Letter: A tale of a daughter’s research before voting

“I would love to be able to support Kathleen Wynne and vote for Charles Fox but…”

To the Expositor:

I got good news last Thursday. My stepdaughter from Ottawa told us she had decided whom she was going to vote for. She had done her homework. She looked at the two platforms of Kathleen and Andrea, and the few details of what Doug seemed to be offering her and her family, and settled on the leader who was generally regarded as having won the televised debate on Wednesday. She could actually tell you, in detail, why she chose to vote the way she plans to.

It made me wonder how many voters could do the same. How many people know that the 12 percent savings on hydro that Doug is offering is actually much lower than the current 36 to 38 percent responsible consumers like me have enjoyed for over a year already? Are they as skeptical as I am about his keeping his promise not to ravage Toronto’s world renowned Greenbelt, if he gets into power? Are they aware of some of the sleazy tactics he has used to win at all costs?

Although I would strongly prefer to be able to support Kathleen’s party, Andrea’s platform is close enough to Kathleen’s for me to feel comfortable voting NDP this time, but with great reservations. I wish she hadn’t jumped on the media’s bandwagon and translated (as the media did often throughout the campaign) Kathleen’s lower numbers in the polls into evidence of the “disappointment” of voters with both her record and her platform.

I saw only one actual interview in which a potential voter was asked for and gave a reason for his not voting for the Liberal leader but, as the media more and more often referred to her as “unpopular,” and even “widely” and/or “wildly” unpopular, Andrea’s ads fed into the rhetoric, and the next thing we knew, she assumed that the voters were “fed up” with Kathleen Wynne and were “looking for a change.”

Before my stepdaughter did her homework on the election, we briefly discussed her uninformed opinion. She started with, “Well people don’t seem to like Wynne,” but she was unable to explain why.

She was morally opposed to Doug, and thought she might vote NDP.

After she did her homework, she wondered why people would be fed up with Wynne’s record of a million new jobs, the second best rate of economic growth in Canada, lowest unemployment rates in over 20 years, lower hydro rates, etc.

Why would they want a change from a leader whose newest platform showed a continuing strong commitment to doing the best she could for the most people in Ontario: constituents of all origins, all races, all genders; among them parents, children, students, and seniors, and in the most important areas of health, daycare, education, business, job creation and retention, and environmental stewardship?

What she took the time to learn, in order to make a decision in the best interests of her spouse, who is a teacher, their one year old child, and their family’s future in Ontario, led her to the one person, who already has in place, a great deal to build on. No change for the sake of change for her.

So, as I go to the polls, I am gratified to know that one person’s critical thinking skills, that I helped to foster for over 20 years, kicked in at one of the most crucial times in Ontario’s political history.

As long as we do not end up with our version of Donald Trump in charge, I will be happy. I would love to be able to support Kathleen and vote for Charles Fox. But, with so many candidates on the ballot this time around and the dangers inherent in vote splitting, it seems the only chance we have of avoiding ushering in the horror of The Handmaid’s Tale is to vote for the NDP candidate running in our Algoma-Manitoulin riding. At least he has a credible amount of experience in the job, and his leader has more personal knowledge of the kinds of lives most of us live than the man who pretends to care about people he would not choose to associate with in any other capacity than as a candidate for the premier’s job.


Deborah Wilson
Honora Bay