Had I attended the Ontario PC convention last weekend, I'm sure my thoughts would be similar -- although not as eloquently stated -- as these. 66.9% is such a bad number because its just below where you can easily claim victory, and not high enough to be comfortably in the clear. It's an unfortunate outcome for both the Ontario PCs and John Tory, but they will move on.
ALW notes:
There is a reason Mr. Clark, whatever his other merits, is considered the gold standard of poor political decision-making in Canadian politics, and his decision to quit and re-contest the federal PC leadership in 1984 [sic -- 1983] is a major element of that.
I disagree. Clark did the honourable thing by concluding that a level of support below 70% required him to resign and run again. As I noted earlier, the 65%-75% margin should have been a "resign and run again" result in this race, particularly given the contextual factors -- party apparatus was behind the leader, no obvious successor organizing against him, etc.
I don't have the data, but I would think the list of Canadian political leaders who remained after getting 67% in a review vote is fairly thin. In 2005, Bernard Landry quit with 75%.
All this being said, I see no point in further discussion of John Tory's leadership. His decision to stay on is the wrong decision, but he has the right to that decision. I wish the party well going forward.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 2:48 PM
