338 with only a minor change today:
Liberal 187
CPC 126
BQ 23
NDP 6
Green 1
The NDP loses a point in popular vote and a seat.
It’s again worth noting that the Liberals have eaten the NDP, not the Tories. The day Trudeau resigned, the polls had the Tories at 43 percent, the Liberals at 21, the NDP 19. Now it’s Liberals 41, CPC, 37, NDP 9. The Conservatives have lost some votes but not catastrophically so; what’s happened is that at least half the NDP votes have gone red.
The replacement of Trudeau for Carney probably shored up the soft Liberal right (and PP did lose a few points there). However the lion’s share of the Liberal swing has been from the NDP (and a little Bloc too). Trump did that. Trump made this the deny-PP election.
PP also walked into it, by never adapting or softening the hyper partisanship. He reminds the NDP voter that things could get MUCH worse with PP (CBC dead, Dental gone, rollback to the environment, etc).
Keep up the good commentary …been busy disabusing a flock of right wing motorcycle riders that no…the polls are not wrong.
Here’s hoping! 
I disagree. The Liberals are gaining voters from all parties. The NDP most of all, yes, but the Conservatives are down 8% on the 338 graph since Trudeau resigned. That is a lot. The NDP are down 10% and to be fair that’s a bigger portion of their voters, and even the Bloc are down 3%. Which is a lot worse for the Bloc than it sounds, because in Quebec they’re down 9%. But if the Tories were still polling at ~43%, it’d probably be around 43-35 Conservatives ahead of Liberals, and we’d be discussing whether Polievre was more likely to have a majority or just a minority. Instead it’s 41-37 Libs ahead.
I can’t recall any political turnaround like this in this country, ever.
bob rae waking up as ontario premier ?
justins come from third place to majority ?
The Tories getting an overwhelming majority in 1984, then losing all but two seats in 1993?
Poor Kim 
I recall when she correctly said “wait a bit, demographics will fix unemployment”.
Some common sense the Cons could use right now. That was a pretty scathing warning the Con political pundit gave to PP in the paper …change tactics or lose. 
Canada’s debt if $1.4 trillion (we’re not including the provincial debts). The most recent annual deficit is around $40 billion. If we assume interest rates are 3%, $42 billion in interest would be due this year. So the deficit doesn’t even cover the interest payments.
We don’t just need a balanced budget - we need a hefty surplus, and for many years.
And it’s worth noting that the PPC also lost votes. It’s likely that most of those moved to the CPC, which means they lost even more of their “normal” supporters.
Their vote is so small it’s hard to really know for sure if they have.
Today’s projection sees a few more seats go Liberal. The NDP projection is down to 5.
I’d assume this is the end of Jagmeet Singh as leader.
Completely different. Those were all opposition parties surging against unpopular incumbent governments that had gotten too long in the tooth, and the situations had been developing in those directions for years. Campbell didn’t enter the '93 campaign with a solid polling lead.
This is an unpopular incumbent government that’s gotten too long in the tooth suddenly gaining 20+ points in the polls in the space of a couple months.
I dispute that supporters of the PPC are normal.
I meant normal CPC voters. They went Liberal, and were replaced by a smaller number of PPC loonies.
end of Jag - who I happen to like
and end of PP who I dislike.
Splitting the progressive/centrist vote has been an ongoing issue for parties trying to stay in power.
Now in Australia we have the Teals pulling from left and right into balance of power position. 
It’s a reversal of how our politics has always always worked. Canadians almost never turf out a government after one election; in our lifetimes that only happened to the Clark government, which had barely won in the first place. Then after 2-3 elections we get tired of them.
So to be tired of them, and then change by twenty points in about six or seven weeks? Wow.
I have a lot of respect for Mark Carney. Whether this is deserved remains to be seen, but if much of the Canadian public feels the way I do, that would account for the surge in Liberal popularity. Also, abolishing the useless ideologically motivated consumer carbon tax is the right thing to do, especially when our economy is about to undergo extreme stress, and it’s a stark contrast between Justin Trudeau and Carney, and the sort of thing that helped contribute to the reversal in the polls.
Whereas I think PP is still regarded as an untrustworthy opportunistic ass.
Just to add to my post above about Mark Carney:
OTTAWA — U.S. President Donald Trump said things will work out “very well” between his country and Canada shortly after his first call with Prime Minister Mark Carney, though the threat of new American tariffs next week still looms.
Speaking from the Oval Office on Friday afternoon, Trump struck a new, more positive tone about Canada as he described his “very good conversation” with Carney that morning.
“We had a very good talk, the prime minister and myself, and I think things are going to work out very well between Canada and the United States,” Trump said.
“We’re going to end up with a very good relationship with Canada and a lot of the other countries,” he continued, adding that it wouldn’t be the case with some others though.
Another marked change in Trump’s tone was the fact that he deliberately excluded Canada from the list of countries he accused of taking advantage of the U.S.
I note that Trump has gone from “Governor Trudeau” to “Prime Minister Carney”:
I actually suspect the dumpf is intimidated by Mark, one of few people that might inspire that in then belligerent ass.
Every once in a while I catch a glint of steel impatience when some reporter annoys Carney. Will serve him well.
Dominic LeBlanc also a good choice…no one from Canada will be bullied like Zelinski was 
Certainly swapping Trudeau for Carney and dropping the carbon tax have been helpful. But by themselves, I don’t think they would have resulted in even half the bounce we’ve seen. Trump is the cause of this. Carney is seen as someone who’ll stand up for us in the face of US economic aggression, and Polievre is not. And that has become the most important issue, completely eclipsing carbon pricing etc.