The math of the pollsters would earn you a D in elementary school

#Cdnpoli - 

How this headline washes out is beyond me but having a total of 27 percent support for anything means you have a lot of opposition.

Asked what federal party is best at making decisions in the long-term interests of Canada, 27 per cent cited the Conservative Party, 21 per cent pointed to the NDP and 17 per cent lauded the Liberal Party.

But Nik Nanos, President of Nanos Research, noted a large swath of respondents were either undecided or didn’t answer – showing that no party has a clear advantage.

But that's not the lede. This is how the story started.

Canadians hold greatest trust in the Conservatives for making the right decisions in the country's interests — but they think the NDP does the best job of representing voters’ views, according to a newly released online survey by Nanos Research.

A grade 4 arithmetic teacher would have a tough time accepting that conclusion since, of those who answered the question, 38 percent do not trust the Harperites and 35 percent were unwilling to answer. In short, 73 percent of Canadians expressed no trust in the Conservatives at all. 

Poll found in Kandahar Airfield toilet

.

Francis Silvaggio : Notes from Afghanistan, July 2, 2010

"While I doubt Ipsos would approve of the collection process, the data was interesting. Out of 26 respondents, only 7 thought progress was being made. 18 people marked “No” and 1 person ticked “HELL NO!!!” That means 73 per cent of those polled think the mission is failing.

Anywhere else, this may mean very little. But this poll was done in a military bathroom, in the middle of a war zone, by soldiers."

Letter of the day, and Kelly McPoll-land finds a poll

First the letter :

"What is the difference between being told that you do not have the right to public assembly and being told that if you do assemble you run the risk of being injured or arrested? In the first instance, your right has been taken away. In the second, if you stay at home, you have given up your right. The only way to protect your right, therefore, is to assemble after all.

The caution to stay away came officially from the American government, but no Canadian authority contradicted this. The high fences, newly purchased crowd control devices and the assembly of an army of 19,000 security officers served to reinforce this warning, which was essentially a threat.

The most frightening thing that could have happened would have been if the streets of Toronto had been empty last weekend. That is the only reason I went to Queen’s Park last Saturday afternoon. As Benjamin Franklin once wrote, “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

No one is looking for any sympathy, but the next time there is news coverage of demonstrators protesting against a stolen election and being beaten by riot police in some Third World country, let us give thanks for the rights we do have. They will continue to stand up for us as long as we stand up for them."

Patrick Heenan, Mississaugaas
~as posted in the Toronto Star and tweeted by the Divine Ms Z.

Good letter, huh?

Meanwhile over at NaPo, Kelly McPoll-land is delighted to report that after watching the same footage of the same guy smashing a window on the TV news dozens of times every night, 1,003 Canadians told an Angus Reid poll they were disgusted by what happened at the G20 demos :

Poll finds G20 protesters blew it big time

Respondents were asked about their feelings about the demonstrations that took place in Toronto during the G20 summit.
Two-thirds of Canadians (69%) are disgusted, 59% are ashamed, 57% are angry, and 54% are sad. In Toronto, the proportion of respondents who reported negative feelings was higher (Disgust 81%, Anger 74%, Sadness 65%, Shame 61%)

Notable that even at NaPo, more than half the commenters below McParland's article pretty much agree with the feelings expressed in that poll - although for entirely opposite reasons - and a number link to the Canadians Demanding a Public Inquiry into Toronto G20 facebook page where over 36,000 members also have no difficulty at all articulating why they are disgusted, ashamed, angry, and sad.

Yo! Opposition parties! This is what an election issue looks like

Globe and Mail online poll G8/G20 May 29, 2010

Security for the billion-dollar boondoggle is being managed by ex-CSIS director Ward Elcock, who also just spent another billion on the Vancouver Olympics security.

Asked why the London G20 expenses clocked in at $30-million last year by comparison, Alcock answered, "Bookkeeping."

I wonder if we could possibly get some of that.

The national anthem - Thou Dustiness command

Friday Update : After 68 days of careful deliberation and a mere 48 hours after its inclusion in the throne speech, "thou dustiness" gets binned, having successfully served its purpose of providing an amusing distraction from the other dust collecters in the throne speech.



According to this poll at CBC, most do not think two months off were required to consider recalibrating the gender neutrality of the national anthem :

O Canada
Our home and native land
True patriot love
Thou Dustiness command

"Thou Dustiness" is doubtless responsible for the idea of a National Monument to the Victims of Communism in the throne speech, in addition of course to the dust bunnies under your bed.

Poll : Who should be the next host of "On the Hill"?

AKA Who is the next Senator in waiting?

Go vote!

Push polling for deep integration

A mere four days after foisting John Ibbitson's paeon to deep integration on us, the Globe and Mail is at it again, this time reporting on a poll which purports to show that :
"Canadians want Prime Minister Stephen Harper to work more closely with a new U.S. administration" and
"Canadians expect their government to work closely with the U.S. on international problems".
According to the poll, 62% of Canadians would even "adopt American regulatory standards if it would ease restrictions at the border".

As Ibbitson also proclaimed, the reason why this will all be ok is : "Canadians are excited about the prospect of a Barack Obama presidency".
Obama, a fine orator whose speeches move me to tears but whose voting record is thus far still hovering around that of Stephen Harper, is apparently the new deep integration selling point to Canadians.

The G&M refers to the institute which commissioned the poll, the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute, merely as a "Calgary-based institute".
Rather more useful would have been the information that CDFAI is a lobby group funded by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives and "defence contractor" General Dynamics, beneficiary of millions of dollars in arms contracts due to Canadian participation in the U.S war on terra.

The article also quotes "Colin Robertson, senior fellow with the institute", but fails to mention "he was a member of the team that negotiated the Free Trade Agreement with the United States", information freely available on his CDFAI bio, or that currently Mr. Robertson has been seconded by DFAIT to Carleton University to direct the Canada-US Project, along with fellow continentalist Derek Burney :

Blueprint for Canada-US Engagement under a New Administration
Purpose: To develop a blueprint for a joint Canada-US agenda focused on bilateral and global prosperity and security issues.

Included among its listed "themes" are :

• Canada-US defense cooperation (with US spelling of defence)
• The North American energy-environment nexus
• Cross-border regulatory cooperation
• Scope and issue areas for greater bilateral cooperation in the Americas

Unsurprisingly, these are the same issues addressed in the CDFAI poll, happily reported in the G&M as Canadians, despite their "healthy skepticism of the Americans", nonetheless enthusiastically supporting greater ties.

Thanks, G&M. As CDFAI is holding a one-day conference in Ottawa today - What Does it Mean to Be Good Neighbours? - including Robert Pastor, Vice Chair of the 2005 Task Force on the Future of North America and author of Toward a North American Community, I expect we'll be hearing more of the same from you again quite soon.

Cross-posted at Creekside

Positive Poll Portends Possible Party Potential . . . .

On CTV's local noon news show yesterday they had a segment on "Battleground BC" that featured local competitive ridings in the federal election. (Apologies to Dana as this bit of info was gleaned from CTV here in Vancouver before his decision.)

I was able to snatch the following two graphics off the clip as I found them both very interesting.

The first shows the period of time from September 22 through October 8 and the rise and fall of all four parties. Bear in mind, these polls are reflective on polling BC residents only, hence the name "Battleground BC."




The reporter, Jim Beatty in Victoria, then produced the next graphic showing the incredible correlation between the fall of the conservative's poll numbers to the fall in the Toronto Stock Exchange during the same period.





Looks like stevie's timing in calling an election could use some work.

Kind of makes one wonder if the rest of the country might have a similar correlation?

Just askin' . . . .

Ooooh.... a contest!

Buckets is holding a witty caption contest in celebration of KLR VU Bothering People Having Dinner Polling Company and the rousing success of their MASSIVE POLL on the intertoobz this week.

Go!

Only in Canada...

According to this G&M/CTV/Strategic Counsel poll, 82% of Canadians are now opposed to the Iraq war but their three "most admired" politicians are the ones who have supported it.

A more interesting poll would have been to ask what percentage of people are recently coming to the conclusion that Iran was behind 9/11.

Cross-posted at Creekside

Poll vs pols, deep integration edition

In yesterday's Globe&Mail poll, 80% of 11,590 G&M respondants - at one vote per IP only - are not too keen on the whole deep integration "mutually beneficial public policy agenda" with the US thing. Yeah, us!

The poll was still open for voting , last time I looked.

And in a fortuitous coincidence, right across from that poll and linked on the same G&M page is an opinion piece from ubiquitous deep integration media darling Michael Hart and William Dymond, who proudly inform us they are "former officials involved in the negotiation first of the Canada-U.S. free-trade Agreement (FTA) and then of NAFTA".

You'll recall Michael Hart of Carleton U., a former official at Foreign Affairs and Int. Trade and sometime deep integration teacher at the North American University, from his February piece in the Natty Post : Canada blew it! :

"The crisis of Sept. 11, 2001, provided a perfect opportunity to seize the moment to re-imagine the border, but Canada blew it."

in which he bewailed the loss of this unique opportunity to implement "the structural and institutional changes of deep integration" because of "nationalist phobias". Silly us.

Perhaps you also recall his statement to the Int. Trade Committee on SPP in May last year :

"We have made a political choice that we wanted a more deeply integrated North American economy," Hart said. "That means a willingness on our part to, for example, strengthen the perimeter around North America in order to deal with security issues that are uppermost in American minds."

Good to know he was at least partly responsible for the NAFTA deal, huh?

In their new G&M piece, "The sabre-rattling on NAFTA is worrying, but take it as an opportunity", Hart and Dymond warn that "If our neighbours elect a Democratic president, Senate and House on Nov. 4, things could get ugly", but then take some comfort that, unlike Paul Martin whose relationship with the US was marked by "petulance and prickly self-righteousness", at least "the Harper government brought maturity and perspective".

Well ok then.

They then pose a number of questions to us, most notable for the facility with which they replace the word "Canada" with their preferred term, "North America" :

"What can we do together to promote our common interests in the security of the Arctic, the sustainable exploitation of Arctic energy supplies, and environmentally responsible navigation through Arctic waters?"

"What kind of legislative and other programs can we pursue in order to ensure long-term North American energy security?"

"What kind of institutional capacity do we need to have in place to facilitate and promote the governance of North American economic and security concerns and to ensure appropriate co-operation at the state/provincial and legislative levels?"

Gosh, Mike, Bill, I'm guessing your answer to the questions is whatever you quislings decide to call the next incarnation of the SPP, but our answer is right up there at the top in those G&M poll results.

Cross-posted at Creekside

Let's Do a Poll on That . . . .

Jon Stewart had John Zogby on last night to explain the inaccurate polls prior to the New Hampshire primary:




The answer: "I don't know."

Well, that explains it . . . .

(Cross-posted from Moving to Vancouver)

We're just not that into you.

Ipsos Reid : "In four polls in November, 43% of men said they would vote for the Conservatives, compared with only 28% of women.
"There really seems to be a very strong gender effect in Conservative voting," said Ipsos Reid president Darrell Bricker."

Well, duh, Darrell.
In fact compared to a number of polls over the previous year, like this one from Strategic Council in July, 28% actually represents a highwater mark for the Cons with women, who more usually only give them around 24% to 26% approval.

From this latest Ipsos Reid poll for CanWest :
Women's priorities : Environment 29%, Healthcare 27%, with Education and Poverty placing 3rd and 4th.
Men's priorities : Environment 28%, Healthcare 18%, and the Economy and Military Defence in 3rd and 4th place.

Darrell explains this divergent disparity in gender priorities :

"Women tend to not to be as interested in the big-P political-power issues. For them politics isn't necessarily about the cut and thrust of party politics or big-dollar economics or relationships among states," said Bricker. "They tend to be focused more locally; they tend to be more interested in things that affect them and their families."

Apparently we're just too dumb to properly appreciate the greater importance of all that "cutting and thrusting" stuff.

Happily Harper's old eminence grease, Tom Flanagan, is on hand to explain why women's votes don't count if you're a Con : "Why are women's votes so uniquely important? Each vote counts one," he said in an email.

Yes! Someone put this old Milton Friedman fan back in charge of the Cons' electoral fortunes, because I can't think of a better strategy for going down in fucking flames than going into an election with a firm grip on the idea that the concerns of 52% of the electorate don't matter a damn.

Cross-posted at Creekside

Another "Maid in Canada" product, keeping government clean. Your moment of Wingnuterer

Zorpheous, our beloved and lovable Wingnuterer has shopped up a great graphic highlighting the Conservative Party of Canada's ADSCAM shenanigans.

Unfortunately, Blogger is being a little poopy today and any photo uploads simply return an error.

So, to see it, go here.

-------

Oh yeah. While you're at it, take a look at the job done by Red Tory and Calgary Grit. It seems the right-wingers, and some media outlets are claiming that this Ipsos Reid poll shows that a majority of Canadians (58%) would like a majority government led by Stephen Harper.

A quick working of the math, (58% of 58% is 33.6 percent), shows that Harper's base hasn't changed at all. In fact, you could apply another factor which reduces it even further, but why bother?

The proof is in the politics.

If polling had actually showed statistical support for Harper was changing in an upward direction, (which it's not), he'd have the Governor-General drop a writ faster than John Baird could spit on an environmental program.

Harper is stuck in the low 30s, the size of his "base" going into the last election. Not a great showing for a prime minister with a minority government of 22 months.

Could it be Canadians still don't trust him?

CBC and their strange bedfellows

Dear CBC :
About that Environics poll that you state was "conducted in partnership with the CBC", the one all over CBC TV News tonight, the CBC website, CTV, the G&M, etc :

CBC : 51% of Afghans feeling good about country's direction

60 % of Afghans surveyed believe the presence of foreign troops has been good for their country.
43% say that foreign troops should stay as long as it takes to get the job done.
60 % in Kandahar have a somewhat or very positive attitude toward Canada's soldiers.
70% of Afghans surveyed said they think Karzai is doing a good job.
77% of Afghans in Kandahar said Karzai is doing a good job

In fact the poll was conducted by ACSOR–Surveys, the Afghan Center for Social and Opinion Research, which was founded by D3 Systems Int. whose client base include US State Department, the US Embassy in Kabul, the Afghan Reconstruction Group, Voice of America, (PIPA) the Program on International Policy Attitudes, Charney Research of New York.....

A previous PIPA poll conducted by the Afghan Center for Social and Opinion Research in November 2005 found :
80% of Afghans believe their country is going "in the right direction"
83 % of Afghan respondents said they had a favorable opinion of U.S. troops in Afghanistan
81 % expressed a favorable opinion of the United States
83% said they had a favorable (39 percent "very favorable") view of "the U.S. military forces in our country."
75% approved of eradication of opium poppy fields
90% had an unfavorable opinion of the Taliban
and so on....

Another ACSOR Surveys poll for D3 Systems client Charney Research found :
- 83% Support Hamid Karzai
- 75% Support Female Education
- 75% Support Woman Working
- 66% Support Woman in Public Office
- 83% Have Favourable View of the USA
- 8% Favour the Taliban

Do these ACSOR figures seem even remotely credible to anyone?

Nonetheless, they were extensively used in the US media to bolster support for the war.
Just like their new one will be used here.
Peter Mackay outside the HoC today:

"Afghans are now able to take part in democratic processes like polling, and I think that's another brick in the wall as far as building the [needed] security."

Another brick in the wall, indeed. Unusual use of that Pink Floyd metaphor, Pete.

Now even if you do not subscribe, as I do, to the notion that this "CBC/Enviromics partnership" poll is just another piece of bullshit brick-in-the-wall Afghanistan/Iraq/Iran warmongering being spun by yet another US thinktank/research company, this time with our CBC as a willing patsy, you have to admit that comparing the most recent ACSOR survey with their previous ones in fact shows the Afghan outlook for the future and support for foreign troops is actually plummetting :

2005 : 80% believe the country is going in the right direction

2007 : 51% believe the country is going in the right direction

2005 : 80% support American troops
2007 : 60% support foreign troops and Canadian soldiers

So, CBC, what have you got to say for yourself?

Research jointly conducted in the threads of Bread and Roses
Cross-posted, more or less, at Creekside

Bend your mathematical mind around this

My daily romp through Hairy Fish Nuts eventually led me to this. (Emphasis mine)

Two-thirds of Americans continue to oppose the war in Iraq, but the number who say that things are getting worse in that country has dropped 15 points since June, according to a new CNN Opinion Research Corporation poll out Friday morning.
Close to 65 percent of those questioned oppose the war, up slightly from the last time we polled in September. Meanwhile, 34 percent favor the Iraq conflict, which is the exact same as last month.
Only a quarter say the situation in Iraq is improving and two-thirds say things are going badly for the U.S. in the country — but the poll suggests that the public mood on the war is slightly better than it was in June.

Yes, well, that's true, sort of.

A closer read of the first sentence is actually a better gauge. Fewer people think the war in Iraq is getting worse. More people actually oppose US military involvement in Iraq and there is no increase in the number who are in favour of the current US action.

So, CNN reports that the mood on the Iraq war is better because, even though opposition is growing, there aren't as many people forecasting a total disaster.

Disraeli was right.

Mini-Poll results

I just wanted to thank those who participated in our little mini-poll. 109 readers answered the question as follows:

Are you reading The Galloping Beaver from:

Home - 59 (54%)

Work - 20 (18%)

Home office - 22 (20%)

Other - 8 (7%)

Many respondents indicated that they read from both home and office which I'm sure makes up for at least some of the "Other" responses.

Speaking of the "Other" button, its purpose was to allow those who read from some other location to respond if they wished. Things like internet-cafes or utilizing a piece of mobile technology. On that note, The Rev gets a big high-five. He reads us from home, office and on the phone when he's on the train... in Japan.

The purpose was pure curiosity but there was something relevant involved. I was curious as to the amount of time people might have to read posts. If the majority were reading from work, long posts can be frustrating. There was also some design as to when to publish posts. Often it doesn't matter, particularly if some subject is time sensitive. Readers at work, in a four-time-zone continent, have a limited amount of time available to read a post and follow links.
Given that a majority of the readers in our 24 hour sample are actually in a home or home office environment (74%) there is a little more leeway on posting times to give you, the reader, something to get into.

I don't see much change, but it is nice to know.

Again, many thanks to those who participated. And Rev, keep that battery charged!

Just a short question...

This is just a bit of curiosity and if you have a second, how about answering the question in our little poll. We'll publish results after a day or so.

Are you reading The Galloping Beaver from:
	Home
	Work
	Home office
	Other (A note in comments would be cool)
Free polls from Pollhost.com

Update 13/02/07: The poll is now closed. Many thanks to all who participated. Results published this date above.

Conservative Government Weakening

Interesting poll result from Decima today.

Once again it appears the Conservative support is shrinking into it's Alberta base. In the rest of the country the Liberals have overtaken them, sometimes by striking margins.

The most striking margin of course is in Alberta where the Harper Conservatives are supported by a whopping 63 % of the people polled.

But outside Alberta is another matter altogether. If you remove the Alberta results from the poll the Liberals are 7 points up on the Conservatives in the rest of the country.

A few more polls like this and the opposition will be able to demand a national daycare program and Stevie will roll right over.