How Mark Sutcliffe rode the bike lanes issue to his stunning election victory
The longtime broadcaster and successful entrepreneur pounced on perhaps the biggest strategic error of the mayoral campaign
Andrew Duffy, Jacquie Miller, Ottawa Citizen
Oct 26, 2022 • 35 minutes ago • 7 minute read
Consider the challenge that confronted Mark Sutcliffe when he toed the starting line of the mayoral race in late June.
Having never before mounted an election campaign, the political novice had to build the operational side of his team and develop a full policy platform – all while marketing himself to more than 700,000 voters in 24 municipal wards.
He had less than four months to do it. And to win, he had to overcome the popularity and expertise of two-term councillor Catherine McKenney, one of the few civic heroes to emerge from the leadership vacuum amid the “freedom convoy” truckers’ occupation of downtown Ottawa.
McKenney enjoyed a substantial lead, according to early public opinion polls. A Mainstreet Research poll conducted July 23-24 found McKenney had 34 per cent support among decided voters with Sutcliffe well behind at 14 per cent.
Yet, on election night, Sutcliffe cruised to victory with majority (51.4 per cent) support, according to the unofficial results. McKenney finished second with 37.9 per cent of the vote.
“I would hazard to say it was a slow-moving, crushing victory,” said Nik Nanos, founder and chairman of Ottawa’s Nanos Research. “It’s a definitive win for Mark Sutcliffe. Now he has a strong mandate to be the mayor and to help shape the policies coming out of city hall.”
So how did Sutcliffe do it in four months flat?
A longtime broadcaster and successful entrepreneur, Sutcliffe was a somewhat reluctant entry into the mayoral contest. He did not announce his candidacy until June 29 when he told supporters at Brookshire Park in Kanata that he was running for mayor to improve the city’s safety, transit and affordability.
His decision to make that announcement in Kanata, rather than near his home in Wellington Village, spoke to a critical element of his campaign strategy: win the suburbs.
“I want to make sure every part of this city is represented,” Sutcliffe said at his launch event. “I care a lot about the people of Kanata and the people in the suburbs and the rural areas of this city, as well as the urban area.”
His chief rival, McKenney, represented the downtown ward of Somerset West. An experienced, active city councillor, McKenney’s public profile was heightened by their forceful defence of beleaguered residents during the truckers’ occupation. Of all the progressive voices on city council, McKenney now had a powerful political base on which to build a mayoral campaign.
When the traditional NDP vote is combined with those voters who simply want change, it can deliver a progressive candidate between 20 and 30 per cent of the vote, according to a former member of Mayor Jim Watson’s past campaign teams. It meant, the strategist said, McKenney needed only to broaden their appeal to middle-of-the road voters to all but assure themselves of victory.
Sutcliffe, meanwhile, had to win decisively in the suburbs and rural areas to have any chance. He would get there on a bicycle.
Curiously, for someone whose public image is so closely knitted to marathons and fitness, Sutcliffe seized on the issue of bike lanes to define both McKenney’s brand and his own.
Sutcliffe called McKenney’s bike lane proposal – to collapse 25 years’ worth of bike lane construction into a four-year, $250 million investment – impractical and divisive. As mayor, he said, he would not favour bikes over cars.
“He used the cycling issue to define McKenney as a downtown, single-issue candidate, and not the candidate for everyone,” said Nanos. “What was important for the Sutcliffe campaign was not fighting that on a policy basis, but using it to define his opponent as narrowly focused on cycling and downtown.”
Nanos called McKenney’s bike policy the biggest strategic error of the campaign. “McKenney was very passionate about that issue, but it just did not resonate with voters.”
The policy didn’t sell in the suburbs, says Jerald Sabin, assistant professor at Carleton University’s School of Public Policy and Administration, which allowed Sutcliffe to position himself as someone who would serve the whole city, while not departing radically from the direction of Mayor Jim Watson.
“Ottawa is a very centrist city,” Sabin said.
Sutcliffe’s path to victory also depended on making the contest a two-person race. He could not afford to allow former mayor Bob Chiarelli to bleed votes from him in what was expected to be a close contest, and so Sutcliffe set about framing the election as a “clear choice” between McKenney and himself.
Early in his campaign, Sutcliffe focused criticism on McKenney to reinforce the idea that the election was about their competing visions. Many of his early news releases focused on McKenney’s policies rather than his own platform.
McKenney was drawn into the fight, and it left Chiarelli on the sidelines.
The strategy paid dividends for Sutcliffe on election day as Chiarelli’s support disintegrated: He garnered just 5.1 per cent of the vote.
For their part, McKenney sought to brand Sutcliffe as a developer-friendly candidate and a political neophyte unqualified for the job of mayor. McKenney sought to knit him to Jim Watson and the “old boys club” at city hall that they blamed for its dysfunction. Sutcliffe stood for the status quo, McKenney said, not change.
McKenney was aided by Horizon Ottawa, an activist group that landed one of the most significant tactical blows of the campaign against Sutcliffe when it accused him of hosting a “cash-for-access” fundraiser at a Lansdowne Park condominium – the same kind of event that he had criticized as a Citizen columnist. Attendees were invited to donate up to $1,200.
McKenney reinforced the perception that Sutcliffe was hiding his ties to developers by publishing a full list of major donors, and challenging other candidates to do the same.
The attacks served as an inflection point after which Sutcliffe became more pointed and personal in his attacks on McKenney. During a subsequent discussion with the Citizen’s editorial board, he branded McKenney “hard left” and their policies as “activist” and “expensive.”
The first two months of the campaign had been relatively quiet. Sutcliffe, because of his late entry, was still building his campaign machinery – a sign committee, a canvassing committee, a data team – and putting together an election platform.
“Time really wasn’t on his side,” said the former Watson campaign strategist.
But the Sutcliffe campaign hit its stride in September just as voters were tuning into the election following Labour Day.
His profile was bolstered by a punishing schedule of debates – seven in 10 days – that some regard as the campaign’s turning point. Sutcliffe performed well on stage and was able to deliver a digestible message to voters, in no small part thanks to his broadcast skills.
“I think those debates were a positive turning point for his campaign,” said the former Watson campaign official. “He’s just a really good communicator.”
In the debates, Sutcliffe marketed himself as a non-partisan centrist who could end the infighting at city hall and keep tax hikes to 2.5 per cent. He suggested McKenney’s left-wing agenda would cost taxpayers dearly, particularly the bike lanes and fare free transit for young people.
McKenney countered those charges – and sought to appeal to fiscal conservatives – by announcing they would cap budget increases at 3 per cent. McKenney also vowed to take the city in a progressive direction with no cuts to city services, a fight against climate change and an end to chronic homelessness.
A key part of any campaign strategy is the selection of key words and phrases to explain and define a candidate.
McKenney used the word “bold” to describe their platform, while Sutcliffe leaned on the word “balanced.” McKenney promised a “world class city” that was “vibrant, green, healthy and connected,” while Sutcliffe’s motto was “safe, reliable and affordable.”
Sutcliffe tore a page from “the Jim Watson playbook,” said Luc Turgeon, an associate professor in political science at the University of Ottawa.” “He focused on issues that would have attraction for middle class homeowners: limited tax increases and incremental change when it comes to infrastructure.”
In early October, a Nanos poll for CTV News found that Sutcliffe had closed the gap on McKenney. The poll showed five percentage points separated McKenney (29 per cent) from Sutcliffe (24 per cent) with a sizable number of voters (35 per cent) still undecided.
The poll suggested the McKenney campaign had not been able to grow its base or expand its support into the suburbs. It also pointed to the coalition that would ultimately put Sutcliffe over top – the older, suburban, small-c conservative voters who tended to get themselves to polling stations on election day.
“Voters think of these choices in terms of risk,” Nanos said. “I think Mark Sutcliffe looked like the less risky choice.”
In the final two weeks of the campaign, McKenney launched more aggressive attacks on Sutcliffe, in an effort to reverse the trend. But it was too late.
The candidates’ images had already been cast in voters’ minds: McKenney was the candidate for cyclists. And Sutcliffe would ride off to a new job a city hall.
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...ection-victory
Prev
Linear Mode
