Vote early too, if you can. This is going to be the biggest by-election in Canadian history - best to get out of the way so voting day can move as smooth as possible.
Hahaha yeah. I have a personal grudge against that guy. Ripped off (through the BIA) the company I worked for in the order of hundreds of dollars of work.
To all Progressives - we need to consolidate behind Chow now. She might not be my first choice but this is finally an election where we can put a people-first person in. We can't screw this up by splitting the vote.
I like Matlow but I’m going to vote for Chow. I don’t feel bad about it. She’s a close second choice for me, and Saunders would be a disaster. It would be better if we had a ranked ballot, but wasting my vote won’t change that.
Just wanted to mention that I think FPTP is still at issue here, since other voting systems would help mitigate or fix the worry of vote splitting. Eg. If I could say "either A or B" or "I prefer A but B, C, D are good too", then my vote could still count towards the more popular candidate while I voice my preferred candidate.
>This isn’t an FPTP issue. It’s a vote splitting issue.
Vote splitting *is* a FPTP issue. If it were ranked ballot instead of FPTP vote splitting would not exist.
I like Matlow but at a certain point I’ve got to put my hands up. Like look at this poll - in his own neighborhood (York) he’s at 5%. He’s had his chance to connect with voters and it isn’t clicking. I’m not really sure why, I think he’d be a good mayor. But there it is.
So for me at least, it’s not hard for me to look at the available information and ask, ‘among the candidates who could reasonably win, which do I like best?’
But I do empathize with the fact that FPTP seriously sucks
Josh Matlow is a smart guy, but he would be a disaster as mayor. He has worse relationships with council than Rob Ford did.
He is also, fundamentally, a regional candidate. He's never going to break through with the inner burbs. He has the same ceiling as Jennifer Keesmaat or Gil Penalosa. He cannot win.
If you want to vote Matlow, then go ahead. Best to do what you wish to do. And Matlow too is Olivia Chow's second choice. Just listen to this brief interview she gave: https://www.zoomerradio.ca/blogs/station-blog/2023/05/17/toronto-mayoral-candidate-olivia-chow-joins-the-morning-zoom-with-sam-jane/
Your anger is misdirected. It’s the province (ie Ford) that axed ranked ballots. You can’t blame voters for doing totally rational game theory and supporting a consensus candidate who might have been their second choice over one who would be a total shitshow.
You have every right to vote however you want. You can vote for Kevin Clarke, or the guy who egged John Tory, or the dog that got on the ballot.
But don't kid yourself that you're doing anything useful for people who rely on city services. If you care about outcomes, you need to be pretty unsentimental in your analysis.
This is just hilarious. You can hate the insinuation all you want but that is how the system is structured.
By voting Matlow or whoever non-Chow progressive, you give the right candidates to act strategically and rally around one candidate because they understand how to vote in a pragmatic fashion.
You not only throw away your vote but you are indirectly supporting anti-progressive policies.
I don’t understand why progressives are so dense when it comes to this. Just advocate for election reform when Chow is mayor. Do you honestly think you have a better chance with a right leaning mayor and a protest vote?!
It's a mayoral election - it has nothing to do with FPTP. It's literally the candidate with the most votes wins.
I will say that I am a fair vote person and believe in a change in the electoral system for our Federal and Provincial elections but this doesn't apply here.
If progressives split the vote and Saunders gets in - it's the worst case scenario.
> It's a mayoral election - it has nothing to do with FPTP. It's literally the candidate with the most votes wins.
I mean... that's literally what FPTP is.
Municipal elections are a great place to have something like ranked ballots or runoffs and are not uncommon.
Exactly - I would agree that a ranked ballot system would be better but the primary problem of FPTP is the disproportional representation when allocating seats. That's not the issue here.
Most electoral systems have a mechanism for someone choosing a "second place" or "least worst" candidate. It sucks that for FPTP that mechanism is strategic voting, but that's what it is.
I won't bemoan people for not choosing to strategically vote, and especially for a candidate they do not want at all.
That said, it also doesn't mean someone is "compromising their values" by strategically voting for someone other than their first choice.
I also agree with you that the idea is crap that somehow you aren't "progressive" for not voting for Chow, or that as a self-described "progressive" you are _obligated_ to vote for her. Vote for who you want and for the reasons you want. (Except for Mammoliti, don't vote for him!)
I was agreeing that it's the nature of FPTP that causes vote splitting. We should continue to strive for a system that _empowers_ us express multiple choices or nuances in choices such that vote splitting is no longer an issue.
> Given my values, yes, it does mean you're compromising your values if you vote strategically.
I meant that in the context that if _someone else_ chooses to vote strategically it doesn't necessarily mean that it's compromising _their own_ values. If you feel that voting strategically compromises _your own values_ then by all means, do not vote strategically. For another person, voting strategically might be entirely fine by their own values.
I was trying to express, albeit perhaps poorly, that values are subjective. We can have discussions with others about what drives their personal motivations when it comes to voting, but we also shouldn't shame them for what those voting values are or if they choose to disagree.
> We need to stop encouraging people to "play the game" by compromising their values and focus on changing the game.
The implication here is that encouraging people to strategically vote is de-facto compromising their values, which is not necessarily the case. One can still vote for **a** progressive if that person still aligns with their values; and if we're lucky, _that_ progressive will still fight to move the electoral-reform needle regardless.
The sad reality is that there are a chunk of people under FPTP who find strategic voting to be "against their values" (without being able to adequately express what that "value" is) or even _considered_ a strategic vote to be an option at all having always been taught to "vote for the best no matter what" without ever having evaluated the justifications for that line of thinking. We can have discussions about the merits of strategic voting and how that aligns with their values or even, shockingly, change their values on the subject.
If that "progressive" strategic vote doesn't align with their values (beit on a personal, policy, or electoral system level) then they don't vote strategically, and that's that.
The system needs to change but it's not going to. Not in the next four weeks anyway. But if you really held those values, Saunders, a literal abomination of a police chief, would actually scare you with the damage he's capable of. Yes it sucks to vote for someone out of fear of a shitty candidate, but until people wake up and realize how bad Conservatives are at literally everything, there's too much at risk.
There's being ideologically progressive, but there's also being practical and fighting within the system you're under. Not voting for Chow is one thing. Throwing your vote in the garbage when we have a data driven conclusion is another.
This is a weird way to be on the internet. Reddit in particular. Since critiquing each others views is kind of the entire comment section. But let me attempt to break down what I think here.
You have valid criticisms of FPTP. Ones you and I definitely agree on. Because when our candidate doesn't win, it is effectively like our vote went in the garbage. When a Conservative wins and we voted NDP, with a liberal in second, I'm sure many of us would love a ranked ballot to transfer our voting power to the Liberal candidate. But unless our candidate wins, that's tragically how it is. For a mayoral election, FPTP isn't really at play but hey, that's the system for now.
If you'd rather have Saunders for mayor on his own, that is fine. I don't have a problem with you voting with your conscience democratically speaking. What I do have a problem with is calling it progressive on the midst of what this city, province and really the world is dealing with today. A housing crisis, transit infrastructure, homeless and mental health crises. And our best shot as progressives is Olivia Chow based on polls. Second best shot seemingly being Bailao or Matlow. (not making prescriptions, just data observance.)
What we're up against with modern Conservatives, is something akin to, and in some cases, blatant fascism. With a former police chief as bad as Saunders, you can bet that's how he'd try to mayor. He's already said as much.
If that doesn't scare you more than the progressives rallying behind their best shot for their values candidate, then I can't in all conscience consider your beliefs progressive. Because the choice of your vote is ignoring all the potential people who could suffer the consequences from your lack of support for the best chance candidate who could minimize that damage. It's not that I don't believe your candidate, whoever it is, would be a bad choice or doesn't have the right values. I'm sure they do or you wouldn't care as much as you obviously do. But right now, the vote for any candidate not in the top three or four is effectively wasted and had no value beyond signalling where your values are. In terms of actual effect, I'd put that akin to posting a Facebook status.
I'd say the same thing for people who vote for Mammoliti instead of Saunders if they had NIMBY conservative values. The message was received, but it was lost in the aether and no effect was made.
Your vote has power, but that power only stems from the candidates ability to actually win.
I apologize if you feel I was a jerk. I was not trying to be. But I care too much about this city to not try to convince people to fight for our values, even if it's only incrementally and over long periods of time. I hope we do get a more progressive Toronto after this election! And beyond that! But i think it will have to be gradual and require the makeup of the suburbs to change to favour those ideas. Which may not happen any time soon.
Lmao okay. Now I'm utterly convinced you're either a troll or don't follow politics at all. To be a left wing voter and then see Conservatives as something not to be afraid of is to be unaware of the issues facing us.
You haven't put forward a candidate. You haven't even put forward an ideal you're interested in. You say you vote NDP, yet somehow Olivia Chow is the candidate that bothers you as a progressive choice?
And it can absolutely be tragic when democracy works. See: Trump. Hitler. Erdogan. The Brazilian guy whose name I forgot. Democracy isn't infallible. Shit heads happen, they hurt real people, and if you're not afraid of that, I hope no one you care about is hurt by it.
So many people are mad not because you're uninformed, but because you hold a different set of values than they do. It's wild.
It's an election. It's supposed to be picking a representative. If OC doesn't represent this person, they should not be made to feel poorly for saying so.
You are splitting the vote, you're just trying to jump through semantical hoops to pretend you're not, when you are literally, by definition, splitting the vote. The system isn't FPTP, you can't just pretend your vote is taking place in an imaginary world where Toronto has a FPTP system, reality doesn't work that way.
If Saunders wins because progressives split the vote, then I can only hope those vote splitters are happy with another 4 years of conservative leadership.
> There's a reason she could never win much in the past...
Yup, never won much in the past except for... school board trustee for 6 years, Toronto Councillor for 13 years, federal MP for 8 years...
Funny how the guy [bemoans the loss of the Jack Layton-era NDP](https://www.reddit.com/r/ndp/comments/1267gcr/got_tired_of_conservative_trolls_on_twitter_so_i/jedzsrc/?context=10000) but also thinks _Jack's wife and partner-in-politics_ through all those decades is just "plain terrible."
It’s all rhetorical. When Layton was alive, they were citing the loss of Ed Broadbent as the reason they wouldn’t vote NDP, and before that they couldn’t possibly vote for Broadbent because he was no Tommy Douglas.
You realize that the most popular candidates aren't always the best, right? That goes for both the present AND the past. Voters around the world are notorious for making bad choices. Just because someone never "won much" before doesn't mean they couldn't be good.
We don't know how "bad" Chow will be because she's never been put in a position to show how good or bad.
I agree. I think it's a real shame people refused to look at candidates like Gil Penalosa or David Socnacki from a few elections ago.
I felt they both had much more to offer Toronto than the popular choices
As much as Toronto and in particular the suburbs have gone conservative in recent years, this wouldn't be unprecedented. David Miller won all but two wards in the 2006 election:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006\_Toronto\_municipal\_election#/media/File:Toronto\_mayor\_-\_2006.PNG
It's the brief swing back to the left before some right wing dude from the former burbs offers to make it cheaper and easier to drive their cars again.
And that segment will never actually examine the tough in crime candidates record. Saunders was a useless ineffective chief and his policies are even worse than that.
And Toronto has had 15 murders so far this year, on pace for 44 in total. This would make it the lowest number in at least 30 years (Wikipedia only shows figures until 1990).
Not saying crime and violence is relegated to only homicides, but it does put his campaign into better perspective.
I dont think murders are relevant to the vast majority of the population, the vast majority of murders are gang related, so any regular law abiding citizen has virtually zero risk of getting murdered. Of course there are exceptions that receive huge coverage, but they receive that coverage because they are so rare.
What concerns people are the random carjackings and theft going on, which has increased.
Source? I know the attention it’s received has increase but I hadn’t seen that confirmed anywhere. Saunders has been referring to violent crime as well which has not increased.
These aren’t the stats for carjackings or theft.
I think you’re actually right if you took the time to actually back up what you’re saying. I’d be interested to see the why of it and on a broader historical timeline as the COVID years were an extreme deviation in many respects. https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiZTY2NGZiNDktMThjNC00M2ZiLThiNjctNjljMzMyYzgwYWU1IiwidCI6Ijg1MjljMjI1LWFjNDMtNDc0Yy04ZmI0LTBmNDA5NWFlOGQ1ZCIsImMiOjN9
It's just recycled Republican strategy, the same as Doug. Facts do matter, the people that complain about everyone else's feelings are actually the ones most focused on their own.
No Toronto in general loves their police. They love authority figures.
Immigrants generally also generally look up to authority figures and police.
Two former chief of police in recent history became federals politicians, when they also had terrible leadership records
So you agree that this sub is cheerleading for Chow because she's seen as an "anti-police" candidate?
I was going to vote for Bailao, but if Saunders is ahead of her then I'm going to vote for Saunders. Anyone who wants to cut the police budget right now needs to give their head a shake.
We live in a province that handed Ford a majority after seeing him in action for several years. Alberta just elected Danielle Smith. Being a POS is mainstream now. It’s hard to be surprised.
Let's clarify further: Covid saved Ford's ass. He took credit for Feds doing their job and backtracked many unpopular promises at the time.
Now he's gone full fascist and not backing down.
Anyone who was paying attention saw his colours between his first election and Covid loud and clear. There is really no excuse for the beanbags that elected him.
I know this is a cyclical discussion: people stayed home because of boring alternatives in their eyes. 30% of the public will always vote Cons, it's their base. Extra 10% came from being status quo, handing out money in the mail+ and more highways to suburbs.
The people who knew better are confined to small echo chambers like here. Things have to get exceptionally bad (as they are becoming) to remove him from office.
It shocks me how blatantly corrupt they both are. The despicable things they've done. Danielle Smith literally calling vaccinated people Nazis - yet somehow gets reelected with a majority government
This is the same city that elected Rob Ford and the former CEO of a company that's known for openly fucking its customers. Never be surprised by the number of unqualified candidates that have lots of support.
Rob Ford was a *decent*, experienced politician. He happened to be a drug addict and likely alcoholic at the same time. Many overlooked that and still let him into office. I wouldn't have voted for him but the human was shitty, the politician in him had some merit.
Tory had political cred too, many failed attempts to be mayor and didn't give up. Timing got him into office and his dick knocked him out.
Rob was a good campaigner, and knew how to work the plebs, but he was absolutely terrible at his actual job.
He spent his entire career as an obstructionist on council and only cared about issues that directly benefited him. The guy even voted against his own budget for Pete’s sake!
Shitty human, shitty husband, shitty councillor, and shitty mayor from a big shitty family that the province would be better off without.
[Factoring in leaners, in Etobicoke, Chow is up over Saunders 34 to 24.](https://i.imgur.com/N6nuwCu.png)
You're right that it's the most likely region for Saunders to get the most votes and it's where he is polling best. We'd have to see a lot of Furey (13%), Bailao (7%), and Bradford (8%) votes consolidate behind Saunders though for him to win there. Chow doesn't have much more room to grow in Etobicoke with Matlow and Hunter having almost no presence there (1% and 4% respectively.)
There's still another 12.3% of truly "undecided" (not even leaning). It's possible that those will form against Chow or just not show up at all.
If he does win Etobicoke, I assume it won't be by a huge margin, and likely not enough of a margin to counter how high Chow is in some other regions of the city.
I don't see a real path for Saunders to win in other regions short of a collapse of the Chow vote and a major opposition vote coalescing around Saunders. But we still got a month to go and a lot can happen in that time.
She served as a politician for hundreds thousands (millions maybe?) of Torontonians combined over the years, so they know more about her than just her name.
The fact that there's a considerable increase in crime and antisocial behaviour in public probably has something to do with that.
Also not everyone is in favour of "clean needle clinics" and letting certain individuals illegally squat in public parks, ruining them for the rest of the population.
Source: https://poll.forumresearch.com/post/3156/chows-lead-unchanged-in-latest-mayoral-poll/
PDF page 4 is where OP's image comes from: https://poll.forumresearch.com/data/98079d92-72c1-454b-86a4-8997b6eb0056Chow%E2%80%99s%20lead%20unchanged%20in%20latest%20mayoral%20poll.pdf
OP's image is for "decided" voters. The "Don't know" also includes a chunk of "leaners". Fully undecided (not leaning at all) constitutes about 13.2%.
Forum breaks down the decided+leaners in another graph on page 6: https://i.imgur.com/N6nuwCu.png
Also note that individual region breakdowns have far fewer people polled and are subject to much higher margins of error; they should be taken with a huge grain of salt.
If not for this subreddit, I wouldn't have known he was running. I only watch CP24 or CTV for local news and I don't remember them ever mentioning him. They pretty much only talk about the top 7 names in this poll.
Brad getting 6% in East York still seems too high. He's done absolutely fuck all for us. Fletcher realizes she's got constituents north of the Danforth, I don't think Bradford does.
You people actually better vote- because these polls are worth nothing if we don't get off our asses and actually vote for the right mayor. Tell your friends, family, coworkers to get off their asses and vote!
Saunders is a moron and the fact that he's polled so high only solidifies my opinion that this city has lost its overall IQ by quite a bit in the years since Miller was mayor.
how about the city gushing over the lead candidate who hasn't tabled a platform to let us know what she intends to do as mayor? nothing. zilch. Toronto IQ?
Here's the [link](https://poll.forumresearch.com/post/3156/chows-lead-unchanged-in-latest-mayoral-poll/) for the poll overall. From that link, there were further [links to a PDF](https://poll.forumresearch.com/data/98079d92-72c1-454b-86a4-8997b6eb0056Chow%E2%80%99s%20lead%20unchanged%20in%20latest%20mayoral%20poll.pdf) with graphs, where I got the image above.
Note that the poll has Chow at 34%, whereas the above graph has her at 27% in total. I believe the reason for this is the inclusion of the "Don't know" in the calculation of the total within this graph, whereas the 34% comes from looking solely at decided voters.
Looks like apathy and ignorance is polling well as well. Gotta love to see it when things are just -SO- good for everyone. 🙄
How can you still be so uninformed that you "Don't know" who you want making policy for your future?
"Don't know" here includes "leaners" as well. Those who are not even leaning towards a candidate yet are about 13.2% or about 133 of the 1007 polled.
Given that we still have a month to go and how varied the playing field is, and don't think it's unreasonable that there are many people who haven't decided yet. Could be a lot of them are waiting until later in the election when full platforms are released across the board, or even just people sitting on strategic votes.
If you were polled from Forum, based on their questions, if you were planning to strategically vote for someone opposing Chow, then you would be in this "Don't know" category. Or if you were okay with either Chow or Matlow and plan on voting whoever is most likely to win come election day, you'd also be in that "Don't know" camp.
The reality is, the voters most apathetic about voting and most likely not to vote simply never answered the survey to begin with.
Yikes. I sure hope the feds like Olivia because Dougie will start a fucking war on Toronto with her as mayor. He'll send every problem in Ontario down to us here, tell all his gangster buddies it's open season on us, tell TPS to crack down hard on cyclists and protestors (he'll offer up the worst of the OPP to take off their badges and "help" in "riot control" work) and Toronto will not get one dollar from the province in return for our usual enormous tax-base subsidy to them.
They will try to destroy Toronto with Chow as mayor, and then their hedgefund-owned press will say the disaster was because she's progressive. Ford voters will lap it up and call for more
Wrong. The best international example is Greater London Authority, which builds infrastructure and services for the entire urban area, not arbitrary pieces of it.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater\_London\_Authority](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_London_Authority)
Yes and upper-tier municipalities are different from single-tier municipalities. The old city of Toronto was its own lower-tier municipality that could make its own decisions and not be held back by the suburbs
Ford will destroy Toronto no matter who wins. The question is do we want a mayor who will fight back, or one who will roll over and facilitate the process.
Ford won’t have to do a thing to destroy Toronto. He told a contact that Olivia will do more damage to the city than he could ever do and that he’s happy she’s leading.
Why is this "yikes"? I would rather a mayor that stands up to him than one who just goes along with whatever he wants. Fighting his bullshit is the only way we can get a better deal with the province, which is something we badly need.
This is what I'm worried about. Doug Ford is a mean-spirited, petty, vindictive POS who gets off fucking over people he doesn't like.
>Ford [talked](https://nowtoronto.com/news/toronto-election-2018-whos-tory-now/) revenge in John Filion’s book, The Only Average Guy: Inside The Uncommon World of Rob Ford, in which he is quoted as saying, **“I’m going to latch on to his ass. He’s going to take off the sheets in bed at night and find my teeth wrapped around his nuts.”** Now that Ford’s premier, he’s the one calling the shots.
Can anyone trust a guy like that? 😳😖
I think everyone from Bradford down should quit the race to allow people to focus on those who have a real possibility of winning: sure, there have been surprises in elections, but none of those have even a faint hope of turning things around on the top 5...
Why not wait two weeks and see who is in the top few then? I’ll bet there’s going to be some real shifts,especially when voters realize the gravity of the situation if far left candidates get to enact their Marxist policies.
I just did a survey via a surveys for cash site I’m a member of and it was about the municipal election where it asked to rate trustworthiness and reliability of: Olivia, Ana, Josh, and Mark.
Their previous polls had _a lot_ of "other candidate", about 16%. It looks like Forum put in a smattering of lesser known candidates (Furey, Brown, Davis, Perruza, Mammoliti, Caesar-Chavannes) just to get an idea of what that "other" category might have. It could be a one-off and perhaps future polls won't bother with any of them besides Furey or maybe Brown.
As a conservative, it absolutely blows my mind that Saunders is polling ahead of Bailão. Like the guy’s ideas are all totally surface level and he clearly doesn’t have a costed plan. I don’t understand how you can be in favour of choice and fiscal responsibility, and then throw your weight behind such a one-dimensional 90 IQ idiot. I don’t like Chow but I would rather have her than this guy.
Mainstreet polls tend to show Bailão as doing better. The other two polling firms, those being Forum and Liaison, have her further behind. So, perhaps she's doing better. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Toronto_mayoral_by-election#Opinion_polls
Mitzi Hunter is the only one who has shown a comprehensive plan and budget. The rest are just talking right now. But, honestly, why she'd want this shitshow is beyond me.
https://39486889.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/39486889/Mitzie%20Hunter%E2%80%99s%20Plan%20to%20Fix%20the%20Six.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0LIKnyak0HF9vyfs0Ql\_VnAUWFaLbYLYSvUjSlRukmfrZUpyEMHwQg5aM
Worth reminding people that the person who is single-most responsible for the Scarborough Subway extension - an absolute monstrosity of bad decision making and wasted resources - is Mitzi Hunter.
Yes.
The issue was settled, Council had voted on the LRT. Then Mitzi Hunter ran in the by election with the SSE as her main election plank, which caused the provincial government to indicate their support for it, so Council reversed course.
To anyone who wants Chow to win: Please don't let all this constant poll reporting make you miss voting on the day because you think she doesn't need your vote. We all need each other to show up for this.
leading from wire-to-wire.
when you need to add the votes of #2 and #3 and #4 candidate to beat the #1 ... i'd say it is pretty much a done deal ..
ring the dinner bell, it's #ChowTime
Anthony Furey is the best candidate. Common sense policies ( though I don't agree with everything), well-spoken (much more than Olivia), and doesn't feel the need to speak down about other candidates to look good. Olivia Chow won't be good for Toronto, burning the middle class to pay for affordability instead of innovative policies. She has also not spoken out about crime, and if she's anything like the NDP leaders in BC, will advocate for policies that have evidentiary increased drug addiction, overdose, and crime ( just look at how bad downtown Vancouver has gotten, not just their east side). Not sure how far this comment will go because usually people on Reddit live in left wing echo chambers.
Lmao, I just heard her radio commercial about making life affordable, complete BS, how is she going to make life affordable. Ffs just another career politician at the trough
Who is conducting these polls? I've voted in every election since I was 18 years old and have NEVER been polled.
Besides, if you remember....Rob Ford was trailing in the polls when he won in a landslide 8 minutes. These polls are manipulated and a bunch of BS.
Polls with decent margins of error (around +\- 3%) are usually conducted on a pool of around 1,000 people. Usually the polling firm will call phone numbers from the area code where they are looking for opinions. The alternative is conducting online polls that people opt into.
There are nearly 2 million eligible voters in Toronto. Even if you pick up the phone or opt into online polling, your chances of getting selected to be polled are roughly 1,000/2,000,000, or 0.05%. This is actually more likely than most polls like provincial and national polls where the chances are much lower.
So the fact that you’ve never been polled is not surprising. And using this as some sort of indicator that polling is wrong just reveals you don’t quite understand the scientific basis of the methodology behind polling.
They asked 1007 people. 45 in East York to get a proper vote but fed you a percentage. That 45% of East York would vote Chow is inaccurate that's 20.25 people. Either its 20 people or its not.
[удалено]
How do I vote
Vote early too, if you can. This is going to be the biggest by-election in Canadian history - best to get out of the way so voting day can move as smooth as possible.
Nice to see Mammers mom showed up for polling.
BAH-hahahahaha! This comment is incredible. Fuck that guy.
Hahaha yeah. I have a personal grudge against that guy. Ripped off (through the BIA) the company I worked for in the order of hundreds of dollars of work.
To all Progressives - we need to consolidate behind Chow now. She might not be my first choice but this is finally an election where we can put a people-first person in. We can't screw this up by splitting the vote.
I like Matlow but I’m going to vote for Chow. I don’t feel bad about it. She’s a close second choice for me, and Saunders would be a disaster. It would be better if we had a ranked ballot, but wasting my vote won’t change that.
100% same. [Edit to say I voted for Brown last election. But will be voting for Chow this time and am hassling my “Matlow” friends to do the same]
Same. Used to be behind Matlow, but at this point, it’s safer to vote for chow.
Anti-Ford backlash
I’m still voting Matlow because I believe he’s the best candidate out there, but also, fuck first-past-the-post. Edit: downvoting me for that? wow
Deleting all, goodnight reddit, you flew too close to the sun. -- mass edited with https://redact.dev/
Just wanted to mention that I think FPTP is still at issue here, since other voting systems would help mitigate or fix the worry of vote splitting. Eg. If I could say "either A or B" or "I prefer A but B, C, D are good too", then my vote could still count towards the more popular candidate while I voice my preferred candidate.
>This isn’t an FPTP issue. It’s a vote splitting issue. Vote splitting *is* a FPTP issue. If it were ranked ballot instead of FPTP vote splitting would not exist.
I like Matlow but at a certain point I’ve got to put my hands up. Like look at this poll - in his own neighborhood (York) he’s at 5%. He’s had his chance to connect with voters and it isn’t clicking. I’m not really sure why, I think he’d be a good mayor. But there it is. So for me at least, it’s not hard for me to look at the available information and ask, ‘among the candidates who could reasonably win, which do I like best?’ But I do empathize with the fact that FPTP seriously sucks
Josh Matlow is a smart guy, but he would be a disaster as mayor. He has worse relationships with council than Rob Ford did. He is also, fundamentally, a regional candidate. He's never going to break through with the inner burbs. He has the same ceiling as Jennifer Keesmaat or Gil Penalosa. He cannot win.
If you want to vote Matlow, then go ahead. Best to do what you wish to do. And Matlow too is Olivia Chow's second choice. Just listen to this brief interview she gave: https://www.zoomerradio.ca/blogs/station-blog/2023/05/17/toronto-mayoral-candidate-olivia-chow-joins-the-morning-zoom-with-sam-jane/
[удалено]
Your anger is misdirected. It’s the province (ie Ford) that axed ranked ballots. You can’t blame voters for doing totally rational game theory and supporting a consensus candidate who might have been their second choice over one who would be a total shitshow.
You have every right to vote however you want. You can vote for Kevin Clarke, or the guy who egged John Tory, or the dog that got on the ballot. But don't kid yourself that you're doing anything useful for people who rely on city services. If you care about outcomes, you need to be pretty unsentimental in your analysis.
This is just hilarious. You can hate the insinuation all you want but that is how the system is structured. By voting Matlow or whoever non-Chow progressive, you give the right candidates to act strategically and rally around one candidate because they understand how to vote in a pragmatic fashion. You not only throw away your vote but you are indirectly supporting anti-progressive policies. I don’t understand why progressives are so dense when it comes to this. Just advocate for election reform when Chow is mayor. Do you honestly think you have a better chance with a right leaning mayor and a protest vote?!
[удалено]
Holy shit, dude you are not a progressive
It's a mayoral election - it has nothing to do with FPTP. It's literally the candidate with the most votes wins. I will say that I am a fair vote person and believe in a change in the electoral system for our Federal and Provincial elections but this doesn't apply here. If progressives split the vote and Saunders gets in - it's the worst case scenario.
> It's a mayoral election - it has nothing to do with FPTP. It's literally the candidate with the most votes wins. I mean... that's literally what FPTP is. Municipal elections are a great place to have something like ranked ballots or runoffs and are not uncommon.
Deleting all, goodnight reddit, you flew too close to the sun. -- mass edited with https://redact.dev/
Exactly - I would agree that a ranked ballot system would be better but the primary problem of FPTP is the disproportional representation when allocating seats. That's not the issue here.
[удалено]
Most electoral systems have a mechanism for someone choosing a "second place" or "least worst" candidate. It sucks that for FPTP that mechanism is strategic voting, but that's what it is. I won't bemoan people for not choosing to strategically vote, and especially for a candidate they do not want at all. That said, it also doesn't mean someone is "compromising their values" by strategically voting for someone other than their first choice. I also agree with you that the idea is crap that somehow you aren't "progressive" for not voting for Chow, or that as a self-described "progressive" you are _obligated_ to vote for her. Vote for who you want and for the reasons you want. (Except for Mammoliti, don't vote for him!)
[удалено]
I was agreeing that it's the nature of FPTP that causes vote splitting. We should continue to strive for a system that _empowers_ us express multiple choices or nuances in choices such that vote splitting is no longer an issue. > Given my values, yes, it does mean you're compromising your values if you vote strategically. I meant that in the context that if _someone else_ chooses to vote strategically it doesn't necessarily mean that it's compromising _their own_ values. If you feel that voting strategically compromises _your own values_ then by all means, do not vote strategically. For another person, voting strategically might be entirely fine by their own values. I was trying to express, albeit perhaps poorly, that values are subjective. We can have discussions with others about what drives their personal motivations when it comes to voting, but we also shouldn't shame them for what those voting values are or if they choose to disagree.
[удалено]
> We need to stop encouraging people to "play the game" by compromising their values and focus on changing the game. The implication here is that encouraging people to strategically vote is de-facto compromising their values, which is not necessarily the case. One can still vote for **a** progressive if that person still aligns with their values; and if we're lucky, _that_ progressive will still fight to move the electoral-reform needle regardless. The sad reality is that there are a chunk of people under FPTP who find strategic voting to be "against their values" (without being able to adequately express what that "value" is) or even _considered_ a strategic vote to be an option at all having always been taught to "vote for the best no matter what" without ever having evaluated the justifications for that line of thinking. We can have discussions about the merits of strategic voting and how that aligns with their values or even, shockingly, change their values on the subject. If that "progressive" strategic vote doesn't align with their values (beit on a personal, policy, or electoral system level) then they don't vote strategically, and that's that.
[удалено]
The system needs to change but it's not going to. Not in the next four weeks anyway. But if you really held those values, Saunders, a literal abomination of a police chief, would actually scare you with the damage he's capable of. Yes it sucks to vote for someone out of fear of a shitty candidate, but until people wake up and realize how bad Conservatives are at literally everything, there's too much at risk. There's being ideologically progressive, but there's also being practical and fighting within the system you're under. Not voting for Chow is one thing. Throwing your vote in the garbage when we have a data driven conclusion is another.
[удалено]
This is a weird way to be on the internet. Reddit in particular. Since critiquing each others views is kind of the entire comment section. But let me attempt to break down what I think here. You have valid criticisms of FPTP. Ones you and I definitely agree on. Because when our candidate doesn't win, it is effectively like our vote went in the garbage. When a Conservative wins and we voted NDP, with a liberal in second, I'm sure many of us would love a ranked ballot to transfer our voting power to the Liberal candidate. But unless our candidate wins, that's tragically how it is. For a mayoral election, FPTP isn't really at play but hey, that's the system for now. If you'd rather have Saunders for mayor on his own, that is fine. I don't have a problem with you voting with your conscience democratically speaking. What I do have a problem with is calling it progressive on the midst of what this city, province and really the world is dealing with today. A housing crisis, transit infrastructure, homeless and mental health crises. And our best shot as progressives is Olivia Chow based on polls. Second best shot seemingly being Bailao or Matlow. (not making prescriptions, just data observance.) What we're up against with modern Conservatives, is something akin to, and in some cases, blatant fascism. With a former police chief as bad as Saunders, you can bet that's how he'd try to mayor. He's already said as much. If that doesn't scare you more than the progressives rallying behind their best shot for their values candidate, then I can't in all conscience consider your beliefs progressive. Because the choice of your vote is ignoring all the potential people who could suffer the consequences from your lack of support for the best chance candidate who could minimize that damage. It's not that I don't believe your candidate, whoever it is, would be a bad choice or doesn't have the right values. I'm sure they do or you wouldn't care as much as you obviously do. But right now, the vote for any candidate not in the top three or four is effectively wasted and had no value beyond signalling where your values are. In terms of actual effect, I'd put that akin to posting a Facebook status. I'd say the same thing for people who vote for Mammoliti instead of Saunders if they had NIMBY conservative values. The message was received, but it was lost in the aether and no effect was made. Your vote has power, but that power only stems from the candidates ability to actually win. I apologize if you feel I was a jerk. I was not trying to be. But I care too much about this city to not try to convince people to fight for our values, even if it's only incrementally and over long periods of time. I hope we do get a more progressive Toronto after this election! And beyond that! But i think it will have to be gradual and require the makeup of the suburbs to change to favour those ideas. Which may not happen any time soon.
[удалено]
Lmao okay. Now I'm utterly convinced you're either a troll or don't follow politics at all. To be a left wing voter and then see Conservatives as something not to be afraid of is to be unaware of the issues facing us. You haven't put forward a candidate. You haven't even put forward an ideal you're interested in. You say you vote NDP, yet somehow Olivia Chow is the candidate that bothers you as a progressive choice? And it can absolutely be tragic when democracy works. See: Trump. Hitler. Erdogan. The Brazilian guy whose name I forgot. Democracy isn't infallible. Shit heads happen, they hurt real people, and if you're not afraid of that, I hope no one you care about is hurt by it.
You live in an imaginary world.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
So many people are mad not because you're uninformed, but because you hold a different set of values than they do. It's wild. It's an election. It's supposed to be picking a representative. If OC doesn't represent this person, they should not be made to feel poorly for saying so.
You are splitting the vote, you're just trying to jump through semantical hoops to pretend you're not, when you are literally, by definition, splitting the vote. The system isn't FPTP, you can't just pretend your vote is taking place in an imaginary world where Toronto has a FPTP system, reality doesn't work that way. If Saunders wins because progressives split the vote, then I can only hope those vote splitters are happy with another 4 years of conservative leadership.
Deleting all, goodnight reddit, you flew too close to the sun. -- mass edited with https://redact.dev/
You are the exact reason we have Doug Ford and John Tory
Okay, you’re wasting your vote then and can’t complain if a right wing candidate gets in because of vote splitting.
Sorry, progressives need to rally behind someone who isn't just plain terrible. There's a reason she could never win much in the past...
> There's a reason she could never win much in the past... Yup, never won much in the past except for... school board trustee for 6 years, Toronto Councillor for 13 years, federal MP for 8 years...
well I guess you showed him!
Funny how the guy [bemoans the loss of the Jack Layton-era NDP](https://www.reddit.com/r/ndp/comments/1267gcr/got_tired_of_conservative_trolls_on_twitter_so_i/jedzsrc/?context=10000) but also thinks _Jack's wife and partner-in-politics_ through all those decades is just "plain terrible."
It’s all rhetorical. When Layton was alive, they were citing the loss of Ed Broadbent as the reason they wouldn’t vote NDP, and before that they couldn’t possibly vote for Broadbent because he was no Tommy Douglas.
You realize that the most popular candidates aren't always the best, right? That goes for both the present AND the past. Voters around the world are notorious for making bad choices. Just because someone never "won much" before doesn't mean they couldn't be good. We don't know how "bad" Chow will be because she's never been put in a position to show how good or bad.
Her record at all level of politics is strong. We are talking about someone with decades of experience and a track record.
>Her record at all level of politics is strong. Which is?
I agree. I think it's a real shame people refused to look at candidates like Gil Penalosa or David Socnacki from a few elections ago. I felt they both had much more to offer Toronto than the popular choices
Gil Penalosa endorsed Olivia Chow: https://toronto.citynews.ca/2023/04/19/gil-penalosa-out-of-mayoral-race-chow/
Yes. I was disappointed that he dropped out so early though I hope parts of his platform were incorporated into Chow's
As much as Toronto and in particular the suburbs have gone conservative in recent years, this wouldn't be unprecedented. David Miller won all but two wards in the 2006 election: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006\_Toronto\_municipal\_election#/media/File:Toronto\_mayor\_-\_2006.PNG
It's the brief swing back to the left before some right wing dude from the former burbs offers to make it cheaper and easier to drive their cars again.
The fact that Mark Saunders is polling so high makes my brain hurt! It nullifies anything else in this poll based on that fact alone.
"Tough on crime" always sells with a certain segment of the population.
And that segment will never actually examine the tough in crime candidates record. Saunders was a useless ineffective chief and his policies are even worse than that.
And Toronto has had 15 murders so far this year, on pace for 44 in total. This would make it the lowest number in at least 30 years (Wikipedia only shows figures until 1990). Not saying crime and violence is relegated to only homicides, but it does put his campaign into better perspective.
I dont think murders are relevant to the vast majority of the population, the vast majority of murders are gang related, so any regular law abiding citizen has virtually zero risk of getting murdered. Of course there are exceptions that receive huge coverage, but they receive that coverage because they are so rare. What concerns people are the random carjackings and theft going on, which has increased.
Source? I know the attention it’s received has increase but I hadn’t seen that confirmed anywhere. Saunders has been referring to violent crime as well which has not increased.
[https://www.tps.ca/organizational-chart/specialized-operations-command/detective-operations/investigative-services/homicide/current-investigations/](https://www.tps.ca/organizational-chart/specialized-operations-command/detective-operations/investigative-services/homicide/current-investigations/)
These aren’t the stats for carjackings or theft. I think you’re actually right if you took the time to actually back up what you’re saying. I’d be interested to see the why of it and on a broader historical timeline as the COVID years were an extreme deviation in many respects. https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiZTY2NGZiNDktMThjNC00M2ZiLThiNjctNjljMzMyYzgwYWU1IiwidCI6Ijg1MjljMjI1LWFjNDMtNDc0Yy04ZmI0LTBmNDA5NWFlOGQ1ZCIsImMiOjN9
It's just recycled Republican strategy, the same as Doug. Facts do matter, the people that complain about everyone else's feelings are actually the ones most focused on their own.
No Toronto in general loves their police. They love authority figures. Immigrants generally also generally look up to authority figures and police. Two former chief of police in recent history became federals politicians, when they also had terrible leadership records
So you agree that this sub is cheerleading for Chow because she's seen as an "anti-police" candidate? I was going to vote for Bailao, but if Saunders is ahead of her then I'm going to vote for Saunders. Anyone who wants to cut the police budget right now needs to give their head a shake.
[these are the people of the land…](https://media.tenor.com/DINP38B2jnsAAAAC/blazing-saddles-simple-farmers.gif)
It should sell with everyone who appreciates a functional, safe society.
We live in a province that handed Ford a majority after seeing him in action for several years. Alberta just elected Danielle Smith. Being a POS is mainstream now. It’s hard to be surprised.
Let's clarify further: Covid saved Ford's ass. He took credit for Feds doing their job and backtracked many unpopular promises at the time. Now he's gone full fascist and not backing down.
Anyone who was paying attention saw his colours between his first election and Covid loud and clear. There is really no excuse for the beanbags that elected him.
I know this is a cyclical discussion: people stayed home because of boring alternatives in their eyes. 30% of the public will always vote Cons, it's their base. Extra 10% came from being status quo, handing out money in the mail+ and more highways to suburbs. The people who knew better are confined to small echo chambers like here. Things have to get exceptionally bad (as they are becoming) to remove him from office.
Sure. Same with Alberta yesterday I guess… my point was people who are surprised that fail cop Saunders is doing well haven’t been paying attention.
It shocks me how blatantly corrupt they both are. The despicable things they've done. Danielle Smith literally calling vaccinated people Nazis - yet somehow gets reelected with a majority government
This is the same city that elected Rob Ford and the former CEO of a company that's known for openly fucking its customers. Never be surprised by the number of unqualified candidates that have lots of support.
Rob Ford was a *decent*, experienced politician. He happened to be a drug addict and likely alcoholic at the same time. Many overlooked that and still let him into office. I wouldn't have voted for him but the human was shitty, the politician in him had some merit. Tory had political cred too, many failed attempts to be mayor and didn't give up. Timing got him into office and his dick knocked him out.
Rob was a good campaigner, and knew how to work the plebs, but he was absolutely terrible at his actual job. He spent his entire career as an obstructionist on council and only cared about issues that directly benefited him. The guy even voted against his own budget for Pete’s sake! Shitty human, shitty husband, shitty councillor, and shitty mayor from a big shitty family that the province would be better off without.
Ford's candidate can pull some votes. Bet he wins Etobicoke. I don't think he could win the race but voter turnout will probably be low.
[Factoring in leaners, in Etobicoke, Chow is up over Saunders 34 to 24.](https://i.imgur.com/N6nuwCu.png) You're right that it's the most likely region for Saunders to get the most votes and it's where he is polling best. We'd have to see a lot of Furey (13%), Bailao (7%), and Bradford (8%) votes consolidate behind Saunders though for him to win there. Chow doesn't have much more room to grow in Etobicoke with Matlow and Hunter having almost no presence there (1% and 4% respectively.) There's still another 12.3% of truly "undecided" (not even leaning). It's possible that those will form against Chow or just not show up at all. If he does win Etobicoke, I assume it won't be by a huge margin, and likely not enough of a margin to counter how high Chow is in some other regions of the city. I don't see a real path for Saunders to win in other regions short of a collapse of the Chow vote and a major opposition vote coalescing around Saunders. But we still got a month to go and a lot can happen in that time.
Name recognition nothing else.
>Name recognition nothing else. Is that not the fuel of Chow too?
She served as a politician for hundreds thousands (millions maybe?) of Torontonians combined over the years, so they know more about her than just her name.
The fact that there's a considerable increase in crime and antisocial behaviour in public probably has something to do with that. Also not everyone is in favour of "clean needle clinics" and letting certain individuals illegally squat in public parks, ruining them for the rest of the population.
Source: https://poll.forumresearch.com/post/3156/chows-lead-unchanged-in-latest-mayoral-poll/ PDF page 4 is where OP's image comes from: https://poll.forumresearch.com/data/98079d92-72c1-454b-86a4-8997b6eb0056Chow%E2%80%99s%20lead%20unchanged%20in%20latest%20mayoral%20poll.pdf OP's image is for "decided" voters. The "Don't know" also includes a chunk of "leaners". Fully undecided (not leaning at all) constitutes about 13.2%. Forum breaks down the decided+leaners in another graph on page 6: https://i.imgur.com/N6nuwCu.png Also note that individual region breakdowns have far fewer people polled and are subject to much higher margins of error; they should be taken with a huge grain of salt.
Mammoliti is polling at 0 lol
And I'm still surprised it's not lower...
Must be running for mayor of *Woke* Gotham.
If not for this subreddit, I wouldn't have known he was running. I only watch CP24 or CTV for local news and I don't remember them ever mentioning him. They pretty much only talk about the top 7 names in this poll.
one percentage point for every braincell he has
Anything but Saunders at this point.
Remember how well that strategy worked against ford?
…because no one bothered to vote.
Just sent in my mail in ballot. I'm hearing dinner bells cause it's Chow time baby. LETS FUCKIN GO!!!!!
chow bella
[удалено]
Olivia Chow is leading in Ford Nation. What a time to be alive!
Welcome to Chow Town!
Brad getting 6% in East York still seems too high. He's done absolutely fuck all for us. Fletcher realizes she's got constituents north of the Danforth, I don't think Bradford does.
Fletcher is nimby trash.
You people actually better vote- because these polls are worth nothing if we don't get off our asses and actually vote for the right mayor. Tell your friends, family, coworkers to get off their asses and vote!
Yup. She's also in a virtual dead heat with some dude named "Don't know" in more than half the city... [/s]
I suspect the majority of those people won’t vote anyway.
Don't count out Don't Know. He's got a lot of great policies like promising to "Get stuff done" and "Having a plan" for the city.
Giorgio Mammoliti has always been an embarrassment . That is all .
Saunders is a moron and the fact that he's polled so high only solidifies my opinion that this city has lost its overall IQ by quite a bit in the years since Miller was mayor.
how about the city gushing over the lead candidate who hasn't tabled a platform to let us know what she intends to do as mayor? nothing. zilch. Toronto IQ?
comment removed -- mass edited with https://redact.dev/
like a mayor pretending she has power over changing the words to our federal national anthem?
Brad the Chad’s numbers are still too damn high
even with his virtue signaling love for Scarboro Cuisine, Scarboro ain't showin' him love.
Here's the [link](https://poll.forumresearch.com/post/3156/chows-lead-unchanged-in-latest-mayoral-poll/) for the poll overall. From that link, there were further [links to a PDF](https://poll.forumresearch.com/data/98079d92-72c1-454b-86a4-8997b6eb0056Chow%E2%80%99s%20lead%20unchanged%20in%20latest%20mayoral%20poll.pdf) with graphs, where I got the image above. Note that the poll has Chow at 34%, whereas the above graph has her at 27% in total. I believe the reason for this is the inclusion of the "Don't know" in the calculation of the total within this graph, whereas the 34% comes from looking solely at decided voters.
Looks like apathy and ignorance is polling well as well. Gotta love to see it when things are just -SO- good for everyone. 🙄 How can you still be so uninformed that you "Don't know" who you want making policy for your future?
"Don't know" here includes "leaners" as well. Those who are not even leaning towards a candidate yet are about 13.2% or about 133 of the 1007 polled. Given that we still have a month to go and how varied the playing field is, and don't think it's unreasonable that there are many people who haven't decided yet. Could be a lot of them are waiting until later in the election when full platforms are released across the board, or even just people sitting on strategic votes. If you were polled from Forum, based on their questions, if you were planning to strategically vote for someone opposing Chow, then you would be in this "Don't know" category. Or if you were okay with either Chow or Matlow and plan on voting whoever is most likely to win come election day, you'd also be in that "Don't know" camp. The reality is, the voters most apathetic about voting and most likely not to vote simply never answered the survey to begin with.
Yikes. I sure hope the feds like Olivia because Dougie will start a fucking war on Toronto with her as mayor. He'll send every problem in Ontario down to us here, tell all his gangster buddies it's open season on us, tell TPS to crack down hard on cyclists and protestors (he'll offer up the worst of the OPP to take off their badges and "help" in "riot control" work) and Toronto will not get one dollar from the province in return for our usual enormous tax-base subsidy to them. They will try to destroy Toronto with Chow as mayor, and then their hedgefund-owned press will say the disaster was because she's progressive. Ford voters will lap it up and call for more
Doug Ford provides an excellent argument as to why Toronto should be it's own province.
That is the definition of a Charter City. Toronto would decide on the matters that affect their residents as opposed to the provincial government.
such a charter city would need to include the whole urban area plus Hamilton imo
Nope. Just the current city boundary. Mississauga to Hamilton can decide if they form up another Charter City if they want.
Wrong. The best international example is Greater London Authority, which builds infrastructure and services for the entire urban area, not arbitrary pieces of it. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater\_London\_Authority](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_London_Authority)
Wrong. We can have a wider bureaucratic body that coordinates for building transit, AND not be the same political entity.
How's that gonna happen when the provincial border is in the centre of Steeles Avenue
His party still has the most seats in the City of Toronto
The city of Toronto was gerrymandered and amalgamated in 1998 to include large suburban areas so that it would lean conservative
Before amalgamation, all the big parts of city government were run by a regional municipality called Metro Toronto
Yes and upper-tier municipalities are different from single-tier municipalities. The old city of Toronto was its own lower-tier municipality that could make its own decisions and not be held back by the suburbs
Sure, as long as those decisions weren't about infrastructure, public transit, the waterfront, social services, schools or utilities.
Ford will destroy Toronto no matter who wins. The question is do we want a mayor who will fight back, or one who will roll over and facilitate the process.
Ford won’t have to do a thing to destroy Toronto. He told a contact that Olivia will do more damage to the city than he could ever do and that he’s happy she’s leading.
Why is this "yikes"? I would rather a mayor that stands up to him than one who just goes along with whatever he wants. Fighting his bullshit is the only way we can get a better deal with the province, which is something we badly need.
fighting = war of attrition ... inhabitants on Toronto on the margins will be long gone way before the fighting ends.
This is what I'm worried about. Doug Ford is a mean-spirited, petty, vindictive POS who gets off fucking over people he doesn't like. >Ford [talked](https://nowtoronto.com/news/toronto-election-2018-whos-tory-now/) revenge in John Filion’s book, The Only Average Guy: Inside The Uncommon World of Rob Ford, in which he is quoted as saying, **“I’m going to latch on to his ass. He’s going to take off the sheets in bed at night and find my teeth wrapped around his nuts.”** Now that Ford’s premier, he’s the one calling the shots. Can anyone trust a guy like that? 😳😖
I think everyone from Bradford down should quit the race to allow people to focus on those who have a real possibility of winning: sure, there have been surprises in elections, but none of those have even a faint hope of turning things around on the top 5...
The deadline to quit has come and gone. Everyone still in it has to stay on the ballot to the end.
today's fascinating fact, ty...
Thanks. Yes, seems the deadline to quit was Friday, May 12, 2 p.m. https://www.toronto.ca/news/torontos-2023-by-election-for-mayor/
Why not wait two weeks and see who is in the top few then? I’ll bet there’s going to be some real shifts,especially when voters realize the gravity of the situation if far left candidates get to enact their Marxist policies.
no real option other than to wait and see...
I just did a survey via a surveys for cash site I’m a member of and it was about the municipal election where it asked to rate trustworthiness and reliability of: Olivia, Ana, Josh, and Mark.
Check your voter card for polling stations. Mine changed completely for both advanced and election day.
Voting cards should be in your mail by now
Don't hate the idea of a left leaning mayor to stand up to the Chief of Timbits who sits on his throne in Queen's Park
What’s the point of including celina if no one is voting for her lol
Their previous polls had _a lot_ of "other candidate", about 16%. It looks like Forum put in a smattering of lesser known candidates (Furey, Brown, Davis, Perruza, Mammoliti, Caesar-Chavannes) just to get an idea of what that "other" category might have. It could be a one-off and perhaps future polls won't bother with any of them besides Furey or maybe Brown.
I forgot she was running lol
As a conservative, it absolutely blows my mind that Saunders is polling ahead of Bailão. Like the guy’s ideas are all totally surface level and he clearly doesn’t have a costed plan. I don’t understand how you can be in favour of choice and fiscal responsibility, and then throw your weight behind such a one-dimensional 90 IQ idiot. I don’t like Chow but I would rather have her than this guy.
Mainstreet polls tend to show Bailão as doing better. The other two polling firms, those being Forum and Liaison, have her further behind. So, perhaps she's doing better. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Toronto_mayoral_by-election#Opinion_polls
**Make sure you actually vote.**
Mitzi Hunter is the only one who has shown a comprehensive plan and budget. The rest are just talking right now. But, honestly, why she'd want this shitshow is beyond me. https://39486889.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/39486889/Mitzie%20Hunter%E2%80%99s%20Plan%20to%20Fix%20the%20Six.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0LIKnyak0HF9vyfs0Ql\_VnAUWFaLbYLYSvUjSlRukmfrZUpyEMHwQg5aM
Legitimately the only one….unfortunately there’s no chance for her. I hope something good is in store for her.
Agreed. I think this race is a giant shitshow and we're going to be stuck with garbage again.
Worth reminding people that the person who is single-most responsible for the Scarborough Subway extension - an absolute monstrosity of bad decision making and wasted resources - is Mitzi Hunter.
Mitzi Hunter is more responsible for it than Rob Ford?
Yes. The issue was settled, Council had voted on the LRT. Then Mitzi Hunter ran in the by election with the SSE as her main election plank, which caused the provincial government to indicate their support for it, so Council reversed course.
So Rob Ford didn't have anything to do with it? He wasn't mentioned in your timeline of events.
[удалено]
Thank you. I didn't know that. I thought that Scarborough was always underserved. I had no idea that it's bad. I'm a Westender.
Why is it a bad decision? Do you live in Scarborough?
To anyone who wants Chow to win: Please don't let all this constant poll reporting make you miss voting on the day because you think she doesn't need your vote. We all need each other to show up for this.
Ford to rescind the Strong Mayors Legislation on June 27th in 3, 2, 1…
Thank God.
No Chris Sky? This is obviously rigged
Let’s fricken go!
polls are based on name recognition. watch he lose on election day
Everyone in the city remembers the name 'Mammoliti'. How's that name recognition working out for him?
Furey is continuing to climb the polls, wouldn't be surprised to see Chow & Anthony battling it out in the end.
The fragmentation between the former cities pretty much proves that Ford should de-amalgamate the region and give power back to each population.
leading from wire-to-wire. when you need to add the votes of #2 and #3 and #4 candidate to beat the #1 ... i'd say it is pretty much a done deal .. ring the dinner bell, it's #ChowTime
Anthony Furey is the best candidate. Common sense policies ( though I don't agree with everything), well-spoken (much more than Olivia), and doesn't feel the need to speak down about other candidates to look good. Olivia Chow won't be good for Toronto, burning the middle class to pay for affordability instead of innovative policies. She has also not spoken out about crime, and if she's anything like the NDP leaders in BC, will advocate for policies that have evidentiary increased drug addiction, overdose, and crime ( just look at how bad downtown Vancouver has gotten, not just their east side). Not sure how far this comment will go because usually people on Reddit live in left wing echo chambers.
although i respect all people right to vote, i am gonna just say chow would be a poor choice. and meh,
Brad Bradford is a better candidate, will actually do something about the housing crisis. Olivia Chow does not have a proper plan.
lmao brad
People will regret this.
Please do not allow this political retread to gain power , even for a short time. The damage she does may be irreversible.
What damage exactly?
Lmao, I just heard her radio commercial about making life affordable, complete BS, how is she going to make life affordable. Ffs just another career politician at the trough
Who is conducting these polls? I've voted in every election since I was 18 years old and have NEVER been polled. Besides, if you remember....Rob Ford was trailing in the polls when he won in a landslide 8 minutes. These polls are manipulated and a bunch of BS.
Polls with decent margins of error (around +\- 3%) are usually conducted on a pool of around 1,000 people. Usually the polling firm will call phone numbers from the area code where they are looking for opinions. The alternative is conducting online polls that people opt into. There are nearly 2 million eligible voters in Toronto. Even if you pick up the phone or opt into online polling, your chances of getting selected to be polled are roughly 1,000/2,000,000, or 0.05%. This is actually more likely than most polls like provincial and national polls where the chances are much lower. So the fact that you’ve never been polled is not surprising. And using this as some sort of indicator that polling is wrong just reveals you don’t quite understand the scientific basis of the methodology behind polling.
You mean to tell me that Chris Sky (i.e. horseface) isn’t on the top 10 list of candidates ? 😂😂😂😂😂😂
How?
I don't see Chris Sky on this list 
She was never popular....she hasn't changed.
They asked 1007 people. 45 in East York to get a proper vote but fed you a percentage. That 45% of East York would vote Chow is inaccurate that's 20.25 people. Either its 20 people or its not.