Skip to main content

NDP leader Tom Mulcair smiles as he speaks with reporters following party caucus on Parliament Hill Wednesday, May 6, 2015 in Ottawa.

Adrian Wyld/THE CANADIAN PRESS

Nobody who works in or around politics in this country should be feeling too comfortable right now.

Because a lesson out of this week's election in Alberta, the province that was supposed to be most resistant to changing governments, is that the modern electorate is far more volatile than the political class tends to assume or likes to admit.

That message is particularly timely, coming as it does shortly before a federal election that we're already unwisely gaming-out to within an inch of its life, as though we have any idea how voters will behave once the campaign really begins.

Story continues below advertisement

Talk to people who will be working on the federal parties' national campaigns, or are following them closely, and the conversation often becomes an itemization of how many seats each party is capable of winning in each part of the country. The Liberals will reclaim ridings in Toronto or Montreal that are naturally theirs and only slipped away during a fluke election in 2011, but they can't expect too much outside urban centres or west of Manitoba. The Conservatives may be making headway in Quebec, but there's no way they're winning more than 10 or 15 seats there. The NDP will mostly be fighting to keep what it has, and just can't compete in suburban battlegrounds needed to win power.

Behind such prognostications are all sorts of underlying assumptions about how elections are won – that a party that hasn't traditionally been competitive in a region needs a beachhead there before making wider gains, for instance, and that each party's baggage makes it unpalatable for large swaths of the electorate.

It can be reassuring to think along these lines, particularly for those who are in power, but even to some extent for those who aren't. Increasingly sophisticated data collection is supposed to be making it easier to break the electorate down into segments of likely and unlikely supporters, well before the campaign officially starts. A not-insignificant number of people make a living off of predicting voter behaviour, or devising strategies and allocating resources based on that knowledge, or just telling political junkies what they can expect well before the campaign actually starts.

The reality, though, is that, if anything, voter behaviour seems to be getting more unpredictable. The last federal election started with the NDP an afterthought, and ended with it sweeping Quebec despite many of its candidates there barely knowing they were running. Last year's Ontario election saw the governing Liberals win back a majority government that seemed long gone, claiming ridings even they didn't think they had a chance in.

Now, we've got the wildest result of all. It's not just that Jim Prentice's Progressive Conservatives, who were supposed to have an insurmountable advantage in money and organization, were relegated to third place after almost 44 years in power. It's also that they lost to a party, in the New Democrats, who'd never even been seriously competitive before – and who themselves entered the campaign thinking that, at best, they might be able to make it to Official Opposition.

Even as this was unfolding, seasoned observers of Alberta politics refused to believe their eyes. Sure, the New Democrats might sweep relatively left-leaning Edmonton. But there was just no way voters in Calgary or smaller cities were ready for them.

But in Alberta, and elsewhere, it's increasingly obvious that Canadian electorates are no longer so tribal as to just keep voting the way their parents or communities always did. Nor do long-held impressions of parties seem to matter a whole lot, if we like (or dislike) their leaders. And the less engaged many voters are between elections, the more unpredictable their behaviour will be once they start to pay attention.

Story continues below advertisement

It's not that what happens between elections is irrelevant to their outcome; far from it. The resentment toward the Alberta Tories that bubbled over in the past month was percolating through years of scandals and perceived arrogance. Positive impressions of NDP Leader Rachel Notley had to at least be in the back of many voters' heads before they turned to her. The groundwork that parties do leading up to campaigns to build local organizations – well, it might not have mattered that much in this campaign, but even in unpredictable elections, the results are often close enough that it matters a great deal indeed.

It's just time to stop pretending that anyone knows what all the pre-election jockeying adds up to, until the race really begins.

The NDP sweep of Alberta marked a historic end to the Progressive Conservative 44-year run. The shift in the province's politics, while exceptional, is only part of the new Albertan narrative.

The new face of Alberta

How Alberta looked before and after the election

THE GLOBE AND MAIL » SOURCE: Elections Alberta

Edmonton was mostly Progressive Conservative territory before Tuesday night, with just four NDP ridings – including Rachel Notley’s seat – and two Liberal ridings, held by former party leader Raj Sherman and long-time MLA Laurie Blakeman. But even the seat Ms. Blakeman held since 1997 was swept up by the orange wave, and the entire city is now held by the NDP.

In Calgary, Leader David Swann managed to hang on to his Calgary-Mountain View seat, the sole Liberal seat left in the legislature. The Alberta Party also picked up its only seat when Leader Greg Clark won Calgary-Elbow. While the 2012 election left the city largely PC, with a few Liberal and Wildrose seats, most of the city turned orange Tuesday. The PCs were left with eight Calgary ridings after the vote, before Jim Prentice resigned and left his Calgary-Foothills seat vacant. Calgary-Glenmore has yet to be decided for the NDP or the PCs after a tie left the results up in the air.


The government is younger

THE GLOBE AND MAIL

The average age of the MLAs in the legislature in 2012, based on available numbers, was 53. After Tuesday’s vote, the average MLA age is 40 – but the sharp drop is related to a handful of young NDP candidates winning seats. While there were no MLAs younger than 30 voted into office in 2012, the NDP swept several twentysomethings into office Tuesday – the youngest being the new Edmonton-South West MLA Thomas Dang, a University of Alberta computer science student who turned 20 on April 7 – the same day the election was called.

The median age in the legislature is 44.5, dropping nearly 10 years from the median of 54 after the 2012 election. The median age of elected NDP and PC candidates also went down, but for the Wildrose, it increased from 45 to 51.5 years.


“The most women in any government in Canadian history.”

Percentage of female MLAs by party

THE GLOBE AND MAIL

There were 27 women who won seats in Alberta’s Legislative Assembly in this election. In her victory speech Tuesday night, premier-designate Rachel Notley said she thought Alberta may have elected “the most women in any government in Canadian history.” Women make up about 45 per cent of the NDP caucus, which is the highest number for any governing body in the country. The percentage of women for both the PCs and the Wildrose in this election went down compared with MLAs elected in 2012. The race for the Calgary-Glenmore seat is currently tied between two women, potentially adding one more woman to the legislature and bringing the seat total to 28. All but three of the women elected Tuesday were NDP candidates.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter