Categories: Capital Read, Inside the Queensway

Weekly EKOS Tracking Poll: Look! It twitched!

by kadyomalley on Thursday, July 30, 2009 9:55am - 55 Comments

Or was that just a trick of the light? It’s like the penultimate scene in the world’s most slow-moving horror movie, I’m telling y’all. Anyway, without further ado, the latest numbers, which show the Liberals back out in front for the first time in several weeks:

Liberals – 34.1 (+1.6)
Conservatives – 32.5 (-0.3)
NDP – 14.5 (-0.3)
Bloc – 8.6 (+0.2)
Green – 10.4 (-1.1)

Full details available here.

And some commentary from the indefatigable Frank Graves, who is likely very, very glad that he decided to release a bonus poll every week on something other than federal voting intention. This week, it’s all about swine flu, and the government’s handling thereof, which seems to be getting a collective thumbs up from Canadians, albeit not, it’s worth noting, with nearly as much enthusiasm from cynical members of Generations X and Y:

A majority of Canadians approve the job the Harper government is doing to deal with the H1N1 virus, also called the swine flu. While media stories have ebbed and flowed about the seriousness of the pandemic, both currently and in the future, a majority of Canadians are content that the federal government is adequately prepared.

It is worth noting, however, that younger people, who are most vulnerable to the H1N1 virus, are also the least supportive of the government’s approach so far.

“The swine flu issue is reflective of the broader problem the opposition parties have, particularly the Liberals,” said EKOS President Frank Graves “While there is no affection or enthusiasm for the Harper government outside of its core base, there is also no burning sense of dissatisfaction. Many Canadians who say they intend to vote for other parties nonetheless give general approval to the direction of the government and, as we can see with the swine flu, also of its handling of particular issues of public concern.”

Tags: ekos weekly tracking poll, H1N1, heck of a job leona, is this the start of something big? probably not, no, polling down the river, yes it's still a statistical tie

More by kadyomalley

http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com bigcitylib

Angus Reid too, showing almost the same thing, except the Liberal "bounce" is a bit more pronounced.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/673926

http://www.dwatch.ca Duff Conacher

Can't believe that Maclean's, The Star (and many other media outlets) consider this top news.

As in 2004-2005, there have been dozens of polls this year showing the Liberals and Conservatives in a statistical tie (when you take into account the margin of error of the poll) — and neither of them have gone up or down more than the margin of error.

Therefore, this is not new, and not news, and very likely every poll published about this subject up to and including half of the next election campaign (and maybe all of it) will also not be new, and not be news, as the two parties continue to move only up or down within the margin of error.

And of course, like every other pollster in the past few years, Ekos and Angus Ried do not report the number of people who told them they were "undecided" even though it is very likely at least 25% (as it almost always is between elections), even though this is a key part of the poll results, given that those 25% undecided will likely be the ones who decide the next election. Even worse, no one in the media asks Ekos what the undecided percentage is, as they willingly participate in this exercise of pure propaganda that has little to do with anything important concerning the federal government.

Meanwhile, the media essentially ignores or buries in long blogs the news that the federal Ethics Commissioner admitted on Tuesday she has no capacity or power to ensure that any former public office holder (Cabinet minister, ministerial staff, Cabinet appointee, deputy minister) or MP or MP staff person is following the post-employment rules in the federal Conflict of Interest Act (which are aimed at ensuring they are not cashing in on their public service and unethically lobbying their former colleagues), among many other (I'm sure) events in Ottawa that happened in the past few days that are actually news, and that actually affect how the federal government operates and that actually have to do with decisions and actions of the federal government that actually affect Canadians.

And people inside Ottawa wonder why fewer and fewer Canadians are paying attention to politics — why would they when the media focuses on non-news, and the politicians focus on slandering each other.

d.lewis

I think the election result (as usual) is hidden in the regional breakdowns. Ontario and Quebec hold the keys. Also: "Anyway, without further adieu…" I think you mean without further ado.
Dave

So what I'm reading is that crusty old people with no education are Reform's biggest supporters. Are we surprised?

BCer in Mtl

Yeah, the Eric Peterson character (Leroy's dad) on 'Corner Gas' springs to mind. Jackasses!
wilson

Better read that poll again Dave, look at the college (trade) educated column.
Granny

Well son, I think that you are jumping to conclusions (and side-swiping your elders to boot). First of all, CPC voters include the traditional PC voters. Lots of us do not agree with the older "Reform" platforms, especially on the social issues. Older people did not have as many opportunities to gain degrees, so that accounts for part of the correlations. We also know that neither degrees nor experience predicts good judgement. You could also interpret these data to say that the wise, older people, who have seen many governments come and go, are voting for a party with policies who seems to be managing things quite well. Too much is being read into minor changes in voter intentions re: which major party is ahead, as much of the weekly fluctuation is sampling error.

Dave

Nah.

Just old cranky people voting Reform.

hosertohoosier

Have you ever looked at the cross-section of polls with demographic breakdowns? Before the 2008 election, Ekos polled 41,000 people.

http://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2008/10/dai…

The Tories did well among old people, but led among Gen X and Baby boomer voters. Clearly they are not just old people.

When it comes to education, the Tories do strongest among the middle group – people with a college education or some university. The Liberals do best with post-grads and the NDP with the uneducated. People with no education are usually poor, and so it would be strange to expect them to vote for the most anti-poor party.

Dave

Bah. I'm voting Reform cuz they promise to put those smart-ass college freaks in jail!
hosertohoosier

Me too. Less competition for jobs in academia (I assume they will spare me if my dissertation entitled "Did FDR's gay marriage to Stalin cause the Great Depression: A study in things that definitely happened")

Eva

Interesting how young people don't ''approve'' of the government handling this. Could it be perhaps that it's because those young people are scared half to death because swine flu seems to kill the young and healthy?
I know I'm scared, being in my early twenties and all.

wilson

Be sure to get the vaccination this fall Eva.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Fredder99 Fredder99

H1N1 is mostly hype. The ordinary flu kills more people every winter, and nobody notices.

Matthew Fletcher

It is hype right now – this fall/winter it might turn out to be nothing or it might be something big. One of these years there will be another massive flu epidemic, and when it starts, people will likely say it is all hype – then they will die. That might be this year, it might not be this year – but when it does happen, I think we can agree that we want the government to have a plan.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Could it be perhaps that it's because those young people are scared half to death because swine flu seems to kill the young and healthy?

I'm no epidemiologist, but I was under the impression that H1N1 kills the old and infirm about 100 times as often as it kills the young and healthy.

Matthew Fletcher

To say that H1N1 "seems to kill the young and healthy" is somewhat innaccurate. Most of the people to die have had some kind of underlying health problem that has complicated their case fo the flu.

However, the median age of those infected by H1N1 is 21 which is unusual for an influenze strain, I think – I'm no epidemiologist either.

hosertohoosier

It is almost certainly the case that none of the poll respondents have any objective measure for how well the government is doing, and instead sub in their judgments of Stephen Harper. Young people dislike Harper so they say he is doing a bad job. Old people like him so yay to his swine flu policies.

http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

The other part of the Angus Reid poll is that Canadians still believe Harper is the best one to handle the economy. The Libs have actually stalled. In the worse recession since the great depression they cannot do anything but statistically tie the government. That does not bode well for the elitist leader of the official opposition if he forces an election this fall. People will stick with what they know even if its a minority rather than try someone they don't know much about and who many consider a citizen of convenience.

Zeph

Indeed: Nearly half of Canadians (49%) think that the Conservative government has done a poor job and a new party should be elected into power, compared to only slightly more than a quarter (27%) who think that the Conservatives have done a good job and should be re-elected.

Clearly, this doesn't bode well for Ignatieff and the liberals.

wilson

Clearly, this doesn't bode well for Ignatieff and the liberals.

''Despite the increase in Grit support, the momentum numbers for Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff continue to worsen. His momentum score of -18 is five points worse than it was two weeks ago (13% say their opinion of Ignatieff has improved in the last month, while 31% say it has gotten worse).

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s momentum score remained essentially unchanged from the last poll at -28 (one point worse from -27). That the momentum scores of the two leaders are so close represents a huge shift in political perceptions from as recently as February, when Ignatieff had a positive score of +7 compared to Harper’s -35.''

http://intensedebate.com/people/Geiseric Geiseric

Summer Break is supposed to work to the ruling party's advantage.

wilson

And recessions are supposed to bring down a government…..this is not exactly a 'normal' summer.

If the 'worst economic crisis since the Great Depression' has only given the Libs, with a new leader, a statistical tie in the polls,
the Government is doing very well.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Geiseric Geiseric

This recession hasn't even seen it's first birthday. Hell, by the 3 negative quarters standard I'm not even sure it's official.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Geiseric Geiseric

This recession hasn't even seen it's first birthday. Hell, by the 2 negative quarters standard I'm not even sure it's official.

Wayne

The numbers essentially show nothing new .. but .. what is important as alwyas with off election polls are the trend lines … look at the blue line for the 22 – 28 week snapshot and project forward.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Meh. Depending on when you pick your start point, the trend could go either way.

Take it from a month ago, Liberals and Harpers are both slightly up. Take it from the start of the chart, Liberals are flat, Harpers are down slightly. I think all we can really say from the trend lines is that we can't say much. As we both know, as soon as election comes around and the general public starts to pay attention to politics we tend to see the trends move quickly.

uncool

There is no trend line. We've been in this holding pattern for a long time. And likely will be for some time to come.

Don't expect a majority any time soon. (Though I sure do want one. Election readiness is starting to get to me.)

Wayne

did you look at the blue line?

http://intensedebate.com/people/bazoo bazoo

Whenever Harper demonstrates what a graceless tool he is many Canadians are willing to overlook this. However, when he is called on being a graceless tool he often overreacts. Generally, this overreaction involves an attempt at litigation. Without exception the overreaction includes a huge dose of hyper-partisan venom. Imo, it is this biliousness that Canadians find repellant and it is my belief that this latest public display of Harper's bile has produced movement in the polls, resulting in a wafer-thin Liberal advantage.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/bazoo bazoo

Whenever Harper demonstrates what a graceless tool he is many Canadians are willing to overlook this. However, when he is called on being a graceless tool he often overreacts. Generally, this overreaction involves an attempt at litigation. Without exception the overreaction includes a huge dose of hyper-partisan venom. Imo, it is this biliousness that Canadians find repellant and it is my belief that this latest public display of Harper's overreaction has produced movement in the polls, resulting in a wafer-thin Liberal advantage.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/bazoo bazoo

Whenever Harper demonstrates what a graceless tool he is many Canadians are willing to overlook this. However, when he is called on being a graceless tool he often overreacts. Generally, this overreaction involves an attempt at litigation. Without exception the overreaction includes a huge dose of hyper-partisan venom. Imo, it is this biliousness that Canadians find repellant and it is my belief that this latest public display of Harper's has produced movement in the polls, resulting in a wafer-thin Liberal advantage.
uncool

"graceless tool"…. "overreaction"…. "hyper partisan venom"… "biliousness"

oh look… a mirror!

http://intensedebate.com/people/bazoo bazoo

"…finally, monsieur, a wafer-thin mint."

http://intensedebate.com/people/Fredder99 Fredder99

bazoo is very close to Bozo, n'est-ce pas?____I'd rather have the "useless tool" as PM, than Mr. Expat-nieff!

Wayne

is is Bazoo or Bonzo?

http://intensedebate.com/people/bazoo bazoo

"it's only wafer-thin…"

http://www.dwatch.ca Duff Conacher

Can't believe that Maclean's (and many other media outlets) consider this top news.

As in 2004-2005, there have been dozens of polls this year showing the Liberals and Conservatives in a statistical tie (when you take into account the margin of error of the poll) — and neither of them have gone up or down more than the margin of error.

Therefore, this is not new, and not news, and very likely every poll published about this subject up to and including half of the next election campaign (and maybe all of it) will also not be new, and not be news, as the two parties continue to move only up or down within the margin of error.

And of course, like every other pollster in the past few years, Ekos does not report the number of people who told them they were "undecided" even though it is very likely at least 25% (as it almost always is between elections), even though this is a key part of the poll results, given that those 25% undecided will likely be the ones who decide the next election. Even worse, no one in the media asks Ekos what the undecided percentage is, as they willingly participate in this exercise of pure propaganda that has little to do with anything important concerning the federal government.

Meanwhile, the media essentially ignores or buries in long blogs the news that the federal Ethics Commissioner admitted on Tuesday she has no capacity or power to ensure that any former public office holder (Cabinet minister, ministerial staff, Cabinet appointee, deputy minister) or MP or MP staff person is following the post-employment rules in the federal Conflict of Interest Act (which are aimed at ensuring they are not cashing in on their public service and unethically lobbying their former colleagues), among many other (I'm sure) events in Ottawa that happened in the past few days that are actually news, and that actually affect how the federal government operates and that actually have to do with decisions and actions of the federal government that actually affect Canadians.

And people inside Ottawa wonder why fewer and fewer Canadians are paying attention to politics — why would they when the media focuses on non-news, and the politicians focus on slandering each other.
Kelvin

To be fair, the flippant article title clearly acknowledges the pointlessness of reading into this. The fact that we try anyway is more an indictment of ourselves than the media.

http://intensedebate.com/people/YYZ YYZ

Indeed, this blog is also called "inside the Queensway" which I take to mimic "inside the beltway" which I take to mean stuff for political junkies only. Am I wrong?

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

"And of course, like every other pollster in the past few years, Ekos does not report the number of people who told them they were "undecided" even though it is very likely at least 25%"

Hate to get in the way of a good rant, but in the fine print of the Ekos report one can find the following:

"Note: The data on federal vote intention are based on decided voters only. Our
survey also finds that 11.3% of Canadians say they are undecided"

Always worth checking closely before you malign Ekos, the polling industry in general, and the media.

Also, feel free to revise your arguments that hinged on an incorrect 25% undecided assumption.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Hm. Interesting. In the full details.. people with university education or higher have a strong preference for Liberals. Now before folks start up on their "leftist university" rant, I'll reiterate — the Liberals, not, it seems, the NDP. In fact, the NDP support is lowest among university educated folks compared to any other level of education.

And as usual, the more educated someone is, the less likely they're going to prefer Harper's party, but that's just par for the course.

Charles

Lib/NDP numbers make sense given the history of the parties – NDP is more tied to trade unions, etc., which are mostly made up of people without university educations, while Libs are more tied to the business/professional classes, which usually do have university educations.
sbt

I've always thought it would be more interesting to break down the university education numbers further. Is the Liberal preference equally solid across all disciplines or is it simply because the Liberals absolutely dominate among a certain group of university goers that happen to be far more numerous? I wouldn't be surprised if it was either one but I'm just curious if anyone has looked at that.

hosertohoosier

That is a good point. I know a lot more conservatives in business, engineering and the sciences, generally than in the arts. Perhaps part of the reason those with graduate degrees trend liberal is because students in the social sciences or humanities need graduate degrees to get jobs.

At any rate, I think the "Conservatives/Liberals are the party of dummies" arguments are pretty lame. People's politics are driven by their interests and values more than by their mental capacity. There are many extremely brilliant Liberals and Conservatives (and many stupid ones). The questions that voters face are more often ones of what our national priorities should be, rather than a set of skill-testing questions about monetary policy. And in the question of what we each want from government, even a fool is an expert in his own case, and even a genius is a layman in everybody else's.

William

I`m not sure where Thwim has been the last few years but he should know that the Liberal Party is a left-wing party—–since they can no longer depend on large donations from corporations looking for post-election favours, the leftist wing ( Dion, Rae, Kennedy, Dryden, etc. )of the party has taken over. The pros at the universities don`t vote NDP because they can`t win—-they know their best bet is to hope for a Liberal minority gov`t.

I would like to see an honest survey about voting intentions according to professions—I wonder how many journalists vote Conservative ? How many employees of gov`t vote Conservative ?

Kevin Alexander

Sounds to me like a lot of revisionist bunk! Fact is that up until 1968 Cronkite, as had most liberals, been a strong supporter of the war. The US had suffered almost 15,000 deaths and 100,000 total casualties through 1966 and 1967 combined. The response of the generals on the ground and military establishment, though, was to say that the enemy was pretty much a spent and the end was nigh. What made Tet such a shock to the Americans was that even though they technically won the battle, that rather than being close to spent, the enemy was alive and very capable of mounting a huge, nation-wide attack. What Cronkite found in his tour of Viet Nam was that the American troops on the ground were demoralized and that the only apparent objective of the senior military was to try and kill lots of the enemy. The problem was that the enemy had an almost inexhaustable supply of young men willing to die for the cause and almost as many places for them to hide. Indeed, the primary MO of the Americans was to drive NVA/VC off Hill X, in the process taking several hundred casualties, only to have the enemy pop up a few days later on Hill Y. Off went the troops holding Hill X and took Hill Y, again losing more casualties only to have the enemy pop back up on Hill X a few days later. And so it went with American troops taking and retaking territory all the while taking more casualties. Heck even Steyn might have become demoralized after a while. In fact, what has to bug the heck out of the right is that Cronkite was right. Viet Nam was a morass that the US could never win, or at least win without sustaining totally unacceptable casualties. Cronkite though makes a nice scapecoat, although as someone noted above it is simply preposterous to suggest that a comment delivered at the end of a nightly newscast could result in the deaths of 15,000 US troops, along with another 100,000 total casualties in 1968.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

Well, now I understand the regional variations in NDP support.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Geiseric Geiseric

'you haven't explained "why"'

how would I know? what I do know is they did it the last two years in a row.

recession is popularly defined as two quarters of negative, not reduced, growth. except, of course, when it's unpopular to do so.

are you?
James from Vancouver

One has to observe that it is terrible news for a party in power (albeit minority) going on some 42 months now that has failed to draw any more support than it had when it came to power two elections ago. The Conservatives are also quickly losing their advantage in fundraising and can not claim a clean slate….

Wayne

I agree wholeheartedly imagine a minority right party having the sheer effrontery to guide Canada through an unpopular shooting war in a foreign country, the worst global recession in history and all along playing whackamole with the other opposition leaders who continue to play games like say the NDP (let's vote NO now why wait to read the bill) or the BLOQ (well what can you say about them) and the perennial favorite the Liberals who didn't even dare to have a real leadership convention and actually allow for a little democracy in their party – ROFL LMAO – and still not much a drop in the numbers – think about it as I am sure a lot of others are and Iggy if is stupid and somehow manages to bring the gov't down without a good reason (well check out web polls that ask that question and there quite a few who will punish them for that folly!)

http://intensedebate.com/people/Bernie37 Bernie37

Duff Conacher is absolutely correct. The media, including Macleans, are pitifully inept in putting emphasis on the real issues. Cheap entertainment is a better profit generator, I guess.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

Duff Conacher hasn't had the decency to come back and acknowledge his grave error in criticizing Ekos and the media. He is not absolutely correct. As far as I can tell, his talents extend no further than cutting and pasting the same damn comment multiiple times in one thread.

As for Macleans, you clearly don't read the bloody thing. Because if you did, you'd know that they don't routinely publish weekly poll results in the main magazine. This is a quick little blog posting, not a main story. If you take the time to browse the blog postings from all the authors, you'll see there's a mix of the serious, the funny, the minute and the grand. And if you were to follow ITQ in particular, you'd find she blogs more original substantive reporting than most. But I'm guessing that sort of reasonable perspective lies outside your talents too.

http://www.dwatch.ca Duff Conacher

Sorry SeanStok, didn't read your posting until now (I was also contacted this evening by Paul Adams of Ekos and he made similar points as you do).

Yes, my mistake, I'm sorry I missed the fine print in the Ekos report that undecideds were at 11.3% (and was it ever fine, one footnote mention at the bottom of one page of a five-page report).

Meanwhile, the figures listing party support percentages in every chart presented in Ekos 5-page report add up to 100% (giving the clear impression that there are no "undecideds"). How is it that the party support levels add up to 100% + 11.3% undecideds = 111.3% of voters responded to the survey??? So what are the actual levels of party support Ekos?

And why is the stat concerning the level of undecideds buried in the fine print on only one page when 11.3% is higher than the support rates for the Bloc and Greens?

And actually, I do read Macleans, but this is Macleans.ca, and what I was criticizing was the fact that the poll results were listed and linked as a Top Story on the Macleans.ca homepage, thereby clearly identifying this "quick little blog posting" as a main story for the website (even though the poll results were not news).

You may not have seen that link if you went directly through a browser bookmark to ITQ, but it was there for the entire day — one of 5 top stories on the website according to the webmasters of Macleans.ca (really, one of 5 most important things viewers needed to know that day out of everything that happened in the world?).

Finally, none of my arguments hinged on assuming that the rate of undecideds is about 25% — given the margin of error difference between the support for the Liberals vs. the Conservatives, having a level of 11% undecideds still means that these people will likely decide the next election.