The State Capital's seat is going to be too close to predict.

Sydney just has to be the drama "jewel-in-the-crown", literally.

The most likely to win on past figures is the incumbent, Clover Moore who is also the Lord Mayor of Sydney. Or is she?

There have been various blunders and mammoth back-flips that somehow escaped the radar in political circles. We wont go into details here with the Member for Bligh (once misspelt as the "Member for Blight" in her own leaflets). Has she lost her gloss from past heroics?

Who else is running?

All are "gay friendly", or so they claim.

Linda Scott for ALP is a criminologist and psychologist who is keen to take on drug ploblems like Crystal Meth with a plan including harm minimalisation with the police and health Departments. Minority groups, however, in this electorate might not like the sniffer dogs. They are also not in the minority in Sydney.

Edward Mandla for the Liberals is an accountant and small businessman who is keen to save the economy in Inner Sydney. His posters are all over Tayler Square and hopes he has gay "sex appeal". (**cough). The Liberals have already junk-mailed anti-Green hate propaganda, as they usually do. Do they do that "in the Navy"?

Chris Harris for the Greens, is keen to put solar thermal power stations on the NSW agenda and carries Greens policy. Curiously he is the "blokiest" heterosexual of them all and is down to earth and likeable, even to those who don't vote Green.

Then a few unknown independent crazies like Malcolm Duncan, who runs around the Cross in a kilt and threatens to rip into "F#&*ng" Mandla's posters with a hook on a stick. He referes to Mandla and Moore as the "f#*#ng" enemy.

Well, it is Sydney! Even the language is colourful.

Is this a three horse race between Moore, the ALP and the Greens, or will Mandla make this a four horse race? It will be very close and won on preferences.

Anyway, here are some references to consider.

Edward Mandler: Liberal, is the only one with U Tube publicity. Quite innovative really. I love the poodles with the pink leashes. Something rather quirky about this but cute.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kM5PjcENhmo

This U Tube example is the dark side of Mandler, and indeed the Liberals. This is an example of their negative campaign. This is nasty towards Clover Moore...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fNxEbY3EMg

Clover Moore has her own cult following. To her credit, I cannot forget the hard work in being involved in the "Green Bans" some years ago saving the Queen Victoria Building. Despite the recent wave of opposition to Moore, she was strong enough to bring about the ICAC inquirey with the other independents. Moore is still feared by the major parties.

http://www.clovermoore.com

The Greens preselected the candidate: Chris Harris, the first of any in NSW at the start of last year. After a year and a half of door knocking on a crippled leg from a motorcycle accident, Chris just seems to tirelessy keep going. His legal background and getting into the nitty gritty of things is impecable. He tackles important issues that others in the major parties missed and was pivotal in exposing the Cross City Tunnel scandals. As Deputy Lord Mayor of Sydney, even the ALP has asks Chris Haris for advise as he seems to know what is going on as the "wise one" and then walks the mile, does the work that others shrink from.

http://www.chrisharris.org.au

Linda Scot has a growing popularity with social activists, particularly women's groups and those against violence and crime. She should know something about this, she works in Criminology. She is young yet well groomed and the President of the Surry Hills Neighbourhood Centre.

http://www.emilyslist.org.au/candidates/candidate.asp?id=222

Pollbludger's blog insists that this is a 2 horse race between Moore and Scott:

http://www.pollbludger.com/nsw2007/sydney.htm

Once preferences are added to the mix, however to a seat that never existed before, I disagree.

I really think this is a four horse race that no one can predict.

Just as I predicted, we have had our first nasty fight in Sydney:

Liberal accused of poster biff,March 19, 2007 12:00, the Daily Telegraph

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,,21403441-5011900,00.html

Malcolm Duncan has been running around the electorate with his stick pulling down everyone else's posters. Then there was an incident at Paddington 5 ways. Much to the bemusement of the Rose Bay Police who are still investigating the matter.

Duncan accuses Mandla of touching his bottom with his thigh and reaching for his testicals. Mandla's story is that Duncan nearly took his eye out with his stick.

Duncan accused Mandla of calling him a "fat F---" and a C----". Those who I know who know Mandla have never heard him swear before. This accusation is a surprise to us all.

Who assulted whom? This will now be a legal issue and someone could be struck off the electoral candidacy. This sort of violent behaviour must stop. I still find it hard to believe Mandla would do that, and we know that Duncan has a habbit of bad language and a quick temper. Now this is a legal matter, I can only speculate and cannot claim this as fact. Things are building up more seriously in this seat.

Wow! a bit of old time politics.

Duncan the Dill versus the rest. Still he is making a positive contribution to NSW...his deposit.

Leaving aside the competing allegations between the Liberal Candidate and myself for a moment, I think I should make clear to your bloggers my position on illegally erected posters.

This is the fourth time I have run for Parliament in the last ten years. For all that time, it has been an offence both under the Electricity Supply Act and the Parliamentary Electorates and Elections Act to erect campaign material either on public property or publicly controlled property or property controlled by the relevant electricity authority without permission. When I first investigated this in 1996, I formed the view that it would be an offence to erect a poster on a powerpole. One of my supporters did so without my permission on a pole in Marulan and the first complaint came from the National Party. I arranged for its immediate removal after being directed to do so by the Returning Officer. No poster of mine has been erected since.

There is a very good environmental reason that posters should not be erected on telegraph polls, I was informed by an officer of the Electricity Authority: they increase humidity and make the wood more liable to infestation by termites – sounds reasonable to me.

In 1999, the now Lord Mayor and the then Mayor of South Sydney, Vic Smith, had posters all over the electorate of Bligh for months before the election. What possible contribution ugly mug shots make to the political debate is beyond me. After the writs for the election issued, I sued all serious candidates who had erected posters unlawfully in the Land and Environment Court. That action ultimately cost them money and it cost me about $17,000 just to try to enforce the law.

At the next election, I adopted a different strategy. I asked the Divisional Returning Officer to direct the candidates not to erect posters in contravention of the law and to remove them. He did but informed me he did not have the resources to remove them himself (although the Act says he can and can recover the costs from the offending candidate). In a spirit of public goodwill, I offered to do it for him. He agreed. I took them down using the now famous poster-ripper and returned them to him. He directed me to put them in the bin.

At this election, I informed the Divisional Returning Officer of the arrangement last time, asked him to direct candidates who had illegally erected posters to remove them and not erect new ones (which I understand he has done), and informed other candidates and/or their representatives that I would remove any illegally erected posters. The Returning Officer informed me he did not have the resources to take them down, did not have the resources to store them and directed me to throw them in the bin. That is what I have been doing and shall continue to do until my opponents learn to obey the law.

The question here is one of trust.

When any candidate runs for political office, he or she asks you, the voter, for your trust. How can you trust someone who is prepared to commit a breach of the very Act that regulates our electoral system and under which they hope to be elected?

Now, could we get on and discuss some real policy?