Aftermath

So some of my predictions didn't turn out so well. In retrospect, some of it was predictable (Rod Giesbrecht's role as a spoiler in Elmwood-East Kildonan, for instance). The overall makeup of council hasn't really changed much (in effect, the left lost Elmwood-EK but gained Mynarski). And of course Katz was reelected. And the turnout was high in spite of bad weather, which usually indicates an appetite for change, but here it didn't. So what happened?

I'm not sure, but I suspect that those awful shootings in the North End played a role. Yes, they happened under Katz's watch, but that doesn't matter; the right has been extremely effective in branding themselves as the ones who can solve the problem. They've been so effective in this branding effort that people ignore the evidence when they're sufficiently scared. (For similar reasons, deficits seem to help the right, even when they happen under right wing governments). The high turnout is probably partly explicable by people coming out in hope of voting for Judy, but part of it is people from the suburbs coming out to vote out of fear of Judy. Presumably they think that there'd be a veritable explosion of crime if she occupied the Mayor's office. Whatever...

Some guesses for the municipal election

Bartley Kives, in this Free Press article, makes some predictions about how things will play out tomorrow (about halfway down, though the whole article is worth reading). In some cases I have opinions on the matter myself.

Charleswood-Tuxedo: With seven candidates and no incumbent, this would seem to be about as wide open as it gets. Kives considers Havixbeck and Hannah to be the top contenders. My money would be on Havixbeck, since the Tory machine will be working for her, and when you have that many candidates it is a advantageous to have a lot of volunteers to pull the vote.

Mynarski: Again, we have a freshly vacated ward with a large field of candidates. Here, though, turnout is traditionally low, and thus having a lot of volunteers is even more critical. And the NDP has never had a shortage of volunteers. For this reason, I'm calling this one for Eadie.

Elmwood-East Kildonan: Kives calls it a three way race. I'm inclined to narrow it down to Robinson or Giesbrecht; Steen might have a better chance if he didn't open his mouth. In theory, Robinson should have this in the bag, but Giesbrecht is doing dangerously well. This could go either way.

Old Kildonan: Kives thinks Sharma has the edge; I don't know enough about that race to agree or disagree.

Daniel McIntyre: Kives goes no further than to predict that "one of the three lefties" (Smith, Bellamy, or Gilroy-Price) will win. Myself I'd give the edge to Bellamy, both due to the aforementioned organizational factor and due to the fact that Wolseley seems pretty solidly in his camp (and face it, Wolseley has a higher turnout than the West End). But Smith is not to be underestimated either.

River Heights-Fort Garry: Kives puts this as impossible to predict. To my mind it mostly turns on how annoyed people really are about those traffic circles; if Orlikow loses River Heights he's done for. But this may turn out to be a case of much ado about nothing; I do see a fair number of letters and comments defending the circles. Tough call.

St. Norbert: Kives figures a major upset would be necessary to unseat Swandel, but he considers this a possibility. He implies that this would imply a shift to the left; however, it could equally happen through a generalized shift against incumbents. In that case, his prediction -- that Swandel could only lose in a situation where the right gets severely stomped -- might be unsound. If Swandel and Orlikow are both defeated in an anti-incumbent wave, for instance, the net effect on the balance of power is zero.

St. Charles: This is another race that I know too little to challenge Kives' comments (essentially that Nordman has the edge but that Dobson has a chance).

Fort Rouge-East Fort Garry: Strangely, Kives lists this as a race where the incumbent could lose, although he thinks it unlikely. Myself, I would have no hesitation about calling it for Gerbasi.

St. James-Brooklands: Kives also lists this as one where there's an outside chance of defeating the incumbent. I call this for Fielding.

Point Douglas, St. Boniface, St. Vital, and Transcona: I can't really argue with Kives' contention that these are "virtually locks", though I don't know enough about St. Vital to say I agree with him on that one either.

OK, but what about the big one? Kives makes no prediction here, but what about me? Maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I'm going to call this one for Judy. The thing is, there's a huge force of volunteers supporting the NDP-backed candidates, and most of the votes they pull will go to Judy. In addition, some of their opponents are as well. For instance, regardless of whether Harvey Smith or Keith Bellamy takes Daniel McIntyre, both of them are going to be getting a lot of people out to vote, and nearly all of those folks will vote for Judy. The situation with existing patterns of voter turnout is a bit murkier; in southern and suburban parts of the city, which tend to favour Katz, turnout tends to be higher. On the other hand, among identified supporters, this poll has concluded that Judy's supporters are more committed to actually getting to the polls than Sam's. Naturally, polls can be wrong (see Ford's margin of victory in Toronto for an example) but I think Winnipeg might finally break out of its long cycle of reelecting mayors until they retire (or die). Here's hoping...

Anti-incumbent sentiment strong in much of Ontario

Notwithstanding the fact that Hazel McCallion was reelected with a huge margin (along with her counterparts in Brampton, Oakville, Markham, Richmond Hill and Ajax) there was quite a strong shift against incumbents. Vaughan's mayor, and several veteran councillors, went down to defeat yesterday, and so did the mayors of Burlington, Hamilton, and Oshawa. Five incumbent Toronto councillors, representing the right as well as the left, were defeated. Outside of the 905, the mayors of London, Ottawa, Greater Sudbury and Thunder Bay all went down as well.

Now I'd be more than happy to see this pattern repeat itself in Winnipeg tomorrow, but there's something about this that makes me a bit uneasy. The fact that this trend has victims across the political spectrum suggests that instead of voting for a clear platform (or even against one) they're voting against anyone they perceive as being too experienced. Under this mentality, once a politician gains sufficient experience to figure out how to do the job, he or she should be gotten rid of immediately. It's no coincidence that "vote out all incumbents" is a common cry from teabaggers, who would like nothing better than to insure that governments are unable to actually do anything. And consider this -- teabaggers are always going on about the need for term limits, but balk at campaign spending limits. Apparently it's better to stop someone from running at all, than to limit the amount they can spend on their campaign. And guess who that tends to favour?

So tomorrow, Winnipeggers, I'd like you to vote out Sam Katz, but don't do it simply because he's the incumbent. Do it because he sucks, and because Judy will be good.

A guide to Toronto's mayoral candidates

Courtesy of the Star. Some highlights:

Taxes: Ford wants to abolish the land transfer tax, while Smitherman and Pantalone want to keep it. The situation with property taxes is interesting. As noted previously, Smitherman is actually even more aggressive than Ford on this issue - he wants to freeze them, while Ford merely wants to index them to inflation.

Transit: Ford, much like Katz in Winnipeg, wants to tear up the existing plans and renegotiate. Pantalone wants to continue, while Smitherman actually wants to add to existing plans.

Other environmental issues: Both Pantalone and Smitherman scored high here (20 and 18 out of 20 respectively). Ford didn't bother to answer the questionnaire.

Contracting out: Pantalone wants to freeze it; both Ford and Smitherman want to do it. Of the two, Smitherman is arguably worse than Ford, since he is open to contracting out bus routes in addition to garbage and recycling.

Debt: Pantalone figures there are higher priorities, and that the debt can be kept constant. Both Ford and Smitherman want to actively reduce it by selling city assets.

Hiring of staff: None of them advocate massive layoffs. Pantalone wishes to continue the present policy, which is to simply evaluate whether it's necessary to fill a given vacancy. Ford and Smitherman are much more aggressive here, wanting to eliminate 1,500 and 1,300 jobs, respectively, by attrition.

Size of council: Pantalone and Smitherman want to leave well enough alone, while Ford wants to cut it in half.

Looking at it in this way, Smitherman does seem to be somewhat preferable to Ford overall, and I certainly think the venom that some have directed towards those who advocate tactical voting is a bit excessive. Nonetheless, I still think Smitherman would remain mayor for a lot longer than Ford would if elected, and that could be a negative in itself. So I'd still urge progressive Torontonians to hold out for Joe.

Katz in the lead again, but support soft -- poll

The latest poll has incumbent Sam Katz back in the lead:

Mayor Sam Katz has a six-point lead on Judy Wasylycia-Leis as Winnipeg's mayoral race enters the home stretch, but a more committed core of support for the challenger suggests election night may be a nail-biter.

Katz enjoys the support of 38 per cent of Winnipeg voters while Wasylycia-Leis has 32 per cent, according to a Leger Marketing telephone survey commissioned by the Winnipeg Free Press and CBC News.

Source. While this might be good news for Katz, there's a complication:

Survey respondents were asked to rate their interest in the race, on a scale of one to 10. The average interest for a Wasylycyia-Leis supporter was 6.5 out of 10, while Katz supporters averaged 5.4 out of 10, Scholz said.

Furthermore, 25 per cent of Wasylycia-Leis supporters rated their interest at nine or 10 out of 10, compared to only nine per cent of Katz supporters who did so.

"Her voters are significantly more interested in this election than his voters," Scholz said.

"That means her voters are more likely to come out than his are. If there's anything to prevent them, such as bad weather or a TV show, there's a good chance he's not going to get the vote out."

So, if Judy's campaign is able to keep things moving (not to mention the campaigns of council candidates who are onside with her) she has an excellent chance of winning.

More commentary on the Toronto mayoral race

Much as the prospect of teabaggers winning control of the US Congress is a bit worrisome (but see here for some perspective on that), the prospect of someone who is a teabagger in all but name becoming mayor of Canada's largest city is more than a little stomach-churning. But as noted before, not everyone thinks Smitherman is enough of an improvement on Ford to be worthy of support. The Star's Royston James has this to say:

So, before you hold your nose and vote Smitherman, you should ask yourself: What is it about Ford that scares me? Who and what am I voting for? Why am I voting against someone? Because, holding your nose and voting, well, stinks — especially after the vote.

So what are you want from next Monday’s vote?

If your priority is to get someone at city hall who can stand on the international and national stage and represent Toronto — because he speaks well and “looks like a mayor,” then maybe Smitherman gets your vote hands-down. His years as deputy premier were a rehearsal for the role. He is motor mouth.

If your priority is to continue the legacy left by outgoing mayor David Miller — an ethic of growth in city services and civic staff, bike lanes and European-style streetcars, environmental initiatives and making Toronto the greenest city on the planet — then Joe Pantalone is your candidate.

And if you are concerned about city hall spending and the growth of the city’s budget and the perennial fiscal deficit even after hundreds of millions of tax dollars have been added to the ledger, then Ford has earned a penny-pinching reputation.

Now, if you find Ford’s anti-spending policies so repulsive that he must be stopped, then you might be careful with your dalliance with Smitherman, especially if your concern is the diminution or destruction of city services. On that score, both candidates are closer than the Anybody-but-Ford crowd lets on.

From the city budget perspective, Smitherman may even be worse for you.

That sounds strange given what we already know about Ford, but James makes some good points:

First, he advocates a tax freeze in 2011, turning his back on some $60 million he obviously needs. Not even Ford does that.

Second, Smitherman plans to run up to Queen’s Park for a $100 million subsidy to balance the books. Again, he’s alone on that. And he suggests he will get this money even though his budget numbers show the city with a surplus of $50 million. In other words, his friend Dalton will give him $100 million and add to the province’s ballooning deficit so Toronto can net a $50 million surplus.

These two points are relevant because Smitherman intends to spend more on a range of platform promises than either Pantalone or Ford. So, he needs more “savings” to balance the books.

Now on the other side of the coin, of course, is the fact that Ford is so personally offensive. No need to go over the reasons again and again; the guy is ridiculous. And there's no doubt that the next four years will be rather embarrassing for Torontonians if Ford wins (perhaps even worse than Lastman's final term). Nonetheless, I stand by my prediction that if Ford does win he will either serve a single term, or else moderate his behaviour. And in any case, it's not a case of the entire city council being taken over by Ford clones; I'm pretty sure he won't have the votes on council to do all the crazy things he says he wants to do. So all things considered, if I lived in Toronto, I'd feel fine about casting my vote for Pantalone.

Katz starting to panic?

Our esteemed mayor has failed to show up for a debate, and he's clogging citizens' voicemail with allegations that Judy is going to take your house away. Gee, do you think he's worried yet?

Katz's lead vanishes

For the first time, the incumbent has a serious fight on his hands:

THE race for mayor of Winnipeg is now a statistical dead heat. Incum­bent Sam Katz has lost the polling lead he held all year and is now even with challenger Judy Wasylycia-Leis.

According to a Probe Research poll conducted in late September exclu­sively for the Free Press, Wasylycia-Leis is the preferred choice of 50 per cent of Winnipeg voters. Katz sits three points behind with 47 per cent support and Brad Gross and Rav Gill garnered the remaining three per cent. The mar­gin of error for these results is 4.7 per cent.

From the Free Press. Suddenly, Katz looks like he could actually lose, and in any case the campaign will be a lot more interesting from this point on.

Ford still working to undermine himself

The guy would be better off if he just shut up:

The man who would be Toronto mayor yesterday questioned the value of immigrants in the City of Immigrants. He said Tuesday he wants no more newcomers because we can’t manage our current population and an influx will add chaos upon existing chaos. And in case you think he’s being exclusionary, he assured us Wednesday that once he gets the city’s fiscal house in order he will reopen the doors.

Hmmm. With pronouncements like that, no wonder fiscal conservatives were begging John Tory to enter the race and give them a palatable option on the political right.

It was always anticipated that the more Ford spoke, the less voters would like him. The controversial councillor is living up to expectation.

This was no slip-up; it’s vintage Ford — direct, impolitic sand in your eye. When will it begin to wear thin on Toronto voters?

Opponent George Smitherman has spent considerable ammunition — some say, too much — attacking Ford on everything, small and great. He thinks, finally, this is the “turning point in the election.”

From the Star. One would hope this, more than an old drunk driving conviction, would be the thing to derail his campaign. However, that's really secondary; the most important thing is that his campaign gets derailed somehow...

Judy's in the race

Judy Wasylycia-Leis, as expected, has filed her papers to run for Mayor. Interestingly, none other than Sharon Carstairs is going to serve as her campaign co-chair. It's going to be a heck of a campaign for sure. It will also be interesting to see who else shows up at her official campaign launch (tomorrow at 11:30 AM at the Tower Atrium at the Forks, in case anyone's wondering).

Wasylycia-Leis steps down

Well, it was widely expected, but it's now official. So far she hasn't declared her candidacy for mayor, but this is widely expected as well. I'd love to see her beat Sam; we'll have to see how it goes. Either way, big shoes to fill.

Wasylycia-Leis considers running for mayor

Rumours have been flying about this for a while, and now it's being reported in the press:

The race for mayor in Winnipeg just got a little busier, as federal NDP health critic Judy Wasylycia-Leis says she's thinking about running against Sam Katz this fall.

The Winnipeg North MP is mulling the prospect of returning from Ottawa to challenge Katz in the October civic election.

"A lot of people have been raising it with me and asking me to consider running. I'm certainly going to give it some thought," she said Wednesday.

An MP since 1997, Wasylycia-Leis, 58, served as a Manitoba MLA from 1986 to 1993 and held a pair of cabinet posts under Howard Pawley's provincial NDP government. But she has never held municipal office in Winnipeg and concedes she did not consider running for mayor before she was approached in late 2009.

From the Winnipeg Free Press. While I think Wasylycia-Leis would make an outstanding mayor, I don't think she should run right now. Why? For one very simple reason, conveniently pointed out in the article -- it's been over fifty years since an incumbent mayor was defeated in this city, and as sad as this sounds, Katz is popular enough that the pattern is unlikely to be broken this time round. So why would I want a good MP to step down, only to face likely defeat in a run for the mayor's office? And the fact that Lillian Thomas is already in the race seals the deal, as there would be a split in the left of centre vote.

What the left should be doing is focusing on getting more good people on council. That way, maybe Katz would get frustrated and not run again, whereupon Wasylycia-Leis or another worthy candidate could run and actually have a good chance of winning.