News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 729     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 669     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 297     0 

Rob Ford's Toronto

Status
Not open for further replies.
So this has kind of been bugging me:

Putting aside Rob Ford the man (okay, "man-boy") for a minute, let's say that he was elected by some, or many, or most voters on the basis of his ostensible fiscal conservative policies. Now that he's been supplanted as policy-maker, is it appropriate that non-conservative (i.e., liberal, or higher-tax-type) policies are implemented? Even though he himself appointed Norm Kelly as deputy, I have to admit that the idea gives me pause.

I have NO problem getting rid of Rob Ford - lord knows, I hated him as a politician and a person long before the crack story first broke - but if he was elected on the basis of platform, to what extent are the "temps" required to tow that line?

(Addendum: Sorry if this isn't very clear - I'm not all that great at politic-speak :eek: )
 
TheTigerMaster said:
My favourite is the WiFi headaches nonsense. These people have convinced themselves that WiFi is somehow special and more dangerous than all the dozens of different radios we use in our daily lives.
Click to expand...

Too bad we can't import Elizabeth May and some other kooks into the mayor race, would love to see some of these people twist themselves into a knot over which is the most important issue facing the city: gravy at city hall, the poisoned water supply, or brain cooking airwaves...
 
milkywaymusings said:
Fucking hell, Joe. Do you not understand how the Westminster system works? If you're going to call Wynne an "un-elected Premier", then you had better also describe Harper as an "un-elected Prime Minister".
Click to expand...

...even outside the Westminister system there are unelected people like Harry Truman, Gerald Ford and LBJ. Heck, even if you think he really won the 2000 election, George W. Bush didn't win a majority of the popular vote.

People use broad terms like "un-elected" when they're trying to make a ridiculous point. Party leaders, premiers and PMs (to say nothing of GG's and Lt.-Gov's!) are not directly elected by the people. It's common practice (for better or worse) for leaders of a party to change while they are in office. Whether or not you like Kim Campbell, she was a real Prime Minister of Canada, for example.

Deal with it, move on.
 
Jado:

Well, he was elected on that platform (which was as poorly defined and executed as everything else) but one can't forget that ultimately it is council that enacts the budget - and said council members have equal claim on being legitimately elected on the platform they ran in (not to mention, as we know, council is the final arbiter of power). So no, it had never been a clear cut carte blanche about "his" agenda. Besides, the members of the committees haven't changed - the exec in particular is still on the right.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Alvin - Thanks for that very sensible reply.

This forum has been and continues to be a great learning experience for me! (about many things....:p)
 
eyewonder said:
I think the pollsters are kidding themselves.

How many of you have a land line at home? I can't think of ANY of my pals that do.

I think the same people that do, combined with the same people that would spend 20 minutes doing a survey over the dinner hour, equal Ford Nation.
Click to expand...

I've got a land line but nobody's ever called me to answer a survey. I would very much enjoy letting them know what I think of Ford.
 
Something I've noticed a bunch but forgot to comment on.

When Rub Flub challenges people to run against him (in a threatening way) and insists on them not dropping out of the race, he is obviously just trying to water down the vote, no?

I remember him mentioning it during the bloodbath presser, during at least one of his Monday Media Blitz and Campaign interviews and other occasions.

With his approval rating as high as it is, combined with how many people are considering throwing their hats in the race, I'm concerned he has a decent strategy.

Faaaawk... I'll rally the hipsters. Apathy no more.
 
From Reddit:
ptwonline:
Well, the rumour floating around the UrbanToronto forums is that now that Lisi is out of the picture, Ford has been getting his drugs through an escort agency. So perhaps he was already doing business with them and they trusted each other.

frank56781236:
I think I know the person in question. One of his former football player (who is really tight w/Ford and who's father is head of one of the Etobicoke police divisions in question in this article), he deals pot and sometimes other stuff(btw, cops always let him off w/a warning=he's white so that helps too, but his best friend runs an escort agency.

baldersons:
That's not how pot is dealt, that's how crack is dealt. You pay one guy, drive somewhere else and get the drugs from another guy. They're trying to avoid distribution charges, because one guy's getting money for "no reason" and the other guy's just giving out "free crack".

frank56781236:
I'm not saying he deals pot to the Mayor, i'm saying they call him 'Brick' for a reason. He played for Bosco this guy he grew up with runs an escort agency near Dundas and Jarvis.
 
eyewonder said:
When Rub Flub challenges people to run against him (in a threatening way) and insists on them not dropping out of the race, he is obviously just trying to water down the vote, no?.
Click to expand...

I was concerned about exactly the same thing - wondered if there would be enough altruism for possible runners to unite and rally behind one candidate?!
 
Jado said:
So this has kind of been bugging me:

Putting aside Rob Ford the man (okay, "man-boy") for a minute, let's say that he was elected by some, or many, or most voters on the basis of his ostensible fiscal conservative policies. Now that he's been supplanted as policy-maker, is it appropriate that non-conservative (i.e., liberal, or higher-tax-type) policies are implemented? Even though he himself appointed Norm Kelly as deputy, I have to admit that the idea gives me pause.

I have NO problem getting rid of Rob Ford - lord knows, I hated him as a politician and a person long before the crack story first broke - but if he was elected on the basis of platform, to what extent are the "temps" required to tow that line?

(Addendum: Sorry if this isn't very clear - I'm not all that great at politic-speak :eek: )
Click to expand...


That's where the interesting part of our municipal system comes into play. Ford has a hard-right mandate, 'cause that's what he ran on. But his policies have to be passed by council. If he can't muster the support for his idiot policies, his idiot policies don't pass. It was that way when he was the real Mayor. It still is that way with him as MINO.
He can come up with some stupid hard-right ideas like removing all bike lanes and de-funding the TTC, he can do that. If he can garner enough support from his council colleagues, then that's all he needs.

He could have achieved most of what he wanted if he had built consensus on Council.

And if Kelly can get council behind him, he could push through more hard-right bullcrap than Ford ever could.

Or... Council could take a left turn and do all kinds of great stuff.

It's up to council, just like it always was.
 
Jado said:
I was concerned about exactly the same thing - wondered if there would be enough altruism for possible runners to unite and rally behind one candidate?!
Click to expand...

After all this nonsense and the fact that most of the people in this city don't want Rob Ford anywhere near City Hall, how can people not see the need for some kind of ranked voting system?
 
Peepers said:
I will gladly answer the "unelected" question.

We may not vote directly for a premier or prime minister but we do vote indirectly using mpp's or mp's as a proxy. Wynne has yet to lead her party in a general election so in a very real sense she is "unelected".

It is not "trolling" to suggest this! Maybe you should be given a few weeks vacation for calling forum member a "dumbass"
Click to expand...

Back in the glory days of Ernie Eves, did you also call him 'unelected?'
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top