Conservative Populism, or Unpopular Liberalism? Review of the 2018 Ontario Provincial Election
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ontario’s general election on June 7, 2018, brought the Progressive Conservative party to government for the first time in the 21st Century. The PCs’ victory over the incumbent Liberals, however, reached this point despite much turmoil. Months before the election the party faced a crisis when its leader, Patrick Brown, resigned amid a scandal. The PC party hastily organized a leadership election that put Doug Ford at the helm, who then led the party to victory. The following election review traces these steps and looks at some dynamics that contributed to both the PC leadership vote and the overall result of the election. The PC leadership election is analyzed, providing evidence that Ford’s rise may reflect some of the populist sentiment that has gripped other democracies. The analysis then turns to the general election, focusing on media coverage and issue salience, particularly as they relate to the party leaders. Survey data are examined to build some explanatory vote-choice models, which shows that voters in the general election appeared less moved by populism than a desire to punish the Liberals.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".