Giambrone by-election imbroglio

Stock, I agree with what you say about their relationship -- who are we to know their agreements and dynamics in their relationship? I had a similar conversation, though about the different cases of Bill Clinton and Anthony Weiner (another thread). But that is an important point you made.

But i think declaring non-monogomy for all is similar to upholding everyone to monogomous standards too. And saying monogomy is a dated social constuct is a pretty subjective view there.

The sex scandal stuff is scandal, but it does potentially signify how someone upholds themself in the private life versus the public life and if those to things fit and represent the values they are trying to cast on society. I don't think anyone is advocating that sex with more than one person is "punishable by Sharia law" or what have you, but it does potentially contort the public image he has presented of himself.

ooo but the word 'apparently' is there. (being silly)

I see what your saying Stock, and at certain points, these "scandals" aren't the most important thing. For me it would be not "sex being had" but how that act affects the political message being touted. 

For an extreme example, like those Republican politicans that talk about "normal family values" and anti gay crap and then are caught with male sex workers. What they are preaching (the horrible message) to their base is directly opposite of what they are doing. Therefore, how can this person be reliable and accountable if they can't even uphold their own standards?

The same questions could be potentially asked of Giambrone. We do not know what the relationship agreements and dynamics are, but your point that he is a feminist could go both ways -- is it feminist to "cheat" or be non-monogomous or the other way around. Those are really held by the person. So, if the 'scandal' doesn't sway you it fully well can sway other people who define themselves the same way.

The attacks on Giambrone for his private sex life remind me of the campaign against Rob Ford for smoking crack. Progressive people (IMHO) should not get sucked into these dangerous diversions.

What Clinton did was arguably far worse - not because he was a good Christian married man, but because there's a rather obvious unequal power dynamic inherent in the relationship between a female White House intern and a, umm, POTUS (related to the Yiddish word, "potz"). Oh, and instead of saying, "my sex life is not the public's business" (which would have been an arguable position), he simply chose to lie.

Sounds to me as if what Giambrone did to Chhabra was also far worse than his private philandering. That's a political act, and the kind of betrayal the public has a right to be concerned about.

The cheating/sex/scandal thing is a non-issue for me.  Lots of people have sex with people they are not married to.  For all we know, he’s in an open relationship and his then gf (now wife) was fully aware of what was going on.  

Of course, he handled the whole cheating/sex/scandal thing very badly and couldn’t even get through his own press conference.  http://www.blogto.com/city/2010/02/adam_giambrone_drops_out_of_mayoral_race/

His reaction showed a lack of maturity which I believe makes someone ill equipped for a life in public office. He should take a break from politics for a good decade or so and get some real world experience outside of the wheeling and dealing nature of politics so that he can learn that government is not a game.

Overall though, my biggest issue with him is his lack of respect for public money.   If you can’t handle a budget, you don’t belong in office.  If you treat public money like a personal piggy bank, you don’t belong in office.  He is one of the councillors who played right into the Ford “gravy train” narrative and paved the way for the Ford victory.  Ugh.

To me, there is nothing about this man that shows integrity. Call me old fashioned and naive, but I think politicians should at least try to demonstrate a little integrity – especially at the beginning of their careers!  They mostly go downhill over time.  He’s starting so far down the hill, I shudder to think how low he can go.  

Stockholm wrote:

Summer wrote:

Overall though, my biggest issue with him is his lack of respect for public money.   If you can’t handle a budget, you don’t belong in office.  If you treat public money like a personal piggy bank, you don’t belong in office.  He is one of the councillors who played right into the Ford “gravy train” narrative and paved the way for the Ford victory.  Ugh.

Are you sure you're not one of the Ford brothers?

yes.  I'm sure.  Are you sure that you have nothing on point to add to this discussion?  Do you think Giambrone is a good politician and/or would he be a good representative for the people of Scarborough-Guildwood?  Please provide explanations to support your answer(s) as this will contribute to an interesting discussion.  

I take it you don’t like my comment.  Is it because you think it’s ok to use public funds for personal activities?  Or is it because you don’t think that Giambrone did use public funds for personal activities?  Just because someone identifies as “left” or “progressive” or NDP does not mean they get an automatic pass.   

Summer wrote:

Stockholm wrote:

Summer wrote:

Overall though, my biggest issue with him is his lack of respect for public money.   If you can’t handle a budget, you don’t belong in office.  If you treat public money like a personal piggy bank, you don’t belong in office.  He is one of the councillors who played right into the Ford “gravy train” narrative and paved the way for the Ford victory.  Ugh.

Are you sure you're not one of the Ford brothers?

 

yes.  I'm sure.  Are you sure that you have nothing on point to add to this discussion?  Do you think Giambrone is a good politician and/or would he be a good representative for the people of Scarborough-Guildwood?  Please provide explanations to support your answer(s) as this will contribute to an interesting discussion.  

I take it you don’t like my comment.  Is it because you think it’s ok to use public funds for personal activities?  Or is it because you don’t think that Giambrone did use public funds for personal activities?  Just because someone identifies as “left” or “progressive” or NDP does not mean they get an automatic pass.   

 

You seem to have a deep personal vendetta against the guy...maybe you should challenge him to a duel - pistols at six paces or something - and settle it for us.

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Just on the face of it, why was Giambrone parachuted into this riding in the first place? It doesn't have a strong NDP history to begin with. If your party wanted to help a prominent person within advance his or her political career, wouldn't it make more sense to choose a safe riding? To say nothing of the fact that the nomination process, regardless of what may be technically legal, has left a bad taste in some people's mouths. And Giambrone doesn't seem to have a great grasp of issues facing Scarborough. So what was gained by causing needless divisions within the party to parachute in someone with no local connection to an area that isn't that strong for the NDP in the first place? Surely they could have waited for the general election and found a riding that was a better fit for Giambrone? What was his hurry? Why now?

Because the ONDP is run by morons.

Stockholm wrote:

Meanwhile according to the latest Ontariu-wide poll the ONDP has gained 3 points and is now at 27%, just behind the Liberals at 31% and the PCs at 36%...the only possible explanation for this surge has to be the deluge of positive publicity and hype around Adam Giambrone's candidacy!

http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2013/07/24/tories_add_to_lead_ove...

Keep dreaming. Giambrone is going nowhere.

janfromthebruce wrote:

Just saying there is a pattern here that is followed when they want to pillar an NDP but don't do the same relentless bashing of Liberals.

Here's another pattern: in 2010, the entire slate of democratically elected socialist candidates for the ONDP Youth was rescinded by the party brass. In 2011, Barry Weisleder was democratically elected by the members of the Thornhill Riding Association to represent that riding in the provincial election. Less than 48 hours later, the brass rescinded his nomination. Also in 2011, the party brass refused to allow Diana Andrews to seek the nomination for Etobicoke North. And in 2010, the party brass refused to allow MPP Michael Prue to speak at hearing regarding public funding of Catholic schools.

Cheerleading aganist open, transparent and fair party democracy and for the corrupt party brass.

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Summer wrote:

This guy's blog does a good job of summarizing the problems with Giambrone. 

http://davenportdemocracy.blogspot.ca/2011/02/we-need-to-banish-adam-giambrone.html  (FWIW, he appears to support the NDP)

If true, Giambrone does seem to have some character issues.

Interestingly enough, people claim that Giambrone is well-suited to win Scarborough because of his tenure with the TTC and that there are transit issues in Scarborough. I'm sure that's not the only issue facing local voters?

Ouch!

Giambrone's "sex scandal" is a non-issue - unlike in the case of Clinton (unequal power dynamic) and Anthony Weiner (lack of consent) - but supporting him on the basis of how one feels about "1950s sexual morality" and "prudishness" is stupid.  Lorinc for instance has a good piece on Gimabrone's hypocrisy and opportunism without focusing on it at all:

http://spacing.ca/toronto/2013/07/29/lorinc-the-many-faces-of-giambrone/

Transit City doesn’t figure anywhere in Giambrone’s campaign bio or materials, and it certainly didn’t get a walk-on part in the “Meet Adam” video. Which, as Alice said, is “curious and curiouser,” because Giambrone, of course, was Mr. Transit City for so many years — the leading evangelist for light rail — the transit mode that, these days, dare not speak its name (at least in Scarborough).

At a high-voltage press conference back in March, 2007, Giambrone proudly unveiled the $10 billion plan to criss-cross Toronto with LRT lines, including a 15 km connection from Kennedy Station to Malvern that would replace the Scarborough RT and bring rapid transit to one of the city’s poorest communities.

The strategy, he told the assembled scribes, is “designed to inspire people” [emphasis added]. It would bring a downtown-style transit network to the rest of the city. As he told The Star, Transit City “will restore Toronto’s stature as a leader in urban transit.” Such bold statements. You can almost feel the hairs standing up….

Oh, never mind.

Today, Giambrone’s faith in light rail — which he has re-asserted in numerous columns for his pliable patrons at NOW Magazine — is nowhere to be seen. His stance in this by-election has been to say he agrees with whatever city council chooses, which, as we know, is a subway to replace the RT, for an extra $1 billion (but probably more). As he tweeted before the council debate, “I support subways & LRT where they make sense. Right now I’m waiting to hear from #TOcouncil on transit plans for #Scarborough.” Inspired, indeed.

[url=http://spacing.ca/toronto/2013/07/29/lorinc-the-many-faces-of-giambrone/...

This is what makes it even worse and more damaging, the blatant pandering and spinelessness.

The LRT would only cost approximatley $1.8 billion, with seven stops, it would be easier to expand, and with about 47,000 people served.

The subway would cost $2.5 billion, with only three stops, it would be difficult to expand, and providing service for about 28,000.

Adam G is a travesty.

Nothing has been cast regarding the subway considering it might not even get the full funding.

And, it can be spun as choosing your battles, but it's really about sticking to your principles.

I think for most people, it's not the fact he had sex, it's the fact he lied about it.

I can't presume to know the details/arrangements he had with his wife (then fiancé): I know many couples with open relationships and am loathe to judge.  If he did have such an arrangement with his partner and was open and honest with her, then all of this is none of anybody's business.

If not, if he was dishonest and deceitful, either publicly or privately, then I view this as a pretty serious character flaw that I do not wish to see in my representatives, regardless of political stripe.

As to the comparisons you drew to Slitherman's (typo intended) sex life in an earlier post, I believe these to be completely inappropriate, and vaguely offensive and homophobic. George Slitherman is an odious man and was a terribly incompetent cabinet minister - there are many reasons to detest him, but his past sexual partners and their cardinality are none of your f*cking business, Stockholm. 

Stockholm wrote:

I for one was responding this the posting below. People say they don't care about Giambrone's ex life - and then they make it clear that its ALL about his sex life.

Winston wrote:

I think for most people, it's not the fact he had sex, it's the fact he lied about it.

I don't blame him. If a reporter from the Toronto Star called me out of the blue and started asking me invasive questions about whether or not I had had sex with such and such a person on such and such a date etc... i would probably deny it as well. When someone has an "affair" it is by definition a "lie" otherwise it wouldn't be an "affair" in the first place. (Actually I wouldn't even deny it. I would yell "my sex life is none of your fucking business" and I'd slam the phone down as hard as possible in the hope of damaging the reporter's ear drum).

Why should I or anyone else for that matter feel obliged to tell the truth about my sex life to a reporter from some glorified tabloid like the Toronto Star? What right have they to even ask the question? Whatever he did is an issue between him and his wife and no one else. It has ZERO public policy angle and the Toronto Star should be ashamed of itself for even making an issue of it and trying to role play as the Canadain version of the National Enquirer. 

OK, the ONDP vote went up in Scarborough, but we really can't say for sure that it went up because Giambrone was the candidate.

This was a showing that keeps the man's political career alive, but he now needs to start an open and public dialogue with POC's, activists, and women about the events that just occurred.

Congrats on the higher vote, Adam, but learn from this.  OK?

And I'd say that the party has an obligation now to Amarjeet Chhabra to NOT send in a "star" candidate against her in any other seat.  She's probably owed a nomination in a winnable riding at the next opportunity, but I don't expect to see that happen.

Ken Burch wrote:

OK, the ONDP vote went up in Scarborough, but we really can't say for sure that it went up because Giambrone was the candidate.

I think it went up because Giambrone was an excellent team motivator--and as such, perhaps, demonstrated "how things should be done here".  But as such, it went up almost *in spite of his* candidacy...

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

I still think that Amarjeet Chhabra would have done better.

Really?  I don't think anybody believes that.  There is no way Chhabra would have gotten 28-29% of the vote.  

nicky wrote:

I'm not at all sure that Amarjeet Chhabra would have done better, much less that the party owes her a nomination in a winnable riding. 

Consider:

1. She only got 1.5% of the vote in thmunicipl election, running last out of 9 candidtes

2. She only managed to round up 12 supporters for her nomintion fight.

3. She showed bad judgment taking her complaint to the press and greatly undermining the party's prospects, not just in Guildwood but the other ridings as well.

These things suggest to be that she is not a very promising politician and that her judgment and regard for the party is questionable.

Exactly this.

Yeah, this disabled female immigrant union activist is a real loser. She doesn't know how to play by the rules. Doesn't she understand the meaning of the words "star candidate"? Doesn't she grasp that internal party disputes must be handled behind closed doors? Maybe disciplinary action would be in order before she embarrasses the party again?

[url=http://youtu.be/5NuofNHKbVc]Giambrone's back and there's gonna be laundry[/url]

(With thanks to [url=http://rabble.ca/babble/ontario/ontario-elections#comment-1407366]radior....)

nicky wrote:

I'm not at all sure that Amarjeet Chhabra would have done better, much less that the party owes her a nomination in a winnable riding. 

Consider:

1. She only got 1.5% of the vote in thmunicipl election, running last out of 9 candidtes

2. She only managed to round up 12 supporters for her nomintion fight.

3. She showed bad judgment taking her complaint to the press and greatly undermining the party's prospects, not just in Guildwood but the other ridings as well.

These things suggest to be that she is not a very promising politician and that her judgment and regard for the party is questionable.

If Giambrone got 21% as some were predicting, Chhabra *could have* done better (well, it's only a couple of points more than in the last general w/a poteau).  And if it were Chhabra w/Giambrone (or someone from the more localized Rathika/Neethan Shan axis) managing the campaign, she might have done better than 28%.  But I certainly wouldn't say that she'd have done better w/o that kind of support mechanism--that said, I wouldn't keep bringing up her 2006 last-place result in her disfavour, either; that was then, this is now.  (Though paradoxically, that earlier municipal campaign might have suffered from a similar "problem" to Giambrone's presently, i.e. as a "City Idol" winner, she had too much of a Spacing-land Downtown-TO infrastructure behind her for her own good here in the wilds of Scarberia.)

Profound.

Lens Solution wrote:

But I don't know if that was the main factor in the outcome.

You mean, people don't just vote on colour lines? Wow.

What's the male-female breakdown among eligible voters?

OnTheLeft,

You should realize that the party headquarters knows best about each riding. Trust their choices blindly.

Helsinki wrote:

I feel the same way about the party.  The attacks on Amarjeet are ignorant and I suspect they are coming from people involved with the party executive and party staffers -- and those are not the type of people we need running the NDP.  

Well that is the type of people running the NDP at the Federal and Provinicial Levels.

nicky wrote:

As for the evil party establishment denying her the nomination, it turned out, even in the conspiracy theorizing of her proponents, half a dozen  extra votes for Giambrone, all of which were eventually validated. 

Were they? Could you provide a link, Nicky?

nicky wrote:

I am not involved with the party executive, nor am I a party staffer.

I gave three reasons that for me strongly indicate she would not have ben a good candidate in the by-election.

On her behalf I have only heard that she is a handicapped minority woman union organizer. All matters of identity rather than ability. As if that is all we should look for in a candidate. 

As for the evil party establishment denying her the nomination, it turned out, even in the conspiracy theorizing of her proponents, half a dozen  extra votes for Giambrone, all of which were eventually validated. 

Nothing has been validated, other than the anti-democratic meddling and top down power plays of the party brass - in 2010, the entire slate of democratically elected socialist candidates for the ONDP Youth was rescinded by the party brass. In 2011, Barry Weisleder was democratically elected by the members of the Thornhill Riding Association to represent that riding in the provincial election. Less than 48 hours later, the brass rescinded his nomination. Also in 2011, the party brass refused to allow Diana Andrews to seek the nomination for Etobicoke North. And in 2010, the party brass refused to allow MPP Michael Prue to speak at hearing regarding public funding of Catholic schools.