latest polling thread - 5 july, 2012

jjuares wrote:

I raised the point that the NDP should have responded to the Conservative attack ads with some cheap internet ads. Some people responded that the Con ads were ineffective. No arguments here. However that is a good reason to respond to them not ignore them. Next time the Cons come out with negative ads and the NDP responds the corporate media will definitely draw people's attention to the fact that the NDP did not respond to the first ineffective ads but are doing so now. That must because this new bunch of ads are effective will be the argument they put forth. Further to this point, the Con attack ads are an opportunity. The NDP can respond without looking negative. Ask any boxer.Do you fail to counterpunch just because your opponenets blows missed the mark? No on the contrary that is the best time for a counterpunch.

The NDP missed the boat. No shot across the bow should go unanswered.

Perhaps.  But it's worth noting that the advertising blitz defining Mulcair that the NDP launched shortly after the leadership race was part of that response.  They chose (wisely in my opinion) to define Mulcair before the Conservatives got a chance to do it.

That may not make it wrong to respond now, I'm just saying it's not as if the NDP have done nothing to address this expected attack.

Debater...apologize?

Arthur, you've got to be kidding!

Someone so biased towards the Liberals admitting fault...?

Easier to put a fat man throught the eye of a needle!

Stockholm wrote:

Getting back to polling. Check out this new poll of 1,000 Newfoundlders by Environics. It has the federal NDP at 49% in NL as a whole - that would practically lead to a clean sweep of the province!

http://www.environics.ca/uploads/File/Environics-NL-Federal-and-Provinci...

Wow. These numbers for NL are fantastic.

Lou Arab wrote:

jjuares wrote:

I raised the point that the NDP should have responded to the Conservative attack ads with some cheap internet ads. Some people responded that the Con ads were ineffective. No arguments here. However that is a good reason to respond to them not ignore them. Next time the Cons come out with negative ads and the NDP responds the corporate media will definitely draw people's attention to the fact that the NDP did not respond to the first ineffective ads but are doing so now. That must because this new bunch of ads are effective will be the argument they put forth. Further to this point, the Con attack ads are an opportunity. The NDP can respond without looking negative. Ask any boxer.Do you fail to counterpunch just because your opponenets blows missed the mark? No on the contrary that is the best time for a counterpunch.

The NDP missed the boat. No shot across the bow should go unanswered.

Perhaps.  But it's worth noting that the advertising blitz defining Mulcair that the NDP launched shortly after the leadership race was part of that response.  They chose (wisely in my opinion) to define Mulcair before the Conservatives got a chance to do it.

That may not make it wrong to respond now, I'm just saying it's not as if the NDP have done nothing to address this expected attack.

Not to mention that there will be a response, but there isn't a rush, no worries, lets do this right, do the studies, raise the funds, and aim,well so our ads DON'T miss. Nobody that I know, even knows about the ads. The ads won't effect our votes. A swing and a miss when the threat level is low is a waste of funds.

I do understand your worry, but trust me we still have time.

jerrym wrote:

Very Far Away wrote:

Stockholm wrote:

Getting back to polling. Check out this new poll of 1,000 Newfoundlders by Environics. It has the federal NDP at 49% in NL as a whole - that would practically lead to a clean sweep of the province!

http://www.environics.ca/uploads/File/Environics-NL-Federal-and-Provinci...

Wow. These numbers for NL are fantastic.

 

These results (NDP had 49%, Cons 34% and Libs 17%) support the NDP lead in the results in a national poll done in late June where the NDP had 59%, Cons 22% and Libs 18% for a Newfoundland and Labrador subsample with smaller subsample size and larger margin of error.

http://www.threehundredeight.com/2012/06/majority-support-for-federal-nd...

 

You've got the Cons & Libs numbers mixed up

Can you share the link?

Northern-54 wrote:

EKOS poll from early July has been released (regionals only):

Is this the poll you are referring to?

http://www.ekos.com/admin/articles/FG-2012-07-03.pdf

NorthReport wrote:

Is this the poll you are referring to?

 

http://www.ekos.com/admin/articles/FG-2012-07-03.pdf

The numbers are not as similar to what my friends sent me as the article link provided.  The article refers to polling conducted up to July 5 while the link you provide was published on july 3.   So, I think the link you provided is to an earlier poll in July or perhaps the first half of a two week survey.  Not really sure.

Few have commented on this so I'll take a run at it.

The PC or CPC parties have been down before and the Liberals have as well since Confederation they have see-sawed back and forth. However, it is extremely rare if not unprecedented to see them combined at less than 50%. With the Liberals at 19.2 and the Cons at 29.3 they combine for only 48.5% in this latest Ekos poll. This is a stark illustration of the rejection of the two parties that have governed Canada since confederation when collectively they cannot manage 50%.

Another historic point worth considering is that the last time Canada's Conservatives won 4 elections in a row started in 1878 and ended in 1891. This was the only time in Canada's history that the Cons managed to get re-elected 3 times after a first victory. One could argue that Harper is also no John A. It is not surprising to see the government in its third mandate tired and unpopular. The difference is their support is not bleeding to the Liberals - their usual alternate.

The next historic observation is what happens to the opposition party. The opposition party is always the party that replaces the government when that government loses. Every opposition has become the government except for two-- those were regional opposition parties that while they did not become government they overwhelmingly dominated the regions they contested (Reform, alliance and BQ).

Look at the 30% mark in terms of opposition strength in seats. When a party is going down or staying roughly stable and they manage 30% in opposition there is little indication of what will happen in the next election but when a party is trending up from the previous election and they reach 30% they become government in the following election in all cases except one: 1972.

As for parties dropping to third place from government this has only happened once in Canadian history: 1993. That party did not survive to come back above 3rd place. So a fall from government to third is historically a one-way trip in Canada.

You have to like the odds for the NDP.

Agreed but they ate that party whole.

The point that a Conservative party and a Liberal party together don't reach 50% in the polls is a first as far as I know...

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

It is not surprising to see the government in its third mandate tired and unpopular.

It seems to me that over the last 6 years the Conservatives have often polled in the low 30's and sometimes even just in the high 20's. During this time they've been able to raise their numbers during the four elections we've had and this has given them much more power than their ongoing support between elections would indicate they should have.

The financial advantage they have over the other parties has played a large role in allowing them to peak when it counts the most. Their financial advantage has allowed them to mount unopposed advertising campaigns whenever an election seems imminent. So far their ad campaigns have been able to lift their numbers by the few percentage points they need to keep them in power.

It will be interesting to see how this dynamic changes in the future. Will the Conservatives be able to continue holding unopposed ad campaigns during this election cycle? Will their ad campaigns continue moving their numbers upward enough to keep them in power? What can the NDP do to short circuit this process?

The general long-term lack of popularity of our federal government is a trend that distinguishes Canada from other countries. I can't think of another country that has had a government over such a long time with such ongoing low popularity. In most countries when a governing party or coalition continuously polls in the mid to low 30's or worse, they're time is up at the next election. Only in Canada and the UK is it possible for a government to remain indefinitely in power with ongoing support in the mid to low 30's or worse.

The solution to this problem is obvious - proportional representation.

Yeah, that was fascinating, Sean.

Cause for concern for Harper: the NDP is either in first place, or tied for 1st place, in the last eleven federal polls.

And I'm sure this weekend's removal of a refuge who just wanted to ask a question at a Conservative party event by Kenney's thugs is NOT going to help the Cons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/42nd_Canadian_federal_election

It would make sense for pollsters to slow down in the summer-- not as much interest and results are less likely to be accurate as there are fewer people available-- lastly in the summer polling is much more expensive to do.

For those who don't know about this last one, I can explain (I used to work for a pollster).

Pollsters buy phone numbers (sample) and they pay people to dial them. During the summer many more people are away (not just on vacation but outside etc.) but you still have to pay for the sample. Only about 1% of numbers actually turn in to a survey (most are unanswered or hangups and the remainder are mostly refusals) and this goes even lower in the summer. If you need to dial a lot more numbers to get people at home it costs more.The more the public are interested also the cheaper it is because more will agree to do a survey. When we get close to an election and more are paying attention then it actually gets cheaper to conduct a poll because it will take fewer numbers to get completed surveys. If you over poll you also burn your sample-- people start saying "take me off the list" instead of just refusing. If they ask to go off the list, you can't call them again. The busier they are -- like on vacation etc. the more likely they will get fed up and say "take me off the list."

So you see, polling is more costly in summertime when people are busy having fun and are more often out. It is also more expensive when you are not near an election because people are less informed and less interested and less patient about pollsters calling. Finally, polls are down because the clients have less money to spend. When the media is having economic difficulties, they need to cut back on costs including polling. If the public is less interested the expense of polling is even less worth it.

My guess is we will see fewer and fewer polls over the next couple years due to the economic uncertainties in the industry.

Nanos typically puts out a poll every month or so. Their last one was in June, let's see if they release anything by end of July

Nik on the Numbers

The latest Nanos tracking shows the Conservatives with a ballot share of 33.6% nationally, while the NDP have slid to 30.3%. The Liberals remained in third with 26.5%, while the Greens and Bloc were at 4.4% and 4.2%, respectively.

I find it worrisome that this country continues to give the Conservatives support while the gov't continues to behave just despicably, especially with refugee health, budget cuts that impact social and other  programs,  but also with regard to the environment, muzzling of scientists, etc...

I don't buy a lot of these numbers, especially the Prairie numbers. They don't make any sense and are contrarty to what we've seen pretty much from anyone else over the last 6 months or so. I don't know how Nanos does his polling or determines its sample, but this poll looks just too fishy.

I say it again, I don't trust this guy at all. On top of that, on TV, he always looks like the guy who thinks he's smarter then eveyone else.

This poll is another Nanos outlier.

Nanos is to the Liberal party what Ekos is to the Greens, he over inflates them at the expense of the NDP. I never trust Nanos' numbers. Its sad his numbers get the most attention.

And of course, here we go. The Huff Post helping the Libs as always,

Headline "

The Nanos Number: Federal Liberals On The Move In Quebec

From the article "Recognized as one of Canada's top research experts, Nik Nanos provides numbers-driven counsel to senior executives and major organizations. He leads the analyst team at Nanos, is a Fellow of the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association and a Research Associate Professor with SUNY (Buffalo)." This is from a CBC article, quelle surpris!

I know we have to expect this from CBC, but it really makes my blood boil. I'll say it again. Why don't they just start calling themselves the "Justin Trudeau" for Prime Minister of Canada Network". By the way, its accompanied with more Trudeau pictures.

I hate these guys.

I also find Nanos's poll suspicious because it shows the Libs way ahead of the BQ in Quebec (25.0% to 17.2%) when nearly every other poll shows the BQ substantially ahead of the Libs.

You know I just have to say it, its funny that when the NDP are ahead by less the three points, the headline is always "NDP and Tories in statistical tie". Funny that. Over at Huff Post by the way, all the Libs are going the NDP is fading fast, except the NDP has been ahead for almost a year and a half and is still well ahead of the Libs, never mind statiscal noise. That kind of garbage just grinds me. In between May, and these guys, its pretty clear who doesn't like the NDP.

David Young wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

You know I just have to say it, its funny that when the NDP are ahead by less the three points, the headline is always "NDP and Tories in statistical tie". Funny that.

Get used to it, Arthur.  Expect anything less than a 5-point NDP lead to be considered a 'statistical tie' by pollsters.

 

I'm not sure that this is necessarily a bad thing for us.  When the threshold of inevitablilty gets crossed it will be far harder to engage in the "sky is falling - we must all panic - socialists at the gates" hyperbole that would otherwise be part of the MSM discussion.

That poll is not good, but it maybe more a reflection of what,going on in Quebec provincially. Plus thier Quebec numbers provincially seemed off, both,PQ and QLP seemed too high at CAQ and QS's expense, especially given the other poll released the same day. We'll see.

That's a good point Stockholm, but low information voters are still voters. The Federal Liberals and the Federal Parti Quebecois both live and die by their reputation in the provinces. Fortunately, I think Charest has been a net negative for the Liberals and their appeal to progressives in Quebec, the same way that the BC Liberals have killed their reputation as a progressive party out west. The movement is real, but for the reasons you stated, I hope it will be temporary.