Pre-Wynne, NDP led in Ontario

Just before the first ballot results of the Ontario Liberal leadership convention were to be announced, the Toronto Star released a Forum Research poll on the voting intentions of Ontarians. The poll showed that the  New Democrats narrowly led over the Progressive Conservatives, and that the leadership of Kathleen Wynne or Sandra Pupatello wouldn't change a thing. Will that hold?

Forum was last in the field on Dec. 17, and since then the NDP increased their support by four points to 35%. That gave them the advantage over the PCs, who slipped one point to 32%. The Liberals were unchanged at 27%, while the Greens were down three points to 5%.

The margin between the NDP and Tories is not statistically significant, but the changes in support of the New Democrats and Greens are (just).

The New Democrats were ahead in the 905 area code with 36%, trailed by the Tories at 30% and the Liberals at 28%. They were also ahead in the wider GTA with 34% to 32% for the Liberals and 28% for the PCs.

In southwestern Ontario, the NDP picked up 12 points to lead with 39%, putting them ahead of the Progressive Conservatives, who were down to 35%. The Liberals dropped eight points to only 18% in the region.

The NDP also had the advantage in northern Ontario with 42% to 30% for the PCs and 22% for the Liberals.

The Progressive Conservatives led only in eastern Ontario, with 42% to 28% for the Liberals and 24% for the New Democrats. The Liberals, meanwhile, were ahead only in the 416 area code, with 37% to 33% for the NDP and 25% for the PCs.

Most of the changes in support were within the margin of error, so we could be looking at a lot of statistical wobbling. On the face of it, though, it does appear that the Liberals experienced an uptick in Toronto while the NDP made gains in rural (eastern, southwestern, and northern) Ontario. Interestingly, the only major change in support occurred in southwestern Ontario, the only region of the province in which Sandra Pupatello's numbers were better than the generic ballot (23%). With her defeat, the Liberals might not expect to recover in southwestern Ontario anytime soon.

But the election of Wynne or Pupatello would not have changed much. Forum found that, under Wynne, the Liberals would have 26% support to 34% for the NDP and 32% for the PCs. For completely logical reasons, a Wynne leadership pushes one point from the Liberals (and the NDP as well, of course) to the Greens. In other words, her leadership of the party should not change anything in the short term - at least according to these numbers. Pupatello had an identical result, except the PCs dropped a point too. Gerard Kennedy would have done better, with 30% to the NDP's 32% and the Tories' 31%, but that is academic at this point.

With Ontarians' current voting intentions province wide, the Progressive Conservatives could eke out a tiny minority with 40 seats, to 37 for the New Democrats and 30 for the Liberals. The margin is close enough that if this were my final projection in an election campaign, I'd only give the Progressive Conservatives a 45% chance of winning the most seats (33% for the NDP and 22% for the Liberals). Put simply, a toss-up forecast.

The regional distribution is still quite stark, with the Tories winning 31 of their 40 seats in eastern, central, and southwestern Ontario, while the Liberals win 26 of their 30 in and around Toronto.

Note that this projection is based on the province-wide numbers. If it were regionally based (as the model will be when the next election rolls around), the NDP could do even better, winning more seats in the GTA and likely enough to put them narrowly ahead of the Tories.

The ace up their sleeve has to be Andrea Horwath, as she has an approval rating that is head-and-shoulders above her rivals. More than half, or 51%, approve of her, compared to 28% who disapprove. Still, one-in-five don't know what they think of her. New Democrats are almost unanimous, though: they give her an 80% approval rating.

Tim Hudak does worse among Tories, with 59% approval. Among Ontarians as a whole, he gets 27% approval to 53% disapproval. This is still a major problem for the PCs, just as Dalton McGuinty was a problem for the Liberals. His approval rating was 21% to 71% disapproval on the eve of his departure, with only 48% of Liberal supporters approving of him.

Will Ontarians warm up to Kathleen Wynne? Her numbers were improving as the convention approached. Only 8% of Ontarians thought she was the best choice to be OLP leader in November, improving to 23% in December and 25% just before the weekend. That still put her behind Pupatello (26%) and Kennedy (33%), but not by the same margins as in previous polls. Among Liberals, she was the choice of 27%, within the margin of error of Pupatello (28%) and Kennedy (33%). By that score, the Ontario Liberals did not make a bad choice.

Undoubtedly, a rash of polls will break out in the coming weeks as we try to gauge where the party stands now that Wynne is the premier and the province could potentially be heading to an election soon. If her numbers are good, we might see the NDP being a bit more amenable to compromise and the Liberal minority could survive. If her numbers are not, both Horwath and Hudak might turn the screws.

How the OLP leadership vote went down

This weekend's Ontario Liberal leadership convention did not have the kind of surprise some had thought possible - even likely - in a delegated convention. But Kathleen Wynne did emerge victorious after trailing on the first and second ballots behind Sandra Pupatello. How did the vote unfold throughout the day?

The initial results were probably the biggest surprise of the day, as the delegate count between Pupatello and Wynne was separated by only two votes, rather than the 41 that separated the two candidates among elected delegates. Many, including myself, expected Pupatello to be more of a favourite among the ex-officio delegates, but instead it appears that Wynne performed best among the party establishment.

It is difficult to assess exactly how the ex-officios voted, as we do not know the number of elected delegates who were present at the convention. It was not 100% turnout, as the total valid votes on the first ballot numbered 2,084. The number of elected delegates should have numbered 1,857, but instead was closer to 1,765, as the OLP has told me that some 320 ex-officios registered at the convention.

So, about 92 elected delegates were not able to make it to the convention. We don't know how these were distributed between the candidates. Could Pupatello's delegates, many of whom came from the northern, southwestern, and eastern corners of the province, have been no-shows in higher proportions?

It is clear that some of Harinder Takhar's delegates did not show-up, as his first round result was 235 votes - nine fewer than his number of elected delegates. But we might be able to use that as a base for determining how many elected delegates did not show up: if we proportion those 92 no-shows by each candidate's share of the elected delegates, we get 12 no-shows for Takhar. Assuming he got three ex-officios is hardly implausible, so using this method to estimate the number of elected delegates seems safe enough.

If we apply this to all of the candidates, we get the number of elected delegates present at the first ballot as 484 for Pupatello, 445 for Wynne, 247 for Gerard Kennedy, 232 for Takhar, 194 for Charles Sousa, 100 for Eric Hoskins, and 64 independents.

That means that of the 384 independent and ex-officio delegates, Wynne got the support of 152, or 40% of them. Pupatello placed second with 115, or 30%, while Hoskins took 13%, Kennedy took 9%, Sousa 7%, and Takhar 1%. Even if Wynne got the support of every independent delegate, she still would have gotten the nod from 28% of the ex-officios, enough to keep her close to Pupatello's 36%. Of course, it is highly unlikely that Wynne got the support of every independent delegate. If we give Wynne some 70% of those independents (as many of them had been Glen Murray's), we end up with a near-tie in the ex-officios between Wynne and Pupatello.

It was Wynne's support among the ex-officios, plus her likely advantage among independents, that gave her the surprising first ballot results and dulled any sort of momentum Pupatello could have built with a strong first ballot performance.

Overall, Pupatello had 28.7% on the first ballot to Wynne's 28.6%, Kennedy's 13.5%, Takhar's 11.3%, Sousa's 10.7%, and Hoskins's 7.2%.

At that point, it was looking far more difficult for Pupatello. But she was still the favourite at that stage, as it was assumed she would pick up the endorsements of Takhar and Sousa, enough to give her the win. But Hoskins's strong support among the ex-officios gave him a bit more weight in the convention, and his endorsement of Wynne helped her more than his numbers suggested. And whereas people were not sure where Hoskins would go before the convention, Takhar's swing to Pupatello was expected. The momentum was Wynne's.

Though Takhar did not officially drop off the ballot, his announcement was as good as an official withdrawal as only 18 of his 235 supporters still cast their ballot in his favour (in all likelihood, they had voted before his announcement was made).

Pupatello made the biggest jump on the second ballot, gaining almost 57% of the new ballots on the table. Wynne took 40%, while 3% did not vote and another 1% went to Kennedy.

Pupatello increased her haul by 218 ballots to 817, or 39.4%. She picked up almost the entirety of Takhar's delegates. Wynne, however, gained 153 votes - more than the 150 that Hoskins had made available to her. She was up to 750, or 36.2%, having apparently taken some votes from Sousa, who dropped 19 to 203, or 9.8%. This should have been Kennedy's chance to make a move, but instead he gained only four votes, giving him 285 or 13.7% of the total. His path to victory was now definitively blocked.

(Note: More than just Sousa's delegates would have supported other candidates on the second and third ballots than the one they were initially elected to support. Estimating that kind of cross-pollination is near-impossible, so for simplicity I assume that delegates stuck with their candidate throughout the convention. If they didn't, the ones swapping from one candidate to the other probably cancelled each other out.)

If Sousa would have gone to Pupatello after the second ballot, she likely could have won it. Kennedy was always expected to go with Wynne, and the sum of their endorsements would have made it incredibly close (1,038 votes to 1,035). How the ex-officios would have swung in such a scenario, in order to give someone a respectable margin, is impossible to guess.

Instead, Sousa and Kennedy went over to Wynne and sealed her victory. She did not get all of their supporters, however, as 11% of the newly available delegates did not vote and 10% went over to Pupatello. She did get 79%, however, more than the 59% she needed in order to move ahead of Pupatello on the last ballot. But the results were definitive: 1,150 or 57% for Kathleen Wynne against 866, or 43%, for Sandra Pupatello.

This sort of delegated convention is exciting, as the turning points are obvious and, with the candidates moving around the floor with their sign-waving supporters, you have the benefit of actually seeing support swing from one side to the other. There were a few moments that pointed towards Wynne's victory: her stronger than expected first ballot results, the endorsement of Hoskins (who himself did unexpectedly well), and the double endorsement of Sousa and Kennedy. It is possible that each of these endorsements could not have occurred without the turning points that preceded them. However, it might be Pupatello's weaker-than-expected first ballot result that sealed her fate. The ex-officios hadn't sided with her as much as everyone thought they would, and that made all the difference.

How will the Ontario Liberals do now that Kathleen Wynne is their leader? We'll find out over the next few weeks, but it may take a lot longer for opinions to firm up. Conceivably, Wynne as Premier makes a snap election less likely, so she may be able to give herself the time to get ready for the next vote. It should be an interesting few months either way.

With Takhar, does Kennedy stand a chance?

A report in the Toronto Star this morning says that Gerard Kennedy, who finished third in the delegate elections for the Ontario Liberal leadership race, is pushing hard to court Harinder Takhar, who finished fourth. Takhar's support would vault Kennedy into second place among elected delegates, making a path for the leadership much easier to map out. But just how easy is it?

After what happened in the last two delegated conventions for the federal and provincial Liberals, many suspect that a third-place finisher like Kennedy could work his way to the top through the balloting process. But Rob Silver, writing for Maclean's, does an excellent job of showing that Dalton McGuinty and Stéphane Dion's recent victories were exceptions rather than the rule. In addition, the mountain Kennedy has to climb is steeper than either McGuinty or Dion managed in their leadership wins.

But what if Kennedy was able to get Takhar over to his side? Takhar is probably the biggest fish to land in the OLP leadership race, as he is likely to have much more sway over his delegates than those of the other candidates. It is not hard to imagine that Takhar could justify moving over to Kennedy instead of Sandra Pupatello, who many have seen as the candidate he is most likely to support. Takhar would have much more to gain from being the kingmaker for Kennedy than he would being just one piece of Pupatello's victory. With her lead among the elected and ex-officio delegates, Pupatello could probably win without an explicit endorsement from Takhar. Kennedy would have a much bigger favour to return.

When I last mapped out the OLP convention, I did not consider the possibility of Takhar moving over to Kennedy (except in the scenario where I had Charles Sousa and Eric Hoskins endorsing him as well). So let's run the exercise again, with a few different assumptions.

First, we have to re-allocate the ex-officio delegates based on the endorsements that have been made since my original post. Instead of just doing a simple count, I will use the endorsement points system that I am currently employing for the federal Liberal leadership race. Note that the system is designed for federal races, but that it was also calibrated in part with provincial races.

ENDORSEMENT RANKINGS

Sandra Pupatello - 212 points - 48.8%
Kathleen Wynne - 131 points - 30.1%
Gerard Kennedy - 37.5 points - 8.6%
Eric Hoskins - 29.5 points - 6.8%
Charles Sousa - 17 points - 3.9%
Harinder Takhar - 7.5 points - 1.7%

This is one case where I suspect the endorsement rankings will lean too heavily towards the frontrunner, and will almost certainly reverse the order of the bottom three. It is extremely unlikely that Pupatello will come that close to winning, or even approaching 40%, on the first ballot. Instead, we will use this to distribute the 419 ex-officio delegates, with Pupatello taking 205, Wynne 126, Kennedy 36, Hoskins 29, Sousa 16, and Takhar seven.

We also have to distribute the 67 independent delegates that were elected. Instead of giving Wynne 70% of them, as I did last time due to Glen Murray's endorsement, I will give her 50% and distribute the rest proportionate to their elected and estimated ex-officio delegate support. That gives us the following first ballot estimate:

FIRST BALLOT ESTIMATE

Sandra Pupatello - 729 delegates - 32.0%
Kathleen Wynne - 628 delegates - 27.6%
Gerard Kennedy - 302 delegates - 13.3%
Harinder Takhar - 256 delegates - 11.2%
Charles Sousa - 224 delegates - 9.8%
Eric Hoskins - 137 delegates - 6.0%

Compared to the first ballot estimate I made in my previous post, Pupatello and Sousa picked up an extra point while Kennedy dropped one.

Now that we have made a plausible estimate of first ballot support, let's see how Takhar's support could change the race for Kennedy. We will assume that Hoskins and Sousa drop out and decline to make an endorsement, releasing their delegates. We will distribute their delegates proportionately to the top three candidates only. That gives us the following result:

Sandra Pupatello - 887 delegates - 39.0%
Kathleen Wynne - 765 delegates - 33.6%
Gerard Kennedy - 368 delegates - 16.2%
Harinder Takhar - 256 delegates - 11.2%

And now we see the problem. If Takhar publicly endorsed Kennedy and asked his delegates to support him, even with all 256 of them voting for Kennedy he would end up with only 624 delegates and 27.4% support. That still leaves him behind Wynne and forced to drop-off the ballot. Without higher ex-officio delegate support, he would need Takhar's endorsement to influence a large number of delegates that have already supported Pupatello and Wynne to go his way.

Could he have picked them up after the first and second ballots from Sousa and Hoskins? Instead of getting 18.3% of their delegates, as I awarded him earlier, he would need to get some 38%, and all of them coming from Wynne, dropping her to 18% of the Sousa and Hoskins delegates. That does not seem like a plausible scenario - if Kennedy took a larger share of the Sousa and Hoskins delegates, some of them would undoubtedly come from Pupatello instead of Wynne, increasing the number he would need.

Kennedy would stand a chance if he managed to capture some 50% of the delegates that initially supported Sousa and Hoskins, or if he was able to attract those delegates committed to Pupatello and Wynne on the first ballot. But if he was able to take 50% of the delegates released by Sousa and Hoskins, with the rest going to Pupatello and Wynne proportionately, we would get this result:

Sandra Pupatello - 826 delegates - 36.3%
Kathleen Wynne - 711 delegates - 31.2%
Gerard Kennedy - 483 delegates - 21.2%
Harinder Takhar - 256 delegates - 11.2%

Mathematically, it is now possible for Takhar's support to vault him into second place, pushing Wynne off the ballot. But it is not exactly an easy task: he needs 229 of the 256 delegates alloted to Takhar in this scenario, or 89.5%, with all of the remaining delegates going to Pupatello. If even 10 of those delegates went to Wynne instead, Kennedy would need over 93% of Takhar's delegates. In addition to Kennedy taking half of the delegates who supported Sousa and Hoskins, could Takhar really deliver almost the totality of his elected delegates? It starts to stretch the imagination.

Kennedy needs the convention to go incredibly well for him. Unless he somehow becomes an establishment favourite and picks up a swathe of ex-officios (which, considering his history, seems improbable), he probably needs Takhar to endorse him immediately after the first ballot if he can't somehow get Hoskins or Sousa to do so. With Kennedy managing such a coup after the first ballot, he might be able to show himself to be the candidate with the momentum, giving him the necessary support from Hoskins and Sousa. Otherwise, it is difficult to see why those delegates committed to Sousa or Hoskins would vote for Kennedy instead of one of the frontrunners, or why the delegates committed to Pupatello or Wynne would suddenly jump ship. The numbers are there for Kennedy, but the odds are very slim.

What fate awaits the OLP under Wynne or Pupatello?

Barring a big surprise next weekend, either Kathleen Wynne or Sandra Pupatello will be the new leader of the Ontario Liberal Party and premier of the province. How might they do in the next election?

I wrote about this for The Huffington Post Canada today, and I invite you to take a look. In the article, I spell out how I think it could play out. Here, let's take a look at what the numbers show - or at least what can be done with them.

The most recent data about who Ontarians like for the leader comes from a December 17 poll from Forum Research. It asked who Ontarians thought would make the best leader of the Ontario Liberal Party. Gerard Kennedy placed first with 36%, followed by Wynne at 23% and Pupatello at 20%. No other candidate hit double-digits. The poll also broke the numbers down by voting intentions, giving us an idea of what supporters of other parties think of the race.

Let's run a hypothetical exercise using those numbers to determine the potential support Wynne and Pupatello could draw from other parties. Forum did not disclose how many respondents said "I don't know" or "None of the above", but from the sample sizes we can estimate that number.

Kathleen Wynne was the favourite choice of 10% of NDP voters (20% of NDP voters who expressed an opinion, but 10% of the entire pool of NDP supporters) and 6% of Tories. She was also the favourite of 16% of Green voters and 10% of voters who said they intended to support an other party. In a best case scenario where Wynne is able to draw all of those voters over to the Liberals, and using the current Ontario poll averages as a base, we get the following outcome:

WYNNE VICTORY SCENARIO

Liberals - 33.5%, 46 seats
Progressive Conservatives - 32.1%, 35 seats
New Democrats - 27.4%, 26 seats
Greens - 6.2%, 0 seats
Others - 0.8%, 0 seats

Wynne draws away a good deal of support from the New Democrats - and even a few Tories. It keeps the Liberals in power, but makes reliance on another party for survival all the more important. Taking votes from the Greens also helps the Wynne Liberals quite a bit.

Pupatello is not so fortunate. Her numbers among PC voters are the same - she takes 6% of their supporters - but she only attracts 8% of New Democrats and 3% of Greens. That makes it a bit more difficult for her to put the Liberals over the top, which she does by a hair:

PUPATELLO VICTORY SCENARIO

Liberals - 32.2%, 44 seats
Progressive Conservatives - 32.1%, 36 seats
New Democrats - 27.7%, 27 seats
Greens - 7.2%, 0 seats
Others - 0.8%, 0 seats

One of the problems here is that the PC vote is pretty much locked in - only 28% said they thought one of the Liberal candidates would be a good option to lead that party, compared to 49% of New Democrats and 60% of Liberals. It was almost as if the vast majority of Tories would not even consider the question. That bars the door to Pupatello somewhat, as her appeal among New Democrats is more limited.

Nevertheless, in both of these scenarios the Liberals survive. That is a far cry from where they are in the polls right now. But what if things take a turn for the worst? Who could salvage things best?

This is a bit trickier to determine, and requires an even bigger assumption to be made. For the sake of the exercise, let us assume that if Wynne wins, the OLP supporters who said they preferred Pupatello decide to vote for another party, and if Pupatello wins, the Wynne OLP voters jump ship. These can be portioned out according to how PC, NDP, and Green voters considered the race, the assumption being that OLP voters who like a certain candidate probably agree more with the supporters of other parties who also like that candidate. It is a crude way to go about it, but I think it is the best we can do under the circumstances.

Contrary to province-wide opinion, Pupatello was the second choice among Liberal voters behind Kennedy, rather than Wynne. That means that a Wynne victory pushes 16% of OLP supporters to other parties. 52% of them go to the New Democrats, 39% of them to the Tories, and 4% apiece to the Greens and other parties. That results in:

WYNNE COLLAPSE SCENARIO

Progressive Conservatives - 35.8%, 57 seats
New Democrats - 32.7%, 37 seats
Liberals - 22.8%, 13 seats
Greens - 7.6%, 0 seats
Others - 1.1%, 0 seats

The Tories win a majority government while the NDP is vaulted to Official Opposition status. The Liberals are reduced to a rump. This is not an unthinkable scenario, as if Wynne comes out of the gate and trips those left-of-centre OLP voters could easily move over to the NDP. This happened federally as Liberal supporters saw that the NDP became the more viable anti-Conservative option. And coming from the centre-left of the party, Wynne pushes more voters over to Tim Hudak as well.

PUPATELLO COLLAPSE SCENARIO

Progressive Conservatives - 35.2%, 55 seats
New Democrats - 32.1%, 36 seats
Liberals - 23.7%, 16 seats
Greens - 8.0%, 0 seats
Others - 1.1%, 0 seats

If Pupatello wins and she falls flat on her face, the 13% of OLP voters who consider themselves Wynne supporters abandon the party. 48% go to the NDP, 31% go to the PCs, 16% go to the Greens, and 5% to the other parties. That still delivers the PCs a majority, but only just, and the rump the Liberals are reduced to is somewhat larger. This is also a plausible scenario, as Pupatello is probably less likely to lose centrist and centre-right OLP supporters than Wynne would, which might make her seem like a more viable anti-Hudak option than a Wynne-led party that is collapsing.

This exercise shows the risks and rewards that come with a Wynne or Pupatello leadership. Wynne can probably attract more support from the left, putting them ahead of the Tories, who are relatively solid. She potentially has more upside. But by pushing the party to the left, she might make the choice to jump over to the NDP easier than under Pupatello, meaning a Wynne collapse could be worse for the Liberals than a collapse under Pupatello.

All of this assumes the status quo, however. If Hudak's campaign falls apart, Pupatello might be better placed to scoop up those disillusioned PC voters than Wynne. If Andrea Horwath's campaign collapses, disappointed NDP voters may be more willing to cast their ballot for the Wynne Liberals than they would a Pupatello-led party.

But what about Kennedy? Polls show he is more widely liked than either Pupatello or Wynne, even if the OLP itself is not all that keen on him. If he does pull off an upset next weekend, what could happen then?

KENNEDY VICTORY SCENARIO

Kennedy scored very well among NDP voters in the Forum poll. He pulls 23% of NDP votes to the OLP. He also draws 9% of Tories and 18% of Greens.

Liberals - 38.6%, 60 seats
Progressive Conservatives - 31.0%, 29 seats
New Democrats - 23.4%, 18 seats
Greens - 6.1%, 0 seats
Others - 0.9%, 0 seats

His upside among PC voters is still rather limited, but he completely erases the gains the New Democrats have made since the last election. He gives the Liberals a majority government. These might be fairy-tale numbers due to Kennedy's name recognition alone (Hudak and Horwath are also well-known at this point, dulling his potential upside), but it is hard to argue that Kennedy wouldn't stand the better chance in a snap election than Pupatello or Wynne. If you have to spend the first two weeks of a campaign introducing yourself, you will be two weeks behind the other leaders.

Of course, this exercise is highly hypothetical and makes plenty of assumptions that may or may not be warranted. But the results do make a lot of intuitive sense. Unless Wynne or Pupatello can find some support across the aisle, we will probably find out sooner rather than later how they will do.

Who has the easier path to OLP victory?

The voting for the Ontario Liberal leadership took place over the weekend, with Sandra Pupatello and Kathleen Wynne emerging as the two frontrunners. Though the counts differ depending on the source, it appears that Sandra Pupatello has emerged with 27% of elected delegates and Kathleen Wynne with 25%. That puts either of them in the best position to win the race to be premier on January 26.

Gerard Kennedy placed third with 14% of the delegates, followed by Harinder Takhar at 13%, Charles Sousa at 11%, and Eric Hoskins with 6%. Another 4% were elected as independents, many of them supporters of Glen Murray.

If the last Ontario Liberal leadership convention is any guide, this could potentially still be anyone's game. More realistically, however, the race is between Pupatello and Wynne. In the 1996 OLP leadership race, Dalton McGuinty did win after placing fourth on the first ballot and Stéphane Dion won the 2006 federal Liberal race after placing third out of the gate. But in both cases, they started out with 18% support and were 11 or 12 points behind the leader.

Kennedy, Takhar, and Sousa are all well below that 18% and Kennedy trails Pupatello by 14 points among the elected delegates. It is a bit of a stretch to imagine a scenario where anyone but Wynne or Pupatello wins, though it is not impossible, as we will see.

One of the factors complicating the calculations are the ex-officio delegates. These are current and former MPPs, party brass, current Ontario MPs, and others. They are not tied to any candidate on the first ballot, like the elected delegates are.

In order to make some estimates on how the voting might go at the convention, it is necessary to distribute the ex-officio delegates which, again depending on the source in this wonderfully opaque process, number between 419 and "about 600". From what I have seen, however, 419 is probably closer to the real number.

Since these delegates are from the party establishment, it makes sense to distribute these delegates according to the endorsements each of the candidates have piled up. If we look only at current MPs and MPPs and former MPPs, we get the following distribution of ex-officio delegates:

Sandra Pupatello - 47%, or about 200
Kathleen Wynne - 30%, or about 125
Gerard Kennedy - 12%, or about 50
Eric Hoskins - 9%, or about 35
Charles Sousa - 3%, or about 10
Harinder Takhar - 0%

But before estimating the first ballot, the independent delegates need to be portioned out. A look at the 1996 OLP and 2006 LPC races suggests that, when an endorsement is made, about 70% of those delegates will go where they are directed. The remaining 30% generally drift to the other candidates evenly. That means that Kathleen Wynne picks up 47 of the independent elected delegates, with the others getting four apiece.

Now that we have established the number of ex-officio and independent delegates each candidate might get, we can make an estimate of what the first ballot could look like:

FIRST BALLOT ESTIMATE

Sandra Pupatello - 708 votes, 31%
Kathleen Wynne - 635 votes, 28%
Gerard Kennedy - 311 votes, 14%
Harinder Takhar - 248 votes, 11%
Charles Sousa - 212 votes, 9%
Eric Hoskins - 143 votes, 6%

Where do we go from here? Let's assume that both Hoskins and Sousa drop out of the race at this point, and that any endorsements will result in 70% of votes going to the endorsed candidate and the rest being distributed evenly. Let's also assume that the vote of the 4th place candidate, in this case Takhar, drops on the second ballot. In the 1996 and 2006 races, support for candidates outside of the top tier dropped on the second ballot, undoubtedly due to their prospects for winning looking so slim.

Sandra Pupatello has the best position, as if she maintains her lead throughout the balloting (like Thomas Mulcair did in the 2012 NDP leadership race), she will win. In other words, if no candidate makes an endorsement, Pupatello wins in this exercise. Momentum could also work in her favour, as the longer she stays in front on the balloting the more likely she is to get more support from ex-officio delegates. But Wynne has some easy paths to victory as well. Let's look at the scenarios.

WYNNE VICTORY #1 - Hoskins, Sousa, Kennedy to Wynne, Takhar to Pupatello

In this first scenario, Torontonians Hoskins and Sousa decide to lend their support to Wynne, resulting in this second ballot (in this and other scenarios, the total number of votes may not remain constant, as is usually the case when trying to corral 2,000+ to vote):

Kathleen Wynne - 884 votes, 40%
Sandra Pupatello - 760 votes, 34%
Gerard Kennedy - 363 votes, 16%
Harinder Takhar - 213 votes, 10%

Takhar goes to Pupatello but she does not take the lead on the third ballot, when Kennedy drops off and lends his support to Wynne. That results in the following final ballot:

Kathleen Wynne - 1,122 votes, 52.9%
Sandra Pupatello - 998 votes, 47.1%

In this case, Wynne's victory is at its largest due to the momentum swinging to her on the second ballot. If something like this occurs, she will likely win.

WYNNE VICTORY #2 - Hoskins and Sousa neutral, Takhar to Pupatello, Kennedy to Wynne

The second scenario sees neither Sousa nor Hoskins lending their support to any of the candidates. In that case, the second ballot looks like this:

Sandra Pupatello - 826 votes, 38%
Kathleen Wynne - 753 votes, 35%
Gerard Kennedy - 429 votes, 20%
Harinder Takhar - 159 votes, 7%

Takhar drops off the ballot and lends his support to Pupatello. If that occurs, the third ballot looks like this:

Sandra Pupatello - 937 votes, 43%
Kathleen Wynne - 777 votes, 36%
Gerard Kennedy - 453 votes, 21%

Now Kennedy drops off the ballot, and decides the race by endorsing Wynne:

Kathleen Wynne - 1,094 votes, 50.5%
Sandra Pupatello - 1,073 votes, 49.5%

Theoretically, Pupatello could win if Kennedy does not endorse anyone but one assumes that a good portion of Kennedy's support would go to Wynne rather than Pupatello. The result, then, is that Kathleen Wynne wins.

WYNNE/PUPATELLO TIE - Hoskins, Takhar to Pupatello, Sousa, Kennedy to Wynne

Another interesting scenario would result in a virtual tie, meaning either candidate would have a good shot at winning. This assumes that, after the first ballot, Hoskins lends his support to Pupatello and Sousa gives his to Wynne.

Sandra Pupatello - 839 votes, 38%
Kathleen Wynne - 803 votes, 36%
Gerard Kennedy - 352 votes, 16%
Harinder Takhar - 217 votes, 10%

At this point, Takhar goes to Pupatello and Kennedy goes to Wynne, resulting in this final ballot:

Sandra Pupatello - 1,106 votes, 50.1%
Kathleen Wynne - 1,104 votes, 49.9%

There are more than enough assumptions made in this analysis for this scenario to be way too close to call.

PUPATELLO VICTORY #1 - Sousa, Takhar to Pupatello, Hoskins, Kennedy to Wynne

If Pupatello gets Sousa and Takhar to her tent, she has a much better chance of winning. Here is how the second ballot plays out if Sousa goes to Pupatello and Hoskins to Wynne:

Sandra Pupatello - 876 votes, 40%
Kathleen Wynne - 766 votes, 35%
Gerard Kennedy - 352 votes, 16%
Harinder Takhar - 217 votes, 10%

With her larger lead, the support that Takhar gives her makes the difference. Kennedy does not have enough support to give Wynne the victory:

Sandra Pupatello - 1,143 votes, 51.7%
Kathleen Wynne - 1,067 votes, 48.3%

It is still rather close, and again the number of assumptions being made gives this entire exercise a rather large margin of error.

PUPATELLO VICTORY #2 - Sousa neutral, Hoskins, Takhar to Pupatello, Kennedy to Wynne

If Sousa stays neutral after the first ballot but Hoskins goes over to Pupatello, then the second ballot looks like:

Sandra Pupatello - 882 votes, 40%
Kathleen Wynne - 719 votes, 33%
Gerard Kennedy - 395 votes, 18%
Harinder Takhar - 185 votes, 8%

Here again, the lead that Pupatello holds makes Takhar's support the deciding factor.

Sandra Pupatello - 1,138 votes, 52.2%
Kathleen Wynne - 1,043 votes, 47.8%

PUPATELLO VICTORY #3 - Hoskins neutral, Sousa, Takhar to Pupatello, Kennedy to Wynne

Pupatello's victory gets larger when Hoskins stays neutral and Sousa goes to her camp. In that case, the final ballot would be:

Sandra Pupatello - 1,167 votes, 53.2%
Kathleen Wynne - 1,028 votes, 46.8%

And, of course, her victory gets even larger if she gets Hoskins, Sousa, and Takhar on her side throughout the balloting. At any point, Pupatello's chances of victory get slimmer if Takhar stays neutral but Kennedy sides with Wynne. If Kennedy stays neutral, then Wynne is in a difficult position. It makes horse-trading absolutely necessary.

But, within the bounds of this theoretical exercise, other candidates could win as well.

SOUSA VICTORY - Everyone to Sousa

Charles Sousa does have a path to victory, but it is not an easy one. He would need every dropped-off candidate to endorse him, and deliver their delegates, at each ballot. Assuming Takhar also picks up support on the second ballot, and with Hoskins's support going to Sousa, that second ballot would be:

Sandra Pupatello - 718 votes, 32%
Kathleen Wynne - 645 votes, 29%
Gerard Kennedy - 321 votes, 14%
Charles Sousa - 312 votes, 14%
Harinder Takhar - 258 votes, 11%

For the third ballot, Takhar would need to send his support Sousa's way in order for him to overtake Kennedy:

Sandra Pupatello - 744 votes, 33%
Kathleen Wynne - 671 votes, 30%
Charles Sousa - 493 votes, 22%
Gerard Kennedy - 347 votes, 15%

At this point, Kennedy would also have to endorse Sousa:

Sandra Pupatello - 796 votes, 35%
Charles Sousa - 735 votes, 33%
Kathleen Wynne - 723 votes, 32%

But you can see how fraught this path to victory is for Sousa. He ends up ahead of Wynne by 12 votes, a margin that is very small considering the assumptions being made. At this point, though, he could easily win with Wynne's support:

Charles Sousa - 1,241 votes, 54.8%

Sandra Pupatello - 1,025 votes, 45.2%

What are the odds, though, that the candidate one up from the bottom would receive an endorsement at each step of the way? And would the ex-officio delegates perhaps not move strongly way from Sousa  - too strongly for Sousa to over-take Wynne on the third ballot?

TAKHAR  VICTORY - Everyone to Takhar

Takhar's path is similarly unlikely, especially considering that he has not a single endorsement to his name at this stage of the race. After the first ballot, he could overtake Kennedy with just Hoskins's support, with Sousa then dropping off the second ballot and lending his support to Takhar as well:

Sandra Pupatello - 743 votes, 33%
Kathleen Wynne - 670 votes, 30%
Harinder Takhar - 496 votes, 22%
Gerard Kennedy - 346 votes, 15%

And then Kennedy would need to go Takhar's way, which is far less imaginable than Kennedy choosing Sousa over Wynne:

Sandra Pupatello - 795 votes, 35%
Harinder Takhar - 738 votes, 33%
Kathleen Wynne - 722 votes, 32%

And now we need to assume that the ex-officios do not go en masse to Pupatello to prevent Takhar from winning (recall, she currently leads endorsements) and that Wynne prefers Takhar to Pupatello, in order to get:

Harinder Takhar - 1,243 votes, 55.1%
Sandra Pupatello - 1,012 votes, 44.9%

This is the scenario that is hardest to envision, as Takhar is not seen as anyone's consensus second choice. Sousa could conceivably fill that role, but again we're stretching the imagination.

KENNEDY VICTORY - Everyone to Kennedy

But what about the candidate that Ontarians would choose if they were voting? It is not too much of a stretch to imagine the losing candidates deciding to go with the popular choice, at least in terms of name recognition. After all, the next election might be weeks away - no time for an introduction to Pupatello or Wynne.

Sandra Pupatello - 749 votes, 34%
Kathleen Wynne - 676 votes, 31%
Gerard Kennedy - 569 votes, 26%
Harinder Takhar - 217 votes, 10%

Joining Hoskins and Sousa, Takhar decides to go against the establishment and sends his supporters to Kennedy for the third ballot:

Sandra Pupatello - 781 votes, 35%
Gerard Kennedy - 721 votes, 33%
Kathleen Wynne - 708 votes, 32%

At this point, a path to Kennedy's victory is easy to see. Having edged out Wynne, she could lend her support directly to Kennedy and give him a big victory:

Gerard Kennedy - 1,216 votes, 55%
Sandra Pupatello - 994 votes, 45%

But if Wynne decided to stay neutral, Kennedy would only need to carry a little more than 54% of her supporters in order to beat out Pupatello. That is not difficult to imagine, as Kennedy and Wynne share more of a constituency than Wynne and Pupatello.

This means that the leadership is very much up for grabs, and that the machinations on the convention floor will be hugely important. Kathleen Wynne and Sandra Pupatello have the easiest paths to victory. Gerard Kennedy and Charles Sousa also have a not-implausible way to win it, while Harinder Takhar could mathematically emerge as a victor as well.

Much will depend on where the ex-officio delegates go - if they plump for Pupatello by a larger margin on the first ballot, it will be hers. If they instead go to Wynne, she will be in the much better position. Couple that with the potential for candidates to lose control of their delegates through the balloting process, and the race really is anyone's to win. But with their large lead in elected delegates and advantage among the party establishment, the safest money is on Pupatello or Wynne.

PCs maintain advantage in tight race

An Abacus Data poll on the voting intentions of Ontarians shows that the Progressive Conservatives are still in front, with the New Democrats and Liberals tussling for runner-up status. The poll also gauged the Ontario Liberal leadership race, an exercise that drew a blank from most respondents.

This is Abacus Data's first poll of the Ontario provincial scene since the 2011 election (in which they performed quite well). The poll gave the PCs 35% to 31% for the New Democrats and 28% for the Liberals, with the Greens at 5% support.

Compared to the last election, the Tories were unchanged but the Liberals were down 10 points. Eight of those went to the New Democrats and two to the Greens. This aligns with how the poll breaks down past voting: the Liberals have lost about 20% of their 2011 support to the NDP, while only a very small portion (4%) have gone to the Tories.

It is worth noting how complete Abacus Data's report is for this poll. The report shows both unweighted and weighted sample sizes and decided and undecided results. This is exactly how every poll should be reported. It shows that, despite being an online poll, the number of corrections that needed to be made to the sample were relatively minimal. This isn't about double-checking a pollster's work, though - it is about being able to be confident in the results. When a polling firm is transparent, their work tends to be better and their polls are often more accurate.

Also, providing the detailed breakdown of undecided opinion gives us a better understanding of what is going on behind the numbers. For example, it shows that half of those who did not vote in 2011 and two-thirds of those who can't remember if they voted are currently undecided. That means that a large proportion of those who are undecided are highly unlikely to vote in the next election anyway. It also, quite intuitively, shows that Liberal voters are about twice as likely to be undecided as supporters of the PCs and NDP, perhaps because these voters are waiting to see how the leadership race plays out. This would suggest that the next leader of the party has a good chance of improving the party's numbers, but also that the choice the party makes could send more of their 2011 supporters to other parties.

The poll showed the Progressive Conservatives ahead by seven points among men and the NDP four points among women, with the New Democrats in front among voters 29 or younger and the Tories ahead among those 45 or older. Ontarians between the ages of 30 and 44 were split three-ways between the parties.

That split also occurred in and around Toronto, where the Liberals had 32% to 31% for the Tories and 28% for the NDP. Outside of the GTA, the Tories were ahead with 39% to 35% for the NDP. The Liberals were well behind with 22%.

With these numbers, the Progressive Conservatives would win 43 seats to 33 for the Liberals and 31 for the New Democrats.

The Liberals were able to win more seats with fewer votes than the NDP due to their incumbency advantage, which makes the difference in several close races (often PC-Liberal contests). But the margin is close enough that either the Liberals or the NDP could emerge as the second-place party with the results of this poll.

Abacus's assessment of the Liberal leadership race falls in line with what other surveys have shown. Gerard Kennedy is the most well-known and liked, while Kathleen Wynne and Sandra Pupatello also score better than the others.

But the real story of this poll is suggested by the yawning gap between the favourable and unfavourable impressions of each of the candidates.

Even though Kennedy has the highest name recognition, 31% of respondents still did not know who he was or were unsure of their opinion of him, while another 31% had a neutral impression (more suggestive of not knowing much about him than anything else). Wynne and Pupatello combined for 72% and 74%, respectively, on the unknown/neutral score, while all others were at or over 80%.

The winner of the race will have their work cut out for them in order to become better known but also in ensuring that those neutral opinions don't become unfavourable. These numbers do suggest, however, that Kennedy, Wynne, and Pupatello would come out of the starting blocks in the best position.

The canyon narrows a little among Ontarians who voted for the Liberals in 2011, but nevertheless the number of respondents marked as "unknown" in Abacus's polling is still at around 40% for all candidates except the top three. Kennedy has very good name recognition among Liberal supporters, with only 19% marked as "unknown". His 44% favourable impression rating is also well ahead of Wynne (25%) and Pupatello (22%). Of note is that Harinder Takhar scores the highest unfavourable impressions among Liberal voters and Ontarians as a whole.

While Kennedy might have the highest favour among voters, he does not seem to have the same sort of organization as Wynne or Pupatello. That could be a deciding factor in a delegated convention. If an election is called shortly after the leadership race comes to a close, however, neither Wynne nor Pupatello would have the sort of immediate impact that Kennedy would have, at least according to these numbers. That could complicate matters for the Liberals, unless Wynne or Pupatello (or one of the other candidates) turn out to be strong campaigners.

The Liberals need a bump if they are to move definitively ahead of the NDP and out of third place. The Liberals are almost certainly in third spot, as they have been ranked behind the New Democrats in 11 of the last 14 polls (the current aggregation puts them at 27.9% to the NDP's 29.2%). The Progressive Conservatives, meanwhile, have been rock solid at between 32% and 38% in the last 17 polls stretching back to March. The challenge the next Liberal leader faces is twofold: regaining those lost voters who have swung to the NDP and chipping away at the Tories' granite base. No easy task.

Ontario Liberals gain at expense of NDP

Forum Research is out with a new Ontario provincial poll today, published in the Toronto Star, showing that the Liberals have made big gains over the last four weeks, almost all of it at the expense of the New Democrats. Is it an outlier or a sign that the Ontario Liberal leadership race is improving the fortunes of the party?

Forum was last in the field Oct. 30-31, and since then the Progressive Conservatives have dropped two points to 35%. That still gives them a statistically significant lead over the Liberals, who were up seven points to 29% support. The NDP was down five points to 27%.

The Greens were up one to 8% and 1% of respondents said they would vote for other parties.

The Liberal gain and NDP drop is outside the margin of error, so this is not due to a statistical wobble. Whether it is an outlier result is hard to say - with the leadership race in the news it is not surprising to see the Liberals making gains. If this sort of result had come from Nanos Research, which has been more bullish on the Liberals in Ontario, then it would potentially be less significant. But coming from Forum, which has had the Liberals at 22% and 20% in their last two polls, this is perhaps more meaningful.

A few notes on methodology: Forum conducted this poll over two days, which they also did the last time they polled in Ontario. I applaud this, as their usual one-day snapshots are more susceptible to error. But, as usual, the report contains no information on unweighted samples. It does contain information on how respondents voted in the last provincial election, with that breaking down to about 40% for the Liberals, 33% for the Tories, and 19% for the NDP. The actual results are within the margin of error of the poll, but this does suggest that there is a potential that the sample is slightly more favourable to the Liberals (and Greens and others) than to the Tories and NDP. Whether that is due to lapses in memory or methodological bias is impossible to say.

The Tories were ahead in most parts of the province, with 37% support in the Greater Toronto Area, compared to 31% for the Liberals and 26% for the NDP (down six points). In particular, the PCs were strongest in the 905 area code with 41%, followed by the Liberals at 28% and the NDP at 25%.

The Progressive Conservatives were also ahead in eastern Ontario with 37% to 31% for the Liberals (+12) and 22% for the NDP, while they were in front in southwestern Ontario with 36% to the NDP's 31% and the Liberals' 23%.

The Liberals had the advantage only in the 416 area code, with 36% support to 31% for the Tories and 28% for the NDP. The New Democrats, however, were ahead in the north with 32% to 28% for the Liberals, 25% for the Tories, and 15% for the Greens (+7).

It is worth noting that the Liberals were up in every region of Ontario, while the New Democrats were down across the board. The Liberals had the edge among women by a margin of two points over the NDP, while the Tories were ahead by 15 points among men.

44% of respondents favoured calling an election, compared to 49% who said they were against another election right now. Sadly, 44% might be a good estimation of the next election's turnout.

With these numbers, the PCs would win a minority government of 49 seats, with the Liberals winning 30 and the New Democrats winning 28. But that is a close enough margin to the magic number of 54 seats that a majority government isn't out of the question for Tim Hudak. A continuation of the Liberal government is also theoretically possible, if they could get the support of the NDP.

The Tories win 34 of their seats in eastern, central, and southwestern Ontario, with a smattering of other seats in the Golden Horseshoe. The Liberals win 22 of their seats in and around Toronto, while the New Democrats win their seats in and around Toronto, Hamilton, and northern and southwestern Ontario.

Forum also included some polling on the Ontario Liberal leadership race, showing little change in what the numbers have indicated so far.

Gerard Kennedy topped the list of favourite choices at 16%, followed by Sandra Pupatello at 10% and Kathleen Wynne at 8%. The other candidates scored 3% or less. Fully 30% of respondents said that none of these were their favourite choice, while 27% were undecided.

Kennedy led in and around Toronto and in northern Ontario, while Pupatello led in eastern and southwestern Ontario. That jives pretty well with the regional distribution of Pupatello's caucus support.

Among Liberal supporters, Kennedy managed 25% to 16% for Pupatello and 13% for Wynne. Removing the undecideds and "none of the aboves" gives 38% to Kennedy, 25% to Pupatello, and 20% to Wynne. The other candidates were well behind.

Though Kennedy beat out his competitors on questions of "who cares most about people like you", the economy, likability, and trustworthiness, his numbers were very similar to his overall support. In other words, that tells us little about why Kennedy is favoured.

It will be interesting to see how the numbers fluctuate as the race firms up a little more. Kennedy is the favourite choice of NDP voters, suggesting that he has the greatest potential to draw supporters away from the New Democrats. If Pupatello is chosen, however, she may have more luck attracting Tories to the Liberal fold, keeping the NDP in the race. Combine that with how the PCs threw away their last chance and the next election is wide open.

Tight provincial race in Toronto

Lost in the weeds of a poll on the fortunes of Mayor Rob Ford of Toronto, Forum Research's latest poll on the feelings of Torontonians included provincial voting intentions, as well as thoughts on the on-going Ontario Liberal leadership race. The results show that the vote is splitting three-ways in Toronto, and that - shockingly - Torontonians favour a local boy for the leadership.

The poll found the New Democrats ahead in Toronto with 34%, putting them narrowly up on the Liberals, who were at 31%. The Progressive Conservatives came up third with 29%, while the Greens were well back at 5%.

Forum broke down the city into four regions, with each party leading in at least one of them. The New Democrats were ahead in Toronto/East York and in Etobicoke/York, while the Liberals were ahead in North York. The Tories had the edge in Scarborough.

But each part of the city was also split: the Liberals were in the race for Toronto/East York and the Tories in Etobicoke and North York, while all three parties were competitive in Scarborough.

That the Liberals are leading in North York should not be too surprising, they won all of the area's seats in October 2011. The NDP also did quite well in that election in their two pockets of support in this poll. But the PCs being ahead in Scarborough makes it quite possible that Tim Hudak could make a mini-breakthrough into Toronto. This could be an anomaly of the poll, as the Tories did not do very well in the Scarborough ridings in the last election, but it does suggest that the electoral map of Toronto could be a mish-mash of colours when Ontarians are called back to the polls.

Forum's look at the Ontario Liberal leadership race in Toronto tells us little about how the convention will unfold, but it does give an indication of what Torontonians, the last bastion the Liberals can still (mostly) count upon, would like to see as the outcome.

Not surprisingly, Gerard Kennedy and Kathleen Wynne, both from Toronto, topped the list. Kennedy came out well ahead, however, with 22% support as the best choice among all polled residents of the city. Wynne came up second with 11%, while Sandra Pupatello (Windsor) was third with 6%. Eric Hoskins (5%), Glen Murray (4%), and Charles Sousa (1%) rounded out the list.


Among Liberal voters in Toronto, Kennedy does better: 32% to 12% for Pupatello and 10% for Wynne.

It is worth noting that 27% of all respondents said they had no opinion and 21% said "none of these", leaving a lot of points on the table. If we remove them, along with the 3% who said "someone else", we get Kennedy at 45% to Wynne's 22% and Pupatello's 12%.

Word is that Kennedy's campaign is not as well organized as those of some of his main competitors, but having an edge in Toronto could be important. If most of the delegates from ridings in the city vote for him, he will have a solid base of support on the first ballot. Whether he will be able to grow that support, however, will be the big question at the convention - as it was in 1996.

Ontario race remains between PCs and NDP

A new poll was released on Friday showing that the Ontario Liberals are in dire straits, no matter who takes over the party. And that means that, for the time being, the real contest is between the Progressive Conservatives and the New Democrats.

Forum was last in the field in Ontario on Sept. 25, and since then the Tories were unchanged at 37% support. The New Democrats were down three points to 32% while the Liberals were up two points to 22%.

The Greens were unchanged at 7% support.

Whereas the last poll from Forum showed a gap between the PCs and NDP that was within the margin of error, this poll gave the Tories a statistically significant lead. But that significance does not extend to any region of the province except eastern Ontario - all the others are close enough to give us an indication of only who is probably ahead, rather than definitively.

The disparity between men and women in this poll is telling. The Tories held a 43% to 29% lead over the NDP among men but the NDP was up five points (35% to 30%) among women. The New Democrats will need to close the gap among male voters in order to put themselves back in a dead heat with the Tories.

But there is something to note about this poll, similar to what I highlighted in Forum's last federal poll. The real problem is that Forum does not included unweighted and weighted samples in their reports (and they are not alone), which makes it difficult to determine what is actually going on. For instance, Forum says on one of its charts that the number of undecideds in this poll was 13%. But it also says that the total sample was 1,102 Ontarians and that, on the voting intentions question, the sample of respondents was 1,047. If the numbers of undecideds is really 13%, then the number of decided/leaning respondents who answered the voting intentions question should have been 959.

And on the question of how respondents voted in the last election, the numbers are off of the actual results - most strongly for the New Democrats, who were five points below their election result. By my rough calculation of Forum's numbers, if the sample was weighted by past voting behaviour the PC lead would be reduced to three points instead of five. But perhaps Forum is already taking this into account in their final numbers. When I asked if that was the case, I was told that this information is proprietary. That is certainly their prerogative, but it doesn't clear things up much.

Another interesting thing to note is that if you add up the sample sizes of how people said they voted in the last election, you end up with 1,008, or 96% of 1,047. In other words, 96% of respondents said they voted in the last election. That means that the sample Forum compiled either has a lot of fibbers (turnout was 49%) or a lot of forgetful people, and that it is probably not representative of the entire population. It might be representative of the voting population, though.

With the numbers in this poll, the Progressive Conservatives would likely win a majority government of around 60 seats, with strong results in rural Ontario but also a few pick-ups in Toronto as well. The New Democrats would win 37 seats and the Liberals only 10, nine of them in and around Toronto.

The poll also included some information on how Ontarians would vote depending on who was leading the party. Forum reported their numbers with the undecideds still included, but if we remove them we get the following results:

Gerard Kennedy - 24%
Eric Hoskins - 19%
Kathleen Wynne - 18%
Glen Murray - 18%
Sandra Pupatello - 17%
Deb Matthews - 17%
Charles Sousa - 15%

The poll also included Laurel Broten, but she has ruled herself out. What the poll suggests is that only Kennedy would improve the Liberals' current numbers, while they would fall with all of the others. Undoubtedly, this is due to Kennedy being a higher profile candidate. The others on the list are not nearly as well known, but their numbers would likely improve somewhat if they actually became leader.

This leaders question actually shows that the real swing voter in Ontario right now is on the fence between the New Democrats and the Liberals. The numbers hardly budged for the Tories no matter who was on the ballot, but those lower-performing Liberals added to the NDP's tally. It would seem to suggest that the Liberals would do better with a left-wing candidate (like Kennedy or Wynne) rather than one from the right (like Pupatello). But, in the end, if the Liberals get themselves back into a competitive position they will need to win votes from the Tories as well.

As of writing, Glen Murray is the only candidate officially in the race for the Liberal leadership. That list will likely get much longer very soon. How it all plays out between now and January, and then how the new leader will do in the short time before the next election, will be interesting to see.

Three-way race in Ontario?

Another poll for the suddenly fascinating Ontario political scene was released earlier this week, this time by Innovative Research for TVO's The Agenda. The results show a very close three-way race where any party could come out on top.

Innovative Research was last in the field Oct. 27-Nov. 2, just after the October 2011 election. Since then, the Progressive Conservatives dropped two points to 32%, the New Democrats were up eight points to 31%, and the Liberals were down 11 points to 28%. At 9%, the Greens registered a five point gain.

Aside from the PC slip, all of these changes in support are statistically significant - though the actual significance of that is difficult to say considering Innovative's last poll is a year old. What is more interesting is that the margin of error is large enough to say that no party is definitively in front. Though the Tories have the edge, their advantage over the third-place Liberals is not even statistically significant. That means a very close race.

In fact, the race would be so close that no fewer than 11 ridings would feature three-way races, where the projected margin for the winner would be less than 10 points over the third place party. That means a very unpredictable outcome. Even the Greens could manage a seat win with these results.

But the model gives the Progressive Conservatives a minority government of 42 seats with these numbers, the seats coming almost exclusively from rural Ontario. The New Democrats win 33 seats while the Liberals win 32, all but six of them in and around Toronto.

Undoubtedly, things will shift as the Liberal leadership race gets underway, and Innovative asked some interesting questions concerning the race. For example, 18% of Ontarians said that they would definitely (8%) or probably vote Liberal in the next election, with 30% "not sure one way or the other". Put differently, that gives the Liberals a base of about 18% but the potential for as much as 48% of the vote.

That's a wide range, and is further confirmed by the 45% of respondents who said that the Ontario Liberals' policies and programs were working well or okay, and that they needed no or only minor changes. That makes for a large swathe of the population that is open to voting for the party, but it is worth noting that the proportion of respondents who said that the Liberals' policies and programs were working well and needed no changes was minuscule.

Innovative then asked about potential successors to Dalton McGuinty. Unfortunately, the apparent front-runner Sandra Pupatello was not included in the list. But coming out on top on whether a leader would make someone a lot or somewhat more likely to vote Liberal was Dwight Duncan, at a combined juggernaut of 13%. The only problem is that he has already said he won't run. David McGuinty, Deb Matthews, and Kathleen Wynne tied with 10% each.

A major problem for the Liberals, though, is that only David McGuinty (and some of that may have been people mistaking him for the Premier) and Dwight Duncan managed a majority of respondents who were able to recognize their names. Matthews had 51% non-recognition, while all others had over 60%.

In terms of who Ontarians prefer as leader, 42% don't have a clue and 26% said that they prefer no one. Of the rest, Duncan and Wynne led with 5%, followed by Matthews and McGuinty at 3% and Jim Watson (current mayor of Ottawa who has already ruled out a run) at 2%. Considering the small sample size, these numbers are hardly informative.

Among "core" and "potential" Liberals, however, Wynne averaged 14%, putting her ahead of Duncan (12%) and David McGuinty (7%). It will be interesting to see how things shift when the full list of candidates becomes known (and polled).

But it does not seem that the leadership race will make a huge difference for the Liberals. If voters' preferred candidate wins the race, it bumps up the proportion who say it would make them a lot or somewhat more likely to vote for the party to only 25%.

The goal, then, will be for the next leader to get as many as possible of those 45% of respondents who thought that the party's policies were good enough back into the Liberal fold. The question is whether too many of them are simply fatigued with the Ontario Liberals.

PCs in majority territory

A new poll by Angus-Reid released by the Toronto Star on the weekend serves to confirm the sort of race that some other polls have pointed to in Ontario - that the Progressive Conservatives and New Democrats are first and second in the province and that the Liberals trail in third. But the Tories' position at the top of the table is not as solid as it may appear.

This survey from Angus-Reid is the first from the polling firm since the October 2011 election, so it is impossible to discern any trends from the numbers. But they do seem to fall on the side of Forum and Environics, which have shown the Liberals in third in recent polls, rather than on the side of Nanos, which has seen the race as one between the Tories and the Liberals.

Angus-Reid found that the Progressive Conservatives were in front with 36% support, trailed by the New Democrats at 32%. The Liberals were in third were 26%, while the Greens had 5% support.

Angus-Reid's regionals are generally what you would expect with these numbers. The PCs were in front in eastern Ontario with 50%, in southwestern Ontario with 40%, and in the 905 Area Code around Toronto with 40%. The New Democrats were in front with 50% in northern Ontario and 45% in the Hamilton and Niagara region, while the Liberals had a narrow edge over the NDP in the 416 Area Code (Toronto itself) with 38%.

This gives each party some pockets of support, more or less in line with where each party was strongest in the 2011 provincial election. But the poll suggests that it is among women that the next election could be won or lost: while men preferred the Tories by a margin of 40% to 32% for the NDP and 22% for the Liberals, women were split three-ways. The New Democrats had the tiniest of edges with 32% support to 31% for the PCs and 30% for the Liberals.

The seat projection model for Ontario is still a province-wide swing model, so the regional numbers are not taken into account. But with the exception of the Hamilton/Niagara region, where the NDP would likely win a few more seats, the regional breakdown is likely unaffected.

With these numbers, the Progressive Conservatives would win a majority with 56 seats, primarily won in the rural and suburban parts of the province. The New Democrats would form the Official Opposition with 33 seats, while the Liberals would win 18 seats, almost all of them in and around Toronto.

But the PCs have been on track for a majority government before, only to lose it. Tim Hudak proved to not be the kind of compelling leader the Tories needed to replace the Liberals, and the problem does not appear to have gone away. While Dalton McGuinty's personal numbers in this survey are very bad (only 23% had a positive impression of him, compared to a 63% negative impression), he is on his way out (a decision supported by 69% of the population, though 66% oppose his decision to prorogue the legislature).

Tim Hudak garners a positive impression among only 26% of Ontarians, little more than McGuinty. His negative impression stands at 44% in this poll, while 30% say they are either not sure or have no impression of him. Those are not good personal numbers for a leader whose party is ahead in the polls. Andrea Horwath's numbers are far better: 49% positive, 22% negative, and 29% no impression/not sure. (Note that the numbers for Hudak, McGuinty, and Horwath are very close to Forum's latest approval/disapproval ratings for these three leaders.)

Though this would seem to give an opportunity to the NDP, the Liberals' roster of potential successors to McGuinty does not seem to tilt things in their favour.

A huge swathe of the population has little or no impression of some of the Ontario Liberals' brightest lights, at least in terms of the upcoming leadership race. A majority of Ontarians have a positive or negative impression of only Finance Minister Dwight Duncan - all others have scores of 50% or more on the "not sure/no impression" count.

Duncan's numbers aren't terrific, with a positive score of 23% and a negative one of 33%, though that puts him relatively on par with Hudak. Health Minister Deb Matthews comes second with a positive impression from 17% of Ontarians, but at 34% she has the highest negative score of those listed Liberals. Others who score highly for negative impressions are Education Minister Laurel Broten (27%, to 11% positive) and Energy Minister Chris Bentley (29% to 11% positive).

The best net rating belongs to Kathleen Wynne, who has a positive score of 16% to a negative one of 15%. But that still leaves 68% of respondents on the table, and they could go either way.

Other leadership contenders like Charles Sousa, Eric Hoskins, Glen Murray, and Yasir Naqvi are virtual unknowns to a huge majority of Ontarians. While that does not speak to their ability to win a leadership race, it leaves a lot of room for the opposition to define them if they do come out as the winners. Unlike their federal counterparts, who in Justin Trudeau appear to have someone who could potentially turn the Liberal ship around, the Ontario Liberals apparently have no saviour, hypothetical or otherwise, waiting in the wings.