And 'Brian Evans', a politics professor at Ryerson University, is quoted as telling us what we should be thinking:
While the Liberals may have had to backtrack on some key election promises, voters don't appear anxious to toss them after only one term in office, Evans said.
"At the end of the day, people would say this has not been a horribly bad government."
Sorry Professor Evans, but this lemming has decided not to jump over the cliff.
* * * *
Update: What's Dalton doing now? Well, wait for it...
He's going to give us a new holiday!!! He might call it 'Family Day'.
That wouldn't be Working Family Day, would it Dalton?
Neo - The Happy Hooker of Queen's Park. This is a must-read. And check out the comments in the Globe link.
Update: What's Dalton doing now? Well, wait for it...
He's going to give us a new holiday!!! He might call it 'Family Day'.
That wouldn't be Working Family Day, would it Dalton?
Neo - The Happy Hooker of Queen's Park. This is a must-read. And check out the comments in the Globe link.
24 comments:
Hey Joanne - looks like the Prince of Darkness is accusing John Tory of going negative again. The real irony of the Dark One taking offense is in his own words from Kicking Ass - "While denizens of the corridors of power will often suggest, with a straight face, that negativity is unnecessary, and unpleasant, and something that requires no special skill or knowledge, these same spinmeisters also know that the truth lies elsewhere. They know deep in the fetid recesses of their tiny hearts, that negativity and nastiness works. They also know that the practitioners of these dark political arts are a unique breed. While they may indeed be jackasses, they are the only category of jackasses capable of knocking down politial barns. Other jackasses merely bray at the barn doors, uncertain about how to get the job done."
So, is Kinsella now saying that Tory's joined the ranks of the unique breeds?
Interesting question IF one thinks he's gone negative. I don't happen to think so.
Pretty hard to go negative on Dalton's track record which is stand alone negative pretty much all by itself --- no prodding or jackasses necessary.
Here's some of that "record".Please keep in mind this is only the top 50 broken promises,there's too many to list.Wonder if Danny Williams and Dion consider Dalton trustworthy?
http://www.paymoregetless.ca/brokenpromises/
I lived in Toronto in 1990 when David Peterson famously called an election in which the Liberals were sitting at about fifty percent. Five years later, when Bob Rae (who was neither David Peterson nor a Liberal) called the next election, the Liberals were the early favorite in that one, too. These guys are good at finding open manholes and falling into them; all we have to do is pry up the covers. Just don't count on any help from The Star.
Brian Evans doesn't think very much of the average Ontarian then does he?
He can't possibly think that Ontarians will reward broken-promises does he?
This from the same halls of higher learning that hired the Gerard Kennedy?
Nothing short of a Lemming Revolt is required.
And this professor is telling us what to think how??
Polling numbers bear his observations out. Plenty of people are still intending to vote Liberal this fall.
Polling, etc. aside, it's dumb to base one's vote on the party leader, or even the party itself. A government is composed of the elected members, and if crappy members get elected, we get crappy government.
I wish the media and bloggers would stop obsessing over party leaders and spend more time covering candidates.
Anon at 2:20 - Where did that quote come from? It does sounds like a backhanded compliment alright though.
I was actually contemplating doing a post on 'negativity' but never got around to it. I agree with you that simply reminding the public of the truth is not really 'negative'.
Now if John Tory were to make fun of McGuinty, and call him McWhimpy or McLiar or something like that, then it would be negative.
gdw,
May this election be no different for the Liberals in the case that they will pay severely for their proud incompetence.
Please keep in mind this is only the top 50 broken promises
Remember that old Paul Simon song? We should adapt it to: "Fifty Ways to Leave the Liberals".
Kind of a self-help guide.
I wish the media and bloggers would stop obsessing over party leaders and spend more time covering candidates.
Good in theory, but when push comes to shove the little backbenchers don't have a whole lot of clout.
Dirk, the media and people focus on the leaders because ultimately unless you have an amazingly strong willed independent minded MP what you will get is what the leader wants.
Most MPs and MPPs toe the party line on the important issues. And especially on budget issues the MPs have no say whatsoever unless they decide to leave their party. This is how it has always been.
It frustrates me greatly when people vote 'for the MP' without consideration of the party or party leader. Because the MP alone is going to have very little sway in how things are done.
For example, if you opposed SSM but voted for a Liberal MP, you really buggered your own movement since the Liberal government introduced, guided and ultimately forced the vote on SSM. Whereas a Tory government would have done differently (the whole civil union thing).
Anyways, my point being that a vote for a Liberal MP helped SSM become a reality even if that Liberal MP opposed SSM (which many did).
if you opposed SSM but voted for a Liberal MP, you really buggered your own movement since the Liberal government introduced, guided and ultimately forced the vote on SSM.
Was that a closeted pun?
Dalton Mcliar and his poodle Kinsella are just too funny. Of course the Tories will point out the failings of this awful government. There is nothing good to say about them. Except that they were not able to undo everything Premier Harris did.
Of course the Tories will point out the failings of this awful government. There is nothing good to say about them.
And even if there were, do they seriously expect Tory & company to sign on to their "Return McGuinty to Power" campaign?
Or is that a Liberal Entitlement?
Joanne - the quote came from Kinsella's book
Kicking
Ass
In Canadian Politics
ACK! Joanne! Get that mind out of the gutter!
I didn't mean it in that sense.. sheesh..
lol
S.O. - lol! Sorry, just couldn't resist that one.
My bad.
Joanne:
"Good in theory, but when push comes to shove the little backbenchers don't have a whole lot of clout."
Not so. No PM or premier can personally oversee every file no matter how hard they try. MPs, and MPPs don't just oversee major government files: good representatives are committee members where policy details are hammered out, they contribute to debate, and they keep their party leadership accountable.
This is not just good theory, it's good practice. And it's a shame people don't buy into this and vote for smart, committed people.
SO:
"Dirk, the media and people focus on the leaders because ultimately unless you have an amazingly strong willed independent minded MP what you will get is what the leader wants."
The media today is a shell of what it once was, with very little focus given to matters of import that don't happen to be headline grabbers. What gets more attention are the issues like SSM and, of course, cabinet shuffles, election calls, and the like. Remember the vacuous spring election hype?
While whipped votes are commonplace, far more gets decided in our legislatures than whether a budget or bills covering hot-button issues pass. Some representatives may have to hold their noses when they vote, but by and large, a good representative can still have plenty of influence.
One more thought:
Even more stupid than voting for a party or leader is voting based on a single issue. Especially an issue like SSM.
Many, many critical issues affecting the health of our country are dealt with by our various governments. I wouldn't dream of entrusting a one-trick pony to such a position of power and importance as elected representative.
Oh I don't disagree Dirk, about backbenchers holding some power, but again most of the power is held by the party leader or senior members. Which is why I actually do understand if people voted for a Cabinet minister even if they disliked the party.
But if we're talking about backbench MPs you're better off voting for the party. Ultimately, voting for the party or the party leader determines the ultimate course of government.
My point about the SSM comparison was just to point out that even if your MP holds strong views that conflict with their party, that voting for him allows the party control of the legislative reigns and gives that party control akin to a dictator. So if you vote for the MP and that MP helps the leader you dislike become PM, then you are essentially voting for that PM.
And single issue voting seems to be everywhere now, think about Kyoto or environmental policy. In some ways, that is the only way to get people involved in politics. Most people will not get involved unless it was for a particular issue. Be it the environment, Kyoto, SSM, abortion, etc..
But I think most people consider all the issues but make some issues 'confidence issues' in their own minds. For example, some people may say, I definately won't vote for Harper cuz he opposes Kyoto, but I'm going to vote for Layton since he has the best policy for the automotive industry.
The news that I woke up to this morning of Dalton McGuinty's bribe of Ontario voters made me laugh. I guess it shouldn't come as too much of a surprise though. Afterall, the best way to get people to vote for you is to promise to lower taxes or at least not increase taxes or add any new taxes. For obvious reasons, that won't work for him again this time. So this is clearly an attempt to get voters to say "yeah, he broke a bunch of promises and yeah, this was a horribly bad government, but hey, I want an extra day off."
I would like to see the Lieutenant Governor summon the House back tomorrow to give Dalton the opportunity to introduce a bill on this before the election. That would show if he were serious or not. Afterall, the writ hasn't been dropped yet.
Incidentally, I don't agree with having another stat holiday at all. We already have more than the US and each extra stat costs companies incredible amounts of money and will have a detrimental affect on our economy. But worse than that is the blatantness of the bribe, and the fact that many people who realize that it's a bribe will still allow themselves to be bribed by it.
But worse than that is the blatantness of the bribe, and the fact that many people who realize that it's a bribe will still allow themselves to be bribed by it.
Exactly. If Ontario voters continue to buy this garbage, then we deserve exactly what we get.
I agree that this is nothing but a bribe. I also agree that people should be able to see right through this.
However, I believe that a good majority of voters only pay attention to the issues when the voting season presents itself to make the decision on how they are going to vote. Many people seem to forget about how past issues were handled and focus only on how can the current nominees can possibly make our country a better place, not necessarily focusing on the down side of those changes.
In my opinion, there will always be promises that are broken but one key to focus on is the overall viewpoint of the parties involved.
Great insight, Sydney.
Yes, you're absolutely right. We shouldn't let one issue affect our decision. It really should be a blend of information - a synthesis. I'm just not sure how many people bother to do that.
Thanks for weighing in here. Good to hear from you again. I hope things are going well. ;)
Post a Comment