Who Should Replace Howard Hampton?

203 posts / 0 new
Last post
janfromthebruce

quote:


Originally posted by George Victor:
[b]

I heard Peter speak and was able to ask him some questions, recently.

His speech was not inspiring and aside from a green aversion to nuclear, I did not come away with a clear understanding of his economics. He does seem to be the "safe" choice for the powers that be. And maybe he can "get down" and forceful in a fashion that Stephane, for instance, found impossible?[/b]


That Green aversion to nuclear is a real problem in Huron-Bruce riding. Advocating a mixed system is realistic unless Tabuns wants to ensure that in cities everybody has a windmill in their backyard.

aka Mycroft

quote:


Originally posted by Stockholm:
[b]

Someday someone will have to explain to me why Lankin was seen as having the Bob Rae albatross hanging around her neck, while Hampton was not - even though he held two senior cabinet portfolios under Rae and voted for the social contract like almost everyone else.[/b]


Lankin was seen as being in Rae's inner circle while Hampton - who was demoted from Attorney General to Natural Resources in 1993 - was not. It was also widely believed that Rae and Hampton didn't get along and widely perceived that the party establishment backed Lankin.

I was at the convention and saw Rae moments after Hampton was elected - his face was ashen and he looked very displeased, FWIW.

1948

quote:


Originally posted by Max Bialystock:
[b]

You're right - Hampton is a hypocrite.[/b]


And retiring.

Left J.A.B.

Wow was that ever the best least inspiring speech I have heard in awhile from Tabuns. I got bored about 25 seconds in.
My money is on Nash, failing her getting in Horwath. At least they can deliver a speech.

And could we knock off re-fighting the leadership of what 11-12 years ago. All you do is turn new members like me off.

aka Mycroft

So what message is the Tabuns campaign trying to send by surrounding him *entirely* by women in the camera shot?

Stockholm

quote:


It was also widely believed that Rae and Hampton didn't get along

hmmm...well i have to say that both Rae and Hampton are both pretty disagreeable people on a personal level - Its not surprising that two people with poor people skills would also exhibit poor people skills towards each other!

Left J.A.B.

Who cares! Quit focusing on the past battles. It is the now that matters.

Unionist

Other than Rev. DiNovo kindly telling the media that Peggy isn't interested in running, has anyone actually heard from Peggy herself?

Do I need to go appeal to her as one trade unionist to another?

Is there no Ontarian here who will rise to the occasion?

V. Jara

I guess no one will vote Green anymore (tongue [b]squarely[/b] in cheek).

Bring back the angry Hampton:

What happened to the ONDP's rebel spirit? Rae stole the party's idealism, somebody please bring it back.

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: V. Jara ]

Left J.A.B.

I actually thought that was one of Hampton's finest moments.

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by Left J.A.B.:
[b]I actually thought that was one of Hampton's finest moments.[/b]

Beg to differ. He was stuck, because of his hypocritical position on religious school funding (i.e. funding for Catholics only). With an unprincipled stand, it's easy to let the agenda slip away from you.

Seniors need to be cared for, and public education needs to be secular and the same for all. There's no contradiction here.

Hampton's concern for seniors didn't impress the voters much, did it?

This issue was amply debated on babble at the time.

Go, Peggy, go!!!

V. Jara

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: V. Jara ]

Stockholm

What makes you so sure that you would like Peggy Nash's views on whether or not to abolish the separate school system in Ontario?

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by Stockholm:
[b]What makes you so sure that you would like Peggy Nash's views on whether or not to abolish the separate school system in Ontario?[/b]

It doesn't matter in the least. The world doesn't revolve around that one issue. The ONDP is going absolutely nowhere at top speed, and they need a serious change. They need a woman, they need a trade unionist, they need an inspiring and hardworking leader, untainted by the messes of the past. That's Peggy Nash.

If she takes bad positions as leader, I will criticize her. I hope the same can be said for those who never criticize anything the NDP leader does under any circumstances whatsoever.

Left J.A.B.

quote:


Originally posted by unionist:
[b]

Beg to differ. He was stuck, because of his hypocritical position on religious school funding (i.e. funding for Catholics only). With an unprincipled stand, it's easy to let the agenda slip away from you.

Seniors need to be cared for, and public education needs to be secular and the same for all. There's no contradiction here.

Hampton's concern for seniors didn't impress the voters much, did it?

This issue was amply debated on babble at the time.

Go, Peggy, go!!![/b]


What a load of horsedung. There was nothing unprincipled about the NDP stance on funding. If you really think the most pressing issue in Ontario education is seperate vs public financing you need to get out more. Not only that put I went past one of the location McGuinty made one of his big defense of public education speeches at the time all the media vans and the tour bus were there. It was at a school called Mother Theresa. Yu think that was a 'public' school.

And if you think the conditions in nursing homes that many seniors face is anything comparable to a debate of private vs public education you are in for a sad shock in a few years.

Hampton was exactly right and I for one was very proud of him and the NDP when he took on those reporters. The sad answer was though that none of them cared.

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by Left J.A.B.:
[b] There was nothing unprincipled about the NDP stance on funding. [/b]

Yes there was. They're ok with having public Catholic schools but not public Jewish and Muslim schools. That could well serve as a definition of "unprincipled".

quote:

[b]If you really think the most pressing issue in Ontario education is seperate vs public financing you need to get out more.[/b]

I never said it was "the most pressing issue". If Hampton had said, "John Tory is an idiot, and McGuinty had better understand that we need to move toward a single public school system with careful preparation and transition", he could have got back to his agenda. But he (and/or his ONDP) were too cowardly, too scared of their own shadow, to take that simple stand of principle. So, he was fucked, and deservedly so.

quote:

[b]Not only that put I went past one of the location McGuinty made one of his big defense of public education speeches... [/b]

What are you talking about? McGuinty and Hampton shared exactly the same pathetic position. Only McGuinty was a lot more skillful than Hampton at skating and diverting. He managed to turn it into a poison pill for Tory, while Hampton whined about "why won't anyone listen to me and what I think are the REAL issues???"

It would be nice to have an ONDP not haunted by its past that could actually look like a viable opposition to McGuinty's Liberals.

quote:

[b]And if you think the conditions in nursing homes that many seniors face is anything comparable to a debate of private vs public education you are in for a sad shock in a few years.[/b]

Oh spare me. Either the seniors, or secularism, and I have to prioritize. Go Google logical fallacies. And what did Hampton do about nursing homes in 1990 to 1994? Or about same-sex benefits for that matter?

quote:

[b]Hampton was exactly right and I for one was very proud of him and the NDP when he took on those reporters. The sad answer was though that none of them cared.[/b]

He didn't "take on" the reporters. He was whining and evading because he had lost. He's not a leader. Thank God he's leaving.

Left J.A.B.

Please let me know which reporters pointed out the irony of McGuinty speaking about 'public' education at Catholic schools.

The rest of your screed is sure not the reality I remember living in Ontario in the 1990s. But then I wasn't an NDP supporter than. Just a young person trying to make his way in the world.

I was hoping that Nash might come in, but if this is the kind of supporters she would attract, it would doom the NDP to once again fighting for party status. I think I will look elsewhere.

You might want to look up the terms logical fallicies and comparative objects yourself by the way.

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: Left J.A.B. ]

Wilf Day

code:



[/qb]


Okay: he's against smoking, nuclear power and rust belts. He's for Green cars, solar energy and wind power. And to the millions of Ontarians who have been asking "should governments exist?" he has a bold answer: YES.

Hmm.

And he's from the "change wing" of the NDP. A family member asks "is that the old white-haired male wing?"
[img]http://www.nationmaster.com/wikimir/images/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..." width="200[/img]
Andrea Horwath.

quote:

Originally posted by unionist:
[b]He was stuck, because of his hypocritical position on religious school funding (i.e. funding for Catholics only).[/b]

Not Hampton's stand. The Ontario NDP's stand, reaffirmed by several conventions. Don't you think Caucus should follow convention decisions?

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: Wilf Day ]

Lord Palmerston

I think Peggy Nash would probably be a better leader than anyone in the current ONDP caucus. I hope she does support one school system, but the NDP won't do it on its own. What needs to be done is pressure from party activists. Most NDPers support it in principle (we just need to overcome this silly idea that it "divides the working class" and turns the focus away from "real" issues).

George Victor

quote:


Hampton's concern for seniors didn't impress the voters much, did it?


Actually, he lashed out at the media in the dying days of the last election and probably saved a couple of NDP seats in the process. It is too bad he didn't get angry earlier.

As for 1990-94 , you're not arguing there was any opportunity to expand programs in that recession? Or are you ?

The Harrisites lowered the amount of personal care time for long-term-care residents (some wound up with one bath a week) to make the sector more inviting for private sector investment. Helping build some new residences also helped.

One could go on, but what the hell, the great unwashed don't count on ever winding up drooling over the side of a wheechair themselves, so it's not a vital election issue. Certainly not in the face of the now-universal appeal of lower taxes.

Like Bageant's American heartland - "dumb as a bag of hair."


quote:

He didn't "take on" the reporters. He was whining and evading because he had lost. He's not a leader. Thank God he's leaving.


Unmitigated bullshit,u .

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

TCD

I'm not uncritical of Hampton but I think he's something short of the antichrist unionist.

He voted for same-sex spousal benefits. He started drafting the Legislation when he was Attorney General. The government of 1990-1995 was generally seen as moving in a good direction on long-term care but, as with many things, they bungled the execution and the reform process was stillborn by the time they lost. Hard to blame that on Hampton.

I think he rebuilt a party that could have imploded after the Rae years and I think he got some unlucky bounces in the last election. I certainly think the sweep of Northern Ontario had more to do with Howard Hampton then Jack Layton. To be fair to Jack, Hampton's win in Parkdale-High Park had more to do with Layton the Howard.

Anyway.

[url=http://www.insidetoronto.com/article/57813]Nash not after Hampton's Job[/url] reports the local fishwrap.

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by Left J.A.B.:
[b]Please let me know which reporters pointed out the irony of McGuinty speaking about 'public' education at Catholic schools.[/b]

McGuinty is smarter than Hampton. He got away with it.

quote:

[b]The rest of your screed is sure not the reality I remember living in Ontario in the 1990s. [/b]

Then you don't recall the betrayal of a government, elected by efforts of workers and people with high hopes for change, which broke its promise to nationalize auto insurance; tore up signed collective agreements with its own unions and stole from the workers; and made same-sex benefits a "free vote" because of their craven cowardice. Check the history, since you were doing other things at the time, and let me know your verdict on that dastardly group, who did more to sully the name of the NDP than most in recent history. That betrayal needs to be washed clean.

quote:

[b]I was hoping that Nash might come in, but if this is the kind of supporters she would attract, it would doom the NDP to once again fighting for party status. I think I will look elsewhere.[/b]

What a foolish comment. You're smarter than that. Show it. If you think blind uncritical cheerleading support is what your party needs right now, then you are its worst enemy. It will end up on the garbage heap. Your party's leaders need to be held to the highest standard imaginable. If they won't match up, they should be told to ply their wares elsewhere (Bob Rae got that message). You need heroic, self-sacrificing servants of the people in that position, people whose word is their religion, and to whom principle prevails over all petty political partisan advantage. Otherwise, call in the pallbearers and prepare the funeral baked feast.

Fidel

I will miss Hampton as leader of the party. He is very knowledgable of government, and Ontario's power system. He would have made the best premier this province has seen in many years.

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by Wilf Day:
[b]
Not Hampton's stand. The Ontario NDP's stand, reaffirmed by several conventions. Don't you think Caucus should follow convention decisions?[/b]

LOL, what's this, trailblazing a new tradition for the ONDP?

Every gang of hypocrites follows exactly those convention decisions which suits them.

The one time in history that they were in power - those decisions were conveniently shelved.

Stockholm

quote:


I certainly think the sweep of Northern Ontario had more to do with Howard Hampton then Jack Layton.

huh?? how do you explain that credit for the FEDERAL NDP led by Layton winning almost every seat belongs to ONDP leader Hampton who never won more than three seats in the north??

The one seat in all of northern Ontario that the NDP did NOT win on Oct. 14 was Kenora - Hampton's riding provincially. In other words the one seat where you would think that "Hampton-mania" might have helped tghe federal NDP - it didn't.

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: Stockholm ]

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by George Victor:
[b]As for 1990-94 , you're not arguing there was any opportunity to expand programs in that recession? Or are you ?[/b]

1. Betraying the whole electorate by reneging on their promise of public auto insurance.

2. Betraying the workers' movement by tearing up negotiated agreements and stealing from their employees.

3. Betraying the LGBT community by making same-sex benefits (aka human rights) a "free vote", thus ensuring its defeat.

You're not arguing that "the recession made 'em do it" - are you, Mr. Victor?

Fidel

quote:


Originally posted by unionist:
[b]

1. Betraying the whole electorate by reneging on their promise of public auto insurance.[/b]


It was very scary neoliberal old line party-induced nation-wide recession. $4 billion shorted by Mulroney - an "unforseen" $2-$3 billion dollar Liberal budget deficit handoff to the NDP

CUPE told Rae that those insurance industry workers would have a difficult time finding alternate work during that period. Perhaps in a successive term, like Tommy Douglas needed to implement socialized medicine in Saskatchewan

quote:

[b]2. Betraying the workers' movement by tearing up negotiated agreements and stealing from their employees[/b]

And so Harris laid off ten thousand nurses, and waged war on teachers and students and poor people in general. Did unionized workers care about any of that?

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by TCD:
[b]He voted for same-sex spousal benefits.[/b]

He's not a homophobe! See, he's not all bad! Too bad he couldn't sway his caucus to have a whipped vote, and too bad he didn't call for the homophobes in his very own caucus to be tossed out on their sorry asses.


quote:

[b]Hard to blame that on Hampton.[/b]

Ok, can I blame auto insurance on him? Did he apologize on his party's behalf and promise to redress the betrayal? What about the attack on the public sector workers? Did he apologize for that? Did he say he would introduce legislation (in conformity with last year's Supreme Court decision on the constitutional protection for collective bargaining) to make it impossible for government to effect such draconian actions again?

The only thing he and his party accomplished was a disgusted electorate and betrayed supporters, followed by 14 years (and counting) of Harris, Eves, and McGuinty. Lots of penance is needed - and a fresh start.

Fidel

That's okay, because Liberals and other swell parties in Quebec have provided them with some of the highest daycare rates in the country, and worked to keep it that way, too. Who needs a federal NDP government? According to unionist, not Quebec.

Bookish Agrarian

quote:


Originally posted by unionist:
[b]

Ok, can I blame auto insurance on him? Did he apologize on his party's behalf and promise to redress the betrayal? What about the attack on the public sector workers? Did he apologize for that? Did he say he would introduce legislation (in conformity with last year's Supreme Court decision on the constitutional protection for collective bargaining) to make it impossible for government to effect such draconian actions again?

The only thing he and his party accomplished was a disgusted electorate and betrayed supporters, followed by 14 years (and counting) of Harris, Eves, and McGuinty. Lots of penance is needed - and a fresh start.[/b]


Seems to me you know next to nothing about Ontario politics in those days. As a young union leader who publicly quit the NDP and the riding association of a Minister I think I can speak with a bit of authority.

Hampton has in fact publicly admitted that reneging on public auto insurance was a big mistake. How do I know, I was in the damn room when he said it.

If memory serves the only prominent elected member who objected publicly to the Social Contract was Karen Haslam from Perth. To blame Hampton is downright dishonest and silly. There is not a New Democrat from the time who doesn’t share the blame. However, the overwhelming amount of it belongs with Bob Rae. It is only speculation that others would have stood up to Rae publicly like Haslam.

As a public service union local president I have to say that Rae days didn’t seem quite so bad given what happened with Harris in charge. And here is a little newsflash- it was many union workers, teachers, nurses and even social assistant recipient that helped put Harris into office. That doesn’t mean I agree with the social contract, but that in the fullness of time, it is pretty clear that many of us cut off our nose to spite our face by stepping aside and by doing that indirectly helping to elect Mike Harris.

ETA Call me a Hampton loyalist if you want, but I believe strongly the NDP would not exist in any real sense in Ontario without the leadership Hampton showed. I am in the NDP today because of Hampton and a few others.
That said I am looking forward to a new start with a new leader and to next Friday most especially.

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: Bookish Agrarian ]

TCD

quote:


Originally posted by Stockholm:
[b]

huh?? how do you explain that credit for the FEDERAL NDP led by Layton winning almost every seat belongs to ONDP leader Hampton who never won more than three seats in the north??[/b]


I think Layton's done a lot to build a base in Toronto but I think in the North he was standing on the shoulders of the party. I give a lot of people credit: Charlie Angus, Gilles Bisson, Bud Wildman, the Martel clan, John Rafferty, Carol Hughes, Bruce Heyer and all of the perenial candidates, and, yes, Howard Hampton. Ask any of these people and they'd tell you the same.

Hampton, as I mentioned, didn't get the splits he needed in the North.

John Rafferty (a Hampton recruit by the by) lost in 2007 with 37% and won in 2008 with 40%. The difference? Tories went from 9% to 23%.

Peter Denley lost in Algoma with 37% in 2007 while Carol Hughes won with 45% in 2008. Tories way up again.

Dave Battaino went up against a popular cabinet minister in Sudbury and scored 27 per cent in 2007. In 2008 that same Liberal provincial minister spent the entire campaign [url=http://www.northernnews.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1262869&auth=ANGELA%20S... his fellow Liberal[/url] while the Tory vote surged from 7% to 28%... and the we took Sudbury.

In Timiskaming we almost won provincially and were blown out federally. Tories were at 13% provincially - 32% federally.

Nickel Belt felt close in 2007 even though we finished at 46%. Federally in 2008 we finished 20 points ahead with the same result. The difference? Tories went from 10% to 22%.

Jim Foulds lost the other half of T Bay with 39% in 2007 while Bruce Hyer won with 37%. The difference? Tories went from 9% to 26%.

That's right. We got MORE votes in 2007 but we lost then.

Do you get it now?

Next federal convention ask John Rafferty whether Howard Hampton was a drag on his chances. Let me know if he doesn't break your nose.

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: TCD ]

TCD

quote:


Originally posted by unionist:
[b]Lots of penance is needed - and a fresh start.[/b]

Well, rather than kicking a guy when he's down and crawling to the exit, let's focus on that fresh start... shall we?

Sinister

I don't believe Tabuns, Horwath, Prue or Bisson has what is takes to become elected Premiere one day. Peggy Nash is the only (potential) candidate that could appeal beyond our core support.

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
[b]Hampton has in fact publicly admitted that reneging on public auto insurance was a big mistake. How do I know, I was in the damn room when he said it.[/b]

And he promised in subsequent election campaigns to make good on that broken promise? Sorry, I must have missed that.

quote:

[b]If memory serves the only prominent elected member who objected publicly to the Social Contract was Karen Haslam from Perth. To blame Hampton is downright dishonest and silly. There is not a New Democrat from the time who doesn’t share the blame.[/b]

Excuse me, I don't know what you mean by "New Democrat", but every union colleague of mine from Ontario that I can think of (except one weirdo and one CAW local rep) votes NDP, works for the NDP, federally and provincially - and they didn't hesitate to publicly damn the government for what it did to the workers at that time. Yes, let those big shots who all nodded and smiled in unison "share the blame" for what happened at that time. But Hampton, as leader, had to [b]make it good again[/b], and he never did.

quote:

[b]As a public service union local president I have to say that Rae days didn’t seem quite so bad given what happened with Harris in charge.[/b]

Tiresome argument, the same one trotted out to support voting Liberal instead of Tory. And, of course, the victims of the Rae government's betrayal are transformed into the stupid idiots who shot themselves in the foot. Well here's a tip: Sometimes, when you profoundly betray the trust of the people who have supported you and sustained you and made you what you are, they will endure a fair bit of pain just to teach you a lesson. And guess what - even when they were tired of the pain, and needed some shelter, [b][i]they didn't come "home" to the NDP.[/i][/b]

Understand the depth of the betrayal, and make it good again. A new leader with no fear of self-criticism and no fear of taking risks in the future can do that. This crop of candidates can't. That's another reason why Peggy Nash is needed - unless, of course, you folks have someone else who is untainted by that past.

Fidel

quote:


Originally posted by Sinister:
[b]I don't believe Tabuns, Horwath, Prue or Bisson has what is takes to become elected Premiere one day. Peggy Nash is the only (potential) candidate that could appeal beyond our core support.[/b]

Apparently with this crazy fptp system, any one of them would only have to lead the NDP to 22 percent of registered voter support. It's not all that tall an order.

Bookish Agrarian

quote:


And he promised in subsequent election campaigns to make good on that broken promise? Sorry, I must have missed that.

Yes he did. He was very clear about it. I was in Walkerton at Hamptons side the opening of the 2003 campaign. He was asked about it and was unequivical

quote:

Tiresome argument, the same one trotted out to support voting Liberal instead of Tory. And, of course, the victims of the Rae government's betrayal are transformed into the stupid idiots who shot themselves in the foot. Well here's a tip: Sometimes, when you profoundly betray the trust of the people who have supported you and sustained you and made you what you are, they will endure a fair bit of pain just to teach you a lesson. And guess what - even when they were tired of the pain, and needed some shelter, they didn't come "home" to the NDP.

Understand the depth of the betrayal, and make it good again. A new leader with no fear of self-criticism and no fear of taking risks in the future can do that. This crop of candidates can't. That's another reason why Peggy Nash is needed - unless, of course, you folks have someone else who is untainted by that past.


It seems you didn't bother to write what I wrote. I was on the ground, my partner and I both directly effected by the social contract. I had helped organize a union in a large public sector workplace. Did I blame anyone else no. I absolutely saw teachers and union members, in a town with a large union sector, vote Conservative. I didn't- but I did sit out the election. In retrospect I see it as a mistake. Some of us actually learn from the past instead of trying to repeat it.
Peggy Nash is an able politician in some ways, but she is not universially admired. For me at least, the jury is still out whether she would make much of an improvement, especially when someone like Andrea Horwath is expected to run.

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
[b]

It seems you didn't bother to write what I wrote. [/b]


You were there, I wasn't.

In 2003, Howard Hampton promised to set up a public, non-profit auto insurance scheme [b]to compete with the private insurers[/b]. He estimated it would grab 30-35% of the market share.

Sorry, that's not what we did in Manitoba almost 40 years ago.

If he promised something better (or anything at all) in the 2007 campaign, I missed it. Please refresh my memory, I am no expert.

As for the social contract, I feel sorry for you and your partner having been victims of it. But the real victims were not individuals who lost a few bucks. They were the Ontario NDP (self-imposed) and the trade union movement (led down a garden path), and the population as a whole, which saw a government deny fundamental human rights to its citizens - the right to bargain collectively and to rely upon the freely-given signature of the government.

It showed the arrogance of a party leadership that took workers for granted, thinking that workers have nowhere else to go.

What an irony. In actual fact, it is the NDP which has nowhere else to go. Once it loses the trust of the working class, it will die an unlamented death.

That's another reason that someone like Peggy Nash (and none of the others, from what I can see) can rebuild that trust. It is more important than all the other burnt bridges.

Fidel

How does public sector expansion fit with the very neoliberal-Liberals NAFTA Chapter 11?

Or the Liberals SPP and TILMA?

I know, I know, their neoliberal voodoo is coming apart at the seams around the world now, so who gives a shhhhhugar ...

TCD

Can we please start a new thread entitled "Howard Hampton: hideous asshole and source of all evil" and then those of us interested in the thread topic can follow that without getting drawn into the upteenth thread about who was culpable for the shitshow NDP government?

None of the current candidates was in Cabinet during that government. Three of the four weren't even in Caucus. One candidate was still in school.

Heck, you can even talk about the NDP government in that thread. Just relate it to the CURRENT leadership race and save the long debates about the positions taken by the departing leader of the third party in a government that was defeated 13 years ago for the special "Howard Hampton - history's greatest monster" thread.

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: TCD ]

Fidel

quote:


Originally posted by TCD:
[b]Can we please start a new thread entitled "Howard Hampton: hideous asshole and source of all evil" [/b]

And then that same poster can tell us all about the piecemeal day care system they have in Quebec no thanks to Howard and the NDP.

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by TCD:
[b]... those of us interested in the thread topic can follow that without getting drawn into the upteenth thread about who was culpable for the shitshow NDP government?... [/b]

Good idea.

The thread topic is, "Who Should Replace Howard Hampton?"

I've subtly provided my reply.

What's yours?

Stockholm

quote:


Next federal convention ask John Rafferty whether Howard Hampton was a drag on his chances. Let me know if he doesn't break your nose.

I never said that Hampton was DRAG on anyone's chances - but i think that Layton is a vastly bigger asset to the federal NDP than Hampton ever was to the Ontario NDP.

Look at the numbers on "best person for PM". Jack was consistently in strong second to Harper and would get over 20% of people in Ontario saying he would be the best PM. Hampton - even after ELEVEN years as ONDP leader was always in the lows teens as Best Premier and way behind both McGuinty and Tory.

For whatever reason, the guy just doesn't seem to be able to connect with the electorate.

In Toronto, people like Prue, Marchese, Tabuns and DiNovo coast in on their personal popularity and a party loyalty - I have to say that its pretty damn rare that during Ontario elections anyone in Toronto has anything (positive or negative) to say about Hampton - he's like the invisible man.

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: Stockholm ]

Lord Palmerston

Though if one wants to attribute the NDP's pickups in the North to past elections - isn't the '06 federal election (with all those near-misses) just as important if not more than the '07 provincial?

Wilf Day

quote:


Originally posted by TCD:
[b]None of the current candidates was in Cabinet during that government. One candidate was still in school.[/b]

Hmm. A new generation of leadership?

TCD

quote:


Originally posted by unionist:
[b]

Good idea.

The thread topic is, "Who Should Replace Howard Hampton?"

I've subtly provided my reply.

What's yours?[/b]


Horwath intrigues at this point, for the same reason you like Peggy Nash.

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by TCD:
[b]Horwath intrigues at this point, for the same reason you like Peggy Nash.[/b]

I know nothing about her. If she can do the job, go for it. I'll admit that one reason for favouring Nash is the hope of consolidating, repairing, renewing links with the union movement, even enticing the CAW back in. But new, progressive, and female are a powerful combo, and if Horwath is it - and especially if Nash isn't interested (which doesn't clearly emerge from the linked article up above) - then great.

TCD

The article seems clear but her quote is less than that. I'm amazed that the local weekly tracked her down but not the Star.

V. Jara

I'm glad things are starting to settle down on the thread here. The only thing that seems clear to me is that the ONDP is still in a lot of trouble. It's been a long time since it picked a leader, it's deep in debt, and no one current contender has really blown the party membership away. It is a time for tough questions but also a time for renewal. The new leader faces very high expectations and is going to need to adjust to them.

As for Hampton, let sleeping dogs lie. He deserves a lot of credit and also a fair bit of blame. Right now, I am focussing on the credit he deserves.

Fidel

Democracy in general in this country is in trouble. We have 22 percent tin pot dictatorships in Ottawa and Toronto, and some of the lowest voter turnouts in the history of an electoral system invented before electricity...which was a time way before the Neo Tory-Liberal deregulation flip-flop floporama in this province

Unionist

So, V. Jara and Fidel - any views on the thread question? C'mon, stick your necks out a bit.

Pages

Topic locked