Toronto after the election, continued

111 posts / 0 new
Last post
robbie_dee
Toronto after the election, continued

If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever.
- George Orwell

 

Congratulations, Rob Ford! (continued from [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/central-canada/have-you-driven-ford-lately-t....)

Papal Bull

N.R.KISSED

robbie_dee wrote:

If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever.
- George Orwell

 

Congratulations, Rob Ford! (continued from [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/central-canada/have-you-driven-ford-lately-t....)

I think with Ford the image is more of an armpit rubbing in your face-forever

Mick

The class struggle continues...

Ontario Coalition Against Poverty Gets Ready to Confront New Toronto Mayor
Rob Ford

Eight years of the progressive Mayor David Miller has meant little for the
poorest people in Toronto. The former City Council and David Miller are
responsible for 312 shelter beds for the homeless being cut with only 60
ever replaced. Promises of new shelters have been empty rhetoric, with
people waiting years for any new spaces to open up. Gentrification has
continued at high speed, Toronto Community Housing is looking to sell off
properties, while the waiting list for housing is almost 10 years long.
Transit fares have gone up and accessibility was one of the first things
to be cut from the budget. Welfare rates are shamefully inadequate, while
city administrators willfully deny people access to vital benefits such as
the Special Diet Allowance. Poverty in Toronto has continued to grow under
a so-called progressive Mayor. The City of Toronto is increasingly divided
between the rich and the poor.

Now Toronto has elected Rob Ford as its new Mayor. OCAP knows Ford and his
priorities all too well. He has consistently supported cuts to
Welfare/ODSP including the recent cut to the Special Diet Allowance,
spoken out against social programs, community housing, affordable transit,
the homeless and immigrants. Ford's rhetoric in this campaign has been to
'end the gravy train at City Hall' and to 'respect the taxpayer'. What Rob
Ford really means is all too familiar; cutting social services, housing
and transit, while giving tax breaks to the wealthy. We will see cuts to
services that poor people need on top of an already existing lack of
funding to services thanks to Miller. If anything, the 'gravy train' for
the rich will be all that Ford cares about.

"Rob Ford's agenda is the same as Mike Harris’ was in the 1990s –
attacking poor people to benefit the wealthy." says OCAP organizer John
Clarke. “During the Harris period Ontario saw unprecedented civil dissent
and disruption, we are putting Ford on notice that he ought to expect the
same." OCAP will be working with communities across Toronto to fight
Ford’s agenda and defend the rights of poor people.

Media inquiries:
416-925-6939
-----------------

To get involved:
Ontario Coalition Against Poverty
www.ocap.ca

Mick

Double post

Stargazer

Thanks Mick.

Lord Palmerston

Does anyone know how long it takes for mayoral results by ward to be released?  I'm assuming Ford won big in Etobicoke, North York and Scarborough and got crushed in the Old City of Toronto.

Wilf Day

Stockholm wrote:
by my count there were three progressive losses (Heaps, Bussin and Beaulieu losing to Bailao) . . . But there were also three progressive gains (Sarah Doucet, Mary Fragedakis and Jaye Robinson). All in all, I would say that the ideological makeup of council is almost identical to what it was before. I might add that Kristyn Wong-Tam is a shift to the left from Kyle Rae as well.

In that case, Ford and the Council may have serious difficulties with each other.

"Parliamentary mayors" chosen by Council are normal in the UK, where only London directly elects its mayor (plus a small handful of small cities). No cities in France directly elect mayors. Germany's two largest cities, Berlin and Hamburg, also have their Councils choose their mayors.

This would solve one main problem. Fair Vote Toronto says it's time for a municipal democratic reform program.

Quote:
Fair Vote Toronto is calling on the new Council to make an immediate commitment to a substantive democratic renewal process, including a citizen-driven, expert-supported review of all options for electing the Council and mayor.

"This process also needs to address an obvious conflict of interest. The politicians elected by the current system cannot have total control of the reform process if we want what is best for voters," said Greenan. "This process needs a strong citizen engagement element, including an arms-length body - for example, a citizens' jury or citizens' assembly, supported by experts - to help develop the reform proposals."

Fair Vote Toronto said the reform process must focus on two core problems.

"First and most important, we need a modern, fair voting system that allows all Torontonians to cast equal and effective votes so our City Council is truly representative," said Greenan. "It shouldn't matter if we're in a minority in our neighbourhood - whether an ethnic minority or more typically a political minority, like a conservative living in the downtown core or a left-of-centre voter living in other areas. We all have a right to representation and we need a voting system that honours that right."

"Second, we have to step back and look at all options for electing the mayor," said Greenan.

"While Mayor Ford won with nearly half the votes, today's system is subject to unpredictable flukes related to vote-splitting. We have two possible solutions. Many major European cities have parliamentary style mayors, elected by the council so that person is reflective of the majority and has a built-in working relationship with the council. The second approach is to use an instant run-off ballot for electing the mayor, allowing voters to rank candidates, and requiring the winner to gain 50 percent plus one. Both approaches have their advantages and disadvantages. Both deserve full consideration by voters."

Lord Palmerston

Here's how I see the composition of council:

Ward 1 - Vincent Cristani, the only "Rob Ford Party" candidate (Gus Cusimano in Ward 9 just fell short of taking out Maria Augimeri) to succeed, over Suzan Hall - rightward shift

Ward 13 - Sarah Doucette over Bill Saundercook - leftward shift

Ward 15 - Josh Colle beats Rob Davis - while endorsed by Moscoe, he won't be as left, so rightward shift

Ward 18 - Ana Bailao over Kevin Beaulieu - rightward shift, though it's unlikely she'll be in Ford territory

Ward 25 - Jaye Robinson seems Kathleen Wynne-ish politically - a leftward shift from the Tory Cliff Jenkins

Ward 27 - Kristyn Wong-Tam over Ken Chan - leftward shift, KWT is to the left of Kyle Rae (and while Rae was increasingly compromised and opportunistic towards the Libs, I think Ken Chan would have been to the right of Rae).

Ward 29 - Mary Fragedakis over Jane Pitfield and Jennifer Wood (thanks for running!) - significant leftward shift from Case Ootes

Ward 32 - Mary Margaret McMahon crushes Sandra Bussin - rightward shift, but like Ana Bailao it's unlikely she'll be in Ford territory

Ward 35 - Michelle Berardinetti over Adrian Heaps - rightward shift

Ward 36 - Gary Crawford ovr Bob Spencer - rightward shift from Brian Ashton (but Spencer would have been to the left of Ashton).

Josh Matlow in Ward 22 is a bit of a mystery.  Most people I've talked to think he'd be to the left of Michael Walker, but it's hard to say.

 

Doug

Ford will be able to get some measures through with the cooperation of the center votes on council. Many of these will almost certainly trade their support for committee appointments and such. Anything highly controversial will have trouble.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Royson James at the Star, articulates a precise analysis of why Rob Ford's reign will be less bad than people think, here: What happens now? Four turbulent years.

Quote:
Can the new mayor recalibrate spending at city hall? Is that Ford's mandate when so many voted against the eventual winner? Will he be able to implement his platform on a council with a strong contingent of left-leaning politicians committed to thwart him at every turn?

Not all of it. Not as quickly as he thinks. But city council must yield on some of the mayor's promises, if only because the mayor is the only one elected by all the people. Compromises will have to be made. Ford's bully pulpit will be formidable.

James comes up short of coming to the inevitable conclusion that a Ford Toronto would not be that much different from a Smitherman Toronto, when the chips are down.

The truth is that Ford will not be able to do too much on his agenda without the co-operation from the province. Strategically, Ford has two options; one, play his cards close to the chest and be conciliatory until after the Provincial elections, in the hope of helping Hudak win the province; two, bellyache about how his reform program being hamstrung by the province, against the will of the people of Toronto as exhibited by his mandate won through a crushing defeat of George Smitherman, in the hope of motivating his base to "throw bums out" in the provincial election.

Once Hudak is in, then the real slash and burn will begin.

That said the campaign indicated clearly that anyone looking for salvation from the Liberals is sadly mistaken. The left must make its case in the court of public opinion and build for the future.

 

 

Doug
Life, the unive...

You could actually take that same message and transfer it to provincial and federal politics and subsitute in different parts of the province for Scarborough and Etobicoke.

Seems to me the success of Ford had much to do with tapping into the same economic concerns that progressives want to, but Ford did a much better job and provided easier to understand answers to those concerns.  Not suggesting for a moment he is right, but the campaign was much clearer and frankly cleaner in terms of message.

I was amazed at the number of people I know in Toronto who would never vote Conservative, but were voting for Ford.  Some of that had to do with how much people disliked Smitherman though.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Right.

Sineed

It's unfortunate how anti-Smitherman sentiment added up to more support for Ford.  (I've talked to a few of these folks - they just couldn't abide Smitherman, and thought Ford would do less damage.)

Cueball Cueball's picture

That too is a result of the way the mainstreem media play the game of setting the election up as a two way race where Pantalone was a long shot.

They made it become a two sides of the same coin "pot calling the kettle black" fearmongering coin toss.

mybabble

I knew Ford was going to win its because the voters are unhappy with slick talking politicians and feel Ford is a regular guy who they can trust.  He knew the buttons to push, and didn't care if it was unpopular with some Ford speaks his mind.  I agree with you Ford is going to pit society against the poor and cause much harm.  The city is overcrowded and has many new residents and cuts will cut like a knife and will do no good but the rich will continue to get richer and the former middle class are willing to play it all out to the bitter end.  As they bridge the gap between the rich and poor as most are working for the man for a lifetime and a half and gaining time.

N.R.KISSED

The eye story is horseshit. I'm not about to join some pseudo-progressive hipster in putting on a hairshirt and engaging in mass public flagellation. It is not a matter of me not understanding Ford or the suburbs. It is the story of a media created narrative that has been running in the Toronto Sun for the past seven years and was more recently picked up by the Toronto star. The narrative was that spending was out of control and Toronto was on the virge of financial collapse. Miller wearing a $5000 bunny suit was playing violin at Kyle Rae's $12,000 retirement party catered by burger bribes from the Boardwalk cafe. This orgy of overspending needed to be stopped. These same examples were repeated in every conservative news organ, channel and station ad invintum.The Star only joined in the party later(except for Royson James who made a career of attacking Miller) more recently, hoping to set the stage for Smitherman riding triumphant to the rescue. This backfired for a number of reasons, perhaps the biggest giving greater legitimacy to Ford's gravy train theme.

Did the media ever compare these scandals with the real corruption and waste of Lastman? Subway to nowhere(to increase developers land values) the MFP leasing scandal. No of course not this involved significant money and genuine corruption.

Ford did not win the election by "respecting the voters" in general. He also does not have a massive mandate for anything, he didn't even win a majority of those who voted. Ford won the election because he stayed on target , had a theme created and endorsed by almost all the media, and he played to his base. People were shocked when he failed to show up at events highlighting women's issues, the arts, environment lgtb communities, etc. but his campaign knew this was not his base it was a waste of time. Instead he played to his base and managed to mobilize them to come out and vote. Ford one this election because he knew that speaking to, attracting and mobilizing just 25% of the electorate was enough to win. He didn't have to appeal to everyone and he didn't try. I think that was his success.  I also doubt that the majority of Ford's base is working class(another error of the eye writer) they are probably for the most part older middle class and predominantly white. It is more classist of people assuming that just because his voters are inarticulate and easily swayed they are working class. A large number of middle, as well as upper middle or upper are inarticulate, raging and easily swayed by simplistic messages. Welcome to the heart of a collapsing empire.

N.R.KISSED

dp

Bacchus

Except for the fact that his ward regularly gets 70-80% of the vote (as did his brother) and that means if every one that was white voted for him, half of the POC did too. And not for a minute do I think every 'white' person voted for him since I live in that Ward

 

And Im thinking 47% is pretty good as a mandate. How much did Miller get in his 2 elections when we celebrated him having a 'mandate'?

 

Optics matter people. It looks like a 'mandate', he will operate it as if it is so, and hoi polloi will believe it. Rob Ford got 379,755 votes and in 2006 David Miller got 332,969 votes.

And in 2003 David Miller got 43% of the vote and I remember celebrating his 'mandate'

writer writer's picture

podcast: [url=http://podcast.cbc.ca/mp3/asithappens_20101026_40204.mp3]Robert Ford Interview[/url] on CBC radio's As It Happen. Must be heard to be believed.

Bacchus

Im sure after hearing it, it still cant be believed.

 

I dont think I have the stomach for it.

Lord Palmerston

Yes, I find this phony guilt tripping about "not understanding the suburbs" from the hipster intelligentsia to be annoying as well, N.R.

While turnout was high for a municipal election, I'm sure the electorate is still weighted heavily towards homeowners.  My guess is Ford enjoyed a lot of support from working class and middle class homeowners in the suburbs (largely "white ethnic" like the Italians and Poles, but also from many Asian groups as well).

I don't think Ford had all this support from people living in public housing, etc. 

For instance, take Lawrence Heights, which is a big political issue in that area.  I'm sure Ford got a lot more support from the Orthodox Jewish homeowners in the area than he did from the largely Black Canadian population living in Lawrence Heights.

On the whole, I'd say he did very well among the homeowning suburban working class, but also from the (mainly immigrant) small business class and from the affluent suburbanites as well.

This is my guess.  We'll have to wait and see for results by ward.

Cueball Cueball's picture

writer wrote:

podcast: [url=http://podcast.cbc.ca/mp3/asithappens_20101026_40204.mp3]Robert Ford Interview[/url] on CBC radio's As It Happen. Must be heard to be believed.

 

I thought that was a great interview. He really tossed off the CBC there. He has a pretty good sense of humour I think.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Thanks for writing that NR Kissed.  And Bacchus, there's plenty enough white folk in Ward 2 to provide all of those votes.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Bacchus wrote:

Except for the fact that his ward regularly gets 70-80% of the vote (as did his brother) and that means if every one that was white voted for him, half of the POC did too. And not for a minute do I think every 'white' person voted for him since I live in that Ward

 

And Im thinking 47% is pretty good as a mandate. How much did Miller get in his 2 elections when we celebrated him having a 'mandate'

Not just that. On the issues he has a great mandate. All those downtown lNDP "progressives" who voted for Smitherman because he was "not as bad a Ford" signed them on to privitization of the TTC and sub-contracting out garbage collection as well.

On these issues 88% of the electorate is squarely behind him. Wonderful! Good "strategy".

My real view is that many people hid their support for these elements of Smitherman's union busting agenda behind the facade of strategic voting. At the end of the day, defense of collective bargaining rights were not enough of a principle for much of the "progressive" left.

Bacchus

Sorry but no RP, check the stats. His ward is one of the poorest. And the most culturally diverse

 

In fact check out Maysie's blog for those stats

Bacchus

Totally agreed with Cue

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Lol. I hope he keeps those interviews up.  Won't be long...

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Bacchus wrote:

Sorry but no RP, check the stats. His ward is one of the poorest. And the most culturally diverse

 

In fact check out Maysie's blog for those stats

 

Well, there's almost 10,000 households over $50,000 and Doug got 12,000 votes.  Check out these numbers here, you may have used a bit of hyperbole in claiming that if even all the white people voted for him.  All I'm sayin.

 

http://www.toronto.ca/wards2000/pdf/2006/ward2_ethnocultural_page.pdf

Bacchus

If you strolled through the neighbourhood, the ONLY signs were for ford. And every 'immigrant' house in my naighbourhood had them (actually outnumbering the 'whites in my neighbourhood, they dont really do signs there).

They love him because he returns their calls and gets stuff done for them, regardless of what he may think or even say in public about them

 

If you think its only white smug suburban yuppies voting for him and his brother, your ignoring the stats and the reality. His brother got 71% of the vote which is lower than he usually got

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

And if POC did vote for Ford, I'd rather not get into why but say it's not only for his economic message.  eta:  like many of the white voters.

Aristotleded24

When I read the Eye article and look at the results, one thing is clear: regardless of how the numbers add up, the progressive side failed to get the voting public behind its agenda and ultimately bears responsibility. Yes, it's tough to mobilize people, especially when the people who need to be mobilized are those who feel they have the least stake in the system, and yes, the media is not sympathetic to anyone who tries to shake things up, but it can be done, and it must be done. You can look at Calgary where McIvor was the front-runner for a long time, and only in the last little while did Higgins emerge as the "anybody but" candidate, but it was an unknown Muslim business professor who was able to take the city by surprise and win. Perhaps if the elections weren't so close some of the lessons could have been applied, things could have gone differently.

What really pisses me off is that this all seems to be a game to the backroom political hacks who run these campaigns (into the ground) and often we see how the campaigns are failing, we know how the campaigns can be more effective, yet our voices are not heard, and we are the ones who have to suffer from the kinds of policies the Rob Fords of the world would impose on us.

Lord Palmerston

Bacchus wrote:
If you think its only white smug suburban yuppies voting for him and his brother, your ignoring the stats and the reality.

I don't think there are too many "yuppies" in Rob Ford's ward.  But I'm not so convined he has this huge base of support among the "lumpenproletariat" of the City.

 

trippie

Rob Ford won because people were pissed off at the Garbage strike. In the garbage strike the Union left the workers to rote in the sun along with the uncollected garbage.

Also they rememeber that TTC strike and where was the Union on that one? Same thing as the garbage strike, selling out the workers.

People got pissed off as they watched unionized workers getting a  pay raise and themselves looking for a job going broke.

The working class lost it's weak voice in Toronto politics a long time ago.

 

Everytime the workers get sold out by their Unions and NDP politicians, right winged reactionary simpltons gain more control.

trippie

 

ill tell you how it is.. When an auto parts plant goes on strike, the entire working force of Ontario goes on strike. When the government is cutting back welfare money, everyworker takes a few days off.

They close a pool and put our kids out, we shut the province down until that pool is reopened.

 Until that happens, you better start coming to terms with people like Rob Ford.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Aristotleded24 wrote:

When I read the Eye article and look at the results, one thing is clear: regardless of how the numbers add up, the progressive side failed to get the voting public behind its agenda and ultimately bears responsibility. Yes, it's tough to mobilize people, especially when the people who need to be mobilized are those who feel they have the least stake in the system, and yes, the media is not sympathetic to anyone who tries to shake things up, but it can be done, and it must be done. You can look at Calgary where McIvor was the front-runner for a long time, and only in the last little while did Higgins emerge as the "anybody but" candidate, but it was an unknown Muslim business professor who was able to take the city by surprise and win. Perhaps if the elections weren't so close some of the lessons could have been applied, things could have gone differently.

What really pisses me off is that this all seems to be a game to the backroom political hacks who run these campaigns (into the ground) and often we see how the campaigns are failing, we know how the campaigns can be more effective, yet our voices are not heard, and we are the ones who have to suffer from the kinds of policies the Rob Fords of the world would impose on us.

I suspect that both the Ford win and the Nenshi win both have "change" and agressive grass roots marketing at the heart of their succcess. As little as 10% of the voting population in a municpal election where less than 50% of voters vote can be decisive. Under such circumstance motivating groups that are unmotivated normally to vote can be a winning strategy.

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."

Rock promoter styles. Barnum and Bailey logic.

The left had best not understimate the importance of local business leadership in immigrant communities. Neither they, nor the people who work with them and for them have much sympathy for the traditional left union movement that appears just like more of the establishment to them. The economics of breaking into the lucrative public sector job market is not lost on them, and privitization is certainly one way to open that can.

N.R.KISSED

Bacchus wrote:

Except for the fact that his ward regularly gets 70-80% of the vote (as did his brother) and that means if every one that was white voted for him, half of the POC did too. And not for a minute do I think every 'white' person voted for him since I live in that Ward

 

And Im thinking 47% is pretty good as a mandate. How much did Miller get in his 2 elections when we celebrated him having a 'mandate'?

 

Optics matter people. It looks like a 'mandate', he will operate it as if it is so, and hoi polloi will believe it. Rob Ford got 379,755 votes and in 2006 David Miller got 332,969 votes.

And in 2003 David Miller got 43% of the vote and I remember celebrating his 'mandate'

That 70% becomes 35% in the context of voter turnout. I didn't say that no POC or working class voted for him. I am suggesting that they are a small minority the majority of his support probably came from entitled middle class urban and suburban voters.

As for a mandate it isn't a matter of comparisons to Miller or anyone else. What kind of democracy is it that a minority of voters is considered a "strong" mandate. Maybe it's just me but I always thought that under 50% was a fail. Cueball saying that he has a mandate because of Smitherman voters doesn't ring true either people didn't really vote for Smitherman's agenda not even those who thought he was the best candidate.

The ability of either Ford or Smitherman to put forward a right wing agenda is through the votes of the right wing liberals. The dyed in the wool conservatives are a minority on council anything scary about the Ford agenda was not that different from Smitherman and will depend on the same councillors to pass it.

Cueball Cueball's picture

The mandate exists because it will set the tone for how councilors will vote. Looking forward they can expect the same dynamics in the next election if they seek re-election. Their performance will be based on the votes in play, whatever percentage of the electorate is engaged in the process. The mandate is functional not because Smitherman's voters necessarily support the end of collective bargaining rights for garbage collectors, but because they are unwilling to defend it. It doesn't really effect them. Garbage strikes are annoying they think. These progressive voters are soft on these issues.

As for non-voters we can only hypothesize about what they support, and we can make some judgments, but at the end of the day, defending collective bargaining rights for garbage collectors is not enough to get them to the polls. So again, it doesn't really effect them and they are unwilling to defend it on principle and garbage strikes are annoying. These non-votes are not even in play.

Theoretically we can say the mandate does not exist, but in practice it has arrived.

remind remind's picture

Hey cue, how come Chantal Hebert did not know that the NDP were  not supporting Pantalone, as you claim?

 

Quote:
Jack Layton's horse in the Toronto mayoral campaign barely made it out of the gate in Monday's vote. The NDP leader can only hope it is not an omen for the federal race to come.

With son Mike running on Joe Pantalone's ticket, Layton could hardly sit out the campaign of a former City Hall ally.

But on the heels of Monday's vote, his understandable joy at seeing his son elected councillor has to be tempered by the fact that the left has decisively lost its lock on the Toronto mayor's office.

Aristotleded24

N.R.KISSED wrote:
That 70% becomes 35% in the context of voter turnout. I didn't say that no POC or working class voted for him. I am suggesting that they are a small minority the majority of his support probably came from entitled middle class urban and suburban voters.

As for a mandate it isn't a matter of comparisons to Miller or anyone else. What kind of democracy is it that a minority of voters is considered a "strong" mandate. Maybe it's just me but I always thought that under 50% was a fail. Cueball saying that he has a mandate because of Smitherman voters doesn't ring true either people didn't really vote for Smitherman's agenda not even those who thought he was the best candidate.

It's what we have to work with. Of the people who were motivated to vote, this is what they decided they wanted. As I said earlier, the fact that almost half the city did not vote speaks to the fact that progressives failed to motivate that half to vote for them. Progressives clearly lost this one, any attempt to blame "the system" or lament the fact that more people didn't show up is irrelevant. Where do you go from here?

Cueball Cueball's picture

Actually having more than half the population turn out to vote is someting of a victory, imo. It certainly speaks to the idea that people are attempting to engage and take control of the process. That is what I take from Ford's numbers. Also, seeing the new immigrant communities becoming more involved is pretty exciting.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Because I was there, and she most definitely was not. Maybe some people should have considered the optics of Pantalone's defeat and how some some ivory tower political analysts would interpret the results of the NDP's underwhelming efforts here.

I am sorry Remind, I did a lot of work here in Trinity Spadina, and over the entire period I did not meet on single volunteer from the riding who ward from the NDP who was working directly on Joe's campaign. Weather that was intentional as some say, or just bad organization, that is the fact.

It's no big deal. We will just have to take charge of things ourselves from now on.

 

Stockholm

Cueball wrote:

I am sorry Remind, I did a lot of work here in Trinity Spadina, and over the entire period I did not meet on single volunteer from the riding who ward from the NDP who was working directly on Joe's campaign. Weather that was intentional as some say, or just bad organization, that is the fact.

 

Isn't that funny, since on election night there was a joint "victory party" for Mike Layton and Joe Pantalone and it was full of NDP organizers and Jack and Olivia etc... and there were all yukking it up with Pantalone and raising their arms in the air together. Looked like a love-in between Joe Pantalone and the local NDP to me. Since you hate Layton so much, you obviously steered clear of the local NDP campaign in ward 19 - where NDPers were busy killing two birds with one stone campaigning for Mike Layton in tandem with Joe Pantalone.

remind remind's picture

Cueball wrote:
Because I was there, and she most definitely was not.

Just in case you did not realize it, I was tongue in cheek here, shoulda put a winkie up, but had to dash off line for a few mins so hurried too much.

Personally thought it was pretty damn funny that a so called well respected national political pundit, pontificating from Outremount would say such stupid damn things about Toronto's civic election, as if she knew something because she was on the ground there.

Quote:
 Maybe some people should have considered the optics of Pantalone's defeat and how some some ivory tower political analysts would interpret the results

Agree with this completely, and they should be kicking themselves in the ass for not drawing a clearer distinction or giving massive support.

Quote:
 I am sorry Remind, I did a lot of work here in Trinity Spadina, and over the entire period I did not meet one single volunteer from the riding who was from the NDP who was working directly on Joe's campaign. Whether that was intentional as some say, or just bad organization, that is the fact.

No need to be sorry, ever, people who work the front lines always know more than those in the backrooms, it is just too bad those in the back rooms do not understand this. Perhaps their political science degrees blind them to real people's opinions. ;)

Quote:
It's no big deal. We will just have to take charge of things ourselves from now on.

Also agree with this absolutely, for the most part, but  firmly believe the tearing down of Miller and the other left civic politicians, by those supposedly on the left, played a huge part in this situation. 

Listening to whispers in the ear of the provocatuers put there to do so, has long been an issue on the left. Especially for those in Ontario it seems. ;)

Cueball Cueball's picture

Stockholm wrote:

Cueball wrote:

I am sorry Remind, I did a lot of work here in Trinity Spadina, and over the entire period I did not meet on single volunteer from the riding who ward from the NDP who was working directly on Joe's campaign. Weather that was intentional as some say, or just bad organization, that is the fact.

 

Isn't that funny, since on election night there was a joint "victory party" for Mike Layton and Joe Pantalone and it was full of NDP organizers and Jack and Olivia etc... and there were all yukking it up with Pantalone and raising their arms in the air together. Looked like a love-in between Joe Pantalone and the local NDP to me. Since you hate Layton so much, you obviously steered clear of the local NDP campaign in ward 19 - where NDPers were busy killing two birds with one stone campaigning for Mike Layton in tandem with Joe Pantalone.

Settle down.

Stockholm

I know you always need to get the last word - but surely you can do better than that.

Cueball Cueball's picture

I could but it would only encourage another outraged response. I have said what I said, you know what I think. Are you disappointed? The campaign is over, and its time to move on, with some lessons learned and a few victories to account for. You may not see them, but I do.

52% of the voters turned out, and that kind of engagement is a victory all by itself.

Anything to say about Hebert's analysis concerning the significance of Jack's endorsement failing to get out big numbers for Joe? Is the NDP dead? Jack Layton finished? Bad judgement on Jack's part to endorse Joe and bring the party into disrepute in the media?

Bookish Agrarian

For what it is worth here is my take on Ford's election as an outsider.

Ford tapped into a growing anger about how government uses tax dollars at all levels to award its friends.  From eHealth, to fancy parties, to insider contracts and on and on the average citizen feels like government is playing them for chumps.  For the most part the average person supports paying taxes as long as it is used for good things.  But there is a growing sense that government has broken that trust and that the hard work people do to pay their taxes is not respected.  Incidently this is why Smitherman's campaign was doomed from the start.  No amount of preening coverage by the Star or calls for strategic voting was going to change that, in fact it re-enforced the underlying anger in many ways.

Ford was able to tap into this sentiment.  Most of the people who found him attractive that are not dyed in the wool idealogues were not attracted to him because he was talking about tax cuts per se, but because he was talking about turning off the tap for perceived misuse of the trust between citizen and government.  It doesn't matter how much of a percentage that misuse represents- one penny is too much for most people.  In the absense of a progressive argument about stopping that abuse and not just focusing on the scandal of the moment, but getting at the underlying issues- people will be sucked into the anti-tax and tax cutting message.

Missing this message and talking about how low taxes are by comparision, or how we need to protect services and so on is never going to get through without attaching it to this underlying sense that government is not working in our best intererts, but rather the best interests of friends and insiders - the elite if you will.  Defenidng the status quo is a route to being irrelevant.  Anger is growing- we on the left can either try to direct it in positive ways or we can get run over in the stampede.  Our choice.

 

On another note - Cueball I am impressed with the work and dedication you showed in working in this election.  That should be respected and it shames me that it is not.

Cueball Cueball's picture

There were many others who did more than I did. Joe for example, worked tirelessly and gave up his secure position on council. Most of all Joe deserves credit for giving me a candidate that I could support. A very rare thing indeed.

remind remind's picture

Cue, you can't have it both ways, either the NDP did endorse and support Pantelone, or they didn't. This type of commentary by you is why I stated you are not consistent in your expressed political view points, which does you a great disservice.

Herbert's words, were nothing more than a smoke screen to mask the massive Liberal failure in getting their man Smitherman elected, which I noted in another thread, and they no more brought disrepute upon the NDP, than your words do. The only disrepute they brought was upon Herbert herself. People are way smart enough to see the smoke screen she tried to throw up, afterall they saw the TO Star  shilling for Smitherman for what it was, and voted Ford.

But I echo BA's words to you about your hard work, it should be deeply respected, by all who are politically aware. It is true comunity service.

Pages

Topic locked