It seems to me that the Provincial Conservatives are a little bit in the same boat as the Federal Liberals; to an outside observer it seems that they should be way ahead in the polls but their leaders just don't seem to be resonating with enough people. Let's face it, Mcguinty has been a bit of a flop - many of the policies that we opposed in the last PC government remain in place - one example being the terrible school funding formula that the Harris brought in and which the Liberals promised to change but never did. Mcquinty has done a few good things but I don't think any honest Liberal would be overly excited about his efforts overal. And it seems clear to me that if John Tory had not screwed up his campaign he would have won easily.
Yet Hudak is so whacky and hopeless that he has not been able to turn the Liberal failures (whether real or only perceived) into any significant gains.
The comparison is not complete obviously because Ignatieff is not a whack-job like Hudak, nor is he so hopelessly incompetent. Furthermore, Mcguinty is nowhere near as awful as Harper. But Ignatieff, like Hudak is unable to capitalize on the failures of the government.
kirbycairo, as a PCPO supporter (locally anyhow) I can confirm that you hit the nail on the head with your analysis.
McGuinty is vulnerable, but John Tory was too nice a guy and too red a tory (not for my tastes) - thus was being stabbed in the back by his own team. Now we have Hudak trying to bring back the Harris days thinking that will work. You can't draw direct comparisons, but it is very much like the average LPC supporters are feeling now with Dion and Ignatieff.
4 comments:
What the heck does that sign even mean???
Is that the same sign Jim Wilson's grandkid made for him or did the Ontario PCs get a kindergarten class to make all their signs for them.
It seems to me that the Provincial Conservatives are a little bit in the same boat as the Federal Liberals; to an outside observer it seems that they should be way ahead in the polls but their leaders just don't seem to be resonating with enough people. Let's face it, Mcguinty has been a bit of a flop - many of the policies that we opposed in the last PC government remain in place - one example being the terrible school funding formula that the Harris brought in and which the Liberals promised to change but never did. Mcquinty has done a few good things but I don't think any honest Liberal would be overly excited about his efforts overal. And it seems clear to me that if John Tory had not screwed up his campaign he would have won easily.
Yet Hudak is so whacky and hopeless that he has not been able to turn the Liberal failures (whether real or only perceived) into any significant gains.
The comparison is not complete obviously because Ignatieff is not a whack-job like Hudak, nor is he so hopelessly incompetent. Furthermore, Mcguinty is nowhere near as awful as Harper. But Ignatieff, like Hudak is unable to capitalize on the failures of the government.
kirbycairo, as a PCPO supporter (locally anyhow) I can confirm that you hit the nail on the head with your analysis.
McGuinty is vulnerable, but John Tory was too nice a guy and too red a tory (not for my tastes) - thus was being stabbed in the back by his own team. Now we have Hudak trying to bring back the Harris days thinking that will work. You can't draw direct comparisons, but it is very much like the average LPC supporters are feeling now with Dion and Ignatieff.
Post a Comment