Decisive results

While most of the commentary on the latest Strategic Counsel poll has focused on the party numbers involved, it's worth taking a look at the leadership numbers as well - both to see what issues were apparently left out of the poll, and how the leaders compare to each other for the moment:

The poll finds that 53 per cent of voters find Mr. Harper to be the most decisive of the four main party leaders, with 20 per cent opting for the NDP's Jack Layton.

Mr. Dion is the choice of 19 per cent, while Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe is picked by 29 per cent in Quebec.

On the question of who has the best vision for the nation, 50 per cent pick Mr. Harper; 22 per cent Mr. Dion and 20 per cent Mr. Layton.

Finally, with 36 per cent, Mr. Harper tops the field of who Canadians believe would be the best PM, doubling Mr. Dion's score of 18 per cent. Mr. Layton is seen as the best PM by 16 per cent, while Mr. Duceppe pulls the support of 24 per cent in Quebec.

Mr. Gregg said that while Mr. Harper has soared, Mr. Dion has not been able to capitalize on the honeymoon period he received from the convention. Even on the question of charisma, where the Prime Minister has not traditionally done well, Mr. Dion comes out at the bottom, with 20 per cent opting for him, compared to 36 per cent for Mr. Layton and 35 per cent for Mr. Harper.

Compare the categories included in some of polling around election time to the ones mentioned in the article, and a few striking differences emerge.

First, the "overall impression" category for each leader doesn't appear to be mentioned - meaning that the number of Canadians with a strong negative view of Harper isn't captured by the poll.

Second, the questions asked about seem to be ones where Harper fares particularly well (frightening though that is in the "charisma" category). The article doesn't mention any question as to which leader is most trusted, which was the single leadership indicator included in Strategic Counsel's pre-election polling. Nor does it address competence, as SES tracked during the election campaign.

Instead, the new category of "decisiveness" seems to have come out of nowhere. And it's hard to imagine a single category better designed to show a notoriously secretive and stubborn PM in a positive light - which could easily have then spilled over into the other perceptions of Harper (particularly on the "vision" question).

That aside, there are still some problematic factors for both Dion and Layton in the poll. In particular, Layton's scores compared to Harper are starkly down from his numbers in SES' polls throughout the last federal election campaign, when his overall numbers were close to both of the other national leaders. And even with a huge edge in experience and a lack of the internal infighting now plaguing the Libs, Layton doesn't seem to have much of an edge on Dion for now either.

Meanwhile, Dion's ability to drop even below the final numbers of PMPM has to be worrisome for the Libs - particularly to the extent that it may suggest the Cons have been successful in defining his image. And as the old saying* goes, "when Stephen Harper doubles your rating for charisma, you'd might as well start conceding seats to the Greens."

*Note: This may not be an "old saying" in the sense of having been said before. But if not, it should be.

Update: Let's note that even on an apples-to-apples comparison using SES' criteria, Layton's numbers are still down from the 2006 campaign. Though hopefully the recent focus on policy will bring the numbers back up, particularly when compared to Dion's odd tactic of making opponents' attack ads his primary focus.

(Edit: fixed wording.)