Canadian Political Polls

[eyeball]

There are indeed lots of sheeple in Canada. You know the kind, the blind followers who take the easy road because they can. The folks that take this path lack courage and foresight. These are the people who would have a nice and safe static political environment. They are the same group of folks who argued against Churchill in the 30's. Appeasement is a foolish policy direction to take that can and has cost lives.

You must mean the sorts of people who perversely chide voters for naively expecting too much honesty from candidates and their political parties. That's real appeasement as I understand the word to mean.

The only thing certain in politics is change. Sometimes for the better and sometimes not, yet it is in fact certain. That is how the world works. Change is certain, you can bank on it.

And the more things change the more they also stay the same.

It is interesting to see people calling others whiners for simply stating their views. Rather arrogant and even delusional in the view that they can sit in judgment of others for speaking their mind. Not exactly a shining example of the Canadian ability to respect the differences of people and revel in them as a positive diversion from the norms of our insulated lives.

Yet that is their right, and I respect that.

I respect their right too but I don't know where they get off thinking they have the moral or ethical background to do so.

Edited May 1, 2010 by eyeball

[LastViking]

Liberals still hemorrhaging. TrendLines Research gives Harper a 139-87 seat projection lead over Ignatieff, had a writ been dropped last week. OTOH, when this result is averaged with the four other conversion models, their riding projection chart shows the Conservatives have a 132-89 lead over the Liberal Party.

[Keepitsimple]

Latest EKOS poll:

Conservatives - 33.1

Liberals - 26.1

NDP - 16.0

Green - 11.5

Bloc - 10.2

Link: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/05/05/ekos-poll.html

Edited May 9, 2010 by Keepitsimple

[Smallc]

See, now to me, these numbers on best PM make far more sense than some of the 'approval rating' polls:

Stephen Harper, Conservative: 29.5 per cent (-1.1)

Michael Ignatieff, Liberal: 17.3 per cent (+1.2)

Jack Layton, NDP: 15.6 per cent (-2.5)

Gilles Duceppe, Bloc Quebecois: 6.3 per cent (+0.5)

Elizabeth May, Green Party: 5.5 per cent (-1.4)

Unsure: 14.5 per cent (+5.1)

None of them: 11.3 per cent (-0.4)

Nanos Research Poll for CTV News

Edited May 11, 2010 by Smallc

[Michael Hardner]

Harper comes across as someone who will do what's right and not what's popular. Unless Ignatieff can articulate some other kind of vision, then Canadians can only evaluate the candidates based on who will be the most competent leader and Harper hasn't made any mistakes big enough to warrant de-electing him.

[ToadBrother]

See, now to me, these numbers on best PM make far more sense than some of the 'approval rating' polls:

Stephen Harper, Conservative: 29.5 per cent (-1.1)

Michael Ignatieff, Liberal: 17.3 per cent (+1.2)

Jack Layton, NDP: 15.6 per cent (-2.5)

Gilles Duceppe, Bloc Quebecois: 6.3 per cent (+0.5)

Elizabeth May, Green Party: 5.5 per cent (-1.4)

Unsure: 14.5 per cent (+5.1)

None of them: 11.3 per cent (-0.4)

Nanos Research Poll for CTV News

Quite frankly all the polls just seem to circle the same orbit, and have been doing so for six months or more. The Tories will herald a new age is coming when their party blips about 32%, and then it will drop and the Liberals will pop up a percent or so, and the Liberals will declare a new age is near.

What is very clear from all the polls is that if we were to have an election now, we'd get practically the same Parliament with a few minor seat shifts. In fact, other than a few high points, like last fall when the Tories were reaching the high 30s, that's pretty much been the story since the Martin minority government. It is quite possible that we may in fact have entered a much longer phase of minorities than we could have expected early on.

One thing that all of this does tell us is that Iggy has been an utter failure. He has failed to grow the Liberal brand at all, despite a government that at times has behaved most obnoxiously and contemptuously. Harper is becoming, for better and/or for worse, the known quantity, which may be why the Tories consistently stay ahead. Everyone knows he's an autocrat, that he loathes Parliament, dislikes many members of his own party, and pretty much wields caucus solidarity like a billy-club, but he's kind of like Chretien or Trudeau were. We knew they were nasty SOBs too, but nasty SOBs can do very well in democracies. I mean, Nixon won a landslide in 1972 and there probably wasn't a single American who actually liked the guy.

[Wild Bill]

One thing that all of this does tell us is that Iggy has been an utter failure. He has failed to grow the Liberal brand at all, despite a government that at times has behaved most obnoxiously and contemptuously.

This is a very good point. Believe it or not, I could very easily drop my support for the Tories and vote Liberal! The present party is starting more and more to attack some of my core Libertarian values, particularly with their stand on justice reform. They don't seem to have a reasoned approach at all, particularly with what they did to Marc Emery, or the issue itself of marijuana. They seem to think that all they need is a bigger hammer and they can bash a populace into submission!

This might fly in some evangelical corner of the prairies but I guarantee that if they are so foolish as to allow it to become a major issue it could and likely would cost them any hope of a majority in Ontario and Quebec. People here simply don't feel that way towards pot! You can put up any poll results you like saying otherwise and I just couldn't buy it. It would be asking me to disregard what a lifetime of living here in both personal and professional circles has shown me. To us, it just looks like evangelical bullying. Ontarioans have a hefty fear of religion gaining power in politics and of ANY social engineering group being able to use the law to bully us into their own idea of a proper lifestyle!

Also, there is the matter of Harper apparently finding more in common with style with Chretien than Manning, as far as stifling independence from his caucus and the general anti-populism of the new merged CPC and it would take very little for my vote to be gone!

Right now, it's hanging by a thread and that thread is named Ignatieff! The man has zero political experience and it plainly shows! So far, as Leader of the Loyal Opposition he has given us nothing but ad hominem attacks on Harper and the Tories. I haven't heard one PRACTICAL alternative approach from the Liberals on anything the Tories have been doing! Ignatieff seems to be simply marking time, waiting for some parade to start up that he can ride to put his party back into power.

This hasn't surprised me. After Adscam, I expected that the Liberals would realize that it would be some years before they had a strong shot at the brass ring again and would tick along with caretaker leaders. Adscam was exposed in 2004. That's 6 years ago! Long enough to start thinking about a fresh start.

It would take a new, more charismatic leader. It would also take some ideas that seemed practical to more Canadians. If the Liberals accepted that it is no longer the "touchy-feely" world of 1985 Liberalism and went back more to their Classic Liberal roots they might be a better fit to that "magical middle". Other countries went that way during those years but Canada seemed to miss it all, being in stasis with a fractured Opposition, so that Chretien and his crew had no need to change with the times. Afterwards, they found themselves out of step, like a disco chick who gets to the dance only to find that a Metalica cover band is playing and everyone is "slam dancing"!

The strategy I'm painting is for the Liberals to directly attack much of the support for Harper that has not really been comfortable with him, by moving away from the far Left. They have far more opportunity to gain votes from Harper than they do from the NDP!

I'm not saying at all that this will happen, just that it is a practical scenario. Such scenarios could easily pull my vote away from Harper. The only question is whether I am unique or if there is an attractive number of voters who feel the same way!

Edited May 12, 2010 by Wild Bill

[Dave_ON]

I'm not saying at all that this will happen, just that it is a practical scenario. Such scenarios could easily pull my vote away from Harper. The only question is whether I am unique or if there is an attractive number of voters who feel the same way!

I doubt your unique, I don't think voters are particularly taken by either leader. Personally Mr. Harper is a major reason I won't ever vote CPC. I'd likely consider it if they were to get a new leader. As it stands now voting is more a matter of choosing the least objectionable party, as opposed to one we can really truly support.

[ToadBrother]

Also, there is the matter of Harper apparently finding more in common with style with Chretien than Manning, as far as stifling independence from his caucus and the general anti-populism of the new merged CPC and it would take very little for my vote to be gone!

I've never understood why people are surprised by this. On the one hand, Harper since his earliest involvement in politics has always ended up despising hist mentors. And its been clear since Harper departed Reform that Manning had come to deeply dislike and distrust Harper. The two men are kind of like sign posts at the two ends of Reform. Manning represented the populism and perhaps overly-idealistic notions of minimized exercising of power, whereas Harper represents the vigorous autocratic realpolitik. Even in Chretien and Trudeau there was some sense of ideals, perhaps not ideals that many could share, but still some basic signs that they viewed power as a means to an end. For Harper power is the ends, and any means can be justified in seeking it and maintaining. Constitution, law, ideology, they all take a distant second place to the power itself, if they even sit on the same table.

Harper and Manning are polar opposites, two men who I suspect at every level represent two entirely different theories of leadership.

[ToadBrother]

I doubt your unique, I don't think voters are particularly taken by either leader. Personally Mr. Harper is a major reason I won't ever vote CPC. I'd likely consider it if they were to get a new leader. As it stands now voting is more a matter of choosing the least objectionable party, as opposed to one we can really truly support.

Harper is one reason I won't vote for the Tories, the other being the religious lunatic that keeps showing up under the Conservative banner in my riding. As it is, even if they found a candidate that wasn't a Fundie nutbar, I could never support a party lead by a man who views our democratic institutions as obstacles to his own goals.

[capricorn]

Personally Mr. Harper is a major reason I won't ever vote CPC.

I didn't vote Conservative because I liked Harper or my local candidate. I was looking to vote against the Liberals and liked the Conservative policies in general.

I'd likely consider it if they were to get a new leader.

As it stands, a new Liberal leader is immaterial to me if I don't see real change in the Liberal party.

As it stands now voting is more a matter of choosing the least objectionable party, as opposed to one we can really truly support.

The Liberals haven't yet given me an incentive to return to the fold. So I'll continue to vote Conservative until I feel I have a reason not to.

[Dave_ON]

I didn't vote Conservative because I liked Harper or my local candidate. I was looking to vote against the Liberals and liked the Conservative policies in general.

As it stands, a new Liberal leader is immaterial to me if I don't see real change in the Liberal party.

The Liberals haven't yet given me an incentive to return to the fold. So I'll continue to vote Conservative until I feel I have a reason not to.

Agreed and this demonstrates the dilemma that faces us all, we vote the way we do, not because we are particularly motivated to vote for that rep/party, as much as we are trying to vote against a specific party. It’s truly a sad state of affairs when we have to choose the party that we dislike the least or because it’s the only palatable option. In my riding I'm fortunate in that I actually do like my MP Glen Pearson who happens to be a member of the LPC.

Edited May 13, 2010 by Dave_ON

[Smallc]

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1815652620100518

It seems we can't break the holding pattern.

Edited May 19, 2010 by Smallc

[Smallc]

Or maybe, the holding pattern is going away for now:

http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/05/19/ekos-voter-intention-poll.html

BTW, those Bloc numbers are way too high for my comfort level.

[ToadBrother]

Or maybe, the holding pattern is going away for now:

http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/05/19/ekos-voter-intention-poll.html

BTW, those Bloc numbers are way too high for my comfort level.

There's no taste for separation. They're voting Bloc because they can't stomach the Liberals.

[Keepitsimple]

Interesting confusion among Liberal supporters - the country's more or less moving in the right direction - but the government is not.

This week's poll suggests Liberal supporters surveyed were more likely to report that the country is moving in the right direction (50.8 per cent) than the wrong direction (37.1 per cent). But they continue to be critical of the direction of the government, with 32.9 per cent saying the government is moving in the right direction and 52.2 per cent saying it's moving in the wrong direction.

Edited May 20, 2010 by Keepitsimple

[M.Dancer]

never mind..

Edited May 20, 2010 by M.Dancer

[Jack Weber]

Interesting confusion among Liberal supporters - the country's more or less moving in the right direction - but the government is not.

Well it proves to me that after the actions of the '90's until 2006,many Liberal supporters are really slightly right of centre in their outlook.Therefore it's not skocking to see that Liberal supporters are terribly unhappy with the direction of the country because they would do almost precisely the same thing!

So it really means that most Liberal supporters seem to like slight conservativism,they would just prefer it under a Liberal government.The problem is that this is precisely why the Liberals are were they are in the polls.I mean,if one wants conservativism,why not just go for the real deal?It also shows that there must be more than a few disaffected left of centre Liberal supporters.If the NDP where smart,they would move towards the centre and away from some of positions of some of their more nuttier members.There's probably votes that could be picked off...

Edited May 20, 2010 by Jack Weber

[Keepitsimple]

Considering Mr. Ignatieff's performance, that 25% (Liberal supporters) is a stubborn bunch.

[Jack Weber]

Considering Mr. Ignatieff's performance, that 25% (Liberal supporters) is a stubborn bunch.

I agree...He's been a huge disappointment for the Liberal party.I think he's headed back to Harvard after the next election.The simple fact of the matter is that the Liberal party cannot compete in the marketplace of ideas after 15 years of phony majorities and minorities,because they have'nt had to.

I think that last 25% are hanging on to the idea that the Liberals are going to have some sort of glorious return to power.That won't happen as long as they tacitly give the current governmentapproval,feign the odd offense,and then,come up with absolutely no real alternatives.It does'nt do them any good,and in a larger sense,it does'nt do our democracy any good...

[wyly]

One thing that all of this does tell us is that Iggy has been an utter failure. He has failed to grow the Liberal brand at all, despite a government that at times has behaved most obnoxiously and contemptuously. Harper is becoming, for better and/or for worse, the known quantity, which may be why the Tories consistently stay ahead. Everyone knows he's an autocrat, that he loathes Parliament, dislikes many members of his own party, and pretty much wields caucus solidarity like a billy-club, but he's kind of like Chretien or Trudeau were. We knew they were nasty SOBs too, but nasty SOBs can do very well in democracies. I mean, Nixon won a landslide in 1972 and there probably wasn't a single American who actually liked the guy.

I disagree toad...Iggy is no more a failure than Harper if the polls are to be believed, 52% and 51% disapproval ratings for both leaders is essentially a tie, Iggy can't increase liberal fortunes and Harper can't get a majority...

[wyly]

This is a very good point. Believe it or not, I could very easily drop my support for the Tories and vote Liberal! The present party is starting more and more to attack some of my core Libertarian values, particularly with their stand on justice reform. They don't seem to have a reasoned approach at all, particularly with what they did to Marc Emery, or the issue itself of marijuana. They seem to think that all they need is a bigger hammer and they can bash a populace into submission!

This might fly in some evangelical corner of the prairies but I guarantee that if they are so foolish as to allow it to become a major issue it could and likely would cost them any hope of a majority in Ontario and Quebec. People here simply don't feel that way towards pot! You can put up any poll results you like saying otherwise and I just couldn't buy it. It would be asking me to disregard what a lifetime of living here in both personal and professional circles has shown me. To us, it just looks like evangelical bullying. Ontarioans have a hefty fear of religion gaining power in politics and of ANY social engineering group being able to use the law to bully us into their own idea of a proper lifestyle!

we agree on that, pushing through tougher pot laws clearly against public opinion to satisfy the evangelical right is a cause for concern...this isn't a man who separates is religious belief from his political beliefs...even among fiscal conservatives of alberta this is seen as stupid...

[myata]

Together, Liberal (25) + NDP (15) + Green (12) = 52%

But, coalition is big and scary boo for Iggy's partocrats. They have much better idea, they only have to figure out how to break it to us (we can do with more power... all of it.. now!)

[Jack Weber]

Together, Liberal (25) + NDP (15) + Green (12) = 52%

But, coalition is big and scary boo for Iggy's partocrats. They have much better idea, they only have to figure out how to break it to us (we can do with more power... all of it.. now!)

The problem is that Ignatieff is a right leaning Liberal....He's more in line with slightly right of centre conservatives then anyone else on the left.

It will take a different Liberal leader to approach some sort of coalition...AND NOT AND EGGHEAD LIKE DION!!!

[myata]

It will take a different Liberal leader to approach some sort of coalition...AND NOT AND EGGHEAD LIKE DION!!!

No I'd rather see liberal opposition fragmenting a tad further, perchance leading Tories into majority territory with popular support in low 30s. If that wouldn't stir us into thinking seriously about our political system, it'll be sure sign that it's the time for all us to go to sleep, politically.