OASES NEWS spoke with Ari Goldkind , a Toronto-born defence lawyer who was one of the Toronto Mayoral contestants who lost to John Tory. In this interview with OASES NEWS Ari Goldkind talks on different issues regarding his stance during the debate, how he felt before, during and after the election and his advice for the undeveloped/developing countries struggling for the entrenchment of democracy in their countries.

You became popular all of a sudden in the race; your popularity nearly overshadowed others, what was the magic?

I believe the “magic” was simple honesty. People have become very tired of politicians who say one thing and do another, or who outright lie. They also have been frustrated by the reluctance of candidates, journalists and debate moderators to call anyone out on their untruths. I believe people were happy to see someone enter the fray who was unafraid to challenge the sound bites, and then, later, as they investigated my platform, they also enjoyed seeing plans that were realistic, and which spoke to people like adults.

How did you feel when you were not included in the debates initially and how did you feel thereafter when you were included?

At the very outset I felt that I had to earn my place, by creating a plan and a platform that would establish my credibility as a viable candidate rather than someone on an ego trip. Then, it became apparent that the “system” or maybe the tradition of municipal elections, was incredibly skittish about allowing anyone who did not have “legs,” meaning not having years of city council employment. I was of course very enthusiastic about getting into debates, because I truly wanted to debate rather than merely repeat my own mantra. I believe Torontonians deserve to hear candidates actually discuss things, rather than merely trying to out-shout each other.

During the campaign and debates you were always honest and straight in your opinions. Do you think this caused your mayoral loss?

No, I believe if more Torontonians had been able to hear my opinions, then more would have voted for me, including some in Etobicoke and Scarborough. I believe what caused my loss was insufficient exposure due in large part to being kept out of the media and of debates. I will not blame them entirely, however. I have learned that a campaigning candidate is also responsible for building alliances and contacts along the way, and also that a campaign budget and logistics team are necessary in order to maximize the message across all types of media, and of course, in person. In short, rightly or wrongly, you have to be able to afford to run.

Would you be interested to contest in future for the same mayoral post?

I believe so. I would like to see this city move forward, and I would very much like to eliminate the “us versus them” mentality that has been greatly fostered in recent years. So whether I can do that as mayor or in some related role, I am keen to explore the options.

The election process was so unique, free and fair, no rigging of the election. How did your supporters feel before, during and after the election?

I believe everyone felt the same. It was clean and efficient. The candidate with the most votes won. All I would like to see to improve upon this would be greater turnout. This election’s turnout was comparatively high in the downtown core, but, I am saddened when I see anyone pass up on their opportunity to vote.

In some underdeveloped countries, whenever the contestants lose election for any position they use all kinds of ways to protest, fighting, shooting, killing etc. What would you like to tell those countries about losing an election?

A big problem with that approach is that those who live by the sword die by the sword. When intimidation and violence become your chief tools, no progress can be made, and the evidence is plain to see in so many countries around the world. I recognize that not all countries wish to adopt the style of democracy that we enjoy here, but I feel, too that most hard-working people, regardless of nationality, prefer peace over fighting, and a small amount of prosperity in place of living under tyranny. When people take to the streets to protest against their own loss of democratic rights, as it happened in Hong Kong and in the Ukraine, or perhaps against severe cutbacks to their economic prosperity, as happened in Greece, they have to be careful to ensure that the new administration isn’t just a copy of the deposed one. My advice to people in these situations is that education and awareness is their greatest tool for change. Use the Internet, use conversations use what you can to learn more about the world and how things can be done. Awareness is like light. It helps people see the road ahead more clearly.

How do you see the candidates vs the electorates vs candidates programs/plans? E.g. the candidates would say what people like to hear etc.

If I understand your question correctly, yes, I would like every candidate to be sufficiently prepared to both listen to questions from the electorate and to provide appropriate answers together with facts and data to back them up, and which can stand up to real time fact checking. It angers me when a question is asked about housing for the poor and the answer is skewed back to “subways” or some similar mantra. Politicians are here to serve the people, not the other way around. Lip-service to this principle is not acceptable.

What would you like to change in future in the mayoral election if any?

I would like to see a shorter campaign period but with debates that actually are worth something. I would like to see a system by which the candidates have to prove their worth in more ways than simply paying $200 to register, and then complaining that they don’t get the same exposure as those who work for exposure and platform. And I would like to see a system that does not stick only to the “top three” for no reason. There has to be a way to allow new voices into the system. I would also be strongly in favour of ranked balloting.