Note to Facebook readers: since Facebook does not import tables, please click the “see original post” link at the bottom.

I thought it might be useful to see what the demographics in Saanich-Gulf Islands tell us about potential voting patterns. First, I went through the last five Ekos polls for B.C. (Jul 22 to Aug 28) — I use Ekos since they give a handy age breakdown by province and as they poll weekly, we get a good sized sample. I then compared the average support for each demographic group relative to the provincial average for each party — this tells us how well each party fares in each demographic group. The results are below.

There are clear patterns. The Conservatives fair poorly among the < 25 group (16 points below the provincial average), but very well with 65+ (14.4 points above average) -- in fact their support varies directly with age, the older the group, the better the support. The Greens are exactly the opposite -- the older the group, the worse they do (+9.6 points above their provincial average for the 18-24 group and -9.6 for the 65+ group). Liberals and NDP are fairly even across demographic groups, slightly better among young people and slightly worse about seniors.

Second, I looked at the demographics of Saanich-Gulf Islands, then third, I looked at the historical turnout for each group in B.C. (and pro-rated this to roughly 70% turnout in Saanich-Gulf Islands). Taking these together, we get a clearer picture of the potential voter pool for the riding. I then did an estimate of the baseline support by group using the matrix in Table 1 above and what current polling tells us. The results are below.

Note: POP % is the % of eligible voters (i.e. 18+ years); Voter % is the % of total voters; % per party is the % of each age group won; T/O is the estimated turnout.

As you can see, the demographics clearly favour the Conservatives, which gives us a clue why Gary Lunn has held the riding for the past 12 years. By contrast, the demographics work against the Greens. And this is exacerbated by the projected turnout — young people (40%) turnout at only half the rate as people 45 and up (80%). So the net result is that just 26% of voters are under 45 (the most likely to vote Green) while 74% are over 45 (the least likely to vote Green). So baseline support using a demographic/turnout projection is around 38% for Conservative incumbent Gary Lunn, 23% for the Liberals, 22% for the NDP and 17% for the Greens. There’s little doubt that GPC leader Elizabeth May will exceed the baseline support of 17%, but clearly the demographics are working against her.

While it is a moot point since May has chosen Saanich-Gulf Islands (although she’s waiting until Sept 8 to make that official), I thought it might be interesting to compare SGI to the riding that my analysis says was the best riding, Guelph.

We see a similar pattern in Ontario as we did in B.C. — Conservative support goes up as the age group goes up, while Green support goes down as the age group goes up. Liberal and NDP support is more even, with the NDP dipping and the Liberal increasing slightly among seniors. Again, I then looked at the demographics of Guelph and the historical voting patterns by age group in Ontario (and pro-rate to roughly 65% turnout in Guelph). I then used the matrix in table 3 above with current polling to give a baseline projection for Guelph using a demographic/turnout approach.

Note: POP % is the % of eligible voters (i.e. 18+ years); Voter % is the % of total voters; % per party is the % of each age group won; T/O is the estimated turnout.

So baseline support in Guelph using a demographic/turnout projection is around 35% for Liberal incumbent Frank Valeriote, 28% for the Conservatives, 23% for the Greens and 14% for the NDP.

As you can see comparing Guelph to Saanich (table 2), Saanich is a much older riding, which helps explain why it has about 5% higher turnout (since older people tend to turn out in larger numbers). While 30% of voters in Saanich are 65+, only 17% are in Guelph. There are slightly more voters 45-64 in Saanich — 44% vs 38% in Guelph. But the biggest difference is in the 25-44 group — 20% in Saanich vs 36% in Guelph, 80% more.

What’s also interesting is that young voters (18-24) in Ontario historically turn out at a slightly higher rate than in B.C. (40% in BC vs 45% in ON), while those 65+ turn out as slightly lower rate (80% in BC vs 70% in ON). Again, that exacerbates the underlying demographic differences in Guelph’s favour. While there are slightly more youth voters in Guelph (9% vs 6%), this is probably understated because it doesn’t account for the student population at the University of Guelph. While Saanich is also home to students from the University of Victoria, students here are split across 3 ridings (Saanich-Gulf Islands, Victoria and Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca). These numbers also show why a strategy of significantly increasing the youth vote — long held to be a winner for Greens — will have little impact because the youth voter pool is so small. For example, increasing 18-24 turnout from 40% to 60%, only closes the gap between Lunn and May by about 150 votes, which is inconsequential.

The net result is that only about 1/4 of the voters in Saanich are under 45, while a bit less than 1/2 are under 45 in Guelph, almost twice as many. This is significant because as tables 1 and 3 show in both BC and Ontario, the vast majority of Green votes come from people under 45.

So Saanich’s demographics and turnout patterns work against the Greens while they are more favourable in Guelph. This shows another reason why I have reservations about Elizabeth May running in Saanich-Gulf Islands over Guelph. It means May will have to significantly buck the demographic trends to win in Saanich-Gulf Islands.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has continued the tradition of rewarding friends and loyalists with appointments to the Senate, complete with a $130,000 salary and plum pension. The list includes long-time communications aide Carolyn Stewart-Olsen, former national campaign manager Doug Finley (husband of MP Diane Finley), Conservative Party President Don Plett, defeated CPC candidate Claude Carignan, and Conservative council rep (and chair of Harper’s 2004 leadership campaign) Judith Seidman, among others. Harper is not the first Prime Minister to appoint friends to the Senate, but for a guy who reportedly believes in Senate reform, he has an odd way of showing it.

The Senate is deeply flawed. If you want to reward people for their achievements, give them a symbolic Order of Canada or some such thing. If you want “sober second thought” create a royal commission to study particular issues. But the status quo of appointing friends and loyalists to lucrative long-term appointments is an embarrassment to 21st century democracy. And while there certainly are people who agree reform is needed, nobody can agree on how. There are constitutional problems, political problems, questions about whether all provinces should have an equal number of seats, or whether it should be proportional to population, and so on.

There is no solution that will satisfy everyone. Atlantic Canada will lose under any scenario, because they are so badly over-represented (it has 30 seats, even more than Ontario’s 24 seats, despite having less than 1/6th the population). For this reason, I don’t favour giving all provinces the same number of seats. To do so would mean that 20% of the people have power over the other 80%. That’s just not democratic.

Note: the original post noted that as a happy coincidence, with the following distribution, Western Canada (Manitoba westward), Central Canada (Ontario), and Eastern Canada (Quebec eastward) — incidentally like the 3 Canadian junior hockey leagues (WHL, OHL, QMJHL) — would each end up with 35 seats. But I’ve edited it because it was too confusing. Make no mistake, this scheme is representation by population.

Ontario — 35 (+11)
Quebec — 25 (+1)
British Columbia — 12 (+6)
Alberta — 10 (+4)
Manitoba — 5 (-1)
Saskatchewan — 5 (-1)
Nova Scotia — 4 (-6)
New Brunswick — 3 (-7)
Newfoundland & Labrador — 2 (-4)
Prince Edward Island — 1 (-3)
Northwest Territories — 1 (-)
Yukon — 1 (-)
Nunavut — 1 (-)
TOTAL — 105 seats

As you can see, Ontario, B.C. and Alberta all gain seats, but the four Atlantic Canada provinces lose seats. Quebec and the Prairies are roughly the same.

Under this scenario, Senators could be elected using a single transferable vote (STV) at the REGIONAL level (and by region, I mean “natural” regions of that typically have 9-12 MPs, less in sparsely-populated regions). This would provide our system with both local (House of Commons) and regional (Senate) representation. These regions could elect between 1 and 4 Senators using STV, where candidates are simply ranked in order of preference. As an illustration, the distribution in the Senate by Province could look something like this:

Of course, the provincial breakdown is just a summary. What really matters is the region. Here’s what it might look like by region:

Province	Region	# of MPs	# of Senators
ON	Northern Ontario	9	3
ON	Ottawa/Rideau	9	3
ON	Eastern Ontario	9	3
ON	Central Ontario	12	4
ON	Southwestern Ontario	12	4
ON	Hamilton/Niagara	9	3
ON	York/Durham	12	4
ON	Peel/Halton	12	4
ON	Suburban Toronto	12	4
ON	Central Toronto	10	3
QC	Nord-du-Québec	9	3
QC	Capitale-Nationale/Est-du-Québec	12	4
QC	Centre-du-Québec/Estrie	12	4
QC	Lanaudière/Laurentides	9	3
QC	Montérégie	12	4
QC	Montréal Est/Laval	12	4
QC	Montréal Ouest	9	3
BC	B.C. Interior/Fraser Valley	9	3
BC	Lower Mainland	9	3
BC	Vancouver	9	3
BC	Vancouver Island/North	9	3
AB	Calgary	8	3
AB	Edmonton	8	3
AB	Rural Alberta	12	4
MB	Winnipeg	8	3
MB	Rural Manitoba	6	2
SK	Regina/South Saskatchewan	6	2
SK	Saskatoon/North Saskatchewan	8	3
NS	Halifax/South Nova Scotia	6	2
NS	Cape Breton/North Nova Scotia	5	2
NB	South New Brunswick	6	2
NB	North New Brunswick	4	1
NL	Newfoundland & Labrador	6	2
PE	Prince Edward Island	4	1
NT	Northwest Territories	1	1
YT	Yukon	1	1
NU	Nunavut	1	1

A system such as the above would dramatically improve the legitimacy of the Senate, and allow for a balance between narrow local interests (represented by MPs in the House of Commons) and broader regional concerns (represented by Senators). Whatever form it takes, Senate reform is desperately needed in Canada, because the status quo of appointing friends to plush positions has no business being a part of a 21st century democracy.

Briony Penn, the former prominent Green Party of Canada supporter who ran for the Liberals last time (and nearly won) has launched a pre-emptive strike against Elizabeth May, taking to the local papers last week to pour cold water on May’s chances of winning in Saanich-Gulf Islands (May’s candidacy has yet to be formally announced). In Penn’s words:

“As you know, I want to see Green Party of Canada leader Elizabeth May elected to the House of Commons, but having come to know this riding well, I do not believe she can be successful in Saanich-Gulf Islands.”

Penn goes on to tout her preferred candidate, Liberal nominee Renee Hetherington but also refutes the claim that Saanich-Gulf Islands is the best Green riding and even specifically calls out Guelph as a better riding (which is significant coming from her since Guelph is currently held by a Liberal).

“Though it is sometimes touted as “the greenest riding in Canada,” this is not actually true. Further, in another riding —Guelph, Ontario — the Green vote has steadily been increasing on the Liberal incumbent, making it a much better bet statistically for Elizabeth to win there. However, apparently she does not want to run against a Liberal and would prefer to oust Gary Lunn.

Penn also points out the difficulty May will have attracting small-c conservatives in Saanich, where most of the population is:

But the bulk of our population lives in Saanich, which has been well described as “a small-c conservative riding.” Such voters who did not support me will not support Elizabeth, but they may well decide to support Renee with her strong understanding of the economy and with Michael Ignatieff as her party’s leader.

The Greens lost about 4,000 votes to the Liberals in Saanich last time (their “natural” vote, given 9.4% support provincially, should have been around 10,500 or 16-17%, but they got only 6,732 or 10%). They are likely to re-gain a good portion of those, but with Penn pushing hard for the Liberals, will all of those former Green votes come home to roost?

May Challenged in Saanich-Gulf Islands

It appears that long-time B.C. Green Stuart Hertzog is challenging leader Elizabeth May for the nomination in Saanich-Gulf Islands. That can’t be welcome news to the GPC campaign team, as it means dedicating limited resources to winning a nomination battle. I don’t think it’s a bad thing for May, though, as it will force their team to mobilize local support early, so it’s probably a blessing in disguise for May (although if Hertzog is able to muster anything more than token support, there might be lingering feelings about May being parachuted into the riding).

The central party, via a message yesterday by Political Campaign Director Catharine Johannson to a public GPC email list (which drew a subtle scolding by May since Saanich hasn’t been made official yet), and reinforced today in the Globe, is putting on a brave face, saying it shows how the GPC does things differently, welcomes internal debate, isn’t top-down, etc. Some Greens in the know might get a chuckle out of the spin, but there’s not much else they can do, and it’s the right political move (maybe they are learning how to message after all!). But let’s be honest, it’s hardly a typical local race between two people on level footing, since the central party has infinitely more resources at their disposal than Hertzog. And the outcome is not in doubt — May will secure the nomination, as well she should, since she gives the Greens the best chance to win the riding.

Conservatives Up, Liberals Down

In related news, the latest Ipsos-Reid poll is probably also unwelcome news for the Greens. Not because their support has changed — it’s holding steady in the 9-10% range, as it typically does until election day approaches. But the poll shows the Conservatives picking up strength and the Liberals beginning to fade. The poll shows the CPC at 39%, the Liberals at 28%, the NDP at 14%, the Greens at 10% and the Bloc at 8%. The Aug 18-20 sample is 1000, meaning a MOE of +/- 3.1%, 19 times out of 20.

It looks like a bit of an outlier and it’s only one poll — so should be treated with caution — but it does support a trend that we’ve seen over the past month or so. It’s bad news for the Greens because they’ve clearly hitched their wagon to a Liberal victory by running their leader against a Conservative cabinet minister instead of taking on an weaker opposition MP. That’s not a bet I would’ve taken — it’s more likely that Canadians will step back and say, you know what, these guys haven’t done all that much but they haven’t screwed things up that much either; they haven’t had any major scandals and the economy is recovering, so I’m betting after 3 consecutive minority governments and endless partisan gamesmanship on all sides, voters are probably more inclined to give the Conservatives a majority than hand the Liberals a minority. That’s my gut feeling. Rookie Liberal leaders typically don’t win on their first try; people will probably need more time to warm up to Ignatieff.

The polling trend reinforces why I think Guelph was a better choice (but only if she mended fences with the local team, of course). Instead of taking on an incumbent Cabinet Minister who has held his riding for 12 years at a time when the Conservatives are possibly headed for a majority, it just makes more sense to take on a first-term Liberal opposition MP who barely won last time. The Liberals held Guelph running on a green platform. With Michael Ignatieff abandoning that green platform in an attempt to distance himself from Stephane Dion — tossing aside the carbon tax and championing the Alberta tar sands — the Greens have ample ammunition to target eco-friendly Liberals in Guelph (of which there are many). In fact, it would play to May’s traditional strengths. Instead, May will have to step outside of her element and campaign on meat-and-potato economic issues, and specifically their principle of limiting growth, to Green-resistant suburban voters in Saanich. It’s not a question of whether they are right or wrong, it’s just hard to convince average folks that it’s bad to have a growing economy (and with it, more jobs and more prosperity) in the thick of an election campaign.

I wish May and the Greens luck, as the nearly one million Green voters across the country deserve a voice in parliament. But unfortunately, the news that May faces local opposition and that the Conservatives are gaining strength both suggest that the hill that is Saanich-Gulf Islands is looking a bit more steep today.

Update:
A straight average of the last 5 polls (Aug 2-20) shows the following (allowing 1% for others):

Conservative – 33.8%
Liberal – 30.8%
NDP – 16.0%
Green – 9.7%
Bloc – 8.6%

Update-er-er-er:
Harris Decima has a poll showing a statistical dead-heat, further illustrating why any single poll is fairly meaningless. Including this one, here are the current #s (Aug 4- 23), again allowing 1% for others:

Conservative – 33.8%
Liberals – 30.5%
NDP – 15.4%
Green – 10.6%
Bloc – 8.7%

Earlier, I posted a breakdown of the riding of Saanich-Gulf Islands, where Elizabeth May is reportedly running, for the 2004 and 2008 elections. So what does looking at these sub-regions tell us? You can see the different areas of strength in the map below, which shows quite clearly the 3 distinct areas of the riding — the Greens (and to a lesser extent the NDP) are strong on the Islands, the Liberals do well in the suburban areas closest to Victoria and around UVic, and the Conservatives do well in the middle, on the Saanich Peninsula.

AREAS OF STRENGTH IN SAANICH-GULF ISLANDS

Note: blue = CPC, red = LPC, green = GPC, yellow = NDP)

The map illustrates the challenge that Elizabeth May faces. She will no doubt run up big numbers on the Islands by campaigning on her core environmental issues in this more “hippy” demographic. But getting out the vote here is challenged by sparse population and great distances to polling stations. And even still, it’s only 13% of the population. To win the riding will require winning the suburbs (about 1/2 of the population), where Greens are not typically strong — that will require campaigning on meat-and-potato economic issues that resonate with families in the middle-aged demographic in this area. It also means limiting the Conservative margins in their traditional strong areas in the middle (North Saanich, about 1/3 of the population) — and that will require narrow-casting a message that will resonate with the older demographic in that area. So as you can see, winning requires balancing 3 distinct messages, without alienating any one of them. The Greens are strong in one of these 3 areas/demographics, but they will have to significantly broader their message to appeal to the other two.

Collapsing the NDP vote by campaigning on core environmental and social justice issues is the easiest of the 3 tasks. We saw last time, after their candidate dropped out, NDP voters were willing to back the Liberal in large numbers, with about 3/4 shifting. But, barring another bizarre incident, the NDP will have a candidate this time and will certainly not be as low as the 5.7% they got last time with no candidate. We might normally expect the NDP to be in the 20% range in Saanich, given where the NDP is provincially right now. In Central Nova, by my estimation, almost 40% of NDPers shifted towards May (dropped from about 33% to 20%). But that was because there was no Liberal and May was perceived to be the most likely to topple Mackay. So expecting more than 1/3 of NDP voters in Saanich to back May is overly optimistic. Even still, stealing 1/3 of the NDP vote won’t win you the riding.

The Greens won’t steal many votes directly from the Conservatives, many of whom are older, as this is a demographic that is particularly entrenched in their voting behaviour, but also one that votes in large numbers (a recent Ekos poll (note: PDF) puts Green support at < 6% in the 65+ group). But winning votes directly from Lunn is especially difficult in Saanich, where a look at pre-merger results tells us that only about 1/6th of Conservative votes are of the "Progressive" variety (who are more likely to switch to Green) and 5/6s are former Reform/Alliance voters. So the best the Greens can do here is limit the damage, cut into Lunn's margins, and pull a couple points away.

The key, then, is winning the suburbs, which is typically evenly split between Liberals and Conservatives. The Liberals will be easier to attract than the Conservatives. But as we saw in Central Nova, many Liberals simply vote Liberal no matter what and would rather stay home than back May (in Central Nova, a rough estimate tells us that May won about 1/2 the Liberals, about 1/4 stayed home, and the remaining 1/4 scattered between Mackay and the NDP). If only 1/2 of the Liberals backed May when there was no Liberal candidate, expecting more than 1/4 of the Liberals to vote for May is probably overly optimistic, especially since their candidate (I'm guessing it will be Renee Hetherington) is backed by Briony Penn, the star candidate and former Green who ran last time.

So under an best-case scenario, assuming the Greens can narrow-cast their messages, the Greens could steal 5 points from the Liberals, 7 points from the NDP and 2 points from the Conservatives. With a base of about 16% (assuming they fully recover the 6 points they lost to the Liberals last time), that only gets May to a maximum of 30%, with Lunn at around 37%, again best-case for the Greens. As you can see, the Greens need a perfect storm and then some to pull this off. Not an easy task, especially since they are largely starting from scratch in canvassing and IDing support, and moreover, since a perfect storm requires balancing 3 messages across 3 district areas of the riding.

Note to Facebook readers: click on ’see original post’ link at bottom to see the table, since Facebook doesn’t import tables.

I previously broke down Saanich-Gulf Islands into 25 sub-regions plus advance, absentee and mobile polls for the 2008 election. Below, I do the same for the 2004 election, when the Greens ran a fully-funded campaign; this gives a better idea of where the Greens are strongest.

SUB-REGION	ELECTORS	T/O	CPC	LPC	GPC	NDP
Central Saanich [3]	11507 (13.3%)	67%	2934 (38%)	1922 (25%)	1153 (15%)	1632 (21%)
Cordova Bay [2]	2607 (3.0%)	70%	692 (38%)	613 (34%)	205 (11%)	308 (17%)
East Saanich [2]	1068 (1.2%)	63%	271 (40%)	166 (25%)	74 (11%)	161 (24%)
Elk Lake [2]	454 (0.5%)	67%	120 (40%)	89 (29%)	36 (12%)	58 (19%)
Fulford Harbour [1]	1088 (1.3%)	70%	108 (14%)	93 (12%)	344 (45%)	213 (28%)
Ganges [1]	6186 (7.2%)	65%	937 (23%)	699 (18%)	1341 (34%)	1011 (25%)
Gordon Head [2]	4166 (4.8%)	65%	794 (30%)	923 (34%)	424 (16%)	531 (20%)
Lake Hill [2]	3150 (3.6%)	64%	569 (28%)	606 (30%)	290 (14%)	553 (27%)
Mayne [1]	676 (0.8%)	87%	168 (28%)	103 (17%)	215 (36%)	104 (18%)
North Galiano [1]	385 (0.4%)	82%	68 (22%)	46 (15%)	69 (22%)	131 (42%)
North Saanich [3]	8697 (10.1%)	68%	2539 (43%)	1536 (26%)	1033 (17%)	815 (14%)
Pender Island [1]	502 (0.6%)	73%	109 (30%)	65 (18%)	132 (36%)	60 (16%)
Port Washington [1]	1205 (1.4%)	67%	209 (26%)	120 (15%)	308 (38%)	171 (21%)
Royal Oak [2]	896 (1.0%)	74%	311 (47%)	231 (35%)	55 (8%)	67 (10%)
Saanich [2]	32864 (38.0%)	64%	6367 (30%)	6547 (31%)	2946 (14%)	5037 (24%)
Saturna [1]	263 (0.3%)	75%	57 (29%)	38 (19%)	39 (20%)	59 (30%)
Sidney [3]	8669 (10.0%)	66%	2353 (41%)	1385 (24%)	885 (15%)	1092 (19%)
South Saanich [2]	509 (0.6%)	44%	41 (18%)	45 (20%)	34 (15%)	102 (46%)
Sturdies Bay [1]	464 (0.5%)	70%	82 (25%)	59 (18%)	70 (22%)	112 (35%)
Advance Polls	-	-	5424 (40%)	3249 (24%)	1906 (14%)	2803 (21%)
Absentee Ballots	370 (0.4%)	-	610 (42%)	324 (23%)	226 (16%)	275 (19%)
Mobile Polls	703 (0.8%)	74%	221 (44%)	145 (29%)	30 (6%)	100 (20%)
THE ISLANDS	10769 (12.5%)	68%	1738 (24%)	1223 (17%)	2518 (34%)	1861 (25%)
SOUTH SAANICH	45714 (52.9%)	64%	9165 (31%)	9220 (31%)	4064 (14%)	6817 (23%)
NORTH SAANICH	28873 (33.4%)	67%	7826 (40%)	4843 (25%)	3071 (16%)	3539 (18%)
MAINLAND	74587 (86.3%)	65%	16991 (35%)	14063 (29%)	7135 (15%)	10356 (21%)
TOTAL	86429	74%	22050 (35%)	17082 (27%)	10662 (17%)	13763 (22%)

Note: T/O = turnout; 1 = Islands, 2 = South Saanich, 3 = North Saanich; note also the 3 red dots in the Islands are 2008 data; it’s likely that they would be Green or NDP areas had they been broken out in the 2004 data.

As you can see, the Greens did well on the Islands winning 34% of the vote, double their riding-wide average. Given that the Liberals went from 17% in 2004 to 58% in 2008, it shows that many Gulf Islanders are willing to line up behind the candidate deemed most likely to defeat Lunn, which bodes well for Elizabeth May.

However, you can see that the Greens did worse where the bulk of the population is, on the mainland. North Saanich was a strong Conservative area (40%), while South Saanich was dead-even between the Conservatives and Liberals (31% each). Unfortunately for the Greens, their worst of the 3 areas was South Saanich, where more than 1/2 the riding population lives. So they will need to radically alter that trend if they are to pull off a victory in Saanich-Gulf Islands.

Note to Facebook readers: click on ’see original post’ link at bottom to see the table, since Facebook doesn’t import tables.

I’ve broken down Saanich-Gulf Islands into 25 sub-regions (see map) plus advance, absentee and mobile polls.

SUB-REGION	ELECTORS	T/O	CPC	LPC	GPC	NDP
Ardmore [3]	1305 (1.4%)	62%	386 (48%)	301 (38%)	74 (9%)	32 (4%)
Brentwood Bay [3]	1322 (1.4%)	63%	388 (47%)	287 (35%)	96 (12%)	49 (6%)
Capital G [1]	248 (0.3%)	32%	12 (15%)	51 (64%)	8 (10%)	7 (9%)
Central Saanich [3]	3170 (3.5%)	64%	964 (48%)	683 (34%)	254 (13%)	101 (5%)
Cordova Bay [2]	4358 (4.8%)	65%	1459 (52%)	1031 (37%)	213 (8%)	19 (3%)
Deep Cove [3]	2112 (2.3%)	66%	631 (45%)	581 (42%)	140 (10%)	25 (2%)
East Saanich [2]	1682 (1.8%)	54%	490 (54%)	218 (24%)	109 (12%)	75 (8%)
Fulford Harbour [1]	1268 (1.4%)	65%	116 (14%)	570 (69%)	100 (12%)	24 (3%)
Ganges [1]	5305 (5.8%)	57%	728 (24%)	1771 (58%)	405 (13%)	95 (3%)
Gordon Head [2]	4390 (4.8%)	60%	1056 (40%)	1116 (43%)	249 (9%)	177 (7%)
Keating [3]	3432 (3.8%)	64%	1135 (52%)	669 (30%)	238 (11%)	143 (6%)
Lake Hill [2]	3480 (3.8%)	59%	791 (38%)	833 (40%)	233 (11%)	186 (9%)
Long Harbour [1]	508 (0.6%)	59%	91 (30%)	168 (56%)	34 (11%)	8 (3%)
Mayne [1]	851 (0.9%)	58%	182 (37%)	232 (47%)	61 (12%)	13 (3%)
North Galiano [1]	475 (0.5%)	68%	77 (24%)	204 (63%)	31 (10%)	7 (2%)
Pender Island [1]	1413 (1.6%)	57%	251 (31%)	389 (48%)	133 (17%)	25 (3%)
Port Washington [1]	421 (0.5%)	58%	66 (27%)	140 (58%)	32 (13%)	3 (1%)
Saanich [2]	34190 (37.4%)	60%	8209 (40%)	8406 (41%)	2082 (10%)	1607 (8%)
Saanichton [3]	5260 (5.8%)	63%	1714 (52%)	1063 (32%)	357 (11%)	135 (4%)
Saturna [1]	300 (0.3%)	65%	63 (32%)	98 (51%)	30 (15%)	2 (1%)
Sidney [3]	11479 (12.6%)	61%	3710 (53%)	2142 (30%)	779 (11%)	332 (5%)
South Saanich [2]	478 (0.5%)	43%	71 (34%)	60 (29%)	39 (19%)	33 (16%)
Sturdies Bay [1]	426 (0.5%)	69%	83 (28%)	173 (59%)	25 (9%)	11 (4%)
Swartz Bay [3]	1857 (2.0%)	63%	559 (48%)	449 (39%)	124 (11%)	21 (2%)
Vesuvius [1]	961 (1.1%)	60%	185 (32%)	323 (57%)	48 (8%)	11 (2%)
Advance Polls	-	-	3736 (49%)	2790 (37%)	674 (9%)	353 (5%)
Absentee Ballots	376 (0.4%)	-	658 (47%)	533 (38%)	145 (10%)	73 (5%)
Mobile Polls	755 (0.8%)	46%	180 (53%)	85 (25%)	29 (9%)	28 (8%)
THE ISLANDS	12176 (13.3%)	59%	1854 (26%)	4119 (58%)	907 (13%)	206 (3%)
SOUTH SAANICH	48578 (52.9%)	60%	12076 (41%)	11664 (40%)	2925 (10%)	2169 (7%)
NORTH SAANICH	29937 (32.6%)	63%	9487 (51%)	6175 (33%)	2062 (11%)	838 (4%)
MAINLAND	79646 (86.7%)	72%	26137 (46%)	21247 (37%)	5835 (10%)	3461 (6%)
TOTAL	91822	70%	27991 (43%)	25366 (39%)	6742 (10%)	3667 (6%)

Note: T/O = turnout; 1 = Islands, 2 = South Saanich, 3 = North Saanich

As you can see, there is a big difference between results on the Gulf Islands and result on the mainland (Saanich Peninsula) — Briony Penn more than doubled Gary Lunn (58% vs 26%) on the Islands, winning every region, but Lunn did better on the mainland (46% vs 37%). The Greens did a bit better on the Islands than the mainland (13% vs 10%). However, the vast majority of the population (87%) is on the mainland. On the other hand, with turnout at just 59% on the Islands vs 72% on the mainland, there is an opportunity to increase Islands turnout, but that would require significant effort as population is sparse on the Islands. You can also see that the Conservatives did well with advance and mobile polls as well as absentee ballots; the Greens will want to mobilize a strong advance poll campaign to eat into these margins.

I’ve also added a breakdown of the mainland into two: North and South Saanich. The more suburban South Saanich, with over half the riding’s population, is a classic battleground, while the Northern half is strong Conservative territory (Lunn 51% vs Penn 33%). So as you can see there are 3 distinct areas within the riding, each displaying different voting patterns.

I will also produce a similar breakdown for the 2004 election, when the GPC ran a fully-funded campaign (i.e. most analogous to Elizabeth May’s campaign). This will give a better idea of Green areas of strength.

Since there has been no announcement from the Green Party where Elizabeth May will run, I’ll continue to make comparisons between the top two choices, Saanich-Gulf Islands (SGI) and Guelph.

I can’t help but think that SGI is a difficult riding to canvass (and thus to mount an effective ground campaign needed to win) — far more difficult than Guelph (and as previously noted, the Guelph Greens have already canvassed a sizable portion of the riding while they are essentially starting from scratch in Saanich). Both ridings have a population of about 115,000 people. But Saanich-Gulf Islands is 5-1/2 times larger in area and spread over a dozen large islands (and countless small ones) plus a portion of mainland. Below are maps of both ridings published at the same scale (click on image for larger version). Guelph on the other hand is a compact mid-size town no bigger than the mainland portion of SGI, i.e. the Saanich Peninsula.

What do you think? Does size (and shape) matter? Does Saanich being 5-1/2 times bigger and spread over at least a dozen large islands (and countless small ones) make it more difficult for Elizabeth May to win?

SAANICH-GULF ISLANDS

GUELPH

Note: 86.7% of the population is on the Saanich peninsula while on 13.3% is on the Islands. Unfortunately, GPC support is high on the Islands than the mainland (at least mainland Vancouver Island), and voter turnout is considerably less on the Islands (59% vs 72% on the mainland).

Working from home today as it’s my little lady’s turn with our only means of transportation today. So, feeling particularly lazy (something that happens with surprising frequency in August!) and not wanting to fix something for lunch, I strolled out in the customary nauseatingly perfect L.A. weather (sunny, 24C… again), down Melrose Ave to a cafe I like to patronize (why do they call it patronize? just seems wrong). After ordering my favourite yummy strawberry smoothie and organic-laden something-or-other sammich, I sat down and waited (and waited). Not realizing they had to actually go pick the avocado right then and there (no, not really, it just took THAT long), I curled up with some freebie L.A. mag whose name now escapes me — something to do with being out west. Well, as serendipity often happens, I came across a neat little article by a guy who happened to be visiting Prince Edward County in Ontario, just south where I was born. It’s not often you read about rural Ontario waiting for your lunch on Melrose Ave. Turns out he went to a concert by the Sadies at “one of the most photographed barns in Canada”.

Even more scary, I just checked the Sadies website and they are playing tomorrow at the Tweedsmuir in grand ol’ Tweed, which was the second closest pub to where I grew up. Oh, the ’smuir! Anyway, it would appear that Prince Edward County is certified cool, now. ‘Cause it says so here in L.A…

Yesterday, I looked at Elizabeth May’s prospects in Saanich-Gulf Islands, and previously, asked whether Saanich was the right choice, by looking at some basic metrics. Today I thought it might be useful to look at Guelph, which quantitatively and qualitatively is a better choice.

Like Gary Lunn in Saanich-Gulf Islands, the Liberal candidate in Guelph typically follows the provincial trend (i.e. they get 95-99% in Guelph of what the Liberals get provincially) — 2004 (44.7% ON vs 44.6% Guelph), 2006 (39.9% ON vs 38.4% Guelph), 2008 (33.8% ON vs 32.2%). Note that this was true for both Brenda Chamberlain and Frank Valeriote. Guelph is noticeably worse for the Conservatives relative to the province as a whole — typically 15% worse but that jumped to 25% worse in 2008 — 2004 (31.5% ON vs 26.1% Guelph), 2006 (35.1% ON vs 29.8% Guelph), 2008 (39.2% ON vs 29.2% Guelph). Guelph has typically been about 10% above the provincial average for the NDP until 2008, when it fell to about 10% below average despite a star candidate — – 2004 (18.1% ON vs 20.0% Guelph), 2006 (19.4% ON vs 22.0% Guelph), 2008 (18.2% ON vs 16.5% Guelph). No doubt the weaker-than-usual results for all 3 parties is a direct result of the strength of the Green campaign. Given the Greens have built a strong base of support in Guelph, it’s highly unlikely that future trends will suddenly revert to 2004 and 2006 levels for the NDP and CPC.

Here is a comparison of recent results as well as current projections, both on a typical basis and making adjustments for May to give a best-case scenario.

As you can see, the Liberal vote has been in steady decline, mirroring Liberal fortunes across Ontario, while the Green vote has tripled its support in the riding, from 7% to 21%, coming up 10-11% short in 2008. The CPC and NDP have been up and down, but both preformed noticeably worse in 2008 than in previous years (compared to what they did provincially).

So what’s the current situation? An aggregate of recent polling data shows roughly the following in Ontario: LIB 39.3%, CPC 35.3%, NDP 14.3%, GPC 10.3%. Of course, we need to make some minor adjustments to this based on the differences between polling and voting patterns (this reflects the strength of GOTV operations, tendencies of some demographics to vote more than others, strategic voting, last-minute shifts, etc). Using the same methodology, here’s a comparison of the final aggregate polling averages vs. actual results: for 2008 — polling 34.2% LIB vs. 33.8% actual (-0.4); polling 34.1% CPC vs 39.2% actual (+5.1); polling 20.4% NDP vs 18.2% actual (-2.2); polling 10.3 GPC vs. 8.0% actual (-2.3), and for 2006 — polling 37.9% LIB vs 39.9% actual (+2.0); polling 36.1% CPC vs. 35.1% actual (-1.0); polling 20.1% NDP vs. 19.4% actual (-0.7); 5.5% GPC vs. 4.7% actual (-0.8). Given the advantage of incumbency, particularly with a shaky economy, I would estimate the CPC would see a bit of a bump over the polls, although probably not as high as in 2008. Consequently, I would see a slight decrease for the other 3 parties from current poll numbers (the NDP and GPC show a clear pattern of losing some support at the ballot box). So making adjustments, we might estimate current support in Ontario at: LIB 38.8%, CPC 36.8%, NDP 13.8%, GPC 9.8%. So, the NDP has dropped noticeably, and the Conservatives have also dropped. The Liberals and Greens are both up a bit.

Using this estimate and running the projection, we might estimate current support in Guelph at: LIB 36%, CPC 28%, GPC 22%, NDP 14%. The NDP may seem low, but as noted above, last time they ran 10% below the provincial average and previously were only 10% above average, so the riding is probably no better than average for the NDP; given they are currently running below 14% in the polls, 14% seems about right. So with a typical candidate, the Greens might need to close a gap of about 8,400 votes.

However, we can expect May to deliver personal votes. As I noted with Saanich, a reasonable estimate might be a premium of about 8%, similar to what Ed Broadbent delivered for the NDP in Ottawa Centre in 2004. This also includes the benefit of spending to the maximum. This is, of course, an estimate, but it is a reasonable one given past data.

As I noted in Saanich, Greens tend to draw more heavily from the NDP, although Ontario Conservatives are probably marginally more likely to shift to the Greens than their B.C. counterparts (as they are more likely to be “Progressive” Conservatives than in B.C.). So we might estimate that an 8-point bump for May would result in a 4-point drop for the NDP, a 2-point drop for the Liberals and a 2-point drop for the Conservatives. Of course, detailed polling in Guelph can give us a more precise pciture, but this is probably pretty close to what you might expect.

So, the current best case scenario for the Greens, assuming a fully-funded campaign and May able to deliver personal votes is: LIB 34%, GPC 30%, CPC 26%, NDP 10%. What this suggests is the possibility of a large numbers of NDP supporters lining up behind May, potentially collapsing the NDP to some degree, given the sliding fortunes of their own party in the riding, and the prospect of potentially defeating both the Conservatives and Liberals.

That leaves a gap of only 2,400 votes, about one-third of the gap in a best-case scenario in Saanich. Of course, closing the gap requires a strong local operation in either case. But unlike in Saanich, which hasn’t extensively canvassed the riding nor IDed large numbers of supporters, Guelph’s local team that has already canvassed a sizable portion of the riding and IDed several thousand Green supporters from which to build their campaign team.

But more importantly, unlike in Saanich, where the incumbent is a Conservative, in Guelph the incumbent is a Liberal. This is an important difference because we know from polling data that Greens in B.C. don’t draw much from the Conservatives, so closing the gap requires siphoning off Liberal and NDP votes. They would still need to siphon off Liberal and NDP votes in Guelph, but Greens in Ontario draw more votes from Liberals than Greens in B.C. draw from Conservatives (which is almost nil). But a key difference is that any votes drawn from the Liberals does double duty in Guelph — it increases the Green vote but also lowers the Liberal vote, thus closing the gap twice as much. So quite literally siphoning Liberal votes in Guelph counts for twice as much as siphoning Liberal votes in Saanich. So, the Greens could close the 2,400 vote gap by swaying just 1,200 Liberals to vote Green.

There is ample ammunition to do so, since Guelph Liberals are typically fairly progressive and share many of the environmental concerns of Greens. Unlike in 2006, when the Liberals ran on a largely “green” platform, the Liberals under Michael Ignatieff are seen to be more to the right and less green (Ignatieff’s defense of the tar sands being a perfect theme to hit home). This plays to May’s advantage — she could run on her strength, the environment.

But of course, not all the 2,400 vote gap need come at the expense of the Liberals. The Greens would have a strong case to make to NDPers that May is their best option. As we saw even in Central Nova, May is a vote magnet for Dipper votes, especially if she’s seen as the candidate best placed to knock off the incumbent. And even a couple hundred progressive Conservatives (particularly female baby boomers) might be willing to vote for May, particularly if a Liberal could be defeated and their own candidate is seen to be in arrears of May. So if the Greens can convert about 15% of the remaining Dippers (about 800 votes) and 5% of the remaining Conservatives (another 800 votes), then the gap is down to 800, and the Greens need only convert 400 Liberals to be in a dead-heat. All of this could be done using the data gathered from the phone and foot canvass and targeting specific neighborhoods with specific issues, using spatial mapping.

So, as you can see, there is a viable path to victory for May in Guelph. It wouldn’t be easy, of course, but they have the strongest on-the-ground team of any Green campaign in the country. So if any Green team can close a 2,400 vote gap, it’s this one. And since they still have another 75% of the riding to canvass (vs essentially 100% for Saanich), there is plenty more growth potential for the Guelph Greens. For example, the Green team largely concentrated their efforts last time in Guelph’s core, in areas of traditional NDP support, while canvassing virtually none of the more Conservative periphery, or traditional Liberal areas. So there is more support to pick up at the expense of both Liberals and Conservatives.

The path to victory is simply far easier for May in Guelph than in Saanich, and Guelph allows the Greens to build upon the work that has already been done, with people who know the riding (vs. bringing in her own team in Saanich that doesn’t). As I previously noted, the problem is that May doesn’t want to go to Guelph for personal and political reasons and the Guelph Greens don’t want her. It’s a devastating situation for a party looking to win its first seat to have its best candidate not able to run in its best riding. But this is not intractable, as the Guelph team would back her if she reached out to them. Elizabeth May and Mike Nagy (and the rest of the Guelph team) would have to sit down and work out their differences; but this would require May to make the first move. Healing this rift would do wonders for party unity, and bring together countless volunteers from across Southern Ontario (much as she enjoyed in London North Centre).

Do I see that happening? No, unless May does some serious self-reflection. Despite many great qualities, May also has many demons — and one thing she does not do well is listen to informed advice nor change her mind even with compelling evidence to the contrary. Nobody can nor should try to force May to run in Guelph. But since nothing has been made public regarding Saanich, it’s not too late for her to step back, look at the big picture, and recognize this is the last chance she has to been a parliamentarian (and thus effect the course of Canadian history, particularly on the environment). The overwhelming evidence says that Guelph is the best choice.

The Saanich vs Guelph analyses I’ve presented obviously involve assumptions and speculation, but this is something I’ve been doing for quite a while now and, it is also fundamentally data-driven. For comparison purposes, here is what I had predicted prior to Elizabeth May’s previous two attempts to win a seat, in London North Centre and Central Nova.

As you can see, I slightly underestimated May’s vote by about two percent in London North Centre and slightly overestimated her vote by the same in Central Nova. But it’s pretty damn close.

To conclude, I’m willing to predict at this stage, if there is a fall election and May runs in Saanich-Gulf Islands, she will lose and her political career will be over. If she makes peace with the locals and runs in Guelph, by building upon the work already done in a Green-friendly riding, she may well come out as the first Green elected to the Canadian parliament. We shall see how it plays out, but I would hate to say a few months from now — as I’ve unfortunately said before — that I told you so.