Categories: Capital Read, Inside the Queensway

About that traitorous, illegitimate, antidemocratic Ekos poll …

by kadyomalley on Wednesday, January 21, 2009 11:08am - 48 Comments

… you know, the one we’ve all been yammering on about over at Colleague Wherry’s place? Anyway, the background data is now available, including full regional and party support breakdowns. Enjoy!

Tags: coalition, don't tell potter about this, Ekos, rolypolly goodness, The Madness, the triumvirate lives, why do canadians hate democracy?

More by kadyomalley

TJ Cook

Off-topic for a moment: that yellow insurance company banner ad is *awful*. I keep accidentally passing my mouse over it, then have to go and find the ‘Close’ button to see the screen again.

Really, really, really annoying.

Ekos: I think the poll makes it clear that Canadians are unCanadian. We should be ashamed of ourselves.

MJ Patchouli

I also really dislike that the comments open at the end instead of the beginning: I think we should be encouraged to read all the comments before posting ourselves, and this is discouraging. I keep having to scroll up to the top.

Please fix that, Macleans.ca.

john g

The poll question on the coalition does not even mention the BQ. Does not even mention “Liberal/NDP coalition supported by the BQ”. Just says “Liberal/NDP coalition”. Despite the fact that Gilles Duceppe himself told the Canadian Press that “his party’s coalition with the Liberals and NDP is stronger than ever”.

This is news manipulation. Plain and simple.

And why did the G&M go to EKOS for this poll when they use the Strategic Counsel for everything else?

Scott M.

Wow, you simply refuse to read and understand the definition of a coalition, don’t you? Ekos is correct, and Gilles Duceppe (if quoted correctly) isn’t.

john g

Scott you are being obtuse.

The CPC has 142 MPs. Lib+NDP has about 110. Ergo, they cannot command the confidence of the House unless they are supported by the BQ, either as a coalition partner or with a support agreement.

You can try to see how many angels can dance on the head of a pin by saying that the BQ is not part of the coalition all you want, but the BQ has to be on board in some way for the coalition to have the confidence of the house.

Given that the BQ attachment to the coalition is what makes it poisionous in the ROC, that the poll doesn’t even mention that shows the political motivation behind it.

Scott M.

Actually, the Liberals + NDP could command confidence of the house with the 142 (or fewer) Conservative MPs. There is nothing preventing any MP from supporting a government of any stripe.

It’s not obtuse. It’s simple. Does a member of the party have a cabinet post? Are they seated with the Government? If not, they’re opposition and not a member of a coalition.

Call it an “unholy alliance” if you insist. But it’s not a coalition.

john g

Actually, the Liberals + NDP could command confidence of the house with the 142 (or fewer) Conservative MPs. There is nothing preventing any MP from supporting a government of any stripe.

That is definitely true in the context of one or two votes.

But it’s an awfully long road from there to suggest that the GG should give a 110 member coalition power over a 142 member opposition without an election and demonstrate that a stable government could result.

TJ Cook

Shorter john g: I am outraged that this survey wasn’t worded according to my preferred spin. There must be a conspiracy.

Andrew (not Potter or Coyne)

Yeah… what we need is a poll that asks if voters approve of the ‘deal with the devil’.

http://macleans.ca kc

I think we already had one, out west anyway.
Dave

If you were forced to choose between the duly elected Conservative government led by Stephen Harper,, the SEPARATIST COALITION led by Gilles Duceppe, and the SOCIALIST COALITION led by Jack Layton, you’d choose the the legitimate Prime Minister who, need I remind you, received a strengthened minority in the last election just three months ago, wouldn’t you?

TJ Cook

CAPITAL LETTERS do not make cheap spin any more true.

Sisyphus

I guess you’re assuming all that woofing about ” separatists and socialists ” was a total waste of time.

So, why bother then ?

And why bother now ?

http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

I think the Coalition was not popular for two reasons: involved BQ and many people thought what they were doing by trying to usurp power wasn’t quite cricket because it was unexpected. I think Lib/NDP coalition would be popular with many if they ran as coalition during election but didn’t involve the BQ in any way.

Right/wrong direction numbers suggest all Iggy needs to do is get Libs to the middle once again and Cons will lose next election. People tend to vote out the government of the day during a recession and combine that with conservative discontent with Cons and they are in trouble. If I was Con strategist, I would be trying to trigger an election as soon as possible while Con numbers are still holding up and before con discontent spreads from fringe.

Scott M.

Interesting idea… in that case, would it not be best to present a budget that was more right-winged in the hope of keeping (and expanding) your base and fall on your sword that way?

The trick with this is that I suspect the GG said to Harper privately that she will ask the opposition to form a government should his budget fall, hence all the “anti-coalition” rhetoric still going on.

Funny thing is, of course, there’s no need for a coalition to command the support of the house.

Scott M.

(BTW, what I mean by that is that any party could approach the GG and ask to be given a chance to form a government… there’s no need for agreements or coalitions to do so, the GG need only be convinced to her satisfaction that there’s a chance).
http://macleans.ca kc

Scott
The only way it makes any sense for Ignatief to NOT repudiate the coalition is that he knows or suspects that the GG told Sh, shape up, or ship out!
http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

At the very least, I think Cons should balance this budget by making cuts elsewhere. As far as I am concerned, one of the main issues in last election was balancing budget during recession and people thought Cons were more likely to do that than Libs.

Harper seems to have been infected with belief, typical of many leaders, that he is indispensable to the country and so will do anything to stay PM.

Maybe GG talked with Harper about possible future scenarios but I don’t think she would have been absolute in telling him what she will do. Details/circumstances matter a great deal and I don’t think GG would want to commit herself to a future course of action without knowing what’s what.

http://macleans.ca kc

Like all pols SH’s biggest fear is waking up one day and NOT being PM or in pwer of some kind. If he could have discarded his pathological hatred of the libs either for the good of the country or the future of his party he might have made a good PM. But then he wouldn’t be the Steve we all love and admire.

http://macleans.ca kc

They better do it soon. Because 6 mnths from now if you ask the g/al on the street about deals with the devil, they’ll probably think yr talking about a new movie.

MJH

When all the dust settles the overal voter intentions are: Conservatives 36.2%; Liberals 32.6% and NDP 14.3%.

http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

I find these numbers very weird indeed. At first glance it looks like some Lib supporters are returning to party after moving their vote to NDP last election. But when I started to think about it, what Lib supporter would vote NDP while Dion is leader but move back to party once Iggy took reigns. Doesn’t really make sense.

Scott M.

The numbers in Quebec are telling… they’re the best the Liberals have had in that province for a while.
T. Thwim

ABC voters

Andrew (not Potter or Coyne)

You just don’t run as a coalition. Any party should have the goal of forming majority government. The closest you can come to running as a coalition is being open to the possibility, and not denying it outright.
http://caiti-online.blogspot.com/ Transcanada

Page 10 proves the FU was Stephen Harper’s biggest blunder of his career. :-)

Less than 5 weeks into the job Ignatieff leads Harper in approval numbers.

Clever those CONservatives, they forced out a Liberal leader they could beat with one who will destroy them and gave the Liberals the tools they need to do it.

Scott M.

Haven’t we gotten over the CONservative/LIEberal name calling? *sigh*

Nathan

Hear hear!

Stewart Preston

Next week should be very interesting. I am not sure the poll or the prognostications in the media (or even among the asute contributors here) are worth much. One of the big issues in the next election will be: Who is to blame for this election? I for one do not believe that Harper is out of tricks.

Scott M.

I for one do not believe that Harper is out of tricks.

Indeed, but wouldn’t it be nice to have a break from trickery and deception? I don’t think any other politician will necessarily relieve us of that, but I would *really* like to have a politician who is focused on the issues and being forthright instead of concentrating on what it takes to get/remain in power.

http://macleans.ca kc

Doesn’t our system make this inevitable with its always holding out the promise of power with just a few pts swing in the polls? I think i may be tiring of minority govt, at least until we can make really meaningful changes to the system, ie: PR. Afte all it’s just too much to ask for these guys to NOT grab at power. I wonder how those Pearson govts pulled it off?

Anon

If this keeps up, we may never see another GiornoWatch post ever again. Pity.
Cool Blue

Well, if the coalition is this popular then they should have no objection to immediately bringing it to the voters for a mandate…right?

What does this tell you: “We need an election like we need a hole in the head” – Iggy, G&M, Jan 21, 2009

MJH

I do wonder why the Coalition members don’t form a single Party and run an election against the Conservatives. A two party system like the US. Let the voters decide.

Andrew (not Potter or Coyne)

Because that’s a stupid idea. The Coalition is a short-term response to the composition of the House of Commons, not a long-term alliance.

MJH

It could be long term alliance if they ran for a 4 year term. The Coalition of Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal (CTOM) against the Conservative Party of Canada.(CPC) The Coaltion has more seats and could win in a cake walk.

http://deleted Sandi

Amazing how many don’t, or chose not to, understand the parliamentary system and our Constitution – and Harper is totally misleading Canadians ON PURPOSE. If Harper doesn’t understand it, he shouldn’t be PM.

A coalition is an “option” legally allowed in our system. Elections are not “agenda” items. People choose a parliament by voting and the people chose the set up as it is now, BUT, for those who voted against Harper, and they are in the majority, the option is there to removed him if he isn’t cutting it.

Like or lump it CPC supporters – thems the rules.

I’m not saying I’m for or against a coalition but I am saying I am against Harper misleading people for his own benefit – this is not the US. If he had an guts, he’d be telling the truth.
Jason Hickman

I see that Ekos used a “unique hybrid internet-telephone research panel [called] Probit” to get their numbers.

I’ll assume that this means that (as long as we’re only looking at coalaition-yay-or-nay numbers) Liberals are ok with internet-based opinion polling, and Tories aren’t.

Tune in next week, when some polling company or another that uses the internet to get some/all of its numbers gives the CPC an 8-point lead over the Liberals, and watch those positions shift.
http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

I have a question for anyone who understands polling methodology or statistics.

The margin of error for each prov ranges anywhere between 4.8 and 11.4 but when it’s all added up nationally, the moe is 3.2. How can that be? Why/how is national moe significantly less than any single prov?

Sisyphus

Bigger sample numbers, jwl.

http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

Of course, thank you.

Critical Reasoning

The national MOE is smaller because it is based on a larger sample size (n=1500). MOE is inversely proportional to sample size.
Anon

The national poll has a much larger sample than the regional ones, hence it has a lower margin of error. As you move to the provincial breakdowns, the samples get small and small, increasing the margin of error.

Margins of error for various sample sizes don’t correlate linearly to the size of the total population (ie. If you decrease the population by 1/4 and the sample by 1/4, the margin of error will not remain the same) So even though you have population-proportional sample sizes, the margin of error still becomes much larger in small provinces than in larger ones.

Also, to get the total margin of error, you don’t add up all the small ones, each group is its individual calculation.
Andrew (not Potter or Coyne)

In practical terms, we can assume that the population were are sampling from is infinite in either case of a province or nationally since the total population is much larger than sample sizes. From that assumption, margin of error is driven by the number of samples obtained, with each additional sample giving a diminishing improvement in MoE. That first thousand does the heavy lifting, while going to 10,000 only gives a moderate improvement. But sampling only 100 still leaves a large MoE (for any population size > than a few hundred thousand).

I also dislike the idea of ‘statistical ties’ if two parties are within the MoE of each other in support (one leads by two points, within the MoE of 3.5). To say they are tied isn’t quite true. The one with the higher support is still likelier to have higher support among the overall population, but not to the level of confidence we want (usually 95%).

Andrew Potter

How come nobody told me about this?

Sisyphus

Diane Feinstein drama queen …..

Dave

I’m glad we got a chance to see the actual question being posed. The results of a poll like this would be strongly affected by the wording of the question, I suspect – if “Bloc Quebecois” appeared anywhere in the poll, the results would likely be quite different.

One happy consequence of this poll is that Stephen Harper is now less likely to play hardball. I may be naive here, but we now might actually get a budget that addresses some of the needs of Canadians. Dare to dream!
Wascally Wabbit

I must be obtuse – I suppose – but I find it confusing that the Cons – who broke their own election law – to hold an election – that was not necessary – are hurtling to a precipice where they might ask the GG to call yet another election – which is even less necessary – when they have the solution in their own hands – by proposing a budget appropriate to the times and need – rather than one based upon ideological planks that have been shown to be worneaten!
And if what they propose falls short – it would be both wise and appropriate for the GG to tell Harper to take a hike – avoid an election – and permit a legitimate coalition to form a government – WITH NO MEMBERS FROM THE BLOC!