The Pollcast: The DNC in the City of Brotherly Love

After the Republicans got their time in the spotlight last week in Cleveland, now it's the Democrats' turn. 

But will the Democratic convention in Philadelphia this week give them the unity that Hillary Clinton needs to take on Donald Trump?

National polls indicate that Donald Trump did get a boost coming out of his party's convention. That's turned the race to the White House into one that is increasingly difficult to call.

But convention bumps are historically common. If Clinton gets the same bump out of her convention, Trump will once again be this campaign's underdog.

But with the Democratic Party still divided between Clinton supporters and those backing Bernie Sanders, that might be a big 'if'.

Joining me from Philadelphia on this week's episode of the Pollcast is Keith Boag, the CBC's senior reporter in Washington, D.C.

You can listen to this episode here and subscribe to future episodes here.

Donald Trump gets a convention bump, but Hillary Clinton's could be next

Thanks to a bump from the Republican National Convention, Donald Trump has closed the gap on Hillary Clinton in U.S. polls. But with the Democratic National Convention now in full swing, will Clinton find herself comfortably in the lead again this time next week?

According to the CBC's new Presidential Poll Tracker, which you can follow throughout the campaign to see where the race to the White House stands, Clinton retains a narrow lead with 44.6 per cent to Trump's 42.8 per cent in a weighted average of polls.

Since the convention got underway, this represents a drop of 0.4 points for Clinton and a gain of 1.8 points for Trump.

You can read the rest of this analysis of U.S. polls here. You can also check out the newly launched Presidential Poll Tracker by clicking on the banner at the top of this page.

The Poll Tracker will be updated daily, and will feature state-by-state projections soon. In the meantime, my analyses (like today's) will feature the state of the electoral college map as well as where the polls stand in the closest states.

Canadians feel men have easier time in politics, but women have the chops, poll suggests

As the Democratic Party is set this week to officially nominate a woman for the U.S. presidency — a first for a major party in America — a newly published poll shows that Canadians agree that men have an easier time getting elected to public office than women, though men are less likely to see obstacles to the election of female candidates. 

And in addition to differences in views by gender, younger women tend to see their potential political futures differently than older women — namely, that the system is stacked more unfairly against them.

You can read the rest of this article on the new poll from the Angus Reid Institute here.

Liberals onside with public opinion on doctor-assisted dying legislation

The Liberal government sided with public opinion in the doctor-assisted dying legislation that was tabled on Thursday. Canadians were already widely on board with legalizing it, but the Liberals have also aligned themselves with the views of most Canadians on the details, too.

The government had to come up with the legislation due to the unanimous landmark ruling last year by the Supreme Court of Canada that struck down the ban on doctor-assisted dying. Politically, it was not dangerous territory, as at least two-thirds of Canadians have supported legalizing doctor-assisted death since the late 1970s.

But the devil was in the details on how it would be implemented, who would be eligible and what protections would be put into place to spare the vulnerable.

Polling conducted by the Angus Reid Institute (ARI) in March suggests that the Liberals did not take many controversial positions in putting together this legislation.

You can read the rest of this article here.

The Pollcast: The impact of the Manitoba leaders' debate

Four party leaders faced off in last night's leaders' debate, with just a week to go before Manitoba goes to the polls on April 19. But this late in the campaign, did their performances do anything to move the dial?

A new poll taken just after the debate by Mainstreet Research found that 44 per cent of viewers thought PC Leader Brian Pallister did the better job, followed by NDP Leader Greg Selinger (24 per cent), James Beddome of the Greens (19 per cent) and Liberal Leader Rana Bokhari, with just 4 per cent rating Bokhari as the best performer.

Joining me to discuss what went down in last night's debate is the CBC's Cameron MacIntosh. You can listen to it here.

Keeping Tom Mulcair may have been safer bet for NDP, history suggests

Losing seats from one election to the next can sting for the devotees of a political party. The natural reaction may be to call for a change of leadership, as New Democrats did on Sunday at the NDP's convention.

But history suggests that a change in leadership is not necessarily a ticket for future success — in fact, holding on to the leader may be the safer choice.

You can read the rest of this article here.

NDP lost the left to Justin Trudeau before rejecting Tom Mulcair

New Democrats rejected the leadership of Tom Mulcair at their party convention on the weekend, kicking off a battle for the soul of the NDP. With their support for a closer look at the Leap Manifesto, NDP members seem to believe the party's future lies in a return to the left.

But that edge of the spectrum, if the New Democrats want to occupy it again, will need to be wrested away from the Liberals first.

You can read the rest of this article on how the NDP is polling among its core constituencies here.

Premier approval ratings: cracks in the Wall?

The Angus Reid Institute has published its quarterly review of premiers' approval ratings from coast-to-coast (excluding the territories and Prince Edward Island). The numbers show some significant shifts in opinion since Angus Reid's summer poll, and diverging fortunes for the two premiers headed for an election in April.

But while Brad Wall still topped the list, some (small) cracks are beginning to show in his dominance in Saskatchewan.

Wall's approval rating stood at 60 per cent in the poll, with 35 per cent disapproval. That puts him as the only premier with a majority approval rating, but it is his lowest approval rating recorded by the Angus Reid Institute since these quarterly polls began at the end of 2012.

The Saskatchewan premier was the only one with a strong net rating, but two other premiers also had positive scores. Stephen McNeil of Nova Scotia had the approval of 46 per cent and the disapproval of 43 per cent, while Rachel Notley in Alberta had an approval rating of 45 per cent and a disapproval rating of 44 per cent.

(Paul Davis was included in this poll, as he lost the Newfoundland and Labrador election on November 30.)

Brian Gallant of New Brunswick was the only other premier with a generally even rating, scoring 34 per cent approval and 39 disapproval. His 'not sure' rating of 27 per cent was, by far, the largest.

Four premiers put up some very poor numbers. The best of them was Philippe Couillard of Quebec, with an approval rating of 35 per cent and a disapproval rating of 57 per cent. He was followed by British Columbia's Christy Clark (34 per cent approval, 60 per cent disapproval) and Ontario's Kathleen Wynne (30 per cent approval, 60 per cent disapproval). For Wynne, that was her lowest rating since becoming premier in early 2013.

At the bottom of the list — again — was Manitoba's Greg Selinger, with an approval rating of 22 per cent and a disapproval rating of 65 per cent.

Wall and Selinger, book-ending the table, are also the two premiers headed to an election in the spring. However, in terms of who has positive momentum and who has negative momentum, the roles are reversed.

Since the last quarter, Selinger's net approval rating has increased by three points, from a woeful -46 to a still woeful -43. But since this time last year, in the final quarter of 2014, Selinger's net approval rating has actually improved by 13 points. That is the greatest improvement recorded by any premier in the last year. Admittedly, though, it was from a very low base.

Wall, on the other hand, has seen his net approval rating drop by seven points since the last quarter, and 14 points since last year. Only Wynne had a worse year-on-year drop in support, with her net rating dropping by 20 points to -30.

McNeil and Gallant, perhaps buoyed by the federal Liberals' strong performance in Atlantic Canada, saw their net approval ratings increase by eight and 30 points, respectively. Clark was also up three points since the last quarter.

Notley, however, has seen her net approval rating slide by 13 points over the last three months. That has decreased her net rating from a respectable +14 to a break-even +1. Couillard's rating has also dropped by 13 points over the last three quarters, though he was in a worse position a year ago.

If approval ratings can act as a proxy for potential electoral performances, a few of these premiers are in a very safe position: Wall, McNeil, and Notley. Couillard could prevail in a divided political landscape in Quebec. Clark and Gallant would be in much more trouble, while Wynne and Selinger would be defeated.

Luckily for most of these premiers, they do not have to face the electorate for quite awhile — the provincial elections on the schedule for 2017 are in British Columbia and Nova Scotia, and Clark has shown her resilience before. Wall is a virtual lock for the April election in Saskatchewan, but Selinger looks like he will be in tough.

Of course, four months is an eternity in politics, so neither Wall nor Brian Pallister, leader of the Manitoba Progressive Conservatives, can take anything for granted. But these will be hard numbers to mess up, in Wall's case, or, for Selinger, overcome.

Quarterly check-in with the premiers (updated)

Yesterday, Angus Reid released the results from their quarterly polling on the approval ratings of Canada's premiers. As usual, Brad Wall of Saskatchewan topped the list while Manitoba's Greg Selinger, after almost losing his job in a leadership vote, was at the bottom. But the poll did have some interesting findings - namely that two of the premiers heading to the polls this year have decent numbers and that, for the most part, premiers are unpopular.

Update: It was indeed a typo, but Gallant's DK was 10 points too high, rather than his disapproval rating. It has been fixed below. Angus Reid caught it earlier, but the wrong version of the PDF was still in my cache. Apologies. Before we get into the poll, a note on the numbers for Brian Gallant of New Brunswick. In Angus Reid's poll, the numbers for Gallant added up to 110%. I corrected this in the chart below by reducing Gallant's disapproval rating by 10 points, which aligns more closely with Angus Reid's previous poll. This would mean his 43% disapproval was a simple typo, and should have been 33%. I have checked with Angus Reid and will update once I have the correct numbers.

Let's start with the two premiers who will be asking for a mandate of their own this year (Wade MacLauchlan of Prince Edward Island is the third, but Angus Reid does not include the province in its poll - with good reason, as even with a sample of 6,278, PEI's share of that would represent just 27 respondents).

Jim Prentice of Alberta registered an approval rating of 43%, representing a drop of seven points for the PC leader since the last quarter. His disapproval rating was up six points, to 39%.

That is not a positive trend for Prentice, but with the divided opposition he faces he can easily win with 43% support. In fact, Alison Redford took 44% of the vote when she won the 2012 election, so Prentice appears in a good enough position.

And with a new rating of +4, Prentice is one of only two premiers with a net positive score.

Paul Davis of Newfoundland and Labrador had similar numbers to Prentice, with 41% approval and 43% disapproval. That is a sharp improvement for Davis, who had an approval rating of just 34% last quarter. His disapproval rating, however, was also up, by six points.

The issue with Davis is that in a three-party system where the third party may take just 10% of the vote, 41% would not be enough to win. And the polls by the Corporate Research Associates show that satisfaction with the PC government in the province is relatively high - and yet, the governing party is trailing in the polls at a great distance. It is almost as if Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have gotten over the anger they felt with the Dunderdale administration, but still want a change. That will be tough for Davis to overcome.

Two premiers have a year to go before the next election in 2016, and they could not be any more different.

Wall topped the list yet again with an approval rating of 64% and a disapproval rating of 30%, the highest and lowest scores, respectively, in Canada. His net rating is a remarkable +34, the best by a wide margin. And that 64% approval, in fact, matches the share of the vote his party took in the 2011 provincial election. He would seem to be in fine form to secure re-election, which no one doubts at this stage.

His numbers have slipped a little, as they have dropped for three consecutive quarters. But the shifts have been marginal, and he has a lot of room to fall before he has to worry.

At the opposite end of the spectrum is Selinger, who found himself at the bottom of the list again. His approval rating stands at just 22%, with disapproval at 63%.

That is an improvement for Selinger, who was at just 17% last quarter, but it still makes for the two worst quarters for the NDP premier in Angus Reid's polling. It spells doom for his party's re-election chances, and that is part of the reason he almost lost a leadership vote a few weeks ago. His net rating of -41 is the worst in Canada, again by a wide margin.

The other premiers on the list are at least two years away from having to face the voters, so this poll is more of a mid-term check-up.

The two Atlantic Liberal premiers, Gallant and Stephen McNeil of Nova Scotia, have decent scores. McNeil put up an approval rating of 43% and a disapproval rating of 44%, rather standard fare for a sitting premier. But he has dropped in three consecutive quarters, after posting an approval rating of 66% in June 2014.

Gallant has rather mixed numbers for a newly-elected premier, at 40% approval to 43% disapproval. His disapproval rating is up rather sharply.

The two central Canadian Liberal premiers, Kathleen Wynne of Ontario and Philippe Couillard of Quebec, are seeing their numbers turn a little sour.

Wynne's approval rating has dropped over two quarters now to 36%, with her disapproval rating at 53%. Her net rating is a poor -17. But this negative trend is lessened somewhat by the fact that Wynne's numbers are now more or less back to normal, after experiencing a post-election bump.

Couillard might be a little more worried, with an approval rating of 35% and a disapproval of 58%. That represents a drop in his approval worth six points, and his net score of -23 is the lowest in Canada with the exception of Selinger and Christy Clark of British Columbia. Coupled with a new poll out today from CROP showing his party dropping to just 29% support, Couillard seems to be experiencing the same post-election slump that Jean Charest went through when he first became premier in 2003.

Finally, Clark's numbers are holding steady with 33% approval and 60% disapproval, though that is a far cry from the post-election honeymoon of a 45% approval rating that Clark had in 2013. Only Selinger's net rating is worse than Clark's -27. But she doesn't have to face the electorate until 2017. Of course, poor approval ratings are certainly something she is familiar with and, undoubtedly, it probably doesn't scare her after the 2013 experience.

An unpopular bunch

As mentioned above, the poll does suggest that Canadians are not very happy with their premiers. In only Saskatchewan do a majority of respondents approve of their premier, and in four of the nine provinces polled (including the three largest) a majority disapprove of their premiers. Seven of the nine boast negative net ratings, and five of them have been in office for about two years or less. Their numbers are bound to get only worse.

What does this mean? Are we just poorly served by our leaders, or are Canadians so polarized that many find it hard to support a leader for whose party they did not vote? In no province does the current approval rating of the premier stand at a higher level than the share of the vote that premier's party took in the previous election. In Quebec, British Columbia, Manitoba, and Newfoundland and Labrador it is significantly lower than the bar set by the last election.

Perhaps it isn't a sign of a serious problem with our leaders or our politics, but rather a case of the grass always being greener on the other side of the fence. One hopes our collective psyche is not as simple as that.

With Godin retiring, is Acadie-Bathurst at play?

The New Democrats received some bad news last week when Yvon Godin announced he would not be seeking re-election this year. Godin has represented the riding of Acadie-Bathurst, in northeastern New Brunswick, since 1997.

Godin won the riding in 2011 with 69.7% of the vote. On the face of it, the New Democrats should have no concerns about retaining such a solidly NDP riding. But the question, which will only be answered when the next election is held, is just how much of a Godin riding Acadie-Bathurst has been.

The riding was not always so safe for Godin. When he first won it in 1997, on the heels of anger of changes to employment insurance by the Liberal government, Godin took the riding with 41% of the vote to 35% for the incumbent Liberals. In 2000, the margin increased to seven points.

But since 2004, the riding has been a very safe one. Only in 2006, when he took 49.9% of the vote, did Godin fail to secure a majority of ballots. In 2011, the Liberals - the traditional rival to the NDP in Acadie-Bathurst - dropped to just 14% support. The Conservatives finished second with 16%.

However, Godin really was a game-changer in 1997. In the 1984, 1988, and 1993 federal elections (and recall that in the 1980s the NDP was at a historic high under Ed Broadbent), the NDP captured just 5% to 6% of the vote in Acadie-Bathurst. Falling that far may not be in the cards for the party now that Godin is gone, but the NDP is suffering in New Brunswick.

There have been three large-sample (by New Brunswick standards) polls since November, which give us a good look at the political situation in the province. And the three polls (by CRA, Angus Reid, and Ipsos Reid) are all in close agreement.

The Liberals were leading in New Brunswick in these polls with between 44% and 49% of the vote, representing a significant increase from the 22.6% the party captured in the 2011 election.

The Conservatives were in second with between 29% and 32%, a big drop from the 43.9% the party had in 2011.

The New Democrats have also dropped a great deal, from 29.8% in 2011 to between 16% and 19%. That sets them up for their worst performance in New Brunswick since the 2000 election. Between 2004 and 2008, the party had consistently captured 21% to 22% of the vote.

If we average these three polls out, we end up with the Liberals at around 46%, the Conservatives at 30%, and the New Democrats at 17%. Under these circumstances, how good are the NDP's chances in Acadie-Bathurst?

I've finished the projection model for the 2015 election, and I am just working on some final touches before launching in about two weeks. In the meantime, though, we can use it to take a closer look at what the polls are saying about what could happen in Acadie-Bathurst.

If we just go by the regional trends, which is what the model is designed to do, the riding should stay in NDP hands. The model gives the New Democrats between 44% and 50% of the vote without Godin on the ballot. The Liberals come in second with between 30% and 35%, while the Conservatives come in third with between 14% and 16%.

With Godin, the NDP would have been projected to win more easily, with between 48% and 55% of the vote against 28% to 32% for the Liberals.

But these New Brunswick polls suggest the race could be much closer, before we even take into consideration the drawing power of Godin.

If we swing the model according to the three New Brunswick polls only, the NDP drops to between 42% and 48% and the Liberals to between 33% and 38%. While that still points to an NDP victory, that is a much closer margin. The 'minimum/maximum' projection would make Acadie-Bathurst, under these circumstances, a potential Liberal pick-up.

Quantifying Godin's value is a much more difficult thing to do. If we look at the 1997 election when Godin first came along, the province-wide swing from 1993 to 1997 would have given the New Democrats about 22.4% of the vote in Acadie-Bathurst, rather than the 40.5% Godin actually captured. At the time, he was apparently worth about 20 points.

If we use that as our guide, and penalize the departure of Godin by a factor of 0.55 rather than the normal 0.9 penalty assigned to departing incumbents, the model would give the NDP between 33% and 37% of the vote, with the Liberals between 37% and 43%. In other words, the riding becomes a toss-up that heavily leans towards the Liberals.

Of course, that penalty is based on an election that occurred almost 18 years ago. But it does give an idea of the potential effect Godin's retirement will have on the results in Acadie-Bathurst. News reports did quote New Democrats recognizing that the formerly-secure riding is now one that will need to be fought over, so these calculations make some intuitive sense.

The party's chances in Acadie-Bathurst would be improved if it can find a similarly popular candidate to take Godin's place. But the NDP would also benefit from a boost in the Atlantic region as a whole. At about 17%, where the polls have them now, the party is on track for their worst result since the 2000 election.

The polls in Alberta as Wildrose implodes

Some momentous and unprecedented events are taking place this week in the Alberta legislature, as the province's Official Opposition splits apart. We will only know the scope of the implosion later today, but the latest reports suggest that leader Danielle Smith and perhaps half of her caucus will cross the floor and sit with the Progressive Conservative government. Wildrose may (barely) hang on to its role as the Official Opposition, but without their charismatic leader their future looks bleak.

But the polls have given little indication that Wildrose was on track for such a catastrophe.

Indeed, it seems the bones of contention may be more personal and related to Jim Prentice's new style, rather than any fear of crushing defeat. Based on what the polls were showing, the PCs would probably have prevailed in a snap election, but Wildrose would have remained as a strong opposition.

Let's take a look at the evolution of voting intentions in the province since the 2012 provincial election. The charts below are mash-ups of all the polls that have been publicly released since then, averaging them out when more than one appeared in a given month.

It really is a two-horse race in Alberta, as the Liberals and New Democrats have been polling some where in the teens for the last four years.

The Tories under Alison Redford had a bit of a honeymoon after the 2012 victory, leading in the polls until the end of the year, when Wildrose inched ahead. From then on until the fall of 2013, the two parties were in a close fight, swapping the lead depending on the poll. Between October 2012 and October 2013, the PCs averaged 34% against 33% for Wildrose.

But when things turned south for Redford, Wildrose stormed ahead, polling between 46% and 50% in March and April of this year. The PCs were at around 20%, and en route for disaster. Redford was out.

With Redford gone and Dave Hancock in as interim leader, the PCs slowly started to claw their way back. From 21% in April they went to 26% in June and 29% in September. They were still trailing Wildrose, but only by a handful of points.

When Prentice came in, the Tories moved ahead - narrowly so in October, and in more convincing fashion in the latest poll out of the province, that of Insights West (November 28-December 1). That survey gave the PCs 35% of the vote, against 29% for Wildrose, 16% for the NDP, and 15% for the Liberals. A series of by-election victories cemented the Tories' return to front-runner status, though also confirming that the PCs are not as strong as they were on election night in 2012.

That would, normally, be a good thing for the opposition. The PCs did hold on to their four seats, but with substantial loss of vote share. A repeat performance province wide would be a boon to the opposition parties. Instead, Wildrose took their four losses to incumbent Tories, two of which were high-profile, as a death knell. Recent events in the legislature simply further poisoned the well.

Defections are one thing. Wildrose has already lost some MLAs. But to have the leader cross the floor is something else entirely. How were the leadership numbers looking?

Smith's numbers were always enviable, and from December 2012 she consistently had better approval ratings than Redford and Hancock. 

Redford's numbers were pretty good after the election, with an approval rating of between 43% and 58% throughout 2012. 

But in December 2012, Smith's approval rating stood at 48%, and remained high throughout 2013. averaging 46% against 40% disapproval. By comparison, Redford's dropped to an average of just 32%, with 59% disapproving of her leadership.

Brian Mason and Raj Sherman, the NDP and Liberal leaders, roughly split the electorate three ways over this time, divided almost equally between those who approved of them, those who disapproved of them, and those who had no opinion. New NDP leader Rachel Notley still needs to be introduced to almost half of the population.

Redford's numbers fell significantly early this year, to an approval of just 20% between February and March. Her disapproval was a catastrophic 69%. Smith looked much better by comparison, and her approval rating soared to over 50% during this time.

Again, Hancock did his best to right the ship, with an approval rating of about 33% over his tenure (his disapproval rating was half of Redford's before she left). 

Prentice has put up some good numbers since he took over, with an approval rating of between 45% and 50% in the three polls that have been published since he became premier. The latest, by Angus Reid Global (December 4-13), gave him an approval rating of 50%, with just 33% disapproval.

Smith's numbers have worsened of late, but they are hardly disastrous. She managed 44% in the first post-Prentice poll, with 38% disapproval. In the latest poll by Insights West, she was down to 38% approval, with 40% disapproval. While down from her Redford highs, those are still numbers she could have worked with. Her move can't be chalked up to an attempt to save her own skin.

It seems we will not know how Smith would have compared to Prentice over the long run. We will have to see what happens with the rump Wildrose caucus going forward. A merger, at this stage, seems unlikely. 

With the most recent numbers from Insights West, Wildrose would have had a good chance of keeping its entire caucus in the legislature, with about 20 seats to 51 for the Tories and eight seats apiece for the Liberals and NDP.

But what if the electorate moves in the same way as the Wildrose caucus, with half going to the Tories? In that case, the Tories would win a landslide, with 76 seats to six for the NDP and five for the Liberals. Wildrose would be shut out. But those Liberals who went over to the PCs to block Wildrose in 2012 might revert back to their old party - not enough to change the government, but the Liberals would likely return to Official Opposition status in this scenario. It would likely be, though, a smaller and weaker opposition than the one Wildrose had - before today.

Liberals potentially most vulnerable on Iraq mission vote

While MPs debate what kind of role Canada should play in the fight against ISIS, polls suggest a majority of Canadians are supportive of the country joining the United States and its coalition partners in a combat mission against the Islamic militants.

To read the rest of the article looking at what polls are saying about Canadians' views on the mission in the Middle East, visit CBC.ca.

In the article, I briefly look at the partisan divide on the issue. I thought it might be worthwhile to explore that a little more deeply here.

The chart above comes from Abacus Data's report, breaking down responses by party support for the question of whether Canadians supported sending military advisers to Iraq.

Conservatives were the most enthusiastic, with 68% strongly or mostly in support of sending the advisers. Just 23% were in opposition.

Liberals and New Democrats saw things roughly equally, with 56% of Liberals and 55% of New Democrats in support. Opposition, at 29% and 31%, respectively, was also virtually identical.

Where opposition was strongest was among supporters of the Bloc Québécois. Just 18% supported sending the advisers, while 65% were in opposition. Greens were split, at 41% for and 34% against.

But what about sending combat aircraft, which the Prime Minister is suggesting Canada do?

We find similar divisions here, though with less agreement among Liberals and New Democrats.

Conservatives were 67% in favour of sending jets, with 25% opposed.

Liberals were also strongly in favour, with 55% in support and 36% in opposition.

A plurality of New Democrats supported sending jets, but not a majority: 49% in favour, with 39% in opposition.

Greens and supporters of the Bloc were against sending jets.

While the order of enthusiasm of the three parties does align with the views of their supporters, both the Liberals and New Democrats seem to be somewhat offside on these issues. The NDP is perhaps less vulnerable, as its supporters were the least likely to view a mission in Iraq favourably. But the Liberals may find themselves offside - their voters were only slightly less favourable to hitting ISIS than Conservatives were.

But what if respondents were given the option between a combat role, an advisory role, or no role at all? Angus Reid Global looked at this.

When given the choice, sending advisers is the preferred option by Conservatives, Liberals, and New Democrats. But again we see the same order of intensity: the Conservatives most favourable to some sort of role, the Liberals in between, and the NDP the least enthusiastic.

Among Conservatives, fully 81% supported a role of some kind, with 55% of them preferring advisers and 45% supportive of military intervention.

Among Liberals, support for a role of some kind totaled 72%, with 58% of them favouring advisers over military intervention.

And among New Democrats, still 63% favoured a role of some kind, with 62% of them preferring military advisers. Again we see the same order of support: Conservatives most, Liberals next, NDP last.

Non-voters, interestingly, were the least supportive of any sort of mission. Perhaps if they'd like to actually have a say in whether these things happen, they should go out and vote.

The New Democrats are following their more pacifist traditions, and their supporters are the most ambivalent, so the NDP is best positioned to be the dove on this issue. But these numbers suggest that the Liberals may have been better off choosing a more moderate position on the mission in Iraq.

Whether or not Justin Trudeau has miscalculated, however, will depend on several factors: the success or failure of the mission, of course, but also whether this is an important issue to voters. The polls did not investigate this question, but we may see some fallout in the voting intentions numbers in the coming weeks.

Breaking down the Quebec vote

Ever since the controversial Mario Beaulieu became its leader in June, the Bloc Québécois has been drifting further into irrelevance. What kind of opportunity has this opened up for the other parties in Quebec?

To read the rest of the article on the CBC website, click here.

But let's go over the data quickly, first paying attention to the new Angus Reid Global poll released this morning.  Nationwide, it puts the Liberals ahead of the Conservatives by six points, finally putting Angus Reid in line with the consensus of other pollsters. I briefly analysed the poll here.

The Quebec results are of particular interest, as they break the deadlock between Léger and CROP. Léger gave the Liberals a 10-point lead in the province, while CROP gave the NDP the edge by two points. Angus Reid comes down on Léger's side, putting the Liberals ahead by six points.

As you can see, they tally among eligible voters for Angus Reid is quite close to Léger's. On the other hand, Angus Reid's estimation of likely voters puts it closer to CROP. But we saw in the Ontario election how likely voter models can come up short and are still in an experimental phase.

Angus Reid was also in agreement with CROP and Léger on preferences for prime minister: Thomas Mulcair was ahead of Justin Trudeau in all three polls.

Though CROP may be a little more bullish on the NDP in Quebec than other polls would consider appropriate, the poll does have some value for its regional breakdowns.

If we consider the NDP a little too high, we can still derive a lot of information from the CROP survey. It would still suggest an NDP lead among francophones, as Léger has it (albeit by a narrow margin). It would still put the NDP and Liberals in a close race throughout the province, though with the Liberals likely having the edge in each region instead of the NDP.

Otherwise, everything looks as it should be. The Bloc is stronger in the Montreal suburbs than in Montreal itself, and is polling best in the regions of the province. The 3% score in Quebec City is probably too low, but CROP has been putting the Bloc in single-digits in the capital for three consecutive polls now. The Parti Québécois is also polling badly in the region, where the Conservatives put up their best numbers.

Quebec will undoubtedly be the most interesting battleground of 2015, though its importance will still take a backseat to Ontario. But much is riding on what happens in Quebec. While the identity of the government will not be decided here (it won't be an election where either the NDP or Liberals would be in the running for government - it will have to be one or the other vs. the Conservatives), the province could decide the kind of government that is formed: majority or minority. And in the latter case, the number of seats it gives to either the Liberals or NDP could indeed make the difference between a Conservative (though likely short-lived) minority or one formed by either of the opposition parties. When was the last time the vote in Quebec will have mattered so much in a federal election?

Conservatives ahead in new Angus Reid poll

For only the third time in the last year and out of the last 49 polls, the Conservatives have placed first in a national survey. Seasoned poll-watchers know that when something so out of the ordinary has happened, it is usually an anomaly that is quickly corrected. But until a new poll emerges to confirm or refute the findings of Angus Reid Global, we can only speculate as to whether this is a blip or a sign of things to come.

Angus Reid was last in the field in early March. Since then, the Conservatives picked up four points to lead with 32% support, putting them two points up on the Liberals, who fell three points to 30%. The New Democrats were down one point to 26%, while the Greens and Bloc Québécois were unchanged at 6% and 5%, respectively.

As I wrote in my piece for The Globe and Mail yesterday, these are unusual numbers. They are not completely implausible, though, as a swing of three or four points between the Liberals and Conservatives is not enormous. Nevertheless, these sort of numbers have been extremely rare over the last 12 months, as the chart below shows.

Polls since April 2013, with Angus Reid highlighted

Each dot represents a poll that has been released since Justin Trudeau became Liberal leader. The poll highlighted in green is this Angus Reid survey. As you can see, the Conservative result is higher than any recent survey. The Liberal result is lower than any recent survey. Is it a wobble or have the Liberals really taken a hit to the advantage of the Tories? We will have to wait and see.

Angus Reid also reported support among likely voters, which they determine based on a respondent's historical likelihood of voting and past voting behaviour. This is a good model for estimating likely turnout if turnout does not change to a great degree. If the assumptions the model is based on end up being off (if, say, young people turn out in larger numbers in 2015) the estimate will be wrong. This happened in the last US presidential election for a few pollsters. They assumed that the voting patterns of 2008 were anomalous and that turnout would revert to pre-2008 patterns. That did not happen, and so some pollsters, for instance, told Mitt Romney that he was going to win.

Nevertheless, according to Angus Reid's estimation of likely voters, the Conservatives have the support of 34%, a gain of three points since March. The Liberals dropped three points to 29%, while the New Democrats were up one point to 27%. At the regional level, the major changes were that the Tories placed first in the Prairies (42% to 34% for the Liberals) and extended their lead to 17 points in Ontario (43% to 26% for both the Liberals and NDP). The NDP's advantage in Quebec also increased (36% to 30% over the Liberals).

That the Conservative lead grew among likely voters is in line with what Angus Reid has found to be the case in the past. In February, a five-point national lead for the Liberals among all voters turned into a one-point deficit among likely voters. In March, that lead of five points decreased to just one.

Among eligible voters in this new poll, the Conservatives led in Alberta and Ontario. They had 57% support in Alberta, against 20% for the NDP and 17% for the Liberals. The Conservatives led with 41% support in Ontario (a gain of nine points) while the Liberals dropped eight points to 28%. The NDP was at 23%.

The surge in Conservative support in Ontario explains most of the gain the party made nationwide. It is what put them in front. But here again the numbers are unusual, as the Conservatives haven't been pegged at over 40% or with a lead of 13 points or more in the province in over a year.

The Liberals led in the Prairies and Atlantic Canada, with 36% support in Saskatchewan and Manitoba against 33% for the Conservatives and 18% for the NDP. In Atlantic Canada, the Liberals had 57% support to 21% for the Tories and 17% for the NDP.

The New Democrats led in British Columbia with 34%, a gain of seven points, followed by the Liberals at 31% and the Conservatives at 26%. In Quebec, the NDP was at 33% to 29% for the Liberals, 19% for the Bloc, and 14% for the Tories.

With these regional levels of support among all eligible voters, the Conservatives would likely win 139 seats, with 100 going to the Liberals, 96 to the New Democrats, two to the Bloc, and one to the Greens.

The Conservatives are far from majority territory due to their poor showings in British Columbia, the Prairies, and Atlantic Canada. The Liberals are hamstrung due to their distribution of the vote in Quebec, while 71% of the NDP caucus comes from either B.C. or Quebec.

Among likely voters, the Conservatives get much closer to a majority with 157 seats, with 98 being won by the NDP, 82 by the Liberals, and one by the Greens.

Angus Reid included some leadership questions in its poll. Stephen Harper topped the list for best Prime Minister with 27%, up four points from March, while Trudeau fell four points to 20%. Thomas Mulcair was at 16%, Elizabeth May at 4%, and André Bellavance at 1%.

Mulcair had the best approval rating of the leaders, at 46% against 35% disapproval. Trudeau had 45% approval to 44% disapproval, while Harper split 38% to 55%.

Comparing these numbers to Angus Reid's March poll is problematic. That poll showed increases of about 10 to 30 points in the number of 'unsures' compared to the previous poll in February, while this current poll shows a reset, with the number of 'unsures' dropping by 16 or 17 points for Mulcair and Trudeau and by 21 to 26 points for May and Bellavance. I'm not sure why that happened, but it makes it wiser to compare the approval rating results in this April poll to the last set of numbers in February.

When we do that, we certainly see that Trudeau has taken a step backwards. His approval rating fell by six points, while his disapproval rating increased by six. Harper and Mulcair experienced only insignificant shifts. When asked if their opinion of the leaders had changed in the last three months, 30% said that their opinion of Trudeau had worsened, against 21% who said it improved (those numbers were 41% to 8% for Harper and 11% to 17% for Mulcair, respectively). So, the drop in support for the Liberals nationally is corroborated by the drop in support for Trudeau - though, of course, if the sample was unusually anti-Liberal the results would be repeated throughout.

One interesting aspect was how support for who would make the best PM did not always follow voting intentions. In British Columbia, for example, the NDP outpaced the Liberals by 34% to 31%. But Trudeau outpaced Mulcair by 24% to 20% on this question. On the other hand, in Quebec the margin between the NDP and Liberals was relatively narrow (33% to 29%), but Mulcair was the choice of 30% of respondents as best PM, compared to just 16% for Trudeau. Support for a leader and support for a party, then, is not always contiguous.

But this is one poll and an unusual one at that. We have to wait and see what other surveys show before we take these results at face value. Has the political landscape in Canada really flipped, or was this a blip? The death of Jim Flaherty, and the resulting outpouring of sympathy and analyses of his legacy, could not have had no influence on the results of this poll (the biggest Conservative jump was in Ontario, after all). We should have a better idea of the significance of this poll in a few weeks' time.

Angus Reid hints at further CAQ gains

What could end up being the last poll of the campaign (never say never) was released yesterday by Angus Reid, showing the same numbers for the Liberals as other polls but a tight race between the Parti Québécois and the Coalition Avenir Québec for second place. Was Angus Reid at the top end of the consensus of where the CAQ stands, or did Angus Reid record further gains for the CAQ? And, perhaps the most important question going into tomorrow's vote, can the CAQ continue its momentum to move into second?

The projection does not consider it a likely possibility. The maximum support for the CAQ and the minimum support for the PQ estimated by the model puts them in a tie at 26.5%. But that would still translate into no fewer than 32 seats for the PQ and no more than 21 for the CAQ. (Recall, however, that the maximum and minimum confidence bands include 95% of scenarios.) But that we're talking about the possibility that the CAQ could actually emerge out of this campaign with more seats than it had at dissolution speaks to the tremendous gains the party has made in the last two weeks.

The Liberals are still well ahead in the projection. While it leans towards the party capturing a majority, the likely ranges still envision as few as 59 seats for the Liberals. That puts them under the 63-seat mark needed for a majority government.

Let's move on to the Angus Reid poll. My detailed analysis of the final projection will  be posted tomorrow morning.

This is the first outing from Angus Reid in this campaign, and for several years in Quebec. The company did put out some numbers in 2008 and did well enough, however.

Angus Reid released only their estimation of likely voters, so we do not know what they got for all eligible voters.

Among likely voters, the Liberals managed 39%, where they have generally been in all polls conducted over the last two weeks. The PQ was at 27% (note that the four previous polls have had the PQ at between 26% and 29%), while the CAQ was at 25%. This is where Angus Reid stands out, as it is the best number the CAQ has recorded in any poll in over a year. But it also continues a rather consistent trend for the party. Since Forum pegged the CAQ at 13% on March 19, there has not been a poll where the CAQ's numbers have not increased.

Québec Solidaire was at just 7%, on the lower side compared to other recent polls.

Angus Reid reported a tight race among French-speakers, with the PQ at 31% to 30% for the Liberals and 28% for the CAQ. Note that Angus Reid appears to use a similar definition for language as Ipsos Reid does. Ipsos found similar numbers in their recent poll. It is inappropriate to compare the language results of Ipsos and Angus, however, to those of CROP and Léger.

Regionally, Angus Reid split up the province by postal codes. In Montreal and Laval, the Liberals were ahead with 48% to 28% for the PQ, 13% for the CAQ, and 9% for QS. This suggests higher PQ support, and lower QS support, than some other polls have recorded in the area.

In eastern Quebec, which encapsulates Trois-Rivières and everything east of it, the Liberals and CAQ were tied at 33%, with the PQ at 26%. As this region includes PQ strongholds like the Lac-Saint-Jean and the Gaspésie, this implies strong Liberal/CAQ numbers in Quebec City and west of it.

In western Quebec, which encapsulates everything west of Trois-Rivières, with the exception of Montreal and Laval, the Liberals led with 36% to 28% for the CAQ and 27% for the PQ. This implies rather strong numbers for the CAQ in the suburbs of Montreal.

But as these definitions are different from those of other firms, it is difficult to draw significant conclusions from them.

Angus Reid did have some other interesting numbers, however. Liberals and PQ supporters remain the most decided (80% and 75%, respectively), while little more than half of CAQ and QS voters have made their final choice.

On who would make the best premier, Philippe Couillard was ahead with 30% to 23% for François Legault and 20% for Pauline Marois. This corroborates the numbers published by Léger, which similarly showed a strong result for the CAQ leader.

Angus Reid also asked respondents whether their opinion of the leaders had worsened or improved during the campaign. For my part, I found the breakdown by 2012 vote the most revealing.

Liberals seem very pleased with Couillard, as 56% of the party's 2012 supporters said their opinion of Couillard improved during the campaign, against just 5% who said it worsened. The numbers are virtually identical for 2012 CAQ voters and Legault: 57% improved to 5% worsened. Françoise David also had similarly positive numbers among QS voters: 40% said their opinion improved against just 4% who said it worsened.

But Marois performed much less well. Only 21% of PQ voters from 2012 said their opinion of her improved during the campaign, while 20% said it worsened. And when we look at her target voters, we see why the PQ is on track for a defeat. Among people who voted CAQ in 2012, only 4% said their opinion of Marois improved during the campaign, while 63% said it worsened. That is enormous. Among QS voters, just 4% said their opinion of Marois improved, while 56% said it worsened. This has made it impossible for the PQ to gain new supporters during this campaign, and it also suggests how the PQ can be dropping from their 2012 performance.

Couillard, on the other hand, has done rather well among CAQ voters: 35% said their opinion of him improved, while 25% said it worsened. Legault had positive scores among Liberal voters (34% to 11%) and PQ voters (34% to 19%) as well, while David had a positive 27% to 10% split among PQ supporters. In other words, Couillard, Legault, and David all had success in pulling support from the kind of voters they needed to target to make gains. Marois had virtually none.

These numbers seem particularly relevatory, and hint at just how difficult it would be for the PQ to make the gains they need in these final days of the campaign. Marois's three main opponents, on the other hand, have good reason to believe they might be able to attract some waverers to their side. There is still much that could happen between this poll leaving the field on April 4 and voters casting their ballots on April 7. But a PQ comeback seems the least likely to occur.

Wall, Dunderdale book-end the premiers table again

Angus-Reid released its ratings of Canada's premiers (with the exception of Prince Edward Island) this morning, showing that once again Brad Wall of Saskatchewan remains, by far, the most popular premier in Canada. Though his numbers are impressive, they could be a lot worse and he would still be near the top. The poll suggests that most Canadians disapprove of their premiers, with only two of the nine boasting disapproval ratings lower than 50%.

Wall's approval rating was virtually unchanged from Angus-Reid's last report in September. It stands at 66% with just 27% disapproval.

Second on the list is newcomer Stephen McNeil of Nova Scotia. As this poll was conducted at the beginning of December, McNeil had only been on the job for two months. Coming off a landslide victory, his 57% approval rating is not much of a surprise. That represents a gain of six points over his last rating as opposition leader, with the gain coming primarily from undecideds (dropping to 14% from 20%).

Only Wall and McNeil could be considered popular premiers. Their approval ratings are high and their disapproval ratings are low. If an election were held today, both would easily win a majority government.

There are two other premiers with approval ratings that put them in a position to win re-election, though neither could be considered popular. The first is Christy Clark of British Columbia, who managed an approval rating of 42%. Her disapproval rating, however, stands at 51%. This has not changed much from where it was in September, but her approval rating has dropped in two consecutive polls since June.

The other premier with an approval rating high enough to have good reason to hope for re-election is Kathleen Wynne of Ontario. That rating sits at 35%, with her disapproval at 50%. Excluding the undecideds, that gives her an approval rating of 41% among decided respondents, enough to win an election. But momentum is going in the wrong direction for her. Her approval rating is down four points from September and eight points from May. Her disapproval rating has increased by 13 points since March.

The next tier of premiers are those are are competitive but still at risk. Topping that list is Pauline Marois of Quebec, with an approval rating of 32%. That is down seven points since September, but higher than where it was in June. Her disapproval rating increased by six points to 62%, but with an approval rating of 34% among decideds she stands a shot at re-election.

That would be harder for Alison Redford of Alberta and David Alward of New Brunswick. Redford's approval rating dropped three points to 31%, while her disapproval rating was up six points to 63%. Alward also managed 31% approval, though that was a gain of four points. His disapproval rating was virtually unchanged at 57%.

The last tier of premiers are those who are in deep trouble. The first is Greg Selinger of Manitoba, with an approval rating of just 28% and a disapproval rating of 62%. Kathy Dunderdale of Newfoundland and Labrador scores at the bottom of the list with an approval rating of only 24% and a disapproval rating of 69%, the worst in the country. Though her approval rating has increased by four points since September, her numbers are still worse than they were in June.

Unfortunately, Angus-Reid did not release any numbers for opposition or third-party leaders, as they have done in the past. I have asked whether this information could be made available, and will post here if it emerges. Update: Angus-Reid did not ask for anything but the premiers' approval ratings, so nothing for the opposition leaders will be forthcoming. This is another indication that the firm is moving away from free political poll releases.

When taking into account the premiers' net ratings (approval minus disapproval), the order of the leaders does not change drastically. Alward, with a relatively higher undecided proportion, jumps ahead of Marois and Redford to place fifth instead of eighth.

But only Wall and McNeil have positive ratings: +39 for Wall and +29 for McNeil. That is a drop of four points for Wall but an increase of eight for McNeil since September.

Three other premiers improved their net ratings since September. Both Alward and Dunderdale improved theirs by five points while Selinger's ticked upwards by one. But in all three cases, these may simply be bounce-backs from particularly low numbers.

Clark's net rating has worsened by four points, but she remains third on the list of overall net approval. Redford's score has worsened by nine points, while Wynne and Marois have seen theirs tumble by 10 and 13 points, respectively.

Overall, the Canadians' opinions of their premiers has worsened. Disapproval ratings increased by an average of 1.8 points in the nine provinces polled, while approval ratings dropped by an average of 0.2 points. For the three premiers likely to face the electorate in 2014 (Alward, Wynne, and Marois) that could be very bad news.

Ball set to take over leading NL Liberals

Liberals in Newfoundland and Labrador will be choosing their new leader this weekend. The man or woman they select will take over a party that is leading by a wide margin in the polls less than two years before the next provincial election.

A new survey conducted by MQO Research for NTV between Oct. 22-26 and surveying 400 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians by telephone found the Liberals well in front with 52.1% support among decided voters (margin of error of the entire sample is 4.9%, among the decided sample it is 6%). The governing Progressive Conservatives placed second with 28.7%, while the New Democrats dropped to 17.9% support. Other parties garnered 1.3%, while 32.3% of the entire sample was undecided, said they would not vote or would not respond to this particular question.

The numbers for the PCs seem in line with recent polls, part of a worrying trend for Kathy Dunderdale's government. The Liberals have been trending upwards for some time, but the NDP's score is the worst they have registered in any public poll since before the 2011 election. This is certainly a problem for them, but whether they have suffered a lasting blow remains to be seen. This poll was conducted in the midst of a leadership crisis in the party, when its MHAs demanded a test of Lorraine Michael's leadership. The crisis seems to have passed for the time being.

With these levels of support, the Liberals would easily form a majority government with 30 seats, compared to 13 for the Progressive Conservatives and just five for the New Democrats. The Liberals would win almost all of their seats west of St. John's, while the PCs and NDP would take most of their seats in and around the provincial capital.

The poll showed that Dwight Ball was the favourite candidate of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians among those in the race for the Liberal Party leadership:

Dwight Ball: 27.8%
Cathy Bennett: 21.8%
Paul Antle: 18.7%
Danny Dumaresque: 6.2%
Jim Bennett: 3.2%

The leftover proportion was undecided. The poll also suggested that Ball, Antle, and Cathy Bennett were all capable of defeating the Dunderdale government, as they bettered her on who would make the best premier. Jim Bennett and Dumaresque placed third, behind Dunderdale and Michael when they were inserted into the question.

Antle did better than either Ball or Bennett with 33% support against 32% for Ball and 30% for Bennett when stacked up against the other two party leaders.

But what does ThreeHundredEight's leadership endorsement rankings say? This system worked quite well in the federal leadership race for the Liberal Party. If we apply the same system, but swap the value of provincial and federal politicians, we see that Dwight Ball is the overwhelming favourite to win.

Ball leads in the endorsement rankings with 61.7% of all points awarded (at least according to the best of my scouring of the Wikipedia page for this race and the websites of each of the leadership candidates). Antle finishes second with 24.4% of the endorsement points, followed by Cathy Bennett at 7%, Danny Dumaresque at 4.5% and Jim Bennett at 2.5%.

Endorsements

Update (16/11/13): An intrepid reader alerted me that John Efford was a former MP as well as MHA, so his value (and the points for Dumaresque) have been increased from yesterday's post.

Based on Cathy Bennett's support in the MQO poll and the opinion of one of the journalists in Newfoundland and Labrador I quizzed on the race, she is likely to perform better than 7.1% of the leadership vote this weekend. But it seems very likely that Ball will come out on top, with Antle in second place.

(If I have missed any endorsements, please let me know and I will update this post.)

Update (17/11/13): In the first round of voting, the order of the candidates matched the leadership rankings, but as expected Cathy Bennett performed much better than 7%. The results were: Ball 44.4%, Antle 27.5%, C. Bennett 22.7%, Dumaresque 2.7%, J. Bennett 2.7%. The second ballot results were: Ball 47%, Antle 29.1%, C. Bennett 23.9%. The final ballot results were Ball 59%, Antle 41%. 

If Dwight Ball does win the leadership race, it seems unlikely that the party's support will change in the short term as a result. The Liberals started their uptick in the spring, and at that point the Corporate Research Associates were showing Ball polling ahead of Dunderdale on the leadership question. Surveys by Angus-Reid have shown strong approval ratings for Ball as well, with the latest poll putting him at 57% approval to just 23% disapproval. Compared to Michael's result of 63% approval to 22% disapproval and Dunderdale's woeful 20% approval and 73% disapproval in the early September poll, Ball seems well positioned to take over the Liberals.

B.C. NDP on track for win, but doubts remain

The penultimate update to the projection and forecast for tomorrow night's election in British Columbia shows the gap in popular support widening between the B.C. New Democrats and the B.C. Liberals, but the  margin in the seat projection tightening up. Adrian Dix and the NDP retain the advantage across every poll, but disagreement in some of the last surveys of the campaign leave the question of how it will all turn out unanswered.

The NDP is projected to have between 43.6% and 47.4% support, while the Liberals stand at between 35.6% and 39.4%. The precise projection puts the NDP at 45.5% and the Liberals at 37.5%, a gain of 2.5 points for the NDP compared to the last projection and an uptick of 0.7 points for the Liberals. The model estimates that the odds the Liberals can overcome this eight point margin in the four days between the most recent polls and election day to be just 2.8%.

The New Democrats are now projected to win between 45 and 56 seats, putting them in majority territory, while the Liberals stand at between 26 and 40 seats. The most likely outcome, at 48 seats for the NDP and 36 for the Liberals, represents a swing of four seats from the NDP to the Liberals since the last projection. A margin of eight seats is not very much, and the model estimates the odds of the Liberals being able to win the most seats with these numbers to be 21.4% (this takes into account both polling error and seat modelling error).

The gain in seats for the B.C. Liberals occurred primarily in the Interior and North, as the party narrowed the margin in the region and is now projected to win the majority of seats there.

But on the face of it, the New Democrats seem to be in a strong position. Their projected vote and seat haul does not overlap with the Liberals, at least based on current polling information. But what about how things might change between the last last poll and the actual vote?

This is difficult to judge, as the polls have not been very consistent. I have certainly seen more disagreement, but things are getting close enough where the variations start to make a difference. Accordingly, the forecasting model is unable to make a very precise estimate of likely outcomes tomorrow night: 20 to 77 seats for the NDP and 6 to 63 for the Liberals. This should take care of any Alberta-esque situation, but apart from that there is not much to glean from the forecasts.

More polls are expected to be released today, so hopefully this will make things more clear. Unless these final polls start to show some major shifts in the final hours of the campaign, I will have the final projection up on the site before midnight (ET) tonight to incorporate whatever polls emerge by the end of the evening. If these final polls are not clear as to what is going on, I may wait until the morning to see if any other surveys are released before midnight Pacific time to post the final projection. This is not my preferred option, however, as I much rather have my final projection numbers on the site before election day, if only to follow the spirit of the polling blackout laws in British Columbia.

Update: With all the late night polls I am expecting, I don't think I'll be able to get any numbers up before midnight Pacific time. As I am writing from Ottawa, trying to get the final numbers and an analysis posted within, at most, 90 minutes by 3 AM and also have it be coherent seems impossible. If the goal was to get something up before midnight and stay true to the spirit of the province's election laws, it does not make much difference if I post at 12:30 AM or 6:00 AM Pacific time. So, check for the final projection tomorrow morning.

Friday afternoon was a polling smorgasbord, as surveys from four different firms were released in a matter of hours. Though they do show some broadly similar numbers, the polls were suggesting conflicting trends and had some of their own methodological issues to note. Let's go through them one-by-one.

Forum's poll for the National Post is the oldest of the lot, having been conducted on May 8. Just as they did with their previous survey, Forum suggests a much closer race: 43% for the NDP and 41% for the Liberals.

Compared to their last poll of Apr. 30, the NDP had picked up four points and the Liberals had gained six, as support for the Greens and Conservatives fell by four and three points, respectively.

The lower support for the Conservatives and Greens is not too surprising, as more British Columbians become aware of a lack of a candidate in their own ridings and as voters decide that this may not be the election for a protest vote. The narrow gap between the NDP and Liberals appears to be somewhat out-of-step, but sampling error could easily push the margin further apart without making the poll explicitly wrong.

But Forum did have the same issue that they had in their previous survey, under-sampling people who said they voted for the NDP in 2009. By Forum's numbers, 50% of people who said they could remember who they voted for in 2009 had voted for the Liberals, while only 32% had voted for the NDP (actual result: 45% to 42%). Granted, four years is a long time and memories of the federal election could be mucking things up a little, but this is likely why Forum is showing a narrower gap than the other firms. This should lead us to believe that the wider margins that the other polls have recorded are probably more realistic.

The gap of 14 points registered by Justason Market Intelligence may be too much on the wide side, however. The firm pegs NDP support at 45% and the Liberals at 31%, a drop of four points for the NDP since their last survey of Apr. 15-23, and a gain of four points for the Liberals. The trends are not very informative, however, as Justason seems to have used only their online panel for this survey, whereas their last poll used a hybrid telephone-online methodology. And since Justason was last in the field at an earlier time than Forum, Ipsos-Reid, and Angus-Reid, comparing the trends from this poll to those others is also not very helpful. But it is interesting to note that Justason is nevertheless recording a narrowing margin, and lower support for the Conservatives. That is indeed an important trend, particularly in terms of Liberal fortunes.

Ipsos-Reid's poll for Global News also showed a narrowing gap, with the NDP falling two points from Ipsos's Apr. 30-May 2 poll to 43%, and the Liberals increasing by two points to 37%. That shrank the margin from 10 points to six, but those changes in support are not statistically significant. The Greens and Conservatives were unchanged at 10% and 7%, respectively.

The last poll of the day, and the most recent, was by Angus-Reid for the Globe and Mail and CTV. It, however, showed a widening margin: the NDP was up four points to 45% and the Liberals were up two points to 36%. But here again the trends are difficult to assess. Angus-Reid changed their methodology to present respondents with an accurate local ballot. That means that people in ridings without a Green or Conservative candidate were not given that option.

Accordingly, the Greens fell three points to 9% and the Conservatives dropped four points to 6%. Was the gain that Angus-Reid recorded for the Liberals and NDP due to shifting support or the accurate ballot? We don't know, but this methodology should provide better results, which may lead us to believe that a margin of this size is more realistic than the one recorded by Forum.

It should be noted that these polls are not particularly contradictory. Having the NDP at either 43% or 45% and the Conservatives between 6% and 8% puts these firms well within each other's margin of error (assuming a probability sample, etc.). The Greens are a little less consistent, with between 8% and 14%, but somewhere around 9% is probably about right. The Liberal numbers are more problematic. With Justason's poll, the difference is 10 points among these four surveys. Even without it, the difference is five points. That is stretching the MOE.

Putting aside the province-wide numbers for a moment, are there any other under-lying trends across the Forum, Ipsos, and Angus-Reid polls (as noted, Justason's previous poll was not in the field at the same time as the last poll of these three firms)?

Regionally, they all show generally stable numbers in metropolitan Vancouver. All three put the NDP at either 44% or 46% and no different than one or two points from their last poll. The Liberals were at either 38% or 41%, with Forum showing the bigger uptick. All three polls showed the NDP with a good lead over the Liberals on Vancouver Island (the Liberals were tightly grouped at either 29% or 32%), and all three showed a drop in Green support (two points for Ipsos, four for Forum, and six for Angus, though all are ostensibly within the MOE). Ipsos and Angus put the NDP and Liberals about even in the Interior and North, but Forum put the Liberals way ahead. What is going on there is less clear.

What about demographically? All three showed a gender gap, but of different magnitudes. Angus-Reid had the NDP up by three points among men, Ipsos-Reid had the Liberals up by four, and Forum had them up by 11. Among women, though, all three had the NDP at either 14 or 15 points over the Liberals. By age group, both Ipsos and Angus had the New Democrats ahead among the oldest (and most enthusiastic) voters, but Forum gave the edge to the Liberals.

On the personal front, Ipsos had Christy Clark up three points on the Best Premier question, giving her 34% to Dix's 31% (-3). Angus-Reid had Dix ahead with 30% (+4) to Clark's 25% (+1). Forum and Angus-Reid had almost identical approval ratings for the two leaders, however. Angus-Reid had Dix at 42% approval to 47% disapproval, and Clark at 33% approval to 61% disapproval. Forum had the split at 41-48 for Dix and 35-57 for Clark. Those may be very important numbers come election day.

So, for all the new polling data we have it would appear that we are left with more questions. Is the margin between the Liberals and New Democrats narrowing, widening, or holding steady? Is the NDP poised for a landslide, or tight win, or a shock? Hopefully the polls to be released within the next 18 hours will clear things up. I have a hunch, though, that they may just confuse us more.

B.C. Liberals narrow gap considerably

Perhaps the debate was better for Christy Clark than most people thought, or perhaps the campaign is finally catching up to Adrian Dix. But the B.C. Liberals have made good gains in the polls and have now narrowed the gap between themselves and the B.C. New Democrats to single-digits.

Some context is needed, however. Trailing by seven points in the polls with less than two weeks to go before the vote is not a position most incumbent governments would want to be in. The forecast considers the odds that the Liberals will be able to close the gap completely by May 14 to be only 7.3%. In fewer than one out of every 10 cases has a party been able to close such a gap in such a short period of time. But those are better than the 50-to-1 odds Clark had only a few weeks ago.

Nevertheless, we are definitely in a new part of the campaign. The New Democrats are still safely ahead of the Liberals but the gap is not nearly as comfortable as it was before. They are now projected to have 43% support, down 3.8 points from the last projection that included polling data up to Apr. 26. The Liberals are up 2.6 points to 35.8%, while the Greens are up 1.4 points to 10.1%. The Conservatives have held steady with 7.8% support.

The ranges have tightened up somewhat due to three new polls being added to the model, and the projected vote ranges do not overlap. But the seat ranges do: the New Democrats are projected to win between 38 and 53 seats, while the Liberals are projected to win between 28 and 46 seats. For the first time in the projection model, the upper range for the Liberals is actually enough to win the election.

More precisely, the New Democrats are projected to win 46 seats and the Liberals 38, a rather close result. With a gap of only eight seats between the two, the projection model now gives the New Democrats a 73.8% chance of winning the most seats if an election were held today, a big change from the 95.2% chance of Apr. 26. Considering the potential for further swings and errors in both the projection model and polls, eight seats is not a very good cushion.

One big advantage the New Democrats have is that they are holding relatively steady in the Vancouver region, where almost half of the province's seats are located. They only dropped 1.5 points there, and are still projected to win 25 seats. Their lead on Vancouver Island has been whittled down, though, with a drop of 7.1 points to 45.8%. The Liberals jumped 7.6 points to 30.9% (the Greens were mostly unchanged), and could now win two seats on the island.

The most important change occurred in the Interior and North. The New Democrats plummeted 8.5 points to 35%, pushing them behind the Liberals. They are up 5.3 points to 41.1%, giving them the lead for the first time in the region since the projection model was launched in November. Accordingly, they are projected to win 22 seats in the area, with only nine going to the New Democrats. The NDP will need to make up ground here.

But the polls are certainly under-estimating the New Democrats and the Liberals. The unadjusted average gives the NDP 40.7% and the Liberals 33.8%, with 12.5% going to the Greens and 10.1% to the Conservatives. But without a full slate (not to mention their disadvantage in money and organisation), it is virtually impossible that the Greens and Conservatives will take that much of the vote. The model assumes that the over-estimation will go the NDP and Liberals proportionately, but if it doesn't the end result could be at the higher or lower ends of the projection ranges.

The forecasts are currently unusable. The polls have moved around so much in the last 12 days that the model considers anything possible. If the polls continue to swing to the degree that they have in the last two weeks, the Liberals could easily be re-elected or catastrophically defeated. The uncertainty and volatility that the last few days have instilled in the model make the result of May 14 impossible to predict with a good degree of confidence. All that can be said is that, with what the polls are currently showing, the New Democrats are in a far superior position than the Liberals and should still be heavily favoured to win.

The poll by Forum Research for The National Post that was released yesterday morning caused the biggest splash, as it put the gap between the New Democrats and Liberals at only four points. But the polls that were subsequently released by Insights West and Angus-Reid show that Forum was not completely out of whack.

Looking at the three polls together, you can see that the differences are marginal.

Forum has not polled in British Columbia since August 2012, so the trends that could be derived from their survey are slim to none. They show a close race in Vancouver (42% to 36% for the NDP) and on Vancouver Island (39% to 33%), while the Liberals were ahead in the Interior and North (37% to 29%).

The survey put the Liberals ahead among those aged 55 and older, while the NDP held a one-point advantage among men and a seven-point edge among women.

A potential problem with the poll, however, is that 48% of people polled who said they voted (or could remember who they voted for) in 2009 cast a ballot for the Liberals, while only 30% did so for the NDP (the 8% result for the Greens was good, the 8% for the Conservatives was not). The actual margin in 2009 was 46% to 42%. The poll under-sampled New Democrats, then, but whether or not Forum weighted for this factor is a mystery. It is probably the reason that Forum has the NDP lower than the other two polls.

Insights West released their poll to News 1130, and found a more significant eight-point gap between the NDP and Liberals. They were last in the field Mar. 26-31, and since then the NDP fell four points and the Liberals gained five. Insights West also showed a closer race in Vancouver (41% to 35%) and a Liberal advantage in the Interior/North (33% to 30%), but not nearly the close race that Forum had found on Vancouver Island (43% to 28%). It does seem, however, that the Liberals are no longer in danger of placing third on the island. Green support was very consistent across these three polls, at between 19% and 21% on Vancouver Island.

Insights West included some numbers on likelihood of voting, finding that the New Democrats had the most certain respondents (97%), while Liberals (93%), Greens (91%), and Conservatives (89%) were somewhat less convinced. If those people who were not certain do not vote, Insight West's eight-point gap turns into a nine-point margin in favour of the NDP.

Angus-Reid's poll for The Globe and Mail and CTV News found similar movement, though their last survey was more recent (Apr. 24-25). They put the NDP down four points to 41% and the Liberals up three points to 34%. Those are probably not statistically significant changes in support, but the trend is in favour of the Liberals over the last few surveys.

Again, Angus-Reid found a closer race in Vancouver (45% to 35%) and a Liberal advantage in the Interior/North (estimated to be 43% to 33%). And like Insights West, a wide gap on Vancouver Island (44% to 28%).

Interestingly, Angus-Reid found that the gender gap had disappeared with the NDP having a seven-point lead among men and an eight-point lead among women. Like Forum (but unlike Insights West), they showed the Liberals doing much better than before among older voters. The demographics are not so bad for the Liberals anymore.

It is undeniable, then, that the race has been tightening up. But it was always supposed to - at least according to the politicians and the pundits (including yours truly). However, Clark is still at a personal disadvantage compared to Dix.

Her approval ratings in the Forum and Angus-Reid polls were almost identical: 34% approval, 56% to 57% disapproval. That is better than some of the numbers Clark had put up in the past, but they are still very bad. She really needs to be at 40% or more approval to be able to win. Because of her personal unpopularity, she keeps the potential for Liberal gains down.

Dix's numbers are not stellar either (37% approval to 44% disapproval for Forum, 41% approval to 47% disapproval for Angus-Reid), but they remain better. And 45% of respondents to Angus-Reid's poll still say their opinion of Clark has worsened, a much higher proportion than those who say their opinion of Dix has worsened. Of note, however, is that Clark now leads Dix on the question of who is best able to handle the economy, something that has not occurred for a very long time. But Dix still leads on other important issues like health care and education, but the economy remains the top campaign issue.

So, it is a race. Clark has gained on Dix but she still trails by a significant margin. It could be that she has momentum and will continue to gain, or it could be that she is peaking now and will end up with the moral victory of having salvaged her party from a mauling. We should have a better idea of which is closer to the truth in a week's time.