Nanos poll: Cons and Liberals neck-and-neck

[brewn...@gmail.com]

That's *with* the 'scandal' that would topple Trudeau and his government. And still
more than 7 months to go to an election. Somebody wipe that spittle off Scheer's face.
___________________________
2019-03-05

Ballot
–
The latest Nanos federal ballot tracking has the Conservatives at 34.7 per cent, followed by the Liberals at 34.2 per cent, the NDP at 15.5 percent, the BQ at 3.6 per cent, the Greens at 9.1 per cent and the People’s Party of Canada (PPC) at 0.7 per cent.

http://www.nanos.co/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Political-Package-2019-03-01-FR.pdf

[M.I.Wakefield]

"Karen Gordon" wrote in message
news:bdfb2d53-5c0e-476f...@googlegroups.com...

And Karen conveniently forgets that Nanos is a rolling poll, which at this
point include two weeks where the SNC-Lavalin scandal was hitting, and two
weeks where it wasn't.

[M.I.Wakefield]

Comparing to last week's Nanos poll, and multiplying by 4 to isolate this
week's numbers, the Liberals were down 6 point points compared to 4 weeks
ago, while the Tories were up 4.4, and the NDP were up 2.

[brewn...@gmail.com]

Add and multiply all you like, Wakeford . . . your cherished rightwing Cons are not surging in the polls over this "scandal". If you think Scheer is a sincere specimen, he should invite Jody Wilson-Raybould over to the Conservatives with a promise that he'll make her Attorney-General - no caveats. That should be fun.

[M.I.Wakefield]

"Karen Gordon" wrote in message

news:c57497c1-d7c5-40d0...@googlegroups.com...

> On Friday, March 8, 2019 at 2:19:14 PM UTC-8, M.I.Wakefield wrote:
> > Comparing to last week's Nanos poll, and multiplying by 4 to isolate
> > this week's numbers, the Liberals were down 6 point points compared to 4
> > weeks ago, while the Tories were up 4.4, and the NDP were up 2.

> Add and multiply all you like, Wakeford . . . your cherished rightwing
> Cons are not surging in the polls over this "scandal".

Sorry Karen, but that's how the math works with a rolling poll: To move a
party by one point from the week before needs a four point change between
the new week and the week that's being dropped.

So two weeks ago, when the Liberals dropped 2.2 points from the previous
week, and the Tories went up 1.8, that meant the new week was 8.8 points
worse for the Liberals, and 7.2 points better for the Tories ... a net swing
of 16 points is huge.

Nanos is great for showing trends, but isn't good at dealing with
catastrophes ... for that you need snapshot polls, like Angus Reid, showing
the Tories up 7, or Ipsos, showing the Tories up 9, or Abacus, showing the
Tories up 6 ... Leger just caught the beginning of the SNC-Lavalin scandal,
and even they had the Tories up 2.

> If you think Scheer is a sincere specimen, he should invite Jody
> Wilson-Raybould over to the Conservatives with a promise that he'll make
> her Attorney-General - no caveats. That should be fun.

Even better, if they form the next government, separate the Justice and
Attorney General portfolios, and name JWR as AG, but not a member of
Cabinet, and watch the Liberals squirm.

[brewn...@gmail.com]

On Friday, March 8, 2019 at 2:59:02 PM UTC-8, M.I.Wakefield wrote:
> Sorry Karen, but that's how the math works with a rolling poll: To move a
> party by one point from the week before needs a four point change between
> the new week and the week that's being dropped.

You seem to have no trouble quoting the polls of known anti-Liberal pollsters.
I have no problem with quoting one that doesn't seemed tied to the Conservatives.

Your 'scandal' is already fizzling - and it's only about a week between testimonies from both sides. You've got 7+ months to make your case for the Harper Cons.
GO !

[Liberals are VERMIN!]

Yes, liberal corruption is so entrenched people just don't react to it like they should. It's like asking the HIV virus to stop spreading AIDS.

[M.I.Wakefield]

"Karen Gordon" wrote in message

news:c29af165-9cce-4db5...@googlegroups.com...

> On Friday, March 8, 2019 at 2:59:02 PM UTC-8, M.I.Wakefield wrote:

> > Sorry Karen, but that's how the math works with a rolling poll: To move
> > a party by one point from the week before needs a four point change
> > between the new week and the week that's being dropped.

> You seem to have no trouble quoting the polls of known anti-Liberal
> pollsters.

I actually mentioned the Nanos poll back on Tuesday ... when it was
released.

> I have no problem with quoting one that doesn't seemed tied to the
> Conservatives.

You opinion of pollsters is well documented, Karen: Anyone who produces a
number you don't like is dishonest, and tied to the Tories ... which is all
of them, at one time or another.

> Your 'scandal' is already fizzling - and it's only about a week between
> testimonies from both sides.

And you evidence for that is that Nanos has the Liberals and Tories in a
virtual tie ... except that you didn't know how rolling polls work, and
didn't realize that Nanos is still carrying two weeks of data from before
l'affaire SNC-Lavalin blowing up real good.

So let's check the news websites for SNC-Lavalin related stories:

National Post: 10 items on main page
Globe & Mail: 6 items on main page
Tor Star: 7 items on main page
CBC: 6 items on main page

> You've got 7+ months to make your case for the Harper Cons.

For the amount of time you'd been posting here, one would think you'd have
figured out that, firstly, Harper is retired, and secondly, governments run
on their record, not defeating the guy they beat last time.

And SNC-Lavalin is part of the Liberal's record now.

[brewn...@gmail.com]

On Friday, March 8, 2019 at 5:56:06 PM UTC-8, M.I.Wakefield wrote:
> You opinion of pollsters is well documented, Karen: Anyone who produces a
> number you don't like is dishonest, and tied to the Tories ... which is all
> of them, at one time or another.

I know the history of most pollsters who work in Canada, Wakeford. Abacus was a one-man poll company for years: David Coletto, educated in Alberta, whose sole purpose in life is to smear the federal Liberals.

Like I said, it's the right-wing polling companies that come out of the woodwork the minute the Liberals (or NDP) stumble on any issue. Even the Nanos polls can be skewed when the only polls they include in their 'averaged' poll numbers are from the same company - because they're the only ones doing constant polling after a Liberal faux pas.

Take a look at Coetto's Abacus polls - he's been jumping like a Mexican bean since the SNC issue made headlines. And every one of his polls favours the Cons - because he IS a staunch Conservative.

Ipsos is another pollster that is made up of Conservative-linked owners. One worked for Mulroney as his PR guy. Angus Reid is so pro-Conservative, they don't even bother to try to be honest.

Mainstreet is just a joke. They're the ones (actually one guy) who predicted a win for the rightwing BC Liberals in the last by-election in BC. We know what happened to that prediction, don't we?

Poll tracker is here:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poll-tracker-federal-poll-averages-and-seat-projections-1.4171977

Scroll down to:
The following is a list of recent polls that are included in the projection.

Nanos is more reliable but then I haven't seen Nik Nanos speaking on politics and that is usually the best indicator of a pollster's bent.

You're all excited about your ex-Harper/now Scheer Cons regaining control of Canada's government . . . it's not going to happen. The polls may go up, they may go down, but no one is going to forget the damage that the Harper Conservatives did to Canada.

And those MPs from his government are still sitting in the Opposition seats in the House, waiting to resume their dirty politics. We're not as stupid as Americans.

Remember this?. . . .
__________________________________

CBC News · Posted: Mar 20, 2013

SNC-Lavalin staff donated $15K to Conservative nominee

Michel-Eric Castonguay received two-thirds of war chest from Montreal-based company's employees

SNC-Lavalin is defending $15,000 in political donations made during the 2011 federal election to a Conservative candidate by at least 12 company executives and two family members — even though at least one alleged donor says he was unaware any contribution was made in his name.

The Montreal-based engineering company's staff made a string of donations on April 30, 2011, to Michel-Éric Castonguay, who was in a hotly contested race in Montmorency-Charlevoix-Haute-Côte-Nord, east of Quebec City.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper visited the riding during the campaign. Each person contributed the maximum $1,100 except for a $600 donation by SNC-Lavalin executive VP Michael Novak, whom Castonguay says is a friend of both his and his campaign finance chairman, Conservative Senator Michel Rivard.

Their donations, 14 of the 24 received by Castonguay, were two-thirds of his war chest, but not enough to defeat NDP candidate Jonathan Tremblay.
_____________________

Embrace your skewed polls, all you want, Wakeford. They still say that Trudeau is the preferred leader for this country.

[Greg Carr]

Ed Broadbent repeatedly led polls for best PM in polls during his heyday. Of course he never won the Prime Minister's job.

[M.I.Wakefield]

"Karen Gordon" wrote in message

news:fc3001e0-14db-4450...@googlegroups.com...

> On Friday, March 8, 2019 at 5:56:06 PM UTC-8, M.I.Wakefield wrote:
> > You opinion of pollsters is well documented, Karen: Anyone who produces
> > a number you don't like is dishonest, and tied to the Tories ... which
> > is all of them, at one time or another.

> I know the history of most pollsters who work in Canada, Wakeford. Abacus
> was a one-man poll company for years: David Coletto, educated in Alberta,
> whose sole purpose in life is to smear the federal Liberals.
>
> Like I said, it's the right-wing polling companies that come out of the
> woodwork the minute the Liberals (or NDP) stumble on any issue. Even the
> Nanos polls can be skewed when the only polls they include in their
> 'averaged' poll numbers are from the same company - because they're the
> only ones doing constant polling after a Liberal faux pas.

Or, alternatively, the Liberals are mired in a high-profile scandal, and all
the pollsters are showing them losing support, so maybe, just maybe, they're
actually losing support.

And polling companies rely on being right for future business ... and in the
last Ontario election, they nailed it:

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/pollsters-nail-ontario-election-despite-public-criticism-over-string-of-recent-missteps

> Poll tracker is here:
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poll-tracker-federal-poll-averages-and-seat-projections-1.4171977
>
> Scroll down to:
> The following is a list of recent polls that are included in the
> projection.
>

> Nanos is more reliable ...

That's your bias: they're producing results you like, so you think they're
reliable ... until they're not.

> ... but then I haven't seen Nik Nanos speaking on politics and that is

> usually the best indicator of a pollster's bent

Then you must live in a cave.