The most convincing thing I've seen on the internet to indicate that there was anything particularly wrong with the Outremont campaign is Justin's post here.All of the things that he lists in his post can be explained by two potential causes: First, the people running the campaign were incompetent. Second, Dion is unpopular in Quebec.Specifically, the claim of identified voters could have been from an old list. Putting the HQ inside a mall, not having things for unexpected volunteers to do, not having poll kits or buttons, all of that is just as easily explained by incompetence as anything else. Plus, as important as I know all campaigners would like to believe they are, campaigns just don't matter much. The useful function they provide is to identify supportive voters and get them to the polls, but in the absence of supportive voters, the campaign is a waste of time. That said, it does have the opportunity to sink itself.As I said yesterday, you'll find effective campaigners where effective campaigns are valuable. Places that are "Liberal Strongholds" are not going to develop strong Liberal campaigners, and neither are places like Alberta where Liberals, even with an excellent campaign, have no chance.Ineffective campaigns don't surprise me here, and I don't know why they would surprise people there. As for Dion's popularity in Quebec, I don't know what illusions the rest of the party had about it. I had none. My estimation of the party's chances into the future hasn't changed.