Mon 9th January 2012, 5:40pm
Loving some of the comments:
Interested Western Observer
11:37 AM on January 9, 2012
This article is pure speculation masquerading as news!
11:40 AM on January 9, 2012
Wow. I have seen some lazy political analysis in my day, but this takes the cake.
11:41 AM on January 9, 2012
This is one of the most ridiculous articles I've ever seen. Especially because it's not the general public voting for NDP leader, but party members! NOT JOURNALISM.
12:12 PM on January 9, 2012
Coincidence is not correlation......
You have no idea why people are going to Wikipedia, and in this race? no way of telling that the people who are going to wikipedia have any influence in the outcome of the race via a vote.
Increase traffic can be due to several things....ie: it follows a news article that people want to know more about, as the convention grows closer journalists/public need a refresher and etc......
Wikipedia indicates interest to be sure.....but does that mean it translates into voter intention? specifically in a niche voting situtation where only SOME of the traffic actually has voting ability?
This is a reach and is no substitute for real analysis.
11:50 AM on January 9, 2012
I never thought I would actually yearn for the days where the Globe was publishing corrupt incompetent Nanos polls and calling it news. This is a new low.
11:54 AM on January 9, 2012
How lazy is journalism really getting? Citing Wikipedia isn't even okay in a Highschool paper! lol
12:40 PM on January 9, 2012
I've just completed an extension of Grenier's statistical analysis of Wikipedia and -- this just in -- now beating out Mulcair in the NDP race are the following candidates:
Ms. Pamela Anderson
Mr. Rusty Trombone
Wikipedia is an excellent source of political forecasting!