Chad No Longer 4 Mayor

Chad Novak is no longer running to be the mayor of Regina. From the CBC:

“I have found that I am just not built for the dirty world that is politics,” Novak said in his statement, which also expressed gratitude to people who had supported his bid.

It must be true, too, since he deleted his Twitter account.

The citizens of Regina at least have a picture of Novak in the mayor’s office with Pat Fiacco. If living in a post-Chad4Mayor campaign world is too terrible for you to imagine, you can look at that and make believe they’re starting the transition to Novak’s reign. (I guess in that scenario, the folks from Jack FM would be his advisers.)

Author: James Brotheridge

Contributing Editor with Prairie Dog.

19 thoughts on “Chad No Longer 4 Mayor”

  1. This is not an unexpected development.

    On the topic of civic elections, I’m wondering why we have a ward/subdivision system if people are allowed to run in wards/subdivisions where they don’t live. That loophole should have been closed long ago. A candidate has to gather the required number of signatures on his/her nomination papers from the appropriate ward/subdivision, so why shouldn’t candidates be required to live where they run? On principle, I would never vote for a parachute candidate, no matter how attractive the platform.

  2. #1 Exactly!

    To the 2 that pulled out too early.

    Why didn’t ya stay in at least for the so-called mayor debate?

    Then jump out of the picture, 2 weeks before the election.

  3. I also 100% agree with Barb on this one. It does matter. Not living in the riding/ward/constitch is like living in a long-distance relationship conducted over skype and email. It doesn’t work!

    Of course in this day and age, many members are just there to blindly support their leader and donors anyway, while ignoring their constituents, so in that regard….BUT, a person SHOULD live in their riding/ward/constitch.

  4. Sadly, several parachute candidates in the upcoming civic election are “progressives”. Back in 2006, the Coalition for a Citizen Friendly Regina began its campaign to be “different” politicians by insisting its carefully vetted candidates would run where they lived. Partway through the campaign, they changed their minds and authorized parachute candidacy. So much for “different”.

  5. let’s all take a moment to remember happier times, like when chad novak’s platform was half about how he got banned from the occupy regina facebook page for trolling

  6. Barb, I only know of one parachute progressive candidate, and it’s not really a far drop to where they are running. They’ve run there before even. Regina is not so big a place that you can’t know and represent people well even if you aren’t living smack in the middle of all of them, and are a few blocks from some of them instead.

    Ron, fee must be paid in Sept. so dropping out in Oct. is more expensive and time costly too.

    Talbot, incidentally, I did at one point have a long distance MSN relationship, and it worked for about 3 years (as long as the average municipal political lifespan).

  7. John: unless someone’s dropped out of the campaign for city council seats, I make the parachute candidate count 2; you can look it up.
    History lesson for the day: “progressives” called for the implementation of a ward/subdivision system; a “progressive” government brought it into being; and yet “progressives” are the first to violate the spirit if not the letter of the law — and the first to make self-serving excuses about it.
    Oh, and just in case you forgot: if elected, you’ll serve 4 years, not 3.

  8. Prove me wrong with hisorical and current facts, Emmet. Oh, wait: you’re doing your kvetching from long distance and from a disinclination to keep up with events, past or present. Not one thing I said is specious – if you even know the meaning of the word.

  9. By turns specious and childish. Lovely. What “historical facts” have you cited? If you knew the meaning of the word “specious” then you’d know I was calling into question the integrity of your reasoning, not your vague insinuations.
    You boorishly attempt to reframe my statement and then you attack my literacy. Learn some tact, ma’am.

  10. Look up some history, both past and present, in Saskatchewan, and you’ll see that I’m correct, Emmet. Or would you rather just flatter yourself that you’re a master baiter?

  11. I don’t agree with the concept of “parachute cantidates”.

    Someone who lives in Wascana View may not be up to date on Normanview issues, for example.

  12. @16: you’re apparently too tired either to look up the facts or to make an actual argumant. Note that I said “tired”, not “lazy”.

  13. argument

    @Ron: the ward/subdivision system was inaugurated to make sure that local representatives attuned to local issues would be elected by their neighbours. It was projected to yield more diversity of personality and opinion on councils/school boards, and to eliminate problems inherent in the at-large system of election. Parachute candidates demonstrate disregard for the legitimate aims of the ward/subdivision system, and to a degree for the citizens of the ward/subdivision itself.

Comments are closed.