Canadian polls, 2021

470 posts / 0 new
Last post
melovesproles

Badriya wrote:

Pondering, you keep repeating on various threads that Trudeau "did not get a mandate for the massive spending he has done or intends to do. "  That is just not true.  He got a mandate when the Speech from the Throne passed, in October 2020, with NDP support.  

https://www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/campaigns/speech-throne/2020/spee...

But Trudeau's "mandate" isn't from the majority of our elected representatives to pass anything in Parliament, it's from the Super-MPs in his own party that count for more than everyone else's representatives. So as long as that minority get's a plurality, walah, he has a new mandate and the majority of Canadians can go suck an egg. That seems to be how Pondering thinks our "democracy" works. Bullying by a bunch of anti-democratic thugs that call themselves Liberals.

JKR

melovesproles wrote:

But Trudeau's "mandate" isn't from the majority of our elected representatives to pass anything in Parliament, it's from the Super-MPs in his own party that count for more than everyone else's representatives. So as long as that minority get's a plurality, walah, he has a new mandate and the majority of Canadians can go suck an egg. That seems to be how Pondering thinks our "democracy" works. Bullying by a bunch of anti-democratic thugs that call themselves Liberals.

I think that's how FPTP works. It creates "super-MP's" who represent a minority of the voters but make up a majority of representatives. NDP and Conservative majority governments have also appreciated having "super-MP's" cement their power.

melovesproles

JKR wrote:

melovesproles wrote:

But Trudeau's "mandate" isn't from the majority of our elected representatives to pass anything in Parliament, it's from the Super-MPs in his own party that count for more than everyone else's representatives. So as long as that minority get's a plurality, walah, he has a new mandate and the majority of Canadians can go suck an egg. That seems to be how Pondering thinks our "democracy" works. Bullying by a bunch of anti-democratic thugs that call themselves Liberals.

I think that's how FPTP works. It creates "super-MP's" who represent a minority of the voters but make up a majority of representatives. NDP and Conservative majority governments have also appreciated having "super-MP's" cement their power.

I agree but as bad as that is, this is even more antidemocratic. It would be one thing if the Liberals were able to game the system and get an artificial Majority government by playing the splits. Getting a majority of our representatives with less than 40% of the vote is obviously evidence of a rigged system but at least it is operating within the confines of that rigged system. The Liberals and their apologists are trying say the Liberals don’t even need to get a majority of the representatives, just by getting a plurality they can claim that the majority of the MPs that Canadians elected are toxic or obstructionist.

The question is if this election results again with the majority of Canadians electing a majority of MPs that are not Liberals, how is Parliament supposed to function? Liberals and their apologists are unwilling to say the Liberals need to be the ones to compromise and that they will have won some type of “mandate” just by getting the same plurality they had before they called an election. That shows an incredible contempt for democracy. I agree that FPTP is a massive problem and would love to see PR implemented but this doesn’t require systemic change to fix-just an ability to count to 169.

The Liberals are showing an extreme arrogance that is taking the concept of SuperMPs to a whole new level. I don’t see how Canadian “democracy” is expected to have any legitimacy if this is how bad things have gotten.

JKR

melovesproles wrote:
.

The question is if this election results again with the majority of Canadians electing a majority of MPs that are not Liberals, how is Parliament supposed to function?

If the majority of the MP's are not Liberals they will be able to form a minority or coalition government without any Liberals. If the Liberals don't win a majority government they will still require help from non-Liberal MP's to form another minority government. Conservative, NDP, BQ, or Green MPs are not being forced to support a Liberal government.

Pondering

What the heck is a "super MP"?  As far as I can tell ministers don't even have much influence. The PMO seems to  direct the ministers as well as all MPs. 

We live in a democracy because we don't have to pick up a gun to revolt. We just have to convince enough citizens to agree with us. That they don't agree with us doesn't mean we don't live in a democracy. If we think PR is more democratic then FPTP then we need to convince enough Canadians to agree and that it is an important enough issue to be a deciding factor in elections. 

Not even BC could get citizens to agree that PR would be a better system provincially. Most PR proponents never seem to deal with the arguments against it. They just keep declaring PR is the sole democratic model and expecting that to work. 

Democracy means majority rules with the exception that majorities have recognized the danger to individual rights that democracy poses so have devised systems to try to protect minority rights. 

Canadians have chosen FPTP every time they have been offered PR. I don't like the system we have either but as it is chosen by the people, and can be unchosen by the people, it is democratic. Imposing PR would be undemocratic. 

melovesproles, as JKR noted, if Trudeau wins another minority then depending on the size of it things will carry on much the same as before. Trudeau will put forth his legislation and dare the other parties to take him down which they won't do because they won't be prepared to run another election. 

Trudeau's reasoning for the election is that the pandemic changed things dramatically, which it did, so Canadians should get a say in how we move forward from here. 

 

Geoff

Canada should follow New Zealand's example. Decide on a system of PR, run an election based on that system, then hold a referendum to choose between PR and FPTP. Canadians will be reluctant to support PR, if they don't see it in action first. There may be some objections that we didn't vote for it before trying it, but we never voted to adopt FPTP either. New Zealand took the chance; why not Canada?

Pondering

Geoff wrote:

Canada should follow New Zealand's example. Decide on a system of PR, run an election based on that system, then hold a referendum to choose between PR and FPTP. Canadians will be reluctant to support PR, if they don't see it in action first. There may be some objections that we didn't vote for it before trying it, but we never voted to adopt FPTP either. New Zealand took the chance; why not Canada?

The population of New Zealand is under 5 million.  We have provinces that could take that leap as proof of concept.  We have multiple provinces that have already voted against PR. Citizens would be outraged if it were imposed nationally even temporarily. 

It is anti-democratic to impose a system that people have already expressed they don't want in order to prove to them that it is better. 

If PR is so fabulous, why is it such a hard sell? 

I think that part of it is refusing to acknowledge its faults or address concerns. 

kropotkin1951

Pondering wrote:

It is anti-democratic to impose a system that people have already expressed they don't want in order to prove to them that it is better.

According to our system, as you rightly point out, if a majority of Liberal's get elected then the decisions they make are legitimate and the democratic will of the people. Personally I find that aspect of our system is one of the things that leads to undemocratic results, on an issue by issue basis. So the TMX is democratic despite being opposed by most Canadians, sales of weapons to Saudi Arabia is also democratic although unpopular. Buying fighter jets and other military equipment using P3 style contracts were we will be paying and paying is also not supported by the people but a majority of the MP's have the authority to impose it and we call it democracy.

In 2015 three parties ran on changing the political voting system. The Liberal's won a majority of the seats and with the NDP and Greens the candidates who stood for MP while promising the people that FPTP would be ditched won 229 seats out of 338. However you now say that despite the election of two thirds of MP's who supported the issue it is undemocratic to even consider a change without a referendum. Its as if destroying the planet and arming misogynists is something that only needs a nod and a wink from the ruling party but substantive change that might bring about more democratic results and lead to less seats for the ruling party needs a special referendum where the elite can concentrate their propaganda machine on that single issue to prevent the change.

Now six years after claiming that if they won it would be the last FPTP election the Liberal machine is claiming that it is undemocratic for the majority of the MP's in parliament to have any say on any issue and that only a one party state is democracy in action.

Sadly they may get a majority because you and your fellow Quebec voters have been split on sectarian lines and the real issues get marginalized across that divide. I think that Quebec is like other parts of the country and most people have woken up to the environmental problems however that is not going to be as important as the belief of many Quebec people that their nation should separate from Canada or at least have a large group of MP's in Ottawa avowed to work first and foremost for the benefit of their residents by triggering a constitutional crisis. A PQ/BQ group of FPTP elected MP's and MNA's will go to the bargaining table to gain more political and economic influence at the expense of other regions of Canada. The other option of course will be secession, if enough concessions are not on the table. But its not like the planet is on fire and we are building pipelines and fighter jets to deal with the problem.

melovesproles

Pondering wrote:

melovesproles, as JKR noted, if Trudeau wins another minority then depending on the size of it things will carry on much the same as before. Trudeau will put forth his legislation and dare the other parties to take him down which they won't do because they won't be prepared to run another election.

That's not a "democratic mandate." That's a hostage situation.

It's gross-trying to game an already rigged system with an extremely low bar to get a majority government and not even able to achieve that but showing pure contempt for the majority of our elected representatives. Fuck Canada if that is how pathetic our "democracy" is. The 33% playing chicken to bully the rest of the country and talking through their ass about "democratic mandates". 

Trudeau ran on ending FPTP in 2015 and got far more support than he ever has since breaking that promise. Just a piece of human waste.

I don't think I'm going to vote for the NDP either. Their foreign policy is abysmal and I don't want a representative that will in any way enable the POS Trudeau. If they lose, the Conservatives will win the seat but at least they are less likely to play the role of Liberal-enabler.

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:
According to our system, as you rightly point out, if a majority of Liberal's get elected then the decisions they make are legitimate and the democratic will of the people. Personally I find that aspect of our system is one of the things that leads to undemocratic results, on an issue by issue basis. So the TMX is democratic despite being opposed by most Canadians, sales of weapons to Saudi Arabia is also democratic although unpopular. Buying fighter jets and other military equipment using P3 style contracts were we will be paying and paying is also not supported by the people but a majority of the MP's have the authority to impose it and we call it democracy.

The people have decided to accept a system in which they bestow the right and responsibility to make decisions on representatives even if they disagree with individual decisions those representatives make, even on big issues.

I agree that we should have a much greater say on important issues. I’m not convinced PR will give us that any more than FPTP. I don’t think either system works for the people. I think both are archaic.

kropotkin1951 wrote:
In 2015 three parties ran on changing the political voting system. The Liberal's won a majority of the seats and with the NDP and Greens the candidates who stood for MP while promising the people that FPTP would be ditched won 229 seats out of 338.  

We knew before the election that he favored ranking not PR. The 3 parties could not agree on changes. He had a majority of seats. Should he have imposed a ranked ballot?

kropotkin1951 wrote:
However you now say that despite the election of two thirds of MP's who supported the issue it is undemocratic to even consider a change without a referendum.

I’m in favor of a unilateral change in Quebec, even though the proposed system would result in Montreal having fewer seats. Quebecers have never voted against it. P.E.I, B.C. and Ontario have already voted “no”.  For that reason I think it must be put to vote, not imposed, on Canada as a whole.

kropotkin1951 wrote:
where the elite can concentrate their propaganda machine on that single issue to prevent the change.

They have a huge unfair advantage to be sure, but we have mass social media. Qanon is all about social media.

kropotkin1951 wrote:
Now six years after claiming that if they won it would be the last FPTP election the Liberal machine is claiming that it is undemocratic for the majority of the MP's in parliament to have any say on any issue and that only a one party state is democracy in action.

There has been another election since then during which Trudeau did not promise electoral reform. Nor has he claimed that only a one party state is democracy in action. He has called an election so Canadians can see each party’s plan for moving forward. Canadians can agitate for PR if that is what they want.

 

kropotkin1951 wrote:
Sadly they may get a majority because you and your fellow Quebec voters have been split on sectarian lines and the real issues get marginalized across that divide.  

Legault won an election and continues to be hugely popular because he promised not to hold a referendum. Even people in favor of separation don’t want to talk about it anymore. It is a sore subject for people on both sides of the aisle. Most understand which side won and that it is unlikely to change.

kropotkin1951 wrote:
at least have a large group of MP's in Ottawa avowed to work first and foremost for the benefit of their residents by triggering a constitutional crisis.

How can they trigger a constitution crisis and if they can why haven’t they done it already?

kropotkin1951 wrote:
A PQ/BQ group of FPTP elected MP's and MNA's will go to the bargaining table to gain more political and economic influence at the expense of other regions of Canada.

Not like MPs from BC and Alberta who would never do such a thing.

kropotkin1951 wrote:
The other option of course will be secession, if enough concessions are not on the table.  

That has not been the case since 1995. Quebecers voted against secession and the movement has only gotten smaller since then. Ottawa fears it could rise again if Canada tries to impose its will on internal Quebec matters but as long as Canada doesn’t try to push a pipeline through there is no threat.

 

kropotkin1951 wrote:
But its not like the planet is on fire and we are building pipelines and fighter jets to deal with the problem.

Right, and yet people are more worried about what style democracy we have than convincing Canadians to demand action of whatever government is in power.

 

kropotkin1951

So Pondering the Quebec "question" is settled and people vote for either the Liberal's or Bloc only based on their environmental platforms. Good to know so tell me how is it that people in Quebec will vote for the TMX party.

I agree that Canadians are too content and just accept our flawed and undemocratic political structure without trying to change it. I think we need to have austerity imposed on us from other countries until our citizens are going without food and medicine because otherwise they will just accept the current system. After all that is the Canadian governments (both Liberal and Conservative) response to other countries like Venezuela and Syria. All the Canadian parties agree that the best way to get rid of the CPC is impose sanctions on the country until the people rise up.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Pondering wrote:

The people have decided to accept a system in which they bestow the right and responsibility to make decisions on representatives even if they disagree with individual decisions those representatives make, even on big issues.

The people did not decide this. The ruling class of the 1860s decided it and the people have been both intimidated and propagandized into accepting it ever since.

Pondering

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Pondering wrote:

The people have decided to accept a system in which they bestow the right and responsibility to make decisions on representatives even if they disagree with individual decisions those representatives make, even on big issues.

The people did not decide this. The ruling class of the 1860s decided it and the people have been both intimidated and propagandized into accepting it ever since.

Propaganda didn't stop the French revolution. If those rebels were as "woe is me we are helpless" it would never have happened.

At some point the left, and I include myself in that, have to accept that we are succeeding to slowly and think about what we could do differently which means thinking less about what we want and more about what the 99% want.

kropotkin1951

Pondering may I ask if you have ever been arrested for civil disobedience? In Canada you can protest until some business says you are obstructing their rights. Then they get an injunction and then if you still peacefully protest they charge you with criminal contempt of court for disobeying the Judge's order to stop obstructing the business interest. A Judge then fines you and if there are many protestors they escalate the fines as the protests increase until they reach a point if they are not deterring enough people they begin sending people to jail. Currently the sentence for peacefully blocking construction of TMX is three weeks in jail. Please come to the coast and show us how the revolution starts. If you are a repeat offender then you get months in jail. The judge has the constitutional authority to keep increasing the sentences until the protests stop.

Now tell me once again why you think people in Canada don't have sustained protests that affect policy?

jerrym

Pondering wrote

 

The only success that matters to the Liberals is winning elections. They are successful. It's just a matter of degree. 

People know the faults of the Liberals. They know about WE. They know about Election reform not happening. They know all the boil water advisories have not be lifted. They know the Liberals bought TM and are corporate friendly. 

They still see the Liberals as the best of the bunch and as long as everyone, including the NDP it seems, thinks the Conservatives are the best money managers, and the Liberals are kinder Conservatives, the Liberals will win. 

The Nova Scotia election shows that the polls at the beginning of an election can be extremely different from the final results. The results also show that while people may appreciate what a government has done with regard to Covid, they are also looking at what you have failed at and at what you are promising. The federal Liberals are the favourites to win this election, but that is far from guaranteed. Campaigns matter. 

NorthReport

And according to the most recent EKOS poll something already has happened.

JKR

Pondering wrote:

Democracy means majority rules.... 


But Canadian governments very rarely represent a majority of voters.

Badriya

Good post, gerrym! While I am hoping for another minority government federally rather than a Con majority, your points are valid.

The Nova Scotia election results show, yet again, the unfairness of FPTP.  

The Conservatives got 31 seats, 57.4% of the total, with 39.03% of the popular vote.

The Liberals got 17 seats, 31.5% of the total, with 36.75% of the popular vote.

The NDP got 6 seats, 11.1% of the total, with 21.02% of the popular vote.

How democratic is that??  With PR, the number of seats would more closely reflect the % of the popular vote.

(I excluded the one Independent who is leading so there is a total of 54 seats rather than 55).

 

NorthReport

NDP up 2% to 22% in latest poll

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Pondering may I ask if you have ever been arrested for civil disobedience? In Canada you can protest until some business says you are obstructing their rights. Then they get an injunction and then if you still peacefully protest they charge you with criminal contempt of court for disobeying the Judge's order to stop obstructing the business interest. A Judge then fines you and if there are many protestors they escalate the fines as the protests increase until they reach a point if they are not deterring enough people they begin sending people to jail. Currently the sentence for peacefully blocking construction of TMX is three weeks in jail. Please come to the coast and show us how the revolution starts. If you are a repeat offender then you get months in jail. The judge has the constitutional authority to keep increasing the sentences until the protests stop.

Now tell me once again why you think people in Canada don't have sustained protests that affect policy?

Because the numbers aren't high enough and emotions not strong enough. The TMX protesters are a success story in that they have managed so well with so little support. 

Occupy had all this momentum but turned into the dog that caught the car. When the right wing catches the car they know what to do. We turned it into an exercise in direct democracy proving when everyone decides no one decides.

We need millions in the street and the backing of the majority or at least a plurality of Canadians not just a few hundred or even a thousand. Get 5K willing to block railroads and a million willing to take to the streets. Now you've got a protest. 

NorthReport

Mainstreet

Libs 34%
Cons 32%
NDP 18%

NorthReport

EKOS

Libs 34.3%, Up 0.6%
Cons 30.6%, Up 1.2%
NDP 21%, Up 0.5%

jerrym

Looked at the regional level for the EKOS results posted in the last thread are very surprising, if true showing the NDP down at 22% in BC (which I see no evidence of while living there) but at far above other polls at 20% in Quebec and 28% in the Maritimes. 

 

https://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2021/08/daily-tracking-august-18-...

NorthReport

Angus Reid

Libs 36%, No Change
Cons 30%, Down 1%
NDP 20%, Up 1%

Pondering

Quebec is interesting. Were it not for the turban Singh would be doing better in Quebec. Maybe beating the Liberals. 

BC numbers may suffer at the hands of strategic voting. So could Atlantic Canada but it is interesting to see all three parties so close. 

NorthReport

Counsel

Libs 30.3%
Cons 28.5%
NDP 21.7%

Geoff

Pondering wrote:

Geoff wrote:

I don't know why Canadians would be any more outraged than New Zealanders, who voted to accept PR when the referendum was held. Also, I've never read anywhere that Canadians were consulted when the government imposed FPTP. That might be a good point to make to those who object.

Canada should follow New Zealand's example. Decide on a system of PR, run an election based on that system, then hold a referendum to choose between PR and FPTP. Canadians will be reluctant to support PR, if they don't see it in action first. There may be some objections that we didn't vote for it before trying it, but we never voted to adopt FPTP either. New Zealand took the chance; why not Canada?

The population of New Zealand is under 5 million.  We have provinces that could take that leap as proof of concept.  We have multiple provinces that have already voted against PR. Citizens would be outraged if it were imposed nationally even temporarily. 

It is anti-democratic to impose a system that people have already expressed they don't want in order to prove to them that it is better. 

If PR is so fabulous, why is it such a hard sell? 

I think that part of it is refusing to acknowledge its faults or address concerns. 

Geoff

Pondering wrote:

Geoff wrote:

I don't know why Canadians would be any more outraged than New Zealanders, who voted to accept PR when the referendum was held. Also, I've never read anywhere that Canadians were consulted when the government imposed FPTP. That might be a good point to make to those who object.

Canada should follow New Zealand's example. Decide on a system of PR, run an election based on that system, then hold a referendum to choose between PR and FPTP. Canadians will be reluctant to support PR, if they don't see it in action first. There may be some objections that we didn't vote for it before trying it, but we never voted to adopt FPTP either. New Zealand took the chance; why not Canada?

The population of New Zealand is under 5 million.  We have provinces that could take that leap as proof of concept.  We have multiple provinces that have already voted against PR. Citizens would be outraged if it were imposed nationally even temporarily. 

It is anti-democratic to impose a system that people have already expressed they don't want in order to prove to them that it is better. 

If PR is so fabulous, why is it such a hard sell? 

I think that part of it is refusing to acknowledge its faults or address concerns. 

NorthReport

Counsel's polling sure doesn't look like any majority government to me.

But Counsel is there to make the Cons look stronger. Unfortunately their BS will probably scare some NDP voters into voting Liberal.

kropotkin1951

jerrym wrote:

Looked at the regional level for the EKOS results posted in the last thread are very surprising, if true showing the NDP down at 22% in BC (which I see no evidence of while living there) but at far above other polls at 20% in Quebec and 28% in the Maritimes. 

 

https://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2021/08/daily-tracking-august-18-...

That can be a margin of error since in the last federal election they only got 24%. If you take Vancouver Island out of the numbers for BC it is worse. The election, as far as potential seat switches goes, is largely going to be fought in the Lower Mainland. On VI in 2019 the Liberals polled in fourth, at 16%, so its not likely they are getting any seats for their majority here.

NorthReport

EKOS Aug 18

Libs 33.3%
Cons 32%
NDP 20.1%

NorthReport
laine lowe laine lowe's picture

Liberal minority might even be in jeapordy given what happened in Nova Scotia.

NorthReport

Compared to previous elections there is probably going to be a huge mail-in vote which is going to effect the dynamics of the campaign so if a party does not do well at the beginning of the campaign they probably are going to be at a disadvantage on election nite

NorthReport

Trudeau seen as best pick for PM, but faces trust issues as election ramps up: poll

 

https://globalnews.ca/news/8127486/canada-election-leadership-trudeau-poll/

NorthReport

Mainstreet's latest and it is presently, apparently, a horserace.

Libs 33.4%, Down 0.2%

Cons 33.3%, Up 2.2%

NDP 19.8%, Up  1.4%

Pondering

I'm pretty sure Mainstreet leans right. Much ado about nothing. 

NDPP

"The familiar idea of thoughtful citizens steering the ship of state from the voting booth is fundamentally misguided. Voters - even those who are well informed and politically engaged - mostly choose parties and candidates on the basis of social identities and partisan loyalties, not political issues..."

Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government

https://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Realists-Elections-Responsive-Governmen...

NorthReport

Polls are published to manipulate, just like any other part of the mainstream media is.

NorthReport

EKOS, certainly not a Conservative pollster, latest polling results.

Libs 32.5%, Down 0.8%

Cons 31.9%, Down 0.1%

NDP 19.2%, Down 0.9%

Bloc 5.7%, Up 0.2% 

Pondering

NDPP wrote:

"The familiar idea of thoughtful citizens steering the ship of state from the voting booth is fundamentally misguided. Voters - even those who are well informed and politically engaged - mostly choose parties and candidates on the basis of social identities and partisan loyalties, not political issues..."

Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government

https://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Realists-Elections-Responsive-Governmen...

Sounds US centric. Canadians aren't at all as likely to identify with a particular political party, maybe in part because we don't register as supporting one party or another. I think most Canadians swing between any two of the top 3 parties.

They don't produce responsive governments because representatives usually answer to their parties or funders instead of to the people who elect them. Voters are presented with a few take it or leave it options. 

NorthReport

Mainstreet Aug 20

Libs 33.9%
Cons 32.6%
NDP 19.3%

NorthReport

Nanos

Libs 34.2%, Up 0.8%

Cons 32.3%, Up 3.9%

NDP 20.2%, Down 0.5%

Liberal, Conservative race narrowing

PREFERRED PRIME MINISTER

While Trudeau still remains the preferred prime minister among respondents, O’Toole has realized a noticeable gain, according to a separate Nanos survey that was released Saturday.

The nightly tracking data, ending Friday, suggests 32.2 per cent of respondents ranked Trudeau first, down from 35.6 per cent on Aug. 12, while 24.8 per cent ranked O’Toole first, up from 17.7 per cent.

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh comes in at third with 17.7 per cent of respondents ranking him as their preferred choice.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/federal-election-2021/liberal-con...

NorthReport

No wonder the Trudeau leadership team has taken the day off.  Yikes!

EKOS - Aug 20 21

Cons  32.9%, Up 1%, and moved up to 1st place.

Libs 31.4%, Down 1.1%, and dropped down to 2nd place. 

NDP 18.3%, Down 0.9%

https://twitter.com/CanadianPolling/status/1429196195294027784

 

josh

Mainstreet tracking poll has Liberals up 34-31-20.

nicky

Does anyone know anyone who actually likes Justin anymore?

His numbers so far are not terrible. Roughly the same number approves as disapproves. But 3/4 of those who disapprove do so strongly. Only a quarter of his backers strongly approve.

I discern a slow erosion of his position. Even his supporters are ambivalent, even apologetic. More and more people feel something between disapproval and betrayal. More think he is unethical or in it for himself. That he is smarmy  and insincere. Astonishingly a poll out a couple days back indicates that more people think he has a hidden agenda than those who think this of the Cons.

He may recover. The Liberal Party is endlessly resourceful, just as it is endlessly cynical and opportunistic. Those of course are overlapping concepts.

But still, Trudeau may just be dragging the Liberals down to defeat. 
 

A Hemingway character is asked "How did you go bankrupt?". "At first gradually and then suddenly."

NorthReport

Nanos - Aug 21

Libs 34.3%, Up 0.1%

Cons 30.9%, Up 0.1%

NDP 19.7%, Down 0.9%

 

Mainstreet - Aug 21

Libs 34%, Up 0.1%

Cons 30.9%, Down 1.7%

NDP 19.7%, Up 0.4%

josh

The two most accurate pollsters last election 

Pondering

Accurate on election day. I hope, for the sake of the NDP, that by election day the Conservatives will be tanking. 

Aside from that, where is the "undecided" %?  If they are being divided up evenly it is misleading. 

 

kropotkin1951

Pondering wrote:

Accurate on election day. I hope, for the sake of the NDP, that by election day the Conservatives will be tanking. 

Aside from that, where is the "undecided" %?  If they are being divided up evenly it is misleading.

I always presume most "undecided" end up being no shows. There are likely few citizens who bother to go to a polling staion if they don't know who they prfer.

Pages