🇨🇦 2024 Canadian by-elections

[adma]

Getting over 10% is important since it qualifies a candidate to get half of all election expenses rebated by Elections Canada...it will be interesting to see how much each party actually spent in this byelection.

The Tories likely spent the maximum allowed by law during the writ period which is about $100,000, plus I'll bet the Tories also spent a vast sum before the byelection was called when they could spend as much as they wanted.

The Liberals likely spent a decent amount - maybe $60k to $70k

I'd wager that the NDP spent very, very little here - like maybe $5,000 (meaning that getting over 10% might save them $2,500).

FWIW back in 2013 there was a federal byelection in Durham when O'Toole was first elected. That time the NDP made a fully funded effort and threw everything but the kitchen sink at the seat - they managed to come in second with 26% but still wayyyyy behind the Tory. Moral of the story is unless you are rolling in dough, its a waste of money to spend the maximum just to lose by a slightly smaller margin

And of course, in 2013, they had reason to make that fully funded effort: they were in Official Opposition thanks to the Orange Crush, they'd already been 2nd here in '11 without really trying thanks to said Orange Crush, and they still earned the OO benefit of the doubt while the Libs were still licking their wounds.  It was really less to *win*, per se, than to get a respectable result and demonstrate their OO viability in an otherwise foregone-conclusion HarperCon hold circumstance--to prove that '11 wasn't a flash in the pan (and *maybe* set the stage for Mulcair finishing Jack's business in '15).

As far as the NDP byelection share-loss business goes, it's only of import to inside-baseball types who follow byelection results as a personal-option barometer--though of course, the Libs *would* use such concern-trolling in order to persuade Dippers into their camp.  But in practice, it's more akin to the UK Lib Dems getting 2-3% byelection results and behind Reform & Green (though of course, the Lib Dem situation's a bit different since the Cameron/Clegg era Audrey/Alexa'd the party).  The thing is, the NDP doesn't have the "establishmentarian" base that the Libs & Cons have; and sadly, changing patterns of electoral engagement, media coverage, civic awareness, ground-troop availability, etc make the old Caplan/Lewis '64 "Riverdale formula" difficult to come by--today's electioneering methods favour the big-money top-down over the rootsier bottom-up.  

But that said, there's still *something* of an asterisk about Poilievre's appeal--that is, the ugly truth is that present-day polling would give him a "Mulroney landslide", but we're not dealing w/someone w/the big-tent charm of an '84 Mulroney.  And as w/Harper in all of his elections save maybe '11,  I can picture voters "sobering up" t/w the finish line--whether on behalf of the Libs, or the NDP, or a "dual front" chipping from both ends, who knows...

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Because if I'm an ABC voter whose main priority is stopping Poilievre, these last few byelections have given me zero reason to think that the NDP are a viable option.

I have news for you - NO ONE is going to stop Poilievre. The Tories will win the next election its a 100% certainty unless a meteor hits the earth. It won't matter of you vote Liberal or vote NDP or vote Green or vote Rhino (do they still exist) - the Tories will win. The only issue in the next election will be the balance of power between Liberals and NDP on the opposition benches.

The whole strategic voting argument only makes sense IF you live in a marginal seat and IF there is any doubt whatsoever as to who will win the election. The current situation is reminding me of the 1984 election - at the start of that campaign people thought the NDP was doomed (for a variety of reasons) - but once it became clear that the Tories under Mulroney were going to win in a landslide, people in ridings where the NDP had incumbents running or were clearly competitive "came home" to the NDP since it was clear that the Liberals were 100% certain to lose no matter what.  

Oh you don't have to sell me on strategic voting being a crock for the most part. Lucky for me, I'm not an "ABC" voter, I'm a "C" voter.

Let me rephrase - its not so much about who can stop Poilievre, strategic voting isn't going to overcome a 20 point lead. But take downtown Toronto for example, where you don't really need to "stop the conservatives" in any election, because the conservatives simply don't win seats in that part of the world. Despite that, the region ALWAYS coalesces around whichever progressive party looks stronger. Urban progressives won't pick the next government, but they could very well pick the next opposition, which should be the NDP's goal. But getting 10% in Durham, even in a byelection, is objectively a poor performance, and I can't see this helping their confidence.

Of course, things could change. It wasn't that long ago that the CPC was having embarrassing showings in byelections. But it's not like things just magically changed, the CPC rebranded Poilievre to the point that he actually has net positive favourables (which no CPC leader has had in a decade), and the CPC actually has message discipline now, which was lacking under Scheer and certainly under O'Toole. So I don't think it's a matter of just waiting for Trudeau to slip on enough banana peels to cede second place to the NDP, they actually need to have a real plan to turn support into votes.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

I think there clearly is a time when public sentiment gets set in stone so it won't change no matter what happens (this imaginary external event that some Liberals joke about.) I think the polling has been consistent enough for long enough to say that we are here now federally no matter what happens.

I saw this in 2000-2001 in B.C as well (although for some reason the polling slightly underestimated NDP support.)

What does everybody else here think?

Yeah I agree. I just can't think of any election in Canadian politics where a governing party comes back from the kind of unpopularity the Liberals are seeing right now. Now when governments poll this badly, sometimes it leads to a third party surging to first place. Mike Harris in 1995 comes to mind, arguably even Trudeau himself in 2015. I don't see that coming from the NDP in 2025, but there's at least a historical precedent. And there's plenty of historical precedent for a third party to jump into official opposition. But when a government polls this badly, they have historically never come back to actually win.

Preventing a CPC majority is a more realistic goal, and I do think the polls narrow a bit once we get into an election campaign. But when you're 20 points down, even holding them to a minority is a tough task. 338Canada currently projects a 98% chance of a Conservative majority, because with the current polling numbers it's basically guaranteed. And the crazy thing is, we don't even know the CPC's ceiling. It used to be 40%, now it's inching closer to 45%. There's not going to be some a-ha moment where Canadians suddenly come back to the Liberals, it's going to be a real fight. In a 40-30 environment, sure maybe you can swing just enough points and force a Conservative minority. In a 45-25 environment? Forget it.

[DL]

Yeah I agree. I just can't think of any election in Canadian politics where a governing party comes back from the kind of unpopularity the Liberals are seeing right now. Now when governments poll this badly, sometimes it leads to a third party surging to first place. Mike Harris in 1995 comes to mind, arguably even Trudeau himself in 2015. I don't see that coming from the NDP in 2025, but there's at least a historical precedent. And there's plenty of historical precedent for a third party to jump into official opposition. But when a government polls this badly, they have historically never come back to actually win.

Actually as I recall the PCs under Mulroney had incredibly low polling numbers in 1987 and were often in third place behind the Liberals AND the NDP - they went on to win a majority in 1988. The Alberta PCs under Allison Redfern were losing by double digits to Wildrose in 2012 - and then staged an upset and won. Supposedly the Manitoba NDP under Howard Pawley was practically in single digits in 1984-85 and then managed to win in 1986. Depending on what polls you want to believe the BC Liberals under Christy Clark were down by as much as 15 points in 2012-13 - then won in May 2013. The BC NDP was ridiculously unpopular in 1995 - then Harcourt quit and was replaced by Glen Clark and they won in 1996. The Ontario Liberals were ridiculously unpopular in 2012-13 then McGuinty quit, was succeeded by Kathleen Wynne and they won a majority in 2014 - so it does happen   

[adma]

Oh you don't have to sell me on strategic voting being a crock for the most part. Lucky for me, I'm not an "ABC" voter, I'm a "C" voter.

Let me rephrase - its not so much about who can stop Poilievre, strategic voting isn't going to overcome a 20 point lead. But take downtown Toronto for example, where you don't really need to "stop the conservatives" in any election, because the conservatives simply don't win seats in that part of the world. Despite that, the region ALWAYS coalesces around whichever progressive party looks stronger. Urban progressives won't pick the next government, but they could very well pick the next opposition, which should be the NDP's goal. But getting 10% in Durham, even in a byelection, is objectively a poor performance, and I can't see this helping their confidence.

Of course, things could change. It wasn't that long ago that the CPC was having embarrassing showings in byelections. But it's not like things just magically changed, the CPC rebranded Poilievre to the point that he actually has net positive favourables (which no CPC leader has had in a decade), and the CPC actually has message discipline now, which was lacking under Scheer and certainly under O'Toole. So I don't think it's a matter of just waiting for Trudeau to slip on enough banana peels to cede second place to the NDP, they actually need to have a real plan to turn support into votes.

TBH I don't think *anybody's* yet seriously internalized the likelihood of Durham *presently* (as opposed to in 2013) being in 2nd-place NDP contention.  In fact, it was a low-intensity byelection all around; and face it, the Cons had, as their candidate, a Lantsman-level symbol of how they could be a Millennial-friendly "modern" party, just the thing to surf their polling sugar high on.  Silently, *everybody* might as well have been conceding it--so in a way, simply by giving more of an effort, the Libs wound up looking more like the chumps than the no-effort NDP.

And while I did correctly anticipate a majority here, I'd still prepare for the "corrective" likelihood (but *not* certainty) of a submajority come the next general election--and more of an opposition split a la present national polling.  Bearing in mind that aside from a withdrawn-candidate-still-on-the-ballot situation in '08 (and even *that* didn't impede a saved deposit), the NDP in Durham has ranged from 15% to 21% in general elections since the dawn of the Layton era; and the Libs'll likely be more focussed upon saving the furniture than targeting Durham in a non-byelection situation.  And barring a *big* Jagmeet bomb (or '18-provincial-Andrea-esque surge), somewhere within that range is likelier in the next general than a repeat of the byelection basement...

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

I doubt the NDP's performance in the byelection means that much considering how little they put into it but the attitude of "we can't win so let's not even try" is emblematic of the Singh era NDP. In the short run avoiding elections and attaching himself to Trudeau may have saved Singh some marginal seats but in the long run it cripples the NDP's ability to present itself as a viable alternative.

[adma]

Preventing a CPC majority is a more realistic goal, and I do think the polls narrow a bit once we get into an election campaign. But when you're 20 points down, even holding them to a minority is a tough task. 338Canada currently projects a 98% chance of a Conservative majority, because with the current polling numbers it's basically guaranteed. And the crazy thing is, we don't even know the CPC's ceiling. It used to be 40%, now it's inching closer to 45%. There's not going to be some a-ha moment where Canadians suddenly come back to the Liberals, it's going to be a real fight. In a 40-30 environment, sure maybe you can swing just enough points and force a Conservative minority. In a 45-25 environment? Forget it.

However, we're dealing with a circumstance outside of the writ period--and as we know from past elections, the modern-era CPC has tended to be overcome by an "unlikeability problem" once the campaign's underway.  Thus I can actually see Con support *receding*--even if not enough to prevent a majority; and that's because PP's no Mulroney, or Dief.  Essentially, it's pure "throw the bums out" angst at this point...

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

Yeah I agree. I just can't think of any election in Canadian politics where a governing party comes back from the kind of unpopularity the Liberals are seeing right now. Now when governments poll this badly, sometimes it leads to a third party surging to first place. Mike Harris in 1995 comes to mind, arguably even Trudeau himself in 2015. I don't see that coming from the NDP in 2025, but there's at least a historical precedent. And there's plenty of historical precedent for a third party to jump into official opposition. But when a government polls this badly, they have historically never come back to actually win.

Actually as I recall the PCs under Mulroney had incredibly low polling numbers in 1987 and were often in third place behind the Liberals AND the NDP - they went on to win a majority in 1988. The Alberta PCs under Allison Redfern were losing by double digits to Wildrose in 2012 - and then staged an upset and won. Supposedly the Manitoba NDP under Howard Pawley was practically in single digits in 1984-85 and then managed to win in 1986. Depending on what polls you want to believe the BC Liberals under Christy Clark were down by as much as 15 points in 2012-13 - then won in May 2013. The BC NDP was ridiculously unpopular in 1995 - then Harcourt quit and was replaced by Glen Clark and they won in 1996. The Ontario Liberals were ridiculously unpopular in 2012-13 then McGuinty quit, was succeeded by Kathleen Wynne and they won a majority in 2014 - so it does happen  

1.The Progressive Conservatives bottomed out right around where the Liberals are now at 23%. in May of so of 1987. However, they were obviously still a first term government and they first increased their popularity by passing a series of legislation which showed that they were focused on governing and not on creating scandals. Then they promised I think about $1 billion to get Lucien Bouchard elected in Lac St Jean, whose victory enormously boosted party morale. Finally they succeeded in turning the 1988 election into a referendum on free trade with the United States.

2. I don't think the Manitoba NDP were that unpopular around 1984-1985. I could be wrong, but I think it's possible you're confusing this timing with 1988 when the Manitoba NDP bottomed out at 6% in the polls after the government fell and before Gary Doer was elected party leader. (Doer himself refused to be referred to as Premier at that time.)

3.The B.C NDP was also a first term government in 1995 and there was a Glen Clarkmania in British Columbia for some reason after he was elected leader and Premier but before he called the election. I heard Glen Clark when he gave a speech at some 'meet the NDP leadership candidates thing and I wasn't impressed because he delivered his entire speech in a (kind of) monotone yell. So, I didn't even see him as charismatic but as a person who was trying to be charismatic.

4.The Ontario Liberals kept getting reelected because the Ontario Progressive Conservatives kept 'snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.' In 2014 Tim Hudak promised '100,000 civil servants would be fired' and people did the math and realized he could not cut that number without cutting teachers and nurses.

[adma]

This *is* a byelection thread, though, as opposed to a forecast-the-next-federal-election thread.  And I'd still advise caution in reading *too* much, *too* deeply into the present Durham result--even if I was correct about it being more of a blowout than some (mainly overzealous election geeks who *love* a horserace) were anticipating.  There just wasn't enough motivation or enthusiasm to make it anything *other* than a blowout (compounded by the Libs fumbling whatever opportunity they had via "Twofergate"); and it's in a riding which, in a Conservative-favouring climate, wore the incumbent party like an old shoe.  It's the Durham Conservative version of Irwin Cotler's 92% Mount-Royal byelection in 1999.  But also remember when the PET government was at its original late 70s nadir and they were blowing byelections all over the place; a lot of those outcomes were "corrected" or "re-normalized" in 1979.  Maybe they will this time; maybe they won't.

Though it is worth noting the local vs national picture--in 2019, the Libs nationally got 33.12%, and locally got 32.25%.  In 2021, they nationally got 32.62%, and locally got 29.92% (with a likely bump-down from O'Toole being national CPC leader).  And the present figures seem to similarly correspond w/national polling.

[Flyersfan232]

best tory results since 1917

Wrong. Best result since 1984 (59%). The riding had a different name though (Durham-Northumberland)

they got 80 in 1917

[Hatman 🍁]

best tory results since 1917

Wrong. Best result since 1984 (59%). The riding had a different name though (Durham-Northumberland)

they got 80 in 1917

So?

[DL]

Yeah I agree. I just can't think of any election in Canadian politics where a governing party comes back from the kind of unpopularity the Liberals are seeing right now. Now when governments poll this badly, sometimes it leads to a third party surging to first place. Mike Harris in 1995 comes to mind, arguably even Trudeau himself in 2015. I don't see that coming from the NDP in 2025, but there's at least a historical precedent. And there's plenty of historical precedent for a third party to jump into official opposition. But when a government polls this badly, they have historically never come back to actually win.

Actually as I recall the PCs under Mulroney had incredibly low polling numbers in 1987 and were often in third place behind the Liberals AND the NDP - they went on to win a majority in 1988. The Alberta PCs under Allison Redfern were losing by double digits to Wildrose in 2012 - and then staged an upset and won. Supposedly the Manitoba NDP under Howard Pawley was practically in single digits in 1984-85 and then managed to win in 1986. Depending on what polls you want to believe the BC Liberals under Christy Clark were down by as much as 15 points in 2012-13 - then won in May 2013. The BC NDP was ridiculously unpopular in 1995 - then Harcourt quit and was replaced by Glen Clark and they won in 1996. The Ontario Liberals were ridiculously unpopular in 2012-13 then McGuinty quit, was succeeded by Kathleen Wynne and they won a majority in 2014 - so it does happen  

1.The Progressive Conservatives bottomed out right around where the Liberals are now at 23%. in May of so of 1987. However, they were obviously still a first term government and they first increased their popularity by passing a series of legislation which showed that they were focused on governing and not on creating scandals. Then they promised I think about $1 billion to get Lucien Bouchard elected in Lac St Jean, whose victory enormously boosted party morale. Finally they succeeded in turning the 1988 election into a referendum on free trade with the United States.

2. I don't think the Manitoba NDP were that unpopular around 1984-1985. I could be wrong, but I think it's possible you're confusing this timing with 1988 when the Manitoba NDP bottomed out at 6% in the polls after the government fell and before Gary Doer was elected party leader. (Doer himself refused to be referred to as Premier at that time.)

3.The B.C NDP was also a first term government in 1995 and there was a Glen Clarkmania in British Columbia for some reason after he was elected leader and Premier but before he called the election. I heard Glen Clark when he gave a speech at some 'meet the NDP leadership candidates thing and I wasn't impressed because he delivered his entire speech in a (kind of) monotone yell. So, I didn't even see him as charismatic but as a person who was trying to be charismatic.

4.The Ontario Liberals kept getting reelected because the Ontario Progressive Conservatives kept 'snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.' In 2014 Tim Hudak promised '100,000 civil servants would be fired' and people did the math and realized he could not cut that number without cutting teachers and nurses.

So what are you saying is that when an unpopular governing party manages to stage a comeback and get re-elected against all odds - it happens for a reason! Who knew?

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

Yeah I agree. I just can't think of any election in Canadian politics where a governing party comes back from the kind of unpopularity the Liberals are seeing right now. Now when governments poll this badly, sometimes it leads to a third party surging to first place. Mike Harris in 1995 comes to mind, arguably even Trudeau himself in 2015. I don't see that coming from the NDP in 2025, but there's at least a historical precedent. And there's plenty of historical precedent for a third party to jump into official opposition. But when a government polls this badly, they have historically never come back to actually win.

Actually as I recall the PCs under Mulroney had incredibly low polling numbers in 1987 and were often in third place behind the Liberals AND the NDP - they went on to win a majority in 1988. The Alberta PCs under Allison Redfern were losing by double digits to Wildrose in 2012 - and then staged an upset and won. Supposedly the Manitoba NDP under Howard Pawley was practically in single digits in 1984-85 and then managed to win in 1986. Depending on what polls you want to believe the BC Liberals under Christy Clark were down by as much as 15 points in 2012-13 - then won in May 2013. The BC NDP was ridiculously unpopular in 1995 - then Harcourt quit and was replaced by Glen Clark and they won in 1996. The Ontario Liberals were ridiculously unpopular in 2012-13 then McGuinty quit, was succeeded by Kathleen Wynne and they won a majority in 2014 - so it does happen  

1.The Progressive Conservatives bottomed out right around where the Liberals are now at 23%. in May of so of 1987. However, they were obviously still a first term government and they first increased their popularity by passing a series of legislation which showed that they were focused on governing and not on creating scandals. Then they promised I think about $1 billion to get Lucien Bouchard elected in Lac St Jean, whose victory enormously boosted party morale. Finally they succeeded in turning the 1988 election into a referendum on free trade with the United States.

2. I don't think the Manitoba NDP were that unpopular around 1984-1985. I could be wrong, but I think it's possible you're confusing this timing with 1988 when the Manitoba NDP bottomed out at 6% in the polls after the government fell and before Gary Doer was elected party leader. (Doer himself refused to be referred to as Premier at that time.)

3.The B.C NDP was also a first term government in 1995 and there was a Glen Clarkmania in British Columbia for some reason after he was elected leader and Premier but before he called the election. I heard Glen Clark when he gave a speech at some 'meet the NDP leadership candidates thing and I wasn't impressed because he delivered his entire speech in a (kind of) monotone yell. So, I didn't even see him as charismatic but as a person who was trying to be charismatic.

4.The Ontario Liberals kept getting reelected because the Ontario Progressive Conservatives kept 'snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.' In 2014 Tim Hudak promised '100,000 civil servants would be fired' and people did the math and realized he could not cut that number without cutting teachers and nurses.

So what are you saying is that when an unpopular governing party manages to stage a comeback and get re-elected against all odds - it happens for a reason! Who knew?

What I was really saying is that there are reasons to believe that party support is much more 'baked in' now due to the length of the tenure of the Liberal government as compared to all those examples with the sole exception of Tim Hudak's own goal. I'm sure Poilievre and his team have learned from Hudak's stupidity.

The B.C Liberals of Gordon Campbell/Christy Clark had been in power longer in 2013 than this federal Liberal government but I think there were exceptional reasons given the lack of trust among voters in the NDP at that time and the pliant mainstream right wing media that mostly played up rather then seriously investigated Christy Clark's nonsensical claim that a massive expansion in LNG would make B.C 'debt free.'  "Debt free B.C" was even on Christy Clark's campaign bus.

The media also went after anybody who accurately pointed out the traits of Christy Clark's malignant narcissism. In the book on the 2017 election written by journalists Richard Zussman and Rob Shaw, they even said that anybody who thought that Christy Clark was a horrible person was wrong, which is an example of the editorializing in favor of Christy Clark the media engaged in.

[adma]

If you *really* want the archetypal "Dead Incumbent Party Walking" byelection scenario, look at the Mulroney Tories in '89-90 (mercifully, there were no byelections after '90; but in the nullified York North rematch, the Tory who had been either a hair ahead of or behind Maurizio Bevilacqua in '88 finished w/10% and in 3rd); or in Ontario, the Rae Democrats in '92-95 (consistently single digit except in the first of them; and even that was low teens).

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Preventing a CPC majority is a more realistic goal, and I do think the polls narrow a bit once we get into an election campaign. But when you're 20 points down, even holding them to a minority is a tough task. 338Canada currently projects a 98% chance of a Conservative majority, because with the current polling numbers it's basically guaranteed. And the crazy thing is, we don't even know the CPC's ceiling. It used to be 40%, now it's inching closer to 45%. There's not going to be some a-ha moment where Canadians suddenly come back to the Liberals, it's going to be a real fight. In a 40-30 environment, sure maybe you can swing just enough points and force a Conservative minority. In a 45-25 environment? Forget it.

However, we're dealing with a circumstance outside of the writ period--and as we know from past elections, the modern-era CPC has tended to be overcome by an "unlikeability problem" once the campaign's underway.  Thus I can actually see Con support *receding*--even if not enough to prevent a majority; and that's because PP's no Mulroney, or Dief.  Essentially, it's pure "throw the bums out" angst at this point...

I hear you, that's why I think the polls will narrow closer to the actual election. Going into the election as massive frontrunners will also invite more scrutiny than normal, and there's the possibility that some "get the bums out" voters aren't very motivated to actually vote CPC. On the unlikability thing though, I think it's worth pointing out that unlike the CPC leader in the last three elections, Poilievre has been polling positively in both favourability ratings and preferred PM polls with a certain degree of consistency. But that's a whole another topic.

But even if the CPC's surge is purely a product of voter frustration, I think the size of the gap matters. It's harder to blow a 20-point lead than a 15-point lead, a 10-point lead than a 5-point lead, and so on.

[adma]

Preventing a CPC majority is a more realistic goal, and I do think the polls narrow a bit once we get into an election campaign. But when you're 20 points down, even holding them to a minority is a tough task. 338Canada currently projects a 98% chance of a Conservative majority, because with the current polling numbers it's basically guaranteed. And the crazy thing is, we don't even know the CPC's ceiling. It used to be 40%, now it's inching closer to 45%. There's not going to be some a-ha moment where Canadians suddenly come back to the Liberals, it's going to be a real fight. In a 40-30 environment, sure maybe you can swing just enough points and force a Conservative minority. In a 45-25 environment? Forget it.

However, we're dealing with a circumstance outside of the writ period--and as we know from past elections, the modern-era CPC has tended to be overcome by an "unlikeability problem" once the campaign's underway.  Thus I can actually see Con support *receding*--even if not enough to prevent a majority; and that's because PP's no Mulroney, or Dief.  Essentially, it's pure "throw the bums out" angst at this point...

I hear you, that's why I think the polls will narrow closer to the actual election. Going into the election as massive frontrunners will also invite more scrutiny than normal, and there's the possibility that some "get the bums out" voters aren't very motivated to actually vote CPC. On the unlikability thing though, I think it's worth pointing out that unlike the CPC leader in the last three elections, Poilievre has been polling positively in both favourability ratings and preferred PM polls with a certain degree of consistency. But that's a whole another topic.

But even if the CPC's surge is purely a product of voter frustration, I think the size of the gap matters. It's harder to blow a 20-point lead than a 15-point lead, a 10-point lead than a 5-point lead, and so on.

The positive polling might be through his positioning himself as less "Harper-like" than "Manning-like"--particularly Manning in his latter-day makeover phase. 

Still, sometimes it's about scale of gaps, and relativity of distribution and positioning--that is, Harper got a minority despite an 11-point gap in '08, and a majority on a 9-point gap in '11. 

And also when it comes to incumbent dead-cat bouncing t/w the finish line--the matter of the BCNDP doing better in relative share (if not in seat totals) in 2001 has been raised; but there's also the Rae ONDP in '95 salvaging a lot of seats and quasi-respectable or not-merely-basement shares (and a few 2nd places over the as-humiliated-in-their-own-way OLP) in a way that couldn't have been foretold in previous byelections or by way of the '93 federal Audrey disaster.  Of course, it didn't impede the Common Sense Revolution, but...

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

Preventing a CPC majority is a more realistic goal, and I do think the polls narrow a bit once we get into an election campaign. But when you're 20 points down, even holding them to a minority is a tough task. 338Canada currently projects a 98% chance of a Conservative majority, because with the current polling numbers it's basically guaranteed. And the crazy thing is, we don't even know the CPC's ceiling. It used to be 40%, now it's inching closer to 45%. There's not going to be some a-ha moment where Canadians suddenly come back to the Liberals, it's going to be a real fight. In a 40-30 environment, sure maybe you can swing just enough points and force a Conservative minority. In a 45-25 environment? Forget it.

However, we're dealing with a circumstance outside of the writ period--and as we know from past elections, the modern-era CPC has tended to be overcome by an "unlikeability problem" once the campaign's underway.  Thus I can actually see Con support *receding*--even if not enough to prevent a majority; and that's because PP's no Mulroney, or Dief.  Essentially, it's pure "throw the bums out" angst at this point...

I hear you, that's why I think the polls will narrow closer to the actual election. Going into the election as massive frontrunners will also invite more scrutiny than normal, and there's the possibility that some "get the bums out" voters aren't very motivated to actually vote CPC. On the unlikability thing though, I think it's worth pointing out that unlike the CPC leader in the last three elections, Poilievre has been polling positively in both favourability ratings and preferred PM polls with a certain degree of consistency. But that's a whole another topic.

But even if the CPC's surge is purely a product of voter frustration, I think the size of the gap matters. It's harder to blow a 20-point lead than a 15-point lead, a 10-point lead than a 5-point lead, and so on.

The positive polling might be through his positioning himself as less "Harper-like" than "Manning-like"--particularly Manning in his latter-day makeover phase.  

Still, sometimes it's about scale of gaps, and relativity of distribution and positioning--that is, Harper got a minority despite an 11-point gap in '08, and a majority on a 9-point gap in '11.  

And also when it comes to incumbent dead-cat bouncing t/w the finish line--the matter of the BCNDP doing better in relative share (if not in seat totals) in 2001 has been raised; but there's also the Rae ONDP in '95 salvaging a lot of seats and quasi-respectable or not-merely-basement shares (and a few 2nd places over the as-humiliated-in-their-own-way OLP) in a way that couldn't have been foretold in previous byelections or by way of the '93 federal Audrey disaster.  Of course, it didn't impede the Common Sense Revolution, but...

The Rae government was popular in Northern Ontario due to keeping some paper mills and the like from shutting down (Kapuskasing, Kimberly-Clark - unless those were the same thing, for instance.)

Of the 17 ridings the NDP won in 1995, 8 were northern ridings. In 1987, of the 19 ridings the NDP won, 6 were northern ridings.

Polling for the 1995 election also showed the NDP getting 20% of the vote and they ended up with 20.6% There were a fair number of people who especially from the major cabinet shuffle in 1993 on thought that the Rae government was a decent and competent government, but I think this was another case of public sentiment having also been largely 'baked in' by 1993 given the incompetencies of the government in the first two-three years and the economy being the worst in Ontario since the Great Depression.

From Wiki: The early 1990s recession was notable for being substantially more negative for employment in Ontario than the early 1980s recession; Ontario's percentage of total age 15-64 population employed began to decline early in 1989 and only began to grow again early in 1994

For historical purposes, I don't think it's a totally accurate analogy, but one might look at it as 'Raemania' in Northern Ontario in the same way that there was a slightly offsetting 'Stanfieldmania' in the Atlantic to the Trudeaumania of 1968. (The P.Cs won 25 of the 32 Atlantic ridings in 1968.)

[adma]

And also when it comes to incumbent dead-cat bouncing t/w the finish line--the matter of the BCNDP doing better in relative share (if not in seat totals) in 2001 has been raised; but there's also the Rae ONDP in '95 salvaging a lot of seats and quasi-respectable or not-merely-basement shares (and a few 2nd places over the as-humiliated-in-their-own-way OLP) in a way that couldn't have been foretold in previous byelections or by way of the '93 federal Audrey disaster.  Of course, it didn't impede the Common Sense Revolution, but...

The Rae government was popular in Northern Ontario due to keeping some paper mills and the like from shutting down (Kapuskasing, Kimberly-Clark - unless those were the same thing, for instance.)

Of the 17 ridings the NDP won in 1995, 8 were northern ridings. In 1987, of the 19 ridings the NDP won, 6 were northern ridings.

Polling for the 1995 election also showed the NDP getting 20% of the vote and they ended up with 20.6% There were a fair number of people who especially from the major cabinet shuffle in 1993 on thought that the Rae government was a decent and competent government, but I think this was another case of public sentiment having also been largely 'baked in' by 1993 given the incompetencies of the government in the first two-three years and the economy being the worst in Ontario since the Great Depression.

From Wiki: The early 1990s recession was notable for being substantially more negative for employment in Ontario than the early 1980s recession; Ontario's percentage of total age 15-64 population employed began to decline early in 1989 and only began to grow again early in 1994

For historical purposes, I don't think it's a totally accurate analogy, but one might look at it as 'Raemania' in Northern Ontario in the same way that there was a slightly offsetting 'Stanfieldmania' in the Atlantic to the Trudeaumania of 1968. (The P.Cs won 25 of the 32 Atlantic ridings in 1968.)

Or of course, when it comes to the NDP, Alexamania in the Atlantic in '97.

Though it wasn't just a Northern Ontario thing; maybe it's more that when it comes to a "humiliating" 3rd place, that 20.6% actually didn't look so humiliating in riding-by-riding practice--and particularly after all those basement byelections and the federal Audrey catastrophe, and w/the assist of Lyn McLeod blowing her run as Lib leader making the RaeDems look "salvaging their dignity" by comparison.

The Wynne Libs in '18 was more authentically a "loss of dignity" circumstance, in that there *wasn't* that pattern of even worse electoral humiliation preceding it...

[Hatman 🍁]

Next by-election on the calendar is in Ward 4, St. John's, NL which will be March 12.  It was vacated in December by Ian Froude. Ward 4 is in the north end of the city, generally covering the Mount Scio and Windsor Lake provincial ridings.

Candidates
Tom Davis, business man. Ran for an at-large seat on council in 2021 (finished 9th). Elections Canada indicates a Tom Davis in St. John's made a donation to the Liberals in 2019 and Elections N&L has a Tom Davis making a donation to the provincial Liberals in 2022. He's concerned about increased taxes and city spending, but also supports environmental sustainability, affordable housing and traffic safety.
Nicholas Hillier, teacher.  Wants to fight tax increases, wants better infrastructure, and vaguely supports "better representation".    
Myles Russell, civil engineering technologist. Platform is generally centre-left; supports safer streets for all users, supports more housing, better public transit.
Greg Smith, curler. Ran in the Ward 2 by-election in 2020 and ran for an at-large seat in 2021 (finished 7th). As he's a curler (represented Newfoundland at two Briers), I'm very familiar with him. He's openly LGBT, and is fairly progressive. Paradoxically he a Tory though (this is Atlantic Canada, after all). He backed Jean Charest's leadership in 2022 and supported Eugene Manning's provincial leadership until Manning backed the federal party, which Smith left because it's too right wing under Poilievre. Supports traffic calming, green initiatives, "reducing red tape" (I guess this is what makes him a Tory?)

Seems like Russell is probably the most progressive candidate, though Smith is up there too. Hillier seems like the most right wing candidate, as his #1 focus is taxes. Davis' is focussed on taxes too, but has a more balanced platform.

[Hatman 🍁]

Results:
Davis: 1,211 (43%)
Russell: 657 (24%)
Smith: 650 (23%)
Hillier: 272 (10%)

[Hatman 🍁]

Fogo Island-Cape Freels provincial by-election has been set for April 15. Probably a safe Liberal hold?

[DL]

Some potentially interesting news on the byelection front. Looks like the NDP is going to make a play for Lasalle-Emard. Craig Sauve who is a longtime and well-known city councillor will run for the NDP.

With the Liberals so unpopular these days and much of that riding having voted QS provincially...stranger things have happened.

https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/independent-city-councillor-aims-to-run-for-ndp-in-david-lamettis-former-montreal-riding

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

Some potentially interesting news on the byelection front. Looks like the NDP is going to make a play for Lasalle-Emard. Craig Sauve who is a longtime and well-known city councillor will run for the NDP.

With the Liberals so unpopular these days and much of that riding having voted QS provincially...stranger things have happened.

https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/independent-city-councillor-aims-to-run-for-ndp-in-david-lamettis-former-montreal-riding

Why not? The current 338Canada projection has the NDP winning 2 seats in Quebec.
https://338canada.com/

and some seat projection of the latest Ipsos poll has the NDP winning 36 seats nationally.

[MaxQue]

Independent isn't really telling the whole story (he became an independent in 2021 due to sexual accusations, which seem to have faded as soon he left the party), but he still gets positions on the council on the Projet quota. He is also supported by people like Jimmy Zoubris, which is somewhat of a big cheese in both Montreal NDP and Projet (he is an advisor to Valérie Plante).

His main problem might be that his ward barely overlaps the riding.

[DL]

It’s worth noting that in 2021 the NDP took 20% in Lasalle-Emard-Verdun despite spending almost nothing and just having a paper candidate