Canadian Election Results Thread

[Smid]

So the last ridings close 4:30 CET?

Hard for me to do the math.  10 Eastern, which is 3 London Time and 4 Central European Time, I think.

Better question... rather than specific time zones, in how many minutes/hours will we start to see confirmed results?

[Smid]

So the last ridings close 4:30 CET?

Hard for me to do the math.  10 Eastern, which is 3 London Time and 4 Central European Time, I think.

Better question... rather than specific time zones, in how many minutes/hours will we start to see confirmed results?

49 minutes.

Cheers mate!

[Smid]

Labrador???

Early days yet, but Ignatieff leads by one vote.

[Smid]

Trudeau in third place in Papineau.

Early days in a highly polarised seat... won't comment again on that seat until eventually called.

[Smid]

Primary vote of winning party:

[Smid]

I think the result needs to be formally declared and the website isn't the formal declaration and therefore doesn't actually have any legal status. The successful candidate doesn't become the member until the declaration by Elections Canada and the figures on the website are for information purposes only.

[Smid]

Two things could have happened.
1 - The person at the website putting in the data made a mistake.
If this is true, then no biggie, all will be fixed by morning.
2 - The returning officer, on his validated return, made a mistake.
If this is true, then since these results are valid, someone will need to challenge it, or, this person becomes elected.

Yes, quite right. I'd presupposed option 1 and suspected that's the case. If option 2 is the case, it may well need to be challenged, because that would probably be a legal document.

I think option 1 is more likely, though, because if the error had been made prior to the figures being entered into the computer, they would have probably been flagged by the person entering them, and the media probably would have picked up on it by now.

[Smid]

Very nice, Xahar.

Exceptional work!

[Smid]

However, someone else already has:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Though the way he describes it, I think he made a silly mistake. http://thoughtundermined.com/?p=2011

All very interesting... I've been playing with a spreadsheet for different reasons, which is designed to distribute preferences under AV, or OPV as it is called in Queensland and NSW (although it works just as well for compulsory preferential, by setting an expiry rate at 0%). Do any of those polls have preference flows by Province?

From the blog Max linked to:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The rule of thumb I use (after hearing someone else mention it and it sounding reasonably accurate to me) is that the Coalition will win the seat if it receives greater than 45% primary vote and Labor receives less than 40% primary vote. If Labor receives >40% and the Coalition receives >45%, it's close and you need to look at it on a seat-by-seat basis. If Labor receives >40% and Coalition <45%, it's probably going to be Labor-held but look at it on seat-by-seat basis. If Labor outpolls Coalition, the seat will almost certainly be Labor-held.

I might shorten all this down...

1. If Labor outpolls Coalition, Labor-held (except in rare, but obvious circumstances, such as where the Greens could conceivably win the seat, or where there's a very popular independent).

2. If Coalition outpolls Labor, and receives >45% and Labor receives <40%, Coalition held.

3. If Coalition outpolls Labor and receives <45% and Labor receives >40%, very marginal, look at on a seat-by-seat basis, with the closer the Coalition is to 45% and the closer Labor is to 40% more likely to be a very marginal Coalition-held seat, the further the Coalition is from 45% and the closer Labor is to 45%, more likely to be very marginal Labor-held seat. If Labor and Coalition are very close to equal, Labor-held.

To extrapolate for Canadian results, you can probably say...

1. If Conservatives finish first with >45% of the vote, Conservative-held.

2. If Conservatives finish second, party that finishes first wins the seat.

3. If Conservatives finish third, party receiving Conservative preferences wins if that party finishes first or if the other party finishes first with a margin <5%. I figure the Conservatives would probably preference Liberals ahead of NDP on their official HTV card, but for strategic purposes, they may possibly preference the NDP.

I think generally it can be assumed that somewhere near 80% of Conservative, Liberal, NDP, Bloc or Greens voters would follow their party's HTV card (a report by the VEC suggests lower, but that report looks at voters that perfectly follow their party's card, and does not consider how the preferences flow to the final two candidates in the distribution and whether voters have followed their party's endorsement between those two candidates, therefore I think it's better to use the AEC's tables of preference flows in each electorate showing the percentage of votes going from a primary vote to a particular excluded candidate to each of the winning candidates, in such cases, 70-80% of Greens preference the Labor candidate ahead of a Coalition candidate, with more seats at the 80% end rather than the 70% end... Family First is closer to a 60/40 split to the Coalition, but with fewer booth workers handing out for the party, fewer of their voters will receive a HTV card).

In Queensland and NSW, where preferencing is optional and voters can "just vote 1" if they desire, the expiry rate is close to 50%, so the "would not vote" option in those polls does not seem far wrong to me - I'd expect a country more used to multiple parties would be more likely to preference than a country with two dominant parties... the interesting thing, however, is that the Greens expiry rate is still at that 50% rate, even though Greens voters must surely know that their first preference is less likely to be counted to the final count.

[Smid]

That poll has the NDP performing very strongly. I seem to recall that the Liberals spent a good deal of time in the mid-to-high teens and very little time over 30% (I could be mistaken, however). When was the last time the Canadian Official Opposition performed that well in a poll?

[Smid]

Here is a map showing ridings in which the Conservative Party came either first or second.

2011





2008





2006





2004

[Smid]

Here is a map showing ridings in which the Liberal Party came either first or second.

2011





2008





2006





2004

[Smid]

Here is a map showing ridings in which the NDP came either first or second.

2011





2008





2006





2004

[Smid]

The bit I think I found most interesting was New Brunswick on the NDP map. Basically they came second in every riding held by a Conservative prior to the election. The Liberals came first or second only in the seats where they had an incumbent, which potentially doesn't bode well for their strength in the two seats they lost there. Mind you, I think a decline in the Liberal vote in seats they no longer hold is not unsurprising, it's been occurring in Vancouver and I suspect it may also begin in Toronto.

[Smid]

Can you make a similar map for the Greens, just for reference?

  I could do so, but it could take time.  I know they only got above 10% in a handful of ridings.  If you could list off the ridings I could do one certainly.  I know they got 46% in Elizabeth May's riding, but I don't believe they got above 20% in any other riding and very few above 10%.

You're right. Apart from Saanich-Gulf Islands only in Dufferin-Caledon did they get over 10%. In Bruce Grey-Owen Sound they had 9.99%.

I may be wrong, but I have the Greens at 18.91% in Yukon, 15.44% in Vancouver Centre, 14.69% in Dufferin - Caldon, 13.07% in Calgary Centre-North, 11.61% in Victoria and 10.68% in Okanagan - Shuswap.

[Smid]

I will try to work on the Green Party map this evening.  Also if anybody has the data for Independents that would be great.  I know Andre Arthur in Portneuf-Jacques-Cartier and James Ford in Edmonton-Sherwood Park got in the high 20s, Hec Cloutier in Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke in the high teens and Helena Guergis in Simcoe-Grey in the low teens.  Any others over 5%?

There were five ridings in which an independent received >5% of the vote:

Edmonton - Sherwood Park 29.50% (16,263 votes out of 55,136)
Portneuf - Jacques-Cartier 27.82% (14,594 votes out of 52,468)
Renfrew - Nipissing - Pembroke 18.70% (9,611 votes out of 51,398)
Simcoe - Grey 13.54% (8,714 votes out of 64,373)
Chambly - Borduas 11.33% (7,843 votes out of 69,243)

Those results are based on any judicial recounts, or if no recount was required, the validated results.

The independent in Madawaska - Restigouche received above 1,000 votes (1,290 out of 34,997, or 3.69%), and independents received >1% in another six ridings.

[Smid]

Party Swing Maps:

Conservative



There were two ridings where the Conservatives received the same vote as last time - of course, they didn't run in one of the seats at the past two elections, so I probably could have used the Independent's vote as a proxy-Conservative vote, but it doesn't really matter.


Liberal




NDP

[Smid]

Found an error in my earlier map - 2006, New Brunswick Southwest was held by the Conservatives, not the Liberals. I've edited the maps in the gallery to reflect this correction:



Earl, you may want to adjust that on your website. Sorry to cause trouble.

Edit: To correct subsequently noted errors.

[Smid]

My apologies! I'll check over my spreadsheets. I had found a couple of errors previously, which I corrected, but obviously a fair number have slipped past me. Let me know any that you spot and I'll start fixing them up.

[Smid]

My apologies! I'll check over my spreadsheets. I had found a couple of errors previously, which I corrected, but obviously a fair number have slipped past me. Let me know any that you spot and I'll start fixing them up.

Ive already fixed them. If I recall, they were also South Shore, Thunder Bay SN, and Victoria. But I may have forgotten some of the errors.

Plus St John's South - Mount Pearl.

Going through presently, compiling first a list of winners in each riding, then will make a map just showing winners (not margins), then will compare the winners map to my map and try to spot errors, then go back and correct errors in my spreadsheet. Sorry about all of this. Not quite sure how this happened.

[Smid]

I think the errors are limited to those six ridings:

Random - Burin - St George's
St John's South - Mount Pearl
South Shore - St Margaret's
Ottawa - Vanier
Thunder Bay - Superior North
Victoria (was correct in the spreadsheet, but unshaded on my map).

I'm terribly embarrassed by this. I think the numbers are now correct. I'll update the map in a moment.

[Smid]

Liberal and NDP swing maps up now (editing doesn't show up as a new post).

[Smid]

Also consider that the swings are based on General Election to General Election, and don't include by-election results in seats such as Vaughan and Winnipeg North (or Riviere-du-Loup, for that matter), oh, and of course C-C-MV in NS (I just mention these ones because they changed hands at by-election, unlike, say, Hochelaga). Looking at the strong swing against the NDP in Winnipeg North isn't as big a swing as in the by-election, I think... at least, they almost took it back off the Liberals at the GE. Anyway, much of that swing in Winnipeg North can probably be explained by factors surrounding the by-election, and the loss of an incumbent vote. Some of the big swings to the NDP/against the Liberals are in seats gained by the NDP at the last election, too, such as Vancouver - Kingsway. The so-called "sophomore surge" is probably my thought on a fair amount of that. The southern half of Edmonton seems to be a consolodation of the non-Tory vote (coupled with sophomore surge in E-Strathcona). The drop in NDP vote in Newfoundland may be partially because of a boost to the NDP in the ABC campaign in 2008, with some voters now returning to the Tories.

Elmwood confuses me a little. My first thought was that perhaps if it was seen as being a relatively safe NDP riding, campaign resources may have been diverted from there into the neighbouring Winnipeg North, to regain it from the Liberals. The Tory gain seems to have come from both the NDP and the Liberals, however, so I can't really explain it... maybe some swinging voters in the riding were content with the NDP holding it when the NDP was a third party but didn't want an NDP federal government? I really don't know.

Lethbridge is interesting... I know there's a university down there, and the Liberals hold a Lethbridge seat provincially. The Liberals did better than their average in both Lethbridge seats (as in the town), actually, although federally the riding takes in rural areas, too. I don't think I've uploaded my Alberta provincial maps yet, I might have to do that.

Largish swing against the Liberals in Egmont... incumbent defeated last election so Liberal candidate didn't have the same personal vote, and Tory probably built up a bit of a personal vote (ie, sophomore surge).

St John is interesting. If I remember correct, the NDP almost won a riding or two there in the New Brunswick provincial election. I think the swing fell very nearly on the other side of the margin (and therefore nearly close enough to the next darker shade of green). Perhaps the NDP has a longer-term potential there.

[Smid]

I've attempted to decipher the Liberal change map in my latest blog post.

(sorry to promote it so much, but I do see the blog as an off shoot of this forum )

I think your blog is excellent and I for one have no problem with you plugging it here.

[Smid]

Teddy, would you mind doing Northern Ontario soon? Not necessarily municipal boundaries or anything, but instead the provincial electorates, so we can compare the provincial results with the federal ones?