Opinion Poll - Ekos Feb 28/04

[maplesyrup]

Probable Spring election

Ekos Research Feb 28/04

(previous Ekos Poll Dec 21/03)

1,020 participants surveyed Feb 23-25 (mon-Wed) 2004

Canada

Bloc 9% no change

CPC 32% up 7%

Lib 42% down 14%

NDP 15% up 3%

BC

CPC 27%

Lib 44%

NDP

AB

CPC 63%

Lib

SK/MA 3 way tie

CPC

Lib

NDP

ON

CPC 36%

Lib 47%

NDP 15%

Oth 2%

QC

Bloc 40%

CPC

LIb 38%

AC CPC & Lib tied

CPC

Lib

NDP

If anyone knows where or how to obtain the missing data please post it. Tks.

http://www.torontostar.com/NASApp/cs/Conte...ol=968350116467

[maplesyrup]

More could be lost in waiting

http://www.torontostar.com/NASApp/cs/Conte...ol=968793972154

[Pellaken]

I dont trust Ekos polls

I said that when the NDP was at 17% last year, and say it again when the tories are at 32% this year.

I dont trust Ekos polls

[BigGunner]

Indeed, Ekos is not a very accurate polling agency. They inflated liberal support into the high 50's when every other agency was putting liberal support in the high 40's.

This poll is an attempt to say, 'yes we are recovering, and the conservatives are our target'...but the reality is, and has been proven by more accurate polling, that the liberals are in trouble from both sides...only, the ndp pose a critical threat in the very urban base that the liberals thought they had.

this poll is a stunt, and little else...

[August1991]

The poll made front page news on the Toronto Star's Saturday edition. It is easy to imagine that a polling firm would twist the publicised results a little to satisfy certain clients. Who knows?

Am I wrong to say that I don't believe that, with all the news known by 22 February, 47% of Ontarians still support the Liberals. Maybe I don't understand Ontario anymore. (I simply don't understand the Lib 44 vs CPC 27 in BC. Can anyone explain this to me?)

[Galahad]

I simply don't understand the Lib 44 vs CPC 27 in BC. Can anyone explain this to me?

Don't worry. That is only because there's a choice now between three stooges to pick from. Once it's down to only one, Harpo I think, the numbers will no doubt shrink.

[maplesyrup]

Once again Quebeckers have show themselves to be politically astute.

[August1991]

You got me:

choice now between three stooges to pick from. Once it's down to only one, Harpo

Stooges? There were three: Larry, Curly, Moe. Harpo? That's the wigged, womanizer Marx. There were four Marxes. (Maybe a fifth.) What do you mean? Stooge, womanizer or Marks?

IOW, please explain to me Gordon Campbell, Hawaii, police photo, Nick Nolte, good fun. (Sorry, my Eastern view.)

Once again Quebeckers have shown themselves to be politically astute.

People in Quebec astute? They're clueless! Swedes on a huge continent of German/Spanish marriages.

Please explain why you believe they're astute.

[Goldie]

Yes there have been issues with the polling numbers from EKOS in the past.

I can't reconcile how CROP finds 48% Bloq and Libs at 32% in Labelle, when numbers like 48% in Quebec should not translate into 9% nationally. I love pols and stats but I can't do these numbers.

I could see BC numbers like this only because of super majorities in Vancouver and Greater Lower Mainland.

[maplesyrup]

Goldie.....do you know the calculation how the polling companies arrive at the Bloc national percentage?

I'm going to try a table here - AND see if it works. Please excuse the confusion if it doesn't replicate legibly.

HISTORICAL NATIONAL POLLING RESULTS

COMPANY DATE LIB CPC NDP BLOC PC ALL GRN OTH

EKOS 28/02/04 42 32 15 9

IPSOS-REID 20/02/04 36 27 17 11 4

PRAXICUS 20/02/04 36 28 21 13

IPSOS-REID 17/02/04 35 27 17 11 5

IPSOS-REID 14/02/04 39 24 18 10 5

COMPAS 03/02/04 49 19 17 9

SES 02/02/04 48 23 15 11 3

IPSOS-REID 24/01/04 48 19 16 10 4

EKOS 21/12/03 56 25 12 9

IPSOS-REID 14/12/03 48 21 14 9 4

IPSOS-REID 06/12/03 43 15 9 14 10

SOM 02/12/03 58 13 18 9

SES 14/11/03 49 12 10 16 12

COMPAS 21/10/03 50 14 9 14 10

IPSOS-REID 21/10/03 46 11 8 15 11

ENVIRONIC 10/10/03 46 15 13 14

IPSOS-REID 06/10/03 47 12 9 14 13

SES 13/09/03 46 15 8 19 13

EKOS 17/07/03 54 10 5 17 11

LEGER 09/06/03 55 10 8 14 12

IPSOS-REID 06/06/03 45 11 9 15 14 5

SES 01/06/03 52 10 7 18 12

EKOS 04/05/03 50 10 17 13

IPSOS-REID 27/04/03 50 10 9 13 14 4

SES 24/02/03 48 14 7 16 13

EKOS 23/02/03 47 17 8 14 11

EKOS 21/02/03 52 14 7 14 11

IPSOS-REID 23/12/02 41 10 13 15

IPSOS-REID 14/12/02 41 12 8 17 16 6

EKOS 09/12/02 47 11 8 14 16

EKOS 01/11/02 48 14 8 16 13

[maplesyrup]

Astute beccause at the moment they are giving the Liberals a well needed message they (voters) are not pleased but not jeopardizing their place in confederation.

Of the political opposition partiest is was basically the Bloc that exposed this sponsorship scandal and the Quebec voters are rewarding their good efforts at the moment.

[Galahad]

Stooges? There were three: Larry, Curly, Moe.  Harpo? That's the wigged, womanizer Marx. There were four Marxes.  (Maybe a fifth.)  What do you mean? Stooge, womanizer or Marks?

IOW, please explain to me Gordon Campbell, Hawaii, police photo, Nick Nolte, good fun. (Sorry, my Eastern view.)

Sorry about that.

I emigrated here from an ex-communist country & took the oath at the Canadian border never to mention the name Marx again.

It so scarred me for life that I popped Harpo into the Stooges unconsciously.

As for our fearless leader Campbell/Nolte...I'll explain it only if YOU'll explain your Harpo clone...Charest.

[August1991]

Astute beccause at the moment they are giving the Liberals a well needed message they (voters) are not pleased but not jeopardizing their place in confederation.

I know this is a common thought outside of Quebec, particularly in the West. But it somehow assumes Quebec is one person who is negotiating strategically. Individuals might vote strategically but a society cannot. Rational individuals do not add up to a rational society.

Rather, some people in Quebec are convinced separatists. (They desperately want out.) Others are convinced federalists. (They are determined to stay in.) Unfortunately, neither side has a convincing majority and until one side does, this will never end. (Do you have any idea what kind of arguments this leads to?)

Astute? No astute person would be in this situation of indecision. (I meant the comment differently though. French Quebecers are a minority in North America and for the most part, they don't understand what everyone else is saying. They're not in the loop.)

Of the political opposition partiest is was basically the Bloc that exposed this sponsorship scandal and the Quebec voters are rewarding their good efforts at the moment.

The separatist take on this scandal comes from Parizeau's comment on the night of the 1995 referendum. Money. To a separatist, the scandal is about using federal money to put Canadian flags on posters. The fact that it was done so incompetently is icing on the cake.

[Goldie]

Maplesyrup, ie. 2000 election

12 million voters accross Canada = 100% appx.

Bloq gets 10.7 nationally or 40% in Quebec or 1.3 million votes

48% should garner 1.53 million votes and that should translate into 12.53%, nationally which is a far cry from 9%.

This is based on a constant of 12 million voters.

Of course it is close enough to the margin of error but it would seem to be more contrived. Does this mean that the Liberals are about three points to the left of 42% in the Dominion.

[Pellaken]

your math is a bit off, Quebecois has high turnout. the west has low turnout. more people voted in NS last election then SK, despite SK having 100,000 more people.