[King of Kensington]

Don't know in which thread to post this, so I thought I'd start a new one. Official results are out.

http://torontoist.com/2010/10/which_wards_voted_for_who_for_mayor.php

 

[BobBob]

If you have a Silverlight plugin, there is a cool interactive visualization here:

http://dv.componentart.com/toronto2010/

 

[Eug]

32/44 Ford.

Torontoist states that downtown was overwhelming Smitherman, and the burbs were overwhelmingly Ford. Well yes and no. It's interesting to note that even in the core, there were still significant Ford votes with places like Ward 17 actually going to Ford, and Smitherman got decent votes in parts of the burbs too. eg. Ford got a quarter of the overall vote in Rosedale and won Don Valley West, whereas Smitherman was still getting a 3rd of the vote in far out parts of Scarborough.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

i'd like to see a heat map of polling subdivision results, not wards. wards are too vast.

 

[urbandreamer]

I'd like to see a breakdown according to housing type--single family housing, multi family housing (condos), rental apartment buildings, public housing, homeless shelters, etc.

 

[Admiral Beez]

When standing in the massive line at Spucecourt PS in Cabbagetown to vote, I suspected that every left-leaning person in the area had come to stop Ford. Now I see that Ward 28 (which admittedly is much more than CT) voted more than 60% for Smitherman, plus almost 12% for Pants. The disconnect between the downtowners and the rest of TO is huge it seems.

 

[Eug]

Ward 28 is the Rosedale ward I was talking about. It had 25% of the vote go to Ford. Not exactly insignificant.

 

[adma]

Ward 28 is the Rosedale ward I was talking about. It had 25% of the vote go to Ford. Not exactly insignificant.

In an echo of provincial/federal results, probably overwhelmingly north-of-Bloor.

But actually, I'm more surprised that Smitherman got so close in the Don Valley West wards than that Ford won--they're affluent, after all: John Tory's best result in 2003, and Pitfield's in 2006...

 

[Brandon716]

The map doesn't surprise me too much, although Etobicoke going 86% for Ford? Wow.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

I'd like to see a breakdown according to housing type--single family housing, multi family housing (condos), rental apartment buildings, public housing, homeless shelters, etc.

you can't. it's a secret ballot. the most you can see is how the catchment area for a particular polling station voted.

 

[SimonP]

Working on Joe's campaign, I've had ward by ward polling numbers to look at for the last few months and have noticed a few patterns. It's especially interesting to compare the numbers to 2006. Here is a poll by poll map I did of Miller's vote in 2006:

Here is the same map for 2003:

Miller dominated downtown, but that is not enough to be elected mayor. What put him in the mayor's office in 2003 was also winning areas in southern Scarborough and Etobicoke based on waterfront issues, and high immigrant/low income areas in the northeast and northwest of the city. Smitherman both failed to get as much of the downtown vote as Miller, and lost badly to Ford along the suburban waterfront and in the Rexdale/Jane-Finch/Malvern areas.

Smitherman outperformed Miller in the central belt running from Rosedale, through Leaside, the Bridle Path and up into Willowdale. These were some of Miller's worst areas in both elections, and some of the few areas in Toronto that vote Conservative federally, but Smitherman either won or came close to Ford in all these districts. Ford is not much liked by wealthy conservatives. The private school and country club set, which is still a core Tory constituency, doesn't have much time for Ford.

Joe's vote pattern is also very different from Miller's. Joe's strongest wards were downtown, but his second strongest area of support is along the Weston corridor, areas like York, Downsview, and Humber Summit. These were some of Miller's worst areas, but were some of Joe's best. The population in these areas tends to be working class with a large Italian and Portuguese community. Joe appealed to these communities more than Miller did. These voters also tended to be choosing between Ford and Joe.

 

[Glen]

We could have predicted these results after reading these reports....

http://www.unitedwaytoronto.com/downloads/whatWeDo/reports/PovertybyPostalCodeFinal.pdf
http://www.unitedwaytoronto.com/downloads/whatWeDo/reports/LosingGround-fullReport.pdf

 

[taal]

We could have predicted these results after reading these reports....

http://www.unitedwaytoronto.com/downloads/whatWeDo/reports/PovertybyPostalCodeFinal.pdf
http://www.unitedwaytoronto.com/downloads/whatWeDo/reports/LosingGround-fullReport.pdf

Clearly Miller was a lot more left leaning - and likely did a lot more for homeless and the extermely poor then Ford will ever do.

I'd really like your explanation why you think Ford (or anyone) can remedy this situation - more jobs in outer Toronto ?
That's a valid argument.

But how would we know that would help - wouldn't that genterify those particular neighborhoods and create more denser pockets of poor ? Also, a lot of these people don't have any training they're probably only qualified to do jobs that pay very little - and that's not the sort of job growth we need to be attracting more of. Unless you argue you want to provide them education - but that's left minded thinking - something that cost a lot and may only have gains in the future - something Miller may have attempted.

I'm just not sure what you think the solution would be here ...

 

[archanfel]

Clearly Miller was a lot more left leaning - and likely did a lot more for homeless and the extermely poor then Ford will ever do.

I'd really like your explanation why you think Ford (or anyone) can remedy this situation - more jobs in outer Toronto ?
That's a valid argument.

But how would we know that would help - wouldn't that genterify those particular neighborhoods and create more denser pockets of poor ? Also, a lot of these people don't have any training they're probably only qualified to do jobs that pay very little - and that's not the sort of job growth we need to be attracting more of. Unless you argue you want to provide them education - but that's left minded thinking - something that cost a lot and may only have gains in the future - something Miller may have attempted.

I'm just not sure what you think the solution would be here ...

I'd say we do not need a solution. Poverty is a fact of life, and there's nothing wrong with it. Education is important, but Canada has already got a pretty good education system that offers opportunities to anybody who is willing to work hard. Again, I use Rocco Rossi as an example. He wasn't rich, yet he attended Upper Canada College, McGill University and Princeton.

 

[taal]

I'll take it a step further ... did you even read the report Glen ......

The majority of the recommendations take a left wing approach - invest in neighborhoods / more social programs / help youth ... there's merely one recommendation for more jobs - moreover, it's more a long the lines of making it eaiser for these people to get jobs - not necessarily creating a lot more jobs.

There's no perfect fix for this - creating jobs (and not the type your thinking of) is likely only one small part of the fix.

While this is definitely an issue - and it's occurring throughout North America - the whole argument for more job growth in the outer 416 isn't the be all and end all - frankly, again, more jobs (high pay jobs) will likely only create more denser pockets of these areas or have them move into the 905.

I deffinetly see a huge issue in the lack of job growth in the outer 416 - but I don't think these two issues go hand in hand, this would / will occur either way unless other approaches are taken.