Search

In 2017, Montreal elected Valérie Plante, the first woman mayor in the city's 400-year history. Using this election as a case study, we show how gender did and did not influence the outcome. A survey of Montreal electors suggests that gender was not a salient factor in vote choice. Although gender did not matter much for voters, it did shape the organization of the campaign and party. We argue that Plante's victory can be explained in part by a strategy that showcased a less leader-centric party and a degendered campaign that helped counteract stereotypes about women's unsuitability for positions of political leadership. Keywords: local elections, mayors, political parties, gender En 2017, Valérie Plante est devenue la première femme à être élue au poste de mairesse de Montréal. Cet article présente une étude de cas de cette élection, afin d'explorer l'influence du genre sur cette élection. L'analyse du comportement des électeurs, à l'aide d'un sondage représentatif, démontre que les facteurs liés au genre n'ont pas été déterminants dans le vote des Montréalais en 2017. Pourtant, le genre a été central à cette campagne et ce, de deux façons. Notre analyse propose que la victoire de Plante s'explique en grande partie par l'impact combiné d'une stratégie de campagne visant à neutraliser le genre de la candidate à la mairie et par la consolidation de Projet Montréal comme alternative partisane stable, moins centrée sur la personnalité d'un chef. Ces forces ont contribué à contrecarrer les stéréotypes sur l'inaptitude des femmes en politique. Ce cas illustre l'importance d'analyser l'impact de la consolidation des partis politiques municipaux pour la vie politique des villes. Mots-clés: élections locales, maires, partis politiques, genre, Introduction In 2017, Montreal elected Valérie Plante as mayor, the first woman to hold the position in the city's 400-year history. Her victory was a surprise. Early polls and conventional [...]

Municipal mayoral elections present a compelling puzzle: what happens when gendered stereotypes about level of government conflict with those about type of office? Although local politics is viewed as communal and more feminine, the mayoral office is a prominent, prestigious position of political leadership that voters may perceive as more masculine. We intervene by analyzing open-ended comments about 32 mayoral candidates from a survey of 14,438 municipal electors in eight Canadian cities. We argue gendered trait and issue stereotypes are embedded in voters' assessments of mayoral candidates. We find no evidence that female candidates benefit from their perceived competence in local policy issues, and they experience backlash when they display the traits typically associated with strong leaders. We conclude that, even at the level of government frequently thought of as more open to women, female mayoral candidates are disadvantaged by an enduring association between masculinity and political leadership. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Election to office is shaped by a series of decisions made by prospective candidates, parties, and voters. These choices determine who emerges and is ultimately selected to run, and each decision point either expands or limits the possibilities for more diverse representation. Studies of women candidates have established an important theoretical and empirical basis for understanding legislative recruitment. This study asks how these patterns differ when race and intersectionality are integrated into the analyses. Focusing on more than 800 political aspirants in Canada, I show that although white and racialized women aspire to political office at roughly the same rates, their experiences diverge at the point of party selection. White men remain the preferred candidates, and parties' efforts to diversify politics have mostly benefited white women. I argue that a greater emphasis on the electoral trajectories of racialized women and men is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite increased attention to ethnic differences in political behaviour, there is little research on ethnic minorities as political donors and almost none outside the United States. We draw on an administrative dataset of contributions to candidates, which we augment with donors' ethnicity. Focusing on the 2015 Canadian election, we find ethnic minorities are generally less likely to donate than other Canadians, but South Asian Canadians donate at astonishingly high rates. Contrary to previous research, there are only modest differences in the size of donations across ethnic groups. Linking donation data to candidate characteristics and census data reveals substantial co-ethnic affinity effects among Chinese and South Asian Canadians. Even in the absence of co-ethnic candidates, however, South Asians donate at a substantial rate. The proportion of donations to out-of-district and weaker candidates is also quite high, which could signal symbolic considerations are especially important to ethnic minority donors. The substantial heterogeneity between ethnic groups and the different effects on rates versus size of donations add important nuance to our knowledge of ethnicity and political behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gender gaps in voter turnout and electoral representation have narrowed, but other forms of gender inequality remain. We examine gendered differences in donations: who donates and to whom? Donations furnish campaigns with necessary resources, provide voters with cues about candidate viability, and influence which issues politicians prioritize. We exploit an administrative data set to analyze donations to Canadian parties and candidates over a 25-year period. We use an automated classifier to estimate donor gender and then link these data to candidate and party characteristics. Importantly, and in contrast to null effects from research on gender affinity voting, we find women are more likely to donate to women candidates, but women donate less often and in smaller amounts than men. The lack of formal gendered donor networks and the reliance on more informal, male-dominated local connections may influence women donors' behavior. Change over a quarter century has been modest, and large gender gaps persist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With its relatively high immigration levels and comparatively favorable public opinion, Canada is often seen as a bastion of support for immigrants and refugees. We argue that support is uneven because Canadians differentiate between economic immigrants and those who arrive on humanitarian grounds. Our conclusion is supported by an automated content analysis of Canadian print media coverage over a 10-year period, an approach that allowed us to capture a wide swath of discourse. We found distinct differences in the framing of immigrants and refugees. Immigrants are framed in economic terms, whereas greater attention is focused on the validity of refugee claims, potential security threats, and the extent to which refugees "take advantage" of social programs. More focus is also given to refugees' national origins, and that framing is disproportionately negative. Our analysis illustrates the discursive distinctions that are drawn between immigrants and refugees and the hierarchy of preferences for the former over the latter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]