Federal Liberal Candidates

619 posts / 0 new
Last post
Pondering

jjuares wrote:
Pondering wrote:

 

I know the NDP could still win in 2015, I'm not suggesting anyone give-up. I want the NDP to be strong, but it really isn't looking good for this election cycle so far.

Gee thanks for the words of encouragement and I was just about to suggest we cancel the election and just anoint Trudeau.

That would save money.

Jacob Two-Two

Better yet, let's just make the position of Prime Minister hereditary. We all know it's more about character than qualifications anyway, and Justin seems like a nice guy. What more do we need? We'll give it to him and he can pass it to his eldest child.

trotwood73

More "open nominations" scandals plaguing the Liberals and Trudeau:

Justin Trudeau's Open Nominations Vow Called A 'Farce'  [Huff Post]

Jacob Two-Two

Breaking news! Habitual liars still not telling the truth.

terrytowel

Globe & Mail article about the nomination process in Don Valley North where the candidate bused in only Madarin speaking members and wound up winning the nomination!

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/federal-liberals-cultivate-...

jjuares

Last time I saw a leader dominate the news like Trudeau is doing now,, was back in 1968. I don't have much regard for Trudeau in most areas but in terms of grabbing the spotlight he is amazing.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

terrytowel wrote:

Globe & Mail article about the nomination process in Don Valley North where the candidate bused in only Madarin speaking members and wound up winning the nomination!

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/federal-liberals-cultivate-...

I agree that Chinese Canadians should never have been given the vote unless they promised to follow the voting preferences of white people.[sarcasm alert]

Personally I have no problem with it as long as the individual joining has been persuaded not coerced and they pay their own memebrship fees.  If I sign up a lot of Engish speaking white people and don't get any Chinese or punjabi or urdu speakers does that make my membership signup tainted?

Selling memberships within one's ethnic community is how people get nominated in every party in Canada including the NDP.  In the NDP you can't buy someone elses membership but I've seen it done and within various ethnic communities.  How do you think Ujjal became Premier of BC? If you have any doubt about the reason then contemplate the fact that he easily was able to sell memberships in the Liberal party when he became a Liberal MP.

 

terrytowel

kropotkin1951 wrote:

How do you think Ujjal became Premier of BC?

Wasn't it because Glen Clark resigned, and there was no one else to take his place but Ujjal?

Pondering

trotwood73 wrote:

More "open nominations" scandals plaguing the Liberals and Trudeau:

Justin Trudeau's Open Nominations Vow Called A 'Farce'  [Huff Post]

How bizarre. As I read it I began to realize it was almost 100% inuendo full of mays and mights and even the world "whispers".  It seems more like a gossip column than anything else. There was nothing new in it. I checked the top for the byline.

It was written by none other than Althia Raj. Either she has broken up with Justin or she is trying to appear less biased. I will go with the second because the article isn't really damaging.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Sure thats it. Ethnicity played absolutely no part in the election signups of the Ujjal campaign. Sorry I don't buy that and I was there. The party fixers thought we needed a centrist liberal leader instead of Evans and there were a lot of memberships signed in ethnic communities.

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:

terrytowel wrote:

Globe & Mail article about the nomination process in Don Valley North where the candidate bused in only Madarin speaking members and wound up winning the nomination!

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/federal-liberals-cultivate-...

I agree that Chinese Canadians should never have been given the vote unless they promised to follow the voting preferences of white people.[sarcasm alert]

Personally I have no problem with it as long as the individual joining has been persuaded not coerced and they pay their own memebrship fees.  If I sign up a lot of Engish speaking white people and don't get any Chinese or punjabi or urdu speakers does that make my membership signup tainted?

Selling memberships within one's ethnic community is how people get nominated in every party in Canada including the NDP.  In the NDP you can't buy someone elses membership but I've seen it done and within various ethnic communities.  How do you think Ujjal became Premier of BC? If you have any doubt about the reason then contemplate the fact that he easily was able to sell memberships in the Liberal party when he became a Liberal MP.

I was confused at first because it occured to me that everyone goes to their friends and family and community for support so naturally someone who is Chinese will fine support within their community. I don't like the "full of old people" comment as though that makes their votes less valid. On the other hand:

The result stunned many. Mr. Geng won by a 3:1 ratio. “About 95 per cent of the riding executive supported Rana,” said Allan Miranda, who was a member of the executive. “The result was just a shock. Geng just sewed it up.”

Bryon Wilfert, a former Liberal MP for Richmond Hill, said the real problem is the nomination process, in which the best and brightest with the biggest ideas are not always set up to succeed. “It’s how many memberships can I buy or sell,” he said, adding that he had no knowledge of the Don Valley contest. “It’s which boy scout sold the most cookies. Is that the best way to run this?”

Pasted from <http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/federal-liberals-cultivate-mandarin-powerhouse-in-gta/article20104666/>

It does seem as though it is too easy to hijack proceedings in local ridings.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

How the hell can selling memberships be highjacking a nomination meeting. The old guard got caught by a candidate who wanted the nomination and had a team willing to work and get results.  Its not like the Liberals have an ideology except getting elected. 

Who the hell decides who the "best and brightest" is?  I gather this former Liberal MP believes the process has to be rigged to make sure that his preferred candidate wins since he was obviously the best and brightest. I find it hilarious given that the whole electoral process is a horse race and winning a nomination 3 to1 tells me the winner put together a great team and will likely run a good campaign.  Unless of course the old guard quits in a snit because they got beat so badly by an ethnic. 

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:

How the hell can selling memberships be highjacking a nomination meeting. The old guard got caught by a candidate who wanted the nomination and had a team willing to work and get results.  Its not like the Liberals have an ideology except getting elected. 

Who the hell decides who the "best and brightest" is?  I gather this former Liberal MP believes the process has to be rigged to make sure that his preferred candidate wins since he was obviously the best and brightest. I find it hilarious given that the whole electoral process is a horse race and winning a nomination 3 to1 tells me the winner put together a great team and will likely run a good campaign.  Unless of course the old guard quits in a snit because they got beat so badly by an ethnic. 

I didn't say it had been hijacked, only that it could be under this type of system. Apparently that is how the Tea Party gained ascendency. I think there should be clearer rules for nominations, for example firmer dates that leave plenty of time for drumming up support but that are closed well before the actual date, preferably before candidates are even announced. I don't think busing in supporters is a good idea either. Offering lifts sure but the people voting should be members that are actually involved in the riding not people who just show up to vote. Riding workers and volunteers are the foot soldiers of the winning candidate in the election.

Were the people bused in even aware of the other candidate's platform or credentials? At the national level it is difficult to skew the results through uncommitted sign-ups. At the riding level the numbers are so much smaller that it is easy.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Well, Pondering, many people, including me, consider this a rather intractable problem. Perhaps you could state a set of rules that you think would deal with it in a fair way. Then I can spend an enjoyable few minutes dismembering your ideas, and showing why they would be worse than what we have now.

Pondering

Michael Moriarity wrote:
Well, Pondering, many people, including me, consider this a rather intractable problem. Perhaps you could state a set of rules that you think would deal with it in a fair way. Then I can spend an enjoyable few minutes dismembering your ideas, and showing why they would be worse than what we have now.

Maybe that's because this is the first time I have thought about it.  Most (maybe all) of the time I don't even know who won the nomination for the party I am voting for in my own riding when I am on my way to the voting booth because it doesn't make any difference. I still don't know the name of the NDP rep I voted for to elect Layton. I don't even know if it's a man or a woman.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Pondering wrote:

Were the people bused in even aware of the other candidate's platform or credentials?

That is a racist statement when made as in this case about a specific group of "ethnically challenged" people.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering wrote:

trotwood73 wrote:

More "open nominations" scandals plaguing the Liberals and Trudeau:

Justin Trudeau's Open Nominations Vow Called A 'Farce'  [Huff Post]

How bizarre. As I read it I began to realize it was almost 100% inuendo full of mays and mights and even the world "whispers".  It seems more like a gossip column than anything else. There was nothing new in it. I checked the top for the byline.

It was written by none other than Althia Raj. Either she has broken up with Justin or she is trying to appear less biased. I will go with the second because the article isn't really damaging.

Ha ha regarding Raj, Pondering. I completely agree. I'm not worried though; I'm sure she'll make it up to Justin on the pages of Huff Post soon, one way, or another.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Pondering wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

How the hell can selling memberships be highjacking a nomination meeting. The old guard got caught by a candidate who wanted the nomination and had a team willing to work and get results.  Its not like the Liberals have an ideology except getting elected. 

Who the hell decides who the "best and brightest" is?  I gather this former Liberal MP believes the process has to be rigged to make sure that his preferred candidate wins since he was obviously the best and brightest. I find it hilarious given that the whole electoral process is a horse race and winning a nomination 3 to1 tells me the winner put together a great team and will likely run a good campaign.  Unless of course the old guard quits in a snit because they got beat so badly by an ethnic. 

I didn't say it had been hijacked, only that it could be under this type of system.

Sorry I mistook this part of your post for something other than what it says on its face.

Pondering wrote:

It does seem as though it is too easy to hijack proceedings in local ridings.

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Were the people bused in even aware of the other candidate's platform or credentials?

That is a racist statement when made as in this case about a specific group of "ethnically challenged" people.

I think you should retract your accusation. In fact it sounds like you are the racist with your "ethnically challenged" people reference. Are you incapable of seeing people as just people?

In my "hijack" comment I was referring to the process making it easy to highjack nominations, like the Tea Party did in the States, not this particular situation.

I also objected to the ageism but I understand that isn't the type of comment you look for.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Pondering wrote:

In my "hijack" comment I was referring to the process making it easy to highjack nominations, like the Tea Party did in the States, not this particular situation.

Pondering, there is not the slightest resemblance between the process by which parties choose candidates in Canada, and that by which the Tea Party acquired significant influence in the U.S. Republican Party. About the only similarity is that both involve some people voting. I would suggest learning a bit about both our system and theirs before you pontificate about the comparison.

Aristotleded24

kropotkin1951 wrote:
That is a racist statement when made as in this case about a specific group of "ethnically challenged" people.

Reminds me of the same racist crap we heard at the last Manitoba NDP leadership race when Steve Ashton was questioned about Indo-Canadian support for his candidacy.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

I will not retract the fact that your statement was derogatory and implied that a group of Chinese voters was not qualified to take part in a nomination meeting for a party that has no purpose except getting elected. What do they need to know except that the person they voted for wants to get elected and represent them as an MP.  There is no ideology in the Liberal party so what could posibbly be the problem other than the man's race? I understand that you are incapable of looking inward but your statement was inherently racist. There was no story here especially not a story about unqualified voters. 

I am not used to hearing that kind of crap given no one could get nominatd or elected in Burnaby without significant support from the various Chinese Canadian groups.  By the way are all these people with Chinese last names from mainland China? Are some of them from Taiwan or other countries with significant Chinese populations? You see even presuming that all the people signed up with Chinese last names came from the same community is absurd. Every campaign we ran in Burnaby had a Chinese language phonebank that was as heavily staffed as the English language banks. Every sign and poster was in both languages; English and Mandarin.  We had way more support in the Taiwanese community than in the Hong Kong community and we held our own with the people from mainland China.  Many of our voters in Burnaby only speak languages other than English but that has no relationship to their grasp of politics and their desire to take part in the democratic processes available to them in all parties.

I will say again that this story and your comments are not approprate.

Pondering

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Pondering wrote:

In my "hijack" comment I was referring to the process making it easy to highjack nominations, like the Tea Party did in the States, not this particular situation.

Pondering, there is not the slightest resemblance between the process by which parties choose candidates in Canada, and that by which the Tea Party acquired significant influence in the U.S. Republican Party. About the only similarity is that both involve some people voting. I would suggest learning a bit about both our system and theirs before you pontificate about the comparison.

I know that it is possible in the states and in Canada the parties each have their own system for selecting candidates.

At the end of the article there was a quote saying maybe it wasn't the best system because in practice it is a contest on who can sign up the most new members. With this method most voters being signed up have already decided who they want to support, the person that signed them up.

If all someone needs is a few hundred new members signed up at the last minute and can bus them in on voting day that is an easy system to corrupt. I really don't see what is so controversial about saying that.

wage zombie

Pondering wrote:

Maybe that's because this is the first time I have thought about it.  Most (maybe all) of the time I don't even know who won the nomination for the party I am voting for in my own riding when I am on my way to the voting booth because it doesn't make any difference. I still don't know the name of the NDP rep I voted for to elect Layton. I don't even know if it's a man or a woman.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Pondering wrote:

At the end of the article there was a quote saying maybe it wasn't the best system because in practice it is a contest on who can sign up the most new members. With this method most voters being signed up have already decided who they want to support, the person that signed them up.

If all someone needs is a few hundred new members signed up at the last minute and can bus them in on voting day that is an easy system to corrupt. I really don't see what is so controversial about saying that.

My dad was a Liberal Party organizer in Hamilton, and he had me putting up signs and knocking on doors by the time I was 12. By the time I was 15, I realized that the candidate nomination system has the problems you point out in the quote above.

I've been thinking about the subject for 52 years since then, and I still haven't come up with any good answer. So, obviously, there is nothing controversial about thinking that the current system has serious problems, which can lead to absurd results. It is an unspoken axiom of everyone who is politically literate in this country.

It is only controversial to imagine that they are worth commenting on, without a suggestion for improvement.

 

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

Ideally, a few candidates sign up a few hundred party members. It shows interest in the riding and the party. If one candidate sweeps the deck, it could be a bad sign come election day. They could have just paid for their nomination, which indicates no particular level of support on the ground.

Pondering

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Pondering wrote:

At the end of the article there was a quote saying maybe it wasn't the best system because in practice it is a contest on who can sign up the most new members. With this method most voters being signed up have already decided who they want to support, the person that signed them up.

If all someone needs is a few hundred new members signed up at the last minute and can bus them in on voting day that is an easy system to corrupt. I really don't see what is so controversial about saying that.

My dad was a Liberal Party organizer in Hamilton, and he had me putting up signs and knocking on doors by the time I was 12. By the time I was 15, I realized that the candidate nomination system has the problems you point out in the quote above.

I've been thinking about the subject for 52 years since then, and I still haven't come up with any good answer. So, obviously, there is nothing controversial about thinking that the current system has serious problems, which can lead to absurd results. It is an unspoken axiom of everyone who is politically literate in this country.

It is only controversial to imagine that they are worth commenting on, without a suggestion for improvement.

How odd that my worthless comment is getting commented on so much. I am absolutely politically illiterate in comparison to you and many others here however there is always a chance someone equally illiterate would want to discuss it with me. Not now of course as no one would want to be belittled and insulted as I have been. You do a wonderful job of alienating neophyes to political debate. Maybe rabble should open up a junior forum for those of us who came to politics later in life.

I will hazard a guess that the majority of voters are politically illiterate in comparison to you and the majority of posters on this board. I will happily converse with them and share my political ideas with them. Just today I was talking with someone about why I support Trudeau and telling them of his nuanced views on various issues. She is politically illiterate like myself so we were able to talk on the same level. I explained that Harper didn't save the economy and his policies are hurting Canada's recovery.

Jacob Two-Two

Pondering wrote:

I will hazard a guess that the majority of voters are politically illiterate in comparison to you and the majority of posters on this board. I will happily converse with them and share my political ideas with them.

The more politically ill-informed the better, I'm sure.

Quote:

Just today I was talking with someone about why I support Trudeau and telling them of his nuanced views on various issues.

So you were making things up then? How did that go over?

Quote:

She is politically illiterate like myself so we were able to talk on the same level. I explained that Harper didn't save the economy and his policies are hurting Canada's recovery.

Did you mention how they still haven't done as much harm to Canada as the Liberal party did in their last term of office? No? Well, I can see why you stick to the politically illiterate.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Pondering wrote:

I am absolutely politically illiterate in comparison to you and many others here however there is always a chance someone equally illiterate would want to discuss it with me.

That explains fully why you call yourself a progressive despite the views you spout. Begin your education by determing what progressive means and then maybe you can understand that being a Trudeau Liberal does not fit the definition.

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I will not retract the fact that your statement was derogatory and implied that a group of Chinese voters was not qualified to take part in a nomination meeting for a party that has no purpose except getting elected. What do they need to know except that the person they voted for wants to get elected and represent them as an MP.  There is no ideology in the Liberal party so what could posibbly be the problem other than the man's race? I understand that you are incapable of looking inward but your statement was inherently racist. There was no story here especially not a story about unqualified voters.

I implied no such thing and I did not say anyone was unqualified to vote. In my first post on the topic I stated that it is normal for politicians to turn to their families and communities for support. The former Liberal MP who commented on the process stated that he knew nothing about the Don Valley contest. He was clearly talking about the process in general.

Lack of Liberal ideology does not mean the only other possible means of differentiating between candidates is race.

That is a really ignorant justification for calling me racist and that is a reflection of your character not mine.

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Pondering wrote:

I am absolutely politically illiterate in comparison to you and many others here however there is always a chance someone equally illiterate would want to discuss it with me.

That explains fully why you call yourself a progressive despite the views you spout. Begin your education by determing what progressive means and then maybe you can understand that being a Trudeau Liberal does not fit the definition.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/progressive

1. favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, especially in political matters: a progressive mayor. 2. making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.: a progressive community.

Or if you want something more specific:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism

Canada

Western Canada began to receive an influx of political ideas at the end of the 19th century. The Progressive Party of Canada was founded in 1920 by Thomas Crerar, a former Minister of Agriculture in the Unionist government of Robert Borden. Crerar quit the Borden cabinet in 1919 because Minister of Finance Thomas White introduced a budget that Crerar felt did not pay sufficient attention to farmers' issues. Crerar became the first leader of the Progressive Party, and he led it to win 65 seats in the 1921 general election, placing second (ahead of the well-established Conservative Party). The Progressives also had a close alignment with the provincial United Farmers parties in several provinces. However, the Progressives were not able to hold their caucus together well, and progressive-leaning MPs and voters soon deserted the Progressives for the Liberals and the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (later the New Democratic Party).[citation needed]

Dating back to 1854, Canada's oldest political party was the Conservative Party. Following that party's disastrous showing in the 1935 election during the depths of the Great Depression, the party was leaderless and lacked new ideas. The party drafted Manitoba Premier John Bracken, a long-time leader of that province's progressive "United Farmers" party, who agreed to become leader of the Conservatives on condition that the party add Progressive to its name. The party adopted the name "Progressive Conservative", which it kept until its dissolution in 2003. Despite the name change, most former Progressives continued to support other parties.[citation needed]

During the debate over the merger of the Progressive Conservatives and the Alliance (2003), the meaning of the word caused contention again. Since the Tories have stopped using the word "progressive" in their name federally, it has been used as a synonym for "centrist and centre left". This has been apparent in the debate on a possible coalition between the NDP and the Liberals,[21] or in discussions of strategic voting among leftist voters.

At the provincial level in Alberta, the "progressive" element of the PCs was used in advertisements by Allison Redford's leadership to attack the allegedly "regressive" nature of the Wildrose Party in the 2012 election. Liberal leader Raj Sherman challenged the PC's right to use the label.[22]

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

The story under discussion was about Canadians of Chinese descent and the nomination process. In that context you said; "Were the people bused in even aware of the other candidate's platform or credentials?"  If it had been a busload women and a man on this board said the same thing I can imagine your outrage.

I did not say you were a racist I intentionally said your statement was racist in the context of the story. I stand by that view.  This is a progressive board where you might have thought for a minute or two and listened when people try to point out the inadvertent racism in posts. Too me it is the same as calling someone on a sexist viewpoint even if they didin't mean it to be sexist. I am sure you can understand that impetus.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

This was the definition I had in mind

In defining itself as "progressive," rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and as such encourages discussions which develop and expand progressive thought.

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:

This was the definition I had in mind

In defining itself as "progressive," rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and as such encourages discussions which develop and expand progressive thought.

I feel I match that description. People can share the same goals and still disagree on the best way to get there.

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:

The story under discussion was about Canadians of Chinese descent and the nomination process. In that context you said; "Were the people bused in even aware of the other candidate's platform or credentials?"  If it had been a busload women and a man on this board said the same thing I can imagine your outrage.

I did not say you were a racist I intentionally said your statement was racist in the context of the story. I stand by that view.  This is a progressive board where you might have thought for a minute or two and listened when people try to point out the inadvertent racism in posts. Too me it is the same as calling someone on a sexist viewpoint even if they didin't mean it to be sexist. I am sure you can understand that impetus.

I think any group of people signed up at the last minute and bused in to vote by a particular candidate has a limited knowledge of the other candidates and is heavily biased in favor of the candidate that signed them up. Many are likely not weighting the strengths of the various candidates.

A group of women could hijack a riding, or a group of star trek fans or Raelians, or Conservatives. That is my point. As long as you can take a riding by getting a few hundred votes any special interest group has a shot at taking it. I'm surprised more haven't tried it. You could even take a bunch of ridings by stealth.

Your insistence that I was in some way referring to race is simply wrong.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

WHATEVER

jjuares

I am very concerned about this. The corporate pawn who was supposed to win was beaten by another corporate pawn who had buses. This is huge!

jjuares

I am very concerned about this. The corporate pawn who was supposed to win was beaten by another corporate pawn who had buses. This is huge!

Sean in Ottawa

One thing about visible minorities is that their networks tend to be visible as well. When white people gather friends and family to dominate a political process in a way that is not representative it is not visible. Not, unless you notice that the place is dominated mostly by white males who represent only about a third of the population and at least 80% of the wealth and easily end up with two thirds of the representation.

That said people do figure things out. Those who are not white middle-aged and male learn that they have to gather support in groups to get any representation as surely white middle aged males as a rule won't support anything other than other white middle aged males.

So once in a while communities of other than white middle aged males will get together and actually succeeed. And this only very slightly reduces that massive demographic dominance of white middle aged males in the public life of the country.

terrytowel

Pondering wrote:

A group of women could hijack a riding, or a group of star trek fans or Raelians, or Conservatives. That is my point. As long as you can take a riding by getting a few hundred votes any special interest group has a shot at taking it. I'm surprised more haven't tried it. You could even take a bunch of ridings by stealth.

Which is why Jean Chrétien wanted the veto power to reject single issue candidates (like pro-lifers) who would stack the nomination with their supporters. All to win a nomination, and pursue a pro-life agenda in Parliment.

Some pundits have said that is why Justin Trudeau wanted all candidates to sign a pro-choice declaration before seeking a nomination. So the process wouldn't be stacked for certain pro-life groups wanting to infiltrate the Liberal Party.

Pondering

I'll just quote my first post on this topic:

Pondering wrote:

I was confused at first because it occured to me that everyone goes to their friends and family and community for support so naturally someone who is Chinese will fine support within their community. I don't like the "full of old people" comment as though that makes their votes less valid. On the other hand:

The result stunned many. Mr. Geng won by a 3:1 ratio. “About 95 per cent of the riding executive supported Rana,” said Allan Miranda, who was a member of the executive. “The result was just a shock. Geng just sewed it up.”

Bryon Wilfert, a former Liberal MP for Richmond Hill, said the real problem is the nomination process, in which the best and brightest with the biggest ideas are not always set up to succeed. “It’s how many memberships can I buy or sell,” he said, adding that he had no knowledge of the Don Valley contest. “It’s which boy scout sold the most cookies. Is that the best way to run this?”

Pasted from <http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/federal-liberals-cultivate-mandarin-powerhouse-in-gta/article20104666/>

It does seem as though it is too easy to hijack proceedings in local ridings.

Part 1 of my statement in my first post acknowledges the naturalness of anyone appealing to friends, family and community for support. I noted the ageism in saying they were all old people as though old people's votes have less validity.

Part 2 of my statement refers to comments made about the validity of the process in general which I agree doesn't seem very effective.

In post 212 you accuse Bryon Wilfert, who stated he knew nothing about the particulars of the Don Valley contest, of wanting to rig the system so his preferred candidate could win.

I'm guessing you didn't misinterpret him deliberately, you are blinded by your prejudice, a prejudice that extends to me.

There is nothing racist about my comments unless you deliberately choose to take them out of context then give them the worst possible connotation. You are salivating for an opportunity to put me down personally due to my support for Justin Trudeau.

It's ironic that in doing so you are exposing your own prejudice.

ctrl190

Hamilton mayor Bob Bratina is expected to run in Hamilton-Stoney Creek. Originally he was thought to be considering Hamilton-Centre but backed out. He would be running against Wayne Marston who has held the riding since 2006. 

http://www.chch.com/hamiltonians-weigh-bratinas-parliamentary-bid/

Bratina would not be the first ex-mayor to run against Marston. Former mayor Larry Di Ianni ran against Marston in 2008 but lost.

It's easy to forget that prior to Layton Hamilton was a Liberal stronghold for much of the 90s and early 00s, with Sheila Copps and Tony Valeri having high profile roles.

 

Pondering

ctrl190 wrote:

Hamilton mayor Bob Bratina is expected to run in Hamilton-Stoney Creek. Originally he was thought to be considering Hamilton-Centre but backed out. He would be running against Wayne Marston who has held the riding since 2006.

Because I saw this comment under the article I googled:

Lord help us! Where have those people interviewed been for the past 4 years? His rap sheet is a mile long!

I get this from Wiki:

Bratina entered the 2004 by-election created when the previous councillor for Ward 2, Andrea Horwath, entered provincial politics. Since being elected, he has fought for more citizen participation at City Hall, downtown revitalization and more integrity.[8]

Bratina has had some notable successes as ward councillor. His push to return rail passenger service to its historic location at James Street North has been approved and funded by the province. His concerns over high lead readings in city drinking water has resulted in a lead water service replacement loan program, which allows residents to replace their lead service line and pay for it through their taxes over a ten-year period. He also instigated a lead blood screening program for young children to determine if lead is entering their bodies at levels that may affect their health. He developed a plan to move idling buses from the downtown Gore Park area to provide better connections for riders to GO transit and other city bus routes. A new state-of-the-art community centre to service one of the city's neediest neighbourhoods will be constructed as part of the new Dr. Davey School in Beasley, in Hamilton's inner city. A $7 million infrastructure project at the GO Centre on Hunter Street will provide more train service for Hamilton commuters and better on-time performance. He was instrumental in moving forward the redevelopment of the Education Centre property into a project that may see a downtown McMaster Faculty of Family Medicine, a new public health facility, and potentially a new headquarters facility for the Board of Education. He has consistently been rated as one of Hamilton's most trustworthy politicians by readers of View Magazine. Conversely, he has been criticized for unprofessional conduct during his term on council, although the only support for this criticism was he once tossed a pen during a council meeting.[9]

I am very curious to know what his "rap sheet" is.

 

 

pookie

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Pondering wrote:

At the end of the article there was a quote saying maybe it wasn't the best system because in practice it is a contest on who can sign up the most new members. With this method most voters being signed up have already decided who they want to support, the person that signed them up.

If all someone needs is a few hundred new members signed up at the last minute and can bus them in on voting day that is an easy system to corrupt. I really don't see what is so controversial about saying that.

My dad was a Liberal Party organizer in Hamilton, and he had me putting up signs and knocking on doors by the time I was 12. By the time I was 15, I realized that the candidate nomination system has the problems you point out in the quote above.

I've been thinking about the subject for 52 years since then, and I still haven't come up with any good answer. So, obviously, there is nothing controversial about thinking that the current system has serious problems, which can lead to absurd results. It is an unspoken axiom of everyone who is politically literate in this country.

It is only controversial to imagine that they are worth commenting on, without a suggestion for improvement.

 

Um.  Have you read most of babble lately? 

Jesus Fucking Christ people.

pookie

The pile-on in this thread makes my skin crawl.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Another good example of stacking a meeting on behalf of a single issue candidate will be Jodie Emery trying to get nominated as a  Liberal candidate.

terrytowel

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Another good example of stacking a meeting on behalf of a single issue candidate will be Jodie Emery trying to get nominated as a  Liberal candidate.

The Pope could be nominated to run for the Libs in Vancouver Center and still lose to Libby Davies.

terrytowel

Richard Mahoney is hoping third time is the charm. Instead of challenging Paul Dewer for Ottawa Center, he has changed tactic. He is now going to take on John Baird in Ottawa West-Nepean.

ctrl190

terrytowel wrote:

Richard Mahoney is hoping third time is the charm. Instead of challenging Paul Dewer for Ottawa Center, he has changed tactic. He is now going to take on John Baird in Ottawa West-Nepean.

Christ Richard give it up already. The entitlement of these backroom grits is infuriating 

Meanwhile in Toronto Karen Stintz has bowed out of the mayoral race. There are murmers that Stintz might dip her toe in federal politics in next year's election. 

She has past ties to the CPC but her ward is in Eglinton-Lawrence which is held by Joe Oliver. Given Stintz's history of self-serving political moves it would not shock me if she ran as a Liberal. Trudeau recently attracted another right-of-centre candidate, ex-CD Howe Institute head Bill Morneau to carry the red flag in Toronto Centre. 

terrytowel

ctrl190 wrote:

Meanwhile in Toronto Karen Stintz has bowed out of the mayoral race. There are murmers that Stintz might dip her toe in federal politics in next year's election. 

She has past ties to the CPC but her ward is in Eglinton-Lawrence which is held by Joe Oliver. Given Stintz's history of self-serving political moves it would not shock me if she ran as a Liberal. Trudeau recently attracted another right-of-centre candidate, ex-CD Howe Institute head Bill Morneau to carry the red flag in Toronto Centre. 

Karen would beat Joe Oliver without breaking a sweat if she ran against him as a Liberal. But she told Stephen LeDrew she has no plans to return to politics in the near future.

I suspect because she has small children, she wants to be near home. Instead of flying back and forth from Toronto to Ottawa.

She made it clear to Stephen LeDrew today she is looking for work in the private sector  once her term at city council is up.

Q: What’s in your future?

A: “It’s not going to be in politics. That I can guarantee.”

Q: Never in politics, or not in the short term?

A: “Never is a definitive position but I’m not running federally, I’m not running provincially and I’m not running municipally. I have immensely enjoyed the last 11 years and there is no other political job I wanted other than the mayor.”

http://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/toronto2014election/2014/08/21/kar...

 

Pages

Topic locked