05.05.2011 03:05 PM

Perdu

If Elections Canada allows this one to stand, they have officially become a joke:

“…signatures backing the NDP election winner that may have been forged, of people that may not live in the riding or who weren’t clear what it was they were being asked to support.

It’s just the latest problem to emerge as the media and political parties scratch beneath the surface of Ruth Ellen Brosseau, a single mother who lives in Gatineau, Que., but won the race 300 kilometres away by nearly 7,000 votes.

Midway through the campaign, Brosseau was found to have taken a vacation in Las Vegas. When she returned to Canada, she was leading the race in a riding near Trois-Rivieres, Que., propelled by NDP Leader Jack Layton’s popularity in the province.”

 

127 Comments

  1. Tony Jones says:

    Elections Canada didn’t have a problem with the nomination. One guy can’t remember signing something and we’re supposed to invalidate a whole election? Ignatieff was right – “The only thing Canadians like less than a loser is a sore loser” – she won by almost 6,000 votes – the people have spoken. Move on.

  2. DaveInMapleRidge says:

    There is way more to this one besides the nomination fiasco … they next few years should be an entertaining time in parliament as Jack puts out fires.

  3. Paul R Martin says:

    In other election news, only three days after he lost his seat Iggy has a teaching job at the U of T. The timing is rather interesting.

    • Warren says:

      What, you’d rather he get EI? Is that less “interesting”?

      You guys slay me.

      • The other George says:

        Don’t worry Paul

        Iggy is “just visiting” U of T.

      • Paul R Martin says:

        I believe that he will get a nice retirement package from Parliament, although EI would teach him some humility. Did he have this job offer in his back pocket while campaigning?

        • Rae says:

          You guys are UNBELIEVEABLE!! Are you so brainwashed that you cannot wish someone well in a new endeavor?? I don’t care what your political views are, no one can question his qualifications for this post and no one has the right any longer to assassinate his character with impunity the way that the Harper propeganda machine did when he was Liberal leader. I think you all need to grow up. You won the election and have already slandered this accomplished and passionate Canadian for long enough. You could at least be gracious in your “victory” and wish him well.

          • smelter rat says:

            Exactly.

          • Paul R Martin says:

            Sorry Rae, but I have much more sympathy for the Liberal staffers who lost their jobs because of Iggy’s poorly conceived desire to call an election that he did not have much of a chance of winning. He was clearly the wrong person to lead the Liberal Party and his rash decision to force an election on a trumped up charge of contempt had a serious negative impact on the Liberal Party, its supporters and its employees. I do not hate the Liberals. I like them a lot more than I like the NDP. I would rather have a Liberal as leader of the opposition than the NDP. Iggy may have many fine characteristics, but as a political leader, he was out of place and dragged the party down with him. He has landed in a nice spot that he is extremely well qualified for. On the other hand many Liberal staffers in parliament and in constituency offices now have to find a new job or go on EI.

          • Jan says:

            They don’t seem to be capable of it. What did Dryden called them – small and pinched?

        • Paul R Martin says:

          You are correct Gord. He was first elected in 2006 and first ran for the leadership of the party in 2006. I still understand that he will get some severance pay even if he does not get a pension.

        • Philip says:

          You don’t get to make snide accusations about Mr. Ignatieff anymore. Either man up and explicitly tell the world exactly what you are trying to tip-toe around or shut up. I’m not sure if you get that Ignatieff is now a private citizen and has the freedom to explore and accept whatever job opportunities which come his way. Without innuendo and oh so brave little cheap shots from the comfort of your basement. Your false concern over Liberal staffers isn’t fooling anyone. If you have something to say Paul, say it.
          Just for the record, it takes alot of courage for any one to run for a public office. You put yourself and your family into the public eye, you court the possibility of public failure and there will always be people who are upset with you no matter what you do. I have respect for everyone who runs for public office, regardless of party. What I don’t respect is soft little bitches like Paul who can only snipe from behind a keyboard.

    • nastyboy says:

      That’s no surprise. He’s a well known public intellectual. Any school in the country would love to snatch him up.

      • Ron says:

        on power play today they spoke about how Jim Travers of the Star wrote a column last summer about rumours of Iggy looking for work.

        What’s a guy supposed to do after you’ve been dumped by your party…I wish him well…he took a bit of beating

        • nastyboy says:

          It’s only prudent to have a few irons in the fire. Can’t fault the guy for that.

          • nastyboy says:

            Probably. I doubt it was the only phone call he fielded too. University Deans and Presidents are notorious head hunters. It wouldn’t even surprise me if they planted a bug in his ear before the election. Not a formal offer or anything, but a “Hey if you ever leave politics, we have a position for you.” type of thing.

            Besides, if you’re really good at what you do, you’re never unemployed for long. He may not have been much of a politician, but he’s a world class academic.

    • Paul R Martin says:

      Further to your comment about EI, it is the staffers for the losing candidates who have to contemplate EI. I understand that politicians get a pension if they have served for 6 years and severance pay if they have served for less than 6 years. The staffers are not so fortunate.

    • Phil in London says:

      This was telegraphed even before the writ was dropped (at least some job at U of T) I don’t see a thing wrong with it.

      • Brian says:

        Agreed.

        After being attacked as “just visiting,” he takes a job teaching here. He triggered the election result the CPC has always dreamed of, got Harper his majority, and yet the CPC’s frat is still lining up to slag the guy as though they didn’t win already.

        Doesn’t bode well for those of us who wanted conservativism with a human face for the next four years.

  4. Tony Jones says:

    Maybe I will then.

  5. Steve T says:

    This is indicative of the larger problem with the “orange crush” in Quebec. Many people were voting for a party, rather than a candidate, and moreover they didn’t even really understand the party they were voting for. Instead, as I posted previously on this blog, it was like an election for high school president, or the winner on Dancing With The Stars.

    Mulclair’s stupid comments yesterday regarding Bin Laden’s body is yet more proof that the NDP is not ready for prime time.

    • Warren says:

      It’s not a blog, damn you. It’s a web site that predated “blogs.”

      • Dave says:

        And the early cars were called horseless carriages – but they don’t get upset if they are called cars now.

        • Thor says:

          Still love your hair, Warren. Looks thicker on SunTV for some reason. Do love your “blog.” Dipper’s accidental youth movement will be awkward for some time, I fear. Wonder what else will be uncovered?

          Go see my movie. It’s better the second time.

  6. Cath says:

    Elections Canada IS a joke, although it sure as heck doesn’t speak very well of some Quebec voters.
    What’s very funny to watch is the deflection by Mulcair and the other dippers. What’s truly sad though is their argument about this being a great thing to encourage youth to get involved in politics. They’re not even a week into their Official Oppositon status and already they’re being laughed at. Not a great sign.

    • The Doctor says:

      It happens in our system whenever a party has a huge surge like that. It’s very similar to what happened with Reform in the aftermath of 1993 — lots of rookie MPs who had gone from being high-school teacher in Podunkville, to a nomination meeting in a community centre basement, to being a federal MP. Then as now, people were voting for the party, not the candidate. And just as important, they were often voting AGAINST something else (in 1993, against Mulroney and all the “old line” parties; in 2011 in Quebec, against the BQ and/or Harper and all the other traditional parties that people had historically voted for in Quebec).

      Preston Manning spent much of his first term putting out fires created by rookie backbench MPs shooting their mouths off, etc.

      • Hollywood says:

        There were no nomination meetings with the NDP. They scrounged up anything with a heartbeat and nothing else to do.

  7. fritz says:

    If they call for a re-vote the Tories will parachute in Lawrence Cannon and the other parties will all put forth high profile candidates thinking they could now win. It would be a circus.

    • Brian says:

      So, any result would be a circus then, right?

      Perfect!

    • scanner says:

      Oooo, Ooooo, please do it. The voters will trounce Cannon again, in a different riding. This time maybe the Dippers can point out what a jerk Cannon is and how he has failed as an MP.

  8. catherine says:

    People living outside the riding is not a problem, provided there are 100 legitimate signatures of people living inside the riding. Usually one collects more than 100 sigs just to make sure 100 are inside the riding and eligible voters.

    However, if even ONE signature is a forgery or was collected under false pretences then the entire nomination needs to be dismissed, even if there were 100 legitimate signatures. One can not overlook such fraud. In the end though, citizens who dispute their signatures or what they were told when they signed, would need to swear that this is the case, and the matter would need to be decided in the courts. Right at this moment, it is not clear whether someone will take this to court or not.

    • HonestB says:

      It’s only fraud if you can prove it’s fraud. Otherwise it’s a mistake. People signing these things make mistakes. People who care at all about their nomination make sure that the signatures are done properly. It’s one thing to allege that this new MP is (like several of the new Quebec NDPers) an inexperienced person who didn’t take the race seriously. It’s quite another to allege fraud.

      • Michael says:

        Obviously tthe candidate (now MP) and the party did not think they had a snowballs chance in Hades of winning. So maybe they weren’t so careful with the nomination process, thinking no one would ever care.

        I think the person most surprised by the NDP surge on Monday night was Jack Layton. 😀

      • catherine says:

        I agree with what you say. But it seems at least one is claiming a forged signature that doesn’t look like her signature. Again the courts would need to prove if that is the case.

  9. Matthew says:

    Elections Canada has no say in any of this. The signatures were approved by the returning officer, the results were approved. Only a judge could invalidate the results, and if they’re going to do that they’re gonna have to do a lot more than find 2-4 sketchy signatures in 128. The houses on both sides of this guy confirmed they signed the papers and it was made clear what they were signing. Sounds more like a case of buyers remorse, and that’s not how democracy works. What I don’t understand is why the Liberal riding association is so keen to have a re-vote on such weak grounds in a strong BQ riding that swung to a federalist party for the first time in 18 years?

    • catherine says:

      Why do they have to find more than 2-4? I would hope that if I find out some one forged my signature on a legal document without my consent or knowledge, that it would be illegal. If they find even one forged signature or one signature obtained through fraudulent means (saying it was a petition for a charity, for example) why wouldn’t that be enough fraud to invalidate the nomination. How much fraud would one need to commit to invalidate a nomination?

      On the other hand, if no signatures were forged or obtained through fraudulent means, then all is fine.

      • Matthew says:

        Because there’s a difference between irregularities and proven voter fraud on the part of a political party? Again, several of this guy’s neighbours were clear that they knew exactly what they were being asked to sign. He himself acknowledges that it looks like his signature on the papers. What do you propose, that they went searching through his garbage to find something with his signature on it? If he is as apolitical as he’s now claiming to be then they shouldn’t have any idea what his signature looks like. The party took 5,000 votes in 2008 in this riding, there’s no reason why they should have had to falsify signatures to get their candidate nominated. It’s a desperate grab by a party riding association that was completely rejected by voters and have been for a long time now. The candidate won by almost 6,000 votes. Think 100 of her 22,000 voters won’t be more than willing to take this guy’s place to avoid a completely unnecessary by-election?

      • Brian says:

        Election law in such situations focuses on whether the offence was material to the result. In this case, it’s only material if she’s left with fewer than 100 valid signatures.

        With respect to fraud, that’s not necessarily a problem for her, even if it might be a problem for the NDP. There’s the issue of WHO’s fraud it was. Who put in the fake signatures? Her, or an organizer? If it’s an organizer, or if her own involvement can’t be proven, then it’s not material to her right to the seat either. So, interesting TV, but no change.

    • JenS says:

      From what I read in another news account, there were more issues than one signature.(http://bit.ly/lh1ypA) The nom papers bit may be a legitimate beef. But the baloney about them being upset she doesn’t speak French? Tough. Beans. Voters have a responsibility to find these things out prior to casting their ballots.

      • Philip says:

        Exactly. If you can’t be arsed to check out the person you are going to cast your ballot for, you don’t get to complain later. It’s a democracy not a babysitting service. That said it is pretty weak that LPC riding association is trying to churn this into a scandal. We lost the riding, if there any irregularities, present them to Elections Canada and move on.

    • Michael says:

      According to the story in the Globe and Mail, defeated Conservative candidate

  10. Mark Roseman says:

    If she did in fact lie and in other ways act inappropriately, doesn’t that put to rest the notion that she doesn’t belong as an MP? (Government cabinet member not being an option at the moment).

  11. AP says:

    Welcome to Monday Night kid!

  12. Rob says:

    The point here is the candidate doesn’t matter. Paint a face on a rock is what Quebec if not Canada is telling the elite politique. It is all about the wave from the top. Even the most popular of riding candidates with deep local roots do not have the same impact as say 5 years ago. It took the focus of the entire Green Party and vote swapping sites to get one seat. The only exception in the election.

  13. Jon Adams says:

    And yet, somehow, Rob Anders still draws a paycheque.

  14. dave says:

    I did not know that the nomination papers were made public after an election. I guess that whoever got these ones has been checking all (100?) of the signatures on this one, and, likely, all the signatures of all the nominations papers in Quebec, or even further.
    Anyway, whoever got hold of these nomination papers and checked them out must have gone to the media , rather than to Elections Canada, to complain.

    Next step, I think, Elections Canada should challenge the election of this MP immediately, and the PM should call an immediate by election for the riding. Then we can see what the will of the people is.

    Otherwise, Liberals, maybe you should back off, lest this first rebuilding move that you are making here, be interpreted as the SOS from the Liberal party of Canada.

    (My bet is that she found a last minute, real cheap deal to go to Vegas for a couple of days; hte parents took the childcare on, she got a bit of time from here two jobs, and went to Vegas with pals.
    Sheesh – an ordinary working single parent representing the people of Canada? A female still in her 20’s?
    I will stop…all I am doing is getting irritated with the middle class assumptions about who democracy is supposed to be for.)

    • JenS says:

      Perhaps you need to re-read. The issue is not that she was in Vegas. She most assuredly wasn’t in Vegas for 36 days. At issue is her nomination papers.

      I defended the other NDPer who was reported to have gone on a long planned vacation during the writ period, as I don’t think anyone should be asked to put their lives on hold for the duration of a minority government. I defend this woman’s right to have gone away – what’s it to me? It’s her campaign. But I certainly won’t defend nomination papers fraud, if that’s what this turns out to be.

    • Cliff says:

      Elections Canada should have a full and transparent investigation in order to determine whether there was any wrongdoing. Full stop. That being said, something about the complainant’s story doesn’t check out.

      From the Globe story:
      “A resident in the Quebec riding of Berthier-Maskinongé said he and his wife were improperly listed on Ms. Brosseau’s nomination paper.

      “This morning I went to the [Elections Canada] office. I saw the document and I saw my name and my wife’s name too. My wife never signed that. It’s not her signature. Her name is even misspelled.”

      He said the signature that appeared next to his name appeared genuine but insisted he had never intended to support the NDP.

      “I’m not into politics. I don’t get involved in those things.”

      I’m sure we’ve all casually strolled down to our local returning office the day after the election and asked to see the nominating papers of the winning candidate, on the off-chance that our signature might be on there. Apparently the signatures in question are in sequential order with their immediate neighbours on either side. Unless there are some other details that the Globe is not reporting, this guy’s story does not make sense. Do journalists just take everything they are told at face value?

  15. Warren,

    How does Elections Canada determine the validity of a candidacy AFTER the candidate (a joke of one) won the riding? Do they order a by-election? Or is her whole candidacy thrown out and a new one ordered since that is the requirement to run in a riding? I’m confused as to what they’re going to do about it. Have they made a statement, other than the media echoing the NDP’s position on the matter?

    • Warren says:

      Good questions. But I presume fraud on the official nomination form can lead to a finding her candidacy is null and void, no?

      • That’s exactly what I was thinking. I would assume that Elections Canada has the authority (although I’ve not looked it up) to completely throw out the results of an election when it has been shown that a candidate committed forgery during a nomination process. Furthermore, it begs the question: was it even this candidate that obtained the nomination signatures? If she’s completely anglophone and was absent during the most important event to her success, the actual ELECTION, then what the heck happened here? I agree with you completely, in my opinion, this would definitely render her candidacy null and void. But is this without precedent?

        By the way – I just wanted to let you know that I truly enjoy your insight and commentary. As you can see, I play for team blue, but I absolutely respect your loyalty to your party and your fierce defense of them. These days, loyalty is hard to find. Anyway, you’re a delight to read, even if I disagree. It’s what makes this country the best in the world.

      • Ottawacon says:

        It would be very difficult to prove fraud, and frankly it is very unlikely that if the best the story can come up with is that a guy doesn’t remember signing, but it his signature, he can’t read his wife’s, but his neighbours remember signing and have no problems with it, there is scarcely even a basis for discounting his signature. In the absence of fraud that would lead a judget to set it aside, the need for 100 signatures has been met, and Elections Canada confirmed it as met at the beginning of the campaign.

      • John says:

        Wouldn’t it also involve a criminal investigation for fraud and charges if proven?

      • Gary says:

        That is a very good question. Having a by-election seems to most fair, but what about if (hypothetically) she held the balance of power between a majority and minority government? Seems unfair in some ways to redecide after having all the rest of the information (all the other 307 seats) available.

        What I’m personally more interested in is what happens to Rob Ford if this campaign expenses allegations turn out true. Seems like just a fine isn’t much of a deterrent since he seems to have at least enough money to shrug it off. (And imagine someone Bloomberg-level rich, what would deter them from overspending if all they had was a mere fine to deal with?)

        • JenS says:

          In the Rob Ford case, the penalties, if he were found to have over-spent or otherwise breached campaign financing rules, are quite clearly laid out in the Municipal Elections Act, and include, provided all stipulations are met, forfeiture of office. But the audit then possible court process is quite lengthy. And, in the only one I can think of from my area of Ontario, the politician was never sanctioned – his accountant was: http://www.durhamregion.com/article/121843

    • Michael says:

      Elections Canada does not have the authority to invalidate the election and order a by-election.

      It is up to the courts to determine whether the allegations warrant that a by-election be held in the riding. In this case it would be the Quebec Superior Court.

  16. If nothing else le candidat perdu should learn not to use a wide angle lens for her head shots. She doesn’t have the nose for it. Go medium telephoto, and walk back several more paces, baby.

    • JenS says:

      I will not partake in making fun of her looks. However I would suggest the distance at which the photo was taken has a great deal to do with the length of her arms.

      • The ‘length of arm’ shot is what I was getting at. Surely the NPD must have another photo of her by now.

        If not, #fail. Changing the image might help change the channel, or at least turn the volume down a little.

    • Dan F says:

      What I find really strange is that there exists only *one* photo of her. Every story, every website, and everywhere that she is mentioned uses the same photo. And it looks photoshopped. Has anyone actually seen this woman? Do we know if she even exists?

      • The Doctor says:

        Yeah, it’s like she’s the Unabomber or Carlos the Jackal.

        • JenS says:

          I’m pretty sure the photo is from the NDP website. I can’t imagine there’d be a whole lot of public photos of this woman, given she didn’t seem to lead a life of any level of profile previously, and didn’t campaign. That they’re not releasing others just tells me the party is wary of feeding the fire. I don’t doubt her existence. I just think the NDP is hoping everyone will forget and move on … not that that’s what I think will happen.

  17. Bill M. says:

    Is this Jack’s way of “fixing” Ottawa?

    • The Doctor says:

      It’s going to be very interesting to see how Jack deals with the intense scrutiny of being the Official Opposition. The NDP has often benefited from getting the kid gloves treatment from the PPG/media. Not anymore. The kid gloves are off. Welcome to the bigs, Jack. How do you like it so far?

  18. Jeff says:

    Your bon mot notwithstanding, it’s worth pointing out that if there is any wrongdoing here it would be wrong to blame Ms. Brosseau. All she did was agree to have her name on the ballot for the NDP with the understanding that she had no shot of winning, anyway. Any sketchiness, which does seem somewhat in question in my opinion, would have been committed by someone else on her behalf and without her knowledge. I just feel like this reportedly kind and hard-working young woman is getting her name dragged through the mud unfairly.

    • The Doctor says:

      That’s a great way to start off a career as an MP: “I had no idea what was going on.” Great future leadership material there.

      “Hard-working?” She was vacationing in Vegas and took the position that that gave her a free pass on having to, umm, campaign for office. Give me a break.

      • Jeff says:

        Hey, I don’t know her personally just going by what I just saw Evan Solomon saying today. She’s a single mother, which is no small feat. And none of this speaks to whether she’ll be a good MP or not, she may well be terrible, I’m just saying that it’s pretty unfair to pin any potential wrongdoing with regards to the nomination papers on her personally – it would be the act of an unscrupulous organizer.

        I was trying to reply to Mark Roseman’s comment above, for the record.

        • Canadian Kate says:

          Jeff, I’m sorry, I can’t let your “She’s a single mother, which is no small feat.” comment lie there. Becoming a single parent is all too easy. And, she lives with her father. So that is actually 2 strikes against her as a fully launched young adult. (I’ve recently launched several young adults and define it as a joint-endeavour by both parent(s) and teen.)

          On the plus side, she has a post secondary education and is politically involved enough to let her name stand for a party she believes in (assuming that the whole candidacy wasn’t a fraud and not just the nomination papers.)

          What is most important is that before this happened she had a job. THAT’S no mean feat for young people in that age group. Even if it doesn’t sound like a great job, to land any job these days is really difficult.

          I’m sorry her name is being dragged through the mud but it will be a great life experience for her. She can consider this her second post-secondary degree. It will teach her that what other people think of you really is important as much as that is unfair.

  19. Tiger says:

    If they can prove that enough nominations to knock her petition down to 99 valid signatures, I suppose they can void the election and force a by-election.

    But apparently she had 128 signatures on the petition. This knocks out two.

    I think you’re going to continue to have her to kick around till 2015.

  20. Mike London says:

    She’s elected. I don’t really like how she’s being portayed. We all know she never thought she would win. That said, it should be checked that she actually has 100 signatures.

    If people run too hard on this story, there may be a bit of a backlass from the public. She’s a single mother with two kids, and she’s hasn’t come across well so far, but just give her a chance.

    Wouldn’t it be ironic if she actually turned out to be one of the best of the new NDP Quebec MP’s? Who knows, we’ll see.

  21. Tiger says:

    Sorry — “that enough signatures on her nominating papers were invalid to knock it down to 99 valid signatures”.

  22. MattMcD says:

    I used to believe that with certain exceptions people tend to vote for the party not the indivdual, with a few exceptions. Stuff like this seems to support it. In my riding, Liberal Joyce Murray beat out the NDP and the Conservative candidates by actually campaigning. I think that managed to put her over the edge.

    However in Quebec, most people voted for the party and not the person. Gilles Duceppe didn’t lose because he was Gilles Duceppe. He lost because his platform wasn’t one that resonated with the voters anymore, and his party went down in flames with him. If people didn’t like the guy, he probably would have lost by more votes. It’s because the voters in Quebec decided that to blindly vote NDP without regards to who the candidates actually were that we have stuff like this.

    I’m fairly certain a pumpkin could have beaten Duceppe. After all, they are also orange.

  23. DadAtCheo says:

    Interesting, I’m at CHEO with my son and their free wifi service blocks your website! How stupid is the following? :

    Content blocked by your organization

    Reason:
    This Websense category is filtered: Political Organizations. URL:
    http://warrenkinsella.com/

    I had to resort to sketchy cellular network deep inside this hospital’s labyrinth. Hope it works!

  24. pcase says:

    Easy time to pile on. Great job!

    As usual, Brian Topp gets it right. And once again, old white guys show why Canadians want change. Reactive, mean spirited, partisan and my I say a touch cowardly.

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/brian-topp/three-thoughts-about-ruth-ellen-brosseau/article2011059/

  25. TDotRome says:

    Elections Canada did make a good point, tho. She had 128 signatures on her nomination form. One or two bad ones doesn’t make here nomination invalid. Her Vegas trip or non-existent French is irrelevant.

    Unfortunately, forged signatures aren’t something new. I’m pretty sure that candidates from all the parties have nominations with forgeries. Brosseau is not unique.

    • Michael says:

      Not to in any way condone forgery or election dirty tricks. But if the Liberals or Conservatices had something like this happen, we would just say “oh yeah, same old same old”

      But I specifically remember being at an NDP campaign event. Jack Layton looked me in the eye and told me that “Ottawa was broken” and that the NDP was going to fix it. He told me the NDP were different from the other two parties.

      I guess the little voice in the back of my mind saying “sure you are” was right after all.

    • catherine says:

      Really? If so, they should be charged. I’ve worked with candidates and there certainly weren’t any forgeries. These things are taken seriously as it is a legal document. Where have you encountered forged signatures on nomination papers?

  26. Elisa says:

    For al you know it alls….. he is Dr. Michael Ignatieff…. Harper could go back to the mail room

    • nastyboy says:

      Mailroom boy has sent two college professors packing. All that edyoocashun, didn’t help Iggy become PM did it?

  27. Hishighness says:

    I say leave her alone, even though she’s a useless Dipper she’s a hot one; and we need some eye candy in Parliament now that Guergis and Dhalla are gone.

    Besides she’ll be gone in #elxn42 anyway when Canadians see just how happy they are with the majority harper government they elected because of NDP vote splitting.

    You think Harper ignored the opposition in Parliament before folks? You ain’t seen nothin yet! I’d be shocked if by #elxn42 Harper could pick out Jack Layton in a lineup.

    The good news for the Dippers is that being in opposition to a majority gives the NDP a chance to do what they do best, what they were born to do: Whine and screech and complain like banshee babies with a nasty case of colic and achieve absolutely nothing. Did somebody say #FAIL?

    • JStanton says:

      … you are a piece of shit, in every way.

      If you had a small fraction of this person’s social conscience… you would still be a hateful, misogynist redneck piece of shit.

      .

  28. Robert McClelland says:

    So is this how you’re going to try and sweet talk us dippers into accepting a merge?

  29. Steve Tsuida says:

    I’m gonna go out on a limb and guess this is what you guys are going to sound like for the next four years. Crying foul, externalizing, and… and… and…

    Have a third party read the comments on this page out loud; it reads like a transcript from bad AM talk radio in the USA. The really freaky, angry kind that airs after midnight.

    Maybe Ruth Ellen Brosseau should be turfed out, but I suspect that what’s really happening here is that this is a celebration of how some of you here, in your deepest darkest drunkest moments have already brewed up a stereotype for all NDP MP’s. “Lemme tell ya… them NDP MP’s all go to vegas, NDP MP’s all absentee campaign, NDP MP’s all took jobs away from real Liberal MP’s, an them NDP MP’s should all be sent back where they came from, ‘cause damn it, this isn’t the country I grew up in.” Close? I hope not. But if I am, then maybe go for a vacation, count to a million. Burn off the anger, and then write.

  30. Africon says:

    Let her stay – these rookie goofballs will provide loads of entertainment for all ( except the “we can do no wrong Jack ).

    Talk about contempt for democracy eh? Pin that one on the “progressive” folks of Quebec.

  31. warren t says:

    Does Mulcair have any connection to this single mother from Ottawa. Who paid for her trip to Vegas and why is mulcair ,the Quebec lieutenant refusing to answer any questions. something fishy about this one

  32. Dan F says:

    Even if her nomination was less then kosher, I say we let this one slide. It would be in the best interests of Liberals to welcome her to Parliament and let her speak and be seen. Inexperience will show soon enough, and the gaffes will keep us entertained for the next 4 years

    • Craig Chamberlain says:

      SURE. Let it slide.

      Wow.

      We’re not talking about being ten minutes late in getting back to feed the coin meter.

  33. Una O'Reilly says:

    The Liberal Brand still would have significant appeal if the Party sold that instead of only ripping up its opponents. Is that all you have? Personally I think the attacks on this young woman are unfair and are a distraction from the work you need to be doing if you want your party to back in government. It’s not enough to say you aren’t the other guys.

  34. Cath says:

    hey Warren check it out – Steve and Dalton are apparently Soul Mates:-)
    http://www.nugget.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3110922

  35. HonestB says:

    If it’s fraud, the defeated liberal can take it court and let a judge decide. I find it pretty hard to understand why someone would fraudulently collect 4 out of 128 signatures when they only needed 100 (the 4 number is based on the globe piece here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/rookie-ndp-mp-accused-of-using-falsified-nomination-paper/article2009898/). I wouldn’t find it hard to believe at all if 4 people in the riding didn’t remember all that clearly what they signed when someone-or-another came to their door. I have a lot of faith in the ability of a judge to actually assess the evidence.

  36. Phil in London says:

    I sure hope at the end of the day there aren’t some personal tragedies for these clearly ill prepared candidates. It sounds like a dream winning a $155,000 a year salary but any true politician will tell you there is a lot of sacrifice to representing a riding. Not only could these young people could be eaten alive they could become seriously depressed if they are ill prepared for life under the microscope.

    The quality of some of these new MPs and the questions now being raised are the only reason anyone needs to look seriously at cutting the per vote subsidy. Would the NDP be spending their own money to field 308 candidates when maybe they only have 307, 302, or even 275 really good candidates. It was irresponsible of the NDP to field some of these young people if the reports are evene remotely accurate.

    Micheal Ignatieff was getting roasted early on (by Jack Layton no less) for failure to vet every candidate properly. In fact you could argue the supposed racist in northern Quebec that Ignatieff later learned he could not fire contributed to the Orange wave at least for some disenchanted Liberal voters.

    This investigative journalism could have served us a lot better if it were done three weeks ago.

    • Stuart says:

      Let’s put things in perspective here… Ruth Brosseau is more qualified to be an MP than Brad Trost.

      • Phil in London says:

        An incumbent MP being on the opposite side of a wedge issue is just a tad different than this. Or have you had the exclusive interview with Ms. Brosseau to know better?

        This is going to get uglier for her yet and that’s my observation not my political bent.

        Layton will be in need of some hip waders to walk through this shit pile he created by allowing many untested and uninterested candidates to run. If you don’t have a riding association that can select a competent candidate you are not long to be replaced by the Liberals as the government in waiting.

        The NDP (No Damn Platform) leaders have simply got to do a better job of handling all that is being thrown at them. Again, I hope this young lady is okay, she may just be completely overhwelmed and understandably afraid to face the now angry media mob that failed to do anything in the five week campaign to expose her credentials.

        If this had been a Liberal or Conservative candidate the Quebec press would have served he with a choice of red or white wine long before May 2nd.

  37. Ted says:

    Disappears? Won’t answer questions? Can’t be found anywhere?

    She must be auditioning for a Harper cabinet position.

    • Neither Fish Nor Foul says:

      Party-conducted nomination form amiss (while the candidate they talked into letting them use he name stays in Ottawa working at the Uni. pub)… well, nothing a few judicious, retroactive, uninitialled ^NOT’s can’t fix. Cabinet material, indeed.

  38. Warren,

    If Iggy goes back to teaching doesn’t that make the Cons ads prophetic rather than, “Attack”?

    Like Dion, ” not a leader” Also true.

    So doesn’t that make the next leader prone to Con “Truth” ads.

    Our place back in Government Thinking has to change. http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20110504/justin-trudeau-liberal-future-110504/ Harper tells everyone…… you have to earn it. Big difference, no?

    • Michael says:

      Ignatieff lost his seat and his party faired badly. What would you expect him to do? Sit in the pres gallery every day and watch parliament???

  39. allegra fortissima says:

    A guy who never graduated from high school, didn’t attend college or university, worked as a cab driver, was involved in so-called “revolutionary” political activities, addressed the vice-president of Parliament with the words: “With respect, Mr. President, you are an asshole”, became Minister of Foreign Affairs in 1998. Okay, in Germany, I have to admit to my dismay.

    Are some fellows here complaining about Ms. Brosseau, a single mother who worked as a tavern manager and can’t speak French? LOL. I personally wish her the best of luck.

  40. Rod says:

    The blame rests, if there is any blame to be had, on the electorate. It is clear that the people who voted for this candidate did not research who she was, where she lived, what she stood for, or her experience.

    As for Election Canada being a joke, I summit it could be the electorate not researching what/who they were voting for. To be fair, I think the young lady was more involved in the election than the people that elected her.

  41. billg says:

    Wait till she looks at her first paycheque then goes running into Jacks office and asks what CPP and EI is…….

  42. Paul R Martin says:

    I want to thank Warren for putting up with me. He is doing the country and his party a service by providing this forum. It is time for me to take a break; however, I just want to add that in my opinion, the next leader of the Liberal Party should be Dr. Carolyn Bennett. I disagree with her on some issues, but have enormous respect for her. I sincerely think that she would be a much better for the Party and the country than any of the other people whose names have been mentioned.

    • Transplanted Doerite says:

      “the next leader of the Liberal Party should be Dr. Carolyn Bennett.”

      Good luck with that Paul. I can’t think of a better choice to help the NDP replace the Libs as the progressive alternative to Harperism.

  43. Mike says:

    US Navy Seals find Osama bin Laden! Canadian Baby Seals still looking for Brosseau.

  44. smelter rat says:

    Maybe the MSM should be looking for the invisible Reformacon MP from Lethbridge. No one has ever laid eyes on him either, but he also got elected.

  45. Raymond says:

    Far be it from me to be an LPC supporter, but this NDP ‘surge’ is nothing more than a fad…an uninformed electorate hopping onto an unknown bandwagon.
    It’s a joke.

  46. Marco A says:

    Do you think the Vegas Dipper went to DisneyWorld after E-Day?

  47. Steven says:

    The NDP Quebec Caucus might as well be rejects from the cast of Jersey Shore.

    I hope Jack wears it well!

    Oh Canada!

  48. Perhaps Elections Canada should have been tipped off to the NDP’s recruiting strategy in Quebec by the following career advertisment:

    WANTED: FEDERAL NDP CANDIDATES FOR QUEBEC RIDINGS

    The New Democratic Party of Canada is seeking candidates to run in the province of Quebec for exciting career opportunities as members of parliament.

    THE JOB … As one of just 308 individuals in this country of over 34 million people, you will be among the elite few who determine the taxes that your fellow citizens pay, the laws that regulate their lives and their economic activities and, you will also serve your riding of, typically, 250,000 citizens by representing your constituents in expressing their views and in helping them cut through red tape so as to access government programs and services and resolve disputes with the bureaucracy.

    THE COMPENSATION … Befitting such an important and consequential position, you will receive a base salary of just over $157,000 a year (plus substantial allowances as cabinet ministers, parliamentary secretaries and, chairs and deputy chairs of parliamentary committees), a housing allowance of $2,000 a month tax free, 52 return flights a year to your constituency and unlimited free rail travel, a health club membership, subsidized meals at the gourmet parliamentary restaurant, a personal staff of five and access to your party’s research staff, a full benefits package and the best pension plan in the country which will enable you to enjoy a fully indexed pension at age 55 after just six years in parliament.

    THE QUALIFICATIONS REQUIRED … 1/ ESSENTIAL … You must be a Canadian citizen who is at least 19 years of age and not currently in a mental institution or a prison. To be an NDP candidate in Quebec, you need not live in the riding you are seeking to represent nor speak the language of the majority of your constituents and you can take off for Vegas and other fun places during your election campaign. You need not be currently or have ever been employed nor have any experience in management or anything else relating to your important responsibilities in this elite position.

    2/ DESIRABLE … It is desirable that you have the knack for making everyone you meet feel that you are agreeing with everything they say and this requires the ability to say yes constantly and to nod your head vigorously and to make such comments as “I feel the same way you do” and “I understand exactly what you are saying” and “We’ll certainly be looking into this important matter” and other vague yet seemingly affirmative expressions. You must also have the ability to study the NDP platform and be prepared to recite and explain and endorse it in all communications with the media regardless of whether you believe in any of it or not.

    INTERESTED APPLICANTS are invited to send a resume (maximum of one page) and a colour photograph including face and full torso to NDP HQ in Ottawa at least five weeks before the election

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*