Staggered Senatorial Elections: Strategic Candidacy and Profile Building

Visibility:
It's not just about standing
it's about where you stood first!

Strategic Candidacy and Profile Building

If Senator elections are held first, it’s entirely plausible that some candidates might run for Senator not with a huge expectation of winning, but to gain island-wide visibility—a kind of political audition. This tactic could:

• Boost name recognition ahead of Deputy elections
• Secure media coverage and public familiarity without the cost of a full campaign

Since 2005, I have noted five notable examples - and there may be more, especially among candidates who used the Senator platform to test the waters or raise their profile before pivoting to parish-level contests. Out of respect, as some are still in the States, I am not going to name them. However, since he has long left the States after just one election cycle, I think I can mention Daniel Wimberley:

Case Study: Daniel Wimberley

Daniel Wimberley is a textbook example of the Senator-first visibility strategy in action—though with a twist of idealism and reformist zeal.

In 2008, Daniel Wimberley stood for Senator in the island-wide election held on 15 October. He wasn’t elected, placing 14th out of 21 candidates with 3,458 votes. But just six weeks later, on 26 November, he ran for Deputy of St Mary—and won, securing 52.7% of the vote in a Parish noted for the smallest electorate in the Island.

When he contested the Deputy seat in St Mary, just six weeks later, he faced:

David Johnson (206 votes)
David Richardson (28 votes)

That’s a classic case of using the Senatorial stage to introduce oneself to the island, then pivoting to a parish-level contest with boosted name recognition. 

The 2008 election and Senatorial Profile Building

In the 2008 Jersey Senatorial election, 21 candidates stood for 6 available seats in the island-wide contest held on 15 October 20082. It was a packed field, featuring sitting Senators, Deputies aiming higher, and a wave of newcomers testing their island-wide appeal.

Then, just six weeks later, on 26 November 2008, the Deputy elections were held across the parishes. And here’s where the visibility strategy came into play.

Of the 21 Senatorial candidates, at least 6 went on to win Deputy seats in the same election cycle.

That’s nearly 30% of the Senatorial field who pivoted successfully to parish-level contests - often with boosted name recognition from their island-wide campaigns.

This pattern underscores how the Senatorial stage functioned as a kind of political audition. Even without winning, candidates gained media exposure, public familiarity, and a platform to test their ideas, then leveraged that visibility in the Deputy elections. And it is clear that standing for Senator can often also create a perception of legitimacy or experience, even if candidates don’t win.

Fairness and Free Media Exposure

I think standing twice should consider a question about fairness, which hinges on access and equity:

In particular,  there is free press and media coverage of Senatorial candidates. This gives them a platform that Deputy-only candidates won’t have. Newcomers to Deputy races who didn’t run for Senator may face an uphill battle against better-known names. Media neutrality (we hope anyway!) may not fully compensate for the visibility gap, especially if coverage is driven by novelty or perceived viability. 

This creates a two-tier entry system: one for those who can afford to “test the waters” in a high-profile race, and another for those who enter cold. This could undermine Deputy elections, by privileging prior exposure over policy or community engagement.

Recent proposals to reinstate Senators for 2026 have focused on voter equity and island-wide mandates, but haven’t deeply addressed the timing implications. The Clothier Commission once argued there was no functional difference between Senators and Deputies, which makes this kind of strategic candidacy even more problematic.

That is why simultaneous elections - a one day "General Election" for Senator and Deputy elections on the same day is much better. This removes the “first mover” advantage and ensures all candidates face voters at the same moment. It prevents profile-building through early candidacy.