Raise the Hammer

That's a fair point, but again, you're looking at this very rationally, when I'd say the key is appealing to people on their terms, whether you agree or disagree with those terms.

The cost anxiety is based on fear about "how much this thing is going to cost us". A lot of these people simply don't want to pay higher taxes, some can't afford it, and others would rather not pay them, and that's the bottom line. So cut right to the chase - LRT = taxes increase by x percentage, No LRT = taxes increase by y percentage. Show that taxes increase less with LRT, and quantify it, visualize it nicely (beautiful graphs), and have a charismatic politician promise it. Ideally, you'd even say that for at least x years after LRT is installed "no new taxes". That's the kind of thing people want to hear in order to be sold on the concept.

Part of the problem with actual data about costs and benefits that has been presented so far is the delivery. It's been presented more as something that is wonderful to downtown and about reducing car usage, and while it's wonderful these benefits (somewhat understandably) get air time, the focus should have been on the interests of 'unconverted' suburban and mountain voters (lower taxes, job creation, etc.). The main LRT advocate in the election is a guy who publicly declared he doesn't drive on the Red Hill. Sure he took it back, but the cat was out of the bag. That was a major erosion of trust for mountain and suburban voters who rely on the Red Hill, and are already wary of the LRT.

The work that transit advocates have done in Hamilton is incredible, but I really feel the salesmanship has been poor. There's been a lot of blaming the other side, and that's great and all, but people aren't stupid, and in the long run, great ideas, properly sold, win.