Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: Become a Podcaster | Find a Show
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2012 the authors
Syndicate
Can anyone find a clip of Saganash speaking in English? I have seen clips of him French and hevspeaks it like it was his mother tongue. I also saw clips of him on APTN speaking Cree and some other FN language, but i have not actually heard him say anything in English (which I understand he is totally fluent in).
I also wanted to hear him speak english.
Saw him at the convention and he was not the best communicator in English. But good in French from what I have seen.
Stockholm wrote:
This is a really good profile of Paul Dewar. If only his French was better - I would back him in a flash!!
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/education%2BPaul%2BDewar/5415319/story...
So, bearing in mind that there are 4 years before the next election (in which to improve his French) and also understanding that NONE of the potential candidates have ALL the attributes we would like in a new leader - where do we compromise?
Dewar needs to do more than learn French to win my support. How about back off the military interventionism and pro-Nato stance!
I'm glad Roméo is in. Here is a video from upthread of Saganash speaking English.
There's one video on CPAC, posted in a previous thread. He speaks english very well.
He is good in English. And one cool customer!
Go Romeo!
Here is Roméo's speech at convention. Mulcair begins at the beginning of the clip saying he supported removing the "new" from NDP, extension of the Libya mission, and is against a merger with the Liberals. He doesn't say, but seem to lean towards support of "moderning" the language of the constitution
Dewar needs to do more than learn French to win my support. How about back off the military interventionism and pro-Nato stance!
Yes. So I don't expect he's going to get mine. And if we have a Dion in the race - that is, a potential compromise second-tier candidate who could easily be defined by our enemies as not ready for prime time and depress the enthusiasm of the rank and file - I think it's Dewar.
IMO, it seems like the Saganash candidacy has delighted and excited a lot of New Democrats, and has largely been ignored by the media. That's okay by me, since it's only New Democrats who select the leader, and the media has a long history of getting it wrong about the party.
So, what makes a candidate "second tier"?
ETA: how about we avoid using "second tier candidates" in our terminology and treat all candidates as equals?
The media generally gets it wrong about any party. Paul Martin and Andre Boisclair were both "star" candidates for leadership, according to the media pundits. How well did they actually end up doing?
So, what makes a candidate "second tier"?
ETA: how about we avoid using "second tier candidates" in our terminology and treat all candidates as equals?
I meant by second tier only that the candidate is not perceived as a front runner. I'd call Romeo second tier in that sense, too, though IMO with respect to quality he's first rate.
Dewar needs to do more than learn French to win my support. How about back off the military interventionism and pro-Nato stance!
Yes. So I don't expect he's going to get mine. And if we have a Dion in the race - that is, a potential compromise second-tier candidate who could easily be defined by our enemies as not ready for prime time and depress the enthusiasm of the rank and file - I think it's Dewar.
IMO, it seems like the Saganash candidacy has delighted and excited a lot of New Democrats, and has largely been ignored by the media. That's okay by me, since it's only New Democrats who select the leader, and the media has a long history of getting it wrong about the party.
I see NO similarity between Dion and Dewar, except for the fact that he, like Dion, is perceived not to be a 'front-runner'. He is personable, knowledgeable, has a number of years of electoral political experience and acquits himself well in front of the camera and in the H of C. If HE is not ready for 'prime time' as you put it, I don't know who is? I think ANY of the potential candidates are going to have to be careful to defined by the Conservatives before they can define themselves.
That being said, I too am very pleased to see Romeo Saganash in the race and look forward to see who else declares in the next days and weeks.
Stll problematic. Who and what defines a 'front runner'? I think it's MSM manipulation, which we should avoid.
Dewar needs to do more than learn French to win my support. How about back off the military interventionism and pro-Nato stance!
If you don't like "military interventionism" and a "pro-NATO" stance then why are you singling out Paul Dewar. The NDP caucus has unanimously taken positions about intervening in Libya - so Libby Davies is every bit as pro-military as Paul Dewar is. It happens that Paul Dewar was assigned the role of Foreign Affairs critic - so he is the one who has to deliver the policy position that was forged by the caucus as a whole. If Libby Davies were the Foreign affairs critic - se would be reciting exactly the same lines.
Good people can disagree about the substance of some of the NDP foreign policy positions - but I don't see why people are targetting Paul Dewar personally when he is essentially the messenger.
In the Canadian parlimentary culture, loyalty is everything. Unlike in Europe where the UK labour party fights itself to the death. There are pros and cons to this.
I don't consider Saganash to be second tier. The problem is that he isn't receiving mass nomination backing at the moment. People like Peter Julian have more nominations at the moment, and he hasn't even declared his candidacy. All of this can of course change as the campaigns truely begin. He definately needs to up his profile and get his name out. He also has to (in the long run) show that he is more than able to connect with urban voters. He will definately dominate in issues regarding resources, aboriginals, and sustainable development; but he also has to be able to articulate his views on other issues such as crime, trade, social issues, etc. Only time will tell, the race is still in a very early stage.
The media generally gets it wrong about any party. Paul Martin and Andre Boisclair were both "star" candidates for leadership, according to the media pundits. How well did they actually end up doing?
Its not just how they ended up. Paul Martin for example acted like Mr. Dithers from the outset.
Stll problematic. Who and what defines a 'front runner'? I think it's MSM manipulation, which we should avoid.
I think I'll agree with you, especially for this early stage. It's premature.
Are you serious, Malcolm? Honestly? lol Because he ran a successful presidential campaign, James Carville would have been a perfectly credible candidate for President of the United States?
So? It was also widely known that he wanted Audrey in 1989. How did that turn out?
My point... if he thinks Topp is the best candidate based on his own criteria, fine. But to say only Topp has what it takes to be leader... and NO ONE else... is laughable considering the talent we have in the NDP.
One "reporter" who said Topp is the frontrunner and has it wrapped up said it was based on, among other things, him spending money and that a black SUV picked him up after his announcement.
Seriously... Topp is the frontrunner and has it wrapped up because a black SUV picked him up after his announcement.
That's the quality reporting we have in the media today, folks. Please try not to pee yourself laughing over it :)
Good people can disagree about the substance of some of the NDP foreign policy positions - but I don't see why people are targetting Paul Dewar personally when he is essentially the messenger.
Dewar is not merely the messenger, he played a key role in crafting that policy. Individual Parliamentarians do not have the time or human capability to be experts on every single file that Parliament deals with, so that's why critics are assigned to each portfolio. It's the critic's job to be informed about a particular issue on behalf of the party, and the members of said party will often defer to that individuals judgement for that reason. True, the Caucus isn't entirely free from blame, I think it was shameful of Libby Davies to go along with that position, and it is disappointing that more caucus members did not speak up at the time. Your portrayal of Dewar as being one of equals, however, is not the case.
There's another key difference. In 2003, Broadbent endorsed Layton towards the end of the race, which had weight because he would have had lots of time to see the whole field and make up his mind. But there hadn't even been any candidates declared when Broadbent endorsed Topp, so to say at that point that Topp has what it takes for sure, with six months ahead for the leadership race even before anyone else declares, seems quite presumptuous.
Well put. I think Broadbent was over the topp.
While Broadbent may have been "over the Topp," he did what he had to do to get Topp in the race, and that was to issue him with a very high powered endorsement coming right out of the gate. It is hard to think of anyone more respected than Broadbent, but this is also why the endorsement chafes so much (i.e. because other people haven't had a chance yet to make up their minds or see some of the candidates that they would like to run).
While Broadbent may have been "over the Topp," he did what he had to do to get Topp in the race, and that was to issue him with a very high powered endorsement coming right out of the gate.
I dunno. At least according to the media, Topp was already in the race and even leading it since the day after Jack's death. Broadbent's early endorsement and presumptious declaration that Topp was the "only" one seems intended to effectively end the race. That's what chafes me.
Strange, I watched Saganash give exactly that speech at the convention, and somehow it looks better on video than I thought it did in person. Maybe I was just exhausted from volunteering?
It could also be that the convention was so high-energy, and then Saganash got up and gave a speech in his slow, carefully considered English. Which is not to fault him at all, but how will he fare in a debate context that requires quick and snappy remarks?
Are there any videos of local debates he participated in during the election?
Which is not to fault him at all, but how will he fare in a debate context that requires quick and snappy remarks?
I'm all for a debater that takes time to consider what he is going to say before putting his mouth in gear! I'm excited for Saganash - what amazing hope he can inspire in this country for First Nations as well as all of us tired and beaten down by Harper. I just don't feel that excitement with Topp or Mulcair.
I love the three launch styles: Topp with the big launch (essential to raise his profile, not being an MP); Mulcair with the slow launch in gentle stages (so as not to mount a Quebec juggernaut before lining up endorsements from across Canada); and Saganash with the local launch (he wanted to let his "own people" be the first to know, before even telling any caucus members let alone asking any of them for support.) None of the three styles are better or worse than the others. What I find very appealing is the diversity.
I dunno. At least according to the media, Topp was already in the race and even leading it since the day after Jack's death. Broadbent's early endorsement and presumptious declaration that Topp was the "only" one seems intended to effectively end the race. That's what chafes me.
It's sound political strategy to make yourself look inevitable if you can.
It's sound political strategy to make yourself look inevitable if you can.
Maybe from someone with a more reasonable claim on inevitability. Coming from some one who, until a month ago, showed no personal interest in public office, it seems presumptuous and got my back up.
Topp had to get his name out early, since he's not currently elected. Otherwise he wouldn't get noticed by the media. He is a strategist, he knows what he's doing. All he needs now is to show us his speaking/charisma talents and more about his political views. The same goes with the other candidates. The Broadbent support was a brilliant move, althrough it would have been better if he was surrounded by more of a diverse team of mps. Althrough personally it would be hard to endorse someone until the first debate is completed and until we see what the candidates are really made of.
...if we have a Dion in the race - that is, a potential compromise second-tier candidate who could easily be defined by our enemies as not ready for prime time and depress the enthusiasm of the rank and file - I think it's Dewar.
John Baglow (aka Dr. Dawg) didn't think so, and he posts a very good clip of Dewar taking apart John Baird very effectively at the end of the last election, without being at all nasty about it (even Baird was laughing by the end).
http://drdawgsblawg.ca/2011/09/ndp-leader-paul-dewar-has-the-chops.shtml
Lefties in Ottawa love him, and know the family reputation - not only of Marion who was formidable, but also Ken and Paul's siblings. The babbler who posted a photo of Paul next to Justin Trudeau and sneered about his growing up in "privilege" doesn't know anything about what the Dewar family did for this city - whether it was affordable housing, promoting cycling long before any other jurisdiction in Canada, the arts, supporting new immigrants, advocating peace, and just making everyone feel a part of decision-making. You could not imagine a family that had cared less for the material trappings of middle class life, and more about making sure everyone felt welcome.
And if you ever went canvassing with Marion through chinatown or little vietnam in Ottawa, you would see people pouring out of their houses to greet her and express their affection for her, after the time when she challenged the Clark government to take in more vietnamese boat people than the 4,000 Clark agreed to. Ottawa families wound up accepting over 4,000 just in this city, and it was all instigated out of city hall under her mayorship.
If Paul pours himself into getting his government french up to snuff over the next month, he would be as good as the PM in the other official language - and that really is his only shortcoming as leader.
BTW, the best way to find clips of people speaking in English or French is to look them up in Hansard, and then pull up the Hansard video in floor sound at the ParlVU site. The filibuster debate should be full of good material.
...if we have a Dion in the race - that is, a potential compromise second-tier candidate who could easily be defined by our enemies as not ready for prime time and depress the enthusiasm of the rank and file - I think it's Dewar.
John Baglow (aka Dr. Dawg) didn't think so, and he posts a very good clip of Dewar taking apart John Baird very effectively at the end of the last election, without being at all nasty about it (even Baird was laughing by the end).
http://drdawgsblawg.ca/2011/09/ndp-leader-paul-dewar-has-the-chops.shtml
Lefties in Ottawa love him, and know the family reputation - not only of Marion who was formidable, but also Ken and Paul's siblings. The babbler who posted a photo of Paul next to Justin Trudeau and sneered about his growing up in "privilege" doesn't know anything about what the Dewar family did for this city - whether it was affordable housing, promoting cycling long before any other jurisdiction in Canada, the arts, supporting new immigrants, advocating peace, and just making everyone feel a part of decision-making. You could not imagine a family that had cared less for the material trappings of middle class life, and more about making sure everyone felt welcome.
And if you ever went canvassing with Marion through chinatown or little vietnam in Ottawa, you would see people pouring out of their houses to greet her and express their affection for her, after the time when she challenged the Clark government to take in more vietnamese boat people than the 4,000 Clark agreed to. Ottawa families wound up accepting over 4,000 just in this city, and it was all instigated out of city hall under her mayorship.
If Paul pours himself into getting his government french up to snuff over the next month, he would be as good as the PM in the other official language - and that really is his only shortcoming as leader.
I remember this clip of Paul Dewar but when you go to the blog that is not the clip that comes up. I seem to remember that Dewar threw away Baird's talking points, literally!
Oh, you're right, Jonas. I watched it there last week and it did link to the right one, but I guess CTV has re-orged its Question Period site for the new season. Bummer.
ETA: this link works - http://watch.ctv.ca/news/#clip455230
I didn't know this until now: Since February 5, 2009, Dewar has served as the Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for the Prevention of Genocide and Other Crimes Against Humanity.
Which is not to fault him at all, but how will he fare in a debate context that requires quick and snappy remarks?
I'm all for a debater that takes time to consider what he is going to say before putting his mouth in gear! I'm excited for Saganash - what amazing hope he can inspire in this country for First Nations as well as all of us tired and beaten down by Harper. I just don't feel that excitement with Topp or Mulcair.
It's a rather debased word now, but I think Romeo can be a truly transformative candidate. He may not be as garrulous as Jack, but he radiates a warmth and authenticity that is exceptionally rare in politics. I think his candidacy carries amazing potential.
Are you serious, Malcolm? Honestly? lol Because he ran a successful presidential campaign, James Carville would have been a perfectly credible candidate for President of the United States?
I don't know why you have trouble grasping this subtlety. Being a credible candidate does not mean he would necessarily be the best candidate. His lack of electoral track record would be a negative - as it is with Topp. He would have brought other positives - including, presumably, the capacity to bring in support Iincluding financial support) from the FOB - much as Topp appears to be doing from the various party establishments in Ontario, Saskatchewan and BC.
You hate Topp and everything you assume he stands for. I get that. Your hatred does not make him a non-viable candidate.
knownothing - wrt you ill-informed diatribes about the Saskatchewan NDP government circa 1991-97, I gather you believe the NDP should have defaulted on the debt. I'm thankful that your user name is sufficient to extablish your intelligence and your credibility.
Yeah, I'm liking it, too!
Saganash's entry into the contest reminds me of 1989 when I hoped Elijah Harper would have entered that contest.
Having a First Nation's member as a leadership hopeful shows how the NDP can reach out to all citizens of this country.
But I still wish Olivia Chow would re-consider! She would be my first choice as new Leader.
http://archive.greenpartysask.ca/GPS_Principles_Platform/Backgrounder_Ar...
It is really astonishing that Janice MacKinnon has no discussion of taxation and tax decisions taken by her government. All MacKinnon does is flatly dismiss the critics of the left. The right wing Fraser Institute ranked the Romanow government the second best government in North America. Why would they do that?
Convincing the Wall Street bankers MacKinnon became finance minister in 1993, set forth a four year plan to eliminate the budget deficit, and made further cuts to programs. The cuts were necessary, the NDP insisted, because of the inability to sell bonds in the New York City capital markets. An attempt to raise $500 million in March "failed to sell easily and quickly. It was a warning," MacKinnon argues.
MacKinnon insists that the NDP government "could not borrow money in Canada" in 1993. But in 1992 they began to tap the $8 billion in savings held by Saskatchewan residents. However, they only sought $150 million in the new Saskatchewan Savings Bonds. In 1994 they raised $800 million.
There were other options. They might have gone to the trade unions and negotiated some loans from their pension plans.There was no minimum tax placed on the 30 percent of profitable Saskatchewan corporations who pay no income taxes. In 1992 the NDP government promised to create a new Saskatchewan Economic Development Bank to mobilize local capital for investment, but they never carried through on this.
The Romanow government never addressed the cause of the debt and deficit: the radical drop in revenues from the resource sector. Under the NDP government from 1991 to 2001, the share of resource extraction sales that went to the treasury varied from 11 percent to 17 percent. This was a much smaller share than under the Blakeney or Devine governments.
Throughout the memoirs, MacKinnon insists that the federal government can no longer afford to finance our traditional social programs. She argues that the federal debt and deficit grew because of the expansion of our universal social programs. This is not true. As Statistics Canada demonstrated in a famous report in June 1991 (Mimoto and Cross), the accumulated budget deficit was not caused by increases in program spending but to the introduction of a number of personal and corporate tax breaks which greatly reduced
revenues.
How have the people of Saskatchewan reacted to the new version of the CCF-NDP? In the election in 1991 the party received 275,780 votes. This fell to 192,320 in 1995 and then 156,243 in 1999. When the NDP was routed in the 1982 election they received 201,190 votes. The percentage of eligible voters going to the polls fell from the usual 80 percent in 1991 to 64 percent in 1995 and 56 percent in 1999. There has been no apparent rush to the Saskatchewan Party or the Liberal Party. All three share the same basic neoliberal
policies.
Margaret Thatcher once said that her greatest success as prime minister was transforming the Labour Party into another conservative party. She insisted that there was no alternative to the neoliberal agenda of the free market and free trade. Janice MacKinnon and the new NDP leadership agree.
Sounds like you are trying to dismiss claims that there were no other options just like she was. This is why the NDP has declined in SK> Because they were no longer a socialist party. This clearly shows that other options were available for financing. Maybe you can lay off the personal insults now Malcolm
That was then, the golden age of neoliberalism. Before that it was a time where our ideas reigned, the post-war consensus.
Third way had its day, it taught us the importance of utilizing global markets, but it lead progressives down a path of destruction in the long run due to the dogmatic approach taken. It would be silly for someone to run on a third way platform when the idea itself has been rejected. I don't expect any candidate to run on such as thing, except maybe Pat Martin.
I don't know why you have trouble grasping this subtlety. Being a credible candidate does not mean he would necessarily be the best candidate. His lack of electoral track record would be a negative - as it is with Topp. He would have brought other positives - including, presumably, the capacity to bring in support Iincluding financial support) from the FOB - much as Topp appears to be doing from the various party establishments in Ontario, Saskatchewan and BC.
You hate Topp and everything you assume he stands for. I get that. Your hatred does not make him a non-viable candidate.
I spent some years in the backrooms... in the youth wing, president of provincial and federal constituency associations... helped draft an election platform... and the list goes on.
I guess I'm qualifed to run for leader too?
Does he have a right to run? Yes. Is he qualified? I don't think so. And I think it quite arrogant of someone to assume they can go right to the top job without ever having held public office before.
Do I hate him? No. I think he's a great strategist for the party. And I've enjoyed him on Power Play when he's been on from time to time as a panelist. But as leader and Prime Minister in waiting?
Good people can disagree about the substance of some of the NDP foreign policy positions - but I don't see why people are targetting Paul Dewar personally when he is essentially the messenger.
If he had just supported the NATO bombing it would have been bad enough and similar to his colleagues who all fell into the same trap. He however is the critic and he is supposed to study the issues and bring nuanced and intelligent debate to the table. That is his job. He did not bring intelligent debate he disseminated the "viagra" lie as a rationale for intervention. He is either gullible or lazy in his fact checking. Not the kind of qualities I want in a leader. The last thing this country needs is an NDP leader that can be led by the nose by those who write NATO briefing notes.
That was then, the golden age of neoliberalism. Before that it was a time where our ideas reigned, the post-war consensus.
Third way had its day, it taught us the importance of utilizing global markets, but it lead progressives down a path of destruction in the long run due to the dogmatic approach taken. It would be silly for someone to run on a third way platform when the idea itself has been rejected. I don't expect any candidate to run on such as thing, except maybe Pat Martin.
Exactly, and when I brought up Brian Topp working for the Romanow govt it was because he could be a third way candidate.
I wonder where the potential women leaders are in this debate. Oh yeah as women they are automatically second tier just like the FN's candidate.
The two tier stuff is to gag on. I suspect that if someone polled actual members in the party that Romeo would have more support than Topp. But he is somehow second tire compared to a white guy with the resume of a back room fixer.
At least two credible women candidates need to step forward or this race will be a sad affair.
No candidate will be so politically tone-deaf as to say "Yes, I'm third way." (Okay, maybe Pat Martin.) We'll need to parse their rhetoric more closely, and examine what economic prescriptions they leave on the table and remove from it. As I said in another thread, Topp's rhapsodizing Greece's austerity plan places him, IMO, unequivocally in the third way camp.
No candidate will be so politically tone-deaf as to say "Yes, I'm third way." (Okay, maybe Pat Martin.) We'll need to parse their rhetoric more closely, and examine what economic prescriptions they leave on the table and remove from it. As I said in another thread, Topp's rhapsodizing Greece's austerity plan places him, IMO, unequivocally in the third way camp.
This should be the main issue of the leadership race! Are you third way or socialist?
At least two credible women candidates need to step forward or this race will be a sad affair.
Fine. Name them.
Peggy Nash will be 64 when the 2015 election is held. Credible, but still, most 64-year-olds are getting ready to retire, not to become Prime Minister. (As a 68-year-old I can get away with saying this, I hope). Yes, Jack would have been 65. But if he had not blossomed, in the two months before May 2, into the Leader of the Official Opposition, some people assumed this would have been his last campaign, for that reason.
Niki Ashton will be 33. Okay, Joe Clark was 39 when he took office, the day before he turned 40. I greatly admire Niki Ashton. But 33, really?
Megan Leslie will be 42. I greatly admire her too. I hear her French is coming along, and I hope she runs.
Who else?
So WIlf are you really saying the NDP can't even field two credible women candidates for leadership. Wow!! I hadn't realized the party had sunk that far in its talent pool.
But mostly all the best potential women fail the language purity test. Oh well that is of course the most important quality in a leader.
The smart-aleck troll in me says, Ruth Ellen Brosseau is 27.
(Then again, she might as well be more qualified for the NDP leadership than Rob Ford is for Toronto mayor.)
Personally, I don't trust anyone aged 40-60. History shows that they're responsible for all the problems in the world. It's their sense of entitlement.
NS, that was a better answer for "why are we singling out Paul Dewar" than what I wrote. Thank you.
If someone actually polled the party, you would see that a majority don't rush to conclusions about people and are mostly undecided because the race hasn't even truely began. I also don't see how women are considered second-tier to any new democrat. I treat all candidates as equals and I will consider them equally(except pat martin). I expect all other members to do the same.
The debate here has turned into a debate over suspicions and allegations. We're still in a stage of determining who will run and gathing support from fellow collegues before turning towards garnering support from ndp members.
If someone actually polled the party, you would see that a majority don't rush to conclusions about people and are mostly undecided because the race hasn't even truely began.
I sure hope that's true. I have my doubts, due to conversations here and elsewhere, but man, I hope you're right about that.
If someone actually polled the party, you would see that a majority don't rush to conclusions about people and are mostly undecided because the race hasn't even truely began.
I sure hope that's true. I have my doubts, due to conversations here and elsewhere, but man, I hope you're right about that.
I was at an NDP event yesterday and nobody there had their mind made up
The debate here has turned into a debate over suspicions and allegations. We're still in a stage of determining who will run and gathing support from fellow collegues before turning towards garnering support from ndp members.
In defense of the debate here, it's the most substantial and vibrant happening anywhere, because virtually all the participants have a stake in the race because they care about the party, its direction, and its chance to form the next government. Unlike virtually every debate on the leadership I've seen anywhere else.
I have a good feeling Megan Leslie will run. (And that, unfortunately, Peggy Nash won't.) Rathika Sitsabaiesan won't be running (apparently she's supporting Julian), but I think she has great potential to be a future leader.
Leslie needs to run. Just look at the way she can go in question period.
Personally, I don't trust anyone aged 40-60. History shows that they're responsible for all the problems in the world. It's their sense of entitlement.
Many over-60s and under-40s will agree.
But somehow I doubt you are ruling out Tom Mulcair (who will be only 60 on October 19, 2015), Brian Topp (will be 55), Romeo Saganash (will be 53), Peter Julian (will be 53), and Megan Leslie (will be 42).
Personally, I don't trust anyone aged 40-60. History shows that they're responsible for all the problems in the world. It's their sense of entitlement.
Oh, thank goodness. I'm 62 next month - maybe I should run!
Personally, I don't trust anyone aged 40-60. History shows that they're responsible for all the problems in the world. It's their sense of entitlement.
Oh, thank goodness. I'm 62 next month - maybe I should run!
As long as it's not for the Bloc Québecois
Do babblers think the leadership race might have the unintended consequence of helping out a lot of the rookie NDP MPs by a) deflecting attention of them so that they get more time to develop skills, roots in their ridings? b) highlight the strength of the NDP to Québec through a bilingual leadership field? c) develop the NDP membership in their ridings?
Also, is anyone planning on starting a thread on the next session of Parliament and what the NDP will/should do there?
Personally, I don't trust anyone aged 40-60. History shows that they're responsible for all the problems in the world. It's their sense of entitlement.
Oh, thank goodness. I'm 62 next month - maybe I should run!
As long as it's not for the Bloc Québecois
But mostly all the best potential women fail the language purity test. Oh well that is of course the most important quality in a leader.
While I like Nycole Turmel a lot, and she meets Unionist's criterion (she'll be 73 on E-day 2015), I would prefer someone whose English is more fluent.
If giving good clips in english in Question Period were the only criterion for success as a political party, the Liberals would have won a majority in the last election.
While Broadbent may have been "over the Topp," he did what he had to do to get Topp in the race, and that was to issue him with a very high powered endorsement coming right out of the gate.
I dunno. At least according to the media, Topp was already in the race and even leading it since the day after Jack's death. Broadbent's early endorsement and presumptious declaration that Topp was the "only" one seems intended to effectively end the race. That's what chafes me.
I have a real problem with backroom ppl moving into the politcal frontlines. It just doesnt work IMO.
I have a real problem with backroom ppl moving into the politcal frontlines. It just doesnt work IMO.
So where is Topp going to get a BC base from if both Cullen and Julian enter the race? I think he has been overhyped by his friends in the MSM.
Shhhhh. Don't you know you're speaking heresy? Don't you know that the media talking heads are gods and should be listened to? After all, Paul Martin, Dwayne Lingenfelter, and Andre Boisclair were all annointed the Chosen Ones for their party by the media, and they led their parties on to greatness. The media gods are never wrong!
I was talking to two of my friends who are party activists and organizers and they went to a meet and greet with Topp. They were extremely underwhelmed. Like many they are waiting for Peter's announcement. Unless Libby were to run I think Peter will have a lot of Lower Mainland support and there are a lot of members here.
Shhhhh. Don't you know you're speaking heresy? Don't you know that the media talking heads are gods and should be listened to? After all, Paul Martin, Dwayne Lingenfelter, and Andre Boisclair were all annointed the Chosen Ones for their party by the media, and they led their parties on to greatness. The media gods are never wrong!
Speaking of Lingenfelter, i talked to Ryan Meili yesterday. It would sure be a different situation in Sask this fall if he was the leader!
Since it's New Democrats who decide this thing, you'd think some pundit, any pundit, might want to gauge the opinion of New Democrats. Has anyone heard any of that happening? They're just talking amongst themselves, as far as I can tell.
Since it's New Democrats who decide this thing, you'd think some pundit, any pundit, might want to gauge the opinion of New Democrats. Has anyone heard any of that happening? They're just talking amongst themselves, as far as I can tell.
IMO it is because they are trying to control how the opinions of the New Democrats are formed.
Speaking of Lingenfelter, i talked to Ryan Meili yesterday. It would sure be a different situation in Sask this fall if he was the leader!
Is he going to run for a seat provincially? It be nice if he jumped into the next provincial leadership race with a seat in the legislature.
Speaking of Lingenfelter, i talked to Ryan Meili yesterday. It would sure be a different situation in Sask this fall if he was the leader!
Is he going to run for a seat provincially? It be nice if he jumped into the next provincial leadership race with a seat in the legislature.
No he said he gave up that nomination. But he is still involved and out there.
FWIW, Rex is on the leadership case today. Positive conversation right now about Saganash.
Speaking of Lingenfelter, i talked to Ryan Meili yesterday. It would sure be a different situation in Sask this fall if he was the leader!
Is he going to run for a seat provincially? It be nice if he jumped into the next provincial leadership race with a seat in the legislature.
No he said he gave up that nomination. But he is still involved and out there.
Im not sure if the end result would be much better but certainly Meilli is no Link. Meilli was Linked by the Link mob.
JeffWells wrote: Since it's New Democrats who decide this thing, you'd think some pundit, any pundit, might want to gauge the opinion of New Democrats. Has anyone heard any of that happening? They're just talking amongst themselves, as far as I can tell
No one has yet polled NDP members but as I have posted previously both Leger and Harris-Decima have polled the public at large. Mulcair had 14 % in both surveys and Topp only 2-3%. At least 50 % were undecided in each.
FWIW, Rex is on the leadership case today. Positive conversation right now about Saganash.
Good to hear! CTV's Question Period didn't mention him at all. I guess that's one of the disadvantages of a quiet launch on a Friday, but still.
Does anyone have a video clip of his announcement?
Does anyone have a video clip of his announcement?
It's at this link (French only).
It's at this link (French only).
Nice guy... good resume... but is he always that low key on the stump?
Here is Cross Country Checkup discussion on NDP leadership race. I only heard the first hour, and heard at least two English-speaking callers were really impressed by Thomas Mulcair.
One caller said that he tried to sign up for a NDP membership, but he was frustrated by the NDP.ca website. I took a look at the website and saw the "Leadership 2012 - Be a Part of It" lead-ins (there were two of them on the front page), and I wonder if at least one should spell out "Join the NDP" instead. Or perhaps the lead-ins were put on the websiter after the caller tried signing up earlier in the week.
Isn't this nice? The Toronto Sun endorses Brian Topp because he has a grip on reality because of his time in the Romanow government. Sheesh
http://www.torontosun.com/2011/09/16/topp-gun-for-the-ndp
Wow, the Sun doesn't need to wait to see the field either. I'm impressed.
Finally, and most troubling to many socialists, Topp has worked in the private sector. He doesn't think corporations are evil organizations hell bent on destroying the country.
I thought the cons were hounding him last week for being a "union stooge". This week they are his favorite in a race that barely started with only two people running. Next week they'll call him the "co-op clusterfuck"
Perhaps they seek a new strategy fighting progressives, to divide them and then conquer them(it makes sense, the end goal of the cons now is to split the vote for progressives). Topp hasn't even told us fully his economic views. And how silly, Layton worked for the private sector too if I recall(a small buisness). As did Tommy Douglas in his early life, and many small buisnesses supported the ccf. And its strange to pick a candidate, when the race just started and there are only two currently running and that he hasn't released his future vision of Canada.
I thought the cons were hounding him last week for being a "union stooge".
But that was the Conservative Party. I wouldn't expect them to issue a press release saying "Pretty please, Dippers, choose this one." The Sun can do that.
Oh I recall stockwell day advocating Mulcair. Its just sillyness. The whole article outrages me because its just random baseless chatter. It implies theres a great divide in the NDP, each week theres a new division in the NDP. One week its BC vs Quebec, next week who knows what random chatter they'll post. Look at this debate, the candidates are all nice to each other http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJnvzI7A7Es
The way the article is written ticks me off. Its good that they are scared of Topp, but they know that the left hates them and that they are trying to divide people.
Knownothing. Glad to see clearly that you have no idea what the Romanow government was facing in 1991. I will bear that in mind as I weigh your analysis in the future.
Oddly, while there was lots of quibbling over the details, there was broad support for the Romanow government's priority on rstoring fiscal credibility since the alternatives were too damning to contemplate. (And despite MacKinnon's self-serving fictions in her memoire, there was nobody in the NDP arguing for default.)
Could the Romanow government have done better? Probably.
Did the Romanow government make mistakes? Undoubtedly.
But clearly you fail to understand what was going on. A far right government had deliberately driven the province to the brink of default. It wasn't incompetence, nor was it a blind faith in discredited ideology. It was a deliberate policy choice (much like the Tea Party in the US Cangress a few weeks ago) that they hoped would trigger an economic meltdown on somebody else's watch.
The fact that the Romanow government managed to restore fiscal sanity without an all out attack on the poor - and even to be the first province to balance it's annual budget - was a victory for progressive principles.
As to the rather assinine point about the NDP vote over four elections, perhaps you could show me an example of a government, elected in a sweep, whose vote did NOT show general decline over the next three elections. The salient point is that, having made tough decisions and having demanded sacrifice from all parts of the Saskatchewan population, the NDP proceeded to win three more elections.
But then, there are some who claim to be on the left who agree with the Devine / Tea Party desire for an economic meltdown. I make it a point to give little credence to such views.
Then by all means, vote against him. I have no problem agreeing that never having held public office is a disadvantage. I just think it's daft to claim that this alone disqualifies him. Prior experience in public office is ONE facto - and we've seen no end of folk with that qualification who have been manifestly inept leaders.
Exactly, and when I brought up Brian Topp working for the Romanow govt it was because he could be a third way candidate.
Ah. So really, it's all just paranoia then. Thanks for clearing that up.
It is curious to see messages claiming Topp is disqualified because he's never been elected, followed by messages blissfully imagining how much better off the SNDP would have been had Meili won instead of Link. Something of a disconnect here.
As with the provincial race (where I supported Meili), I will weigh my options as the race develops and I will avoid the foolishness of rejecting candidates based on arbitrary resume requirements or arbitrary shibboleths.
(And FWIW, I am not likely to support Brian Topp. I just think the vast bulk of the criticism of him here has been complete crap.)
One quibble I recall having was Romanow's immediate legislation banning the Saskatchewan Union of Nurses' strike - which they bravely defied for a week, costing them $120,000 in contempt of court citations. I may be wrong, but I don't recall decades of next-door Manitoba NDP governments needing to resort to such a measure. Even Grant Devine let them strike without back-to-work legislation.
But as long as it restored Saskatchewan's fiscal credibility, well, ok then.
Now that we're on that subject, was Brian Topp still deputy chief of staff to Romanow in April 1999, when the strike was broken? Just wondering, given that he is painted by the Cons as a union stooge.
Unionist, the 1999 nurses strike occured after the period which is the basis of knownothing's attacks and is therefore not strictly relevant to the Romanow government's actions in avoiding default.
Which isn't to say that this isn't an area where Topp's record can be questioned, though given where I was working at the time, it isn't appropriate for me to enter into that particular discussion.
If I recall layton didn't have a seat in the House of Commons when he was elected leader. I suppose when I get to know a bit more about Topp Ill be in a better position to comment. But the party has made great strides of late and I'm just not sure Leader of the Official Opposition should be an entry level position.
If I recall layton didn't have a seat in the House of Commons when he was elected leader. I suppose when I get to know a bit more about Topp Ill be in a better position to comment. But the party has made great strides of late and I'm just not sure Leader of the Official Opposition should be an entry level position.
It probably shouldn't, but it's been done before. Layton didn't have a seat, but he held elected office and did have a public profile, even outside of hogtown.
I think the fact that Topp has never held public office to be a perfectly legitimate consideration. Given a choice between two otherwise identical candidates, one with experience in public ofice and one without, I'd choose the one who had held public office.
But experience in public office is (and should be) only one consideration among many.
In 2009, 45% of Saskatchewan New Democrats chose to support a candidate who had never even sought public office over a candidate with something in the order of 20 years in pblic office, including service as a senior cabinet minister and as deputy premier. I was one of them. I don't really care if Hunky_Monkey thinks all 4000+ of us were stupid.
It is worth saluting the wisdom of voters/delegates who can be open to a candidate without political "credentials";
the credentials needed to run for public office in Canada are:
1) to be a citizen;
2+) doesn't matter, every citizen is eligible.
Mulcair 19, Top 10, Saganash 1.
Both the NDP and Liberals are preparing to elect new leaders. The poll asked voters from each party who should head their respective parties. Among NDP voters, Thomas Mulcair, who is expected to run, leads the pack.
Nationally, 17 per cent of NDP supporters backed Mulcair, an MP and former Quebec minister. In Quebec, 50 per cent said they would like to see Mulcair, the NDP's deputy leader, take charge.
Party president Brian Topp, the first declared candidate, came second, garnering 10 per cent nationally and eight per cent in Quebec.
Quebec MP and former Cree leader Romeo Saganash is the only other declared candidate. In the poll, one per cent of NDP voters in Quebec said they would support Saganash as leader. No respondents in the rest of Canada said they would back him.
Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Orange+Crush+just+blip/5422727/story.html#ixzz1YOdBh8Ym
I meant Mulcair 17
Mulcair reflects on his chances. His theme seems to be that he can bring same energy to building the party in the ROC that was brought to bear in Quebec. he is also presenting himself as the underrdog.
Thomas Mulcair: NDP Leadership Bid Could Be Stalled By Lack Of Quebec Party Votes
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2011/09/19/thomas-mulcair-briant-topp-leade...
Lysiane does a Lysiane, soft touch and pretty positive, on Topp, although doubting his political experience will necessarily translate to Parliament:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/lysiane-gagnon/ndp-contender-at-the-topp-of-his-game/article2169560/
Mr. Topp, 51, is gentle, modest, genial and serious, yet with a wry, self-deprecating sense of humour. As he is now, before stylists, speechwriters, and image-makers start working on him, he looks like the guy next door - decent and reassuring, someone you'd trust with your children.
A pleasant surprise was the quality of Mr. Topp's French - he speaks it much better than either Prime Minister Stephen Harper or Mr. Layton. No wonder, since French is actually his mother tongue, a language he learned from a francophone mother who had been schooled by the famously demanding Ursuline nuns in Quebec City. French was the language at home, since his father, an anglophone from the Eastern Townships, was thoroughly bilingual.
Mr. Topp has the style and behaviour of the political strategist he's been for so long. He speaks in a low voice, with a quasi-confidential tone and an occasional wink. One easily imagines him writing position papers, devising strategies, sitting around a table with other backroom boys. It's harder to imagine him on the hustings.
How can this man who has never run for office or had to deal with the turmoil of parliamentary life face tough political animals such as Mr. Harper or Bob Rae, the interim Liberal leader? He wouldn't be good in a shooting match, but his arguments would be sound because he's obviously very bright, knows a great deal about politics, and is the ultimate Canadian: After 30 years in Quebec, he worked in Ottawa, Regina and Vancouver and is now a Torontonian.
Closing for length.