Final quick hitters & observations post-election

Winner: Me. They weren't dead on, but they were pretty darn close. To be honest, if the Liberals had of taken care of business in their stronghold of Ontario, I think my predictions would have been even closer. In the end, that's the difference between being the guy who gets a couple of pats on the back for his effort and being famous amongst his peers. lol

Anyway, here are the comparisons:

My national predictions (Seats, % Votes)
CPC 136 (35.7), Lib 87 (27.8), BQ 49 (10.8), NDP 34 (19.9) , Ind 2 (0.9), Grn 0 (4.8)

Actual '08 election results (Seats, % Votes)
CPC 143 (37.63), Lib 76 (26.24), BQ 50 (9.97), NDP 37 (18.20), Ind 2 (0.65) Grn 0 (6.88)

Winner: Conservative leader Stephen Harper. Over these next few weeks and months, I'm certain Harper's leadership (and coming up short on a majority) will be cannon fodder for the press. However, unlike some pundits and Ottawa experts, I see another minority as a gift from heaven for the Tory leader. Why? Well, there are several reasons. Firstly, Harper has the full backing of his own caucus and party, unlike the Liberals who will certainly be re-entering unstable times with another leadership race. If Harper is smart (which I'm pretty sure he is), he will do what most Prime Minister's do in this situation. Pull up a chair and be a spectator to what will almost certainly be internal Liberal infighting. I mean, the negative "anonymous sources" in the Globe and Mail mid-election were pretty much evidence of that. Secondly, for someone who wants to change the country to a more conservative ethos via incrementalism, he has positioned himself perfectly. If you don't think so, just look at Pierre Trudeau's journey through governing. The man changed the face of this country while both losing to a weak leader and forming a minority during unsettling times. So there is hope yet for Harper and his mission. And finally, by not forming a large majority, he avoids doing what many of his conservative predecessors did. That being, coming in quickly and abruptly on a blue wave, scaring the political establishment, and then subsequently being shown the door as a result. So yes folks, there are advantages to being in a minority government after all.

Loser: Green party leader Elizabeth May. Not only did she do herself a disservice by running in Central Nova against political heavyweight Peter MacKay, she weakened her party's vision (and other candidates chances in the election) by getting too caught up in her local battle. Plus, it didn't help when she confused her own party supporters by calling for them to throw their support behind Dion in order to stop Harper. In the end, she ended up coming across as the leader of an interest group who could care less about the party she was running under and more about settling scores. It's hard to believe she wants to come back for more punishment in Central Nova, especially when she knows the Liberals will run a candidate.

Loser: NDP leader Jack Layton. Don't get me wrong, the dipper leader is well liked and universally trusted. Unfortunately, this just won't cut it for Jacko. Why? Well, at the same time last week, Mr. Layton was convincing Canadians that he was not only ready to replace the Liberals as Official Opposition, he was ready to be Prime Minister. Now that the big gains failed to materialize, I'm sure many Canadians will question his sincerity on such things, unless you're a die hard NDP supporter who drinks the orange Koolaid and doesn't consider missing official opposition status by more seats then you won altogether a failed mission.

Anyway, if the Liberals are smart, they will take full advantage of Layton's inability to sell himself as Official Opposition leader and, in turn, reclaim some of that territory on the left.

Loser: Liberal leader Stephane Dion. What more can be said then has already been said? Honestly, for a guy who wore an albatross around his neck for 3 months by trying to sell his Green Shift plan, he didn't do all that bad. And for that, people will probably question Harper's ability to win more then his opponents obvious political shortcomings.

Anyway, if there is one thing that Dion should be commended for, it's that he ran a respectful, policy oriented campaign under tough circumstances. I'm sure the next Liberal leader will find out very quickly that it's no picnic running against the Tory machine on a good day. A leader, if history repeats itself, will likely be an anglophone from outside Quebec. Which is probably not a good thing considering they just regained a pulse in Quebec while suffering their worst electoral defeat in Ontario in quite sometime.

Oh well, back to the drawing board for the Grits I suppose.

Winners: Gilles Duceppe and Danny Williams. The two regions (other then Alberta) where the Tories seat count declined. Let's just say, Duceppe's ability to beat back the conservatives from making addtional gains on his Bloc turf was the TSN turning point of this election. Had he not, Harper would certainly be governing from a clear majority this morning.

Losers: A disengaged and apathetic electorate. I don't often agree with Paul Zed on much of anything, but he put it perfectly last night about the disinterest in this election: "people are just electioned out." Well said, Paul.

For the record, NB turnout was above the national average of 2006 this time around. On the flip side, voter fatigue seems to be the worst in Newfoundland and Labrador. No surprise here since they had Danny-boy running around telling them who they could vote for.

Projection post mortem

Over the past few weeks, I engaged in one of my favourite pastimes - predictions. To aid me, I developed a bit of an aid in the form a projection model. Here I try to evaluate how it did and what its strengths and weaknesses were.

First, its biggest flaw is that it is almost wholly dependant on outside factors. It is a poll-driven machine and, if the polls are not accurate, then it is not accurate.

Here is how the polling worked out vs. the actual result (both contrasted against the 2006 results):

	CPC		Lib		BQ		NDP		Grn
	Poll Avg	Actual	Poll Avg	Actual	Poll Avg	Actual	Poll Avg	Actual	Poll Avg	Actual
Atl	-9.2%	-4.9%	-2.0%	-4.5%	-	-	+3.8%	+3.4%	+7.2%	+3.7%
QC	-4.4%	-2.9%	-0.1%	+3.0%	-0.8%	-4.0%	+3.9%	+4.7%	+1.8%	-0.5%
ON	-0.7%	+4.1%	-5.1%	-6.1%	-	-	+1.3%	-1.2%	+4.9%	+3.3%
Pra	-0.6%	+5.4%	-6.4%	-7.2%	-	-	+3.4%	+0.1%	+5.0%	+2.7%
AB	-7.1%	-0.4%	+3.5%	-3.9%	-	-	+2.9%	+1.0%	+1.8%	+2.3%
BC	+1.5%	+7.1%	-5.6%	-8.3%	-	-	-2.7%	-2.5%	+7.5%	+4.1%
Natl*	-1.9%	+1.3%	-3.6%	-4.0%	-	-	+1.6%	+0.7%	+4.7%	+2.3%

*National numbers excluding the BQ were used to project the 3 northern seats

As you can see, the pollsters were a bit off (or at least my average of their polls was). No pollster got it exactly right, though Angus-Reid came very close in both national and regional numbers.

Using the actual regional results, my model gives the following:
CPC 145
Lib 77
BQ 48
NDP 35
Ind 3

Using only Angus-Reid's poll, my model gives the following:
CPC 141
Lib 76
BQ 49
NDP 39
Oth 3

So, I think I am relatively pleased with the model, even with the slightly off polling results, I seem to have done better than most prognosticators for a change.

Here is a list of the gross error for all the predictions listed on Calgary Grit's round-up and myself:

1. Ekos Predictions (18)


2. Calgary Grit's model (23.6)
3. Barry Kay Seat Projections (24)
4. Andrew Coyne (26)
5. nbpolitico (28)
6. UBC Stock Market (30)
7. David Akin (30)


8. Kady O'Malley (35)
9. Democratic Space (36)
10. Election Prediction Project (38)
11. Scott Reid (40)
12. Andrew Steele (44)

If I had had a crystal ball or a better gut, using the real results would have projected a gross error of 8, while using the best poll (Angus-Reid) would have given an error of 6 - obviously showing that the model needs a bit of work!!

But of course I am forgetting my blogging colleague NBT. Who needs fancy projection models when you've got him? His gross error: 22, good enough for second place! As the prominently displayed link on my other site says, a better prognosticator than I!

Projection history: Final :: Eighth :: Seventh :: Sixth :: Fifth :: Fourth :: Third :: Second :: First :: Methodology

Live blog (sort of)

(all times Atlantic, will go live at 11 when west coast polls close)

9:17 - So much for my model in the Atlantic. As I had feared, Atlantic polls were not localized enough to be of much use. A *huge* CPC drop in Newfoundland and Labrador poisoned the sample. Tories could gain as many as four seats in NB, two in PEI and hold their own or gain one in NS.

9:52 - Huge upset in Miramichi where Charlie Hubbard is defeated handily. Saint John and Moncton are too close to call and my gut would have had them fall to the Tories before Miramichi. Go figure.

10:48 - Tory vote seems to be up in Ontario considerably over the polls, if this holds things could be a lot different than most folks predicted.

10:59 - Current vote totals have the CPC up 9% over the Libs in Ontario, leading in places like Ottawa Centre... if this holds it would be almost certainly a majority government. But it is pretty early.

11:16 - It continues to look good for the Conservatives - I think that CTV might want to retract calling Florida for Dion a Harper minority.

11:38 - Despite a steep Liberal drop in Ontario, Gerard Kennedy is pulling ahead in his race. He could be the only Liberal gain in that province.

11:59 - Kennedy declared the winner by CBC, ahead by nearly 2000 votes. If there is a Liberal leadership race which is largely a rematch of the last one, expect a major Kennedy speaking point to be that he ran against an incumbent and picked up the only Liberal gain in Ontario while Ignatieff, Rae and Hall Findlay all ran in ultra safe Liberal strongholds.

12:10 - Peter Kent pulls ahead in Thornhill? Would be very interesting if that holds.

12:15 - Who is this independent James Ford in Edmonton--Sherwood Park? He keeps edging in and out of the lead.

Ridings to watch

Here are nbpolitico's ridings to watch for the 2008 federal election. Polls are closed in the Atlantic and I am watching the returns. I'll follow the Election Act and not let you in on the secrets, but in the mean time, here are the seats that my projections showed within 5 points or "the ridings to watch" (parties listed in the order the projection model shows them placing):

1. St. John's East: NDP vs. Lib
2. Central Nova: NDP vs. Grn
3. Dartmouth--Cole Harbour: Lib vs. NDP
4. Honoré-Mercier: CPC vs. BQ
5. LaSalle--Émard: BQ vs. Lib
6. Outremont: Lib vs. NDP
7. Rimouski-Neigette--Témiscouata--Les Basques: Ind vs. BQ vs. Lib
8. Algoma--Manitoulin--Kapuskasing: NDP vs. Lib
9. Beaches--East York: NDP vs. Lib
10. Brampton West: Lib vs. CPC
11. Brant: CPC vs. Lib
12. Etobicoke--Lakeshore: Lib vs. CPC
13. Guelph: CPC vs. Lib
14. Kenora: Lib vs. NDP vs. CPC
15. London West: CPC vs. Lib
16. Mississauga South: CPC vs. Lib
17. Mississauga--Erindale: Lib vs. CPC
18. Newmarket--Aurora: CPC vs. Lib
19. Oak Ridges--Markham: Lib vs. CPC
20. Oakville: CPC vs. Lib
21. Oshawa: CPC vs. NDP
22. Ottawa South: Lib vs. CPC
23. Sudbury: Lib vs. NDP
24. Thunder Bay--Rainy River: NDP vs. Lib
25. Welland: NDP vs. Lib vs. CPC
26. Churchill: NDP vs. Lib
27. Saint-Boniface: CPC vs. Lib
28. Winnipeg South Centre: Lib vs. CPC
29. Palliser: CPC vs. NDP
30. Regina--Qu'Appelle: CPC vs. NDP
31. Saskatoon--Rosetown--Biggar: NDP vs. CPC
32. Edmonton--Strathcona: NDP vs. CPC
33. Burnaby--Douglas: NDP vs. CPC
34. Esquimalt--Juan de Fuca: Lib vs. CPC vs. NDP
35. Newton--North Delta: Lib vs. CPC vs. NDP
36. North Vancouver: CPC vs. Lib
37. Richmond: CPC vs. Lib
38. Vancouver Island North: NDP vs. CPC
39. Vancouver Kingsway: Lib vs. NDP
40. Vancouver Quadra: Lib vs. CPC
41. Nunavut: Lib vs. CPC

Enjoy!

Final projection

After a little break for Thanksgiving weekend, here is the final update based on 7 new polls.

Angus Reid - Oct 8-10 (0.71 weight)
EKOS - Oct 10-12 (1.00 weight)
Ipsos-Reid - Oct 7-9 (0.57 weight)
Nanos Research - Oct 10-12 [ON, QC, Atl only] (1.00 weight)
Strategic Counsel - Oct 10-11 [ON, QC only] (0.93 weight)
Harris-Decima -Oct 9-12 [ON, QC, Atl, BC only] (0.93 weight)
Segma - Oct 5-9 [ON, QC, Atl, BC only] (0.43 weight)


National results (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 129 (+5, -4), Lib 85 (-18, +3), BQ 50 (-1, +1), NDP 41 (+12, n/c), Ind 3 (+2, n/c), Grn 0 (n/c, n/c)

Atlantic (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
Lib 22 (+2, n/c), NDP 6 (+3, n/c), CPC 3 (-6, n/c), Ind 1 (+1, n/c), Grn 0 (n/c, n/c)

Quebec (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
BQ 50 (-1, +1), Lib 12 (+1, n/c), CPC 11 (+1, n/c), Ind 2 (+1, n/c), NDP 0 (n/c, -1)

Ontario (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 47 (+7, +1), Lib 41 (-13, n/c), NDP 18 (+6, -1)

Saskatchewan and Manitoba (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 21 (+1, n/c), NDP 5 (+2, n/c), Lib 2 (-3, n/c)

Alberta (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 27 (-1, -1), NDP 1 (+1, +1)

British Columbia (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 20 (+3, -4), NDP 10 (n/c, +1), Lib 6 (-3, +3)

North (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
Lib 2 (n/c, n/c), NDP 1 (n/c, n/c)

A few remarks...

The final projection echoes the buzz that the NDP will pick up a seat in Alberta and the conventional wisdom that Elizabeth May will lose in Central Nova - however it shows both of these things happening by less than a percentage point. In other words, it says these things with no certainty whatsoever.

We also show a Conservatve collapse in Atlantic Canada offset by gains in Ontario and British Columbia, allowing them to essentially break even, while the NDP grows at the expense of Liberal totals.

I've posted a chart of which seats are projected for each party and the whole projection system for your interest and in the interests of accountability.

No matter who for, don't forget to vote tomorrow. I hope you enjoyed these projection and the musings of NBT and I over the past few weeks. Thanks for stopping by.

Today's chart:


NOTE: These projections do not reflect the wishes, nor predictions, of the author. They are based on simple math using the criteria outlined here and here.

NBT's 2008 Election Projections

National results (Seats, % Votes)
CPC 136 (35.7), Lib 87 (27.8), BQ 49 (10.8), NDP 34 (19.9) , Ind 2 (0.9), Grn 0 (4.8)

Atlantic Canada (Seats, % Votes)
Lib 22 (35.9) , CPC 6 (29.7), NDP 3 (18.3), Ind 1 (0.9), Grn 0 (5.6)

Quebec (Seats, % Votes)
BQ 49 (41.0), Lib 15 (27.5) , CPC 10 (21.1) , Ind 1 (1.2) , NDP 0 (13.6)

Ontario (Seats, % Votes)
CPC 49 (36.9) , Lib 40 (32.3), NDP 17 (19.5) Grn 0 (5.4)

Saskatchewan and Manitoba (Seats, % Votes)
CPC 25 (42.3), NDP 2 (21.5), Lib 1 (22.3) Grn 0 (4.1)

Alberta (Seats, % Votes)
CPC 28 (54.4), Lib 0 (20.5), NDP 0 (18.7) Grn 0 (3.9)

British Columbia (Seats, % Votes)
CPC 18 (41.8), NDP 11 (17.2), Lib 7 (28.8) Grn (6.7)

North (Seats, % Votes)
Lib 2 (38.5), NDP 1 (30.9) CPC 0 (21.6)

A few quick speculations...

There was much chatter around Jack Layton and whether or not he and his NDP party would replace the Liberals as Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. Several polls for much of the campaign showed that Layton was one of the most popular party leaders in Canada ahead of Dion, May and Duceppe. Nonetheless, he will not be successful in translating this into electoral success, much like Broadbent in '88, since I believe the Liberals will reap most of the benefits from an impending Tory majority. In other words, a fair size chunk of last minute, undecided voters will jump over to the Liberals in order to stop Harper.

You could say that New Democrat Thomas Mulclair's by-election win in Outremont was anything but routine, but one thing that may surprise the dippers once again on this one is how short lived his victory will end up. Liberals regain their stronghold tonight and put an end to the NDP's dreams of forming a modest caucus in La belle province.

Liberals make it a clean sweep of Atlantic Canadian islands (Newfoundland, Cape Breton Island and Prince Edward Island). First time this has happened since confederation.

Nova Scotia and New Brunswick keep the status quo, with the exception of electing Bill Casey as an independent and electing one more Tory to the Atlantic NB caucus. Oh yeah, and another thing, for those that thought Pictou-Antigonish-Guysborough (now Central Nova) would be close, you are wrong. Peter in a cakewalk (1000+ vote margin).

Aside from Central Nova, here are 15 ridings to keep your eye on tonight. Anyway, for all those that dropped by Paint the Political Picture, nbpolitico and I can't say how much we appreciate all your comments, opinions and discussion.

Oh, and one last thing, I second this statement by Tim Powers: "... if you do one thing today, make it out to vote. I am just walking over to do it myself now. There is much at stake in this election. There are clear choices. Get some skin in the game and vote.A big congratulations to everyone from every party who put their name on the ballot. It is a courageous and commendable thing to do. Most of us have no clue about the sacrifices you have made to try to serve Canada. Good on you all. Politics matters and you have made the effort to make a difference." That said, have a great election night folks!!

Morer

Not only are Gerry and I close in policy thought, it would seem that we have the same predictions and gut feelings as well. So if we're wrong, we'll still end up being right.

Don't expect voter turnout to break any records after tonight's count comes in. As I see it, it will most likely decline from the improved 2006 levels. Probably around sixty per cent or so...maybe even lower. I mean, honestly, when there's that many people out there who aren't motivated by any of the current political leaders, it's bound to happen.

Eighth projection

For today's update. We are using the following polls:

Angus Reid - Oct 6-7 (0.79 weight)
EKOS - Oct 7-9 (1.00 weight)
Nanos Research - Oct 7-9 [ON, QC, Atl only] (1.00 weight)
Harris-Decima -Oct 6-9 [ON, QC, Atl, BC only] (0.93 weight)

National results (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 133 (+9, n/c), Lib 82 (-21, -1), BQ 49 (-2, n/c), NDP 41 (+12, +2), Ind 3 (+2, n/c), Grn 0 (n/c, -1)

Atlantic (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
Lib 22 (+2, n/c), NDP 6 (+3, +1), CPC 3 (-6, n/c), Ind 1 (+1, n/c), Grn 0 (n/c, -1)

Quebec (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
BQ 49 (-2, n/c), Lib 12 (+1, -1), CPC 11 (+1, n/c), Ind 2 (+1, n/c), NDP 1 (+1, +1)

Ontario (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 46 (+6, n/c), Lib 41 (-13, n/c), NDP 19 (+7, n/c)

Saskatchewan and Manitoba (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 21 (+1, +2), NDP 5 (+2, +1), Lib 2 (-3, -1)

Alberta (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 28 (n/c, n/c)

British Columbia (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 24 (+7, +1), NDP 9 (-1, -1), Lib 3 (-6, +1)

North (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
Lib 2 (n/c, n/c), NDP 1 (n/c, n/c)

A few remarks...

The race remains stable, the widely covered CTV Atlantic interview with Dion last night may cause some final day shifts however.

Elizabeth May has fallen back in today's update, Central Nova shows as: 37.5% NDP, 36.8% Grn.

Tom Mulcair has pulled ahead in Outrement, the model shows that result as: 33.4% NDP, 33.0% Lib.

Today's chart:


I'll continue to update daily until October 14. I welcome your suggestions if you think any aspect of the formula needs to be adjusted.

NOTE: These projections do not reflect the wishes, nor predictions, of the author. They are based on simple math using the criteria outlined here and here.

Seventh projection

For today's update. We are using the following polls:

Angus Reid - Oct 6-7 (0.93 weight)
EKOS - Oct 6-8 (1.00 weight)
Ipsos-Reid - Sep 30-Oct 2 (0.14 weight)
Nanos Research - Oct 6-8 [ON, QC, Atl only] (1.00 weight)
Harris-Decima -Oct 5-8 [ON, QC, Atl, BC only] (0.93 weight)

National results (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 133 (+9, +3), Lib 83 (-20, -1), BQ 49 (-2, n/c), NDP 39 (+10, -3), Ind 3 (+2, n/c), Grn 1 (+1, +1)

Atlantic (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
Lib 22 (+2, n/c), NDP 5 (+2, -1), CPC 3 (-6, n/c), Ind 1 (+1, n/c), Grn 1 (+1, +1)

Quebec (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
BQ 49 (-2, n/c), Lib 13 (+2, n/c), CPC 11 (+1, n/c), Ind 2 (+1, n/c), NDP 0 (n/c, n/c)

Ontario (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 46 (+6, n/c), Lib 41 (-13, n/c), NDP 19 (+7, n/c)

Saskatchewan and Manitoba (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 21 (+1, +2), NDP 4 (+1, -1), Lib 3 (-2, -1)

Alberta (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 28 (n/c, n/c)

British Columbia (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 24 (+7, +1), NDP 10 (n/c, -1), Lib 2 (-7, n/c)

North (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
Lib 2 (n/c, n/c), NDP 1 (n/c, n/c)

A few remarks...

This poll suggests things are beginning to stabilize, with no change in Quebec (for the second day), no change in Ontario and no change or more than 1 seat per party in any other region.

Elizabeth May pulls back into the lead in this update, despite our slightly-revised, slightly-less-favourable formula for her circumstances. The model shows May at 36.7% and the NDP at 35.9%. Due to the Conservative collapse in Atlantic Canada in recent polls, it shows MacKay at 26.7%.

Today for the first time, a crude graphic to show you were the projections have moved since we started a week ago:


I'll continue to update daily until October 14. I welcome your suggestions if you think any aspect of the formula needs to be adjusted.

NOTE: These projections do not reflect the wishes, nor predictions, of the author. They are based on simple math using the criteria outlined here and here.

In Quotes: The conflicting arguments of Jim Flaherty and the Tories

Jim Flaherty on Corporate Welfare: "I don't believe in corporate welfare or in propping up failing companies," he said, rejecting any sort of direct industrial aid or investment as a response to mill closures in New Brunswick.

[Source: The Telegraph Journal, December 13th, 2007]

Ah, but that was then, this is now: "Conservative Leader Stephen Harper pledged $400-million for the hard-hit aerospace and auto sectors today as he unveiled his relatively meagre campaign platform and tried to dispel the impression that he's done little to respond to fresh economic gloom and market turmoil."

[Source: The Toronto Globe & Mail, October 7, 2008]

Jim Flaherty on Bailing out Banks: "We are not looking at a rescue package for banks," he told reporters. "We are not looking at creating any additional risk for taxpayers."

[Source: The Toronto Globe & Mail, October 9, 2008]

Excuse me, if I don't hold my breath, Mr. Flaherty.

Update

Is it me, or is McKenna starting to sound a lot like another Paul Martiin Jr. Maybe he thinks he can sweep to power on the exact same policy agenda as Martin, the only difference being he will be popular with his party. Now, if only Dion will get out of the way. lol

Update II

Not to worry, it's not a bailout: "the plan was one of the many tools available to government help credit conditions, and shows the Canadian government is acting in advance instead of waiting for a crisis to hit the Canadian financial system."

Can't say I didn't warn ya.

Sixth projection

There is a slight revision to the projection method starting today and going forward. In ridings were a party is not fielding a candidate; rather than ignore the polling fluctuations for the non-contesting party, they will be distributed in the same way that party's 2006 votes were distributed.

For instance, in Central Nova, the Liberals are not running and have endorsed the Greens. To create a baseline for the projection, I distributed 60% of the Liberal vote to the Greens and the remaining 40% proportionally among the Conservatives and New Democrats. Today's polling average shows the Liberals down 3.5% in Atlantic Canada from their 2006 result, so I shave 60% of 3.5% off of the Greens and the balance proportionally off of the other two parties. I will use this method for the other 3 ridings where a party has opted to endorse another candidate today and in future projections.

With that business out of the way, on to today's update. We are using the following polls:

Angus Reid - Oct 6-7 (1.00 weight)
EKOS - Oct 5-7 (0.93 weight)
Ipsos-Reid - Sep 30-Oct 2 (0.36 weight)
Nanos Research - Oct 5-7 [ON, QC, Atl only] (0.93 weight)
Harris-Decima -Oct 4-7 [ON, QC, Atl, BC only] (0.86 weight)

National results (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 130 (+6, -6), Lib 84 (-19, +3), BQ 49 (-2, n/c), NDP 42 (+13, +4), Ind 3 (+2, n/c), Grn 0 (n/c, -1)

Atlantic (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
Lib 22 (+2, +4), NDP 6 (+3, +2), CPC 3 (-6, -5), Ind 1 (+1, n/c), Grn 0 (n/c, -1)

Quebec (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
BQ 49 (-2, n/c), Lib 13 (+2, n/c), CPC 11 (+1, n/c), Ind 2 (+1, n/c), NDP 0 (n/c, n/c)

Ontario (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 46 (+6, +2), Lib 41 (-13, -2), NDP 19 (+7, n/c)

Saskatchewan and Manitoba (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 19 (-1, -3), NDP 5 (+2, +2), Lib 4 (-1, +1)

Alberta (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 28 (n/c, n/c)

British Columbia (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 23 (+6, n/c), NDP 11 (+1, n/c), Lib 2 (-7, n/c)

North (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
Lib 2 (n/c, n/c), NDP 1 (n/c, n/c)

A few remarks...

Polls show a huge Liberal resurgence in Atlantic Canada, particularly in the Nanos poll which shows them at 50%! Not sure if this is real or a rogue poll combined with a series of polls with high margins of error. We'll see in the coming days.

Polling has otherwise stablized, with the Conservatives moving up from their low yesterday in Ontario and no change at all in Quebec, Alberta, British Columbia or the North.

Thanks to our revised formula, and strong numbers for the NDP in the Atlantic, the Greens are now shown to be losing Central Nova by 2.7% to the NDP with Peter MacKay finishing a distant third.

I'll continue to update daily until October 14. I welcome your suggestions if you think any aspect of the formula needs to be adjusted.

NOTE: These projections do not reflect the wishes, nor predictions, of the author. They are based on simple math using the criteria outlined here and here.

Day 32: Quick hitters are back baby!

Loser: Moi. For stating the "reverse coattail" strategy had no chance for success. Not only did it work in stabilizing Dion's base support, it has now put him in a position where he can bring some of the marginal ridings along for the ride on his own coattails. Yes, I realize there will be a lot of folks out there who will say it had nothing to do with the Liberal strategy and all to do with Harper's own self-inflicted wounds; even so, you still can't discount the fact that the Liberals strategy worked in keeping them around to fight another day.

Policy loser: Conservative platform. Not only is it late coming, there are way to many pictures (some forty in all of Harper photo ops). Anyway, let Macleans' editor Andrew Coyne explain (since I am lock, stock and barrel in agreement): "Much of it is old news, having been unveiled already in the course of the campaign (or indeed announced in previous budgets). Some of it is wildly wrong — adding yet another regional development agency, pouring yet more subsidies into the auto and aerospace sinkholes..." Read more.

Winner: Conservative Peter Mackay for having his mom come out in the paper as a "Raging Granny" and anti-war advocate. There's no question this will help position him as a Tory who was brought up by someone with considerable empathy and understanding. And for someone in a defense portfolio who needs to court Liberals in that riding to win, it's not a bad thing and doesn't hurt. Plus, when your leader is struggling with his own "empathy deficit" at a national level (L. Ian coined the phrase), you need to pull out all the stops. Keep your eyes on nbpolitico's daily polling in Central Nova, this one is definitely going to be close.

Funny, I see Harper is now playing the mom card.

Winner: Obviously Liberal leader Stephane Dion for getting up off the mat and somehow making this thing interesting. Remember, many big name conservatives in 2003 didn't step up to plate and run because they thought Harper would get waxed by juggernaut Paul Martin. Well, could the same thing happen in 2008? Let me tell you, if it does, you can all but kiss a possible Frank McKenna prime ministerial run goodbye as he doesn't have the years to wait it out since he is already in his late 60s. Anyway, what else can be said other than minority governments definitely bite for aspiring leaders.

















Winners: Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe and NL Premier Danny Williams. I don't agree with their tactics (that is for sure), but as in love and war, in politics all is fair game and it would seem their very aggressive and negative ABC campaigns are getting through to the electorate in both of their perspective provinces. And with Harper needing to breakthrough big time in Quebec, he can't be pleased with this. Let's hope, for his sake, it doesn't come down to those lost NL seats and the one squandered in Cumberland-Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.

Losers: CRA pollsters for issuing an obvious rogue poll (and then trying to hide that fact). With federal Liberal support increasing dramatically in every poll over the last week (see Harris/Decima, Nanos, Strategic Counsel's perception numbers), they come out bragging in the Telegraph Journal (who co-sponsored the poll btw) about how their data projects conservatives to pick up seats in New Brunswick. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see this scenario pan out just as much as the next Tory, but it's a little hackish to believe that it is so, esdpecially when there is so much data to suggest otherwise. I mean honestly, anyone that would put a great deal of weight on just one week of polling with a week left of critical campaigning, is a little naive to say the least. Time to go to a rolling nightly or a weekly one, CRA. Either that, or stay out of the game when elections come around.

Fifth projection (or yesterday's numbers, today)

Due to technical difficulties, I didn't get yesterday's update posted. Here it is this morning, with another to follow this evening with today's polls. For this projection, I used the following polls:

Angus Reid - Oct 2-3 (0.64 weight)
EKOS - Oct 4-6 (1.00 weight)
Ipsos-Reid - Sep 30-Oct 2 (0.43 weight)
Nanos Research - Oct 4-6 [ON, QC, Atl only] (1.00 weight)
Strategic Counsel - Sep 28-29 [ON, QC only] (0.07 weight)
Harris-Decima -Oct 3-6 [ON, QC, Atl, BC only] (0.93 weight)

National results (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 136 (+12, -3), Lib 81 (-22, +6), BQ 49 (-2, n/c), NDP 38 (+9, -3), Grn 1 (+1, n/c), Ind 3 (+2, n/c)

Atlantic (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
Lib 18 (-2, +1), CPC 8 (-1, n/c), NDP 4 (+1, -1), Grn 1 (+1, n/c), Ind 1 (+1, n/c)

Quebec (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
BQ 49 (-2, n/c), Lib 13 (+2, n/c), CPC 11 (+1, n/c), Ind 2 (+1, n/c), NDP 0 (n/c, n/c)

Ontario (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 44 (+4, -4), Lib 43 (-11, +4), NDP 19 (+7, n/c)

Saskatchewan and Manitoba (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 22 (+2, -1), Lib 3 (-2, +1), NDP 3 (n/c, n/c)

Alberta (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 28 (n/c, n/c)

British Columbia (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 23 (+6, +2), NDP 11 (+1, -2), Lib 2 (-7, n/c)

North (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
Lib 2 (n/c, n/c), NDP 1 (n/c, n/c)

A few remarks...

The Conservatives have slipped again, losing 4 seats to Liberals in Ontario bringing that province essentially to a draw. Their losses were however somewhat offset by gains in BC.

The race in Outremont, Quebec remains close, though, for the first time, it hasn't changed hands in a projection. This edition shows the Liberals increasing their lead from 0.3% to 0.37%.

All three new polls in this projection show the Conservatives either tied (1) or behind (2) in Ontario, they retain a 1 seat lead in this projection but that is largely due to their strength in older polling. If the trend continues, the Conservatives are almost certain to lose their Ontario lead in the projection tonight. However, they formed a government with a 14 seat deficit in Ontario last time, unless the bottom really falls out, it seems likely they'll still have some (marginal) gains in Ontario, though the trend would show them still finishing second, just a stronger second than last time.

I'll continue to update daily until October 14. I welcome your suggestions if you think any aspect of the formula needs to be adjusted.

A question for readers (repeated)

There is a slight glitch right now for the projection model in those four ridings where a party is not contesting and endorsing another candidate. The base number for those ridings had the non-contesting party at 0, as they should be, but when the polling data is entered, that number moves, sometimes into negative territory.

*new* No one has answered this, so I wanted to show how it would affect the results, the three options are as follows, with the results as of this projection in brackets:

1. Disregard the number for the non-contesting party (Central Nova: Grn 36%, NDP 36%, CPC 34%, Lib -5%) [what I have been doing];
2. Distribute the gain or loss in the same proportion as I did with the 2006 votes (NDP 34%, CPC 33%, Grn 33%); or
3. Distribute the gain or loss to the candidate the non-contesting party has endorsed? (Central Nova: NDP 35%, CPC 34%, Grn 31%)

NOTE: These projections do not reflect the wishes, nor predictions, of the author. They are based on simple math using the criteria outlined here and here.

In tough times, great leaders, including Harper, need to be challenged

Full disclosure: I skipped the Canadian English debate on Thursday night to catch the US Vice-Presidential debate (although, I'm sure I wasn't the only one). Anyway, the debate went along quite smoothly IMO for what was billed as a possible shootout by the mainstream media. As well, I thought both veep candidates showed well enough to claim victory at the end of the day. But aside from that, what struck me as most interesting was Joe Biden's response to the moderator's question regarding what the role of the vice president would be? He said:

With regard to the role of vice president, I had a long talk, as I'm sure the governor did with her principal, in my case with Barack. Let me tell you what Barack asked me to do. I have a history of getting things done in the United States Senate. John McCain would acknowledge that. My record shows that on controversial issues. I would be the point person for the legislative initiatives in the United States Congress for our administration. I would also, when asked if I wanted a portfolio, my response was, no. But Barack Obama indicated to me he wanted me with him to help him govern. So every major decision he'll be making, I'll be sitting in the room to give my best advice. He's president, not me, I'll give my best advice.

And one of the things he said early on when he was choosing, he said he picked someone who had an independent judgment and wouldn't be afraid to tell him if he disagreed. That is sort of my reputation, as you know. I look forward to working with Barack and playing a very constructive role in his presidency, bringing about the kind of change this country needs.

It's interesting that Senator Biden said that "he wouldn't be afraid to tell him [Barack] if he disagreed." Why? Because that's exactly the kind of veep Obama said he was looking for before the caucus season even started back in December. His exact words were:

I want somebody who can be an outstanding president, should something happen to me. I want somebody who’s got integrity and I want somebody who has independence. I want somebody who will tell me when they disagree with me. [...] I don’t like having a lot of ‘yes’ people around me who are just telling me what I want to hear all the time.

I agree wholeheartedly as all great leaders need someone who has the independence and strength to push them out of their comfort zone from time-to-time. That said, with a few pollsters indicating that the Tory numbers are on the decline both nationally and in Quebec/Ontario, has the Prime Minister done himself a disservice by surrounding himself with "yes people", not to mention the fact that he has limited a talented caucus to mere talking points at a time when the country requires him to be challenged? I don't know about you, but I see this as a major problem for him moving forward. Or maybe I'm mistaken, and he does have someone close to him with the gonads to set him straight on both policy and strategy. Anybody willing to give it a shot on just who that particular person may be?

Quick hint: it's not Spector, Brodie, Kinsella or Flannagan. That is for sure.

Fourth projection

For today's update, we are using the following polls:

Angus Reid - Oct 2-3 (0.79 weight)
EKOS - Oct 3-5 (1.00 weight)
Ipsos-Reid - Sep 30-Oct 2 (0.57 weight)
Nanos Research - Oct 3-5 [ON, QC, Atl only] (1.00 weight)
Strategic Counsel - Sep 28-29 [ON, QC only] (0.21 weight)
Harris-Decima -Oct 2-5 [ON, QC, Atl, BC only] (0.93 weight)

National results (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 139 (+15, -10), Lib 75 (-28, +5), BQ 49 (-2, n/c), NDP 41 (+12, +5), Grn 1 (+1, n/c), Ind 3 (+2, n/c)

Atlantic (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
Lib 17 (-3, n/c), CPC 8 (-1, -1), NDP 5 (+2, +1), Grn 1 (+1, n/c), Ind 1 (+1, n/c)

Quebec (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
BQ 49 (-2, n/c), Lib 13 (+2, +1), CPC 11 (+1, n/c), Ind 2 (+1, n/c), NDP 0 (n/c, -1)

Ontario (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 48 (+8, -9), Lib 39 (-15, +7), NDP 19 (+7, +2)

Saskatchewan and Manitoba (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 23 (+3, n/c), NDP 3 (n/c, n/c), Lib 2 (-3, n/c)

Alberta (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 28 (n/c, n/c)

British Columbia (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 21 (+4, +1), NDP 13 (+3, +3), Lib 2 (-7, -4)

North (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
Lib 1 (n/c, +1), NDP 1 (n/c, n/c), CPC 0 (n/c, -1)

A few remarks...

The Conservatives have, after enjoying a few strong days of polling, slipped back essentially to where they stood in my first projection 4 days ago (that projection showed 142-72-49-42-3-0), far from majority territory.

The race in Outremont, Quebec is one of the closest and volatile in this election according to the model. It has changed hands in every single projection so far. Presently, it shows as going Liberal by 0.3%.

In Ontario, both Nanos and Harris-Decima (two of our three new polls), show the Conservatives slipping into second place which has hurt their totals there. The NDP have also surged to 19 seats, thanks to a projected-near-sweep of Northern Ontario.

Despite a resurgance yesterday, the Liberals have slipped back to just two seats in British Columbia.

I'll continue to update daily until October 14. I welcome your suggestions if you think any aspect of the formula needs to be adjusted.

A question for readers (repeated)

There is a slight glitch right now for the projection model in those four ridings where a party is not contesting and endorsing another candidate. The base number for those ridings had the non-contesting party at 0, as they should be, but when the polling data is entered, that number moves, sometimes into negative territory.

Should I:

1. Disregard the number for the non-contesting party (what I have been doing);
2. Distribute the gain or loss in the same proportion as I did with the 2006 votes; or
3. Distribute the gain or loss to the candidate the non-contesting party has endorsed?

NOTE: These projections do not reflect the wishes, nor predictions, of the author. They are based on simple math using the criteria outlined here and here.

Third projection

For today's update, we are using the following polls:

Angus Reid - Oct 2-3 (1.00 weight)
EKOS - Sep 30-Oct 2 (0.79 weight)
Ipsos-Reid - Sep 30-Oct 2 (0.79 weight)
Nanos Research - Oct 1-3 [ON, QC, Atl only] (0.93 weight)
Strategic Counsel - Sep 28-29 [ON, QC only] (0.43 weight)
Harris-Decima -Sep 30-Oct 3 [ON, QC, Atl, BC only] (0.86 weight)

National results (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 149 (+25, -3), Lib 70 (-33, +3), BQ 49 (-2, n/c), NDP 36 (+7, n/c), Grn 1 (+1, n/c), Ind 3 (+2, n/c)

Atlantic (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
Lib 17 (-3, n/c), CPC 9 (n/c, n/c), NDP 4 (+1, n/c), Grn 1 (+1, n/c), Ind 1 (+1, n/c)

Quebec (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
BQ 49 (-2, n/c), Lib 12 (+1, -1), CPC 11 (+1, n/c), Ind 2 (+1, n/c), NDP 1 (+1, +1)

Ontario (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 57 (+17, -1), Lib 32 (-22, +1), NDP 17 (+5, n/c)

Saskatchewan and Manitoba (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 23 (+3, +1), NDP 3 (n/c, n/c), Lib 2 (-3, -1)

Alberta (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 28 (n/c, n/c)

British Columbia (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 20 (+3, -3), NDP 10 (n/c, -1), Lib 6 (-3, +4)

North (change vs. 2006, change vs. last projection)
CPC 1 (+1, n/c), Lib 1 (-1, n/c), NDP 1 (n/c, n/c)

A few remarks...

In the Atlantic, after a few days of roller-coaster, the numbers seem to have stablized. Elizabeth May stays ahead in Central Nova, though by a more narrow margin; May is now 2.08% ahead of MacKay.

In Quebec, this projection shows Mulcair pulling back into the lead for the NDP Outremont by only 0.99%.

The Liberals have surged back to nearly their 2006 results in BC after flirting with a wipeout in the first few projections.

I'll continue to update daily until October 14. I welcome your suggestions if you think any aspect of the formula needs to be adjusted.

A question for readers

There is a slight glitch right now for the projection model in those four ridings where a party is not contesting and endorsing another candidate. The base number for those ridings had the non-contesting party at 0, as they should be, but when the polling data is entered, that number moves, sometimes into negative territory.

Should I:

1. Disregard the number for the non-contesting party (what I have been doing);
2. Distribute the gain or loss in the same proportion as I did with the 2006 votes; or
3. Distribute the gain or loss to the candidate the non-contesting party has endorsed?

NOTE: These projections do not reflect the wishes, nor predictions, of the author. They are based on simple math using the criteria outlined here and here.