Wednesday, June 19, 2013Partly Cloudy 17°C
City

Why I won't vote strategically for the next mayor of Toronto

Posted by Guest Contributor / October 22, 2010

strategic voting torontoWith just days left to go in the mayoral race, Joe Pantalone, Rob Ford and George Smitherman are locked in a battle for their political lives. Smitherman's taking every opportunity to appeal to Pantalone's peeps: vote for me or you'll be responsible for letting Ford, that bumbling throwback to Mel Lastman, win. But he's wrong about that: if Ford wins, it'll be because he convinced enough people to vote for his idea of what Toronto should be.

I never want to live in Obion County, Tennessee. That's where the fire department wouldn't save the a local family's home because they had forgotten to pay a $75 "subscription fee" for fire services. The firefighters showed up because a neighbour's property was at risk - the neighbour having paid the fee - but stood by and watched the Cranick property burn down, including three dogs and a cat. Even leaving aside the issue of the trapped animals (and I dearly hope that there is some SPCA-type organization out there looking into whether this fire service is culpable), I never want to live in a place where, as the reporter says at the end: "Despite this incident there are no plans to make the fire subscription fee mandatory, like a tax."

Toronto's election this time around has been about city spending which is another way of saying it's been about taxes. As the field of mayoral candidates has shrunk, this has become more obvious than ever: we're watching the three remaining serious contenders fight over two competing visions of municipal services. We can have a great city that provides an array of different services that we may all use at different points in our lives, or we can have a city where services are pared to the bone and run on the cheap. The truth is - and I say this as someone who's spent hours reading election coverage, looking at policy and listening to Joe, Rob and George at debates - the truth is that we can't have both.

Joe PantaloneJoe Pantalone is the only man standing who still believes in what I'd call the great city vision. While it may be fashionable to attack David Miller's legacy and mock Pantalone for wanting to carry on with his civic - and civil - policies, we should take a moment to remind ourselves that it is under Miller's watch that we became a city that is consistently ranked among the most livable in the world.

Rob Ford's numbers may not add up but at least he's open about what he wants - a Toronto that's neatly and cheaply accessible for suburban commuters, without the innate mess and fuss of streetcars, pedestrians and bicyclists. In my opinion, this is a path that eventually leads to Obion County, Tenn., where obviously you get to pay for the services you decide you want and woe betide you if you discover too late that you obviously need a service you didn't - or couldn't - pay for earlier.

While George Smitherman may be more polished and urbane, he's not that different from Rob Ford in terms of policy. Ford's says he's going to "find" billions in savings which will presumably be returned to us taxpayers; Smitherman says he's going to freeze property taxes, at least for 2011. There's no way around the fact that will mean less money will be spent on the things like transit and libraries and retirement homes. Ford's going to replace retiring city workers at the rate of 1:2; Smitherman's going to do it at the rate of 2:3. Either way you slice it, that's fewer people working for the city and fewer people delivering services.

Rob Ford TorontoAs I see it, there's no strategic voting option here: I would as soon vote for Ford as I would for Smitherman. And it isn't just me: political watchers as disparate as Royson James and Gord Perks have come to the same decision. I suppose you could consider voting for Pantalone if you're a soft Smitherman supporter who just wants an urbane, nice guy to be the face of Toronto. Me, I'll vote on the principle that I like the services I get from the city - the TTC, my Toronto Public Library library branch: the Lillian H. Smith, the parks around me, especially Trinity Bellwoods, and, though I've never had to call them, EMS and Fire.

I want to make sure that they'll be around if I ever need them. And that they will be paid for through my taxes and yours. I'll vote for taxes that equalize the cost of services across us all and not for "subscription fees" that allow some of us to buy what most of us should have but can't afford. In other words, my vote will be for a vision of a city that is greater than the sum of all its residents.

If Pantalone wins, I'll be ecstatic. But if it's Ford or Smitherman, I can live with it: my vote will still hold out hope for a kinder, gentler city than the one that they both want to deliver. My vote will be one of thousands that will help those progressive Councillors who get elected - and yes, there will be some, no matter who becomes Mayor - to fight harder and longer for a better Toronto for all.

Writing by Archana Rampure.

Photos from sniderscion, Joe Pantalone's Flickr page and Shaun Merritt.

Discussion

77 Comments

scottd / October 22, 2010 at 10:50 am
user-pic
The Obion County reference is a bit hysterical if you ask me.

BTW what about left of center voters like me who don't want to vote for Joe because they think his vision is old news?
PT / October 22, 2010 at 10:55 am
user-pic
The "Ford and Smitherman are basically the same" argument has been used a lot lately by Pantalone's supporters to argue against voting strategically. However, this argument only holds up if people truly believe that the city's outcome will be the same under Ford and Smitherman, which I really have a hard time understanding.

If you think Pantalone's the better candidate, that's fine, and it's an opinion I can respect. But if your argument against voting strategically is that you honestly believe that Ford and Smitherman are equivalent, that throws some serious doubt on your argument. Smitherman, for all his flaws, is a financially literate person who understands the concept of governing with people, instead of against them. Ford is a polemic who trades on nothing more than anger and ignorance. If we truly care about Toronto, we owe it to ourselves to keep him out of office. If that means voting strategically, so be it.
Mingo Jones / October 22, 2010 at 10:55 am
user-pic
With complete respect for your views and opinions, I find it hard to accept Joe's campaign when there is no money available to finance his visions. As a TO taxpayer, I find the tax burden high and provincial and canadian coffers are all dried up.
Pragmatist / October 22, 2010 at 10:55 am
user-pic
Here's a more realistic look at the election:

1. Good choice (little chance of winning)
2. Bad choice (good chance of winning)
3. Terrible choice (good chance of winning)

Voting on principle sounds great until #3 is easily elected as mayor because a fringe of people voted #1 out of principle.

Here's another principle you might consider: lesser of two evils.
bam / October 22, 2010 at 10:56 am
user-pic
hells yeah!! go Joe Pants!!
jason / October 22, 2010 at 11:00 am
user-pic
i, for one, cannot wait for streetcars and bike lanes to be taken away because a bunch of stubborn jerks voted out of principle.

that pedestal you've sat yourself upon will be sold to the highest bidder, make no mistake.
michelle / October 22, 2010 at 11:11 am
user-pic
Regarding the tennessee example, the owner of the house never paid the fee, had a previous fire and the department DID put it out on condition that he'd pay the nominal fee afterwards, and now he has had yet another fire and chose to save 75 bucks instead of protecting his home and this time the fire dept didn't do anything....its a tragic story, but slightly misreported and the owner could have easily avoided this.

And whilst you say under Ford we might be led on the slope to pay-for-use firefighters, you can be damn sure that under Smitherman we'd be paying consultants $1000/hr to be eFire consultants.

The problem with fors (who i do NOT like) is that we don't know what the city will be like if he ends up in power and we don't know how much he'll cut.
The problem with Smitherman is that we've seen his track record as health minister and other positions (eHealth, c difficile, being in bed with samsung, making $30,000 sex changes covered by ohip but not eye exams, flip flopping, promising tax freezes but that only last for 1/4 of his first term, etc....) and we know exactly what thw city will end up like. How Smitherman even has 1 vote, let alone 40% leaves me shocked, scared, and embarassed at my fellow Torontonians.
Dave / October 22, 2010 at 11:11 am
user-pic
I don't get it. Ford openly says he wants to sell our streetcars, cancel our festivals and events, and get rid of our bike lanes. And you really can't see any difference?
Syncros / October 22, 2010 at 11:17 am
user-pic
I decided today I'm not going to vote strategically and will vote for the candidate I support, even if he may not win and he's not really everything I wanted in a mayor.

If Ford wins by one vote, blame me. I'm voting with my conscience.
Marlon / October 22, 2010 at 11:18 am
user-pic
Great article! People who love this city need to vote pants. The obion comparison is completely fair. If smitherman and ford freeze taxes while inflation continues services will deminish. If you privatize services then the people who can't afford them will suffer (btw, prepare for a lot of sneaky garbage dumpers if garbage gets privatized it happens here in etobicoke all the time) so obion is in fact apt. Also the city is in great shape, read our credit rating. Compare our debt to other major cities. Both ford and smitherman are managing to sell this bullshit line (thank you sun and star equally) in order to discredit the only candidate with a decent vision for this city. All of the people whining about taxes will save very little money and the services and progress lost simply will not be worth the savings. A vote for smitherman is a vote for ford. A vote for pantalone is a vote for Toronto. Don't believe that pantalone has a small chance, look to Calgary, these polls are inaccurate and often paid for by the same people contributing to these campaigns.
Alex / October 22, 2010 at 11:20 am
user-pic
Here's the problem with the Obion county reference...what if I was robbed and then called my old insurance company and said "I meant to buy insurance...I'll pay the premium right now, in fact, if you'll cover the robbery".

I know that it seems kind of icky for the firefighters to let the house burn down...but the flip side is that you don't get cable if you don't pay your cable bill, you don' get insurance if you don't pay for your insurance bill and you don't get "optional" fire coverage if you don't pay for it.

If they put out his fire, they tell everyone that you only need to pay when you need it and that system can't work because fire services are expensive and they rely on everybody paying so that those who need it, can get it.

So, I am sorry but a city that is broke shouldn't be paying for services it can't afford.
Brad M / October 22, 2010 at 11:21 am
user-pic
The reason I'll not be chastizing anyone for 'strategically' voting for Smitherman - despite his political similarities to Rob Ford - is that at least Smitherman wouldn't be a complete and utter embarrassment as the face of Toronto. Sure, I don't agree with him politically, but at least he has some dignity about him. That Rob Ford might end up the face of this city is mortifying.
TheRealJohnson / October 22, 2010 at 11:35 am
user-pic
Ugh. Joey Pants supporters are really pushing this Smitherman is the same as Ford line; and frankly, it's bullshit.

If you support Pantalone and want to vote for him, go for it. But to say Smitherman and Ford's policies are similar is either ignorant or intentionally misleading. They have similar sentiments re: city spending, but that's where it ends. In fact, that's where Ford's whole campaign ends. Unlike Ford, Smitherman also has other elements to his platform - and they include the services you claim are in danger with a Smitherman win.

Obviously Smithemran isn't perfect, but comparing him to Ford is just lazy or dishonest. Please feel free to waste your vote on a losing candidate based on principal, but I'm going to go ahead and actually place a vote that will best serve the city by helping to keep Ford out.
TheRealJohnson replying to a comment from TheRealJohnson / October 22, 2010 at 11:37 am
user-pic
*principle
Get Real / October 22, 2010 at 11:53 am
user-pic
If there is oen word I never want to hear again it is "vision". WTF does it mean when a politican spouts it off? I'me gonna vote for some douche because his "vision" is all lovey dovey. Enron's corporate value statement was, "Respect, Integrity, Communication and Excellence" and we know how that turned out.

Let's look at the facts - money is in limited supply and is fungible. If you have $x to spend and you spend $y, you are left with $x-y. That seems to be a bit complicated for some folks. Hey let's spend money on this because it's a vision of how we want to be.

How about this, pick a few priorities and work like mad to make them happen. Instead, we end up with this BS "vision" where we spend money on anything that has even the slightest to do with the "vision" no matter how useless it is. And we are pretty useless about execution.

Subisdized housing - you think Regent Park is good? Sell all the buildings the city owns for subsidized housing and instead give people who need the assistance the $$$ and let them spend it directly. That way they might acutallu be able to live near where they work and we'd also end up with properly mixed use communities rather than 1950s era gulags.

That $x-y equation again. All that money we spend on delivering subsidized housing incredibly inefficiently could instead be handled far more efficiently by removing layers of city bureaucracy.

The Etobicoke garbage example above is BS. There is dumping all over the city and we are all subject to the same garbe bins and same fees. The only difference is Etobicoke found a far less expensive way to deliver the service. Miller fully agrees but states that he'd rather pay people a "living wage". Great, expect all the inefficiency you just deliveratley built iun necessarily means less $$$ for other causes that are far more worthy.

I'm sick to hell of all the holier than though BS from the Pants and Slitherman crowd. Just because I supoprt Ford does not mean I want to see Hell on Earth. It means I belive that every cent we save on stupid "visoion" BS is a cent we can either keep in the taxpayers hands or spend on something really worthy. Bike lanes, great, I ride a lot and I ride with my kids. Just remember that the $$$ you spend on that necessarily means less $$$ on something else.

Oh wait, we get to supent the laws of finance and simplya dhere to a f**king "vision" and the math will magically work out.

news flash folks.... City = out of money (46% budget increase under Miller), Province = broke (no more handouts) and Feds = +$50 BILLION deficit.

So where the f**k is the fundign for this "vision" of a lovey dovey friendly city coming from. I got news for you... nowhere - George and Pants are making promises they can't live up to - there is no money left to spend.

Ford, yep, his numbers don't add up either. But at least his numbers are based on not digging us futher into the giant hole we are in. Slitherman is "sure the provide will step up."

So, no matter who you vote for folks - the money is gone. None left to spend. But that's be fine as we'll all have bike lanes when the subway breaks down through lack of maintenance because we spend all the money on bike lanes and "living wages."
K / October 22, 2010 at 11:55 am
user-pic
If you're not voting based on principle (i.e. similar principles between yourself and the candidate you support) what exactly are you basing your vote on?

A vote for a candidate you support (i.e. Pantalone) isn't a wasted vote just because it may not necessarily keep Rob Ford from becoming mayor.
K replying to a comment from Alex / October 22, 2010 at 11:57 am
user-pic
The author of the article isn't saying people shouldn't have to pay in order to receive services, he's saying that essential services like that should be included in municipal taxes to avoid a situation where a person who can't afford the service (through no fault of their own) is deprived of an essential service.
TheRealJohnson replying to a comment from Get Real / October 22, 2010 at 12:00 pm
user-pic
Sometimes I wish passing spelling and IQ tests were a prerequisite to casting a ballot.
Parker / October 22, 2010 at 12:00 pm
user-pic
Go Joe! Joe Pants said you build a city up, not tear it down. Also, he's the only candidate that won't sell city assets like Toronto Hydro.
MER1978 replying to a comment from Marlon / October 22, 2010 at 12:04 pm
user-pic
RE: "Don't believe that pantalone has a small chance, look to Calgary, these polls are inaccurate and often paid for by the same people contributing to these campaigns."

Yeah look at Calgary... Nenshi was polling within a few points of the other candidates right before the vote... uhhhhh Joe hasn't cracked 20 for the entire campaign.
mikeb replying to a comment from scottd / October 22, 2010 at 12:12 pm
user-pic
The Obion County is not just hysterical it's a non sequitor.

Electing Rob Ford is not going to bring optional Fire Service subscription fees to Toronto any more than a victorious Joe Pants is going to bring a new strain of anti-car Marxism. You gotta love the tall tales people tell during an election
gadfly / October 22, 2010 at 12:28 pm
user-pic
The city needs a process similar to what condos have: the feds and/or Province need to call in a special committee and take over this city. I know of one building where the Board has resigned and an Administrator has been appointed because a small minority of the owners don't like the current Board and want the duly elected Board out. What that small minority of owners don't understand is that the alternative (the Administator) is going to be far worse: he/she has sweeping powers to implement special assessments, make repairs etc, without ANY regard as to when and how the owners can pay.
Smitherman will tax us into oblivion and cave to every union demand (as will Pants.) Ford will be paralyzed because the lefties and the unions have already drawn their line in the sand.
This city has been careening out of control for about 2 decades: the manifestations are only now beginning to show. Do not be fooled by all the construction cranes: 80% of those units are being sold to off-shore types who either don't know what a mess this city has become, or think this is a paradise, relative to the cesspools they have left.
Streetcars/bicyle lanes - these are only some of the symptoms of a city hall that is tragically out of step with what the MAJORITY want. Forget about CP24/City's microphones. What would most people say when a mike is shoved in their face? "Oh, I love tax hikes and don't care about the homeless?" Of course not!
A landslide by Ford will send a clear message, regardless of whether he can actually accomplish anything or not. Otherwise, we will get 4 more years of crap.
j-rock / October 22, 2010 at 12:35 pm
user-pic
Pantalone is the equivalent of Ralph Nader in the 2000 US election. I just hope that when we wake up to mayor Ford next Tuesday morning that everyone's "principles" bring them some measure of comfort. Politics are ugly and sometimes you have to use your brain instead of your heart. Pantalone seems like a genuinely nice man who cares about the city. But he was a big part of the administration that spent a lot of the past 7 years taxing and alienating Toronto voters. He won't admit that there is a spending problem at City Hall, and that seems to want to pretend as though everything is fine, and that the city can continue with the policies of the Miller era indefinitely. I don't like Smitherman, but sadly he's the lesser of the two evils. Folks need to grow up. Anyone but Ford.
tim / October 22, 2010 at 12:42 pm
user-pic
In any debate I have watched Pantalone seemed altogether ineffectual. He never completes a thought without diverting to "and by the way" and then dropping some platitude with a smug satisfied look on his face. It left me wondering if the guy ever accomplished anything in his 30 years at City Hall besides toadying up to whomever was in the mayor's chair. Now in debates he's snuggling up to reactionary blubbering red-faced Rob Ford. That's your visionary leader?

But go NDP diehards. Your mayor had to give it up because his ideals couldn't cope with striking garbage men. Your first choice for a replacement was the guy turning out student president level videos before he was waylaid by the news that he was using City Hall to entertain college girls. In Pantalone's old ward, they'll support the white male over the very capable visible minority female because the white male is son of their leader. Way to walk the walk.

Smitherman is definitely flawed, and he hasn't run a great campaign, but he's the only choice now. The city won't be well-served by bouncing between the left and right wing extremes.
marlon replying to a comment from TheRealJohnson / October 22, 2010 at 12:45 pm
user-pic
Pantalone supporters push the smitherman is just like ford line almost as often and with more credibility than the smitherman supporters push the voting pantalone is a waste of a vote line.
Ingrid / October 22, 2010 at 01:04 pm
user-pic
I lived in Pants' ward for a long time, and it's why I can't vote for him (as much as I want to avoid voting for the other two). Issue after issue, he never showed any leadership, and didn't really listen to constituents.

I wish I could vote with my conscience, but there isn't a candidate on the list who I feel would best serve this city.
il / October 22, 2010 at 01:13 pm
user-pic
"I would as soon vote for Ford as I would for Smitherman."

A noble sentiment, but elections have consequences. Would you just as soon see Ford elected mayor as you would Smitherman?

I still haven't decided who'll get my vote on Monday (but it won't be Ford).
TheRealJohnson replying to a comment from marlon / October 22, 2010 at 01:19 pm
user-pic
Touché. Fair enough.
Get Real replying to a comment from TheRealJohnson / October 22, 2010 at 01:22 pm
user-pic
Which is a typical snot nosed response. So I typed quickly and made a few typos? You then dismiss my argument by simply stating that I can't "pass an IQ test."

Typical Slitherman and Pants type response - if you don't agree with me you must be an uncouth an uneducated Ford supporter.

Here's the thing, get out from the Junction or Bay and King and go take a walk around the rest of Toronto. Ford rings true to a lot of people. He looks like many of them and he talks like many of them.

Even many of the people he supposedly slighted like him - "Orientals work like dogs" elicited a "it's true" from the Chinese Business Association when they were hosting a lunch in his honour. They took it as a COMPLIMENT. Could he have said it better, of course.

I say it as a downtown private school raised individual that I am amazed at the snobbery in this election. He's fat... get over it. He's not a smoothe talker... get over it. But, "oh my, I can't have an uncouth represent my beloved city on the world stage."

I'll take a solvent and functioning city over a broke one which can't support transit, the arts or the less fortunate because it's blown it's wad on some vision spouting MPP flameout.

How's the TTC since Moscoe and Giamboner started using it as their political soap boxes? Wrecked. Get the politicians out of as much as possible, they couldn't run a whorehouse when an aircraft carrier came to town after 6 months at sea.

Food carts. Wow, what a great execution that was. Great "vision". Too abd it sucks and now the small businessman and woman are stuck with $60k lemons.

City hall can't run sh*t. Nuit Blanche started despite the City - it was turned down by the City and was started by David Pecault and friends. AGO, OCAD, ROM, Etc - how much of their budget comes from the City? U of T, George Brown, Ryerson. Immigrants. These are what make our city a cultural hotspot, not some vision from the mayor.

The more money we spend on garbage the less we have for the TTC. It's that smimple.
Parker / October 22, 2010 at 01:37 pm
user-pic
Smitherman needs a bro for those moobs.
The Shakes / October 22, 2010 at 01:49 pm
user-pic
<I>"we should take a moment to remind ourselves that it is under Miller's watch that we became a city that is consistently ranked among the most livable in the world." </I>

That quote should include a big qualifier - "...for those who have money". Since Miller, Toronto has become a city of poor and rich, everyone in the middle has been forced to live in the burbs, and has been forever priced out of the city. 4 years of Pants carrying on his vision will just force the poor out to the burbs too. Atleast then we will be more comparable to other "world class" cities like NY and London.
Matt replying to a comment from gadfly / October 22, 2010 at 01:58 pm
user-pic
Gadfly sure is sure about his numbers. 80%? Tell us, oh wise free-thinker, from where do you get your facts? (I think I have an idea.)
JB / October 22, 2010 at 02:20 pm
user-pic
I love J-Pants and I've interviewed him before. Great guy, and a fine public servant. That said, I have no intention of being part of an effort for him to play Ralph Nader to Ford's Bush. Do you really think that folks who voted Nader in 2004 in the US are really happy with themselves that they got 4 more years of Bush?
Cliff S / October 22, 2010 at 02:26 pm
user-pic
So there are three candidates left.

Ford - I won't support someone who can't do/ignores basic budget math, not to mention the regressions the city would face on the transit, mobility, and arts & culture front. He also has a full time job at his dad's company. The mayor's job is a full time position.

Smitherman - Dalton's right hand man, right in the middle of eHealth pork-barreling, the sweet Samsung deal, although he appears to have shamelessly sidestepped the fallout. The majority of his campaign is don't let Ford in, vote for me instead - hardly inspiring, although he has the career politician entitlement part down pat.

Pantalone - not much of a leader, little vision for the city other then stay the course, hard to get inspired behind this vision. Has the currently unpopular tie to Miller's legacy.


So none of the above are someone I'm happy about voting for. I could vote for tweeldee to help avoid tweetldum getting in, but I'm still voting for someone I don't want to see as mayor. Pantalone aligns closest to my values, but he hasn't shown leadership that I think the mayor would need to show. I guess the option is between #3 and a spoiled ballot, time will tell.
ICallBS replying to a comment from Get Real / October 22, 2010 at 02:43 pm
user-pic
<---

You're ramblings are akin to the BS that spews out of tea party member's mouths.

"Respect for taxpayers" ?! can't you see how transparent this?
To address your main argument about there being no funding:
That's BS. Toronto represents Canada to the world and the Feds will always spend money on it regardless of their national debt. The Province will also cave on funding for the city, it IS true they will see the light.

"..the subway breaks down through lack of maintenance because we spend all the money on bike lanes." 'cause we all know how expensive bike lanes are to build and maintain haha

"He's fat... get over it." because he's a lazy slob. He's lethargic not (that) genetically challenged.
"He's not a smoothe* talker... get over it." he's too stupid to speak eloquently so he opts to shout and throw violent tantrums.
*private skool fail

"..one which can't support transit, the arts or the less fortunate because.." he will slash and burn all arts funding, his public transit scheme is retarded. He also doesn't give a shit about "the less fortunate" (I'm guessing you don't either) Privatization and selling of city assets is just a band-aid fix and is detrimental in the long run. It's easier to make a desert than build and oasis.. unsustainable government practices and unrealistic tax cuts will turn this city into a desert.
Not that Ford supporters care! They're content to getting fat living life in their bubble - big box stores, drive through fast food , 1000 tv channels and a pleasant commute in their gas guzzling SUV or flashy luxury sedan to their droning city job (which they prob resent and therefore feel resentment towards downtown t.o.)

"..they couldn't run a whorehouse" 'cause we all know how important it is to know all about the sex trade.. not everyone can as well informed as you.

Anyways.. I gotta go but I just had to say something
here - I dedicate this song to you:

yt/watch?v=pc0mxOXbWIU
CanuckNurse / October 22, 2010 at 02:52 pm
user-pic
I emigrated to Canada from the US and became a citizen after people "voted with their conscience" in 2000 and the world was nearly set ablaze in the following 8 years. I'm consistently told Nader's 97,421 votes did not put Bush in office. History says otherwise. People knew then the election was going to be very close.

The differences between Ford and anyone else are stark enough that your conscience ought to be causing you to choose the candidate with the most realistic possibility of beating him. Just my two cents. Your mileage may vary.
CantSqueezeBloodFromStone replying to a comment from Get Real / October 22, 2010 at 03:07 pm
user-pic
When TheRealJohnson said
"Sometimes I wish passing spelling and IQ tests were a prerequisite to casting a ballot."

He wasn't talking about your typos. Durrr

Arthur Hanks replying to a comment from CanuckNurse / October 22, 2010 at 03:45 pm
user-pic
Gore lost in 2000 because he couldn't win his home state of Tennessee. Was that Nader's fault as well?

http://www.presidentelect.org/art_notfavson.html
Chuck / October 22, 2010 at 04:00 pm
user-pic
The citizens of Toronto should put out a "wanted" add out.. these three bums are all bad choices.

#1 Wants to follow the path of the previous Mayor which is bankrupting its citizens and putting money in lazy union workers (Yeah, I'm generalizing! Suck it TTC workers)
#2 Wants to get elected by telling everyone is the better option in a race of lame horses
#3 Wants to turn the downtown core into a giant highway for all the suburbanites, so that they can shop at the Eaton center without worrying about traffic.

I'm moving to Calgary.. Somehow they got a qualified Mayor..
Rae / October 22, 2010 at 04:05 pm
user-pic
Ok, this is good argument, a noble sentiment and a generally great position to have. As someone who typically votes to the left, and genuinely likes Joe Pantalone, I want to agree with you.

The trouble is that I remember the US election in 2000. They had three options too. You could vote Gore, vote Bush, or vote Nader. I'm sure a lot of well meaning people cast their vote in for Nader only to end up facing a George W. Bush presidency, “won” by at best, a handful of votes. Once the shock wore off, I imagine a lot of those voters might have regretted not voting strategically for Gore. The pre-“I'm kind of cool now because I made a movie about climate change" Gore was boring, dry and spouted the same old democrat lines that progressive voters were tired of hearing. But at least he wasn’t George W. Bush.

This is not like a lot of voting situations in Canada where there is actually significant voter representation across 3-4 major parties. This is Ford v. Smitherman whether we like it or not, and while the center and left leaning voters dance around the idea of voting for a candidate they like and believe in rather than "the lesser of two evils", the right wing ideologues have unilaterally thrown their support behind a single candidate.

When I think about how many well intentioned, clever, informed voters will NOT vote strategically on election night, it scares me. Do not kid yourselves, voting for Pantalone, or one of the candidates who has dropped out, or some fringe candidate may be the right choice for you, but it is NOT the best choice for Toronto.
canadiancitizen0 / October 22, 2010 at 04:27 pm
user-pic
Get Real wrote: "Let's look at the facts - money is in limited supply and is fungible. If you have $x to spend and you spend $y, you are left with $x-y. That seems to be a bit complicated for some folks. Hey let's spend money on this because it's a vision of how we want to be. "

That's simply incorrect. The real money supply changes over time depending on inflation and monetary policy. Production can even allow one to generate net value through the use of capital (even debt) (it's called investment). Even if money stays constant, you can still transfer it (and other value) from one place to another (ie into Toronto).
JJ / October 22, 2010 at 05:05 pm
user-pic
On principle, I too would vote for Joe Pantalone. Unfortunately, this race is between Ford and Smitherman now.

There isn't a single poll out there that puts Pantalone in the mayor's seat. As much as I like the man, he simply cannot win this.

Meanwhile, Rob Ford certainly can win. And he will win, if the non right-wing vote gets split.

So the choice is clear; be principled and vote your principles, or be a realist and vote realistically.

Enough has been said about Rob Ford that I probably don't need to get into detail about why he would make a terrible mayor. Smitherman has his issues too, but I agree with today's Globe and Mail editorial. Smitherman is by far the lesser of two evils.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/the-globes-endorsement-for-mayor-of-toronto/article1767954/

Come Monday, I'm voting Smitherman.
TheRealJohnson replying to a comment from Get Real / October 22, 2010 at 05:06 pm
user-pic
You're defending a dumb argument with even dumber ones I don't have the time to get sufficiently angry about, so just rad this:
http://www.realjohnson.com/2010/08/voting-for-dummies.html

"He looks like many of them and he talks like many of them."

Instead of voting for someone who looks and talks like you, why not vote for someone who is actually qualified for public office? If you were the kind of person that could be mayor, you'd probably be running.

As for the rest of your "arguments" I'm not sure I follow most of them. You literally have one sentence that is just the word "immigrants." Huh?

Please be quiet, grown-ups are talking.

Anon replying to a comment from Arthur Hanks / October 22, 2010 at 05:53 pm
user-pic
"Gore lost in 2000 because he couldn't win his home state of Tennessee. "

I guess some Canadians on here might be confused but that's really not how elections work in the US.
Steve replying to a comment from TheRealJohnson / October 22, 2010 at 09:51 pm
user-pic
The comment by Get Real is the most lucid writing on this entire thread, despite the many typos and grammatical errors. It was a rant for sure, but completely on the mark.

The money for any service the city provides comes from us. If you want more city, then you get less you. That's fine for those making a good income, but Toronto is an expensive place. If you can barely afford a roof over your head, another city-sponsored festival or Live Green booths taking up a quarter of the floor space at conferences, are not going to make your any life better.

We need a city government that sticks to basics, and that includes fire departments and libraries. No candidate has ever suggested disbanding those public services. That is simply a pointless straw-man argument.
gadfly replying to a comment from Matt / October 22, 2010 at 10:59 pm
user-pic
Sarcasm aside, I am actually rounding DOWN, my friend. At the 4 major downtown condo projects that I was acquainted with last year, 90% of the units were pre-sold to CRESPO. (There's an acronym, look it up!) So, averaging DOWN, we're probably in the 80% range for all of downtown.
The only difference between today and 1990 is that back then builders would accept 5-10% down and then go to their banks to get financing. That's why Bramalea, Olympia and others collapsed. The difference now is that the savvy builders are demanding 25% down, in increments, of course. If the buildings are cancelled or the market collapses, the builders will be protected, but not the 'investors,' who are mostly 'new Canadians' or off-shore folks being hoodwinked by the greedy agents who, like many people on this Board, prefer the Pollyana, Toronto is the best city in the world myth to reality. It blows me away that the same people who would haggle to the death over $100 at a car dealership, will willingly plunk down $75k on a building they've never seen, on a project barely approved, and on the word of an agent, who although the same ethnicity as theirselves, is no more honorable than the snake salesman of yore.
Of course, as long as the Ponzi scheme is kept afloat, the real estate bubble (which is the only thing keeping Toronto itself from a total collapse) will keep on swelling.
Pick your poison, folks. Smitherman will promise the moon and stars, deliver on borrowed money and perhaps stave off the disaster for another few years, or until McGuinty gets tossed from office. Ford, on the other hand, may incite a riot with the unions and Civil service, which although that may bring Toronto down sooner; IMO, it will be a better poison pill for everyone in the long run.
Neither politician stands a chance of fixing this city. It will take a major, cooperative intervention of Ottawa and Queen's Park to right the country's only megalopolis.
Fat chance of that happening, of course.
Spek / October 22, 2010 at 11:40 pm
user-pic
RF as mayor would be an embarrassment for Toronto, but he won't get very much done. People say he'll do this or that, well only if council agrees. So many of his ideas got nowhere at council votes. At least we can have some laughs while we wait it out.

Vote for the person you would want for mayor. I'm with Pantalone.
Marlon replying to a comment from TheRealJohnson / October 23, 2010 at 12:43 am
user-pic
Just curious, the election is between smitherman and pantalone, it's close, who are you voting for?
Ron / October 23, 2010 at 08:53 am
user-pic
I am one of the 20% of undecided voters who has decided to vote for Smitherman. As far as I am concerned....if I can look past Ford's drinking problems, temper problems, DUI's and spousal assault charges...then I can look past Smithermans's somehat murky relationship with e-Health. Ford has it right when he says that there is wasteful spending....but what turned me off of him was the fact that his entire campaign was centered around that idea. There was no vision....nothing about how he would make Toronto and bigger and better place. At the end of the day I want my mayor to make me feel good about living in this great city, someone who understands that the Toronto icons like the CN Tower were built by visionaries who saw a chance to make us different then the next city and went for it. I also I so tired of hearing people complaining about our property taxes....they are, BY FAR, the lowest in the GTA. Move to Ottawa or Montreal where you will pay almost 30% more in property taxes!!!
EM / October 23, 2010 at 10:18 am
user-pic
Thanks so much for expressing what I believe. Go, Joe Pants!
TheRealJohnson replying to a comment from Marlon / October 23, 2010 at 10:27 am
user-pic
I`d probably still be voting for Smitherman. I just don`t feel like Pantalone can actually run shit. That is, he makes a great foil to a current leader and he`s great at keeping certain issues on the table during this election, but I don`t think he actually has the skills to lead.
Basically, I`ve bestowed my feelings about their respective provincial party affiliation on each candidate: I definitely don`t want the Conservative guy, and the NDP guys is charming and idealistic, but not realistic, so I`ll vote for the Liberal. It ain`t a particularly romantic way to cast a vote, but that`s how it is.
JT / October 23, 2010 at 03:35 pm
user-pic
Having Seen Ford speak recently at the CBC debate, I can say I now disagree with him less for his views, but because he is a fumbling idiot, unable to articulate a single point.

Not that I don’t think Joe Pants wouldn’t be a great mayor, but this whole issue about sticking to your principles and voting strategically is a cry for attention by the Joe Pants camp, thinking that their candidate is low in the poles because everyone is anti-Ford, rather than pro-Smitherman.

I find this over the top rhetoric and concern simply an issue of one political group not wanting to lose. Voting democratically and by principles is also strategic. Not wanting to lose doesn’t make your cause and vision of Toronto better or more ethical. Wanting to win is not you being more sincere. It also doesn’t point to the fact that Ford isn’t the issue here, it is that a huge segment of Toronto still feels alienated, even as we express our own views are good for Toronto as a whole.

The moral righteous of this article is the kind of problem with democracy and dialogue we see in this city. Even with Ford, we would never see the Tennessee issue occur here. To say Smitherman is similar to Ford just completely ignores the complexity of the candidates as we continue to put down each other to get our candidate ahead.

Lets face it, Toronto is going through a huge transition and no one knows where it should go. We are a bit overly utopian and dreamy about how we want to direct the growth and sustainability of Toronto, which is great and why I love Toronto. But to conflate Ford and Smitherman because they say similar things, and not discuss the actual issues Toronto is facing, is just you being strategic, as you discuss your non-strategic approach to this Mayor race.
simuls / October 23, 2010 at 08:51 pm
user-pic
To me, this issue is simple. Is this about feeling good about me and my vote or building a better city?

While I support Pantalone, it would be IRRESPONSIBLE of me to vote for him in our current electoral system. I value what Miller has done and the only person with a shot at keeping and possibly continuing that is Smitherman.

If you vote for Pantalone it's not based on some principle or some belief in democracy, it's based upon needing to feel better about yourself. It's selfish, it's small and it's shortsighted.
Andrew / October 23, 2010 at 09:11 pm
user-pic
I usually prefer left wing parties and candidates but I'm most likely going to vote for Rob Ford. Many of the city councilors we have now are addicted to inefficient spending.

I just want to thank GetReal for his posts, in particular this one: "City hall can't run sh*t. Nuit Blanche started despite the City - it was turned down by the City and was started by David Pecault and friends. AGO, OCAD, ROM, Etc - how much of their budget comes from the City? U of T, George Brown, Ryerson. Immigrants. These are what make our city a cultural hotspot, not some vision from the mayor."

Yes Ford would cut funding to "culture", but to events I never go to, all the events I go to are run by private organizations. If these events get canceled and you enjoyed them, that sucks, but not as much as a summer of parks turning into stacks of garbage.

I also liked this one: "The more money we spend on garbage the less we have for the TTC. It's that simple."

I also think including that story about private fire services is completely irrelevant, I don't think even the most right-wing voters, candidates, or councilors would want fire fighters to be optional services.

Just for fun, here's my least favourite comment of this whole thread: "Please be quiet, grown-ups are talking.". Someone disagreeing with you does make them stupid. In the post this came from the poster only had one attack on his targets entire post, ignored the rest, and called him stupid. Do you actually think having a particular political affiliation makes you more intelligent than someone else? I see alot of anger and arrogance in your comments TheRealJohnson, the same kind of anger you dislike in Rob Ford. I don't like him as a person, but I think he'll do a better job running the city than Smitherman given it's present condition.

I would like to restate that I usually lean left, but garbage workers going on strike every 4 years and TTC ticket collectors (a job which shouldn't even exist) getting paid overtime, pisses me off. While cutting the budget and not doing much else isn't a great platform, its much better than spending even more money carelessly.

Please consider leaving idealism out of this. Smitherman and Pantalone are snobs who think they have unlimited budgets, the things they want to do may be nice but we don't need them. What we do need is reduced spending, at least for now. Hopefully I can vote for a left wing candidate in the next municipal election but right now I need to be practical and realistic. I wanted Sarah Thomson to win, but even if she was still in the race I wouldn't vote for her because the choices really are just Ford and Smitherman, and I prefer Ford.
Mike W replying to a comment from Dave / October 23, 2010 at 11:45 pm
user-pic
Quit drinking the kool-aid and maybe you will get it.

Or provide a quote where Ford said he'll take out existing bike lanes, cancel festivals, or sell all our streetcars.

Misinformation lives on.
marlon replying to a comment from simuls / October 24, 2010 at 11:32 am
user-pic
You've gotta be kidding! I'm voting pantalone in order to feel good about myself? Project much? I vote for pantalone because I don't want ttc to be privatized. Because I don't want want public interests sold for short term gain. I believe in a green city. I don't believe the city is broke. I refuse the other candidates I don't like their ideas and I love a lot I also think that while the polls have effectively scared a lot of pantalone supporters out of voting for who they actually want, they are not completely accurate as many progressive active people have discovered in this day and age that there is no longer much use for the landline.
marlon replying to a comment from simuls / October 24, 2010 at 11:40 am
user-pic
*love a lot of pantalone's ideas.
MER1978 replying to a comment from marlon / October 24, 2010 at 12:14 pm
user-pic
"many progressive active people have discovered in this day and age that there is no longer much use for the landline."

Progressive people are more likely to enjoy the freedom and reduced cost of no landline vs. people of any other political stripe... ummm ok sure.

If Joe was within say 5 points instead of 20 you might have a point.

The last poll that came out before the 2006 election (Decima Nov. 3 to 5) had Miller at 55%... on election day (Nov. 13) he earned 56.97% of the vote... aka a gain of 1.97% over the last poll.

Most polls put the margin of error at about 3%... if the difference is even as much as the margin of error (which might even be set taking into consideration landlines vs. cell phones)... I'd be surprised.
Steve replying to a comment from marlon / October 24, 2010 at 01:22 pm
user-pic
The result of this election will be the starting point for the next municipal election. Strategic voting (i.e., voting for someone you would not otherwise support) is fundamentally anti-democratic. In the end, the beneficiary of your strategic vote will likely forget about you once they win. Moreover, the prospect of attracting a good candidate to represent your views the next time will be diminished if it looks like a long shot.

Marlon is right, when you vote you have to feel good about yourself.
Dave replying to a comment from Mike W / October 24, 2010 at 03:28 pm
user-pic
I don't have time to find you quotes. I'll grant you that "cancelling our festivals" was a bit of an overstatement, but he surely advocates pulling funding for Caribanna and Pride, and and has mused about removing the two marathons from the streets. Are you seriously denying that his platform includes removing the Jarvis bike lanes? Or that he has repeatedly talked about reselling the newly ordered streetcars?

Have you been paying any attention to the campaign at all?
Dave replying to a comment from marlon / October 24, 2010 at 03:40 pm
user-pic
"Pantalone supporters push the smitherman is just like ford line almost as often and with more credibility than the smitherman supporters push the voting pantalone is a waste of a vote line."

The latter is actually based on evidence, whereas the former is nothing but a ridiculous and false talking point. Given the polls, the probability of Joe Pantalone being elected tomorrow is so small as to be indistinguishable from zero. A vote cast with no chance of electing the chosen candidate is a wasted vote.
TheRealJohnson replying to a comment from Andrew / October 25, 2010 at 09:43 am
user-pic

First of all, I certainly don't dislike anger in a candidate. I'm voting for Furious George. There's nothing wrong with a candidate who's passionate about what he or she believes in (even if, like Ford, those beliefs are different than my own).

Furthermore, my comment about Get Real being stupid wasn't about his/her choice for mayor exclusively; it was also about his/her:

• lack of punctuation,
• misspelling the words smooth, bad, simple, one, I'm, actually, garbage, deliberately, in, vision, and funding - among others,
• use of ridiculous Toronto Sun-style nicknames like "Giamboner" and "Slitherman," and
• inventing the word "supent."

I'm willing to listen to an intelligent argument about the case for Rob Ford. I'm simply yet to hear it, and this certainly isn't it.

As for his/her "arguments," Get Real (like you) is essentially arguing the case for electing a mayor with no vision for the city. If that's the kind of mayor you want, and that's how you choose your candidate, please feel free to agree with him. If you don't think the arts and cultural events the city helps finance are important, please feel free to agree with him. If you don't think transit, bike lanes or the environment are important municipal issues, please feel free to agree with him.

I'm insulting because I'm insulted. I like Toronto and I think you're backing a candidate who doesn't care about it as much as the other two.

Regardless, we're never going to agree. You're voting for Ford and I am voting for Smitherman. Either you think governments should provide services (and are therefore OK with taxes), or you think governments should watch out for your bottom line (and you are therefore voting for the guy who will [theoretically] save you some money).

[side note: we're all engaging in a lot of rhetoric and hyperbole here. Whoever is our next mayor will require approval of city council. Ford won't actually be able to slash everything wantonly nor will Smitherman being permitted to go on some insane spending spree.]
KL / October 25, 2010 at 10:00 am
user-pic
Umm, people, if you vote for Rob Ford under the guise of "fixing" the unions, be prepared for more lengthy TTC, garbage, city-affected strikes.

It "pisses you off" that TTC/garbage went on strike? Dude, they'll do it again and again and again when Rob Ford tries to tell them they make too much money. How come I can see this coming and Ford voters who NEED these services cannot?
Mike W replying to a comment from Dave / October 25, 2010 at 01:04 pm
user-pic
Your comment is a joke; Ford <b>was at Caribanna</b> and said it was great, said he wants to remove street cars from specific streets ("arterial roads", not all roads), never said he'd remove Jarvis bike lanes (you're thinking of Rossi), and even had bike lane plans in his official transit plan, where the rest of those facts are found.

Pride <b>should</b> have their funding cancelled after their bait and switch F.U. to the city last time.

Obviously I've been paying attention, to the right sources.
MER1978 replying to a comment from Mike W / October 25, 2010 at 01:23 pm
user-pic
RE: Mike W...

"never said he'd remove Jarvis bike lanes (you're thinking of Rossi)"

So when he constantly misrepresented the cost of the Jarvis bike lanes as $6 million over and over and over again vs. the reality of $59K... it's a stretch to think he would have them removed?

Can we trust Rob Ford, a guy who gets his numbers wrong?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/marcus-gee/can-we-trust-rob-ford-a-guy-who-gets-his-numbers-wrong/article1719778/
Mike W replying to a comment from MER1978 / October 25, 2010 at 01:43 pm
user-pic
Yes it is a stretch, in fact.

On the subject of trust; can you trust Smitherman, a guy who pissed on a billion dollars for practically nothing and thinks of it as no big deal?
MER1978 replying to a comment from Mike W / October 25, 2010 at 01:59 pm
user-pic
RE: Mike W...

I don't think I was talking about trust... I was saying that whether a koolaid drinker such as yourself chooses to believe he would remove the Jarvis bike lanes or not... hearing him rant about the imaginary $6 million they didn't actually cost CONSTANTLY for the entire campaign has led me... and many others to the reasonable conclusion that he would remove them.
Mike W replying to a comment from MER1978 / October 25, 2010 at 02:11 pm
user-pic
lol ok. I'm the koolaid drinking because I don't think he'll do it because there's no evidence to support that he will.
Where you and your "may others" aren't because your guess says he will... great logic Holmes.


Your last sentence starts with "Can we trust", so yeah, you mentioned something about "trust".
MER1978 / October 25, 2010 at 02:24 pm
user-pic
RE: Mike W...

"lol ok. I'm the koolaid drinking because I don't think he'll do it because there's no evidence to support that he will."

So he complains about it the entire campaign... but then won't do nothing... because it's obviously a huge issue to him?

The last sentence was part of the title of an article that backs up what I said about the bike lanes only costing $59K.
Paul / October 25, 2010 at 04:59 pm
user-pic
Better title: "Why I won't vote strategically for the next mayor of Toronto: Because a part of me kind of wants a racist, homophobic, drunk, hard-right sod prone to outbursts to win...even though I lean left...yes, I'm that stupid. Screw the reasonable centre-right alternative."
Steve replying to a comment from Paul / October 25, 2010 at 05:40 pm
user-pic
Yep Paul. That's the way to win them over. Call them stupid and they'll fall in line. That about sums up Smitherman's strategy for attracting Pantalone supporters.

As to your vile characterization of Ford, you seem to be the one who has difficulty parsing the truth from the over-the-top, and inaccurate, rhetoric of his opponents.
Mike W replying to a comment from MER1978 / October 25, 2010 at 06:49 pm
user-pic
So was he complaining about the cost or the logistics of the bike lane? His comments indicate the former. Yours indicated the latter.

@Paul: I prefer that (well, the truthful attributes since you obviously took liberties) over a crook.
ICallBs replying to a comment from Mike W / November 1, 2010 at 09:21 pm
user-pic
"racist, homophobic, drunk, hard-right sod prone to outbursts"

what "obvious" liberties? all of these attributes apply to blob ford and there is plenty of evidence to prove it.
money lending montel williams / February 3, 2012 at 06:21 am
user-pic
I'll complain that you have copied material from another source
jeux de casino gratuit / February 21, 2012 at 09:33 am
user-pic
Thank you for taking turns that excellent subject matter on your internet site. I came across it on the search engines. I will check back again whenever you post extra aricles.
Michael / May 11, 2012 at 07:17 pm
user-pic
I am often to blogging i genuinely appreciate your posts. The content has truly peaks my interest. I'm going to bookmark your internet site and keep checking for brand new info.
Tyson Cartier / February 8, 2013 at 05:32 pm
user-pic
Thanks for the info. I went to the bell - scarborough town centre to find out where I was and surprisingly, I was able to use it just fine. Usually, my oldness causes problems with the younger people's fancy gadgets. This time, luckily, it didn't.

Add a Comment

Other Cities: Montreal