A long campaign coming to an end
The next four years aren’t promising much of anything
Well, that was a fast 10 months. (Haha, no, just kidding.) As Toronto’s election lurches to a close, Chris Selley, Matt Gurney, and NOW’s Jonathan Goldsbie try to figure out how we got here, and where next.
Selley Toronto has a history of shifting back and forth between relatively left-wing and relatively right-wing mayors. At this point, we seem set to switch from a fellow seen by his detractors as the living embodiment of all conservative evils — in fact his beliefs are a dog’s breakfast, but still — to more or less the living embodiment of modern Ontario Red Toryism. I’d love to be able to explain why we are where we are. But frankly, the whole thing feels like a bit of an accident. I struggle to identify anything significant that John Tory has done right, or anything that Olivia Chow has done wrong, that explains their respective positions in the race. As boring alternatives to the Ford Brothers Circus, both are pretty conspicuously unthreatening. As such, it doesn’t surprise me that Chow supporters’ flailing attempts to portray Tory as some kind of racist sexist troglodyte don’t seem to have had much effect. Perhaps in the absence of any particularly compelling platforms, people supported the candidate in front for the simple reason that he was in front — and not named Ford. How would you fellows sum up this election campaign? Gurney Long and surprisingly quiet, even with Rob Ford’s sudden health crisis. I’m not sure that even properly falls into the campaign narrative or if it’s almost just a sad conclusion to the Rob Ford unravelling. I think we can probably do a whole panel on how the campaigns in this city are actually run (Too. Many. Debates.) but if we just look at how this one unfolded, I share some of Chris’s confusion. Chow was winning until she wasn’t, at which point Tory seemed to become untouchable. Like him, I can’t point to anything specific that would have caused that turnaround. She came in with huge expectations and just began fizzling away from day one. It turns out that virtually all the political magic in the Jack/Olivia political team was Jack’s. Tory may not be an exciting politician, and he hasn’t advanced any brilliant policies, but he’s better at this than he was before. As Chow’s campaign withered, people found Tory doing better than expected — and that sense of stability became even more attractive as the Ford campaign went bonkers. If I had to guess, we’ ll end up with a mayor who had matured as a candidate at about the best possible moment in time. Luck on his part, but he was probably due a political break. Goldsbie Chow’s campaign was originally premised on winning the votes of people who supported both Rob Ford in 2010 and Jack Layton in 2011. While that wasn’t a terrible idea in theory, it turned out to be a disastrous strategy in practice: Chow couldn’t compete with Ford’s populist charisma and alienated many left-wingers with her apparent tack to the centre (in messaging, if not policy). The campaign corrected itself by Labour Day, realizing its best remaining hope would be to inspire progressives, but by then it was too late. If the election were a few months shorter or a few months longer, it could very well be hers — but it’s not, and she declined in the polls at exactly the wrong moment. It shouldn’t be surprising that for many the election would come down to a Ford or Not-Ford binary. Either Tory or Chow could have been that Not-Ford, but Tory peaked at the right time and gathered momentum from there. The Fords have caused more people to pay attention to City Hall than ever before, and that’s a good and healthy thing for democracy. But for a great many people, that’s the extent of their understanding and notice, and their votes are little more than reactions to the idea of the Fords’ continued presence. To grasp the distinctions between Chow and Tory, however, requires a deeper comprehension of the city, its issues, and the ways those candidates intend to address them. Selley That “disastrous” strategy is definitely one of the most intriguing aspects of this. Ford won votes from people who despise City Hall, or think it’s essentially useless; Chow thought she could win them over by saying City Hall would help solve their problems. And it didn’t just not work — Doug Ford maintains an astonishing level of support. Long before Rob’s cancer battle, I said I could imagine him running in 2018 if he didn’t run or win in 2014. It’s even more plausible today. The next mayor needs somehow to bring these people back to reality. Gurney But how? The next four years aren’t promising much of anything. There’s no radical new direction, no new deal. Really, while they’ve gussied it up differently, both Tory and Chow were essentially proposing a return to the status quo for Toronto. I’d take it, at this point, and I think most of us would ... but nothing about a return to a more normal Toronto — kinda plodding and helpless, but at least not offensive — is going to win over new supporters. We live in a town where “mostly harmless” should be printed on all municipal government stationary. Forget bringing the outraged Ford Nationals back down to Earth. I just want more transit, dammit. Goldsbie If “status quo” means a sufficiently competent mayor who doesn’t actively despise the majority of council, then, yeah, both Tory and Chow propose a return to that. But such a conception minimizes the fact that Tory and Chow have very different visions of what’s wrong with Toronto, let alone how to proceed. Chow believes the city has deep divisions caused by structural inequities that government is best positioned to address. Tory believes that the city’s primary ailment is a failure of leadership and that everything else will fall into place once an amiable fellow with the right business connections gets put in charge.