[pman]

I agree Tory was vague about ST. Inaccuracate, misleading and woefully ignorant come to mind. However, Tory has been crystal clear about his stance on taxation - property tax increases to be limited to inflation. Of course he managed to violate that promise in his last mayoralty by introducing the transit levy for SSE. But one would have to say he’s generally credible and specific on an issue he made a central plank of his platform. In contrast to Tory, Keesmaat was long on aspirational spending ideas, but taxes were very much an afterthought in her messaging. Except of course for her largely symbolic eat the rich proposal which wouldn’t have gone very far to pay for her vision. Given Keesmaat’s poor showing, it’s not unreasonable to think that the stark difference between the two candidates was a factor in voters’ preferences.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I agree Tory was vague about ST. Inaccuracate, misleading and woefully ignorant come to mind. However, Tory has been crystal clear about his stance on taxation - property tax increases to be limited to inflation. Of course he managed to violate that promise in his last mayoralty by introducing the transit levy for SSE. But one would have to say he’s generally credible and specific on an issue he made a central plank of his platform. In contrast to Tory, Keesmaat was long on aspirational spending ideas, but taxes were very much an afterthought in her messaging. Except of course for her largely symbolic eat the rich proposal which wouldn’t have gone very far to pay for her vision. Given Keesmaat’s poor showing, it’s not unreasonable to think that the stark difference between the two candidates was a factor in voters’ preferences.

If I remember correctly the SSE levy was not his doing. In any case, what you have added maybe true, but that's somewhat different from your original premise that "disconnect between the city-building aspirations she expressed and her unwillingness to talk candidly about how she proposed to pay for them" and "It wasn’t a particularly honest or coherent package. In fact, dare I use the analogy, it looked like it had been sketched on the back of a cocktail napkin." - that statement applies to both candidates.

AoD

 

[steveintoronto]

...that statement applies to both candidates.

It really does. Keesmaat's proposals were also 'limited tax' by general standards. It seems so ridiculously easy for some to conveniently overlook how low Toronto's taxes are compared to neighbouring munis. Tory makes promises based on empty coffers. He hasn't a hope in hell of fulfilling promises with the present tax and rate base. Keesmaat was in fact labelled many times as being the (gist) 'alternate establishment candidate' by other candidates and progressive authors.

It was a contest between Mr Milquetoast and Ms Enhanced Beige, my favour being on the latter, as at least she offered a better sense of progressive change, within pretty much the same parameters of believability.

 

[pman]

I’m not sure we’re disagreeing that much, but to simplify what I was trying to say:

Tory: cocktail napkin on policy and vision / clear and credible on property taxes

Keesmaat: aspirational and often specific on policy and vision / cocktail napkin on how to pay for it.

That offered voters a pretty clear choice, and the not-even-close result was a good indication of general opinion on the two options.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I’m not sure we’re disagreeing that much, but to simplify what I was trying to say:
Tory: cocktail napkin on policy and vision / clear and credible on property taxes
Keesmaat: aspirational and often specific on policy and vision / cocktail napkin on how to pay for it.
That offered voters a pretty clear choice, and the not-even-close result was a good indication of general opinion on the two options.

We probably don't - though I personally do not subscribe to the belief that Tory is anything but cocktail napkin on how to pay for any of his visions. He is credible on property taxes purely on the basis of being an incumbent - a known quantity. Even then, I suspect your average voter doesn't even chose on such a basis - the acceptable if not perfect familiar is probably an easy choice over an unknown. This really isn't a change election.

AoD

 

[Videodrome]

Have people been paying attention to how Steve King is being disowned by his own party? I never thought that him endorsing a mayoral candidate in Toronto could possibly end his time in Congress.

 

[Thorns_Embrace]

Have people been paying attention to how Steve King is being disowned by his own party? I never thought that him endorsing a mayoral candidate in Toronto could possibly end his time in Congress.

Is this really that big a factor?

 

[ShonTron]

With the poll-by-poll results available and the electoral geographies live, I mapped the poll-by-poll results for mayor.

If we were still using the 44 wards, Keesmaat would have won three - Wards 14, 18, and 19, even though Tory came first in all of the new 25 wards. Those are the same wards that Chow won in 2014, though by a larger margin in each. Neighbourhoods like the West Annex, Seaton Village, Parkdale and Roncesvalles, Trinity-Bellwoods, and the Junction Triangle are the urban progressive base, and any challenger must not only appeal to the suburbs, they must also appeal to downtown condo dwellers. Keesmaat couldn't do so.

Keesmaat failed to run a strong, organized campaign. I'd attribute part of that to running at the last minute, without the organization or fundraising that Tory had. And Tory is popular despite urban progressives' angst about his inaction on housing, road safety, and police reform, and his agenda of low tax, low spending. But like Chow, she couldn't come up with a real vision and enough difference from Tory's status quo.