throw Mcguinty out now!!!

moviefan

Court jester
Mar 28, 2004
2,531
0
0
Interesting column today in the Globe and Mail by Adam Radwanski:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...liberals-off-guard/article1641765/?cmpid=rss1

Radwanski is sympathetic to the Liberals. Nonetheless, he makes a similar point to the one I made a few weeks ago in this thread (post number 7) -- that in his second term, McGuinty keeps screwing up.

Apart from the debates about his policies, it may be dangerous to reward such an incompetent government with a third term. Lord knows how the Grits might screw things up after 2011 if they think the public doesn't care.
 

johnny

New member
Feb 12, 2002
232
0
0
Tim Hudak is too closely associated with Mike Harris. I don't know if Ontario is ready for another Harris-style government, given his popularity when he left office.
All political parties go stale after a while and then screw up. Thats what happened with Harris. But to this day, he is my favorite politician yet. he did what he said he was going to do and he stayed out of my life the most of any premier i have known.
Harris was a man of the people, a regular joe, who let us drink beer on the golf courses finally. Fucking Mcguinty wont even let us enjoy a UFC fight in Ontario because it might be bad for us.......caretaker premier? more like the Nanny Premier, always telling me whats best for me.
Hudack would have brought the HST in as well, Liberals and Conservatives were both for it. Federal conservatives supported it and the provincial liberals implemented it. I still think its shit because at the end of the day i am paying more taxes...not to mention this Eco tax bullshit.
I would take Hudack over McGuinty in a heartbeat.
 

buckwheat1

New member
Nov 20, 2006
1,064
0
0
TIM HUDAK!!! NO THANKS - he has stated he cut the health tax 2.5 billion gone and cut 1% of the new HST to 2% and that would euual another 2.5 billion sp were at 5 bilion out of the pot now. Hudak willnot manage the province he'll just cut cut cut services and we'll be worse off the the Harris days. The province is a have not province because we were mainly a manufactoring province auto ect. 1. The Canadian dollar rose up to the American dollar 2. There was a world wide recession going on, what would Hudak of done is the real question. Lets not for get teh real HST came from the former Ontario
Harris Flarity from Whitby Ontario. Now that Ontario has the HST the rest of the country will go that way and some already have.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
79,966
8
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
It's better to say that Harris TRIED to do what he said he would do.

In most cases he implemented so incompetently that he did not actually succeed, although he plainly tried. He executed his policies in such a combative way that he wound up with too many enemies, and as a result much of his work was undermined.

You may blame that on those who opposed him but the sign of a good politician is that they can get everybody moving together and make changes that actually last and make a difference.

Aside from a few things like the amalgamation of Toronto most of what Harris tried to do either never actually went into effect, or was so loathed that it was eventually reversed or changed into something quite different. His elimination of rent control, work for welfare, overhaul of the inspection systems, all these signature policies were eventually reversed because they were hated.

Had he been a more competent politician he would have done a better job of selling people on the merits of his ideas and we would still have these things in place today.
 

johnny

New member
Feb 12, 2002
232
0
0
Granted Harris did what he said he was going to do, but bottom line is he quit politics before the 2003 election knowing there wasn't a snowball's chance that he would get re-elected. Common sense revolution ?? Yah, right. :rolleyes:

As for UFC .. that's not a 'sport' it's just two guys beating on each other. Doesn't bother me in the slightest that you can't see a 'match' in Ontario.

Thats not the point if you like the UFC or not, the point is the Prem,ier telling us what we should watch and enjoy and what we shouldnt.
I cannot stand basketball, but hey if you want to go watch it go ahead no one shoudl stop you. Why should someone stop me from watching UFC?
why is boxing any better? and its allowed.

Harris and the Common Sense Revolution rocked. Only time i became excited about politics. He was elected in 1995 and quit in 2003 8 years is a good long time to be premier and it was time to go anyways.
If it wasnt for Harris we would all be getting pictures and fines in the mail from Photo radar, just another government user tax.

We need another Harris, cut E.I rates, cut welfare payments, cut social program that i dont use, cut cut cut...but most of all cut my taxes...
 

johnny

New member
Feb 12, 2002
232
0
0
TIM HUDAK!!! NO THANKS - he has stated he cut the health tax 2.5 billion gone and cut 1% of the new HST to 2% and that would euual another 2.5 billion sp were at 5 bilion out of the pot now. Hudak willnot manage the province he'll just cut cut cut services and we'll be worse off the the Harris days. The province is a have not province because we were mainly a manufactoring province auto ect. 1. The Canadian dollar rose up to the American dollar 2. There was a world wide recession going on, what would Hudak of done is the real question. Lets not for get teh real HST came from the former Ontario
Harris Flarity from Whitby Ontario. Now that Ontario has the HST the rest of the country will go that way and some already have.
Oh that would be a real shame if Hudack got rid of the health tax, only another $900 a year in my pocket..ya that would really suck.
right on cutting services, why shoudl i pay for everyone else? socialism sucks.
 

moviefan

Court jester
Mar 28, 2004
2,531
0
0
It's better to say that Harris TRIED to do what he said he would do.

In most cases he implemented so incompetently that he did not actually succeed, although he plainly tried. He executed his policies in such a combative way that he wound up with too many enemies, and as a result much of his work was undermined.

You may blame that on those who opposed him but the sign of a good politician is that they can get everybody moving together and make changes that actually last and make a difference.

Aside from a few things like the amalgamation of Toronto most of what Harris tried to do either never actually went into effect, or was so loathed that it was eventually reversed or changed into something quite different. His elimination of rent control, work for welfare, overhaul of the inspection systems, all these signature policies were eventually reversed because they were hated.

Had he been a more competent politician he would have done a better job of selling people on the merits of his ideas and we would still have these things in place today.
You're cherry picking a little bit. Much of what Harris did is still in effect.

For example, his reforms in education are still in place. The improved curriculum, provincewide testing (actually started under the NDP, but implemented in a meaningful way under Harris), and the improved structure for funding education are all still in effect. Indeed, the McGuinty government likes to talk about the fact that test scores continue to improve, but somehow neglects to mention that it is the Harris curriculum that is responsible for these improvements.

Anyway, McGuinty's second term continues to be a disaster. And judging from today's papers, it won't get better any time soon:

http://www.thestar.com/business/article/837058--opp-probes-ministry-staff?bn=1
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
28,695
9,805
113
Room 112
Ontario's structural problems as a manufacturing economy in a world where manufacturing jobs are moving to developing nations aren't really due to McGuinty, it's affecting all similar economies in North America in the same way.

You're being a little foolish.
That is partially true. However, McGuinty and gang refused to remove onerous capital taxes when they should have. It would have lessened the blow significantly.
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
28,695
9,805
113
Room 112
Granted Harris did what he said he was going to do, but bottom line is he quit politics before the 2003 election knowing there wasn't a snowball's chance that he would get re-elected. Common sense revolution ?? Yah, right. :rolleyes:

As for UFC .. that's not a 'sport' it's just two guys beating on each other. Doesn't bother me in the slightest that you can't see a 'match' in Ontario.
He quit politics because he had 8 years as Premier under his belt and 13 as leader of the PC Party. He'd done what he set out to do. I like Eves but he wasn't leadership material which contributed to the heavy loss in '03.
 

johnny

New member
Feb 12, 2002
232
0
0
That's the ONLY good thing Harris did - getting rid of Bob Rae's photo radar.
What about letting us drink beer on the golf courses? That was another good thing as far as i am concerned. McGuinty would never bring that in, being the nanny that he is, I am sure he would find something objectionable to it.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,949
5,755
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Does one go to a golf course to play golf or drink beer ?
Some go for the girls!
Ever been to the Tournaments the SCs throw???....:p
 

slowpoke

New member
Oct 22, 2004
2,899
0
0
Toronto
....Apart from the debates about his policies, it may be dangerous to reward such an incompetent government with a third term. Lord knows how the Grits might screw things up after 2011 if they think the public doesn't care.
I'm sure McGuinty knows his government executed some files badly. But if he still got re-elected, do you really think he'd conclude that the people who'd voted for his party did so because they simply didn't care how badly he'd performed? When a voter gets off his ass and takes the trouble to vote, he doesn't put the little "x" beside his preferred candidate's name because he doesn't care. At least not in my world.

And, even if McGuinty did attribute his re-election to a disproportionate number of Stepford voters, do you also think that would encourage him to be even more careless during his next term? Doesn't constant mismanagement eventually lead to political ruin? Doesn't McGuinty know this? I guess not.
 

johnny

New member
Feb 12, 2002
232
0
0
Does one go to a golf course to play golf or drink beer ?
Thats like asking if someone goes to a strip club to look at the ladies and get lap dances or drink beer...Alot go for both. its all about having fun and a good time.
Drving a golf cart under the influence? WTF, thats what i am talking about a freaking nanny state, where you cant do anything without it being politically incorrect. next thing you know the government do gooders will be saying we should wear helmets in a golf cart.
 

moviefan

Court jester
Mar 28, 2004
2,531
0
0
I'm sure McGuinty knows his government executed some files badly. But if he still got re-elected, do you really think he'd conclude that the people who'd voted for his party did so because they simply didn't care how badly he'd performed?
He might. Politicians know that people often vote to support your motives, rather than how well you execute -- or are expected to execute -- on your promises.

Indeed, McGuinty is a perfect example of how politicians who win elections lose any sense of modesty. Right after McGuinty secured his second majority in 2007, his people were already talking about going for a third term in 2011. This is in spite of the fact McGuinty mostly won because of John Tory's screw-up on the religious school issue, rather than anything McGuinty did.

To some extent, the idea that people mostly vote for a politician's motives might also explain Rob Ford's unexpected popularity in Toronto. He probably has a number of supporters who aren't convinced he'll be a great mayor but they like what he stands for, particularly in contrast to the current regime.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
79,966
8
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
You're cherry picking a little bit. Much of what Harris did is still in effect.
Only a bit. If you looked at what was put forward as the signature items for the "common sense revolution" very little of it remains.

In my opinion that's too bad because there were some good ideas in there, but the antagonistic way Harris went around attempting to implement those policies pretty much ensured that they would never succeed.

An example would be "work for welfare". Fundamentally not a bad idea, but it was sold in terms that disparaged those that needed help and insulted those trying to help them. There was no need for that--it COULD have and SHOULD have been sold as a positive step up for those in need in help and a better way of helping. Instead of "the unemployed need more work experience, that's how we think we can help them" it came across more as "kick those lazy welfare bums off the public tit and make them scrounge in the dirt for a few bucks". It must have sold well to the core conservative base that loves that sort of thing, but it guaranteed that the policy itself would never succeed. In the end it was billed in negative terms rather than in positive terms and that guaranteed that it would fail.

That's the sort of incompetence that I can't stand. I'd much rather have someone in power who generate collaboration and co-operation than someone who generates division and in-fighting within the government. The latter is never really productive.
 

johnny

New member
Feb 12, 2002
232
0
0
Only a bit. If you looked at what was put forward as the signature items for the "common sense revolution" very little of it remains.

In my opinion that's too bad because there were some good ideas in there, but the antagonistic way Harris went around attempting to implement those policies pretty much ensured that they would never succeed.

An example would be "work for welfare". Fundamentally not a bad idea, but it was sold in terms that disparaged those that needed help and insulted those trying to help them. There was no need for that--it COULD have and SHOULD have been sold as a positive step up for those in need in help and a better way of helping. Instead of "the unemployed need more work experience, that's how we think we can help them" it came across more as "kick those lazy welfare bums off the public tit and make them scrounge in the dirt for a few bucks". It must have sold well to the core conservative base that loves that sort of thing, but it guaranteed that the policy itself would never succeed. In the end it was billed in negative terms rather than in positive terms and that guaranteed that it would fail.

That's the sort of incompetence that I can't stand. I'd much rather have someone in power who generate collaboration and co-operation than someone who generates division and in-fighting within the government. The latter is never really productive.
You are right that alot of the Common Sense Revolution has been torn down. I guess with McGuinty he has thrown common sense out the window.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
79,966
8
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
You are right that alot of the Common Sense Revolution has been torn down. I guess with McGuinty he has thrown common sense out the window.
You are forgetting just how angry voters in Ontario were at the Tories when McGuinty took power. If he had not rolled that stuff back people would have lynched him.

Why was it so unpopular?

There's nothing inherent in notions like "work for welfare" that should be so widely hated, it was the belligerent, arrogant, combative way that Harris did things that eventually got everybody's back up. A competent politician would not have been so widely despised for policies which, just a few years previously, had been wildly popular with voters.

In short it's pretty clear that Ontarians voted in an idea, and then voted out a man. He took a good idea and botched it by failing at the most basic task any politician faces: Finding ways to bring people together and generate collaboration.
 

slowpoke

New member
Oct 22, 2004
2,899
0
0
Toronto
He might. Politicians know that people often vote to support your motives, rather than how well you execute -- or are expected to execute -- on your promises.

Indeed, McGuinty is a perfect example of how politicians who win elections lose any sense of modesty. Right after McGuinty secured his second majority in 2007, his people were already talking about going for a third term in 2011. This is in spite of the fact McGuinty mostly won because of John Tory's screw-up on the religious school issue, rather than anything McGuinty did.....
I didn't notice any such lack of Liberal modesty following McGuinty's last majority. If anything, McGuinty himself seemed quite humble. And there's nothing wrong with party members aiming for another majority - that's what all parties strive for. A few Liberals may have enthused that we were seeing the beginning of a Liberal dynasty but I'm sure that was just the exuberance of the moment.

I agree that people often vote for a particular leader or party on the basis of a leader's perceived motives or the core values of a particular party. But those are generally the committed and politically aware voters who strongly approve of a particular leader or who routinely support the same party. They still care about execution but they will forgive a certain amount of ineptitude if the leader is seen to be trying to do the 'right' thing. But there are limits to how much arrogance or incompetence these voters will tolerate and McGuinty knows this.

In the not too distant past, we had a PC dynasty ending with Bill Davis, then the Peterson Liberals, then Bob Rae's NDP, then Mike Harris' PC, then Mike Harris/Ernie Eves, and now McGuinty' back to back terms. And you're right that McGuinty was a sitting duck until Tory shot himself in the foot last time. Which means that McGuinty's recent support was not very deep. He was lucky to get a second majority and he knows it. Given such precarious support to begin with and the subsequent triple whammy of e-health, the recession and HST, McGuinty certainly won't be thanking voter apapthy if he wins another majority. He'll be thanking his lucky stars and Tim Hudak.
 

buckwheat1

New member
Nov 20, 2006
1,064
0
0
McGuinty had the largest support of any 1 premier in Ontario I don't call that lucky he held the most seats. John Tory thaught he could nock off the education ministers seat and lost by over 5000 votes.
He then had no seat and tried to run in a Peterborough area riding a conservative riding at best and lost that and then resigned. I think John is a nice overall guy but no leader. Tim Hudak has no direction
or vision but to cut and we know what that means deaths, hospital closures, teacher cut backs, nurse layoffs ect WE want to IMPOROVE the province not kill it. McGuinty fell into the recession not nay one governments fault Ontario is a mnaufactoring province and it hit all around the world, were slowly coming out of it do to our banking policies. Liberals will hold a minority government in October 2011.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts