Juno News - Signs the polls may be WRONG

00:00:00.000 China's killing our canola. $45 billion gone. Western farmers bleed. Mark Carney?

00:00:09.980 Silent. Made millions off Beijing's dime. He won't fight. He's Beijing's banker, not our Prime

00:00:18.740 Minister. Hi, I'm Candace Malcolm and welcome to The Candace Malcolm Show. We have a great

00:00:31.520 episode for you today. I want to spend some time on the episode today, drilling into the

00:00:36.340 polls. I know a lot of you out there don't believe the polls. You don't trust the polls.

00:00:40.720 We've seen a massive flip from the Conservatives over to the Liberals. And for so many people

00:00:47.000 out there, it's hard to believe that it's true. Some of us just don't want to believe

00:00:51.160 that it's true. It can't be true. How can Canadians be so naive to want to give Mark Carney and

00:00:57.400 the Liberals another term in office? Why would we want to have a fourth term of this disastrous

00:01:02.820 Liberal policies? Can Canadians really be so naive? Well, to help me dive into the polls 0.93

00:01:08.780 and figure out whether they are right, whether they are misleading us, I am joined today by

00:01:15.580 David Murray, who is our in-house pollster at Juno News. He works for One Persuasion, which is a

00:01:20.760 government relations and strategy firm in Ontario, and he's been going out into the field and doing

00:01:25.300 polls for us at Juno News. We're going to talk about those now. So David, thank you so much for

00:01:29.520 joining the program. Great to be with you. Okay, so we had a poll last week, and we talked about how

00:01:35.740 there were some signs in this poll that maybe the polls aren't right, that there is a Liberal

00:01:41.740 mirage, or that the Liberals are kind of oversampled, or that the polls are over-exaggerating

00:01:47.980 what they might be doing out there. So the top line of the poll showed that the Liberals maintain

00:01:53.540 their lead, that they are still in majority government territory, as unbelievable as it

00:01:57.920 sounds. They were polling at 41% in this poll, with the Conservatives down at 35%, which is quite low

00:02:04.000 for the Conservatives. But then there was a couple of things lower down in the poll that might give us

00:02:09.940 some sign of hope, sign of optimism. The first one was the results that you had in Quebec. So why

00:02:16.360 don't you walk us through those? Sure. So in Quebec, we found that actually 36% of those that responded

00:02:23.360 or actually supported the Bloc Québécois this time, compared to 34% for the Liberals and 22% for

00:02:29.380 the Conservatives. Now, this is a very big uptick for the Bloc Québécois, and I think that it's really

00:02:35.420 important to note that it follows on the heels of some pretty serious gaffes in the Quebec campaign

00:02:41.960 of McCartney. First of all, there was turning down the TVA debate. There was also getting his

00:02:50.520 candidate's name wrong and misstating which massacre she actually survived. There's a few things that are

00:02:57.700 very core to Quebec culture that simply do not fly, not to mention also his French skills at the same

00:03:06.240 time. So seeing this bump to the Bloc Québécois makes sense in our poll. I know there's other

00:03:14.860 pollsters that are showing that it's a bit of a deficit still, but I'm fairly confident that given

00:03:20.860 this, I think we'll start to see more and more people come out and show the Bloc up on the upswing

00:03:27.660 in the province of Quebec. And so without Quebec, does Marc Kearney still have that path towards

00:03:34.300 majority, or is he really reliant on a strong showing in Quebec in order to win this election?

00:03:40.520 It is very much core and central to their campaign objectives, like being very strong on the island of

00:03:46.700 Montreal, and then over in the Laurentides, like up around like north of Ottawa, that area, and down

00:03:52.420 into the eastern townships. Like those are places that the Liberals hold like 20, 30 seats. Like when

00:03:57.980 you're talking about the difference between a majority and a minority government, like that is

00:04:02.900 absolutely critical for him to get. Okay, so they're not doing as well in Quebec as they might like

00:04:09.020 to. Interestingly, you noted this, that this is the only poll showing that. So all of the other

00:04:14.160 pollsters out there are not showing this surge for the block. And you were sort of the outlier

00:04:19.800 in that. What should we read into that? Disrupt and see?

00:04:24.960 Well, just there's different methodologies, different people that are able to be surveyed.

00:04:29.320 There's, we use online panels for ours. That's very different from interactive voice recognition,

00:04:35.400 which is IVR used by many other pollsters as well. Like they just reach fundamentally different people.

00:04:40.400 Interesting. Okay, so the fact that we are quite different there is one thing. And then we did

00:04:45.760 something different on this last poll, the last time we were out in the field, which is that we

00:04:49.920 asked Canadians who they think their neighbors would be voting for. And this is something interesting

00:04:55.680 that I read about in the American election, that one of the pollsters that really got it right,

00:05:01.000 when most of the other pollsters were wrong in the US, we're using this method. And the reason that

00:05:06.580 they ask, who do you think your neighbors are voting for, is because that might give signals

00:05:11.780 that the individual might not want to tell the pollster. Like, we know that there's a phenomenon

00:05:16.020 in the States about a shy conservative or a shy Trump voter, where Americans who vote and support

00:05:22.700 Republicans basically have such distrust for the legacy media and their pollsters, that they don't

00:05:28.660 want to tell the pollster the truth, that they'll just either lie and say they're voting for the other

00:05:32.220 candidate, or they'll hang up the phone and they won't answer. But then when asked this question of

00:05:37.620 who is your neighbor voting, or who are the people in your community voting for, people might be more

00:05:42.460 open to saying the truth to saying, Oh, you know, I'm not going to tell you who I'm voting for. But I

00:05:48.780 will tell you that my neighbors and everyone in my community is supporting the right wing candidate or

00:05:53.800 the conservatives are in the US Donald Trump. So that's that was the idea as to why we wanted to ask

00:05:58.740 this neighbor question. Why don't you walk us through what the results look like?

00:06:03.460 Sure. So this is not just a US phenomenon. This has been tried in multiple different types of

00:06:08.340 of electoral systems. This was used in the French presidential election and also in the Bundestag

00:06:14.180 election in Germany as well, which was also very well studied for this phenomenon. So actually,

00:06:19.860 what we found was that the conservatives were four points ahead when you asked this neighbor question.

00:06:25.300 And that's including 34% of people saying simply, I do not know, which is totally fair, 1.00

00:06:31.540 but it showed 29% of people said that their neighbors, people in their community were voting

00:06:36.260 for the conservatives, and that 25% were voting, voting liberal. So when we also looked at it in

00:06:42.660 Ontario specifically, in our regular poll, we have the conservatives down by by nine. But when we look at

00:06:50.820 this, ask this question specifically in Ontario, they're statistically tied, like it's 28% for

00:06:56.420 conservatives 29% for the liberals. And what's also very interesting about this is when you actually

00:07:01.060 broke this down by how people say they're voting. How does that actually translate to how they think

00:07:06.340 their neighbors are voting? If you're voting conservatives for the conservatives, 59% of people

00:07:11.140 that are voting conservatives also believe that their neighbors are voting conservatives. Whereas for

00:07:15.140 liberals, 42% of those that are voting for liberals also believe that their neighbors are voting liberals,

00:07:20.740 voting for liberals. And then for the NDP, this kind of reinforces some of the the collapse narrative

00:07:26.660 that we've seen play throughout this election for the NDP. It's down to 37% of those that support the NDP,

00:07:33.300 say their neighbors are supporting the NDP as well.

00:07:36.340 That is unbelievable. So even though our poll shows that the liberals would be up 6% according

00:07:43.300 to the methodology used, when it comes to who your neighbors vote for, the conservatives actually

00:07:48.500 have the lead, which is interesting, because if the reality out there is that the liberals are cruising

00:07:54.260 towards a majority, you would think that people would know that and they would talk to their friends

00:07:59.140 and family and hear people say, I'm voting liberal, I'm voting Mark Carney. But that doesn't really seem to

00:08:04.340 be the case. It seems that more people are actually hearing the opposite, that people in their

00:08:08.660 community, their friends and family, their neighbors are supportive of Pierre Polyev, which David,

00:08:14.420 I mean, you know, if I'm just going to trust my gut and what I'm seeing on the campaign, look,

00:08:19.460 Mark Carney had his launch event in Nepean over the weekend and someone counted that there was 47 people

00:08:26.180 in the room, 47 people. Okay. I think I had more at my son's birthday party last month.

00:08:31.380 Um, whereas Pierre Polyev is having these massive rallies, some of the biggest rallies in Canadian

00:08:39.060 history, thousands upon thousands of people. I think that there was 4,500 reported in Hamilton last

00:08:44.980 week. This over the weekend, we saw 5,000 people in Surrey. You know, this isn't like a downtown

00:08:51.300 convention center that anyone can just wander into. This is like something that you have to drive. You

00:08:56.340 can't even take public transit. You have to drive, you have to coordinate, you have to carpool,

00:08:59.860 you have to figure out a way to get to this. And to me, the excitement and the enthusiasm

00:09:05.460 is behind Pierre Polyev and the conservatives. And maybe that is what this neighbor poll

00:09:11.620 is showing that that is where the momentum is heading. That's where the enthusiasm is headed.

00:09:16.580 What do you think? I absolutely agree with that. I think that, uh, and we saw this during the leadership

00:09:21.700 race as well, because like when we started to see massive, massive people coming to, uh, our meet and

00:09:27.460 greets, uh, we knew we were onto something very special. It was a very engaged electorate. It was

00:09:31.540 some people that they really believed the message that we were saying, which was that like, if you

00:09:37.460 work hard, you should be able to get ahead. And currently after 10 years of the lost liberal decade,

00:09:42.180 uh, it's, it's not happening. And so like the, the need for change and embodying that change is actually

00:09:48.260 a very, very powerful and engaging force. Um, which is what we, uh, which is what I think is

00:09:55.140 really happening behind the, behind the scenes as well. Well, it's so interesting and I'm looking

00:10:00.740 forward to, we have another poll in the field right now. And so we're going to get the results,

00:10:04.500 uh, later this week. We'll have to have you back on later in the week to talk about that. But while

00:10:08.020 we're on this one, I want to, uh, take your attention over to an abacus data poll. So this was,

00:10:14.660 uh, released on Sunday, March 30th. And according to David Coleto and abacus poll,

00:10:20.980 he has the liberals and the conservatives tied, but he says that the advantage would still be with

00:10:27.700 the carny liberals. Perhaps that's because of the efficiency of their vote. We've seen that in the

00:10:32.260 last two elections where the conservatives have won the popular vote. They've received more votes

00:10:37.780 across the country, but because the liberals have just enough support and just enough writing,

00:10:43.220 writings, they managed to come out ahead and get a minority government. So abacus has 39 39.

00:10:51.140 What this shows me though, because I went back and I looked at the last two weeks of polling, David,

00:10:55.940 and this is from three 38. And so they put together, you know, the legacy media's choice of the,

00:11:01.780 their pollsters. And according to that group of pollsters, we're talking about

00:11:06.660 ECOS and Ipsos and main street and all of the sort of legacy media go to polls.

00:11:12.660 They have the liberals up in every single one of them. Every single one over the last two weeks

00:11:17.380 has liberal ahead. I think you have to go back to, I think it's March 19th or March 20th before you

00:11:23.140 have one that was tied or has the conservatives up by one point. Um, so the fact that abacus has a tie

00:11:30.660 to me, that's also showing a shift last week. We had you on and you said that we were seeing signs

00:11:34.980 that Mark Carney had perhaps peaked. Um, is this another sign that maybe according to their own

00:11:40.180 pollsters that the liberals have peaked, they have no more room to grow and they can only go down.

00:11:45.300 And when you look at the last few days of media attention, you know, we've just seen scandal

00:11:49.140 after scandal, after scandal for Mark Carney and the liberals. The latest is this outrageous story

00:11:54.580 of a liberal MP saying that people, that Canadians should turn over the conservative MP to a bounty

00:12:01.220 put on by the Chinese communist regime and that he should be turned over to a Chinese consulate so

00:12:06.820 they can deal with him. I think that there were several other scandals last week. We learned that

00:12:10.500 Mark Carney used a tax haven in Bermuda, um, to save money on taxes so that he could avoid Canadian

00:12:16.020 taxes. He took out a bank loan from the communist Chinese government's central bank or state bank.

00:12:22.820 Um, you know, we've, we're learning a lot of things about Mark Carney.

00:12:26.420 Do you think any of those are starting to have an impact in the way that the electorate is viewing

00:12:30.900 Mark Carney? I do. And every day that the headline coming out of that campaign is negative is what we

00:12:38.180 call a million dollar mistake because of the amount of advertising that's spent every single day

00:12:42.260 by political parties. It works out to about a million dollars a day. And so if you're not talking

00:12:45.860 about your message and you're put on your heels and you're unable to, uh, really pierce through that,

00:12:51.060 that, uh, that, uh, that naked, that negative narrative, like what we're seeing with, uh,

00:12:55.700 with Paul Chang right now, um, doesn't matter what he's saying on the campaign. It's going to result

00:13:01.300 in that's what the takeaway is going to be. And it's in this business, it's typically death by a

00:13:06.340 thousand cuts. And when you, when you talk about a lapse of judgment, which I think that this,

00:13:10.740 the Paul Chang, uh, saga really points to that, like very definitively, uh, to, to want to stand behind

00:13:17.540 a person who literally made reference to a, a, a bounty on, uh, a conservative candidate. Uh,

00:13:27.060 I think that rank like typical everyday Canadians are going to see that at home, especially given

00:13:31.940 that it's really, it's not just, uh, more independent media that are reporting this.

00:13:36.660 It was on the front page of the national post and the mail in, uh, believe in CV and CBC, uh, has a

00:13:42.180 story on this. Like this is permeating into the main street side and it really showcases a lack of

00:13:46.420 judgment, uh, on behalf of, of Mr. Carney. So the question is how much of this is going to,

00:13:53.460 to permeate. Like we even see that there's a, like now calls for a criminal investigation with

00:13:58.340 the RCMP on this, like, like this drip, drip, drip, this, uh, further development into these

00:14:03.860 stories are going to be like, this is issues management 101. You either want to kill a story,

00:14:09.060 like, like make it go away as fast as possible. Um, or if you have the persistent, like every,

00:14:15.700 every day people hear about it for five seconds, that's what really forms people's opinions about,

00:14:20.740 uh, about leaders. And we saw this with the SNC Lavalin scandal. It was not just the one,

00:14:25.940 one off issue. It was the successive, uh, the stories that started to come out, uh, and, uh,

00:14:32.980 because of what, uh, Jody Wilson-Raybould did, or even the We Charity scandal, the new developments

00:14:37.700 in that, that happened every single day. That's what really built the momentum that actually forced,

00:14:42.340 uh, Bill Moore no to resign. So like these kinds of dynamics, when they're happening in a,

00:14:47.620 such a short campaign, uh, it's, it can be extremely damaging. I think we're going to

00:14:52.820 start to see that in the polls in the coming days. I agree. I think this is one of the biggest

00:14:57.300 bombshell of a story that I have seen. It's so unbelievable to me now. I just want to point

00:15:01.620 this out because this is kind of amusing. The story broke on Friday and at the time,

00:15:06.180 no one was really talking about it, right? It was broken by an independent pro-democracy paper

00:15:11.300 in Canada, a Chinese paper. And Juno news was one of the first people to pick it up. I think we

00:15:15.940 might've been the first people to write about it. I wrote this on X. I said, this should be on the

00:15:21.620 front page of every newspaper in Canada. The fact that it isn't tells you everything you need to know

00:15:26.980 about our corrupt media who have sold out to the liberal parties and the corrupt liberal party who

00:15:32.180 is sold out to China. Now, I think that like, this is one of those instances where I'm glad to say 1.00

00:15:37.380 I've been proven wrong because I thought that the media were going to ignore it. They did at first,

00:15:41.700 they tried, but it just became such a huge story. Once you had international observers,

00:15:46.900 Human Rights Watch, uh, you know, pro-democracy voices from China coming out, other MPs, including

00:15:53.300 NDP MP, Jenny Kwan, um, speaking about just how absolutely outrageous and unacceptable, um, this is.

00:15:59.300 And so to your point that it was on the front page of the national post, I'll be at two days

00:16:03.780 later than Juno news report on it. Look, I'll take it. I think it's good that the media has been

00:16:08.100 shamed into covering this important story. And I agree that I think Mark Carney has made a huge

00:16:13.300 mistake to your point. The thing that Mark Carney wants to be talking about is the trade war because

00:16:19.700 polls have showed, and you mentioned this in an earlier interview that we did that when it comes to

00:16:25.860 the main ballot box question, the country is still kind of split, right? Younger Canadians 1.00

00:16:30.580 are still saying it's cost of living, more conservative minded Canadians. I know that

00:16:34.260 there's a lot of people in the comment section that are going to say, Candace, I'm a boomer,

00:16:38.180 I'm older, and I still am voting for Polyev. So don't just brush us all with the same liberal brush.

00:16:43.780 I know, I know when, when I'm talking about the older generation, when I'm talking about boomers and

00:16:47.860 saying that they're voting for Carney, not all of them, you know, the good ones, God bless you. The ones

00:16:53.220 watching this show, I know, you know, it's still, it's still 55, 45, right? It's just that the

00:16:58.900 plurality or the majority of that age group tends to be more interested in the trade war as a topic

00:17:05.380 issue. Their top concern is Donald Trump. And those are the same people who are telling us that they're

00:17:10.020 voting for the liberals. So let's just go through some of the abacus polls here. They asked which

00:17:15.940 political party is best able to handle the impact on Donald Trump's decisions in Canada. 54% say that's the

00:17:22.740 top issue, whereas which political party is best able to deliver a change in direction, 46%.

00:17:30.740 And then I want to go to this, this post by Kirk Lubinov on X. And I know I showed this to folks

00:17:39.860 in a video essay that I did last week on Mark Carney, but he points this out, and it's just so crystal

00:17:45.700 clear. You can see the most important factors when deciding who to vote for. So dealing with Trump,

00:17:51.700 50% of that older demographic, 60 years and older, 50% say that dealing with Trump is a top election

00:17:57.140 issue. Whereas all the other age groups, 18 to 29, 30 to 44, 44 to 59, the majority or plurality of all

00:18:07.380 of those, like 47, 51, 48% are all reducing the cost of living. And then you can see how that translates

00:18:14.420 into votes that chart on the bottom. Actually, this is so interesting, David. Younger Canadians 0.99

00:18:20.740 are saying that they're voting conservative. I've never seen this in my life, but here it says

00:18:25.140 18 to 29 year olds. So those would be like the Gen Zers. 40% are voting conservative. Wow. 0.91

00:18:32.580 30 to 39 and 40 to 49. You know, we've got millennials and Gen Xers there saying conservative,

00:18:40.660 35%, 38%, 50 to 59 year olds, 43% saying as a result of Gen X as well. And then the boomers,

00:18:47.300 50% liberal is the only demographic according to this chart that has the liberals up ahead. What do you,

00:18:54.500 what do you make of all this? I think it speaks to exactly why Mr. Paglia's messaging has been

00:19:00.980 working so far to date. And it's because he's, as I mentioned before, at the rallies, he makes a point

00:19:06.980 of shaking everyone's hands and listening to their actual concerns. It becomes his own mini sample of

00:19:13.940 Canadians basically every night that he does it, at least when we were doing him during the leadership

00:19:17.940 race and whatnot. So hearing the concerns about Canada's promise, about the fact that people are

00:19:22.740 working so hard and they can't get ahead because the cost of living has gone out of control. They

00:19:28.020 can't afford, uh, the down payment on a house and then it takes them in Toronto. It takes as long to

00:19:33.780 save for a down payment as it used to take to actually pay for an entire, the 25 year amortization

00:19:39.540 for an average house with an average income. Like these are like society destroying stats, right? Like

00:19:45.140 if you're talking about walking out an entire generation from the primary wealth building tool,

00:19:51.220 like they're, they're, they're backed into a corner that they feel that there's, there's literally

00:19:56.820 no one that actually is listening to them except for Mr. Polyev. Um, and so he, because he's been

00:20:01.780 able to number one, understand their issues at a level I've never seen with any other politician,

00:20:06.260 but number two, the solutions that he actually puts forward are so practical and actually like,

00:20:10.420 are just such common sense. Like say for example, on housing, when he talks about like removing

00:20:15.220 gatekeepers at the municipal level, understanding that like, uh, up to the biggest single cost when

00:20:21.060 it comes to building housing is in fact government taxes, delays and all that stuff. Like this is

00:20:26.660 stuff that it makes inherent sense because the land, the labor and the construction materials don't

00:20:32.100 come even close to the selling price. So like making sure that policy actually speaks to those very real

00:20:37.460 concerns is something that he makes a huge effort, uh, in doing and contrast that with the challenges

00:20:44.820 faced by the older generation, the boomers specifically who have assets, like generally

00:20:49.700 speaking, homeownership is significantly higher under, uh, with this, uh, with this group of

00:20:55.300 individuals. So if it's not, if affordability and cost of living and homeownership are not nearly as big

00:21:00.980 of an issue because you have, uh, inflation index pensions, like there's obviously always still cost

00:21:06.580 pressures, but they're not nearly as pronounced, uh, as they would be for, uh, typically younger families

00:21:12.180 who are still, who are just starting out and they want to have a family and they feel that they don't

00:21:16.180 have the financial means to be able to do, to do so. Like there's just simply a different level of

00:21:21.220 emphasis put on these issues by the, by the older generation. So when they're sitting at home, they're

00:21:26.980 retired and they're watching CBC or whatever, and they're seeing day in day out the, uh, comments made by

00:21:34.980 president of the United States. And it's very concerning. It's very, uh, belittling. It's like when he talks about

00:21:39.860 51st state, when he talks about like governor Trudeau and things like that, like there's an

00:21:43.780 emotional component to this that they're seeing on repeat every single day that certainly elevates

00:21:48.660 this issue to the top of mind for this demographic way more than it would for people that are every

00:21:53.220 single day going to work and are struggling to keep up with the cost of living.

00:21:57.780 Well, do you think that Mark Carney's more productive conversation? I mean,

00:22:02.260 president Trump, uh, put out a post on social media last week after their call where he was quite

00:22:06.500 respectful. You know, he didn't do the whole governor Carney thing. He called him prime minister

00:22:11.220 and he said that they were probably going to have a great relationship. Do you think that that in some

00:22:15.860 ways actually hurts Carney and that kind of mitigates the issue? Or do you think that that, uh, provides

00:22:20.180 assurances for those voters to say, okay, Carney is the guy that can deal with Trump? I think time will

00:22:25.940 tell. I think that what this actually points to more than anything is the fact of the personal,

00:22:30.180 uh, personal conflict that Mr. Trump had with, uh, former prime minister,

00:22:36.340 Justin Trudeau. Uh, I think that specifically on the governor stuff, I thought that was like very

00:22:42.180 telling, uh, when he said that on Friday, like referring to him by his proper title as prime

00:22:46.500 minister of Canada. Uh, I, I think that it much more speaks to like the fact that Trudeau, every

00:22:52.580 single opportunity he got would drag president Trump's name through the mud would call like in

00:22:58.420 Freeland would call, uh, as a slur, the conservatives, the maple syrup, MAGA conservatives and stuff like

00:23:04.900 that. Like this is just meant to be, there was all meant to be effectively personal attacks on

00:23:10.020 Mr. Trump. Just the second he left office, they had no idea that he was going to come back.

00:23:14.420 Right. So like, I, I, I think time will tell as to exactly what the implications of this are.

00:23:20.020 I think that if it's, uh, if it's understood that the relationship and we're, we're going to see this

00:23:26.020 on, on, uh, April 2nd, uh, that's going to be very interesting to see if this actually, uh, continues,

00:23:32.020 uh, like the, in terms of the, uh, the level of debate and the level of quorum that's, uh,

00:23:37.700 enjoyed between the, the, the United States and Canada, I think that's going to be actually very

00:23:41.860 indicative of kind of the future impact that this issue will have on the Canadian electorate.

00:23:46.900 If it's something that, uh, Canadians feel like there's progress that can be made, that it's not

00:23:53.460 simply just petty, uh, just like name calling like governor Trudeau and 51st state, because it's a very

00:23:59.620 emotional issue. You're talking about, uh, something that you can't really counter with

00:24:03.860 facts. This is about Canadian identity, Canadian culture, Canadian sovereignty. At the end of the

00:24:07.620 day, it's not inherently something that can be borne out with exclusively facts. So if there can be the

00:24:13.940 temperature taken off that, if the, the, the sting of the pain can actually be removed, I think that's

00:24:19.700 going to have a profound impact on, on how these debates, uh, uh, move forward throughout the election.

00:24:24.820 Well, that'll be something really interesting to watch David. Okay. I have one final question for you.

00:24:28.660 I just, uh, plugged in three 38 federal projections. So they take all of the, again, this is a take it

00:24:34.420 with a grain of salt because it's the legacy media and their pollsters, um, exclusively, but here they

00:24:39.940 have, uh, their projections. If an election were to take place now, I suppose, um, here, it shows that

00:24:46.500 the liberals, this is the average of all the polls has 42% of the popular vote, which would translate to

00:24:53.460 approximately 187 seats, which is enough for a majority. You can see the range. There is one

00:24:58.420 162 all the way up to 217. Oh my goodness. Goodness gracious. If Canadians give the liberals a fourth

00:25:04.500 term with 217 seats, I don't know. I don't know if I can take it, but, um, here it shows the

00:25:09.860 conservatives with 38%. Again, 38% in some years is enough to actually win the election. 38% of the

00:25:16.500 vote, but you can see how that translates into seats, approximately 129 seats. The range is 102 to 152.

00:25:24.260 So potentially very close, but it still shows liberals ahead. Now, this is the thing that I

00:25:28.820 want to point out to you because here, the third place party would be the bloc with approximately

00:25:34.660 6% of the voting. Obviously that's national. So it's much more dense in Quebec. It would translate

00:25:40.100 to 21 seats approximately, but look at the NDP in single digits, 9%. They estimate the NDP getting

00:25:49.460 approximately five seats. Again, this is if an election were held today. And again, grain of

00:25:53.620 salt because it's the legacy media's pollsters and average of them, but look at the range of seats,

00:25:58.820 David, zero to 12, zero. That is part of the possibility in this universe that the NDP could

00:26:08.100 get completely wiped out down to zero seats. Unbelievable. Um, this is such an interesting

00:26:16.020 proposition because like, would Canada be a better country if we just had two parties,

00:26:21.220 kind of like the Democrats and the Republicans or in the UK, you have the labor and the conservatives,

00:26:26.340 just a true right wing party and a left wing party, left and right, and not have this weird

00:26:31.700 situation where you have multiple parties. I mean, I think that it might spell trouble for the

00:26:36.740 conservatives, given that it seems that there are more left wing voters in Canada than there are

00:26:41.220 conservative voters, but I can't over score this, overstate this enough that the NDP might get

00:26:48.020 completely wiped out down to zero seats. What do you think? I'm not enthusiastic about this proposition

00:26:56.420 at all. And also, uh, 217 MPs for any party is going to be challenging no matter what. But the fact of

00:27:04.740 the matter is if the, if the, uh, if the NDP is relegated down to minivan status, like we saw the

00:27:11.060 Ontario liberals under Kathleen Wynne, uh, that's a problem for the country. As far as I'm concerned,

00:27:15.220 I think, uh, there, there's always going to be a cohort of the more hardcore, uh, socialist, uh,

00:27:23.060 side of Canadians. And even in, in the UK, they have the labor, they have conservative, but they also have

00:27:28.180 the liberal Democrats as well, uh, that I, and also the SMP at the same time that also, uh, provide

00:27:33.700 different policy angles, uh, and different perspectives as well. But I think that what

00:27:39.060 really separates us, especially from the UK is the fact that in the UK, they actually have like

00:27:45.140 significant powers given to individual MPs, uh, to hold their own leaders accountable when they took,

00:27:50.660 when it's in their own caucuses. Uh, we really don't have those parts. Like some of the, we have

00:27:55.380 some through the Reform Act of Michael Chong, uh, but fundamentally it's whoever sits in the executive

00:28:00.740 side of that party, whoever's in the prime minister's office or the leader of the opposition.

00:28:04.900 Um, there, there's all, there's, it's a significant amount of power that they have much more than you'd

00:28:11.460 see in, in the United Kingdom. We saw Liz Truss, we saw, uh, Theresa May get forced out by her own

00:28:17.140 colleagues. Uh, I think that that operates as a, uh, necessary check and balance within their system.

00:28:23.060 Translate that over to ours. If we have a, like a two party system, we have a right wing and a left wing, 0.68

00:28:28.420 and you have a, a, uh, a coalition of Bay street bankers plus the champagne socialists,

00:28:34.900 and then trying to get into the working class blue collar. Like we would try, if you, if you try to

00:28:39.140 imagine a, uh, a marriage of NDP and liberal party, like that would be, uh, like whoever becomes the

00:28:46.340 leader is going to have significant power without the necessary checks to be able to keep the entire

00:28:53.460 coalition, uh, happy. And so depending on what happens in the leadership race, which you can,

00:28:59.540 uh, based on the, like your tactics of campaigning, based on your proficiency,

00:29:04.900 you could have some fairly extremist folks in those seats of power. Now, mind you, we also can make that

00:29:12.100 argument that's still happening today with what we see through, through Mark Carney, through what we've

00:29:16.740 seen through the legacy of prime minister Trudeau. But I think that reducing it down to two

00:29:21.940 parties makes that even more likely. And I think that's, uh, just fundamentally not helpful for

00:29:25.780 the Canadian political discourse. Well, it's so interesting that Mark Carney, a banker, a wealthy

00:29:31.860 multimillionaire, who's, you know, made his money working at Goldman Sachs is somehow the party leader

00:29:38.420 that may decimate the left wing party. The fact that they don't have a viable criticism of Mark Carney

00:29:46.020 from the political left. There's so much room there considering that Mark Carney has tacked to the

00:29:50.500 right and is copying Pierre Polyev's very conservative policies. You would think that

00:29:55.700 there would be a huge opportunity for the social Democrats and the NDP in this country. The fact

00:30:00.740 that they don't, I think David, I think that Canadians are taking their frustration of the last

00:30:05.540 nine years out on Jagmeet Singh, because Justin Trudeau is gone now. They see that Mark Carney is

00:30:09.940 different enough, even though those of us who pay attention know that he's not, but to the average

00:30:14.420 Canadian that's not paying close attention, they see him as a new face and they still see the old

00:30:19.220 Jagmeet Singh, the guy that propped up Justin Trudeau. He's being punished in the polls. Pierre

00:30:24.180 Polyev's doing great. You know, he's got huge rallies. He's got a great team around him. He's still

00:30:29.620 averaging 38%, which again, is enough to win in other, in other elections. In the past, conservatives have

00:30:36.740 won with 38%. And the fact that he's not winning doesn't really have a lot to do with what he's doing,

00:30:42.500 but it has more to do with the total collapse of the NDP and how many, many NDP voters are running

00:30:48.660 to Mark Carney and the liberals as a countervailing force to Donald Trump. We had a reporter on the

00:30:53.860 ground at Nathan Phillips Square during that elbows up rally, Noah Jarvis. He was talking to people

00:30:59.460 on the ground there. He spoke to a lot of people who are lifelong NDP supporters who've never voted

00:31:04.660 liberal in their life, but will be voting liberal this time around because of that reason that they want

00:31:09.700 to stop Donald Trump. And so I think, again, this is the biggest story of the campaign so far.

00:31:15.700 The campaign is far from over. We still have three weeks left to go and so much can happen. We're

00:31:20.260 really looking forward to those debates because Pierre Polyev is such a skilled debater. And I think

00:31:24.420 that will give him a huge opportunity to point out to Canadians some of the flaws with Mark Carney.

00:31:30.100 He certainly has his work cut out for him just with the various factors that are beyond his control.

00:31:35.620 Well, David Murray, you're our in-house pollster at Juno News this election cycle. Usually we put these

00:31:40.580 interviews behind our paywall. So I've been having a weekly session with David. They provide us our own

00:31:46.340 unique numbers, which we publish every week. We do writings to watch. So David has picked,

00:31:51.460 I think a couple of dozen or a dozen or two swing writings, which will determine the election. And we have

00:31:57.540 tons of data and a really interesting analysis of each of those writings. So all of that information

00:32:03.300 is exclusive to our paid subscribers over at Juno News. You can subscribe for as little as $10 a

00:32:09.380 month. So the price of lunch at Tim Hortons or a couple of coffees. Instead, come over, support

00:32:16.020 independent media. You get access to all of our exclusive polling, all of these conversations

00:32:21.380 that we're having, and much, much more. A lot of our interviews and investigative research and our

00:32:26.820 documentaries are behind that paywall. So we really encourage you to head on over, subscribe, support our

00:32:32.180 work, support independent pollsters like David Murray as well. David, thank you so much for your time.

00:32:37.860 And we're really looking forward to your next report later this week. See you soon.

00:32:42.100 All right, folks. Thanks so much for tuning in. That's all the time we have for today. We'll be

00:32:46.660 back again tomorrow with all the news. I'm Candace Malcolm. This is The Candace Malcolm Show. Thank you

00:32:50.900 and God bless.

Juno News - April 01, 2025

Signs the polls may be WRONG

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript