Northern Magus
Active Member
The Globe (can't remember which article) also theorized that Smitherman and Tory may battle for the centre-right vote, leaving someone to come up through the centre-left. Of course, you have to take in account that the market for a centre-right mayor is probably a lot bigger.
He's young, but he's an over achiever. I think he'd make a very competent mayor and carry Miller's torch..... I think while Tory and Smitherman are fighting it out and destroying eachother with negative ads, Giambrone can come up the middle and be the David Miller of 2010, the underdog who beat out the giants.
First, let me be clear: most journos haven't the slightest idea about how to win elections. They tend to like parsing things into neat, tidy "left v right" labels. They shouldn't be relied on too much for guidance.
Municipal elections, with turnouts around 30%, are not about left v right or pitching for a "mushy middle". They're predominantly issues based (remember the island airport?), with personality and organiazation playing monumental roles -- and they're all about firing up 14% or more of the electorate enough to show up and vote for you.
The NDP, however, tends to act in a strictly partisan fashion even at the municipal level. That's why they're going to run a candidate of their own no matter what. And that's why Giambrone (if he wants it) could easily get the nod. He will definitely be an NDP torch-bearer, as he has been for all his adult life, and this is largely why under an NDP mayor he was given so many responsibilities that would ordinarily be thought of as out of his league. It also helps explain why he was able to get so many of his projects through.
Mayoral races in Toronto tend to whittle down to two horses in the end. Even when Lastman had no serious challenger for his second term, the media played up (ie overhyped and overplayed) the prospects of his nearest challenger, who wasn't anywhere near at all. Media tend to like two-option point-counterpoint stories, probably for reasons that go to human psychology, and that's probably what we'll get in the end.
And that's why this race will more than likely have whittled down to two horses by Thanksgiving. It will come down to microdemographics. Not just urban-suburban, but income, ethnicity, gender, age, lifestage, etc.
Potentially, John has much less growth appeal than George. If it was John vs "The Strike-Loving, Car-Hating, Tax and Spend Socialists" John could probably find enough Miller-haters to come through. Having little municipal baggage, he could probably forge a big enough tent by promising change and keeping the focus on Miller's negatives. But Miller's retirement and George's entry have wrecked that. He now has to find ways to pull microdemographics out of George's base. Given that John's negatives as a privileged wasp affiliated with a party that has arguably displayed a strong anti-urban, anti-education, anti-multiculturalism bias, this may be a tall order. George's biggest negatives, his bullheadedness and his sexuality, will probably not be hot-button enough to do the trick.
My point: This election will not be about centre left vs centre right because it will not be about ideology. It will be about John and George's defining issues that will create, expand and motivate their political base. Same for Adam, unless he wants this to be a dress rehearsal for the future.
Last edited: