NDP strategy for the next federal election, whenever that may be. (Thread 3)
July 22, 2009 - 1:18pm
Continued from http://www.rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/ndp-strategy-next-federal-election-whenever-may-be-thread-2
Let's talk a bit about Gartineau.
The trend is quite good for the NDP. So who is running for each party, and what is the NDP going to do to win it. Party/2004 election/2006 election/2008 election Bloc / 40.3% / down 39.2% / down 29.2% Libs / 42.1% / down 31.3% / down 25.3% NDP / 5.7% / up 10% / up 26.1%
Let's try this again
Gatineau
Party/2004 election/2006 election/2008 election
Bloc / 40.3% / down 39.2% / down 29.2%
Libs / 42.1% / down 31.3% / down 25.3%
NDP / 5.7% / up 10% / up 26.1%
That looks like an interesting race
To go back to the debate we are having in the previous thread on this topic. I don't expect the NDP to actually campaign on wanting a coalition. It would make no sense to do that since the NDP will be battling against the Liberals during the campaign, they can't at the same time be saying "we like the Liberals so much we want to form a coalition with them". Instead, I expect Jack to campaign to be PM like last time, attack the Liberals for being Harper's silent partner, and to make it clear that if we have another minority parliament, the parties will have to all work together after the election to find a workable stable arrangement and that nothing is to be ruled out in advance.
I expect Ignatieff to say much the same thing. Its not in the interest of any of the opposition parties for the campaign to start to revolve around post-election arrangements. It might be interesting if Layton puts Iggy on the spot by declaring that the NDP will work with anyone if it means a change of government and getting rid of Harper - and then challenges Iggy to state that he is committed to wanting to boot Harper from power no matter what.
Coalitions are something that get negotiated AFTER the votes are counted - not before. We do know from a recent poll that a majority of Canadians prefer a coalition government to another unstable minority government that is on a knife's edge of defeat on a daily basis. There is virtually ZERO chance of anyone getting a majority - so its a question of what people prefer - a stable majority coalition government that can last years and have a productive agenda - or more of the paralysis we have had for the last three years.
Steven MacKinnon, the former National Director of the Liberal Party is running for the Liberal nomination in Gatineau.
What do we know about this fella?
MacKinnon was born and raised in PEI. Was a top Frank McKenna staffer throughout his Premiership. Paul Martin made him National Director of the Liberal Party, which he held until Dion became leader. Currently, he's a VP at a lobby firm in Ottawa and President of the Gatineau Federal Liberal Association. You could find more on his website, I know he has one for his campaign as the Pundits' Guide linked to it.
Hey, you are a largehearted boy, thanks.
i wonder why the change when Dion became the leader.
He only would have held said position for less than 2 years. And he obviously did nothing for the Liberal Party under Martin except ensure they lost. :D
Check out his clients in the Federal lobbyist registry. Chances are he's represented some clients that wouldn't necessarily help his electoral chances...
There will be no Fall election, as Canada's right-wing coalition will make sure of that.
What a surprise!
Tories, Liberals start EI talks that could avert fall election
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5gQ_j8pXRZ4l...
Which makes sense. Neither party can be very confident of winning just yet.
Absolutely Doug.
This election fever silliness is, to a large extent media driven, who are actually thriving on minority governments. Just think of all the showdowns, every spring summer, and fall, that the msp can put on their front pages to sell their advertsing.
It's mostly BS, and if anyone wants to look back on what has happened since we got our first minority government, in the current series of minority governments, it is almost the identical nonsense every season.
Fool some of the people some of the time..................................
Continued from http://www.rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/ndp-strategy-next-federal-election-whenever-may-be-thread-2
Let's talk a bit about Gartineau.
The trend is quite good for the NDP. So who is running for each party, and what is the NDP going to do to win it. Party/2004 election/2006 election/2008 election Bloc / 40.3% / down 39.2% / down 29.2% Libs / 42.1% / down 31.3% / down 25.3% NDP / 5.7% / up 10% / up 26.1%Sounds like the Liberals are really taking dead aim at the overwhelmingly francophone riding of Gatineau - by running an anglophone party hack from PEI who speaks French like my ass chews gum!
What's wrong with an Anglophone running there? He is bilingual. He hasn't been selected as the nominee yet though.
Meanwhile it seems the only way the NDP can be competitive in the riding is by running a former Liberal MP.
There's nothing "wrong" with running an anglophone in a heavily francophone riding - but it just seems a bit odd that in one of the few seemingly winnable new seats for the Liberals in Quebec - instead of finding a star candidate who had some roots in western Quebec and who is francophone - the Liberals would be set to run a backroom hack from PEI who is an anglo.
Well we now know what the Cons and Liberals are up to strategy wise
"It's been particularly since John Rowswell said he was going to seek the Conservative nomination in the next election,"Martin charged.
"He's been the go-to person with these announcements and anointed by the Conservatives who are trying to give him a profile so he's invited to give a speech and cut the ribbon," he said.
The three-term mayor announced in January that he would not seek re-election to the city's top elected post when his term is over in 2010, but is interested in seeking the federal Conservative party nomination to work at a higher level of government.
Under the minority government, an election could come as early as this fall.
Rowswell said that he is seriously considering running for member of Parliament and will make his decision before the next federal election.
On Tuesday, Martin was not given notice by the federal government that the formal announcement was to be made to create a $24-million invasive species centre in Sault Ste. Marie.
He said he has lobbied for the centre since he was first elected and approached by Errol Caldwell, then of Science Enterprise Algoma, to help with the drive.
http://www.saultstar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1671029
There's nothing "wrong" with running an anglophone in a heavily francophone riding - but it just seems a bit odd that in one of the few seemingly winnable new seats for the Liberals in Quebec - instead of finding a star candidate who had some roots in western Quebec and who is francophone - the Liberals would be set to run a backroom hack from PEI who is an anglo.
Well actually there are more than just a few new seats for the Liberals to win in the next election - they have the potential to pick up about a dozen seats in Quebec. But putting that aside for the moment and focusing just on Gatineau, it may be that the Liberals feel that since they came close to winning this riding last year even with a weak campaign, they feel that whoever runs next time will have a good shot at winning considering they are 10 points higher in Quebec now.
Incidentally, Ignatieff was in Gatineau yesterday.
" may be that the Liberals feel that since they came close to winning this riding last year even with a weak campaign, they feel that whoever runs next time will have a good shot at winning considering they are 10 points higher in Quebec now."
Liberals appear arrogant to the end. In other words, Gatineau doesn't need "in-house" representation and "paying back" our own is more important to liberals than actually representing the good folk of Gatineau. Righto!
Debater: Even you must know that traditionally, in PQ until VERY recently, politics was fought mostly through the Sovereignty / Federalist lens. IOW, You had the BQ (lots of social democrats, but originally started from Former PC's Mulroney's Cabinet) during the great Tory meltdown. Then you had the Federalists (I.E the PQ LIBERAL Premiere was former FEDERAL TORY LEADER). It comes down to the fact that MANY "Liberals" in Quebec were simply in that party for no other reason than they WERE at one point the default Federalist party regardless of where they lie on the ideological spectrum. Deputy NDP leader Muclair falls into that category. You also know the dynamics are different. it is no longer a simple federalist vs sovereigntist fight (though still a factor). Many (Most?) people who vote PQ are not even sovereigntists. Fact is that the NDP has 12%-16% of the vote, & Layton is preferred over IGGY & HARPER as PM.
Debater: Even you must know that traditionally, in PQ until VERY recently, politics was fought mostly through the Sovereignty / Federalist lens. IOW, You had the BQ (lots of social democrats, but originally started from Former PC's Mulroney's Cabinet) during the great Tory meltdown. Then you had the Federalists (I.E the PQ LIBERAL Premiere was former FEDERAL TORY LEADER). It comes down to the fact that MANY "Liberals" in Quebec were simply in that party for no other reason than they WERE at one point the default Federalist party regardless of where they lie on the ideological spectrum. Deputy NDP leader Muclair falls into that category. You also know the dynamics are different. it is no longer a simple federalist vs sovereigntist fight (though still a factor). Many (Most?) people who vote PQ are not even sovereigntists. Fact is that the NDP has 12%-16% of the vote, & Layton is preferred over IGGY & HARPER as PM.
This is a very misleading statement to say the least, and is therefore hardly a "fact". Ignatieff has been ranked as the top federalist leader in Quebec in almost all of the polls done there this year. There was one poll recently that put Layton ahead of Ignatieff in Quebec, but that hardly shows he is preferred over Ignatieff until it becomes consistently repeated.
It is also not a "fact" that the NDP has 12%-16% of the vote - we don't know what the NDP vote in Quebec will be yet.
We do not know what the Liberal vote will be in QC yet, by that very same token.
Please do put up all the polls showing Iggy ahead in QC. As apparently seeing as how Layton is ahead in at least one, Iggy has not been consistently ahead either.
but good try anyway
remind, being ahead in almost all of the polls in Quebec is by definition being "consistently ahead".
The NDP somehow must be scoring bigtime to get an editorial like this, as stupid as it actually is, in the National Post. Some of the comments are priceless.
Layton gets full salary for dismal performance, just like pension plan
News flash: Jack Layton collects cash rewards for dismal performance
NDP leader is paid full salary despite placing last, again, in federal election
So why is he dissing the pension plan?
Jul 24 2009
12:26 PM
You better hope no one reads past the headline, since the article has absolutely nothing to do with Jack getting paid more than his MPs salary. In fact, it says the opposite, the NDP are pushing to get our money back from bonuses paid out to government employees.
The Post must think very poorly of their readers and not remember anything about their journalistic integrity. Shame on you.
This headline has nothing to do with the press release that follows. So Jack Layton took his full salary. Careful readers will note that the press release makes no comment on execs getting salaries; rather, it's concerned with bonuses - ie. payments IN ADDITION to salaries. Blind conservatives, however, seem to be unable to see the difference.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/07/25/304811.aspx
I think this article actually backfires. The executives' in question performance was dismal. Makes it hard to argue for "performance pay," regardless of what "performance" that pay was tied to.
I rarely read the National Post because it's a POS, but this is quite amazing how their readership is turning against them for such a brain-dead attempt to smear Layton. What idiots are in charge there? I can't believe this paper, rag is a better term, still exists.
I am far from a Jack Layton supporter. However, I am a supporter of quality journalism, and would like to know: who wrote the headline to this story? Is your supervisor away on holidays this week? You turned the opportunity to write the headlines for legitimate news stories into an opportunity to take cheap pot shots at someone who had nothing to do with the news article. I don't think you're cut out for the job - maybe you should stick to getting coffee and muffins for your co-workers. (The National Post is not necessarily consistently stellar at writing headlines, but this one is preposterous)
The NP once again proves itself to be a useless waste of space, and thought.
Not one of the comments after even noted that the Bill of Marsten's passed unanimously.
What a bunch of lack wits right wingnuts are. Harper has a 156 billion dollar deficit the largest in history, and they are yapping about their wallets and the NDP.
I see that they are allowing a slanderous allegation about public housing too. Jack and Olivia lived in co-op housing and payed full market rent- that is the whole freakin point of co-op housing. If anything it shows they live their values something this country could use more of! The lies of the right never cease to amaze me.
Btw, I like this tack the NDP is taking. The sort of "value for your money" populist slant is usually the purview of the right with their war cries against "government waste."
Off topic a bit, but has anyone laid eyes on the new candidate questionaire. If you have I am wondering what you think of it?
I know, and they keep repeating them over and over and over again.
Haven't viewed it you got a link or copy?
Well we have heard a lot about peak oil, but what about peak oil demand.
If this report is for real, this would be a major switch, and the NDP probably has a golden opportunity here.
Greenpeace study finds oil companies may be doomedEnvironmental activist network argues that the oil industry might be approaching a tipping point from fall in the price, advances in technology and policies on climate change
Lorne Stockman, the author of the report, said: "A peak in oil demand was barely discussed even a year ago, but now it is a viable idea. When it happens, I wouldn't want to guess, but it will happen sooner than we thought. There has been lots of talk about a supply peak, but it is good to start talking about a demand peak, and that has huge implications for these companies.
"All of the international oil companies as you look beyond 2020 need a high oil price to be profitable, because they are increasingly being pushed to develop expensive resources in not just the tar sands, but in deep water and offshore Arctic sites.
"But there is something more structural going on," he added. "Governments are beginning to act, and not just the Obama administration. In the EU, the policy driver is climate change, and in China and the US, it is about energy security and the vulnerability of the economy to volatility in the oil price."
The rush to exploit the tar sands in Canada has been described as a modern day gold rush that has led to a huge boom in once sleepy towns in the province of Alberta. The oil was once considered too difficult and expensive to extract as it is a mixture of clay, water and bitumen.
Many of the projects have been mothballed until the oil price recovers. It has fallen from a peak of $147 a barrel and is currently at about $68. Merrill Lynch estimates that the price would need to settle at about $80 to make further investment viable. Critics argue that tar sands extraction is disastrous to the environment, causing deforestation, requiring huge amounts of water and greenhouse emissions three to five times greater than conventional crude.
The report notes that Opec and the IEA have been revising projections for oil demand downwards since 2006, with by far the sharpest revision this year. Opec has revised its 2025 oil forecast down by 12% within the past four years.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jul/27/greenpeace-oil-companies-...
I'm from and live in Montreal and, though I'm not a memeber, I'm very close to the Quebec Liberal Youth Party organization main heads. Speaking to one of the main advisers to the President of the youth wing and organizer for the party, he clairly stated that they really want to see the FLP pick up Outremont and will be working in conjunction with them to do so. The former President of the QLP is now the co-chair of the FLP for Quebec in the next election, which shows a strong intermixing of the two organizations. This is something the NDP really really needs to worry about.
For those who know anything about Quebec politics, which to be honest is minimal here (such as one person thinking that the BQ would want more NDP MPs in Montreal?? That's absurd), the QLP is by far the most powerful organizations in Quebec. If they really want that seat to go FLP over Mulcair, then it will happen, most likely. As the CPC becomes less and less important, so does the NDP, because it tends to concentrate the Federalist voters in the Liberal corner. Contrary to many people's hopes, the NDP is not relevant in nationalist circles and can only hope to win seats in typically federalist ridings like Outremont, Westmount, and Gatineau (though it has a BQ member, the seat has typically been a strong federalist riding and has only gone to the BQ because of circumstance like Federalist vote spliting). Is there any BQ held seats that the NDP had any chance in the last election other than Gatineau? Like within 10%?
Generally speaking, the NDP has little chance in winning anymore seats in Quebec and will be lucky if they win Outremont. I'm not saying this because I have a problem with the NDP (I voted NDP in the last two elections), but because I think I'm correct.
PadraigD,
Thanks for sharing your perspective about the political situation in Quebec.
Are you suggesting the Bloc doesn't want the NPD to win seats in the Mtl area because they hope to win themselves, or because the Bloc doesn't expect to win them, and the Bloc hopes some other party, other than the NPD will win those Mtl area seats.
Here are the closest seats that the NDP didn't win in percentage order in the last election. It does not appear that there are any other seats apart from Gatineau that are within the 10% you asked about, at least in Quebec. The next closest in Quebec after Gatineau, is Brossard-Laprairie with 20%
1 SK Sastatoon-Rosetown-Biggar 2nd, 1%, 262 votes C
2 NS South Shore-St Margaret's 2nd, 2%, 932 votes C
3 NL St John's South-Mount Pearl 2nd, 3%, 949 votes L-1
4 BC Surrey North 2nd, 3%, 1,106 votes C
5 QC Gatineau , 2nd, 3%, 1,577 votes B
6 BC Vancouver Island North 2nd, 4%, 2,497 votes C
7 ON Oshawa 2nd, 7%, 3,201 votes C
8 ON Parkdale-High Park 2nd, 7%, 3,373 votes L-2
9 NU Nunavut 3rd, 7%, C
10 NS Dartmouth-Coal Harbour 2nd, 8%, 3,223 votes L-3
11 ON Beaches-East York 2nd, 9%, 4,092 votes L-4
12 BC Newton-Nrth Delta 3rd, 10%, L-5
13 SK Regina-Qu'Appelle 2nd, 10%, 2,809 votes C
14 SK Palliser 2nd, 10%, 3,294 votes C
15 BC Kamloops-Thompson-Cariboo 2nd, 10%, 5,608 votes C
16 BC Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca 3rd, 11%, L-6
17 NS Halifax West 2nd, 12%, 4,928 votes L-7
18 ON Essex 3rd, 13%, C
19 BC Vancouver-Centre 3rd, 14% L-8
20 ON Davenport 2nd, 15%, 5,057 votes L-9
21 BC Nanaimo-Alberni, 2rd, 15%, 9,250 votes C
22 ON Guelph 4th, 16%, L-10
23 ON Kenora 3rd, 17%, C
24 ON Hull-Aylmer 3rd, 17%, L-11
25 BC Vancouver South 3rd, 18%, L-12
26 NB Fundy-Royal 2nd, 18%, 9,304 votes C
27 ON York South-Weston 2nd, 19%, 6,430 votes L-13
28 BC Pitt Meadows-Maple Ridge-Mission 2nd, 19%, 9,618 votes C
29 ON Kitchener Centre 3rd, 19%, C
30 QC Brossard-La Prairie 4th, 20%, L-14
31 AB Edmonton East 2nd, 20%, 8,169 votes C
32 MB Kildonan-St Paul 2nd, 21%, 7,658 votes C
33 ON Kingston & the Islands 3rd, 22%, L-15
34 NS King-Hants 3rd, 22%, L-16
35 ON London North Centre 3rd, 22%, L-17
36 BC Fleetwood-Port Kells, 3rd, 22%, C
37 ON Scarborough Southwest 3rd, 23%, L-18
38 SK Regina-Lumdsen-Lake Centre 2nd, 23%, 7,090 votes C
39 QC Westmount 2nd, 24%, 9,137 votes L-19
NS Cape Breton 3rd, 27%, L-20
Y Yukon 4th, 37%, L-21
There's a good chance the NDP will lose Outremont next election but it has nothing to do with the Quebec Liberal Youth Wing. The NDP will lose from voters returning to old habits. In other words, voting Liberal. The one big advantage that Mulcair has that you can't discount is incumbency. With poll numbers still in flux and pundits declaring the Liberals to be on the slide, a Liberal rebound in Quebec is not a certain thing anymore. That being said, both the NDP and Liberals will probably fight fiercely to hold Outremont. Both have a good chance of taking it.
As for Gatineau, unless the Liberals run a high profile candidate there, this one is still very much in contention for the NDP.
There is a big misconception here that Mulcair won Outremont by getting votes from ex-Liberals and that those people will go back to the Liberals now that Dion is gone. If you actually look at the results in Outremont over the last three elections (let's set aside the byelection since those are always a bit anomalous) - you will see that the Liberal vote is quite stable and that the Liberal guy who lost to Mulcair last October got about the same percentage of the popular vote as Lapierre when he won in Outremont in '04 and '06. Mulcair wins because he has a 15% base that was NDP to begin with and he also cannibalizes almost all of what was once a very sizeable BQ vote in Outremont. If the Liberals really want to win Outremont - my advice is that they try very hard to convince the BQ to run a strong candidate and pour all available resources into the riding. Something tells me that the BQ will not be eager to do Iggy any favours and will have their hands full trying to retain their own marginal seats in Montreal such as Ahuntsic and Jeanne LeBer.
Just like Quebec.
Federal NDP leader says perseverance will be key to victory in Alberta
However, there's one old-line politician Layton is happy to reference when discussing his party's opposition to the rapid pace of oilsands development in Alberta.
He notes that former Alberta Conservative premier Peter Lougheed has called for limits to the pace of growth; Ignatieff, on the other hand, has made it clear he intends to stand behind the massive and controversial fossil-fuel resource.
"We've supported this growing movement in Alberta to say there shouldn't be more (oilsands project) approvals until there are well-conceived, thorough plans in place to determine how the consequences will be addressed," he said.
"You'll have the Liberals and the Conservatives supporting what appears to be a kind of untrammelled approach to as rapid development of the tarsands as possible, whereas you'll have our party calling for a different and more responsible approach, thinking more about the long-term legacy for Albertans and Canadians and the environment."
Asked if that stance might be unpopular with voters in a province that has reaped significant economic benefit from the oilsands, Layton pointed out that Alberta has also been a leader in the development of wind power; that Edmonton has been a leader in municipal recycling; and that Calgary has used wind-generated electricity to power its transit trains.
"I've often found that Albertans are far more thoughtful than the eastern press gives them credit for," he said.
"I don't accept the proposition that Albertans are simplistically just gung-ho about pushing the foot down all the way on the accelerator for the tarsands and the consequences be damned."
http://www.660news.com/news/national/more.jsp?content=n282438621
. Tell us something, anything, we don't know Jeff.
How do you spell :
M-I-N-O-R-I-T-Y G-O-V-E-R-N-M-E-N-T
Until something changes, the road to majority is blockedParties and voters have been boxed in by the unchanging nature of Canadian politics
The NDP, better financed than ever in recent years and led by the experienced Jack Layton, has held its own, winning a few more seats and making inroads in the slow-growth parts of the country. But the party, soon to gather in convention, is still essentially where it was three or four years ago, stuck in the 13- to 18-per-cent range in the polls.
Yesterday, Statistics Canada reported the largest number of employment insurance claimants since it began collecting such statistics in 1997. With all the gloomy economic news, and the hurt that the recession has inflicted on so many people, you might think the federal NDP - the self-described part of "ordinary," "hard-working" Canadians - would be reaping political benefits from the dislocations. Not so, despite the party's best efforts.
Contrary to popular belief, the NDP and the CCF before it have never gained ground during recessions. In fact when the CCF was founded at the height of the Great Depression - it won a whopping 7% of the vote nationwide - it then soared up to lead national polls in 1943/44 when we were winning the war, there was full employment and people wanted something better. If you look at other periods where the NDP has had its high water marks it was during relatively prosperous economic times like the late 60s/early 70s, 1988 and most recently in 2004, 2006 and 2008 when there were surpluses and high economic growth.
I think we will get an inkling of how the NDP could do in francophone Montreal with incumbent Real Menard out of the way, and a strong local labour candidate already nominated for us in that upcoming by-election seat. How will it play for the Liberals if they come in third or worse in that seat?
I would like to see Layton, Dexter, Godin, and others spend some time in the riding of Saint John, NB.
I would like to see Layton, Dexter, Godin, and others spend some time in the riding of Saint John, NB.
Any particular reason?
Hopefully he's been showing up at every sort of constituency event imaginable and knocking on doors. However, being a good constituency MP didn't seem to help Peggy Nash in Parkdale, though she had less time.
Nobody wants to take a chance on radical politics - and as laughable as that might seem to some, the NDP are still popularly seen in that light - if things are going badly. Well, not unless they're REALLY going badly and right now, they aren't.
Hopefully he's been showing up at every sort of constituency event imaginable and knocking on doors. However, being a good constituency MP didn't seem to help Peggy Nash in Parkdale, though she had less time.
Actually Parkdale went NDP, High Park went Liberal link
I would like to see Layton, Dexter, Godin, and others spend some time in the riding of Saint John, NB.
Any particular reason?
You forgot an important figure that might complete the equation, provided she's up to returning to elected politics: Elizabeth Weir. If anyone can cinch the seat Jack Harris-style, it's her.
I agree that Saint John is NDP-winnable with the right dominoes in place; trouble is, it's had a string of awful luck with said dominoes--didn't the next-to-last candidate wind up endorsing Paul Zed last time?--and back in the Alexa days of Maritime breakthroughs here and there, the phenomenon known as Elsie Wayne stood in the way of Saint John following suit...
Thanks for the Saint John and New Brunswick political history lesson adma, which I had forgotten about. And yes it would be great if Weir came out of retirement. as somebody needs to put those two right-wing dead-end political parties, the Libs and the Cons out of their misery in Saint John.
Contrary to many people's hopes, the NDP is not relevant in nationalist circles and can only hope to win seats in typically federalist ridings like Outremont, Westmount, and Gatineau (though it has a BQ member, the seat has typically been a strong federalist riding and has only gone to the BQ because of circumstance like Federalist vote spliting). Is there any BQ held seats that the NDP had any chance in the last election other than Gatineau? Like within 10%?
Generally speaking, the NDP has little chance in winning anymore seats in Quebec and will be lucky if they win Outremont. I'm not saying this because I have a problem with the NDP (I voted NDP in the last two elections), but because I think I'm correct.
I would agree with you, and I think most Quebec analysts would say the same at this point in time - the only other Quebec riding that the NDP is likely to be in contention for other than Outremont would be Gatineau.
The last federal election gave the opportunity to the NDP to make some real inroads in Quebec because none of the other parties were at their peak - the Conservatives lost support, the BQ went down in the popular vote, and while the Liberals improved, they were still way down from their normal strength and had a leader whp was unpopular in the province. Despite that, the NDP was not able to emerge in Quebec as a major force. As Chantal Hebert said on CBC Election night:
"What's happened tonight is that the Liberals have turned the page on the sponsorship scandal - they're up in the popular vote and they're taking seats off the Bloc. They have also stoped the NDP from emerging in the province as an alternative to them."
Therefore, the fact that the NDP couldn't add any new seats to Outremont in the last election may mean that it will also be hard to do so in the next election now that the Liberals have gone up in Quebec and have a leader who is much more popular in the province than Dion was.
I was just in Quebec for several days actually and visited a number of ridings in Montreal.
Contrary to many people's hopes, the NDP is not relevant in nationalist circles and can only hope to win seats in typically federalist ridings like Outremont, Westmount, and Gatineau (though it has a BQ member, the seat has typically been a strong federalist riding and has only gone to the BQ because of circumstance like Federalist vote spliting). Is there any BQ held seats that the NDP had any chance in the last election other than Gatineau?
And what overt nationalists/sovereignists think about the NDP was neither the point or what is most relevant.
The core supporters of any party are only a slice of who its voters are. The relevant point is about the behaviour of BQ voters overall.
Ditto: while the NDP making large gains, or if lucky even winning, seats now held by the BQ is relevant, that wasn't the main point: which was that the NDP makes its biggest gains in seats that usually vote federalist from voters who have previously voted BQ.
What is the voting trajectory of the BQ? Hardly bleeding, and not to the NDP. It is true that in Outremont that where the BQ vote fell, the NDP picked up equally, but that doesn't really mean that Bloc voters/organizers shifted to the NDP. Simply, the Bloc stayed home. Understanding a riding's dynamics needs more than looking at voting results on wikipedia.
People need to understand on this website the preception of what the NDP is in Quebec. Contrary to my beliefs, the summary of the views of the NDP is a party that is a WASP party.
Re Outremont: provincewide the polls show the NDP roughly where they were in the last election-- those votes have to be somewhere.
If there is a movement back from the NDP in parts of the province there must be an increase elsewhere to compensate. This is in fact likely.
The last election was below hopes in Quebec and so some voters may think again in no hope ridings while those in close ridings may be encouraged. There is a reasonable chance that the NDP vote in Quebec may be concentrating-- first in Mulcair's riding and second possibly in Gatineau while in other places the voters could melt away-- for now to come back when there is another rising tide in the province. This is a trend we have seen often for the NDP-- increasing locally even while going down province-wide.
the same people who are voting Liberal in many other places could want to see Mulcair win.
Another point that the NDP should talk up: in a minority parliament you don't just want government representation -- you want representation in each party. What is best for Quebec when the rest of Canada can't decide who should be governemtn by a majority-- it is best for Quebec to ensure it is representated in every party that wins seats at the national level.
Sure I am worried about Outremont but the riding is far from lost.
What is the voting trajectory of the BQ? Hardly bleeding, and not to the NDP. It is true that in Outremont that where the BQ vote fell, the NDP picked up equally, but that doesn't really mean that Bloc voters/organizers shifted to the NDP. Simply, the Bloc stayed home. Understanding a riding's dynamics needs more than looking at voting results on wikipedia.
People need to understand on this website the preception of what the NDP is in Quebec. Contrary to my beliefs, the summary of the views of the NDP is a party that is a WASP party.
Yes, in Outremont it most certainly DOES mean that vast numbers of BQ voters shifted to the NDP from the 2006 election to the byelection to the 2008 general election. The BQ vote in Outremont in 2006 was 29%, it fell to less than 10% in both the byelection and the general election of 2008. The Liberal and Tory votes were actually quite stable. No one is suggesting that BQ "organizers" worked for Mulcair - but its clear that about two-thirds of the BQ vote shifted en masse to the NDP in that riding - they didn't just "stay home" they voted NDP. In raw votes the NDP made a massive increase in Outremont from 2006 and 2008 - those votes came from somewhere.
To certain extent, people in Quebec see ALL parties other than the BQ as WASP parties - or in the case of the Liberals they are seen as a party of tight-assed Trudeau-style federalists who haven't had a new idea in 40 years.
Elect Peggy Nash as President.
Nash hopes to make a difference in two ways:
Her first goal is to push for a well-thought-out plan to rebuild the economy as it emerges from the recession. "We (New Democrats) need to play a stronger economic role," she says. "That could become one of our strengths."
Her second goal is to promote old-fashioned organizing; connecting with people, listening to their concerns and speaking out on their behalf, showing up at community events and renewing its links with labour, the women's movement, human rights organizations and anti-poverty groups. "It's not always a recipe for success," she admits ruefully, referring to her 2008 defeat. "But it's what a progressive party should be doing."
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/674428
Hopefully he's been showing up at every sort of constituency event imaginable and knocking on doors. However, being a good constituency MP didn't seem to help Peggy Nash in Parkdale, though she had less time.
Peggy Nash was elected MP in January 2006 and the election wasn't until September 2008, so she actually had been MP for close to 3 years by the time of the election. Mulcair was elected MP in September 2007 and then there was an election a year later. However, as of this point he has been an MP for less than 2 years, and Nash actually had more incumbency than Mulcair does.
Still, to have a strong incumbency advantage, you really need to have been an MP for several years, and Mulcair is still a short-term MP at this point.
Funny how you break it down to less than, in respect to the NDP, while trying previously to state that Iggy has been Liberal leader for a year.
LMAO!
I know that the NDP is already promoting it, but the Green economy is where the NDP needs to be, and be there, louder, and faster, which will lead to continued electoral success at the polls.
The current hot weather ithat folks are experiencing in BC right will not be forgotten during the next election, when voters are looking at the different party's environmental platforms.
For all the talk of Quebec in this thread, I really think if the NDP wants to make some gains or even stay stable, it should focus on the West.
Regardless of if the Liberals or Tories end up winning the next election, (it will almost certainly be another minority), the Liberals will almost certainly do better than they did last election, and the Tories will do worse. In order to win the next election, the Liberals need to probably win at least 120 or so seats. However, the vast majority of the seats the Liberals will need to win are held by either the BQ or the Tories. Here is a regional breakdown:
Atlantic Canada:
If the NDP wants to have success here, it should campaign on the NDP brand-name and attack the Tories. No seat held by the NDP in Atlantic Canada is really under threat from a potential Liberal surge, and similarly, if Liberal numbers go up a bit in the Atlantic, no Liberal seat is really rich ground for NDP gains, (with the possible exception of St. John's-South Pearl, as the Tory vote will probably recover a little in Newfoundland and could take some Liberal voters). South Shore-St. Margaret's is an extremely winnable seat, and should the by-election be cancelled and Scott Armstrong go into the election without incumbancy, CCMV could be viable. In New Brunswick, Fundy Royal could potentially be turned into a 3 way race. Look for the Liberals to take back seats they narrowly lost to the Tories last time like West Nova, Egmont, Fredricton, and Saint John.
Quebec:
Try to hold on for dear life in Outremont and hope for a strong local campaign in Gatineau and a couple MacKinnon missteps. If the NDP was stronger in rural francophone Quebec, the dynamics of a collapsing Tory vote going largely Liberal while the BQ vote dips a bit could in theory benefit the NDP, but I can't think of a single seat that the NDP has a solid enough base in rural Quebec where it could result in a seat. The Liberals will be pushing hard in Outremont, as well as Gatineau, but if the NDP can hold on to Outremont, they should be ok in terms of maintaining a beachead in the province, as the Liberals will mostly be eyeballing winning back Liberal turned Tory voters and picking up some soft nationalist support from the BQ to try and rally the traditional federalist vote back to supporting the Liberals predominantly. The Liberals will need to win at least another 10-15 seats in Quebec if they want to form government, and with the exceptions of Outremont, Pontiac, every seat they need/want to win is owned by the BQ. The NDP should try and stem a Liberal tide (it's no use going after the collapsed Tory vote, as the BQ and Liberal have locked that up it seems) in order to maintain as many candidates getting +10% as possible and maybe having a shot at fluking out a win in Gatineau.
Ontario:
The Liberals will need something like 15-20 more seats in Ontario, but overwhelmingly these seats are held by the Tories. The NDP is entrenched enough in strongholds like the Windsor seats, Hamilton, (with the possible exception of Hamilton Mountain), the two Toronto ridings, Ottawa Centre, and the pre-2008 seats in Northern Ontario, that the only NDP seats at risk of a Liberal take over are seats which flipped the NDP only in 2008 like Welland and a couple of the Northern Ontario seats like Sudbury. Even assuming the NDP loses a couple of the Northern seats, the general dynamics of "Liberals up, Tories down" could create good situations for NDP gains in 3 way ridings like Essex, Oshawa, Cambridge. Ontario is a bit of an odd duck for NDP fortunes since the NDP vote tends to be very strong in some areas like Northern Ontario/Windsor/Hamilton but nearly dead in other parts like the GTA West, resulting in the NDP picking up 7 more seats in Ontario in 2008 than 2006, but actually having it's % of the vote decline by over a full point. Attacking the Tories should be the NDP main tactic in Ontario as well, since all the aforementioned possible NDP gains in this scenario are held by the Tories.
Praries:
This is where "Liberals up, Tories down" could really help the NDP. The NDP is already the main alternative to the Tories west of Lakehead, and the only NDP seat the Liberals have a hope of winning is Churchill, as their main focus will be winning Tory held seats like Winnipeg South, Saint Boniface, and perhaps DMCR (although the NDP could potentially do well here if the vote splits) and Edmonton Centre (what would potentially be interesting would be an unofficial deal between the local riding associations for the Liberals and NDP in Edmonton Centre and Edmonton Strathcona that the NDP doesn't campaign hard in EC and the Liberals don't campaign hard in ES). Outside of these ridings, the Liberal vote might rise, but it won't win a seat. However, if the Liberal vote rises and takes votes off the Tories, this opens doors to NDP pick-ups particularly in Saskatchewan, in ridings like Palliser, Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre, Regina-Qu'Appelle, and Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar. The old CCF heartland should be THE target for the NDP in the next election.
BC:
BC is always a bit of a mess to predict, but a couple factors could help the NDP. A decline in the Green vote could open up eco-friendly voters to the NDP, which could help in marginal ridings, and the same Tory down Liberal up calcuation could play well for the NDP in ridings like Kamloops-Thompson-Cariboo, Cariboo-Prince George, Pitt Meadows-Maple Ridge-Misson, and traditionally 3-ways ridings like Fleetwood-Port Kells, run solid local campaigns in potential Liberal targets like Vancouver Kingsway and Burnaby.
The North:
Hope to come out on top in what was a 3-way race last time in Nunivut, try and hang on to Western Artic.
So to review and simply:
Try and pick up a couple Tory seats in Atlantic Canada. Hold on for dear life in Outremont and hope for a quirk of the FPTP system in Gatineau for Quebec. Focus on three-ways races in Southern Ontario to protect against potential Liberal gains off the NDP in Northern Ontario (this is the only area of the country where the Liberals will really be trying to directly pick off from the NDP). Pick off declining Tory votes in the Praries, with a particular emphasis on Saskatchewan. Focus on a handful of Tory held ridings in BC where the NDP could squeek out a win in 3-way races, try and guard against Liberal gains in lower mainland BC.
If everything goes accordingly, this plan should at the very least deliver an NDP seat could roughly where it is now, which would demonstrate the NDP vote can hold up against both shifts to the Liberals and the Tories, and if the breaks go the right way, could even end up with a handful more seats.
--
--
Makes sense to me.
I'd sure like to be working towards a less ad-hoc strategy of playing different margins here and there. But it beats being kicked in the teeth.
Thanks for your informative analysis StarSuburb
Here is a golden opportunity for the NDP, if they move quickly here with their Green Jobs Program
Alberta set to benefit from finite cap on greenhouse gases
Limited cap on oilsands emissions would place unfair burden on industries in B.C. and other provinces, environmentalists warnhttp://www.vancouversun.com/business/Alberta+benefit+from+finite+greenhouse+gases/1848610/story.html
With all that strategy I outlined being said, it comes down to a question of what the NDP will actually campaign on. As much as campaigning on a Green Jobs program would be good in theory, right now people (including a big chunk of the working class NDP base) are far more concered with the "jobs" part of the equation than the "green" part. Jack ran a pretty solid campaign last time, focusing more on lunch-bucket, centre-left social democratic issues, which was great with a flimsy Liberal campaign, because despite Dion being percieved as bringing the Liberals a bit more to the left, it was still a muddled message, leaving the NDP as a solid centre-left vote (I have heard more than a few of my Liberal friends say that from their perspective, one of the big problems with Dion's messaging last election was that the Liberals became just a different flavour of centre-left, ie, they were telling the 65% of centre-left voters who won't vote Tory not to vote Tory, but without giving any really compelling reasons to vote for the Liberals over the NDP or Green Party, and I sort of agree with this analysis)
With Iggy taking the party a bit more towards it's traditional broad centre, to try and take back Tory votes, particularly in Ontario, the NDP should continue to maintain the "lunchbucket social-democrat" approach. The NDP campaign needs to realize that right now voters aren't particularly enamoured with any political party (A trend that the NDP should have picked up with the results of the last election, despite having the 2nd best result in the history of the party seat wise, fewer people actually went out and endorsed the NDP platform by voting NDP in 2008 than 2006.) Something that could be risky, particularly given Layton's populist style of campaigning, but could help set the tone for the debate, is come right open and say that taxes will have to rise in order to balance the books. This obviously has risks, but the NDP could mitigate any potential blowback in a couple ways. First, most of the people who would say "ahhh, those crazy socialists want to raise taxes" are never going to vote NDP in the first place. Secondly, the NDP's message should be attacking Harper/Ignatieff for not being honest with Canadians about how to balance the budget and get the economy moving. The NDP platform should be moderate but unmistakeably centre-left, and offer a great degree of transparency about which taxes will be raised by how much, to help counter any attacks on the NDP having a "secret agenda." Use messanging that speaks about the need to have a stable social safety net in order for individual Canadians to suceed in the re-building of the economy. Say exactly what raised taxes will pay for, and how that will help the economy, and turn the tables on any Liberal/Tory who attacks it by saying they have no plan for the economy (considering the Liberals and Tories will both be accusing each other of having no economic plan, this could help feed a narrative that neither of the two have any real plans, while the NDP has a costed platform that is forward looking.
Our society is now firmly based on greed, having replaced God with the almighty buck a long time ago.
Has there ever been a political party that had a lot of success based on a platform of raising taxes.
Unfortunately I think any party that ran on a raise taxes program, detailed or not, would be trounced, because it would be distorted bigtime in the msp.
If you want to appeal to the little guy, I don't think this is the way to go.
Redistribution perhaps however the big question is how to market it.
Let's not forget the inheritance tax fiasco
A mini-Green Shift might do the trick, given that the Liberals aren't about to go there again. An increase in gas taxes offset against an increase in the basic exemption for income tax. Green and progressive. But I'm thinking that the matter of a platform probably deserves its own thread.
A mini-Green Shift would be a very big contradiction with our existing GHG reduction policies, which we have campaigned on. [I also think they are better policies, and that 'mini-Green Shift', a la Campbell is still bad policy/politics interface.]
Your not thinking of our existing policy, and/or not knowing how it fundamentally differs from the 'green shift' package [which entails FAR more implications than its simple appeal] is symptomatic of how much the NDP has not developed communications and initiatives on this policy package.
But like you said, thats another discussion.
Pension plans
But pensions appear to baffle most of us. They shouldn't. Pensions and other retirement benefits are simply deferred wages – money you earn now and sock away (or have someone else sock away for you) so that you'll have something to live on when you're too old, tired, sick or unwanted to work.
Even before this recession hit, it was clear that pensions were under the gun. Good retirement benefits, like good wages, interfere with what economists call labour market flexibility – that is, the willingness of workers to take low-wage jobs.
Put simply, 65-year-olds who can get by on the pension income they earned earlier in their careers may not be willing to work as Wal-Mart greeters.
This rethinking of retirement expressed itself in different forms. Governments that in the past had committed themselves to better public pensions began to fret that those they offered were already too expensive.
In the U.S., Washington raised the retirement age at which workers could collect social security. Canada's federal government took a different tack by moderately boosting the payroll taxes that employers and employees pay to fund its Canada Pension Plan.
More important, perhaps, Ottawa allowed those running the CPP to invest taxpayer money in more lucrative, but higher-risk stocks – a strategy whose drawbacks are now painfully obvious
http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/674978
Strategy for the next recession:
Make sure each candidate has his own website or at least webpage on which to include his e-mail address and his ideas on various issues. That may have cost the NDP candidate in my riding my vote last election since I knew little about her and was unable to reach her efficiently either. Sure I did find her home phone number on-line, but felt uncomfortable calling a person I don't know at their personal residence especially considering that many others might be calling her there too.
That's a good article remind, and thanks for bringing it to our attention. Walkom usually has good columns, and his last sentence is the key;
That's a good idea. But it's one that would have to be paid for by a significant tax increase - which is perhaps why no Canadian political party actively promotes it.
I can't emphasize this often enough - do not put any money into a private busiess pension plan, nor any union plan that can be accessed in any way by private business. Well-run unions hire financial experts to do their investing but these experts are not infallible either, and good common sense with the governance is imperative as well. Anything that is too good to be true, usually is.Now that Inky Mark is stepping down, maybe the NDP could convince Harvey Paterson (wikipedia bio) to run in Dauphin- Swan River- Marquette. Also, maybe ex-cabinet minister Scott Smith could pull a dosie-doe and be coaxed to run in Brandon-Souris against Merv Tweed- seeing as Borotsik resigned to take on him
To the person advocating "Green Jobs". I want to ask you.... how do you intend to keep "Green Jobs" in Canada any better then any other job? If anything Green Job production is highly likely to be done offshore or in countries that protect their industries. Canada does not do this, therefore, any technology or production in Canada would be subject to foreign takeover of purchase and liquidation of assets and move the technology over to another country.
There is no basis for manufacturing a Green Job and keeping that technology or production in Canada.
You need a plan to
1) Attract Green Jobs
2) Keep the production and technology in Canada
3) If you can do #2..... alone, without the Green Jobs aspect, you have just saved 300,000 jobs, while creating possible 8,000 to 30000 Green Jobs.
Otherwise Green Jobs... is more of the same "Green Washing" that makes people numb.
The problem with our economy as stated above..... continues to be....
"Our society is now firmly based on greed, having replaced God with the almighty buck a long time ago."
Funny how you break it down to less than, in respect to the NDP, while trying previously to state that Iggy has been Liberal leader for a year.
LMAO!
What? I'm not even sure what you are referring to. What does Ignatieff have to do with Peggy Nash or Thomas Mulcair? The above was a discussion of how long those MP's had/have been in their seats prior to an election and how much incumbency is an advantage for an MP.
With Iggy and the Liberals, it is always more than figures, or rounding up, with you debator, to make it appears as if everything is more, while when you mention the NDP, it is less than, or "only" rhetoric. Was just noting the propaganda style is all. carry on!