Canadian views are hardening on gun control, & away from the Conservative line

Angus Reid released survey data today with a lot of questions on gun control and gun registry-related issues. I’m sure you’ll hear many of the usual c/Conservative suspects grab a few of the figures to support their talking-points. Indeed, they already are. But looking more closely at the numbers, and more importantly at the trend lines, show some interesting findings they’ll chose to ignore.

They don’t provide the trendlines directly, but if you pull-up the last gun study Angus Reid did in 2009 and compare the findings (the bulk of the questions are identical) some very interesting trends emerge showing the views of Canadians are trending toward greater measures on gun control. You also see some of the funny inherent contradictions that come with public opinion measurement.

For example, Canadians by and large agree gun violence is becoming less of a serious problem. Just 28 per cent called it serious, down by six points, while 42 per cent called it moderately serious, down by four points. Some 23 per cent said it was not too serious, a rise of eight points.

You’d think with that trend, people wouldn’t favour stricter gun control measures. But they do. When asked if they’d favour a complete ban on handguns in Canada, nearly half, 49 per cent, said yes it would be justified, while 39 per cent said it would not be justified. Again, besides the near majority, the interesting thing here is the trends: support for a ban was up three points, and more strikingly opposition to a handgun ban was down by seven points.

Which brings us to the infamous gun registry. One question you’re seeing be latched-onto is if the registry has been successful or not fighting crime. Just 13 per cent said it was (up two) while 43 per cent said it wasn’t (down four) and 20 per cent said it had no effect (down three). Those are interesting results, particularly when compared to the complete ban results. Do they mean many want the government to go further because the registry hasn’t been effective enough, or scrap it all together because it’s ineffective? Probably both, but it’s impossible to say with the available data.

On support/oppose scrapping the long gun registry, the figure you’ll hear most is that 44 per cent support scrapping it, while 35 per cent oppose it. That those numbers aren’t more wide given the opinion on its effectiveness shows that some simply want a more effective registry. And again, here, the trend is telling. Support for scrapping the registry has dropped by seven points since last November, while opposition is up by one point. Which means some former registry opponents are on the fence, and support for scrapping the registry is on the decline.

Finally, going further than just a handgun ban, Angus Reid also asked if it should be legal or illegal for ordinary Canadians to own firearms all together. In a reversal from last year, a plurality of Canadian (45 per cent) said it should be illegal, and 40 per cent said it should stay legal. Illegal was up by six points, while keep it legal declined by seven.

So, look at the numbers and the trends in totality and what can we take away? Canadians are increasingly favouring stricter gun control, not looser. Support for scrapping the registry is declining, and support shouldn’t be taken as a condemnation of gun control.

Finally, a few things are often overlooked by the pundits and the media around this issue. They paint it as a rural/urban thing, which is fair enough. But while they spend much time on how this could impact rural voting, they ignore how it could impact urban voting. We have the registry now, and I’d argue this issue has largely been factored into rural voting patterns. Urban, though, is a different story. How many swing urban soccer mom votes who have gone Conservative during Harper’s sweater vest era (and moved seats) would flip if he succeeds in killing the registry and is seen as soft on gun control? Those are swing seats at risk, while the votes they’d gain are in rural ridings they probably already hold.

Also, look at the regionals and you’ll see opinions in Quebec are quite staunchly anti-gun. Some 76 per cent of Quebecers view gun violence as very or moderately serious, 54 per cent support a handgun ban, 54 per cent would make gun ownership illegal, and 51 per cent oppose scrapping the gun registry.

A: Urban Canada. Quebec.

Q: What are two places the Conservatives can’t afford to lose support if they’re going to ever get a majority?

Were I an NDPer representing a riding like Outremont I’d be a little concerned here too.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Like sands through the hourglass, these are the polls of our lives

A poll just dropped from Angus Reid that I’m sure will get the blogsphere buzzing today. There’s the usual horse-race numbers that are bad for the Liberals and their leader, nothing new there. That’s a drama for another day. No, what’s interesting is they also polled how a potential Liberal/NDP merger would fare.

Led by Michael Ignatieff, it found the electoral result with a merger would be pretty much the status-quo, hampered, says the pollster, by Ignatieff’s personal unpopularity:

However, led by Bob Rae it’s a different result, with a dead-heat and a shot at government, depending on the regional break-downs:

Apparently, says the pollster, Bob’s popularity in Ontario would be a difference-maker:

The prospect of a centre-left merger—similar to the one that allowed the Conservative Party to challenge and ultimately break the Liberal hegemony—is not greeted with the same enthusiasm by voters when the leader is revealed.

Ignatieff would not provide the new party with a shot at victory. Rae's popularity in Ontario, and to a lesser extent in British Columbia, would turn the next election into a tight contest.

I was slightly amused as I read this, and not just because of their comments about Rae’s popularity in Ontario, which certainly turns the popular meme on its head. No, I was amused because I was reminded of another Angus Reid poll of hypothetical leaders, this one during the last aborted Liberal leadership race.

From December of 2008, with Ignatieff as leader here were Angus Reid’s numbers (changes from the then current numbers in brackets):

Conservatives: 38% (-4)

Liberals: 33% (+11)

NDP: 13% (-5)

Bloc: 10% (-)

Green: 6% (-1)

And Angus Reid from December 2008 with Rae as leader:

Conservatives: 41% (-1)

Liberals: 26% (+4)

NDP: 15% (-3)

Bloc: 10% (-1)

Green: 6% (-1)

The point being, a hypothetical poll and a $1 will buy you a can of Fresca. And the X factor, of course, is the multi-million dollar demonization campaign the Conservatives unleashed on Ignatieff, and you can be sure one is sitting in a drawer on Bob.

Finally, back to the merger numbers, according to Angus Reid the LiberalDippers would fare best under Jack Layton (that sound you hear is a collective shriek of delight from the Blogging Dippers:

But Layton would immensely help the new party with good numbers in Ontario and a remarkable showing in Quebec, pushing the Bloc to second place for the first time in years.

Of course, I should caution those numbers don't factor in the thousands of Liberals who would be unable to vote, due to their heads having exploded.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Look beyond the polls

Two polls out this morning that will no doubt give some comfort to the anti-perogie forces, but both should be taken with a grain of salt and should only be considered a conformation that while there is opportunity around the Conservative decision to shut down parliament and take a two-month vacation, converting on that opportunity is both challenging and uncertain.

The first poll is from Angus Reid and the Toronto Star and surveyed specifically on the decision to prorogue parliament, and it found a majority (53 per cent) opposed the decision, either strongly or moderately. Just 19 per cent agreed with the decision, while 28 per cent were unsure. Support was highest in Manitoba/Saskatchewan at 31 per cent, and opposition was highest in Atlantic Canada at 61 per cent and Ontario at 59 per cent. Along party lines, naturally opposition supporters were opposed, but so were 35 per cent of Conservative supporters (46 per cent of them agreed).

Asked if they believed the government that the decision to prorogue was just about gearing-up for the next stage of the economic plan, or the opposition that it was about hiding from the Afghan detainee abuse scandal, 23 per cent believed the government, 38 per cent sided with the opposition, and 39 per cent didn’t know who to believe. The party line numbers are predictable.

So, Angus Reid tells us Canadians disagree with the decision to prorogue (and that most aren't really paying that close attention either). That’s all well and good, but in isolation it means little. The real question is, what impact, if any, will this disagreement have on their voting intention? Just because I disagree with something doesn’t mean it will change my vote.

That’s where the latest poll from Ekos and the CBC comes in to play. Here’s the latest Ekos numbers on voter intention:

Conservatives: 33.1 (-2.8)
Liberals: 27.8 (+1.1)
NDP: 16.0 (-1.0)
Green: 13.4 (+2.2)
Bloc Quebecois*: 9.8 (+0.6)
Undecided: 14.7

So, an outside the margin decline for the Conservatives, a small within the margin gain for the Liberals, a slight drop for the NDP and an unusual increase for the Greens. What does it all mean? Who knows for sure, but here’s my take:

Since not much else has been happening lately, it’s safe to say based on the Conservative dip that the prorogue story is putting a crimp in their numbers. And it’s also safe to say the opposition parties have yet to benefit much at all from the public disapproval of the Conservative decision.

These numbers largely echo what I’ve been saying since this began: even if people are annoyed at the Conservatives, the Liberals haven’t done the necessary spadework to be able to convert that dissatisfaction into support. We’re still languishing below 30 per cent, and only got a small bump. That’s because while there is anger with the Conservatives, they’re not enamored enough with the alternatives to make the jump. If the Liberals were a more credible alternative, you’d see a larger Conservative decline and a higher Liberal increase. But just because someone dislikes one choice doesn't mean they automatically like another.

Instead, you see a relatively small but still significant Conservative decrease, as those that are really dissatisfied park their support temporarily with the Greens, a traditional holding-basin for the temporarily annoyed, or with the undecided.

If the opposition parties, in particular the Liberals, don’t do anything to begin converting those dissatisfied former Conservative supporters into Liberal supporters by giving them a reason not just to be mad at the Conservatives but to support the Liberals, then over the next few weeks and months that support will slowly trickle back into the Conservative support column, and we’ll be back where we started.

That has been the clear pattern for several years now. They know what they need to do to break it. If they will or not remains to be seen.

UPDATE: For more on the polls see Scott and Scott, as well as Impolitical.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Liberal/NDP coalition viable without the BQ and Dion?

There were two major factors that made last December’s opposition coalition a tough sell and, ultimately, likely doomed it to failure: the presence of the Bloc Quebecois if only on the tertiary, and the unpopularity of Stephane Dion. The fact we’d just had an election that had increased Conservative seat count didn’t help any either. But what if Dion and the BQ weren’t in the equation – does a coalition become more viable?

Some numbers today from pollster Angus Reid suggest that, while it would still be an uphill battle to sell it, under the right circumstances a Liberal/NDP coalition may not be as toxic as originally thought by some, including, well, me.

Asked if they’d support formal power-sharing coalition between the Liberals and the NDP, 42 per cent said yes and 47 per cent said no, with 11 per cent undecided. Those 11 per cent would be critical, and much would demand on the circumstances at the time: electoral result, issues of the day, and so forth. Some 64 per cent of Liberals would support a coalition, and 70 per cent of NDPers. Interestingly, a majority of Green supporters, 51 per cent, would be opposed.


Angus Reid also polled other questions under a “unite the left” theme. While support was highest for the coalition option, they also polled running joint candidates to avoid vote-splitting and a party merger. Here it’s the Liberal and NDP supporter numbers that are really most relevant, as they didn’t ask if the options would change voter intention.

On an agreement between the Liberals and NDP not to run candidates against each other where it would split the vote, 55 per cent of Liberals and 51 per cent of NDPers were supportive.


And on a full-blown merger between the Liberals and NDP, 50 per cent of both Liberals and NDPers would be supportive.

Frankly, I don’t consider the latter two likely enough scenarios to discuss at length. Even if agreements could be reached around non-competes in swing ridings, the per-vote subsidy, which both opposition parties ironically fought hard to keep, is a major disincentive to not running strong with 308 candidates on the ballot.

As for an out-right merger, there’s not the historical unity on the left there is on the right. I doubt the far-left would be willing to be shut-out or would be placated as easily by a LPC/NDP as the far-right has by the Conservatives. There would be much more likelihood of a left-wing splinter party emerging and, while the remaining moderates would still be a force, there would be some bleeding on the centre-right to the Cons. And besides, I don’t think the lefties would let the NDP go without a dogfight.

Back to the coalition question, while it appears the battle wouldn’t be as uphill as I’d previously thought, I still think it’s highly unlikely. For starters, I think both parties would need to signal openness to the possibility before an election. You can do it after, but to try to arrange one after an election when you went into it saying no makes the sales battle all the much harder. It could be overcome, but it wouldn’t be a good start.

Declaring openness to a coalition before an election though is highly unlikely, at least for the Liberals. The NDP would probably be fine with it. That’s because the possibility of a coalition going into an election will bleed Liberal votes to the NDP. The Liberals run to win, and part of that strategy is always going to be “we’re the only party that can stop Harper and form a government” which means solidifying the anti-Harper vote in the Liberal column. Openness to a coalition gives license to NDP swing voters to avoid going Liberal to stop Harper, ie. voting strategically. I know that’s cynical, but this is politics.

So, in the next election I expect every party will run hard to win, and then the chips will fall where they may. I think a far more likely option than a coalition, other than a Conservative government of some variety, would be a Liberal minority with a governing agreement short of a formal coalition. That would mean no joint government caucus, no joint cabinet, but a Liberal government with NDP support for a given period based on a set of agreed-to legislative priorities.

Whether the NDP would accept that scenario instead of a formal power-sharing coalition would depend on how well each party does in the next election. The NDP would likely of course want the formal coalition; their chances of getting it would be dependent on their bargaining power, determined by their support. Neither party would want to be seen by Canadians as putting personal ambition ahead of a progressive government. And such governing agreements have a strong history in the Canadian system, and so would be seen as credible by the public.

But anyways, looking at those Angus Reid horse race numbers, that’s still a bridge far, far away.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Going behind the horserace numbers

We had two polls out last week, one from Angus Reid and one from Ekos, both of which showed the Liberals and Conservatives neck-in-neck as we go into the fall session of parliament and a possible election campaign.

I don’t put much import in the polls, other than affirming that Ipsos poll looks to be the 19th time out of 20, that anything is still possible and that, as always, the campaign will be determinative. I would say it’s a positive for the Liberals to be tied coming out of a summer when the opposition always has a hard time attracting national attention, particularly when the government has billions of dollars in stimulus funding to announce, and re-announce. It will be interesting to see where the numbers go now that people are paying attention once again.

Rather than focus totally on national horse race numbers though, I wanted to dive a little deeper and look at some of the other numbers in the two polls that I found interesting.

Regional highlights

When I look at regional numbers, I’m usually most interested in Ontario, Quebec and BC. The first two for strategic reasons, the latter personal.

Ekos has the Liberals restoring a decent lead in Ontario, at LPC 40.4, CPC 33.1, NDP 15.6. The Angus Reid numbers have it a bit tighter, at LPC 40, CPC 37, NDP 14. The Liberals need to be at 40 per cent or higher in Ontario to be competitive nationally. The NDP number is also important, because higher NDP numbers will create favourable vote splits for the Conservatives. The NDP have shown some weakness in Ontario lately, but the Liberals would like to see more daylight between them and the Conservatives.

Ekos also provides some interesting metro numbers, although with slightly higher margins of errors. In Toronto, Ekos has it Liberals 44.8, CPC 35.4, NDP 11.8, GPC 8.1 with a 6.6 MOE. The CPC shows strong strength in the GTA here but what surprised me was the low number for the NDP. That could make things interesting for a few of their incumbents.

In Quebec. Angus Reid has it BQ 35, LPC 31, CPC 18, NDP 10. Ekos calls it BQ 32.3, LPC 30.9, CPC 19.4, NDP 9.8. Again, two sets of similar numbers. Continued CPC weakness in Quebec will cost them seats they’ll need to make up elsewhere just to tread water. The BQ and the Liberals will gain, probably the BQ a little more. The NDP numbers are just above the Green Party in Quebec; if I was Thomas Mulcair I’d be a tad concerned.

Ekos puts Montreal at LPC 32.7, BQ 32.3. CPC 18.2, NDP 9.1 with a 6.5 MOE.

Finally, out in BC, Ekos has it CPC 35.3, NDP 25.5, LPC 24.9, GPC 14.3. At Angus Reid, its CPC 34, NDP 33, LPC 24, GPC 9. There’s been a lot of fluidity in the BC numbers of late. I don’t see the tightness of the Angus Reid number, but I also don’t see the high Green numbers that Ekos has holding. The Greens polled strongly in BC during the last campaign too, but came back down by e-day.

The thing to remember about BC is that the Conservatives largely run the table in rural BC, and compete just with the NDP in coastal BC and a few interior and Island ridings. So large Conservative rural pluralities can create a mini-Alberta effect in the provincial numbers. Liberal strength is largely concentrated in the Lower Mainland and South Island. In Vancouver, Ekos puts it at LPC 32.4, CPC 30.7, NDP 26.5, GPC 10.4 (MOE 10.5). While there’s a few strong CPC ridings in that mix, those numbers are still a little tighter than I’d like.

Doing the demographics

But enough of horserace numbers. What really interests me is when the pollsters make demographic data available. For example, support by gender.

The gender breakdowns from Ekos offer some interesting insights. Amongst men, its CPC 35.8 to LPC 33.1. That’s tighter than I recall it being for awhile, usually the CPC leads strongly with men. Among women, its LPC 32.2 to CPC 29.5. The Liberals have traditionally done very well with female voters; they lost that edge last election to the Conservatives and it was a big factor in the poor results. We look to be getting women back, and that’s a very positive sign. But we need to continue to build our support there with targeted policies and messaging to be competitive for government in the next election.

This is borne out by the Ontario numbers. Here, they show the seven point Liberal lead in Ontario is largely thanks to female voters, who preferred the Liberals 41.1 to 27.9 for the Conservatives. The Liberal lead with men in Ontario is much tighter, 39.8 to 37.6.

Nationally, the older you are the more likely you are to vote Conservative. The Liberals hold the advantage up to age 44, then the Conservatives the rest of the way. Interestingly, while the Conservatives still lead, as people leave middle-age for their golden years, there’s an uptick in Liberal support, which indicates targeting seniors would be advisable.

On the education front, don’t think I’m making any judgement here but the more education you have, according to Ekos you’re more likely to vote Liberal. Those with university degrees are LPC 38.9 to CPC 30.2, but those with high school or college favour the CPC by five to six points.

Beyond the surface

Some of the additional questions that Angus Reid asked help to illustrate a point I like to often make, and that’s that numbers, on the surface, can be deceiving.

For example, Angus Reid reports that 41% oppose toppling the government and 16% moderately oppose it, with just 14% strongly supporting it and 18% moderately supporting it. Regionally, opposition is strongest in Manitoba and Saskatchewan at 61% strongly opposed, and support strongest in Atlantic Canada at 25% strongly support.

So, we can take from those numbers that an election is a bad idea and the perceived culprit will be smacked for it, right?

Well, maybe not.

When asked the change question (it’s time for a new party in government, or it’s not change the CPC should stay), 42% said it was time for change while 34% wanted the CPC to stay. Of course, those 42% will disagree on what the change should be, naturally.

Still, the contradiction between the opposition to election and desire for change is there. What does it mean? I’d argue it means that, while Canadians aren’t keen on the idea of election, that’s not surprising because they never are. But they’ll still go and vote, they’re looking for change, and there is unlikely to be any kind of election backlash, no matter how hard the spinmiesters try.

Anyway, while interesting when a new dynamic unfolding now these polls mean nothing. They’re merely the starting-point, not the destination.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Describe Stephen Harper? Secretive, arrogant, out of touch

A few polls out today that others will I'm sure offer plenty of analysis of, one from Ekos and one from Angus Reid. Both show tight races, but solid Liberal prospects.

The Angus Reid folks have posted a PDF breakdown with lots of interesting stuff, and I wanted to share a few thoughts on.

First, they offer some interesting insight on the impact of the Conservative ads:

After disclosing their voting intention, respondents to this survey were divided into three groups. The first group observed one of the television ads that the Conservative Party has launched targeting Ignatieff, the second group was shown the same ad and the response that Ignatieff posted on YouTube, and the third group was not exposed to any ads or videos.

The momentum score for Harper among respondents who saw the ad is -40 (10% improved, 50% worsened), and the prime minister posts similar numbers among those who saw the ad and the video (9% improved, 52% worsened) and those who were not exposed directly to either the ad or the video (7% improved, 49% worsened).

The momentum score for Ignatieff among respondents who saw the ad is -18 (24% improved, 42% worsened). However, the opposition leader bridges the gap with those who also saw his YouTube video (29% improved, 31% worsened) and is even among those who did not see the ad or the video (28% improved, 28% worsened).

As I've said before, I'm not ready to pass judgment on the effectiveness, or lack thereof, of the Conservative ads yet. But there is one message I take from these results: The Liberal Party needs to get its response in front of more people than those who watch YouTube.



On another note, I found this amusing:

Respondents were also asked to select up to six words (out of a list of 17 traits and characteristics) that may be used to describe Canada's federal political leaders.

The words that were associated with Harper the most are secretive (54%), arrogant (53%), out of touch (38%), uncaring (37%), intelligent (35%), boring (34%) and dishonest (also 34%).

Ignatieff comes across as intelligent (53%), arrogant (42%) and strong (31%), and a quarter of respondents also see him as open, secretive end efficient.

And who says pollsters don't have a sense of humour?

Remarkably, the five federal party leaders post exceptionally low marks on being exciting (from 3% for Harper to 13% for Layton), and at least one-in-five Canadians regard them all as boring (from 21% for Ignatieff to 34% for Harper).

Remarkably? Surely that's sarcasm, Angus...

Finally, interesting regionals. I like those Quebec numbers (ouch, Cons) but those Atlantic numbers aren't pleasing.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Yaffe: nearly a quarter of NDP voters are now supporting Ignatieff's Liberals

A column from the Vancouver Sun's Barbara Yaffe today that discusses the recent Angus Reid polling numbers and paints a dire picture for the NDP, and highlights positive growth for the Liberals. It's news many of my NDP friends will likely dismiss as biased corporate media nonsense Liberals bad yada yada, thus compounding the trend. An attitude I'm fine with, incidentally.

Polls show the NDP's loss in popularity is the Liberals' gain

Party's surge is hard to explain, given that Michael Ignatieff has yet to put forward a vision of where he'd take the country

By Barbara Yaffe, Vancouver Sun March 19, 2009 1:08 AM

Federal New Democrats need to find some way to get their mojo back.

As Canadians adjust to a new political map featuring reinvigorated Liberal leadership, it is becoming clear that the big losers are New Democrats, although Conservatives also should be looking over their shoulders.

Not only are Liberals -- with Michael Ignatieff at the helm -- stealing support from the left-wing party, but a just-released Angus Reid poll suggests, at a time of financial crisis, Canadians don't believe the NDP has the answers.

Only 13 per cent of 1,002 poll respondents believe Jack Layton "can manage the economy effectively."

The party no doubt was discredited by its January decision to reject the Harper government's stimulus budget before it was even presented.
(read more)

_____
**Help send a BCer to BC for the Liberal convention. Your support greatly appreciated.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

We're competitive with Michael, but not so much with Bob: poll

Interesting polling numbers from Angus Reid in today's dead tree edition of the Toronto Star.

First, the party support numbers are troubling for the Liberals, and I'd say speak to our inability during round one of this coalition battle to win the public relations battle. If an election were held now, we'd be in trouble:

Conservatives: 42%
Liberals: 22%
NDP: 18%
Bloc: 10%
Green: 7%

However, asked the pollster, were Michael Ignatieff the leader of the Liberal Party, how would you vote?

Conservatives: 38%
Liberals: 33%
NDP: 13%
Bloc: 10%
Green: 6%

So with Michael, we're still a few points behind but we're competitive, and it's ground we can make up in a campaign. He gives us an impressive 11 point swing in support, and what's interesting is where that swing comes from. He pulls four from the Conservatives but he also pulls five from the NDP. I'd argue that arguers well for Michael as a solidifying figure of the political centre, which is what the Liberal Party needs right now.

The pollster also asked respondents how they'd vote were Bob Rae the Liberal leader:

Conservatives: 41%
Liberals: 26%
NDP: 15%
Bloc: 10%
Green: 6%

Not impressive numbers, with Bob managing only a four-point swing in Liberal fortunes. The Conservative figure, well inside majority government territory, is virtually unchanged, with Bob managing to pull a few points from the NDP although, notably, not as much as Michael. Now, ground can be made up in a campaign, but to close a 15-point gap between the Liberals and the Conservatives would require a miracle.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Fortune favours the daring

Two polls came out today, one from Angus Reid and the other from Harris-Decima . One shows it C34/L28, the other C31/L30. I prefer the latter one, for obvious reasons.

I'll leave the analysis to Steve, Scott and others, and there is something interesting stuff in some of the regionals (NDP and Greens tied in Ontario?). I will say that I think it's too early to look for what reaction there will be, if any, to the Cadman affair. Both these polls were conducted or began very early in that story. These things take some time to percolate, we should check back in a few weeks and I'll of course wait for The Nanos to weigh-in from on high.

I wanted though to note though this line from Angus Reid:

While Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion was critical of the budget, he immediately announced his party would not defeat Prime Minister Stephen Harper's minority government.

Only 24 per cent of those polled supported his actions, with 51 per cent saying they disapproved of his performance.

And this from Decima:

A new poll suggests Stephen Harper's Conservatives have taken a beating in public opinion over the past week, but the opposition Liberals have done nothing to capitalize.

He's says the two major parties are in a neck-and-neck battle and neither appears to be gaining an edge.

If we'd said last Tuesday we're voting NO to this budget, I'd wager we'd be seeing very different poll numbers today. It would have been a gamble, yes. But fortune favours the daring, and it appears that for week one of the campaign at least the electoral gods would have been smiling upon us.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Justin, Justin, Justin!

(headline should be read as if said by Jan Brady) I just participated in my first online political survey over at Angus Reid, so we can look forward to the results in a few days I’m sure. And allow me to give you a preview of the resulting headlines: Justin Trudeau…

In addition to the usual questions about the performance of the party leaders, who you’d vote for, top issue facing Canada and so forth, there were three (3!) questions related to Liberal wunderkind Justin Trudeau.

Angus Reid wanted to know if his nomination win impacted your view of the Liberal Party, if you’d vote for him if you lived in his riding, and, would you be more or less likely to vote Liberal if….Justin were Liberal leader. Someone’s getting ahead of themselves I think, but it will give the media lots to write about.

Other questions covered whether the Geneva Convention should apply in Afghanistan, whether Gordon O’Connor should quit as defence minister, and whether you’re aware of Sears Days. One of these things is not like the other...

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers