Wednesday, July 17, 2019
More Bad News For Doug Ford And Andrew Scheer
In my last post I looked at a new poll that suggested that 60 per cent of people in Ontario now believe that Doug Ford's government is corrupt.
And how the stench of that corruption was dragging down Andrew Scheer's numbers in that province.
But that same poll also has some more bad news for Ford and Scheer.
It seems that a large majority of people in the province believe Ford needs a new slogan.
Premier Doug Ford bills himself and his government as “for the people,” but a new poll suggests a clear majority of Ontarians do not believe he cares about people like them.
Asked whether “Doug Ford cares about people like me,” 67 per cent of respondents disagreed with that statement.
And as if those numbers aren't bad enough, and are probably the real reason why he no longer answers his phone.
These numbers are even worse.
About three-quarters of respondents — 74 per cent — agreed with the statement that “catastrophic climate change is happening and it’s caused by human activity” while 13 per cent disagreed and 13 per cent didn’t know.
At the same time, 68 per cent believe “the Ford government is wasting $30 million by advertising against the federal carbon tax” while 15 per cent disagreed and 16 per cent were not certain.
Especially since Ford spends most of his time campaigning against the "job killing carbon tax," and so does Scheer...
Both are shameless climate change deniers.
And since this summer promises to be a really hot one, and a really wet one, they're both going to look like Con clowns, or climate criminals
And make Justin Trudeau look even more like a winner...
It's funny how things turn out eh?
Who knew Doug Ford could be such a useful idiot?
But as I said in my last post, get ready to party in October...
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
I don't understand why Eric Grenier gives a disproportionate amount of weight to AR and IR polls while assigning "outlier penalty" to the Nanos poll because it has a 6 point LPC lead. Meanwhile the aforementioned Con biased poll has the CPC with an 8 point lead and Grenier sees nothing amiss with it. He then states NANOS has no credibility because the NANOS regionals are behind a paywall. It's $4/month to access them. Methinks Grenier is a biased hack who has no business doing any polling analysis for the national broadcaster. AR/IR are consistently off the mark. Their numbers consistently inflate con support but somehow NANOS has no credibility? Why can't the CBC hire decent analysts?
Why is 4 cents a job killing tax but the 14 cents Ontario grabs is somehow not a job killing tax?
The current "pollster wars" three months away from an election are idiotic and bad for democracy. I have never seen anything like it even in the United States. Nobody at Pew Research got into a flame war with Nate Silver even during the most heated points of the Hillary/Trump battle. FFS. Angus Reid in particular is an absolute dick who chased gentle Narnia bear Frank Graves off Twitter. Reid also infantilized Nanos by calling him "Nicky" and saying his polls were crap. Quito Maggi of Mainstreet was appalled and suggested that Reid was in violation of the code of conduct for an organization lending credentials to data analysts. Not surprisingly, he hasn't apologized, and probably won't. John Corbett summed up the two outliers best in a response to a Liberal supporter on Twitter: "Forget it Jake. It's Ipsos." Note also that this latest Oopsos chart was commissioned by Goebbels News. AKA Fox North.
My advice? Ignore Poll Tracker and tell everyone you know to boycott the CBC. And also, to write letters/emails to the ombudsperson. Whether or not they get read is anyone's guess, but at least you'll be letting them know your dissatisfaction with their polling analysis. The national broadcaster is corrupt. I have no idea why Grenier and his colleagues are shilling for the party that wants to cost them their jobs, but that's their problem. Our job is to get the general public engaged and ready to vote to block the Cons.
A better alternative, for riding-specific data in case of strategic voting, P.J. Fournier at 338Canada.com has a better analysis and a cooler head. Even with this Ipsos one he calls it a head-scratcher and says to just toss it on the pile and move on. Read his article about the movement of the tides. Nothing to do with Bill O'Reilly's head-scratcher about science. It's about how to respond to and interpret erratic swings in polling numbers leading up to a contentious election. And remember that the only poll that matters in the end is E-Day. My guess is that Fournier won't give as much credence to this Ipsos survey based on his blog post about it. He won't say so verbatim, nor will he engage in verbal fisticuffs with Grenier, but it's probably going to be thrown on the junk pile as an extreme outlier. There is no way in hell the Cons lead among women or 6 points in Fordistan.
Take heart that Trudeau's breakthrough in 2015 didn't come until September. If the track in July had held through October we'd be answering to Prime Minister Mulcair. And don't forget that Ipsos met with Scheer and the CAPP for a strategy session on how to rig their polls in the Cons' favor. Ipsos is crap. I said months ago that Grenier should have dropped them after their partisan bias was revealed. They're basically Canada's version of Rasmussen. How to tell? They just ran another poll about Trump's hateful rhetoric that showed Republican support for him had skyrocketed in the aftermath of his bigoted statements towards the four congresswomen. Nice to see they're collecting numbers from Nazis. Note also that Darrell Bricker has a vested interest in a particular narrative (he collaborated on a Trudeau slam book with Con hack John Ivison that comes out next month), and has been having his own juvenile pissing war on Twitter with Gerald Butts. I like Gerry, he's a pretty chill dude, and he just basically ignores Bricker other than to say "dude, we really should grab a cup of coffee."
What's most important is for Liberals to keep working hard like you're 20 points in the hole. As for the numbers, follow the tide, take the aggregates with a grain of salt, and trust Nik (or "Nicky"), Bruce and David at Abacus, and Quito and Joseph at Mainstreet to be fairer and more accurate and, also, not exhibit obnoxious behavior like Cons are wont to do. Angus and Darrell maybe need to switch to decaf. Dogs know best what to do with their "polls."
After reading this, I'm inclined to ignore the Con pollsters altogether and just follow Nanos, Abacus, EKOS and Mainstreet among a couple others (and now John Corbett) if I want the truth about where the trends are going. The Con pollsters wank off each other and have a mutually parasitic relationship with the Con media. Check this out. Reid, Bricker and Wright are literally best of buddies who attend each other's weddings. Does it get more incestuous? What crap.
Grenier wants to be the Canadian Nate Silver but can't work out the methodology . To make the poll average system work you need more polls. Grenier goes for fewer polls
Doug the slug meant to say " Fuck The People " but he don't spill to gud.
CBC Poll Tracker is not very useful. Under Definitions, Method, they used to include the fact that there is no margin of error for NET based polls. Since I complained about Grenier including an MOE for NET based polls in his consolidation of various polls, they changed the definition instead of removing the MOE in his chart. NET polls continue to be of little value.
Philippe Fournier is Canada's Nate Silver. Eric Grenier is the guy who copies off his homework. You might say he has poll envy.
Hey I just read something else about the Oopsos poll. And it's from P.J.
It's actually a four point spread with a margin of error of... 3.5%.
Fun with math.
Post a Comment