Just be polite.

Comments (5)

We are interested in hearing from you if you are young, political and progressive – and a good writer. Email your stuff to info at daisygroup dot ca.

Comments (11)

Anyone reading this? Don’t sign with pair who are “coaching” now. Email me if you want details.

They’re bad, bad news.

Comments (3)

So, the good people of Thornhill and Niagara vote today.  Here are my predictions, and I expect all of you to mock me if (when) I am shown to be wrong.

1. Thornhill: Seriously? Harper was in Israel when this by-election was called.  Canadian Jews are conservative.  Hudak will keep it, Wynne will be second (but not close) and the NDP will only be kept alive by endangered species protection laws.
2. Niagara Falls: This one’s the big one.  It was an Ontario Liberal seat for a long, long time.  The Wynne Liberals are going to finish in a distant third place, however, and the NDP are going to win it – and it’s right next door to Tim Hudak’s home riding, too.  For both Wynne and Hudak, an NDP victory will represent humiliation on a historic scale.  For Horwath, it means she’s a lot closer to being Premier of Ontario.

If I’m right – and of course, I am – it means a Spring election.  Niagara Falls will give Horwath what she needs to stare down  Sid Ryan and his ilk, who cravenly want to prop up Wynne as long as possible.

Who will win the election? The Ontario NDP, methinks.  That’s been my view for months, and all that has happened in the past year has reinforced that view.

 

Comments (23)

This guy is my new personal hero.  Just epic.

Comments (20)

They share the same initials, and they share the same tactics.

 

Comments (3)

I’m about six minutes in, after Brian’s editorial.  My speculation about Flaherty’s state of mind, and his whiplash-inducing flip-flop on income splitting:

• He has been taken hostage by officials in Finance, and what we saw post-budget was a hologram;
• He thought it would be funny to blow up all the post-budget communications plans; or
• He was in the bag.

Your own wild-eyed speculation is welcome. Anyway, one thing ain’t speculation: as no less than Brian and I agreed, everyone had a lousy comms day – except Thomas Mulcair.

Comments (9)

Check this out:

I find that fascinating.

What interests me most is Stintz’s decision to (a) attack someone who clearly has her worried (b) her bizarro swing at the NDP and (c) her naked shilling for the Harper/Flaherty Conservatives.

Now, given that Karen is a lifelong, hardcore Conservative, one who worked to privatize healthcare – and whose partner worked for the aforementioned Flaherty – I guess I shouldn’t be so surprised.  But, honestly: if you are running for mayor of Toronto, is it a good idea to be seen doing Harper’s dirty work?

Anyway, keep at it, Karen.  At this rate, if you get your deposit back, I’ll be frankly amazed.

 

Comments (9)

As a public service, here’s what Nick Kouvalis used to say about John Tory. Below that, my column about what everyone has to say about Nick Kouvalis – with bonus stuff about the time he was charged for threatening to kill someone, and a damning report about his ethics. Your’e welcome.

NICK ON JOHN

“It’s all about accountability and John Tory’s leadership.” – Nick, explaining why he was starting a campaign to remove John from the Ontario PC leadership. Press release, December 6, 2007

“Based on the devastating loss that we’ve just experienced as a party, John Tory must command a significant majority of support to be able to effectively lead us into the next election.” – Nick, in a story headlined about how he was seeking to “oust” Tory. CBC News, December 6, 2007

“John Tory [lost] his own seat and receiving less votes than Ernie Eves…John Tory’s support is not vast nor overwheling [sic]…Tory is slipping.” – Nick, on the The Politic blog, December 23, 2007

“[We] called into the radio show and challenged John’s integrity, and then John decided not to get in the race. And that was a huge victory for Rob. We kept John out and Rob won because of it.” – Nick, bragging about Rob Ford’s win to BlogTO, November 7, 2010.

EVERYONE ON NICK

Nick Kouvalis is a big man. Or he used to be.

He allows that he had a surgical procedure that helped him shed nearly 200 pounds.

Kouvalis is also kind of a big deal. Just ask him.

He brags to reporters about how he created a fake Twitter account, and how that single bit of trickery helped to elect Rob Ford. He yaps about a crude YouTube video he created, and how that was important. He says he’s “good” at ending Liberal careers. He recounts how he told Ford to punch his main opponent, and “make him bleed.”

Now, all of this tough-guy talk isn’t such a good idea, sometimes. Not so long ago, Kouvalis was tried for uttering a death threat against a Conservative MP. In July 2005, it was alleged by the Crown that Kouvalis said to two young women: “If I could kill Jeff Watson with my bare hands and get away with it, I would.” He did this while campaign manager for another Conservative in Windsor.

The judge acquitted Kouvalis, believing he wasn’t serious. But, a few years later, Kouvalis could again be seen trying to suggest that it had all been clear evidence of his superior strategic mind. “Actually,” Kouvalis said, “I thank Jeff. It made me.”

If that’s so, Kouvalis must be simply delighted – Thrilled! Overjoyed! – by the recent finding of a panel of the Market Research and Intelligence Association.

The association oversees the activities of the Canadian polling industry, of which Kouvalis is ostensibly part.

The panel was struck after the association received no less than seven complaints about the activities of Kouvalis’ firm, Campaign Research. According to the complainants, Kouvalis’ company bombarded residents of Irwin Cotler’s Montreal riding with false claims about the Liberal MP.

Among other things, callers were told that Cotler was about to resign, which was a lie.

MPs complained about the calls in the House of Commons. The Conservatives’ odious House leader, Peter Van Loan, defended it.

“It’s a normal part of politics,“ Van Loan said. The House of Commons’ eunuch of a speaker, Andrew Scheer, said it was all “reprehensible,” but he couldn’t do anything about it. (He used Kouvalis, too!)

The Market Research association wasn’t nearly so pathetic. They spent a few months looking into the matter. Last week, they concluded Kouvalis’ firm had violated no less than three sections of its code, and that the violations were “more serious than a minor transgression.”

The violations were serious enough to discredit the entire industry, they concluded. Kouvalis’ firm acted in a way that diminished the public’sconfidence, it found. In particular, an interview Kouvalis gave to the media in which he attempted to minimize what had happened, amounted to a “blatant contravention” of the association’s code, the panel ruled.

Now, given that Campaign Research has been linked to the ongoing robocalls investigations, none of this should be particularly surprising. Nick Kouvalis is who he is. He does not hide it. He is a boor and a loudmouth, and now he is someone who “blatantly contravened” the rules of his own profession.

Comments (11)

I don’t do this thing, for free, to play host to someone to let them libel me and everyone else. In more than 2,000 comments, no less.

Buh-bye.

Comments (11)