New poll sees Ignatieff gain on Harper -

New poll sees Ignatieff gain on Harper

Conservatives “squandered” lead with census debacle


The latest Ekos poll conducted for the CBC has the Liberals and Conservatives locked in a virtual tie, with the Tories garnering 29.4 per cent support, while the Liberals are at 29.1 per cent. The NDP, meanwhile, came in third with 15.7 per cent support, and was trailed by the Greens at 13 per cent and the Bloc at 10.9 per cent. The pollster found that Harper’s party “squandered” its lead by driving educated voters away from the party with the census debacle. Fifty-six per cent of respondents said the census change would cost the country vital data and only 26 per cent of respondents said that the mandatory long form was a violation of privacy.

National Post


Filed under:

New poll sees Ignatieff gain on Harper

  1. The pollster that is a large donor to the Liberal Party, recommends a cultural war finds them tied again, will wonders never cease?

    How much time will CBC provide an in-depth analysis on this Poll?

    Liberal Internal Pollster does not support the fairytale.
    The pollster's numbers show the Liberals with the support of 29 per cent of Canadians compared to 35 per cent for the Tories; the NDP are polling at 18 per cent, the Bloc has 9 per cent and the Green Party has the support of 7 per cent of Canadians.

    A point is made how much more on air coverage for the Liberals and repeating the reasons will get air play for this recent poll.

    Some people refuse to accept a bias exists in the media unless they are attacking Fox, or now Sun TV.

    • I'm sure if Ekos showed the Conservatives had a 10 point lead you'd either praise them or you'd be silent.

    • How would you know what a Liberal internal pollster is finding out?

      • Mr. Marzolini spoke to the press at the Liberal caucus sessions this week. Whether he was entirley candid may be another question, but his reported poll results were similar to other polls recently released. His estimates for the Lliberals were similar to those in this Ekos poll, but his reported support for the Tories was higher. I do note this Ekos poll has somewhat surprising swings in support – a 15% drop in Tory support in BC over two weeks which, in the absence of any actual news over the summer, might mean this particular poll needs to be taken with an extra helping of salt.

      • It is called reading a newspaper.

        Another story, this time with a link.

        Liberals seem to have a problem with keeping their mouths shut on air planes.

        Word is that on a recent Air Canada flight from Ottawa to Toronto, the Liberal leader, his wife and his chief of staff, Peter Donolo, took up the first two rows in executive class and started flapping their gums about the political scene.

        Read more:

        • " …. started flapping their gums about the political scene."

          This is great example of why Canadian msm is dire and circling the drain. Most people, particularly political junkies reading newspaper, would like to know what their flapping gums were saying.

          I wonder why Ivison even bothered to write it because the gist is – Iggy and couple others were on a plane talking. Wow!!! I am surprised Ivison doesn't mention whether Iggy also ate some nuts, or visited the washroom, when he was on this plane.

          • Loose lips sinks ships. You need to read the rest of the story, it demonstrates another misstep by the Liberal leader, his wife and Peter Donolo.

            They were completely oblivious to the dapper, 60-something gentleman sitting within earshot in the row behind them. That may yet prove to be a costly error, given the man was Senator Doug Finley, the Conservative campaign director.

            Read more:

          • yeah Peter Donolo missed Doug Finley…..sure he did

            National Post is nothing more than a gussied up gossip rag at this point… should have died when it had the chance.

          • You refuse to accept they made a mistake, talking too loudly? Reminds me of how the NDP redirected their conference call to the wrong person.
            If you like I can point to a Conservative Minister (Staff) leaving her briefing notes in the CTV green room.

            Mistakes happen.

            Your personal bias against the National Post is noted. Did the government provide a bailout to the newspaper? Did you argue against corporate welfare for GM and Chrysler?

          • Never heard of the misinformation trick?
            Time to hold a leadership convention and replace Harper who is dragging you all down with him.

          • Do you have any facts to back that up? Those with a bias for the opposition parties keep making that claim but the ballots, donations and leadership polls for confirmed Conservatives refute your opinion.

          • The man cannot get you out of minority territory.

          • You are incorrect. He has managed to get at least thirty Ignatieff led Liberal MPs to not show for work to oppose his policies in 2009-2010.

            He managed to convince Dion to follow the same strategy. Complain about everything but when a vote might trigger an election make sure at least 30 MPs don't show up.

          • I wish you would tell us what makes you follow you leader with such blind loyalty …. educated Canadians want to know~!

          • Is this the best you can come up with?

            An ad hominem attack calling people who voted for the PM ignorant. You should read this article.

            Liberalism under siege is an ugly sight indeed. Just yesterday it was all hope and change and returning power to the people. But the people have proved so disappointing.

            The Democrats are going to get beaten badly in November. Not just because the economy is ailing. And not just because Obama over-read his mandate in governing too far left. But because a comeuppance is due the arrogant elites whose undisguised contempt for the great unwashed prevents them from conceding a modicum of serious thought to those who dare oppose them.

    • I love how conservatives automatically assume bias whenever the facts are against them.

      • Biases exist, I simply pointed out a few examples. Feel free to refute the bias does not exist.

        • You pointed out no actual examples, just conservative talking points that have no basis in fact.

  2. Read another way, "we don't trust any of the above" seems to be the party with the most growth. Again.

  3. On a final note, Jack Layton's lustre seems diminished from the past. While he is still the only tested leader with a net positive approval rating, that margin has shrunk. He does very well with women and in Quebec.

    Heh, the Quebec ladies love a mustache.

  4. The Green Party is slowly sneaking up in the polls, and then maintains its popularity.
    It's only a matter of time before it hits third place and then watch out — real social, economic and environment issues will have to be dealt with in moribund Parliament.

  5. novagarden deleted his comment.

    "I'm sure if Ekos showed the Conservatives had a 10 point lead you'd either praise them or you'd be silent." his reply to me and sent via email notification.

    • Thanks for the explanation, CanadianSense!

    • I did not delete my comment.

      • It was not visible at first when Jen asked or I tried to respond to it, may have been a glitch.

  6. This poll almost certainly does not reflect Layton's decision to back away from the gun registry battle. It is now looking like his party will save him from the embarrassment of watching his own end the gun registry but he is still the leader who was willing to let it happen.

  7. A debate over a what type of census should be used should not affect how one votes. For those who have completed the census you are aware that many people do not take it seriously and the resultant data is suspect. Has anyone seen what the short form census? If so would it provide a reasonable level of information for the government? Assuming that a short form would like result in more accurate information, would it not be as useful as a long form with less accurate information?

    It amazes me that we are in a country that is doing very well when the rest of the world is failing, yet we see discontent – over what?

    • The point is not the status specifically. It's the government scrapping it against almost unanimous fact-based opposition from much of civil society and completely ignoring reason. That's a symptom of how the Harper government has operated.

      The short form census asks only basic questions–how many people in your house, language, etc. The really important data comes form the long form, which is only useful if it's mandatory.

  8. Maybe people have other strawmen to tear down.

    • Liberal theft and corruption was agreed upon at the Gomery whitewash, there was no debate about whether they stole the money or not, everyone agrees that Liberals stole the taxpayer's money, the RCMP, the public, voters, etc. all agree that Liberals stole tens of millions of dollars: How is that a 'straw man' argument when none of the facts of Liberal theft are in dispute?

  9. Ha ha ha… Wow, Adscam! Geez it only took 11 posts for this old stand by to be dredged up. I see your Adscam with Mulroney's money envelopes and raise you John A. Macdonald's Pacific Scandal.
    You guys crack me up.

    • Myron Baloney was investigated, and investigated, and investigated….. by the RCMP, over and over again. The Liberals owned the RCMP at the time and sicced them on Mulroney out of spite, but if there was something nefarious going on then you would think that 15 years of investigating would have uncovered it! Give it a rest.

      • And what's the statute of limitations on giving Adscam a rest?

        • Apparently if it doesn't rev up their base any longer.. which at this rate wont be for another 20 years.

    • Cool, bring on the election then! C'mon Iggy….

  10. Hey, why is there an unreported comment here?

    Hopefully Stock Day can track it down.

  11. The big issue here is the shift of educated voters away from the Conservatives. (emily please contain yourself) This is an identifiable group both in demographics & geography which is not the typical group that bounces back and forth between the two major parties. Indeed, I suspect some of the voters lost by the Conservatives are so anti-Liberal they parked their vote with the Greens.

    • Not really, this demographic is raised to push the cultural war, a myth that women or university educated voters support Liberals. Anyone can pull out a single poll and suggest it to be trend.

      The numbers don't add up when you include twelve months of Ekos polling to make that statement.

      If you narrow it down to University Educated in Toronto, Montreal, Atlantic region you may have a trend.

      Since 2000 discounting ever voluntary poll for an actual ballot result, how have the Liberals fared?

      • I assume the last bit was a shout-out that the Conservatives do better at getting their vote out? Conceded.

        The shift wrt education is regional agreed, but is has shown up in two consecutive polls. I thought it was intriguing in mid-August and now I would guess it may be important.

        I think it may be important because it not observed in the usual slop of voters back and forth between the Liberals and Conservatives, so I am inclined to believe that it might be associated with strong feelings about a particular policy and it may be longer lasting i.e. the damage may have been to move a small fraction of the Conservative base rather than a movement of swing voters.

        A couple of polls don't prove anything. I concede. Polls don't prove anything. I concede.

        Making up stuff after finding tidbits in polls. priceless

        • Thank you. I am not interested in trading barbs over partisan talking points, I trust you to accept we each have our own biases that may affect our opinions.

          GOTV is only one part of a larger problem for your team. It runs much deeper and the signs exist if we were to have a frank conversation. I have linked to a non-partisan study on The Anatomy of The Liberal Defeat to explain how this is a serious structural problem at various times.
          It is not limited to changing leaders or blaming the Conservative war chest for their ability to frame the leader as inept.

          Feel free to examine a website that maps the ridings 2004-2008 with which party carried the poll.


  12. The CPC lead has been a "dead heat" virtually every summer.

    General voter historical tendencies rather than a meaningful choice (Harper v Iggy) is what comes about.

    When the election speculation heats up once again and voters begin to actively contemplate a real choice, like the other years watch the gap widen.

    Indeed all objective measures suggest the CPC will be well into majority territory when the real election comes.

    • To what "objective measures", in their "allness", are you referring?

    • Indeed all objective measures suggest the CPC will be well into majority territory when the real election comes.

      Please explain.

      • Recent history has indicated a trend of the Liberals losing five percentage points of support during election campaigns and the Tories gaining five per cent (measured from the immediate pre-election writ polls). If the Tories have a six or seven point lead on the Liberals, as most polls show them to have, that would, if past patterns hold true, give them a 16 or 17 point lead on election day. That is enough for a majority. I am skeptical that the patter will hold since it may contain some element of anti-incumbency, but it has been there for a few elections now.

        • Thanks. Interesting stat, one with which I wasn't familiar and, on the face of it, hard to explain. Over how many elections? Were the numbers broken out by region?

          By the way, what's the source?

          • Aaron Wherry, among others have noted this – if I can find an easier reference I'll note it for you. The trend has been there since 2000 anyway. Of course, past performance is no guarantee of future results, but it does seem to be something.

          • Sorry, it was Wells (what was I thinking? It would be so unlike Wherry to refer to the facts). Here's a link to his article:

  13. Since corporate donations are no longer allowed to political parties, how can Ekos be a large donor to the Liberal Party?

    • I did not make that claim that Ekos made a donation to the Liberal Party. I am referring to the pollster employed by Ekos only. The information was made public regarding his contributions to the Liberals.

      • Since this is an Ekos poll, it seems silly to accuse them of being biased simply because one of their employees is a supporter of a particular party. What evidence is their that the poll has been skewed in some way, or the evidence fabricated?

        • You are demanding I provide proof of mistakes or fraud on the recent poll because I point to a personal bias?

          Maybe you can ignore how bias may affect your judgment, a decision to dedicate resources to investigate "x" and make the negative information available.

          The strategy from everyone demanding I provide evidence to refute a specific poll was never my objective.

          I am clear in my position a specific poll or a short series of Polls mean absolutely nothing. The analysis and comments regarding a specific poll can illustrate our own bias. They are fun to mock each others party and suggest the strategy is working.

          I challenge you to examine real events instead of relying on polls. The financial strength of each party, their electoral success at the ballot from 2000-2009. Those should be compared to the partisan talking points of a pundit of a specific poll.

  14. Incorrect.

    Frank Graves donations to the Liberal Party is public information as his comments about invoking a cultural war are both verifiable.

    Fee free to do you own research or ask another poster to provide the link if you can't be motivated to find your own facts.

  15. Interesting analysis on how you view donations over a number of years may not be proof of a personal bias. You forgot to deflect point number two about the advice of invoking the cultural war.

    Who is playing the unskeptical person, that bias does not exist with the evidence?

    • So even if Mr. Graves supports the Liberal party, what evidence is there that he has fabricated his polling results? Apart from the rather wild swings on this one from BC and Atlantic Canada (which may simply be a factor of the large margins of error in both regional polls and the fact summer polls tend to be a bit wonky) his numbers, while low for the Tories, aren't ludicrously out of line with any of the other polls.

      • You have introduced a question I did not ask or allege.

        My post introduced a bias exists because of his suggestions of invoking a cultural war and his years of donations to a political party.

        (It would be similar to the software company supporting the LGR donating to the Police Chiefs annual gala events.)

        Recently a high ranking Democrat asked Fox to add a disclaimer because of a donation by Rupert Murdoch to the Republican Party.
        A study shows a much larger problem with the main cable outlets to the Democratic Party. Do you think he has asked for same disclaimer for ABC, NBC or CBS?

        • Mr. Graves can have any opinion he wants. Most pollsters are interested in politics and most of them have some opinions on the matter. So long as their methodology is sound and their results honeslty reported, what's the problem?

          • Mike R,

            You are free to allege a bias does not exist. We don't agree on the importance of bias.

            For skeptics, we allege many on the CAGW bandwagon were biased and their actions affected their behaviour.

            I can't explain how a bias may impact your work if you refuse to accept Frank has demonstrated his bias for the Liberal party.

          • You are saying having an opinion is a "bias". It seems pretty open to anyone to have a political opinion. If Mr. Graves is a supporter of the Liberal party, that's surely his privilege. But if you want to simply discount Ekos opinion polls because of it, don't you have to have some actual evidence that his methodology is affected by his bias?

          • You keep moving the goalposts, I don't play that game. Re read the original post, it is at the top the very first.

            You are free to disagree with the post and the importance of bias.

          • Frank Graves and Ekos also has done work (ie polling) for the Conservative government.

            Just because Kory doesn't like Frank doesn't make his polling firm biased.

          • I did not introduce Kory into any of my posts. Try reading it again.

            O/T did you ever get that Wafer Inquiry launched?

  16. No need to apologize.

    We have a different understanding how bias can affect your decisions. Did you notice you kept changing my words in the original post to suit your position?

  17. Forty million dollars looks like chump change beside a billion for Harper's photo op at the G.20 …. give it a rest will ya.

  18. Tell you what, when Harper comes up with the billion dollars he stole from our lumber industry to pander to his American fund raisers for his 2002 alliance leadership campaign, we can then ask Ignatieff to come up with the paltry by comparison 40 million.

    • Interesting revision of history.

      The auditor general Sheila Fraser was blocked by the Liberals in investigating many things including crown corporations. The Liberals used their majority to limit and end the Gomery Inquiry into the Sponsorship Affair.

      I don't remember any report from the AG citing controls, rules being ignored for the diversion of funds to advertising agencies with the current government. Can you list ANY auditor general report that shows a disrespect for the taxpayer that is similar to what took place under the Liberals?

      The Softwood deal was passed in a minority parliament, what party joined the government in allowing it to gain Royal Assent?

      Thwim your bias is blinding you to the simple fact, the current government needs the confidence of the opposition MPs to move their agenda forward. Since 2006 the opposition parties have taken turns in supporting that agenda.

      Look to your Liberals for over 100 votes in support of the Conservative agenda.

      • Interesting red herrings. It's not a disrespect to the taxpayer, it's a disrespect to the voter.

        The point, which you so predictably missed/ignored, was that Harper promised that if he were prime minister he "would seek a clear commitment of the United States to comply with the NAFTA ruling. If the Canada-U.S trade relationship is to remain a fair, stable, rules-based system, then the United States has a moral obligation to return those duties to Canadian softwood lumber companies." His words, not mine. His actions? The exact opposite, thus blatantly (though legally) ripping off a billion dollars of Canadian money and the jobs that went with that. Of course, I'm not at all surprised that you would rather defend Mr. Harper than defend the people in BC whose jobs he destroyed.

        That the softwood lumber deal was passed was because it was made a confidence vote, and, sadly, passed due to the opposition party's inability to be able to fund yet another election campaign so soon after a previous one. In short, because Harper was playing Realpolitik rather than governance. I realize you'd prefer it if we all forgot about that little bit of reality, but there it is.

        Since 2006, the opposition parties have taken the principled stance of not forcing this government to an election over various pieces of legislation, none of which are deserving of an election, and *none* of which were deserving of being tied to a confidence vote. Mr. Harpers abuse of the confidence mechanism in this manner is one of the worst ways that he has injured and polarized our government. Of course, you revel in his doing such, I'm sure.

        But they're not my Liberals, any more than you're my idiot.

        • You have a difficulty in grasping partisan political talking points from reality.

          You again can't accept this is in FACT, we have been in a minority parliament since 2004. The deal negotiated for Softwood or the future purchase of JETS need a majority of MPs, a senate to gain Royal Assent.

          The rest is noise.

          Your excuse for remaining in the cheap seats? You like to hear your own voices and you have no substance to offer.( Layton and Muclair both stated that after your party broke its word on their signed coalition deal)

          You like to talk about about parliament supremacy but when your team has the majority of MPs to protect democracy what did they do?

          You leader loves to jump on planes, trains and buses and offer zero in policy alternatives inside parliament. Sixth tour and counting?

          Thirty Liberal MPs have been sitting on their hands since 2006. They were not sent to Ottawa to avoid their duty.

          It is a very basic principle, remove confidence from the government if you don't support the Policy. Full STOP.

          Your political ideology is in decline, it is divided, it can't deliver at the ballots above 30% in popular support regardless of the help from the media and self-inflicted wounds as you suggest.

          You party stinks and voters have abandoned it for others since 2000 in large numbers.

          Your party refuses to seek a mandate through a ballot or make the details of the coalition deal public.

  19. I don't recall Mr. Pearson emigrating to another country and coming back only late in life. Is that how you recall it?

  20. The Liberal Party president is on record a couple of months back confirming that they plan to form a coalition with the NDP and BQ if it becomes 'necessary' (due to Liberals coming second again). The coalition is already planned. Anything less than a Tory majority will mean a coalition with the leftists. The CBC and Globe think they can keep that genie in the bottle and control the message in the next election cycle. Ok.. game on. Call the election you liberal wimps…. What is the point of all this polling if you aren't every going to pull the trigger. Iggy just looks like an arrogant Yankee wimp which no Canadian can relate to in any fashion…

  21. Who cares if Iggy's dad spent time with Pearson… what are we electing a fraternity president? Canadians don't care for elitists or snobs. It is precisely the fact that the Liberals try to trade on Ignatieff's royal family history and pedigree that has alienated virtually all but died in the wool Liberals. This poll does not reflect how the election would go. Graves (Ekos) is totally suspect and biased. Ignatieff has never been through an election yet.. He will be destroyed.. He admits he's arrogant.. The amount of ammo the Tories have on him from his obnoxious TV shows is amazing. He is unbelievably arrogant. Nothing can hide it. The Liberals installed him wihtout a convention to test his metal. Stupid move.