Toronto after the election, continued

robbie_dee wrote:

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

 

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

Double post

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.)

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.

dp

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.

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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. ;)

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

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.

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.