There are currently 4 candidates for city councillor in my ward: the incumbent and 3 challengers.
The incumbent has the expected online presence. But I can't find any trace of any of the 3 challengers. I've googled with multiple combinations of keywords, I've searched social media, I've looked up possible matches on LinkedIn (multiple possibilities for each name, none of whom say they are running for city councillor). Even the City of Toronto elections website that lists all the candidates for each ward doesn't have any contact information for them - not even an office phone number, just their name and ward number. None of the organizations and media outlets that send questionnaires to each candidate have gotten responses from any of the challengers (if they were in fact able to get in touch with the challengers). None of the organizations that endorse candidates have endorsed in my ward. I not only find no evidence of any of the challengers running a campaign, I find no evidence that anyone else has been able to get in touch with the challengers in their capacity as candidates.
If this situation persists, I'm left with a dilemma: should I vote for the incumbent, or for no one?
The incumbent's record is decent enough that I don't see a reason to try to unseat him, but it's quite plausible that there could be another candidate who aligns more closely with my views. (There was in the last election.) It's also quite plausible that none of the other candidates would align as closely with my views. It all depends on what the other candidates' platforms are.
I don't think that simply showing up should be enough to win my vote. Earlier in the race, the incumbent was the only council candidate for the ward. I googled around the question of whether we'd still vote for councillor if there's only one candidate (wasn't able to find out conclusively), and decided during this process that I wouldn't vote for a candidate running unopposed. I'd be okay with them winning, of course, but I wouldn't give them a vote just for being the only one there.
So, on one hand, I feel like I similarly shouldn't give a candidate my vote just for being the only one visible. But, on the other hand, they've clearly run the best campaign. But, on the other other hand, what if they're not actually the best candidate? But, on the other other other hand, how would I ever know?
Things They Should Study: why do people get themselves put on the ballot but not run a campaign?
6 comments:
Could it be the others are trying to run campaigns but don't have the funds or the know-how to go about it?
It's interesting to hear that this situation exists in Toronto! We have a similar situation in Mississauga. In many wards, only the incumbent is visible. I thought it was peculiar to the suburbs, where political engagement is notoriously low. But apparently not.
I agree that simply showing up and having name-recognition should not be enough to earn your vote.
One thing that would be useful would be to circulate this post with an identifying ward number. You could also send an edited version to The Star as a letter to the editor. I think it would be published, and you might get a response with more information.
There's an idea! I think I'll make them their own post for higher googleability.
could it be that your local regs require a certain number of on-ballot candidates, and just pulled three names from the hat? Or--and more chilling--could your incumbent want to be reelected so badly that he or she--or their publicity staff-- just made up some names and pretended they were real...?
yes, yes, I know. But it does make you wonder how they got there in the first place. And why--
Invisible candidates have aren't unusual. (I blogged about one in the previous municipal election.) Weird, definitely, but not unusual. I've just never had a full slate of invisible non-incumbent candidates before!
Nothing online; however, check out the Rogers 10 debate on rogerstv.com. if you aren't a Rogers customer, I'm afraid you'll need to seek it out some other way.
It's quite entertaining BTW. Josh is your only hope.
The debate to which Anonymous refers is available here. I haven't watched it yet because it's an hour long, but there seem to be only three candidates there - Mr. Khan, Mr. Matlow and Mr. Murphy - so Mr. O'Shaughnessy is still a mystery.
Post a Comment