Timing note: Between recording the podcast and broadcasting it, this poll came out.
TL;DR: plus full transcript below.
* The flood delay: the province says the mayor’s office took 8 days to request assistance after the July 1 flood. Leiper’s campaign wants the paper trail — potential October surprise, and Brigitte notes that just asking the question may be damage enough.
* 27,553 early voters: up 46% from 2022, 76% from 2018. Only the Leiper campaign told Brigitte they’re happy with their early-voter data — a confident ground game. High turnout favors challengers.
* The engaged are really engaged: notebook-toting crowds at Saravanamuttoo events, young volunteers canvassing for Leiper. But most voters will still vote on trust and name recognition, not policy (see: Gore vs. Bush, 2000).
* Watch the undecideds: a third of voters were undecided in summer polling. If they’ve broken, they’ve likely broken away from the mayor. The coming public poll tells all.
* The soft-win scenario: Sutcliffe could win with 32–36% — “a win is a win, but it’s a soft win,” and a diminished mandate has council colleagues already eyeing 2030.
* Lawson’s week: the zero-tax-increase plan is “beautiful politics” — his big beautiful idea — and his homelessness/addiction treatment plan is one Brigitte wants every candidate to steal.
If you like this work, please consider supporting it.
Transcript:
Brigitte Pellerin (00:00): Hi everyone. Hi Evan. How are you doing this week?
Evan Potter (00:04): Great. I’m doing great this week. And you know why I’m doing great this week?
Brigitte Pellerin (00:07): Tell me. Tell the people why you’re doing great this week.
Evan Potter (00:12): Because I know there is at least one public poll coming up. And there may be more — it could be up to three public polls. One for sure.
Brigitte Pellerin (00:16): Woo. All right.
Evan Potter (00:24): We’re going to find out things, Brigitte. Things will be confirmed — or things will be contradicted. But there will be —
Brigitte Pellerin (00:28): Is that all you want to say for now?
(00:35) No, that’s great. You’re making everyone sit on this cliffhanger so they have to watch us again next week. It’s perfect. Great marketing. You’re the best.
Evan Potter (00:41): There might be a real surprise.
Brigitte Pellerin (00:47): Well — before I go into what we decided to talk about this week, just one thing about what came out earlier this week. I believe it was Tuesday.
The minister responsible — I forget her first name; Dunlop is her last name — was explaining that, you know, with the floods, the July 1 flood. When there’s a problem like this and the city requests the assistance of the provincial government with an extreme event, it’s up to the city to request assistance. That’s the way things work in this country.
(01:17) But the provinces typically will remind the city that there are resources available. And so this is what happened. As we understand it, as we record this, the province did remind the city that there were resources available.
And apparently — not confirmed, but this is from the mouth of the minister of the Ontario government — the mayor’s office took eight days to request assistance after the July 1 flood.
I don’t know why they would do that. So Jeff Leiper’s campaign is asking for the paper trail showing that.
(01:55) If indeed it is true — and I don’t know why she’d be lying about this on camera — but if that is true, there has to be a really, really good reason why it took eight days to request assistance. Because the people whose basements were flooded, they won’t find it funny at all.
Evan Potter (02:08): I’m sure there’s an explanation. And the only question now is whether the Leiper campaign can get the paperwork before election day.
Brigitte Pellerin (02:17): Maybe they don’t need that. Because if you sow enough doubt in voters’ minds that there was a delay, and that it’s unexplained as of yet — that’s enough. I don’t think you need the paper trail.
Evan Potter (02:26): But the media needs the paper trail.
Brigitte Pellerin (02:30): Of course. But for people to decide how they want to vote, maybe just asking the question is enough damage to the Sutcliffe campaign. So maybe that’s our October surprise. We’ll find out.
(02:37) Meanwhile — and I want to say that we’ve been saying this all wrong. This was not the advance poll. The advance poll is October sixteenth. What we had last week was early voting. Am I correct?
Evan Potter (02:54): Yes, that’s correct.
Brigitte Pellerin (02:57): Not that it really matters. Anyway, we had four days of early voting.
(03:02) And I think we may have — I don’t know if it’s a record we’ve beaten, but let’s call it a high-water mark. We had 27,553 voters who voted in those early voting days last week. Which is a 46 per cent increase from four years ago, and a 76 per cent increase from eight years ago, 2018. So that’s a good number.
(03:18) Now, I have to say something for folks who may not understand how this works.
So Elections Ottawa — big shout-out. I love these people. They do the work of angels and they’re great. When you go and vote, please thank them for their work. That’s all they really — they don’t get paid that much to do this work, and it’s critically important.
Anyway: when Elections Ottawa tallies everything, they share with all the campaigns a list of who voted in those early voting days. But of course, they don’t say anything about how those people voted.
(03:47) So the campaigns get the list of who voted early. And then I’m assuming they cross-reference it with their own list of known supporters — people who told them yes, who have a sign on the front lawn, who said I’m going to vote for you, or I might vote for you. So they have those lists, and that gives them an indication of how they’re doing in their campaign. Because if their voters have already voted for them — that’s good.
(04:21) Well. All the campaigns have my number. They know how to get hold of me. And there’s only one that reached out to say they were happy with the data they received from Elections Ottawa. That’s the Jeff Leiper campaign.
Evan Potter (04:36): Okay. That’s the open and transparent campaign.
Brigitte Pellerin (04:39): That’s right. And so I’m sharing this — the campaign is, how could I say this, going into this holiday weekend feeling confident that their voters are going out and doing what they said they would do, which is vote for Jeff Leiper. That’s my interpretation of the message I received earlier.
But if that’s true in the other campaigns — guys, you can reach out. If you’re also happy with your numbers, I’d love to report that.
(05:00) It’s an interesting phenomenon. And it goes to what we’ve been saying for weeks: what Jeff Leiper needed was a superior ground game.
Evan Potter (05:20): Not just superior. Incredible.
Brigitte Pellerin (05:23): Okay. And a dissatisfaction with Mark Sutcliffe, and everyone else voting strategically for Leiper.
Evan Potter (05:27): Yes, of course. And a lot of people loving Alex Lawson. He needed those things together. He needs an incredible ground game, an unbelievable ground game — and he needs Alex Lawson in the high twenties. That’s what he needs.
Brigitte Pellerin (05:47): Right. So we’ll find out about that part, the Lawson numbers — and I believe that’s what you want to talk about, how that’s the one number we should all look at. But if all of this is happening, then we may be looking at an upset.
Evan Potter (06:02): You may be very, very happy.
(06:06) But just a comment on the early voting. 27,000 — that’s great, it’s a high number. Let’s say there are three hundred and thirty thousand people who vote on October twenty-sixth. So that’s about eight per cent, nine per cent — don’t call me on the math — somewhere between eight and ten per cent who’ve gone for the early vote.
(06:30) I was told this week by someone that a higher percentage of Toronto municipal voters went to the polls for the early vote. Just an interesting factoid — that more Toronto voters, as a percentage of the total vote, took advantage of their early vote.
Brigitte Pellerin (06:54): This means something. We just don’t know what it is.
Evan Potter (06:57): But let’s carry it through. Let’s say the high early vote is an indicator of an unusually high turnout on voting day. It doesn’t mean it will be — but let’s play a thought game.
High voter turnout is good for challengers. Low voter turnout is good for incumbents.
Brigitte Pellerin (07:21): Always. That’s right.
(07:26) That’s usually true. It won’t be true in the US midterms, but it’s usually true — because the Republican voters are not going to go out. That’s my point. Anyway, we don’t need to talk about this, because this is a municipal podcast.
Evan Potter (07:34): So that’s no surprise. Mark Sutcliffe is running a status quo campaign. His campaign would prefer there to be a lower voter turnout, of course.
Brigitte Pellerin (07:42): Of course.
(07:48) Just again for numbers: last election the voter turnout was 43-ish per cent. And it was up a little bit, because the one before that was 41 or 42-ish.
And I’m gunning for 45. I’d like to keep this increasing, and to be reasonable in my ambitions — I’d love to have over 50 per cent, but maybe in a couple of cycles we can have that.
(08:10) But here’s what I’m noticing, and this is the subject of my upcoming Ottawa Citizen column. I’ve been going out to events, canvasses, town halls, church basements, what have you — and we’ve been at some of the same ones; we see each other in real life.
What I’ve noticed is — I don’t want to say there are huge numbers of people very engaged with the campaign, because that’s not true. But the people who are engaged are really engaged. And that crystallized for me maybe about a week ago. The intensity.
Evan Potter (08:49): Intensity.
Brigitte Pellerin (08:52): I mentioned last week on the pod that I see people showing up at Neil Saravanamuttoo’s events with notebooks, scribbling notes, and then they stand up to speak and they have stories to illustrate what their dissatisfaction is with the city and the services it provides.
(09:00) And we were together — Jeff Leiper had a canvass with Catherine McKenney, the NDP MPP for Ottawa Centre, in the Glebe. So obviously, friendly Jeff territory.
Evan Potter (09:20): Nice meeting Catherine McKenney for the first time.
Brigitte Pellerin (09:24): It was great. I’m glad you finally got to meet them.
So we followed along a little on the canvass. But what really impressed me was the group of volunteers showing up to canvass with Jeff — and how young they are.
And you know me, I’m the terminally curious person. I’m constantly asking: why are you here? Tell me what makes you come out and knock on people’s doors.
(09:40) And the fact that people are interested, and younger — I don’t want to betray their confidence, this was not for the record — but the overwhelming impression I’m getting is that young people, especially the ones volunteering on Jeff Leiper’s campaign, are engaged and interested in having a better city. Better for them, more affordable. They have different priorities among themselves, but generally speaking, they want something better.
(10:20) And the status quo politics we’ve had, where politicians promise you goodies — I don’t think that’s working with those younger folks. I know it’s not working with people my kids’ age. My kids don’t like that. They feel like: what are you taking me for? Some stupid person who’ll just vote for you because you promised me something — you dangle a little piece of candy in front of me? What the heck is that?
They don’t like it. They want a city that engages them. That values their voice and their opinions.
(10:50) They understand democracy, and that you don’t always win. But at least if you feel like your voice was heard and considered, and then you lose the vote because it’s majority rule — you’re okay with that. It’s when you feel like nobody wants to hear from you until it’s time for you to take the little candy and go vote in the right spot.
That kind of politics — which you and I are used to, because, not to age ourselves, but we’re older than that — I don’t think is working anymore.
Now, I could be wishful-thinking out loud again, and probably I am for this cycle. But I think there’s a sea change coming, and I’m delighted to see it.
Evan Potter (11:25): I want the world to be like your world. It’s a beautiful world. It’s an ideal world.
(11:37) I would say that this is normal campaigning. Now, in a municipal election context where you have six months — it’s not like a federal or provincial campaign of four or five weeks.
Brigitte Pellerin (11:48): It’s five weeks.
Evan Potter (11:50): Sure. As Kim Campbell is famously said to have said about a campaign being no place to discuss — I’m garbling it —
Brigitte Pellerin (12:01): Serious arguments. Serious issues, I believe it was.
Evan Potter (12:04): Serious arguments. In a municipal context, with five months, you can have the engagement you’re talking about.
(12:10) But what I think we’re seeing — my inbox is flooded with Mark Sutcliffe messages of candies, and candies from the other campaigns too. Policy candies, as you said. Goodies and candies.
And I think it works. It doesn’t work for you and me and the other ten per cent of voters — that cohort of very highly informed voting public. But these goodies work on single-issue voters, low-information voters, people who won’t be thinking about the election until the day or the hour before they go to the polling station.
(12:50) And do you know what they’re thinking? They’re thinking: who’s familiar? Literally, who am I familiar with? I’m familiar with the mayor, but I don’t recognize these other names. I’ve never heard of these other people. I’m doing my civic duty — I’m going to vote for the mayor. Or: I want change. What are my choices?
They’re not thinking policy, the specifics. What’s the difference between Neil’s transit plan and Jeff Leiper’s and Alex Lawson’s? They’re not thinking that. The academic literature tells us this: they’re thinking about trust. Whom do I trust more?
(13:38) Al Gore was an egghead — egghead meaning a brain. Bill Clinton’s former vice-president, who was then the candidate in the 2000 US federal election. I think most people thought Al Gore was smarter than George W. Bush.
Brigitte Pellerin (13:45): He’s sharp.
Evan Potter (13:46): But they trusted George Bush more than Al Gore.
Brigitte Pellerin (13:51): Which is a weird thing to say, but you’re right. I mean, they voted for him.
Evan Potter (13:55): And it was not about policy. Al Gore had all the policy. He was the policy wonk. He was the policy nerd.
Brigitte Pellerin (14:00): He’d grown up in it, too. His father was a senator from Tennessee. Mind you, George W. Bush’s father had been president and vice-president, but —
Evan Potter (14:10): But Al Gore came in after eight years of Bill Clinton, one of the most popular presidents in the United States. And it was a nail-biter. The Supreme Court basically decided the 2000 US election.
Brigitte Pellerin (14:18): Remember the hanging chads? What a world.
Evan Potter (14:27): It just tells you — not in every case, not in every election — but it’s not the smartest guy who will win, or the guy with the best policy. It’s that trust factor, or the change factor.
(14:43) So that’s what I’m looking for. That’s my metric: do you trust this candidate more than the other one? Because if I trust you, Brigitte, I’ll trust that your policy decisions, once you’re mayor or councillor, are going to be the best policy decisions.
Brigitte Pellerin (15:05): Right. So this is where I’m going to push back just a little bit. Not really — because you’re right, that’s the history, that’s the academic work, and historically it’s true.
But I’m going to flip it around a little. There’s also the question of people who are just now starting to tune into this campaign. And there are a lot of them. I know, because they come to me.
Evan Potter (15:25): Most people. Yeah.
Brigitte Pellerin (15:29): They ask what I think.
And they’re starting to think about it and going: okay, I know my life, I know my situation. One friend was talking to me about this just last night, saying it doesn’t really affect him — his house is paid for, they have two incomes, they’re living comfortably. It doesn’t really matter to them who’s in charge, because they’re paying their tax bill and they don’t really —
So I asked this friend: then how do you decide who to vote for? Not sure yet.
(16:12) So maybe then, if you’re in that kind of situation, you start to think: do I trust the guy who’s currently in charge? Do I like the way this guy makes decisions? Because when push comes to shove — any idiot can make you promises. I can show you a three-year-old who’ll promise to clean his room and not do it. Any idiot can make a promise.
It’s how do you govern. How do you make decisions when there’s a hard decision, a hard call you didn’t expect.
(16:37) And so people are asking those questions about the incumbent too. I think that’s true in every other election — which is why I say I’m not really pushing back against you. I’m highlighting this other element.
And my sense — and it’s a vibe reading, okay — my sense, and I’m looking forward to that new poll, is that we have so far underestimated how unimpressed most, maybe not most, but a plurality of Ottawa residents are with the mayor.
(17:06) It’s not that he’s a bad person. He’s not completely wrong. But he’s also not great. That’s very much the vibe I’m getting. And people are actively looking for someone else they could trust with it.
And I don’t know — Alex Lawson, being 38 years old, may not benefit from a lot of immediate trust. A lot of people like what he has to say, though. They want him to stay involved even if he doesn’t win, which, you know, is pretty likely. And then it comes down to Neil versus Jeff.
Evan Potter (17:38): So, as I’ve said before, my take at this stage of the campaign — in the final stretch — is that both Neil and Alex have overperformed. They’ve exceeded expectations.
Jeff Leiper needed to overperform against the mayor, because he’s automatically the underdog but the most serious contender. And he didn’t overperform.
Brigitte Pellerin (18:07): Not that we know so far. That’s why those polls are going to be —
Evan Potter (18:09): When I say overperform, I mean as a candidate, visibly, to us. He might yet have a ground game that has exceeded all expectations and delivers — and maybe that’s his narrow path to victory. But he hasn’t overperformed in the public domain, in my view.
And the mayor didn’t need to overperform. He just had to make sure he didn’t make any major mistakes. And he hasn’t — he’s a careful person. He hasn’t made any major mistakes.
And he can still — well, we’ll see the polls. That’s why I need to see that public poll.
Brigitte Pellerin (18:45): I want to say something, because the polls we’ve had so far — excluding the one in September, which was just weird — all the other ones, the Liaison tracking polls, showed by and large a third of voters undecided.
What if these people have since decided, and they’ve gone away from the mayor?
Evan Potter (19:03): Right.
Brigitte Pellerin (19:06): Do you remember? I said this — I believe in July. My theory was that this high a number of undecided, this late in the campaign, is an indication that people don’t want to vote for the incumbent. They’re just not sure who to vote for instead.
And they may now have made that choice. So I’m so curious to see where those people will have distributed, if they have distributed, in the next poll.
Evan Potter (19:30): Excellent point, Brigitte. I totally agree. Again, comparing to Toronto — Ottawa had a much higher undecided than Toronto. A third. And even going into September, that non-probability-based poll had it at twenty-eight per cent. So still really a third.
(19:50) So I’ll be looking for a lot of indicators in the upcoming public poll. And obviously we’re all going to be looking at the undecided, which should, in theory, by now be down to twenty per cent. Usually in the last week it’s ten per cent. But maybe down to twenty.
I share your view that a lot more Ottawans do not want Mark Sutcliffe to be mayor than his campaign probably thinks.
Brigitte Pellerin (20:24): And it’s also entirely possible — not to depress them, not that they care — it’s also possible that these undecideds who don’t really feel like voting for Mark Sutcliffe might vote for Mark Sutcliffe anyway, because having surveyed the field, they believe there’s nobody who’d be better. That’s also a possible read of the situation. And many people may just do that.
(20:49) But again, that goes to what we were saying last week. Even if Mark Sutcliffe wins with a much diminished mandate — if his mandate is weak because he wins with a tiny number.
Even the Parti Québécois won the Quebec election this past week with less than 30 per cent of the vote. This is mind-blowing.
So what if the mayor of Ottawa wins with that kind of mark — thirty per cent, thirty-two per cent —
Evan Potter (21:18): Thirty-two, thirty-three to thirty-six.
Brigitte Pellerin (21:21): — and say a full third of the people who voted for him did it on the basis of I guess, because I don’t like the others. That’s not a huge mandate. It’s soft.
A win is a win is a win — but it’s a soft win.
Evan Potter (21:32): A win is a win here. And in Ontario we don’t have municipal parties, so it’s the individual. And of course, if he does win with a substantially diminished vote share, his team and his office are going to make sure we try to forget that very quickly.
Brigitte Pellerin (21:57): Well, of course. I would do the same thing. That’s fair enough. It’s the game.
Evan Potter (22:00): The question is: does that matter to his council colleagues, his allies, and the people who are not that supportive of him getting a second mandate?
Brigitte Pellerin (22:08): Especially those council colleagues who are thinking of their own run for mayor four years from now.
Evan Potter (22:13): Absolutely. Some of those council colleagues are already starting to think seriously — to strategize about 2030.
Brigitte Pellerin (22:18): Strategize and position themselves.
So that’s the thing. If Mark Sutcliffe wins again, he’s going to be watching his back the whole entire time. People are coming for him.
Evan Potter (22:28): Or — if he doesn’t intend to run again, it doesn’t matter. He just has to do a decent job until 2030 and then go on to the next phase of his life.
(22:47) Brigitte: Alex Lawson, zero tax increase in 2027. What do you think?
Brigitte Pellerin (22:52): Okay, so first of all — I have the privilege of getting embargoed copies of things. So I got this policy the night before, because that’s what journalists get. We’re used to that.
And I had just played a long game of frisbee, and it was 10:30 at night when I got home and I saw this. And it was not great to look at — I don’t like numbers. So I was a little bit unhappy about it. But nobody cares.
(23:10) Look — the zero per cent thing. I think a lot of people have dismissed this out of hand as irresponsible or unreasonable or unrealistic. And it may very well be.
But politics-wise? Man, did he hit it. Bullseye.
Evan Potter (23:30): Absolutely. I talked to somebody on his campaign and I said: I don’t think, policy-wise, this is really smart. I don’t think this is smart policy — but it’s beautiful politics. It’s just beautiful politics. And people talk about it.
Brigitte Pellerin (23:45): And it worked. People talked about it. And he got attacked for it, which is great for his brand.
He played the game like a guy who’s been playing the game for a very long time. And he’s not — I mean, some of the people around him, including his half-brother Emrys, have been around politics for a long time. So they know the game, and they’re playing it super well.
Evan Potter (24:09): Guess what? It’s a big beautiful idea. Where have I heard that before? I wanted a big beautiful idea, and Alex Lawson delivered one right to my door.
Brigitte Pellerin (24:14): You wanted one, you’ve got one now.
(24:21) And I wrote about it, and I got a number of interesting comments — including from people saying: well, I don’t know if it’s any crazier than Mark Sutcliffe’s two-point-five per cent cap. It’s just pushing it to its logical conclusion.
Evan Potter (24:36): Guess what, Brigitte? What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If Mark Sutcliffe can present, with a straight face, obviously artificially low annual tax hikes — then why can’t one of the candidates for office go one further?
Brigitte Pellerin (24:56): Go one further.
Evan Potter (24:58): So listening to the mayor stumble through his rebuttal amused me. He doesn’t have any leg to stand on.
Brigitte Pellerin (25:06): It triggered me, because he brought back Larry O’Brien. And I want to forget Larry O’Brien.
Evan Potter (25:10): He can bring back Larry O’Brien all he wants. This is good politics. He knows it.
Brigitte Pellerin (25:18): It was brilliant politics. I’m not going to mince words. It was great.
Evan Potter (25:21): The Sutcliffe campaign team knows it. They’re just going to have to deal with that now.
Now — how many points will it add to Alex? We don’t know. We’d have to test it. And that’s why I want to see the public polling coming up.
Brigitte Pellerin (25:36): I want to give him some points too, Lawson — because the next day he came out with another one. And again, I got that one the night before as well, also after playing frisbee, but this one didn’t have as many numbers. It was the one on homelessness, drug use, and help for people struggling with drug addiction and seeking treatment.
And that’s something I knew was coming, because I’d had discussions with him about it.
(26:18) Of all the candidates — especially the candidates who haven’t had a lot of experience in municipal politics — he’s done his homework, by going around with people in the field. Including people who used to live on the street, used to be homeless, used to be addicted to drugs.
And I think there’s something there. I’m not the expert. But when I read his proposal, and when I heard him talk about this stuff —
(26:39) And I want everyone to steal this idea, regardless of who wins. Right now we keep putting band-aids on situations. We put people in shelters, we put them somewhere. But when someone says I want better for my life, I want to get clean, I want help, help me somebody — and not everyone is ready, but when someone is — we don’t have the resources. We don’t have the beds, in the sense of beds and the wraparound services. We don’t have enough of that.
Some of that is up to the province. But it’s time for the city to take leadership on this and really go strongly in that direction.
(27:10) And I’m not saying Lawson’s plan is the right one — I’m not the expert. But it sounds good to me. And I would like everyone to steal it. We need to help these people. You can’t just move them from shelter to shelter and not help them when they are ready to live differently and get their lives back on track. It’s the least we can do.
And it’s also smart economically. Because once these people’s lives are back on track, they can get a job and work and be productive and pay taxes.
So that was Alex Lawson’s week, I think.
Evan Potter (27:39): I think it was. And now what I’d like to see is: how does he top that? Can he top the zero tax increase in ‘27 with another proposal?
Because this is the raw politics. Let’s face it — the last three weeks, two and a half weeks, it’s going to be raw politics.
Brigitte Pellerin (27:56): This is where it starts to get rough.
Evan Potter (28:00): You can expect two things happening concurrently. There’s the ground game — get out the vote, obviously. And then trying to stand out, to show contrast.
But ultimately voters are going to feel just a blizzard of policy proposals. Contradictory. Confusing. You and I and the other ten per cent of informed Ottawans will try to distill them and figure them out. But the vast majority of voters can’t, and won’t.
Brigitte Pellerin (28:34): They don’t have time. It’s a lot, in fact.
Evan Potter (28:37): So, as I said at the beginning, they’re going to go with the person they recognize. That name recognition.
Brigitte Pellerin (28:44): And trust.
Evan Potter (28:44): And I have to say that local Ottawa media have been doing a pretty good job over the last 90 days in giving Leiper, Saravanamuttoo and Lawson coverage.
Brigitte Pellerin (28:54): Including the op-eds in the Ottawa Citizen, which allow each candidate, unfiltered, to make their pitch. Same length, same format, go.
Evan Potter (29:02): They’ve got a lot of media coverage — the media hasn’t ignored them. Those four leading candidates.
(29:10) And I don’t suggest that the other ten candidates, or nine, or however many are left, are fringe candidates. I’m just saying that we’re talking about the four leading candidates.
Brigitte Pellerin (29:19): They’re protest candidates. Let’s put it that way.
All right — listen, we’re almost out of time. So next week I want us to talk a little more about the local races.
And in the meantime, I want to wish you and everyone watching a very happy Thanksgiving long weekend. Talk to you next week. Bye.
Evan Potter (29:32): Yes — happy Thanksgiving. We’ll see you next week. Bye-bye.
