Choosing a candidate in an election is a daunting and challenging task. Politicians bend the facts to suit their needs; they deflect; they exaggerate; some have even been known to lie.
So what should a voter do?
Take everything said with a grain of salt. Know the promises are political, which means they are at best, temporary, forged in the heat of the stumpings.
The editorial in the Toronto Star says it very well at
‘Emotion rules, not economics.’ Voters vote with emotion rather than with intellect. Saying this does change it, nor does it jar the electorate into altering the way they vote.
The Star states it very clearly and very correctly. Based on current polls, Ford is predicted to winning a majority. The editorial staff further emphasizes that no matter what facts are presented by Wynne or Horwath in the campaign, the two of them will be very hard-pressed to overcome the hurdle the voters set, a hurdle which is a purely emotional wall.
We do not endorse any candidate at this time in the campaign, though we feel we may be leaning toward Andrea Horwath.
Wynne’s government has been abysmal
Wynne has terrible baggage from exorbitant spending of tax payer money to examples of corruption and scandal. Admittedly, some of this baggage was a legacy of other governments but she did not seem to do much to correct errors made before, but instead compounded them so that today the province is in horrendous debt. Yet, she campaigns with promises of greater expenditures in the areas of basic salary levels, denticare, pharmacare and more. How she is going to do this with a province deeply in debt is a troubling question.
Ford huffs and puffs saying little concretely speaking
Ford speaking off script, seems to evade, deflect and bafflegab his audiences. But he does so in language which appeals to the general populace. Most voters find his words appealing and persuasive. Many attend his Ford Nation barbecues enjoy a cold one and a hot dog as they gland hand “one of them!” But dig behind the coffee mug/beer mug phrases to find a vacuous void. His promises argue to save the taxpayer money: firing civil servants who make incredibly high paying salaries, lowering taxes, lowering hydro rates and more, or should we say less. How can he do it? Sounds like pulling a rabbit out of a hat; lower revenue but greater benefits for all. If it could be done, he deserves the vote but it cannot be done.
Horwarth, likely to be a bridesmaid again
Finally, Horwath, always the loser. Bridesmaid level at best, but never the bride. She too promises many things as if the province has a treasure trove of endless wealth. Again, voters must listen with a discerning ear, separating the wheat from the chaff, analyzing the possibility of the promised pipe dreams from bottomless coffers. Horwath may be in a puzzling position: this will be her last kick at the can in politics. She has been a professional, an ethical and a principled politician; no corruption, no scandals. But to win, she needs to do two very challenging things: make her expensive policy promises more acceptable, more credible and more realistic given the economy and the treasury which she is facing and she needs to don a more down-to-earth facade, speaking to the average voter “over a cup of coffee,” not to the cerebral post secondary intellectuals studying for MA’s or worse, Phd’s. Join us little people and we may listen.
The Toronto Star has presented a very clear analysis as to why the electorate votes as it does, ignoring analyses and critical examination of campaign promises. This is a very difficult election and voters are really stuck between a rock and a hard place. Changes are needed at Queen’s Park but who should lead the change?
An addendum: Horwath responds to voters more than Wynne and Ford. Recently when a request was sent to each party’s campaign office for a summary of their party platform, Horwath’s office responded within a couple of days. Ten days later, still no response from Wynne or Ford. A very indication of something: either our website is totally insignificant, hard to believe that is a possibility or the two leading parties cannot be bothered to respond to one voter such as we are.