News   May 17, 2024
 2.7K     5 
News   May 17, 2024
 1.8K     3 
News   May 17, 2024
 11K     10 

Rob Ford's Toronto

Status
Not open for further replies.
So I guess nothing is going to happen, and he's going to remain our mayor until the next election. I wouldn't even be surprised if he gets re-elected. People talk, but they don't vote.
 
Rob Ford vs. John Tory will be like Rob Ford vs. George Smitherman: Conservative vs. Conservative Lite. Once again, progressive voters who make up the majority of the electorate will have no viable candidate to support.
 
I'm pretty sure he meant the Mayors office budget.

I hope not. The Mayor's office budget isn't an issue when we're talking about a $10B dollar budget. I understand optics are important, but that's all that is - optics. Bottom line, my property taxes are going up this year, and Rob Ford is at the helm while it happened.
 
John Tory vs Rob Ford: RF wins.

OC vs RF: RF wins.

See you in 2015

You trolling again? The first, probably no, depending on the platform Tory puts out. The second, probably yes.

So I guess nothing is going to happen, and he's going to remain our mayor until the next election. I wouldn't even be surprised if he gets re-elected. People talk, but they don't vote.

Hence the need for an effective get-out-the vote campaign by Ford's opponent. Mark my words, this race is all about a centrist-conservative semi-suburban platform and getting out the vote.

BOa347PCYAAAs2r.png:large

From: https://twitter.com/GraphicMatt

Matt Elliott ‏@GraphicMatt 5 Jul said:
Actually, this is interesting: Ford's Forum approval ratings since 2011 with 18-34 demo eliminated from sample. Flat. pic.twitter.com/r9lo64sZVZ
Nick Kouvalis ‏@NickKouvalis 5 Jul said:
@GraphicMatt exactly 45-50%. These demo(graphic)s vote much more than 18-34. Ford supporters are harder for him than opponents. Very sticky.
Nick Kouvalis ‏@NickKouvalis 5 Jul said:
@GraphicMatt look at weights & turnout model. #'s are consistent with pre-Election numbers. If his voters turnout more than others, he wins
Nick Kouvalis ‏@NickKouvalis 5 Jul said:
@GraphicMatt 46-51% 2 was B4 Eday. Still at same #'s. Without the chaos from libraries to video, he would likely still truly be at 50.

I personally don't have any problems with Ford returning, as long as the current slate of councillors is not replaced with a more conservative slate. It'll be seen if Ford puts out a slate of his preferred candidates and pulls strings in order to make them win.
 
Last edited:
Though not entirely for the same reasons, progressives had problems voting for Smitherman, remember.

A lot of things, notably his strong ties to Bay Street and Toronto's social elite, his connections to the the provincial PC's (although less so during the Harris years) and what many detect as faux-populism he espouses on his radio show.
 
Last edited:
A lot of things, notably his strong ties to Bay Street and Toronto's social elite, his connections to the the provincial PC's (although less so during the Harris years) and what many detect as faux-populism he espouses on his radio show.

Ahh okay. I hope that progressives will have the sense to vote for Tory if Chow were to run. We can't have the vote being split three ways. That will guarantee that the 1/3 of people who still approve of Ford will get their man in office.
 
From the very link you posted:
The 2012 Budget marks the first decline in gross expenditures since Toronto's amalgamation with a $20 million decrease.
Right, and if you look at the 2012 Operating Budget table, you'll see that this claim comes from the comparison of the Total Levy Operating Budget, which notes a reduction from the 2011 budget figure it offers of 0.2%. If you think this a one-fifth of one percent reduction is significant, you're welcome to tout that figure as gospel.

However, when one does an apples-to-apples comparison, that decrease actually vanishes. The number the 2012 table gives for the 2011 approved budget is 9,409,056.4, but the number given in the equivalent 2011 budget table is 9,382,869.1. This figure is actually less than the comparable 2012 figure of 9,389,954.2, meaning that, by this comparison, the 2012 budget was actually $7 million more than the exactly comparable 2011 amount. And things get even dicier when we look at the 2013 budget table, which has the 2012 budget at 9,417,784.7, higher than the number in the 2012 table, and certainly higher than either figure for the comparable 2011 amount. In other words, those comparisons show an increase in 2012, and not a decline.

(Of course, you can see this as well in the listed budget summaries that I linked to originally -- 2011 says that that "the 2011 tax supported 2011 Operating Budget is $9.383 billion", and 2012 states that "City Council approved a balanced tax-supported 2012 Operating Budget of $9.4 billion". By any math I do, 9.4 is bigger than 9.383, not smaller.)

That 2013 table also has something interesting: by the same comparison in 2012 that claimed a budget decline, the 2013 numbers show an increase from 2012 by, yep, 0.2%.

Now, I am not an accountant, and there may things I'm missing here. But on a straightforward reading of the figures, it sure seems to me that the claim "He did put out a budget smaller than the year before" is a) at best only technically true and represents no major decline, b) is incorrect when later figures are used and direct apples-to-apples comparisons are made, which themselves show an increase in 2012, and c) is wrong when one looks at this year, where there was an increase that matched percentage-wise the best claim for a decrease the year previous.

Anyone with a greater understanding of city finances is welcome to correct me.
 
Ahh okay. I hope that progressives will have the sense to vote for Tory if Chow were to run. We can't have the vote being split three ways. That will guarantee that the 1/3 of people who still approve of Ford will get their man in office.
Or progressives could, you know, vote for Chow.

I'll never vote for Tory, largely because of the reasons mjl08 so clearly enumerates. Tory is a four-time losing back-room party hack with no civic politics experience who seemingly had his roots in the sensible Red Tory tradition, but then embraced the looney social conservative wing when he ran for Premier, and seemingly continues to espouse this approach. He's at best a phoney and panderer, and at worst yet another knee-jerk conservative.

No thank you. I'll take the alleged "socialist" who actually sat on Toronto city council for a decade making the city work over Tory.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top