Next Mayor of Toronto?

[Peepers]

After tonights debate I think it is safe to say that Pantalone will be staying in the race until the bitter end. I don't think any amount of bullying or bribing can force him out. You may not agree with his policies but he is clearly a man of principles much like Ford. You may not like what either of them have to say but you can be sure that they WILL do what they say they will do. In both cases what you see is what you get. By contrast the phony Smitherman is a man without any principles. He will say and do anything to get elected. You may like Smithermans position on the issues but don't be fooled in believing he will actually deliver on his promises. As Pantalone stated tonight - if elected Smitherman will resort to the secret back-room deals that characterized his time at Queens Park. Deals like the no-bid back-room Samsung contract that will see our energy rates skyrocket into the stratosphere (the actual impact is being kept secret until AFTER the next Provincial election).

From his time at Queens Park we can see what happens when you place an uneducated, unprincipled, former long-time substance abuser into a position of power. The result is disaster.

In the end it comes down to who do you trust and in the recent nanos poll when asked who do you trust with your pocket book 39.5% said Ford while only 24% said Smitherman

 

[mig174]

How is Ford a man of principles? He tried to lie about a DUI, for one...

 

[Fac1]

You may not like what either of them have to say but you can be sure that they WILL do what they say they will do

Really? I wonder what Ottawa has to say about a politician that promised tax relief and improved service as a way to balance the budget. We'll certainly see Ford living up to his promises when he realizes it's not possible to balance a budget by both increasing service and reducing taxes. He'll either cut service heavily or increase taxes, especially when, shock, he realizes council is not going to vote themselves out of a job.

 

[Action Jackson]

Is George Dubya Bush more apt?

Yes. Bush was at least somewhat educated and experienced. Still dumb as a brick, but at least somewhat able to comprehend what he was saying and doing. Palin and O'Donnell don't know or don't care about the damage they are doing to their societies. I hope it's don't know, because if they don't care, that's even more freightening.

 

[Peepers]

How is Ford a man of principles? He tried to lie about a DUI, for one...

No he didn't!

When confronted with the pot arrest in Florida Rob did the honorable thing and called a press conference for the very next morning where HE REVEALED FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME the much more serious DUI charge. He owned up to the mistakes of his youth.

 

[Fac1]

Yes. Bush was at least somewhat educated and experienced. Still dumb as a brick, but at least somewhat able to comprehend what he was saying and doing. Palin and O'Donnell don't know or don't care about the damage they are doing to their societies. I hope it's don't know, because if they don't care, that's even more freightening.

And they both came from wealthy families and got their jobs through their fathers. Though Bush was actually likebale, Ford just seems contemptuous.

 

[Fac1]

No he didn't!

When confronted with the pot arrest in Florida Rob did the honorable thing and called a press conference for the very next morning where HE REVEALED FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME the much more serious DUI charge. He owned up to the mistakes of his youth.

Wow, good spin-job there, so good that it's an outright lie.

Not that I think the drug is an issue, but Ford denied smoking weed vehemently and only manned up when he knew someone had a copy of his criminal history in Florida, including his DUI. He claimed he "forgot" and only disclosed his DUI when he knew it was about to leak. You make it seem like, of his own volition, Ford thought it would be the honorable thing to "reveal" his DUI, when in reality it was damage control a pragmatic decision. His thinly veiled attempts at "owning up to the mistakes of his youth" have obviously worked as his shills swallow his BS whole.

Take a look at the document:

Also in here at 4:15 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VS3buOr8Nm0&feature=player_embedded#!

 

[Peepers]

WOW!

George Smitherman really got a free pass from the media on this one.

Listen very carefully to the following secret tape recording beginning at about 39 minutes 30 seconds into the tape

http://twitlens.com/?Mn4

In 2001 George Smitherman was already an MPP at Queens Park!

 

[Peepers]

Wow, good spin-job there.

Not that I think the drug is an issue, but Ford denied smoking weed vehemently and only manned up when he knew someone had a copy of his criminal history in Florida, including his DUI. He claimed he "forgot" and only disclosed his DUI when he knew someone had a copy of his criminal record. His thinly veiled attempts at "owning up to the mistakes of his youth" have obviously worked as his his shills swallow his BS whole.
Take a look:

Also in here at 4:15 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VS3buOr8Nm0&feature=player_embedded#!

I think Rob explained this very well. The very serious DUI charge overshadowed the minor pot bust and since this happened years ago when asked about the arrest in Florida Rob remembered the DUI but not the pot bust which the reporter was asking him about. The reporter came at him totally from left field so he was caught off-guard and confused. The next day - in a display of character - Rob called a press conference where he revealed the serious DUI charge.

 

[Fac1]

The next day - in a display of character - Rob called a press conference where he revealed the serious DUI charge.

Except a reporter had a copy of his criminal history, and what do you think would have been exposed next when he started digging deeper? It's called damaged control and a pragmatic reaction to a situation that would have looked even worse had the reporter broke the whole story. You don't think his handlers urged him to come clean as a preemptive measure? Give me a break. That's not what I call a display of character, that's an act of desperation. Beyond that, how do you "forget" a marijuana charge, especially one in another country? All that shows is doubly poor judgment, that he was drunk and high while driving.

Does anybody know if any bars/pubs downtown have traditionally served as de facto hotspots for election night coverage (kind of like during the World Cup)? I want to go out with some politically-minded friends to either drown our sorrows or celebrate (either way, we're getting smashed).

I asked this earlier and got no response. I'd like to know this as well.

 

[Peepers]

Really? I wonder what Ottawa has to say about a politician that promised tax relief and improved service as a way to balance the budget. We'll certainly see Ford living up to his promises when he realizes it's not possible to balance a budget by both increasing service and reducing taxes. He'll either cut service heavily or increase taxes, especially when, shock, he realizes council is not going to vote themselves out of a job.

I don't know about the Ottawa experience but it IS possible to cut taxes AND increase services IF you eliminate waste. Waste contributes nothing. Get rid of waste and you can have your cake and eat it too!.

Get rid of the gravy train and you get rid of waste.

 

[Peepers]

Beyond that, how do you "forget" a marijuana charge, especially one in another country?

The only person who can answer this question is Rob Ford. You can say that he is making this all up but I take him at his word. I have no reason not to.

 

[Fac1]

I don't know about the Ottawa experience but it IS possible to cut taxes AND increase services IF you eliminate waste. Waste contributes nothing. Get rid of waste and you can have your cake and eat it too

So, in the case of the "waste" of having 44 councillors, can you explain to me how Ford will halve the number of councillors from 44 to 22 and thus end the "gravy train" (extra points for parroting that talking point!)?

I'd love to see the "waste" that he cuts because it looks an awful lot like a know-nothing populist that blows hot air. The numbers simply don't add up and his woeful transit plan is a great example of this. Is he going to save money by cancelling contracts with Bombardier and being forced to pay a hefty cancellation fee?

The only person who can answer this question is Rob Ford. You can say that he is making this all up but I take him at his word. I have no reason not to.

Well, he's a politician that is working very hard to cultivate a positive image of himself. He has a vested interest to lie in order to maintain that façade. It seems much more likely that he's lying and if he's not and he truly has forgotten, well, someone with that kind of mental capacity shouldn't be a mayor of a major city.

 

[Peepers]

He'll either cut service heavily or increase taxes, especially when, shock, he realizes council is not going to vote themselves out of a job.

Actually Rob correctly pointed out that quite a few Councillors would be enticed by the prestige and LARGER SALARY that would naturally come from heading up much larger Ward. In fact the egotistical Adam Vaughan, who almost never agrees with Ford, is in FAVOUR of reducing the number of Councillors.

 

[Fac1]

Actually Rob correctly pointed out that quite a few Councillors would be enticed by the prestige and LARGER SALARY that would naturally come from heading up much larger Ward. In fact the egotistical Adam Vaughan, who almost never agrees with Ford, is in FAVOUR of reducing the number of Councillors.

Vaughan can say that because he knows how popular he is and that he is ensured a job. What other councillors are in favour of that proposal? It's funny that you call Vaughan egotistical because that's precisely what Ford is, but I don't think it's as much a negative trait as you do. Further, I don't think it makes sense in a city where people complain about how hard it is to get in contact with their councillor - we'll see how much harder it will become with even less representation.

Regardless, do you truly think a majority of council will do that? What did he correctly point out - that a tiny minority would be in favour of it, far short of the necessary majority? It's laughable to even conceive that idea - a majority will not vote against their best interests and it's misleading at best for Ford to include that in his estimated budget cuts.