New poll gives Conservatives commanding lead

Survey shows Stephen Harper and the Conservatives inching toward majority


A new poll gives the federal Conservatives a staggering 13-point lead over Michael Ignatieff’s Liberals. At 39.7 per cent support, Stephen Harper and the Conservatives are now flirting with the 40-per-cent mark which many say is a prelude to a majority government. The Nanos Research survey showed a modest 1.6-point gain for the Conservatives. The Liberals, meanwhile, lost 4.6 points, to fall to 26.6 per cent support, while NDP support rose 1.7 points to 18.9 per cent.

CTV News

Filed under:

New poll gives Conservatives commanding lead

  1. Since the CPC is so fond of reminding Canadians about what Mr. Ignatieff said a decade ago, here is what Mr. Harper said about the NDP in 1997:


    Let's hop that Mr. Layton remembers this if he contemplates negotiating an agreement with Mr. Harper over the 2011 Budget.

    • I have been watching Liberal heads explode all evening. What fun!

  2. …should put Coyne on suicide watch.

    • And Wherry. And Feschuk.

      • Definitely wherry…

  3. Where does Mr. Harper profess his love for America in this link? And where does he refer to America as his country?

    • The majority of the sane World worships America, as do most Canadians. Why, Quebec even has 5 Embassies in the United States, compliments of Alberta tax dollars, in their desperate attempt to be accepted by them, although as the educated elite would sat, fat chance! lol.
      In fact, notice Quebec now copying other 3rd World Countries in attempting to bring in the Russians. They would do ANYTHING, to be noticed.

  4. Hardly a "staggering" lead. Seems to be a cycle where the Cons go up a few points, flirt with what the pundits call majority territory and then float back down into the 30's again…until Iggie is let loose to "campaign" with predicable results, or the Cons let loose with another bunch of silly attack ads and they float back to "majority territory….then back down…repeat as often as necessary, I suppose…yawn

    • Lying, even just to yourself, is not a good thing to do.

      • What do you mean?

    • Yeh except this is the fourth poll in a week indicating the upswing. Could be a trend that settles in as far as you know.

      • And about the umpteenth time this cycle has repeated itself. Same as between every election Crazy Lizzie polls into double digits only to fall back into single digits when the real vote is taken…yawn again..zzzzzzzzzzzz

    • Liberals please fight back. Unleashing a series of attack ads against Harper should be fairly easy. Why cower helplessly in the corner waiting to be hammered again?

      • I think the Liberal Party has given up on Iggie. Rae is the next "Messiah" waiting in the wings that they think will lead them back to their "natural governing" position. Plus the fact that apparently the party is broke and can't afford to buy air time. That was the real purpose of the coalition the last time. The only thing they ever agreed on was saving their own skins. Without taxpayer money they couldn't pay staff.

  5. Bogus poll. None of the above contenders are really catching fire. I mean let's face it, Harper is fascist dressed up in his fundamentalist Sunday best. Iggy hasn't connected and the NDP sells itself at the drop of a hat.
    When it comes to forward looking policies and leadership we are in a serious drought here.

    • If it was only one poll showing this, you could be correct in being skeptical. All recent polls, however, have shown the same trend, with the Tories opening up a statistically significant lead, and Mr. Ignatieff sinking firmly back into Stephane Dion-like territory. Individual polls don't mean much, but longer and consistent trends, which appear to be setting in now, are pretty solid indications of where the parties are now in opinion. An election campaign can change things, of course, but I'd be happier starting out where Mr. Harper appears to be now, than where Mr. Ignatieff is.
      And it does seem that "negative" advertising does work doesn't it?

      • http://www.cbc.ca/thenational/indepthanalysis/ati
        Around 11:00 Chantal Hebert gives a nice rundown on the accuracy of past polling in predicting such events as the landslide victory of Kim Campbell and the electoral failures of Dalton McGuinty and Jean Charest.

        Given that, I really hope the Harper Conservatives takes us to the real polls in the belief that 40% of the elderly and rural who have land line phones and do not call-screen constitute grounds for a majority (and that's without factoring in about 17% undecided).

        It would only be natural justice if the party that consistently rejects evidence based decision making were to lose an election they thought they had in the bag, because they based their decision on bad data.

        • Your comment reads like a comedy show.

          because they based their decision on bad data

          What decision? The only people that have been calling for an election for the last 6 months have been the opposition, mostly the Liberals but also the NDP. So, let them go ahead and have their election.

          As for the Conservatives, they have nothing to lose. The worst that can happen is a Conservative minority again.

        • "evidence based decision making" ?
          means "agree with bureaucrats and other self-serving living off the gov't teat employees".

    • Of course? Unless it was the Liberals in the lead, then it would be rock solid. Hypocrite!

  6. I almost feel sorry for all the frustrated Liberals out there : BUT .. this is the price the party pays for abandoning it's grassroot members and coronating a leader .. parachuting in star candidates never works in political parties. Had the party taken the risk of a real leadership convention when Iggy and Bob threw Dion under the bus then – we would be seeing a completley different picture here and there is no doubt about this. The party had a knee jerk reaction and caved into political cowardice and abandoned it's own members in it's rush for a cheap american import .. it has, is and will suffer the consequences until the grassroots workers take back the party from the ol bay st gang and choose then get behind a real leader – until then long may Iggy reign over the Lib's because he is most definitley the best friend us Conservatives ever had and why Harper has been holding him up for the last few rounds …

    • Perhaps they should have stayed with Mr. Dion. By now people may have become fond enough of him to accept his laguage inadequacies and considered his substance. It doesn't seem likey at this point that they are interested in reconsidering their opinion of Mr. Ignatieff.

      • by the way what happened to dion

    • dion looked great under the bus

  7. Up, down, round and round….we've been here many times before.

    Both the pollsters and Harper have told us not to believe the polls.

    Only thing we know for sure is that Canadians don't want an election, because there's nothing to choose between them, and it would be money spent for nothing.

    • That's funny, because I never see a poll that has Iggy ahead, and isn't he the one who keeps talking about bringing Harper down?

    • Canadians are very happy, nothing from Quebec! Keep it that way and Harper will end the corruption. Very rare for a Canadian Government to ever have a 40% approval.

      • LOL it's not rare, it's a requirement for a majority govt. We've had it many times before.

    • I thought we wanted an election. I heard this over and over again in the past few months. Now that the Liberals are down (again), now we don't.

      At least you folks are consistent.

    • No we know more than that. For instance, we know the Libs don't have a hope in hell of forming a government anytime soon.

    • Which Canadians don't want an election?
      The approx 30% who are part of a family that works for a government?
      The approx 30% who receive money from the government?
      The approx 40% of the electorate who would vote conservative today?
      We need a majority to get things done. Either you are working for the gov't, receiving entitlements from them or trying to save face.

  8. EMily wrote:
    "Only thing we know for sure is that Canadians don't want an election, because there's nothing to choose between them, and it would be money spent for nothing.

    I think you are forgetting the most salient point, Emily.

    Liberals tend to lie, cheat, steal, and are generally seen to be without a moral compass. The conservatives on the other hand, are seen as beating the opposition without mercy.

    But at least the Conservatives aren't thieves.

    Can't say that about the libs.

    • Ottawa just reimbursed Mr Chretien, so give the propaganda a rest.

    • Give that man a prize for the best post so far!

    • "Liberals tend to lie, cheat, steal, and are generally seen to be without a moral compass." You can easily replace "liberals" with "Conservatives" and the statement will be equally true. The list of Conservative broken promises is longer than any I can remember from Liberals, and started on Day One (which must surely be a record) by enticing a Liberal to switch parties for a Cabinet position. There simply isn't room here to list the rest.

      Cheating? Let's try, oh… the in-and-out scandal? Stealing? There's nothing as blatant as Adscam, but the $50 million porkbarrel payment to Clement's district is, in the minds of many, a despicable form of graft which actually EXCEEDS the Adscam total.

      The Liberals aren't perfect. But the Con record since taking office is no better and I would argue somewhat worse. Emily is right (something I don't say often); very little to choose from- no matter how you slice it.

  9. Weird….wrote the exact same thing and it was deleted the first time, but not the second.


    Where do they get their tech support….the CBC?

  10. Well, hopefully the polls are accurate and would last through an election. It could be Canadians see that socialist/progressives south of the border are driving their economy into bankruptcy.

    • Actually, Bush did that – though I'm not at all convinced Obama's actions are doing much to turn things around.

      • Obama took Bush's debt and quadrupled it, so he's not doing anything to turn it around, he's making it worse.

        • Much like the Cons here with their deficit, the claim is that it's short-term, emergency debt. Not saying I buy it, but I haven't seen the Republicans offer much of an alternative to Obama's approach. And they ARE the ones who created the mess to begin with… Clinton handed off to Dubya a government with no deficit spending.

  11. This is a bogus poll.Consistently upgrades conservatives and downgrades the green party. A conservative propaganda machine. Thank you very much.

    • @ bert…downgrades the Green Party….What Green Party ?

      • The 'green-with-envy' party? ie. Liberals?

    • Uh, Nanos was the most accurate poll in 2004 and 2006. And how is it unrealistic that the Greens are at 5% (give or take whatever the margin of error is)? Most polls overestimate Green support, because people will say they will vote Green more to express a dislike for the big parties than to express support from the Greens.

      2008 election poll predictions for the Greens
      Strategic Counsel: 11%
      Ekos: 9.6%
      Harris-Decima: 9%
      Nanos: 8.2% (more than the Greens got)
      Angus-Reid: 7%
      Actual results: 6.8%
      Average overestimate: 1.8%

    • what is a Green Party?

      • It's a place where aging hippies and drugged up morons delude themselves into thinking that they are relevant.

    • Unless it showed the Liberals in the lead, in which case it would be fair and balanced. Hypocrite!

    • The polls are fixed because it shows the conservatives leading and the greens dropping?
      What does Ernie say?

  12. This is not too hard to figure out.the average hard working Canadian see the attack on Oda as the proof of the hypocrisy of the opposition.It is well know how Canadians look at all their politicians as overpaid liars who vote themselves golden plated pensions,large unaccountable expense accounts without a decenter when it comes to a vote on featuring their own nests.To see Layton and Iffy and their cohorts stand up and call this woman the worst names and how the Government is eroding our democracy because they pulled funds on so called God fearing bunch who blame the Jews for everything.Most Canadians want a majority Conservative government at this time and all these negative blogs are orchestrated by the left and only infuriate the majority of us.

    • Today's input from the Harperbunker.

      • Yeah, but that Harperbunker is situated closer to the well of truth than all the superficial stuff Ignatieff is spouting upwards coming out of nowhere.

        • Equating a running smear campaign with the "well of truth" is something of a stretch.

          Unless you are Reform. Then its standard operating procedure.

          • You people are so hardcore. Don't you ever get sick of yourself?

    • Have to agree – and judging by the FACT and the REALITY of the situation which clearly displays that Iggy is falling over as leader of the LPT = EKOS, IPSOS, Harris and now Nanos all confirming the dire starits of the LPT – have you checked out the pitiful fundraising of the party of late – no political party can survive without the support of it's grassroots members and clearly now the party has lost touch with it's own worker bees = the result is the last few moans and groans before the inevitable happens – which is playing out right in front of us. Right now the players are Steven and Jack next they will start carving the remains of the LPT up between them – just watch it is quite the show to behold!

  13. It wasn't just a questioning of religious beliefs. It was the sort of slanderous garbage that used to get Harper up in arms. However, i can't see how it is relevent to the budget…little bit of a hail mary maybe.

  14. Maybe it was altered after the fact to say we believe Harper is ^NOT dishonest :)

  15. The reliability of polls and pollsters has been called into question lately by Gregg, so who knows…is it just the demographic that favours cons stepping to the fore, those still with landlines?
    My suspicion is the portion of the public who do pay attention is sending another we want minority govt to work message – particularly to the libs. Or view it as a vote of confidence for the govt…the interesting thing will be to see how the libs react internaly – luckily for them Jack may have thrown them a landline. Isn't it about time to renew the infighting over Ignatieff's suitability as liberal leader?

  16. With numbers like these, the Liberals would be foolish to want an election.

    • You don't think the Conservatives are in danger of peaking too soon? In an election campaign they'd have nowhere to go but down. Perhaps the opposition parties will be scared off by this. Further polling is needed…

      • In an election campaign they'd have nowhere to go but down.

        Historically, the CPC has always gained in the polls when the writ is dropped. It's possible that the CPC has peaked too soon, but it's also possible that the LPC is one the verge of a catastrophic defeat. Further polling is needed… ;-)

        • …always gained in the polls when the writ is dropped.

          Always? Like always since Confederation (yes, I'm lumping the PCs and its predecessors with the CPC), or just always since 2003?

          You know what is said about trends (especailly disturbing trends ;-))…….this can't go on forever!

          • That reminds me of a George Will quote that Paul Wells used to make a similar point:

            This is the kind of thing that reliably gets George Will to say, "Such things are true until they stop being true." The next election could well have a different dynamic. But the precedent is pretty robust. On one hand, on the other….


        • But that's cause they're usually in opposition, right?

          The downside is that an election people will pay attention, something the CPC has been banking on Canadians NOT doing. And Iggy is likely to win the debates. The parties should make of it what they will.

          • iggy could'nt win a free meal for a hummingbird

        • I suppose the concept of "peaked" would require that that the level of support is the result of a specific event. It strikes me as more of a trend. My suspicion is that people are a) tired of the opposition's shenanigans where they try to claim every event is a monstrous scandal and b) the growing realization that Canada fared better than almost all countries throughout the recession and c) the recent advertising campaign.

          Reasons a) and b) suggest a trend, not an event, caused the surge (which is what Harper has been waiting for). Reason c) suggests it was an event.

          • Ironically, (b) was in spite of, rather than because of, the CPC. Harper & Co were planning to make changes to banking and mortgage regulations in Canada to more closely model the US, but the bottom fell out before he could. To anyone aware of this, it was actually amusing watching him then going around boasting about our banking rules and recommending that other nations follow Canada. I'm surprised his tongue didn't swell and his eyes bulge every time he choked out those words…

          • You know, guys like you trot out the argument that we could have elected a bunch of chimpanzees and outperformed the rest of the G7 economically. Which makes me wonder who is running the rest of the western world? Baboons? Lemurs?

            I wonder how many years of success is required for you to credit Harper. I suppose we are just about to embark up on the results of Mulroney's policies. Chretien's results will show up a few years later, perhaps 2016.

            What does it take? 5 years of Harper? 10 years? How many years before he gets the credit for Canada's lead in both employment and GDP every single year?

            I suppose I would prefer to elect a bunch of monkeys over the Liberals, so there is some common ground between you and I.

          • So you are denying Harper planned to Americanize the banking system and then backed off when the US system collapsed? I WILL give him credit for realizing the error of his ways on this one.

            All I'm pointing out here is that Harper and Flaherty have consistently held up our strong financial sector as one of the key reasons we weathered this storm so well – and that the regs are good in spite of, rather than because of, the Harper government. For all I know, those regs may be a Mulroney legacy.

            As for their other financial moves, I'm no economist, so I can't easily pass judgment on whether their moves have strengthened or weakened our recovery. But I do know (a) they completely misread the collapse when it began (or lied about it because it was election time); (b) they deliberately eliminated the surplus right at the time it would have come in handy, and plunged us into deficit spending.

          • They deliberated ended the surplus? You must be joking! Do you realize when the recession started? Mid 2008. The gdp numbers came in at the end of the year to confirm it. The biggest reason the surplus was gone was the GST cut, which started on Jan 1 2008 and would have provided a jolt to the economy.

            Well guess what, Sherlock? That GST cut was the perfect stimulus, occurring at exactly the time the recession was starting! So the elimination of the surplus was done at exactly the right moment, for exactly the reasons everyone wanted to spend that surplus, and this included all federal parties.

            Any now we have revisionist historians like you who will claim anything to distort the truth.

            Americanize the banking system? What on earth are you talking about? Harper never ever proposed any changes to Canada's banking system whatsoever. This is one of those fictional stories invented by the opposition, and you've fallen for this myth hook, line and sinker.

          • "Harper never ever proposed any changes to Canada's banking system whatsoever."

            They actually IMPLEMENTED changes to mortgage lending policies, liberalizing lending requirements, minimum down payments, and length of amortization, that they have since partially rescinded. Other changes were discussed but dropped when the bottom fell out.

            As for the GST cut being the perfect stimulus at the perfect time… as they had no clue the recession was coming, IF it was the stimulus you claim, it was a serendipitous fluke. As you yourself note, we were already well into the recession as of the fall 2008 election, and Harper & Co were still denying its existence. Flaherty's continuing denial of the recession was one of the events that led to the infamous coalition threat and proroguing. So yeah, I don't think they know what they are doing, and baboons and lemurs might very well do as good a job.

          • One moment you are claiming they would have wrecked the economy had they changed the banking system, now you're claiming that they did change the banking system (yet the economy was fine).

            You're arguing out of both sides of your mouth:
            1. The economy did well despite the Cons
            2. The Cons would have wrecked the economy with banking changes
            3. The Cons implemented their banking changes

            Do you realize the contradiction? Probably not.

            Here's another:
            1. The Cons did nothing to help the economy, it was the Libs
            2. They Cons did help the economy, but they didn't know they were doing it

            Do you realize the two statements contradict each other?

            As for the existence of the recession, yes they did, but of course you cannot know until you've measured GDP, which had not been done yet, so at the time, there was no confirmation of a recession, so if Harper was arguing otherwise, that's his right. Hardly anybody on earth predicted the recession.

            Yet somehow Canada has fared the best regardless. But since Harper is not a clairvoyant psychic, he deserves no credit, according to you.

            I'm not surprised you don't think they know what they're doing, because I can't make any sense of what you're saying, so I see no reason why that would make any sense either.

          • Yadda yadda,

            1. The economy did well despite the Cons – depends on your definition of "well", I suppose, but the point I made was that things would likely have been worse if they followed their plans to Americanize our banking regs, as it was the American system that led to the collapse. The Cons try to take credit for a system they didn't develop and had planned to change for the worse.
            2. The Cons would have wrecked the economy with banking changes – see above.
            3. The Cons implemented their banking changes – some; and then had to pull back on the ones they did implement, when they realized they weren't good for the country.

            Where's the contradiction? Other than between the Cons' stated intentions and their actions?

            As for Harper not being clairvoyant – by election time he didn't have to be. Everyone BUT the Cons were saying it was a recession. That's ignoring the evidence and going with the gut.

    • OTOH, a case can be made that the best thing for the Liberals would be to have four uninterrupted years to rebuild/revitalize/renew themselves.

      • I agree with this. Arguably, the Liberals will be stronger in the long run if they have a few years to take some deep breaths and focus on the basics, free of the pressures of preparing for an election that is constantly around the corner.

        • Better yet, win a few more seats, wait for Harper to go and the CPC to implode without him.

          • Sure, also an option.

            At some point in time the voters will get to choose. Personally, I'm almost always ready for an election.

      • And I'm not at all convinced that this renewal would necessarily need to include replacing Ignatieff with a new leader.

        Not sure that Ignatieff is willing to sign up for four years of Opposition duty, so as to contest the following election and then maybe become PM, but by that time he will have been an MP for at least 10 years (I believe), and the just visiting claim will be pretty stale by then. Who knows, he might even have morphed back towards that blue sky thinker that he used to be.

        • That's for the Liberals to decide, but I have a hunch that most Liberals would prefer that Ignatieff retire if Harper wins a majority. The resulting leadership convention would also be a good opportunity for the rebirth and renewal that you mentioned.

          • Absolutely, can't disagree with anything you typed.

            I was simply indicating that I don't believe that it is a slam dunk case that Ignatieff would want to leave, or that his departure would be an absolute pre-condition for a successful renewal. On some occasions he actually seems to be growing into the role.

            And if he does quit, I can see this narrative developing…."See? We were right! He WAS only in it for himself. The Liberals can't be trusted to pick a leader who has Canadian interests at heart, they only pick leaders that they hope will get them back into POWER!". Granted, that is a bit lengthy for a little sound bite….maybe it could be shortened to "_______: The NEXT shooting star!"

          • Maybe he could present himself as a candidate in a REAL leadership convention the next time. If he comes out the winner, then we can all drop the (deserved) barb of his politically-illegitimate coronation.

          • The LPC thanks concern troll for his concern!

            Seriously, this is as bad as crying that Dion should give up his French citizenship.

          • Uh… You're welcome? And since I never called for Dion to renounce his citizenship (although don't get me started on the stupidity of the very concept of more-than-one-country-of-allegiance), I fear you now think my concern trolling today is even worse? How ever shall I recover from that…

            Seriously: I WANT there to be AT LEAST two serious adult political parties ready to contest for a deserved right to govern. So far, only one party comes close, and I am less and less happy with that one party. Any time the official opposition would like to declare itself a serious example of an alternative governing party, it would truly be fine with me. If that's worthy of a "concern troll" insult these days, well, that's the price this interested Canadian (only Canadian!) citizen will have to pay.

          • But how can you square this supposed opinion with Harper's craven dishonesty?

            It's near impossible to think that Iggy would be anything other than a slightly more honest version of the CPC.

          • Sadly, only the first ten words of your last sentence, standing alone, make any sense.

          • I dunno; "Harper's craven dishonesty" makes perfect sense on its own…

          • myl as troll?

            Come on.

          • Well, he's an extremist, if not always a partisan. It just fit into the "helpful" advice from the other side bit the disingenuous like to engage in.

          • …the "helpful" advice from the other side bit the disingenuous like to engage in.

            Got to agree with you there, at least as far as finding snide helpful advice to be disingenuous.

            And while I would agree that myl can often be "less than malleable", I think that it would be wrong to mistake myl for an extremist. Also, if I had to place all of the contributors here on a partisanshipliness continuum, I would honestly put myl way towards the non-partisan end.

          • "partisanshipliness"??? ;-)

          • Ya, well, what is the "conjunctive past participle, once removed" form of partisan that I should have used?

            PS If you read it quickly, I get parisianshapliness, a very pleasing thought!!

          • Oh, I know, partisanshipism.

          • "Partisanship continuum" works fine. No need for any more suffixes.

          • Oh…….well…………that's, ummmm, unfortunate. ;-)

          • madeyoulook is one of the most polite and engaging persons on these boards.

          • Uhh, sure, maybe….

            Of the many criticisms levelled against the Ignatieff and the LPC, this one (unelected by the party) has very little resonance – I'm having a very difficult time believing that very many voters, once in the voting booth, are going to hum and haw and then ultimately decide against the Liberal candidate on the basis of the LPCs awkward annointing of Ignatieff as leader.

            I'm not familiar with the LPC constitution as it stands today, but if the CPC were to capture a majority, I'm assuming that this would lead to a convention of some sort at which the party, now having the luxury of some time to breathe, will either confirm Ignatieff or hold a leadership election.

            As well, in the big scheme of things, I personally am kind of fond of the British (?) way of electing the PM – by a vote of the MPs.

          • I wasn't saying the coronation thing is why Canadians have, uh, yet to warm to the current LPC leader (I fear even that delicate language will brand me a concern troll again…). But I wonder just how eagerly the rank and file in the party are preparing for electoral battle. Does anyone see anything approaching morale within the LPC? Don't you think there would be more Liberals to work hard under a leader if a solid number of liberals had a chance to elect him their leader?

            Your big scheme of things might well be a solid idea. But none of the parties (AFAIK) follow this convention. Not that the LPC followed much of any convention to get its current leader, mind you.

            And I have wailed in the past about the backroom nonsense that seems to infest EVERY party as a leadership contest approaches. The tweaking of rules according to which potential candidate's thugs ardent supporters can best take over the executive at just the right time is antidemocratic bull.

          • Ahhh, yes, I see where you were headed, the rank and file, their morale, and so on. Odd folks they are…. ;-)

            Seems obvious that the rank and file, much more than the rest of the population (whether they follow politics or not), are way more convinced that their party has all the answers, and that the country is screwed if their party doesn't get elected. With that mindset, you would think that they would go hard ALL THE TIME, no matter what the polls say, no matter how bad the leader might be, no matter the obstacle.

            Yet in some ways those rank and file folks seem to be even more fickle than the general population…..whaaahhh, I didn't vote for the leader, so I won't work as hard, whaaahhhh, I hate the NDP as much as I hate the CPC, so if there is talk of a coalition, I won't work as hard. Man, cut off your nose to spite your face much?

            Ya, the option of having MPs elect the leader, is a longer term idea. I'm not wedded to it, and I don't really know all of the ins and outs, but I do like parts of the method.

          • If Iggy were to retire, who would be the successor? I have a hard time believing Rae would be any better – of the three of Iggy, Dion and Rae, I've always ranked Rae the lowest. Maybe they'd want Iggy to hang on for a while until a better leader materializes?

          • Dion had his shot and blew it…he's gonzo.

            Rae is past his "best before" date…and what good is it to lose an election because disaffected Rae Liberals sit on their hands…only to make Rae leader and lose the next election as disaffected and bitter Iggy supporters sit on theirs?

            I don't see any "first string" candidates entering the race and vying for the job. None of the "third string" (Kennedy, Lebland…er…I mean Leblanc…Dryden, Martha) are very inspiring…I don't know if they've all paid off their debts from their last run either.

            No…in a swoon of "feel good" Liberal nostalgia with giddy thoughts of invigorating the youth vote…and possibly just because he's got great hair…get ready for Trudeaumania II.

          • OMG, I think that would be a big mistake. Young Trudeau doesn't know what he's talking about most of the time.

  17. And so no election!

  18. If Harper hasn't found anything in 5 years, and you know he's been looking, there isn't anything to be found.

    Give it up.

    • how do you know Harper hasn't found anything? – it would be the perfect ammunition to use ' During ' an election :) – in point of fact it would the death of the party itself and would be exactly what harper promised us CPC'ers some time back when he told us what he was going to with the party when he was finished -> to the side of the road :)

      • Because it would be national 'second coming' headlines if he had. LOL

        And we've had several elections…so he's had plenty of chances.

        However, if that's what Harp told you he was going to do to the Libs, then he's crazy, and so are you for believing him. LOL

        • No Prime Minister would survive the outing of a former PM. Thats a known fact. No prime Minister, as smart as Harper, will let vindictiveness take control of his agenda. See how fast he got rid of arar scam. Proving, in court, that he was guilty , would have lost Harper many votes. We, or some of we, are very able to tell who is a criminal or not. Notice cretin, has no friends! Tis not the job of the PM to curtail some other political parties corruption. The liberals, actually, convicted themselves. Leaving Harper, in full control, backed by the People. And is the West ever lucky and benefiting beyond their wildest dreams.

        • you as usual misunderstood the point – Harper told us CPC'ers a long time ago that he would stab the liberal party in the heart and then throw the corpse to the side of the road where currently it's numbers lay … Now as to the issue of whether or not he has something on the LPT that he would drop onto the table during the debate – the threat enough makes Iggy check his depends and Bobby R smile all warm and fuzzy like.

    • Ya you just keep on believing there Em!

    • 1) Stick fingers in ears.

      2) Yell…"NA-NA-NA-NA" as loud as you can.

      3) In case of emergency, break glass, remove bucket of sand and firmly plant head inside of it.

  19. When the latest hate campaign blows over, we'll be right back to the old stalemate.

    • until the tories spend some of their own money again to point out things Iggy said. i'd suggest the anomoly is when they are in "stalemate", not when the tories flex their muscle.

      • Reform has been in a position to "flex their muscle" for over 5 years now. Why haven't they ?

        • How do you "flex your muscle" with a minority government? perhaps the question is why a majority leftwing opposition has been totally useless as a government in waiting presenting no compromising solutions of anykind. the liberals are afraid of the electorate. They have nothing to offer. Harper has managed the country well considering the recession and is trying to keep us on a stable course with austerity measures expected in this budget. The liberal position: spend more on stimulus, spend more on national childcare, free university and college tuition. Add the coalition position and they are zero with no chance of retaining the seats they currently have in the house.

  20. "Only 13.6 per cent of those surveyed said they feel Ignatieff would make the best prime minister. That is down from 15.5 per cent from another poll conducted late last year. Meanwhile, 34.5 per cent of respondents said Harper would make the best prime minister, up from 28.4 per cent from last year. "

    • Now that's a more believable number than the Leadership Index score cited by wilson (farther up this thread)

      • The Poll had different questions. Wilson gave you Leadership Index Score:

        Leadership Index Score:

        Stephen Harper: 98.9 (+14)
        Jack Layton: 43.6 (-2.5)
        Michael Ignatieff: 36.9 (-8.2)
        Gilles Duceppe: 17.7 (-7.6)
        Elizabeth May: 12.7 (-2.1)

        • Yes – and as I noted earlier, that number is simply not credible (if it is a percentage, which is how I initially took it – and if not, then how is it calculated and what is it out of? Your link doesn't explain how it was calculated – but I did notice it was the only one where the numbers weren't followed by "%".). Which is why I said FV's number is more believable.

          • Leadership Index Questions: As you may know, [Rotate] Michael Ignatieff is the leader of the federal Liberal Party, Stephen Harper is the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, Jack Layton is the leader of the federal NDP, Gilles Duceppe is leader of the Bloc Quebecois and Elizabeth May is the leader of the federal Green Party. Which of the federal leaders would you best describe as:

            You should visit the site. The details are located on several pages. http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT
            Page 4 of 7 gives more detail on the leadership. This has been measurement has been taking place for years. http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT

          • Yes; I saw the question. That just tells what they asked, not how they came up with the scores.

            I've tried your links and there is still no clear explanation as to how the Leadership Index number is determined, what it stands for, or what it is out of. I'm a pretty intelligent guy; if they can't explain that in a way that makes sense, then the Index is essentially meaningless to me, and will be meaningless – or worse, misleading – to a good many others as well.

            As to the measurement having been taken for years, maybe it has, but it is the first time I've ever seen it cited; they usually go with the "who would make the best PM?" percentages.

  21. Hello all;

    With only eleven articles on this story:

    Globe and Mail Poll: Conservative support gains momentum
    CTV.ca – 3 hours ago
    Prime Minister Stephen Harper attends a press conference in Toronto on Thursday, Feb. 17, 2011. (Chris Young / THE CANADIAN PRESS) Montreal Gazette – UPI.com – Macleans.ca – Edmonton Journal
    all 11 news articles »Email this story

    it would seem that the press is just as bored with poll results; and besides that, poll results are not reliable (or did somebody else already say that?) so,(yawn) what were we talking about again?

    • The death of the Liberal party of Canada. Where were you?

    • BLE
      Polls are not something you would invest in. There have been opposing polls before as well. The election will be determined by the details in the upcoming budget and it's specific talking points. canadians are tired of the constant threat of election with a minority government. How do you trust an opposition party that says it will vote down the budget regardless of its content.

  22. I wonder how long it will be until we hear from the Liberals that Bob Rae has been appointed Interim leader as Iggy has health issues in the family and needs an academic hiatus but might stll show up as an MP for a vote or two – me thinks Bobby is getting tired of holding his ol roomie's jacket :)

    • Ignatieff will be gone, they CANNOT afford to have him as a leader any longer!

      • Agreed…and the only way to turf him is to force an election now…which is exactly what they're doing.

        Really…and I said this back in the Dion era…the best thing that could happen to the Liberals right now is a Conservative majority government. It's probably the only way to stop the "quick fix" cycle they've been in and truly regenerate (perhaps save) a tired and arrogant party.

        I don't actually expect them to do that though. I suspect we'll see more of the same, election, Harper minority, Iggy resigns and let Trudeaumania II run wild.

  23. Hate to get all 'There's only one poll that counts', but, um, there's only one poll that counts. I'm sure Conservatives are very excited and all that, and by all means congratulations, but remember the polls leading up to the 2004 election? The ones that showed a Conservative minority, maybe a majority? Things didn't exactly happen the way the pollsters expected, did they.

    Yeah, yeah, I know… another Liberal trying to downplay the news, right? No, not really. The polls could be bang on. Just bringing up a touch of history. Take it or leave it. If you guys want to count your chickens now, though, knock yourselves out.

    • Fair enough GBS, but you have to admit that 4 polls in a row showing a 12-14 point spread in favor of the Conservatives can't be good news for the Liberals. I agree that the regional breakdowns are not particularly meaningful given the MOE (+/- 5-10%). However, some of the details in the polls are even worse for the Liberals than the overall popular vote numbers.

      Where they have been reported, the gender imbalance for the Conservatives has largely equalized, and they now have a massive lead amongst 45 yrs and over age group (44+%). The Lib still have some strength in the 18-25 yrs group, but this is a notoriously apathetic demographic when it comes to voting.

      Simply put, the Libs are doing well with voters who don't bother voting and the Cons are doing well with voters who will give up a limb to vote. Therefore, the point spread is even wider than the headline numbers depict.

      This isn't about counting chickens…seriously, who's troops have higher morale at the moment?

    • The polls in 2004 showed the Cons with about a 3 point lead at a certain point in the campaign. Not much comparison with the current 10+ point lead. There is no guarantee that they have their majority, the Conservatives. So what? It's still positive news for their support to be higher.

      • A three point lead that dissolved into an 'x'-point trail may amount to a 10-point swing… I don't know the number were, but the swing was likely more than you're suggesting. But, yes, these polls are certainly good news for Conservative supporters — even if the numbers are off, they're in pretty comfortable territory. I just point to that particular instance because, for me, I started ignoring polls after that election. It was a major theme on election night and a few days after: how could the pollsters be so wrong?

        • The pollsters were not wrong in that election. If you look at the polls closely, you can see that the Liberals were making an upswing in the final week of the election. The polls caught the front end of that upswing, and then there was several days just before the election with no polls. There was a swing of a few points but both parties and the polls caught the front end of the swing.

          If you actually accept the polls for what they are, then there is no need to ignore them. For instance, they specifically state that 1 out of 20 are out of the margin of error. Since there is a couple of polls daily in an election campaign, one poll every two weeks will be highly inaccurate. Of course, that won't stop some boobs in the media from claiming either armageddon when that one poll arrives. If you have two in a row that show the same result, then it's extremely unlikely they're both highly inaccurate.

          Secondly, there have a margin of error. So if you see one poll showing 35-30 and the next showing 37-28, then it does not necessarily mean the lead has widened. What it means is that it's possible the lead has widened. The reality is that if both polls were +-3 19 times out of 20, and poth were not the 1 rogue poll in 20, then the lead support is likely between 34-31 and 38-27, with the most likely scenario being 36-29. So yes, one scenario is that the lead is smaller than what both polls indicate.

          God only knows why people actually read more into polls. If you actually looked at the 2004 polls closely, you would see that that there was nothing wrong with them.

          You have to look at a bunch of polls to get a better picture. This site is the best: http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/elections/polls.html

  24. So now does Harper call an election or does he trick the opposition into forcing one?

  25. The Tory surge in this poll is mostly concentrated in the west – where they do not stand to gain seats (except maybe in BC).

  26. Wow. Can Canadians be that good at calling off the election dogs by polling themselves into CPC majority territory?

    • Good one!

    • The mass media advertising buy works. It ran during prime time and was probably over as large as the buy during an actual campaign. This campaign did not have a competing message.

      Our guy is working hard for you (soft sell positive ad) and 2-3 negative ads on Liberal coalition for more taxes.

  27. Harper wound be an anomaly if he wee not some degree dishonest


    Absolutely. It's the extent of his dishonesty, and the fact he's willing to shove it in Canadian's faces and pretend it isn't utter dishonesty that's noteworthy.

  28. You see Libs, we can all see through the thin veneer of your accusations. None of the pseudo-scandals you have been trying to foist on the majority, with the aid of your leftist press, are working. You have nothing to offer Canadians except shrill hate mongering. No policies. A leader from out side the country, who your did not elect as leader. Your incessant kangaroo courts in the House of Commons. Your arrogance in thinking of your vision of Canada as the only valid option. Your vilification and personal attacks on anyone who disagrees with you. Your intolerance of religious folks. You unwillingness to recognize the clear theft of our tax dollars to the benefit of the Liberal Party of Canada through ADSCAM. You refuse to accept the damage your party has done to Canada since the repatriation of the Charter. (I am old enough to remember the day and to whisper to my self that we would rue that day). Now your chickens have come home to roost. I used to vote Liberal myself at times, until ADSCAM. Now I'll never vote Liberal again. Your party is dead and/or dying. Personally I cannot wait till the wake. I'll have a few that evening just to toast the demise of the most crooked political entity ever to hold office in this country. No, Mulroney cannot come close either, even though I voted to remove him as well.

    So go ahead. Have at me with the personal attacks. List all the so-called scandals you think I am ignoring, (not one of which holds water, including the Oda issue). But all you are doing is living in denial. The CPC would have to do a whole lot worse to come anywhere near the corruption of the Liberal Party of Canada. Bring on the Harper majority. Tomorrow is not soon enough!

    • "You have nothing to offer Canadians except shrill hate mongering. No policies." – applies equally to the CPC. In fact, the policies they purport to support are NEVER carried out.

      "Your intolerance of religious folks." – No; an intolerance of those who try to foist a particular set of beliefs on all society, perhaps. I have a Liberal bent, but was far more able to support the old PC party (having actually voted for them on occasion) than I am able now to support the CPC. Despite being Christian, I very much support a separation of Church and State.

      I have no problem accepting that ADSCAM was wrong; however, it wasn't all Liberals, nor was it condoned by most Liberals. Most Liberal supporters recognize that it was wrong, and criminal – but those involved are long gone. Bringing it up over & over is like blaming a newly ordained priest for the pedophilic acts of a long-convicted priest. Different people; move on.

  29. Iggy's scores I believe – but if those are genuine numbers for Harper, then Hell has truly frozen over…

  30. Polls are irrelevant really. Even Allan Gregg and Stephen Harper think so.

  31. What we have now seen is that a series of polls have come to the same conclusion. Allan Gregg may not be happy with the results since they don't seem to be more in line with what he expects. Nanos has earned a reputation for being an accurate pollster and that his results don't bode well for the Liberals or the NDP.

    Its quite clear that the NDP even discussing with Harper shows that Layton has some great concerns about how his party will fare. Many of the seats the NDP holds are very much targets of the Conservatives, especially in the west. Most of their supporters won't move to the Liberals unless they are dead. However, if the "strategic voting" were to show its head again, the Liberals may bleed enough support to allow the Tories to win a number of seats.

    Igantieff is considered a target from within his own party, as he never had the support of the party rank and file in the first place. Harper is rock-solid secure compared to Iggy, and the election would be his moment of the truth. Anything other than a Liberal majority will save his job. A Conservative majority will sink him along with the party into historical oblivion.

  32. One can find these polls in the same fairy tale as “Yes, Virginia there is a Santa Claus.” Understand the poll came from a rural reach of between 800-1000 Canadians. Gun controlled isn’t on the top of their concerns as most still see Harper with his Stampede leather outfit and a 6-gun on his hip.

    Of course, the polls were requisitioned by the CTV and Globe and Mail while we await Fox News North.

    Bring on the elections and get this useless, juvenile government back to their roots; Harris and Harper Inc.

  33. Ignatieff the neo-con dressing up as a socialist NDP.

    "Lipstick on a pig" and "deathbed conversion" come to mind.

  34. Detailed analysis of the poll shows that the Conservatives have actually lost ground in Ontario, British Columbia and Atlantic Canada – most of their gains were in the Prairies, which were already a Conservative stronghold.

    And this was before the Oda incident.

    Things aren't looking particularly good for the Liberals, it's true – but there's a world of difference between "Nobody particularly likes the Liberals" (true) and "The country is solidly behind the Conservatives" or "The conservatives have a good chance of achieving a majority" (both false).

    • Alan Gregg made some rather interesting comments on the CBC the other day about polls and pollsters.

      One of his main points was that pollsters had somehow morphed into political commentators and political analysts rather than pollsters. The numbers are one thing…coming up with the reasons for the numbers crosses the line into pure speculation on the part of most pollsters.

      Hence….we have Nanos concluding that "negative advertising" is the reason Conservatives are up in the polls today. And as Gregg says…no matter what poll numbers look like in the next week or so…the conclusion will be that the "Oda" crisis is what moved them…either up or down. It's really a "knee-jerk" type of analysis which generates conclusions which are highly suspect.

      IMHO…no election in 2011…and if we do have one…it would result in another Harper minority and another Liberal leader.

  35. The ads work. We all know that. And this latest batch are as vicious and untrue as usual.

  36. The problem is that the Liberals have more to lose if the result doesn't go their way (a majority gov't). If Iggy fails at this, he could just as likely get tossed under the bus like Dion.

  37. Nanos poll before Oda-gate,
    but after Duceppe announced $5 billion as the purchase price for his support in the redo of the 2008 coalition of losers.

    Hence the 'stunning' spike in CPC support in the West.

    Iffy and Jack take note,
    come clean one way or the other on forming a coalition with the separatists,
    or be wiped out in the West.
    Not that Liberals can do much worse,
    but Dippers do have a lot to lose.

    • "come clean one way or the other on forming a coalition with the separatists"

      Doesn't really matter what they say; if they deny any such plan, people like you will simply call them liars anyway. They are better off saying nothing on the subject, and dismissing any direct question with a dismissive reference to paranoia or propaganda.

  38. ouch!
    The Nanos Leadership Index score, an amalgam of questions on trust, competence and vision:

    Ignatieff at 36.9, down from 45.1
    ( Dion was at the same level during the 2008 coalition crisis)

    Harper scores 98.9, up from 84.9.

Sign in to comment.