Canadian Political Polls

[capricorn]

The general poll numbers put the Tories at about 36% and the Liberals at about 30% - which is exactly what they both got in 2006.

IOW, if we had an election now, we would wind up with another Conservative minority government. I have to say that all things considered, that's my opinion too.

That's also my opinion. But a minority government is only as good as the opposition decides it will be.

I don't know why exactly but too many women don't like Harper.

Somehow, it has to do with the masculinity of the two leaders. IMO men don't think Dion is masculine enough and women don't think Harper is masculine enough.

On an open line show which asked why women don't like Harper, one woman said Harper is too "girly". That got me thinking. I think this is as a result of Harper trying not to look like a controller or a "bully" as some put it. So he keeps his masculine side in check to try to win over women but it is having the opposite effect.

Dion doesn't even try to appeal to male voters. Men just don't relate to him period.

Environics' Michael Adams puts it bluntly: “This man has to be more masculine. He has to think about how to be more masculine.” And the behavioural scientist who characterized Mr. Dion as a “risen not-someone” agrees: “Primitive leadership – you've got to have it.”

In politics, strong but wrong beats weak but right. And it is Stephen Harper, not Stéphane Dion, who is seen as having carved out the territory of the archetypal male. Mr. Dion, up close, looks untouched by life – not boyish but untouched. A too-smooth face.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...tory/Front/home

Behavioural scientists must be having a field day on this one.

[jdobbin]

The general poll numbers put the Tories at about 36% and the Liberals at about 30% - which is exactly what they both got in 2006.

IOW, if we had an election now, we would wind up with another Conservative minority government. I have to say that all things considered, that's my opinion too.

My thoughts exactly. There have been some occasions where the Tories have moved into 40 territory but it really hasn't stuck there for long. There are some here that are putting great stock in the party's own internal polls and how those probably give a clearer indication of the Tories heading for a majority. I think if that was true, Harper would have pulled the trigger long ago. He hasn't because I don't think it is as cut and dried as that.

From Harper's perspective, why we would he want an election now? At present, he can stay in power with the sole support of one of three opposition parties. That's not a bad situation and it's as close to a majority as possible. After an election, Harper may not have such numbers.

Harper may be hoping for the Liberals to do even worse but despite Dion's problems, Liberal support seems to have reached its floor. As the polls keep showing, there is resistance to giving the Tories majority support as well as support for the Liberal party in general.

From Dion's perspective, he probably has only one kick at the can. For the past few months, he's been making sure that the Liberal organization is more or less ready. (It still isn't but at least the skeleton exists now.) Then, Dion has to pick the right issue. (Side question: If Dion gets more seats in th next election but doesn't make PM, what then? Do the Liberals dump him? I reckon anything but power means Dion is finished. And I think that will be a mistake for the Liberals. I digress.)

The Unimarketing poll this past week predicted Liberals winning more seats than they have now. If that happens, Dion could have another chance with the prospect of a quick election. There will be some that would try to dump Dion even if he was to win a minority. I daresay some of those people who dislike Dion would try to get him to step down even if he won a majority.

With all that said, an election might change the numbers if someone makes a horrible gaffe. In addition, Canada's federal politics are regional and federal polls don't capture regional details. One region that is invisible in federal polls is Quebec outside Montreal. Here, the Conservatives lead the BQ and stand a chance of getting as many as 20-25 seats.

I wish we could see more polls there myself. I think we have seen the BQ revive too many times to declare the monster dead yet.

To win a majority, Harper has to improve among women, cities (Mtl, Van and Toronto) and Quebec. I think cities are a write off except maybe some suburbs. Harper has done well in Quebec. He has to improve among women.

I know that Capricorn posted above an article implying that women are split between Liberals and Tories. I disagree (and agree with Dobbin). I don't know why exactly but too many women don't like Harper. Maybe he should invite Oprah to 24 Sussex for lunch or something.

I think if Harper actually had a daycare plan that worked, he would improve his numbers. The lack of spaces hurts him with women who want or need to work outside the home.

Older women have had issues with social issues that are still not being addressed. If they aren't addressed in a minority, when will they be addressed?

[August1991]

I think if Harper actually had a daycare plan that worked, he would improve his numbers. The lack of spaces hurts him with women who want or need to work outside the home.

Older women have had issues with social issues that are still not being addressed. If they aren't addressed in a minority, when will they be addressed?

I may be talking through my hat but it seems to me that a breakdown of data would show that Harper does reasonably well among married women; that is, married women choose much like their husbands do.

Where Harper is weak is among single women: divorced, widows, never married. Harper probably doesn't do well among younger people in general so in effect we're looking primarily at older women living alone (divorced/separated women and widows) in Ontario and the Maritimes. (Harper doesn't have to worry too much about western Canada and Quebec too is different.)

This may sound horribly sexist but I think many of these women suffer from bag lady syndrome and look to the State as a substitute husband. They want to know that they will be taken care of.

In terms of image, Harper appears to be a trustworthy breadwinner. He's reliable. But that's not what his words or body language say. Harper's not paternalist. (The Liberals have been successful in sending the message to such people that a Liberal government will take care of them - whether true or not. In addition, Harper will never have the charisma of Trudeau. Sad to say and security/bag lady theories be damned, a flower in the lapel would win this demographic in a heart beat - but Harper can't do that.)

I don't know if Harper should go with day care spaces. (On ideological grounds, I find the idea abhorent. Such policies should be up to the provinces anyway.) OTOH, Harper could do something with pensions. This family tax splitting is perceived as a benefit to older married couples. What do older singles (many of them women) get? Nothing. In fact, this family tax splitting deal just reminds them of their single status, how alone they are and how Harper doesn't care about them.

-----

In the last campaign, Harper learned that a clear promise on a clear policy change (a cut in the GST) can dominate the campaign. I would expect that the Conservatives will have something similar for the next election. And I think it will be aimed specifically at older, single women.

Edited April 14, 2008 by August1991

[jdobbin]

I may be talking through my hat but it seems to me that a breakdown of data would show that Harper does reasonably well among married women; that is, married women choose much like their husbands do.

Really? You find that with women in Quebec that they vote the way their husband's do?

Where Harper is weak is among single women: divorced, widows, never married. Harper probably doesn't do well among younger people in general so in effect we're looking primarily at women living alone (divorced/separated women and widows) in Ontario and the Maritimes. (Harper doesn't have to worry too much about western Canada.)

This may sound horribly sexist but I think many of these women suffer from bag lady syndrome and look to the State as a substitute husband. They want to know that they will be taken care of.

Once again, it would help if you had a breakdown to indicate what women are not supporting Harper and why. As one of the links I've shown indicates, women are becoming less conservative than they were in the past.

If daycare is listed as an issue with women, I suspect that support for Harper among with women with children (married or unmarried) will be critical.

In terms of image, Harper appears to be a trustworthy breadwinner. He's reliable. But that's not what his words or body language say. Harper's not paternalist. The Liberals have been successful in sending the message to such people that a Liberal government will take care of them.

Action speaks louder than words when it comes to public policy. He may be a great guy at home but if the policies aren't in place to show that he is helping women with something they repeatedly say they support in polling such as daycare spaces, the government ought to be prepared to deliver to suffer the consequences. It is clear that both the private sector and the provinces haven't delivered.

I don't know if Harper should go with day care spaces. (On ideological grounds, I find the idea abhorent. Such policies should be up to the provinces anyway.) OTOH, Harper could do something with pensions. This family tax splitting is perceived as a benefit to older married couples. What do older singles (many women) get?

Nothing. And since men die earlier than women, married women ultimately become single widowed women.

It is hard to believe this tax was considered as something that would be cheaper than income trusts and a fairer tax.

-----

In the last campaign, Harper learned that a clear promise on a clear policy change (a cut in the GST) can dominate the campaign. I would expect that the Conservatives will have something similar for the next election. And I think it will be aimed specifically at older, single women.

I think it will have to be a lot more than personal income tax cuts that appeal to women. According to polls, they are likely to react to changes to the healthcare act, gun control, the war in Afghanistan and criminal justice issues. A conservative stance on those areas often whittles away support women might feel for the Tories.

[August1991]

Really? You find that with women in Quebec that they vote the way their husband's do?

In voting terms, Quebec is an entirely different planet. Harper is doing as well as he can in Quebec - and far better than anyone would have thought. In Quebec, the demographics are straightforward and have little to do with women. (BTW, never in Canadian history has a WASP won seats in Quebec in his own name. Harper's achievement is historic. Many Quebecers outside of Montreal are very comfortable with him.)

----

Let's be honest, many Canadians (women or men) will never vote for Harper under any circumstances. Rather, Harper is only looking to change the vote of about 1 Canadian in 20 (since that's what he needs to go from 36% to 40%). Perhaps even less than that because Harper will likely get about another 10-15 seats in Quebec. IOW, he needs another 20 seats elsewhere in English Canada, principally Ontario and the Maritimes. A shift in the votes of older women spread all across Ontario and the Maritimes will mean possibly that about 20 marginal (rural, suburban) ridings will go Tory.

I think it will have to be a lot more than personal income tax cuts that appeal to women. According to polls, they are likely to react to changes to the healthcare act, gun control, the war in Afghanistan and criminal justice issues. A conservative stance on those areas often whittles away support women might feel for the Tories.

Women like men may say that they want something in a poll but that's not what will really change their vote.

To get a woman (in the potential pool of Tory voters) to change her vote requires something far more concrete. These women won't choose Harper because of Afghanistan (although his resolute policy there will help his credibility). Day care spaces don't matter much to older single women except as grandmothers - and as a measure of the Tories concern for "feminist" issues.

Health care matters but first, it's a provincial jurisdiction and second, the Liberals have destroyed any credibility of any politician on health care promises. (Dobbin, you should understand that the problem of the federal Liberal Party is that it has made too many promises too many times. Paul Martin called this the "democratic deficit".) Health care promises are too vague anyway - unless the promise is that State health care will exist and take care of you.

I still go with the pension idea. Pensions are a Conservative bailiwick. Honest people work hard, pay their taxes, contribute to society and as a reward, receive a decent pension. These are Conservative values.The Tories introduced the TFSA which was a huge, hidden tax cut. Maybe they'll do something similar aimed at older singles - since most older singles are women.

I'd love to see the Tories allow (empower) individuals to control their own CPP portfolio. (That would require Quebec agreement for the RRQ, like the TFSAs.) At the same time, we could bonify pensions for single people.

Edited April 14, 2008 by August1991

[jbg]

Harper probably doesn't do well among younger people in general....

This may be totally anecdotal but when I went to the CPC policy convention in 2005 there were many young Harper supporters there, and at the hospitality suite I went to run by another more conservative political website.

[jdobbin]

In voting terms, Quebec is an entirely different planet. Harper is doing as well as he can in Quebec - and far better than anyone would have thought. In Quebec, the demographics are straightforward and have little to do with women. (BTW, never in Canadian history has a WASP won seats in Quebec in his own name. Harper's achievement is historic. Many Quebecers outside of Montreal are very comfortable with him.)

The Liberals are still reeling from sponsorship and Dion's poor performance and his link to the Clarity Act?

I guess then if the Liberals do get a new leader such as John Manley, a WASP, they will bounce back. The polls have indicated a number of times that all the Liberals have to do is change leaders and they will be taking the fight to the Tories.

The demographics are straight forward in Quebec? That still doesn't answer the question of whether Quebec men vote and Quebec women follow.

Let's be honest, many Canadians (women or men) will never vote for Harper under any circumstances. Rather, Harper is only looking to change the vote of about 1 Canadian in 20 (since that's what he needs to go from 36% to 40%). Perhaps even less than that because Harper will likely get about another 10-15 seats in Quebec. IOW, he needs another 20 seats elsewhere in English Canada, principally Ontario and the Maritimes. A shift in the votes of older women spread all across Ontario and the Maritimes will mean possibly that about 20 marginal (rural, suburban) ridings will go Tory.

And yet it is older women who have increasingly indicated they are not supporting Conservatives. It will take more than taxes to change their minds.

Women like men may say that they want something in a poll but that's not what will really change their vote.

To get a woman (in the potential pool of Tory voters) to change her vote requires something far more concrete. These women won't choose Harper because of Afghanistan (although his resolute policy there will help his credibility). Day care spaces don't matter much to older single women except as grandmothers - and as a measure of the Tories concern for "feminist" issues.

Health care matters but first, it's a provincial jurisdiction and second, the Liberals have destroyed any credibility of any politician on health care promises. (Dobbin, you should understand that the problem of the federal Liberal Party is that it has made too many promises too many times. Paul Martin called this the "democratic deficit".) Health care promises are too vague anyway - unless the promise is that State health care will exist and take care of you.

I still go with the pension idea. Pensions are a Conservative bailiwick. Honest people work hard, pay their taxes, contribute to society and as a reward, receive a decent pension. These are Conservative values.The Tories introduced the TFSA which was a huge, hidden tax cut. Maybe they'll do something similar aimed at older singles - since most older singles are women.

I'd love to see the Tories allow (empower) individuals to control their own CPP portfolio. (That would require Quebec agreement for the RRQ, like the TFSAs.) At the same time, we could bonify pensions for single people.

I still don't think taxes alone will cut the mustard. Pensions alone won't cut it either.

It should be noted that Harper has been hurt by inconsistent stands on the death penalty and support for Canadians who run into problems in other countries and need consular support. Older women travel and would like to know that Stockwell Day isn't just going to write them off.

Harper is not going to get away with sloughing off everything to the provinces such as healthcare. Both men and women will look for federal initiatives on that.

In poll after poll, women consistently highlight issues they have with the Tories on social issues. If taxes and pensions were so important with women, their voter support would be rising not falling.

Edited April 14, 2008 by jdobbin

[August1991]

I still don't think taxes alone will cut the mustard. Pensions alone won't cut it either.

A pension cheque is money in the bank.

And so different from Dion or any other Liberal, Harper is honest and delivers. Harper does what he says he will do.

Dobbin, the Kinsella/Chretien Liberals are all smoke and mirrors. Stephen Harper promised to cut the GST and then he did it. Chretien didn't.

[jdobbin]

A pension cheque is money in the bank.

However, it isn't a substitute for accepting social conservatism.

And so different from Dion or any other Liberal, Harper is honest and delivers. Harper does what he says he will do.

Income trusts. Transparency.

Dobbin, the Kinsella/Chretien Liberals are all smoke and mirrors. Stephen Harper promised to cut the GST and then he did it. Chretien didn't.

Kinsella and Chretien have been out of power and influence in the Liberal party for more than five years.

Martin promised income tax cuts and delivered more of an impact in his budget than Harper did in two.

Chretien was stupid to promise to drop the GST. Harper was stupid to actually do it.

I'll say it again and again: Income tax cuts are superior in every way, shape and form to a GST cut. A tax cut is not just a tax cut. They have to be measured out in how fair and widespread they are, how they impact the economy in terms of revenue and stimulus, how easy they are to administer and how they help Canada remain competitive world-wide. In short, the GST was not the best cut.

I'll say this again: Harper will have to do more than have an economic plan to win female voters. Harper might think that being a sugardaddy is all he needs to do but it won't win over women turned off by his gun law stance, death penalty position outside of Canada, same sex marriage and daycare.

[MontyBurns]

... but it won't win over women turned off by his gun law stance, death penalty position outside of Canada, same sex marriage and daycare.

There is no way to please women anyway. Harper should stick to his guns.

[jdobbin]

There is no way to please women anyway. Harper should stick to his guns.

He probably will and subsequently repeat a minority.

[MontyBurns]

He probably will and subsequently repeat a minority.

Probably so. A minority is still a win.

[jdobbin]

Probably so. A minority is still a win.

Not for Harper. And probably not for the Conservative party. Harper's own future will likely depend on him delivering a majority. For a "winner take all all" guy like Harper, it will be seen as a defeat. If he can't beat Dion, who is likely to beat for a majority?

[Shakeyhands]

Not for Harper. And probably not for the Conservative party. Harper's own future will likely depend on him delivering a majority. For a "winner take all all" guy like Harper, it will be seen as a defeat. If he can't beat Dion, who is likely to beat for a majority?

I can picture it now, he sulk like he did after he was beat before. If he were to get another minority I think he'd stay though.

[MontyBurns]

If he can't beat Dion, who is likely to beat for a majority?

You sound supremely confident in your leader there. This minority government is almost as good as a majority anyway. The Liberals keep supporting Harper. They must like their policies or they would have brought them down already.

[jazzer]

They must like their policies or they would have brought them down already.

Yeah right, especially when almost every vote is a confidence one. Kinda unprecedented, but that's politics. I kinda hope Harper gets another minority. It would be the death knell for him and Dion.

[MontyBurns]

Yeah right, especially when almost every vote is a confidence one.

Yes, and Liberals are afraid of confidence votes. They could have brought down Harper ages ago if they wanted to. They won't though. I think they secretly like the current government myself. They like the no-nonsense style of government that gets things done. That's my theory.

[jdobbin]

You sound supremely confident in your leader there. This minority government is almost as good as a majority anyway. The Liberals keep supporting Harper. They must like their policies or they would have brought them down already.

I'm fairly confident that there isn't any evidence that Harper isn't in majority territory now and Dion probably has only one election to improve his chances of staying on. If Harper can't deliver a majority, his own future comes into question.

It doesn't bode well if Harper gets another minority.

The zero sum game of making every vote a confidence vote can't be sustained forever. An election will come soon enough and the free ride that the BQ and the NDP have had for pretending they really want an election will end. It will also show if Harper can get his majority. If he can't, he is very likely to face a new Liberal leader who has a better chance of defeating him outright.

[jdobbin]

Yes, and Liberals are afraid of confidence votes. They could have brought down Harper ages ago if they wanted to. They won't though. I think they secretly like the current government myself. They like the no-nonsense style of government that gets things done. That's my theory.

Harper let 19 confidence votes go when he was leader and Martin was PM. I think Harper must have secretly liked the Liberals.

[MontyBurns]

If he can't, he is very likely to face a new Liberal leader who has a better chance of defeating him outright.

I think it's going to be difficult for either side to get a majority the way things are now. Chretien was only getting majorities because the right was split. That advantage is gone now. It's probably going to be minority governments for some time.

[jbg]

I'm fairly confident that there isn't any evidence that Harper isn't in majority territory now.....

Wow, you've never admitted that Harper was in majority territory. It's a new day!!!

[jbg]

Harper let 19 confidence votes go when he was leader and Martin was PM. I think Harper must have secretly liked the Liberals.

The Liberal Party is not a brand new party, without even policies. The CPC was formed for the first time the same month that PM became PM, and was barely on its feet on June 29, 2004 when it reduced PMPM to a minority. Are you saying Canadians were hankering for an election soon than April 2005, when the CPC and the Bloc began trying to pull the Martin government down?

[jdobbin]

Latest poll from Strategic Counsel.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...14?hub=Politics

The Conservatives' nationwide lead over the Liberals has slightly narrowed to six points, partly because of a surge in support among Ontario voters for Stephane Dion's party, according to a new poll.

National results show the Liberals up three points and the Conservatives down two (percentage-point change from a March 13-16 poll in brackets):

* Conservatives: 36 per cent (-2)

* Liberals: 30 per cent (+3)

* NDP: 15 per cent (+1)

* Green Party: 10 per cent (-2)

* Bloc Quebecois: 8 per cent (-2)

The Strategic Counsel survey, conducted between April 10-13 for CTV and The Globe and Mail, comes less than a month after two Ontario byelection victories that sent Bob Rae and Martha Hall Findlay to the House of Commons.

Liberal support has jumped substantially in Ontario but they have dropped a lot in Quebec.

One wonder how the raid will on Tory headquarters will play out with voters in the next set of polls.

[Who's Doing What?]

If he can't beat Dion, who is likely to beat for a majority?

And such is the sad state of Canadian Politics. lol

[Who's Doing What?]

The Liberal Party is not a brand new party, without even policies. The CPC was formed for the first time the same month that PM became PM, and was barely on its feet on June 29, 2004 when it reduced PMPM to a minority. Are you saying Canadians were hankering for an election soon than April 2005, when the CPC and the Bloc began trying to pull the Martin government down?

I think there was too many of the old guard either behind the scenes or pulling the strings to really say the current CPC was a "new" party. Sure there were new faces. Just a new layer of stain put on over the same tired old fence boards.