Canadian Election 2019

[DC Al Fine]

It isn't something that one could ever prove, but there might be practical - governance, discourse - implications to less and less detailed information like that. I do sometimes wonder if some of the more bizarre and inexplicably stupid political blunderings seen in this country over the past decade might have been... if not averted then maybe lessened... if our politicians actually knew who was voting for them. Uniquely, of course, they have no real idea at all.

Any specific examples where you're suspicious?

[DC Al Fine]

Wow, BQ winning Quebec! Are they still actively trying for separatism or have they evolved into a sort of "Quebec interests" party after the failed referendums and what not?

It's an internal party divide. They had a hardline seperatist leader who got turfed last year. The Quebec interest types are firmly in control right now.

Why have the Liberals lost so much ground in the Atlantic since their sweep last time? Dogsh**t provincial governments?

Partially, but a lot of it is just regression to the mean. Harper was a uniquely bad fit for the region and he reformed unemployment benefits in his last term, which is a perpetual vote loser in Atlantic Canada, where seasonal unemployment is a way of life (see also: 1997).  Those factors aren't there anymore, or at least aren't as fresh in voters minds.

[DC Al Fine]

What's the likelihood of either Wilson-Raybould or Philpotts winning as an independent? I guess that might be relevant to the electoral calculus if Lib + NDP is about the same as Con.

I think, my observation, is that Wilson-Raybould has a better chance of winning then Philpott does.

Why are CON and NDP contesting those seats.  Should they not step aside to back these two to highlight their concern and anger over the Lavalin affair ?  Especially when Wilson-Raybould seat it seems neither CON nor NDP has much of a chance anyway.

That generally doesn't happen in Canada; parties generally still want their names on the ballot for party loyalists, polling, etc. Their also use to be a deposit issue up until 2017, if you got under a certain % of the vote you lost your deposit.
By-elections we see smaller parties, like the Greens in particular, that used to bow out (most recently in Burnaby South)
Their has been some un-official campaigning by May for Wilson-Raybould and I wouldn't be surprised if many NDP/Green and even LPC voters were happy if she won. Independents though, don't last very long in Canadian Parliaments from what I remember

This

The most relevant and recent examples are Andre Arthur (Tories bowed out in '08 and '11 but he was almost a de facto Tory), and Bill Casey (only the Greens bailed).

[DC Al Fine]

One thing I don't understand is why the Liberals didn't use their majority to push through ranked ballot legislation when they had the chance.  It would have set them up for almost perpetual majority governments.

And I REALLY don't understand why the Ontario Liberals didn't do it too.

The consensus coming out of consultations was that Canadians preferred some sort of PR system. Changing the vote system to favour your party, against what the people wanted, would be an extremely risky proposition, like calling a snap election early in one's mandate.

That especially goes for Ontario. "Premier 12% Approval Rating changes electoral system to favour her party" ain't a great headline.

[DC Al Fine]

https://twitter.com/quito_maggi/status/1184924872251772931

I actually believe this might very well happen.  Devastating result for Tories and almost certainly will force Scheer's resignation and big changes in the party, but I think a combination of things are happening to cause this.  Tories are strong in Prairies but weak elsewhere.  Atlantic Canada is a Progressive Conservative and Scheer still seems too Reform like to win there.  Scheer's French is very weak so losses in Quebec, although BQ gains will temper Liberal support there.  Ontario hates Ford and so desire to not have a second Conservative government will mean a very poor showing there.  In BC, environment is a huge issue and while any are fiscally conservative, Tories weak stance on the environment hurts them there.  Still with strong splits will probably gain in the last one.

I fear though national divisions will get worse as Alberta and Saskatchewan will feel even more alienated from the rest of Canada and that will be a challenge Trudeau will have to deal with which won't be easy.

I agree, but what else could the Conservatives possibly do? They picked the most generic and unoffensive candidate possible--someone youmg amd upbeat and right wing enough to avoid Tory defections while not setting off serious alarm bells among swing voters.

Good question

First off, let's not count our chickens before they hatch. Maggi's  poll/projection gave the Liberals a 66 seat lead over the Tories on a 1% lead. That's certainly possible under FPTP, but it feels a bit off, especially now that the Bloc has eliminated the possibility of the Liberals running up the score in Quebec. But assuming Maggi is correct...

Scheer's big issue in my opinion isn't his ideological positioning. I agree with your assessment there. There's an annoying genre of Canadian punditry that likes to pretend the Reform Party wasn't a thing and that there's zero risk of tacking left . His big problem is that he's just so darn uninspiring. A new leader (and another four years for Trudeau to make mistakes) might provide an opening on that front.

I think such a big gap in seats, when compared to the MOE popular vote, is Unlikely. There's just too many easy flips for team Blue, even with the Grit stranglehold on Ontario. There's also the NDP right now, in broad strokes are going to be picking up a bunch of lib/NDP seats that they lost in the 2015 wave.

Yeah, I think most seat projections have the big two roughly tied right now in seats. Maybe Maggi's polling has the Tories higher than most pollsters out West and lower everywhere else? That would explain the gap.

[DC Al Fine]

One thing I don't understand is why the Liberals didn't use their majority to push through ranked ballot legislation when they had the chance.  It would have set them up for almost perpetual majority governments.

And I REALLY don't understand why the Ontario Liberals didn't do it too.

The consensus coming out of consultations was that Canadians preferred some sort of PR system. Changing the vote system to favour your party, against what the people wanted, would be an extremely risky proposition, like calling a snap election early in one's mandate.

That especially goes for Ontario. "Premier 12% Approval Rating changes electoral system to favour her party" ain't a great headline.

True, but the worst part of the headline is "Premier 12% Approval Rating".

Voters don't care a lot for the 'inside baseball' stuff, as much as we pundits might like to think.  Despite the Fair Vote folks claiming that huge majorities of Canadians favour Proportional Representation, those numbers seem to evaporate whenever a plebiscite is held.

Ranked ballots would have kept the 'electoral reform' promise without bringing in the transformative effects of PR.  Voters would still keep their local MP/MPP, and no one would get elected without majority(-ish) support of the voters.  The NDP and Greens might howl, but the Liberals would get the benefit of strategic voting without having to force people to vote against their first choice.  

And it could have the added effect of splitting the Tories into further factions.  A new SoCon party could run unabashedly against abortion and gay rights, with the assumption that their supporters would give the Conservatives their second ranking.  How well would the PPC be doing now under ranked ballots, if their voters knew they could oppose immigration without helping to re-elect Trudeau?

Frankly, I see far more upside to the Liberals if they had just plunged right through the line.

Don't the Liberals have a right flank (the blue liberals, whom are extremely prominent in some of the wealthier parts of Canada) that would almost certainly peel off under this scenario?

Whatever the (fair) electoral system you devise you will always get governments of both the left and of the right over the years. Changing the electoral system will only allow for the wide range of views that exist in society to each have their own political party and basically not force people with very different views to share a 'broad church' political party (a good thing IMO). If you think proportional representation will lead to permanent left rule (or right rule for that matter) then you are utterly delusional and clearly have no idea how people vote or how democracy works.

NC Yankee has done some good work on this in the American context. In short whenever one party gains a signficant advantage, ther coalition is spread too thin. Eventually part of the winning party's coalition gets alienated either through the winning party choosing on group over the other or a new issue emerging. The losing party moves in the path of least resistance and appeals to the alienated group. E.g. The GOP had an advantage in the 80's but eventually alienated socially liberal northern suburbanites, leaving them open to the Democrats.

Applying this to a Canadian context, the Tories act the way they do in part because the electoral system allows them to win on 35-40% of the vote. If the system changed to preferential voting, the Tories wouldn't change overnight, which would lead to a big Liberal advantage in the short to medium term.  In the long run though, the Liberals would alienate some of their voters and/or the Tories would modify their approach, restoring competitiveness. 

[DC Al Fine]

Election models are pretty good at the national leevel, but maaaann are they bad at the riding level. Seeing a lot of predictions that the NDP will pick up Acadie-Bathurst despite not running Yvon Godin. The models really need some sort of adjustment for candidates.

[DC Al Fine]

Election models are pretty good at the national leevel, but maaaann are they bad at the riding level. Seeing a lot of predictions that the NDP will pick up Acadie-Bathurst despite not running Yvon Godin. The models really need some sort of adjustment for candidates.

They are running Daniel Thériault, long time president of the Acadien Festival, which is considered a star candidate.

Hmm, may have to eat crow tonight then.

[DC Al Fine]

Will there be turnout updates throughout the day at the national or provincial level?

No, I don't believe so.

[DC Al Fine]

The Liberal Party of Canada occupies a very unique space. It is similar to the Liberal Democrats in Japan or the PRI in Mexico in terms of its image as a party of power and as a party without a well-defined ideology. In practice, even if it is a shape-shifting entity, it usually governs more like a center-right party than anything else and, when it does not, it's usually due to the influence or threat of the NDP. During electoral campaigns, it always positions itself as a center-left party but, predictably, it always governs more like a center-right party.

I'd argue that the Canadian electorate basically allows it to occupy this space because Canada is such a disparate country. The Western wackos who have tended to dominate the Conservative Party since the functional demise of the Progressive Conservatives lack credibility with Canadians outside of the Prairies, oilfields - it's too adversarial and too clearly about Western interests vs. everyone else when there isn't a concerted effort to broaden the base.

Maybe I'm off-base here but I tend to be fascinated by the inability of the NDP to gain traction as a major second party at the national level when it has done so with ease in many provinces. Contrasting the achievements of NDP governments with Liberal governments always serves as a reminder of the gigantic gulf that exists between the two parties and I tend to be baffled by the existence of left-leaners who almost always vote for Liberals. I guess the specter of the wackos and nutjobs coming to power is enough of an inducement? Wynne and McGuinty were a disgrace but when compared with Ford or Harris, I can grasp why the Liberals are able to justify themselves.

There was a really good discussion of this a few years ago in one of the Canada General Discussion threads.

The conclusion was that it was a bunch of smaller factors that came together to prevent a labour left from dominating the Canadian centre left like it did in much of the west. Liberal competence, NDP incompetence, Anglo Canada being more right wing than the stereotype, and the NDP's inability to break through in Quebec until 2011 all played a role in stopping them from becoming a major party.

[DC Al Fine]

Wait....if I am reading this right, center right and right-wing parties in canada will barely combine for 1/3 of the vote? That is embarrassing.

It's Canada not Louisana

I get that, but the U.K., Germany, etc are also not Louisiana and center right parties combine for way more there than Canada.

Best way to understand Canada is that ~1/3 of the seats are located in a region comparable to NY/IL, and a majority of the national seats are  in sub/urban areas. That's not a recipe for a strong conservative party, which is why they often have to win 'red-tories' to remain relevant.

To add to what Oryxslayer said, there exists a substantial bloc of voters in Quebec who in other contexts would be open to voting for rightist parties, but usually don't due to the toxicity of the Tory brand in Quebec going back to WW1. These voters have historically backed Social Credit, the Bloc Quebecois, and even the NDP and Liberals at times, rather than the Conservatives. The Australian, British, German etc right doesn't have to deal with this.

It's hard to win elections consistently when such a large chunk of demographically favourable voters aren't open to voting for you.

[DC Al Fine]

The NDP wave seems to have dropped back a little; additionally, every incumbent government from 1997 to 2011 has done noticeably better than the last polls have indicated (the Tories also did so in 2015, but since the Liberals did too it was pretty much a wash).

I expect figures round about this:

145 Grits
125 Tories
  34 Bloquistes
  30 New Democrats
    2 Greens
    2 Others

Given how fortunate the Liberals have been over the last ninety years in missing the big recessions, I wonder if that luck will elude them in the next couple years given what's forecast to happen. (The only other time they were in office for a big downturn was Pierre Trudeau in the early 1980s - they missed all the rest since the Depression.)

Indeed, if one were to be ultra-cynical one might even suppose that the Liberal & Tory campaigns were both so pathetic this time because neither wants to be in government when the big slump hits. Obviously that's not the reason, but it still gives one cause to think.

Do you have links for 1997 and 2000 polls? Can't seem to find any good poll lists for those elections.

[DC Al Fine]

Let's say the election results in a Liberal minority with NDP/Green support. How realistic is Alberta secession? Is this 'Wexit' stuff mere sound and fury?

Not at all. Worst case scenario you get some nasty Fed-AB relations

[DC Al Fine]

Should I not be surprised the NDP picked up Nunavut? Seemed a bit unexpected.

Literally every possible result up North should be unsurprising

[DC Al Fine]

What *I* find depressing is how the Cons just keep getting more stratospheric in the West, i.e. all the 75%+ and even 80%+  mandates with opposition all in single digits--and really, that should be depressing to *them*, too, in a dumbed-down "why bother having elections?" way...

Between that and a few other things, I'm starting to think that for the health of the Canadian polity (if not necessarily the party) it would be a good idea for the NDP to have a Westerner as leader for a while.

Similarly, the Tories probably should put a non-westerner in charge at some point

[DC Al Fine]

Still bro, dozens of seats.

Can you give us a list?

West Nova, Right wing parties only got ~40% and won the seat

Charlesbourg-Haute-Saint-Charles, Right wing parties only got ~40% and won the seat

Chicoutimi-Le Fjord, Right wing parties only got ~38% and won the seat

Lévis-Lotbinière, Right wing parties got ~48% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Louis-Saint-Laurent, Right wing parties got ~47% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Montmagny-L'Islet-Kamouraska-Rivière-du-Loup, Right wing parties only got ~43% and won the seat

Portneuf-Jacques-Cartier, Right wing parties got ~46% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Richmond-Arthabaska, Right wing parties got ~47% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Aurora-Oak Ridges-Richmond Hill, Right wing parties got ~46% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Barrie-Innisfil, Right wing parties got ~46% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Barrie-Springwater-Oro-Medonte, Right wing parties only got ~41% and won the seat

Brantford-Brant, Right wing parties only got ~43% and won the seat

Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound, Right wing parties got ~49% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Carleton, Right wing parties got ~48% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Chatham-Kent-Leamington, Right wing parties got ~49% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Dufferin-Caledon, Right wing parties only got ~45% and won the seat

Durham, Right wing parties only got ~44% and won the seat

Essex, Right wing parties only got ~44% and won the seat

Flamborough-Glanbrook, Right wing parties only got ~40% and won the seat

Hastings-Lennox and Addington, Right wing parties only got ~44% and won the seat

Kenora, Right wing parties only got ~36% and won the seat

Niagara Falls, Right wing parties only got ~37% and won the seat

Niagara West, Right wing parties got ~48% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Northumberland-Peterborough South, Right wing parties only got ~42% and won the seat

Oshawa, Right wing parties only got ~41% and won the seat

Parry Sound-Muskoka, Right wing parties only got ~42% and won the seat

Perth-Wellington, Right wing parties got ~49% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Simcoe-Grey, Right wing parties only got ~45% and won the seat

Simcoe North, Right wing parties got ~46% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Wellington-Halton Hills, Right wing parties got 49.88% of the vote and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Charleswood-St. James-Assiniboia-Headingley, Right wing parties only got ~45% and won the seat

Kildonan-St. Paul, Right wing parties got ~47% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Desnethé-Missinippi-Churchill River, Right wing parties only got ~42% and won the seat

Edmonton Centre, Right wing parties only got ~45% and won the seat

Cloverdale-Langley City, Right wing parties only got ~40% and won the seat

Kamloops-Thompson-Cariboo, Right wing parties got ~46% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Kelowna-Lake Country, Right wing parties got ~48% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Kootenay-Columbia, Right wing parties got ~47% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Langley-Aldergrove, Right wing parties got ~49% and won the seat (would have been a tossup otherwise)

Mission-Matsqui-Fraser Canyon, Right wing parties only got ~45% and won the seat

Pitt Meadows-Maple Ridge, Right wing parties only got ~38% and won the seat

Port Moody-Coquitlam, Right wing parties only got ~33% and won the seat

South Surrey-White Rock, Right wing parties only got ~44% and won the seat

Steveston-Richmond East, Right wing parties only got ~42% and won the seat

Expecting tactical voting to take seats where the right is in the high 40's is silly. Non-Tory voters aren't some monolithic anti-conservative bloc. Some Liberals and even NDPers prefer the Tories to the other progressive parties. Some NDPers like Hatman think the Liberals are just as bad as the Tories and refuse to give them their vote. And that's before we even start on Quebec (lol at the idea of a hardcore seperatist voting for a Trudeau instead of the Bloc)

[DC Al Fine]

Bloc got a swing towards them in 77 of the 78 Quebec ridings.

And -5.5 in Laurier--Ste-Marie.

Did you notice any major trends in the various Quebec regions?

[DC Al Fine]

The comments about Scheer and Singh's results are classic Atlas.

Scheer: +25 seats, wins the popular vote. "He has to go"
Singh: -15 seats, worst share in 15 years. "Here's a list of reasons why he should stay"

[DC Al Fine]

So, is the left going to bring up the popular vote here...

Also (I don't follow Canadian politics closely, so I don't know), could all the other parties come together and remove the Liberals from government?  Could we wind up with a stalemate in Canada like the one in Spain for a while a few years ago?

No.

I mean technically the Tories, Bloc and NDP could vote down the Throne Speech and nominate someone else for Prime Minister, but there's no chance of that happening. If/when the government falls, since there is no chance of someone else obtaining the confidence of the House, we would just have new elections.

[DC Al Fine]

I'm familiar with the general lay of the land in Canadian politics and the big names in Canadian political history but don't follow the Canadian political process day-to-day. Can someone explain to me what exactly it is about Biebertrudeau that makes him so uniquely loathsome to the West? He's not even that anti-fossil fuel except rhetorically. Do people see the campaign rhetoric and assume he's coming for their livelihoods even though he's barely lifted a finger against the oil lobby in the past four years? Is there just a different culture out there that's put off by the dictatorship-of-the-woketariat vibes? Is it an affirmative strategy on the CPC's part to establish itself as a Western Canadian sectional party, rather than toxicity on Trudeau's part?

Less a failing of the Libs or Ottawa in general, and more a success on the part of the various conservative parties that they have cultivated a loyal base in the oil industry - it's just maybe a bit too successful. Various conservative tickets have not lost Alberta in recent history, more often than not it's their best province. The province was so loyal that it had two viable right-wing parties locally until their vote splitting finally enabled the NDP opposition. The Petroleum industry in general tends to draw/cultivate right-wingers, no matter where you are in the  globe. The low education requirements, high pay, and male dominated environment all set the starting point for the industry rather far toward the conservative axis of ideology.

More recently though? Oil states as a general rule go in boom and bust cycles that boom when the overall market is poor and bust when the overall market is high. Since the markets are  strong, Alberta will suffer no matter how many pipelines are built. Same situation in Alaska which is why the state is ungovernable right now. People were highly motivated to turnout and highly motivated to vote for the  opposition because they feel left behind in contrast to the rest of the country, even though whenever the next recession hits it will be the other way around. We can debate endlessly whether the decision to put all of Alberta's eggs into to Oil extraction basket rather then diversifying industry to oil-related manufacturing for plastics or cement or whatever was a good one, but Alberta's situation is that of a rentier state whose opinions of govt move with the markets. Add on a side of every other serious party supporting some sort of climate policy that attacks the fuel industry and we get a recipe for 80% blowouts.

To add to this, Trudeau while not overtly attacking Alberta oil like some eastern politicians are prone to do, has developed a reputation as uncaring and aloof to Alberta's problems. Things like the SNC-Lavalin affair bolstered the impression that Trudeau/Liberal Party/elites, will bend over backwards and even break the law to help a Montreal firm, but Calgary with the highest unemployment rate in the nation, gets very little attention.

[DC Al Fine]

Trudeau talks and comes off like an effeminate hippy and a hardcore SJW. That's not 100% true mind you, but those elements are there in his personality, and if you dislike thise things you will latch onto them. He is EXTREMELY minority-friendly and LGBTQ-friendly as well. You can see how some traditional conservatives will view this. His actual policy isn't noticed as much as his personality by his detractors, but they DO notice when he does controversial liberal things like giving taxpayer money to Syrian refugees and dressing full-on Indian on his trip to India.

TL;DR: He isn't a "man's man" that you want to drink beer, watch hockey and chase girls with, he's a liberal p__sy.

Though it doesn't quite explain the Cons' reach in places like Mayor Nenshi's Calgary.

When it comes to the urban West, it's a matter of being minority/LGBTQ-friendly on their own terms.  (Remember how as a federal politician, Jason Kenney was basically *the* Conservative face for multicultural outreach)

Yeah it's hard to explain running up the score in a riding like Calgary Skyview, that's <40% white, with "they don't like brown people".

[DC Al Fine]

Speaking of that, I wonder if it might be argued that a vestigial "Scheer effect" even leaked eastward into Northern Ontario--obviously with the Kenora pickup, but also in the Conservatives being second *everywhere else* except Sudbury and Nickel Belt--yes, even unexpectedly versus the NDP's Angus and Hughes...

It's not a "Scheet effect", no. Trudeau's not really too popular in Northern Ontario compared to 2015, and Singh's not as popular of a leader that past NDP leaders were because of reasons (guess which ones!). That being said, the Liberals still did pretty well in the region. And Kenora has a history of electing Conservatives too, both federally and provincially.

Though I'm also taking calibre of candidates and conventional wisdom into account (the incoming Kenora Con being a lot "rawer" than Greg Rickford--though in a funny way, I wonder whether Premier Ford's Kenora visit actually *helped* CPC here).

And in some ways, my point might be more regarding seats like Algoma (where 2015's Lib candidate was running again) and Timmins--even if Justin was less popular, few would have called for *those* seats to be second-place Conservative unless Scheer was polling in clear seat-plurality territory...

I'd suggest it wasn't Scheer specific, or Western alienation. Just the slow steady trend of the left upscaling and the right downscaling. To be honest, what I find confusing is that the Liberals do so well in Northern Ontario to begin with. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the region, but it feels like the sort of place that would be Tory-NDP out in BC.

[DC Al Fine]

Kind of weird to think that until this week, the largest margin of victory was in Vaughan. Goes to show how much of a difference trends and demographic changes can make over time.

[DC Al Fine]

Since 2015 the NoVA-ization of Ottawa is very much evident.

It's interesting then that the Tories were able to hold Carleton, when they lost the other 'bedrooming communities' of Milton and Kitchener-Conestoga, with Milton being the notable target of the  three. It's also interesting with the context of the CAQ victories in the Outaouais last year.

The Liberals had a star candidate in Milton, which is why they won it.

Conestoga has been known to give us surprise results in the past. In the 2007 provincial election, it was supposed to go PC, but the Liberals picked it up. I believe the Waterloo Region as a whole is also trending heavily away from the Tories.  It is after all dominated by the Tech sector.

As for Carleton, it's mostly an exurban riding, and also still has a large rural population, so it is still voting Tory. As Riverside South, Stittsville and Findlay Creek get bigger, the riding will trend Liberal, but by that point it will probably be split up again with the rural parts probably joining a Lanark or Leed-Grenville based district.

Pollievre is still pretty young. If he spends his whole career in Parliament it'd be funny to see how far away his riding is from Ottawa in the end, after several rounds of moving to better seats in redistribution.

[DC Al Fine]

Ipsos conducted an exit poll which included a question about how you would vote under straight PR. Actual poll results only added up to 95%, so I pro-rated the extra 5% by vote share. Seat change is vs actual FPTP results.

Tory: 31.6%, 107 seats (-14)
Liberal: 27.4%, 93 seats (-64)
NDP: 21.0%, 71 seats (+47)
Green: 8.4%, 28 seats (+25)
Bloc: 7.4%, 25 seats (-7)
People's: 4.2%, 14 seats (+14)

Tl;dr: PPC enters parliament (or narrowly misses out if we have a 5% threshhold), Liberals would have tremendous difficulty forming government on their own, and would need the support of the NDP + Bloc and/or Greens to pass anything. We probably see a coalition or at the very least a more formal arrangement with the NDP.