Giambrone by-election imbroglio

235 posts / 0 new
Last post
Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

1)Joy Taylor is(probably temporarily)leaving the ONDP...she isn't joining the Ontario Liberals.

2)Reid Scott joined the federal Liberals because he liked Dion's carbon tax proposal.  Joy Taylor is angered about what happened at a nomination meeting. 

3)The link you posted is from five years, two federal elections, and TWO ultimately failed federal Liberal leaders ago.  

Stockholm

He makes a couple of clearly valid points:

1. If Joy Taylor nominated Chhabra then she is not the neutral salt of the earth sweet little old lady she is being depicted as. She was actively involved in the campaign of the losing candidate. But i get it. Disagreeing with a 90 year old woman is like accusing a station wagon full of nuns of perjury. You can't win.

2. There are two sides to every story. Why is it that not once in any of the Star's absurd obsession with this story have they ever interviewed any of the many NDP members in Guildwood who worked on Giambrone's campaign and were happy to have him as their candidate and who think the local riding executive are out to lunch.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Y'know, Stock, it's more than likely that Giambrone will be nominated somewhere in the next Ontario election.  I'm not sure you're helping the guy by making posts like that-OR by dissing Amartjeet Chhabra and Joy Taylor.

It'd be far more beneficial to Giambrone's political future AND to the ONDP in general for you to find some way to work to heal the divisions caused by the S-G situation.

aka Mycroft

Stockholm wrote:

 Whether you like it or not - Adam Giambrone proved to be the best thing that ever happened to the NDP in Scarborough-Guildwood!

So Giambrone will be running in Scarborough-Guildwood in the next provincial election then?

aka Mycroft

janfromthebruce wrote:

Giambrone when he was president and willing to take on such a hard position at such a young age.

What a martyr!

aka Mycroft

Stockholm wrote:

29% is an all-time high for the NDP in a barren riding like Scarborough-Guildwood. With another candidate no one had heard of and in a short three week campaign - the NDP would have been lucky to avoid an Etobicoke-Lakeshore style result (7%)

Giambrone did well for three reasons:

1) The NDP is generally in a stronger position now than it was in 2011

2) Name recognition ie all publicity is good publicity

3) Party workers poured into Scarborough Guildwood from across Toronto, and did so at the expense of Etobicoke-Lakeshore (the only one of the 5 by-election ridings where the NDP did worse than in 2011). Had party workers from outside the riding been evenly split between EL and SG the result in both ridings would have been different.

Stockholm thinks Giambrone is the best thing that ever happened to Scarborough-Guildwood. That may be true if he moves to the riding and works to build to the next election but we all know he's not going to do that. So what will he leave behind in Scarborough-Guildwood? A demoralized and alienated riding association and the likely loss of the local candidate who appeared to be willing to invest time and energy in the riding in the long haul, not just for 3 weeks. Giambrone, having used Scarborough-Guildwood as a stepping stone, will move on to Trinity-Spadina or another riding and leave the Scarborough-Guildwood riding association in a weaker position than it was before. The local organization in the riding has been destroyed and unless all the outside workers who parachuted into the riding to help Giambrone this summer are prepared to do the same thing in 2014 or 2015 the NDP could do worse than they did in 2011.

Stockholm

You're being charitable in even calling it a "local organization". It sounds like what passed for a riding association in S-G was more like an eight member sewing circle! Its hard to be any weaker than nothing.

I cannot read Giambrone's mind but I suspect that by running in Guildwood he was probably making a medium to longterm commitment to Scarborough - even if not to that particular riding. Who knows, maybe he's run again in Guildwood or maybe he'll move over to Scarborough Centre or Scarborough Southwest - both have better NDP demographics and longterm Liberal incumbents with a lot of negatives. We shall see.

aka Mycroft

Stockholm wrote:

 

I cannot read Giambrone's mind but I suspect that by running in Guildwood he was probably making a medium to longterm commitment to Scarborough - even if not to that particular riding. 

Considering that, Ignatieff style, he wouldn't even commit to moving to Scarborough if he won the by-election (Ignatieff remained in Yorkville throughout his time as an MP) I find it doubtful that he has any desire to move their now that he's lost, let alone make any "medium or longterm commitment to Scarborough." But, I could be wrong. Perhaps someone can give us monthly updates as to whether Giambrone has moved his residence to the former borough?

Stockholm

I have no strong feelings on whether he chooses to live there or not. Neither Gaimbrone nor the winner Mitzie Hunter live in Scarborough and rtogether they took 70% of the vote. Jack layton never lived in Toronto-Danforth either. If some people in SG object to voting for anyone who doesn't live in the riding - that's their choice.

Apropos of nothing in the UK its so routine for MPs to be parachuted into ridings they have no ties to - that its actually a news story if an MP DOES live in the riding they represent - that's how much of an oddity it is.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

And yes, the Torstar has its own agenda here, but you can't ascribe this entire dispute to the machinations of one newspaper.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Stockholm wrote:

He makes a couple of clearly valid points:

1. If Joy Taylor nominated Chhabra then she is not the neutral salt of the earth sweet little old lady she is being depicted as. She was actively involved in the campaign of the losing candidate. But i get it. Disagreeing with a 90 year old woman is like accusing a station wagon full of nuns of perjury. You can't win.

2. There are two sides to every story. Why is it that not once in any of the Star's absurd obsession with this story have they ever interviewed any of the many NDP members in Guildwood who worked on Giambrone's campaign and were happy to have him as their candidate and who think the local riding executive are out to lunch.

The issue isn't really that Joy Taylor is 90.  It's that she has worked hard in the party for decades, and, as such, is entitled to a massive level of respect.  It's irrelevant that she worked for Chhabra-she'd have said the same thing if she'd been neutral.

The ONDP gained in S-G because more people agreed with the party's message...it was not about Giambrone as a person.  And the 2011 federal result of 25% for the NDP in the same boundaries as the provincial riding, with a different candidate, shows that Giambrone really didn't add THAT much to the vote total...certainly not enough for anyone to act like it was all about him, and that nothing else mattered.

You are hurting Giambrone and the ONDP by dismissing and belittling real people with real concerns...the best way to help Giambrone AND to help the party overall is to listen to those who were hurt by this, consider what they are saying, and find some way to reach out TO them-not to keep telling those who disagreed with how the SG thing was handled that they should shut up and know their place.

Do you ALWAYS have to diss people personally when you oppose them? Weisleder, Chhabra, Joy Taylor...your debating style sometimes sounds like the voice of a comedy-club heckler. Not cool for somebody who is involved in what is meant to be an inclusive party a party that also considers itself a movement.

Your posts on this particular topic sound like the embodiment(I'm trying to separate the posts from the person) of the stereotypical early Seventies macho, sexist New Left type, the kind who was good on some things but utterly clueless about the fact that the game was changing and that(IMPORTANT NOTICE:the following list is NOT in order of importance) women, POC's, THE LGBTQ(watch this acronym for additional letters as they emerge)community, FN's, the poor and the disabled now HAD to be included in the coalition for broad social change, and included AS EQUALS, if that coalition was to have any chance of anything remotely resembling victory. By then, there simply weren't any longer enough working-class white dudes who were still open to the idea of any sort of progressive, let alone radical social change(and that situation has simply worsened since the early 70's-white men were already the most reactionary members of every North American and European countryin that era, and nothing at all is likely to change that for the forseeable future-including giving center-left parties a political culture in which white male "pros" are assumed to be the natural leaders).

These early Seventies types I described in that last paragraph saw themselves as antiracist(they at least tried to be)and as opposed to most other forms of bigotry, but they couldn't quite accept anybody who wasn't a man(a white man if possible)as entitled to being treated as their equals within the Left, as truly having a right to be heard and respected, or as truly having a legitimate role within the movement other than to look pretty, make the damn coffee, and clean up after the meetings. And their mindset weakened the left and center-left everywhere.

The worst thing you can do, for any of the things you say you believe in, is to sound anything at all like those guys in your posts.  You do the Right's work for it when you post in that tone.

I'm saying this as a person who respects you and has found your posts interesting and instructive at various points...but you really ought to consider stopping for a bit and working on finding less-toxic ways to communicate here.  You're making yourself look far worse than you must actually be.

 

 

edmundoconnor

Ken Burch wrote:

Perhaps she put him in his place at some point or didn't treat his masculine sense of entitlement with the respect he felt it deserved(in other words, she ruled some motion he made at a riding meeting out of order, or told him to stop telling blonde jokes or something).

Now we're venturing into the realm of complete speculation. I tend to judge people innocent until proven guilty, and the poster has made some substantive complaints which deserve scrutiny. I don't indulge in character assassination or ask babblers to "unmask" commenters (if it's against rabble policy to unmask or attempt to unmask fellow babblers, then it's not on to ask babblers to unmask a commenter on another site), even if they hold viewpoints or make accusations that undercut my own. I put my real name here, because I stand behind what I say, and I am proud to put my name beside it. However, I know that others don't, for a whole host of valid reasons. "Spamming" is a cheap, and easily misused, term. Posting multiple times on a thread doesn't mean much when the site has a firm character limit, forcing multiple posts when you have a substantive and longer point to make. I myself have posted multiple times on this thread (as have you), and it doesn't negate in of itself the points we have to make.

Shouldn't we be interested in what really happened in S--G? The commenter (if his facts check out) is a member of the riding association, something which neither you nor I am. If he's right, and he is a valid member with a membership card to prove it, and that the riding association has an inexact grasp on who is and isn't a member in the riding, then that goes to the very heart of the matter under discussion.

edmundoconnor

Ken Burch wrote:

You are hurting Giambrone and the ONDP by dismissing and belittling real people with real concerns...

Do you ALWAYS have to diss people personally when you oppose them?

Yet you don't hesitate to impugn and speculate negatively about someone when they bring up possible facts that complicate the situation. See above in your treatment of the commenter of The Star's article.

edmundoconnor

Stockholm wrote:

2. There are two sides to every story. Why is it that not once in any of the Star's absurd obsession with this story have they ever interviewed any of the many NDP members in Guildwood who worked on Giambrone's campaign and were happy to have him as their candidate and who think the local riding executive are out to lunch.

If the Star was interested in writing an article about another riding member who has a different take on the situation, then the commenter on the original article would make an excellent candidate to get in touch with (if they are amenable). However, I don't think it is. It's only interested in dragging up dirt, and to hell with what actually happened. Simple stories are easy to sell. Complicated ones, not so much.

adma

Ken Burch wrote:

1)Joy Taylor is(probably temporarily)leaving the ONDP...she isn't joining the Ontario Liberals.

2)Reid Scott joined the federal Liberals because he liked Dion's carbon tax proposal.  Joy Taylor is angered about what happened at a nomination meeting. 

3)The link you posted is from five years, two federal elections, and TWO ultimately failed federal Liberal leaders ago.  

Note: I'm not denying any of that, including the age of the link I posted.  Strictly posted for "comparison's sake".

Stockholm

I think the point of linking to that Reid Scott story was to show how the Star has a history of giving MASSIVE above the fold publicity to sny story that involves someone in their late 80s or 90s being pissed off at the NDP. In contrast when Liberals desert for the NDP you might find some reference to it if you have a magnifying glass and look to page 54.

 

Geoff

In response to my earlier post, I was told that we should wait until the facts are out before we judge what happened.  Does that mean there is some kind of party investigation of the process?  If so, who is conducting the investigation and how long is it expected to take? 

I've seen nothing about it, myself, so I'm curious to know what, if anything, is being done to assure people that the process was followed correctly and that what transpired met the ethical standards expected of our party.

OnTheLeft OnTheLeft's picture

Ken Burch wrote:

Anybody here have any idea who "RWiseman3" in the Star comments section might be, btw?  He has a photo for his icon but it's impossible to tell if that's him or a character from a film or tv show.

I know who he is.

He's a sexist asshole.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

And Stocks, the guy in the Star comments section("RWiseman3") basically spammed the same post FIVE different times.  It sounds more like he has personal beef with Joy Taylor(we only have it on his word that she came to his house to try to stop him from voting at the nomination meeting)than anything substantive to say. 

Anybody here have any idea who "RWiseman3" in the Star comments section might be, btw?  He has a photo for his icon but it's impossible to tell if that's him or a character from a film or tv show.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

edmundoconnor wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

You are hurting Giambrone and the ONDP by dismissing and belittling real people with real concerns...

Do you ALWAYS have to diss people personally when you oppose them?

Yet you don't hesitate to impugn and speculate negatively about someone when they bring up possible facts that complicate the situation. See above in your treatment of the commenter of The Star's article.

You're right, I could have been less personal in my comments about mr "Wiseman".  I've now deleted the harshest phrases. 
As for "undermining him"...if the guy is being quoted here to try to discredit Joy Taylor, it seems to me only fair to try to find out who he is and what his agenda is. 

felixr

-

terrytowel

Joy Taylor "This is NOT over!"

Viresh Raghubeer is preparing to do battle with NDP Leader Andrea Horwath and the party brass at the New Democrats’ provincial council next month.

The president of the NDP’s Scarborough-Guildwood riding association said Thursday he is determined to get answers for why the party appears to have orchestrated Adam Giambrone’s nomination in last month’s byelection and wants the matter put on agenda.

“Too many people are afraid to speak truth to power,” said Raghubeer.

Party president Neethan Shan, in an earlier interview with the Star, said he would support the controversy being aired at the Oct. 26-27 provincial council meeting — “I am not closing any doors.”

At the centre of the controversy is the fact that some 12 people, of questionable party standing, arrived at the last minute for the July 7 nomination meeting in order to poll vault Giambrone over local favourite, Amarjeet Kaur Chhabra.

Giambrone, who left the 2010 Toronto mayor’s race of over a sex and lies scandal, placed third in the Aug. 1 byelection, more than 1,800 votes behind Liberal winner, Mitzie Hunter.

Raghubeer said the party has yet to provide, two months later, the riding executive with a promised explanation as to why the latecomers were allowed to vote.

Horwath and party officials, including Shan, insist it was nothing more than a hotly contested nomination meeting and that everything was above board.

“As in any nomination meetings we have had there are usually people who come in and their name may not appear on the list that provided to the riding association for various reasons,” Shan said, adding that all 12 checked out on the party’s central database.

“It is completely unfounded to say the party had any influence on this decision.”

Riding executive members suspect the nomination meeting was rigged, which caused veteran party volunteer Joy Taylor, to tear up her membership in the NDP, which she had been with since its inception.

The 90-year-old has spearheaded a ground war with the party, sending an eight-page letter to 18 New Democrat MPPs laying out the facts of how the riding executive challenged all 12 — some of whom appeared to be confused as to why they were there, according to witnesses — but was overridden by senior party representatives at the nomination meeting.

In her package, Taylor provided a list of the 12 latecomers, noting that some did not even live at the addresses provided.

“I did it for all you members at Queen’s Park to show you the beginning of the decay that if allowed to spread will destroy a party that brave men and women fought to start. A party for the people, based in truthfulness and honesty,” she wrote in a letter to the MPPs.

Taylor said she has heard from only one MPP, Rosario Marchese (Trinity—Spadina), who told her he was passing along the package to NDP provincial secretary Darlene Lawson. She was one of the party representatives at the nomination meeting who set aside objections over membership.

http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2013/09/05/adam_giambrone_nominat...

Stockholm

who cares?

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Stockholm wrote:

who cares?

That is the equivalent of, "they're all the same."

terrytowel

Stockholm wrote:

who cares?

90 year-old Joy Taylor who had been a card carrying NDP member for 52 years.

That is who cares.

 

Brian Glennie

I found this very compelling:

“I did it for all you  members at Queen’s Park to show you the beginning of the decay that if  allowed to spread will destroy a party that brave men and women fought  to start. A party for the people, based in truthfulness and honesty,”  she wrote in a letter to the MPPs.

Stockholm

terrytowel wrote:

Stockholm wrote:

who cares?

90 year-old Joy Taylor who had been a card carrying NDP member for 52 years.

That is who cares.

 

Being elderly doesn't make anyone infallible. She was an active supporter of the losing nomination candidate in Scarborough-Guildwood and she is understandably upset that her candidate lost. Meanwhile Giambrone got the best NDP result in the history of that riding - clearly the voters in the riding were delighted to have him as the NDP candidate.

Aristotleded24

Stockholm wrote:
Giambrone got the best NDP result in the history of that riding - clearly the voters in the riding were delighted to have him as the NDP candidate.

Why yes, the NDP also got good results in London West and Windsor. I suppose Giambrone had a hand in that as well?

What really bothers me about your arguments is they seem to originate from a "my-party-right-or-wrong" standpoint, and everything else flows from there. There's no doubt in my mind that if Taylor were to instead sing Giambrone's praises that you would hold up the endorsement of a long-standing member of the party as evidence of Giambrone's greatness.

No, being elderly does not make one infallible, but to dismiss a person with that kind of life experience out of hand is inappropriate.

terrytowel

Stockholm wrote:

terrytowel wrote:

Stockholm wrote:

who cares?

90 year-old Joy Taylor who had been a card carrying NDP member for 52 years.

That is who cares.

 

Being elderly doesn't make anyone infallible. She was an active supporter of the losing nomination candidate in Scarborough-Guildwood and she is understandably upset that her candidate lost. Meanwhile Giambrone got the best NDP result in the history of that riding - clearly the voters in the riding were delighted to have him as the NDP candidate.

WOW talk about spin.

Remember when Tony Clement was parachuted into the riding of Muskoka? I could rewrite Stockholm words like this

Meanwhile Tony Clement got the best Conservative result in the history of that riding - clearly the voters in the riding were delighted to have him as the Conservative candidate.

So the next time a candidate of any party is parachuted into a riding, we all now know how Stockholm feels about it.

Pogo Pogo's picture

She may have a long term membership, but I would hazard a guess that the rules about voting rights and residency were settled before she joined the NDP/CCF.

janfromthebruce

In other news, OLG is promoting a stub subway and the newly elected MPP is nowhere to be seen. Now this same parachute liberal candidate had been an outspoken supporter of Light rail transit until the elected Lib candidate and thus switched her tune.

Except now all those subway stops are downsized to 2, and maybe it will happen in ten years.

Stockholm

terrytowel wrote:

WOW talk about spin.

Remember when Tony Clement was parachuted into the riding of Muskoka? I could rewrite Stockholm words like this

Meanwhile Tony Clement got the best Conservative result in the history of that riding - clearly the voters in the riding were delighted to have him as the Conservative candidate.

So the next time a candidate of any party is parachuted into a riding, we all now know how Stockholm feels about it.

There is no law that says that candidates have to live in their ridings - nor should there be one. Jack Layton never lived in Toronto-Danforth, Justin Trudeau has never lived in Papineau and we all know that Elizabeth May went sky-diving into Saanich-Gulf Islands. I don't care if Tony Clement was parachuted into Muskoka - I would hate him just as much if his riding was the Toronto riding he lives in - that's all irrelevant. In Guildwood - virtrually everyone was a parachute - Giambrone didn't live in the riding, but neither did Amarjeet Chhabra and neiter does Mitzi Hunter - obviously the voters don't care since the vast majority of votes went to people who did NOT actually live in the riding. Giambrone proved to be a hit with the voters in Scarborough-Guildwood and with another week - he probably would have won. Its now time to look forward to the imminent new upcoming general election and see who runs where for that.

Stockholm

Pogo wrote:

She may have a long term membership, but I would hazard a guess that the rules about voting rights and residency were settled before she joined the NDP/CCF.

Oh but you forget that she claims that some people can't possibly have been eligible to vote in the nomination contest because she didn't know them personally!

adma

Stockholm wrote:
Meanwhile Giambrone got the best NDP result in the history of that riding - clearly the voters in the riding were delighted to have him as the NDP candidate.

Though we're dealing w/a limited history, i.e. Guildwood in its present form has existed for less than a decade.  So, "best NDP result" isn't necessarily *that* hard to attain...

Pages