Nothing else really to comment on at this time. The Tories seem to be doing rather well in Winnipeg, and if that continues, I will need to increase the number of seats they take in that city.
Thursday, April 7, 2016
Manitoba Prediction
I've worked on my prediction for Manitoba a bit, and have come up with the following:
Nothing else really to comment on at this time. The Tories seem to be doing rather well in Winnipeg, and if that continues, I will need to increase the number of seats they take in that city.
Nothing else really to comment on at this time. The Tories seem to be doing rather well in Winnipeg, and if that continues, I will need to increase the number of seats they take in that city.
Wednesday, April 6, 2016
Saskatchewan without the Saskatchewan Party
First, a quick note; yes I am keeping my eye on what's going on in Iceland, as well as working on Manitoba.
Earlier, I said that I could use 3rd place results to determine what things would look like without the Saskatchewan Party. I've been able to do so. It became quite simple, actually, once I was able to fill in the gaps in the PC Candidate list.
There are a number of ways I was able to do this, and I wish to detail the method(s) I've used so that you may do so yourself.
1 - Use a swing from another party, or other parties. This is most difficult, as you need to figure out exactly where the swing is coming from. It's also most likely that the swing is not coming from just a single party, but multiple parties; compare, for example, the Reform vote in 1993, and you'll notice it does not match the PC vote, but rather, a combination of PC and NDP vote, but with the NDP weighted less in areas where the NDP did well, and vice versa in certain rural areas.
2 - Check the past. In the last election the party ran in Moose Jaw, but it did not this time, as such, one way to fill in the gaps is to simply pen in the last-time results, with possible adjustments for vote growth (or shrinkage) based on the ratio of the last-time vote, with further adjustment for current or past star candidates. This is also the sole method I used to fill in slots for the Green Party. You can also use results from another level of government (Federal or Provincial) but it is very important to keep in mind unique circumstances, (like the BC Liberals), or that strengths are not equal (like the Tories right here in our example of Saskatchewan)
3 - Check nearby ridings, or similar ridings. One simple way to fill in a gap is to take the average of all neighbouring ridings. This, clearly, has some faults to it, but it can do in a crunch. Always be sure to reduce the result by 10% or 20% when the gap was created by the party being unable to find a candidate, as opposed to an error (like a death or being slightly late with the paperwork) as being unable to find a candidate tends to indicate weakness in any particular area.
4 - Use the area's average. This is more useful in cities. For example, the PC Party missed a few spots in the "South and East" region I use, and as such, using the area average (with the same reduction noted above) is a good way to achieve the result you need.
5 - Randomness. At some point, especially for the tiny parties, picking a random number actually provides you with the most accurate. Note this only works for tiny parties, parties taking about 1% of the popular vote in the ridings where they run, and, who only run in a handful of ridings. You can also use this to decide upon a random factor; for example, I've decided that 0.1% of the vote is an accurate number for the "Other" parties in Saskatchewan, based on randomness alone.
6 - Update Update Update. If you plan to keep using your file, you will want to keep things up to date. Any of these methods can work for a growth of about 2X (double the last-time result) plus about a raw 2% of the vote. As such the PC Party, which took 4.5% in the ridings they ran. This is too much for Randomness. As such the "area average" can be used to determine the entire PC vote province-wide, and, accurately work even if the PC Party takes 11% of the vote. (double plus 2%) If, however, they are polling at 12%, you will want to use the next method up on the list. There is no exact math to determine when you need to use #1 from the list, but I am personally comfortable that using accurate swings will work even if a party is up 100 fold (0.5% last time, 50% this time)
Remember that these numbers are a baseline, to which you can add further adjustments later on.
I've also divided the province into a number of regions, as outlined on this map:
The reason for these regions focuses almost exclusively on the PC Party, especially the rural split. This split is the most useful for using method 4 as outlined above, and that was the first method I used.
One important thing I noticed was a negative swing compared to the Liberals; that is, where the Liberals did well, the PC Party did poorly. I also noticed that where the Sask Party did well, the Pc Party did well. This helped me determine which ridings would lean more Liberal (where the Liberals and Sask Party did well) and which were more Conservative (where the Sask Party did well, but the Liberals did not)
Either way, when I ran the math, this is what I ended up with:
The NDP's weakness becomes clear, as even with the Saskatchewan Party split in two, they fail to win a majority, or even a plurality. What is most interesting is there has been a change, over time, in areas of strength. The Liberals previously had done in the central-east areas, near Yorkton, but now find themselves doing better near the Battlefords. Federal results over the last two decades do indicate a slight shift in this direction as well; this seems to have been instigated by conservative and Conservative strength in the eastern area or the province, which has prompted former Liberals to choose between the NDP and the Tories, while the opposite has happened in the areas around Battleford, where the NDP's weakness has allowed more votes go go Liberal.
It's difficult to say how such an alternate election would have turned out. The parties have been "merged" as the Saskatchewan Party since 1997. You'd need to re-run the 1999, 2003, 2007, and 2011 elections to determine a more "real" result. In 1999 in particular, it's likely the NDP would have faced a minority, but also faced a Liberal party unwilling to deal. 2007 also may not have been won by either the Liberals or Tories.
Regardless, this is a potentially useful way to indicate ridings (IE Liberal ones on the map) that the Saskatchewan Party could lose if it decides to move too far to the right, or, ridings they could lose to a resurgent PC Party (the blue ones) if it moves too far to the centre.
As it stands, Brad Wall is too smart to pull his party off it's successful track, and it would take a significant change for any of this to actually be of any impact to the Saskatchewan Party.
Earlier, I said that I could use 3rd place results to determine what things would look like without the Saskatchewan Party. I've been able to do so. It became quite simple, actually, once I was able to fill in the gaps in the PC Candidate list.
There are a number of ways I was able to do this, and I wish to detail the method(s) I've used so that you may do so yourself.
1 - Use a swing from another party, or other parties. This is most difficult, as you need to figure out exactly where the swing is coming from. It's also most likely that the swing is not coming from just a single party, but multiple parties; compare, for example, the Reform vote in 1993, and you'll notice it does not match the PC vote, but rather, a combination of PC and NDP vote, but with the NDP weighted less in areas where the NDP did well, and vice versa in certain rural areas.
2 - Check the past. In the last election the party ran in Moose Jaw, but it did not this time, as such, one way to fill in the gaps is to simply pen in the last-time results, with possible adjustments for vote growth (or shrinkage) based on the ratio of the last-time vote, with further adjustment for current or past star candidates. This is also the sole method I used to fill in slots for the Green Party. You can also use results from another level of government (Federal or Provincial) but it is very important to keep in mind unique circumstances, (like the BC Liberals), or that strengths are not equal (like the Tories right here in our example of Saskatchewan)
3 - Check nearby ridings, or similar ridings. One simple way to fill in a gap is to take the average of all neighbouring ridings. This, clearly, has some faults to it, but it can do in a crunch. Always be sure to reduce the result by 10% or 20% when the gap was created by the party being unable to find a candidate, as opposed to an error (like a death or being slightly late with the paperwork) as being unable to find a candidate tends to indicate weakness in any particular area.
4 - Use the area's average. This is more useful in cities. For example, the PC Party missed a few spots in the "South and East" region I use, and as such, using the area average (with the same reduction noted above) is a good way to achieve the result you need.
5 - Randomness. At some point, especially for the tiny parties, picking a random number actually provides you with the most accurate. Note this only works for tiny parties, parties taking about 1% of the popular vote in the ridings where they run, and, who only run in a handful of ridings. You can also use this to decide upon a random factor; for example, I've decided that 0.1% of the vote is an accurate number for the "Other" parties in Saskatchewan, based on randomness alone.
6 - Update Update Update. If you plan to keep using your file, you will want to keep things up to date. Any of these methods can work for a growth of about 2X (double the last-time result) plus about a raw 2% of the vote. As such the PC Party, which took 4.5% in the ridings they ran. This is too much for Randomness. As such the "area average" can be used to determine the entire PC vote province-wide, and, accurately work even if the PC Party takes 11% of the vote. (double plus 2%) If, however, they are polling at 12%, you will want to use the next method up on the list. There is no exact math to determine when you need to use #1 from the list, but I am personally comfortable that using accurate swings will work even if a party is up 100 fold (0.5% last time, 50% this time)
Remember that these numbers are a baseline, to which you can add further adjustments later on.
I've also divided the province into a number of regions, as outlined on this map:
The reason for these regions focuses almost exclusively on the PC Party, especially the rural split. This split is the most useful for using method 4 as outlined above, and that was the first method I used.
One important thing I noticed was a negative swing compared to the Liberals; that is, where the Liberals did well, the PC Party did poorly. I also noticed that where the Sask Party did well, the Pc Party did well. This helped me determine which ridings would lean more Liberal (where the Liberals and Sask Party did well) and which were more Conservative (where the Sask Party did well, but the Liberals did not)
Either way, when I ran the math, this is what I ended up with:
The NDP's weakness becomes clear, as even with the Saskatchewan Party split in two, they fail to win a majority, or even a plurality. What is most interesting is there has been a change, over time, in areas of strength. The Liberals previously had done in the central-east areas, near Yorkton, but now find themselves doing better near the Battlefords. Federal results over the last two decades do indicate a slight shift in this direction as well; this seems to have been instigated by conservative and Conservative strength in the eastern area or the province, which has prompted former Liberals to choose between the NDP and the Tories, while the opposite has happened in the areas around Battleford, where the NDP's weakness has allowed more votes go go Liberal.
It's difficult to say how such an alternate election would have turned out. The parties have been "merged" as the Saskatchewan Party since 1997. You'd need to re-run the 1999, 2003, 2007, and 2011 elections to determine a more "real" result. In 1999 in particular, it's likely the NDP would have faced a minority, but also faced a Liberal party unwilling to deal. 2007 also may not have been won by either the Liberals or Tories.
Regardless, this is a potentially useful way to indicate ridings (IE Liberal ones on the map) that the Saskatchewan Party could lose if it decides to move too far to the right, or, ridings they could lose to a resurgent PC Party (the blue ones) if it moves too far to the centre.
As it stands, Brad Wall is too smart to pull his party off it's successful track, and it would take a significant change for any of this to actually be of any impact to the Saskatchewan Party.
Tuesday, April 5, 2016
Pirate Party to win government - no this is not a joke
Again; this is not a joke.
Thanks in large part to the Panama Papers, the Prime Minister of Iceland has asked the President to dissolve the legislature (The Althing) and hold a snap election.
Due to the nature of the Panama Papers themselves, the Pirate Party of Iceland can be expected to gain 5%, perhaps even 10% above their current position in the polls; especially given the unique nature of Iceland.
Here's the "problem"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_parliamentary_election,_2016#Opinion_polls
The party is already on nearly 40% of the vote.
There is an honest to goodness chance that if they play their cards right, the party could top 50%, and win a majority.
Even at current strength, the Pirates are a shoe-in for the largest party, and given the issues, will almost certainly retain that position.
I will keep you updated as the situation develops.
UPDATE: The President has apparently said "no"
UPDATE: From what I can gather, the President's actual answer was along the lines of "Try again later" with some implication that if a majority of Parliament wants a dissolution, he'd grant it. The President also has made noises that he may be willing to act on his own in the interests of the country.
UPDATE: Final update to this post: The PM has resigned. This has an implication that there will not be a dissolution; as it's unlikely (though possible) the new PM would dissolve a parliament he (or she) controls.
Thanks in large part to the Panama Papers, the Prime Minister of Iceland has asked the President to dissolve the legislature (The Althing) and hold a snap election.
Due to the nature of the Panama Papers themselves, the Pirate Party of Iceland can be expected to gain 5%, perhaps even 10% above their current position in the polls; especially given the unique nature of Iceland.
Here's the "problem"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_parliamentary_election,_2016#Opinion_polls
The party is already on nearly 40% of the vote.
There is an honest to goodness chance that if they play their cards right, the party could top 50%, and win a majority.
Even at current strength, the Pirates are a shoe-in for the largest party, and given the issues, will almost certainly retain that position.
I will keep you updated as the situation develops.
UPDATE: The President has apparently said "no"
UPDATE: From what I can gather, the President's actual answer was along the lines of "Try again later" with some implication that if a majority of Parliament wants a dissolution, he'd grant it. The President also has made noises that he may be willing to act on his own in the interests of the country.
UPDATE: Final update to this post: The PM has resigned. This has an implication that there will not be a dissolution; as it's unlikely (though possible) the new PM would dissolve a parliament he (or she) controls.
Saskatchewan Election Results.
The results of the election were as follows:
51 - SKP
10 - NDP
You likely heard the NDP took 9 seats last time, and that is true, but also misleading. Due to boundary changes, the NDP was actually sitting on 10 seats. This election they took 10. The differences are in where those seats changed. Both Moose Jaw and Prince Albert are split into two ridings, one covering the north, and another the south, of their respective cities. The NDP has, effectively, changed their Moose Jaw seat (which was based on math) for a Prince Albert seat (filled by a real human) The NDP also exchange it's current leader's seat in Saskatoon for it's former leader's seat in Regina. Should the NDP exchange this seat for their next leader in the next election, that would be a "hat trick" of leader losses.
So, we all knew this was coming, that's a bit boring; so what is interesting? We could look at second place finishers:
As you may see, there is one riding with a giant blue X in it. This indicates that in this riding, if you combine all the "other" parties (not including the first two) that the total would put that combined vote in second. This is more to indicate that this does not occur in any other riding; in 59 of the 61 ridings, the two major parties took so many votes, that even all other parties combined could not finish second. Kindersley is the one riding where the NDP finished in third, as an Independent and former Sask Party MLA ran (and lost). Speaking of third:
This is perhaps the most interesting map. The PC Party actually maintains some of it's historic pattern, not exactly, but the north-south split is clear. The Liberals meanwhile win a majority of the ridings on this 3rd place map, indicating a positive step in rebuilding. The Greens are not left out; they win their leader's riding, as well as three others in more rural areas. I can not say for certain exactly why they won these areas, but I have noted a few things. First, Weyburn (in the extreme south) saw both the Liberal and PC Candidates doing worse than expected, leaning me to think there are local voting patterns and/or issues impacting the result. Second, Swift Current (the small one) is the home of Brad Wall. It's important to remember that the Saskatchewan Party was a merger of the majority of PC Party MLAs with the majority of Liberal Party MLAs. Wall, although a PC member at the time, has governed very much in a "Liberal" manner (or at least, how Liberal was understood, provincially in Saskatchewan, at the time or said merger.) It is extremely likely that he gains a personal vote from Liberals. Lastly in Rosetown, the Greens seem to actually have (a very small amount) of local strength, while the Liberals do not. There was no PC Candidate in this riding and it is my guess that had one run, they would have won (3rd place in) this riding.
I may be able to use some of this data to "unmerge" the Saskatchewan Party, and do an estimation as to what an election would have looked like, if the Saskatchewan Party did not exist, and if the PC Party and Liberals were both competitive.
So what does this all mean?
Independents: 1,680 votes, 0.39%. Nobody won, so nobody will remember any of them even ran. Last election they took 44 votes, at 0.01%.
Western Independence Party: 318 votes, 0.07%. They finished 4th and beat the Liberals in the one riding in which they ran (the northmost PC riding on the 3rd place map), but despite that, my mentioning them here on this small blog is the best thing to come out of the election for them. Last election they took 58 votes, at 0.01%.
Tories: 5,515 votes, 1.29% or 4.14% in ridings where they ran. This is not that bad, better than the Liberals on a per-riding basis. The PC Party seems to be on the slow path to rebuilding, the problem is long-term loyalty and stability. The Liberals could always pull on Federal members, but the PC Party has no similar pull with most CPC members being Saskatchewan Party supporters. If the party can manage a full slate, and take 5% of the vote or more, they could be on the path to being truly "back". Last election they took 1,315 votes, at 0.33%, but 3.5% in the ridings which they ran.
Greens: 7,896 votes, 1.85%. Not so great, but not so bad that any heads need to roll. While they are down from last election, that was facing a much less crowded field; where the Tories had only run 5 candidates, and the Liberals, 9, with only 3 others running, meaning that 42 ridings had only SKP, NDP, and Green candidates. Losing what they did in that context is fair. Last election they took 11,561 votes at 2.87%
Liberals: 15,399 votes, 3.61%. Good, not great. Had this been great, Lamoureaux would be guaranteed his job next election. There's certainly no reason to dump him, but he may not want to stick around as a seatless leader of a 3.6% party. What's important is that all the above parties combined only took 15,409 votes; and while that is 10 votes more than the Liberals, it does indicate the province now clearly has a "3rd party". The problem is they also clearly had a "3rd party" last time, and that party finished 4th this time. The future of the party will be determined by what it's members do over the next year. If they are still committed to the party, it will continue to grow, but if they say "screw this" because things did not go as well as they hoped, the party will not be any further ahead after this election than they were before it. Last election they took 2,237, at 0.56%.
NDP: 129,530 votes, 30.36%, 10 seats. Wow did things turn out badly. The election did not turn out this way because the Saskatchewan Party has done so well; it has turned out this way because of the NDP's awful campaign. Lets also look at other provinces. In PEI they failed to elect an MLA. In NB they failed to elect an MLA. Federally they lost Leslie, Stoffer, and Harris. And now here in Saskatchewan, Broten, the leader, has lost his seat. The NDP has forgotten tactics; compare this to the aforementioned PEI and NB where the Greens managed to elect MLAs. The NDP (not just the Saskatchewan NDP) has forgotten how to organize, and this problem will continue to haunt the party until such as time as they figure it out. Last election they took 128,673 votes, 31.97%, and 9 seats (10 redistributed)
Saskatchewan Party: 267,238 votes, 62.63%, 51 seats. It's interesting to compare raw votes over time, while this is a high share, you only have to go back to the 80's and 90's to find parties taking a higher vote, mostly due to the fact that in those elections, 100,000 more people voted. In addition, Saskatchewan is a funny word, say it a few times... Okay I admit, I am avoiding discussing the performance of the Saskatchewan Party because there's nothing new to say. People like Wall. Saskatchewan's economy has done well compared to other provinces. The Saskatchewan Party has taken moderate stances that appeals to the electorate. That's all. Last election they took 258,598 votes, 64.25%, and 49 seats (51 redistributed)
Summary:
What we knew would happen, happened; NDP did poorly.
51 - SKP
10 - NDP
You likely heard the NDP took 9 seats last time, and that is true, but also misleading. Due to boundary changes, the NDP was actually sitting on 10 seats. This election they took 10. The differences are in where those seats changed. Both Moose Jaw and Prince Albert are split into two ridings, one covering the north, and another the south, of their respective cities. The NDP has, effectively, changed their Moose Jaw seat (which was based on math) for a Prince Albert seat (filled by a real human) The NDP also exchange it's current leader's seat in Saskatoon for it's former leader's seat in Regina. Should the NDP exchange this seat for their next leader in the next election, that would be a "hat trick" of leader losses.
So, we all knew this was coming, that's a bit boring; so what is interesting? We could look at second place finishers:
As you may see, there is one riding with a giant blue X in it. This indicates that in this riding, if you combine all the "other" parties (not including the first two) that the total would put that combined vote in second. This is more to indicate that this does not occur in any other riding; in 59 of the 61 ridings, the two major parties took so many votes, that even all other parties combined could not finish second. Kindersley is the one riding where the NDP finished in third, as an Independent and former Sask Party MLA ran (and lost). Speaking of third:
This is perhaps the most interesting map. The PC Party actually maintains some of it's historic pattern, not exactly, but the north-south split is clear. The Liberals meanwhile win a majority of the ridings on this 3rd place map, indicating a positive step in rebuilding. The Greens are not left out; they win their leader's riding, as well as three others in more rural areas. I can not say for certain exactly why they won these areas, but I have noted a few things. First, Weyburn (in the extreme south) saw both the Liberal and PC Candidates doing worse than expected, leaning me to think there are local voting patterns and/or issues impacting the result. Second, Swift Current (the small one) is the home of Brad Wall. It's important to remember that the Saskatchewan Party was a merger of the majority of PC Party MLAs with the majority of Liberal Party MLAs. Wall, although a PC member at the time, has governed very much in a "Liberal" manner (or at least, how Liberal was understood, provincially in Saskatchewan, at the time or said merger.) It is extremely likely that he gains a personal vote from Liberals. Lastly in Rosetown, the Greens seem to actually have (a very small amount) of local strength, while the Liberals do not. There was no PC Candidate in this riding and it is my guess that had one run, they would have won (3rd place in) this riding.
I may be able to use some of this data to "unmerge" the Saskatchewan Party, and do an estimation as to what an election would have looked like, if the Saskatchewan Party did not exist, and if the PC Party and Liberals were both competitive.
So what does this all mean?
Independents: 1,680 votes, 0.39%. Nobody won, so nobody will remember any of them even ran. Last election they took 44 votes, at 0.01%.
Western Independence Party: 318 votes, 0.07%. They finished 4th and beat the Liberals in the one riding in which they ran (the northmost PC riding on the 3rd place map), but despite that, my mentioning them here on this small blog is the best thing to come out of the election for them. Last election they took 58 votes, at 0.01%.
Tories: 5,515 votes, 1.29% or 4.14% in ridings where they ran. This is not that bad, better than the Liberals on a per-riding basis. The PC Party seems to be on the slow path to rebuilding, the problem is long-term loyalty and stability. The Liberals could always pull on Federal members, but the PC Party has no similar pull with most CPC members being Saskatchewan Party supporters. If the party can manage a full slate, and take 5% of the vote or more, they could be on the path to being truly "back". Last election they took 1,315 votes, at 0.33%, but 3.5% in the ridings which they ran.
Greens: 7,896 votes, 1.85%. Not so great, but not so bad that any heads need to roll. While they are down from last election, that was facing a much less crowded field; where the Tories had only run 5 candidates, and the Liberals, 9, with only 3 others running, meaning that 42 ridings had only SKP, NDP, and Green candidates. Losing what they did in that context is fair. Last election they took 11,561 votes at 2.87%
Liberals: 15,399 votes, 3.61%. Good, not great. Had this been great, Lamoureaux would be guaranteed his job next election. There's certainly no reason to dump him, but he may not want to stick around as a seatless leader of a 3.6% party. What's important is that all the above parties combined only took 15,409 votes; and while that is 10 votes more than the Liberals, it does indicate the province now clearly has a "3rd party". The problem is they also clearly had a "3rd party" last time, and that party finished 4th this time. The future of the party will be determined by what it's members do over the next year. If they are still committed to the party, it will continue to grow, but if they say "screw this" because things did not go as well as they hoped, the party will not be any further ahead after this election than they were before it. Last election they took 2,237, at 0.56%.
NDP: 129,530 votes, 30.36%, 10 seats. Wow did things turn out badly. The election did not turn out this way because the Saskatchewan Party has done so well; it has turned out this way because of the NDP's awful campaign. Lets also look at other provinces. In PEI they failed to elect an MLA. In NB they failed to elect an MLA. Federally they lost Leslie, Stoffer, and Harris. And now here in Saskatchewan, Broten, the leader, has lost his seat. The NDP has forgotten tactics; compare this to the aforementioned PEI and NB where the Greens managed to elect MLAs. The NDP (not just the Saskatchewan NDP) has forgotten how to organize, and this problem will continue to haunt the party until such as time as they figure it out. Last election they took 128,673 votes, 31.97%, and 9 seats (10 redistributed)
Saskatchewan Party: 267,238 votes, 62.63%, 51 seats. It's interesting to compare raw votes over time, while this is a high share, you only have to go back to the 80's and 90's to find parties taking a higher vote, mostly due to the fact that in those elections, 100,000 more people voted. In addition, Saskatchewan is a funny word, say it a few times... Okay I admit, I am avoiding discussing the performance of the Saskatchewan Party because there's nothing new to say. People like Wall. Saskatchewan's economy has done well compared to other provinces. The Saskatchewan Party has taken moderate stances that appeals to the electorate. That's all. Last election they took 258,598 votes, 64.25%, and 49 seats (51 redistributed)
Summary:
What we knew would happen, happened; NDP did poorly.
Monday, April 4, 2016
Saskatchewan Prediction - Corrected Map
As was perhaps obvious to anyone who knows the numbers, there was an error in Moose Jaw.
I've also decided to up the NDP's take by adding two ridings (one in rural north and one in Regina) as I generally follow the same rule in predictions - over-estimate the smaller party.
Saskatchewan Prediction
Due to the fact that Saskatchewan is one of the smaller provinces (under 4M population) any math projection would have a great amount of error; as such, this is a "prediction"; meaning that it does not have my usual "stamp of approval" so to speak, but rather, is for fun and entertainment.
This is my final prediction for the results of the election:
This is my final prediction for the results of the election:
Friday, April 1, 2016
Provincial Liberals to win majority in both Saskatchewan and Manitoba
Also, April Fools!
On a serious note; I am not covering the provincial elections in SK and MB because of the certainty of the results.
In Saskatchewan the Saskatchewan Party will win. I do have a regional breakdown however:
Saskatoon
NDP: 4-6 seats
SKP: 7-9 seats
Rural
NDP: 2-6 seats
SKP: 31-35 seats
Regina
NDP: 3-8 seats
SKP: 3-8 seats
It's also possible for the Liberals to win one or even two seats, but this is unlikely.
My expectation is for the final result to see 15 NDPers elected, facing off against 46 from the Saskatchewan Party
In Manitoba, the PC Party has a majority locked up. Unlike Saskatchewan, there is a third party that will win seats.
Winnipeg
PCP: 11-23 seats
NDP: 5-11 seats
LIB: 3-9 seats
Rural
PCP: 19-24 seats
NDP: 1-3 seats
LIB: 1-4 seats
There is a question as to which party will finish second, and, bluntly, this is really the only interesting thing about these April elections.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)