[unimaginative2]

We could turn half the subway network into streetcars!

 

[Urban Shocker]

Yes, and the City could finally fund the local arts scene properly - I see Munro at the opera and symphony all the time.

 

[King of Kensington]

First of all, I certainly wouldn't call Warren Kinsella a big-"L" Liberal. Also, Adam Vaughan might disagree with you since last campaign he was going on about how he was a Liberal and he used the Liberal machine to get elected.

Why isn't Kinsella a Liberal? He is, along with Jason Cherniak, their most prominent blogger!

I live in Vaughan's ward and I can assure you he did not and does not publicly identify as a Liberal. If you can cite evidence that he kept saying he was a Liberal or that he used the Liberal machine to get elected, I'd like to hear it.
All I can find is:

We've also noticed that as an independent Vaughan has stayed away from all the party colours and chose a black and yellow motif for his site"

http://torontoist.com/2006/05/adam_vaughan_ge.php

"Vaughan ran as an independent in Trinity-Spadina - Ward 20 to fill the vacant seat left open by Olivia Chow's departure after her win in the 2006 federal election."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Vaughan

and

VOLPE: Now you are, as I understand it, a member of a partisan political organization.

VAUGHAN: Excuse me.

VOLPE: Mr. Vaughan, you ran under a particular party label.

(Loud voices.)

THE CHAIR: Order, please.

VOLPE:We need to know whether a witness that comes before this committee isrepresenting a partisan position or whether it is a personal position.

(The room erupted in shouts)

THE CHAIR: Order, please.

VAUGHAN: Excuse me that's a lie. That is a deliberate lie.
(Adamhad risen out of his seat he was so angry. He pointed his finger andwas shouting, “That’s a lie!†There were other shouts. I joined them:“Adam ran as an independent!†but it was not recorded.)

THE CHAIR: Order, please.

VAUGHAN: Mr. Volpe, I expect you to conduct your business with the honour of your office.

THE CHAIR: Order, please, Mr. Vaughan. Mr. Vaughan, please.

VOLPE: Mr. Vaughan, you ran as an NDP councillor.

(Adamwas beside himself at this attempt to undercut his credibility. I wassitting beside him, and for a moment I thought I might have to try andrestrain him. This accusation was particularly galling to Adam becausehe had run as an independent against a strong NDP candidate and haddefeated her.)

VAUGHAN: That’s a lie!

THE CHAIR: Order, please! Can we have the mics shut off, please!

(Funny how Joe Volpe - granted not the brightest Liberal around - doesn't realize Vaughan is a "fellow Liberal" (sic.))

http://blog.communityair.org/2008/02/19/adam-tackles-grit-hack-joe-volpe.aspx

The only people who seemed to believe that were some desperate people working on Helen Kennedy's campaign and a few Liberals who want to give off the impression that Tony Ianno is going to beat Olivia Chow in the next election (not likely!)

And if it turns out he actually is one, I'd be pretty disappointed if I were a Liberal supporter because I doubt there are too many Liberals happy with Vaughan if they think Miller is too leftwing, etc. Vaughan takes his independence very seriously and he's in my view, a progressive independent a la John Sewell (prior to St. Clair ROW anyway!)

My guess is if Vaughan gets a serious challenge in the 2010 election, if is more likely to come from some big-L Liberal Cesar backed by NIMBYs angry about his support for homeless shelters in the Entertainment District and not an NDPer with basically the same platform (just like Democrats don't run serious campaigns against Bernie Sanders in Vermont). But that's two years away...

 

[King of Kensington]

First of all, I certainly wouldn't call Warren Kinsella a big-"L" Liberal. Also, Adam Vaughan might disagree with you since last campaign he was going on about how he was a Liberal and he used the Liberal machine to get elected.

Why isn't Kinsella a Liberal? He is, along with Jason Cherniak, their most prominent blogger!

I live in Vaughan's ward and I can assure you he did not and does not publicly identify as a Liberal. If you can cite evidence that he kept saying he was a Liberal or that he used the Liberal machine to get elected, I'd like to hear it.
All I can find is:

We've also noticed that as an independent Vaughan has stayed away from all the party colours and chose a black and yellow motif for his site"

http://torontoist.com/2006/05/adam_vaughan_ge.php

"Vaughan ran as an independent in Trinity-Spadina - Ward 20 to fill the vacant seat left open by Olivia Chow's departure after her win in the 2006 federal election."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Vaughan

and

VOLPE: Now you are, as I understand it, a member of a partisan political organization.

VAUGHAN: Excuse me.

VOLPE: Mr. Vaughan, you ran under a particular party label.

(Loud voices.)

THE CHAIR: Order, please.

VOLPE:We need to know whether a witness that comes before this committee isrepresenting a partisan position or whether it is a personal position.

(The room erupted in shouts)

THE CHAIR: Order, please.

VAUGHAN: Excuse me that's a lie. That is a deliberate lie.
(Adamhad risen out of his seat he was so angry. He pointed his finger andwas shouting, “That’s a lie!†There were other shouts. I joined them:“Adam ran as an independent!†but it was not recorded.)

THE CHAIR: Order, please.

VAUGHAN: Mr. Volpe, I expect you to conduct your business with the honour of your office.

THE CHAIR: Order, please, Mr. Vaughan. Mr. Vaughan, please.

VOLPE: Mr. Vaughan, you ran as an NDP councillor.

(Adamwas beside himself at this attempt to undercut his credibility. I wassitting beside him, and for a moment I thought I might have to try andrestrain him. This accusation was particularly galling to Adam becausehe had run as an independent against a strong NDP candidate and haddefeated her.)

VAUGHAN: That’s a lie!

THE CHAIR: Order, please! Can we have the mics shut off, please!

(Funny how Joe Volpe - granted not the brightest Liberal around - doesn't realize Vaughan is a "fellow Liberal" (sic.))

http://blog.communityair.org/2008/02/19/adam-tackles-grit-hack-joe-volpe.aspx

The only people who seemed to believe that were some desperate people working on Helen Kennedy's campaign and a few Liberals who want to give off the impression that Tony Ianno is going to beat Olivia Chow in the next election (not likely!)

And if it turns out he actually is one, I'd be pretty disappointed if I were a Liberal supporter because I doubt there are too many Liberals happy with Vaughan if they think Miller is too leftwing, etc. Vaughan takes his independence very seriously and he's in my view, a progressive independent a la John Sewell (prior to St. Clair ROW anyway!)

My guess is if Vaughan gets a serious challenge in the 2010 election, if is more likely to come from some big-L Liberal Cesar backed by NIMBYs angry about his support for homeless shelters in the Entertainment District and not an NDPer with basically the same platform (just like Democrats don't run serious campaigns against Bernie Sanders in Vermont). But that's two years away...

 

[unimaginative2]

Why isn't Kinsella a Liberal? He is, along with Jason Cherniak, their most prominent blogger!

Uh, well I wouldn't call somebody who has agressively agitated against the party and expressed his hope that they would lose for two straight elections a Liberal. Warren Kinsella subscribes to whatever ideology he finds most remunerative

I live in Vaughan's ward and I can assure you he did not and does not publicly identify as a Liberal. If you can cite evidence that he kept saying he was a Liberal or that he used the Liberal machine to get elected, I'd like to hear it.

I live in the ward too. I'm part of that Liberal machine. I still have copies of the many emails I received from the Liberal organization in the riding exhorting me to join Adam Vaughan's campaign. I declined.

What's all this stuff about running as an independent? Of course he did. Every municipal councillor does. Political parties are illegal under the Municipal Elections Act, though the NDP does have "caucus" meetings of dubious legality.

And if it turns out he actually is one, I'd be pretty disappointed if I were a Liberal supporter because I doubt there are too many Liberals happy with Vaughan if they think Miller is too leftwing, etc. Vaughan takes his independence very seriously and he's in my view, a progressive independent a la John Sewell (prior to St. Clair ROW anyway!)

I'd be pretty disappointed as a Liberal supporter, too, but that's because I'm on the left of the party. I'm sure lots of Liberals support his pro-NIMBY, anti-"clubber" policies. Many Liberals supported Miller, too, though he is certainly an official NDP candidate.

My guess is if Vaughan gets a serious challenge in the 2010 election, if is more likely to come from some big-L Liberal Cesar backed by NIMBYs angry about his support for homeless shelters in the Entertainment District and not an NDPer with basically the same platform (just like Democrats don't run serious campaigns against Bernie Sanders in Vermont). But that's two years away...

I just don't know where this is coming from. The NIMBYs support the homeless shelter because they support anything that kills clubs. It's the clubs that he hates, for all the worst reasons, and it's by closing down clubs that he's pandering to the NIMBYs.

 

[King of Kensington]

I agree - Toronto politics are really like the US Congress. Sure you may be a party member - but there's no whip, etc. You can be an NDPer - like Maria Augimeri - and vote against Miller's tax increases, etc. and nothing happens to you (this is why I agree Vaughan and Sewell's purist rhetoric about "no parties at City Hall" is sometimes over the top.)

And you're right Miller has lots of left-Libs supporting him. In the last election he took virtually all the NDP vote and probably 75% of the Liberal vote. Jane Pitfield was stuck with Tories and a few "Tom Wappel/Alan Tonks/Joe Volpe Liberals"

I don't think an e-mail sent by someone in the Liberal organization saying let's support Vaughan's campaign makes Vaughan a Liberal. Maybe someone just liked Vaughan. More cynically it's called "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" - when there's two candidates running where there's no left/right difference but one is a member of an opposing party and the other is independent - Vaughan sounds somewhat better, sure. Maybe a few genuinely thought he was a good candidate and just wanted to tell their friends about it - but certainly there wasn't any evidence of the Liberal "machine" going out to support Vaughan. Vaughan had lots of NDPers supporting him (most of Tam Goossen's people went over to Vaughan it seems, and he also had the support of Barbara Caplan, Bob Frankford, Helen Breslauer, Cathy Crowe and others, plus lots of independent progressives too).

I don't see Tony Ianno and Vaughan aligned in any way. Vaughan's politics are much closer to Olivia Chow's than to Ianno's. I also don't think a City Council race really translates much into federal voting. In an open Council race between two progressive candidates with no slates, people feel free to vote based on the candidate and Vaughan was the better candidate. I In federal and provincial races, most people vote for the party they want in Ottawa and Queen's Park, individual candidates have only a swing effect - i.e. someone like Bob Rae would be much more appealing to soft NDP intelligentsia types than someone like Ianno, who is a terrible fit for a well-educated, politically astute riding like Trinity-Spadina (of course Rae, understandably, wanted a safe seat and didn't want to get into a grudge match with an NDPer).

ETA: Finally the edit function works (that explains the double post!) I don't agree that NIMBYs want a homeless shelter. I can't think of anything that creates "NIMBYs" more than homeless shelters! Vaughan, along with Gord Perks, has come against rec center user fees from the left (and in opposition to Miller). He is a big opponent of the Port Authority and the Island Airport (unlike Ianno). He expressed sympathy with demonstrators who marched on City Hall demanding the city improve its shelters. He signed the Housing Not War statement written by the TDRC. Supporting a homeless shelter in your own ward - even when it comes to risk losing votes - is a principled, progressive to me (I never found Olivia to be particularly principled as a councillor BTW). He's also pretty much a Miller supporter - except he'll occasionally criticize the centralization of power in the Mayor's office (not necessarily a left/right thing - a lot of people tend to change their position based on who is in office!) from time to time.

 

[JasonParis]

I also don't think a City Council race really translates much into federal voting.

I also think it's fairly safe to say that most people will vote more left-wing at the municipal level, than they likely would at the provincial/federal level.

 

[King of Kensington]

I also think it's fairly safe to say that most people will vote more left-wing at the municipal level, than they likely would at the provincial/federal level.

That certainly explains Joe Mihevc's commanding victories in the western half of St. Paul's (which after all includes Forest Hill and Cedarvale). Of course Joe has Carolyn Bennett - just about the most progressive person who I think can get elected federally in a wealthy riding like that - supporting him. (it also helps he is extremely affable and he isn't seen as a polarizing figure).

 

[adma]

Remember, too, that Adam Vaughan's "Liberal" identification is in large part inherited from his father...

 

[unimaginative2]

Absolutely. I think part of the reason why people tend to lean to the left (and in particular to the NDP) in municipal elections is because their candidates are often rather more competent. That's because competent Tories and Liberals can easily get elected to higher office, while even good NDPers don't have too much chance of becoming an MP or an MPP. Council is a good place for them to be able to make a real difference.

You're totally right about Joe Mihevc. He gets votes from everyone, NDP to Tory, because he's seen as competent and likeable.

I don't think an e-mail sent by someone in the Liberal organization saying let's support Vaughan's campaign makes Vaughan a Liberal. Maybe someone just liked Vaughan. More cynically it's called "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" - when there's two candidates running where there's no left/right difference but one is a member of an opposing party and the other is independent - Vaughan sounds somewhat better, sure. Maybe a few genuinely thought he was a good candidate and just wanted to tell their friends about it - but certainly there wasn't any evidence of the Liberal "machine" going out to support Vaughan. Vaughan had lots of NDPers supporting him (most of Tam Goossen's people went over to Vaughan it seems, and he also had the support of Barbara Caplan, Bob Frankford, Helen Breslauer, Cathy Crowe and others, plus lots of independent progressives too).

I've been around the block a few times. I know the difference between one guy's "enemy of my enemy" endorsement and the party's machine actively campaigning on behalf of someone. These weren't people telling their friends. It was official party machinery. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that there wasn't any evidence that the Liberal machine went out to support Vaughan. They did. It happened. It doesn't mean some NDPers didn't support him too, but the NDP machine was clearly behind Helen Kennedy. Now Vaughan wants to duck and hide by claiming to be an "independent" so that he can try and grab some more NDP voters.

I don't see Tony Ianno and Vaughan aligned in any way. Vaughan's politics are much closer to Olivia Chow's than to Ianno's. I also don't think a City Council race really translates much into federal voting. In an open Council race between two progressive candidates with no slates, people feel free to vote based on the candidate and Vaughan was the better candidate. I In federal and provincial races, most people vote for the party they want in Ottawa and Queen's Park, individual candidates have only a swing effect - i.e. someone like Bob Rae would be much more appealing to soft NDP intelligentsia types than someone like Ianno, who is a terrible fit for a well-educated, politically astute riding like Trinity-Spadina (of course Rae, understandably, wanted a safe seat and didn't want to get into a grudge match with an NDPer).

Yeah, the Liberals are a big tent. Anyway, now that Adam Vaughan's elected, he'll call himself an independent so he can get votes from everyone. I certainly wholeheartedly disagree with you on Vaughan being the better candidate then Helen Kennedy!

ETA: Finally the edit function works (that explains the double post!) I don't agree that NIMBYs want a homeless shelter. I can't think of anything that creates "NIMBYs" more than homeless shelters! Vaughan, along with Gord Perks, has come against rec center user fees from the left (and in opposition to Miller). He is a big opponent of the Port Authority and the Island Airport (unlike Ianno). He expressed sympathy with demonstrators who marched on City Hall demanding the city improve its shelters. He signed the Housing Not War statement written by the TDRC. Supporting a homeless shelter in your own ward - even when it comes to risk losing votes - is a principled, progressive to me (I never found Olivia to be particularly principled as a councillor BTW). He's also pretty much a Miller supporter - except he'll occasionally criticize the centralization of power in the Mayor's office (not necessarily a left/right thing - a lot of people tend to change their position based on who is in office!) from time to time.

Obviously most NIMBYs don't want a homeless shelter. I understand that. But these NIMBYs do, because all they care about is clubs. They're basically an organization in opposition to the club district. It's pretty wacky to claim that he's so brave to risk opposition from the neighbourhood when there has been no organized opposition , other than a few words from some club owners who he has said he doesn't care about anyway. I do not think it's even remotely principled to spend scarce anti-homelessness money just to buy up a property that some local NIMBYs don't like, and I don't think it has a damned thing to do with helping the homeless. The simple fact is that the same anti-homelessness budget could have built far more beds if they didn't build the shelter on an expensive commercial corner. Even a handful of blocks away. But then his objective wasn't housing the homeless. It was killing the club district, and he's quite explicit about it. I think it's very easy (and rather hypocritical) to express sympathy with marchers against homelessness and say that you care. Actions speak louder...

 

[King of Kensington]

Re: Mihevc, one of the big mistakes the "Save Our St. Clair" people made was to try to paint him as some sort of polarizing figure who was dividing the community. Quite the contrary, has a very broad reach and is the ultimate "consensus" guy. It also didn't help that most of the opposition to ROW came from the Corso Italia BIA - which is in Cesar Palacio's ward! I also don't think there's a nicer person in politics. (Sadly Mihevc - who represents one of the most heavily Jewish wards - also had to put with a very desperate smear by rightwing opponent John Adams for being "anti-Israel", etc. - though fortunately that didn't win him very many votes.)

As for Vaughan, if the Liberal machine opted to support him, it was pretty half-hearted, and they basically ended up with someone clearly allied with the progressives on City Council and certainly no ally of Ianno politically. I was well immersed in that race - though I didn't work on anyone's campaigns - and the active Liberal presence on the Vaughan campaign was minimal (actually it's amazing how INVISIBLE the Libs are in Trinity-Spadina besides Ianno's campaigns - the last serious challenger they ran against Rosario Marchese was Bob Wong in '95 and since then Rosario has come up against very, very weak candidates like that low-profile school trustee from Davenport and Kate Holloway - but I digress). Unless we have some evidence of Vaughan publicly declaring he's independent and privately telling Liberal Party activists he's one of them, it's difficult to really prove anything, most councillors are pretty honest about their partisan affiliations (if any) and I see no reason to see why Vaughan isn't being honest about being independent. The NDP "machine" didn't amount to much either - a lot of people ended up supporting Vaughan because of accusations of cronyism and a lot of Tam Goossen's supporters ended up working on Vaughan's campaign. Some say Vaughan wouldn't have run against Tam Goossen - who knows whether that's true or not, it's all speculation. Of course in the end very, very few Canadians are actually party members and you had lots of examples of "Liberals for Kennedy" and "NDPers for Vaughan," not surprising given that it was an open city council race between two progressives where voting had more to do with personality than ideology. Vaughan won all over the ward by very wide margins including the NDP strongholds. As for his mayoral aspirations, that is a long way off. He certainly would not run against Miller and I also think he comes across way too "downtown" to fly in Etobicoke and North York - Miller has much greater "reach" in suburbia.

Anyway, it's after 2 am...and I have papers to finish grading for students tomorrow...so I shall sign off for now!

 

[unimaginative2]

He certainly would not run against Miller and I also think he comes across way too "downtown" to fly in Etobicoke and North York - Miller has much greater "reach" in suburbia.

I have no doubt that Vaughan would run against anybody if he thought he had a chance of winning. I think his crusade against clubland is for more than just the neighbourhood NIMBYs. It's clearly with an eye on a future mayoral campaign, because being known as the "Slayer of Clubland" would play very well in suburbia.

 

[adma]

The clincher about Miller is that he's "Bloor West", i.e. neither too abrasively "city" nor too abrasively "suburb". A fine balance...

 

[Hydrogen]

Honestly, who cares what Vaughan's attitude towards clubland is anyway? The place is undergoing a transformation, an evolution that would have happened anyway regardless of Vaughan. Over time the number of residential buildings will increase and the number of larger clubs will decrease. If anything he is a product of that transformation.

 

[unimaginative2]

Absolutely, adma.

I care about his attitude toward clubland more as a matter of principle. People who talk about not wanting a certain "kind" of people in their neighbourhood make me deeply uncomfortable. It's all the more galling when they express this most unprogressive of attitues while claiming to be the most progressive people in the world.

I'm also deeply upset by the wasting of scarce funding for housing the homeless on buying up high-value real estate to achieve political goals that have absolutely nothing to do with housing the homeless.

His crackdown on Little Italy upsets me even more. It's a thriving neighbourhood, day and night, and it attracts a lot of people simply looking to have a good time. Yet he has sicced the bylaw enforcement people on restaurants, simply because they let a few people dance later at night. One restaurateur got ticketed while he took down his license for cleaning, with the bylaw officer saying "We're watching you, and we will shut you down." Is this the kind of attitude we should have toward successful independent businesses in one of Toronto's most attractive urban commercial strips?

I deal with the issues of clubland. In my home, I hear people shouting and cars revving from time to time at 2am. I understand, though, that I have no cause to bitch. I moved into a neighbourhood in the heart of downtown, and I accept that it won't be as peaceful as Bramblebrook Crescent on the edge of Richmond Hill. Hell, we get a lot more noise when a Blue Jays game lets out.