Federal Election Polls

[Harry]

Your news is outdated.

ORANGE CRUSH: ARE JACK LAYTON AND THE NDP REDRAWING THE BOUNDARIES OF CANADAS POLITICAL LANDSCAPE?

After several years in a political rut characterized by trench warfare between the Conservatives and the Liberals, Jack Layton and his NDP party appear poised to reshape Canadas political landscape. With all the necessary provisos and caveats about weekends and how things can still change, we are reporting the results of over 3,000 cases collected from Friday to Sunday which suggest an astonishing shift in the voter landscape from the outset of this campaign. While the Conservatives are still hanging on to a fairly stable (if somewhat diminished) 33.7 front runner position, the NDP wave which has continued in Quebec is now gaining a strong foothold throughout English Canada. The NDP stands at 28.0 points nationally and they are seeing important gains in virtually all parts of the country. Michael Ignatieffs Liberals are stuck at 23.7 points but are still in the game in Ontario.

These results, if they were to hold, would produce a profound transformation in the Canadian political firmament, tantamount and arguably more far reaching than the Reform explosion in 1993. With the current splits, these levels of support would produce 131 Conservative seats but the NDP would have 100 seats while the Liberals would hold 62. Together, the NDP and Liberal Party would have a majority and 31 more seats than the Conservatives, as well as nearly 20 more points in popular vote. It is hard to imagine how these totals would not produce the once unimaginable outcome of a

Jack Layton led coalition government deposing Stephen Harpers Conservative government. Unless of course, Stephen Harper could convince Michael Ignatieff that the Conservatives were more appropriate political bedfellows for the Liberals.

http://www.ekospolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/full_report_april_25_2011.pdf

Edited April 25, 2011 by Harry

[Bryan]

The EKOS numbers are heart-stopping but... EKOS has consistently shown the Liberals and NDP higher and the CPC lower than every other pollster, right?

Not just than the other pollsters, also compared to actual results when polling in other elections as well. EKOS always grossly under estimates the Conservative support both in absolute numbers and in relative support. On the same day, EKOS has CPC at 33.7, but Nanos has it at 39.2, and even Nanos has a consistent track record of under-reporting Conservative support.

I know Frank Graves tries to claim that his connection to the Liberal Party, and his job at CBC and TorStar does not affect his objectivity as a pollster, but it's painfully obvious that he's trying to form public opinion rather than reflect it.

[wyly]

Not just than the other pollsters, also compared to actual results when polling in other elections as well. EKOS always grossly under estimates the Conservative support both in absolute numbers and in relative support. On the same day, EKOS has CPC at 33.7, but Nanos has it at 39.2, and even Nanos has a consistent track record of under-reporting Conservative support.

I know Frank Graves tries to claim that his connection to the Liberal Party, and his job at CBC and TorStar does not affect his objectivity as a pollster, but it's painfully obvious that he's trying to form public opinion rather than reflect it.

soooo...a liberal supporter is deliberately falsifying a opinion poll that would ruin his party possibly forever in order to help the ndp to become at least the official opposition possibly the government??? ...wowzer that's some conspiracy theory...

[Harry]

There is now only 5.7% separating the NDP from first place

EKOS polling April 25

Party / 08 GE / Apr 20 / Apr 24 / Change

Cons - 38% / 34.4% / 33.7% / Down 4.3%

NDP - 18% / 24.7% / 28% / Up 3.3% (An NDP gain of 7.6% on the Cons in 4 days)

Libs - 26% / 24.7% / 23.7% / Down 2.3%

http://www.ekospolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/full_report_april_25_2011...

Edited April 25, 2011 by Harry

[Mr.Canada]

There is now only 5.7% separating the NDP from first place

NDP - 18% / 24.7% / 28% / Up 3.3% (An NDP gain of 7.6% on the Cons in 4 days)

The NDP aren't going to win 100 seats, they're just not. They may get 50 but I'd be shocked if they got more then that. Their Qc. numbers are inflating their national numbers. Outside Qc. their numbers are normal, they're not gaining in Ont which is the most important province to do well in. The Tories are about 20 pts ahead in Ont.

[Bryan]

soooo...a liberal supporter is deliberately falsifying a opinion poll that would ruin his party possibly forever in order to help the ndp to become at least the official opposition possibly the government??? ...wowzer that's some conspiracy theory...

You got a better explanation as to why he's always got CPC support several points lower than what they actually get? Why he's always lower than everyone else?

If it's not malice, that leaves what, incompetence? Is that any better?

[Mr.Canada]

You got a better explanation as to why he's always got CPC support several points lower than what they actually get? Why he's always lower than everyone else?

If it's not malice, that leaves what, incompetence? Is that any better?

I never just look at one poll for something reasonable. It's usually best to look at a few polls and take an average, that's usually more in line with reality.

[cybercoma]

Not just than the other pollsters, also compared to actual results when polling in other elections as well. EKOS always grossly under estimates the Conservative support both in absolute numbers and in relative support. On the same day, EKOS has CPC at 33.7, but Nanos has it at 39.2, and even Nanos has a consistent track record of under-reporting Conservative support.

I know Frank Graves tries to claim that his connection to the Liberal Party, and his job at CBC and TorStar does not affect his objectivity as a pollster, but it's painfully obvious that he's trying to form public opinion rather than reflect it.

I already responded to this in the prediction thread. Stop spouting partisan crap and start learning from your fellow posters.

Here is the entire post re-iterated, since you cannot put quotes within quotes.

____________________________________________________________________________

That article points out something important to remember not just when predicting seats, but also when reading the daily polling. Going back several elections now, pretty much every pollster and projector has shown Conservative support as being considerably lower than what they actually get on election day. Conversely, they pretty much all over-estimate the Liberal support. This is even the case in provincial elections, as the article points out.

What's most interesting to me is the BQ and NDP numbers for the most part are much closer to the actual result. That is why the NDP surge in Quebec is so interesting, because they really could be getting the support the polls show. It makes using seat projection models (which are already suspect at best) tough, because previous data of a similar NDP surge can't be factored into the model.

That was answered by the article and to be frank it doesn't bode well for the Conservatives:

The inherent bias in seat prediction methodologies to favour previous election results means they tend to overly favour parties set to lose seats, such as the Liberals and Bloc Québécois in the last election. They also tend to miss the likelihood of parties on the rise to gain seats, such as was the case with the Conservatives in the last election. Only the NDP, whose vote intention numbers showed little gain by the end of the 2008 campaign, saw seat count predictions on both sides of its eventual total.

The Liberals were over-estimated because they lost seats during the last campaign. The Conservatives were considerably under-represented because they were set to overthrow the Liberals. The seat predictors do not capture swings in the electorate very well. They're "sticky" if you will. It could very well be the Conservatives over-represented this time around and the NDP under-represented.

It does not bode well for the BQ either.

Edited April 26, 2011 by cybercoma

[Shady]

If anything I think the NDP are extremely over-represented. I think they peaked about a week ago.

[punked]

If anything I think the NDP are extremely over-represented. I think they peaked about a week ago.

Doesn't feel like it at the office. More and more people everyday join the campaign.

[Smallc]

If anything I think the NDP are extremely over-represented. I think they peaked about a week ago.

I don't see that at all. Their numbers keep going up....and they're the party with the most room to grow.

[Harry]

You got a better explanation as to why he's always got CPC support several points lower than what they actually get? Why he's always lower than everyone else?

If it's not malice, that leaves what, incompetence? Is that any better?

Hilarious - do you even read what you write!

[Shady]

I don't see that at all. Their numbers keep going up....and they're the party with the most room to grow.

Well, Layton's had an easy ride so far. He's had the good fortune of escape any negative ads. However, now that he's improved in the polls, you'll start to see more negative ads run against him, and you'll start to see the effect of those ads.

Most politicians do well when they're not criticized by the opposition. That's about to change for him. Just ask Dion and Ignatieff how that ends up working out.

[Harry]

I don't see that at all. Their numbers keep going up....and they're the party with the most room to grow.

Absolutely. Just look at the NDP 2nd choice support while the Cons have almost none.

[cybercoma]

I think in this circumstance it will work in his favour, not next time however. The reason being that the ads at this point will look like exactly what they are: a desperate attempt to stop the bleeding. In the meantime, Layton has not been putting out depressingly negative ads. His attacks have been on point while positively showing what his party will do. I'm biased however.

[Shady]

while positively showing what his party will do.

Yes, spend lots of money we don't have.

[punked]

Well, Layton's had an easy ride so far. He's had the good fortune of escape any negative ads. However, now that he's improved in the polls, you'll start to see more negative ads run against him, and you'll start to see the effect of those ads.

Most politicians do well when they're not criticized by the opposition. That's about to change for him. Just ask Dion and Ignatieff how that ends up working out.

Sorry Shady attack ads only work at the start of en election. See the first week of an attack ad will actually bump the Party support up because it is giving that voter more exposure to the candidate. For someone who is do defined in the public it would take 3-5 weeks maybe even more to start to tear down his image. It is just to late in the game.

[Harry]

I would think right-wingers would jump on the NDP bandwagon to abolish the unelected Senate. Think of how much money that would save.

‘Terra incognita’: Poll projects 100 seats for surging NDP

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/terra-incognita-poll-projects-100-seats-for-surging-ndp/article1998361/

[punked]

I would think right-wingers would jump on the NDP bandwagon to abolish the unelected Senate. Think of how much money that would save.

Some of them are. I think we are capturing some of the populists we lost in the Reform days. Right now their is only one populist party while back then there was a right wing one and left wing one.

[wyly]

Doesn't feel like it at the office. More and more people everyday join the campaign.

that seems to be the consensus from pollsters and other pundits, ndp is the only party with momentum and the support is firming up and the ndp ultimately has more growth potential than any other party...

[punked]

that seems to be the consensus from pollsters and other pundits, ndp is the only party with momentum and the support is firming up and the ndp ultimately has more growth potential than any other party...

Today while making calls through voter lists, remember these are cold calls, three people asked me how they could volunteer and we ran out of signs yesterday. You could feel the movement on the ground about a week and a half ago.

[wyly]

I think in this circumstance it will work in his favour, not next time however. The reason being that the ads at this point will look like exactly what they are: a desperate attempt to stop the bleeding. In the meantime, Layton has not been putting out depressingly negative ads. His attacks have been on point while positively showing what his party will do. I'm biased however.

that was my impression as well, layton seems to have made a deliberate choice to rise above the tactic of using really negative adds...ignoring the negative adds launched against him making himself look like the popular favourite under attack....

[wyly]

Today while making calls through voter lists, remember these are cold calls, three people asked me how they could volunteer and we ran out of signs yesterday. You could feel the movement on the ground about a week and a half ago.

I think there's an infectious spontaneity that grips people when they sense a historical cultural/political shift they want to be part of not unlike how small protests in eygpt and tunsia kept growing and growing spreading across all demographics....

[blueblood]

Sorry Shady attack ads only work at the start of en election. See the first week of an attack ad will actually bump the Party support up because it is giving that voter more exposure to the candidate. For someone who is do defined in the public it would take 3-5 weeks maybe even more to start to tear down his image. It is just to late in the game.

Laytons attack ads which started early in the campaign are cartoony yet witty. The liberals attack ads are gloomy, and "scary". The tories have both witty and scary attack ads.

Personally I prefer the ndp attack ads even though I disagree with their policies, they're just better made.

[Bryan]

Hilarious - do you even read what you write!

I'm asking a question. Do you have an better reason as to why Graves is consistently so wrong?