Four Sures — City Council Challenger Endorsements VII

The Four Sures are a subset of our Essential Eight city council challenger endorsements, an entirely subjective (as if this whole process isn’t heavily subjective) categorization based on little more than just the positive reaction in sitting down, talking. These four candidates (two today, two more tomorrow), I could’ve hung out with them, drinking coffee, discussing their ideas for the city, for hours. Imagine how great it’ll be for the next four years!

endorsement3

Ward 20 Trinity-Spadina

It’s impossible to see a bad outcome in this race to replace Adam Vaughan. As far as I can tell, there are 3 or 4 candidates who could more than ably fill the former councillor’s shoes. I mean the worst outcome on October 27th will be a Joe Cressy victory, and we could survive that.

But for my money Anshul Kapoor is the best bet for Ward 20. Instrumental in building the NoJetsTO grassroots push against the island airport expansion, the possibilities of what he could do in an official capacity like city councillor are truly exciting. He represents a new wave of young people moving downtown, raising their families there because of the richness of the public domain rather than the vastness of their private space. Build neighbourhoods not just condos, he told me. Let him continue that conversation down at City Hall.

We here at All Fired Up in the Big Smoke endorse Anshul Kapoor for city council in Ward 20 Trinity-Spadina.

endorsement1

Ward 36 Scarborough Southwest

Let me just sum up my pure admiration for Bob Spencer by lifting a quote (like I did for the post I wrote about the Spencer campaign last month) from his interview with David Hains in the Torontoist.

The reality is the city is only great because its people are great. The city only works well because we all get together and work together. I think there’s a whole slew of issues that are missed—if you only look at the hard services in a city, you miss what makes a city useful: art, culture, community education, good health programs, and good nutrition programs for kids. Those are all within the mandate of the City. They’re all much more interesting than arguing about whether eight years from now an environmental assessment is going to be put on this alignment or that alignment, this number of stations or that number of stations.

The added bonus is Spencer’s running against one of the most spectacularly ineffective and insignificant city councillors at City Hall, mayoral portraitist and musical accompanist, Gary Crawford. Spencer lost the council race in 2010 by about 400 votes. It would be a tremendous addition to city council if he turns that result around on October 27th.

We here at All Fired Up in the Big Smoke endorse Robert Spencer for city council in Ward 36 Scarborough Southwest.

hopefully helpfully submitted by Cityslikr

4 Responses to Four Sures — City Council Challenger Endorsements VII

  1. GW says:

    Wouldn’t it make your analysis much simpler if you simply took each candidate in a particular race and scored them on how much they (based on their public statements) dislike:

    a) Cars
    b) Single-family housing
    c) Porter Airlines, and
    d) the Scarborough subway

    and simply endorse the candidate that scores the highest? You could even weight the scoring such that someone who is, say, neutral about Porter but hates cars trumps a competing candidate who hates Porter and the “stubway” but likes cars.

    Or to make it even simpler, why not simply evaluate each candidate on a purely subjective scale on how much he/she reminds you of David Miller? Or is that kind of what you’re already doing?

    • cityslikr says:

      Dear Mr GW,

      Thank you for pointing out to us here at All Fired Up in the Big Smoke that we seem to have a certain ‘type’ of preferred candidate. Imagine that.

      Actually our only drop dead line we wouldn’t cross was the Scarborough subway issue. We were up front about that. In our opinion, support of it showed a shocking lack of respect for expert opinion and for tax dollars that were going to be spent unnecessarily. Make of that what you will.

      The other criteria? You’re just making that up to suit the preferred candidate of your choice.

      • GW says:

        I’m not the one endorsing candidates, including those representing areas of the city you’d otherwise have little to do with. In the absence of party politics at City Hall, you seem bent on constructing an imaginary party (sort of a Fantasy Football for civic politics) aligned with your general “urbanist” philosophy of minimizing personal space, personal possessions and personal mobility.

        Could the reason that you’ve pretty much written off the mayoral race be that even the best case scenario from your perspective (a Chow or, heck, Goldkind victory) would be a poor substitute for having David Miller back?

      • GW says:

        Sonny, it’s not healthy to get so angry at someone simply for having opinions that differ from yours.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: