[Tuscani01]

It's questionable at best whether or not he'll get that support. It's somewhat unprecedented to have council turning against the mayor in a flagship issue so early in the term.

But which mayor in the past has faced such a divisive flagship issue this early into their term?

Edit: I guess Miller had his Billy Bishop Bridge fight.

Ford had the Transit City cancelation (Agreeing to build underground transit only), however he signed an agreement without council approval for that.

 

[Edward Skira]

None. Rob Ford had to be caught smoking crack before he lost support of council.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

But which mayor in the past has faced such a divisive flagship issue this early into their term?

Edit: I guess Miller had his Billy Bishop Bridge fight.

Ford had the Transit City cancelation (Agreeing to build underground transit only), however he signed an agreement without council approval for that.

An incredibly stupid move by Ford. He would've gotten it approved if he didn't foolishly attempt to circumvent Coucil's authority.

 

[nfitz]

None. Rob Ford had to be caught smoking crack before he lost support of council.

Though given how little Ford ever tried to do, there wasn't huge stuff to rebel against.

 

[Tuscani01]

An incredibly stupid move by Ford. He would've gotten it approved if he didn't foolishly attempt to circumvent Coucil's authority.

Well, when it finally did go to council, they voted against him. So evidence says otherwise.

 

[Rainforest]

Torontoist did a fact-checking of John Tory's speech at the Empire Club last Monday. Spoiler alert: he lied 36 times.

http://torontoist.com/2015/06/john-tory-goes-full-ford-in-his-gardiner-expressway-speech/

No he did not.

The authors of that paper are biased against Tory (I will give more details below). However, your statement is much more biased than the original paper.

The authors counted 22 statements in Tory's speech that they consider "straight-up falsehoods", marked red; and 14 statements that "may be disingenuous or questionable", marked yellow. The latter 14 are certainly not "lies".

My own analysis of the 22 statements in red:

- 8 are, indeed, falsehoods, and are relevant for the current debate

- 2 are falsehoods but apply to historical events and have little relevance for the current debate; most likely, they are not "lies" but rather results of ignorance

- 12 statements are debatable to various degrees, but not necessarily wrong

I will not give full list here, just one example: the authors counted a "lie" when Tory "cherry-picks one statistic from a U of T report commissioned by pro-hybrid lobbyists". IMO, it is a highly questionable practice to dismiss scientists by calling them "lobbyists"; that way one can dismiss any scientific results. And in any case, Tory cannot know who is a lobbyist and who is not. It is not surprising that he has some trust in U of T researchers.

Bottom line, you can't fight misinformation with much greater misinformation on your own.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Well, when it finally did go to council, they voted against him. So evidence says otherwise.

I think you're misunderstanding me.
My point was that if Ford had brought Transit City to council immediately after the election, he likely would have won the vote. This is because in Toronto, it was very unusual for Council to vote against the mayor early in the term. Once Council inevitably brought Transit City back to vote, there was a lot of bad blood between the mayor and Council, and Ford was unlikely to get his way.

Since the Ford era, councillors apparently have a much stronger sense of independence from the mayor. A lot of them no longer see the need to look to the mayor for leadership. This is part of the reason why Tory has and will continue to have incredible difficulty leading our city and council.

The Gardiner isn't even that big of an issue compared to SSE and ST. If Tory can't get a definitive win from Council on this smaller issue only 6 months into his term, it's very questionable if he'll be able to get them to cooperate with him on bigger issues in the future. Council might do what they want, regardless of Tory's objections.

 

[Rainforest]

Based on his poor political track record, I never had high expectations of Tory's performance as mayor. But I must admit that even I'm surprised about how quickly he's crashed and burned. He's certainly less effective at implementing his agenda than Mayor Ford at this point in his tenure. I don't expect Tory to have much success at implementing his agenda over the next 3.5 years. When it's all said and done, he'll likely be recognized as one of Toronto's least effective mayors.

To be fair to Tory, be arguably is working with a more challenging Council than any other recent mayor. After the year or so where we didn't have mayoral leadership, Council learned that they don't need to look to the mayor for leadership. Our mayor's office wields less power over the city than ever.

Let's wait and see.

My take is that on the transportation file, SmartTrack is the only project that will have major impact on Tory's re-election prospects. If he fails to deliver SmartTrack (shovels in the ground, or at least the funding secured and detailed design work underway before the next elections), the he is toasted.

On the other hand, if he loses on Gardiner, it will leave him a bit humiliated but not really beaten. Many drivers are worried about the lost link, but not to the point when they will base their voting decision on that issue. Besides, if he personally votes for Hybrid but the majority of council chooses Boulevard, drivers will have no reason to hold it against Tory.

Even if he is defeated on SSE (but continues to support it personally), by itself it will not necessarily diminish his re-election chances. It will complicate his job in many respects though.

 

[Rainforest]

I think you're misunderstanding me.
My point was that if Ford had brought Transit City to council immediately after the election, he likely would have won the vote. This is because in Toronto, it was very unusual for Council to vote against the mayor early in the term. Once Council inevitably brought Transit City back to vote, there was a lot of bad blood between the mayor and Council, and Ford was unlikely to get his way.

Since the Ford era, councillors apparently have a much stronger sense of independence from the mayor. A lot of them no longer see the need to look to the mayor for leadership. This is part of the reason why Tory has and will continue to have incredible difficulty leading our city and council.

You are right. Ford could easily pass the Transit City cancellation if he put it up to vote in the beginning of his term.

Councillors abandoned Ford's transit stance en masse when it became obvious that he cannot secure private funding for Sheppard subway.

The Gardiner isn't even that big of an issue compared to SSE and ST. If Tory can't get a definitive win from Council on this smaller issue only 6 months into his term, it's very questionable if he'll be able to get them to cooperate with him on bigger issues in the future. Council might do what they want, regardless of Tory's objections.

I expect Tory to fare better than Ford. He might be defeated on some issues, but he is much more capable of accepting the democratic decision and moving on.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Let's wait and see.

My take is that on the transportation file, SmartTrack is the only project that will have major impact on Tory's re-election prospects. If he fails to deliver SmartTrack (shovels in the ground, or at least the funding secured and detailed design work underway before the next elections), the he is toasted.

On the other hand, if he loses on Gardiner, it will leave him a bit humiliated but not really beaten. Many drivers are worried about the lost link, but not to the point when they will base their voting decision on that issue. Besides, if he personally votes for Hybrid but the majority of council chooses Boulevard, drivers will have no reason to hold it against Tory.

Even if he is defeated on SSE (but continues to support it personally), by itself it will not necessarily diminish his re-election chances. It will complicate his job in many respects though.

I think Tory's advocacy for the Hybrid option might prove to be fatal for his reelection prospects. From what I've been reading, his very public efforts for the hybrid option has created a lot of bad blood between him and a significant part of Council. These councillors will now be less willing to work with Tory when SmartTrack is up for vote. Tory probably would have been better off letting councillors lead the discussion around the Gardiner, saving his political capital for ST.

If the SmartTrack studies come back saying that it's a great idea, I'd expect him to have no trouble getting it through council. I the studies say its expensive, with little merit, then I wouldn't be surprised if Council votes against the idea, regardless of Tory's objection. As you said, this would be fatal for Tory.

 

[Palma]

The Gardiner west of Jarvis moves significantly more people than Gardiner east. Is there any planning justification for removing it?

It looks ugly and also cuts off the city in 1/2 in the west

 

[Palma]

Well, when it finally did go to council, they voted against him. So evidence says otherwise.

Thats cause he waited too long and was already appearing in the news. If he had brought it up in year 1 it would have passed. And this is from someone who did not vote for Ford

 

[FNTS]

the authors counted a "lie" when Tory "cherry-picks one statistic from a U of T report commissioned by pro-hybrid lobbyists". IMO, it is a highly questionable practice to dismiss scientists by calling them "lobbyists"; that way one can dismiss any scientific results.

They're talking about who commissioned the report, and that was the Canadian Automobile Association (CAA), who are registered lobbyists and are pro-hybrid... what is the misinformation here?

Also, the one statistic being cherry-picked is the fact that Tory cited a number that was the maximum delay, not average, for a traffic light configuration that was purely a thought exercise by the U of T people (a one-stage approach for pedestrians crossing Lake Shore, not the two-stage crossing proposed), and which has never been part of what has been brought to Council. Mind you, that fictional number has been very convenient for both the CAA and Tory.

 

[howl]

I think, no matter what the vote, the vote should be considered the final word on the issue by all Torontonians. Tear it down or rebuilt it, but don't keep debating it like what happened to transit in Scarborough.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I think, no matter what the vote, the vote should be considered the final word on the issue by all Torontonians. Tear it down or rebuilt it, but don't keep debating it like what happened to transit in Scarborough.

Tory has been unable to get Council to support his plan, so deferral is the most likely outcome. This would obviously mean that Council will debate the issue again in a few months.

If hybrid wins by a margin of a few votes, it's very likely that Council will debate this again in the future, especially if we're facing lawsuits from developers. A few councillors have already said that they expect this debate to be reopened if hybrid doesn't get a definitive win. Of course, we all know that neither side will have a definitive success.

If removal wins by a small margin, we'll certainly see the issue reappear in the 2018 election. At that point it may or may not be too late to change course.