You Tube Attacks

There are some over-the-top videos on You Tube attacking Iggy and Rae. I don't care for either of them, but they raise a valid point. If a couple of kids can produce these stinging attacks, imagine the attack ads the Tories and Dippers are going to put out in the next election. Rae and Ignatieff have a lot of baggage. We shouldn't forget that when we vote this weekend. There are two things that are crucial in a leader: good ideas and a good track record. Ignatieff's defense positions are not good ideas and Rae has about as bad a track record as a politician in Ontario could have.

Fry is Fried

Hedy Fry has dropped out and is endorsing Bob Rae. Hey, is that tumbleweed?! I have dutifully moved the 15 delegates I had assigned in my projections to Fry (yeah, I know I was generous) into the Rae column. Only one question, what happens to all the ballots that have Hedy Fry delegates on them? And tangentially, what if the people of her riding decide to do what the Democrats of Vermont did for Howard Dean, and elect Fry in spite of the fact that she has dropped out? Oh think of the possibilities... man, can you tell that I'm bored with this race, can we vote already?

As for the other controversies. I really am not all that shocked. Nor am I that appalled. First, the dead. The point of signing up dead people is beyond me. They can't vote! I'm pretty sure about this. They really can't vote. Were they going to send staffers in to vote with fake ID's? So what exactly does it accomplish for Messrs. Ignatieff and Volpe? Boost their sales totals which were never released except via rumours? Are they taking politics lessons from Sideshow Bob? I'm confused. I guess the LPC should add those donations to the candidates' donations to the party for the year.

The living. This is a little nauseating, but I'm not really surprised. Anything to get them in the door, right? The microscope has been on the ants far too long and some of them are starting to burn. This is why you don't have 9 month leadership races: all the dirty little tricks get exposed and the party looks bad for it. The next time we do this, please for the love of God, make it shorter.

86% of all Statistics are Made Up

The Toronto Star has joined the Globe and Mail in commissioning a poll of Liberal members. The star is not disclosing how they got their hands on the membership lists. All I can say is the Liberal lists seem to be easier to get than the common cold. I have a couple of questions about the accuracy of the polls:

1. The Star notes that a majority of riding delegates will come from Ontario and Quebec. This is true. It is also true that 20% of delegates will come from Alberta and BC where the membership rolls are considerably smaller. I wonder if Alberta and BC liberals were properly represented in this poll. If not, numbers for candidates with strength out West (like Kennedy) will be significantly lower than their delegate count will be next weekend.

2. There are going to be a lot of youth going to the convention. Nearly a third of all delegates by reckoning will be youth. Now, I know that youth do not decide which youth delegates go to the convention but I guarantee you that youth will go out and vote this weekend. Furthermore, there will be about 200 delegates from student clubs which will be chosen only by youth. Pollsters have a tendency to ignore young people when they do polls. This makes sense in a normal election because young people don't have that much of a say in who wins (their voter turnout is abysmal), but in this case the youth have real power and will shape this race. If the pollsters discounted youth members because they're hard to find or because they don't think that they matter, strength for certain candidates with strong youth support, (like Kennedy) would be underestimated.

Now it's possible that both of these things were considered by the pollsters. In which case their numbers should be accurate. I guess we'll find out this weekend.

The Envelope Please

In the interest of posting something I present my projection of the liberal leadership delegate count. Student and Women's clubs are reflected based on the lists available online. I've used delegate count's projections for ex-officio delegates. I can't determine the number of Aboriginal or Senior clubs so their numbers are not reflected. I don't know if anyone else noticed but of the 82 accredited women's clubs, 21 are in New Brunswick and 1 is in British Columbia. Now, there's something for the West to be alienated about! Anyway here are my first ballot projections based on my knowledge of regional support and membership sales for each candidate:

Iggy: 23.77% (1241/5220)
Rae: 18.85% (984/5220)
GK: 18.79% (981/5220)
Dion: 13.22% (690/5220) (I admit this looks low but I can't figure out where in the country his support comes from outside of Quebec)
Volpe: 10.71% (559/5220) (I really hope this is a high projection but Volpe knows how to get the vote out and should do well in Ontario and Quebec)
Dryden: 7.13% (372/5220)
Brison: 6.57% (343/5220)
MHF: 0.67% (35/5220)
Fry: 0.29% (15/5220)


Here it is by Province:
Newfoundland & Labrador: Iggy 22.22 %; Rae 17.46%; GK 21.43%; Dion 3.97%; Volpe 3.97%; Dryden 5.56%; Brison 25.40%; MHF 0%; Fry 0%

Nova Scotia: Iggy 23.83%; Rae 8.41%; GK 7.94%; Dion 6.07%; Volpe 4.67%; Dryden 2.80%; Brison 46.26%; MHF 0%; Fry 0%

New Brunswick: Iggy 32.13%; Rae 19.28; GK 23.69%; Dion 5.62%; Volpe 4.02%; Dryden 4.02%; Brison 11.24%; MHF 0%; Fry 0%

PEI: Iggy 29.41%; Rae 19.12%; GK 32.35%; Dion 1.47%; Volpe 2.94%; Dryden 5.88%; Brison 8.82%; MHF 0%; Fry0%

Quebec: Iggy 17.84%; Rae 23.16%; GK 4.91%; Dion 28.40%; Volpe 21.11%; Dryden 3.76%; Brison 0.82%; MHF 0%; Fry 0%

Ontario: Iggy 24.76%; Rae 17.12%; GK 18.12%; Dion 10.97%; Volpe 9.42%; Dryden 11.41%; Brison 6.15%; MHF 1.83%; Fry 0.22%

Manitoba: Iggy 36.84%; Rae 17.81%; GK 15.38%; Dion 6.48%; Volpe 6.07%; Dryden 14.98%; Brison 2.43%; MHF 0%; Fry 0%

Saskatchewan: Iggy 29.09%; Rae 24.55%; GK 25.91%; Dion 5.45%; Volpe 4.55%; Dryden 5.45%; Brison 5.00%; MHF 0%; Fry 0%

Alberta: Iggy 24.49%; Rae 10.34%; GK 38.65%; Dion 8.54%; Volpe 5.84%; Dryden 5.84%; Brison 6.07%; MHF 0.22%; Fry 0%

British Columbia: Iggy 20.73%; Rae 23.32%; GK 32.47%; Dion 7.43%; Volpe 8.64%; Dryden 3.11%; Brison 2.25%; MHF 0.17%; Fry 1.90%

The North (a complete guess): Iggy 28.89%; Rae 26.67; GK 31.11%; Dion 13.33%; Volpe 0%; Dryden 0%; Brison 0%; MHF 0%; Fry 0%

Bennett's On The Move

And then there were 9. Not much else to say. I guess Rae has a bit of Joementum going into the delegate selection. Carolyn Bennett could not have decided the leadership at the convention and she certainly won't decide it at this stage of the game. Add St. Paul's to ridings where Rae should do well and all calculations should remain the same.

I guess there's a possibility of more support going to the Hall-Findlay and Fry campaigns for those intent on seeing a woman in leadership. Wait, who am I kidding Bennett never had any support.

Another AG Bomb

The Auditor General is preparing to release a report slamming the management of the Ministry of the Environment under the David Anderson and Stephane Dion eras. Dion could be hurt by this depending on the severity of the report. Dion more than any other contender is basing his candidacy on his experience in office. His 'ten years at the cabinet table' are supposed to be the reason that he has the goods to lead the party. The part of that time he seems particularly proud of is his time at Environment. Hmmm... I wonder why he doesn't talk about his time at Intergovernmental Affairs crafting Chretien's response to the referendum including Quebec favourites like the Clarity Act and the sponsorship program, but I digress. If the environment candidate did a bad job of running the ministry of the environment his credibility may be on thin ice.

Citizens Assembly BS

Ian Urquhart has an excellent piece in the star talking about the citizens' assembly that is being set up in Ontario to possibly propose electoral reform. I called this blog 'All Politics is Local' because I firmly believe that. This is the primary reason why I oppose proportional representation. Our government should be a representation of the people from all parts of the province. This is of particular importance in Ontario where such divergent communities exist. But I'll save my defence of first past the post for another day.

What troubles me is the whole business of a citizens' assembly. I guess the point is that if the assembly pisses anyone off the government doesn't get the blame. However, the idea of 103 Ontarians with no special knowledge of electoral systems being asked to alter the course of Canadian electoral history is a little bit ridiculous. This is particularly true when the people running the assembly are not as neutral as advertised.

I had the pleasure of having Professor Jonathan Rose, who has now been named head of the secretariat responsible for the citizens' assembly as my first year political studies professor. I mean that with all sincerity. I have the utmost respect for Prof. Rose. However, he is not neutral on the issue of proportional representation. He is, like the vast majority of politics profs, pro-PR. Now, hopefully his personal opinions will not impact the course of the citizens' assembly but I am more and more concerned that Ontario is on the road to party dominated minority parliament land. I hope that someone grants this assembly the wisdom to advise the status quo.

Kennedy on Afghanistan

Still catching up on the leadership news. I read Linda Diebel's article on Kennedy's speech on Afghanistan. First impression: it's bold. I'm still kind of on the fence on this issue (a rarity for me) but I like that Kennedy is doing more than talking in platitudes. As we approach the fifth anniversary of September 11th and subsequently the invasion of Afghanistan, I think it is reasonable to re-evaluate our mission in the country. Here are some facts:

-27 Canadian soldiers are dead
- There has been some improvement in quality of life in Afghanistan
- There is still a very strong Taliban-led insurgency
- The occupation does serve to bolster anti-Western feeling in the Muslim world
- There is no end game
- Afghanistan deserves better than what it has had in the past 30 years

As I said I'm still kind of on the fence but the preponderence of evidence is increasingly on the side of withdrawl. One of the main reasons I think I agree with Kennedy that it is time to leave is that I can't accept the Bush/Ignatieff (not a slur, they're in the same boat on this one) justification for staying. Ignatieff argued in Empire Lite that the presence of overwhelming military force sets the groundwork for open communication and peace. This is true when dealing with rival warlords. This does not hold true when dealing with the Taliban. The crux of Iggy's argument is that an omnipotent neutral party can provide peace, but the Taliban do not view the coalition as neutral. They do not respect international mandates or their own national government, they cannot be brought to the table no matter how large the force. Thus we should remind ourselves of the history behind the phrase Pyrrhic victory. King Pyrrhus of Epirus tried to defeat the Roman military in Italy. He had an overwhelming military advantage (elephants) but in spite of many victories in battle he could not secure the Italian penninsula. He eventually was forced to retreat with his tail between his legs. The Romans won because they had homefield advantage. They knew the terrain and they were more dedicated to the mission. The Taliban has the advantages the Romans had, that the American revolutionaries had, that the Viet Cong had. History is not on our side. Still I'm not entirely convinced. But good on Kennedy for opening the debate.

Greetings from Sweden

Hejsan!

Sitting comfortably in a mental hospital (dormitory) in Sweden. Been out of the loop will resume blogging soon.


Hejdo!

Something Happened

So Bevilacqua has decided to cut and run. YAWN! Apparently, Greg Sobrara is the broker here. So Vaughan will go to Rae. And what else? Not much. Maybe some more right wing cred? Bevilacqua made the papers coming in and going out and never in between. Hard to miss a guy when your not sure that he's there in the first place. Rae has some momentum going into delegate selection I guess... although I'm not sure Maurizio will carry him to the end of September by himself. Anyway, snooze alarm has been hit. I'm going back to bed. Wake me up when something really happens.

Wake me up when something happens

My enthusiasm for the liberal leadership racce is waning. Okay, its partially because I'm leaving the country and will not be participating for a while but its partly because nothing is happening. The two biggest stories in the last few weeks was the fact that major candidates went awol (namely Iggy and Kennedy.)

Neither of these stories are particularly interesting. Iggy, thinking the race is in the bag, makes a quick trip to Hungary before being tied down at Stornaway. Kennedy's car broke down. Period. His French will improve. He's lightyears ahead of Dryden already.

Furthermore, in the course of my duties with the Kennedy campaign I have learned that outside the blogosphere and the campaign office very few Liberals give a rats ass about the leadership race. Okay, to be fair they might care in september... but not until september. Many grits are painfully unaware that they a) are Liberals, b) that there's a leadership race on or c)who the candidates are aside from the fact that there are a lot of them. This means that the race is even more wide open than perhaps people are aware. So, as the ground war rages, the party sleeps... I think I'll join them.

Volpe and Israel

Not sure why everyone's surprised by Volpe's commitment to Israel. You can't exactly be anti-Israel and expect to win an election in Eglinton-Lawrence. For me the only rational position is pro-peace. I don't really care who's to blame anymore (everyone as far as I can tell) I just want peace for all sides.

Kudos to Gerard Kennedy for taking a similarly balanced approach

http://www.gerardkennedy.ca/news_e.aspx?id=59

Policy Voids - Real and Imagined

As a Kennedy supporter, I am always a little dismayed when people say that Gerard has a deficit of policy out there. In reality, Kennedy is basically the only candidate with anything new to say that is more than just platitudes. A quick browse of the 5 real contenders for Stornaway's websites (Kennedy, Ignatieff, Dion, Rae and Dryden) reveals that the deficits lie with the other candidates.

Dryden- A host of platitudes. All no more than 500 words and certainly nothing that we haven't run on in the last 13 years

Rae- A hodgepodge of reactionary statements. Mostly just criticisms of Harper. Anything else is more platitudes.

Ignatieff- Hard to tell. He has a policy forum message board which ranges from real Ignatieff issues to things completely unrelated e.g. Volpe's campaign donations and Layton on Afghanistan. Otherwise, a bunch of speeches with more platitudes. Oh, and a carbon tax so that Liberals will never ever win in Alberta.

Dion- Some hard policy on the environment. Unfortunately, it's a government report from 2005 which makes it pretty much the Martin environmental policy. Otherwise very little in the way of hard policy.

Kennedy- An admitted lack of breadth of issues but on the issues where policy has been released- hard targets and new ideas. Some examples:

On the environment: - tax breaks for environmentally friendly cars and taxes on gas guzzlers
- hard targets on power creation through wind power ( 5000 MW by 2010; 10000 MW by 2015)
- An acknowledgement that any environmental policy must work with the oil and gas industry not against it.
-25% improvement in environmental standards

On Immigration- Acknowledgement that immigration only way to fund social programs with retiring baby boom!!!
- Acknowledgement of real challenges immigrants face in getting credentials recognized/upgraded

We tried the host of platitudes approach in the last election and it got us nowhere. People had no idea what Liberals stood for. The only real policy we had was the 50/50 education plan which was a good plan but a horrid soundbyte. If we want to win, we need to steal a page from Harper's playbook. We need specific ideas in key policy areas that are implementable and understandable. It is not enough to "stand for truth, justice, all that stuff."

Election Timing

I like to fall on my own sword as much as the next guy, but why exactly is Bob Rae calling for the Liberals to provoke a fall election? The softwood lumber agreement is not exactly great for Canada granted, but how are we going to fix it if the Tories are sitting to the right of the speaker with a majority? Rae of all people should know how important election timing can be. After all, it was an overenthusiastic David Peterson who handed Rae the Premier's office when he went to the polls too early in 1990. What we need is for the committees in both the senate and the house to take their time with the softwood deal. Parliament doesn't sit for all that long in the fall and there's no reason we can't push the vote until the beginning of the new year when we have our house in order.
Softwood lumber is a big issue in British Columbia, Northern Ontario and Northern Quebec and is little more than a confusing footnote anywhere else. Harper has been politically shrewd in his moves to date but he has to start giving something to his Alberta base. I say let's wait for the homophobic comments the same-sex marriage debate is likely to induce from the backbench of the Conservative caucus. Wait until he actually tries to make a move on senate reform. Or at very least wait until the next Conservative budget when they realize that there's no money left for any new promises. Mr. Rae is new to the Liberal Party and therefore probably doesn't fully appreciate the idea that when you are part of a party people elect more often then Halley's Comet you have to be measured and tactical in your response. No matter how odourous the softwood deal may seem, we need to suffer it until we have a snowball's chance of winning the election.

Liberal Leadership Race

I'll add my two cents to the hundreds of dollars worth of opinion out there. First of all, 11 candidates is an absurd number but I'll go through them one by one. Here they are from worst to best:

Joe Volpe-
Say it ain't so Joe! Say you aren't still in this race. Someone with some sort of common sense should be able to say no to $5400.00 from 14 year olds. I mean I've heard of engaging the youth but that is just ridiculous. Volpe along with his pal Jimmy K. have lots of connections in the cultural communities of Toronto and have somehow managed to pull the wool over enough eyes to get some people signed up. Carolyn Bennett, who hasn't done much right in this campaign, was dead on in her Globe article this morning: Volpe is embarassing the party and needs to set his ego aside and bow out.

Maurizio Bevilacqua-
The member from Vaughan always manages to get himself elected with large pluralities and for that I can only praise him. As a national candidate he has been taking lessons from Houdini: he's made himself completely invisible. I think Volpe probably took his angle: long time Grit with good connections with the minority groups, because I cannot for the life of me figure out why he deserves to be leader.

Carolyn Bennett-
Before today's Globe article I would have assigned the Houdini remark to Bennett. Another great local politician who has been unable to find her feet. First, Gerard Kennedy and now Stephane Dion took her women in politics angle and with two other women in the race she hasn't been able to get support from people looking for the first female leader of the federal liberal party. It is high time that the party had a woman in charge, but Bennett has certainly not shown that she deserves that honour.

Hedy Fry-
Not to burn a cross on her lawn or anything, but what about Hedy Fry's cabinet career makes her a good leadership candidate? If I want an angry Westerner who shoots their mouth off, and I say this as a card carrying Liberal, I'll take Deborah Gray. At least she's fun. Fry will forever be remembered as the woman who knocked off a sitting Prime Minister back in 1993 and she will be very useful for whoever wins in making sure that David Emerson never comes back to Parliament Hill. I've heard varying rumors about who exactly put her up to this leadership campaign. Whoever it was, it's time to sacrifice your pawn: there's no reason to waste time in the fall debates.

Martha Hall-Findlay-
She has made an admirable run for someone who will make a very good parliamentarian if elected. However, there's nothing on her resume that indicates to me that she's qualified to be the next Prime Minister of Canada. Still she's done a good job at getting her name out there and her presence is good for the race. If the next time around she has some cabinet experience under her belt, who knows she could make a run.

Ken Dryden-
How you spend as long as Ken Dryden did in Montreal and pick up as little French as he did, is beyond me. However, his unilingualism would be manageable if he had anything else going for him. Congratulations, you helped to create a child care program which died a year after it was born. All eleven candidates would try to revive it if elected and frankly there are more impressive resumes when it comes to starting social programs. I haven't even mentioned the fact that he makes Stephen Harper look like Trudeau in terms of charisma. He's been able to create a small following across the country so he deserves to be in the middle of the pack but I'm not sure a cut-out drawing of Ken Dryden couldn't have garnered the same support.

Scott Brison-
The best leader the Progressive Conservatives never had. I mean that as a compliment. When he ran against Peter McKay I thought he was the right man for the job. In this field he looks out-classed. The youth are supporting other candidates and he has been left in fortress Nova Scotia abandoned. The stupid e-mails which helped sink the last federal election campaign don't help matters. He was probably the best minister in question period in the Martin government and should get another shot at the cabinet table.

Bob Rae-
John Rae and Eddie Goldenberg have it figured out. Find a semi-retired politician with a checkered past and trot him out as the white knight that will save a crumbling Liberal Party. Unfortunately for them, this is not 1990 and Bob Rae is not Jean Chretien. Rae has no credibility as a liberal and his election as leader would be the ideal way for the NDP and the Conservatives to squeeze the Grits right out of national politics. A lot of people have praised Rae for standing up to Harper on the softwood lumber issue and urging the party to fight an election. I agree it is a bold idea... but then again so is jumping off a cliff. If we tried to run this campaign leaderless the NDP would raise the spectre of Michael Ignatieff and the Conservatives would raise the spectre of Rae Days. In other words the worst of both worlds. Rae is a smart man who fell in with the wrong party and got into power at the wrong time. I don't doubt his ability to be a great PM but I seriously doubt his ability to get elected.

Michael Ignatieff-
All hail Caesar! Seriously, read Empire Lite before you vote for Ignatieff. You can agree or disagree that an overwhelming hegemonic force is the only means of curbing third world anarchy, but just picture the NDP ad campaign. I shutter at trying to sell renewed imperialism to my neighbours here in Toronto-Danforth. No one will be happier with Ignatieff's victory than old Jack-in-the-box-Layton. That's one person I don't need to make happy. Furthermore, Ignatieff makes Harper look warm and fuzzy. He's too far right and too little of a politician. NEXT!

Stephane Dion-
The great federalist intellectual has now decided that he is the great environmentalist intellectual. The environment is a hot issue and Dion has some credibility on the issue. Notwithstanding the fact that I disagree with him and the rest of the party on Kyoto (it's bad ecological policy but I'll save it for another post), Dion has a serious lack of ideas on how to actually fight global warming. Most importantly though, he has a mountain to climb in his home province. The clarity act made him public enemy number 1 in Quebec and I cannot believe he is the one who will lead us out of the political wilderness in that province. A Quebec candidate who can't win in Quebec? No thanks.

Gerard Kennedy-
If you have been counting you'll realize that this is the eleventh candidate and therefore my choice for the next leader of the Liberal party. Kennedy's only major problem is his French and frankly its a lot better than Harper's was when he moved into Stornaway. Also, his wife is Acadian so he should have no problem improving his French. Otherwise his record in Queen's Park and as the leader of a charity is impeccable. He is willing to talk about the impending problems which are going to be caused by the retirement of the baby boomers and his immigration success policy is a good strategy to deal with it. He has a strong following among youth and has proven (read the Star article if you've missed it) that he can campaign with the best of them. He is the only candidate who can do real damage out West and he is popular in Ontario where we must keep our base. Is he the perfect candidate? No, but that's because there's no such thing. Kennedy is the only candidate that won't leave Conservative and New Democratic spin doctors enough ammunition to blow a hole the size of Saskatchewan and he might actually be able to grow the party. Therefore, GK for PM.

Introduction

This blog is dedicated to the random political ramblings of my brain. I never intend to offend but I probably will offend somebody. I'm a Toronto based Liberal speaking his mind. I believe that political camaigns are won and lost on the local level and that our system of government should reflect that. More to come...