ARS Regionals: 1,003 Canadians polled between Aug 25-26, 2009
Party / CDA / BC /... AB / ..MB/SK / ON / QC / AT
Cons / 34% / 43% / 62% / 51% / 35% / 16% / 20%
NDP/ 18% / 28% / 16% / 31% / 13% / 12% / 33%
Libs / 30% / 19% / 12% / 17% / 37% / 33% / 39%
reposted from here
Thanks remind for beginning this continuation of our polling thread.
Wow, maybe that Ipsos Reid poll showing Harper with an 11% lead was accurate, or was it? My hunch is that perhaps Ipsos Reid is playing us for suckers and giving us a snow job. On the other hand........
Is this the end of the age of our social cohesion?
Discrepancies in recent poll results may be a symptom of increasing fragmentation in Canadian society, rather than of any fault in the methods of data collection. It is harder to find a representative sample when people actually have less and less in common.
The Canadian median age in 1967 was 26, when Pierre Trudeau was getting ready to lead the country. It is now 43. Thus, not surprisingly, for the first time since Ekos began asking Canadians 15 years ago how they self-identify, a slightly larger number label themselves small-c conservative rather than small-l liberal, reinforcing policy indicators such as declining support for pacifism and a single-payer public health-care system.
The boomers eventually will totter off stage, but the people behind them are cleaved into two significant age-related groups, what Ekos president Frank Graves calls "open cosmopolitans" and "continental conservatives."
The open cosmopolitans, with an over-representation of Generation X, are extremely receptive to diversity, immigration and the outside world and hold generally progressive views on issues such as foreign policy. The continental conservatives, with an overrepresentation from Generation Y (the under-30s), are comfortable with current government directions and see Canada being more closely drawn into a North American partnership.
There is no identifiable successor group on the radar screen to the vanishing supporters of Pearson-Trudeau progressive statism, in case anyone was hoping.
A DEEP SPLIT
But there is a deep split between megalopolitan Canada and everywhere else. (Think of a Conservative government with no elected members in Vancouver, Toronto or Montreal.)
There is a deep split between those with postsecondary education and those without. Canada has the world's highest proportion of people with postsecondary education.
And there is a marked split between genders. Among current voters, for example, women tend significantly to dislike both Stephen Harper and Mr. Ignatieff. Actually, for the past three years, Canadians as a whole have rarely got beyond mustering tepid interest in the two major parties, a favour the Conservatives and Liberals have returned by offering nothing approximating a national vision.
No mind-map, no soul-map, of Canada.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/is-this-the-end-of-the-age-...
And keep in mind that younger, more progressive voters have unlisted cell-phones, and would hardly be asked for polling data by the various firms.
I wish that the polling firms released the ages of the people they question, not just how many of them were asked!
Um, if you went to the Ekos polls they most certainly do do the age gradient breakdowns, and sex as well.
I'm puzzling over the "continental conservatives, with an overrepresentation from Generation Y (the under-30s)". Unless there's some "natalist" explanation (i.e. by the 1980s, having large families was increasingly a suburban/conservative pursuit, nurture is nature, etc, and you don't expect kids raised in such entropy to be terribly enlightened socially, politically, culturally, etc)
And the Liberals thought they had troubles with Dion as their leader.
Anxious Liberals await poll data
MPs to view hard numbers at retreat this week, and they could spark second thoughts on fall vote
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/688612
And the Liberals thought they had troubles with Dion as their leader.
This statement is unrelated to the article.
Liberal insiders have already stated the polling numbers are not good for the Liberals, so as much as they try and put a brave face on things it's obvious the Liberals lost their mojo some time ago, and it sure doesn't appear to be coming back anytime soon.
I'm puzzling over the "continental conservatives, with an overrepresentation from Generation Y (the under-30s)". Unless there's some "natalist" explanation (i.e. by the 1980s, having large families was increasingly a suburban/conservative pursuit, nurture is nature, etc, and you don't expect kids raised in such entropy to be terribly enlightened socially, politically, culturally, etc)
I'm puzzled by this as well. I know a lot of socially and fiscally progressive people in that age group. I even know quite a few fiscally conservative and socially progressive people who would be loathed to vote NDP but need certain assurances before they vote Conservative (ie. that they don't have a socially conservative agenda), but I don't know a whole lot of social conservatives in the under 30 age group. At least if that's what "continental conservative" means... and I'm not really sure what its supposed to mean.
There is a reference to "continental conservatives" under paleoconservatism - see wiki
"Some modern European continental conservatives, such as Frenchmen Jacques Barzun, Alain de Benoist, and René Girard, have a mode of thought and cultural criticism esteemed by many paleoconservatives."
Oh, oh, doesn't look good.
It's not the polls?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/spector-vision/its-not-the-polls/ar...
"EI and the unemployed, or whatever the principle, be damned."
it's all about the polls.
Liberal insiders have already stated the polling numbers are not good for the Liberals, so as much as they try and put a brave face on things it's obvious the Liberals lost their mojo some time ago, and it sure doesn't appear to be coming back anytime soon.
Liberal insiders have said no such thing - you are letting your imagination run away with you, as usual. 
Oh... so we are supposed to overlook the Liberal Senator's remarks about the polls do not look for the Liberals, are we?
Or is he not an insider?
Liberal insiders have already stated the polling numbers are not good for the Liberals, so as much as they try and put a brave face on things it's obvious the Liberals lost their mojo some time ago, and it sure doesn't appear to be coming back anytime soon.
Liberal insiders have said no such thing - you are letting your imagination run away with you, as usual.
Debater,
Have you ever posted anything here of substance or truthfulness since you arrived here. I've been wondering about that?
Yes, Liberal party insiders did say internal Liberal polling shows less support than the published polls for both the Liberals and for Igantieff, so are you calling me a liar?
Just curious about that as well.
Liberal insiders have already stated the polling numbers are not good for the Liberals, so as much as they try and put a brave face on things it's obvious the Liberals lost their mojo some time ago, and it sure doesn't appear to be coming back anytime soon.
Liberal insiders have said no such thing - you are letting your imagination run away with you, as usual.
Debater,
Have you ever posted anything here of substance or truthfulness since you arrived here. I've been wondering about that?
Yes, Liberal party insiders did say internal Liberal polling shows less support than the published polls for both the Liberals and for Igantieff, so are you calling me a liar?
Just curious about that as well.
Yes I have. I always post items of substance and truth and discuss the trends, polls and comments of the political analysts. You are the one that tends to create dozens of threads every week posting your own personal opinion about all the Liberal failings as if they were facts and predicting the demise of the Liberals and the likelihood of the Conservatives getting a majority.
It is your posts that tend to lack truth and objectivity - not mine. I am cautious and measured in my analysis and predictions whereas you tend towards flights of fantasy and melodrama - eg. the NDP is going to beat the Liberals, the Liberals are going to collapse, the Conservatives are going to dominate etc. without any evidence to back it up.
Liberal insiders have said no such thing - you are letting your imagination run away with you, as usual.
Debator,
Never mind your mumbo-jumbo attempts to sidetrack.
I stated that Liberal party insiders said internal Liberal polling shows less support than the published polls for both the Liberals and for Igantieff, so are you calling me a liar?
This is a simple question debator, so why are you avoiding answering it?
Liberal insiders have said no such thing - you are letting your imagination run away with you, as usual.
Debator,
Never mind your mumbo-jumbo attempts to sidetrack.
I stated that Liberal party insiders said internal Liberal polling shows less support than the published polls for both the Liberals and for Igantieff, so are you calling me a liar?
This is a simple question debator, so are you avoiding answering it because you know damn well I am telling the truth and the truth hurts your attempts at credibility here.
I just can't think of any other reason why are you avoiding answering it?
EKOS
Cons - 32.6%
Libs - 32.6%
NDP - 16.5%
For the record
Insiders say internal party polling has found even weaker support, both for the party and Ignatieff, who has faced criticism for keeping a relatively low profile over the summer while the prime minister grabbed the limelight and basked in tentative signs of economic recovery.
NB Provincial Numbers from last week.
Lib-41%
PC-35%
NDP-22%
The NS election bounce.
NDP are growing at the expense of the PC support.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2009/09/02/nb-cra-poll-libe...
These are great numbers from New Brunswick, but since they are about provincial politics maybe we should be discussing them in the Atlantgic Canada forum
I thought of posting them there Stockholm but the Atlantgic (sic) 
forum doesn't get much traffic. Feel free to just consider the numbers an FYI that don't require much comment.
Details from the Ekos poll are here:
http://ekos.ca/admin/articles/cbc-2009-09-03.pdf
Of course everything will be highly fluid in a campaign, but these numbers suggest that the Liberals and NDP could get a majority between them.
If only the NBNDP had any organization on the ground.
We are in 2nd place in BC (just behind the cons), Alantic Canada (just slightly behind the libs) and in Sask/Manitoba (behind the cons).
Can we borrow Nova Scotia's Ken?
EKOS
Cons - 32.6%
Libs - 32.6%
NDP - 16.5%
NR, I'll answer your question above by referring to the new EKOS numbers out today that you have just posted. As you can see, most polls show the Liberals and the Conservatives in a tie. The Liberals would not be considering an election if they had poll numbers way below that of the Cons.
As far as I know there was one Senator last week who expressed some concern about the polls - not a whole bunch of insiders. There is naturally a big risk involved in having an election when the Liberals are only tied with the Conservatives rather than being well ahead of them and polls can change very quickly. There is a concern when things are so close because Ignatieff is not guaranteed to win.
No debator, just having had a look at it, most polls do not show that.
"The Liberals would not be considering an election if they had poll numbers way below that of the Cons."
So you admit that the timing of an election is totally dependent on hwo the Liberals see their political prospects and that substantive issues have nothing to do with it. Glad we finally got that cleared up.
One of the reasons the Libs might want a fall election is some more Senate vacancies will be arising early in 2010.
Oh...that is intresting, more self serving without regard to Canadians, and wasting of tax payer dollars, to serve themselves.
I was trying to think like a Liberal... I think I need a shower now.
wow, that ekos one is huge. i'm gonna go with that one! 16.5 isn't bad, considering how the ndp usually gains a little from campaigns. the iggs campaign may be tough, so it's nice to see that the ndp isn't starting from too far behing the 2008 score.
There is a new Angus Reid poll in the Toronto Star (in print only - cannot find a link). It was in field Sept. 1 and 2 and it says:
CPC - 33%
Libs - 32%
NDP - 19% (highest i've seen in a while)
BQ - 9%
Gween - 7%
No debator, just having had a look at it, most polls do not show that.
What do they show then? Please enlighten me.
Is there a thread where the NDP's current equivocating about supporting Harper at unnamed conditions is being discussed? It's very big in the MSM - strong editorial by Josee Boileau in this morning's Le Devoir - but I see naught but an eerie silence here. Am I wrong?
AR poll details. Looks really good, could pick up in BC, and MB/Sask
http://www.angusreidstrategies.com/uploads/pages/pdfs/2009.09.03_Politic...
There has been a string of better and better federal vote numbers in BC lately. I know that the BC sample size within a national poll is small - but there seems to be a pattern. I wonder whether the federal NDP may be able to capitalize on the fury over the HST in BC which is something that can be blamed on both the BC Liberals and the federal Tories and also the revelations about Campbell's lies about the deficit and his budget full of cutbacks etc...the Liberal brand name is taking a bit of a beating in BC - and it could give the NDP a bit of a shot in the arm federally.
well, we are talking about it but don't any stalk in it - the MSM is pushing either corp sector party - NDP played its cards to say, sure we deal with Harper (knowing that Harper wouldn't budge). I guess the MSM is ticked cause Iffy wants to go - maybe - well we'll know if he is crying wolf again.
I wonder whether the federal NDP may be able to capitalize on the fury over the HST in BC which is something that can be blamed on both the BC Liberals and the federal Tories and also the revelations about Campbell's lies about the deficit and his budget full of cutbacks etc...the Liberal brand name is taking a bit of a beating in BC - and it could give the NDP a bit of a shot in the arm federally.
I know that you've brought up that concept before... it's possible perhaps... but I'm not so sure. Remember that Manitoba is also looking at the HST. And another 800 sample size BC Ipsos poll was released today asking, among other questions, if Carole James and the NDP would have done better with the budget:
better - 29%, same - 20%, worse - 38% - So it's a double-edged sword.
What really concerns me is that the Cons had an effective tv/radio ad campaign, during the 2008 election, against the NDP here in BC. Not so previously in 2004/06. I suspect that they will do so again in this next round and will likely bring up the proposed coalition with these optics:
[img]http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/images/2008/11/30/layton_ducepp...
[img]http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20081201/450_sign_081201.jpg[...
And when those visuals originally hit the tv media, the Cons skyrocketed to 55% here in BC.
It wouldn't be hard to find all kinds of pictures of Harper shaking hands with Duceppe as well. Woudln't if be funny if Duceppe decided to have the BQ vote confidence in Harper this fall and let everyone see him making "deals with separatists" (sic.)
They can try to touch that blarney stone again. It would be a sort of recreation of the Reform Party's infamous ads in 1997 attacking all those "Quebec politicians running the country". But of course that type of a Quebec-baiting campaign would get massive publicity in Quebec and would likely be viewed as racist as anti-Quebec and would lead to even more of a meltdown of Tory support than we have already seen. I can only see the Tories trying that if they are in a desparate "save the furniture" mode and they know that they will be wiped out in Quebec no matter what and they are just trying to prevent a meltdown in the west. But I honestly think that that is all water under the bridge.
The risk also for the Conservatives is that everyone knows that whatever happens in the election we will have another minority government - and its becoming increasingly clear that there is only one party in canada that is totally intransigent and refuses to try to work with anyone - the Conservatives.
Of course anyone with half a brain would know that the more seats the NDP gets and the fewer seats the BQ gets - the greater the mathematical possibility of a minority government that can be completely independent of the BQ.
As for the HST - in the unlikely event that Manitoba jumps on the HST bandwagon it won't be anytime soon what with them picking a new premier in mid-October. It also really doesn't matter whether people think Carol James would have brought down a better budget. She is not on the ballot. But we know that there is massive disapproval of campbell now and people can easily treat the federal election like a ginat byelection. Remember how the federal Liberals were burned in Ontario in 2004 because people were mad at McGuinty for the his new health surtax? It didn't matter whether or not people thought that Ernie Eves would have been better - they were angry in the here and now and they wanted to register a protest.
No debator, just having had a look at it, most polls do not show that.What do they show then? Please enlighten me.
Ahhh, after reading back I realize now you were shifting focus from the Ekos regional poll results, to speaking about "polls' in the greater context.
While I was speaking about the regional breakdowns, where the Libs are not tied in the majority with the Cons.
Yes, nationally they seem to be tied, not that that means much for seat counts, unless it is in areas were the race was close prior.
Is there a thread where the NDP's current equivocating about supporting Harper at unnamed conditions is being discussed? It's very big in the MSM - strong editorial by Josee Boileau in this morning's Le Devoir - but I see naught but an eerie silence here. Am I wrong?
Eerie as in spooked, you mean?
More like bored.
That old nostrum has already been tossed out a few times in the various threads discussing the elctions [or not] possibilities. It gets little or no reaction any more.
No debator, just having had a look at it, most polls do not show that.What do they show then? Please enlighten me.
Ahhh, after reading back I realize now you were shifting focus from the Ekos regional poll results, to speaking about "polls' in the greater context.
While I was speaking about the regional breakdowns, where the Libs are not tied in the majority with the Cons.
Yes, nationally they seem to be tied, not that that means much for seat counts, unless it is in areas were the race was close prior.
I wasn't shifting focus - I was only ever talking about the national polls. That's what most people are doing right now - talking about how the national polls are tied.
I'm not sure what you mean about regional breakdowns - the Liberals are ahead of the Conservatives in all regions of the country except the Western provinces. The Liberals lead the Cons in Atlantic Canada, Quebec and Ontario.
Never said they were not ahead
What are you saying then? I don't get it. You said: "the Libs are not tied in the majority with the Cons".
NDP continuing their climb, now up to 19%. Sweet Stock.
Everyone is out of step except Ignatieff. Right.
I notice you always take the highest NDP number as being the true one. The NDP may be at 19% as in Angus-Reid, or it may be at 16.5% as in EKOS.
What I am finding interesting is some of the regional numbers now - in both the Angus-Reid poll and the EKOS poll the NDP appears to have lost some ground in Quebec and comes behind the Conservatives in both.
EKOS - Toronto Star - Liberals.
Get it yet!
