RTW is high risk strategy for PCs

[Lovehobby]

http://ontarionewswatch.com/onw-news.html?id=689

Frankly I believe it is a Bridge Too Far for the Tories. The issue is not really whether the policy is correct. The usual suspects will line up on either side.

Kelly seems to think it is close to suicide for Hudak. I tend to agree. Bill Clinton sums it up as a low wage policy The Right to Work (for less).

 

[Moviefan-2]

It is risky but the reality is the unions will target the Tories in any event (they've done it in every election since 2003, including the 2007 election when the party had a moderate, John Tory, as its leader).

What will be interesting is to see where the union support goes, and whether the Liberals can hold on to the Working Families Coalition.

The Liberals made a huge mistake running Ken Coran in the recent byelections. That was a slap to many union types who were still smarting from the way the Liberals crushed collective bargaining in their fight with the teachers.

If union rights becomes a key election issue and the unions line up solidly behind the NDP, this could actually work in Hudak's favour (decimating the Liberals could benefit both the Tories and the NDP, as we saw in the 2011 federal election).

There are many 'ifs' in that thinking. Nonetheless, the strategy may be more sound than Sue Kelley realizes.

 

[Lovehobby]

The unions will set aside about 30 seats where they back the NDP including incumbents and close finishes, even close finishes where Liberals won. They will then choose about 40 seats where they back the Liberals against the PCs. It is known as strategic voting. They will tell the Libs, you could have had more but you fucked up on public sector wage freezes. They will tell the NDP, these are the 30 seats where you came 1st or 2nd. Show us polling where you are over 30%before we add to your list.

Ruthless but there you have it.

 

[FAST]

Bought and paid for

They will tell the Libs, you could have had more but you fucked up on public sector wage freezes.

For once I agree with you,...way too high !!!

FAST

 

[Anynym]

The unions will set aside about 30 seats where they back the NDP including incumbents and close finishes, even close finishes where Liberals won. They will then choose about 40 seats where they back the Liberals against the PCs. It is known as strategic voting. They will tell the Libs, you could have had more but you fucked up on public sector wage freezes. They will tell the NDP, these are the 30 seats where you came 1st or 2nd. Show us polling where you are over 30%before we add to your list.

Ruthless but there you have it.

Not sure they'll but so fine a point on it (preferring to concentrate their message by region, rather than by riding, leading to a more approximate seat count that they're targetting), but what you say sounds about right otherwise.