I don’t think any of them did riding-specific polls/predictions.

I think most aggregators had PP winning as the most likely outcome, but his defeat was within the MOE.

I think they’ll have the next election (the 2026 mid-term) but I’m less sure about the election after that…

It appears you didn’t link the article.

Might be too nitpicky but the article says

Liberal Leader Mark Carney was re-elected in his Ottawa riding

which seems like such a huge error.

I think that was Carleton because they have 91 candidates on the ballot, so they had to get a special dispensation to start early.

EDIT fixed autocorrect

CBC said it’s riding by riding the order they count the ballots.

Could change, but as of right now, they’re not leading anywhere.

Although it’s not available for the most serious violent offences — such as murder, sexual assault or aggravated assault — it can be used for lesser crimes.

While this program isn’t set up for serious offences, restorative justice can be brought to these situations too. It’s usually less of an “alternative justice” and more of a parallel to our punitive justice system to but can bring healing to both victims and perpetrators.

Authoritarians? You mean glorious communists! /s

That’s not how legislation is typically written. Anyways, just because someone states their purpose doesn’t mean that’s actually their intentions. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

I’m more than happy to support any measures which actually increase safety, but prohibiting these guns is just for show. Putting forward ineffective legislation like this wastes political capital which could have instead been used to actually make our society safer.

It’s not a strawman. I am all for gun safety, but the rifles that have been recently “prohibited” are simply models that “look scary” while their sporterized counterparts have had their classification unchanged.

Please point out any. I know there are models that fit European standards instead of North American, but they aren’t arbitrarily banned because “they look scary.”

🤞the bastard is the one to the south 🤞

While this is definitely a positive, I worry it’s a repeat of what happened in the Ontario election: Likely voters want to get-it-over-and-done-with so they go as soon as practical. In the case of Ontario’s election, it was just a shift that a larger percentage of voters went to the Advanced Polls, not that a larger percentage of people voted.

Actually, not like gun laws because we don’t ban “scary looking” models of vehicles. In generally we don’t even ban provably deadlier models or limit their usage based on need. Any idiot can buy a jacked-up F150 and drive it on any public road.

Don’t treat this kind of projection as remotely reliable at the riding level, it doesn’t actually tell you anything about what’s happening in your locality.

338Canada’s record has been pretty darn good. Saying, “it doesn’t tell you anything” is downplaying not only their historical accuracy, but also the effort they put into their methodology.

They aren’t perfect. For example, I lived in Kitchener Centre where the Greens were out of 338Canada’s MOE 2 elections in a row, but on the whole, they’ve been pretty accurate.

Also the 2024 election.

Almost all of the polls were within the MOE. The polls said it was a toss up, and it was.

Also the bc provincial election last year. Pretty sure the last federal election polls Also were wrong.

The results for both of these were very close to what the polls predicted. Not sure why you felt they were off?

Polls are instantly biased by the type of people that answer polls, or the audience that the polls are based on.

Very true, which is the job of pollsters to adjust for. And, as I’ve said, I think they are pretty good at their jobs.

I keep hearing statements like this, but they’re not backed up by data. Polls are rarely “wrong” and aggregators such as 338Canada do a pretty good job of predicting local races. While there are are some historically bad misses (many pollsters for the 2016 US Presidential Election), IMHO the biggest issues is people not understanding what polls actually mean, and the media doing a terrible job of explaining them.

3 days seems like a good “default” but I agree I’d definitely like the option to make it shorter.

You assumed by, “save you a click,” they’d read and summarized the article? No, they are such a big brain, they know everything without even having to read the article!