05.30.2014 08:07 AM

Ipsos’ numbers + H&K’s ridiculous seat projection widget =

This.

I don’t believe it, myself, but H&K’s thing fun to play with I guess (but just remember, kids, Hill and Knowlton are the Satanic overlords who brought us the Persian Gulf War).

My take, in easy-to-digest bullets:

  • No one is paying attention at all.
  • The people who are paying attention find the choices uninspiring.
  • None of the parties have much money to spend.
  • All of the parties are exhausted by the length of this campaign.
  • There is no single galvanizing issue…
  • Turnout will therefore be very low.
  • Low turnout, low engagement always favours the conservative option (which is why they like vote suppression so much).

So Hudak had an unhappy get-together with the Globe and Mail editorial board, according to Canada’s most-boring newspaper columnist?

Big deal.  Harper has won successive victories by flipping the bird to those of us who make up the news media. For Conservatives and conservatives, being hated by ink-stained wretches and wretchesses is a good thing.

So, again: I don’t see a majority for Hudak. ¬†But if he has a good debate (and if Horwath does, too, and she likely will) – and if his GOTV is superior (and it likely will be) – a PC minority appears to be in the cards.

Less than two weeks to go. That debate is going to be pretty important – if anybody bothers to watch it, that is.

.

32 Comments

  1. Matt says:

    How can they make seat predictions just based on overall support levels?

    Wouldn’t you need to poll each individual riding to see how efficient the support level is?

    • !o! says:

      If it’s a good calculator, they will do what models do, make a calculation it based on vote swing from the last election on a per-riding basis.

      You compare overall or regional support with support at the last election, calculate the % support change from last election for each party, and apply that to individual riding totals. It’s not perfect, but it draws some kind of picture.

    • jeff316 says:

      Poorly is the answer!

      t is missing the local dynamics. It has some astonishingly low numbers for the Liberals throughout. It has the PCs winning Guelph. It has the NDP not only keeping all their Toronto seats, but adding one! It has the PCs getting 30% of the vote in Windsor West. I don’t think the NDP will win Windsor West, but they’ll sure as heck get more than 23 percent of the vote there and certainly will not come third.

      It’s too bad – there are a plethora of prediction websites out there and these guys put one together that just extrapolates raw numbers province-wide. It not only doesn’t add anything, it detracts from the whole exercise.

  2. doconnor says:

    I don’t see how Hudak can have a good debate without dealing with his Million Job numbers, and I don’t see how he can deal with the Million Job numbers without destroying his entire campaign.

    I don’t see the Liberals or NDP tolerating a Hudak government even for a second.

    • Lance says:

      This million job/100k cut thing isn’t something he did on the fly. The last sitting of government was one big election campaign; I seriously doubt that this wasn’t well thought out.

      And I don’t see an NDP Opposition hypocritically tolerating another Liberal government based upon their rationale for voting to defeat it in the first place.

      • doconnor says:

        It sounds like you are unaware that the data he release to support his Million Jobs claim they mix up person-years of employment with “jobs” so the number of jobs he expects to create with 8 times lower then states (and is less then the 100,000 jobs he plans to cut). This is the problem that Hudak has to deal with. The fact that it was well thought out means it was more likely an attempt fraud then an incompetent mistake.

        In a minority situation, the NDP would have to tolerate either Liberal or Conservative government. Given the alternative, they could justify supporting the Liberals if they get cabinet seats where they can claim to watch over government spending.

        • jeff316 says:

          The NDP does not want Cabinet seats. They want to dictate the agenda and let another party take the fall when it does not get implemented. The NDP will work with either party. I wouldn’t be surprised to see some sort of plan (shhh don’t say coalition) hashed out that keeps a stable minority going for another 2-3 years.

        • Matt says:

          So does Wynne’s favorite “arms length” group Metrolinx. They’re claiming 800,000 to 900,000 jobs created wint their Big Move transit plan.

          It to is person years, not jobs.

      • GSW says:

        I disagree and can envisage Horwath again shoring up another Wynne minority government “to save 100,000 public service jobs”… notwithstanding the Liberals are drenched in corruption and incompetence. Horwath will in effect whitewash the Liberals of all their past sins … because supporting a Con government would decimate, disintegrate the NDP… just as the NDP “toxic 34” have demonstrated in their disapproval of Horwath’s swing to the right.

        Of course if Horwath supports Wynne again, she may face a party revolt against her leadership. No matter what, there will be a lot of blood-letting within the ranks of the two losing parties after the election. Gonna be interesting times ahead…

  3. GSW says:

    If Hudak wins a majority of ridings he will be the next Premier of Ontario. If he only wins a minority Wynne can continue to govern counting on the support of the NDP to keep out the PCs or having another snap election. You see, if Hudak on has a minority of say 50% – 1 riding, Wynne can still govern with the support of the NDP. Of course, Wynne could give up governing and let Hudak form a minority PC government and see if the NDP supports him, which is unlikely if Hudak brings down an Austerity Budget that gores NDP supporters.

    Please understand that Wynne can continue to govern with a minority result as long as Hudak only has a minority too; with the NDP holding the balance of power. Wynne can go back to Queen’s Park after the election telling the LG that she intends to continue governing and expects the support of the NDP. Wynne does not have to resign her government position if Hudak only has a minority even if it’s larger than Wynne’s minority. It would be a grim position for Wynne, but the alternative would be a Hudak minority government brought down by the Liberals and NDP on the PC Budget and another election.

    As for a real “coalition” between the Liberals and NDP, that would have to include NDP ministers in a Wynne Liberal government. Otherwise it’s just the NDP holding the balance of power and keeping the Liberals as the government.

  4. MississaugaPeter says:

    “… if anybody bothers to watch it, that is.”

    Sad, but may be reality. Just because it is broadcast, does not mean people will watch. And if they do, maybe only the first 15-30 minutes.

    Crazy times. Such an important election, and many people are uninterested. Is someone drugging our water supply? Are cell phones and all the frequencies in the air frying our brains? Crazy times.

    • TrueNorthist says:

      In this instance, apathy does not tend to favour the PCs, rather it favours the incumbent Liberals. I too have a hunch that the debates will not be viewed by nearly enough people to alter current trends, which does not bode terribly well for both challengers. Crazy times indeed, but they are very much a deliberate design that requires extraordinary skill to defeat, which also appears is sadly lacking.

  5. Lance says:

    Please understand that Wynne can continue to govern with a minority result as long as Hudak only has a minority too; with the NDP holding the balance of power.

    And if Hudak ends up with the most seats, you think people will accept that Wynne just holds on to power anyway? And, as you say, with NDP support, when the NDP defeated the government for the reasons that they did in the first place even when presented with a budget that gave them everything that they and their supporters could ever want?

    Uh yeah, not likely.

    • GSW says:

      If Wynne voluntarily steps aside for a larger Hudak minority government, will Wynne also support a Hudak Austerity Budget for Ontario… or will the Liberals join in with the NDP to vote no confidence in the Hudak minority government and another election? Do you not think that Wynne and Horwath will form an official coalition with a cabinet mix of Liberal and NDP to replace the Hudak minority and without an election?

    • Michael Bluth says:

      Well said.

      From a practical perspective whoever wins the plurality of seats gets to govern. I don’t believe there has ever been a coalition or minority government at the Federal or Provincial level where the biggest party in the house has been shut out of government. People wouldn’t accept that regardless of the fact it would be legal. It wouldn’t be seen as legitimate.

      The only way a precedent could be set would be if both the eventual second and third parties make it clear during the campaign that they will work together in a minority situation. Don’t see that happening.

      • doconnor says:

        “there has ever been a coalition or minority government at the Federal or Provincial level where the biggest party in the house has been shut out of government.”

        This happened all the way back in 1985 in the far away land of Ontario.

        • sezme says:

          Yes, but in that case, that was only after the party with the most seats had formed a government but quickly fell on a non-confidence motion. Still, though that (Liberal-NDP) coalition proved popular enough that it spawned Liberal and then NDP majority governments.

      • sezme says:

        I thought so too with regard to historical precedent. But yes, the Liberals under William Lyon Mackenzie King formed the government in 1925 with fewer seats than the Conservatives. So I guess anything’s possible, however unlikely.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_election,_1925

  6. Bobby says:

    I see the NDP doing much better than this predication indicates. Other than that your take is sound IMO.

    • GSW says:

      The public service voting bloc will massively support the Wynne Liberals as they did for the McGuinty Liberals, so where will the NDP improve their standing?

  7. Rick says:

    I will preface this by saying that I have not seen the same person actually write this, but it infuriates me when I read things like:

    1) (insert leader name) can govern with a minority as long as the other party doesn’t have a majority. this is the law of the rule – I am not quoting anyone verbatim.
    2) (insert leader name, but usually a Tory or PC) is governing with a majority but only has 40% of the electorate! We do not have one vote on a national scale for who governs, we have 107 (in Ontario) and 308(federally, at least currently) seats, many seats of which are won with large majorities of votes, and the ones with the most seats form gov (usually, see above quote.) Case example – the Federal Tories have a majority gov, and not by one or 2 seats, but “only 40% elected them” or “60% voted against them” – no, they have the majority because the had the most majorities and pluralities in the most number of ridings and control a majority of seats in gov.

    bonus 3) “thanks Jack for giving us Harper”, or “thanks Andrea, we might get Tim now!” I never realized that power was given by a single leader of a 3rd place party. The people choose their government – not a single person!

    • Rick says:

      and I realize I did not make my point very clear – I hate when people say the first and then also say the second. Don’t taylor the rules to your viewpoint, accept them both or say nothing.

    • GSW says:

      How about the “grandfathered” veteran MPs currently in the Liberal caucus; will they feel comfortable in Justin’s pro-choice/abortion Liberal party? Of course, old dog Liberal MPs will say and do anything to retain their place at the political trough, or will they? I can see some of the veteran MPs deciding to throw in the towel and not run in the 2015 election for a Liberal party that is no longer the Liberal party of their past.

    • Matt says:

      This guy was trying to go up against Justin’s hand picked candidate Andrew Leslie.

      The “nonination contest” is a sham. It is and was ALWAYS going to be Leslie.

  8. Kelly says:

    It’s bull. Until we have a normal system where 10% of the vote gets 10% of the seats the whole thing is a sham.

    • Al in Cranbrook says:

      God forbid! That’s all we need to breathe life into the likes of the Rhino Party, or some collection of screwball Marxist/Lennist/Che wannabes.

  9. Eric says:

    http://www.threehundredeight.com/ goes like this:
    PC: 39 to 57
    Lib: 28 to 48
    NDP: 17 to 25

  10. Matt says:

    I propose an experiment.

    Pick an upcoming election, doesn’t matter what level municipal , provincial or federal and ban public opinion polling during the campaign.

    Purpose – To see what affect, if any no polling has on voter turnout.

    Hypothesis – Voter turnout increases. Big time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*