Do you believe polls showing a win for trudeau liberals?

[sdw]

So from what I've read here, you guys are saying there is an election being held soon?

Yep. If you stopped roping "em ladies, you'd know that. BTW, what do you do with them once you have them tied up?

 

[sybian]

You gotta be fast when tying them up...My big clumsy Rancher fingers don't work so fast...
When it comes to a young lady, a rope ,and getting tied...The tables get turned in a real hurry.
If your not well placed and fast tying a calf....You just get a hoof kick in the head.
So in my case, there is never any harm done.

What was I talking about again?

 

[tedsweettangv]

CBC interviewed a couple of the polling organisations I think it was last week. They admitted there is a problem. Most polls are telephone polls (no pun intended). They randomly call numbers and then poll the people that answer. This is almost exclusively land lines. This means not only does the person have to have a land line, they also have to be home to answer it. This skews to an older demographic. In the past the polls still had some validity as people tend to participate more in voting as they get older, i.e. young people don't vote. But as the age of people without land lines (I think they said most people under 40 now do not have land lines) you start to hit the demographic that votes, and the polls become less and less valid. I don't know if we are at that tipping point yet where the majority of the people who will participate in voting no longer have land lines making the polls invalid as a predictor. Note I said people who will participate, not those eligible as 60% of them don't vote.

 

[bcneil]

CBC interviewed a couple of the polling organisations I think it was last week. They admitted there is a problem. Most polls are telephone polls (no pun intended). They randomly call numbers and then poll the people that answer. This is almost exclusively land lines. This means not only does the person have to have a land line, they also have to be home to answer it. This skews to an older demographic. In the past the polls still had some validity as people tend to participate more in voting as they get older, i.e. young people don't vote. But as the age of people without land lines (I think they said most people under 40 now do not have land lines) you start to hit the demographic that votes, and the polls become less and less valid. I don't know if we are at that tipping point yet where the majority of the people who will participate in voting no longer have land lines making the polls invalid as a predictor. Note I said people who will participate, not those eligible as 60% of them don't vote.

Its better to look at polls to see trends. Not exact number. Like the Libs have been gaining ground...the NDP losing. There are going to be dozens of built in biases to any poll. You mention land line usage of younger voters. That's a big one. But on the otherhand with seniors. For instance my grandma will not answer the phone to any number on her call display that is not a relative. Telemarketers go after seniors like thieves. It would make a big difference in time of day they call. Even whats on tv when they are calling.
Telephone polls will be main tool for awhile still. No real alternative.

 

[sdw]

CBC interviewed a couple of the polling organisations I think it was last week. They admitted there is a problem. Most polls are telephone polls (no pun intended). They randomly call numbers and then poll the people that answer. This is almost exclusively land lines. This means not only does the person have to have a land line, they also have to be home to answer it. This skews to an older demographic. In the past the polls still had some validity as people tend to participate more in voting as they get older, i.e. young people don't vote. But as the age of people without land lines (I think they said most people under 40 now do not have land lines) you start to hit the demographic that votes, and the polls become less and less valid. I don't know if we are at that tipping point yet where the majority of the people who will participate in voting no longer have land lines making the polls invalid as a predictor. Note I said people who will participate, not those eligible as 60% of them don't vote.

The Province of BC did an extensive study on voting a few years ago. http://www.elections.bc.ca/docs/stats/Motivations-and-barriers-2010.pdf On page 6 it shows that fully 30% don't ever vote (non voters 16.1% + not eligible/don't know 13.9%) an additional 13.1% didn't vote in 2005 for various reasons and an additional 23.7% didn't vote in 2009. Therefore the non voters in 2005 were 43.1% of adult population and the non voters in 2009 were 53.7% of adult population. This study was prepared to aid in the conduct of the 2013 provincial election. Accordingly, a LOT of money was spent on voter education and heavy advertising to encourage voting.

The BC Elections report on the 2013 provincial election http://www.elections.bc.ca/docs/rpt/2013-General-Election-Report.pdf page 31 reports that fewer people voted in 2013 than voted in 2005 and about 5% more people voted in 2013 than voted in 2009. On the same page, there is a breakdown of the age of who voted. Since it's easy to load students on a bus, 18 - 24 votes at a higher number than 25 - 34. More than half of people over 50 vote, more than half of people under 50 don't vote.

If you look at polling, the young are actually massively over represented in the numbers that public pollsters report. This is why there was a failure of public polling in 2013 and in the Albert election. The pollster is counting people that don't vote.

I think that there is a failure in polling in this federal election and the media, pollsters and political parties are in for a shock.

 

[sdw]

Two new polls put the Trudeau Liberals above 38%. That's majority government territory.

The Leger poll http://leger360.com/admin/upload/publi_pdf/soen20151017.pdf breaks down the support for the Liberals in Quebec (31%) and the Rest of Canada (40%) on page 6. Basically, the Trudeau Liberals are expected to do very well in the GTA.

Mainstreet http://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/canadas-choice-2015/ is getting 32% support for the Liberals in Quebec and 44% support for the Liberals in Ontario.

“When you look at those who’ve indicated they’ve already voted, however, we see a different picture. Among those who voted early, 34.2% said they voted for the Conservatives, 33.7% for the Liberals, 19.5% for the NDP, 4.5% for the Green Party and 2.4% for the Bloc, while 5.7% of those who voted early didn’t say. This is a pretty clear indication of the resilient Conservative vote, which could produce some surprises. With dozens of close four-way races in Quebec and three-way races in BC, the next government could largely be determined by the success of each party’s ground game,” concluded Maggi.

Now it's all up to the GOTV teams in each party. The Liberals have to realize all of their support to hold off the Conservatives who don't have nearly the difficulty getting their support to vote.

Innovative has done tables to predict the seat count at various levels of support
http://www.innovativeresearch.ca/si..., xls, xlsx/151016_IRG_Wave_6_Seat_Models.pdf

What I noticed is that it is no longer possible for the Conservatives to achieve majority government if the polling numbers are even near correct.

 

[wilde]

There was a post on Facebook this morning pandering to the ethnic Chinese vote with a video of Mr. Robot with Chinese sub titles. The comments were 50/50 pro and against Harper. I posted a comment in Chinese along with the loosely translation of: he is talking out of his ass with his fear mongering tactics, he can go and have a sexual relation with himself. 10 minutes later, the post along with all the comments were deleted.

 

[Tugela]

Two new polls put the Trudeau Liberals above 38%. That's majority government territory.

The Leger poll http://leger360.com/admin/upload/publi_pdf/soen20151017.pdf breaks down the support for the Liberals in Quebec (31%) and the Rest of Canada (40%) on page 6. Basically, the Trudeau Liberals are expected to do very well in the GTA.

Mainstreet http://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/canadas-choice-2015/ is getting 32% support for the Liberals in Quebec and 44% support for the Liberals in Ontario.



Now it's all up to the GOTV teams in each party. The Liberals have to realize all of their support to hold off the Conservatives who don't have nearly the difficulty getting their support to vote.

Innovative has done tables to predict the seat count at various levels of support
http://www.innovativeresearch.ca/si..., xls, xlsx/151016_IRG_Wave_6_Seat_Models.pdf

What I noticed is that it is no longer possible for the Conservatives to achieve majority government if the polling numbers are even near correct.

The problem with that approach is that it uses overall polling numbers to essentially predict the probability of winning in individual seats. That sort of methodology is fundamentally flawed because in some types of seats (rural ones, for example) the electorate is much more locked into party loyalty than others. People in Alberta for example are less likely to change their opinion no matter what, whereas people in (for example) Quebec are much more open to strategic voting. In that sort of scenario using overall poll percentages would be wrong because those percentages are not proportional to what will actually happen on a region by region basis. If the Cons were getting, say, 60% support in Alberta and that was not significantly different from before, it will raise their average, which means the drop in support in other regions is greater than the average numbers suggest. And that will have a big impact in seats they currently hold where their majority from 2011 is not all that great.

There are regional divides and urban/rural divides that have to be taken into account.

 

[Tugela]

The Province of BC did an extensive study on voting a few years ago. http://www.elections.bc.ca/docs/stats/Motivations-and-barriers-2010.pdf On page 6 it shows that fully 30% don't ever vote (non voters 16.1% + not eligible/don't know 13.9%) an additional 13.1% didn't vote in 2005 for various reasons and an additional 23.7% didn't vote in 2009. Therefore the non voters in 2005 were 43.1% of adult population and the non voters in 2009 were 53.7% of adult population. This study was prepared to aid in the conduct of the 2013 provincial election. Accordingly, a LOT of money was spent on voter education and heavy advertising to encourage voting.

The BC Elections report on the 2013 provincial election http://www.elections.bc.ca/docs/rpt/2013-General-Election-Report.pdf page 31 reports that fewer people voted in 2013 than voted in 2005 and about 5% more people voted in 2013 than voted in 2009. On the same page, there is a breakdown of the age of who voted. Since it's easy to load students on a bus, 18 - 24 votes at a higher number than 25 - 34. More than half of people over 50 vote, more than half of people under 50 don't vote.

If you look at polling, the young are actually massively over represented in the numbers that public pollsters report. This is why there was a failure of public polling in 2013 and in the Albert election. The pollster is counting people that don't vote.

I think that there is a failure in polling in this federal election and the media, pollsters and political parties are in for a shock.

There wasn't a failure of polling in the Alberta election, it was pretty close. Below are the rough averages of polls conducted in the last few days and the actual result:

NDP: ~43% predicted, actual results 40.6%
PC: ~23% predicted, actual results 27.8%
WR: ~24% predicted, actual results 24.2%
Lib: ~4% predicted, actual results 4.2%
A: ~3% predicted, actual results 2.3%

The NDP were slightly lower than polling predicted, and the PC slightly higher, but the other three parties were pretty much as predicted.

 

[sdw]

There wasn't a failure of polling in the Alberta election, it was pretty close. Below are the rough averages of polls conducted in the last few days and the actual result:

NDP: ~43% predicted, actual results 40.6%
PC: ~23% predicted, actual results 27.8%
WR: ~24% predicted, actual results 24.2%
Lib: ~4% predicted, actual results 4.2%
A: ~3% predicted, actual results 2.3%

The NDP were slightly lower than polling predicted, and the PC slightly higher, but the other three parties were pretty much as predicted.

The pundits had the seat projection totally wrong. The NDP was expected to do well in Edmonton, Calgary was supposed to be a wash for them. The PCs were expected to retain Calgary and benefit from vote splitting. Instead, vote splitting ate them alive, despite the PCs having more votes than WR.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberta_general_election,_2015

The Progressive Conservatives finished second in the popular vote, 50,000 votes ahead of the Wildrose. However, they were decimated due to a near-total collapse in the major cities, as well as massive vote-splitting with the Wildrose. They were completely shut out in Edmonton, Lethbridge and Red Deer, and lost 12 of their 20 seats in Calgary. Since the first-past-the-post system awards seats to leading candidates in local contests (not necessarily to those who get a majority of the vote) and awards power solely on the basis of seats won (not by proportional representation), the Tories were knocked down to third place with only 10 seats, only two of which were outside Calgary. The Tories were reduced to their smallest presence in the legislature since 1967. With few exceptions, their support in the cities bled to the NDP, while their rural support bled to the Wildrose. All but three members of Prentice's cabinet were defeated.

http://www.electionalmanac.com/ea/alberta-election-polls/

In Canadian Polling, Liberal and NDP support is usually over counted and Conservative support is under counted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_in_the_Canadian_federal_election,_2011

 

[wilde]

I'm really liking the Liberals' positive attack ads...

 

[sybian]

What needs to be defined is what is "Middle Class"..And what is "Upper Class"...If he does away with the Tax Free Saving Accounts like he has said..That affects me.
Having said that....To penalize him for being the son of a Prime Minister that was responsible for ramming policies down Canadians throats, perhaps isn't fair....I mean, Prime Minister Trudeau Senoir ,and Justin, is like comparing George Senior, to George "W"..Two very different men.

Lets all try to remember how that worked out.

 

[Tugela]

The pundits had the seat projection totally wrong. The NDP was expected to do well in Edmonton, Calgary was supposed to be a wash for them. The PCs were expected to retain Calgary and benefit from vote splitting. Instead, vote splitting ate them alive, despite the PCs having more votes than WR.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberta_general_election,_2015



http://www.electionalmanac.com/ea/alberta-election-polls/

In Canadian Polling, Liberal and NDP support is usually over counted and Conservative support is under counted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_in_the_Canadian_federal_election,_2011

Actually, they DIDN"T have the seat projections all wrong. Seat numbers are difficult to predict accurately because there are local variables that province wide polling doesn't account for, but even so the pollsters got it fairly close to the real result with the polls conducted just prior to the election.

http://www.electionalmanac.com/ea/alberta-seat-projections/

http://www.electionalmanac.com/ea/alberta/

 

[Tugela]

What needs to be defined is what is "Middle Class"..And what is "Upper Class"...If he does away with the Tax Free Saving Accounts like he has said..That affects me.
Having said that....To penalize him for being the son of a Prime Minister that was responsible for ramming policies down Canadians throats, perhaps isn't fair....I mean, Prime Minister Trudeau Senoir ,and Justin, is like comparing George Senior, to George "W"..Two very different men.

Lets all try to remember how that worked out.

The reason for getting rid of the tax free savings account is because they don't do what they were meant to do. They were intended to be a tool to encourage people to save in order to reduce reliance on CPP, but it hasn't worked out that way. Most people aren't using them because the don't have extra cash over and above their RRSP to save anyway. The only people who use the tool are those who don't really need it for its intended purpose anyway, since they would save that cash irrespective of whether the plan was there or not. In other words, it effectively becomes a tool for rich people to pay less taxes and not a tool to encourage the young and the middle class to save. That is something that should be handled in the general tax code, not through special tools such as this.

The whole thing was poorly thought out, or more precisely, it was well thought out, but really a sly backdoor move by the Harper government to reduce tax for the well off without saying so.

As for ramming policies down Canadians throats that they don't want, what exactly do you think Harper has being doing for the last decade? The majority of Canadians are opposed to the things he is doing, but he just ignores that and does it anyway. He is an order of magnitude worse than Trudeau ever was.

 

[PerbMod]

Insults and name calling are not going to be tolerated. Storm Rider gets a week off. Keep it civil please.

 

[sybian]

Well.......I'm no politician, but I fought for the man "Over There"..And it was a proper piece of work.
Having said that..I see how Veterans Affairs has been put on ignore by the current Government.
I have friends who have been wounded and tossed aside...so I'm torn between my loyalty to who I fought for, and the reality of the Government when I'm back home.
I suppose in retrospect, I'm not really qualified to comment on this thread..You see, I was trained by our Government to hate with the proper vigour.
If you'll allow me....I'll just abstain.

 

[westwoody]

I have a friend who was very badly hurt in training. He was paid off with a lump sum and is now a mess.
Had a big argument with a co worker yesterday. She said Harper supports vets blah blah. I told her about my friend and she just did not understand at all. She kept saying he could get help but I know he has tried everything.
The ultimate insult was one counselor said it wasn't as serious as an actual combat injury so he should not expect much. Wtf? Poor guy can barely walk, but how dare he ask for help eh?

 

[Tugela]

Injuries in training are not combat. They are more along the lines of workplace accidents, and should be lumped together along with generic WCB incidents.

 

[sdw]

Abacus Data polled who voted at Advance Polls

Abacus also polled who was expected to win (note, not who they were going to vote for) and which leader performed best during the campaign

Played with the Vote Compass at CBC - even if I put I eat babies in front of their parents, the CBC insists that I'm a Liberal. I think their seat projection is of similar quality.

 

[HankQuinlan]

Played with the Vote Compass at CBC - even if I put I eat babies in front of their parents, the CBC insists that I'm a Liberal. I think their seat projection is of similar quality.

I found it very accurate in my case (it says I most closely correlate with the Green party position, but I do not intend to vote for them. I would under a proportionate vote, though). The site does not conclude that you are a "Liberal"; they say that that party most closely represents your beliefs on the majority of the issues they present. I played with the site a number of times. By selecting responses exactly contrary to my beliefs, it told me the CPC would most closely represent me.