Ontario 2018 election

[Hatman 🍁]

Giorgio Mammoliti is running, but in Brampton Centre.  I think unlike where he lives that riding is winneable but most simulations show it a three way race so will be interesting as I think all three parties have a reasonable shot there.  Wonder what cabinet post he would get?  Maybe the minister responsible for prostitution (remember he was the one who wanted to make Toronto Island a red light district).

Doesn't he live in York West? York West is a 60%+ Fordnation riding. It's definitely a potential PC pickup.

Yup, but there is already a PC candidate nominated in the old York West riding, now called Humber River-Black Creek. Which even with redistribution this time around, I don't think the boundaries changed here only the name, odd.
The PC candidate probably did not want to step aside.

I know, I'm just saying that the PCs have a good chance at winning the riding. It depends how loyal Fordnation is to the Ford brand.

(And yes, I'm aware of the new name, but I keep forgetting it, so I've just kept calling it York West).

[Hatman 🍁]

Do the NDP have any chance picking up bobo votes in Toronto, or are they stuck in depressed post-industrial areas and the North (?).

It depends on the campaign. If the NDP pulls ahead of the Liberals, the bobos will swing over in droves.

[Hatman 🍁]

Do you honestly think the people of Etobicoke North are more loyal to the Liberal Party than the Fords?

[Hatman 🍁]

Do you honestly think the people of Etobicoke North are more loyal to the Liberal Party than the Fords?

Liberals won Etobicoke North by 10-11% in 2011 and the current polls are in the ballpark of the federal 2011 result. Ford Nation has to be worth at least a 5% swing.

Well, not to mention turnout was much higher in the Toronto election than the provincial election (believe it or not!), so a lot of that Ford nation support is actually from non-voters.

What visible minorities are most attracted to/ turned off Ford Nation?

I'd guess Blacks are the most attracted, followed by East Asians, Hispanics and South Asians the least. But all more so than White Torontonians. Hence why the comparisons with right wing populism in any other country has to stop.

[Hatman 🍁]

Rob Ford has said some racist things over the years (ethnic jokes mostly). Not sure about Doug. The important thing is though they are not nationalists, which is what really would turn off minority voters.

Many minorities are pretty anti-political correctness, which means Ford's off colour jokes actually helped him.

[Hatman 🍁]

Barely over two months from the election and the NDP still has nominated candidates in only about half the ridings (this includes the 16 incumbents running for reelection.)  If the NDP don't do well in this election, Andrea Horwath has a lot to answer for.

The NDP always takes forever nominating candidates. I wouldn't worry (too much) about it.

If no clear alternative for Ford presents itself, I do expect an NDP + LIB coalition in the event there is a Ford-led minority government.  I don't think the Forum poll provided seat projections, but with those numbers, the NDP and Libs would likely have about the same number of ridings.

If the Greens and NDP didn't make a formal coalition in BC, then the Ontario NDP and Liberals certainly would. It's time we remove that word from our vocabulary. Neither party wants to turn into the Lib Dems.

[Hatman 🍁]

Having reviewed the budget, and realizing how the government has not planned for any way of paying for any of it (trivial raise in taxes; and cigarette taxes amounting for a whopping 0.2% of revenue), what are the odds the NDP attacks the Liberals for being fiscally irresponsible? There is nothing actually inherently right wing about being fiscally responsible; in fact the NDP has a long track record of balanced budgets in other provinces. I know when Mulcair ran on a balanced budget in the federal election it kind of backfired, but with an unpopular Liberal Party, it might be away to win over some centrist voters who don't want to vote for either Ford or Wynne. Of course the downside is the NDP might have to promise to raise taxes in order to pay for their promises, and that might not go over well.

[Hatman 🍁]

Another question for people who understand these things better than me, if Ontario has one of the highest deficits and highest upper income tax rates in the OECD, but doesn't have the corresponding social program spending to go along with it, then where is all the money going to?

[Hatman 🍁]

Another question for people who understand these things better than me, if Ontario has one of the highest deficits and highest upper income tax rates in the OECD, but doesn't have the corresponding social program spending to go along with it, then where is all the money going to?

Good Question -
http://www.macleans.ca/economy/economicanalysis/the-2018-ontario-budget-in-charts-and-numbers/

38.7% Health Care!
18.3% Education
13.1% "Other programs"
11.3% Children and Social Services
7.9% Interest on Debt
7.4%  Postsecondary and Training sector
3.2% Justice Sector

Revenue sources are interesting as well:
23.4% Personal Income Tax
17.6% Sales Tax
17.1% Federal Transfers
11.5% Other Non-Tax Revenues
9.9% Corporate Tax
4.3% Employer Health Tax
4.0% Education property tax
3.9% Other Tax
3.5% Income from Gov`t business enterprises
2.6% Health Premium
2.3% Gas and Fuel Taxes

** The NDP is already going to be running on higher corporate taxes, that`s pretty much a given.

Yeah, I saw that chart, but wanted something more detailed.

Another question for people who understand these things better than me, if Ontario has one of the highest deficits and highest upper income tax rates in the OECD, but doesn't have the corresponding social program spending to go along with it, then where is all the money going to?

The reason for this is overall taxation is low by OECD standards.  In most of Europe the difference comes in much higher sales tax rates.  The HST is 13% in Ontario while in most European countries VAT rates are 20-25%.  Federally each point in the GST is $7 billion so adjusting for population difference essentially every point in HST is $3 billion so if raised to 20% it would be $21 billion extra and if raised to 25% (That is what it is in the Nordic Countries) would be $36 billion extra so that is where the difference comes from.  Off course raising HST like that would be political suicide for any party, but that is the reason.  Also debt level servicing is another as the three most Western provinces have top marginal rates under 50% and more in line with the OECD and G7 averages (BC 49.8%, AB 48%, SK 47.5%, while France 54.5%, Japan 55.9% so higher than ON, but Italy 45.8%, Germany 47.5%, UK 45% ((47% if you include National Insurance)), US 37% to 50.3% depending on state) so that is another advantage of having a lower debt.  All provinces from Manitoba eastward have debt to GDP ratios above 30% and top marginal rates over 50% whereas all provinces west of that have debt to GDP ratios under 16% and top marginal rates under 50%.  Off course had Mulcair been PM the top marginal rates wouldn't have gone up federally so less of an issue as Ontario's top rate would be 49.53% so only slightly above the G7 average.  Ironically enough Trudeau only got an extra $1.5 billion in revenue from the 4% hike in the top rate as it just led to more aggressive accounting.  Case and point, many executives switch to stock options which are taxed at half the rate.

Sounds like we need to start taxing stock bonds more

[Hatman 🍁]

I'm not a fan of GST/HST because it's regressive, but I'm not opposed to the idea of taxing certain things if they're 'sinful', so perhaps one idea might be to increase the VAT on items that are harmful to society.

[Hatman 🍁]

The final possibility, rarer nowadays: like the famous top marginal rates in the 1950s USA or 1960s UK, almost nobody is actually in the tax bracket. This doesn't seem to apply to Ontario

To the best of my knowledge no country has a top marginal rate exceeding 60%.  Some countries have wealth taxes so if obscenely wealthy it might be possible to be paying more but for income taxes top rates of over 90% like the US once had no longer exist although no one actually paid anywhere close to that, well except for Elvis Presley who had a terrible accountant so IRS got more from him than any other American.  UK had a top rate of 95% in the 60s which is why most British artists went abroad.  Beatles tax man song that says if 5% appears too small or 1 for you 19 for me refers to this.  Paul McCartney today would have a top marginal rate of 45% (Since over 70 he is exempt from national insurance thus not 47%) and I suspect like most rich people he has good accountants so probably pays much less than that.

Taxman confirmed worst Beatles song.

[Hatman 🍁]

Junk poll out by Mainstreet this morning. It seems they haven't learned anything from their Calgary mayoral election fiasco. Massive lead for the Tories among under 35s? Yeah right.

[Hatman 🍁]

Well, our poll (as miles pointed out) also shows the PCs way ahead with under 35s so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ We also asked past vote, and a plurality of under 35 respondents indicated they voted Liberal, but many have switched allegiances. Some of the PC vote came from people who didn't vote in 2014 too. Something to keep an eye on, anyway. I guess I can just blame the erratic nature of subsamples.

[Hatman 🍁]

I can't speak more than anecdotally on millennial trends, so take it with a grain of salt, but most of my Ontario friends here at McGill are genuinely torn about who to vote for. They generally don't like Doug Ford, but detest Kathleen Wynne and see Andrea Horwath as irrelevant.

I have one friend from a small Central Ontario town from a Liberal family who just doesn't know. One friend from Etobicoke who voted for Wynne but is a huge Doug Ford fan. One friend from downtown Toronto who won't vote for Wynne because she "screwed over schools" but doesn't like Ford much at all. Another one who is all in for Wynne and might work for the OLP if he doesn't get another political gig over the summer.

It's an interesting blend, and those are just a few.

Sounds like these people should just vote NDP. Horwath will only remain irrelevant as long as people keep thinking that it’s a two-party race.

As long as the NDP are polling >20%, they are not irrelevant. And when the top two choices are as awful as they are, the third place party automatically becomes relevant.

Anyways, my bold prediction: youth turnout will be abysmal.

[Hatman 🍁]

Ipsos uses an opt-in panel, which is problematic, so I can't say I have much faith in those numbers. Their youth (<35) breakdown makes more sense though. Perhaps online panels are a better way of measuring that demographic than IVR.

[Hatman 🍁]

I see Hagrid badly wants a replay of the US election.

I actually do think sexism may be a part of the equation (she deserves to be unpopular, but the most unpopular premier? not sure if that's deserved), but it is not the only reason, and probably not the biggest part of it.

[Hatman 🍁]

Kids gloves? Wynne has done nothing particularly offensive. Parties face atmospheres of fatigue all the time, but rarely do their leaders experience the same sheer force of pure personal vitriol that Kathleen Wynne is facing. People aren’t “tired” of her—they hate her. A 14% approval rating for delivering generally popular policy initiatives isn’t just because of fatigue.

The situation is different for other women like Kim Campbell and Horwath because they never actually had to make any meaningful decisions. We haven’t had to find an excuse to criticize them for absolutely everything yet.

By all means, subject Kathleen Wynne to fair criticism. But most of what I hear is vague BS about her being out of touch, opportunistic, or politically correct. Not everyone who votes against the OLP is motivated or moved by sexism. But to say that’s it’s not a large factor is a deliberate exercise of ignorance.

Off the top of my head, the gas plant scandal, the Sudbury by-election, massive hydro rate hikes since the last election, and Ontario having the worst wage growth in the country over the past decade (worse than even my economic basket case of a province) are all normal, concrete reasons why the government is unpopular... And I don't even follow Ontario politics that closely. I'm sure RB or Harman or LittleTommy could come up with more. Besides this is a government seeking its fifth term, not it's second. One has to expect a much larger level of fatigue than normal.

What's more, some of the vague reasons you cite tie in pretty well with my concrete ones. (E.g. "opportunistic" to "gas plant s" or "out of touch" to "focusing on green projects while hydro rate skyrocket")

I see Hagrid badly wants a replay of the US election.

I actually do think sexism may be a part of the equation (she deserves to be unpopular, but the most unpopular premier? not sure if that's deserved), but it is not the only reason, and probably not the biggest part of it.

The problem with the sexism hypothesis is that we have a recent, relevant test case to compare to in Greg Selinger, and the evidence doesn't support it. Like Wynne, Selinger was seeking a second term and fifth in a row for the party. Like Wynne, his approval rating bottomed out in the teens. One would think that if the sexism hypothesis was true, a male Premier in a similar situation two years ago would have much better approval ratings than their female equivalent today, but that isn't the case.

Selinger was a particularly bad case of awful. I would not have even voted for him, had I lived in his riding! But had he been female, I would suspect things would've been even worse!

Anyways, it is a hypothesis, but when I see such awful sexist things said about (or to) prominent female politicians on social media, it is hard to ignore that a lot of it has to do with the sex.

[Hatman 🍁]

Earl, what did Selinger do for you to rate him so poorly? I'd rank Wynne worse personally.

He should have resigned when his caucus rebelled instead of holding a divisive leadership election to succeed himself, which he almost certainly lost the popular vote in.

[Hatman 🍁]

To be fair, the number of "Francophone Sikh" families are negligible.

[Hatman 🍁]

I know I may be butting in, but this is one of the few threads that I regularly follow, and I feel I just should make a point about electability. First off, the school issue might just be a non-issue. Everywhere there are just some issues that the majority of people don't really care about. They are just happy to leave it the way it is and move on. Anyone who tries to reraise the issue gets shouted down. I don't know much about Ontario Politics, and you do, but perhaps Catholic schools are just that kind of issue. Horwath might just not want to raise the issue for fear of backlash, just like the Tories.

Agreed. Sadly, only the Greens care about this issue. Even though most Ontarians support abolishing the Catholic boards, the main parties are too scared about the Catholic vote to rock the boat on the issue. All three parties have seats that are at least a plurality Catholic.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, there will be no coalition. Maybe a working arrangement a la BC, though.

[Hatman 🍁]

I do know non-Catholics who send their kids to a Catholic school. I was encouraged to put our daughter in one, but I refused on principle. Plus, I don't even know where the nearest Catholic elementary school is.

[Hatman 🍁]

Changing topics for a bit - I've created a "partisan index" for every riding, similar to the Cook partisan index, but not exactly. I've averaged the difference between the results of the last two provincial and federal elections in each riding and the province wide popular votes for each election.

I've made a map which shows each riding coloured by the party with the highest index score for each riding.



One interesting riding is Brantford-Brant, which the NDP has the highest score despite never having won the seat in any of the elections.

[Hatman 🍁]

Using this partisan index, the "safest" Tory ridings are:

Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke (+21)
Leeds-Grenville (+20)
Stormont-Dundas-South Glengarry (+18)
Carleton (+18)
Wellington-Halton Hills (+18)
Thornhill (+17)
Niagara West (+17)
Haldimand-Norfolk (+15)
York-Simcoe (+15)
Lanark-Frontenac-Kingston (+15)

Strongest ridings for the NDP:
Hamilton Centre (+34)
Mushkegowuk-James Bay (+33)
Kiiwetinoong (+31)
Nickel Belt (+30)
Toronto-Danforth (+28)
Timiskaming-Cochrane (+25)
Windsor-Tecumseh (+25)
Algoma-Manitoulin (+24)
Davenport (+23) - surprising since they don't hold the riding in federally or provincially.
Hamilton Mountain (+23)

Strongest Liberal seats:
Toronto Centre (+17)
Toronto-St. Paul's (+16)
Humber River-Black Creek (+16)
Don Valley East (+16)
Don Valley West (+16)
Ottawa South (+14)
Ottawa-Vanier (+14)
Etobicoke North (+13)
Orleans (+13)
Eglinton-Lawrence (+12)


As this index measures average results, it doesn't take into consideration voter elasticity, so some of the ridings aren't exactly "safe".

[Hatman 🍁]

Changing topics for a bit - I've created a "partisan index" for every riding, similar to the Cook partisan index, but not exactly. I've averaged the difference between the results of the last two provincial and federal elections in each riding and the province wide popular votes for each election.

I've made a map which shows each riding coloured by the party with the highest index score for each riding.



One interesting riding is Brantford-Brant, which the NDP has the highest score despite never having won the seat in any of the elections.

Interesting; especially Brantford-Brant, how does the formula work to have this riding labelled NDP but not won by the party during this period?. Not too many other surprises eh?
I wonder what impact redistribution would have moving forward? Specifically i'm thinking Toronto Centre, University-Rosedale and Spadina-Fort York. I think TC would be much lighter red now moving forward, UR would be also more favorable to the Liberals? I see these three as swing progressive riding all three being more pale coloured red or orange? 

This is based on transposed results, but the boundary changes may make ridings like Toronto Centre more competitive, as it could potentially have close elections.

What's happening in Brantford-Brant is the NDP regularly polls better than their province-wide popular vote, while  the other two parties haven't. Provincially, it's a Liberal seat, but they haven't done well in the riding federally, and vise-versa with the Tories.

[Hatman 🍁]

It's relative to the average of the last four elections (2 federal and 2 provincial), which was:

Liberal 37%; Cons 37% and NDP 22%

Because there are three main parties, you can't say "this PVI" will get a party a seat, but you can say the NDP needs a PVI of +27 (under the magical Grenier scenario) to get 50%. This would get them the top 5 seats.