I have been reading all these news stories about how the election in Outremont tonight is a test of Stephane Dion's leadership of the Liberal Party. That struck me as strange, at first, but then I remembered what I learned taking a political science degree for four years: people vote based on the leader, and the opposition has got the advantage in by-elections, because only the government has to defend its record.So is the result tonight a comment on Dion's leadership? Maybe, but not in the sense that people will be making a decision on whether or not to support Dion as a result of this election. They're making their decision whether or not to support Dion on the basis of his ability to win a general election, and they're taking his ability to win a by-election as a proxy indicator.That's not totally unreasonable on its face.What is unreasonable, by the way, is what's-his-name with the god-awful blonde wig on CTV news saying that Dion was elected on the expectation that he could win seats in Quebec. I don't know what the hell convention that guy was at, but I was there, and no one was advertising Dion as the guy who could deliver Quebec. I think some people were making that claim about Ignatieff for having started the whole Quebec is a nation debate, but it was widely recognized in the Palais de Congress that Dion was widely disliked in Quebec for bringing in the clarity act. I walked out of the Palais as Dion was finishing his speech to meet my cousin and his wife for dinner. We walked into a restaurant in Old Montreal just down the road from Dion's hotel headquarters, and a patron at the restaurant noticed my Ignatieff scarf. He asked who had won the convention, and when I told him Dion, he said "there's no way I would ever vote for that man."Some people have decided to preempt any attempt to paint a potential loss tonight as a reflection on Dion's leadership by accusing the deputy leader of having sabotaged things. At least, that's the only explanation I can find that would make any sense. I can't imagine anyone thinking that throwing a by-election is a good idea. If the last leadership race taught us anything, it's that being the least disliked is what will win you the leadership. If you throw a by-election, people will notice, and you will be disliked. You can't get disliked by helping someone win a by-election. Even if you were hoping for someone to trip up, staying out of it would make it a more legitimate test in the eyes of others.I suppose it is possible that someone is just sincerely mistaken about whether the campaign in Outremont is incompetent or sabotaged. I apply Hanlon's razor to such questions. Incompetent is the default explanation. Considering that Outremont is considered one of the Liberals' safest ridings, there has been no "evolutionary pressure" for competence in their local organization, has there?But no, I suspect that it's a defensive tactic. I think Dion's supporters actually recognize that there is a legitimate reason to question Dion as a leader, and that they're trying to transfer blame for the loss, or near-loss. Whatever happens, no one will get any credit for a win at this point, which is too bad.Now, here's a totally different question: Is this actually a good indication of how Dion will do in a general election?No, of course not. This is a Quebec by-election. Quebec + Dion = sux. As I mentioned above, we've known that for almost a year, save for delusional wig-guy on CTV. So if Ignatieff's people are throwing a sandal in the works in Outremont, or if someone is legitimately trying to push blame elsewhere, those people are all crazy and wasting their time.Outremont means nothing to anyone with two brain cells to rub together.