Joe Mihevc endorses Smitherman

Not a big surprise. I predicted this in the NDP: Slithering to Slitherman thread. Unfortunately for Joe Mehvic, he is dead wrong here. First of all Smitherman can not and will not beat Ford, if only because a large part of the pro-Ford vote is actually an anti-Smitherman vote. If he genuinely had a chance his polling would have increased over the last 8 months. However his polling is flat, Contributing to the hysteria about Ford, and making it look like Smitherman might take it, is only encouraging people to vote for Ford.

Strategic voting only disburses the vote further in a situation where there is more than one candidate opposing the fron runner.

... Tune in tomorrow ...

Can't say I'm surprised about Joe M's decision although I am disappointed. 

There is a lot of be fearful of in politics at all levels. 

Mehvic also told Miller he should get out of the race in order to make room for Barbra Hall. Mehvic's political smarts are doubtful, and his position apparently self-serving.

The only reason that Liberals like to try and intimidate people with strategic voting is because running on their platform on the the issues and their record is not going to get them elected by anyone.

I have nothing against "strategic voting" when it is actually strategic. For example, I wish more people who voted for ralph Nader in 2000 had voted "strategically" for Al Gore. I'm glad that in 2003 people who were going to support Barbara Hall voted strategically for david Miller (I remember how two days before the vote Kyke Rae switched from backing Hall to backing Miller for "strategic reasons - good for him - better late than never) and I think its good when people who are considering voting Green vote strategically for NDP candidates who have a chance of winning.

If on the eve of election day the final polls have Ford and Smitherman at - say 40% each and Pantalone at 12% - then i would say that IF you really think its important that Ford not be mayor - even if it means holding your nose and voting for Smitherman - then that is what you should do. I am not convinced that it is that important to "stop Ford" - but I am open to being convinced. 

Stockholm wrote:

If on the eve of election day the final polls have Ford and Smitherman at - say 40% each and Pantalone at 12% - then i would say that IF you really think its important that Ford not be mayor - even if it means holding your nose and voting for Smitherman - then that is what you should do. I am not convinced that it is that important to "stop Ford" - but I am open to being convinced. 

That's my dilemma. I'm not really sure that it's worth voting for Smitherman so as not to get Ford.

@ Writer - I detect a tone of sarcasm but most of the cost overruns on the St. Clair right of way were not on the TTC part of the bill. I don't think Mihevc deserves to be smeared with that. As well, there was a one year delay in the project due to the (failed) lawsuit by the dinosaurs in Palacio's ward as well as engineering problems at St. Clair West station.   

In fact, if it wasn't for Joe Mihevc (and Miller & Pantalone & Giambrone et al), the likes of Ford, Rossi & Smitherman would have had their way and no transit improvements would have been made on St. Clair. Mihevc is certainly the best local councillor I've ever had and I am still voting for him notwithstanding my differences with him over the Mayor's race. 

I don't doubt Miller's version of events but I also remember Mihevc working hard on Miller's behalf. Joe recruited me to help out with Miller's campaign. 

 I think the level of opportunism in this election is as high as Ive ever seen it and I go back to the early 70's.TCHC

is in crisis as well as the TTC.We have been given lots of nice words from Miller and company over the years yet nothing

was done.When Mr Gosling died the city said the TCHC wasnt their responsibility yet Paula Fletcher sits on their board

Real change needs to happen and I dont really care who implements it as long as they solve problems not talk them to death

Cueball wrote:

The way I make it out, the city is on the cusp of the first major transit expansion in 20 years, and for some reason the union is taking the heat for the lousy service, when its one of the most underfunded systems in North America. This is on the table, and only one candidate for mayor is wholeheartedly supporting this, and all the others want to throw the expansion in the wastepaper basket and come up with something diffierent.

This is a formula for making sure that no expansion of improvement of service happens for another 10 years. Not only that, the union and its workers will take all the flak for the shitty service.

Sounds like the BRT/LRT debate we're currently having in Winnipeg.

I disagree with McGovern, actually. Where Smitherman may say he is only going to cut 4000 jobs as opposed t0 6000, Ford's promise to increase property taxes by the rate of inflation suggest that his budget will be better able to maintain services, whereas Smitherman will contribute to chronic underfunding of those services.

In essence, Smitherman's lesser cuts in adminstration will necessarily require cuts in other aspects of service other than staffing, if he really wants to freeze property taxes. Victims will likely be outsourced programs relating to things like ESL programs and so on.

McGovern's letter creates the impression that there is a tangible superior difference to be offered by Smitherman, when in fact, it is very possible he will be worse.

Yeah Cueball. It is unlikely that a guy who says he can save the city budget "$1.67 billion" and then this:

"This plan, ladies and gentlemen, is achievable and realistic ... It won't be easy to stop the gravy train, but I will do it," he said at today's news conference.

...probably will use inflationary tax increases to maintain services. Whew, I was worried about Ford for a minute.

I don't. What I actually think is that its all fluff. The so called plums that Smitherman is offering are entirely dependent on variables and can disappear as quckly as you can say Ehealth. Smitherman can't promise the 100 million that he expects from the province, and his "relationships" (sic) will have no bearing on a Hudak government. He claims he can eleminate "inefficiencies" to pay for more programs but we know that this politicians primary achievement to date is bleedin the public purse, not staunching the flow,

Therefore, at the core of both of these platforms are the cuts to city administration, and the reality is they will both cut as much staff as is possible, and any savings will then be converted into the tax rebates, based on how much is possible to cut. 4000 jobs or 6000 that is all guesses, one is posed just to sound more reasonable than the other, and both are equally meaningless.

At the end of the day the core of the program is the same. Kill jobs at city hall. Cut taxes. Sell of city land to developers. And of course, and attmept to break the garbage workers union, so that this sector of the workforce (which incidentally is comprised of the most non-white people of any of the other sectors of the CUPE workforce) can eek on lives as without any reasonable prospects or reward.

Indeed, the tenor of this campaign is bound up in this last promise. Where Ford promises to privatize curb side pick up, Smitherman promises to "talk about" priviatizing curb side garbage pickup. Indeed the real difference is that Smitherman is lying about his intentions, because he really means that he wants to privatize when he says he wants to "talk about" it, while Ford is honest enough to say what he intends.

The dipsute is about "whose friends will get in at the trough?"

I don't. Business associations are very strong local organizing tools. Also, Mihevc's defection is certain to have caused some confusion and demoralization in his crew as well.