Liblogs, bye bye, zzzzz

This may have happened months ago, which will tell you how often I check out Liblogs.  But it seems to have gone, you know, 86.

I think I was on there for a while, even though I didn’t ask to be or particularly want to be. They then removed me, I’m told, because someone threatened to sue them because they linked to me.

Anyway, I’m now completely bored talking about this. How about those Blackhawks?

www.warrenkinsella.com is now in its 15th year, with around 3,000,000 page views annually. Jason Cherniak is 106.


What goes down can also go up

Much sturm und drang on that Ekos, last Friday.  Some of the commentariat commenting is commented on, below.

L. Ian MacDonald:

As much as the Conservatives should be concerned about their flatlining numbers, the Liberals have even more to be worried about. Since last summer, the Liberals have plummeted from 39 to 24 per cent in the EKOS poll. They’re in third place in Quebec, Ontario and British Columbia. They’re in third place among college and university graduates. They’re also in third place among both genders and in every age group. Those are very bad numbers for Trudeau and the Liberals, especially with an election just over four months away.

Michael Harris:

Ironically, it is the PM and his party who may end up paying the price for the unexpected developments on the progressive side of Canadian politics. The Conservatives always knew they needed to keep the left side parties in a near dead heat to exploit the same weird splits that gave them a majority last time. They have pounded Trudeau to the point they might have damaged him irreparably and in so doing, handed the would-be splits to the NDP.

Harris has an interesting point, particularly given how much he hates Harper: that is, the Conservatives did their job too well on Trudeau. MacDonald, meanwhile, just seems to be marvelling at this dramatic Liberal decline. (Us, too.)

Me, I still think Trudeau is in the race. He has lots of money, lots of party infrastructure. If he has (a) effective paid in the writ and pre-writ, (b) superior GOTV, (c) the CPC turning their guns on Mulcair for a while, and (d) a smashing debate performance, he will do better than the polls currently suggest.

Am I right? Am I wrong? Whaddya think, folks?


Kudos to John Tory (twice)

He has reversed his previous position, and thereby done the right thing:

John Tory to call for full stop to carding, citing ‘eroded public trust’ 

Toronto’s mayor tells the Star he will call for a moratorium on carding next week until more transparent rules for how police deal with the public.

PS – He’s right on the Gardiner, too, BTW. When they tear that sucker down, do y’all think those Markham and Pickering and Oshawa and Ajax commuters are going to ride bicycles instead? They’re going to stay in their cars and snake through peoples’ neighbourhoods – as in, my neighbourhood. 


“Questionable expense”

Quote:

“Two sitting senators – Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu and Colin Kenny – are among nine who the Auditor General plans to refer to the RCMP for a criminal investigation, CTV News has learned.

The other seven are all retired. They are:

Don Oliver (appointed by Brian Mulroney)
Gerry St. Germain (appointed by Mulroney)
Sharon Carstairs (appointed by Jean Chretien)
Rose-Marie Losier-Cool (appointed by Chretien)
Bill Rompkey (appointed by Chretien)
Rod Zimmer (appointed by Chretien) [No he wasn’t. – Ed.]
Marie-Paule Charette-Poulin (appointed by Chretien)

In addition to the nine senators being referred to the RCMP, 21 more will be compelled to repay questionable expenses.”

The entire Senate is a “questionable expense,” if you ask me. And it remains an abomination that we still have an appointed body wielding power in the year 2015.

I should also say I was sad to see Carstairs, Rompkey and Poulin on that list. In my experience, they are very decent people.

* Oh, and you’ve made a factual error, CTV. Zimmer was appointed by Paul Martin.


About that ad

The one to the left.

In case you’re wondering, that space:

  1. Was first offered to Team Red, to a very senior person.  They said they’d get back.  They didn’t.
  2. Was next offered to Team Orange. They considered it for quite a while, but then very courteously said not yet.
  3. Was only then offered to Team Blue, who also reflected on it, then said yes.  They, too, were very courteous and professional.

The space has been on the market for many, many weeks.  And, to be blunt, multiple offers were made to assist Team Red.

They declined.


In this week’s Hill Times: election 2015 is the NDP’s to lose (and they might)

TORONTO — Knowing the precise moment when New Democrat winners were transformed into New Democrat losers isn’t all that simple.

Was it when first-place Toronto mayoral candidate Olivia Chow — whose victory was considered inevitable by most — had yet another uninspiring debate performance, or couldn’t conjure up anything coherent to say about the city’s suffocating transit problems?

Was it when front-running B.C. NDP leader Adrian Dix — whose ascension to the premier’s office in Victoria was regarded as a given — flip-flopped on the Kinder Morgan pipeline, or chose not to respond to B.C. Liberal attack ads?

It’s hard to say. But lose Chow and Dix did, badly. And therein lies a cautionary tale.

In these exciting times, of course — when the Orange Crush is being spoken of once again, and the socialist sky is without a cloud — New Democrats don’t like to talk about losers. Alberta Premier Rachel Notley is all that New Democrats can talk about. And that’s understandable.

But reflecting on the sad endings to the stories of Adrian Dix and Olivia Chow — and, before that, Ed Broadbent and Carole James and not a few others — is what New Democrats should be doing. There are more political lessons to be learned in losing than is winning. Always.

Herewith, some things for Dippers to consider.

Justin Trudeau: The Liberal leader peaked too soon, of that there can be no doubt. The myriad verbal flubs, the near-total absence of policy, the astonishing arrogance of his inner circle, the consensus that he “just isn’t ready,” and so on: all these factors have contributed to Trudeau’s current dilemma. No longer can he claim to be the only progressive alternative to Stephen Harper — after Alberta, now Thomas Mulcair can say that, too. But be forewarned, Team Orange: Trudeau seems to excel when he is underestimated. Don’t underestimate him. Patrick Brazeau did, too, remember?

You Dippers: The decline in the trade union movement helped you, it didn’t hurt you: it suggested to the electorate that you weren’t all that radical anymore. So, too, your wise decision to distance yourself from the Sid Ryan/York U. types who love deficits and detest Israel. Stick to the Roy Romanow/Brian Topp formula — balanced budgets, caution, Prairie common sense — and you will be more than a more one-term wonder, as in Ontario and Nova Scotia.

Angry Tom: Mulcair’s style — righteous indignation and finger-pointing prosecutorial anger — shouldn’t have worked, but it did. Mulcair was angry about everything at precisely the moment voters were, too. He aligned with the popular mood. But be careful, Dippers: TV is a cool medium, and so is politics, most days. Mulcair is the opposition leader: don’t have him audition in the election for the job he already has.

The research: Innumerable focus groups have been conducted in recent months. Out of these, moderators have distilled the three main party leaders down to their base elements: Harper is “experienced and serious.” Trudeau is “progressive and new.” Mulcair is “serious and progressive.” That is why you are ahead these days, federal New Democrats: your leader can say he possesses positive attributes of the other two guys — but the other two can’t say that, at all. Keep it that way, from now until Election Day.

The media: The Grit boss had an 18-month-long honeymoon, and then he didn’t. Chinese dictatorship, whip out your CF-18, budgets balancing themselves, Ukraine jokes, and on and on: all of those rookie errors, and more, have taken their toll. The news media now agree — Justin Trudeau might be Prime Minister one day — but he shouldn’t be Prime Minister this year, because he isn’t ready. New Democrats need to ratify the Conservative shorthand on Justin Trudeau — because they benefit from it almost as much. Don’t let the media change their collective view.

Will New Democrats heed the cautionary tales of Chow and Dix and others? Will they maintain the gifts they’ve received from Trudeau and the unions and their leader and the media?

We’ll see soon enough. But, for now, Election 2015 is theirs to lose.

(And they might.)