Why did the Maritimes vote Liberal and the Prairies vote Conservative?

Age and Regional politics in Canada

On a regional basis, the results of the 2025 election can be summed up pretty simply:

• The Liberals cleaned up in the Maritimes and Quebec.

• The Conservatives cleaned up in the Prairies.

• Ontario and British Columbia were fairly evenly split.

There are more seats in the Maritimes/Quebec than in the Prairies, so the Liberals won.

This raises the question: why are the Maritimes and Quebec so different than the Prairies. After all, both regions are more hinterland than metropolitan (with the exception of Montreal) with historical resentments towards the federal government. What’s more, the Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island both have Conservative provincial governments. Newfoundland had a Conservative government as recently as a decade ago – and New Brunswick just last year.

So why the federal Liberal dominance of the Maritimes and the Conservative hegemony in the Prairies?

I’d like to present a partial explanation at least for the 2025 election – the age structure of the regions.

Pollsters have identified age as a key determinate of voting intentions in this election. People in the “Boomer” cohort (60 and over) have been identified as being much more likely to have voted for Mark Carney’s Liberal. Younger voters (18 to 34) have been much more supportive of the Pierre Poilievre Conservatives.

This makes sense based on the positioning of each party. Let’s look at one signature issue - housing prices and the affordability of buying a home. From the beginning of his tenure as Opposition Leader, Poilievre has made this a signature Conservative issue. Housing prices, he has consistently argued, are too high. High prices either keep young people from becoming homeowners or condemns them to a lifetime of massive mortgage payments. Since becoming Opposition Leader, Poilievre has promised to lower housing prices.

Here's the thing. The generations have very different interests when it comes to housing prices.

By and large, Boomers (people my age) have a strong vested interest in “maintaining property values” (a.k.a. keeping house prices high). For most of us, our house is our largest asset. We want to keep it valuable.

People in their 20s and 30s have a different imperative. High housing prices are an evil impediment to ownership. High rents create impoverishment even with good incomes.

Older people want high house prices. Younger people want low house prices.

It’s simple balance sheet math.

In large part because of his embrace of making housing more affordable (a.k.a. lower housing prices), Poilievre won the support of the majority of young voters. Liberals got the homeowner vote notwithstanding a late conversion to the cause of affordable housing.

Age and regional politics

If the pollsters are to be believed about the generational voting gap, how does this translate into Canada’s regional electoral divide in which Liberals won the Maritimes and Quebec, Conservatives won the Prairies, and the parties fought to a draw in Ontario and British Columbia?

The age composition of the electorate in these regions is different.

I’ve calculated a Boomer (aged 60 and older) to Young Voter (aged 18 to 34) ratio based on 2021 census data. This provides the number of Boomers per Young Voter in each region.

For Canada as a whole, there are 1.21 Boomers for every Young Voter. This closely aligns with the demographics in Ontario (1.21) and British Columbia (1.26). It was a close election nationally. The age distribution in the provinces where the election was close was identical or similar to the national demographics.

Now let’s look at the regions where the Liberals steamrolled to victory. In Quebec, there are 1.4 Boomer voters for every Young Voter. In the Maritimes, there are 1.6 Boomers for every Youngun.

Now let’s look at the Prairies. In Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta (combined), there were only 0.99 Boomers for every Young Voter.

Let’s put this another way. Compared the national Boomer/Young Voter ratio, the regional percentage variation was:

• Ontario – identical.

• British Columbia – 4 percent more Boomer strength.

• Quebec – 16 percent MORE Boomer strength.

• The Maritimes – 32 percent MORE Boomer strength.

• The Prairies – 18 percent LESS Boomer strength.

The two extremes in the Boomer/Young Voter ratio are Newfoundland & Labrador versus Alberta. Newfoundland has 1.83 Boomers for every Young Voter while Alberta has only 0.95. This is largely the result of the migration of Newfoundlanders moving to Alberta. Liberals got 54 percent of the popular vote in Newfoundland while Conservatives got 63.5 percent in Alberta. Newfoundlanders who moved to Alberta mostly voted Conservative while those remaining in Newfoundland mostly voted Liberal. Young people move in search of jobs. Old folk do not.

How much does this explain?

This difference in age appears to explain some, but not all, of the difference in regional voting patterns. After all, some Young Voters do vote Liberal and some Boomers vote Conservative.

One complication is that there was also an urban/rural divide. For the most part, Liberals did better in the big cities and the Conservatives better in the rural areas, suburbs, towns, and smaller cities. This occurred despite the fact that the cities skew younger than the urban areas. There are other things going on other than a straight correlation between age demographics and voting results.

That being said, more detailed analysis supports the general trend I’ve identified. I’m not going to wallow in the numbers here since I don’t think anyone other than me is interested in a full description of the 6 excel spreadsheets and 23 graphs I’ve constructed, but I’ll just observe that:

· In the big metropolitan areas, the Liberals did better in the core city areas and the Conservatives prospered in the suburbs. The suburbs tend to be younger than the downtown core areas.

· Of the major metropolitan centers, the two big exceptions to Liberal success were Calgary and Edmonton. These are the big metropolitan areas with the youngest age profiles.

Demography is not destiny, but it does have an impact.