DarnDirtyApe
Active Member
He has to be a joke candidate, even though his sense of humour is just slightly offensive.
|
|
|
- Thread starter ShonTron
- Start date
He has to be a joke candidate, even though his sense of humour is just slightly offensive.
nfitz
Superstar
He's been going on like this for years and years. He might well be a joke, but he's not in on it.
DarnDirtyApe
Active Member
Or rather, the rest of the world is not in on his joke...
WislaHD
Superstar
Speaking of, how is Mammo looking? I heard the vote split in that ward is pretty nasty.
salsa
Senior Member
Nick Di Nizio is the person who could beat Mammoliti, but I heard he's just as bad. If that's the case, I would still prefer to see Mammo lose.
pman
Senior Member
KWT's identity issues mean she's completely unresponsive to the concerns of anyone in the ward who lives north of Bloor. I know...evil Rosedale and Moore Park capitalists don't deserve a voice - and with KWT at the helm we certainly don't get one.
the lemur
Senior Member
Really? What's an issue she's been unresponsive on? I mean, it seems like she listened to people about the Chorley Park trail - the ones who said they weren't consulted, even when there had been notices and mailings.
nfitz
Superstar
Better yet. Why does pman think her alleged non-responsiveness is related to her "identity issues" and what does pman mean by "identity issues".
Greg Banks
Active Member
Has anyone watched the Rogers debates for Ward 32?
Just curious as to someone else's view of Brian Graff....
He seemed to me to head and shoulders more prepared, informed and proactive either of the frontrunning contenders (MMM, Bussin)
Just curious as to someone else's view of Brian Graff....
He seemed to me to head and shoulders more prepared, informed and proactive either of the frontrunning contenders (MMM, Bussin)
nfitz
Superstar
I haven't seen the debates, but he's contributed here at UT. And has some odd ideas ... such as getting rid of streetcars on street, and converting the Parliament bus line to a subway.
typezed
Active Member
Since I first used the term, I'll explain my usage. Wong-Tam is very attentive to concerns of gender, race, sexuality. In my viewings of city council I've noticed that she often adds amendments to motions to reflect those concerns, even to motions that seem to me to have little to do with those concerns. Now many people, especially young activist students, want to measure everything against identity, it seems to be the direction of our times, so in her focus she is representing their interests. Someone has to, and maybe in the end it will be of benefit to all. I've just sometimes found it a little much, KWT once again adding some special hat tip to a particular group, although I admire most of her initiative elsewhere. Unfortunately, I expect this mention will set you off for like six pages of commentary and argument, since on these boards you're a caricature of someone who goes overboard on identity issues.
Greg Banks
Active Member
Yes, that information was originally up on his campaign website, it no longer seems to be there...Just think of the hand wringing should his idea for a DRL be taken seriously...not only how Scarborough but how east of the Don would be underserviced and why should Rosedale, Bennington and Leaside (well all of Ward 26) be given preferential treatment
nfitz
Superstar
I was aware of how you used it. I'm curious how pman is using it, given he/she says that's the reason she's of no help to those in Rosedale. I don't see the link ...
DarnDirtyApe
Active Member
What are the pressing issues in Rosedale anyway? Aside from Chow's LTT expansion which would probably unite everyone in the neighbourhood in opposition.
On the Jarvis issue I would imagine she was on the "wrong side" (in favour of bike lanes, etc.) according to Rosedalians.
On the Jarvis issue I would imagine she was on the "wrong side" (in favour of bike lanes, etc.) according to Rosedalians.
pman
Senior Member
By that, I mean that KWT identifies with "racialized [sic] newcomer communities", to use her language in a November 2012 submission on redistricting Toronto Centre to create a new Mount Pleasant riding. Oddly enough, the proposal was to give more representation to people living in central Toronto by reducing the number of voters per federal MP. That would seem to be a no-brainer for anyone representing a central Toronto ward, but not for KWT. Her submission went on to criticize the proposed new riding for its potential negative impact on residents of areas covered by the Church Wellesley Village BIA, the Church Wellesley Neighbourhood Association, the Upper Jarvis Neighbourhood Association and the Bay Colverhill Community Association. Fair enough - we all get to choose our people, but it illustrates that KWT's community ends at Bloor. Anyway, here's the link:
http://ward27news.ca/kristyn-wong-t...-on-the-proposed-federal-electoral-boundaries
On KWT's non-responsiveness to north of Bloor issues, I mean:
1. The Chorley clear-cut and paving project, which she still clearly supports and only slowed down in the face of massive local opposition, which by the way she continues to dismiss.
2. Total non-action on the mess that is Glen Road north of the bridge until the screaming from locals became impossible for even her to ignore.
3. Refusal to secure a single penny for the rebuild of the Rosedale Park playground, even though she had the gall to attend the opening ceremony.
4. Complete indifference to the voices of anyone north of Bloor in her advocacy of the now-defunct Jarvis bike lanes.