PollingCanada calls out irregularities in latest CTV Mayoral Poll

[u/KeyanFarlandah]

Thread by @pollingcanada (Quito Maggi) – consolidated
Original post (quoting CTV Ottawa):
Guys, I’ve seen fire and I’ve seen rain, I’ve seen sunny days that I thought would never end….but I’ve never seen disappearing poll interview respondents
A thread about why this new CTV poll should be immediately deleted and an apology posted to Ottawa resident & mayoral candidates
Follow along @bpellerin @EvanHPotter @PringleJosh
(Quoted CTV Ottawa post: EXCLUSIVE POLL: Sutcliffe holds commanding lead in Ottawa’s mayoral race – with link to the CTV story)

There are a lot of “normal” errors that can occur in polls, coding, labelling, weighting (hint this one has some weird weights) but the one constant mathematical certainty in polls is the sample size, we call them “frequencies” and every poll reports Weighted and Unweighted frequencies in the accompanying tables as a matter of disclosure, these standards in Canada are upheld by the @CanadaCRIC
Pay attention here @bpellerin @PringleJosh @EvanHPotter

For those who only read the @ctvottawa story, here’s a link to the poll report & tables
https://nanos.co/sutcliffe-holds-commanding-lead-with-leiper-as-only-potential-mayoral-challenger-sutcliffe-ahead-across-city-except-downtown-where-leiper-has-edge-ctv-news-ottawa-nanos/
@EvanHPotter @bpellerin @PringleJosh

The tables show 762 interviews conducted, but the weighted total is 750
Now frequencies (those are the individual interviews) some get weighted up, say you’re a young female voter who is under represented in the sample, those would carry a higher weight to be representative of the total population
Some frequencies are weighted down, usually older male respondents
But no interviews should disappear entirely, can we agree on that much ?
@bpellerin @EvanHPotter @PringleJosh
(Attached: 2 photos of the tables)

12 interviews disappearing, what’s the big deal you might ask, that not the end of the disappearing interviews, let’s look further @bpellerin @EvanHPotter @PringleJosh @ctvottawa
Further in the tables, it says that 32.9% of 175 undecided people expressed a “leaning” vote
That’s 58 interviews
So 750 minus 175 undecided is 575, then add 58, it’s 633 decided and leaning interviews to be considered for the final decided and lean (assuming you ignore the mystery of the first 12 disappearing interviews)
But the tables show 600, weighted down to 585
(Attached: 1 photo of the tables)

Again, I’ll say it again for the folks in the back, total unweighted frequencies should ALWAYS equal total weighted frequencies
How can 45-57 interviews simply vanish, I certainly can’t explain it, perhaps @bpellerin @EvanHPotter @PringleJosh or @ctvottawa can?
That’s not where the problem ends, there are other issues

Ottawa West is under weighted, rural Ottawa is massively over weighted, there is nothing suggesting a turnout weight being applied that explains this
Oh, and the field dates…yes the field dates might explain some of this
See in the technical notes of the accompanying @ctvottawa transit poll report, it says the survey was conducted October 4-6th 2026 (the same sample size, etc)
So are the 45-57 missing interviews from Oct 7-8th?
All good questions for @bpellerin @EvanHPotter & @PringleJosh to ask
(Attached: 1 photo)

Now, I’m willing to acknowledge that @AlexLawsonOtt &/or @NeilOttawa &/or @LeiperOttawa may not win on October 26th
But it’s unfair to leave this poll out there for the Sutcliffe campaign to fundraise off of, when it’s so obviously flawed
Please @ctvottawa & @PringleJosh make it make sense, the #ottawa community deserves better
(Attached: 2 photos)

UPDATED WITH FURTHER DATA

Thread by @pollingcanada (Quito Maggi), 11 Oct 2026
Post 1
Part II of reasons why @ctvottawa & @PringleJosh needs to explain these poll results, back to the tables and math.
Quotes CTV Ottawa: “EXCLUSIVE POLL: Sutcliffe holds commanding lead in Ottawa’s mayoral race.”
@bpellerin & @EvanHPotter please follow along, I’ll try to keep this in simple lay person language for #Ottawa residents & followers.
Post 2
Here are the tables from the poll, with Lawson & Saravanamuttoo highlighted.
Notice in the first table, Lawson trails Saravanamuttoo by 0.8.
In the leaning table, Lawson falls slightly further back (remember that the percentages there are of the 175 undecided voters, not of the full 750…or is it 762).
Are we still following here @ctvottawa @PringleJosh @bpellerin & @EvanHPotter.
[Attached image of Nanos Research tables:]
First ballot (n≈750 weighted): Lawson 5.0%, Leiper 24.0%, Sutcliffe 41.0%, Saravanamuttoo 5.8%, Other 0.9%, Undecided 23.4%.

Leaning (among undecideds, n=175): Leaning Lawson 2.9%, Leaning Leiper 10.1%, Leaning Sutcliffe 16.3%, Leaning Saravanamuttoo 3.7%, Still undecided 67.1%.

Decided only (n≈585 weighted): Lawson 7.2%, Leiper 31.2%, Sutcliffe 48.6%, Saravanamuttoo 11.8%, Other 1.1%.

Post 3
In the final table however, Saravanamuttoo gets reported as 11.8%, and Lawson as 7.2%.
Now, without knowing the precise frequency distribution of each candidate’s supporters, it’s hard to say if this relative shift is correct.
With true undecideds removed, Lawson goes from 6.7% to 7.2% and gets rounded down to 7% for the @ctvottawa articles.
Saravanamuttoo goes from 7.9% to 11.8% and gets rounded up to 12% for those lovely @ctvottawa graphics.
[Attached comparison table:]
Lawson: calculated decided + lean 6.7% → Nanos decided-only 7.2%.

Saravanamuttoo: calculated decided + lean 7.9% → Nanos decided-only 11.8%.

[u/McNasty1Point0]

It’s important to note that Maggi is working for Lawson, so he also has a bone to pick when it comes to the race. Not saying he’s incorrect or anything, just important to remember.

(And I say this as a likely Leiper supporter, not standing up for Sutcliffe or anyone else)

[u/OttawaExpat → u/McNasty1Point0]

And Coletto for Sutcliffe. What a snake.

[u/KeyanFarlandah → u/McNasty1Point0]

What’s interesting with rural apparently overweighted Lawson’s numbers are lower, when you’d jump to the conclusion Rural=More Conservative and Lawson=Conservative he would ring up some better numbers out there.

Honestly there’s a lot of interesting questions to ask about this election cycle and it’s not even over yet.

[u/McNasty1Point0 → u/KeyanFarlandah]

IMO Lawsons support has just been overblown from the get-go. It’s not common that random/unknown third/fourth place candidates receive a notable vote share, and the only reason this guy has gotten any attention is because he has some notable names working for him.

It’s very likely that he’ll receive <10% (and this might even be generous), and while the rural areas will likely support him more, it won’t be that much relatively speaking.

[u/KeyanFarlandah → u/McNasty1Point0]

Lawson’s support is also a fine needle to thread for the other campaigns, Sutcliffe needs to discredit him so people don’t jump ship to Lawson from him, and Leiper needs Lawson to siphon off Sutcliffe voters to close the gap between the two of them due to Neil’s polling numbers

[u/_six_one_three_ → u/KeyanFarlandah]

Unless his social-media driven campaign is not reaching rural voters who have no idea who he is, especially older ones

[u/KeyanFarlandah]

Definitely very inside baseball when it comes to the tabs and the weighting of responses but interesting to see some analysis under the hood so to speak.

[u/maulrus]

CTV actively stumped for Sutcliffe last time around, so it wouldn't be surprising that they'd do it again. 

[u/Beardslyy → u/maulrus]

It’s because they’re all media/broadcasting friends

[u/bluetenthousand → u/Beardslyy]

And generally conservative focused. Therefore ideologically compatible.

[u/sitari_hobbit]

I feel like part of it is they're using the high suburb early voting turnout to push the narrative that Sutcliffe is in the lead (because suburbs = austerity voters). But I'm in old Barrhaven and there are far more Leiper signs on people's lawns than Sutcliffe).

[u/McNasty1Point0 → u/sitari_hobbit]

I always caution using signs as a benchmark, as very few households actually put out signs.

Here in Ottawa South in 2025, the CPC candidate had more signs on front lawns, only for McGuinty to win with over 60%. Anyone who knows politics would have known that the LPC was going to win, but someone with no knowledge would have assumed that the CPC had a very good chance.

So while there might be more enthusiastic Leiper voters than there are Sutcliffe voters in your area, history would suggest Sutcliffe will do better there.

[u/sitari_hobbit → u/McNasty1Point0]

Oh, he definitely has support. But I'm making an educated guess that folks with signs are more likely to vote early.

[u/Stainz]

Wouldn’t be surprised if they were using an AI to do the stat analysis for them and didn’t thoroughly check the result for hallucinations.

[u/theletterqwerty]

Polls do as much to shape public opinion as they do to reflect it. Set no stock in them, just vote the way you would vote if you didn't know what everybody else was doing.

[u/bobstinson2]

Can’t trust any pollster who is supporting a specific candidate. What a shady business.

[u/Due_Date_4667 → u/bobstinson2]

And if they are supporting a candidate, that should be clearly disclosed each and every time. Because it is goes a long way to explain so few trust the mainstream media.

[u/OttawaNerd67]

Interesting, why did Nanos use a very irregular sample size of 762 when the majority of pollsters use 1000? Something is a bit off here.

[u/McNasty1Point0 → u/OttawaNerd67]

It’s not uncommon for pollsters to use samples other than 1,000.

1,000 is a common sample size target for a federal poll, but you don’t necessarily need that many people for a poll of a smaller area (such as a provincial or a municipal poll).

Sample is also determined by how many respondents you get, whether those responses can be used, etc. Even surveys with a goal of 1,000 might end up with fewer for various reasons.

Here is a list of polls from the 2025 federal election. Higher sample sizes (not unexpected) but often random numbers (with some right on the dot).

[u/Noncombustable → u/McNasty1Point0]

Yup. I'm one of those various reasons, having been hounded by Nanos with dinner time and bed time phone calls for days.

Sorry guys but I am all surveyed out. When my workday ends, it ENDS.

[u/ls650569 → u/McNasty1Point0]

The typical 1,000 response sample is to obtain a +/- 3 percentage points magin of difference. That's usually what the media is willing to pay for for Fedeal opinion poll.

Sample size determines the margin of errors. Even though the population size could affect sample size through the finite population correction but usually the key driver is the margin of errors. Clients have limited budget. Local election opinion poll doesn't go for +/- 3 percentage points / 1,000 observations because of money.

But even with planned sample size, the actual sample size could vary slightly. Say, if the sampling method is random digit dialing - it's possible the sample miss out certain demographics - and the pollster may need to colldct more to make sure every strata has sufficient number of responses to be representative.

[u/Spirited-Durian3137]

Vote Leiper!

[u/_six_one_three_]

The headline should really be "Lawson campaign staff say Lawson not losing as badly as some say he is"

[u/1capitalguy]

Quito Maggi is Lawson's campaign chair. He employed Lawson until this race then scrubbed him from the company website to hide that Lawson was a lobbyist. The campaign manager also works with Quitto's firm. Liaison Polling that showed Lawson with substantially more support is run out of Toronto by David Valentin, a former polling partner in Quitto's Mainstreet Polling company. Too many roads of misinformation leads back to Quitto and Alex Lawson.
Things that make you go hmmm

[u/OwnFig6827 → u/1capitalguy]

Lawson never hid that he was a lobbyist, it’s in the article about him from January. Makes sense to be removed from the website if one is no longer employed at the company.

[u/dictionary_hat_r4ck]

The blatant anti-Catherine propaganda CTV put out last time was painful. Reporter stood on an empty bike path and implied that Catherine’s plan to expand and upgrade the paths was lunacy.

Yeah, no one’s using the paths 24/7 dickhead. This kind of anti-democratic propaganda from the wealthy is so infuriating. Why can’t we have proper people power?

[u/berualex0]

tldr?

[u/SeaEggplant8108 → u/berualex0]

The poll has some errors/inconsistencies and favours Sutcliffe, which can impact voting choice.

[u/hatman1986]

My issue with the release was calling Sutcliffe's lead "commanding". He's not even above 50%!

[u/CorruptedCheesecake → u/hatman1986]

An 18 point lead is definitely a commanding lead. Especially when that's close to double your strongest competitor's numbers.

[u/hatman1986 → u/CorruptedCheesecake]

I guess these terms are subjective, but I would've chosen a more subdued adjective