The meaning and non-meaning of Monday’s federal by-elections

In the National Post, Kelly McParland, said this of the recent federal by-elections:

“Stephen Harper would be very foolish not to examine the results of Monday’s four contests and be concerned about the amount of protest being sent his way. The two results from Toronto, in particular, and especially the Liberal victory in the downtown riding of Trinity-Spadina, should be extremely worrying to any Tory official tasked with getting the party re-elected in 2015.” 

While McParland is wrong in some of the details, I think he on to something. 

With regard to the Toronto ridings, he is wrong. The least significant election result came from the one riding that actually switched sides: Trinity-Spadina, where the Liberal share of the vote massively increased, allowing them to retake a riding from the NDP. This sounds impressive if you are not from Toronto. In reality, the NDP only held this riding because of long-time left-wing Toronto City Councilor (and wife of Jack Layton), Olivia Chow. Her resignation (to run for Toronto’s mayor) handed the seat over to another long-time fixture of Toronto politics, Adam Vaughan. In terms of politics, both are extreme-left. The only thing was that Vaughan surprised everybody by running for the Liberals instead of the NDP, the party that would seem to be his natural home. The Liberals won mainly because of Vaughan. There is no question that he was able to pull many NDP voters with him. In contrast, I have never heard of the NDP candidate, Joe Cressy, before.

In two of the remaining three contests, Scarborough-Agincourt and Macleod (Liberal and Conservative strongholds respectively), it is true the Liberals did increase their vote share, but hardly by worrying margins. It is necessary to keep in mind that the 2011 Federal Election was the historic nadir of Liberal electoral fortune, so some regression to the mean was to be expected. This is particularly true of Scarborough-Agincourt, where the Liberal traditionally poll in the 60-70% range. In 2011, they only got 45%. On Monday, it was back up to 59%. More worrying for the Liberals was that this by-election was triggered by the resignation of long-time Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis. He quit to run municipally but it is rumoured that he was dissatisfied with Justin Trudeau. 

The only really worrying result of the night came from Fort McMurray-Athabaska, where the Conservative vote dropped from 72 to 47%, and the Liberals surged from 13 to 35%. My sense is that local dynamics were at play but, as I am not from that area, I can’t draw any definite conclusions in this regard. Perhaps the oil sands-fueled jobs-boom has brought in enough new residents from other parts of the country who don’t share the voting habits of traditional Albertans. If a reader from Fort McMurray has any insights on what happened, I would appreciate hearing about it in the comments section.

In all of these elections, it must also be noted that the voter turnout was only half the turnout in general elections, meaning that a different mix of voters than usual went to the polls.

On the other hand, as the underlying trend of the night was an increase in Liberal fortune, McParland is right to conclude that Harper’s usual tactic, to taint his main opponent with attack ads, is no longer working. I believe it worked in the past mainly because his previous opponents, Stephane Dion and Michael Ignatieff, were fundamentally unlikable. One was an arrogant, academic dweeb with a poor command of the English language, and the other was a haughty member of foreign nobility who had lived outside of Canada for thirty years. It didn’t take too much to convince Canadians that they were unsuitable to run the country.

On the other hand, the Low Information Voter sees Justin Trudeau as a sunny, photogenic candidate. Now you and I know that Trudeau is a pretty boy of no substance, but that is not the surface impression he leaves. Unfortunately, juxtaposing his surface optimism with the nasty, cynical ads only reinforces this impression. Besides, after four elections, people are sick and tired of harsh and hectoring attack ads. They have worn out their welcome.

(As an aside, I think highlighting Trudeau’s marijuana policy is a mistake. Many libertarian-minded conservatives like me actually agree with Trudeau on this point. This is not to say that Harper should also seek to legalize pot. He would merely alienate his more traditional voters if he did. But it is just not the issue that is going to fatally wound Trudeau.)

To defeat him, Harper must change tactics. Obviously, it would be a mistake to try to out-glamorize Trudeau, say with a jet-ski photo-op. That would only play to Trudeau’s strengths. What Stephen Harper needs to do is to draw Justin Trudeau out on policy matters where people can see him for the empty suit that he really is. We have already seen glimpses of this side of Trudeau in his self-inflicted stance on abortion, alienating the traditional Catholic wing of the Liberal Party (causing people like, say, Jim Karygiannis, to leave). 

The ideal issue would be one that puts Trudeau on the horns of a dilemma. I would suggest Stephen Harper declare war on affirmative action and political correctness, while simultaneously championing free speech. Most ordinary people loath affirmative action and political correctness but they are cherished by the Liberal Party’s brain trust. My bet is that Trudeau won’t have the guts to make a definite decision either way, thus alienating both sides of the debate. In this way, Harper can expose him to be the straw man that he really is. 

Comments

[Nicola Timmerman]

I think the real problem is that voters seem to want a change, even if it is cosmetic (see recent Ontario election). And as PM Harper seems to want to stay on, we are screwed (as much as I admire him). It is sad for so many reasons that Jim Flaherty got sick and then died. He would have made a great Conservative leader with a human face. And he wouldn't have taken any guff from Trudeau. I can't see Jason Kenney as being popular across the board. Having met him once I found he was too fond of his own voice. Plus with no wife or kids it would be hard to compete with Trudeau. Maybe Christine Elliot should have kept her powder dry and ran for the leadership of the Conservative Party federally instead.

[John T]

The issue IMO, where Harper needs to draw out Trudeau is on energy development and the pipe-lines. I am actually stunned that the Liberals did as well as they did in Fort Mac considering that Trudeau is against Northern Gateway. Trudeau and the Libs essentially want to land-lock the oil sands and stunt their development. (Trudeau is for Keystone XL, but it's dead). So Harper needs to put it to Trudeau - what's your plan for getting this oil to market? Trains? OK, right. Yes, it may cost Harper votes in B.C. and among the environmentalists but he's got to stop being so namby-pamby on the Northern Gateway. With the Ontario economy being in such dismal shape, even most Ontarians know that Western resource development and safe pipelines will be the saviour of the Canadian economy for the foreseeable future (and of course that means good jobs in Ont. too). Get on with it Stephen. Draw the lines sharply on this issue. Be the pro-development, pro-jobs candidate. No, you will never win against the shiny new-pony personality of Trudeau, so pull out the stops on the pocketbook issues.

[Sean M]

Good post... Personally, I'm not worried about the middle aged boy leader of the corrupt Liberals. The media have a job to do and that job is to do everything possible to get the empty headed child dictator elected PM, what else is new. I don't believe Canadians are sufficiently stupid enough to ahere to the medias call and elect the retard. However, if Canadians are stupid enough to put the boy dictator and his merry band of radicals in charge of the nation then Canadians deserve the consequences of such an ill conceived decision. The country will never survive another dictating Trud, and frankly any country that would elect an unaccomplished imbecile like Junior doesn't deserve to survive.

[Alex]

Perfect analysis. I like your policy differences idea since Trudeau represents red jello. I also think cannabis should be legal but I don't think the policy discussion should be avoided. I think it should be explored but not actively fought against. Conservatives should take an attitude of reluctant skepticism but not derision. Its the attitude of most Canadians. How do you plan to legalize it? When? How will you protect Children? How much lung cancer do you expect? Just ask for details and frame the questions with the negative consequences in mind. Its important not to get hysterical about it. Just let Trudeau put his oratory to use. Its a question we lose on, so be sure to expect it. We can use it to reinforce the notion that Trudeau is a spoiled famous boy who is out of his depth. A narrative is much easier to tell when its the truth.