There has been a lot of talk (maybe, maybe too much talk) about the urban/rural split of the Election 2006 results. One of the mottos here at PoliticalStaples is that if in doubt, make a graph.
I decided to see, in graphic form, if there is any correlation between a riding's density (population/area) and the way they vote.
Here is the graph for the National Results (the density axis is displayed logarithmically for clarity).
As you can see the Conservative Party clearly does better in ridings where the Population/Area(km) is in the range of 1 to 1000 (say Yellowhead and Calgary Southwest) whereas the Liberals begin to dominate once the 1000 wall is crossed. The Bloc Quebecois seems to do well all across the density range and the NDP does well in some ridings on the polarized edges of the density range and randomly in the rest.
If you want to compare the trendlines of just the Conservatives versus the Liberals Nationally this graph is a little (ok slightly) more clear.
Of course when most pundits talk about the urban/rural split they mean it in terms Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto and of special importance the 905 belt surrounding Toronto. So let us look at the chart for Ontario.
In this chart it is clear that there is a divide. The Liberals and NDP fight over extremely large ridings, the Conservatives dominate in rural ridings up to a density of about 120 persons/sq. km, then the Conservatives and Liberals compete in ridings up to about 900 persons/sq. km (and check out the crossing trend lines) and above the Liberals dominate but with some specific competition from the NDP as their vote increases in dense ridings.
What I find interesting is that in ridings with a density around 1000 persons/sq. km the Conservative vote is still pretty strong (30-43%) but the NDP vote hovers around the 8-20% range.
This analysis is a work in progress. Next I will look at the number of seats in the 1000 persons/sq. km or less range for the Conservatives to switch over to win a majority. Of note is that the urban/rural divide (or more correctly metro/rural) cuts two ways. How rural will the Liberals need to go win back a majority.
Another question that arises from looking at the numbers is the weird coalition that the NDP has. To generalize they do well in very large rural ridings, metro ridings and union ridings. One one group has to do with another is beyond me and can the NDP keep the coalition from fracturing? It appears to me that they are losing the Prairie Christian Populist segment of their base. Will others fracture off as they try to become more urban. Ah, the big tents, so tough to keep together.
