2013 Calgary Municipal Election Thread

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't agree with you whatsoever. I have my own business and while it has absolutely nothing to do with building and development, I can totally see the developers point of view here. Its not that I agree with them, so let me make that clear, but I see why they feel the need to ask their employees to consider certain candidates.

I'm in securities. If one party (because its not a municipal matter) were to take a position that I thought would hurt my business I would not only vote against them, but explain to employees why they should as well. Is that lobbying? Sure. But anyone in a similar position would do the same. My employees are free to do what they like, but of course I'm going to suggest the candidates who are best for me and my business. There is nothing wrong with that.

I also own a house in the suburbs. Can you explain how I should feel the need to "lube up"? I'm not following that part of your argument here.

The situation is complicated somewhat by the imbalance in the employer-employee relationship though. Voting is anonymous however, but employees might feel pressure not to participate in other, more visible, democratic exercises (lawn signs, etc.).

[worth]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't want to vote for any of the mayoral candidates.

Maybe I can just vote to replace my alderman.

Pretty sure you can abstain from voting for the mayoral race if you want and only vote for alderman.

I think I did that during the last Provincial election.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Makarov

The situation is complicated somewhat by the imbalance in the employer-employee relationship though. Voting is anonymous however, but employees might feel pressure not to participate in other, more visible, democratic exercises (lawn signs, etc.).

This is what I was referring to. Pressuring people is one thing, but pressuring your employees is another story. If my boss drives by my house and sees that I don't have the sign of a candidate they asked me to support, am I going to get penalized in the workplace for it? I certainly hope not.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

This is what I was referring to. Pressuring people is one thing, but pressuring your employees is another story. If my boss drives by my house and sees that I don't have the sign of a candidate they asked me to support, am I going to get penalized in the workplace for it? I certainly hope not.

Or worse, how would your boss feel if he saw you had a lawn sign for a candidate he/she specifically advised you not to support?

[V]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

The mere fact that a corporation is trying to influence my decision is atrocious at worst and unethical at best. I hate when business, or any other outside influence gets in the way of the democratic process. I really do.

That's falt out ridiculous, of course. Businesses are heavily impacted by the democratic process, why would they not be involved in it?

You must be angry all the time considering businesses impact the democratic process each and every day in a more significant manner than any voter can.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by V

That's falt out ridiculous, of course. Businesses are heavily impacted by the democratic process, why would they not be involved in it?

You must be angry all the time considering businesses impact the democratic process each and every day in a more significant manner than any voter can.

Yes I do have an issue with it. I hate being told who to vote for by businesses, special interest or lobby groups. Especially if there are consequences if I don't vote for who someone else wants.

Or was this not clear?

[Muta]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Or worse, how would your boss feel if he saw you had a lawn sign for a candidate he/she specifically advised you not to support?

I'd be wondering why my boss is driving by my house at night. Creepo.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by worth

Pretty sure you can abstain from voting for the mayoral race if you want and only vote for alderman.

I think I did that during the last Provincial election.

Yes, you can do that. Vote for as many or as few choices as you wish, just don't exceed the maximum in any one category. You can vote for the mayor, if you wish, ignoring all others, or whatever you want.



If someone is trying to influence your vote, just ignore their lobby attempts and vote as you please.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Or worse, how would your boss feel if he saw you had a lawn sign for a candidate he/she specifically advised you not to support?

Tell him that's your wife's side of the lawn and her candidate.

[Regular_John]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

This is what I was referring to. Pressuring people is one thing, but pressuring your employees is another story. If my boss drives by my house and sees that I don't have the sign of a candidate they asked me to support, am I going to get penalized in the workplace for it? I certainly hope not.

That hypothetical situation would clearly be inappropriate and over the line. A single memo saying "here's the candidates we'd encourage you to consider" is not.

You're view point seems to be "in absolutely no way should an employer attempt to impose their political view on their employees", which is a valid opinion to hold. But I'm not sure it's shared by everyone here.

A few of us feel that it's not a black & white issue, and depending on the context/wording of the statement it's perfectly acceptable for an employer to communicate how election issues/candidates may effect the companies bottom line & thus the employees.

Whether you acknowledge it or agree with it you do have a shared stake in the success of any company you work for, your salary.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by jaydorn

That hypothetical situation would clearly be inappropriate and over the line. A single memo saying "here's the candidates we'd encourage you to consider" is not.

You're view point seems to be "in absolutely no way should an employer attempt to impose their political view on their employees", which is a valid opinion to hold. But I'm not sure it's shared by everyone here.

A few of us feel that it's not a black & white issue, and depending on the context/wording of the statement it's perfectly acceptable for an employer to communicate how election issues/candidates may effect the companies bottom line & thus the employees.

Whether you acknowledge it or agree with it you do have a shared stake in the success of any company you work for, your salary.

That's fair, I can respect that opinion. I have a bit more of a cutthroat mentality about it (I know), and I stand behind it. I definitely can appreciate others viewpoints on it too!

[Muta]

Originally Posted by jaydorn

Whether you acknowledge it or agree with it you do have a shared stake in the success of any company you work for, your salary.

That's true, but there could be other issues that concern you too, such as affordable housing, secondary suites, the ring road, McCall Lake golf course, etc.

Your company's financial success shouldn't be tied to your political voting habits. It should be tied to maximizing the firm's presence in the environment they have to work within. If that means being more creative to succeed because political situations have changed, so be it. Oil and gas companies dealt with this when Stelmach imposed all those royalty rules, and today employees in that industry make more than ever.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Yes I do have an issue with it. I hate being told who to vote for by businesses, special interest or lobby groups. Especially if there are consequences if I don't vote for who someone else wants.

Or was this not clear?

The politicians themselves are the ultimate in special interests. Everyone is telling you who to vote for. It is up to you to decide which arguments are most persuasive and vote accordingly.

That a business owner endorsed certain clients isn't really a problem from a moral or legal standpoint - so long as the employer makes no effort to determine who the employees actually voted for or action against employees who voted the 'wrong way'.

[1stLand]

Just reviewed Gael's List of Donors. She is a candidate that is endorsed by Nenshi (Ward 4) and running against Sean Chu.

She has posted an Anti Sean Chu website and criticized his support of the South LRT (Because it is not in his ward), he inability to do math, and most importantly, his refusal to disclose his campaign donors. it has also been insinuated that he is Builder / Developer friendly.

I think Sean Chu should disclose his donors. It can't be much worse than Gael's!

Gael is supported by alot of Builders & Developers.

Which got me thinking, Nenshi isn't anti-developer. He is just Anti Shame Homes & a number of other Builders.

Nenshi is essentially has a vendetta against a small group of people and is blowing it out of proportion and using it as his campaign theme - "Charge Developers & Builders more money because they aren't paying enough!"

I am neither a fan of Sean Chu or Gael. But I do respect Gael for being transparent and if I had to vote, I would vote for Gael.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

This is what I was referring to. Pressuring people is one thing, but pressuring your employees is another story. If my boss drives by my house and sees that I don't have the sign of a candidate they asked me to support, am I going to get penalized in the workplace for it? I certainly hope not.

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Or worse, how would your boss feel if he saw you had a lawn sign for a candidate he/she specifically advised you not to support?

Poor Bunk. His boss has been in the media openly supporting some candidates and not others. Worse yet (according to your view I suppose), he has been openly campaigning with some of them.

I'm not sure where Bunk lives, or who he would support, but maybe he has been coerced into supporting a candidate for councillor that he otherwise wouldn't?

[Bill Bumface]

I was quite close to registering a parody account with the username "Fist Lady" and using Jane Scumgan's picture for the avatar, and then spewing a bunch of ultra far left rhetoric all over the site.

To generate conversation.

So she could call me and talk about it.

Or something.

Too bad I like this site too much to drag it down with scum tactics and get myself banned.

[Ozy_Flame]

I am actually surprised the mayor is supporting other candidates publicly. Not sure I agree with it as it. However, he is an elected politician, he's running and has been on council, knee-deep in the process of it all. Not sure if that qualifies him differently than a business interest group though.

Ultimately it comes down to how well Council can make decisions, both in cohesion and with differing points of views. Whatever happens I hope a fractured and broken Council is not the result of this municipal election.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I am actually surprised the mayor is supporting other candidates publicly. Not sure I agree with it as it. However, he is an elected politician, he's running and has been on council, knee-deep in the process of it all. Not sure if that qualifies him differently than a business interest group though.

Ultimately it comes down to how well Council can make decisions, both in cohesion and with differing points of views. Whatever happens I hope a fractured and broken Council is not the result of this municipal election.

I support Nenshi, but I have some concerns about him endorsing candidates. What happens if Druh loses? How conentious will council be with Kevin Taylor sitting there? Same with James Maxim and who knows who else? It just makes for some questionable times going forward.

I do think its interesting that a number of Nenshi supporters (not on this site entirely, but on twitter as well) seem upset with the "slate" implications here, but have no issue with unions donating thousands of dollars to campaigns and supporting candidates. I don't see a difference at all, but I suspect some of that difference is ideology.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Slava

Poor Bunk. His boss has been in the media openly supporting some candidates and not others. Worse yet (according to your view I suppose), he has been openly campaigning with some of them.

I'm not sure where Bunk lives, or who he would support, but maybe he has been coerced into supporting a candidate for councillor that he otherwise wouldn't?

I keep telling Chima and Naheed I'm voting for Sandra Hunter - aka "Mayor-juana". She also has a great plan to stop wasteful spending at "Silly Hall". They respect my decision.

[GGG]

This whole developer spat has really soured me on Nenshi. Last election his slogan was politics in full sentences. He wanted meaningful debate. This year he us basically running a negative campaign against the development industry. Instead of positively selling the idea of paying for the externalities of your decisions its turned into an urban suburban war.

It really disappoints me that someone who has appeared above political bickering and ideolgy has approached this issue this way.