I am not sure that Bob Rae, given his obvious political skills, couldn't transcend it with a good campaign performance. On the other hand, maybe not. Certainly, if there is anyone on offer in '13 without his baggage and even two-thirds of his charisma, then that person would be the better choice. Bob Rae if necessary, but not necessarily Bob Rae.
Speaking of charismatic politicians, Gerard Kennedy might attempt a come-back. He definitely has the hair to lead this nation to greatness. I remember, though, finding his last go round as leadership candidate a bit light on substance, and at the time his French was said to be weak. If Gerard up his game this time out, then maybe...
19 comments:
The last thing we need is someone "light on substance."
After seeing this I'm wondering if at some point the general public is going to start to turn on Harper?
Think about it. We've got Toews' unconstitutional internet spy bill, Woodworth trying to re-criminalize abortion, and the very real possibility that the Reformatories committed election fraud in 2011.
And what's their response?
Three years before any election they launch an attack ad against the interim-leader of a deeply-wounded party with only 35 seats in the HOC. Oh, incidentally that interim-leader agreed to the job on the condition he would not run for the permanent position.
The only thing I can think is this is like the Harperbots are kicking a homeless kid. You have to wonder if at some point their over-the-top mean streak will start to act against them.
That's why Harper needs to build many stalags. He knows Canadian's are going to turn on him. It's started already.
Quebec has told Harper to go to hell, on his asinine crime bill.
Ontario has told Alberta to go to hell, over the dirty tar sands money dispute.
It doesn't matter where you go, supermarkets, Doctor's offices or pharmacy's...everyone hates Harper. They say Harper is responsible for the fraudulent robo-calls.
Herr Harper and his, ranting and raving henchmen are tiresome. Canadians are, Harpered right out.
BC is telling Harper to go to hell, on the Enbridge pipeline and the dirty tar sands tankers. BC has many axes to grind with Harper.
@Tof KW
"their over the top mean streak will start to act against them"? Not on your life, because the recipients of the attack ads are over the top mean as well, as I, a rather naive immigrant who used to believe the fairy tales about "nice" Canadians, have discovered to my disgust. Read comments by "ordinary" people in the media of all stripes and despair.
"Not on your life, because the recipients of the attack ads are over the top mean as well"
Seriously? Sorry but what a lame argument, one the Reformatories use too... everybody is doing it.
BULLSHIT!
Please tell me what over-the-top attack ads the NDP or the Liberals are running right against Harper? In fact, who the hell ever ran attack ads 3 years before an election before - against an Interim-Leader even???
Mind you, maybe the Liberals should be flattered that Harper is launching these attacks against Rae? The see him as a threat, and they are completely bypassing the actual Official Opposition in Ottawa, and that says something.
I don't believe Canadians give two flying fir trees over what these sleaze ball Reform cunts do. Hence election-style attack ads 3+ years before any campaign. They do it because Canadians allow it. Collectively we are blind as bats and dumb as stumps.
By the way, could attack ads such as these, presented so far from an actual federal election, not be considered a form of voter suppression? Just another tool to sour the populace against voting at all?
Omar, didn't you say sometime back that the Tories would never get a majority? Well, here we are. :D
Oh yes, I get why, robcalls, vote supression, blah blah blah. Votes were "surpressed"; yeah, despite the numbers of people voting being up more the last election.
I get it - you lost the election and now it hurts, it burns, and wafer scandals a day aren't cutting it. Harper and the Tories just keep winning, and winning, and winniing. That is all.
Meadowlark, people like you are saying that they "hate Harper", yet his support is as solid as ever. You say that BC has had enough of Harper, yet even EKOS today has them leading large in BC. Cinch that tinfoil hat a little tighter while you're at it.
Yes, I believe I did say that. Several times actually. Yeah, losing the election blew. But what "hurts", what "burns" is having to endure absolute and utter buffoons pulling the levers of power in Ottawa. It's embarrassing. As are you, Michael.
Well, no one can say they didn't expect this. It's what they do.
The question is how effective this will be. How many people didn't know that Bob Rae was premier of Ontario and ran up a deficit? And did you know water's wet? Or that Harper did a speech infront of some Americans where he called Canada a second-rate socialist country?
But if we're going to go after Ontario MPP now fiddling in federal politics, could we do something about Tony Clement? Man has the crap touch. Right before SARS, he lays off scientists responsible for "the diagnosis and surveillance of new and emerging infections" (pg 1310). He was transport minister when the 407 deal went down. More recent points... the G8/G20 spending, and, on a matter of taste, doing "this guy" when asked about who gets over 100K at the PMO.
No Michael. What hurts is that when the inevitable happens, and Harper is gone, you will run away and be nowhere to be seen so we won't be able to laugh and point, and make jokes about exploding heads and the like.
You can sneer about how bad I must feel at my party losing but your projections simply reveal yourself, nothing more. I can hear better trash talk from minor hockey players dissing each others' teams.
Meanwhile, I am most pleased that the Liberals finally have a leader who can fight back. He effortlessly parried the attack ad. It was supposed to make him claim that "Angry Mike" Harris was worse, then on cue all the BTs would be chattering and sniggering about how Mike Harris is to blame for global warming, the bank bailouts and any number of other things he obviously had nothing to do with.
Instead, Bob just yawns and wonders why, if they blame him for a worldwide recession when he took power, why don't they give him credit for the end of the Soviet Union? Nice job of turning the tables, no?
Now "Michael", you could learn a thing or two from this, eh? Compare your lame material with that.
We've been handed this malarkey for years about Harper being the master strategist. The chess master. Now you'll get to watch the real master. How much did you blow on your silly ad? Yet Bob mocked them got covered everywhere for free. Even the Sun! That's because when you're actually good, interesting and humorous, you don't need to pay to get your message out.
Watch Bob fly rings around your buffoons, and maybe you can learn how it's done. Or to coin a phrase, "just watch him".
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
And about time.
Meanwhile, I am most pleased that the Liberals finally have a leader who can fight back. He effortlessly parried the attack ad.
Actually he stammered out a couple of excuses about his handling of Ontario's finances.
Instead, Bob just yawns and wonders why, if they blame him for a worldwide recession when he took power, why don't they give him credit for the end of the Soviet Union? Nice job of turning the tables, no?
No. Nice attempt at deflection, but it still failed.
We've been handed this malarkey for years about Harper being the master strategist. The chess master. Now you'll get to watch the real master.
Oh, please. As much fun as it is to watch Bob Rae turn purple when he feigns outrage, a "master" he is not. You don't even understand why those ads were really released, do you? Bob does...and it has nothing to do with any imaginary 'fear' of him..;)
How much did you blow on your silly ad? Yet Bob mocked them got covered everywhere for free. Even the Sun!
CTV and CBC both gave the Conservatives tons of free coverage on this, sorry.
Watch Bob fly rings around your buffoons, and maybe you can learn how it's done. Or to coin a phrase, "just watch him".
Like he's been doing so far? How's the latest faux-scandal working out for you?
"Robocon", isn't that what you call it? Hope it works out better than the gun registry, the wheat board, the long-form census, gay marriage, Kairos, abortion, doorknobs, communion wafers, etc, etc.
Bob Rae is the gift that just keeps on giving. Thanks!
Tof KW said...
Three years before any election they launch an attack ad against the interim-leader of a deeply-wounded party with only 35 seats in the HOC. Oh, incidentally that interim-leader agreed to the job on the condition he would not run for the permanent position.
The answer is right there in front of you.
The only thing I can think is this is like the Harperbots are kicking a homeless kid. You have to wonder if at some point their over-the-top mean streak will start to act against them.
Nope. The public doesn't feel any sympathy for the Liberals (why should they?) and your tactics are backfiring on you. The Conservative poll numbers are holding just fine, and the one thing you guys could do to change that you seem utterly unable to manage...
(a hint? It's NOT another manufactured 'scandal'. It's something that people haven't seen from you for several years now...)
'
As I said before, Bob Rae is a polarizing figure. The problem is that how many people don't know this stuff about Rae. Yes, there's the whole define before you get defined, but Bob Rae's been in public office for 30+ years. Yeah, time might soften people's memories, but I doubt that Mike Harris will even have a future in public office.
They might end up being as effective as those commercials the Liberals ran against Harper in 2005-2006. Or those endless commercials the Ontario PC run against McGuinty for breaking his word and raising taxes. Yes, we know this....
A commercial like this get the bases whipped up, but how would the general public react?
There are two rejoiners on this.
Rae could deflate the entire thing by saying, “As flattering as it is to have attack ads against me, I’m not running for Prime Minister. I’m the interim leader. Makes you wonder about a party that would do this.”
Short of that, he could do something like this. Call them up on this. Who airs an attack commercial 3 years from an election. Note that the ad won’t lower the deficit the Conservatives created while in office. And air the quote of a reporter or twitter comments about how these commercials are there to distract from the Election fraud situation. Because that's what a lot of people are saying.
sharonapple88 said...
There are two rejoiners on this.
Rae could deflate the entire thing by saying, “As flattering as it is to have attack ads against me, I’m not running for Prime Minister. I’m the interim leader. Makes you wonder about a party that would do this.”
Yes, except that he IS going to break his promise (and LPC rules) and run for permanent leader.
Short of that, he could do something like this. Call them up on this. Who airs an attack commercial 3 years from an election. Note that the ad won’t lower the deficit the Conservatives created while in office. And air the quote of a reporter or twitter comments about how these commercials are there to distract from the Election fraud situation. Because that's what a lot of people are saying.
You could do just that, IF you had a few million dollars kicking around. To defend your 'interim' leader, though?
I knew it would be only a matter of time until a Liberal blogger or two figured out what the Conservatives were up to. I didn't expect that WK would be one of them, though (Jedras, sure...he's pretty sharp, and mature enough to tell it like it is. But Kinsella? Didn't think he had it in him). Oh well...it was fun while it lasted. Time to sit back and enjoy the show.
You could do just that, IF you had a few million dollars kicking around. To defend your 'interim' leader, though?
By the same logic, the Conservatives just spent a couple of million dollars to attack the interim leader of a third place party. (Actually, as far as I know, they're airing this commercial in select markets, so I doubt it's as high as this.)
Attacks like this can backfire. You've identified the Conservatives' opponent. You might spur people who don't like the Conservatives (and there are people who passionately dislike the party), into donating to the Liberals.
Recently,
Republican Peter Hoekstra ran an attack ad against his Democratic opponent, which rin the end raised 150,000 for the Democrats.
If the Liberals respond with the right attack ad, it might end up being a money blurt for the party (something the Conservatives are very effective at doing).
I suspect that the ad may not be for the Liberals as much as it's a money blurt -- there to remind Conservative donors that despite the election fraud accusations, that the alternatives are worse.
Wow they really are scared if they pull out the big guns, like "Fred from BC".
At least "Fred" gives better trash talk than "Michael". Even though it's still just one big sneer. That channel just isn't changing though.
Keep at it Fred! I'm looking forward to ordering vanity license plates in the next few years, just so I have a chance of getting one made by Harper himself.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
sharonapple88 said...
By the same logic, the Conservatives just spent a couple of million dollars to attack the interim leader of a third place party.
They did so for a very good reason, though. Read Kinsella and Jedras for more a more thorough explanation...
liberal supporter said...
Wow they really are scared if they pull out the big guns, like "Fred from BC".
I'm touched that you think I'm that important (or that the Conservative Party has ever even heard of me).
At least "Fred" gives better trash talk than "Michael". Even though it's still just one big sneer. That channel just isn't changing though.
Keep at it Fred! I'm looking forward to ordering vanity license plates in the next few years, just so I have a chance of getting one made by Harper himself.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Whatever you say, little guy. You know that I live in constant fear of your superior intellect and devastating point-by-point deconstructions of all my arguments, right?
Post a Comment