How Ford won the campaign on the ground, and not in the media

113 posts / 0 new
Last post
Cueball Cueball's picture
How Ford won the campaign on the ground, and not in the media

Why the media got it wrong

Quote:
Mr. Granatstein also agreed with Ryerson University journalism professor April Lindgren's suggestion that, with polls handy, anecdotal evidence often gets short shrift.

"I think reporters have gotten away from trusting what they hear on the street because it's considered unscientific," Ms. Lindgren said.

But even the subtler signals of public intentions proved hard to read. Mr. Ford's overt decision not to court the mainstream media, and in some cases to shut writers out entirely, obscured what is often the best litmus test: the body language inside a leading campaign team.

"[Ford's team] basically gave the finger to the traditional media," Mr. Strashin said.

And some, including Globe and Mail columnist Marcus Gee, speculated that a spate of recent endorsements Mr. Smitherman garnered from public figures, including former mayors David Crombie and Art Eggleton, may have created a false sense of momentum.

Ultimately, Mr. Strashin thinks many journalists misjudged Mr. Ford's huge stable of campaign workers, many of whom "weren't seasoned politicos in any sense."

"One thing everyone underestimated was Ford's ability to get the vote out on election day," he said.

 

Issues Pages: 
Regions: 
Cueball Cueball's picture

Some NDP long-beards, such as Brian Topp, are bemusedly repeating sophomore lessons on marketing 101, and the benefit's of Ford's repetition of a "simple" mantra and staying on message in the wake of Ford's massive landslide win. But an analysis of the Pantalone campaign that ends with a glib "It wasn't there" for Pantalone doesn't cut it. The reality is that Ford was no better served by the media than Pantalone, but Ford still managed to drive through to victory. True, the Star did its best to set up Ford as evil incarnate and bury the Pantalone story at the end of the campaign, but in the early going Ford was also being treated as an "also ran", and a wacko outsider.

Progressive organizers must answer the question: what did Ford have in the early going that Pantalone did not have? The real lesson that the left needs to learn from this election is about activating and empowering and mobilizing grass roots support through direct marketing and old style glad-handing. This formula carried Ford through despite a hostile press.

Quote:
Whoever called it (or failed to), the sizable turnout and margin were because of the electoral machine Mr. Ford's campaign was able to mobilize. Thanks to months spent building telephone databases, they identified more than 140,000 people planning to vote for Mr. Ford - and made sure they got to the polls on election day to do so. The campaign had close to 4,000 volunteers, pounding pavement and knocking on doors across the city.

Why the pollsters didn't get it right

Reliance on technical analysis of polling, think tank style politics and managing campaigns solely through the media messaging paradigm are only reinforcing the disconnect that lies between the progressive left, the NDP, and the grassroots of the electorate. Worse it is leaving the left at the mercy of a hostile press. In short, we have become too clever by half. Volunteers organization, not ideas were the key to mobilizing around Ford's simple message.

 

 

Stockholm

Pantalone had no clear message and he was seen as a tired insider who had been around for 30 years. Its hard to make a purse out of a sow's ear.

Kloch

This is another reason the NDP, I don't think, can deliver anything other than downtown councillors anymore (and only in a few places): their volunteer organization in Etobicoke, parts of Scarborough and North York is almost non-existant.

Kloch

Stockholm wrote:

Pantalone had no clear message and he was seen as a tired insider who had been around for 30 years. Its hard to make a purse out of a sow's ear.

Ford is a drunken, racist, wife-beating lunatic who can barely put together two words.  Either everybody in Toronto is insane, or maybe your analysis is lacking.

Stockholm

I'm not insulting anyone. I'm giving a frank assessment of why Pantalone's candidacy was a flop. He may agree himself for all I know.

There are books to be written on why people voted for Ford - but I'm looking at why they DIDN'T vote for Pants - I think he had a very vague uninteresting status quo oriented message and he was a very undynamic and uninspiring stump performer. Its too bad - he is a very capable intelligent man - but I don't think he was ever cut out for being a mayoral candidate.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Stockholm wrote:

Pantalone had no clear message and he was seen as a tired insider who had been around for 30 years. Its hard to make a purse out of a sow's ear.

Does your buddy Layton know that you litter the internet with anonymous posts issuing crass insults about his long time friends and allies?

Kloch

I think there is one conclusion leftish candidates will have to draw from this: screw the mainstream media.  Outside of the Sun and AM radio, Ford was beaten up daily.  Drug charges, spousal abuse, drunken outbursts, sober outbursts... Giambrone text's a mistress and he runs away.

Of course, you can only do that if you have an "on-the-ground" volunteer base, which the NDP no longer has anymore.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Your so mired in cynical denial you don't even realize that calling someone a "sows ear" is an insult. It's not surprising that someone as dellusional as that would also think that their value set fits in with progressive politics, and the left.

So, I guess that is it for inspired critical thinking from the sages of NPD analysis, the tea leaves weren't their for Pantalone, according to Topp, and the NDP has no viable talent to run for mayor of Toronto, from Stockholm, here. I guess the stars wont be aligned for some time, for the NDP given this level of insight.

Kloch

At the rate the party is kicking out young people, that might happen sooner than they realize.

Cueball Cueball's picture

It is hardly going to be able to build such a base when its bigest supporters seem to spend all their free time trashing the people who represented it during the mayors race. But I doubt they really care, as long as their relatives can still keep feeding at the public trough, and a few political consultants can keep the fundraising engine going long enough to keep them in chips and beer.

I notice that one of the most likely and winnable possible candidates for mayor in 2014, Adam Vaughan has assidiously kept his distance from being to close too the quick sand. A smart move.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Young people don't donate, so who cares? Nor do the homeless, and most other people on marginal incomes.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Here's a telling graphic from the Torontoist on Ford's new "united" Toronto:

How Toronto Voted For Mayor

jrootham

Cueball, Stockholm may be insulting, but you are slanderous.  This is helpful how?

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

Meanwhile in the real world:

Quote:

Ford's campaign strategist Nick Kouvalis said his camp ran a simple campaign that appealed to the average voter.

"Identify your voters, raise money and lock them in. Get five bucks from everybody and they're all committed to you instead of trying to get 2,500 bucks from a few people," Kouvalis said. "People switch their votes but once they make that donation even if it's 50 bucks they are with you."

 

 

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
"People switch their votes but once they make that donation even if it's 50 bucks they are with you."

 

I remember being told in Psychology class in first year that the big reason candidates want to put a cheap sign on your lawn is not because you're so influential that people will follow your support, but because, psychologically, it won't make sense to you to NOT vote for the person you've already supported. I call Jedi Mind Trick on this one!

Cueball Cueball's picture

We know how Toronto voted. The point is to discern how it was that they voted for whom. Again, on the Ford Campaign, and Nick Kouvalis:

Read Carefully:

Quote:

Dismissed as ill-fit for public office when he entered the race, Mr. Ford has become the man to beat without the help of any of Toronto’s big-name political strategists, all of whom flocked to George Smitherman, Rocco Rossi, and, to a lesser extent, Joe Pantalone.

With a little more than three weeks to go until election day, veteran Conservative and Liberal strategists such as Warren Kinsella, Bernie Morton, Bruce Davis and John Laschinger are now panicking to figure out how to keep Mr. Ford from becoming mayor.

Mr. Kouvalis, a no-name by comparison, is prepping his candidate for what will undoubtedly be the fight of his career, especially if the others drop out and coalesce around Mr. Smitherman.

“Another poll will come out that shows us with a strong lead,” he said. “They’ll have no choice but to go negative and we expect that they’ll throw everything but the kitchen sink at Rob in the last two weeks.”

Nick Kouvalis, the man behind the Ford campaign

The funny thing is that all of Kouvalis's tactics are all street smart direct marketing rock promoter moves -- but this leaves the egghead media specialists in the Liberal and NDP camps in the dust.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Snert wrote:

Quote:
"People switch their votes but once they make that donation even if it's 50 bucks they are with you."

 

I remember being told in Psychology class in first year that the big reason candidates want to put a cheap sign on your lawn is not because you're so influential that people will follow your support, but because, psychologically, it won't make sense to you to NOT vote for the person you've already supported. I call Jedi Mind Trick on this one!

It is pretty simple Snert, this is all about getting a person to do what we call taking ownership of the candidate by making them personally invest in the candidate.

This is the essential quality that must be understood about networked grass roots campaigns. Any "investment" is good, including putting up signs, or any small task is good enough.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Now the problem with the populist campaign, as opposed to a true grass roots campaign is that it replace real empowerment generated by having ownership of the candidate or movement with a "feeling" of empowerment generated by having ownership of the candidate or movement, in the same manner that one becomes emotionally involved with a sports team.

But, the chief lesson to be learned is that an important factor in both a grass roots campaign, and a populist campaign, ownership of the movement of candidate is an essential element of being successful.

Significant in the Rob Ford campaign is that he is bringing into play many persons who are not normally active politically, and empowering them through giving them ownership of the process inclusively. And this is working in segments of the population that traditionally the left would like to think it represents.

This is not to say the Mr. Ford is really going to do anything for these people in the long run, but it does underscore the fact that they are not being mobilized by the left, and it is also clear that they are not satisfied with being on the outside looking in, and they are looking for solutions. To my mind the fact that there is this movement for "change" among marginalized people, is an excelent sign, even if the results are not what we would expect or want.

jrootham

The Star's view. (Did the first graphic change?)

Election results map (Star)

Stockholm

I also think that Pantalone was never really in it to win. I don't think he started campaigning until September and I never got the impression that he really wanted to make the effort. It was like he had already decided to retire and decided to go on a farewell tour.

You can't expect people to vote for you when you don't look like you're taking yourself seriously as someone who is in it to win.

Kloch

Cueball wrote:

Snert wrote:

Quote:
"People switch their votes but once they make that donation even if it's 50 bucks they are with you."

 

I remember being told in Psychology class in first year that the big reason candidates want to put a cheap sign on your lawn is not because you're so influential that people will follow your support, but because, psychologically, it won't make sense to you to NOT vote for the person you've already supported. I call Jedi Mind Trick on this one!

It is pretty simple Snert, this is all about getting a person to do what we call taking ownership of the candidate by making them personally invest in the candidate.

This is the essential quality that must be understood about networked grass roots campaigns. Any "investment" is good, including putting up signs, or any small task is good enough.

 

My only qualifier on this one, is that there is a history of candidates winning sign wars and still getting obliterated.  The NDP has a history, in Parkdale-High Park, for example, of doing well in sign wars and still losing badly.  The municipal candidate who came a distant second in Ward 6 had way more signs than votes.  

KenS

Cueball wrote:

Significant in the Rob Ford campaign is that he is bringing into play many persons who are not normally active politically, and empowering them through giving them ownership of the process inclusively. And this is working in segments of the population that traditionally the left would like to think it represents.

I'm skeptical about this. So much has been made about Ford the outsider, and about the partipation of immigrants in the campaign.

Ford himself is a veteran campaigner. And the small c conservatives have LOTS of veteran campaigners... who have never had a chance to go this big. Plus there would have to be a lot from Lastman's machine. Pull all of these people together and you've got impressive potential and VERY extensive networks of campaigners for all levels of a campaign.

When they started, they would have known they were the underdogs. But with huge potential outside the city core. Then, icing on the cake: starting with Gambrione's immolation, their putative opponents went into dissaray.

"bringing into play many persons who are not normally active politically". How many is 'many'? In any strong campaign you have a combination of veteran volunteers that you knew to tap, and people who walk through the door because you are happening. If you dont have the people walking through the door you dont have a strong campaign. But they are not the dominant numbers. If they were, you'd have severe coordination problems: campaigns who get most of their volunteers late are flameouts. Campaigns like to emhasise 'all the new people', and when they do, it makes good copy and sound bites. But that doesnt mean its what it is cracked up to be.

I would agree that no matter what, its impresive how many people the Ford campaign organized and how effectively. Wherever exactly they came from, for purposes of lessons, is kind of beside the point. But I'm skeptical that many of them really did come from 'unexpected sectors'.

[Not that the potential attraction of immigrants to social conservatism should be unexpected.]

KenS

Cueball, you go on about how "the NDP sages" around here have nothing to say. Who wants to 'engage' with insults? Anyone can beat up on soft targets: toss off comments from Stockholm who is thick skinned enough to ignore the insults, and repeatedly going after Brian Topp's "analyis" of Pantalone's campaign when there is not even an attempt at analysis. Good grief, Topps column is a few paragraphs saying Ford did what you are supposed to do.

Cueball wrote:

Progressive organizers must answer the question: what did Ford have in the early going that Pantalone did not have?

Pretty simple. Ford had an impressive campaign machine that had been built for months. The Pantalone campaign organization was slapped together.

Cueball wrote:

The real lesson that the left needs to learn from this election is about activating and empowering and mobilizing grass roots support through direct marketing and old style glad-handing. This formula carried Ford through despite a hostile press.

All I have knowledge about is that Ford had a really good old fashioned voter contact and E-day machine. How they did that would interest me, but it isnt rocket science either. Even in Toronto, election machines for successful mayoral candidates have always come together around the candidates, not the parties. As out of the mould as Ford is, he still fits into that. And who he was going to be running against turned out to be an unending farce of failures around one or another individual candidates.

But I'm very curious where direct marketing fits in. Direct marketing as in delivered to peoples doors? The Ford campaign put that to a lot of use? And/or you see it as central? How so?

Cueball wrote:

Reliance on technical analysis of polling, think tank style politics and managing campaigns solely through the media messaging paradigm are only reinforcing the disconnect that lies between the progressive left, the NDP, and the grassroots of the electorate. Worse it is leaving the left at the mercy of a hostile press. In short, we have become too clever by half. Volunteers organization, not ideas were the key to mobilizing around Ford's simple message.

The emphasis on mistaken polling, etc, is the medias navel gazing schtick. I see no evidence it substantially distracted any of the campaigns. Its just that nobody except Ford had a serious rival to his conventional boots on the ground campaign.

 

Kloch

Ford was polling 50% in immigrant communities, compared to Smitherman's 32%.   So how do you know that immigrants have a "potential attraction" to social conservativism?  And even if they do, is that really the most important issue for them?  Personally, my experience is that even socially conservative types care more about their wallet's then whether two guys are allowed to kiss in public.

In any case, it doesn't matter since the Mayor can't do anything about gay marriage, except be publicly against it.

I disagree with your analysis that his opponents were "an unending farce of failures".  Sorry, but he was up against a former Deputy Mayor and the former Deputy Premier.    That hardly qualifies as a farce.  Giambrone's immolation had nothing to do with Ford winning.  If anything, it should have made it harder, since there would be less of a vote split on the left.

I will share something with you that not a lot of people have discussed: the first poll that showed him in the lead showed that nearly half his support came from self-identified Liberals and New Democrats.  I think a lot of those people feel alienated from the political establishment, including groups like the Labour Councils and downtown acitivisty types. They see the corporate world, public sector unions and the mainstream political establishment as one big party that they are cut-off from. The more the establishment mocked Ford, the more they saw him as their man. 

KenS

I didnt say that social conservatism is the most important thing to immigrnats. But it does have purchase.

And my point about the farce of the opponents is them pulling together campaigns. That was Fords strength. Gambrione's immolation did not have to be defining. But it had to be reversed by somebody. Being deputy Mayor or Deputy Premeir means squat for decisively pulling a team around you. And no one else did that. I think its possible Ford could have beat even a well organized opponent. But the opposing campaigns he faced made it easy.

It doesnt surprise me at all that half Ford's support came from self-identified Liberals and New Democrats.

sanizadeh

KenS wrote:

I didnt say that social conservatism is the most important thing to immigrnats. But it does have purchase.

I doubt that very much.  IMO most new immigrant communities are still struggling with getting themselves established and making politicians listen to them. This is not to say there are no progressives or conservatives in immigrant communities, but that we simply cannot yet afford to draw lines based on social ideologies. For Immigrants whoever appears (or pretends) to be listening, gets the vote. It was also an anti-establishment vote in some communities where the majority of community leaders are Liberal party lackeys, and a sense of dissatisfaction with those leaders may have pushed many members of the community in the opposite direction.

Aristotleded24

Kloch wrote:
I think there is one conclusion leftish candidates will have to draw from this: screw the mainstream media.

I agree. Whining about how the media is out to get us doesn't change anything and it sounds like sour grapes. It's a huge opportunity Judy Wasylycia-Leis had and failed to take advantage of.

Cueball Cueball's picture

KenS wrote:

Cueball, you go on about how "the NDP sages" around here have nothing to say. Who wants to 'engage' with insults? Anyone can beat up on soft targets: toss off comments from Stockholm who is thick skinned enough to ignore the insults, and repeatedly going after Brian Topp's "analyis" of Pantalone's campaign when there is not even an attempt at analysis. Good grief, Topps column is a few paragraphs saying Ford did what you are supposed to do.

Cueball wrote:

Progressive organizers must answer the question: what did Ford have in the early going that Pantalone did not have?

Pretty simple. Ford had an impressive campaign machine that had been built for months. The Pantalone campaign organization was slapped together.

Cueball wrote:

The real lesson that the left needs to learn from this election is about activating and empowering and mobilizing grass roots support through direct marketing and old style glad-handing. This formula carried Ford through despite a hostile press.

All I have knowledge about is that Ford had a really good old fashioned voter contact and E-day machine. How they did that would interest me, but it isnt rocket science either. Even in Toronto, election machines for successful mayoral candidates have always come together around the candidates, not the parties. As out of the mould as Ford is, he still fits into that. And who he was going to be running against turned out to be an unending farce of failures around one or another individual candidates.

But I'm very curious where direct marketing fits in. Direct marketing as in delivered to peoples doors? The Ford campaign put that to a lot of use? And/or you see it as central? How so?

Cueball wrote:

Reliance on technical analysis of polling, think tank style politics and managing campaigns solely through the media messaging paradigm are only reinforcing the disconnect that lies between the progressive left, the NDP, and the grassroots of the electorate. Worse it is leaving the left at the mercy of a hostile press. In short, we have become too clever by half. Volunteers organization, not ideas were the key to mobilizing around Ford's simple message.

The emphasis on mistaken polling, etc, is the medias navel gazing schtick. I see no evidence it substantially distracted any of the campaigns. Its just that nobody except Ford had a serious rival to his conventional boots on the ground campaign.

1) Ford was not campaigning for months. He was campaigning for years.

2) You are right it is not rocked science to build the kind of organization that Ford put together. That is why Topp's apparent inability to recognize the evident fact that it was organization based on good old fashioned glad handing that propelled Ford to victory sticks out like a soar thumb, and indicates a serious incapacity of analysis that certainly can not be good for the NDP electoral results. In short, I agree about the "media naval gazing". My point is that Topp doesn't seem to be able to get beyond it.

He did make an analysis of the Pantalone campaign, he said: "It wasn't there"! He didn't say, the Pantalone organization failed to get the boots on the ground fast enough.

3) It was quite evident to me that the media strategy applied by Laschinger and co. was just fine. The problem was that the organization that was supposed to put the boots on the ground did not show up for the fight, or was incapable of doing so. That should at the least have been the NDP. On the ground the labour unions were visible if not overwhelming.

My conclusion is that where the right has successfully spent the Miller years building up alliances within the communities of the marginalized of Toronto, the left, and in particular the NDP, has failed to successfully build those same relationships. What should be a natural strategic alliance between those who preach diversity, and those who are "diverse" (this term is really beginning to bother me) does not exist, in part because the labour unions, and the party that many imagine represents them only plays lip service to diversity in theory and not in practice.

This is best exampled, by the race in Ward 19 where the NDP chose to back the son of the NDP leader against a well known non-white social activist who had been building up her ward organization for many years, and was clearly capable of putting up a good fight to win the ward, as can be seen because she actually came in second, with about 3/5ths of the vote share of the NDP establishment candidate.

If the NDP really wants to be the party of diversity, it had better walk the walk. The left leadership of the immigrant communities needs to be nourished and fostered, if the NDP wants to foster the alliance with progressive new Canadians. Not fostering the progressive leadership in immigrant communities only dis-empowers them and will result in making their communities open terrain for the right to move in and mobilize through the conservative elements in those communities.

This is one of the things that has occurred in the recent campaign and helped Ford. Ford has been building this movement for a lot longer than a few months, and the NDP had better take a look at this campaign closely and understand that it has to give more than lip-service to diversity, and build for the long haul as opposed to short term electoral gain, based in what seems politically expedient.

If it does want to make progress in this department, one thing it could look at is putting the needs of the communities it wants to represent, above and beyond the immediate political aspirations of the party insider apparatus, once in a while. Suggesting that non-white folks don't flock to the NDP because they are more homophobic is not going to cut it.

Notice that Ford favourite and Black evangelical social conservative minister Wendell Brereton in Ward 6 only managed 605 votes . If there was any truth to the slur that people of Caribbean decent are flocking to the right because of they are driven by social conservative values, the truth of that lies there. Frankly the assertion itself sounds like a bit of a prejudiced slur.

Aristotleded24

Cueball wrote:
If the NDP really wants to be the party of diversity, it had better walk the walk. The left leadership of the immigrant communities needs to be nourished and fostered, if the NDP wants to foster the alliance with progressive new Canadians. Not fostering the progressive leadership in immigrant communities only dis-empowers them and will result in making their communities open terrain for the right to move in and mobilize through the conservative elements in those communities.

I remember when Steve Ashton ran for the Manitoba NDP leadership last year he continually referred to Manitoba's ethnic diversity and had a broad base of support within those communities.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Steve Ashton doesn't sound like a very diverse name. Here is his policy page, I couldn't find the word diversity in it once. Anyway I don't really know that much about Manitoba.

Aristotleded24

Ashton actually lost the leadership race, and that's the policy page for the NDP, not Ashton. He may not have used the word diversity, but his support is that strong in ethnic communities that he doesn't have to.

 

trippie

As every thing. Ford won because ofthe economy.

The leaders of the working class, a long time ago, sold us out.

Ford won when the ruling elite were able to make the City workers look like over paid lazy fucks that were taking the tax payers for a ride.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Ashton actually lost the leadership race, and that's the policy page for the NDP, not Ashton. He may not have used the word diversity, but his support is that strong in ethnic communities that he doesn't have to.

 

I don't really care about the word "diversity". The problem is confronting real live issues of social mobility for immigrant populations. And we are talking about Toronto, where there seems to be a big disconnect. 

Aristotleded24

Cueball wrote:
Aristotleded24 wrote:
Ashton actually lost the leadership race, and that's the policy page for the NDP, not Ashton. He may not have used the word diversity, but his support is that strong in ethnic communities that he doesn't have to.
I don't really care about the word "diversity". The problem is confronting real live issues of social mobility for immigrant populations. And we are talking about Toronto, where there seems to be a big disconnect.

Fair enough, I was basically holding up somoene who had successfully done what you advocated in regards to mobilizing the immigrant community.

Cueball Cueball's picture

I think the point I am trying to get across is that it is not enough to represent a particular constituency but to help build political space where they can represent themselves.

Sineed

Interesting insights, everybody!

I agree that Ford was campaigning for years.  I'm thinking Ford's victory was basically bought and paid for by the Ford family, who purchased the best lawyers to help Ford beat his criminal charges over the years, and also helped buy the most effective political organizers who helped a weak candidate win against a field of poorly-organized competition.  

Ford is in 'way over his head - we're in for a few years of stagnation, IMV.  It's the career of Nick Kouvalis that is one to watch.

Polunatic2

I'm trying to think of another Cdn politician who has been as badly underestimated as Rob Ford in recent times. For starters, he was smart enough to be elected mayor. His re-election campaign has already begun.

Caissa

Stephen Harper.

Stockholm

Polunatic2 wrote:

I'm trying to think of another Cdn politician who has been as badly underestimated as Rob Ford in recent times. For starters, he was smart enough to be elected mayor. His re-election campaign has already begun.

Chretien was constantly underestimated as well. But I think Ford is in a bit of a class of his own in that no one (even people on the right who agree with his politics) believes he has much upstairs or that he has any real agenda beyond stopping the so-called "gravy train" - what happens once he stops having $70,000 a year spent on having plants watered at City Hall and all those plants die of thirst? The what?

Because this is municipal politics with no party structure - it is a totally different situation from federal or provincial politics. One of two things will happen:

Scenario 1 - Ford follows the Mel Lastman model. He quickly gets a couple of his pet issues through (ie: reducing councillors office budgets and getting rid of the vehicle registration tax) - then he goes "wobbly" (not hard since he clearly has no policies beyond the above), appoints councillors from across the ideological divide to executive and to head committees and keeps them busy - and basically Ford ends up as sort of a glad-handing mascot for the city while the real work of city government continues as usual.

Scenario 2 - Ford follows the Larry O'Brien model and tries to ram his people and policies down council's throat, makes no attempt to build any alliances and the result is that he turns the centre and the left against his and start losing vote after vote on issue after issue and becomes a virtual prisoner in his office.

Which will it be?

pogge

I haven't read the whole thread so apologies if this has been noted, but if you haven't seen it check out the map in [url=http://torontoist.com/2010/10/which_wards_voted_for_who_for_mayor.php]this post[/url] at torontoist. Smitherman won downtown Toronto. Ford won the 'burbs. Thank Mike Harris.

Edited to add: That should in no way be interpreted as an endorsement of Smitherman. If I expressed my opinion of him in a thread title, the mods would likely edit it. Wink

Stockholm

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If we want to elect a progressive mayor in the future, it won't happen with a stereotypical downtown counter-cultural media scribe like Adam Vaughan (much as i like him now). It has to be someone who can appeal to the suburban voters. Someone like Shelley Carroll from North York would fit the bill.

edmundoconnor

I'm betting on Lastman, mark II. I'd prefer the second scenario, but even his handlers know that if he goes off the deep end, he's a one-term mayor who damages the conservative (big and small C) brand in Toronto for years afterward. Either way, if Shelley Carroll runs in 2014, she'll either beat him by an inch or a mile (first and second scenarios, respectively). She's smart as hell, she's got financial nous, and she's from the suburbs. Vaughan for deputy mayor.

KenS

sanizadeh wrote:

KenS wrote:

I didnt say that social conservatism is the most important thing to immigrnats. But it does have purchase.

I doubt that very much.  IMO most new immigrant communities are still struggling with getting themselves established and making politicians listen to them. This is not to say there are no progressives or conservatives in immigrant communities, but that we simply cannot yet afford to draw lines based on social ideologies.

Its not an either/or. Clearly, people can be more concerned with daily on the ground issues of getting on, and devote themselves to whatever concerns they have. Lefties make the assumption that it is the populist message that is the defining resonance with immigrants who supported Ford. That is true to a very big degree. But it is also what we prefer to think. And for a significant chunk of communities, a nebulous free floating conservatism is as much there as it is anywhere else in Canada. It can resonate in immigrant communities, and to a substantial degree it did with the Ford campaign.

Immigrants are no different than anyone else: part of the appeal is the content/issues of the populist appeal, and part of it is the free floating 'aura' of alienation.

KenS

Again, when it comes to municipal politics, the NDP is not this machine that autonomously chooses where it will go and what it will do.

It takes what individual candidates there are, and as a machine, or part of a machine, works for them, through them, whatever. And nowhere is that more true than the race for Mayor. When it comes to the race for Mayor, the NDP is just a part of the left [which is turn a part of the amporphous politics of municipla coalitions]. Its the biggest single piece of that picture, but is not and never will be THE driver.

Skinny Dipper

Here are some of my own thoughts about the top three mayoral candidates:

Pantalone was the a Miller mini-me.  He represented the status quo when voters wanted change.  Had Pantolone offered some ideas that would have differentiated himself from Miller, he probably would have received a few more votes.

Smitherman gave a first impression that he wanted to become the mayor of Toronto because he wanted to become the mayor of Toronto.  His mayoral race was about him--not the voters.  It was only later in the race that he had to define himself vis-à-vis Rob Ford.  By then, it was too late.  His message seemed to be, "Vote for me; I'm not Rob Ford."

Ford knows the city well outside the downtown core.  He knew that a simple message geared toward suburban voters that he would take care of their basic services resonated with the surburban voters.  He could ignore the arts and social organiztions such as those who support the arts and Pride Toronto because their voters from the burbs are less likely to benefit from City Hall funding the arts community and Pride Toronto.  The suburbs are not hotbeds of street performers.

How does the Toronto mayroal election translate to federal and provincial politics?  For the NDP, its problem is right now is how to preach to the proletariat when the Conservative Party has them in their grasp.  The NDP preaches to the working class.  However, the working class voted for Ford in the mayoral election.  The working class will likely vote for the Conservatives.  Unionists will vote for the Conservatives.  Unionists who are also moose hunters will vote for the Conservatives.  The NDP works strongly for the environment and women's rights.  The party strongly supports Canada's aboriginals.  However, based on Pavlov's hierarchy of needs, these issues are not basic (unless one belongs to a group supporting the environment, and rights for women and aboriginals).  The Conservatives talk about lowering taxes for homeowners so that homeowners can pay for food, shelter, and clothing (basic Pavlov needs).

The Liberal Party will get into trouble in the next election if they complain about the F-35 aircraft purchases by the Conservative government.  The NDP will also get into trouble if they complain about human rights abuses during the G20 weekend in Toronto.  While these issues are very important, they do not deal with the basic needs of Canadians unless these two parties can translate that households will lose or have lost several hundreds of dollars because of the Conservatives' ineptitude.  As for the Liberals and their views about the F-35 purchases, I believe that if Ignatieff's Liberals were to form the next government, they would likely not change a thing.

Messaging will be extremely important in the next federal election.  If the Liberals and NDP can't express basis messages to voters living in Toronto's suburbs, the Conservatives may close their donut hole centred in Toronto's downtown core.

KenS

Unionist is going to vote for the Conservatives. Who knew?

I dont know whether Unionist hunts moose. But it sounds like hes going to vote for the Conservatives even if he doesnt bag a moose.

As us proletarians say, "rack em and stack em."

Yee haw.

Aristotleded24

Skinny Dipper wrote:
Smitherman gave a first impression that he wanted to become the mayor of Toronto because he wanted to become the mayor of Toronto.  His mayoral race was about him--not the voters.  It was only later in the race that he had to define himself vis-à-vis Rob Ford.  By then, it was too late.  His message seemed to be, "Vote for me; I'm not Rob Ford."

"George Smitherman wants to be mayor because George Smitherman wants to be mayor"-Parkdale Councillor Gord Perks

Skinny Dipper wrote:
How does the Toronto mayroal election translate to federal and provincial politics?  For the NDP, its problem is right now is how to preach to the proletariat when the Conservative Party has them in their grasp.  The NDP preaches to the working class.  However, the working class voted for Ford in the mayoral election.  The working class will likely vote for the Conservatives.  Unionists will vote for the Conservatives.  Unionists who are also moose hunters will vote for the Conservatives.  The NDP works strongly for the environment and women's rights.  The party strongly supports Canada's aboriginals.  However, based on Pavlov's hierarchy of needs, these issues are not basic (unless one belongs to a group supporting the environment, and rights for women and aboriginals).  The Conservatives talk about lowering taxes for homeowners so that homeowners can pay for food, shelter, and clothing (basic Pavlov needs).

The NDP actually has a chance to test this out in Manitoba. The constituency of Dauphin is open. The former MP actually tried to run for mayor of Dauphin and lost, so that is more evidence to me that traditional voting patterns can no longer be taken for granted. The NDP should send resources to Dauphin because it would provide an excellent petri dish for strategies the Party could take to beat Harper in his own back yard.

Skinny Dipper wrote:
Messaging will be extremely important in the next federal election.  If the Liberals and NDP can't express basis messages to voters living in Toronto's suburbs, the Conservatives may close their donut hole centred in Toronto's downtown core.

It should be pointed out that in Toronto the Conservatives beat the NDP in most ridings, so they could certainly ride a rising tide and win.

Doug

A map of the mayoral vote, this time on the basis of polls rather than wards

 

Results? Well, the gays and U of T students really really don't like Rob Ford.

 

Stargazer

That includes Scarborough Campus students.

edmundoconnor

Doug wrote:

A map of the mayoral vote, this time on the basis of polls rather than wards

Results? Well, the gays and U of T students really really don't like Rob Ford.

I'm just wondering how long it's going to take Ford to pull the city's funding away from Pride. The argument that the city shouldn't be helping to support Pride is an odd one, given that the event and associated activities have been a boon for many local businesses, and money spent by the city on the event reaps many more times the amount put in (not to mention the additional taxes). Would Ford really want to be opposing local businesses?

Pages

Topic locked