In past post I discussed how parties did in general while this looks at various regions and will give my thoughts on what happened, why, and what this means long term.
Atlantic Canada
Liberals once again dominated region and seat count was unchanged from 2021. Liberals got 55% which is shy of 2015 high, but still a very good showing. Despite same seat count, you had some changes under the surface. Tories flipped two rural Newfoundland ridings while Liberals offset that by defeating two Tory MPs in Nova Scotia. My guess why Liberals did well here is this is a centrist region where people like solutions and believe in working together. Combative type politicians may be popular in Prairies, but here they are toxic. Trudeau was seen as too much of a big city progressive which hurt him towards the end, but Poilievre’s support in region was always quite soft. With Carney being more centrist, he was able to win back many Red Tories who reluctantly were parking votes with Conservatives. Nova Scotia & PEI in particular have a strong Red Tory tradition which is quite different from your Prairie populism you now see with Conservatives. Conservative party doesn’t need to be like Tim Houston, popular premier of Nova Scotia who they got into a spat with. Just needs to have room for such people and I get impression party wants to expunge them as saw old PCs and Atlantic PCs as liberal lite and is paying the consequences. Carney by contrast welcomed Blue Liberals who were marginalized under Trudeau. Some Conservatives may say Atlantic Canada doesn’t matter, but its seats not votes that counts. And despite double the population, Alberta only has 5 more seats than Atlantic Canada does so dismissing region not a great idea. Also in smaller cities like Fredericton, Saint John, and Charlottetown, Conservatives bombed badly again showing problems there too. Yes they won your usual rural Anglophone New Brunswick ridings which is one part of region where more right wing conservatism sells. Also gained in rural Newfoundland likely over issues with fishing industry as region struggling so in many ways swing there was not too dissimilar to that in Northern Ontario, Windsor, Hamilton and other blue collar communities that swung towards Conservatives. Its true Conservatives got 38% which ties what they got in 2011, but fact provincially routinely top 40% and sometimes 50% while pre-merger, old PCs often got that too suggests new merged party still struggling in this region and some former Progressive Conservatives not comfortable with current iteration.
Quebec
Despite Carney’s weak French, which is weakest of any Liberal leader since John Turner, that didn’t seem to matter. I believe a combination of desire to keep Poilievre out and also Trump’s 51st state talk is a big reason this didn’t handicap him in a way it normally would. Quebecers are very sensitive to protecting language and culture and they know full well any takeover by US in long run would mean death of language much same way Louisiana was once predominately French speaking but isn’t anymore. As much as they may complain at times or be nationalistic; Quebecers understand that in Canada efforts will be made to protect their unique culture and language while if part of US would not. Bloc Quebecois was really more your types who disliked both Liberals & Conservatives thus why held most rural and exurban seats but lost in suburban and urban areas. Rural areas across Canada generally don’t like Liberals while Poilievre despite having best French of Conservative leaders since modern party’s creation in 2003, is not well liked. They won in usual areas but unable to make big breakthrough. Things like defunding CBC, overly pro oil & gas, and loosening gun laws are just some of the examples where conservative base is offside with vast majority of Quebecers.
Ontario
Liberals got 49% which is best showing since 2000 which would normally ensure a solid majority nationally. But based on where shifts were and fact Conservatives got 44%, which is a very good showing for them in Ontario, it was ultimately Ontario that denied them the majority they wanted. By same token lack of splits on left is big reason Conservatives failed to win despite modest gains there. Conservatives never get over 50% in Ontario and have ceiling around 45%, so Poilievre actually got pretty close to party’s ceiling there and only 0.6% less than what Harper in 2011 did. Main reason failed to win big is NDP cratered and that mostly benefitted Liberals. Despite that, polls didn’t show what was happening under the surface so applying a uniform swing from 2021 would have given an inaccurate picture. Liberals had biggest swings in urban cores of Toronto & Ottawa as well as rural Southern Ontario. Former already winning so this swing just meant more wasted votes. Latter got them lots of new votes, but to win had to get some who voted Conservative or PPC from 2021 to crossover and they failed to do that. Thus why got north of 40% in many rural ridings, but Conservatives topped 50% thus holding them. Conservative gains were biggest in ethnically diverse suburbs and blue collar ridings. Liberals likely still won visible minorities, but unlike past elections we saw racial depolarization like did in US only here its likely results amongst whites and visible minorities probably pretty similar. This allowed Conservatives to gain some seats while strong second in many others. Some like Jewish community swing was over Israel as Conservatives most pro-Israel party while in heavily Chinese areas, simply a rebound to 2019 as in 2021 had foreign interference. For South Asians, swing was quite dramatic but not totally unexpected as Rustad in BC in 2024 and Ford in 2025 also saw similar swings. Blue collar ridings like Hamilton, Windsor & Northern Ontario were interesting as NDP imploded but it appeared in those unlike elsewhere; a sizeable portion of NDP voters swung over to the Conservatives instead of Liberals. This suggests Liberals & NDP are struggling to connect with some blue collar workers while Conservatives doing a better job. Whether this holds or not remains to be seen.
For Liberals, to do well next time they need to keep NDP in single digits and also make progress on areas of weakness so as to push Conservatives below 40% in Ontario. In rural Southern Ontario, things may look promising at first glance but Liberal support there is quite soft and getting Conservatives to crossover won’t be easy. Still with more people working remotely thus moving to rural areas as well as boomer retirees, I do believe party has some potential there. So Liberals would be smart to focus on rural ridings with lots of ex-city voters. Bay of Quinte which flipped is one example and there are others that have potential. Otherwise your Canadian versions of Door County, Wisconsin and Leelanau County, Michigan is where they need to aim. Your ridings where agriculture, small business, and manufacturing are main part of economy probably out of reach. For Conservatives they did make some gains as needed, but their alienation of upper middle class suburban boomers probably cost them. Seats like Burlington and Kanata were once solidly conservative back in 80s and even more recently while Liberals won those by double digits. Bashing boomers, homeowners who have seen property values rise and laptop class was dumb idea. That group is most likely to turnout and no guarantee those mad at them will show up. Never mind younger voters struggling are not a given. Young men may have been attracted to conservatives but young women sure were not. Also in Ottawa huge anti-Conservative swing and I am guessing Poilievre’s support of convoy was part of that and partly why lost his own seat. Asides a handful of rural areas in Southwestern Ontario, that kind of right wing populism is toxic in much of Ontario unlike rural Prairies. Also if Canada moved to a two party system, Ontario was best example of this. In over half the ridings in province, BOTH Conservatives and Liberals got north of 40% showing a fairly evenly split province with slight Liberal edge and in most parts of province no matter who won, you can find plenty of Conservative and plenty of Liberals supporters. Its not lopsided like you see in Prairies.
Saskitoba
While pollsters usually group the two together, I would argue unlike past, two have little in common. Saskatchewan votes more like Alberta than it does Manitoba today. Still you had a few common themes. Liberals saw big gains in votes in cities thus winning most in Winnipeg while in Regina & Saskatoon, they scooped up most of the NDP support thus making them competitive but failure to gain Conservative voters from 2021 is why fell short. Rural areas asides northern ones went massively conservative as you would expect. Northern ones have large indigenous population and with Carney much stronger on reconciliation, its why I think Conservatives did poorly there.
Alberta
Once again it goes massively Conservative with Liberals gaining lots of votes in Calgary & Edmonton thus putting up impressive numbers but still falling short. Main reason fell short in both is support for parties on right at or above 50% so needed to get some Conservative voters from 2021 to crossover and they failed to do that. Most obvious ones would be those who voted for O’Toole in 2021 but Notley in 2023 provincially. For whatever reason, it seems Conservatives almost always get about 10% more federally in Alberta than do provincially. But for Liberals to gain, that would be group need to focus on. And gaining more seats there would be good for national unity. While a minority, Alberta separatists will no doubt play up this as reason province needs to separate amongst other issues. Had they won 6-8 seats instead of only 2 seats, that might have allowed more cabinet representation. Still I believe there is no rational for Alberta separation and will do another blog on this issue. Carney can by allowing pipelines and being seen as less hostile to province help a bit, but also needs to counter those pushing separatism based on a bunch of lies. Never mind most separatist have views even most Albertans find too extreme so they need to be called out for it. Despite stereotype, most Albertans are not your small government libertarians. They may be more wary of an activist government than elsewhere in country, but most still support a social safety net, progressive taxation, regulations to ensure business doesn’t harm society. If Donald Trump cannot get Canada to become 51st state, would love Alberta to so must also guard against foreign interference.
British Columbia
Despite being on other end of country, results were remarkably similar to Ontario in terms of how different demographics voted and shifts. Main difference in past is stronger NDP, not BC being more conservative as some on right push as it is not. BC interior was a lot like rural Southern Ontario where Liberals gained a lot of votes, but conservatives mostly held by holding onto their 2021 support plus gaining PPC voters thus pushing them over 50% mark. In Lower Mainland, you saw tight two party race south of Fraser River much like provincially showing conservatives rebounding with Chinese community and making big gains with South Asians. However in suburbs north of Fraser River, Liberals did much better and conservatives weaker. North Shore is an example of area that once used to favour centre-right parties but now solidly Liberal. Demographics there not too dissimilar to Winnipeg South, Winnipeg West, Burlington, and Kanata which were all ridings when party was more your low tax pro business not populist one like now, thus able to win. This suggests Carney’s strong economic credentials and Poilievre’s populism had big impact. Vancouver Island was an interesting mix as Liberals surged allowing them to win seats in Greater Victoria, but in rest of Vancouver Island just led to splits allowing Conservatives to come up the middle. Of the three Conservative ridings on Vancouver Island; all of them were won with less than 40%. This contrasts with national and in fact even mainland in BC where conservatives lost many ridings they topped 40% due to lack of splits. My guess is for those who wanted to vote strategically; it was unclear which was best party unlike in much of country. This is why I said if want to stop Poilievre, go Liberal everywhere as you may get a few where accidentally elects a Conservative but in most ridings nationally it will elect Liberals.
Territories
Status quo there with Liberals gaining in all and Conservatives too but no ridings changed. Much like northern Manitoba & Saskatchewan, guessing Carney’s support amongst indigenous community was big reason here. While only 3 seats and barely 100,000 people, this region could get a lot more attention in next decade. US, Russia & China all want greater control of Arctic so expect a lot more spending in this region to help secure our sovereignty.
Next blog on Alberta separation and why a dumb idea and must be stopped at all costs.
afiscalconservativepointofview 
A few other thoughts:
Atlantic Canada – Quite a number of retirees have moved there in recent years (mainly since the pandemic), especially to Nova Scotia and PEI, and that has been to the benefit of the Liberals. Meanwhile, I agree those Newfoundland seats were just a case of a working class region getting in line with the rest of the country. I think, if these trends hold, the best chance for any seats for the Conservatives in Nova Scotia in the future may be in Cape Breton and not the western mainland.
Quebec – Agreed, and that could be a big problem for the Bloc Quebecois going forward. Also, with a provincial election next year, sovereignty may be a tough sell which could really hurt the Parti Quebecois if it becomes a key ballot issue.
Ontario – Some of the changes were probably surprising but foreseeable too. Polls had consistently shown a big difference on education levels (huge LPC leads for those with university degree, solid CPC lead for those with college/trade school or high school). That is likely the main reason why Poilievre lost his own seat – the riding’s demographics had trended away from them, while they made it up in unlikely places like London, Windsor, Sudbury and Hamilton. The BC election could have also given clues on why the northern GTA moved so much to the right, since Surrey and Brampton are almost interchangeable, as are Markham and Richmond. I do think that, if the 2025 provincial electorate was the federal electorate, it would have been a crushing LPC win (many Ford-Carney voters exist, especially in more affluent areas) – but of the quarter of voters that didn’t vote then but did on April 28, the CPC won them by a wide margin (they think Ford is too liberal). Poilievre will likely need to find a new riding permanently, since Ottawa is becoming perhaps the Liberals’ best area in all of Canada now.
Manitoba – I only think it differs a lot from Saskatchewan because Winnipeg anchors it – and the Liberals did very well there (Transcona was the only CPC seat, which is not surprising since that’s a very working class area).
Saskatchewan – Interesting that the Liberals made major gains in the cities, even if it couldn’t flip any seats. They had long been invisible in Saskatchewan, sometimes finishing neck and neck with the Greens. It shows how far the NDP have fallen there.
Alberta – I do think the trends you saw elsewhere in Canada actually showed up here too. It was surprising to see Calgary Confederation flip, but Calgary McKnight flip back, until you realize that McKnight is basically a mini-Surrey, while Confederation is quite highly educated. Same with Edmonton Southeast versus Edmonton Centre. I do think Poilievre is taking a risk running in a rural riding, since separatism is definitely an issue that will come up and there it has strong support. He’d have been better off running in something like Calgary Shepard or Calgary Midnapore, which are conservative but more business oriented ridings.
British Columbia – I agree that Ontario basically replicated itself; the only riding in the province that is more Prairie-oriented is Prince George-Peace River which is a bedrock right wing riding (that area has more in common with Alberta anyway). Kelowna could be swapped with something like Bay of Quinte, while a riding like Skeena-Bulkley Valley could easily be swapped with Nickel Belt-Manitoulin and they match up. Agreed that the Fraser River seems like a key boundary, Surrey and Richmond gave good results to the CPC, while the LPC and the North Shore match up well. Singh was definitely DOA the whole time – the irony is if he did a bit better, the CPC would have won the seat on the splits. But those in Burnaby realized it since that’s a city that almost never votes for right-wing parties.
LikeLike
Largely agree. I think real question is will two party system be new norm or one off. UK had similar results in 2017 swapping Liberals for Tories and Tories for Labour while now it is a very divided country with Reform leading at only 30%. Doubt will become like that in Canada but be interesting if two party new norm or one off. If new norm, party will need to change and build a bigger tent that might be tough to hold together in order to win.
LikeLike
I remember there was an excellent Coletto sample on different groups of voters, mentioning 5 groups and where all parties can potentially make gains. That said, the “moderate” group is a catch-all and I would argue those on the top or left side on one lean towards the left on the other and the “true” middle is smaller.
Group 1: True moderates (10%) – These would have been the ultimate swing voters, and probably broke about 60-40 for the Liberals in the last election. They are OK with Carney, but think the Liberals as a whole are a bit too far left (on either economic or social issues). I’d have to say these are the traditional Red Tories, although some of them may lean more progressive on social issues these days. They are most dominant in suburban areas (such as Mississauga, Waterloo, the Tri-Cities of BC, south Edmonton and north Calgary) and with those with a higher education, and with older voters (Boomers especially), while balanced among gender.
Group 2: All-around progressives (40%) – They were the classic Liberal or NDP voters who would never even consider the Conservatives, and they won it for the Liberals (a few still voted NDP or Green). When Trudeau was still in power, many likely were undecided between Liberals and NDP so they weren’t registering in polls, but Carney brought most of them in. A subdivision of this group is in the upper left corner (12%) and that would be NDP voters who jumped strategically. This is a very urban or university town demographic, heavily tilting female and somewhat younger, although they are represented in all age groups especially among females.
Group 3 – Cultural conservatives/economic progressives (23%) – This is the group Poilievre made significant gains with, especially when you look where they are, and denied Carney a majority, going about 80% for the CPC and about 20% for progressives. A group the Liberals and NDP have lost a lot of ground with, they believe in unions and working class values and spending, but also think Canada is far too woke today and that will be hard to recover for the Liberals and NDP. Most of the areas that swung rightward (i.e., Windsor, northern Ontario, York Region, Brampton, Surrey, northern BC, Prairie mid-sized cities) have a large number of these voters. A Red Tory leader would struggle to hold them. They are disproportionally male, younger (i.e. Gen-Z, Millennial and younger Gen-X) and lower educated (high school or community college).
Group 4 – All-around conservatives (17%) – This is the conservative base, which is the angriest part of the electorate today and would have been the Reform Party electorate in the 1990s. They are both economically and socially conservative and voted almost unanimously for the CPC, although have flirted with the PPC in the past. They are most dominant on the Prairies, especially in rural areas, and represent most of the population in the areas they dominate.
Group 5 – Cultural progressives/economic conservatives (10%) – If Group 3 gave Poilievre a lot of votes, this group would be the ones who denied him a seat. A more Red Tory leader would likely be able to bring these voters back, but possibly at the expense of others. Best way to describe is those who don’t like high taxes, but are repelled by social conservatism and populism. His old riding (along with much of Ottawa) has a disproportionate number of them, along with places like Oakville, Burlington, and the North Shore, along with friendlier areas to the CPC like south Calgary. They are very rare in non-touristy rural areas. A very affluent group, very highly educated and balanced in gender and age.
LikeLike