MF YYC Politics - there, I mega did it

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Torture

So...the real money is not in being a politician, it's being a politician's lackey and then have perceived access to power.

There's tons of money to be made in lobbying. Not uncommon to see people go straight from politics to that. Heck, even Marlaina was a lobbyist before becoming UCP leader and Premier.

That, or political consulting. Whatever that is. I think Harper did it.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Torture

I don't think Gondek has been perfect, but I definitely don't think she's the worst mayor ever or deserves to be recalled. It kind of seems like at times she's walked down the middle and managed to piss off both sides of the political spectrum.

For instance..

The right is mad about the climate emergency, bag tax, taxes going up, etc.
The left is mad that she (and the rest of council) handed out millions for an arena deal.

Yet if she had just acted as most typical right wing politicians without the climate emergency, bag tax on single use, etc, that same right wing base probably would have been just fine with handing out millions for the arena (in fact in previous elections the right wing mayoral candidate was all for an arena)....and taxes probably still would have gone up. Or, if she hadn't done the arena deal, much of the left would probably still be happy with her.

Sometimes when you get a deal and both sides are a little bit upset that's a sign you found some balance.

I actually think she's highly intelligent and technically very competent. She's an awful politician though because she's absolutely tone def on how to handle and message things publicly. The mayor's job isn't technical, it's to create and spend the political capital publicly and intergovernmentally to get done what must be done for the benefit of Calgarians and to that point she's awful.

The original arena deal falling apart happened because Murray got cold feet with the cost overruns from inflation from when the original deal was signed. By applying additional spend for solar panels / sidewalks et al (Even if that's standard course for the approvals process for similar projects) it gave him an opening to paint the deal falling apart as being related to the 'climate emergency' declaration et al and make it seem like essentially the city's fault when it was actually the exact opposite. This error meant that the city got steamrolled by Murray on deal #2 because a lot of the public was not on the mayor's side.

The menorah lighting mishap. Honestly if she just showed up and lit the menorah like every other Calgary mayor has done since the beginning of time any blowback from pro-Palestinian folks would have been very minor if at all, because it would have run under the surface and probably wouldn't have been noticed. Instead she had to break with tradition and throw out a tweet spotlighting the issue and her position which is counter to a good chunk of Calgarians. It basically created a Streisand effect to the issue and where she stood.

Getting booed at the Saddledome on national TV. I don't know who thought it was a good idea to put the mayor who has the lowest popularity reading of all time in front of an audience that is heavily composed of her most critical demographics in front of a national audience that probably had 10-20% of the entire city of Calgary watching (What could go wrong? . . .lol). Again one can blame her staff for this, but she herself should have had enough self-awareness to avoid this situation.

Again, intelligent person, highly competent on city issues, but extremely poor politician.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by chedder

I know this board seems to skew pretty high income but it's funny when people always say politics is a pay cut. A Calgary councillor makes base pay of $120,000 plus pension plan, good benefits, a transition allowance when they quit or get defeated. Plus a really good annual car allowance, expense account and generous budget for their constituency offices. I don't imagine they pay for too many fancy lunches themselves either.

So, while not huge money, a lot of people would think it's a pretty decent living.

I also don't think their hours of work would be any more than most.

Aside from the time commitment that Boogerz mentions, it’s not a job that the average person has the aptitude for.

We like to criticize politicians for being dumb, but most are pretty smart. The great majority have university degrees. They have to read and speak to long reports and papers. Discuss complex budgets. So already you’re looking at people who are going to be qualified for substantially more than average salaries.

They also have to be driven and willing to take risks. Knocking on thousands of doors and having half the people who answer ream you out or slam the door would discourage the great majority of people. They’re investing huge amounts of time and energy to campaigns that they can easily lose and wind up with nothing (even in safe seats, the nomination races can be brutal).

They have to be socially fluent. They need to be able to comfortably work a room full of strangers, speak in public, remember names, exude confidence, and make people feel good around them. Every day.

Lastly, to be a successful politician you need to be well-connected. A wide circle of friends, deep roots in the community, and the confidence of influential people.

So:

Willing to work long hours
Smarter than average
Driven risk-taker
Socially adept
Well-connected

People who have all of those traits can typically earn much more than an average income in jobs where they enjoy privacy and civility.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I actually think she's highly intelligent and technically very competent. She's an awful politician though because she's absolutely tone def on how to handle and message things publicly. The mayor's job isn't technical, it's to create and spend the political capital publicly and intergovernmentally to get done what must be done for the benefit of Calgarians and to that point she's awful.

The original arena deal falling apart happened because Murray got cold feet with the cost overruns from inflation from when the original deal was signed. By applying additional spend for solar panels / sidewalks et al (Even if that's standard course for the approvals process for similar projects) it gave him an opening to paint the deal falling apart as being related to the 'climate emergency' declaration et al and make it seem like essentially the city's fault when it was actually the exact opposite. This error meant that the city got steamrolled by Murray on deal #2 because a lot of the public was not on the mayor's side.

The menorah lighting mishap. Honestly if she just showed up and lit the menorah like every other Calgary mayor has done since the beginning of time any blowback from pro-Palestinian folks would have been very minor if at all, because it would have run under the surface and probably wouldn't have been noticed. Instead she had to break with tradition and throw out a tweet spotlighting the issue and her position which is counter to a good chunk of Calgarians. It basically created a Streisand effect to the issue and where she stood.

Getting booed at the Saddledome on national TV. I don't know who thought it was a good idea to put the mayor who has the lowest popularity reading of all time in front of an audience that is heavily composed of her most critical demographics in front of a national audience that probably had 10-20% of the entire city of Calgary watching (What could go wrong? . . .lol). Again one can blame her staff for this, but she herself should have had enough self-awareness to avoid this situation.

Again, intelligent person, highly competent on city issues, but extremely poor politician.

I agree with your other comments, but I bet getting boo'd at the saddledome improves her electability not hurts it.

There's a long history of Canadians voting for politicians they feel have been unfairly wronged. Cretien when they made fun of his speech impediment, when Prentice told Notley math is difficult, etc.

I think she's doing a bad job and is unlikely to get re-elected anyway, but the people who were aggressively booing her probably didn't vote for her the first time, and there is some segment of the rest of the population who will feel sorry for her after that.

[The Fisher Account]

Originally Posted by chedder

I know this board seems to skew pretty high income but it's funny when people always say politics is a pay cut. A Calgary councillor makes base pay of $120,000 plus pension plan, good benefits, a transition allowance when they quit or get defeated. Plus a really good annual car allowance, expense account and generous budget for their constituency offices. I don't imagine they pay for too many fancy lunches themselves either.

So, while not huge money, a lot of people would think it's a pretty decent living.

I also don't think their hours of work would be any more than most.

Way off base.

These guys work 80-100 hours a week and the homework/reading/board meetings/never ending citizen complaint responding is non-stop. Most wards have 60-90k residents.

$120K is crap pay for the amount of work required.

$120k is honestly low-to-middle-manager pay at almost every high-rise downtown.

[GioforPM]

My mom was a school board trustee, and I've known a few other people in similar low level political positions - counsellors, some MLAs. My impression is that the higher in politics one goes, the less important competence is and the more important social/spin skills are. My mom was a horrible "politician" as far as public pseaking, etc, but she was good at local doorknocking and did a decent job when elected. She couldn't have gone higher because campaigning is a different skill set than actually governing.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Torture

So...the real money is not in being a politician, it's being a politician's lackey and then have perceived access to power.

The real issue is the amount of money both politicians and politicos can make after politics due to their influence yes.

It's a far more serious issue than elected officials making the same amount of money as professionals or mid-level managers

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

The menorah lighting mishap. Honestly if she just showed up and lit the menorah like every other Calgary mayor has done since the beginning of time any blowback from pro-Palestinian folks would have been very minor if at all, because it would have run under the surface and probably wouldn't have been noticed. Instead she had to break with tradition and throw out a tweet spotlighting the issue and her position which is counter to a good chunk of Calgarians. It basically created a Streisand effect to the issue and where she stood.

I agree with much of what you've said, with the exception of the quoted above. The problem was that it wasn't just a menorah lighting - the scope of the event changed and it became a political "pro-Israel" rally, in addition to being the usual Hanukkah event.

It was a no win decision for her, but she made the correct decision. If a Ramadan event got changed and was being advertised as a Palestinian political rally, I wouldn't be OK with her attending that either.

[Torture]

lol, Landon Johnston says he has ~56k signatures. For reference that's about as many votes as Jeff Davison got in third place, and about half as many signatures as Farkas got...hardly a strong statement against Gondek.
Not to mention, how many of those are fake, duplicates, or out of towners? Half?


214k people voted for somebody other than Gondek, so he could only get...1/4 of those to sign a recall? Nice.

[btimbit]

The guy's a complete whackadoodle. He actually got a sitdown with the mayor last week and afterwards said he was upset that she didn't meet with him to resign.

Absolute moron

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

I agree with much of what you've said, with the exception of the quoted above. The problem was that it wasn't just a menorah lighting - the scope of the event changed and it became a political "pro-Israel" rally, in addition to being the usual Hanukkah event.

It was a no win decision for her, but she made the correct decision. If a Ramadan event got changed and was being advertised as a Palestinian political rally, I wouldn't be OK with her attending that either.

Sure, but if she attended the event anyway would most people even known about it in the first place?

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Sure, but if she attended the event anyway would most people even known about it in the first place?

It would set a bad precedent though. The reasonable response from the public would've been "yeah - I get it. We can't have mayors attending war rallies, regardless of side."

But we're not exactly living in the age of nuance.

Honestly, if the tables were turned and she attended a Palestinian rally, she'd be absolutely roasted by the same people that are roasting her for NOT attending a rally for Israel. Better to just not attend rallies like that at all when you're a mayor.

[getbak]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1776135315360460925

Enjoy your spam calls from Take Back Alberta, losers.

[Fuzz]

Why didn't they roll them straight into the shredder? If they know they are way short, just #### off.

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I actually think she's highly intelligent and technically very competent. She's an awful politician though because she's absolutely tone def on how to handle and message things publicly. The mayor's job isn't technical, it's to create and spend the political capital publicly and intergovernmentally to get done what must be done for the benefit of Calgarians and to that point she's awful.

The original arena deal falling apart happened because Murray got cold feet with the cost overruns from inflation from when the original deal was signed. By applying additional spend for solar panels / sidewalks et al (Even if that's standard course for the approvals process for similar projects) it gave him an opening to paint the deal falling apart as being related to the 'climate emergency' declaration et al and make it seem like essentially the city's fault when it was actually the exact opposite. This error meant that the city got steamrolled by Murray on deal #2 because a lot of the public was not on the mayor's side.

The menorah lighting mishap. Honestly if she just showed up and lit the menorah like every other Calgary mayor has done since the beginning of time any blowback from pro-Palestinian folks would have been very minor if at all, because it would have run under the surface and probably wouldn't have been noticed. Instead she had to break with tradition and throw out a tweet spotlighting the issue and her position which is counter to a good chunk of Calgarians. It basically created a Streisand effect to the issue and where she stood.

Getting booed at the Saddledome on national TV. I don't know who thought it was a good idea to put the mayor who has the lowest popularity reading of all time in front of an audience that is heavily composed of her most critical demographics in front of a national audience that probably had 10-20% of the entire city of Calgary watching (What could go wrong? . . .lol). Again one can blame her staff for this, but she herself should have had enough self-awareness to avoid this situation.

Again, intelligent person, highly competent on city issues, but extremely poor politician.

I think this is all true but incomplete. On the one hand, we complain that politicians are dishonest weathervanes and on the other we complain when politicians are too transparent and don't play the game. We get the leaders we deserve.

[boogerz]

Originally Posted by btimbit

The guy's a complete whackadoodle. He actually got a sitdown with the mayor last week and afterwards said he was upset that she didn't meet with him to resign.

Absolute moron

During the pandemic he had troubles applying for CEBA and his first instinct was to go directly to the media.

Landon definitely seems like a useful idiot for TBA

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Why didn't they roll them straight into the shredder? If they know they are way short, just #### off.

Yup, the first question should be, "how many signatures did you collect?" and if the answer is below the required threshold, the city should take them and say, "okay thanks, we'll make sure these are securely destroyed."

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by getbak

Yup, the first question should be, "how many signatures did you collect?" and if the answer is below the required threshold, the city should take them and say, "okay thanks, we'll make sure these are securely destroyed."

I’d say it is highly improbable that he or the Project YYC/TBA guys haven’t already photocopied the petitions, so a shredding is likely to have no impact.

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I’d say it is highly improbable that he or the Project YYC/TBA guys haven’t already photocopied the petitions, so a shredding is likely to have no impact.

It's likely from a CYA perspective. That way, if, for some reason, the petition 'leaked', the City could say "All the copies we were provided were securely destroyed as per policy".


But I also agree with Fuzz...any further action on this by the City is a complete waste of time and money and should not be entertained. Straight to the shredder.

[iggy_oi]

Highly doubtful the city shreds the petitions. They need to keep them as evidence that there were not enough signatures collected.