News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.2K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.5K     0 

Who gets your vote for Mayor of Toronto?

  • Ana Bailao

    Votes: 18 16.4%
  • Brad Bradford

    Votes: 3 2.7%
  • Olivia Chow

    Votes: 58 52.7%
  • Mitzie Hunter

    Votes: 2 1.8%
  • Josh Matlow

    Votes: 20 18.2%
  • Mark Saunders

    Votes: 4 3.6%
  • Other

    Votes: 5 4.5%

  • Total voters
    110
  • Poll closed .
Yeah that's possible, but it feels potentially unrealistic to me in two aspects: will Matlow become the standard-bearer for the "left" and will Saunders become the primary candidate on the "right"? I'm not sure I'd bet on either.

On that subject of who is the conservative candidate, it's been interesting to me to see Nick Kouvalis working with Bailao, Kory Teneycke working Bradford and then Ford supporting Saunders. Is there some sort of schism going on amid all these guys and the right wing establishment that's causing them to spread out their support? Is it just a question of Bailao and Bradford are paying them money so they'll take the money and be on their teams for now? Why has the right not consolidated around a single candidate? Is it 4D chess? Do the strategists think Saunders can't win/don't like Saunders, but he's Doug's guy? Does Doug think Bailao and Bradford are too centrist and hates their Toronto council downtowniness but the strategists think those candidates are better positioned to win and will play nice with the province?

I suspect Tory and his team were in the early stages of a succession plan for 2026, where his team would select their preferred flagbearer to replace him. It was probably going to be Bailao, Bradford or McKelvie. The scandal torpedoed these plans so it became a free for all, which is why you see a very crowded centre/centre-right field.

From what I've heard, Bradford has the slight edge in resources from Team Tory over Bailao, but Bailao has deeper support from the big red Liberal machine.

Both Bradford and Bailao were ready and organized right when the writ was dropped. Bradford is already running door-to-door canvasses and Bailao is staffing up a big office at University and Dundas. From what my source tells me, Matlow and Hunter appear to be slow in getting their resources together. It's a race against time as candidates have less than three months to organize.

Expect to Olivia Chow to formally register next week.
 
I suspect Tory and his team were in the early stages of a succession plan for 2026, where his team would select their preferred flagbearer to replace him. It was probably going to be Bailao, Bradford or McKelvie. The scandal torpedoed these plans so it became a free for all, which is why you see a very crowded centre/centre-right field.

From what I've heard, Bradford has the slight edge in resources from Team Tory over Bailao, but Bailao has deeper support from the big red Liberal machine.

Both Bradford and Bailao were ready and organized right when the writ was dropped. Bradford is already running door-to-door canvasses and Bailao is staffing up a big office at University and Dundas. From what my source tells me, Matlow and Hunter appear to be slow in getting their resources together. It's a race against time as candidates have less than three months to organize.

Expect to Olivia Chow to formally register next week.

Cheers for the insights.

Is there any strategic reasoning behind Chow's late registration?
 
I suspect Tory and his team were in the early stages of a succession plan for 2026, where his team would select their preferred flagbearer to replace him. It was probably going to be Bailao, Bradford or McKelvie. The scandal torpedoed these plans so it became a free for all, which is why you see a very crowded centre/centre-right field.

From what I've heard, Bradford has the slight edge in resources from Team Tory over Bailao, but Bailao has deeper support from the big red Liberal machine.

Both Bradford and Bailao were ready and organized right when the writ was dropped. Bradford is already running door-to-door canvasses and Bailao is staffing up a big office at University and Dundas. From what my source tells me, Matlow and Hunter appear to be slow in getting their resources together. It's a race against time as candidates have less than three months to organize.

Bradford is smart to start hitting the doors. This race will be won with: A) Money raised B) Good messaging C) An excellent ground game

That said, my gut feeling is Bailao will out fundraise all other candidates. That will be vital. So far, she has solid messaging and a solid platform. I hope to see her and her team at the doors asap. Brad Bradford might be framing himself as a younger version of John Tory but that could backfire. He does have lots of energy behind him. I could see him coming up the middle but his campaign feels more like a campaign to build his name up, not to get him elected, if that makes any sense.

As far as the teams goes, it looks like 60% of Tory's team is behind Bradford whereas the other 40% are behind Bailao. Bailao does have the masterminds behind Tory's past election wins though and it does look like she will have the Liberal machine backing her. That must sting for Mitzie Hunter though.
 
Cheers for the insights.

Is there any strategic reasoning behind Chow's late registration?

She's got enough recognition she could lay low for a few weeks and let the smaller names use up their oxygen in the media, then announce when the news has settled down.

That's my best guess.
 
She's got enough recognition she could lay low for a few weeks and let the smaller names use up their oxygen in the media, then announce when the news has settled down.

Yeah I agree with this. Right now the field is crowded and confusing with most of the candidates lacking widespread recognition. If Chow waits a bit to enter she gets to have her own news cycle about her entering the race, and maybe that + a strong launch offers her an opportunity to define herself as the solution of the problem of who to vote for for some progressive voters or people who vote more on someone being a known figure they trust who are currently looking around and wondering who to support. And have her candidacy seem like and be portrayed in the media as a big entrance that could shake up the race, rather that just being one of many candidates out at the start.
 
Here's hoping Chow does NOT run, I've never understood her popularity. I would never vote NDP, if the party affiliation was known.
 
Here's hoping Chow does NOT run, I've never understood her popularity. I would never vote NDP, if the party affiliation was known.

I usually vote NDP, but won't vote for Chow unless there is no one else to the left of Bailao. Need fresh ideas for the city.
 
Bradford is smart to start hitting the doors. This race will be won with: A) Money raised B) Good messaging C) An excellent ground game

That said, my gut feeling is Bailao will out fundraise all other candidates. That will be vital. So far, she has solid messaging and a solid platform. I hope to see her and her team at the doors asap. Brad Bradford might be framing himself as a younger version of John Tory but that could backfire. He does have lots of energy behind him. I could see him coming up the middle but his campaign feels more like a campaign to build his name up, not to get him elected, if that makes any sense.

As far as the teams goes, it looks like 60% of Tory's team is behind Bradford whereas the other 40% are behind Bailao. Bailao does have the masterminds behind Tory's past election wins though and it does look like she will have the Liberal machine backing her. That must sting for Mitzie Hunter though.

Solid messaging and platform??? It's basically, "I'll just ask the province to solve my problems, and do absolutely nothing." At least Brad Brad, who I despise, says he's going to actually do something.
 
Matlow out with a platform commitment to shift the Housing Now sites to a new public agency to begin construction and maintain ownership, rather than using private partners.

He proposed that the RGI units would be self-sufficient with cross-subsidies from the market units that would continue to be part of the plan; but that the agency would build directly.

This would require seed capital to get started, which Matlow claims he can find by repurposing 300M from the Hybrid Gardiner project. (While I prefer the boulevard option I am dubious such savings can be achieved within the near-term)


From the above:

1681236242622.png


Candidate Saunders is also given space in the piece to take a pot-shot at Matlow:

1681236275895.png


Of course he completely misses the key change, which would shift the builds to being publicly rather than privately financed.
 
Last edited:
This would require seed capital to get started, which Matlow claims he can find by repurposing 300M from the Hybrid Gardiner project. (While I prefer the boulevard option I am dubious such savings can be achieve within the near-term)

Indeed. The bulk of savings from the ground based option was in maintenance costs over a 50 year period.
 
Candidate Saunders is also given space in the piece to take a pot-shot at Matlow:

View attachment 468375

Of course he completely misses the key change, which would shift the builds to be being publicly rather than privately financed.
Neoliberals forgetting that public operation of society is even possible. /s

I guess he just didn't pay attention to the details of what he's responding to condescendingly would be the charitable interpretation here. Or he's just taking a dishonest cheap shot and he knows there's a difference. Who can say...

But if Saunders doesn't want to pay attention to the details on housing policy, I'm not sure why the city should elect him mayor when the city faces a housing crisis.

It would be nice if the journalist pointed out the difference here and didn't give Saunders' misconstruing of Matlow's policy proposal the last word in the article. Does the journalist understand the difference? Or are they just including misconstruing of policy from opponents for "balance"?

I agree the funding source here is not likely realistic and I wish Matlow would not build it all upon that — it undermines his own seriousness around having a realistic conversation about funding the city. But someone talking about more public involvement in housing is welcome.
 

Top