This is a new one on me. I’m sure there are a lot of politicians who are affronted at the concept of facing opposition, but usually they aren’t so frank about it. And to be quite honest, anyone who says out loud that their opponent can’t win is tempting fate.
This kind of thing almost happened where I live, when it looked like the incumbent mayor would stand unopposed until another person announced his intention to run. The nominal challenger is the type of person who believes the solution to all economic and political problems is “legalize marijuana.” Headline in the local paper the next day “$50 000 up in smoke.”
His candidacy later became moot when another more mainstream candidate annouced his own campaign. The incumbent still won though, with about 75% of the vote.
I should clarify the $50 000 referenced in the headline was the costs of having an election (mail-in ballots only)
Well, looks like a similar but much more sinister thing happened in another suburban election: a construction entrepreneur tried to buy off the mayor and two opposition councillors to not have a contested election.
I don’t suppose there’s an English version of that article?
No shit, that is the sort of thing that gets an almost kneejerk reaction to vote for an opponent!
This is hilarious. From the article in the OP:
Yeah, democracy is such a waste of taxpayer money. It’s just so much more efficient when you don’t have to have elections.
Well when I lived in the Montreal area in the 70s, hardly any of the cities had competitive elections for mayor. This included Montreal itself – it was the era of Jean Drapeau who was mayor of Montreal for something like 50 years…
If you’re that 100% certain that the other guy has no chance in hell of beating you do you even need to run a campaign?
Don’t send mailers, don’t campaign, don’t hire an election staff. Just throw your name on the ballot if you’re so confident.