Many more seats change hands in Canadian elections In Canadian elections many more seats can change hands than 25 percent.
Alberta the last two elections saw two government changes in a row, a record for the province. Usually we go 20, 30 tor 40 years between changes, 14 years at the very least. So we expect to see change but the amount of change is staggering.
If we look at the 2019 election we see massive changes. 46 MLAs were elected for the first time in this election. These were new faces in half the seats in the Legislature. The United Conservatives lost five seats (or so) and went up by 43 seats, to take 63 in total. (The uncertainty is due to MLAs running for re-election in different districts, sometimes under different labels, and boundaries of districts themselves being re-drawn or being re-named.) These changes were made with just a change of a couple percentage points compared to the Wild Rose and Progressive-Conservative percentages of 2015 election. The NDP elected 24 MLAs in 2019, a drop of 30 seats compared to its 2015 high, with a drop in percentage points of only a fifth of its 2015 total.
And in fact the NDP lost government status even though it in fact received more votes in 2019 than 2015.
This is due to overall more votes being cast in 2019 than 2015. This is likely a sign of increased party competition and partly-separately-produced revived sense of importance of voting. Many NDP voters, prior to 2015 had been pessimistic after decades of being ignored, and had stopped voting. But with NDP's belated success in 2015 they had begun to think that voting was possibly actually worth it.
400,000 more votes were cast in 2019 compared to 2015. (1.9M votes were cast in 2019 compared to 1.5M in 2015.)
The right-wing vote, now under the UCP label, had been split among two parties in 2015. This vote splitting in many districts allowed NDP to take many district seats with only a minority of the votes in the district
Only in 24 districts did a candidate receive a majority of the votes.
So in 63 districts, in more than two thirds of the districts, the MLA was elected with less than a majority of the votes in the district.
But vote splitting among the right wing alone does not account for NDP successes. In 21 Edmonton and area districts, NDP candidates received a majority of the votes in each of the districts.
Vote splitting also was responsible for some of the changes that occurred in the 2019 election.
In the 2019 election, 20 MLAs were elected without a majority of votes in their districts. This time two thirds of the districts did see a majority winner.
12 NDP MLAs were elected this way, one with only 40 percent of the vote. 8 UCP MLAs were elected this way, one with only 45 percent of the vote. Most of the districts that elected a UCP MLA gave a majority of votes to the UCP.
These 20 districts where a minority winner was elected, could easily be considered to be swing districts. A swing district is one where a shift of a few percentage points could easily shift possession of the seat in the legislature. Perhaps even a slighter lower or higher turn out could also change the party affiliation of the district MLA!
So altogether the changes in this election, although not typical for Alberta history, show the vast almost-random shifts in party seat tallies that are seen in most FPTP elections elsewhere. They are typical for single-member plurality contest elections anywhere.
These vast shifts affecting more than half of Alberta 's seats, and caused by a change of just perhaps 15 percentage points of support, shows up in stark contrast to the 25 percent of seats that changed hands in the 2020 ACT election, held using the more balanced and scientific STV system.
================================
I think proper analysis must be based on distinction between district results and overall party tallies, but we also must take into account that FPTP produces disproportional results at both levels. (What I mean may come clear by reading further but if murky I can clarify further.)
I have found stats that shows that NDP victory in 2015 was due to rise in NDP votes and not to any new vote splitting between Cons and Wildrose that happened in 2015.
In 2015 the traditional Conservative vote was split between Conservative candidates and Wildrose. But the vote had been split between those two parties in 2012 as well.
Having two right-wing parties could account for the NDP 2015 victory if the NDP only received in 2015 the same number of votes as it had received in 2012.
But the NDP vote increased by half a million, and the combined Conservative and Wildrose vote dropped by 250,000. (The two (the drop and the gain) might be related or the NDP increase might have come from the more than 45 percent of eligible voters who did not vote in 2012!)
The NDP seat count increased from miniscule 4 to majority government status so it is also not true that NDP victory was result of the opposition seats being split among two parties and the NDP merely being the largest group in the Legislature.
The NDP took more seats than all the other parties put together, in 2015 so split among the two other parties in the Legislature (such as Harper used to stay in power in HofC over Liberal/NDP opposition) does not account for the NDP being government.
It is true to say that for the NDP to be re-elected in 2019 depended on
1. the NDP retaining its voter support in most of the districts and
2. in most of the districts if right-wing portion stayed split, neither the Conservative or Wildrose getting more votes than the NDP candidate.
3. in most of the districts if right-wing portion unified (such as under UCP label) the UCP candidate not getting more votes than the NDP candidate.
1 happened,
3 did not happen. In 30 seats the NDP candidate lost his or or her lead and lost the seat.
But that is not to say that the NDP success in 2015 was due to vote splitting. The NDP vote was exceptionally strong (compared to past party tallies) as it remained in 2019, but the right-wing vote was weak (compared to past tallies). This weakness was compounded by FPTP's dis-proportionality and single-winner contests.
Perhaps Wildrose voters would have given their second preference to Conservative candidates but that is not certainty. The two parties were actually fighting back then.
In any event, NDP in 2015 did have more votes than combined Conservative/Wildrose votes in many districts.
23 districts == NDP took majority of votes
3 districts = = NDP took more votes than combined Cons/WR tallies, although not a majority of the votes
Spruce Grove
Calgary Fort
Lethbridge East
Calgary Varsity NDP took only one vote less than combined Cons/WR tallies
9 districts == combined NDP/Liberal tallies were more than combined Cons/WR tallies in these districts:
Red Deer North (NDP won this seat)
Fort Saskatchewan (NDP won this seat)
Calgary Buffalo (NDP won this seat)
Calgary Currie (NDP won this seat)
Calgary Klein (NDP won this seat)
Calgary Varsity (NDP won this seat)
Spruce Grove (NDP won this seat) (NDP alone had more votes) Calgary Fort (NDP won this seat) (NDP alone had more votes) Lethbridge East (NDP won this seat) (NDP alone had more votes)
so in 32 districts it seems fair to say the NDP had more support than either the Conservative or the Wildrose, or both put together.
The NDP won 22 seats more than this.
in Calgary Mountain View Liberal had more votes than combined Cons/WR tallies
in Calgary Elbow Alberta Party candidate had more votes than combined Cons/WR tallies
the Conservative/Wildrose camp lost 56 seats
NDP took 23 seats by majority of votes.
Liberal took one seat
Alberta Party took one seat
The vote split in the Conservative/Wildrose camp meant that the NDP took 19 seats that they likely would not have without the split.. less than one quarter of the seats.
But in zero sum game like this, one party's loss is another's gain, and vice versa.
In 2019, again many seats changed hands. more than half the seats changed owners.
This was excessive to any difference in how votes were cast.
Only about 250,000 votes (15 percent of the votes) changed, assuming UCP = Cons + Wildrose.
But half the seats changed hands.
from 2015 to 2019, vast shifts, which affected more than half of Alberta 's seats, were caused by a change of just perhaps 15 percentage points of support.
NDP vote percentage dropped from 41 to 33 percent.
Conservative's 28 percent; Wildrose's 24 percent -- changed to UCP's 55 percent. pretty consistent.
In 2019 the drop in NDP seats had little to do with drop in votes - the NDP actually took more votes in 2019 than 2015.
The NDP defeat was caused by two things-
- rise in Conservative votes. (UCP actually took more votes in 2019 than in 2015 - 1M in 2019 compared to 775,000 (spread over Cons and WR) in 2015)
overall 400,000 more votes were cast in 2019 compared to 2015. (1.9M votes were cast in 2019 compared to 1.5M in 2015.)
- right-wing votes in district not being split between Wildrose and Conservative candidates but now (mostly) being concentrated behind the "United Conservative Party" candidate in each district. This changed the outcome in the 19 districts where vote split had given NDP the seat in 2015.
District results achieved by plurality vote which may or may not be reflected by overall vote tallies or percentages.
When someone can win a seat with anywhere from 80 to 17 percent of the votes cast in the district, there is very little accountability or certainty.
All we know is that the leader was of a particular party. And that is all the map of Alberta districts you provide shows.
My conclusions:
2015 NDP took government because they took more votes than before. (Dissatisfaction with Conservative government had it seems led to NDP success in 2015. and wishful thinking after the NDP victory had led pundits to say that if those two rightist parties had been one, the result would have been different. But the 2012 Conservative victory had not been due to lack of vote splitting but to lack of NDP votes.
And the Conservative victory in 2019 was due to rise in Conservative votes, not due to any drop in NDP vote (because there was not any).
FPTP produced wide seat change in 2015 and 2019, which inflated the rise in NDP votes in 2015 and inflated the rise in Conservative votes in 2019.
The NDP had taken four seats in 2012.
In 50 districts the 2015 increase was enough to take the seat.
NDP took majority of seats in the legislature, It is unclear how much of this was produced by Conservative vote drop and how much due to NDP rise.
The Conservative vote did drop but vote split with Wildrose seems not to be cause. Wildrose vote also dropped, 2015 compared to 2012 so if vote was split, it was not a new thing.
It looks like the Wildrose vote of 2015 had not hived off of the Conservative vote of 2012.
NDP vote did rise, 2015 compared to 2012
I have found no districts where NDP took same number of votes as 2012 and did not take the seat in 2012 but won the seat in 2015 due to the Cons/WR vote split.
In all cases where NDP won in 2015, it seems, the NDP candidate took many more votes -- sometimes ten times the number of votes the NDP candidate had taken in 2012.
I think this shows the NDP 2015 victory was not due to vote splitting alone.
Supporting evidence/notes:
2015
In 21 Edmonton and area districts, NDP candidates received a majority of the votes in each of the districts.
in 2019, NDP took more votes overall than in 2015 -- 619,000 votes compared to 605,000 in 2015 but Conservative vote went up by 250,000 compared to combined Cons and WR vote in 2015.
Voter turnout in 2015 was 57 percent, 2019 67 percent.
2012 votes percentage of overall votes seats pc. of overall seats
Conservative 567,000 44 percent 61 70 percent
Wildrose 442,000 34 percent 17 20 percent
NDP 127,000 10 percent 4 5 percent
2015 votes percentage of overall votes seats pc. of overall seats
Conservative 414,000 28 percent 10 11 percent
Wildrose 361,000 24 percent 21 24 percent
NDP 605,000 41 percent 54 62 percent
2019 votes percentage of overall votes seats pc. of overall seats
UCP 1,040,000 55 percent 63 72 percent
NDP 619,000 33 percent 24 28 percent.
From 2012 to 2015, NDP went up by 500,000, combined Cons and WR vote dropped by 250,000.
Leading party in each case received 20 to 26 higher percentage points of seats than its vote percentage.
From 2015 to 2019, NDP went up marginally, combined Cons and WR vote went up by 250,000.
Leading party in this case (UCP) received 17 higher percentage points of seats than its vote percentage. (NDP got five p.c. lower seat count than its votes. Alberta Party got no seats despite getting 10 p.c. of the votes.)
Parties' seat stats (2012/2015/2019)
seats won by plurality not majority seats won by majority TOTAL
Conservatives 42/10/X 19/0/X 61/10/ X
Wildrose 9/17/X 8/3/X 17/20/ X
UCP X/X/8 X/X/55 X/ X/63 .
NDP 2/31/12 2/23/12 4/54/24
Analysis based on two levels give us this matrix of possibilities for the NDP 2015 victory:
District votes
A. In a sizable number of districts, party A takes the same number of votes but the opposing vote was split between two parties and party A had the most votes in the districts (although only a minority of the districts' votes) and won the seats. (This produces Y below)
B. In a sizable number of districts, party A took many more votes, and has the most votes in each of these districts (although only a minority of the districts' votes) and won the seats. (This produces Z below)
C. Party A taking as many seats as before but now the opposition's seats were split between two parties, so party A had the most seats in the Legislature and were named government.
D. Party A took most of the seats by majorities of votes and were named to government. (This produces Y below)
2012 Conservatives were Party A in option A.
2015 NDP were Party A in option B. (NDP took 31 seats by minority of the vote and 23 by majority)
2019 United Conservatives (UCP) were Party A in option D. took 55 seats by majority
Seat tallies
four outcomes
W same number of seats as previous election or fewer, still minority and still fewer than another party = out of power
X more seats than previous election but still minority, still fewer than another party = out of power
Y minority of seats but now more than any other party = minority gov't
Z a majority of seats in Legislature = majority government
2012 Conservatives took option Z, NDP took option W
2015 NDP took option Z, Conservatives took option W
2019 UCP took option Z, NDP took option W
===========================================
Comments