Canadian Political Polls

[LastViking]

Was getting a Majority in the Senate worth the price? TrendLines Research gives Ignatieff a 121-115 seat projection lead over Harper, had a writ been dropped last week. OTOH, when this result is averaged with the six other models, their riding projection chart shows the Conservatives have a 121-107 lead over the Liberal Party.

[normanchateau]

My hypothesis is that it's not uncommon for telephone poll respondents to be less than honest in answering poll questions from a stranger at the other end.

I would not be surprised that some political poll respondents would inflate their educational achievements because they don't want to come across as uneducated...

Let's examine your hypothesis further. I was referring to the February 4th ekos poll and voting preferences among those who report themselves as university educated. Of those, 40% prefer LPC versus 27% CPC. It appears you are suggesting that more LPC voters engage in impression management, inflating their educational accomplishments, than CPC voters.

Interesting hypothesis but difficult to explain relative to other polls and therefore it's somewhat improbable. The January 28th ekos poll had a 39% LPC versus 30% CPC split among the university educated. The January 21st ekos poll had a 37% LPC versus 29% CPC split among the university educated. It's difficult to believe that among LPC voters, there's been an increase in impression management over such a short time period. A more probable explanation is a shift away from Harper among the university educated.

[normanchateau]

How about educating those "physicians of tomorrow" at a university that has corrected its flaws and reversed its slide into decadence?

More simply, you can have both good and bad universities.

I was responding to blueblood's stereotypically absurd comment that university degrees are worthless and asked where blueblood proposed that physicians should be educated. How do your comments address my question?

Of course there are good and bad universities but how does that follow logically from my question?

[Keepitsimple]

Party polls aside, here's a Globe & Mail Nanos poll on Leadership....Harper is ahead by a nose :

How the leaders are faring

The Nanos Leadership Index measures public response to political leaders across three categories. It combines answers to three questions: which leader is the most trustworthy, the most competent and has the 'best vision for Canada's future?'

Stephen Harper / 85.4%

Jack Layton / 52.2%

Michael Ignatieff / 40.3%

Elizabeth May / 19.6%

Gilles Duceppe / 17.2%

The poll: a random telephone survey of 1,001 adults, considered accurate to within 3.1 per cent,

19 times out of 20

THE GLOBE AND MAIL / SOURCE: NANOS RESEARCH

Link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ignatieff-wades-into-pmo-versus-banker-fight/article1468522/

Edited February 15, 2010 by Keepitsimple

[William Ashley]

Party polls aside, here's a Globe & Mail Nanos poll on Leadership....Harper is ahead by a nose :

Link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ignatieff-wades-into-pmo-versus-banker-fight/article1468522/

Is this in Alberta - I fear Canadians have gone mad - I so doubt this accuracy. I know for a fact more than 15% of Canadians despise harper so it shows how wrong the poll must be.

Also phone surveys don't reach all of the population. More people are shifting to cell phones especially in younger generations and aren't listed in phone books.

Perhaps they should throw in some other people like the pope, the queen, or your next door neighbor and see how they rate compared to them. No way in hell does 85.5% of Canadians find Harper trustworthy the guy is a snake.

How the hell do you test this one.. you can't so how is this 19 times out of 20.. makes no sense.

Edited February 15, 2010 by William Ashley

[capricorn]

Interesting hypothesis but difficult to explain relative to other polls

Granted there is no empirical data to support my hypothesis, as is also the case with many opinions.

[Wild Bill]

Of course there are good and bad universities but how does that follow logically from my question?

It follows from the premise that most modern universities have declined in standards over the past few decades and are often more politically correct than logical in their thinking.

In California since the mid 80's a sky high percentage of new university enrollees are made to take what is commonly known as "bonehead english", since the average competency of the high school graduates is so low.

[bloodyminded]

It follows from the premise that most modern universities have declined in standards over the past few decades and are often more politically correct than logical in their thinking.

In some ways this may well be true. But in other ways, political correctness has been defeated, and in the name of logic and free inquiry. This is particularly true of social issues and foreign policy matters. You can disagree with many of the trends--and perhaps you do--but at one time, certain commonplace contemporary controversies were scarcely even discussed. So that's an improvement.

In California since the mid 80's a sky high percentage of new university enrollees are made to take what is commonly known as "bonehead english", since the average competency of the high school graduates is so low.

But this sounds like universities tasked with repairing an existing problem, not with creating it.

[Wild Bill]

But this sounds like universities tasked with repairing an existing problem, not with creating it.

You must have missed the start of my difference with normanchateau. The original premises involved have nothing to do with your points.

Here's what triggered my exceptions:

"A Harper supporter suggesting that a university degree is worthless...why am I not in the least surprised?

Tell me, typical Harper supporter, where you would suggest that the physicians of tomorrow should be educated. A bible college? A Sunday school?

Do you, like Stephen Harper and his Evangelical fundamentalist co-religionists, believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old? Do you, like Stephen Harper and Fred Flintstone, believe that dinosaurs and humans co-existed. Do you, like the ignorant Stephen Harper and George Bush, oppose embryonic stem cell research on religious grounds?

What's your hypothesis as to why less than 27% of Canadians with a university education now support CPC versus 40% for LPC?"

---Norman Chateau replying to Bloodyminded, re: his implication that better educated university grads support Harper, conversely Harper's support comes more from the poorer educated.

Norman appears to be saying that either you are a well educated university graduate which means you are more likely in your wisdom to be anti-Harper and pro LPC OR you must be some bible thumping fundamentalist neanderthal! He limited the choices, leaving his opponent with only some ridiculously extreme choice that would be impossible to defend.

My point was that having a university degree no longer suggests a better likelihood of wisdom and more logical thinking. They tend to be bastions of modern liberal, politically correct "thought".

I gave up on universities after Queens banned Jewish lecturers and paid students to prowl the campus eavesdropping on private conversations, butting in if they heard anything politically incorrect and admonishing the speakers.

Here's a link:

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/letters/story.html?id=c92f9bfc-e0f1-48b6-a9b1-e6f04eff3ade

"In their finest moments, universities provide an open and safe environment where students can immerse themselves in higher learning and debate. At their worst, the folks who run these institutions can come up with some strikingly unintelligent and oppressive ideas.

If Queen's University authorities believe they are benefiting education by enlisting six student monitors as a cleansing force to eradicate impure thoughts on campus, then it may be time for an overhaul of the school's administration."

[bloodyminded]

You must have missed the start of my difference with normanchateau. The original premises involved have nothing to do with your points.

Here's what triggered my exceptions:

"A Harper supporter suggesting that a university degree is worthless...why am I not in the least surprised?

Tell me, typical Harper supporter, where you would suggest that the physicians of tomorrow should be educated. A bible college? A Sunday school?

Do you, like Stephen Harper and his Evangelical fundamentalist co-religionists, believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old? Do you, like Stephen Harper and Fred Flintstone, believe that dinosaurs and humans co-existed. Do you, like the ignorant Stephen Harper and George Bush, oppose embryonic stem cell research on religious grounds?

What's your hypothesis as to why less than 27% of Canadians with a university education now support CPC versus 40% for LPC?"

---Norman Chateau replying to Bloodyminded, re: his implication that better educated university grads support Harper, conversely Harper's support comes more from the poorer educated.

Norman appears to be saying that either you are a well educated university graduate which means you are more likely in your wisdom to be anti-Harper and pro LPC OR you must be some bible thumping fundamentalist neanderthal! He limited the choices, leaving his opponent with only some ridiculously extreme choice that would be impossible to defend.

My point was that having a university degree no longer suggests a better likelihood of wisdom and more logical thinking. They tend to be bastions of modern liberal, politically correct "thought".

I gave up on universities after Queens banned Jewish lecturers and paid students to prowl the campus eavesdropping on private conversations, butting in if they heard anything politically incorrect and admonishing the speakers.

Here's a link:

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/letters/story.html?id=c92f9bfc-e0f1-48b6-a9b1-e6f04eff3ade

"In their finest moments, universities provide an open and safe environment where students can immerse themselves in higher learning and debate. At their worst, the folks who run these institutions can come up with some strikingly unintelligent and oppressive ideas.

If Queen's University authorities believe they are benefiting education by enlisting six student monitors as a cleansing force to eradicate impure thoughts on campus, then it may be time for an overhaul of the school's administration."

I read your link, and I am frankly astonished.

However, and fortunately, this was not my experience at UNB. There were sponsored debates between Jewish and Palestinian groups; there was a Young Conservatives group who were organized (and so frequently heard), a Socialists group...and so on. I had some issues with university myself, but they weren't along the realms of political correctness or the stifling of debate and inquiry.

[blueblood]

I was responding to blueblood's stereotypically absurd comment that university degrees are worthless and asked where blueblood proposed that physicians should be educated. How do your comments address my question?

Of course there are good and bad universities but how does that follow logically from my question?

ho hum

My link

You make bigotted comments towards Christians, and suggest that people that don't have a university education are trash and stupid. Some of the richest people in Canada don't have a University Education.

If you want to make ignorant blanket statements, I can make the same right back.

[Smallc]

ho hum

My link

If you can find a more ignorant website, I'd like to see it.

[M.Dancer]

ho hum

My link

6. Communications

That is nonsense. Communications can and often does lead to many diverse and intresting fields of employment. A friend of mine majored in communications at McGill and is now a senior producer in london with the BBC. I personally know dozens of people in the corporate world actively involved in communications as well as dozens more in advertising and PR.

1. Religion

Everyone I know who has majored in religion (or more accurately, theology) is gainfully employed either teaching or praying. One fellow I know was the head curator for the AofC.

9. Philosophy

3. Latin

You might be surprised the number of Lawyers who took one or the other.

[Smallc]

Conservatives reopen lead.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/02/24/ekos-poll024.html

[Mr.Canada]

Conservatives reopen lead.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/02/24/ekos-poll024.html

As I've said. The Liberal numbers are only temporary. People will forget about prorogation and the tempeture will cool down and the numbers will return to where they were.

Nothing surprising smallc except your willingness to pay good money for membership to the Liberal Party. After all the adscams and theft of tax payer dollars you still stand behind these people.

[ToadBrother]

Conservatives reopen lead.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/02/24/ekos-poll024.html

Still not enough, I think, to tempt the Tories back to the polls. Unless something extraordinary happens, we're not going to see an election this spring.

[Mr.Canada]

Still not enough, I think, to tempt the Tories back to the polls. Unless something extraordinary happens, we're not going to see an election this spring.

No way, no election this spring. I totally agree. I'll guess a fall election. If Harpers numbers rise as I predict they will he'll proabably start engineering his defeat after the summer break.

[ToadBrother]

No way, no election this spring. I totally agree. I'll guess a fall election. If Harpers numbers rise as I predict they will he'll proabably start engineering his defeat after the summer break.

I doubt even then. Maybe if Harper didn't shoot himself in the foot like he did with the last prorogation, but he seems to be a guy who is able to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Yes, he probably would have lost Mackay if he had let Parliament go on, but so what? I doubt very much that Harper would cry a considerable number of tears if his chief competitor went down the tubes.

He takes too many risks. Sometimes they pay off (the 2008 prorogation), but then he pushes the envelope. He's a great political manager, but I'm beginning to think he's a mediocre political strategist, who has got lucky more than demonstrated any particular skill.

[Mr.Canada]

I doubt even then. Maybe if Harper didn't shoot himself in the foot like he did with the last prorogation, but he seems to be a guy who is able to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Yes, he probably would have lost Mackay if he had let Parliament go on, but so what? I doubt very much that Harper would cry a considerable number of tears if his chief competitor went down the tubes.

He takes too many risks. Sometimes they pay off (the 2008 prorogation), but then he pushes the envelope. He's a great political manager, but I'm beginning to think he's a mediocre political strategist, who has got lucky more than demonstrated any particular skill.

McKay is a good politician and his seat is safe for as long as he runs in that riding. Harper doesn't have many seats out east and it would be bad if he lost it. In this day and age I don't know if anotherr Tory could old that seat. May got quite a few votes there and that was running against McKay. She'd probably run again in a By election and with no McKay might well take it. Too risky. Better to prorogue and get some backlash for a bit. Canadian voters are predictably forgetful and I'm sure Harper is banking on this and thinks it will blow over. Most likely he's right.

Anyway it didn't really go away. The first words out of Layton and Ignatieff mouths when Parl. resumes will be to blast the PM and McKay. Maybe Harper is trying to goad Ignatieff to trigger an election, daring him to. Who knows? I don't pretend to know what goes on in Harpers head.

Then again maybe this whole thing back fired on Harper which I find more likely as you say.

[ToadBrother]

McKay is a good politician and his seat is safe for as long as he runs in that riding. Harper doesn't have many seats out east and it would be bad if he lost it. In this day and age I don't know if anotherr Tory could old that seat. May got quite a few votes there and that was running against McKay. She'd probably run again in a By election and with no McKay might well take it. Too risky. Better to prorogue and get some backlash for a bit. Canadian voters are predictably forgetful and I'm sure Harper is banking on this and thinks it will blow over. Most likely he's right.

First of all, Elizabeth May is a moron. That's the only word I can think of to describe running against not just a cabinet minister, but against an MP who is very popular in his riding. Nothing convinced me more that the Greens aren't ready for Prime Time than that stupid stunt (why didn't she parachute into one of the friendlier Sunshine Coast ridings out in BC?). The fact that she even survived that colossal blunder and is still the leader of the Greens tells you these guys just aren't serious about improving their electoral prospects.

I'm not talking about Mackay's electoral future, which seems relatively safe. I'm talking about his future as basically the second man in the party, and more specifically as a senior cabinet minister. To me, he has always represented the largest threat to Harper. He's more charismatic than Harper, who, quite frankly, tends to look more like a banker or an accountant than a politician. But if the Afghan prisoner abuse nonsense takes out anybody, it will be him.

Anyway it didn't really go away. The first words out of Layton and Ignatieff mouths when Parl. resumes will be to blast the PM and McKay. Maybe Harper is trying to goad Ignatieff to trigger an election, daring him to. Who knows? I don't pretend to know what goes on in Harpers head.

Of course Iggy will blast the government. That's his job. But the numbers are such that the situation will be very similar to last spring. Everyone will be jumping up and down, insisting they know best, that the other guys are morons, and yet everyone will be throwing ideas in the hat. Whatever budget Flaherty tables, it will decidedly different once it comes out the other side.

Then again maybe this whole thing back fired on Harper which I find more likely as you say.

I'd like to say that the other Tory MPs will keep him in check, like I did after the near disaster of the party funding crisis. But it may very well be true that the average MP, perhaps even his own cabinet, has very little influence over what he does. I can't imagine anybody but Mackay (who must have been most greatful for Harper taking the heat off) thinking that proroguing was going to be something they could sell back in their ridings, and sure enough, the word is out that a lot of Tory MPs have definitely felt the anger of their constituents. Worst of all, they got to hear for an entire extra month.

But if one thing is true in politics, it's that electorates have short memories, and what angered them today won't even be a blip on the radar tomorrow (with some notable exceptions). I don't think the prorogation will permanently damage Tory numbers, and it is possible that the crisis is over, but it does signal one thing, that Harper might as well throw Iggy the keys to 24 Sussex Drive if he ever tries it again, if his own caucus even let him do it. That means he's going to have to play a lot nicer with the other kids than he did last fall.

Edited February 25, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Smallc]

OTTAWA, March 2 (Reuters) - Enjoying a post Olympic Games glow, Canada's governing Conservatives got a boost in a public opinion poll on Tuesday just as they prepare to deliver tough news about how they plan to control spending.

The Ipsos-Reid survey for CanWest put the Conservatives at 37 percent popular support, a higher approval rating than other polling firms have reported for the Conservatives over the past six weeks. An Ipsos-Reid poll last month put the party at 34 percent support.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who won a strengthened minority government in the October 2008 election, says he wants to focus on the economic recovery and insists neither he or Canadians are interested in another election now.

Ipsos-Reid said the official opposition Liberal Party, which has been level with the Conservatives for weeks in most polls, had slipped two percentage points to 29 percent. The left-leaning New Democrats dropped one point to 16 percent.

Canada Conservatives take poll lead ahead of budget

[eyeball]

Enjoying a post Olympic Games glow, Canada's governing Conservatives got a boost in a public opinion poll on Tuesday.

Canadian banality is even more legendary than our patriotism.

I guess we'll hear no apologies for this.

[Alta4ever]

Canadian banality is even more legendary than our patriotism.

I guess we'll hear no apologies for this.

Considering this poll was done Feb 18 to 22nd. I doubt this is the poll with the "olympic" bounce. This was the week we heard all of the Own the Podium failed and the games were being run down by the British media.

[nicky10013]

Considering this poll was done Feb 18 to 22nd. I doubt this is the poll with the "olympic" bounce. This was the week we heard all of the Own the Podium failed and the games were being run down by the British media.

Feb 18-28 Harris Decima has the Conservatives and Liberals stalled at 31% a piece. Looks like the Ipsos Reid is an outlier. The most the conservatives had in any other poll is 33%. 37 is a little out there IMO.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/773840--tories-liberals-both-stalled-poll

Edited March 2, 2010 by nicky10013

[punked]

Feb 18-28 Harris Decima has the Conservatives and Liberals stalled at 31% a piece. Looks like the Ipsos Reid is an outlier. The most the conservatives had in any other poll is 33%. 37 is a little out there IMO.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/773840--tories-liberals-both-stalled-poll

I think it is the start of a pattern.