Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan
I don't really see what you call a "reversal." When looking at the numbers it's important to look at the average and not get too attached to a single, outlier poll. What I see is a slight downward correction as the campaign begins, from a peak of 38% to around 33-35%--both of which are VERY close to their final numbers of 37.5%.
When a single poll contradicts that trend, you have to ask yourself which explanation satisfies the test of Occam's Razor: that ALL the other polls are wrong, or that the single poll is probably an outlier.
The poll you cited has, you won't be surprised to learn, additional problems, because its prediction of a majority depends on smaller, regional samples. Their overall sampling error is based on a sample size of 1200--small but serviceable. But their "seat predictions" break that sample down into regions, and though they don't give us sample sizes for the smaller sub-groups, they have to be huge. How many Atlantic Canadians were in the poll? How many Ontarians? 200? 300?
If so--we're talking about a margin of error of somewhere between "this poll is utterly useless." and "this poll was made by Kevin Lowe."
In any case, we're splitting hairs: you claim they were polling at 43%, and they clearly never were apart from an outlier in September. (though indeed, they polled that high in May, and again in November). Even assuming that's true, those are hardly encouraging numbers for a PM who is literally opposed by nobody. As it happens, he was closer to 35-37% for most of the election cycle--and well before the stock market crash. If Harper wants to use that as an alibi, I suppose he can, but the numbers just don't bear it out.
Here's another listing of polls from last year and this--a bit more complete. You'll see what I'm talking about.
http://www.electionalmanac.com/canada/polls.php |
Blah, blah, blah . . . .
Trending toward a majority . . . . very clearly.
Peaks then drops, coincidental with horrific economic events. . . . . very clearly.
A columnist in the Globe and Mail in March, under the headline
"The Rise And Fall Of The Harper Majority" gives a different rationale than my own but still wonders why the Conservatives didn't get the majority they were trending when the election was called on September 7.
The opening paragraph for his column is:
In late September, when a majority appeared likely . . . . .
On September 25, a left-wing blog called Excited Delerium wrote this:
However, every day, we are pushing them closer to a majority because we all have different views on who the strongest party should be. LIiberals? NDP? Greens? The Marijuana Party?
A blogger at the Laurier Institute for the study of Public Opinion and Policy wrote this:
The Conservatives did manage to move their numbers up in the early going in September. At one point they were flirting with a possible majority,
And that's just the first page of a google search of "Harper, September, Majority."
Seriously, what are you arguing this for?
Cowperson