I think the only possible impact of the brake line cutting might have been to shake a few liberals out of their complacency and go to the polls. I've lived in St. Pauls for 12 years and it's been a liberal bastion federally the whole time.
I didn't know I was supposed to burn my Margaret Atwood books. I'll get right on that.
quote:
Originally posted by adma:
[b]
EtN: 12.2%, 10.6%, 15.7% (14.9%)
ScRR: 9.3%, 10.8%, 14.7% (13.7%)
YSW: 21.2%, 21.3%, 28.0% (41.5%)
YW: 15.3%, 14.1%, 18.7% (28.0%)
[/b]
These are all largely non-white and working class areas, right?
quote:
Originally posted by adma:
[b]
EtN: 12.2%, 10.6%, 15.7% (14.9%)
ScRR: 9.3%, 10.8%, 14.7% (13.7%)
YSW: 21.2%, 21.3%, 28.0% (41.5%)
YW: 15.3%, 14.1%, 18.7% (28.0%)
[/b]
These are all largely non-white and working class areas, right?
quote:
Originally posted by adma:
[b]
EtN: 12.2%, 10.6%, 15.7% (14.9%)
ScRR: 9.3%, 10.8%, 14.7% (13.7%)
YSW: 21.2%, 21.3%, 28.0% (41.5%)
YW: 15.3%, 14.1%, 18.7% (28.0%)
[/b]
These are all largely non-white and working class areas, right?
Stock!!!
What's with the hate on for Atwood? Is there a book burning I don't know about. Has the central committee deemed her unrevolutionary and she must be purged???
My god you sound like a jilted lover who's out to trash the reputation of their ex.
Seriously what the hell did one of Canada's great authors do to you?
Stock!!!
What's with the hate on for Atwood? Is there a book burning I don't know about. Has the central committee deemed her unrevolutionary and she must be purged???
My god you sound like a jilted lover who's out to trash the reputation of their ex.
Seriously what the hell did one of Canada's great authors do to you?
Stock!!!
What's with the hate on for Atwood? Is there a book burning I don't know about. Has the central committee deemed her unrevolutionary and she must be purged???
My god you sound like a jilted lover who's out to trash the reputation of their ex.
Seriously what the hell did one of Canada's great authors do to you?
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
[b]Was it a false flag operation to swing the sympathy vote for an otherwise high calibre candidate?[ 20 October 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ][/b]
WHAT??? Seriously you think Carolyn cut breaklines for the headlines?
I love you Fidel you're three shades of crazy, paranoid and delusional. You tickle me in all the right places.
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
[b]Was it a false flag operation to swing the sympathy vote for an otherwise high calibre candidate?[ 20 October 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ][/b]
WHAT??? Seriously you think Carolyn cut breaklines for the headlines?
I love you Fidel you're three shades of crazy, paranoid and delusional. You tickle me in all the right places.
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
[b]Was it a false flag operation to swing the sympathy vote for an otherwise high calibre candidate?[ 20 October 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ][/b]
WHAT??? Seriously you think Carolyn cut breaklines for the headlines?
I love you Fidel you're three shades of crazy, paranoid and delusional. You tickle me in all the right places.
quote:
Originally posted by St. Paul's Progressive:
[b]While the NDP has never been much of a factor in my riding, their vote was significantly lower this time. The NDP candidate this time was not of the calibre of Paul Summerville, Norman Tobias or Julian Heller (who ran provincially). Carolyn Bennett is also very personally popular and one of the most progressive Liberals. After seeing Kent lose so badly in '06, it's pretty clear St. Paul's has emerged into a very Liberal riding. [/b]
I don't recall seeing you in the campaign office this time out, either. Perhaps that was a factor?
More seriously, the campaign was run on a bit of a shoestring this time out. As Summerville was a high profile candidate, a lot of money was spent. Less than half that amount was spent on Anita Agrawal's campaign, recognizing that she's a young unknown who's just building recognition this time out. And she came to us at the last minute, as another person who had planned to run dropped out due to complications.
That said, Anita's far more likable than Summerville, and has much going for her. She's extremely well-spoken. She's been very active in the Council of Canadians, and in the local arts community. She's also an experienced business woman, very hands-on in her family's import business. I look forward to working with her again.
quote:
Originally posted by St. Paul's Progressive:
[b]While the NDP has never been much of a factor in my riding, their vote was significantly lower this time. The NDP candidate this time was not of the calibre of Paul Summerville, Norman Tobias or Julian Heller (who ran provincially). Carolyn Bennett is also very personally popular and one of the most progressive Liberals. After seeing Kent lose so badly in '06, it's pretty clear St. Paul's has emerged into a very Liberal riding. [/b]
I don't recall seeing you in the campaign office this time out, either. Perhaps that was a factor?
More seriously, the campaign was run on a bit of a shoestring this time out. As Summerville was a high profile candidate, a lot of money was spent. Less than half that amount was spent on Anita Agrawal's campaign, recognizing that she's a young unknown who's just building recognition this time out. And she came to us at the last minute, as another person who had planned to run dropped out due to complications.
That said, Anita's far more likable than Summerville, and has much going for her. She's extremely well-spoken. She's been very active in the Council of Canadians, and in the local arts community. She's also an experienced business woman, very hands-on in her family's import business. I look forward to working with her again.
quote:
Originally posted by St. Paul's Progressive:
[b]While the NDP has never been much of a factor in my riding, their vote was significantly lower this time. The NDP candidate this time was not of the calibre of Paul Summerville, Norman Tobias or Julian Heller (who ran provincially). Carolyn Bennett is also very personally popular and one of the most progressive Liberals. After seeing Kent lose so badly in '06, it's pretty clear St. Paul's has emerged into a very Liberal riding. [/b]
I don't recall seeing you in the campaign office this time out, either. Perhaps that was a factor?
More seriously, the campaign was run on a bit of a shoestring this time out. As Summerville was a high profile candidate, a lot of money was spent. Less than half that amount was spent on Anita Agrawal's campaign, recognizing that she's a young unknown who's just building recognition this time out. And she came to us at the last minute, as another person who had planned to run dropped out due to complications.
That said, Anita's far more likable than Summerville, and has much going for her. She's extremely well-spoken. She's been very active in the Council of Canadians, and in the local arts community. She's also an experienced business woman, very hands-on in her family's import business. I look forward to working with her again.
quote:
Originally posted by cornerstone:
[b]WHAT??? Seriously you think Carolyn cut breaklines for the headlines? [/b]
Well, I've heard of that "sleazy sympathy harakiri" theory before, though I wouldn't subscribe to it--and if I did, I'd be much less likely to ascribe it to CB than to some I'm Always Right/Doug The Slug putz of a Liberal thug...
quote:
Originally posted by cornerstone:
[b]WHAT??? Seriously you think Carolyn cut breaklines for the headlines? [/b]
Well, I've heard of that "sleazy sympathy harakiri" theory before, though I wouldn't subscribe to it--and if I did, I'd be much less likely to ascribe it to CB than to some I'm Always Right/Doug The Slug putz of a Liberal thug...
quote:
Originally posted by cornerstone:
[b]WHAT??? Seriously you think Carolyn cut breaklines for the headlines? [/b]
Well, I've heard of that "sleazy sympathy harakiri" theory before, though I wouldn't subscribe to it--and if I did, I'd be much less likely to ascribe it to CB than to some I'm Always Right/Doug The Slug putz of a Liberal thug...
quote:
What's with the hate on for Atwood? Is there a book burning I don't know about. Has the central committee deemed her unrevolutionary and she must be purged???
She may be a good author - but she clearly knows ZILCH about politics. What can you say about someone who claims that he number one issue is stopping the SPP - and then says that people have to vote Liberal - even though it was the Liberals who created the SPP in the first place?
quote:
What's with the hate on for Atwood? Is there a book burning I don't know about. Has the central committee deemed her unrevolutionary and she must be purged???
She may be a good author - but she clearly knows ZILCH about politics. What can you say about someone who claims that he number one issue is stopping the SPP - and then says that people have to vote Liberal - even though it was the Liberals who created the SPP in the first place?
quote:
What's with the hate on for Atwood? Is there a book burning I don't know about. Has the central committee deemed her unrevolutionary and she must be purged???
She may be a good author - but she clearly knows ZILCH about politics. What can you say about someone who claims that he number one issue is stopping the SPP - and then says that people have to vote Liberal - even though it was the Liberals who created the SPP in the first place?
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
[b]She may be a good author - but she clearly knows ZILCH about politics. What can you say about someone who claims that he number one issue is stopping the SPP - and then says that people have to vote Liberal - even though it was the Liberals who created the SPP in the first place?[/b]
You have had a hate on for Atwood ever since she endorsed Adam Vaughan. Give it a rest.
Margaret is a fabulous author and a great critical thinker. To bad your skin is too thin when she criticises the NDP or any of your pet policies.
You want to know why the NDP is falling in Toronto? It's because of Dipper reactions like yours. Viscously attacking anybody of note who doesn't support your Orthodox political view.
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
[b]She may be a good author - but she clearly knows ZILCH about politics. What can you say about someone who claims that he number one issue is stopping the SPP - and then says that people have to vote Liberal - even though it was the Liberals who created the SPP in the first place?[/b]
You have had a hate on for Atwood ever since she endorsed Adam Vaughan. Give it a rest.
Margaret is a fabulous author and a great critical thinker. To bad your skin is too thin when she criticises the NDP or any of your pet policies.
You want to know why the NDP is falling in Toronto? It's because of Dipper reactions like yours. Viscously attacking anybody of note who doesn't support your Orthodox political view.
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
[b]She may be a good author - but she clearly knows ZILCH about politics. What can you say about someone who claims that he number one issue is stopping the SPP - and then says that people have to vote Liberal - even though it was the Liberals who created the SPP in the first place?[/b]
You have had a hate on for Atwood ever since she endorsed Adam Vaughan. Give it a rest.
Margaret is a fabulous author and a great critical thinker. To bad your skin is too thin when she criticises the NDP or any of your pet policies.
You want to know why the NDP is falling in Toronto? It's because of Dipper reactions like yours. Viscously attacking anybody of note who doesn't support your Orthodox political view.
Actually Atwoods last book was terrible.
A good author, or even a cogent thinker does not give one added understanding of political reality. The simple fact of the matter is that Atwoods analysis of the political landscape had the subtlty of a Harlequin romance.
Actually Atwoods last book was terrible.
A good author, or even a cogent thinker does not give one added understanding of political reality. The simple fact of the matter is that Atwoods analysis of the political landscape had the subtlty of a Harlequin romance.
Actually Atwoods last book was terrible.
A good author, or even a cogent thinker does not give one added understanding of political reality. The simple fact of the matter is that Atwoods analysis of the political landscape had the subtlty of a Harlequin romance.
quote:
Originally posted by cornerstone:
[b]You want to know why the NDP is falling in Toronto? It's because of Dipper reactions like yours. Viscously attacking anybody of note who doesn't support your Orthodox political view.[/b]
It's hilarious when people try to blame broad political trends such as a decline in NDP votes in Toronto on the behavior of a few jackasses posting on internet message boards. Message boards which are only even read by something like 0.00001% of the population at most. For me, Stockholm's posts have mostly just turned me off of Scandinavia.
I actually didn't even know that Margaret Atwood endorsed anyone in the municipal election.
I don't "hate" her. I'm sure she is probably a perfectly nice person who has written some good novels.
I just think that when it comes to politics she's as dumb as a post.
She should stick to pontificating on topics that she actually knows something about.
quote:
Originally posted by cornerstone:
[b]You want to know why the NDP is falling in Toronto? It's because of Dipper reactions like yours. Viscously attacking anybody of note who doesn't support your Orthodox political view.[/b]
It's hilarious when people try to blame broad political trends such as a decline in NDP votes in Toronto on the behavior of a few jackasses posting on internet message boards. Message boards which are only even read by something like 0.00001% of the population at most. For me, Stockholm's posts have mostly just turned me off of Scandinavia.
I actually didn't even know that Margaret Atwood endorsed anyone in the municipal election.
I don't "hate" her. I'm sure she is probably a perfectly nice person who has written some good novels.
I just think that when it comes to politics she's as dumb as a post.
She should stick to pontificating on topics that she actually knows something about.
quote:
Originally posted by cornerstone:
[b]You want to know why the NDP is falling in Toronto? It's because of Dipper reactions like yours. Viscously attacking anybody of note who doesn't support your Orthodox political view.[/b]
It's hilarious when people try to blame broad political trends such as a decline in NDP votes in Toronto on the behavior of a few jackasses posting on internet message boards. Message boards which are only even read by something like 0.00001% of the population at most. For me, Stockholm's posts have mostly just turned me off of Scandinavia.
I actually didn't even know that Margaret Atwood endorsed anyone in the municipal election.
I don't "hate" her. I'm sure she is probably a perfectly nice person who has written some good novels.
I just think that when it comes to politics she's as dumb as a post.
She should stick to pontificating on topics that she actually knows something about.
Not what you said in August of 2006 Stock.
You surmised that Atwood was naive and played into Adam's hands. In addition you implied that Adam was a shill for Tony Ianno and that Tam Goossen was undermining Helene Kennedy
Long time to hold a grudge for old Margaret and anybody who dares disagree with your Orthodox view of the world.
This thread is about how the NDP is loosing support in Toronto. Pretty easy to figure out why from the tone of this thread. Who the hell wants to be a part of a party that eats its own and is dismissive of success. Check that, despises success.
I'm proud of Atwood's success and what she has done for canadian literature. She paved the way for the following generation of authors to be heard on a much larger stage. Yann Martel and others would not have had their opportunity if it wasn't for people like Margaret. We build on the successes of those who come before us.
Stock, your attacks on Atwood are petty and vindictive. To dismiss her because she is simply successful is asinine. As for your assertion that we don't "need" the Atwood's of the world then what the hell was all that electioneering around Canadian Culture?
Stock, you're coming of like Harper and his quips about artists being government subsidised whiners.
Not what you said in August of 2006 Stock.
You surmised that Atwood was naive and played into Adam's hands. In addition you implied that Adam was a shill for Tony Ianno and that Tam Goossen was undermining Helene Kennedy
Long time to hold a grudge for old Margaret and anybody who dares disagree with your Orthodox view of the world.
This thread is about how the NDP is loosing support in Toronto. Pretty easy to figure out why from the tone of this thread. Who the hell wants to be a part of a party that eats its own and is dismissive of success. Check that, despises success.
I'm proud of Atwood's success and what she has done for canadian literature. She paved the way for the following generation of authors to be heard on a much larger stage. Yann Martel and others would not have had their opportunity if it wasn't for people like Margaret. We build on the successes of those who come before us.
Stock, your attacks on Atwood are petty and vindictive. To dismiss her because she is simply successful is asinine. As for your assertion that we don't "need" the Atwood's of the world then what the hell was all that electioneering around Canadian Culture?
Stock, you're coming of like Harper and his quips about artists being government subsidised whiners.
Not what you said in August of 2006 Stock.
You surmised that Atwood was naive and played into Adam's hands. In addition you implied that Adam was a shill for Tony Ianno and that Tam Goossen was undermining Helene Kennedy
Long time to hold a grudge for old Margaret and anybody who dares disagree with your Orthodox view of the world.
This thread is about how the NDP is loosing support in Toronto. Pretty easy to figure out why from the tone of this thread. Who the hell wants to be a part of a party that eats its own and is dismissive of success. Check that, despises success.
I'm proud of Atwood's success and what she has done for canadian literature. She paved the way for the following generation of authors to be heard on a much larger stage. Yann Martel and others would not have had their opportunity if it wasn't for people like Margaret. We build on the successes of those who come before us.
Stock, your attacks on Atwood are petty and vindictive. To dismiss her because she is simply successful is asinine. As for your assertion that we don't "need" the Atwood's of the world then what the hell was all that electioneering around Canadian Culture?
Stock, you're coming of like Harper and his quips about artists being government subsidised whiners.
quote:
Originally posted by robbie_dee:
[b]It's hilarious when people try to blame broad political trends such as a decline in NDP votes in Toronto on the behavior of a few jackasses posting on internet message boards. Message boards which are only even read by something like 0.00001% of the population at most. For me, Stockholm's posts have mostly just turned me off of Scandinavia.[/b]
How many people on this board worked on a campaign??? How many of them answered phones and knocked on doors??? A lot I'd bet.
Think of all of those points of contact with the public. This is not some random board without influence or meaning. If it is without meaning, as you claim Robbie, why is there that big bash at Steam Whistle on Thursday.
quote:
Originally posted by robbie_dee:
[b]It's hilarious when people try to blame broad political trends such as a decline in NDP votes in Toronto on the behavior of a few jackasses posting on internet message boards. Message boards which are only even read by something like 0.00001% of the population at most. For me, Stockholm's posts have mostly just turned me off of Scandinavia.[/b]
How many people on this board worked on a campaign??? How many of them answered phones and knocked on doors??? A lot I'd bet.
Think of all of those points of contact with the public. This is not some random board without influence or meaning. If it is without meaning, as you claim Robbie, why is there that big bash at Steam Whistle on Thursday.
quote:
Originally posted by robbie_dee:
[b]It's hilarious when people try to blame broad political trends such as a decline in NDP votes in Toronto on the behavior of a few jackasses posting on internet message boards. Message boards which are only even read by something like 0.00001% of the population at most. For me, Stockholm's posts have mostly just turned me off of Scandinavia.[/b]
How many people on this board worked on a campaign??? How many of them answered phones and knocked on doors??? A lot I'd bet.
Think of all of those points of contact with the public. This is not some random board without influence or meaning. If it is without meaning, as you claim Robbie, why is there that big bash at Steam Whistle on Thursday.
Let's not go back to Vaughan/Kennedy/Goossen again...I don't think it had any significant impact on the election result in Trinity-Spadina.
[ 21 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]
Let's not go back to Vaughan/Kennedy/Goossen again...I don't think it had any significant impact on the election result in Trinity-Spadina.
[ 21 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]
Let's not go back to Vaughan/Kennedy/Goossen again...I don't think it had any significant impact on the election result in Trinity-Spadina.
[ 21 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]
I admire Atwood's success as an author.
But, if she says that her NUMBER ONE concern is to stop the Security and Prosperity Perimeter (SPP) and then she thinks that the best way to do that is to vote for the party that introduced the SPP in the first place and remains committed to it - then my conclusion is that when it comes to politics she must be really, really, really STUPID.
All that being said, all's well that ends well. Olivia Chow was easily re-elected and obviously few, if any, people in Trinity-Spadina paid any attention to Margaret Atwood's desperate attempts to elect the no-name rightwing Liberal candidate running in the riding.
Which will be a very insular affair. This and every other website on the virtual planet does not speak to the average person.
I admire Atwood's success as an author.
But, if she says that her NUMBER ONE concern is to stop the Security and Prosperity Perimeter (SPP) and then she thinks that the best way to do that is to vote for the party that introduced the SPP in the first place and remains committed to it - then my conclusion is that when it comes to politics she must be really, really, really STUPID.
All that being said, all's well that ends well. Olivia Chow was easily re-elected and obviously few, if any, people in Trinity-Spadina paid any attention to Margaret Atwood's desperate attempts to elect the no-name rightwing Liberal candidate running in the riding.
Which will be a very insular affair. This and every other website on the virtual planet does not speak to the average person.
I admire Atwood's success as an author.
But, if she says that her NUMBER ONE concern is to stop the Security and Prosperity Perimeter (SPP) and then she thinks that the best way to do that is to vote for the party that introduced the SPP in the first place and remains committed to it - then my conclusion is that when it comes to politics she must be really, really, really STUPID.
All that being said, all's well that ends well. Olivia Chow was easily re-elected and obviously few, if any, people in Trinity-Spadina paid any attention to Margaret Atwood's desperate attempts to elect the no-name rightwing Liberal candidate running in the riding.
Which will be a very insular affair. This and every other website on the virtual planet does not speak to the average person.
quote:
Originally posted by Left Turn:
[b]I think the msm fearmongered a lot of people in Toronto into voting Liberal rather than NDP, by runninng stories about whether the Conservatives could pick up any ridings in Toronto. There were stories about how the Conservatives were competitive in Don Valley West, and were making a major push to win this riding. There was even one evening where polster Nick Nanos mused on CPAC that his polling numbers for the greater Toronto area might allow the Conservatives to pick up ridings like Etobicoke Lakeshore.[/b]
I think you give way to much credit to the media, whether the Star or Nick Nano's musing over the possible CON pick-ups. Most voters don't even read papers let alone editorials and the editorial sections of newspapers. A whole bunch of people know going in who they will vote for and who they won't and the undecided distribute in almost the same percentages as those who have made up their minds. The NDP message doesn't resonate with 80% voters 80% of the time. Almost as many people who vote anybody but Tory vote anybody but NDP. Just like many NDPers vote anybody but Liberal. I think the nDP supporters on this board spend way to much time trying to figure out who spoiled their fortunes, instead of coming to grips with the fact that the message blame on business, the banks and the coporates doesn't work. Heck many voters in Toronto work for those business, banks or corportations!
[ 21 October 2008: Message edited by: A political ]
quote:
Originally posted by Left Turn:
[b]I think the msm fearmongered a lot of people in Toronto into voting Liberal rather than NDP, by runninng stories about whether the Conservatives could pick up any ridings in Toronto. There were stories about how the Conservatives were competitive in Don Valley West, and were making a major push to win this riding. There was even one evening where polster Nick Nanos mused on CPAC that his polling numbers for the greater Toronto area might allow the Conservatives to pick up ridings like Etobicoke Lakeshore.[/b]
I think you give way to much credit to the media, whether the Star or Nick Nano's musing over the possible CON pick-ups. Most voters don't even read papers let alone editorials and the editorial sections of newspapers. A whole bunch of people know going in who they will vote for and who they won't and the undecided distribute in almost the same percentages as those who have made up their minds. The NDP message doesn't resonate with 80% voters 80% of the time. Almost as many people who vote anybody but Tory vote anybody but NDP. Just like many NDPers vote anybody but Liberal. I think the nDP supporters on this board spend way to much time trying to figure out who spoiled their fortunes, instead of coming to grips with the fact that the message blame on business, the banks and the coporates doesn't work. Heck many voters in Toronto work for those business, banks or corportations!
[ 21 October 2008: Message edited by: A political ]
quote:
Originally posted by Left Turn:
[b]I think the msm fearmongered a lot of people in Toronto into voting Liberal rather than NDP, by runninng stories about whether the Conservatives could pick up any ridings in Toronto. There were stories about how the Conservatives were competitive in Don Valley West, and were making a major push to win this riding. There was even one evening where polster Nick Nanos mused on CPAC that his polling numbers for the greater Toronto area might allow the Conservatives to pick up ridings like Etobicoke Lakeshore.[/b]
I think you give way to much credit to the media, whether the Star or Nick Nano's musing over the possible CON pick-ups. Most voters don't even read papers let alone editorials and the editorial sections of newspapers. A whole bunch of people know going in who they will vote for and who they won't and the undecided distribute in almost the same percentages as those who have made up their minds. The NDP message doesn't resonate with 80% voters 80% of the time. Almost as many people who vote anybody but Tory vote anybody but NDP. Just like many NDPers vote anybody but Liberal. I think the nDP supporters on this board spend way to much time trying to figure out who spoiled their fortunes, instead of coming to grips with the fact that the message blame on business, the banks and the coporates doesn't work. Heck many voters in Toronto work for those business, banks or corportations!
[ 21 October 2008: Message edited by: A political ]
quote:
The NDP message doesn't resonate with 80% voters 80% of the time. Almost as many people who vote anybody but Tory vote anybody but NDP. Just like many NDPers vote anybody but Liberal. I think the nDP supporters on this board spend way to much time trying to figure out who spoiled their fortunes, instead of coming to grips with the fact that the message blame on business, the banks and the corporates doesn't work. Heck most in Toronto work for those business, banks or corportations!
...and the Liberal message doesn't resonate with 75% of the voters and the Green message doesn't resonate with 94% of the voters...
I think there is a legitimate question about why in this election, the NDP had great success in Hamilton, Windsor, northern Ontario and several other blue collar pockets in Ontario - but had a bit of a setback in Toronto that was totally counter to what happened everywhere else.
I think you make a valid point that Toronto is a largely white collar city (or if not white collar then aspiring to being white collar) and it may be that the class-based economic populist NDP message that worked so well in other places - doesn't resonate as well in Toronto.
