nathan Philips Square, and I have a few friends who plan to take the train into Toronto to do one or the other. I'm not certain whether this will impede their getting to the polls, but it's easy to imagine how.

      It's hard to claim or believe that a baseball game could change the results of a single riding. Baseball fans are probably not more likely to be supporters of one or another party, but people who will miss getting out to the polls because of a sports game are probably more likely to be younger. Who knows, maybe a few ridings in Toronto and the 905 will have slightly lesser turnout than they would have had the game been on Tuesday instead.

      Delete
    8. So game time is listed as 7 pm which would include the ceremonies. First pitch is 8 pm.

      Conservatives are ahead among those who have already voted. (Angus Reid and EKOS) Liberal strength is young and in the GTA. Conservative voters are more committed (every polling company under the sun)

      And I'm not desperate, I'm just commenting.

      btw Erics model was only 76% correct last time when polls were in more agreement.

      Erics model was off by 13% in the last BC election.

      Just sayin'

      Delete
  40. There’s a cool map at the bottom of this article where you can click on any riding to see how many people voted in the advance polls there: http://globalnews.ca/news/2276728/map-advance-voter-turnout-in-your-riding/

    ReplyDelete
  41. Hi Eric,

    I think you might have missed the most recent Innovate Research Poll dated October 11 from your latest projection. The numbers were LPC: 38, CPC: 30, NDP: 22, GPC: 6, BQ: 3.

    http://one-org.s3.amazonaws.com/us/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/14164737/ONECanadaPollResults.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  42. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Can someone explain how Nanos is claiming that their live interview poll is including the 15th of October when it was released at 6 am on the 15th of October? What did they ask around the office at 5:50 am EST. Surely they aren't polling after midnight. Even midnight EST is 9 pm Pacific. After 9pm is not ok for surveying people is it, and wouldn't this change all of their results so far if the are counting the few people in BC polled after 9 pm as rating their polls as another day fresher.

    ReplyDelete
  44. If the polls hold up, it'll be so nice to actually feel proud about being Canadian again, and not living under an American thinking government. How did we ever vote these Rush Limbaugh thinking Conservatives in. It was like the dark ages over the last five years and I say that as someone who used to vote PC. This type of "Republican stay in power at all costs" should never ever happen again in Canada. Hopefully the Conservatives will lose badly and they can go back to being more like the old PC party, that was very electable and had actual Canadian conservative ideas on how to run the country.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Polling stops over the weekend, right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I doubt it. They won't want to miss a late swing (like Alberta 2012).

      Delete
    2. No that's the old rule. They can poll up to but not including election day now.

      Delete
  46. The Poll Tracker updates keep on showing the LPC ticking up steadily in ON. Unless Harper pulls off a miracle with the spectre of niqabs and kids buying weed from the corner stores next door to the brothels, Trudeau's PM early next week.

    The NDP looks set to lose seats in QC, but some of that looks like a reversion to mean.

    Got an Orange leaflet telling me the NDP is the strategic choice in my riding (consistent with local polling). Might saunter over there to pitch in on GOTV.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Poll tracker only had a 76% accuracy rate in the last election on its final day and I will put forward that the polls in this election are more divergent and erratic thereby less likely to be accurate than in 2011. The already voted numbers also don't match the projection and 3 million Canadians have already voted.

      Delete
  47. Hey Eric, would you mind commenting in a few sentences about Trudeau's comment on a majority government? Is it possible? How is the trend line looking in respect to that comment? Is he disillusioned? Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Look at the PollTracker. With current polling, the maximum likely Liberal result leaves them 15+ seats short of a majority.

      Delete
  48. Forum says one fifth of past Conservative voters are now voting Liberal.

    There is a lot of grumbling and descent with Harper among Conservatives. It seems Harper's days as leader are coming to a close.

    ReplyDelete
  49. If the Liberal Party has been trying to convince voters like me that they have left their scandals in the past they are off to an inauspicious start to say the least.

    A lobbyist currently on the payroll co-chairing your campaign, and communicating advice to his employer. This may or may not be illegal, but it is certainly unethical.

    If Justin wins Monday I honestly hope that he does such a smashing job that he ends up going down as our greatest PM ever. Country before party always.

    I appreciate that you do not have to be the smartest guy in the room to be a good leader, you just have to listen to the right people. My hope was that the "old boys" in the Liberal Party would be able to steer young Trudeau in the right direction.

    That was apparently a double-edged sword to hope for, as this latest revelation reeks of "same old Liberal graft".

    I hope I am wrong, and they do a fantastic job if elected, but as of this moment I am not optimistic. That is clearly a problem with them and not with me.

    Anyone who wants to minimize this just ask yourself how you would feel if one of Harper's co-chairs turned out to be on the Exxon payroll. Say what you like about Harper, his government has been mostly corruption free. The Duffy case is more about the shoddy senate rules than CPC graft. The closest I can think of to this for the CPC is Rahim Jaffer, and that was quickly snuffed out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nothing compares to the CPC scandals like Duffygate, and DelMastro.

      Delete
    2. Upon reading the facts, it is my understanding Dan Gagnier, Trudeau's former national campaign co-chair is NOT a lobbyist.

      What he is and has been for some is a consultant for a number of energy companies. This, in itself, is not a problem. All other national campaign advisers for all other candidates have other careers. Where Mister Gagnier overstep his bounds is his "advising" his energy client on, if the are elected government., which individuals would be most likely involved with the energy file.

      It isn't lobbying in the classic sense - he wasn't using his connections to set up the meetings or influence a ministers decision to meet with a client.

      Still, for a smart man like Mr. Gagnier, who has been a senior energy advisor for many years, to not see how these actions by him at this time could be seen as anything but continued backroom boys corruption is mind boggling.

      Very stupid.

      Delete
    3. How many CPC are in jail for corruption? How many are in court? This is why Harper is polling so badly. Harper and his continuous scandals and deceitful scheming has handed the election to Trudeau.

      "Say what you like about Harper, his government has been mostly corruption free."

      This statement is a real laugh. And since you make no mention of polls I guess your comment is just trolling for Harper.

      How many CPC are in jail for corruption? How many are in court? This is why Harper is polling so badly. Harper and his continuous scandals has handed the election to Trudeau.

      Delete
    4. @AJR

      Despite wishful thinking from Conservative and NDP partisans, I don't think this is going to have too much of an impact on swing voters who are leaning to the Liberals. The people who want change, the majority of Canadians, will vote for the party that is poised to be that change - the Liberals.

      It's bad optics, sure, but as Terry Milewski said on The National last night, all parties have their lobbyists. To pretend that they don't is delusional thinking.

      This also happened during the same time Harper is facing controversy about campaigning with Rob Ford. Seeking the Fords' endorsement is purely hypocritical for the "tough on crime" party when they campaign with someone who has repeatedly broke the law. Crack cocaine, serial drunk driving, associating with criminals, misogyny, and he is now facing reports that he abused his wife, at least on an emotional level. That is something Harper should be condemning, not embracing.

      The claim that the Conservatives have been corruption free is also laughable. A third of the Senate is under RCMP investigation, the F-35 boondoggle, the missing billions from Veteran's Affairs, Robocalls, Duffygate, Bruce Carson, Arthur Porter, and the Conservatives' ethics spokeperson, Dean Del Mastro, has been charged with election fraud. Nearly every time the Conservatives threw their support behind these people.

      There are always going to be bad apples in politics. That's the nature of the system. It's how the parties deal with them that's more important.

      Delete
    5. Senate corruption is not a partisan problem. It is a problem with the institution itself. Did Harper appoint Mac Harb? It is fine to question Harpers judgement in appointing the likes of Duffy, but it is not indicative of systematic corruption.

      I long to see a Liberal scandal in the future where the contraversy is how taxpayers were paid back.

      What evidence is there of corruption in the F-35 file? Not every mistake is a scandal. I hold governments accountable for both, but mixing and matching is pure obfuscation. It shows how low in the barrel you have to scrape to find ANYTHING at all to show CPC corruption. Ditto Veterans Affairs.

      Bruce Carson is a good example though. I had forgotten him. That is some odious stuff. If you can provide me with a link showing that the CPC defended his actions at any time, or helped cover them up you will have a good example. I believe you will find the opposite to be true. Ditto Arthur Porter. Ditto Del Mastro.

      Michel Sona was an overzealous staffer who should have got a longer sentence IMO. As odious as this is it had no real effect on the outcome of the election. Do you have any CPC statement defending his actions?

      So out of your laundry list that I have just unpacked at no time (as far as I can see) was any attempt made to justify actions of corrupt individuals.

      That is a far cry from the systematic funneling of 100 million taxpayer dollars to friendly companies, with the nudge and wink that large donations be given back to the Liberal Party. Has that money been paid back BTW? In this context, with the latest breaking news, I think it is quite fair for me to question whether the Liberals have truly left their scandals behind. They were certainly quick to say that this was all some kind of CPC and NDP desperation play at first. That does not bode well for similar future actions in a potential Liberal Majority environment.

      My comment was pretty fair to the Liberals in that I wished them well if they get elected. Some yahoos have already stated that the CPC cannot win without voter fraud. This is untrue and is an attempt to colour any outcome other than the commenters preferred outcome as "cheating".

      That is how you play tennis without the net. A Harper victory shows how evil Harper is. Contrast that with my wishing a potential PM Trudeau all the success imaginable. Who is the rabid partisan here? Easy for me to see.

      Delete
    6. To be clear I am in agreement with you last statement about bad apples and how they are delt with.

      We have witnessed this week that the LPC instinct is to blame the other parties and attempt the "nothing to see here" trick. They originally defended Gagniers actions. That is plain for all to see.

      If you can find similar statements from the CPC regarding the laundry list of "scandals" (half of which aren't) then I will be happy to take a look at them. Please provide links. I think you will find it mighty slim pickings.

      To further clarify I do not believe that Trudeau OR Harper will tolerate courruption. I just believe in Harpers ability to lead his party, rather than be lead from the backrooms.

      IMO Trudeau needs another few years as official opposition. He has shown some ability to learn which I do find heartening, but he is a long way from ready to lead this country.

      I wish him well if he wins, but I have strong misgivings as to his ability to lead at this time. He really needs more seasoning.

      Delete
    7. How I would feel? My reaction would be "Only found one? Obviously no one's looking very hard." (That's if Harper has "co-chairs" at all: I find it hard to imagine him sharing any power with anyone.) But, seriously, (1) you seriously think no senior Conservative people had, have, or will have connections to the oil industry? and (2) as an environmentalist Harper's already more pro-oil-industry than the oil industry, so having people on his staff also on the oil industry payroll wouldn't change anything.

      I'm going to disagree with you: I think Harper's government has been far more corrupt than any Canadian government before it. There are just so many ways for politicians to get the same effect as Adscam while remaining completely legal. Take those $50 million of gazebos in a minister's riding, for example: completely legal and above board, but, bluntly, Adscam was better value for money for the taxpayer.

      I see this government passing a law that allows sitting politicians to select the people who will administer their next elections. (For much of the last election, the Elections Canada site has had links saying, basically, "want a job on election day? ask your MP or runner-up for a referral") and I wonder: who could possibly think that this is a good idea? Who could possibly think that an election run this way is not compromised? But it's all, as AJR says, completely legal, not like Liberal "graft" at all. I've no doubt that the rest of the Conservative administration is every bit as corruption free as partisan canvassers working as poll clerks.

      Delete
    8. I also have to mention that a persons pride in being Canadian should not rest on their opinion of the government of the day. You can be ashamed of your governments actions while still being proud to be Canadian.

      For example if Trudeau wins large I will be disappointed in the Canadian electorate for electing a famous last name not nearly as smart as his father ala George W Bush, but that will not stop me from taking pride in my country.

      Delete

  50. Nik Nanos: “Liberals lead by six points nationally in Nanos tracking.” Oct 16

    > Conservatives: 30.6 per cent (down 0.4 from last week)

    > NDP: 23.5 per cent (down 1.5 from last week)

    > Liberals: 36.5 per cent (up 2.5 from last week)

    > Green: 4.7 per cent (up 0.5 from last week)

    > Bloc: 4.3 per cent (down 1.0 from last week)

    Nanos conducts daily tracking for The Globe and Mail and CTV. A three-day rolling sample of 1,200 Canadians are contacted through phone (cell and landline). The margin of error is 2.8 point

    ReplyDelete
  51. It'll be interesting on Monday to see how many leaders have to resign. If Harper loses he is toast I'd have to think. Mulcair if he comes in 3rd and has 50 or fewer seats will be very toasted, not sure what he has to do to save his job as winning is now out of the question. Trudeau is safe now I'd think, as 2nd is a lock with victory likely. Elizabeth May will be Green leader as long as she wants to be I suspect. The Bloc might be completely wiped out (lets all hope) but might hang around with 1 or 2 seats. Duceppe shouldn't have bothered coming back but I guess he couldn't resist.

    ReplyDelete
  52. More on the campaign:

    In the scale of 0 to 10 of sleaziness

    Just not ready 2
    Mulcair "he's no fresh face" 2
    Running simultaneous ads accusing one guy of being too old and the other too young 5
    No income splitting for seniors 5
    Marihuana for minors 6
    Niqab 7
    Brothels in your neighbourhood 7
    Snitch line for niqab 8
    Campaigning with the drug addict Ford brothers 9

    ReplyDelete
  53. Peter, pollsters are reporting that lvie interviews are favouring the Liberals. Nanos uses live interviewers. Two polling companies today put the Liberal lead at 1 point, concentrated in the GTA and among youth, under 34, and that's not enough to win them the election. (certainly not with the baseball game happening in Toronto on Monday evening)

    I still think as far as polls now show we will have the most Conservative seats on Monday.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Angus Reid, a traditionally Conservative friendly pollster, is now showing results similar to what we've been seeing with other pollsters. Lib: 35, Con: 31, NDP: 22, BQ: 5, Green: 5. It looks like they are predicting a Liberal minority.

    http://angusreid.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/2015.10.15-Final-Horserace.pdf

    I read on Mainstreet's Twitter page that they will have a national poll out tomorrow and saw a tweet from Quito Maggi from a few days ago saying that it will be a Liberal majority. Interesting that the last Conservative outliner is reporting such a reversal of trends.

    https://twitter.com/quito_maggi/status/654113484729282560

    ReplyDelete
  55. If Elizabeth May's comments are any indication it seems that strategic voting in BC is having an effect on Green supporters. They're moving to either the local NDP or Liberal candidate - depending on who is seen as having the best chance to defeat the local Conservative. Obviously, she doesn't like that. But I believe she's wrongheaded.

    Looking at the issue of electing Greens from a basic marketing standpoint I suggest she adopt the following formula:

    Goal: elect a Green government.
    Strategy: have as many Green candidate elected as possible.
    Short term tactic: support the NDP or Liberal candidate with the best chance of winning in that riding.

    Long term tactic: ensure the Liberals or NDP honour the their campaign promises to replace first past the post with either preferential or proportional representation.

    Such a plan is much more likely to see Green members off parliament than their current futile efforts.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Things may already be looking bad for the Conservatives when... … the PMO is already shredding documents: http://www.buzzfeed.com/emmaloop/the-governments-contracted-shredder-company-was-at-the-prime#.oymL5X95d

    ReplyDelete
  57. BTW the already voted results are coming in as a Conservative minority win.

    ReplyDelete

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.