Latest polling has LPC continuing to tick up, Conservatives leveling off, NDP and Bloc continuing to slide. At this point, further drops in NDP support probably aren’t terribly relevant as their seat projection has dropped into single digits, but a continuing drop in Bloc Quebecois support is absolutely devastating to Conservative prospects, because the seats the Bloc loses are going to be picked up almost exclusively by Liberals.
The 338 graphs showing projections over time are just absolutely insane:
Today’s CBC and Economist polls also show Libs at around 42%, Cons at about 37%, NDP at 9%, Bloc at about 6%. The CTV-Globe poll is similar. The CBC regional analysis currently gives the Libs an 88% chance of winning. Remarkable given Trudeau’s numbers.
I know it’s been said before but I can’t get over how absolutely remarkable the change in this election has been. A 22% gain in polling average, near 150 swing in projected seats, from less than 1% chance of winning to 93% chance of winning in less than 3 months, and not yet levelling off. And it’s not like some Conservative scandal blew it all up for them, Poilievre hasn’t been caught with the proverbial live boy or dead girl, people just…changed their minds. I can’t decide if it’s a bigger testament on how unpopular Trudeau was, or how unpopular Poilievre is.
PP missed the mark. Division and hate, when the country needed to draw together. He never stopped screeching or attacking, relentlessly. That’s hard to pull off. Plus he looks soo smug all the time, it’s off putting. I guess he can’t help it? But it’s like Conservatives respond to that look. Sheer was the same.
At least he’s made the record books, I think, largest lead squandered in shortest time!
But the race isn’t won yet whatever the polls say. These are unpredictable times. Clearly.
Add to that, the Conservatives still trying to have the same conversations they were having six months ago. I got into this a bit with a guy at the pub this past weekend. He just couldn’t conceive of how someone might vote Liberal, because of inflation, wokeness, all that stuff PP was pushing six months ago. He just couldn’t see that Trump kicked over the whole table, and the issues that will determine this election are completely different now.
As I’ve said before, quick response time and flexibility is what our government is going to need for however long Trump remains in power, and continues to sow chaos. And the CPC has shown they’re utterly inflexible, and have poor reaction times. They’re just not cut out for this new era of Canadian governance.
The best explanation I heard was that the CPC basically put all their eggs in the Running Against Trudeau basket and had zero backup plan. Carney axes the Carbon Tax almost first thing, and their key rally-the-rural-vote issue pretty much evaporates overnight. And they’ve got nothing else to sell.
As for the Trump factor, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith saying (onstage, in the States, at a forum with a right wing influencer) that PP will be much more in synch with Trump’s agenda, after flying to Mar-a-Lardo to meet with him in January…the own goals just keep coming for the cons.
I think the bigger issue might be PP disregarding good advice, possibly since he does not want to come down harder on Trump or wing nuts.
This is ironic since PP must despise Trump under his current political circumstances. To be clear, PP is not Trump, never has been, and the comparisons to gain political advantage are often unfair.
He’s definitely not Trump, he’s far more (book-smart) intelligent and classier, and doesn’t have the brawler mentality.
On the other hand, they do share a lot of the same cultural obsessions (wokeness, et al.), their political careers float on regional feelings of resentment (though that’s true of the last batch of CPC candidates, not just PP) and they both feed off the energy of their wingnuttiest audiences, they share a philosophy that government sholdn’t do anything that could turn a profit for one of their pals if it were to be privatized, and they’re about level in ethics. It’s not for nothing that Smith says he’d be in synch with the travesty down south.
Poilievre, and his closest western minions, Danielle smith & Scott moe have been “late to the party” every time it’s politically wise to trash Trump and appear to be sabotaging Canadian solidarity in the eyes of the voters. PP has that “angry” Trump style & it’s simply turned people off. Honestly I don’t think it’s really anything more or less than that.
I never bought that PP was a Trump Lite figure. He isn’t. But adopting even some of the more moderate elements of American Republicans - using their motto, being praised by influencers, crying out against wokeness when the American alternative seems to be cruelty - these things seem positively toxic when Trump is talking tariffs and Canschluss.
Trudeau had many problems and Carney seems have been able to dodge blame, seem competent, has international friends and perhaps might even stand up to Trump. I was amazed PP has been unable to persuade Ford to take an interest, and indeed, seemed to rarely talk with him. That’s concerning regarding his ability to reach out to influential people.
Even without the tariffs, they’re toxic. Like the GOP, they’ve decided to focus most of their “effort” on fake crises like transgender people, while ignoring all of the real problems we have. They make a few pro-forma complaints about things like inflation, the housing crisis, and government debt, but the only solution to any of that they offer is more tax cuts that primarily benefit the rich, and trickle down economics that has been shown not to work over the last 50 years or so.
He has no cred, no relevant experience or education - he is waaaaay out of his depth and Canadians know it.
This populism stuff is just mob rule…I want leaders to lead not follow. Polly just trots out the same tired memes, law n order, Liberals bad, free speech, freedum …not working
All that time that they had CPC redlined against the 100% ceiling is a sign that they’re not very good forecasters. Even if they didn’t know what specifically was coming, they should have known that there was a greater than 1% chance of some sort of black swan throwing off all of their assumptions.
I don’t think they were trying to forecast out to the election in those charts. They’re just saying “if the election was held today, based on the polling information we have, this is the expected result”.
The forecast is explicitly “If the election were held today, based on current polling this is the expected result.” Which, when you remember we’re talking about a Westminster-type Parliament with a minority government, is a much more interesting question than what might happen months or years from now when a “regularly scheduled” election would be held. There isn’t really any such thing, the Harper era fixed election date legislation notwithstanding.
