Our Methodology and Criteria

  To come up with a recommendation I used:

  • Publicly available riding-level opinion polls data. Latest polls take precedence as the long as the poll result is higher than the margin of error
  • 2015 election results, if supported by available opinion polls
  • When polling data conflicts with 2015 election results, I review previous election results (2004, 2006, 2008 and 2011) for the riding voting trend and the reason behind the conflict. This is especially important with the 2015 Liberal vote results

When building our methodology and party selection criteria I have 3 main objects:

1 To better reflect each district’s voting preferences.

2 To maximize the number of progressive MPs

3 To keep each progressive party’s share of the vote (same overall number of ballots as much as possible.).

To accomplish this, we have:

  • identified 93 districts (from 2015 Elections) where the Combined Progressive Vote (CPV) is greater than that of the conservatives
  • recommended a progressive MP for each one of the 338 ridings to cement the already positive results in the ridings that already have a progressive incumbent MP, and raise a challenge in the rest
  • In most cases, we recommended voting for the progressive party with the most votes in a district. In ridings that are solidly conservative, we switched to the second or the third progressive party to make sure each part will keep, at the very least, the number of ballots they received in the last election.

    All exceptions to these criteria is detailed in the comments field in the riding’s detailed information page .

Please check the methodology FAQ, I tried to answer most of the questions I received regarding our criteria.


 What are trying to achieve by advocating strategic voting?

  • Strengthen the position of the incumbent progressive MPs in their ridings.
  • Win the 93 swing ridings that was lost due to vote splitting.
  • Encourage progressives to vote, by showing that we can make a difference in all 338 electoral districts.
  • Support strategic voting in each and every riding to prevent party consolidation on the center/center-left, as we saw on the right. No one wants a two party system.

 Why are you asking me to vote for the Green Party (GPC) when it came third in the last election?

For strategic voting to work, some Green and Liberal voters in certain ridings will be voting NDP; to keep the number of ballots each party received the same, an NDP voter in another riding should vote Green or Liberal. I’m only advocating for a vote for the progressive party that came second or third when the riding is not in contest, i.e. it has been won by the Conservatives with 55 percent or more in the last election.

 Are you going to take into account, local poll results or will you be using 2015 election results only as the base of your recommendations?

Yes, I did take into account independent, consistent and confirmed poll trends. I will be adjusting my recommendations if it is warranted.

 If you are recommending the second or third candidate in a riding that was won by the Conservatives with more than 55 percent in the last election but it is in play this time, would you be changing your recommendation?

Yes I did.

 Why have you left some ridings without recommendation?

When the polls suggest that both the Liberals and the NDP are competing for the first spot in a riding and the Conservatives are non-viable, I leave the riding without a recommendation.