CTV Poll Analysis is Warped

I just finished watching the CTV nightly news and was dismayed at how they covered the latest Strategic Counsel poll.

First, the Greens at 12%? That seems a bit high considering all the other polls, including SES, has them at a more modest number. This should really be the focus of the reporting. But alas, pollsters work in their own world, ignoring any other polls commissioned in between their own.

As for the "nosedive" comment, I think Gregg's analysis needs some context. The previous poll was conducted in December during the weekend of the Liberal leadership convention. Taking into account the margin of error (and Strategic Counsel has had its share of error if we remember their 2006 election polling), the Liberals and Conservatives are basically tied. In all reality, I think this poll is bogus. Though what is far worse is the manner in which the CTV reported the poll.

Can anyone say drive-by smear? In my opinion this was probably one of the worst attempts at political reporting in a long time. Maybe it was a make-up by the CTV for releasing the December poll in the first place.

Does it get attention? Yes.
It is headline worthy? Of course.
Was it good journalism? Hell no.

I don't think the Liberals should worry about this poll... and here's why.

I did a quick analysis of the 2006 Election Study released recently. The results of the survey showed that on Election Day in 2006, the Liberals lost a substantial block of voters who went to the Conservatives and the NDP. Also of note, the Green Party picked up more voters from the Liberals than they kept from the 2004 election.

Here is a chart I put together that outlines the entire 2,700 respondent panel. Along the columns are respondents behaviour during 2006. Along the rows are respondents reported behaviour in 2004.

		2006
		Lib	CP	NDP	Other	Bloc	Green	DNV
2004	Lib	22.0%	8.5%	4.7%	0.1%	0.8%	1.3%	2.3%
	CP	0.8%	22.5%	1.1%	0.1%	0.1%	0.2%	1.1%
	NDP	1.0%	1.1%	9.1%	0.0%	0.3%	0.4%	0.5%
	Other	0.1%	1.4%	0.6%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.4%
	Bloc	0.3%	0.4%	0.6%	0.0%	7.5%	0.8%	0.1%
	Green	0.1%	0.2%	0.1%	0.0%	0.1%	1.2%	0.0%
	DNV	1.5%	2.4%	1.0%	0.1%	0.8%	0.3%	5.7%
	NE	0.0%	0.0%	0.1%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%

As you can see, the 2006 election attracted a lot of voters who did not vote in 2004. The Liberals and Conservatives were the main beneficiaries of these new voters. Also of note here, 2.3% of the electorate who voted Liberal in 2004 choose to stay home in 2006.

The NDP was able to pick up 4.7% of the electorate from the Liberals, and one can assume that many will come back to the Liberal fold during the next election to prevent the Conservatives from winning again. Why? Because the Conservatives have basically dismantled social programs, threw away Kyoto and put more Canadian troops into Afghanistan. A Liberal government is far better than a Conservative one in the eyes of rational progressive voters.

The CTV poll is bad: bad polling and bad reporting. Watch it here.

I am not worried - Canadians still don't know who Dion is yet. Once they are given the choice, the Liberals will be well positioned to retake government, albeit with a minority government.

John McCain - Campaign Finance Reform and Hypocracy

John McCain is running for president. No one doubts it and no one doubts his strength and the establishment's support for him in the Republican Party. However, the difference in his campaign strategy and tactics between 2000 and now are light years apart.

Note this Washington Post article. In 2000, McCain was the champion of reform - pushing for tough new campaign finance legislation to limit the influence of big donors on campaigns. It was a good bill, but it had plenty of holes (mainly allowing donors to bundle contributions).

Back in the early 1990s, McCain and four other Senators were caught helping a political contributor (who happened to own a failing savings and loan company) with federal regulators. So to improve his image, McCain starts his crusade to remove soft money and reform the campaign finance system: clearly a rational decision on his part.

Flip back to 2007 - McCain is running for president. He needs big money to do it and cannot count on the support of small contributors because he's no longer the reformer, but the establishment candidate of the GOP. What does he do? He taps some of the GOP's biggest fundraisers - former George W. supporters to raise him huge sums of money.

The problem? - When McCain needed a face lift, he became the reformer. But now he needs big money. John McCain is a shame. At one point, particularly after the 2000 election when he pushed the campaign finance law through the Senate, I had some respect for the man as someone who would speak out against his party. Now it's clear - McCain is a hypocrite, and in my opinion, scarier than George W. Bush.

In 2007, let's get rid of Harper and Howard...

Yesterday, in responses to Obama's announcement, Aussie PM John Howard was quoted as saying:

Australia's Prime Minister John Howard blasted Senator Obama's policy on the Iraq war and said al-Qaeda would "be praying as many times as possible for a victory for not only Obama but also for the Democrats".

Australia will throw Howard out as Canada sends Mr. Harper packing.

Update:
Obama responds to the Aussie War Monger

"If Prime Minister Howard truly believes what he says, perhaps his country should find its way to contribute more than just 1,400 troops so some American troops can come home," [Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs] said. "It's easy to talk tough when it's not your country or your troops making the sacrifices."

Obama Announces (Again) that He's Running for President

Today on the steps of the Illinois State Legislature, Barak Obama announced that he's running full steam ahead for the Democratic nomination.

Where his political career began as a State Senator, Obama referred to Lincoln and his vision for America. You can read his announcement speech here.

He's definitely an exciting candidate. Although, as I've said before...I'm waiting for Gore.

This also shows that the Democratic contest will be far more interesting than that of the Republicans who have a bunch of has beens and no-bodies running for the job. '08 looks like a Democratic year and this is great news for mankind :)

SES Research - Liberals and Conservatives Tied at 33%

Canada's most accurate pollster, SES Research, has released their latest national poll:

Decided Voters

Conservatives: 33% (-1)
Liberals: 33% (+1)
NDP: 17% (+1)
Bloc: 10% (-3)
Greens: 7% (+2)

Undecided: 9% (-3)

This poll comfirms what we have thought - this thing is close and the Conservatives are not really interested in going to an election.

The Leger poll seems to be an outlier since it has the Conservatives with such a large lead. The only poll I trust is SES.

You can get SES' stat sheet here.

Bill Richardson for President 2008?

While I am partial to Gore and will wait until the end for him to enter the race (btw I'm going to see him live in Calgary in April).

I thought you might be interested in this video

Richardson is very much like Clinton was in 1992 - turned around a weak state. But he has the foreign policy experience to match.

Watch the video - you will be impressed.