Breaking down the Sudbury results

The provincial by-election in Sudbury culminated in a somewhat anti-climactic fashion, with Glenn Thibeault (the NDP MP turned Ontario Liberal) prevailing by a little more than six points over the NDP's Suzanne Shawbonquit. The wildcard in the race, Andrew Olivier (the Ontario Liberal turned independent), took less of the vote than expected. But was he really a spoiler?

Let's first take a look at the shift in vote share since the 2014 provincial election.

Thibeault captured 41.2% of the vote, increasing his party's share by 1.9 points. Shawbonquit finished with 34.9%, a drop of 7.3 points over the NDP's victorious performance in 2014.

Olivier took 12.3%, not a bad performance by an independent candidate, but well below expectations.

The Progressive Conservatives' Paula Peroni saw her vote share (she ran last time as well) fall 6.3 points to 7.5%, while the Greens' David Robinson was down 0.4 points to 3.2%.

On the face of it, it would seem that Olivier drew votes from the NDP and the PCs, suggesting he could have been a spoiler for the NDP. But the New Democrats would have had to hold virtually all of their vote to beat Thibeault, a tough assignment considering that many Sudburians used to voting for Thibeault the New Democrat might have been willing to vote for Thibeault the Liberal.

In terms of actual votes, no party made any gains. The total number of voters dropped by some 8,000, as turnout fell to around 34%.

Of the three major parties, Thibeault saw the smallest drop, of 2,670 votes. Peroni fell 2,730 votes while Shawbonquit saw the largest slide, from 14,274 votes to 8,985 (a drop of 5,289).

Overall, turnout had dropped to about 76% of what it was in 2014. That means Thibeault outperformed that baseline, retaining 80% of the votes that the Liberals took in 2014.

Robinson retained 68% of 2014 Green voters, while Peroni retained just 41%. The problem for the NDP was that Shawbonquit retained 63% of her voters, when she needed at least 74%. In other words, the NDP just needed to tread water in order to hold off Thibeault, but they disproportionately lost voters, and so the by-election.

Was Olivier the cause? Quite possibly. If the number of votes cast had dropped uniformly across the board due to falling turnout, Shawbonquit would have won with about 10,900 votes and a lead of 700 or so over Thibeault. Instead, she under-performed that mark by about 1,860 votes. Peroni also under-performed, by about 1,610 votes. In total, these two parties took about 3,470 fewer votes than they should have, all else being equal. Perhaps not coincidentally, Olivier captured 3,177.

Just looking at the math, it doesn't seem like many Liberals went over to Olivier's camp. Undoubtedly some did, but they were more than made up for by New Democrats and PCs who voted for Thibeault. It seems more likely that Olivier drew support from the NDP, reducing their chances of victory. Or, at the very least, he did not draw enough Liberals to make up for the number of New Democrats who followed Thibeault across the metaphorical aisle.

Mixed results for the by-election polls

Polling in by-elections is risky business. It becomes even riskier when word that the OPP believes the Liberals did something under-handed to try to get Olivier out of the race drops on election day.

It is impossible to know the effect that news might have had on the outcome. Many voters may not have heard the news when they cast a ballot - certainly those who voted in the advanced polls, and potentially most of the voters who cast a ballot on election day itself (not everyone checks the news as frequently as you or I may). And maybe even the news wouldn't have had much of an effect, merely confirming what people were already thinking. In the end, the OPP appears to be looking at some individuals within the Liberal Party, not Glenn Thibeault. Voters may have compartmentalized the two - something they probably would not have been able to do if Thibeault wasn't already a known quantity.

So that is one thing to keep in mind when looking at how the polls performed. Another thing to keep in mind is the effect of the polls themselves. All of the polls over-estimated Olivier's support. Might voters who were aware of the polls have decided to cast a ballot for one of the two front runners, rather than the all-but-guaranteed third place finisher? Lastly, even the most recent polls were out of the field on Monday, three days before election day in a topsy-turvy campaign. So, some mitigating factors.

Nevertheless, none of the three final polls published in the last stages of the campaign did particularly well. But two of the three did correctly identify the winner.

Mainstreet Technologies had the smallest amount of error, totaling 14.1 points for the five major candidates (or 2.8 per party). Mainstreet had the gap at five points, close to the 6.3-point gap that actually occurred. But the results for Thibeault, Olivier, and Peroni were all outside the margin of error for the sample of decided voters (and taking into account the estimated support of the each candidate). However, the story Mainstreet's poll told was closest to the truth.

Forum Research's poll had only a little more absolute error, but the story it told was false. Two of Forum's three polls throughout the campaign had Shawbonquit ahead of Thibeault, including the last one.

Total error for Forum was 17.3 points, or 3.5 points per party. Again, though, Thibeault's result was outside the margin of error, as was Peroni's and Robinson's. Forum was the only pollster to get Olivier's support within the margin of error.

Oraclepoll Research had the largest degree of total error at 20.1 points (or four points per party). But it has to be rated ahead of Forum for not having pushed the narrative of a very, very close race that the NDP had better than even odds to win. Oraclepoll always had Thibeault ahead, and he ended up winning.

Oraclepoll was the only firm to get Thibeault's score within the margin of error, as well as Peroni's. But the results for Shawbonquit were well off the mark, as were Olivier's. Note, however, that Oraclepoll was out of the field the earliest of the three. It finished polling on Saturday.

So, not exactly a terrific performance by any pollster. At the same time, however, the polls were far better than what we have seen in some other by-elections. Mainstreet and Oraclepoll both said Thibeault would win, and he did. Forum said the race would be close, and it wasn't a landslide. I think, considering the drama of the campaign and the amount of time between the final polls and the results, we can give the polls a passing grade.

What are the polls really showing in Sudbury?

As by-elections go, the one in the provincial riding of Sudbury in Ontario has been pretty dramatic. Accusations of skulduggery, a Liberal-turned-independent candidate mixing it up, and a floor-crosser that managed to ford both the ideological gap between two parties as well as the federal/provincial line.

Some of the polls have been showing a close race between Liberal candidate Glenn Thibeault and the NDP's Suzanne Shawbonquit, with independent Andrew Olivier earning a big chunk of the vote. Other polls have shown Thibeault with a relatively comfortable lead. What gives?

At first glance, it is very puzzling that the polls by Forum Research and Oraclepoll Research can differ so much. Both firms have been in the field twice at exactly the same time. Oraclepoll was in for three to four days, with the Forum polls right in the middle of those sampling periods. So timing should have nothing to do with it.

Forum's first poll on January 13 put the gap at just two points, with Shawbonquit narrowly ahead. Olivier scored just 1%. Then on January 21, the gap was three points for Thibeault as he dropped seven points and Shawbonquit fell 12. Olivier made a miraculous 21-point gain, which Forum called a surge.

Meanwhile, Oraclepoll gave Thibeault a lead of 13 points on January 12-15 at 39% to 26% for Shawbonquit, with Olivier at 19%. On January 20-22, the gap was 16 points (42% to 26%), with Olivier at 20%. In other words, while Forum was showing a major shift, Oraclepoll was showing stability.

So who's right?

There are many reasons to trust Oraclepoll's numbers more than Forum's. Here's why.

Firstly, Forum is based out of Toronto and Oraclepoll is based out of Sudbury. Right out of the gate, the local firm has an advantage both in terms of local knowledge and a local area code showing up on the caller ID.

Secondly, and most importantly, Oraclepoll is conducting a superior survey. Forum is doing its polls via IVR, as it always does. It jumps into the field for a few hours on one evening, gathers its 500 to 800 responses, and reports the numbers a day or two later (response rates being what they are for Forum, it probably needs to call 25,000 to 80,000 households to get even those small samples).

Though it doesn't say explicitly, we can assume that Forum is not calling cell phones. This is because, unlike land lines, it is not possible to know for certain where a respondent on a cell phone is living. This is a problem in by-elections, as ridings do not entirely occupy an area code. This is not an issue in provincial or national polling. Cell phones can be included there without issue, and usually are.

Update: Commenter DL (see below) points out that targeting cell phones in a billing area is straight-forward, so Forum may indeed be calling cell phones. The inability to call cell phones pinpointed to a specific riding would be more of a problem in a city like Toronto where there are multiple ridings within one municipality.

Oraclepoll, on the other hand, is doing its polls with live-callers and it explicitly says that it is including cell phones in its sample (perhaps it has a list of local cell phones to call from). It is also in the field for several days, and according to its press release is calling back numbers where respondents did not answer up to five times before giving up. That is how a poll is supposed to be done.

Forum is getting responses from whoever is home between, say, 7 PM and 9 PM on January 13 and January 21 and is willing to answer a survey. Oraclepoll is doing everything that is reasonably possible to reach everyone it is calling. The potential for a biased sample is far lower.

Lastly, Forum's 1% result for Olivier on January 13 defies logic. At the time the poll was released, people were very surprised that Olivier, who had a relatively high profile, was scoring just 1%. That his number jumped from 1% to 22% in eight days makes little sense, particularly when Oraclepoll was showing his support levels to be steady at between 19% and 20% over the same period. While it is conceivable that the discrepancies in the results for the Liberals and NDP can be explained away by sampling issues and statistical probability, the discrepancy for Olivier's numbers are virtually impossible.

I don't know what happened in Forum's January 13th poll. But it simply doesn't make sense.

In that survey, Forum inquired as to whether Sudburians (Sudburites? Sudburers?) approved of the candidates on offer. The responses there just don't line up with the voting intentions numbers it recorded.

At the time, the poll found that 95% of respondents were aware or had an opinion of Thibeault, compared to 75% for PC candidate Paula Peroni and just 61% for Shawbonquit. But Olivier, who had just 1% support in the same poll, had 88% recognition - better than either the NDP or PC candidates.

That poll also suggested that 48% of all respondents (including undecideds and those who did not know him) approved of Thibeault, indicating that he was converting about 80% of sympathizers into supporters. Shawbonquit, with 41% approval, was converting an incredible 99% of sympathizers.

Peroni's approval was just 28%, as she was unknown to many respondents, but she was converting just 45% of sympathizers into supporters.

Olivier, though, had an approval rating of 60% of all of those sampled - and this is including those who did not have an opinion or did not know him. That was higher than any other candidate. According to the poll, we are thus supposed to believe that Olivier was converting just 2% of his sympathizers into supporters. If you can believe that, I have a bridge that spans the width of Lake Huron to sell you.

I think we can reasonably conclude that the January 13 poll by Forum can be tossed aside and discarded. Forum's January 21 poll has no similar problems, and support levels for Olivier and Peroni are similar to those recorded by Oraclepoll. Considering the sample sizes, Shawbonquit's support is also within the margin of error of these two polls, and Thibeault's is only slightly outside of it.

Due to the advantages that Oraclepoll's survey has over Forum's (not to mention the poor record Forum has in by-elections outside of Toronto), the benefit of the doubt should probably go to Oraclepoll. And that's even with the smaller sample size (the margin of error of decided voters would be just under +/- 6%).

If we use that margin of error to estimate support ranges, we'd get Thibeault at between 36% and 47%, Shawbonquit at between 21% and 31%, Olivier between 16% and 25%, and Peroni between 5% and 11%. That is probably as close as we can get to the truth at this stage of the campaign, which will come to a merciful end on Thursday.

Ontario race remains tight with days to go

It is coming down to the wire in one of the closest elections this site has covered. The latest polls added to the model all suggest an extremely close race, with the margin among all eligible voters being three points or less and the margin among likely voters being less than two points. It will make for a nail-biting finish, particularly for your correspondent.

The Liberals are now narrowly in front with 37.3%, or between 36% and 41%, followed by the Progressive Conservatives at 36.5%, or between 35% and 40%. The New Democrats have up-ticked to 19.8%, or between 18% and 21%, while the Greens stand at 5.2%, or between 4% and 7% support.

The Liberals have dropped away from majority territory and are pegged to take 51 seats, or between 42 and 60 seats, while the PCs sit at 37 seats (or between 32 and 45). The NDP is now back up to 19 seats, or between 13 and 22.

This will be the last update before the final projection update, which will be posted either late Wednesday night or early Thursday morning. The final analysis, either way, will be up on Thursday morning.

It really is very close, but it is one thing to have a close race and another to have a race that might not end up being very close at all. The polls suggest a very tight margin between the Liberals and PCs, but the likely voter model from Ipsos Reid gives it to the PCs in a near landslide. And support for the NDP is either well above their 2011 performance, or well below it, which has a profound effect on the seat numbers for the Liberals and PCs. Unless the final polls show a move all in one direction, we should be going into Election Day with little comfort.

The three latest polls, from Abacus Data for the Sun News Network, EKOS Research for iPolitics, and Oracle for ECO, used a mix of methodologies. They all came to the same general conclusion for the two leading parties: either a tie or a statistically insignificant lead. The Liberals get either 34% or 35% in these polls, the PCs between 31% and 36%. That is rather tight.

For the NDP, though, the range extends from 20% to 28%. That is a very wide range, and spans everything from a waste-of-time election for the NDP or a major breakthrough.

It is interesting to compare the trend lines, however. Abacus was last in the field May 28-31, just before the debate on June 3. Since then, the Liberals dropped three points, the Tories picked up one, and the NDP gained four.

EKOS has been conducting a rolling poll since before the debate, but if we look at its May 29-June 1 numbers, done at mostly the same time as Abacus, we see similar movement: a drop of four points for the Liberals, a gain of one for the Tories, and a gain of three for the NDP. It will be interesting to see if, in the last numbers put out by these polls, we will see things continuing to move in the same direction.

Adam Radwanski in the Globe and Mail today writes about the internal polls being done by the Liberals and Tories. Both now seem to expect a minority government in which they will hold sway, but more interestingly perhaps is that both internal polls have shown an uptick for the PCs since the debate. That jives with the public polls. The projection, for example, had the Tories at just 33.8% in polls done up to June 2.

Abacus had a series of other questions included in their poll that may shed some more light on these horserace numbers.

32% of Ontarians expect the Liberals to win, while 25% think the Tories will prevail. That is rather close, and suggests that voters may go into the polling booths expecting a very tight result. That might encourage strategic voting, which could hurt the NDP and Greens.

On the other hand, just 24% think the Wynne government deserves re-election, a drop of three points since last week, while 54% think it is time for a change, a jump of six points.

Interest in the campaign is growing, as 42% told Abacus they had given quite a lot of thought to the campaign, up from 32% when Abacus first polled in the early stages of the race. Interestingly, and perhaps depressingly for those in the media, the proportion of respondents saying they are following the news concerning the campaign very closely has hardly changed (24%).

Counter-acting the benefits that Tim Hudak has probably gained as a result of the debate (which Abacus's respondents said he won) is that the percentage of Ontarians saying they have a negative opinion of the PC leader has jumped to its highest of the campaign so far, at 52%. No wonder, then, that the Liberals are going after NDP voters with the Hudak boogeyman. Will it work? According to Abacus, NDP/OLP swing voters favour Kathleen Wynne as premier over Andrea Horwath by a margin of 48% to 26%. Oracle, meanwhile, showed that 46% of non-PC voters were casting a ballot against Hudak, rather than for another leader or party.

It is a dizzying array of pros and cons for each leader. Plausible, defensible, and ultimately accurate arguments as to why Wynne or Hudak will win (or that the NDP will out-perform expectations) on Thursday could be written up, and proponents of either could only reasonably agree to disagree. A terrific situation for democracy and election-watchers, a horrible one for pollsters.

Brief Ontario update

The projection has been updated with a poll from Oracle Research, who we heard from earlier in the campaign. The poll is older than the most recent Ipsos Reid survey, however, as it dates from May 23-27. It was a telephone poll interviewing 1,000 people for Environmental Communications Options, a consultancy. The poll gave the PCs 36% support against 32% for the Liberals, 25% for the NDP, and 7% for the Greens.

Had the poll been included along with the other survey completed on May 27 by Forum Research, the dramatic swing that occurred with the addition of the Ipsos poll yesterday would have been lessened, as in the prior update the PCs would have narrowly led in the vote and seat count. The range tracker graphic on the projection page has been retroactively updated to show this.

The Oracle poll is interesting as their previous survey had shown a very large lead for the Tories (42% to 31%), just as an Ipsos poll done at the same time did. And now they show a close race leaning PC, just as Ipsos has in their eligible-voter tally released on Thursday. It helps to clarify the picture somewhat.

While I do not include internal party polls or interest-group polls in the projection model, I have included those commissioned by consultancies before (Hill & Knowlton in 2013 in British Columbia), as well as the previous Oracle poll and the riding polls being done by Oracle in the party leaders' ridings. In addition, Oracle Research has conducted polls in other races over the last few years, notably British Columbia and in a number of Ontario by-elections.

EKOS shows widening Liberal edge in Ontario

Another poll, another take on the political situation in Ontario. The latest survey from EKOS Research for iPolitics shows the Liberals ahead of the Progressive Conservatives by the healthiest margin we have seen in any poll so far in this campaign. The only leads we have seen wider than this were the ones awarded to the Tories!

Sunrise, sunset. The projection now shows - again - a close race between the Progressive Conservatives and the Liberals. The PCs are back down to 35.8%, or between 34% and 39%, while the Liberals are at 35.7%, or between 34% and 39% as well. The New Democrats slipped to 21.8%, or between 20% and 23%, while the Greens are at 5.5%, or between 4% and 7%.

The Liberals have moved ahead in the seat projection, and now lead with 49. The PCs have fallen back into second with 44, while the New Democrats have taken a deep tumble to just 14 seats. The ranges favour the Liberals, at between 39 to 57 seats against 35 to 52 for the Tories and 14 to 18 for the NDP.

Why the steep drop in the NDP projection? This can be blamed almost entirely on Toronto, as EKOS shows the party to be at a very low level of support there. The projection now gives them just 18% support in the city, and this costs them dearly in seats: they are currently projected to take only one to three in Toronto. This could be a bit of fluke in EKOS's polling, but Ipsos Reid also had the NDP relatively low in the city in their last poll. EKOS does not show the same trend as Forum and Ipsos did in terms of PC growth in Toronto, however, so it appears that the provincial capital is a battleground in flux.

I wrote about this poll for The Huffington Post Canada, so I suggest you read that analysis instead of me repeating myself here.

But let's look at the toplines. Since EKOS's last poll of April 25-May 1, the Liberals picked up 2.4 points to reach 37.1%, followed by the Tories at 30.3% (down 1.3 points). The NDP was also down 1.3 points to 20.9%, while the Greens were down 2.1 points to 7.3%.

All of these shifts were within the margin of error. The only regional shifts outside of the margin of error were the 13-point gain for the Liberals in Toronto, the 12-point drop for the NDP in the north, and the 10-point gain for the Greens, also in the north. That is probably an anomaly, though, which Frank Graves himself said on his Twitter feed.

Let's try and find some common threads in this poll with the other polls that have been out recently. There are a few, frayed as they are:

The Liberals have been steadily picking up support since the pre-campaign period, with EKOS showing Liberal gains in two consecutive polls. Forum also showed the same thing, while Ipsos recorded consistent gains for the Liberals among likely voters (though a drop among eligible voters). That the Liberals seem to be taking these voters primarily from the NDP also seems to be relatively consistent.

The PCs have an ingrained turnout advantage. Ipsos showed that explicitly in their 'likely voter' tally, while both Forum and EKOS have shown significant leads for the Tories among older voters, the cohort most likely to cast a ballot. In this EKOS poll, Ontarians 65 or older favoured the Tories over the Liberals by a margin of 42% to 34%.

The NDP is mostly putting up its best numbers in southwestern Ontario. EKOS had them at 26% in the region, their best result in the province. Ipsos has put them in the lead in the region, though that includes the Hamilton and the Niagara peninsula. Forum has not been as bullish in the southwest for the NDP, however. But according to Adam Radwanski of The Globe and Mail, the southwest is the cornerstone of the NDP's strategy. So far, and for the most part, that seems to be a good idea. But they are also not making inroads elsewhere, and on that the polls are unanimous.

In other news, a riding poll by Oracle in Don Valley West gave Kathleen Wynne a very comfortable lead in her own riding. The numbers were hardly different from the projection, but the poll was taken into account nevertheless. Oracle will apparently poll in all of the leaders' ridings, which seems rather fruitless since Tim Hudak and Andrea Horwath are in absolutely no danger of being defeated. Hopefully they will poll Mike Schreiner's riding of Guelph, since that is a much more interesting contest. Stay tuned.

Will turnout give the PCs a majority?

The poll that hit the wires on Friday night was within the norm of what we have been seeing in the polls lately. Depending on the survey, either the Liberals or the Tories hold a lead with the NDP in third. With the six-point advantage awarded to the PCs by Ipsos Reid in a survey for CTV News and CP24, the poll was not unusual. But it is in Ipsos's estimate of likely voter support - the only current attempt to make such a measurement - that the PCs move ahead significantly.

As the projection model is designed to replicate the likely outcome of the election, likely voter tallies are preferred when they are available during an election campaign. Accordingly, the 14-point lead recorded by Ipsos for the Tories among likely voters has made the projection swing wildly in their favour.

The PCs are now projected to have 39.6% support (or between 38% and 43%), followed by the Liberals at 31.1% (or between 30% and 34%) and the New Democrats at 25.3% (or between 23% and 27%). This gives the Tories a slim majority of 55 seats (54 are needed), with their likely range standing at between 43 and 63 seats.

The Liberals are now projected to take 28 seats, or between 21 and 42, while the NDP is at 24 seats (or between 19 and 26). In other words, if an election were held today the Tories would likely win at least a plurality, with the Liberals having the inside edge on the Official Opposition role in a tight race with the NDP.

This is a big swing in the projection. There is a cap on how much weight a single poll can carry in any projection update (66.7%), and the Ipsos poll falls short of that. But their attempt to measure how likely respondents are to turn out to the polls is absolutely vital - particularly in a polling context where no two polls seem to agree.

Ipsos was last in the field on April 15-17, and there has been very little change since then. The Tories were steady at 37% support among all eligible voters, with the Liberals down one point to 31% and the NDP up one point to 28%. Another 4% said they would vote for a different party (including the Greens), while 16% were undecided (a drop of four points).

Among likely voters, there was even less change. This adds some weight to Ipsos's findings, as these numbers have been consistent: 42% for the PCs, 28% for the Liberals, and 27% for the NDP.

Turnout could be an election-winning factor in the upcoming election, particularly if it is as anemic as it was in 2011. The Tories appear to have a crushing advantage in this regard. Among all Ontarians aged 55 or older (the cohort most likely to tramp out to the polls), the PC lead expanded to 51% against 24% for the Liberals and 23% for the NDP. That is enormous.

There were few major shifts at the regional level, with the Progressive Conservatives leading in eastern Ontario (50% to 34% for the OLP), the portion of the GTA in the 905 area code (45% to 29% for the OLP), and central Ontario (39% to 31% for the OLP). That area is defined by Ipsos, roughly, as the part of the province between the GTA and the north.

The Liberals led only in Toronto, with 45% to 26% for the PCs, while the NDP led in northern Ontario (45% to 27% for the PCs) and was narrowly ahead in the southwest (38% to 36% for the PCs). In Ipsos's estimation, the southwest includes the Hamilton/Niagara regions. The NDP has jumped 11 points here since mid-April.

On who would make the best premier, Tim Hudak led the way with 34%, followed by Andrea Horwath at 29% and Kathleen Wynne at 28%. The numbers were identical for Horwath and Wynne among likely voters, but increased to 38% for Hudak.

It is difficult to know what to make of all the polls that have been coming out since there has been little consensus. But let's see what other surveys show in the coming days. The trends have - so far - pointed to stability at the very least.

Riding polls

Two riding polls were also added to the projection. They were both conducted by Oracle Research and done for the northern ridings of Sault Ste. Marie and Sudbury. The two polls were conducted on May 1-4 via telephone, surveying 450 people in each riding. Both suggested that, since the 2011 election, the Liberals have taken a step backwards.

In Sault Ste. Marie, the Liberals remained ahead with 43% support to 32% for the NDP, while the Tories were at 18%. This suggests a swing since 2011 from the Liberals to the Tories. It was the same situation in Sudbury, where it resulted in an NDP lead with 42% to 35% for the Liberals and 20% for the PCs. Before adding this poll to the projection, the Liberals were favoured in Sault Ste. Marie and the NDP in Sudbury. The only difference has been a tightening of the projected margin.

Ontario polls continue to confuse

Two new polls emerged in the last few days, the first from Oracle Research for Global News and the second (and third) from the Innovative Research Group, the results of which were first discussed on TVO's The Agenda. But there's a hiccup. According to these polls, the Tories are either leading by 11 points or trailing by six.

Yet again, the projection model splits the difference to come up with a near tie in the aggregate: 35.6% for the Tories (or between 34% and 39%) and 35.5% for the Liberals (or between 34% and 39%). The New Democrats remain in third, with 22.6% (or between 21% and 24%).

The Liberals have moved ahead in the seat count again, with 46 seats to 40 for the PCs. The ranges overlap a great deal, however, making the Liberal advantage incredibly soft. The Liberals range from between 39 to 50 seats compared to between 39 and 48 for the Tories. Despite the overall lead for the Liberals, it is still really a toss-up.

And the polls give little indication of which way we should lean.

The Oracle poll pegged the Tories to have 42%, against 31% for the Liberals and 25% for the New Democrats. We haven't heard from Oracle at this level any time recently, though their website does have a poll from early April done for an energy organization. Compared to that poll, this represents an eight-point jump for the Tories and a four-point slip for the Liberals.

The two Innovative polls are interesting, in that the company released the results from both a telephone and online poll done at the exact same time. And the results were almost identical.

The telephone poll gave the Liberals 38.7% support, with the Tories at 32.8% and the NDP at 23.7%. Those results showed no real change from a previous poll done by Innovative in March. The online poll gave the Liberals 38.8% against 32.8% for the Tories and 19.9% for the NDP. This showed a bigger change from an April poll done online, with a swing of three points between the Tories and NDP to the benefit of the PCs.

It is interesting that Innovative shows very little difference between methodologies, except for a higher Green number in the online poll at the expense of the NDP.

Also interesting are the other numbers released by Innovative. The company estimates that 15% of voters are "Core Liberal", with 14% being core PC supporters and 10% being core NDP supporters. That is the base (which includes undecideds), but most fascinating is Innovative's estimate of swing voters. The poll suggests that 5% are PC-NDP swing voters, 7% are Liberal-PC swing voters, while 13% are Liberal-NDP swing voters. This gives one indication of why the Liberals have lurched towards the left in their latest budget - there are more voters to pick up in that direction.

But the polls are still confused, as they have been for some time. A PC lead of the size measured by Oracle is certainly unusual, only replicated in Ipsos Reid's most recent estimate of likely voter support. The large Liberal lead is also hard to swallow, though it has been repeated in some other polls. That the race remains close among a disinterested electorate is probably the safest bet. Hopefully the polls will begin to converge as Ontarians tune in and election day approaches.

Gap continues to close, but time running out in B.C.

The newest projection for Tuesday's B.C. election shows the gap between the B.C. New Democrats and B.C. Liberals narrowing further, to 6.3 points. And for the first time, the high seat projection range for the Liberals puts them just over the bar of a majority government (43 seats). But with only a few days remaining, Christy Clark is still just a 10-to-1 shot of being re-elected.

The New Democrats are projected to take 43% of the vote based on current polling, or between 40.5% and 45.5%. The Liberals have increased to 36.8% (or between 34.4% and 39.2%), but there is still enough volatility in the polls to give the NDP as little as 37% by election day or as much as 49%. Suffice to say, at those extremes the Liberals are either decimated or re-elected. But they are extremes.

These numbers give the New Democrats 52 seats to 32 for the Liberals, but the projected high and low ranges now overlap: 40-65 for the NDP and 16-43 for the Liberals. Those are rather wide as the amount of polling data has thinned out (it should beef up again between now and Monday night) and the race is rather close in the Interior and North. But that 43 is the highest the Liberals have been in the projection ranges. The forecast ranges have tightened up a little as some older polls have dropped out of consideration, but they nevertheless still envision anything from an NDP landslide to a Liberal majority. We shall see if they will tighten up further, but with the changes that have occurred in the last two weeks it is perhaps wise to keep our expectations to a minimum.

However, the NDP is still the heavy favourite. A 20-seat edge in the projection will be right 91.7% of the time, so the odds that Clark's Liberals will prove the polls (and thus my projection) wrong are not very high. The odds that they can overcome the 6.3-point margin in six days (four remain before the vote, but the last bit of polling was out of the field on E-6) are slightly larger, at 9.5%, but we're still talking about an exceptional case. The NDP remains the easy favourite to win, but we will have to see what Angus-Reid and Ipsos-Reid have to say in the coming hours and days.

I have some mixed feelings about the two polls that were added to the projection, as they are both from firms dipping their toes into the B.C. campaign for the first time (publicly, at least).

We have already heard from Oraclepoll as they were commissioned to do riding surveys for local newspapers in Kamloops and Prince George. But they haven't put out a province-wide survey since November 2011.

They show a closer race than everyone but Forum has indicated, but we should consider that Oraclepoll is the only firm using live-callers to have put out a provincial poll out in this campaign. Perhaps that methodological difference means something.

If we look at their last poll from 2011, we see that it pegged the NDP at 44%, the Liberals at 25%, and the Greens at 16%. By comparison, the polls taken in the two months before and after that Oraclepoll averaged 41% for the NDP, 30% for the Liberals, and 10% for the Greens. If anything, Oracelpoll was showing lower numbers for the Liberals and higher ones for the Greens than other surveys at the time. That does not give us much reason to suggest that Oraclepoll's methodology is conditioned to over-estimate Liberal support, and thus show a narrower gap, but their methods may have changed in the last two years.

The amount of available information about this poll is disappointing, as we don't even have regional breakdowns. But their provincial results aren't out of step with other surveys to any significant degree.

The survey from Hill and Knowlton came out of the woodwork even more. The Victoria Times-Colonist commissioned the poll from Oraclepoll, but this one from H&K was put out in a press release. It was done with H&K's online panel, and did not show any odd results. Aside from a closer race in (small sample) Vancouver Island, their regional breakdowns fell well within the norm.

Though I don't consider Hill and Knowlton to be a polling firm (they do lobbying and public relations), it should come as no surprise that this important company would have its own public opinion research wing to help it advise clients. And considering they are putting their reputation at stake to some degree by releasing these numbers, it seems safe to conclude that they are reasonably confident in them. They have no particular reason not to be.

But as both Hill and Knowlton and Oraclepoll are publishing for the first time in this campaign, it is impossible to really say what these numbers represent in terms of a trend. Is the gap narrowing? Or if these two firms had been in the field earlier in the campaign, would they have shown a similar gap? We don't know, but other polls have been showing the same sort of trends. It should make Tuesday night interesting.

B.C. race tightens, but NDP still in control

Though the margin between the B.C. Liberals and B.C. New Democrats has tightened since the last projection update of Apr. 19 (based on polling data running up to Apr. 14), the NDP remains the odds-on favourite to win the election of May 14.

The New Democrats are now projected to take 47.6% of the vote, down 0.3 points from Apr. 19. The Liberals gained 2.8 points to hit 32.4%, the highest they have been since mid-January, while the B.C. Conservatives dropped 3.3 points to 8.5%. The B.C. Greens fell 0.7 points to 8.2% in the projection, while support for independents and other parties increased to 3.4%.

The NDP is now projected to win 59 seats, down six, while the Liberals are pegged to take 25. The ranges have widened considerably, to between 45 and 75 seats for the New Democrats and between eight and 39 seats for the Liberals. The Greens are now projected to be capable of winning as many as three seats with current polling support.

There are some important reasons why the projection and forecast ranges have increased so dramatically, and support for the Conservatives and other parties has changed so much.

First, the methodological shift in the projection. As the official list of candidates was released over the weekend, the projection model has been updated to accurately reflect the field of candidates that British Columbians will be able to vote for on May 14. In the case of the independents and fringe parties, this allowed me to estimate how much support they will get in each riding and, therefore, in each region of the province. This is why support for independents and other parties has increased from 1.8% to 3.4%. 

More importantly, an adjustment has been added to the vote projection model to take into account the fact that the Conservatives have put up only 56 candidates. That means they are running in only 66% of ridings, making it extremely unlikely that they will be able to take as much of the vote as the polls are awarding them. Most respondents who intend to vote Conservative likely have no idea whether or not there will be a Conservative name on the ballot, and if they find out between now and the election their change in support will not be reflected. And, in the past, there has been a strong correlation between polls over-estimating a party's support and a less-than full slate. Accordingly, the Conservatives will now have the "no seat in the legislature" adjustment applied to their polling numbers, which means a reduction by a factor of 0.73.

Lastly, because of the updated candidates list, the projection has to be tweaked to ensure accurate distribution of support. For example, prior to this update Green support was spread over the 14 ridings in the Vancouver Island region. But since they are only running 11 candidates in the region, that same support needs to be distributed over 11 ridings instead. All else being equal, that increases their support in each riding where they have a candidate. The same has had to be done to the Conservatives.

As for the wider ranges, this is due to the campaign having started and the numbers of polls having dropped. Prior to an election campaign, the projection model reduces the weight of a poll with each passing week. During a campaign, that weight is reduced by the same amount each day. The projection has had only two polls added that were taken during the campaign (Angus-Reid, Apr. 24-25 and Justason Market Intelligence, Apr. 15-23) meaning that the pre-campaign polls now have an extremely low weight in the model. And as the projection dates a poll by its median date, that means the Justason poll is considered six full days older than the Angus-Reid poll. That reduces its weight considerably, and results in the Angus-Reid poll taking up roughly 93% of the aggregation right now. Due to the Angus-Reid being almost the only poll being considered by the model, the uncertainty of where the parties currently stand is very high.

This will undoubtedly change as more polls are released to capture the effect of tonight's debate. But keep that in mind when looking at the numbers in this latest update.

The Justason poll, released today via The Tyee (surveying 600 via telephone and internet), is interesting as it shows the NDP with a 22-point lead. That is unchanged from Justason's last poll from the end of January, suggesting that little has changed since then. Justason gives the NDP 49% to 27% for the Liberals, 12% for the Greens, and 11% for the Conservatives. Like other surveys, it shows the Greens doing very well on Vancouver Island.

The Angus-Reid poll was released on Friday via CTV and The Globe and Mail (surveying 812 via their online panel) but was conducted more recently than Justason's survey. The poll gives the NDP 45%, the Liberals 31%, the Conservatives 11%, and the Greens 10% support.

Compared to Angus-Reid's last survey taken just before the campaign began, that represents a gain of three points for the Liberals, a drop of one point for the Conservatives, and a decline of three for the Greens. The NDP held steady.

A sign that the Liberals are making up ground on the New Democrats? We will have to see what other surveys show, as the three-point increase in Liberal support is within the margin of error (or would be, if the sample was probabilistic). There is good reason to suspect a statistical wobble, as the Liberals have been hovering between 28% and 31% in Angus-Reid's polls going back to November 2012, and the Justason survey suggests no reason to believe there has been a big change in voting support. 

Also of note are two riding polls that were released by the Prince George Citizen last week for the ridings of Prince George-Valemount and Prince George-Mackenzie. Conducted by Oraclepoll on Apr. 17-20 and Apr. 15-18 (respectively) and surveying 300 people in each riding, the survey found the Liberals narrowly ahead. In Prince George-Valemount, incumbent Liberal Shirley Bond had 46% to 41% for the NDP's Sherry Ogasawara and 10% for the Conservative candidate. In Prince George-Mackenzie, rookie Liberal Mike Morris had 44% to 37% for the NDP's Bobby Deepak, 14% for the Conservative candidate, and 5% for the Greens.

In part due to these two polls, but also the better Liberal numbers in the Interior/North in both the Justason and Angus-Reid polls, the two Prince George ridings have gone over to the Liberals from the NDP in the projection. But the results of these surveys are similar to the ones that were done for the two Kamloops ridings, showing stronger Liberal support than expected. Perhaps this is a methodological bias on Oraclepoll's part, or perhaps this is a sign that the Liberals will not be easy to defeat in the Interior and North. It is something to keep an eye on. 

Resiliency for B.C. Liberals in the Interior?

The newest projection for the now on-going election campaign in British Columbia continues to have little good news for the B.C. Liberals, as the B.C. New Democrats remain well in front and with a roughly 98% chance of winning on May 14. But a new riding poll for the two seats in Kamloops suggests the B.C. Liberals may be more difficult to knock off in some ridings than expected.

The projection now incorporates all of the new polling that was released for the start of the campaign, from EKOS, Angus-Reid, and Ipsos-Reid. But there have been no major changes: the NDP is projected to be between 46.1% and 49.7% support and capable of winning between 57 and 73 seats, based on current polling data. The B.C. Liberals trail with between 28% and 31.2% support and between 10 and 27 seats. More precisely, the NDP stands at 47.9% and 65 seats to 29.6% and 19 seats for the Liberals.

The other parties trail at some length, with the B.C. Conservatives between 10.6% and 13% support and the B.C. Greens between 7.9% and 9.9%. Neither are currently projected to be in the running for any seats, but the forecast gives the Greens a high of four seats and the Conservatives a high of one. Unfortunately for Christy Clark, her high forecast is only 37 seats - short of a majority.

For a broader analysis of the trends and the projection, please read my article this morning in The Globe and Mail.

Before going into the three province-wide polls, a new survey by Oraclepoll commissioned by The Daily News in Kamloops is worth a look. The poll was conducted between April 12 and 14 and surveyed 300 people apiece in the ridings of Kamloops-North Thompson and Kamloops-South Thompson via IVR. Unfortunately, the polls did not include a Green candidate in either riding as any have yet to be named.

In Kamloops-North Thompson, the NDP's Kathy Kendall was given 49% to 43% for the Liberals' incumbent MLA Terry Lake. The Conservatives got only 8% in the riding. In Kamloops-South Thompson, rookie Liberal candidate Todd Stone took 48% to 34% for the NDP's Tom Friedman and 18% for the Conservative candidate.

This poll has been included in the projection, but both ridings had been considered to be relatively easy victories for the NDP by the model. Both are now a bit closer with the inclusion of this poll, but it suggests that the B.C. Liberals may not be so easy to knock off in the Interior. We saw something similar happen for the Alberta Liberals in Calgary and Edmonton and the Quebec Liberals in central Quebec. In both cases, the Liberals were able to hold on to a lot more of their support than expected, while their vote tanked where they did not hold a seat. Could the same thing happen here?

How a Green candidate would change things up is uncertain. It might drag the NDP's vote down a bit, but also the Liberals'. There is some indication that much of the Green support is coming from disaffected Liberals who do not see themselves in the Conservatives but won't support the NDP.

The support for the Conservatives in these two ridings should be of some concern for the party. Not that these were serious targets for the party - they weren't - but it should be disappointing to them that they are not even close to being in the running in two B.C. Interior ridings. In Kamloops-South Thompson, they haven't been able to take greater advantage of the lack of a Liberal incumbent, the sort of situation that should give the Conservatives more of a chance. Their support in the Interior would need to double before the Conservatives could start thinking of winning that riding.

For the NDP, their score in Kamloops-South Thompson is virtually unchanged from 2009, despite their uptick in support. That suggests that the NDP may not be able to make inroads throughout B.C., and that more than a couple ridings where they are pegged to be ahead by a narrow margin could be difficult ones for them to win.

Hopefully we'll see more riding polls from the Interior to shed some more light on this.

For the provincial polls, we'll start with EKOS. They are doing something interesting, reporting their results for the entire population but also just likely voters. Likely voters are primarily those who voted in the last federal election, but EKOS does some other calculations to model what the voting population will look like as opposed to the general population. As the purpose of the projection is to predict the outcome of the election, and not what all British Columbians think, the projection will only be using the 'likely voter' numbers from EKOS.

The big question with these numbers is whether other firms are already doing some of these calculations. It seems that some of them are, so EKOS is merely showing a little bit more about how the sausage is made.

But in terms of the general population, EKOS shows little change from their last poll from February. And their likely voter numbers are well within the norm of other surveys. Of note: the NDP leads by four points among men but 20 points among women. They also lead in every age group except among those over the age of 65, where the Liberals have the advantage.

The new Angus-Reid poll also shows little change from their last survey, conducted in mid-March (NDP down three, Liberals unchanged, Greens up two). They do show a drop in Adrian Dix's approval rating, however, which could be something to keep an eye on.

This poll had the much ballyhooed result of the Greens in second on Vancouver Island, with 22% to the Liberals' 19%. Considering the sample sizes, it is not much of a lead. And it is counter to what Ipsos-Reid found (see below).

Angus-Reid shows the same gender split as EKOS, with the NDP up by 11 among men but 25 among women. Perhaps most importantly, their respondents rated Dix more highly than Clark on the economy (27% to 22%).

Ipsos-Reid has shown a little more change since its last poll of mid-March, but it is still within the margin of error (or would be, if this was a probability sample). Ipsos has the NDP and Liberals down three points apiece, and the Greens and Conservatives up two each.

Again, we see the gender divide: the NDP up by seven among men, but 31 among women. And they lead by 17 points among those aged 55 or over (i.e., voters).

The approval ratings (30% for Clark, 51% for Dix) show no real change, but both Jane Sterk and John Cummins had increases (to 28% and 19%, respectively). Note that in the rolling three-poll average of approval ratings, Sterk now rates more highly than Clark.

Also problematic for Clark is that 43% of British Columbians strongly disapprove of her. That is a huge number. And 58% of respondents expect the NDP to win a majority (they must be ThreeHundredEight readers), compared to only 8% who expect the Liberals to be re-elected to a majority. Perception can be everything.

The regional result on Vancouver Island is worth noting, as it differs from Angus-Reid's. The two polls put the Liberals and Conservatives at roughly the same level of support, but the big difference seems to be between the NDP and the Greens. But if this were a random sample, the margin of error would be over eight points - so maybe this is much ado over nothing.

What is perhaps most remarkable about these polls is that they have been more or less identical for the last seven months. The opinions of British Columbians seem pretty solidified. With such unusual consistency, it may be too much to expect the Liberals to overcome such a huge margin in just four weeks.

Quebec results pulling NDP along in ROC

Four national polls are surprisingly consistent on the situation in Quebec while disagreeing with one another greatly on what is happening in Ontario. But what seems to be clear in these polls from Innovative, EKOS, Nanos, and Angus-Reid is that the rest of Canada is starting to jump on the NDP's Quebec bandwagon.

Whether that bandwagon leads us to a Conservative majority or minority government, however, appears to be within the margin of error.

With the Conservatives around 38% and the Liberals and New Democrats spliting the vote relatively evenly between them, as Innovative and Nanos show, we can expect the Tories to pull a majority government out of the mess. But if the Conservatives are instead at 34-35% with the NDP nipping at their heels, as EKOS and Angus-Reid indicate, then we can expect a re-run of the 2006 election with the New Democrats taking the place of Paul Martin's Liberals.

What is fascinating about these two scenarios is that they have extremely diverging consequences but are both drawn from polls that are not inconsistent, considering their margins of error. We're in such unknown territory that the election result is still very much in the air.

But what's happening to the Conservatives? Even in Nanos's polling the Tories have dropped. Ipsos-Reid might come along this week pegging the Conservatives at 40% or more, but every recent poll points to a drop for the Conservatives. Whether this is being caused by centrist Tories moving over to the Liberals to stop the orange tide or populist Conservatives jumping in with the New Democrats is impossible to say. But the Conservatives are starting to see a strong mandate slip away. They may still win a majority, but it could conceivably come with a smaller share of the vote than in 2008.

Across the polls, not all taken on the same dates but all overlapping, we can see some consistencies. In British Columbia, the New Democrats are clearly back in second and above their 2008 performance. They're currently around 28-30%, whereas they have also grabbed the runner-up position in Alberta as well.

In Quebec, all of the polls are remarkably similar on the NDP's score. These four polls put the party between 36% and 38%, an incredibly consistent result considering the margin of error in Quebec can be as high as six points. The Bloc's support level varies more (24% to 29%), as do that of the Liberals (14% to 20%) and the Conservatives (14% to 18%). They do seem to be indicating that the Tories are stumbling in the province.

But Ontario and Atlantic Canada appear to be toss-ups. That shouldn't be too much of a surprise in Atlantic Canada as the sample sizes are small, but even that region is starting to look erratic by its standards.

Ontario is all over the map. The Conservatives might have a huge lead, the Liberals might be hanging tough, or the NDP might be on track to historic levels of support. We may have to wait a few more days for Ontario to straighten up, or this might be a hint of some new volatility in the province.

A few riding polls from yesterday also caught my attention. There was a poll done by Oracle for the Green Party in the riding of Saanich - Gulf Islands. Polls conducted for parties, and especially those made public by parties, should be treated with suspicion. I do still add them to the model, though at a reduced 10% weighting, compared to 25% for media-funded riding polls.

This particular poll puts Elizabeth May ahead of Gary Lunn at 45% to 38%, with the Liberals and New Democrats out of the race at 9% apiece. The poll was taken on April 18-19 and surveyed 389 people. It has a margin of error of 4.9%, 19 times out of 20. It means the two main parties are statistically tied.

Of course, political parties don't release their privately funded polls without reason. For all we know, the Greens have been polling constantly and this is the first poll to put them in front.

The other riding poll that was brought to my attention was apparently conducted by Léger Marketing in the riding of Lac-Saint-Louis for the Conservative Party. The only information we have is via Ian MacDonald, a columnist. It was taken "after the debates" and included 500 people. Presumeably provided to Mr. MacDonald by Larry Smith's campaign, it puts the Liberals ahead 36% to 30% in the riding, a much closer race than an earlier poll showed. It pegs the NDP at 17%, but the level of support that the Bloc and Green candidates have in the riding is unknown. For that reason it wasn't added to the projection model. Polls need more than a vague mention in a column, particularly when they are paid for and provided by a political party.

Nevertheless, if true these two polls indicate that Saanich - Gulf Islands and Lac-Saint-Louis could be close ridings on Monday night. They were already ones to watch, but now we have more reason to watch closely.

Tomorrow, it looks like we'll have polls from Nanos Research, EKOS Research, Forum Research, and Segma Recherche to add to the model. Hopefully more will pop up. From what I'm being told we can expect a lot of polls over the last four days of the campaign.