After having declared his intention to seek a rematch against NDP MP Linda Duncan in Edmonton-Strathcona, former Conservative MP Rahim Jaffer has bowed out of his party's nomination race.
Tory nominations drive Jaffer from politicsCandidates for the Conservative nomination include Ryan Hastman, Linda Blade, and Cathay Wagantall.
Former MP gives up on his ambitions after being shut out of Edmonton riding in favour of PMO staffer
JENNIFER DITCHBURN
The Canadian Press
May 7, 2009 at 6:53 PM EDT
OTTAWA — Former Conservative MP Rahim Jaffer is giving up on his political ambitions for now, after Tory sources say he was effectively shut out of the nomination process in his Edmonton riding.
A staffer in the Prime Minister's Office is one of the contestants in that race.
“My understanding is that the party does not want him to run,” said a Conservative source. “The party is doing what the party does.”
Mr. Jaffer, a former caucus chair, told the party in a letter last month that he intended to run in Edmonton-Strathcona to win back the riding he narrowly lost last fall to the NDP. [Read more]
(h/t @MrBWH)
Posts
26 comments:
I remember saying to some people a little while ago that you don't actually get to pick your nominee as a party member in this country.
Those people replied "Well, maybe not in your riding."
Maybe not in Edmonton-Strathcona, either.
Or maybe, it's not in any riding where the party leader gives a crap.
But if the leader has a veto, who exactly is doing the choosing?
Interesting... I wonder where he will end up now? Does he still own those coffee shops in Edmonton?
Jaffer was only "shut out" in the sense that other people were organizing while he was pursuing other things (has anyone even seen him in the riding post-election?)
Rahim never had to work hard to be an MP. His laziness finally caught up with him last election. When he saw that this nomination wouldn't be handed to him on a silver platter either... let's just say his decision not to run was no surprise to those who have helped Rahim in the past.
Ryan Hastman seems like a much harder worker.
During the last election, for some reason, party HQ put way more effort into Edmonton-Centre (Laurie Hawn's riding) where he was likely to win anyway (which he did by thousands of votes). Harper even visited the riding.
Edmonton-Strathcona on the other hand was a much more competitive race.
The party obviously hung Rahim out to dry.
So 11 years after being an MP, he collects a healthy pension (albeit one he refused an increase to after Jaffergate many years ago).
Rahim's a good friend and I wish him all the best.
Thanks for staying on top of this Dave.
Didn't Edm-Str reject young business type last election? A PMO fly-in? How about some real life experience raising a family, travelling abroad, inspiring and leading people - what has been lacking...of the candidates it looks like Linda Blade has that...and she could easily beat Duncan in the next election
I'd like someone to explain how following Stock Day or being an assistant in the PMO suddenly makes you a frontrunner...didnt't Rahim refer to Ryan as a "assurance there was a candidate in place in case there was a snap election".
anon@1:48 pm
First of all, i dont think beating linda duncan will be easy for any candidate. She smart and savvy and will be tough to knock off.
anon@2:09 pm
hastman looks to be the frontrunner because he is out there and organized. the race will be tight but ryan has been the first one out with materials and out on the doorsteps ... he sure is working hard for a "pmo fly-in" as you call him. i'd be interested in seeing where rahim said that about him. Do you think you could provide a link?
See, us locals read the Edmonton Journal...from today:
A staffer in the prime minister's office, Ryan Hastman, is running to become the Conservative candidate in Edmonton-Strathcona.
Jaffer said the party simply wanted to ensure a candidate is in place quickly in case an election is called.
"I totally understand in a minority government situation, you don't know when the election is going to be, and they have a job to do in order to prepare for the election," he said.
What does it matter if someone is married, single, has children or not? That has no bearing on the job they'll do (or won't do) as a politician.
A long history of strong commitment towards community, dedication, knowledge of what it takes to make big things happen...not to mention a doctoral education, and the kind of integrity rarely seen in today's world....in my books, that speaks volumes about the job somebody will do as a politican!
Jaffer is no big loss.
Sure, committed to your community, being dedicated, and a hard worker are good things. But what does it matter if someone is married or not? An individual's personal relationship, race, religion, or sexual orientation has no bearing at all on the type of job they will or won't do as an elected official.
Who somebody is and their experiences in life has everything to do with how they can relate and represent the people within a constituency. If they have worked in Iran, tehy know that better than someone else...if they have been on municiple council, that is another experience that aids in representing the constituents. Mike Lake is respected and appreciated in his ability to discuss autism because of his life experience. These do not define a candidate but they all add to the experience and credibility of a candidate and in how they can relate to the people they represent.
I could not possibly disagree more. Whether a person is married or not has absolutely nothing to do with the job that they will do as an elected person. To say anything other than that is blatant prejudice and radical social conservatism. In any other job it would be completely irrelevant.
There's lots of single politicians of many stripes. Ken Hehr, James Rajotte, Jason Kenney, Rob Renner, Jonathan Denis, Rona Ambrose, Manmeet Bhullar, and the list goes on.
Rona Ambrose is still married, Anon at 12:42. Hope that's not too disappointing for you.
Actually, they're separated. Hope that's not too disappointing for you, nor is the fact that Anon @ 12:42 makes a great point.
How did this discussion turn into an argument over marital status. Nobody said that being married makes for a better politician. The comment made referred to a particular candidate with breadth to her experience - a quality that makes her unique among the candidates. This is not about race, religion, or sexual orientation - it's about inspiration, integrity, and intellect.
And marriage or non-marriage has absolutely nothing to do with a person's inspiration, integrity, or intellect.
"And marriage or non-marriage has absolutely nothing to do with a person's inspiration, integrity, or intellect."
Marital status does have a bearing on electability, not necessarily their competence. Race, religion, gender, disabilities (or abilities) also have a factor on electability.
If Ambrose is single again, that is unfortunate and may reflect on the difficulty of keeping a relationship in her position. She also leaves the relationship with no children (or at least I have never heard her to have any).
A single may have more time to devote to public matters, and that may be attractive to some voters. Some voters may identify with a married with kids and a dog type.
Jaffer, getting married during an election, did not save him on either count. He was voted out because it was time for a change, and he faced a strong candidate.
One lives in a dream world to think that certain life experiences do not affect a politician's character and ability. A person's inspiration certainly affects and is affected by their life experiences. A democracy requires more than lawyers, men, trade unionists, or farmers. Persons of exemplary character, can still be branded homophobes, or champions of gays. A male married to a male or a female married to male certainly affects their politics and may inform the voter on their ability to carry their view to government.
Depending upon how one defines integrity certainly determines whether or not a candidate has integrity in the eyes of a voter.
What a load of garbage. If you apply for any other job, your marital status, sexual orientation, race, etc. cannot be brought up by law. It has no bearing on your performance and is completely irrelevant. To make it an issue is simply discriminatory and used by only the furthest fringe of the political spectrum for their own narrow gain.
What is your point, Anonymous 10:40pm? Are you suggesting that a particular candidate is making marital status, race, sexual orientation - the basis of his/her campaign? If so, that's news to me.
(Anonymous 10:40pm) One is also naive to assume that discrimination does not take place in the employment arena. The problem is still there, just hard to prove. Age discrimination is rampant. Try to breakthrough into a career path as a male, into a female dominated field. My music teacher wife was fired by an Asian mother, not because of ablity, but because she wanted an Asian teacher for her son.
The voters are employers and take all kinds of things (or very narrow parameters) into consideration. We are certainly allowed to discriminate on whatever we feel is important.
Point being though what bearing does a person's marital status have on an ability to do a job, elected or not? None.
I don't think anybody here suggested that a person's marital status has a bearing on his/her ability to successfully do a job. It is just one factor, of many factors, that helps to characterize a person's experience. The more breadth to that experience, the more confidence some people will have in a candidate's ability to represent the needs of a diverse community.
I think that everyone is missing the larger issue here, which is the autocratic Conservative Party not allowing constituency associations to pick their candidates for the elections. Edmonton-Strathcona is not the first riding to have a potential Conservative candidate drop out or be turfed due to meddling from higher up. This is undoubtedly a reflection of Harper and neocon philosophies of how to run the country (i.e., with much secrecy and tight control from the top).
Post a Comment