The governing Conservatives once again find themselves on the defensive in two by-elections in England with seats they won in 2019 with strong majorities. The Tamworth constituency in Staffordshire was vacated with the resignation of Chris Pincher, accused of sexual harassment (a contributing factor in clouding the Premiership of Boris Johnson with respect to how much he knew, “Pincher by name, pincher by nature”).  The Mid Bedfordshire constituency held by Nadine Dorries was vacated with her resignation ten weeks after she had first indicated she would do so, after failing to have secured a peerage to the House of Lords.            

The Mid Bedfordshire constituency was existing in its current form since 1918 and has been held by the Conservatives continuously since 1931.  Labour has never held this seat.  It is a rural ‘county’ constituency with the two largest towns being Ampthill and Flitwick, roughly 70 miles (45km) from the heart of London. Income is above average.  The riding was closely divided in the Brexit referendum but tilted slightly to the Leave option. 

The Tamworth constituency has existed in various forms for the last 460 years and is centered around the market town of Tamworth in the south of Staffordshire, West Midlands region.  It is approximately 18 miles (30km) from central Birmingham.  It was perhaps most notably represented by Sir Robert Peel, a UK Prime Minister in the mid-19^th century, a Conservative noted for his pro-free trade stance.  Although Tamworth has a slightly larger Conservative majority in 2019 than Mid Bedfordshire, it is considered a bellwether constituency, last held by Labour’s Brian Jenkins up to 2010.  It voted heavily for Leave in the Brexit referendum, at 66%.  Income is around the U.K. average.

The Conservatives are weighed down by the legacy of the two former MPs, particular Ms. Dorries, according to local news reports.  Several news reports relayed the impression of many voters of that of an absentee MP who was neither accessible nor very responsive. The current Conservative candidate in Tamworth, Andrew Cooper, was embroiled in at least some controversy when a social media post disparaging struggling parents some years ago emerged.  Both he, and the Mid Bedfordshire Conservative candidate, Festus Akinbusoye, (Bedfordshire Police and Crime Commissioner) have generally opted to a more low-profile campaign.  This is against the overall backdrop of Conservatives polling anywhere from 12 – 20 points behind Labour nationally.

Interestingly, the Conservative Party generated a memo then obtained by media sources projecting that vote shares in both byelections to be essentially halved to around 30 percent.  The memo did not actually project a huge swing towards Labour so much as disillusioned Conservative voters not showing up to vote. There was some speculation the memo was ‘leaked’ to help manage expectations.

Labour would be seen as the main alternative in Tamworth with union official Sarah Edwards as the candidate.  There was some controversy as to her actual residence as reported by the Daily Mail.  In Mid Bedfordshire, Alistair Strathern is standing for Labour, previously a councilor on the Waltham Forest London Borough Council and specialist at the Bank of England on climate insurance.  While Labour remains ahead nationally, it might be noted that depending on the poll, approval ratings for Sir Keir Starmer are more mixed, with a mixture of approval and disapproval.  They have also played down their ‘moonshot’ chances of winning ‘supersafe‘ Tory seats.

The Liberal Democrats are considered to be a complicating factor in the Mid Bedfordshire constituency, where polling has local councilor and charity executive Emma Holland-Lindsay in a strong third place position behind the Conservatives and Labour, both tied in a recent poll.  While the Liberals historically have held the constituency, and the Liberal Democrats are seen as making a serious bid for the seat (the type of rural English, soft leave constituency they might be expected to do well in) in the last 30 years they have only once succeeded in being a clear second to the Conservatives, that being the election of 2010.  While there have been arguments for tactical voting for either party so the Conservatives don’t squeak through, there has been reports of some friction on the ground between the two organizations.

While Tamworth is technically a bellwether, it is also seen by virtue of the strong leave vote as being a ‘red wall’ constituency, the type of working-class constituency both Labour and the Conservatives need to form a majority government.  I calculated the necessary swing here to be 21.3% from Conservative to Labour, which during the recent rounds of by-elections was previously exceeded by Labour in Selby and Ainsty.  If the Conservatives were to retain Tamworth, that might portend some disquiet on the Labour benches that they might not be able to achieve a majority, despite their high polling nationally.

Mid Bedfordshire, on the other hand, could go one of three ways, and is not seen as critical to Labour majority hopes, not having won the constituency before in its 105-year history.  The swing Labour would need here is just over 19%, again, within the realm of possibility.  The significance of a Labour win in a constituency they never previously held would reinforce the message that the incumbent Conservatives are headed towards a resounding defeat, at least as voting trends presently are.

By-elections in the UK generally produce larger swings than at general elections.  The central London constituency of Bermondsey had the largest swing of any modern byelection in 1983, the Liberals winning a 44.2% swing from Labour.  It isn’t unusual to see swings in the low 20 percent range, with varying levels of turnout and the chance for voters to send a message without, in most cases, seriously altering the balance of power.  The 1994 Dudley West byelection has to date been the biggest Conservative to Labour swing at 29%, at a time where Labour has running around 30 points ahead of the then governing Conservatives.

In predicting these two races, I would defer to two former Conservative local elected officials in Tamworth, including a former mayor, who believe that the Labour Party will eke out a win due to Conservative troubles both locally and nationally.  Mid Bedfordshire will be harder to predict – to the extent that the Liberal Democrats achieve a strong vote share, that will likely put the Conservative candidate ahead rather than being elected in their own right, since Labour is a factor.  Ultimately it comes down, however, to the message that the voters wish to send, especially with the previous MP, Ms. Dorries, plus the fact that the necessary swing to flip the seat here is less than in Tamworth, and nationally the Liberal Democrats have not notably benefited, per polling, from the Conservative decline.  I’d differ somewhat from the betting websites putting odds on the Conservatives to retain the seat, for those aforementioned reasons, I’d place them myself at 40% (or 3/2).  That said, if the Conservatives retained Mid Bedfordshire, it would be much less surprising than if they held Tamworth.

It may be of more consequence to Labour that they won the earlier Rutherglen and Hamilton West by-election, since they have never previously won a majority government in the UK without significant Scottish support  (something both the UK and Canada have in common, btw – regional parties such as the Bloc Quebecois and Scottish Nationalists currently pose a real challenge to both left-of-centre parties from winning an outright majority even if conditions are otherwise quite favourable).

Special thanks to Niamh Baker and Elise Uberoi, the UK House of Commons Library, Research Briefing on their excellent paper on Electoral Swings

Update 10.34 pm Central – for the first time since 2011, the Louisiana Governor’s race appears to have been decided in the first round of voting, and the first time since 2007 that a non-incumbent won the first round.

Louisiana’s off-year election is characterized by a ‘jungle primary’ where all candidates for a particular office, regardless of party, are on the same ballot, if no one individual candidate gets 50% + of the vote, the election goes to a runoff with the highest two vote getters.

Incumbent Democratic Governor John Bel Edwards is term limited.  Running to replace him were two Democrats, seven Republicans and 5 independents.  As predicted, Jeff Landry picked up the most votes, ultimately winning in the first round, while Democratic Shawn Wilson placed second. Accoridng to preliminary returns, Landry won nearly all counties save for 4 – East Carroll on the Mississippi (north east part of state), Orleans (New Orleans), East Baton Rouge and St. John the Baptist (near New Orleans).

Also on the ballot today are 4 referendum questions, other statewide offices for Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, Secretary of State, Treasurer, and all 105 Louisiana State House Districts and 39 State Senate Districts.  The Governor’s race is expected to be the most closely watched, although the most competitive race might be House #105 in the southeastern part of the state, which former U.S. President Donald Trump carried by single digits.  There is expected to be no change in control of any of the other offices (statewide) or legislative chambers, where the Republicans currently maintain a super majority in each.

The Republican frontrunner, Jeff Landry, is the current state Attorney General.  Most observers consider the former U.S. Congressman a staunch conservative who has not shied away from controversy.  During Governor Edwards’ term, he clashed with the Governor on issues such as LGBTQ protections in the awarding of state contracts and how to handle a lawsuit regarding Common Core (education standards), He was part of a lawsuit seeking to challenge the 2020 election results in several states U.S. President Donald Trump had lost, and later on filed a suit against the Biden Administration over requirements that healthcare workers be vaccinated against COVID-19.  Landry is focused on abortion, crime, social issues, taxation, and home insurance, among other issues in his campaign.

Several of Landry’s GOP rivals registered dismay over how the state GOP party officially endorsed Mr. Landry early on, allegedly without much transparency, and likewise they expressed disdain over how Mr. Landry had not participated in several election debates.  Polling showed that it was unlikely any of his Republican rivals will make much headway, and in the end even the fact that 6 other Republican candidates ran in the primary, the vote was sufficiently consolidated on the first round for Landry to win.

The main Democratic candidate, Shawn Wilson, holds a Ph.D. in Public Administration, served in several public service roles, including most recently as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development under Governor Edwards.  His campaign has also addressed home insurance, increased accessibility in health care, crime, education, and the economy, to name a few.

Governor Edwards was able to break the long-term trend towards Republican voting in the state at least partly by carving out some fairly conservative positions atypical of the Democrats on such issues as abortion, where he signed a six-week abortion ban.  However, he has taken some more liberal positions regarding LGBTQ protections, expanding Medicaid, and vetoed a ban on gender-affirming care (which was then overridden by the Republican-controlled legislature).  While Wilson is seen as more liberal than Edwards, he has referenced appealing to middle ground and in so doing, “satisfy the masses.” 

Louisiana has long been known to have colorful personalities and a brand of politics unique to the Pelican state.  The end result is that over the past 70 years, Louisiana politics has been fairly competitive between the two parties on a national level between 1952 and 2000, although the designation of blue versus red states since then has placed Louisiana as a consistent member of the Team Red, with Democrats taking no more than 40% of the vote, and the Republicans no less than 56% from 2004 onwards.  National debates and a broad rural/urban divide appear to have supplanted the older, more dynamic political alignments of the state based on demographics and geographical/cultural regions within the state.

The state has faced a few challenges after being hit with several strong hurricanes in recent years, a decline in population and a significant rise in homeowner’s insurance rates after a number of insurers pulled out of the state market after recent weather-related events, widely attributed to climate change.

The end result of a Republican win for Governor has historically little portent for how Louisiana might vote in the next Presidential election, never mind the country as a whole.  For instance, in 1995 Mike Foster, Republican, won the Governor’s race but the following year both Louisiana and the country at large reelected Democrat Bill Clinton.  In 2003 Kathleene Blanco won the Governor’s race for the Democrats, but again, both state and country reelected Republican George W Bush as President the following year.  Bobby Jindal reclaimed the Governor’s office for the Republicans in 2007, and while the state consistently voted Republican for President ever since, the country has alternated between Republican and Democratic nominees for President.

***

So, the main takeaway – if Republicans, as expected, win the Governor’s race this fall, and claim to have some momentum going forward (especially since the Republican frontrunner was endorsed by Donald Trump), they might bear in mind that historically, at least, Louisiana Governor’s races generally don’t foretell any national outcomes the following year where the winning party is concerned. It might be telling, however, that the 1st round win by Landry might portend a more united Republican party for next year, at least in this one crimson red state. If the final results show that the Democrats underperformed, it can’t be discounted that some of the independent vote might have siphoned off support, (as well as a lower turnout), both of which might end up being portents for next year nationally as well.

Posted 7.53 pm 10/14, before polls closing

Currently Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives are leading opinion surveys nationally by, on average, 10 points.  While this does not preclude the incumbent Liberals under Justin Trudeau returning to power, since there are some instances where incumbent parties have erased those polling deficits, at this point, it is the Conservatives’ election to lose. 

At the present time only 9 out of the 78 Quebec MPs are Conservative (one more was elected as a Conservative and since left the caucus).  Regional polling consistently has the federal Conservatives in the low to mid-20s in Quebec, behind both the Liberals and the Bloc Quebecois compared to leads in most other parts of the country.  While it is possible that the Conservatives can make further gains in Quebec, especially if the Bloc should falter, recent history suggests that these gains would be limited given previous Conservative PM Stephen Harper’s inability to get more than one dozen seats in the province despite winning 3 elections overall.

In Quebec opinion surveys show the autonomiste, centre-right Coalition d’Avenir Quebec (CAQ) comfortably ahead in opinion surveys, although facing some headwinds, notably over a cancelled tunnel project in Quebec City.  The separatist Parti-Quebecois (PQ) is a discernable, if distant, second place, amidst 3 other opposition parties.  The Jean Talon byelection in Quebec City might portend the opposition coalescing around Paul St-Pierre Plamondon’s PQ, which won the riding for the first time in its history (going back to 1966), or it may be an anomaly since the riding was directly impacted by the decision to cancel the tunnel project.  It can’t be discounted, however, since the southern, river front ridings in Quebec City tend to be more left leaning, Quebec Solidaire (QS) holds the two neighbouring ridings and ran a very close second to CAQ in Jean Talon last general election, carrying nearly half the polls.  It is therefore possible that the PQ win in Jean Talon reinforces the narrative that they, more than anyone else, are the government in waiting.

Governments in Quebec, since the end of the Duplessis Union Nationale era, generally point to a particular government’s best-before date as being 2 full mandates, but with some exceptions (nearly all on the one mandate side, only 1 instance since Maurice Duplessis where a government received 3 consecutive mandates, one of which was a minority, during the Jean Charest years). CAQ would hit the two full mandates with next election in 2026.

We also know that the Parti Quebecois traditionally wins power for the first time by campaigning not on holding a referendum but on offering good government to a province tired of the incumbents (1976 and 1994), in both instances the PQ government called a referendum in the first mandate, lost both times, and then handily won reelection in the subsequent election (either despite, or perhaps because, sovereignty was no longer on the table).  Pauline Marois’ 2012 victory was an outlier since she only won a minority government after campaigning on Jean Charest’s record, and assumably, due at least in part to her minority position did not call a referendum.

So Plamondon might be best placed for his PQ party to succeed the CAQ after 2 terms in 2026, he might campaign on good government, and might make good on his intent to hold a referendum, the next Quebec election campaign would almost certainly be held after the next federal election campaign, while any future Quebec referendum would be well after the next federal election.

Referendum support might potentially increase in the wake of federal Conservative leader Poilievre’s pledge to make Canada ‘the freest country on earth’ since Quebec politics has traditionally been left of centre, is seen as considerably more socially liberal than a number of MPs in the federal Conservative caucus and is aligned more with renewable energy than fossil fuel production (which might also limit the federal Conservatives’ gains in Quebec).

Federal campaigns have rarely turned on the prospects of Quebec referendums.  The 1979 election campaign saw PC leader Joe Clark win power with a minority, with PQ Premier Rene Levesque in power in Quebec.  Clark only had 2 Quebec MPs out of 75.  In the subsequent election in 1980, the campaign was fought over issues such as Clark’s failed attempt to pass a budget which would have raised the tax on gasoline by 18 cents a gallon. 

While the Quebec government was at the time actively debating a referendum question for a plebiscite to be held later that year, and while that might have prompted some swing voters outside of Quebec to consider the federal Liberals as a better alternative to fight a referendum campaign (given their much stronger Quebec representation), most observers felt that the prospect of a Quebec referendum, while not hurting the federal Liberals at the time, was mostly peripheral to the electorate outside of Quebec in 1980, concerned as they were more with the price of energy. 

Likewise, while the 1993 campaign featured for the first time the separatist Bloc Quebecois, much of the election elsewhere was focused on the lethargic state of the economy and the unpopular Goods and Services Tax enacted by the incumbent PC government.

The last two referendum campaigns were led on the federalist side by Liberal Prime Ministers from Quebec (Pierre Trudeau in 1980, Jean Chretien in 1995).  Likewise, they had strong, if not completely harmonious ties with their provincial Liberal counterparts in Quebec, and a fairly deep bench of prominent Quebec politicians to advocate for the federalist side 

By contrast, none of Poilievre’s Quebec caucus has national household name recognition, and the most discernably federalist provincial party, the Quebec Liberal Party, is largely confined to western Montreal and with few ties to the federal Conservatives.   It is true that former Conservative leadership candidate, and former Quebec Premier Jean Charest, was a Liberal, as was Dominique Vien, the now Conservative MP for Bellechasse.  The Conservative MP for Louis-Saint-Laurent, Gerard Deltell, was also previously leader of the CAQs successor, the Action democratique du Quebec ADQ.  Some of the Conservative Quebec MPs have some provincial experience, therefore, but not necessarily on a magnitude that might move the needle in a campaign. Finally, it is also worth noting that during the last leadership campaign, the Quebec caucus overwhelmingly endorsed Jean Charest, with 7 out of 10 MPs, with Poilievre receiving the endorsement of only one caucus member.

So what is the takeaway?

If Poilievre wins in the next federal election (still a big if) and Jean Talon portends the eventual return of the PQ to power in Quebec, he may be faced with the prospect of a Quebec referendum down the road with minimal resources on the federalist side – namely, a small Quebec presence in his caucus, potentially estranged ties with the Quebec Liberals who traditionally spearhead the federalist campaign in referendums and an policy platform less in sync with Quebec voters than elsewhere.  This would be a first in that this could potentially be the weakest federalist coalition yet to campaign in a Quebec independence referendum, if due care is not taken.

This means that Poilievre could risk being the Prime Minister that saw Quebec separate on his watch if he does not take events like Jean Talon into account.

So if I was Poilievre – I would

1. Court both the CAQ and the provincial Liberals (and provincial Conservatives) in the next election
2. Give high profile roles to my Quebec MPs (which he will likely do)
3. Keep Jean Charest’s contact information handy

If I was Plamondon, I would

1. Get enough Solidaire voters on side
2. Campaign on good government in the next provincial election
3. Be prepared to strike fast and strike hard if Poilievre is my counterpart in Ottawa, especially if he proposes something significant that is offside with most of the Quebec electorate

Ten Observations from a Pundit across the Pond

1. Byelection triggered with the successful recall petition of the previous incumbent, SNP Margaret Ferrier for serious breaches of COVID-19 regulations, to which she pled guilty and was sentenced to community service hours
2. The constituency is described as a marginal SNP/Labour seat in the Glasgow area, previously a Labour stronghold, first flipping to the SNP in 2015, reverting to Labour in 2017 and then returning to the SNP fold in 2019
3. Both SNP and Labour are seen as having political baggage in this byelection
4. This is the major electoral test under the new SNP leader and First Minister, Humza Yousaf, who replaced outgoing SNP leader and First Minister Nicola Sturgeon
5. SNP support has declined in polls, while not precipitously, enough to make marginals competitive, Sturgeon’s resignation also seen as a negative for SNP strength, and while the pro-independence Alba Party did not field a candidate in a bid not to split the independent vote, other independence-minded candidacies such as the Scottish Greens and the Independence for Scotland Parties may end up splitting the vote enough in a tight race to tip the outcome to Labour
6. Labour has its own challenges.  A number of analysts see this as a must win for UK Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer, who has embraced a position on not lifting the two-child benefit cap, contrary to the local Labour candidate, Michael Shanks’ position being to lift the cap (in line with the SNP position and likely closer to Scottish opinion)
7. The council tax in South Lanarkshire is also increasing, where the Labour Party has minority control, and several other controversies attributed to local Labour leadership on the council might weigh down Labour’s bid
8. Mathematically, Labour has outperformed their Scottish totals in this constituency by around 10%, while SNP generally has run close to even to their overall Scottish vote totals
9. Current polling suggests that the SNP has around a 5% plurality over Labour in UK elections, which suggests a 2-3% Labour edge in today’s byelection
10. Should Sir Keir lose this byelection, it might raise questions on his leadership on at least two fronts, firstly, absent a strong showing in Scotland, especially in marginals, if he could win a majority government should the race in England tighten, and secondly, if his more ‘fiscally cautious’ approach on such policies as the two-child benefit cap would dampen Labour enthusiasm, limit Scottish gains (or conversely, if he took a more ‘liberal’ approach on social policy such as the cap, if it might limit gains in swing ridings elsewhere in the country)

	Seats	% Votes
NDP	33	46.3%
PC	22	40.3%
Liberals	2	9.5%
Greens	–	2.5%
Ind/Otr	–	1.4%

Voting is underway in Manitoba’s 43^rd general election.  If polling is to be believed, NDP Wab Kinew will become the province’s next Premier with a modest majority, and the riding dynamics largely support this narrative.

Since the rise of NDP vs. PC contests over 50 years ago, the electoral map has seen a remarkably stable group of ridings seen as safe for both parties.  Broadly speaking, the southern, and especially southwestern rural ridings have remained reliably PC, as well as those areas towards the south of outer Winnipeg.  The NDP has seen comparable electoral strength from the northern ridings and a core of north central Winnipeg ridings.  Apart from 1988 where the Liberals made significant (if one time) inroads in Winnipeg, both parties have (perhaps unique to any Canadian province) maintained a sizeable presence in the legislature of more than one dozen seats out of 57 total (a number that has also remained the same since 1949).

The swing ridings do consist of a few rural areas but are mostly ridings closer to the Perimeter Highway around Winnipeg and are in turn “consistent” bell weather ridings.  As a Canadian myself it would be tempting to call these swing areas ‘donut’ ridings, surrounding a more orange urban core and a bluer rural background, but geographically this would not correspond to anything approximating a perfect ring.  Most of the swing areas are towards the north or southeast, whereas the southwest has maintained a more consistent blue.

Regardless of how these geographically appear on a map, however, the fact that these individual ridings being swing ridings, further out from the core but still urban Winnipeg, augurs more for an NDP victory despite the relatively close polling throughout a campaign.  Certainly, it is at least in theory possible that the incumbent PCs under incumbent Heather Stefanson can pull off an upset reelection – there are a number of precedents for this in Canada, and the PCs could lose up to 6 seats and still maintain a bare majority government.  But that’s a very fine needle to thread, and while history suggests a two-term government is achievable, the math becomes more complicated, if not impossible, for a hat trick. 

The incumbent PCs have been close to or modestly underwater in polling over the past several years.  In addition to the normal malaise of a government in its now 7^th year of power, the province has struggled with high inflation and struggling healthcare services, even if the national housing crisis is not as acute, as say, Toronto, and the provincial budgets are turning a respectable surplus.  The campaign was initially characterized as being uneventful with the PCs advocating tax cuts and the NDP greater investment in healthcare.  However, towards the end of the campaign the PCs have made it a point to not just state, but openly campaign on a pledge to not search a local landfill for the remains of two First Nations women, while the NDP and third-party Liberals have pledged to do this, albeit with differing commitments of financial resources.  In addition, the PCs have been promoting what is characterized, (rightly or not) as parental rights in schools in relation to transgender and non-binary students who might feel unsafe to reveal gender identities at home.

Whatever the merits of the PC position (there certainly has been some blowback with accusations of less than subtle dog whistling), it is this blogger’s opinion that this (newly found?) focus on social issues appears to be badly targeted to the specific ridings the PCs need to maintain power. The ‘reliable’ swing ridings, those places such as Assiniboia, Kildonan-River East, Radisson and Rossmere, all correspond to areas both provincially and federally where either economic issues have held greater sway (at least based on prior elections) or where the pattern of voting suggests, if anything, suburban moderation. If the social areas were to play better in rural areas, there are only a handful of truly swing ridings which wouldn’t offset a potentially steeper decline of the PCs in suburban Winnipeg.

With respect to individual leaders and parties, it is anticipated that both the PC and NDP leaders should be able to easily maintain their seats.  It is noteworthy that should Mr. Kinew become Premier, that he would be the first Indigenous Premier elected in Manitoba in almost 150 years.  The Liberals face a challenge not only in the decline of their brand federally, but the fact that election cycles favouring the NDP has been often to their detriment.  The safest riding for them is River Heights, held by former leader Jon Gerrard (for close to a quarter century).  Both leader Dougald Lamont and their other MLA, Cindy Lamoureux, are expected to face tough challenges in their respective seats of St. Boniface and Tyndall Park, respectively.  The Greens have nominated a considerably reduced slate of candidates, with the only (probably still unlikely) prospective win in Wolseley for leader Janine Gibson.

In sum – best chance the province turns orange similar to 1999. Remote chance the PCs are able to remain in power. Nothing suggests underlying voting dynamics to significantly shift between strong PC, strong NDP and swing ridings.

The current CAQ government is trending down in recent opinion polls, as they near the middle of their second mandate with five years in power.  Recent opinion surveys show CAQ falling to third place in the Quebec City region, with the Parti Quebecois or Conservatives leading in the region, depending on the particular survey. 

One of the main issues in the riding is the cancellation of a promised automobile tunnel linking Quebec City with Levis, a decision the Legault government made the spring after the 2022 election, and which reportedly caused many residents in the region to be upset with the incumbent government.

The riding contains the former municipalities of Sillery and Ste-Foy, along with the Universite Laval.  It was first created as the Jean Talon riding in the 1966 election and previously occupied in earlier years areas closer to the centre of Quebec City.  While to date the PQ have never held the riding, it nearly won the riding in 1994 and 1998.  While Quebec City trends more conservative than the province as a whole, the particular localities represented by Jean Talon have not trended conservative as much as some of the more northern ridings in the region.  Since 1993 the federal Conservatives have only won the federal counterpart, Louis Hebert, once, barely, and with those particular polls commensurate with Jean Talon being where the second place Bloc Quebecois finished more strongly.  Provincially Quebec Solidaire has received strong support in the riding, corresponding to their relatively strong showing in the southern parts of Quebec City and election wins in neighbouring Taschereau and Jean Lesage.

While Quebec Solidaire has gained one other seat in a byelection since the 2022 vote, that being the St.-Henri-Ste.-Anne riding held by the former Liberal leader Dominique Anglade in Montreal, there is less hope that they will prevail here on election day.  The PQ has discernably moved ahead in the Quebec City region in recent polls and has consistently claimed second place in province wide opinion polling overall.  Finally, a Leger opinion poll for this byelection puts the PQ at 32 %, CAQ at 30%, with QS at 17% and the Liberals at 16%. 

With this in mind, I am predicting at least 50% chance that the PQ will win the riding, 35% for CAQ and 15% QS, and additionally, a 40% chance that QS will displace CAQ for second place. 

While this would undoubtedly be good news for the PQ, it would not necessarily be more discernable which party, between the PQ and QS, would be seen as the alternative to the governing CAQ.  Since the latter party’s founding in 2006, in large part as a left-wing response to the 2005 neoliberal Pour un Quebec lucide manifesto and has previously rejected cooperation with the other sovereigntist party, the PQ.  Polling suggests a significant age gap between the sovereigntist parties, with younger voters favoring QS 2 to 1 over the PQ, and often with an outright plurality, whereas older voters who are sovereigntist are more apt to stay with the PQ.  If the PQ can demonstrate, however, with this win, in a riding they have never previously held, that they are the default choice for previous CAQ voters, this might help them move past core QS support and in a better position to return to power.  But like neighbouring Ontario where the incumbent government there enjoys a divided opposition as well, it may end up being several election cycles before a badly beaten previous governing party discernably moves out into second place, let alone making a credible bid for power outright.