What you said is what I mean. The swings are recent and expected due to leadership change, the amount of swing and the slight correcting (on the swing) is what I don’t see as logical. The only possible way this could be true is if 90% of Canada hated Trudeau and 50% of that 90% blamed him 100% for the state of the country, thereby absolving the liberal party of any blame, and are willing to give them another 4 years.
Re Trump, I agree with this 100%, Poilievre has lost direction due to this and should refocus on what was working for him.
PS: I don’t think Trump is a real ballot issue, I think its one of those fake issues that pop up in elections, and try to mask the real issues. When Canadians go to vote, Trump will be way down on the priorities. If you voting and have Trump as the biggest issue, well you have rich person problems.
Was on a flight back to the UK a while ago and we did an emergency landing in Gander. Some poor fella on the plane had a heart attack.
or you are an autoworker, dairy farmer, etc., etc. The tariff issue is doing all of the Liberals’ campaigning for them. Layer on the 51st state stuff, and it is pretty damn clear it is driving the polls.
I don’t think it is that inconceivable. Not many particularly liked or trusted Poilievre, but Trudeau had developed really strong negatives. Carney tacks back to the middle on policy, and Trump does the rest of the work. At the most basic level, I think that is why someone like Freeland never had much of a chance - she was in the room with Trudeau for too much, for too long. The ‘Carney was an economic advisor’ line that the Cons have been trying to run just isn’t getting the same level of reaction that the visceral association a Trudeau cabinet minister would.
I do think the danger the Liberals face is in how early it actually is (despite that, there are columns saying it is over). They could make a mistake and change the dynamic very easily - the obvious volatility shows how quickly voters are re-assessing. But the tempo right now is not in the Conservatives’ favour, if Trump is to be believed there will be another wave of tariffs announced April 2, which will soak up another week of attention, and suddenly we are only three weeks from election day.
Unfortunate timing for this Trump tariff announcement from the Conservative point of view. After a dismal start and some fairly clear signs of schism within the Cons, Carney’s Liberals made their first real mistake - candidate says unforgivably stupid thing that also touches on the Canadian nationalism driving the Liberal renaissance. Liberals should have dropped him immediately, circling the wagons around him became a story in itself.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/paul-chiang-liberal-candidate-withdraws-election-2025-1.7498693
In a normal election, something like that can be a turning point, and one Poilievre desperately needed. Tomorrow’s announcement is going to pre-empt all of that, and the Conservatives will spend another week struggling for air. Not sure if the timing is related, but the Conservatives chose today to drop two of their own candidates.
Unless something dramatically changes, Mark Carney will win a majority government.
If you’re a Canadian who hates Trump, you can thank Trump for his provocations towards Canada. Because otherwise, there would have been virtually no chance the Liberals would have won this election.
One good thing is that with the collapse of the BQ, when the PQ wins, their legitimacy to hold a third referendum on sovereignty association will be dramatically diminished.
Oh, and the NDP not winning enough seats to be an official party will be hilarious.
Jagmeet Singh is a horrendous politician. Thomas Muclair telling Canadians not to vote for the NDP is mind boggling. Jack Layton was awesome. Audrey McLaughlin was the second worst leader after Jagmeet. At least Jagmeet will get his pension lol
Why does this party still exist, at least federally?
I actually think the Liberal campaign is in a bit of a stall right now. A couple of unforced errors, even since the fiasco around the ‘bounty hunter’ candidate - Carney showed his inexperience in responding to a heckler by staking out a strong position on the arms embargo on Israel. The Liberals have lost a great deal of support in the Jewish community under Trudeau, and Carney had an opportunity for a bit of a reset. There are no contracts or purchase orders at hand, Israel isn’t buying anything new, and I very much doubt the Liberals intend to suspend any more than the 30 export permits they already have (about 200 active). Answering a heckler was just a dumb mistake, staking it out a no-win position could have been a critical mistake.
That again however highlights the Conservative’s central problem. It was top of page for less than 6 hours before Trump knocked it off.
It now very much looks like Singh will be out of the House, he is in 3rd in his riding. Granted, it is not quite his riding with redistricting, but it was the largest section of it.
An interesting comment from north of the border…
"The polls are swinging so dramatically, they don’t seem like they’re well put together,” said one of them, Paul Micucci, adding that he believed Poilievre was actually ahead by at least eight points. Prominent supporters have started using the phrase “too big to rig” when describing the size of the rallies.
Remember when the Goobers started railing against postmodernsim because it corroded the universal truths we all hold so dear??
Who knew that the answer the world over was just to make up your own truth?
Post-postmodernisn is gonna be amazeballs.
It is a really weird story, but any possible interpretation is a disaster for the Cons, either Conservative fratricide or Trump-style denialism
The Romney team in 2012 refused to believe the polls showing them losing. Right up until states started being officially called for Obama they thought they were going to win. There was an argument about how to interpret data underlying that false belief that gave it the appearance of genuine debate, but at its heart it came from the same place we see now - political operatives so deep in the RW bubble that they viewed every piece of negative data as simply the result of a media establishment that was against them. They got to a point where their approach was to say “we’re down by 5 in this poll, so how far do we adjust our turn out model to turn that into a 1 point win…[turns nob]…see, we’re winning now?” to produce a bunch of swing state polls showing them winning.
That was the early days of “data journalism”, before Nate Silver even had a podcast, so the coverage was limited of how insane it was. But in the emerging data journalism sector they expected the spectacular failure of the mental model to usher in a new sophisticated era of data interpretation in campaigns. And then came Trump…
Polls here are different to the one in the USA in that the Lib party could be well ahead and still lose the election. The reasoning behind it is that the pollsters pull a large portion of their data from very liberal ridings and from people that will answer poll questions (Over 65’s), and both of these combined skew liberal significantly. Secondly, the Lib party will win area’s in Montreal in a landslide (large population) , while CP will win some Toronto ridings in a closely contested race (large population), on the other hand the Liberals will do really poorly in other regions where the population is quite small, so a blowout here doesn’t effect the “popular” vote much at all, however does give the CP seats. The general analysis of the polls (if reasonable accurate, and some are), is that at a 42% vs 38% (Lib vs CP), the election will be a coin flip. I think one of the main issues will polls this election is that the poll don’t reflect (reconcile) with what people are saying, seeing and hearing. The polls imo have significantly under reported the NDP and the Bloc, and both of these will boost the Lib numbers.
If you dig into a subsection of the polls, when you look at people that claim they will definitely vote, the CP are slightly ahead of the Libs, which would be close to a majority for the CP.
Here, like the US, there are several polls that are so way off that they should be scrapped or at least severely handicapped, before being added into the poll averages.
I still think the CP will win this election, however no longer very confident that it will be majority government. In all honesty I would prefer a majority of any of the major parties rather, so that policies can be put through in an unadulterated form. A non majority will be a huge disaster for Canada, and as stated before, I have little hope that any party has the stomach to make the drastic changes that are needed.
If the Lib party does win (it’s 100% between 2 parties), then I expect Alberta to get enough votes (I forget what its called, not talking about election votes) so that they can then can then have an election for independence from Canada. That election will be close as I don’t think the Libs will make enough changes to appease Alberta. I also think Saskatchewan is being ignored as far as a independence threat to Canada. The east and west in Canada do not mix well with the middle of Canada atm, even more so than normal.
I don’t know if pollsters in Canada are as professional as they are elsewhere, but I would expect that they would do their best to account for all of these factors. Certainly the problems you mention aren’t unique to Canada, nor are you accurate as in saying that the skew isn’t a significant issue in US polling. In fact, quite the opposite happened, where people weren’t too sure about the statistical adjustments that pollsters used, that turned out to be relatively accurate after all.
You see, what the experts don’t realize is…
It would be hypocritical of me to accuse someone of doing that, given all that I was saying in the run-up to the US elections…
You should always blindly follow the experts…
Definitely also significant in the US, just different here. The relationship between the popular vote here, verse the popular vote in the US both show the same “winner” (Except for a rarity like Trump 2024), I find the skewing here more significant. I find the traditional liberal media here more biased than the US (CBC is MSNBC on multiple doses of steroids), and to add, they are funded by the Government, but not actually owned by the Gov. At the moment the one party gives them more and more money over the years, while the other one wants to remove government funding (Which party do you think they will be more supportive of?). They have already been caught editing CP videos in order to show them less favorably (2 journalists were let go).
Here is a quick example from a recent election:
Liberal - POP Vote: 32.6% - SEATS%: 47.3%
Conservative - POP Vote: 33.7% - SEATS%: 35.2%
Bloc Québécois - POP Vote: 7.6% - SEATS%: 9.5%
New Democratic Party - POP Vote: 17.8% - SEATS%: 7.4%
So liberals win the pop vote in POLLS, but lose it in election, HOWEVER win significantly more seats. The Bloc vs NDP is even more skewed, and this is because the Bloc is a provincial party that runs in a federal election (There is nothing like this in the USA). So in this universe the NDP has double the popular vote than the Bloc, however 2% less in actual seats.
This is what I mean by difference between polls and reality when it comes to Canada.
… I know more than them as I go on social media as well as talking to John, the barman, at the local.