The City has posted per-ward and per-poll results on their website. Of course, people were quick to map and analyze these results.
Torontoist has a great map that shows a clear downtown (or old City of Toronto) vs. Megacity (or Metro Toronto) divide when it comes to choice for mayor. Not surprisingly, Ward 18 chose Smitherman and even Pantalone almost beat Ford here:
Ward 18, Davenport
Rob Ford: 3973 (27.5%)
George Smitherman: 5697 (39.5%)
Joe Pantalone: 3756 (26.0%)
Total votes: 14422
A few commenters on that Torontoist article also posted some interesting map mashups:
If I knew where each Ward 18 poll was located, it would be fun to do a Ward 18 version of a map like this, to see who the residents of the Junction Triangle would have chosen as councillor and mayor.
There is a small tank truck pumping something at different spots in the lot and a small pick up has been there the whole time with a construction guy who's walking around the property looking at the ground.
The owners were telling me about this recently. The inspector was satisfied with everything at Angel's, except that they didn't have the proper sink setup (two vs. the required three sinks, I believe). They're working on correcting it. It's totally not something to be worried about. Ask the owners if you have any questions. :)
I agree it's time to extend congratulations to Ana. I voted for Kevin and hoped he would get in. But I was impressed by how hard Ana worked to gather support over a period of many months. She must have been at my door at least five times. Let's hope she works as hard for our community as our councillor, and that as a neighbourhood we can forge a good relationship with her and her office, the way many of us did with Adam, Kevin and those who worked for them.
The filing dates don't mean anything. Heyma was planning on running in Parkdale and talked with Kevin's campaign team before she switched to ward 18. People already knew who was planning to run.
In Calgary a reverse situation, Naheed K. Nenshi did engage a lot of new voters and used social media etc etc but the right vote was split between two higher profile candidates and slipped up the middle. Right wingers can't believe they let this one slip away.
I am not saying people should or should not run, but in theory you should be a slave to the vision and making that happen.
I like the shooting in a circle reference. We stick with what we are good at.
Earlier in the year there was some dust kicked up over the choice of moderator for a mayoral debate. In the debate itself the moderator used the occasion to resurrect the issue of panhandling. This struck me as being particularly not 'of this place'. I think the issue of the safety of our children is far more important. In particular the boys and girls club has experienced some turbulence lately. I hope it does not come to be seen as an opportunity to 'cut waste'. This might be a good time to rally to the cause. I would not substitute my own voice for those around me. Perhaps this would be a good opportunity to use your own voice (or keyboard) to welcome Ana to her new role in our community and gently remind her that some people round here are a touch sensitive about our kids. Or, if your values are different than mine feel free to express that.
"As a progressive thinking person I would have not run in the ward considering it was clear from day 1 that it was between Kevin and Ana."
Let me play Devil's Advocate:
Ana registered on 27-Jan-10.
Hema: 09-Feb-10
Frank: 23-Apr-10
Kevin: 28-Apr-10
Should we have stopped taking "progressive" nominations after Hema joined on February 9th? :) Should Hema and Frank have stepped aside once Kevin decided to run?
I don't like either of those scenarios. Kevin was also my #1 choice, but it doesn't mean that others should stay out.
Ana has spent a lot of time canvasing the ward not only in this campaign but previously as well. She put a great deal of work into a successful candidacy.
With his name on the ballot for the first time I think Kevin did a great job building recognition as a legitimate contender.
With a campaign team being so important I think it is great to see an independent candidate do as well as Hema.
I support extending municipal voting to all residents and also ranked ballots. These reforms would improve democracy somewhat. But we should remember that ALL candidates have contributed to democracy by giving us choices. This is the most critical element of a vibrant democracy.
So I hope many people will join me in applauding and thanking all of the candidates for ward 18 and in wishing Ana luck in securing strong support for ward 18 from the city.
True. There were NDP people as you would expect considering that Kevin is a progressive. I saw a lot of Liberals and unaffiliated helpers too. Hardly a machine. I did see squads of Ana lawyers at polling stations such as Wallace Emerson poll 4 though. Cheri Di Novo likes to quip about the joke that progressives like to get in a circle and open fire and in this case she may not be too are from the truth. It shows that progressives can suffer from the same ego issues as everybody else. As a progressive thinking person I would have not run in the ward considering it was clear from day 1 that it was between Kevin and Ana. We should have a progressive knowledgeable on council for the next 4 years protecting the quality of life in the ward but we don't and it did not have to happen.
I volunteered with Kevin's campaign, and the idea that there was an "NDP machine" directing or controlling things is nonsense. Frankly, I found the NDP-bashing by so-called "independent progressives", in this ward and others very offputting. I vote NDP because in my opinion they are the party that best reflects my "progressive" values. If a candidate shares those values, I don't understand why they would sneer at NDP voters rather than trying to build bridges with them.
Really I think Kevin's campaign did a great job of bringing diverse progressive communities together. Students, environmentalists, cyclists, transit geeks, neighborhood groups... and yes, union members and NDP supporters... came together and worked really hard. Unfortunately it wasn't enough this time.
I wonder if the results would have been any different if we had a ranked ballot with an instant runoff. Such a ballot might have solidified Ana's win to over 50%, or it might have put Kevin ahead once some of the less popular names were dropped. Or maybe even Ken's scenario would have come out. :) Either way, we would have elected someone who was supported by at least half of the voters.
A really interesting race was in Ward 10. See results here. In that ward, James Pasternak won with only 19.156% of the vote! The top four contenders were all within 4% of each other, and fifth place was only 8% behind. No real clear "winner" that represents the wishes of the whole ward very well. A ranked ballot with instant runoff probably would have cleared things up in that ward too.
I know you are kidding Ken. But people who study the way people vote know that a race in an incumbent ward is different than in an open one. Open races attract more candidates of all levels; wing nuts, honourable but unelectable, and contenders. Hence people running who lived nowhere near and knew nothing about Ward 18, a few nutbars who never made any effort to meet residents, and a group that in theory would agree on more things than they would disagree with. In the case of the progressives they together got over 50% of the vote but ended up putting a less than progressive candidate in office. Egos aside, 50% of the ward would have preferred a more progressive candidate. Those are the numbers.
Had Kevin and Joe MacDonald not run, perhaps Frank de Jong would have gotten their votes, giving him 6449 votes to Ana's 6277 votes and he would have won!
Voter turnout up from 35% to almost 54% ! Something to be happy about.
Yet of all eligible voters, Ana got the support of 23.5% of them.
12,391 people who could have did NOT vote.
Were they of the 'None of the Above' persuasion or just didn't care or were lazy?
Or - to put it another way, more people who did vote voted for someone OTHER THAN Ana.
We really, really, really need ranked ballots so people can express true priorities.
Every person who ran had the right to run. Never assume votes that went to others would have gone to any particular candidate - they may in fact have not voted at all.
When you look at the platforms of the other progressives you mention, they were decidely different in many respects. So - choice was offered.
In my view, Kevin lost because of his loyalty and ties to Giambrone and Miller.
Yes he showed personal integrity in not deserting his former boss and mentor, but he could have done more to distance himself from some of their mistakes. I remember the very first Torontoist interview (one he got before even registering) and it was said he'd have to show he was his own man. Instead, a tightly controlled NDP machine underestimated the crafty/sneaky Bailao Liberal machine.
Well fought, but in the end we all have to accept the outcomes.
(Still cannot help wondering how things would have been different with ranked ballots....)
Kevin didnt loose to Ana, he lost to three other progessive candidates, none who had a chance of winning, who took enough votes away so that no progressive could win. Hope they feel happy now.
Hope someone knows the story. Here is a picture.
Patrick Cain has some excellent maps and commentary on his website too:
http://www.patrickcain.ca/?cat=13
Sounds like he might take a stab at ward-level results.
The City has posted per-ward and per-poll results on their website. Of course, people were quick to map and analyze these results.
Torontoist has a great map that shows a clear downtown (or old City of Toronto) vs. Megacity (or Metro Toronto) divide when it comes to choice for mayor. Not surprisingly, Ward 18 chose Smitherman and even Pantalone almost beat Ford here:
A few commenters on that Torontoist article also posted some interesting map mashups:
Anyone else find this stuff interesting??
If I knew where each Ward 18 poll was located, it would be fun to do a Ward 18 version of a map like this, to see who the residents of the Junction Triangle would have chosen as councillor and mayor.
As of this afternoon:
There is a small tank truck pumping something at different spots in the lot and a small pick up has been there the whole time with a construction guy who's walking around the property looking at the ground.
Interesting.
Please visit this Flickr site to view images associated with the Junction Triangle Visioning article above:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54803001@N07/5077031793/in/photostream/
The owners were telling me about this recently. The inspector was satisfied with everything at Angel's, except that they didn't have the proper sink setup (two vs. the required three sinks, I believe). They're working on correcting it. It's totally not something to be worried about. Ask the owners if you have any questions. :)
Actually, you can look up their Dinesafe record online:
http://app.toronto.ca/food2/DineSafeMain?userRequest=view_history&ESTABL...
Angel's is a great, clean place. Definitely check it out.
Yes, they have to add a commercial dishwasher
Hey Lindsay, I noticed at the side of the window the City Public Health gave Angel's a yellow sign(conditiona) Do you know why????
LEASE-TO-OWN
* Do you want to own your home?
* Do you have, or can get, some funds for your down payment?
* Do you have bruised credit?
This could just be your solution to home-ownership! You’re invited to join us!
WHEN: SUN OCT 31
4:00 – 5:30PM
WHERE: ANGEL’S CAFÉ
145 SYMINGTON AVE
AT WALLACE
Angel’s amazing coffee and pastries
FREE OF CHARGE
To all attendees.
Lindsay Karabanow
(416) 809-6245 (cell)
Sales Representative
Royal LePage Realty Plus, Brokerage
905.828.6550 (office)
Well put Kristen!
I agree it's time to extend congratulations to Ana. I voted for Kevin and hoped he would get in. But I was impressed by how hard Ana worked to gather support over a period of many months. She must have been at my door at least five times. Let's hope she works as hard for our community as our councillor, and that as a neighbourhood we can forge a good relationship with her and her office, the way many of us did with Adam, Kevin and those who worked for them.
The filing dates don't mean anything. Heyma was planning on running in Parkdale and talked with Kevin's campaign team before she switched to ward 18. People already knew who was planning to run.
In Calgary a reverse situation, Naheed K. Nenshi did engage a lot of new voters and used social media etc etc but the right vote was split between two higher profile candidates and slipped up the middle. Right wingers can't believe they let this one slip away.
I am not saying people should or should not run, but in theory you should be a slave to the vision and making that happen.
I like the shooting in a circle reference. We stick with what we are good at.
Earlier in the year there was some dust kicked up over the choice of moderator for a mayoral debate. In the debate itself the moderator used the occasion to resurrect the issue of panhandling. This struck me as being particularly not 'of this place'. I think the issue of the safety of our children is far more important. In particular the boys and girls club has experienced some turbulence lately. I hope it does not come to be seen as an opportunity to 'cut waste'. This might be a good time to rally to the cause. I would not substitute my own voice for those around me. Perhaps this would be a good opportunity to use your own voice (or keyboard) to welcome Ana to her new role in our community and gently remind her that some people round here are a touch sensitive about our kids. Or, if your values are different than mine feel free to express that.
Let me play Devil's Advocate:
Ana registered on 27-Jan-10.
Hema: 09-Feb-10
Frank: 23-Apr-10
Kevin: 28-Apr-10
Should we have stopped taking "progressive" nominations after Hema joined on February 9th? :) Should Hema and Frank have stepped aside once Kevin decided to run?
I don't like either of those scenarios. Kevin was also my #1 choice, but it doesn't mean that others should stay out.
Ana has spent a lot of time canvasing the ward not only in this campaign but previously as well. She put a great deal of work into a successful candidacy.
With his name on the ballot for the first time I think Kevin did a great job building recognition as a legitimate contender.
With a campaign team being so important I think it is great to see an independent candidate do as well as Hema.
I support extending municipal voting to all residents and also ranked ballots. These reforms would improve democracy somewhat. But we should remember that ALL candidates have contributed to democracy by giving us choices. This is the most critical element of a vibrant democracy.
So I hope many people will join me in applauding and thanking all of the candidates for ward 18 and in wishing Ana luck in securing strong support for ward 18 from the city.
True. There were NDP people as you would expect considering that Kevin is a progressive. I saw a lot of Liberals and unaffiliated helpers too. Hardly a machine. I did see squads of Ana lawyers at polling stations such as Wallace Emerson poll 4 though. Cheri Di Novo likes to quip about the joke that progressives like to get in a circle and open fire and in this case she may not be too are from the truth. It shows that progressives can suffer from the same ego issues as everybody else. As a progressive thinking person I would have not run in the ward considering it was clear from day 1 that it was between Kevin and Ana. We should have a progressive knowledgeable on council for the next 4 years protecting the quality of life in the ward but we don't and it did not have to happen.
I volunteered with Kevin's campaign, and the idea that there was an "NDP machine" directing or controlling things is nonsense. Frankly, I found the NDP-bashing by so-called "independent progressives", in this ward and others very offputting. I vote NDP because in my opinion they are the party that best reflects my "progressive" values. If a candidate shares those values, I don't understand why they would sneer at NDP voters rather than trying to build bridges with them.
Really I think Kevin's campaign did a great job of bringing diverse progressive communities together. Students, environmentalists, cyclists, transit geeks, neighborhood groups... and yes, union members and NDP supporters... came together and worked really hard. Unfortunately it wasn't enough this time.
I wonder if the results would have been any different if we had a ranked ballot with an instant runoff. Such a ballot might have solidified Ana's win to over 50%, or it might have put Kevin ahead once some of the less popular names were dropped. Or maybe even Ken's scenario would have come out. :) Either way, we would have elected someone who was supported by at least half of the voters.
A really interesting race was in Ward 10. See results here. In that ward, James Pasternak won with only 19.156% of the vote! The top four contenders were all within 4% of each other, and fifth place was only 8% behind. No real clear "winner" that represents the wishes of the whole ward very well. A ranked ballot with instant runoff probably would have cleared things up in that ward too.
I know you are kidding Ken. But people who study the way people vote know that a race in an incumbent ward is different than in an open one. Open races attract more candidates of all levels; wing nuts, honourable but unelectable, and contenders. Hence people running who lived nowhere near and knew nothing about Ward 18, a few nutbars who never made any effort to meet residents, and a group that in theory would agree on more things than they would disagree with. In the case of the progressives they together got over 50% of the vote but ended up putting a less than progressive candidate in office. Egos aside, 50% of the ward would have preferred a more progressive candidate. Those are the numbers.
Had Kevin and Joe MacDonald not run, perhaps Frank de Jong would have gotten their votes, giving him 6449 votes to Ana's 6277 votes and he would have won!
See how progressives split the vote?
...just kidding....
Voter turnout up from 35% to almost 54% ! Something to be happy about.
Yet of all eligible voters, Ana got the support of 23.5% of them.
12,391 people who could have did NOT vote.
Were they of the 'None of the Above' persuasion or just didn't care or were lazy?
Or - to put it another way, more people who did vote voted for someone OTHER THAN Ana.
We really, really, really need ranked ballots so people can express true priorities.
By the way - my "Aftermath" take on the results here:
http://davenportdemocracy.blogspot.com/2010/10/aftermath.html
Every person who ran had the right to run. Never assume votes that went to others would have gone to any particular candidate - they may in fact have not voted at all.
When you look at the platforms of the other progressives you mention, they were decidely different in many respects. So - choice was offered.
In my view, Kevin lost because of his loyalty and ties to Giambrone and Miller.
Yes he showed personal integrity in not deserting his former boss and mentor, but he could have done more to distance himself from some of their mistakes. I remember the very first Torontoist interview (one he got before even registering) and it was said he'd have to show he was his own man. Instead, a tightly controlled NDP machine underestimated the crafty/sneaky Bailao Liberal machine.
Well fought, but in the end we all have to accept the outcomes.
(Still cannot help wondering how things would have been different with ranked ballots....)
Kevin didnt loose to Ana, he lost to three other progessive candidates, none who had a chance of winning, who took enough votes away so that no progressive could win. Hope they feel happy now.
Amen
We might as well change our city name to Detroit right now.