"A 40% endorsement IS a strong showing"
RE: “40% of Torontonians voted with Mayor Miller 8 years ago to stop the BRIDGE - NOT the airport. As previously stated - hardly a resounding mandate from the electorate.” (Does the Island Airport give Torontonians a "razzberry?" 6Apr09)
I’ve seen this hackneyed and widely discredited contention made here several times and by others at the Toronto Board of Trade, and the CAW.
The 40% endorsement being “hardly a resounding mandate” (re the 2003 Toronto municipal election) is just so much sour grapes! Hell, there were FIVE (not two) strong mayoral candidates in that election, including a popular incumbent mayor, and the only female of the five to boot! No matter how you look at it, with that many contenders, a 40% endorsement IS a strong showing. And just to put a little further twist on it, that so called “hardly a resounding mandate” was reconfirmed in the 2006 municipal elections. This would be a strong endorsement in any democracy.
One has to wonder what’s the big deal about the bridge being a totally stand alone issue separate from the airport. I mean it’s patently clear the only reason for the bridge is the airport. These guys are sure walking on thin ice if they expect people to believe that the vote against the bridge in the 2003 municipal election was NOT a rejection of the argument pushed by airport protagonists … that a bridge would make airline service more efficient, and provide a financial benefit. Clearly the vote was a straight out rejection of this argument! Torontonians are not comfortable with a growing commercial island airport smack dab on the waterfront which parliamentary representatives like Bob Rae, in whose riding it’s happening, ignor at their political peril.
David Wilson
I’ve seen this hackneyed and widely discredited contention made here several times and by others at the Toronto Board of Trade, and the CAW.
The 40% endorsement being “hardly a resounding mandate” (re the 2003 Toronto municipal election) is just so much sour grapes! Hell, there were FIVE (not two) strong mayoral candidates in that election, including a popular incumbent mayor, and the only female of the five to boot! No matter how you look at it, with that many contenders, a 40% endorsement IS a strong showing. And just to put a little further twist on it, that so called “hardly a resounding mandate” was reconfirmed in the 2006 municipal elections. This would be a strong endorsement in any democracy.
One has to wonder what’s the big deal about the bridge being a totally stand alone issue separate from the airport. I mean it’s patently clear the only reason for the bridge is the airport. These guys are sure walking on thin ice if they expect people to believe that the vote against the bridge in the 2003 municipal election was NOT a rejection of the argument pushed by airport protagonists … that a bridge would make airline service more efficient, and provide a financial benefit. Clearly the vote was a straight out rejection of this argument! Torontonians are not comfortable with a growing commercial island airport smack dab on the waterfront which parliamentary representatives like Bob Rae, in whose riding it’s happening, ignor at their political peril.
David Wilson
Comments