| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 8:08 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Any ideas on who will replace McGuinty? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Progressive Tory wrote: | | Any ideas on who will replace McGuinty? |
I think Kennedy has this one in the bag |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm surprised you think Kennedy will win. He's the most popular among voters but doesn't seem to have much support from the party. Christy Clark and Alison Redford only had one caucus endorsement each though. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Its just an unsettling feeling I have. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cosmostein wrote: | | Its just an unsettling feeling I have. |
Not a fan? haha
Who would you like to see win? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Progressive Tory wrote: | | cosmostein wrote: | | Its just an unsettling feeling I have. |
Not a fan? haha
Who would you like to see win? |
I think Kennedy is a status-quo leadership selection.
A guy who can shrug his shoulders and say "but I haven't been here since 2006" and pass the buck onto Dalton while allowing the same broken brain-trust to continue to operate and the same cabinet to move forward unpunished while Bentley and McGunity take 100% of the blame.
He is also left of center which has some appeal to me because it plays into the PC's hands in the 905's which is basically all they need to form a government.
The OLP needs some new blood.
Who would I like to see win;
Yikes.
Of the mess that is running;
Sandra Pupatello.
She jumped ship when the alleged corruption began, shows me she is a smart cat.
She also strikes me as someone who wont mess with tax rates for business and someone who may turf that idiotic punish the rich for being rich tax bracket at 250,000.
If I could pick anyone;
I would take one of your favs from the Federal Liberals and toss Martha Hall Findlay in there. She would be ideal for what the OLP needs |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
I can't see how the "tax the rich" bracket gets eliminated. I also cannot stand Sandra Pupatello's husband so I kind of want to see her lose for that reason alone, though I agree she's probably the safest choice.
Gerard Kennedy may be able to win over the NDP vote which is what the Liberals need to win, though for the party's own sake they'd probably be better of being out of government. The government has such a bad track record when it comes to spending that even though they have had to be more fiscally conservative they can't win over PC voters, despite Hudak's weak leadership. The PC vote, while not very high, has been pretty steady with their result from last year. If the Liberals remain in government they are just going to continue to alienate the left-wing of their party and drive them to the NDP, and without balancing the budget they won't be able to win over PCs and will likely just drive people to team Hudak. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 11:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Progressive Tory wrote: | | I can't see how the "tax the rich" bracket gets eliminated. I also cannot stand Sandra Pupatello's husband so I kind of want to see her lose for that reason alone, though I agree she's probably the safest choice. |
Sooner or later someone needs to work with the PC's on something.
The 250,000 bracket was a gun to the head demand by the NDP, and much like we saw in 2005 when Martin made the deal with Layton on corporate taxes they were lowered within six months after the NDP assisted in passing the budget.
The Liberals are not for it, the PC's are not for it;
The Liberals may be benefiting from the added revenue but I suspect it goes away at first logical opportunity or with the election of the PC's
| Progressive Tory wrote: | | Gerard Kennedy may be able to win over the NDP vote which is what the Liberals need to win, though for the party's own sake they'd probably be better of being out of government. The government has such a bad track record when it comes to spending that even though they have had to be more fiscally conservative they can't win over PC voters. |
I would argue that the NDP vote isn't the vote they really need.
While the NDP looks good on paper to be a viable contender for victory, the reality is that Horwath's popularity is limited to within the 416's, Hamilton, Windsor, and to an extent Northern Ontario which appears to be slipping just a bit.
They are 3rd everywhere else in the Province;
The Liberals victory can nearly entirely be attributed to the 905's in general and peel region specifically and they are very unfriendly to the NDP.
While I think Kennedy helps the LPO win back some of the lost NDP support in Toronto and perhaps Hamilton, how many seats are we really talking about?
You win back Davenport, Kennedy *should* secure Parkdale—High Park, maybe Hamilton Mountain?
The LPO got sissy slapped in Eastern, Midwestern, and Central Ontario, I think if the goal is to win you need a leader who holds some appeal in those regions and I am not convinced Kennedy is that leader. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hudak could have stopped the tax the "rich" bracket but he never.
Eric Hoskins seems very interesting as well, though he likely doesn't have a chance. I will say thst the Ontario Liberals did a better job getting leadership candidates then the federal Liberals. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Progressive Tory wrote: | | Hudak could have stopped the tax the "rich" bracket but he never. |
It was a bad budget;
I would sooner have none of the stink of passing it on the PC's hands then some token concession.
| Progressive Tory wrote: | | Eric Hoskins seems very interesting as well, though he likely doesn't have a chance. I will say thst the Ontario Liberals did a better job getting leadership candidates then the federal Liberals. |
Hoskins is an interesting candidate.
He didn't have much luck winning federally and was successful on a provincial level after being given a given a sweetheart riding, but the guy has an impressive resume.
Had he been elected in 2007 and held down a cabinet role he would be pretty formidable.
Last edited by cosmostein on Fri Dec 28, 2012 4:26 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Did he have an unsuccessful run provincially too? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Progressive Tory wrote: | | Did he have an unsuccessful run provincially too? |
Actually no!
That was an opps on my end, I had a second window open at the time and for some reason thought he ran in Niagara region in 2007. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Too bad the PCs didn't hold a leadership race during this period too, I'm still not that fussy on Hudak. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 10:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Progressive Tory wrote: | | Too bad the PCs didn't hold a leadership race during this period too, I'm still not that fussy on Hudak. |
My hope is the Hudak that existed during the Harris years is the guy who comes out if he is elected.
He made Harris look like Mulcair, and I would said without question he was the most fiscally conservative PC MPP in caucus by miles.
However the second he started running for leader we started seeing this "family values" guy that really puzzled me?
He is a union buster and a tax slasher;
The type of Premier that would have public sector unions begging for Harris.
The opposition federally accused Harper of a "hidden agenda", my hope is that Hudak in fact has one and we see it soon. |
|
|
|
|
|
