Horgan for BC

I've now seen John Horgan and Adrian Dix in person, have watched a number of the all-candidate debates on the BCNDP website, and have followed the campaign in the press avidly. Here's what I know so far:
1    All 5 candidates are excellent public speakers. All have a firm grasp of the issues and the politics. All are convincing when speaking extemporaneously. None speaks in "talking points".
Purely from that point of view any of them would present a more convincing public face of the BCNDP than our last leader.
I would judge John Horgan the most comfortable, the funniest, and the most loquatious.
2    Only three have a realistic chance: John Horgan, Adrian Dix, and Mike Farnworth. Nicholas Simons, while strong on social concerns, doesn't look or sound like a prospective Premier Simons. Dana Larsen, an unexpectedly effective and engaging candidate, cannot get a reference in the press that doesn't also reference his marijuana activism: not Premier material.
3    There is no evidence of a split in the party. All the leading candidates stayed with Carol James until the end; all the leading candidates have attracted and welcomed endorsements from dissident MLAs.
4    The campaign has been so civil that John Horgan is frequently quoted in the press when he characterizes the debates as "another NDP love-in". Some columnists would like to see fireworks, but most acknowledge that only very small differences separate the candidates. The candidates appear to genuinely like and respect each other. This is not normal for BC politics.
5    Of the front-runners, as must be pretty clear by now, I like John Horgan the best. He's not as well-known as the other two, but I think that would dissipate very quickly were he to become the voice of the NDP. I suspect he's the most able of the three to point out Premier Clark's foibles and weaknesses in a humorous way, and I think that's the way to beat her and her machine.
    My second choice has to be Mike Farnworth. He clearly has the confidence of large segments of the party, and according to polls, is the most liked by the electorate at large. I suspect his justice issues stance, which has been widely covered in the press over many years, is largely responsible for his good name recognition. Unfortunately I don't agree with this stance; fortunately he's solid on the other issues near and dear to me, especially on the environment.
    I've admired Adrian Dix for years, ever since he was the BC head of Canadian Parents for French. He's also obviously the best-organized of the candidates and has an uncanny ability to summon at will statistics for every occasion: it's quite dazzling. Unfortunately, I've seen no evidence of a sense of humour, and I do think that's an important political tool: I'm tired of our perpetual righteous indignation. We really haven't been amused by BC politics since Dave Barrett, who took down an iconic WAC Bennett by pointing out how ridiculous his platform was, given the problems the province was facing at the time.
    But the biggest problem with Adrian Dix is that he has baggage. Vaughan Palmer's column of January 19, 2011, laid out the case: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Opinion+Liberals+have+lots+common/4130156/story.html
I also wonder about the judgment of some of his supporters: Mable Elmore's activities in recruiting new NDP members on his behalf represented the one blot on the entire leadership process. Everything may have been perfectly above-board, but the new memberships looked fishy, and the press sensed blood.
    You cannot just shuck that kind of record, irrelevant as it may be to present circumstances, as Christy Clark and the BCLiberals (Christy's role in the BC Rail fiasco: look it up!) are going to find out eventually.

    So that's it: one of the least consequential political endorsements of all time!
    But all mine.