Thursday, March 6, 2014

Atlantic Polls

I'll note that since the last Nova Scotia election was rather recent, and since the poll does not show a radical change from that result, I will not be covering Nova Scotia.

Prince Edward Island

The damage the PC Party faced Way back, a year ago, when I first posted on it has yet to heal. The NDP has consistently been in second place since the incident, and remains in second place even as the NDP's provincial numbers in other provinces - which were virtually all boosted by the 2011 election showing - are returning to more traditional levels.

The Liberals are now up to 53%, compared to 22% for the NDP. This puts the Liberals up 4 points and the NDP down 4 points. The NDP, however, remains ahead of the PC Party, unchanged at 17%.

Normally a 53-22 split would mean the opposition is lucky to take one riding, but, the NDP has always had a more concentrated vote base. My prediction is as follows:

Crane may retain her seat and become the first Independent to win a seat in the provincial legislature in over 100 years. Meyers has the benefit of having a strong showing in his riding last time, and as leader, may be the only PC member returned. The NDP however could take two Charlottetown ridings, especially if they use their resources wisely. If so, this would make Mike Redmond the first NDP leader of the Official Opposition in PEI history.

New Brunswick

First off, I want to apologize for the map. The copy I had was out of date and I realized far too late, so I had to rush to get this one up.

The CRA Poll shows the PC Party returning to more traditional levels. If you want to know what ridings they win at 31% that they would not win, by my guess, at 25%, the answer can be found in the map error - those ridings "outlined" in another colour.

There is some good news in the numbers. The Liberal leader seems unable to break 31% popularity, and the Premier has recovered slightly. The PC Party can still recover; though a victory seems unlikely.

The NDP however has maintained a strong showing. The problem for the party is that in NB their vote has always been very distributed. There are two Saint John ridings that will almost certainly fall with this vote level, and I've also given the leader his seat, as his staying power has far exceeded my expectations, so credit where it is due.

In the end you end up with a "traditionally sized" liberal victory; with the only real note being the 3 NDP members.

Newfoundland and Labrador

As noted in the CRA poll Newfoundland and Labrador has a new premier; or at least, new from the last survey. Tom Marshall - seen on the map as the small blue splotch in the western end of the province - has restored his party in the polls to something respectable. Meanwhile, the NDP, still suffering from their own problems, have been reduced to 13%.

A 53% victory, with 33% for the opposition is not abnormal in Newfoundland. Like Alberta, New Brunswick, and PEI, Newfoundland is one of the provinces that tends to reward it's governments with very comfortable majorities.

I don't see how anyone else can win beyond the Liberals. Everything is pretty well done and written in stone at this point. Sure there is always the chance they can screw it up - I mean, only 4 years ago this was a party that had to beg people to run for leader - but the party has too deep a history to falter so easily. The only way the Liberals lose the next election is if the seriously screw something up, and given the party and what I know about it, that will not be happening.


Lastly a bit more on Quebec. I'm finalizing my map for my predictions. I will post this one today, and will from then on only post on Sundays!

Remember that these are not official projections - Kyle will be doing those - these are simply predictions.

In this update, we see the PQ and Liberals closing, with the PLQ having a good poll - but a dubious one. Also noted is one riding where an Independent may have an effect.


  1. I am not sure one can call 63 seats a majority. While it is a majority in terms of seats (50.4%) in Parliament such terminology is debatable due to the Denison rule. Assuming the next Speaker is a member of the PQ that would leave the Government with only 62 votes equal to the combined votes of the opposition. The principle of the Denison rule is to vote in favour of further debate. Therefore, at first and second reading the Speaker would vote in the affirmative but, not so on third reading since passage of legislation would end debate. A Government with 62 members would not be able to pass legislation so long as the Speaker adhered to the Denison rule a long held parliamentary and constitutional convention.

    1. 50.4% is a majority. The media will report it as a majority. On election night, if the PQ wins 63 seats, the newspapers the next day will all report PQ MAJORITY, even if some add in words like "razor-thin" or "unworkable"

    2. In addition this is the second time you've replied to one of my posts with a response focusing on a pedantic prospective; what you are saying is, in effect, what is known in parts of the community as "rules lawyering"

      I told you in the other post and will tell you again here: I generalize on purpose. If you truly feel the need to say OMG YOU ARE NOT PERFECTLY EXACT, however, feel free to continue; but do not expect further responses from me.

    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. Wow thin skinned! So what you are saying is you are quite happy to pass along incorrect-even untruthful information so long as they are generalities. You are willing to slander people or corporations so long as it is a general statement, as you did with Ipsos.

    I don't think politics is for you, you appear to become overly emotional at the most minor of comments. Perhaps you should start a sports blog. I don't require your reply or opinion to assume I would only further serves to demonstrate your arrogance.

    1. Bede,

      No offense, but you're being a bit unreasonable. All Teddy has said here is that no matter what, even with just 63 seats, it will still be reported at a PQ (or PLQ or whatever) majority since that is, in fact, what it is - it will be 63 seats to 62 seats, that is a majority government by definition. It may be a super razor thin majority government that, yes, is subject to the Denison rule as you describe it, but it is nevertheless a majority government as the PQ has more seats than the Opposition at the outset, before the speakers are even chosen. It will be reported as such by the media.

      Lets not even get into the fact that with 62 seats, the PQ can pretty much be assured that their government will be stable. Lets not forget that it isn't going to be 62 pequistes to 62 Liberals - its 62 pequistes to the Liberals, CAQ, and more likely than not, two solidaire members. It would take a hell of a lot of pissing folks off for the pequistes not to survive in that kind of legislature.

      Also, do not call my blogging colleague "thin skinned" or tell him what is, or is not, "for" him, otherwise you can comment on another blog.

    2. Hi Kyle,

      My last comment was perhaps a bit harsh but, Teddy seems to like to insult people such as calling my writings "pedantric" and accusing me of "rules lawyering" which are essentially the same thing, or accusing Ipsos of "trickery".

      I brought up the definition of majority government not as criticism but as a discussion topic on potential Quebec election outcomes. Sadly, Teddy's rudeness overshadowed my original intent and I admit I lost my head.

    3. All I ask is to keep it civil.

  3. Your analysis of Newfoundland is missing a very large piece. Since, Dunderdale's resignation PC popularity has recovered considerably. Last fall the Conservatives were as low as 17% in some polls now they have almost doubled in support to 33%. The Liberals still have a large lead but, the situation is more fluid than polls suggest. Tom Marshall is well liked and respected which explains why the last CRA poll had Government satisfaction at 57%. So, you have really gone out on a limb to predict a Liberal majority government a year before an election and with momentum seemingly headed in the PC's direction.

    1. We've seen this before, sadly for the Tories. Governments that are very unpopular under one leader, never quite seem to be able to rebuild under another. From Harris-Eves, to Mulroney-Campbell; nearly every province has an example of this, including Newfoundland. The only recent counter example is Christy Clark.

      What really drives it home for me is that a good fraction of the current NL Liberal caucus defected to that party. People make those decisions not only based on polls, but on the "feel" of the electorate. If, somehow, the Liberals lose, it would mark the largest number of defections to an opposition party leading in the polls without the result being a government, in the history of Canada. (as far as I know)

    2. Fair enough but, we've also seen the opposite. Gordon Campbell to Christy Clark, Klein to Stelmach to Redford, John Hamm to Rodney MacDonald, Roy Romanow to Lorne Calvert. There are many examples.

      The defections actually don't help the Liberal cause. Most people view them as opportunists, some may win re-election but, others such as Paul Lane may find he has more of an uphill fight than he expected. I find defections often say more about personalities than the overall political landscape.

    3. Almost forgot Doer to Sellinger in Manitoba.

    4. As far as defections go the BQ probably holds the record. Right off the bat they received 12 defectors from the Liberals and Tories.

    5. To point out Pete, the BQ went on to wild levels of success in Quebec.

    6. Stelmach was never expected to lose. Nor was MacDonald. Calvert, though, is a valid example, as is Sellinger; but I'd argue those have more to do with politics on the prairies than it does with the trend.

      Another problem is nobody wants to be leader of the Tories.

      The Tories are not going to lose because there are defections. There are defections because the Tories are going to lose.

    7. I think you're incorrect that defections occur because MLAs think their party will lose. Politicians defect because of personality conflicts primarily. Those who defect have a poor track record of getting re-elected; Wajid Khan, John van Dognen, Russell MacKinnon. Other than David Kilgour I can not think of a defector who was re-elected under his new party at least not in Canada. Just this week a PC from Alberta left the Government because of conflict with Redford not because the Tories are expected to lose the 2016/ 17 election.

      What does the expectation of losing have to do with our discussion? In fact both Stelmach and Rodney MacDonald were expected to lose or receive a significantly reduced caucus the polls were not favourable to either. Stelmach nearly had to resign before the election because Wildrose was riding high in the polls and MacDonald was always in a tight fight with both the NDP and Liberals as demonstrated by his minority government in 2006, tight polling numbers were a constant between 2003-2006 in Nova Scotia and there certainly was no guarantee the PCs would have been returned to Government even if they won a plurality of seats.

  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

  5. Re: PEI

    I agree with you on almost all fronts. However:

    - I think Souris-Elmira will go Liberal yes (but could be very close with the PC)
    - I think Steven Myers is definitely out. I think it might be too rural for an NDP seat but it's not often Liberal so that will be an interesting race
    - Chtown - Victoria Park is looking like it might go NDP, yes
    - Stratford-Kinlock has potential with the NDP, although I think it will be a tight race all around
    - Chtown-Lewis Point I think will stay Liberal
    - I think one of the Summerside ridings will turn from Liberal to NDP...maybe
    - Alberton-Roseville has potential to go PC, perhaps
    - I'm unsure about whether or not Tignish-Palmer Road will go Liberal or PC, however I wouldn't be surprised if Hal loses his nomination for the Liberals

    So glad to have stumbled upon this blog! I will check in often :)

  6. NEED YOUR RESPONSE: Please only YES or NO

    We need your confirmation ...

    We have a new paid survey for you.

    Interested taking it?

    It's nothing hard and get profits ...

    It is an opportunity in which your only option is to win.