Jagmeet Singh, NDP Leader

890 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sean in Ottawa

JKR wrote:

I think countries with relatively inexpensive labour like China, India, and Mexico, will not agree to raise the cost of their labour because inexpensive labour is currently the comparative advantage in international trade that is increasing their standards of living. Also, if we increase tax rates on our corporations many of them will then be outcompeted by companies from jurisdictions with lower tax rates and also many of our companies will also move to jurisdictions with lower tax rates. I think we should follow the path currently taken by the social democratic countries of northern Europe and maintain competitive corporate tax rates while providing our populace with the best social programs in areas such as education, health care, transportation, recreation, and housing.

I disagree with your list of three countries becuase what these countries have in common is a desire to orient their economies away from lowest base labour -- particularly China. China wants a labour economy that looks more like South Korea and Japan than Malaysia and Vietnam.

China , while it would never say this, has an active policy to follow the road Japan took a  few decades earlier and go from a country specializing in cheap products to one with the best technology and products and workers making more money. While many low end products are made in China still, this policy is advancing and Chinese workers are less able to compete with workers in Indonesia, Malaysia, Cambodia and Vietnam and others on price. Chinese workers are increasingly getting better wages than many other Pacific countries. China is a massive economy and it takes time to turn it around, but there is a steady push to move into competing without the lowest global labour price. It is true that relative to North America Chinese labour is much lower but the trend lines are not to compete based on labour price but on the quality and value of their labour.

Mexico entered NAFTA with one objective of increasing its labour value and this is happening slowly. I think the country may want to price lower than the rest of North American but they are not trying to be the global bottom of labour.

India has a policy of expanding its power in specific areas especially services. While they are the most behind of the three countries they also have expressed a desire to increase wages.

The other countries I mentioned that you did not mention are the ones that do not have a policy of desiring to be able the lowest wage countries.

China is the countrie with the strongest stated policy on wage improvement in the world at this time. I woudl see them attempt to manipulate currency before they would abandon this. It looks like they are making state investments in both education and technology in order to increase the wage potential of workers. This is a stated government policy that has seen considerable action so it is clear it is far from an empty promise. I believe that there is strong evidence that the Chinese government really does want its population to be individually well off.

JKR

I agree that foreign countries like China, India, and Mexico are rapidly modernizing their economies and that they want their labour to get paid wage levels similar or even higher than that of countries like Canada.  What I was trying to say in my previous post is that countries like China, India, and Mexico, are not going to allow countries like Canada to dictate to them the terms of international trade agreements. I think countries like China, India, and Mexico, understandably are not about to sign international trade agreements that require them to meet the higher labour, wage, and environmental standards of countries like Canada, Germany, Japan, and the U.S. 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
the higher labour and environmental standards of countries like Canada, Germany, Japan, and the U.S.

What do environmental standards have to do with it?

Is Stephen Harper Chinese now?

JKR

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
the higher labour and environmental standards of countries like Canada, Germany, Japan, and the U.S.

What do environmental standards have to do with it?

It seems to me that environmental standards effect the costs of business. 

WWWTT

Holy f$”& people the thread drift is really really bad!!!!  

And it seems that I’m the one starting it with a side comment. 

maybe I should b starting more threads here or you guys are going to have to build stronger discipline?

NorthReport
NorthReport

Jagdeesh Mann: Lessons from the aftermath of Hurricane Khalistan

Why yet another "separatist" media storm hit Canada and how, out of the debris, a new generation of Sikh Canadians has established their voices

https://www.straight.com/news/1048021/jagdeesh-mann-lessons-aftermath-hu...

R.E.Wood

More risk than reward in six months of Jagmeet Singh’s NDP leadership

"When Jagmeet Singh stampeded to a first ballot win in the NDP leadership race last autumn, senior caucus members acknowledged they had anointed a “high risk, high reward” candidate.  Six months later, the party has been living the risk.

It is still waiting for the reward.

... There is open grumbling inside his caucus — some of which broke into the open Tuesday. He is not raising the money the party needs in advance of a 2019 campaign and the hiring transition period has been too long, leaving posts unfilled and leaving him challenged to get ahead of issues, join the national conversation and sense potential danger ahead."

Interesting. Caucus isn't happy (that's become obvious!), and fundraising is going poorly. Where's Brampton when you need them?

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/03/27/more-risk-tha...

josh

Yeah, Weir seems to have been forgotten.  Especially now that it’s Christopherson’s turn to twist in the wind.  Wonder who’s the next in line.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Yeah, Weir seems to have been forgotten.  Especially now that it’s Christopherson’s turn to twist in the wind.  Wonder who’s the next in line.

Well, if it's a pattern (harrassment / defying the whip) then whoever's next in line should be a harrasser, and after him/her, someone who defies the whip.

Pondering

R.E.Wood wrote:

More risk than reward in six months of Jagmeet Singh’s NDP leadership

"When Jagmeet Singh stampeded to a first ballot win in the NDP leadership race last autumn, senior caucus members acknowledged they had anointed a “high risk, high reward” candidate.  Six months later, the party has been living the risk.

It is still waiting for the reward.

... There is open grumbling inside his caucus — some of which broke into the open Tuesday. He is not raising the money the party needs in advance of a 2019 campaign and the hiring transition period has been too long, leaving posts unfilled and leaving him challenged to get ahead of issues, join the national conversation and sense potential danger ahead."

Interesting. Caucus isn't happy (that's become obvious!), and fundraising is going poorly. Where's Brampton when you need them?

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/03/27/more-risk-tha...

When Jagmeet Singh stampeded to a first ballot win in the NDP leadership race last autumn, senior caucus members acknowledged they had anointed a “high risk, high reward” candidate.

Senior caucus did not anoint him he was elected by members and it seems caucus has no respect for that. You've been against him since the day he was elected. The Liberals have it made. The NDP will defeat themselves and it won't be Singh's fault it will be the fault of Angus and his ilk. 

R.E.Wood

Pondering wrote:

You've been against him since the day he was elected. 

Wrong. I've been against him since before he was elected, and with good cause, which I've detailed in numerous past posts. And Singh's actions since becoming leader have only served to make my opinions of him more negative. We might just as well still have Mulcair.

R.E.Wood

Trudeau’s India fiasco boomerangs on Jagmeet Singh in Quebec

Singh’s misery has only just begun — particularly in Quebec.

On the morning the Globe story broke, I spoke with Pierre Nantel, one of the more prominent members of the NDP’s Quebec caucus. Nantel was a vocal critic of Singh’s election as leader; last September, he penned an open letter castigating the leader for suggesting, as Singh did at the time, that an NDP government would consider using federal resources to fight Quebec’s religious neutrality bill.

Nantel, who hadn’t yet read the Globe piece when I spoke to him, had since softened his stance on Singh. “I would say that Jagmeet understands Quebec better and better,” Nantel told me.

The Globe story blew this talking point out of the water, in large part because Singh’s apparent dalliance with Sikh separatists plays worst in Quebec, where politics and religiosity don’t mix well. It has also underscored the party’s severe structural shortcomings in the province. Riding assistants in Quebec have already felt the electoral headwinds and are leaving the party in droves, according to NDP sources over the last two weeks.

Several high-profile NDP MPs, including party whip Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, are well on her way out the door. (François Soucy, Boutin-Sweet’s well-regarded assistant, recently decamped for municipal politics.) The NDP’s Quebec caucus was by far the noisiest in condemning Singh. Yet at the offices of both the leader and the party whip, where few notable warm Quebecois bodies remain, the criticism has fallen on deaf ears.

“It’s kind of assumed Quebec MPs are dead politicians walking, so they don’t have any real influence anymore,” says an NDP source. “The party is anticipating a wipeout — zero to five seats in the next election.”

https://ipolitics.ca/2018/03/27/trudeaus-india-fiasco-boomerangs-on-jagm...

Just to be clear: "The party is anticipating a wipeout" in Quebec.

Rev Pesky

From CBC:

Jagmeet Singh not picking sides in pipeline debate:

Federal NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh is refusing to take sides in the British Columbia-Alberta pipeline feud.

...Singh wouldn't take the side of either of the NDP premiers currently at odds over the proposed expansion of the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline.

Instead, he opted for diplomacy.

"Premier Notley is doing exactly what she promised to do,"  Singh told CBC Radio's The House. "Premier Horgan is doing exactly what he promised to do."

..."I haven't spoken to either of them on this issue," Singh admitted.

...By not weighing in, Singh avoids angering either B.C. or Alberta. But sitting on the sidelines isn't what the new leader needs to do, according to some critics.

"We need big change," said Avi Lewis, one of the drafters of the divisive Leap Manifesto, which was released in 2015.

Jeez, couldn't we get back to talking about inequality...

josh

R.E.Wood wrote:

Pondering wrote:

You've been against him since the day he was elected. 

Wrong. I've been against him since before he was elected, and with good cause, which I've detailed in numerous past posts. And Singh's actions since becoming leader have only served to make my opinions of him more negative. We might just as well still have Mulcair.

I don’t know if I’d go that far.  But the party would be stronger in Quebec.

R.E.Wood

Free advice to the NDP: Measure twice, cut once -- The NDP was headed toward a possible leadership putsch on Tuesday. It’s time for the party to start asking: does it have a plan?

That was a really nasty crisis the NDP was headed into until the elements of a deal emerged on Tuesday evening. I’m not sure the party is out of the woods yet. Everyone would do well to consider the stakes.

...Singh’s hold on the leadership must already be judged shaky: A couple of weeks ago, when his position on Sikh nationalism was the hot issue, the party held an extra Monday caucus meeting so MPs could vent and Singh could find the language to calm the waters. A new open challenge to Singh’s judgment, from two and maybe eventually more MPs, would endanger his ability to lead the party. (I’ll happily stipulate, by the way, that Angus was sincere in his opinions, and not plotting against the new leader. But the effect would be the same.)

Then on Tuesday, a round-robin denouement played itself out on, mostly, Globe reporter Laura Stone’s Twitter feed. First Singh put Christopherson back on the process-nerd committee. Then Christopherson said he’d spent a lot of time talking to the boss and had discovered “complete trust in his leadership.” Then Angus congratulated the other two for rediscovering the spirit of solidarity. It was as choreographed as the National Ballet.

Thus ends the latest ominous rumble from Jagmeet Singh’s NDP.

... Some New Democrats will be amazed to see me speculating about a possible leadership putsch. But until Tuesday night’s truce, that’s where the NDP was heading, and it might start heading there again.

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/free-advice-to-the-ndp-measure-tw...

josh

Unless the bottom really starts falling out, a new leader won't be likely until after the election.  Angus, Caron and Ashton may not survive it.

 

R.E.Wood

josh wrote:

Unless the bottom really starts falling out, a new leader won't be likely until after the election.  Angus, Caron and Ashton may not survive it.

I agree, Josh. The most likely scenario is that Singh will lead the party into the 2019 election. Unless things change dramatically I think there will be another major loss of seats, with most of our Quebec MP's going down to defeat (perhaps Boulerice, Caron and REB might survive?), as well as some others across the country, with very few gains to help make up for the bloodletting. 

Pondering

R.E.Wood wrote:

https://ipolitics.ca/2018/03/27/trudeaus-india-fiasco-boomerangs-on-jagm...

Just to be clear: "The party is anticipating a wipeout" in Quebec.

Just to be clear, that isn't what the polls are predicting and he did well on Tout le monde en parle. Quebecers will see that he stands for the right of people to peacefully separate if the majority so chooses. I don't see that damaging him. For anyone for whom religion is a barrier the turban knocks them off already. The notion that Quebec voters are paying attention to the India thing is ridiculous. We're all obsessed with Quebec politics if anything. 

An entire article that is nothing but chattering class gossip with a few facts thrown in to make it look serious. Anything for eyeballs. 

If this keeps up the NDP is is out of the running for 2023. It's clear who wants control of the party. Angus. He and others believe that he should have won. They think with a do-over he will win. They are probably right. Then Angus will bring the party to defeat in 2023 worse even than Mulcair's because Angus will be a terrible leader. He will be all torches and pitchforks bitter in his attacks against the establishment.  

The NDP should be rallying around the leader for the good of the party and Canada or they will find themselves in desperate need of a messiah like Trudeau for 2027.

Ironically it seems Angus and his pals are the ones who expect instant rescue through leadership change.

The NDP is sending the message that it is a party still divided and from the outside it looks like a division between the moderates and the "extremes". They think the moderates had their chance under Mulcair so now they want to go full out Leap Manifesto or as close as they can get to it. 

We are over a year away from the next election and a faction of NDPers are already predicting massive defeat. With friends like that, the NDP doesn't need enemies. 

Welcome to another Liberal majority followed by a third Liberal or Conservative win if the faction trying to destroy Singh's leadership succeeds. 

Pondering

Singhs enemies are disgrunted losers and right wing rags who are working towards and salivating over what they dearly hope will be his defeat. 

https://ipolitics.ca/2017/10/02/will-racist-attacks-work-on-singh-were-a...

First, there’s the precedent. In 2014, the Parti Québécois ran an election campaign based largely on targeting the very religious symbols that Jagmeet Singh wears every day. The Quebec people rewarded this behaviour by handing the Parti Québécois its lowest share of the popular vote since its rookie run in 1970. In 2015, the federal Conservative party tried to tickle the same xenophobic nerve with its proposed ban on face coverings during citizenship ceremonies and its ‘barbaric cultural practices’ hotline. Today, noted cheery multiculturalist Justin Trudeau is prime minister.

And Singh himself isn’t necessarily out of sync with Quebec sensibilities. A recent Mainstreet poll that analyzed data culled from NDP membership and donor lists suggested the majority of NDP members in the province supported Singh. In Quebec, the 38-year-old from Scarborough, Ontario outpaced leadership hopeful Guy Caron, Rimouski’s native son, by a three to one margin.

Singh is an unknown quantity is Quebec and can therefore write his own story here. He can also speak it aloud in near-perfect (if heavily accented) French, and has already made the correct noises about wanting to protect the language. Trudeau is often faulted for his French, which is chock full of anglicisms and spoken with a poncy, private school inflection. Singh is a guy who had no good reason to learn French, but did. This is a distinct advantage.

The NDP has significant problems. Its debt is high, its fundraising low. The party has yet to solve the issue of the Trudeau Liberals, adept as they are at eating the NDP’s ideological lunch for fun and electoral gain. If Singh is bad at his new job, the next election will be Liberal romp. If he’s middling, he’ll split the progressive vote.

But if he’s great, if he defies accepted wisdom and transforms old stereotypes … then we’re in for a treat.

Looks like his enemies within the party are going to try to prevent that from happening. Their worst nightmare is if he maintains or increases the NDP seat count. They do not want the NDP to succeed in 2019. I"m sure they are very sincere about it. 

josh

Right wing rags?  Charlie Angus lusting for control?  Enemies everywhere,

R.E.Wood

Pondering, unless I'm mistaken you've only recently become an NDP supporter due to your belief that Singh is the party's messiah. You're one of his cheerleaders in these parts. Forgive some of the rest of us if we have mounting doubts that outweigh our ability to see Singh and the party's current fortunes as clearly as you do. Your tea leaves are telling a different tale than mine are.

Pondering

R.E.Wood wrote:

Pondering, unless I'm mistaken you've only recently become an NDP supporter due to your belief that Singh is the party's messiah. You're one of his cheerleaders in these parts. Forgive some of the rest of us if we have mounting doubts that outweigh our ability to see Singh and the party's current fortunes as clearly as you do. Your tea leaves are telling a different tale than mine are.

Not a messiah, just the NDP's best hope. No one else who ran for the leadership would be doing half as well. The only identity crisis the NDP is having is whether or not they want to be a viable party or another Green Party. The NDP cannot win going with the Leap Manifesto nor trying to out Liberal the Liberals. The only way for the NDP to break through the federal Liberal/Conservative ping pong game is to convince a a big chunk of the 99% that the NDP will leave them better off financially than either the Liberals or the Conservatives. 

I understand better now why some people supported Mulcair. It's not that he wasn't flawed, it's the alternative was Trudeau and for awhile there it looked like Mulcair was going to beat Trudeau and be the first NDP PM. There were a lot of things I didn't like about Mulcair, but I also felt that he would blow it, that he lacked the political instincts to win. Trudeau supported legalization of cannabis which is a huge issue for me. I also believed that Trudeau could defeat Harper and Mulcair could not. I thought a Mulcair win would ruin the NDP because he would not have done a good job. He wouldn't have pleased anyone. He couldn't have balanced the budget or delivered on his promises. The NDP would have been back to the wilderness as surely as they have been since Rae days. There is no way Mulcair would have had a majority so the government wouldn't have lasted long. 

I don't have near as much confidence in Singh but the lay of the land has changed dramatically. Cannabis is about to become legal. I don't believe Scheer can win. I think his current support is soft. Trudeau will absolutely get a second term, most likely another majority. With a lot of luck he will be held to a minority with the NDP holding the balance of power. Even if Scheer were to win it would be a minority and I think the Liberals would be forced to work with the NDP to overthrow the Conservatives as was done in BC. While not giving up on 2019 positioning for 2023 has to be a major consideration. 

If there were some other terrific candidate for leadership of the NDP that would change things but there isn't. Angus is too "firebrand" and Ashton doesn't yet have the political instincts. I would have voted for Caron but I can see that he too lacked what it takes to win a national election. If I thought Scheer might win a majority I would rally for Trudeau. 

So best case scenario for the NDP would be to hold the Liberals to a minority and be the balance of power. It's a longshot but Singh would be excellent in that role advancing the NDP's position for 2023.

The leader of the NDP has a very difficult balance to pull off. The NDP should never be on the side of injustice. That is what ires members on the Palestinian issue. The NDP can't take as extreme a position as some would like but they could be much more balanced, and it seems under Singh it will be. Singh has made some missteps but I believe he has strong political instincts and the ability to think on his feet. I really look forward to seeing him debate Trudeau. He would never turn down debates as Mulcair did. Every debate and interview is an opportunity to promote the NDP. 

You said "you've only recently become an NDP supporter ". I have usually voted NDP, even when I was pissed off at Jack Layton. Just nobody believed me because I supported Trudeau so strongly. The arguments I presented were dismissed not countered by those who support the NDP religeously. 

I wasn't a fangirl for Trudeau nor am I one for Singh. I just see their qualities and flaws as leaders in terms of how that will impact people who know little to nothing about politics. Probably because I was so recently one of them and still am to some extent. 

Right now Singh's task is to familiarize himself to Canadians, to appear less exotic, more culturally Canadian. He needs to establish his personal image before Conservatives do it for him. Le bon Jack did not win Quebec over through policy as much as through personality. Going on Tout le Monde, attending the Juno's, allowing limited access to his engagement, and any other event large or small that allows Canadians to get to know him as a person will help him tremendously once it's time to lay out policy. He needs to go on the Social and any other Canadian talk show that wants him. 

I'm not just blindly supporting Singh. He is the best thing on the menu not the best thing ever, he will make mistakes. The NDP should have his back not put a knife in it. 

 

NorthReport
NorthReport
Pondering

No it isn't. Angus isn't giving up. 

“My loyalty is to the party and to my caucus,” he says. “I’ve been here for many, many years, but when I say something in public, I’m willing to stand by it and I hope that it’s to be helpful. And I think we’re in a much more helpful position today than we were at the start of the week.”...

“Sometimes when issues come in public, it’s not indicative always of some great plot,” he says. “It’s an issue that has to be addressed, and sometimes it’s addressed in public. But it’s about making sure the ship is going in the right direction.”

Only caucus has his loyalty. If he were loyal to the party it would include the leader the party voted for. Mark my words Angus is going to continue trying to take Singh down. It's in his words. "It's about making sure the ship is going in the right direction" that's the leader's job. Apparently he had no problem with Mulcair's steering. 

Singh outsmarted Angus by backing down thereby taking it out of the news cycle and denying Angus a platform but it is far from over. Every chance he gets to publically attack Singh he will take. 

josh

“Sometimes when issues come in public, it’s not indicative always of some great plot,” he says. “It’s an issue that has to be addressed, and sometimes it’s addressed in public. But it’s about making sure the ship is going in the right direction.”

 I guess I read that quite differently.

pietro_bcc

Are the Singh supporters already pre-emptively blaming everyone other than Singh for his potential loss in 2019? At least let him fail before you start hunting for scapegoats.

I was a Mulcair supporter, but when he lost I had the sense to realize that the reason for Mulcair's loss was Mulcair. Similarly if Singh loses, the person to blame will be Singh.

NorthReport
Mighty Middle

Even if Jagmeet leads the party to maybe 20 seats (winning only 5 seats in Quebec) in 2019, I think he will survive until 2023 election. Jagmeet is a good organizer and unlike Mulcair, he will rally his supporters to show up  and vote for him in any leadership review.

R.E.Wood

Mighty Middle wrote:

Even if Jagmeet leads the party to maybe 20 seats (winning only 5 seats in Quebec) in 2019, I think he will survive until 2023 election. Jagmeet is a good organizer and unlike Mulcair, he will rally his supporters to show up  and vote for him in any leadership review.

If the NDP loses a large number of seats again (over half, as you propose 20) Singh will have no right to keep his job. 

 

R.E.Wood

After six months of Singh, doubts surface that he's just not ready

Leadership is hard.  Just ask Jagmeet Singh as he marks six months in the NDP leadership with back-to-back mea-culpas to a caucus starting to wonder if they’re being led into electoral battle by an overnight dud.

With the glory of his GQ magazine cover a fading memory, Singh been confronted by an almost unprecedented caucus backlash which cannot be entirely erased by his undeniable charisma and charm.

Not since Canadian Alliance leader Stockwell Day was forced to call a snap leadership vote by walkaway MPs in 2001 has a party leader endured so much open and whispered doubt about his abilities.

And it’s not just sour grapes and gripes from leadership losers – it’s wide and deep inside a caucus that, by in large, didn’t support his candidacy and rarely bonds with him in Ottawa as he is a leader without a Commons seat.

Those videos featuring Singh sharing a stage with Sikh separatists were toxic in the party’s Quebec stronghold. And his inexplicable decision to punish a senior NDP MP for refusing to support a Liberal veto on jobs grants to anti-abortion causes was very badly received in public and private.

In both cases, Singh furiously backpedaled, but the damage was done and the doubts planted.

... Now insiders are bracing for a Quebec NDP wipeout - this despite Singh being celebrated for a superior performance on a Quebec television show two weeks ago where mere survival is a rite of passage for politicians of all stripes.

What’s worse, Singh’s missteps and zen-like demeanor come on top of other irritants to his fellow caucus members.

They cringe when Singh describes the victims of any form of harassment as 'survivors', which offends anyone who has experienced life-threatening trauma.

And they wince at his treatment of mild-mannered MP Erin Weir, who endured Singh’s nationally televised shaming three months ago over perceived misconduct that nobody has yet substantiated.

It’s far from hopeless for the new leader - and this is the season of resurrections, after all.

But Jagmeet Singh quickly needs to master the hard part of leadership or caucus doubts will spread to voters, leaving them to wonder if the NDP has a leader who is just not ready.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/don-martin-blog/don-martin-after-six-mon...

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Jagmeet Singh is no Jeremy Corbyn, but the way R.E.Wood gleefully quotes every unfavourable poll or comment about him reminds me of the postings by nicky and sherpafinn prior to the British election last June.

Rev Pesky

One difference is that Corbyn had a long and honourable history as a Labour parliamentarian. Before Corbyn became leader of Labour, he spent over thirty years as a Labour MP.

Mighty Middle

R.E.Wood wrote:

If the NDP loses a large number of seats again (over half, as you propose 20) Singh will have no right to keep his job.

Alexa McDonough lost 6 seats in 2000 (going from 19 to 13). Her leadership review a year later (2001) was 84% and in 2002 she would step down as leader. But she left the leadership on her own terms. 

The only way Jagmeet would lose the leadership is if he didn't win a seat. Then an argument can be made that he has to go. But if he wins a seat and 19 to boot, then the argument could be made to give him a chance in the house show off his skills. And then wait for the next election.

wage zombie

Mighty Middle wrote:

Even if Jagmeet leads the party to maybe 20 seats (winning only 5 seats in Quebec) in 2019, I think he will survive until 2023 election. Jagmeet is a good organizer and unlike Mulcair, he will rally his supporters to show up  and vote for him in any leadership review.

R.E.Wood wrote:

If the NDP loses a large number of seats again (over half, as you propose 20) Singh will have no right to keep his job. 

Mulcair could've kept his jobs if he provided some kind of mea culpa after the election.  Instead he did victory laps.

Mulcair wasn't removed for his bungling of the election, it was for his bungling of the post election.

Pondering

pietro_bcc wrote:
Are the Singh supporters already pre-emptively blaming everyone other than Singh for his potential loss in 2019? At least let him fail before you start hunting for scapegoats.

I was a Mulcair supporter, but when he lost I had the sense to realize that the reason for Mulcair's loss was Mulcair. Similarly if Singh loses, the person to blame will be Singh.

I've already stated I'll consider it a success if he just holds the seats the NDP has. Dion was forced to resign by party insiders after which they appointed Ignatieff and Rae until finally they had no choice but to hold a leadership convention. The old guard lost. It's a whole new set of people in charge now. You could still say it was Dion's failure to gain the support of insiders, but that would have been impossible. 

Mulcair had the full support of the party even when he made mistakes. 

As to setting up excuses, we will see if Angus keeps taking potshots at Singh through twitter and the media. "Caucus" doesn't have a problem with Singh, Angus does. Maybe there are some others that are disgruntled but Angus is engaged in a power struggle with Singh. In my opinion he doesn't believe that Singh has the right to lead the party. In my opinion he is bitter over Singh's membership drive in non-traditional communities. 

Angus is going to be quiet for a bit but I very much doubt he will desist because he is sincere. He doesn't support Singh's leadership and he doesn't want to make a secret of it. He's being pressured internally. 

R.E.Wood

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Jagmeet Singh is no Jeremy Corbyn, but the way R.E.Wood gleefully quotes every unfavourable poll or comment about him reminds me of the postings by nicky and sherpafinn prior to the British election last June.

It's not with "glee" that I do, post, or think anything about Singh.  I feel more horrified - like someone watching a car crash happening, and unable to stop it. The reality is that he's making rookie blunders, having difficulties with caucus unity, apparently not raising much money, continuing his evasive-answering-ways until pushed to take a position, etc,.... And through it all he's generating a lot of bad press. Would you rather not see it? Ignorance is bliss, they say.

R.E.Wood

Pondering wrote:

pietro_bcc wrote:
Are the Singh supporters already pre-emptively blaming everyone other than Singh for his potential loss in 2019? At least let him fail before you start hunting for scapegoats.

I was a Mulcair supporter, but when he lost I had the sense to realize that the reason for Mulcair's loss was Mulcair. Similarly if Singh loses, the person to blame will be Singh.

I've already stated I'll consider it a success if he just holds the seats the NDP has. Dion was forced to resign by party insiders after which they appointed Ignatieff and Rae until finally they had no choice but to hold a leadership convention. The old guard lost. It's a whole new set of people in charge now. You could still say it was Dion's failure to gain the support of insiders, but that would have been impossible. 

Mulcair had the full support of the party even when he made mistakes. 

As to setting up excuses, we will see if Angus keeps taking potshots at Singh through twitter and the media. "Caucus" doesn't have a problem with Singh, Angus does. Maybe there are some others that are disgruntled but Angus is engaged in a power struggle with Singh. In my opinion he doesn't believe that Singh has the right to lead the party. In my opinion he is bitter over Singh's membership drive in non-traditional communities. 

Angus is going to be quiet for a bit but I very much doubt he will desist because he is sincere. He doesn't support Singh's leadership and he doesn't want to make a secret of it. He's being pressured internally. 

Your anti-Angus conspiracy theory is getting a bit out of control... What do you mean by "He's being pressured internally" ??

NorthReport

MM well said!

 

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Jagmeet Singh is no Jeremy Corbyn, but the way R.E.Wood gleefully quotes every unfavourable poll or comment about him reminds me of the postings by nicky and sherpafinn prior to the British election last June.

NorthReport

Right-wing Don Martin from right-wing CTV is not really the person to be quoting about giving advice to Jagmeet Singh.  Just think about it!

 

NorthReport

He has a point. I think it is time for Jagmeet to make the move now.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/mulcair-s-advice-to-ndp-leader-jagmeet-singh-get-a-seat-1.3865140

Pondering

R.E.Wood wrote:
 Your anti-Angus conspiracy theory is getting a bit out of control... What do you mean by "He's being pressured internally" ??

No conspiracy. Conspiracies have to be secrets and this is no secret. Angus has made previous snarky comments aimed at Singh.

PARLIAMENT HILL—Failed NDP leadership candidate Charlie Angus deleted a tweet he posted criticizing his party for fixating too heavily on image and style because he didn't want to be seen as coming out against "new ideas" and "new people" entering party ranks, he said. In an interview on Wednesday, Mr. Angus (Timmins-James Bay, Ont.) said he wrote the tweet on Jan. 19 because he was “very upset" that the party was losing a "powerful organizer" in Michele Girash,  https://www.hilltimes.com/2018/01/24/biotechnology-151/132162

and 

Replying to 

Jagmeet's policy writer loses it when the policy gets challenged. Leave it to your candidate to defend it. All the best.

5:08 PM - 13 Jul 2017

Angus is a disgruntled loser. He sincerely believed it was time for a more leftist leader to take control. He probably would have been okay with Ashton, or Caron. Singh is an upstart. 

It's nothing to debate. I will be proven right or wrong over the next year.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Angus is a disgruntled loser.

This is so out of character for Angus.   It can't just be that he thought it should have been him.

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:

He has a point. I think it is time for Jagmeet to make the move now.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/mulcair-s-advice-to-ndp-leader-jagmeet-singh-get-a-seat-1.3865140

Really, would that be anything like Canadians getting to know Mulcair when he was giving Harper the third degree over the payment to Duffy? That was huge. It was in the papers every day. It didn't help him a bit. 

Singh is better off doing exactly what he is doing. There is no reason for him to run for a seat when the election is being called next year. Isn't caucus capable of representing the NDP in parliament? Is someone in caucus going to step down to give him a safe seat? If not, what happens if he loses the seat he goes for? 

Trudeau didn't go for a seat, and he is leading a majority government. I wouldn't copy him for the sake of copying but it is a valid choice and seems best for Singh and the NDP.

Mulcair's advice isn't helpful. He just wants his name in the papers. 

Sean in Ottawa

I do not see a great benefit in Singh going for a seat and the NDP askign someone to step down to fight an election the party has to pay fro when another is coming next year.

I am not sure this advice is helpful -- I am sure the media would love the story to cover but the NDP's job is not to provide stories unless they are helpful to the party.

Singh has a lot of work to do and some serious work in Quebec and he does not ahve a lot of time. Spending 10-20% of that fighting for a seat is not practical and woudl only appear to be a mark of desperation and failure as if this was to be done it should have been done a while ago.

The party is best focussing on the election, finances and the platform. My guess is this is a decision that already has been made.

Mighty Middle

Parliament has a tradition that when a leader runs in a by-election for a seat, the Governing party (which would be the Liberals) DO NOT offer up a candidate allowing for the leader an easy ride to victory.

The last time this happened was 2000 when Stockwell Day ran in Okanagan—Coquihalla and Joe Clark ran in King-Hants. The Liberals chose not to run a candidate, though the NDP did run candidates in the both ridings.

Tom Mulcair riding of Outremont will be free this summer for a by-election. If Jagmeet decides to run in that riding, will the Liberals follow Parliamentary tradition? Because if they do follow tradition, with the Liberals out it would be an easy win for Jagmeet in Outremont.

Pondering

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
Angus is a disgruntled loser.

This is so out of character for Angus.   It can't just be that he thought it should have been him.

He probably would have been fine with Ashton or Cullen winning, both having paid their dues and both being on the leftist side of the party. He isn't just unhappy that he personally didn't win. He's unhappy that Singh won. People new to the federal NDP have more power than party stalwarts. The goal was to overthrow the centrists. Infuriated might be a better word. 

cco

Pondering wrote:

Trudeau didn't go for a seat, and he is leading a majority government.

I could've sworn he'd run in Papineau in 2008, long before he was leader of the Liberal party.

Pondering

cco wrote:
Pondering wrote:

Trudeau didn't go for a seat, and he is leading a majority government.

I could've sworn he'd run in Papineau in 2008, long before he was leader of the Liberal party.

oops, you are right of course, it's just that he didn't spend any time there so I forgot lol. 

Pages