-
I've decided to run an interesting what-if scenario. Over at 308.blogspot, they ran a piece on removing parties, and what would happen. See more info here Click Me! I've decided to add parties. Using the 2000 election as a base, I've decided to see what would have happened in the 2008 election, if the parties were split the way they were in 2000 (PC and CA)
NL
Lib - 5
PC - 1
NDP - 1
(2006 was used as a base for NL due to the anybody-but-harper campaign. Harris, however, was declared Elected)
PE
Lib - 4
NS
NDP - 5
Lib - 3
PC - 3 (Including Casey)
NB
Lib - 6
PC - 3
NDP - 1
ATLANTIC
Lib - 18
PC - 7
NDP - 7
(Personal note - I'm a bit shocked at this myself!)
Manitoba
CA - 7
NDP - 4
PC - 2
Lib - 1
Saskatchewan
CA - 12
Lib - 2
Alberta
CA - 25
Lib - 2
NDP - 1
British Columbia
CA - 25
NDP - 8
Lib - 3
WEST
CA - 69
NDP - 13
Lib - 8
PC - 2
Territories
Lib - 1
NDP - 1
PC - 1
Quebec
BQ - 56
Lib - 16
PC - 1
CA - 1 (in Pontiac)
NDP - 1 (in Outremont)
(See my note later)
Ontario
Lib - 62
CA - 24
NDP - 18
PC - 2
TOTAL
Lib - 105
CA - 94
BQ - 56
NDP - 40
PC - 13
And there you have it. Stephane Dion would have been popular enough to get elected Prime Minister... If the right were still divided.
Note that in Quebec I gave the Alliance the seat they would have won by the math. This happens to be the seat currently held by Andre Arthur. I feel he would have been more likely to run as an Alliance candidate than a "Conservative" one.
Sorry, no extra data today!
2 comments:
"Note that in Quebec I gave the Alliance the seat they would have won by the math. This happens to be the seat currently held by Andre Arthur."
If so, then you must mean Portneuf--Jacques Cartier, rather than Pontiac which is currently held by the Conservative M.P. Lawrence Cannon.
Hum. I think I was confused between the two.
Post a Comment