Debate night = ladies' night

Alright, Ontario, we’re on day 20, 9 more to go. I wasn’t in the field last night, so there is no updated vote. But I do have a lot to say about the debate! You can read about it here or listen to this morning’s Curse of Politics. Or both! You political nerd, you.

Last night, I used my proprietary methodology, Text Snapshot, to assess how voters react to the debate. It’s important to point out that this is qualitative research. It’s meant to shed light on how two types of voters reacted, but it’s by no means representative of the broader population. And while it’s helpful to understand which moments popped, it’s also important to remember that most people don’t consume the debate in its entirety. They might tune in for the first few minutes or only see coverage and clips after the debate. But this research helps us understand which moments the campaigns should focus on elevating, which they should ignore, and if there are any that need damage control.

28 participants were recruited, half of which belonged to each of the following groups: 

• Loose Progressive Conservatives: Those who currently plan to vote for Ford but say they’re only “possibly” voting for him. This is ~10% of the PC voting base and is the low-hanging fruit of the PC coalition. 

• Swing Left: Those who are certain not to vote for Ford but are open to both the Liberals and NDP. This group represents about 20% of the total population, and they will likely decide which party is the official opposition.

Before the debate, participants were asked a set of questions. They then texted my team 👍👎 emojis when they liked or disliked what they saw. The data was aggregated so we could understand key moments. Participants were once again surveyed after the debate to understand how their opinions changed. OK, enough methodology, let’s dive into what I learned.

The bottom line: to a pretty dramatic degree, Ford did not live up to expectations. 15 participants expected Ford to win or tie, including 4 Swing Left voters. By the end of the debate, just 1 voter thought he clearly won, and an additional voter thought he tied with Crombie. 5 voters expected Stiles to win, and by the end of the debate, 13 thought she came out ahead. Notably, few (3) of these participants expected Crombie to win, meaning she also outperformed expectations (8). But Marit Stiles was the queen of the debate, at least among these participants.  

However, there’s a difference between not meeting expectations and performing poorly. From polling data, we know Ontarians are not terribly familiar with Crombie, Stiles, or Schreiner, but they are with Ford. I think of the debate as providing a really strong introduction to these leaders. Ford kind of disappeared on the stage or simply reinforced participants’ priors. That’s not the worst outcome for him. I don’t see anything in the moment-to-moment data to suggest that he had a gaff or something that can be clipped and go viral. It’s more so that the other candidates were more shiny.

 Marit Stiles performed extremely well among Swing Left voters, while Bonnie Crombie was effective at pulling support from Ford. Among the Swing Left, Stiles retained all but one of her voters and picked up 4 more. Notably, Crombie only retained one of her voters, while 2 moved to the NDP and 1 became undecided. Again, this isn’t representative data, but it’s a helpful indicator. 

Of our 14 Loose PC voters, just 2 planned to stay with the PCs after watching the debate. Crombie was the top beneficiary of this movement: 5 voters moved to her party, 2 voters went to the Greens, 3 to the NDP, and 1 became undecided.

Now, which moments stood out to voters? There are two Ford moments and two Crombie moments that stood out to Loose PC Voters. Ford’s first peak moment, which happened well into the debate at the 26-minute mark, happened during the discussion of youth crime. It was classic Doug Ford, “you do the crime, you do the time” type stuff. Another good moment was during the discussion of building housing in the Greenbelt when he talked about reversing his decision and apologizing to voters, which politicians don’t usually do. 

Crombie had a very strong moment around the 49-minute mark when she discussed her tax cut, building housing, supporting rent controls, and examining auto insurance premiums. It was nice of the other leaders to let her so long uninterrupted. This is the moment I would clip and promote. She also had a good exchange with Mike Schreiner, during which she discussed her platform and the creation of jobs for Ontario youth. 

There’s some needed interpretation in the negative moment numbers. It’s not necessarily that respondents were disagreeing with these moments, it’s that many of these moments were discussing negative topics and respondents were indicating their mutual concern. In this vein, Mike Schreiner had some very effective moments. His critiques of Ford’s record on healthcare, giving away $200 cheques, and education broke through. Stiles and Crombie had a good moment criticizing Ford for building on the Greenbelt, and Stiles was effective at discussing Ford freezing educator wages and reducing funding for students. 

The only opposition moments these voters really took issue with were Stiles and Crombie’s closing statements, which included hard contrasts with Ford. 

To the left. The first breakthrough moments were both Crombie’s, which bodes well for the at-home watchers who only tuned in for the first few minutes. Her intro statement and discussion of healthcare, where she challenged Ford to look at the camera and apologize to Ontarians and tell them what he’s been doing on healthcare for the past 7 years, tested well. Crombie’s other strong moment was when she attacked Ford for being raised with a silver spoon in his mouth and being out of touch with the cost of living. Remember, these are left-leaning voters who have already written off voting for Ford. 

These participants responded well to Schreiner’s discussion of doubling ODSP rates and people with disabilities living in poverty and unable to afford rent. They also really liked his closing statement. 

Stiles had a good moment discussing crime. She effectively weaved a discussion of community support for those facing homelessness and addiction while reflecting on people’s worries about their own safety. Her attack on Ford regarding the Greenbelt was also a top moment.

Similar to the Loose PC voters, many of the negative moments from the debate that resonated were Schreiner’s attacks on Ford’s record. These included his record on housing, giving away $200 cheques, wasting money on Ontario Place, and his record on public education post-COVID.

The one moment that rubbed people the wrong way was Crombie asking NDP voters to vote strategically, and move their vote to the Liberals. During this morning’s Curse of Politics, Scott Reid made the point that voters are always kind of offended by this ask, but it plants the seed. This is kind of like how voters hate attack ads but then recite them verbatim in conversation. Of course, Crombie needs to have a substantial enough lead over Stiles to make this appeal. As of yesterday’s polling numbers, I’d say she does, but we’ll see over the coming week. 

In a campaign defined by disinterest, does any of this matter? It would appear so. Looking at Google Trends data, this appears to be the one moment of the campaign where search for the opposition leaders is even registerable relative to interest in Ford. And people have searched “debate” twice as much as they’ve searched “Doug Ford” at any point during the campaign.  

Beyond politics, I thought it was a really well-formatted debate. The wide range of topics, the mix of ways for the candidates to engage, and the inclusion of personal questions made it more engaging than most debates. Kudos to the broadcasters.