Quote:

So watch out for door to door fraud by this despicable hate group. Danforth Music Festival and Beaches Blues Festival are owned by Leroy St. Germaine, the same waste of skin who owns and publishes Your Ward News. If they come to your door asking for money, you might want to report it as fraud…

And James Sears, YWN’s new editor in chief is all kinds of anti-Semitic crazy lately. His most recent tweet is a Holocaust denial video featuring “pastor” Steven Anderson, the leader of a Christian fundamentalist hate group from Arizona.

A few days ago, I contacted Toronto Mayor John Tory about this problem, which has literally thousands of people in East Toronto very upset. I will let you know when I get a response.

Meanwhile, below is a screen cap of the Twitter feed of James Sears, the editor of Your Ward News. He also goes by the name of “Dimitri the Lover,” via which he advocates sexual assault – a crime for which he has pleaded guilty in the past.

Comments (8)

if you reappoint this guy, you need help. 

Signed,

Ontario

  

Comments (32)

But God help you if you actually say that out loud. I mean, Olivia Chow may pretend that she doesn’t know you!

“David Hulchanski, a professor of housing and community development at the University of Toronto, has spent years documenting how Toronto evolved from a mixed-income city to an increasingly segregated one. His “Three Cities” research [PDF], which was updated earlier this year, shows that from 1990 to 2012 the average household income in a number of neighbourhoods, such as North Toronto, increased by more than 20 per cent. In roughly the same number of neighbourhoods, though, average household income declined by 20 per cent. Meanwhile, the number of middle-income communities, which accounted for the majority of Toronto in 1990, dropped to less than a third of all census tracts.

…Wealthy Torontonians are increasingly concentrated in downtown and midtown enclaves, while low-income residents are relegated to the inner suburbs, with limited access to transit, grocery stores, and other essential services.”

Comments (4)

By Elise Hategan, who knows what she is talking about:

“…And then comes this – news that a hateful, xenophobic rag called Your Ward News, put together by a network of nutcases and old Heritage Front members, one of whom none other than Gary Schipper himself (under the alias of J.J. / Johnny Jensen), is being distributed to 50,000 homes in Toronto’s Beaches neighbourhood by Canada Post. Yes, our very own Canada Post has, somehow, after evaluating the garbage Your Ward News contains, ruled that it didn’t fit their own definition of what constitutes hate material.

So – despite objections from postal carriers, despite articles from mainstream press and articles on activist websites, Canada Post continues to distribute hate propaganda. Which clearly is an offence under Section 319 of the Criminal Code…

Twenty years ago, these hateful bastards – or rather, “unscrupulous fanatics” as Judge Tremblay-Lamer put it in her judgement writ – were ordered by the courts not to RECORD their hate messages. They served their prison time, they scurried underground like the cockroaches that they are. But now they’re back, putting their hate in WRITING. And what are WE as a society doing about it?

Nothing.

…Worse yet, they have an office now and public funding. And they have Canada Post and the police condoning it, to boot.

Please tell me that everything I did twenty years ago wasn’t for nothing.

TAKE ACTION.

Comments (5)

Here’s what Senior Statesman Ed Broadbent says:

The polling done by the Broadbent Institute shows Canadians support those ideas.

“Time after time, we find on almost every issue, a majority of Canadians are social democrats,” he says.

“On tax policy, on (the) Canada Pension (Plan), a whole range of issues that are reasonably described as social democratic, there is a significant majority of Canadians that are on that side.”

Broadbent says the long-term trend shows voters are warming to the NDP.

“One of the things that is happening now, and we’ll see if (it) persists in the election, is where some of those (voters) were split in their partisan positions, they’re increasingly coming behind the NDP.”

Leaving aside how ridiculous it is that “polling done by the Broadbent Institute” in a story about Ed Broadbent is considered in any way relevant, let’s reflect on the big question of the moment: is the NDP’s rise permanent?

Personally, I think it isn’t just an NDP thing. There are a number of variables at work, here:

• Justin Trudeau peaked too soon.  That – plus the serial gaffes, the paucity of policy, the arrogance of an inner circle who have angered legions of Liberals, and the emerging consensus that he “just isn’t ready” – have crystallized at precisely the wrong moment for the Liberal leader.  For two years, his message was: “If you are looking for a progressive alternative to Stephen Harper, I’m the only guy that fits the bill.” After Alberta, after months of slow but steady NDP growth, that is no longer true.
• The NDP, and their base, ain’t what they used to be. When the trade union movement started to founder and lose relevance, everyone thought that would be a death knell for the NDP.  It wasn’t.  In fact, it helped to de-radicalize the Dippers in the eyes of many voters.  Simultaneously, another thing happened: the Dippers chose to be what Norman Spector once described to me as “mature social democrats” – that is, Romanow-style balance-the-budget types who see government as a force for good, but not the solution to every problem.  The Kooky-York-University-Sid-Ryan-nationalize-everything-hate-Israel types lost out.
• Angry Tom, Angry Voters.  Plenty of pundits – me among them – thought Mulcair’s genetic predisposition towards anger would kill him, just as it had back when he was a Quebec Liberal.  It didn’t.  In fact, Tom’s anger turned on many more voters than it turned off – because they, as it turned out, were angry too.  Voters were looking for a politician who was angry as they were about the federal Conservatives, and about the direction in which the country was headed.  And along came Prosecutor Tom, all righteous indignation and fury, giving the Tories what-for in Question Period.  Mulcair matched the popular mood.
• The key attributes of the leaders.  Innumerable focus groups have been conducted about Messrs. Harper, Trudeau and Mulcair, of course.  No news there. Moderators in these groups typically ask participants for one or two words to describe each leader.  Here’s what they’ve gotten back, over and over: Harper is “serious, experienced.” Trudeau is “progressive, new, change.” Mulcair is “serious, progressive.”  See the problem for the Tories and the Grits? Only one leader – Mulcair – embodies positives of each of the other options.  He’s “serious and progressive” at a time when voters seemingly want both.
• The media have bought into the Harper narrative on Trudeau. Reporters spend almost as much time with Justin Trudeau as his family does, perhaps more.  And they have concluded, with considerable reluctance, that Harper’s shorthand on Trudeau – now contained in multi-million-dollar ad buy coming soon to a television near you – is accurate.  He really isn’t ready yet.  Nice guy, not ready.

There are other variables at work, but I think those are the main ones.  Can New Democrats sustain the resulting dynamic over barbecue season? Hard to do, but not impossible.

As a public service, I offer only four words of caution: 1. Adrian 2. Dix. 3. Olivia 4. Chow.

Both of those people were initially considered inevitable winners, too, weren’t they?  In the latter case, I saw up close what the electorate eventually saw.  Chow was a lousy communicator, she didn’t offer much in the way of ideas, and she didn’t inspire.  Similarly, Dix lacked Christy Clark’s verbal dexterity, he played it too safe, and he had the worst debate performance in modern times.

Nobody can accuse Angry Tom of lacking communication and debate skills.  Nobody can say that he isn’t putting ideas out there, or occasionally taking risks.

But you Dippers out there in the Internet ether know I speak the truth, don’t you? 

Orange Crush, the drink, can go flat in no time at all.

Comments (76)

When someone says something "changed everything," you know something didn't.

— Warren Kinsella (@kinsellawarren) May 26, 2015

Comments (2)

The good news for Liberals: they have a way to make fun of that new CPC ad.

The bad news for Liberals: that old Manitoba campaign ad worked – my very good friend Hugh (sadly) lost.

Comments (7)

The NDP ignores Trudeau, the CPC one is mainly about him.  The Dipper spot tries to be positive, the CPC spot is less preoccupied with all that, but isn’t very mean.  The Liberal one, appended at the end? It’s okay.

All three, however, strongly suggest the election campaign is underway.

First, Team Orange:

 

• It’s not bad, but it isn’t particularly great, either. You forget about it a minute after you watch it.
• The visuals are the kind of stuff political backroomers love – working classy, ethnic diverse-ness, slice of life, blah blah blah. Not original.
• The soundtrack riff is a direct steal from the Menzingers’ ‘The Obituaries,’ which features the “F” word about a million times.
• At the end, you can see they struggled with what to do with what to do with Angry Tom. Tie? No tie? Tie loosened? Jacket? No jacket, sleeves? No jacket, sleeves rolled up? Hmm.
• In the end, his look and demeanour and surroundings reminded me of Assistant Principal Vernon in The Breakfast Club. Not good.

The Blue Crew, meanwhile, have leaked their latest offering…but no one has a link except John Ivison. Interesting strategy.

Anyway, what John tells us about the ad reflects what many hacks already know about the research: no one dislikes Justin Trudeau – it’s just that no one thinks he’s ready to be Prime Minister. (In focus groups, anyway.)

The structure of the ad – diverse group of Canadians passing judgment on the Liberal leader – recalls the Muttart-era “Entitled to my entitlements” diner spot, which was seared on our collective consciousness through a gazillion repetitions back in 2005-2006.

The Harper part sounds like what I had figured would always be his 2015 writ narrative: “Hey, look. They said I’d wreck the place, and do all kinds of radical stuff, and I didn’t. We got through some tough times, we’re keeping folks safe. Oh, and Justin? I like him, too. He’s just not ready.”

If anyone gets a link, please send along. I couldn’t find it anywhere (beyond John’s column, that is). But I suspect that, when I see it, my assessment won’t change too much.

UPDATE: And here it is! (Thanks, folks.)

My take:

• These guys love research! The statements made by the actors in this ad are taken directly from actual statements made by actual Canadians in actual focus groups!
• Actually, when you are assessing the ad for yourself, keep that in mind – this may not be what you are saying, but it is what your neighbors are saying. Important.
• I think the ad will work.  Expect to see it in heavy rotation, boys and girls!

UPDATER: Um, oops.

UPDATEST: And here is the Liberal ad. Same sort of diversity/middle class/family stuff we see in the other ones. Not bad, but not great.

Comments (65)

Photo (and apparently untouched) by @karltims.

Comments (7)

Right here. And it’s real. 

What a genius. 

Comments (5)