![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rfmcdonaldAs the National Post's Chris Selley writes, the decision of Sarah Thomson to end her campaign and support Smitherman for the explicit reason that he's not Ford may well end in Smitherman's election, despite Ford's simple populist message (as described by Gerald Hannon at Toronto Life).
Suffice it to say, Tomasz Bugajski's blogTO post explaining his decision to engage in strategic voting is going to be highly prominent in my mind. Vote Smitherman, everyone! Vote Smitherman, and avert a terrible, terrible fate for Toronto!
Did I mention that you should vote for Smitherman in the upcoming mayoral elections? Seriously.
[A] Global News Ipsos Reid poll released on Monday showed Mr. Smitherman within five points of Mr. Ford — just .1% outside the margin of error. Break the numbers down according to how likely respondents were to vote, and you find reason to believe the Anyone But Ford movement is indeed coalescing around Mr. Smitherman: He actually leads among respondents who say they’re “absolutely certain” to vote. If it was in fact a two-man race, Mr. Smitherman would win by three points over Mr. Ford; among “absolutely certain” voters, he’s ahead by a whopping 20.
These polls aren’t statistically comparable, and this narrative might not survive the next one. But if it’s basically true, Mr. Smitherman suddenly has his hands on a pretty useful, middle-of-the-road platform.
Crucially, he’s fiscally hawkish: His balanced budget plan, released on Monday, isn’t a thousand miles away from Mr. Ford’s. (It just isn’t Mr. Ford’s, which is the name of the game.) For example, Mr. Smitherman promises $332-million in savings by 2014 from a three-out/two-in attrition plan for municipal employees.
[. . .]
Mr. Smitherman has appealing little sound bites to toss out in various directions. He’s gay, meaning he has “an identification with minorities.” But he’s also the “son of a trucker,” so he’s a bit salty and fanatically opposed to Toronto’s world-beating gridlock.
He’s got a hodgepodge of non-ideological positions on lots of minor issues. There isn’t much room on the left between him and Joe Pantalone on the environment and the arts, and he supports the fair wage policy that means all city projects get built at unionized labour rates. But hey, at least he wouldn’t pay a premium for locally produced infrastructure like streetcars and subway trains. He is clearly not altogether comfortable with the Port Authority’s tunnel to the Island Airport, which you might think is nuts, but at least he can live with it. He knows we’ve got bigger fish to fry.
Suffice it to say, Tomasz Bugajski's blogTO post explaining his decision to engage in strategic voting is going to be highly prominent in my mind. Vote Smitherman, everyone! Vote Smitherman, and avert a terrible, terrible fate for Toronto!
It might be time to start supporting someone, though this raises a serious question for me and others in my position: do we just suck it up and vote for whoever has the best chance of beating the candidate we don't like? Or do we stick to our principals and only vote for the candidate who truly inspires us?
Unfortunately, following the second choice would mean rarely or never voting. It would also mean I'd have to disengage from the political process whenever it didn't reflect my exact needs.
It could be said that casting the wrong strategic vote is worse than casting the wrong honest vote. If your strategic choice turns out badly -- particularly if you didn't fully support the candidate in the first place, you might feel especially responsible. The wrong honest vote, on the other hand, is done from the heart and can't be blamed on an irresponsible gamble.
Despite this, I think it's important to take the risk. It's better than backing off and letting others make decisions for you. Though ideology will play a role in my decision (it would be hard for me to back a staunch conservative in general), I'm mostly concerned that Ford lacks the competence and leadership skills to run a city as complex as Toronto. Not only are his numbers are often wrong -- one small example being the Jarvis bike lanes that he said cost $6 million while the real price tag was closer to $60,000 -- but his track record shows no serious accomplishments over his ten years on council (although, I'll admit a Ford supporter might disagree with that last evaluation).
Did I mention that you should vote for Smitherman in the upcoming mayoral elections? Seriously.
