I'M BACK TO UNDECIDED
It's not your fault Tim, I still love ya, and the deal's still on if you win... but thanks to some members of the organization, and the various online antics of some supporters, I am once again in the "undecided" column.
So much for the "11th Commandment"... I've seen more violations of that sacred tenet from Tim's supporters than I've seen from any other camp. Add to that this whole scrapping the HRT (not HRC, as I've been corrected) issue, and you may see why my support has wavered. It's the Third Rail folks... ZAP!!!
To commenters who support Hudak, be careful what you say here today... you may push me over the edge to Elliott. In fact, it's thanks to you, in large part, that I'm now undecided once again.
If there's one thing I can't stand in politics, it's the cult of "group think". It's the standard diagnosis of most Liberal supporters, and I find it repulsive. If you're going to support someone, you'd better be able to articulate why. But don't dare tell me you're supporting someone simply because you want to stop the other guy, because that's the standard line a Liberal would give me as to why they're a Liberal... "To stop Harper and the scary Conservatives".
If you're wondering why I've "fallen off the bandwagon" as it were, here's just a couple of reasons...
1) The rumours, the inuendo, and the outright lies I've been seeing online about the various other campaigns... predominantly coming from Hudak supporters. It was the MAIN reason I could never support the likes of Ron Paul in the States, or Randy Hillier during this Leadership race... because many of their supporters were/are rabidly partisan nutcases. [To my Faithful Fergus Follower, I'm not talking about you here... you've been doing much better now that you're taking your meds... just kidding! ;-)]
2) Many Hudak supporters have been running around online and openly accusing the Elliott camp for the push-poll that occured the other week. Well kiddies, keep your eyes on the news, cause you're all in for a surprise... did I mention I don't like folks who spread stories without a shred of evidence?
3) The comedy of errors that has been the Hudak Campaign... no fault of Tim's, I must say though. I've talked to Tim several times, met with him once, and I was impressed forwards and backwards. I really like Tim, and I think he'd make an excellent Premier... however, he made the same mistake as John Tory, in who he's listening to for advice. It's been like watching the 2007 election all over again, and it ain't been pretty. I know several of Tim's people, and his organizers, and I love'em... but I'm really concerned about some of the upper level folks who have been calling the shots, the folks who are whispering in Tim's ear. Again, if Tim wins, I'll be fine with that, so long as some serious house cleaning gets done at the top levels, with certain folks being brought on board for the 2011 Campaign. Adopting Christine's "Path To Victory" document would also be a good idea. I'll be keeping an eye on the makeup of the 2011 Campaign Team, and that will assist in determining my level of support for the election.
Go ahead, comment away, I'm open to discussion... but behave, and let's talk rationally and positively, or you'll go pushing me over the edge.
So much for the "11th Commandment"... I've seen more violations of that sacred tenet from Tim's supporters than I've seen from any other camp. Add to that this whole scrapping the HRT (not HRC, as I've been corrected) issue, and you may see why my support has wavered. It's the Third Rail folks... ZAP!!!
To commenters who support Hudak, be careful what you say here today... you may push me over the edge to Elliott. In fact, it's thanks to you, in large part, that I'm now undecided once again.
If there's one thing I can't stand in politics, it's the cult of "group think". It's the standard diagnosis of most Liberal supporters, and I find it repulsive. If you're going to support someone, you'd better be able to articulate why. But don't dare tell me you're supporting someone simply because you want to stop the other guy, because that's the standard line a Liberal would give me as to why they're a Liberal... "To stop Harper and the scary Conservatives".
If you're wondering why I've "fallen off the bandwagon" as it were, here's just a couple of reasons...
1) The rumours, the inuendo, and the outright lies I've been seeing online about the various other campaigns... predominantly coming from Hudak supporters. It was the MAIN reason I could never support the likes of Ron Paul in the States, or Randy Hillier during this Leadership race... because many of their supporters were/are rabidly partisan nutcases. [To my Faithful Fergus Follower, I'm not talking about you here... you've been doing much better now that you're taking your meds... just kidding! ;-)]
2) Many Hudak supporters have been running around online and openly accusing the Elliott camp for the push-poll that occured the other week. Well kiddies, keep your eyes on the news, cause you're all in for a surprise... did I mention I don't like folks who spread stories without a shred of evidence?
3) The comedy of errors that has been the Hudak Campaign... no fault of Tim's, I must say though. I've talked to Tim several times, met with him once, and I was impressed forwards and backwards. I really like Tim, and I think he'd make an excellent Premier... however, he made the same mistake as John Tory, in who he's listening to for advice. It's been like watching the 2007 election all over again, and it ain't been pretty. I know several of Tim's people, and his organizers, and I love'em... but I'm really concerned about some of the upper level folks who have been calling the shots, the folks who are whispering in Tim's ear. Again, if Tim wins, I'll be fine with that, so long as some serious house cleaning gets done at the top levels, with certain folks being brought on board for the 2011 Campaign. Adopting Christine's "Path To Victory" document would also be a good idea. I'll be keeping an eye on the makeup of the 2011 Campaign Team, and that will assist in determining my level of support for the election.
Go ahead, comment away, I'm open to discussion... but behave, and let's talk rationally and positively, or you'll go pushing me over the edge.
Labels: election, PCPO Leadership '09, Queen's Park
posted by Christian Conservative @ 2:45 p.m.
11 Comments:
At Thu Jun 18, 04:27:00 p.m. EDT,
Joanne (True Blue) said…
Personally, I think they all have strong qualities and anyone of them would make a great leader.
There. That didn't offend you, did it?
At Thu Jun 18, 04:30:00 p.m. EDT,
Joan Tintor said…
That's sacred "tenet" not "tenant."
I'm neutral in this race but I can still be a spelling cop.
At Thu Jun 18, 04:54:00 p.m. EDT,
Christian Conservative said…
As with our current Ontario Justice system, I've been arrested, tried, convicted, and already let out on early parole, all in the space of about two minutes.
Sounds just about average, eh? ;-)
At Thu Jun 18, 06:39:00 p.m. EDT,
Anonymous said…
I think you're off base on the HRT -- I really dont think it will be a major issue in a general election. But clearly your mind is made up.
I don't know who you think is whispering in his ear, but I'm never in favour of slagging volunteers, particularly without firsthand knowledge of the situation. I'm also not sure what classifies the Hudak campaign as a "comedy of errors" unless you believe there actually is a back room girl.
There are those who question Tim not hitting back at the criticism from Elliott and Klees, but even if it costs him some support, I respect his choice to take the high ground.
If Tim wins, it will be because his team chose (wisely) to run a leadership campaign, not a general election campaign, focusing on persuading voting members one on one, not trying to convince the general public through the media.
So if Tim wins, why would you want him to fire the team that won, and replace them with the losing team? I'm sure though, as most leaders do, he will bring some people on board from the other campaigns.
I think you should vote for Elliott if you are more comfortable with her policies, and you think she has a better chance of winning than Tim.
I'm supporting Tim because I think he understands the importance of being a party leader, that he is our best chance at beating the liberals, he is a decent man, and he has conducted himself in a manner that will allow the party to heal after the negativity of the campaign.
At Thu Jun 18, 09:21:00 p.m. EDT,
Joanne (True Blue) said…
So did you watch the debate CC? Especially the part where Steve Paiken said that the poll was paid for by the Elliott campaign? (for full disclosure)
At Thu Jun 18, 09:44:00 p.m. EDT,
AEK said…
Ok, so you 'love' Tim Hudak (but....), and 'many of' Randy Hillier's 'were/are rabidly partisan nutcases'.
I hope you don't mean that people who strongly believe in conservative principles are 'nutcases'.
I watched the four candidates on TVO tonight and I hope you watched it too.
Christine Elliot said she would basically shy away from significant reformative changes to the Ontario Human Rights Commission and Tribunal because she was concerned that she wouldn't be able to communicate the issue effectively to the electorate.
Frank Klees essentially took the same position. He stated his priority was getting elected, not (according to my recollection) dealing with fringe issues such as free speech which he thought most Ontarians don't care about, and which would bring bad headlines.
How's that for principle, even when not considering that most newspapers have come out in support of Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn's exposes of the corruption that the federal and provincial HRCs have fallen into?
Don't forget that almost everyone at the Nov CPC Convention voted to abolish Sec 13, including Rob Nicholson, and that Liberals MPs such as Keith Martin have serious issues with the federal law as it stands?
If all the Ontario PC Party wants or has sufficient leadership guts to do is get power by being "Liberal Lite", they will have a tough time motivating anyone other than their traditional core supporters to vote for them, since they will have little alternative to offer.
I sincerely hope my frank comments haven't pushed you 'over the edge' to make a protest vote, but rather, will give you reason to consider your choices based on each candidate's stated positions.
At Thu Jun 18, 10:26:00 p.m. EDT,
Christian Conservative said…
Not a worry AEK, your post is just the sort of "rational" discussion I prefer to have. ;-)
I missed out on the debate tonight, was at prayer meeting, but will be reviewing the tapes over the next 48 hours... right up till I vote on Sunday.
At Fri Jun 19, 09:46:00 a.m. EDT,
HudakBooster said…
I respect your feelings, and I am admittedly a Hudak supporter, but I was wondering if you could clarify a few things.
A number of your comments in both this and the last post talk about "online smears" that the Hudak folks have made online "without a shred of evidence", but then you go ahead and don't provide evidence yourself. What exactly are you referring to? Where are the Hudak folks smearing other camps? Now YOU need to give specifics.
Speaking of specifics, I looked back at the pro-Hudak comments and the polling stuff about Elliott was based on comments from a CFRB reporter, not Hudak supporters. He called them out on it, saying it was underhanded. Why is it unfair to raise that as an issue?
CC, you're entitled to your opinion, but you can't have it both ways. You can't accuse one camp of making baseless accusations while doing the same yourself.
At Fri Jun 19, 10:42:00 a.m. EDT,
Christian Conservative said…
HudakBooster, maybe you should ask your guys to produce the legal letter regarding the push-polling they just sent yesterday... stay tuned
At Fri Jun 19, 11:36:00 a.m. EDT,
JB said…
Shouldn't you be upset that a campaign (I thought it was Elliott, but evidence points to Frank) used an anti-Hudak push poll? I know because I was called:
I did not write down the questions but was shocked when I was asked:
Why do you think Tim Hudak has failed as a candidate in this election race?
a) because of his support of Mike Harris and too much reliance on the past
b) because of his divisive view on the HRC
C) his lack of experience.
Keeping in mind the Hudak campaign's poor performance, are you now more or less likely to change your support?
This is a classic example of PUSH POLL. Why aren't you outraged by those tactics?
At Fri Jun 19, 01:32:00 p.m. EDT,
Joanne (True Blue) said…
maybe you should ask your guys to produce the legal letter regarding the push-polling they just sent yesterday... stay tuned
Could you please elaborate on that? Thanks.
Post a Comment
<< Home