jeff316
Active Member
Yeah, Royson has never been a lefty. He's more of an urban centrist that can tilt a little past the centre in either direction now and again. You can find him hitching rides on both the St Clair streetcar and the gravy train.
Royson fancies himself a bit of an institution at city hall - he was tight with Mel, supportive of his accomplishments but light on his flaws, and had a lot of access to Lastman. During the majority of the 2003 campaign, Royson was tepid on Miller. But Royson was very angry when, after endorsing Miller in the final days of the 2003 mayor's race, Miller then subsequently ignored him. The reason he only flirted with Pitfield but openly endorsed Ford is that he knows you don't gain influence by promoting losing candidates.
The flip-flopping critique is small-minded and immature. I'm no Royson fan, but when the facts change most rational people change their minds. If he's willing to take the heat for perceiving to have made a mistake and is subsequently willing to change his opinion, all power to him.
Royson fancies himself a bit of an institution at city hall - he was tight with Mel, supportive of his accomplishments but light on his flaws, and had a lot of access to Lastman. During the majority of the 2003 campaign, Royson was tepid on Miller. But Royson was very angry when, after endorsing Miller in the final days of the 2003 mayor's race, Miller then subsequently ignored him. The reason he only flirted with Pitfield but openly endorsed Ford is that he knows you don't gain influence by promoting losing candidates.
The flip-flopping critique is small-minded and immature. I'm no Royson fan, but when the facts change most rational people change their minds. If he's willing to take the heat for perceiving to have made a mistake and is subsequently willing to change his opinion, all power to him.
Last edited: