Saturday, April 23, 2005

April 23 Aggregate Seat Projection

UPDATE (6:05pm PT):
Poll Averages Conservative Green Liberal N.D.P. BQ
Atlantic 36% 3% 44% 16% 0%
Quebec 15% 4% 20% 10% 51%
Ontario 39% 5% 36% 19% 0%
Prairies 50% 3% 25% 18% 0%
Alberta 61% 5% 20% 13% 0%
British Columbia 34% 10% 26% 28% 0%
SAMPLE: 4000


THIS IS the April 23 seat projection from the 3 latest polls with regional data. You can get the latest IPSOS breakdown here (pdf via Nealenews). The sample size is 4000 Canadians over the past 9 days.

SINCE the last aggregate 1 week ago:
  • CONSERVATIVES are UP 11 seats.
  • LIBERALS are DOWN 8 seats.
  • NDP is DOWN 3 seats.
  • BQ is STEADY at 68.

CONS Green Liberal N.D.P. BQ Total
Newfoundland 2 0 5 0 0 7
0 0 4 0 0 4
Nova Scotia 4 0 7 0 0 11
New Brunswick 2 0 7 1 0 10
Quebec 0 0 7 0 68 75
Ontario 55 0 40 11 0 106
Manitoba 10 0 0 4 0 14
Saskatchewan 13 0 1 0 0 14
Alberta 28 0 0 0 0 28
British Columbia 19 0 5 12 0 36
The North 0 0 2 1 0 3
Totals 133 0 78 29 68 308
April 23/2005 CONS Green Liberal N.D.P. BQ Totals

UPDATE (cont'd): Some people are concerned that the NDP are being shut out of the Atlantic provinces, while the Liberals only have 7 Quebec seats projected.
  • First of all, this projection is an opinion.
  • Secondly, I have not made any human adjustments to the computer model seat projection. I do realize that there are some anomalies across the country. Independents, federalist seats, etc.
  • Come election time, I will be making human adjustments to arrive at a more accurate prediction.

New polls

I HAVE the latest poll numbers taken this past weekend and week. Below is National and Ontario data. Some observations first:
  • MARTIN'S SPEECH may have shifted support towards the Conservatives. IPSOS reports that "there was a "spike" in support for the Conservatives" during the night of the televised address to the nation.
  • SEAT PROJECTIONS by IPSOS conclude that the Conservatives are "bumping up against a majority."
  • HOWEVER MY LATEST AGGREGATE polling data suggests that Liberals are slowly regaining their support. Liberal support has risen a full 2 percent in the past week or so.
  • CONSERVATIVE SUPPORT is slowly rising, but levelling off at around 35 percent.
  • ONTARIO NOW APPEARS to be shifting slowly into Conservative country. The latest poll by IPSOS suggests that the Conservative support is growing rapidly over the past month. This is key for the Liberals. IPSOS:"For the Liberals, you have to ask, if they lose these seats in Ontario, where are they going to make them up?"







15-17 Decima


16-17 Pollara


19-21 IPSOS








16-17 Pollara 39


19-21 IPSOS 36



Friday, April 22, 2005

Telling stories titilate all

I wonder how Canadians would have responded, if Bush said something to the effect of what Martin said last night:

"When I was young, I practically lived here in the White House. My father was president and he went to war against Iraq. He taught me that those who serve in public office have a duty to protect the integrity of government."

Telling stories is one thing, but to play into a story of nationhood that may be more a matter of mythmaking is something that Canadians have lacked in contrast to Americans.

Two rather fascinating quotes from George W Bush used at the beginning of Rogers Smith's new essay, Providentialism, Foreign Policy, and the Ethics of Political Discourse, sounds like something I'd never hear a Canadian PM say:
“We have a place, all of us, in a long story; a story we continue, but whose end we will not see…It is the American story…We are not this story’s Author, Who fills time and eternity with His purpose. Yet his purpose is achieved in our duty; and our duty is fulfilled in service to one another.” -- George W. Bush, 2001

“We go forward with complete confidence in the ultimate triumph of freedom…Not because we consider ourselves a chosen nation; God moves and chooses as He wills…History has an ebb and flow of justice, but history also has a visible direction, set by liberty and the Author of Liberty…we are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom.” – George W. Bush, 2005
Rogers M Smith's thesis in the paper, I think, is:
[Bush's] ... providentialist discourse bears the hallmarks of a “story of peoplehood” that is being used politically to gain an aura of ethical legitimacy for policies that are otherwise unlikely to be seen as in accord with the nation’s dominantmoral traditions.
Though Smith is critical of the story telling, I wonder if a country can really do with out it.

For why do people find coercive force and persuasive stories convincing? You might recognize that behind the pusher and the story teller is an elite group of people who are using their power or ability to accumulate power against people, but why does it work? When pushed, why do people not just fall over and die, becoming useless to the state? When told a story, why do people not just say, "yeah, whatever"?

Political societies may indeed not be natural, as Smith says, but why is their naturally a favourable response to pushing and story telling? Is there something in Bush's story telling that does come natural? Or is the notions behind the ideas he appeals to in their linguistic context and syntax merely the product of nurture? Is there something missing in Canada persuant to the notion of an evolving story?

Paul Martin speaks for himself, but others can do it better

Not after 9/11, even though 24 of our countrymen were murdered by terrorists. Not when we joined the war in Afghanistan. Not when we declined to back the U.S. in Iraq; not when we naively rejected the U.S. missile defence program.

Not when the government refused to compensate thousands of victims of the tainted blood scandal, many of whom are dying as they continue to await justice today (despite a hasty Liberal flip-flop on the issue Wednesday night, which will change little). Not even when the government decided to redefine the institution of marriage.

No, none of those things were deemed important enough for the Liberal prime minister to address the nation.

But hey, through all of those events, the Liberals were doing fine in the polls.

Linda Williamson wins the competition for best response to the Martin address to the nation. Damian Penny comes second with his truncated version of the Martin speech:
I'm sorry, I didn't do it, I'm cleaning it up, let Gomery finish his work, I'll call an election within 30 days of the report being published, please please please please please don't call an election right now, I hung out here on Parliament Hill when I was a kid, let's get back to the real issues.

Editorials like this demonstrate why the elites at the Globe just don't get it: they cannot trust the people to hold politicians to account. It boggles my mind to think that we would need a judge to determine what is fact and what is not. When I hear two witnesses say the same thing, putting their own hide on the line, who am I going to believe -- Paul Martin, who will not say what he did know (it was obvious he knew something or other) or them?

The Globe does not understand that fact is not constituted by a judge, but by anyone who wishes to see the evidence for themselves. I think the Globe forgets that it is not merely what goes on at the sponsorship inquiry that will be judged, but the leadership qualities of Paul Martin in trying to obfuscate his role.

The fact is, the government is supported by 15% of the population. I would say that whatever mandate they may have had deserves another look.

Besides, the Gomery inquiry's mandate does not even cover all the scandal as of late.

Thursday, April 21, 2005

Conservatives up

Conservatives are up almost a full point in the latest aggregate round of polling. Here are the numbers:

Apr-16 27.94 34.25 19.31 11.94
Apr-20 28.33 35.00 17.00 12.00
Gain 0.39% 0.75% -2.31% 0.06%
Sample: 3000

A prediction

Apparently Harper will be getting some airtime to talk too.
Martin has not demanded airtime, and it's up to the networks to decide whether to carry it. (It will run at 7:45 pm ET on CTV Newsnet, followed by a response from Conservative Leader Stephen Harper.)

Seeing as though it will likely be after Martin, I would say that any effect he had in convincing the public that he clearly did not have anything to do with the sponsorship inquiry will be neutralized somewhat. Actually, I think this will work to Harper's advantage.

Here is my prediction of what Martin will do:
  • Slam the opposition parties for making his job unworkable.
  • Claim that the Liberals are doing everything they can to get to the bottom of this.
  • Reveal Scott Brison's scriptwriter.
  • And finally, promise to let Gomery do his work and finish his report before an election. He would like the opposition parties to do the same.
Big surprise there! By extending this promise, if it is true, Martin looks like the good guy if the opposition calls an election. The only problem is that with a quarter of the voting population, and more like 15% of the actual population supporting the Liberals, who is going to be convinced?

The more Liberals in the news, the worse it will be for them.

Wednesday, April 20, 2005

Through the backdoor

It appears as though an election writ could be dropped sooner than May 19. If this motion passes, then the House will be dissolved. One question, aren't all no-confidence motions binding? Reuters with the story:

The Conservative Party will ask a key parliamentary committee to approve a nonbinding motion of nonconfidence in the minority Liberal government, a leading party official said on Thursday.

The measure will be formally introduced into the public accounts committee on May 2 and if approved -- which seems likely -- it would then be voted on by the House of Commons elected chamber within 10 days, Jay Hill told reporters.

Asked whether the Liberals could ignore the results of a full parliamentary vote on what would be a nonbinding motion of confidence, Hill replied:

"If the majority of the members of Parliament elected to the House of Commons voted in favor of nonconfidence, it would be extremely hard for the prime minister to maintain that he had the confidence of the House."

Question period highlights

HARPER MONEY QUOTE:“If it wills to violate the will of this house, it does so at its own peril."


CONSERVATIVES ATTACK TRANSPORT Minister Jean Lapierre. They demanded he resign over lobbying for a contract without registering as a lobbyist.

The attack is not as strong as I would have liked. It was easily refuted by the Transport Minister.

BLOC ATTACKS WITH Kinsella testimony. Questioned David Herle's involvement in Earnscliffe. Liberal replies:

"Time and time again, you will find that your allegations are completely false," - Ralph Goodale.
"The member's statement is totally false" - Paul Martin

I wonder if Liberals actually believe this.

NDP's LAYTON ATTACKS on taking away opposition days. Martin says "it was a very successful day for Canada" - referring to the foreign policy review. Even though that had nothing to do with the question regarding opposition days.

CONSERVATIVES ATTACK with Kinsella via Peter MacKay. Quotes Kinsella. Asks PM to admit that his leadership activity was financed through dirty money. PM replies: "Every single penny that I have used has been fully disclosed."

But uh, if these payments to the Liberals were happening in cash, then uh, it wouldn't be on the record. I think the Consevatives need to point this out.

Ablonzky: Martin sent Boulay's resume to get special treatment in the government. Brison quotes Paul Wells' blog. "They all should be hanging their heads in shame" - Brison referring to the opposition. Ablonzky: "If all the members knew the meaning of shame." Boulay worked on PM's campaign twice. Gave Boulay a personal referral for government contracts.

Monte Solberg hammers Paul Martin. Brison answers for him instead. I guess the Prime Minister is only out for about 2 times in order to give TV a limited amount of clips to choose from.

Tuesday, April 19, 2005

Battered and cut up by fists

TONIGHT ON CTV, Craig Oliver (video) reported that "The opposition are using their power to control things, to make the Commons, and possibly the country, ungovernable."

Although this story suggests that Liberals are still very much in (or spinning out of) control (via Coyne)
The Liberals choked off an opposition attempt to control the timetable for possibly bringing down the government. They cancelled a so-called parliamentary opposition day on Wednesday in a move foes called a desperate attempt to retain power

IT APPEARS LIKE the only one with freedom are the Liberals. They could keep delaying this opposition days. While reading John Locke's Second Treatise, this related anecdote made me smile:
libertas pauperis haec est:
pulsatus rogat et pugnis concisus adorat
ut liceat paucis cum dentibus inde reverti

"The poor man's freedom is this: battered and cut up by fists, he begs that he may be permitted to return home with a few of his teeth."

::The way things are looking, the Liberals aren't going to have too many seats, cough, I mean teeth, left.::

White smoke, White pope

Joseph Ratzinger becomes:

Pope Benedict ..................... 16th
Born April......................... 16th
of non-italian popes, he is the ... 16th

Christo makes an interesting point. Why don't they select the Pope like the Apostles selected one another?: through the fatalism of lots. Instead of determining the will of God through politics, why not arbitrary fate? Here is the narrative as found in Acts 1:
23So they proposed two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone's heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” 26Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.
This article suggests that the latest CBC/Environics poll is skewed.

Monday, April 18, 2005

Martin Meltdown

IT LOOKS LIKE this is a bit more than "in-fighting." It is a full scale internal war, with the governing Liberals on the collapse. One month ago, Jane Taber asked: "Will the real Scott Reid keep out of trouble?

The answer is that the other Reid, Martin's Reid, is in trouble. Kinsella is suing Martin's spokesman Scott Reid as of today. Kinsella complained that Earnscliffe was a company which received some dubious contracts while Martin was Finance Minister and Kinsella was working for the government. Reid said this about Kinsella's testimony today:
"I think people see Warren Kinsella for what he is. I think his testimony is flat out false lies."
And perhaps it was Reid is who called him minutes before his testimony today, vowing to refute everything he was going to say. This act sounds more related to salve ipso than sape audere ("saving oneself" as opposed to "daring to hear" Kinsella's testimony). Not a good day for Martin, or those around him. Having a Liberal sue the Liberal PMO spokesman is nothing but terrible news for the Liberals.

MARTIN KNEW ABOUT THE sponsorship details says former Liberal aid Warren Kinsella.
Not only did he know, but
"In my opinion Mr. Martin was aware of the situation," said Mr. Kinsella, who served at the time as an aide to then-public works minister David Dingwall."He knew of the problems with regard to contracts."
Where is the CBC on this? Their story, found here, contains no such details of Kinsella's explosive testimony. On The National tonight, they mentioned two people involved, but only Terrie O'Leary's (Martin's ex-rebuttal. Kinsella's response: "Terrie, all of this spells trouble and you know it."

better than he let on in the House of Commons last week. Last week, he said that
"I have never had a lunch with Claude Boulay or anybody else to discuss the direction of contracts, directing contracts, intervening in contracts, that's
just simply not my style of politics."
Today, it appears that he may not have had lunch with Boulay, but he may have had dinner. I guess it depends on what the Opposition's definition of "Lunch" is. Is it after 4? Does Martin need to order anything? The qualifiers are all over the place. " "I can't recall having had
lunch with him since we formed the government."

CHRISTO: A question now is whether Martin knows them well or if he just sees them. Martin says:
"I don't know them well, but I do see them," Martin is quoted as saying in the inquiry transcripts. "I would bump into them socially or at political events in the Montreal area. I have a place in the country about an hour anda half away."
I don't know about you, but people who drive an hour and half out of town to see me desire to say more than just "How do you do?" I suppose the question Martin needs to answer is, why and how does he know Mr. Boulay? It is not guilt by association here. But it seems suspicious that many of the Liberals' top brass seem to know these marketing executives personally. It seems a bit too "coincidental" to me.

National Averages

I have taken the liberty, since no one else seems to have done this, of aggregating the national polling numbers of the last three polls (see below for details). Here are the results of a sample size of 3200 people.




11-13 CBC 27


10-12 IPSOS 27


11-13 COMPAS 30



Total 27.94%



Sunday, April 17, 2005

Poll Averages

SUNDAY NIGHT UPDATE: I have replaced first Ipsos Poll with the Saturday COMPAS/National Post/Global Numbers. The results are even more tight, and I believe to be very accurate (thanks to All things Canadian for the original spreadsheet).

I have analysed the data for the last 3 polls this week. Two were done this week by IPSOS-REID/Globe and Mail the other is the COMPAS/National Post poll released Saturday. I chose these polls because I find that IPSOS polls are very accurate and that the COMPAS has been commissioned by the other national newspaper, the NATPOST. The total sample size is 3,200. It is using the spreadsheet developed here (All things Canadian).

CONS Liberal N.D.P. BQ Totals
Newfoundland 2 5 0 0 7
Prince Edward Island 0 4 0 0 4
Nova Scotia 3 7 1 0 11
New Brunswick 2 7 1 0 10
Quebec 0 7 0 68 75
Ontario 45 46 15 0 106
Manitoba 10 0 4 0 14
Saskatchewan 13 1 0 0 14
Alberta 28 0 0 0 28
British Columbia 19 7 10 0 36
The North 0 2 1 0 3
Totals 122 86 32 68 308
Poll Averages CONS Green Liberal N.D.P. BQ Undecided
Atlantic 31% 3% 38% 16% 0% 14%
Quebec 15% 3% 17% 8% 46% 7%
Ontario 33% 4% 34% 19% 0% 11%
Prairies 46% 2% 21% 19% 0% 13%
Alberta 61% 3% 14% 15% 0% 9%
BC 34% 5% 26% 28% 0% 7%

Points of Interest

COMPAS SHOWED THAT Quebecers are 1 percent less likely to vote for the BQ when reminded of the Gomery revelations, while the rest of Canada are, on average, 3 percent less likely to vote for the Liberals when reminded.

IN BC, the NDP are second place. No surprise here.

IN QUEBEC, Liberals are left with 7 seats. I guess this correlates with this article in the Montreal Gazette.

LIBERALS STILL LEAD in Atlantic Canada by a healthy margin.

UPDATE 2: I was asked what just the latest IPSOS numbers would do to the seat distribution. Here are the details:

CONS Liberal N.D.P. BQ
Newfoundland 3 4 0 0
Prince Edward Island 0 4 0 0
Nova Scotia 5 6 0 0
New Brunswick 5 4 1 0
Quebec 1 15 0 59
Ontario 67 28 11 0
Manitoba 8 4 2 0
Saskatchewan 13 1 0 0
Alberta 28 0 0 0
British Columbia 30 4 2 0
The North 0 2 1 0
Totals 160 72 17 59

Based on this, the Liberals would get crushed. And interestingly enough, the Conservatives only come away with 1 seat in Quebec! However, something tells me that 30 seats in BC for the CONS is a bit unlikely. If you take a closer look at the distribution, Conservatives are weak everywhere east of Ontario, winning only 14 seats. The swing province is Ontario. Every seat is a two point differential between the Liberals and Conservatives, since they are the major players in that province. If the CONS can clean up Ontario and solidify their Western base, I would say that a Tory majority is in the cards without even tapping into the 100 or so seats east of Ottawa.

If you would like to see how I analysed the data, just email me here for more details.