« George Smitherman finds out the hard way that the rainbow coalition isn’t what its cracked up to be. | Main | How to repeal Obamacare »

November 01, 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

CanadianSense

Many voters in Toronto did not listen to expert opinion forwarded by the Toronto Star or Globe & Mail.

The campaign against Ford was the opposite against the winner in Calgary.

Both had spent time in "listening" to the disinterested voters of mainstream politics.

Both deployed messages that resonated and drove the call the action to the ballot.

The Calgary mayor elect did not face the level of scrutiny or attack from his opponents. The attack and hope to dismiss Rob Ford as a credible candidate failed and likely may have helped propel him to the front with the free publicity.

real conservative

When there are problems, you must take corrective action. Half hearted solutions to problems lead to more problems.

WiseGuy

There is one bit more to Ford's victory, in addition to running a great campaign.

Ford already had a reputation for opposing over-spending. This made his pledge to "stop the gravy train", credible.

Would he have won without credibility? I wonder.

George Smith

I'm not a voter in Toronto ... so my opinion may be discarded. However, there is a world outside of the 416 ... and we sometimes also get it right.

I believe that voters were willing to go to a candidate who stated his position clearly and without equivocation. Principles do have an appeal ... especially after years of the warm and fuzzies.

Of course, a candidate's dependence on principles eliminates the need for all those professional consultants and political aides. Obviously, then, this cannot be allowed ... so the vested ones will gang up on the principled one. We should help him resist and defeat them.

Regards.

The comments to this entry are closed.

e-mail address

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 02/2008

Blogging Tories

  • Blogging Tories