Toronto Centre by-election: The Exciting Conclusion

LIB: 2007 - 47.8%, 2010 - 45.5%

PC: 2007 - 20.2%, 2010 - 16.1%

NDP: 2007 - 18.8%, 2010 - 33.7%

GRN: 2007 - 9.8%, 2010 - 3.2%

OTH: 2007 - 3.3%, 2010 - 1.4%

Man, I love rabble predictions and the rationales behind them.  Here's some highlights from the previous thread. Nice to see the NDP significantly improve their standing and come in 2nd though and the cons in 3rd. That could be more of a referendum on Harper than Hudak and a testament to the NDPs choice of an excellent candidate. 

Quote:

* there's room for surprises and for the received wisdom to be confounded.

* Too Close to Call

* I'm going to pin this on Crowe by a margin of 500-1,000 votes (maybe a little more).

* big things could happen

* Glen Murray will eke out a narrow win.

 * ...too little, too late for the Liberals.People will see this as the last desperate act of a party to stop what they see as a highly regrettable incident: them losing Toronto Centre.

* If Murray squeaks in, expect blood on the carpet at Liberal headquarters

* would there even be such a thing as a safe Liberal seat? ....then the impossible ... could happen. History could very well be made tomorrow.

* the Libs are terrified and think they are in trouble there

* could be the final nail in Murray's political coffin.

Re "best ever": I think Carolann Wright did something like 35% or so vs Ian Scott in 1990...

Wow, an amazing turnout of NDP voters given the history of this riding. This is a testament to the fantastic vote pulling work of an outmatched ndp machine. Take a look at the donor lists on elections ontario if you want a wake up call. Let this be a lesson though about investing in pointless by elections.  Given the state of things I would never commit another ndp dollar to the people of this riding who clearly do not deserve proper representation in gov't.  I suggest ignoring future by elections in unwinnable Ottawa and focusing on developing  candidates in northern and rural ridings outside of Toronto and work from that position of strength. Slow and steady wins the race.   Lets hope that the party brass learn from this and stops chasing the white rabbit in the next provincial election and instead dedicates the financial resources to where they actually have a chance at success....outside of the great city of Toronto. 

Once again, John Turmel falls short of electoral victory

I'm sorry, Maysie. Go you three guys I've never heard of! Especially the orange one!

Dayumm, Busted. We out. Ladies and Gentlemen, Mr. Bill Withers...

Congratulations to Cathy Crowe on a well run campaign and anyone here who worked the campaign. 

Aside from the predictable results (which happily show the PCs taking a beating), should we be worried about social democrats leading a "tax-grab" revolt while at the same time championing the virtues of the Sally Anne army?  And what's this pursuit of populism worth in the next provincial election?  How many NDP seats are we willing to trade off for anti-tax resentment and a potential Hudak backlash?

Stockholm wrote:

Huh??? First of all, the NDP campaign in Toronto Centre was not nearly as anti-HST centered as it had been in St. Paul and was much more focused on social issues - which made sense given the candidate. I have no idea what you're talking about with regard to "championing the Sally Anne army". There is a palliative care hospital in the riding that was in danger of closing - any reasonable persona would be alarmed about that. Given that the Ontario PCs have crashed and burned and three straight byelections - and don't see any evidence of a "Hudak backlash" unless you meant a backlash AGAINST him. Something tells me we won't see very many people (if any) in the next Ontario election saying "Oh I'm going to vote PC because the NDP told me to".

While I've spoken out against the anti-HST campaign, I (mostly) agree with Stockholm here.  It was not an HST-dominated campaign like in St. Pauls.

The "social democrats" campaigned against a tax transfer that takes money from the poor and gives it to the rich.

They campaigned to keep a hospital open instead of selling its services off.

Shake your head until the silly comes out.

SO, does the showing tonight mean the ONDP will consider this a winnable riding at the next provincial election(or that the federal party will see as a potential target seat when Harper finally throws the dice for his LAST shot at a majority?)

@Polunatic2:

I have to notice, with more than a little chagrin, that the more excitable predictions were mine. Guess that'll happen when you're swept up in a campaign and you become an utterly partisan hack.

Cathy did stellar work yesterday. Getting the vote up to almost 34% is an incredible achievement, especially in Toronto Centre. She put her heart and soul into the campaign, and I hope, once she's suitably recovered, that she begins to consider the possibility of a rematch.

As for the rest? Well, the Greens got flattened and paid the price for running a limp campaign. It turns out even my prediction of 4% was optimistic for them. They have some serious work to do next time to convince people they're relevant around here.

The PCs will never want to run Taylor again (although I'm given to understand the feeling's mutual). She couldn't have given a hoot whether she helped the party or not. Maybe the disaffection was the reason behind the John Baird outburst.

The Liberals learnt you can run anyone (as long as he's not a complete doofus) and you still win. I have to wonder if Bob Rae's relationship with Murray is not somewhere south of zero right now, and whether that could cost Murray down the road.

John Turmel: The fight goes on. Someday soon, all the other candidates will keel over, and he shall win with his handful of votes. THEN we'll all be sorry.

@Ken Burch: This riding has the *beginnings* of looking interesting for 2011. Almost doubling the vote in TC means the votes aren't locked up with the Liberals. The NDP might have to give this a few rounds before they win here, though.

And FYI: I now know that Paul Ferreira has been reading the thread(s). Wave, everyone!

Interesting to note that the NDP received 8,528 votes in 2007 and 8,685 in 2010 whilst the Liberal vote went from from 21,585 to 12,327; the Tory vote went from 9,225 to 4,030 and, most dramatically, the Greens went from 4,366 to a pitiful 806.

So it may be less that the NDP vote spiked than that their traditional supporters were more excited and were more likely to come out in a February by-election than while the other parties suffered from lower turnout. Plus, it's likely the NDP picked up a lot of younger voters who would have supported the Greens in 2007 and perhaps some tactical Tory voters who thought Crowe had a better chance of knocking off the Liberals than their own candidate. Also, some Red Tories who supported Taylor in 2007 probably went to Murray (or just stayed home) because they find a Hudak-led Tory party unpalatable.

BTW, listening to the Metro Morning interview, I don't think Taylor outed Baird out of spite - I think it was just that Baird's orientation is such an open secret that you'd have to be pretty well informed and in the LGBT community to know that he's actually in the closet:) What I mean by that is Taylor's around enough gay Tories being in Toronto Centre to know that Baird's gay and has probably seen him at LGBT events in the riding but she's not integrated enough in the community to know it's a "secret". I mean, really, everyone knows Baird is gay - you have to be slightly clueless though not to realize that he's in the closet.

Maysie wrote:

My best guess is the provincial Greens don't have the resources to use/waste on a by-election that's bound to go Liberal.

Ken Burch wrote:

 SO, does the showing tonight mean the ONDP will consider this a winnable riding at the next provincial election(or that the federal party will see as a potential target seat when Harper finally throws the dice for his LAST shot at a majority?)

Dude, this is Bob Rae's riding federally. The federal Liberals pwn TC. As, apparently, the provincial ones do. 

First of all, if the Ontario Greens "don't have the resources" to "waste" on a byelection that's bound to go Liberal - then I presume that they don't have the resources to waste on any of the 106 ridings in Ontario! Ridings in Ontario fall into four categories: Ridings that are bound to go Liberal (waste of Green resources), ridings that are bound to PC (waste of Green resources), ridings that are bound to NDP (waste of Green resources) and ridings that are toss-ups between any two of the main parties but where the Greens are going to be in last place (waste of Green resources). When you are a party that has never even come close to winning a seat at any level anywhere in Canada - you can't just ignore byelection after byelection on the grounds that you can't win. The new leader of the Ontario Greens is from Toronto, they had above average showings in Toronto Centre in the federal byelection and general election and in the last provincial election, this is a riding which is full of opinion leaders and the byelection was getting a lot of coverage. When you only get 3% of the vote in a byelection like this - the media and the voters will quite rightly conclude that you are not a serious player. Imagine if the Green leader demands to be included in a leaders debate in 2011? All the media and the other parties have to do is say "gee there were five byelections since the 2007 provincial election and in each case the Green got low single digits - remind su why we should take you seriously?"

AS for the winnability of Toronto Centre for the NDP. My view has always been that under the current boundaries, the TC COULD be winnable for the NDP under the following circumstances: 1. The NDP runs a really stellar candidate who can attract people beyond the usual party vote (we had that in Cathy Crowe). 2. The Liberals have to be really, really unpopular - like the Ontario Liberals were in 1990 AND they have to make the mistake of running some corporate type who is TURN-OFF to small "l" liberals (much as some people find Glen Murray to be a bit of a prick - to the average person he looks good on paper - first openly gay mahyor of any city in North American, head of the Urban Institute etc...) 3. The Tories have to have a moderate red Tory leader and run a strongt candidate and a strong campaign (this most definitely did NOT happen this time).

Even in 1990 when the stars all aligned almost perfectly for the NDP - the Liberals still held on to Toronto Centre by a narrow margin.

As Michelle pointed out somewhere else, success can be measured in more ways than just winning - particularly if you set out with other goals - e.g. base building, organizational development, public education, etc. In that respect, there would be a number of reasons to suggest that Crowe's campaign was a success. Whatever one thinks of the HST, a causal relationship could be made between the centrality of the issue in St. Paul's and Toronto Centre and the results. I suppose polling would be necessary to confirm that. 

McGuinty must be pleased to have garnered 47% in the riding. They'll probably spin it as a referendum even if it is a stronghold. They may draw some lessons from the campaign for tougher by-elections coming up on March 4 in Leeds-Grenville and Ottawa-Nepean which I wasn't aware of until I checked Elections Ontario this morning for final results.

Hate to sound like a broken record, but the best way in the long run to get great candidates like Cathy Crowe in the legislature is to have proportional representation. 

I agree with Stockholm's analysis, but I would say that at the moment, the NDP would need ALL the stars to be in alignment. That didn't quite happen here. If Taylor had run a stronger campaign, and been more attractive to Lib/Tory switchers, she could have hoovered up a lot of Murray's votes, maybe even enough for Crowe to have snuck through the middle. The mathematics mean that this is a long-haul riding.

edmundoconnor wrote:

John Turmel: The fight goes on. Someday soon, all the other candidates will keel over, and he shall win with his handful of votes. THEN we'll all be sorry.

And it would look something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEJAZHsEkb4&feature=related

For historical comparisons:

Federal NDP Candidates

(Toronto Centre, Toronto Centre-Rosedale, Rosedale)

2008 - 7,744 - 15.1% - El-Farouk Khaki

2008 By - 3,299 - 13.8% - El-Farouk Khaki

2006 - 14,036 - 23.7% - Michael Shapcott

2004 - 12,747 - 23.8% - Michael Shapcott

2000 - 5,398 - 11.4% - David Berlin

1997 - 9,597 - 20.6% - David MacDonald

1993 - 5,547 - 10.8% - Jack Layton

1988 - 8,266 - 15.1% - Doug Wilson

1984 - 7,836 - 17.8% - Dell Wolfson

1980 - 5,698 - 14.9% - Jim Hockley

1979 - 6,902 - 17.5% - Ron B. Thomson

1978 By - 3,008 - 9.3% - Ron B. Thomson

1974 - 3,285 - 9.4% - Maurice Desjardins

1972 - 4,598 - 12.6% - Ron Sabourin

1968 - 4,083 - 12.3% - John Chamard

1965 - 4,514 - 20.8% - Harding E. Bishop

1963 - 3,534 - 15.1% - Harding E. Bishop

1962 - 3,778 - 15.9% - Desmond Sparham

Provincial NDP Candidates

(Toronto Centre, Toronto Centre-Rosedale, St. George-St. David)

2010 By - 8,685 - 33.1% - Cathy Crowe

2007 - 8,528 - 18.9% - Sandra Gonzalez

2003 - 9,112 - 20.1% - Gene Lara

1999 - 4,019 - 8.8% - Helen Breslauer

1995 - 9,672 - 30.7% - Brent Hawkes

1993 By - 1,451 - 8.2% - George Lamony

1990 - 10,646 - 35.8% - Carolann Wright

1987 - 5,658 - 19.2% - John Campey

Polunatic2 wrote:

As Michelle pointed out somewhere else, success can be measured in more ways than just winning - particularly if you set out with other goals - e.g. base building, organizational development, public education, etc. In that respect, there would be a number of reasons to suggest that Crowe's campaign was a success. Whatever one thinks of the HST, a causal relationship could be made between the centrality of the issue in St. Paul's and Toronto Centre and the results. I suppose polling would be necessary to confirm that. 

McGuinty must be pleased to have garnered 47% in the riding. They'll probably spin it as a referendum even if it is a stronghold. They may draw some lessons from the campaign for tougher by-elections coming up on March 4 in Leeds-Grenville and Ottawa-Nepean which I wasn't aware of until I checked Elections Ontario this morning for final results.

Hate to sound like a broken record, but the best way in the long run to get great candidates like Cathy Crowe in the legislature is to have proportional representation. 

I agree 100%.  Another difference between this byelection and St. Pauls is that it was much more focused on issues of concern to the riding, while in St. Pauls it was very much a cookie cutter campaign that could have been done anywhere.

I'm sure in many if not most of the polls Cathy Crowe won, the Tories were in single digits!

I think last night was a bit disappointing for the Ontario PC's, but it's hard for a Conservative candidate to win in a liberal city like Toronto.  It's not easy trying to break into a liberal enclave like that.

Tim Hudak gave credit to Pamela Taylor for the effort she put in:

"Proud of the efforts of @electtaylor and her hard working team for all of their efforts in a tough riding. Keep building for 2011."

http://twitter.com/timhudak

The NDP did finish behind the Conservatives in Toronto Centre in the 2008  federal election though.  This means that the Conservatives may be emerging as the rival to the Liberals in Toronto Centre at the federal level.