2019 polls 3

I have found that Angus Reid leans Conservative. I'm quoting this from the previous thread.

Angus Reid Institute poll shows continued momentum for NDP under Jagmeet Singh...

• A new poll shows that NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has the highest favourability rating.

...Among decided voters, the Conservatives are in the lead at 33 percent, according to the poll, followed by the Liberals at 29 percent.

The NDP under Jagmeet Singh has risen to 19 percent, up five percentage points since the beginning of October.

Singh's favourability rating is 64 percent, up 25 percentage points since the start of the campaign.

Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer's favourability rating is 37 percent, compared to 36 percent for Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau.

Green Leader Elizabeth May's favourability rating is 47 percent, whereas Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-Francois Blanchet is at 56 percent.

..."With election day approximately a week away, just half of Canadian voters (52%) say they are absolutely locked in to support one specific party," the Angus Reid Institute said in its report. "Thus, the vote result on October 21 will depend on personal calculations in the final days.

"On this front, the Conservatives hold the advantage: vote certainty among their supporters remains highest, while the NDP’s late momentum appears subject to change based on the fluidity of their supporters. The same phenomenon is seen among Green supporters, and to a lesser extent, among Liberal supporters."

https://www.straight.com/news/1314156/angus-reid-institute-poll-shows-continued-momentum-ndp-under-jagmeet-singh

[/quote]

The Conservatives don't hold the advantage. Their base is always certain and always the largest. It's centrist voters they have trouble getting and they don't seem in the mood to support the Conservatives. There is a lot of fluidity between the Greens, Liberals and NDP but not much of it goes Conservative. Voters are neither supporting the Conservatives nor fearing them which would cause a rush to the Liberals.

I suspect a large portion of the undecided will go Liberal saving their bacon. Singh is the most popular leader so that could indicate the NDP has the momentum not the Conservatives. If Singh didn't wear a turban and beard I think he would be doing even better. That means Canadians want to fight climate change and inequality and tax the wealthy.

Angus Reid has the Conservatives leading in the Atlantic.  Which is an eyebrow raiser.

josh wrote:

Results from Mainstreet's daily tracker poll released Wednesday show 30.9% of leaning and decided respondents said they’d vote for the Liberals, while 30.6% opted for the Conservatives and 18.3% said they’d vote for the NDP

NDP + 1, Greens -1

n/a

KarlL wrote:

Mainstreet has the Liberals up 2.0 percent since their polling low point last week (Oct 10) and the NDP up 1.7% since then. Greens down 1.7% and the Conservatives down 1.1% over the same period.  All within the 2.15% MOE of course but a pretty clear upward trajectory for the NDP if a bit more gradual now.  

As noted before I don't have much faith in Mainstreet poll considering the questions raised by an independent panel of experts about their accuracy in the Calgary mayoral race.

A new report looking at the inaccuracies of Mainstreet Research’s polling methods during the 2017 Calgary municipal election is pointing fingers at a number of flaws with the poll’s results, what led to them and what happened in the aftermath. ...

As the mayoral candidates were in the final days of their election campaigns, a Mainstreet Research poll, commissioned by Postmedia — which publishes both the Calgary Herald and the Calgary Sun daily newspapers — changed the narrative, putting candidate Bill Smith in a 13-point lead over incumbent Naheed Nenshi. ...

What happened three days later stunned many Calgarians as Nenshi held tight to the mayor’s seat, winning with a 7.6-point lead. ...

Days later, Mainstreet Research apologized for what Maggi called a “catastrophic polling failure” that some argued interfered with the democratic process. ...

Months later, the Marketing Research Intelligence Association launched a review into the polling results. The association said the results were conflicting and underperforming, and the review would focus on the degree of inaccuracy, the reasons for the inaccuracies and whether the results were adequately given to the voting public.

The review was conducted by a panel of three independent academics — Dr. Christopher Adams with the University of Manitoba, professor Paul Adams at Carleton University and Dr. David Zussman with the University of Victoria — and it takes concern with a number of issues that arose as a result of the poll results. ...

The more than 70-page report also takes issue with Mainstreet’s “overconfidence” in its results when critics started voicing concerns. "Mainstreet executives responded with unshakeable confidence in their results and attacked their critics, often in personal terms, at one point suggesting there would be ‘payback’ after the election results were known,” the panel said. ...

The report said that confidence contrasted with the firm’s internal concerns over the poll results eventually led it to change its methodology — another point of contention within the polling.

Instead of using random-digit dialing, Mainstreet used phone numbers pulled from a “directory,” which pollster Janet Brown said meant the survey started out with a “flawed sample.”

The experts said the directory was under-representative of young voters who eventually made up a large portion of the unexpectedly high voter turnout. Mainstreet failed to provide more information on what that directory was or where it came from. ...

One of the biggest critics of the 2017 poll was Mount Royal University political scientist Duane Bratt. Bratt — who was one of the people interviewed by the panel — called the 2017 poll “a damaging blow to the entire polling industry. “All can agree that the polling during the 2017 Calgary election was bad,” he told Global News. “Moreover, it had a direct impact on the result — although we cannot properly ascertain what that impact was besides destroying Andre Chabot’s candidacy.” ...

In addition to Mainstreet itself, the report also placed some of the blame for the media and public confusion on Postmedia, which the panel argued “was not critical enough in its reporting of polls for which it was partially responsible.” Postmedia did not participate in the review.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4375306/report-flawed-calgary-election-pollin...

NDP + 1, Greens -1

Mainstreet has the Liberals up 2.0 percent since their polling low point last week (Oct 10) and the NDP up 1.7% since then. Greens down 1.7% and the Conservatives down 1.1% over the same period.  All within the 2.15% MOE of course but a pretty clear upward trajectory for the NDP if a bit more gradual now.  

[/quote]

Conservatives are ahead of the Liberals in 7 out of the 10 most recent polls.

According to EKOS

NDP 2% out of first place in BC, Liberals are third, and the Greens a distant 4th, which could mean several more NDP seats in BC

And now the NDP is at 21% in Ontario.

Liberals, Conservatives still tied for first, while NDP jumps over 18%: Mainstreet poll

By Marco Vigliotti. Published on Oct 16, 2019 3:38pm

New Democratic Party of Canada (NDP) leader Jagmeet Singh speaks in his campaign office in Burnaby, B.C. on Wednesday, Feb. 20, 2019, five days before the Burnaby South byelection in which he's running for his first seat in Parliament. David P. Ball/Star Vancouver

https://ipolitics.ca/2019/10/16/liberals-conservatives-still-tied-for-first-while-ndp-jumps-over-18-mainstreet-poll/

Conservatives Seen As Party That Will Keep Election Promises (28%), Ahead of NDP (23%) and Liberals (22%)

Singh Surges As Best PM (23%, +9), But Remains in Third-Place Behind Trudeau (28%, -7) and Scheer (27%, -3)

Toronto, ON, October 16, 2019 —With unmet expectations and broken promises a focal point of the campaign, new Ipsos polling done exclusively for Global News reveals what Canadians think about their political leaders and the extent to which they trust them to deliver on their campaign pledges.

When it comes to keeping the election promises made during this campaign, the Conservatives come out as the top pick for being the party most seriously committed to keeping their election promises (28%), followed by the NDP (23%), the Liberals (22%), Greens (14%), People’s Party (6%), and Bloc Québécois (6%). Those in Alberta (50%) and Saskatchewan and Manitoba (46%) are more likely to think the Conservatives under Andrew Scheer are the most seriously committed to keeping their promises, whereas those in Quebec (28%) and Ontario (27%) see the Liberals as being the most seriously committed to doing the same. However, political cynicism remains high, as three-quarters (78%) agree (25% strongly/52% somewhat) that regardless of which party leader becomes prime minister, they will break their election promises.

While more Canadians think the Conservatives will keep their word more than the other parties, both Trudeau (28%) and Scheer (27%) are in a virtual tie over who would make the best prime minister. Just last week, Justin Trudeau had a five-point lead over Andrew Scheer. That lead has since evaporated, with Singh benefitting from this shift in perceptions.

Regional divides are clear when it comes to who prefers which candidate; Those in Quebec (34%) prefer Trudeau, while those in Alberta (55%) and Saskatchewan and Manitoba (37%) would rather see Scheer lead the country. The two major party leaders are followed by Singh (23%), May (10%), Bernier (4%), and Blanchet (4%). Another 4% simply don’t know which party leader would make the best PM.

Making the Right Choice

In such a close race, making the right choice at the ballot box is even more important than before. A large majority (83%) agree (48% strongly/35% somewhat) that they will vote for someone they can believe in, most likely meaning that they will listen to their hearts when at the ballot box and vote for someone they can trust.

But whom do Canadians trust? Unfortunately, the news isn’t good for the major party leaders, as 3 in 10 (30%) say they don’t trust any of them the most, a sentiment that is felt more strongly in Atlantic Canada (39%) and among those aged 35-54 (36%). Scheer (19%) is the most trustworthy major party leader, but by a small margin when compared to Singh (17%) and Trudeau (16%).

When it comes to the two main party leaders, there is a distinct characterization in the minds of voters. Compared to the other party leaders, Trudeau is seen as someone who will best represent Canada on the world stage (30%), whereas Scheer outperforms when it comes to being seen as someone who will tackle Canada’s deficit (34%), spend taxpayer money wisely (25%), and get things done (25%).

How well do these perceptions align with the issue that Canadians care about the most? The most recent Ipsos polling has found that healthcare, climate change, and affordability are the top three issues that are the most determinant of how Canadians will vote next week. Therefore, it is very telling that a quarter (24%) of Canadians say no party leader is best to help improve health care, 2 in 10 (21%) say no leader would be best to tackle climate change, and a 3 in 10 (31%) say no one will make things more affordable.

Perhaps then it is not surprising that 40% agree (12% strongly/28% somewhat) that they don’t really like any of the parties this election. Even taking politics out of the equation, when asked with which major party leader they would like to have a coffee or beer, almost 3 in 10 (28%) said none of them. Of the party leaders, Singh is the most popular (22%) drinking mate, followed by Trudeau (20%), and Scheer in a distant third (14%). That the major party leaders are not seen as addressing the issues that matter most to Canadians and dislike for the parties and their leaders may mean that those who are still on the fence about their vote choice may simply stay at home.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-ca/news-and-polls/overview

Nanos for this morning:

CON 32.5% (flat) / LIB 31.5% (-0.4%) / NDP 18.9% (+0.1%) / GRN 9.2% (-0.2%) / BQ 6.0% (+0.1%) / PPC 1.6% (+0.5%)

Very little movement, bearing in mind that a change of 0.1% across a 1200-person 3-day sample is one voter.

https://election.ctvnews.ca/nanos

.

NorthReport wrote:

So today’s Nanos poll shows the NDP gaining 1/2 per cent on the Liberals.

I suppose that's true but it may not mean much depending on which ridings your additional 1-out-of-1200 voters lives in or which ridings the Liberals' 5 lost voters out of 1200 live in.  You could just as readily have gained your one new voter from the Greens.  The Liberals could have bled to the Bloc and to the Conservatives, who in turn bled to the PPC.

I think Blanchett could become Prime Minister

You're predicting a Liberal majority?

NorthReport wrote:

8 out of the 10 most recent polls show the Cons in the lead 

and now this

https://election.ctvnews.ca/scheer-says-party-with-most-seats-should-have-right-to-form-government-1.4642331

These are dangerous lies. There are people who do not understand how parliament works and cannot see the lie that is obvious when you understand:

1) a PM needs a parliamentary majority of votes to govern (including their party and supporters) - this may not be majority of seats as other parties may prevent a defeat by not voting or abstaining.

2) There is no right for a party to demand or expect the support or abstention of another in the House of Commons.

This is the reason government goes to the party that can get the most voluntary support rather than the one with the biggest party.

Given what is going on in Israel and the Conservatives obsession with Israel, you would think they would know by now. So this is not a mistake. It is a lie.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2019_Canadian_federal_election#Campaign_period

Mainstreet results released on October 17.

Lib 31.9% (+1.0%) / CON 30.9% (+0.3%) / NDP 18.6% (+0.3%) / GRN 7.0% (-0.7%) / BQ 7.6% (-0.3%) /PPC 3.2% (-0.4%)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2019_Canadian_federal_election

KarlL wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

josh wrote:

He can talk and expect all he wants, if he doesn't have the votes to pass his agenda, he doesn't have the votes.

Constitutionally that means he does not have the right becuase the GG has the obligation to call on a party that can claim to be able to pass legislation. This is not an opinion -- it is a fact.

 

I don't think it is that simple.  Yes that describes his inability to pass legislation and probable inability to initiate a government at all but that is not what he is aiming at, I believe.

The public and the Conservative base are being prepped for a storyline.  Essentially, it is that the Liberals and NDP colluded/conspired to prevent CPC from forming government even though it won the most seats (a lot of Canadians will presume that's the yardstick, as noted earlier).  That storyline may have value later in blasting the arrangement as it comes together and again later still, if the Trudeau-led government stumbles or is brought down. But right now it also motivates his base to vote and also attempts to draw Trudeau into the fray, which raised the prospect of an NDP role in setting the agenda, which in turn could have an impact on voters who swing between the Conservatives and Liberals.

There is also the matter that Conservatives risk being shut out over the longer term unless they can shift to a "plurality winner takes all" convention.  Lastly, "we wuz robbed" may help him fend off any internal dissent post-campaign.

Sorry, one more thing.  Even if he gets a plurality of seats, he is nowhere without the Bloc and yet his base will have some issues with doing a deal with separatists and ones who hate pipelines to boot.  To his base, he can say "there is no choice; otherwise we will be faced by an unholy alliance of Liberals and New Democrats who will steal government from us".

KarlL wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

josh wrote:

He can talk and expect all he wants, if he doesn't have the votes to pass his agenda, he doesn't have the votes.

Constitutionally that means he does not have the right becuase the GG has the obligation to call on a party that can claim to be able to pass legislation. This is not an opinion -- it is a fact.

 

I don't think it is that simple.  Yes that describes his inability to pass legislation and probable inability to initiate a government at all but that is not what he is aiming at, I believe.

The public and the Conservative base are being prepped for a storyline.  Essentially, it is that the Liberals and NDP colluded/conspired to prevent CPC from forming government even though it won the most seats (a lot of Canadians will presume that's the yardstick, as noted earlier).  That storyline may have value later in blasting the arrangement as it comes together and again later still, if the Trudeau-led government stumbles or is brought down. But right now it also motivates his base to vote and also attempts to draw Trudeau into the fray, which raised the prospect of an NDP role in setting the agenda, which in turn could have an impact on voters who swing between the Conservatives and Liberals.

There is also the matter that Conservatives risk being shut out over the longer term unless they can shift to a "plurality winner takes all" convention.  Lastly, "we wuz robbed" may help him fend off any internal dissent post-campaign.

Actually it is that simple -- the complication is in the problem for the conservatives and their messaging. It is still a lie.

They are doing what you say and trying to argue a story that is false. They are trying to make people think they are being ripped off when they are facing the impossibility or a party that cannot get a majority even in FPTP of governing when they have no allies. They are lying when they suggest that other parties should be their allies just becuause they get the most seats. No party is obliged to help another party and he is trying to blame others in advance for being an unacceptable coalition partner. We do not have to make what actually is simple complicated.

You get a majority or find other parties to get there either by anstention or voting for you when you need. You can try case by case but if the GG is faced with a chocie between case by case and a working arrangement by others to a majority then she has to take it and the plurality does not mean squat.

The incumbant government gets to go first if they want to and think they can obtain confidence in a throne speech.

Conservatives are the ones trying to make this complicated when it is not really. They cannot blame others if they cannot get confidence for a throne speech and they cannot blame others for the reality that the incumbant government gets to try to do this first.

New Leger poll on Quebec federal vote

Lib.   31

Bloc.  31

Con.    16

NDP.    14

Gr.         6

PP.         2

https://www.tvanouvelles.ca/2019/10/17/au-quebec-liberaux-et-bloquistes-au-coude-a-coude

Good possibility the BQ will end up with balance of power then. New election in 2020.

KarlL wrote:

nicky wrote:

New Leger poll on Quebec federal vote

Lib.   31

Bloc.  31

Con.    16

NDP.    14

Gr.         6

PP.         2

https://www.tvanouvelles.ca/2019/10/17/au-quebec-liberaux-et-bloquistes-au-coude-a-coude

Ouch.  40+ Bloc seats.

highest NDP vote share in Quebec for the campaign, though.  

DART & Maru/Blue Voice Canada Poll 

Cons - 33%  Libs - 29%  NDP  21%

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-scheer-set-to-win-most-seats-according-to-polls

Ken Burch wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

I think Blanchett could become Prime Minister

So...Blanchett could end up with the one job he would never want?

That would kind of be like Parnell or John Redmond ending up in 10 Downing Street, wouldn't it?

I know that it is an erudite group but is the Irish Home Rule movement still forming part of the educational curriculum?

KarlL wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

I think Blanchett could become Prime Minister

So...Blanchett could end up with the one job he would never want?

That would kind of be like Parnell or John Redmond ending up in 10 Downing Street, wouldn't it?

 

I know that it is an erudite group but is the Irish Home Rule movement still forming part of the educational curriculum?

Yes and No.  

A brief primer:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Parliamentary_Party

I have, on several occasions, compared the roll the BQ could potentially play in a minority parliament-the Bloc was hampered, at the height of its 1990s parliamentary strength, by the fact that the Liberals had solid majorities in every election in that decade, but it did have at least the potential to extract significant concessions from both Liberal and Conservative minority governments during the 2004-2011 era-in which it had both the overwhelming support of Quebec voters and the numeric balance of power.  The results on Monday will give the BQ a strengthened caucus, but it looks as though at least 65% of the voters in Quebec will vote for other parties.   When the Irish party had both unified support through most of Ireland AND the balance of power in a series of minority parliaments, it was able to force Liberal governments to pass Irish Home Rule legislation in the House of Commons; unfortunately, the unelected and overwhelmingly Tory House of Lords always blocked those bills.

It will be interesting to see what calculus the BQ would use to work out what it asked for in a situation where it won a lot of seats on a comparitively low vote share.   And it's actually possible that Blanchet might end up being pushed into leading a coalition government in which he had little if no actual power and was forced to do the bidding of the Liberal or Conservative partners in the arrangement.mmm