2014 Mayoral Election

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Re Fred

We know he supports LRT but perhaps, like so many others, he knows something we don't.

For me, the LRT fustercluck takes me back to my childhood. I always had plenty of toys: Matchbox cars, Star Wars figures, Lego, etc. But then this thing called Nintendo came along and the ante was raised considerably. I made noises about a potential purchase to gauge interest. None was forthcoming. Quite the opposite, really > My parents made it very clear that that shiny, grey box would not be appearing under the Christmas tree. I did not broach the subject again, nor did I whinge about it to my Nintendo-owning friends. It was done. Dead.

Lame analogy? Perhaps, but I believe that's what's going on here. The City has allowed the Province to waffle on the issue because they know it isn't happening. And hanging the Province out to dry would be bad politics for the City of Hamilton, not to mention those on Council looking to make a career out of politics. They're playing each other and the electorate until such time as the issue can be safely and officially removed from the table.

Hope I'm wrong.

[thistleclub]

Building off of a post of about a year ago, some rudimentary but revealing visualizations.

[mattgrande]

1. I'm surprised by the drop in Ward 2 between 2003 and 2010. I'm not surprised that there is a drop; just how big it is. I wonder what the 2014 numbers will look like?

2. Just a note on the last chart, I think you're trying to show that the suburbs are the largest area (and growing), but it's not too surprising when you're comparing five wards to three wards to six wards.

[thistleclub]

Originally Posted by mattgrande

2. Just a note on the last chart, I think you're trying to show that the suburbs are the largest area (and growing), but it's not too surprising when you're comparing five wards to three wards to six wards.

This was prompted by a question about what kind of electoral numbers were in the suburbs. I agree that various factors make it hard to be perfectly even-handed about things. In light of that, here's another perspective, weighing those three blocs in terms of a per-ward average:







Ward 2 cast 399 more votes in 2010 than in 2003, but the sharp decline in registered voters in the ward makes it look like a much more dramatic electoral engagement — jumping from 28% to just over 40% turnout — had taken place. If you set Ward 2's 2010 votes against 2003's registered voters, the ward's voter turnout drops to 29.5%. Do the same across the lower city and you get 33.4%, 25%, 31.7% and 37.3% turnout for wards 1, 3, 4 and 5 respectively. The situation is not aided by population loss, but that's an incomplete explanation for the dwindling pool of registered voters in the lower city:

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

How about if a lot of those undecideds are those who can't choose between Eisenberger and McHattie? Those two have a lot more in common and if it's between one of them and Clark, it's easier to decide that.

I don’t think most undecided voters are undecided because there’s so much to digest and they see multiple good candidates, but rather because they save their decision making (such as it is) for about five minutes before they leave for the polling station. I expect that Matt602 is right that many of these will go for Clark because his message is pithier and more easily understood.

For what it’s worth, most people I talk to about this (and most of them happen live in the suburbs) are almost completely disengaged, are aware that there is an election but cannot themselves remember the candidates’ names. They claim to be undecided and, when prompted, they either say that they will vote for Clark because they think he’ll do a good job, or for Eisenberger because they remember that they did a good job. I’m not hearing a lot of real rationale for either of these opinions when I hear them.

[thistleclub]

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

For what it’s worth, most people I talk to about this (and most of them happen live in the suburbs) are almost completely disengaged

Small crowds at People’s Platform events across Hamilton
(Flamborough Review, Kevin Werner, Sept 28, 2014)

The People’s Platform forums may have attracted about 150 people throughout the 15 locations across the city last weekend, but the attendance at a few suburban areas remained thin.

At the Orchard Park location in Ward 10, only 11 people showed up to discuss various topics, including a Ward 10 and school board trustee candidate. At the Valley Park Recreation Centre location, two people attended, and both were Ward 9 candidates, while at the Ancaster High location, seven people turned out, including three local council candidates and a school board trustee candidate.

“We are doing our best,” said Marie Lefort, who along with her husband Brian Ross, were the facilitators for the Ancaster forum. “There have been lots of ideas proposed.”

Altogether participants in all of the discussions included nearly 90 residents, 37 candidates for public office and 26 facilitators.

Read it in full here.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by thistleclub

The situation is not aided by population loss, but that's an incomplete explanation for the dwindling pool of registered voters in the lower city:

Has anyone tried to explain why the lower city's change in voter registrations was so large relative to population change?

The Voters' Guide notes that municipal voters lists are based on MPAC ownership and tenancy data, corrected by the city clerks. Perhaps greater turnover in residency pulled the numbers down because the data could not be updated fast enough?

I'm curious how the 2014 numbers will stack up.

[oldcoote]

The way to increase voter turnout is to rally them emotionally.

I recall the 2002 election was based on the RHVE, which divided the lower city (Christopherson) and the mountain/suburbs (DiIanni).

That might explain for the lower city voter drop since then.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by oldcoote

The way to increase voter turnout is to rally them emotionally.

I recall the 2002 election was based on the RHVE, which divided the lower city (Christopherson) and the mountain/suburbs (DiIanni).

That might explain for the lower city voter drop since then.

I suppose engagement on a big issue could entice people who weren't automatically registered to get themselves on the list.

But that's still a pretty big change in registrations for wards 1 to 5 - they decreased more than 17%, whereas votes cast declined by just over 5%.

[thistleclub]

Wide angle:



Via City of Hamilton:

Are you on the voters list?

The Preliminary List of Electors for the 2014 City of Hamilton Municipal Election is now available (as per the Municipal Elections Act, 1996). Confirm if you are on the Voter's List and find out where to vote during Advance Voting opportunities and on Election Day.

Am I On the Voters' List? Where Do I Vote?

I'm not on the Voters' list. How can I be added?
Visit City Hall or any Municipal Service Centre between September 2, 2014 and October 27, 2014 to complete an Application to Amend the Voters' List. Application forms will also be available at each polling station when you go to vote. You will need identification showing you are eligible to vote.

Questions?
As of September 2, 2014, please contact the City of Hamilton Election Office at (905) 546-4365, or the Customer Contact Centre at (905) 546-2489 for more information.

Advance polls open a week from today.

[thistleclub]

McHattie picks up four council supporters
(Hamilton Spectator, Andrew Dreschel, Oct 2 2014)

Councillor Brian McHattie's mayoral bid has picked up the support of four members of city council.

Jason Farr (Ward 2), Scott Duvall (Ward 7) Terry Whitehead (Ward 8), and Bob Morrow (Ward 3) are singing McHattie's praises in prepared statements.

In unveiling their remarks, McHattie suggests the approvals are not the same as endorsements, though any distinction is sure to be lost on most people.

"I didn't ask for endorsements, but I'm pleased to accept statements of support about my leadership from the people I work with every day," McHattie said in a release.

Morrow's support for McHattie comes on the heels of his rather confused endorsement this past weekend for Fred Eisenberger.

When Eisenberger's camp claimed Morrow was endorsing him, McHattie's people called it a misrepresentation.

In an interview today, Morrow tried to clarify the mixed messages.

He said his endorsement of Eisenberger means he's backing him and his policies for mayor, while his statement of support for McHattie is more of a personal expression of approval for their working relationship on council.

Read it in full here.

[thistleclub]

What's past is prologue.

Councillor positions on contentious issues (CATCH, Oct 18 2010)
Mayoralty candidates’ transit record (CATCH, Sept 22 2014)
Mayoralty candidates’ voting record (CATCH, Sept 29 2014)
Voting record of the mayoralty candidates (CATCH, Oct 6 2014)

[thistleclub]

Which mayoral candidate can keep council rowing together?
(Hamilton Spectator, Andrew Dreschel, Oct 3 2014)

Which of the mayoral frontrunners has a better chance of keeping Hamilton council united and pulling in the same direction?

That's a key issue for a city whose council has often been compared to a dysfunctional three-ring circus full of distracting infighting and backbiting.

True, that pattern changed during the last term of council which, despite some notable backsliding, was the most harmonious and, arguably, successful since amalgamation.

Its new co-operative spirit was largely spurred by a collective reaction to the image-bruising stadium debacle and a MIA Mayor Bob Bratina.

But who's best equipped to keep that amicable momentum going — former mayor Fred Eisenberger, Councillor Brad Clark or Councillor Brian McHattie?

To fully address the question you need to spool back the film and look at their track records.

Read it in full here.

[durandy]

None of them! McHattie and Clark are perennial lone wolves, while Eisenberger could never get unity on anything.

[thistleclub]

Mayoral candidates interview live at CBC Hamilton

Hamilton’s big three mayoral candidates will appear live, unedited and uncensored in the CBC Hamilton studio next week.

Brad Clark, Fred Eisenberger and Brian McHattie will appear for one-on-one interviews that we'll stream live. We’ll ask them about who they are and their stances on key Hamilton issues, and pose them a few questions from you, the viewers.

We’ll also have a chat window, so you can discuss what the candidates are saying.

Clark is a current Ward 9 councillor. Eisenberger was mayor from 2006 to 2010. McHattie is a Ward 1 councillor.

Here’s the schedule:

Brian McHattie: 12 noon, Wednesday, Oct. 8
Fred Eisenberger: 12 noon, Thursday, Oct. 9
Brad Clark: 12 noon, Friday, Oct. 10

Email your question for one of the candidates to [email protected] or tweet us at @CBCHamilton.

[thistleclub]

One more take on Hamilton’s lower-city electoral dynamic:

Pop’n Age 18+, 2011 / Registered Voters, 2010 / Votes Cast, 2010

Ward 1: 25,160 / 20,767 / 8,454 = 40.7% of registered voters, 33.6% of voting-age population
Ward 2: 33,485 / 19,424 / 7,842 = 40.4% of registered voters, 23.4% of voting-age population
Ward 3: 30,620 / 23,670 / 7,329 = 31.0% of registered voters, 23.9% of voting-age population
Ward 4: 35,430 / 23,721 / 8,420 = 35.5% of registered voters, 23.8% of voting-age population
Ward 5: 28,995 / 25,755 / 10,642 = 41.3% of registered voters, 36.7% of voting-age population

SOURCES: 2011 Census Profiles 2010 Municipal Election Results

As an earlier exercise on Raise the Hammer noted, "The ward totals are approximate; StatsCan data is broken down by Census Tract and they do not map exactly to our ward boundaries. As a result, a few CTs span two wards... In those cases, the CT has been assigned to the ward that contains the bulk of the CT." This primarily relates to muddiness along the border between wards 4 and 5, though a foible of tract alignment (CT 5370017.00) also means that a portion of south Durand (Queen to James, Aberdeen to Escarpment) is lumped in with the Ward 1 count. The upshot is that the latent voting-age population of Ward 1 is marginally lower and Ward 2 marginally higher than the above count suggests.

And here’s a quick and dirty read on the 2006 electoral cycle across lower-city wards, using a conservative estimate of the voting-age population (simply because of the convenient but chunky data samples in cited source material).

Population Age 20+, 2006 / Registered Voters, 2006 / Votes Cast, 2006

Ward 1: 24,180 / 21,215 / 8,149 = 38.4% of registered voters, 34% of ward population age 20+
Ward 2: 30,890 / 19,782 / 6,182 = 31.2% of registered voters, 20% of ward population age 20+
Ward 3: 29,855 / 23,913 / 6,368 = 26.6% of registered voters, 21% of ward population age 20+
Ward 4: 26,820 / 23,322 / 8,042 = 34.5% of registered voters, 30% of ward population age 20+
Ward 5: 29,605 / 24,937 / 9,444 = 37.9% of registered voters, 32% of ward population age 20+

SOURCES: City of Hamilton Ward Profiles (1/2/3/4/5) & 2006 Municipal Election Results

[SteelTown]

Seems like we're on track of gaining a few females councillors which is a good thing. Could see up to three new female councillors, ward 2, 9 and 13.

[matt602]

I doubt it in Ward 2, personally. Jason Farr is looking pretty likely to be re-elected, as far as I can see.

[SteelTown]

sorry meant ward 1

[HillStreetBlues]

Is that your call for Ward One? I’m curious, because I have been having a difficult time getting a read. Sign-wise, no one is way ahead (and I’m not so sure about that methodology, anyway…), and the few people I talk to who have decided, are all over the place.