The Conservatives have the support of 39 per cent of decided voters, according to the Ipsos Reid survey, commissioned by Canwest News Service and Global National. The Tory support level is unchanged from the last Ipsos national poll on Aug. 21.
The Liberals have 30 per cent support, up two percentage points from Aug. 21. The NDP dropped two points to 12 per cent, while the Green party fell two points to eight per cent. The NDP received 18 per cent support in the last federal election in October 2008, but have fallen to 12 per cent in four separate Ipsos polls since then.
The Bloc Quebecois received nine per cent on a national basis. Seven per cent of respondents were undecided.
With the threat of an election looming, the Conservatives remain on the cusp of majority, with massive numbers in Ontario, while the party that must decide what to do gets it's lowest number on record. Fascinating result for Canwest.
Ontario:
The Tories have 46 per cent support in Ontario, compared with 36 per cent for the Liberals.
With only 18% remaining for the Greens and NDP, a decent national result for the former, that NDP number must be ugly. The last Ipsos "poll" had it 43-31% for the Conservatives. Now, the Conservatives go even higher, at staggering levels not seen since the coalition. I don't dispute that Ontario has tightened to a "pick em" province, the Liberal lead eroding, but...
This type of number from Ipsos should really scare the NDP, as they weigh their options. Oh wait...
24 comments:
7% undecided is a lot of people who aren't sayin'. Just sayin'.
Was there really an Ipsos poll showing an 11-point conservative lead? How did I manage to miss that? Oooo, I guess that means the liberals are "recovering."
I hate to dismiss it out of hand, but I find it so hard to even pay attention to them anymore. They just give the conservatives so much of what they want when they want it. Can't wait to read their "analysis" for myself.
With these numbers, why aren't the conservatives just pulling the plug themselves?
To me that's more telling than anything in this latest iteration.
Speaking of which, the president and operations manager for Ipsos are part of some speaker's series next week in Vancouver, entitled "We know what Canadians are thinking?" or some such rubbish. I almost spilled my coffee when I saw the ad in the canwest paper out here ;)
They had a 11% poll out a few weeks ago.
Yes, why aren't the Cons pulling the plug, those Ontario numbers represent a majority. I know, even they don't believe it.
Let's see - a couple weeks ago IR produces a poll that is instantly criticized since it is out of line with all other polls.
Then, oddly enough, their next poll is in line with their last one.
Why, it is almost as though they want to use the second poll to justify the results from the previous poll. Rather convenient I think.
Is Ipsos not the most Conservative pollsters around?
How could the people of this Country be so blind...do they know who to call..haven't called me yet.
If we saw a wild swing back towards the other pollsters, then it would have looked even more "odd". A slight narrowing, Libs up, NDP down, even though this poll shows people HATE the Libs for the mere suggestion of an election and would punish them firmly. I predict the next one is around 6-7% lead, just a slow return to the pack ;) People have reputations you know.
I was reading that we know what you are thinking crap too, Joseph. I was eating a sesame snap.
"Is Ipsos not the most Conservative pollsters around?
"
Any objective statistical analysis that I've seen would say the answer is yes. It is also true that the client is the most overtly biased media organization in Canada.
Maybe it's their methodology, whatever, but their predictive record is relatively poor and that's a fact jack :)
With these numbers, why aren't the conservatives just pulling the plug themselves?
The numbers are partly due to the public rejection of the party that is perceived to be the election trigger. It's better for Cons to let someone else pull the trigger. If they can force Dippers to knuckle under and look weak, all the better for the Cons.
The Cons can say they don't want an election but how can they get that majority King Steve was yammerin' about without an election. They want it. They just don't want to be blamed for it. Iggy is taking the blame now and the Cons will be sure to bring up those 79 NDP no-confidence votes during the campaign as proof of how the Dippers don't want parliament to work.
Sad to say, but the Con's are comin' out on top... again. Sheesh!
JB
JB
I don't dispute that, to a certain degree. The Con numbers are up, no question. Temporary, or real, too early to say. That said, I'm not basing that on this outfit, I assure you :)
"...the president and operations manager for Ipsos are part of some speaker's series next week in Vancouver, entitled "We know what Canadians are thinking?""
Would that be Darryl Bricker? He has an identical twin brother named Cal. I knew him when he lived in Edmonton. Creepy seeing his brother on the news all the time.
So the CEO of Ipsos Public Affairs calls Ignatieff "Iggy" in his quoted analysis of the poll?
Why doesn't he - and maybe canwest - just sell out to Fox and get it over with. I'm sure Harper won't see any problem with that.
You noticed that too :)
Unless the other polls this week say a similiar story, which I doubt, it looks like we have two rogue polls in a row. I've seen the odd one here and there but never two back to back.
Besides, Ontario and Alberta are the only regional numbers that look way out of whack. In the case of Alberta, that largely doesn't matter as the Tories will win all or almost all of the seats there.
In Ontario, there is no way they are at 46% province wide. 40% is a bit of a stretch but plausible. Maybe they polled only white males over 50, or those living in towns with less than 10,000 people as that is probably about where the Tories are province wide amongst those two groups.
Miles
I don't want to infer any intent here, but let's just say you came out with a complete turd of a poll. Everyone is scratching their head, all these other polls show nothing close, it just stands out like bad gas. You lose a bit of credibility, which could affect your business. So, you do another poll, what's your thinking? Do you want to show some wild swing back, in line with others, then everybody starts to wonder, or do you tweak, keep your overall numbers but dial it down a notch. Poll again in a couple weeks, oh look within the MOE of everyone else. Nice and gentle, the election threat passed, whatever. Just sayin, but I've actually seen this movie before.
Steve -
I agree when you come out with a poll that is well out of line with others you do it again, but having two out of whack just loses more credibility. One rogue poll can happen from time to time, but two in a row suggest something is wrong with the methodology. I am not suggesting I believe this poll, as until I see otherwise, I don't, but I think this is a case of faulty methodology as most decent pollsters won't have this happen.
I should also add, although a rogue poll may hurt business a bit, anyone who understands statistics knows that 1/3 polls are one standard deviation off (half the margin of error), 5% are two standard deviations off (margin of error) and 0.3% are three standard deviations off (1.5 times the margin of error) so having two polls that is 1.5 times the margin of error just doesn't happen by coincidence. At least one rogue poll can happen. So although slowly moving back towards the other polls might make sense, I think those who are in the business of asking for polls probably realize rogue polls happen occassionally but not back to back.
I put these guys and Strategic Counsel as the most prone to "iffy" results. I don't trust them, it's secondary. Nanos, Decima, Angus Reid, EKOS, CROP, would be the only ones I would actually infer anything from. Say you get a batch of polls, and then SC comes out with something similar. I just see it as added weight, that's about it.
Here's an example. I'll brush this off, but I'm about to do a post on Nanos and I take that quite seriously.
I've got to agree with JimBobby on this one, this whole scenario plays well for Harper and his opportunity for a majority. Our “predictable” media have already began to frame this one up for the Cons., those horrible Liberals are willing to do anything to get back into power. I was watching “ At Issue” last Thursday night and as usual they put the cause for any up and coming election squarely on Mr. Ignatieff. Q.P. on Sunday was a little bit better for sharing the blame, however I’m sure that whole well balanced journalism will soon change. I personally DO NOT see any change in success for the Liberals (unfortunately), until there is a radical change in the way our media spins the stories in favour of the Cons. Also the massive load of commercials on every station and during every sports cast about how our current government is doing so good in fighting this recession and how all these new jobs are being created and how its so important not to let anything obstruct this progress, PLEASE, this is definitely going to influence people against the who ever is responsible for triggering an election and that seems to be the Liberals (or at least who our media is saying it is). I hope I’m wrong, but man does it ever look like a familiar build up to an election, and the way things are going Harper just may be the first P.M. to gain a majority without Quebec support. What worries me here is, that if he can’t get a majority without them, are we going to here more and more about those darn separatist, in hope they just separate already, then he would only have to worry about the ten or fifteen percent of so called socialist we have in this country. Again, man I hope I’m wrong!
I keep running the numbers and I don't see a majority, I really don't. Where are the seats? The Liberals would have to run a dreadful campaign for that to be a remote chance. Given that we are much better prepared than 2008, no matter where you look, no matter which region, to the point of absolute it will be a better presentation, I don't see it being possible.
I don't dispute a Con uptick, but I'm not buying the majority talk, it's perfect storm stuff and I think the optimal opportunity has already passed.
I also see a majority as highly unlikely. I wouldn't see impossible as bigger surprises have happened, but I would say there is a 95% chance or probably higher they won't get a majority. The only three surprises I can think of that were even bigger were
1. NDP provincial win in Ontario in 1990.
2. The Tories dropping to 2 seats in 1993 (they were leading in the polls at the beginning of the election)
3. Mulroney's 1984 landslide. He entered the campaign 15 points behind the Liberals.
However, the country was less polarized then, so such large swings were probably more realistic than they are today. Also in cases #2 and #3, it was replacing a government that had overstayed its welcome, while the Tories are trying to get re-elected.
I'm good with those odds. The Liberals would have to implode. Last election looks like rock bottom, I also think it's about a 95% chance we get more than 77 seats. You can't get much more out of our baseline, so where does Harper get the rest? I've scanned the Ontario map, which is where it has to come, it's not there unless we collapse. Harper mania running wild at this stage, how?
No one has ever called me either. I am sure he basically calls the Reform/Con base in an attempt to fool the average Canadian. I don't beileve these polls as I am quite sure they answer depending on how a question is asked. Call me Nanos and I can lie through my teeth just like the Harper clan does on a regular basis.
Post a Comment