capricorn Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 But this is odd and the only logical conclusion that I can draw from this action is that they are concerned about their support going back to the liberals. If you want to understand the motives behind this Rae ad, read this analysis by a well known Liberal blogger. Jeff Jedras: Tories toss a well-aimed grenade into Liberal tent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 Running attack ads against Bob Rae is not "publicly criticizing our government." In case you weren't aware, the Tories formed the government in the last election. So one can only criticize members of the majority? Riiight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 I've been discarding requests for a donation since the last time I sent in a cheque. Learning about the anti-Rae ad motivates me to donate again. Funny that. The anti-Rae ad was motivation, but more than that is the anti-free speech response by members of this forum. I'm going online right now to donate $100 dollars. Thanks cybercoma, thanks dre, for the extra push. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 The anti-Rae ad was motivation, but more than that is the anti-free speech response by members of this forum. I'm going online right now to donate $100 dollars. Thanks cybercoma, thanks dre, for the extra push. phhbbt... I highly doubt you are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 phhbbt... I highly doubt you are. Already did. I used my Mastercard. It was quite easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 If you want to understand the motives behind this Rae ad, read this analysis by a well known Liberal blogger. Jeff Jedras: Tories toss a well-aimed grenade into Liberal tent Interesting article, thanks for the link. I LOVE the caption under the picture of Harper. Hilarious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 Already did. I used my Mastercard. It was quite easy. Pic or it didn't happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noahbody Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 If you want to understand the motives behind this Rae ad, read this analysis by a well known Liberal blogger. I would assume the motive behind the ad is because they fear if Rae wins he might attempt to merge or form a coalition with the NDP. The money would be better spent sending their "war machine" to marketing school and to buy better sandwiches for their focus groups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 The Conservatives have more money then they know what to do with. Their attack against Rae is brilliant because it doesn't just hurt him personally but it causes problems for the Liberals internally. I'm willing to bet that the Consrvatives already have research done for attack ads against all the frontrunners in the NDP leadership campaign and that it will only be a matter of getting it filmed once the leader is decided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) I would assume the motive behind the ad is because they fear if Rae wins he might attempt to merge or form a coalition with the NDP. I don't think it's as simple as that. Noah, one thing this ad does is spark a discussion among Liberals about whether it is wise to spend money defending an interim Leader, or reserve the funds for a time when they have a permanent leader. It's no secret that Liberal insiders want Rae to come clean on his intentions so that other contenders can plan accordingly. If Rae truly held the good of the Liberal Party top of mind, why is he acting in a manner that causes divisions within the party? IMO, he is holding back the Liberal Party from making any headway. To some, such ads may not seem to make sense but successful politics is played as a long game. It's time the Liberals got in the game and Rae is in the way of that objective. Edited March 20, 2012 by capricorn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 If Rae truly held the good of the Liberal Party top of mind, why is he acting in a manner that causes divisions within the party? IMO, he is holding back the Liberal Party from making any headway. Who says he is? IMHO, he is far and away the best choice for both positions, and frankly that's the position of a lot of liberal supporters known to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) Who says he is? IMHO, he is far and away the best choice for both positions, and frankly that's the position of a lot of liberal supporters known to me. If he's the best then why won't he come clean and say he's running, publicly? I agree that Rae is just hurting the party by not letting his intentions known. Edited March 20, 2012 by Newfoundlander Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) If he's the best then why won't he come clean and say he's running, publicly? I agree that Rae is just hurting the party by not letting his intentions known. Why would he? Why would the party want him to? The convention isn't for another year and change and as far as I know, Rae serves at the Boards pleasure and with the support of a majority of Senators. Edited March 20, 2012 by Shakeyhands Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 Why would he? Why would the party want him to? The convention isn't for another year and change and as far as I know, Rae serves at the Boards pleasure and with the support of a majority of Senators. So he should just go around continuing to lie to everyone? All Rae is doing is trying to screw over his potential competition for the leadership and make himself look good so he doesn't have any competition. Rae is likable but he is only in it for himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 Pic or it didn't happen. Daddy's credit card... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huh Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 Man this attack add is freekin hallarious! Was Bob Rae responsible for the jobs lost due to the global recession of the time? Was Bob Rae responsible for the GST and income tax increases brought in by the progressive conservatives and Brian Mulroney? Was Bob Rae responsible for the job losses due to the free trade agreement brought in by Brian Mulroney? Was Bob Rae responsible to the inherided debt/deficit from previous provincial governments(Bill Davis,David peterson)? Was Bob Rae responsible for the massive transfer payment cuts by Cretien? Anyone who is gullible enough to believe or give credit to this attack add is completely biased and has absolutely no credibility!Whatsoever! But don't argue with me,argue with the facts! Either way it does not matter to me.Actually it is a very good sign for the NDP to see the conservatives try to fight ghosts from nearly 20 years ago(very long time ago politically).This is a big sign that the conservatives are very worried about the strength of their support! If this is what all the conservatives got then all the power to them and let the adds keep rolling! WWWTT Have you ever once negatively referred to our national debt and the spending the cons did to make it grow? If so, welcome to hypocriteville. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 So he should just go around continuing to lie to everyone? All Rae is doing is trying to screw over his potential competition for the leadership and make himself look good so he doesn't have any competition. Rae is likable but he is only in it for himself. He can fulfill his mandate, no more no less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 So one can only criticize members of the majority? Riiight. Look, I never said anyone can only do anything. In my opinion, campaign ads should only be run after the writs have dropped up until the day of the election. Running attack ads all the time and any time grows tiresome and stinks of propaganda. I find it distasteful and an insult to the public. Moreover, they're proclaiming that "Bob Rae can't run the country." There are many things wrong with this. 1) There is no election. So it's a moot point right now. 2) Bob Rae is only interim-leader. Unless the rules change he cannot be the leader proper. 3) The Liberals aren't even the official opposition yet. 5) Their argument presumes that there's some correlation to running the province and running the country. However, the most important point is quite possibly that the leader of a political party does not run the country, contrary to what Stephen Harper thinks of himself. Parliament is in charge and the leader of the party is an MP like every other member in the House. Harper and the Conservatives will do everything they can to distance themselves from the ills of their party, but at the same time they make proclamations like the running of the entire country sits on a single individual. None of the faults of the ad are really my point, though. My point is simply that it is unnecessary propaganda to run campaign ads when an election isn't even remotely close. They're simply using the, granted successful, tactics they used against Ignatieff and they're going to villify the opposition leaders right up until the election. It's one thing to run attack ads during a campaign to try and discredit your opponents, but it's quite another thing to run those same ads outside of an election cycle. It borders on slanderous and is quite literally nothing more than propaganda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 Look, I never said anyone can only do anything. In my opinion, campaign ads should only be run after the writs have dropped up until the day of the election. Running attack ads all the time and any time grows tiresome and stinks of propaganda. I find it distasteful and an insult to the public. It also discriminates against the other parties that can not afford to continuesly run adds. In other words we should not be allowing a political party the ability to "buy" an election/democracy! WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 The Conservatives have more money then they know what to do with. Their attack against Rae is brilliant because it doesn't just hurt him personally but it causes problems for the Liberals internally. I'm willing to bet that the Consrvatives already have research done for attack ads against all the frontrunners in the NDP leadership campaign and that it will only be a matter of getting it filmed once the leader is decided. If this is going to be status quo then I would certainly love to see the opposition pool their resources against Harper and run attack ads as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 He can fulfill his mandate, no more no less. The mandate he lied to get? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 It also discriminates against the other parties that can not afford to continuesly run adds. In other words we should not be allowing a political party the ability to "buy" an election/democracy! WWWTT Discriminates against the other parties that can not afford to continuously run ads? Please tell me you're not serious? There's no limit on how much money a party can raise, if parties want to run ads continuously then they should learn how to raise money. Is it discrimination that Peggy Nash is able to run a better leadership campaign than Nikki Ashton because she raised more money? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 Discriminates against the other parties that can not afford to continuously run ads? Please tell me you're not serious? There's no limit on how much money a party can raise, if parties want to run ads continuously then they should learn how to raise money. Is it discrimination that Peggy Nash is able to run a better leadership campaign than Nikki Ashton because she raised more money? The NDP has a cap of 0.5 million dollars for the leadership race. Democracy should not be up for the highest bidder. Tell me your joking if you think democracy can be bought? WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 The NDP has a cap of 0.5 million dollars for the leadership race. Democracy should not be up for the highest bidder. Tell me your joking if you think democracy can be bought? WWWTT You still have candidates who can't raise even close to that, is that fair? If the NDP wanted to lead by example maybe they should have given all the candidates $500,000 to run with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 I LOVE the caption under the picture of Harper. Hilarious. I went back to have a look. It is quite humourous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.