Winnipeg North byelection: What happened? What now?

116 posts / 0 new
Last post
robbie_dee
Winnipeg North byelection: What happened? What now?

I thought this was supposed to be a safe NDP seat?!

Regions: 
KenS

Any time someone called it a safe NDP seat during discussions here, that was corrected.

It was unquestionably a seat the NDP should have won. But not a safe seat. I'm hard pressed to think of a seat anywhere, except maybe Vancouver East, that could be called a safe seat for the NDP if the incumbent has left. People can name a few others maybe, but there are few if any that are very unlikely to be lost when an MP steps down or if there is some tidal wave against the NDP, or whatever.

KenS

Here is what I alreadt said in the by-elections thread:

Lots of mitigating factors. But the NDP shouldnt even have let Lamoureux get close, let alone win.

And some of the motigating factors are organizational: the recent loss of Judy W-L, and Lamoureux's organizational depth.

But I still think this has to be chalked up as an organizational failure. Whatever lack there was locally could and should have been made up for by the party.

I dont begrudge Jack Layton's visits to Dauphin and the profile devoted to them. But the fact that there wasnt the same in Winnipeg perhaps speaks to a general underestimation of the needs there: that with Winnipeg in the bag they could afford to throw a lot into Dauphin.

That kind of second guessing is endemic. But you dont have to second guess the comparative allocation of resources to simply say that there may have been a fundamental error made in judging the WN race.

and...

Again on the organizational front:

There is a consistent pattern where the Liberals beat the NDP in places where NDP levels of support should prevent that.

Winnipeg North, Dartmouth-Cole Harbour, and Dartmouth East provincialy.

In all those cases you have not only strong NDP support, but in the area Liberal organizations that are generally weak. But if a Liberal candidate comes along who bucks that general organizational weakness, he can dislodge the NDP.

In the provincial election Andrew Younger beat the NDP incumbent despite a tidal wave sweeping the NDP to power. That was a classic case of excellent and well established personal organization up against the opposite.

In Winnipeg North, and Dartmouth-Cole Harbour when Mike Savage got in, the NDP organizations were not weak. But they were beat by organizations that were very good, and determined.

KenS

Not to mention that it looks like Lamoureux knew how to run a very good campaign, was determined, and pulled it off.

vaudree

Lamoureau is a former leader of the Provincial Liberals so he could be construed a high profile candidate.  Hopefully, we regain the seat at the next election.

Stockholm

was he ever leader of the Manitoba Liberals? I thought he ran for the leadership and lost to John Gerrard?

I also read that Lamoureux is quite "controversial" within Manitoba Liberal circles and there are reasons why they never let him have much profile outside his riding. It sounds like he is sort of a "Rob Ford minus the ultra rightwing ideology" and is a good ward-heeler who brags about phoning a thousand constituents a week and being a bit of ambulance chaser when it comes to looking for occasions to make cheap populist outbursts, but he doesn't know much about policy, and given that the Manitoba Liberals are basically now just a party of sherry-sippers in River Heights - Lamoureux is wayyy to trashy and uncouth to ever have been allowed to play a leadership role.

I have the following questions/observations:

1. Losing this seat is a blow to NDP morale in Winnipeg in the short-term - but realistically if there is a federal election in the Spring, there is a reasonable chance that we could win the seat back given a much higher turnout and the possibility of being lifted up by a strong national campaign. Also, there is little time for Lamoureux to establish himself as an incumbent if there is a general election soon and in a general election, people will be much more likely to feel that they are choosing between Jack Layton and Michael Ignatieff than between Lamoureux and Chief. Also, there is no way that Tory support will be a piddling 10% in that riding in a federal election - they could easily rebound to their traditional 20% or so.

2. Does Chief run again or failing that does Judy W-L make a comeback?

3. There will now be a provincial byelection in Inkster. Can the Manitoba Liberals win there with someone other than lamoureux running?

Lou Arab Lou Arab's picture

I think one lesson (and there are likely others) is that the Liberal brand is very durable and should never be underestimated.  Give the Liberals one element for success (in this case, a strong local candidate who knows how to win elections in hostile turf) and it can be enough to beat us in one of our strongest ridings across the country.

I know there are lots of examples across the country of Liberal vote being higher on election night than NDP campaigners thought it would be.  It's a powerful brand with a lot of latent (and blatent) support.

So in otherwords, the NDP can't sit back and rely on Ignatieff screwing things in order to make gains in the next election. Not that I think the NDP is doing that as an institution, but those of us in the trenches need to guard against complacency.

 

Stockholm

Generally I agree with your point - but the "Liberal brand" has never been particularly strong in Manitoba - if it was that strong - you wouldn't have had the generic Liberal candidate winning 8% of the vote in that riding in the '08 election. Lamoureux probably could have won a very big chunk of votes just running as an independent.

Lou Arab Lou Arab's picture

No, I think there is some latent strength to the Liberal brand in almost all parts of Canada, Manitoba included. 

If you look at the electoral history in Winnipeg, voters have turned to the Liberals from time to time.  Under Sharon Carstairs, the Liberals won a pile of seats when voters turned on Howard Pawley. When the NDP was nearly wiped out in 1993, Winnipeg North (and perhaps other MB seats?) went Liberal. And even when the Liberals haven't won - they generally have a pretty decent showing in parts of Winnipeg.

My point is that even where the NDP are strong, the Liberals are often a second choice for many NDP voters. In some cases, the Liberals may even be the first choice of NDP voters - but because the voter believes the NDP has the better chance of winning, has a stronger candidate, or some other reason - they cast an NDP ballot.

Liberals are resilient. They are difficult to slay. Give them any small advantage (like a strong local candidate a la Lamoureux) and their odds of winning increase.

Stockholm

Actually believe it or not Winnipeg North first went Liberal in 1988 when Rey Paghtakhan upset David Orlikow - and that was in the contest of the NDP having its best showing ever with 44 seats nationwide - so go figure.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Point of information: is Rey Paghtakan the only Filipino-Canadian ever elected as an MP?

Lord Palmerston

It's pretty clear Iggy-mania had nothing to do with it...but still, this is still not good for the NDP.  Certainly there are questions to be asked.  Did the NDP take this "safe seat" for granted?  And is it possible that anti-Native prejudice had a role?

Debater

Ken Burch wrote:

Point of information: is Rey Paghtakan the only Filipino-Canadian ever elected as an MP?

I'm not sure, but the discussion about Rey Paghtakan reminds me of an important point.  In 2004, the ridings in Winnipeg were re-drawn and it lead to an amalgamation in the Winnipeg North area whereby both RP and Judy W-L had to run against each other as 2 incumbent MP's, with Judy W-L prevailing.

Therefore, considering that the Liberals did occupy some of the riding until RP's defeat in 2004, it's understandable in retrospect that there is still some Liberal support in the area which lead to Kevin Lamoreux re-taking the riding for the Liberals.

Centrist

Lou Arab wrote:
When the NDP was nearly wiped out in 1993, Winnipeg North went Liberal.

Vancouver East, BC's safest NDP seat, also went Liberal in 1993. Granted both happenings occurred during general elections but nobody saw this coming.

 

Debater

Vancouver East was lost during the Liberal sweep of 1993 and during the NDP's worst election in history when it only won 9 seats.  It's not totally surprising in retrospect that it fell during that election.  It was won back in 1997 and will likely stay NDP for the foreseeable future until Libby Davies retires.  Libby is very popular and well-liked by her community.  I don't think it's in any danger to the Liberals until it becomes vacant and/or until Liberal support goes back up to majority levels.

Malcolm Malcolm's picture

I don't know if there was an organizational failure or not, since I had nothing to do with the campaign.  But that does need to be reviewed at the highest level by the federal and provincial NDP.  Figure out what went wrong and learn from it.

Debater

Stockholm wrote:

Does Chief run again or failing that does Judy W-L make a comeback?

Wouldn't it be pretty much unprecedented for an MP who quit their seat one year to then run again the following year to take it back?

If Judy W-L did that she would face a lot of criticism from her political opponents and the media, as well as by some members of the public.  It was her resignation that lead to the cost of a by-election in the first place, and she would need to have a good explanation as to why she was running for the seat again that she just gave up.

Paul Gross

There was once was an MP who quit their seat one month to then run again the following month to take it back. It was her resignation that led to the cost of a by-election in the first place, and I, for one, never understood her explanation as to why she was running for the seat again that she just gave up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamilton_East_%28electoral_district%29

jrootham

Sheila Copps did that so she could say she faced the electorate after flip flopping on the GST.

She had enough support that it was grandstanding.  It would have been more interesting if the entire party did it.

 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Well, there used to be the custom that, after a new Canadian prime minister picked his Cabinet, ALL the newly-appointed ministers resigned and fought by-elections in their ridings, thus giving the electorate, in theory, a chance to directly ratify the new government.

Anybody know when and why that practice was abandoned?

Scott Piatkowski Scott Piatkowski's picture

What happened? The Conservative vote collapsed and went Liberal.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Scott, you are in part right. But the other thing that happened in Winnipeg North last night is simply that NDP vote did not come out. Lameroux did not win the election last night, the NDP lost it.

I worked as a volunteer for Chief almost from the start of his campaign. I think it was a very strong campaign, but when you don't get out the vote, you lose. I can tell you that the bad weather really played significantly against the NDP. The NDP won more then 50% of the polls, but not by wide enough margins. If the vote had come out, Chief would have won. Lameroux's base came out in significant numbers. But he can't win the riding in a general when the likelihood of normal turnout is both not only likely, but very probable.

As for the General, Lamoureux doesn't have a chance.

2dawall

The Conservative candidate had a couple of big billboards but otherwise did not campaign and only gave one very brief media interview on a weekend broadcast. As previously stated, many NDP'ers stayed home, and Lameroux's pull with Sikh voting blocs paid off. Not likely to be repeated in a general election. Many Liberal party members will whisper stuff about him to other Liberal party members but not say anything public about him. He must have some serious skeletion in his closet because many in the local party will not talk to him. Just to the west side of the Osborne village, Liberal Senator Rod Zimmer and former Liberal MP, former Lt Governor John Harvard live right beside each other and they often have dueling faction Liberal party parties where certain people will go to Zimmer's house and others will go to the other, later event at Harvard's but they do not go to the each other 's vent (weird as the policy differences are pretty minute - Zimmer a Paul Martin Liberal, Harvard a Chretien Liberal); Lameroux will not get into either.

melovesproles

It isn't Iggymania, everyone still thinks he sucks but I think a tipping point has been reached which will work against the Cons and probably the NDP.  There is going to be a pretty clear ballot question-the fact is the only way we see any change in the next election is if Harper is defeated. 

Obviously this won't usher in an ultra-progressive Iggy government but it'll have some important effects on the political landscape and the framing of debate in this country.  Harper will step down and his party will start bickering again, the NDP will probably get new leadership as well and since they tend to be far more progressive when the Liberals are in power we might see them turn back into an effective opposition.  Layton's leadership and record was better when Martin was in power than during the Harper years.  The only issue the NDP currently has as an effective wedge against the Liberals is Afghanistan and they've become increasingly less effective at using it.  Ignatieff certainly could manage to fuck it all up but I think there has been a little improvement in his understanding of how to attack the Cons and really the bar isn't that high any more.

There's serious anxiety, a lot of it seems to exist outside of the mainstream babyboomer echo chamber, but it's there amongst the great undervoting demographics that the future of the country looks increasingly shaky and that there needs to be a political shift.  It's been slow to happen in Canada but I think the point has been reached, although our political class has an inspired ability to make people tune out completely from electoral politics.

adma

Debater wrote:
Wouldn't it be pretty much unprecedented for an MP who quit their seat one year to then run again the following year to take it back?

The PCs' Roch La Salle quit in 1981 to lead the provincial Union Nationale--upon losing, he ran for his federal seat again and won...

jas

I don't think W-L has any intention to do that. Why is there this speculation?

Unionist

Maybe because she's out of a job?

jas

Maybe. Maybe she has other things to do, too.

Debater

As some journalists pointed out today, one of the ironies of last night's results was that a few days ago Jack Layton and Brad Lavigne had said that these by-elections would send an important message to the parties and that whoever lost a by-election would have trouble building momentum before the Spring.

NorthReport

Some people show class when their opponents lose, and then there are Liberals. 

Debater

adma wrote:

Debater wrote:
Wouldn't it be pretty much unprecedented for an MP who quit their seat one year to then run again the following year to take it back?

The PCs' Roch La Salle quit in 1981 to lead the provincial Union Nationale--upon losing, he ran for his federal seat again and won...

Thanks for the info.

It looks like the examples of it happening are pretty few and far between over the years.

KenS

NorthReport wrote:

Some people show class when their opponents lose, and then there are Liberals. 

You should read what you write.

And if you dont see the irony, keep reading.

Stockholm

This blogger has a really good interpretation of the byelection spin

http://tcnorris.blogspot.com/2010/11/by-election-post-mortem.html

"A small lesson from history.  In the autumn of 1978 Prime Minister Trudeau deferred a federal election call and instead fifteen by-elections were held on October 16. Some called it a mini-general election at the time.  It was a low point in Liberal popularity and the outcome was a Liberal disaster. While the results did tell us the Trudeau government would lose the next election, at the time it appeared as if the outcome would be an unprecedented Liberal disaster on the order of a 1958.  Instead, Joe Clark's PC's won a minority that lasted less than a year before giving way again to the Trudeau Liberals. Less well-remembered is that two of the constituencies that switched from Liberal to PC that night in October 1978, one in Winnipeg (St. Boniface) and one in Toronto (Parkdale), went back to the Liberals just six months later in the 1979 general election.

By-elections in particular can be influenced by local circumstances and events as well as broader trends. One should be cautious in drawing overly broad conclusions from them."

EDIT - actually I checked and FOUR of the ridings the Tories won in byelections in 1978 went back to the Liberals six months later - the blogger forgot Eglinton and Ottawa Centre.

Debater

From the previous thread:

edmundoconnor wrote:

Debater wrote:

I'd say the significance of Lamoreux's election is that it gives the Liberals a much-needed extra MP on the Prairies.  

Manitoba/Saskatchewan only has 2 Liberal MP's between them - Anita Neville and Ralph Goodale.  The Liberal performance in that region has been very poor in the past several federal elections and if they are going re-build in that area a 3rd MP could be a help. 

That news comes in a slightly downbeat manner. D-SR-M is a much more likely indicator of how the Liberals will do on the prairies outside of Winnipeg come the next federal election. Sarna struggled to remain in double-digits all evening, and it`s hard not to see even more Liberal votes drifting to the NDP next election. D-SR-M was never going to be likely for the NDP, but now the party has emerged as the clear opposition to the Tories. This can only mean good things next time around.

Actually, when I suggested the possibility of the Liberals picking up new seats in Manitoba next time I wasn't referring to Dauphin or the other rural ridings - I was only thinking of the Winnipeg and urban ridings that the Liberals have held in recent years such as Saint Boniface and Winnipeg South.

I agree that for the immediate future the NDP will be the main opposition to the Conservatives in the rural ridings, and hopefully the NDP will be able to defeat the Conservatives there down the road.  Before the Liberals can even begin to be competitive in places outside the Winnipeg region they would have to be much higher in the polls and beat the Conservatives by becoming the next government.

Stockholm

I have to agree. While Lamoureux is a unique situation in many ways - since he wins by running as a virtual independent - I think that the Tory vote crashing to 10% in Winnipeg North ought to be a sign that other marginal seats in Winnipeg like the ones you mention could be at risk.

Debater

In order for the Liberals to carry through with picking up other seats they will have to learn the lessons from this campaign though.  That means having strong local campaigns and well-known names who are able to get out the vote and take advantage over their opponents.

Former MP Raymond Simard is running again in Saint Boniface.  Not sure who the Liberal in Winnipeg South is yet.  Kildonan-St. Paul is also something the Liberals should think about for the future, and they should also do some rebuilding in Winnipeg Centre.

I don't see many opportunities next door in Saskatchewan for the Liberals for awhile, but there are 1 or 2 for the NDP if the Conservative vote drops in the next election.

Aristotleded24

Debater wrote:
Not sure who the Liberal in Winnipeg South is yet.

[url=http://terryduguid.liberal.ca/]Terry Duguid[/url]

Debater

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Debater wrote:
Not sure who the Liberal in Winnipeg South is yet.

[url=http://terryduguid.liberal.ca/]Terry Duguid[/url]

Thanks for the info.  I think he ran in Kildonan-St.Paul a couple of times and almost won.  I guess now he's moved over to Winnipeg South.

As I've said in the past, all parties are guilty of having candidates who play musical chairs.

Stockholm

"Former MP Raymond Simard is running again in Saint Boniface."

If that's the case, I'm not optimistic about their chances. I heard that Simard was widely regarded as lazy and low profile and he lost last time because he refused to do any campaigning.

Debater

Stockholm wrote:

"Former MP Raymond Simard is running again in Saint Boniface."

If that's the case, I'm not optimistic about their chances. I heard that Simard was widely regarded as lazy and low profile and he lost last time because he refused to do any campaigning.

He's not my favorite person either.  Too socially conservative as well.

Policywonk

Stockholm wrote:

EDIT - actually I checked and FOUR of the ridings the Tories won in byelections in 1978 went back to the Liberals six months later - the blogger forgot Eglington and Ottawa Centre.

The 1978 byelection was the last time Eglinton was contested. Eglinton-Lawrence is the closest approximation, given redistribution.

David Young

A quick question to rabblers...

Does anyone recall the parliamentary careers of Liberal M.P.s Christian Jobin (LEVIS-et-CHUTE-de la CHAUDIERE) or Gilbert Barrette (TEMISCAMINGUE), who were elected to Parliament in by-elections on June 26, 2003?

I didn't think so.

Why?

Because they were both defeated in the election of June 28, 2004, and haven't been seen around Ottawa again.

Kevin Lamoureux will be another parliamentary foot-note (trivia question?) after the next federal election.

 

adma

I'm sure someone, somewhere has invoked "Sorry about that, Chief"

adma

duplicate

Aristotleded24

David Young wrote:
Kevin Lamoureux will be another parliamentary foot-note (trivia question?) after the next federal election.

I live in Winnipeg, and I would not count on that. Here's why:

Lameroux now has the advantage of incumbency. It is easier to hold a seat than to challenge for one.

Lameroux is a formidable campaigner and has a solid backing behind him.

The NDP in Manitoba is a mess. People are starting to feel it's "time for a change," and this is the second election in as many months (the other being the recent civic election) that the NDP machinery lost when it should have won.

If we're going to talk NDP in Manitoba, I would not be surprised if after the next federal election no NDP MPs are elected from Winnipeg. I've already discussed Lameroux. Pat Martin has alienated some people, and a strong challenge from the Liberals could knock him off, especially if this challenge combines with another candidate challenging Martin from the left. Over in Elmwood, Jim Maloway has not really distinguished himself in any great way, and the Conservatives came close to taking the seat last go around. He clearly relies on the NDP machinery to win, and that machinery may not be enough to hold off a Conservative challenge, especially when traditional voting patterns can no longer be relied upon.

autoworker autoworker's picture

Paul Gross wrote:

There was once was an MP who quit their seat one month to then run again the following month to take it back. It was her resignation that led to the cost of a by-election in the first place, and I, for one, never understood her explanation as to why she was running for the seat again that she just gave up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamilton_East_%28electoral_district%29

In 1996, Sheila Copps promised to resign her seat if the Liberals didn't scrap the GST.  She kept her promise, and won the by-election.

Stockholm

Aristotleded24 wrote:

I live in Winnipeg, and I would not count on that. Here's why:

Lameroux now has the advantage of incumbency. It is easier to hold a seat than to challenge for one.

Lameroux is a formidable campaigner and has a solid backing behind him.

The NDP in Manitoba is a mess. People are starting to feel it's "time for a change," and this is the second election in as many months (the other being the recent civic election) that the NDP machinery lost when it should have won.

I'm not sure about all that.

*First of all three months (i.e. the likely amount of time between now and the next federal election) is very little time to establish much of an incumbency factor.

*Second of all, in a byelection its easy to totally localize the race and have the 29% of people who vote see it as being all about "who will be my best ward-heeler" and to even think that its all about provincial politics. But in the context of a federal election - suddenly 95% of people are voting based on national leaders and national politics and a vote for Lamoureux will be a vote for Ignatieff and a vote for Chief will be a vote for Layton and a vote for the next Tory sacrificial lamb will be a vote for Harper.

*Third of all, after a 35 day (or more) federal election campaign - I think that provincial politics will totally recede from peoples' minds and it will be all federal all the time. In any case, if the Manitoba NDP were to lose the provincial ridings that make up Winnipeg North - it would mean that they were going to be reduced to ZERO seats in the Manitoba legislature. I have not seen any evidence that they are even remotely that unpopular - at worst they might be one or two points behind the Tories across the province).

*Fourth of all, since when was the Winnipeg municipal election one that the NDP "should have won"?? Did they have a shot - yes. But from what I can tell, Katz was not all especially unpopular, polls taken over the course of the year gave him relatively healthy approval ratings. I don't live in Winnipeg, but from what i had read and heard - it seemed to me that defeating Katz was always going to be a bit of a longshot and if anything Judy W-L came closer to winning than I would have expected.

All of which is to say that while I don't think its a "slam dunk" by any means that the NDP wins back WN in the next federal election - Its also not unlikely they will win it back. Byelections that have a massive swing almost always correct themselves at least to some extent in the following election - Mulcair won Outremont by 17% in the byelection and that was cut to a 6% margin the the '08 federal election - even though the Liberal running in '08 was literally just a "NOB" (Name on the Ballot). But there (or was) is a lot of "Liberal DNA" in Outremont and it asserted itself. There is a lot of "NDP DNA" in Winnipeg North and since the margin there was 5% not 17% - it wouldn't take much of a "return to normalcy" to have the seat swing right back.

Aristotleded24

Stockholm wrote:
*Fourth of all, since when was the Winnipeg municipal election one that the NDP "should have won"?? Did they have a shot - yes. But from what I can tell, Katz was not all especially unpopular, polls taken over the course of the year gave him relatively healthy approval ratings. I don't live in Winnipeg, but from what i had read and heard - it seemed to me that defeating Katz was always going to be a bit of a longshot and if anything Judy W-L came closer to winning than I would have expected.

You're righ, you don't live in Winnipeg. Katz has been a terrible mayor. Look 2 hours down the road to Brandon, and while people weren't exactly happy with Burgess, he wasn't nearly as bad as Katz. And the right-wing Burgess lost the mayor's race to a left-wing woman, and Brandon is a dyed-in-the-wool Tory town. So a Tory town elects a left mayor and social democratic Winnipeg re-elects a right-winger.

Not only that, but the NDP's council strategy was terrible, and there wasn't a change in the balance.

Debater

David Young wrote:

A quick question to rabblers...

Does anyone recall the parliamentary careers of Liberal M.P.s Christian Jobin (LEVIS-et-CHUTE-de la CHAUDIERE) or Gilbert Barrette (TEMISCAMINGUE), who were elected to Parliament in by-elections on June 26, 2003?

I didn't think so.

Why?

Because they were both defeated in the election of June 28, 2004, and haven't been seen around Ottawa again.

You do realize that the Sponsorship Scandal happened in between those 2 dates, right?

Stockholm

Aristotleded24 wrote:

You're righ, you don't live in Winnipeg. Katz has been a terrible mayor.

Its all a matter of opinion. If you are right of centre person who votes Conservative or (often times Liberal) you probably think he's been a fantastic mayor! I'm sure you think he has been a terrible mayor and I'm sure people in the leftwing/NDP/union sub-culture think he's terrible and i'm sure if i lived in Wpg, I'd think he was terrible. But obviously the majority like him - or they wouldn't have re-elected him. If he was so indisputably terrible why would over half of people in Winnipeg have said that they approved of him in polls taken all year?

Since when is Brandon such a "dyed in the wool" Tory town? There are two provincial seats that make up Brandon. Brandon East has been NDP since 1969 - it even stayed NDP in the wipeout of 1987 and Brandon West has gone NDP off and on and only went Tory by something like 50 votes last election.

 

Aristotleded24

Stockholm wrote:
Aristotleded24 wrote:
You're righ, you don't live in Winnipeg. Katz has been a terrible mayor.
Its all a matter of opinion. If you are right of centre person who votes Conservative or (often times Liberal) you probably think he's been a fantastic mayor! I'm sure you think he has been a terrible mayor and I'm sure people in the leftwing/NDP/union sub-culture think he's terrible and i'm sure if i lived in Wpg, I'd think he was terrible. But obviously the majority like him - or they wouldn't have re-elected him. If he was so indisputably terrible why would over half of people in Winnipeg have said that they approved of him in polls taken all year?

It's not just a left-right thing, he has even made horrible business decisions. How can you do business with someone who says he is going to build Rapid Transit to the University of Manitoba and then doesn't build it? Or some of the questions around a council decision regarding the Winnipeg Goldeyes, which he owns? Even PC Bill Norrie came out for Judy, what does that tell you?

As for those polls, what do you expect? People generally don't pay attention anyways, so of course they're going to say, "Sam Katz? Yeah, he's doing a great job." The other thing is that the Judy campaign did not adequately rise up to the challenge of explaining what she would do. People were looking for change, but being unsure what kind of change Judy would bring, reluctantly went with the devil they knew.

Stockholm wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

You're righ, you don't live in Winnipeg. Katz has been a terrible mayor.

Since when is Brandon such a "dyed in the wool" Tory town? There are two provincial seats that make up Brandon. Brandon East has been NDP since 1969 - it even stayed NDP in the wipeout of 1987 and Brandon West has gone NDP off and on and only went Tory by something like 50 votes last election.

For one, look at federal voting habits. It's consistently returned a Tory MP since WWII (often with a large majority), with the exception of 1993 when it went to the Liberals on a right-wing vote split.

Brandon-West has swung NDP in the past, but has a reliable Tory base that will come out loyally.

Municipally, it has elected right-wing mayors for a long time, certainly at least since 1979.

Pages

Topic locked