| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
SFrank85
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2269
  
votes: 4
Location: Toronto - Scarborough Southwest
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:31 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| cosmostein wrote: | | SFrank85 wrote: | | It was interesting to see Klees take most of the Toronto ridings! |
Hudak not winning Toronto riding's may perhaps be the thing that makes me most comfortable with the fact that I voted for him. |
Klees is also from the Mike Harris wing of the party. I was surprised Elliott did not do as well in Toronto. She seemed to be the more “progressive” candidate, and was of course endorsed by the Tor Star. |
|
|
|
 |
Libertas
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 358
votes: 6
Location: Medicine Hat, AB
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| My preference would have been for Frank Klees but Tim Hudak should be good. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SFrank85 wrote: | | cosmostein wrote: | | SFrank85 wrote: | | It was interesting to see Klees take most of the Toronto ridings! |
Hudak not winning Toronto riding's may perhaps be the thing that makes me most comfortable with the fact that I voted for him. |
Klees is also from the Mike Harris wing of the party. I was surprised Elliott did not do as well in Toronto. She seemed to be the more “progressive” candidate, and was of course endorsed by the Tor Star. |
I am not questioning how blue Frank is,
Just pointing out that Toronto does not like Tim.
Which I quite enjoy. |
|
|
|
|
SFrank85
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2269
votes: 4
Location: Toronto - Scarborough Southwest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cosmostein wrote: | | SFrank85 wrote: | | cosmostein wrote: | | SFrank85 wrote: | | It was interesting to see Klees take most of the Toronto ridings! |
Hudak not winning Toronto riding's may perhaps be the thing that makes me most comfortable with the fact that I voted for him. |
Klees is also from the Mike Harris wing of the party. I was surprised Elliott did not do as well in Toronto. She seemed to be the more “progressive” candidate, and was of course endorsed by the Tor Star. |
I am not questioning how blue Frank is,
Just pointing out that Toronto does not like Tim.
Which I quite enjoy. |
I am not so sure they don’t like him so much. We will never know how many of Frank Klees supporters in Toronto picked as their second choice. Plus, North Scarborough went for Hudak. |
|
|
|
|
ezbeatz
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 1140
votes: 10
Location: Vaughan, ON
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| My Riding, Vaughan, went Hudak on the first ballot. Interesting since Elliot had campaign signs up outside the voting location. |
|
|
|
|
Mac
Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The good part about this is that I wouldn't be upset with any of the candidates. All of them were a vast improvement over John Tory.
Congratulations, Tim Hudak!! Now... time to put together a platform for the next election and start kicking ass in the parliament!!
-Mac |
|
|
|
|
Willg
Joined: 19 Oct 2008
Posts: 289
Location: 905
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Many of us expected it to be much closer result in that third ballot. Many of us knew that Hillier's supporters had Tim as their #2, but were not sure which way Elliott's supporters were going to go. The logical destination we figured for most of them was Klees, however this must have not been the case.
BTW, Hillier ended up being many people's #2. He is a very nice guy, but what I also attribute it to is the fact that Hillier stayed out of the "shots" that were being taken by one candidate at the other and in doing so probably did very little to alienate himself down people's list. |
|
|
|
|
ezbeatz
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 1140
votes: 10
Location: Vaughan, ON
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Willg wrote: | Many of us expected it to be much closer result in that third ballot. Many of us knew that Hillier's supporters had Tim as their #2, but were not sure which way Elliott's supporters were going to go. The logical destination we figured for most of them was Klees, however this must have not been the case.
BTW, Hillier ended up being many people's #2. He is a very nice guy, but what I also attribute it to is the fact that Hillier stayed out of the "shots" that were being taken by one candidate at the other and in doing so probably did very little to alienate himself down people's list. |
Klees got Elliot's vote by about a margin of 3:1. However, the total votes that went to Hudak and Klees were less then 2/3 of Elliot's which would suggest that many simply didn't vote for a 3rd candidate. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Now everyone has to get behind hiim. With the economy and the carbon....err HST tax we should have a realy good chance in the next election, |
|
|
|
|
Willg
Joined: 19 Oct 2008
Posts: 289
Location: 905
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I can see that the Toronto Star is already in fine form regarding the results. |
|
|
|
|
Willg
Joined: 19 Oct 2008
Posts: 289
Location: 905
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I guess the fact that the Liberals still need to bring up Harris' name despite themselves being in power for six years means that they have nothing to run on. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fiscalconservative wrote: | | Now everyone has to get behind hiim. |
I believe that most, if not all, will. As with the last contest when I was not a John Tory supporter, I rallied around the new leader and did my best, as did many others ......but after the faith-based funding fiasco and his election loss (the riding in which he chose to run was another very poor decision IMHO), it was clear that he had to go for the good of the Party.
I am facing a dilemma though in that the candidate in my riding for the last election may be interested in running again. In a long Liberal held riding, there seems to be a reluctance among potential candidates in contesting a nomination ......the first to announce is usually uncontested if they have previously run. However, the fact that this past candidate was a BIG John Tory supporter is one strike against him. He simply presumed to speak on the radio and through the media in place of the riding association executive many times since the last election, which has alienated many potential volunteers and members here. Combined with the fact that he essentially wanted to manage his own campaign and seemed uninterested in the opinions and ideas of the volunteer campaign workers is something that will cripple our effort before it even begins. All this at a time when some are actually trying to rebuild / maintain the riding association, and we may have an opportunity since the long-serving Liberal is rumoured to be retiring . :( |
|
|
|
|
Mattman
Joined: 24 Jun 2009
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Northern Ontario Tory wrote: | | However, the fact that this past candidate was a BIG John Tory supporter is one strike against him. |
Is the problem with John Tory that he was a bad leader and failed in many ways.
Or simply a limited number of political mistakes, such as allowing the faith based funding issue to be so thoroughly exploited by the other parties. |
|
|
|
|
Craig
Site Admin
Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
votes: 36
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mattman wrote: | | Northern Ontario Tory wrote: | | However, the fact that this past candidate was a BIG John Tory supporter is one strike against him. |
Is the problem with John Tory that he was a bad leader and failed in many ways.
Or simply a limited number of political mistakes, such as allowing the faith based funding issue to be so thoroughly exploited by the other parties. |
He was McGuinty-lite. Top that off with his poor political judgment and you may as well vote McGuinty. You have to give the electorate something to get excited about (GST tax cut comes to mind) and he didn't. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mattman wrote: | | Northern Ontario Tory wrote: | | However, the fact that this past candidate was a BIG John Tory supporter is one strike against him. |
Is the problem with John Tory that he was a bad leader and failed in many ways.
Or simply a limited number of political mistakes, such as allowing the faith based funding issue to be so thoroughly exploited by the other parties. |
Tory choosing to run in a tough riding hurt the Party as a whole. Instead of focusing so much effort on winning his seat in a challenging, and decidedly hostile riding, he should have stuck to the safe riding and directed his efforts to boosting party hopes in other ridings.
The faith based funding failed not because the opposition exploited it, but because the ONPC base did not support it or believe in it. A testimony to the fact that policy should at the very least be developed with the support of the party membership (ie: bottom up instead of top down).
In terms of this past candidate, he had said that John Tory would visit the riding and region again before the election concluded.....in the candidate's word "I spoke to John Tory and he said he would come back here again during the campaign. If John Tory is a man of his word he will do what he told me he would." So, when Tory did NOT venture north or to the riding, that damaged the credibility of both. Also, there is the fact that I am unaccustomed to a leader or any MPP venturing my way. Despite the fact that I have been a member for a number of years through several leaders, when Tory came basically into my back yard twice I was thoroughly pissed that a) I never received notice from the Party or Tory's office, and b) the past candidate in question never contacted me either about it. Hearing about the visit on the radio the morning after the visit, which the media knew about but I as a party member did not, was extremely frustrating to say the least. The excuses given for this oversight were pitiful. |
|
|
|
|
|
