Thursday, October 14, 2010

Nanos and Ekos polling not as bad as it seems

Both Nanos Research and EKOS have released polling today, as I'm sure most are aware. And while the Liberals have definitely lost some of the momentum - to be expected, frankly - we are still polling in a fairly strong position in key races.

First, breaking down EKOS (going with the two-week result), we get these regional results:

Key things to take away: the lead in Ontario, strong results in Alberta and the Prairies, and at least a modest showing in Quebec, where the Conservatives and the NDP have fallen on their faces. While the poll results are not necessarily fantastic, they will play into our favour, for example, 21% in BC is on the low end for us, but with the Conservatives at 31%, and the NDP at 27%, we retain our support and can probably ride up the middle in a couple of ridings. If EKOS' seat projections are to be believed, we'd remain the clear Official Opposition, and get a gain of nearly 20 seats. Not great, but not bad.

The Nanos results are a little more interesting:

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

They show a less-than-competitive but still well positioned result in Ontario (42-36), while giving us good numbers in Quebec, the Prairies, and BC, where unlike EKOS, we're in the lead (however slim that lead is). Our "drop" in Nanos comes from the Ontario numbers, which are mostly offset by increases everywhere else.

Now, what does this mean? We've clearly dropped, but we're still competitive, and if EKOS is to be believed, "angry old white men" in Alberta flocking to the Conservatives is mostly the cause of the drop. While ideally, given this government's ineptitude, we'd be riding higher, let's be honest: we're not a party that has everything together and our leader is still very unpopular. We should be happy with the fact that we can maintain competitive results regionally.

I believe that, basically, we're going to end up with a result more or less like 2006, with the Conservatives sitting at 125-130 seats, the Liberals with 90-100, Bloc with around 50, and the NDP with around 30. Harper's government is getting bogged down little by little, but Ignatieff is, at this point, not enough to wash over the Conservatives. Polls have confirmed this time and time and time again. The Liberals would be hard pressed to form even a respectable minority. Could it change during an election? Of course, everything turns on a dime during an election. But right now, it's not in the cards.

But, let's take solace and breath a little - we're competitive, and we'll drop the Conservatives down a few notches. That may just end up being what needs to happen if we want to keep this country chugging along.


  1. Nik Nanos clip on CTV explains to look for trends.
    We look for trends
    a) horse race
    b) a new Normal
    c) Conservative lead 5-8%

    looks like "C" is shaping up again. Any news on membership or balance sheet improvements vs 2009?

  2. At least in my own riding, a Conservative held riding paid little attention to by the federal party, our rosters are up 50% since 2009. I'd call that a victory or two.

    Otherwise, Nik is right - this is the "new normal," at least in our current political climate.

  3. Longest and most successful minority in the history of the nation, during some of the worst economic times.. and the numbers keep going up.

  4. Um, just to point out, this government has only lasted 5 years - Pearson's government lasted 7, with much better poll results. How has this become the "longest and most successful" minority government, unless we take out the 1960's?

  5. Not according to Wiki:

  6. No comment or witty correction?
    One thing we can all agree on is the Pearson government won't be getting any more days. For all the bluster and "your time is up" talk, the Liberals definately are not ready to call an election.

  7. 1. I was at work

    2. That talks about singular minority governments, from term to term - not the entire stretch of a government's life.

    Now, if you want to measure governments only by their terms, and not their entire lifespan, that's fine by me. I'll look at the big picture, however.

    3. Wikipedia is not a source.