Is the Dinning Campaign Playing Dirty - Again?
November 10, 2006 · By H. Cameron
We’re already aware of the Dinning campaigns recruitment of a replacement for Lethbridge West MLA, Clint Dunford, and now it appears they’ve been badgering Dave Hancock’s wife about having Dave drop out of the race in exchange for a cabinet seat. Here is a snippet form Janet Hancock first post on the subject:
“Dave is a really great person and I have a lot of respect for Dave.” At this point, it is usually followed up with some line like “Too bad, Jim has the race sown up and Dave won’t win.” At the AUMA forum, the individual told me that if Dave immediately stepped down and supported Jim, he was in touch with someone in Edmonton who would personally see to it that Dave got a great Cabinet position. [Emphasis Mine]
Following up by this rather threatening“whopper” in the second post:
However, the line continues with, “Since Dave will be at the very bottom of all candidates running, his careeer in politics will be over. He will never recover.” And then the offer - “if Dave steps down now and comes over to Jim, we will see that he has a powerful cabinet position.” What made the approach this time really interesting was the line, “But of course, this is a time sensitive offer. Dave would have to come over to Jim right away.” [Emphasis Mine]
If Hancock has the lowest amount of support, then why bother offering him a cabinet position now?
Tom - Probably to reduce a vote-split and pull some support his direction. NTM the “propoganda” effect of having a candidate quit and throw their support behind you. It might convince others to take another look in your direction.
Hmm…proof, please? Hollow allegations are extremely easy to throw out there. Proving them, however, is something else.
If your husband was in a leadership race, wouldn’t it be easy to accuse the competition of something?
Leigh Sullivan,
hey, we’ll have to take Janet’s word on this. However, if you’re at all familiar with the Dinning campaign, you’ll know that this is a regular technique used to “convince/bully” people. In fact, its usually the first thing out of a Dinning campaign workers mouth after you tell them that you’re not supporting Dinning. The idea that if you want to go anywhere in Alberta politics, you have got to support Dinning is drilled into almost all of the Dinning supporters. We’re just now beginning to see this type of ignorance expressed publicly.
However, lets be honest, deals like this - cushy positions in exchange for support - are the hallmark of politics in Canada. However, this one is particularly disgusting because the “offer” was made to his wife and was accompanied with a subtle threat - “his career in politics will be over. He will never recover.”
Entitlement and ignorance are the predominate themes in the Dinning campaign. Follow the many many posting we have here on the Dinning campaign, and you’ll see that the Dinning crew is running around behaving as he’s got the race wrapped up.
Hell, if you want to see ignorance, just go read Dinning’s recent campaign blog posting,
Ted Morton was criticising Dinning’s positions, and Dinning responds with this drivel. One thing is obvious - the Dinning campaign is running scared.
[...] H. Cameron introduces us to the latest attack from Jim Dinning on Ted Morton. Instead of the usual fear-mongering and untruths spread by his little minions, Dinning has actually had to courage to deliver the attack himself. So I suppose that we’re making progress in that regard, at least. [...]