babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
You missed my point entirely.
"I feel I am the frontrunner" says Tabuns.
Funny. Most people, especially if you might be the frontrunner, tend not to say they're the frontrunner (eg. Dalton McGuinty in the last Ontario campaign). If there's a strategy here I don't get it.
Xtra profiles the race.
The comment section quote cracks me up: "Gilles Bisson is a hot bear!"
I see that I have not missed that much in the last week. I really wonder if this is changing anyones mind?
"Funny. Most people, especially if you might be the frontrunner, tend not to say they're the frontrunner (eg. Dalton McGuinty in the last Ontario campaign). If there's a strategy here I don't get it."
In a leadership campaign where core party members are voting - it makes sense to send out the message that you are a winner and are leading.
Well, with both Kormos and Marchese endorsing Horwath, Tabuns needed a major endorser to break her momentum. Who better to endorse Tabuns than --- Tabuns?
The Star endorses Horwath in it's Editorial. Not sure if that's good or bad for Andrea considering they spelt her last name wrong.
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/590904
Some of the comments on synthome were unfair. However, his comments weren't fair either. Many weren't even accurate. These threads have been dominated by a number of fairly partisan people - many of whom insist that everyone who oppses them is too partisan.
Anyway...
Toronto Star endorses Horwath
I don't know how much this helps Horwath but it's definitely bad news for Tabuns. His hometown paper quickly and brutally dismisses him. Prue's skewered as well. Bisson comes off relatively well.
Of the four, Bisson and Prue have been the most ready to challenge NDP orthodoxy during the leadership campaign. Bisson has called for the NDP to move away from its "tax the rich" stance in favour of "wealth creation," and he has advocated a tougher position on crime. But like Hampton, Bisson is a northerner, and it is time for a southern NDP leader.
Prue is pushing for a debate on whether the NDP should continue to support separate school funding. And he alone of the four candidates questioned the party's decision to hold up the York U. bill. But in other respects, Prue's positions seem hackneyed, up to and including his campaign slogan ("results we've never had before").
Tabuns comes across as a single-issue candidate focused on the environment and energy – a reflection of his past position as head of Greenpeace Canada. He appears to be the choice of many in the party establishment.
Of the four, Horwath would be our choice. While during the campaign she has stuck rigidly to past NDP platform positions, she represents change in other ways – generation (at 45, she is the youngest of the four candidates), geography (she is from Hamilton) and gender (the provincial NDP has never had a woman leader). And there is hope she would grow in office.
Now that I've had a good cry and a hug from my therapist I can lift my head and face you mean bullies again. ;-)
I stand by what I've written, most of which was an expression of what I'd like to see the NDP become and of what would, as an active member, drive me away. Sunday Hat, I would suggest you similarly stand by what you wrote and not resort to the "but he did it too" stuff. Just call me out when I'm out of line and I'll show up.
Let me be clear. I self-identify as a democratic socialist and desire the NDP to represent those interests in some way. The ONDP can't do much worse in terms of electoral success and, in my view has little lose and everything to gain by taking a sharp left turn rather than sidling up to the Liberal center. That is my ideological hope.
I voted for Peter Tabuns for a variety of reasons. It's not that he's casting himself as a "socialist" but he is in my view the most "leftist" of the candidates. So aside from the specific reasons, which I've mentioned a few times, (See here) for supporting Tabuns, a very simple one is that I always start counting from the left and Peter was the first candidate that came into view and increasingly the only one that comes into view at all until you reach the middle road owned by the Liberals.
re: Star's endorsement of Andrea Horwath
When the Liberals, I mean The Toronto Star, makes such an endorsement, it should only give us pause for thought (after all they were so kind to the ONDP in the previous provincial election).
Is it because Andrea's been adopted into the Liberal family or because she's seen as easy prey for the Liberals in the next election? I believe this now makes Andrea the establishment candidate, the Liberal establishment that is.
I'd say they endorsed her because they assume a leader from Hamilton would be good for Toronto Liberals (the only Liberals who count in the Star's editorial board room.) Deliberately misspelling her name would be consistent with that motivation.
Am I unfair to the Star? Consider their attitude to Proportional Representation. Look at the effect of regional MMP on the Liberal Party's MPs. Instead of having only seven western MPs, Liberal voters would have elected 16, nine more. And this was even more true in Ontario outside the GTA where they elected only five MPs, and would have elected 15, ten more. On the other hand, they would have elected seven fewer from the City of Toronto. The Liberal establishment and the Toronto Star are apparently more concerned with keeping those seven Toronto MPs than getting nineteen from the rest of Ontario and the West.
the star has a new editor who is far from being a liberal.
Yep. And Peggy Nash and Marilyn Churley are even bigger Libs - after all the Toronto Star says they should have run. Evidently, Peter Kormos is a Liberal plant too. He's been luring us all in for the last 2 decades with radical rhetoric but now his real plan is revealed.
Once Horwath wins she'll rip off her mask and reveal she's Dalton McGuinty.
or...
Maybe the Toronto Star simply thinks that Andrea's the best of the candidates.
Well, certainly I think Andrea's the best of the candidates. But it's so long since I've ever agreed with the Toronto Star on anything that it's making me a bit paranoid.
There's a headline: "Toronto Star and Wilf Day agree"
My only concern about Andrea Horvath is that she was one of the co-chairs of the last provincial election campaign - which was a bit of a flop - and that I hear that she is backed by all the "lifers" at ONDP HQ who want a leader who won't rock the boat and won't change anything and will let them all keep their sinecures. That is cause for concern. I think Tabuns is the most intelligent of the candidates and has the best grasp of the issues - and despite all the focus on image - I think that being very smart is a major factor in being a good leader.
That being said, Horvath wouldn't kill the party in the way that Prue or Bisson might. My concern is whether she actually has what it takes to be leader or if people are just thinking: She's a woman - check, she's younger - check, she's from Hamilton - check. When parties choose a leader through that kind of thinking, you end up with Kim Campbell leading the PCs and Audrey McLaughlin leading the NDP. People who know her better than me can explain why they think she DOES have the right stuff - but I want to vote for someone whoI think is the smartest person with the most forward looking ideas and who is running for the right reasons -not based on who fits a series of demographic characteristics....and before anyone accuses me of being sexist for saying the above - note that to this day, I think the most catastrophic mistake the ONDP ever made was in NOT picking Frances Lankin to be leader in 1996!
The deliberate misspelling is cute Stockholm (but please don't keep it up) I think the rumour mongering is lot less so.
The nice thing about assertions that can't be proven is that you can smear a person with them and the victim of the smear can't dissprove them.
But, let's look at the facts:
A quick look at Tabins (sic) website shows that he is backed by Diane O'Reggio, the outgoing provincial secretary who had a much much much bigger role in the last campaign than Andrea - or anyone else.
He's also backed by Sherrill Game, David Mackenzie, Michael Lewis, etc. all of whom were working at provincial headquarters in senior roles in the last campaign.
I don't think any of this is a reason to vote against Tabins (sic) but if his campaign wants to start a whisper campaign about Andrea Horwath this is the one that makes the least sense.
An even better idea would be to NOT start a whisper campaign and discuss the facts.
ETA:
Your comparisons are interesting. Kim Campbell was seen as having a very sharp mind and a strong grasp of the issues. It was something the PC campaign emphasized in 1993. I think it's still safe to say that Campbell had a better grasp of the issues then Chretien. Chretien was simply a better politician. I don't think anyone accused Dave Barrett of having a better grasp of policy than Audrey McG either. When people claim he would have made a better leader they rarely cite his grasp of policy.
All that said, I think it's a subjective call. From what I've seen Peter has a thorough understanding of energy supply issues. That's fine for an energy Critic but it seems to me that a myopic focus on a single issue is a risky proposition - particularly if most people in the province don't care that much about the issue.
Get Orange - now that was a big hit - NOT. Now which MPPs were the co-chairs of this "all over non-coherant campaign mistake?
______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!
After all its not like the entire election campaign was hijacked by an ill-conceived plan to discuss religious school funding issues that will always work to the Liberal's benefit.
I heard that certain candidates were the cause of raining frogs and for low tides in the Great Lakes too. Let's burn them at the stake. After all its not like ALL MPPs would have senior roles in setting the tone and tenor of the campaign now would they. You know like the property tax plan that was a complete dud.
Or being quiet on things right now like a hugely bad precednet in McGuinty's "Green" energy plans.
Well no wonder McGuinty thought it would be great - running against "funding all" and knowing that the NDP held the same position that the liberals and thus off-siding them, as me too.
Anyway, who was the co-chair of "get orange"?
______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!
Stockholm, I have to say I have trouble believing you're sincere given the fact that you've made it plenty clear that you've made a decision. And that by that decision you've made it pretty clear that you don't actually have much of a problem with the party establishment and have little sincere desire to shake them up (the Tabuns campaign team was at the centre of the last campaign so the idea that he represents some radical break is farcical, to say the least).
All that said, assuming I've misunderstood, here's why I voted Horwath:
- Andrea is the only candidate who can actually play province-wide. Throughout this campaign, and in the past, Andrea's shown that she can bring people into the tent and can spearhead a broad movement that works in downtown Toronto as well as Kenora. The team that's forming behind her includes everyone from urban Toronto activists like Jehad Al-Iwewi and Andrea Calver to class warriors like Wayne Samuelson. While other candidates have made bonehead moves that alienate key constituencies (like Bisson's opposition to the Endangered Species Act or Tabuns' praise for high electricity rates) Andrea's avoided these traps and shown that she can be a provincial leader - not a spokesperson for a constituency.
- Andrea has put the jobs crisis front and centre. She has earned the support of workers and their unions (she's got more endorsements from organized labour then the other candidates combined) not just because she has put a lot of thought into protecting the manufacturing sector and creating new jobs but because she's promised to stand with them when the going gets tough - and it will be getting tough very soon.
- Andrea is charming, funny and quick. That's a subjective call and people have had a chance to see the candidates in action and can make their own calls. Having canvassed - like a good New Democrat - in the by-elections where both were first elected I can say, with confidence, that Andrea inspired a fevered devotion in her potential constituents and Tabuns invoked a shrug.
- Scott Piatkowski supports her. And he's never wrong.
ETA: His name is spelled correctly.