There are a few things I have wanted to say since I saw advocacy postings by Cerberus and others on Friday night putting out front and centre incorrect final (?) delegate numbers the night before the Conseil général in Montreal. The reason I couldn't blog - I was busy with things having to do with this gathering in my region.
First up, the reason the delegate numbers of the fifth, sixth, and seventh candidates - the non front runners - dropped at least 1% point each is because those numbers do not include backfill.
This is prejudicial to those "wind powered" campaigns - the ones without highly organised MACHINES. Why? The reason they have backfill yet to be placed is that none of these candidates ran very many delegates. Why? Because it is impossible for campaigns with less money to with credibility make any assurances to prospective delegates that their $995 plus expenses will be covered.
The big machines (I know this via reliable sources) either told prospective delegate candidates not to worry about the fees for now or, if you can't find the money, don't go - but sign this form to run as a delegate anyhow. But fundraising is still a common problem, right? Stephane had to take out a $500,000 loan to compete, right? Because of common fundraising challenges the subsidising of delegates strategies is being done on the cheap - many Montreal Liberals are representing the machine candidates in rural Quebec ridings.
The wind powered campaigns could not (and for ethical reasons by one highly ethical candidate) or did not offer to pay for any delegates. Pundits should check on the number of delegates run (particularly in Quebec) and compare that number with the number of elected delegates. They would find at least one non-front runner is possibly batting .400 plus in that department. Isn't that a better measure of who is leading this thing? Take the MACHINES, their funding and willingness to pass around "brown paper envelopes" out of the equation and another definition of "frontrunner" is what you are left with.
Also, since we are talking about process flaws, the process for choosing resolutions in Quebec at least is totally BAD (and I am being nice). At the end of the day, one person only, someone with a specific view of the world chooses which resolutions are voted on and which are not. Resolutions passed at the Biennial Policy Convention at the Fairmont Queen Elizabeth last November were somehow "not eligible" even if they passed unanimously the last time. Most Liberals that I know (except for perhaps those who live in an ivory tower) are furious about this.
There is a very specific agenda here that is "trumping" renewal in a bad way. Even if the renewal process appeared transparent and legitimate, it cannot work if so much power lies in the hands of one person. Kim Jung Il does not necessarily have anymore power in North Korea than this man does when it comes what can become policy and what cannot.
The same thing goes for the Quebec party executives. They are all endorsing (publicly or not) frontrunner candidates. They have all been promised something if they can deliver a victory. Riding association presidents supporting frontrunners will receive money for their ridings if they deliver a winner (or at least some believe this somehow). These are the same people in Quebec who had control over who was notified about about delegate elections. That is probably why delegate turnout was so low and the "frontrunners" with large organisation prevailed. But that is just me.
On outrageous items of logic and deduction like this one, I attribute blogger silence to either advocacy, apathy or fear. I am shocked more people are not talking about these unbelievably "kangaroo" process flaws. Is this about smoke and mirrors?
Some other observations:
Rae was not friendly to me, again (and almost rude). Yesterday, more than before, he reminded me of a certain type of "old boy" from my years at private school in Ontario that I also did not identify with very well when I was 15.
Iggy was very nice and friendly (as was his fantastic wife) though probably because he is courting my vote.
Stephane Dion was forced to defend himself amongst a band of highly organised Iggy supporters, mostly youth. I was close to his wife on the way to the press conference after the debate and she was upset (and I understand) by the way her husband was treated by the Iggy youth (in his own province). If Iggy loses, Pablo and Dennis may have a hard time living this one down. Mr. Dion and Ms. Kreber did not stay for the cocktail.
I told Gerard that I liked what he had to say about renewal. I overheard one person (supporting a frontrunner) say to him that if he does not win he will definitely be Deputy PM. Pandering or desperation?
Ken. Every Canadian should spend 20 minutes with Ken Dryden. I can't say enough good things about what he is like one on one. He performed very well yesterday and looked and behaved prime-ministerial, yet kind of altruistic and not ambitious like some other candidates. His French is much improved, many times better than in Quebec.
Martha is freakin' excellent. She has great policy, much courage and lots of ideas about renewal too. I would like to just hang out or be friends with her. She is fun!
I missed both Scott and Joe.
There are too many stories to tell about this, especially my either very friendly or very cold greetings by various party executives who I have known for some time. I can't figure it out apart from comments by someone on one of my previous blogs that the Quebec president should resign. Should I be held accountable for such comments when I said nothing of the sort?
7 comments:
How exactly is copying and pasting the actual final results from the Liberal.ca website to a blog "advocacy"? Especially when I go out of my way to highlight that the backfill process has not been completed?
Cerberus. That was not a shot against you. You wrote what you observed. The claim that these were final numbers by you and others was incorrect though at best and misleading at worst.
This is more about the executive who support some canadidates but not others depending upon momentum. Why would they choose to release incorrect numbers - not final numbers (as you claimed) - the day before the Conseil général.
Does this not further limit the potential momentum of other candidates and their ability to access ex-officio support going into a very important regioal meeting?
It is just typical of this process, that's all.
This is to the advantage of some candidates like I explained and in line with other decisions that have been made that play to the advantage of the candidates with highly organised machines.
When you say things like "not final numbers (as you claimed)", it implies you think I am spinning.
The Liberal Party released the official "Final" numbers, subject to appeals and some backfills. I didn't, CalgaryGrit, etc. didn't "claim" it was "final", we reported what the party stated. And the second thing I wrote was that the backfill numbers are still to come.
The truth is, other than the issue of Rae's delegate manipulations in BC, the numbers won't change much. You can only backfill up to 2 candidates per riding and almost all of the 4333+ delegate spots have been filled so no need to backfill, and there are strict rules on backfilling (i.e. you can just assign anyone to fill the spots) so many of these will not be filled at all I would expect.
I agree this will benefit the non-frontrunners, but I'd be very surprised if we saw much percentage change, if any, as a result.
One blogger claimed that candidates 5, 6 and 7 had all fallen more than 1% point as a result of removing the backfills from the "ticker". For some this represented 15-20% of their delegates.
This choice, possibly strategic, made created the optics that all momentum was gone from those campaigns not running on "high octane".
This was misleading at a very important time. No one at the party should have written "final numbers" (except for the backfill and all the other numbers still in question). That is much different from real "final numbers" - a REAL play on words in my opinion and to the benefit of those who make the decisions about this type of thing at the party and to whom they tend to support.
This is like reporting the final score after the second period and it is not useful to a process that should be fair and transparent.
Yes unfortunately Mr. Ignatieff is now willing to risk the entire country for his ambitions. Not surprising from someone who hasn't been here for 37 years. Hope full y this ends at convention when someone else is elected. Yes they are courting Kennedy and promising him things because they figure he's all they need to win and he isn't a threat. However, I don't think they will be over 50 with Igs and Gerry.
Ken is the most sincere and poorly used candidate in this race. The ridiculous slams against him as dull etc are just garbage. First of all its not true, second of all who cares. Ken cared the most about membership women children natives etc. The ruthless campaigns who abuse this process will win this time, hopefull not the next. i don't even believe they can win a general election at this point certainly not with Mr. Arrogant Gaffe in charge. So we shall see, perhaps we'll elect Ken next year after Liberals have woken up and learned a thing or two about corrupt practices and how they are viewed by the Canadina public, because many especially in Quebec just seem to be going alloong with the same old same old corrupt Liberal crap. it is illegal by the way for campaigns to pay delegate fees. the conservatives will be all over that like a hawk. When it happens, especially in Quebec, won't that just be friggin great for us in a general election. Some people never learn, well Igs wasn't even in the country so what would he know.
Hopefully we still have a country after convention and this man goes back to his ivory tower in the US.
Cerberus you spin like a top when your string is pulled by Camp iggy. ahahahaha Wow your posts are so spinny I think they are written by HQ. The latest praising Kenny is on of of them. Did that directive come from Toronto or Montreal. Give me a friggin break Cerberus. you bet you spin and not even your own spin. Oh yeah and did you think that those of us who follow the leadership weren't aware of the lastest tactics by the Iggy team?
Wow, everyone has to spin and rinse these days. Hijacking policy and promoting one candidate's special cause can only create a division where there wasn't really one before, and how does that help Mr Centre-Left? He's already supported the Iraq War, disappeared midway through a leadership campaign, said he might not run if he doesn't like the final choice, called Qana something that he "wasn't losing sleep over" and then suggested Israel is guilty of "a war crime" at the same spot... I'm a little tired of the Rae-he cheats-man slander because its fair game to go after his record but he essentially pulled his delegates for all to see. No shenanigans -- the LPC made the ruling and will make a ruling on the appeal. Otherwise, Iggy and now the others would rather see BC send the same representation number as Nova Scotia and PEI combined!
I'll agree that its weird and a shame that both Dryden and Brison have slipped off the radar, both deserve to be major movers and hopefully will be when all is said and done. Can't agree on Martha -- what policy? She's been an empty vessel, just saying 'renewal' and asking people what they think. Too touchy feely, as tho Bob Hartley's love child ran for office. But I digress. She is probably a lot of fun, too.
Post a Comment