News & Analysis

TDSB Ward 20 election analysis: Did Sotiropoulos lose due to his pro-family views?

In the October 27th Ontario municipal election, pro-family observers were saddened by the defeat of the heroic Toronto Public School Board Trustee, Sam Sotiropoulos. He lost in Ward 20 to an NDP staffer, Manna Wong, who was heavily supported by the unions.  

Trustee Sotiropoulos made headlines throughout 2014 for opposing full-frontal nudity at Toronto’s gay pride parade, which the TDSB supported annually by sending a float, students and teachers.  He further enraged leftists in the media by tweeting that there is no scientific proof that transgenderism is a legitimate gender, and he therefore reserves the right to believe that it is a mental illness.

On the latter point, Sotiropoulos’ view is backed by the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistics Manual, which lists Gender Identity Disorder (GID) as a mental pathology. As a result of political pressure, it reclassified the disorder in 2012 from the category of “gender identity disorder” to “gender dysphoria”.  Despite the reclassification, the APA still acknowledges it is a mental illness that may require psychological treatment.

After Sotiropoulos’ defeat, the mainstream media immediately began suggesting in its election coverage that Sam’s common sense beliefs somehow caused the electorate to turn on him.   Example from the Globe & Mail:  “Name recognition may have worked against incumbent Sam Sotiropoulos, who has made headlines with controversial comments regarding transgender people and the Gay Pride Parade.”

The problem with that theory is:  there’s no evidence for it.

Our political sources tell us that Manna Wong, who works as a staffer for NDP MPP Peter Tabuns, managed to defeat Sotiropoulos because she ran a campaign of ethnic politics, appealing to immigrants and especially to the large Chinese community in the ward. Wong herself is a Chinese Canadian. 

We are told that Candidate Wong made no mention of gay pride nudity or transgenderism issues in her literature, nor while campaigning. In fact, her literature did not even reveal that she works for the hard-left New Democratic Party.

The fact is that that Chinese immigrant community in Toronto is very socially-conservative. If anything, Sotiropoulos’ support of traditional values would have won him ethnic votes, had they known about his stance on the issues.

CLC contacted Trustee Sotiropoulos and asked if he saw any evidence of losing votes on account of his anti-nudity motion or his comments on transgenderism.  The pro-life Trustee responded that was not a significant factor, and in fact, for the voters who had any knowledge about those controversies, it actually endeared him to them.

“I received many phone calls from voters requesting lawn signs expressly because my values aligned with theirs. And also to show support for freedom of speech. My values align very well with those of the electorate”, Trustee Sotiropoulos responded to CLC.

Sotiropoulos said he believes the reason he lost came down to having too few boots on the ground. His opponent had a large team of volunteers, while he had basically himself. As a result, Wong reached more people.   This rings true with what CLC’s inside sources told us:  that Wong had many teachers canvassing for her, thanks to being backed by the teachers unions.  Given she works for the NDP, it’s conceivable she also had the benefit of party infrastructure.

So, it appears that Wong’s victory came down to ethnic voting and perhaps even of great importance, having more volunteers. There is no evidence to suggest that Sotiropoulos’ anti-nudity or transgenderism stances were the reason people voted against him.  Had Wong campaigned on those issues, the claim could be accepted, but she did not.

Indirectly, one could argue that the leftist teachers unions may have worked hard to send Wong volunteers in order to defeat Sotiropoulos over his views. However, that would represent only an indirect effect of his views. It would be wrong to claim that that the voters rejected Sotiropoulos because of his pro-family values.

There are three take-away lessons here. First, standing for family values may be controversial to journalists, but it is not controversial to the electorate, no matter how the mainstream media tries to spin things. Second, pro-life citizens need to be more willing to sacrifice their personal time to help good candidates.  We are all very busy, but we must make time to join the campaign team of pro-life candidates during elections.  That often makes the difference between victory and defeat, as it did in Sotiropoulos’ case.  Third, much of the voting public is totally oblivious to the moral stands of candidates, so average pro-lifers must do a better job at networking and informing their friends, neighbours and relatives.