[Scarberian]

Let me remind you that it was you speculated that Tory was going to be a one term. And alluded that a change in the electoral system would make this a reality.

And let me suggest to you, go read what I wrote again. The word "likely" does not mean definitely. Unless your definition of speculation means something likely=guaranteed it will for 100% happen for shure. In that case I will make sure I'll write, "I will likely win five billion dollars."

re: ranked ballot, here is what I wrote about ranked ballot which may come in 2018: " At least ranked ballots will likely be in place come 2018." What you think I allude to and what it has to do with Tory, is all entirely on you. But I'll spell it out for you if you want it clearer. Sweet, Eff Ay. If there is any link I intend between ranked ballots to anyone, it would be more on reducing the chances of having another Fordian Fiasco.

The voting day for 2014 mayoral bowl is not even over yet, it's extremely wishful thinking to play the 2018 bowl, with possible rule changes, with a 2014 roster.

And I certainly wouldn't speculate as definitively as you have on the end of his term.

Speculate as definitively? Is that like icy hot frozen boiled soup? It's called speculation. There is no "definitive speculating", other than the one you seem to think exists between the lines. And I'll speculate as much as anyone else, thanks, how would others speculating on anything, take away from your bowl of cereal?

And I think Doug Ford will be in Chicago in time for this weekend.

Well on that, that's likely definitive. Chicago bound 8/10, the only betting action is the departure date.

 

[rbt]

Honestly, you guys, while I know that Tory will win, I don't have a prediction about his margin. All the same, I hope Tory comes out with over 50% to make it a really good victory for him.

This will be an interesting day -- will Chow place 2nd like she should, or will she place after that nauseating DuhFo? We'll see.

My squeeze and I have a bottle of champagne ready to toast a Ford-Free mayor's office, later on today. The past four years have been a terrible and sad waste of time for Torontonians.

If Doug gets 30% we will probably see him trying for a run at Conservative Party Leader in a decade or two (he'll take a break from politics to fix his business first; perhaps hire competent management), or possibly going for Chicago mayor. It'll be weird to watch him in his 50's and early 60's.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Not really - that kind of bargaining only works when it is a mayor that holds sway. If JT got elected by a huge margin, it would be due to the strength of the ABF vote and not from the sheer force of his personality. It maybe the case four years down the road, but as it stands right now, he is no Hazel.

Besides, I bet you Queen's Park will be thinking twice about giving the city any additional powers given the Ford tenure - I can't imagine a more compelling argument for a paternalistic approach based on what we've seen the last four years.

AoD

I'd say the opposite. What David Miller did, after begging for money each year, was convince the province to give him a fishing rod, instead of just a few fish, with the new City of Toronto Act. Ford's refusal to take advantage of those powers isn't as noteworthy as the electoral support it garnered. There something ironic about his "only one taxpayer" mantra, given that what he really means is that Toronto isn't willing to pay for its own stuff and that other taxpayers should do it; he seemed to think that property tax is a tax but that income tax is just something totally different. Point being, what Ford exposed, time and time again, was the need for more powers.

It shouldn't have fallen to council to vote to strip away his powers since no recall mechanism existed.
It shouldn't have gotten to the point where the premier is being asked whether she'll kick him out of office.
It shouldn't have fallen to people like Jude McDonald to enforce violations of provincial legislation.

What Ford showed time and time again (at least IMHO) was how poorly the existing legislation reflects the political reality. (And, FWIW, that's not just Toronto and Ontario; that's a problem, starting with the British North America Act that continues to filter down). So perhaps it depends how you define "more powers" but I think more independence for the city (and other cities too) is necessary and inevitable, in time.

As for "He is no Hazel," I don't know how you can say that about someone not yet even elected. You think, the day before Hazel was elected people knew she would stay in that seat until 2014? I doubt it. You could be right but unless you guessed that a) Ford would win b) the second half of his term would be dominated by news of his crack use, I don't know how good your predictions 30 years out (nor anyone else's) would be.

on a semi-related note - I don't know how many people here follow civic activist Dave Meslin but he's always a very reasonable guy and, among other things, is probably the person single-most responsible for ranked balotting moving forward. I want to post some excerpts of what he said about each of the 3 candidates in a long Facebook post. Each is a thoughtful approach, IMHO, that gets past a lot of the hysteria that's been out there. You might expect he'd be a knee-jerk, shoo-in for Olivia but it's not that simple...

I've worked with John on a few projects and events, and I have enormous amount of respect for him. I think the criticisms being aimed at him by Chow supporters are really unfair and simplistic. I think he has a great track record as a city builder and consensus builder. I also think he has a deep understanding of white privilege, despite his reluctance to embrace the politically-correct term while caught off-guard in a scrum. CivicAction is one of the most diverse organisations I've seen in Toronto. Their staff are almost exclusively female, and women of colour have soared up the ranks quickly, during John's term as Chair (including Mitzie Hunter, who is now one of the most powerful women of colour in Ontario. ...And who did the NDP recruit to run against Mitzie - in Scarborough? A white guy from downtown....) I also think John has a progressive economic outlook, again proven by his time at Civic Action where he oversaw their campaign for new revenue tools to build public transit (a campaign that was killed by the Ontario NDP). I like his SmartTrack plan, and I think his greatest strength is that he spent the last few years doing non-partisan municipal advocacy, bringing groups together to tackle important issues like environmental sustainability, and political access & inclusion. He's a good guy, who volunteers enormous amounts of time, and it's sad to see him being attacked, and portrayed as an out-of-touch right-wing business man.

As for Olivia, I think she'd be an amazing mayor, and I strongly encourage her supporters to vote for her - rather than to vote strategically. Voting from the heart is the core principle of our entire democratic system. Once every few years, we get to express what we want - not what we DON'T want. Olivia is one of the most committed and passionate voices for social change I've ever seen in my life. She's been supporting my work since 1998, when I used to organise Reclaim the Streets in Toronto. We've worked together on the Toronto Cycling Committee, the campaign against the Adam Mine, and many other issues/projects/campaigns. She walks the walk (or bikes the bike?), and gives 100% of her energy to the advancement of social justice. I've found her campaign to be disappointing, from the original slogan "New Mayor - Better City" (which I found to be hollow and patronising), to their strategy of focusing on her "story" rather than her platform (which I also find patronising). I also think her campaign has been too negative. Regardless, I think she'd be a fantastic mayor, and wouldn't discourage anyone from voting for her. Her track record as an environmental and social justice activist is inspiring.

Then we have Doug. I'll be honest, and most of you will disagree with me... and that's ok. I don't think the Fords are racist or homophobic. I think they are clueless about political correctness, and I think they are kind of vulgar in their choice of words, but I think they embrace cultural diversity in very real ways. The most concrete example, is their staff. The political staff hired by both Doug and Rob have been more culturally diverse than most of the other political offices at City Hall, including perhaps all of our former mayors. I also couldn't care less about the fact that Rob smokes crack cocaine. I personally feel that it's none of our business what politicians do in their personal lives, unless questions of moral judgement come into play. And I don't think doing drugs is immoral. And I'm not sure if lying about it immoral either, because no one should have been intruding on his personal life in the first place. I'll take it a step further, and say that progressives in Toronto had a great opportunity to advance the harm-reduction movement forward, under Rob Ford. Instead, the demands for his resignation set our movement backwards. Addicts aren't bad people, and they already face incredible amounts of discrimination and cultural isolation. They need love and support. The response to Ford's addiction (mockery and mass calls for his resignation) only served to feed negative attitudes about users and addicts. But I'm no fan of the Fords. I think the Ford brothers are extremely dangerous, politically, because they represent a Tea-Party attitude that sees government as the enemy. They foster division, they feed conflict and they play politics as a blood sport.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Not really - that kind of bargaining only works when it is a mayor that holds sway. If JT got elected by a huge margin, it would be due to the strength of the ABF vote and not from the sheer force of his personality. It maybe the case four years down the road, but as it stands right now, he is no Hazel.

Besides, I bet you Queen's Park will be thinking twice about giving the city any additional powers given the Ford tenure - I can't imagine a more compelling argument for a paternalistic approach based on what we've seen the last four years.

AoD

IDK, AoD:
1. Not really an 'additional' power, but the one major legislative change with a certain amount of support and momentum is ranked balloting, and Ford was instrumental in advancing that cause (by negative example.)

2. Taking a good, hard look at how the amalgamation of all social housing into TCHC and putting it into the city ended up with the current status quo. I'd say allowing Tory to change the way TCHC Board and administration works, including selling more properties to fund repairs and/or new units, might be in the cards after the success of Don Mount/Riverside and Regent Park.

I'd love to see something jazzy from Tory on new revenue tools connected directly to infrastructure repair or new roads/parks/bike paths/whathaveyou, like a short-dated sunsetted 'neighbourhood' property tax to pay for a new park/playground (sort of like the Sec 37(?) fee), but I think that's way too much of a reach.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Just about the only people who amuse me more than homophobes are those people who like to pretend that white privilege doesn't exist. They act like little 4 year old brats who, when you point something out that they know is true but don't want to awknoledge, stick their fingers in their ears, scream and pretend that it's not there.

I don't have an issue with you saying 'white privilege' exists. You can even say I benefitted from it, and I won't object too much (although, given my work history, I'd quibble given the number of women bosses and Chinese and South Asian contemporaries I've had). But, and it's a BIG but, there's a HUGE difference between that generalization and what most people who scream 'white privilege' are doing: they're trying to paint the failure of a specific politician to win a specific election based on a generalized, theoretical view of the contemporary developed world's culture.

Nothing amuses me more than people who try to take theories they learned in undergrad bars from their friends who were actually taking the course and paint them onto an entire electorate in completely inappropriate ways.

Donato's an unfunny ass. Lots of people, including white males, are calling him on it. Lots of people are voting for Chow because they want to 'fight white privilege.'

 

[nfitz]

Donato's an unfunny ass. Lots of people, including white males, are calling him on it. Lots of people are voting for Chow because they want to 'fight white privilege.'

Exactly. What pushed me over the top towards Chow instead of Goldkind is that no one should have to put up with the vile over-the-top racist attacks that Chow has had to put up with, and that neither Ford nor Tory have gone out of their way attack. It's only this final straw that has seen the Tory camp react to any great extent.

It's the similar thing that drove me to vote NDP in the last federal election. The muck-raking attack over-the-top attack on Layton at the last minute of the campaign. Until that point I was going to reluctantly vote for Minna (reluctant because of Ignatieff). Similarly in 1993 I was torn between the Liberals and PC (the PC candidate where I was had a good reputation from her council days, and I thought Kim Campbell was a change for the better), and it was John Tory's shocking attack on Jean Chretien's physical disability that pushed me over the edge.

 

[Forgotten]

I'm not going to make any predictions but election day belongs to the silent majority, as it did in 2010.

I eagerly await the columns from freshcutgrass, Silence&Motion, hper, and the rest of the gang in the next NOW explaining to us in small words how strategic voting is the reason why the NDP lost (again). I must compliment all of you for your gainful employment because it must be a full time job.

 

[sarnya]

I'm not going to make any predictions but election day belongs to the silent majority, as it did in 2010.

It seems to me like John Tory and his supporters have been the silent majority.

 

[nfitz]

Ford more hours!

 

[Silence&Motion]

I eagerly await the columns from freshcutgrass, Silence&Motion, hper, and the rest of the gang in the next NOW explaining to us in small words how strategic voting is the reason why the NDP lost (again). I must compliment all of you for your gainful employment because it must be a full time job.

Again, if people are going to attribute views to me, I'd really like to see some actual quotes where I professed those views.

I voted for Olivia Chow, but I expect her to lose tonight. I'll be happy tonight if (1) Chow does better than the polls predict, and (2) Doug Ford loses.

If Chow does lose, I'll attribute it mostly to her debate performances. Lastman, Miller, Ford, and Tory have all excelled in debates either because they are great public speakers (Miller, Tory), or have a kind of charisma that connects with audiences (Lastman, Ford). You can't become mayor if you can't wow a debate audience.

Another take away from the last few campaigns is that it helps to have multiple candidates on your side of the political spectrum. Tory will win despite Ford and Stintz. Ford won despite Smitherman, Rossi, and Thompson. Miller won despite Hall. The benefit of not putting all your eggs in one basket far outweigh the danger of vote splitting, it seems.

 

[Silence&Motion]

on a semi-related note - I don't know how many people here follow civic activist Dave Meslin but he's always a very reasonable guy and, among other things, is probably the person single-most responsible for ranked balotting moving forward. I want to post some excerpts of what he said about each of the 3 candidates in a long Facebook post. Each is a thoughtful approach, IMHO, that gets past a lot of the hysteria that's been out there. You might expect he'd be a knee-jerk, shoo-in for Olivia but it's not that simple...

The fact that Meslin defends the Fords as not being racist or homophobic should make us question Meslin's judgement of character in general (and by extension his defence of Tory).

 

[StatGeek]

I'm not going to make any predictions but election day belongs to the silent majority, as it did in 2010.

Even if I try to give you the benefit of the doubt that 47% is the new "majority". But how exactly is Ford supporters "silent"? 90% of talk radio callers seem to be their supporters, in 2010 they had almost every talk radio host and multiple newspaper endorsements. What is your definition of silence?

Honestly stuff like this drives me up the wall. The constant Ford frauds and lies about him being a victim and underdog. The "noise" for Ford has always been exaggerated. I would say the Ford supporters actually have a much louder "noise factor" than it reality. Ford was never as popular as Miller, Lastman or Eggleton and had sub-50% approval rating since his first term. His supporters are loud, but not nearly as vast as it's made out to be.

 

[JGHali]

Indeed it can be. And like I've said, Tory could be a one-term mayor if other levels of government come calling....I think he might get a crack at the provincial PCs again if he proves to be a popular Toronto mayor and if can pull the party to the centre. But those are big ifs. And I certainly wouldn't speculate as definitively as you have on the end of his term.

Did you know that no mayor of Toronto has ever gone on to be elected premier of Ontario? Two premiers - Conant and Drew - had been mayors of Oshawa and Guelph, respectively, but even a Toronto alderman/councillor hasn't become premier since the 19th century.

There is little to no chance that Tory is going back to provincial politics. He was - rightly - viewed as a failed PC leader who couldn't even win his own seat. For all your talk about Toronto's supposed turn away from the "left", the real story in the last provincial election was that the PCs were yet again shut out of the city and lost 5 seats in the GTA and Hamilton/Niagara, while the NDP managed to take seats in Peel and Durham. And, whether correct or not, the three NDP defeats in Trinity-Spadina, Davenport, and Beaches-East York came in the context of rabble.ca types turning on Horvath for not being sufficiently leftist! At least some part of those defeats came from otherwise NDP-inclined voters who were pissed off at the "opportunistic" Horvath. So... yeah. Not really seeing your argument here.

 

[SunriseChampion]

The fact that Meslin defends the Fords as not being racist or homophobic should make us question Meslin's judgement of character in general (and by extension his defence of Tory).

So, also his assertion that Chow would make a good mayor?
.....or are we picking and choosing?

 

[nfitz]

So, also his assertion that Chow would make a good mayor?
.....or are we picking and choosing?

And why wouldn't Chow make good mayor?

Remember, the bar is pretty low after Lastman and Ford.