The advance polls open tomorrow for Edmonton's municipal elections, and I am in a quandary regarding the selection for mayor. I know who I want to vote for, but I am worried about vote-splitting allowing a less-desirable candidate to waltz in.
I was in a similar predicament in 2004 and voted my heart in that election, giving Stephen Mandel the win over incumbent Bill Smith and Robert Noce. The former I had viewed as a tired status quo, while the latter had displayed a number of weasely tendencies over their campaign. I considered voting strategically to keep a weasel out of the office, but was dissuaded by a timely column from the Journal's municipal affairs columnist (and later councillor) Scott McKeen.
At that time, I chose optimism over pragmatism, and maybe I should again - I have less than no interest in having Mike Nickel as my mayor.
 |
| Portrait by Tim Mikula |
Nickel has a well-deserved reputation as an outspoken city councillor, and whose blunt and confrontational manner has seen him brought to council's attention on multiple code of conduct violations but has escaped censure every time as this requires 9 council votes. Marketing reports (described in the article linked above) show how many voters see Nickel as “says no,” “an I-told-you-so guy,” “frustrated” and “irritable,” now of which are flattering and all of which are easy to ascribe to him.
He is a hard-working and experienced campaigner, and there is no question he is winning the battle of the yard signs, at least from my perspective here on the North side. I saw him canvassing door-to-door a couple of weeks back, and hoped he would come to my step so I could speak my mind, despite my general aversion to confrontation.
He did not, but here is what I hoped I would have said to him:
Mr. Nickel, a part of me is sad you are not running for council again, as I think these bodies work best when they represent a multiplicity of perspectives. I think it is good to have someone on council who can always be counted on to ask, "but what is that going to cost?" and "where is the benefit to this?"
But a good mayor has to build a consensus out of those perspectives, and I have seen absolutely no demonstration that you possess any diplomatic inclinations whatsoever. You bad-mouth city staff and administrators and even endorse council candidates against incumbent councillors that you may end up having to work with! I can't decide if this is naked opportunism ar just short-sightedness, but neither of these endear you to me as a candidate.
If I add that to your frankly bullying and harassing ways on social media, I can't help but think you would be a bad choice for mayor.
I mean, who knows how far I would have gotten before he realized there is no way to get my vote and he walked off, at which point I might have added, "Is this the kind of interaction I can expect if you do win? To walk away from opinions you don't agree with?"
In the end, though, this discourse remains a fantasy, and my difficult choice for mayor remains.
My two favoured candidates are both former councillors (I would have a hard time voting in a mayor with no council experience). I have been a fan of Kim Krushell from her tenure of council from 2005-2013, particularly her standing up to the Kingsway Business Association (and all their money) and their dogged determination to keep the municipal airport open.
She had my vote until former Trudeau cabinet minister Amarjeet Sohi announced his candidacy four months later. I like Sohi; prior to his council term, he was a city bus driver, and this working-class perspective is often left out of elected office. And his name recognition gives him a serious edge over Krushell, out of the public eye for almost a decade now. - in fact, a Leger poll in late July gave Sohi a significant lead, but at that time, 43% of those polled were undecided.
A friend in the know also tells me that a private poll now shows Nickel ahead of Sohi.
So these are the horns of the dilemma on which I find myself - if my primary goal in this election is to keep the least desirable candidate imaginable out of the mayor's seat, do I:
i) vote my heart and hope many others do the same, risking splitting the vote and giving Nickel an easier path to victory, or
ii) vote strategically for the early frontrunner since I feel they would also be a good mayor?
My optimism is struggling to overcome my pragmatism, and more than anything else, I dearly wish we had preferential balloting for municipal elections.
As it sits, please feel free to share your opinions about my decision either in the comments or with me directly; at least the election isn't until October 18 so I have time to decide, if not a methodology for doing so!
No comments:
Post a Comment