Pollser Nanos research asked the question of Canadian voters about how firm they are in their decision of who they are are voting and the results tell us some interesting things.
40% of Canadians are firm in who they are voting for, the highest being in the West and Quebec with 43% and lowest in the Atlantic with 26%.
The West has the least voters that are realistically looking at possibly changing their vote with only one in seven in play. In contrast Ontario it is almost one in four and in Qubec and Atlantic Canada more than a quarter.
What this means is that the West is not useful ground for the parties because they are not going to get the big returns they need.
Of the five major parties, the Liberals have the lowest number of very firm supporters and the Bloc has the highest. The Conservatives are close to the Bloc.
The Greens have the highest level of not firm at all or unsure at 21%. In total the Greens have close to 1/3 of their voters that are wavering and could be poached. This is much higher than the other political parties. What this says to me is that the Greens will poll about 6% to 7% on election day.
The Bloc is effectively hit the bottom and is unlikely to drop below 1/3 of the vote in Quebec. The Bloc numbers also give us a roundabout view of the federalist levels of support in Quebec. 31% of non Bloc supporters in Quebec are open to changing their vote, only marginally less than the number of people that are very firm in their decision. Firm and Very Firm support for federalist parties is weaker in Quebec than any one of the parties are in the nation. Effectively one in five federalist supporters is not set in how they will vote.
Both the NDP and Liberals have weaker solid bases and more supporters open to potentially changing their vote. The Liberals have almost one in ten supporters saying they are not at all firm about their support for the Liberals. This translates into 3 percentage points of voters up for grabs, or a boost of 1.5 percentage points to both the Conservatives and the NDP if it were to split evenly.
Nanos has had the Liberal vote higher then others in the last week be about four percentage points and the NDP lower by about two. If we apply some of these uncertain numbers to the Liberals and NDP, I see the Liberals in the Nanos work at 28% and not 31% and the NDP at 16% and not 14%.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Friday, September 19, 2008
They let her into the boys club, now she has to show the party matters.
Elizabeth May has taken the hard work Jim Harris, the previous Green Party of Canada leader, did in 2004 and 2006 and brought the Greens square into the mainstream of Canadian politics. The media are taking her seriously and reporting on where she is and what she is going. She even managed to be the main news story in the nation for the last few days with her exclusion from the leaders debate. But where will all of this lead to and will the Greens have any real success on the ground?
For the Greens to remain relevant the party needs to elect at least one MP in this election. This still remains an almost impossible task. If the Greens can not win a seat, the party will drop out of the national political media spotlight for the next four years. The party will not be able to get into the leaders debate again. The media will simply relegate the party back to fringe status.
Where could a Green MP be elected?
In descending order:
Central Nova – Elizabeth May is running in her home riding against Peter MacKay, scion of Atlantic conservatism. The Liberals are not running here. I am not willing to call this riding, but I do give her better odds of winning than any other Green in the country. Peter MacKay has his personal popularity that he draws from, but Elizabeth May is popular in Nova Scotia. The NDP will not be an issue in this race.
Blair Wilson offers an interesting situation. He was elected as a Liberal in 2006 for West Vancouver – Sunshine Coast – Sea to Sky Country but crossed to the Greens just before the election. Most observers are writing him off, but this is an error. Provincially the Greens have managed to get about a ¼ of the vote in this region. In 2006 this was in the top 40 of Green results nationwide and in 2004 the fifth best result in the whole country. If Blair Wilson can call on people such as Rafe Mair to endorse him and bring a lot of Liberals to the Greens with him and finally convince New Democrats that he should get their strategic vote, he has a shot at winning. The latest polling numbers in BC put the Greens very close to the Liberals and NDP.
London North Centre – Elizabeth May did very well there in the by-election in 2006 coming second. By-elections are not general elections and have to always be taken with a grain of salt. She has left the Greens in the region with a higher degree of organization than almost anywhere else in the country. All three ridings in the area should see strong Green votes, but it is unclear if they can elect anyone.
Guelph – the Greens were shown to be a distant second in some polling in the run up to a now canceled by-election. Mike Nagy, the Green will benefit from the campaign lengthening and the Greens have more time for more people to meet him. Still he remains a very long shot at even coming second.
London West - The London area offers a lot for the Greens to be able to succeed, most importantly it is any area for the Liberals, Conservatives and NDP are all in the race. Having all of them in the race means someone can with as little as 30% of the vote and that is a number within reach of the Greens. The fact this riding is held be a Liberal makes it much more vulnerable to a Green win than London Fanshawe which is held by the NDP. The 2008 election is about what seats the Liberals are losing in Ontario, Quebec and BC and who will claim them.
For the Green Party, the party has done well in BC Southern Interior for a number of elections, but they remain very far out of the running. This is a riding that is classic BC two party slugfest, NDP v. Conservatives. The Greens and Liberals are after thoughts.
Yes, Esquimalt Juan de Fuca is a VERY long shot, but I am at only 7 ridings and having to look at fluky long shots. In general, the Greens have the best odds of electing an MP in a riding where there is an existing three way race and the riding is held by a Liberal in BC or Ontario. This describes Esquimalt Juan de Fuca.
That is all there is out there for the party and they have to win at least one of those seven, and ideally several of them. Elizabeth May and Blair Wilson are the only ones that have better odds than drawing to an inside straight on fifth street. Other than these seven, the Greens are drawing dead.
The Greens came second in one riding in 2006, Wild Rose in Alberta. This second place finish was not much of a prize as Myron Thompson of the Conservatives got over 70% of the vote.
The best result the greens had in 2006 was in the Ontario riding of Bruce -Grey-Owen Sound with just about 13% of the vote and a distant third place finish. The Greens could come second here, but they can not win. They tried with all their might to be the main alternative to the PCs in the last provincial election in this riding but still came a distant second.
A number of the other best results for the Greens in 2004 and 2006 came in the Calgary area where the real race is the Conservative nomination and not the election. Coming second in a Alberta riding is really like coming fourth anywhere else in the country.
BC has the best organized Greens in Canada and the ones in the Victoria area are the most organized in BC, but they will not have any luck in electing an MP in this area.
Saanich Gulf Islands – Andrew Lewis is back for the Greens in a riding he had a very strong vote in 2004 and a somewhat dampened one in 2006. Odds are he will gain votes, but he will not get enough to win. Frankly the fact that Briony Penn and Julian West are former Greens and running for the Liberals and the NDP respectively will further reduce anyone's chances of beating Gary Lunn.
Victoria, like Ottawa Centre, are ridings where the Greens could do well if they were not running against an NDP incumbent.
Elizabeth May is being given her chance to make the Greens, she has until October 14th to prove the party can win anywhere in the country.
For the Greens to remain relevant the party needs to elect at least one MP in this election. This still remains an almost impossible task. If the Greens can not win a seat, the party will drop out of the national political media spotlight for the next four years. The party will not be able to get into the leaders debate again. The media will simply relegate the party back to fringe status.
Where could a Green MP be elected?
In descending order:
- Central Nova
- West Vancouver Sunshine Coast Sea to Sky Country
- London North Centre
- Guelph
- London West
- BC Southern Interior
- Esquimalt Juan de Fuca
Central Nova – Elizabeth May is running in her home riding against Peter MacKay, scion of Atlantic conservatism. The Liberals are not running here. I am not willing to call this riding, but I do give her better odds of winning than any other Green in the country. Peter MacKay has his personal popularity that he draws from, but Elizabeth May is popular in Nova Scotia. The NDP will not be an issue in this race.
Blair Wilson offers an interesting situation. He was elected as a Liberal in 2006 for West Vancouver – Sunshine Coast – Sea to Sky Country but crossed to the Greens just before the election. Most observers are writing him off, but this is an error. Provincially the Greens have managed to get about a ¼ of the vote in this region. In 2006 this was in the top 40 of Green results nationwide and in 2004 the fifth best result in the whole country. If Blair Wilson can call on people such as Rafe Mair to endorse him and bring a lot of Liberals to the Greens with him and finally convince New Democrats that he should get their strategic vote, he has a shot at winning. The latest polling numbers in BC put the Greens very close to the Liberals and NDP.
London North Centre – Elizabeth May did very well there in the by-election in 2006 coming second. By-elections are not general elections and have to always be taken with a grain of salt. She has left the Greens in the region with a higher degree of organization than almost anywhere else in the country. All three ridings in the area should see strong Green votes, but it is unclear if they can elect anyone.
Guelph – the Greens were shown to be a distant second in some polling in the run up to a now canceled by-election. Mike Nagy, the Green will benefit from the campaign lengthening and the Greens have more time for more people to meet him. Still he remains a very long shot at even coming second.
London West - The London area offers a lot for the Greens to be able to succeed, most importantly it is any area for the Liberals, Conservatives and NDP are all in the race. Having all of them in the race means someone can with as little as 30% of the vote and that is a number within reach of the Greens. The fact this riding is held be a Liberal makes it much more vulnerable to a Green win than London Fanshawe which is held by the NDP. The 2008 election is about what seats the Liberals are losing in Ontario, Quebec and BC and who will claim them.
For the Green Party, the party has done well in BC Southern Interior for a number of elections, but they remain very far out of the running. This is a riding that is classic BC two party slugfest, NDP v. Conservatives. The Greens and Liberals are after thoughts.
Yes, Esquimalt Juan de Fuca is a VERY long shot, but I am at only 7 ridings and having to look at fluky long shots. In general, the Greens have the best odds of electing an MP in a riding where there is an existing three way race and the riding is held by a Liberal in BC or Ontario. This describes Esquimalt Juan de Fuca.
That is all there is out there for the party and they have to win at least one of those seven, and ideally several of them. Elizabeth May and Blair Wilson are the only ones that have better odds than drawing to an inside straight on fifth street. Other than these seven, the Greens are drawing dead.
The Greens came second in one riding in 2006, Wild Rose in Alberta. This second place finish was not much of a prize as Myron Thompson of the Conservatives got over 70% of the vote.
The best result the greens had in 2006 was in the Ontario riding of Bruce -Grey-Owen Sound with just about 13% of the vote and a distant third place finish. The Greens could come second here, but they can not win. They tried with all their might to be the main alternative to the PCs in the last provincial election in this riding but still came a distant second.
A number of the other best results for the Greens in 2004 and 2006 came in the Calgary area where the real race is the Conservative nomination and not the election. Coming second in a Alberta riding is really like coming fourth anywhere else in the country.
BC has the best organized Greens in Canada and the ones in the Victoria area are the most organized in BC, but they will not have any luck in electing an MP in this area.
Saanich Gulf Islands – Andrew Lewis is back for the Greens in a riding he had a very strong vote in 2004 and a somewhat dampened one in 2006. Odds are he will gain votes, but he will not get enough to win. Frankly the fact that Briony Penn and Julian West are former Greens and running for the Liberals and the NDP respectively will further reduce anyone's chances of beating Gary Lunn.
Victoria, like Ottawa Centre, are ridings where the Greens could do well if they were not running against an NDP incumbent.
Elizabeth May is being given her chance to make the Greens, she has until October 14th to prove the party can win anywhere in the country.
Green Party in BC
The latest polling from both Ekos and Harris/Decima has the Greens in BC at 18%.
Ekos
Conservatives 39
NDP 24
Liberals 19
Greens 18
Harris/Decima
Conservatives 36
NDP 22
Liberals 22
Greens 18
The obvious thing is that the Conservatives are comfortably in the lead and not in much danger anywhere.
Less obvious is what these polling numbers mean for the other parties. If they hold, the Liberals will suffer badly, very badly and may be looking at a shut out. The Liberals will also be out of election expense revovery in a number of the ridings, something they can not afford at the moment.
At the same time the Greens are high enough that they are running second and third in a whole series of ridings, but the question is where? Could they be coming close to first in Vancouver centre?
Ekos
Conservatives 39
NDP 24
Liberals 19
Greens 18
Harris/Decima
Conservatives 36
NDP 22
Liberals 22
Greens 18
The obvious thing is that the Conservatives are comfortably in the lead and not in much danger anywhere.
Less obvious is what these polling numbers mean for the other parties. If they hold, the Liberals will suffer badly, very badly and may be looking at a shut out. The Liberals will also be out of election expense revovery in a number of the ridings, something they can not afford at the moment.
At the same time the Greens are high enough that they are running second and third in a whole series of ridings, but the question is where? Could they be coming close to first in Vancouver centre?
From Ekos
DAILY TRACKING - SEPTEMBER 19, 2008
Are the Greens Set to Break Through?
[OTTAWA – September 19, 2008] In our latest EKOS tracking poll, the Green Party has achieved its highest level of support ever, at 13% — very close to triple the level of support it garnered in the last election.
Even more important to the Greens, it seems they are on the threshold of transforming the contest in British Columbia into a four-way race. They are now just one percentage point behind the Liberals in B.C. according to our poll, and they are the strongest of all the parties in terms of “second-choice” options.
“The Green Party has always faced the challenge that, come election day, supporters might be inclined to think that a vote for the Greens was ‘wasted’ because they couldn’t win a seat,” said EKOS President Frank Graves. “That could be about to change, particularly in British Columbia.”
In terms of the overall party dynamics, the Tories have now settled back into the mid-30s, while the Liberals have steadied themselves in the mid-20s and have somewhat narrowed the gap with the Conservatives. In fact, the regional analysis shows that the Liberals are now highly competitive East of Sault Ste Marie; they have managed to close the gap, and are now running neck and neck in Ontario and Atlantic Canada.
The NDP seem stuck in the high teens in terms of support. So, the Greens are the party with momentum.
The NDP now faces a substantial challenge in its quest to displace the Liberals as the obvious alternative to the Conservative government. Not only is the gap with the Liberals no longer closing as it was in the first week of the campaign, the New Democrats may soon feel the Greens breathing down their necks nationally, and already should be feeling some of that pressure in B.C.
“Nationally, the NDP has sometimes been at or below the 13% level in the last five years, so the Greens have to be taken seriously now,” said Graves. “In fact, the old Canadian Alliance sometimes polled below the 13% level.”
On the other hand, NDP supporters will be encouraged to note that they now lead as the party of second choice.
Of course, the Green Party continues to suffer from the fact that their support is “less efficient”, in the sense that it is relatively evenly spread across the country. That’s why the Bloc Québécois, whose support is geographically concentrated, would win more seats than the NDP or the Greens if an election were held today, even though the BQ is now the fifth party in terms of national support.
Another challenge is that the Greens draw much of their support from younger voters, who traditionally have had low turn-out at election time. At the moment the Greens are close to leading among voters under-25. The Greens are not so much a party of the left as they a party of the frustrated younger generations that have felt left out of baby-boomer dominated politics.
“There are two crucial questions for the Greens,” said Graves. “Can they convince their supporters that a Green vote is not wasted; and can they motivate younger voters to get involved and turn out to vote in the way Barack Obama appears to have succeeded in doing south of the border.”
Are the Greens Set to Break Through?
[OTTAWA – September 19, 2008] In our latest EKOS tracking poll, the Green Party has achieved its highest level of support ever, at 13% — very close to triple the level of support it garnered in the last election.
Even more important to the Greens, it seems they are on the threshold of transforming the contest in British Columbia into a four-way race. They are now just one percentage point behind the Liberals in B.C. according to our poll, and they are the strongest of all the parties in terms of “second-choice” options.
“The Green Party has always faced the challenge that, come election day, supporters might be inclined to think that a vote for the Greens was ‘wasted’ because they couldn’t win a seat,” said EKOS President Frank Graves. “That could be about to change, particularly in British Columbia.”
In terms of the overall party dynamics, the Tories have now settled back into the mid-30s, while the Liberals have steadied themselves in the mid-20s and have somewhat narrowed the gap with the Conservatives. In fact, the regional analysis shows that the Liberals are now highly competitive East of Sault Ste Marie; they have managed to close the gap, and are now running neck and neck in Ontario and Atlantic Canada.
The NDP seem stuck in the high teens in terms of support. So, the Greens are the party with momentum.
The NDP now faces a substantial challenge in its quest to displace the Liberals as the obvious alternative to the Conservative government. Not only is the gap with the Liberals no longer closing as it was in the first week of the campaign, the New Democrats may soon feel the Greens breathing down their necks nationally, and already should be feeling some of that pressure in B.C.
“Nationally, the NDP has sometimes been at or below the 13% level in the last five years, so the Greens have to be taken seriously now,” said Graves. “In fact, the old Canadian Alliance sometimes polled below the 13% level.”
On the other hand, NDP supporters will be encouraged to note that they now lead as the party of second choice.
Of course, the Green Party continues to suffer from the fact that their support is “less efficient”, in the sense that it is relatively evenly spread across the country. That’s why the Bloc Québécois, whose support is geographically concentrated, would win more seats than the NDP or the Greens if an election were held today, even though the BQ is now the fifth party in terms of national support.
Another challenge is that the Greens draw much of their support from younger voters, who traditionally have had low turn-out at election time. At the moment the Greens are close to leading among voters under-25. The Greens are not so much a party of the left as they a party of the frustrated younger generations that have felt left out of baby-boomer dominated politics.
“There are two crucial questions for the Greens,” said Graves. “Can they convince their supporters that a Green vote is not wasted; and can they motivate younger voters to get involved and turn out to vote in the way Barack Obama appears to have succeeded in doing south of the border.”
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Whole Bunch More Polling Analysis
These are national numbers only. I used everyone that has been out in the field in the last week and used all the analysis I could of extra details such as this.
This is where it leaves it all:
Conservatives 39.3%
Liberals 23.8%
NDP 18.7%
Greens 12.1%
Bloc 7.6%
The number I was most surprised at was the Green totals. My goal was to factor in the danger of soft voters leaving a party and I know the Greens support is a not as committed as for other parties. But once I crunched the other numbers, there are enough people that are soft supporters of the NDP, Liberals and Conservatives that would chose Greens second to make up for their soft support.
This analysis shows that the gap between the Conservatives and the Liberals is 15.5 percentage points. This gap has to be scary for the Liberals and, short a Conservative meltdown, means the Liberals can only hope they remain ahead of the NDP.
This is where it leaves it all:
Conservatives 39.3%
Liberals 23.8%
NDP 18.7%
Greens 12.1%
Bloc 7.6%
The number I was most surprised at was the Green totals. My goal was to factor in the danger of soft voters leaving a party and I know the Greens support is a not as committed as for other parties. But once I crunched the other numbers, there are enough people that are soft supporters of the NDP, Liberals and Conservatives that would chose Greens second to make up for their soft support.
This analysis shows that the gap between the Conservatives and the Liberals is 15.5 percentage points. This gap has to be scary for the Liberals and, short a Conservative meltdown, means the Liberals can only hope they remain ahead of the NDP.
Terry Glavin - Always Worth Reading
Check out Terry Glavin's site.
He raises a lot of the issues I am concerned about as well. There was a time when I was a good lefty, but the direction of the left in Canada too often is one that makes no sense to me at all.
Terry Glavin is involved with the Afghanistan - Canada Solidarity Committee. I am impressed with a lot of what they are doing and would consider joining them expect for one reason. My religious faith means I am a pacifist.
I am a pacifist and prefer a world that has no military and no armed conflict. But believe that if we are to have a military it should be being put to use to to improve the world, to support human rights and civil society. As far as I can tell, this is what is going in Afghanistan.
The NATO intervention in Afghanistan is the first time troops have come from outside of the country to help support human rights and democracy in a civil society. This is a fundamental first and an evolution in global thinking - the military has a place in helping nations build a better society.
Canada's involvement in Afghanistan is only the second time in our history where our military was clearly used against tyranny in defense of basic human rights. Most of the peacekeeping Canadian troops did was to maintain political status quos that were not beneficial to the world. Sitting between the Greeks and the Turks in Cyprus only allowed both sides to avoid talking to each other.
Imagine what would have happened in Bosnia if 100 000 NATO troops intervened early on? Instead Lewis Mackenzie had to sit back and watch the Serbs slaughter people.
If the western world has all these troops and military forces, why is not using more them to fight fascism and tyranny in the world?
It all leads back to my belief that you support the democracies and push the tyrannies to be ended. Why do we have diplomatic relations with the anti-semitic and tyrannically kleptocracy of Saudi Arabia? Why do we pretend that unelected and imposed dictators have any right to our respect or acknowledgment?
Why is no one party in the federal election willing to come out and say that Canada will change to a foreign policy where democracies are respected and the rest have change or see Canada's opposition to them at every turn. I would love to see a national party leader say that the UN should expel all countries that have not elected their governments in an open and democratic manner.
We can set the example by being first. If we are followed by Japan, the EU and Australia, the US will follow and then it will become the norm.
I would like to see a day in my life when all the nations of the world respect human rights and are democratic. I can not see how anyone could argue against this.
He raises a lot of the issues I am concerned about as well. There was a time when I was a good lefty, but the direction of the left in Canada too often is one that makes no sense to me at all.
Terry Glavin is involved with the Afghanistan - Canada Solidarity Committee. I am impressed with a lot of what they are doing and would consider joining them expect for one reason. My religious faith means I am a pacifist.
I am a pacifist and prefer a world that has no military and no armed conflict. But believe that if we are to have a military it should be being put to use to to improve the world, to support human rights and civil society. As far as I can tell, this is what is going in Afghanistan.
The NATO intervention in Afghanistan is the first time troops have come from outside of the country to help support human rights and democracy in a civil society. This is a fundamental first and an evolution in global thinking - the military has a place in helping nations build a better society.
Canada's involvement in Afghanistan is only the second time in our history where our military was clearly used against tyranny in defense of basic human rights. Most of the peacekeeping Canadian troops did was to maintain political status quos that were not beneficial to the world. Sitting between the Greeks and the Turks in Cyprus only allowed both sides to avoid talking to each other.
Imagine what would have happened in Bosnia if 100 000 NATO troops intervened early on? Instead Lewis Mackenzie had to sit back and watch the Serbs slaughter people.
If the western world has all these troops and military forces, why is not using more them to fight fascism and tyranny in the world?
It all leads back to my belief that you support the democracies and push the tyrannies to be ended. Why do we have diplomatic relations with the anti-semitic and tyrannically kleptocracy of Saudi Arabia? Why do we pretend that unelected and imposed dictators have any right to our respect or acknowledgment?
Why is no one party in the federal election willing to come out and say that Canada will change to a foreign policy where democracies are respected and the rest have change or see Canada's opposition to them at every turn. I would love to see a national party leader say that the UN should expel all countries that have not elected their governments in an open and democratic manner.
We can set the example by being first. If we are followed by Japan, the EU and Australia, the US will follow and then it will become the norm.
I would like to see a day in my life when all the nations of the world respect human rights and are democratic. I can not see how anyone could argue against this.
Detailed Seat Projection
Using all the best data I can find at the moment I am putting out a better projection of where the current data says we are at in this election today. I still think the trend will be one of the Liberals losing even more seats by October 14th.
I am becoming convinced the Elizabeth May will beat Peter Mackay in Central Nova.
Ontario is where the Liberals are in real trouble, their sinking vote is making many more ridings very vulnerable. Taking the regional results and weighting them for poll size, the Liberals are a long way down in Ontario. Having Toronto mayor David Miller coming out for the Greens and Liberal Ontario premier Mcginty sitting on the side lines is killing them.
Pundits are very conservative by nature, they assume what happened last time and the time before will happen again. The will argue against a change because it has not happened. They were very wrong in 1984 and 1993 in what would happen in the election. Almost no one predicted the NDP would do as well as they did in 1988.
This election is one in which we very likely could see the federal Liberal party reduced to a smaller rump than ever before, but few pundits are willing to say this because they do not want to break from the pack and make a prediction that is dramatically different than the other pundits. They honestly can not believe that a Dion meltdown is already underway.
In from April 1999 to the May 2001 election in BC, people could not believe my prediction that the NDP was in danger of being reduced to almost no seats. People looked back at past elections and assumed that something similar would happen.
If the federal Liberal party wants to make it through this election in second, they need to move all their resources into their 50 safest ridings and fight like hell there. They have to defend their core territory now or they will lose a lot of their safest ridings.
In Canada the federal Liberal party has seen the provincial wings leave the fold over the last years. In BC the and Quebec the provincial parties are no longer formally affliated with the federal party. In Ontario the affliation is loose. In Saskatchewan the party has been reduced to fringe status. I can see more provincial wings ending the formal connection the federal party.
| Party | BC | AB | SK | MN | ON | QC | NB | NS | PEI | NFLD | Nth | TOTAL |
| CPC | 26 | 28 | 12 | 10 | 63 | 23 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 175 |
| LPC | 2 |
|
| 1 | 25 | 12 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 56 |
| NDP | 8 |
| 2 | 3 | 18 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 1 | 1 | 37 |
| Bloc |
|
|
|
|
| 38 |
|
|
|
|
| 38 |
| Ind |
|
|
|
|
| 1 |
| 1 |
|
|
| 2 |
| GP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| 1 |
I am becoming convinced the Elizabeth May will beat Peter Mackay in Central Nova.
Ontario is where the Liberals are in real trouble, their sinking vote is making many more ridings very vulnerable. Taking the regional results and weighting them for poll size, the Liberals are a long way down in Ontario. Having Toronto mayor David Miller coming out for the Greens and Liberal Ontario premier Mcginty sitting on the side lines is killing them.
Pundits are very conservative by nature, they assume what happened last time and the time before will happen again. The will argue against a change because it has not happened. They were very wrong in 1984 and 1993 in what would happen in the election. Almost no one predicted the NDP would do as well as they did in 1988.
This election is one in which we very likely could see the federal Liberal party reduced to a smaller rump than ever before, but few pundits are willing to say this because they do not want to break from the pack and make a prediction that is dramatically different than the other pundits. They honestly can not believe that a Dion meltdown is already underway.
In from April 1999 to the May 2001 election in BC, people could not believe my prediction that the NDP was in danger of being reduced to almost no seats. People looked back at past elections and assumed that something similar would happen.
If the federal Liberal party wants to make it through this election in second, they need to move all their resources into their 50 safest ridings and fight like hell there. They have to defend their core territory now or they will lose a lot of their safest ridings.
In Canada the federal Liberal party has seen the provincial wings leave the fold over the last years. In BC the and Quebec the provincial parties are no longer formally affliated with the federal party. In Ontario the affliation is loose. In Saskatchewan the party has been reduced to fringe status. I can see more provincial wings ending the formal connection the federal party.
National Polling Numbers
Looking at the three national daily tracking polls, Nanos, Harris/Decima and Ekos, gives us a running total of 6400 respondents, a decent sized national poll. Weighting the three companies based on their poll sizes gives us the following national results:
Conservatives - 38%
Liberals - 26%
NDP - 18%
Greens - 10%
Bloc - 8%
Harper is consistently staying in the 38% of the vote for the last week or so. He is in the range of a good majority because the second place party is so far behind him.
The Liberals are continuing to trend downwards, they are now at 85% the level of support they had in 2006.
The NDP is potentially marginally ahead of where they were in 2006, but this masks weakness in traditional areas such as BC because of the dramatic increase in support in Quebec. The NDP may increase their vote and not gain any seats.
Greens are not really a potential to win seats, yet. There has to be a stronger concentration of their votes for them to begin to win seats. The region in which they are strongest is BC, but they are still running fourth. The party is with in range of passing the NDP and Liberals if their fortunes go well. I would expect them to be able to pass the Liberals and not the NDP.
Based on the current polling numbers:
Seat Projection Based on How I expect the Election to End:
Conservatives - 38%
Liberals - 26%
NDP - 18%
Greens - 10%
Bloc - 8%
Harper is consistently staying in the 38% of the vote for the last week or so. He is in the range of a good majority because the second place party is so far behind him.
The Liberals are continuing to trend downwards, they are now at 85% the level of support they had in 2006.
The NDP is potentially marginally ahead of where they were in 2006, but this masks weakness in traditional areas such as BC because of the dramatic increase in support in Quebec. The NDP may increase their vote and not gain any seats.
Greens are not really a potential to win seats, yet. There has to be a stronger concentration of their votes for them to begin to win seats. The region in which they are strongest is BC, but they are still running fourth. The party is with in range of passing the NDP and Liberals if their fortunes go well. I would expect them to be able to pass the Liberals and not the NDP.
Based on the current polling numbers:
- Conservatives - 167 seats
- Liberals - 65
- NDP - 36
- Bloc - 38
- Ind - 2
Seat Projection Based on How I expect the Election to End:
- Conservatives - 206
- NDP - 39
- Bloc - 34
- Liberals - 26
- Ind - 2
- Green - 1
- Conservatives - 144.5
- Liberals - 84.7
- NDP - 40.4
- Bloc - 32
- Others - 4.6
Latest Federal Polling Numbers in BC
Ekos polled 842 people in BC for the federal election - data released today.
These numbers are very interesting because it means that the Greens are going to be coming second in a whole series of ridings, most specifically in Saanich - Gulf Islands, where the Conservation Voters just endorsed the Liberals.
As a total aside, I think one more reason the conservation voters decision is dumb because I believe that Harper will do more for the environment than Dion because Dion is a Liberal and what they promise on the campaign trail is normally the one thing they will not do.
I believe that Blair Wilson is becoming electable as a Green.
- Conservatives - 39%
- Liberals - 22%
- NDP - 22%
- Greens - 17%
These numbers are very interesting because it means that the Greens are going to be coming second in a whole series of ridings, most specifically in Saanich - Gulf Islands, where the Conservation Voters just endorsed the Liberals.
As a total aside, I think one more reason the conservation voters decision is dumb because I believe that Harper will do more for the environment than Dion because Dion is a Liberal and what they promise on the campaign trail is normally the one thing they will not do.
I believe that Blair Wilson is becoming electable as a Green.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Globe and Mail Poll of Polls
I have been watching the Globe and Mail poll of polls on their website since the start of the election and been wondering a bit about their methodology.
First of all, they include a poll from Innovative Research that no one I know of can seem to find a copy of. The poll is the worst for the Conservatives and a good for the Liberals. Without knowing dates for it or the size, it is hard to say how relevant it is.
Second, their math seems a bit odd. On a simple averaging of the polls the Liberal support is a bit high and the Conservatives are a bit low. They then say sample size is taken in account. When I do this with the same polls they have listed, the Liberal support is too high on their site.
Third, when the polls come out each day, they seem to wait to post them and keep a Liberal favorable one close to the top. I would think you should list them in order of how big they are on each given day. It would also be nice if they showed the size of each poll. As an example, the smallest poll released yesterday was the Nanos one, it was first on the list. Ekos was bigger than Nanos and Harris/Decima combined and it was listed third.
Fourth, their regional breakout numbers are weird. Why add the north to BC? Why lump all three prairie provinces together? Those two decisions make the numbers for those areas much less useful. It would also be nice to know which polls they are using for the regions. Nanos does not break out BC from the praries - an odd thing in itself - so Nanos numbers could not be used for the regional numbers. Only Ekos has sample sizes large enough for the regions that make reporting on them better than throwing a dart. Because of the huge difference between Ekos and other numbers in wieghting the regional numbers on the poll on polls does not seem to jive with the national numbers.
It would be nice if they applied a little more statistical analysis to their poll of polls.
First of all, they include a poll from Innovative Research that no one I know of can seem to find a copy of. The poll is the worst for the Conservatives and a good for the Liberals. Without knowing dates for it or the size, it is hard to say how relevant it is.
Second, their math seems a bit odd. On a simple averaging of the polls the Liberal support is a bit high and the Conservatives are a bit low. They then say sample size is taken in account. When I do this with the same polls they have listed, the Liberal support is too high on their site.
Third, when the polls come out each day, they seem to wait to post them and keep a Liberal favorable one close to the top. I would think you should list them in order of how big they are on each given day. It would also be nice if they showed the size of each poll. As an example, the smallest poll released yesterday was the Nanos one, it was first on the list. Ekos was bigger than Nanos and Harris/Decima combined and it was listed third.
Fourth, their regional breakout numbers are weird. Why add the north to BC? Why lump all three prairie provinces together? Those two decisions make the numbers for those areas much less useful. It would also be nice to know which polls they are using for the regions. Nanos does not break out BC from the praries - an odd thing in itself - so Nanos numbers could not be used for the regional numbers. Only Ekos has sample sizes large enough for the regions that make reporting on them better than throwing a dart. Because of the huge difference between Ekos and other numbers in wieghting the regional numbers on the poll on polls does not seem to jive with the national numbers.
It would be nice if they applied a little more statistical analysis to their poll of polls.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Projection for Sept 16th 2008
Using the latest polling numbers the election would come out as follows:
I can see a trend of falling Liberal and Bloc support and project that it will continue during the election. Based on this I see the final election result as:
The Liberal vote has to be seen as a tide and as it falls there are a lot of boats being very quickly beached. The Liberals do not have the advantage of having a concentrated vote like the Bloc or NDP do. If their numbers fall to under 20%, and they are close to this than 30% now, the party will lose a lot of seats and in areas most people think are impossible to lose.
No one thought the PCs could lose almost all their seats in 1993. Few people are willing to suggest that hardcore long time Liberal seats will fall, but the possibility is emerging.
The only strategy left for the Liberals to identify their core fortress of seats, the 50 safest, and put all their resources into them now to ensure the party does not come fourth in the election.
- Conservatives - 164
- Liberals - 69
- NDP - 30
- Bloc - 38
- Green - 1
- Ind - 2
I can see a trend of falling Liberal and Bloc support and project that it will continue during the election. Based on this I see the final election result as:
- Conservatives - 203
- NDP - 39
- Bloc - 34
- Liberals - 28
- Greens - 2
- Ind - 2
The Liberal vote has to be seen as a tide and as it falls there are a lot of boats being very quickly beached. The Liberals do not have the advantage of having a concentrated vote like the Bloc or NDP do. If their numbers fall to under 20%, and they are close to this than 30% now, the party will lose a lot of seats and in areas most people think are impossible to lose.
No one thought the PCs could lose almost all their seats in 1993. Few people are willing to suggest that hardcore long time Liberal seats will fall, but the possibility is emerging.
The only strategy left for the Liberals to identify their core fortress of seats, the 50 safest, and put all their resources into them now to ensure the party does not come fourth in the election.
The Election in Atlantic Canada
I have assumed that the Conservatives would do badly in Atlantic Canada because of their petulant angry over wanting to be on federal welfare while having enough revenues that they no longer need it. We really need to drastically change the federal equalization system and make provinces less dependent on Ottawa - but that is something for another time.
What interests me is that polling numbers coming out of Atlantic Canada. The samples are all small and there is a lot of movement all over the place, but I can see is that the Conservatives are at the same level they were at in 2006 or slightly better. The Liberals look to be down slightly and the NDP numbers are all over the place.
IF one assumes that the Conservatives are doing badly in Newfoundland, then their support has to be in the other three provinces. This means their numbers are high enough to take seats from the Liberals in Nova Scotia, PEI and New Brunswick.
Dion is in huge trouble if he has to defend seats in Atlantic Canada, the party's only strong hold other than the GTA.
What interests me is that polling numbers coming out of Atlantic Canada. The samples are all small and there is a lot of movement all over the place, but I can see is that the Conservatives are at the same level they were at in 2006 or slightly better. The Liberals look to be down slightly and the NDP numbers are all over the place.
IF one assumes that the Conservatives are doing badly in Newfoundland, then their support has to be in the other three provinces. This means their numbers are high enough to take seats from the Liberals in Nova Scotia, PEI and New Brunswick.
Dion is in huge trouble if he has to defend seats in Atlantic Canada, the party's only strong hold other than the GTA.
Poll Out for BC Only
The Mustel Group took a poll of people in BC and their federal voting intentions. They surveyed 750 people from September 2nd to 8th. The poll was released today - why this long after the survey, I have no idea.
18% undecided, which means there are people that answered with a party that are not going to vote in the election.
This poll gives us a strong measure of BC overall at the start of the election, much better than most of the break outs of the national polls where the BC sample is only 100 to 150 people. Only Ekos gives us any results that comparable. Their tracking poll is getting about 455 BC voters. Actually, their September 11th poll had 1152 respondents in BC out of 4367 nationwide - I had not noticed this high spike in BC numbers. I need to account for this in my other polling analysis as this makes the poll more like a 3600 nationwide poll and not a 5000 as I had assumed.
Working with the Mustel numbers, discounted because they are getting stale, the recent Ekos numbers at full value and discounting their earlier, and other poll samples very much discounted because they are so small, the current level of support in BC of the political parties is:
In seats this would indicate the following
- Conservatives - 39%
- NDP - 25%
- Liberals - 24%
- Greens - 12%
18% undecided, which means there are people that answered with a party that are not going to vote in the election.
This poll gives us a strong measure of BC overall at the start of the election, much better than most of the break outs of the national polls where the BC sample is only 100 to 150 people. Only Ekos gives us any results that comparable. Their tracking poll is getting about 455 BC voters. Actually, their September 11th poll had 1152 respondents in BC out of 4367 nationwide - I had not noticed this high spike in BC numbers. I need to account for this in my other polling analysis as this makes the poll more like a 3600 nationwide poll and not a 5000 as I had assumed.
Working with the Mustel numbers, discounted because they are getting stale, the recent Ekos numbers at full value and discounting their earlier, and other poll samples very much discounted because they are so small, the current level of support in BC of the political parties is:
- Conservatives - 39%
- NDP - 25%
- Liberals - 22%
- Greens - 14%
In seats this would indicate the following
- Conservatives - 26
- Liberals - 2 Vancouver Centre and Vancouver South
- NDP - 8
Monday, September 15, 2008
More on polls
I wonder why the Nanos numbers in the polls show the Liberals in the range of 30% - since the start of September they are the only company that has the Liberals at 30% or more. If one takes their numbers out, things look worse for the Liberals than most people are saying. Nanos seems to be about 3-4 percentage points than the others for the Liberals. Nanos looks like they have a systemic error in favour of the Liberals. Because of this seemingly systemic error, I will be reducing the weight I give Nanos polls by 30%.
Then there is Harris/Decima - their numbers look high for the Conservatives. They have had the Conservatives at over 40% twice. Only Segma's September 6th poll has the Conservatives at over 40%. Harris/Decima does not seem to have an ongoing systemic error in favour of the Conservatives, but at the same time their numbers have been more erratic. I will be assigning a 20% reduction in weight to their polls.
Now companies that crop up with polls, such as Segma, will be assigned a 50% reduction in weight until they have a track record.
To date the Ekos polling seems to be most consistent. They also have the largest polls and the only ones with decent regional break out numbers.
Using the latest Ekos numbers for BC, 38 CPC, 27 NDP, 20 Liberal and 14 Green, means that the Liberals will be reduced to one or two seats in BC. Vancouver South is their only seat they can count on and they may be able to hold onto Vancouver Centre.
The NDP has a decent chance to pick up Vancouver Kingsway and Esquimalt Juan de Fuca. The NDP may finally be able to pick off Vancouver Centre for the first time after putting in more than a generation of effort into the attempt.
The Greens are not out of the running in West Vancouver - Sunshine Coast - Sea to Sky Country. The party is running at 14% and has some benefit from Blair Wilson in the riding. Should the Greens maintain 14% at the polls, they will come third in some of the ridings in BC and push the Liberals into fourth.
The Conservatives should see an increase of five seats from BC.
Then there is Harris/Decima - their numbers look high for the Conservatives. They have had the Conservatives at over 40% twice. Only Segma's September 6th poll has the Conservatives at over 40%. Harris/Decima does not seem to have an ongoing systemic error in favour of the Conservatives, but at the same time their numbers have been more erratic. I will be assigning a 20% reduction in weight to their polls.
Now companies that crop up with polls, such as Segma, will be assigned a 50% reduction in weight until they have a track record.
To date the Ekos polling seems to be most consistent. They also have the largest polls and the only ones with decent regional break out numbers.
Using the latest Ekos numbers for BC, 38 CPC, 27 NDP, 20 Liberal and 14 Green, means that the Liberals will be reduced to one or two seats in BC. Vancouver South is their only seat they can count on and they may be able to hold onto Vancouver Centre.
The NDP has a decent chance to pick up Vancouver Kingsway and Esquimalt Juan de Fuca. The NDP may finally be able to pick off Vancouver Centre for the first time after putting in more than a generation of effort into the attempt.
The Greens are not out of the running in West Vancouver - Sunshine Coast - Sea to Sky Country. The party is running at 14% and has some benefit from Blair Wilson in the riding. Should the Greens maintain 14% at the polls, they will come third in some of the ridings in BC and push the Liberals into fourth.
The Conservatives should see an increase of five seats from BC.
The Economic Issue For the Federal Election
The biggest economic issue for the federal election is the Mountain Pine Beetle. The economic cost to Canada from this one pest is in the order of three billion cubic metres of wood. The value of this wood to the Canadian economy is about one trillion dollars.
This is is just from the lodgepole pine in BC, Canada's single most important forestry tree. If it does spread east, the economic damage to the country could be as much as 30% to 40% higher.
The impact is going to be felt over a long time and not in one year. We are looking at a loss of close to half of BC's annual allowable cut within the next ten years. That is 1/4 of the Canadian forestry industry.
The loss to the federal and provincial governments will be about $4 billion a year in revenues. The economy will have come up with an extra $12 billion in annual economic activity to make up for the lose of forestry.
Forestry is least goverment subsidised industry in this country and not surprisingly the most productive sector in our economy. Our dollar is dependent on the export earnings of forestry and engery. Knock out one large part of this, the least subsidised part, and there will be a long term negative impact on the value of the Canadian dollar. Without the roughly $40 billion in forestry exports Canada would have a trade deficit and more importantly a current account deficit - we would have more money flowing out of Canada than in.
The following communities will be dramatically reduced in size
Prince George and Kamloops will both stagnate.
This is the biggest demographic economic re-location in Canada since the depression.
This is a bigger problem than all the fishery problems we have seen. This is a national economic disaster and no one is making it the number one issue in Ottawa.
This is is just from the lodgepole pine in BC, Canada's single most important forestry tree. If it does spread east, the economic damage to the country could be as much as 30% to 40% higher.
The impact is going to be felt over a long time and not in one year. We are looking at a loss of close to half of BC's annual allowable cut within the next ten years. That is 1/4 of the Canadian forestry industry.
The loss to the federal and provincial governments will be about $4 billion a year in revenues. The economy will have come up with an extra $12 billion in annual economic activity to make up for the lose of forestry.
Forestry is least goverment subsidised industry in this country and not surprisingly the most productive sector in our economy. Our dollar is dependent on the export earnings of forestry and engery. Knock out one large part of this, the least subsidised part, and there will be a long term negative impact on the value of the Canadian dollar. Without the roughly $40 billion in forestry exports Canada would have a trade deficit and more importantly a current account deficit - we would have more money flowing out of Canada than in.
The following communities will be dramatically reduced in size
- Quesnel
- Williams Lake
- 100 Mile House
- Vanderhoof
- Smithers
- Burns Lake
- Mackenzie
- Fort St James
- Clearwater
- Blue River
- McBride
- Valemount
- Fraser Lake
- Houston
- Merritt
- Princeton
Prince George and Kamloops will both stagnate.
This is the biggest demographic economic re-location in Canada since the depression.
This is a bigger problem than all the fishery problems we have seen. This is a national economic disaster and no one is making it the number one issue in Ottawa.
The Decline of the Federal Liberals
In a Canadian election it is important to be either first or second because you gain a lot in those slots from strategic voting. From 1993 to 2004 the Federal Liberals benefited from strategic voting like no one else has ever managed to in Canadian history.
In the five last elections, there is only one province in the country where the Liberals were not consistently first or second and that was in Saskatchewan. In 1997 the Liberals came a close third in Nova Scotia but were shut out of the seats. 28.4% of the vote and 0 of 11 seats.
In 2008 the Liberals go into the election as acknowledged third place party in BC, Saskatchewan and Quebec. They go into the election being the ones having to fight against strategic voting in those provinces. Over 40% of Canadians live in the provinces where the Liberals are not a top tier party.
This is new territory for the Liberals as they have to do as the NDP has always had to do, justify why you should vote Liberal when this will only help elect more Conservatives. They have to campaign in a very different way and they do not even realize it. If they miss the boat on this, as it looks like they will, they will see their vote drop further close to October 14th. Polling behind the NDP nationally is much more likely at this point than becoming any sort of a threat to Stephen Harper.
In the five last elections, there is only one province in the country where the Liberals were not consistently first or second and that was in Saskatchewan. In 1997 the Liberals came a close third in Nova Scotia but were shut out of the seats. 28.4% of the vote and 0 of 11 seats.
In 2008 the Liberals go into the election as acknowledged third place party in BC, Saskatchewan and Quebec. They go into the election being the ones having to fight against strategic voting in those provinces. Over 40% of Canadians live in the provinces where the Liberals are not a top tier party.
This is new territory for the Liberals as they have to do as the NDP has always had to do, justify why you should vote Liberal when this will only help elect more Conservatives. They have to campaign in a very different way and they do not even realize it. If they miss the boat on this, as it looks like they will, they will see their vote drop further close to October 14th. Polling behind the NDP nationally is much more likely at this point than becoming any sort of a threat to Stephen Harper.
Weighting of Polls
I was asked how I weight the polls. To give you an example, here is how I weighted the last few days.
Adjusting for size:
I give five times the weight to the Ekos results because theirs was a poll of 5000 people. I aggregate the Nanos and Harris/Decima daily tracking polls and give them a weight as if they were one poll each of 2000 people. For Ipsos and Angus Reid, the weighting reflects the number of respondents in their one poll.
Doing this gives the following results:
It is important to do this because Harris/Decima has a new tracking result everyday and seems to have the Conservatives higher than the rest and Nanos has a new result each day but with the Liberals higher than the rest. Neither company asked as many people as Ekos did and therefore should not hold as much weight in the averaging.
The above results show the Greens as the big winners and the Liberals and Bloc both suffering.
If we look at the CTV/Globe Battleground ridings and average out the results over a week, which they are not doing I think should be, we see some clear trends.
In BC the Conservatives have gained only marginally on 2006, just over two percentage points. But their gain is more than matched by a fall for the NDP and Liberals.
The NDP is down marginally but the Liberals are down more than a 1/4 of their vote. This is a huge problem for them as they hold six of the ten BC Battleground ridings.
In Ontario the Conservatives have a much bigger gain in the vote, they are up almost six percentage points on 2006.
The Liberals have lost 1/4 of their vote in Ontario as they have done in BC.
The NDP is also down from their 2006 support.
In Quebec Conservatives are up more than either BC or Ontario and very close to the levels of Bloc support. The Bloc has seen their vote fall by 20%.
The Liberals once again are down a 1/4 of their vote in Quebec.
These trends in the battleground ridings are very bad news for Stephane Dion. If this were to extrapolate to the rest of the country, 22.5% support for the federal Liberals is realistic.
Adjusting for size:
- Ekos x 5.0
- Harris x 2.0
- Nanos x 2.0
- Angus Reid x 1.15
- Ipsos x 1.0
I give five times the weight to the Ekos results because theirs was a poll of 5000 people. I aggregate the Nanos and Harris/Decima daily tracking polls and give them a weight as if they were one poll each of 2000 people. For Ipsos and Angus Reid, the weighting reflects the number of respondents in their one poll.
Doing this gives the following results:
- Conservatives - 37.4%
- Liberals - 26.8%
- NDP - 17.1%
- Bloc - 7.9%
- Greens - 10.2%
It is important to do this because Harris/Decima has a new tracking result everyday and seems to have the Conservatives higher than the rest and Nanos has a new result each day but with the Liberals higher than the rest. Neither company asked as many people as Ekos did and therefore should not hold as much weight in the averaging.
The above results show the Greens as the big winners and the Liberals and Bloc both suffering.
If we look at the CTV/Globe Battleground ridings and average out the results over a week, which they are not doing I think should be, we see some clear trends.
In BC the Conservatives have gained only marginally on 2006, just over two percentage points. But their gain is more than matched by a fall for the NDP and Liberals.
The NDP is down marginally but the Liberals are down more than a 1/4 of their vote. This is a huge problem for them as they hold six of the ten BC Battleground ridings.
In Ontario the Conservatives have a much bigger gain in the vote, they are up almost six percentage points on 2006.
The Liberals have lost 1/4 of their vote in Ontario as they have done in BC.
The NDP is also down from their 2006 support.
In Quebec Conservatives are up more than either BC or Ontario and very close to the levels of Bloc support. The Bloc has seen their vote fall by 20%.
The Liberals once again are down a 1/4 of their vote in Quebec.
These trends in the battleground ridings are very bad news for Stephane Dion. If this were to extrapolate to the rest of the country, 22.5% support for the federal Liberals is realistic.
Second Election Sign Stolen
I have never had this problem before, but I have now had two Jack McClintock signs stolen from in front of my house. The second one lasted about 48 hours. I replaced it today as I was gone for the weekend.
I know that I live in a very pro NDP neighbourhood and that supporting a Conservative is going to bug some people, but I had not expected to lose signs this fast. In the 2006 election my sign made it through the whole election.
What this says to me is that there are politically aware people out there on the left that are worried the Conservatives could win in Victoria.
I know that I live in a very pro NDP neighbourhood and that supporting a Conservative is going to bug some people, but I had not expected to lose signs this fast. In the 2006 election my sign made it through the whole election.
What this says to me is that there are politically aware people out there on the left that are worried the Conservatives could win in Victoria.
Views from a Weekend Trip to Salmon Arm
I had to go up to Salmon Arm this weekend. The trip gave me a chance to see how the sign war was going through various parts of BC. What I saw surprised me.
In very few ridings that I passed through were there many signs up. I did not see much evidence of the election on the ground in the areas that I passed through. The party that had the most signs up, and the only ones in front of private homes that I saw, were the Conservatives. I saw at last some for each Conservative candidate in the ridings I passed through.
For the Greens I saw a few small signs in Salmon Arm and some large Andrew Lewis ones along highway 17 here in town.
For the Liberals I saw a few large Briony Penn signs next to Andrew Lewis's signs, some for Suhk Dahliwal in Newton-North Delta, and some for whomever was running against Nina Grewal.
For the NDP I saw some in the Salmon Arm area, in the riding were Nina Grewal is and some in Kamloops. Where I did not see them was in Saanich and the Gulf Islands, a riding where the NDP came second last time and has had Julian West nominated as their candidate for months now, if not longer. With the NDP doing better than the Liberals in BC, it is surprising I do not see them plastering every inch of BC with their signs right now.
In very few ridings that I passed through were there many signs up. I did not see much evidence of the election on the ground in the areas that I passed through. The party that had the most signs up, and the only ones in front of private homes that I saw, were the Conservatives. I saw at last some for each Conservative candidate in the ridings I passed through.
For the Greens I saw a few small signs in Salmon Arm and some large Andrew Lewis ones along highway 17 here in town.
For the Liberals I saw a few large Briony Penn signs next to Andrew Lewis's signs, some for Suhk Dahliwal in Newton-North Delta, and some for whomever was running against Nina Grewal.
For the NDP I saw some in the Salmon Arm area, in the riding were Nina Grewal is and some in Kamloops. Where I did not see them was in Saanich and the Gulf Islands, a riding where the NDP came second last time and has had Julian West nominated as their candidate for months now, if not longer. With the NDP doing better than the Liberals in BC, it is surprising I do not see them plastering every inch of BC with their signs right now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)