Rob Ford's Toronto

[JWBF]

Blah, blah, blah...

Hi Dave!

(sorry, but it seems you are stuck in 2010, and with the requisite diversionary practises.)

 

[Ralph]

What your saying is that Toronto want straight forward talk.


I agree. People want someone they can have a beer with. Chow and Miller were not that.

The essence of Ford Nayshun!

 

[blearghhh]

I don't know if Ford will win again, but I do know that "One City" will only increase his chances. Mark my words. I'm going to bet Chow drops this halfway into the campaign and starts attack ads.

The interesting thing about Municipal politics, as opposed to federal or provincial, is that with so many people in the game, there can be one person doing negative campaigning against one other, and the benefits for that (if any) would accrue to all of the other opponents, but the negatives would only stick to the person doing the negative messaging.

Which is to say that I could enter the race, be unrelentingly negative on Ford, point out each and every one of his missteps, lies, flubs and evasions, never let him say anything without refuting it, which may get some of a competing narrative out there against his creative storytelling. Then someone else (like Stinz, or Chow, or whoever) who stays out of it is clean.

 

[CowboyLogic]

I think you might be partially wrong, though I'd agree that "One Toronto" probably won't be enough to win the election for Chow by itself. I do believe that a successful campaign against Ford needs to emphasize that a key part of Chow's mission and vision for Toronto is to connect all the diverse and far-flung corners of the city, through hard infrastructures like public transportation (that is properly planned, I pray) but also through more nebulous processes like collectively defining a direction for the city.

Ford doesn't appear to have a vision for Toronto as a whole beyond 'low taxes'. His opponent will need to have that kind of vision, but in my opinion, to win a sufficient swath of the suburbs, Chow will also have to find ways to convince residents of Scarborough and Etobicoke that they will have as much of a voice in defining that vision as the downtowners.

Fair enough. I agree with you that Chow will have to resonate with Scarborough and Etobicoke voters, but I think she's going to have to do that with specific policies and a focus on certain issues. I don't think vague assurances or schmaltzy feel-good appeals - which this "One Toronto" plan appears to be based off of MetroMan's description - will do this for her.

A lot of people on here are giving me shit, but I'm not even saying anything particularly pro-Ford. Ford won. That's a fact. You have to look at the reasons why he won. There are many, but one clear thing about the last election was that Ford's campaign was a lot more unpolished and finessed than Smitherman's, which had a lot more corporate backing and several well-polished media campaigns and websites. At the end of the day, Ford's message resonated more than Smitherman's.

Hi Dave!

(sorry, but it seems you are stuck in 2010, and with the requisite diversionary practises.)

Sorry, who's Dave? I have a hard time keeping track of all the people I'm supposed to be. Last time around I believe I was a covert operative from Ford's office (still waiting for the check, by the way).

"One city" attempts to bring the city together and bridge partisan divides that have been particularly pronounced since Ford came into power- it's not just a meaningless term.

But what does "One City" mean? What policies does this suggest? What issues does this put the focus on? Non-partisanship and compromise are not political stances - they're an approach, a means to an end.

In the end, "Stop the gravy train" is as much a slogan as "One city together." You can do all the mental gymnastics you want, but fact is fact.

I don't think you understand what facts are.

What your saying is that Toronto want straight forward talk.


I agree. People want someone they can have a beer with. Chow and Miller were not that.

That's not what I'm saying, although I'm sure likability does play a factor for some voters. However, I was saying that a message which resonates with voters is very important, and, from what MetroMan has described, I do not see "One Toronto" resonating with voters.

What in the world leads you to think Chow won't have specific campaign policies/political positions or issues?

The "One Toronto" slogan. That doesn't mean she won't have any specific campaign policies, but if MetroMan is correct, her campaign theme is going to be one of non-partisanship and compromise, which really doesn't have any implications for policies/political positions/issues. Specific campaign policies would be counter-intuitive to her theme as well.

So you don't think the division and animosity between different parts of the city is a real definable issue worthy of policy? I take it you're of a mind with Rob Ford in that you don't care about anyone else's desires for the city so long as you're getting what you want?

I think its a real issue - in fact, I've said in the past that's part of the reason Ford won in the first place. I fail to see how electing a downtown-centric NDPer is going to correct this.

Given that you're using this sentence to prop up "Stop the Gravy Train" and cut down "One Toronto", I'm pretty sure that there's no point in talking to you because it makes zero sense.

Otherwise - the campaign hasn't even started, and we don't even know who the candidates are. You can't critique a not-yet-candidate who doesn't have a platform (....because she isn't a candidate) just because the incumbent has a set of values you're already familiar with. Get real.

So I can't critique a "not-yet-candidate who doesn't have a platform"? Who exactly are you talking about, because MetroMan has apparently confirmed Chow is a done deal and detailed her platform.

Chow has been discussed ad nauseum on here for the past couple days, both in regards to her being a candidate and what her platform will be. But yeah, once someone criticizes her, it can't be discussed anymore.

 

[CowboyLogic]

The interesting thing about Municipal politics, as opposed to federal or provincial, is that with so many people in the game, there can be one person doing negative campaigning against one other, and the benefits for that (if any) would accrue to all of the other opponents, but the negatives would only stick to the person doing the negative messaging.

Which is to say that I could enter the race, be unrelentingly negative on Ford, point out each and every one of his missteps, lies, flubs and evasions, never let him say anything without refuting it, which may get some of a competing narrative out there against his creative storytelling. Then someone else (like Stinz, or Chow, or whoever) who stays out of it is clean.

True. However, with Stintz and Chow in the race, I don't know if there are going to be any other notable candidates (unless Tory runs as well).

 

[PinkLucy]

I was sent a survey that included Minnan-Wong, Stintz, Chow, Glen Murray, John Tory and at least one other person. The survey seemed to be pro-Ford since one of the questions was about the job Ford has done with 3 out of 4 potential responses leaning towards the positive and only one negative choice.

 

[JWBF]

Sorry, who's Dave? I have a hard time keeping track of all the people I'm supposed to be. Last time around I believe I was a covert operative from Ford's office (still waiting for the check, by the way).

I guess all the intense email sorting is causing havoc with the old brain cells, that or the intense hash and crack sessions with Robbie and Dougie.

Have a good day Dave! And don't forget to leave early so you don't miss the train.

 

[ttk77]

I think its a real issue - in fact, I've said in the past that's part of the reason Ford won in the first place. I fail to see how electing a downtown-centric NDPer is going to correct this.

You think Ford won (in part) because of his inclusiveness?!?! I don't even know how to respond to that. I can't think of a more divisive mayor in Toronto's history. He's almost made his career on deriding the "pinko, latte-sipping, down-town elites". Miller may not have been giving the burbs exactly what they wanted, but you'll notice that a very large number of his city building initiatives were targeted at improving transit in the suburbs and targeting funds into more troubled parts of the city. He at least tried to make things better for all Torontonians, while Ford is basically a giant middle finger pointed at anyone who disagrees with him and his policies.

Chow may be an NDPer, she has a great deal of traction outside of the downtown area. I don't see her being downtown-centric at all.

 

[typezed]

I can't see this "One Toronto" approach working either, especially if it's something that aims to win with a warm Liberal Party dose of multicultural diversity, looks ad agency produced and focus-grouped, and gets praised for its message by the CBC, NOW, the Star, and the Twittersphere. Too much potential for those sympathetic to Ford's message to see "One Toronto" as the downtown elite asking the taxpayers to step back into line, quit acting uppity and adopt our proper tasteful values of tolerance and diversity.

Anyone good with video? Here's an idea for a grassroots negative campaign for Youtube:

Find a few examples of Ford saying "Anything else?"

Find a few examples of Ford running from the media, including the time he walks into the camera.

Then, using a combination of text and pictures, begin the retelling of all the Ford scandals, from the simple and stupid like the time he gave the finger to the mother in the next car, to the serious and dangerous, like the drunk driving or the associations with criminals.

You can also throw in there a few direct questions that Ford has never answered like, "MAYOR FORD, WHAT IS YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THESE THREE INDIVIDUALS, ONE LATER MURDERED, THE OTHER TWO ARRESTED?" or "MAYOR FORD, HAD YOU BEEN DRINKING BEFORE YOU DROVE YOURSELF TO THE TASTE OF THE DANFORTH?" or "MAYOR FORD, IS IT NOT GRAVY WHEN YOUR OFFICE STAFFERS SPEND CITY RESOURCES TO ASSIST YOUR FOOTBALL TEAM?" or "MAYOR FORD, WHAT DOES LONG-TIME FAMILY FRIEND DAVE PRICE DO IN YOUR OFFICE AND IS THIS WORTH $130,000 A YEAR SALARY?".

Between each Ford scandal or episode cut to him once again asking "Anything else?", so that it seems like he's asking for just what more he could have possibly done. The idea is to illustrate just how never-ending Ford screw-ups and scandals have been, will continue to be, and how significant and serious some of them have been.

Throw in the shots of him hiding and running from the media, making them more frequent as the video progresses.

 

[ducati0000]

Its going to be two horse race...Ford or Chow.....I put my money on Chow since she is so well spoken in the media and a huge loyal following in downtown areas.Give Ford credit though he saved money contracting out jobs,stop the reckless spending for bicycle routes that causes major traffic jams during rush hour,and petty pet projects.Him getting the subway into scarborough and getting some of the left wing politicians to agree is one hell of job,of course the side circus some what tainted his accomplishments.Property values in parts of Scarborough will definitely go up because of the subway and hell maybe there be a condo boom there also.

 

[MetroMan]

I have to step in here to clarify that One Toronto is just a placeholder. It describes the campaign concept that they were considering at the time but I very much doubt it's going to be that vague. They'll develop a catchy slogan that passes focus groups (believe it or not, Stop the Gravy Train was vetted by focus groups) and Olivia's campaign will have substance and verifiable policies -- something Ford's never had. Ford's next campaign (Promise Made Promise Kept) will also lack substance and in fact will be yet another slogan based on a lie. There was no gravy, and no: promises were not kept. So who's the one running vague campaigns?

I can't wait for January. Let the games begin!

 

[GenerationW]

The level of a mind that thinks standing in that kind of line up for a free hot dog is a good idea is exactly the level of a mind that thinks voting for Rob Ford is a good idea.

People endure huge lineups for a host of things (clubs and bars, Hollywood summer blockbusters, the latest Apple product, etc.), and usually for things that aren't free. But maybe they're all Ford voters, too.

I don't understand people's obsession with subways. Yes, it's nice that it's away from traffic and it's fast (at times) but that's about it. I would rather be above ground where I can look out the window at things, have the sun coming in, have the ability to exit and flee the area if an emergency occurs instead of being underground in a shoe box with nothing to look at but the floor. Subways can be depressing.

It's by far the most successful and popular form of rapid transit in Toronto's history, and is arguably most responsible for making the city what it is. Not that hard to understand.

 

[animatronic]

Ford's next campaign (Promise Made Promise Kept) will also lack substance and in fact will be yet another slogan based on a lie.

It doesn't matter. Ford saved a billion dollars, balanced the budget for the first time in history and brought subways to Scarborough. Olivia Chow lived in publicly-subsidized housing and her husband got hand jobs from hookers.

 

[jje1000]

But what does "One City" mean? What policies does this suggest? What issues does this put the focus on? Non-partisanship and compromise are not political stances - they're an approach, a means to an end.

I don't think you understand what facts are.

What you're saying is that Ford's "Cut the gravy" is clearer than the "One city together" approach. Sorry mate, but I say that both are just as clear in their roles as stances- non-partisanship is just as important a goal as cutting waste.

"One City": "Let's bridge our differences- prevent our city from balkanizing itself" as a political stance. Let's get proper discussion around fixing issues A, B and C, which are discussed further in the mayoral platform.

"Cut the Waste": "Waste is bad" as a political stance. My topic focuses on issue A solely, the approach to how I approach it isn't important.

While I agree with other points that a "One City" approach may not necessarily win on its own merits on the account of modern-day politics being modern-day politics, it's much better than a single-issue mayoral race.

 

[freshcutgrass]

There are no campaigns...because there are no candidates.

If Chow does end up running, I'm sure her experience as a Member of Parliament for 7 years plus 14 years on City Council just might contribute to something less than "vague". The fact that she is also vastly superior to Ford in the brain cell department might help (or hinder given the apparent sad state of affairs that passes for an electorate in this city).