Stay out of Toronto, Peter Kent

Once again more evidence that no one should vote Conservative in Toronto. This morning Peter Kent complained about the voters in St. Pauls and claimed that 905’s Thornhill is a riding more capable of “rational thought.” I love how the Cons keep insulting Toronto and Torontonians in the hopes that we can be berated into supporting them. Kent further went on to suggest that urban voters vote “against their interests” as if we are too dim to see the light of Harpermania. Or something.

Good riddance, Peter, stay north of Steeles Ave.

Advertisements

5 responses to “Stay out of Toronto, Peter Kent

  1. “The voters in the big cities didn’t elect representatives to reflect their values and voice in Parliament,” said Kent. (2:32)

    Living in Toronto, I did vote for a candidate who lost to a Liberal. I thought my preferred candidate represented my values. A plurality of voters in my riding elected the Liberal candidate who will represent the values and voice of the constitutents in my riding. I believe that Peter Kent suggested that only voters who vote for Conservative candidates will have their values represented in Parliament. These values are synonymously Conservative and Canadian. Any voter in Toronto and elsewhere who didn’t vote Conservative is un-Canadian.

    I do wish the good people of Thornhill well with their new member of parliament. They voted as rationally as any other Canadian.

  2. If the Conservatives want to win seats in Toronto the next time, they are going to have to earn them. They need to have policies that can meet the specific needs of Torontonians. If public transportation is a problem, then the Conservatives will need to work with the local politicians and other people of all political stripes to come up with workable solutions. Only then will the people of Toronto consider voting Conservative in greater numbers.

    Earn support!

  3. Kent is the smiling face of extremism–he’s an executive member of the anti-Muslim hate group “Canadian Coalition for Democracies.”

    By all means keep him out of Toronto–but we should be following every political move he makes.

    Reference: http://bouquetsofgray.blogspot.com/2008/10/handy-peter-kent-thornhill-controversy.html

  4. Dr. Dawg has been systematically trawling the Web trying to do this guilt by association hit job on Peter Kent. It’s petty, small-minded, and, well, a logical fallacy.

    Similarly, the idea that Kent truly thinks that voters in one riding are more “rational” than other — I mean, come on. This was an early-morning interview after a late night, from a hostile interviewer looking to pin him.

    Finally, it is a bit weird to tell Kent to “stay out of Toronto”. Thornhill may be outside the megacity boundaries, but anyone who has ever been there knows that it has a lot more common with neighbourhoods like Willowdale or Downsview than with Newmarket or Whitby or wherever. It’s pretty much Toronto by all but theoretical, non-real-world definitions. Visit us sometime to see.

    As to voting against their interests — if you look at the popular vote in 416 alone, the Conservatives (28%) actually came second to the Libs (40%) but ahead of the NDP (20%), surprising as that is.

  5. Pingback: The new federal cabinet - now with more Toronto-hatred! « More Notes From Underground

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s