2008 Federal Election: GTA Voting Patterns

[kEiThZ]

I think this is a great topic to discuss, particularly given the stability of our minority government. Feel free to throw out your ideas.

It's always bothered me that the 416 has nearly two dozen safe Liberal seats. I don’t think Toronto benefits by being safe ridings. The Libs ignore us when in power cause we’re safe seats. And the Cons ignore us when in power because they know that whatever they do will go unnoticed.

Any thoughts?

 

[cuzzin_elias]

Good point, which is why we should encourage our neighbours to vote NDP

 

[Observer Walt]

^ Ha ha elias!

Keith raises a good point. I don' t think we are served well when one party becomes so secure that they take for granted that they have some right to govern. We have seen that with both Liberals and Conservatives over the past twenty years. Governments become complacent at best, downright abusive and dishonest at worst.

I remember saying, on this forum, how extremely pleased I was with the result of the last federal election, because I thought the Liberals needed a time out, but also because the new government had a minority, not a majority. It's working pretty well, IMO. The polls have been consistently showing that people are generally satisfied and not clamoring for a new election.

 

[kEiThZ]

Good point, which is why we should encourage our neighbours to vote NDP

Realistically, they don't have a chance outside of a handful of ridings....

My MP is a great guy and very bright. And he does an okay job. But the dude wins by like 20 000 votes every election. I don't think you deserve that kind of margin unless you get the feds to send Christ/Mohammad/Krishna/(other religious figure) to your riding.

I have started voting green just so they get the $1.50 from my vote. My vote makes no difference so what the hey, i'll use it to give another guy a chance. I might decide that those funds will be better used by the Marijuana party in the next election.....

 

[kEiThZ]

^ Ha ha elias!

Keith raises a good point. I don' t think we are served well when one party becomes so secure that they take for granted that they have some right to govern. We have seen that with both Liberals and Conservatives over the past twenty years. Governments become complacent at best, downright abusive and dishonest at worst.

I remember saying, on this forum, how extremely pleased I was with the result of the last federal election, because I thought the Liberals needed a time out, but also because the new government had a minority, not a majority. It's working pretty well, IMO. The polls have been consistently showing that people are generally satisfied and not clamoring for a new election.

I agree with you. The shrill "Sky is falling" routine by a lot of left wingers is starting to sound ridiculous. Its interesting to note that the Harper Conservatives have paid in more to Move Ontario 2020 than the previous two Liberal governments. Even if Harper had a majority I don't think he would be too far from where he is now, unless he didn't want re-election. We are a country of centrists (myself included) and we don't tolerate radical policies from either side of the spectrum.

And if Toronto doesn't change its voting patterns we'll keep getting rail lines from Peterborough instead of cash to extend the TTC. Heck, even the Alberta Tories used to silently campaign for Anne McLellan just to ensure they had a voice in cabinet.

 

[Chuck]

In this country, it is often more advantageous to support the party in which the leader lives closest to home rather than the party that most closely reflects your political views. The only reason why Toronto is repeatedly screwed over by the Conservative Party is because the leaders typically hail from Alberta or Northern Ontario and therefore hate Toronto by default. Similarly, we tend to fare better under Liberal or NDP rule because the leaders tend to live in urban centres located near Toronto and therefore have an understanding of our unique circumstances.

Regionalism aside, an urban agenda could just as easily form the basis of a Conservative platform as it could an NDP platform. After all, it was right leaning Jane Pitfield and not left leaning David Miller that advocated non stop subway construction in the last municipal election.

 

[kEiThZ]

In this country, it is often more advantageous to support the party in which the leader lives closest to home rather than the party that most closely reflects your political views.....

Regionalism aside, an urban agenda could just as easily form the basis of a Conservative platform as it could an NDP platform. After all, it was right leaning Jane Pitfield and not left leaning David Miller that advocated non stop subway construction in the last municipal election.

Yet, somehow most Torontonians decided to look over John Tory both for mayor and premier. The fact that he was born in Toronto, raised and educated in Toronto, became the CEO of a major corporation in Toronto and volunteered and ran the United Way campaign for Toronto, apparently wasn't enough for the voters of Toronto.

I had hoped that the election of John Tory would transform politics in Ontario, by ridding Ontario of the hard-line rural conservatives and making the Ontario PC party much more of an urban party. I mean really, what has Dalton McGuinty done for Toronto. He's a nice guy, and I like him for that. But how much has he actually accomplished for Toronto. He didn't fix our biggest complaint: reversing all the provincially downloaded services. I'll give him credit though if MO2020 actually makes it through to completion.

 

[adma]

The only reason why Toronto is repeatedly screwed over by the Conservative Party is because the leaders typically hail from Alberta or Northern Ontario and therefore hate Toronto by default.

Since when has a federal Conservative leader been from Northern Ontario? Even provincially, Mike Harris (and, I guess, Ernie Eves) was exceptional--and remember that while he was in power, not a single Tory got elected in Northern Ontario, proper (i.e. everything beyond Nipissing).

Perhaps you're better off referring to Rural Ontario, or the Rest Of Ontario...

 

[urbandreamer]

Stephen Harper is from Toronto, not Alberta! Duh!

 

[GraphicMatt]

Canada has a weird culture when it comes to this city. Promising to short change or screw over Toronto probably WINS votes in a lot of places in this country. A federal (or even provincial) politician that looks too cozy to TO will probably lose some support everywhere else in Canada.

Let's all Hate Toronto.

 

[kEiThZ]

Canada has a weird culture when it comes to this city. Promising to short change or screw over Toronto probably WINS votes in a lot of places in this country. A federal (or even provincial) politician that looks too cozy to TO will probably lose some support everywhere else in Canada.

Let's all Hate Toronto.

That's a myth Torontonians like to tell themselves. While Toronto isn't well liked, its not despised by other Canadians and I have yet to see a politician run on an anti-Toronto platform. This has more to do with the fact that Torontonians have an over-inflated view of our city. Toronto is not New York, or London or Paris. But Torontonians (myself included sometimes) like to think that we are. Outsiders know the difference. What major attractions are there in Toronto? And I mean on the global scale.... Until we become the centre of Canadian culture and offer attractions that are world class, we won't really be respected by the rest of Canada. All that being said, it doesn't explain why Torontonians let the Liberals lead us like sheep to the slaughter.

I say Torontonians should whore ourselves out in the next election. Whichever of the two major parties promises to bring serious investment to this city will get two dozen seats (that alone guarantees party status in ottawa).

 

[afransen]

Keith,

While parties obviously don't run on anti-Toronto platforms (no party runs on a explicitly anti-region platform--bad politics), there certainly are anti-Toronto sentiments and politicians have to be cautious not to appear to be favouring Toronto overmuch.

While you can't paint everyone in Calgary, Vancouver or Montreal with the same anti-Toronto brush, you also cannot deny that there is quite a bit of anti-Ontario/Eastern Canada if not anti-Toronto sentiment in those parts of the country. It's mostly a resentment of the greater influence and power held by Ontario and Toronto. Every election, we hear whining from Alberta and BC about how the election is already decided before the polls even close in BC. They don't seem to grasp that their seats count just as much as ours and that they seem to be advocating the disenfranchisement of Ontarians/Quebeckers. Maybe they would be satisfied if the ballots boxes all remained sealed until the polls close across the country, not that it would change the outcome. The real travesty is that urban voters are shortchanged representation vis. rural areas.

 

[Whoaccio]

I don't think it is an "anti-toronto" sentiment so much as an "anti-urban" sentiment. BCers hate Vancouver ("metro-sexual valley people" that they are), Quebecers hate Montreal ("anglo/immigrant overlords") and Albertans hate Edmontons ("commie pinko Trudeau loving pinkos"). Calgary only avoids it by pretending to be rural, which is odd as that is one of the most white collar cities in Canada.

Back to my point though... while BC hates Vancouver, Quebec hate Montreal, in the national context, everyone hates Toronto (and they hated Mtl. equally when it was top dog). If Calgary or Vancouver becomes the biggest city, we will probably hate them. It isn't unique to Canada either. British hate London, French hate Paris and Americans hated NYC until 9/11.

There are some CPC policies which can be construed as anti-Toronto if you look hard enough. Their proposal to redistribute seats in the HoC which would increase Albertas & BC's to account for population growth, yet not increase Ontario's was discriminate against Toronto. The GTA is the only part of Ontario which has grown significantly, so shortchanging Ontario would have left the GTA with electoral quotients of 130k-140k people/MP vs. 90k/MP (Canada average) or 30k/MP (Newfound Land).

More generally, we get screwed by the libs as well:

A lot of the policies related to equalization screw Toronto (although not any more than they screw Vancouver or Calgary). Like including 50% of resource revenue in equalization calculations, but not actually collecting this money. That has the effect of raising the price tag of equalization, but the actual funding for it comes primarily from Ontario, which one way or another trickles down to Toronto. The lack of a national securities regulator screws our primary industry (finance), the prohibitions on bank mergers screw finance as well and prevent foreign banks from setting up shop in T.O.

Toronto gets neatly screwed when it comes to immigration. Toronto get's 40% of all immigrants, yet 60% of the funds to "integrate" (ESL, EI, job placement) were going to Quebec, which receives like 10% of immigrants. The feds collect all of the GST and income tax (which rises with immigration) yet the city, backed by the province, has to pay for social housing, education, ESL and pretty much every other cost. And somehow only 15% of Toronto qualifies for EI, which is just bizarre and points to how much we get milked by other areas of the country.

I would vote for any party that promises to adress the imbalance in rural/urban seats. That is the root cause of this problem. It isn't a Toronto specific problem, all Canadian cities would have a similar list of grievances. It is in any government's nature to "buy" the electorate. In the case of a Toronto riding, they would have to "buy" 110-130k people to score one seat in the HoC but in Newfoundland or Manitoba, they would only have to "buy" 40-50k people to score a seat in the HoC. So obviously there will be pork barreling on the shoulders of urban residents, regardless of political party. Until this imbalance is fixed, i'm voting green (just to make sure none of those other parties get my $1.50)

 

[jn_12]

I'd really suggest reading R. Alan Walks' papers. I have two of his that I used for a number of undergrad papers. I have PDF's of "The City-Suburban Cleavage in Canadian Federal Politics" and "SUBURBANIZATION, THE VOTE, AND CHANGES IN FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL POLITICAL REPRESENTATION AND INFLUENCE BETWEEN INNER CITIES AND SUBURBS IN LARGE CANADIAN URBAN REGIONS, 1945-1999" (sorry about the caps... long title and I just copied/pasted it from the article)

Feel free to send me a PM if you want to take a look at them, I'll gladly pass them along.

 

[northstar]

While you can't paint everyone in Calgary, Vancouver or Montreal with the same anti-Toronto brush, you also cannot deny that there is quite a bit of anti-Ontario/Eastern Canada if not anti-Toronto sentiment in those parts of the country....

... but by the same token, it's so refreshing to know that Toronto holds no regional bias of its own.

Anyhoo, I understand that a Toronto group has decided to shun the CFL in favour of the NFL, by bringing in Buffalo Bill exhibition games.

In all seriousness, how can Torontonians seriously expect the rest of Canada to want to respect the city of Toronto, when the city of Toronto constantly shuns Canadian institutions and try to pretend that the city is somehow too good for them?

... and this, my friends, is simply one example that helps to show how a typical Canadian views Toronto - somehat like a selfish spoilt child who stomps his feet and pouts when things don't go his way.


*
Toronto needs to realise "perception is 9/10ths of the law". Many Canadians perceive Toronto as selfish and spoiled.
Some serious marketing work needs to be done to change that perception, and it has to start locally with people from Toronto. Otherwise, the rest of the country's perception of this city is only going to get worse, which is a lose-lose situation for all.