Sunday, July 5, 2026
Friday, July 3, 2026
We Can Do Better Than This
It often pains me to read the nature of some of the comments posted on Facebook in response to articles shared by The Hamiltonian.
A few recent examples illustrate the point.
When we published our review of Mayor Andrea Horwath's first four years in office, we expected mixed reactions. The Mayor has both supporters and detractors, and healthy debate is part of any democracy. What troubled me, however, was not the disagreement—it was the volume of deeply personal and, at times, cruel attacks directed at her.
To be clear, I am not on anyone's side in this mayoral race. Had those same comments been directed at any other candidate or public figure, I would have felt exactly the same way.
Another example arose when we shared mayoral candidate Ejaz Butt's interview in our Before the Ballot – Questions for Hamilton's Next Mayor series. While many readers engaged thoughtfully with his responses, some comments were unmistakably rooted in racism. There is simply no place for that in our city—or in our humanity.
The final example undermines what could otherwise be meaningful discussion. We often receive insightful, thoughtful, and well-reasoned comments. Then, in the final sentence, the writer adds something like, "I'd never vote for that fool," or another unnecessary personal insult. In that moment, the value of the entire comment is diminished and never appears in The Hamiltonian.
Political campaigns are, by their nature, passionate. People care deeply about the future of their community, and they should. But there is a profound difference between challenging someone's ideas and attacking their dignity.
We can disagree vigorously without demeaning one another. We can criticize policies without ridiculing people. We can expose flaws in an argument without resorting to racism, insults, or personal attacks. If we want better politics, we must also model better citizenship.
A few recent examples illustrate the point.
When we published our review of Mayor Andrea Horwath's first four years in office, we expected mixed reactions. The Mayor has both supporters and detractors, and healthy debate is part of any democracy. What troubled me, however, was not the disagreement—it was the volume of deeply personal and, at times, cruel attacks directed at her.
To be clear, I am not on anyone's side in this mayoral race. Had those same comments been directed at any other candidate or public figure, I would have felt exactly the same way.
Another example arose when we shared mayoral candidate Ejaz Butt's interview in our Before the Ballot – Questions for Hamilton's Next Mayor series. While many readers engaged thoughtfully with his responses, some comments were unmistakably rooted in racism. There is simply no place for that in our city—or in our humanity.
The final example undermines what could otherwise be meaningful discussion. We often receive insightful, thoughtful, and well-reasoned comments. Then, in the final sentence, the writer adds something like, "I'd never vote for that fool," or another unnecessary personal insult. In that moment, the value of the entire comment is diminished and never appears in The Hamiltonian.
Political campaigns are, by their nature, passionate. People care deeply about the future of their community, and they should. But there is a profound difference between challenging someone's ideas and attacking their dignity.
We can disagree vigorously without demeaning one another. We can criticize policies without ridiculing people. We can expose flaws in an argument without resorting to racism, insults, or personal attacks. If we want better politics, we must also model better citizenship.
Cal
Thursday, July 2, 2026
Wednesday, July 1, 2026
And it Begins....
As I predicted, it has already begun: the dirty—and at times absurd—side of municipal politics.
Over the past few days, social media has once again reminded us how quickly context can be discarded in favour of ridicule. A video clip (the socket puppet one) involving mayoral candidate Scarlett Gillespie has been selectively presented to invite mockery rather than understanding. Anyone who views the full context should recognize it for what it is: a manufactured controversy that deserves no attention.
Unfortunately, this is unlikely to be the last time we see this kind of campaigning. As election day draws closer, expect more edited clips, misleading narratives, half-truths, anonymous posts, and personal attacks designed to generate clicks rather than inform voters.
Hamilton deserves better.
Our city faces serious challenges—housing affordability, public safety, infrastructure, taxation, economic growth, and the future of our neighbourhoods. Those issues should define this election, not schoolyard-style political gamesmanship.
Voters should be skeptical of sensational social media posts, verify information before sharing it, and judge every candidate on the strength of their ideas, their leadership, and their ability to govern—not on contrived attempts to score cheap political points.
The campaign is just getting started. If this is any indication of what lies ahead, voters will need to be as discerning as ever.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)