News   Jul 24, 2024
 482     0 
News   Jul 24, 2024
 506     0 
News   Jul 24, 2024
 420     0 

Next Mayor of Toronto?

Well.. .perhaps you should check out the Globe and Mail

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ant-be-everything-to-everyone/article1628028/

Looks like they agree with me (smaller presence)

Were you hoping people wouldn't read that article? Because it didn't agree with you. It said he was there.

An aside to the discussion of mayoral politics but this article is very interesting, discussing how pride has splintered into different political movements. While I support people standing up for whatever they believe in, I'm a bit afraid of what might happen to pride if too many political groups, especially controversial ones like the anti-Israeli apartheid group mentioned, are involved in the proceedings. It seems likely to detract from the overall message of the event.

Which is of course that you should parade naked through downtown Toronto :D
 
now to turn the page from a silly discussion on whether a mayoral candidate was at PRIDE or not...

Does Rocco A. have a good chance to become the next Mayor?
 
@Juan_Lennon: Unfortunately not. He seems like a good prospect for future mayor but right now, he should be running for councillor to build up some political experience and partnerships.
 
For all the flack that the 'left' mainstream media gets for being biased, Sun Ann Levy is the only journalist in Toronto I'm aware of who is serving as a de facto spokesperson for a mayoral candidate.
 
^I guess when you are being obvious about it, it's not really "bias." Conservatives' paranoic fear of left-wing "bias" in the media probably has to do with the fact that to them, it feels so sneaky - ie based on subtle interpretation of facts rather than outright emotion. It's like the people who worry about a vague feeling of social decline. They feel that with social standards declining they are being convinced to accept something wrong against their will. SAL probably trusts NOW magazine more than the National Post, say.

And how was that SAL article proof of anything? I really wish people would call Rob Ford on his customer service shtick. The mayor of Toronto is not meant to be an operator or a personal assistant. He's supposed to think of the city as a whole, not respond to any random nutjob who strings together the right numbers on a telephone. I would prefer a Prima Donna to a Wal-Mart greeter for mayor, honestly: at least everyone acknowledges the Prima Donna has skills that no one else has.
 
"Waaaah! I can't tear down this obsolete old wreck for my grotesque McMansion, because the NIMBYs and hysterical preservationists together with the local councillor are all on my back! Can you help me, please, Mayor Ford?"
 
Well.. .perhaps you should check out the Globe and Mail

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ant-be-everything-to-everyone/article1628028/

Looks like they agree with me (smaller presence)

Interesting considering he's the 'downtown' candidate.

Wonder if he will return to his council seat.

Well, wouldn't Smitherman be even more of a "downtown" candidate--heck, even having politically represented this turf (unlike Joe Pants)?

Somehow, Pantalone's "smaller presence" still seems rather deliberately tortoise-vs-hare low-key--and remember that he had this as a parade giveaway. Otherwise, he left it up to Smitherman and Rossi--the "gay" candidate and the "big-money establishment" candidate--to go the 76-trombones route. Plus Team Thomson's more earnest presence.

It's weird: for all of Ford's bumph about austerity, it's Pantalone who's thus far running the most deliberately austere campaign of all...
 
Austere?

Joey Pants hasn't really done anything in this race. As the one "voice" of the Left, he should be out there beating the drums and standing up for his issues. Oh wait, isn't his platform to keep things essentially as they are now and as they have been run by Mayor Miller since he's the Deputy Mayor. All he does is try not to tick off too many people and to take small (pardon the pun) steps with his campaign. Lame duck Mayor... Lame Duck Deputy Mayor.
 
Were you hoping people wouldn't read that article? Because it didn't agree with you. It said he was there.

An aside to the discussion of mayoral politics but this article is very interesting, discussing how pride has splintered into different political movements. While I support people standing up for whatever they believe in, I'm a bit afraid of what might happen to pride if too many political groups, especially controversial ones like the anti-Israeli apartheid group mentioned, are involved in the proceedings. It seems likely to detract from the overall message of the event.

Which is of course that you should parade naked through downtown Toronto :D

Well.. perhaps people need to read..

i said they agree with me.. (the smaller presence) perhaps you should read my quote again? :)

Also i proposed it as a question - hence the question mark .

yes sly i know... learning from the NDP ;)



Simon P.. I love the spindoctoring... a smaller presence is deliberate.. .lol...

Maybe perhaps.. Considering the old school italian catholics (still a large voting population) are frankly not as tolerant as the rest of the Torontonians.

Joey Pants classic politics. Smart move though.
 
Last edited:
The dude was handing out condoms with his face on them and you're thinking it was all part of a deliberate strategy to placate the Catholic voters in his ward?



it says 'not yoru average joe' there is no face, no last name etc.

I don't even know why i'm wasting time.... he's not even a contender...

i guess on to ford smitherman and Rossi, and maybe thomson!
 
P.S. JOE pants didn't make an appearance at the pride parade?? Deal Breaker!

js97 said:
Well.. .perhaps you should check out the Globe and Mail

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1628028/

Looks like they agree with me (smaller presence)

js97 said:
i said they agree with me.. (the smaller presence) perhaps you should read my quote again?

Also i proposed it as a question - hence the question mark .

The Globe and Mail didn't agree with you because you originally said he had no presence. You then changed history without changing history by claiming that you said he had a 'smaller prescence' all along.

And the way you posed it originally didn't look like a question with the double question mark - it looked like outrage ("polkaroo was here and I missed him again??") so you can't really hide behind them.

But this is a silly argument. I just wanted to discredit you by showing how you don't make any sense. You seem to be needlessly attacking Joe Pantalone for something he didn't do (which is not attend pride...oh god double-negatives). It was like you were trying to discredit him for no other purpose than to discredit him...

Oh god, my brain hurts trying to understand your twisted re-writing of history...
 

Back
Top