30 September 2009

You know them as sooks, Ma’am.

In Corner Brook, they are apparently called penders, after the big sooky former mayor of the great city of the west.

Rather than be gracious in defeat, Charles Pender decided to moan and whine a bit:

“It wasn’t a one-on-one campaign,” Pender said. “I had other forces I had to deal with ... Mr. Greeley had a definite strategy with the support of Gerry Byrne’s campaign team, which is a formidable opponent, and Eddie Joyce bringing people to the polls all day in Curling.”

Pender must get the sooks from some of the company he’s been keeping since 2001.

-srbp-

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

I noticed that too. Too bad Ralph Wiseman has chosen to stay off the record.

David said...

Actually, Wiseman spoke to someone at vocm and they aired it yesterday. His sookiness was barely a degree below Pender's - claimingyoung Coombs ran a negative campaign and saying that Coombs brought up all the things that Paradise *didn't* have, like propoer infrastructure for a town that size. Seems to me that the Coombs claims were true - and obviously successful.

How one wins says something about their character. How one loses says everything.

Edward G. Hollett said...

Yeah, David, Kurtis seemed to hit a bunch of themes from dogs to infrastructure that resonated with voters.

That's what a political campaign usually looks like and good on Kurtis for doing what he needed to do.

In St. John's, there's a tendency to try and mute political differences and debate such that the fight at the deputy mayor level this time was an aberration.

If you look at the rest of the campaigns there really wasn't much discussion of issues and performance at all.

Most of the stuff candidates were spouting consisted of lame platitiudes and, on things like mill rates, the bullshit promises of cutting the mill rate when they were actually talking about a tax increase.

And look if some guy can basically swan his way through and still get elected, you know there is something fundamentally rotten in the system.

Candidates in St. John's are not subjected to any sort of test which is what the political fight is supposed to be.

Not surprisingly a number of the winners turn out to be major-league duds.

I'd venture that if there was a more robust system in St. John's Ron Ellsworth would have been weeded out early on or have sorted hismelf out. Ditto Doc and Keith.

Anonymous said...

another example of political pettiness came from the mouth of sheila guy during a discussion on the cbc morning show during the campaign. When Debbie Hanlon said (something like) she'd be a "fulltime" councillor, guy-murphy said (in my best catty tone) "that's surprising considering all the things your involved in". The only thing missing was the "hiss-hiss-yeow" sound.

Hanlon - a weak candidate in her own right - got my vote only because guy-murphy repelled it.

David (wasn't able to log name)

Edward G. Hollett said...

Well, David given that Debbie boosted her vote by 500 votes or so (working from memory) she's hardly a weak candidate. In fact, she could have taught the high spending losers in the mayor and deputy mayor race how to run a hypermanic campaign that used things like facebook to maximum advantage

Sheila's decision to run in this case was a bit odd. She's tried Ward One before and finished abysmally.

Her campaign seemed to be driven much more by animosity toward Debbie than anything else. Her catty comment that you noted was just one of many. Hopefully this will be the end of her dalliances.

Anonymous said...

Fair point. My comment about her being a weak candidate was more toward how I perceive her ability and stature in the council - fully recognizing that is subjectively based.

Also, yes she received hundreds of more votes but she was running against 2 others last time. This time she had only to divide the votes with one other (clearly weak) candidate. Her percentage was higher - and so it should be.

David