Author
|
Topic: Super absorbent polling thread with odour control
|
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289
|
posted 11 October 2008 10:17 AM
Continued from hereNanos results today are below and you can get regional breakdowns at the link above. Con 32% Lib 28% NDP 22% Bloc 10% Green 8%
From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
candle
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3103
|
posted 11 October 2008 10:26 AM
Putting the Nanos Ontario numbers into H&K gives thisLibs 56 (+2) Cons 29 (-11) NDP 21 (+9) Despite the Cons have a 35/32 lead over the libs. THis makes me think there is something severely wrong with their model or the Conservative vote in Ontario is very ineffecient Under their model, NDP pick ups are: Beaches-East York Algoma-Manitoulin Welland Thunder Bay- Superior North Thunder Bay - Rainy River Peterborough !!!!!!! Oshawa Nickel Belt Kenora (so 7 from the Libs and 2 from the Cons). This means that the model has the Libs picking up 9 net seats from the Cons.
From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
candle
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3103
|
posted 11 October 2008 10:35 AM
If I make some assumptions on vote movement in Ontario and plug it into UBC to get the 35/32/24/8 split. I get seats as follows:Cons 48 Libs 37 NDP 21 I think that is more realistic than H&K The NDP seats are the same as in H&K except for Sudbury instead of Peterborugh (which stays with the Cons)
From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northern54
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5325
|
posted 11 October 2008 11:43 AM
"We're still at 22 in today's Nanos ...Con-33 Lib-27 NDP-22 BQ-10 Grn-8 What does this mean, and why the divergence from Harris-Decima?" The Harris-Decima poll was taken between October 7-10 while the Nanos poll was taken between October 8-10. As well, the Nanos poll has increased its size the last three nights to 500 from 400 so last night's sample was larger than the sample that was left off and it means that the last night's data had a weighting of approximately 40% of the poll. This means that the more recent night's impact on overall numbers was much greater in the Nanos case. Perhaps, that helps to explain the discrepancy. Most (perhaps all) of the newspaper polls were taken at earlier dates (though published either today or yesterday). As a result, they are more dated. I think (quite rightly) that part of the reason why the Nanos polls were best in recent elections were because they were the least dated. Change does happen quickly the last couple of days of an election. [ 11 October 2008: Message edited by: Northern54 ]
From: Yellowknife | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138
|
posted 11 October 2008 11:48 AM
A more plausible explanation is the following:a. margin of error - no two polls are ever identical and so there may be some difference just as a matter of chance. b. Nanos does not read the names of the parties at all. Decima prompts them all and i think this may be why the Decima poll seems to always gross inflate the Green Party. I know it may seem self-serving to say that I have more trust in Nanos than Decima since they happen to have better numbers for the NDP - but when i look at the regional numbers in the Decima poll there are some very bizarre numbers that just don't make any sense.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Northern54
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5325
|
posted 11 October 2008 12:06 PM
quote: Originally posted by Stockholm: A more plausible explanation is the following:a. margin of error - no two polls are ever identical and so there may be some difference just as a matter of chance. b. Nanos does not read the names of the parties at all. Decima prompts them all and i think this may be why the Decima poll seems to always gross inflate the Green Party. I know it may seem self-serving to say that I have more trust in Nanos than Decima since they happen to have better numbers for the NDP - but when i look at the regional numbers in the Decima poll there are some very bizarre numbers that just don't make any sense.
I agree that usually the difference in polls can be attributed to "margin of error". In respect to these two pollsters throughout the tracking season, there have been too many times where they differ by enough (outside the margin of error, particularly in respect to Liberal/Green support) that it seems that it might be caused by another factor. I also agree with you in respect to the procedure of "prompting" with party names when asking people how they are going to vote and what impact that would have on results. I will be interested in seeing the actual results and see if the Green Party really does have the support Harris-Decima has been indicating. The sample size also has something to do with the differential. Harris samples 300 per night over four nights (at the beginning of a campaign, this seems okay) while Nanos was doing 400 per night (and last night, added on an additional hundred). I was trying to find a site that indicates how the sample is gathered in each case. If my memory serves me correctly, I read somewhere (I can't find it right now) that one of the two pollsters selects voters at random from each constituency to make sure all areas of a province/territory are included in the sample. There was an argument that this kind of sampling would tend to underestimate the vote of those parties whose vote is concentrated. [ 11 October 2008: Message edited by: Northern54 ]
From: Yellowknife | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138
|
posted 11 October 2008 01:08 PM
Its interesting that all three leaders have gone all the way to Nunavut to to campaign. Its a pretty long trek to make unless you think you can win - and with no incumbent I assume all bets are off.I don't claim to know much about political trends in the NWT - but my impression is that in the past the Liberals would scoop up votes among First Nations (not just in the territories but all across the north of Canada) by saying "we are the government, either you give us 99% of the vote in this community, or else say good bye to any funding from INAC". Now that the Liberals are out of power and are clearly not about to regain power - surely it makes it harder for them to use those old Tammany Hall-style tactics. [ 11 October 2008: Message edited by: Stockholm ]
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289
|
posted 11 October 2008 01:38 PM
Was reading as much as I could find last evening about the Yukon race, and from what I could find it seems Bagnall will take it again. There does not appear to be any political race on there at all.While in other news apparently the Conservatives are buying their way in NWT, and using our money to do so.. quote: The federal NDP candidate in the Northwest Territories is crying foul over a government contract that the Conservatives gave to their campaign manager there.
[URL=http://ca.news.yahoo.com/nphotos/NDPs-Bevington-questions-govt-contract-for-Torys-campaign-manager-Image/photo/09102008/3/photo/canada-ndp-s-bevington-questions-gov-t-contract -tory-s.html]Yahooooooooooooooooo news[/URL]
From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
KenS
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1174
|
posted 11 October 2008 01:44 PM
quote: I wonder what kind of prime minister stephane dion would make. If he lives up to half his rhetoric on the environment, I'll be content.
Yes, but you vote now, find out later. The odds that the Liberals would deliver even half are ________ ? Meanwhile you would have given up your share in helping to build an alternative to rotating sellouts. Bon chance.
From: Minasville, NS | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Northern54
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5325
|
posted 11 October 2008 02:05 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by remind: While in other news apparently the Conservatives are buying their way in NWT, and using our money to do so..[URL=http://ca.news.yahoo.com/nphotos/NDPs-Bevington-questions-govt-contract-for-Torys-campaign-manager-Image/photo/09102008/3/photo/canada-ndp-s-bevington-questions-gov-t-contract -tory-s.html]Yahooooooooooooooooo news[/URL] [/QUOTEIn addition, the Conservative candidate said on television that the contract and the election were unrelated. According to the newstory, there was a 3-day difference between the time of the campaign manager's appointment and the contract ($70,000) being awarded (without any contest). [ 11 October 2008: Message edited by: Northern54 ]
From: Yellowknife | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
500_Apples
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12684
|
posted 11 October 2008 02:38 PM
quote: Originally posted by KenS:
Yes, but you vote now, find out later. The odds that the Liberals would deliver even half are ________ ? Meanwhile you would have given up your share in helping to build an alternative thttp://www.rabble.ca/o rotating sellouts. Bon chance.
Canadians as a whole vote now. I find out later.
From: Montreal, Quebec | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289
|
posted 11 October 2008 03:16 PM
quote: Originally posted by skoblin: Canada Election Prediction Project now has the NDP at 33 confirmed, with 24 seats still close to call.New additions: Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar Thunder Bay-Rainy River Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing London-Fanshawe
Then what seat are they saying the NDP will lose? As we have 30 MPs currently.
From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 11 October 2008 03:17 PM
They are listing Vancouver Island North, Surrey North, Hamilton East-Stoney Creek and Parkdale-High Park as TCTC.Forecast NDP gains are Vancouver Kingsway, Sasakatoon-Rosetown-Biggar, Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing, Nickel Belt, Thunder Bay-Rainy River, Thunder Bay-Superior North and St. John's East, leaving a net gain (so far) of three seats. Other TCTC seats where the NDP is competitive: Esquimalt - Juan de Fuca, Newton-North Delta, Pitt Meadows-Maple Ridge-Mission, Churchill and South Shore-St. Margaret's. So, if you go by EPP, if the NDP runs the table it will end up with 42 seats. There are some seats, though, that they have called for other parties that the NDP could still win (eg Beaches-East York, Sudbury, Edmonton-Strathcona). [ 11 October 2008: Message edited by: ghoris ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Centrist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5422
|
posted 11 October 2008 04:24 PM
quote: Originally posted by Stockholm:
I know it may seem self-serving to say that I have more trust in Nanos than Decima since they happen to have better numbers for the NDP - but when i look at the regional numbers in the Decima poll there are some very bizarre numbers that just don't make any sense.
I totally agree. The track record of Nanos is pretty good. I've just never had a comfort zone with Harris/Decima, Ekos, or ARS baced upon some of their wonky numbers. Perhaps I would also place Ipsos up there with Nanos despite their Canwest Global links. Current Nanos numbers do make sense in that the NDP vote appears to be UP in Atlantic Canada, UP in Quebec and UP in Ontario, while flatlined in the West. That certainly reasonably translates into an increase in NDP support from 18% in 2006 to 22% in 2008. [ 11 October 2008: Message edited by: Centrist ]
From: BC | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
janfromthebruce
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14090
|
posted 11 October 2008 05:03 PM
quote: Originally posted by Lord Palmerston: The EPP guy obviously has trouble coming out and saying the Libs won't win Hamilton East-Stoney Creek and Parkdale-High Park...with "star candidates" Larry DiIanni and Gerard Kennedy running and all.[ 11 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]
You have got to be kidding re: Di ianni as "star" candidate? He got 6 convictions in 2006 in election fraud when mayor and lost in the next municipal election. I have been working in that riding and I can tell you, Di ianni is not going to win. And Peggy Nash, there was a recent poll which says she is 11% ahead of Kennedy, so it's not going anywhere either.
From: cow country | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
candle
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3103
|
posted 11 October 2008 05:03 PM
quote: Originally posted by remind: [QUOTE] quote riginally posted by skoblin: Canada Election Prediction Project now has the NDP at 33 confirmed, with 24 seats still close to call. New additions: Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar Thunder Bay-Rainy River Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing London-Fanshawe
Then what seat are they saying the NDP will lose? As we have 30 MPs currently.[/QUOTE] London Fanshawe is a new addition to the EPP predictions but the NDP already holds it.
From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
candle
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3103
|
posted 11 October 2008 05:08 PM
quote: Originally posted by ghoris: Interestingly, EPP is more bullish on calling seats for the NDP in northern Ontario than democraticspace. Greg Morrow is only calling Thunder Bay-Superior North as an NDP gain, all of the others (except for incumbents Rota, Angus, Martin and Clement) are TCTC.On the flip side, he is calling all the Hamilton seats for the NDP and shows Beaches East-York and Parkdale-High Park as the only TCTC seats in Toronto (probably the correct call). Other potential NDP gains still listed as TCTC on democraticspace but not EPP: Kamloops-Thompson-Cariboo, Oshawa, Welland, Palliser, Dartmouth-Coal Harbour.
The one thing I find curious is that Greg has Essex as a solid Cons win with over 40% for Watson despite reports out of Windsor to the contrary that the anti Conservative voters are gelling behind Taras Natyshak
From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
candle
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3103
|
posted 11 October 2008 06:17 PM
Here is a link to a CTV story on the SC poll Bekayne mentions above: SC Oct 11
Sample size = 1000 ON Lib37/Cons 31/NDP 22/Green 10 PQ BQ 37/COns 25/Lib 23/NDP 11/Green 5 West Cons 46/NDP 21/Libs 20/Green 13
From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
bekayne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11876
|
posted 11 October 2008 06:27 PM
quote: Originally posted by candle: Here is a link to a CTV story on the SC poll Bekayne mentions above: SC Oct 11
Sample size = 1000 ON Lib37/Cons 31/NDP 22/Green 10 PQ BQ 37/COns 25/Lib 23/NDP 11/Green 5 West Cons 46/NDP 21/Libs 20/Green 13
That's strange. Strategic Counsel released a poll yesterday with the Conservatives 5 points ahead in Ontario. Those Quebec numbers are pretty close to the Leger poll.
From: Kelowna, BC | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138
|
posted 11 October 2008 06:41 PM
One good thing about the SC poll is that it is causing a big lead story on CTV and in the Globe that any hope for a Tory majority is evaporating.The best way to keep soft NDP voters from drifting is when there is a consensus that a Tory majority is not likely - but when there is also a sense that the election is not particularly close and that the Liberals have no hope of winning. Which is more or less the situation we are in right now.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138
|
posted 11 October 2008 06:47 PM
...and now Leger (remember them?) has just come out with a national poll of 1,500 Canadians:Cons - 36% Libs - 27% NDP - 20% Gr. - 9% BQ - 8% http://legermarketing.com/documents/pol/081011ENG.pdf I think we are starting to see a bit of a pattern here.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
West Coast Lefty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3697
|
posted 11 October 2008 07:27 PM
EKOS published a seat projection on Oct 10, based on their Tues-Thursday polling from this past week. I don't think these numbers have been posted on babble yet, my apologies if this is a duplicate posting:The EKOS seat projection predicts the following result: Cons 152 Libs 60 BQ 57 NDP 39 Does anybody think the Libs could go down as low as 60? It seems incredible, but they got 40 seats with 28% of the vote in 1984. I think the BQ number from EKOS is about right, the Cons will be about 5-7 seats lower, and the NDP about 5-7 seats higher. I think the Libs will be closer to 70-75 seats on Oct 14th.
From: Victoria, B.C. | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276
|
posted 11 October 2008 07:28 PM
Does anyone know whether Pat Cordner is a long-shot possibility in Selkirk--Interlake?
VoteForEnvironment says to vote for her. They don't generally endorse no hopers. She was Executive Vice President of the Manitoba Federation of Labour for 15 years, and President of the Selkirk and District Labour Council for 15 years. Sounds pretty capable. They also endorse Zeni Maartman in Nanaimo–Alberni. School Trustee for Nanaimo-Ladysmith School District 68 from 1996 to 1999 Anyone know of any local polls?
From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Malcolm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5168
|
posted 11 October 2008 08:41 PM
The methodology of each of the pollsters varies slightly - in how they generate their sample, how they weight their demographics from their results, how they frame and ask the questions.For example, Stockholm has pointed out that Nanos doesn't prompt with the party names - which probably explains why the Greens are lower in Nanos than anywhere else. It might be noted that, between elections, Nanos used to show the NDP lower than other pollsters did as well. It's worth noting here that the one event which correlates with the sudden rise of the Greens in the polls was when the various polling companies (except Nanos) started including the Greens by name. It is silly to get hung up on the variances between pollsters. All the polls show the Liberals have been struggling throughout the campaign, but have stabalized and slightly recovered at the end. All the polls show the Conservatives were sailing along and then stalled - first in Quebec, then everywhere else. All the polls show the NDP reaching towards historic highs and well above what we were polling over the summer.
From: Regina, SK | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
V. Jara
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9193
|
posted 11 October 2008 09:53 PM
quote: Originally posted by West Coast Lefty: Lunney is a no-name Tory incumbent in Nanaimo-Alberni but I stand by my anaylsis of the demographics. If the seat was really that winnable for the NDP, more prominent candidates would have come forward to seek the nomination. The provincial seat for most of this riding is Nanaimo-Parksville, and it is the lone BC Liberal seat on the mid-Island amid all the NDP MLAs. Both the BC Lib MLA and the Tory MP are weak, but again, I wasn't saying they were that great, I was referring to the riding voting trends and population patterns.
The NDP could have won it this time with city councillor Dianne Brennan, but she chose to run for mayor of Nanaimo.
From: - | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 11 October 2008 09:59 PM
quote: Originally posted by West Coast Lefty:Lunney is a no-name Tory incumbent in Nanaimo-Alberni but I stand by my anaylsis of the demographics. If the seat was really that winnable for the NDP, more prominent candidates would have come forward to seek the nomination. The provincial seat for most of this riding is Nanaimo-Parksville, and it is the lone BC Liberal seat on the mid-Island amid all the NDP MLAs. Both the BC Lib MLA and the Tory MP are weak, but again, I wasn't saying they were that great, I was referring to the riding voting trends and population patterns.
The other 'half' of Nanaimo-Alberni is the provincial seat of Alberni-Qualicum, where the NDP did quite well, so you would think this wasn't a totally lost cause. However, I tend to agree with you - for whatever reason this area has always had a bit of a Conservative streak federally even though it tended to go NDP provincially. It has voted PC/Reform/Alliance/Conservative since 1984, except for Bob Skelly's one term from 1988-1993. Before 1984, it regularly elected NDP MPs with the exception of 1974 when the Liberals grabbed it for one term. [ 11 October 2008: Message edited by: ghoris ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
NorthReport
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15337
|
posted 11 October 2008 10:49 PM
Nanos Research (today) Con 32%, down 4% Lib 28%, down 2% NDP 22%, up 5% Bloc 10%, no change Green 8%Strategic Council - (today) cons - 35%, down 1% Libs - 28%, down 2% NDP - 19%, up 2% Bloc - 9%, down 1% Grn - 9% EKOS (yesterday) Cons - 34%, down 2% Libs - 26%, down 4% NDP - 19%, up 2% Grn - 11% Bloc - 10%, no change Leger Marketing (today) Cons - 36%, no change Libs - 27%, down 3% NDP - 20%, up 3% Gr. - 9% BQ - 8%, down 2%
From: From sea to sea to sea | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938
|
posted 12 October 2008 04:22 AM
quote: Originally posted by West Coast Lefty: EKOS published a seat projection on Oct 10, based on their Tues-Thursday polling from this past week. I don't think these numbers have been posted on babble yet, my apologies if this is a duplicate posting:The EKOS seat projection predicts the following result: Cons 152 Libs 60 BQ 57 NDP 39 Does anybody think the Libs could go down as low as 60? It seems incredible, but they got 40 seats with 28% of the vote in 1984. I think the BQ number from EKOS is about right, the Cons will be about 5-7 seats lower, and the NDP about 5-7 seats higher. I think the Libs will be closer to 70-75 seats on Oct 14th.
That's not the question. The question is the extent to which EKOS will have discredited itself after the election is over.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
ForestGreen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13611
|
posted 12 October 2008 06:57 AM
quote: Originally posted by remind:
Yes, he is, and he does not put in whether the GP is up or down. I presume as they never get what they are/were polling at.
Why does everyone say that on Babble? Look at polling results from 2006, and the Greens weren't the only ones to lose half to one percent on election day. The NDP did too. Look here! [ 12 October 2008: Message edited by: ForestGreen ]
From: Alberta | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Northern54
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5325
|
posted 12 October 2008 07:15 AM
This has happened to the NDP in as many elections as I can remember. The Liberals trot out that line every election and there are always a few people who buy into it. NDP supporters have more and more experience with it so I (like to) think that there will be fewer NDP supporters who switch allegiance than Green supporters this election. Given the deal Ms May made with the Liberals before the election, activists in the Green Party are not as familiar with Liberal "dirty tricks" yet.Another dynamic that is in play this election is that there are certain parts of the country (British Columbia outside of the Lower Mainland, Saskatchewan, Northern Ontario, some parts of Atlantic Canada) where either the Liberals and/or Conservatives are not competitive and the NDP should benefit from some strategic voting. It is my expectation that it should be almost a "wash" with the NDP losing only slightly more votes in Southern Ontario/Quebec as it gains elsewhere. I expect the Greens to lose more votes as there is nowhere for them to gain votes from the Liberals/NDP/Conservatives as voters seek an alternative to their main competition in specific ridings.
From: Yellowknife | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ottawaobserver
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14981
|
posted 12 October 2008 07:16 AM
Everyone says that on Babble, FG, precisely because they've been-there-done-that, and have learned not to count their votes before they're cast.Some of the Green Party supporters haven't had that experience yet (well, except in Saanich-Gulf Islands which dropped between 2004 and 2006, and Vancouver Island North, ditto, plus Victoria, Newton-North Delta, Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca, New Westminster-Coquitlam, Western Arctic, Nanaimo-Cowichan, Parkdale-High Park...). Everyone here would agree that if the Green Party holds the vote it has achieved in some of its better public domain polls, it will be one of the big stories of the campaign. What will be interesting is to see what that votes comes from, relative to the last election. I do notice, however, that it's been awhile since I heard any Green Party supporter brag that they were "tied with the NDP in the polls". [Northern54 was faster to reply than me!] [ 12 October 2008: Message edited by: ottawaobserver ]
From: Ottawa | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
ForestGreen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13611
|
posted 12 October 2008 07:45 AM
quote: Originally posted by ottawaobserver: Everyone says that on Babble, FG, precisely because they've been-there-done-that, and have learned not to count their votes before they're cast.Some of the Green Party supporters haven't had that experience yet (well, except in Saanich-Gulf Islands which dropped between 2004 and 2006, and Vancouver Island North, ditto, plus Victoria, Newton-North Delta, Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca, New Westminster-Coquitlam, Western Arctic, Nanaimo-Cowichan, Parkdale-High Park...). Everyone here would agree that if the Green Party holds the vote it has achieved in some of its better public domain polls, it will be one of the big stories of the campaign. What will be interesting is to see what that votes comes from, relative to the last election. I do notice, however, that it's been awhile since I heard any Green Party supporter brag that they were "tied with the NDP in the polls". [Northern54 was faster to reply than me!] [ 12 October 2008: Message edited by: ottawaobserver ]
The Greens are no more tied with the NDP than the NDP are with the Libs. The Greens can be a bit idealistic, and I take issue with the Jim Harris press releases that make a big thing about the Greens being 26% in B.C. or tied with the NDP, so I'm not one to make a big issue of isolated polls. But since we're on the topic of national polls, I think it is worth considering the results of last time - that the Liberals ended up scoring near the top of their polling range last election, while the NDP and Greens scored closer the bottom. Maybe because of strategic voting. If the pattern repeats itself, we're looking at 18-19% for the NDP, around 8% for the Greens, and near 30% for the Liberals. And the Conservatives may pull out only a little ahead of the Liberals with about 34%. As for the specific ridings last time, the Green campaign in 2006 was, I think, in disarray financially, and they didn't seem to be targeting any ridings. Don't know why.
From: Alberta | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
ottawaobserver
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14981
|
posted 12 October 2008 07:55 AM
quote: Originally posted by ForestGreen: But since we're on the topic of national polls, I think it is worth considering the results of last time - that the Liberals ended up scoring near the top of their polling range last election, while the NDP and Greens scored closer the bottom. Maybe because of strategic voting. If the pattern repeats itself, we're looking at 18-19% for the NDP, around 8% for the Greens, and near 30% for the Liberals. And the Conservatives may pull out only a little ahead of the Liberals with about 34%.
Yes, but last time the Liberals were the out-going government, so the issue was should they be replaced. This time they're not, and from all appearances they are not in any kind of shape to bid to replace the Conservatives (and if you have ANY remaining doubts about that, please examine Dion's tour schedule ... last night he had a rally in Vaughan, for pete's sake, just so they could pull a crowd together that wasn't an embarrassment). Also, their "stop Harper" argument is a lot weaker because they didn't vote. And their "you know the NDP, they're fiscally irresponsible ... just look at Bob Rae" argument can't be used in quite that way anymore. So, expect the opposite to occur ... the Libs will be at the bottom of their range, not the top. quote: Originally posted by ForestGreen: As for the specific ridings last time, the Green campaign in 2006 was, I think, in disarray financially, and they didn't seem to be targeting any ridings. Don't know why.
If you pore over the ridings the Green Party lost votes in last time, it was ridings where the NDP either gained the seat, or came very close to doing so. Not targetting may have been part of it at the party level, I don't know. But, are you saying they're targetting certain seats this time, apart from Central Nova, Guelph and Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound? It seems like they never target the seats they did well in last time (e.g., Saanich-Gulf Islands in 2006, London North Centre this time). ETA: Should probably have added Vancouver Centre to the list of likely targets, too, I think. [ 12 October 2008: Message edited by: ottawaobserver ]
From: Ottawa | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ForestGreen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13611
|
posted 12 October 2008 08:00 AM
quote: Originally posted by Stockholm: The thing about all these theories about which party does or does not tend to do better than the final polls show - is that every election is different. In the US it was a rule of thumb that the Republicans always did a bit better than what the final polls said - but then in 2000 Gore actually did better than predicted by the final polls.We know that the Liberals did better predicted in '04 and '06 - but we don't know why that was. Was it because so many people secretely liked Paul Martin? was it because the Liberals were the incumbent party? Who knows...all i know is that every election has its own dynamic.
I don't know... at this point, all I can say is "we'll see..." Election weariness in starting to kick in, for me anyway... I'm ready for it to be over.
From: Alberta | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
ForestGreen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13611
|
posted 12 October 2008 08:03 AM
quote: Originally posted by ottawaobserver: But, are you saying they're targetting certain seats this time, apart from Central Nova, Guelph and Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound? It seems like they never target the seats they did well in last time (e.g., Saanich-Gulf Islands in 2006, London North Centre this time). ETA: Should probably have added Vancouver Centre to the list of likely targets, too, I think. [ 12 October 2008: Message edited by: ottawaobserver ]
I don't know. They didn't seem to target any ridings last election. This time probably Guelph (which started in the byelection), Central Nova, and places like Vancouver Centre as well. I hear there are a dozen or so. Saanich is harder because of Briony Penn, the former Green. But I'm not an insider to Green activities, so I don't have much more information than you do. It's mostly what I get off of their site.
From: Alberta | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
NorthReport
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15337
|
posted 12 October 2008 08:52 AM
Nanos Research (Sat) Con 32%, down 4% Lib 28%, down 2% NDP 22%, up 5% Bloc 10%, no change Green 8%Strategic Council - (Sat) cons - 35%, down 1% Libs - 28%, down 2% NDP - 19%, up 2% Bloc - 9%, down 1% Grn - 9% EKOS (Fri) Cons - 34%, down 2% Libs - 26%, down 4% NDP - 19%, up 2% Grn - 11% Bloc - 10%, no change Harris Decima (Sun) Cons - 35%, down 1% Libs - 25%, down 5% NDP - 18%, up 1% Bloc - 10%, no change Grn - 9% Leger Marketing (Sat) Cons - 36%, no change Libs - 27%, down 3% NDP - 20%, up 3% Gr. - 9% BQ - 8%, down 2% [ 12 October 2008: Message edited by: NorthReport ]
From: From sea to sea to sea | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Centrist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5422
|
posted 12 October 2008 09:23 AM
quote: Originally posted by Stockholm: I guess we will never get a decent sample province-wide poll in BC by Mustel or any other BC players.All we have to go on are these skimpy BC sub-samples in national polls.
Yeah I'm disappointed that Mustel didn't come out with their final BC campaign results as they did in 2004 and 2006. National pollsters and their regional sub-samples in BC are wonky and they continually have a terrible time with their BC numbers. It's akin to polling Quebec whereby CROP and Leger usually get it right. That said, and to be objective and analytical, probably the most reliable BC poll that I have seen to date are the numbers released by Ipsos on Friday. The extra large BC sample size was apparently polled by Ipsos BC office (BC's Kyle Braid commented on the numers), which has a good handle of BC polling akin to that of Mustel as witnessed by Ipsos' provincial polls. In that context, those Ipsos BC numbers released on Friday were: Sample Size: 452 BC: Con: 39% (+2% from 2006) NDP: 25% (-4% from 2006) Lib: 24% (-4% from 2006) Grn: 11% (+6% from 2006) While I would have liked to have seen an 800 sample size, these numbers are not too far off from my "gut" feel that I posted in an earlier thread.
From: BC | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ForestGreen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13611
|
posted 12 October 2008 09:58 AM
Latest Nanos numbers:Conservative: 33 (+1) Liberal: 27 (-1) NDP: 22 (NC) Bloc: 10 (NC) Green: 9 (+1) Nanos Research
Nik on the Numbers
From: Alberta | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138
|
posted 12 October 2008 10:03 AM
That is great - the 22% for the NDP has now held for three straight days and keep in mind that Nanos has boosted his daily number of interviews from 400 to 500 the last two nights - so this is now based on 1,400 instead of the usual 1,200.I really like what i see at the regional level. It was probably too good to be true for the NDP to be as high as 19% or even 17% in Quebec since that flies in the face of all the Quebec wide polls which have us at 12-13%. So, I'm very happy to see the NDP now at 26% in Ontario and the 23% in the west is good too since that is actually a bit above the NDP showing in the west in 2006.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
ForestGreen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13611
|
posted 12 October 2008 10:08 AM
And WCG can take heart that the Greens are up one point in every region with Nanos. Even though Decima has them down. At least now the polling companies have come together on the Green support.The Conservative numbers have bumped up a bit from Atlantic Canada (where they're still in third place), and Western Canada (where, depending on the exact region, it may not make a difference). And the NDPers here will be pleased to know Nanos has released a poll on outcome preferences that includes a Layton majority/minority as a choice.
From: Alberta | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
bekayne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11876
|
posted 12 October 2008 10:12 AM
quote: Originally posted by candle: NDP at 26 in Ontario per NanosHow many seats does this put in play
According to the UBC Forecaster: Con 46 Lib 39 NDP 21 The NDP comes within 5% in 4 other ridings
From: Kelowna, BC | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
NorthReport
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15337
|
posted 12 October 2008 10:14 AM
A very good question. How about it Greg Morrow? quote: Originally posted by candle: [QB]NDP at 26 in Ontario per NanosHow many seats does this put in play[/Q]
From: From sea to sea to sea | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138
|
posted 12 October 2008 10:15 AM
quote: NDP at 26 in Ontario per NanosHow many seats does this put in play
It remains to be seen if the NDP actually does that well in Ontario - but I will say this - if the Nanos was right and Ontario split its vote C35, L33, NDP26 and G9 - it would be a very similar vote split to what we saw in the 1975 Ontario provincial election when the Ontario popular vote went PC36, L34, NDP 28 - and that produced 51 Tories, 36 Liberals and 38(!!)NDPers. I think that if this scenario unfolded, it would mean that the NDP would go beyond winning the "low-hanging fruit" from '06 (ie: all those seats in the north, plus Oshawa, B-EY and Welland) and might have some surprise wins in places like Essex, Sarnia, Guelph, Davenport, York-South-West etc... Anything is possible in that scenario.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
skoblin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15569
|
posted 12 October 2008 10:28 AM
Nanos poll showing government preference by region, party affiliation and gender.http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-F08-T340E.pdf Irony of ironies.......Green party supporters' preference NDP minority - 18% Conservative minority - 18% NDP majority - 15% Conservative majority - 14% Liberal minority - 13% and...following in the rear.... Liberal majority - 7% lol...
From: Victoria BC | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
bekayne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11876
|
posted 12 October 2008 10:32 AM
quote: Originally posted by Stockholm:
It remains to be seen if the NDP actually does that well in Ontario - but I will say this - if the Nanos was right and Ontario split its vote C35, L33, NDP26 and G9 - it would be a very similar vote split to what we saw in the 1975 Ontario provincial election when the Ontario popular vote went PC36, L34, NDP 28 - and that produced 51 Tories, 36 Liberals and 38(!!)NDPers. I think that if this scenario unfolded, it would mean that the NDP would go beyond winning the "low-hanging fruit" from '06 (ie: all those seats in the north, plus Oshawa, B-EY and Welland) and might have some surprise wins in places like Essex, Sarnia, Guelph, Davenport, York-South-West etc... Anything is possible in that scenario.
When I ran it through the UBC thing the NDP was within 5% in Davenport, Peterborough, London North Centre & Guelph. Within 10% in Ottawa-Vanier, Scarborough SW, London West, Brant, Kitchener Centre, St. Catherines. Next closest after that in terms of margin were Toronto Centre, Essex, Ancaster-Dundas, Niagra Falls, Kitchener-Waterloo.
From: Kelowna, BC | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
ForestGreen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13611
|
posted 12 October 2008 10:32 AM
quote: Originally posted by skoblin:
I note Liberal rag Toronto Star has now ignored two Nanos polls showing the NDP at 22% while still shuffling the third Nanos poll showing showing the NDP at 22% further back than it should be. HD polls showing the NDP at 18%, however, are dutifully reported front and center.
But the Toronto Star always pays more attention to Decima. I don't think it's got anything to do with the NDP numbers.
From: Alberta | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
skoblin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15569
|
posted 12 October 2008 10:42 AM
quote: Originally posted by thorin_bane: Interesting that greens have virtually the same numbers liking NDP/CON minority/majority governments. In all 4 categories.
when you add the preferences together for the Greens, you end up with: NDP government 33% Conservative government 32% Liberal government 20% I wonder what this means if the Green vote starts bleeding off on election day...........
From: Victoria BC | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Northern54
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5325
|
posted 12 October 2008 10:42 AM
quote: Originally posted by skoblin: Nanos poll showing government preference by region, party affiliation and gender.http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-F08-T340E.pdf Irony of ironies.......Green party supporters' preference NDP minority - 18% Conservative minority - 18% NDP majority - 15% Conservative majority - 14% Liberal minority - 13% and...following in the rear.... Liberal majority - 7% lol...
I suspect Green Party members will be less and less enthused with Liberals once this election is over. The new most frequent argument for the Liberals is for Green voters to change and vote Liberal. But, the NDP isn't being left out either. Dion is saying that he would be great for Canada's poor so that should please NDP voters enough to change their vote too!
From: Yellowknife | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
NorthReport
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15337
|
posted 12 October 2008 10:57 AM
FGWhy am I beginning to get the impression that you are starting to sound like a Liberal party supporter yourself. quote: Originally posted by ForestGreen: [QB]Greg Morrow has said that he voted NDP last time. I see no indication that he has ever been a Liberal.[/Q]
From: From sea to sea to sea | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152
|
posted 12 October 2008 11:33 AM
In case anyone's interested, Election Prediction Project has updated again. Current numbers CPC 121-Lib 81-NDP 33-BQ 51-Oth 2 with 21 TCTC.Quebec calls are complete. Very few changes: projecting the Libs to take Ahuntsic and Papineau from the Bloc, Bloc takes Beauport-Limolou, Louis-Hebert and Jonquiere-Alma from the Tories (that's Harper's PS and a cabinet minister for those keeping score). Net result BQ 51-Lib 14-CPC 8-NDP 1-Oth 1. PEI's been complete for a while - Liberals take all 4 again. Newfoundland is complete - Tories lose all three seats - Avalon and St. John's South-Mt. Pearl to the Libs and St. John's East to the NDP. Saskatchewan calls are now complete - NDP projected to win in Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar, otherwise no change - CPC 12, NDP 1, Lib 1. All other provinces have some TCTC
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
JeffWells
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4761
|
posted 12 October 2008 11:42 AM
quote: Originally posted by Stockholm:
It remains to be seen if the NDP actually does that well in Ontario - but I will say this - if the Nanos was right and Ontario split its vote C35, L33, NDP26 and G9 - it would be a very similar vote split to what we saw in the 1975 Ontario provincial election when the Ontario popular vote went PC36, L34, NDP 28 - and that produced 51 Tories, 36 Liberals and 38(!!)NDPers.
I think that's an excellent comparison. If the NDP poll 26% in Ontario while the Cons and the Libs are near parity in the low to mid 30s, there are going to be results that the Hill & Knowlton predictor is simply not built to handle. We haven't seen a vote break like that in a federal election.
From: Toronto | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|