🇨🇦 2024 Canadian by-elections

[adma]

And I did mention waaaay upthread that I got a bit of a "Jess Spindler" vibe from Leslie Church (i.e. the sure-bet Lib who fell to Jill Andrew provincially in '18)

Federally as well as provincially, St Paul's is overrated as "bombproof Lib"--even Bennett's going submajority in '21 ought to have stood as a warning sign.  And as it turns out, it's overrated as "no longer on Conservative radar"--even under Poilievre, much as even under Harris in '15.  And I think the *nature* of the Poilievre big tent that's coming together is ill understood.

And yes, after the Potemkin of early Jill Andrew-coattails signage, *something* must be addressed re where the NDP's going awry--and yes, I can see a Jill Andrew/Don Stewart crossover vote out there (particularly among the Millennial/post-Millennial "mugged by reality, or what they perceive as reality" crowd out there)

[adma]

Plus, something to keep in mind about the federal vs provincial scene these days: inherently, it's about a certain "gravitas"--and whether one likes it or not, the federal Conservatives carry more of said "gravitas" than the provincial Conservatives, even if the former's not in power but the latter is.  It's almost like a subliminal "parliamentary scale" thing.  It might even transcend leadership--but, still, it's in how Poilievre *feels* "national" and Doug Ford doesn't.  And in educated urban seats like St Paul's, gravitas has meaning (and it's also why the federal NDP has eternally underpolled the provincial NDP--they feel too "micro" for comfort, whereas gravitas is "macro").

Bearing in mind that Ben Mulroney stumped for the Cons in this byelection, I have this feeling that if Caroline Mulroney ran provincially here instead of in York-Simcoe in '18, she'd have won it--because she was the provincial leadership contender w/the most federal-esque "gravitas".

[toaster]

A little different, it was pretty much known before election day that the Liberals were losing St Pauls provincially in 18. Kathleen Wynne gave up, and was, at best, trying to keep a few incumbents (of which, Jess Spindler was not). Here, everyone still expected a Liberal win (with a narrow margin). Nobody was predicting a Conservative win tonight.  The Liberals should be worried (and changing leaders), but the federal NDPs should also be really questioning Singh here - they weren't able to convert any centre-left ('promiscuous progressive') voter like the ONDP was able to do in 18, which is concerning, people are seeing the Trudeau/Singh coalition as two of the same. On paper, a St Paul's Lib should have no problem going over to NDP if they don't like the Lib leader (or the Lib party) as they did in 18, but that wasn't achieved at all tonight.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Called it a night when it was about LPC+6 after 40% of votes counted, I figured it was over. Turns out, there's only one thing that's over...it's Trudover

[CumbrianLefty]

Well this is bad for the Liberals. no question. Thinking they had narrowly held it until almost the very end of the count probably increases the psychological trauma too.

Anybody know anything about the candidate who got zero votes?

(and some complain certain ballot papers at our current GE are too long!)

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Honestly this couldn't really have gone any better for the Conservatives. 43% turnout is very high for a summer byelection. In 2021, this riding had 65% turnout, and the CPC candidate got 13,587 votes. Last night, 43% turnout and 15,555 CPC votes. That means, even as turnout dropped 22pp, Conservatives managed to find roughly 2,000 new voters.

I suppose the NDP getting 11% isn't too bad considering their tendency to underperform in byelections, but this riding did have higher turnout than most other byelections we've seen. That said, the framing of this byelection as a referendum on Justin Trudeau and the possibility of the CPC winning probably didn't help them. I'm quite surprised at the Greens only getting 3% though, considering this is one of their best 416 ridings.

[adma]

A little different, it was pretty much known before election day that the Liberals were losing St Pauls provincially in 18. Kathleen Wynne gave up, and was, at best, trying to keep a few incumbents (of which, Jess Spindler was not). Here, everyone still expected a Liberal win (with a narrow margin). Nobody was predicting a Conservative win tonight.  The Liberals should be worried (and changing leaders), but the federal NDPs should also be really questioning Singh here - they weren't able to convert any centre-left ('promiscuous progressive') voter like the ONDP was able to do in 18, which is concerning, people are seeing the Trudeau/Singh coalition as two of the same. On paper, a St Paul's Lib should have no problem going over to NDP if they don't like the Lib leader (or the Lib party) as they did in 18, but that wasn't achieved at all tonight.

I think my point is more about how both Spindler and Church carried an uncompelling "party hack" cast under the circumstance, i.e. they're the kinds of potentially-viable standard-bearers you expect to run in "safe Con" ridings, not the sorts who'd be defending "safe Lib" ridings.

And re the NDP, one might argue that the Libs' biggest "success" in this election was in convincing voters that NDP was a wasted option, Jill Andrew or no Jill Andrew.

[Swalwell was Right (God help us)]

Damn, there actually was a 4am vote dump that put the Tory over the top. This is completely uncharted territory.

[adma]

I suppose the NDP getting 11% isn't too bad considering their tendency to underperform in byelections, but this riding did have higher turnout than most other byelections we've seen. That said, the framing of this byelection as a referendum on Justin Trudeau and the possibility of the CPC winning probably didn't help them. I'm quite surprised at the Greens only getting 3% though, considering this is one of their best 416 ridings.

I think that given the kind of riding it is and the kind of sign effort they gave, it...is pretty NDP-mediocre.  Now, 11% might be byelection-terrific in a 905 riding or somewhere more obviously afterthoughtish; but in a riding like this, something like btw/the 15-20% range would be more of an "isn't too bad" barometer.

As for the Greens: I'm not surprised because their "byelection problem" parallels that of the NDP: strategically marginalized by the Libs (and even, in a way, the NDP).  And it's not so much that it's one of their best 416 ridings; more that it's one of their better "pool of potential voters" ridings--but it's a pool with alternative options...

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

I suppose the NDP getting 11% isn't too bad considering their tendency to underperform in byelections, but this riding did have higher turnout than most other byelections we've seen. That said, the framing of this byelection as a referendum on Justin Trudeau and the possibility of the CPC winning probably didn't help them. I'm quite surprised at the Greens only getting 3% though, considering this is one of their best 416 ridings.

I think that given the kind of riding it is and the kind of sign effort they gave, it...is pretty NDP-mediocre.  Now, 11% might be byelection-terrific in a 905 riding or somewhere more obviously afterthoughtish; but in a riding like this, something like btw/the 15-20% range would be more of an "isn't too bad" barometer.

As for the Greens: I'm not surprised because their "byelection problem" parallels that of the NDP: strategically marginalized by the Libs (and even, in a way, the NDP).  And it's not so much that it's one of their best 416 ridings; more that it's one of their better "pool of potential voters" ridings--but it's a pool with alternative options...

If it is to be read as an NDP underperformance in the same election that was obviously an LPC underperformance, then we might be at a point where 'ABL' is a more relevant acronym than 'ABC'. And the ABL vote ain't gonna go NDP as long as they're seen as junior partners of the Liberal government.

[Oryxslayer]

Well this is bad for the Liberals. no question. Thinking they had narrowly held it until almost the very end of the count probably increases the psychological trauma too.

Anybody know anything about the candidate who got zero votes?

(and some complain certain ballot papers at our current GE are too long!)

This seat was targeted by the longest ballot committee,  a group that protests against fptp by running a excess of candidates. I'm not sure if every independent was with them, but they sponsored the mass list of names.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Well this is bad for the Liberals. no question. Thinking they had narrowly held it until almost the very end of the count probably increases the psychological trauma too.

Anybody know anything about the candidate who got zero votes?

(and some complain certain ballot papers at our current GE are too long!)

This seat was targeted by the longest ballot committee,  a group that protests against fptp by running a excess of candidates. I'm not sure if every independent was with them, but they sponsored the mass list of names.

The Longest Ballot people are to electoral reform what the "Just Stop Oil" people are to climate change activism. Attention seekers latching onto a progressive cause as an excuse to be a nuisance.

[Oryxslayer]

Well this is bad for the Liberals. no question. Thinking they had narrowly held it until almost the very end of the count probably increases the psychological trauma too.

Anybody know anything about the candidate who got zero votes?

(and some complain certain ballot papers at our current GE are too long!)

This seat was targeted by the longest ballot committee,  a group that protests against fptp by running a excess of candidates. I'm not sure if every independent was with them, but they sponsored the mass list of names.

The Longest Ballot people are to electoral reform what the "Just Stop Oil" people are to climate change activism. Attention seekers latching onto a progressive cause as an excuse to be a nuisance.

No complaints from me:

https://twitter.com/ElectionsCan_E/status/1805375398307389567?t=ZmN4EjQi5T79CJoy...

(When people complain about US counts relative to stuff like this, it's often forgotten an American GE ballot is longer than this with many contests, sometimes on numerous pages)

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

Well this is bad for the Liberals. no question. Thinking they had narrowly held it until almost the very end of the count probably increases the psychological trauma too.

Anybody know anything about the candidate who got zero votes?

(and some complain certain ballot papers at our current GE are too long!)

This seat was targeted by the longest ballot committee,  a group that protests against fptp by running a excess of candidates. I'm not sure if every independent was with them, but they sponsored the mass list of names.

The Longest Ballot people are to electoral reform what the "Just Stop Oil" people are to climate change activism. Attention seekers latching onto a progressive cause as an excuse to be a nuisance.

No complaints from me:

https://twitter.com/ElectionsCan_E/status/1805375398307389567?t=ZmN4EjQi5T79CJoy...
(When people complain about US counts relative to stuff like this, it's often forgotten an American GE ballot is longer than this with many contests, sometimes on numerous pages)

Not quite. Each contest isn't that long and is there a single state that hand counts paper ballots?

[Hatman 🍁]

Final results:
Cons: 42.1% (+16.8)
Lib: 40.5% (-8.7)
NDP: 10.9% (-5.9)
Grn: 2.9% (-3.1)
PPC: 0.6% (-2.0)
Oth: 3.0%

Cons GAIN from Lib (Swing: 12.8%)

Turnout: 43.5% (-22.0)

Takeaways:
Quite the shock to wake up this morning to this result, considering the Liberals had a somewhat decent lead when I went to bed. Obviously a big advance poll(s) were dumped over night. What was looking like a 30% turnout ended up being 43%, so obviously it was an advance poll boosting those numbers. And Quito Maggi wrote a blog post about how they tried to poll the riding and stated how the advance vote was heavily Tory (they didn't end up releasing the data as they didn't think it was reliable, but he did indicate it was basically tied). Anyway, decent turnout. Clearly the race was nationalized.

As others mentioned, the Conservatives managed to not only increase their vote share, but increase their vote total. Liberals stayed home or switched Conservative. I don't think they'll hold it in the general as the Liberal/Progressive vote that stayed home will come back to vote Liberal.

As for the NDP, yeah - bad result. Clearly the nationalizing of the race squeezed them here. We'll finally get to see if the NDP can do well in a by-election in LaSalle—Émard—Verdun. They're running a popular city councillor, so they have a good shot at it.

Oh, and this appears to be the first time a candidate has won 0 votes in a federal election since... 1872. That was the last election before the adoption of the secret vote.

So, does Trudeau resign?

[King of Kensington]

Holy moly.  So the Cons win and the Liberals didn't bleed significantly on their left flank.

[DL]

Its amusing to see some "Tru-anon" people on twitter trying to say its all the NDP's fault the Liberals lost St. Paul's...I actually wonder if there was a not insignificant number of Liberal voters who voted Tory in the byelection to try to get Trudeau to quit!

This is bringing back memories for me of the 15 federal byelections that Pierre Trudeau called all in the same night when he was at the height of his unpopularity and that were a total bloodbath for the Liberals. They lost Toronto seats like Rosedale, Eglinton, Parkdale and York-Scarborough by massive margins. Bob Rae won Broadview that night for the NDP but the Liberal was a distant third with about 15% of the vote. Of course if Justin wants any consolation he can look to how six months later in May 1979 the Liberals won back some of those seats and held Joe Clark to a minority...and we all know what then happened in 1980!

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Its amusing to see some "Tru-anon" people on twitter trying to say its all the NDP's fault the Liberals lost St. Paul's...I actually wonder if there was a not insignificant number of Liberal voters who voted Tory in the byelection to try to get Trudeau to quit!

Yeah the "vote split" argument is pure cope. It'd be one thing if the NDP and/or Greens increased vote share, but they literally both lost vote share. This is as "un-split" as the left is gonna get in a riding like this where, need I remind anyone, there's an NDP MPP and the Greens regularly get some of their best numbers in Toronto. But at the end of the day, if voters wanted to vote Liberal, they'd vote Liberal. If you can't convince enough people to vote Liberal in one of the most LPC-friendly seats in Ontario, that's a you problem.

I think the "Liberals against Trudeau" cohort you mention would have been more likely to sit this one out rather than actually vote Conservative, but I'm sure there were some who, at least in their minds, strategically voted Tory to force a leadership election. But I think the more relevant cohort may have been people who don't necessarily identify with any party or even sort themselves on an ideological spectrum, but want Trudeau and/or the Liberals to go. For those people, the CPC was the obvious choice.

[DL]

I also think it was smart of the Tories to keep Poilievre away from the riding. I think that in a riding like St. Paul's he is more of a liability than an asset and the Tories were better off keeping it away from being a a referendum on Poilievre.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Initially I didn't think this result was too bad for the NDP, but the more I look at it, the more I agree that this is a big disappointment for them too. For one, this was the most "nationalized" byelection we've had this parliament, and 44% turnout is as good as it gets in a late-June byelection. So if the St. Paul's byelection is even somewhat reflective of the overall national mood, the NDP is on track to perform even worse than current projections suggest.

Not to mention, as DL mentioned there may be is certainly a cohort of Liberals who are unhappy with the way the country is being led and can't bring themselves to vote Liberal. I would suggest that, in a riding like St. Paul's, many of these voters would be the same kind of people who can't bring themselves to vote CPC either, as that would betray their generally left-wing instincts and values. Considering this was a byelection framed as a referendum on Trudeau - yet completely inconsequential in the sense that it wasn't going to change the government, you'd think the NDP would be able to find some voters in this cohort. A "send the Liberals a message, vote for real progressive change" or something like that, you'd think would be a good campaign for the NDP, a la Lib Dems in UK winning byelections framed as "sending a message to the government". Yet there's very little evidence that they tried that, and if they did, it clearly didn't work.

[King of Kensington]

I didn't think the perception of being "enablers" would really hurt the NDP in a riding like St. Paul's.  But it looks like it did.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

I didn't think the perception of being "enablers" would really hurt the NDP in a riding like St. Paul's.  But it looks like it did.

Yes, but I think it's more than just being "enablers", it's the lack of any clear message at all, which IMO is reflective of the lack of professionalism or a knack for realpolitik in the federal NDP (I say federal because provincial NDPs out west are some of the most politically-competent parties in Canada right now). The Conservatives are very direct in their messaging. We all know about Poilievre's "noun the verb" slogans. Tacky and vague as it may be, it works because it gives voters a sense of certainty at a time when there's a lot of uncertainty and anxiety in the country.

So coming back to the NDP, they're not direct with voters. While the Liberals have often been wishy-washy, the NDP has the opposite problem, they're trying to do two things at once. Singh is always putting out messaging about how the Liberals are hurting Canadians, giving all our money to greedy capitalists while Canadians starve, that kind of thing. Yet it's lost on absolutely no one that this government that they claim is hurting us, is only in power, because of them! So the argument seems to be "Liberals are awful, but Conservatives are more awful, so we support the Liberals". Yeah. "Liberals aren't perfect but better than Tories" is the sentiment that gets Liberals elected, not New Democrats.

The NDP dug themselves into this hole by entering the C&S agreement, and honestly I don't even know what they can do to dig out of it. But at the very least, they need to understand that trying to have it both ways at a time of broad public discontent just pisses everyone off.

[lfromnj]

Isn’t the turnout really high for a game 7 Stanley cup day?

[King of Kensington]

In some ways, voting NDP seems like the Working Families Party in New York State, a safety valve for people who don't want to vote for the machine/establishment. 

[CumbrianLefty]

I didn't think the perception of being "enablers" would really hurt the NDP in a riding like St. Paul's.  But it looks like it did.

Yes, but I think it's more than just being "enablers", it's the lack of any clear message at all, which IMO is reflective of the lack of professionalism or a knack for realpolitik in the federal NDP (I say federal because provincial NDPs out west are some of the most politically-competent parties in Canada right now). The Conservatives are very direct in their messaging. We all know about Poilievre's "noun the verb" slogans. Tacky and vague as it may be, it works because it gives voters a sense of certainty at a time when there's a lot of uncertainty and anxiety in the country.

So coming back to the NDP, they're not direct with voters. While the Liberals have often been wishy-washy, the NDP has the opposite problem, they're trying to do two things at once. Singh is always putting out messaging about how the Liberals are hurting Canadians, giving all our money to greedy capitalists while Canadians starve, that kind of thing. Yet it's lost on absolutely no one that this government that they claim is hurting us, is only in power, because of them! So the argument seems to be "Liberals are awful, but Conservatives are more awful, so we support the Liberals". Yeah. "Liberals aren't perfect but better than Tories" is the sentiment that gets Liberals elected, not New Democrats.

The NDP dug themselves into this hole by entering the C&S agreement, and honestly I don't even know what they can do to dig out of it. But at the very least, they need to understand that trying to have it both ways at a time of broad public discontent just pisses everyone off.

Tbh not sure there is really any way out until they join the Liberals in opposition.

Which might get Singh to finally call it a day too - which can only help.