I think it is more about the power of incumbency, and in the case of the PEI Liberals their incumbents were all multi-term MLAs, vs. the single-term Green MLAs. And, if you've held power, then you probably have more long-standing incumbents, so it is self-reinforcing.
For the Quebec Liberals, it is more about the concentration of their votes. And Ontario is a counter-example. If being a party of government was the key point, the Ontario Liberals should have won more seats than the NDP. Incumbency, vote efficiency, those are big factors in FPTP.
"While there are many political or personal reasons that pose as barriers to voting, only 10 per cent of respondents identified an election process-related barrier to voting. Many lost interest in the election due to early reports of one-sided results."
Presumably this is something gleaned from their surveys of voters.
I think it would depend on the election rather than the party. When the ban would come into force, I think it would benefit the party or parties that are leading and hurt the parties that are trailing. If there is one leading party and a few trailing parties, I think that leading party really benefits because strategic voters opposed to that party would get no clues as to which way to go.
True. You can do the same federally and I have pointed that out to some people in the past. They usually answer along the line of 'why would I show up just to not vote'. When I've mentioned a none of the above option, they were a little more interested in that. So I think it is more of a psychological thing.
I think it is more about the power of incumbency, and in the case of the PEI Liberals their incumbents were all multi-term MLAs, vs. the single-term Green MLAs. And, if you've held power, then you probably have more long-standing incumbents, so it is self-reinforcing.
For the Quebec Liberals, it is more about the concentration of their votes. And Ontario is a counter-example. If being a party of government was the key point, the Ontario Liberals should have won more seats than the NDP. Incumbency, vote efficiency, those are big factors in FPTP.
There's this on page 88, but I think that's it:
"While there are many political or personal reasons that pose as barriers to voting, only 10 per cent of respondents identified an election process-related barrier to voting. Many lost interest in the election due to early reports of one-sided results."
Presumably this is something gleaned from their surveys of voters.
Do you have any thoughts as to which party, if any, may benefit/be harmed by a ban in polling before the election?
I think it would depend on the election rather than the party. When the ban would come into force, I think it would benefit the party or parties that are leading and hurt the parties that are trailing. If there is one leading party and a few trailing parties, I think that leading party really benefits because strategic voters opposed to that party would get no clues as to which way to go.
Adding 'none of the above' as a valid option on the ballot would likely do more to increase turn out than anything else.
In Ontario, you do have the option to 'decline' your ballot, which sets it apart from those that are spoiled.
True. You can do the same federally and I have pointed that out to some people in the past. They usually answer along the line of 'why would I show up just to not vote'. When I've mentioned a none of the above option, they were a little more interested in that. So I think it is more of a psychological thing.