City of Victoria | 2022 municipal election + REGIONAL election night discussion/results

The bigger issue is not a business candidate but the lack of organization and effort.   Whatever people think of Lisa Helps, in 2014 and 2018 she campaigned harder than all the opposition combined.

Indeed. Anger and/or want for change only drives so many people. I'd love to see the details on the canvass teams for Helps, NewCouncil.ca and Together Victoria

Indeed. Anger and/or want for change only drives so many people. I'd love to see the details on the canvass teams for Helps, NewCouncil.ca and Together Victoria

I do not have the details but some reliable sources have informed me that both Lisa Helps and Together Victoria managed to canvass a significant portion of the single family homes in Victoria and tracked their supporters making sure they all had voted on election day.    

No one connected to NewCouncil has told me that they did anything close to this.  As one person said to me "We knocked on doors but did not track supporters, that is just too much work to do and we were not planning on getting out the vote on election day."

No one connected to NewCouncil has told me that they did anything close to this.  As one person said to me "We knocked on doors but did not track supporters, that is just too much work to do and we were not planning on getting out the vote on election day."

Wow. Things like NationBuilder are a must for this kind of stuff. And GOTV makes or breaks elections.

More people voted for change than voted to maintain the status quo, though.

Unfortunately for them their vote was split between three major contenders against the incumbent, one of whom was more than likely the reason for Hammond's upset. Not only did he take as many votes as Hammond needed to win, he also issued a press release suggesting Hammond was engaging in inappropriate behaviour but never produced a single shred of evidence. Was the damage done, though? It sure looks like it.

That individual was also the 'business' candidate. A perennial business candidate backer, VicPubCo/Matt McNeil, even allowed that candidate to place his advertising materials in the restroom of at least one of the organization's downtown pubs.

"Unfortunately for them their vote was split between three major contenders against the incumbent, one of whom was more than likely the reason for Hammond's upset."

I met a number of folks, not to mention comments on VV, who stated that they voted Geoghegan but had zero interest in voting for Hammond, and would have either not voted or voted Helps had he not been in the race.

As has already been noted in this thread, newcouncil.ca dropped the ball on a lot of things this election: they started too late, had terribly designed materials (did anyone catch their laughable attack leaflet on Isitt and TV?), and literally had no campaign outside of bike lanes are bad (with no concrete plan on what they were going to do about them) and no answer to the housing affordability crisis in our region. Blame Geoghegan at your own peril, he was not responsible for newcouncil's poor showing. 

^ How many people saw or knew about the Geoghegan claim, though?

The only - only! - place I ever heard about it was here on VV, which - from all I can tell - isn't exactly the most-seen supplier of news in town.  Never saw anything in the TC, for example. (that said, I don't do Facebook or the like, so if it appeared in there it might as well have appeared on the moon)

^ How many people saw or knew about the Geoghegan claim, though?

 

The only - only! - place I ever heard about it was here on VV, which - from all I can tell - isn't exactly the most-seen supplier of news in town.  Never saw anything in the TC, for example. (that said, I don't do Facebook or the like, so if it appeared in there it might as well have appeared on the moon)

It was all over FB/twitter/reddit etc as well as discussed on various radio shows, it got out there

The only - only! - place I ever heard about it was here on VV, which - from all I can tell - isn't exactly the most-seen supplier of news in town.  Never saw anything in the TC, for example. (that said, I don't do Facebook or the like, so if it appeared in there it might as well have appeared on the moon)

This is actually a big issue - different age groups now have very different views of the "news" - a lot of young people don't listen to talk radio or read the TC

This is actually a big issue - different age groups now have very different views of the "news" - a lot of young people don't listen to talk radio or read the TC

Yup there are many new mediums that require coverage...FB is for old folks (at least thats what my kids tell me!)

Lisa Helps may not have gotten 50%+1 fo the vote but her margin over Stephen Hammond was large enough that in a two-person race she would still have won.   to suggest that she only won because of a split vote is being willfully blind to reality.    To blame a third candidate for the loss of a candidate is simply avoiding the truth that Hammond did not campaign well enough to win.   This sort of thinking does not constructively improve the opposition to the mayor and make a win in 2022 likely against her successor.

Vote splitting is almost always a myth or an impact that is very small

Two factors come into play:

Every candidate causes some people to vote that would not have voted otherwise.   Something like 5% to 30% not voting is a reasonable assumption in most elections

No candidate's votes will ever flow 100% to another candidate - anything over 80% is unrealistic, there is more than enough data out there to clearly show this.  

So where does this leave us?

Let's do a very generous Hammond scenario using the best of all possible worlds -this is unrealistically optimistic for Hammond

The voters of candidates 5-10 (1,315 votes) I am assuming will drop to 1,200 votes evenly split Hammond and Helps

Bruce McGuigan - of his 2,377 I am assuming 2,200 would have voted and given his platform I give Helps the edge, 1,200 for 1,000 for Hammond

Mike Geoghegan - of his 4,335 votes, I am going to assume 4,200 would still have voted and I am going to give Hammond 3,360 and Helps 840

Based on this what we get is Helps at 15,282 and Hammond 13,677  she still wins by 1,605 votes   52.7% to 47.3%.   

.FB is for old folks (at least thats what my kids tell me!)

My wife tells me this too - she's a coach and all her kids are on instagram and whatsapp

Unfortunately for them their vote was split between three major contenders against the incumbent, one of whom was more than likely the reason for Hammond's upset. Not only did he take as many votes as Hammond needed to win, he also issued a press release suggesting Hammond was engaging in inappropriate behaviour but never produced a single shred of evidence. Was the damage done, though? It sure looks like it.

Most likely there will always be a Geoghegan. 

Multiple candidates are the norm in Victoria mayoral elections.

If a "business-friendly" candidate can only win when it is a perfect two horse race between them and the current Stalinist/SJW/Afflicter of Bike Lanes candidate that is tantamount to saying that a business candidate can never win in Victoria, which I don't believe.

[color=rgb(40,40,40)][font=helvetica]they literally had no campaign outside of bike lanes are bad (with no concrete plan on what they were going to do about them)

Most likely there will always be a Geoghegan. 

 

Multiple candidates are the norm in Victoria mayoral elections.

 

If a "business-friendly" candidate can only win when it is a perfect two horse race between them and the current Stalinist/SJW/Afflicter of Bike Lanes candidate that is tantamount to saying that a business candidate can never win in Victoria, which I don't believe.

A 'business-friendly" candidate can win if they do the hard work of campaigning.  This means meeting as many voters as possible - I would aim for shaking 20,000 hands, that is only 200 a day for 100 days, very doable.   I would want to ID 5000 to 8000 supporters and then make sure they all vote on election day, this means tracking who has voted and who has not.

Anyone running for mayor should expect to put the whole life on hold for 100 days.   Anything else and there is no point in running at all.

Everything Bernard says is true. I think supporters of a "business candidate" are better at writing cheques than organizing boots on the ground.

More people voted for change than voted to maintain the status quo, though.

Unfortunately for them their vote was split between three major contenders against the incumbent, one of whom was more than likely the reason for Hammond's upset. Not only did he take as many votes as Hammond needed to win, he also issued a press release suggesting Hammond was engaging in inappropriate behaviour but never produced a single shred of evidence. Was the damage done, though? It sure looks like it.

That individual was also the 'business' candidate. A perennial business candidate backer, VicPubCo/Matt McNeil, even allowed that candidate to place his advertising materials in the restroom of at least one of the organization's downtown pubs.

Last time around (i.e. 2014) VicPubCo backed Ida Chong, this after a long run of rumours and suggestions that Matt McNeill was himself going to run.

We know to stand a reasonable shot in 2022 we need a largely positive campaign that can effectively reflect on the weaknesses of the incumbents while mapping out a viable vision for Victoria in the years to come.  I don't think a purely "business" candidate is going to cut the mustard, unless they are palatable to a much broader cross section of voters.  I'm going to be blunt, but I've perceived an undercurrent of contempt for anyone that is perceived to be affluent.  I recall the accusations leveled at residents near Clover Point, many of which seemed to be - "you're rich suck it up."  For some reason academics seem to be more palatable than business owners in the current environment, despite the fact that academics are not particularly known for their pragmatism.  Things that work beautifully in theory can fail in spectacular ways when implemented in the real world.  

Ideally the future slate would have a current incumbent run for Mayor as part of the slate, but given the composition of council now, I don't really see that happening.  Of the current incumbents, I'd be inclined to see if Loveday would be willing to work with a pro-economic prosperity slate and run as mayor as he seems to be the most "middle of the road" with a fairly broad appeal and far less left leaning than many of the alternatives.  

We know to stand a reasonable shot in 2022 we need a largely positive campaign that can effectively reflect on the weaknesses of the incumbents while mapping out a viable vision for Victoria in the years to come. I don't think a purely "business" candidate is going to cut the mustard, unless they are palatable to a much broader cross section of voters. I'm going to be blunt, but I've perceived an undercurrent of contempt for anyone that is perceived to be affluent. I recall the accusations leveled at residents near Clover Point, many of which seemed to be - "you're rich suck it up." For some reason academics seem to be more palatable than business owners in the current environment, despite the fact that academics are not particularly known for their pragmatism. Things that work beautifully in theory can fail in spectacular ways when implemented in the real world.

Ideally the future slate would have a current incumbent run for Mayor as part of the slate, but given the composition of council now, I don't really see that happening. Of the current incumbents, I'd be inclined to see if Loveday would be willing to work with a pro-economic prosperity slate and run as mayor as he seems to be the most "middle of the road" with a fairly broad appeal and far less left leaning than many of the alternatives.