Interesting Poll Results...

[sir_springer]

This is the first credible poll I've seen in ages.

_____________________________________

United right will halt Liberal landslide

poll: With 36% surveyed backing Grits, 31.2% behind merged party, Martin could face minority government

David Vienneau and Sean Gordon

The Ottawa Citizen; with files from Global National

Tuesday, November 04, 2003

A united Conservative party would go a long way toward preventing the Paul Martin-led Liberals from winning a landslide victory in the next federal election, possibly even resulting in a minority government, a new poll obtained by Global National shows.

"Although the new Conservative party may not keep the Martin Liberals from forming another government, it would instantly make federal politics more competitive, (and) likely reduce the Liberal margin of victory, possibly to a minority government status,'' says an executive summary of the poll conducted by JMCK Communications of Calgary.

"The new Conservative party would out-poll the Liberals in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, move to within 12 per cent of the Liberals in Ontario, and to within approximately seven per cent of the government party in Atlantic Canada."

The poll of 1,018 Canadians, conducted between Oct. 19 and 30, showed the Liberals had the support of 37.8 per cent of those surveyed, compared to 16 per cent for the Canadian Alliance and 11.2 per cent for the Progressive Conservatives. The poll is considered accurate with 3.1 percentage points 19 times out of 20.

Should the Alliance and the Tories unite, the new party would be much more competitive, receiving the support of 31.2 per cent of those surveyed, less than five percentage points behind 36 per cent for the Liberals.

The New Democratic Party was supported by approximately 10 per cent of those surveyed under either scenario, while the Bloc Quebecois would drop from 10.1 per cent with two right-wing parties to 8.4 per cent with just one. The poll found more than 10 per cent of Quebecers would support a new party, compared to only 3.2 per cent who would vote for either the Alliance or the Tories.

The poll was conducted before former Ontario premier Mike Harris announced he was abandoning a bid for the leadership of the proposed new party. He was the preferred choice as leader of the new party, garnering support from 22.5 per cent of those surveyed.

Alliance leader Stephen Harper placed second, at 19.6 per cent, followed by New Brunswick Premier Bernard Lord at 9.5 per cent and former Reform leader Preston Manning at 9.3 per cent. Tory leader Peter MacKay was supported by less than five per cent of those surveyed. Almost one-fifth of Canadians are undecided, and 14.5 per cent wanted some other candidate.

"Of the two current leaders, Stephen Harper is being viewed by the Canadian public as having the potential to lead this party, much more so than MacKay,'' JMCK pollster Faron Ellis said. "MacKay's credibility with the average voter has been taxed through this process."

Mr. Martin is still the preferred choice for prime minister with almost 44-per-cent support; compared to 14.1 per cent for Mr. Harper and only 3.7 per cent for Mr. MacKay.

Given Mr. Harris's decision not to run, Mr. Harper is now seen as the early front-runner by people in both parties, although several Tory sources pointed out the leadership selection process -- which gives each riding equal weight -- could be a disadvantage to a candidate like the Alliance leader, who has a strong regional base rather than national reach.

The parties must ratify the merger deal by Dec. 12 -- the Alliance is expected to announce the results of its mail-in ballot by Dec. 4 and the Tories will make their results known two days later.

Mr. Harper remained coy about his intentions, although sources said he has already informed his caucus he will enter the race once ratification of the agreement seems assured. The Alliance leader rebuffed suggestions that he could alienate Tory members.

"It's inevitable that the leader is going to come from one of the two parties. ... The truth is that we have got to leave our former affiliations behind, and commit to the new party," he said.

Mr. MacKay said he hasn't decided whether to run, but warned against bestowing the leadership crown on Mr. Harper prematurely.

"I think we are going to get a balance of candidates getting into this race, we are going to see a lot of healthy competition around the leadership contest, which is always good. ... It's too early to suggest that this is going to be a one-person race," he said.

© The Ottawa Citizen 2003

[Rob1963]

Why do think these results are credible? Because it shows you something you want to see? I think it is totally unbelieveble. Polls have consistently shown the PC's leading the CA for over two years, yet this one poll shows the Alliance at 16 to 11 for the PC's? No way!!

[dnsfurlan]

Polls have consistently shown the PC's leading the CA for over two years

That's not true. The polls have danced around during this period. But, whichever way you look at it, both parties were hovering somewhere near the 15% level. Only Ekos was giving the kind of results you seem to be suggesting.

Now, the polls seem to say that the new party would have about 30. Which makes sense, right?

And if you could tell me how the PC Party would be better off without merger than with it then that's something I'd really like to hear.

All I hear from some PCers is a bunch of fear-mongering and sloganeering - the same stuff we've been hearing from Joe Clark and the gang for the past ten years.

When are you going to pull your heads out of the sand?

[westcoast99]

This poll is great news.

Edited August 12, 2015 by Gugsy

[Rob1963]

This is from the Politics Canada web page:

HISTORIC NATIONAL POLLS

Date Liberal PC Alliance NDP Bloc Others

Compas

21/10/2003 50 14 10 14 9

Ipsos-Reid

21/10/2003 46 15 11 11 8

Environics

10/10/2003 46 13 14 15

Ipsos-Reid

06/10/2003 47 14 13 12 9

SES Research

13/09/2003 46 19 13 15 8

Ekos

17/07/2003 54 17 11 10 5

Leger

09/06/2003 55 14 12 10 8

Ipsos-Reid

06/06/2003 45 15 14 11 9 5

SES Research

01/06/2003 52 18 12 10 7

Ekos

04/05/2003 50 17 13 10

Ipsos-Reid

27/04/2003 50 13 14 10 9 4

SES

24/02/2003 48 16 13 14 7

Ekos

23/02/2003 47 14 11 17 8

Ekos

21/01/2003 52 14 11 14 7

Ipsos-Reid

23/12/2002 41 13 15 10

Ipsos-Reid

14/12/2002 41 17 16 12 8 6

Ekos

09/12/2002 47 14 16 11 8

Ekos

01/11/2002 48 16 13 14 8

Politics Canada

31/10/2002 23 26 25 18 1 7

Ekos

27/08/2002 53 15 10 10 8

Ipsos-Ried

18/08/2002 41 18 16 13 8

Focus Canada

11/08/2002 40 15 18 16 9

Ipsos-Ried

21/06/2002 43 16 17 14

Ekos

07/06/2002 50 13 16 11 8

Ipsos-Ried

03/04/2002 45 15 15 10 10

Ekos

18/02/2002 55 19 9 9

Ipsos-Ried

30/09/2001 51 18 10 9 10

Gallup

24/09/2001 60 16 10 9 10

Compas

23/09/2001 55 18 7 4

Ekos

02/09/2001 53 18 10 9 8

Leger

17/08/2001 48 16 10 9 9

Ipsos-Ried

09/07/2001 48 21 10 10 9

Ipsos-Ried

27/04/2001 49 15 13 11 9

Environics

04/02/2001 45 23 8 8 10

Clearly showing the PC's leading the CA. Nonetheless, even if they were both dancing around 15%, the JMCK poll shows quite an improvement in CA and quite a drop in the Liberal numbers. I would be sceptical of any of the results until there is a clear trend.

Also, any polling about the Conservative Party is going to be exaggerated until a new leader is chosen, and platform is laid out. Until then it is all things to all people.

And it seems those in favour of this takeover (er, merger) are the ones doing the scare-mongering.

[SirRiff]

i'm interested too, i dont know if its right, but why is it more credible then any other poll?

SirRiff

[Pellaken]

Springer, I'm sure you heard the phrase that polls are right "19 times out of 20"

well there's 19 polls that disagree with you.

[Black Dog]

I'm a NDPer to the core. But I will vote Liberal if it keeps the Neo Con party from gaining ground. Chances are, I'm not alone.

[Hugo]

I'm a NDPer to the core.

Why am I not surprised? It amazes me that, even after socialism and communism have killed almost a hundred million people this century, people are still willing to give socialists the time of day.

Anyway, what you also have to remember is that Liberals tend to be younger, and Conservatives tend to be older, and therefore 1) Conservatives will be more interested in politics, not many leftists will put much thought into switching parties, and most NDPs are too hard-core to vote Liberal and 2) voter turn-out for the Conservatives will be better than for the Liberals.

[SirRiff]

Why am I not surprised? It amazes me that, even after socialism and communism have killed almost a hundred million people this century, people are still willing to give socialists the time of day.

so you are implying that socialist philosophies killed millions but the racial and religous polices of the right wing didnt?

uh, no.

its not likely the NDP will start WWIII either

and lets not confuse justification of evil with the value of the philosophy itself. else christianity would be just as indictable as socialism.

Sirriff

[xcr]

I suspect that you will find that NDP supporters will, largly, not hesitate to ote liberal if the new Conseratie party resembles the Alliance more than the PC party, and shows a real chance of winning. I support the NDP, and their are many curcumstances were I wouldote Liberal- for example, i would hae oted liberal in the recent Ontario election if I lived in Ontario (I dont). As for the pole, I certinly hope it is innacurate, and the other poles certinly support this.

As for the association of the NDP with Athoritianian Communist regiems, that is absured. The NDP in actual fact supports social freedom more than does the Alliance. There hae in fact been athoritarian Capatilist goernments as well (Pinochet comes to mind). Athoritarinasim can come from any economic standpoint (as is further demonstrated by the Americian Patriot act). A good social safty net and protection from abuse by concurn for profit aboe all else does not constitute opression so much as protection from it.

[Hugo]

so you are implying that socialist philosophies killed millions but the racial and religous polices of the right wing didnt?

Socialism has killed far more people than Nazism, Imperialism and Christianity put together.

its not likely the NDP will start WWIII either

Probably not, however, if someone starts espousing to me a social philosophy that is responsible for more suffering, misery and death than any other, I wouldn't listen. I certainly wouldn't vote for them. I won't give the time of day to a neo-Nazi party nor a Communist party.

A good social safty net and protection from abuse by concurn for profit aboe all else does not constitute opression so much as protection from it.

Which is basically what Adam Smith was espousing.

The NDP in actual fact supports social freedom more than does the Alliance.

No, I don't think so. What the NDP stands for is ending or at least curtailing freedom of speech, opinion, and belief, which is a right humanity has struggled for millenia to achieve and in most cases, is still struggling towards.

[Black Dog]

Why am I not surprised? It amazes me that, even after socialism and communism have killed almost a hundred million people this century, people are still willing to give socialists the time of day.

The NDP are as close to a moderate centrist party in canada. You're funny, but not ha-ha funny.

No, I don't think so. What the NDP stands for is ending or at least curtailing freedom of speech, opinion, and belief, which is a right humanity has struggled for millenia to achieve and in most cases, is still struggling towards.

Can I have whatever you're smoking? 'cause it must be some prime shit for you to cook up a whopper like that.

As much as I dislike the CA, I'd never stoop to such slanderous, infantile characterizations without some sort of proof to back it up. But then, who needs proof when you have blind allegiance to an ideological dogma, hey? Not you, obvs.

[Hugo]

The NDP are as close to a moderate centrist party in canada.

It's a sorry indication of what Trudeau has done to this country, when the NDP is viewed as a moderate centrist party. In any other country, they'd be far-left, and the Alliance would be centrist, or slightly right of center.

As much as I dislike the CA, I'd never stoop to such slanderous, infantile characterizations without some sort of proof to back it up.

Here's my proof: Svend Robinson (NDP), and Bill C-250.

[theWatcher]

I'm a NDPer to the core. But I will vote Liberal if it keeps the Neo Con party from gaining ground. Chances are, I'm not alone.

I guess there won't be an NDP party after the next election if the merger goes through then....

That's a wonderful way to support your party, keep up the great job. If enough of your brethren feel that way your party is going to dissapear.

[Black Dog]

Here's my proof: Svend Robinson (NDP), and Bill C-250.

Bill C-250

The proposed changes under Bill C-250 would expand the definition of "identifiable group" in Section 318 of Canada's Criminal Code, which deals with hate propaganda. Where the code refers to "any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion or ethnic origin," it would also include "sexual orientation."

The legislation would mean that inciting hatred on the basis of sexual orientation would be considered a criminal violation of the "Hate Propaganda" section of the code.

Sections 319 and 320 also refer to the definition of "identifiable group" in the code. Changing the meaning of the phrase would also affect these sections.

So what's the problem? Don't use the 3,000 year old ramblings of some nomadic desert tribe as a basis for projecting bigotry and you'll be just fine.

[Hugo]

If you start curtailing political expression or scientific fact you are in trouble. This bill does both of those things. FastNed (a lawyer) has already confirmed that what I have said in this forum could be used against me under C-250 and have me sentenced to up to 5 years in prison - and why? Because I have a genuinely held belief about homosexuality and I choose to back it up with facts?

Does it not worry you that C-250 makes many papers in psychiatric and medical journals illegal documents? Does it not bother you that any study of homosexuality can only have one answer, or it will be banned as hate speech, and the author imprisoned? The Papacy used the same tactics to muzzle the findings of Galileo. Preconcieved ideas should not stand in the way of scientific investigation, but C-250 makes sure that they do.

So it also began in Nazi Germany. Don't say you weren't warned.

[Goldie]

Anyway the poll by jmck was conducted by former employees of undisclosed members of parliament based in Calgary. I became A little suspiciscious about the numbers, as much as I want to believe them but needed to see no bias. I will hold judgement untill they can be repeated by another pollster. If anything it is a nice counter to the Ekos bias.