Why Ford’s successful campaign was a failure

Ontario spent $186 million to get a new government that’s in no stronger position to protect Ontario than the last.

It’s called an election campaign for a reason. Even though its purpose is to secure votes, instead of purchases, it is, in many ways, akin to marketing campaigns selling beer or detergent. Most of all, it starts with clearly stated quantitative objectives. Usually, it is to contribute to an increased market share. As such, Doug Ford’s campaign to secure a third majority is a failure.

How can that be when he became the first leader to win three straight majorities since PC premier Leslie Frost 66 years ago?

Well. It failed to meet its main objective. A goal Mr. Ford made clear when he launched his campaign in Windsor on January 29th: “The bigger the mandate I receive from you, the better we’ll be able to protect our province.” Ford said.

Mr. Ford did not get the bigger mandate he was seeking. The results speak for themselves.

And he’s disappointed, according to reporting by the Toronto Star: “Ford’s Tories had hopes of winning 90 to 100 ridings in the 124-member legislature but ended up with 80 seats, three fewer than they won in 2022, pending recounts in several close contests. Adding insult to injury, they lost two incumbents, including in Etobicoke, the heartland of the so-called “Ford Nation.”

But Mr. Ford was also hedging his bet in case he didn’t get more seats.

That same day in Windsor, Ford insisted he needed to call an early election to secure a “strong, stable, four-year mandate” to respond to Trump’s tariff threats. “President Trump will use every day he’s in office to exploit any weakness he can find,” said Ford. “To protect Ontario, we need a mandate that will outlive and outlast the Trump administration.”

With this third majority, Mr. Ford will likely outlast Mr. Trump in office by one month. Unless Trump gets his wish for a third term, he will leave the White House in January 2029. Ontario will have to hold an election by February 2029. Had this snap election not taken place, one would have had to be held by June 2026, potentially leaving Ontario with a government with an uncertain future. Which, according to the Conservatives, would have put them in a weaker position to “protect” us.

So, what’s the return on investment for the taxpayers of Ontario for an election that cost $186 million, according to Elections Ontario?

Based on the first measure of success Mr. Ford provided, Ontario got a new government that’s in no stronger position to protect Ontario than the last.

Although this changes little in a non-proportional voting system, the PC increased its share of the popular vote by 2.14%, or 238,547 votes. It cost $186 million to Ontario taxpayers to hold this snap election. In the marketing realm, this $792 cost per additional vote is known as the cost per acquisition. Is that reasonable or steep? The only way to answer this is to calculate the lifetime value of that upfront cost. And, since it does not add up to a stronger mandate to protect Ontario, it’s hard to defend it.

As for the secondary metric of being re-elected to outlast Trump, time will tell if it delivered any return.

However, if the real, unstated objective was to capitalize on an existential threat to change the channel and avoid calling an election when the conditions would be less favourable, this campaign is a resounding success. By choosing an early election, Ford has not only managed to retain power but also avoid future uncertainties that could complicate governance.

Just like in marketing, it takes rigour and humility to return to the initial objectives of a campaign to make an objective assessment of its performance.

Ultimately, the true measure of success in both politics and marketing isn’t just in meeting short-term objectives but in securing long-term stability and trust, ensuring that campaigns genuinely reflect and serve the needs of their audiences.