Archived Seat Projections
- NDP Maintains Momentum
2015-05-19 - Shakeup After Alberta Election
2015-05-19 - Liberals Slip in Quebec
2015-04-08 - Conservatives Edge Upward Among Mixed Regional Trends
2015-03-05 - Slight Conservative Rise
2015-01-22 - Back to a Horserace
2014-12-09 - NDP Rebounds as Polls Vary Widely
2014-10-24 - Liberals Surge in Quebec
2014-10-24 - January Polls Place Conservatives on Cusp of Majority
2013-01-30 - Liberals Make Some Gains
2012-11-29 - Seat Redistribution Benefits the Conservatives
2012-10-10 - Federal Voting Patterns Stable
2012-08-22 - NDP Honeymoon Persists
2012-05-18 - NDP Gains in Wake of Mulcair Victory
2012-05-03 - Conservatives Continue to Slide
2012-03-27 - Conservatives Slide in Ontario, NDP Down in Quebec
2012-01-30 - Post Mortem 2011
2011-10-07 - Final 2011 projection
2011-05-01 - NDP still climbing in Quebec
2011-04-27 - Tsunami in Quebec
2011-04-22 - Conservatives gravitating towards 2008 results
2011-04-20 - Conservatives Recover Marginally
2011-04-15 - Something Stirring in Quebec?
2011-04-11 - Conservative Minority Holds Steady
2011-04-08 - Liberals Cutting into Harper Majority
2011-04-06 - Conservatives Slip Out of Majority Range
2011-03-31 - New Polls Project Harper Majority
2011-03-28 - Final Projection Prior to 2008 Election
Final Projection Prior to the 2008 Election
The following is an application of the LISPOP seat projection model applied retrospectivrely using the actual election vote proportions provided regionally as presented in the Globe & Mail website. Two tables are presented below. The first is a postdicted seat distribution using the actual regional percentage splits (with the actual seat distribution in parentheses). The second reports the actual percentage regional splits from the election. In parentheses are the poll-based percentage splits (from the final Globe & Mail regional aggregations reported the morning of Oct.14) which formed the basis for the final Oct.14 LISPOP projection.
Table 1 - 2008 Seat Postdiction based upon actual regional vote splits
 |
 |
 |
 |
Other |
|
| Canada | 147 |
78 |
34 |
49 |
1 |
| 2008 Election Results | 143 |
76 |
37 |
50 |
2 |
| Atlantic provinces | 9 |
20 |
3 |
-- |
-- |
| 2008 Election Results | 10 |
17 |
4 |
-- |
1 |
| Quebec | 11 |
14 |
1 |
49 |
-- |
| 2008 Election Results | 10 |
13 |
1 |
50 |
1 |
| Ontario | 55 |
33 |
18 |
-- |
-- |
| 2008 Election Results | 51 |
38 |
17 |
-- |
-- |
| Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and territories | 21 |
6 |
4 |
-- |
-- |
| 2008 Election Results | 23 |
3 |
5 |
-- |
-- |
| Alberta | 28 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
| 2008 Election Results | 27 |
-- |
1 |
-- |
-- |
| British Columbia | 23 |
5 |
8 |
-- |
-- |
| 2008 Election Results | 22 |
5 |
9 |
-- |
-- |
Table 2 - Actual regional percentage splits with Oct.14 Globe and Mail regional aggregates
|
|
|
|
Ind. |
|
| Canada | 38% |
26% |
18% |
18% |
8% |
| Globe and Mail Aggregates | 35% |
27% |
19% |
10% |
-- |
| Atlantic provinces | 29% |
35% |
26% |
-- |
-- |
| Globe and Mail Aggregates | 24% |
37% |
28% |
-- |
1 |
| Quebec | 22% |
24% |
12% |
38% |
-- |
| Globe and Mail Aggregates | 21% |
21% |
12% |
41% |
1 |
| Ontario | 39% |
33% |
18% |
-- |
-- |
| Globe and Mail Aggregates | 34% |
35% |
21% |
-- |
-- |
| Prairies | 54% |
15% |
25% |
-- |
-- |
| Globe and Mail Aggregates | 52% |
18% |
21% |
-- |
-- |
| British Columbia | 45% |
19% |
26% |
-- |
-- |
| Globe and Mail Aggregates | 40% |
23% |
25% |
-- |
-- |
Observers will note that the greatest differential was in Ontario where the Conservatives had a 6% lead over the Liberals, but the pre-election estimate estimate was a 1% Liberal lead. those who would like to work it out for themselves, can simply apply the change from the 2006 election to the current figures and apply it to each seat in the designated region. For example in Ontario in 2006 the Liberals led the Conservatives in Ontario 40% to 35%, a 5% difference. By subtracting the 2008 difference of a 6% Conservative lead, one arrives at an 11% movement toward the Conservatives in the region. Apply that difference to each of the 2006 constituency results and do the same thing for the NDP to obtain an estimate of the results in Table 1. There is a bit more to the model than that , but this is the core, should you wish to verify the above figures. This translated into a 12 seat difference in Ontario from the final pre-election projection of 132-90-51-33-2, which is broken down elsewhere on the website.
Note:
The "regional swing model" is more fully explained in a paper originally prepared and presented by Dr. Barry Kay to the 1990 annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, entitled "Improving Upon the Cube Law: A Regional Swing Model for Converting Canadian Popular Vote into Parliamentary Seats". It should be noted that the application of the model above does not make use of the "incumbency effect" described in that paper. In tests for past elections, using late campaign polls to project electoral outcomes, the model has proved to be accurate within an average of four seats per party since 1963. Readers interested in post-dictions for past federal elections dating back to 1963, for projections using pre-election polls dating back to the 1980 federal election and for three Ontario provincial elections, may contact me at bkay@wlu.ca.