Carolyn Bennett drops out and endorses Rae
Well it looks like the Liberal leadership race has dropped further to 9, with Carolyn Bennett dropping out and throwing her support behind Bob Rae. I am not surprised she dropped out considering she had virtually no chance at winning, but to see her throw her support behind Bob Rae was a bit of a surprise. While they both come from the left side of the party, she ran as a Liberal in 1995 against the Rae government, so I was surprised she would endorse him. I thought she would have thrown her support behind Gerard Kennedy who she supported in the 1996 Ontario Liberal leadership race and also has similiar viewpoints to her. This is definitely good news for Bob Rae as each supporter in Ontario he picks up, he can point to this as a reason that he is electable in Ontario, though I still have my doubts.
I have no doubt if Bob Rae becomes leader, most Liberals will have no trouble supporting him and we won't see very many if any defections. However, gaining the support of hard-core partisans is one thing, but being able to appeal to the average swing voter is quite another thing. The polls so far suggest his time as premier in Ontario isn't hurting him much in the province, however one should note he hasn't been attacked harshly by any of his opponents, which makes sense considering they may have to work with him if he wins. But, if he is chosen as Liberal leader, one can be sure the Tories will do everything possible to remind Ontario voters of his time as premier. And lets remember he got reduced to 17 seats and barely over 20% of the popular vote in the election that brought Mike Harris to office. As someone who has watched politics closely, parties rarely get decimated that badly, unless people are very unhappy. Even Ernie Eves in 2003 still managed to get a respectable 35% of the popular vote. Now it is possible his strong debating skills may overcome this weakness and also possible people might see the Tory attacks as just negative campaigning. However, what if the Tory attacks on Rae do work and we lose 20-30 seats in Ontario, is this a risk we are willing to take. I am not willing to take this risk, which is why I won't be endorsing Bob Rae. I would rather choose a safe candidate who I think can win and if they don't win, they will for sure at least hold Harper to a minority. Had Rae been a Liberal member of parliament for the last four years, I would be far more open to endorsing him as he could have shown he has learned from his mistakes.
I have no doubt if Bob Rae becomes leader, most Liberals will have no trouble supporting him and we won't see very many if any defections. However, gaining the support of hard-core partisans is one thing, but being able to appeal to the average swing voter is quite another thing. The polls so far suggest his time as premier in Ontario isn't hurting him much in the province, however one should note he hasn't been attacked harshly by any of his opponents, which makes sense considering they may have to work with him if he wins. But, if he is chosen as Liberal leader, one can be sure the Tories will do everything possible to remind Ontario voters of his time as premier. And lets remember he got reduced to 17 seats and barely over 20% of the popular vote in the election that brought Mike Harris to office. As someone who has watched politics closely, parties rarely get decimated that badly, unless people are very unhappy. Even Ernie Eves in 2003 still managed to get a respectable 35% of the popular vote. Now it is possible his strong debating skills may overcome this weakness and also possible people might see the Tory attacks as just negative campaigning. However, what if the Tory attacks on Rae do work and we lose 20-30 seats in Ontario, is this a risk we are willing to take. I am not willing to take this risk, which is why I won't be endorsing Bob Rae. I would rather choose a safe candidate who I think can win and if they don't win, they will for sure at least hold Harper to a minority. Had Rae been a Liberal member of parliament for the last four years, I would be far more open to endorsing him as he could have shown he has learned from his mistakes.
posted by Monkey Loves to Fight at 12:33 AM
11 Comments:
I absolutely CANNOT support Rae. I'm disappointed in Carolyn Bennett as I thought she was one of the "clean" candidates and was into "renewal". Hmmmm.
This one smells that's for sure.
And,what about her supporters? Had any of them already sent in their forms? Not nice Carolyn.
i love moron cherniak's whining aoubt what happens to the bennett people signed as delegates. Too bad as a Dion campaign thingy that he doesnt know that the rules are in place for such an eventuality.
If your candidate drops out you are classed as undeclared.
Another disappointing analysis. I can understand the courageous anonymouses hiding behind the ol' 'He can't get elected in Ontario' boogeyman but you are someone who seems to be not of rash or snap judgements. With all the signs pointing to Ingatieff being the front runner, the Audie General's report about the environment dept getting leaked, and Kennedy's almost no-show result in quebec, there is obviously no candidate without a weakness. Rae's remains a 10-year old issue, one that has been presented in both lights. Are you denying that there was a recession? That the Peterson gov't left a surprise deficit? And that the whole NDP caucus of the day had no governmental experience? Factor in the major change in tax system, going to the GST after the old one, and when Chretien came in there was major off-loading of transfer payments to the provinces, with Ontario being among the worse hit. You remain capable of only seeing the Tory argument, which suggests 'NDP gov't decision created the hole and dug it deeper'... In fact, Harris had to paint the situation worse than it was to get away with his draconian slashing, actually putting more people out of work. If the economy hadn't already begun its recovery and industries made the adjustments necessary (some of it slowcoming but a result of the NAFTA) Harris' would have created even more turmoil -- just check out the 'hidden' surprise left for McGinty.
Rae can't dismiss all responsibility, nor has he. He faced the question about his time in gov't and I think answered it well. However, to say that his party was 'decimated' following the next election is a lot of hoohaw -- it returned to its regular popularity in a province where it had always polled third.
And next you'll be buying into these cowardly driveby smears from anonymouses like the top who hits both Rae and Bennett, with no evidence and no responsibility behind their acusations.
I may feel that Ignatieff is our 'John Kerry', and I may make many decisions on the floor of the convention behind that fact, but I sure as hell will fight to get him elected if he's our leader. You don't seem to be of the same stripe.
Disappointing.
Oh and one more bit, without resulting to poll after poll which disproves your alarmistism... Rae was serving the public during the past six years, on the Air India inquiry, the Federation of Federations in building democracies in Iraq and Sri Lanka, on a few other files too from the request of our Prime Minister of the day.
Instead, you choose to wipe that off the history books and say essentially complain that he didn't sit as an MP those days? Didn't he assist the cause, perhaps a greater cause, in those ways?
And yes, he could not be a party member and serve in those positions.
You astound me.
Burlivespipe, I realize Rae had to deal with a difficult situation, however Ontario's recession was far worse than any other province. Certainly the fact he had a left wing and inexperienced caucus didn't help as it would have been difficult to get the support to make the changes he wanted. My point is here, Bob Rae has done some good things, which I am sure he will highlight, but I always try to anticipate how our opponents will paint us. The Tories will almost certainly as I point out bring up his term as premier, and so I am saying he would be bad a choice due to the risk. I would rather play it safe than take a big risk. Had he run as an MP four years ago, I might have a different opinion of him since he could have proven himself. And I should note Jason Cherniak is a director for Richmond Hill, part of the 905 belt and he seems to think Rae would cost the Liberals those seats.
As for Dion, the auditor general's report still has yet to come out and from what I've heard it will likely be mostly about programs under David Anderson's watch.
Question for you Miles...
If Bob Rae wins the leadership race, would you still support the Liberals?
Question for you Miles...
If Bob Rae wins the leadership race, would you still support the Liberals?
It depends. I would take a wait and see approach. If he moves the party to the left, then No, but if he keeps it in the centre than Yes. I will say though that I will not support the Conservatives under any circumstances unless by some miracle their leader is not Stephen Harper. If the Conservatives want my vote, they need to dump Stephen Harper and his replacement must not be someone from the Reform/Alliance party.
Amazing.
Miles might actually be prepared to support a socialist ex-premier who severely screwed up his province over a libertarian-leaning free market economist.
What did I tell you folks? The leftward drift at work.
Amazing.
Miles might actually be prepared to support a socialist ex-premier who severely screwed up his province over a libertarian-leaning free market economist.
What did I tell you folks? The leftward drift at work.
Brandon, that is only if he actually admits he screwed up badly and shows he has truly changed. In all likelihood, if he wins, I probably won't vote for either the Conservatives or Liberals. I will still help some Liberals who I think are good candidates and if my riding has a good candidate, I'll vote for them. I think my biggest problem with Bob Rae winning is we are choosing between an ex-NDPer and an ex-Reformer, i.e. a more polarized race. And if Burlivespipe is still reading this, I should note I am former Progressive Conservative, so getting me to support a former NDPer is a bit of a stretch. In 2003 I joined the Progressive Conservatives, had I wanted a Reform leader, I would have joined the Alliance but I didn't. In 2006 I joined the Liberals since I thought the Liberals were the closest to my values. If I wanted an NDP leader, I would have joined the NDP but I didn't.
And Finally Brandon, my hope is once the Reform elements are wiped out in the Tories (if that ever happens) we can have a truly free market libertarian party. But until that happens, I am playing it safe and staying with the Liberals. I do though prefer the NDP, to the Bush Republicans.
Brandon, Harper is not at all "libertarian leaning". He is an evangelical Christian who courts the social conservatives. I think you should read this month's issue of the Walrus, where there is an excellent article demonstrating Harper's ties to the religious right.
I think Harper is an economic conservative, but I wouldn't describe him as a libertarian. Mike Harris perhaps, but not Harper. He may not wear his social conservatism on his sleeves like Stockwell Day does but this is only because he realizes it is political suicide.
Post a Comment
<< Home