Week 2: Evan Bray’s panel discusses ground game, younger voters

The Evan Bray Show hosts a weekly panel this election season to discuss everything from advice for leaders ahead of the debate, how to connect with different generations of voters and updated predictions.

Evan is joined by John Gormley, lawyer, former Member of Parliament and host of The John Gormley Show, and Kevin Fenwick, Saskatchewan mediator and facilitator, former Deputy Minister of Justice and Saskatchewan’s provincial ombudsman.

Listen to week 2 of the panel on the Evan Bray Show

John, last week you talked about how the NDP had such a strong ground game for many years, you feel like the Sask. Party probably is stronger today. Maybe just explain that for the people that were wondering what that means.

GORMLEY: Yeah, absolutely. We tend to focus, of course, on the campaign. You see Carla Beck, you see Scott Moe, you see the big messages, the big promises. There are 61 separate elections underway, and that’s what’s really important to remember. So how do you win those 61 elections? It’s ground game.

There’s two sets of initials – ID. So your job up to the election, and during the 28-29 day writ period is to identify the people who will vote for you. And it’s not just hey, do you think you’ll come out and vote? It’s Evan Bray, your address, your cell number, your email. So Evan’s on my list, so I’m IDing and trying to get 5,000 people out to vote. You get 5,000 people to vote, especially in the cities. You win the riding. So ID is that part.

Then the ground game is the G-O-T-V, get out the vote. So I’ve got my list of 5,000 names. And then, of course, there’s a conversion factor. Nobody gets all 5,000 out. A hugely successful campaign might be 80%. Well, that’s 4,000, so I probably want 6,500 names.

It goes on all the time, and then the run up now, especially with voting week. You know, we used to do the GOTV on one day. Now you’ll have six days where you are literally phoning 6,000 people, sometimes going to their house and offering to babysit. I remember a campaign back in the 70s, when I almost flunked out of university. I was working a campaign. I’m 19 years old. I said, ‘Well, okay, if you go vote now, I look after your kids,’ so I pulled up my beater, my rusty car in the driveway, sat there in a perfect stranger’s house, looking after their kids, finishing the supper dishes. The couple went out and voted, they came back. So that’s what ground game looks like. The NDP for decades was the best, in recent years, they’re not as good anymore.

John Gormley is a lawyer, former Member of Parliament and host of The John Gormley Show.

The principles are the same, rural and urban. Yet I’m guessing there’s some nuances that might look a little different.

FENWICK: Well, there are. I 100% agree with John that it is absolutely crucial. It may be even more crucial today than it was a few decades ago, because you used to be able to count on 60 or 70% of people coming out and voting. Now you’re, you know, we’re barely over 50%, so drawing those votes is really, really important in the rural areas, especially sometimes driving is as important as babysitting, because somebody may not have access to a vehicle, and you need to get them to the polls. So it is a little bit different.

We’ve seen weather even play a factor. I mean, I would like to think on October 28 that won’t, but certainly in a municipal election, we saw that happen before.

FENWICK: For sure, it used to be that you planned on three visits to every house if you weren’t sure how they were going to vote. If you knew how they were going to vote, you either didn’t go back because you didn’t want to antagonize the opposition, or you went back one more time to make sure that you had a plan for election day to get those.

How important are campaign promises in terms of influencing voters, and how much focus has to be placed on how the message is delivered, who’s delivering it?

FENWICK: It depends, I think, partly, on the on the strength of the personalities of the leaders. I mean, let’s face it, I don’t think that anyone would argue that either Scott Moe or Carla Beck has the personal charisma that a Brad Wall or a Roy Romanow had. So it’s more important for people to get to see them and hear them in person and experience what you did, where you get a good sense about who they are. But it’s impossible for more than a few thousand people in the province to do that in any particular campaign. So if you don’t get to meet them, then the charisma factor, if it’s not present in a strong way, means, I think people look a little bit more at what the policies and the promises are. Sometimes charisma carries the day, sometimes not.

Kevin Fenwick is a Saskatchewan mediator and facilitator, former Deputy Minister of Justice and Saskatchewan’s provincial ombudsman.

GORMLEY: I agree with Kevin, and the overarching theme, of course, is what they call the ballot question. So both of the parties have a ballot question. So the leaders are playing into that ballot question. The 61 campaigns are playing into it, and it’s pretty easy to summarize it already.

Sask. Party been around too long. They’re old. They’re tired. That’s the NDP ballot question. For the Sask. Party, opportunity and growth, still even more ahead. And remember the last time the NDP were in all the things you didn’t like about the way they govern? So you’ve got those two views. And what depends, as Kevin puts it so well, is the way in which the salespeople, in this case, Scott Moe and Carla Beck are going to sell that ballot question in those 61 campaigns.

FENWICK: I want to add one other thing though, we may not have the experience or the opportunity to visit with Carla Beck and Scott Moe, but every person in Saskatchewan probably has the opportunity to meet with their candidate.

Let’s remember that we’re in a parliamentary democracy. There’s only two constituencies in Saskatchewan where people are going to be voting for either Carla Beck or Scott Moe. We vote for our elected MLAs. So reach out, talk to those folks, give them a phone call, ask them to come visit you, so that you can get that feeling of whether these are good people, are the kind of people you can support. And that’s how it should work in a parliamentary democracy.

GORMLEY: And I agree with Kevin insofar as that, but remember now the ratios are a little different provincially, because it is closer to home. The old federal adage is what they call the 86% rule. First election you’re ever running in, every 100 votes you get, 86 of them weren’t for you. They were for your leader. They were for the platform. They were for the party. They were against the incumbent party. You only got 14.

Now provincially, I would argue the ratio is a bit better than that. But then power of incumbency, once you’ve been in for four years, you know more people. You resonate with more people. When you’re brand new, either governing or the opposition, you’ve got again, a much tougher sell job, because you’ve got to be one on one at the doors.

How much do you think federal politics comes into play influencing this provincial election?

GORMLEY: It’s very, very important, but it does depend on the nature of federal politics. During the Harper government, you saw less of this during the Cretien years, except Bill C 68 gun control and the firearms registry. So if you’ve got a federal government that gets precipitously into provincial issues or issues that hurt the province, you bet provincial politicians will be there. And I’m sorry this character in Ottawa could not stake out more things inimical to Saskatchewan’s interests if he sat down and tried. So you obviously are going to have Saskatchewan stand against Ottawa on the carbon tax. Stand against Ottawa on its aversion to, oh, being the fifth largest energy producer on the planet, these sorts of things.

Now the NDP challenge is that, historically, an NDP membership was both redeemable federal and provincially. I don’t know if they still do it, but that used to be the nature of the party. So when you’ve got the NDP propping up for the last year and a half, this exceptionally anti-Saskatchewan government, you bet people are going to say to the NDP, hey, do you really agree with Trudeau?

They, of course, will distance themselves. Carbon Tax is a good example. A lot of the MLAs existing, you know, just look at Erica Ritchie. Look at Meara Conway. Have shot their mouths off excessively over the years on anti-carbon, pro Carbon Tax, anti-oil. So these are issues that if I’m provincially campaigning, I’m going to try and tie my opponents to those positions.

FENWICK: I don’t disagree with John. I think that there’s a bit of a gap. However, in terms of what people look at with respect to the link with the federal government, I think the NDP has tried very hard in Saskatchewan to distance itself from the federal NDP, and maybe too little too late.

So I think there’s going to be, it’s not going to be a net gain for the NDP on those kinds of things.

However, when we’ve got an election that is probably going to be very close, and I still focus on that group of centrist Sask. Party supporters, what I often think of as the former liberals and that liberal conservative coalition that led to the Sask. Party.

Not everybody in Saskatchewan hates Justin Trudeau and the federal Liberals to the extent that the Sask. Party would have us believe. There are people out there who would rather see the provincial government work cooperatively sometimes with the federal government.

Personally, I’m a proud Canadian and a very proud Saskatchewanian. I’m tired of politicians saying over and over again that they will fight for me. I want them to work for me. Sometimes the provincial and federal governments have to make a deal. You just got to make a deal. And so I think that there will be some people who look at the approach that the provincial government has taken and say, you know, once in a while, you got to give credit where credit is due. And if those people happen to be in the constituencies that are really close, the link that the NDP have with the federal NDP might not be as damaging as we would think.

Listen to week 1 of the panel on the Evan Bray Show

GORMLEY: I can’t agree with Kevin on that one, because what credit would one give to Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Singh at the moment, if you’re in Saskatchewan.

FENWICK: I’ll give you an example, John, and that’s with respect to our premier a little while ago, standing up and taking credit for Saskatchewan having one of the highest participation rates in the $10 daycare program, which is almost exclusively federal money. He was bragging about Saskatchewan having all of these $10 day care spaces, didn’t once mentioned that the money came from the federal government. That’s an example to me, where you could practice cooperative federalism and give credit when credit is due.

GORMLEY: Good point in that the government’s acknowledged it, but it’s rather begrudging. I mean, you’ll hear yes, Ottawa finally did something for us. So there, I would concede. But the point is, this is a position of a government federally that has really gone hunting on a lot of Saskatchewan issues. And again, this will pass. It always does, but it will pass with Mr. Trudeau moving on.

Let’s talk about ridings to watch. We’ve talked already today about the fact that there are 61 elections happening in the province. There are a number that are featuring a new candidate, regardless of who is winning, because the existing incumbent has, for whatever reason, stepped down, moved on. What ridings do you have your eye on going forward?

FENWICK: It’s a long list. Actually. That’s what makes this election so interesting for watchers of politics. I think any riding in Saskatoon, in Regina that’s currently held by the Saskatchewan Party is worth watching because every one of them is in trouble.

If you’re a Sask. Party supporter, I think some of the smaller urbans are going to be crucial, the Moose Jaws and the Prince Albert ridings, which may very well determine who wins this election.

A couple of ridings where the Sask. United Party could have an impact, Saskatchewan Rivers, where Nadine Wilson is, maybe Lumsden Morris, where the Sask. United Party leader is running. The northern ridings, especially Athabasca on the west side, which is traditionally NDP, but right now is held by the Sask. Party.

So I think all of those are interesting. And for me, the other one that’s interesting for different reasons, is the Saskatoon riding, where the current Minister of Justice is running because I have some real concerns. As a former Deputy Minister of Justice and former Deputy Attorney General, I have grave concerns about the actions of this minister.

GORMLEY: I must disagree with my friend on a few of his assessments. You know, there’s an old thing in politics, and let me just riff a little bit in the brief time I was in Alberta, lived in Edmonton, and those were the Lawrence Decore days. The liberals were going to sweep Alberta, and there was this new guy named Ralph Klein becomes the party leader. Everywhere in Edmonton you turned, the liberals were going to win the election. And I thought, this doesn’t feel right, so I phoned a buddy in Calgary. Phone, a buddy in Red Deer. Phone somebody I know in Medicine Hat, and they said the Liberals might win 40% of the seats, probably 30% and that’s exactly what happened.

So Kevin is taking what is an overwhelmingly strong NDP presence in Regina. You know, in Regina, I’m completely with Kevin Right now the NDP has seven of the 12 Regina seats. Sask. Party will be contesting very, very vigorously the seats they hold. I think they will likely come out with at least a couple. But it wouldn’t surprise me if the NDP did better. For Bronwyn Eyre to lose Saskatoon Stonebridge, I don’t see that. Ken Chevyldayoff in his riding of the Arbor Creek area, Paul Merriman in his area which abuts that, those are three pretty strong Sask. Party seats.

What I will be watching, though, speaking of ministers of justice, Don Morgan, who had a huge majority last time, 2,600 votes, completely brand new. Riding is still very strong Sask. Party territory, but you have a new candidate, John Owojori, who’s a Nigerian crop scientist, and then Brittney Senger for the NDP that used to be Pat Lorje’s riding back in the day.

So can the NDP make up nearly 3,000 votes? Not likely, but worth watching. I’ve got a couple of other seats. Mohammed Fayez, I’m watching in Pasqua, Sask. Party. Lisa Lambert, Saskatoon-Churchill-Wildwood, an NDP seat, University Sutherland.

I think this Ghislaine McLeod from Sask.Party could do very well there. And here’s one for you. This is going to be a sleeper. You’ve got Aleana Young in Regina South Albert. You remember she lost to Tina Beaudry-Mellor two elections ago, then wins Tina Beaudry-Mellor, and each the loss in the win, where, I think under 400 votes, very close.

You’ve got Lucky Mehrok, who is a force of nature. I don’t know a lot of guys who go by one name. I was in Regina the other day and somebody said, have you met Lucky? I said, No, 30,000 doors. This guy is a force of nature at the doors. So you’re not seeing much Aleana Young outside her riding these days, because she’s a good politician. She’s staying very close to home. Will the Sask. Party win it? I don’t know, but it’s going to be a very close seat.

Will Jon Hromek and the face time he’s getting through being the leader of the Sask. United Party, pose a threat for change in the Lumsden Morris riding?

GORMLEY: Hromek is not going to come close. That is a safe Sask. Party seat as it ever was. The SUP and the Buffalo, the seats that they have any chance of getting votes in are not going to split. NDP, so again, I respectfully disagree with Kevin. I don’t read a thing into Sask. United. Good example is Sask. rivers. That is the nominal leader of the SUP Nadine Wilson, she’s going to lose badly, probably coming in third place, even fourth place. So again, I just don’t see the SUP, but I you know, Kevin does, and I guess we’ll see which one of us is correct on election night.

FENWICK: I don’t see them winning. I agree with John. I don’t see them winning any seats. I think when we’re talking about Nadine Wilson at Sask. Rivers, the question is, does she pull enough votes in what a couple of elections ago was an NDP seat? Does she pull enough votes to let the NDP come up the middle?

What about the two former Sask. Party MLAs that are removed now running for Sask. United. Do either of them, through their name and through their relationship with the Sask. Party, carry any weight into this election?

GORMLEY: Nope. Look at those MLAs when they were MLAs for goodness sakes, I just don’t see it.

FENWICK: Yeah, I don’t either. I don’t see it as a big impact. The only thing is, I do think this is going to be a close election. Maybe, I think it’s closer than John would be. There is certainly the possibility that there will be ridings like those two where they pulled just enough votes to allow the NDP to get in. I don’t see that happening in either of those ridings, but, you know, I guess we can’t write it off.

GORMLEY: The only seats I would keep a close eye on. And to this extent, I agree with Kevin, always watch Moose Jaw and PA, there are different configurations. I’ve run about three different models using those four seats, and those are worth watching.

We have a variety of voters all the way from the silent generation, those that were born the generation before the Baby Boomers to Gen Z voting in this election. How do we find a way to engage everyone in the political process?

FENWICK: It’s a huge challenge, I think, for political parties, because, unlike a lot of advertisers, you can’t just pick your market and concentrate on that. You can’t decide that we’re selling designer jeans so we’re going to market to people under 30. You’ve got to be able to market to everybody across the board. I’m dating myself here, but I’m reminded of the Marshall McLuhan statement decades ago, that the medium is the message, and I think that’s part of the answer. It’s partly your message, but it’s partly how you deliver it. That’s why we see political parties doing so much more now on social media, right? The other thing that all I think we need to be careful of it.

We used to teach a class when I was teaching at Johnson Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy. We taught a class for a while on generational differences, and we would give our participants a survey to figure out whether they were Gen X, Gen Z, a Baby Boomer, traditionalist, etc, not based on their age, but based on their belief systems. And I was always surprised at how many people didn’t fall within their chronological group. I’m a baby boomer chronologically, but I’m more of a traditionalist in terms of my belief systems. So I think the parties need to be careful that they don’t just cater to people based on their age. I think they have to deliver the message in different ways. I don’t know if the message can change that much if you want to be true to your beliefs.

GORMLEY: In politics, invariably, younger voters tend to skew a bit more left than older or experienced voters, because it’s life experience. It’s lived experience. I mean, what is the NDP? There are a whole bunch of voters who were toddlers when we last had an NDP government. So you know, there is a bit of that.

When you look at the polling, younger people do tend to skew in this election, provincially, far more New Democrat than people aged, even later millennials. Millennials are now 42, so people into middle age and up are going to be more inclined toward the Sask. Party.

But my advice, and this is cynical, this is mean and this is petty, is if you are a Gen Z, I think you’ve got to spend more time on Reddit. You’ve got to become a TikTok influencer. Don’t help anybody knock doors. Don’t knock in lawn signs. Don’t actively participate in the election, because Reddit is really where you belong.

I said that the other day to a young person. He looked at me. He goes, Are you making this up? I said, Yes, I am. But you know, again, don’t ever forget Brad Wall was dogmatic about this. He said, If I see a social media post from a candidate before nine o’clock at night, we’re going to have a long discussion. Because social media is never, ever a duplicate for one-on-one voter ID, interacting at the doors and putting your ground game in place.

The challenge is that there’s a lot of people who consume their information based on what they see on Reddit, TikTok, Instagram, whatever the case may be.

FENWICK: And we circle back to where we started this discussion as well, is that I agree with John 100% that ground game is crucial, but it’s so much more difficult now, because it used to be, if you knocked on door, there’d be somebody in the house 75% of the time. Now you’re lucky if somebody’s home 25% of the time.

GORMLEY: Absolutely.

What advice in 30 seconds to a minute would you give to the leaders ahead of next week’s debate?

GORMLEY: Stay on your message. You know what your message is. You always go to your core vote. So you start with your base, then you extend into the middle. So Scott Moe has to soften and move to the middle a little. He’s got his base well shored up.

Carla Beck has got her base shored up. She’s got to be able to say the crazy Palestinian crowd, the crazy pronoun crowd, they’re not today’s NDP. Of course, Mr. Moe will suggest they are. So both have to moderate, but always start with truth to message.

FENWICK: I agree with John. My message to Scott would be, you need to get away from the reputation that you have as you’re the big defenseman from Shell Lake with us with a hard slap shot.

Sometimes politics needs some finesse. You need a little more Gretzky. So you need to soften your message, so you’re not seen to be fighting about everything all the time. That you can be a deal maker.

The message to Carla, I think, is just let people know who you are. She’s an unknown factor yet. The feedback I’m getting from people that know her is she seems genuine. She seems to actually believe what she’s saying. Is the direction we should go. That’s what she has to make shine through.

Last week, we talked about seat count predictions, John, you threw out a 38 seat win for the Sask. Party Any changes now?

GORMLEY: No, I’m still in 38 to 40 is my range. I’ll probably modify that as we go on.

Kevin, you said 32 to 34 votes for the winner, but you weren’t committed to who. Are you committing to something?

FENWICK: At the end of the show last week, I sat down and I crunched the numbers, and I came up with 34 Sask. Party and 27 NDP. But I spent the weekend, or the end of last week and the weekend in Saskatoon, and I was very surprised at some of the feedback I was getting in Saskatoon, even to the to the point that it was spilling over to the Saskatoon mayoral race and the disenchantment with the government in the City of Saskatoon.

So I’m changing my prediction and now I would be saying that we’re talking about 32 Sask. Party and 29 NDP, but I’m reminded of a friend of mine who was very active in politics, who told me years ago, you should pay more attention to the trend than you do to the actual numbers, and so this may change again.

Editor’s note: This transcript has been edited for clarity.