CPAC-Nanos Daily Election Tracking CP 33, LP 29, NDP 20, BQ 11, GP 7 (ending October 7)

Do my eyes decieve me or has anyone ever see a leader of the Liberal Party with such abysmal leadership numbers and with the NDP in second place. I am looking forward to this election as I think Canadians are going to be very surpised the morning after. I was crunching as many numbers that I could get and the seat counts are all over the place we could end up with the NDP as the opposition party - who would have thought and maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing as it may be time to give the Lib's a good time out so they can get a leader who won't drag them down as much as Dion.

[updated Wed Oct 08 14:10:14 EDT 2008]

I think this poll means good things for the NDP, and therefore possibly good things for the Conservatives if the NDP (and the Greens) end up splitting the vote.

I think the second choice data ("This analysis points to a level of fluidity between the Liberals, the NDP and the Greens") points to this as well.

[updated Wed Oct 08 14:15:42 EDT 2008]

GO DION! DOWN WITH THE CONSERVATIVES!

[updated Wed Oct 08 14:16:40 EDT 2008]

The Maritimes numbers look suspect today s no one moves up or down 9% in one day.

However, the news in Ontario continues to be fantastic for the Libs..who now lead the cons 40 to 28%.

Quebec is in total collapse for the cons as well and the Libs need to beat down the NDP a little more there and in Ontario.

This shows the Liberal surge is for real and I can't wait for election day!!!!

[updated Wed Oct 08 14:18:13 EDT 2008]

there they go the Liberals are beginning their spiral, the spin doctors call it a success but they are down 6 % since August 29th. PC hasn't changed.

LP 35, CP 33, NDP 17, BQ 8, GP 7 -(2008-08-29) Nanos

[updated Wed Oct 08 14:37:08 EDT 2008]

I always felt that it is difficult for Harper to keep up his 'made for campaigning' persona. The sweater vest, casual attire, calm and smiling and in control. I see him cracking now that the election is on the home stretch. It is difficult to be someone you are not. At least the other leaders are themselves, and not trying to trick us all into voting for him/her. I still do not trust him (as with so many women from the last election), and find that he makes a terrible prime minister, especially on the world stage.

[updated Wed Oct 08 14:40:25 EDT 2008]

Libs have been trending upward too fast since the debates; unsurprising to see momentum dip, nor could the bleed go anywhere but to the NDP. Expect Libs' numbers to keep growing & Cons' numbers to keep dropping over the next week & brace for a Liberal minority on Oct. 14.

[updated Wed Oct 08 15:31:13 EDT 2008]

Polls diverge on fortunes of Conservatives
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081008/wl_canada_nm/canada_us_politics_poll_5

[updated Wed Oct 08 15:32:27 EDT 2008]

Would love to hear all your thoughts, I have compiled today's polls...

One time:
Angus Reid- Tories 35%, Libs 27% (Oct. 6th, 7th) 1,000 ppl.

Daily Rolling:
Ekos- Tories 34 (+1), Libs 25 (-1) (Oct.5th, 6th, 7th) 3,100 ppl. total
Nanos- Tories 33 (-1), Libs 29 (-2) (Oct. 5th, 6th, 7th ) 1,200 ppl. total
Harris Decima: Tories 31 (NC), Libs 27 (+1) (Oct. 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th) 1,200 ppl. total

Summary:
The poll with the most recent dates, not a rolling average with the weekend, has the tories at their highest- 35% (although AR has always been high with tory support throughout the campaign). This includes polling the night the platform was released. Tomorrow should show begin to fully show us how that platform was received- or if it had any impact.

Rolling polls show that those with more recent days have the Tories scoring better, though the Nanos drop by 1 means last night might have not been good polling for the tories. Also, the larger the sample size also shows better Tory performance.

Overall, I believe larger samples sizes, and more recent dates show better Tory performance.

[updated Wed Oct 08 15:34:31 EDT 2008]

Hey Nik and all - why would a man who claims he predicted the global financial meltdown throw Canada into an election? He brought down his own government all the while knowing there was a looming financial disaster?

[updated Wed Oct 08 15:50:05 EDT 2008]

Well I have read the Conservative Platform in PDF format at the G&M, is colorful, easy to understand and the points I like are: BC Alberta and Ontario to receive their rightful number of seats in the House of Commons, 2. Abolishing the Senate or Elected, Jim Munson will have to find a real job now 3. Unscruplous Immigration Consultants, the problem they do not live in Canada, they live in China, the worst has a office near Burrard and Georgia Street in Vancouver. Ontario you can thank Jean Chretien for sending your jobs to China, now we have to spend 400 million to get your industry back and running, next time think before you Vote for the Liberal Brand, it does not work anymore

[updated Wed Oct 08 16:42:50 EDT 2008]

The convservatives are in trouble is an understatement -, The Why is Simple- During times of real issues like what is going on in the world markets the last thing people want to hear that "is it's a good to time to buy cheap stocks."

For a Prime Minister to suggest that people with very little money start betting on the stock market, is not wise... That also is an understatment.

In some places the NDP may pick-up but if the Liberal messaging is consistent and people begin to believe that they should put their vote with a party who done quite well managing the economy, you may see a movement to the Liberals,

In my case, this time I have decided to vote Liberal simply because I do not believe the conversvatives are the Party to trust during the upcoming bad economic times.

I think we are looking at an upset in terms of expectations of what the conservatives thought they would accomplish, I now believe that with the apprehension out there,,,,, people will be prudent and move their vote to the Liberals from the NDP and from soft Conservatives,

No prediction as of yet on who may win ,.... But if the conservatives do not do well as they expected to - watch for the upcoming bloodbath and it will not be pretty...

[updated Wed Oct 08 17:16:03 EDT 2008]

Harper lied - Read his letter - look at his signature.
Establish the simple facts - Harper Lied

For the purpose of establishing facts. Read the letter from Harper and signed by Harper.
It remains unbelievable in this day of technology that a fact cannot be established.

http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2006/exec/01harper.pdf

[updated Wed Oct 08 17:47:14 EDT 2008]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Page/document/video/vs?id=RTGAM.20081008.wvdion_speech1008

The best speech of any party leader in this election. This could take Dion over the top.

Its being played on every news channel continuously

[updated Wed Oct 08 19:31:22 EDT 2008]

There ya go.... Elizabeth May finally comes out to tell people to vote for liberals instead of for her own party.....

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081008.welxngreens1009/BNStory/politics/home

[updated Wed Oct 08 20:11:25 EDT 2008]

This is on behalf of rsharp, arbitrarily suspended by Nik because he called evalngelical Christians freaks. Richard tried to deal with Nik on the matter, but received no reply.

I invite you to read Richard's last 30-50 posts. He has been respectful of others in all cases (not including public figures such as Mr. Harper). At worst, Nik should have simply deleted his offensive comment.

To suspend him (indefinitely) in light of the apparently acceptable but much more hateful comments of others is, well, not like Nik.

[updated Wed Oct 08 20:39:47 EDT 2008]

Battleground Ridings- 45 ridings that can change the country
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/v5/content/election2008/battleground-ridings.html

I would like to hear from users on the results of those battleground ridings. With supporting data and links. BTW telling me you have an inside poll and you have walked door to door in 10 ridings won't cut it. Also using multiple accounts to spin please leave this thread untouched with spin. Thanks and good luck in your vote this Tuesday.

[updated Thu Oct 09 08:34:09 EDT 2008]

Any political leader telling the truth? Or is it a "No Fly Zone" to admit if things go south a government will have to run a deficit?

KONRAD YAKABUSKI

Globe and Mail Update

E-mail Konrad Yakabuski | Read Bio | Latest Columns
October 9, 2008 at 6:00 AM EDT

These days, even acknowledging the possibly of a budget deficit is enough to earn a mainstream Canadian politician shaming looks and opprobrium. Pierre Trudeau's legacy of debt and deficits so traumatized the political class that now even the NDP sounds like the Fraser Institute.

NDP Leader Jack Layton's insistence that he'll run no deficit if he moves into 24 Sussex demonstrates how far to the right he, along with the entire Canadian political elite, has shifted. Or how scared they are to admit otherwise.

Mr. Trudeau was our last great (or not so great) Keynesian leader. This is what he said in 1979, as Joe Clark's Progressive Conservatives vowed to rein in spending: “In Liberal views, a deficit is an instrument. It is not something you necessarily want or necessarily steer away from. It is something you use to direct the economy when you want jobs.”

What poetry. What delusion. When Mr. Trudeau left office in 1984, the federal budget deficit had grown to almost 9 per cent of gross domestic product. Any more stimulus than that and you normally go into cardiac arrest. Brian Mulroney's Tory government brought down the so-called structural deficit on program spending. But rising interest rates and a recession sent the overall deficit soaring again in the early 1990s.
"....."
So, why let Mr. Trudeau haunt us, still? Would it be so bad for Ottawa to spend some of its fiscal dividend if the economy tanks? By sticking to their no-deficit guns, our political leaders are either woefully inept at making policy or willfully dishonest with voters.

Mr. Harper came the closest of any of the leaders to conceding the obvious this week when he told Business News Network that nothing “indicates to me that we should immediately go into deficit.” What that means all depends on your definition of immediately.

In February, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty forecast a $2.3-billion budget surplus for the current fiscal year and $1.3-billion next year, based on projected GDP growth of 1.7 per cent in 2008 and 2.4 per cent in 2009, respectively. Optimistic does not begin to describe those numbers now.

Federal budget documents estimate that a 1 per cent drop in GDP growth below the February forecast would reduce the “budgetary balance” by $3.3-billion this year and $2.8-billion in 2009-10. That does not include any extra stimulus – such as speeding up infrastructure spending – that the next government might undertake to prime the pump.

A longer, deeper economic downturn would render a deficit unavoidable. No one is suggesting we should spend our way out of a recession. But any move to cut expenditures or raise taxes just to avoid going into the red would exacerbate the pain we're all about to feel.

Besides, why should the left embrace the idea of balanced budgets just when the right in most of the world has abandoned it? Next to George W. Bush, Mr. Layton looks like a fiscal conservative. The U.S. President started the year by passing a $150-billion (U.S.) stimulus package that sent $600 cheques to most individuals. Now his $700-billion bank bailout law, laden with tax breaks, will add at least $100-billion to the federal budget deficit next year on top of the $438-billion shortfall originally projected. That will push the U.S. deficit-to-GDP ratio to almost 4 per cent and send the public debt-to-GDP ratio above 40 per cent. Yes, it's scary. But can anyone imagine what misery would await the Canadian economy if the Americans actually believed in balanced budgets?
"........"
Unlike our leaders, theirs weren't traumatized by Mr. Trudeau.

http://www.reportonbusiness.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081008.wyakabuski1009/BNStory/robColumnsBlogs/?cid=al_gam_nletter_maropen
2 Paragraph removed for text limit.

[updated Thu Oct 09 08:58:12 EDT 2008]

Can anyone from Nanos Research please give some details on how they compute their party standings numbers, and how it is different from other major election pollsters? The reason I am asking is that your numbers almost always are systematically (and substantially) different from those of the rest of the pollsters, by much more than a standard error. In particular, your numbers for Greens are usually much smaller, and for NDP are noticeably smaller, whereas Liberals usually get much higher marks. I know your predictions were the most accurate for the last two elections, so whatever you do apparently better mimics what voters do on the voting day (which includes some degree of strategic voting).

Here is my theory on how you do it. I know you are the only one who collects not just first, but also second party choices. I can imagine you also ask everyone how likely that they are going to switch from their first to their second choice on the election day. Then you can process all this information on a statistical basis, by adding a fraction of voter support to the second choice parties (mimicking strategic voting). Of course, the reality may be more complicated than that. E.g., NDP/Greens are less likely to vote strategically if the chances for Conservative majority are slim. But that would be a second order correction I guess.

Am I right (in principle)? If not, what is you trick?

Thank you,

Sergey M. (PhD)

[updated Thu Oct 09 10:35:31 EDT 2008]

Canada rated world's soundest bank system: survey
Thu Oct 9, 4:40 AM
By Rob Taylor
CANBERRA (Reuters) - Canada has the world's soundest banking system, closely followed by Sweden, Luxembourg and Australia, a survey by the World Economic Forum has found as financial crisis and bank failures shake world markets.
But Britain, which once ranked in the top five, has slipped to 44th place behind El Salvador and Peru, after a 50 billion pound ($86.5 billion) pledge this week by the government to bolster bank balance sheets.
The United States, where some of Wall Street's biggest financial names have collapsed in recent weeks, rated only 40, just behind Germany at 39, and smaller states such as Barbados, Estonia and even Namibia, in southern Africa.
The United States was on Thursday considering buying a slice of debt-laden banks to inject trust back into lending between financial institutions now too wary of one another to lend.
The World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness Report based its findings on opinions of executives, and handed banks a score between 1.0 (insolvent and possibly requiring a government bailout) and 7.0 (healthy, with sound balance sheets).
Canadian banks received 6.8, just ahead of Sweden (6.7), Luxembourg (6.7), Australia (6.7) and Denmark (6.7).
UK banks collectively scored 6.0, narrowly behind the United States, Germany and Botswana, all with 6.1. France, in 19th place, scored 6.5 for soundness, while Switzerland's banking system scored the same in 16th place, as did Singapore (13th).
The ranking index was released as central banks in Europe, the United States, China, Canada, Sweden and Switzerland slashed interest rates in a bid to end to panic selling on markets and restore trust in the shaken banking system.
The Netherlands (6.7), Belgium (6.6), New Zealand (6.6), Malta (6.6) rounded out the WEF's banking top 10 with Ireland, whose government unilaterally pledged last week to guarantee personal and corporate deposits at its six major banks.
Also scoring well were Chile (6.5, 18th) and Spain, South Africa, Norway, Hong Kong and Finland all ending up in the top 20.
At the bottom of the list was Algeria in 134th place, with its banks scoring 3.9 to be just below Libya (4.0), Lesotho (4.1), the Kyrgyz Republic (4.1) and both Argentina and East Timor (4.2).
RANKINGS
1. Canada
2. Sweden
3. Luxembourg
4. Australia
5. Denmark
6. Netherlands
7. Belgium
8. New Zealand
9. Ireland
10. Malta 11. Hong Kong
12. Finland
13. Singapore
14. Norway
15. South Africa
16. Switzerland
17. Namibia
18. Chile
19. France
20. Spain
--------------------------------------------
124. Kazakhstan
125. Cambodia
126. Burundi
127. Chad
128. Ethiopia
129. Argentina
130. East Timor
131. Kyrgyz Republic
132. Lesotho
133. Libya
134. Algeria
SOURCE: World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2008-2009.
(For the full World Economic Forum report click on: http://www.weforum.org/GCR0809_Browser )
(Editing by Kim Coghill)

[updated Thu Oct 09 11:29:46 EDT 2008]

Advance Polls Voter turnout is down. Do you think that favours the Government?

( I do.Supports the Ekos Polling results I listed earlier)

Press Releases and Media Advisories
Elections Canada: Media: Press Releases and Media Advisories

First Estimate of Turnout at Advance Polls Now Available
OTTAWA, Tuesday, October 7, 2008 — The Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, Marc Mayrand, announced today the preliminary estimate of the number of electors who voted in advance on Friday, October 3, Saturday, October 4, and Monday, October 6.

According to the preliminary figures, 1,459,253 electors voted at the advance polls in this election. This is a decrease from the 1,561,039 electors who voted in advance in the 39th general election in 2006.

Following is a breakdown of the estimated number of electors who voted at the advance polls, by province or territory and electoral district, for all 308 electoral districts.
http://www.elections.ca/content.asp?section=med&document=oct0708b&dir=pre&lang=e&textonly=false

[updated Thu Oct 09 13:52:54 EDT 2008]

We have seen a narrowing gap between the Liberals and the Conservatives over the past few days. As the election cliche goes, the next few days will be very important. If the Conservatives can reverse their decline, they might increase their seat count over last time, and with a favouring wind, even a majority is possible-- not likely, but possible, expecially if the four opposition parties split their votes almost evenly.
On the other hand, it would not take much of a shift in the other direction for the Liberals to overtake the Conservatives in the seat count. They have a big lead in Ontario, and have been gaining ground in Quebec. They seem to have cemented gains elsewhere except for the west, and besides, they don't have many seats to lose out there. A gain of about 10 to 12 seats in Ontario and Quebec, combined with a similar loss for the Conservatives in these provinces and elsewhere (the NDP seem poised to make some gains in Conservative ridings) and you could have a narrow liberal minority. This could happen if they manage to narrow the gap by another point or two.
As I posted elsewhere, a lot depends on how motivated voters for each party are. If the Liberal momentum continues, this should help them on Election Day. Dion has had some very successful TV appearances, and the increased respect he has earned might help traditional Liberals who parked elsewhere to return to the fold.
The Conservatives on the other hand still have lots of loyal supporters and lots of resources to make sure their vote comes out. As we've seen over the past few days, though, their core vote is only abut 30 percent of the electorate-- not enough to ensure a victory.
The spoiler might just be the enthusiasm of the NDP and Green supporters. Layton has run a much better campaign this time, and is almost certain to increase his share of the popular vote. Some of these gains are in Quebec, though, and might not translate into seats there. Then there's the traditional Election Day bleeding to the Liberals to worry about. I suspect that because of their momentum that this will not be as much of a factor this time. The Greens might lose more votes to this phenomenon, and they seem to favour the Liberals over other parties. IF both parties hold on to their votes, on the other hand, they might just split the vote enough for some Conservatives to squeak in with 30 percent of the vote or less in some ridings.
Barring any major disasters, then, the advantage seems to be with the Liberals. A further wild card are the anyone-but-conservative strategic voting sites. These favour the Liberals, and in close ridings that might make a big difference.
Here's what I think is the most interesting scenario: A repeat of the 1972 election in which the governing party wins just a handful more seats than the main opposition. If both the Liberals and the Conservatives win about 110 to 120 seats, either could likely form a government, since they could turn to either the NDP or the Bloc for the necessary votes to pass a bill. Given the way the election has gone, though, if I were the Governor-General I'd have a difficult time handing the reins over to the Conservatives, since the other parties are much closer politically. (That would create an absolute firestorm in Conservative circles, but it would make for interesting times.)
And if Harper does win fewer seat this time than he did last, I wouldn't be surprised of caucus members who'd smarted under his whip would start actively trying to replace him, regardless of whether he manages to form a government.

[updated Thu Oct 09 14:12:19 EDT 2008]

Who is this Kevin Page so called Independent Parliamentary Budget Secretary, we have far to many Parliamentary Staff, What was his motive for bringing out this Report to day, few days before the Vote, this nonsense he should be fired, and he says he has a great team, how do we know, to me they come from Universities that are Liberal strong holds I do not trust them and do they have most importantly any experience in Life or just Theory!
Give me your comments on this, on a side Note I consider Nik Nanos the most trustworthy Pollester of them all, I watch Peter and Nik nightly, Do you agree or disagree?

[updated Thu Oct 09 15:16:03 EDT 2008]