babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
I voted for Joe, and I encouraged other people to do so - but privately I was never very excited about doing so. There were obviously a whole bunch of factors at play in this election, but I think my general apathy for his run was based on a few things:
First of all, I think he kind of antagonized a lot of the people who were supportive and excited about Adam (pre-scandal) by deciding to run against him. Presumably he was hurt not to have been the 'anointed one', and in retrospect maybe we would have been better off if he had been, but it just started his whole campaign with a 'sour grapes' impression.
The other big thing with Joe, for me anyway, was that he had served for 30 years yet had very few accomplishments with resonance to point to in all that time on council. The lit from a distinguished council veteran should be a scorecard of recognizable success stories, and while he had a few good ones his overall record didn't come across as very impressive to me.
Add to that the fact that in the recent past he had garnered a bit of a reputation as an authoritarian (shutting down Ossington, trying to block a cafe's liquor license on Harbord) and his undying support for the Front Street Extension. He just didn't seem like a modern city-builder.
I think you've already dissected his campaign pretty thoroughly, but I don't know if anyone has mentioned how slow he was to ramp up. It seems like he didn't start campaigning in earnest until after Labour day. I'm sure the received wisdom was that people don't pay much attention until then, but I don't think that's true anymore, and while he was taking it slow Rob Ford was getting a ton of media attention and building name recognition.
So, that's why I wasn't very excited about his campaign and why I donated my time and money on a council race instead.
If Jack Layton walked on water, Chantal Hébert would write and article about how he can't swim.
As it turns out - its a good thing that a lot of people in the NDP focused on those council races rather than "throwing good money after bad" on the mayoralty. There were some very close calls at the council level and if a few narrow wins by left of centre candidates had instead been narrow losses - Ford would have a big leg up in implementing his agenda.
I think Lazy Tony makes a lot of other very valid points as to why so many people felt quite lukewarm about Pantalone from the get-go. Its a bit silly to say "Pantalone wasn't the problem, he was a great candidate! He just had terrible organization, not enough money, terrible strategy and a lack of volunteers". A big part of being a "good candidate" is being able to pick people who will organize a great campaign, motivate people to volunteer, raise money and developping a winning strategy. If none of those things materialize - at some point that candidate him or herself has to take some responsibility.
A few weeks ago you were reminding me that he had hired John Laschinger (whom Giambrone had perviously hired) and described him as one of the best in the business. Now his problem is that he didn't hire smart people.
Maybe Laschinger's heart wasn't in this race? Who knows, I'm sure there are inside stories to be told.
On this point, we agree.
i have 3 primary thoughts on monday's election and one sidenote
1-while miller was effective at securing a number of new powers for the city of toronto via the city of toronto act, with rob ford in power, i am rather grateful that the province was sensible and prudent in not granting other powers that mayors/cities have in other jursdictions (i.e. Chicago, London etc).
2-i respect adam vaughan and it's time for progressive (and thoughtful) councillors to rally around him. 2014 should be his time to shine.
3- i agree with those pundits that have either explicitly or implicitly noted that this ford win was a long time coming following amalgamation. it's time for the city building paradigm to look at the city in its entirety -i know spacing mag, progressive voices have turned their attention and interests to see Scarborough, Etobicoke, North York etc recently; however some fundamental reconceptualizing of 'who is your city' might need to be done
sidenote- while happy for Kristyn Wong-Tam in Ward 27, Joel Dick's low support in that race would suggest that team was working the NDP lists and all the NDP support in the riding went to her. I was so disappointed for this talented (and proudly NDP) candidate.
i'll say it, and i'm not going to apologise for it like Glen Murray was forced to. It's homophobia. If you are a practising religious person that belongs to any sect using the Bible or the Koran, you simply couldn't vote for a gay person in my observation/opinion. I think the technical term that would apply in this case is "elephant in the room".
I voted Pantalone because Smitherman and Ford were awful candidates and he was pitching a Toronto i know, like, and wanted to continue. I know alot of "POC's" in my end of town had Ford signs on thier businesses and lawns. This is clearly against their own interests so there has to be another reason, and I'm pretty sure it's the one i just stated.
Must be picking the wrong people. How Miller overcame the Laschinger deficit is hard to explain. Maybe that is because Miller was really John F. Kennedy reincarnated.
Hurt? Maybe he just said: "fuck this shit, I am tired of being run over by the party aparatus: we will see who can do better." Hardly a big deal since there was plenty of time for one or the other to drop out before election day and solidify support around a single candidate. Perhaps, at the very least, he though he could shape the campaign, and negotiate concessions from the NDP extablishment.
In the final analysis Pantalone was clearly a superior candidate than Giambrone, who not only got himself involved in some silly shenanigans with his groupies... sorry I mean interns... but then wilted at the first sign of controversy. Ford, has done 10 times worse things, even being arrested for DUI and marijuana possession, but he had the fortitude to stick it out.
Or maybe not.
While strong support for Mr. Ford among older Torontonians and non-union members of the working and lower-middle classes was anticipated by pollsters – “They’re the guys on the winning side in upper North America,” said Ekos Research president Frank Graves – the strong backing he received from immigrants is imperfectly understood.
They were 20 per cent more likely to vote for Mr. Ford than Canadian-born residents of the city. “It was a surprise to me,” Mr. Graves said.
I am sorry that you feel hurt that they do not feel that their interests coincide with your own. More focus on why the progressive segment of immigrant populations is silent during elections might bear fruit. It's a peculiar thing. The thing about partisan politics. In particular, it is consistentl that when NDP supporters find out that they have been "betrayed" by those they like to believe they represent they goes on the defensive and blame them for their loss, as opposed to listening to the message that is being conveyed.
Who is saying that the, the progressive segment, were not engaged, and were silent, Cue? Do you have numbers or other reference material showing this? Or is this personal speculation?
Moreover, if new immigrants vote for reasons of bigotry, as opposed to what is best for the community, their being engaged is a regressive social action, not a progressive one.
I am. The other angle would be to say something along the lines that these communities are essentially more conservative. I don't think so. I think the progressive vote in these communities, has a hard time getting traction with their constituency because the left, and the unions have failed to deliver. The fact is that these communities are among those that for the most part are on the outside looking in. It is a real mistake to underestimate the power of the local business leaders among them, and the fact that they can easily pitch privitization as a means of opening up the coffers at city hall for more equitable distribution.
nm you back edited and I am getting grumpy, 'night
The fact that the unions and the left have failed to deliver has everything to do with why progressive voices are silent in many immigrant communities. Just taking broad sideswipes at immigrants as enraged backward reactionaries does absolutely nothing except reinforce racist stereotypes.
We take as our standpoint that all communities of people have regressive and progressive elements. We know this to be true even if we are only hearing from one element among them. I don't see how we could say otherwise and still call ourselves progressive really. Then we have to examine how it is that right wing immigrant voters are mobilizing in the cause of the right, and ask ourselves why. The answers are very obvious, just by looking at the right wing rhetoric around the "socialist elite" and privileged unions to see that this message is being conveyed and it is evidently bearing fruit.
I think that the reason that it is resonating strongly in these communities is because those on the left in those communities are demoralized by years of promises that do not bear fruit.This is not to say that this is necessarily the fault of the left and the unions. Indeed a major reason that the uniionize work force is still disproportionately white is directly linked to cutbacks that prevent new workers from being introduced to the system, while the seniority system protects those who are already entrenched.
But blame is not the issue, when the evident reality is that the unions largely act to protect the right of white workers, since that is the main body of people who are enlisted in the unionized workforce. Therefore the unions and the left appear to be part of the white establishment, just as much as the corporate managers appear to be the white establishment.
This holds, regardless of whether it is intentional or not.
I think the left and the unions must agressively confront the realities of this issue with an open mind to new inclusive solutions, and the first order of business is to listen to the message that is being conveyed. This is particularly hard to do within the union movement, beyond lip-service, because first and foremost any Union must protect the rights of its existing membership, not the theoretical membership of potential members.
farnival said it and he was spot on to what I was alluding to and you avoided it Cueball. Perhaps, it's better not discussed here but I've been hearing about a lot of homophobia driving Ford's vote.
Wow, cross-posted with my other but this just stopped me in my tracks. Well written Cueball.
Pantalone is gay?
ROFL!
Though I dropped by the thread to share this, an interview with Rob Ford on "As it happens."
If you have Facebook, spread it around.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHJGR4i7fhw
No but Ford share's the attitude openly.
I also want to add that just because someone belongs to a union and they vote for leftist candidates, that do not necessarily mean they dont have racist feelings. I get the sense that many union members feel threatened by private sector workers , and it is hard ot build alliance when you feel threatened by the "outsiders" who also happen to be made up of many non white "immigrants."
So much conflicts can be resolved if people have more empathy and get out of their comfort zone and talk to people unlike themselves.
I feel that even in a city as diverse as Toronto, people often socialize among themselves and there is a sense of segregation among different groups based on many different criterias.
Most people are polite and smile , but they don't really do anything more to reach out, and when their sense of security is threatened, they shut down entirely and just get pissed off at "the other" and vote for a guy like Rob Ford.
Its really sad...Apparently, only the rich and the elites get to be angry and pissed off during a recession.
You are definitely on to something there. Ford is excelent at that. So is Pantalone, but I don't think his campaign was geared up enough to take advantage of his ability in this area.
I have to wonder if in this new world of "change" that long-standing service to one's community is not something to be honoured any more, that it's actually a hinderance. Looking at the results in Toronto, or even here in Manitoba tonight, as a long-standing MP lost the race for mayor and every single incumbent in Brandon who was challenged ended up defeated. Bookish Agrarian is raising the theme of broken trust, so maybe long-standing incumbency is too easily tied with being part of the "old boy's club." Maybe if the trust can be rebuilt, then long-standing service, along with a balance of new faces and new ideas, will be considered assets.
My experience was that he was very well liked by youth, Indeed, if we consider that youth are more tech aware than older folks, it was kind of odd that Pantalone had the largest turn out for his Facebook page, given the fact that he was somethng of a career socialist technocrat heading into his twilight years, and not at all like the swinging Slitherman.
Here's what the Left should do to Ford
I've followed the various TO Mayor threads from the beginning and it's been very informative.
I was involved in the local, small\medium town, races in my area. A LOT of incumbent mayors went down in a wide area around London. I think there's a general dissatisfaction with the way pols conducted themselves during the recession, and municipal pols were simply the first targets in Ontario where voters had a chance to express this frustration. Merited? Debatable.
Ford, as BA and other have suggested, was able to organize his campaign around this reality.
My local election notes also point to a emphasis from the business communities on pushing forward electable candidates with a "bringing the private sector into politics" angle. The business candidates have a built in organization via employees and affiliated businesses that creates a strong base. There's a general nervousness out here in the hinterland about diminishing economic opportunities, and voters could perhaps find this appealing in uncertain times.
Ford's cost-cutting promises resonated with the business community in Toronto, winning him an endorsement from the National Post. That he was perceived as the most business-friendly candidate had a lot more to do with his victory, IMO, than homophobia.
It's unquestionable that Ford's campaign was simple-minded and based on obfuscation and lies. It was also the most consistent campaign. Unlike Smitherman, Ford never wavered, repeating the same lies over and over.