Ontario 2018 election

[PeteB]

I agree with @King of Kensington.  The NDP vote is inefficient.  NDP will rack up huge majorities in certain ridings (Hamilton, North), but will lose rural ridings by a large margin, and many urban ridings by a small margin.  The voting intentions shift to the NDP is simply not enough to overcome the PCs structural advantage.  Nor is every Liberal voter willing to go to the NDP, as many analysts wrongly assume.  

As for TO, NDP should be sincerely hoping that the Liberals do get at least 5-7 seats, otherwise they will go to the PCs, due to vote splitting, as imho the NDP have no capacity to win in places like Willowdale, Don Valley West or Etobicoke Lakeshore.

I don't know where the NDP/PC difference should be for an NDP majority, but I am guessing that it should be closer to 10-12%.  We are still far away from that.  Even an NDP minority government would have NDP at least 5% ahead of PCs.

In Canadian politics, there's no such thing as a "structural advantage" because there aren't many core supporters of parties. I wouldn't count out the NDP winning Willowdale or Etobicoke Lakeshore. The latter is very unlikely, the former is somewhat unlikely but it's far from impossible - Wynne is about as unpopular of a figure as I've ever seen in my time following politics. When this happens, you don't start rambling about "structural advantages".

The structural advantage I am referring to is the lock the PCs have on rural ridings. Even if Doug Ford "shoots someone on the street", to borrow liberally from Mr. Trump, PCs would still win ridings like Parry Sound, Leeds Granville or Elgin Middlesex. And more importantly, because they are rural, these wins come with a low overall voter impact and on their ability to stay competitive elsewhere. Unlike them, NDP needs a lot of votes to win seats in Hamilton or London, creating a vote "deficit" elsewhere.

The other structural advantage PCs have (at least vis-a-vis the NDP) is that they are the main alternative to the Liberals in many suburban ridings. That is why an NDP breakthrough in the Ottawa suburbs, or the York region is more wishful thinking than reality, at least at current poll numbers!

1. It's Ontario - there aren't many ridings that any party has a lock on. Coalitions constantly change. Horwath and the NDP currently have very broad appeal. Polling suggests that they have significant appeal with swing/centrist voters. They even appear to have appeal with conservatives. Polling also suggests that the OLP is winning roughly 0 of voters in either category. That's a recipe for the NDP sweeping areas in unexpected ways - contrary to what you'd expect, left-liberals and "progressives" are not driving the movement towards the NDP.
2. Citing Trump in any capacity when making the arguments you are making is foolish, even if it's in passing - even in the United States, it's possible for supposed "structural advantages" to evaporate and we're talking about Ontario, a province where in three consecutive elections, three different parties landslided the competition in late 80s to mid 90s. When coalitions change, they tend to do so in dramatic ways.

To be more blunt, you're using historical evidence to make claims about a reality where the OLP is about as popular as AIDs and the NDP is polling near 40%. This is bizarre. You cannot talk about "structural advantages" when we don't see a structure and a party has surged by 15 percentage points! That makes no sense!

Seriously? It's a known fact that PC has had a lock on about 25-35 of these rural/suburban ridings for years and you are not considering that a structural advantage? Take a riding like  Parry Sound - Muskoka - it has elected conservatives in every election since 1999, often with over 50% of the vote. How does that support your thesis that coalitions and conditions constantly change? It's also a fact that the NDP has never been successful in penetrating small town Ontario, except in the North. Andrea Horvath is a formidable campaigner but excuse me for being somewhat sceptical that the NDP will do it now.  These smaller communities have often never voted by more than 10-15% for the NDP, and I am not convinced that it will suddenly change now.

To be clear, I am not discounting the NDP's chances of a breakthrough in some of these ridings, but it probably won't happen when the PC and NDP are tied in poll numbers. And in that environment, a Liberal implosion is more likely to help the PCs than the NDP. Also, when you start using words like "foolish", "no sense" and"rambling", you are foregoing rational arguments and letting your partisanship get in the way of clear analysis.

[King of Kensington]

Re Hudak, more so in 2011 than 2014--his civil-servant-bashing '14 campaign actually helped him in wealthier polls (check comparative polling maps in those years for proof)

Hudak's 2014 progam had a lot of appeal at the Financial Post editorial board, in right-wing think tanks and on Bay Street and had virtually no "populist" appeal whatsoever.  It was a completely austere, orthodox conservative program with few specific pitches to the "middle class."

According to Sid Ryan (who was head of the OFL at the time), only 19% of union members voted PC in 2014.

This is why I'm skeptical of claims that all these Hudak '14 voters are ripe for voting for Andrea Horwath's NDP now.  He never had the swing voters to begin with and pretty much took them to the floor.

[PeteB]

I agree with @King of Kensington.  The NDP vote is inefficient.  NDP will rack up huge majorities in certain ridings (Hamilton, North), but will lose rural ridings by a large margin, and many urban ridings by a small margin.  The voting intentions shift to the NDP is simply not enough to overcome the PCs structural advantage.  Nor is every Liberal voter willing to go to the NDP, as many analysts wrongly assume. 

As for TO, NDP should be sincerely hoping that the Liberals do get at least 5-7 seats, otherwise they will go to the PCs, due to vote splitting, as imho the NDP have no capacity to win in places like Willowdale, Don Valley West or Etobicoke Lakeshore.

I don't know where the NDP/PC difference should be for an NDP majority, but I am guessing that it should be closer to 10-12%.  We are still far away from that.  Even an NDP minority government would have NDP at least 5% ahead of PCs.

In Canadian politics, there's no such thing as a "structural advantage" because there aren't many core supporters of parties. I wouldn't count out the NDP winning Willowdale or Etobicoke Lakeshore. The latter is very unlikely, the former is somewhat unlikely but it's far from impossible - Wynne is about as unpopular of a figure as I've ever seen in my time following politics. When this happens, you don't start rambling about "structural advantages".

The structural advantage I am referring to is the lock the PCs have on rural ridings. Even if Doug Ford "shoots someone on the street", to borrow liberally from Mr. Trump, PCs would still win ridings like Parry Sound, Leeds Granville or Elgin Middlesex. And more importantly, because they are rural, these wins come with a low overall voter impact and on their ability to stay competitive elsewhere. Unlike them, NDP needs a lot of votes to win seats in Hamilton or London, creating a vote "deficit" elsewhere.

The other structural advantage PCs have (at least vis-a-vis the NDP) is that they are the main alternative to the Liberals in many suburban ridings. That is why an NDP breakthrough in the Ottawa suburbs, or the York region is more wishful thinking than reality, at least at current poll numbers!

As urban and rural ridings have the same population, I'm very confused by what you're trying to say.

I would humbly disagree with you. Here is an example.

Electors by riding:

Parry Sound Muskoka - 62,109
London North Centre - 94,684

[King of Kensington]

^ Parry Sound-Muskoka is considered Northern Ontario though (to the chagrin of many!), where riding populations are smaller.

[Boston Bread]

If you looked at Waterloo from 1990-2011 you would've thought it was a solid PC seat, yet in 2014 the PCs came third. Popular incumbents can mess with things. And similarly enough in London North Centre the PCs came third as well in 2014.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Re Hudak, more so in 2011 than 2014--his civil-servant-bashing '14 campaign actually helped him in wealthier polls (check comparative polling maps in those years for proof)

Bit of a dead cat bounce, but yes, that's so. I do wonder whether there's a chance of the Ontario Liberals ending up in a situation to the LibDems here in 2017; i.e. credible (even good in some cases) results in seats with heavy concentrations of higher professionals, total disaster everywhere else. I also wonder whether the extremely suburban Ford will do quite as well as Hudak in the countryside - Hudak era PC maps stink of cow sh!t after all...

[King of Kensington]

Re Hudak, more so in 2011 than 2014--his civil-servant-bashing '14 campaign actually helped him in wealthier polls (check comparative polling maps in those years for proof)

Bit of a dead cat bounce, but yes, that's so. I do wonder whether there's a chance of the Ontario Liberals ending up in a situation to the LibDems here in 2017; i.e. credible (even good in some cases) results in seats with heavy concentrations of higher professionals, total disaster everywhere else. I also wonder whether the extremely suburban Ford will do quite as well as Hudak in the countryside - Hudak era PC maps stink of cow sh!t after all...

I hope so!  I think they'll probably prevail in St. Paul's and hopefully retain a concentration in the "John Tory Liberal" ridings of Don Valley West, Eglinton-Lawrence and Willowdale.

[adma]

If you looked at Waterloo from 1990-2011 you would've thought it was a solid PC seat, yet in 2014 the PCs came third. Popular incumbents can mess with things. And similarly enough in London North Centre the PCs came third as well in 2014.

Waterloo was more of an Elizabeth Witmer seat than a Tory seat--had it not been for her, the seat would have gone Liberal in '03.  (And conversely, the federal Libs overperformed in 2011--in part due to Andrew Telegdi's takeback bid, in part for campus-town reasons.)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's also a fact that the NDP has never been successful in penetrating small town Ontario, except in the North. Andrea Horvath is a formidable campaigner but excuse me for being somewhat sceptical that the NDP will do it now.  These smaller communities have often never voted by more than 10-15% for the NDP, and I am not convinced that it will suddenly change now.

Might want to take a quick glance over the 1990 election before using words like 'never'. Different circumstances of course, but not exactly 'never'.

[PeteB]

It's also a fact that the NDP has never been successful in penetrating small town Ontario, except in the North. Andrea Horvath is a formidable campaigner but excuse me for being somewhat sceptical that the NDP will do it now.  These smaller communities have often never voted by more than 10-15% for the NDP, and I am not convinced that it will suddenly change now.

Might want to take a quick glance over the 1990 election before using words like 'never'. Different circumstances of course, but not exactly 'never'.

Your point is well taken - never is too strong a word . NDP did make rural gains in that election, especially in the SW, but that was as a result of a "perfect storm" with 3-way splits across several rural ridings, allowing NDP MPPs to be elected in places like Prince Edward Lennox with just 33% of the vote or in Huron with 34%. With the OLP going down fast, those conditions will probably not be repeated. Mind you, even in 1990, PCs managed to hold on to a lot of of the central and eastern rural seats.

[136or142]

Andrea Horwath could have been dumped as leader after the last election, and here she is now.

Not that Jagmeet Singh has been terrible, but I think this is more evidence that Mulcair deserved another shot.

[Linus Van Pelt]

Most "structural advantages" are pretty dubious, outside of cases in which you have a concentrated ethnic minority like black Americans or non-Francophone Montrealers.

[Holmes]

^ Parry Sound-Muskoka is considered Northern Ontario though (to the chagrin of many!)

Like yours truly.

[cp]

To be more blunt, you're using historical evidence to make claims about a reality where the OLP is about as popular as AIDs and the NDP is polling near 40%. This is bizarre. You cannot talk about "structural advantages" when we don't see a structure and a party has surged by 15 percentage points! That makes no sense!

Rude.

Most "structural advantages" are pretty dubious, outside of cases in which you have a concentrated ethnic minority like black Americans or non-Francophone Montrealers.

It wouldn't take much stretching of the term 'ethnic minority' to encompass the white, rural, conservative voters of rural southern and Eastern Ontario who beget the PCs their 'structural advantage' in seats. I'm not prepared to go quite that far into the sociology of it, but I still think it's fair to say that the PC lock on the seats north of Guelph and along Highway 7 is well established and a genuine structural impediment to any other party wanting to win a majority.

In any case, it's a moot point unless the gap between the PCs and the NDP is under 3 points or so. More than that and either party will start getting those 'we have no business winning here' seats that will push them over the top.

[DC Al Fine]

It's also a fact that the NDP has never been successful in penetrating small town Ontario, except in the North. Andrea Horvath is a formidable campaigner but excuse me for being somewhat sceptical that the NDP will do it now.  These smaller communities have often never voted by more than 10-15% for the NDP, and I am not convinced that it will suddenly change now.

Might want to take a quick glance over the 1990 election before using words like 'never'. Different circumstances of course, but not exactly 'never'.

Your point is well taken - never is too strong a word . NDP did make rural gains in that election, especially in the SW, but that was as a result of a "perfect storm" with 3-way splits across several rural ridings, allowing NDP MPPs to be elected in places like Prince Edward Lennox with just 33% of the vote or in Huron with 34%. With the OLP going down fast, those conditions will probably not be repeated. Mind you, even in 1990, PCs managed to hold on to a lot of of the central and eastern rural seats.

Well there's never and never. 1990 had the Confederation of Regions and Family Coalition parties scoring double digits in some rural seats, allowing the NDP to come up the middle. I suppose it's technically possible for that to happen or for Reform 2.0 to show up but I really doubt the NDP will ever win a material number of rural seats when their only competition is the Liberals and Tories...

*Looks across the river where the NDP went from 0 to a majority of rural Quebec seats in one election*

[toaster]

Re: Willowdale and Etobicoke-Lakeshore, they are similar in that they both have a ton of new condo buildings and new residents which could be a big factor in changing the voting patterns.  With the right candidate, I think the NDP could have won, but I don't think either nominated strongly.

[DC Al Fine]

Grits and Star are gonna bomb Doug tomorrow with a story about purchasing a nomination for a woman who Frank strongly hints is his mistress.

Hmm. I'm always skeptical of nomination scandals moving votes, but the mistress thing could be big.

[mileslunn]

Grits and Star are gonna bomb Doug tomorrow with a story about purchasing a nomination for a woman who Frank strongly hints is his mistress.

Hmm. I'm always skeptical of nomination scandals moving votes, but the mistress thing could be big.

This might be like the firing 100,000 last time if a big enough bombshell.  Wondering is there anyway to get rid of Ford as leader this late in the game.  I know they cannot have a leadership convention, but they could appoint a interim leader to lead them.  Yes quite risky but if a big enough might be the only option left.  Interesting the Liberals not NDP are releasing this as every damaging thing on Ford has just helped them not the Liberals.

[lilTommy]

I agree with @King of Kensington.  The NDP vote is inefficient.  NDP will rack up huge majorities in certain ridings (Hamilton, North), but will lose rural ridings by a large margin, and many urban ridings by a small margin.  The voting intentions shift to the NDP is simply not enough to overcome the PCs structural advantage.  Nor is every Liberal voter willing to go to the NDP, as many analysts wrongly assume.  

As for TO, NDP should be sincerely hoping that the Liberals do get at least 5-7 seats, otherwise they will go to the PCs, due to vote splitting, as imho the NDP have no capacity to win in places like Willowdale, Don Valley West or Etobicoke Lakeshore.

I don't know where the NDP/PC difference should be for an NDP majority, but I am guessing that it should be closer to 10-12%.  We are still far away from that.  Even an NDP minority government would have NDP at least 5% ahead of PCs.

In Canadian politics, there's no such thing as a "structural advantage" because there aren't many core supporters of parties. I wouldn't count out the NDP winning Willowdale or Etobicoke Lakeshore. The latter is very unlikely, the former is somewhat unlikely but it's far from impossible - Wynne is about as unpopular of a figure as I've ever seen in my time following politics. When this happens, you don't start rambling about "structural advantages".

The structural advantage I am referring to is the lock the PCs have on rural ridings. Even if Doug Ford "shoots someone on the street", to borrow liberally from Mr. Trump, PCs would still win ridings like Parry Sound, Leeds Granville or Elgin Middlesex. And more importantly, because they are rural, these wins come with a low overall voter impact and on their ability to stay competitive elsewhere. Unlike them, NDP needs a lot of votes to win seats in Hamilton or London, creating a vote "deficit" elsewhere.

The other structural advantage PCs have (at least vis-a-vis the NDP) is that they are the main alternative to the Liberals in many suburban ridings. That is why an NDP breakthrough in the Ottawa suburbs, or the York region is more wishful thinking than reality, at least at current poll numbers!

1. It's Ontario - there aren't many ridings that any party has a lock on. Coalitions constantly change. Horwath and the NDP currently have very broad appeal. Polling suggests that they have significant appeal with swing/centrist voters. They even appear to have appeal with conservatives. Polling also suggests that the OLP is winning roughly 0 of voters in either category. That's a recipe for the NDP sweeping areas in unexpected ways - contrary to what you'd expect, left-liberals and "progressives" are not driving the movement towards the NDP.
2. Citing Trump in any capacity when making the arguments you are making is foolish, even if it's in passing - even in the United States, it's possible for supposed "structural advantages" to evaporate and we're talking about Ontario, a province where in three consecutive elections, three different parties landslided the competition in late 80s to mid 90s. When coalitions change, they tend to do so in dramatic ways.

To be more blunt, you're using historical evidence to make claims about a reality where the OLP is about as popular as AIDs and the NDP is polling near 40%. This is bizarre. You cannot talk about "structural advantages" when we don't see a structure and a party has surged by 15 percentage points! That makes no sense!

In regards to #1. The NDP momentum, from 10 days ago now, but goes more to the point I want to make, The NDP has basically already pulled over all the "Core Left" 47% (+17% since 2014) and now lead the "Left-Liberal" group 38% (+18% since 2014). This is the voting group that lead to the NDP losing seats in Toronto, and held them back from winning places like Ottawa Centre.

https://innovativeresearch.ca/ontario-politics-in-depth-values-and-attitudes/

But to your point, the NDP is seeing huge growth among "Thrifty Moderates" 31% (+10% since 2014) But so have the PCs 39% (+18 since 2014) This group is where the NDP needs to win over more of if they want to be government.
The PCs have eaten out the "Business Liberal" vote, 37% tied with the OLP, but +16 since 2014 while the OLP has seen -17%.

There is an interesting section called "Canadian Dreamers"

"Meanwhile, some of the economically alienated voters who initially were rallying to the Doug Ford PCs appear to be shifting to the NDP.
Voters who reject the idea you can be anything you want in Ontario if you work for it have shifted from supporting the PCs in April to the NDP in early May.  However, the NDP has also gained in two of the three clusters that are struggling to some degree but believe in the Canadian dream.  There is now a three-way tie among Canadian Dream Hopeful voters while the NDP and Liberals are closing the gap with the PCs among the Canadian Dream Heavy Strugglers."

The NDP in rural areas, in particular SWO, I think their chances are rather good. It's been stated that this is not the same as 90's sweep. But looking at the 90's you had the FCP, which at most took 12% in one riding, the Confederation wasn't really an impact but FCP was running in most seats. Today you have the Greens who effectively take that 5-12% in the SW as well, in some ridings much higher like Guelph and Dufferin-Caledon. Some of the riding results from 90, look similar to what we have today but the PCs in third. Today we have the Liberal vote imploding, and I don't see the bulk of this vote going PC, not at this point. The OLP-PC voter already jumped ship back in 2011, when the OLP lost most of the SW to the PCs (except Essex which went NDP) If the PC vote starts to slip even more, I'd expect the SW to look like it did in 2003, but NDP rather then Liberal.

 

[DC Al Fine]

Grits and Star are gonna bomb Doug tomorrow with a story about purchasing a nomination for a woman who Frank strongly hints is his mistress.

Hmm. I'm always skeptical of nomination scandals moving votes, but the mistress thing could be big.

This might be like the firing 100,000 last time if a big enough bombshell.  Wondering is there anyway to get rid of Ford as leader this late in the game.  I know they cannot have a leadership convention, but they could appoint a interim leader to lead them.  Yes quite risky but if a big enough might be the only option left.  Interesting the Liberals not NDP are releasing this as every damaging thing on Ford has just helped them not the Liberals.

To paraphrase RogueBeaver, changing leaders midstream is almost always a terrible idea.

[DL]

Leger poll:

PCs 37%
NDP 37%
Liberals 21%

[mileslunn]

Grits and Star are gonna bomb Doug tomorrow with a story about purchasing a nomination for a woman who Frank strongly hints is his mistress.

Hmm. I'm always skeptical of nomination scandals moving votes, but the mistress thing could be big.

This might be like the firing 100,000 last time if a big enough bombshell.  Wondering is there anyway to get rid of Ford as leader this late in the game.  I know they cannot have a leadership convention, but they could appoint a interim leader to lead them.  Yes quite risky but if a big enough might be the only option left.  Interesting the Liberals not NDP are releasing this as every damaging thing on Ford has just helped them not the Liberals.

To paraphrase RogueBeaver, changing leaders midstream is almost always a terrible idea.

Yes, but if bad enough keeping Ford might be even worse.

[Tintrlvr]

Leger poll:

PCs 37%
NDP 37%
Liberals 21%

They hadn’t polled since April, but that’s PC -6, NDP +11, Lib -5.

Seems like a lot of pollsters are showing ties. I wonder if we’ll get any polls where the NDP are clearly ahead.

[DC Al Fine]

I agree with @King of Kensington.  The NDP vote is inefficient.  NDP will rack up huge majorities in certain ridings (Hamilton, North), but will lose rural ridings by a large margin, and many urban ridings by a small margin.  The voting intentions shift to the NDP is simply not enough to overcome the PCs structural advantage.  Nor is every Liberal voter willing to go to the NDP, as many analysts wrongly assume.  

As for TO, NDP should be sincerely hoping that the Liberals do get at least 5-7 seats, otherwise they will go to the PCs, due to vote splitting, as imho the NDP have no capacity to win in places like Willowdale, Don Valley West or Etobicoke Lakeshore.

I don't know where the NDP/PC difference should be for an NDP majority, but I am guessing that it should be closer to 10-12%.  We are still far away from that.  Even an NDP minority government would have NDP at least 5% ahead of PCs.

In Canadian politics, there's no such thing as a "structural advantage" because there aren't many core supporters of parties. I wouldn't count out the NDP winning Willowdale or Etobicoke Lakeshore. The latter is very unlikely, the former is somewhat unlikely but it's far from impossible - Wynne is about as unpopular of a figure as I've ever seen in my time following politics. When this happens, you don't start rambling about "structural advantages".

The structural advantage I am referring to is the lock the PCs have on rural ridings. Even if Doug Ford "shoots someone on the street", to borrow liberally from Mr. Trump, PCs would still win ridings like Parry Sound, Leeds Granville or Elgin Middlesex. And more importantly, because they are rural, these wins come with a low overall voter impact and on their ability to stay competitive elsewhere. Unlike them, NDP needs a lot of votes to win seats in Hamilton or London, creating a vote "deficit" elsewhere.

The other structural advantage PCs have (at least vis-a-vis the NDP) is that they are the main alternative to the Liberals in many suburban ridings. That is why an NDP breakthrough in the Ottawa suburbs, or the York region is more wishful thinking than reality, at least at current poll numbers!

1. It's Ontario - there aren't many ridings that any party has a lock on. Coalitions constantly change. Horwath and the NDP currently have very broad appeal. Polling suggests that they have significant appeal with swing/centrist voters. They even appear to have appeal with conservatives. Polling also suggests that the OLP is winning roughly 0 of voters in either category. That's a recipe for the NDP sweeping areas in unexpected ways - contrary to what you'd expect, left-liberals and "progressives" are not driving the movement towards the NDP.
2. Citing Trump in any capacity when making the arguments you are making is foolish, even if it's in passing - even in the United States, it's possible for supposed "structural advantages" to evaporate and we're talking about Ontario, a province where in three consecutive elections, three different parties landslided the competition in late 80s to mid 90s. When coalitions change, they tend to do so in dramatic ways.

To be more blunt, you're using historical evidence to make claims about a reality where the OLP is about as popular as AIDs and the NDP is polling near 40%. This is bizarre. You cannot talk about "structural advantages" when we don't see a structure and a party has surged by 15 percentage points! That makes no sense!

In regards to #1. The NDP momentum, from 10 days ago now, but goes more to the point I want to make, The NDP has basically already pulled over all the "Core Left" 47% (+17% since 2014) and now lead the "Left-Liberal" group 38% (+18% since 2014). This is the voting group that lead to the NDP losing seats in Toronto, and held them back from winning places like Ottawa Centre.

https://innovativeresearch.ca/ontario-politics-in-depth-values-and-attitudes/

But to your point, the NDP is seeing huge growth among "Thrifty Moderates" 31% (+10% since 2014) But so have the PCs 39% (+18 since 2014) This group is where the NDP needs to win over more of if they want to be government.
The PCs have eaten out the "Business Liberal" vote, 37% tied with the OLP, but +16 since 2014 while the OLP has seen -17%.

There is an interesting section called "Canadian Dreamers"

"Meanwhile, some of the economically alienated voters who initially were rallying to the Doug Ford PCs appear to be shifting to the NDP.
Voters who reject the idea you can be anything you want in Ontario if you work for it have shifted from supporting the PCs in April to the NDP in early May.  However, the NDP has also gained in two of the three clusters that are struggling to some degree but believe in the Canadian dream.  There is now a three-way tie among Canadian Dream Hopeful voters while the NDP and Liberals are closing the gap with the PCs among the Canadian Dream Heavy Strugglers."

The NDP in rural areas, in particular SWO, I think their chances are rather good. It's been stated that this is not the same as 90's sweep. But looking at the 90's you had the FCP, which at most took 12% in one riding, the Confederation wasn't really an impact but FCP was running in most seats. Today you have the Greens who effectively take that 5-12% in the SW as well, in some ridings much higher like Guelph and Dufferin-Caledon. Some of the riding results from 90, look similar to what we have today but the PCs in third. Today we have the Liberal vote imploding, and I don't see the bulk of this vote going PC, not at this point. The OLP-PC voter already jumped ship back in 2011, when the OLP lost most of the SW to the PCs (except Essex which went NDP) If the PC vote starts to slip even more, I'd expect the SW to look like it did in 2003, but NDP rather then Liberal.

Tommy, I mostly agree with you but I don't think you're discussion of 1990 vote splits is right. FCP did top out at 12%, but they also put up lots of high single digit results and these numbers get even higher when you throw COR into the mix. That's a big deal when we're talking sub 5% wins like a lot of the rural NDP wins. Even if you make generous allowances for some of those voters going NDP or staying home if FCP and COR weren't on the ballot, there's 8 or 9 mostly rural seats that the NDP won off the backs of vote splits

[mileslunn]

Leger poll:

PCs 37%
NDP 37%
Liberals 21%

They hadn’t polled since April, but that’s PC -6, NDP +11, Lib -5.

Seems like a lot of pollsters are showing ties. I wonder if we’ll get any polls where the NDP are clearly ahead.

Probably not right away, but if they continue to surge then most definitely.  IVRs still show PCs ahead although only in single digits not double, but still more than five.  Both mainstreet and Ekos show this.  From tweets at both firms appears PCs still ahead although much smaller lead than earlier in the campaign.  No idea what CATI polls show.