List of marginal seats in the 2015 Canadian federal election
Based on the transposition of votes from the 2011 election to the new ridings created under the 2012 redistribution, the following seats had a margin of victory of less than 5 percentage points in that election:
Marginal constituencies, based on 2012 redistribution, ranked by 2011 pro forma margin of victory | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Constituency | Province | Rank of parties | Margins | 2015 result | ||||
1st | 2nd | 3rd | 1st vs 2nd | 1st vs 3rd | ||||
Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup | Quebec | 36.4% | 36.3% | 20.1% | 0.1% | 16.3% | Con gain | |
Nipissing—Timiskaming | Ontario | 36.5% | 36.4% | 21.1% | 0.1% | 15.4% | Lib hold | |
Winnipeg North | Manitoba | 35.4% | 35.0% | 27.4% | 0.4% | 8.0% | Lib gain | |
Cowichan—Malahat—Langford | British Columbia | 43.6% | 43.1% | 7.2% | 0.5% | 36.4% | NDP hold | |
Mississauga—Malton | Ontario | 37.4% | 36.8% | 23.4% | 0.6% | 14.0% | Lib gain | |
Labrador | Newfoundland and Labrador | 39.8% | 39.1% | 19.8% | 0.7% | 19.8% | Lib gain | |
Markham—Thornhill | Ontario | 37.1% | 36.4% | 23.4% | 0.7% | 13.7% | Lib hold | |
Yukon | Yukon | 33.8% | 32.9% | 18.9% | 0.9% | 14.9% | Lib gain | |
Scarborough—Guildwood | Ontario | 35.8% | 34.7% | 26.7% | 1.1% | 9.1% | Lib hold | |
Ahuntsic-Cartierville* | Quebec | 31.1% | 29.9% | 28.3% | 1.2% | 2.8% | Lib hold | |
Surrey—Newton | British Columbia | 35.3% | 34.1% | 27.4% | 1.2% | 7.9% | Lib gain | |
Richmond—Arthabaska | Quebec | 33.8% | 32.5% | 24.7% | 1.3% | 9.1% | Con gain | |
Etobicoke Centre | Ontario | 41.9% | 40.6% | 14.6% | 1.3% | 27.3% | Lib gain | |
Regina—Lewvan | Saskatchewan | 45.2% | 43.9% | 8.2% | 1.3% | 37.0% | NDP hold | |
Lévis—Lotbinière | Quebec | 39.9% | 38.5% | 14.9% | 1.4% | 25.0% | Con hold | |
Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River | Manitoba | 46.9% | 45.4% | 5.3% | 1.5% | 41.6% | NDP gain | |
Dartmouth—Cole Harbour | Nova Scotia | 36.4% | 34.7% | 25.0% | 1.7% | 11.4% | Lib gain | |
Honoré-Mercier | Quebec | 35.2% | 33.5% | 16.0% | 1.7% | 19.2% | Lib gain | |
Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke | British Columbia | 39.4% | 37.6% | 12.9% | 1.8% | 26.5% | NDP hold | |
Don Valley East | Ontario | 38.4% | 36.4% | 21.9% | 2.0% | 16.5% | Lib hold | |
Scarborough North | Ontario | 35.4% | 33.4% | 28.9% | 2.0% | 6.5% | Lib gain | |
Sydney—Victoria | Nova Scotia | 39.9% | 37.8% | 19.0% | 2.1% | 20.9% | Lib hold | |
Elmwood—Transcona | Manitoba | 46.9% | 44.8% | 5.2% | 2.1% | 41.7% | NDP gain | |
Louis-Saint-Laurent | Quebec | 39.9% | 37.6% | 14.4% | 2.3% | 25.5% | Con gain | |
Willowdale | Ontario | 41.5% | 39.2% | 18.9% | 2.3% | 22.6% | Lib gain | |
Don Valley West | Ontario | 43.9% | 41.5% | 10.7% | 2.4% | 33.2% | Lib gain | |
Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel | Quebec | 38.3% | 35.6% | 13.0% | 2.7% | 25.3% | Bloc hold | |
London North Centre | Ontario | 37.1% | 34.2% | 24.3% | 2.9% | 12.8% | Lib gain | |
Kings—Hants | Nova Scotia | 39.6% | 36.6% | 20.0% | 3.0% | 19.6% | Lib hold | |
Don Valley North | Ontario | 40.3% | 37.3% | 20.7% | 3.0% | 19.6% | Lib gain | |
Sault Ste. Marie | Ontario | 40.4% | 37.4% | 19.7% | 3.0% | 20.7% | Lib gain | |
Scarborough Centre* | Ontario | 34.9% | 31.9% | 30.7% | 3.0% | 4.2% | Lib gain | |
Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount | Quebec | 38.2% | 35.1% | 17.7% | 3.1% | 20.5% | Lib hold | |
Waterloo | Ontario | 41.4% | 38.3% | 14.9% | 3.1% | 26.5% | Lib gain | |
Scarborough—Rouge Park* | Ontario | 34.8% | 31.6% | 31.0% | 3.2% | 3.8% | Lib hold | |
Scarborough Southwest | Ontario | 34.9% | 31.7% | 29.3% | 3.2% | 5.6% | Lib gain | |
Toronto Centre | Ontario | 39.7% | 36.5% | 17.3% | 3.2% | 22.4% | Lib hold | |
Malpeque | Prince Edward Island | 42.4% | 39.1% | 14.6% | 3.3% | 27.8% | Lib hold | |
Pierrefonds—Dollard | Quebec | 34.1% | 30.5% | 26.9% | 3.6% | 7.2% | Lib gain | |
Avalon | Newfoundland and Labrador | 37.1% | 33.2% | 28.5% | 3.9% | 8.6% | Lib gain | |
Brossard—Saint-Lambert | Quebec | 36.8% | 32.8% | 15.9% | 4.0% | 20.9% | Lib gain | |
Lac-Saint-Louis | Quebec | 34.1% | 30.1% | 28.4% | 4.0% | 28.4% | Lib hold | |
Niagara Centre | Ontario | 43.2% | 39.1% | 14.4% | 4.1% | 28.8% | Lib gain | |
Courtenay—Alberni | British Columbia | 44.9% | 40.7% | 6.8% | 4.2% | 38.1% | NDP gain | |
Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine | Quebec | 33.1% | 28.8% | 19.1% | 4.3% | 14.0% | Lib gain | |
Surrey Centre | British Columbia | 40.0% | 35.7% | 17.8% | 4.3% | 22.2% | Lib gain | |
North Island—Powell River | British Columbia | 46.0% | 41.7% | 6.4% | 4.3% | 39.6% | NDP gain | |
Burnaby South | British Columbia | 44.0% | 39.6% | 11.7% | 4.4% | 32.3% | NDP hold | |
Winnipeg South Centre | Manitoba | 41.2% | 36.6% | 18.3% | 4.6% | 22.9% | Lib gain | |
Vancouver Centre* | British Columbia | 31.0% | 26.3% | 26.1% | 4.7% | 4.9% | Lib hold | |
Nanaimo—Ladysmith | British Columbia | 45.3% | 40.4% | 7.2% | 4.9% | 38.1% | NDP hold |
* - indicates a margin of less than 5 points between 1st and 3rd place
Analysis of 2015 results
Gains and losses by party in marginal seats
Party in 1st place (2011) | Holds | Gains | Party taken from | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | NDP | Liberal | Bloc | ||||
Conservative | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | |||
New Democratic | 5 | 4 | 4 | ||||
Liberal | 13 | 24 | 13 | 10 | 1 | ||
Bloc Québécois | 1 | – | |||||
Total | 20 | 31 | 17 | 12 | – | 2 |
Analysis of 2011 rankings
First- and second-place finishes of such seats were grouped as follows:
Marginal seats: ranked by 1st and 2nd place
Party in 1st place | Party in 2nd place | Total | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | NDP | Liberal | Bloc | |||
Conservative | 6 | 12 | 18 | |||
New Democratic | 12 | 5 | 17 | |||
Liberal | 8 | 5 | 13 | |||
Bloc Québécois | 3 | 3 | ||||
Total | 20 | 14 | 17 | 51 |
Broken down by province:
Marginal seats – analysis by province/territory
Party in 1st place | BC | MB | NL | NS | ON | PE | QC | SK | YK | Total | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | 2 | 3 | 2 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 18 | ||||
New Democratic | 6 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 17 | ||||
Liberal | 1 | 2 | 6 | 1 | 3 | 13 | |||||
Bloc Québécois | 3 | 3 | |||||||||
Total | 9 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 18 | 1 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 51 |
gollark: PotatOS has a somewhat leaky usermode code sandbox, yes.
gollark: Idea: fork gofmt and apply your own better rules.
gollark: ++delete Go
gollark: Yes, golang is in fact bad?
gollark: No, only the mathematicians get those.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.