Ward 18 City Councillor candidates promised, on-air, September 29 on Rogers TV debate "The Local Campaign" to release their campaign donor lists one week priotr to the election. Time's up:
See the few who kept the promise (so far) at: http://www.ward18.ca
I know many of the endorsers asgood, reasonable and progressive people-all and all lousy site though.
I think its a matter of opinion whethetr being endorsed by John Tory and Warren Kinsella is supposed to be proof of progressive credentials. Then again Heather mallick likes her too.
Itds a mystery. is she another Karen Stintz or is she another Adam Vaughan - does she or doesn't she? Only her hairdresser knows for sure.
Why doesn't she come out and clear the air and state categorically "I am a left of centre progressive". "I have never voted Conservative in my life and despise everything Harper, Hudak and Ford represent", "I am sympathetic to the labour movement". A few details about her philosophy might might win over people who want someone who votes the same way as Bussin without being her. but we don't want another Karen Stintz disaster.
All things being equal, the Star will always back whoever the Liberal party brass tells them to endorse. I'm sure Smitherman's people fax a list of who they want the Star to endorce and presto.
So we can expect Ken Chan to be endorsed in Ward 27, then.
And here we are. They also endorse 3M.
Its interesting that in Ward 29 where it is a bitter two way race between Jane Pitfield the quintessential patrician blue rinse crowd candidate and NDP-backed Mary Fragedakis - the Star endorses third place Diana Wood who was in the news this week because people from Pitfield's campaign threatened that if she didn't quit the race and stop "splitting" the rightwing vote - her career would be destroyed.
The people at the Star aren't stupid. They know its a close race in ward 19 between Layton and McCormick - so they think that if they can throw a few votes to Karen Sun, it might help McCormick come up the middle.
Karen has very strong endorsements from prominent community activists. But I guess you don't travel in such circles.
Mike Layton also has very strong endorsements from prominent community activists - plus he has the endorsement of the three wildly popular local elected officials (Chow, Marchese and Pantalone) and he has a zillion signs up. Only a very small minority of voters have even heard of any of the community activists and they will vote based on name recognition. It will still take a supreme effort to overcome the Liberal juggernaut behind McCormick.
Exactly! The party must commit all its resources to win a single council seat for the son of a well known politician, in a seat that has been held by the party since 1980! No chance at all of being effective in the mayoralty race. Those days are over for the NDP in Toronto. In 2006 they couldn't even hang on to Ward 20. That is the sad truth of that.
Its interesting that in Ward 29 where it is a bitter two way race between Jane Pitfield the quintessential patrician blue rinse crowd candidate and NDP-backed Mary Fragedakis - the Star endorses third place Diana Wood who was in the news this week because people from Pitfield's campaign threatened that if she didn't quit the race and stop "splitting" the rightwing vote - her career would be destroyed.
That's Jennifer Wood
OK, I'll admit I'm a foreigner. All I know about Toronto is the Leafs and the inside of Pearson International. But I listen to AM640 ( An overall disgusting station, I admit. Nevertheless it is "The Home of the Leafs"). They are running an advert for that Ford guy, in which he says that he's in favour of increasing the municipal government's "customer service".
Yeah, I found it weird too.
Apparently he's the front-runner in the election for Toronto's Mayor. Are you kidding me?
Calgary just elected a Muslim who is also a Harvard grad.
Don't you feel silly?
Should we expect at least a week's moratorium on West-bashing by Torontonians?
Mike Layton also has very strong endorsements from prominent community activists - plus he has the endorsement of the three wildly popular local elected officials (Chow, Marchese and Pantalone) and he has a zillion signs up. Only a very small minority of voters have even heard of any of the community activists and they will vote based on name recognition. It will still take a supreme effort to overcome the Liberal juggernaut behind McCormick.
Get out of the way and make room for Mike Layton!
Should we expect at least a week's moratorium on West-bashing by Torontonians?
You expect minor things like actual reasons to stop the Centre Of The Universe making 'Deliverance' jokes? I wish.*
* I really do, as it happens.
The crazy thing is that nearly half of Smitherman's vote is strategic according to recent opinion polls. Therefore, actually Pantalone is preferred by nearly twice as many people as Smitherman. Something like 35%. One can guess that at least some of Ford's support is also a strategic vote against Smitherman.
At the end of the day, it really looks like Pantalone might have been able to take this, if it were not for a huge amount of manipulation from the Star, and sotto voice "strategic voting" advice from some of Pantalone's "allies". It should be Smitherman who is being asked at this point if he will drop out to solidify Pantalone's vote
The prisoners dilemma examples how solidarity creates the best result for all. There was a song about this called "solidarity forever" but some people seem to have forgotten what that was about.
I agree with Cueball. I think there were a number of "progressives" including ndp supporters and members who believed from the start that Pantalone was not a viable candidate and were committed to the strategic vote, stop Ford hysteria all along. There seems to be a pattern with some to give up long before the fight has even begun. They never really gave pants a chance.
The crazy thing is that nearly half of Smitherman's vote is strategic according to recent opinion polls. Therefore, actually Pantalone is preferred by nearly twice as many people as Smitherman. Something like 35%. One can guess that at least some of Ford's support is also a strategic vote against Smitherman.
I guess this is what people derisively call "new math". Pantalone runs a distant third on every single measure - trust, competency etc... If people really liked him so much better than we woulod expect to see the kinds of numbers we often see at the federal level where Jack layton often leads Harper and Ignatieff on certain attributes even though it isn't enough to get people to say they would vote NDP.
Of course Pantalone is going to lead on "second choice" for the simple reason that he is the first choice of such a small proportion of people. Of course nearly half of Smitherman's vote is "more to stop someone else than to vote for him" (or however they phrase it) - that makes perfect sense since his rise in the polls has been almost exclusively the result of supporters of sarah Thompson and Rocco Rossi moving en masse to him to stop Ford. Pantalone has been doddering along at the same mid-teen percentage of the popular vote he's had for the past eight months - his support has never budged.
I watched the debate on CP24 last night. I thought Joe was better than usual in it and Smitherman and Ford both came across as really despicable people - never mind policy, i mean as people they were both utterly charmless. But its all too little too late and not enough people would have been watching for it to have made a difference.
I agree with Cueball. I think there were a number of "progressives" including ndp supporters and members who believed from the start that Pantalone was not a viable candidate and were committed to the strategic vote, stop Ford hysteria all along. There seems to be a pattern with some to give up long before the fight has even begun. They never really gave pants a chance.
Except that Pantalone announced he was running in January and from January (when Giambrone imploded) until June - for six long months - the conventional wisdom was that Ford was a joke who would only get 5% of the vote or so. No one took him seriously enough to feel they needed to stop him until some shock polls at the beginning of the summer that showed Ford was in contention.
The crazy thing is that nearly half of Smitherman's vote is strategic according to recent opinion polls. Therefore, actually Pantalone is preferred by nearly twice as many people as Smitherman. Something like 35%. One can guess that at least some of Ford's support is also a strategic vote against Smitherman.
At the end of the day, it really looks like Pantalone might have been able to take this, if it were not for a huge amount of manipulation from the Star, and sotto voice "strategic voting" advice from some of Pantalone's "allies". It should be Smitherman who is being asked at this point if he will drop out to solidify Pantalone's vote
The prisoners dilemma examples how solidarity creates the best result for all. There was a song about this called "solidarity forever" but some people seem to have forgotten what that was about.
Then again, if Smitherman had not been in the race, would they have been Pantalone supporters, or Rossi/Thompson supporters?
This is a slightly roundabout way of asking how much support left-wing politicians really have? Not to say that the fight is hopeless, merely that fighting the way we have for the last few years, within the parliamentary side of things, is hopeless.
At the end of the day, it really looks like Pantalone might have been able to take this, if it were not for a huge amount of manipulation from the Star, and sotto voice "strategic voting" advice from some of Pantalone's "allies". It should be Smitherman who is being asked at this point if he will drop out to solidify Pantalone's vote
Cueball, I think you give the Star way more credit for people's voting patterns. I read the Globe, Star and Sun everyday and usually NOW on Thursdays. Wonder which one I should listen too.
The crazy thing is that nearly half of Smitherman's vote is strategic according to recent opinion polls. Therefore, actually Pantalone is preferred by nearly twice as many people as Smitherman. Something like 35%. One can guess that at least some of Ford's support is also a strategic vote against Smitherman.
At the end of the day, it really looks like Pantalone might have been able to take this, if it were not for a huge amount of manipulation from the Star, and sotto voice "strategic voting" advice from some of Pantalone's "allies". It should be Smitherman who is being asked at this point if he will drop out to solidify Pantalone's vote
The prisoners dilemma examples how solidarity creates the best result for all. There was a song about this called "solidarity forever" but some people seem to have forgotten what that was about.
Then again, if Smitherman had not been in the race, would they have been Pantalone supporters, or Rossi/Thompson supporters?
This is a slightly roundabout way of asking how much support left-wing politicians really have? Not to say that the fight is hopeless, merely that fighting the way we have for the last few years, within the parliamentary side of things, is hopeless.
There is nothing to suggest that Pantalone support does not constitute the 35% support that Miller still hangs on to. Obviously Toronto is not as right wing as it is clear that people have been vainly trying to vote left for years here by voting for the NDP, for lack of a better option. This amounts to 2 federal seats and 5 provincials ones.
Pantalone has had to overcome a huge organizational deficit without media support or even a competent party organization behind him. He has been campaigning behind the eight-ball for month. Only now with signigicant public exposure due to the narrowing of the race is he begining to have the kind of visibility he needed at the get go, for example, the Angus-Reid analysis of its poll also says:
Momentum
Pantalone heads to the election with a positive momentum rating. Across the City of Toronto, 19 per cent of respondents say their impression of Pantalone has improved over the past 30 days, while 17 per cent say it has worsened. Smitherman checks in at -1 on this indicator, while Ford is at -21 (more than a third of Torontonians say their views on Ford have worsened in the past month).
The poll results before media filtering.
I agree with Cueball. I think there were a number of "progressives" including ndp supporters and members who believed from the start that Pantalone was not a viable candidate and were committed to the strategic vote, stop Ford hysteria all along. There seems to be a pattern with some to give up long before the fight has even begun. They never really gave pants a chance.
Except that Pantalone announced he was running in January and from January (when Giambrone imploded) until June - for six long months - the conventional wisdom was that Ford was a joke who would only get 5% of the vote or so. No one took him seriously enough to feel they needed to stop him until some shock polls at the beginning of the summer that showed Ford was in contention.
Ford was at 27% already by April and was looking like a contender. Pantalone went from 5%-14% Jan-April his support dropped as the anyone but Ford campaign took hold. It is also worth noting that the polls between Jan-june were reporting 40-60% undecided.
Of the 40% saying they are voting Smitherman it is quite possble that a significant proportion would prefer Joe it is also probably true that some who would prefer Pantalone would vote Ford to stop Smitherman. It is also not accurate that those who previously prefered Rossi or Thompson automatically prefer Smitherman over Pantalone even if they do strategicly vote for Smitherman.
I would also repeat that it would be inaccurate to call supporters of Rossi/Thompson who now support Smitherman as strategic voters. A strategic voter is someone who votes for one candidate when they prefer another who is actually running. Maybe I'm being pedantic not like that ever happened before.
Crossposted with the Liberal troll.
The question on the survey was not "are you voting for one candidate even though you prefer someone else who is running and actively campaigning?". The question was are you voting "strategically to ensure that a specific candidate doesn't win" or are you voting for "the candidate you most want to win regardless of strategic impact"
Obviously i you are one of the 20% of so of voters who had backed Thompson or Rossi and who is now backing Smitherman - you would say you were reluctantly voting "strategically" since the candidate you liked best has dropped out and you have been left to choose "the lesser among three evils". Thomspon and Rossi's names are still on the ballot so people can still vote for them if they REALLY wanted to.
You can be "pedantic" if you want and define a true "strategic voter" anyway you want - but we aren't talking about who fits your definition of a stratgic voter - we are talking about who answered a specific polling question which way. I'm sorry, but you don't get to recontact all the Smitherman voters who say they are "voting strategically" and grill them on whether they had previously been Rossi or Thompson supporters so you can then tell them that they don't count as "real" strategic voters. They see themselves as being motivated to vote for Smitherman more out of hatred for Ford than out of love for Smitherman. Surprise, surprise - if those people really liked Smitherman that much they would have supported him in the first place rather than parking their voted with Rossi or Thompson for so long.
I agree with Cueball. I think there were a number of "progressives" including ndp supporters and members who believed from the start that Pantalone was not a viable candidate and were committed to the strategic vote, stop Ford hysteria all along. There seems to be a pattern with some to give up long before the fight has even begun. They never really gave pants a chance.
Except that Pantalone announced he was running in January and from January (when Giambrone imploded) until June - for six long months - the conventional wisdom was that Ford was a joke who would only get 5% of the vote or so. No one took him seriously enough to feel they needed to stop him until some shock polls at the beginning of the summer that showed Ford was in contention.
Ford was at 27% already by April and was looking like a contender. Pantalone went from 5%-14% Jan-April his support dropped as the anyone but Ford campaign took hold. It is also worth noting that the polls between Jan-june were reporting 40-60% undecided.
Saying that the "Anyone but Ford campaign took hold" is a misnomer. The "anyone but Ford campaign" was agressively promoted by a good chunk of the NDP establishment, the media, including push polls that were used to show that Smitherman was supported by more people than Ford, without questions being asked about how Ford's other opponents stacked up against Ford in a two way race.
The critical problem for Joe has not been media attention. Indeed that Pantalone campaign has done an excellent job of promoting Joe in the media and keeping him in the race.Joe has also proven himself to be the most charismatic of the three contenders as we can see by the fact that he is the only one who has really developed popular appeal over the campaign, while Smitherman and Ford have stagnated, and lost substantial support.
What has been the main problem is the "left" has absolutely no way of gaining traction inside a hostile media environment because the main media is simply not going to be supportive or fair or honest. The only possible way for the left to gain traction in that kind of media environment is through effective grass roots organization and activism outside of the media paradigm.
A good example of course is the NDP organization, which seems to have completely dropped the ball, or to be absent, or massively incompetent. It is very likely that the NDP organization simply does not exist and so therefore is blameless, because it has shriveled up as the result of playing the media polling game, based on "optics", as opposed to solid organizational grassroots organizing on the issues.
Of course this problem is not solely exampled by the NDP, but the left in general, but the NDP is a case in point.
It simply has not tool to build momentum outside of the rigged game.
There should be a serious effort to rebuild this organizational ability following the election, but I doubt the NDP is the vehicle to do that.
Joe has also proven himself to be the most charismatic of the three contenders as we can see by the fact that he is the only one who has really developed popular appeal over the campaign, while Smitherman and Ford have stagnated, and lost substantial support.
Pardon while I pop the champagne cork over this evidence of massive charisma on the part of Pantalone. 19% of people say their opinion of him has gone up and 17% say it has gone down - and the other 60% didn't like him before and still don't like him - whoop-dee-doo!! That's what i call Pantalone-mania! Meanwhile the one guy who has really negative momentum - Rob Ford - is the one who is leading the polls!
If people really liked Pantalone that much - I would expect to see some evidence of that like him bieng the number one choice on measures like trust, likeability, competence etc... instead he is dead last on every single attribute. There is no point grasping at straws - the reality is that he is the wrong man, with the wrong message at the wrong time.
You are the one who thinks that Mike Layton is so uncharismatic that there is absolutely no possible way for him to defeat his competitors in Ward 19 without an serious campaign effort. This even though Pantalone has been crushing the opposition there handily for decades.
Pantalone would definitely crush Mike if he ran against him. Does that mean that Pantalone is naturally more charismatic than Layton? Well no not really. Incumbency, candidate visibility, media support, and so on. All kind of factors are relevant. Indeed that is why we have "campaigns", with campaign organizations, media events and debates. But in the case of polling for Pantalone we have to accept the poll numbers as immutable facts written in stone, beyond mediation or analysis, so according to you, any effort was a wasted effort.
The evidence is quite clear, aside from the 40% of Smitherman's vote that is voting Strategically, Smitherman and Pantalone are at least equally popular, and more importantly, Pantalone has even become more popular with public exposure, while Smitherman substantively less. Yet you have let Smitherman run away with the race, and even argued the case for strategic voting, run down Pantalone constantly, and not lifted a finger to support him. Meaner people might call this sabotage, but I will just call it a self-fulfilling prophesy.
Now of course, in the case where you are promoting the interests of the white anglo clique that runs the NDP, no effort is too large.
But in the case of polling for Pantalone we have to accept the poll numbers as immutable facts written in stone, beyond mediation or analysis, so according to you, any effort was a wasted effort.
No, the polling merits lots of analysis and that's what some of us are doing there. The analysis indicates that people don't want to vote for Pantalone. Are polling numbers immutable for ever - of course not. We all know what happened in 2003 where Miller was in single digits for much of the campaign and then surged to a win at the end. We also saw in Calgary how a candidate who was in third place for much of the campaign surged to victory - but in each of those cases, the polls picked up signs of a surge weeks before the election. When Pantalone was languishing in the low teens through January, February, March, April, May, June, July and August - I was patient and i figured it was early days and that at some point Pantalone might "catch fire". But it never happened. Its now less than a week before the election and I see no momentum whatsoever - if anything i see negative momentum. Torontonians just don't want to vote for him - its as simple as that. Maybe they don't like his policies, maybe they don't like his message, maybe his campaign strategy was flawed - who knows there are a zillion explanations for a failed campaign. I think that there was a lot of disssatisfaction in Toronto and people wanted to vote for change.
Even the left (such that it exists in Toronto) had reasons to be apathetic - why go out of your way to work for a man who supports Israeli apartheid (sic.), thinks the police did a great job during the G20 and supported the city's anti-union position 100% during the CUPE strike. Pantalone's biggest claim to fame over the years has been as the token New Democrat who could always be counted on to work with the rightwing establishment that runs the city. He worked with Paul Godfrey and Alan Tonks on Metro Council and he cooperated with Art Eggleton and Mel Lastman as well. You seem to be projecting a lot onto Pantalone that has never been there. He's a good man, but hardly some leftwing radical.He's about as centrist and pragmatic a New Democrat as you are ever likely to get.
Your analysis is that people don't want to vote for Mike Layton. As you have confessed by repreatedly stating the case that the Liberals are likely to take the seat. I mean seriously, if Mike was really charismatic his vote for me vibe should emanate from his home while he is sitting on his couch playing nintendo. A simply annoucement that he has entered the race on the City Hall web page should be enough to bring in the votes. Godly, truly he is.
Why should anyone do anything at all to support him? Put up signs, popularize him on the web, go door to door, drop flyers and so on?
If you don't campaign, you don't win - no matter how good a candidate you are. No one operates in a vacuum and the other candidates are working hard as well. I'm not sure why you seem to have some bizarre personal vendetta against Mike Layton - did he not pay enough attention to you and now you've turned on him in a fit of pique? He's just about the only person running for council who is actively helping Pantalone's campaign for mayor - but i gues that's not good enough for you.
Israeli apartheid (sic.),
Why the (sic.)? That is the correct spelling for the crime that the Israeli state is committing. Unless you think "apartheid" should be capitalized? Is that it?
If you don't campaign, you don't win - no matter how good a candidate you are.
Thank you. That is the point. And you have done nothing but campaign against Joe Pantalone on this baord for six months. On the other hand, you will kiss ass with the white anglo-clique that runs the NDP unabashedly and without reservation.
I'm flattered that you think I'm so powerful and influential that a few anonymous posts in a newsgroup like babble are enough to change the entire course of the Toronto mayoral campaign!!
I'm not sure why you keep attacking this so-called "white anglo clique" than runs the NDP - when the person you seem to spew the most invective at is Olivia Chow - last time I checked she was neither white nor anglo - unless you want to claim that since she was born in Hong Kong when it was a British protectorate - that makes her "anglo".
You've done nothing but campaign against the NDP at every level for about the last eight years (and probably before that as well) - do you think you've accomplished anything?
I don't agree and neither does Joe Pantalone. In fact one of the reasons I like Pantalone si that he's been such a solid supporter of Israel!
I'm flattered that you think I'm so powerful and influential that a few anonymous posts in a newsgroup like babble are enough to change the entire course of the Toronto mayoral campaign!!
I said "on this board". I am sure that you have been doing pretty much the same in NDP ciricles, and in the campaign for Mike Layton: Joe's own ward! A place where Joe should easily get numerous votes. Having you running down Joe in his own ward organization must be wonderful for moral there.
At least you are not pretending that you have not been campaigning against Joe Pantalone, even though he is the only NDP member running in the mayoralty election. Not campaigning for someone is a far cry from campaigning against them, and that is what you are doing.
I don't need to have any delusions of grandeur of my own - Cueball seems to think I'm some incredibly important influential rainmaker whose opinions can make or break a candidate - i only wish it was true!!
Did I say that? No I said you were campaigning against Joe on this board and elsewhere. Part of the NDP group that sold out Joe, something that you helped build, in your own small-minded way.
So you think I'm "campaigning against Pantalone" elsewhere than on this board - what did you do? hire a private investigator to stalk me, tap my phone and record every personal conversation I have? Maybe you have video tape of me spending every evening knocking on doors urging people not to vote for Pantalone? I invite you to produce a link to it so people can watch it as "video on demand".
Glad to know you have a hobby that makes you happy.
I see no reason to think otherwise. Nor have you denied it.
You have been peevish ever since pretty boy Giambroni got caught with his pants down.
And you are free to do so in any public forum and to anyone you choose whereever. Hence I have no reason to think that you have not been openly campaigning against Joe, running him down, and talking up strategic voting just as you have been here, elsewhere. I don't really need you to answer, just stating the facts as I see them.
I don't dignify your absurd "when did you stop beating your wife?" style questions with an answer. This is an open forum where people are free to comment on municipal political developments and are free to point out any and all candidates' strengths and weaknesses.
If you really have nothing better to do with your time (and I suspect that you don't) - you can look back at what i had to say about Giambrone a year ago when I posted over and over again about what a mistake I thought it was for him to run for mayor and how he was too young and too easily linked to the unpopular TTC and that he ought to stand aside and support Pantalone and focus on getting re-elected to council. Sorry, if I've ruined another half-baked conspiracy theory.
Who's talking up "strategic voting"? I'm the one trying to downplay it and am pointing out that much of what we see of it is not from people who were ever tempted to vote for Pantalone but rather is from former Thomson and Rossi supporters who are reluctantly voting for Smitherman.
I've said nothing but good things about Pantalone - but I have pointed out that he has proven to be a weak candidate with a weak campaign and that is pretty self-evident given how little support he has in the polls. I wish things had panned out differently, but this is the hand we have been dealt.
What has been the main problem is the "left" has absolutely no way of gaining traction inside a hostile media environment because the main media is simply not going to be supportive or fair or honest. The only possible way for the left to gain traction in that kind of media environment is through effective grass roots organization and activism outside of the media paradigm.
Look at the election of Naheed Nenshi in Calgary, who was able to mobilise grassroots support and claim victory even though almost every poll didn't show him to be in contention.
The internet is not a hostile media environment because it is not filtered and controlled. Hence, it is possible to organize there in a manner simillar to other forms of grass roots organizing.
I've said nothing but good things about Pantalone - but I have pointed out that he has proven to be a weak candidate with a weak campaign and that is pretty self-evident given how little support he has in the polls. I wish things had panned out differently, but this is the hand we have been dealt.
How does calling him "a weak candidate with a weak campaign" fit in with saying "nothing but good things about Pantalone"? I guess you just don't have any idea how toxic your "support" really is.
If he wins the election - i will stand corrected.
You seem to have no compunction coming up with copious justifications for the dismal results of the NDP federally and in most places, and have no end of excuses for them. Especially media bias. Jack never being able to mount 17% in the opinion polls never seems to be a reason for you to suggest that Jack Layton is a "weak candidate with a weak campaign", however Joey's failure to breach that mark in this election is entirely his responsibility according to you.
Your negativity has been consistent on this point. Indeed, a .05% increase in Jack's polling is enough for you to start waxing poetic about Jack's magnetic personality, and the brilliance of the NDP strategy, Indeed a 1% increase in support for Jack is enough for you to start ranting about building momentum.
For example, this kind of crap:
More confirmation of how well the NDP is doing in Quebec - 17% according to the latest Leger poll - and in second place among francophones!
http://www.ledevoir.com/documents/pdf/sondage_politique_181010.pdf
So, there you have it. Joe Pantalone has similar numbers as the Federal NDP. I guess you should just pack it in then, since Jack is obviously not going anywhere, because he is a "weak candidate with a weak campaign."
If you win the next federal election, I will stand corrected.
YOu have to judge a candidates performance in comparison with the historic range of support for his or her party. In 2003 David Miller was the NDP endorsed progressive candidate for mayor and he won with 44% of the vote. In 2006 David Miller was the NDP endorsed progressive candidate for mayor and was re-elected with 63% of the vote. In 2010 Joe Pantalone is the NDP endorsed progressive candidate for mayor and known as Miller's deputy and "mini-me"and he'll be lucky to get 15% of the vote. We know from the 2003 and 2006 elections that as many as 63% of Torontonians can potentially vote for a progressive candidate for mayor who has an NDP pedigree. If Pantalone was a strong, inspiring attractive candidate then he would be getting just as many votes as Miller was able to get.
No I don't. All I have to do is look at the poll numbers. Jack support and Pantalone's support is the same. You personally don't like Pantalone, so you spin his numbers negatively. You like Jack, so you spin his numbers positively. That much is blatantly obvious..
Jack became leader after three straight elections where the NDP got less than 10% of the vote and was flirting with extinction as a party. Pantalone is the handpicked successor of a man who won 63% of the vote in the last municipal election. Why do you think that about three-quarters of the people who voted for Miller in 2006 don't want to vote for his handpicked successor?
Also, when you win 18% of the vote and 37 seats in a multi-party parliamentary system, you are a player for the entire duration of the parliament and you get funding and you take part in the legislative process etc...when you run for mayor of a city - it is an all or nothing situation. It doesn't matter of you lose by one vote or a million votes - the loser gets NOTHING.
Pantalone started with 4% support in the polls a virtual unknown. Indeed Pantalone has increased his support by 400% in 9 months. Jack on the other hand has only increased the support for the federal NDP by 70% and has been languishing at the same level for 10 years.
What does is say about someone that they can be a city councillor for 30 years, deputy mayor for four years - and yet be "a virtual unknown"?
What does it say about someone who will continue to agressively promote a candidate who has led his party for 8 years without any measurable increase in support, and still think that that candidate is not a "weak candidate".
