Sock it to me

This week in The Incline

• Hamilton's year without an election

• A subdued 2026 campaign

• The far-right comes for a sock puppet

• A chat with Scarlett Gillespie

Up until yesterday, the 2026 Hamilton municipal election seemed pretty sleepy (no word yet on how the whole data centre thing will impact the election). For most of the nomination period, the election has been low-energy, sparsely-reported, and featuring a strikingly small number of candidates.

Hell, even Hamilton’s “not so la-de-da” election of 1918 had more excitement and intrigue.

Fewer votes, more hogs

As Hamilton muddled through another year of a world war, the last thing on people’s minds was a municipal election. The civic battles in years past had pit labour against business, workers against bosses, the people against the establishment. But that enthusiasm had waned as the fight against the Kaiser brought all but the most committed of leftists under the Union Jack-festooned banner of imperial nationalism. Topping it off, Prime Minister Borden had called a federal election for December 17, 1917, which was widely viewed as a referendum on his handling of the war effort. His government was returned with a massive majority, but the enthusiasm of the electorate had been almost completely drained.

In early December, 1917, there was open talk in the city of a coordinated effort on the part of sitting members of council and their backroom boys with all of the major parties to ensure acclamations across-the-board. “…the contest on New Year’s day is certain to be as tame as the kitchen canary,” the Spec wrote, referencing the historic fixed municipal election day of January 1. After Borden’s landslide victory, that talk only intensified.

But nothing in politics is ever certain. And, in this case, the total acclamation of Hamilton’s elected bodies hinged on the political aspirations of one Thomas Morris. An outspoken fixture in Hamilton’s civic politics for years, Morris lost a mayoral bid the previous year against local businessman Charles Booker. That campaign was brutal, featuring a concerted effort on the part of the Spec and the city’s Conservative establishment to paint Morris as a self-important, credit-stealing, ignorant blowhard in stark contrast to the economizing, humble, and responsible Chas. Booker. Morris’ painful loss on January 1, 1917, led to speculation that he would seek a rematch with Booker in 1918. Deepening the intrigue was the fact that the city’s Independent Labour Party (ILP) had pinned their involvement on what Morris did; the ILP’s leadership said that, if Morris ran, they too would nominate candidates, not wanting to be left out of the show.

Local institutions came out against an election, including the Board of Trade, who instead urged the city to focus on the war effort. Their executive submitted a letter to City Council to this effect, urging Hamilton’s civic leaders to do what they could to force acclamations and avoid a campaign. Four days before nominations were set to open, the City Clerk read the Board of Trade’s letter into the official record, which council quietly accepted before moving onto more pressing business; council had, on its agenda that day, a thrilling report about how Hamilton could encourage its hog production to support the war effort.

As the days before nominations opened slipped by, prominent local officials, often thought of as mayors-in-waiting, either announced their intention to not run, or said they would make up their minds on the spot. Tension built. Rumours flew from Paradise Road in the west to Ottawa Street in the east.

Nomination day was held on Christmas Eve. The doors of the city’s returning offices stayed open all day and curious Hamiltonians would occasionally pop their heads in to see if there was any civic action before returning to their pre-Christmas preparations. There was a mild shock when two former members of the Board of Control were nominated for their old seats, bringing the total number of candidates to 6 for the board of 4. Sensing the overwhelming opposition in the city to the idea of an election, the two former members quickly announced they would speak with the clerk and withdraw their nominations.

On Boxing Day, the city clerk made the official announcement: for the first time in Hamilton’s history, there would be no municipal election. Every elected official, from the mayor to school trustees, were returned to office unopposed. Morris, the ILP, the two former controllers, and every other aspirant had bowed out, putting the good of the country above their own ambition. The inauguration of the new council and school board would happen as usual, assured the Spec, but it wouldn’t be “so ‘la-de-da’ as in other years”.²

***

It was the year without an election. And yet, despite the absence of a campaign, there was still drama and interest.

Why is it, then, that we have a contested municipal election this year that is so…bleh? And why is it that the biggest story to come out of the campaign so far has been a far-right fixation on an out-of-context clip of a mayoral candidate - a story that has been mostly ignored by local media and that is being used by extremists to attack queer people and further justify the annexation of our country?

The dog days of the nomination period

There are 36 days left in the nomination period for Hamilton’s 2026 Municipal Election. 102 days until municipal election day. Just over three months for people to wake up and smell the democracy. But everyone is still snoozing in a smoky summer sunbeam, it seems.

By this point in the last election, there were over 40 references to the campaign in the Spec. Full coverage of the Loomis campaign launch. Discussion over Mayor Eisenberger’s decision to not seek a fourth term. What Andrea Horwath would do after losing the provincial election on June 2.

This cycle, there have been a handful of mentions, mostly in the form of informational explainers. Who is running where. What the rules are. What to expect when voting. There’s just no energy there, from the local media or from the commentators you’d expect.

As of the morning of Thursday, July 16, there are just 82 candidates for 38 offices across the city. That’s around half the number of candidates who ran in the 2022 election. If nominations closed today, there would be two council acclamations, 13 trustee acclamations, and three trustee seats left vacant for lack of candidates.

***

Most of the modest activity has been on the head-of-council front.

Keanin Loomis has been hosting a “listening tour” across the city, focusing on the suburban communities in which he performed well in 2022. In this election, he’ll be fighting Councillor Rob Cooper for support in those places, so it makes sense that he kicked things off out there. But the media hasn’t really paid attention to Loomis and it remains to be seen if there will be any coverage of his campaign launch on July 18.

Cooper, for his part, has already launched his campaign, though you’d be excused for not knowing it. Cooper’s campaign has been tightly controlling his access to the public, opting to mainly focus on likely voters and supportive media. That said, he was spotted at July 10’s Art Crawl on James North, handing out business cards imploring voters to back Cooper if they support “tackling violent crime, capping taxes, fixing roads, confronting the housing crisis, creating jobs & economic growth”. The modest “platform” fits for the ideologue who has, as a pseudo-campaign slogan “Too much political ideology”.

The only reference to Cooper’s campaign launch in any local media appeared in the increasingly right-wing Bay Observer, which took time off from fixating on the “woke” epidemic in Hamilton to cover his mayoral kick off. The launch was apparently well-attended; according to the BO, 150 people filled a ballroom at the Carmen’s hotel in upper Stoney Creek to hear Cooper lay out his vision for a city where taxes are low, services are plentiful, and grievances are settled. The BO reported that, during the launch, Cooper was endorsed by the Mancinelli’s, the influential Progressive Conservative-affiliated local family who run the development focused-”union” LiUNA.

And Mayor Andrea Horwath will apparently be filing her paperwork any day now, though there seems to be almost no enthusiasm in the community about her bid for a second term. It’s entirely possible that Horwath’s mayoral career may mirror that of former Calgary Mayor Jyoti Gondek, who slipped to third in her re-election bid last year. But I’ve been wrong before. Many times. Horwath’s own political career is a reminder that, in politics, anything is possible.

Enough misinformation to fill a sock

Before yesterday’s clusterbumble of a vote on the proposed interim control by-law regarding data centres, there was one big municipal news story floating around.

Again, as was the case with Cooper’s launch, you’d be excused for not knowing much about it. Local media has been almost entirely silent about this story, which blends online misinformation, rabid transphobia, and the MAGA-inspired push to have the United States of America annex Canada.

Why it hasn’t been more widely reported on is beyond me. Unsatisfied with that, I decided to dive into the story and speak with the candidate at the centre of it all.

***

One of the first people to declare their intention to run for mayor was local activist and advocate Scarlett Gillespie.

Recognizable to many Hamiltonians as the Executive Director of the Sex Workers Action Program (SWAP), Gillespie (also known as Jelena Vermilion) spoke up for sex workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic, joined the calls to hold the Hamilton Police Service accountable after the violence at Hamilton Pride 2019, and was targeted on social media by then-Councillor John-Paul Danko who called Gillespie and another YWCA Women of Distinction Award winner “ungrateful, self-righteous, toddlers with a microphone” - which earned the now-MP one of his many, many, many code of conduct violations.³

When Gillespie announced a mayoral bid at the end of last July, she wrote that Hamilton “deserves a Mayor who cares and who actually shows up.” And show up she did; on May 1, Gillespie was one of the first people to sign up to run.

***

On June 13, Gillespie was a special guest at an event held at west Hamilton’s historic Staircase Theatre. The event was part of the Uncloseted Comedy Festival, which bills itself as “celebrating queer joy through comedy”. The events have been going on for some time and their posters are a regular fixture throughout town.

Gillespie posted video of the event to Instagram and TikTok around a week later. In the video, Gillespie chats with Uncloseted producer and local comedian, Rae Lockdust, about her run for mayor. The event was, of course, part of the larger comedy festival, so Lockdust provided Gillespie with a sock puppet to try and add a splash of humour to what could otherwise be a very serious conversation about municipal issues.

The conversation oscillates between comedy and campaign speech. It’s equal parts funny and informative and, if I may be so bold as to editorialize, a great example of the kind of joy we should be bringing back to politics. Yes, we have to talk about big, serious issues, but there’s no reason we can’t also have a little fun in the process.

Gillespie posted the video on June 19 and carried on campaigning.

And then the far-right clipping farms found it.

***

Clipping farms are the latest iteration of “content farms” that have polluted the internet landscape for years. Instead of generating their own content, these clipping farms scrape content from other sources - news outlets, large creators, independent posters, everyday people, etc. - and sometimes make selective edits to better fit the narrative their viewers expect. They then post their doctored clips to advance a particular political agenda, make money off ad revenue, or both.

It’s cheap, lazy, and designed to make money off outrage using the platforms people are stuck on. And, more often than not, these clips are in the service of an extremely right wing agenda. In some cases, right-wing activists will pay people in the Global South pennies to spend all day pumping out clip after clip after clip.

The Garbage Day newsletter has been highlighting the epidemic of clipping for a while, and I highly recommend checking out their reporting on it.

One such clipping farm is “canadianmorningcoffee”, a TikTok account that has as its bio “Canadian Political page based off my mood each day so expect Left, Right Center and some laughs.” Almost every clip attacks Prime Minister Mark Carney or showcases Pierre Poilievre “epically shutting down arrogant reporters”. Not so much “left right centre”. Mostly just right. Really, really right.

On June 28, “canadianmorningcoffee” took a break from attacking Carney to focus on Hamilton. The account posted a clip from Gillespie’s video that they had apparently edited on their own. They cut out Lockdust, zoomed in on Gillespie, and overlaid the text: “Candidate running for Mayor of Hamilton, Ontario requires a sock puppet,” interspersing their editorial comment with a handful of emojis.

They simply made up the idea that Gillespie “requires” a sock puppet (whatever that means). There’s no reference to that in the full video, Gillespie doesn’t mention that in the edited clip they posted, and a 15 second Google search will produce dozens of videos of Gillespie delegating to council, speaking at meetings, and leading protests sans puppet.

By 8:00 PM that evening, the clip had migrated from TikTok to X/Twitter. Far-right clipping account “JayGenXer” - an account claiming to be based in Ontario that mainly promotes the need for the United States to invade and occupy Canada, bemoans the evils of race mixing and immigration, and sprinkles everything with heaps of transphobia - posted “canadianmorningcoffee’s” doctored clip with basically the same text: “Mayoral candidate Scarlett Gillespie who's running for Mayor of the city of Hamilton, Ontario in Canada requires a sock puppet. Yes… A.. SOCK 🧦… PUPPET 🤦🏻‍♂️”

***

The doctored clip quickly broke containment. At nearly 4:00 in the morning the next day, it was picked up by an account started by Chaya Raichik, a former real estate agent, COVID-19 conspiracy theorist, and January 6 rioter. Raichik is mainly known for starting the far-right clipping farm “Libs of TikTok”.

Raichik is openly and passionately anti-queer and was one of the main proponents of the “groomer” panic a couple of years ago. Her social media posts have been linked to dozens of bomb threats to hospitals, attacks on drag shows, and threats toward teachers. The Southern Poverty Law Center has an “extremist file” on Raichik, noting that she has used Libs of TikTok “in an anti-LGBTQ+ disinformation campaign that mobilizes right-wing extremist groups in violent attacks against LGBTQ+ people, spaces and events, as well as against doctors, hospitals, librarians, libraries, teachers and schools.” Raichik’s posts are explicitly designed to stoke hatred against queer people. The Human Rights Campaign has openly called Raichik’s Libs of TikTok a “hate speech account”.

She’s turned her hate into a profitable business (Libs of TikTok sells merch, generates ad and subscription revenue, and Raichik has become a sought-after paid speaker in far-right circles) and has leveraged her power to influence legislation and get appointed to public boards in the United States.

Libs of TikTok reposted “JayGenXer’s” repost about Gillespie, but leaned hard into the transphobia. Their post inaccurately says that Gillespie “uses a sock puppet [in her] speeches” and concludes with the line “Canada is a circus”.

From there, all hell broke loose. Conservative activist Jeff Ballingall’s “Canada Proud” astroturf group promoted it. Garden variety right wing influencers like Sonduren Fanarredha scooped it up. The far right social media ecosystem churned out mountains and mountains of vitriolic transphobia. They blended their hate with calls for the United States to invade Canada and “restore sanity”. Posters claimed Canadians are incapable of governing ourselves. That we’re a lesser people who need to be brought into line. That only the current American president can save us.

Far right activists reposted and reposted and reposted the clip, adding their own commentary, based entirely on the out-and-out lie that Gillespie “requires a sock puppet”.

There were some modest attempts to correct the record. After the Libs of TikTok post, Quebec-based fact checking site VérifRadar debunked the claim that Gillespie “requires” the puppet, as did the French fact checker AFP.

That didn’t stop it from entering the mainstream. On July 2, Fox News host Jesse Watters featured the clip on his segment “DEI Thursdays”, using it to mock Canada, peddle more transphobia, and make fun of Gillespie with the out-of-context clip. After the clip hit the mainstream, its popularity began to fade, and the far-right clipping farms and influencers who spread it moved on to their next marginalized target.

The only reference to the event in The Spec came in a July 9 “roundup” interview on what the mayoral candidates have been doing. In the article, the Spec erroneously notes that Gillespie “has used a sock puppet in some interviews making the rounds on social media.”⁴ The wording here matters; it was one appearance at a comedy show that was taken out-of-context and spread across far-right social media accounts, not “some interviews”.

***

Aside from that one sentence in the Spec, there has been no reference to this saga in any local media. A mayoral candidate has been targeted by the far-right, subjected to horrifying transphobia, and mischaracterized across social and conventional media. A clip of someone currently registered to run for office here is being used to, among other things, encourage the invasion of our country.

But, still, there’s been almost no domestic reaction to the events, aside from (and this might be surprising) Ben Mulroney of all people, who spoke with Gillespie about this and her campaign on his syndicated talk show.

I reached out to Gillespie to ask about the clip, the campaign, and how the hate out there might dissuade people from participating in politics. I really appreciated her thoughtful answers and for the time she took to provide her perspectives. Enjoy my chat with mayoral candidate Scarlett Gillespie.

A conversation with Hamilton mayoral candidate Scarlett Gillespie

Chris Erl: You were one of the first people to announce a mayoral bid one year ago and were one of the first people to register on May 1. How has the campaign been so far?

Scarlett Gillespie: The campaign has been intense, humbling, and energizing. I announced early because I knew I was serious about this race and because I wanted to model what it looks like for someone from a non-traditional background to step forward into municipal leadership. Many ordinary Hamiltonians do not see themselves reflected in municipal politics. They feel and assume City Hall is for insiders, career politicians, business elites, or people with institutional access. Part of my campaign is about challenging that idea. I also felt it was important to register on May 1 in honour of International Workers' Day (May Day) given its significance of commemorating historical working-class resistance to advance workers' rights, safer conditions, and economic justice.

The campaign has also been incredibly moving. People have shared stories with me about housing, disability, poverty, public safety, small businesses, aging, addiction, and feeling ignored by the systems that are supposed to serve them. Those conversations have reminded me why I am running.

CE: You’re an outspoken activist and advocate in Hamilton who will often stand up and speak out in challenging settings (eg: during the YWCA’s Women of Distinction Awards) or on challenging topics (eg: serving as Executive Director of SWAP). Has the mayoral campaign been different? What are some of the unique challenges in running for elected office that might set it apart from some of your past experiences?

SG: Yes and no. I am used to speaking in difficult rooms and addressing issues that make people uncomfortable. As Executive Director of SWAP Hamilton, I have had to advocate on issues that carry a lot of stigma, including sex work, policing, access to housing, poverty, public health, and violence. I have also spoken publicly in moments where people were not always prepared to hear what I had to say.

What is different about running for office is that everything becomes filtered through electability, optics, and opposition. People are not only responding to what you say; they are responding to what they think someone like you represents. For me, as a trans woman, a former sex worker, a person living with disabilities, and someone living in public housing, I am aware that my very presence in the race challenges some people's ideas of who is "allowed" to lead. That is also why I think it is incredibly important.

CE: What are the biggest issues you’re hearing from people? Are there issues not being covered widely in the media that are coming up in your conversations with voters?

SG: Housing is the biggest issue by far, but it connects to everything else. People are worried about rent, homelessness, public housing, property taxes, infrastructure, and whether they can afford to stay in Hamilton. I also hear a lot about public safety, especially downtown. Residents are concerned about visible addiction, mental health crises, encampments, and disorder, but many also understand that enforcement alone will not solve those problems. People want practical, humane, effective solutions. Other issues that come up often are roads, snow clearing, accessibility, taxes, City Hall transparency, the condition of public housing, and the feeling that residents pay more while receiving less.

One issue I do not think gets enough attention is how many working-class, disabled, elderly, and low-income people are simply exhausted from trying to navigate broken systems. It is not just poverty. It is administrative cruelty. It is being sent from office to office, process to process, form to form, while your actual living conditions deteriorate, your landlord applies for Above Guideline Increases of rent, and our courts are backlogged while people suffer needlessly without protection. I also think the media does not cover bad-faith retaliation and reprisal by landlords towards tenants who advocate for improved living conditions enough. Take my personal example, with CityHousing Hamilton.

CE: Over the past few weeks, you’ve gone viral for an out-of-context clip that is being spread over social media by the far-right. Could you explain what happened at the comedy show on June 19?

SG: Just one small clarification: the Uncloseted Comedy Show clip was from June 13, while I posted the clip June 19th and it went viral shortly thereafter. The clip being circulated removes the context that it was part of a queer comedy event produced by Rae Lockdust where puppets were used (one also by Rae) to bring levity to audience-submitted questions. It was not something I have used before, nor do I use a sock puppet in regular public speaking or campaign events, as per two independent fact checks by Ophélie Dénommée-Marchand [VérifRadar] and Gwen Roley [AFP]. Anyone who has seen me delegate at City Hall, speak at public events, appear in interviews, or advocate in the community knows that is political hogwash.

What was frustrating was not only that I was targeted, but that a queer comedy event centred on joy and community was turned into a vehicle for mockery and transphobic harassment. However, I was able to capitalize and convert the attention to scale my social media exponentially in a short time. The spectacle ultimately garnered me an interview on the Ben Mulroney Show, where the son of Canada's former Progressive Conservative's Prime Minister Brian Mulroney tacitly endorsed me.

CE: What do you think it is about this clip in particular that has driven the far-right to try and make this “go viral”?

SG: I think the clip gave people who already wanted to discredit me an easy visual to weaponize as fodder. It allowed them to avoid engaging with my actual platform or the issues I am raising.

It is much easier to mock a trans woman with a puppet than it is to talk seriously about housing, public accountability, disability, poverty, or why people in Hamilton feel abandoned by their institutions. The far-right often relies on decontextualized images because they are not trying to understand people; they are trying to create a caricature. In this case, the goal was not really to discuss my campaign. It was to turn me into a symbol that could be ridiculed. However, I benefited from their poor attempts to mock me as they inadvertently amplified my message and gave me a larger platform.

CE: How have you responded to the far-right obsession over this clip?

SG: I have tried to respond with clarity and humour, but also with boundaries. I am not interested in spending my campaign chasing or attempting to correct every bad-faith interpretation of who I am, nor answer every bad faith, redundant question in a Facebook comment thread.

I have been bullied, harassed, and misunderstood for much of my life as a trans and queer person. I am not new to cruelty. What I am focused on is making sure the people who do care about Hamilton can find the real campaign underneath the noise. If anything, the clip has introduced more people to my platform. Many people came because of the controversy and stayed because they realized I am talking about issues they care about. You destroy your enemy when you make them your friend.

CE: What have you heard from the community since this clip went viral? Is this something that regular people are talking about or does it seem to be confined to the internet and some select right-wing news outlets.

SG: Most regular people I speak with are not fixated on the clip. They may have seen it, or heard about it, but when I am talking to people at doors, community events like Artcrawl earlier tonight, or online, they usually want to talk about housing, safety, taxes, accessibility, public services, and whether City Hall is listening.

The obsession seems much louder online and in certain right-wing media spaces than it is in actual community conversations. On the ground, people are much more thoughtful than social media gives them credit for. I have also received a lot of support from people who recognize what was happening. Many people saw the clip being used to mock a marginalized person and understood that it was not really about a puppet. It was about who certain people believe is allowed to be taken seriously in public spaces and in roles of leadership.

CE: So many people are tuning out of politics because of the amount of hate and vitriol out there. How do you approach this kind of hate? What would you say to anyone, especially someone with a marginalized identity, who might be hesitant to get involved because of the hate out there?

SG: I understand why people are afraid to get involved. The hate is real. The harassment is real. The emotional cost is real. I would never minimize that. Women entering politics is rife with disrespect and gender-based scrutiny and bias.

And I also strongly believe that public life cannot belong only to people who are already protected by power and money. If marginalized people are pushed out of politics because the environment is too cruel, then the people most affected and impacted by policy are excluded from shaping it. My message is not that everyone has to run for office. My message is that your voice matters. You can speak at a meeting, volunteer, organize with your neighbours and coworkers, support a campaign, intervene when someone is being bullied or harassed, write or delegate in-person to council, attend a debate, or simply refuse to believe that politics is not for you. The cruelty is meant to segregate us and make people disappear. I am choosing not to disappear and inversely use my hyper-visibility as a trans woman and public figure in a way that subverts the usual fusillade of stigma and vitriol targeting people like me to role model behaviour that assures people that... If she can do it - so can I.

CE: Anything else you’d like to share?

SG: I am running because I believe Hamilton needs leadership rooted in lived experience, public accountability, and true care for the people who are struggling most. We are the government, yet we aren't actually steering the ship. I represent that change.

My campaign is not about being perfect or polished. It is about being honest. I know what it is like to live in public housing. I know what it is like to experience homelessness. I know what it is like to navigate disability, stigma, and systems that were not built for people like me.

I also know how to organize, how to advocate, how to build partnerships, how to challenge institutions, and how to keep showing up even when it is difficult. Hamilton deserves a Mayor who listens, who understands working-class struggle, and who is willing to tell the truth about where our systems are failing.

That is why I am running. I am uniquely positioned to not only improve Hamilton, but to bring to the forefront real working-class economic justice.

1  _{Historical side note: Nominations for municipal elections used to happen on one day at a ward’s “returning office”, which was usually a local school or civic building. Each ward in the city had a designated returning officer who would accept nominations in person. For mayoral, Board of Control, and Hydro Board candidates, City Hall served as the returning office. A candidate for any office needed to have a nominator and a seconder and was then expected to give a speech to the assembled crowd. These were usually spectator events, so people would gather in these buildings to see who was being nominated and what their platform would be for the election. Nomination day was usually held around two weeks before the vote, meaning there would be a 14-ish day campaign.}

2  _{Spec archive selections used for this section: June 17, 1916; Dec 23, 1916; Dec 28, 1916; Jan 2 1917; Dec 19, 1917; Dec 20, 1917; Dec 21, 1917; Dec 24, 1917; Dec 26, 1917.}

3  _{Spec archive selections used for this section: April 2, 2020; June 9, 2020; June 13, 2024.}

4  _{Mac Christie. “Listening tours, barbecues and sock puppets: here’s how Hamilton mayoral candidates are trying to grab your vote” Hamilton Spectator, July 9, 2026 - Link (Paywalled).}