2018 Polls

380 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport

I don't think that is necessarily accurate.

alan smithee wrote:

SocialJustice101 wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

Which is more significant: Fund-raising or Polls?

Liberals won federal election despite ranking third in fundraising.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-fundraising-winners-losers-1.3296947

Yeah. Fundraising means little to nothing. When a party out funds the other parties it just means they have richer donors. Big surprise that these richer donors would be funding the Cons.

SocialJustice101

And now the real poll.

Today's Nanos Research data tracker update: 

Lib 39.15%

Con 30.63%

NDP 18.19%

https://tinyurl.com/y7srwskl

NorthReport
Debater

SocialJustice101 wrote:

And now the real poll.

Today's Nanos Research data tracker update: 

Lib 39.15%

Con 30.63%

NDP 18.19%

https://tinyurl.com/y7srwskl

Looks like the Liberals have gained some ground over the past couple of weeks.

Perhaps they have recovered from some of the damage that was inflicted earlier in the year with the India trip, etc.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

It never says on Nanos polls who is paying for them. Why would Nanos go to the expense to conduct and publish a poll for free? If a polling company just puts a poll "out there" with no explanation of its funding source, we have to assume the funding source does not want to be made public. Therefore we can only deduce there is some kind of hidden agenda. It looks like they just took the last election results, cooked the numbers a bit, and put it out. 

Why should anyone believe this (or any other) poll?

Pondering

SocialJustice101 wrote:

"any type of capitalism is inherently unstable and unsustainable, prone to boom and bust, and trending asymptotically to absolute inequality and absolute authoritarianism."

- Isn't it true of any government/economic system?  It's not just important to "spread the wealth around," but it's also important to spread the power around.   Both governments and corporations are controlled by people, and some of them will be "bad apples", regardless of the system of government.  I don't want either the corporations nor the government getting too much power.  Let them balance each other out.

I disagree. People in general do not control corporations, at least not the significant corporations. Those are controlled by the wealthy alone. Government is chosen by the people. We haven't been choosing very well but we have the power to change that. The Government belongs to the people. 

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:

Which is more significant: Fund-raising or Polls?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservatives-liberals-fundraising-federal-1.4641963

What's more important, apples or oranges?

Your problem is you think people consider polls as precise measures. Most don't. They are indicators not predictors. They generally confirm our general notion of what is going on based on news and our perception of the people around us. For example, if Trudeau sent the military into BC to force the pipeline through his numbers would go down. If a poll showed his numbers increasing anywhere but Alberta I'd call it BS. 

I expect Trudeau's numbers to be down a bit. If people were judging Trudeau alone his numbers are down a lot, but if he is being judged in comparison to Scheer and Singh, I expect his numbers to be quite stable, maybe down a bit in comparison to Scheer but nothing dramatic. I also judge polls against themselves. Angus Reid is obviously Conservative. I don't know if Nanos leans Liberal or not because generally they do seem to have reasonable numbers and they are accurate at election time. It's true that they could be accurate the day before the election and be fudging the numbers in between but there is no indication that is happening. That doesn't mean they are spot on. There is always a margin of error. Polls indicate trends. They aren't precise measures. 

Are you arguing that polls are 100% meaningless? The equivalent of throwing dice in the air?

SocialJustice101

progressive17 wrote:


Why should anyone believe this (or any other) poll?

Because Nanos Research (formerly known as SES Research) has been the most accurate pollster since the 2004 election?   They are also the only Canadian pollster to still utilize live telephone calls.  All others have swithced to much cheaper online polls or automated telephone polls, some of which were discredited in past elections.

SocialJustice101

Pondering wrote:
I disagree. People in general do not control corporations, at least not the significant corporations. Those are controlled by the wealthy alone. Government is chosen by the people. We haven't been choosing very well but we have the power to change that. The Government belongs to the people. 

The government is indeed elected by the people, unlike corporation leadership.  But if a government controls all of the media, they can literally get away with murder and still win elections. 

On a day-to-day basis, both are controlled by very small groups of people, who may be out of touch and are prone to corruption.  If they are not yet wealthy, they can become wealthy.   It's just a bad idea to give too much power to one tiny group of people, whether they are a mega-corporation or a mega-government. 

progressive17 progressive17's picture

SocialJustice101 wrote:

progressive17 wrote:

Why should anyone believe this (or any other) poll?

Because Nanos Research (formerly known as SES Research) has been the most accurate pollster since the 2004 election?   They are also the only Canadian pollster to still utilize live telephone calls.  All others have swithced to much cheaper online polls or automated telephone polls, some of which were discredited in past elections.

You did not answer my question about who is paying Nanos' bills. Typical Canadian response. Ignore a question by using an irrelevant non-answer.

Nanos will not disclose who their paymasters are, so I am suspicious of their motives. Unless they clearly state who is paying for each poll, I must conclude there is an ulterior motive, no matter what the results.

SocialJustice101

Of course Nanos discloses their paymasters.   All you have to do is search their website and read their reports.  http://www.nanos.co/our-insight/

Many of their polls are specifically ordered by CTV.    Nik Nanos regularly appears on CTV, so I would assume their weekly polls are also a part of the CTV package deal.

gadar

There has to be a conspiracy, like the Russia meddling in the US election.

Russia beside pushing false info, also apparently used message boards to influence people's take on the politics and politicians.

It can be organised, as in the Russia thing, or it could also be individuals learning from the Russians tactics and freelancing.

Where is Babble's McCarthy 

NorthReport
SocialJustice101

Lumping all the pollsters together is the same as lumping all politicians together.  It's just carelessness and lack of nuance.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

If you don't trust anyone, you will never be disappointed. Now you are pushing Nanos. Why are you doing that? What is your hidden agenda? What is CTV's agenda? To get the Communist Party elected?

SocialJustice101

Trust the most reliable sources available, based on past record and methodology.   Otherwise you're in your own bubble. 

SocialJustice101

As for CTV, I think their Con bias is very obvious.   Anyone still remembers the hatchet job they did on Stephane Dion in 2008?   

The Cons also get their Senators directly from CTV.

Nevertheless, CTV ditched Ipsos and hired the most accurate pollster instead.

josh

Maybe that's why Darrell Bricker blocked me on twitter.

SocialJustice101

Who are you?  Nik Nanos?

NorthReport

All the pollsters claim their polls are the best A few years ago we did an analysis of the polling firms here Many had political connections At that time Angus Reid and Ipsos Reid were considered the most  accurate I think based on the average of their polls in the period prior to the election But my hunch is that it changes and one pollster is close in one election but not so close in the next one 

Right now for example in the Ontario election Ipsos’s most Recent poll says PCs then NDP then Libs and more recently Darrell Bricker of Ipsos says there has not been any change Ipsos also polls for the Ontario Government But who knows for sure Probably no one 

SocialJustice101

Use public information to assess pollster's accuracy, not their own self-evaluations.  Both Ipsos and Angus Reid used to conduct live telephone polling, but they no longer use that methodology.   They both switched to online polling. 

NorthReport

Imagine that. They are operating in the 21st century

SocialJustice101

Regular people are much more likely to use a cellphone in the 21st century, rather than doing an online survey.     Online polling and IVR polling has produced  wildly inaccurate results in several provincial and municipal elections.

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:

Imagine that. They are operating in the 21st century

Online polling has no "margin of error" because it is unscientific. There is no way to randomize. The polling companies get people to join their "forum" to answer survey questions of all kinds, for example, what laundry detergent you use. People join and answer the surveys because you can win prizes or air miles points. It isn't modern it's cheap. 

progressive17 progressive17's picture

If you want to make a statistically significant poll, you have to select your sample carefully. Thus if 55% watch TV, then 55% of your poll sample should watch TV. Your sample should match age, urban and rural, gender, identity, country of national origin, etc. demographics. This is one reason why good polling is so expensive. 

Now if you had say 100,000 respondents on an online poll, and you were able to question them carefully about their personal characteristics, you might actually be able to extract a statistically significant number which could give you a reasonably accurate result. However you would probably find that many people would give up after being asked a certain number of questions. After all, the French word for "to ask" is "demander", and peppering people with questions is ultimately making demands on their dignity and privacy. So on those Internet questionaires I tend to bail out quickly.

There is no cutting corners. Polling is expensive, and we must know who is paying the bills, or we must assume a hidden agenda.

SocialJustice101

We do know who pays the bills.  It's almost always some media company.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

I look at the PDFs pretty carefully just like everyone else, and I do not see any mention of the paymasters. The only one which is consistent about labelling the paymaster is CROP.

SocialJustice101

There is usually a media outlet which has the right to release a poll first.  They are the sponsor of that poll.   It's not always in the report.

Mobo2000

Nanos is pollster of record for CTV.   Like Forum Research is for the Toronto Star.

Live telephone polling has it's own weaknesses, particularly around cell phone numbers and the difficulty in geo locating them.   IVR and online polling is widely used now.

As SocialJustice has said before, most polling outside an election campaign is commissioned to make a political point, or create a news story or cycle.    Many pollsters are politically aligned and work for a particular party and not others.   Polls aren't reliable, but they aren't useless either, they are better than guessing what the public thinks.

If you want to see the bias or expected outcome for the poll, it's best to see the precise wording of the questions and the question order.   That is where things can be tweaked to get the desired outcome.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=884qXhIqsKU

Pages