Jason Cherniak

Lots of fun cheering on the @BlueJays win in enemy territory. I was at the Ex in 1987 with @cherniakldc when their fans were starting fights, so I suppose this is my revenge. #bluejays50

@5150Inprogress I was reminded when they completely missed a play while interviewing Dylan Cease.

@Cherniak Couldn’t agree more. It’s like some high school public access broadcast. It’s bland on an epic scale. Spice it up with some trivia or highlights between innings to start.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Apple TV is horrible at baseball. #bluejays50

I thought Jeff Hoffman wasn’t allowed to pitch in the ninth inning anymore #bluejays50

@Anthony74398607 Wait for the decision first.

@Cherniak ALL of the OLP exec who condoned this by not controlling the nomination voting need to resign. If the “winning” candidate and his campaign people are implicated then they need to be banned from the OLP. Quite fair and simple. Ontarians need a functional OLP. You’re not it.

The article by Jonathan Scott gives me pause. Firstly, read it and enjoy it. It is wonderful because it hits some nails right on the head. Secondly, ask yourself, as I am, whether you are helping the cause as he describes it. The problem in politics is that no matter how pure your motives might be, you cannot allow those attacking to be unanswered. If you do not respond to public accusations and mud flinging, then the one making the accusations tends to win the media war and you (or those you are defending) will still be covered in mud. I have been posting a lot online about how I think Nate’s accusations are wrong, unfair, exaggerated and misleading. That is largely because I believe the meeting last Saturday was not much different than other meetings. Nate accepted the process before the vote and would have continued to accept it if he won. His various allegations sound really bad when not answered, but that does not mean he is right. When he started attacking and claiming to be clean as a whistle, I felt it was necessary to respond. In that process, I know I have upset some people who liked me, but also liked Nate. But if I did not speak up as a person who was on the scene, who else was doing it? I do not think it was wrong to respond, but Jonathan convinces me that it is important to be clear: Nate’s motivations and claims to purity are wrong, but that does not mean the process needs to stay the way it is. Nate makes some valid points along with some wrong accusations, but those valid points do not invalidate the meeting. We do need renewal; it just needs to be led by somebody other than Nate. All political parties in Canada have work to do on nominations. There is no denying that. The time to have that conversation, though, is not immediately following a controversial meeting with the losing candidate leading the discussion. I have lost a nomination before. I know how it feels. I was in no position at the time to be objective, clear headed or fair. Frankly, it took me ten years to seriously dip my foot back into politics and it still bothers me when I think about it. I can never undo what happened and it will be a permanent scar. The difference is that I knew enough to know that and mostly stayed quiet instead of attacking. Ontario Liberals still have six months to go in this leadership contest. Renewal and fixing many of the problems in our party will be part of that conversation. I look forward to joining it constructively and supporting a candidate who has some great ideas, but also understands that the brand has to come before his own ambitions. So, yes, I do think I am helping the cause. Of course I am biased in that assessment. But so is everybody when they look inward. The key is to know that, and keep doing your best (that includes @J_Scott_ ). Do not give up or wait for other people to solve the problems that you see. Unless you are emotionally distraught and unable to think clearly. #onpoli

@StreetNepean No, Nate is not the person.

@Cherniak "now is not the time" It's that kind of thinking that has allowed this ridiculousness to persist. Now is exactly the time.

@KarlRholoff If you look back at my other posts, I have addressed some of them. On that particular issue I honestly don’t know the numbers. I am waiting to see if his allegation of 34 is even correct.

@Cherniak Not asking for a brief, just an example of one of the things you think in his appeal is "wrong". Is the allegation that there were more votes than voters wrong? Is the allegation that people were allowed to vote with ID/residence not on the approved list wrong?

@KarlRholoff I’ve certainly denied some of them. I made deny more. I’m not writing a legal brief here.

@Cherniak In all of your posts on this topic I have not seen any denials of the specic allegations in the appeal. If something is wrong than what is it? More votes than voters to cast them? People using amazon packahes to prove addresses? What specifically in his complaint isnt true?

@DhillonHariGTA That is not admitted. What you’ve written is an outright lie.

Nate's biggest allegation of 34 ballots is admitted by Hafiz team! Mysteriously paper docs are now lost. That alone warrants this election tossed out and Hafiz, his campaign manager banned. How did 34 ballots got into box? Someone put them in. Who? How? Hafiz was ok when 1800 votes were struck off. Nate wasn't. Hafiz was ok with 34 extra ballots. Nate wasn't. Any honest candidate would be rattled by ballot stuffing unless that candidate knew he is the beneficiary. You are on the team that got caught with worst political scandal. You preaching purity, ethics, loyalty to others is a bit rich. If OLP and Liberal brand is being damaged, it is on your team. And on the old guard who after knowing 34 extra ballots called it a fair election. Such large scale manipulation is never an accident or one-off. It was planned and funded. Hafiz owns it. Toss the election out. Ban Hafiz. Ban his campaign manager and all other tricksters. Only path to restore trust - the hardest thing to earn in politics.

Once again, Ford fails to deliver. #onpoli

@agalbraith You think that’s the worst thing he’s done recently?

OMG. In political world this is a big faux pas.

Walk off grand slam by Varsho!!! #bluejays50

@LoriinDurham @Karen3267084417 Those rules were followed at the meeting as far as I saw. That’s why I’m so upset. I don’t think the allegations are accurate.

@Karen3267084417 @Cherniak In the 2023 leadership vote, anyone without ID wasn’t allowed to vote. Including my kid, who everyone scrutineering knew & knew he was my kid. Rules are rules.

The Ontario Liberals were making headway. Ford was on the ropes and the wind was in our sails. Then along came Nate. There is nothing wrong with appealing a result, but there is something wrong with orchestrating a media campaign to attack the party you claim to want to represent and/or lead before that appeal has been responded to. It is even worse when you do it just as a winnable by-election is about to be called. Doug Ford must be laughing himself to sleep. Exaggerating claims, submitting memberships that did not comply with party rules then complaining when they were denied, ignoring reasonable explanations such as language issues, complaining about things you did not complain about during the meeting, posting pictures of people voting online while complaining about people taking pictures of others voting, attacking political volunteers in national media while you take a government paycheque, pretending your team did not engage in the same tactics as the other team, insisting that it is all for the greater good and completely without self-interest... amazingly, I could go on! Some people invite conflict. Some people create conflict. Some people divide voters. Some people upset their own potential voters. Some people make everything about themselves. Some people have superiority complexes. Some people are narcissists or even have narcissistic personality disorder. Some people fall into many or all of these categories when one or two alone can be too many. Nate could have taken the loss in stride and shown class. He could have congratulated the winner and allowed a newcomer to celebrate his success instead of creating a nightmare. He could have said that it was a mistake to divide his time into two different campaigns. He could have said that the leadership will be decided by 124 ridings and not one. He could have pulled this out of the fire in any number of ways, but instead he lit more matches. Enough is enough - most of the rest of us Ontario Liberals are trying to earn back the trust of voters and improve our province. Let’s end this sideshow and get back to work! #onpoli

@DhillonHariGTA I don't have the information to comment on that, but I've seen some suggestion online that Nate's numbers might be wrong. I'm waiting to see the response to appeal before I comment.

Why are avoid the more obvious and easy to prove/disprove allegations - 34 extra ballots, Amazon order slip and visitor visa voters? That is elephant in the room and you have not uttered a word about it.

@l_stone Correction "Nate Erskine-Smith claims the Liberals can't even run a nomination".

NEW: Speaking to the Globe briefly at QP, Premier Ford said of Scarborough Southwest: "It's amazing how the Prime Minister endorsed him, and it still didn't put him over the finish line...The Liberals can't even run a nomination and they want to run the government?" #onpoli

@LoriinDurham I ran a contested nomination in 2014 due to over 300 members of an ethnic group being signed up just before the meeting was called. The winner Alleslev later switched to the Conservative. Don’t try to challenge my knowledge or experience.

@Cherniak This is REALLY quite simple. Of the sitting MPPs - who had to run in a contested nomination? And past candidates? Clearly ONLY people who had contested nominations would be able to analyze, discuss & fix systemic issues in this process. Minus the hypocrisy.

@MargauxPeckLaw I can only do so much with each tweet!

@Cherniak Had this been the only irregularity, I doubt that Nate would have appealed. Cherry picking a single allegation & explaining how it may have an innocent enough explanation is ridiculous. Nate pled every irregularity identified by his scrutineers. That one might be explained (1/2)

I want to consider one of Nate’s allegations directly. “Among the large number of temporary residents who voted, many could not initially state their address when asked and defaulted to documentation.” 1) When you ask a person who does not speak English what their address is, you should not be surprised if they hesitate and point to their ID. 2) I personally saw many cases where a person did not understand what they were being asked and we had to call over a translator. 3) Just by making the allegation, he is admitting that the person had ID with the right address on it! 4) Unless I missed it, Nate never objected to temporary residents voting prior to the meeting and I expect he signed them up as well. If this line were coming from a Conservative, we would be calling it a dog whistle. #onpoli