NDP leadership race 3

580 posts / 0 new
Last post
MegB
NDP leadership race 3

Continued from here.

Issues Pages: 
Regions: 
Mighty Middle

Hopefully we can continue with the latest speculation off of twitter

http://rabble.ca/comment/1597816#comment-1597816

Sean in Ottawa

That rumour has problems. The seat is Beaches -- the NDP has many people who would want to represent it. The NDP also has a policy that makes it hard for a party to bolt to them and those who cross the floor are often not appreciated by the public. The jump would require a byelection with the NDP accepting him as a Candidate.

It is not impossible but that is a big deal.

It is also possible the Liberal member is doing what his consitutents want and has no intention of leaving the Liberals. He has good reason to be worried. If the Liberals lose support in the next election due to broken promises this is one of the seats they would have at risk.

He has little to lose  but whatever he does (stay or try to go to the NDP) will be difficult and risky.

Mighty Middle

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

The NDP also has a policy that makes it hard for a party to bolt to them and those who cross the floor are often not appreciated by the public.

With the floor crossing of Sandra Jansen in Alberta, that policy has gone out the window. If you remember in that thread many people here justified floor crossing. If this were to happen I'm sure those same people would justify it given Trudeau betrayal of Electoral Reform. Because Nate took such a stand, I doubt there would be blowback if a floor crossing took place.

quizzical

 agree with mm on this.

i would hope all those Liberal sucked in candidates who believed the Liberal bs and got them to run on it for them would walk away in disgust to the NDP.

Sean in Ottawa

quizzical wrote:

 agree with mm on this.

i would hope all those Liberal sucked in candidates who believed the Liberal bs and got them to run on it for them would walk away in disgust to the NDP.

I am not so sure. The NDP leadership is very unhappy with the concept of floor crossing and so I think they would want some kind of a process.The ones I have had contact with felt really strongly about this.

I suspect the compromise would be that they would agree to accept them without challenge as candidates but they likely would want them to run before joining.

In the meantime they could have other options like a joint caucus with MPs who are independent and even giving them some questions. They might offer them a number of things but I doubt they would let them call themselves New Democrats before a byelection.

The federal NDP is different on this than the provincial NDP and I suspect they woudl continue with the view they have had for some time. No doubt they could speak to a Liberal rebel and work out what the arrangement would be but I am betting it would not be a simple quick floor crossing even if they do their best to support that MP.

Sean in Ottawa

Also if there are several the NDP could work something out with a caucus of them.

I also think a rebel Liberal may want to be independent for some time to wait for the NDP leadership to be settled.

These are of course details -- the NDP will produce soem sort of soft landing for Liberals who feel they did not sign up for what that party has become (or returned to).

Mighty Middle

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

In the meantime they could have other options like a joint caucus with MPs who are independent and even giving them some questions. They might offer them a number of things but I doubt they would let them call themselves New Democrats before a byelection.

That happened with the Canadian Alliance "dissendent" group that formed a coalition with the PC Party and called themselves DRC - Progressive Conservative - Democratic Reform Coalition Caucus

quizzical

i care little about "floor crossings". to me if the party you ran for and got elected under is a party of lying liars and is doing contrary then you're obligated to walking away.

imv  you got eleted for the things the party said they were going to do and if it was a lie i as a voter for you would expect you to walk asap.

Debater

Mighty Middle wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

The NDP also has a policy that makes it hard for a party to bolt to them and those who cross the floor are often not appreciated by the public.

With the floor crossing of Sandra Jansen in Alberta, that policy has gone out the window. If you remember in that thread many people here justified floor crossing. If this were to happen I'm sure those same people would justify it given Trudeau betrayal of Electoral Reform. Because Nate took such a stand, I doubt there would be blowback if a floor crossing took place.

The Alberta example is different because that is the provincial NDP.  The Federal NDP appears to have a stricter policy against floor crossing.

If Nate were to cross the floor, he might be expected to sit as an Independent like Maria Mourani did before running for the NDP.

Sean in Ottawa

quizzical wrote:

i care little about "floor crossings". to me if the party you ran for and got elected under is a party of lying liars and is doing contrary then you're obligated to walking away.

imv  you got eleted for the things the party said they were going to do and if it was a lie i as a voter for you would expect you to walk asap.

I get the leaving part and I agree, but the NDP has been vocal about the coming in part. I think the NDP will design some process (better than purgatory) for those leaving another party and coming in to the NDP. I don't think they will want to just call a Liberal of yesterday a New Democrat of Tommorrow. The NDP has thought about this for some time so it would not suprise me to see some creative process that will respect the voters, other possible candidates and an elected MP who feels the need to make a change.

Nothing stops the NDP from a joint caucus with dissidents of another party planning to run as NDP in the next election. Nor is there anything preventing them from giving the opportunity to ask questions.

quizzical

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
quizzical wrote:
i care little about "floor crossings". to me if the party you ran for and got elected under is a party of lying liars and is doing contrary then you're obligated to walking away.

imv  you got eleted for the things the party said they were going to do and if it was a lie i as a voter for you would expect you to walk asap.

I get the leaving part and I agree, but the NDP has been vocal about the coming in part. I think the NDP will design some process (better than purgatory) for those leaving another party and coming in to the NDP. I don't think they will want to just call a Liberal of yesterday a New Democrat of Tommorrow.

seeing as how the Liberals appealed to both the voters and the people running for them by bsing them on long held NDP policies and platforms  think it would be a great statement to the lying Liberals and Canadians at large. it would tell Canadians the DP are not 'Liberal light' and there's a difference and indiate to voters what liars the Liberals are. if it's as pondering contends most voters are switch voters then they'll get the message not to waste time voting for the Liberals.

Quote:
The NDP has thought about this for some time so it would not suprise me to see some creative process that will respect the voters, other possible candidates and an elected MP who feels the need to make a change.

Nothing stops the NDP from a joint caucus with dissidents of another party planning to run as NDP in the next election. Nor is there anything preventing them from giving the opportunity to ask questions.

weak brew. a strong statement against Justin's lying liars is better imv

Sean in Ottawa

quizzical wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
quizzical wrote:
i care little about "floor crossings". to me if the party you ran for and got elected under is a party of lying liars and is doing contrary then you're obligated to walking away.

imv  you got eleted for the things the party said they were going to do and if it was a lie i as a voter for you would expect you to walk asap.

I get the leaving part and I agree, but the NDP has been vocal about the coming in part. I think the NDP will design some process (better than purgatory) for those leaving another party and coming in to the NDP. I don't think they will want to just call a Liberal of yesterday a New Democrat of Tommorrow.

seeing as how the Liberals appealed to both the voters and the people running for them by bsing them on long held NDP policies and platforms  think it would be a great statement to the lying Liberals and Canadians at large. it would tell Canadians the DP are not 'Liberal light' and there's a difference and indiate to voters what liars the Liberals are. if it's as pondering contends most voters are switch voters then they'll get the message not to waste time voting for the Liberals.

Quote:
The NDP has thought about this for some time so it would not suprise me to see some creative process that will respect the voters, other possible candidates and an elected MP who feels the need to make a change.

Nothing stops the NDP from a joint caucus with dissidents of another party planning to run as NDP in the next election. Nor is there anything preventing them from giving the opportunity to ask questions.

weak brew. a strong statement against Justin's lying liars is better imv

I think being correct, consistent and not hypocritical is the stronger message. I think they will do that. Not to would invite a predictable response. The NDP will probably find a protocol for how this should be done and I think the federal party is motivated to do so and it will be an example to others of how this should be done.

quizzical

correct? it's a subjective reality.

consistent as long as it's not masquerading and is just resistent to change.

hypocritical maybe it's a position they wee wrong on in the first place and need to re-think.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
i care little about "floor crossings". to me if the party you ran for and got elected under is a party of lying liars and is doing contrary then you're obligated to walking away.

I don't think anyone here has ever questioned that.

The question is always "walk away into the waiting arms of another party?  Or into the waiting arms of a byelection under a different party banner, to ensure that those electors who chose you under one party continue to want you under another?"

Mighty Middle

Nate just retweeted a picture of him and NDP MP Finn Donnelly making a media appearance to discuss banning shark fins

https://twitter.com/alannealottawa/status/829102852610076672

Sean in Ottawa

quizzical wrote:

correct? it's a subjective reality.

consistent as long as it's not masquerading and is just resistent to change.

hypocritical maybe it's a position they wee wrong on in the first place and need to re-think.

NDP policy page 21 5.3 e

http://xfer.ndp.ca/2016/documents/2016_PolicyBook_EN_WEB.pdf

You have a lot of people to argue with. This is not just a campaign position or opinion of a person but party policy. Affirmed within the last year.

Pondering

I understand thread drift happens, I'm often a participant, but the first 16 posts on a thread called NDP leadership race 3 have zero to do with the NDP leadership race.

I'm not saying the conversation shouldn't happen, just that it should happen in a different thread.

Debater

Getting back to the NDP Leadership Race . . .

 

Chantal Hébert said this week that Charlie Angus will need to spend time in French immersion if he becomes NDP Leader:

 

It sounds like @CharlieAngusNDP will be spending time in French immersion if he becomes NDP leader...#notquitedebateready

https://twitter.com/ChantalHbert/status/828683796056768513

Sean in Ottawa

So how about Carol Hughes?

Bilingual, been in caucus for 9 years, demonstrated committment to Indigenous peoples, good experience on Health care,  as DS has better than average knowledge of the House workings, has worked in labour, has developed positive relations with members of all parties. She is a principled MP.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

So how about Carol Hughes?

Bilingual, been in caucus for 9 years, demonstrated committment to Indigenous peoples, good experience on Health care,  as DS has better than average knowledge of the House workings, has worked in labour, has developed positive relations with members of all parties. She is a principled MP.

Never heard of her to tell you the truth but I like her profile including her connections to the CLC. The real question is will she play in TO and Montreal. The West Coast Liberal seats are ripe for the taking and who is leader will not overly affect that dynamic. To at least get back to the OO the NDP needs to win many seats in Ontario and retake a few seats in Quebec. I think that she would appeal to the same constituency as Charlie Angus. Coming from Val Caron she was from a Francophone/bilingual area of Greater Sudbury so it is good to see her French is passible.

Sean in Ottawa

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

So how about Carol Hughes?

Bilingual, been in caucus for 9 years, demonstrated committment to Indigenous peoples, good experience on Health care,  as DS has better than average knowledge of the House workings, has worked in labour, has developed positive relations with members of all parties. She is a principled MP.

Never heard of her to tell you the truth but I like her profile including her connections to the CLC. The real question is will she play in TO and Montreal. The West Coast Liberal seats are ripe for the taking and who is leader will not overly affect that dynamic. To at least get back to the OO the NDP needs to win many seats in Ontario and retake a few seats in Quebec. I think that she would appeal to the same constituency as Charlie Angus. Coming from Val Caron she was from a Francophone/bilingual area of Greater Sudbury so it is good to see her French is passible.

Her French is excellent.

Mighty Middle

Pondering wrote:

I understand thread drift happens, I'm often a participant, but the first 16 posts on a thread called NDP leadership race 3 have zero to do with the NDP leadership race.

I'm not saying the conversation shouldn't happen, just that it should happen in a different thread.

We were talking about the rumors of Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith jumping ship and running for the NDP leadership. Then conversation dissolved into the practicality of resigning and then running in a by-election. Or sitting outside of caucus as an independent in a "coalition"

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Mighty Middle wrote:

We were talking about the rumors of Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith jumping ship and running for the NDP leadership.

I think you must have made up the second part of the rumour. Only a Liberal or someone with a similar distain for the party would imply that a floorcrosser could actually try and run for the NDP leadership.

quizzical

kropotkin1951 wrote:
Mighty Middle wrote:
We were talking about the rumors of Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith jumping ship and running for the NDP leadership.

I think you must have made up the second part of the rumour. Only a Liberal or someone with a similar distain for the party would imply that a floorcrosser could actually try and run for the NDP leadership.

i know we weren't talking about a floor crossser  to run for leader.

there was no mention of leader whatsoever.

quizzical

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Mighty Middle wrote:

We were talking about the rumors of Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith jumping ship and running for the NDP leadership.

I think you must have made up the second part of the rumour. Only a Liberal or someone with a similar distain for the party would imply that a floorcrosser could actually try and run for the NDP leadership.

i know. his running for the leader of the NDP was never fkn mentioned in our discussions on his leaving the Liberals in digust.

Sean in Ottawa

Mighty Middle wrote:

Pondering wrote:

I understand thread drift happens, I'm often a participant, but the first 16 posts on a thread called NDP leadership race 3 have zero to do with the NDP leadership race.

I'm not saying the conversation shouldn't happen, just that it should happen in a different thread.

We were talking about the rumors of Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith jumping ship and running for the NDP leadership.

??? Huh what?

Pondering

quizzical wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Mighty Middle wrote:

We were talking about the rumors of Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith jumping ship and running for the NDP leadership.

I think you must have made up the second part of the rumour. Only a Liberal or someone with a similar distain for the party would imply that a floorcrosser could actually try and run for the NDP leadership.

i know. his running for the leader of the NDP was never fkn mentioned in our discussions on his leaving the Liberals in digust.

Which is discussing a fantasy because he hasn't left the Liberal Party in disgust or otherwise. Although he is deeply disappointed in Trudeau ditching electoral reform there are other areas in which he remains pleased with the party's accomplishments.

MM, I understand you were continuing a conversation from the other thread and I am guilty too. It's just confusing for anyone coming to the board to read about or discuss the NDP leadership race. If such a person wants to discuss the leadership race should they start a new thread?

Mighty Middle

I my post here

Mighty Middle wrote:

Hopefully we can continue with the latest speculation off of twitter

http://rabble.ca/comment/1597816#comment-1597816

My apologizes. The reason I had posted in this thread is that several twitter posters were urging Nate to not only join the NDP but run for leader! I had thought I had indicated that in the thread above. Upon re-reading that I realized I forgot to add that. Which is why I had posted this in this thread in the first place.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I think you must have made up the second part of the rumour. Only a Liberal or someone with a similar distain for the party would imply that a floorcrosser could actually try and run for the NDP leadership.

If you want I can post the tweets from NDP posters on twitter urging Nate to run for NDP leader. Just let me know.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

Please don't post tweets. We should not encourage Twitter, as it encourages people like Donald Trump

josh

montrealer58 wrote:

Please don't post tweets. We should not encourage Twitter, as it encourages people like Donald Trump

Huh?

Sean in Ottawa

twitter is a tool not a media provider. It has responsibilities of course but you cannot jusdge it by every tweet.

MM -- it is silly to use twitter as a source. Refer to who is speaking -- it is like referring to anyone that says something on a street corner. There is no implied authority.

The NDP is not likely to be interested in some backbencher who joined them yesterday as leader.

There is no substance beyond speculation that this person even wants to leave the Liberals. He has said nothing about any interest in the NDP -- I can see why you would expect the NDP to respond to him at all.

Twitter is like wikepedia. Useful but you have to know what it is while using it. Like Wikipedia you look for the source and follow it not take it as a source in itself.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

I say boycott Twitter. It allows people to anonymously abuse others, and gives a platform for blowhards like Donald Trump.

Sean in Ottawa

montrealer58 wrote:

I say boycott Twitter. It allows people to anonymously abuse others, and gives a platform for blowhards like Donald Trump.

I find it useful a wide sharing platform. I block Trumpsters and there are a lot of other people engaged in what we are engaged in. I don't recommend boycotting potentially helpful tools.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
I say boycott Twitter. It allows people to anonymously abuse others, and gives a platform for blowhards like Donald Trump.

So does the telephone system.  Or lettermail.  Or the "Community Message Board" in the lobby of the local grocery store.

But just out of curiousity, montrealer58, which public venues do you believe are untainted, and should be therefore respected?

Rev Pesky

Speaking of telephone calls, got a call from Peter Julian's office today with the message that he will have an announcement on his leadership decision this Sunday at the Columbia Theatre in New Westminster.

I suspect he has chosen to run, mostly because there's not much point in a big meeting to announce he's not running.

He is the MP in my electoral district, and I did vote for him, but as leader of the NDP...I don't know. He's always seemed kind of mushy to me. Still, I don't know who else is running; he might be the only reasonable candidate.

Pondering

This is getting hilarious. Post # 35 and still no serious discussion on actual contenders for the NDP leadership. I really think this thread should just be closed so a new one can be started that has a few intial posts that are about the people who are likely candidates.

Rev Pesky

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
I say boycott Twitter. It allows people to anonymously abuse others, and gives a platform for blowhards like Donald Trump.

So does the telephone system.  Or lettermail.  Or the "Community Message Board" in the lobby of the local grocery store.

But just out of curiousity, montrealer58, which public venues do you believe are untainted, and should be therefore respected?

In fact those three examples you mention Magoo are not anonymous. It is unlawful to harass someone over the phone, a community message board would not allow a personal attack to be posted, and letters are hardly anonymous. People who send letters, even anonymous ones almost always get found out.

All three of those also require a real commitment in time and organization.

Any twit can twitter.

By the way, despite my not approving of calling politician's names, I have backslid far enough to refer to Donald Trump as 'Boss Tweet'.

Left Turn Left Turn's picture

Rev Pesky wrote:

Speaking of telephone calls, got a call from Peter Julian's office today with the message that he will have an announcement on his leadership decision this Sunday at the Columbia Theatre in New Westminster.

I suspect he has chosen to run, mostly because there's not much point in a big meeting to announce he's not running.

He is the MP in my electoral district, and I did vote for him, but as leader of the NDP...I don't know. He's always seemed kind of mushy to me. Still, I don't know who else is running; he might be the only reasonable candidate.

I got the same phone call from Peter, and my conclusion is the same as yours. I'm in south Burnaby -- used to be in Peter's riding, but was moved put of it in the last riding boundaries update. Kennedy Stewart is now my MP.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Rev Pesky wrote:

By the way, despite my not approving of calling politician's names, I have backslid far enough to refer to Donald Trump as 'Boss Tweet'.

Very clever. Laughing

R.E.Wood

Charlie Angus doesn't say anything new about his leadership bid, but is asked about it here:

"MP Charlie Angus on Indigenous equality, NDP leadership"

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/mp-charlie-angus-on-ind...

 

R.E.Wood

And an article that re-affirms what other posters here have reported regarding an announcement coming from Peter Julian on Sunday, which will launch him fully into the leadership campaign:

"New Westminster-Burnaby MP Peter Julian to run for federal NDP leadership?"

http://www.voiceonline.com/new-westminster-burnaby-mp-peter-julian-to-ru...

R.E.Wood

And Jagmeet Singh is still considering his options (and receiving attention from GQ for his sense of style!):

““That’s smooth,” he said with a laugh when the magazine writer asked if he sees himself “taking on Justin Trudeau in Canadian federal politics?”

"Well done. It’s something I’m considering. My name was initially put forward with, what I thought, was something of a fluke. I’m a provincial politician, so I didn’t think it was a serious thing,” the MPP said.

“I was honoured, but I thought the story would go away. Instead, it continued to build, and we recently received a lot of coverage, and, because of the support, I’ve been receiving, it is something I’ve given serious attention to.

“I haven’t decided yet.”

https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2017/02/10/mpp-jagmeet-singh-mak...

 

R.E.Wood

At the risk of having four on-topic posts in a row, here's a direct link to the lengthy GQ interview with Singh:

"Meet the man who just might be the new face of Canada's New Democratic Party."

http://www.gq.com/story/jagmeet-singh-interview

 

R.E.Wood

The G&M gets in on the speculation about the NDP leadership race, suggesting Singh would be front-runner if he chooses to run, and that his main competition would be Angus. A few snippets:

The candidate generating the most buzz, and the most support within the party establishment, is the 38-year-old deputy leader of the Ontario NDP, Jagmeet Singh.

...Though stronger on sentiment than substance in his policy pronouncements, Mr. Singh is viewed within the party as someone who would hew to the centre-left line forged by Mr. Layton and Thomas Mulcair, both of whom were determined to make the NDP a party of government. But he lacks experience running a large political organization, and he’s not certain he even wants to run for the leadership.

...For now the race is in a holding pattern, waiting for Mr. Singh to make up his mind. His most prominent opponent is likely to be Charlie Angus... Though he has not formally committed, betting within the party is that Mr. Angus will almost certainly run. If so, he would carry the banner for the more radical wing of the NDP, which values social protest over any sail-trimming in search of soft Liberal voters.

... B.C. MP Peter Julian, 54, who has registered as a candidate, apparently appears to have little support within caucus or the party leadership. Quebec MP Guy Caron, who would embody the party’s Quebec voice, is considering a run, while Ontario public-service labour leader Sid Ryan and northern Manitoba MP Niki Ashton are also testing the waters.

With the vote still eight months away, most potential candidates will continue to weigh their options, ignoring a candidates debate scheduled for March. Spring is plenty of time, goes the reasoning, to begin fundraising and campaigning.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/protest-or-power-possible-n...

 

 

josh

Last thing they need is to follow Mulcair's line. They need to distinguish themselves from the Liberals as much as possible.

Geoff

josh wrote:
Last thing they need is to follow Mulcair's line. They need to distinguish themselves from the Liberals as much as possible.

Agreed. On that note, from what I've heard, there have been very few Leap meetings in ridings across the country. I don't know what that means for the left in the NDP.

The Socialist Caucus has been talking up the LM, but their support would probably generate more opposition to the document, within the party, than support. An opportunity for the Greens?

quizzical

nope. it's not any party.

people in general are sick of hearing about it and won't discuss it publically.

at the same time they're admitting internally climate change is happening but imv they need to be left to come to their own way of addressing it.

 

Stockholm

josh wrote:
Last thing they need is to follow Mulcair's line. They need to distinguish themselves from the Liberals as much as possible.

I doubt if any of the leadership candidates will run promising to "follow Mulcair's line"...that is a dead letter

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
In fact those three examples you mention Magoo are not anonymous. It is unlawful to harass someone over the phone, a community message board would not allow a personal attack to be posted, and letters are hardly anonymous. People who send letters, even anonymous ones almost always get found out.

Really?  If I call someone from a pay phone and don't identify myself it's not anonymous?  (Yes, it's illegal to harrass someone over the phone, but isn't it still anonymous?)

If I tack up some kind of offensive message on the community message board, it's not anonymous?  (Admittedly, it might get pulled down, but hopefully not before people see it!)

If I send someone a poison pen letter without a return address, it's not anonymous?  (Can I be at least as offensive as a Twitter user before police dust the envelope for prints and hunt me down?)

 

Rev Pesky

Mr. Magoo wrote:
...Really?  If I call someone from a pay phone and don't identify myself it's not anonymous?  (Yes, it's illegal to harrass someone over the phone, but isn't it still anonymous?)

A pay phone? What's a pay phone. You sure you're living in the same century as everyone else?

Mr. Magoo wrote:
...If I tack up some kind of offensive message on the community message board, it's not anonymous?  (Admittedly, it might get pulled down, but hopefully not before people see it!)

Oh, somebody would see it alright. They'd watch on the security camera footage. Again, where've you been living for that last few decades?

Mr. Magoo wrote:
...If I send someone a poison pen letter without a return address, it's not anonymous?  (Can I be at least as offensive as a Twitter user before police dust the envelope for prints and hunt me down?)

As a person who has received poison pen letters, I can tell you it's simplicity itselt to track the writer down. The last one I rec'd I knew within ten minutes of opening it who the writer was (and no, they did not put their name on it).

I think you'd better go back to the pay phone thing. You might have to drive around for a while to find one though...

Pages