The National Telegraph - Wyatt Claypool - August 13, 2026


Carney's Lead Has Shrank Despite What Liberal Polls Say!


Episode Stats


Length

34 minutes

Words per minute

180.69

Word count

6,235

Sentence count

223


Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
00:00:00.160 Ahoy everyone, Wyatt Claypool here, back for some more polling time on the whiteboard.
00:00:05.960 As you can see, our subject for today is awful polls, because the news is chock full of them
00:00:13.200 right now. Have you ever noticed whenever Prime Minister Mark Carney and the Liberals are in
00:00:18.000 trouble, suddenly we all start talking about how popular the Liberals are in the mainstream media,
00:00:23.520 and in fact how unpopular Pierre Polyev and the Conservatives are? I'm not here to argue that
00:00:29.020 the Conservatives are actually leading the Liberals in the polls, but the Liberals are not
00:00:33.220 leading by 20 points. The two pollsters I like the best are Abacus Data and Angus Reid, and they show
00:00:40.140 the Liberals' lead is 6% or 4%, and that's after a series of bad news cycles for them, so it makes
00:00:47.260 sense why they used to show them polling as high as 10%, 12%, 13% four or five months ago, and why
00:00:54.400 that lead has significantly softened after things like the Alto high-speed rail project going up
00:00:59.800 like a lead balloon, the condo bailout announcement, and all of the futzing around that's happened
00:01:05.240 with trade with Donald Trump. Obviously, that is going to affect people's confidence in the
00:01:10.440 Liberal Party if they were previously supporting them. But here comes ResearchCo to show that no,
00:01:16.920 no, no, actually the Liberals are more popular than ever. Guys, this trend line makes absolutely
00:01:23.320 no sense. And one, I'm just going to point out, research code doesn't even do all that many
00:01:28.400 federal polls. They're not very good at it. The last time they had things even slightly tight
00:01:32.940 was back in September of 2025. And that was after there was a bunch of kind of fumbles from the
00:01:39.660 liberals as well on the issue of trade with the Trump administration. And so as it looked like
00:01:44.500 they weren't going to secure a deal and Carney has been fibbing about his skills, much like what
00:01:49.120 is affecting the news cycle right now, they had the margin between conservatives and liberals down
00:01:53.680 to plus five liberal, which at the time seemed reasonable. Other pollsters had it tighter, even
00:01:58.340 conservatives leading by a point or two. But now look at this. They have the liberals leading by
00:02:05.100 20 points, 47 to 27. I don't need to tell you that that makes no sense. There is a concept in polling
00:02:13.520 called an unmotivated change
00:02:16.240 in public opinion
00:02:17.300 in the sense that
00:02:18.880 if we are seeing big moves
00:02:21.200 for one party
00:02:22.160 that don't correspond at all
00:02:24.220 to the news cycle
00:02:25.200 that's probably just a low quality poll
00:02:27.920 if the liberals were like
00:02:30.060 basically way up here
00:02:31.640 and then they fell down
00:02:33.660 when they had messed up on this issue
00:02:35.400 back in September 2025 on trade
00:02:37.620 and then after the Davos thing
00:02:40.140 that gave Carney a bit of a shot in the arm
00:02:41.800 he jumps back up
00:02:43.520 But then we have him basically repeating the same mistakes that put him down in 2025, but it's even worse now. But no, no, not only is he not going down, he's in fact going up. That is an unmotivated change in the polls.
00:02:58.740 And the same thing goes for the conservatives when they have them pretty decently tight to the liberals back in 2025 at that September, back in September, they weren't that far away from each other.
00:03:13.200 But, you know, during the Davos thing, when Carney was getting that shot in his arm because he's fighting Donald Trump and it made him look good.
00:03:20.240 And, hey, he's rolling about a bunch of fake trade deals out that people didn't realize were fake at the time.
00:03:25.360 It helped out Carney and it would have hurt the conservatives a bit.
00:03:29.440 And then but after Carney starts messing up more, who's actually suffering in the polls?
00:03:33.860 It's not the liberals. For some reason, Polly keeps going down more.
00:03:38.040 That is effectively the trend line that we're looking at here.
00:03:41.680 It makes absolutely no sense. And I'm not just saying it makes no sense because I feel like it doesn't make sense. I will show you how their own regional numbers don't make any sense when it comes to how Canadian elections actually work, where the strength of the party is. And if a party goes up and down in the polls, where do we expect that support to be bleeding from or rising in?
00:04:05.220 So in just a second, I'm going to erase this board and then we're going to get to some of the regionals.
00:04:09.500 And then I want to go back to that Nanos poll that came out where they were saying there's no opponent of Mark Carney right now from the Conservatives.
00:04:17.260 Because there's a bunch of people trying to pump that up again, because, again, the news cycle sucks for Carney.
00:04:22.100 So now they want to talk about a poll from last week that there's no good news for Carney right now.
00:04:27.940 But before I erase the board, I just want to remind you guys, if you like the show, make sure to leave a like on the video.
00:04:32.760 subscribe if you are not yet a subscriber and consider hitting the join button if you like
00:04:37.440 these style of videos since I'm kind of the only conservative YouTuber in Canada who does these
00:04:42.120 so if you want to contribute a few dollars a month it really does help make the channel
00:04:46.140 more sustainable for me join button is right below the video as well as pinned at the top
00:04:51.760 the comment the link to the membership program anyways I'm pausing erasing this then we will
00:04:56.580 be getting into the ResearchCo regionals. Over and over again, the region that you will see
00:05:03.560 bad quality pollsters messing up is prairies. Prairies is always the thing that is way off.
00:05:10.800 Whenever you see an awful poll from Frank Graves at ECOS, it will usually be their Manitoba-Saskatchewan
00:05:17.060 sample that completely dumps, because it's a complicated region. Saskatchewan is very,
00:05:23.440 conservative. The only liberal seat in the entire province is the big northern rural seat that just
00:05:29.540 happens to have a lot of reserves in it where people vote liberal. And in Manitoba, things are
00:05:34.280 actually still quite conservative. Southern Manitoba, especially rural areas, goes very
00:05:38.620 conservative. Winnipeg is a bit of a mix between liberals and NDP, although there's only one NDP
00:05:44.340 seat left in Winnipeg, although these days they'll probably be bumping up their support more and more
00:05:49.260 since WAP canoes heavily backing them, and then the Liberals win the North. But when you combine
00:05:54.020 those two provinces together, and remember that Saskatchewan is still a little bit bigger than
00:05:58.440 Manitoba, you naturally assume that you're going to have a plurality or majority of people who are
00:06:04.680 going to be voting conservative in that region. But what does this new ResearchCo poll have?
00:06:10.680 Well, this new ResearchCo poll, which everyone is saying is COPE if for some reason you don't
00:06:15.300 believe it. ResearchCo currently has Manitoba, Saskatchewan going 42% liberal. It's absolutely
00:06:26.620 wild that they would be that high in this region, especially because they usually share the rise in
00:06:33.380 the left-wing vote in that province with the NDP. Hopefully I'm writing that in an attractive way
00:06:39.040 on the screen. Yeah, that's fine enough. I'm going to write the other poll. I'm going to compare it
00:06:42.960 to regionally over there in just a second. It's not even like they're at 42 and the conservatives
00:06:48.860 are very, you know, very mildly behind them at maybe 40 or 39. No, the conservative party
00:06:56.880 and Pierre Polyev in Manitoba, according to this research co-poll, are at 29% support.
00:07:04.720 okay i guess and then the ndp are at 13 percent not too bad for them considering how badly they
00:07:14.840 did in the last election and you know who's in fourth place it's not the green party uh it's the
00:07:19.700 ppc who got like one one and a half percent in the province of manitoba and saskatchewan last
00:07:25.580 election they're currently at seven oh wow they're they're just popping off right now everyone wants
00:07:30.520 to vote PPC right now. No, they don't. I can tell you that no, they don't. That doesn't make any
00:07:37.080 sense whatsoever. And even the Green Party in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, the Green Party,
00:07:43.020 Elizabeth May's party, they're at 5%. Dead marker, guys, my goodness. 5% for the Green Party in
00:07:51.880 a rural area and a very rural province is impossible. 5% would actually be putting them
00:07:58.960 in the contention to potentially win a seat because elizabeth may wins her seat in bc with
00:08:04.500 like one or two percent of the vote in the entirety of british columbia like they're very good at
00:08:09.360 concentrating support when they have it five percent would be a coup for the for the um for
00:08:15.780 the greens seven percent for the ppc that's like what they got in manitoba saskatchewan
00:08:20.580 back in 2021's federal election do we think they're going from 0.7 nationally in 25 to getting
00:08:27.600 7% regionally in Saskatchewan and Manitoba? No, they're not. And no, I'm going to compare this
00:08:33.280 to an abacus data poll. I'm not even going to compare it to the recent one that puts the
00:08:37.520 Liberals only ahead by six points, which is a far cry from what Research Co and Nanos and
00:08:42.720 ECOS are claiming. I'm going to go back in time. We are going to use a poll from when they were
00:08:48.440 still having the Liberals leading by 10 points, which I would say these days would be a pretty
00:08:53.220 big overpull. Back when they were doing that, it was probably reasonable. Carney was flying high
00:08:57.980 on a bunch of artificial winds. He was fighting with Donald Trump, which always helps him out a
00:09:01.980 little bit. These days, his fighting with Donald Trump doesn't help nearly as much because he's
00:09:05.580 just clearly incompetent. But again, marvel at this. A 13% lead, a plus 13% lead for the liberals
00:09:14.860 in a region that they frequently lose to the conservatives in the general. Even Manitoba alone,
00:09:20.660 They lose it to the Conservatives, and that's without the buffer of Saskatchewan.
00:09:24.320 This is both of them combined.
00:09:26.400 But now let us jump over to the abacus data poll for Manitoba, Saskatchewan.
00:09:32.600 This is a poll where, again, they had the Liberals federally leading by 10 points.
00:09:39.740 They have, unsurprisingly, the Conservatives leading in Manitoba, Saskatchewan.
00:09:44.840 By how much? By like 42% like the Research Code had the Liberals?
00:09:50.320 are they swapping? No, they're not. They're leading by 52%, the conservatives, in a poll
00:09:57.040 where nationally they were down by 10 points. Liberals regionally in this area are behind by
00:10:05.980 quite a bit. They're sitting at 34%, which is still higher than they had, than ResearchCo had
00:10:11.980 the conservatives in that area. And then the NDP, makes sense, are at 8%.
00:10:20.320 8% of the vote in Manitoba, Saskatchewan.
00:10:24.420 The Greens are at 3%, which is probably even a little bit higher than they should be,
00:10:29.640 considering it's just not really an area with any obvious places for them to pick up votes.
00:10:34.040 And the PPC are also at 3%, a bit more reasonable, but like the Greens,
00:10:38.800 I really doubt that they actually would ever achieve that percentage these days.
00:10:43.140 Oftentimes, smaller parties over-poll since their own members, their own supporters,
00:10:48.080 are more highly motivated to vote than like the supporters of major parties.
00:10:53.200 If you pick up the phone, or you get them to pick up the phone,
00:10:56.220 they will definitely say that they're voting for that party
00:10:58.440 because it's a bit of an oddball party to support.
00:11:01.560 So if you support it, you're definitely the type of person who's very political.
00:11:05.140 But right here, what do we have?
00:11:07.380 That's what, a 6%, 10%, 18% lead for the conservatives in Saskatchewan, Manitoba,
00:11:14.360 despite trailing nationally in this old abacus data poll from three or four months ago they are
00:11:20.100 still leading by 18 points in the prairies guys and you could say well that one had them leading
00:11:26.460 by 20 points so it makes sense the liberals would be in the lead i'm like guys you can double the
00:11:30.640 lead but why would it be this region that would be flipping red first the the the research co-poll
00:11:38.200 also has these other absurd claims where like Alberta is super close 42 to 36 British Columbia
00:11:45.340 is 45 to 32 which is weird that the margin in British Columbia would somehow not be as good
00:11:51.900 as the margin or it'd be as good as the margin in the prairies this place that is hyper competitive
00:11:57.980 for some reason that wouldn't go liberal harder than the prairies would that's very strange
00:12:04.320 Ontario, also some of these other ones are really not that, I'm not saying not that bad for the
00:12:09.340 Conservatives. Obviously, if this was actually what the polling was, it would be terrible for
00:12:13.400 the Conservatives. A telltale sign, though, of bad polls is that the regionals are very constant.
00:12:20.480 Like, usually you expect Conservatives, even if they're losing, again, by 10 points,
00:12:25.680 Prairies, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, they're going to be up still massively. In Alberta,
00:12:29.820 they're still going to be massively up, even if the liberals are leading by a wide margin federally.
00:12:35.320 If you see a poll where the liberals are leading by 12, 15, 16 percent, these days that's just an
00:12:41.900 absurd lead. No, they're not leading by that. But whatever lead that you see, even if it just says
00:12:46.260 they're leading by two points, if they're only leading by two points, but every province kind of
00:12:51.280 the liberals are leading by the same margin, like Atlantic, Prairies, Ontario, Quebec, British
00:12:58.840 Columbia, Alberta, if they're all looking oddly similar, it's because they have a bad sample.
00:13:05.020 They're polling a type of person rather than they are polling regional voters. They're polling far
00:13:11.140 too many public sector people, far too many urbanites. This is the problem with Leger polls.
00:13:16.580 Leger could be a good company if they actually picked it up a little bit. Leger will frequently
00:13:21.620 show urban and rural differences are only three points away from each other. It's like,
00:13:26.860 have you ever been to a rural area are you really telling me that the liberals are doing like 47 or
00:13:34.320 44 points in the urban areas and in rural areas they're at like 40 i'm like no if anything urban
00:13:43.340 if you told me the liberals had a majority of urban voters you know downtown toronto montreal
00:13:48.660 vancouver voters fair enough i could kind of see that you're going to tell me that the liberals are
00:13:54.800 doing better than even 25 points in rural areas you're absolutely insane and all that support is
00:14:00.620 going to be concentrated in like dairy cartel type regions of the of the country or areas where
00:14:06.660 there's significantly large reserve areas where they can win votes from first nation bands even
00:14:12.540 then first nations tend to be pretty conservative in most parts of the country outside of a few
00:14:17.340 specific regions of certain provinces but that's kind of it like guys this is what realism looks
00:14:25.180 like this is not every time someone pushes a crap poll on you look at the regionals look at what the
00:14:31.520 manitoba saskatchewan prairie samples look like check out some of the other ones and they have
00:14:36.680 to stand to reason they have to make sense if you're gonna have the liberals start leading
00:14:41.780 in a province that they typically don't lead in it's not going to be a saskatchewan area
00:14:47.700 That's just not an area that they're going to run, they're going to do well in.
00:14:50.640 And it's just, it's just not Saskatchewan.
00:14:52.860 It's farmers.
00:14:53.960 It's rural people who want to be left alone.
00:14:55.540 It's rural people who don't like big liberal government.
00:14:58.580 They're not going to change their opinion even after all the Davos stuff, even after all that.
00:15:03.040 That's not how those people make political decisions.
00:15:05.760 That's the thing too.
00:15:06.580 Whenever a party starts doing better in the polls, typically where its support goes up disproportionately is the areas where they were already popular.
00:15:15.600 That's usually the places that are going to start doing well first.
00:15:18.380 So when the Liberals gain a few points in the polls, it's mostly going to be concentrated in that Montreal, GTA, Vancouver area.
00:15:24.940 And then it kind of has a bit of a ripple effect outward.
00:15:27.340 If Conservatives, like, let's put it this way, Conservatives gain five points in the polls tomorrow.
00:15:32.320 If we saw that it was oddly concentrated in Quebec, probably doubt that poll.
00:15:37.320 If you see a poll that sometimes, they sometimes do include Toronto-only samples inside their Ontario sample.
00:15:43.940 If you saw Toronto getting close, but for some reason, the Alberta margin is like normal, like, you know, 53%, 55% liberal or conservative and like 27, 28 liberal. And but then for some reason, Toronto is getting tight, like, no, it's not.
00:16:00.720 Typically, if things are going to tighten for a party, if they're going to increase their support, it's going to first concentrate in the areas where they normally get a lot of support, and then it's going to have a lesser increased effect in the regions that are not traditional territories for that party.
00:16:14.740 There's a reason why when the NDP went from 18% of the vote in 21 to six, they didn't just lose all their seats. Typically, you think, oh, wow, they had two thirds of their vote shredded. Well, look at all their incumbents take two thirds of their vote away, they would all lose. That's just not how it works.
00:16:32.960 They first lost those two-thirds from areas they typically don't win in because those people know they're not going to win, and it's a liberal versus conservative race, so they'll do that.
00:16:42.860 Whereas in areas where there's an incumbent NDP who's confident running a good campaign, that's the ridings where they lost six, seven, eight points, but they were still able to hold on by a bit.
00:16:52.400 But now I want to jump over to this, my new favorite YouTuber to talk about, Illyria A, talking about the Nanos poll from last week, because it feels like such a Doth protest too much thing to be doing. The news cycle for Carney has sucked, and I'm actually helping run three by-election polls with Shreya Teest and Northern Watcher for Polywave.
00:17:15.500 We're going to be dropping by-election polls for North Vancouver, Capilano, Chiquitini, Le Fjord, as well as Beaches, East York, just to see how people are reacting to things.
00:17:24.720 And we'll even have specific questions about pipelines or the Billy Bishop Airport or the Alto train based on the region that they're being conducted.
00:17:32.520 And I, the thing is, I think we need, I want good data in this country.
00:17:36.660 And it frustrates me every time we see people pushing bad data, especially when it's only being done because they know the news cycle is bad for Carney.
00:17:45.920 It's almost like this person we're going to talk about is telling on themselves.
00:17:50.020 They know that Carney is not actually, like, he's messing up right now.
00:17:53.620 So we're going to talk about how, hey, this bad poll shows that he's super popular.
00:17:57.780 But I'm just going to pause, clear the board, and then we're going to get into her video talk about the old Nanos poll.
00:18:05.060 So I got the board cleared, and now I'm just going to let Illyria A. here take it away and tell us about how much Canadians like Mark Carney and how no conservative can challenge them.
00:18:19.060 All right. So there is a new poll that came out on August the 4th from Nanos Research, and it was commissioned by CTV News.
00:18:27.100 And here's what was basically asked in the poll.
00:18:29.520 They gave Canadians a list of conservative politicians and said, OK, if any one of these people led the conservative party today, who could actually defeat Mark Carney?
00:18:40.440 It was a simple question. And the answer? Well, one third of the people surveyed said, well, none of them. Nobody on that list.
00:18:50.700 Now, before anyone gets the wrong ideal, this wasn't a poll of the Conservative Party members or supporters, okay?
00:18:57.420 It was a random survey of about 1,100 Canadians from right across Canada, average Canadians, right?
00:19:04.740 So when one-third of them say nobody could beat Mark Carney on that list, that is just the general public speaking, not the party faithful.
00:19:14.500 I like how she says that, not realizing that completely screws up her point.
00:19:18.540 if it's a poll of just every canadian from the poll and that poll had the liberals literally
00:19:25.100 leading i'm not even kidding by 47 points the nanos poll she is citing had 47 percent of people
00:19:33.120 saying they're voting liberal and like i believe the ndp was at like 11 or 13 percent of the vote
00:19:38.380 it's an extremely left-wing poll and you're shocked that a plurality of people said that
00:19:45.520 Carney cannot be beaten by any conservative. As you get more into the stats, you can see how the
00:19:51.700 whole thing is basically cooked to come to the conclusion that Carney's the greatest and
00:19:56.680 Polyev and the Conservative Party suck. But let's break it down because I want you guys to actually
00:20:03.660 know the real numbers before I get into why this matters. So in the poll, Stephen Harper,
00:20:12.760 the former Prime Minister of Canada, ended up topping the list at 16%.
00:20:17.560 Pierre Polyev, the current leader of the opposition, he only got 15%.
00:20:22.640 Doug Ford, the Ontario Premier, got 11%.
00:20:26.460 And then it starts to drop under 10% from everybody after that.
00:20:30.940 People like Peter McKay, Rona Ambrose, Danielle Smith, Jean Charest, and Lisa Wright.
00:20:37.120 There were people worth even less than 5%.
00:20:39.360 People like Jason Kenney, Mark Maroney, Aaron O'Toole, Andrew Scheer, Leslie Lewis, Jamil Javani, Tim Houston, and Caroline Elliott.
00:20:49.460 All of those people were 5% or less.
00:20:52.940 So the best Canadians think the Conservatives can do when asked who could beat the current Prime Minister was 16% for a guy who isn't even running.
00:21:02.740 who who i'm sorry but like the only person running to be prime minister is the person who's leading
00:21:09.100 the conservative party and there's effectively really no difference within the margin of error
00:21:13.220 between harper and pure poly of here like she's trying to act like oh look they couldn't get the
00:21:18.860 best they could do with 16 i'm like of course the best they could do with 16 as she has admitted
00:21:25.340 they broke up all of the nobody can beat mark carney options not just between harper poly of
00:21:32.080 and ford they've broken up between harper polly afford other a bunch of other options and then
00:21:38.240 probably also people who don't know they just are genuinely undecided and by the way probably the
00:21:42.720 right answer you probably shouldn't know gun to your head uncertainty who can beat mark carney
00:21:48.160 you know we're just not really in that sort of we're just you know you can never really know
00:21:52.320 who's going to be able to beat the current prime minister when we're not even anywhere close to an
00:21:57.040 an election cycle and we don't know what the issues are going to be and just like anyone can
00:22:01.960 beat him and then also anyone can lose to him but like do we do we see the problem here do i do i
00:22:07.660 need to really do the math for everybody here like obviously if you're in the audience you don't need
00:22:12.660 me to do the math we have 33 percent of people who are saying that nobody can beat him and by the way
00:22:18.500 remember 47 percent of people in this poll were liberal party supporters and then there was also
00:22:24.180 block and NDP people who wouldn't be completely unopposed to being able to admit that Carney can't
00:22:30.320 be beaten. But 33, only 33 of respondents said nobody can beat Prime Minister Carney. But when
00:22:37.100 you add all of this together, when you add other Doug Ford, Stephen Harper, Pierre Polyevin Harper,
00:22:45.160 we're at not just 40, there's, these are 42% combined, all three of these major options,
00:22:51.300 plus 25% naturally we are at 67% of people who think that Carney can be beaten by someone or
00:23:01.380 they're not quite sure who somebody would be who could beat him or they don't know if he can be
00:23:06.000 beaten or not like what this is just a cooked pull by Nick Nanos to be able to get some good
00:23:12.420 headlines for Mark Carney while the liberals are going through an absolute nightmare news cycle
00:23:17.320 now that doesn't mean I think that by next week the conservatives are going to be leading
00:23:21.240 they could tighten it up to being like plus two maybe the liberals within the margin of error of
00:23:26.820 the past polls go up to plus five in angus reed or plus seven in abacus but i think the general
00:23:33.900 trend over the next month or two unless he somehow has a crazy good deal none of us expected but
00:23:38.320 doesn't sound like it they're going to start losing confidence with certain canadians who
00:23:42.840 typically would have at least considered voting for them but guys like what are the fact that
00:23:48.120 the news served this raw garbage up to you is telling about what they care most about. It's
00:23:56.000 about making Carney look good. Turning one third of people saying nobody can beat him in one of the
00:24:01.080 most liberal leaning polls out there into, oh my goodness, what a robust leader. What an amazing,
00:24:07.460 what an amazing stalwart man to be leading this country. Nobody can think of anyone else to beat
00:24:12.780 him because we made one option that basically says, I like Mark Carney. And then we had 17
00:24:17.940 other buttons that said somebody else. And we're like, oh my goodness, the top rated answer was
00:24:22.560 only 16%. I'm like, that's kind of impressive because you gave people an abundance of choice
00:24:28.240 and still 16, 15 and 11% of people chose these specific options. When there were other good
00:24:34.580 people mentioned there, Rona Ambrose, probably Stockwell Days in there, Jamil Giovanni,
00:24:39.580 there's Lisa Raitt there's many people who I think are quite good conservatives and you still got a
00:24:44.900 decent amount of consolidation around the former prime minister and current conservative party
00:24:49.100 leader despite throwing all these things out at people but Illyria A is not analyzing this she's
00:24:55.100 non non-compost mentis when it comes to uh when it comes to actually thinking about this poll past
00:25:00.720 the surface level because she's on a mission a mission from Carney who left politics years ago
00:25:06.340 and the guy who is running the leader of the opposition only 15 percent of canadians thought
00:25:12.520 he could beat mark carney i mean no no no no not only not only 15 percent of people thought he
00:25:19.900 could beat mark carney you did not do a poll where it was can it can polly have beat mark carney yes
00:25:26.700 no unsure if you did that and only 15 percent of people said yes he could beat him really bad
00:25:32.400 result. Now, you'd have to temper that with the fact this is a super liberal poll. That would be
00:25:36.520 a not good result for Pierre Pauly. Undoubtedly, that would be a bad result. You can't just say,
00:25:41.440 oh, only 15% of people think he can. Well, you can still think he can beat him, but you really
00:25:47.860 like Jamil Giovanni, so you selected Jamil Giovanni, or you really like Lisa Raid, or you really like
00:25:51.980 Stephen Harper, or for some reason, I don't know why, you said I like Doug Ford better. That's
00:25:56.680 really it's like a popularity contest stapled onto a poll where we're asking whether or not
00:26:02.960 people think that Carney can be beaten like Nick Nanos is a fraud if he actually thinks
00:26:09.640 that this was a good way of answering a poll or asking a poll question like no this is just
00:26:16.940 embarrassing keep in mind that list does include people who would never vote for conservatives in
00:26:23.640 like a million years and so some in fact that actually makes it look really good did you know
00:26:29.200 in this poll do you know how many people actually were voting conservative rounded up in this poll
00:26:35.860 compared to the 47 percent of people voting liberal 28 28 in this nanos poll said they would
00:26:42.720 they were voting conservative it was a super super left-wing leaning poll and still in a poll where
00:26:48.900 only 28 of people are voting conservative and maybe one percent of people are voting ppc and
00:26:53.480 are more right wing. 67% of people still did not agree that nobody can be Carney. And they were
00:26:58.880 even significantly naming people like Harper and Polly, despite the fact that like 10,000 other
00:27:03.760 options were also available. So the funny thing is the poll ends up proving the opposite. In a
00:27:09.960 certain sense, you could read in far more reasonably that he actually is kind of vulnerable
00:27:15.100 because even a liberal poll doesn't have like a hard consensus that he can't be beaten. It's not
00:27:19.780 of majority of people saying he can't be beaten right now. By the way, if you ask the same
00:27:23.520 question, probably in Nick Nanos' bad polling four or five months ago, probably this number
00:27:28.680 would be more like 50% because that's when he was riding really high. He's not riding so high
00:27:33.560 anymore. So they had to screw with the poll to make it look like he's still riding high when we
00:27:38.240 really just made sure to chop all of the opposition up so that it doesn't consolidate anywhere in
00:27:43.200 particular. I'll let her go on a little bit more. Then I want to jump to a clip of Frank Graves.
00:27:47.260 But that none of the above is just liberal and NDP voters saying nobody, right? That's fair. I mean, that's to be expected. But here's the thing. Even setting all of that aside, the official opposition itself, okay, their supporters couldn't point to a single name that Canadians see as a real threat to the prime minister, okay?
00:28:07.700 This wasn't a focus group. This wasn't like a focus group room where you got all the conservatives together and you say, which guy can beat him? And we were all talking about it. We were disagreeing and we couldn't come to a consensus. Like, no, it's anonymous. It's just random people at home picking names. Some of them could even be liberals saying, well, I could see Harper beating him. You know, I don't, maybe I wouldn't vote for him, but I could see Harper beating Carney. I could see Doug Ford beating Carney.
00:28:33.520 That's what this is measuring.
00:28:35.300 But we're just painting within the lines of any color we want, no matter what it is.
00:28:42.120 Now I need to take you guys over to this similarly obnoxious clip of Frank Graves, who runs Ecos, on the horrible Hurley Burley Curse of Politics podcast, where he talks about how shocking it is in his awful poll that the conservatives would only win 50 seats.
00:28:59.880 Even though the Liberal lead is expanded somewhat, it's not dramatically different from the election.
00:29:08.180 But what's impressive is the amount of churning that has gone on to produce what right now is a very commanding position for the Liberals.
00:29:17.480 Even though the numbers aren't that much higher than what they got in the last election,
00:29:22.360 and they narrowly missed the majority, basically in the final stages of that campaign when they were backing up quite a bit,
00:29:29.200 But because of the way the vote splits now, this would produce a massive majority if there was an election to be held in the near future, which obviously there's not supposed to be, but you never know.
00:29:41.680 And what's happened is, even though the Liberals have lost in this binary election the last time where 87% of voters picked one of two choices, which is almost unprecedented, the NDP who are the miserable 6% are now up at 17%.
00:29:59.200 in our poll with some interesting angles about who that is. I actually think it's the more
00:30:03.520 significant story and the one which is perhaps more threatening in the longer term to the Liberals
00:30:09.760 than the collapse of the Conservative Senate. But we'll talk about that. How can you have
00:30:15.840 losing about 12 points of NDP voters who led their votes to the Unliberals,
00:30:22.800 yet you're still ahead? Well, the answer is pretty straightforward. They have
00:30:27.360 absorbed maybe even swallowed would be the better term the conservatives who are status quo
00:30:32.640 conservatives who are not particularly disinformed who are not attracted to some of the right-wing
00:30:37.280 populism which is he mentions disinformed voters because ecos frank graves pollster always does the
00:30:43.120 stupid disinformation poll where they rate which party supporters are more likely to fall for
00:30:47.440 disinformation and it really ends up just being a poll of do you agree with frank graves's
00:30:52.400 particular political opinions like some of the stuff doesn't even make any sense like it's
00:30:57.320 considered disinformation if you don't believe that humans contribute the most to climate change
00:31:04.300 and not natural causes which is just true that it's mostly natural causes which is why the climate
00:31:09.940 changes over time despite the industrial revolution having not started until a couple hundred years
00:31:14.920 ago like that is genuinely something that is in his poll saying that if you believe in disinformation
00:31:21.780 if you don't believe that like driving your car
00:31:24.780 is the biggest factor on the weather on this planet.
00:31:29.660 Also, he says, well, you know,
00:31:31.260 the numbers are not that much different
00:31:32.760 from where they were at on election night.
00:31:35.480 It's like they're way different.
00:31:37.500 In fact, he was trying to show
00:31:39.340 that the liberals were gonna win,
00:31:41.220 I guess in a certain sense,
00:31:42.560 the numbers aren't that different
00:31:43.320 because ECOS was a crappy pollster in the last election.
00:31:45.780 He showed the liberals at like 47, 48% of the vote
00:31:49.020 and his current poll shows them
00:31:50.360 at 47 percent of the vote now but the problem is he had the conservatives like way down if his 25
00:31:56.180 election polls were accurate the liberals would have won over like 220 seats or something like
00:32:01.000 that so him acting like he was so accurate because the current polls are quite similar to what they
00:32:05.820 were what we were showing before the last election it's like um you comparing a your own crappy poll
00:32:14.020 now and saying it looks like your own crappy poll before the last election is asinine that doesn't
00:32:19.860 make any sense at all and by the way he goes on later I didn't realize the clip was this long but
00:32:25.240 he says oh in our own poll we're showing that the conservatives could just win 50 seats and it's
00:32:30.160 like wow you cooked a poll that over surveyed left-wingers and it would show the conservatives
00:32:36.620 collapsing what are you talking about that's not how polling works you need a good mix but he's
00:32:42.780 like acting like like oh well the NDP have surged to 17 percent dude even the other pollsters like
00:32:48.780 nanos and research co don't even show the ndp doing that well they're showing them at like 12
00:32:54.320 or 13 or whatever which is a decent recovery from them and then frank graves with no information
00:32:59.600 because he never really releases any of his real he doesn't release much data past his regionals
00:33:04.540 and that's pretty much it how can he tell us how can he prove to us he's never released the data
00:33:10.440 to show that and that a bunch of the liberals shed 12 to the ndp and then the conservatives
00:33:16.700 shed 12% to the liberals. No, I really doubt you had that many people saying, yes, I did vote
00:33:22.760 conservative last election. Now I'm voting liberal, or I voted liberal last election. Now I'm voting
00:33:26.660 NDP. That did not occur. He is simply making things up. He gets hundreds of thousands of
00:33:33.040 dollars a year to do polling contracts for the federal government. And then we're shocked he
00:33:37.940 puts out this microwaved awful polling like Nick Nanos does that shows that the liberals are
00:33:43.080 actually super popular. Who cares about the trade fiasco? Who cares about all the scandals? They're
00:33:48.600 super robust because my poll of five liberals in a downtown Vancouver coffee shop says they're
00:33:54.200 super popular. Anyways, with all that being said, thank you guys for watching the show. Make sure
00:33:59.520 to like, share, subscribe. If you like the fact that I do these videos, consider hitting the join
00:34:04.200 button below the video or hitting the join link at the top of the comments. I always say if you're
00:34:09.240 living on a fixed income and you know that's not something that you can spend money on do not join
00:34:14.320 the membership program i will survive without it but it does make it more sustainable for me for
00:34:18.840 those who are comfortable doing that contributing a bit makes it much easier to operate the channel
00:34:23.460 and doing very niche videos like this but with all that being said thank you guys for watching
00:34:28.860 and i'll see you all later