News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6.7K     0 
Jonny5 said:
I wouldn't say that exactly. The good poll aggregators weight the value of the polling firm and have documentation on each of their reliability and biases right down to a local level.
Even with polling firm bias, you get value by seeing their own changes over time. It doesn't matter if they always overweight in one direction, you can still look at their changes over time.
The polls also don't only count on election day. Trudeau resigned because the polls showed him what was coming if he didn't.
Click to expand...
*Was* there polling for University-Rosedale, though? If there was, it was never brought to my attention--and it isn't the kind of race that would have earned a "daily tracker" or multiple polls from several agencies.

Again, let's not mistake "poll aggregators" for projection sites that operate off of previous elections combined with current national/regional polls. Such things might not capture riding-specific dynamics (though in this age of limited resources for finding out about actual ground conditions, the aggregators/projection sites *can* serve as passive-aggressive push-poll-like "voter guides"--like, voting for or not voting for a particular party because the aggregator/projector says it's likely or not likely to win)
 
Mihairokov said:
Not sure there's a lot to read into the declining CPC voteshare. There wasn't much motivating CPC voters to go vote in these byelections.

Likewise, the NDP leapfrogging CPC in U-R doesn't mean much either, by virtue of everyone basically knowing this result was a foregone conclusion.
Click to expand...

I actually think there subliminally *can* be something to read in such results. Or, it's not like everybody who voted Conservative or NDP in those very same ridings in '25 did so with the confidence that their party would win *then*, either--so if the chances were as dismal now as then, why did the Cons lose another 10%+ in share? They didn't *have* to. (It's what makes psephology--the study of election statistics--kind of fun. And in the case of Terrebonne, it'd be interesting to know which direction the '25 high-teens Con share went--I suspect a fair bit went "strategic Lib" *and* a fair bit "strategic Bloc", the latter being a bit of a "BQ/CAQ exurban-heartland-populism" demographic).

And likewise when it comes to the NDP leapfrogging CPC in U-R--it is, in effect, a statement that the '25 result was a blip in the electoral status quo rather than a permanent shift; as well as a symbolic "bookmark for the future", the way that a lot of the federal NDP 2nd places in the 416 were under Alexa McDonough in '97. (In Charles Caccia's Liberal fiefdom of Davenport that year, the NDP got a solid 18% 2nd place to Caccia's 66%. Yeah, that was a nearly 50-point gap; but up to that time Davenport was never taken seriously as an NDP target--yet by the 2010's, it was the party's strongest riding in Toronto, even if demographic changes played a part. Likewise, going into the 90s, Parkdale-High Park was commonly viewed as a Lib/Tory swinger; but the NDP got a solid 20% 2nd in '97, and ultimately traded its way up to Peggy Nash's 00s/10s representation, as well as its being the party's only 2nd place in Toronto last year.)
 
Jonny5 said:
I wouldn't say that exactly. The good poll aggregators weight the value of the polling firm and have documentation on each of their reliability and biases right down to a local level.
Even with polling firm bias, you get value by seeing their own changes over time. It doesn't matter if they always overweight in one direction, you can still look at their changes over time.
The polls also don't only count on election day. Trudeau resigned because the polls showed him what was coming if he didn't.
Click to expand...
You guys have a lot more faith in that process than I do...

...and the only polls that don't count on election day is that if the party in power doesn't count the ones that opposes them, Vlad Putin style. >.<
 
Would anyone think the NDP could win an election in the 2030s I suppose(?). I remember last year some FB page once said that the NDP could win by 2034 with an election in that year I guess.
 
I got a phone poll (as usual on my landline) a just now. From Forum Research.

Something along the lines of:

"With Nathan Erskine Smith's announcing his intention to resign as Beaches—East York MP, who would you vote for in a by-election:
  • Jack Pennings of the Green Party
  • Avi Lewis of the NDP
  • John Tory of the Liberal Party
  • (someone I don't recognize for the Conservative Party)
Wow.

I can only guess that someone is testing the waters. If I was John Tory's people polling, I'd test him against the worst-case scenario - which would surely be Lewis. On the other hand, the Liberals might be seeing if Tory is electable.

It would certainly be a race for the ages. And would shift my support to the NDP. Nathan was great - though the way Carney screwed him over, is already making me less likely to vote Liberal.

Locally it often comes down to the candidate - and I doubt that's John Tory.

And Carney would really run the former Conservative leader in a swing riding? WTF?
 
nfitz said:
I got a phone poll (as usual on my landline) a just now. From Forum Research.

Something along the lines of:

"With Nathan Erskine Smith's announcing his intention to resign as Beaches—East York MP, who would you vote for in a by-election:
  • Jack Pennings of the Green Party
  • Avi Lewis of the NDP
  • John Tory of the Liberal Party
  • (someone I don't recognize for the Conservative Party)
Wow.

I can only guess that someone is testing the waters. If I was John Tory's people polling, I'd test him against the worst-case scenario - which would surely be Lewis. On the other hand, the Liberals might be seeing if Tory is electable.

It would certainly be a race for the ages. And would shift my support to the NDP. Nathan was great - though the way Carney screwed him over, is already making me less likely to vote Liberal.

Locally it often comes down to the candidate - and I doubt that's John Tory.

And Carney would really run the former Conservative leader in a swing riding? WTF?
Click to expand...

Oh that would be one hell of a crazy race and I can really see the outcome would either be really close or it would swing way in one or the other direction, but no matter what it would be nasty.
 
I would not support Tory, I voted for NES, generally support the Liberals (and I'm in Beaches—East York). If he was the candidate, I'd support either NDP or Greens

Edit to add I'm not much of an Avi Lewis fan
 
John Tory is a pretty tired name. Is there really no one more compelling that the Liberals could put forth?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PL1
picard102 said:
They need to build up their roster of corporate suits to enshitify everything so CEO class can extract the most out of the rest of us. Carney is full mask off.
Click to expand...

"Full mask off." Does that include funding Alto and a portion of Waterfront East LRT? And was Trudeau's admin markedly less cronyistic/pro-corporate? The political class being CEO class-adjacent aside...
 
urbanclient said:
"Full mask off." Does that include funding Alto and a portion of Waterfront East LRT? And was Trudeau's admin markedly less cronyistic/pro-corporate? The political class being CEO class-adjacent aside...
Click to expand...
It includes courting so-con loons to maintain power, and delivering legislation all but penned by tech bros.
 
picard102 said:
It includes courting so-con loons to maintain power, and delivering legislation all but penned by tech bros.
Click to expand...
The current admin is far from perfect, but there's some nuance to be had here. I still believe Trudeau's was pro-corporate in some of the worst ways. Carney's seems to be an improvement.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top