ThreeHundredEight.com

NDP widens lead in BC

2012-02-09T08:35:00.000-05:00

Two polls taken at the end of January by Forum Research and Angus-Reid indicate that the B.C. New Democrats have pulled further ahead of the governing Liberals. And with support for the B.C. Conservatives continuing to ride high, Christy Clark is unequivocally on track to lose the next election.

The poll by Angus-Reid gives the NDP the widest lead at 14 points, with Adrian Dix's party at 42% to 28% for the B.C. Liberals. The Conservatives stand at 19%, while the Greens trail with 10%.

Angus-Reid was last in the field October 31-November 1, and since then the NDP has gained two points. The Liberals are down three while the Conservatives are up one.

The New Democrats lead in every part of the province, with 42% in Vancouver, 51% on Vancouver Island, 37% in the Interior, and 43% in the North. They have made substantial gains on Vancouver Island and in northern British Columbia since Angus-Reid last reported.

The Liberals have dropped substantially in the north, and are stuck at between 27% and 30% throughout the province. The B.C. Conservatives are doing well everywhere but on Vancouver Island, and are even seven points behind the Liberals in Vancouver. They have outpaced the Greens for third spot throughout British Columbia.

They are the real problem for Christy Clark. Roughly one-quarter of B.C. Liberal voters from 2009 have gone to the B.C. Conservatives. Give those votes back to the Liberals and the race is neck-and-neck. Adrian Dix's lead has been formed thanks to with the weakness of the Liberals and the strength of the Conservatives.

His personal numbers aren't as good as those for his party: 26% think he is the best person to be premier. Clark is not far behind with 22%. Dix's approval ratings are positive, however, with 45% approval to 36% disapproval. Clark (40% to 49%) and Cummins (23% to 39%) have negative approval ratings.

The poll by Forum Research is somewhat older, but finds some similar results. The B.C. New Democrats lead with 39% to 26% for the B.C. Liberals, while the B.C. Conservatives are solidly in third with 22%.

Since Forum was last in the field on December 15, the NDP has gained five, the Liberals have gained three, and the Conservatives have dropped one.

Like Angus-Reid, Forum has the NDP up in each part of the province: 39% in Vancouver, 41% on Vancouver Island, and 37% in the Interior and the North. They've made important gains in Vancouver and in the Interior-North.

Liberal support is also at a similar level as Angus-Reid, but one difference is in the Interior-North region. There, Forum sees the B.C. Conservatives at 25% to 17% for the Liberals. Dropping into third in this part of the province would be a disaster for Christy Clark.

Also like Angus-Reid, Forum has positive approval ratings for Adrian Dix (though, at 35% to 34%, narrowly so) while Christy Clark (34% approval to 46% disapproval) and John Cummins (21% to 35%) have negative numbers.

The projected seat results for these two polls are relatively similar, giving us a good idea of where things stand right now.

With the B.C. Conservatives at 22% and beating out the Liberals in part of the province, Forum's numbers would result in 60 seats for the B.C. New Democrats, 18 for the B.C. Liberals, and five for the B.C. Conservatives. The potential for more seats for Cummins is large, particularly if he can line up some compelling candidates and pull ahead of the Liberals in the Interior or the North, or both.

While Angus-Reid has a wider lead, its weaker results for the Conservatives gives 61 seats to the NDP, 22 to the Liberals, and only two to the Conservatives.

But in both scenarios we see a massive two-thirds NDP majority for Adrian Dix, thanks in large part to John Cummins. In fact, if we look at the polling trends over the last two years we see that the B.C. Liberals have returned to the levels of support they had in their last months under Gordon Campbell. Christy Clark's honeymoon, in which her party pulled ahead, is clearly over. Since at least January 2010, the B.C. New Democrats have out-polled the B.C. Liberals for most of the time, suggesting that it will not be a simple task for Christy Clark to right the ship.

Mulcair lands big endorsements

2012-02-08T09:52:00.002-05:00

This past week was an important one for Thomas Mulcair, as he captured more of Robert Chisholm's endorsements and received his first nod from a major labour organization.

Two debates were also held by local bodies of the NDP in Sudbury over the weekend and last night in Saskatoon. Fundraising details were also released, indicating that Brian Topp and Thomas Mulcair are well ahead of the others, while Nathan Cullen is closer to the group of frontrunners than he is to the second tier of candidates.

But on the endorsement front the week was a good one for Thomas Mulcair. He got the endorsement of four Nova Scotia MLAs, Graham Steele (Finance Minister), David Wilson, Ross Landry, and Brian Skabar. The first three had endorsed Chisholm when he was still in the race.

Mulcair also picked up the endorsement of former Ontario NDP leader Howard Hampton, who had also endorsed Chisholm. Mulcair has now gobbled up four of Robert Chisholm's endorsements, more than any other candidate (Peggy Nash and Topp have one apiece).

Most important, however, is the endorsement of the United Food and Commercial Workers, the largest private sector union in Canada representing some 250,000 members. It's important because it is Mulcair's first major labour endorsement, finally putting him in the company of Topp, Nash, and Paul Dewar, all of whom have received the endorsement of large labour unions.

(Click here to learn more about the endorsement system and here for how the points are awarded. And, as always, you can right-click the list of endorsers and open in a new tab or window to magnify it.)

The next biggest gainer this week was Paul Dewar, who received the endorsement of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, a 39,000-strong union, as well as the support of former Victoria MP John Brewin.

Niki Ashton received the nod from Michael Sather, a BC MLA, while Peggy Nash got the support of Sharon Blady, an MLA from Manitoba.

The rankings have not changed this week, but the race has gotten a lot closer. Brian Topp has dropped 1.4 percentage points to only 30.5% of all endorsement points, his lowest point of the campaign so far. Peggy Nash is down one percentage point to 23.9%, while Thomas Mulcair is up 2.4 percentage points to 22.7%. He is now only 7.8 endorsement points behind Nash.

Paul Dewar has not budged from 14% of all endorsement points, while Nathan Cullen is down 0.2 points to 4%. Ashton is unchanged at 3.7%, while Roméo Saganash is down 0.1 point to 1.1%. Martin Singh remains stuck at zero points.

Endorsements and fundraising seem to point to Topp, Nash, and Mulcair being the top three in the race, with Mulcair perhaps being better positioned than Nash. They also seem to point to Dewar being in fourth spot, but he is one of the candidates that has the most second (and subsequent) ballot potential. A candidate like Mulcair may not have as much second ballot potential, meaning he has to pile up as much support on the first ballot as possible. But Michael Ignatieff demonstrated how limited late ballot growth can be in the 2006 race.

Worth noting is that Martin Singh raised more money than either Ashton or Saganash (though virtually all of it seems to have come from the Sikh community). He will obviously get more than zero per cent of the vote and I imagine Saganash will do better as well.

The one candidate I think the endorsement rankings is underestimating the most is Nathan Cullen. He had some impressive fundraising figures when compared to the others. He was only a few thousand dollars behind Paul Dewar. He's been getting some of the best press as well, so he could very well be much closer to the four frontrunners on the first ballot than the rankings might suggest. Whether he has a chance to emerge as the winner, however, is another thing entirely.

Tories lead by 22 in ROI poll

2012-02-07T14:04:00.000-05:00

Over the last few days, Return on Insight (ROI) has released a series of Alberta polls via the CBC, analyzing voting intentions, leader approval, and where Albertans stand on the issues. The poll shows the Progressive Conservatives to be in a dominant position.

ROI finds Alison Redford's Tories to have the support of 46% of Albertans, with 24% opting for Wildrose, 14% for the NDP, and 12% for the Liberals.

These numbers generally echo, or at least fall in between, what we've recently seen from Léger Marketing and Forum Research. They also agree on where the parties stand in each part of the province.

In Edmonton, the Tories have a solid lead with 49% support, while the NDP comes up second with 17%. The Liberals and Wildrose are tied with 16%.

In Calgary, the Tories have a solid lead as well but are being trailed more closely by Wildrose: 48% to 28%. This is also the case in the rest of the province, where the Progressive Conservatives hold a 43% to 29% edge over Danielle Smith's party. This closer race outside the cities and a competitive Wildrose in Calgary is what other polls have reported.

This poll has been added to the Alberta projection. It has given the Tories an extra 0.6 points and they now lead with 45.9% support, compared to 23% for Wildrose (down 0.2), 13.1% for the Liberals (down 0.3), and 12.4% for the New Democrats (up 0.2). Minor shifts, but thanks to gains of 1.8 points in Edmonton and 1.5 points in Calgary, the Progressive Conservatives are now projected to win 76 seats, with seven going to Wildrose, three to the NDP, and one to the Liberals.

In this ROI poll, the leaders all get net positive approval ratings. Alison Redford tops the list with 59% approval to 22% disapproval, with her best numbers coming in the two main cities and among women.

Danielle Smith has a 46% approval rating with 26% disapproving, her best results coming in Calgary and among men.

Brian Mason of the NDP scores a 39% to 29% split while Raj Sherman manages 37% approval to 33% disapproval. Both leaders have their best results in Edmonton.

Glenn Taylor of the Alberta Party has the highest "unsure" result, but still got 24% approval to 10% disapproval.

On the issues, Albertans identified healthcare (41%), the economy (31%), oil and gas (27%) and education (25%) as the most important ones facing the province. The Tories are well placed on these issues, however. They received top marks on healthcare (26%), education (33%), and the economy (43%) in terms of which party was chosen to be best able to handle these issues. Wildrose came second (19%) on the economy while the NDP came second (also with 19%) on healthcare and education.

These are not particularly strong indicators for Wildrose. They are not making big gains in voting intentions and on the important issues Albertans think other parties are stronger. If the campaign is about healthcare or education, the NDP might make gains. If it is about the economy, the PCs are best positioned. Where Danielle Smith finds her niche is difficult to see. But it appears that Albertans are generally comfortable with the Tories. Wildrose will need to turn the population against the governing party before they can work on bringing new voters into their tent.

Redford's Tories on track for landslide in first projection

2012-02-06T08:51:00.000-05:00

Premier Alison Redford is expected to present her first budget to the Alberta legislature this week, the first step towards the province’s next election scheduled to take place within the next four months. But if an election were held today, Ms. Redford’s Progressive Conservatives would win a landslide victory.

The latest seat and vote projections based on all publicly released polls indicate that the Progressive Conservatives have the support of 45.3 per cent of Albertans, down 7.4 points since the 2008 provincial election. But faced with a divided opposition, the Tories are projected to win 73 seats in the 87-seat legislature, six more than they currently hold.

You can read the rest of the article on ThreeHundredEight's first Alberta projection at The Globe and Mail website here.

With the Alberta legislature returning to work and an election call coming in four to six weeks, ThreeHundredEight is now launching its vote and seat projection model for the province. It's a little different from the models I've used in the past.

The graphic on the top of the page shows the projected vote and seats for each of the parties in Alberta. It also shows their low and high ranges. This is one of the changes that ThreeHundredEight will be making going forward, and that is a measure of the uncertainty involved in polling and projections.

This uncertainty is measured by the volatility in the polling. For example, if recent polls have one party's support varying by no more than three points, the volatility for that party will be low. In this Alberta projection, this applies to the Liberals and the New Democrats. On the other hand, if polls vary by a lot more points then the volatility will be quite high. This is the case for the Progressive Conservatives, projected to have the support of between 37.8% and 52.8%, and Wildrose (16.7% to 29.7%).

The projected result, however, is the most likely. But the projected vote is not just the result of an aggregation of the polls. Though weighing the polls by date, size, and polling firm accuracy is still most important, the polls are also adjusted according to how they should be expected to diverge from actual voting behaviour. After analyzing all recent provincial and federal elections where detailed polling data was available, I've found that the number of seats each party has in the legislature is the best predictor of how voting intentions differentiate from voting behaviour.

The first and second largest parties tend to out-perform the polls, perhaps because of their better organization, higher fundraising, and better chances at forming government. Third and fourth parties tend to under-achieve their poll results, likely because of their weaker organizations and susceptibility to strategic voting. In these cases, the difference is roughly by a factor of 5% or so (not percentage points). If a party is not represented in the legislature, they tend to under-perform the polls by about 25%.

This model, unlike previous ones, is a regional model. I have split Alberta into three regions: the CMAs of Edmonton and Calgary and the rest of Alberta. Aside from Forum Research, every active pollster in Alberta splits up the province in this way.

The seat projection is done at the regional level, and here again volatility comes into play. This determines the low and high ranges of the projections in each and every riding, and from these vote ranges the seat ranges are determined. If a party's high range is greater than the low range of the party projected to win the seat, that indicates that the seat is at play and this is how the seat ranges are determined. When there is less volatility in the polling, the ranges shrink. That is why the ranges for the NDP and the Liberals are so small, while that of the Tories and Wildrose are so large. Their polling has been all over the place.

The image at the top of the right-hand column shows the regional vote and seat projections. It can be clicked on to see the regional vote and seat ranges. The riding projections can be accessed by clicking on the "Alberta Riding Projections" banner under the main projection image at the top of the page.

Finally, the chart at the very bottom of this page shows which polls are included in the projection and what weight the polls of each firm are given. There are always older polls included in the projection than those showed, but their weights are too small to register. Also note that the weight chart lumps multiple polls for each pollster together. The main reason why Forum's polls are weighted more heavily than Léger's is because there are two of them to Léger's one.

As the projection is updated, I will put up the tracking charts that will follow the shifts in the vote projection and vote ranges over time. It should give a good road map to the campaign as it unfolds.

The potential for a good contests exists, as the vote ranges show the margin between the Tories and Wildrose could shrink to as little as eight points, and Wildrose could win as many as 24 seats. Those are, at this stage, unlikely outcomes. But hopefully we'll see plenty of action in the coming weeks both in the polls and on the campaign trail.

Tory fundraising lead narrows

2012-02-03T09:39:00.000-05:00

The Conservatives remain Canada’s best funded political party, but for the first time in five years they are no longer taking in most of Canada’s political donations.

Financial reports posted on the Elections Canada website this week show that the Conservatives raised $4.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2011. While this was more than any other party, it was the worst fourth quarter result since before Stephen Harper became prime minister.

You can read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post Canada website here. It takes a look at how this fourth quarter of 2011 compares to others in the past.

Compared to the Conservatives' $4.1 million raised, the Liberals raised $2.8 million, the NDP $1.6 million, the Greens $383,000 and the Bloc Québécois $162,000. What does that mean in electoral terms?

Let's try to find out. In the second quarter of 2011, which happened to include a federal election, the Conservatives raised $8.2 million, more than the other four parties combined. The Liberals raised $3.6 million while the New Democrats raised $3.1 million. The Greens raked in almost $800,000 while the Bloc took in almost $600,000.

What did it get them? For the sake of this exercise, let's assume that money raised during the second quarter of 2011 is related to the number of votes each party received. How much money did each party have to raise to get one vote?

$1.41 per vote - Conservatives
$1.34 per vote - Greens
$1.31 per vote - Liberals
$0.69 per vote - New Democrats
$0.64 per vote - Bloc Québécois

With these numbers, let's "buy" votes using money raised in the fourth quarter. The end result, in total vote share (and with difference from the 2011 election result in brackets), is:

36.6% - Conservatives (-3.0)
29.5% - New Democrats (-1.1)
27.0% - Liberals (+8.1)
3.6% - Greens (-0.3)
3.2% - Bloc Québécois (-2.8)

This actually looks quite similar to the some of the polls that we've seen recently. But what it does put into context is that this was a very good quarter for the Liberals. Of course, the Conservatives still raised the most money but their advantage over the Liberals and, to a lesser extent, the New Democrats has been reduced. It almost appears that the Liberals and NDP have kept their fundraising machines ticking while the Conservatives have taken their foot off the gas a little.

It should come as no surprise, however, that the Bloc Québécois would be having such a hard time of it after the May 2011 debacle. Adding to their trouble is that Quebec is heading towards an election, meaning the average Bloc donor is probably giving his or her money to the Parti Québécois, if at all. Translating that 3.2% in our exercise means a drop to about 12.5% in Quebec - absolute disaster for the Bloc. But the party tends to raise a lot of its funds at the local level, so perhaps this isn't as disastrous as it appears.

Also released this week were the fundraising totals of the NDP leadership hopefuls. Glen McGregor has a very neat graph here and the CBC has the actual details here. Brian Topp and Thomas Mulcair top the list, with Topp raising the most money but Mulcair having the most donors. Peggy Nash and Paul Dewar came in third and fourth, rounding out the top four. But surprisingly, Nathan Cullen pulled in the fifth most amount of money, coming up less than $8,000 short of Dewar's total. Cullen may be a much more important factor in this race than previously thought, as both he and Dewar have raised around $90,000 despite Dewar having the far greater national profile.

Martin Singh comes up with almost $50,000, while Roméo Saganash and Niki Ashton each raised less than $20,000.

These totals tell a slightly different story of the race than, for example, my endorsement rankings. Brian Topp is still in first, but Thomas Mulcair is very close and well ahead of both Nash and Dewar. Though those are the four frontrunners, Nathan Cullen is very much in the race and Niki Ashton is very much at the bottom. However, we don't know how much was raised in January and there is still more than a month before the convention, so these numbers could change dramatically before the end of March. But these totals do paint a portrait of the race that is easily the most objective and quantifiable information that we've seen so far in this campaign.

Liberals and PQ gain on CAQ drop

2012-02-02T11:07:00.002-05:00

Two polls were released recently by Léger Marketing (via Le Devoir and the Montreal Gazette) and CROP (via La Presse) on the provincial political situation in Quebec. The province remains in flux, but thanks to a slip in support for François Legault's Coalition Avenir Québec, the Liberals and Parti Québécois have made gains.

We'll start with the older CROP, which shows a close race between the CAQ and the Liberals.

Compared to their last poll from December 12-14, the CAQ has dropped eight points to 31%, only two points ahead of the Liberals (+1 to 29%). The PQ is up three points to 21%, but is still trailing the others by a wide margin.

Québec Solidaire stands at 11%, the Greens are at 5%, and Option Nationale (its first appearance in province-wide polling) has the support of 2%.

The CAQ holds a solid lead among francophones, with 34% to 24% for the PQ and 21% for the PLQ. They also lead in Quebec City with 41% to the Liberals' 26%, while they hold a narrow edge in the regions of Quebec with 31% to 30% for the Liberals. The PQ trails there with 20%.

The Liberals are ahead among non-francophones, with 64% support to 18% for the CAQ. They are also tied with the CAQ in Montreal with 29%. The PQ sits at 22% in and around the city.

Léger was last in the field January 11-12, and since then the CAQ has slipped one point to 32%. The Liberals are also down one to 26%, while the Parti Québécois is steady at 25%.

QS sits at 9%, while the Greens are at 6%.

In this poll, the CAQ has a smaller lead among francophones with 36% support to 30% for the PQ, while they also lead in the regions of Quebec with 38% to 26% for the PQ and 21% for the Liberals. In Quebec City, they lead with 33% against 27% for the Liberals and 26% for the PQ.

The Liberals lead among non-francophones with 61%, with the CAQ and the Greens tied in second with 11%. They also lead in and around Montreal with 30% to 26% for the CAQ and 25% for the PQ.

But Léger was also in the field December 13-14. As both Léger and CROP were polling at around the same time in both December and January, we can compare the trendlines.

Provincially, the two polls show a significant drop in CAQ support since December, five points for Léger and eight points for CROP. They both show a gain for the Liberals (four points for Léger, one for CROP), and gains for the PQ (one point for Léger, three for CROP). That is a pretty consistent trend.

The consistencies continue in some of the cross-tabs. The CAQ is down between six and ten points among francophones, while the Liberals are up two points in both polls and the PQ is up three. The CAQ is also down across the board in Montreal, Quebec, and in the regions in both polls, with the two surveys showing significant, double-digit drops in and around Quebec City. They also show Liberal gains in the capital and the regions, and agree on PQ gains in Montreal and Quebec City.

What we can take from these two polls is that the race in Quebec is becoming a three-way contest. The CAQ is dropping while both the Liberals and PQ have made modest gains, thanks to increases in support among francophones. The Montreal region is very tight, while the CAQ leads in Quebec City. The polls do not agree on what is happening outside of the two major cities, however.

And this makes a big difference in the seat projection. With the numbers from the CROP poll, the Liberals turn a tight race in the Montreal region and in the rest of Quebec into a minority government. Though they are 13 points behind the CAQ among francophones, they are nevertheless only one point behind them in the regions of Quebec, where a good chunk of the seats are located. I don't quite understand how this can be, considering that the regions of Quebec are predominantly francophone, but this is what CROP is showing.

The tight race in CROP's polling results in 56 seats for the Liberals, 44 for the CAQ, 21 for the Parti Québécois, and four for Québec Solidaire. Note, however, that the CAQ trails the Liberals by a margin of five points or less in nine ridings, which could turn this seat projection into 53 for the CAQ and 47 for the Liberals.

In and around Montreal, the Liberals win 28 seats, the CAQ 17, the PQ six, and QS four.

In and around Quebec City, the CAQ wins eight seats, the Liberals two, and the PQ one.

And in the rest of Quebec, the Liberals win 26 seats, the CAQ 19, and the PQ 14.

In Léger's polling, however, the Liberal lead in Montreal puts them in good standing, while the close race among francophones gives the PQ a boost outside of the major cities.

With their numbers, the CAQ wins 45 seats, the Liberals win 42, the Parti Québécois wins 35, and Québec Solidaire wins three.

In and around Montreal, the Liberals win 30 seats, the PQ wins 12, the CAQ wins 10, and QS wins three.

In and around Quebec City, the CAQ wins seven seats, the Liberals three, and the PQ one.

And in the rest of Quebec, the CAQ wins 28 seats, the PQ 22, and the Liberals nine.

All of this points to a minority government. The question is whether that minority would be led by Jean Charest's Liberals or the CAQ's François Legault.

Quebecers would appear to prefer Legault, who scored between 23% and 25% in the "best premier" question. Charest was second with 19% in the two polls, while Pauline Marois scored between 11% and 15%.

Léger had some interesting details on how Quebecers feel about the national question. CROP found support for sovereignty sitting at 37%, while Léger has it at 43%. But most interestingly, 41% of the CAQ's supporters are sovereigntists. That is not much less than the 55% of Québec Solidaire's supporters, though at 85% the PQ gets the vast majority of its support from sovereigntists.

More specifically, however, Léger found that 30% of Quebecers would choose sovereignty as their first preference, compared to 39% who wanted more powers for the province. Only 21% were happy with the status quo.

Put together, that means 69% of Quebecers want more powers of some kind. When we break that down by political support, we get 85% of the CAQ's supporters wanting more power. That is not much less than the 95% of the PQ's supporters. This will put Legault in a difficult position, as his supporters seem to want him to work towards getting more powers from Ottawa while his party has said it doesn't want to touch the issue.

The PQ is mulling pushing sovereignty harder, particularly as a bulwark against the federal Conservative government. According to Léger, 14% of Quebecers who said they intended to vote for another party would instead vote for the PQ if they pushed the sovereignty file harder. That would bump them up to 36% support in the province, pushing the CAQ down to 26% and Québec Solidaire to 7%. The Liberals wouldn't be much changed, and that means the PQ would stand a good shot at a slim majority government.

It would appear that Quebecers simply want their leaders to have a plan. Legault has said he'll focus on the province's problems and Charest has his Plan Nord and federalism. The PQ, however, does not have the same kind of firm position, as they are not pledging sovereignty but instead a "sovereigntist governance". As I've seen mentioned elsewhere, Quebecers do not seem to want to support a party with enthusiasm when that party can't support its own raison-d'être with enthusiasm.

It might not be a winning formula, however. In 2007, André Boisclair's electoral chances were hurt by the focus on sovereignty during the campaign. Jean Charest brought up the issue of partition, and Quebecers flocked to Mario Dumont's middle-of-the-road ADQ. Considering what happened in that campaign, a push for sovereignty by the PQ might instead be the winning formula for François Legault's CAQ.

Dewar, Ashton make endorsement gains

2012-02-01T09:25:00.001-05:00

Another week in the NDP leadership race has passed, with the debate in Halifax ushering in a spate of endorsements from the provincial NDP in Nova Scotia. But thanks to a handful of caucus endorsements from Ontario, both Paul Dewar and Niki Ashton have made important gains in the endorsement rankings.

Paul Dewar landed the most valuable endorsements, getting the support of Ontario MPs Irene Mathyssen (London-Fanshawe) and Claude Gravelle (Nickel Belt). Mathyssen is a three-term MP, while Gravelle has been elected twice. In all, that gives Dewar an extra 12.5 points. Add to that the endorsement of Maurice Smith, a Nova Scotia MLA, and Dewar has made a gain of 13 points this week.

This has bumped him up 1.6 percentage points to 14% of those currently available. This still puts him below the 14.2% he reached in mid-January.

Like Nathan Cullen last week, Niki Ashton has re-emerged with a caucus endorsement of her own: Carol Hughes, two-term MP from Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing. This gives Ashton an extra five points, bumping her up 0.7 percentage points to 3.7%. She is still behind Cullen, but is moving away from Roméo Saganash, who is unchanged at 1.2%, and Martin Singh.

(Click here to learn more about the endorsement system and here for how the points are awarded. And, as always, you can right-click the list of endorsers and open in a new tab or window to magnify it.)

The top three ranking candidates also landed new endorsements, but only Paul Dewar and Niki Ashton made gains in their share of the points.

Thomas Mulcair received the endorsement of St. John's South-Mount Pearl MP Ryan Cleary, who had originally endorsed Robert Chisholm. Cleary is in his first term and gives Mulcair an extra 2.5 points, but he still loses 0.3 percentage points. He now sits at 20.3%, his lowest of the campaign so far.

Peggy Nash received the endorsement of three Nova Scotia MLAs, Pam Birdsall, Vicki Conrad, and Marilyn More, the last of which had endorsed Chisholm while he was still in the race. This gives Nash an extra 1.5 points, but she has slipped 0.7 percentage points to 24.9%.

Brian Topp also got the nod from some Nova Scotia MLAs while in the province, getting the support of Lenore Zann and Mat Whynott (who had endorsed Chisholm). This gives him an extra point, but he is down a percentage point to 31.9%.

The four frontrunners are beginning to bunch-up in the endorsement rankings, which also seems to be the case in the race itself. There are only 17.9 percentage points separating first (Topp) from fourth (Dewar) in the rankings, compared to the 18.3 points that separated first (Topp) from second (Mulcair) when I launched them.

Nathan Cullen and Niki Ashton are also beginning to lift themselves up after trailing for so long. And while Cullen has been getting the most positive press recently, it's worth noting that Ashton currently has as much caucus support as Dewar (four MPs), and the support of only two fewer sitting MPs than Nash. It is experience that makes the difference, however. Ashton's caucus support (excluding herself) has won a total of five elections, the same as Cullen's, whereas Nash's has won eight and Dewar's 11.

By comparison, Topp's caucus support has won 28 elections while Mulcair's has won 40 (but most of those were in Quebec).

The race is far from over and in many ways it is just beginning. With the debates starting to now take centre stage, what came before were almost the preliminary rounds. The candidates were lining up endorsements, getting a feel for the race, and preparing their organizations. They only have a few more weeks to sign-up new members. The debate in Halifax provided more contrast between the candidates than the ones that came before it, and I suspect future debates will serve to separate the contenders more and more. But by the time the race approaches the convention, it's quite possible that the frontrunners will be even closer together in support than they appear to be today.

NDP slips in Quebec

2012-01-31T09:19:00.000-05:00

With a steep drop in support among francophones, the New Democrats are now only one or two points ahead of their main rivals in Quebec, where more than half of the NDP’s 101 MPs were elected in May 2011.

Two recent surveys, one by Nanos Research for CTV and The Globe and Mail and the other by Léger Marketing for Le Devoir and the Montreal Gazette, indicate the New Democrats continue to bleed support in the battleground province.

You can read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post Canada website here.

The article focuses on the results of the Nanos and Léger surveys in Quebec. But let's here take a closer look at the Léger poll as well as Nanos's national results.

Nanos Research was last in the field December 15-18, and since then the Conservatives have dropped 0.8 points to 35.7%. They are trailed not by the NDP, however, but instead by the Liberals, who are up two points to 27.6%.

The New Democrats trail in third with 25.2%, down 3.5 points since Nanos's last poll.

Nanos is the polling firm that records Liberal support higher than any other at the moment, while also showing NDP support to be lower than other surveys. It certainly makes it stand out from the others, particularly in terms of its strong Liberal showing in Quebec and its weak NDP number in Ontario.

But there have been two polls recently that pegged Liberal support at 25%, while more have put the NDP at 28%. This does not make Nanos too different, though it does put it on the optimistic side of Liberal support.

The Conservatives are up 7.6 points in Ontario to 42.1%, followed by the Liberals at 35.1%, down 3.3 points. The New Democrats are down a whopping 12.6 points to 16.9%, a number so large that I think we can expect a whopping NDP gain in Nanos's next survey.

Quebec is the most interesting result, and in fact is not too different from the Léger poll below. The New Democrats are down 4.4 points to 29%, while the Liberals are up 3.6 points to 26.5%. The Bloc Québécois is up 4.2 points to 24.1%, while the Conservatives are down 5.7 points to 15.1%. This is not the first poll to show the NDP down to this level of support, and corroborates the slip that Léger has also recorded since mid-December (as well as the Liberal gain).

Elsewhere, the Conservatives have gained 6.6 points in British Columbia and lead with 41%, while they have dropped 6.4 points in the Prairies (including Alberta) to 48.1%. They are also down 12.1 points in Atlantic Canada to 29.5%.

The Liberals have gained 4.5 points in Atlantic Canada to reach 33.6%, while they have not moved much in British Columbia (21.2%, down 1.6) and the Prairies (20.5%, up 1.1). The New Democrats are down 4.7 points to 28.5% in British Columbia, but are up 5.1 points to 25.9% in the Prairies and 9.2 points to 35.2% in Atlantic Canada. The NDP has led in four of five recent polls on the East Coast.

With the current 308-seat electoral map, the Conservatives win 134 seats with the results of this poll. The Liberals win 80 and the New Democrats win 66, while the Greens take one and the Bloc takes 12.

The Conservatives win 20 seats in British Columbia, 24 in Alberta, 16 in the Prairies, 56 in Ontario, eight in Quebec, nine in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

The Liberals win four seats in British Columbia, two in Alberta, five in the Prairies, 37 in Ontario, 22 in Quebec, 16 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

The New Democrats win 11 seats in British Columbia, two in Alberta, seven in the Prairies, 13 in Ontario, 33 in Quebec, seven in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

This would still give the Liberals and the NDP a combined majority of seats, but would place the NDP in a junior position. And while 29% and 33 seats is not great for the NDP in Quebec compared to their election result (though stellar compared to where they were a year ago), it could be worse.

Léger was last in the field December 13-14, and since then the NDP has dropped five points to 28% in Quebec, a very similar result and trend to what was identified in the Nanos poll.

The Bloc Québécois has picked up one point to close to within one of the NDP, and stands at 27%. The Liberals are up five points to 22%, while the Conservatives are down three to 15%.

Those are not dissimilar results to Nanos. It gives us a range of 28-29% for the NDP, 24-27% for the Bloc, 22-27% for the Liberals, and 15% for the Conservatives. That is relatively tight, but compared to other surveys conducted in January it is on the higher end for both the Liberals and the Bloc, and the lower end for the NDP. Nevertheless, Léger and Nanos have the most up-to-date data available.

The New Democrats have dropped among francophones (seven points to 26%), non-francophones (three points to 33%), in Montreal (four points to 30%), and in the rest of Quebec (nine points to 26%). This is problematic in every case, as it puts the NDP behind the Bloc among francophones and in the rest of Quebec, behind the Liberals among non-francophones, and in a close race with the Bloc and the Liberals in the Montreal area. The NDP has picked up one point in Quebec City, but they stand at 24%, seven points behind the Tories.

The Bloc is up two among francophones, in Montreal, and in the rest of Quebec. They are down six in Quebec City, however.

The Liberals are up four points among francophones and in the rest of Quebec, six points in Montreal and Quebec City, and 10 points among non-francophones.

The Tories have slipped two points among francophones and in Quebec City and five points in Montreal and among non-francophones.

These numbers would result in 27 seats for the Bloc Québécois, 25 for the New Democrats, 15 for the Liberals, and eight for the Conservatives.

Those are very problematic numbers for the NDP. Grafted on to today's parliament, it would reduce the NDP to only 68 seats in the House of Commons (the Liberals would increase to 42, the Conservatives to 169).

Being in the lead is still a good thing for the NDP, but they are in a very delicate position. By the time the next leader is chosen, he or she may take over a party in second or third place in Quebec unless things are turned around. The one advantage the NDP does have in this case, however, appears to be that neither the Liberals nor the Bloc are making their gains by anything but default. Neither party has really done anything to warrant a big increase in support.

The party can try to dismiss the polls considering the next election is still more than three years away, but during the years of the Bloc's dominance in Quebec a drop in support of this size would have been a major story. Much of the support the NDP gained in Quebec in the last election is relatively soft - it has to be, considering how quickly it turned from the other parties to the NDP. Waving away the results of these polls does not take anything away from what appears to be discontent among Quebecers with how the NDP has handled their new role in the province. The NDP ignores this discontent at their own peril.

Who can grow the NDP?

2012-01-30T11:19:00.000-05:00

Late last week, Abacus Data released a very interesting poll on the NDP leadership race. It wasn't about who should win or who would win, but rather whether Canadians were familiar with the candidates, whether they would induce them to vote NDP, and what they were looking for in an NDP leader.

Before getting into the nitty-gritty of the numbers, I invite you to take a look at my latest column in The Hill Times here on the opportunity that the current level of NDP support gives the next leader. You may need a subscription to read it, but The Hill Times is well worth it! Also, check out my round-up of polls in Alberta since the last election on The Globe and Mail website here.

The most important numbers in the NDP poll deal with name recognition. Are Canadians aware of the eight people vying for the job of Leader of the Opposition?

The answer is that a lot of them aren't. Fully 40% of Canadians did not recognize any of the eight leadership contenders. Thomas Mulcair's name was the most recognized, with 36% of Canadians aware of him. Brian Topp, who was a relative unknown when the campaign began, appears to have been successful getting his name out as 31% of Canadians recognized him. Paul Dewar came in third with 27%, while Peggy Nash was in fourth with 23% recognition.

About one-quarter to one-third of Canadians appear to be aware of the four frontrunners in the race. After that, however, it really drops off: 11% for Roméo Saganash, 9% for Niki Ashton, and 8% for Nathan Cullen and Martin Singh.

Among NDP supporters, people who should be more interested in the race, 35% were still unable to name one of the candidates. Among those who could, the order was not any different nor was the proportion who could recognize them. But every candidate except Nash had better or equal recognition among NDP supporters as they did among Canadians. That Nash had a lower recognition score among her party's own supporters is slightly odd.

Thomas Mulcair, of course, was top in Quebec at 67% recognition. Topp (31%) and Saganash (24%) followed. Atlantic Canadians were most familiar with Dewar (32%), while Singh got a good score (18%). Ontarians were most familiar with Dewar (36%) and Nash (33%), while western Canadians were most familiar with Topp (35%). Niki Ashton (15%) and Nathan Cullen (18%) had their best results among this group. Dewar's 30% was quite good as well, indicating he has decent name recognition across the country.

What was interesting is that Liberals were more aware of the race than NDP supporters - only 29% were unable to recognize a single the candidate. Conservatives were more indifferent, with 42% unable to name any of the candidates.

But it was the question of whether any of the candidates would make Canadians more likely to vote NDP that interested me the most. It speaks to growth potential for the NDP and among which groups each of the candidates might be able to make the most inroads.

First, I noted that 28% of Canadians "would never vote NDP". That is a surprisingly small number, and gives the NDP plenty of growth potential. The number was even lower in Atlantic Canada (22%) and Quebec (14%), but was higher in Ontario (30%), British Columbia (33%), and Alberta (55%). Nevertheless, the ingredients of an NDP majority do appear to exist.

But which leader is most likely to get them there?

Click on the image to magnify. The circles for each of the leaders are proportional to their recognition score. It shows quite clearly how the four frontrunners are very far ahead of the others.

Among all Canadians, Mulcair gets the best score in terms of being able to make people more likely to vote for the NDP (21%, most of it in Quebec). Topp is second with 10%. But it is more interesting to look at the breakdowns.

Thomas Mulcair would be best positioned to grow (or at least sustain) the party in Quebec, as 78% of Bloc supporters and 62% of Quebecers would be more likely to vote NDP with him at the helm. He also would be able to grow the party in the Prairies (18%) and could draw in the support of Liberals (18%) and Greens (16%).

Brian Topp, however, would bring in British Columbians (17% of whom said they would be more likely to vote for a Topp-led NDP), Atlantic Canadians (16%), Albertans (13%), and Conservatives (9%).

Paul Dewar gets the green light from Greens (21%), Atlantic Canadians (16%), Ontarians (15%), and Liberals (13%), while Peggy Nash attracts Ontarians (14%) and Liberals (10%) as well.

The other four would have far less potential for growth than the others. Roméo Saganash and Niki Ashton's best demographic are Prairie Canadians (8% and 10%, respectively), while Nathan Cullen and Martin Singh do best in their home provinces (10% in BC for Cullen, 3% in Atlantic Canada for Singh).

Each of the frontrunners, then, has the potential to grow the party in different parts of the country. According to this poll, New Democrats concerned with holding on to Quebec would be best to vote for Mulcair. Those who want to grow the party in the western provinces might like Topp, while Dewar and Nash could put the party in a better position in Ontario.

Brian Topp, however, might have the best all-around numbers. He is second in Quebec to Mulcair, though he is far behind at 8% who say they would be more likely to vote NDP with Topp as leader. He is also close behind Dewar and Nash in Ontario with 9%. But Mulcair is not badly position either. Though he ranks fourth in Ontario, he is better placed than Dewar and Nash in western Canada.

This poll does not provide any clues as to how the members of the NDP will vote, nor was it designed to. The members will choose who they think is the best person to lead their party, but Canadians will decide whether that leader is the best person to lead the country. The two decisions are, of course, connected.

Liberals up, NDP steady, Tories down

2012-01-27T10:13:00.000-05:00

Because the next election is more than three years away, four federal polls were released this week amid the heightened tension that the upcoming vote in 45 months has caused.

In all seriousness, though, this spate of new polls does give us a good idea of where Canadians stand as the 2012 political year starts to get going. The implications of these polls are, of course, relatively minor. But getting a bead on the mindset of Canadians is never a meaningless exercise.

Take a look at my article today on The Huffington Post Canada website here for a shorter overview of these polls, what trends they are showing, and what that might mean.

As we rarely get the chance to look at a series of polls taken over so short a time outside of an election campaign, let's examine these four federal surveys (by Abacus Data, Angus-Reid, Harris-Decima, and CROP) side-by-side.

The three Canada-wide polls were taken between January 12 and 22, surveying a total of more than 4,000 Canadians. The dates of the three polls all overlap with one another, except Abacus and Angus. As they both use online panels, that is perhaps a good thing.

The three polls run the gamut of scenarios. Angus-Reid gives the Conservatives an 11-point lead, with 39% to the NDP's 28%, while Harris-Decima gives them only a three-point lead, with 32% for the Conservatives and 29% for the New Democrats.

Since Abacus's last poll in early December, the Conservatives have dropped three points to 37%. The NDP has also dropped three points to 28%, while the Liberals are up three points to 21%. Angus-Reid was last in the field in September, and since then the Conservatives are unchanged, the NDP is down one, and the Liberals are up one to 22%.

Harris-Decima has the Tories down two since their early December report, while the NDP is up one and the Liberals are up three.

Though the Liberals don't exactly have the momentum of a runaway freight train ("Why are you so popular?"), this is a positive trend across the board in their favour. The New Democrats appear to be steady, while the Conservatives appear to be slipping.

British Columbia, however, is far less clear. The Conservatives ranged between 30% and 47% in the three polls, putting them either 12 points behind the NDP or 26 points ahead. This is what smaller samples can do.

The New Democrats ranged between 21% and 42%, while the Liberals ranged between 13% and 18%. Angus-Reid has the NDP up 10 points and the Conservatives down nine since August, while Abacus has the Conservatives up one, the NDP down 18, and the Liberals up 11 since December. Harris-Decima also shows wide variation, with the NDP up 11 points and the Conservatives down seven. That is a little too wild to conclude anything definitive, but we can certainly say that the race in British Columbia appears to be solely between the Conservatives and the New Democrats.

Alberta is a little more cut-and-dry, as usual. The Conservatives lead by between 44 and 57 points, with between 61% and 72% support. The New Democrats stand between 10% and 17% while the Liberals have between 11% and 17% support. This is where it gets a little muddier. Most polls have shown the NDP solidly in second in Alberta, but Harris-Decima shows the Liberals in second. Compared to everything else we've seen, that makes it a small outlier.

The Prairies pose another problem, but this is not new. Abacus Data shows the usual Conservative lead and relatively strong NDP showing, while Angus-Reid gives the Prairies to the Tories in a walk and Harris-Decima has a neck-and-neck race. Most recent polls have been between the results of Abacus and Harris-Decima, so we have to consider Angus-Reid to be the outsider on this one.

These are important differences. Angus-Reid would give most of Saskatchewan and Manitoba to the Conservatives, while Harris-Decima would actually split the provinces between the NDP and the Tories. This is one of the reasons why I expect Manitoba and particularly Saskatchewan to be more important in 2015 than they have been in a long time.

Ontario is slightly more in line. The Conservatives range between 35% and 42%, the Liberals stand between 29% and 34%, and the NDP between 24% and 26%. This generally jives with what other polls have been showing: the New Democrats are holding on to their gains while the Liberals have eaten into the Conservative lead. This is the major reason why the Liberals have been stronger in recent months.

Since August, Angus-Reid has the Conservatives unchanged at 42%, while the Liberals are up two and the NDP is down two. Since December, Abacus has the Conservatives down five while Harris-Decima has them down one. The Liberals are up four points according to Abacus and three points according to Harris-Decima, while Abacus has the NDP down three and Harris-Decima has them down one. In other words, the trends point to the Conservatives and (to a lesser extent) the NDP slipping in Ontario to the benefit of the Liberal Party.

We have a richer set of data in Quebec as CROP also reported this week with a survey of 1,000 Quebecers, at least twice as many as any other poll in the field. CROP also has the most up-to-date data, as it was in the field between January 19 and 23, overlapping with all three other polls but also stretching later than all of them.

Across the board, the New Democrats are leading with between 29% and 37%. Optimists might point to Abacus's 37% result, but the three other polls are far more in line with what the general trend has been since December.

The Bloc Québécois holds second in three of the four polls with between 21% and 23% support, a very tight grouping. The Conservatives have between 17% and 24% support, while the Liberals are also tightly grouped at between 17% and 19%.

In what direction the NDP is heading is difficult to say. Since August, Angus-Reid has the party down seven points. CROP also has them down seven points since their mid-December survey. But Abacus Data has them up one point since December while Harris-Decima has them up six. It would appear that the most likely situation is that the NDP is holding generally steady in the mid-to-low 30s.

The Bloc, however, seems to be slipping. Though Angus-Reid has them up two points since August, the three others that last reported in December have them either holding steady (CROP) or dropping (four points according to Harris-Decima, five according to Abacus). In any case, it does not seem that the Bloc is making any new gains, contrary to what seemed to have been the case in December.

The Conservatives seem to be holding, with no changes larger than two points since December (positive in the case of Harris-Decima and CROP, negative according to Abacus), while the Liberals have made three to four point gains in CROP and Abacus's polling. Harris-Decima has them down one, however.

This all seems to point to a general status quo in Quebec. That is good news for everyone but the Bloc, as the NDP slide seems to have stopped and both the Conservatives and Liberals are polling above the last election's result.

Finally, in Atlantic Canada the New Democrats lead by good margins in two of the three polls, and overall average between 27% and 42%. The Conservatives range between 26% and 30%, while the Liberals stand somewhere between 21% and 34%. With its small sample sizes and tricky three-way race, it is difficult to discern any real trend here. But the NDP has being doing well in the area recently.

Both Abacus Data and Angus-Reid see generally similar situations - a large Conservative minority. Abacus Data's polling would result in 147 Conservatives, 96 New Democrats, 60 Liberals, four Bloc seats, and one Green, using the current 308-seat boundaries. Angus-Reid's numbers would give 150 Conservatives, 101 New Democrats, 50 Liberals, six Bloc MPs, and one Green.

Harris-Decima, on the other hand, shows an extremely weak Conservative minority: 118 Conservative seats, 106 New Democrats, 77 Liberals, six Bloc, and one Green. Undoubtedly, this Conservative government would not last very long.

Broken down regionally, these three polls would give the Conservatives between 11 and 26 seats in British Columbia, with the New Democrats winning between four and 20 and the Liberals between four and five. The Greens win one seat in each of these three polls.

In Alberta, the Conservatives range between 27 and 28 seats, while the New Democrats could win one or none.

The Conservatives win between 12 and 26 seats in the Prairies, with the New Democrats winning between two and 11 and the Liberals between none and five.

In Ontario, the Conservatives range between 48 and 64 seats, the Liberals between 20 and 37 seats, and the NDP between 21 and 22 seats.

In Quebec, the New Democrats range between 39 and 52 seats, the Conservatives between eight and 16 seats, the Liberals between 11 and 13 seats, and the Bloc between four and seven.

And in Atlantic Canada, the Liberals range between nine and 17 seats, the New Democrats between five and 14 seats, and the Conservatives between nine and ten seats.

Taken altogether, the Conservatives range between 116 and 171 seats. This means they could win a majority government with these polls, or could even be replaced by the New Democrats, who range between 72 and 121 seats. I only see a 9% chance of an NDP victory, however.

The Liberals range between 45 and 78 seats, meaning they could potentially form the Official Opposition, while the Bloc ranges between four and seven seats. That keeps them out of official party status.

So what do all of these polls tell us? Generally speaking, Canadians haven't moved too much from where they were in May 2011. If they have moved, outside of Quebec it has been from the Conservatives to the Liberals while inside Quebec it has been from the New Democrats to either the Liberals or the Conservatives. Though it is somewhat more complicated than that, as we seem to have the NDP making gains in British Columbia and Atlantic Canada as well, this is what we're seeing.

But overall, the Liberals and NDP can take the most from these polls. The Liberals are showing signs of life, indicating that a future recovery is possible. The New Democrats are showing staying power, indicating that the next leader will not have to play catch-up, at least outside of Quebec. Of course, the Conservatives are still in control. But they have a majority government and are looking less towards 2015 than the other parties. There is nothing to worry them just yet, but the situations in British Columbia, the Prairies, and Ontario point to the potential for problems when Canadians next cast their ballots.

Two Alberta polls, two outcomes

2012-01-26T11:17:00.001-05:00

With the Alberta legislature set to get back to work on February 7 and the next election campaign likely to begin at the end of March, two polls were released this week for the province. One was by Forum Research and the other was by Léger Marketing. The two were radically different from one another.

Forum indicated that Progressive Conservative support stood at 38%, unchanged from their last poll in December. The Wildrose Party had gained six points to reach 29%, while the Liberals were up two to 14% and the NDP was steady at 13%.

But Léger Marketing found that Progressive Conservative support was at 53%, with the Wildrose Party at 16%, the NDP at 13%, and the Liberals at 11%.

Let's start with where these two polls agree. Both seem to have pegged NDP and Liberal support at about the same level, and even across the regional breakdowns the polls line up quite well. So, we can say with some confidence where the Liberals and the New Democrats stand.

But this race is going to be between the Tories and Wildrose, and on this score the two polls differ greatly. Léger gives the PCs a 37-point lead, while Forum gives them a nine point lead. That is the kind of difference that the margin of error cannot explain away.

Why are these polls so different? Forum uses the IVR method to conduct its polls while Léger uses an ~~online panel~~. EDIT: Léger uses an online panel for its Quebec and federal polls. In this case, Léger contacted Albertans by telephone. While that might be one reason for the difference, this kind of disparity should not happen. Both were taken at about the same time, with Léger in the field between January 13-18 and Forum in the field on January 17.

But the difference between a poll taken over six days and a poll taken over one day can be huge. A poll taken over a week will be less influenced by day-to-day events, whereas a poll taken on one day might be overly influenced by whatever was in the news that day or the day before. However, there does not appear to have been a major story that broke at around that time, so it is difficult to say what could have provoked such a backlash against the Tories to the benefit of Wildrose. There was some talk of dodgy political financing, but Léger should have captured that as well. If Léger had a day-by-day breakdown, we'd have a better idea of what happened.

There is a small difference in how Forum and Léger defines its regions, but aside from Edmonton (by my calculations, Forum's Edmonton numbers would be 38-20-17-17 if they used Léger's definition of the city) it does not change much.

Since Forum has shown little real change since their last poll from December while Léger Marketing seems to line-up with some of the other polls that were taken at the end of last year, we might have to conclude that there is a methodological reason for this difference. That does not help us determine which of these two polls is closer to the truth, unfortunately.

The polls do agree on a few things. Both Léger and Forum indicate that PC support is generally uniform across the two major cities and the rest of the province, while Wildrose is strongest in Calgary. They both indicate that the NDP is running second in Edmonton while the Liberals are also doing best in that city. Their support in Calgary, which was relatively high in the last election, appears to have bottomed out.

But, again, the problem is the margin between the Tories and Wildrose. Forum sees a very close race in Calgary and a close one as well in the rest of the province. Léger has the Progressive Conservatives romping to victory across Alberta.

This is reflected in the seat projections for these two polls. The projection model for Alberta is completed, and incorporates a few of the lessons of the 2011 provincial campaigns. The projection model is regional, breaking the province down into Edmonton, Calgary, and the rest of Alberta, and has a few other tweaks that differentiate it from the models used in past elections. I'll go into more detail when the projection model is fully launched.

I will start making projections for the Alberta election once the legislature returns. I am still working on a vote projection model that should bridge the gap between what the polls say and what the voters do.

Plugging these two polls into the model individually gives very different results. With the Forum poll, Wildrose would make a big breakthrough and form the largest opposition since 1997. With the Léger poll, the opposition ranks are reduced and the NDP becomes the second largest party in the legislature.

More specifically, with the Forum poll the Progressive Conservatives would win 65 seats, 18 of them in Calgary, 24 in Edmonton, and 23 in the rest of the province. The Wildrose Party would win 17 seats, half of them in Calgary and half in the rest of the province. They would be shut out of Edmonton. The New Democrats win four seats, all in the provincial capital, while the Liberals win only one.

With Léger's numbers, the Progressive Conservatives win the largest majority government in the province's history, with 81 seats. The New Democrats win four seats, all in Edmonton, while Wildrose wins only two (one in Calgary, one outside the two largest cities). The Liberals don't win a single seat.

As you can see, these are two very different scenarios. In the first, Wildrose is able to put up enough of a fight to win a good chunk of the province's seats, but they are still too thin to put up a real challenge to the Tories. In the second scenario, the Tories take advantage of a very divided electorate to win a huge majority.

Reconciling these two polls may be impossible. We'll have to wait for more data from other sources before we can say with any confidence what is going on in Alberta. What we do know is that the Tories are still very well placed to win yet another election in the province.

The Forum poll had an interesting breakdown of the approval ratings of the leaders. Both Alison Redford and Danielle Smith had net positive ratings, but whereas Smith had relatively uniform approval among both men and women, Redford has terrific approval ratings among women but has a negative approval rating among men. Gender does not appear to be an issue for Smith, but it might be for Redford.

Nevertheless, according to Léger Redford is still the favourite person to be premier at 37%. Smith is at 16% while Brian Mason of the NDP comes in third at 8%.

As we approach the election, more and more attention will be turned towards Alberta. If a scenario like Forum envisages plays out, it will be an interesting contest. Redford's Tories look pretty safe, so the real question will be how Smith performs during the campaign and whether the Liberals can survive.

Nash and Cullen make endorsement gains

2012-01-25T09:21:00.000-05:00

The NDP leadership race is starting to kick into a higher gear, with the next debate to be put on by the party scheduled for this weekend in Halifax. The race is starting to gain a bit of attention as the candidates are beginning to (mildly) differentiate themselves from one another. And in the past week a few major endorsements were handed out.

Peggy Nash has, by far, made the biggest gain this past week in the NDP leadership endorsement rankings, thanks to a handful of high profile labour endorsements.

Nash picked up the support of the Federations of Labour of Ontario, Alberta, Nova Scotia, and the Northern Territories for a combined membership of 924,000 people. That is huge, and in addition to the endorsement of the United Steelworkers Toronto Area Council (representing 13,000 people) gives Nash a major 56.2-point bump in the endorsement rankings, propelling her 6.8 percentage points to 25.6% and ahead of Thomas Mulcair. Nash now trails only Brian Topp.

Nathan Cullen also made a splash this week, the first of the second tier of leadership candidates to announce an endorsement in quite some time. Cullen received the support of two British Columbian NDP MPs, Fin Donnelly of New Westminster-Coquitlam and Alex Atamanenko of British Columbia Southern Interior. Donnelly is a two-term MP while Atamanenko is a three-term MP, giving Cullen an additional 12.5 points. He now stands at 4.3% of the total, up 1.7 percentage points. That puts him on top of the second tier, ahead of Niki Ashton.

(Click here to learn more about the endorsement system and here for how the points are awarded. And, as always, you can right-click the list of endorsers and open in a new tab or window to magnify it.)

Brian Topp also picked up a few endorsements from Chris Charlton, three-term MP from Hamilton Mountain, and former MP Bill Siksay. Together, that gives Topp an extra 9.5 points but with Nash's big gain he has still fallen 3.1 percentage points to 32.9% of the total, his lowest of the campaign so far.

Thomas Mulcair obtained only one endorsement this past week from the United Association Local 46, a union of 7,000 plumbers, steamfitters, and welders in the GTA. That gives him an extra 0.4 points, but he has dropped three percentage points to 20.6% and now stands in third behind Topp and Nash.

Without any new endorsements that are recorded by this system, Paul Dewar has fallen 1.8 percentage points to 12.4%, while Ashton is down 0.5 points to 3% and Roméo Saganash is down 0.2 points to 1.2%.

Receiving the support of labour organizations from across the country is a bit of a coup for Peggy Nash, who appears to be the labour candidate. She has more union support than any other candidate by a wide margin. By my count, Paul Dewar has the combined support of unions and organizations representing 480,000 people, Brian Topp has the support of a 250,000-strong union, and Thomas Mulcair has union support totaling some 20,000 (though he does have the support of several high profile former labour leaders). Nash's union support combines for more than 1.4 million union members.

Of course, some of these organizations overlap and not all of them are explicitly affiliated with the New Democratic Party. Nevertheless, Nash does seem to have the support of the labour world.

It's good news for Nathan Cullen that he picked up some caucus support, as his plan for combined NDP/Liberal/Green nominations is controversial within the party. Cullen has yet to receive the support of anyone from outside of British Columbia, however, a province already being mined for endorsements by Brian Topp and Thomas Mulcair, but also Peggy Nash, Paul Dewar, and Niki Ashton. Though he might get a good chunk of the British Columbia membership, he'll need more than that to survive late into voting day.

It appears likely that the first ballot vote will put Topp, Nash, Mulcair, and Dewar all in decent positions. The big question is what happens on the second ballot. At least one candidate will be forced to drop-off but more could as well, potentially throwing their support behind one or two of the other candidates. And if the membership sees that one candidate or another has under-performed expectations, their votes might bleed to one of the others that has emerged as a front-runner. Though a good deal of members will undoubtedly vote via mail, and so already have their second and subsequent choices recorded, the day of the leadership vote could nevertheless be quite interesting.

Hudak back on top

2012-01-24T09:04:00.001-05:00

It has been little more than three months since the last vote was held in Ontario, but already the pendulum has swung back in Tim Hudak’s favour. The good news for Premier Dalton McGuinty, however, is that Hudak has squandered an advantage before.

You can read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post Canada website here.

The article gives the poll a little context and looks at the stakes in the Ontario minority legislature. But let's look at the actual results of the poll.

If Forum wasn't releasing a poll-a-week, I'm not quite sure what we'd all do. But Ontario is in a minority situation, so it is probably a good idea to keep tabs on what's going on in the province.

This is the second poll to be released since the vote was held on October 6, the other having been put out in November by Innovative Research and finding that Ontarians had not yet changed their minds.

This poll, however, shows a big shift in support as the Progressive Conservatives stand at 41%, six points above their election result. The Liberals have fallen five points to 33%, while the NDP is down three points to 20%.

I don't have a model prepared yet for the next Ontario election, but this would likely result in a PC majority and a loss of seats for both the Liberals and the New Democrats.

The Tories are leading in eastern Ontario (51%), the 905 region of Toronto (44%), southwestern Ontario (38%), and northern Ontario (42%). They hold a narrow one-point edge over the Liberals in the GTA, which includes the 905 region.

The Liberals are only leading in the 416 region of Toronto, the core of the city (44%), while the New Democrats look weak in every part of the province. Most dangerously for them, they are behind both the Liberals and the Progressive Conservatives in northern Ontario.

But Andrea Horwath has the best personal numbers, with an approval rating of 40% and a disapproval rating of 28%. That gives her a net +12 approval rating, whereas both Dalton McGuinty and Tim Hudak are net negatives. Hudak has the lowest approval rating at 26%, but McGuinty has the highest disapproval rating at 56%. Hudak's disapproval rating stands at 48% while McGuinty's approval rating is at 33%.

Almost everyone in Ontario has an opinion on Dalton McGuinty, with only 11% unsure of whether they approve or disapprove of his performance. That contrasts quite a bit with Hudak (26% don't know) and Horwath (32%).

As I mention in the article, Tim Hudak has led the Liberals by wide margins before only to fall behind. At 41%, his party is at its highest level of support since the beginning of the last election campaign, while the Liberals hit 33% several times prior to the vote. In other words, this poll could have been pulled out of early September, suggesting that there's little that could be taken to the bank if the Tories somehow managed to force another election. I wouldn't bet against McGuinty if the campaign started today.

Just how big an electoral challenge do Liberals face in 2015?

2012-01-23T10:18:00.001-05:00

Buoyed by the energy of this month’s policy convention, Liberals across the country might feel compelled to look forward to the next election with enthusiasm. By then Stephen Harper will have been in power for almost 10 years and Canadians may embrace the next leader of the Liberal Party rather than one of the eight contenders currently vying for the NDP’s top job. However, for the Liberals to defeat the Conservatives in 2015 they need a comeback of historic proportions.

You can read the rest of the article on The Globe and Mail website here.

Some Liberals at the recent convention seemed to realize the enormity of the task ahead of them, but the idea that the Liberals could return to power in 2015 seems extremely unlikely. As this article shows, the Liberals would need to overcome the largest margin in Canada's federal electoral history to defeat a sitting government.

History is always ready to be re-written, and considering the exceptional nature of the 2011 election it is certainly possible that the 2015 election will be just as historic. At this point, though, it doesn't look like 2015 is lining up to be this sort of historic election, though admittedly 2011 wasn't looking like a historic year even a couple weeks before the vote.

That means 2019 should be the Liberal target. A sensible strategy would seem to be a return to Official Opposition status in 2015 and then a to return to power in 2019. Another minority in 2015 and some sort of governing coalition with the New Democrats, however, would radically change things. That is a far more likely outcome than a Liberal-led minority or majority government in 2015, but is something that the Liberals should probably not be exclusively pursuing.

Being second fiddle in a coalition makes it more likely that, in a subsequent election, the leading party in the coalition (i.e., the NDP) would be given power alone or that the opposition party (i.e. the Conservatives) would be returned to power. Unless the Liberals are setting their ambitions low, this is something that, for their sake, might actually be better avoided.

But 2019 is very far away. According to the polls, Bob Rae has been doing a good job as interim leader and if he becomes permanent leader he could do very well in 2015. He will be 71 years old in 2019, and if elected Prime Minister that year would be the oldest since Charles Tupper, who was 74 years old when he was sworn-in in 1896. Rae would actually be the second oldest Prime Minister in Canada's history. That means 2019 could be a historic election if 2015 doesn't make the cut.

Liberals gain in Forum poll

2012-01-20T09:14:00.000-05:00

The Toronto Star released the results of a new Forum poll yesterday, indicating that the Liberals have made gains since December. But it isn't as simple as that.

The poll found that the Conservatives have gained two points since Forum's last poll conducted on December 13. They now lead with 35%.

The New Democrats are up one point to 28%, while the Liberals are up four points to 25%.

You get a bump in the polls! You get a bump in the polls! Everyone gets a bump in the polls!

Why? In December, the Forum poll pegged Green support at 8% and support for other parties at 5%. Both numbers were a little high, but particularly the result for the Others. They have since dropped to more plausible levels of support, with the Greens at 4% and the Others at only 1%. Because of this, eight points were made available and everyone got a piece of the pie. Whether that is an indication of actual real growth by the Liberals (and the Conservatives, and the NDP) or not is a little fuzzy.

As Forum did not release any federal voting intentions before their December poll, we can't say very much about where the parties are heading.

To find out what this poll suggests about what Canadians think about the party leaders, however, you can read my latest article on The Huffington Post Canada website here.

One odd thing stood out when looking at the cross tabs of this poll: the Conservatives held an important lead (39% to 29% NDP) in the 18 to 34 age group. That seems a little unlikely, just as it seems unlikely that the New Democrats would lead (33% to 32% Conservatives) in the 35 to 44 age group.

The Conservatives have made a big gain in Ontario, picking up eight points since Forum's December poll to hit 41%. The Liberals (29%) and New Democrats (25%) are each up two points, largely because of the four point drop in support for the Others and the eight point drop in Green support. Again, it is difficult to discern any real meaning in this - it appears that this is more of a "reset" poll from some quirky results last time around.

It is the same situation in Quebec, where the "Others" has dropped from 8% to a much more plausible 1%. Accordingly, the gains have gone to everyone: four points for the Conservatives (22%), two points for the Liberals (21%), and a point apiece for the New Democrats (29%) and the Bloc Québécois (23%). Those results all generally line-up with what other firms have recorded, but Forum is seeing a much more bunched up situation in Quebec. Having four parties between 20% and 30% support is about as close as it gets.

The main reason for the Liberal gain, however, is British Columbia. Unlike some of the other provinces, this can't be blamed on a big change in support for "others". Instead, the Conservatives have dropped nine points to reach 30% and the NDP has dropped seven points to hit 32%, giving the Liberals an extra 17 points to put them at 30% support. But considering what we've seen from other surveys, I'd have to call this one a bit of an outlier until we see some corroborating results.

Elsewhere, the Conservatives have gained one point in the Prairies (including Alberta) and lead with 52%, but the NDP is not too far behind with 28%, a gain of five points. And in Atlantic Canada, the NDP is up eight points to 38%, the Liberals are up five to 32%, and the Conservatives are down three to 29%.

With these numbers and using the current 308-seat electoral map, the Conservatives win 141 seats and are reduced to a minority government. The New Democrats win 92 seats and the Liberals win 64 seats, while 10 go to the Bloc Québécois and one to the Greens (guess who!).

The Conservatives win 11 seats in British Columbia, 26 in Alberta, 18 in the Prairies, 63 in Ontario, 14 in Quebec, eight in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north. Whereas the western caucus (including the Conservatives' two northern MPs) is currently larger than the Ontario caucus, in this scenario the Ontario caucus would be larger. The party moves east?

The New Democrats win 14 seats in British Columbia, two in Alberta, eight in the Prairies, 22 in Ontario, 36 in Quebec, nine in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

The Liberals win 10 seats in British Columbia, two in the Prairies, 21 in Ontario, 15 in Quebec, 15 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

It will be worth watching British Columbia to see if there is anything really going on with the Liberals, and Quebec remains very fluid. But this poll generally jives with what others have shown recently and continues to show the two main changes since the May 2011 election: the New Democrats are slipping in Quebec and the Conservatives are no longer in a majority position.

Mulcair edges Nash in NDP leadership poll

2012-01-19T11:18:00.002-05:00

Forum Research and The National Post released a new NDP leadership poll last night, indicating that Thomas Mulcair remains the favourite of both Canadians and NDP supporters. But what does it mean?

Once again, the sample size of NDP supporters, particularly of decided NDP supporters, is very small. The small size of the sample gives the poll a relatively large margin of error, making it difficult to discern any trends since Forum last reported.

But among decided NDP supporters (which, I should emphasize, do not necessarily share the opinions of the NDP members who will actually choose the next leader), Thomas Mulcair leads with 36% support, down nine points since Forum's December survey.

Peggy Nash follows with 20%, up four points, while Brian Topp and Paul Dewar are tied for third with 11%. At the very least, this survey seems to confirm the perceived frontrunners. Whether that has more to do with name recognition than anything real, however, is impossible to say.

Roméo Saganash leads the next tier with 8% (+1), followed by Nathan Cullen at 7% (+3), Martin Singh at 4% (-1), and Niki Ashton with 3% (-5).

If we include the undecideds, however, which number 48% of NDP supporters, we get Mulcair at 19%, Nash at 10%, Topp and Dewar at 6%, Saganash and Cullen at 4%, Singh at 2%, and Ashton at 1%. It is noteworthy that among this group of NDP supporters, Mulcair is falling while Nash, Topp, and (especially) Dewar have made gains.

Among all Canadians, Thomas Mulcair is the preferred choice at 14%, followed by Peggy Nash at 6% and Brian Topp and Paul Dewar at 5%. Fully 62% have no opinion.

It may be a knock against him, but Thomas Mulcair is also the preferred choice of Conservatives (11%), Liberals (13%), and Bloc supporters (33%). That may also be an indication that he has the best chance of winning new support.

Regionally, and without removing the undecideds, Thomas Mulcair leads among NDP supporters in Quebec (42%) and Atlantic Canada (6%), where he is tied with Brian Topp. The Quebec number is actually quite astounding, as only 42% of NDP supporters in that province are undecided. That contrasts very sharply with the 65% of undecideds in Ontario, 69% of undecideds in the four western provinces, and the 81% of undecideds in Atlantic Canada.

Peggy Nash leads in Ontario (10%), while Topp leads in the Prairies (9%) and British Columbia (6%).

Obviously, Quebec is Mulcair's best region. Ontario is the best region for Nash and Dewar (9%), which should come as no surprise as, like Mulcair, that is their home region. The Prairies is the best region for Topp, which again is not surprising as Topp made his name with the Saskatchewan NDP. Oddly, British Columbia is the best region for Saganash (6%) but also for Nathan Cullen (5%), while Singh's best result came in Quebec (3%) and Niki Ashton's came in the Prairies (5%).

What this indicates is that, with the exception of Saganash and Singh, the native region of each candidate is the region where they have the most support. This might also be the case on the convention floor (virtual or otherwise), but it might also be caused by name recognition.

But what do these levels of support mean in the context of the NDP's leadership race? Mulcair's numbers are undoubtedly inflated due to his lead in Quebec, which at last count contains only 6% of the party's membership.

If we weigh the results of this poll by the proportion of members each region contains (based on the numbers the party last released), we get a much closer result:

19% - Thomas Mulcair
19% - Brian Topp
16% - Peggy Nash
13% - Paul Dewar
9% - Roméo Saganash
8% - Nathan Cullen
8% - Niki Ashton
6% - Martin Singh

This is also a quite plausible result. Mulcair's strength is diminished as Quebec gives him less real votes than either Ontario or the Prairies, and just as many as he earns in British Columbia. Topp, on the other hand, builds his support on the four western provinces, where he receives almost four-fifths of his votes. Peggy Nash is strongest in Ontario, as is Dewar, while Cullen banks on British Columbia and Ashton on the Prairies. Saganash's numbers are perhaps exaggerated by his B.C. result.

Whether or not these are the numbers we'll see on March 24, they do reveal the problem with Thomas Mulcair's campaign. He is overwhelmingly the favourite of Quebecers, but they can only give him so many votes. Topp may not be dominating east of Saskatchewan, but he is strong in the provinces that have a lot of members, while Nash and Dewar have a solid base in Ontario.

Based on information published in the media from Brian Topp's campaign, however, there does seem to be an indication that membership numbers in Quebec have ballooned to somewhere closer to 15% of the total membership. If that is truly the case, then Mulcair will have a very good chance of coming out on top, and perhaps by a wide margin, on the first ballot.

Where he'll end up on the second and subsequent ballots, however, is the real question. The other three frontrunners seem to have a higher chance of earning second ballot support, particularly Paul Dewar and Peggy Nash.

Mulcair's campaign is centred on expanding the NDP's support beyond its traditional base. He may also be expanding the NDP's membership in that way as well. But he'll still need more than 50% of the votes on March 24, and that means getting support from the rank-and-file members who were there long before Mulcair was even an MP.

Dewar closes in on front-runners

2012-01-18T09:10:00.000-05:00

In this week's NDP leadership endorsement rankings update, Paul Dewar makes a big leap forward with important endorsements out of Ontario and Manitoba. Thomas Mulcair also lands a few endorsements from both ends of the country.

But it was Dewar who made the biggest news this past week, thanks to the endorsement of Charlie Angus, four-term MP for Timmins-James Bay. Angus is one of the more well-known MPs in the NDP caucus and has been representing his riding since 2004. His endorsement awards Dewar ten points, but more importantly increases his caucus support to two MPs, both of them important figures in the party. Angus also helps Dewar in the all-important province of Ontario, joining former MP Tony Martin, current MPP Rosario Marchese, a couple labour unions and former Ontario NDP leader Mike Cassidy as supporters from within the Ontario wing of the party.

Mike Cassidy was the other important endorsement that Dewar picked up this week. Cassidy led the Ontario NDP from 1979 to 1982 and was MPP and then MP for Ottawa Centre from 1971 to 1988. This endorsements gives Dewar an extra 12 points, and is a good representation of the support Dewar should be able to call upon in some quarters of Ontario.

But Dewar did not stop there, he also announced the endorsement of three Manitoba MLAs: Andrew Swan, Deanne Crothers, and Matt Wiebe. This brings his total of endorsements from the Manitoba NDP to 13, more than a third of the province's NDP legislators. These three endorsements give him an extra 1.5 points.

In total, that bumps Paul Dewar up 23.5 points to 75.8 endorsement points, or 14.2% of all available endorsement points. That is a 3.8 percentage point gain since last week. He is now nipping at the heels of Peggy Nash.

(Click here to learn more about the endorsement system and here for how the points are awarded. And, as always, you can right-click the list of endorsers and open in a new tab or window to magnify it.)

Thomas Mulcair's most important endorsement from this past week comes from Don Davies, two-term MP from Vancouver-Kingsway. Mulcair already has the support of a few MLAs from British Columbia, but this is the first caucus support Mulcair has received from the province, home to a large proportion of the NDP's members. Davies's endorsement gives Mulcair an extra five points.

Mulcair also announced the endorsement of two northern Ontario figures, former MPP Elie Martel and former MP for Thunder Bay-Nipigon Ernie Epp. As former provincial legislators are not counted in the system, Mulcair gains two points from Epp's endorsement only. Nevertheless, the two of them give Mulcair more support in the northern part of the province, adding to the endorsement of MP John Rafferty.

Lastly, after getting the support of Herb Dickieson, former leader of the PEI NDP, Mulcair this week received only the second endorsement to come out of Atlantic Canada since Robert Chisholm, Nova Scotia MP and former head of the party in that province, dropped out of the race. Mulcair received the support of the PEI Federation of Labour, an organization the size of which I have been unable to discover. I've assumed that it is of similar size to that of the Manitoba Federation of Labour, proportionately speaking, so I've awarded Mulcair an extra 0.6 points on the assumption that the union represents some 10,000 Islanders.

In all, that gives Mulcair an extra 7.6 points in the endorsement rankings. Normally that would not be a bad week's work, but compared to Dewar's score it is relatively small. It does keep him treading water, however, as he has managed to gain 0.1 percentage points. He now has 125.9 points, or 23.6% of all available endorsement points.

That is important, as with a lack of endorsements coming out of any other camp the other candidates have all taken a step backwards in their share of endorsement points. Brian Topp is down 2.2 points to 36% and Nash is down 1.2 points to 18.8%. Niki Ashton (-0.2%), Nathan Cullen (-0.2%), and Roméo Saganash (-0.1%) have all dropped a little as well.

Paul Dewar is certainly on a roll, picking up major endorsements in the last few weeks. But both Brian Topp and Thomas Mulcair have tried to hold their own with endorsements of their own. Peggy Nash, at least in the endorsement race, appears to be falling behind.

Caucus support tells a somewhat different story, however. Mulcair has the largest crop of MPs behind him with 35, not including himself, giving him 39 election wins' worth of support. Topp comes up second with 11 MPs supporting him totaling 25 terms. Then it drops off by a huge extent.

Peggy Nash has six MPs behind her with a total of eight terms in office, while Paul Dewar has only two MPs supporting him, totaling six terms in office. But Niki Ashton (three MPs, three terms) and Roméo Saganash (two MPs, two terms) are in the same league in terms of caucus support. That tells us that, at least at this stage of the race, within the NDP caucus it is Thomas Mulcair and Brian Topp who are the real front-runners. On this score, Nash and Dewar have a long way to go.

However, it doesn't always go according to the whims of the caucus. Jack Layton and Adrian Dix did not win the leadership of their respective parties with more caucus support than their rivals. On the other hand, Greg Selinger and Andrea Horwath did.

There's a lot of campaigning still to go, and the Dewar camp has already hinted that they have some endorsements coming out of Quebec soon. And with the debates now starting to roll, things should begin to shake loose.

EKOS highlights eligible vs. actual voters

2012-01-17T08:58:00.002-05:00

Last week, EKOS released a series of poll results for iPolitics that were drawn from a survey conducted online in mid-December. Unfortunately, that makes these results slightly out of date but we can still take a look at them. I invite you to take a look as well at all of the other information contained in the expansive EKOS report, as it touches on much more than voting intentions.

This is the first publicly released report of federal vote intentions from EKOS since the May 2011 election, and the poll shows a much closer race between the Conservatives and the New Democrats than we've seen elsewhere.

The Conservatives finished with 31.4% support in this survey, compared to 29.5% for the New Democrats and 24.8% for the Liberals.

The Bloc Québécois stood at 6.7% while the Greens were at 6.1%.

But EKOS also filtered these numbers out according to who voted in the May 2011 election, weighing them accordingly. With those weightings, EKOS pegs Conservative support at 36.7%, with the NDP at 27.8% and the Liberals at 21.9%.

That is quite a big difference between the voting intentions of the general population and the voting population. It does not surprise me that there would be a disparity, though this is larger than I would have expected. This EKOS poll was taken at the same time as a Nanos poll (December 15-18), and EKOS's likely voter numbers are similar to what Nanos had found, though I believe Nanos reports the voting intentions of all eligible voters. Nevertheless, that Conservative support among actual voters would be far higher than it is among eligible voters jives with what we have seen in recent election results.

EKOS's main divergence from other surveys seems to be in British Columbia, where EKOS has the NDP leading with 35.9% to 29.1% for the Conservatives and 21.1% for the Liberals. Considering sample size, however, this is not problematic.

The poll confirms what we've seen in some other surveys taken at the end of 2011, notably that the race in Ontario is far closer than it was on election night, with the Conservatives at 34.6% to the Liberals' 31.9%. It also shows that the NDP has dropped in Quebec (34.4% to 27.4% for the Bloc) and that the Prairies are looking to be a real battlefield. In this poll, the margin between the Conservatives and New Democrats is tiny (42% to 38.7%).

Primarily because of the results in British Columbia and the Prairies, but also the close race in Ontario, these numbers would result in a small Conservative plurality of 118 seats. The New Democrats would take 103 and the Liberals 74, with 12 going to the Bloc Québécois and one to the Greens. If they could co-operate, the Liberals and NDP would be able to govern with a stronger majority than the Conservatives currently enjoy.

The Tories would take 12 seats in British Columbia, 26 in Alberta, 13 in the Prairies, 48 in Ontario, five in Quebec, 13 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north with these numbers. In a 338-seat House of Commons, they would likely win 133 seats.

The New Democrats win 17 seats in British Columbia, one in Alberta, 10 in the Prairies, 23 in Ontario, 46 in Quebec, five in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north. In the expanded Commons, they would likely win 111 seats.

The Liberals win six seats in British Columbia, one in Alberta, five in the Prairies, 35 in Ontario, 12 in Quebec, 14 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north. With the extra seats in the House, the Liberals would likely win 80 in total.

The EKOS results for the more likely voters would probably result in a much stronger Conservative minority, with the Liberals and Bloc Québécois making most of the gains at the expense of the Tories and NDP.

These are interesting results, and at the very least add another set of data showing that Conservative support has slipped since the election and that the NDP's support in Quebec is wobbly, though still enough to give them a majority of seats in the province. This may seem like an irrelevant point considering that the next election is more than three years away, but I'd counter that knowing how Canadians feel about the people and parties who govern them is worth knowing. And if the Conservatives increased their support to 60% or if they dropped to 10%, that would be a significant piece of information - even if it wouldn't change the make-up of our government for several years.

Note: The monthly federal polling averages chart has been updated to include this December 2011 EKOS poll.

CAQ on track for minority in three-way race

2012-01-16T10:10:00.002-05:00

Last week, François Rebello crossed the floor from the Parti Québécois to the Coalition Avenir Québec. Though François Legault gained a new MNA, picking up another member of the PQ might have actually hurt his levels of support in the province.

What are Rebello's chances of being re-elected now that he has crossed the floor? Check out my article today on The Globe and Mail's website on federal floor crossers here. The news is mixed for Lise St-Denis, who last week left the New Democrats for the Liberals.

Léger Marketing released a new poll over the weekend for the Journal de Montréal, taken January 11-12 and so shortly after Rebello's defection to the CAQ. The result is that the party has slipped four points since mid-December to 33%.

The Liberals have benefited with a gain of five points, and now trail with 27%. The Parti Québécois, meanwhile, is up one point to 25%.

Québec Solidaire is unchanged at 9% while the Greens have 3% support. Other parties, which would seem to include Jean-Martin Aussant's Option Nationale, also have 3% support.

The Liberals have gained eight points in the Montreal RMR and now lead with 35%. The CAQ has dropped two points to 29%, while the PQ is down another two points to only 19% support. At 11%, QS is closer to the PQ than the CAQ is.

In the Quebec City RMR, the CAQ is up three points to 46%. They really dominate the capital. The Liberals are up two points to 24%, while the PQ is down six points to 14%.

In the rest of Quebec, however, the PQ is up six points and now trails the CAQ by 34% to 36%. That is a seven point drop for the CAQ. The Liberals are up one to 18%.

Among francophones, the PQ is up three points to 31% while the CAQ is down four points to 38%. The Liberals are up one point to 17%.

Among non-francophones, the Liberals are up 16 points to 69%, trailed by a wide margin by the CAQ (12%).

With these levels of regional support (but not yet using the new electoral boundaries), the CAQ would win 47 seats, far short of the 63 needed to form a majority government. The Liberals win 38 seats and the Parti Québécois 37, a margin too close to say with any great degree of confidence who would form the Official Opposition.

Québec Solidaire would win three seats, all of them on the island of Montreal.

The CAQ wins 16 seats around Montreal, eight in the Quebec City RMR, and 23 in the rest of Quebec. Broken down more specifically, the CAQ wins 10 seats in western Quebec, two in eastern Quebec, 15 in and around Quebec City, 10 in central Quebec, none in Montreal and Laval, and 10 in Montérégie.

The Liberals win 31 seats in and around Montreal, two in the Quebec City RMR, and five in the rest of Quebec. More specifically, they win three in western Quebec, one in eastern Quebec, two in and around Quebec City, one in central Quebec, 26 in Montreal and Laval, and five in Montérégie.

The Parti Québécois wins five seats in and around Montreal, one in the Quebec City RMR, and 31 in the rest of Quebec, or 10 in western Quebec, 12 in eastern Quebec, two in and around Quebec City, five in central Quebec, four in Montreal and Laval, and four in the Montérégie.

If we look at which party wins each specific region of Quebec, we see a definite pattern. The CAQ wins Quebec City, the suburbs of Montreal, and the area between the two cities. In all, they win Lanaudière, Laurentides, Capitale-Nationale, Chaudière-Appalaches, Mauricie-Bois-Frances, and Montérégie. These are all relatively well-off, francophone regions that voted for the ADQ in 2007.

The PQ, on the other hand, wins Abitibi-Témiscamingue, Côte-Nord, Gaspésie, and the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean. These are relatively less well-off francophone regions that have long supported the PQ.

That leaves the affluent, more anglophone, and federalist regions of Quebec to the Liberals: Montreal, Laval, and the Outaouais.

The Bas-Saint-Laurent and Estrie are split evenly between the CAQ and the PQ.

With the francophone vote so close between the CAQ and the PQ and the Parti Québécois looking good in the regions of Quebec, the election would be between those two parties outside of the major centres. In the major centres, the Liberals dominate Montreal while the CAQ dominates Montreal's suburbs and Quebec City. In other words, a three-pronged campaign.

It is interesting to note that support for sovereignty was up in January to 43%, well above the combined 34% support that the Parti Québécois and Québec Solidaire enjoys. This is because, according to the Léger poll, about one-third of CAQ supporters are also sovereigntists.

Quebec continues to become more and more interesting - à suivre.

What happened to the Liberals in Quebec?

2012-01-13T09:30:00.001-05:00

As Liberals from across the country gather in Ottawa today for the start of their biennial convention, one question on almost everyone’s lips is whether Bob Rae will eventually turn his interim position as leader into a permanent one.

Few Liberals deny that Rae has done a good job or that, if he chooses to run in the leadership race scheduled to come to a conclusion in early 2013, he would be a good candidate to lead the party into the next election. That he is the best person for the job, however, is far from a consensus opinion.

But more than eight months after the Liberals were handed a drubbing in the last federal election, Bob Rae has undoubtedly kept the Liberal Party’s head above water. Eight months down, 46 more to go.

You can read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post Canada website here.

A new poll conducted by CROP for L'Actualité was released yesterday, investigating what Quebecers think have been the causes of the poor performances of the Liberal Party in recent elections. The results are interesting.

The most common answer is the one that Liberals themselves seem to have identified as their major problem in the past. Almost one-third, or 30% of Quebecers, said that the main reason for the Liberal decline was that their leaders have not been inspiring.

For party members looking for that next messiah, this would seem to back them up.

But it isn't as simple as that. Another 25% of Quebecers blamed the sponsorship scandal, which is now getting a little long in the tooth. Undoubtedly, these Quebecers know their history - it absolutely was the sponsorship scandal that sent the Liberals on their long trip south in the province. Whether that is still the problem, however, is more difficult to say. The scandal tarnished the Liberal brand in Quebec, and while the scandal itself may not be the reason today that Quebecers are not supporting the Liberals in large numbers, its effects appear to still be haunting the party.

This convention taking place over the next three days is about re-building and renewal, and that is what 14% of Quebecers said the Liberals have not managed to do. Another 12% blamed a lack of clarity the Liberals have had in their proposed policies.

Two per cent said that the Liberals were too left-wing and were trying to resemble the NDP, while 2% said that they were too right-wing and were trying to resemble the Conservatives. Make up your mind!

A last tranche of 15% said they did not know, an opinion that is probably shared by many members at the convention this weekend.

If we look at these another way, and taking out the "don't knows", we get 35% identifying leadership as the problem, 35% identifying policy and communication as the problem, and 30% identifying the sponsorship scandal. That sounds about right. There are more than a few causes of the Liberal decline in Quebec.

And a decline it certainly has been - but not just since the days of the Gomery Inquiry. Liberal support has waxed and waned since then. The Liberals averaged 17% support in Quebec in December. While that was their best result since April 2011, it is still half of where they were in May 2009. In that month, the Liberals averaged 34% support in Quebec and were nipping at the Bloc's heels. In December, the Liberals were fourth in support in the province behind the NDP, Bloc, and Tories, a position they have owned for the last eight months.

Weighing the polls (again)

2012-01-12T13:46:00.000-05:00

In the wake of the 2011 federal election, I took a look at what had been the Achilles' heel of my projection model at the time: the daily reduction in weight of a given poll. For the federal election, I reduced the weight of a poll by 7% per day. This was not aggressive enough to be able to adequately record the increase in New Democratic support in the final week of the campaign, throwing everything off.

Accordingly, after some analysis I decided to instead decrease the amount of weight given to a poll by 23% per day. This worked pretty well during the last set of provincial campaigns, enough so that it was not the cause of any major errors.

That does not mean that the daily weight reduction cannot be dialed in more accurately. However, polls in the five campaigns acted very differently from one province to the next. On the one hand, in Ontario, Manitoba, and (especially) Prince Edward Island, increasing the rate of reduction increased the degree of accuracy of the vote projection model. On the other hand, in Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador, decreasing the rate of reduction upped the accuracy.

The chart above records the total cumulative error of the projection compared to the vote results for major parties. This means that if the model is under-estimating the support of one party by two points and over-estimating the support of another by two points, that equates to a total error of four points. A daily rate of reduction of 0.75, for example, means a rate of reduction of 25% per day.

For the federal election, a rate of reduction of about 25% would have worked well. For Ontario, a reduction of around 40% or more would have been best, while 35%-40% for Manitoba would have yielded better results. For P.E.I., the accuracy increased with every increase of the rate of reduction, but for Newfoundland and Labrador and Saskatchewan it was the opposite.

What this chart shows is that over the six elections, a daily rate of reduction of between 30% and 40% would have yielded the best cumulative result of 43.7 points of total error. This indicates that, in the future, a daily reduction in this range would be best.

But how to decide? A reduction of 30% would have worked better in the federal, Newfoundland, and Saskatchewan campaigns, a reduction of 40% would have been the better option in Ontario, Manitoba, and Prince Edward Island.
What I've done in the chart above is rank each rate of reduction from one to six for each election. The lowest total when adding up these rankings, then, should tell us which rate of reduction would have had the better results across the board.

That turns out to be a reduction of 35% per day, or by a factor of 0.65. This is the top rate for Manitoba, and it ranks in the middle for every other election. Upping the rate of reduction to 40% would have been too much for the federal, Newfoundland, and Saskatchewan elections, while putting it to 30% would not have been the best result for anyone.

Moving forward, the vote projection model will be using this 35% daily reduction during a campaign. Outside of a campaign, I will be applying that 35% reduction on a weekly basis.

But that is only one part of the story. The next task is to figure out the difference between poll results and election results, so that the vote projection model can bridge the gap between the two. Stay tuned.

Dewar makes big gain in endorsement rankings

2012-01-11T08:56:00.000-05:00

This week's NDP endorsement rankings update has all four of the frontrunners on the move, but only Paul Dewar has made a gain in his share of the points with the endorsement of a large national union and a veteran MP.
Dewar's most important endorsement this week comes from the National President of the National Union of Public and General Employees, James Clancy. The union has a membership of 340,000 people, making it one of the largest in the country. That alone nets Dewar 20.4 points.

Another endorsement, presumably to be announced tomorrow, comes from Linda Duncan, the MP for Edmonton-Strathcona. Having been elected twice by the people of the riding, Duncan adds five points to Dewar's total.

If this endorsement does occur as expected, this will be a big one for Dewar. Unlike his other main rivals, Dewar has not had much support from the NDP caucus. Duncan will become the first sitting MP to endorse Paul Dewar for leadership. And as Duncan is the only MP for Alberta, this gives Dewar an edge on the more than 8,000 NDP members that were last reported to be in the province.

These two endorsements give Dewar a boost of 25.4 points, increasing his total to 52.3 points or 10.4% of all available endorsement points. That is a gain of 4.7 percentage points since last week, and puts him in the double digits. He is now 48.1 points and 9.6 percentage points behind Peggy Nash.

(Click here to learn more about the endorsement system and here for how the points are awarded. And, as always, you can right-click the list of endorsers and open in a new tab or window to magnify it.)

Nash has landed two endorsements of her own, one from Mike Sullivan, the rookie MP for York South-Weston, and another from Dany Morin, freshman MP for Chicoutimi-Le Fjord. This gives her an extra five points and increases her caucus support to six MPs, not including herself.

With these endorsements, Nash now stands at 100.4 points, or 20% of the total. That is, however, a 0.3-point loss since last week, owing to the major gain that Paul Dewar made.

Brian Topp also made a splash this week with the endorsement of former Saskatchewan NDP Premier Lorne Calvert. This gives him an extra five points and increases the net support out of Saskatchewan to 10 points, perhaps better reflecting the clout of the endorsement of one Roy Romanow. The endorsement points system is, after all, somewhat abstracted.

With Calvert's support, Topp now has 192 endorsement points or 38.2% of the total available. That is a drop of 1.7 percentage points since last week, again because of Dewar's gains, but Topp remains in the lead by a wide margin.

Thomas Mulcair has had a bit of a mixed week. The good news is that he received the support of BC MLA Leonard Krog, awarding one point to Mulcair's campaign. The bad news is that Lise St-Denis, the MP for Saint-Maurice-Champlain who endorsed Mulcair for leadership, has jumped ship to the Liberals. This means Mulcair has lost 2.5 points in the endorsement rankings, and has gained the stigma of having once had the support of someone who is now persona non grata in the NDP.

Mulcair has thus had a net loss of 1.5 points this week, dropping him to 118.3 points or 23.5% of all available points. That is a two percentage point drop since last week.

Niki Ashton (0.2%), Nathan Cullen (0.2%), and Roméo Saganash (0.1%) have all dropped slightly in their share of endorsement points as more have been added to the pile. None have landed new endorsements in some time. Martin Singh remains mired with zero endorsements.

With Paul Dewar now in the double digits and finally having some caucus support, he has a real, verifiable claim to being within the top tier. I'm not quite sure that Brian Topp is having as much trouble as some seem to think, as he continues to gain the support of important figures within the NDP. Perhaps the membership will revolt against this decision from on high, but with many debates still to come there is plenty of time for Topp to demonstrate that he belongs among the top contenders. Paul Dewar and Peggy Nash will also have quite a bit riding on the debates, as they need to show how they might look in the inevitable sparring matches against Stephen Harper.

Riding History: Toronto--Danforth

2012-01-10T09:22:00.002-05:00

Last night, the New Democrats chose Craig Scott as their candidate for the upcoming by-election in Toronto--Danforth. The by-election date has to be announced before the end of February.

This is the first of what I hope will be many riding histories. Each riding history will stretch back to Confederation, linking former ridings with ridings that exist today. With Toronto--Danforth heading towards a by-election, it seems like the perfect place to start - and Toronto--Danforth's history starts in the riding of Toronto East.

Toronto East did not share all of the geography of today's Toronto--Danforth, but the riding did encompass much of what today makes up the riding. The riding was one of the few in the country where the working class vote was an important one in the 1860s and 1870s, and Toronto East's first MP, James Beaty, was seen as a hero of the working class, despite having a fortune of some $150,000 in 1873 - a huge sum for the time.

Running as a Conservative in 1867, Beaty defeated a Dr. Aikins with 52.2% of the vote. Another candidate, a Mr. Allen, received a single vote (presumably himself).

Beaty was a merchant and newspaper owner, head of the Leader who had no less a figure than George Brown as his prime antagonist. He was born in Kileshandra in Ireland in 1798 and his nephew, born in Upper Canada in 1831 and also named James, went on to be twice elected as MP for Toronto West in 1880 and 1882.

Beaty moved to Toronto in 1818 when the city had a population of only 500, but by the 1870s the city was a major centre with a large working class. The Leader stood on the side of the strikers during one particular work stoppage, and that was undoubtedly a factor in Beaty's success in the 1872 election.

Beaty faced off against John O'Donohue in an election Beaty would call "a hard and bitter fight." He did not stay long in office, however, retiring shortly after Sir John A. MacDonald left office in the wake of the CPR scandal. In an interview after his retirement from politics and business, Beaty said that he was "hopeful that I will be spared to see Toronto become a still greater city than it is at the present."

O'Donohue ran again as a Liberal-Conservative in 1874 and won with 52.8% of the vote against Emerson Coatsworth. It appears that this may have been the father of Emerson Coatsworth Jr., who would win the riding under the Conservative banner in 1891. O'Donohue was another Irish-born MP. He would eventually be appointed to the Senate by MacDonald in 1882.

For some reason, the 1874 election was declared void and in a subsequent by-election in 1875 Samuel Platt, another Irishman, defeated O'Donohue with 58.7% of the vote. Platt was re-elected in 1878, with the records not indicating whether either Platt or his opponent, Ed Galley, belonged to any particular party.

Platt did not re-offer and in 1882 John Small was elected as a Conservative. He would be re-elected in 1887 against the first Liberal candidate on record for the riding.

Emerson Coatsworth then took over for Small in 1891, winning 63.1% of the vote, the most yet seen for any one candidate in this riding. Coatsworth was defeated in 1896 by John R. Robertson, but would eventually go on to be Mayor of Toronto from 1906 to 1907.

Robertson was an Independent Conservative in the 1896 election, but he did not run again in 1900 when Albert E. Kemp, who would be the longest serving MP in the history of Toronto East and its successor ridings down to Toronto--Danforth, was elected. The 1900 election was also the first appearance of a third party on the ballot: Labour.

Kemp was re-elected in 1904 but was defeated by Joseph Russell, an independent, in 1908. Kemp ran again in 1911 and defeated Russell, who would go on to be an MPP for Riverdale in 1914. In Robert Borden's cabinet, Kemp was Minister of Militia and Defence from 1916 to 1917 and Minister of the Overseas Military Forces from 1917 to 1920, Toronto East's first full cabinet minister. Kemp was named to the Senate in 1921 by Arthur Meighen.

Edmond B. Ryckman continued the Conservative dominance of Toronto East in 1921, in an election that featured the first female candidate. Elizabeth Bethune Kiely, "housewife", was the Liberal candidate but received only 52 votes. Perhaps because she was a woman, the Liberal vote instead went to an independent "gentleman" and to the Progressive Party candidate.

Ryckman was re-elected three more times, taking over 80% of the vote for the Conservatives in 1925 and 1926. He was briefly Minister of Public Works in 1926 and was Minister of National Revenue from 1930 to 1933.

Ryckman passed away while in office (sadly, he would not be the first to die in office while representing this riding) and in the by-election of 1934 he was replaced by Thomas L. Church. The Conservative candidate defeated the Liberals with 46.3% of the vote to 37.5%. This by-election is also notable for it being the first appearance of the CCF. The party received 16.3% of the vote.

Church was not a political neophyte, having been Mayor of Toronto from 1915 to 1921 and the MP for Toronto North and Toronto Northwest from 1921 to 1930, when he was defeated. Toronto East gave him the chance to return to the House of Commons.

By 1935, Toronto East was split into the ridings of Broadview and Greenwood, and Church ran as the incumbent for the riding of Broadview in the election that year. He was re-elected in 1935, 1940, 1945, and 1949, barely holding on to his riding in a real three-way race in that year. He took 37.9% of the vote to Liberal candidate Ruth Radford's 33.6% and the CCF's George Grube, who took 27.5%.

Church passed away and in the 1950 by-election the Progressive Conservatives returned in force, taking 48.1% of the vote under George Hees. Hees was re-elected four more times and sat as Minister of Transport from 1957 to 1960 and Minister of Trade and Commerce from 1960 to 1963.

But in 1963, Hees lost the riding for the Progressive Conservatives to the Liberal candidate, D.G. Hahn. Aside from the election of a few independents prior to the First World War, this was the first time that Broadview/Toronto East was not represented by a Conservative. Hahn took 40.9% of the vote to Hees' 31.3%, while the NDP's John Gilbert took 26.1% of the vote. Hees did not leave politics, however, being elected seven more times as MP for Northumberland and Prince Edward Hastings. He would eventually receive the Order of Canada.

Hahn did not stay in office long, however, being defeated by the NDP's Gilbert in 1965. From this point on, the riding would forever be a contest between the Liberals and the NDP. Gilbert won with 39.7% of the vote. Gilbert would be re-elected three more times, always taking between 40% and 42% of ballots cast. He resigned in 1978, and Bob Rae was elected under the NDP banner in a by-election held that year. It was a close race, with the PC's Tom Clifford losing by only 420 votes. Rae would be re-elected in 1979 and 1980, keeping the NDP's support at the 40% or so it held steady at from 1965 through to 1984.

Rae resigned from office to become the leader of the Ontario NDP. He was Official Opposition Leader in the Legislative Assembly from 1987 to 1990 and Premier from 1990 to 1995. He is now, of course, interim leader of the Liberal Party and MP for Toronto Centre.

By 1979, Broadview had been incorporated into a new riding called Broadview--Greenwood. In the by-election of 1982 following Rae's resignation, Lynn McDonald was elected for the NDP with 39.1% of the vote. She faced stiff competition from independent candidate Peter Worthington, then editor of the Toronto Sun and today still a columnist for that newspaper. Worthington had tried to capture the Tory nomination but had failed. He would eventually get that nomination and run again in 1984 for the Tories, when he was again defeated by McDonald. That election, in which the Tories took 34.7% of the vote, was the last in which the party was a real factor in this riding.

Broadview--Greenwood elected a Liberal for only the second time in its history in 1988, when Dennis Mills narrowly defeated McDonald. Mills was re-elected in 1993 with 61.1% of the vote, the best the Liberals have ever done in this riding, and again in 1997 and 2000. In the 1997 election, however, he was tested by the NDP's Jack Layton.

The riding's name changed to Toronto--Danforth in 2000 and in 2003 it was re-organized into the riding we know today. But in 2004, Mills was defeated by Layton, 46.3% to 41.3%. Jim Harris, leader of the Green Party, was a candidate in Toronto--Danforth in 2004, and took 5.4% of the vote.

Layton was re-elected in 2006 and 2008 with 48.4% and 44.8% of the vote, respectively, before winning with 60.8% of the vote in 2011, the best performance by an NDP/CCF candidate in the riding's history. Layton was, of course, leader of the New Democrats from 2003 until his passing in 2011, when he was briefly Leader of the Opposition. Layton's wife, Olivia Chow, is currently the MP for Trinity--Spadina while his father, Robert Layton, was the MP for Lachine and Lachine--Lac-Saint-Louis from 1984 until 1993. His great-great-uncle William Henry Steeves was named a senator in 1867.

Toronto--Danforth and its predecessors has had its fair share of stellar MPs, including cabinet ministers, mayors, party leaders, senators, and premiers. George Hees and Thomas L. Church were elected most often in the riding, with five elections each to their names. Undoubtedly, Jack Layton would have tied them in 2015.

Because of its attachment to the Conservative Party from 1867 until 1963, the Conservatives (and Progressive Conservatives) have won the riding most often: 24 times. The New Democrats have dominated the riding since 1965, and have won it 13 times. The Liberals have won it five times, while Independents have won the riding three times.

Since 1934, when the CCF first appeared, the New Democrats (including the CCF) have averaged the highest share of the vote with 32.1% in contested elections. The Liberals come a close second with 32%, while the Conservatives (including the PCs, Reform, and Canadian Alliance) have averaged 31.7% of the vote. It has been a three-way race over the last 78 years primarily because each party has had its turn in the sun: the Conservatives for the first 100 years, the Liberals under Mills, and the NDP since the 1960s.

With the exception of Mills' time in office, the chart at the top of this post shows how the New Democrats have been remarkably steady in the riding since 1965. Between that election and 1988, the NDP always took between 36% and 46% of the vote, a tradition Layton continued until last year's spike. The chart also demonstrates that the Liberals have been on an almost constant decline since 1993, while the Conservatives have not been a factor since 1984 - though it is interesting to see how dominant they were before the election of D.G. Hahn in 1963.

Though the riding's boundaries have changed since 1867, there is a common geography for Toronto East, Broadview, Broadview--Greenwood, and Toronto--Danforth. There is also a common link of MPs, making Toronto East the ancestor of the riding that will soon by contested in a by-election. The successor of James Beaty, quite fittingly a "hero of the working class", was Jack Layton until 2011. It seems quite likely that Craig Scott will soon be the successor of Beaty and Layton.

Saskatchewan: Projection vs. Results

2012-01-09T11:27:00.000-05:00

The election in Saskatchewan was held a little more than two months ago, so I apologize for the lateness of this analysis. It is a bit of necessary housekeeping, however.

If this sort of post-mortem is not of interest, I invite you to read my article today on The Globe and Mail website here. It takes a somewhat quirky approach to analyzing the NDP leadership race.

Saskatchewan was always going to be the easiest to project of the five provincial elections held in 2011. A massive win by Brad Wall was a foregone conclusion, while the New Democrats were the only ones capable of forming the Official Opposition. The real challenge was nailing down the number of seats, which in the end proved somewhat more difficult than I had expected. But the projection for Saskatchewan was, in fact, one of the best for the projection model.

Of course, Brad Wall's Saskatchewan Party did win its majority government, taking more seats and more of the vote than expected. Dwain Lingenfelter's NDP was handed a major defeat as Lingenfelter himself was defeated in his riding. The NDP leader stepped down shortly afterwards.

ThreeHundredEight projected 43 seats for the Saskatchewan Party and 15 for the New Democrats. Instead, the SP won 49 and the NDP only nine. The biggest problem in the model was, as will be shown, the difficulty in forecasting the SP's support in Saskatoon and especially Regina. In the rural parts of the province, the model did exceptionally well.

But with the actual provincial vote the projection would have been no different: 43 SP and 15 NDP.

The model was off by six seats per party, which is a relatively large amount. But the model only made six incorrect calls, all going the same way. This gave the projection a riding accuracy of 89.7%, which is one of its better results.

The seat ranges suggested that the NDP could do better than projected but only slightly worse. The reality was quite different, however.

The seat ranges with the actual provincial vote, on the other hand, were much better: 43-48 for the Saskatchewan Party and 10-15 for the New Democrats. That was much closer to the end result.

The projection model under-estimated Saskatchewan Party support by 1.8 points, forecasting 62.4% to the actual 64.2%. It over-estimated NDP support by 1.6 points and Green support by 0.2 points, for an overall error of 1.2 points per party. That is quite acceptable, and one of the model's best results.

The chart above summarizes some of the results of the individual riding projections for each party.

Overall, the average victory margin in the six wrong calls was 8.4%, a relatively large amount. But aside from these six ridings, the model performed very well.

Projected Results

Every riding projection for the Greens was within 5% of the actual result, while almost four out of every five NDP projections was within that margin. Another three-quarters of SP projections was within 5%. In all, 67.2% of ridings were projected to within 5% for every party. That is the model's second best performance, ranking only behind Manitoba 2011.

On average, the Saskatchewan Party was under-estimated by three points in each riding, while the NDP was over-estimated by 2.4 points. The Greens were slightly over-estimated by 0.3 points per riding.

The margin of error per party per riding was +/- 2.8%, again the model's second best performance after Manitoba.

The real problem was in the cities. Whereas the model was off by an average of +/- 2.0% per party per riding projection outside of Regina and Saskatoon, within those cities the model was off by an average of +/- 3.9%. If we just concentrate on the SP and the NDP, that margin of error in the cities was +/- 5.6%. The need for a regional model becomes all the more apparent - the polls with regional breakdowns had indicated that the SP's support was higher in the cities than should have been expected by province-wide trends.

The model did make many close calls in individual ridings. In three of them, the projections for the Saskatchewan Party, the NDP, and the Greens were all bang-on. Two of them were rural (Batoche and Wood River), while one of them was urban (Saskatoon Massey Place). In six other ridings, the average error per party was less than 1%.

The projection for the 2011 Saskatchewan election was, in the end, a good one, with the exception of the model's performance in Regina. A few tweaks to incorporate regional data, which are being made in models for other provinces going forward, would have resulted in a very close projection. This makes the Saskatchewan projection a qualified success - the problems are easily recognizable and avoidable for the future.

December 2011 federal poll averages

2012-01-06T10:33:00.000-05:00

Though there has been little change at the national level since November, significant shifts in support did take place in Ontario and Quebec in the last month of 2011 - at the expense and benefit of different parties.

Six federal polls were released during the month of December. Four of them were national polls and two of them were Quebec-only polls. In all, 6,171 Canadians were surveyed in the six polls.

The Conservatives slipped 0.6 points since November and led with an average of 35.5% last month. The New Democrats were down 0.5 points to 28.5%, while the Liberals were down 1.6 points to 21.9%.

The Greens picked up 0.9 points and stood at 6.1%, while the Bloc Québécois gained 0.7 points to reach 5.6% support nationally.

The Conservatives continue to slide in Ontario, dropping 1.7 points since November to 36.4%. This is much lower than the 42% the party had in October. The Liberals dropped 3.8 points to 29.3% in December to the benefit of the NDP. They were at 26.6%, up 3.7 points since last month and their best result since September. The Greens were up 1.9 points to 6.4%.

But while the NDP is up in Ontario, they are dropping in Quebec. The party stood at 45% support in September and October, but they dropped to 32.7% in December, down 4.3 points since November alone. The Bloc Québécois, at 24% (up 1.1 since November), reached their highest level of support since before the May 2011 election. The Conservatives were up 0.5 points to 19.5% while the Liberals were up 1.4 points to 17.4%. That is the best Liberal score since before the election as well. The Greens picked up 1.3 points to reach 4.5%.

There was little real change in British Columbia in December, as the Conservatives picked up 1.9 points and averaged 38.6% in December. The New Democrats picked up 2.1 points to reach 34.6%, their highest total since August 2011. The Liberals were down 1.5 points to 15.9%, while the Greens were down 3.5 points to 9.6%. They had previously been at their peak last month since January 2011.

Atlantic Canada remains a close three-way race, as the Conservatives dropped 0.9 points to 33.6%. December was the third consecutive month of Tory decline in the four Atlantic provinces, however. The New Democrats dropped 4.5 points to 30.3%, their lowest result since the May 2011 election. The Liberals were up 2.7 points to 27.9%, while the Greens were up 2.5 points to 5.1%.

Alberta's voting intentions have been steady, with the Conservatives dropping only 0.3 points to 60%. The New Democrats were up 0.9 points to 19.6% while the Liberals were down 1.4 points to 10.4%. The Greens were stable at 7.1%.

The Conservatives recovered their losses from November in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, gaining 6.5 points to reach 47%. The NDP dropped 3.7 points to 30.4% while the Liberals were down 2.5 points to 15.5%. The Greens were up 2.3 points to 7.1%, their highest level of support since February 2011.

With these levels of support and using the current 308-seat electoral map, the Conservatives win 140 seats, a gain of six since November but a loss of 26 compared to their current standing in the House of Commons.

The New Democrats win 100 seats, a drop of two compared to November. The Liberals win 61 seats, seven fewer than they were projected to win in November but nevertheless 27 more than they currently hold.

The Bloc Québécois wins six seats, a gain of three since November, while the Greens win one.

The Conservatives win 19 seats in British Columbia, 27 in Alberta, 19 in the Prairies, 52 in Ontario, eight in Quebec, 14 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

The New Democrats win 12 in British Columbia, one in Alberta, six in the Prairies, 24 in Ontario, 50 in Quebec, six in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

The Liberals win four seats in British Columbia, three in the Prairies, 30 in Ontario, 11 in Quebec, 12 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

But based on the level of uncertainty and error both in the projection and the polls, the Conservatives could win as few as 115 seats or as many as 189. This means that everything from Official Opposition to another majority is possible from these numbers, though a result around 140 is the most likely.

The New Democrats could win as few as 55 seats or as many as 126. This means an NDP minority government is possible with these numbers, though very unlikely. It is also possible that the NDP could finish behind the Liberals in terms of seats. That is more likely than the NDP coming out ahead of the Tories.

In all, the Conservatives would have about an 85% chance of forming government based on these numbers, while the NDP would have a 15% chance.

The Liberals could win as few as 26 seats or as many as 85, making it possible for them to surpass the NDP as the Official Opposition. However, they could also drop behind the Bloc Québécois as their seat range stands at between zero and 31 seats. The Greens could win between one and two. The potential exists, then, for the Greens to win more seats than the Bloc.

As the chart above shows, there is far more overlap between the New Democrats and the Liberals than there is between the Conservatives and the NDP. That is not to say that the battle is one between the NDP and the Liberals. Most of the NDP battles are against the Tories and the Bloc, while most of the Liberal battles are against the Conservatives (mostly in Ontario). The New Democrats, thus, have the most to gain but also the most to lose. I imagine that is going to remain a constant right through to 2015.

The rise of the B.C. Conservatives?

2012-01-05T09:53:00.000-05:00

Just before Christmas, two polls were released concerning the provincial situation in British Columbia. One is problematic, and I'll get to that later, but the other shows that the B.C. Liberals and the B.C. Conservatives are tied, well behind the B.C. New Democrats.

This is the first Forum Research poll for British Columbia that I've recorded. It shows the New Democrats ahead with 34%, well below were some of the other polls have situated the NDP. Nevertheless, they have a healthy 11-point lead.

The Liberals and the Conservatives are tied with 23% apiece, a horrible result for Christy Clark but a wonderful one for John Cummins. The Conservatives have not done better than 18% in any poll, but considering that the party has been put in the mid-teens recently it is not unusual to have them so high in this survey.

Oraclepoll had the Liberals at 25% at the end of November, so for Forum to have them so low is also not unlikely. Forum and Oraclepoll are also on the same page when it comes to the Greens.

But one problem we've seen lately in Forum's polls is that the "Other" results are unrealistic. The Alberta poll from December had the Others at 9%. Here it is a more reasonable 5%, but that is still at least three points too high. We've seen these kinds of results in other IVR polls. Perhaps it would be best for firms using the IVR method not to give respondents the "Other" option.

Forum has the NDP ahead of the Liberals and Conservatives by significant margins in most parts of the province, though the 32% to 27% split between them and the Conservatives in the Interior/North is somewhat close. The Liberals are tied with the Conservatives in Vancouver and the Lower Mainland, but are ahead of them on Vancouver Island.

The problem appears to be, in part, one of leadership. Clark has an approval rating of only 29%, with 45% of respondents disapproving of her job as premier. Adrian Dix, on the other hand, has a 37% approval rating as leader of the NDP, compared to 28% disapproval. John Cummins, head of the Conservatives, has a 23% approval rating to 32% disapproval.

A complete model for British Columbia is not yet ready, but a simple model gives the New Democrats a majority government with these numbers. They win 57 seats, with the B.C. Liberals taking 18 and the Conservatives winning eight. Two independents are also elected.

It should come as no surprise that the NDP would win by such a large margin against a divided electorate. How the Liberal and Conservative vote will fall, however, is a little trickier. If they have some good candidates they should be electable at this level of support, but I imagine with less of a profile and being a completely new party, they will have some difficulty getting enough support to defeat sitting MLAs in individual ridings.

The other poll released just before Christmas was by the NRG Research Group, a polling firm of which I am unfamiliar. I have a real problem with this poll.

NRG decided to leave the Greens off the survey because the party has opted not to run in by-elections. This, they say, gives a "realistic scenario of the political situation at this time." That is ridiculous. Unless NRG is only polling in ridings where by-elections are scheduled, leaving the Greens off the survey completely (there is no "Other" option in this IVR survey, though they combined "None of the Above" with undecideds) distorts the political situation entirely. When the next provincial election rolls around the Greens will be presenting candidates. Just because they have decided not to contest by-elections does not mean they are no longer a viable party or that anywhere from 5% to 15% of British Columbians intend to vote for them. It boggles the mind.

The results that the poll did yield were 36% for the New Democrats, 32% for the Liberals, 19% for the Conservatives, and 13% "NotA/Undecided", though the preamble in the report only calls that 13% undecided. Transforming that 13% into the Green vote is far too much of a leap for my taste, making this an incomplete survey and one that I wouldn't include in my projection model if it were currently running.

NRG has the NDP leading on Vancouver Island and the North Coast, as well as in the Interior. The Liberals lead in the Lower Mainland, while Conservative support is generally uniform.

But what Forum and, to some extent, this NRG poll suggest is that the B.C. New Democrats have a solid lead going into the last (and only) full year of Christy Clark's Liberal government. It also suggests that the B.C. Conservatives will be an important factor when the next election is held in 2013. One wonders whether Cummins will be handing the NDP a victory by splitting the right-of-centre vote. Perhaps that is too simplistic a view - if the Conservatives were not on the scene would the anti-Liberal vote coalesce around the NDP anyway?

What we know for sure is that the next election in British Columbia should be an interesting one. The last round of provincial elections were relatively ho-hum, but with Alberta, Quebec, and British Columbia on the docket in the next 18 months things are looking up.

Tory and NDP slippage gives Liberals a polling boost in key provinces

2012-01-04T10:16:00.000-05:00

Entering the New Year, the Conservatives continue to hold a solid lead over their rivals on the opposition benches. But 2011’s two big winners have taken a step backwards as 2012 begins, permitting the Liberals to move forward with gains in Canada’s two largest provinces.

An aggregation of every public opinion poll released since the May 2 election, heavily weighted toward the most recent data, indicates the Conservatives have the support of 36 per cent of Canadians, down 3.6 points since the election and 2.2 points since Nov. 2, 2011.

You can read the rest of the article, detailing my latest federal vote and seat projections, at The Globe and Mail website here.

Before getting to this week's update of the NDP endorsement rankings, let's take a deeper look at the projection featured in this article.

Using the widest margin required to have given the proper seat ranges to the parties in the last Ontario election, which featured ridings of similar size to that at the federal level, I calculated what the seat ranges are for this projection as well.

Though the most likely outcome is the 140-99-63-5-1 seat distribution described in the projection, the Conservatives could win as few as 109 seats and as many as 187, based on the degree of error that the projection model has had in the past (and this includes the degree of error the polls have had as well).

Of course, winning as few as 109 seats or as many as 187 is very unlikely. The most likely outcome is 140 seats or close to it.

The New Democrats could win as few as 56 seats or as many as 128, meaning that they could potentially win more seats than the Conservatives.

The Liberals could win as few as 29 seats and as many as 88. At their current levels of support it does not appear that the Liberals could do much worse than their 34-seat performance in May 2011. They could, theoretically at least, surpass the NDP.

The Bloc Québécois seat range stands at between one and 27 seats, while the Greens could win one or two.

In addition to calculating the range, I also recorded what kind of races current levels of support would yield.

Of the 140 seats projected to be won by the Conservatives, 31 are considered close enough races that the projection could make the wrong calls. Interestingly, however, they are spread relatively evenly between the New Democrats (17) and the Liberals (14). But of the 47 ridings in which the Conservatives are trailing by a close margin, 28 of them are Liberal, 16 are NDP, and three are projected to be won by the Bloc Québécois.

This means that in a defensive campaign, the Conservatives would need to fight off both the New Democrats and the Liberals in order to save what they could. But in an offensive campaign, the Conservatives would mostly be targeting Liberal ridings or ridings in which the Liberals stand to win seats back from the Tories.

It is a very different situation for the New Democrats. In the 43 seats in which they lead by close margins, in 19 of them they are being chased by the Bloc. In another 15 they are trailed by the Conservatives and in nine the Liberals are not far behind. This means that a defensive campaign would mostly be fought in Quebec, primarily against the Bloc, but that the NDP would also need to fend off the Tories and the Liberals.

Of the 29 seats in which the NDP is trailing, however, 17 of them are projected to be won by the Conservatives. Another nine are Liberal while three are projected to vote Bloc. That means that if the NDP is moving to gain seats they need to win them mostly from the Conservatives.

For the Liberals, they are being chased in 27 ridings by the Conservatives and in only six by the NDP. In one riding the Bloc is on their tail. The Liberals trail the Conservatives in 15 ridings, the NDP in nine, and the Bloc in one. This indicates that though the Liberals need to prevent their vote from slipping to the NDP, most of their riding-by-riding battles are against the Conservatives.

And for the Bloc Québécois, they trail the NDP in 21 ridings and the Liberals in one, while leading the NDP in two ridings and trailing the Liberals and Conservatives in one apiece. Unsurprisingly, their major foes are the New Democrats.

A rough estimate based on these ranges, then, suggests that there is a 76% chance that the Conservatives would win the most seats based on these numbers, with a 24% chance that the New Democrats could win the most seats. No scenario puts the Liberals on top, and no scenario puts the Bloc back in third.

Now to the updates to the NDP endorsement rankings. This past week being a holiday week, there isn't much to report. But there have been a few minor changes.

Paul Dewar is the only candidate with a new endorsement that can be recorded in the rankings: Mable Elmore, an MLA from British Columbia. That gives Dewar an extra point, bumping him up to 26.9, or 5.7% of the total available points (a gain of 0.2 percentage points). Dewar has said he will have more endorsements to announce in the new year, so we should expect him to get another boost soon.

The endorsement of Thomas Mulcair by Herb Dickieson, former leader of the PEI New Democrats, was not added to the rankings last week but should have been. Dickieson gives Mulcair an extra 0.5 points, meaning he now stands at 119.8 points, or 25.5% (unchanged). The margin between Mulcair and Brian Topp now stands at 67.2 points.

That is partly because Topp has dropped one point as I have removed the endorsement of Joy MacPhail, former BC MLA. As a former MLA and interim leader, she was not supposed to be included in the rankings to begin with. This means Topp is now down to 187 points, or 39.9% (-0.2).

Because of the gains by Mulcair and Dewar, Peggy Nash's share of all endorsement points has dropped by 0.1% to 20.3%.

(Click here to learn more about the endorsement system and here for how the points are awarded. And, as always, you can right-click the list of endorsers and open in a new tab or window to magnify it.)

So, a relatively quiet week. But whatever momentum there is appears to be in the corners of Mulcair and Dewar. Since December 14, Mulcair has made a 2.1-point gain in the points share while Dewar has gained two points. But, as he was starting from a lower share, that is a much more significant increase for Dewar.

The press has also been much more positive for Mulcair, Dewar, and Nash than it has been for Topp. Virtually every report says he is no longer the front-runner, though that seems to be based primarily on anecdotal evidence, gut-feeling, and reports from people within the party (always to be taken with a grain of salt, since a leadership race splits a party into various camps, no matter how amicable they may be).

The next round of debates should shake things up and provide a clearer picture of the race. It might not have the drama of last night's Iowa Republican caucus, but the NDP leadership campaign should still have some surprises in store.

The new year

2012-01-03T09:32:00.002-05:00

With a new political year on the horizon, each of the parties in the House of Commons could stand to make a few New Year’s resolutions. In addition to encouraging their members to visit the Parliamentary gym more often, here are some of the resolutions each of the parties might want to consider for 2012.

You can read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post Canada website here.

To some extent, I think we're all still getting used to the new reality that is a majority government here in Ottawa. This year will be Canada's first full year of a sitting majority government since 2003. That isn't to say it will be a quiet year. This spring the federal budget will be tabled and the NDP leadership race will come to an end. In the last few months of 2012 the Liberal Party's leadership race will start rolling, and all of this while provincial elections in Alberta and perhaps Quebec take place, not to mention the election south of the border.

Speaking of which, the Republican primary vote in Iowa looks like it will be an incredibly close one between Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, and Rick Santorum. At various times in the last few months, that list was supposed to include Rick Perry, then Herman Cain, then Newt Gingrich, in place of either Paul or Santorum, or both. Meanwhile, in our NDP leadership campaign, it's all a big mystery.

But 2012 will be an important year for almost every party in this country. This is Daniel Paillé's first full year as leader of the Bloc Québécois. The Liberals will be preparing for next year's leadership race. The New Democrats will be choosing the leader who will take them into the 2015 election. The Conservative budget will set the agenda for most of their next few years in government. Could it be the most determinant year on the Hill until 2015?

It will be a big year for ThreeHundredEight, as the projection model goes through more changes and improvements, taking into account more regional data and making what I hope will be better estimations of how the votes will break on election night. Alberta and Quebec (if the latter does indeed go to the polls) should provide their fair share of challenges, what with the Wildrose Party likely to be a major factor throughout the province for the first time in Alberta and the Coalition Avenir Québec being a completely new entity there.

While on the topic of Alberta, which will become the focus of this site as we approach the election period, let's briefly take a look at the story the polls have been telling since January 2010.

It has been a bit of a ride for the Progressive Conservatives, who began 2010 more than 10 points behind Wildrose.

That changed in April 2010 when the Tories moved back in the lead, and that is where they have stayed since. Their numbers were relatively flat until the summer of 2011, when the leadership race galvanized the party. Their levels of support have improved under Alison Redford.

Wildrose, meanwhile, has been on the decline since November 2010. They are still comfortably ensconced in second place, however, holding a double-digit lead over their opposition rivals. But they are far removed from the salad days of late 2009-early 2010.

The Alberta Liberals are also on the decline, and their recent leadership race has not helped them at all. They haven't gotten too close to Wildrose in some time, but until May 2011 they were safely in third place. Since the federal election, however, the Liberals have moved into a tie for third place with the New Democrats, who have seen their levels of support increase slightly. But the likelihood that the NDP could finish third in the 2012 election ahead of the Liberals has more to do with Liberal weakness than it does with NDP strength.

The monthly provincial polling averages chart has been updated to include an Ontario poll by Innovative Research, taken at the end of October and beginning of November. I missed it at the time. The voting intentions results are unchanged from the election, but the poll does have some interesting things to say about why Ontarians voted the way they did. It is also a somewhat confusing slideshow - it looks like a few stray slides from other presentations somehow made their way into it. But it might be worth a look. It seems unlikely that Dalton McGuinty's minority government will fall this year, but at least Ontario gives us the kind of uncertainty that our federal politics used to provide.

CAQ up, NDP stable in CROP polling

2011-12-30T12:44:00.000-05:00

Federal and provincial polls for Quebec were released by CROP and La Presse two weeks ago, but considering that the most recent Nanos poll (released this week) was taken only a day after this CROP poll, it isn't as relatively out of date as it might look. Let's take a peek at the federal results first.

Contrary to what some other polls have shown, CROP does not have the NDP in free-fall in Quebec. Instead, they have them at 36%, down only one point from their last polling conducted November 21-23.

It does put CROP at the high end of NDP polling in Quebec for December, as others have had them between 26% and 33%, and all of them have shown them dropping by a significant amount.

But compared to the Léger poll taken December 13-14, so on the same days as this CROP poll, there is not much difference. Aside from the NDP being a few ticks higher here and there, CROP and Léger show virtually the exact same results across the board, particularly when taking into account the margin of error.

CROP does not have any of the other parties varying by more than one point provincially. The Bloc is up one point to 22%, the Conservatives are down one point to 22%, the Liberals are up one point to 16%, and the Greens are up one point to 4%.

Among francophones, the NDP has dropped four points to 35%, while the Bloc Québécois is up one point to 27%. Among non-francophones, however, the NDP is up eight points to 38%. The Conservatives have dropped by eight points to 28%, putting them only three points up on the Liberals.

In and around Montreal, the NDP is up one point to 36%. But the Bloc is gaining more, with a three point jump to 23%. In and around Quebec City, however, the NDP is down nine points to 28%. The Conservatives have roared forward with a six point gain to 45%. In the rest of Quebec, the NDP is down three points to 37% while the Bloc is down one to 24%.

The New Democrats would win 53 seats with these numbers, with 11 going to the Conservatives, seven to the Liberals, and four to the Bloc Québécois.

The CROP cross-tabs allow us to look at the numbers at a deeper lever. For example, support for sovereignty stood at 36% in this poll. But among Bloc voters, that support stands at 90%. So while the Bloc is clearly getting the support of sovereigntists, they are not getting the support of every sovereigntist.

The Conservatives and Liberals get the support of a few sovereigntists, at 13% and 11%, respectively. But these are very small numbers. Instead, it is the New Democratic Party that is getting the support of a lot of sovereigntists: fully 32% of NDP voters support independence. This means that the NDP's voter profile is actually quite similar to the profile of the average Quebecer. But keeping that 32% of voters happy is going to be difficult if Daniel Paillé bangs the sovereigntist drum, as he has promised to do.

Now to the provincial scene, where things are in a state of flux.

Whereas CROP and Léger found little to disagree upon at the federal level, provincially it is a different situation.

Léger found that the CAQ had a strong lead over the PQ, which had itself rebounded slightly. CROP instead sees the PQ continuing to slide, and the CAQ holding a lead over the Liberals, who have rebounded slightly themselves.

Which is true? That is a bit of an unknown at the moment.

For CROP, however, the CAQ has gained six points since November and now leads with 39%. The Liberals follow with 28% (+1) while the Parti Québécois is well behind at 18% (-1). The big difference between CROP and Léger seems to be that the ADQ's voters went en masse to the CAQ in CROP polling, while they split among the three main parties according to Léger.

Québec Solidaire is up three points since November to 9%.

The CAQ holds a very important lead among francophones, standing at 44% (+4) to the PQ's 21% (-3). They also lead in and around Quebec City with 54% (+6) to the Liberals' 23% (+8) and in the rest of Quebec, at 45% (+8) to the Liberals' 22% (-1).

The Liberals still lead among non-francophones with 68%, as well as in the Montreal region with 33% to the CAQ's 30%.

That Liberal support in Montreal is concentrated on the island, however. According to CROP, the Liberals have 36% support on the island to the CAQ's 26%, while in the suburban areas the CAQ leads with 36% to 30%.

But who is a supporter of the CAQ? While 94% of PQ voters and 72% of QS voters support sovereignty, the CAQ's voters support sovereignty to the tune of 35%, or about the same as the Quebec population as a whole. But though they have this in common with the NDP, they are not the same as NDP voters.

Why? According to the cross-tabs, only 46% of the CAQ's voter pool supports the NDP. They draw 25% of their support from Conservative voters and 14% from Bloc Québécois voters. Only 7% of their voters support the Liberals, meaning that the CAQ's support is not as uniform as it might be. Instead, it is more NDP/CPC and less LPC/BQ than the average Quebecer.

And this is why I don't agree with the La Presse report saying that the CAQ would win 100 seats. Instead, my model shows them winning 65 seats with this level of support - a majority but nowhere near a landslide. The Liberals win 45 seats and the Parti Québécois only 12, with Québec Solidaire winning three. Recall that the model is using the current electoral boundaries, not the ones that will come into effect early in 2012. As the suburbs of Montreal are gaining the extra seats, we could bump up the CAQ a couple at the expense of the PQ/PLQ.

But on the older map, the CAQ wins 17 seats in Quebec City, 15 in Montérégie, 14 in western Quebec, 13 in central Quebec, six in eastern Quebec, and none in Montreal or Laval. That is their major problem - they do not seem poised to win in Montreal.

Or do they? With a ten-point spread between the PLQ and CAQ on the island of Montreal, that means the CAQ could potentially win some seats in the francophone parts of the island as the Liberals are running up the numbers in the western parts. The projection model is not yet designed to go into this level of detail, but it will before the next election. Nevertheless, the sample sizes begin to get quite small at these levels.

The Liberals win 26 seats in Montreal and Laval, seven in western Quebec (primarily along the Ottawa River), four in Montérégie, three in central Quebec, three in eastern Quebec (the Gaspésie), and two in Quebec City.

The PQ wins six seats in eastern Quebec, four in Montreal and Laval, and two in western Quebec.

The three QS seats are won in Montreal.

But the potential for a bigger win for François Legault exists. Of the 12 seats projected to go to the PQ, seven of them are extremely close CAQ/PQ races. Close enough that in some cases we are talking about less than 1%. If a few PQ MNAs decide not to run again or the CAQ puts up some good candidates, these seven seats could easily go to the CAQ, bumping them up to 72 seats and the PQ down to only five.

There are a few close CAQ/PLQ seats as well, making the potential for the Liberals to win fewer than 40 seats and the CAQ more than 80 relatively significant. But I don't see 100 seats for the CAQ happening just yet, particularly when there are fewer than 100 seats outside the island of Montreal. Even if the CAQ manages to steal half-a-dozen seats in Montreal, they would still need to run the table in the rest of the province. I simply don't see Legault winning everything from Abitibi to the Outaouais to the Saguenay to the Gaspésie on a right-of-centre platform.

NDP up in Ontario, down in Quebec

2011-12-29T11:27:00.000-05:00

After a vote that dramatically changed the federal political landscape and elections in half of the country’s provinces, 2012 promises to be a quieter year than 2011. But there are still a few things to keep an eye on over the next 12 months.

You can read the rest of my article on what to watch in 2012 at The Huffington Post Canada here.

But before looking at 2012, let's take a look at what the (likely) last federal poll of 2011 tells us.

For Nanos Research, which was last in the field in mid-November, there hasn't been much change at the national level. The biggest shift has been a 2.5-point drop for the Liberals to 25.6%, putting them behind the Conservatives (36.5%, +0.9) and the New Democrats (28.7%, +1.4). But all of these variations are within the margin of error.

Most of the regional shifts are also within the margin of error, except in Ontario. There, the Conservatives are at 34.5% but the Liberals have slipped seven points to 31.8%. The NDP has taken advantage, gaining 9.9 points to reach 29.5%.

The Conservatives have been on a bit of a downturn in Ontario in Nanos's polling, and this isn't the first poll to put the NDP at a decent amount of support after slipping to the low 20s in September and October.

In Quebec, the New Democrats have dropped again to 33.4%, echoing what other recent polls have shown. The Liberals are second with 22.9%, while the Conservatives stand at 20.8% and the Bloc Québécois at 19.9%. That is Nanos's highest result for the BQ since the election, but is still somewhat lower than what other surveys have suggested. Nevertheless, Nanos has been showing the Bloc on the rise of late.

The race in British Columbia is close, with the Tories at 34.4% and the NDP at 33.2%. The Liberals are up to 22.8%, while in the Prairies the Conservatives are doing quite well, as they are also doing in Atlantic Canada.

On the 308-seat map, the Conservatives would win 135 seats with this level of support. The New Democrats would win 97 seats and the Liberals 74, making them the big gainers. The Greens keep their one seat in British Columbia while the Bloc Québécois is reduced to one seat.

The Tories win 16 seats in British Columbia, 27 in Alberta, 21 in the Prairies, 46 in Ontario, 10 in Quebec, 14 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

The NDP wins 13 seats in British Columbia, one in Alberta, two in the Prairies, 26 in Ontario, 49 in Quebec, five in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

The Liberals win six seats in British Columbia, five in the Prairies, 34 in Ontario, 15 in Quebec, 13 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

On the 338-seat map (yet to be determined), we're looking at roughly 151 Conservative seats, 104 NDP seats, and 81 Liberal seats.

The year closes with three things to watch in federal polling. Firstly, will Ontario continue to be a close race, will one party move ahead, or will it return to a two-horse contest? Secondly, where is the NDP going in Quebec? And thirdly, who is going to take the lead for good in British Columbia? The battlegrounds and story lines for 2015 may already by forming.

Mulcair, Dewar win new endorsements

2011-12-28T10:11:00.001-05:00

This week's NDP leadership endorsement rankings update sees Thomas Mulcair and Paul Dewar making gains. But both contenders remain in the second and fourth positions, respectively.

Understandably, the leadership race has been somewhat quiet over the holidays. Brian Topp, however, has recently said he is moving to the second portion of his campaign. The first was meant for endorsements, so that means we may see no more major endorsements for Topp unless he knocks it out of the park in future debates. On the other hand, Dewar has said he will have endorsements to announce in the new year, which should give him some momentum.

But, for now, Thomas Mulcair has made the biggest gain this week with the endorsements of two sitting MPs from Quebec: Ève Péclet, from La Pointe-de-l'Île, and Paulina Ayala, from Honoré-Mercier.

This gives Mulcair a five point boost to 119.3, or 25.5% of the total share of available endorsement points. That is a 0.7 percentage point gain for Mulcair since last week. Perhaps more importantly, this now gives Mulcair the support of the majority of the NDP's Quebec caucus.

Mulcair is now 68.7 points, or 14.6 percentage points, behind Topp. He needs a few high profile endorsements to close the gap. A few MPs with a lot of experience in the House of Commons, particularly from Ontario, remain uncommitted, as do Greg Selinger, Premier of Manitoba, Darrell Dexter, Premier of Nova Scotia (at least since the withdrawal of Robert Chisholm), and provincial leaders Andrea Horwath and Adrian Dix. A smattering of MLAs, MHAs, MPPs, current and former leaders remain on the table as well.

Paul Dewar also made a gain this week, picking up the endorsement of the Ottawa and District Labour Council, a body representing 50,000 members. This gives him an extra three points, but as I mistakenly gave him the points of a former MLA (who did, indeed, endorse him but I am not assigning points from former provincial legislators), Dewar has a net gain of 2.5 points this week.

Last week, it was brought to my attention that the points I assigned Dewar from the Manitoba Federation of Labour were being double-counted, as it is an umbrella organization already partly represented by the endorsements given by other bodies. I've decided to let that stand - unions overlap quite a bit and I don't want to overly complicate things. If it means double-counting certain union members, so be it. That two unions commanding the allegiance of one person have stepped into the debate means, I imagine, that this union member is doubly motivated to cast a ballot.

So, this puts Dewar up 2.5 points to 25.9, or 5.5% of the total. That is a 0.4 percentage point gain since last week, putting him still well behind Peggy Nash. But there is now some light between him and Niki Ashton. If Dewar's promised endorsements start piling up in the new year, we will probably see him close in on Nash and force the three frontrunners down in their point share quite a bit.

The new endorsements for Mulcair and Dewar have already pushed Topp down 0.7%, Nash 0.3%, and Ashton 0.1%.

(Click here to learn more about the endorsement system and here for how the points are awarded. And, as always, you can right-click the list of endorsers and open in a new tab or window to magnify it.)

There has been a lot of talk recently about Brian Topp being a weaker candidate than many have thought. The fact remains that Topp's list of endorsers is impressive, including the likes of Ed Broadbent, Roy Romanow, and some of the NDP's most experienced MPs. Only one of the debates has already taken place so there is still a lot of impressing (or disappointing) for Topp and the other candidates to do. Though the race is now more than half-way through, it really has only just begun.

Three to five months out, Redford on track

2011-12-23T09:28:00.000-05:00

The next province heading to the polls looks set to continue the winning streak for incumbent governments.

But as in Manitoba and Newfoundland and Labrador, the incumbent party will be led by a new leader who represents both change and continuity.

Alberta's Premier Alison Redford was named leader of the Progressive Conservatives in October. Before the leadership campaign had started, the Alberta Tories were bleeding support away to Danielle Smith’s Wildrose Party, and an end to the uninterrupted period of PC rule stretching back to 1971 seemed possible.

But the leadership campaign itself rejuvenated the party and under Redford's leadership the Tories are on track to win another majority government in the province.

You can read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post Canada website here.

It'll sneak up on us, but the Alberta election might be as near as three months away! I think it might be sneaking up on Albertans, too, as Alison Redford looks like she'll win another majority without any problem.

This is Forum's first foray into the Alberta scene. They have the Progressive Conservatives leading with 38%, well ahead of Wildrose at 23%.

The New Democrats and Liberals trail with 13% and 12% apiece, while the Alberta Party stands at 6%.

Unfortunately, the number for the "other" parties is huge: 9%. If we take that out and distribute the 9% to the other parties proportionately, we get 42% for the PCs and 25% for Wildrose.

That is a solid lead for the Tories, though not completely comfortable for the PCs. However, with the Liberals so low the Tories will likely be able to pick-up a lot of new seats, even if Wildrose does steal a dozen or more from them.

Calgary, however, will be a bit of a battlefield. The Tories lead with 35% to 27% for Wildrose (or 38% to 30% without all the others), while in Edmonton the battlefield is for second. The Progressive Conservatives have the edge with 33%, but the Liberals (22%) and New Democrats (21%) are very much in the race. However, that is quite a drop for the Liberals, meaning they will be hard-pressed to hold on to their seats.

In northern Alberta, the Tories lead with 42% (49% without the Others), well ahead of Wildrose. Southern Alberta is a bit closer, with the Progressive Conservatives at 41% to 28% for Wildrose.

The projection model for Alberta is not yet complete, so for now I am using a simple swing model at the provincial level based primarily on the old boundaries. With that model and these poll numbers, the Progressive Conservatives win 65 seats and an easy majority.

Wildrose wins 15 seats and forms the Official Opposition while the New Democrats win six seats and become the third party in the legislature. The Liberals are reduced to a single seat.

Before the election rolls around, and according to this poll 68% of respondents approve of having fixed election dates (or, at least in this case, fixed election seasons), I'll have the new projection model up and running. It will be quite a departure from what I've used in the past. It'll be regionally based and, if I have the time, sub-regionally based as well. I don't imagine that there will be many, if any, riding polls for Alberta but the model will be designed to be able to incorporate them. The vote projection will also be different, in that it will attempt to estimate how the polls will be off, rather than only averaging them out with a weighting.

It will be an interesting race. Alison Redford, Danielle Smith, and Raj Sherman will all be leading their parties into a general election for the first time - that means that, more than usual, anything might happen.

CAQ minority?

2011-12-22T12:16:00.001-05:00

Last Friday, Le Devoir/Montreal Gazette released a new Léger Marketing poll on the political situation in Quebec at the provincial level. With an election rumoured for 2012, though I can't imagine why Jean Charest would want to rush into anything at these numbers, where the parties stand right now is very important. This is the first poll, along with La Presse's CROP, to show the landscape since the announced merger of the CAQ and the ADQ.

Since Léger's last poll taken between November 14-17, the Coalition-Avenir-Québec has gained two points and now leads with 37%. It appears that either all of the 8% the ADQ scored in the last poll has not gone to the CAQ, or that the CAQ has lost some of the support it had before the merger.

I imagine that is the case. With the ADQ now melded into the CAQ, the party is now more obviously right-of-centre, whereas before François Legault spoke of a "gauche efficace". It would not surprise me that more than a few Quebecers were not pleased that Legault aligned himself with the ADQ.

The Parti Québécois, for example, has gained three points and now trails the CAQ with 24%. As Gérard Deltell had taken the ADQ in a definitively federalist direction, it is possible that the CAQ has lost some of its more sovereigntist supporters with the merger.

The Liberals are unchanged at 22%, while Québec Solidaire is up one point to 9%. The Greens are up two points to 5%.

Adding further evidence that the merger of the CAQ and the ADQ has cost Legault support in some quarters, his party is down three points in the Montréal region to 31%. The Liberals are up six to 27%, while the PQ is down one point to 21%.

On the other hand, the CAQ is up big in the Quebec City area and in the other regions of Quebec. They now lead with 43% (+14) in Quebec City and 43% in the rest of Quebec (+7). The Liberals trail in Quebec City with 22% while the PQ is up nine points to 28% in the rest of the province.

Among francophones, the CAQ is up two points to 42% with the PQ up four points to 28%, while among non-francophones the Liberals lead with 53% to the CAQ's 15%.

With these regional numbers, ThreeHundredEight projects that the CAQ would win 59 seats on the old 125-seat boundaries. As the new boundaries aren't officially in place yet, I am holding off on making projections based on the new electoral map.

The Liberals would form the Official Opposition with 32 seats, while the PQ would win 31 and Québec Solidaire would win three.

That means a minority government for François Legault. It would be a difficult proposition to govern in such a situation - it is unclear to me who Legault would turn to for support. Perhaps he would be able to lure four or five PQ and Liberal MNAs to his side.

Now, it may come as a surprise that I am projecting a CAQ minority with these numbers. Firstly, the projection model is a regional model, and the CAQ's lead in the Montreal region is quite small. It generally assumes that the CAQ's Montreal strength is in the suburbs and not on the island, while its "rest of Quebec" strength is disproportionately concentrated in the area between Montreal and Quebec City, leaving the western and eastern edges more to the PQ.

Secondly, the CAQ's support is based on the ADQ's 2008 support base. This means that in some areas there is very little growth for the CAQ, even if the party is doing two or three times better than the ADQ did in 2008.

The old model I was using that had both the ADQ and CAQ included assumed that the CAQ's support was more uniform, like the NDP's support was in the 2011 federal election. This was a safe assumption because the CAQ was almost as new to Quebec as the NDP was in May, and because Legault embodied that same element of change.

But now that the CAQ and the ADQ have joined forces, I think that the party will be identified more with the right-of-centre political spectrum, and will have its best performances in areas where the ADQ performed well in 2007. The recent by-election in Bonaventure gives us some evidence. The area was never good ADQ territory, and the party did horribly in the by-election. But polls indicated that a CAQ candidate would have only gotten around 15% support - almost exactly what my current projection gives the CAQ in Bonaventure.

The CAQ and the NDP have only their novelty in common. There is no reason to think that the civil servants of the Outaouais, a perhaps natural clientele for the NDP, would vote for the CAQ, or that Gaspesians, who have some of the province's better ranked hospitals while also being among its poorest residents, are going to warm up to the public/private health care proposals of the CAQ.

The CAQ follows in the ADQ's footsteps by winning in its traditional areas of support: 13 seats in Quebec City, 12 in central Quebec (Mauricie, Centre-du-Québec, Cantons de l'Est), and 12 in Montérégie. The party also wins 12 seats in western Quebec (Laurentides, Lanaudière, primarily). But like the ADQ, the CAQ has less luck in eastern Quebec, winning only two seats. But unlike the ADQ, the CAQ actually breaks into the metropolis with two seats in Montreal and Laval.

The Parti Québécois is strongest in the parts of Quebec where the Bloc Québécois performed well in the federal election, primarily in eastern Quebec. The PQ wins 12 seats there, with seven in western Quebec, three apiece in Montérégie and Montreal/Laval, and two apiece around Quebec City and in central Quebec.

The Liberals win 22 of their seats in Montreal and Laval, with another three coming in Montérégie, two apiece in Quebec City and western Quebec (the Outaouais), and one apiece in eastern Quebec and central Quebec.

Québec Solidaire wins all three of its seats on the island of Montreal.

Is the potential for a bigger CAQ sweep there? Absolutely, as with the older model of uniform CAQ support the party would win more than 90 seats at these numbers. But I don't believe that their support will be uniform. Their message will find resonance particularly in the ADQ's traditional strongholds. What Legault brings to the table is the ability of the CAQ to breakthrough into areas the ADQ was never competitive. But I do not think that Legault will have the widespread appeal that Jack Layton did, and the 2012 election will look more like 2007's provincial vote than it will the 2011 federal result.

Dewar, Mulcair gain endorsements

2011-12-21T10:50:00.001-05:00

EDIT: This post has been updated since this morning due to the withdrawal of Robert Chisholm from the race today.

It's Wednesday, so that means it is time to update the NDP leadership endorsement rankings. It's been a quiet week on the endorsement front. Only two new endorsements have been added to the system, and one of them just went unnoticed last week.

But the withdrawal of Robert Chisholm from the race brings the list of candidates down to eight. It also means that everyone has gained in the share of points, as Chisholm's 27.4 points are now taken off the table.

As always, you can right-click on the image to the right and open it in a new window to magnify.

Paul Dewar is this week's big winner after landing the support of the Manitoba Federation of Labour. Not only did Dewar get the support of the current president of the MFL, he received the support of the three preceding presidents.

The union numbers some 90,000 members (almost as many as the NDP itself!) and so this gives Dewar a gain of 5.4 points. He now has a total of 23.4 points and ranks fourth behind Peggy Nash. He has moved ahead of Niki Ashton, and I imagine quite definitively - at least for now. He and her have been swapping places for months.

Dewar now has 5.1% of all available endorsement points.

Thomas Mulcair has also gotten a small boost in the endorsement rankings. The support of Newfoundland and Labrador MHA Dale Kirby has been added to the system, but this means a gain of only 0.25 points (or, rounded up, 0.3).

Mulcair is now at 114.3 total points, 73.7 behind Brian Topp and 18.9 points ahead of Peggy Nash.

(Click here to learn more about the endorsement system and here for how the points are awarded.)

It is good to see Paul Dewar picking up some endorsements because I think the points system is under-estimating his support within the party. He has mentioned that he will be announcing new endorsements in the new year, as I imagine other candidates will be doing. But hopefully that will push Dewar up into the top tier of Mulcair, Topp, and Nash, where I think he belongs.

He is now, at least, in actual fourth place with the withdrawal of Chisholm. If Chisholm decides to endorse someone, I will assign half of those points to the person he chooses to endorse. If any of the people who endorsed Chisholm take their support to another person, the half-points will be removed from the person receiving Chisholm's support.

That means that Robert Chisholm alone is a big fish - worth 13.7 points until any of the people who have endorsed him go elsewhere. Darrell Dexter and Howard Hampton, worth 10 and 5 points, respectively, would also be good people to land if they are willing to hand their support out to another candidate. Another 4.5 points are available from the NDP members of the Nova Scotia legislature who lent their support to Chisholm.

The race has gotten a little more interesting, an undoubtedly the front benches of the Opposition will be happy to have an experienced person like Chisholm back in the House asking questions.

Mulcair leads by wide margin in new poll

2011-12-20T10:03:00.000-05:00

With the NDP’s support beginning to slip in Quebec, a recent survey from Forum Research indicates that among the party’s supporters Thomas Mulcair is the leadership candidate seen as the best person for the job.

The poll, conducted on December 13 and surveying some 300 NDP supporters, suggests that roughly half (47 per cent) of the party’s voters are unsure who would make the best leader. But of the 53 per cent who expressed an opinion, Mulcair garnered 45 per cent support, well ahead of fellow MP Peggy Nash (16 per cent).

You can read the rest of the article on my thoughts on what these numbers mean at The Huffington Post Canada here.

For all of the actual numbers from the poll, keep reading. But before we get to the leadership numbers, let's look at the voting intentions of those surveyed in this IVR Forum poll.

This is the first federal poll that Forum Research has released since the election, so we don't have anything to compare it with. Nevertheless, the Conservatives lead in this poll with 33%, six points ahead of the NDP at 27%.

This six-point gap has been repeated in other surveys.

The Liberals stand at 21% while the Greens are at 8%.

This poll is marred a little, however, by an overly large "Other" response. One imagines that this is something to expect in IVR polling, and much of that other (5% nationally) probably represents undecided voters.

Forum has the Conservatives down to 33% in Ontario, with the Liberals trailing at 27% and the NDP at 23%. The one remarkable number is the 12% for the Greens, which would be enough to put them in striking distance of a seat in the province - though we're likely talking about the outside edges of the MOE.

In Quebec, the New Democrats are down to only 28%, the second poll to put them below 30% support. The Bloc Québécois stands at 22% while the Liberals and Conservatives are almost tied with 19% and 18% support apiece. But these numbers are deceptive, as 8% of respondents said "Other". Sorry folks, François Legault isn't running federally! Portioning out that 8% more reasonably boosts the NDP to 30% and the Bloc to 24%.

Forum has the Conservatives and New Democrats tied at 39% apiece in British Columbia and the three main parties neck-and-neck in Atlantic Canada. The pollster has also taken on Nanos's bad habit of lumping Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba together. In this Albersaskitoba the Conservatives stand at 51% to the NDP's 23%.

These numbers would give the Conservatives 143 seats, the New Democrats 94 seats, the Liberals 61 seats, the Bloc Québécois nine seats, and the Greens one.

The Conservatives win 19 seats in British Columbia, 27 in Alberta, 19 in the Prairies, 52 in Ontario, 11 in Quebec, 14 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north, putting them 12 short of a majority and 23 seats short of their current standing. In the 338-seat House of Commons their number would probably increase to 159, or 10 short of a majority.

The New Democrats win 15 seats in British Columbia, one in Alberta, six in the Prairies, 23 in Ontario, 42 in Quebec, six in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

The Liberals win one seat in British Columbia, three in the Prairies, 31 in Ontario, 13 in Quebec, 12 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

Of note is that a combination of Liberal, NDP, and Green seats would total 156, or a majority. In a 338-seat House they might win 170, or one above the majority threshold.

Now, the NDP leadership poll. Forum asked supporters of the NDP in the 2011 federal election who they thought would be the best leader of the New Democrats. Fully 47% were undecided, but of the 53% who were decided Thomas Mulcair came out on top with 45% support. Peggy Nash followed with 16%.

After that, we get into the dregs. With a margin of error of about 8%, we can only really say with real confidence that Mulcair is definitely ahead and Nash is probably ahead of the peloton.

In that peloton is Brian Topp and Niki Ashton at 8%, Roméo Saganash at 7%, Martin Singh at 5%, and Paul Dewar, Robert Chisholm, and Nathan Cullen at 4%.

As I mention in my article, this could be all about name recognition. It isn't a predictor of who will win the race, since it is members and not voters that will decide. But if Brian Topp wins with 8% name recognition among decideds (or 4% among undecideds) that is a wee bit of a problem.

The chart at the top of the page that tracks the leadership support of NDP voters does not take out the undecideds. If we keep the undecideds in the calculation, we get 47% without an opinion and approximately 24% support for Mulcair, 8% for Nash, 4% for Topp, Ashton, and Saganash, 3% for Singh, and 2% for Dewar, Chisholm, and Cullen.

At the very least, if the NDP chooses Mulcair, Canadians will have a good idea of what they are getting, or at a minimum will know the name of the Official Opposition leader. If the NDP chooses Topp or Dewar or Nash, the party will need to work on defining their new leader and getting Canadians to know him or her. That means lost time and an opportunity for the Conservatives to do what they did so successfully to Michael Ignatieff.

It will be interesting to see how these numbers move as the leadership race continues.

Leger sees NDP slide in Quebec

2011-12-19T11:18:00.002-05:00

While new Bloc Québécois Leader Daniel Paillé and former New Democratic Party president Brian Topp do not have much in common, they both are without a seat in the House of Commons. If Mr. Topp wins the NDP leadership race, this will put him and the Bloc chief squarely in the minority of Canada’s political leaders since Confederation.

You can read the rest of the article on The Globe and Mail website here.

Brian Topp has said he will run in Quebec if he wins the NDP leadership, but the latest polls show that he'll have some work cut out for him. While a recent CROP suggested that the NDP was alright at 36% or so, new surveys from Harris-Decima, Forum Research, and Léger Marketing indicate that the bottom may be falling out for the NDP in Quebec. Let's look at the Léger survey today.

Léger was last in the field between November 14-17, and since then the New Democrats have dropped four points to 33% in the province.

Around November, we were seeing the NDP slipping from the low-to-mid 40s to the high 30s. Now, it appears that the New Democrats are slipping again, though this time to the low-30s or high-20s.

The Bloc Québécois has not, in this survey at least, made any gains. They've actually dropped one point to 26%.

Instead, the Conservatives have made a three-point gain and now stand at 18%, compared to 17% for the Liberals (+2).

Though they would still lose between 10 and 20 seats, the NDP can still work with this kind of lead - they are still the dominant party in the province. But any lower and a lot of bubble seats get flipped to the Bloc.

This is primarily because the francophone vote is now split between the two parties. The NDP has dropped seven points among francophones to 33%, now just one point ahead of the Bloc (down one point themselves).

The New Democrats are leading once again among non-francophones, but these are always small samples. The NDP is up eight points since November to 36% while the Liberals are down nine points to 28%. It could be coincidence, but with the calls the Conservatives were having made in Irwin Cotler's riding it is perhaps not a surprise that the Tories have dropped six points to only 18% among non-francophones in Quebec.

Regionally, there has been little change in the Montreal region, with the NDP still holding a lead over the Bloc. In Quebec City, however, the NDP's support has dropped by nine points to 23%, behind the Bloc at 25% (+1) and the Conservatives at 33% (+5).

There has also been little change in the rest of Quebec, with the NDP and Bloc taking a small step backwards to the benefit of the Conservatives.

With this seven-point lead over the Bloc Québécois, the NDP would win 45 seats of the 75-seats in Quebec. That is still a large portion, but down 14 from their current standing. The Bloc Québécois would win 12 seats, making them an officially recognized party in the House, while the Liberals win 10 and the Conservatives eight.

The last couple of weeks have shown just how fragile the NDP's support in Quebec can be. A new leader may turn the tide and push the New Democrats back to dominance in the province, but it is far from a sure bet. A misstep could easily push the NDP down into second place in Quebec. They don't have to worry much about third or fourth again, however, as it does not appear that the Liberals or Conservatives are resonating very much.

NDP support collapses in Quebec without Layton - or does it?

2011-12-16T09:53:00.001-05:00

With an election years away, polls provide a reflection of what Canadians are thinking but have little bearing on what happens in the House of Commons. Unlike the seven years that preceded the May federal election, the country is not on the brink of a new election with every passing season.

But even with the next vote far beyond the horizon, a poll can have a real impact on the political landscape.

You can read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post Canada website here.

Check out the article for my thoughts on the implications of the poll, but before you do let's look at the numbers of this new Harris-Decima survey.

Their last poll was taken between October 27 and November 6, and there has been very little national change since then: the Conservatives are down two points to 34%, the New Democrats are down one point to 28%, and the Liberals are unchanged at 22%. All variations within the margin of error.

But in Ontario and Quebec some interesting things come out of this poll.

In Ontario, the Tories are down two to 36% and the Liberals are also down two to 31%, but the NDP is up six points to 27%. This gain is an important one because the party has lost so much support in Quebec.

There, the NDP is down 10 points to 26%, tied with the Bloc Québécois (up six points). The Liberals are up two to 20% and the Conservatives are down one to 17%. It's a very crowded field.

But is the NDP really down to 26%? Harris-Decima surveys 2,000 people over two weeks so the sample in Quebec is likely some 500 people, so not a horrible number. But CROP has a new poll out today maintaining the NDP at 36% - so is Harris-Decima just an outlier? I suppose we'll find out after a few more polls come out.

In British Columbia the Conservatives and Liberals are each up two points to 37% and 18% respectively, while the NDP is down five to 31%.

The Conservatives have rebounded in the Prairies with a ten point gain to 47%, while the NDP is down two to 34% and the Liberals are down five to 11%. Things have changed a lot less in Alberta, where the Conservatives have 63% (-3) and the NDP has 20% support (+2).

Finally, in Atlantic Canada the three-way race continues.

Now for something completely different - with these numbers we are looking at a very divided parliament, reminiscent of what we were familiar year with for most of the seven years before the last election.

The Conservatives win 138 seats, the New Democrats win 75, the Liberals win 65, the Bloc Québécois wins 29, and the Greens win one seat. The NDP remains the Official Opposition but the Liberals make big gains and the Bloc returns to prominence in Quebec.

The Conservatives win 18 seats in British Columbia, 27 in Alberta, 20 in the Prairies, 50 in Ontario, 11 in Quebec, 11 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

The New Democrats win 13 seats in British Columbia, one in Alberta, seven in the Prairies, 24 in Ontario, 20 in Quebec, nine in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

The Liberals win four seats in British Columbia, one in the Prairies, 32 in Ontario, 15 in Quebec, 12 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

So, the most important change is, of course, in Quebec. The Bloc goes from four to 29 seats while the NDP goes from 59 to only 20. Even the Liberals make big gains, all in and around Montreal.

It is worth noting where the New Democrats make their retreat. They still win seats in western Quebec and a good deal of seats in the Montreal region and between Montreal and Quebec City (Mauricie, Estrie, Montérégie), but they are pushed completely out of eastern Quebec and keep only one seat in the Quebec City region. The Tories return to Quebec City in force and win a few seats in eastern Quebec, while the Bloc takes seats in every part of the province.

It makes for a messy political landscape in Quebec - Montreal is Liberal, the western half of Quebec is NDP, the eastern half is more Conservative, and the Bloc has seats here and there throughout.

Of course, it'll probably be completely different by the time 2015 rolls around. But it is interesting to see how quickly the political waters in Quebec have been muddied.

Redford's approval ratings up

2011-12-15T10:19:00.000-05:00

Unless Jean Charest jumps the gun, and he even has the option to wait until the end of 2013, the next province to go to the polls will be Alberta. Under new leader Alison Redford, the Progressive Conservatives will be launching the next election campaign sometime between March and May of next year. Though the PCs hold a comfortable lead, it should be an interesting race.

ThinkHQ Public Affairs is out with a new poll today for the Calgary Herald, unfortunately bereft of voting intentions numbers. But in the increasingly leader-led Canadian political landscape the approval ratings of the leaders of the four major Alberta parties is perhaps just as useful.

She's had the job for a few months now, so while Alison Redford's honeymoon with Alberta's voters might still be underway, she has been around long enough for most Albertans to form an opinion about her. And, so far, that opinion is good: she enjoys a 59% approval rating, which bodes well for her party's chances in the next election.

Danielle Smith, leader of the Wildrose Party, has an approval rating of 40%. It isn't enough to compare with Redford, but it does look like Wildrose is on course to form the Official Opposition in the province.

Raj Sherman, leader of the Liberals, and Brian Mason, leader of the New Democrats, each have an approval rating of 31%. The two parties will be fighting it out for third spot unless Wildrose falters. The NDP seems to have a better concentration of support in Edmonton and so could come out on top and ahead of the Liberals in the spring.

In terms of the government's approval rating, Redford has bumped it up from 36% in September to 45%. She has also lowered its disapproval rating from 55% to 48%. Those are still negative net numbers, and Albertans seem to have a problem with the waste in the government's spending (an important theme for Smith), but Redford is certainly heading in the right direction.

The spring election may just coincide with the end of her honeymoon with the province, or it might carry on long enough to give her a mandate of her own. But there is still a lot up in the air - Wildrose led the PCs for a brief period two years ago and if Redford stumbles on the campaign trail Danielle Smith may be able to take advantage once again. And then there is the fate of the New Democrats, who seem to be on the upswing, and that of the Liberals, who seem to be on the decline. Though a PC victory is likely a safe bet in Alberta, the race will nevertheless have its charm.

Mulcair, Nash, Topp, and Chisholm gain endorsements

2011-12-14T09:29:00.000-05:00

A number of endorsements were handed out over the last week, ranging from British Columbia all the way to Newfoundland and Labrador. As the leadership candidates took part in a debate organized by the BC New Democrats this week, many of the endorsements that were landed in the past few days came from that province. But a few other big fish were landed.

As ever, you can right-click on the chart to the left listing all of the endorsements to date and open in a new window to magnify it.

Thomas Mulcair was this week's big winner, with a jump of 10 endorsement points. Mulcair is now up to 114 points or 23.6%, a gain of 0.8 percentage points since last Wednesday. He still trails Brian Topp by 74 endorsement points or 15.3%, but these are the first new endorsements he has gained in some time.

Mulcair's biggest gain came from the endorsement of Ed Schreyer. He is a former MP, former NDP Premier of Manitoba, and former Governor-General. Mulcair also picked up the endorsements of former BC MP Lyle Kristiansen and current BC MLA Claire Trevana.

The next biggest gainer was Peggy Nash, up 6.4 endorsement points to 95.4, or 19.8% of all currently available endorsement points. That is a gain of 0.3 percentage points. However, while Nash was steadily gaining on Mulcair, the gap has widened between them by 3.6 endorsement points.

Nash's most important endorsement this week came from the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Labour, which counts some 65,000 people as members. In addition, Nash also got the support of Quebec MP Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet.

Brian Topp gained 5.5 points and now stands at 188, or 38.9%. That is a drop for Topp of 1.1 percentage points, as others have made larger gains. He earned the support of Quebec MP Isabelle Morin (who is also the chair of the NDP's youth caucus), as well as that of BC MLAs Kathy Corrigan, Raj Chouhan, and Lana Popham.

Finally, Robert Chisholm got the endorsement of former Ontario NDP leader Howard Hampton. This bumped Chisholm up five points to 27.4, or 5.7% of the total. That is a 0.8 percentage point gain for Chisholm, who despite his problems in the French debate has managed to pick-up the support of two former or current provincial leaders.

(Click here to learn more about the endorsement system and here for how the points are awarded.)

None of the other contenders gained any important endorsements, and there have been no changes in position from last Wednesday.

To follow all of the updates to the endorsement rankings, you can click on the tag at the bottom of this post or on the link in the "Special Coverages" section in the right-hand column. You can also check out the posts on the now completed Bloc leadership race.

Let's break the NDP endorsement rankings down by region:

British Columbia: Topp 57.5, Cullen 14.0, Nash 10.0, Mulcair 3.0, Dewar 2.0, Ashton 1.0
Prairies: Ashton 10.0, Mulcair 9.0, Topp 7.0, Dewar 5.5
Ontario: Topp 93.5, Nash 31.5, Mulcair 17.5, Dewar 10.5, Chisholm 5.0
Quebec: Mulcair 82.0, Topp 15.0, Saganash 7.5, Ashton 7.5, Nash 5.0
Atlantic Canada: Nash 48.9, Chisholm 22.4, Topp 15.0, Mulcair 2.5

This gives us an idea of the strength of each campaign in each part of the country. Topp is clearly in front in British Columbia and Ontario, but is also present in the Prairies, in Quebec, and in Atlantic Canada. Mulcair, like Topp, has some support in every part of the country but is less of a factor on the two coasts.

Nash is doing well in Ontario and in Atlantic Canada, where she leads thanks to the support of Alexa McDonough and Lorraine Michael. Chisholm's strength is also based in Atlantic Canada.

And then we see the regional bases of the next tier of contenders. Ashton is strongest in her home region of the Prairies, while Dewar is also present there and in Ontario. Cullen is the main opponent to Topp in British Columbia while Saganash pulls some support from the Quebec membership.

Endorsements are, of course, only one part of the picture. But I think they do give an idea of what may be happening on the ground. I imagine, however, that Paul Dewar is doing far better among the party's members than he is doing among the party's elite.

I also imagine that a good deal of endorsements are still coming. There are still many MPs who have not sided with one candidate or another (and they may continue do so right up to the vote), and we have not heard from some of the current party leaders (British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, and PEI) and many former leaders. The Ontario NDP has also been very quiet, with only two MPPs making endorsements. There are still a lot of points on the table.

Dexter's NDP gains in Nova Scotia

2011-12-13T09:55:00.001-05:00

Last week, the Corporate Research Associates released their quarterly poll for the four Atlantic provinces. The details of the polls for Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland and Labrador are available at their website. As all of these provinces are many years away from the next election, I invite you to check out the polls directly.

But before you do, let's take a look at the results for Nova Scotia, where the next election is scheduled for 2013.

Darrell Dexter's New Democrats have gained four points since CRA's last poll in August, and now lead with 45%. That is the highest that they have been in at least a year.

The Progressive Conservatives are down one point to 29%, while the Liberals are down four points to 22%.

The Greens are unchanged at 4% support.

For Dexter, this is the kind of support he enjoyed in the 2009 election. But the Liberals have been losing ground, primarily to the Tories. The Liberals had beaten the PCs by about 27% to 25% in that last election.

Dexter's numbers are very good, as 55% of Nova Scotians are satisfied with his work as Premier. That's up six points since August.

He is also doing quite well in the Best Premier poll, at 36% (up five points since August). Stephen McNeil of the Liberals is down one point to 22% while Jamie Baillie of the Tories is up one point to 18%.

McNeil is probably ahead of Baillie because he is better known. He led the Liberals in the last election, while Baillie took over from Rodney MacDonald last year.

Though Dexter's personal support is lower than his support among decided voters, that is merely because of the inclusion of the "none of the above/don't know". If we took those out, Dexter gets 44% on the Best Premier question.

A new riding model for Nova Scotia is now ready, though it isn't a regional model just yet. As CRA doesn't break down their polls by region, at least not until a campaign is under way, a regional model would not make any difference at this point.

With these numbers, the New Democrats win 31 of the 52 seats in the Nova Scotia Legislative Assembly, unchanged from their current standing. The Progressive Conservatives win 11 seats, one more than they did in 2009 and four more than they currently have, while the Liberals win 10, one fewer than the last election and three fewer than they currently occupy.

The New Democrats dominate the Halifax region with 15 seats. The Liberals take the three others.

In the Annapolis Valley and the South Shore, the NDP win seven seats, the Liberals four, and the Progressive Conservatives three, while in the Fundy and Central regions the NDP wins seven and the Tories four. Cape Breton Island is most split, with four seats going to the PCs, three to the Liberals, and two to the NDP.

The New Democrats are about half-way through their first mandate in Nova Scotia, and it appears to be smooth sailing. At this point, it looks like Darrell Dexter is on track to avoid being a one-term premier.

Quebec-born leaders give federal parties a significant electoral edge

2011-12-12T10:31:00.003-05:00

While the nine NDP leadership hopefuls have to wait till March before a winner is named, the Bloc Québécois announced Sunday that Daniel Paillé will be taking the reins of the sovereigntist party. His main opponent in the province will be decided after New Democrats cast their ballots and history suggests that his chances will be greatly improved if they opt for a non-Quebecker.

You can read the rest of the article on The Globe and Mail website here. You can also read my column in this week's Hill Times here (subscription required, but it is money well spent!), and my piece on what Paillé's victory means at The Huffington Post Canada website here.

Daniel Paillé won the Bloc's leadership race yesterday on the second ballot, defeating Maria Mourani and Jean-François Fortin. Paillé isn't a Member of Parliament but he is in no rush to become one, meaning that a by-election in Quebec is not going to be forced by the resignation of one of the Bloc's four sitting MPs.

Paillé is calculating that he is not going to get much attention in the House of Commons as head of a party without official status. Instead, he can do interviews in Montreal and Quebec City and make preparations for 2015. Jack Layton, after all, spent more than a year outside of the House of Commons after he became leader in 2003. We shall see how it works out for Paillé, but the deck is already stacked against him.

His leadership run, though, was quite successful.

About 38% of the Bloc's members voted, or some 14,000. But the party has been losing members since the election as members allow their memberships to lapse. Undoubtedly, many of the 62% of Bloc members who did not vote are not going to be members this time next year. Though I imagine we won't know how many members the Bloc has in June 2012, that actually might be the better number to determine the participation rate of the Bloc's membership in the leadership race.

Daniel Paillé took 44.1% of the vote on the first ballot (I've seen 44.5% reported elsewhere, but the Bloc's website says 44.05%), with Maria Mourani beating out Jean-François Fortin by only 39 votes to take 28.1% to his 27.8%. That means Fortin was dropped off.

With the preferential system, the second choice of Fortin's supporters was then determined. Roughly 60% of Fortin's voters opted for Paillé, giving him 61.3% of the vote to Mourani's 38.7%.

What is really interesting to contemplate is what would have happened had Fortin received 40 more votes. Mourani would have been dropped off, and I think there is a much better chance that Mourani's voters would have gone to Fortin rather than Paillé. Mourani was the candidate promising to shake things up the most, while Paillé was the "establishment" candidate. Fortin being somewhere in the middle means he could have taken a good swathe of Mourani's support. I imagine Paillé was too close to the 50% mark to lose after the first ballot, as Fortin would have needed about 80% of Mourani's support, but it probably would have been a lot closer.

The endorsement system did its job, which was to gauge support within the party apparatus and give us an idea of the frontrunner. It isn't meant as a predictive model, but it tells us what the party elites think. Often, based on my tests of past leadership races, the party elites reflect the opinion of the general membership. This could be because they are of the same mind, because the elites don't want to be at odds with the membership, or because the membership respects what the elites think. It is probably a combination of all these factors, which is why an endorsement system like this will, more often than not, reflect the eventual result. There are always cases, though, where the membership and the elites do not see eye-to-eye.

What the endorsement system also shows us is how candidates performed within their own membership compared to the elites. Fortin was about par for the course, while Paillé was not as popular among the Bloc's membership as he was among the party's elites. Mourani was the outsider's candidate, as she greatly over-performed expectations. Her support from the Bloc's youth wing, usually the more dedicated supporters of any party, was probably a major factor.

Conservatives up in Abacus poll despite troubles

2011-12-09T11:22:00.000-05:00

Despite Peter MacKay’s helicopter ride, admitting to spreading false rumours of an impending resignation of an MP in Montreal and the troubles in Attawapiskat, the Conservatives still hold a comfortable nine-point lead over the opposition New Democrats, according to a poll released this week by Abacus Data.

The online survey was taken between December 2 and December 4 in the midst of these developing stories. Yet, compared to Abacus’s last poll dating from mid-August, before the death of Jack Layton, the Conservatives are up two points to 40 per cent support.

You can read the rest of the article at The Huffington Post Canada here.

For my full analysis of the poll, check out the article. In the meantime, here are the details:

As you can see, things haven't changed too much since the last election in May. And, from Abacus's perspective, there hasn't been much change from August. The biggest national shift has been the two point gain for the Conservatives.

Regionally, there have been a few larger changes: a drop of 16 points for the Tories in the Prairies, a drop of 10 points for the Liberals in British Columbia, and a gain of nine points for the Greens in the Prairies. The most important shift, though, is likely the six point NDP slip in Quebec.

As you can see, I've made a few minor stylistic changes to the graphics as well.

This Abacus poll would not deliver a very different House of Commons. The Conservatives win 162 seats with these numbers, while the New Democrats win 100 seats and the Liberals win 37 seats. The Bloc Québécois doubles its caucus and wins eight seats while the Greens take one.

The Conservatives win 20 seats in British Columbia, 26 in Alberta, 23 in the Prairies, 70 in Ontario, 11 in Quebec, 10 in Atlantic Canada, and two in the north.

The New Democrats win 15 seats in British Columbia, two in Alberta, two in the Prairies, 23 in Ontario, 51 in Quebec, six in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

The Liberals win no seats in British Columbia or Alberta, three in the Prairies, 13 in Ontario, five in Quebec, 16 in Atlantic Canada, and none in the north.

There are also a number of seats in Quebec that are on the bubble between the NDP and the Bloc Québécois, so it is possible that the Bloc could manage official party status with these numbers.

Steady as she goes, though, for the most part. A bit of a tighter race in Quebec and British Columbia looks interesting, but this is generally what we saw on election night.

November 2011 federal poll averages

2011-12-08T10:21:00.000-05:00

Six federal polls were released for the month of November, three of them national, two of them for Quebec, and one for British Columbia. In all, 6,804 Canadians were surveyed during the month. The weighted average of these polls indicates that, compared to the October averages, the Conservatives have shed the most support, but it is the Greens and the Bloc Québécois that have made the gains.

The Conservatives averaged 36.1% national support in November, down 2.3 points from October. The New Democrats and Liberals each dropped 0.5 points, to 29.0% and 23.5%, respectively.

The Greens made a 1.9-point gain and stood at 5.2%, while the Bloc Québécois was up 1.4 points to 4.9% nationally.

At this level of support, the Conservatives are back to where they were in August, when the death of Jack Layton resulted in a bump of sympathy for the New Democrats. At 29%, however, the NDP is at their lowest level of support since April.

The Conservatives dropped 3.6 points in Ontario and stood at 38.1% in November, ahead of the Liberals who, at 33.1%, were up 1.9 points. This is the highest the Liberals have reached in Ontario since before the federal election. The New Democrats were up 0.1 point to 22.9%, while the Greens were up 0.2 points to 4.5%.

In Quebec, the New Democrats dropped 7.5 points from October to November, a major shift in support. They averaged 37% last month, their lowest level of support since April. The Bloc Québécois gained 5.5 points to reach 22.9%, their highest since the election, while the Conservatives slipped 0.6 points to 19.0%. The Liberals were up 2.8 points to 16.0%, and the Greens were up 1.2 points to 3.2%.

The Conservatives dropped 5.6 points to 36.7% in British Columbia, allowing the New Democrats to pick up 8.3 points to reach 32.5%. The Liberals fell 8.7 points to 17.4%, while the Greens were up 6.2 points to 13.1%. This is the highest level of Green support in the province since January.

In Alberta, the Conservatives are unchanged at 60.3%, while the New Democrats are down only 0.7 points to 18.7%. The Liberals were down 2.1 points to 11.8%, and the Greens were up 5.1 points to 7.1%.

There was more change in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, as the Conservatives fell 7.5 points to 40.5%. The NDP picked up 1.7 points and stood at 34.1%, while the Liberals were down 0.4 points to 18.0%. The Greens were up 3.6 points to 4.8%. This is the lowest level of support I have for the Conservatives and the highest for the NDP in the Prairies since I started calculating monthly averages in January 2009. Have I been at this for that long?

Finally, in Atlantic Canada, the Conservatives fell one point to 34.5% while the New Democrats gained 4.1 points to reach 34.8%. The Liberals dropped 4.2 points to 25.2% and the Greens were down 0.2 points to 2.6%, below the 2.9% for "Others".

As you can see, I have changed the positioning of the parties on the seat projection pie chart. I placed the parties according to the left-right spectrum, since it gives a little more information than the random placement I had before. Placing the parties in this manner allows people to, if they wish, look at it from the perspective of left vs. right. You could say that on this chart the left-centre has a strong majority, or you could say that the right-centre has an even stronger majority. Or, you can not look at it this way at all. At least it provides the option.

With the November averages, the Conservatives are projected to win 134 seats in the 308-seat House of Commons, a drop of 15 seats since October and 32 seats from their current standing. The New Democrats win 102 seats, up one from October and unchanged from their current standing, while the Liberals win 68 seats, a gain of 12 since October and a doubling of their current representation. The Bloc Québécois wins three seats, up two from October and down one from their current standing, while the Greens win one seat, unchanged.

The Conservatives take 19 seats in British Columbia, 27 in Alberta, 15 in the Prairies, 51 in Ontario, eight in Quebec, 13 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north. A rough estimate gives them 150 seats in the 338-seat House of Commons that is planned for the 2015 election.

The New Democrats take 12 seats in British Columbia, one in Alberta, eight in the Prairies, 19 in Ontario, 53 in Quebec, eight in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north. Their 338-seat estimate is 110.

The Liberals win four seats in British Columbia, none in Alberta, five in the Prairies, 36 in Ontario, 11 in Quebec, 11 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north. Their 338-seat estimate is 74.

The Bloc's three seats are, of course, in Quebec while the Green seat is in British Columbia. They would still win this many seats in the 338 scenario.

November was a bit of a rough month for the Conservatives, as they dropped in every part of the country except Alberta. Their slips in Atlantic Canada and Quebec were insignificant, but British Columbia, the Prairies, and Ontario look to be important battlegrounds going forward. Yes, I include the Prairies as I believe that Saskatchewan will be a much more competitive province in 2015.

For the NDP, they are looking good in the West and on the Atlantic coast, but they need to be doing much better in Ontario if they ever want to form government. Their drop in Quebec is not too worrisome just yet as the Bloc hasn't really taken off, but if they choose the wrong leader from the province's perspective things could get dangerous for them.

And the Liberals are not looking very good anywhere but in Ontario. They are generally back to where they were there prior to the May debacle, but they are shedding support in Atlantic Canada, the one region they salvaged in the federal election.

Of course, things are going to be shaken up on Sunday when the Bloc names its leader and in March when the NDP names theirs. But any gains will need to be maintained by these new leaders and any losses will need to be made good, making their current standings in the polls not insignificant.

Nash and Ashton gain endorsements

2011-12-07T09:18:00.004-05:00

The New Democratic leadership hopefuls held their first debate on Sunday. It was a generally polite affair, but with two debates (one in French, one in English) between nine candidates squeezed into 120 minutes there wasn't much time to really get into it.

If I'm not mistaken, subsequent debates will be either all in French or all in English, which should give the participants more time to get into detail.

I thought it not a bad debate to get things started. But with the buzz about Nathan Cullen's performance, Brian Topp's targeting of Paul Dewar, and the trouble with Robert Chisholm's French, one is led to believe that the endorsement rankings may be a few notches below actual support for several candidates.

One hopes that a poll or two might be commissioned now that the debates have begun. While it won't tell us what NDP members think, it will give us an idea of what Canadians and NDP supporters think. These kinds of polls may not predict the race's outcome, but it will give us something to compare what the voting public wants to what the members decide.

But this being Wednesday, it is time for an endorsement update.

As always, you can open the images on the right in a new window to magnify.

Peggy Nash is this week's big winner, as she gained the endorsement of three-term Victoria MP Denise Savoie. Though she may not be a household name, Savoie does have quite a bit of respect on Parliament Hill as Deputy Speaker.

Savoie gives Nash an extra 7.5 points, bumping her up to 89 overall, or 19.5% of currently available endorsement points.

Nash is now only 15 points behind Thomas Mulcair, who has not picked up an endorsement in some time. Topp, too, has been quiet on this front. There are still 43 sitting NDP MPs that have not endorsed any candidates, so there are still plenty of points to go around, not to mention the support of NDP party leaders in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, and Prince Edward Island and the myriad of MLAs, MHAs, and MPPs in those provinces.

Niki Ashton is also up one point thanks to the endorsement of British Columbia MLA Guy Gentner. This gives Ashton 18.5 points to 4.1% of the total, pushing her back into fifth place ahead of Paul Dewar.

None of the other candidates have picked up any endorsements this week. Will the debate shake any fence sitters loose? I imagine we'll get another round of endorsements after the holidays to get the ball rolling on 2012.

(Click here for an explanation of the point system and here for the value of various endorsements.)

The Bloc Québécois leadership race comes to a close on Sunday, as the winner will be announced. The race is effectively over, as votes were due last week.

EDIT: Sorry for the mistake, this is not true. For the life of me, however, I am sure that the Bloc originally stated that mailed-in ballots had to be post-marked by November 28. Now, votes need to be received by December 10. Did they change the rules mid-campaign, or am I remembering incorrectly? I imagine it is the latter, as it would have been noticed more widely. It seems there was a misunderstanding somewhere.

EDIT Part 2: On further review, it seems that a statement on the Bloc's website ("Les bulletins de vote devront être expédiés au plus tard le 28 novembre 2011.") was misinterpreted by many people, including myself. It says that the ballots should be sent at the latest by November 28. The statement is referring to the Bloc sending out the ballots by November 28, not that voters need to send them out by then. The more detailed rule document makes this clear. Apologies for the error.

But that hasn't stopped the endorsements from pouring into Daniel Paillé's campaign. Shortly after my last update, Paillé emerged from a meeting with the Parti Québécois's caucus with the endorsement of 21 PQ MNAs.

This has given him a big 21-point jump, pushing him up to 53.7% of all available points. Jean-François Fortin has dropped down to 30.2% while Maria Mourani is now at 16.1% of the total available.

These endorsements indicate that if Paillé wins he will have good support inside both the PQ and the BQ.

Sunday's result could be a bit of a surprise, though. The race has been relatively low-key and it is difficult to get a gauge on what the members think. After May's defeat, how many of the party's 36,000 or so members are still engaged enough to vote? Are the ones who are engaged looking to change the party, which would benefit Fortin and Mourani, or are they the never-say-die, veteran base, which would benefit Paillé?

It will be interesting to see the results. I'd say that Paillé is most likely to win, but it is very possible that Fortin could also pull through. I don't think Mourani has much of a chance, but no outcome can be completely ruled out.

Charest wins, Marois loses, neither does good enough

2011-12-06T09:04:00.000-05:00

Before getting to last night's results in Bonaventure, I invite you to take a look at my article at The Huffington Post Canada on Sunday's NDP debate.

Normally, Bonaventure does not showcase gripping electoral races. Nathalie Normandeau and Gérard D. Lévesque were both long-time and popular local MNAs, and the riding is solidly in the Liberal camp. But with Jean Charest's numbers tanking, Pauline Marois's doing worse, and the emergence of François Legault's CAQ, all eyes were on the by-election. RDI, Quebec's equivalent of CBC News Network, kept a running tally of the votes as they were coming in.

To many, this election was a test of Marois's leadership, which is already on the rocks. She could have lowered the stakes in Bonaventure, but instead she spent a lot of the campaign beside her candidate, Sylvain Roy. This made it personal. And the results are in the uncertain gray area of not good enough, but not bad enough to topple her.

This first chart compares the vote share of the parties in the 2008 general election and last night's by-election, with the 2008 result on the left and the 2011 result on the right.

As you can see, it was a much closer race between the Liberals and the PQ. The Liberals dropped 14.7 points to below the 50% threshold, while the PQ picked up 8.1 points.

Legault's CAQ did not present a candidate. Marois said that had he done so, the federalist vote would have split and the PQ would have won. I'm not sure I agree, as the last poll from Segma (which turned out to be very close to the result) showed that the CAQ would take more support away from the PQ than it would the Liberals.

The ADQ dropped 1.2 points while the Greens did not run a candidate in 2008.

Québec Solidaire improved its score dramatically, picking up 5.7 points to go from 3.2% to 8.9%. Bonaventure is part of the federal riding that elected an NDP MP in May, so this may not be surprising. Patricia Chartier, the QS candidate, even works for the federal NDP. But that QS can do as well as this in a rural riding is a good sign for them. Their generally decent poll results, at least compared to their election results, seem to be for real.

I don't think the PQ was ever in the running to take this riding. If the Parti Québécois was more popular at the moment this Liberal fortress could have easily fallen as Charest is extremely unpopular. It happened last year in Kamouraska-Témiscouata. But Marois's troubles always made a PQ victory here unlikely.

This puts her in a gray area. There was some talk that after being defeated in Bonaventure a whole swathe of PQ MNAs would resign from caucus. If the PQ had gotten over the 40% threshold I would have thought that Bonaventure would have been an unmistakeable moral victory for the PQ and Marois. Below 35% would have been only a few ticks better than 2008 and so would have sunk her. But at 37%, Marois neither did badly enough to force her opponents within the party to act nor did she do well enough to shut them up completely.

Turnout in Bonaventure was actually quite good for a by-election: 54.6%. Accordingly, there were only 725 fewer valid ballots cast in the by-election than there was in the last general election in the riding. This makes it easy to compare total votes.

The difficulty for Charest to claim anything but a disappointing victory is clear. Damien Arsenault, the new MNA for the riding, took 2,820 fewer votes than did Normandeau only three years ago.

The Parti Québécois gained 1,091, a modest but positive amount, while Québec Solidaire almost tripled their vote haul, going from 533 to 1,422.

The only winner from last night's vote is, in my view, Québec Solidaire. They increased their support by a significant amount in the kind of riding that isn't supposed to be fertile territory for QS. Had this by-election taken place in central or eastern Montreal, we might have easily seen a second QS MNA elected.

Both the Liberals and the PQ can't take too much from last night's vote. The Liberals won, yes, but they were always supposed to win. Their vote dropped significantly, and had the CAQ been in the race it would have dropped even more. For the PQ, it was a good showing but not nearly as good as it should have been if Pauline Marois really isn't the problem. To have the party leader in the riding for much of the campaign during the tenure of a supremely unpopular government and for the PQ to only gain eight points is not much to boast about. But at the same time, it is not a step backwards.

The big loser then, has to be the ADQ. The ADQ took fewer votes from a slightly smaller pool. While this isn't a mark against the CAQ, which is in talks for a merger with the ADQ, it certainly doesn't give Gérard Deltell a lot of bargaining power. A merger now more easily becomes a takeover.

The Bonaventure by-election was probably not going to be a decisive moment in Quebec's politics. The next 24 hours could prove me wrong, but it appears that things are still in limbo for the time being.

Farmers better represented in the House than the field

2011-12-05T08:50:00.001-05:00

The House of Commons sealed the fate of the Canadian Wheat Board last week, removing the organization’s control over grain sales in Western Canada. The decision that will have a profound effect on the lives of thousands of farmers was approved by a House made up of, among others, lawyers, doctors and career politicians. But farmers, too, voted to end the board’s 76 year monopoly.

You can read the rest of the article on The Globe and Mail website here.

The House of Commons has historically been seen as a debating club for lawyers, but that isn't quite the case. Though lawyers have been the most common occupation of MPs, farmers come in second. They used to make up a larger proportion of the House than they do today, but that was also the case in the general population as well. The Globe article looks at this in light of the demise of the Wheat Board.

But in the course of my research, I noticed a few amusing little tidbits. Some of you may have seen me write about this on Twitter last week.

In the House of Commons' 144-year history, 27 MPs listed "gentleman" as their occupation. This was an "occupation" more common to a bygone era, but Peter Stoffer, current MP for Sackville-Eastern Shore has listed his occupation (at least in the past) as "country gentleman"!

Fans of There Will be Blood may find it funny that five MPs listed their occupation as "oilman". Surprisingly, only one of them was from Alberta - the other four were from Ontario.

There have been eight students, six of them currently sitting in the ranks of the New Democratic Party. The other two were first elected in 1921 and 1974.

Nine MPs have been "persons of independent means" and three were undertakers.

All of this information, and the information used for this Globe article, was gleaned from this website. Click around and you'll find a lot of interesting stuff.

Liberals in second?

2011-12-02T12:18:00.003-05:00

With an election almost four years away, the stakes are low. But are the Liberals really back in second place?

You can read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post Canada site here.

Nanos released a new poll earlier this week. Putting the Liberals in second place ahead of the New Democrats, it got some attention.

Nanos was last in the field October 20-24, and since then the Conservatives have dropped 2.1 points. They stand at 35.6% in this poll, a level of support the party was very familiar with for the year prior to the May 2011 election.

The Liberals, at 28.1%, have gained 4.7 points while the New Democrats, with 27.3%, have dropped 2.7 points.

The Bloc Québécois and Greens are at 3.9% apiece.

The most interesting result is in Ontario, where the Liberals are up 8.3 points to 38.8%. The Conservatives are down 5.2 points to 37.2%, while the NDP is down 2.9 points to 19.6%. This is a remarkable result for the Liberals, but it is difficult to attribute this to the Ontario election. The big jump in Liberal support has come since that late October poll, which was done well after the provincial vote. There could be a bit of delay, but it doesn't seem to explain away all of this increase. It appears that Ontario is reverting to its pre-2011 status of the Liberals and Tories neck-and-neck and the NDP at 20% or lower. An Ontario-based NDP leader like Brian Topp, Peggy Nash, or Paul Dewar might help in that department.

In Quebec, Nanos confirms what four others polls have shown: the NDP is below 40%. They've dropped 7.4 points to 37.7%, while the Liberals are up 5.4 points to 23.6%. That is a much higher result than other polls have shown. The Conservatives are up five points to 20.1% while the Bloc is up 0.7 points to 15.9%. Nanos continues to be the only pollster showing the Bloc at such a low level of support.

Elsewhere, the Conservatives are down a point in British Columbia but still lead with 39.4%. The New Democrats are up 2.7 points to 28.8% while the Liberals are down 5.8 points to 20.4%. The three-way race in Atlantic Canada continues, while in the Prairies (which Nanos lumps Alberta into) the Conservatives are down 7.3 points to 48.6%. The NDP is down 2.2 points to 24.3% while the Liberals are up 6.6 points to 21%.

In the 308-seat House of Commons, the Conservatives win 132 seats with these poll numbers. The New Democrats take 94 seats and the Liberals 81, with one seat going to the Greens in British Columbia.

The Conservatives win 20 seats in British Columbia, 25 in Alberta, 17 in the Prairies, 46 in Ontario, nine in Quebec, 14 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

The New Democrats win 11 seats in British Columbia, one in Alberta, six in the Prairies, 17 in Ontario, 52 in Quebec, six in Atlantic Canada and one in the north.

The Liberals win four seats in British Columbia, two in Alberta, five in the Prairies, 43 in Ontario, 14 in Quebec, 12 in Atlantic Canada, and one in the north.

Yes, two Liberal seats in Alberta. In vain, I will try to head-off the incredulity that this will cause. I already see the "two Liberal seats in Alberta?!?!" comments coming.

Nanos doesn't separate Alberta from the two other Prairie provinces like every other pollster does. Because of this, I need to separate the results myself, and doing so with this poll gives the Conservatives 52% and the Liberals 18% in Alberta. This means a drop of more than 1/5th for the Tories and a doubling of Liberal support. With that happening, the Liberals gain Calgary Northeast and Edmonton Centre.

Do I think this would actually happen? No. But that is what the numbers show. Double the support of the Liberals and drop the Tories by almost one quarter, and, surprise surprise, the Conservatives don't sweep everything but Edmonton-Strathcona.

With a 338-seat House of Commons, a quick estimate gives the Conservatives 148 seats, the New Democrats 100 seats, and the Liberals 89, with the Greens still winning one.

This is only one poll, and there isn't enough information yet to say that the Liberals have definitely moved into second place, or even whether they are in a tight race with the NDP. Yes, the next election is almost four years away and, yes, the NDP has no leader, but this poll is what it is. What it suggests is that the Liberals are not dead and do have potential to make a comeback, while the Conservative lead is quite wobbly.

Arsenault on track to win Bonaventure

2011-12-01T10:34:00.000-05:00

Quebecers love polls. Le Devoir/The Montreal Gazette and La Presse put out polls on a monthly basis, while in the last federal campaign one-third of Quebec's 75 ridings were polled individually. Less than a dozen were polled in the rest of the country.

A by-election in a safe Liberal riding far removed from Quebec's urban centres would not, you would think, garner much attention. But no, this week a second poll for the Bonaventure by-election has been released. By comparison, the last spate of federal by-elections, two of which were hotly contested and in major urban centres, were not polled at all!

This Bonaventure by-election, however, is not insignificant. Pauline Marois has been pressing the flesh for days in the riding, despite the odds being stacked against her. Helping out the local PQ candidate Sylvain Roy raises the stakes for Marois, as a loss will hurt her more than it otherwise would have. Of course, the PQ put off a national convention for this by-election so it would have been bad optics for her to put up her feet this past week.

But for all her efforts, it does not look like the Parti Québécois will pull off another upset in Bonaventure like they did in Kamouraska-Témiscouata a year ago. The poll by Segma Recherche for Graffici.ca and a local radio station suggests that little has changed since their last poll taken mid-campaign.

Liberal candidate Damien Arsenault has dropped only three points, and leads with 49%. Granted, that is a big drop from Nathalie Normandeau's numbers, but it is still almost a majority. The PQ is down one point to 35%, while Patricia Chartier of Québec Solidaire is up three points to 9%. That is not a bad number for QS, as it has not had a great record outside of Montreal.

The ADQ's Georges Painchaud is only at 4%, while Jean Cloutier of the Greens is at 3%. Cloutier got some attention this week as he invited francophones to vote for the PQ as it has the best chance to win while also having what he considers better positions on the environment.

Independent Martin Zibeau scored 0.4%.

Many have thought that Arsenault would win because he is an Arsenault, but that may not be the case. His town, Saint-Elzéar, is not exactly a metropolis in the region. Instead, Segma has found that 44% of Liberal supporters will be voting for Arsenault because of the good work that Normandeau did when she was the MNA. Only 35% said they were voting because of Arsenault himself, while 15% said they were voting for the Liberals because of their approval of Jean Charest's government.

For the other parties, Charest is the lightning rod. More than half said they were voting for another party because of their dissatisfaction with the Liberals, while only 23% identified the candidate as their primary reason for voting the way they intend to.

But what if François Legault's CAQ had entered a candidate into the race? Painchaud was likely hoping that an ADQ/CAQ merger would already be in the works by the day of the vote when he decided to carry the ADQ banner. But it would not have necessarily given him a win. Only 15% of respondents said they would have voted CAQ if the party had entered a candidate into the race. That would have put the party in a decent third, dropping the PQ to some 29% according to the poll, but nowhere near the Liberals, who would have dropped to about 45%.

Monday's vote looks like a slam dunk for Damien Arsenault and the Liberals, giving Jean Charest the first bit of good news he has had in quite some time. Though 35% would be a good improvement over the PQ's performance in the riding in 2008, it might not be enough of a gain to give Marois something to boast about. Will she survive the results? I don't think Bonaventure will put a stake in her leadership's heart, but it might be another nail in the coffin.

Chisholm and Dewar gain endorsements

2011-11-30T09:47:00.000-05:00

A few endorsements were handed out over the last week to candidates in both the NDP and Bloc Québécois leadership races.

The biggest gainer this week was Robert Chisholm, an MP from Nova Scotia and former leader of the provincial party there.

Chisholm picked up the endorsement of Ryan Cleary, an MP from Newfoundland and Labrador, as well as the Newfoundland and Labrador CUPE. This particular union is small, only 6,000 members, so it isn't worth very much. But overall, with the one-term Cleary, Chisholm has picked up 2.9 points and now stands at 22.4 overall, giving him 5% of the available endorsement points.

Chisholm is not the only candidate scooping up support in Atlantic Canada, however. Peggy Nash has the endorsement of NL NDP leader Lorraine Michael and former federal NDP leader Alexa McDonough, who hails from Nova Scotia. Dominic Cardy, leader of the New Brunswick NDP has opted for Thomas Mulcair, while New Brunswick MP Yvon Godin has sided with Brian Topp.

As there are about 4,300 members in Atlantic Canada, out of a total of some 95,000 nationally, this is a small pie to cut up between these candidates.

The other gainer this week was Paul Dewar, who got the endorsement of former MP Tony Martin. That bumps him up two points to 4% of the total. He has also moved from sixth to fifth, over-taking Niki Ashton.

(Click here for a description of the point system and here for a breakdown on how points are assigned.)

But how the membership breaks down provincially is something that will be absolutely crucial when the votes are counted. Let's do a simple exercise to demonstrate why.

Let's assume that every endorsement is equal, and divide up the membership by the proportion of endorsements from each province that have gone to the various candidates. For example, when the NDP last reported their membership numbers earlier this month there were 5,558 members in Quebec. There have been 43 endorsements from Quebec, and Thomas Mulcair has 31 of them, or 72%. If we give him 72% of the member votes in Quebec, that is 4,007.

If we do that for all the candidates, Brian Topp comes out way ahead with a total of 34,657 votes. His endorsements in British Columbia, 20 of the 27, gives him a huge lead as the province has 31,456 members.

Second is Mulcair with 16,227 votes, demonstrating that being far ahead in Quebec gives him very little. His greatest vote haul in this simple calculation comes from Ontario, and he gets more from Saskatchewan than he does his home province.

Third is Paul Dewar with 11,705 votes, thanks to his support in Ontario, British Columbia, and Manitoba.

Peggy Nash comes in with 9,385 votes, followed by Nathan Cullen (5,825), Niki Ashton (5,416), Robert Chisholm (3,172), and Roméo Saganash (388). Chisholm being so low, despite having good support in Atlantic Canada, indicates how regional bases of support can only go so far, particularly if your region does not have a large proportion of the federal party's membership.

A couple of endorsements were also handed out to the Bloc Québécois leadership contenders this past week, but with voting having been closed on Monday they may have had very little effect.

Daniel Paillé got the endorsement of former MP Thierry St-Cyr while Jean-François Fortin got the endorsement of former MP Hélène Alarie. This bumped up both candidates by two points.

There are now 100 endorsement points available in the Bloc race, so the share of the points matches the number of points each candidate has: Paillé leads with 44%, Fortin has 36.5%, and Maria Mourani has 19.5%. The end result could be different, but my gut tells me this could be close.

If Fortin becomes the leader there shouldn't be too many consequences. The race hasn't been dirty enough to force André Bellavance, who supported Paillé, or Mourani to resign from the House of Commons. Fortin will be in the news a little bit more and Quebecers will have four years to get to know him.

If Paillé wins, however, there could be some reverberations. I still don't think either Fortin or Mourani would resign, but Louis Plamondon could. He has sat in the House of Commons since the 1980s, and so has more than put in his time. He may choose to resign to give Paillé a chance to win the by-election and enter the House of Commons. But would the Bloc win that race? It's a good riding for the Bloc in terms of its profile, but Plamondon has been there so long that his support may not so easily shift over to Paillé. However, the NDP is down a touch in the polls and voters may feel that having the leader of the Bloc, small as it is, as their MP may be more worthwhile than the 60th NDP MP from the province. It would be an interesting race, though, as the NDP would not have a hard time finding a quality candidate.

We shall found out what will happen soon enough, as the results of the Bloc's leadership vote will be revealed on December 11.

Redford/McGuinty vs. Smith/Hudak

2011-11-29T10:35:00.000-05:00

Ontario and Alberta are two important provinces in a period of political flux.

The governing Alberta Tories have a new leader at the helm in Alison Redford, who hails from the more progressive side of the Progressive Conservative Party. She has a feisty challenger in Danielle Smith, leader of the right-wing Wildrose Party.

In Ontario, the Liberals were re-elected but with only a minority government, and the province could be heading to the polls at any time. Premier Dalton McGuinty’s main opponent at Queen’s Park, Tim Hudak, comes from the more conservative wing of the Ontario’s PCs.

Two provinces with premiers from different parties, and yet they have a lot in common.

You can read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post Canada website here.

What Alison Redford and Dalton McGuinty don't have in common, however, is their standing in the polls. The most recent numbers out of Alberta, reported last week by the Calgary Herald, show that the Alberta Tories are outpacing their rivals by 32 points.

The Environics telephone poll shows that the Progressive Conservatives have dropped only three points since July, and lead with 51%. Redford wasn't the party leader at that point, so that is good news for her.

The Wildrose Party is up three points to 19%, while the NDP is unchanged at 14%. The Liberals have slipped one point to 13%.

Details in the Herald report are slim, but it appears that the NDP is running second in Edmonton with 21%. That falls nicely in line with the most recent data from Lethbridge College and Angus-Reid. Wildrose is running second to the Tories in Calgary, as would be expected.

The seat projection model for Alberta is still in a rudimentary stage, and needs to be revamped entirely. But as it stands, these results would give 81 seats to the Progressive Conservatives, four to the NDP, and two to Wildrose. I imagine, though, that the more sophisticated model, once it is complete, would show a slightly different result.

What we can say confidently is that with 51% and a very divided opposition the Progressive Conservatives have a good shot at a virtual sweep. The NDP is doing well enough to retain, and perhaps even grow, its toehold in Edmonton, while the Liberals are looking to be in trouble. If under Raj Sherman the Alberta Liberals see a drop in support next year, it would be the trifecta of the provincial Liberal decimation in the Prairies after the elections in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

It is still very, very early going for Alison Redford and this kind of bump is to be expected. Ironically, in the interview I mention in the Huffington Post article, Danielle Smith made the same argument, saying that this kind of honeymoon in the polls comes with the territory of being a new leader. What she could have added is that she knows this by experience, as her party had a bump after she took on the leadership. But Wildrose is now far removed from where it was a year ago.

Can Quebec’s new party win over non-francophones?

2011-11-28T11:02:00.000-05:00

Though the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) was officially launched as a political party only two weeks ago, it would virtually sweep the province of Quebec if an election were held today – but only if Gilles Duceppe stays on the sidelines.

You can read the rest of the article on The Globe and Mail website here.

Quebec is the place to be in Canadian politics right now. In addition to the CAQ, there is Jean-Martin Aussant's Option Nationale that could be a nuisance for the Parti Québécois as well. The political geography of Quebec could be very, very different after the next election.

Or, it could revert to type and François Legault's experiment will fall flat on its face. Most pundits out of Quebec do find it somewhat puzzling that Legault is so popular. He is not known for having much charisma, and he is only a few years removed from the PQ. And then there is the Gilles Duceppe factor, who would win a majority according to my projections based on CROP's numbers, seven months after voters rejected him at the polls. It is a bit of a head-scratcher.

In the Globe piece I averaged the Léger and CROP polls. Here's the full breakdown of this averaging:

The colour chosen in this graph (and future graphs) for the CAQ is based on the dominant colour of their logo. With the PQ, the ADQ, and now ON there is a lot of blue in Quebec politics.

But for Jean Charest and Pauline Marois, it's just the blues. Sorry.

These are the first real poll results including the CAQ, so it is a very interesting starting point. Note that the CAQ is strongest around Quebec City and outside of the two main urban centres. It's the same problem the ADQ had. Also note that the CAQ is not having any traction among non-francophones. The Liberals still own that vote.

What's most exciting is that this Globe article features the first projection by the new projection model for Quebec. The model is regional, using the data from the CROP and Léger polls to make projections based on regional support in Montreal RMR, Quebec RMR, and the rest of the province. Thankfully, and I confirmed it, both CROP and Léger use the same regional breakdown for their polls.

But how to include the CAQ? That is a bit of a trickier affair, as we have nothing to base their support upon. If they end up merging with the ADQ, the easiest thing would likely be to use the ADQ's support as the base. But in the meantime, the regional support levels are being applied uniformly throughout each region, with small variations based on the shifting support of the other parties. Quite interestingly, the CAQ's regional support in each riding usually fills the empty space created by proportionately dropping the support of the other parties almost perfectly.

After using this system, I noticed that the CAQ was winning some ridings in Montreal from the Liberals that just seemed unnatural. So, a first for ThreeHundredEight, the projection model in Quebec is also taking into account the linguistic profile of some ridings.

In any riding that has a disproportionately high percentage of non-francophones, the CAQ's support is determined by their support among the two linguistic groups. This means that in the West Island, particularly in ridings where non-francophones make up the vast majority of the population, the CAQ is not projected to do very well. Without using these linguistic profiles (and Elections Quebec has a wonderful amount of data on the population profiles of ridings in the province), the Liberals lose a lot of ridings that they simply won't lose.

What's great about this new model is that it allows me to use every scrap of data that can be pulled from a Quebec provincial poll. If an ADQ-CAQ merger is on the books I'll need to do some re-jigging, but I think the model should provide a very good guide of the likely outcome of the next election.

Bloc leadership race comes to a close

2011-11-25T09:48:00.001-05:00

The votes need to be in the mail by Monday, but it will not be until December 11 before the ballots will be counted and the next leader of the Bloc Québécois will be announced.

At one time a prestigious post, the leadership of the Bloc Québécois is not what it used to be, with only four MPs in the House of Commons and fundraising slowing to a trickle. Nevertheless, three candidates are vying for the job.

You can read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post Canada website here.

Coincidentally, this morning CROP has a new poll out in La Presse. The provincial data is fascinating, and I'll get to it next week, but let's take a look at the federal results for Quebec.

CROP last reported in mid-October, and since then the New Democrats have dropped nine points to 37%. This is the fourth consecutive poll (the others being from Harris-Decima, Ipsos-Reid, and Léger Marketing) putting the NDP below 40%, so we can say this is confirmed. Where the other parties are, however, is up for debate.

CROP sees the Conservatives up one point to 23% and the Bloc up six points to 21%. All of these recent polls have shown the Bloc up over 20%, and with Léger this is the second poll to show the BQ up a significant amount since October.

But Conservative support is pegged at anywhere between 15% (Léger) and this 23%, so there is a lot less of a consensus there.

Having the Liberals at 15% squares well with other polls, and for CROP that is a gain of two points. So, we're seeing the Tories and Liberals stable and the Bloc making gains at the expense of the NDP.

In terms of seats, these numbers would net the New Democrats 54 seats (down five from their current haul) and the Conservatives 13 seats (up eight). The Liberals would take five seats and the Bloc Québécois three.

These recent polls show that the Bloc is not quite dead yet. It is still on life-support and needs something to shock it back into cognizance, but taking over its leadership is not quite the poison pill it appears to be. The problem is, however, that the NDP and Bloc are contesting a lot of the same ridings and both parties have generally uniform support. This means that even with a closer race like we saw in the Léger poll the NDP is still able to take virtually all of the NDP/BQ contests. Unless the Bloc Québécois can get itself back over 30%, or drag the NDP down below it, they are unlikely to win enough seats to reach official party status in the House of Commons.

A proposal for the House and the Senate

2011-11-24T11:18:00.001-05:00

The Conservatives, Liberals, and New Democrats have all proposed changes that could be made to how seats are allocated and distributed in the House of Commons.

The Conservative proposal aims to improve representation by adding 30 seats to the House, while the New Democrats have proposed to give Quebec more seats than are being offered by the Tories in order to keep the province at the same level of representation it had when it was recognized as a "nation within a united Canada."

The Liberals then came forward with a proposal to keep the number of seats in the House at 308 to reduce costs, and change the allocation of seats within that 308 to improve representation. They are the only party to suggest removing seats from certain provinces.

All of these proposals are aimed at improving representation, but all of them fail to give each province proper representation. Due to the senatorial clause requiring that a province have at least as many seats in the House of Commons as they do in the Senate, changes of real substance are impossible. In order to give each province proper representation but keep Prince Edward Island at four seats, the number of MPs needs to be increased to over 900.

In other words, all of these solutions are temporary, incomplete solutions that pass the problem on to the future. If we want proper representation in the House of Commons (and that is up for debate as well), something bolder needs to be attempted.

If there was no senatorial clause and no fear of removing seats from a province, proper representation could be easily achieved. But those are two major obstacles.

In order to get the senatorial clause off the books, the provinces would need to agree. As there are a lot of provinces that stand to lose seats for no other gain that is a non-starter.

To make a change to representation in the House of Commons requires a removal of the senatorial clause, and in order to remove the clause something needs to be given to the provinces in return. Taking this into consideration, here is my humble proposal and I invite readers to pick it apart.

I should point out that this is my proposed solution to this particular problem, if it is a problem that needs a solution. I am not advocating that either the House or the Senate needs substantial reform. It just seemed like an interesting puzzle to tackle.

Firstly, let's look at how to change the House of Commons formula for allocating seats. We will assume that the senatorial and grandfather clauses have been negotiated away (more on that later).

The proposal is a simple one. Every ten years, the number of seats each province receives is determined based on the newest data from the last census.

The proportion of the national population made up by each province and territory is calculated, and then applied to the number of seats in the House of Commons at the time of the re-distribution. In other words, there are 308 seats in the House now and if a province has 10% of the country's population, the province receives 30.8 seats. All decimals are then rounded-up, so this would give the province 31 seats. Using the latest estimates from Statistics Canada, this would give us the following seat distribution:

There are two reasons for rounding-up across the board. For one, it ensures that the territories would each have at least one MP. Secondly, it increases the size of the House incrementally every ten years, ensuring that MPs aren't representing huge ridings several decades from now but also ensuring that the House isn't growing by 30 seats every ten years.

Now, to the Senate. In order to get this kind of change approved by some of the provinces that stand to lose seats using this new formula, they need to be given something in the Senate. My proposal envisions a complete overhaul of how senators are chosen.

There would be 100 senators in this new Senate, with 10 from each province. This is similar to the U.S. Senate, where each state is represented by two senators. In this proposal, the House of Commons provides representation by population while the Senate is our chamber of second thought - an assembly of the provinces.

Senators, however, are not simply appointed by the federal government in this proposal. To get representation by population in the House, the federal apparatus gives up a little power in the Senate. In this proposal, the federal government chooses 40 of the senators while the remaining 60 are chosen by the provincial governments.

But in order to give the Senate a longer view towards the legislation it reviews, senators are not chosen en masse.

Each province would appoint two senators after each provincial election, meaning that senators would serve for three "terms". Each term begins and ends with a provincial election. This means senators would be entering and leaving the Senate at different times. A string of majority provincial governments would mean a senator's term could last 15 years (or 12 in the case of fixed-election provinces), while a string of minority governments could reduce a senator's term significantly. With each new provincial election, two new senators are appointed by the provincial government and the two longest serving senators from that province are dropped.

The purpose of giving the provinces the choice of 60 of the Senate's 100 members is to give them a reason to get on board. Provincial governments would actually have representatives, chosen by the provincial party leaders themselves, in Ottawa. While some provinces would lose representation in the Senate, they would gain influence as those members would be directly responsible to the provincial governments.

It would be the same system for the federal appointees, though they would sit for four terms. After each federal election, 10 federal senators (one from each province) would be appointed to the Senate, with the longest serving federal senator from each province leaving the Senate.

But the Senate should not be a place to reward political operatives, and it should be accountable to the population. To reflect this, in addition to nominating candidates in provincial and federal ridings, parties would be required to nominate the people they would appoint to the Senate during an election campaign. This would prevent defeated candidates for the House of Commons being appointed to the Senate, since both riding candidates and senatorial candidates would need to be named for the vote is held.

For example, in the last election campaign each party would have nominated one senator per province that they would appoint if elected as the government. So, in addition to the 308 candidates they would also have 10 senator candidates. This would give voters an extra thing to consider when heading to the ballot box, and force parties to choose worthy senatorial candidates in order to help their parties' electoral chances.

Provincial parties would do the same during their election campaigns, nominating the two senators they would appoint to the Senate if elected.

One of the objections some provinces have to an elected senate would be removed in this manner. Elected senators would compete with the provincial government as a voice for the province. Provincial senators appointed by provincial governments would not be in competition with their governments - they would be answerable to them.

To avoid cases where senatorial nominees would resign immediately after being appointed in order to give the government in power the opportunity to appoint someone else, first-term senators would not be replaced if they retire. Only in case of death would a first-term senator's vacated spot be filled by the government, while vacancies arising from the death or retirement of two-, three, or four-term senators would be filled by the government in power but these appointees would be considered to have sat for as long as their replacement.

In other words, the replacement of a retiring fourth-term senator would only sit out that remaining term. Of course, the governing party could nominate this senator again in the next election campaign.

This system would retain the long-term view that senators can currently take into account, as terms could be as long as 16 years for federal senators. It would also make the make-up of the Senate different from the House, giving it a different point of view, both in terms of the staggering-in of appointees and the different parties represented.

Assuming that no senators would have died or retired and that this system had already been in place for the last four federal elections and three provincial elections, the make-up of the Senate would be as follows:

This would certainly give a lot of legislation sobre second thought, particularly considering that the voting blocks would not be as monolithic as they are now. The 56 Conservative/Progressive Conservative/Saskatchewan Party senators, along with the six B.C. Liberals, would be expected to vote together on a lot of legislation, but if the federal government is proposing things that are not in line with the interests of, say, Atlantic Canadian provinces, the coalition of 62 conservatives could fall apart. If the 16 Progressive Conservatives from Atlantic Canada voted with the opposition, for example, they could send a bill back to the House for revision.

In this way, the Senate would be more useful and also more accountable, as senatorial nominees would play a role in ensuring that their provincial or federal parties have success in elections and they would also play a role in ensuring that they can be joined by like-minded senators in subsequent elections. A senator that enrages the population may hurt his party's chances in the next election, meaning the balance of power within a provincial delegation could be changed. But at the same time, as a senator is in for at least three terms, they would be able to do what is right rather than what is popular from time to time.

By giving the provinces an incentive to remove the senatorial clause, this proposal improves representation within the House. It also makes the Senate a potentially more effective chamber with far more diverging points of view and senators not accountable to the federal government. It also has an aspect of electoral support thrown in, giving senators greater legitimacy.

Is our current system dysfunctional? Perhaps not, and these changes are not required. But it is, I hope, an interesting alternative solution.

Over to you readers for comment and criticism!

Ashton, Dewar, and Paillé pick up new endorsements

2011-11-23T08:44:00.000-05:00

Manitoba is putting its weight behind two candidates for the race to be the next New Democratic leader, though that hasn't changed the breakdown of the three frontrunners, while the Bloc Québécois moves into the final days of its leadership campaign.

Niki Ashton is this week's big mover, as she has picked up the endorsement of a smattering of Manitoba MLAs (including her father) as well as the MP for Joliette, Francine Raynault. Ashton has jumped up 7.5 points in the endorsement rankings, now giving her a total of 17.5 points, or 4.0% of the total. She has moved from seventh to fifth in the rankings.

Paul Dewar is also up this week, thanks to more endorsements from the Manitoba NDP. He also picked up the endorsement of Catherine Bell, former NDP MP from British Columbia. This puts him up 5.5 points for a total of 16, or 3.6% of the total. He is still in sixth.

Also moving this week but not due to any new endorsements is Robert Chisholm. The Nova Scotia MLAs who endorsed him along with their premier, Darrell Dexter, have been added to the endorsement rankings. This does not move Chisholm from fourth, but gives him an extra 4.5 points for 4.4% of the total.

Moving downwards is Nathan Cullen, who has dropped from fifth place to seventh in the endorsement rankings.

These are small movements when taking into account the gap that exists between the top tier candidates (Brian Topp, Thomas Mulcair, and Peggy Nash) and the second tier candidates. With the endorsement of Pierre Ducasse (who I haven't added to the rankings, as he doesn't fit into any of the categories), Nash is looking like a good compromise candidate if the party splits between Topp and Mulcair.

Chisholm, Ashton, Dewar, and Cullen look to be the second tier candidates, with Chisholm getting much of the Atlantic Canada vote, Ashton and Dewar the Manitoba vote, and Cullen some of the British Columbian vote. This puts Ashton and Dewar at a disadvantage, as they appear to be fishing the same pond, though Dewar is likely to get more Canada-wide support as well.

There has also been a little movement in the race for the Bloc Québécois leadership. The last debate was held last night, and for all intents and purposes the campaign is as good as over. The deadline for submitting the mail-in ballot is Monday.

The only change this week is Daniel Paillé's pick-up of former MP Raynald Blais. This might seem relatively mundane, but it is a more important endorsement than it appears at first glance.

Blais was the MP for Gaspésie - Iles-de-la-Madeleine before the 2011 election, and he also had the good sense to resign before the debacle. He doesn't have the stigma of having been rejected by the voters, but more importantly he is a former MP from the Gaspésie, the same region as Jean-François Fortin. The Gaspésie is a close-knit community, so for Blais to opt for the Montreal-based Paillé rather than a fellow Gaspesian is not insignificant.

(Click here for a description of the point system, and here for a breakdown on how points are assigned.)

But though the Bloc Québécois race is coming to an end, the New Democratic race is just getting started. The first debate is scheduled for next month and attention is going to turn from these preliminary maneuvers to the nitty-gritty. It should be an interesting contest.

Another incumbent victory, but Vancouver isn't attached to status quo

2011-11-22T09:47:00.001-05:00

Gregor Robertson continued the winning ways of Canada’s incumbents over the weekend, being re-elected as Vancouver’s mayor.

Mr. Robertson captured 53 per cent of votes cast and all seven of his Vision Vancouver Party candidates won their council seats, with the remaining three going to opposition parties.

After the federal Conservative victory in May and the re-election of sitting governments in Prince Edward Island, Manitoba, Ontario, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Saskatchewan this fall, Gregor Robertson makes it 7-0 for incumbents in major elections in 2011.

But the thirst for the status quo is not ubiquitous among Vancouverites. Not even a fresh take on the party in charge has improved the fortunes of the governing B.C. Liberals.

You can read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post Canada website here.

But to switch over to the other side of the country, Léger Marketing has some new federal numbers out for Quebec today. They show that the New Democrats are losing a little bit of their shine in Quebec, echoing the drop in support that Harris-Decima and Ipsos-Reid identified earlier this month.

Léger was last in the field between October 11 and 12, and since then the NDP has dropped six points to 37%. The Bloc Québécois has taken advantage and is up six points to 27%, the narrowest gap between the two parties since the May election.

The Liberals are up four points to 15%, while the Conservatives are down four points to 15%. Some of the follow-up questions Léger asked concerning unilingual auditors general and the long gun registry give an idea of why the Tories might have slipped in Quebec.

The New Democrats are down among both linguistic groups and in every region. Among francophones, they are down five points to 40%, only seven points ahead of the Bloc (up eight). The Conservatives have shed five points and stand at 13% among francophones.

Among non-francophones (i.e., virtually a poll of the West Island), the Liberals are up eight points to 37%, leading the NDP (down six to 28%) and the Tories (up five to 24%).

In the Montreal region itself, the NDP is down two points to 37% while the Bloc is up five to 27%. In and around Quebec City, the NDP is down 11 points to 32%, trailed by the Conservatives at 28% (unchanged) and the Bloc at 24% (+8). Finally, in the rest of Quebec the NDP and Bloc have swapped eight points, and the gap stands at 10 points (39% to 29%).

With these numbers, the New Democrats would still hold on to most of their seats but more than a few are held by tiny margins. The NDP would win 54 seats, with eight apiece going to the Bloc Québécois and the Liberals and five to the Conservatives.

As the Bloc is also in the midst of a leadership race, the absence of a New Democratic leader cannot entirely explain why the NDP appears to be bleeding support to the Bloc. Undoubtedly, the choice of leader for the NDP will play a big role in determining whether the New Democrats can get themselves back over 40% support in Quebec, but the four months or so where the Bloc will have a leader and the NDP will not could be very important.

The Liberals still seem to be very solid among non-francophone Quebecers and the Conservatives are competitive in Quebec City, meaning the two parties are still in a strong position to fight for their fortresses. It does not seem unlikely that the NDP may have peaked in Quebec with 59 seats. The boundary re-distribution could become very significant going into the 2015 election, though, as there are many close NDP/Liberal ridings in Montreal, NDP/Conservative ridings in Quebec City, and NDP/Bloc ridings in the rest of Quebec.

Will by-election boost Charest before battle with Legault begins in earnest?

2011-11-21T11:46:00.000-05:00

Though François Legault launched his new Coalition-Avenir-Quebec party last week, voters in the eastern Quebec riding of Bonaventure will not see CAQ on the ballot when they vote in a by-election on Dec. 5. That is good news for Jean Charest.

The leaders of the two main parties in Quebec’s National Assembly have both been unbalanced by the new arrival on the political scene. The by-election that was forced by the resignation of Liberal cabinet minister Nathalie Normandeau has come at a difficult time for both Mr. Charest and Pauline Marois.

You can read the rest of the article on The Globe and Mail website here.

This piece looks at a recent poll by Segma Recherche on the Bonaventure by-election, as well as the by-elections that have taken place since Jean Charest was first elected in 2003. This is the 21st by-election to take place in those eight years in Quebec, which might seem like a remarkable amount but 20 federal by-elections have also taken place since 2003. However, perhaps Quebec is more volatile, as eight of those 20 federal by-elections took place in the province while 14 of the last 39 by-elections (stretching back to 1998) took place in Quebec.

The province certainly accounts for more than its fair share of by-elections, at least over the last 13 years.

This one will be poured over, as it is somewhat of a test for both Jean Charest and Pauline Marois. One wonders how the CAQ would have performed in Bonaventure. According to the Segma poll: not very well. It seems it would have gotten something like 22% of the vote, which would have put it in a strong third or a weak second if it stole that vote primarily from the Parti Québécois.

But Bonaventure is not a good riding for the CAQ in general, since it has a long history of sticking to the Liberals (and, in particular, their well-known, long-serving, and popular MNAs) and even in their banner year of 2007 the ADQ did not do much better than 12% support. It was probably a good thing for the CAQ that François Legault did not do what was necessary to enter a candidate into the race. His launch would have been quite the let-down if it was closely followed by a third-place finish in its first electoral test.

Keystone, Alberta, and the NDP

2011-11-18T08:38:00.000-05:00

The NDP's concerns over the Keystone XL pipeline are not likely to make the party many new friends in Alberta.

But are the New Democrats writing off the province, or speaking for an unrepresented portion of the population?

You can read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post Canada website here.

Alberta isn't the most exciting political battlefield in Canada - actually, it is probably the least. But with the New Democrats poised to be the main alternative in 2015 and with the party already occupying one seat in the province, Alberta could be a bit more interesting in four years' time.

Harris-Decima and Ipsos-Reid were the two polling firms to report so far in November, and their Alberta results overlap each other taking into account the margin of error. Though the Conservatives are, in these polls, somewhere between 58% and 66%, their lead is clear and the effect on their electability in its 28 (or, soon, 34) ridings is not changed either way.

But for the other parties it is pretty consistent. The New Democrats have around 19% support in Alberta while the Liberals are between 9% and 10%. Green support is harder to peg, but it is likely closer to Harris-Decima's result than Ipsos-Reid's.

It is interesting to note that prior to the 2011 federal election this was the sort of breakdown we often saw, but with the Liberals in the place of the NDP. They've swapped in Alberta, like they have done in several other parts of the country.

But what would it take for the New Democrats to win a second seat in Alberta in its current 28-seat make-up? Let's play around with the projection model to find out.

The Conservatives only took less than 50% support in two of the 27 seats they won, so the likelihood of some combination of opposition parties winning a big swathe of seats from the Tories in Alberta is very low. What needs to change?

Let's start from the average of these two polls (62% CPC, 19% NDP, 9.5% LPC, 8.5% GPC) and go from there. Let's first assume that the Tory vote is unassailable, and the NDP only takes from the Liberals and the Greens. By giving the NDP 0.5 points at a time each from the Liberals and the Greens, the second NDP seat becomes winnable at 24% for the NDP, with the Liberals at 7% and the Greens at 6%. The second seat is, of course, Edmonton East.

What about a third? Edmonton Centre becomes winnable for the NDP at 32% provincial support, pushing the Liberals to a bare 3% and the Greens to 2%. A fourth seat, Lethbridge, falls in the NDP column when the party reaches 35%, with the Conservatives still at 62% and the Liberals and Greens at 1.5% and 0.5% apiece.

But what if the NDP were able to take votes away from the Conservatives as well as the Liberals and the Greens? Let's bump NDP support up by one point at a time, taking 0.5 from the Conservatives, 0.3 from the Liberals, and 0.2 from the Greens.

With this incremental change, Edmonton East turns orange at 59% CPC, 23% NDP, 8.3% LPC, and 7.7% GPC. Edmonton Centre falls at 56% CPC, 29% NDP, and 6.5% apiece for the Greens and Liberals. The fourth seat, Lethbridge, goes NDP at 54.5% CPC, 32% NDP, 5.9% GPC, and 5.6% LPC.

So, it is plainly obvious how far we are from more than two seats voting anything but Conservative in Alberta. The new boundaries could change things, though, depending on how Edmonton's seats are re-distributed.

Newfoundland & Labrador: Projection vs. Results

2011-11-17T11:48:00.000-05:00

Time flies, but a little over a month ago Newfoundlanders and Labradorians went to the polls. It was a difficult election to project, as public opinion polls pegged support at ranges of up to eight points for each of the parties. How the vote would breakdown regionally in a small province like Newfoundland and Labrador was also key, and in the end the voters did something surprising.

It wasn't that they gave Kathy Dunderdale and the Progressive Conservatives a majority government, it was that they placed the Liberals as the Official Opposition over Lorraine Michael and the New Democrats. Usually that would be nothing surprising in Newfoundland and Labrador, but they did so while giving the NDP more of the popular vote and not electing Liberal leader Kevin Aylward in his own riding.

ThreeHundredEight projected 42 seats for the PCs, four for the New Democrats, and two for the Liberals. In other words, the NDP would form the Official Opposition.

The result (37 PCs, 6 Liberals, 5 NDP) was not strikingly different but was different for an important reason, as it meant a Liberal opposition. The error was a total of 10 seats, or 3.3 seats per party. Stacked up against other projections for past elections, that is not a bad result. The 77.1% (or 37 out of 48 correctly called) accuracy rating for the individual riding projections, however, was quite bad.

Using the actual provincial vote result gave a better projection with the Liberals as the second party. The riding accuracy drops to 75%, however. So there would have been more individual errors but they would have cancelled each other out for a better error per party of 2.7 seats.

The seat range was slightly better, as it forecasted the five seats for the NDP. It still didn't put the Tories under 40, however, and limited the Liberals to only three.

The seat ranges with the actual vote was far better, with ranges of 35-43 for thee Progressive Conservatives, 2-9 for the Liberals, and 3-4 for the New Democrats.

The vote projection model worked well for the Progressive Conservatives with a difference of only 0.9 points, but was off for the Liberals and New Democrats, as were the final polls of the campaign (none had the NDP at less than 27%). It is here that the vote seems to have swung, with the Liberals taking five points and the Tories only one from the New Democrats (as a net result, of course).

Accordingly, the average error per party of 3.9% was the worst of the elections that ThreeHundredEight has called.

The chart below shows a few quick facts about the projection at the riding level.

In the 11 incorrect calls made by ThreeHundredEight, the average margin of victory was 10.7 points, so this was not a factor of races being close.

Only 35.4% of individual riding projections for the Tories were within 5% of the result, and overall the projection over-estimated the Tories by an average of 4.6 points in each riding. In the 48 ridings, their vote was over-estimated in 31 of them and under-estimated in 15, with two correct calls.

For the Liberals, the riding projections were better with 45.8% of them being within 5% of the result. They were under-estimated by an average of 2.9 points. In all, they were under-estimated in 27 ridings and over-estimated in 17, with four correct calls.

Finally, the New Democrats were called to within 5% of their result in one-third of ridings, but were under-estimated on average by 1.8 points. They were over-estimated in 20 ridings, under-estimated in 26 (primarily in the St. John's region), and called correctly in two.

On average, the riding projections for each party had a margin of error of +/- 10.2%, which is not good at all.

But there were a few highlights. Here are the top three projected ridings:

Humber East was the best as the NDP was only missed by two points while the Tories and Liberals were on the money. Burgeo-La Poile and Mount Pearl North were off by a little more.

There was nothing that could have been done to have the incorrect ridings called correctly. The level of error was too high for any adjustments to have corrected. Overall, Newfoundland and Labrador was a miss for ThreeHundredEight. A regional model would have worked much better for Newfoundland and Labrador, as it would have had an easier time forecasting the Liberal strength in western Newfoundland and the NDP strength in St. John's. A regional model will be developed for Newfoundland and Labrador, as elsewhere.

Fortin moves into second in endorsement race

2011-11-16T11:26:00.001-05:00

Jean-François Fortin has moved into second in the Bloc Québécois endorsement race, but Daniel Paillé stays in front thanks to the support of four-term MP André Bellavance.

Meanwhile, the addition of union support into the endorsement rankings has inflated Peggy Nash's numbers, though she still ranks third.

As always, right-click and open the leadership charts below in a new window in order to magnify them.

With the addition of several former MPs and a swathe of Parti Québécois MNAs (primarily from eastern Quebec, provided to me by the Fortin campaign), Fortin now has 34.5 points in the endorsement ranking (36.7% of all available points) and has vaulted ahead of Maria Mourani, who has fallen to 20.7% of the total.

But Daniel Paillé is still leading, thanks to the support of Bellavance. Paillé now has 40 points, or 42.6% of the total. This indicates a first ballot win for Paillé is no sure bet.

For the New Democrats, there have been no new endorsements but what has changed is the addition of union support.

Unions make up an important part of the NDP's support base, and many union members are also members of the NDP. Though unions won't have a set portion of the ballot as they did in 2003, their influence will nevertheless be important.

Peggy Nash has the support of the presidents of two unions: the Canadian Auto Workers and CUPE Ontario. Brian Topp has the support of the United Steelworkers.

After looking into the 2009 Ontario NDP race, I've decided to award 0.06 points to every 1,000 members of a union that is endorsing a candidate. I'll get into why I did that a little further on in the post.

But thanks to this addition to the rankings, Peggy Nash is now in a far more impressive third place.

Brian Topp still leads with 181.5 endorsement points, or 42.8% of all available points. Thomas Mulcair is second with 104 points, or 24.5%, while Peggy Nash is third with 81.5 points, or 19.2% of the total.

There have been no other major changes. Robert Chisholm, Nathan Cullen, Paul Dewar, and Niki Ashton all have between 10 and 15 points, putting them at between 2.4% and 3.5% of the total.

Now why the need for a change? First, let's look at how the endorsement system would work for the three most recent provincial NDP races. For the purposes of these races, I have treated MLAs and MPPs the same way as I do MPs.

Let's start with British Columbia, which is the most problematic (especially for the BC Liberal leadership race).

I jumped ahead to the second ballot as Dana Larsen had no endorsements and so dropping him off the first ballot made no difference.

As you can see, Mike Farnworth was the favourite to win. He actually was during the campaign as well. He had more caucus and federal support than either Adrian Dix or John Horgan, which led to him being favoured in the endorsement rankings. Nevertheless, the final result on the third ballot was close.

The Manitoba leadership race, however, worked much better with this system.

Greg Selinger had, by far, more support within the Manitoba NDP caucus than did Ashton, and the system overstates his support. But it does see him winning easily on the first ballot - thanks in part to the support of CUPE Manitoba.

In Ontario, both Gilles Bisson and Andrea Horwath had some union support, while Peter Tabuns had the support of Ed Broadbent. In the end, it seems that union support tipped the scales in Horwath's favour, as well as her good support within the caucus.

Though the system overstated Tabuns's support in the first and second rounds, the system worked well enough. After the first ballot, Michael Prue threw his support behind Bisson, while after the second ballot Bisson threw his support behind Horwath. That was the clincher, but without including union support the system would have suggested that Tabuns would have won on the first ballot.

Going through the permutations found that 0.06 points per 1,000 union members yielded the best result. At 0.05 points per 1,000, Tabuns still would have led on the first ballot.

The chart on the left lays out the points system, and now includes union support. Obviously, this is really only an important factor for the New Democrats (though the FTQ could get involved in the Bloc race). I think it will help the rankings and they look, to me, pretty plausible. But the caveats described in the first post on the endorsement ranking system still apply - especially since the NDP and Bloc will be using a OMOV system, meaning the results in December and March could look very different.

Two polls show NDP slipping in Quebec, Tories in Ontario

2011-11-15T13:55:00.000-05:00

If an election were held today, the Conservatives would probably lose their majority in the House of Commons. But the New Democrats would not be much closer to replacing them.

Two polls released over the last few days by Ipsos-Reid and Harris-Decima show small shifts in support from the May 2 election, but not enough to completely overturn the results. A Conservative slip of between three and four points, however, puts them solidly in minority territory.

You can read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post Canada website here.

The national results of these two polls are strikingly similar, a difference of no more than two points for any of the main parties. The regional results are slightly more different, so I invite you to check them out in the article and the reports on the Ipsos-Reid and Harris-Decima numbers.

Turning these polls into seats also doesn't make a huge difference, both putting the Conservatives in a minority. But there are enough changes around the margins to make them interesting.

In the Ipsos-Reid poll, the Conservatives would win 145 seats, with 102 going to the NDP and 55 to the Liberals. The Bloc Québécois would also win six seats.

In the Harris-Decima poll, the Conservatives win 133 seats, with 108 going to the NDP and 63 to the Liberals. The Bloc wins three and the Greens one.

If we take the best and worst results for each party in each region and combine them, we get some interesting seat ranges.

The Conservative best and worst scenarios out of these two polls is between 126 and 152 seats, so still outside of a majority. Regionally, their ranges are 17-21 in British Columbia, 27 in Alberta, 13-19 in the Prairies, 51-57 in Ontario, 7-10 in Quebec, and 10-17 in Atlantic Canada.

The New Democrats could win between 95 and 115 seats with these two polls. Their regional ranges are 11-14 in British Columbia, one in Alberta, 6-10 in the Prairies, 18-24 in Ontario, 53-54 in Quebec, and 5-11 in Atlantic Canada.

The Liberal range is between 42 and 76 seats, so a repeat of the 2008 election is possible. Their regional ranges are four in British Columbia, none in Alberta, 3-5 in the Prairies, 25-37 in Ontario, 5-12 in Quebec, and 4-17 in Atlantic Canada.

It is worth noting that in both the Ipsos-Reid and Harris-Decima scenarios the Liberals and NDP are able to command a majority of seats in the House on their own. It also worth noting how the NDP range spans only 20 seats, while that of the Tories spans 26 seats and that of the Liberals 34. The NDP seems a bit better placed to hold what they have.

Some interesting results, but the first person who comments that this doesn't matter as the next election is four years away loses.

Provincial election results reinforce Liberal pain, Tory and NDP gains

2011-11-14T11:39:00.003-05:00

Fewer total votes were cast in favour of conservative candidates in the five provinces that went to the polls this fall than the federal Conservative Party received in those same five provinces in the spring federal election. But the results in the provinces are part of a trend of faltering support for the Liberals and gains for the Conservatives and the New Democrats over the last four years.

You can read the rest of the article on The Globe and Mail website here.

On the endorsement front, it is worth noting that André Bellavance, MP for Richmond-Arthabaska and apparently the only sitting Bloc MP that will endorse one of the candidates (Jean-François Fortin and Maria Mourani being the sitting MPs running for the leadership, and Louis Plamondon stating he will stay neutral), has said that he will announce his decision as to who he will endorse this week.

As a four-term MP, he will be worth 10 points in the endorsement rankings. That won't be enough to put anyone ahead of Daniel Paillé, but if he opts for Mourani the two will be neck-and-neck. Bellavance recently had a fund raising event and both Paillé and Mourani attended and gave speeches, Fortin having another engagement.

In this little game of endorsements, Bellavance is the biggest fish to land unless Gilles Duceppe, Lucian Bouchard, or a former leader of the PQ endorses one of the candidates. But Plamondon, who is the longest serving MP from any party in the House of Commons, would be worth 22.5 points.

NDP and BQ leadership endorsement rankings

2011-11-11T11:31:00.001-05:00

With the provincial elections behind us, the leadership races for the New Democrats and the Bloc Québécois now stand as the two most important political events scheduled for the next five months. With this in mind, ThreeHundredEight now turns to these leadership races.

A few weeks ago, I read an interesting piece on Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight that talked about Republican presidential nominee endorsements, and how they are a good indicator of who is likely to perform well in the primaries. It got me thinking how this could be applied to leadership races in Canada.

That leads me to present ThreeHundredEight's endorsement rankings, which will be maintained and updated throughout the race for both the NDP and the Bloc, and perhaps the Liberals once that campaign gets started. You'll also see charts tracking leadership polls in the right-hand column for the NDP race.

A few caveats: this is, in no way, a scientific method that is meant to have any precise predicting capability. It is just one way to interpret the endorsements and what they might mean in the respective leadership races. And they are just to make the race a little more fun.

So how does it work?

Points are assigned for each endorsement received by a candidate. The amount of points assigned, much like Nate's system, is somewhat arbitrary. But, I did use the 2006 Liberal and 2003 NDP leadership races to calibrate the points system, so they are based on something real.

The chart on the left spells out the points system. Having the endorsement of a former party leader is most important. For every election the former leader led the party, 20 points are assigned.

The endorsements of Members of Parliament are also very important. For every election they have won, 2.5 points are assigned to the leadership candidate. This means an MP who has been around for a long time is worth more than one who was just recently elected.

Former MPs give a candidate two points, while senators (though I don't expect any to come forward in these two races) are worth one point.

Having the support of a current or former provincial premier or party leader is also quite important, but that importance is based on what province the leader comes from. For the NDP race, Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia are considered "first tier" provinces. Alberta, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia, and Manitoba make up the second tier, New Brunswick and Newfoundland & Labrador make up the third tier, and PEI is in the fourth tier. The territories are in a fifth tier of their own. These tiers were determined by the number of votes received in the 2011 election, as well as the strength of the party brand in each province and whether the party is in government.

Obviously, these are somewhat arbitrarily chosen. And this is why I emphasise that this is not a scientific exercise, it is just a spot of fun. But the points were not chosen completely out of the air. Let's look at how the system performs for the 2006 Liberal leadership race.

As you can see, aside from Scott Brison earning more points than Ken Dryden, the points sytem does a good job of estimating first ballot support. Of course, this should be expected. The Liberals used a delegate voting method where endorsements were the name of the game. But there were still some delegates undecided going into the first ballot.

After the first ballot, Joe Volpe and Scott Brison went over to Bob Rae while Martha Hall Findlay went over to Stéphane Dion.

Assigning their endorsement points accordingly gives us a good result, with the order of the candidates correct and their share of the points closely lining up with the results of the second ballot. After that ballot, Dryden went over to Rae and Gerard Kennedy went over to Dion.

After assigning their endorsement points, Dion moves to the top ahead of Michael Ignatieff and Rae drops to third. Again, their share of the endorsement points matches up well with the third ballot result.

After the third ballot, Rae dropped out but didn't lend his support to any other candidate. Dryden and Volpe went over to Dion while Brison went over to Ignatieff.

And after assigning their endorsement points, Dion wins more than half of them and his share of the points matches well with the fourth ballot result.

After using the Liberal leadership race to calibrate the points system (which did not need too much tweaking after my own estimates to start the process), I moved to the 2003 NDP leadership race. It used a bit of a mixed system of delegates and one-member, one-vote (OMOV). So, it was a different kettle of fish.

The big difference in this race was that Bill Blaikie had most of the individual endorsements, but Jack Layton had the support of Ed Broadbent. That was crucial, and so I was able to calibrate the points system by taking into account Broadbent's influence.

As you can see, aside from the vote share of the three bottom candidates, the points system matches up relatively well with the results of the first, and only, ballot.

I understand that the points system is fitted for these past leadership races, so they should line up well. But that it can be used across two different kinds of leadership races with generally good results indicates that the endorsement ranking I will be using for the next five months is not meaningless. Will it predict the outcome closely? Probably not, but that is not its purpose. It is simply an interpretation of the endorsements that tells us something about the race. Having endorsements generally means a better and/or more motivated organization, and a better and/or more motivated organization will more successfully deliver votes on the metaphorical convention floor.

So, now that the explanation is out of the way, let's look at how the endorsements stack-up in the Bloc Québécois leadership race.

Daniel Paillé, who is probably best known considering his background as a cabinet minister in Quebec, leads the endorsement ranking with 30 points, or 50% of all available endorsement points. Maria Mourani has 19.5 points to 32.5%, while Jean-François Fortin has 10.5 points ot 17.5%.

This endorsement ranking actually lines up pretty well with the only poll we have, taken in early September. It put Paillé at 11% among BQ supporters, ahead of Mourani (6%) and Fortin (3%).

As you can see in the chart to the left, this race is not very dynamic. There are only four sitting MPs and two of them are in the race. Their own "endorsements" for themselves are the most important factors. All the other endorsements come from former Bloc MPs.

Perhaps if a few MNAs step-in or one of the former PQ leaders stands behind one of the candidates things could get a bit more interesting. But as it stands, Paillé has the backing of more former MPs than any other candidate.

Now, onto the New Democratic leadership race. This is a much more dynamic one, as endorsements have come in from provincial party leaders, sitting premiers, former federal leaders, and provincial legislators from across the country.

Not surprisingly as he is seen as the "establishment" candidate, Brian Topp has the most endorsement points with 166, or 43.3% of all endorsement points currently on the table. If this result was repeated on voting day, Topp would not win on the first ballot.

Thomas Mulcair comes in second with 104 endorsement points, or 27.2%. He has the most individual endorsements, but as most of them are from first time MPs from Quebec they are not worth as much as Topp's. This, I think, will reflect the organizational weakness the NDP has in the province, as well as its low number of members (though that number is going to increase as the campaign drags on).

(Right-click and open the chart to the left in a new window to be able to magnify it.)

Coming in third is Peggy Nash, thanks in large part to the support of former leader Alexa McDonough. She comes in at 56 endorsement points, or 14.6%.

If we can consider Topp and Mulcair to be first tier candidates and Nash a second tier candidate, we then get into the third tier. Now, any one of these could move up as the campaign goes on. Some of them have just jumped into the race recently. And the fact that someone like Nathan Cullen or Paul Dewar does not have a lot of endorsements might not mean anything in a OMOV system if they have good grassroots support, but the rules of the game being what they are, we have Robert Chisholm, Cullen, and Dewar as what I would consider the third tier candidates.

Chisholm is narrowly on top of the others due to his support from Atlantic Canada (i.e., Darrell Dexter), while Cullen and Dewar so far are relying on endorsements from provincial MLAs in British Columbia and Manitoba, respectively.

Niki Ashton and Roméo Saganash round out the main candidates, in what I'd call a fourth tier. Both of them have the support of two sitting MPs, but Ashton's longer time in the House of Commons puts her ahead of Saganash. Martin Singh has no endorsements at this point.

There we have it. The endorsement rankings put Brian Topp and Daniel Paillé ahead of the others for their respective parties. But I hope the killjoys out there won't take it too seriously. Does it have limitations? Absolutely. But that doesn't mean we can't have some fun with it. And since this isn't set in stone, I'm happy to hear your suggestions on how it can be improved.

The Bloc race is going to be wrapped up in a month, but the NDP race is just getting started. It will be interesting to see how the rankings twist and turn over the next five months.