Rob Ford's Toronto

[MetroMan]

Council Appointed Ford Adversary

I've been thinking a lot about this poll (yeah, I know, it's the Toronto Sun, grain of salt etc etc)

Stintz 44; Ford 40. And in a 3-way, Ford 37, Vaughan 30, Stintz 18.

But thinking about it, if Vaughan does so much better than Stintz in a 3-way (and by taking 3% of the Mayor's share), how might he do in a straight 2-way....or if not Vaughan, a more conciliatory downtown-lefty such as Wong-Tam...

I don't think Vaughan would do well enough in the outer city to capture the Mayor's chair. I'd rather go with a safe bet to unseat Ford.

Ideally, I'd like to see city council come together, and in realizing that Ford must go for the good of the city, announce a consolidated candidate who will run with the endorsement from the left, centre and right. Ford is making so many enemies on council that this scenario is entirely possible and even likely.

An agreement could be drafted between councillors that would ensure that the executive committee and appointments to chairs would come from the entire political spectrum.

I can see Stintz being the torch bearer for this movement, although I'd prefer Josh Matlow who hasn't kissed up to Ford like Stintz has. In any event, I've never wanted three years of my life to go by so fast as I want these to.

 

[jje1000]

Only in the minds of people who think money sprouts from the ground. Toronto and (worse) Ontario are running huge deficits and are in big trouble, thanks to years of unbridled spending. Blame the Feds and lack of sufficient transfer payments if you like, but it's real.

I think you forget the fact that the city has grown by a fair bit, and that the expansion of municipal services were needed to keep up with demand. That, combined with the Mike Harris municipal downloading (loss of TTC funding, etc.) created the structural deficit we have today. I also remember a chart or graph detailing the fact that spending has not increased significantly, but I'm too busy to go dig that up at the moment.

 

[Action Jackson]

Gasoline taxes go to the province, and go to general revenue. If you take the total square feet of paved roads in the City of Toronto, you'll find that the vast majority is not maintained by the province.

I'm tired of driver's getting a free ride at the city's expense. $100 a month would seem reasonable to me!

$100 a month for the people living in Toronto would see lots of them headed to the suburbs, adding to the problem. Not a good idea. If you want to get revenue that way, go with congestion charges or tolls on the 400-series Highways.

 

[BurlOak]

I think you forget the fact that the city has grown by a fair bit, and that the expansion of municipal services were needed to keep up with demand. That, combined with the Mike Harris municipal downloading (loss of TTC funding, etc.) created the structural deficit we have today. I also remember a chart or graph detailing the fact that spending has not increased significantly, but I'm too busy to go dig that up at the moment.

I was going to say the exact opposite. in the 1990's, the Feds cut transfers significantly and Harris passed those cuts on to the city (true he added a bit more to the cuts as well). In the past 8 years - basically when there were minortiy governments in Ottawa, the transfers to the Provinces were significantly increased, but these were not really passed through to the city. In the past 8 years, the provincial governemnt had enough resources to help the municipalities, but chose to blame Harris instead.

 

[jje1000]

I was going to say the exact opposite. in the 1990's, the Feds cut transfers significantly and Harris passed those cuts on to the city (true he added a bit more to the cuts as well). In the past 8 years - basically when there were minortiy governments in Ottawa, the transfers to the Provinces were significantly increased, but these were not really passed through to the city. In the past 8 years, the provincial governemnt had enough resources to help the municipalities, but chose to blame Harris instead.

True, but the point still stands that it was the Harris government which chose to implement the cuts in the first place. The fault of the Eves and McGuinty governments lies in the face that they did not restore that funding and pissed it away on their own projects.

Regardless, the funding gap is caused not only by spending increases (necessary for a growing population), but also by provincial governments taking more money out of Toronto than they put in. There is a bit of misspending, typical of a government of this size; but as the KPMG report showed, there isn't a lot of money going to waste.

 

[Torontovibe]

If they don't (and I believe they do, via gasoline taxes) then yes, they should. But now we get into a tough area because most of the real damage to roads is done by vehicles that weight more than 12,000lbs, cars contribute very little. So, what should we do, start billing trucking companies, couriers, etc., for all the road repairs?

You're VERY wrong! Gas taxes don't even nearly cover the costs of road maintenance. The Ontario government subsidizes drivers by a huge amount. So you'd be cool with gas taxes doubling or tripling? It's funny how certain people say everyone should pay their own way, except when it comes to Hydro, driving and education. NOBODY really pays the full cost of what they use and if they were forced to, they'd scream bloody murder, including, most likely, yourself.

 

[GraphicMatt]

I don't think Vaughan would do well enough in the outer city to capture the Mayor's chair. I'd rather go with a safe bet to unseat Ford.

Ideally, I'd like to see city council come together, and in realizing that Ford must go for the good of the city, announce a consolidated candidate who will run with the endorsement from the left, centre and right. Ford is making so many enemies on council that this scenario is entirely possible and even likely.

An agreement could be drafted between councillors that would ensure that the executive committee and appointments to chairs would come from the entire political spectrum.

I can see Stintz being the torch bearer for this movement, although I'd prefer Josh Matlow who hasn't kissed up to Ford like Stintz has. In any event, I've never wanted three years of my life to go by so fast as I want these to.

Apparently Forum Research also polled on three one-on-one mayoral race scenarios: Ford vs. Shelley Carroll, Ford vs. Vaughan and Ford vs. John Tory.

Results were never released publicly, but the Star's David Rider heard from sources that they found that Ford would lose all three races.

Against John Tory in a one-on-one scenario, the mayor would get less than 30% of the vote.

 

[hawc]

Against John Tory in a one-on-one scenario, Ford would get less than 30% of the vote.

Too bad when given the chance to elect Tory, the champagne socialists instead chose 7 years of union loving, Island Airport hating Miller. (Good thing we stopped that Island Airport. Porter would have been a disaster!) Miller was so hated by the end of his term that he then directly led to the election of Ford.

 

[Action Jackson]

Apparently Forum Research also polled on three one-on-one mayoral race scenarios: Ford vs. Shelley Carroll, Ford vs. Vaughan and Ford vs. John Tory.

Results were never released publicly, but the Star's David Rider heard from sources that they found that Ford would lose all three races.

Against John Tory in a one-on-one scenario, the mayor would get less than 30% of the vote.

I wanted him to run in 2010. Damn it John. Oh well, he can ride in with ease once 2014 comes and Ford has proven himself to be the incompetent, inconsiderate idiot that he is turning out to be.

 

[Torontovibe]

Too bad when given the chance to elect Tory, the champagne socialists instead chose 7 years of union loving, Island Airport hating Miller. (Good thing we stopped that Island Airport. Porter would have been a disaster!) Miller was so hated by the end of his term that he then directly led to the election of Ford.

Are you sure that had everything to do with Miller and nothing at all to do with Smitherman and EHealth? I love how people put spin on everything yet disregard what doesn't fit into their agenda. The same BS spin is put on Ignatif, yet there are many possible factors for his defeat. Ford did not win because of Miller, he won due to a number of factors, including the fact that there was nobody worth voting for. If they had presentented me with one good option, I would have voted for them. I really believe Miller would have won, if he ran.

 

[MetroMan]

Apparently Forum Research also polled on three one-on-one mayoral race scenarios: Ford vs. Shelley Carroll, Ford vs. Vaughan and Ford vs. John Tory.

Results were never released publicly, but the Star's David Rider heard from sources that they found that Ford would lose all three races.

Against John Tory in a one-on-one scenario, the mayor would get less than 30% of the vote.

Typically, an incumbent Mayor has an advantage because turnout is usually low and the Mayor has more name recognition. With the outrage at Ford being Mayor, I predict a large turnout from at least downtown voters who want to dislodge him. Stintz will have similar name recognition because of her high profile TTC chair position and with her name being in the news as directly contrary to the Mayor. I think she could win and should run.

 

[adma]

Too bad when given the chance to elect Tory, the champagne socialists instead chose 7 years of union loving, Island Airport hating Miller. (Good thing we stopped that Island Airport. Porter would have been a disaster!) Miller was so hated by the end of his term that he then directly led to the election of Ford.

Ah, but you seem to forget that at least one midelection poll in 2010 showed that had Miller ran again that year, he would have won solidly versus the competition, Ford included.

Oh, how fun it is to pwn. (And imagine what the results'd be had Forum Research currently posited a Ford vs Miller scenario.)

 

[adma]

Stintz will have similar name recognition because of her high profile TTC chair position and with her name being in the news as directly contrary to the Mayor. I think she could win and should run.

Problematic; because she's also identified with the right. Not the Ford yahoo-populist fringe right; but still, the problem that left-leaning voters had with Smitherman in '10 would only be magnified with Stintz. Only against a Rob Ford could she be viewed as a leftish coalition candidate--otherwise, forget it. Even John Tory (vs Smitherman) had more "leftish coalition candidate" buzz, believe it or not.

And besides, consider that she got the short end of the stick in that Ford-Vaughan-Stintz 3-way hypothesis. If she's not good enough to beat Ford *and* Vaughan, together, then...

 

[voxpopulicosmicum]

Ah, but you seem to forget that at least one midelection poll in 2010 showed that had Miller ran again that year, he would have won solidly versus the competition, Ford included.

Oh, how fun it is to pwn. (And imagine what the results'd be had Forum Research currently posited a Ford vs Miller scenario.)

Ipsos -Reid's August, 2010 poll had Miller's support in the low-forties, well ahead of any other actual candidate. A late October, 2010 Ipsos-Reid poll showed Miller with 59% support for his performance as mayor.

 

[MetroMan]

Problematic; because she's also identified with the right. Not the Ford yahoo-populist fringe right; but still, the problem that left-leaning voters had with Smitherman in '10 would only be magnified with Stintz. Only against a Rob Ford could she be viewed as a leftish coalition candidate--otherwise, forget it. Even John Tory (vs Smitherman) had more "leftish coalition candidate" buzz, believe it or not.

And besides, consider that she got the short end of the stick in that Ford-Vaughan-Stintz 3-way hypothesis. If she's not good enough to beat Ford *and* Vaughan, together, then...

I'd happily trade Ford for Stintz, even if she is right wing and kissed up to Ford until the last possible moment. At least she's reasonable and is willing to work with councillors from across the entire political spectrum. I just want to see sanity restored to City Hall.

Whatever happens, we can't have 2 or more candidates running against Ford. Council needs to come together and for the greater good and future of this city come up with a single candidate. Given that option, I'm fairly certain that even a leftist voter would vote for the not-Ford candidate.