Defining the competitive election

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 26/08/2023 (742 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

BASED on a June public opinion poll which showed Manitoba’s two main parties in a dead heat on a province wide basis, the pundits (including yours truly) have revised earlier forecasts that, absent some kind of blunder, the NDP was headed to victory in the October election. Now the conventional wisdom is that this will be a “competitive election”.

But what do we mean when we say an election is competitive? And, how do we measure the degree of competitiveness?

To begin, elections are more complex phenomenon than many media commentaries acknowledge. Voters cast ballots for hundreds of different reasons. Any talk about a single “ballot” question that drives results involves oversimplification.

Each election is fought in a somewhat different context. By context I mean a set of interrelated conditions, both historical and contemporary, which shape the results.

Economic and social conditions, policy disagreements, and the performance of party leaders are among the factors which can change drastically from one election to the next. Easy generalizations from the results of the most recent, past election should, therefore, be avoided.

All elections, even ones involving a runaway victory for particular party, involve some level of competition. When pundits talk about competitive elections, however, they usually mean that the contest will be close and that the outcome is uncertain.

Campaigns matter. Even though the campaign period in Manitoba is relatively short at 28 days, the dynamic of competition among parties can shift in response to short term developments, like a contentious issue or a leadership gaffe.

Polls capturing the popularity of parties and leaders at one point in time is one measure of competitiveness. A related measure are perceptions about how close a given election contest will be. Those perceptions exist among politicians , paid staff and party volunteers, among media commentators and among the interested public.

When party officials perceive they are involved in a tight contest, presumably they increase their efforts to appeal to voters, to identify their supporters, and to get out the vote. Citizen perceptions of the closeness of contests will presumably increase their attentiveness to campaign developments.

Stronger efforts by parties and greater voter engagement in what is perceived as a close contest should logically increase voter turnout. However, careful empirical studies indicate this is not necessarily the case.

Like other aspects of elections, explaining turnout is complicated, involving multiple factors.

What is at stake in an election contest is one of those factors which can affect competitiveness, turnout and outcomes. Some elections happen in a context where there is an accumulation of disappointment, frustration and even anger toward the governing party.

Pundits often describe such contests as a “change” election or more dramatically as a “realigning” election. The latter label refers to a fundamental and enduring shift in the traditional sources of support for different parties.

Deciding whether a given election qualifies for either label is most reliably done after two or more elections.

In an age of disillusionment with politics, voters have become fickle, meaning they are more inclined to change their voting preferences from one election to the next. They are also inclined to vote with less confidence that changing parties in office will make any difference in terms of policies and improvements within society.

In Manitoba, competition happens on a province wide basis, as well as within each of the 57 constituencies.

On the provincial level, the two main parties each have a relatively persistent territorial basis of support. There is, in effect, a diagonal line which runs through the province, including Winnipeg, from the northeast to the southwest corners. The PCs have strength south and west, the NDP to the east and north, and the most intense competition occurs in the constituencies which straddle the line.

The stability of the geographical voting patterns results in, a “floor” below which each of the major parties is unlikely to fall; for the PCs this is in the 18-20 seat range and for the NDP it is between 12-15 seats.

Another measure of competitiveness is the margin of victory in terms of the popular vote. That number can be misleading, however. Our simple plurality electoral system rewards parties with concentrated territorial voter support. The PCs run up large majorities in their southwest strongholds, but this means their total popular vote is less efficient in delivering seats.

Pushed for a generalization about Manitoba elections, this pundit would say that the contests are usually close, victories are often based on hundreds of votes in a half dozen constituencies, and the winning party often has a narrow majority in the Legislature.

Paul G. Thomas is professor emeritus of Political Studies at the University of Manitoba. Some people describe him as a pundit because they have trouble spelling charlatan.