James gives NDP no chance

Yeah no shit. TRhey whined about Stupich’s dumbass Bingo scandal so much Harcourt fell on the sword for the Party.
Instant Karma. The whiners got Glen Clark as a replacement… :smiley:
Bingo and porches…
vs Drunk drivers, land scandals, Chinese ladies with paper bags full of money. Like comparing grapes to watermelons.

Pretty sure you have a bit of a double standard going on there, doesn’t matter if the NDP has leaders who make mistakes, only if the Liberals do.

Past NDP leaders (Harcourt and Clark) took responsibility for perceived transgressions by resigning.
Our Premiere was charged with a criminal offense in Hawaii, but, chose not to take responsibility for it.

chose not to take responsibility for it, correct me if i’m wrong he didn’t fight the charge in Hawaii and actually was charged according to their legal system there, to me that is taking responsibility unlike drunk drivers in BC who fight it and waste our courts time,
as for bingogate Harcourt had nothing to do with it he just went down in flames for it,

and those foreign workers brought in to build the SKytrain well hate to say this but they were paid over $20 per hour plus living expenses, not full union wages for their trade in canada but still good pay, our rivers haven’t been sold either to the IPPS and taxpayers don’t subsidize exports of electricity at all they sell it at market rates

Gordon Campbell also gave up drinking completely after the incident, which I would commend him for.

If you think Mike Harcourt is an example to follow it’s interesting to me that he fully supports the BC Liberals’ plan to sell “our rivers to private companies and forcing the taxpayers to subsidize their exported power.”

Actually, you didn’t say that but, seeing how wrong you were, you switched gears, as if you were just explaining parliamentary democracy. What you said was: “you aren’t voting for a leader, but a party.”

That’s simply wrong. Many people will vote the party they believe has the best leader - some will jump ship because they have lost faith in their leader. A lot of people do vote just based on the party but to say that everyone votes that way, regardless of who is the leader, is ridiculous.

Just look at how Bob Skelly fumbled what looked like a sure NDP win in 86 against the far more charismatic Vander Zalm. And your boy Harcourt’s win had less to do with his “team approach” than it did with Socred scandal and the rise of Gordon Wilson and the BC Liberals, who split the right vote with the Socreds - again showing the importance of leadership as Wilson’s performance in the televised debate brought many voters over to the Liberals.

Like it or not, leaders do factor in significantly with voters.

I wonder how much Gordo coming to town hurt Herb? As a very divisive personality, he might have done some damage. I haven’t live in Roop long enough to know for sure, so I’ll let the rest of you HTMFers decide, but I truly agree with Max that leaders matter when voters head to the voting stations… that is IF they head to the voting stations.

Leaders are the image and personality of the party. When you think “Keep BC Strong” perhaps you think, “Keep Gordo Long”. When you think “Take back BC” perhaps you think “Oh for god sakes, he drank and drove as the freaking Premier of this province while abroad! Even if you have no faith in me, which you don’t, think of the children!”

You bring up some very good points…  For me I was decided long before Gord got here that I was not voting for Herb…  But I can see where for the undecided his coming to town could of hurt Herb.  It still floors me that Gordo got away with the drinking and driving in Hawaii…  As early posts stated with NDP the leaders answer for their scandals by leaving but with the liberals they stay on no matter what…  What kind of an example does this set for children is so right…

Sorry Krissy, but this is where we would always disagree. No one is perfect, of course, but there is a moral imperative as the leader of anything to take full responsibility for your actions. That means, in the end, stepping down as leader.

If Rod Blagojevich said he gave up bribery “after the incident” should that have meant he should have stayed on as the Illinois Governor? I sure hope not. 

I know I’ve already argued this with you before, but I think you’re comparing two separate things.

I’m not a Gordon Campbell fan at all, but I don’t think the DUI thing is a big deal.

To use your own analogy, Gordon Campbell should have stepped down because he is a threat to have eight martinis at lunch time, then get back to the legislature, rock a piss in the center aisle, sign a few papers without reading them, and throw a punch at the speaker? It’s like saying that Danny Heatley shouldn’t be allowed to play hockey, because he was a reckless driver. I have difficulty following the logic.

Everyone always says “Well, it speaks to his flawed character and poor judgment.” I don’t think it has any bearing on his ability to be an effective administrator, where he receives advice and criticism from dozens of people before making a decision.

Finally, to address a broader issue, I do not agree that politicians/leaders/figureheads should be held to a stricter behavioural model than laypersons such as myself, because to say that is to admit that for some reason they are superior to you.

I guess what I’m trying to say is, if you’re going to attack the guy, attack policy. Attack his job performance. If all you’ve got is name-calling, you’re no better than those Ignatieff attack ads.

I can’t believe I’m defending Gordon Campbell.

I think you’re missing the point. It’s not about whether or not he can still do the job. It’s about respecting the position.

The Premier represents British Columbians and when he takes that job he is, understandably, held to the highest moral standard. As citizens, ,most of us believe drunk driving is a very serious offence. It is not a “personal matter,” as Campbell and his cronies put it, since it endangers the lives of others. Going by your reasoning, it would also be okay if Campbell was a coke dealer and had sex with underage girls as it would not affect his ability “to be an effective administrator, where he receives advice and criticism from dozens of people before making a decision.”

And, to use your sports analogy, pro athletes ARE suspended or given lifetime bans for committing serious offences off the field because those leagues, particularly MLB and the NFL, are an elite club and see their athletes as representatives of that club.

Gordon Campbell is a member of an elite club, a club of people who were chosen by their constituents and entrusted not only to make important decisions on their behalf, but to represent them well and with honor.

Should he have resigned? Not necessarily. But he should have at least suspended himself from office and submitted himself to the laws of his own province, returning only when he had met all of its requirements and penalties for the offence. 

It’s like saying that Danny Heatley shouldn’t be allowed to play hockey, because he was a reckless driver. I have difficulty following the logic.

I actually think Danny Heatley got off pretty light. Perhaps because he was a professional athlete, the judge felt he would be best served giving back to the community rather than serving time. But what he did resulted in the death of a friend and a human being. Of course Dan Snyder’s mother forgiving him played a large role in moving that forward, but a hockey player and an elected official are not grapes of the same vine.

Then what speaks to good judgement? Eso, you know this isn’t personal between us, but I disagree with this. He is not just an administrator like a deputy minister(who he gave a 43 per cent rise to, while claiming there just isn’t enough money for everyone) he is supposed to be an elected leader, an adult who represents the best of us. Whether that actually happens, well we could waste a lot of this thread going back-and-forth. Point is, we’ve held North American politicians in the past to a higher standard and penalized people like Paul Martin for being dithering or not worthy, and yet someone who, I feel, stooped to the lowest of lows (that’s where I place drinking and driving) is cool to keep his job as the top rep for B.C.

[quote]Finally, to address a broader issue, I do not agree that politicians/leaders/figureheads should be held to a stricter behavioural model than laypersons such as myself, because to say that is to admit that for some reason they are superior to you.

Again not a personal thing Eso, but it says a lot about our society that a HIGH RANKING OFFICIAL can drink and drive and people go “well, I’d hate to judge him at a higher level than I live by”. I don’t believe you are careening down McBride with a flask of whisky on a Saturday night.

And to be really fair, if this were Herb or Jack or Gary then this site would be el fuego with how much these gents had messed up.  

Why are we even still talking about this?  It happened six years ago, and there have been two elections since.  Obviously, voters have forgiven him for what he did or else just completely forgotten about it.

Same reason the BC Liberals keep bringing up the Fast Ferries.

The fast ferries cost the province over $400 million dollars.  Gordon Campbell drunk driving didn’t cost anything. 

Because the principle of it, the question of whether or not a politician should resign for committing a criminal offence, makes for an interesting debate. Campbell is close to home and the best recent example.

Is that okay with you, Krissy, if we use this website to hold forums/discussions on issues every now and then?

Well, it’s been brought up here in response to the “why aren’t we building ferries in BC anymore?” idea–not as a reason Carol James is unfit to be Premier.

John A. MacDonald was an alcoholic. Churchill was an alcoholic too–as well as rude and sexist. That doesn’t have much to do with respect for their office, but just demonstrates that whatever one’s position in life we’re all flawed individuals in our own way. And, as others have said, I don’t think we should hold our elected officials under a different set of rules than the rest of us. Campbell was caught driving under the influence and was charged–he faced the same justice system any of us would have. To me, that’s fair, and doesn’t mean he should step down as Premier.

I do, however, acknowledge what a terrible example it is to people in this province. I certainly hope the Premier thinks every day how fortunate he is that he didn’t kill anyone that night. I also acknowledge that I might be singing a different tune if Carol James was Premier and she was caught doing something similar–but I haven’t had to face that situation yet.

Wait till the cost over runs on the 2010 games come in.  That will make the fast cat cost look like pocket change…