U.S. election watching guide

1. Florida

This is painful for me to write as I have rolled my eyes as pundits said "it all comes down to Florida" in every election cycle since Florida was "decisive" in 2000. (And, in reality, Florida wasn't that decisive; if Gore had won Tennessee or New Hampshire, just as close and easier lifts, he would have won without Florida).

But this year, it really does come down to Florida; mostly.  Particularly if you are looking for an early resolution to the election.

According to Nate Silver's 538 projection model, Trump has a less than 1% chance of winning the election overall if he loses in Florida.

Biden could still win if he loses in Florida, but if he loses in Florida, it means it is a really tight race that won't likely be resolved for several days.

Florida is also one of the few critical states that will complete most of its counting of all ballots on election night, meaning it is likely to be called unless the state is very close.

So watch for the call in Florida.  If Biden wins, he has almost certainly won the election.  Otherwise, we will have to look elsewhere for signs.

2. South Carolina

South Carolina's polls close early (7 p.m. Eastern) and count all of their ballots on election day.  Biden is highly unlikely to win here, but if he does, he has almost certainly won the election.  If it is really close here, he has also almost certainly won.  Similarly if Trump does about as well here or only slightly worse than he did here in 2016 (he won by 14 percentage points), then that bodes well for Trump to hold the neighbouring states of North Carolina and Georgia.

So here is your Carolina voting guide:

• Biden win to 5 point loss: Biden has likely carried North Carolina and Georgia and won the election;
• Trump win of 5 to 10 points: Biden is significantly over-performing Clinton in the south and likely wins unless Trump majorly over-performs elsewhere (holding his mid-west victories from 2016 and picking up something like Minnesota or Nevada);
• Trump win of 10+ points: not a lot to read-in here, move on.
  

3. Trump?

Other states that count most of their ballots on election day that are worth watching include New Hampshire (8 p.m. Eastern), Missouri (8 p.m. Eastern), and Nebraska (9 p.m. Eastern).

If Trump wins in New Hampshire, a state he has targeted but lost in 2016, that is a very good sign for him.  Though a small state, 538 says Trump's odds jump to 40% from 10% if he wins here.

Not a lot has been written about Missouri which is not expected to be a battleground.  However, traditionally it was and when Obama lost here in 2008 (by only 4,000 votes!) it was only the second time in over a century that Missouri had voted against the overall winner.  Democrats remain competitive here in other statewide contests and the state has been identified on lists of Biden stretch targets were he to be headed for a blowout.  On the other hand, if Trump can hold his margin here (he won by 19 percentage points in 2016!), that is a very good sign for him and perhaps also a good sign for him in neighbouring Iowa--a must win state for Trump.

In Nebraska, it all comes down to the second congressional district.  Nebraska, like Maine, awards electoral votes by district.  Biden is heavily favoured in this district which voted for Obama in 2008.  So much so that if Trump wins it, even though it is worth only 1 electoral vote, it boosts Trump's national chances to 33% in the 538 simulator.  If Trump wins the 5 electoral votes of NH and NE-02, 538 shifts him to the favourite with a 58% chance of winning the national electoral vote!

4. Other States

No other even quasi-competitive state will complete counting their ballots on election night and the networks are likely to be very hesitant to call these states unless there is a blow out.  For example, Ohio and Iowa: they might be called if someone is ahead by 5+ points in the count of what has been counted.  If Trump or Biden were to be declared the winner in these states on election night, they would probably have won the election.  I doubt we will see that happen however.

5. Pennsylvania

The real bad news comes if it all comes down to Pennsylvania.

Imagine a plausible map like this where Biden and Trump each have 259 electoral votes and Pennsylvania is too close to call.

The election result is unlikely to be finalized until late Friday at the earliest, and perhaps not until next week.  And that is before lawsuits begin for recounts or disqualification of certain ballots.  So if it all comes down to Pennsylvania, we will be prognosticating on whether or not 2020 beats the record of 2000 when it took until Dec. 13 to resolve the election.  Not to mention the other unfortunate things that might occur in this circumstance.

Immigration is not the silver bullet to growing our labour force

It has been said that “demographics are destiny” and this can’t possibly be more true anywhere than it is in New Brunswick. Population growth, or perhaps more specifically, labour force growth, is by far the most urgent public policy issue facing our province and addressing this could solve many other challenges.

Other problems that preoccupy our politics are just symptoms of our demographic challenge.  

• Deficits?  They would be easily resolved if we had more workers paying taxes and spending disposable income. 
  

• Wait times in health care?  Wouldn’t have them if we attracted more doctors and nurses.
  

• More jobs?  It is the chicken and the egg; many companies can’t expand or locate here because they can’t fill all of the positions they need to make a go of it.  It is a frustrating irony that we have thousands who can’t find jobs and dozens of businesses that can’t fill jobs.
  

• School closures?  If we had more young people, we would need more schools, not fewer.

Unfortunately, those who recognize the importance of this issue generally focus a disproportionate amount of resources on immigration and that is wrong-headed.

Don’t get me wrong.  I love immigration.  The better understanding of the world and more well-rounded cultural awareness that my children are gaining growing up in a multicultural school as compared to how I grew up is amazing.  Our province is richer for sharing in the diverse cultures that immigrants bring to our communities.

But immigration is hard.  First, we do not control our own fate.  We must rely on the federal government to allocate immigration slots to us and to process and authorize applications.  Second,  immigrants are hard to find.  We need to sift through 8 billion people and find those with the right skills, demographics and interests.  Third, once we get them here, there may be a lot of effort required in language training and credential recognition.  Fourth, once they are integrated into the workforce we must convince them to stay here while there are larger cities with more opportunities and better access to their native language and culture.

Immigration is among the hardest of ways to grow our workforce.  Instead, we could:

• Attract youth to return.  I come from a generation where the majority of my high school classmates no longer live in New Brunswick.  That is probably true of most generations of New Brunswickers.  The vast majority of those who have left would love to return.  But they are living fulfilling lives with good jobs and busy families.  There is no incentive for them to figure out how to find perhaps two jobs in the same city halfway across the country, sell and buy homes and uproot their children.  But these people already know and love New Brunswick, they do not need to be convinced to come home.  Finding them jobs and helping them with moving expenses would close the deal.  We need to create a service like this to bring people home.
  

• Create opportunities to retain youth. We need to invest in a culture of training and apprenticeship.  We need government policies and programs that are youth-friendly.  Too often graduates can’t find jobs in their fields here because they lack two years of experience.  That gap has to be closed through collaboration between government and the private sector.  And we need to make sure that when those gaps are closed, this is a place where young people want to live.
  

• Help people to (re-)enter the workforce. Statistics Canada measures the labour force participation rate.  This is the percentage of people aged 15 and older who are working or looking for work.  In New Brunswick, the participation rate hovers around 62%, while the national average is 66% and in Alberta it is 72%.  These don’t sound like huge differences, but if we raised our participation rate by 4 points to the national average that would add 25,000 workers to our economy without anyone having had to move here.  How do we help those who have given up on finding or never tried to find a job get into the workforce?
  

• Focus on interprovincial migration. Many Canadians and other permanent residents of Canada don’t know about what New Brunswick has to offer.  Think of this as easy immigration.  We are searching in a pool of 37 million instead of 8 billion and they can move here tomorrow without any permits or applications.  So much has been written about millennials and the generation coming behind them and their inability to afford homeownership or save for the future due to the double whammy of high student debt and high cost of living.  New Brunswick needs young professionals.  Toronto and Vancouver have young professionals living in basement apartments paying $2,000 per month in rent.  Is there not a mutually-beneficial arrangement to be had here?  Come to New Brunswick, solve our labour shortage, live in your dream home for half the cost of your rent and apply the rest to your student debt. 
  

We must do all of these things, including immigration.  But the focus of some on immigration as a priority above others is akin to climbing a ladder to get the apples from the top of the tree while ignoring the low-hanging fruit below.

We have never been particularly good at marketing our province.  We derisively refer to ourself as the “drive-thru province” because PEI, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland have built so much more effective tourism brands.  When I lived in Ontario, it was a common occurrence for people to be able to easily list three Atlantic Provinces; New Brunswick was always the one they forgot.  We must do better.  New Brunswick is a great province, that’s why I came back here to raise a family.  We all know this.  We need to do a better job of spreading the word.

A smart population growth strategy continues the current focus on immigration.  But it also invests as much or more effort in marketing New Brunswick to millennials and others across the country that would be far better positioned to achieve their dreams here than in costly cities like Toronto or Vancouver.  It invests by leveling the playing field and giving a hand up to those who can’t break into the labour force such as people with disabilities and people trying to break the cycle of multigenerational poverty.  It ensures that no young person has to leave to find their first job in their field.  And it provides those ex-New Brunswickers who would love our province to come home and gives them an easy path to do so.

The art of the possible in local governance reform

In last week's cabinet shuffle, Premier Blaine Higgs named a "minister of local government and local governance reform." Daniel Allain enters the elected provincial political arena with high expectations.

Policy wonks in this province have been fixated on local governance reform for over a decade. Many point to the 12-year-old Finn report as the panacea.

The Finn report proposes a complete reimagination of our municipal structure with huge changes and a series of complex implementation periods. Some say simply implement Finn, but there is a simpler solution to municipal reform.

This is a very emotional subject. It boils down to one's own identity. "Where are you from?" Many Miramichiers will answer that question with "Chatham" or "Newcastle" when those municipalities haven't existed since the last century. Frederictonians might answer with "Nashwaaksis" or "Barkers Point" when those municipalities haven't existed in 50 years.

Many politicians have uttered words like "no forced amalgamations" to temper fears about loss of identity or loss of community.

In Quebec in the early 2000s a number of forced amalgamations were so unpopular the controversy spilled over into the 2003 provincial election contributing in part to a change of government and a reversal of several of the amalgamations.

Minister Allain must work hard to find meaningful reforms that can achieve broad public acceptance. The worst thing government could do is impose reforms that are so politically toxic that an opposing party might propose to reverse them, get elected on that platform, and do so. Such a failure would likely mean significant reform is shelved for another generation.

In tackling local governance reforms, it is important to understand that the way people expect to be governed has changed. At one time, people generally elected a government and stuck to their knitting until the next election. Today, with an information-driven culture plugged-in instantaneously to networks of like-minded people to share it with, it is different. People expect ongoing and meaningful consultation. Government must secure buy-in from the people as they implement these reforms.

I do not believe that the Finn Report is the panacea that some suggest. It is 199-pages long, very complex and 12 years old. At its core, it proposes merging New Brunswick's 300+ local entities into 53 municipalities. This might perhaps be an ideal state, but it would cause so much controversy it would likely be a poison pill that would ruin any lasting reform.

Many plebiscites have been held in the last decade to allow voters to decide whether to merge or form municipalities in their area. Most of these have been voted down by the people. How could government justify municipalization in a place like Lincoln, when just a few years ago 75% of residents voted against it?

One of the recommendations of Finn that has been partially implemented is the creation of regional service commissions. Further implementation and refinement of this is the low-hanging fruit in reform. This can partially tackle two of the biggest problems that reform seeks to fix: lack of regional cooperation, and lack of governance in unincorporated areas.

These commissions were created in 2012 and have jurisdiction over regional planning and solid waste. Finn recommended that they also control policing, emergency measures, and economic development. Their mandate should be expanded to cover these services and I would argue also fire, recreational infrastructure and local highways. The commissions should have full municipal authority over unincorporated areas within their region, rather than the provincial government.

These commissions are currently unelected and have no direct control over their budgets.  That would have to change. Commissioners should be elected from wards of relatively equal population, with care taken to avoid any one municipality holding a majority of seats on the commission. The division of property tax revenue collected on behalf of municipalities by the province should be allocated between regions and local municipalities on a formula that reflects their relative division of responsibilities.

This model is similar to that which exists in Ontario where there are “tier-1” (regional) and “tier-2” (local) municipalities.  As in Ontario, if all of the communities in the region wished to merge and have one level of government for all services, this should be an option available to them.

This would accomplish the goals of full municipalization that many seek, without the emotional debate around merging municipalities and imposing new governments and new taxes on unincorporated communities.

Something does have to be done about taxes however.  Currently the provincial government maintains roads in unincorporated areas, from local highways to subdivisions.  The cost of this is subsidized by taxpayers around the province as the local tax levy only pays a fraction of the cost of maintaining roads.  This was formerly also the case with the cost of policing, but the full costs of rural policing were phased into property taxes over a four year period.  The same thing should occur with the cost of roads, allowing regional governments to have the budget to maintain these roads either on their own, or by outsourcing the work to the provincial government at true cost, or the private sector.

The final matter that has to be addressed is tax reform.  This is a complex and broadly misunderstood issue.  Two things in particular are misunderstood: the “double tax” on non-owner occupied properties, and the fact that the province keeps property tax revenue at all when in other provinces this is the exclusive domain of local governments.

The reason why there is a provincial share of property tax is because in New Brunswick, the province delivers a lot of municipal services.  In other provinces, housing, local courts and schools are funded and operated by local authorities.  In New Brunswick, the provincial government funds and operates these services partially out of property tax revenue.  As for why non-owner occupied properties pay “double” is in fact the opposite.  The reality is owner-occupied properties are only paying half, creating the perception of a punitive tax on non-owner occupied properties. This  is a policy from the 1970s, when the Hatfield government waived provincial property taxes on primary homes as a policy measure to encourage ownership.

Whether or not the province should continue to retain some property tax revenue is a matter that should be discussed in broader conversation about the division of powers between provincial, regional and local governments.  If the local governments want all of the tax revenue, they should also deliver all of the services.  That invites a question of equality of services in all regions, something New Brunswick lacked prior to the 1960s and the reason why the current system of provincial administration of education and justice came into play.

The reforms explored in this column are complex and would require strong leadership to succeed. They are far more likely to succeed, however, because they divorce the emotion of municipal amalgamation (forced or otherwise) from the conversation.

The delay of municipal elections to May 2021 creates a great opportunity to allow for the election of regional councils in short order which would be a key first step to ensuring democratic engagement and legitimacy in the implementation of reforms.

Three health reforms our government should pursue

This is the first in a potential series of opinion columns about public policy issues in New Brunswick.

 

Premier Blaine Higgs has often said that we need to make do with what we have; maximize the benefit of existing assets rather than building something new. This is something with which I generally agree.

It is very much true in our healthcare system, both as it relates to infrastructure, to human resources, and to points of access for specialized care.  

We have regional hospitals that are overtaxed and in need of more space. In Fredericton, the Chalmers Hospital is currently undergoing an expansion at a cost of over $200 million. They were out of room, but was there a way to make do with what we have rather than build new?

We have a beautiful highway infrastructure in our province and thanks to that, the Upper River Valley Hospital is just 50 minutes away from the Chalmers. It is the newest hospital in New Brunswick but an entire wing is empty. Many day surgeries in the Fredericton region are done at the Oromocto hospital 20 minutes away. If a similar arrangement had been made upriver, hundreds of millions of dollars could have been saved.

This kind of thinking can and should be made around the province. We often hear talk that politicians should make the "tough decision" and close rural hospitals. That is not tough; it is easy, at least in terms of creative and strategic thinking. But if you do that, then what happens? How do you deal with already congested regional hospitals that will face more pressure?

The real tough decision is taking the time to figure out how to reallocate services within our existing infrastructure so that we have a mix of optimally used buildings instead of some overcrowded and some underused.

That will mean some services have to leave some regional hospitals, something that is antithetical to the mandarins in the healthcare system and that's the really tough political decision to make. This won't solve all of our health infrastructure needs, but it will solve most of them at a small fraction of the cost of the status quo where we drive more and more into regional centres in the cities.

In addition to moving services from crowded regional hospitals to rural hospitals with excess capacity, we should also be exploring publicly-funded delivery of services in privately-owned infrastructure. There has been a lot of attention paid to public funding for abortions at Clinic 554 and potentially similar clinics. This would make sense not just from an access and safety perspective but also fiscally responsible management of infrastructure. The same applies to many other services, for example blood work. In Ontario, when you need blood work you don't wait for weeks for a letter to come in the mail advising you that weeks still in the future you can go and queue up for an hour to have blood drawn at a busy regional hospital. Instead, you can walk into any private blood clinic at your convenience without an appointment and be in and out in under 10 minutes at no charge to you, public health care pays the clinic the same way they pay your family doctor.

This also speaks to the need for better access to primary care. Wait times for family doctors is the most acute example of this. Closing access points in rural areas makes no sense. We need more access to primary care, not less. How these facilities are used and re-orienting them to be more focused on primary care does make sense but this must be done gradually in a way that allows for community buy-in and for the rest of the system to adjust to the change. When a community is used to using an emergency room for primary care because proper access doesn't exist, you can't simply close the emergency room. This is not just an issue in rural New Brunswick; many Frederictonians use the Oromocto emergency room for primary care, many Saint Johners use St. Joseph’s urgent care centre, and many Monctonians use walk-in clinics.  None of these are proper access points for primary care as there are no patient records, no continuity of care and no follow ups.  However, we must provide proper access to primary care first, then ensure that those using the emergency room or other stop gaps for primary care are being transitioned and being well served, and only then have a conversation about whether or not corresponding services reductions make sense.

More broadly on primary care, the main challenge is human resources. Our system is built on the notion that a family doctor must be the entry point to health care. This is expensive and creates unnecessarily long wait-times. Other provinces have more fully integrated nurse practitioners to their primary care system. There is also a lot of talk about increased roles for other professionals like pharmacists and optometrists. For the price of one family doctor, we could hire four nurse practitioners and make four times the dent in the waitlist. If routine prescriptions are being filled by pharmacists, that frees up countless appointments for doctors and nurses to see patients who need to see them.

Every election, the New Brunswick Medical Society puts out a call for parties to commit to hire more doctors. Doctors are an important part of our health system but they can no longer be the be-all-and-end-all; due to scarcity of doctors as well as their relatively high cost.  To allow a nurse practitioner to take a family practice, or a pharmacist to bill Medicare will cost a little bit more than doing nothing. But it will dramatically improve access, reduce wait times and be far, far less expensive than solving the problem with more doctors.

The above are all meaningful solutions to primary care challenges in our system.  But what about specialists?

The crown jewel of New Brunswick's health care system is the centre of excellence in Saint John called the New Brunswick Heart Centre. All serious cardiac cases are sent there and that builds the scale to attract world-class surgeons, afford world-class technology, and ensure those surgeons remain world-class by working at a volume to maintain and grow their skills.

We need to do this with more specialized medical services. This invites risk as it requires telling some specialists they may have to move from their current hospital to another that will host the centre of excellence in their practice. Some argue doctors may leave the province rather than move a 100 kilometers within the province. That is a risk and pains must be taken to mitigate that risk. But the alternative is a more expensive system that requires more infrastructure and delivers inferior results. Imagine a province that has an oncology centre as world-class as the heart centre.  The choice should be obvious.

Taken together, a more rational use of our health infrastructure, a more inclusive and expansive use of existing health care professionals, and building and leveraging scale in specialized care could transform our healthcare system. It would lower wait times, lower capital costs and increase quality of care. It will be hard and involve knocking down silos and fiefdoms but this is the kind of health reform our province needs.

Final 2020 NB election thoughts and predictions

I've written two previous posts on this election and the below may be an easier read if you've read them.

I often like to take a look at the upside potential for the parties, so I will begin there.

What is the Tory path to victory?

The Tories start the election with 20 seats, having won 22 in the last election.  A majority path should begin by reclaiming St. Croix; it seems very unlikely that they would regain Shippagan-Lameque-Miscou.  So their base is 21.  

For a majority, they require four other seats and they have a few options.  The Liberal seats of Fredericton North, Saint John Harbour, Moncton South and Moncton East would all appear to be prime pick up opportunities, as would the Alliance seat of Fredericton-York.

For additional cushion, the PCs could conceivably also take the Liberal seats of Carleton-Victoria and Miramichi Bay-Neguac and the Alliance seat of Fredericton-Grand Lake, though these seem unlikely.

That gives them an upward universe of 29, and they need only win 4 of 5 truly competitive seats or 4 of 8 of the above to win a majority.

I do not foresee any PC incumbents losing, though Carleton-York, held by a retiring PC incumbent, could be threatened by the PA.

What is the Liberal path to victory?

The Liberals start the election with 20 seats, down from 21 at the last election, but are almost certain to regain Shediac Bay-Dieppe and pick up Shippagan-Lameque-Miscou.  They therefore start with a base of 22 seats.

Their pickup opportunities begin with the Alliance seat of Miramichi being contested by their leader.  Liberals would also heavily target the Green seats of Memramcook-Tantramar and Kent North.  If they were to win all of these, that would give them 25 seats and a majority government.

However, they are playing defence in at least 3 seats that they are unlikely to win: Fredericton North, Saint John Harbour and Moncton South.  And also are at risk in Moncton East.

The Liberals must run the table with these to win a government of their own.  Conceivably if they failed to win either of the Green seats and one other they would have 25 seats in combination with the Greens, however I find it highly unlikely that the Greens would back a tenuous Liberal government in the current circumstances.

Stretch targets for the Liberals include Sussex-Fundy-St. Martins, where they believe the hospital issue could carry the day for them; Southwest Miramichi-Bay du Vin, where they believe they could win on a vote split; and Oromocto-Lincoln-Fredericton, where they nearly won last time, have a strong candidate and have invested heavy resources.  I do not think any of these are likely unless there is a major polling error.

What is the best case scenario for the Greens?

The Greens are favoured to hold all 3 of their current seats in my view.  Their first tier of expansion targets are Fredericton North and Restigouche West.  They could also conceivably win in Fredericton-York on a vote split on the right between the PCs and the PA.  That puts them on six seats; others have pondered potential other Green gains but I do not see them.

What is the best case scenario for the Alliance?

At least two and perhaps all three of the PA seats are at risk.  Holding them would be considered a good night.  I believe they have a very strong shot in Carleton-York and in fact may have a better shot here than in their current seats of Fredericton-York and Miramichi.  They came within 34 votes of winning Southwest Miramichi-Bay du Vin last time so that has to be on their radar.  I have written before about their potential opportunity in St. Croix.  That puts them on 6 seats as well for a high water mark.

Polling

Polling has been all over the map.  Not just at the top line but in the cross-tabs.  Two things that have stood out to me fairly consistently: significant PC gains in Moncton and a high rate of undecideds.

If the PCs are picking up one or two seats in Moncton, this almost certainly eliminates any path to a majority for the Liberals.

If undecideds are still high on election eve, that invites a question about the mood of the remaining electorate.  A record number of voters voted in advance.  There are plenty of compelling reasons to vote for the government due to both their perceived success in managing the pandemic, and the risk and uncertainty of changing a government in a pandemic.  So what are the undecideds thinking?  I think that they are predisposed to break against the government and that could result in a "surprise" result.

In 2018, I believe undecideds broke for the Greens and PA because they just couldn't get behind the main parties and I think that that is going to happen again this year.

Final Prediction

PCs hold 19 of their current 20 seats and gain Moncton East (Lib), Moncton South (Lib) and Saint John Harbour (Lib) for a total of 22.

Liberals hold 16 of their current 20 seats and gain Shippagan-Lameque-Miscou (Ind former PC) and Shediac Bay-Dieppe (vacant former Lib) for a total of 18.

Greens hold their 3 current seats and gain Fredericton North (Lib) and Fredericton-York (PA) for a total of 5.

The People's Alliance holds 2 of their current three seats and gains St. Croix (vacant former PC) and Carleton-York (PC) for a total of 4.

Brief look at the ridings, part deux

Last week, I took a look at the ridings and found 19 to be competitive. I now see 6 of those 19 still in play, with one additional one moving into play due to a change of circumstances.

Safe PC Seats (13)

• Riverview
• Albert
• Gagetown-Petitcodiac
• Sussex-Fundy-St. Martins
• Hampton
• Quispamsis
• Rothesay
• Portland-Simonds
• Kings Centre
• Fundy-The Isles-Saint John West
• St. Croix (moved to competitive)
  
• New Maryland-Sunbury
• Fredericton West-Hanwell
• Carleton

Safe Liberal Seats (14)

• Campbellton-Dalhousie
• Restigouche-Chaleur
• Bathurst West-Beresford
• Bathurst East-Nepisiguit-Saint-Isodore
• Caraquet
• Shippagan-Lameque-Miscou (pickup)
• Tracadie-Sheila
• Kent South
• Shediac Bay-Dieppe
• Shediac-Beaubassin-Cap-Pele
• Dieppe
• Moncton Centre
• Edmundston-Madawaska Centre
• Madawaska-les-Lacs-Edmundston

Safe PA Seats (1)

• Fredericton-Grand Lake

Safe Green Seats (1)

• Fredericton South

Likely PC Seats (8) - moved from competitive

Southwest Miramichi-Bay du Vin (PC vs PA vs Lib) - With polls consistently showing PCs slightly or significantly above their 2018 result and Stewart's increased profile from having been in cabinet he is likely to be re-elected.

Moncton South (Lib vs PC) - Greg Turner is well known and an effective campaigner.  With a significant increase in PC support in the Moncton area according to polls, he is likely to win.

Moncton Northwest (PC vs Lib) - With a significant increase in PC support in the Moncton area according to polls, it is unlikely they would lose this seat.

Moncton Southwest (PC vs Lib) - Ibid.

Saint John East (PC vs Lib) - PC support is at or above 2018 levels in Saint John according to opinion polling while Liberal support is down; this is not the recipe for a pick up opportunity for the Liberals.

Saint John Harbour (Lib vs PC) - PC support is at or above 2018 levels in Saint John according to opinion polling while Liberal support is down; it seems unlikely the Liberals will be able to hold this seat which they won by only 10 votes last time.

Saint John Lancaster (PC vs Lib) - PC support is at or above 2018 levels in Saint John according to opinion polling while Liberal support is down; this is not the recipe for a pick up opportunity for the Liberals.

Oromocto-Lincoln-Fredericton (PC vs Lib) - With Liberal support consistently low in the Fredericton area according to opinion polls, gaining this seat seems unlikely despite a star candidate and significant effort on the ground.

Likely Liberal Seats (3) - moved from competitive

Miramichi Bay-Neguac (Lib vs PA vs PC) - Lisa Harris won 42% of the vote here in 2018 and is likely to receive a similar number this time; it does not seem there will be enough coalescing of PC and PA support for either party to exceed that number.

Carleton-Victoria (Lib vs PC) - The rematch between Andy Harvey and Margaret Johnson is likely to be won again in Harvey's favour.  Voters in the riding's most populist community of Perth-Andover (also the most likely community to be a swing vote) are unlikely to trust a Carleton County Tory with the fate of their hospital after her party nearly closed it six months ago.

Victoria-la-Vallee (Lib vs PC) - The hospital issue already had this riding leaning heavily Liberal; the recent dropping of the PC candidate by his party seals the deal.

Likely Green Seats (2) - moved from competitive

Kent North (Grn vs Lib) - With Greens consistently polling above their 2018 numbers, it is hard to imagine them losing seats.

Memramcook-Tantramar (Grn vs Lib) - Ibid.

Battlegrounds (7)

Restigouche West (Lib vs Grn) - Charles Theriault is running again for the Greens after receiving over 30% of the vote in 2018 and nearly 20% as an independent in 2014.  This is a realistic pickup opportunities for the Greens.  Edge to the Liberals but this is definitely a potential election night surprise.

Miramichi (Lib vs PA) - This will be a very interesting race.  Michelle Conroy of the PA knocked off long-time Liberal MLA Bill Fraser by a massive margin in 2018.  Liberals I talk to are very confident that they will pick this seat up.

Moncton East (Lib vs PC) - PCs have landed a star candidate in Daniel Allain, though he lives and represents municipal voters in another riding.  This is the best pickup opportunity for the PCs on paper of the 3 Moncton seats they don't hold.  That said, PCs thought they were going to win here in 2018 and Monique LeBlanc held it handily for the Liberals.

St. Croix (PC vs PA) - I had originally assigned this seat as safe PC, but Charlotte County sources tell me that the Liberal dropping of their candidate there has given PA candidate Rod Cumberland a boost as those worried about the local hospital shift their support to him.  However, even if true, how many of those voters had already cast ballots before the ejection?  Interesting race to watch.

Fredericton North (Lib vs PC vs Grn) - Rematch between Liberal Stephen Horsman and PC Jill Green.  Speaking of Greens, they seem to be all-in here behind candidate Luke Randall employing a similar strategy to what they did successfully in Memramcook-Tantramar and Kent North in 2018... this is clearly the Greens' main target for pick up.  Can they pull it off, or will they split the vote and help the PCs on a path to a majority, or will Horsman win a third term?

Fredericton-York (PA vs PC vs Grn) - PCs very much want to take this seat back which they had held since 1999 before falling to team purple in 2018.  Sources in the riding tell me that Green candidate Melissa Fraser is also in contention here, has been campaigning hard and if signs count for anything my recent drive through the riding certainly suggests she is in the hunt.  In 2014, the results of this riding were PC35-Lib29-NDP21-Grn7-PA5 while in 2018 they were PA34-PC31-Lib18-Grn15-NDP1.  There are some huge shifts there, so this race could be very unpredictable.

Carleton-York (PA vs PC) - PA lost by only 400 votes last time and their candidate of record is reoffering.  In the meantime, locally beloved long-time MLA Carl Urquhart of the PCs has retired.

Of these 7, I currently would guess PC 4, Lib 2, PA 1.

Prediction as of September 4: PC 24 (14-29), Lib 20 (14-31), Grn 3 (1-5), PA 2 (1-5)

Prediction as of September 11: PC 25 (21-26), Lib 19 (17-21), Grn 3 (3-6), PA 2 (1-5).

A brief look at the ridings

By my estimation, about 19 ridings are competitive in this election, with the remaining 30 facing fairly predictable outcomes.  Below, I lay out the state of the race as I see it with commentary on the 19 closer ridings.

Likely PC Seats (14)

• Riverview
• Albert
• Gagetown-Petitcodiac
• Sussex-Fundy-St. Martins
• Hampton
• Quispamsis
• Rothesay
• Portland-Simonds
• Kings Centre
• Fundy-The Isles-Saint John West
• St. Croix
• New Maryland-Sunbury
• Fredericton West-Hanwell
• Carleton

Likely Liberal Seats (14)

• Campbellton-Dalhousie
• Restigouche-Chaleur
• Bathurst West-Beresford
• Bathurst East-Nepisiguit-Saint-Isodore
• Caraquet
• Shippagan-Lameque-Miscou (pickup)
• Tracadie-Sheila
• Kent South
• Shediac Bay-Dieppe
• Shediac-Beaubassin-Cap-Pele
• Dieppe
• Moncton Centre
• Edmundston-Madawaska Centre
• Madawaska-les-Lacs-Edmundston

Likely PA Seats (1)

• Fredericton-Grand Lake

Likely Green Seats (1)

• Fredericton South

Battlegrounds (19)

Restigouche West (Lib vs Grn) - Charles Theriault is running again for the Greens after receiving over 30% of the vote in 2018 and nearly 20% as an independent in 2014.  This is one of two realistic pickup opportunites for the Greens.  Edge to the Liberals but this is definitely a potential election night surprise.

Miramichi Bay-Neguac (Lib vs PA vs PC) - PA finished second here in 2018.  Edge to the Liberals but if the the right-of-centre vote collases behind one of the PA or PC this could be a real race.  Former PC cabinet minister Robert Trevors is running for the PCs.

Miramichi (Lib vs PA) - This will be a very interesting race.  Michelle Conroy of the PA knocked off long-time Liberal MLA Bill Fraser by a massive margin in 2018.  Kevin Vickers needs to win this seat if he has a path to a government.  The result of this riding could be a proxy for whether or not the Liberals win the night.

Southwest Miramichi-Bay du Vin (PC vs PA vs Lib) - Very close PC/PA race last time with the same candidates again.  Can PA improve on its results and win?  Can Liberals sneak up the middle?  Or will Jake Stewart, the first PC ever re-elected in this riding, win a fourth term?

Kent North (Grn vs Lib) - Bertrand LeBlanc is looking to make a comeback for the Liberals after retiring in 2018 and his successor under the red banner being handily defeated by Kevin Arseneau of the Greens.  Liberals very much want to win this seat back, if Arseneau is re-elected he may well be a fixture of New Brunswick politics for a generation.

Memramcook-Tantramar (Grn vs Lib) - Megan Mitton won by a narrow 11-vote margin.  Former Liberal MLA Bernard LeBlanc's hand-picked successor Maxime Bourgeois wants to win it back.  Will Mitton face the same fate as Bob Hall, or will she be re-elected?  How does the pandemic impact on students at Mt. A. affect her path to victory?

Moncton East (Lib vs PC) - PCs have landed a star candidate in Daniel Allain, though he lives and represents municipal voters in another riding.  This is the best pickup opportunity for the PCs on paper of the 3 Moncton seats they don't hold.  That said, PCs thought they were going to win here in 2018 and Monique LeBlanc held it handily for the Liberals.

Moncton South (Lib vs PC) - With Cathy Rogers' retirement and popular deputy mayor Greg Turner running for the Tories, this is possibly the most likely PC pick up in the province.

Moncton Northwest (PC vs Lib) - Liberals came within about 200 votes of winning this seat in both 2014 and 2018, is the third time the charm?

Moncton Southwest (PC vs Lib) - Ibid.

Saint John East (PC vs Lib) - Liberals won this seat, briefly, in 2014 before losing it in a by-election.  Phil Comeau ran in that election for the NDP and did will and now seeks to win as a Liberal.  Can he knock off PC cabinet minister and lone "francophone" Glen Savoie?

Saint John Harbour (Lib vs PC) - In the aggregate from 2010 through 2018, this is the closest riding in the province having been a nail biter each of those 3 election cycles.  Will it be so again?  

Saint John Lancaster (PC vs Lib) - Minister responsible for nursing homes vs. head of nursing home workers union.  Popcorn please.

Oromocto-Lincoln-Fredericton (PC vs Lib) - One of the closest ridings in 2018, this seat is critical to a Liberal path to government.  If they don't win here, it is not a good night for them.

Fredericton North (Lib vs PC vs Grn) - Rematch between Liberal Stephen Horsman and PC Jill Green.  Speaking of Greens, they seem to be all-in here behind candidate Luke Randall employing a similar strategy to what they did successfully in Memramcook-Tantramar and Kent North in 2018... this is clearly the Greens' main target for pick up.  Can they pull it off, or will they split the vote and help the PCs on a path to a majority, or will Horsman win a third term?

Fredericton-York (PA vs PC) - PCs very much want to take this seat back which they had held since 1999 before falling to team purple in 2018.

Carleton-York (PA vs PC) - If the PA are going to pick up a new seat, this is probably their best shot.  They lost by only 400 votes last time and their candidate of record is reoffering.  In the meantime, locally beloved long-time MLA Carl Urquhart of the PCs has retired.

Carleton-Victoria (Lib vs PC) - This has been one of the closest races in each of the last two elections and is the last remaining Liberal seat that is rural and predominately anglophone.  Can Andy Harvrey win a third term in a rematch against the PC's Margaret Johnson?

Victoria-la-Vallee (Lib vs PC) - This is the PCs best shot at winning a francophone seat and they lost by only 400 votes last time.  The aborted plan to close the local hospital may put it out of reach for them however.

Of these 19, I currently would project 10 PC, 6 Liberal, 2 Green, 1 PA.

Prediction as of September 4: PC 24 (14-29), Lib 20 (14-31), Grn 3 (1-5), PA 2 (1-5)

Should we police criminals or police victims?

Politics and policy-making can yield strange bedfellows. During the Strategic Program Review from 2015-16, a plan was sought to balance the budget. Every program of government was studied, as were many opportunities to increase revenues. In the end, a plan was put forward through a mixture of about 50/50 of revenue increases and expenditure reductions to put the province on track for a balanced budget. It worked and it worked better than expected, thanks to strong economic growth the third and fourth budget years of the Liberal government of the day ended in surplus despite expectations. But I digress. 

One of the revenue measures was an increase to tobacco taxes. For governments, these taxes serve two goods: they raise revenues and they discourage an unhealthy habit that costs the healthcare system dearly. Here come the strange bedfellows. 

Big tobacco doesn't like higher tobacco taxes, presumably because it decreases sales. There is however an area for alignment: higher tobacco taxes can lead to increased sale of illegal contraband, something that hits revenues steams of both government and big tobacco companies. 

So the tobacco lobby proposed to the government that if they were going to raise tobacco taxes, they should also invest in combating the import and sale of contraband. Public servants studied the proposal and said it was a good one. The contraband enforcement unit was born and they were a big success. They weren't chasing people with a carton of illegal smokes, they were chasing organized criminals who were bringing it in by the truckload and shutting them down. And in the process they were levying fines and mitigating the decrease to tobacco tax revenue. 

The public service is wonderful organization with many hardworking people doing great work in thankless jobs. Structurally, however, it is far from a perfect entity. One of its greatest failings is "silo" thinking. Each department operates like an independent entity; that is how their budgets are allocated and how deputy ministers' performance is measured. The political arm of government is also imperfect; directives can be given with good intent that are ill-considered. 

Of note: all government revenue goes to a central pot of money called the consolidated revenue fund. Departments do not see the revenue they raise and are their performance is not measured against revenue. In part this is because it is impractical to do so; most revenue is collected by the federal government on the province’s behalf and paid in bulk by a formula. It is not siloed, but as a result it is often overlooked in siloed decision-making.

One of the worst and most common ill-considered directives from politicians are across-the-board budget cuts. These have been a hallmark in New Brunswick under PC governments. Operating from the notion that there is lots of waste and fat to be found everywhere, the edict goes out at budget time that X% must be cut. And departments are measured on whether or not they hit that target. 

I do not know what occurred here but I've been around government long enough to make a good guess: in the 2019 budget process, departments were given a cut target. Every department must cut the same percentage from its budget irrespective of the import of its work, previous cuts it has faced, how much of its funding is flow-through from the federal government, how much of its work it is required to do by law, etc. The department of public safety would look at a program like the contraband enforcement unit and see it as "nice to have" but much easier to cut than building inspectors or highway safety officers. Because they never see the money it brings in and are not graded for that revenue the contraband enforcement unit was of no "benefit" to them, at least in the way that the current government measures results: only numbers count, societal benefit does not. The fact that overall the government makes money off of this unit is not something that is relevant to a departmental silo. They offer the unit up and it is cut. 

So is there more illegal tobacco in New Brunswick now? Probably. Is there less revenue related to tobacco taxes and fines from tobacco enforcement? Definitely. 

But that isn't even the whole measure. Organized crime creates many societal problems. One of the best public policy arguments for cannabis legalization was to reduce a revenue stream for these cruel criminals. If we dry up all of their sources of revenue they will shrink or hopefully die. 

Fast forward to this week. Our premier promises that if re-elected he will invest more than he cut from fighting these criminals in new policing to target drug users. 

Drug users are mostly victims. Victims of a system that provides insufficient mental health supports, victims of a system that fails to break the cycle of poverty, likely victims of many other things. The solution to their problem is not enforcement. And if you fine them, the likelihood they will have the ability to pay is low so instead they will serve time, costing taxpayers even more in the short-term, and more still in the long-term as incarceration creates even more problems for the individual that may lead to yet more drug use. Drug use may be increasing, but it is a symptom of other societal problems; we need to focus on curing the disease, not the sneeze. Forward-looking cross-party consensus supported by law enforcement in British Columbia has figured this out. We should too.

Setting aside that this program made money, how is that we can't afford $900,000 per year to fight criminals when we can suddenly afford twice that much to fight victims?

2020 NB Voting Guide

Can You Vote?

All Canadian citizens who have lived in New Brunswick for 40 days before election day (i.e. since August 5th) and will be 18 years old by election day are eligible to vote. Period, full stop. 

If you are on the voters list, you should have received a notice in the mail by now in a big yellow envelope. If you received this and your name was correctly listed, you will receive a voter information card in the mail. If you received this and your name was missing or you didn't receive this, you probably aren't on the voters list. This is not a big deal and can be fixed relatively easily.  

If you plan to go vote in person, you can get added to the list when you arrive to vote. You need to bring either some ID or official mail with your current address, or a friend that is on the voters list and who votes at the same polling place as you and they can vouch for you and get you added to the list. 

If you want to vote by mail, you need to be on the voters list before they will send you a ballot and you should call 1-888-858-8683 to get on the list. 

When To Vote?

While you can vote now, exercise caution when voting too early. You will have to write in the name of your candidate on the ballot and most candidates are not yet officially registered. If you vote for someone who ends up not being an official candidate your vote will be spoiled (i.e. it won't count) and you can't take it back and change it. Also if you write in the name of your candidate and it differs from how their name appears on the ballot, your vote could also be spoiled. Before writing in a name on a ballot, I would strongly recommend you check the list of official candidates, wait until your candidate of choice is listed, and make sure you write their name in exactly as it is listed on the registry. 

Vote By Mail

You need to fill out and sign a form. The signature is used to verify your identity when you vote. So that means you need access to a printer and scanner, or you need to go to the returning office.  If you are going to go to the returning office anyway, you may as well just vote while you're there (see below).

After you apply, Elections New Brunswick will send you a vote-by-mail package that you need to ensure is returned to your returning office by the time the polls close: 8 pm on September 14th. It doesn't matter if it is posted by then, it is when it arrives that counts. This freaks me out: mail gets lost, can be unpredictably slow, etc. So exercise caution and in spite of my advice above, mail your ballot as early as you can. The sweet spot is probably the afternoon of August 28th, if you have received your ballot kit by then, as the final list of candidates will be published shortly after 2 pm on August 28th. 

It is also important to know that you must vote for your candidate by name; writing in their political party alone will spoil your ballot. Adding the name of the party in addition to the name of the candidate should be fine, but may spoil your ballot at the discretion of the returning officer. Please just write the name exactly as it appears on the registry of candidates, this is the best way to ensure your vote counts. 

You might be wondering about the secrecy of your ballot due to the signature verification process. You are mostly safe there. You will fill your ballot and put it in an unmarked envelope. You put that first envelope into a second envelope which you sign. The returning office will verify that your signature matches and then discard the second (outer) envelope. Your anonymous inner envelope will then be placed with other such envelopes and counted later. So unless you are the only person who votes by mail in your riding, the secrecy of your vote should be maintained. 

Vote at the Returning Office

You can vote at any returning office any time they are open which is 9 am to 7 pm Monday through Friday and 10 am to 5 pm on Saturday. (They are not open on Sunday because that's the Lord's day, as you know.)

It is important to note that you can vote at any returning office and the nearest returning office to your home or work may be in another riding. For instance, if you live in a geographically large riding like Carleton-York, the returning office is in the southwest corner of the riding in Harvey and it may be easier for you to go to a returning office in Woodstock or Fredericton. The riding of Fredericton-Grand Lake has its returning office in Minto, while many of the riding's residents live and work in Fredericton--they can go vote in a returning office in another Fredericton riding. 

If you vote in a returning office before ballots are printed or any time at a returning office other than your home riding, you will have to write in the name of your candidate and the same advice as above on mail-in ballots applies: ensure your candidate of choice is an official candidate and that you know the correct spelling and form of their name before you vote. 

If you vote in your own returning office after ballots are printed (probably after approximately September 1st), you will mark the same ballot you would on election day. 

Advanced Polls

Advanced polling stations will be open from 10 am to 8 pm on Saturday, September 5th and Tuesday, September 8th. (For those of you used to the normal rhythm, this may sound odd. In provincial elections, they are normally open on Saturday and Monday the week before election day. However, because that Monday is Labour day, it is bumped to Tuesday.)

Your advanced polling location will be listed on your voter information card which you should receive in the mail if you are on the voters list. If you didn't receive a card, you can look up your voting location online (the polling locations might not be available yet; as of this writing on August 23 mine were not). 

Ordinary Polls

You can also vote the old fashioned way on election day. Polling stations will be open from 10 am to 8 pm. Your polling location will be listed on your voter information card which you should receive in the mail if you are on the voters list. If you didn't receive a card, you can look up your voting location online (the polling locations might not be available yet; as of this writing on August 23 mine were not). 

Nevada caucus

Just as in Iowa, Nevada has a rule of 15% viability in a particular voting location for a candidate to get any delegates from that location. Polls show all of the non-Sanders candidates near or below 15, meaning they will surely miss viability in some significant number of precincts.

Nevada is clearly a race for second.

Biden has managed to maintain his lead in all post-Iowa/New Hampshire polls of South Carolina, which votes just 7 days after Nevada and just 3 days before Super Tuesday. Can Biden survive another loss and win in South Carolina? And if he does, will it be too little, too late?

Klobuchar seems to have not taken off in Nevada or South Carolina and may place sixth in both states. She will go on to perhaps win her home state of Minnesota on Super Tuesday on a day when Sanders could conceivably sweep the rest; does she stay for that possibility?

If Biden finishes second, after finishing fourth and fifth in previous outings, does that become the story and given him momentum heading into a win in South Carolina and thereafter into Super Tuesday?

If Warren finishes second, is her campaign reborn?

If Buttigieg finishes second, does the narrative get reset back to the possible Bernie-Pete two-way showdown that was being discussed out of Iowa?

If Steyer finishes second, could he parlay that into a win or second in South Carolina and a viable player on Super Tuesday?

Stay tuned!

New Hampshire primary

The chaos in Iowa ended up being the story coming out of Iowa, where otherwise there might have been three stories:

- Biden's hard fall

- Buttigieg's come-from-behind victory

- Klobuchar's surge to the second-tier alongside "frontrunners" Warren and Biden

New Hampshire voters who are more tuned in than ordinary voters may have read this in to the equation even though this was not a major focus of media coverage. This, coupled with a strong performance in Friday's debate, seem to be leading to a last minute surge for Klobuchar.

Sanders' support is locked in and loyal. He will perform in or around 30% no matter what happens. The big question for me tonight is: is Klobuchar's surge real and at whose expense does it come from, Buttigieg, Warren or Biden or some combination of two or three of them?

The two polls I am following most closely are the nightly tracking polls by Suffolk and Emerson because the number, which is inevitably old, is less important than the trend line that you can see.

Sanders is flat.

Buttigieg rose and has peaked or is falling.

Warren is flat.

Biden has fallen and bottomed out in the neighbourhood of Warren.

Klobuchar is enjoying a late surge.

This all makes intuitive sense. Everyone has turned their fire on Buttigieg and his support was softest. In the last Emerson poll, they asked people how sure they were of their vote and 85% of Sanders voters, 68% of Warren voters, 66% of Klobuchar voters and 59% of Buttigieg voters were sure.

So what are the possible outcomes and what do they mean?

Sanders

He is almost certain to win, and probably won't get much of a bump for doing so. He seems to have locked in a core of support with little room to grow or shrink. However, if he were to lose, this would be a shock and would lead to a series of stories about the establishment striking back against him, etc. Whether or not that would have any impact on his campaign remains to be seen.

Buttigieg

He sort of benefited from beating expectations in Iowa (this was muted by the chaos and delays). Now he may suffer from expectations; he is now expected to finish second with Sanders clearly in first and the others battling for third. If he slips into third, the story may be that he was a flash in the plan that may not be able to stand close scrutiny of his record or lack thereof. If he finishes second, it is steady as she goes. If he were to some how pull of another upset, this would make him the clear frontrunner for the nomination.

Klobuchar

As I wrote in my Iowa post, her better-than-expected finish in Iowa is helpful to her, but she still lacks the money and organization to fully capitalize on it. If she comes third in New Hampshire, she is the story and if she comes second she is a huge story. Nevada is next and is a caucus state which means the ground game really matters; can she build on momentum to win a low turnout, time-intense caucus process or does she move on to South Carolina where Biden once dominated but is likely slipping leaving votes on the table? She probably needs a win or at least two second places to get the cash to mount an air war on Super Tuesday.

Biden

Does he finish fourth or fifth? Both are a disaster, though now what is expected. He probably limps on to South Carolina, perhaps skipping Nevada. If he finishes third, which would have been considered fatal weeks ago, he may be on the road to recovery. Seems highly unlikely he finishes second unless there is a four-way muddled-up-tie in the low teens and he gets lucky by a fraction of a percentage point.

Warren

In my view, there is no room for both Warren and Sanders in the race. I had expected her to seize the left, but instead she has run as a quasi-moderate which doesn't seem to have helped her in the centre but has made it even more difficult for her to compete for the Bernie true believers. The outcome possibilities for Warren are similar to Biden, but unlike Biden, she doesn't have a beach head coming up in South Carolina, so her chances for rebirth are even less likely than Uncle Joe.

Iowa caucus

Tonight marks the beginning of voting in the Democratic nomination process to choose the candidate who will face off against Donald Trump this fall.

This race has been very tightly contested with various candidates leading in the polls over the past year.  The excitement and confusion has not yielded in the days leading into the vote.

Ann Selzer, who has run the definitive poll in Iowa for decades, abruptly cancelled the release of her completed poll due to irregularities in data collection.  The absence of this gold standard makes predicting the winner of tonight's caucus all the more difficult.

Also, the processes used in the Iowa Democratic caucus are unique, and some new features are being used for the first time ever today.  The caucus model, which is used by a minority of states, is comparable to the process used in Canada to select candidates and previously to select leaders.  A primary is a state-run process, where civil servants conduct the election in a non-partisan fashion to select party nominees; that is completely foreign to Canada.  A caucus is a party-run process, where party members must sign up in advance and attend a physical meeting at a specific time; this may sound familiar to those who have participated in the Canadian political process.

Iowa, however, has unique features.  And Iowa Democrats have further unique features of their own, such as the rule of viability.

In each polling precinct, voters must arrive and publicly reveal their candidate of choice by standing among fellow supporters of that candidate.  A head count is conducted and any candidate with less than 15% support is considered "not viable" and his or her supporters must distribute among the remaining "viable" candidates and final head count is taken and results announced for that precinct.  This process happens more or less simultaneously in about 2,000 locations across Iowa. (New features this year allow some pre-caucus caucuses for those who are unable to attend the actual caucus meetings.)

In an extreme example, a candidate who gets 14% of the vote in every precinct would get 0 delegates because he or she would be non-viable everywhere and would be reported as having gotten 0% of the vote, as pre-viability results are not revealed.  Many believe this is what happened in 2008 to Bill Richardson and Joe Biden, who had been polling in the mid-high single digits but got near zero on caucus night.  In this same scenario, another candidate whose support was concentrated in one region might get a bunch of viable votes and delegates while enjoying less support overall.

The caucus has become a five-way race.  In one of the most recent polls, five candidates polled between 19 and 11 per cent.  The six polls included in the RealClearPolitics average include three polls in which Sanders is leader, two in which Biden is leading, and one in which Buttigieg is leading.  In those six polls, candidate position among each other has been all over the map.

	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th
Sanders	3	3
Biden	2	1	3
Buttigieg	1	1	4
Warren	0	1	1	4
Klobuchar					6

While Klobuchar is consistently fifth, she has strong regional support which should help her with viability and she has been surging of late, hitting double digits in 3 of the last 4 polls.

Sanders can afford to lose and very much benefits from winning.

If Biden loses, he is in trouble and if he places worse than second his campaign may not recover.

Buttigieg led in the polls consistently for about six weeks from mid-November to the end of 2019.  For him to place worse than third would probably be a big blow for his campaign.  Expectations are probably low and second place finish may give him the "big mo" coming out of Iowa.  A win certainly would put him on an upward trajectory.

Warren's campaign has been in free fall and if she were to slip into fifth behind Klobuchar, she might have to drop out.  Finishing in third would stabilize her campaign.  Finishing first or second would give her the "big mo".

Klobuchar finishing fourth or better would give her the "big mo".  However, much like Mike Huckabee in 2008, even a win might not be enough to make her a contender because she lacks the organization and money to compete in the states that follow.

What will be interesting to see is how this all plays out into the following states.

If Biden does poorly, he is likely to repeat that in New Hampshire in eight days.  He has been dominating in South Carolina but does that slip away after two loses?  If Biden wins, could he bounce to a win in New Hampshire, followed by wins in South Carolina and Nevada?  Does that mean the race is over before Super Tuesday? Bottom line: Biden needs to finish in at least second place.

Regardless of the outcome in Iowa, Sanders is favoured in New Hampshire.  He has led the last nine polls there and represents a neighbouring state.  If Warren, who also represents a neighbouring state and has been running third in New Hampsire, does very badly in Iowa, this really helps Sanders.  Bottom line: Sanders has the least to lose tonight and could finish third and still realistically win in New Hampshire.

Buttigieg has money and organization.  He has led some polls in New Hampshire but has slipped into fourth place in the polling average of late.  A win or second place in Iowa could lead to a win or second place in New Hampshire.  Otherwise, he is likely to lag in New Hampshire and South Carolina which may eventually prove to be insurmountably bad for his campaign.  Bottom line: Buttigieg needs to finish at least third and probably second to have a viable shot at the nomination.

Warren continues to poll okay in New Hampshire, where she is a de facto favourite daughter as she represents Massachusetts in the Senate and most New Hampshirites consume their news from the Boston media market.  She also polls robustly in South Carolina.  However, she has been moving in the wrong direction and is viewed as having negative momentum.  Bottom line: Warren's campaign is on life support and a third place finish could allow that to continue, but she needs to finish first or second to spring back to life.

Others: Klobuchar may live to fight a few more days with a fourth or better finish, but short of a shock win, it is hard to see her even having an unlikely path to the nomination.  Billionaires Bloomberg and Steyer will not place better than fifth and probably not better than seventh tonight, however they have a lot to gain out of tonight's results.  If Biden does poorly, Steyer has been in second and third place in South Carolina polls and could benefit most.  Bloomberg is playing for Super Tuesday and if Sanders is standing alone, Bloomberg might be able to defeat him in the big states.  If two or three candidates are still viable heading into Super Tuesday, that's bad news for the billionaires.