News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6.1K     0 

ChazYEG said:
You did not present hard evidence, only speculative, and every time someone called you out on it, you deflected. As someone else pointed out, by your kind of logic, all Councilors are in conflict of interest at all times, since they have the power to vote in favour of things that can benefit them far more than the accusations you're making. I am more than willing to hear what you have to say, and even change my mind about her potential conflict of interest, if you present hard evidence, until then it's just a conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...
That is the right wing way, Make the comment then deflect and say do your own research.
 
Turnout is usually higher if there's a stronger anti-incumbency factor when it comes to a "change" election. Despite what a lot of people online said, this really wasn't a change election. Either the progressives rallied, and/or most people were apathetic. Infill and bike lane opposition didn't move the needle as much as their opponents thought it would, which is one of the pitfalls of being stuck in an echo chamber.

Even a 10x financial advantage didn't do much.

It helps a lot that Sohi took the sins of the previous council, and understood the political realities and resigned to being only there for one term and allowed someone else to take over the progressive coalition. Which Gondek didn't do, and got flamed for it as a result.

We're going to see more bike lane investment, stronger results from infill and substantial completion standard implementation (thank god).
 
Well a number of polls consistently said around 70% of people were not happy with the past council. I suspect many of of those people did not turn out to vote and more of the other 30% did. It was probably because many didn't feel some of the change candidates were so great either.

I agree, the previous mayor also did become the lighting rod for much of the discontent, his not running again changed the dynamic. I feel that decision caught some other candidates by surprise as they were expecting him to run again.
 
Edmcowboy11 said:
Well most of the time the rhetoric was simply, "kick em all out" but yet answer to who to put into their spaces.
Click to expand...
Well it was hard to claim being for change when the main mayoral challenger was also on council quite a while. A lot of people also did not like the idea of parties being imposed on them and the funding advantages given to them.
 
ChazYEG said:
You did not present hard evidence, only speculative, and every time someone called you out on it, you deflected. As someone else pointed out, by your kind of logic, all Councilors are in conflict of interest at all times, since they have the power to vote in favour of things that can benefit them far more than the accusations you're making. I am more than willing to hear what you have to say, and even change my mind about her potential conflict of interest, if you present hard evidence, until then it's just a conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...
I presented evidence but it didn't meet your threshold to be concerned about. I don't like any conflict of interest. We're different. All good mate.

I'm not right wing at all to the other two chiming in lol
 
Kosy123 said:
Turnout is usually higher if there's a stronger anti-incumbency factor when it comes to a "change" election. Despite what a lot of people online said, this really wasn't a change election. Either the progressives rallied, and/or most people were apathetic. Infill and bike lane opposition didn't move the needle as much as their opponents thought it would, which is one of the pitfalls of being stuck in an echo chamber.

Even a 10x financial advantage didn't do much.

It helps a lot that Sohi took the sins of the previous council, and understood the political realities and resigned to being only there for one term and allowed someone else to take over the progressive coalition. Which Gondek didn't do, and got flamed for it as a result.

We're going to see more bike lane investment, stronger results from infill and substantial completion standard implementation (thank god).
Click to expand...

Neighbourhood renewals should keep moving full steam ahead as well.

By the time our next council is elected, Edmonton, especially downtown, should feel quite different with about a dozen or so condo developments either completed or under construction, new lrt line opened, event centre, post secondary buildings and maybe a surprise or two.

The status of the High Level Bridge will be determined. Some Rossdale development perhaps and more.

Oh, and hopefully Stanley Cup parades.
 
Last edited:
David A said:
Well a number of polls consistently said around 70% of people were not happy with the past council. I suspect many of of those people did not turn out to vote and more of the other 30% did. It was probably because many didn't feel some of the change candidates were so great either.

I agree, the previous mayor also did become the lighting rod for much of the discontent, his not running again changed the dynamic. I feel that decision caught some other candidates by surprise as they were expecting him to run again.
Click to expand...
People can also say “I’m not happy” and then look at the candidates running and not like the options for new ones. I suspect that happens too.

Also, when given a chance to complain, people will complain a lot more than they’ll praise. The city can hit some stuff out of the park that someone cares about, but there’s always another thing they can point to and complain about.

You’d be hard pressed to find large cities in North America with more than 50% of people liking the current direction I’d imagine.
 
thommyjo said:
People can also say “I’m not happy” and then look at the candidates running and not like the options for new ones. I suspect that happens too.

Also, when given a chance to complain, people will complain a lot more than they’ll praise. The city can hit some stuff out of the park that someone cares about, but there’s always another thing they can point to and complain about.

You’d be hard pressed to find large cities in North America with more than 50% of people liking the current direction I’d imagine.
Click to expand...
Yes, you can't please everyone. If we were at 50%, I think that would probably be fairly good, the 70% dissatisfaction seems a bit high. So I feel our new council has some work to do and can make it a goal to improve some here.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top