The National Post’s endorsement of PC Party leader Tim Hudak in a weird way shows exactly what is wrong with his campaign. And make no mistake, win or lose on Thursday, something has gone terribly wrong with the PC Party campaign.
The endorsement begins with a long description of exactly how and why Dalton McGuinty has been a bad premier for Ontario. It seems obvious that such a bad government, for it has been a bad government, needs to be replaced. The National Post says that the NDP leader may be a swell person but socialism isn’t the thing and so there can only be one choice: Tim Hudak.
It has been pretty obvious throughout the election that this has been exactly the attitude of the PC Party. Ontarians don’t really have an option. Voters don’t like McGuinty and so Tim Hudak is the default choice. The campaign as a result has been pretty lackluster. They repeatedly say they are about change but they offer little of substance and most of their attacks have been extremely lazy and vague. Basically they didn’t think they would have to fight for it, and so they aren’t fighting for it.
The National Post tries to jazz up Tim Hudak by pointing out that he is proposing to change the government’s relationship with the public sector unions. Taking on the unions is something that is needed but that alone won’t fix the problems that Mr. McGuinty has caused. None of the other proposals that have come out of the PC platform would fix the fiscal mess either.
I am going to say that again because it’s important:
Nothing that Tim Hudak is promising to do will fix Ontario’s fiscal crisis any faster or any better than anything that Dalton McGuinty is promising to do.
Even the National Post in the midst of endorsing Tim Hudak expresses frustration that he has pledged to protect 2/3 of the budget while somehow ending the deficit at the same time. The National Post tries to get around this by saying that politicians are probably all liars anyway, but that is part of Mr. Hudak’s problem. He can’t credibly say that Dalton McGuinty lacks credibility on fiscal issues because he too lacks credibility of fiscal issues.
Ultimately the National Post is supporting Tim Hudak because he isn’t Dalton McGuinty and a lot of people will vote PC for the same reason.
But the PC party has yet to give anyone a good reason to vote FOR them. And if they lose that is why they will lose.
Showing posts with label PCPO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PCPO. Show all posts
Ernie Eves says that he doesn't like democracy
Okay he didn’t exactly say that but that is what he meant.
Ernie Eves, the former Premier that confused Magna International with the legislator of Ontario, made some snarling comments about Norm Sterling being replaced by Jack MacLaren as PC candidate in that riding.
In case you aren’t familiar with the story: Mr. MacLaren and his friends felt that Mr. Sterling wasn’t representing their views. So they organized themselves and challenged Mr. Sterling in an election to choose the PC candidate. Due to the superior organizational abilities of Mr. MacLaren, and despite the interference of the outgoing association executive, he won.
This is how Mr. Eves characterized it:
Yes the horror and unfairness of a democratic vote. Clearly Mr. MacLaren didn’t understand that the point of internal party democracy is just to make people think that political parties are democratic institutions. You aren’t actually supposed to vote for someone that represents your views and aspirations. That would not be fair or compassionate!
I also think that the Tea Party comparison is hilarious. The Landowners Association is only superficially similar to the Tea Party activists. Unlike the Tea Party, the Landowners is a single advocacy group with a pretty clear political agenda. I’m not totally sure what the political agenda of the Tea Party is except “we are mad and we want you to do something about it.”
Really the thing that they most have in common is that they share a political strategy of being active within a political party; both organize and vote in internal party elections. That is to say, they both make use of grassroots democratic tools to make their opinions heard. Again it seems that Mr. Eves’ fundamental problem is that he doesn’t like democracy.
To PC leader Tim Hudak’s credit, his response was pretty good:
“It’s difficult to go through, no doubt about it,” he said. “But it’s democracy, and democracy can sometimes be messy.”
By messy I assume he means that you don’t always get the response that you want. By messy I think he means that sometimes you lose. Mr. MacLaren claimed that Mr. Sterling had become complacent, doesn’t the attitude that you shouldn’t be allowed to lose prove that?
I for one applaud the PC Party of Ontario for having the maturity and the sense to allow true democracy within its ranks.
Ernie Eves, the former Premier that confused Magna International with the legislator of Ontario, made some snarling comments about Norm Sterling being replaced by Jack MacLaren as PC candidate in that riding.
In case you aren’t familiar with the story: Mr. MacLaren and his friends felt that Mr. Sterling wasn’t representing their views. So they organized themselves and challenged Mr. Sterling in an election to choose the PC candidate. Due to the superior organizational abilities of Mr. MacLaren, and despite the interference of the outgoing association executive, he won.
This is how Mr. Eves characterized it:
“I don’t care who hears this,” Eves said at a recent tribute dinner for Sterling at a golf club outside Carleton Place. “The treatment that Norm got from his own party was not very polite, was not fair, it was not loyal, it was not compassionate, it was not even and it was not honest.”
Yes the horror and unfairness of a democratic vote. Clearly Mr. MacLaren didn’t understand that the point of internal party democracy is just to make people think that political parties are democratic institutions. You aren’t actually supposed to vote for someone that represents your views and aspirations. That would not be fair or compassionate!
I also think that the Tea Party comparison is hilarious. The Landowners Association is only superficially similar to the Tea Party activists. Unlike the Tea Party, the Landowners is a single advocacy group with a pretty clear political agenda. I’m not totally sure what the political agenda of the Tea Party is except “we are mad and we want you to do something about it.”
Really the thing that they most have in common is that they share a political strategy of being active within a political party; both organize and vote in internal party elections. That is to say, they both make use of grassroots democratic tools to make their opinions heard. Again it seems that Mr. Eves’ fundamental problem is that he doesn’t like democracy.
To PC leader Tim Hudak’s credit, his response was pretty good:
“It’s difficult to go through, no doubt about it,” he said. “But it’s democracy, and democracy can sometimes be messy.”
By messy I assume he means that you don’t always get the response that you want. By messy I think he means that sometimes you lose. Mr. MacLaren claimed that Mr. Sterling had become complacent, doesn’t the attitude that you shouldn’t be allowed to lose prove that?
I for one applaud the PC Party of Ontario for having the maturity and the sense to allow true democracy within its ranks.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)