Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T15:09:14.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Did They Mind the Gap? Voter/Party Ideological Proximity between the BQ, the NDP and Quebec Voters, 2006–2011

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2016

Jean-Philippe Gauvin ,
Chris Chhim  and
Mike Medeiros
Jean-Philippe Gauvin*
Affiliation:
Université de Montréal
Chris Chhim*
Affiliation:
McGill University
Mike Medeiros*
Affiliation:
McGill University
*
Département de science politique, Université de Montréal, CP 6128 succ. Centre-ville, Montréal, QC H3C 3J7, Email: jean-philippe.gauvin@umontreal.ca
Department of Political Science, McGill University, Leacock Building, 855 rue Sherbrooke Ouest, Montréal, QC H3A 2T7, Email: chris.chhim@mail.mcgill.ca
Centre for the Study of Democratic Citizenship, McGill University, 855 rue Sherbrooke Ouest, Montréal, QC H3A 2T7, Email: mike.medeiros@mail.mcgill.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The 2011 Canadian federal election results changed the face of federal politics in Quebec. In a sudden and spectacular reversal of electoral fortunes, BQ support crumbled while that of the NDP surged. While most commentators focused exclusively on the 2011 election itself to explain what had happened, we offer an interpretation that takes a longitudinal approach. Using data from the Canadian Election Study and political party manifestos from 2006 to 2011, we propose a three-dimensional proximity model of voter/party congruence to explore the evolution of the ideological stances of Quebec voters and parties. Empirical results suggest these ideological distances between the NDP and Quebec voters decreased over time, whereas the BQ has distanced itself from voters. Furthermore, ideological distances between party and voters are a significant predictor of vote.

Résumé

Les résultats de l’élection fédérale canadienne de 2011 ont transformé le visage de la politique fédérale au Québec. Dans un revirement subit et spectaculaire de tendances, le soutien au Bloc Québécois s’est effrité au plus grand avantage du Nouveau Parti démocratique. Alors que la plupart des commentateurs ont concentré exclusivement leur attention sur l’élection de 2011 proprement dite pour expliquer ce qui s’était passé, nous fournissons une interprétation qui adopte une approche longitudinale. En nous appuyant sur les données de l’Étude électorale canadienne et les manifestes des partis politiques de 2006 à 2011, nous proposons un modèle de proximité tridimensionnel de congruence entre l’électeur et le parti pour analyser l’évolution des positions idéologiques des électeurs et des formations politiques du Québec. Les résultats empiriques suggèrent que l’éloignement idéologique entre le NPD et les électeurs québécois s’est estompé avec le temps, tandis que le BQ se distanciait de son électorat. De surcroît, les distances idéologiques entre les partis et les électeurs sont un facteur prévisionnel significatif du vote.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , June 2016 , pp. 289 - 310
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abramowitz, Alan and Saunders, Kyle. 2006. “Exploring the Bases of Partisanship in the American Electorate: Social Identity vs. Ideology.” Political Research Quarterly 59(2): 175–87.Google Scholar
Albright, Jeremy J. 2010. “The Multidimensional Nature of Party Competition.” Party Politics 16 (6): 699–719.Google Scholar
Barnea, Marina F and Schwartz, Shalom H. 1998. “Values and Voting.” Political Psychology 19 (1): 17–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bélanger, Éric and Nadeau, Richard. 2006. “The Bloc Québécois: A Sour-Tasting Victory.” In The Canadian Federal Election of 2006, ed. Pammeett, Jon and Dornan, Christopher. Toronto: Dundurn Press.Google Scholar
Bélanger, Éric and Nadeau, Richard. 2009. Le comportement électoral des Québécois. Montreal: Presses de l'Université de Montréal.Google Scholar
Bélanger, Éric and Nadeau, Richard. 2011. “The Bloc Québécois: Capsized by the Orange Wave.” In The Canadian Federal Election of 2011, ed. Pammeett, Jon H. and Dornan, Christopher. Toronto: Dundurn Press.Google Scholar
Blais, André, Gidengil, Elisabeth, Nadeau, Richard and Nevitte, Neil. 2002. Anatomy of a Liberal Victory: Making Sense of the Vote in the 2000 Canadian Election. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Blais, André, Nadeau, Richard, Gidengil, Elisabeth and Nevitte, Neil. 2001. “The Formation of Party Preferences: Testing the Proximity and Directional Models.” European Journal of Political Research 40 (1): 81–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budge, Ian. 1994. “A New Spatial Theory of Party Competition.” British Journal of Political Science 24 (4): 443–67.Google Scholar
Castles, Francis and Mair, Peter. 1984. “Left–Right Political Scales: Some ‘Expert’ Judgments.” European Journal of Political Research 12 (1): 73–88.Google Scholar
Clarke, Harold, Sanders, David, Stewart, Marianne and Whiteley, Paul. 2004. Political Choice in Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cochrane, Christopher. 2010. “Left/right Ideology and Canadian Politics.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 43 (3): 583–605.Google Scholar
Collette, Benoît and Pétry, François. 2012. “Le positionnement des partis sur l'échiquier politique québécois.” In Les partis politiques québécois dans la tourmente. Mieux comprendre et évaluer leur rôle, ed. Pelletier, Réjean. Québec: Presses de l'Université Laval.Google Scholar
Cross, William and Young, Lisa. 2002. “Policy Attitudes of Party Members in Canada: Evidence of Ideological Politics.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 35 (4): 859–80.Google Scholar
Dalton, Russell. 2008. Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies. 5th ed. Washington,DC: CQ Press Google Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Enelow, James M. and Hinich, Melvin J.. 1984. “Probabilistic Voting and The Importance of Centrist Ideologies in Democratic Elections.” The Journal of Politics 46 (2): 459–78.Google Scholar
Fournier, Patrick, Cutler, Fred, Soroka, Stuart, Stolle, Dietlind and Bélanger, Éric. 2013. “Riding the Orange Wave: Leadership, Values, Issues, and the 2011 Canadian Election.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 46 (4): 1–35.Google Scholar
Fournier, Patrick, Turgeon, Mathieu, Blais, André, Everitt, Joanna, Gidengil, Elisabeth and Nevitte, Neil. 2011. “Deliberation from Within: Changing One's Mind During an Interview.” Political Psychology 32 (5): 885–919.Google Scholar
Frognier, Andre-Paul. 1976. “Party Preference Spaces and Voting Change in Belgium.” In Party Identification and Beyond: Representations of Voting and Party Competition, ed. Budge, Ian, Crewe, Ivor and Farlie, Dennis. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Gagnon, Alain-G. and Hérivault, Jacques. 2007. “The Bloc Québécois: Charting New Territories?” In Canadian Parties in Transition, ed. Gagnon, Alain-G.. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.Google Scholar
Gidengil, Elisabeth, Nevitte, Neil, Blais, Andre, Everitt, Joanna and Fournier, Patrick. 2012. Dominance and Decline: Making Sense of Recent Canadian Elections. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Hinich, Melvin J. and Munger, Michael C.. 1994. Ideology and The Theory of Political Choice. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Holmberg, Sören. 2007. “Partisanship Reconsidered.” In Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, ed. Dalton, Russell and Klingemann, Hans-Dieter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald. 1990. Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keating, Michael. 2001. Nations Against the State: The New Politics of Nationalism in Quebec, Catalonia, and Scotland. Basingstroke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Klemmensen, Robert, Hobolt, Sara Binzer and Hansen, Martin Ejnar. 2007. “Estimating Policy Positions Using Political Texts: An Evaluation of the Wordscores Approach.” Electoral Studies 26 (4): 746–55.Google Scholar
Lachat, Romain. 2011. “Electoral Competitiveness and Issue Voting.” Political Behavior 33 (4): 645–63.Google Scholar
Laver, Michael and Hunt, Ben. 1992. Party and Policy Competition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Laver, Michael, Benoit, Kenneth and Garry, John. 2003. “Extracting Policy Positions from Political Texts using Words as Data.” American Political Science Review 97 (2): 311–31.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour and Rokkan, Stein. 1967. “Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments.” In The West European Party System, ed. Mair, Peter. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
Loewen, Peter, Héroux-Legault, Maxime and de Miguel, Carolina. 2015. “Nationalism and ethnic heterogeneity: The importance of local context for nationalist party vote choice.” Electoral Studies 39: 129–141.Google Scholar
Lowe, Will. 2008. “Understanding Wordscores.” Political Analysis 16 (4): 356–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, Will and King, Gary. 2003. “Some Statistical Methods for Evaluating Information Extraction Systems.” Proceedings of the 10Th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 19–26.Google Scholar
Macdonald, Stuart Elaine, Listhaug, Ola and Rabinowitz, George. 1991. “Issues and Party Support in Multiparty Systems.” The American Political Science Review 85 (4): 1107–31.Google Scholar
Matthews, Steven A. 1979. “A Simple Direction Model of Electoral Competition.” Public Choice 34 (2): 141–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Medeiros, Mike and Noël, Alain. 2014. “The Forgotten Side of Partisanship Negative: Party Identification in Four Anglo-American Democracies.” Comparative Political Studies 47(7): 1022–46.Google Scholar
Medeiros, Mike, Gauvin, Jean-Philippe, and Chhim, Chris. 2015. “Refining Vote Choice in an Ethno-Regionalist Context: Three-Dimensional Ideological Voting in Catalonia and Quebec.” Electoral Studies 40: 14–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merrill, Samuel III and Grofman, Bernard. 1998. “Conceptualizing Voter Choice for Directional and Discounting Models of Two-Candidate Spatial Competition in terms of Shadow Candidates.” Public Choice 95 (3–4): 219–31.Google Scholar
Nicoud, Annabelle. 2011. “Avec les souverainistes unis, tout redevient possible, croit Duceppe.” La Presse (Montreal), April 17, 2011.Google Scholar
Nie, Norman, Verba, Sidney and Petrocik, John. 1979. The Changing American Voter. Cambridge: Harvard University Press Google Scholar
Pallarés, Francesc, Lago, Ignacio and Muñoz, Jordi. 2006. “The 2005 Autonomous Election in Galicia: the End of Conservative Hegemony.” Regional and Federal Studies 16 (4): 481–94.Google Scholar
Pardos-Prado, Sergi and Dinas, Elias. 2010. “Systemic Polarisation and Spatial Voting.” European Journal of Political Research 49 (6): 759–86.Google Scholar
Powell, Bingham. 2009. “The Ideological Congruence Controversy The Impact of Alternative Measures, Data, and Time Periods on the Effects of Election Rules.” Comparative Political Studies 42 (12): 1475–97.Google Scholar
Rabinowitz, George and Macdonald, Stuart Elaine. 1989. “A Directional Theory of Issue Voting.” The American Political Science Review 83 (1): 93–121.Google Scholar
Rehm, Philipp and Reilly, Timothy. 2010. “United We Stand: Constituency Homogeneity and Comparative Party Polarization.” Electoral Studies 29 (1): 40–53.Google Scholar
Rusk, Jerrold. 1987. “Issues and Voting.” In Research in Micropolitics, ed. Long, S.. Greenwich CN: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Schofield, Norman. 2008. Spatial Model of Voting. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schrodt, Philip A. and Van Brackle, David. 2013. “Automated coding of political event data”. In Handbook of Computational Approaches to Counterterrorism, ed. Subrahmanian, V.S., New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Singh, Shane P. 2010. “Contextual Influences on the Decision Calculus: A Cross-National Examination of Proximity Voting.” Electoral Studies 29 (3): 425–34.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul, Brody, Richard and Tetlock, Phillip. 1993. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stokes, Donald. 1963. “Spatial Models of Party Competition.” The American Political Science Review 57 (2): 368–77.Google Scholar
Tjur, Tue. 2009. “Coefficients of Determination in Logistic Regression Models.” The American Statistician 63 (4): 366–72.Google Scholar
Treier, Shawn and Hillygus, D. Sunshine. 2009. “The Nature of Political Ideology in The Contemporary Electorate.” Public Opinion Quarterly 73: 640–66.Google Scholar
Wagner, Markus and Ruusuvirta, Outi. 2011. “Matching Voters to Parties: Voting Advice Applications and Models of Party Choice.” Acta politica 47 (4): 400–22.Google Scholar
Wheatley, Jonathan, Carman, Christopher, Mendez, Fernando and Mitchell, James. 2014. “The Dimensionality of The Scottish Political Space: Results from an Experiment on the 2011 Holyrood Elections.” Party Politics 20 (6): 864–78.Google Scholar