the ekos numbers in the last federal election were an actual outlier, and in the end it seemed to be that his methodology had a problem with undecided voters, who really only made up their mind to vote liberal at the very last minute. i suggested to him that he should publish undecideds.
he's not publishing these numbers.
i can speculate that he's dealing with the same basic concern, which is that his system is being broken by an electorate that doesn't want to give him a straight answer - because it doesn't have one. that's consistent with the other numbers i'm seeing.
...which isn't to say that i think he's making up numbers. i don't doubt that this is what he has. but, it seems to be reflecting low engagement, rather than a surge of young people swinging ndp. if young liberals & young conservatives just refuse to vote, or are tuning out of the system altogether due to awful choices, the historically solid - but smaller - ndp base looks dominant because they're the only people that are still bothering to show up. they're the only people still excited, the only people still into this.
voter apathy usually helps the conservatives. this is is usually explained by demographics, but it might also have something to do with the conservatives having a more robust grassroots - and they do. maybe a part of the reason that conservatives have higher voting retention is that they're more involved in the selection process. but, conservatives don't like their own guy this time, either. that's unusual.
it may be the ndp that has the most engaged base this election. and, if voter engagement amongst conservatives & liberals is really falling by up to 40%, they may win accidentally due to voter suppression.
it's not hard to believe that the ndp have the most engaged and dedicated voting base amongst young activists; if they're the only young people that bother to vote this election, you get that exaggerated skew out of nowhere.
this at least makes sense to me; it would be less that horwath is swinging all of these liberals all of a sudden, and more that the ndp is the only party that hasn't cratered with it's own support base. and, that is indeed sort of what happened in 1990, right?
but, as mentioned in the analysis, and also by mainstreet, the key variable appears to be turnout modelling. if the liberal ground game in toronto holds, or the conservatives can get the old folks excited after all, the calculation changes.
i'm just trying to get the point across so this isn't misunderstood: there doesn't appear to be a surge towards the ndp so much as there seems to be an extreme level of apathy setting in with the other two parties, which could allow the ndp to double the percentage of their vote, even as they don't actually swing anybody.
but, again: that might not translate into actual seats.
i'm still waiting on the mainstreet numbers.
http://www.ekospolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/full_report_may_25_2018.pdf