Canada's electoral history from 1867 to today

When one doesn't understand strategic voting
(or the Conservatives' path to their majority in 2011)

by Maurice Y. Michaud (he/him)

Alternative scenariosEmerging from the 34th Parliament with its best standing to date at 43 seats in the House of Commons, the New Democrats, along with the Progressive Conservatives, found themselves without official party status once the dust had settled from the 1993 general election. They regained it in 1997 and kept it after that, but their rebuilding didn't bring them anywhere near their glory days of 1988 to 1993: 21 seats in 1997; 13 in 2000; 19 in 2004; 29 in 2006, and 37 in 2008. But then, a peculiar alignment of circumstances occurred in 2011 and led to what was dubbed the Orange Crush, which resulted in the NDP becoming the Official Opposition in the Commons for the first time.

That "peculiar alignment of circumstances" was two-fold. First, the election had been necessitated because the incumbent Conservatives, unpopular among a large swath of the electorate and led by Stephen Harper, had been found in contempt of Parliament, although they wanted people to believe they had been brought down by a non-confidence vote over their budget. Second, the rehabilitation of the Liberals, who had lost power in 2006 due to a sponsorship scandal as well as the usual wear of power after 13 years in office, wasn't going well. Although Harper seemed cold, calculating and uncaring, the Conservatives had managed to brand the Liberal leader, Michael Ignatieff, as being "Just in it for himself" and an elitist who was out of touch with Canadians.

Against this backdrop, Jack Layton, who had been leading the NDP since 2003, started his fourth election campaign as he had his first three: by presenting himself as the happy warrior, and, some would say, cringeworthily declaring that he was "running to become Prime Minister of Canada." Except that, this time, after two Conservative minority governments over nearly five-and-a-half years, a near constitutional crisis in 2008 that brought Harper to prorogue Parliament, and a widespread sense that the national political discourse had turned negative, Layton's sunny disposition and passionate plea that he was the one who was "working for families" became appealing to some centrist voters.

But his appearance on the popular talk show Tout le monde en parle during the election campaign is today viewed as the moment when the Orange Crush began. As election day came closer, incredulous pollsters noticed that the NDP, which had never won more than one seat in Québec, was poised to win more seats there than the Bloc Québécois ever had. In turn, that led centrist voters elsewhere in Canada who disliked the Conservatives to take notice: if the Québécois were willing to ditch the Bloc, why shouldn't they, too, consider ditching the Liberals? However, in doing so, they fell into a trap of the first-past-the-post electoral system. Not all centrist voters were willing to abandon the Liberals, so if one lived in a riding where the NDP traditionally and consistently came in a distant third (or worse), all they would accomplish is to split the left-of-centre vote between the NDP and the Liberals, leading the Conservative candidate to become — indeed — the first past the post. In other words, precisely what they didn't want!

Winning 30.7% of the votes nationally, the NDP picked up 33.4% of the seats, or 103. The Liberals, with a meager 18.9% of the votes, got only 11% of the seats, or 34, not to mention that their leader, Ignatieff, was defeated. And the Conservatives, with only 39.6% of the vote, finally got their majority mandate: 53.9% of the seats, or 166. But it is also worth noting that the participation rate was such that Nobody was the figurative winner in 79.6% of the ridings, or 245.

Canada Canada
41 → 2011 ::  2 May 2011 — 18 Oct 2015 — Majority Majority  CPC 
Summary Government Opposition Unproductive votes
Party Votes Seats Party Votes Seats Party Votes
# % % # # % % # # %
Parliament: 41   Majority Majority
Majority=155  Ab.Maj.: +12  G.Maj.: +24
Population [2011]: 33,468,423
Eligible: 24,257,592  Particip.: 61.11%
Votes: 14,823,408  Unproductive: 229,131
Seats: 308   1 seat = 0.32%
↳ Elec.Sys.:  FPTP: 308  
↳ By acclamation: 0 (0.00%)
Plurality: Votes  CPC  Seats  CPC 
Plurality:  +1,322,859 (+8.98%)
Plurality:  Seats: +63 (+20.46%)
Position2: Votes  NDP  Seats  NDP 
Candidacies: 1,587 (✓ 308)   m: 1,133 (✓ 232)   f: 454 (✓ 76)
 CPC  307   NDP  308   LIB  308   BQ  75   GRN  304   OTH  225   IND  60  
CPC
5,835,270 39.63 53.90 166
NDP
LIB
BQ
GRN
4,512,411
2,783,076
891,425
572,095
30.65
18.90
6.05
3.89
33.44
11.04
1.30
0.32
103
34
4
1
OTH
IND
REJ
ABS
57,145
72,558
99,428
9,434,184
0.39
0.49
0.67
——
 OTH  CHP  47   ML  70   LBT  23   PCP  9   RHIN  14   PPC  10
 OTH  COMM  20   ACT  12   MP  5   AAEV  7   WBP  4   UPC  3   FPNP  1
 !!!  245 (79.55%)

How many CPC candidates thus managed to come on top because of this vote splitting? Did it happen often enough to give their party the majority they coveted, which, at the time, was 155 seats? Or was the Liberal-NDP vote splitting negligible, as those who don't think that there is such a thing as strategic voting want you to think?

To find the answer, let's:

  1. Find the party — likely  NDP  but possibly also  GRN  — causing a vote split that:
    • directly and negatively affected  LIB  and
    • thus allowed  CPC  to be the first past the post and acquire a new seat.
  2. Set aside the 280 ridings where the person elected:
    • represented a seat that  CPC  had already won in 2008,
    • or won the seat for  CPC  with a clear majority (50%+1),
    • or represented a party other than  CPC 
    which leaves us with 28 ridings.
  3. Find the increase in percentage of votes of the spoiler party (i.e., the % in 2011 minus the % in 2008).
  4. Take that percentage and apply it to the number of valid votes to determine the number of votes to transfer from the spoiler party to  LIB 
  5. Recalculate the results in each of those 28 ridings to identify those where  CPC  won due to vote splitting.

Thus we could conclude that there would be 15 differences.

Riding, Eligible, Votes & Participation Benefitting Party Spoiler Party Spoiled Party
1.
 
17,982  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
58,075
39,939
154
69.04%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
36.26%
38.82%
+2.56%
+722
 
 
 
 
15,506
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
14.12%
–19.89%
-5.77%
 
 
7,945
–2,304
5,641
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
42.27%
37.02%
-5.25%
+1,582
 
 
 
 
14,784
+2,304
17,088
2.
 
26,223  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
75,298
48,724
351
65.17%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
33.23%
35.73%
+2.50%
+2,161
 
 
 
 
17,408
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
16.26%
–28.84%
-12.58%
 
 
14,053
–6,129
7,924
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
39.13%
31.29%
-7.84%
+3,968
 
 
 
 
15,247
+6,129
21,376
3.
 
9,561  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
20,305
10,692
52
52.91%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
7.97%
39.81%
+31.84%
+79
 
 
 
 
4,256
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
17.85%
–19.83%
-1.98%
 
 
2,120
–212
1,908
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
70.28%
39.07%
-31.21%
+133
 
 
 
 
4,177
+212
4,389
4.
 
50,501  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
108,751
57,796
454
53.56%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
37.13%
34.44%
-2.69%
+539
 
 
 
 
19,907
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
12.03%
–33.51%
-21.48%
 
 
19,368
–12,415
6,953
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
45.06%
28.38%
-16.68%
+8,910
 
 
 
 
16,402
+12,415
28,817
5.
 CPC  Joe Daniel
 
30,260  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
69,690
39,212
218
56.58%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
31.00%
36.78%
+5.78%
+870
 
 
 
 
14,422
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
13.33%
–25.19%
-11.86%
 
 
9,878
–4,651
5,227
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
48.08%
34.56%
-13.52%
+3,781
 
 
 
 
13,552
+4,651
18,203
6.
 
28,449  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
82,107
53,482
176
65.35%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
38.83%
42.93%
+4.10%
+611
 
 
 
 
22,962
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
10.19%
–11.74%
-1.55%
 
 
6,280
–829
5,451
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
44.36%
41.79%
-2.57%
+218
 
 
 
 
22,351
+829
23,180
7.
 CPC  Ted J. Opitz
 
28,971  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
81,765
52,523
271
64.57%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
37.51%
41.21%
+3.70%
+26
 
 
 
 
21,644
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
8.29%
–14.73%
-6.44%
 
 
7,735
–3,382
4,353
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
48.85%
41.16%
-7.69%
+3,356
 
 
 
 
21,618
+3,382
25,000
8.
 
32,425  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
87,188
54,520
243
62.81%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
34.87%
40.35%
+5.48%
+2,869
 
 
 
 
21,997
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
11.66%
–20.26%
-8.60%
 
 
11,046
–4,689
6,357
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
46.13%
35.08%
-11.05%
+1,820
 
 
 
 
19,128
+4,689
23,817
9.
 CPC  Susan Truppe
 
35,574  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
88,478
52,673
231
59.79%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
32.97%
36.96%
+3.99%
+1,665
 
 
 
 
19,468
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
17.47%
–24.67%
-7.20%
 
 
12,996
–3,792
9,204
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
39.13%
33.80%
-5.33%
+2,127
 
 
 
 
17,803
+3,792
21,595
10.
 
37,704  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
85,018
47,025
289
55.65%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
32.56%
39.97%
+7.41%
+676
 
 
 
 
18,796
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
11.36%
–18.79%
-7.43%
 
 
8,836
–3,494
5,342
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
50.16%
38.53%
-11.63%
+2,818
 
 
 
 
18,120
+3,494
21,614
11.
 CPC  Jay Aspin
 
28,258  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
70,754
42,271
225
60.06%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
32.34%
36.66%
+4.32%
+18
 
 
 
 
15,495
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
15.85%
–20.77%
-4.92%
 
 
8,781
–2,080
6,701
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
44.56%
36.61%
-7.95%
+2,062
 
 
 
 
15,477
+2,080
17,557
12.
 
30,429  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
78,501
47,916
156
61.24%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
32.45%
40.11%
+7.66%
+1,207
 
 
 
 
19,220
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
10.59%
–18.64%
-8.05%
 
 
8,932
–3,857
5,075
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
49.69%
37.59%
-12.10%
+2,650
 
 
 
 
18,013
+3,857
21,870
13.
 
32,090  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
70,274
37,967
217
54.34%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
30.11%
35.55%
+5.44%
+1,470
 
 
 
 
13,498
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
15.75%
–30.14%
-14.39%
 
 
11,443
–5,463
5,980
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
48.68%
31.68%
-17.00%
+3,993
 
 
 
 
12,028
+5,463
17,491
14.
 
40,030  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
93,584
53,259
295
57.23%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
32.46%
41.7%
+9.24%
+932
 
 
 
 
22,207
 
 
 NDP 
2008
2011
Diff
10.21%
–18.36%
-8.15%
 
 
9,777
–4,341
5,436
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
48.67%
39.95%
-8.72%
+3,409
 
 
 
 
21,275
+4,341
25,616
15.
 CPC  Ryan Leef
 
8,217  !!! 
E:
V:
R:
P:
24,341
16,057
67
66.24%
 CPC 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
32.66%
33.77%
+1.11%
+132
 
 
 
 
5,422
 
 
 GRN 
2008
2011
Diff
12.83%
–18.91%
-6.08%
 
 
3,037
–976
2,061
 LIB 
2008
2011
Diff
Plur
45.8%
32.95%
-12.85%
+844
 
 
 
 
5,290
+976
6,266

A shift of 58,615 votes in 15 ridings nationwide — 57,638 from the Liberals to the NDP and 976 from the Liberals to the Greens in the Yukon — gave the Conservatives their majority. That was on a total of 14,723,980 votes cast (not counting the rejected votes), or only 0.40%.

Picking up two new seats in Atlantic Canada and sweeping up 59 of the 75 seats in Québec, the Orange Crush ebbed upon hitting Ontario, where it picked up only five new seats but caused 10 seats to go to the Conservatives, and disappeared in the West, grabbing only one new seat on its way through. Many were those east of Manitoba who switched from the Liberals to the NDP, but not nearly enough to win new seats yet certainly enough to seriously wound the Liberals in the process. Moreover, had those who normally vote Liberal remained in that camp, the Conservatives would have won their third consecutive minority government, four seats shy of a majority.

Not understanding the need to vote strategically in the first-past-the-post system, many got... precisely what they didn't want!



© 2019, 2024 :: PoliCan.ca (Maurice Y. Michaud)
Pub.: 21 May 2023 11:56
Rev.:  8 Nov 2023 07:27