can you at least decriminalize in the first few days so we can celebrate freely?
yeah, yeah. i know why it's not in the speech. and he's pointed out he'll move quickly before. still...
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/canada-election-2015-justin-trudeau-100-days-1.3276219
Sunday, October 18, 2015
“Why are Liberals higher with a live interviewer than with the robot?”
you really gotta figure that out. i’ve provided some ideas. but, you really need to work that through.
i just want to add that the comments i’ve posted are not meant to be generalized. the dynamics of this specific election – where 2/3rds of the population sees the two opposition parties as interchangeable – is not likely to repeat itself.
but i would also point out that you were lowballing the ndp when they were ahead, too.
whatever explanation you get should have to explain both of these things. mine can do that.
www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2015/10/deadlock-broken-liberals-surging/#comment-60049
Jeremy
It is interesting. I have heard some say the “shy Conservatives” are more likely to hang up the phone (based on UK studies). Without declaring my own support – I know I hang up the phone anytime I hear a robo-dialler without waiting to here what it is about.
deathtokoalas
the thing with biases like this is that they’re constantly shifting, constantly cancelled out, constantly complicated…
i’ve posted here a few times. i think he’s picking up a “dithering progressive” reaction over ivr, where liberal-ndp swing voters are having a harder time committing to a machine, but are reflecting social bias on the phone.
you can transfer the mainstreet results down from 38/33 (decided only) to 34/30 (including undecideds). it’s harder to do that with ekos’ data because he’s mixing sample, which i think is really the core of the inconsistencies. but, i would suspect that those results would scale down consistently – at least with the conservative vote.
he may actually simply be correctly picking up that the polls putting the liberals over 35, and heading to 40, are picking up a lot of very soft liberal support – people that would tell a live interviewer they’re voting liberal, and legitimately will probably vote liberal if they vote at all, but are, in their heart, truly conflicted.
if a polling company is meant to predict results, it’s a crappy result. if it’s meant to understand what people are actually thinking, there’s perhaps some usefulness in what he’s picking up.
ways to know frank was picking something up:
1) an unexpected last minute low turnout leads to a higher conservative outcome. this may happen if the ditherers can’t pull the trigger and stay home.
2) there’s an unexpected surge in ndp support. i know he’s not picking that up. but he seems to be picking up huge amounts of indecisiveness (that maybe broke at the last minute).
caveat: i’m interpreting these results in ways the pollster has not, and likely would not (yet) endorse. but, i’m mildly worried about (1), if not particularly worried about (2).
Raunch
Yeah……the polls for the National Post (Postmedia), Global News, and the Globe and Mail (who all have the Libs in front) are trying to support the Libs? Seriously?
3 weeks ago, when Nanos, Ekos, Angus Reid, etc. were showing the Cons taking a lead over the other two parties, the Con-friendly commentors on here thought these polls were legit.
Now, because these polls show different results than what you want to see….you think they are garbage. Well, good luck with your way of thinking. Seems a little hypocritical, don’t you think?
deathtokoalas
i’ve been wondering for a while if there might be a kind of scare tactic at play, to rev up the base.
but, at the least, you don’t expect nik to play around with this. he nails elections. you can do just about anything you want with an online panel at this point, then blame it on untested technology. but, nik has a reputation, and if he’s putting those numbers out, it’s because he believes in them.
--
that liberal swing in quebec is going to elect bloc mps.
i’m plugging in:
libs: 160+, but not 170. 90+ seats in ontario.
cons: ~100, probably a seat or two less. -25 seats in ontario.
ndp: ~45. only ~15 seats in quebec.
bloc: ~35, by coming up the middle on the ndp–>liberal shift. i also think that they get a last minute boost around quebec city to stop the conservatives there.
you really gotta figure that out. i’ve provided some ideas. but, you really need to work that through.
i just want to add that the comments i’ve posted are not meant to be generalized. the dynamics of this specific election – where 2/3rds of the population sees the two opposition parties as interchangeable – is not likely to repeat itself.
but i would also point out that you were lowballing the ndp when they were ahead, too.
whatever explanation you get should have to explain both of these things. mine can do that.
www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2015/10/deadlock-broken-liberals-surging/#comment-60049
Jeremy
It is interesting. I have heard some say the “shy Conservatives” are more likely to hang up the phone (based on UK studies). Without declaring my own support – I know I hang up the phone anytime I hear a robo-dialler without waiting to here what it is about.
deathtokoalas
the thing with biases like this is that they’re constantly shifting, constantly cancelled out, constantly complicated…
i’ve posted here a few times. i think he’s picking up a “dithering progressive” reaction over ivr, where liberal-ndp swing voters are having a harder time committing to a machine, but are reflecting social bias on the phone.
you can transfer the mainstreet results down from 38/33 (decided only) to 34/30 (including undecideds). it’s harder to do that with ekos’ data because he’s mixing sample, which i think is really the core of the inconsistencies. but, i would suspect that those results would scale down consistently – at least with the conservative vote.
he may actually simply be correctly picking up that the polls putting the liberals over 35, and heading to 40, are picking up a lot of very soft liberal support – people that would tell a live interviewer they’re voting liberal, and legitimately will probably vote liberal if they vote at all, but are, in their heart, truly conflicted.
if a polling company is meant to predict results, it’s a crappy result. if it’s meant to understand what people are actually thinking, there’s perhaps some usefulness in what he’s picking up.
ways to know frank was picking something up:
1) an unexpected last minute low turnout leads to a higher conservative outcome. this may happen if the ditherers can’t pull the trigger and stay home.
2) there’s an unexpected surge in ndp support. i know he’s not picking that up. but he seems to be picking up huge amounts of indecisiveness (that maybe broke at the last minute).
caveat: i’m interpreting these results in ways the pollster has not, and likely would not (yet) endorse. but, i’m mildly worried about (1), if not particularly worried about (2).
Raunch
Yeah……the polls for the National Post (Postmedia), Global News, and the Globe and Mail (who all have the Libs in front) are trying to support the Libs? Seriously?
3 weeks ago, when Nanos, Ekos, Angus Reid, etc. were showing the Cons taking a lead over the other two parties, the Con-friendly commentors on here thought these polls were legit.
Now, because these polls show different results than what you want to see….you think they are garbage. Well, good luck with your way of thinking. Seems a little hypocritical, don’t you think?
deathtokoalas
i’ve been wondering for a while if there might be a kind of scare tactic at play, to rev up the base.
but, at the least, you don’t expect nik to play around with this. he nails elections. you can do just about anything you want with an online panel at this point, then blame it on untested technology. but, nik has a reputation, and if he’s putting those numbers out, it’s because he believes in them.
--
that liberal swing in quebec is going to elect bloc mps.
i’m plugging in:
libs: 160+, but not 170. 90+ seats in ontario.
cons: ~100, probably a seat or two less. -25 seats in ontario.
ndp: ~45. only ~15 seats in quebec.
bloc: ~35, by coming up the middle on the ndp–>liberal shift. i also think that they get a last minute boost around quebec city to stop the conservatives there.
i’d say you’ve got a last minute bloc surge, there. forum is picking it up as well. nanos has….let’s call it a bump rather than a surge. i would agree with anybody suggesting that you can’t honestly separate it from possible sampling error, but the thing is that i think this makes sense. with the ndp down a large chunk as it is, a lot of what’s left are going to be scrambling to find ways to make sure neither the conservatives nor the liberals (who are nearly equally despised in much of quebec) can win in their riding. with those numbers, i think it’s clear that the bloc win a lot of seats.
i don’t think a late swing to the conservatives in bc is unbelievable, either. but nobody else is picking it up yet. and, you have to ask “where?”, too, and “from who?”. i’m skeptical about a swing in the lower mainland. rather. what i’m willing to believe here is maybe counter-intuitive. outside of the lower mainland, the haunting sceptre of a liberal minority, even, could be enough to firm up traditional conservatives that were leaning ndp on the perception they had a chance of forming government. most of bc is going to vote on a populist/elitist axis, which makes the liberals broadly uncompetitive. it’s the one place in the country where you’ll get ndp voters voting strategically for the conservatives, just because the spectrum is completely different. nanos *does* have the ndp down and the conservatives up a bit relative to last week, but it’s the same thing with sampling and margins. i’m not overwhelmingly skeptical, anyways. it was maybe hard to believe they were down 15-20 points.
it’s clearly the uncertainty in bc and quebec that are warping your numbers. i’m still leaning towards it being a consequence, or artefact, of the method. but these have been trouble points for pollsters recently, too. really: you’re not telling me anything absurd, right now. i’m just left with same concerns regarding the question of what are truly reasonable sampling frames.
--
i’ve been posting photos of the 2014 ontario election for comparison, but the numbers have stabilized higher than that – closer to the 2004 federal election.
this is a very different map than the models are producing, but i suspect it will be closer to the final outcome.
i don’t think a late swing to the conservatives in bc is unbelievable, either. but nobody else is picking it up yet. and, you have to ask “where?”, too, and “from who?”. i’m skeptical about a swing in the lower mainland. rather. what i’m willing to believe here is maybe counter-intuitive. outside of the lower mainland, the haunting sceptre of a liberal minority, even, could be enough to firm up traditional conservatives that were leaning ndp on the perception they had a chance of forming government. most of bc is going to vote on a populist/elitist axis, which makes the liberals broadly uncompetitive. it’s the one place in the country where you’ll get ndp voters voting strategically for the conservatives, just because the spectrum is completely different. nanos *does* have the ndp down and the conservatives up a bit relative to last week, but it’s the same thing with sampling and margins. i’m not overwhelmingly skeptical, anyways. it was maybe hard to believe they were down 15-20 points.
it’s clearly the uncertainty in bc and quebec that are warping your numbers. i’m still leaning towards it being a consequence, or artefact, of the method. but these have been trouble points for pollsters recently, too. really: you’re not telling me anything absurd, right now. i’m just left with same concerns regarding the question of what are truly reasonable sampling frames.
--
i’ve been posting photos of the 2014 ontario election for comparison, but the numbers have stabilized higher than that – closer to the 2004 federal election.
this is a very different map than the models are producing, but i suspect it will be closer to the final outcome.
you know what i want, as a trans person? to no longer see trans people thought of as a voting block, or for there to be a section of supposed election concerns called "trans issues".
i vote on the same issues everybody else does, and resent being pandered to as an identity voter. my gender identity has no effect on my other perspectives. that human rights amendment would be great and everything, but it will make no functional difference in the actual real world.
www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/10/18/transgender-issues-canada-election_n_8323144.html
i vote on the same issues everybody else does, and resent being pandered to as an identity voter. my gender identity has no effect on my other perspectives. that human rights amendment would be great and everything, but it will make no functional difference in the actual real world.
www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/10/18/transgender-issues-canada-election_n_8323144.html
i complain about the models. so, what's my prediction?
....here's my election prediction.
liberals: 160+. probably not more than 170. they're going to try and get some people to floor cross. i think they're going to nearly sweep not just the gta but all of ontario, including coming very close and winning in seats nobody would normally give them a chance in. the numbers look similar to 2004, which would give them around 90/121 seats - and reduce the conservatives to less than 25 seats in ontario. find the 2004 map on wiki for an idea as to what it will look like in ontario. they'll also do well in the east, in montreal, in gatineau, in winnipeg, in calgary (expect big upsets here) and in vancouver. but note that they will have essentially no rural representation, outside of the maritimes and probably ontario.
conservatives: ~100. it's going to be basically all rural seats. but, they're going to get hurt in ontario and it may actually take them under 100, a little.
ndp: ~45. they'll do slightly better in quebec and bc, but they're going to be shut out out of a lot of provinces and be down to a handful in the rest of them. mulcair will lose his seat, which will mean they'll be pushovers for a while.
bloc: ~35. so, what has actually happened in quebec? as usual, begin by ignoring the media. the conservatives show no statistically meaningful growth, and the bloc haven't up to now either - although they may be surging a little the last few days. it won't matter much, at this point, unless the ndp vote completely collapses, which seems unlikely; it'd already have happened by now. but, there has been a large and clear and measurable movement from the ndp to the liberals. that is what has happened in quebec. obviously, that helps the liberals where they are competitive. but, it does not help them where they are not, which is most of quebec. rather, what happens is that, as the ndp vote fades away to the liberals, the bloc (which finished second in 2011 almost everywhere) move into a dominant position almost everywhere outside of montreal (where the liberals become dominant) and quebec (where the conservatives do). and, the more the province becomes aware of this advantage for the conservatives, the more they vote for the bloc for strategic reasons.
green: 1.
....here's my election prediction.
liberals: 160+. probably not more than 170. they're going to try and get some people to floor cross. i think they're going to nearly sweep not just the gta but all of ontario, including coming very close and winning in seats nobody would normally give them a chance in. the numbers look similar to 2004, which would give them around 90/121 seats - and reduce the conservatives to less than 25 seats in ontario. find the 2004 map on wiki for an idea as to what it will look like in ontario. they'll also do well in the east, in montreal, in gatineau, in winnipeg, in calgary (expect big upsets here) and in vancouver. but note that they will have essentially no rural representation, outside of the maritimes and probably ontario.
conservatives: ~100. it's going to be basically all rural seats. but, they're going to get hurt in ontario and it may actually take them under 100, a little.
ndp: ~45. they'll do slightly better in quebec and bc, but they're going to be shut out out of a lot of provinces and be down to a handful in the rest of them. mulcair will lose his seat, which will mean they'll be pushovers for a while.
bloc: ~35. so, what has actually happened in quebec? as usual, begin by ignoring the media. the conservatives show no statistically meaningful growth, and the bloc haven't up to now either - although they may be surging a little the last few days. it won't matter much, at this point, unless the ndp vote completely collapses, which seems unlikely; it'd already have happened by now. but, there has been a large and clear and measurable movement from the ndp to the liberals. that is what has happened in quebec. obviously, that helps the liberals where they are competitive. but, it does not help them where they are not, which is most of quebec. rather, what happens is that, as the ndp vote fades away to the liberals, the bloc (which finished second in 2011 almost everywhere) move into a dominant position almost everywhere outside of montreal (where the liberals become dominant) and quebec (where the conservatives do). and, the more the province becomes aware of this advantage for the conservatives, the more they vote for the bloc for strategic reasons.
green: 1.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)