01.11.2012 02:27 PM

Rae speech: there’s good news and there’s bad news

The good news is that he recognizes his tenure as Ontario’s NDP Premier could be a problem in the 2015 election.

The bad news is he doesn’t think it is.

Sigh.

72 Comments

  1. Brandon Eyer says:

    Watch Rae run and watch Rae lose

    • Sean says:

      I’m not sold on Rae but if he runs, I’m fairly certain he will win decisively on the first ballot, to the tune of about 60 – 80%. I could be wrong, but I’d encourage others to show what other campaign has any organisation / support / experience / built loyalties which even approaches Rae’s. At first glance this is looking a lot like a coronation.

  2. Gerry Hawes says:

    It seems to me that the Conservatives will conduct a campaign of character assassination against the new leader, whoever he or she is. The Liberals would be wise to chose a leader with the moxy to respond to these inevitable attacks.

    • Warren says:

      It’s “wise” to not have a leader who doesn’t have steamer trunks full of baggage, actually.

      • W.B. says:

        I’m with Hawes: They’ll find something about anybody. JC of Nazareth wouldn’t be safe from these guys. So it’s number one to have a fighter, a really tough one.

        • Jan says:

          The Cons openly mocked Ken Dryden and got away with it. I am afraid they would do the same with Marc Garneau. This is a job, while Harper is the government, that requires a certain type of really big balls. I think Rae is the only one who has them.

      • Jordan says:

        I’ve thought the same thing Warren. What kind of attacks could the Conservative really do on Canada’s first astronaut in space Marc Garneau or someone else like Dominic LeBlanc, Denis Coderre, Ted Hsu, or David McGuinty (without bringing up Dalton)?

        Pick a someone without any dirt and there will be no need to defend their screw ups.

      • Kev says:

        Any names to suggest?

    • Philippe says:

      The Cons would find some dirt on Ghandi. The best we can do it hire someone who’ll fight back hard and eloquently, which both Iggy and Dion sucked at, frankly.

  3. frmr disgruntled Con now happy Lib says:

    Sorry Mr. Kinsella……we continue to disagree on this issue……but again, you are the successful politico…..Im just a simple grunt in the trenches…..but I still believe Mr. Rae has the moxy and the personal appeal to overcome what difficulties might ensue from his tenure as Ontario PM…….
    Other contenders may not be saddled with, for want of a better term, baggage….but will they have the ability to lead as Mr. Rae has done, and to connect with ordinary Canadians as Mr. Rae can?
    I think not…….warts and all, I still think Mr. Rae has the right stuff to overturn the Harper cabal…..I might be naive, but until someone better in the wings shows themselves, Im sticking with Mr. Rae.

  4. Dan says:

    I like Rae. Think he has served well as an interim leader for us. But I still view him as being unelectable in Ontario.

      • Pat says:

        /So why aren’t Baird, Clement or Flaherty unelectable

        • The Doctor says:

          Because none of them were ever Premier. And the Ontario economy didn’t suck big moose c*ck when they were in office.

          • Pat says:

            Yeah… but there are a lot of people that hated the Harris government more than the Rae government. The Ontario economy might have sucked with Rae as Premier, but the Harris government basically crippled Ontario’s public sector… I mean, in order to win all McG had to say in the recent Ontario election was that Hudak would be a return to Harris.

          • The Doctor says:

            I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said. I was simply explaining why Baird, Clement and Flaherty don’t have the same stink attached to their names that Rae does. Rae was the boss. Those guys weren’t, and they weren’t presiding over an economy in the toilet. If you were going to argue equivalencies or near-equivalancies, you should talk Harris, not those guys. Harris was the boss. If Harris were a current Tory MP, you’d have an equivalency, but he’s retired.

        • Ted B says:

          None of them were the leader and none of them are currently the leader and none of them ever will be the leader.

          • frmr disgruntled Con now happy Lib says:

            Agreed. I voted for Clement to lead the CPOC…I thought he might be a little more “progressive” than Mr. Harper……but hes cut from the same neoCon Harris tweed cloth……and no, the man is not leadership material…

            Flaherty is vertically challenged…..sorry to say it, but height does play a part when people choose a leader…..

            Baird?…..well, good luck with the base……lol

            Guess that leaves Jason Kenney…..whoops, see Baird comment above……

    • Ted B says:

      What BS and arrogance. The west of Ontario is where he could be strongest, you know, where they still elect NDP governments.

      • The Doctor says:

        Ted, the voters west of Ontario behave rather differently in federal versus provincial elections. There are a lot of voters in SK, MB and especially BC who are willing to vote NDP in provincial elections but vote Conservative federally. Anyway, if you think Rae would be a strong candidate for Western Canada, I’m not convinced.

  5. JamesHalifax says:

    Warren, Given that the [LIBEL ALERT] “hurl-ee”, er Herle, has his fingers in this thing…what are the chances of success?

    I always wondered why you didn’t throw your hat into the ring for this position. It can’t be due to you not wanting to lose the Gig at SUNTV, but really….an old hack like Sheila Copps? That’s hardly my idea of renewal. It’s more akin to re-cycle.

    Give it a think….I bet you’d do better than Sheila…….and it would certainly be more entertaining.

  6. Memo to Bob Rae:….Dude…You’re Bob Rae..

  7. AmandaM says:

    For fuck’s SAKE. That man is such a weasel.

    Although, chutzpah abound.

  8. jack says:

    rae will have lots of trouble getting elected in Ontario. the attack ads and quotes would be brutal to say the least. However, one has to ask who doesn’t have baggage that the harperoons would take advantage of. Do we really want another Stephen Harper who really never had a real job ever and had never travelled abroad ever? Someone with a blotless personal life? Somehow such a person has been elected as PM. An ubernerd. Last picked in any sporting event at school. i dare say I never want that to happen again. Such a lack of experience and adherence to ideology that we see now is going to hurt Canada for a long long time.

    But how does one combat these unrelenting attacks that may not even have an ounce of fact in them or be taken totally out of context?

    The simple fact is canadians will have to accept some baggage for the lib leader to be successful. Rae does have too much from a bad time in ontario that people remember but are Canadians ready to accept any baggage at all?

    That will be the question.

    • Jordan says:

      What kind of dirt does Dominic LeBlanc, Marc Garneau, Ted Hsu, David McGuinty or Denis Coderre(may find something there) have? There are likely a number of people in private life, or in provincial politics who could be a great leader and doesn’t have baggage.

    • The Doctor says:

      “Last picked in any sporting event at school.”

      Way to zero in on the relevant.

      What next, briefs rather than boxers?

  9. Brammer says:

    The Libs need new leadership with new ideas. Look at how Ron Paul is resonating with US voters. Hell, even the folks commenting on CBC like him.

    Speaking of renewal, Gwyn makes a good argument here for a primary system, warts and all:
    http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1112998–gwyn-messy-primary-system-delivers-new-ideas

  10. Jordan says:

    I like Bob Rae now much more then I ever did, but I still do not think he would make a good permanent leader for the Liberal Party. I don’t support any federal political party, but I could support the Liberal Party if they had a strong leader who knew how to run the economy effectively.

  11. David_M says:

    I still think its a head fake.
    You know, never yes or no, make all the appropriate noises, get the CPC propaganda machine all sweaty and drooling, then at the last possible moment…. No Bob on the leaders list.
    I can see the jaw drops and the tears well up in the eyes of the Harper election campaign team.

  12. Rob says:

    No baggage eh? Like Maybe Dion or Ignatieff? That worked well, didn’t it?

  13. Dave Wells says:

    Seems like the LPC is slooowly making its way through all the candidates from the 2006 convention. When Rae goes down in flames, is it Ken Dryden’s turn? Then Gerrard Kennedy?

    BTW, LOVE the stat where Rae showed he hiked spending by ‘only’ 15% compared to Wee Jimmie The Personal Injury Lawyer’s 40%. Looking for some good Conservative talking points on that one.

    • Ted says:

      It may be a bit difficult for the biggest spending Prime Minister in our entire history, the one who created our largest deficit ever, to criticize anyone for deficits and stimulus spending and Keynsian economics.

      • Kev says:

        So far they are getting away with it.

        So far we’ve let them.

        Certain Liberals frothed at the mouth about Bob Rae’s speech today. Lettem froth. Today was Day One of not letting those asswipes get away with it.

        And for any virulently anti-Rae Liberals, or any of the Liberals who are eating each other alive over nearly-irrelevant executive election positions, ask yourself: how does this hurt Harper in 2015?

        If it doesn’t: stop. Do something else. Something that hurts Harper.

      • Marc L says:

        Exactly. The biggest deficit as a share of GDP in Canadian history was the last Liberal budget in 1984-85 before Mulroney came in. Liberals tend to forget history — the may have fixed the meess, but it was a mess THEY created. Can anyone forget the hysterics from the rat-pack (including a certain Sheila) whenever Mulroney tried to limit spending. Anyone remember them arguing AGAINST deficit elimination. Hell, even the 1993 platform did not include eliminating the deficit, but only limiting it to 3% of GDP. It took the peso crisis for Paul Martin and Chretien to wake up in their second — yes their second — budget. So, it’s a bit rich to hear Liberal supporters go back through history to criticize others’ records on deficits and debt — especially when they have to distort the facts to do it.

  14. Alex Cameron says:

    I think the point on attack ads is very well positioned in this discussion.

    The whole point of the “attack” is to do it first. Otherwise it’s called defense.

    How may of Bob’s attacks have stuck so far?

  15. Cameron Prymak says:

    Saw Dr. Strangelove late last night on cable and the style of the ridiculous arguments and posturing by politicians haven’t changed in 50 years. Kubrick captured it perfectly – the absurd and ridiculous nature of such accusations.

    Then, as it turns out, I caught the CPAC re-broadcast of Allan Gregg discussing the lack of public trust in our elected officials over the last 50 years. His essay is found on his blog, http://allangregg.com/?p=69 and I think that every Liberal should read it.

    I agree with Mr. Gregg – it’s about authenticity.

  16. JH says:

    Imteresing conversation. Personally I’d still favour Garneau, but another person I’ve liked of what I have seen
    is Martha Hall Findley. Whatta ya think?

  17. Steve Gallagher says:

    Can we please leave Mr. Ron Paul out of anything on this planet? Maybe he’d like to blast into outer space???

  18. frmr disgruntled Con now happy Lib says:

    Just a comment….Mr Harper is off to China……what a difference a pipeline makes…….

    From no truck nor trade with those godless heathen a few years back to the Bitumen-Beijing express of today……Joe Oliver cant move that tar fast enough…..

  19. billg says:

    I’m just not sure how the LPC can trumpet renewel with Bob Rae.
    Unless your the ultimate partisan, you have know your trying to set up an election win in 2019, so, shouldnt the next LPC leader not be 71 years old when he or she is trying to unseat the Cons in 7 years from now? If its all about renewel and a new party why is it the same players?
    Unless, like the Republicans, the good ones are sitting this one out and trying to avoid the obvious.

    • Blair says:

      I agree. Nothwithstanding all his other shortcomings, Rae will simply be too old.

      • frmr disgruntled Con now happy Lib says:

        As I am in my fifties,(52 to be exact) I resent this notion of “too old”….one Canada’s best and most successful Prime Ministers Louis St. Laurent was 66 when he became PM, and led the Liberal Party and the govt for 10 years after that…..retiring at 76….so I dont buy this “too old” nonsense….

        And as for the argument he wouldn’ be youthful enough or attractive enough to appeal to “the youth”…..I couldnt give a rats ass because the majority of todays youth are too lazy( sorry Young Libs) to get off their asses and cast a vote….You could put a twenty something pop star in as leader and todays youth would still be disinterested…..theyre too damn self absorbed, by and large, to give a shit….there I said it, and Im glad…..

        Back to Uncle Louis……In the 1949 federal election that followed his ascension to the Liberal leadership many wondered, including Liberal party insiders, if St-Laurent would appeal to the post-war populace of Canada. On the campaign trail, St-Laurent’s image was developed into somewhat of a ‘character’ and what is considered to be the first ‘media image’ to be used in Canadian politics. St-Laurent chatted with children, gave speeches in his shirt sleeves, and had a ‘common touch’ that turned out to be appealing to voters. At one event during the 1949 election campaign, he disembarked his train and instead of approaching the assembled crowd of adults and reporters, gravitated to, and began chatting with, a group of children on the platform. A reporter submitted an article entitled “‘Uncle Louis’ can’t lose!” which earned him the nickname “Uncle Louis” in the media (Papa Louis in Quebec). With this common touch and broad appeal, he subsequently led the party to victory in the election against the Progressive Conservative Party led by George Drew. The Liberals won 190 seats—the most in Canadian history at the time, and still a record for the party.

        Nuff said….

        • The Doctor says:

          I agree the age thing is a bit of a red herring. Ronald Reagan, whatever you think of him, was extremely successful politically and was way old when campaigning for his first term in 1980. Generally voters don’t care about someone’s age as long as they trust, admire and/or respect the candidate and are on board with the candidate’s party and policies.

          One person’s fuddy-duddy is another person’s respected elder statesman.

    • Paul says:

      I agree Bill. The election 3 years from now is likely to be some type of split decision. Canadians haven’t been giving majorities to many leaders the first time out – we like to ‘test drive’.

      If you put in Rae who’ll never win a majority with his baggage, you’ll need a new leader in 7 years who also will struggle to win first time out.

  20. WarrenT says:

    LeBlanc or Manley would be perfect party builders. No baggage.

  21. Jordan says:

    Why do people care so much if someone does not have wide spread name recognition throughout the country before they run for the leadership of a party? LeBlanc who? Really… why does it matter if Dominic LeBlanc isn’t widely known? Stephen Harper and Jack Layton were not household names when they became party leaders and they have been just as or more successful then the last three Liberal leaders. The vast majority of people who voted NDP in May didn’t have a clue who Brian Topp was when they cast their ballot and now he’s a leading to candidate to be NDP leader.

  22. A says:

    To be fair, McGuinty’s deficit is bigger than Rae’s ever was.

Leave a Reply

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


*