The Continuing Cafuffles of Bob Rae
So, now we have a situation where a bunch of Rae's delegates didn't sign their form 6's personally. Instead, they were signed by (or by the direct representatives of) his B.C. campaign co-ordinator. Sketchy. And quite unkosher according to the parties rules. Yet another thing that makes us Liberals look bad...oy...
Personally, I'm going to take the same line I did with the last Volpe scandal: it's not that big a deal. What does this scandal show us?
a) There are some sketchy political organizers. Shocking.
b) There are some sketchy political organizers in the Rae campaign. Again, shocking. *eye-roll* There are a few bad apples in every bunch. I'm sure that if a political party formed by an angel that was trying to get its wings would still attract some thoroughly rotten pieces of fruit.
Does it show us that Rae himself is sketchy? No. If it is revealed that he knew anything about this prior to its actual occurence, then my tone will immediately do a complete 180. But for the time being, I'm willing to give him, like I have given much scuzzier politicians (who will remain nameless...), the benefit of the doubt.
At the same time, I can't help but be kind of happy about the hits he's taking on this. Why? I thought he should have taken a lot more flack than he actually did over his NDP donations. So, in the cosmic balancing act that is our world, I guess I net even for my desired level of Rae-bashing, because he's taking more flack for one thing than I wanted and less for another.
As a final Rae note, if it becomes even more clear that it's a two-horse race between him and Ignatieff--which it probably will be if he secures one of Brison, Dryden, or Volpe--I'll be relishing the fact that he'll finally be subjected to some of the media scrutiny that Ignatieff has faced for months. I don't deny that Ignatieff has received a lot of favourable media, but, because of his perceived front-runner status, a lot of media were quick to jump on him over virtually any little thing. Rae, on the other hand, has been largely free from this.
There was that little blip (you know, when those polls came out showing him on top...) when the media was really starting to explore him and hammer him, but so far, he hasn't received the worst of it.
In all fairness, I will note that he also has been neglected when it comes to the good stuff. I don't think most non-political-junkies really know all of Rae's accomplishments and experiences, which are certainly numerous and profound. At the same time, I don't think most Liberals know of all his links to the NDP in recent years, as well as the many time's he's slammed the Liberal Party over the years.
In short, I'm just looking forward to this being a two-horse race so that each candidate can be subjected to a lot (and I mean a lot) of media scrutiny. With 11 candidates, this was hardly possible, and even with (effectively) 4 candidates it's tough. I'm hoping it's two, so that we can realy see what everyone stands for.
Personally, I'm going to take the same line I did with the last Volpe scandal: it's not that big a deal. What does this scandal show us?
a) There are some sketchy political organizers. Shocking.
b) There are some sketchy political organizers in the Rae campaign. Again, shocking. *eye-roll* There are a few bad apples in every bunch. I'm sure that if a political party formed by an angel that was trying to get its wings would still attract some thoroughly rotten pieces of fruit.
Does it show us that Rae himself is sketchy? No. If it is revealed that he knew anything about this prior to its actual occurence, then my tone will immediately do a complete 180. But for the time being, I'm willing to give him, like I have given much scuzzier politicians (who will remain nameless...), the benefit of the doubt.
At the same time, I can't help but be kind of happy about the hits he's taking on this. Why? I thought he should have taken a lot more flack than he actually did over his NDP donations. So, in the cosmic balancing act that is our world, I guess I net even for my desired level of Rae-bashing, because he's taking more flack for one thing than I wanted and less for another.
As a final Rae note, if it becomes even more clear that it's a two-horse race between him and Ignatieff--which it probably will be if he secures one of Brison, Dryden, or Volpe--I'll be relishing the fact that he'll finally be subjected to some of the media scrutiny that Ignatieff has faced for months. I don't deny that Ignatieff has received a lot of favourable media, but, because of his perceived front-runner status, a lot of media were quick to jump on him over virtually any little thing. Rae, on the other hand, has been largely free from this.
There was that little blip (you know, when those polls came out showing him on top...) when the media was really starting to explore him and hammer him, but so far, he hasn't received the worst of it.
In all fairness, I will note that he also has been neglected when it comes to the good stuff. I don't think most non-political-junkies really know all of Rae's accomplishments and experiences, which are certainly numerous and profound. At the same time, I don't think most Liberals know of all his links to the NDP in recent years, as well as the many time's he's slammed the Liberal Party over the years.
In short, I'm just looking forward to this being a two-horse race so that each candidate can be subjected to a lot (and I mean a lot) of media scrutiny. With 11 candidates, this was hardly possible, and even with (effectively) 4 candidates it's tough. I'm hoping it's two, so that we can realy see what everyone stands for.
posted by Anonymous Liberal at 9:31 PM
1 Comments:
a) Personally, I don't care if it's Iggy v. Gerard or Iggy v. Rae. All I care is that it's Iggy. Don't apologize.
b) Who the hell cares whether a candidate got an excessive number of delegates for a given number of votes? What matters at the convention isn't the amount of raw support you got; it's the number of delegates you have. That argument is hogwash.
c) Are you blatantly ignoring things like ex officio support, where Kennedy trails significantly, and the fact that Quebec delegates will turn up in the highest numbers, which is precisely where Kennedy is weakest? Even the analysis of certain Kennedy suports (e.g. Greg at democraticspace.com) shows that he's probably going to the first of the four to drop off.
Post a Comment
<< Home