101 responses so far ↓

• 1 John // Oct 16, 2008 at 1:24 pm

  Our electoral system works just fine,in every electoral district gets represented by the person with the most votes.
  That’s democratic and works well.
  We don’t need a system like in the Netherlands with 22 different political one isseu parties to choose from.
  The Liberals here have allready gone so far to the left,they might as wel join the N.D.P.
  Then we can have a two party system with a place for every one.

• 2 Sam Mooney // Oct 15, 2008 at 12:21 pm

  The results - smaller percentage of the popular vote and 19 more seats. It’s time for electoral reform - http://www.living-in-the-country.com/2008/10/2008-election-r.html

• 3 Robert White // Oct 15, 2008 at 8:29 am

  with the exception of the Liberals taking more seats in Ontario than the Conservatives despite being behind in the polls, this turned out to be fairly accurate. Good guess!

• 4 tom // Oct 14, 2008 at 3:15 pm

  Luc : I must correct you. You are right that there are more consumers in the east, who will be paying more carbon tax but the amount of carbon tax per person will be more in the west which is more rural and in the end its the government that takes the taxes and wastes or steals all they can get their hands on.

• 5 GottaLoveDemocracy // Oct 14, 2008 at 12:26 pm

  I love reading the comments of all you folks who are so solidly left or right. I have had to learn to temper my hard and fast views. I have been around long enough to witness both Liberal and Tory’s rapidly move away from election promises when faced with the econimic realities of governing. I recall the high spending Conservatives under Mulroney (who had promised fiscal responsibility after the Trudeau era) and deficit slaying Liberals under Chretien (who promised a social conscience and new programs … yet never delivered). Both decidedly different than their pre-election rhetoric. I would argue that when faced with reality they chose to make the best decision for the country even if it was in conflict with their ideoligical beliefs.

  Witness at present the American government “buying” equity positions in banks! … not something I would have believed would happen in my lifetime. From time to time reality has its own way of overtaking our sincerest and deepest held beliefs.

  Call me naive, but … there are good and well meaning folks on both sides of the political spectrum who will no doubt do the right thing for Canada when called upon … regardless of their beliefs.

  My hope is that the radical voices on either side tend to be marginallized by the greater needs of the country when decisions are finally made.

  Go Canada!

• 6 charles // Oct 14, 2008 at 12:13 pm

  WLU: I found this website to be a great source for election predictions and poll info. Thank you for taking the time to post the seat projections. Personally, I think we may be in for a big surprise after the polls close. I suspect that it will take some time to determine winners. It may be alot closer than any one thinks. The vote is split, GO HARPER. You either vote Harper or you have your head in the sand. He is the only leader who can properly govern in these tough times. God help us if we wake up to a Dion coalition.

• 7 Chris // Oct 14, 2008 at 9:43 am

  Hi WLU,

  I just wanted to thank you for updating this seat projection throughout the campaign. It has made the poll results much easier to understand.

• 8 Paul // Oct 14, 2008 at 9:05 am

  Still with the fear-mongering!!!
  I love democracy. Even the paranoidally delusional fools get their say.

• 9 Luc // Oct 14, 2008 at 1:09 am

  Barry H wrote// …Today a vote for the Liberals is a vote for separation. If the green shift is imposed the West would be saying “good-bye” within a year. NEP2 will not fly!
  _____________________
  This is the politics of fear and hatred that is practised by Harper. Harper or other conservative political hack defines this as NEP2 and gullibles like Barry here accept the lies hook, line, and sinker. Barry obviously hasn’t taken time to even read the Green Shift. He caved to Harper fear mongering because he wants the lies to be true. In all reality the green shift tax on pollution will be paid by the end consumer. Now use your head Barry, where is the largest number of end consumer, eastern Canda or Western Canada. ? Although the tax would be collected from western Canada, it would paid by Eastern Canada to western Canda. This is the dirty little secret that Harper doesn’t want you to realize. The other secret he doesn’t want you to know is that his environmental policy is expensive, bureaucratically heavy like the gun registry, ineffective and difficult to implement. It will cost taxpayers more than the Green shift. But he has somehow manged to run a campaign hiding John Baird and not talking about his “Turning the corner” environmental plan. He is definitely ashamed of his environmental record.

• 10 Michiel Horn // Oct 13, 2008 at 10:26 pm

  Hmm. The three most accurate predictors in 2006 were the EPP, ESM, and Democratic Space. Your estimate for the CPC was too high and for the Liberals too low. On the basis of the other three sources, I suspect your numbers for the Cnservatives and Liberals are out again this year, but not as much as last time. On the Bloc and NDP I suspect you’re just about right on.

• 11 H. Moreton // Oct 13, 2008 at 7:33 pm

  Those who think that the upcoming minority government is a triumph of the electorate over an evil Conservative majority had better rethink their thesis. When analyzing the election results, it would be good to remember that if it were not for the Bloc Québécois, there would likely be a Conservative majority. The Bloc seats are primarily outside of Montréal where the majority francophone sentiment is anti-Liberal and where the NDP is not even on the radar screen. The only credible alternative for these Bloc voters is the Conservatives. So the unholy alliance of so-called anti-Harperites includes the Bloc separatists along with the Liberals and NDP’ers - what a witches’ brew!!! And this scenario of yet another ineffectual Federal minority government plays right into the hands of the separatists - for don’t ever forget, their main raison d’être is still independance for Québec.

• 12 Irem Ali // Oct 13, 2008 at 5:57 pm

  I’ve really enjoyed checking out the latest projections every few days. If memory serves me right, Dr. Kay’s model comes pretty close to determining the election result.

  This election will not determine much other than our country is divided and pretty much thanks to the Tories. Almost 2/3 of Canadians will reject the Tories “wedge” tactics, pitting one part of the country against the other to secure a puny mandate.

  Mr. Harper, enjoy your final kick at the can. Your “Rovian” attempt to divide Canada will ensure your minority status.

• 13 The other Josh // Oct 13, 2008 at 4:46 pm

  Burke: Saying hello to Harper IS saying hello to Big Government. Or haven’t you been paying attention to Bills C-61 and C-51? Harper is rapidly taking away our rights, making new laws and stricter punishments, and still campaigning under the false guise of Right Wing “less government intervention” ideals. Don’t be fooled by people who will tell you that “The Left” always wants to control you and “The Right” wants you to be free… unfortunately it’s no longer black and white in this day and age.

  Paul: Well the pipe dream of a deranged section of the so-called “Right” already came true when all of our separate parties from the Right formed one party. If that had not happened we would never be in this position in the first place - it is clear that far more Canadians strongly DON’T want Harper than do. I for one would love the opportunity to place my vote for a Right wing party with our country’s interests truely at heart… however the thought of having to vote for an evil man like Harper makes that impossible in my mind.

• 14 Ben // Oct 13, 2008 at 1:54 pm

  3rd Federal Election in 6 years - $50 million dollars

  4 Weeks of campaigning - $10 million per party (except for the Green’s, they spent 20 bucks)

  Global Economic Meltdown - Trillions and Trillions

  Being right back where we started 2 years ago - PRICELESS

  Some things in life are worth doing for everything else there’s Stephen Harper.

• 15 Jim Smith // Oct 13, 2008 at 12:44 pm

  A vote for Green is a vote for the Liberals.
  If people really want change, don’t split the votes.
  Liberal/Green is a new party.
  Wake up and smell the coffee.
  Vote for the person who offers your riding the best alternative, not for any of the back stabbing leadeds who are offering you nothing but more debt.

• 16 Paul // Oct 13, 2008 at 12:21 pm

  Today’s projections point to another de facto Conservative majority. Unfortunately committee work will be hindered by partisanship.
  At least there will not be any burdensome tax increases.

• 17 H. Moreton // Oct 13, 2008 at 12:03 pm

  Several observers are already lamenting yet another fractious minority government and the high frequency of elections with the same result. Maybe it is finally time to return to effective government with a majority government next election - and if after a full term the population is unhappy with the government, throw the bums out and give the other folks a chance with a majority government in the following election. It would make for a more civil parliament, fewer elections and give a chance to each government to govern, while providing the democracy that was originally envisioned by this nation’s founders.

• 18 Christopher // Oct 13, 2008 at 10:08 am

  Great - another $200M plus spent to achieve the same result! (And only because of some arts funding realignment.)

• 19 Richard // Oct 13, 2008 at 12:22 am

  The NDP only at 3 in Atlantic Canada? I can’t imagine them getting fewer than 2in NS, 1 in NB, and 1 in NL.

• 20 Paul // Oct 12, 2008 at 2:30 pm

  I for one appreciate this site. It really is silly how so many partisans use a site like this to attack each other and their parties.

  Interesting, civil dialogue would make for a nice change of pace.

  Based on your numbers Mr. Harper will have another comfortable minority. A possible Liberal-NDP-Bloc coalition is a pipe dream of the deranged section of the Left.
  Political poison for the Liberals and the NDP to form a coalition with the Bloc.
  A late surge may just strengthen Mr. Harper’s position. Regardless of one’s political persuasions this would probably be the best scenario for Canada in these perilous economic times.

• 21 Andrew // Oct 12, 2008 at 12:00 pm

  Michael;
  Check out climate change further: read the letter to the editor in the Economist (Sep 27) by Philip Stott, Emeritus Professor Biogeography, U of London. If you have more time read Bruno Wiskel, The Emperor’s New Climate. Neither gentleman is beholden to any oil or car company. And secondly, why is it that socialists always cloak themselves in the term democratic? And, eh, Canada has not been a Social Democratic country since Confederation. Socialism settled in about the time Canada ceased to be a Dominion during the Trudeau era.

• 22 John // Oct 12, 2008 at 11:49 am

  Why has Dion relaced Bob Rae with Justin Trudeau ?
  Does he not want to be seen with Bob Rae in Ontario ?
  But does de name Trudeau not remind you of 1981 a $200.oo0.000 debt,a 20 % morgages and interest rates ,15.000 people losing their homes and business ?
  Wake up Canada,Trudeau,Chrettien,Dion they’re all the same,a 30 day plan to get elected and then they’ll give you the finger when you lose your home and your business.

• 23 Mohammad // Oct 12, 2008 at 1:35 am

  hahaha, job numbers for September?

  Well, of course, a lot of people got TEMPORARILY hired in September because of the election.

  It’s OK if Harper wins again, it is a phase we have to go through, after all, joy wouldn’t feel so good if it wasn’t for pain.

• 24 Zodiac // Oct 12, 2008 at 12:19 am

  JNG you wouldn’t happen to be Stephen Harper would you?

  Actually Mann went back and re-analyzed the data (Sept 2008) based on the suggestions and his original conclusions still hold true:

  http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11646

  Climate change and global warming are used interchangeably in the media, but there are differences:

  http://www.grinningplanet.com/2007/01-02/global-warming-vs-climate-change.htm

• 25 JNG // Oct 11, 2008 at 4:45 pm

  Michael, you wouldn’t happen to be Michael Moore would you? Global Warming?
  Mann Hockey Stick Graph No longer credible:
  http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=cea34354-b1af-467b-9f49-4ef98f416e71&p=1
  In Aug. 2007, a Canadian named Steve McIntyre discovered that NASA’s Global Temperature numbers were flawed. Shortly after that they were quietly corrected. Now 1998 is no longer the warmest year on record - it is 1934. Now we also know that our planet has been cooling over the last decade.
  The Global Warming boogyman is dead. It’s now called Climate Change. That is perfect because the climate always changes. If it rains a lot , snows a lot, we have icebergs melting in the artic and ice thickening in the Antartic it is all man-made climate change! If enough people say it, it will be true.

• 26 JNG // Oct 11, 2008 at 4:28 pm

  “All those wonkies on the left talk “pie in the sky” with all these new huge money promises.”
  So much for that. Today Dion is saying that because of the Worldwide economic meltdown he may have to delay his social spending promises until the 3rd or 4th year of his mandate (if he wins a majority). So we can look forward to a hefty carbon tax immediately but nothing else.
  He is already leaving himself an out.

• 27 Michael // Oct 11, 2008 at 2:54 pm

  What about the Lehman’s CEO for the $500 million, and the people losing their retirement funds, pensions and homes down in the USA?

• 28 Christopher // Oct 11, 2008 at 11:00 am

  You certainly have a flair for the dramatic, Michael. I’m so tired of people railing against the so-called nameless, faceless, evil corporations. Corporations are run by people, they employ people, sell stuff to people. How is it exactly do they destroy peoples (sic) lives? And how many CEOs can you name that earn $500M a year? Maybe you should read a few less proletariat (read “student”) newspapers and pick up an economics textbook.

• 29 Michael // Oct 11, 2008 at 8:06 am

  Oh and Andrew,

  We do live in a Social Democratic country. Canada has been that since Confederation. I’d rather live with those benefits than in a USA type country where big business destroys the peoples lives and the CEO’s take home $500 million in a year.

  Why don’t you go to the States for your next hospital visit without insurance. That way you’ll see what Harper wants you to pay for health care.

  He’s the nightmare.

• 30 Michael // Oct 11, 2008 at 7:59 am

  Andrew,

  Go back and listen too any one the Climate Change Specials from each year of CBC’s Quirks and Quarks. They also did an election special in early September talking about the carbon tax system or a cap and trade. They not only work in other countries, those countries are always at the forefront of new greener power technologies. The best one they did was from earlier this year with the fellows describing what the planet will look like in 50 years if we do nothing to curb our oil dependency.

  To me I’d rather be at the forefront of renewable energies than standing still, burning oil, and heating the planet. Any scientist that I have heard trying to disprove climate change is either backed by oil companies, car companies, or completely dismisses it as non-fact without giving any prove.

  The planet is warming. It may not be all burning of fossil fuels but that surely doesn’t help.

  We cannot stand by and do nothing.

• 31 Burke // Oct 11, 2008 at 2:36 am

  I think the Conservative projection is 15-20 seats low. Unfortunately it looks like a minority again. Did you see the job growth numbers for September??
  Some countries would give anything for that. Harpers a great leader. All those wonkies on the left talk “pie in the sky” with all these new huge money promises.
  Hello big government cradle to graver liberals, you need to have something more than bashing the United States for policies. Geez you’ll be out of business when a liberal President comes in January 09. Jokes on you then.

• 32 Paul // Oct 11, 2008 at 1:58 am

  “Harper broke his own election law, to call a rush election. Methinks somebody got a tip on the coming economic collapse from his Washington minders.”

  Is that what passes for meaningful political discussion in this forum? Or is it just another forum for idiotic partisans of all stripes?

  I was hoping for something with a little gravitas.

• 33 Another Josh // Oct 10, 2008 at 8:42 pm

  It looks to me like Harper wanted it to coincide not only with the economic collapse, but also with the US elections to deflect young voters’ attention away, knowing he is very weak in that demographic. Everyone is saying how the youth in Canada are not paying attention to our own election because they are all so busy watching the US election!

  If Harper was “on top of things” and knew about the coming collapse as he himself claims, then he was negligent in not warning Canadians. Many Canadians will have lost a great deal of their savings in investments backed in the US and abroad… thanks Harper, for once again looking out for the little guy ahead of Big Business.

  I say he may have been warned of the collapse, but he either doesn’t have a clue or doesn’t care about how to deal with the Canadian economy. The only reason Canada is weathering the crisis so well is because of the good economic position Chretien’s Liberals forked hard for 10 years to get us into. Harper has done nothing.

• 34 JNG // Oct 10, 2008 at 8:18 pm

  Latest number - October 10th
  Nanos:
  CPC= 33%
  Libs= 27%
  NDP= 22%
  Green= 8%
  Bloc= 10%

  Harris Decima:
  CPC : 34%
  Libs : 26%
  NDP : 18%
  Green : 12%
  BQ : 9%

• 35 KRB // Oct 10, 2008 at 5:06 pm

  Rob Doyle (Oct 9), great comment!! Shows just how out to lunch the opposition parties were, and how Harper was on top of things.

  Now where are the CPC ads/backgrounders circulating this information? I dare say it would come in handy!

• 36 Andrew // Oct 10, 2008 at 3:06 pm

  I challenge Michael on the point that Carbon taxes work in other countrys (sic). Carbon taxes are in disarray in Europe. Concerning the need to think about what the planet is going to be like for our kids, the climate change scare is blown out of proportion: remember how Y2K played out? 00:00 hours on 2000-01-01 came and went and nothing happened, except that accountants and consultants pocketed some $14 Billion in fees. The real nightmare scenario that may face us on the morning of September 15 is a Green Liberal-Socialist (let’s call a spade a spade) - BQ coalition in charge of this country.

• 37 Mike // Oct 10, 2008 at 1:29 pm

  Harper broke his own election law, to call a rush election. Methinks somebody got a tip on the coming economic collapse from his Washington minders.

• 38 Calgary Junkie // Oct 10, 2008 at 12:21 pm

  At 25 % popular vote, the LPC will face an existential crisis., because of their big reliance on the $1.85 per vote per year allowance.

  Their money problems will just snowball. The wolf will be knocking on the LPC door. And it won’t be Harper, but the collection agency.

• 39 Josh // Oct 10, 2008 at 9:36 am

  BK - How do you think the growing dislike of the Campbell government is playing into the hands of the federal Conservatives in British Columbia?

• 40 Michael // Oct 10, 2008 at 5:25 am

  Please take a look at the Green Shift and what a carbon tax is before believing the Harper attack adds. Carbon taxes work in other countrys and we really need to think about what the planet is going to be like for our kids. Climate change is a fact! Don’t believe the oil backed politicians.

• 41 Rob Doyle // Oct 9, 2008 at 10:03 pm

  Today, opposition parties are all talking about the dangers that global economic uncertainty is posing to the Canadian economy. Having suddenly woken up to the danger facing the economy, they are scrambling to invent policies about this crisis.

  Prime Minister Stephen Harper in December 2007

  Last December, the Prime Minister was talking about the coming challenges brought on by the collapse of the U.S. housing market.

  (London Free Press, December 12, 2007, A1.)

  “Harper ready to give us the squeeze. Tells Canadians to tighten their belts as U.S. financial collapse looms” (Ottawa Sun, December 21, 2007).

  “In CTV’s year-end interview with Prime Minister Stephen Harper, he says he’s concerned about the slowdown in the American economy and how it could impact businesses north of the border” (Canadian Press, December 20, 2007).

  “After almost two years of ‘don’t worry, be happy’, the PM has been raising a caution flag, if not an alarm, about the Canadian economy in the year ahead. ‘I think 2008 will be a more challenging year for the country and for the government,’ he predicted during a recent chat with us at 24 Sussex Dr.” (Greg Weston. Whitehouse Star, December 31, 2007).

  · “Harper said he’ll be keeping watch on the looming storm on Canada’s economic horizon. ‘We know there is considerable uncertainty in the world economy, in the American economy, and we’ve seen very strong performance from our economy so far,’ he said Monday. ‘So obviously, our wish for the year is we’re able to sustain that momentum and shelter as best we can Canadians from any fallout of global economic problems’” (Canadian Press, December 31, 2007).

  The Prime Minister was clear that the difficulties in the American economy were a real concern.
  · ROBERT FIFE (Reporter): As the Prime Minister sat down with CTV to reflect on the past year, he has worries about the next. Top of mind, a threatening downturn in the American economy that will be felt north of the border.
  STEPHEN HARPER (Canadian Prime Minister): I believe that 2008 is likely to be a challenging year in terms of the economy… There’s no way we can be completely insulated from what’s going on in the United States or in the global economy (CTV National News, December 20, 2007).

  The Liberals and the NDP in December 2007

  The Liberals and the NDP responded to the Prime Minister’s careful concern by saying the economy was fine and that the Prime Minister was trying to “create a climate of fear.”

  The Liberals said the Prime Minister was overstating the risk.

  “[John] McCallum said the government is overstating the risks because many experts expect the Canadian economy to grow by up to 2.5 per cent this year, which would leave room for spending and tax initiatives” (Toronto Star, January 1, 2008).

  “McCallum accused Harper of sending a confusing message to consumers by combining talk of a tax cut with a warning the economy could be headed for trouble. ‘This is clearly a triumph of gimmickry over good public policy to announce the GST cut in a store and tell us the cupboard is bare,’ said McCallum. ’I think they’re trying to downplay expectations and then people will be positively surprised’” (Toronto Star, January 1, 2008).

  The Liberals were apparently still unaware of the challenges the crisis proposed when they wrote their platform.

  Stéphane Dion recently admitted that ‘It was difficult for us to write a chapter on a U.S. economic crisis when we were preparing our platform’ (Stéphane Dion, Le téléjournal, October 6, 2008).

  And Jack Layton and the NDP were not any better. Mr. Layton said that the threat to the economy was “climate change” rather than the collapse of the American housing markets.

  “NDP leader Jack Layton accused Mr. Harper of trying to ‘create a climate of fear’ to justify government plans for the economy, as he said the government has done to gain support for the war in Afghanistan and to avoid joining the global fight against climate change. ‘If the economy is getting into some trouble and the government’s finances are in some trouble, it’s because Mr. Harper has paid no attention to that issue (climate change) at all,’ Mr. Layton said, adding that his party will continue to vote against the government on no-confidence motions” (Ottawa Citizen, December 24, 2007).

  JACK LAYTON: “Well I think he is trying to create a climate of fear, and, you know, that’s been his approach unfortunately on some issues, whether it was the way in which we have gone to war in Afghanistan” (CTV, Question Period, December 23, 2007).

• 42 Chris London // Oct 9, 2008 at 6:30 pm

  This is looking better all the time. Minority governments force the leaders to work together. It is a much more representative form of government.

• 43 Mary // Oct 9, 2008 at 12:59 pm

  Give us a majority Conservative so
  something can get done. The other two
  scare me with their spending and taxing.
  There are too many parties.

• 44 L. Mitchell // Oct 9, 2008 at 4:16 am

  The whole process is a joke with a disappointing punch line.

  We have allowed Federal Governments to divide us by regional interest’s (so they can use them to get elected) and in doing this are allowing them to waste our country.

  We have done this by not demanding that our Provincial Government’s be given the authority, and accountability for effective regional government. AND YES, that means fighting with the Feds and other provincial government’s for your regional piece of the pie.

  It’s time we challenged a Federal Government to fight for what’s good for Canada and for Provincial Government’s to fight for what ’s good for their province.

  Definition of disfunctional: a national party debate with 5 parties represented, 1 of whom obviously has no intention of being the leader of this country, and another who represent’s a party that has no elected MP. How do you think the other 13 registered political parties in Canada might feel about that? Group hug everybody.

  WHAT ARE WE DOING

• 45 Ike // Oct 8, 2008 at 11:31 am

  I’m predicting a minority liberal government within a range of 120 - 130 seats. Hoping I am out to lucnch because I scared by the carbon tax. I believe Harper has lost the election.

• 46 TB // Oct 8, 2008 at 10:51 am

  Rick: In the 2006 election, Nanos (formerly SES Research) was actually the most accurate. If I remember correctly, they predicted each major party’s vote totals to within 0.1%.

• 47 Josh // Oct 8, 2008 at 10:41 am

  Actually the Nanos polls were the most accurate last time.

• 48 Brent // Oct 8, 2008 at 9:29 am

  The seat projections are based on the Globe and Mail’s poll aggregation, which as of writing (Oct. 8, 9:20), showed the Conservative’s with a 10 point lead.

  This would seem to be misleading given that recent polls show a much closer race (3 to 7 points) compared to older polls (14 to 15 points) included in the aggregate.

  It seems highly unlikely that the older polls in the sample are an accurate reflection of current voter sentiment. This would result in an overestimation of Conservative seats in the model.

  Given the saying about a week in politics being a long time, has there been any consideration to more heavily weighting more recent polls when doing such aggregation?

• 49 Mark // Oct 8, 2008 at 5:58 am

  No way in hell the Conservative party is going to win 149 seats, they’ll be lucky if they can hold 100.

• 50 Mike // Oct 8, 2008 at 12:48 am

  If like me, you haven’t decided which way you plan to vote yet, this might help:

  The Conservatives are apparently planning to re-introduce the unpopular bill C-61, aka “The Canadian DMCA”:

  http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3439/125/

• 51 Neil Anstett // Oct 7, 2008 at 11:05 pm

  Dr. Kay, first off the seat projection, looks good. Secondly, I am from the Huron Bruce Riding, I believe that this may be one of the closely contested ridings in Ontario. The Conservative candidate Ben Lobb is a second time candidate for the riding, while the Liberal candidate, Greg McClinchey is a former municpal councillor and first time federal candidate. I am almost wondering if this riding could to go to the Liberals just as easy as it could go to the Conservatives which you have predicted it too. While Lobb ran in the 2006 election and lost to incumbent Paul Steckle who had been the Member of Parliament since 1993 when he defeated Murray Cardiff, Lobb only lost by 971 votes which is quite astonishing. I am wondering though if the riding will go to McClinchey will have a better chance at taking the riding because of his past politcal career and his years of working for Steckle in Ottawa.

• 52 Rick // Oct 7, 2008 at 5:21 pm

  I look at the IPSOS polls as the most effective. Last election they were tag on , while all the others missed by quite a margin.

• 53 Josh // Oct 7, 2008 at 10:36 am

  Eli - consumption is the key to a carbon footprint, Canadians are average are the 2nd largest consumers per capita in the world. In environmental impact assessment there is the IPAT formula, Inpact = Population times Affluence times Technology, we are far ahead in affluence and technology compared to major populations like Nigeria, Bangladesh and Indonesia that have more than 5 times are population but no where near our affluence and technology. Canada has a lot of heavy industry and mining that also creates a much larger footprint. And our economy doesn’t run on oil, the GDP of Ontario is more than double that of Alberta’s and Alberta is only the 4th province in total GDP.

  Gary it will be interesting with Hoskins in Haldimand/Norfolk. He is very popular there and should easily take the majority of votes in Simcoe, I saw him speak there once and it was a love-in. There are a few seats I question the projections of, Gatineau, Ottawa South, London’s 3 ridings, most other prediction websites of 2 going to the Liberals and 1 to the NDP, the northern ridings around Nickle Belt/Sudbury, Brant, Haldimand/Norfolk, Hamilton Ridings, Vancouver Kingsway, Vancouver Quadra, Winnipeg ridings in general. Some of these ridings will be more competitive but many of them are not going in the direction the methodology suggests.

  I also think that the territories are going to be interesting, they tend to vote with the government.

• 54 Sam Mooney // Oct 7, 2008 at 8:06 am

  I found your blog yesterday after seeing a video clip where you mentioned LISPOP.

  I started blogging about the election hoping that I could get one Canadian who wasn’t planning to vote to change his/her mind and go to the polls. Initially I said I was willing to live with any Government elected by a majority of the popular vote.

  Naive? Very. Why? Voter apathy and our electoral system.

  Mr Harper’s ill-conceived comments about arts and culture funding have moved me to the ABC camp.

  The only thing that we can do at this point to try and ensure that we have a government that reflects the desires of a majority of Canadians is to personally tackle voter apathy.

  Today I’m asking people to spend the coming week persuading others to vote - http://www.living-in-the-country.com/2008/10/time-to-vote-st.html.

  I’m willing to live with a majority Conservative government as long as it represents significantly more than 25% of the popular vote.

  I’ve been advocating strategic voting.

• 55 Chris Donat // Oct 6, 2008 at 12:05 pm

  The prairies are including the 3 ridings from the territories.

• 56 Mark gardner // Oct 6, 2008 at 10:45 am

  I don’t understand the prairie vote, your totals are 31 seats. Doesn’t Saskatchewan have 14 and manitoba have 14.

• 57 Ewen Lasalle // Oct 5, 2008 at 2:59 pm

  If these polling number hold true we probably will see one of two outcomes…
  1) a tory minority that will have a few seat crossers becomes a bare majority(a distinct possibility as we have a lot of opportunists in politics)

  2) an attempt by the Liberals NDP and Bloc to form a coalition. The danger of course allowing political opportunism to blind them to the damage done to reputation to forming a government with a party dedicated to destroying Canada.

  Time will tell of course……

• 58 Phil Hauser // Oct 5, 2008 at 1:51 pm

  The problem with the Green Party is it’s irrelevance, it has not ever won a seat in Federal politics and demands a seat at the table. It has never polled over 6 per cent in an election (wait and see but I see the vote evaporating in a mad rush to block the Tories)

  Greens could always have a home in either the NDP and now could have a home in the Liberal tent.

  Their presence in the debate is dividing the left further and yet the leader has very right wing social views. If the vote doesn’t drift away in the next ten days, the Greens could end up being the wildcard through vote splitting that delivers the Conservative majority.

  As a conservative I say thank you Liz May!

• 59 gary // Oct 5, 2008 at 8:30 am

  You have Haldimand Norfolk as a Conservative win. I would suggest from signs, comments and opinions expressed from those in the community that Hoskins has a better chance of returning this riding to the Liberals than you are giving him credit for. Diane Finlay is vulnerable because of her lack of activity on the land claims issue, the tobacco issue and her lack of activity in the riding.

• 60 Eli // Oct 4, 2008 at 1:08 pm

  I cannot believe the non-sense or the emphasis of the “GREENERS” (that includes Liberals and the NDP) in this election. Carbon tax, opposition to “Big Oil” will dramatically increase the cost of everything we consume. Canada’s economy runs on oil. We represent less than 0.1% of the world’s population, how is it that anyone can imagine our carbon foot-print affects global warming and needs to be taxed? I don’t have figures, but I’ll wager the cattle in Canada contribute far more GH gas than the entire population does. Shall we tax grass next?

• 61 Sasha // Oct 2, 2008 at 5:22 pm

  I have not seen any prediction web site giving the Green Party any realistic chance of actually winning a seat. Barry is consistent with every other source out there.

  Pre-election polling numbers for the Greens never actually convert into the same number of votes, and for those two ridings, I don’t see Wilson being re-elected, and the MacKay name is too big for the incumbent to lose Central Nova to May.

• 62 Wasyl Wysoczanskyj // Oct 2, 2008 at 5:01 pm

  How close was your prediction to actual in 2006?

• 63 Scott // Oct 2, 2008 at 4:51 pm

  Harper will turn minority into majority.
  If Harper wins around 147 seats watch for him to pluck 9 or 10 Liberals out of the back bench and put them in his cabinet and there is his majority.
  Its not unthinkable. If he doesnt win anything in Vancouver proper and Toronto and Montreal he can put 3 Liberals from each of these cities into his cabinet and can use the excuse he doesnt want to see these 3 cities excluded from his cabinet

• 64 R.A. LeBlanc // Oct 2, 2008 at 3:34 pm

  I’ve been paying close attention to your model and I believe I understand the methodology. I, however, do not understand how, when properly employed, it still calls Cumberland/Colchester/Musquodoboit Valley Too Close To Call. The fact that your model has consistently had only 1 Independent/Other for weeks leads the obeserver to dismiss it at first glance. Given the probabilty of Green Party seats in Central Nova, and West Vancouver/Sunshine Coast/Sea to Sky Country as well as the likely victories for Independents in Cumberland/Colchester/Musquodoboit Valley and Portneuf/Jaques Cartier a rehtinking of the “Other” seat count should be considered.

• 65 Robert White // Oct 2, 2008 at 9:11 am

  Paul, the only person you will be able to go to if you have a problem that requires the federal government will be your local member of parliament. Therefore I would say that it is best to elect the local guy you think is best.
  Although I may disagree with your choice I do understand your dilema. When I have had a question about a federal policy, I’ve always got a response from our current member. Our previous member would not send me a reply of any type and was downright rude when asked in person, knowing I didn’t vote for him.
  It is better to have a parliament full of good people, than to have one full of partisan hacks.

• 66 Paul // Oct 1, 2008 at 4:02 pm

  I think this has always been a dilemma in a Parliamentary political system. What do you do if your support the policy of a party, but the candidate of that party in your riding is a scumbag? or vice versa?

  Without revealing my riding, I want to say my Liberal candidate is my man, but their platform and leadership is really poor. (Green shift? really??)

  I also want to praise this website. Canadian politics has been constrained to mainstream. I’m glad to see blogs and discussions such as this.

  I am currently running a Project - Test Your MP to determine if your MP candidates actually read your emails.

  Please share: http://www.blables.com/new/ca_election_test_your_mp

• 67 Kevin // Oct 1, 2008 at 10:14 am

  Does anyone else get the idea that this election is presenting only one reasonable choice? I have been a CPoC in the past, but this election I just do not see how you could vote for anyone else. In the past at least the other parties had some policy you could get behind, if you were not too conservative.

  This election, I find that despite the CPoC being not so conservative in practice, there is just no other place to park my vote. And some of the parties have policy that is downright hostile to western interests, so parties like the Greens, NDP, and Liberals actually have to be stopped.

• 68 Josh // Sep 30, 2008 at 9:58 pm

  Hi

  I am from the riding of Brant and wondering why you are strongly giving the riding, one that has never been held by a Conservative in its 40+ years as its current riding format, to the Conservatives. I know the campaign of Mr. McColeman is highly organized but also the NDP and Greens are running unknown weak candidates. Mr. St. Ammand is by no stretch of the imagine a good MP but I just don’t think you should be counting him out.

• 69 Robert White // Sep 30, 2008 at 3:29 pm

  this projection has a 54:37 split, but electionprediction.org is still showing 40:41. i’m thinking that means there will be at least 18 shocked candidates on election night.
  applying the margin of error to the polls so far and dropping the extreme results given the accuracy only applies 19 times out of 20, the campaigns have been relatively flat so far.

• 70 BK // Sep 30, 2008 at 10:25 am

  Phil,

  For you to conclude that the 905 region in our projection is “almost entirely Liberal” I can only deduce that you are unfamiliar with the parameters of the region, which extends from Niagara Falls to Whitby excluding Toronto. The areas adjacent to Toronto are mostly Liberal, but of the six “905″ ridings among the twenty in the Ontario sample, only one (Mississauga South) is immediately adjacent. Of those six, four are indicated on our map as Conservative, one NDP and one “too close to call”. Because of that skew in riding selection, I would infer that the “905″ data are not as representative for the overall region as they might be. BK

• 71 EJ // Sep 30, 2008 at 1:45 am

  It would be interesting to get a more detailed breakdown as to how each of the regional/constituency breakdowns comes about. In the Globe and Mail poll of polls, the NDP are now only 4% behind the Liberals (24% to 20%). While the NDP’s support may either be spread out or higher in constituencies where Conservatives will win (i.e. Saskatchewan), but it is difficult to understand why such a small spread would result in such a large discrepancy in seats.

  The interesting thing to watch over the next two weeks is whether the NDP will continue to gain Liberal votes and whether Liberal losses will ultimately result in the Conservatives gaining seats with the assistance of the NDP. Also, whether the NDP will continue to gain support and break their previous mark of 44 seats. The fact that if the Liberals cannot stop their slide could benefit the NDP long term as the NDP’s largest hurdle has always been that people will not vote for them because they could not win. If the trend continues, the NDP could end up being the biggest benefactor long term.

• 72 Phil // Sep 29, 2008 at 9:13 pm

  Hi BK, strategic council has been doing polls of the 45 closest ridings from the last election. Recently, Peter Donolo was showing the results from the 20 Ontario seats. Harper and the conservatives had 48% support in the 905 region yet when I look at the 905 region in your projection, it’s almost entirely liberal. What are your thoughts?

• 73 Peter Misiaszek // Sep 29, 2008 at 12:23 pm

  I am interested to see that the Liberal decline is not resulting in significant NDP gain. That in mind, what would it take to see the NDP replace the Liberals as the official opposition?

  At hillandknowlton.ca they have an election predictor whose methodology is similar to the one employed Kay et. al. It suggests that the Liberals would have to collapse to about 21% and the CPC to surge to about 40% to make that happen. In addition the Green vote would have to swell to about 15% before they got their first MP.

  What the regional swing has difficulty with is taking into account the fact that a tidal wave of support sometimes comes out of no where to the benefit of one party (e.g. Tory support in QC and the Beauce in 2006). In these cases, CPC no names, with little support on the grround saw upwards of 15,000 votes migrate their way. What refinements to your model have been made to take into account massive regional changes in voter allignment?

  BTW. I took Barry Kays US Politics 1 & 2 in 1989 (Poli Sci class of ‘91). You were a fascinating prof then as you are today. Keep up the amazing work.

• 74 Phil Hauser // Sep 27, 2008 at 9:04 am

  This is a virtual majority as others have stated but not because of the seat of Mr. Andre is a independent conservative. Nor to the fact that the speaker of the house will likely be from one of the other parties. (The current speaker is a liberal but it is not a god-given right, he must be elected).

  There is another reason that this would be effectively a minority. Voter apathy.

  Harper can run through his agenda and make all votes matters of confidence. The Libs for one can’t afford this election yet another. However as leader of the fourth party in the next parliamaent Dion will also be cast aside for a new saviour.

  As long as the liberals don’t have to go the polls they will sit on their hands if they can’t support a government bill.

  Barring crass opportunism, none of the other parties will feel comfortable forcing an election knowing that the public is not exactly opposed to a Conservative government.

  They have been afraid of triggering this election and Harper knew/knows it.

  With 18 days to go the other question here was where might the Tories solidify the majority?

  1) Every Liberal seat outside of Toronto INCLUDING Montreal. 2) Quebec’s soft nationalists have to get on board to make this a big majority. 3) Floor crossers from some remaining Liberals who want to get out of the way of a leftward leaning leadership battle. 4) Vote splitting will also pave the way just as it did for Jean Chretien. THREE TIMES!

  The question really though is whether Harper needs more then this current projection to govern firmly.

  The left is divided for much the same reason the right was divided, leaders are out of touch and/or they have niche interests that don’t appeal to the mainstream.

  Look for the results of this election to pave the path for the next election in 3,4,5 years. If the liberals fall as far as I believe they will the landscape will be immensely different in 2012

• 75 H. Moreton // Sep 27, 2008 at 12:14 am

  In Québec the Conservatives have succeeded in wooing back old Mulroney organizers to run some of the outside of Montréal campaigns which should help them attract back the soft sovereignist vote - but only if they can emphasize a softer Harper as well as populist programs such as the proposed anti-consumer fraud measures and environmental standards for all oil sands production.

• 76 Mike // Sep 26, 2008 at 3:01 pm

  Given the current projections where might the Conservatives have to make a final push in order to secure a majority?

• 77 Matt // Sep 26, 2008 at 1:34 pm

  Bill Casy is going to win his seat in Nova Scotia with the NDP second.

• 78 Mark gardner // Sep 26, 2008 at 11:37 am

  153 seats would be a majority for the conservatives. The independent in Quebec always votes with Harper. that would be 154 to 154. The speaker is a liberal, hewon’t vote unless there is a tie. therefore 154-153 .

• 79 H. Moreton // Sep 25, 2008 at 11:24 pm

  I hope you are right about the Bloc falling to 38 seats in Québec, but unfortunately Gilles Duceppe is very effectively attacking the Tories on their “cultural subsidy cuts” and the “tougher sentences against minors”.This debate could decide whether Canada finally gets back to a majority government situation or falls back into minority chaos.

• 80 Alan Kan // Sep 24, 2008 at 6:43 pm

  Anthony is correct. The Conservatives have opted not to run a candidate against Mr. Arthur in Portneuf. The Liberal are not running one against Liz May in Central Nova, and the Greens are not running in Dion’s riding or Bill Casey’s (the independent who was expelled from the Tory caucus) riding. The NDP have apparently dropped some candidates due to marijuana or nudity issues.

  So this election, no party is really running a full slate are they?

• 81 Anthony Piscitelli // Sep 24, 2008 at 2:20 pm

  “In Portneuf, at one time we listed Arthur as the favourite, but Quebec City-based polls indicate a substantial swing in that region to the Conservatives.”

  I’m not sure if the model allows to take this into consideration, but I believe the Conservatives have elected to not run a candidate in Portneuf.

• 82 BK // Sep 24, 2008 at 1:21 pm

  Craig:

  There are a number of observations here, many of them quite valid, and I will try to address them in order. You are absolutely correct that Toronto is not the same as Ontario, Montreal the same as Quebec, etc. but we are limited to dealing with the polling data in the form that is available. Ideally we would have polls from each of the 308 ridings to undertake this project, but we are constrained by the resources available.

  Independents can and have been included in the projection in the past. What is required is demonstrated voting stregth in the previous election. The two best shots for Independents this time are Cumberland-Colchester where the former Conservative incumbent Bill Casey is now running as an Independent, and Portneuf where Andre Arthur won last time. Both ridings are currently classified as “too close to call”. In Cumb-Colch it is because of a lack of clarity as to how much of Casey’s support was personal vs party-based. In addition, the Liberals are not campaigning there. In Portneuf, at one time we listed Arthur as the favourite, but Quebec City-based polls indicate a substantial swing in that region to the Conservatives.

  Floor crossings are somewhat problematic, but the rule of thumb used here is to use the party vote in the previous election as a base, but award 3% as new incumbents to those who crossed the floor. Halton and Miss-Streetsville were handled this way.

  The assertions mentioned about election day shifting are impressionistic, and there is no clear pattern established over time. Bandwagon and underdog effects do occur, but tend to offset each other. In 2004 & 2006 in Ontario, the Liberals actually were the party that performed better than the aggregation of late polls indicated. The reason for greater error in our own projections in those years was attributable to this. I emphasize that this projection is only as accurate as the polls it is based upon. If the polls are incorrect, so will be the projection.

  The use of census data is an interesting idea, but is not neccessarily current and can be five years old. Given that the regional swing model compared shifts in the same riding between 2006 and now, demographic change is limited to a 2 and a half years. We don’t claim that this is the only projection method available or even the best one, but it does have a proven track record that goes back 15 federal elections, and has proven well in Ontario provincial elections as well, with the exception of 1990. BK

• 83 admin // Sep 24, 2008 at 12:55 pm

  Alan:

  I had a look at the legend and it has been adjusted. Thanks for noticing the discrepancy.

• 84 Alan Kan // Sep 24, 2008 at 10:12 am

  Dr. Kay:

  Thanks for responding to my comment. I have an observation I’d like to make; it’s more in relation to technical aspects of the map. It seems in Quebec, ridings which you have indicated will stay BQ are a different colour on the map than what the legend shows. I was wondering why that is, unless it’s the computer I’m using that is the problem.

• 85 Craig Hubley // Sep 24, 2008 at 12:49 am

  A few notes about the assumptions. First, the regional data just has to be better.

  1. Montreal is not Quebec.

  2. Toronto is not Ontario.

  3. Newfoundland is not the Maritimes.

  4. Lower Mainland is not BC.

  5. Independents simply need to be excluded from the model. Assume any independent running again will be re-elected, it’s a safer bet than to assume that they won’t, at least recently. Or assume that 2/3 of them will, or some other such fixed figure.

  Some similar statistical constant might be appropriate for floor-crossers, too. Though I think it’s fair to distinguish between floor-crossers and independent MPs kicked out by a party or forced to leave for policy differences with leaders (which generally means they stood up for their constituents) vs. those kicked out for Elections Canada abuses or who grabbed an opportunity (which generally means they didn’t). I think it might be possible to make this distinction without subjective input but based rather on how it was reported by the media. The adjectives used by the media to describe their action, for instance.

  6. There is always election-day shifting towards a party more likely to win seats and away from the weaker sentimental favourites (typically NDP or Green). It can be a very marked effect, often the Green vote has been cut in half in actual election results. This should be part of the model, with overall strength of that party perhaps reducing the probability of a strategic shift at the last moment.

  There may be similar shifts even from strong parties (Conservatives, Liberals) in regions where they are weak (Cons in Toronto may vote Liberal, Liberals in some ridings in BC may vote NDP etc.)..

  7. With recent 2004 and 2006 results for the whole country (and soon 2008) it should be possible to create a model far more accurate than those used in any previous election. Combined with census data on ethnicity/demographic changes in particular ridings, voter turnout patterns, etc., I suspect these things can get quite accurate. But they aren’t now.

  They need a lot of work, to work.

  For now electionprediction.org may be the best we’ve got.

• 86 BK // Sep 22, 2008 at 11:19 pm

  Alan:

  I don’t doubt that you have good reason for your observations, and you might well be correct, but the projection is based upon a conceptual model not subjective perceptions, and doesn’t claim to be sensitive to local factors. BK

• 87 Alan Kan // Sep 22, 2008 at 4:48 pm

  Dear Dr. Kay:

  Your predictions on Mississauga ridings seems to be off. I live and work the campaigns in Streetsville and I can tell that voters are not happy with the antics of the ‘Conservative’ incumbent, Wajid Khan. Any mention of Khan by voters was a negative one. I would change your prediction to at least Lean Liberal.

• 88 BK // Sep 22, 2008 at 12:32 am

  Jim F:

  Seat changes in the projection can be seen in the accompanying LISPOP map. The ridings involved include Ahuntsic, Papineau, Brossard and Jeanne le Ber. The Quebec polls tend to show that the Liberal vote is flat, but the BQ has declined precipitously. Bloc losses in Montreal will go to the Liberals and outside Montreal to the Conservatives. BK

• 89 travis // Sep 21, 2008 at 10:27 pm

  its a shame to see how well the conservatives are doing. harper is a crook folks, hello to big oil.

• 90 BK // Sep 21, 2008 at 9:15 pm

  For those unfamiliar with it, during the Ontario provincial election in 2007 the site had a feature where the seat projection could be customized by users to specific polls. That could be implemented when just one region was was being calculated, but we have six separate regional calculations for the federal projection, and it is simply not possible. BK

• 91 Anthony Piscitelli // Sep 21, 2008 at 8:59 pm

  Are you planning to put up the feature where we can pick polls and make our own predictions of the elections results using Kay’s model? I really liked that feature last election.

• 92 Barry H // Sep 21, 2008 at 10:36 am

  The Liberal Party used to campaign as the federalist Party that would keep Canada united. Today a vote for the Liberals is a vote for separation. If the green shift is imposed the West would be saying “good-bye” within a year. NEP2 will not fly!

• 93 JNG // Sep 21, 2008 at 9:03 am

  The latest prediction from Democratic Space also shows the Tories just shy of a Majority @ 150 seats . I guess we will be going back to the polls in a year or two - ughhh. I say give Harper his majority and either he will impress us or he will blow it. If the “hidden agenda” rears it’s ugly head, he can’t do much damage in just 4 years. Honestly I think he would do just fine. His policies will continue to be focused on the middle of the polticial spectrum - he doesn’t want to be a one hit wonder.

• 94 Jim F // Sep 19, 2008 at 12:47 pm

  Considering that the Liberals won only 13 seats in Quebec in 2006, and lost a subsequent by-election in what was a Liberal stronghold last year, with no prospects of wins in any additional Quebec seats, I have no idea where 18 Liberal seats there would come from.

  National polls that show Liberals leading anyone in Quebec does not reflect reality - the polling samples are too small and does not show the split between Montreal Island the rest of the province. You need to look at the Quebec-only polls with far higher sampling numbers for the province to get the real picture - which is that the Liberals are dead in the province.

• 95 DN // Sep 19, 2008 at 12:23 am

  I can’t believe the Liberal idiots will still get 100 seats. Time to put this loser party to pasture.

• 96 Irem Ali // Sep 18, 2008 at 3:00 pm

  The recent Harris/Decima poll should excite non-Tory supporters. Two key demographics that I am looking at, Quebec and women, are looking better for the Grits. The gap that existed several weeks ago is narrowing. If this continues, the Tories are fated to a minority government.

• 97 BK // Sep 16, 2008 at 6:17 pm

  You might be right about Newfoundland, but this projection is based upon the systematic application of a research model, rather than subjective impressions. If there is polling data available from there, I will be happy to incorporate it. Otherwise, I will continue to use the Atlantic regional figures provided by the national pollsters.

• 98 Jordan // Sep 16, 2008 at 2:48 pm

  I think they need to do a bit more research especially in Newfoundland seeing they have the whole avalon peninsula blue, even thoguh that seems quite impossible I believe we can add an another seat to the NDP and another to the Liberals and take two from the conservatives.

• 99 BK // Sep 16, 2008 at 11:02 am

  The problem for the Green Party is that the system penalizes it, for not having esablished a regional base. Hence the BQ with a smaller popular vote wins a substantial number of seats while the Greens will possibly be shut out.

  The method employed for the seat projection does not predict the future, but is based upon regional aggregations of recent polls which constitute a “snapshot in time” of the recent past.

  Although there are numerical calculations behind each of the constituency assessments, that can’t readily be presented in an easily observable form. The concept of regional swing since the last election is the primary, but not exclusive element of the model. It is described in more detail elsewhere on the site. The rationale for the colour shading is that constiuency leads in excess of 5% are represented by a bright colour. Leads between 3% and 5% by a pale colour, and leads of less than 3% by grey. In a small number of ridings, like Cumberland-Colchester and Portneuf, grey might also be used if there are unusual candidacy situations that confound the model. In Cumberland-Colchester for example, a popular incumbent is running as an Independent.

• 100 Matthew Neugebauer // Sep 16, 2008 at 12:53 am

  also, is it possible to see the numbers for individual ridings?

• 101 Matthew Neugebauer // Sep 16, 2008 at 12:33 am

  hmm-

  I’m surprised that the Greens still won’t pick up a seat this time around. I’m glad the Tories will still be held to a minority. It’s too bad the left-leaning parties aren’t willing to compromise. That’s 166 combined seats to the Tories’ 143!

  I’m also glad that my home riding of Thornhill is a solid red. Unfortunately, Ohio’s 5th (where I am now) looks the same colo(u)r…

Leave a Comment