This post illustrates exactly what has been bothering me: the intelligent guy who votes for the absurdly asinine Rebuild because he is not aware or has given up hope that the authorities could simply Repair the viaduct.
I'm voting NO on the tunnel and YES on a new Viaduct. I'd prefer to repair the existing structure instead of building a new one, but the important thing is to preserve capacity for the most reasonable cost...
The reason I blame the Surface/Transit people (I take for granted the complete venality of Tunnel supporters) is that they have been willing to accept the convenient lie that the Viaduct must be Replaced. They have accepted that lie without hesitation because they wanted to use the supposed impossibility of Repairing the viaduct to further their own goals if tearing it down.
Thanks, Erica Barnett, Cary Moon and Horse's Ass. I believe that the Rebuild is a terrible, terrible idea — especially when the Viaduct can be Repaired for whatever combination of dollars, timeframe and safety you desire. So anything which helps the Rebuild (such as silence about other alternatives) is a huge error. If we get a strong vote for the Rebuild (because many people are just not aware that the Repair is possible) we'll know the villains: it's people who helped spread the lie that the Viaduct must be Replaced.