[NicolBolas]

I think the only reason why Knack is in, was because of the absolute shit show the municipal election was.

I waited for 2 hours in line and had to leave before I voted because I had to be with the kiddos..

 

[UrbanEnjoyer]

I think the only reason why Knack is in, was because of the absolute shit show the municipal election was.

I waited for 2 hours in line and had to leave before I voted because I had to be with the kiddos..

It was a shit show for sure, but what are you suggesting? That 17,000 would be Cartmell voters all left preemptively because of the long lines? Lol

 

[Kosy123]

Yeah, it wasn't the long voting lines or the infill vote tbh. Cartmell and Better Edmonton arguably ran a shit campaign to the point where some candidates were openly criticizing and going against the party line on infill.

Which is even more embarrassing considering they had every advantage with them when this all started, with money, ads, the perception of a "change" election, and the fact he's been a mayor-in-running for the last few years anyway. Knack wasn't really a factor since a lot of people were expecting Sohi to pull a Gondek and run. He didn't, passed the progressive torch to someone else while taking all the unpopularity baggage with him, which was a good political move.

In the end, Knack consolidated the progressive vote behind him, like I mentioned was going to happen, and that carried him home.

 

[policyenthusiast]

Yeah, it wasn't the long voting lines or the infill vote tbh. Cartmell and Better Edmonton arguably ran a shit campaign to the point where some candidates were openly criticizing and going against the party line on infill.

Which is even more embarrassing considering they had every advantage with them when this all started, with money, ads, the perception of a "change" election, and the fact he's been a mayor-in-running for the last few years anyway. Knack wasn't really a factor since a lot of people were expecting Sohi to pull a Gondek and run. He didn't, passed the progressive torch to someone else while taking all the unpopularity baggage with him, which was a good political move.

In the end, Knack consolidated the progressive vote behind him, like I mentioned was going to happen, and that carried him home.

Walters ran a decent campaign but was at a disadvantage as he wasn't an incumbent, plus that side of the vote was split. Mohammed was fundamentally unserious. Cartmell had an easy win on the forecast, all he had to do was present a substantial plan rather than picking apart all the things the City sucks at. Knack has been a known name and is well-liked (even among the UCP believe it or not) so it wasn't a surprising outcome. It wasn't that Knack was super smart about his campaign, it's that everyone else was in a toe-stubbing contest.

 

[SarcasticMarmot]

I continue to believe that him being absent from that one infill vote last July, which he motioned for and which would have passed had he been present to vote, singlehandedly killed his credibility and cost him the election.

Don't underestimate how much his rogue cooperation with the UCP pissed off alot of voters as well. That was a monumental miscalculation that had poisoned the water long before the election.

As well, Edmonton municipal coverage is skewed by the fact alot of the loudest "conservative" voices who dominate traditional media (Journal/Sun) or online don't actually live within City limits. I can't tell you how many times I heard a coworker rant about inflill or 15 minute cities and then I had to respond "But don't you live in Leduc?".

Infill and an urbanist progressive approach is popular with the majority of politically engaged folks who actually live within city limits. And even among those who aren't a fan, the UCP is even more unpopular and their attempt to hijack the Municipal elections with parties was reviled. I think the election results bore that out.

 

[ADob]

Walters ran a decent campaign but was at a disadvantage as he wasn't an incumbent, plus that side of the vote was split. Mohammed was fundamentally unserious. Cartmell had an easy win on the forecast, all he had to do was present a substantial plan rather than picking apart all the things the City sucks at. Knack has been a known name and is well-liked (even among the UCP believe it or not) so it wasn't a surprising outcome. It wasn't that Knack was super smart about his campaign, it's that everyone else was in a toe-stubbing contest.

Walters also announced his candidacy waaaaay too late. I'd have voted for him, since he is experienced and is apparently good at building consensus. But I was also happy to vote for Knack, who was another known quantity.

 

[TAS]

Walters also announced his candidacy waaaaay too late. I'd have voted for him, since he is experienced and is apparently good at building consensus. But I was also happy to vote for Knack, who was another known quantity.

I thought Walters was also in Cartmell's camp originally and then didn't like what he was seeing and decided to run.

 

[ADob]

Not as far as I know, but I don't know enough to argue about it online (which, admittedly, has never stopped anyone before).

 

[David A]

Don't underestimate how much his rogue cooperation with the UCP pissed off alot of voters as well. That was a monumental miscalculation that had poisoned the water long before the election.

As well, Edmonton municipal coverage is skewed by the fact alot of the loudest "conservative" voices who dominate traditional media (Journal/Sun) or online don't actually live within City limits. I can't tell you how many times I heard a coworker rant about inflill or 15 minute cities and then I had to respond "But don't you live in Leduc?".

Infill and an urbanist progressive approach to is popular with the majority of politically engaged folks who actually live within city limits. And even among those who aren't a fan, the UCP is even more unpopular and their attempt to hijack the Municipal elections with parties was reviled. I think the election results bore that out.

Yes, the loudest conservative voices are not necessarily in step with how many people in the city really feel. I also feel the mainstream print media in particular with its declining circulation is becoming increasingly irrelevant.

I feel the loud controversial approach is mostly a way for them to try get attention or hold on to their remaining readers, but as a way to influence public opinion it is not as effective.

 

[David A]

I continue to believe that him being absent from that one infill vote last July, which he motioned for and which would have passed had he been present to vote, singlehandedly killed his credibility and cost him the election.

It wasn't the only big mistake he made, but it was a crucial one at a critical time. He came across as either trying to dodge a controversial issue, not caring or trying to sabotage a reasonable, workable compromise.

Of course none of these impressions are very good, particularly at a time when voters were just starting to look seriously at the candidates and he actually had some initial momentum and advantages.

 

[TAS]

Not as far as I know, but I don't know enough to argue about it online (which, admittedly, has never stopped anyone before).

Chair of Better Edmonton Party wrote op-ed in EJ following election:

"Then came Michael Walters, whose late-summer entry — after months of support for the Better Edmonton Party — undercut Tim Cartmell and fractured the very coalition needed for victory. It wasn’t strategy; it was self-sabotage."

 

[policyenthusiast]

Chair of Better Edmonton Party wrote op-ed in EJ following election:

"Then came Michael Walters, whose late-summer entry — after months of support for the Better Edmonton Party — undercut Tim Cartmell and fractured the very coalition needed for victory. It wasn’t strategy; it was self-sabotage."

This quote looks like it was 100% written by ChatGPT.

 

[TAS]

This quote looks like it was 100% written by ChatGPT.

Here is full op-ed if you want more.

Opinion: How the centre-right lost another Edmonton election

The business community — and those who believe in pragmatic, fiscally responsible government — need to grow up politically.

edmontonjournal.com

 

[policyenthusiast]

Here is full op-ed if you want more.

Opinion: How the centre-right lost another Edmonton election

The business community — and those who believe in pragmatic, fiscally responsible government — need to grow up politically.

edmontonjournal.com

I would say 10:1 odds that the entire base draft of this was AI-generated, if not the final product. The em-dashes, the "it's not ___ it's ___.", and the relentless quick sentences that sound thought-provoking but actually don't make much sense are all classic markers of AI copy.

Not overly surprising, given how consistently error-ridden Cartmell/BE's press content was. But still, come on.

 

[TAS]

I would say 10:1 odds that the entire base draft of this was AI-generated, if not the final product. The em-dashes, the "it's not ___ it's ___.", and the relentless quick sentences that sound thought-provoking but actually don't make much sense are all classic markers of AI copy.

Not overly surprising, given how consistently error-ridden Cartmell/BE's press content was. But still, come on.

Regardless if it was AI or not though, the real point was that Walters was on side with Better Edmonton originally, according to Party Chair (not AI), and then Walters decided to run on his own rather than support Cartmell. Or are you suggesting it's AI's belief that Walters was onside with Better Edmonton originally and none of this is the belief of the Party Chair?