Byelections 2010: No trends, just some stuff that happened

After every by-election, it’s always fun to watch the punditry and chattering classes flail about trying to read the entrails in search of trends to derive from the results. Politicos will look for trends to favour their party, while pundits will look for trends they can shoe-horn into whatever narrative they’ve been pushing, thereby affirming their awesome powers of punditness.

While every now and again you can find national trends in by-election results (there is an exception to every rule, after all) by and large there are usually no wider trends to derive from a series of randomly occurring by-elections scattered around the country. Usually, they’re just some stuff that happened, driven by unique circumstances in each riding.

Thomas Mulcair’s byelection win in Outremont didn’t presage an NDP wave sweeping Quebec. Elizabeth May’s strong second-place showing in London North Centre didn’t presage a Green wave, or get May any closer to the House of Commons.

The same is true for last night’s three races. Local factors are behind each result, and those trying to read too much into them are only fooling themselves. Or trying to fool us, because I’m sure most of them probably don’t believe the malarkey they’re peddling anyways.

The Races

Let’s start with the easiest one: Dauphin-Swan River-Marquette. It’s a strong Conservative riding in the rural West that stayed a strong Conservative riding last night. No change, no trend, status quo.

Further south was Winnipeg North. In a tight two-way race in a traditionally NDP seat (although Ray Pagtakhan snuck in there for a bit for the Liberals), Liberal Kevin Lamourex narrowly defeated NDP candidate Kevin Chief.

Is this a sign of a red wave set to sweet the prairie West? Is the NDP vote about to collapse? Not hardly. This was a case of a strong and respected but new to politics candidate in Chief facing off against a veteran of provincial politics in Lamoureux. Both sides poured-in resources and volunteers and fought hard on the ground, but in the end Lamoureux’s name-recognition was likely the difference. Hard to find any trends there.

And then there’s Vaughan. A Liberal seat for some years, by narrow margins at first and then with increasing pluralities. Often Conservative provincially, and in a belt of 905 seats that tend to tip bluish.

Expected to be a landslide for high-profile star Conservative candidate Julian Fantino over last-minute Liberal candidate Tony Genco, it ended up being a very narrow Conservative victory.

As the marquee match-up in the eyes of the media punditry, everyone is quick to ascribe trends to this result. Some say it’s a sign of a coming Conservative breakthrough in the GTA. Of course, that requires overlooking that the Conservatives already hold the ridings to the North (Oak Ridges-Markham), West (Dufferin-Caldeon) and South-East (Thornhill). Others say it was a referendum on Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff, and he failed (no races being referendums on anyone else, of course).

In actuality, the result in Vaughan can entirely be attributed to local factors, national trends be dammed.

It was a seat with favourable demographics for a Conservative candidate, held in recent years in part by the personal popularity of the Liberal incumbent, recently elected to the mayoralty in a landslide. A Conservative star candidate with extremely high name recognition (and a nearly guaranteed cabinet post) faced off against a Liberal neophyte, and was expected to win handily. Instead, he eked-out a narrow victory. It’s hardly a surprising result, and it’s not indicative of any wider trend. The race was tight, both sides poured-in volunteers and resources and, like in Winnipeg-North, name recognition was the likely difference-maker for Fantino, not any alleged Conservative wave.

As for Fantino's peak-a-boo campaign, did it help or hinder? Again, hard to draw a lesson, because it could go either way. Would the Conservative margin have been bigger if they hadn't hid their rock-star candidate? Or would greater exposure have led to a gaffe that could have cost him the narrow race? Who can say.

What about the wither the NDP trend being pushed by some, with their defeat in Winnipeg-North and poor showing in Vaughan? Does it really show a two-way national race? Sorry, I'm not buying. I think in races where it's clearly a LPC/CPC race, the NDP vote will bleed LPC to stop the CPC. But in race where its clearly a NDP/CPC race, expect the LPC vote to bleed to the NDP somewhat as well. Again, local factors will be the determinant in most cases.

The Lessons

Perhaps we can't legitimately pull any trends from last night’s by-elections, but can we pull some lessons?

Definitely.

Lesson one: It’s all about the ground war. The pundits like to punditize, and we bloggers and twitterers like to trade barbs and post videos and revelations. It’s fun and entertaining, but its impact in the grand scheme of things is negligible. We saw two tight races in Winnipeg-North and Vaughan, and they were fought and won not by any ad, attack press release, soundbite or blog revelation. They were won by old-fashioned, on the ground campaigning. Knocking on doors, making phone-calls, identifying the vote and getting it out on e-day. Particularly in a by-election, voters aren’t paying attention to the air war – it’s a phony war. Boots on the ground win elections, and that’s where these races were really fought.

Lesson two: It’s hard to sense the local mood from Ottawa. It was really amusing, and saddening, to watch the national media and punditry seriously try to handicap these races without ever leaving the friendly confines of their offices near Parliament Hill, relying instead on the spin they’re fed by each of the parties. No wonder they thought Vaughan would be a Conservative landslide, that the Liberals were having trouble pulling volunteers, and never even saw Winnipeg-North coming. I’m not that old, but I do remember a time when reporting meant first-hand observation. If they’d visited Vaughan or Winnipeg-North to talk to residents, meet the candidates and stop by the campaign offices, they’d have gotten a much better picture of the races.

Lesson three: No one will remember these by-elections in a week. What was today’s biggest story and the big thing that will change everything will quickly be forgotten. That’s how it has always been. And particularly when the results can’t be made to fit the narrative that’s being pushed. So just relax, because life does always go on.

Finally, if you’ll permit me, a few partisan observations. Tony Genco and team ran a very impressive campaign in Vaughan, and he probably deserves a shot in the general election. With the glare of the byelection off and the PMO off running the national campaign, he just might win. Particularly since Harper won’t be able to keep Fantino muzzled forever.

And a big congrats to Kevin Lamoureux and team in Winnipeg-North, for a very impressive win against a political newcomer, but highly-respected and capable candidate in Kevin Chief.

For those looking for signs of Liberal disunity, it’s hard to find any here. From what I hear, Genco in Vaughan had more volunteers than he knew what to do with, which is a great sign of how committed and energized Liberals on the ground are, and bodes well for the next election. Same in Winnipeg. A major inhibitor for the Liberals in the last few election as been their inability to identify and marshal the Liberal vote, and find the volunteers to run an effective GOTV operation. These results bode well for the next race.

Finally, it was nice to see the Liberals finally get it right on expectations management, and even beat the Conservatives on that font. They under-promised -- sending-out signals of a huge defeat in Vaughan and little chance in Winnipeg-North – and then over-delivered with a tight defeat and a narrow victory. A nice change from the recent trend of over-promise, under-deliver.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Lamoureux and Ignatieff chat with 2100 Winnipegers

The tele-townhall last night with Winnipeg-North Liberal candidate Kevin Lamoureux and Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff was for the residents of Winnipeg-North, but I got a chance to listen-in on the questions and answers. And as I’ve said before, it’s always informative to see the questions regular Canadians ask when they have the opportunity to question politicians without the media filter.

And this tele-townhall format is pretty cool. It’s been all the rage lately. They were a big part of the successful Rob Ford mayoral campaign in Toronto, and other municipal campaigns used them too. The Liberal candidate for Vaughan, Tony Genco, had one recently with over 8700 participants. How it works is an automated call goes to residents in the geographic area, and they’re invited to participate. If they accept, they’re put into the live townhall, and get the opportunity to ask a question and listen to the questions and answers of others.

Lamoureux’s tele-townhall Wednesday with Ignatieff for Winnipeg-North residents was a definite success, with many diverse questions during the one-hour session and more people waiting on the line that there wasn’t time to get to. Over 2100 people listened-in on the townhall, and I counted at least 16 questions asked and answered.

(I might add that while Lamoureux and Genco are reaching-out to thousands of Canadians, their respective Conservative opponents are in hiding and skipping all candidates meetings.)

The topics were diverse. Crime was probably the top issue, but there were also a couple of questions on education, the economy and deficit reduction. Some questions were pointed and some of the answers weren’t always what the questioners wanted to hear, but it was a very civil and social exchange. This kind of tool is going to be big in the next election.

Crime

Questioners wanted to know about specific measures to combat crime.

Lamoureux said crime is definitely the number one issue at the door. People have the right to feel safe in their homes but sadly we have too much crime and measure must be taken. He noted he was the only local politician who petitioned against the closure of the local community police office when it was closed, and he said we need to get more people and police involved at the community level. He was disappointed Stephen Harper’s promise to put more police officers on the street doesn’t seem to have included Winnipeg, and said we can’t just talk tough on crime, we need to get tough on the causes of crime.

Another questioner asked about tougher punishment for crime.

Ignatieff said we need to be tough on crime, and he has never hesitated to support tougher sentencing, recognizing the terrible shootings and other incidents Winnipeg-North has had to go through. We need to be tough on gun crime, but also tough on defending the gun registry which the Conservatives want to gut but the police say is needed to fight crime. We also need to make sure youth feel safe, finish school, and get more training and education after high school and stay on the right path so we don’t lose our youth to gangs and drugs. We need more police resources, the gun registry and tough sentances, but we also need to commit as a community to keeping those kids on track and if we can do that, we can crack this crime problem.

A questioner was very much opposed to the gun registry and the money spent on it, feeling it should be scrapped and the money utilized elsewhere.

Ignatieff agreed the registry cost too much to set up and money was wasted, but added now it is very inexpensive to maintain and every police chief he has talked to across the country says they need it to keep communities safe. He’s with the cops on this one, not the Conservatives. He agrees on the point about consequences and sentencing, but said we also need to build a community where we stand up for and help each other.

Lamoureux added the registry’s implementation was a disaster and a case study in what not to do, but what he is telling people at the door is that police forces across the country, including Winnipeg’s, are accessing it thousands of times daily, it’s inexpensive to maintain, and police say it’s an important tool they want to keep.

A questioner asked about working with church groups in fighting crime.

Lamoureux said he’s been a part of the kids club at his local church for many years, and it’s a wonderful way to get young people doing positive things. He encourages faith-based and other groups to get involved, because the more groups we can get involved taking responsibility for our communities, the better off we’ll be.

On another question about crime coming in from other neighbourhoods, Lamoureux said he’s a big advocate of community policing. We need to identify where the high-risk offenders, particularly youth, are and build a relationship between them and the police. It’s a small percentage of people committing a large percentage of the crimes, and we need to get targeted. He also mentioned championing ankle bracelets as an MLA.

Education

The first question of the evening was actually on making post-secondary education more affordable.

Lamoureux said we have to make sure post secondary education is affordable. If we as a society believe in the benefits of education we need to be prepared to put resources into it. We want to make it affordable so if you have the ability you can get the education.

Ignatieff added the next Liberal platform will have a specific, costed commitment to enhanced assistance for post secondary. You get the grades, you get to go. We need to take any barriers off the table, particularly for aboriginal Canadians. The platform proposal won’t get all the way, but it will be a “heckuva big jolt” to make it more affordable.

Economy

The economy was the topic of several questions. On reducing the deficit while revitalizing Winnipeg, Ignatieff said the Liberals set a target to reduce the deficit in the 1990s and achieved it, and it will do it again. He’ll start by cancelling the corporate tax giveaway to large businesses because we’re not talking small businesses we’re talking about big businesses that don’t need another tax cut. He also wants to revisit the $16 billion untendered stealth fighter purchase, saying by putting it to competitive tender we can get a better deal and save money. What we don’t want to do, he said, is cut spending that benefits Winnipeg North residents. He want to safeguard education and community services and work with the provinces to protect public health care. He’s worried the Conservatives will reduce the deficit on the backs of the average people of Winnipeg, and said the Liberals have a better plan.

Asked what a Liberal government would do differently to stimulate the economy, Ignatieff said the government’s focus on physical infrastructure was good but it politicized the program by diverting funding to Conservative ridings, which was wrong. He came back to education again, calling it a key way of stimulating the economy both short and long term. He doesn’t have 27 priorities, just a couple, and one of them is education. We can’t create the jobs of tomorrow unless we ensure Aboriginal Canadians get more education, that new Canadians get language training, and that we train people for the jobs of tomorrow. We also need tax incentives so companies can invest in new plant and manchinery to become more productive, and to get the economy more green we need a green retrofit tax credit for families.

A student of social work asked about helping the poor. Lamoureux said this is a very real issue and there’s no single way to tackle it. One is making access to food a basic right. Also crucial is affordable housing. There’s a huge demand for affordable housing and we need to be more creative coming up with ideas that will work and enable people to participating in housing projects. He mentioned he used to see a lot more co-op activity, something that could be revisited.

Fighter Jets

A questioner asked why the Liberals aren’t supporting the F-35 purchase. Ignatieff said his problem is there was no competitive bid, and no national discussion on what we need to replace the CF-18. We need to replace them to protect our sovereignty, and we also need to make sure we guarantee jobs for our aerospace industry. The way to do that is have a competitive tender, which will get better value for money, and allow us to demand a better deal for our aerospace industry. With the Conservative mishandling of the F-35 we’re missing out on the opportunity to get value for money and protect jobs.

Lamoueux added the aerospace industry is an important industry in Winnipeg, and we need to make sure it’s protected for the long-term. The way to do that is a competitive bid.

Seniors and pensions

A questioner asked about improving retirement security for pensioners. Ignatieff noted a Liberal government oversaw the re-financing of the CPP in the 1990s, but 75 per cent of Canadians in the private sector have nothing but the CPP, and it won’t provide them with the income security they need. The Liberals want to set up a supplementary CPP that someone in the private sector could put money into. It would be managed by the CPP, who have a solid track record and low management costs. If we don’t encourage people to save more, he said we’ll have a real problem. The Conservatives have done absolutely nothing about improving retirement security for Canadians.

Lamoureux added seniors have a right to enjoy their retirement yeas. Too often he talks to seniors who can’t afford a meal out once a month with their grandchildren. We need to get more money into senior’s pockets, because they deserve better.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers