03.20.2012 12:00 AM

In today’s Sun: that ad will work

Later on Tuesday, you will start seeing Conservative Party ads attacking “interim” Liberal Leader Bob Rae.

The ads are pretty good, as these things go. They cite unhelpful things about Rae’s record as the NDP premier of Ontario, and they end it with the obvious tagline: “He couldn’t run a province. He can’t run Canada.”

That’s the main criticism that can be made of Bob Rae, of course, and you’re going to be hearing a lot of it in the months ahead. Under his watch, Ontario became an economic basket case — unemployment and welfare rates way up, growth and investment way down.

The purpose of attack ads is to surface feelings voters already have about a politician. Rae, Canadians suspect, makes wildly spending drunken sailors look like paragons of fiscal probity.
The Con ads will remind voters about Rae’s record and voters will vote accordingly.

74 Comments

  1. Erik says:

    Warren, what do you think is the proper response? If you were writing TV ads for the LPC right now, what point would they make?

    • sharonapple88 says:

      Rae could deflate the entire thing by saying, “As flattering as it is to have attack ads against me, I’m not running for Prime Minister. I’m the interim leader. Makes you wonder about a party that would do this.”

      Short of that, he could do something like this. Basically, call them up on this. Who airs an attack commercial 3 years from an election. Note that the ad won’t lower the deficit the Conservatives created while in office. And air the quote of a reporter or twitter comments about how these commercials are there to distract from the Election fraud situation.

      Or that’s what I do.

    • Ted B says:

      Don’t play defence. Play offence. That’s what I’d do.

      Fire back with ads about the in-and-out convictions and admissions of guilt. The electoral fraud now under investigation. Irwin Cotler dirty tricks. Contempt of Parliament. Record deficits. Record # of broken promises. Shutting down debate in Parliament. Pound home the theme NOW that they will do anything and everything to keep power. Then ask “where are they taking us” and flash a photo of Nixon.

      Just put in on the internet and don’t pay for expensive TV ads.

      That way we are fighting back, fighting back with current news not decades old news, and we are not focusing on Rae.

    • Jim Hanna says:

      I’d take the ads head on. Running from them is disingenious. First, there Rae could point out there was a lot going on at the time. And then he could point out, that at that time, he was in th NDP. The NDP’s solution to this, made things worse.
      He learned from his mistakes, and one of thse mistakes was blindly following ideology in the face of commons sense. And then blast both the NDP and Tories for taking an ideaological approach to the economy.

      As far as the timing, I think its interesting (and I know you disagree or think its an apology for his tactics) but the Tories want to take out Rae before he becomes leader. Sure it could be just to bury the party mid stride, but right now we don’t attack hard or if its apparent the ads work then Rae is out and we have a new leader….hwy didn’t they just wait until he won, if they think he’s so beatable? Does it make sense to knock down an easy opponent, when ya don’t know who’s going to be on the other side of things?

      If he doesn’t fight these ads, hard, then you’re right. I’d like to see what he will do now. Again, I never was a Rae supporter, if anything I’m leaning to Leblanc. But either way, we’re not winning the next election, and if its really got to the point where a leader only has one kick at the can (which I think is ridiculous, but it seems all we’re allowing for these days) then let him do the lifting and get us at least back into the OLO.

      Or let the next leader have at least 2 if not 3 goes at it; we need some stability.

      • Warren says:

        So Liberal donation dollars should be used to defend an NDP government’s record?

        • Philip says:

          Really?

        • Jim Hanna says:

          No, of course not. The NDP would called out at the same time. NDP ideology inspired the polices that caused the problems. Rae left the NDP after. The ideology did’t work and he learned from his mistakes. And now Harper is ruling based on ideology, and that will cause the same problems.

          Either way, he has to take responsibility for what happened; and the best way IMO is to say, yep, it was wrong, I learned, and I changed parties because I can’t deal with that approach anymore.

          The ads can’t go unanswered and the answer can’t be too defensive. I’d like to see how saying ” I was wrong” works. If Rae still burns…well then we pick a different leader in a year or so.

          Oh..sorry, I forgot, we won’t get to pick the leader. The NDP and Tories get to pick our leader. Ain’t that another hornets nest…

      • Ted B says:

        There is zero zero zero point in fighting these ads head on.

        1. The moment you do so, he wins. You’ve conceded that this is THE issue we should be talking about right now, instead of the shiny thing distraction it is meant to be.

        2. You pour scarce financial resources into defending an “interim” leader’s reputation. So what if Rae is branded a big spender? He’s said he’s not going to run for leadership and he hasn’t stepped down or officially reversed himself. Crawley should not allow our money to be spent on something very important to Rae but not the party.

        3. By defending the record of an NDP government, you make that a Liberal Party issue.

        4. By defending, you are on the defensive. Better to be on offense. If Harper wants to focus on deficits? Then let’s talk about what the federal Liberals did the last time they took over from Conservatives (record deficit to record surplus) and compare that to what the Conservatives did when they took over from Liberals (record surplus to record deficit). That way it is about the party and not about an individual or some other party.

        • Philip says:

          Works for me. Not getting distracted by this is key and there is no shortage of Harper grist to mill.

          The Election Fraud file is sticking to the Conservatives, so let’s keep singing that song loudly and often. The F-35 clusterfuck is about to finally come home to roost, particularly since the Conservatives from Laurie Hawn to Julian Fantino have done such an epic job of painting themselves into the corner.

        • Jim Hanna says:

          1) Again, I never said defend the NDP record. I’d tear into the NDP record. Rae is no longer in the NDP.

          2) For years we’ve been saying that we have let the Conservatives frame the leader. Ignoring the ads and attacking something else is EXACTLY what we did the other times.

          3) I’m not saying be defensive. Thats saying its not true blah blah blah. I’m saying take the issue head on, say ” I was wrong” and in the next sentance pivot into an attack on the NDP and Conservative record. And point out everything good you said in your 4th point. The Liberals have been the only party to actually make government work.

          4) As for resources; we have to practice disrupting the Conservative cycle. We need to eviscierate this attack or try to, so that we can hone that skill and make sure its ready for the new leader. And on top of it, we can use this for fundraising.

          We have to meet fire with fire, or we’re never going to get out of this hole. We’ve been playing nice WAY WAY too long.

  2. J Ross says:

    That the Liberals one day or another will have to work with the NDP is a long, foregone conclusion if they are ever, in any way, to return to power. That the NDP will have to meet the Liberals well more than halfway to the centre in order for the hybrid to have any chance of regularly competing for power is also a foregone conclusion. However, I’m not sure if your diatribe is intended to speed up this process (that looks like it will go on a very long time indeed), but unless you have hopes it might a la the Canadian alliance democractic caucas revolt circa 2001, I’m not sure what your rant achieves other than to make an already very weak side that much weaker.

  3. Kevin says:

    We only need McGuinty to remind us what wild spending can do to a province.

  4. Jordan says:

    With Mulcair’s victory looking even more likely the Liberal Party’s life support is about to get cut off, Rae becoming permanent leader will be just like yanking the plug.

    • Philippe says:

      You must be kidding. Those who know Mulclair best say he’s a decisive, vindictive & volatile shit disturber. People who know him don’t like him. He will single-handedly kill the NDP party if their members are stupid enough to vote him in. Bank on it.

      • Ted B says:

        Sounds like someone we all know and dislike/hate who seems to be sitting in office with a bit of power right now.

    • Matthew says:

      PEople within the NDP despise Mulcair.

      His mouth is often moving before his brain is in gear.

      Remember the comments he made of Power and Politics about the US and the pictures of a dead Bin Laden?

      Look at the kind of people donating to Mulcair’s leadershit campaign. Some of the richest, big name CORPORATE types on Bay street.

      • Jordan says:

        Yet he’s well ahead of the other candidates in the race and is the publics choice. Who do the Liberals have that is really better?

  5. Tiger says:

    Interesting tidbit in that column re Rae running. Not surprising, but interesting.

    But isn’t it a bit early to forecast the Liberals’ demise? I mean, they’re healthy on the provincial level. And we’ve heard that they’ll go the way of the British Liberals for quite some time now, and they haven’t yet…

    • Jordan says:

      What province would that be?

      • Ted B says:

        BC, Ontario, Quebec, PEI, NB (though not in power right now), territories. Not too bad for a party on its deathbed.

        • Jordan says:

          The BC Liberals are a conservative party, and the Quebec Loberals have no affiliation with the federal party and are led by a former Progressive Conservative. As well if an election were held today both those parties would be soundly defeated. The Ontario Liberals lost a lot of support last years, the NB Liberals had a horrible election in 2010 and still trail the PC Party. Only the Yukon has political parties and the Liberals area the third party.

  6. Marc L says:

    And if Rae ends up as Liberal leader, here comes the next attack ad: “he couldn’t even tell the truth to his own party. And, you think he’ll tell the truth to you?”, with a clip of Rae saying he will not run for permanent leader. If Mulcair ends up at the head of the NDP, that’s it for the Grits. Agree with you Warren. dead and buried.

  7. William says:

    NHL playoffs around the corner heralds yet another season of CPC attacks on the 3rd place party.

    At least they know their demo.

  8. Robbie says:

    “Without an arrangement with the NDP, and with Bob Rae as leader, the Liberals are heading towards gritterdamerung. The end times.

    The ads that started Tuesday, therefore, aren’t original or even a surprise. They will, however, do what they are intended to do. Kill off the Liberal Party of Canada.”

    Bob, thy name is Icarus, He of the Waxed Wing, cousin of Iron Snowbird, and Lord Protector of the Realm of Manning. Hail the new Conservative Party Saviour.

  9. Brad Young says:

    Nobody has put this country into as much debt as Steven Harper. Can the Liberal party remind the nation of that?

    • Marc L says:

      Not a good idea because it’s not true. The largest deficit as a share of GDP wwas the last Liberal budget in 1984-85.

    • William says:

      I’ll go one better, the coalition were responsible for the stimulus.

      Joker Flaherty proposed zero stimulus in his November, 2008 economic update…and that was after he had attended G20 meetings where stimulus had been discussed.

      The coalition and subsequent chicken shit proroguing to avoid a confidence vote is what created the stimulus.

      And voting for stimulus isn’t the same as voting for irresponsible and unaccountable stimulus spending.

      Got Gazebo?

      • Mulletaur says:

        “Joker Flaherty proposed zero stimulus in his November, 2008 economic update…and that was after he had attended G20 meetings where stimulus had been discussed.”

        Actually, the Government of Canada promised stimulus during the G20 summit held in Washington on 14-15 November 2008 :

        http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/16/washington/summit-text.html

        Flaherty’s fiscal update of 27 November 2008 reduced government spending – effectively reneging on what Canada agreed to at the G20 summit. The ‘coalition’ forced the Harper government to keep its promises, nothing more.

    • Ted B says:

      100% true based on actual numbers. Play with technicalities and % all you want and Canadians will look at you puzzled.

      Harper set a record for spending increases twice before the recession creating a deficit, and then he went nuts on spending after the recession started, acccumulating a record deficit when he promised there would never be a deficit.

  10. William says:

    My return volley would show unaccountable spending of the biggest stimulus and biggest deficit ever, indecisiveness and no back up plan over the huge F35 purchase, and allusions to voter fraud here while Canadian troops fight on foreign soil.

    I think those would work too.

    • William says:

      Correction, this majority government has no back up plan and they are the ones calling all the shots.

      But senior Conservative officials say there really isn’t a Plan B.

      “Plan B is F-35s. Plan C is also F-35s,” one official said.

      http://www.torontosun.com/2011/11/16/canada-will-get-the-best-military-equipment-fantino

      But why would they have a back up plan on this, they didn’t have a plan, let alone a back up plan when the economy hit the shitter in 2008.

    • kenn2 says:

      The F-35 started stinking early into its development cycle. Other development partner countries read the tea leaves and cut their losses, or at least cut down their order.

      The fact that the F-35 is mainly a short to medium range attack fighter makes one question why it would be suitable for the defense of Canada. The question gets answered when you consider how Harper has outsourced our foreign policy, and our new military role as dependable sidekick and source of spares. The icing on this cake is that we are both a source of cheap oil and an uncritical, easily-manipulated buyer of these over-priced and under-performing fighters.

    • William says:

      I don’t care what other government’s do.

      It’s not other government’s who told me they had a plan.

  11. Ted H says:

    Bob Rae gets a bad rap, even from so called friendly fire. He did his best in the economic times he found himself in. The Rae days were unpopular among unions, a core NDP base but at least he tried to keep people working rather than resorting to mass lay offs of public sector workers. Both the Harris government that followed him and the Harper government have been far more profligate than Rae ever was. My biggest beef with him, and it isn’t entirely his fault, is that he positioned Ontario for an unfortunate swing to the right that put Conservatives (this is where I spit) in power. I am not politically astute enough to know how his baggage will play out but he seems to be doing a good job for the Liberals right now.

    • sharonapple88 says:

      If Rae is pressing to take the job permanently, he’d be a fool to handicap the race. It won’t mean anything if he’s crowned leader. There’s a funny, but old joke, in The Dictator where the main character competes in a race and then threatens his competition with his gun. Yeah, he wins, but he looks like a damn fool in the process.

    • Matthew says:

      Increasing the deficit by 300% is the best Rae could do?

      I always find it interesting how the left in Ontario always blame Harris for the cuts he made but never hold their hero’s Chretien ad Martin to blame for FORCING Harris’ hand.

      The LIBERALS under Chretien and Martin made DRASTIC cuts to the public service, transfer payments to the provinces, while at the same time downloaded BILLIONS of dollars worth of services that were covered by the feds onto the provinces in order to bring Ottawa’s books back to balance.

      As is so typical with the left, when the Liberals cut, it’s fine.

      When the Conservatives cut, it’s heartless and draconian.

      Don’t believe me?

      Just wait until the Ontario Liberals announce the cuts in their budget March 27th, then compare the media reaction and lefty “outrage” to the Conservative cuts in the MArch 29th budget.

      • sharonapple88 says:

        I always find it interesting how the left in Ontario always blame Harris for the cuts he made but never hold their hero’s Chretien ad Martin to blame for FORCING Harris’ hand.

        If you’re going to blame Chretien and Martin for forcing cuts on Harris… they came into power in 1993, two years before Harris, and two years towards the end of Rae’s term. Shouldn’t you be sympathizing with Rae as well then?

        As for forcing Harris’s hand to cut services… I suppose a 30% income tax cut Harris implemented didn’t help. The economy grew about 39.4% from 1993-2000, but revenue from income tax didn’t keep pace, it just grew by 26.2%. During the period of 1995-1999, with all the service cuts, about $20 Billion was added to the provincial debt. This during a period when Ontario was recovering from a recession.

      • Ted B says:

        What a load of fabricated outraged. I am so sick of this whine that Conservatives are so unfairly mistreated. The Vast Leftwing Media Conspiracy myth is just that a myth.

        Chretien and Martin didn’t force Harris to do anything. Funny how you whine about the Liberals making cuts in provincial areas of jurisdiction but conservatives applaud Harper for saying he’ll stay out of provincial jurisdiction.

        Here you are whining that “the left” thinks cuts are fine when they are Liberal but not when they are done by Conservatives. Did you live on this planet in the 1990s? Do you know how many people complained constantly with great vitriol, including Premier Bob himself and most of the media, when Chretien saved Canada?

        I wouldn’t say all Conservatives/conservatives are complete baby whiners and inventors of facts and have short term memories, but I love how back then Harris was doing good things and was a decisive leader and doing what he promised because he cut and Chretien only cut because Manning forced him to and now Harris only cut because he was FORCED to cut and all of the cuts Chretien made were heartless and draconian (as per Dear Leader Harper himself).

        As is so typical with the left, when the Conservatives cut, it’s fine or they were forced to. When the Liberals cut, it’s heartless and draconian.

        Don’t believe me?

        Read some bloody history bud.

      • Ted B says:

        Oh, and as for increasing the deficit by 300%?

        Harper topped that by turning a multi-billion dollar surplus into a deficit, even before the recession when he set record deficits year after year after year.

        Flaherty did the same thing in Ontario.

        There isn’t a fiscally prudent or responsible bone anywhere in government right now.

    • Ted H says:

      That is the stupidest fucking statement I have ever heard. Socialist caliphate indeed, nothing but absurd hyperbole that is becoming typical of right wing ranting. You manage to bring in the dual bogeymen of socialism and Islam all in one label, neither of which has any real relevance to the discussion.

    • Jan says:

      You’re listening to Rush Limbaugh, aren’t you?

  12. Anne Peterson says:

    Bob Rae took power at the beginning of a recession. That’s what he was struggling with. That is, besides not ever expecting to win and besides everything the establishment could do to sabotage him. I’m a little older and I remember that. I read the threads on the Globe and Mail web site yesterday, and people are not happy about the ad attacking Rae. Just on general fair minded principles. I’ve never seen such an outpouring of anger and contempt as that directed at the conservatives about this ad. Made me smile. All evening.

    • Matthew says:

      Rae also prorogued the Ontario legislature FOUR times for a total of 373 days.

      Think about that. The guy who had the nerve to publicly rip the Conservatives for Proroguing in December 2008 and January 2010 spent OVER A YEAR of his 4 as Ontario Premier with the legislature shut down.

      As far as the “establishment sabatoging him” he did that by himself.

      If you’re old enough to remember Rae as Premier, you are old enought to remember his “brilliant” idea for reducing health care costs.

      I’ll refresh your memory:

      He paid the University of toronto $10 million to graduate FEWER doctors. We’re STILL trying to get over that one with our doctor shortage in this province.

      • sharonapple88 says:

        Prorogue is to end a legislative session. Proroguing isn’t controversial in itself. It’s less controversial when the person pushing it has a majority in parliament. It’s more suspicious when the guy proroguing has a minority and prorogues to avoid a confidence vote (Dec 2008), or to suspend a committee investigating the government on torture (Dec. 2009).

        I do agree with you on the med school situation.

  13. Anne Peterson says:

    But it’s the government that’s supposed to have the back up plan Gord. They act like dictators and won’t ever listen to anyone else but when things go wrong, instead of stepping up and taking responsibility for their actions they bawl and whine and expect everyone else to have done the thinking for them.

  14. patrick deberg says:

    Gord.

    Would you tell us what number is assigned to you in the 1500 “Paid media consultants” Harper has loosed? 100? 1492? Do you get paid by commet which would be the free enterprise model you love or is it by the pound in bulk? By the number of sites you visit? Do you and the other consultants have assignments depending on your temperment? This site might be your assignment since the big con love fest in Ottawa? Do you guys and gals get awards or trophys? Maybe cash incentives for new customers? I’m curious Gord because I want a piece of that too. If you guys are getting paid out of my tax collection to destroy democracy I think at the very least you could pay me to counter a few of your arguments. I’m getting nothing now and I’m worked pretty thin right now. Who do I phone Gord? It’s day time so you must be at your day job
    ‘consulting.”

  15. Lance says:

    Because, for starters, Rae has decided to break his promise — he’s after the permanent leadership post. A few weeks ago, one of his Toronto loyalists summoned some former Michael Ignatieff staffers to a meeting. Rae walked in and said, “I’m running for leader.”

    Nicely done, sir. This one excerpt alone is going to force Bob Rae’s hand, one way or the other. WK, I hope you know the shit storm that is now about to happen, LOL. But you’ve got big shoulders and have weathered worse.

  16. Philippe says:

    No need to be so apocalyptic about 1 goddamned ad. As if the survival of our historic party rests with 1 ad. There will be more ads, way nastier than this, no matter who the leads our party. The focus has to be of defending ourselves – not whether our candidates are flawed (the Cons will find flaws with any candidate known to man).

    • GPAlta says:

      It also only took one ad to destroy the PC party in 1993, one that they paid for themselves. One of these days they’ll face a backlash again for this kind of nonsense.

      Just imagine how unpopular the CPC would be if they had not been airing election ads continuously since 2004. We’re closing in on a decade’s worth of begging, and they are still despised by over 60% of Canadians. No wonder they’ve resorted to cheating.

    • Philippe says:

      You hope it does.

      You were allowed to assassinate Iggy and Dion because they could barely defend themselves. Rae’s tongue is a lot sharper. t’s about effective defense & counter-attack. Case and point, Harper with his extreme “on-the-record” comments vis-a-vis our Canadian “welfare” state, abortion, capital punishment and so on.

  17. Bill says:

    Sadly, I think you’re right. The upside will be that in 2019 (or there abouts) the Left will be united — but not in the fashion it could have been. We’ll also have to endure yet another majority Conservative Government. I am not a big Harper hater but it would be nice to have another party win in 2015. With Rae at the Liberal helm I can’t see that happening. Older Ontario voters (50+) still talk about how much they dislike Bob Rae. Rae is Iggy with real baggage.

  18. Pat says:

    Defeatist. How about the LPC screws its head on properly, drifts back to its home at the centre of the spectrum, figures out what the hell it stand for, and starts looking for the next crop of leadership candidates.

    This “end of the world” talk is garbage. The LPC shouldn’t merge with the NDP because they stand for two entirely different things, they inhabit two entirely different places on the spectrum. At least, this is true based on the principles that guided the LPC of Chretien. I, like many other liberal Canadians, have no idea what the LPC actually stands for today.

    For a guy who pretends to be progressive, a man of ideas and action, this article is pathetic, Warren. I doubt you ever actually cared about the LPC, because anyone who did would fight for it rather than watch it get assimilated into the socialist club.

    And everyone has to stop with this LPC is leftist crap. The LPC isn’t SUPPOSED to be a left-wing party.

    If everyone thinks it is left wing, then maybe it SHOULD merge with the NDP, but then we’re all screwed, because I guarantee people will see the CPC as more centrist than a LPC-NDP combo where the LPC is the poor cousin.

    A huge percentage of voting Canadians are right where they’ve always been, at the centre of the spectrum. There’s enough of them there to win governments for the LPC, but the LPC actually needs to be sitting at the centre on the spectrum…

    • Warren says:

      Thanks. For someone who considers it pathetic, etc., you sure spend a lot of time posting here. If it’s so crummy, why don’t you go elsewhere?

      • Pat says:

        Because I look up to you. I agree with you on so much, but I have no idea why you seem to think the LPC is dead. I mean, within the last year you even suggested that you might run in an election, or at least get more involved (because you didn’t like what you were seeing happen to the LPC), and now it looks like you’ve just given up. I don’t know, I guess I just didn’t expect YOU to give up.

        But you should know, more than anyone, that the LPC is not the NDP. They are two completely different entities, and to call them both progressive is a misnomer – the NDP is social democratic, the LPC is centrist. Totally different. Chretien knew that better than anyone (which is why I’m so surprised as his position on this too).

        I’m sorry, Warren, if what I’ve said has offended you.

        • Warren says:

          I don’t think it’s dead.

          A headline writer wrote the “stick in a fork” thing. Not me.
          I do, however, feel that the party I’ve devoted my entire life to could disappear because of one man’s total indifference to anything other than his own ambition. He is so reckless, he is prepared to sacrifice everything that others have built.

          Everyone here knows I am a Liberal and always will be. But I won’t suspend my critical faculties for that.

          • Pat says:

            Rae becoming leader isn’t a foregone conclusion, though.

            If you really oppose him so much (and I agree with you here, I wouldn’t want him as leader of the LPC either), what are you going to do about it? You have a national (international) profile, and you probably know the LPC caucus and potential leadership candidates better than anyone. You could actually have an impact on whether Rae becomes leader. It doesn’t get the LPC anywhere to simply say that Rae is bad, but provide no alternative. More than anything, instead of talking about Rae as though he is destined to become leader, we need to be showing people that many LPC supporters DON’T think Rae should be the next leader. We need to encourage people to run. We need to encourage ideas from other potential leaders rather than focusing on how bad the CPC will destroy a guy who isn’t even leader yet.

            I guess I’m just afraid that, by repeatedly writing like you assume he will become leader, you are giving Rae an unofficial coronation.

            It may be unfair, but I centre you out for this type of thing because, like I said, people listen to you.

            No one is going to listen to some kid from London.

    • Dan says:

      A lot of people voted for Chretien to be a progressive. To eliminate the GST. To have fair trade with the US. They were sorely disappointed, But the opposition was so fragmented that it didn’t matter.

      Then the Liberals were dumb enough to make the guy behind their budget cuts into the guy who succeeded him to be Prime Minister.

      The insult to injury was nominating a leader who advocated “empire lite” and “the lesser evil”. When Ignatieff told us to “rise up against Harper”, the result was the Orange Wave.

      You have to go back to Trudeau to find a Liberal Party that stands for something.

      That was 30 years ago. There are as many people who have fond memories of the Liberal Party as people who have fond memories of Betamax and Atari.

      • Ted B says:

        That makes no sense.

        If “they were sorely disappointed” then his popular support would have gone down instead of up, as it did, no?

        And the NDP would have gone up by a whole bunch, no?

        It’s a nice tidy narrative. Too bad it bears so little resemblance to reality.

  19. DanO says:

    “The purpose of attack ads is to surface feelings voters already have about a politician.”

    Yup, and this is exactly how some of the conversations I’ve had with long-time Liberals have gone -they vote Liberal, but won’t with Bob at the helm.

  20. Michael says:

    If Rae does become permanent leader we’ll see the “He lied to his own party so he’ll lie to you” attack ads along with the “He screwed up Ontario and he’ll screw up Canada” ads.

    Whatever Rae’s political acumen – and I think there is no denying that he is a talented ‘polished-tician’ – he’ll be an unmitigated disaster as Leader not because of what he is capable of doing in that role, but because of what he has done in the past, and, perhaps most importantly from a membership perspective, because what he’ll have to get there, which is lie to his own people.

  21. Patricia Morfee says:

    I will probably regret adding to this conversation but I am a Senior who voted only time ever for NDP with Bob Rae, lived through his government,while working in Medical field and Doctors offices loved Rae days so much that to this day they still take extra day off. I am a Liberal and would vote for Bob Rae as Leader to keep taking Libs back to center. I hate Cons that much even more than Mike Harris and the NDP have lost their moral compass by backing Cons when it benefits their hate of the Liberals.

    • Swervin' Merv says:

      Thanks, Patricia, for your honesty and perceptive perspective, like that of Ted H. Too bad that Warren attracts a bunch of petty whiners less interested in what someone actually stands for than in which elevator they might have farted in before. I’d like to see the former Liberal Mulcair lead the NDP and the former NDP Rae lead the Liberals. But then I like to see people articulate their visions rather than wallow in the partisan mud, especially when the country is at stake.

  22. Jordan says:

    Rae is a talented politician, but do Liberals actually think he could govern well as Prime Minister?

  23. Massimo Savino says:

    Well, he takes the permanent leader post, I’m done, I rip up my Liberal membership. Not that it will matter one way or the other, but if Rae can’t even keep a promise to hold himself back I certainly won’t be sticking around. I know a few other tenuous supporters in the same boat; they all say the same too.

  24. kenn2 says:

    If becoming the national Liberal leader and a PM hopeful involves enduring a right-wing sh!tstorm, like what happened to Dion, Ignatieff and now Rae…. then I’m not that surprised that there isn’t a long list of applicants, and Rae might be the best on offer. Or maybe it’s a clear sign that the Liberals need more time on the sidelines.

    If I was Rae, I don’t think I’d wanna go for the permanent job, I’d just use the interim leader position to rip into the CPC nonstop.

  25. Cam says:

    If not Rae, than who?

  26. Gtoronto says:

    I think you’re wrong on this one, Dion and Iggy to the uninformed were unknowns, where as Bob Rae is a known quantity.
    I think more people know about Rae than Harper, well at least in the riding rich province of Ontario.
    Also the ads are amateurish at best, technically it looks like something a grade 11 kid did and the message seems like it was written by WWE staff.

Leave a Reply

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


*