10.16.2015 05:52 PM

Ekos: it’s gonna be a long, long night

PS – Harper ain’t dead yet, folks. 

  

60 Comments

  1. Ridiculosity says:

    One of the clearest takes I’ve read on this election so far. A must-read. https://twitter.com/BrentButt

  2. Matt says:

    Interesting the Liberal lead in Ontario was 18 on Wednesday, down to 7 today.

    But, the regionals have small sample sizes and large MOE’s so who knows.

    Also interesting graves feels the CPC have the slight edge in the advanced vote.

    As for the long night, that’s what everyone thought in the 2010 Toronto election between Ford and Smitherman. But polls closed at 8:00, Ford declare winner 8:10.

  3. Ridiculosity says:

    If Harper ain’t dead yet, why I they delivering flats of moving boxes to his office – and carting full boxes away? http://www.buzzfeed.com/emmaloop/the-governments-contracted-shredder-company-was-at-the-prime#.mk0lXE0q9

  4. Ridiculosity says:

    …sorry, it should have been “why are they delivering…”

  5. PJ says:

    What are the chances Dippers get spooked by this and NDP vote collapses further and goes to the Liberals?
    I submit that even if Liberals finish second JT wins. Taking a 3rd place party that continuously lost seats in 3 successive elections and knocking on the door of 24 Sussex is no easy task.

    This was do or die for the Liberals; no matter the result on Monday night the LPC will be around for awhile.

  6. Jack D says:

    I’m kind of excited.

    I think it’ll be a very close race on election night, right down to the wire.

    Or not.

    Might end up being a sweep for one party.

    Not entirely sure yet.

    What I can say for absolutely sure though, is someone is going to win on October 19th.

    Methodology: Fried brain after months of being inundated by polls.

  7. Jason Smith says:

    As a white dude in my 30s with a good income I will do well no matter who wins.

    But my neighbour…In his late 40s moved to Canada from Pakistan when he was 4 years old. He told me that this was the first election where he really payed attention and the first time he actually considered moving out of Canada if a certain party was re elected. His wife doesn’t wear the niqab or the Hijab (which the Conservatives have also talked about banning ….Chris Alexander said as much…Google it) and niqab either does his daughter. But when women from his community have been openly attacked in the street among the Conservatives using Muslims as an electoral straw man to pose them an as the threat that only chicken hawks Harper can protect us from, people like him are scared.

    I’ll feel pretty god damn sad for people like him if Harper wins amass Canada affirms it’s approval of attacks on a minority group. And I’ll be doubly as sad if Trudeau gets in and doesn’t repeal parts of C 51.

    There’s 1.2 million Muslims in Canada and very few cause any issues….chances Andre if you live in Calgary Edmonton, Toronto, Vancouver, Surrey, Brampton, Ottawa, Winnipeg, Prince George, Victoria, Montreal, or even Regina…you’ve seen them, met them and interacted with them. They didn’t scare you, they didn’t try to convert you by force, attempt to behead you or make you adhere to Sharia law. The Harper fear mongering is inaccurate and disgusting.

    • Hawaii Five Oh says:

      Sweden now rape capitol of Europe

    • Maps Onburt says:

      Actually it’s LIBERAL fear mongering… the Conservatives just believe that the Niqab shouldn’t be in between her and her wanting to join Canadians. 80% of Canadians agree. The Liberals are trying to turn this into an attack against Muslims. I’ve got lots of Muslim friends, including some very close friends. They aren’t the slightest bit concerned by this and except for one, support the Conservative position on this.

      • Bluegreenblogger says:

        Amazing how coincidentally it is the visible feature of Muslims that is the arbitrary target for your race baiting. Perhaps, had a different piece of unconstitutional Conservative policy or legislation been struck down by the courts mid election, we would have been railing against ‘feckless Indians’? Ten years ago it was Sikh Turbans soiling our sacred RCMP stetson. But surely it is coincidence that true patriots fixate on the visible symbols of the hated minority. Heavens forfend that anybody would mistake your patriotic zeal for, dare I whisper it; Racism?

  8. Kelly says:

    From the introduction to the survey…”Finally, while we know that the percentage of early voters in our survey is exaggerated due to social desirability and other factors, we note that cellphone users are showing up in comparable numbers to their landline-using counterparts. Of those who do not have access to a landline, 23 per cent tell us they have already voted, compared to 26 per cent on average. This is a rather significant finding, as cellphone-only households have historically been less likely to vote and we would speculate that this does not bode well for Stephen Harper’s prospects”

    I wager the Cons have plateaued. They got a boost from their brothel and drug house comments in the 905 but some of that will collapse as the Liberals remind this audience that Harper thinks they are gullible as he says one thing then parties with a crack smoking racist who openly talks about wanting to cheat on his wife with a colleague. I think they will also bring up the shredder parked outside the PMO and that will finish Harper. NDP vote will collapse of the final polls look even tighter on Sunday. Progressive voters are determined this time. Also read Graves last sentence, again.

  9. Luke says:

    Again, not really any different than the last few ekos polls. Error margin, etc.

    Still, Conservatives shouldn’t be counted out. Only fools would do that, considering GOTV superiority and polling woes of recent years.

    • Reality.Bites says:

      I remember people saying during the last election that the NDP’s poll strength in Quebec might not turn into seats because of the lack of ground organization to get out the vote. I imagine the same was said of the NDP in Alberta. I think if people want the Conservatives out (which is not certain), the Conservatives will be out, and their clearly superior GOTV machine won’t save them.

      The other lesson from previous elections is that polls are broken beyond repair. I would not be surprised by a Liberal majority. I would not be surprised by a Conservative majority. The only things I’d be surprised by are an NDP victory or official opposition and the Greens winning more than one seat. Actually, I wouldn’t be surprised at them losing their two seats.

  10. Mike says:

    Im in my 50s and came to Canada when I was 4 years old and the thought that somehow now my citizenship is less worthy than those of my fellow Canadians who were born here, scares me.

    • Matt says:

      Exactly how is your citizenship worth less.

      Seriously, I’ve asked three people who have made the “two tier citizenship” comment and they weren’t able to give me a credible, coherent answer.

      Rambled on about taking citizenship away. I said they’re trying to take it away from convicted terrorists. I asked are you planning a terrorist attack? They said no, of course not.

      So I asked what are you worried about then? No answer.

    • MississaugaPeter says:

      I’m in my 50’s and came to Canada when I was 5 years old. I don’t associate with terrorists so I do not share your fears.

    • Maps Onburt says:

      Only if you plan on committing terrorist acts. Then you get deported. If you only had Canadian citizenship, you’d spend your life in jail.

    • UFP Ambassador says:

      Straw man. Your citizenship only becomes less worthy when you become a traitor and violently attack Canada and Canadians. And that’s true for every one of us, except those of us born here get thrown in the slammer forever and ever, you get an airplane ride instead. Apart from that, feel free to vote, protest, bitch, whine and complain all you want…the only person scaring you is you because you haven’t been paying attention.

      • KBab says:

        Fellas, the catch here is the definition of terrorism.

        As the Conservatives have it a great range of things could be defined as terrorist acts. Even acts of protest against a government could be defined as terrorist. All this terrorist fear is a red-herring to enable the government to take away rights under the guise of protection. What they really want to be able to do is jail protesters who oppose things like pipelines being built in ecologically sensitive areas, especially through native lands. They have put in the necessary legislation that enables them to shut down such protests quickly and harshly. All the terrorist babble is a distraction.

        Be afraid.

        • Maps Onburt says:

          From the Department of Justice’s website:

          “In Canada, section 83.01 of the Criminal Code[1] defines terrorism as an act committed “in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause” with the intention of intimidating the public “…with regard to its security, including its economic security, or compelling a person, a government or a domestic or an international organization to do or to refrain from doing any act.” Activities recognized as criminal within this context include death and bodily harm with the use of violence; endangering a person’s life; risks posed to the health and safety of the public; significant property damage; and interference or disruption of essential services, facilities or systems. ”

          The only reason to be afraid is if you think you are going to do any of the above… in which case, you deserve to get deported or locked away for life.

    • Cory says:

      We’ve removed citizenship from Nazi war criminals in the past, where was the outcry then?

      I shake my head at those hoping that revoking citizenship gets struck down by the courts. If that happens a number of old Germans are gonna be moving back to Canada to collect their Canada Pension Plan benefits.

      • Nicole says:

        Not the same at all. The German war criminals committed the crimes prior to obtaining citizenship and not after. So they lied about their criminal record in the application. The current bill is removing the citizenship from people who were either born here and have a parent who provided a dual citizenship, or else they became Canadians as kids or young adults. Huge difference and one that guarantees that this gets overturned by the SCC because it is unconstitutional. You cannot have different levels of citizenship. We have a justice system that can sufficiently punish Canadians who commit horrendous acts.
        Harper and any lawyer worth their salt knows this too. He was simply playing to his base.
        And as mentioned above, the definition of terrorism is also quite vague as well. Yet another poorly drafted piece of legislation by an inept government.

        • Scotian says:

          Pretty much says it all…except…

          I’ve seen this argument that equates lying about one’s past on the citizenship form which is the only acceptable reason we have had for citizenship stripping with it being obvious that it is fine to do for terrorists since they lied on theirs. The problem with that reasoning is that it presupposes that the person was already radicalized and intending to commit terrorist acts against Canada when they swore the oath, and unless we have developed the technology to see within the human mind/soul for such that is clear impossible to determine save for very explicit hard evidence proving such that predates the swearing in, not post facto after the fact assumptions! I have found that argument/defence of the Harper government’s law to be one of the more odious aspects of this discussion.

          It is one thing to be able to prove dishonest swearing based on the active lying on an application of facts clearly known and hidden at the time by the appllicant, it is quite another to be presupposing such after the fact from actions taken after the fact, and that is almost the classic example of a slippery slope argument and no true conservative minded person would consider that acceptable. By conservative minded I mean real conservatives, not the political branded kind, because real conservatives are cautious about how they allow things to evolve in law because of how easily things get out of control! Pity we haven’t seen real conservatives having any say within the CPC since its creation.

  11. Liam Young says:

    I still don’t get why mainstream media isn’t reporting that Lynton Crosby has dumped Stephen Harper.
    Any takers on this? Media is bought/sold by the Harper Cons and elaborate ad campaigns?

  12. Curt says:

    If you are not planning any terrorist attacks, then you have not anything to worry about. Mike you are just trying to stir the pot.

    • KBab says:

      Define terrorist Curt.

      Is a protest that STOPS the building of a pipe-line through an ecologically sensitive area, or through Native Lands, a terrorist act?

      Is protesting against the government a terrorist act?

      Or is a government that attempts to whip its citizens into a fearful frenzy over imagined threats the real terrorist?

      Chew it over.

  13. Jack D says:

    I think what many staunch Harper supporters aren’t realizing is that even amongst Conservatives, they are a shrinking minority.

    Say what you will about the Conservative party and its ideological basis of governing, it can still very much be a part of the Canadian political fabric. Voters for the most part can except the idea of fiscal responsibility with social progressivism. I think this is one of things that made the Progressive Conservatives of yore so successful. But this party is suffering under Stephen Harper and he’s has become the proverbial skunk in the room for the party.

    He’s become far, far too polarizing for Canadian politics. He’s taken divisiveness and nastiness of politics to a level unseen in Canadian history, all for the cost of him retaining power.

    I’m not saying this as a partisan, but consider for a moment if Trudeau becomes PM on October 19th. That success will go a very long way to legitimizing his credibility as a leader. To bring the Liberals back from the brink and to hold the responsibility of Prime Ministership will allow Canadians to view Trudeau in a different way. Imagine then what that would do to the Conservatives. If the major concern about Trudeau is that he “just isn’t ready” and he proves otherwise, where does that leave Harper’s demagoguery? More importantly, where does that leave the party of Conservatives that is so heavily influenced by Stephen Harper?

    I’m just saying, a leader usually knows they should go; Harper did and decided not to leave when he should have. Now he’s become a liability to his own party and will inevitably leave it searching for identity for sometime after he leaves.

    • Al in Cranbrook says:

      It’s popular among the left to accuse Harper of divisiveness. I think it’s more the case that it’s the other way around.

      Peter Foster, FP…

      http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/peter-foster-vote-against-hate

      Nobody loves to play the us (progressives) vs them (everyone else) game more so than far too many of the usual suspects on the left.

      • Jack D says:

        Al, this isn’t an issue of right v.s. left, or progressive v.s. conservative. Take a moment here to briefly observe this from outside the point of view of a partisan.

        In Canadian political tradition, most parties will govern from more-or-less centrist positions. Its part of the political pragmatism that allows a governing party to successfully maintain their agenda without alienating large swaths of the electorate. A certain degree of appeasement is always required for stability in government. This is one of the reasons why Stephen Harper has such a difficult time with minority governments; he’s entirely inflexible. He’s allowed himself to become such an uncooperative figure in Canadian politics that its near impossible for a working consensus to be built in the HoC without a very heavy degree of political posturing.

        The one common term of criticism I’ve heard from many Liberals and Conservatives over the years of Stephen Harper is: “unnecessary”. Constantly being on the offence while in a majority government inhibits proper political discourse with mutual respect; it ramps up partisanship on all sides without any real need. Even amongst your own, pettiness over differing opinions and heavy-handedness is corrosive (i.e. rejecting Ches Crosbie as a candidate over a perceived insult).

    • Reality.Bites says:

      My fondest hope is that Harper leaves the party in the same condition Brian Mulroney did.

  14. Will B says:

    Interesting. Both Nanos and Leger are reporting a much wider gap as of this morning. 7-8 point liberal advantage. I wonder why Ekos’ poll results are different?

    • Maps Onburt says:

      Go back and read them again… Nanos is showing a 6.3 point lead (with the Conservatives up .2 since yesterday) and Leger is showing a 6 point lead. Leger ovesampled on Quebec and then applied some wonky “distribution” numbers to get to their numbers for the rest of Canada. Mainstreet is showing a 5 point lead. They all have MoE’s around 3 pts so frankly, it’s still a horse race and will depend upon the GoTV efforts of the parties.

      • Luke says:

        Plus whatever methodological differences (e.g., assumptions in weighting formulae, live-caller vs. interactive voice response vs. online, landline vs. cell+landline, etc.

  15. Paul Raposo says:

    Harper’s dead if he doesn’t get a majority and the perps will be his own party. And the CPC will be screwed as the only guy who could have been a viable leader–John Baird–was told off when he made it clear he wanted to be the next leader of the party.

    • Maps Onburt says:

      First, I think you are counting your chickens… but secondly, it isn’t the Conservatives who tear their leaders to shreds for losing elections, it is the Liberals. Thirdly, there are lots of good candidates that could succeed PM Harper – including Baird, Lisa Raitt, Kellie Leach, Michelle Rumpel, Peter McKay, Brad Wall, Jason Kenney, etc.). Don’t forget the folks outside the current cabinet (or Premiers), as they could also pull from outside like the Liberals did with Ignatief and Trudeau Jr.

      • Paul Raposo says:

        Who’s counting chickens now Maps? Next you’ll be naming Gary Goodyear as a viable candidate. Baird will never be back and he was the only person who could have be a serious inducement to many people voting CPC next time around. The rest of that lot will be as useless to CPC members as tits on a boar.

  16. Matt says:

    Mainstreet:
    Decided an leaning
    Libs 38
    CPC 33
    NDP 21

    I (assume) just decided
    Libs 34
    CPC 30
    NDP 19

    Maggi went from no doubt Lib majority Tuesday, to they COULD POSSIBLY be on the razors edge of a majority IF the numbers hold today

    Angus Reid
    ELIGIBLE votersLibs 35
    CPC 31
    NDP 22

    LIKELY voters
    Libs 34
    CPC 33
    NDP 22

    Among advance voters, the Conservatives and Liberals are tied at 34 per cent apiece.

    Libs NEED 18 to 34’s to show up in hege numbers
    CPC vote moe efficient
    “Shy Tory” COULD be big factor on results

  17. patrick says:

    Will someone just rip off the bastard’s hair helmet and throw him into the sunshine! Geez!

  18. Jen says:

    The liberals are rising in Quebec acccording to latest leger poll. Will there be a massive surprise for the liberals in Quebec?

  19. James Curran says:

    I, like many, considered Harper dead a loooooong time ago. It will be refreshing to see a new kind of leader when Mr. Trudeau is sworn in as Canada’s next Prime Minister.

  20. Vancouverois says:

    the only guy who could have been a viable leader–John Baird

    Say what?

    I’m pretty sure that Baird would not have been a viable leader, especially not if the country is looking for a hug.

    I’m also pretty sure that there are others withing the Conservative party who can manage it.

    • Paul Raposo says:

      Doubtful V. John Baird is as warm as a speculum in January but he knows how to run the party and isn’t a right wing loon and because of that he knows how to keep those who are under control. But it was made clear to him that certain members of the party faithful would never accept a glass closeted gay man as the party leader. And since he didn’t get Harper’s blessing, he decided to leave.

  21. Greyapple says:

    They’ve crashed in Quebec the most recent EKOS.

  22. RogerX says:

    Harper and Mulcair will flat-line and fall on election Monday…. while Justin will get ^^^wings^^^ as the Liberal Red Bull tsunami waves swamps the nation leaving CPC and NDP debris and a PM Justin floating into 24 Sussex…!!

    The greatest and most opportune election marketing campaign in Canadian political history …. the drama teacher becoming the PM-in-training in his final level of incompetence.

Leave a Reply

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


*