Nik on the Numbers
The latest Nanos poll shows that comfort with the Harper minority government winning the next election and forming a majority government has marginally eroded comparing four waves of research since 2007. Of note, the proportion of respondents in Quebec who are uncomfortable or somewhat uncomfortable (63.1%) is relatively higher than in other regions. Although the Conservatives enjoy a 13 point advantage in the ballot box, fewer Canadians embrace a Harper majority now than four years ago.
Nanos Research's findings also indicate that Michael Ignatieff is perceived as comparatively having the most negative impact on local party candidates, with a net impact score* of -11.8 points. In contrast, Duceppe's net impact score remains the most positive (+39.2) among party leaders, followed by Stephen Harper (+9.5), Jack Layton (+8.0) and Elizabeth May (-4.1).
It is important to note that, when Ignatieff was officially endorsed as the Leader of the Liberal Party in 2009, a previous Nanos poll showed that he was perceived as having a net positive impact of +19.0 on local Liberal candidates, significantly higher than Harper's net positive impact at the time (+5.0).
*Note: Net impact is calculated by subtracting those who thought a leader would have a negative impact on a local candidate from those who thought a leader would have a positive impact on a local candidate.
To chat about this poll, join the national political online chat at Nik on the Numbers.The detailed tables and methodology are posted on our website where you can also register to receive automatic polling updates.
Methodology
To follow is a review of the latest Nanos national random telephone survey of 1,016 Canadians 18 years of age and older. It was completed between February 11th and February 14th, 2011. The statistics of a random sample of 1,016 respondents are accurate to within 3.1 percentage points, plus or minus, 19 times out of 20.
Impact Question:
For each of the following leaders please indicate whether you think they will have a positive, neutral or negative impact on the local party candidate in your riding?
The numbers in parentheses denote the change from the last Nanos National Omnibus survey with this question completed between January 30th and February 3rd, 2009 (n=1,000).
Net Leader Impact on Local Candidates* (n=1,016)
Gilles Duceppe** +39.2 (-8.2)
Stephen Harper +9.5 (+4.5)
Jack Layton +8.0 (+3.4)
Elizabeth May -4.1 (-7.2)
Michael Ignatieff -11.8 (-30.8)
*Note: Net impact is calculated by subtracting those who thought a leader would have a negative impact on a local candidate from those who thought a leader would have a positive impact on a local candidate.
**Note: Asked in Quebec only (n=253)
Comfort Question:
As you may know the Conservative Party led by Stephen Harper is a minority government. Based on what you know and have seen about Stephen Harper and the Conservative government's record so far, would you be comfortable, somewhat comfortable, somewhat uncomfortable or uncomfortable with the Stephen Harper-led Conservatives winning the next election and forming a majority government?
The numbers in parenthesis denote the change from the Nanos National Omnibus survey completed between February 2nd and February 8th, 2007 (n=1,002).
Comfort with Harper Majority (n=1,016)
Comfortable: 26.3% (-7.3)
Somewhat comfortable: 21.7% (+3.1)
Somewhat uncomfortable: 17.6% (+2.6)
Uncomfortable: 30.3% (+1.2)
Unsure: 4.1% (+0.5)
STEVE, BUDDY, we don listen to these polls no smore!!!!
ReplyDelete-----
Political Polls out themselves as worthless
OTTAWA - Canada's notoriously competitive pollsters have some surprisingly uniform advice about the parade of confusing and conflicting numbers they're about to toss at voters ahead of a possible spring election:
Take political horse race polls with a small boulder of salt.
"Pay attention if you want to but, frankly, they don't really mean anything," sums up Andre Turcotte, a pollster and communications professsor at Carleton University.
He has even more pointed advice for news organizations that breathlessly report minor fluctuations in polling numbers: "You should really consider what is the basis for your addiction and maybe enter a ten-step program."
And for fellow pollsters who provide the almost daily fix for media junkies: "I think pollsters should reflect on what this does to our industry. It cheapens it."
Turcotte's blunt assessment is widely shared by fellow pollsters, including those who help feed the media addiction to political horse race numbers.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/breakingnews/pollsters-advise-voters-to-be-wary-of-polls-ahead-of-possible-spring-vote-116112554.html
Point 8:25 in the video:
Peter Mansbridge on CBC discusses story of the year: worthless polls
http://www.cbc.ca/thenational/indepthanalysis/atissue/story/2011/02/17/thenational-atissue-170211.html
We invited Allan Gregg from Harris Decima (and the At Issue Panel on The National) and Paul Adams, assistant professor at the Carleton school of journalism. Adams covered Parliament Hill for the CBC and The Globe and Mail. He also worked for EKOS Research. Here's that conversation:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/inside-politics-blog/2011/02/on-the-house-how-reliable-are-polls.html
Canadian political polls are obviously no longer believable. The links provided in the post above bear that out.
ReplyDeleteThe proof for me is the number of current polls showing strong support for a majority for the current regime. This is absurd as Canadians will never give this low-rent group a majority. They are not palatable and are facing a scandal a day. 5 years of questionable deeds are catching up with them and they have completely run out of believable spin. I smell desperation and would not put our current PM above messing with the medium and the message.