Andrea Horwath's fate on Friday the 13th

220 posts / 0 new
Last post
takeitslowly
  • and the lesson for the NDP is perhaps, next time, do not vote down the budget unless you find something wrong with the budget. Do not confuse the budget with other scandals or courrption unless it is currently a "breaking news", liike the sponsorship scandal from Paul Martin liberals.

people dont seem to have time for election or understanding the party platforms, so do not cause an election unless you have found something you cant accept in the budget or people will blame you for it.

terrytowel

takeitslowly wrote:

    people dont seem to have time for election or understanding the party platforms, so do not cause an election unless you have found something you cant accept in the budget or people will blame you for it.

    Kim Campbell was right. Elections are not the time to talk about serious issues.

    Jacob Two-Two

    Canadian people are very small-c conservative. We like tradition, we love institutions, and our cultural changes can be downright glacial in speed. Basically people love to vote Liberal. It's sticking with what they know, it's rooting for the old team. It's very Canadian. The fact is, if the party hadn't self- destructed into a dumbfounding pageant of goonery over the past fifteen years, if they were still the party they once were with a crafty operator like Chrétien at the helm, the NDP would be hard pressed to keep up. Every year the Liberal brand sinks a little lower but for now it's still a strong reflex in our voter culture, and it doesn't take much to trigger. Make people crave security and they'll run towards the familiar.

    I'm not saying we shouldn't make a strong critique of the Horwath campaign. There was lots about it that I found distasteful, and some outright stupid, but just because we can say that there were things that didn't work, doesn't automatically mean that those things "lost the election". I think if you want to make that claim then it falls on you to provide some evidence to the effect that the election was ever the NDP's to lose. Sometimes forces are just too big for you to take control of. Probably this election could have been done better, and we should talk about that, but not in the context of "that's why we lost" unless, like I said, you know something we don't.

    Debater

    terrytowel wrote:

    I was reading Svend Robinson book and he write that being openly gay worked against him, when he ran against Hedy Fry in Vancouver Center.

    Vancouver Center has a large LGBT population, and they were angry that they were asked to make a choice between Hedy and Svend. They felt this label was being put on them of voting for Svend just because he is gay. They didn't want to be defined that way.

    They overwhelming voted for Hedy because she had done more for their individual community in Vancouver Center, then Svend would. They saw Svend running in Vancouver Center as opportunisim.

    It is all in Svend book.

    It was political opportunism by Svend.  And it was time for Svend to leave by that point anyway, and Layton was reportedly glad he did.

    Svend should have run in a different riding, but he was in the awkward situation of trying to make a political comeback after the ring theft controversy and his decision to resign his Burnaby-Douglas seat which had gone to Bill Siksay at that point.

    And gay people don't just vote for someone because they are gay if they are running for the wrong party.  Lorne Mayencourt found that out when he ran against Hedy Fry a couple elections ago.  Why would he have thought gay voters would want to vote Conservative?

    Doug

    Some would. There are wealthy gays who would prefer their taxes be kept low and are convinced the Conservatives won't do anything to affect gay rights. The trouble is that there just aren't enough of them to flip Vancouver or Toronto Centre, but they are out there.

    swallow swallow's picture

    1, Plenty of non-luxury apartments on Bay Street, including some pretty basic rental units. 

    2. Lisa Raitt was much disliked in Toronto when she headed the Port Authority. 

     

    terrytowel

    swallow wrote:

    1, Plenty of non-luxury apartments on Bay Street, including some pretty basic rental units. 

    2. Lisa Raitt was much disliked in Toronto when she headed the Port Authority. 

    1, how many of them are high rise

    2, no matter, it still gives her urban cred

    swallow swallow's picture

    1. Bay and Charles towers, and I can't be bothered to count beyond that. "Bay Street" is shorthand to make people think wealth, but this does not reflect the reality of everything on the actual Bay Street. 

    2. If you think so. She did a lot to help Dasvid Miller get elected by stopping her/Porter's bridge to the island aiport scheme, wasted large sums on the ferry-to-Rochester terminal, etc etc. (read the wikiepda entry.) Personally I think she's less than impressive based on her very unimpressive performance towards the Cantons de l'Est, but maybe y'all love her in urban Ontario. 

    Stockholm

    I have several friends who live in "Bay St. highrises" and guess what - they are very modest one bedroom apartments that are nothing to write home about at all. I have lived in downtown Toronto most of my life and only reading babble for the last few days did I learn that living in an apartment building anywhere on Bay St. automatically meant living in some Leona Helmsley style palace. Gosh, I never knew that Bay St. was the Toronto equivalent of 5th Avenue...

    Walk up Bay St. between College and Bloor and you will see a lot of very non-descript "cookie cutter" high rise apartment buildings and condos that are very run of the mill...the receptionist in my office lives in one of them.

    adma

    takeitslowly wrote:
    Well, no one directly voted for Wynne except the people living in Don Valley West or East or wherever the hell she lives in. So its apples and oranges. 

    However, it's possible for people to vote in a directly-for-Wynne spirit--sort of like, voting presidentially, rather than congressionally.

    Which is, come to think of it, how Quebeckers ushered in the Orange Crush.

    Now, imagine if you will, that Wynne lost the leadership and opted, instead, to run for Toronto Mayor--if that were the case, and if both Chow and Ford were also in the race, I can picture the share distribution being identical to Trinity-Spadina, i.e. Wynne w/46.27%, Chow w/30.56%, Ford w/13.86%.  *There's* a measure of her popularity.

    Wilf Day

    PrairieDemocrat15 wrote:
    Since you are saying Andrea's weakness is urban Ontario, I can only assume you consider any city smaller than Ottawa as non-urban. The NDP cleaned up in Hamilton, London, Windsor, and the Niagara region, and did quite well in Kitchener-Waterloo, Brampton, and Sudbury. I'll grant you Andrea's appoach this time around did not work in Toronto proper, but Thursday's result demonstrated Horwath's appeal outside of the Toronto-Ottawa bubble.

    It did not work in downtown Toronto. It worked in York West where Tom Rakosevic's vote went up from 7,901 (34.8%) to 10,007 (39.3%), nearly winning, even while turnout went up 3.9%. In Etobicoke North, Nigel Barriffe got 7,134 (26.3%), up from 5,426 (21.8%), as the 3.1% higher turnout went to him, while the Liberal % dropped from 48.5% to 44.8%. And of course in Bramalea Jagmeet Singh's vote went up from 16,626 (38.2%) to 23,521 (44.2%), and in Brampton-Springdale the NDP vote went up from 5,378 (15.3%) to 13,481 (31.9%) despite strategic voters saying vote Liberal to stop the Tory (who came third.)

    Orangutan

    Wilf Day 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%.

    I find on this forum and within NDP circles, you hear all this talk about Trinity-Spadina.  You also find many Trinity-Spadina folks later working in higher up position within the party or as staffers to NDP MPs/MPPs/City Councillors throughout the city.  Because of that many within the NDP see Trinity Spadina as some kind of natural NDP turf, when in fact it is more of a swing riding that leans towards the NDP (more so provincially). With the changing demographics, I think ridings such as Davenport and Parkdale High Park will become the 'new' Trinity Spadina - and Trinity-Spadina replacement ridings will become more in play until/unless the NDP can supplant the Liberals (as most Labour parties have done elsewhere in the world) or some kind of proportional represetnation or ranked ballot came in.  

    I can tell you this: if we had ranked ballots, you'd see a NDP majority government as most Liberals and Conservatives would have ranked Andrea and the NDP as their 2nd choice.  

    Rokossovsky

    I am curious about the Trinity Spadina statistics. This is an awesome increase in voter turnout. Provincially voter turn out increased by 3% or something, in Trinity Spadina there was a 20% increase in voter turnout. Any ideas on that? Is that the case in any other ridings?

    ghoris

    terrytowel wrote:

    I was reading Svend Robinson book and he write that being openly gay worked against him, when he ran against Hedy Fry in Vancouver Center.

    Vancouver Center has a large LGBT population, and they were angry that they were asked to make a choice between Hedy and Svend. They felt this label was being put on them of voting for Svend just because he is gay. They didn't want to be defined that way.

    They overwhelming voted for Hedy because she had done more for their individual community in Vancouver Center, then Svend would. They saw Svend running in Vancouver Center as opportunisim.

    It is all in Svend book.

    I'm not sure it was an LGBT issue, but it sure was opportunism. Svend ran for Parliament mere months after claiming he was mentally incapable of being held responsible for stealing a ring. He came across as a complete flake and voters of Vancouver Centre responded accordingly.

    nicky

    the increased "turnout" in Trinity-Spadina is because of the population growth, particularly in waterfront condos. That why a new seat in being added in the new redistribution.

    Skinny Dipper

    Orangutan wrote:

    Wilf Day 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%.

    I find on this forum and within NDP circles, you hear all this talk about Trinity-Spadina.  You also find many Trinity-Spadina folks later working in higher up position within the party or as staffers to NDP MPs/MPPs/City Councillors throughout the city.  Because of that many within the NDP see Trinity Spadina as some kind of natural NDP turf, when in fact it is more of a swing riding that leans towards the NDP (more so provincially). With the changing demographics, I think ridings such as Davenport and Parkdale High Park will become the 'new' Trinity Spadina - and Trinity-Spadina replacement ridings will become more in play until/unless the NDP can supplant the Liberals (as most Labour parties have done elsewhere in the world) or some kind of proportional represetnation or ranked ballot came in.  

    I can tell you this: if we had ranked ballots, you'd see a NDP majority government as most Liberals and Conservatives would have ranked Andrea and the NDP as their 2nd choice.  

    This is why I oppose single-member district ranked ballots.  Those who champion it for municipal politics will champion it for both provincial and federal politics. It blows away the notion that those who advocate for single-member district ranked ballots are doing so only at the municipal level.  They want it implemented at the provincial and federal levels also.  Finally, based on the Australian elections for the House of Representatives, around 90 to 95% of the first choice candidates do go on to win their electoral districts.  In practically every election, the ranked-ballot effect does not change the overall party composition in the House of Commons from first-choice to 50%+1 on the final vote count.