Toronto Centre by-election

196 posts / 0 new
Last post
janfromthebruce

Take note of the comments that both nominated candidates made:

“It gives us some bellwether or some reading of the NDP strength versus the Liberal strength,” Loewen said.

McQuaig

McQuaig agrees. One of the reasons the race is attracting a lot of attention and well-known candidates is because it comes at such an “interesting, exciting moment in Canadian politics,” she said.

The governing Conservatives are in serious trouble in the wake of the Senate expense scandal and seem to be unable to recover, she said. It creates an “incredible dynamic” of which of the two opposition parties will likely emerge as the alternative to the Tories in the next general election.

“So it really does set up a kind of fascinating competition that could, in fact, create momentum for 2015,” said McQuaig. “Like whichever party wins … it would look like the pendulum was swinging towards that party.”

Freeland

Freeland said it’s wonderful how many people have rallied around her, but that’s really due to her team’s efforts — the “building of a new coalition.”

“I think that Toronto Centre, in some ways, is going to be the first act of the 2015 general election,” she said.

“I think the stakes are very high and it is a very consequential moment. And that, to me, is one of the reasons to do this.”

McQuaig appeared in just in her response, ready with direct jab at the Harper Conservatives and do a political analysis of opposition parties dynamics. Freeland's response just blah. 

toaster

janfromthebruce wrote:

The riding is being redistributed and so Jennifer has a clear shot at the other new riding. It was an excellent race and McQuaig is an excellent candidate. One of her flyers sitting on the seats in the hall stated that 40 economists supported her candidacy. That speaks volumes to McQuaig's understanding of progressive economic and social politics. And also a deep knowledge of international/global economic politics.

 

She has been in the business of discussing income inequalities and finance for some time.  One would assume she has been in close quarters with progressive eocnomists in that role.  Would be similar to Hollett saying she got the support of 40 former Much VJs, IMO. 

 

Anyway, all the best to McQuaig.

theleftyinvestor

One lesson Linda can learn from other NDP winners: Visibility. She needs to be mainstreeting, meeting people on doorsteps, being visible in every corner of the riding, sending out lots of organizers. Voters need to meet her multiple times so that the ones who ignore her the first time pay attention the next time. Especially for someone who is best known as a byline, she really needs to become a familiar face. Come to the community events, come to the drag shows, the restaurants, everywhere. And by all means talk about income inequality, but also be well-spoken about all the issues in the community big and small.

Aristotleded24

Link posted in wrong thread, sorry

Stockholm

toaster wrote:

 

She has been in the business of discussing income inequalities and finance for some time.  One would assume she has been in close quarters with progressive eocnomists in that role.  Would be similar to Hollett saying she got the support of 40 former Much VJs, IMO. 

With all due respect - when a person is running for parliament and wants to be a law maker who will help run the country - being backed by 40 economists would totally TRUMP being endorsed by 40 Much Music VJs - or are you trying to say that VJs are just as capable of making economic policy as progressive economists?

Centrist

Personally, while Linda is a great candidate, I still think that Jennifer Hollett may have been a tad more electable. For instance, Linda includes this tidbit on her websiate:

Quote:
[Harper] has taken numerous steps to shut Canadians out of the key debate over the future of the tar sands by blocking citizens and groups wanting to voice objections at environmental regulatory hearings – including hearings into a proposal that would allow highly hazardous tar sands oil to move through the northern part of Toronto.

I assume that Linda is speaking in reference to the proposes east-west oil/bitumen pipelne, from Alberta to Quebec, which the NDP supports?

And this tidbit:

Quote:
High taxes, big government and big social programs are the key to creating a globally competitive and equal society. The high-tax, high-spending model works, McQuaig concluded, and it amounts to a political choice.

Now while I sympathize with that model, politically it can be dangerous, esp. when Linda needs former Lib voters to ensure her victory. And the other parties might even use those above quotes as a wedge issue against Linda unfortunately. Just my 2 cents.

janfromthebruce

Both candidates came with their strengths - Jennifer speaks beautifully and is very progressive. Linda is deeply embedded in economics and has such a depth of knowledge and understanding of economics going back and thus no BS will get past her. Her knowledge is embedded in historical understanding of Canadian economics/politics and situated globally. She knows where the Conservative and Liberal past govts' bodies are buried.

She has written about oil, neoliberalism, lib govts, and oh, billionaires (which will come in handy with disecting the 1 percenters (such as Libs new party bagman Bronfman). Having read many of her books and owning quite a few, she is a best selling Canadian author. Here's a list of her books from her wiki page:

  • 1991 – The Quick and the Dead: Brian Mulroney, Big Business and the Seduction of Canada – Toronto: Penguin Books; ISBN 0-670-83305-3
  • 1993 – The Wealthy Banker's Wife: The Assault on Equality in Canada – Toronto: Penguin Books – ISBN 0-14-023065-3
  • 1995 – Shooting the Hippo: Death by Deficit and Other Canadian Myths – Toronto: Penguin Books; ISBN 978-0-670-84767-9
  • 1998 – The Cult of Impotence: Selling the Myth of Powerlessness in the Global Economy – Toronto: Penguin Books; ISBN 0-670-87278-4
  • 2001 – All You Can Eat: Greed, Lust and the New Capitalism – Toronto: Penguin Books; ISBN 978-0-14-026222-3
  • 2007 – Holding the Bully's Coat: Canada and the U.S. Empire – Toronto: Doubleday Canada; ISBN 978-0-385-66012-9
  • 2010 – The Trouble with Billionaires – Toronto: Viking Canada
  • 2012 – Billionaires' Ball: Gluttony and Hubris in an Age of Epic Inequality (co-authored with Neil Brooks) – Boston: Beacon Press; ISBN 978-0-8070-0339-8

Brachina

janfromthebruce wrote:

McQuaig: delighted Liberals have finally discovered income equality; too bad they haven't yet acknowledged their role in creating it.

Pundit's guide tweeting thank you speech.

 I love that line.

nicky

Tom and Linda together on Thursday:

 

https://www.facebook.com/events/588441497869384/?fref=ts

toaster

Stockholm wrote:

toaster wrote:

 

She has been in the business of discussing income inequalities and finance for some time.  One would assume she has been in close quarters with progressive eocnomists in that role.  Would be similar to Hollett saying she got the support of 40 former Much VJs, IMO. 

With all due respect - when a person is running for parliament and wants to be a law maker who will help run the country - being backed by 40 economists would totally TRUMP being endorsed by 40 Much Music VJs - or are you trying to say that VJs are just as capable of making economic policy as progressive economists?

I'm trying to say that it is not such an impressive feet to say you got the support of 40 colleagues in your field of work, who you've worked with closely all your life.  Equally impressive would be if Hollett got the support of 40 cooleagues in her former field of work.  Basically I'm saying is that it isn't quite as remarkable given her history.  One would expect progressive economists to support her.

PrairieDemocrat15

Centrist wrote:

And this tidbit:

Quote:
High taxes, big government and big social programs are the key to creating a globally competitive and equal society. The high-tax, high-spending model works, McQuaig concluded, and it amounts to a political choice.

Now while I sympathize with that model, politically it can be dangerous, esp. when Linda needs former Lib voters to ensure her victory. And the other parties might even use those above quotes as a wedge issue against Linda unfortunately. Just my 2 cents.

She should have said "fair taxes, strong government, and robust social programs..."

Stockholm

Surely, one can support the idea of having a pipeline AND also support doing it as safely as possible and giving local people an opportunity to take part in hearings etc... Can't people walk and chew gum at the same time?

Centrist wrote:

Personally, while Linda is a great candidate, I still think that Jennifer Hollett may have been a tad more electable. For instance, Linda includes this tidbit on her websiate:

Quote:
[Harper] has taken numerous steps to shut Canadians out of the key debate over the future of the tar sands by blocking citizens and groups wanting to voice objections at environmental regulatory hearings – including hearings into a proposal that would allow highly hazardous tar sands oil to move through the northern part of Toronto.

I assume that Linda is speaking in reference to the proposes east-west oil/bitumen pipelne, from Alberta to Quebec, which the NDP supports?

elfin

I like Linda but she's never going to win.  She only appeals to the NDP party faithful and there's just not enough of them in Toronto Centre to beat the Liberals.  Total shame.        

theleftyinvestor

Well a lot of things have shifted since 2011, when the NDP was 11 points away. The Liberals have a more popular leader now (advantage) and a less prominent candidate than Rae (disadvantage). The NDP has a less popular leader now (disadvantage) and a more prominent candidate than 2011 (advantage). Throw in the by-election factor and how well they actually do on the campaign trail, and really anything is possible.

I don't think it's inconceivable that some of Rae's 2011 votes were "Rae voters" and not Liberals. Rae voters may not even all be impressed with Trudeau. There is still room to grow.

knownothing knownothing's picture

elfin wrote:

I like Linda but she's never going to win.  She only appeals to the NDP party faithful and there's just not enough of them in Toronto Centre to beat the Liberals.  Total shame.        

Save this quote for later

janfromthebruce

Voters make decisions on voting based on many factors. So there is a factor of where that person comes from. So Linda has lived in the riding and resided in Canada and wrote/spoke about Canadian politics and economics. As for the base, why I think it's much wider, including the occupy movement.

Freeland had no name recognition and is an elite from the States. I'd vote for the person who actually talked and wrote about my life and situation which Linda has been doing for years in Canada, and in Toronto. I loved Linda's tweet today:

Linda McQuaig ‏@LindaMcQuaig 3h

@cafreeland vows to “work really hard” to “come up with some great ideas” on income inequality. She has none yet? #cdnpoli #torcen #ndp

Freeland today talked about this:

  1. Richard Madan ‏@RichardMadan 6h

    #LPC's @cafreeland wonders why "sexy magnets for the urban creative class" isn't discussed in politics. Watch her invw w/ @DonMartinCTV 5pm

    Expand

  2. Ian Gillespie ‏@IanRGillespie 4h

    Freeland says "no one is talking abt" the kind of cities agenda NDP's promoted for yrs. http://ndp.ca/4Ly @RichardMadan@punditsguide

So Freeland coming from far away is so disconnected that she talks about promoting cities like none of that has happened. Oops, she showed her ignorance of "not knowing" because she didn't keep up with Canadian news and politics.

janfromthebruce

I thought this tweet reply was funny

Ian Gillespie ‏@IanRGillespie 5h

NDP is focused on cities as hubs for investment, innovation & talent. Not sexy magnets. http://www.ndp.ca/4Ly  @RichardMadan

felixr

janfromthebruce wrote:

I loved Linda's tweet today:

Linda McQuaig ‏@LindaMcQuaig 3h

@cafreeland vows to “work really hard” to “come up with some great ideas” on income inequality. She has none yet? #cdnpoli #torcen #ndp

Linda McQuaig comes across as nasty and mean sometimes. She needs to be careful.

felixr

knownothing wrote:

elfin wrote:

I like Linda but she's never going to win.  She only appeals to the NDP party faithful and there's just not enough of them in Toronto Centre to beat the Liberals.  Total shame.        

Save this quote for later

Question: Is Bay Street and the Toronto financial district wholly within the Toronto Centre riding?

Geoff

felixr wrote:

janfromthebruce wrote:

I loved Linda's tweet today:

Linda McQuaig ‏@LindaMcQuaig 3h

@cafreeland vows to “work really hard” to “come up with some great ideas” on income inequality. She has none yet? #cdnpoli #torcen #ndp

Linda McQuaig comes across as nasty and mean sometimes. She needs to be careful.

Linda sounds perfectly logical to me.  If I have to choose between a) someone who has some great ideas or b) someone who is going to start coming up with some great ideas after she's elected, I choose "a".  Why is it mean to point out the obvious? 

Stockholm

felixr wrote:

Linda McQuaig comes across as nasty and mean sometimes. She needs to be careful.

I don't find her to be that way at all. On the other hand I have seen a few interviews with Freeland and as much as i try to be objective - i find her trite, vacuous and grating and ttally devoid of any substance. Its as if she has spent her life as a pundit on American TV where she smugly assumed she was the last word on progressivism because she actually talks about plutocrats (even if she seems to secretely worship them) - now she seems shocked that here in canada - she is being attacked from her left and she doesn't seem to know how to respond!

felixr

Stockholm wrote:

On the other hand I have seen a few interviews with Freeland and as much as i try to be objective - i find her trite, vacuous and grating and ttally devoid of any substance.

I agree.

Lou Arab Lou Arab's picture

I seriously hope that the McQuaig campaign doesn't go overboard to try to feed the media narrative by running extensively on income inequality. I don't live anywhere near Toronto Centre, but I suspect voters there (and everywhere) care about more basic concepts - like quality health care, good education, decent public services, employment opportunities.

I realize that income inequality impacts on all of these issues. I just don't believe it's 'top of mind' for 97% of voters. Just because the top two candidates have written books on the subject, doesn't make it the issue everyone is talking about.

josh

It may not be foremost in a lot of people's minds because candidates (and the media) do not focus on it.  So not focusing on it because it's not on people's minds just reinforces a vicious circle.

janfromthebruce

And Linda has such a breath of knowledge and depth of understanding across many areas of interest in the local, provincial, and national areas that she can best address them. Look at what she has written about to get a sense of that depth beyond "income inequality".

  • 1991 – The Quick and the Dead: Brian Mulroney, Big Business and the Seduction of Canada – Toronto: Penguin Books; ISBN 0-670-83305-3
  • 1993 – The Wealthy Banker's Wife: The Assault on Equality in Canada – Toronto: Penguin Books – ISBN 0-14-023065-3
  • 1995 – Shooting the Hippo: Death by Deficit and Other Canadian Myths – Toronto: Penguin Books; ISBN 978-0-670-84767-9
  • 1998 – The Cult of Impotence: Selling the Myth of Powerlessness in the Global Economy – Toronto: Penguin Books; ISBN 0-670-87278-4
  • 2001 – All You Can Eat: Greed, Lust and the New Capitalism – Toronto: Penguin Books; ISBN 978-0-14-026222-3
  • 2007 – Holding the Bully's Coat: Canada and the U.S. Empire – Toronto: Doubleday Canada; ISBN 978-0-385-66012-9
  • 2010 – The Trouble with Billionaires – Toronto: Viking Canada
  • 2012 – Billionaires' Ball: Gluttony and Hubris in an Age of Epic Inequality (co-authored with Neil Brooks) – Boston: Beacon Press; ISBN 978-0-8070-0339-8

also

Themes

She is currently best known for her series of books challenging Canada's departure from the principles of universal social programs toward an American model of strict means-based programs. She came to prominence with her best-selling 1993 book The Wealthy Banker's Wife, which challenged the argument that universal social programs such as the child welfare benefit (which had recently been discontinued) could be less expensive if funds were not paid to well-off people (such as the wife in the title). McQuaig noted that in Western Europe, such programs were common and even the Queen of the Netherlands received the benefit when she had young children.

This theme was explored further in her 1995 book Shooting the Hippo, which argued that, contrary to what was being propagated by the Liberal government (and the outgoing Conservatives) and the Bank of Canada, the country's large deficit was not caused by the so-called "enormous costs of social programs." The book details in full the government's plan to slash all social spending and to drastically increase interest rates in order to eliminate the national debt and to curb inflation. McQuaig countered these claims by arguing that two-thirds of Canada's debt had actually been created by these same high interest rates; the high rate of interest on Canada's initial loan, and that social spending had little, if anything, to do with increasing the debt burden. Shooting the Hippo also explains how high interest rates benefit the wealthy (by increasing the value of large assets) but impoverish the lower-income bracket by making all types of loans (student, car, mortgages etc.) far more difficult to pay off, in effect decreasing inflation (hence keeping the value of assets intact) but increasing unemployment and creating recessions simultaneously. As small businesses deal with paying off the high interest rates on their business loans, they found it hard to cover the overhead, in effect having to lay off employees they could no longer afford to pay.

In her 1998 book, The Cult of Impotence, McQuaig challenged assumptions about the effect of globalization on industrial economies and the argument that market forces could not be controlled by government intervention. She argued that attempts to rein in inflation because of the largely theoretical benefits to economic growth from zero inflation were actually causing high unemployment and that a move towards moderate inflation and high employment would naturally raise government revenues and reduce government welfare spending.

In All You Can Eat, McQuaig challenged the system of regressive taxation that led to the unequaled accumulation of wealth by the top 1% of the Canadian population since the early 1980s. Her proposition was that by cutting taxes and government benefits, the wealthy had benefited primarily at the cost of the less advantaged, including the middle class, whose real wages and wealth had barely grown during that period of time.

Her 2004 book It's The Crude, Dude: War, Big Oil and the Fight for the Planet was an investigation of United States foreign policy from the assumption that it acts in order to secure its supply of petroleum products, particularly in light of the recent actions of the United States in Iraq.

In Holding the Bully's Coat: Canada and the US Empire (2007), McQuaig argued that Canada should reject the role of adjunct to the United States and find its own way in the world.

In a 29 July 2008, article in the Toronto Star, McQuaig wrote that "Obama is resolutely in sync with the existing script prepared by Washington power brokers, not even veering far from the Bush White House."[14]

Linda has wrote extensively about income inequality and how it affects across those themes of jobs, environment, effects on health care and accessible good education (cuts).

Brachina

 Can you imagine what a wonderful cabinate minister Linda would make!

elfin

I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but this election isn't going to be about books.  The average voter doesn't care about books.  If they did, we wouldn't have the government we do.  It's not going to be about books or an economic policy debate.  Lou Arab is right, Linda needs to get back to basics and start talking about the things that regular people care about, instead of expecting people to vote for her because she's an author.  The Liberals are way ahead of her in canvassing the riding as it is.     

Stockholm

elfin wrote:

 Linda needs to get back to basics and start talking about the things that regular people care about, instead of expecting people to vote for her because she's an author.  The Liberals are way ahead of her in canvassing the riding as it is.     

Huh? I was under the impression that the whole Liberal campaign was centred on "you MUST vote for Freeland because she has written a big book and has been a guest on American talk shows - ergo she is IMPORTANT". I sure have not heard one single solitary substantive idea coming from her. in fact the Liberals are quite blunt about saying that from now until 2015 the only policies they will commit to are to legalize marijuana and to cheerlead for Nexen to be taken over by the Chinese.

Lord Palmerston

The Greens are running John Deverell, who is pretty credible and is an ex-Liberal, who will hopefully take more votes from Liberal voters.

As for the Conservatives, looks they'll be putting in a minimal effort so it's unlikey Linda McQuaig can't count on a credible Tory pulling center-right votes away north of Bloor.

Stockholm

I'm not so sure about the Conservatives putting in such a "minimal" effort in Toronto Centre. Their candidate seems very credible and seems to be "out and about"...they may make more of an effort than you think

elfin

Of course there are no substantive ideas coming from the Liberals.  Sadly they have proven time and time again that they don't have to have any, and yet people will still vote for them.  This is the sad state of affairs in Canadian politics.  The NDP has to crack this egg. 

Summer

who's the Con's candidate?

Stockholm

elfin wrote:

Of course there are no substantive ideas coming from the Liberals.  Sadly they have proven time and time again that they don't have to have any, and yet people will still vote for them.  This is the sad state of affairs in Canadian politics.  The NDP has to crack this egg. 

That's not quite true - in 2000 they had 180 seats and now they have 35 seats - obviously the old Liberal tactics don't always work!

janfromthebruce

Must welcome Elfin who is a new member on babble and only posted in this forum topic so must have keen interest in the race. Linda has good retail politics in this riding and a well known entity. And she has local name recognition as a progressive writer in the Toronto Star and in the media frequently.

And judging by the turn out for the nomination race and summer long campaign provided much street face time. Linda can count on labour support and local community support. For example, she is a well known entity in Labour/work circles and very much out on Labour Day for example.

Meanwhile Freeland was nowhere near the Toronto Labour Day parade so she won't be getting support or volunteer workers from that sector.

Brachina

http://www.punditsguide.ca/ this site will tell you who the Tory Candiate is.

 

 Has anyone heard how the Mulcair event with Linda at the pub went last night?

Summer

Brachina wrote:

http://www.punditsguide.ca/ this site will tell you who the Tory Candiate is.

 

 

Thanks :)

Stockholm

Brachina wrote:

 Has anyone heard how the Mulcair event with Linda at the pub went last night?

Its was PACKED with people and so in retrospect the venue was probably too small. Lost of enthusiasm and Linda had a particularly good line in her speech when she said that Freeland sees things from from within the world of the super-rich and that along with drinking their champagne, she is drinking their Kool-Aid! Tom gave a rousing speech as well and Hollet and gapka were there too - it was more or less a "love-in"...it was mainly a social event with lots of people having drinks etc...

Brachina

Stockholm wrote:

Brachina wrote:

 Has anyone heard how the Mulcair event with Linda at the pub went last night?

Its was PACKED with people and so in retrospect the venue was probably too small. Lost of enthusiasm and Linda had a particularly good line in her speech when she said that Freeland sees things from from within the world of the super-rich and that along with drinking their champagne, she is drinking their Kool-Aid! Tom gave a rousing speech as well and Hollet and gapka were there too - it was more or less a "love-in"...it was mainly a social event with lots of people having drinks etc...

 

 Thanks, I'm glad it went well. Were the media there?

 @Summer your welcome 

janfromthebruce

yes, at least one sun media

David Akin ‏@davidakin 20h

Meanwhile in #TorCen MT @GeorgeNDP: packed at Pogue Mahone's -@LindaMcQuaig & @ThomasMulcair & @Cash4TO pic.twitter.com/AAbFqVD0V4

Embedded image permalink

toaster

felixr wrote:

janfromthebruce wrote:

I loved Linda's tweet today:

Linda McQuaig ‏@LindaMcQuaig 3h

@cafreeland vows to “work really hard” to “come up with some great ideas” on income inequality. She has none yet? #cdnpoli #torcen #ndp

Linda McQuaig comes across as nasty and mean sometimes. She needs to be careful.

I agree with this.  It isn't always about portraying the opposition as vile creatures at all costs.  The majority, although not all, of politicians on all sides are not vile or nasty people.  They may happen to differ from McQuaig on policy, but it does not mean they are inhenrently evil.  Just as she believes that her ideas will help make Canada a better place, so do the opposition.  Hollett, for me, appeared to be more aware of this notion.

Brachina

 That comment wasn't mean, it was a valed critism, Freeland has been writing and speaking on income inequality for how long and yet she has no ideas for fixing it? It shows Freelands a joke.

elfin

Thank you for the welcome janfromthebruce!  I am very interested in this race!  I think a lot of issues/ideas that will play out here will play out in the next general election.  

I think we can all agree that Freeland has no substance whereas Linda does, but I'm worried that this won't be enough to win.  I take Stockholm's point, that clearly the electorate is capable of pulling themselves away from the Liberals from time to time, but now that Justin Trudeau is in place the Liberals are able to portray this image of young/cool politics.  It's worth noting that the media reported how much older and whiter the NDP nomination meeting was compared to the Liberals.  This should be raising alarm bells for the NDP. If they are going to win in Toronto Centre and in the next election, they must fight the Liberals where the Liberals are strong, not just hope that voters will see through their barely existent policies.  

 

Stockholm

FYI: the turnout in byelections tends to be quite low...especially in urban ridings like Toronto Centre. Older people will vote in large numbers while younger people while likely stay home. I predict that the winner will be the candidate that carries "boomers".

janfromthebruce

and the diversity piece may also mean that the Libs brought in more diversity appearing "workers" to appear diverse, however, the lack of energy and laid back, as well as not being able to energize their member base (libs) shows that rich people just couldn't be bothered.

Further, it was noted that the NDP could was diverse along class lines and very diverse.

And young and cool doesn't mean we checked our heads at the door. At the end of the day, the Liberals choice a nobody knows and lived in the USA Freeland who represents the aloft crowd.

As for enough to win, it's the door step and identifying your voters. With the ONT Libs now getting into bed with Hudak and showing through anti worker/union legislation, the hip and cool crowd may well stomp to the NDP seeing that liberals are just not that hip and cool when it comes to pocket book issues, good paying jobs and a national "affordable" housing strategy.

The national housing policy that last time the liberals were in power they got rid of. The national housing policy in which that "not self-made" millionaire, Paul Martin who was head of finance, got rid of. On the door step, those types of conversations are going to have huge impacts rather than vote for me because I'm young and cool and know nothing of real working class ordinary daily lives.

Lord Palmerston

If anyone wants to donate to Linda's campaign, here's an easy way to do it:

http://tinyurl.com/Help-Elect-Linda

 

Pages