LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

Bowinn Ma, MLA - North Vancouver-Lonsdale.

NDP candidate Bowinn Ma, who was sexualized in a retirement roast tribute gone wrong by Liberal candidate Jane Thornthwaite, worries about the message “casual sexism” sends to women considering a career in politics.

“This is not about me,” said Ma at an event in her North Vancouver riding on Monday. “If we want more young women and people of colour to run for politics, we need to be creating an environment to attract them. These comments did the exact opposite.”

Thornthwaite is being criticized following a series of sexualized comments

made online about Ma. The comments, made during a Sept. 17 virtual roast of former B.C. Liberal MLA Ralph Sultan, were screen recorded and later shared with Mo Amir, a Vancouver podcast host. Amir posted the two-minute clip to his Twitter on Saturday evening and asked women to chime in with their thoughts.

In the clip — which included B.C. Liberal Leader Andrew Wilkinson — Thornthwaite is heard sharing a story about Ma and Sultan’s interactions, implying flirtatious behaviour between the two.

“Bowinn is a very pretty lady, she knows she’s got it, and she knows how to get Ralph going,” says Thornthwaite to laughs from the other participants. She then goes on to describe an event where Ma and Sultan were “stuck on the couch together — very, very close together — for almost the entire time.”

In response, Sultan groaned, prompting Thornthwaite to say, “Yes, Ralph. You remember that. We were supposed to be networking and all this — but Bowinn knows how to get you. She knows how to get you.

“Ralph would be sitting on one couch, say, the middle of the couch and Bowinn would be right up next to him, cuddling, cuddling, cuddling — a little cleavage there — and Ralph would be enthralled with her,” said Thornthwaite, as other participants chuckled.

Thornthwaite eventually apologized on Twitter to Ma for her comments.

Wilkinson tweeted that “those comments were inappropriate and it was right for Jane to apologize.”

But Ma on Monday said, “Andrew Wilkinson has a lot to answer for” because the comments reflect a “pattern of behaviour that Andrew Wilkinson has personally endorsed by allowing it to carry on.”

Ma said Thornthwaite left her a voicemail but she wasn’t ready to listen to it. Ma said she had not received any other calls or messages from any other Liberal.

“I was disappointed,” said NDP Leader John Horgan at another event on Monday. “It’s not OK to joke about sexism, racism, and intolerance. It’s appropriate for leaders to step up and call that type of behaviour out.”

“I certainly hope that I would have done that in the same circumstance,” said Horgan. “Having said that, I’m a flawed individual, I’m imperfect and I try and learn every day and I believe this is a teachable moment for all of us.”

Liberal supporters on Twitter brought up a radio debate in the 2017 campaign, during which Horgan took “sharp personal digs” at former Liberal Premier Christy Clark, according to then Province columnist Mike Smyth.

“At one point, frustrated with Clark interrupting him, Horgan said to her: “If you want to just keep doing your thing, I will watch you for a while; I know you like that,” Smyth wrote.

“He later explained this creepy comment by saying Clark is a ‘photo-op premier’ who loves attention,” Smyth wrote.

Related


None of us.

There is a simple reason why no one really wants to say Donald Trump is going to lose in 2020.

Because no one really got it right in 2016.

This writer is one of the many who got it wrong.  Never saw it coming.  And I was close enough to the action to know better.

Full disclosure: I've helped out the Democrats for years, and I was again proudly working for Hillary Clinton in 2016.  As a foreign national, I couldn't donate to her campaign, or get paid.  But I could volunteer for her, and I did in Maine, in New Hampshire, and at her Brooklyn headquarters.

We had more money.  We had better people.  We had organization.  We had ideas galore.  We had experienced campaign managers.  And we had the best candidate, too: a former Secretary of State, a former Senator, a former First Lady and accomplished lawyer.  We had it all.

Our opponent was a joke.  Donald Trump been caught on tape, proclaiming that he "grabbed [women] by the pussy."  He refused to release his taxes because, we suspected (correctly), he hadn't paid his fair share.  He was an unapologetic racist, calling Mexicans drug dealers and rapists, and pledging to bar Muslims from entering the United States.

And he had denigrated captured war heroes like John McCain who was being tortured in Vietnam right around the time Trump was dodging the draft and chasing escorts around New York City.

We couldn't lose or so we thought.  For months, every national poll had shown us far ahead of Trump.  The politics and the punditocracy, too: all were convinced we'd win.

We didn't.

Even though Hillary got three million more votes than Trump, the United States' byzantine electoral college system produced a perverse, and shocking, result: the narrowest of victories for Donald Trump.  Because slightly more than 70,000 votes went the wrong way in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, Trump bested Clinton in the electoral college.

Could it happen again?

It could.  It might.  A characteristic of Trump's core vote, those of us on Clinton's team later learned, is that they are older and tend to hide from pollsters in the lead-up to voting day and then they come out to vote, en masse.

Trump was assisted, too, by Bernie Sanders in 2016.  Sanders had repeatedly demonized Hillary as corrupt and a captive of Wall Street thereby suppressing our youth vote.  The clueless, witless FBI director also helped to kill Hillary's momentum when it hurt the most, with a bogus and needless probe of some emails.  And, finally, white suburban women who we had thought would be repulsed by Trump voted against their self-interest, and for a "man" who bragged about sexual assault.

Four years later, and with three weeks to go until voting day, none of that applies anymore.  For Donald Trump, the political landscape is radically different.

The coronavirus has sickened or killed Trump's most loyal supporters white retired seniors.  Poll after poll now show that older Americans have abandoned Trump because they have been appalled by his mismanagement of the pandemic, which has killed 215,000 Americans.  Seniors are now mostly lining up behind the Democrats' Joe Biden.

Bernie Sanders, meanwhile, has a far better relationship with Biden than he did with Clinton.  As a result, Sanders has urged his youthful supporters to rally behind Biden and they have.

This time around, there is no manufactured scandal swirling around the Democratic presidential nominee.  Trump tried to get one going in Ukraine against Biden and his son, of course.  But that only resulted in Trump's impeachment and Biden winning the Democratic nomination in a walk.

Finally, white suburban women long ago abandoned Trump, fed up with his sexism and misogyny and payoffs to porn stars.  Biden's massive national polling lead has been fuelled, for the most part, by female voters.

But that's the polls.  Is Joe Biden winning on the ground, where it counts?

This time around, I am doing phone banking calling up registered voters, to I.D. the vote, to get out the vote.  I've called hundreds of residents of New England states so far, asking how they've marked their absentee ballots.  And this is how many have told me they've voted for Donald Trump:

None of them.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Annamie Paul, the federal Green Party's newly-minted leader, might be a great environmentalist, but I suspect she'll make for a lousy politician.

I say that because she was recently whining about how, during the last federal election, the NDP had distributed pamphlets attacking her Green Party, attacks which included the accusation that the Greens share "many Conservative values."

Horror of horrors!

Anyway, Paul was apparently so shocked that the NDP would carry out such an audacious attack strategy, that even a year later, she still feels the sting.

Said Paul recently to the media, "there is still a lot of hurt and confusion about the NDP's decision to use American-style attack ads and literature during the 2019 (federal) race.  The Green party is a relatively young party; we have lots and lots of former NDP members, we have lots who are very sympathetic to the NDP, and who have lots of friends in the NDP.  So, there's still a lot of hurt and confusion about the decisions they made."

OK, there's a lot to unpack here.

First off, I think it's kind of cute the way Paul equates pretty harmless pamphlets to the dreaded "American-style attack ads."  Talk about being overly sensitive!  I can only imagine the amount of "hurt and confusion" she'd feel if a rival party ever actually did unload a bona fide negative blitz against her!

She might have to hide away under a solar panel.

Secondly, it seems Paul isn't all that confident in the loyalty of her Green Party supporters, if she fears even the slightest of criticisms will cause them to break ranks.

And lastly and most tellingly, Paul's comments seem to betray a stunning naivety about how politics actually works.

Otherwise why would she be so astonished that the NDP would attempt to pry away Green Party supporters, whom she admits "are very sympathetic to the NDP?"

Of course, the NDP would try to woo away such supporters, just as the Conservatives would try to woo away Liberal supporters who might be sympathetic to them.

My point is, the NDP and the Greens are basically both fishing in the same voter pool, so naturally there'd be some conflict between them.

It's inevitable; it's the political law of the jungle.

If Paul doesn't get this reality, she's in for a rude awakening.

Mind you, Paul's predecessor as Green Party leader, Elizabeth May, also wasn't exactly savvy when it came to political tactics.

I remember, for instance, when May hired Warren Kinsella, a combative, aggressive, fire-eating political operative, who wrote a book called Kicking Ass in Canadian Politics to help her set up a "war room".

Many at the time, including myself, saw this move as evidence that May was getting ready to duke it out with the other parties in the political arena, giving as well as she got.

Indeed, the Green Party deputy-leader Jo-Ann Roberts told the media: "Elizabeth had to admit that she does not have the sophistication it takes to deal with this stuff.  We can play to her great strength, climate change, but only if we don't let other people take her apart at the knees.  Kinsella knows the dark world much better than we do.  By hiring him, we are sending a message to other parties: we will not just let ourselves be attacked."

Yet, as it turned out, May wasn't totally sold on the Kinsella concept.

In fact, when Kinsella went on Twitter and tweeted this line: "Elizabeth May brings on Kicking Ass in Canadian Politics author Warren Kinsella to help Green war room", May responded with this tweet: "Greens do politics differently. @kinsellawarren knows we have no 'war room.'  Peace Room?  Situation Room?  Room of Zen?"

Unfortunately, for May, her "Room of Zen" didn't stop the NDP attacks.

Perhaps this is why the federal Greens, despite getting mainly positive press, are still essentially just a fringe party.

Sure, its pro-environment message might resonate with a lot of people, but when it comes to the "dog eat dog" world of politics, it's just a puppy.

Photo Credit: CBC News

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.