Nov 29, 2010 By-elections: news and views

Vaughn is actually a made to order opportunity for the Greens to do party building.

The GPC does very well in suburban 905 ridings where the NDP is not in serious contention, and they put even modest local resources into the campaign. When they do that, they often pass the NDP and make the all important threshold of 10%, where you get 60% of your expenses reimbursed. This builds the local campaign, and provides important regional and national benefits.

A by-election in a suburban riding is the perfect opportunity. No need to depend on whether the locals see the opportunity and initiate it... a very small commitment of party organizing resources is easily repaid, and gets results.

But it isnt going to happen because there is nothing going on in the GPC except waiting to see what May does in her million dollar all eggs in the basket longshot to win in Saanich-Gulf Islands. The rest of the GPC has been left on or driven to the sidelines. 

KenS wrote:

Vaughn is actually a made to order opportunity for the Greens to do party building.

The GPC does very well in suburban 905 ridings where the NDP is not in serious contention, and they put even modest local resources into the campaign. When they do that, they often pass the NDP and make the all important threshold of 10%, where you get 60% of your expenses reimbursed.

Yes, but outer suburbs, not Vaughan.

In 2008, the Greens got an average of 7.46% in the 22 City of Toronto ridings. They got 6.85% in Vaughan, 4.94% in Thornhill, 4.18% in Markham-Unionville, 6.84% in Oak Ridges-Markham, 7.41% in Richmond Hill, 8.23% in Newmarket-Aurora, 5.16% in Bramalea-Gore-Malton, 7.77% in Brampton-Springdale, 6.17% in Brampton West, an average of 6.51% in Mississauga, and 7.28% in Ajax-Pickering.

It starts to go up in Oakville (8.45%, ahead of the NDP), Wellington-Halton Hills (9.85%, ahead of the NDP), York-Simcoe (10.11%), Simcoe-Grey (10.13%), Barrie (11.10%), and Dufferin-Caledon (Orangeville) (16.80%, ahead of the NDP).  

ottawaobserver wrote:

It probably doesn't mean very much, but I wonder if anyone has noticed that our new candidate in the Dauphin seat, Denise Harder, has just motored past the Conservative candidate, who's been in place for a year, in the number of Facebook fans she has.  She's been on Facebook for less than 3 days or something.

Any news from out that way?

Pundits' Guide reports that Harder is apparently trying out (tonight!) her own version of a tele-town hall in the riding. I'd like to hear how that goes. If it helps pull the vote up significantly (which could happen), we could see more of this.

ottawaobserver wrote:

In that riding?  Probably that he is a visible member of the italian-canadian community who has achieved a prominent role in society, and that makes them proud.  If I had to guess.

Fantino sounds like another Sergio Marchi (York West Liberal MP 1984-1999) in the making to me.

That guy was an embarassment to Parliament when he was one of the Liberal 'Rat Pack' during the Mulroney era.

As Mary Agnes Welch points out here, it looks like Iggy was quoted more than a little out of context. What's going on with the WFP? Is their editorial board so eager to slam the Liberals that they don't even bother to check the transcript? There are plenty of reasons to criticize the Libs up, down and sideways, but this is silly.

Has the Filipino Journal come out and endorsed Javier, or is it just obvious that it will?

There seems to be some odd "shadow boxing" going on in Winnipeg North. The NDP took over 60% of the vote there last time and the only way you would typically lose a seat where you have a cushion like that is if your party is in total free-fall nationally (ie: if the NDP was in single digits in all the polls), or if there was some unique local factor - like let's say that the provincial NDP government in manitoba was as unpopular as Howard Pawley was in 1986 (when they were at 6% support in polls after a few major fiascos) or even as unpopular as Gordon Campbell is in BC - but no - from what i can tell, there may be a bit of fatigue with the NDP after three terms - but they are still in the thick of things and have won byelections by huge margins in the past year in their core areas, OR maybe if there was someone running for another party who was more than just a good candidate but was a real "super nova" - sorry neither Kevin Lamoureux nor Julie Javier qualify.

For all the blather, I predict that the NDP vote percentage will drop somewhat simply because they have a serious campaign against them - but it will end up being something like NDP 50%, Tories 25%, Liberal 21%, Green/Pirate 3%

The Winnipeg North Liberals didn't even get their rebate in 2008, getting only 9.2% of the vote. And now they claim to have a chance at victory? When was the last time anyone won a by-election after getting less than 10% at the previous election? (Not counting, of course, Gilles Duceppe in 1990.)

It happened in 1987 when Jack Harris won the St. John's East by-election with 46.3%, although the NDP in 1984 had gotten only 6.6%. But Ed was doing very well in 1987, at or near his peak. Ignatieff has not, shall we say, peaked. (Thanks, Pundit's Guide, for remembering that 1987 precedent.)

It has never happened since 1987. Even Mulcair in Outremont in 2007 had a 2006 base of 17.2%. Even in 1987 in Yukon Audrey McLaughlin had a base in 2004 of 16.1%. In 1978, again in Newfoundland and Labrador, Fonse Faour won a by-election for the NDP with a 1976 base of only 4.6%.

When did it ever happen before that? (Not counting in 1960 in Peterborough, when Walter Pitman's New Party victory was a situation like Gilles Duceppe's 1990 victory, from a CCF 1958 base of only 6.6%.) I may have missed one, but I can't find a comparable party victory since the bizarre PC 1949 victory in Nicolet-Yamaska from a base of 6.1% in 1945, with an anti-conscription candidate at odds with the party's new leader George Drew.   

So other than the Newfoundland NDP, such a victory is unheard of. 

How about *general* elections?  I'm sure there might have been a few Carstairs-ians in 1988 that'd count, provincially speaking...

Virtually all of the examples given have been in cases where a party surged across an entire province and a rising tide raised all ships. I suppose that would mean that the Liberals going from 8.5% to victory in Winnipeg North would be possible is there was a MASSIVE Liberal surge across Canada and IGGY-MANIA was the talk of the town - and no where was it more evident than on the Prairies where Ignatieff was looking to be a new Diefanbaker - wildly popular and picking up support from right and left like a massive juggernaut! If that happened and we had poll after poll showing the Liberals polling at 45% nationally and maybe even consistently leading in Man/Sask - then you might have the conditions for an upset. But its hard to move numbers that much in the absence of any national momentum whatsoever. Winnipeg North is an urban seat where a lot of people are very influenced by the big picture and the last week or two has mostly been making the Liberals look bad and the NDP has had a good couple of weeks. About the only "mega-trend" the Liberals have going for them that might bolster their support A BIT is the dead cat bounce of no longer being led by Stephane Dion.    

Stockholm wrote:

I will go out on a limb and make a slightly "inside baseball" prediction. I think the NDP will win Winnipeg North by a bigger margin than the margin they will lose by in Dauphin-etc...

Care to attach some numbers, Stock? I'm going to stick my neck out and say that Chief will get 50-55% of the vote, Javier 25-30%, and the other Kevin 10-15%. That said, being spectacularly wrong has never stopped me before, and it won't stop me now.

Electionprediction currently has Dauphin and Vaughn called for the Conservatives, with Winnipeg North too close to call.

Stockholm wrote:

Since "electionprediction.org" is essentially the "wish list" of Liberal back room boy - what that tells me is that in the Liberal backrooms they know they have a 0% chance of winning in Vaughan and that they have deluded themselves into thinking that they have a 5% chance in Winnipeg North (if you follow that site over time - you will notice that any seat where a Liberal has even the remotest, slimmest snow-balls chance in hell of going Liberal - invariably gets called as a tossup and that any true tossup involving a Liberal gets called as a safe Liberal seat.

Its common knowledge that site is entirely run by Milton Chan who is an EA to Gerard Kennedy and that its worth reading only to understand what the latest Liberal spin is.

They can be judged on their previous predictions, which are on their website.

That said, the candidate profile is such that I'm not *terribly* surprised at Winnipeg North being called TCTC by EPP--at the very least, despite all the CPC smoke and mirrors I can't see the Grits under a populist like Kevin L. dropping back to third once again.  Yet even if the provincial NDP is in a polling lull, Greg Selinger's no Howard Pawley, so it isn't as if a perfect-storm anti-NDP backlash is in the works, either--despite whatever Team Lamoureux thinks...

Maybe what EPP is really trying to say is that Winnipeg North is TCTC for second place between the Liberals and Conservatives.

I agree with OO that each election, EPP tends to have wildly optimistic projections for the Liberals throughout the campaign - and then on the eve of the election, they suddenly make everything a bit more realistic in order to save their credibility. Mark my words - Sunday night, EPP will predict Wpg North as an NDP hold, the next day the NDP will win by a wide margin and EPP will say "see we were right".

ottawaobserver wrote:

That's true, bekayne, but the complete history of the predictions is either not published, or hidden away.  They can indeed be judged by the performance of their very last prediction for every seat.

And most web prediction is a crock because people don't realize what a reasonable standard is. In most elections the majority of seats are safe-- and a small number of swing seats make the difference. Get half of those right (which you can do by random) and you can be looking at an 80% success rate for the overall election. Total failure and success actually would be only a few points apart because of the number of safe seats bulking up the stats.

And the prediction.org record is worse than that. All campaign they lead the seats they want, they say its based on what people say but it isn't. Then at the last second they change the predictions to reflect actual polling. The whole idea of "people on the ground talking" is a joke because they don't even use that information. The site organizers use opinion polls and best guesses themselves not the advice of people posting. They leave every seat that is in play a toss-up to the last moment as well so they are not calling many seats where they have a real chance at being wrong. They post no explanation for their decisions or rationale so the site is really to lead the campaign where they can for propaganda purposes and then call enough seats using whatever information everyone else has in order to claim to be accurate-- and in the end they really are not that accurate anyway when you look at their success rate of calling the seats actually in play. Since the only controversial calls they make on the day before the election, at best it is a bit of election-night drama posing as political punditry.

No can't say anything nice about them-- years ago I wrote some suggestions as to how to make the site have more integrity and got a snarky reply back. I still have the ideas I sent them-- there are ways to make such a system interesting.

ottawaobserver wrote:

Just curious if you could flesh out your rationale for saying the Conservative should "easily win" Dauphin-Swan River-Marquette.

Main reason is that the riding has gone Con/Reform/Alliance in every election since 1958 except for: 

1980 - 1984 when it went NDP for one term (the only time they've  done so since the riding was won by the CCF in 1957)

1993 - 1997 when it went Lib for one term (when the Cons had two parties and Lib Cowling won by a mere 31% of the popular vote and then came in 4th in 1997)

That makes it a textbook Con stronghold. Between 1997 and 2008, Inky Mark increased the Cons share of the vote in each successive election. Undoubtedly some of that may be his personal popularity but it also says a lot about the disposition of voters in the ridings.

Inky's popular vote record: 

1997 -  35.5% (with the PC candidate coming second with 21.6%)

2000 - 47.7%

2004 - 54%

2006 - 59%

2008 - 61%

That's a huge deficit for anyone to overcome, no matter how good a candidate. Con candidate Robert Sopuck (a right-wing think tanker) has been flying under the radar with no google news hits since November 9. There was some "controversy" about the nomination process that had Inky complaining that his hand-picked successor was iced out of the nomination process (the guy didn't get his papers in on time). But the Con "brand" looks pretty safe to me. 

The only possible saving grace is that it's a by-election where voter turnout is generally lower than in a general election. However, the NDP & Libs have run neck and neck in every election since 2000. Without a clear opposition candidate with the best chance of winning, it's likely that the anti-Harper vote will be fatally split even if the Sopuck receives less than 50% of the popular vote. 

Con candidates are playing whack-a-mole with the media and voters in Vaughn and Winnipeg Centre. 

Fantino needs to tell voters where he stands, critics say

Quote:

Retired OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino is in political protective custody, his critics say.  The usually blunt speaking Fantino, the Conservative’s candidate in the Nov. 29 Vaughan federal by-election appears to be running a textbook peek-a-boo campaign.

He’s become a kind of virtual candidate. Voters can follow him on Twitter and listen to his messages on the campaign website but have yet to see him debate his opponents. The Toronto Star had no luck reaching Fantino or even his office despite several calls and an email.

If Fantino can pull this off, it will be a set back for the Libs' morale. Aren't by-elections usually for governing parties to lose (not the opposition)? This is a long time Lib seat. 

Prediction: Libs will squeak through in Vaughn. 

Javier may prove to play spoiler role

Quote:

With the knowledge that she could get media attention while ignoring them might explain why Javier ditched an all-candidates forum on Nov. 16. Javier refused to be interviewed about the no-show, and in fact has refused several Free Press requests for a sit-down interview. A campaign spokesman would only say she had prior commitments. For those of you scoring at home, Javier has turned her back on the mainstream media and ducked head-to-head fights with her opponents. At first blush, you might think the Tories are giving up. You'd be wrong.

This is a part of a calculated strategy by the Conservatives. First, as evidenced by Harper's secret-but-not-so-secret visit to her campaign office, Javier ignores the mainstream media in favour of local, ethnic media. The Conservatives believe, and have for a very long time, that the traditional media treat them unfairly. And they are aware that ethnic media are, with no recrimination, an easier touch. Full-time political reporters are cynical and adversarial; local reporters, ethnic or not, are usually just happy they got to talk to the prime minister.

Prediction: The NDP will take this riding handily. 

Prediction: And a Con should easily win Dauphin-Swan River.

Well, say the vote ends up as CON 45-NDP 30, that would be a strong showing. The NDP should (as it has done by shipping Layton up there) take this area seriously and try really hard. A sure-fire way to not gain ground would be to say, "the Conservatives are going to win anyways, so why bother?"

Stockholm wrote:

Even if we don't win, I agree with Aristotled that a big increase in the popular vote would demonstrate that the NDP was serious about expanding support in rural areas and it would bode well in other more winnable seats in Saskatchewan (and elsewhere) that have a rural component

I hadn't thought about that, Stock, but it's a good point. If people on the prairies see the NDP is serious, places like Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar and even Saskatoon-Humboldt become a lot more possible. Knocking Kelly Block and Brad Trost off their perches on election night sounds pretty sweet to me.

edmundoconnor wrote:

If we can grab SRB, SH and Palliser on election night, I will be extremely happy. I want to give Maurice Vellacott in Saskatoon-Wanuskewin his marching orders too, but politics is the art of the possible, so I'll settle for three Tories seeking alternative employment.* For now.

*Having said that, Liberal support in the riding looks to be circling the drain, so you never know.

I want to see the day when the NDP gets Yorkton-Melville back. Impossible? Well Dauphin and Swan River, just across the border, are NDP provincially, and we're talking about the NDP being in contention federally. Conventional wisdom is that the NDP does better in urban areas. Well, Yorkton-Melville is 51% urban if you count the City of Yorkton's CA plus Stats Can's other "urban areas," while Dauphin--Swan River--Marquette is only 27% urban. Yorkton has its own TV station, and its own Parkland College (with satellites in Melville, Canora and Esterhazy).