Winnipeg Mayoral Election 2018

[Ando]

Originally Posted by StNorberter

I think it's more of the "She came from the old school hard right reform political machine" Her husband once ran for the Canadian Alliance

Fair enough. What I meant is that right now she is supported by the federal provincial Conservative machine.

[Ando]

Originally Posted by cheswick

https://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/bowman-o...cers-1.4100595

Bowman is pledging to remove OT from officer pension calculations. Personally support this.

Yeah, it's a ridiculous practice that OT is now part of pension calculations.

[buzzg]

Jenny seems to be softening her stance on P&M now, perhaps trying to get some voters back.

“Just because I agree with the vast majority of Winnipeggers that we should not be allocating precious resources to re-opening Portage & Main does not mean I support leaving it in a “status quo” condition,” she said.

Source: https://winnipegsun.com/news/local-n...ion-owners-say

Originally Posted by cheswick

I see Jim Gauthier is a supporter since his dealerships have her sign up. One thing I've noticed over the years is that number of lawn signs present is a poor indication of election results.

I anecdotally think that it's actually an indication of the opposite – people supporting fringe or less-supported candidates who feel they need to help spread the word.

[Curmudgeon]

In terms of police efficiency, ie. number of officers per 100,000 population (so by extension, cost) compared with the overall crime rate, Winnipeg is the least efficient by far amongst major Canadian cities.

I think there has to be an honest discussion about this. The current spending levels and future obligations are completely unsustainable. Plus, what's really worrying as well is much of Winnipeg's infrastructure dates from the 50s and 60s and will soon need renewal and replacement.

[Wolf13]

So I've been absent a few weeks, any progress?????

Lol.

[Ando]

Bowman skillfully avoided debating Motaluk by insisting the Chamber of Commerce debate include all mayoral candidates, there are eight. So the debated was cancelled.

[cheswick]

Originally Posted by Ando

Bowman skillfully avoided debating Motaluk by insisting the Chamber of Commerce debate include all mayoral candidates, there are eight. So the debated was cancelled.

He's already participated in a debate with her and is scheduled for 7 other debates with her. Why does the Chamber of Commerce feel the need to decide who's a viable candidate and who is not? For the record they didn't invite David Sanders last time and he finished ahead of Paula Havixbeck whom they did invite.

[Ando]

Really, seven times with just her? Because he seemed be saying he wouldn't participate in an official debate without all mayoral candidates. The reason the Chamber would want it limited is because of the sheer numbers. Eight people doesn't allow for a focused debate and a number of those are fringe candidates. I'm not saying it is right or wrong but that's the reason.

[cheswick]

Originally Posted by Ando

Really, seven times with just her? Because he seemed be saying he wouldn't participate in an official debate without all mayoral candidates. The reason the Chamber would want it limited is because of the sheer numbers. Eight people doesn't allow for a focused debate and a number of those are fringe candidates. I'm not saying it is right or wrong but that's the reason.

No, he's scheduled to be in 7 debates, with all candidates, including her. The chamber had 5 candidates last go round, not sure that 8 is suddenly unwieldy. They can choose to format their debates however they choose and choose not to have 8 candidates or not have it at all. I personally have no issue with Bowman's stance on only debating all candidates. If the Chamber chooses not to have the debate at all then, that's on them not Bowman.

[Ando]

Totally agree.

[buzzg]

^Same.

[wardlow]

Originally Posted by cheswick

No, he's scheduled to be in 7 debates, with all candidates, including her. The chamber had 5 candidates last go round, not sure that 8 is suddenly unwieldy. They can choose to format their debates however they choose and choose not to have 8 candidates or not have it at all. I personally have no issue with Bowman's stance on only debating all candidates. If the Chamber chooses not to have the debate at all then, that's on them not Bowman.

In 2014, there were more clear credible candidates. If there were eight candidates the Chamber felt were credible, they'd invite all eight. I would imagine they want a serious discussion among serious candidates rather than to scratch the egos of the also-rans.

Maybe that's elitist. But I know that for myself, a grown-up citizen of this city, I want to hear from serious candidates more than I want to hear what amusingly odd thing Ed Ackerman said about chem-trails or whatever at a debate.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by wardlow

In 2014, there were more clear credible candidates. If there were eight candidates the Chamber felt were credible, they'd invite all eight. I would imagine they want a serious discussion among serious candidates rather than to scratch the egos of the also-rans.

Maybe that's elitist. But I know that for myself, a grown-up citizen of this city, I want to hear from serious candidates more than I want to hear what amusingly odd thing Ed Ackerman said about chem-trails or whatever at a debate.

Well put.

It would be nice if Bowman stopped scurrying away from everything like a cornered animal... P&M, mayoral debates, yeesh.

I mean, chances are I'm going to end up voting for him by default, but I wish he'd give me at least a few reasons not to hate myself for doing so.

[OTA in Winnipeg]

Originally Posted by esquire

Well put.

It would be nice if Bowman stopped scurrying away from everything like a cornered animal... P&M, mayoral debates, yeesh.

I mean, chances are I'm going to end up voting for him by default, but I wish he'd give me at least a few reasons not to hate myself for doing so.

He was on CBC Radio this morning talking about just that. Short but decent interview with Marcie Markusa.

[Danny D Oh]

Motkaluk now debating skipping any forums that aren't a 1-on-1 battle with Bowman.

Why does she think she deserves that? Why should I vote for someone who doesn't believe in democracy?

[roccerfeller]

Originally Posted by OTA in Winnipeg

He was on CBC Radio this morning talking about just that. Short but decent interview with Marcie Markusa.

Wouldn't mind listening to that - any idea if it's uploaded online? I did a quick search on CBC radio and couldn't find it. Do they tend to upload right away? or does it take them a while (24ish hours) to do so

Edit: https://www.cbc.ca/programguide/dail...=1538175722742
this was the schedule for the day...any idea what show it was? Cheers

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by Danny D Oh

Motkaluk now debating skipping any forums that aren't a 1-on-1 battle with Bowman.

Why does she think she deserves that? Why should I vote for someone who doesn't believe in democracy?

Regardless of belief, she honestly just seems to be a bit of a lunatic to me. Like doesn't make any sense and just spews incoherent nonsense. I'm baffled so many prominent people are supporting her, but it's clear their just anti-Bowman, many of them likely just for the fact he's not as "conservative" as when he entered office. It's just bizarre to me so many of the things he's being hated on for are things he was very clear in his platform on when elected (by a landslide).

[Ando]

Originally Posted by Danny D Oh

Motkaluk now debating skipping any forums that aren't a 1-on-1 battle with Bowman.

Why does she think she deserves that? Why should I vote for someone who doesn't believe in democracy?

That strategy is straight out of the Harper Conservative playbook. She’s being handled carefully.

[cllew]

Advanced voting starts on Monday I wonder if there is going to be a huge uptake in the advanced voting like there was during the last city election?

[Ando]

Advanced polling has shown a dramatic increase at pretty much every level - the convenience factor.