Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      


Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6034
Reputation: 290.8
votes: 8

PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think is due to any strategy. The public made up its mind about Kathleen Wynne some time ago. It did so without any of the pollsters or the pundits noticing it when it happened.

They aren't to be blamed, these may not be conscious decisions so much as the expression of a disgust that people feel reluctant to express.

The public, in the mainstream, knows this government is off the rails. Left or right, they know that.

As I said, only half-jokingly, this is not an election, this is an execution.

It could be Patrick, it could be Doug, it doesn't matter. The qualities of the new premier almost don't matter, the feeling being that nobody couldn't be worse than what we have at present. Kathleen Wynne is another Smitherman.

The reporters have a ready-to-go narrative for this -- they will cover it like it's a horserace. But it isn't. The appropriate metaphor is an execution. Wynne doesn't seem to have anything that works. Every time she goes on the offensive, she loses support.
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 9221
Reputation: 301.8Reputation: 301.8
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 3:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
I don't think is due to any strategy. The public made up its mind about Kathleen Wynne some time ago. It did so without any of the pollsters or the pundits noticing it when it happened.

They aren't to be blamed, these may not be conscious decisions so much as the expression of a disgust that people feel reluctant to express.

The public, in the mainstream, knows this government is off the rails. Left or right, they know that.

As I said, only half-jokingly, this is not an election, this is an execution.

It could be Patrick, it could be Doug, it doesn't matter. The qualities of the new premier almost don't matter, the feeling being that nobody couldn't be worse than what we have at present. Kathleen Wynne is another Smitherman.

The reporters have a ready-to-go narrative for this -- they will cover it like it's a horserace. But it isn't. The appropriate metaphor is an execution. Wynne doesn't seem to have anything that works. Every time she goes on the offensive, she loses support.




its generally a bad idea to go desperate as a political strategy this early , maybe if it was the final week of a campaign and you had nothing to lose , going desperate would be ok

but the election hasn't even been called yet , its a bizarre campaign strategy at this point and makes her look incredibly desperate


one assumed the liberals actually had something to run on , a campaign platform , policy , record in government but apparently all they have at this point is some lame quotes from when ford was a city councillor and a trump comparison



but the problem is wynne hasn't even called the election so at this point the coverage is dominated by whatever she says, as she is still the premier and apparently being the premier guarantees you news coverage whenever you want it , no matter how pitiful your comments are


once the campaign starts the dynamics shift , the opposition leaders get more press , campaign ads start running on tv and signs start appearing on peoples lawns , the actual campaign should be a bit different


also it clearly has to be a liberal campaign strategy , she claims it isn't but does anyone believe anything she says ?

there is no reason for her behaviour at all , at this point she could still be talking about actual issues ( health care / education etc ) and making government announcements , there is no reason to be making trump comparisons about ford or claiming he's a bully , its just weird , signals some sort of personal grievance against the pc's and ford himself

there is no reason to go this low , this early , unless the entire liberal campaign strategy is some sort of personal smear against Doug Ford in the desperate hopes it allows for them to cling onto more seats than there expected to win as it stands now
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6034
Reputation: 290.8
votes: 8

PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why would Wynne go off like this, you might ask. Perhaps because the grand strategy they laid out isn't working?

Think of what is happening, and project that against what they hoped/expected to happen. They brought in huge increases in the minimum wage, free prescription drugs for kids ... not much support ... so they prorogued Parliament so they could present a goody-filled 'election' budget, even a dental plan.

It has done little to move the needle. Imagine what they expected/hoped would happen.

Perhaps a heckler, or maybe earlier in the day, and she felt angry and frustrated. So she let it out.

What I see is a woman coming face-to-face with the fact that the public has quit listening to her -- or else, has quit taking her seriously.

Perhaps for only a moment, that frustration, the anger at the thought of losing all of her personal investment in the premiership ... her dreams ... overwhelmed her.

Bear in mind, fundamental to winning an election is feeling that you are going to win it. You diminish your chances considerably when you act like a loser. It means faking it, but it also means believing it as much as possible. Secondly, premiers are surrounded by 'yes men' who are reluctant to tell them negative, discouraging things -- particularly as an election looms.

Wynne probably has little notion of what the public mood is at the moment.

Does Kathleen Wynne really think she's going to win this election? Is she acting that way?
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 9221
Reputation: 301.8Reputation: 301.8
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
Why would Wynne go off like this, you might ask. Perhaps because the grand strategy they laid out isn't working?

Think of what is happening, and project that against what they hoped/expected to happen. They brought in huge increases in the minimum wage, free prescription drugs for kids ... not much support ... so they prorogued Parliament so they could present a goody-filled 'election' budget, even a dental plan.

It has done little to move the needle. Imagine what they expected/hoped would happen.

Perhaps a heckler, or maybe earlier in the day, and she felt angry and frustrated. So she let it out.

What I see is a woman coming face-to-face with the fact that the public has quit listening to her -- or else, has quit taking her seriously.

Perhaps for only a moment, that frustration, the anger at the thought of losing all of her personal investment in the premiership ... her dreams ... overwhelmed her.

Bear in mind, fundamental to winning an election is feeling that you are going to win it. You diminish your chances considerably when you act like a loser. It means faking it, but it also means believing it as much as possible. Secondly, premiers are surrounded by 'yes men' who are reluctant to tell them negative, discouraging things -- particularly as an election looms.

Wynne probably has little notion of what the public mood is at the moment.

Does Kathleen Wynne really think she's going to win this election? Is she acting that way?



the liberals don't seem to have a clear strategy , its been tough to follow this and figure out where this is headed


the only reason this election is still competitive or that the liberals have any chance in some of these ridings , is the strength of the liberal brand , especially among new immigrants and urban voters


if the party brands were reversed rate now , could you imagine wynne having any chance in this election if she was leading the ndp and andrea horwath leading the liberals , wynne would be lucky to even win 10 seats , it be a total wipe out


wynne brings nothing to the liberals , has no personal appeal and has huge negative ratings , seems its only the fact so many liberal voters would vote for any liberal over the ndp and conservatives that she is still polling in the high 20's

they seem to believe the liberal party is superior and has the right to be in power for ever no matter how horrible its own leader is
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6034
Reputation: 290.8
votes: 8

PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't want to fight about it, but I think the Liberals had a very clear strategy of 'buying' the votes of the electorate. You can see it in the series of announcements of new benefits, culminating with the budget. I think they would have offered even more, but they couldn't think of a what it would be ...

My bet is that a team of experts has put months of work into preparations for this campaign. This is a "test balloon" stage of a campaign. Party observers are noticing the crowds she draws, and the themes that turn them on and off. Could they be finding their strategy isn't going to work? And they don't know what to do?
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 8101
Reputation: 323.8Reputation: 323.8
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 9:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:

Bear in mind, fundamental to winning an election is feeling that you are going to win it. You diminish your chances considerably when you act like a loser. It means faking it, but it also means believing it as much as possible. Secondly, premiers are surrounded by 'yes men' who are reluctant to tell them negative, discouraging things -- particularly as an election looms.

Wynne probably has little notion of what the public mood is at the moment.

Does Kathleen Wynne really think she's going to win this election? Is she acting that way?


I think that is fair;
No one wants to be their parties version of Micheal Ignatieff.
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 8101
Reputation: 323.8Reputation: 323.8
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 9:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:

My bet is that a team of experts has put months of work into preparations for this campaign. This is a "test balloon" stage of a campaign. Party observers are noticing the crowds she draws, and the themes that turn them on and off. Could they be finding their strategy isn't going to work? And they don't know what to do?


I think one of the challenges that may present themselves as the election looms is that some incumbent OLP MPPs are going to start thinking about their future.

Someone has to lead this party if the Premier loses, and if she lost big how many people will be left standing in caucus?

The LISPOP map;
http://maps.lispop.ca/ontario_projections/

Has seven Liberals ridings that are considered "Safe" a projected OLP win with > 10% and six that are considered "Lean";

There are 124 Seats on Ontario and the Liberals are projected to likely hold 13?

They currently have 55 MPPs and they are projected to have 13 after the election.

If you are an MPP in a riding that now appears blue or TCTC in projections and it appears like the Premier is acting as the boat anchor, at what point do you simply refuse to have the Premier in your riding?

Its one thing to expect opposition from the opposition, but if it gets two weeks from election day and it appears to be a situation where the OLP is going to be decimated in terms of seat total I suspect we will see some from within the party start distancing themselves.
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 9221
Reputation: 301.8Reputation: 301.8
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

cosmostein wrote:
Bugs wrote:

My bet is that a team of experts has put months of work into preparations for this campaign. This is a "test balloon" stage of a campaign. Party observers are noticing the crowds she draws, and the themes that turn them on and off. Could they be finding their strategy isn't going to work? And they don't know what to do?


I think one of the challenges that may present themselves as the election looms is that some incumbent OLP MPPs are going to start thinking about their future.

Someone has to lead this party if the Premier loses, and if she lost big how many people will be left standing in caucus?

The LISPOP map;
http://maps.lispop.ca/ontario_projections/

Has seven Liberals ridings that are considered "Safe" a projected OLP win with > 10% and six that are considered "Lean";

There are 124 Seats on Ontario and the Liberals are projected to likely hold 13?

They currently have 55 MPPs and they are projected to have 13 after the election.

If you are an MPP in a riding that now appears blue or TCTC in projections and it appears like the Premier is acting as the boat anchor, at what point do you simply refuse to have the Premier in your riding?

Its one thing to expect opposition from the opposition, but if it gets two weeks from election day and it appears to be a situation where the OLP is going to be decimated in terms of seat total I suspect we will see some from within the party start distancing themselves.



there is a lot of interesting decisions that will soon have to be made by the liberals


even if some mpp's try and go it alone and don't bring wynne into there ridings , that by itself might not be enough as provincial elections are not the same as municipal elections , being the incumbent is only worth so much and often when a party loses many incumbents previously though safe lose as was the case with pc's in 2003

if the election was today big names in the 905 like Helena Jaczek , Charles Sousa , Steven Del Duca , Kevin Flynn would very likely not hold there ridings


the liberals also have to look at there party finances , and decide if its worth risking its long term financial state on an election it appears to have no chance of winning . how many $millions are they willing to go into debt to try and save wynne by running these dumb smear ads ? when she appears to have no path forward

they could dig themselves into a hole and have no way to get out , especially if ford eliminates the per vote subsidy and even if he doesn't at 20% they would get much less than 2014
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 9221
Reputation: 301.8Reputation: 301.8
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2018 9:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

( ford has said he wants to end the per vote subsidies , meaning if the liberals lose big , they might have no way to dig themselves out )


Ontario PC leader Doug Ford says he would end subsidies to parties, calls it ‘political welfare’

A Liberal Party official said Ontario’s financing rules are designed to keep well-funded interests from buying influence and dismissed Ford’s idea as ‘Trump-like bluster’


Doug Ford said ending per-vote subsidies to political parties "will be healthy for democracy, and will keep parties accountable."Stan Behal/Postmedia Network


Tom Blackwell



April 19, 2018
7:11 PM EDT

Last Updated
April 20, 2018
11:26 AM EDT

Filed under
Canadian Politics


Ontario’s Progressive leader says he would end the millions of dollars in per-vote subsidies the government pays to parties like his, calling it “political welfare” and bad for democracy.

Doug Ford’s promise, made as the province prepares for an election June 7, adds to a vigorous debate about how to fund political campaigns — and reduce the influence that donors can have on parties.

While the former Conservative government phased out subsidies federally in 2015, Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne introduced them to the province in 2016, while also banning union and corporate donations.

The rationale is that government grants lessen politicians’ dependence on donors, and the chance they’ll bend to the will of those supporters. But Ford suggested they are a waste of resources.

“I do not believe the government should be taking money from hard-working taxpayers and giving it to political parties,” he wrote on Facebook during the PC leadership campaign in February. “Corporate welfare is wrong, and political party welfare is equally wrong; I will put an end to both.”


A spokesman for Ford said Thursday he remains committed to eliminating the subsidy. “Political parties need to appeal to grassroots supporters — they should not receive taxpayer-funded welfare,” said a spokeswoman.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation also blasts the program, calling it a “scam.”

It ” has the public paying for political attack ads they don’t want to see and mailbox stuffing pamphlets they don’t want to have,” said federation spokeswoman Christine Van Geyn. “Having to see that stuff is bad enough, we shouldnt be expected to pay for it as well.”

But Liberal Party executive director David Clarke dismissed the idea as “Trump-like bluster.” The province’s financing rules are designed to keep well-funded interests from buying influence, he said.

“If Ford were to cut the subsidy, how would he finance a campaign?” asked Clarke. “Through corporate donations from the companies who are getting his tax breaks? Or, would politics only be open to the wealthy — people just like him?”

Under current law, in fact, no company can make political donations.

The Democracy Watch organization was also critical of Ford’s proposal, arguing it would “rig” the political system in favour of politicians with wealthy supporters.

The subsidies are the most democratic part of Ontario’s system, allocating funding based on the parties’ ballot-box backing, said Duff Conacher, the group’s head.


The subsidy aligns with the fundamental democratic principle of one-person, one-vote


“The money comes from the taxes each voter pays and goes only to the party they support,” said Conacher. “As a result, the subsidy aligns with the fundamental democratic principle of one-person, one-vote.”

Like the NDP, the Conservatives under previous leader Patrick Brown had supported the introduction of subsidies, part of legislation that also banned union and corporate donations and capped personal contributions at $3,600 per individual.

Ironically, the legislation came in the wake of a Liberal controversy. Media reports suggested the party required cabinet ministers to meet fundraising quotas of as much as $500,000 a year, leading to charges they were selling access.

The initial subsidy was $2.71 per vote every year, to be gradually reduced to about $2 by 2021.

It meant the Liberals received $5 million in 2017 — the program’s first year — the Conservatives $4 million, the NDP $3 million and the Green Party $630,000.

There was another instalment for the first quarter of 2018, providing the Liberals and Conservatives each with about $1 million, the Elections Ontario website shows.

And separate subsidies are provided to individual party riding associations — a chunk of $6,250 per constituency each quarter, based on the party’s share of the vote there. That provided hundreds of thousands more to the top two parties this quarter.

But Ford said ending the subsidies “will be healthy for democracy, and will keep parties accountable to their members and supporters, no longer allowing them to rely on the government for support.”

Conacher said getting rid of the grants would make political financing dependent on donations that still have a relatively high cap, which many voters couldn’t afford. That would favour parties that attract wealthy contributors, he argued.


http://nationalpost.com/news/p.....al-welfare
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 8101
Reputation: 323.8Reputation: 323.8
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2018 12:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was in favor of removing the per vote subsidies Federally and just as much so Provincially.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 3

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Doug Ford: Minimum wage = no income tax

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB