babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
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: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
The candidates I would place as the leading contenders are Mulcair, Nash, and Topp, and I'd guess they all have a signifciant number of endorsers. I'm not sure how the folks who actually vote will be swayed by endorsements, but they probably make the candidates feel good about themselves, so it's all good.
As a side note, on who might move the party vto the left, right or centre, I'm not as concerned about that as I am concerned about who in my opinion has the best chance at winning against Harper in 2015. I think that person is Mulcair, although Nash probably has a fairly good chance at winning the leadership. She won't fly in Quebec, though.
If this goes past one ballot and avoids a coronation, it could be a tight race to the finish, and if goes past two ballots, then probably all bets are off as to who might win. I'll live with the results regardless of who wins, but in my heart if Mulcair does not win this, I think we'll lose a significant amount of support in Quebec and maybe elsewhere, and we'll be back again to life in opposition again in 2015, and hoping for a coalition deal with the Liberals. Sigh.
That's my whine for the day. Carry on.
Maybe that's the difference between Mulcair and Nash on the coalition issue. Maybe Nash isn't confident she could win a majority.
The notion of a "coronation" is a serious spot of silly, it's not going to happen.
I challenge anyone to come up with an example where anyone in any Canadian party ever won a first round victory in a field with 7 active candidates (and an 8th on the ballot).
oh Howard please spare me. When you frame the argument that way, Nash's stance on the coalition based on HER confidence whereas Mulcair HE is so confident and macho that he doesn't need to consider a coalition - just to let you know I see that as a big turn off and moreoever it makes me see Mulcair as a arrogant Liberal - exactly what you don't want to project him as image for leader of the NDP - I'm sure you get my drift.
And it is that arrogance that he turns me off if he persona is projected by the people who are openly supporting him. The Mulcair crew on babble have really become "really full of themselves" in my view.
I'm not confident Nash could win a majority, either, because she can forget about keeping Quebec support. As for Mulcair, I sincerely hope that if he wins the leadership, he's able to pull off an electoral miracle in 2015 - he's probably the most likely to do it. He could be the leader of a minority government which is probably more likely. If in 2015 he wins a minority government, I wonder who will back the NDP - Greens, BQ, Liberals??? Who knows.
I'm not confident Mulcair could win a majority. There is a huge gap to close with the Conservatives. The NDP only has 44 seats outside of Québec and needs to win about 70 more.
The NDP finished close behind first place in only a dozen or so ridings last time.
Yuck, what a turn-off. With supporters like Mulcair's, who needs critics? :)
Peggy Nash might not have as obvious a base in Quebec as Mulcair. But she has a base in Ontario, and understands the dynamics to win key ridings in battleground GTA. I also think her French is good, and can only get better by 2015. Jack showed that you don't need to be a Quebecker to win in Quebec. You only need to speak to their concerns -- as progressives who want a more equal and fair society, and as Francophones who want to keep their culture from eroding. If she has the skill to win the leadership, then she should have the skill to win most of the seats we took in 2011.
I have little confidence that Mulcair can achieve a minority gov for the NDP next election. Unfortunately, with any other candidate I have no confidence we can win at all. I do however have confidence that with any of the other candidates we will be third or fourth next election.
Wasn't Jack a Quebecer? Yes, and from a very prominent family at that.
I can feel Ashton could win a majority becuz lotta young voters and aboriginal voters goes high vote turnout and west and she would make mulcair become deputy leader quebec would more ndp over 65-70. that my predicting
I think it's still early to predict what things will be like going into the 2015 election. It's three and half years away after all. I understand the argument that Mulcair is the most likely to win, but if 2011 taught me anything, it's that you really should expect the unexpected.
I was visiting Nathan Cullen's website and I noticed that he has officially refrained from making any recommendation on second, third, fourth choices, advising supporters to choose who they prefer.
I was wondering if anyone has noticed if any of the other candidates have made a statement on alternate choices?
Any word on what province? There are a couple of bigs ones left here in NS. Dexter still hasn't endorsed since Chisholm dropped out, Leslie as well. I believe Stoffer and Godin have said that they are remaining neutral however I may be wrong on that. If it is going to be a "significant" endorsment from someone in the area I guess it would have to be one of those two, both would be great endorsments however I think Leslie would be a better one for him.
While I like Dexter and think that an endorsment from him could help I think that Chisholm's endorsment has probably helped with the same people already while I think that Leslie has very wide appeal across the country (cause honestly, Megan Leslie is just awesome) and is more widely known outside the country.
Watch it's someone different..
I'm very concerned about 2015. I feel like a lot of New Democrats think that just because we won the official opposition in 2011, it is going to be straightforward to win government in 2015. We got really lucky in 2011. We won 59/75 seats in Québec. The amount of knowledge and connection these Québec voters have to the NDP is approximately zero. Most of these voters were probably voting NDP (largely uninformed) for the first time in their lives. It was a not the Liberals + not the Conservatives + not the BQ-again kind of vote, with Jack being the last candidate standing.
The Québec media also played a huge role in the win. In the last week of the campaign, they were writing headlines and articles as if the NDP was well on its way to 24 Sussex. The NDp fell significantly short.
Even with the NDP's surge to a clear second place in the polls (thanks to Québec), we did very poorly in the rest of Canada (44/233 seats), losing a lot of ground in many seats where Liberal votes went Conservative.
We are way behind our competition in most seats.The Conservatives won close to 50% of the vote in Ontario and all of the West :(
That is where the new majority lies. That is why Harper is king.
The next leader has to be able to drive a wedge through that and also try to organise and inspire an additional group of Canadians to vote. The Canadians that don't vote now, are just as unlikely to vote in 2015. They don't read babble. They don't care about politics. They more motivated to cut their lawns than they are to vote.
Long thread!