Mayor Tory the Tory

119 posts / 0 new
Last post
Debater

As several writers pointed out today, despite John Tory claiming that he was going to be non-partisan and be friendly to those in the center (eg. Liberals), his choices this week show that he is sticking very much to his Conservative roots.  He has chosen mainly right-wingers, and not really any centrists or lefties at all.

Debater

Stockholm wrote:

That just tells you how rightwing the Liberal party is to have dorks like palacio in their tent. Vicious homophobes like Roseanna Skoke and Tom Wappel and Jim Karygiannis also "identify as Liberals" does that make the hate that they spew any less offensive?

Stockholm, I agree with you on your observations on John Tory.  He is not the centrist he pretended to be - he is very much a Conservative, and that is coming through again this week.

But I disagree in your attempt to portray Tom Wappel & Jim Karygiannis as mainstream Liberals.  They were on the party's right-wing, and they don't have anything to do with the Federal Liberals under Justin Trudeau.   The Liberals have become much more socially progressive under Justin's leadership.  The fact that Wappel & Karygiannis got angry with Trudeau for banning anti-abortion candidates proves that their views are outside the Trudeau Liberal Party.

Wappel retired from Parliament a couple of elections ago and will never have a role in the Trudeau Liberals, and Karygiannis is gone now, too.  There are virtually no right-wingers left in the Trudeau Liberals.  The one that comes closest to a right-winger is probably John McKay, but even he has now been told by Trudeau that he must vote pro-choice, and he knows what Trudeau will do to him if he doesn't.

terrytowel

Summer wrote:

I'm a downtowner who voted for Tory and I'm disappointed in his picks.  I'm particularly disappointed in the choice of Minnan-Wong for deputy mayor.   I think that Tory loves downtown Toronto and Waterfront TO and Civic Action and all that jazz so I'm surprised he would put such a small-minded penny-pincher in charge.  Initially, I was feeling a bit better after reading Terrytowel's take.  Ensuring the suburbs feel that they are represented is important and could possibly justify some of the picks.  But on reflection, I don't think that's why he did it.  He could have pleased the suburbs while still having some balance on the executive.   His picks are evidence that he has decided to run a pretty conservative ship. 

Nonetheless, I don't regret voting for Tory (yet).  Does anyone really think Chow would have made an effort to reach out the conservative councillors?  4 years of Chow would begat 4 years of Ford (or Ford-similar).   The issues that concern me are increasing transit and reducing gridlock and the ability to negotiate successfully with the provincial and federal government to protect our city's interests.  I have no faith in Chow to make headway with any of this.  Things only got worse under Ford. Tory has already started working on it. (e.g. re gridlock: He has asked that the Pan Am planners revist their boneheaded plan to close lanes of traffic to the public before the Pan Am games even begin.  I think he will get results on this.  Ford wouldn't have been able to.)  I'm also hopeful that he'll do something the reduce the ridiculous police budget. 

Summer has said it best I agree with all his points 100%

Stockholm wrote:

Had there been no strike in the summer of 2009 Miller would have still had 65% approval ratings and would have virtually been accliamed if he had decided to run again in 2010.

But according to polling done ( I remember reading this somewhere) Miller number were still strong and still lead over both Ford and Smitherman

Rokossovsky wrote:

To be completely accurate, Ford actually had about the same number of women on his first executive, he just drove them off, so there really isn't any big change there, either.

Not true. Ford only had two women on executive. Tory has four Ana Bailao and Mary Margaret McMahon, along with vets Jaye Robinson and Michelle Berardinetti

Stockholm wrote:

terrytowel wrote:

You guys just don't understand how the suburbs feel about Downtown getting EVERYTHING. While the suburbs feel left out in the cold.

For the last four years under Ford it has been downtown that has had NOTHING and Ford excluded anyone from downtown from his executive - along with all women. Under Tory its even worse.

So you want everything to go back to Downtown again and for the suburbs to have nothing. Which was the perception from the suburbs under eight years of Miller. So according to your logic, since Downtown got ignored for four years, and all the attention should rightfully go back to Downtown. And suburbs should get nothing. And that is how it should be. Is that correct?

Which is how we wound up with the Fords, this suburban ailenation. You want it to be Downtown vs suburbs, with Downtown getting everything like they always do. Correct?

Stockholm

terrytowel wrote:

So you want everything to go back to Downtown again and for the suburbs to have nothing. Which was the perception from the suburbs under eight years of Miller. So according to your logic, since Downtown got ignored for four years, and all the attention should rightfully go back to Downtown. And suburbs should get nothing. And that is how it should be. Is that correct?

Which is how we wound up with the Fords, this suburban ailenation. You want it to be Downtown vs suburbs, with Downtown getting everything like they always do. Correct?

NO - and you are being purposely disingenuous by lying about and distorting what i said. No one NO ONE!!! has ever suggested that any mayor of Toronto should have an executive 100% composed of councillors from the downtown core NO ONE - so quit setting up a straw dog that does not exist. I believe (as would any sane person) that the make up of executive committee of council should be evenly geographically distributed - if the old City of Toronto is about 30% of the population of the City of Toronto as a whole then 4 out of 13 people on exec.comm should be from the old city. If Scarborough is 25% then it should get three seats and so forth.

But my point is that John Tory had plenty of choices of progressive city councillors from the suburbs with whom he could have killed two birds with one stone (i.e. get suburban representation but alos get some progressive representation). Why not a progressive liberal like John Filion from Willowdale instead of braindead rightwing conservative David Shiner from Willowdale? Why not a progressive very moderate NDPer like Maria Augimeri from North York instead of a brain dead Ford nation acolyte like Vince Crisanti?

There are some good progressive councillors who were elected by wide margins in suburban wards - Tory opted to shit on all of them and instead appoint nothing but rightwing conservatives.

Stockholm

Debater wrote:

But I disagree in your attempt to portray Tom Wappel & Jim Karygiannis as mainstream Liberals.  They were on the party's right-wing, and they don't have anything to do with the Federal Liberals under Justin Trudeau.  

I'm not trying to portray Wappell or Karygiannis as "mainstream Liberals" I recognize that they are an increasingly marginalized group. But "terrytowel" was trying to claim that a couple of fanatically rightwing Ford Nation councillors like Cesar Palacio and Michele Berardinetti are somehow "leftwing" just because they might hold a Liberal party membership card. My point is that just because someone says "I'm a Liberal" doesn't make them ipso-facto progressive and there are tons of examples of very very rightwing people who claim to be Liberals. Palacio is anti-labour, anti-gay, anti-environment has a 100% pro-Ford voting record - I don't give a damn if he calls himself a Liberal - actions speak louder than words and the guy is very very very conservative - in fact he would probably be a Conservative party member if he wasn't from davenport where the Conservatives are non-existent and have no machine to help him win elections. 

Rokossovsky

Summer wrote:

Nonetheless, I don't regret voting for Tory (yet).  Does anyone really think Chow would have made an effort to reach out the conservative councillors?  4 years of Chow would begat 4 years of Ford (or Ford-similar).   The issues that concern me are increasing transit and reducing gridlock and the ability to negotiate successfully with the provincial and federal government to protect our city's interests.  I have no faith in Chow to make headway with any of this.

If you are thinking that friendly relations will create a bonanza in funding dropping from the senior levels of government, I think you are going to be disappointed. The best that John Tory will get from the province is permission to sell off Toronto Hydro for one time only cash, more or less in the manner that Wynne is selling off assets at fifty cents on the dollar, something I don't think Wynne could object to since they are also in the process of selling off all of Ontario's "legacy" assets that help support government revenue in the long term.

As Wynne notes, a lot of Tory's plan already is in play at the province, covered by assets sales and privatization, funneling public money into private profit.

There will be no new money, only privatization. TIF financing for Smartrack likewise just increases debt, again undermining long term fiscal solvency, while selling Toronto Hydro will kill long term revenue for the city, undermining our ability to pay for operating costs, and future investment. 

Don't be surprised if Tory sells off our water rights as well.

Ultimately, what you are talking about is sculpting a "strategic" voting plan based on porkbarelling, since the assumption is that because Chow doesn't have the right conservative party connections with his opposite conservative minded peers at the province and the federal level, she wont get play. Possibly true, but let's call it for what it is.

Rokossovsky

terrytowel wrote:

So you want everything to go back to Downtown again and for the suburbs to have nothing. Which was the perception from the suburbs under eight years of Miller. So according to your logic, since Downtown got ignored for four years, and all the attention should rightfully go back to Downtown. And suburbs should get nothing. And that is how it should be. Is that correct?

Which is how we wound up with the Fords, this suburban ailenation. You want it to be Downtown vs suburbs, with Downtown getting everything like they always do. Correct?

So. Now you are back to talking about Miller excluding the suburbs. As I pointed out at the last time you brought this up, Miller made far more efforts to include the suburbs than Ford and now Tory have in being inclusive of the inner city. At that time you changed your tune, and said you were actually talking about the prospect of a Chow adminstration "excluding" the suburbs.

So, what are you talking about?

In either case we aren't talking about excluding the suburbs, or the inner city, what we are really talking about is including mass privatization of public assets and funnelling public money into private hands.

Rokossovsky
terrytowel

Rokossovsky wrote:

So. Now you are back to talking about Miller excluding the suburbs. As I pointed out at the last time you brought this up, Miller made far more efforts to include the suburbs than Ford

Which is completely TRUE.

But the residents of the suburbs don't see it that way. Even if you show suburban residents concrete proof that Miller gave equal time to the Suburbs, you mention Miller name and all suburban residents say the same thing. Miller was and is a Downtown mayor. Only caring about Downtown. Which is why Ford got elected. And brother Doug swept suburban ridings.

That is just how suburban residents see it, and nothing you can say or do will get them to change their minds. Those are the residents that make up Ford Nation, which Ford continually exploits for his benefit. He exploited this FALSEHOOD to his advantage.

If Tory put any Downtown councillors on his executive, Ford will just repeat what he said about Miller. It is all Downtown elitists on executive.

Once he gets better, Ford will start gearing up for his re-election campaign. He already is saying he is the 'opposition' leader at council. If Tory put any Downtown councillors in Executive. Ford would just start by taking a page during the Miller years. Saying downtown elitists are running the show, and Tory is just an elitist. And he would have cultivated other right wing councillors on his side to oppose Tory.

Tory had to get as many of these former Ford loyalists on his side, so Ford could be marginalized as a solo act.

Otherwise it would be Miller all over again. Tory as the downtown elistist on one side, with Ford and his Ford Nation allies on the other side.

Seriously everything you say is true about Miller. But the suburbs and Ford Nation see it completely different.

No matter what you say, or how much proof you offer up, residents in the suburbs feel short shrifted for Downtown. Nothing will get them to change their minds (other than getting Ford back in office)

End of story.

Rokossovsky

And so the solution to that is to exclude the downtown councillors.

I have another theory. No rightwing privatizing wingnuts get elected downtown, so Tory has no option but to stack his committees with pro-privatization councillors in order to sell off our assets to his friends -- don't worry, Liberal party "friends" will get their piece, since Tory can't sell off Toronto Hydro without having the laws changed at Queens Park.

terrytowel

Rokossovsky wrote:

No rightwing privatizing wingnuts get elected downtown

Except Liberal MPP

Rokossovsky

terrytowel wrote:

Rokossovsky wrote:

No rightwing privatizing wingnuts get elected downtown

Except Liberal MPP

All these newly elected Downtown Toronto MPPs are right wing privatizers. The guy who replaced Michael Prue in Beaches-East York, is on record as saying that Mike Harris's labour reforms did not go far enough -- he wanted more "right to work" type legislation written into the Harris labour reform.

The Liberals at Queens Park are presently selling off what remains of the Hydro One distribution system for half its value, starting with a big chunk that represent about 1/3rd of all Hydro One revenue generation. They are hoping to get between 2 or 3 billion dollars of cash up front on this, which is basically a fire sale price because it should be valued at between 5 billion and 6 billion, using industry standard return of investment models in the energy sector.

What is "progressive" or "left wing" about Han Dong, Cristina Martins or Arthur Potts?

5 Things Liberal Voters Should Know About Arthur Potts

Stockholm

terrytowel wrote:

No matter what you say, or how much proof you offer up, residents in the suburbs feel short shrifted for Downtown. Nothing will get them to change their minds (other than getting Ford back in office)

End of story.

Well if you really think suburbanites are that stupid and contemptable then all i can say is that your condescending attitude towards people who live in the suburbs is deplorable. If its true then suburbanites  will be convinced that the city is rigged in favour of downtown no matter what the mayor does - so maybe the mayor should just appoint good people from across the city - end of story. Keep in mind that Tory himself is a Rosedale patrician who lives in a luxury condo at Bay and Bloor - so he himself is the quintessential downtown elite.

I would still like a response to my question about why Tory also froze out SUBURBAN city councillors who are mildly progressive (i.e. Augimeri, Peruzza, Filion) in favour of brain dead arch rightwingers like Minnan-Wong and Shiner. People in the suburbs have no problem electing NDP affiliated and left-Liberal city councillors - why not promote those people and show that there is more than one way to make the suburbs feel included.

BTW - the only issue you ever cite that means anything to you is gay rights. So how do you feel about your beloved John Tory appointing the viciously homophobic Catholic religious freak Denzil Minnan-Wong to be the second most powerful man in the city. What kind of an example does that set? I wonder what happens when Minnan-Wong has to be in the same room as Kathleen Wynne? Does he rubber gloves so as not to be infected by any lesbian molecules she might give off?

Stockholm

Even the Tory-loving Toronto Star already has serious buyers remorse and their editorial today suggests

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2014/12/02/mayor_john_torys_ac...

Had this inspiring inauguration event been Tory’s first major move as mayor we could all applaud. But the day before, he announced his inner circle at city council — the people he will rely upon to deliver his agenda. And this remarkably one-sided team does not bode well for unity.

Indeed, it’s hard to read these choices as anything other than a declaration of war against downtown progressives, as the Star’s Edward Keenan noted.

Council’s left wing includes some remarkably talented and experienced people but they were entirely shut out from Tory’s executive committee — a body akin to the cabinet at other levels of government. Indeed, a majority of those selected had also served on Ford’s executive.

Tory kept another Ford crony, the hopelessly inept Frances Nunziata, as council speaker. And he named arch-conservative Denzil Minnan-Wong as deputy mayor.

These appointments matter. Unlike upbeat speeches pledging an abstract commitment to unity, they go a long way towards determining how Toronto will actually be governed.

Tory attempted to leaven the one-sidedness of this selection by appointing council progressives Pam McConnell and Glenn De Baeremaeker as ceremonial deputy mayors, along with former Ford loyalist Vince Crisanti. But that’s little compensation for the polarizing make-up of Toronto’s new executive and its committee chairs.

 

Summer

Rokossovsky wrote:

Summer wrote:

Nonetheless, I don't regret voting for Tory (yet).  Does anyone really think Chow would have made an effort to reach out the conservative councillors?  4 years of Chow would begat 4 years of Ford (or Ford-similar).   The issues that concern me are increasing transit and reducing gridlock and the ability to negotiate successfully with the provincial and federal government to protect our city's interests.  I have no faith in Chow to make headway with any of this.

If you are thinking that friendly relations will create a bonanza in funding dropping from the senior levels of government, I think you are going to be disappointed. The best that John Tory will get from the province is permission to sell off Toronto Hydro for one time only cash, more or less in the manner that Wynne is selling off assets at fifty cents on the dollar, something I don't think Wynne could object to since they are also in the process of selling off all of Ontario's "legacy" assets that help support government revenue in the long term.

As Wynne notes, a lot of Tory's plan already is in play at the province, covered by assets sales and privatization, funneling public money into private profit.

There will be no new money, only privatization. 

I fear you are right but I'm still holding out hope that you're wrong.  One thing I know is that the Wynne government loves to spend money and they also seem to want to keep Toronto happy.  A lot of services were downloaded onto Toronto during the Harris years.   Maybe Wynne willl take some of the funding responsibility back... (hey, a girl can dream can't she?)

Rokossovsky

That just isn't my read on Wynne. She has "pragmatically" decided to drive the privatization train, but forgotten that the driver only determines how fast or slow the train is going.

mersh

Privatization and speculation - don't forget those magic beans - I mean green bean bonds that will find all our transportation dreams

Debater

The Toronto Star was foolish to endorse John Tory - it's their own fault if they regret it now.  It was just as foolish as endorsing the NDP in the 2011 Federal Election - all that did was hand more seats to the Conservatives in the GTA.

Stockholm

...that's only possible if you seriously believe that newspaper endorsements change a single solitary person's vote - I do not

terrytowel

Rokossovsky wrote:
terrytowel wrote:
Rokossovsky wrote:

No rightwing privatizing wingnuts get elected downtown

Except Liberal MPP

What is "progressive" or "left wing" about Han Dong, Cristina Martins or Arthur Potts?

When did I say they were "progressive" or "left wing"?

Stockholm wrote:
terrytowel wrote:

No matter what you say, or how much proof you offer up, residents in the suburbs feel short shrifted for Downtown. Nothing will get them to change their minds (other than getting Ford back in office)

End of story.

If its true then suburbanites will be convinced that the city is rigged in favour of downtown no matter what the mayor does - so maybe the mayor should just appoint good people from across the city - end of story. Keep in mind that Tory himself is a Rosedale patrician who lives in a luxury condo at Bay and Bloor - so he himself is the quintessential downtown elite.

Which is why Tory needs suburban councillors on his team for two reasons (second reason below) The first is to show Etobicoke and Scarborough that his Executive is not Downtown only. During the campaign Doug Ford kept saying John Tory is an elitist and out of touch and doesn't know the common folk. Which the suburbs agreed with, because the turned out to vote for FORD. The minute he would appoint a Downtowner on Exectutive, Ford would immediately call out Tory as an elitist. Which those suburbs would agree with, as they see Ford as one of them. And conclude Tory is only interested in Downtown.

Stockholm wrote:

I would still like a response to my question about why Tory also froze out SUBURBAN city councillors who are mildly progressive (i.e. Augimeri, Peruzza, Filion) in favour of brain dead arch rightwingers like Minnan-Wong and Shiner. People in the suburbs have no problem electing NDP affiliated and left-Liberal city councillors - why not promote those people and show that there is more than one way to make the suburbs feel included.

Second reason he went with suburban councillors on Executive. Those suburban progressives are not Ford aillies. Tory needs to get as many former Ford allies on his side. Because when Ford gets better he will start his re-election campaign for 2018. He needs as many allies on council to align with him. So it can be Tory the elitist versus Ford Nation. But if Tory has all of Ford former allies on his team, Ford will be marginalized as a solo act. The only person Ford has left is Georgio Mammolliti. Need I say more?

Stockholm wrote:

BTW - the only issue you ever cite that means anything to you is gay rights. So how do you feel about your beloved John Tory appointing the viciously homophobic Catholic religious freak Denzil Minnan-Wong to be the second most powerful man in the city. What kind of an example does that set? I wonder what happens when Minnan-Wong has to be in the same room as Kathleen Wynne? Does he rubber gloves so as not to be infected by any lesbian molecules she might give off?

Well obviously I'm not happy about it, but what can you do? When did you start caring about Kathleen Wynne or how she feels? I doubt you would shed tears if she got hit by a bus, so why all this concern now about Wynne now?

Stockholm are you even from the suburbs or even visited either Scarborough or Etobicoke lately? If not, you really don't understand the anger the suburbs feel towards the city. They now realize they have power in their votes. And they outnumber the Downtown in terms of electoral results. And they will use it to get someone who understands their issues, and not the issues of Downtown only.

Rokossovsky

Stockholm wrote:

...that's only possible if you seriously believe that newspaper endorsements change a single solitary person's vote - I do not

Actually confused "strategic voters" who were being told to vote Liberal based on polling and election results that were hopelessly out of date, gave the win to the Tories.

Stockholm

terrytowel wrote:

Stockholm are you even from the suburbs or even visited either Scarborough or Etobicoke lately? If not, you really don't understand the anger the suburbs feel towards the city. They now realize they have power in their votes. And they outnumber the Downtown in terms of electoral results. And they will use it to get someone who understands their issues, and not the issues of Downtown only.

Yes, I have been to the suburbs many times. I think its grotesque the way you keep trying to fuel a fire of division between suburbs and downtown that are almost entirely based on crude stereotypes. Its as if you think anyone who doesn't live downtown is some sort of seven headed hydra with horns growing out of the sides of their heads.

People who live in Scarborough and people who live in Parkdale are actually not that different and want the same things for themselves. I have actually talked to a fair number of people from the 'burbs who voted for Ford in 2010 - they never say that they "hate" downtown or that they think people who live south of Eglinton are all evil. They are typically just working class people who are looking for someone who they feel represents them...many of them also voted for that quintessential "downtowner" - Jack Layton.

If people in the suburbs are all - as you say - reactionary mouth breathing freaks waving around pitchforks - why do they elect some very progressive councillors with NDP ties such as Augimeri and Perruzza, as well as some Liberals who vote with the NDP councillors most of the time like Filion, Carroll and De Bearemaker?

Tory's policies will actually hurt the the people who live in the suburbs the most. If you live downtown you are already well-served by transit etc... its people in the run-down areas of Etobicoke and Scarborough who will see their community centres, day cares and libraries closed and will see high TTC fares and cuts in bus services as Tory struggles to be all things to all people while trying to freeze property taxes.

Stockholm

terrytowel wrote:

The minute he would appoint a Downtowner on Exectutive, Ford would immediately call out Tory as an elitist. Which those suburbs would agree with, as they see Ford as one of them. And conclude Tory is only interested in Downtown.

Except that Tory actually did appoint some councillors from downtown wards to his executive committee - its just that he went out of his way to choose the most brain-dead functionally illiterate zombies (Palacio, Bailao and MacMahon) instead of choosing downtown councillors who are widely acknowledged to be very competent, talented and effective. But according to you (since you seem to think that all suburbanites are incredibly stupid) if there is even one single solitary member of the executive from old Toronto, East York or York, every single person in the suburbs will immediately think that Tory packed all 13 positions on his executive with downtown elites (whatever they are) and will start marching in the streets with pitchforks.

Do you actually believe the ridiculous drivel you post here or are you just being provocative becaus eyou have nothing better to do with your time?

terrytowel

Stockholm wrote:

why do they elect some very progressive councillors with NDP ties such as Augimeri and Perruzza, as well as some Liberals who vote with the NDP councillors most of the time like Filion, Carroll and De Bearemaker?

In 2010 Augimeri won by 1% over her challenger. Perruzza by 3%, Peter Milczyn by 1%, Paula Fletcher by 1%  as Ford targeted those ridings with robo-calls to get his perferred candidate in, as he exploited the anger over David Miller policies. But they won by the slimmiest of margins.

Suzan Hall & Cliff Jenkins both lost their seats due to Rob Ford robo-calls to elect his perferred choice of Vincent Crisanti and Jaye Robinson.

Read below

Why it's so difficult for challengers to unseat incumbent councillors

http://torontoist.com/2014/05/incumbency-for-the-win/

Stockholm wrote:

Do you actually believe the ridiculous drivel you post here or are you just being provocative becaus eyou have nothing better to do with your time?

Actually I have better things to do with my time, but you keep baiting me.

One thing I keep mentioning again and again is that you never back up your claims with links of proof. You just fly off the handle, and when I ask for links to back up your claims. You change the subject and change the channel.

Nothing I say will change your mind, and we can agree to disagree. And you are welcome to your opinion.

It is one thing to visit the burbs, and speak to certain people. But it is another thing to actually live in Scarborough or Etobicoke.

I'm not the one that is dividing, I'm just telling you the way it is. Just as you are convinced people in the burbs don't feel ailenated, and list all these factors. The map tells a different story on election night.

Again I don't want to discuss this anymore because frankly I have better things to do with my time, and if you want to go on and on and on about how the city is NOt divided, by all means go for it. The map below says it all and there is no dispute the city is divided.

Stockholm wrote:

I think its grotesque the way you keep trying to fuel a fire of division between suburbs and downtown that are almost entirely based on crude stereotypes.

I'm not the one saying it, the voters are with their votes below.

 

 

Stockholm

Accordiing to that map - Ford lost in many suburban wards including most of his nagtive Etobicoke and most of North York

terrytowel

Stockholm wrote:

Accordiing to that map - Ford lost in many suburban wards including most of his nagtive Etobicoke and most of North York

Divide is a divide.

Stockholm

The way you reunite a divided city is by making EVERYONE feel included including the vast number of suburban voters who are progressives and elected progressive councillors.

So far as mayor John Tory has done the following:

-Appointed an office exclusively composed of rightwing conservative hacks who used to be staffers to Mike Harris and Tim Hudak - plus a few retreads from the dying days of the Lastman administration

-Given every single Ford flunky the same job they had under Ford and indicated that NOTHING will change under Tory from what Ford was doing

-appointed a divisive, vicious homophobe who is an anti-abortion fanatic to be the second in command in the city.

-frozen out anyone remotely progressive from any power of any kind just weeks after begging progressives to vote for him by LYING and saying he would govern on behalf of everyone.

John Tory has taken a long dildo covered it with sandpaper in rammed up the asshole of every single pseudo-progressive voter in Toronto who was stupid enough to be fooled into voting for him. 

Debater

I've never trusted John Tory.  I told this to Terry Towel on the Toronto Mayoral thread earlier this year.  Tory is a lifelong Conservative and showed no remorse or apology when his operatives made that nasty attack ad on Jéan Chrétien's face in the 1993 election.

Stockholm

terrytowel wrote:

Divide is a divide.

Guess what - that's what elections are all about - some people vote for candidate A, some people vote for candidate B and some people vote for candidate C - its ALWAYS a divide.

In terms of maps - the one time Toronto was not "divided" was in 2006 when david Miller cruised to re-election with over 60% of the vote and won every single suburban ward.

terrytowel

Stockholm wrote:

John Tory has taken a long dildo covered it with sandpaper in rammed up the asshole of every single pseudo-progressive voter in Toronto who was stupid enough to be fooled into voting for him. 

That is so classy the way you put it.

Stockholm

Debater wrote:

I've never trusted John Tory.  I told this to Terry Towel on the Toronto Mayoral thread earlier this year.  Tory is a lifelong Conservative and showed no remorse or apology when his operatives made that nasty attack ad on Jéan Chrétien's face in the 1993 election.

Tory is much like a Liberal in that he says "not right, not left but forward" before the election, then the moment the votes are counted and takes a sharp turn to the hard right and anyone left of centre who voted for him gets thrown out of the car.

What's remarkable is that ANYONE was gullible enough to fall for Tory shtick in the first place. A lifelong hyper-partisan conservative does not suddenly change his spots.

Rokossovsky

Debater wrote:

I've never trusted John Tory.  I told this to Terry Towel on the Toronto Mayoral thread earlier this year.  Tory is a lifelong Conservative and showed no remorse or apology when his operatives made that nasty attack ad on Jéan Chrétien's face in the 1993 election.

He also didn't utter a peep when Chow came under attack for her "immigrant" background.

Summer

Tory unveils six-point plan for tackling Toronto’s gridlock  

My faves:

1. Rush hour crackdown (i.e. towtrucks).  

5. Closing lanes less often (and hiking fees to developers for lane closures)

6. Construction changes  (extended hours for construction)

 

mersh

Another non-solution that individualizes blame and feeds into the mobility for drivers above all else line of thought. Are we really going to shorten red lights to speed the flow? I suppose tickets and towing will contribute some revenue.

Summer

mersh wrote:
Another non-solution that individualizes blame and feeds into the mobility for drivers above all else line of thought. Are we really going to shorten red lights to speed the flow? I suppose tickets and towing will contribute some revenue.

These initiatives may not be exciting but they will be good for anyone who uses the roads- be it drivers, bikers or transit takers.  

I barely ever drive.  I rely on the King car for most of my transportation needs.  All traffic is slowed down by delivery trucks blocking a curb lane, cars blocking an intersection and lanes that are closed for construction.  Reducing this kind of congestion costs next to nothing and makes the roads faster for everyone.  Sometimes it takes 3 rounds of traffic lights to get through an intersection in the streetcar.  More often than not, the traffic is not slow because of the moving vehicles, the traffic is slow because 1 of the 2 lanes is useless.  

In the summer, I bike.  Making sure the curb lane is actually empty of parked/stopped vehicles during rush hours will make my bike ride faster and safer since I won't have to move around the taxis and delivery trucks.  

Rokossovsky

Summer wrote:

mersh wrote:
Another non-solution that individualizes blame and feeds into the mobility for drivers above all else line of thought. Are we really going to shorten red lights to speed the flow? I suppose tickets and towing will contribute some revenue.

These initiatives may not be exciting but they will be good for anyone who uses the roads- be it drivers, bikers or transit takers. 

The point is that there are solutions to these problems are social/structural, not simply regulatory. Banging up a few more drivers and hoisting a few more cars on tow trucks isn't going to please anyone other than the mafia/biker guys who run the tow truck companies. Not to mention the fact that having the police and truckers clogging the streets is no better than the obstrcuting vehicles, themselves.

Real solutions would mean increasing the utility of mass transit, bicycles and foot traffic in order lure drivers away from their cars.

mersh

I was going to be a bit more blunt - since when does Tory give a shit about cyclists? And are we going to crowd source transit? Really, he might shake some loose change from developers for lane hogging but that does nothing to address the sheer volume of cars on our streets. It's certainly not a sustainable, equitable solution, but plays well to car owners and Spacing magazine readers alike.

swallow

John Tory wrote:
“Wherever I go in the city … people say that traffic congestion is the single most frustrating thing about living in Toronto,”

So I guess John Tory doesn't get about very much. 

Debater

Rokossovsky wrote:

Debater wrote:

I've never trusted John Tory.  I told this to Terry Towel on the Toronto Mayoral thread earlier this year.  Tory is a lifelong Conservative and showed no remorse or apology when his operatives made that nasty attack ad on Jéan Chrétien's face in the 1993 election.

He also didn't utter a peep when Chow came under attack for her "immigrant" background.

Tory is a scumbag.

That's one thing we can agree on. Smile

Stockholm

Why was Kathleen Wynne so gullible as to think that Toronto needed an ultra rightwing partisan conservative like John Tory as mayor? is she really that dumb?

The only theory i can imagine - apart from simple stupidity - is that she thinks its politically advantageous for the Ontario Liberal government for the mayor of Toronto be a reactionary rightwing conservative who has good table manners - the last thing Wynne wants is a progressive mayor of Toronto who actually stands up for the city and holds the provincial government's feet to the fire on issues like transit and housing and social programs and who actually pushed the envelope with the province demanding that they do more. Its better for Wynne if the mayor of Toronto is weak advocate for the city who just busies himself doling out favours to his lobbyist and developer friends and makes no demands of Queens Park at all.

Wynne will regret this when Tory throws his weight behind a Christine Elliott-led PC party in 2018 and the PCs take a big chunk out f Liberal support in 416. 

Rokossovsky

Stockholm wrote:

Why was Kathleen Wynne so gullible as to think that Toronto needed an ultra rightwing partisan conservative like John Tory as mayor? is she really that dumb?

Because she is actually a reactionary?

terrytowel

Stockholm wrote:

Wynne will regret this when Tory throws his weight behind a Christine Elliott-led PC party in 2018 and the PCs take a big chunk out f Liberal support in 416. 

That is doubtful because

1) No PC MPP endorsed him for mayor, as the PC don't have any GTA seats

2) The Ontario PC party knifed him in the back dozens of times every which way. All to oust him from his leadership of the PC party. They felt he was too moderate, and the Ontario PC Party wanted nothing to do with him.

Why would he back a PC Ontario party when the backstabbing he got from that party has never healed?

Besides Tory needs Liberal votes for his re-election. He will probably remain neutral. Just like Olivia did when an NDP candidate went looking for her endorsement.

Didn't you say the NDP will come back in 2018? Why would he want to back ANY party, only to piss off the NDP when they come roaring back to power in 2018?

Rokossovsky

Harper will privatize the Wheat Board.

Wynne will privatize Hydro One.

Tory will privatize Toronto Hydro.

Where is the ideological distinction?

Stockholm

John Tory is a lifelong HYPER-partisan Ontario PC/federal CPC. That will never change. He may not have liked the crowd around Hudak but those people are gone and Tory's puppet Christine Elliott is almost certain to be the next Ontario PC leader - that will mark a total restoration of Tory's people at the helm of the PC party. 

Saying that Tory now hates the entire Ontario PC party because of what Hudak did to him is like suggesting that Jean Chretien no longer supports the Liberal Party because of what Paul Martin's people did to him in 2003.

If Tory wants Liberal votes to get re-elected - maybe the easiest way would be for him NOT to govern like a rabidly rightwing conservative. People are already referring to Tory as "Rob Ford minus the crack addiction"

 

terrytowel

Stockholm wrote:

John Tory is a lifelong HYPER-partisan Ontario PC/federal CPC.

Not anymore. he is like Scott Brison as he didn't leave the PC party, but the party left him.

True he has staff with links to the Cons. But he himself is pretty much through with the PC Party of Ontario.

If you don't think so please provide link where he has endorsed an PC candidate for MPP, appeared at a PC Ontario fundraiser or showed up at any PC Ontario event. & Bill Davis events don't count, because he considers that man family.

terrytowel

Stockholm wrote:

Saying that Tory now hates the entire Ontario PC party because of what Hudak did to him is like suggesting that Jean Chretien no longer supports the Liberal Party because of what Paul Martin's people did to him in 2003.

Are you kidding? Jean Chretien implemented all these new financing rules for elections that would benefit the Cons, and limit Martin. No more corporate donations, which was how the Liberals traditionally got their money. Instead grassroots fundraising, which was the Cons strong suit. The Libs didn't even have a fundraising machine set up, and they were severly limited in how to raise money.

Chretien did that on purpose to screw up Martin chances come election time, and bankrupt the party.

He did not shed any tears when Martin lost, and Harper won. In part because the Cons had a huge advantage with a war chest over the Libs. As  Chretien new election financing rules torpedoed the Liberals, Martin and his loyalists.

Say what you want about Chretien, but nobody crosses him without consequences.

Stockholm

Yes but ever since Martin was gone - Chretien went back to being the world's most loyal Liberal. Similarly Tory the Tory will be as happy as a clam once his puppet Christine Elliott takes control of the PC Party - then the Tory-Elliott axis of evil can plot to rule  Ontario and they will do their part to help Harper as well so that the rightinwg conservatives get their trifecta. Kathleen Wynne let the Trojan Horse into the the gates of Troy - poor woman - she seems like a nice enough person but she is as dumb as a post!

terrytowel

Stockholm wrote:

Yes but ever since Martin was gone - Chretien went back to being the world's most loyal Liberal. Similarly Tory the Tory will be as happy as a clam once his puppet Christine Elliott takes control of the PC Party - then the Tory-Elliott axis of evil can plot to rule  Ontario and they will do their part to help Harper as well so that the rightinwg conservatives get their trifecta. Kathleen Wynne let the Trojan Horse into the the gates of Troy - poor woman - she seems like a nice enough person but she is as dumb as a post!

First you say poor Wynne has to put up with anti-gay Denzil Minnen Wong. Now you are saying Wynne is dumb as a post?

please provide link where he has endorsed an PC candidate for MPP, appeared at a PC Ontario fundraiser or showed up at any PC Ontario event. & Bill Davis events don't count, because he considers that man family.

Put up or shut up

Stockholm

Rhee your awfully thin skinned and touchy whenever anyone dares to criticize your beloved John Tory...sorry I hurt your feelings.

Of course none of the candidates running for mayor we're going to openly endorse any provincial election candidates in the middle of the mayoral campaign. Ford was never seen campaigning with any PCs either.

But I'm looking ahead to 2018 when the PC party will be headed by Tory's puppet Christine. Elliott, that will be a different story

terrytowel

Stockholm wrote:
But I'm looking ahead to 2018 when the PC party will be headed by Tory's puppet Christine. Elliott, that will be a different story

Yeah but why should you care what the PC party does? They are not in power, and according to you the NDP will come roaring back to power in 2018. You should be spending more oxygen trashing the liberals, as the PC are irrelevant.

Pages