Canadian by-elections 2023

[DL]

Its worth noting that Mainstreet did an IVR poll of St. Henri-Ate. Anne and as usual it was an abysmal failure. They had the Liberals ahead of QS 36% to 25% when in fact QS won 45% to 29%!! They also overestimated the PQ and CAQ.

I wish people would wake up and smell the coffee and realize that in this era of cell phones - polls at the riding level (especially urban ridings) are almost a complete waste of time. The only people who are polled are people over 50 who have a landline and have not moved in the last 25 years since it is impossible to source cell phone numbers at the riding level. Mainstreet also grossly underestimated QS in riding after riding in the last Quebec election and perhaps not coincidentally, their riding polls in urban seats in Toronto in last year's Ontario election also grossly underestimated the Ontario NDP.

Caveat emptor

[Hatman 🍁]

I recall we did some riding polls during the election that did happen to pick up on QS strength on the island, including their win in Verdun. Of course, we were calling cell phones.

[King of Kensington]

Ottawa Centre:

https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/naqvi-takes-another-step-toward-running-for-ontario-liberal-leader-1.6312918

[Hatman 🍁]

Ottawa Centre:

https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/naqvi-takes-another-step-toward-running-for-ontario-liberal-leader-1.6312918

He is not resigning as MP.

[DL]

There is another thread specifically on the Ontario Liberal leadership contest - let's stick to byelections here

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=537419.0

[Benjamin Frank]

Hamilton Centre by-election is tomorrow.

[adma]

Hamilton Centre by-election is tomorrow.

Yeah, I know the Liberal candidate got 10% in '18; but given the escalating controversy over the NDP candidate, I wonder what the likelihood of a "Simon Hughes" surprise (or at least a serious scare) is...

[DL]

The number of voters in Hamilton Centre who consider the conflict in the Middle East to be a vote determining issue is very close to zero

[Hatman 🍁]

My prediction is turnout will be abysmally low; the NDP easily wins with a reduced share of the vote, and the Liberals take second.

The NDP floor in the riding is in the mid-40s, so I can see them dropping down there if they have a bad night. Though, I think the final result will be around:

NDP: ~50
Lib: 25-30
PC: ~15
Grn: 5-10

[Upper Canada Tory]

I would be happy to see the NDP lose Hamilton Centre but that doesn't look like it's going to happen.

[adma]

The number of voters in Hamilton Centre who consider the conflict in the Middle East to be a vote determining issue is very close to zero

I think it's more of a general Corbynesque "perhaps a bit too far left for her own good, with a looming cloud of so-labelled anti-Semitism for good measure" matter of tin-eared political optics.  That is, we're dealing w/a different case from Horwath's big-tent mainstream appeal--even if similar traits didn't impede Joel Harden's Ottawa Centre reelection last year.

In a way, as far as south-side-of-the-Golden-Horseshoe byelection replacements for party leaders go, Sarah Jama might be seen as the Sam Oosterhoff of the left.

[DL]

Hamilton centre is very “inner city” and the federal NDP MP Matthew green is also very much on the left of the party. I don’t think being known as a leftwing social activist is a liability in that seat. Oosterhoff for all his craziness has zero problem winning in his own riding which is a safe Tory seat.

[Benjamin Frank]

NDP at 58% with 6 of 53 polls reporting.

[DL]

It’s narrowing! With 6 polls reporting the NDP was at 58% and now with 15 polls reporting they have crashed to 57%

[adma]

Hamilton centre is very “inner city” and the federal NDP MP Matthew green is also very much on the left of the party. I don’t think being known as a leftwing social activist is a liability in that seat. Oosterhoff for all his craziness has zero problem winning in his own riding which is a safe Tory seat.

Which is why I didn't present the JamaOost corollary precisely in terms of *vulnerability*, as opposed to wishful-think "targetability".  (Though at least "on the grade", I can actually see Oost as more vulnerable--he got just under 45% last time, though a lot of that shortfall was shaved away by the New Blue/Ontario Party axis.  Plus, he had former Pelham and West Lincoln mayors running against him for the NDP & Libs.)

Anyway, with 47 out of 53 polls in, the NDP's got 54.42%, and the Libs just over 20%; so that's it for "Simon Hughesing".

[adma]

Final 53:53 Hamilton Centre figure: NDP 9560 (54.28) (-2.98), Liberal 3535 (20.07) (+7.04), PC 2733 (15.52) (-.95), Green 1220 (6.93) (-1.83) New Blue 148 (.84) (-.82) Electoral Reform 121 (.69), Libertarian 105 (.60), Lingard (Ind) 102 (.58), Yan (Ind) 51 (.29) (-.21), Turmel (Ind) 37 (.21).  21.97% turnout.

[Hatman 🍁]

As expected, the turnout was low. I think I was a little shy on my NDP expectations though, I expected a larger swing to the Liberals.

[DL]

As expected, the turnout was low. I think I was a little shy on my NDP expectations though, I expected a larger swing to the Liberals.

Why would you have expected any swing to the Liberals at all? I suppose its not surprising that the NDPO vote share would be slightly lower now that they are losing the "leader bonus" that came with Horwath being the candidate in the general election - plus maybe the Liberals get a "dead cat bounce" from being able to run 100% on party brand and not being dragged down by Del Duca

[Hatman 🍁]

As expected, the turnout was low. I think I was a little shy on my NDP expectations though, I expected a larger swing to the Liberals.

Why would you have expected any swing to the Liberals at all? I suppose its not surprising that the NDPO vote share would be slightly lower now that they are losing the "leader bonus" that came with Horwath being the candidate in the general election - plus maybe the Liberals get a "dead cat bounce" from being able to run 100% on party brand and not being dragged down by Del Duca

The Liberals are the natural second party in the riding, that's why. Just look at the riding's history, only the NDP or the Liberals have won it since the 1960s. So, when the NDP vote goes down (which was obvious, given Horwath wasn't on the ballot, and the minor controversies), it benefits the Liberals.

And I was right, there was a 5 point average swing to the Liberals. Not as large as expected, but a swing nonetheless.

[adma]

As expected, the turnout was low. I think I was a little shy on my NDP expectations though, I expected a larger swing to the Liberals.

Why would you have expected any swing to the Liberals at all? I suppose its not surprising that the NDPO vote share would be slightly lower now that they are losing the "leader bonus" that came with Horwath being the candidate in the general election - plus maybe the Liberals get a "dead cat bounce" from being able to run 100% on party brand and not being dragged down by Del Duca

The Liberals are the natural second party in the riding, that's why. Just look at the riding's history, only the NDP or the Liberals have won it since the 1960s. So, when the NDP vote goes down (which was obvious, given Horwath wasn't on the ballot, and the minor controversies), it benefits the Liberals.

And I was right, there was a 5 point average swing to the Liberals. Not as large as expected, but a swing nonetheless.

Given that the Greens went down as well, the Libs seem to have galvanized the "non-NDP progressive  vote" as well.  So yes, they rekindled their "nominal opposition party" status after 2 consecutive 3rd place elections--however, re the Horwath vote "naturally" migrating to the Libs, it's worth noting that her vote share went down 8 points from '18 to '22,  but it went all over the place (a couple of points to the still-third-place Libs, just under a point to the Tories, 3 points to the Greens, and 2 points to other parties.)

Perhaps it comes down to this: as much as the alarm might have been sounded on Jama's "extremism", those sounding said alarm didn't galvanize behind any particular opposition force.  So given the turnout, the biggest upshot might have been that a good deal of the "moderate establishmentarian" Horwath vote opted to sit on its hands instead.  It wasn't the difference btw/54% and 57% of the vote, it was the difference btw/22% turnout and 38% turnout (yeah, I know, it was only a byelection, but still).

And as much as the Tories have made blue-collar inroads lately, their Hamilton Centre ceiling remains mired in the mid-teens.  It's just that the relative centre of gravity for Libs and Tories in the riding has done a switcheroo: the tony "Red Tory" neighbourhoods below the Mountain are now the heart of yuppie Liberalism, while the ethno-working-class "Copps country" E end is now where lunchbucket Tory strength is founded...

[Hatman 🍁]

We also can't discount the very low turnouts of not just the by-election, but the general as well. Horwath did better in the 2018 election, because the NDP was seen as the main non-Tory party, and that was a bit muddled in 2022. Many of her 2018 voters may have just stayed home in 2022, and they were unlikely to have voted in the by-election.

Speaking of turnout, I think in the current provincial climate low turnout is helping the NDP. According to our post-election polling, most non-voters would have gone PC or Liberal. Makes me think that low information voters are more likely to back the established parties, while high info voters were more aware that the NDP was the main opposition, and therefore they should get your vote to stop the PCs. This is also why the NDP did better than expectations, whereas they normally do worse.

[DL]

Speaking of turnout, I think in the current provincial climate low turnout is helping the NDP. According to our post-election polling, most non-voters would have gone PC or Liberal. Makes me think that low information voters are more likely to back the established parties, while high info voters were more aware that the NDP was the main opposition, and therefore they should get your vote to stop the PCs. This is also why the NDP did better than expectations, whereas they normally do worse.

That would also explain how the Ontario NDP did far better in the seat count in the June 2022 than anyone expected. The conventional wisdom was that whatever the final polls showed the NDP would do even worse because in a low turn out environment, their voters would be more likely to stay home - instead the exact opposite happened. I think part of what is happening a reflection of the new "education" factor on turnout. While its true to NDP vote tends to skew younger and lower income, it also skews towards higher levels of education - and people who have more education tend to follow politics and vote more.

This is also why the conventional wisdom in the US about vote suppression and turnout are getting turned upside down. It used to be that a low turnout favoured the GOP since GOP voters tended to be richer and older etc... but now that the GOP is increasingly becoming the party of (for want of a better term) "the poor white trash" and the Dems are increasingly the party of educated people - the turnout effect is very different. We see that the GOP has a big problem because unless Trump is on the ballot, many of their voters now can't be bothered to vote, while the more Dem leaning demographic segments are much more likely to be "high propensity voters". Paradoxically, the more the GOP keeps trying to make it more difficult to vote, the more they may be disenfranchising their own voters.

[adma]

Speaking of turnout, I think in the current provincial climate low turnout is helping the NDP. According to our post-election polling, most non-voters would have gone PC or Liberal. Makes me think that low information voters are more likely to back the established parties, while high info voters were more aware that the NDP was the main opposition, and therefore they should get your vote to stop the PCs. This is also why the NDP did better than expectations, whereas they normally do worse.

That would also explain how the Ontario NDP did far better in the seat count in the June 2022 than anyone expected. The conventional wisdom was that whatever the final polls showed the NDP would do even worse because in a low turn out environment, their voters would be more likely to stay home - instead the exact opposite happened. I think part of what is happening a reflection of the new "education" factor on turnout. While its true to NDP vote tends to skew younger and lower income, it also skews towards higher levels of education - and people who have more education tend to follow politics and vote more.

This is also why the conventional wisdom in the US about vote suppression and turnout are getting turned upside down. It used to be that a low turnout favoured the GOP since GOP voters tended to be richer and older etc... but now that the GOP is increasingly becoming the party of (for want of a better term) "the poor white trash" and the Dems are increasingly the party of educated people - the turnout effect is very different. We see that the GOP has a big problem because unless Trump is on the ballot, many of their voters now can't be bothered to vote, while the more Dem leaning demographic segments are much more likely to be "high propensity voters". Paradoxically, the more the GOP keeps trying to make it more difficult to vote, the more they may be disenfranchising their own voters.

Though also re a seat like Hamilton Centre, it's also possible that a lot of "non-NDP" voters simply sat on their hands because they knew no other party had a chance, so why bother.

Conversely, let's not forget that just like Trump populism, Ford populism can be a "vote-motivator" to the otherwise-unmotivated--it certainly was in the 2010 and 2014 Toronto mayoral races, or in 2018 provincially.  That it wasn't so in 2022 had a bit of calculated incumbency inertia about it--plus, it might say more about people not motivated to vote *Liberal*, what with their dud of a leader and platform (and perhaps the Tories exploiting said dud-ness in the name of passive "opposition voter suppression").  As well as the fact that (as municipal elections bear out), the epitome of Ontario-style low-propensity voters are the "Lib/Con swing" 905 suburbans, which this time voted Ford out of status quo boredom, and where the NDP's biggest reversals relative to '18 happened.  (And as much as the media tried to push the Horwath-as-dud-leader narrative, it probably worked more to discourage further hitherto-Lib voters from swinging to the NDP, or '18's suburban "red Dippers" from making it a twofer.)

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Hate to be that guy, but I don't think there's anything to be interpreted from the Hamilton Centre byelection. Sure, a slight NDP->OLP transfer, but that's probably reversion to the mean more than anything else. I mean, not only did Horwath have a leadership bump, she held this riding and its predecessor for 18 years. The OLP has a lot of work to do before we can definitively say they're back.

On top of that, Hamilton Centre is as quintessentially NDP as it gets. The Liberals do have a history of winning here, but it requires many things to go right for them and wrong for the NDP. If Trudeaumania (TM) wasn't enough to even get within striking distance of turning this seat red, Minivan Caucus (TM) never had a chance. Obviously the PCs are a complete non-starter here, and it showed.

[adma]

Hate to be that guy, but I don't think there's anything to be interpreted from the Hamilton Centre byelection. Sure, a slight NDP->OLP transfer, but that's probably reversion to the mean more than anything else. I mean, not only did Horwath have a leadership bump, she held this riding and its predecessor for 18 years. The OLP has a lot of work to do before we can definitively say they're back.

On top of that, Hamilton Centre is as quintessentially NDP as it gets. The Liberals do have a history of winning here, but it requires many things to go right for them and wrong for the NDP. If Trudeaumania (TM) wasn't enough to even get within striking distance of turning this seat red, Minivan Caucus (TM) never had a chance. Obviously the PCs are a complete non-starter here, and it showed.

Well, there would have been no urge to interpret anything were it not for the NDP candidate controversy "forcing the issue".  Were it a more orthodox "Matthew Green" type of municipal leftist bearing the standard, there really would be no reason to bother seeing anything here.  But w/Jama, the main story is the negligible effect said controversy had on the vote.

And sure, the OLP have a minivan caucus--however, they just had their annual meeting in Hamilton which, on paper, *ought to have* energized the base; and we know from the Lib Dems in the UK that monkey-in-the-middle rump "middle parties" *can* muster a lot of maverick byelection energy.  It's just that, out of power and reduced to a minivan rump two elections in a row, the OLP is *that* energy-depleted.  (That those sounding the alarm over Jama stopped short of endorsing an alternative didn't help the Libs' cause, presuming that they're the only other even vaguely "electable" alternative here.)