Andrea Horwath's fate on Friday the 13th

220 posts / 0 new
Last post
terrytowel

I said this early in the election campaign, and I bring this up again. Is sexism at play here? If a male NDP leader presented this NDP platform, with the same amount of charisma as Andrea, would the outcome be the same?

Jack Layton moved the party to the center, and there was hardly a cry or hue about that.

There are parallels here between Jack and Andrea.

Jack brought down a government, even though they had a childcare program in place. And the Kelowna Accord. No one said anything, particularly women.

Andrea brings down a government, and immediately is the brunt of a backlash from NDP supporters. Then they come out with the letter.

But where were these people when Jack moved the party to the centre and killed the childcare program. Where was there letter?

The only difference seems to be gender between the two.

terrytowel

Svend Robinson has long advocated for a 'rainbow' coalition. That is collecting an electorate made up of visible minorities, women, GLBT community, environmentalists, union workers and activists. Which is why he founded the NPI

But his detratcors have said that type of coalition doesn't win elections.

theleftyinvestor

terrytowel wrote:

I said this early in the election campaign, and I bring this up again. Is sexism at play here? If a male NDP leader presented this NDP platform, with the same amount of charisma as Andrea, would the outcome be the same?

No, the platform was just lousy.

Layton presented an inclusive platform that had diverse regions of the province and country inspired. Horwath presented a divisive platform that had regions of the province sniping at one another throughout the campaign. Coincidentally they each won about the same number of seats. Yes she had charisma but the words themselves were uninspiring. The way New Democrats felt about their party when they woke up the morning after the election was starkly different between Layton and Horwath.

theleftyinvestor

Unionist wrote:

Agreed, leftyinvestor - but maybe stop buying into A24's condescending delusion about who the working class is and what interests them. More than anything, the working class hates false friends.

I can't speak for the working class any more than I know if anyone on this forum can. The point about false friends is reasonable. But I feel like the audience Horwath was aiming at was often asking "If I'm this perplexed by her platform, how can I trust that I know what Horwath will do in office?"

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Brachina wrote:

  And lets not put all the blame on Andrea, this Hudak gunning for defeat with promises like cutting a 100,000 jobs and a Liberal many feel is a closet New Democract this was always going to be a difficult battle, its a miracle that the NDP wasn't crushed.

Laughing

Yes let us all thank the goddess for the miracle.  To think it seems like just yesterday some were predicting ...  Although I must say I found your use of the term closet to refer to Wynne to be in rather bad taste.

Don't worry the federal NDP will do better running a with a Leader many voters will see as a "closet" Liberal.

takeitslowly

I will say it again

Liberal propagenda supported by the media such as the Toronto Star is what caused the NDP to lose seats in Toronto. The idea that Horwath is willing to prop up and support a Hudak government is on the lips of many supposed NDPers who chose to vote for Wynne.

 

I also hear those people saying the ONDP campaign "feel" right wing to them. Facts do no matter to those people. It's all about the feeling of betrayal because Andrea Horwath dares to reach out to new voters. 

They don’t like voters who read the Sun or those who are not as environmentally conscious or found the campaign rhetoric Rob Ford’s appealing in some aspects.  They dont want the NDP courting them, because to them, they are not worthy. It's an "us" versus "them" mentality and its shortsighted and prejudical.

robbie_dee

robbie_dee wrote:

At this point I am expecting a Liberal minority with just 2-3 fewer Liberal and NDP seats and 4-5 more Conservatives, although I still think the Conservatives could surprise.

There are polls with the NDP at 26% of the vote and others with the NDP at just 18% so I just don't know what to believe. Andrea's late campaign itinerary suggests she believes the good polls. But frankly even if the NDP does better than in 2011 (and with such a result, likely pushes the Cons ahead), I STILL want Andrea Horwath to resign. I'd like to see some senior staff turnover, too. I think this election has been a missed opportunity - a terrible platform and an unimaginative campaign.

Wow. I definitely underestimated what would be the the scope of Tim Hudak's self-immolation. And I have to give the NDP some credit for holding its own against what turned out to be a "Red" crush. That being said, I still think Horwath dropped the ball. With polls showing up to 70% of Ontarians wanting a change of government, the opportunity was there. We need to do better next time and that includes both having a better message and I think having a better messenger.

mark_alfred

"70% wanting change" can mean a couple of things.  It could mean a change of the political party in government, but it could also mean a change from minority to majority government.  In this case it seemed the latter.

KarlL

Rokossovsky wrote:

Anyway, we now know that the EKOS and Forum Polls were total crap.

 

On NDP numbers, yes, EKOS and Forum missed the mark with around 19%.  But they were the best of the pollsters on Liberal and PC numbers.  

IPSOS was total, unadulterated crap, especially on "likely voters": 36 PC/30 NDP/ 30Lib.  Absurd.  Incompetent.  Indefensible. They missed it utterly.

Either that or they should be renamed iPCos and included in the PCs' declared advertsising subject to campaign spending limits.

 

 

Rokossovsky

Unionist wrote:

theleftyinvestor wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

While working-class voters who vote for the likes of Rob Ford, Tim Hudak, and Stephen Harper on the basis of pocket book issues should be villified and ignored?

Are pocketbook issues the only way to get those voters to the orange team? Wasn't there a time when bigger broader ideas inspired the working class to be a part of the NDP?

Can the NDP come up with pocketbook issues that their entire base actually *likes*?

When everyone is finished venting their anger, can we stop with the "Fuck Toronto", the "faux-progressives" talk, and ask how to come up with a campaign that brings out the good in the electorate?

Agreed, leftyinvestor - but maybe stop buying into A24's condescending delusion about who the working class is and what interests them. More than anything, the working class hates false friends. They have not forgotten the betrayal of the ONDP government, and they saw the same dismal performance in this election campaign.

Rather than get "these voters to the orange team", might I suggest purging or disbanding the "orange team", and get a new team to "these voters"?

 

What an obnoxious and arrogant comment. You alone speak for the working class? Ok. I speak for myself.

But to the point, you make the argument that they, the working class, "have not forgotten the betrayal of the ONDP government" in 1994, a talking point that most often appears as part of the campaign to forget the betrayal of the Liberal government, where union executives fall all over themselves with "but I love him" glee as they try and stampede their members into the Liberal love nest, in order to "Stop Hidak, despite back to work legislation and imposed contracts in 2012.

Debater

robbie_dee wrote:

Wow. I definitely underestimated what would be the the scope of Tim Hudak's self-immolation. And I have to give the NDP some credit for holding its own against what turned out to be a "Red" crush. That being said, I still think Horwath dropped the ball. With polls showing up to 70% of Ontarians wanting a change of government, the opportunity was there. We need to do better next time and that includes both having a better message and I think having a better messenger.

As did I.  On the prediction page I had Hudak *gaining* seats from the Liberals.  Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine that Hudak would *lose* 9 seats to the Liberals, many of them in Conservative ridings.

Who on earth would have thought Hudak would lose:

Cambridge

Burlington

Durham

Halton

Northumberland-Quinte West

Newmarket-Aurora

Barrie

Thorhill

--

Thoes are all ridings that are Conservative federally, and usually vote PC provincially.  As CBC said last night, Burlington has been PC since 1943!  Hudak lost seats that even Tory was able to hold onto.

As for the NDP, it picked up 3 seats, but they were all in traditional NDP strongholds (Windsor West, Sudbury & Oshawa), and the former 2 it holds federally and only won by small margins last night.  

The NDP did indeed succeed in raising its vote in several other ridings, but contrary to what Brachina and some others claim, it did not increase its seat count.  It went into the election with 21 seats and it still only has 21 seats today.  We measure how many seats it won from where the legislature was at disolution - not from where it was 3 years ago.

The NDP also dropped in the majority of the 107 ridings in the province.  Down in Toronto, Ottawa, and many of the Mississauga seats, and also dropped in Northern Ontario seats such as the 2 Thunder Bay ridings & Sault Ste. Marie.  The NDP finished behind the Greens in Guelph, and behind the Greens & the Liberals in Dufferin-Caledon.  Even finished 3rd behind the PC's in Toronto Centre.  It wasn't a disaster for the NDP like some were predicting, and I actually predicted 24 seats for the NDP so I wasn't someone that predicted they would tank.  But it certainly wasn't the wonderful result that Brachina & adma are claiming.

youngsocialist

It's not Andrea's fault. The liberal budget was filled with bullspit and austerity. The party did the right thing. The liberals campaigned on "a vote for the NDP is a vote for Hudak." That's how they won my riding Beaches East York. Andrea played the election right and held her ground for the most part, preventing a complete liberal swipe of 416. We really could have used her support in Beaches East York!

It was not the working class that voted for the liberals in my riding, it was the young professionals and upper middle class who supported Arthur Potts. They seized this opportunity and played their cards right. They campaigned hard and were always in our neighbourhood. The NDP was to little avail.

Aristotleded24

While we're talking about Ontario NDP leadership, should Andrea step down, how do people feel about Catherine Fife? She won a traditional PC seat in a by-election, which speaks to her ability to reach out to people. She also represents an urban area, so maybe she would be in a position to bring the urban/suburban, rural, and small city left together?

takeitslowly

maybe she just need a better Toronto advisor. She did great outside of the GTA. Not sure its her fault, if Joe cressy loses , it will vindicate Horwath. GTA is a liberal haven. 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Another goal they need to set is breaking through in the Ottawa-area ridings.  Ottawa should, in theory, have at least some potential for the ONDP, what with the large number of public employees if nothing else.  Perhaps conditions will be more favorable there in 2018 or 2019, when the new riding boundaries are in place.

adma

Debater wrote:
It wasn't a disaster for the NDP like some were predicting, and I actually predicted 24 seats for the NDP so I wasn't someone that predicted they would tank.  But it certainly wasn't the wonderful result that Brachina & adma are claiming.

I'm not claiming it's "wonderful".  I'm claiming it's interesting and even promising in many subtle sleeper regards--maybe not presently in Toronto's favour; but if, from all of this, one can reboot a Toronto-favourable strategy, couple it w/what's been postitively/promisingly evidenced in all sorts of other places here and there, and couple it without fatally alienating either camp (yes, every election offers its lessons to learn, even the present one), neat little advances can be made.

Even presently--the NDP helped the Liberals.  Because the Tories took it from both barrels, rather than the conventional-wisdom single barrel.  And any seats they *still* hold...well, at this point, w/a Grit majority, it's churlish to insist that "yeah, well, they could have been won too had the left been united".  It isn't like total Ontario domination a la the Chretien-era feds should be the ideal goal, after all.

For you see: the sensual art of an ideal Ontario election is in the unpredictable, indeterminate poll-by-poll three-way (or more) dynamic.  To reduce it to a blunt two-way red-blue choice dumbs things down: it knocks the wind out of the sensuality.  It's like travelling from Toronto to Windsor exclusively along 400-series highways, as if the old King's Highways didn't exist--and yeah, I know going the slow route is "inconvenient" in the same way that "unelectable" third parties are "inconvenient" to those who desire a united-front one-on-one...but it sure is interesting.  And you can learn a lot.  And if the only "lot" you learn is "geez, I shoulda stayed on the 401"...maybe the problem's with you.

Unionist

Aristotleded24 wrote:

While we're talking about Ontario NDP leadership, should Andrea step down, how do people feel about Catherine Fife? She won a traditional PC seat in a by-election, which speaks to her ability to reach out to people. She also represents an urban area, so maybe she would be in a position to bring the urban/suburban, rural, and small city left together?

Horwath unilaterally, despotically, changed the party program on May 22, and deleted the existing policy book from the website.

Will Catherine Fife do likewise? If yes, then who cares about her reaching out, urban rural, whatever? If, however, she has a sense of democracy and loyalty to her members, then go for it. Couldn't very well be worse than Horwath in that respect.

 

mark_alfred

I'd have to look at the results further, but I speculate that the NDP's losses in Toronto are also attributable to the absolute bottoming out of PC votes rather than a loss of NDP votes.  I scrutineered a poll in Trinity Spadina, and the PCs got less votes than the Green Party.  I suspect that a lot of people who generally vote Conservative switched to Liberal because they just found Hudak too repulsive.  With a stronger PC campaign, I suspect the NDP would do better in Toronto, because some of the votes that the Liberals caught in Toronto would go back to the PCs.  The vote for Marchese was still strong, but not as strong as it was for the Liberal.  The PC vote however was much lower than normal, and I think much of that went Liberal.

Wilf Day

Aristotleded24 wrote:
The media tried to make it all about a tight race between the Liberals and the PCs, and there was a possibility that the NDP would have been wiped off the map in this scenario. That Horwath kept the NDP in the game, and with less than 10 seats separating them from official opposition status, is remarkable.

That's how it looks from where I sit.
Also, a lot of people are saying she lost three and won three. The comparison should be with 2011. She won seven and lost three, including the four by-election wins that, contrary to the pundits, she hung on to.

This campaign was won by the strategic voters. They expected Andrea to win in seven "key ridings." She won all seven. By comparison, the Liberals failed to carry Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, Kitchener-Conestoga, and Perth—Wellington, winning 24 of the 27 they were assigned. Andrea did her part.

adma wrote:

When it comes to potential spots for Andrea federally, Wayne Marston will be approaching 70 next election, so who knows what his future plans might be...

That's who I was thinking of. His wife is not well.

takeitslowly wrote:

Rosario worked his ass off; I saw the stuffs he posted on facebook. He is so knowledgeable about the needs of his constituents and they voted for THAT GUY.

All the new condos are changing the demographics. Just look at the result in working-class York West: Tom Rakocevic got 39.2%, up from 34.8%, while Rosario dropped to 30.5%.

theleftyinvestor

mark_alfred wrote:

I'd have to look at the results further, but I speculate that the NDP's losses in Toronto are also attributable to the absolute bottoming out of PC votes rather than a loss of NDP votes.  I scrutineered a poll in Trinity Spadina, and the PCs got less votes than the Green Party.  I suspect that a lot of people who generally vote Conservative switched to Liberal because they just found Hudak too repulsive.  With a stronger PC campaign, I suspect the NDP would do better in Toronto, because some of the votes that the Liberals caught in Toronto would go back to the PCs.  The vote for Marchese was still strong, but not as strong as it was for the Liberal.  The PC vote however was much lower than normal, and I think much of that went Liberal.

The results do not bear this out. Assuming my lazy Wikipedia numbers are correct, here are the changes in raw vote numbers from 2011 (not vote share) in the three ridings the NDP lost. A few trends emerge:

1) Turnout increased significantly, and Liberal votes increased significantly. In each case the Liberal increase is at least 63% of the increase in total turnout. The bulk of the Liberal surge could be seen to have come from voters who did not vote last election.

2) In all 3 ridings, the PCs gained votes whether a marginal or more significant number. Some new voters turned out for the PCs - they absolutely did not bottom out in these ridings.

3) In all 3 ridings, the Greens gained as well. The Green gains were greater than or roughly equal to the loss in NDP votes. Some new voters turned out for the Greens, and it's conceivable that some NDPers went Green.

4) In all 3 ridings, the NDP lost votes but not a particularly large number. Although it is true that some NDP voters switched to Liberal, some could have gone Green or may well have just stayed home.

5) In Trinity-Spadina and Davenport the NDP losses are significantly smaller than the Liberal gains. Retaining 100% of NDP voters from 2011 would not have kept these ridings safe. Liberal gains won these ridings, and bulk of these gains did not come from the PC, NDP or Greens, but from increased turnout. To keep these ridings the NDP would have had to match the Liberals' get-out-the-vote success. Only in Beaches-East York would NDP voter retention have kept the riding safe.

Trinity-Spadina

Liberal 19870 -> 26569 (+6699)

NDP 18731 -> 17547 (-1184)

PC 5420 -> 7961 (+2541)

Green 2415 -> 4069 (+1654)

Valid votes 46906 -> 57425 (+10519)

 

Davenport

Liberal 12953 -> 16205 (+3252)

NDP 14367 -> 14164 (-203)

PC 2480 -> 2619 (+139)

Green 855 -> 1974 (+1119)

Valid votes 31279 -> 35598 (+4319)

 

Beaches-East York

Liberal 13813 -> 17102 (+3289)

NDP 17925 -> 16671 (-1254)

PC 5333 -> 5595 (+262)

Green 1025 -> 2213 (+1188)

Valid votes 38285 -> 42261 (+3976)

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

I don't think Horwath should stand down, but she needs to work on clarifying the delivery of her message and her relationship with the party base.

Obviously, the ONDP needs to win over voters they don't already have, but at the same time Horwath and the party need to make it explicitly clear to the base that they aren't moving away from the core values of social democracy OR shunning the kinds of people who make up the base.  There were a lot of good things in the ONDP platform, but Horwath didn't emphasize them enough(and her removal of the platform from the ONDP website in mid-campaign made no sense whatever.

The challenge involves two objectives:

1)making it clear, over and over, that labour, the poor and social activists, and the things they care about and fight for, whether in the GTA, other cities, small towns and rural areas still matter MORE to the ONDP than they do to the other parties.  People who already vote for the party need to be reminded, again and again, that their support and their loyalty still matters, that their needs and their values still matters to those they elect, and the party needs to remind itself that the base itself is NOT the cause of the party's past misfortunes. Defeats are caused by bad leadership, not the base.

2)making a real effort, in appealing to other voters, to win THOSE voters over to the idea that it's in their interest to see labour and the poor as equal and natural allies in a coalition for change, in an alliance of everyone who's getting shafted in te status quo.  The ONDP is only going to be able to win over voters who see themselves as facing troubles...it can;t get votes from people who see themselves as "winners", or who are still invested in the "aspirational" mindset.   And it can't get votes from those who see labour, social activists, and the poor as "special interest groups" or as enemies to be crushed.  

 

mark_alfred

Perhaps it was just the area I was in where the PC vote really seemed oddly small.  Anyway, the numbers above suggest to me that the new condo developments are a cause then.

Debater

And DiNovo only hung on by 1 percentage point in Parkdale-High Park, despite being a multipe-term incumbent up against newcomer Nancy LeBlanc.  DiNovo hung on by almost sheer luck, and perhaps a bit of her own political smarts in recognizing that keeping as far away from Horwath was her best chance at survival.  She knew that Horwath was bad news for the Toronto MPP's, and she was right.  Horwath hurt Marchese, Schien, Prue & DiNovo.  Even Tabuns dropped in Toronto-Danforth, although fortunately for him he was in a safe seat.

wage zombie

Unionist wrote:

Horwath unilaterally, despotically, changed the party program on May 22, and deleted the existing policy book from the website.

How would she be able to unilaterally, despotically change party policy?  Or are you saying she removed a file from a website?

http://xkcd.com/932/

youngsocialist

A lot of my peers did in fact vote green. I am disgusted with the green platform. Why is our green party such a disgrace to social justice issues compared to green parties abroad. How did it become such a rich white people party?

Who would be a good replacement for Prue in 2018?

Debater

Prue only lost by a narrow margin (unlike Marchese, and not by as much as Schien) so there's nothing stopping him from running again.

And yes, the Greens did go up in this election, afterall.  I didn't think they would, but I think some NDP supporters did vote for them.  I especially saw this in the Ottawa-area ridings where the NDP vote was down everywhere (as The Ottawa Citizen pointed out, NDP candidates in Ottawa were ignored by Horwath).  The Green vote went up in the Ottawa-area ridings.  The Greens also beat the NDP in Guelph and Dufferin-Caledon (and I think Bruce-Grey-Owen-Sound).

mark_alfred

wage zombie wrote:

Unionist wrote:

Horwath unilaterally, despotically, changed the party program on May 22, and deleted the existing policy book from the website.

How would she be able to unilaterally, despotically change party policy?  Or are you saying she removed a file from a website?

http://xkcd.com/932/

It was that the party updated it's website then.  Previously they had the 2011 general election platform on there.  Then it was updated to the 2014 general election platform.  "Despotic", according to Unionist.

Unionist

mark_alfred wrote:

It was that the party updated it's website then.  Previously they had the 2011 general election platform on there.  Then it was updated to the 2014 general election platform.  "Despotic", according to Unionist.

You have never answered - because you don't know - how that "website update" led to dropping the promised 2.5% corporate tax hike down to 1%, and dropping the pension plan completely.

I guess the webmaster decides election platforms and party policy - right? That's a lot more plausible than suggesting that it's the membership.

Got an answer? Yes? No? Do you understand what I mean by "despotic"? Can you explain why they would leave the 2011 platform up for 3 weeks into a 6-week campaign?

These are not technical matters. They are matters of political betrayal, of their supporters, and of working people as a whole. You can blame me for exposing them if you like, but I'm not the one who supports a party that lusted to be Liberal clone, but went a bit too far in that direction.

 

mark_alfred

All party's platforms change between elections Unionist.  They were tardy.  Their tardiness was a big news story.  Everyone but you knew they had not yet released their 2014 platform.  But don't let that stop you from ranting about their tardiness.

ETA: and why are you ranting anyway?  You should be happy.  Your preferred party for this election won a majority.

takeitslowly

“Since day one, Andrea Horwath has not been able to catch a break from the media,” he said. “Every panel has been stacked against her.”Horwath “has brought fiscal prudence and social liberalism,” he said. “She’s brought the province honesty and integrity." “She’s humble. She’s real,” Merulla said. “She can be contentious but she’s never pretentious.http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/news/support-for-horwath-s-leader...

theleftyinvestor

Debater wrote:
I especially saw this in the Ottawa-area ridings where the NDP vote was down everywhere (as The Ottawa Citizen pointed out, NDP candidates in Ottawa were ignored by Horwath).  The Green vote went up in the Ottawa-area ridings.  The Greens also beat the NDP in Guelph and Dufferin-Caledon (and I think Bruce-Grey-Owen-Sound).

I think it's fair to say that the same concerns Toronto progressives had about the NDP campaign held true in Ottawa and some other urban areas too. It's just that Toronto is the only region where this was noticed by way of seat losses.

One thing that surprises me is that the ONDP tried to use all the same marketing materials and messages in Toronto. It's like airing ads in BC about fixing a crumbling bridge in Montreal, or putting up beer ads for bros in a women's bookstore. I viewed a lot of print and video ads from all three parties, and I just didn't see what I felt to be a progressive message embodied in any of those ads. Surely someone in party HQ could have known that the auto insurance and home HST message would not have resonated widely in any of their five 416 ridings, where car and home ownership rates are lower than most of the GTA? But there was still plenty to like about the platform and there were plenty of ways to target Toronto voters directly. Even if a good chunk of the platform was in line with these voters' values, the campaign itself was not.

terrytowel

Rumors abound the Tories that MP Lisa Raitt is seriously looking at jumping ship and taking on the PC leadership.

Which doesn't bode well for Andrea, as she won't be able to compete sharing the limelight with a star of Lisa's stature.

How will Andrea able to carve out her own niche up against Lisa Raitt mega-watt charisma?

theleftyinvestor

Oh yeah, the solution to succeed Hudak after his disastrous anti-union campaign is totally to replace him with Harper's personal strike-breaker.

terrytowel

theleftyinvestor wrote:

Oh yeah, the solution to succeed Hudak after his disastrous anti-union campaign is totally to replace him with Harper's personal strike-breaker.

It worked with the Liberals. Why wouldn't lightning strike twice?

Andrea has such vitriol towards Wynne. I get the feeling she doesn't like sharing the limelight with another woman. Wanting that female vote all to herself. Imagine if there was another female she would compete against to get any coverage.

swallow swallow's picture

terrytowel wrote:

Rumors abound the Tories that MP Lisa Raitt is seriously looking at jumping ship and taking on the PC leadership.

Which doesn't bode well for Andrea, as she won't be able to compete sharing the limelight with a star of Lisa's stature.

How will Andrea able to carve out her own niche up against Lisa Raitt mega-watt charisma?

Seriously? Mega-watt charisma? Lisa Raitt? 

mark_alfred

terrytowel wrote:

theleftyinvestor wrote:

Oh yeah, the solution to succeed Hudak after his disastrous anti-union campaign is totally to replace him with Harper's personal strike-breaker.

It worked with the Liberals. Why wouldn't lightning strike twice?

Andrea has such vitriol towards Wynne. I get the feeling she doesn't like sharing the limelight with another woman. Wanting that female vote all to herself. Imagine if there was another female she would compete against to get any coverage.

Ugh.  Silly comment. 

Unionist

mark_alfred wrote:

All party's platforms change between elections Unionist.  They were tardy.  Their tardiness was a big news story.  Everyone but you knew they had not yet released their 2014 platform.  But don't let that stop you from ranting about their tardiness.

ETA: and why are you ranting anyway?  You should be happy.  Your preferred party for this election won a majority.

Why did Horwath slash the corporate tax hike promise and get rid of the ONDP's pension plan, in the middle of an election campaign?

You seem to have a huge dose of trouble addressing that question. I know the answer, and I don't even live in Ontario. The answer is incredibly simple.

Your view that the Liberals are my "preferred party" is simply the hallmark of a partisan cheerleader who can't conceive of someone criticizing their flawed party without being a shill for another flawed party.

My loyalty is to none of these scumbags. It is to the working class. I measure them by how loyal they are to us. Strange, I know, but what is life if not full of surprises.

 

 

felixr

Horwath should quit. This was a strategic bungling of historic proportions and the direction she has led the NDP in (into incoherent right-wing populism) is frightening. She's personable, but she's also dangerous, reckless, and clearly surrounded by questionable advisers. The fact that she proudly lives in a luxury Bay Street apartment says a lot to me already.

Unionist

mark_alfred wrote:

Unionist, they didn't advocate as high a raise in corporate taxes this time as they did last time.  Platforms change, but the basic premise of raising corporate taxes remained.

No. Either there was a reason, in which case it should be public. Or no reason - in which case, it shouldn't have happened. I know the reason, as I mentioned earlier. You don't. Doesn't that strike you as odd?

Quote:
  Why try to frustrate support for the NDP, the one party to advocate raising corporate taxes, when the others are for lowering them?  

Because their actions are the hallmark of dishonesty. If they can cut from 2.5% to 1% without even an acknowledgment let alone an explanation, they can cut to 0%. They thought their loyal supporters would just salute and carry on. It didn't happen this time, did it?

In 1990, they promised public auto insurance. Once elected, they broke their promise. This is dishonesty in the DNA. That's why truly committed NDP supporters must demand that every change in policy, every elaboration of new policy, must be discussed and debated and made transparent, not only within the party, but in the public arena. Otherwise, there is nothing to distinguish the NDP from the parties of the wealthy and powerful (except, of course, for their sad inability to convince Bay Street to trust them with the combination of the safe).

Finally, you still haven't addressed the small matter of just dumping their own pension plan proposal on the very day that Kathleen Wynne publicly decided to endorse it. Doesn't this strike you as a bit crooked? Cockeyed? Cavalier?

Once again, I know why Horwath (or rather, her braindead strategists) did this. You don't, because she never said.

 

onlinediscountanvils

Debater wrote:
And yes, the Greens did go up in this election, afterall.  I didn't think they would, but I think some NDP supporters did vote for them.  I especially saw this in the Ottawa-area ridings where the NDP vote was down everywhere (as The Ottawa Citizen pointed out, NDP candidates in Ottawa were ignored by Horwath).  The Green vote went up in the Ottawa-area ridings.

Several lifelong dippers in my riding remarked that the NDP candidate put in such a dismal performance at the Lowertown debate that you could almost see the orange support turn to green right in front of your eyes. And I know a former NDP candidate who ran federally in the past two elections, who announced on election day that he had voted Green.

onlinediscountanvils

mark_alfred wrote:
They were the only party to advocate raising corporate taxes (of the four -- I'm pretty sure the Greens also believe in lowering corp taxes*).  The Liberals bragged about how they lowered corporate taxes (and likely still plan to do so even more -- their hold the line plea was advocated as "for now"), and the Cons vowed to lower them.  Yet 95% of your comments are darts thrown to the NDP (rather than the Liberals, to whom you mostly throw laurels).  Why try to frustrate support for the NDP, the one party to advocate raising corporate taxes, when the others are for lowering them?  Odd.

* the Ontario Green Party site is down now, but I'll confirm that later.

When you get around to checking, you'll find that the Green platform also includes a corporate tax increase to 12.5%.

mark_alfred

Unionist wrote:

mark_alfred wrote:

Unionist, they didn't advocate as high a raise in corporate taxes this time as they did last time.  Platforms change, but the basic premise of raising corporate taxes remained.

No. Either there was a reason, in which case it should be public. Or no reason - in which case, it shouldn't have happened. I know the reason, as I mentioned earlier. You don't. Doesn't that strike you as odd?

Quote:
  Why try to frustrate support for the NDP, the one party to advocate raising corporate taxes, when the others are for lowering them?  

Because their actions are the hallmark of dishonesty. If they can cut from 2.5% to 1% without even an acknowledgment let alone an explanation, they can cut to 0%. They thought their loyal supporters would just salute and carry on. It didn't happen this time, did it?

The platforms (both 2011 and 2014) proposed keeping corporate taxes competitive with surrounding jurisdictions if they raised them.  The NDP maintained that a raise now of 1% would bring in needed revenue and would accomplish keeping them competitive.  I didn't see a specific number in the 2011 platform (IE, I can't find the 2.5% rate that you speak of).  Instead it says "restore general corporate tax rate".  I searched, but could find no mention of the 2.5% raise in corporate tax rate that you speak of.  Rather, I believe at the 2011 general election, the Libs were promising to cut corporate taxes, and the NDP were promising to hold the line (link).  So, feel free to tell me where you get this 2.5% number from, because I can't find it.  Rather, I feel the NDP has remained consistent in their pledge to be open to corporate tax raises by first assessing the surrounding jurisdictions to determine if there is in fact room for them to be raised.

mark_alfred

onlinediscountanvils wrote:

mark_alfred wrote:
They were the only party to advocate raising corporate taxes (of the four -- I'm pretty sure the Greens also believe in lowering corp taxes*).  The Liberals bragged about how they lowered corporate taxes (and likely still plan to do so even more -- their hold the line plea was advocated as "for now"), and the Cons vowed to lower them.  Yet 95% of your comments are darts thrown to the NDP (rather than the Liberals, to whom you mostly throw laurels).  Why try to frustrate support for the NDP, the one party to advocate raising corporate taxes, when the others are for lowering them?  Odd.

* the Ontario Green Party site is down now, but I'll confirm that later.

When you get around to checking, you'll find that the Green platform also includes a corporate tax increase to 12.5%.

So it is!  That's good.  I think they previously had advocated a more right wing neo-liberal approach like cutting income and corporate taxes and replacing these with flat consumption taxes.  So, glad to see they're going more left.  Good to see the Greens on the same page as the NDP on this one.

mark_alfred

Unionist, they didn't advocate as high a raise in corporate taxes this time as they did last time*.  Platforms change, but the basic premise of raising corporate taxes remained.  They were the only party to advocate raising corporate taxes (of the four -- I'm pretty sure the Greens also believe in lowering corp taxes**).  The Liberals bragged about how they lowered corporate taxes (and likely still plan to do so even more -- their hold the line plea was advocated as "for now"), and the Cons vowed to lower them.  Yet 95% of your comments are darts thrown to the NDP (rather than the Liberals, to whom you mostly throw laurels).  Why try to frustrate support for the NDP, the one party to advocate raising corporate taxes, when the others are for lowering them?  Odd.

* I initially took Unionist's word without question, but I'm not sure this is correct.  See post #143.

** the Ontario Green Party site is down now, but I'll confirm that later.

wage zombie

mark_alfred wrote:

It was that the party updated it's website then.  Previously they had the 2011 general election platform on there.  Then it was updated to the 2014 general election platform.  "Despotic", according to Unionist.

Unionist wrote:

You have never answered - because you don't know - how that "website update" led to dropping the promised 2.5% corporate tax hike down to 1%, and dropping the pension plan completely.

I guess the webmaster decides election platforms and party policy - right? That's a lot more plausible than suggesting that it's the membership.

Got an answer? Yes? No? Do you understand what I mean by "despotic"? Can you explain why they would leave the 2011 platform up for 3 weeks into a 6-week campaign?

Because they are disorganized and lazy and broke.  As someone who works in the web, this is a pretty standard state of affairs (content that's no longer relevant), especially for organizations working above capacity. 

You were sarcastically mocking them for having a page up mentioning working with Jack Layton.  And now you're all shocked and outraged about an old file being left up, and then disappearing.  And then you're complaining in other threads about how petty it is to talk about $16 orange juice.

Do you think they had that page up in an effort to trick people into thinking that Layton was still alive?

Debater

swallow wrote:

terrytowel wrote:

Rumors abound the Tories that MP Lisa Raitt is seriously looking at jumping ship and taking on the PC leadership.

Which doesn't bode well for Andrea, as she won't be able to compete sharing the limelight with a star of Lisa's stature.

How will Andrea able to carve out her own niche up against Lisa Raitt mega-watt charisma?

Seriously? Mega-watt charisma? Lisa Raitt? 

The journalists on Power & Politics were all gushing over Lisa Raitt yesterday.  Kady O'Malley, John Ivison, Kelly Cryderman & Rosie Barton were talking about who should succeed Hudak, and they kept going on about how amazing she is, and they also proposed her as someone who could succeed Harper in a few years.

Perhaps they have forgotten that she can barely put a sentence together in French and will have to take a lot of French immersion classes if she wants to lead the Federal Conservatives.  I'm also not sure if I see the current Conservatives electing a woman leader anyway.

Christine Elliot is a more likely contender for PC leader provincially.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Debater wrote:

The journalists on Power & Politics were all gushing over Lisa Raitt yesterday.  Kady O'Malley, John Ivison, Kelly Cryderman & Rosie Barton were talking about who should succeed Hudak, and they kept going on about how amazing she is, and they also proposed her as someone who could succeed Harper in a few years.

Perhaps they have forgotten that she can barely put a sentence together in French and will have to take a lot of French immersion classes if she wants to lead the Federal Conservatives.  I'm also not sure if I see the current Conservatives electing a woman leader anyway.

Christine Elliot is a more likely contender for PC leader provincially.

For once, I find myself agreeing with Debater. I would add that her ability to put a sentence together in English is not overly impressive either. Personally, I am amazed that journalists consider this dull, lacklustre person such a star.

Captain Obvious

Debater wrote:

Christine Elliot is a more likely contender for PC leader provincially.

A TorStar piece this morning said that she was interested in jumping to the federal arena, which would make a certain amount of sense for her.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/06/13/who_will_replace_tim_hudak.html

One would suspect the pendulum in the PC party will swing back to a more moderate leader, with strict instructions that separate schools not be speculated on in any way, shape or form. I really don't know who would qualify as "moderate" in the PCs anymore (yes, always a relative term). I heard Witmer's name mentioned, but I can't see how that would be possible--she'll get hammered for resigning her seat in 2012 so the McGuinty Libs could get another shot at the majority.

Debater

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Debater wrote:

The journalists on Power & Politics were all gushing over Lisa Raitt yesterday.  Kady O'Malley, John Ivison, Kelly Cryderman & Rosie Barton were talking about who should succeed Hudak, and they kept going on about how amazing she is, and they also proposed her as someone who could succeed Harper in a few years.

Perhaps they have forgotten that she can barely put a sentence together in French and will have to take a lot of French immersion classes if she wants to lead the Federal Conservatives.  I'm also not sure if I see the current Conservatives electing a woman leader anyway.

Christine Elliot is a more likely contender for PC leader provincially.

For once, I find myself agreeing with Debater. I would add that her ability to put a sentence together in English is not overly impressive either. Personally, I am amazed that journalists consider this dull, lacklustre person such a star.

I think sometimes the press gallery allows its own personal preferences or affection for particular politicians to influence who they think the public would respond to.  Perhaps Lisa Raitt has a good relationship with those journalists and they like her.  I've heard them talk about how much presence she has and how she is striking because she's nearly 6 feet tall, and John Ivison said she could be CPC leader someday, etc.

It's similiar to the outpouring of accolades and almost Mandela-like tributes that the press gallery gave to Jim Flaherty when he died a couple months ago.  They went on & on about his wonderful warmth & Irish charm and what an amazing human being he was.  So much for the 'liberal bias' in the media.  All the glowing coverage of Flaherty even gave Harper a bit of a bump in the polls.  The journalists seemed to forget that when Flaherty was in the Harris cabinet he once considered making homelessness a crime.

Captain Obvious

Debater wrote:

"So much for the 'liberal bias' in the media.  All the glowing coverage of Flaherty even gave Harper a bit of a bump in the polls.  The journalists seemed to forget that when Flaherty was in the Harris cabinet he once considered making homelessness a crime.

Yeah, this irritated me too. He was lionized by everyone, and all I could think of was how much harm he'd caused over the years. I was baffled by the recasting of him as a moderate. It'd be like praising Boehner's progressive attitude by comparing him to Glenn Beck.

Pages

Topic locked