Skip to main content

B.C. NDP Leader Adrian Dix addresses supporters after conceding defeat in the provincial election, in Vancouver, May 14, 2013.

DARRYL DYCK/THE CANADIAN PRESS

The NDP weren't the only heavy losers in Tuesday's stunning comeback victory by the governing B.C. Liberals.

Mainstream pollsters also wound up with egg on their face. Not a single one gave an inkling the NDP would squander the solid lead they enjoyed in the polls right up to voting day.

On the eve of the election, Angus Reid had the New Democrats ahead by nine percentage points. Instead, the party finished five points behind the Liberals, an astonishing swing of 14 points.

Story continues below advertisement

Still "completely flabbergasted" by the results several hours after the polls closed, Mario Canseco, vice-president of Angus Reid Public Opinion, said a major factor may have been the NDP's failure to motivate young British Columbians, their strongest supporters, to vote.

Polls gave the NDP a two-to-one lead over the Liberals among voters 18 to 34 years of age, Mr. Canseco said.

"If that young vote decides not to show up, you're kissing goodbye to a third of your base, and that's exactly what happened," he said, noting that the overall turnout was "abysmal" (52 per cent). "When you have a party at 45 per cent, and they end up with 39, that means there was a difficulty getting their voters out."

Polls are based on stated preferences of the general population, not those who actually show up to vote, Mr. Canseco said. "The electorate did not resemble the electorate we were polling."

The Liberals polled much better among voters 55 years of age and over, he pointed out. That group had a much higher turnout, and was susceptible to the Liberals' focus on the economy and jobs, Mr. Canseco said.

He said the B.C. results, which closely resembled what happened last year in Alberta when the Conservatives were re-elected by a wide margin despite polls predicting a victory for the Wildrose Party, will likely force Angus Reid to re-examine the way it calculates pre-election voter preferences.

"I'm not saying people didn't tell us what they were hoping to do," Mr. Canseco said. "But there's got to be some way to factor in the electorate that is actually going to show up to vote."

Story continues below advertisement

There was nothing in all the trends they tracked since Ms. Clark was elected Liberal leader more than two years ago that suggested Tuesday night's result was possible, he said. "So obviously, there was something we didn't do properly. Clearly, the voting intention trends we were tracking were off."

Consistent through all their polling was the desire for a change in government, but when many voters got into the polling booth, their desire softened, Mr. Canseco speculated. "It was simple for people to say they wanted change, but ultimately, the change they saw was not particularly palatable."

The best way to determine what went wrong is to go back and interview people, and try to understand why the opinions they offered to Angus pollsters was so different from the final result, he said.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter