Alberta election 2023

[King of Kensington]

Comparing with the major centres in 2021 election (Elections Canada website).

CPC + PPC vote:

Calgary  61.6%
Edmonton  56.2%

So 9 point difference between UCP and CPC/PPC vote in Calgary, and 21 points in Edmonton.

[Njall]

Comparing with the major centres in 2021 election (Elections Canada website).

CPC + PPC vote:

Calgary  61.6%
Edmonton  56.2%

So 9 point difference between UCP and CPC/PPC vote in Calgary, and 21 points in Edmonton.

The EC numbers are somewhat misleading, especially for Edmonton, as they include some areas outside of the cities proper. Here are the numbers on the same geographies as the provincial numbers I posted yesterday:

Calgary:

2019
CPC: 405,208 (66%)
LPC: 111,341 (18%)
NDP: 60,856 (10%)
GPC: 22,739 (4%)
PPC: 11,424 (2%)
OTH: 4,083 (1%)

2021
CPC: 304,968 (53%)
LPC: 128,173 (22%)
NDP: 95,559 (17%)
PPC: 25,940 (5%)
GPC: 10,113 (2%)
OTH: 5,983 (1%)


Edmonton:

2019
CPC: 231,813 (52%)
LPC: 100,759 (23%)
NDP: 92,733 (21%)
GPC: 10,264 (2%)
PPC: 7,848 (2%)
OTH: 2,015 (0%)

2021
CPC: 160,938 (39%)
NDP: 133,984 (32%)
LPC: 94,886 (23%)
PPC: 22,307 (5%)
GPC: 1,933 (0%)
OTH: 1,700 (0%)

[mileslunn]

It does seem federally Tories tend to do better in Alberta than provincially so any reason for that as that was case even before you had more crazy ones like Danielle Smith?  Never mind Harper and Scheer were probably more conservative than most Alberta PC leaders and similar to Kenney.

Does though suggest even if Notley wins, Poilievre likely will still win vast majority of seats in Alberta in next federal election.  Although I imagine if Notley wins both federal NDP and Liberals might spend slightly more resources on trying to win seats in Alberta but short of an agreement not to run candidates against each other, I don't expect them to win many seats and even there I suspect Poilievre led CPC would still get over 50% and win majority of seats in Alberta.  Poilievre's bigger issue is can he win BC & Ontario as loses those two then loses election.

[King of Kensington]

It does seem federally Tories tend to do better in Alberta than provincially so any reason for that as that was case even before you had more crazy ones like Danielle Smith?  Never mind Harper and Scheer were probably more conservative than most Alberta PC leaders and similar to Kenney.

It's a vote for the "party of Alberta" (the CPC).  Provincially people feel more free to choose among parties.

[Njall]

It does seem federally Tories tend to do better in Alberta than provincially so any reason for that as that was case even before you had more crazy ones like Danielle Smith?  Never mind Harper and Scheer were probably more conservative than most Alberta PC leaders and similar to Kenney.

It's a vote for the "party of Alberta" (the CPC).  Provincially people feel more free to choose among parties.

Can confirm. Western alienation is a very real thing for some voters.

[King of Kensington]

In neighboring Saskatchewan, the Saskatchewan Party vote lines up pretty closely with CPC vote.  But it's a much more "natural" small-c conservative demographic.  Calgary and Edmonton vote rather conservatively at the federal level largely for regional grievance reasons.  I suspect if they were US states, Alberta would be a purple state and Sask a red state.  It's quite telling that it's very difficult to see an NDP path to victory in Saskatchewan.

[If my soul was made of stone]

In neighboring Saskatchewan, the Saskatchewan Party vote lines up pretty closely with CPC vote.  But it's a much more "natural" small-c conservative demographic.  Calgary and Edmonton vote rather conservatively at the federal level largely for regional grievance reasons.  I suspect if they were US states, Alberta would be a purple state and Sask a red state.  It's quite telling that it's very difficult to see an NDP path to victory in Saskatchewan.

The United States being a country famously lacking in regional resentment and conservative urban areas, of course. Tulsa? Never heard of her.

[King of Kensington]

Pales in comparison to Canada though.  US voting is much more demographically-driven.

[mileslunn]

Pales in comparison to Canada though.  US voting is much more demographically-driven.

US didn't have a single city as large as Calgary or Edmonton vote GOP.  Now true Edmonton Tories federally won more on splits as more voted left than right but in Calgary majority voted Tory federally.  In 2016, Trump did win Maricopa and Duval counties although Phoenix and Jacksonville I believe went for Hillary Clinton, latter just barely.  At same time US cities don't tend to extend all the way out to countryside and big reason Tulsa and Oklahoma City were competitive for GOP is like Calgary & Edmonton extend right out to countryside unlike most US cities.  Areas with urban types densites vote Democrat while those more suburban in nature go GOP.  Edmonton is like that, but in Calgary, Tories even win in central cores.  London is only other place in Anglosphere where that happens and even that probably changes next election.  London as a whole votes Labour, but the very central parts which are quite rich still vote Conservative.

[If my soul was made of stone]

Pales in comparison to Canada though.  US voting is much more demographically-driven.

US didn't have a single city as large as Calgary or Edmonton vote GOP.  Now true Edmonton Tories federally won more on splits as more voted left than right but in Calgary majority voted Tory federally.  In 2016, Trump did win Maricopa and Duval counties although Phoenix and Jacksonville I believe went for Hillary Clinton, latter just barely.  At same time US cities don't tend to extend all the way out to countryside and big reason Tulsa and Oklahoma City were competitive for GOP is like Calgary & Edmonton extend right out to countryside unlike most US cities.  Areas with urban types densites vote Democrat while those more suburban in nature go GOP.  Edmonton is like that, but in Calgary, Tories even win in central cores.  London is only other place in Anglosphere where that happens and even that probably changes next election.  London as a whole votes Labour, but the very central parts which are quite rich still vote Conservative.

I'm comparing the Canadian cities to the American built-up areas as a whole, not just the cities. Tulsa proper is majority-minority and narrowly voted for Biden, but its built-up area and even Tulsa itself stretches into three or four more surrounding counties. Oklahoma City proper narrowly voted for Trump, and even just the portion in Oklahoma County's Biden margin was underwhelming for an urban area of that size. Both cities are often compared to Calgary culturally and economically, and not without reason.

[DL]

Pales in comparison to Canada though.  US voting is much more demographically-driven.

US didn't have a single city as large as Calgary or Edmonton vote GOP.  Now true Edmonton Tories federally won more on splits as more voted left than right but in Calgary majority voted Tory federally.  In 2016, Trump did win Maricopa and Duval counties although Phoenix and Jacksonville I believe went for Hillary Clinton, latter just barely.  At same time US cities don't tend to extend all the way out to countryside and big reason Tulsa and Oklahoma City were competitive for GOP is like Calgary & Edmonton extend right out to countryside unlike most US cities.  Areas with urban types densites vote Democrat while those more suburban in nature go GOP.  Edmonton is like that, but in Calgary, Tories even win in central cores.  London is only other place in Anglosphere where that happens and even that probably changes next election.  London as a whole votes Labour, but the very central parts which are quite rich still vote Conservative.

Don’t the Nationals in New Zealand and Liberals in Australia still win upscale urban seats?

[adma]

Another thing about places like Oklahoma is that much like Utah, the voters can have an Alberta-esque tendency of saving their progressive urge for the municipal sphere--and even there, it can sometimes be a matter of "shades of Republican" rather than outright red/blue divides...

[mileslunn]

Pales in comparison to Canada though.  US voting is much more demographically-driven.

US didn't have a single city as large as Calgary or Edmonton vote GOP.  Now true Edmonton Tories federally won more on splits as more voted left than right but in Calgary majority voted Tory federally.  In 2016, Trump did win Maricopa and Duval counties although Phoenix and Jacksonville I believe went for Hillary Clinton, latter just barely.  At same time US cities don't tend to extend all the way out to countryside and big reason Tulsa and Oklahoma City were competitive for GOP is like Calgary & Edmonton extend right out to countryside unlike most US cities.  Areas with urban types densites vote Democrat while those more suburban in nature go GOP.  Edmonton is like that, but in Calgary, Tories even win in central cores.  London is only other place in Anglosphere where that happens and even that probably changes next election.  London as a whole votes Labour, but the very central parts which are quite rich still vote Conservative.

Don’t the Nationals in New Zealand and Liberals in Australia still win upscale urban seats?

New Zealand and Australia they win in city proper, but not sure win in central parts but definitely in upscale areas unlike in Canada or US.

[adma]

New Zealand and Australia they win in city proper, but not sure win in central parts but definitely in upscale areas unlike in Canada or US.

Well, there, or in the core of London, it's more akin to Quadra/Quilchena-type areas being federal and provincial Liberal as opposed to NDP.  Remember how in the UK and Aus/NZ, the "conservative" parties are still fundamentally big-tent in an anti-socialist-hordes way--or if those upscale city-proper parts are to shift away, it's likelier to forces like Lib Dem in the UK or the "teals" in Australia...

[mileslunn]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-a-new-poll-paints-a-grim-picture-for-danielle-smiths-united/ another poll out but no tables but devastating for Smith and before bad week.

53% NDP
38% UCP

While could be an outlier, I tend to believe it is accurate.  I think like seeing in UK, even for those on right, if you push things too far they can go over to other side.  Its not like US where you can go as far right as you want and still win a large chunk of the population.

[King of Kensington]

Danielle Smith is really out there, consorting with anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists:

https://www.bugeyedandshameless.com/p/danielle-smiths-magical-mystery-media?sd=pf

[If my soul was made of stone]

I think like seeing in UK, even for those on right, if you push things too far they can go over to other side.  Its not like US where you can go as far right as you want and still win a large chunk of the population.

Smith and Truss are each a very particular type of ideologue with a base of and mandate from only party insiders and activists. American right-wing cranks at least have a wider base of primary voters from either open primaries or closed primaries with much lower barriers of entry before they're hoisted on a broader electorate.

If Paul Ryan had ever run for President, or taken over the helm after a Romney 2012 victory under strange circumstances, I'm sure we'd see something more similar happening here.

[adma]

I think like seeing in UK, even for those on right, if you push things too far they can go over to other side.  Its not like US where you can go as far right as you want and still win a large chunk of the population.

Smith and Truss are each a very particular type of ideologue with a base of and mandate from only party insiders and activists. American right-wing cranks at least have a wider base of primary voters from either open primaries or closed primaries with much lower barriers of entry before they're hoisted on a broader electorate.

If Paul Ryan had ever run for President, or taken over the helm after a Romney 2012 victory under strange circumstances, I'm sure we'd see something more similar happening here.

Actually, Ryan or even Truss (who, given her history, might be less ideologue than "pushed by ideologues") are more akin to Poilievre, who has just as much of a "party insiders and activists" base...

[mileslunn]

I also think in case of Smith fact votes not weighted by riding big reason she won as I heard 70% of UCP membership came from outside Calgary and Edmonton even though only 40% of population live outside two cities.  And while she may be too extreme for Alberta as a whole, in much of Rural Alberta who views are quite mainstream.  Its more in two cities where she is toxic.  Edmonton was always going to be a lost cause for UCP, but Calgary absolutely should have been winnable and if NDP wins as I suspect, it will be because Calgary goes NDP.

[King of Kensington]

Yes election will be won in Calgary and Danielle Smith is a horrible fit there.

[Benjamin Frank]

Per Dave Cournoyer's (Daveberta) the NDP has nominated 58 candidates, or exactly 2/3 of the 87, however they also have announced nomination dates for, I believe, another 11 candidates, and have 3 additional ridings with approved candidates, taking them to 72 of the 87 ridings, with three new recently announced approved candidates

https://twitter.com/davecournoyer/status/1582728797694349314
Bounsall and Dale were obviously two of the 11 with announced nomination dates, and this is the third newly approved candidate: Conservationist & author Kevin Van Tighem running for the NDP nomination in Livingstone-Macleod.

In terms of winnable ridings, it seems that the NDP has already nominated or announced candidates in all but Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville. One of the more marginal winnables to be sure, but I'd say more winnable than Livingstone-Macleod, for instance.

Not that I'd say they're winnable, but the more urban northern cities of Fort McMurray and Grande Prairie are laggards for some reason.

Anyway, it does seem to me that the NDP wants all their candidates nominated by the end of the year (or the start of the Holiday season more likely) which would be a full five months before election day.

I think there is no question that late nominations in winnable ridings cost the NDP in the 2018 Ontario election and possibly in the 2019 Federal election (I can't remember.) So, given all the NDP rules around their nominations, this is quite an organizational achievement for the NDP, even if they don't have quite all 87 candidates nominated by the end of the year.

Of course, it's always a matter of trade-offs, as I'm sure seeing Danielle Smith winning the UCP leadership that there are probably a few ridings where the NDP now wishes that a different candidate would have been nominated. I don't know anything specific on this though, it's just the way these things go.

Edit to add: Just to make this clear. As interesting as the drama is with Leela Aheer, my post was entirely about the Alberta NDP and it was not my intent to post that. Since, Dave Cournoyer posted that on the NDP as a subtweet to that tweet on Leela Aheer, I guess it has to come with the subtweet.

[Benjamin Frank]

This is the Nature Conservancy of Canada write up on NDP candidate Kevin Van Tighem in Livingstone-MacLeod:
Kevin Van Tighem was born and raised in Calgary. His family roots in what is now Alberta go back to 1875. He graduated with a degree in plant ecology from the University of Calgary in 1977 and went on to work as a biologist with the Canadian Wildlife Service. In 1985 Kevin joined Parks Canada and subsequently worked in various national parks before retiring as a park superintendent in 2011. Kevin is the author of fourteen books on wildlife and conservation and writes a regular column ("This Land") in Alberta Views magazine. His most recent books are Heart Waters/Sources of the Bow River and Our Place/Changing the Nature of Alberta.

https://www.natureconservancy.ca/en/what-you-can-do/events/naturetalks/past-speakers/kevin-van-tighem.html

I post this because I had no idea that there was a Canadian Wildlife Service seperate from that of Parks Canada (or that there used to be, anyway.)

[King of Kensington]

From RidingBuilder I can find the following:

Calgary:

2015
NDP: 147,169 (34%)
PC: 136,152 (31%)
WRP: 98,037 (23%)
ALP: 31,171 (7%)
ABP: 14,914 (3%)
GRN: 3,503 (1%)
OTH: 1,689 (0%)

2019
UCP: 295,005 (53%)
NDP: 188,729 (34%)
ABP: 52,729 (10%)
ALP: 10,951 (2%)
GRN: 3,405 (1%)
OTH: 3,942 (1%)


Edmonton:

2015
NDP: 219,154 (65%)
PC: 68,792 (20%)
WRP: 27,931 (8%)
ALP: 18,916 (6%)
ABP: 3,114 (1%)
GRN: 664 (0%)
OTH: 640 (0%)

2019
NDP: 213,546 (53%)
UCP: 140,672 (35%)
ABP: 40,108 (10%)
OTH: 5,928 (1%)
ALP: 3,969 (1%)
GRN: 1,960 (0%)

Interesting that the NDP vote share in Calgary remained the same in 2019.

[politicallefty]

Interesting that the NDP vote share in Calgary remained the same in 2019.

It seems like 2019 was sort of a primal scream on the part of the right in Alberta. I would be interested in seeing the 2015 federal results in each city. Apart from 2021, 2015 was the only year since 1968 that the LPC managed to win a seat in Calgary.

It's been obvious to me that the key to winning Alberta provincially is winning Calgary. Despite the landslide that was 2019, what was the tipping point riding in the provincial election? Of course, I think the biggest issue is that models don't really work when you move from a 22% win to something much closer or a significant loss.

[If my soul was made of stone]

It seems like 2019 was sort of a primal scream on the part of the right in Alberta.

Andrew Scheer levels of Designated Conservative Region Resentment Drivel Standard Bearer Candidate