Joe Cressy: "[the next election] is going to won or lost based on seats where you’re taking on Tories." I agree, so let's check the numbers

This graph has been making the rounds on social media to show growing support for the federal Liberals in by-elections across Canada, including Trinity-Spadina, where I was happy to do a bit of volunteering for Adam Vaughan.

Speaking of Trinity-Spadina, I've quoted NDP candidate Joe Cressy above from this article where the NDP tries to spin the rather negative by-election results it's had under Mulcair.

Cressy's full quote is:

“The next federal election will not be won or lost on the basis of a couple of seats in Canada where it’s the Liberals and the NDP squaring off. Rather, it’s going to won or lost based on seats where you’re taking on Tories,” Cressy said.

“The focus has to be and should be on taking out Harper, not focusing on the Liberals.” 

So, with that in mind, why don't we actually look at the vote changes from the 2011 elections in by-elections in Conservative held seats since the last election?

Calgary Centre

NDP: -11%

Lib: +15

Con: -21%

Liberal vote shoots up 15%, to make the Calgary Centre by-election the best Liberal result in Calgary since 1997, as the Tory vote goes way down and the NDP vote declines by 11%, as they get less than 4% of the vote.

Durham

NDP: +5%

Lib: -1%

Con: -4%

Congrats NDP, you managed to increase your vote by 5% (still finishing 24% behind) during a by-election held when the federal Liberals were leaderless and the provincial Liberals were in the middle of a leadership race leaving the local campaign short of volunteers. Worth noting the provincial Liberals would go on to win the seat in the Ontario election, with the NDP back in third. 

So those two by-elections were held when Mulcair was leader, but the Liberals were still without a permanent leader. Let's see what happens when Trudeau becomes leader:

Labrador

NDP: -1

Lib: +9%

Con: -7%

The NDP vote dips slightly, but the Trudeau Liberals shoot up almost 10% and actually take a seat back from the Harper Conservatives.

Provencher

NDP: -10

Lib: +23%

Con: -12%

In the ultra safe Conservative Provencher seat, the Liberal vote goes up by 23%, as the NDP vote crashes 10%, finishing with a deposit-losing 8.2% of the vote.

Brandon-Souris

NDP: -18%

Lib: +37%

Con: -20%

Grit vote sky-rockets as a Justin Trudeau-led Liberal Party goes from 4th place and 5% to coming within a few hundred votes of winning the riding. NDP vote absolutely craters to 7% for another lost deposit - despite the NDP holding one of the Brandon seats provincially for decades.

Macleod

NDP: -6%

Lib: 13+%

Con: -9%

Another ultra-safe Conservative seat to be sure, but the Liberal vote share goes from less than 4% to 17%, while the NDP barely finishes ahead of the Christian Heritage Party for 4th place -  Mulcair's NDP candidate only 3 votes ahead of the CHP with 4.2% of the vote.

Fort McMurray-Athabasca

NDP: -2

Lib: 25%

Con : -25%

Not quite the nail-biter as Brandon-Souris, but Liberal candidate Kyle Harrietha pulls in a solid 35% of the vote on a 25% increase, the best Liberal result in the riding since 1968. NDP at least manages to hang onto it's deposit this time (a rarity with Mulcair as leader in Tory held ridings as we've seen) but the NDP does decline.

So what does that leave us then, when looking at the seats where the Liberals and NDP are going up against the Tories?

Assorted thoughts from the ground from a Liberal majority

Well, having had a few days to think about it, I had some scattered thoughts about the Ontario political scene in the aftermath of a Wynne majority government. I am so happy to have played a small part in it in York South-Weston. In no particular order, here are some things that have I've been thinking about since the election, with one point largely about each party.

• People judge governments economic credentials and reliability based on job creation, not being deficit hawks for the sake of deficit hawking

"Jobs Not Cuts" was a simple but effective slogan the Liberal campaign was quick to start using to hammer Hudak once he announced he would be cutting 100,000 public service jobs as part of his platform. Balancing the deficit and bringing down the debt is important, as Kathleen Wynne and Charles Sousa have stated many times, but Ontario can't afford to put people out of work and slash public services just to bring the budget to balance a year earlier, as Hudak promised. Liberals were able to tell a good message: vote Liberal, and you'll have a government that protects health care and education as well as protecting good paying jobs that help the economy. This will benefit you and your family. Vote Hudak, and you'll have a government that slashes services that impact your family, with no immediate benefit in your everyday life. Hudak's math errors in the "Million Jobs Plan" didn't help his economic credibility, neither did his attacks on "corporate welfare" while praising companies that had in fact partnered with governments (including Harper's Conservatives) to create jobs. And speaking of Harper...

• Hudak ran on a hard-right platform that was designed to fire up his base...it ended up firing up moderate voters to vote against him en masse

Paul Wells, while explaining why he supported the PC's in this election explores some of the difference between Hudak's conservative pitch this election which failed pretty spectacularly, and Stephen Harper's conservative pitch, which won him a majority largely based on the kind of seats Hudak either failed to win from the Liberals or actually lost to the Liberals:

"Hudak, on the other hand, had to keep impressing the Ayn Rand League, thanks largely to his ever-shaky command of the party’s leadership. That’s why he put a big number on his public sector job-cut target, because he decided his target audience was people who think eliminating public sector jobs is always excellent. Compare and contrast: During the 2011 federal election, I worked hard to get a succession of federal Conservatives — Jim Flaherty, John Baird — to give me any indication of the scale of public sector job cuts the Harper government had in mind...

Nobody seriously doubts Stephen Harper is a conservative, so he can tell conservatives they have to wait. That’s why I saw Alison Redford’s Alberta Conservative victory over Danielle Smith’s Wildrose party as a vindication of the Harper style, even though a lot of Harper Conservatives supported Wildrose: because politics isn’t about scratching your swollen id. Harper’s conservatism is a broad and not always internally coherent coalition, and it spends a lot of time wondering when something exciting will happen. "

Stuff like this is also at the core of Wells' The Longer I'm Prime Minister, basically arguing that Harper can afford politically to not govern as a Reform Party conservative because as long as it keeps delivering electoral results, the base will more or less be happy. Harper's relative moderation and embrace of economic interventionism allowed him to campaign to a majority in 2011 with a message to Ontario voters that he could be trusted on the economy because he wasn't radical, had created jobs, etc. Hudak instead campaigned on an unabashed vision of shrinking government that Harper has largely abandoned in the successful pursuit of electoral gain. Quite simply, the coalition of voters that would support Hudak's hard-right, fiscal hawkishness simply isn't big enough to form government, and Hudak's assumptions that his own base would turn out were swamped by moderates who were turned off enough by his platform to get out to vote against him.

• Horwath tried to expand her voter coalition a step too far, and while she made gains in some parts of the province, lost others

Looking at how much NDP results in Toronto fell, the letter that some NDP stalwarts send to Horwath mid-campaign can't be judged as something trivial - plenty of traditional NDP supporters in Toronto 

My policy on improving civic education makes the Ontario Liberal Party platform!

Readers of this space will remember my policy on youth voter registration that was passed as a priority policy at the Ontario Young Liberals Summer Fling last year. The policy was also debated on Common Ground platform building discussion site where it became one of the top ranked policies in the education section. 

Today, I am very proud to say my policy has been adopted as a part of the Ontario Liberal Party platform!

"ENGAGING OUR YOUTH.

We will introduce voter registration in high schools to help students prepare for the responsibilities of citizenship and replace the Grade 10 Civics curriculum with a more hands-on course that includes a community improvement project." 

Thanks to everyone who supported my policy at every step of way!

Is Andrea Horwath for real?

That's what the new Kathleen Wynne ad asks Ontarians after Horwath said NO to an increased child benefit, an Ontario Pension Plan, better transit, and a new job creation strategy for Ontario. I'm really digging the "I'm Kathleen Wynne and I stand behind this message" tag the Premier has been using.

I'm sure NDP'ers will complain about "going negative", to which I have to ask, isn't joining with Tim Hudak and Stephen Harper and saying NO to a strong plan for Ontario a tad more negative?

While Horwath is silent, labour and progressive speak: The Ontario Budget deserves support

While Ontario NDP leader Andrea Horwath was silent on Ontario's Budget today, continuing her approach that saw her take no position on the minimum wage and pensions, labour and other progressive are speaking loud and clear that Ontario's 2014 Budget deserves support for the people of Ontario.

JERRY DIAS, NATIONAL PRESIDENT, UNIFOR

“Things like pensions, things like infrastructure spending, taking care of child care, seniors, those are all things that have been, you know, the backbone of the NDP’s policies for years. I would expect that [the NDP] would support [the budget].

"Today's budget will make a positive difference in the lives of working families in Ontario - and should be supported by the NDP…We hope the NDP will work with the Liberals to pass the budget."

SUSAN ENG, VP – ADVOCACY, CARP CANADA

“The time is long past for debating whether we need a supplementary pension plan…CARP members have been calling for just such a plan…The proposed pension plan will benefit their children and grandchildren, not themselves directly, but it is a ballot question for them.”

LINDA HALSEM STROUD, ONTARIO NURSES ASSOCIATION

“With the improvements in the personal support workers, and supporting health care workers in the community…and with a real focus on ensuring that Ontarians feel like they are better living here in Ontario, we should stay the party line.”

ANDREA CALVER, COORDINATOR, ONTARIO COALITION FOR BETTER CHILDCARE

“There are a tremendous number of things in this budget that can do a lot of good for people for child care staff for personal support workers and for those with developmental disabilities.  I remain hopeful that the budget will pass and that we'll be able to make the gains for child care workers and personal support workers.”

FRED HAHN, PRESIDENT, CUPE

"There are important investments in the Budget...There's lots of good measures here, paying PSWs…that's incredibly important."

GAIL NYBERG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, DAILY BREAD FOOD BANK
"Keeping poverty reduction on the table is always the right thing to do…Daily Bread has always been a strong proponent of the Ontario Child Benefit. Indexing it will allow low-income families with children to keep up with the rising costs of living such as food."

ONTARIO HEALTH COALITION
"The good news: An Ontario pension plan that will provide an enhanced public pension for those with no private pensions."

Anita Vandenbeld on the "Fair" Elections Act

Anita Vandenbeld, past federal candidate in Ottawa West-Nepean and green lit candidate for the 2015 nomination has written a fantastic post for iPolitics about the "Fair" Elections Act and how regressive it truly is.

"The last time I worked in a country where a government used its majority in Parliament to ram through changes to an election law without public input was in the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2011. I never would have expected this in Canada."

"I can honestly say that in all my years of working on democratic development with the United Nations, OSCE, NDI and other international organizations on five continents, I have not found another electoral commission that was prohibited by law from speaking to the public about elections or doing public awareness campaigns to encourage people to vote."

This is one of the best commentaries on the Harper-Poilievre scheme to make it harder for you to vote, I encourage you to share it widely.  

Mapping out past Quebec election results - vote splits and vote efficiency make the different in Quebec provincial elections

In preparation for the Quebec provincial election on Monday, I mapped out some past Quebec election results, comparing the vote and seat share received by each party. Click the graph to embiggen, the vote share is on the left, seat share on the right.

In Quebec elections, the Parti Quebecois is often said to have a built in advantage, in that they have a more "efficient" vote. The Liberals win super-majorities in Montreal, while the PQ is able to squeak out more victories by a smaller margin in the regions by winning francophone voters, meaning that in theory, the PLQ need a significant vote share advantage, as the PLQ have more wasted votes in ultra safe seats in Montreal.

You can see that is is what played out in the 1994 and 1998 elections. The vote share for the PQ and PLQ was within 1-2 percentage points of each other, but the PQ won solid majorities. Indeed, the PLQ actually won the popular vote in the 1998 election. However, in 2012, the PQ and PLQ again had a tight race for the popular vote, finishing a single point apart, but the PQ barely squeezed ahead of the PLQ in the seat count.

The rise of other parties in Quebec is one factor in this - in 2003, the PLQ popular vote barely moved from 1998, but the ADQ jumping from 12% to 18%, particularly rising in the regions and amongst francophone voters, sapped a lot of support directly from the PQ, and allowed the PLQ to win a solid majority. The ADQ, however did not have a particularly efficient vote prior to its 2007 breakthrough, as 18% of the vote was only able to deliver 4 seats.

2007 was one of the most unpredictable elections in Quebec up until that point, with the ADQ surging and almost doubling its popular vote from the last election, stealing from both the PQ and PLQ. This election, oddly, the showed the flip side of having an "efficient" vote - when another party is surging and taking votes from you, your 5% victories in a lot of ridings are going to be in danger. Large parts of the PQ and PLQ voter base abandoned the parties, and because the PQ base was spread more evenly, it was pushed into third place by the ADQ. Looking at the actual seat results from 2007, it can be argued that the PLQ actually had the most "efficient" vote, as while it suffered significant damage in the regions, it was able to retain enough bedrock support in it's core federalist areas (Montreal, the Eastern Townships, the Outaouais) to win the most seats.

After an ADQ collapse returned Quebec election results "normal" in 2008, the 2012 election and the rise of the CAQ and to a lesser extend Quebec solidaire marked another wide open election, with only 5% separating first from third in the popular vote. The CAQ took enough francophone vote from both the Liberals and the PQ to be competitive, but not enough to reach the height of the ADQ.

30% seems to be a flipping point for parties in Quebec, particularly for the non Liberal parties. Only 4% separated the ADQ in 2007 from the CAQ in 2012, but the difference between 31% and 27% in vote share was 32% and 15% of the seat share. The PQ has a pretty big range for seat share depending on how the votes of the ADQ/CAQ/QS go, demonstrated by the PQ winning more seats and a narrow majority in 2012 with only 32% of the vote, when 33% of the vote delivered them opposition and fewer seats.

Right now ThreeHundredEight has the PQ pegged at 28%, the same as in 2007 election that placed them in 3rd, but in total seat count he has them significantly higher than in 2007.

Where the CAQ ends up is the big wildcard, the last couple of polls have shown them recovering support lost to the PLQ in the first part of the campaign, but still below where they ended up in 2012. If the CAQ surges over the last weekend, what result could that have?

The other wildcard is Quebec solidaire. While at absolutely maximum they can win 4-5 seats (they will certainly hold onto the two they have, and a third seat isn't out of the question) if they are polling in the double digits, that is a lot of vote they could take from the PQ. QS tends to underperform compared to the polls, however, so solidaire being at 8% vs 12% could be the difference (particularly for the PQ) in a lot of seats.

43

27

15

6

2