Quote:
Originally Posted by Crisis
I'm also surprised that that poll results are that close. When he first announced his candidacy, I thought that Tom Wolf was going to be a very strong contender, based mainly on being able to garner support from the younger portion of the population concerned primarily about environmental and social issues. During the campaign, his platform hasn't seemed to particularly highlight these items. Wolf instead has been focusing largely on infrastructure, same as Atch, but stating that Atch has done a poor job on infrastructure and that, if elected, he would do better. I honestly expected to see much more of a distinction between these two candidates.
As for Clay Mazurkewich, he seems to be half asleep most of the time when I see him in election coverage.
|
Pretty much all of the candidates you would expect to support more urban developments and the types of things this forum preaches stuck to the traditional narratives: more money for crumbling roads, a new north bridge, and maybe money for a new school. Sean Shaw in particular moved away from his more progressive positions during the race to focus on issues that matter to most of his constituents. Sadly, it didn't pay off - Troy Davies took ward 4. That has to hurt Shaw considering he's practically been campaigning the past 3 years, attends council meetings to live tweet, and is possibly more engaged in civic politics than some of our elected councillors. Maybe the dude just isn't cut out for politics. Or maybe he's like Diefenbaker and he will fail and fail and fail until suddenly failing upwards and getting elected.
Fairly dismal results, though. Anything less than 50% turnout is embarassing. However, this may suggest there aren't as many single issue roads/art gallery voters as I thought there were. Or they're just too lazy to walk, er, drive to the polls.