Federal polling - April 15

I've never understood why the NDP doesn't go negative against the Cons here.  Polarization works in their favour in BC.  The slick anti-Harper ads they ran in Quebec during the last election would have been great out here.  The fact Harper wants to hand out mandatory mins for growing six pot plants is well out of step with most BCers but you don't hear a peep about it, Harper's been given a total pass on his 1950s era social policies.  In the Ads out here the Cons are running against the Liberals and the Liberals are running against the Cons and the NDP is bashing the Liberals??  The NDP have allowed themselves to be taken out of the conversation in what should be one of their key battlegrounds.

Of course that is if the Liberals have enough seats to take a run at it by themselves-- they may not. It could even be the NDP asking the other parties for support. The election is not over.

melovesproles, I hear you. Hopefully the NDP has an ace up the sleeve and the selection of a new BCNDP leader will free up some resources to go head-on.

http://www.angus-reid.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/2011.04.16_Debate_E...

I've not seen this poll mentioned. It is about the English debate.

Actually, I think Stockholm is right, I wasn't think about the survey question clearly (maybe the surveyors weren't either...haha). Going very neg on the Conservatives in BC in the air war might be good because, as was mentioned, it might polarise things. Harper addressing the HST in his latest campaign stop in Vancouver shows that this issue is coming up at the doorstep. It is clearly the Conservative's biggest gaffe since 2008...it cost Campbell his premiership after all. Also, the Conservative counter is not that great: "look at the NDP in NS, they reduced the HST on home heating then raised it on everything else." This is just an attempt at mis-direction, the main anger for BCers is that it was a tax increase and was lied about (during a provincial election campaign) before being brought in right-away later. Also, contrast the NDP's promises with the Conservatives, not only would they respect BCers decision in a referendum on the HST (and not essentially fine the province $1-2 billion), they would drop taxes on the very small businesses that got kicked in the teeth over the tax, and to a lot of people that live "off-grid" (e.g. rural areas) and say the HST take a hit to home heating fuel budgets.

Garth Brasseur wrote:

Actually, I calculated it out with a spreadsheet.  It isn't that hard.  You take the average of the three days from the day before.  Then, you substract 1/3 of that vote.  Then you add on what is necessary to make the new percentage and multiply by 3 to get the daily poll result.  I am a Math teacher and I know this will give me a good estimate of what the night's vote was (certainly within a half percentage).  I do wish I had a spy there...

I am currently finishing off my degree in mathematics, and I have to say that you and Stock both are a little correct, and both a little wrong.

While your procedure should provide a satisfactory estimate of the numbers, you must remember that the third you are removing is an average of the prior three days.  But what Nanos actually drops off is the first of the three days (not the aggregate numbers).

Let's say that Nanos samples a number of people each day and let's say that the NDP numbers for each of those days is y0, y1, y2, y3,...  The polling results that Nanos reports are the average of three days' polling.  Now let's say that you have  Nanos' numbers for 4 consecutive days, and denote those 4 days of polling as x2, x2, x3, x4,... We can now set up a system of equations as follows:

x2 = 1/3 (y0 + y1 + y2)

x3 = 1/3 (y1 + y2 + y3)

x4 = 1/3 (y2 + y3 + y4), and so on

It is clear from the above that we are dealing with a set of n equations (with known x values) and n+2 unknowns (all of the y's).  Since you are a math teacher, you will know that is impossible to find a unique solution to a set of n equations over n+2 variables.

Now if Nanos was willing to tell you the results of two of the daily samples, you would be able to solve for the rest of the unknowns. 

I don't know about all that, but here's a single equation in four variables:

It's my monthly payment on a loan of L dollars borrowed over N months at an interest rate of p. Every month I have difficulty in solving it. Too many variables, I guess...

Unionist wrote:

I don't know about all that, but here's a single equation in four variables:

It's my monthly payment on a loan of L dollars borrowed over N months at an interest rate of p. Every month I have difficulty in solving it. Too many variables, I guess...

N, p and L are known (but the sarcasm is appreciated).  :)

[/quote]

I would argue that Nanos got more than a few outliers a little over a week ago (having us at 8% in ON and 13% in BC is preposterous). I would guess (without any real evidence) that the large spike you observed a few days ago was the result of a combination of two factors: the first one being the addition of a fairly good day to the average, and the second one being the removal of a spectacularly bad day.  I guess we'll know when tomorrow's numbers are out...

[/quote]

My crude method showed a day when the NDP was at 22% on the big jump day.  I could refine it to 22.3% when taking out the previous guesstimate from three days before (as the previous week had no outliers like in the first week or so) rather than dividing it by 3.  I suspect that the 22.3% is within a tenth or so but I cannot prove it so I went with the 22% which is more "conservative".

ghoris wrote:

melovesproles wrote:

The slick anti-Harper ads they ran in Quebec during the last election would have been great out here.  The fact Harper wants to hand out mandatory mins for growing six pot plants is well out of step with most BCers but you don't hear a peep about it, Harper's been given a total pass on his 1950s era social policies.  In the Ads out here the Cons are running against the Liberals and the Liberals are running against the Cons and the NDP is bashing the Liberals??  The NDP have allowed themselves to be taken out of the conversation in what should be one of their key battlegrounds. 

I find this quite maddening as well. I still do not understand why the NDP spent so much time in the last election attacking Harper in Quebec (when Harper's Quebec supporters were never, ever going to vote NDP anyways) which just drove swing voters into the arms of the Bloc. The Liberals don't have a lot of growth potential here - the only real targets are Vancouver-Kingsway and maybe North Vancouver - meanwhile they're stuck playing defence in Esquimalt, Vancouver South and Newton-North Delta. All of the key battles seem to be NDP-Tory battles - why is the NDP not unloading with both barrels on Harper?  The HST snafu seems like a ready-made gift to the NDP. Am I missing something here?

I think the NDP is actually taking the right strategic approach in BC.  Most of the Cons vote here is rock-solid and not movable, which is the bad news; the good news is that the anti-Harper vote can beat the Harper vote if it is unified.  The Libs have zero growth potential in BC but they can play spoilers for the NDP if they draw away anti-Harper votes.  The key to NDP victory in Esquimalt-JDF is to draw the former Keith Martin Lib vote to Randall Garrison and the NDP - the folks who voted for Troy de Zousa (Cons) in the last 2 elections are going to do so again in overwhelming numbers.

Thus, the immediate task at hand is to knock out the Libs as a viable option in the next few days, and then focus the endgame "stop a Harper majority" message on Jack and the NDP as the leading alternative to Harper.  Right now, I'd say the NDP has a good chance of taking Esquimalt-JDF, Surrey North and a decent shot at Newton North-Delta if the LIbs continue to tank in the polls.  If we can knock Harper down a few points, Vancouver Island North becomes competitive and possibly Kamloops North-Thomson as well.  I fear Burnaby Douglas is likely a Conservative pick-up, unfortunately. 

A long time ago, I used to go and canvas in British Columbia elections.  It was back when the Social Credit was in government most of the time.  Anyways, it is my guess that much of the Liberal vote today is descended from the old Social Crediters, particularly in Vancouver and Victoria.    I say it is a guess because I haven't canvassed in a BC election for over 25 years, before my children were born.  I think of many NDP'ers changing to Reform in the days when Reform was in its infancy.  It is my guess that they represent the part of the Conservative vote that could be broken off with some negative advertising.  But, I think that timing is everything when it comes to that negative advertising.  I think it needs to be in the last three to four days of the campaign.  This would make it more difficult to counter, both by the media and the Conservatives.  I think the present attacks on the Liberals in some of the NDP advertising has a long term benefit.  The Liberals might think twice about starting off an election with all guns pointed at the NDP as they did in this election. 

There are parts of B.C. where the NDP-Conservative swing voter is almost non-existent though (or at the most very tiny in numbers)-the Bible belt in the Fraser Valley, West Vancouver, Kelowna.

If Nik Nanos is right, we should start to see the Cons' numbers declining by Tuesday or Wednesday - the effect from Guergis, if there is one.

For the first time Nanos has the NDP in second place in Quebec with 19.5%

Other polls also give the NDP second place there:

 Ekos 23.7

Environics 21

Forum 23

Angus Reid 24

Of course there are several polls that place the party lower but the trend is positive

And the NDP did go down from the day before--so, be prepared for "correction" possibilities...

Vansterdam Kid wrote:

I completely disagree with your take.

If the NDP made all those other ridings competitive, or was about to take them, then Burnaby Douglas would likely be a solid hold considering past results, yes? I know there was a big hullabaloo here about whether the voters supporting Svend Robinon and Bill Siksay are their supporters, or NDP supporters, but that area has always been somewhat NDP friendly and frankly I don't see how Bill Siksay was every particularly popular with the community seeing as he never won by particularly convincing margins. It's one thing to be popular amongst the activist base who will work for you, it's another to be popular among the wider community who will vote for you. If Stewart has no volunteers that's problematic, but if he has a reasonably good team (I have no idea about this) then surely the riding is at least an even chance at a hold? I know Svend did win by big margins back in the day, but after the whole ring incident, his attempted comeback in 2006 was an unmitigated disaster... ironically enough that's compared to the vote total Kennedy Stewart got in 2004.

I also completely disagree with the assertion that the Conservative vote is rock solid here. If anything there's a lot of BC NDP voters who vote Conservative federally. I think it's this demographic that are weakening the federal NDP's attempts to take more working class ridings like Surrey North (held massivley by the BC NDP), Newton North Delta (held pretty solidly by the BC NDP), Pitt Meadows-Maple Ridge-Mission (either held by the BC NDP - or the BC NDP is very competitive here), Vancouver Island North (held by the NDP), Kamloops (either won by the NDP last election - or they're very competitive here), etc, etc. These types of ridings never had that many Liberal voters and the Liberal voters they had would've likely been upper-middle class types who saw themselves as unable to vote for a retrograde Conservative party, but were willing to do so when it presented itself as 'moderate'. They still wouldn't have touched the NDP with a ten foot poll. I also think I'm right about this considering how the fact that when the Liberal vote collapsed in BC it didn't go to the NDP last time.

On the first point, there's no contradiction to say that the NDP can pick up some seats and be in danger of losing incumbents.  In 2008, we won Vancouver-Kingsway from the Libs/Cons (Emerson was elected as a Lib and switched to Cons) and lost Vancouver Island North and Surrey North to the Conservatives.  I know BC NDP voters can vote Cons/Reform federally - my point is that those preferences are stable and last a long time; all of the outer burbs in Vancouver (Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Maple Ridge, Delta, Surrey etc) go mostly NDP provincially and (except for Surrey North) stay Conservative federally, and have done so since 2004 in most cases.  

The federal Libs will be lucky to hold on to Vancouver Centre and Quadra this election, maybe Sukh can hold Newton-ND on his personal appeal. They are simply not competitive anywhere else, and their vote is trending down - why not go after it so the NDP can try to take some close races like VI North and Surrey North?

On the 2nd point, every poll shows that the Cons vote is the most firm and least likely to change, the Libs/Green/NDP vote is more in flux.  This is true in BC and nationally. Iggy has been in free-fall since the debates, the Lib/Con gap in the polls is stable or growing despite all the "scandals" and it makes total sense for Layton and the NDP to go after those votes.  The new Liberal hearl care scare ads against Harper could also help the NDP if Layton is seen as the most viable alternative.

I disagree with most of what people have said about BC. For one, the NDP has almost never had as good a wedge as the HST to burn the Conservatives with (it's a tax and spend issue for crying out loud!). When the BC NDP ran against the carbon tax, their vote went above 42%. They didn't win the election though because the swing seats the party needed were in the Lower Mainland and these voters were more concerned about the environment, but the NDP did pick up skads of votes in previously rib-rock Conservative places. The HST is like the Carbon Tax, although with little to no upside (no one is arguing it will help the environment) and the whole thing was based on a lie. This issue, along with graft, patronage, the undemocratic nature of the senate (e.g. democratic reform), the inquiry into salmon stocks and and the Sask NDP line of BC MPs representing Ottawa to BC as opposed to BC to Ottawa can win votes.

It can help the NDP across the province, because the "we are the only alternative to the Conservatives" is accepted pretty much everywhere but the Lower Mainland as fact, and the only lower mainland seat the NDP wants to gain is Newton-North Delta.

This is a growth campaign for the party and they are not going to grow running on the same campaign as last time. The BC NDP has to try to kneecap the Conservatives in a very populist way, in all the non-Vancouver parts of British Columbia. The votes that will switch, as Garth states, are probably the old reform votes. So the more the NDP sounds like Reform, or even the upstart Conservative party, in substance and not style, the more trouble the Conservatives are going to be in. If the NDP grinds its axe in this way, the only Conservative voters that are going to stay pat are the social conservatives (e.g. no to abortion, gay rights, etc) and (wealthy/ideological) economic conservatives. The only way the NDP can reach out to social conservatives in BC this campaign is through crime. The main wedge the Conservatives have against the NDP getting to its base is the gun registry (but some NDPers supported this and this should be made clear) and ideology (e.g. socialism = bad, bad, bad). The NDP wants to switch ever vote it can and demotivate every vote it can't.

West Coast Lefty wrote:

 

The federal Libs will be lucky to hold on to Vancouver Centre and Quadra this election, maybe Sukh can hold Newton-ND on his personal appeal. They are simply not competitive anywhere else, and their vote is trending down - why not go after it so the NDP can try to take some close races like VI North and Surrey North?

I don't think the Libs will be 'lucky' to hold onto Vancouver Centre and Quadra - I think they will win them both handily. Centre is shaping up to be a cakewalk for Fry as the Tories and NDP have been completely invisible so far - nobody even knows who the NDP candidate is. I've had two pamphlets from Fry and one pamphlet I got from Adriane Carr while she was mainstreeting outside my office. Admittedly I'm not as familiar with the situation in Quadra but I don't see any reason to suspect that Murray is in difficulty.

Its odd in BC, every bit of anecdotal evidence suggests the Liberals are losing ground - but almost every poll suggests that they will recover from the 19% they got in 2008 and get back in to the mid-20s - with all the gains coming from the Tories. If that is the case, the Liberals will easily hold Van South and probably have a decent chance of winning back North Vancouver and West Van and maybe Richmond. A Tory to Liberal shift with the NDP holding steady probably guarantees pickups in Surrey North and North Vancouver Island and will be a big help in holding Burnaby-Douglas. 

Quote:

It can help the NDP across the province, because the "we are the only alternative to the Conservatives" is accepted pretty much everywhere but the Lower Mainland as fact

Unfortunately, that's not true.  I'm costantly amazed how many people ignore the local realities of their riding and get caught up in the false belief that they are voting directly for the PM.  I would have thought that with the greater frequency of elections over the last decade, awareness would have grown but I'm definitely not getting a "only the NDP can stop the Conservatives" vibe and I'm from and live i rural BC.

I actually think the NDP is in trouble in BC.  I'm glad they're doing well in Quebec, hopefully that'll translate into seats because unless they have a gamechanger I'm not optimistic about BC. 

Quote:

The BC NDP has to try to kneecap the Conservatives in a very populist way, in all the non-Vancouver parts of British Columbia. The votes that will switch, as Garth states, are probably the old reform votes. So the more the NDP sounds like Reform, or even the upstart Conservative party, in substance and not style, the more trouble the Conservatives are going to be in. If the NDP grinds its axe in this way, the only Conservative voters that are going to stay pat are the social conservatives (e.g. no to abortion, gay rights, etc) and (wealthy/ideological) economic conservatives. The only way the NDP can reach out to social conservatives in BC this campaign is through crime.

I agree that a 'populist' style can play well in BC but everyone seems to have a different view of what that means.  BC hasn't existed in some vacuum for the last twenty years and chanelling Preston Manning isn't going to win the NDP any votes especially as a lot of Reform's issues were reactionary.  Democratic reform is a good one but that's not the kind of issue you can just pipe up about at election time, it takes time to build credibility and the BC NDP burnt a lot of theirs up during the last referendum on STV.  Crime would be a good issue for the NDP if they attacked the Conservatives on their approach to crime: mandatory mins for juveniles and people who grow 6 pot plants while encouraging prohibitionist policies that enrich organized crime and prison-building industries further stressing the ability of BC's government to fund social democratic programs.  Trying to out-tough the Cons on crime is beyond stupid.  Good luck. 

I don't see the HST as the magic bullet.  The furor has subsided somewhat and it's always been tied more to Gordon Cambell than Stephen Harper here.  I guess it's worth a shot though.

I also don't buy the assumption here that there are going to be big NDP gains at the expense of the Liberals.  Certainly not from what I've seen so far.  Ignatieff isn't a strong leader but he's actually probably more saleable than Dion in most of BC and he's done a decent job of focusing his campaign on themes that are easy to argue around the watercooler:  The Cons are plunging us into structural deficits with billions of spending on fighter jets and prisons, the Cons are dictatorial and anti-democratic.  The NDP on the other hand, have sounded scattershot and less focused: limits on interest for credit card rates, something about healthcare?

The NDP needs to start landing some bodyblows on Harper and framing the debate similar to what Duceppe managed in Quebec last election.

"I also don't buy the assumption here that there are going to be big NDP gains at the expense of the Liberals."

That's because the Liberals were reduced to their core vote last time.

In most Interior BC ridings the Liberals finished fourth behind the Greens.

West Coast Lefty wrote:

I agree re Fry winning easily.  Murray came very close to losing Quadra in the 2008 by-election so I don't know that she is safe - again, the NDP gains at Liberal expense will help the Cons close the gap in ridings like Quadra.

The race in Vancouver Centre looks boring for a change this year.  In the past it has been a high-profile race with all of the parties running star candidates, but this year both the NDP and the Cons found candidates at the last minute who have little chance of winning.  Only Hedy Fry and Adrienne Carr have active campaigns.

As for Joyce Murray, she nearly lost the Vancouver Quadra by-election, but she won the riding by 5,000 votes in the 2008 general election, so she seems to be stable now.  I'm surprised the Cons are running the same candidate against Murray again.

I think Surrey North is stronger - both the campaign as Jasbir was nominated as the NDP candidate a long time ago, and the demographics in this heavily indo-Canadian riding work for both Jasbir and the NDP overall.  Vancouver Island North is tougher organizationally, demographically and electorally - John Duncan was the MP for a long time before Bell beat him in 2006 and he will be tough to unseat.  This is a riding where the collapse of the Lib vote in 2008 helped the Conservatives go over the top.  The NDP candidate is a Courtenay city councillor but she was only nominated recently and I'm not clear how much profile/support she has outside of Courtenay.

Stockholm wrote:

Brace yourselves everyone...Angus Reid just put out a new poll in the Toronto Star (one I'm sure the Star wanted to suppress!)

NDP now TIED with the Liberals at 25%!!!!!

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/976225--ndp-moves-in...

 

Why? They didn't suppress it when it happened in the 2008 election

Vansterdam Kid wrote:

I usually find these polling threads an embarrassing guilty pleasure but silly because people jump up and down based on pathetic little swings of the vote. That said, reading that article is interesting because while it's true that the NDP has more persuadable voters for the other parties to pick off, meaning we can't be certain they'll get 25% on election day, the Star sure seems to be doing their best to deflect against the fact that A) the Conservatives won't get anywhere near a majority with these numbers and B) the Liberals are no longer the clear alternative to the Conservatives. If the NDP polls tied with, or even higher than the Liberals, then the whole "strategic voting" and "two horse race" memes are shot to hell.

Which numbers?  Do you mean in the one Angus Reid poll?  Because the Cons are still hovering around majority territory in many of the other polls.