http://www.theglobeandmail.com/community/poll-results-stephen-harpers-ca...
Not a scientific poll but the sampling is huge... would it be mostly T.0. area?
I would say the sample consists mostly of votes from the IP address of one dedicated NDP supporter.
Its actually not easy to do that now. And the other answers to the same poll dont seem to indicate NDP partisans on a rampage...
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/community/poll-results-stephen-harpers-ca...
Not a scientific poll but the sampling is huge... would it be mostly T.0. area?
I would say the sample consists mostly of votes from the IP address of one dedicated NDP supporter.
Well, these polls normally only allow one vote per IP address. However, I suspect that some NDP supporter is enough of a script kiddie to have discovered the means of writing a robot voter which spoofs its IP address. It would be interesting to see how many of the votes for Mulcair also contain an identical set of answers to the other questions. Although a clever script kiddie could have written a bot that would answer the other questions randomly.
If it was easy to spoof ips and flood a poll everyone would be doing it. This result roughly follows Mulcairs personal result from official polling. I wish thay had asked the same question of party name vote and see if the results followed the leaders name question.
Well, these polls normally only allow one vote per IP address. However, I suspect that some NDP supporter is enough of a script kiddie to have discovered the means of writing a robot voter which spoofs its IP address. It would be interesting to see how many of the votes for Mulcair also contain an identical set of answers to the other questions. Although a clever script kiddie could have written a bot that would answer the other questions randomly.
Since my VPN provider assigns me a brand new IP address each time I log into a different server (from among hundreds of servers around the globe), I could run a script to change my IP address and vote on these polls as many times as I like. The whole process could be repeated about once every 3 to 5 seconds for about 700-1200 votes an hour. Requiring a "Captcha" entry as part of the voting process would definitely make things more difficult and tedious, but I do not believe this Globe poll required such a user entry.
Incidentally, if one were so inclined (and purely for research purposes, of course), one could use such a VPN service to access Netflix content from the UK or US or reset the "10 free articles" one is entitled to from news sources behind a pay wall.
Well, these polls normally only allow one vote per IP address. However, I suspect that some NDP supporter is enough of a script kiddie to have discovered the means of writing a robot voter which spoofs its IP address. It would be interesting to see how many of the votes for Mulcair also contain an identical set of answers to the other questions. Although a clever script kiddie could have written a bot that would answer the other questions randomly.
Since my VPN provider assigns me a brand new IP address each time I log into a different server (from among hundreds of servers around the globe), I could run a script to change my IP address and vote on these polls as many times as I like. The whole process could be repeated about once every 3 to 5 seconds for about 700-1200 votes an hour. Requiring a "Captcha" entry as part of the voting process would definitely make things more difficult and tedious, but I do not believe this Globe poll required such a user entry.
Good point. You don't even need to spoof the IP, just use a VPN. While I don't know for sure, I strongly suspect you are right that they didn't use a captcha.
The colours in the poll doesn't represent the parties.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/community/poll-results-stephen-harpers-ca...
They rerpresent levels of satisfaction or lack thereof with the Harper government on various issues.
I was really impressed with the level of organization and technical know-how of the NDP operators who freeped that poll. Very impressive. The results mean nothing. The Conservatives and Liberals were sleeping at the switch.
What it does mean is that the NDP organizational strength is very high, and this bodes well for their ability to mobilize during the campaign -- the NDP is going to be very competive in the election campaign.
Generally, I don't think I have seen the NDP so motivated or so strongly imbued with a winning spirit in many years.
The could have used other colours, terrible graphics and I didn't care for the colour /aspect being similar for a bunch of stuff, IE orange worse, red improved. Then leader names with odd colours. Pschologically it is a push poll to those who view it.
I was really impressed with the level of organization and technical know-how of the NDP operators who freeped that poll. Very impressive. The results mean nothing. The Conservatives and Liberals were sleeping at the switch.
What it does mean is that the NDP organizational strength is very high, and this bodes well for their ability to mobilize during the campaign -- the NDP is going to be very competive in the election campaign.
Generally, I don't think I have seen the NDP so motivated or so strongly imbued with a winning spirit in many years.
What results do you think are in response to the poll being freeped?
The could have used other colours, terrible graphics and I didn't care for the colour /aspect being similar for a bunch of stuff, IE orange worse, red improved. Then leader names with odd colours. Pschologically it is a push poll to those who view it.
Not very subtle there switching the traditional colours for parties on the "future Prime Minister" category. Laughable. Truly.
Sondage Léger–Le Devoir–Le Journal de Montréal
Feu vert à la lutte contre la «terreur»
9 février 2015
Préoccupés par le terrorisme et l’intégrisme religieux, les Québécois donnent un appui sans équivoque à la mission militaire canadienne en Irak et à la nouvelle loi antiterroriste proposée par le gouvernement Harper.
Les électeurs québécois, habituellement sceptiques devant les mesures axées sur la loi et l’ordre, sont plus favorables que jamais à la stratégie antiterroriste du gouvernement conservateur. Les trois quarts (74 %) des Québécois appuient le projet de loi qui donne plus de pouvoirs au Service canadien du renseignement de sécurité (SCRS) et aux policiers dans leur lutte contre le terrorisme, révèle un sondage Léger réalisé pour Le Devoir et Le Journal de Montréal.
. . .
Cette fois, les Québécois appuient pratiquement toutes les initiatives du gouvernement Harper contre le terrorisme. « Je ne me souviens pas d’un tel appui à des mesures conservatrices au Québec. Les Québécois ont tendance à être très frileux envers le discours conservateur », dit Christian Bourque, vice-président et associé chez Léger.
. . .
L’enthousiasme des électeurs québécois envers les projets antiterroristes représente une excellente nouvelle pour les conservateurs en cette année électorale, souligne M. Bourque. Les libéraux de Justin Trudeau ont bien saisi l’enjeu et ont annoncé qu’ils appuient le projet de loi conservateur, malgré des réserves importantes.
--------
http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/canada/431329/sondage-leger-le-devoir-...
It would be nice to credit the Globe's massive online poll WRT to voting intention. But...
Reading the comments by readers indicates that a few days ago the results were very different. There had been a much greater disapproval of the government and its policies but the gap narrowed in the home stretch.
It does seem likely that Con supporters queered the final results in this regard.
On the other hand it seems incongruous that the same people who approved government positions disprortionately backed the NDP. Hard to square this circle.
Looks to me like they just made a mistake and reversed the labels in the last graph.
*
We don't have any hard evidence the poll was feeped and honestly I doubt the NDP would bother with doing that.
There is an important poll from Leger out today saying the large majority of Quebecers approve of Harper's terror bill, and that this could improve Harper's chances in Quebec.
But instead people here are discussing a largely irrelevant online G&M poll?
The NDP needs to take Harper's rising approval in Quebec seriously. Mulcair must be wondering if being on the wrong side of Quebec opinion on the terror issue could effect the NDP's chances.
Just because a large majority support a bill does not mean a large minority will support the government.
Trudeau should be more worried, the votes most likely vulnerible in Quebec to Harper are Trudeau's.
Mulcair must be wondering if being on the wrong side of Quebec opinion on the terror issue could effect the NDP's chances.
More BS from Liberal shills
There is an important poll from Leger out today saying the large majority of Quebecers approve of Harper's terror bill, and that this could improve Harper's chances in Quebec.
But instead people here are discussing a largely irrelevant online G&M poll?
The NDP needs to take Harper's rising approval in Quebec seriously. Mulcair must be wondering if being on the wrong side of Quebec opinion on the terror issue could effect the NDP's chances.
Mulcair must be wondering if being on the wrong side of Quebec opinion on the terror issue could effect the NDP's chances.
More BS from Liberal shills
Liberal shilling has nothing to do with it. You can't call Leger, Chantal Hebert, Christian Bourque and everyone else who has been talking about this issue a Liberal shill. Did you read the poll in the Quebec newspapers above?
And I agree that it also could affect Liberal votes in Quebec. But most of the Liberal seats are out of reach for the Conservatives (eg. Papineau, Bourassa, St. Laurent, etc.) The NDP seats in Quebec City are vulnerable to the Conservatives.
But seriously, this is something that can effect both NDP & Liberal chances in Quebec.
---
Terror could be rare winning issue for Conservatives in Quebec: Hébert
For the first time in years, Stephen Harper has on his side a major issue that connects with more than a small minority of Quebecers
Feb 02, 2015
http://www.ourwindsor.ca/opinion-story/5298507-terror-could-be-rare-winn...
If this Conservative rise in Quebec is real I don't believe for a second it will last past the next month. As far as I am concerned there's nothing that proves these polls in Quebec are correct, everything we know about the electorate there and personal feeling of the Harper government sugest that this can not be correct.
If and When the Tories take over 6 seat in Quebec in 2015 is the day I believe that these polls are true.
If the nerrative that the NDP is the new home of Quebec Nationalist (not that I believe that either) is true there's no way NDP seats are in no danger.
The Conservatives were able to retain 5 seats in Quebec in 2011 even during the Layton Wave, so it's certainly possible they could win back some with NDP numbers lower than what they were under Layton.
Harper is a formidable strategist, and he has been visiting Quebec City once a month for the past 4 years. He's also recruited a CAQ MNA from the area. Eric Grenier's site currently shows the CPC winning back some of the seats they lost there in 2011.
So it's possible. As Chantal Hébert says, there are pockets of Conservative support in Quebec, both federally & provincially, particularly in the Quebec City region.
No one is predicting that Harper is going to be getting Mulroney numbers in Quebec - just that he might not be as dead there as some of us hoped.
As we approach the election some pollsters who had the Liberals as high as 39% six months ago, are now moving to correct their bullshit.
This is why Nate Silver adopted a process in an attempt to reduce or eliminate herding.
This past summer kinda reminded me of Scott Reid and other Liberals saying Paul Martin was going to win 250 or more seats in the 2004 election.
We all know how well that turned out for the Liberals.
In spite of all the noise, the reality is both the NDP and the Cons gained ground, and the Liberals dropped support in the month of January.
Avec les Libereaux "Plus ca change, plus ca reste la meme chose".
The Conservatives were able to retain 5 seats in Quebec in 2011 even during the Layton Wave, so it's certainly possible they could win back some with NDP numbers lower than what they were under Layton.
Debater, it's quotes like this that show what a truly accomplished propagandist you are. "The Layton wave" was what happened in 2011, but Layton is dead, so that can't possibly have any relevance to this year's election. Well done, sir.
Michael, I'm not sure what you mean. What I was saying is that since the Conservatives were able to retain 5 seats in Quebec even during 2011 when their support in the province dropped to 16% and the NDP hit 43%, it shows they can still win seats there even in bad times. Therefore, if they go up a couple of points this year, they could win additional seats on top of that 5.
I basically said what Chantal Hébert said in a recent column where she mentioned that if those 5 Conservatives survived the Orange Wave, they are probably pretty secure for now. How does that make me a propagandist?
I'll quote what I'm referring to:
The prime minister’s five MPs beat the odds of a losing Conservative Quebec campaign in the last two elections. Their re-election prospects are as good or better than most Conservative incumbents outside of Saskatchewan and Alberta.
http://www.ourwindsor.ca/opinion-story/5269011-conservatives-have-only-m...
Michael, I'm not sure what you mean.
I think you know perfectly well what I mean, but just in case, I am saying that you use language (not only in this post, but also in many previous ones) which attributes all or most of the NDP success in 2011 to Layton. This encourages in the reader the idea that since Layton is dead, so is the possibility of many more people voting NDP, in Quebec and the ROC. Once could be just a random locution, but you have done this consistently for years.
I just quoted Chantal Hébert on the subject of the 5 CPC MP's. That's all I was talking about. As Hébert says, since the CPC was able to retain those 5 seats in the Orange Wave, they may have a pretty good chance of doing so again.
And since the anti-terrorism legislation is popular in Québec, Christian Bourque, Chantal Hébert and others say it could give the CPC further gains.
Did you read the Leger poll above, or any of the recent pieces on Quebec by Hebert? I post links to back-up what I say so that people will know I'm not making it up.
As to the 2011 election, most people attribute it to Jack Layton. That doesn't mean that other factors or other people weren't involved, but he was the driving force behind it. It doesn't mean that the NDP can't keep some of that support, siince we've obviously seen that the NDP is still doing relatively well in Quebec. It is down in support from the highs of 2011, but choosing Mulcair was smart because he's another popular figure in Quebec and is keeping the NDP well-placed there.
However, current projections show the Mulcair NDP losing some seats in Quebec to the Liberals and some to the Conservatives.
I think the current seat projection at 308 is 40 NDP seats, 21 Liberal seats, 16 CPC seats and 1 BQ seat.
Who knows how it will all turn out by October.
Its just one poll on one narrow issue. Harper is the same guy who also killed the gun registry. How safe do Quebeckers feel that terrorists can easily get guns under Harper? Campaigning on this isnt going to be that big a problem if the NDP can counter the legislation with something not so egregious on civil rights.
The NDP needs to take Harper's rising approval in Quebec seriously. Mulcair must be wondering if being on the wrong side of Quebec opinion on the terror issue could effect the NDP's chances.
Mulcair taking a firm stance against Islamophobia was a principled choice to make, and unfortunately there will be an anti-Muslim backlash against that. I'm not sure what you are arguing. Are you suggesting that Mulcair should have softened his stance against Islamophobia?
The NDP needs to take Harper's rising approval in Quebec seriously. Mulcair must be wondering if being on the wrong side of Quebec opinion on the terror issue could effect the NDP's chances.Mulcair taking a firm stance against Islamophobia was a principled choice to make, and unfortunately there will be an anti-Muslim backlash against that. I'm not sure what you are arguing. Are you suggesting that Mulcair should have softened his stance against Islamophobia?
No, I didn't say that at all. And Justin Trudeau has taken strong positions on discrimination too, sometimes before Mulcair, as in the case of the PQ Charter of Values. Trudeau spoke out against it a couple of weeks before Mulcair.
The point of the discussion was to draw attention to what the Quebec commentators & pollsters are saying above - that Harper is a smart strategist, he knows Quebec has the 2nd largest number of seats in Canada, and the terrorism issue may give him an opening to make up ground in Quebec.
It's too soon to declare Harper finished there until we see what the upcoming weeks & months hold. It could be a challenge for both NDP & Liberal candidates in Quebec.
As we approach the election some pollsters who had the Liberals as high as 39% six months ago, are now moving to correct their bullshit.
This is why Nate Silver adopted a process in an attempt to reduce or eliminate herding.
This past summer kinda reminded me of Scott Reid and other Liberals saying Paul Martin was going to win 250 or more seats in the 2004 election.
We all know how well that turned out for the Liberals.
In spite of all the noise, the reality is both the NDP and the Cons gained ground, and the Liberals dropped support in the month of January.
Avec les Libereaux "Plus ca change, plus ca reste la meme chose".
1. The reason it was predicted that Paul Martin would win a Majority Government is because that's what likely would have happened had the Sponsorship Scandal not happened. Martin was able to win a good-sized Minority in 2004 even though the Scandal had erupted by then, so it's pretty easy to see how he could have won a Majority if things had gone smoothly. I'm not sure what relevance that has to current events, but since you keep bringing it up, we might as well explain why it happend.
2. Yes the Liberal numbers have dropped several points over the past few months as Harper has ramped up the fears of terrorism. But as I always point out, I'm not sure why NDP supporters are celebrating that. Most of those voters are blue liberals & red tories who are going back to Harper, not to the NDP. The NDP is only at a 20%-21% National Average. I'm not sure how that is good news for progressives. The NDP is currently losing ground in Quebec.
---
We could be in the midst of some significant political shifts. The Liberals could lose the lead in national polls in February for the first time in almost two years, largely driven by an unexpected Conservative surge in Quebec. And that surge could also have implications for the NDP, who have the most to lose to the Tories in the province. Such an unusual turn of events (despite the narrowing of the gap nationally, the Liberals have actually improved their position in battleground Ontario) could change the dynamics of the electoral math. It will be interesting to see what, if any, effect this will have on the party's strategies.
2. Yes the Liberal numbers have dropped several points over the past few months as Harper has ramped up the fears of terrorism. But as I always point out, I'm not sure why NDP supporters are celebrating that. Most of those voters are blue liberals & red tories who are going back to Harper, not to the NDP. The NDP is only at a 20%-21% National Average. I'm not sure how that is good news for progressives.
Based on poor polls, I respect Eric and threehundredeight.com but lately I haven't been impressed with his analysis of the polls and his use and heavy weighting of polls that are clearly suspect.
The NDP is currently losing ground in Quebec.
Which is based on one very suspect poll by EKOS that’s at best an outlier and at worst an outright fabrication or miscalculation. Sorry but if you’re going to believe the CPC is leading the NDP in Quebec I have a bridge to sell you.
Where did I say that the CPC was leading the NDP in Quebec? I didn't. Again, I wish some people here would read what is quoted, rather than what they THINK they read.
It is not just EKOS that shows the CPC moving up in Quebec (and they had the Liberals ahead in QC, not the CPC). It was also Ipsos Reid (a pro-CPC pollster, but still). And Leger shows the NDP at only 31 in last week's poll (ahead of the Liberals by 2 points). And Christian Bourque and Chantal Hebert have both said the CPC position against terrorism has support in Quebec. Over the next week I think there will be a new CROP poll coming out so we will see where they come down.
But again, please read what was WRITTEN. It was NOT was written that the CPC is ahead in QC. What was stated by the above sources was that the CPC has gone UP in support in Quebec. And that it may go up further, depending on how the year unfolds.
"Quebec opinion on terror" implies a monolithic state of mind in Quebec, and it uses the "terrorism" dog whistle which most of us in critical circles see as something which fuels xenophobia and bigotry.
Harper is trying to blow a xenophobic dog whistle to certain groups in Quebec who may respond. As a result of that, there is going to be a social debate about the thinking behind that, and how Harper is trying to divide us AGAIN. And there is plenty of time for that. If the Liberals want to go after that vote, that is their prerogative.
If a hard right-wing vote comes out for the Tories, I think that is going to hurt the Liberals the worst in the long term. Those Liberals not inclined to go that way may go Bloc, NDP, or even Green.
The only way the Liberals can collect vote is to start to appear critical of Harper's security agenda, and start to explain it in terms of "Violent Extremism" which is what it really is. To do that, though, they have to move back from uncritical support of the Tea Party, Keystone, Bibi Netanyahu, etc.
Harper's dog whistles are actions. The electorate have plenty of time to develop reactions to those actions. Perhaps, people in Quebec will fail to see they are being played for suckers. That would not make them different from Canadians anywhere else in Canada.
The NDP needs to take Harper's rising approval in Quebec seriously. Mulcair must be wondering if being on the wrong side of Quebec opinion on the terror issue could effect the NDP's chances.Mulcair taking a firm stance against Islamophobia was a principled choice to make, and unfortunately there will be an anti-Muslim backlash against that. I'm not sure what you are arguing. Are you suggesting that Mulcair should have softened his stance against Islamophobia?
No, I didn't say that at all. And Justin Trudeau has taken strong positions on discrimination too, sometimes before Mulcair, as in the case of the PQ Charter of Values. Trudeau spoke out against it a couple of weeks before Mulcair.
The point of the discussion was to draw attention to what the Quebec commentators & pollsters are saying above - that Harper is a smart strategist, he knows Quebec has the 2nd largest number of seats in Canada, and the terrorism issue may give him an opening to make up ground in Quebec.
It's too soon to declare Harper finished there until we see what the upcoming weeks & months hold. It could be a challenge for both NDP & Liberal candidates in Quebec.
Good. We agree that Harper's anti-terrorism talking is unacceptable. Now, can you set aside your concern for how this plays out in terms of the popularity of polls, and help us figure out how to convince the Liberals and NDP to stand firmly for civil liberties and not buckle under pressure on this issue?
I suppose the Liberals can say in Quebec, "Not only did we give you the War Measures Act, but we are 100% behind Harper on his Security Agenda as well!"
I'm still not convinced that Quebecers will vote for Harper en masse because of a bill.
His seats may be safe in the regions (RE: Rednecks) but I can't see places such as Montreal suddenly falling in love with a man who is very much loathed in this part of the country.
It's all going to come down to the GTA.
Nanos released today:
Polling ended Feb 6, 2015 long before the shit hit the fan with the Eve Adams/Trudeau caper shows Liberals continuing to trend down in all sectors.
Power Party Index
Cons - 53.3%, Up 0.5%
NDP - 48.7%, Down 0.8%
Libs - 57.4%, Down 0.4%
Vote Consider
Cons - 44.3%, Down 0.4%
NDP - 45.3%, Up 0.1%
Libs - 53.7%, Down 1.5%
Preferred PM
Harper - 32.4%, Up 1.2%
NDP - 17%, Down 0.2%
Libs - 31.1%, Down 0.3%
http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/Nanos%20Political%20Index%202...
Even though the Eve Adams thing was tawdry and disgusting, I do not think that many people will care.
The ballot question in the election will be "who do you want in charge of the country's finances, Joe Oliver or Eve Adams or...?" (I hope the NDP nominated someone highly credible in Eglinton-Lawrence just so that the riding becomes a metaphor for the three parties and Eve Adams is viewed as the perfect symbol of everything J Trudeau Liberalism (or shall i say narcissism) is all about
In a random sampling of public opinion taken by the Forum Poll™ among 1018 Canadian voters, almost 4-in-10 will vote Liberal if the election were held today (39%) compared to just less than a third who will vote Conservative (32%). Fewer than a fifth will vote for the New Democrats (17%). These findings represent a contrast to last month, when the two leading parties were tied (Liberals - 34%, Conservatives - 35%) and the New Democrats had a full fifth of the vote (January 28 - 20%).
http://poll.forumresearch.com/post/234/convincing-majority-seen/
Obviously, to be taken with the usual grain of salt.
And apparently the release was premature, or the poll was pulled, as the link now goes to a beer survey.
With any poll it's at least a "grain of salt."
With Forum it is always with "a truckload of salt."
Just ask Glen Thibeault.
With any poll it's at least a "grain of salt."
With Forum it is always with "a truckload of salt."
Just ask Glen Thibeault.
Forum is a relatively new pollster. Give them the benefit of the doubt and let's just say they have a lot to learn to obtain credibility.
So now let's combine the track records using the anaysis to prevent herding for the 2008 and 2011 federal elections*
Pollster / Total Difference
Ipsos Reid / 4% - Most Accurate Pollster
Angus Reid / 5% - Close Second
Harris Decima / 6% - Not bad!
EKOS / 11%
Nanos / 11%
*The Bloc results have been excluded from the stats
Now the poll's back up.
What a joke of a poll.
I have heard of at least one, but one thing investigative types might want to check into is how many Forum Executives and/or employees are running for Liberal nominations? 
EKOS:
Libs 34
Cons 32
NDP 19
At L 39, C 32, N 17 the Liberals would get a good majority. It would be kind of like 1980.
At L 34, C 32, N 19 it becomes much more unsure. I don't think anyone gets a majority.
