Why the NDP must reject Trudeau Dragon Slayer Myths and rebuild now

176 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sean in Ottawa
Why the NDP must reject Trudeau Dragon Slayer Myths and rebuild now

I think there is a lot of exaggeration on the part of Liberals and even some New Democrats about Trudeau's strengths and a denial of some of the dynamics of the election. Liberals like to think that Trudeau was this grand near-invincible greatness. We see Liberals telling us over and over that the Liberal leader has qualities that made the last election a foregone conclusion, and more dangerously they claim the next as well. While Liberal hubris might be entertaining to watch, those who buy in to it from the opposition might make the wrong decisions about what to do next.

In the last election a majority who wanted Harper gone were prepared to go with either the NDP or Liberals to accomplish that. Today, in their infatuation, Liberals fail to recognize the power of that movement. Both then-opposition parties bashed each other because they understood that in many respects the race was between them and only a draw could lead to the Conservatives remaining in power.

The NDP did a bad campaign on several fronts and the Liberal campaign was better. Just enough better to tip the scales towards them. It could have gone the other way. I do not need at this point to go into the deficiencies of the NDP campaign except to say the party failed both pro-actively and reactively.

The reason the NDP fell so quickly has nothing to do with Trudeau, however. Trudeau won the edge in a battle to see which of the two was strongest to take down Harper and then the weight of the ABC campaign moved to him. Yet still Trudeau has one of the thinnest mandates ever.

The previous three years should be instructional: NDP ahead significantly, then Trudeau convention bounce, then NDP coming back, and then Trudeau coming back. What you can see here is that there never really was any enduring tie between the NDP and the Liberals, something that should give you a clue as to what was really happening. Any slight lead was a magnet for the support of the weight of the ABC movement which started in strength upon the shock of the Harper Majority in 2011 and had been the prevailing political dynamic right through the election. This dynamic meant every edge was amplified. The FPTP system has left Liberals with a rather inaccurate view of their real mandate or why they have it.

Of course Trudeau has positives, but for those not completely drunk on Kool-Aid he has negatives that are significant such that he is not so much stronger than any other leader who has taken power. This runs contrary to the contemporary Dragon Slayer myth of his followers. Following the election he has a significant honeymoon, driven by the satisfaction of having beaten Harper, which no doubt even includes some gratitude for that service, and contrast in terms of the optics of the government. It will take some time before this government is measured on more than optics, but that will come and certainly it will arrive before the next election.

The delusional fantasy of the invincible Trudeau is not only offensive because it is clearly meant to be by those who gloat about it, it also represents a misunderstanding of what happened last year, or at least the “why.” Liberals see the victory as about them when that is a small part of it. This politically narcissistic tendency can be seen in some Liberal supporters here.

Trudeau did not manage to win a particularly strong percentage of regular voters, his victory remained below 40% even after benefitting from a significant pool of people who do not normally vote, but who came out to drive a stake in the cold heart of the Harper government. That done, it remains to be seen if this support remains engaged in politics, nevermind glued to the Liberal party.

The NDP as well has to be realistic lest they make mistakes to compound the previous ones. The NDP were in it. The Liberals were not unbeatable. The NDP blew the campaign on several points and Mulcair did some damage within his party due to the kinds of positions and the apparent poor fit between him and the party's social democratic philosophy. In many respects, the NDP has to face the fact that there was a significant rejection of their leader, even if that only set a tipping point for the larger movement of the ABC movement to the Liberals. Some of this rejection was founded in statements Mulcair made and some was founded in the perception that he was less than sincere the few times he did mouth NDP values. However, these issues were hugely amplified by the weight of a large number of people with virtually no loyalty for neither the NDP nor the Liberals but who just wanted Harper gone. Once the Liberals passed them by a hair, the NDP went into an unstoppable free-fall.

There are warnings for the future. For the NDP, the danger might be seen as disunity but there is also risk of a false unity behind a leader who may in the end create more disunity. The party needs a leader that truly represents the membership's values and aspirations. Mulcair is not it. There is no need for a lurch to the left for the party except for the people who have always resided there. It is more a collective realization that the leader and campaign was a disaster, that the party was not too far wrong, yet the leader certainly was. Huge changes to the leadership are essential; more openness and greater connection to members is essential; a leader that can communicate a passion for social democratic values of inclusiveness and equality in a positive way is essential; a greater confidence in the presentation of the NDP's values in practice -- the platform -- is required. The NDP put forward a fairly good platform but campaigned on it so tentatively that observers and members alike had every reason to question the commitment and confidence of both leader and party. As well the NDP cannot argue its way to victory from the mouth of a lawyer but instead inspire. Again Mulcair is not the right person for this.

Going forward the NDP must guard against a lack of confidence, such as what we are seeing now where a large body of the membership are saying openly that their roundly defeated leader is not replaceable. They must guard against the idea that they cannot put up a new leader who could win – even in the next election. And most of all, the NDP must not give up on the values and principles that are the reason they exist as a movement. This idea that you must give up principle, downplay longstanding commitments you have made in a platform just to win is a fantasy that should have been broken by this last election, but sadly it is now colouring the party’s approach to a leadership review.

As well the party must apply a sense of imagination. i could write a long piece on that but hopefully some can see what I mean read widely.

The NDP does have a core problem that needs to be discussed and I have been trying to promote an understanding of this idea. The party has a lost generation. The period from which the leaders of today would have been expected to come from was the worst in the party’s history. In the 2011 election, the party reached out well to a new generation that may include the leaders of tomorrow. But the party has not been able to bring in a replacement for the lost cohort of the 1990s – the people who should now be the leadership group. If the party recognized this, it might reach out beyond its politically established individuals, to find people outside the party who are of the age and accomplishment needed now. Instead we either have people trying to hold on to Mulcair like a life preserver or tout the possible leadership of people who are as young as in their twenties who may have future aspirations but well understand that this is not yet their time. This is not a reason to hold on to Mulcair, but it may be an explanation as to why so many are afraid of letting him go. The best replacement for Mulcair may not presently be in the NDP. This is why I suggested as an example a person like Dr. Joanne Liu who is the type of person the party should be looking to now. There are, I am sure many others.

We must not indulge the Liberals and their Dragon Slayer myths and we must not presume that the next election is already lost. Even more significant, we must not presume that the social democratic foundations of the NDP are a liability. We should recognize that the election was closer than it appeared at the end. There is a taste in the public for what the NDP has long stood for and, I believe personally that, had that been delivered, we would have the first NDP national government today.

For now, we should avoid the suggestion that we either have to keep Mulcair or undertake some lurch to the left. Either would only serve the Liberals. The NDP’s centre long had a place, a purpose, and a vision worth presenting to Canadians as a government. If it forgets these things the party will be in a long wilderness or eventually replaced -- as it should.

Unionist

How does this theme relate to your reflections in the thread you opened three weeks ago:

[url=http://rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/forming-new-party-on-left-how-... a new party on the left - how to do it not whether to do it[/url]

Are you still suggesting a new party is needed now, or is the jury still out?

voice of the damned

^^
I agree, in that I don't think Trudeau's personality or attributes had much if anything to do with his victory. People wanted to get rid of Harper, and for reasons having more to do with inter-party political dynamics than with charisma, settled upon the Liberals as the safest bet. I suspect Dion or even Ignatieff could have pulled off the same trick in 2015.

The hilarious thing, though, is JT really seems to think the public is swooning over his exalted preciousness. Hence, his tendency to express himself in cutesy catch-phrases, that(unbeknowenst to him apparently), come off as a Hollywood scriptwriter's parody of a new-age flake, and seem to get their most prominent mileage in sarcastic message-board commentary("Canadians killed in Burkina Faso? Sunny Ways, ha ha!") .

Not that that's neccessarily going to hurt him, since a lot of the electorate, while not swooning over him, doesn't actively dislike him either, and in the absence of credible alternatives, he can probably win the next election just by default, like Chretien did.

terrytowel

voice of the damned wrote:

The hilarious thing, though, is JT really seems to think the public is swooning over his exalted preciousness. Hence, his tendency to express himself in cutesy catch-phrases, that(unbeknowenst to him apparently), come off as a Hollywood scriptwriter's parody of a new-age flake, and seem to get their most prominent mileage in sarcastic message-board commentary("Canadians killed in Burkina Faso? Sunny Ways, ha ha!") .

As Lysiane Gagnon wrote on Wednesday

Now, we have the other extreme: a prime minister (Trudeau) who hates conflicts and sees the world through a New Age prism in which everything can be solved with love and understanding. Unfortunately, the country he leads doesn’t live in a dream world.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article28272457.ece

voice of the damned

terrytowel wrote:

voice of the damned wrote:

The hilarious thing, though, is JT really seems to think the public is swooning over his exalted preciousness. Hence, his tendency to express himself in cutesy catch-phrases, that(unbeknowenst to him apparently), come off as a Hollywood scriptwriter's parody of a new-age flake, and seem to get their most prominent mileage in sarcastic message-board commentary("Canadians killed in Burkina Faso? Sunny Ways, ha ha!") .

As Lysiane Gagnon wrote on Wednesday

Now, we have the other extreme: a prime minister (Trudeau) who hates conflicts and sees the world through a New Age prism in which everything can be solved with love and understanding. Unfortunately, the country he leads doesn’t live in a dream world.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article28272457.ece

I'm not sure if Ms. Gagnon is correct that JT really sees the world that way, or if that's just the kind of rhetoric he spouts(possibly because he doesn't know anything else). Whatever negative symbolism contained in his lack of attendance at memorial vigils, he hasn't exactly been pursuing a pacifistic foreign policy so far.

That said, you don't have to be a wild-eyed, right-wing warmonger to find his projected image a little of the goofy side. Again, that might not actually hurt him much.

quizzical

voice of the damned wrote:
The hilarious thing, though, is JT really seems to think the public is swooning over his exalted preciousness. Hence, his tendency to express himself in cutesy catch-phrases, that(unbeknowenst to him apparently), come off as a Hollywood scriptwriter's parody of a new-age flake, and seem to get their most prominent mileage in sarcastic message-board commentary("Canadians killed in Burkina Faso? Sunny Ways, ha ha!") .

Not that that's neccessarily going to hurt him, since a lot of the electorate, while not swooning over him, doesn't actively dislike him either, and in the absence of credible alternatives, he can probably win the next election just by default, like Chretien did.

the whole thing about "coolness" is people start recognizing real quick when people are fake cool or truely cool.  and the fake cool becomes the flake.

Justin's nasty comments in Davos, show the Liberals are no different than the Conservative's mean spiritedness and it will only get worse if it's like this 2 months in..

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

I'm reserving judgement for the beginning of the new Parliamentary session that begins today. Let us see what priorities the Liberals are going to lay out in the next few months.

Until then,trashing Trudeau comes across like children having tantrums. It's off-putting.

mark_alfred
Sean in Ottawa

Unionist wrote:

How does this theme relate to your reflections in the thread you opened three weeks ago:

[url=http://rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/forming-new-party-on-left-how-... a new party on the left - how to do it not whether to do it[/url]

Are you still suggesting a new party is needed now, or is the jury still out?

This is related to what I think the party must do. It addresses the issues of Trudeau not being invincible.

The other thread addresses the fact that I do not have any faith that the NDP will do it. Most of the responses from the NDP indicate that they only care about losing not about what the party sdtands for. I do think they are rejected though for related reasons.

This is not an endorsement of the NDP or a suggestion that I have come round to a hopeful position. I have not.

 

Sean in Ottawa

I am sure he does.

Not buying the sincerity since he has provided no explanation for his downplaying of these principles during the election.

Mulcair can say what he wants but he lacks credibility and sounds like he is singing for his job.

quizzical

why on earth would anyone advocate reserving judgement until  the HoC sits when the new representatives for the Liberal government have been running around representing Canada poorly at home and on the world stage?

lolol

Sean in Ottawa

quizzical wrote:

why on earth would anyone advocate reserving judgement until  the HoC sits when the new representatives for the Liberal government have been running around representing Canada poorly at home and on the world stage?

lolol

Perhaps it is a tendency to be overly optimistic. I think that this is something Canadians are indulging in right now after all those years of Conservatives. they will figure out the Liberals but they want to feel good for a few months first.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

quizzical wrote:

why on earth would anyone advocate reserving judgement until  the HoC sits when the new representatives for the Liberal government have been running around representing Canada poorly at home and on the world stage?

lolol

Please explain. Is it that Canada was 'snubbed' by their NATO 'allies'? If so.LOLOLOLOLOL!!!

What has the Liberals done at home yet? Oh,that's right...NOTHING. Parliament has been ajourned for months. We'll soon see if the Liberals can deliver on most of their promises.

Your comment is typical of a partisan. Explain what the NDP would be doing right now if they were the government? I'll tell you one thing for sure,Mulcair would not be disappointing his NATO colleagues and they'd be using this new session to 'balance the books' AKA austerity.

quizzical

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
quizzical wrote:
why on earth would anyone advocate reserving judgement until  the HoC sits when the new representatives for the Liberal government have been running around representing Canada poorly at home and on the world stage?

lolol

Perhaps it is a tendency to be overly optimistic. I think that this is something Canadians are indulging in right now after all those years of Conservatives. they will figure out the Liberals but they want to feel good for a few months first.

i call it turtling. i like to do it too. i just don't think now's the time. give an inch they'll take 10 miles.

and people don't like to admit they're wrong until the wrong shit slaps them in the face.

brookmere

Quote:
We see Liberals telling us over and over that the Liberal leader has qualities that made the last election a foregone conclusion

What are you talking about? Every account of the campaign I've read says that the LIberals regarded victory as anything but a sure thing, and were surprised by the bad moves made by the Cons and the NDP. In particular, Gerald Butts was stunned by Mulcair's "balanced budgets no matter what" promise which allowed the Liberals to campaign to the left of the NDP and marked the beginning of the Liberals' trajectory to a majority government.

 

Sean in Ottawa

brookmere wrote:

Quote:
We see Liberals telling us over and over that the Liberal leader has qualities that made the last election a foregone conclusion

What are you talking about? Every account of the campaign I've read says that the LIberals regarded victory as anything but a sure thing, and were surprised by the bad moves made by the Cons and the NDP. In particular, Gerald Butts was stunned by Mulcair's "balanced budgets no matter what" promise which allowed the Liberals to campaign to the left of the NDP and marked the beginning of the Liberals' trajectory to a majority government.

 

Please explain that to Pondering and other Liberals here.

The fawning over Trudeau perhaps may be more a supporter thing but it is hard to avoid.

Sean in Ottawa

BTW -- I write this knowing that I cannot go to the convention the cost form here is prohibitive. My participation can only be through comment.

monty1

alan smithee wrote:

Your comment is typical of a partisan. Explain what the NDP would be doing right now if they were the government? I'll tell you one thing for sure,Mulcair would not be disappointing his NATO colleagues and they'd be using this new session to 'balance the books' AKA austerity.

You're right, and it's too bad the NDP supporters can't lay their Liberal bashing politics aside for a while and come to the support of the Liberals on at least that. There's little doubt that's in line with the agenda of the NDP supporters on this board! 

But no, they're more concerned with Trudeau's good looks and mannerisms and Sophie's singing to even try to support their own interests.

As was always the case in parliament, the NDP licked Conservative hands like puppies in order to try to find a position contrary to the Liberals. That turned my stomach to the point of maybe never being able to support them again, and many of the NDP's supporters were sickened by it too. 

The NDP is going to have to find it's way in some position that the Liberals don't already own and that doesn't seem possible. That's why they are hoping for the Liberals under Trudeau to go right. And judging from this event where Canada is being snubbed by Nato allies, it's just not happening. 

The Conservatives will again benefit from the NDP's lack of commitment to it's traditional leftist agenda. Same old shit.

Sean in Ottawa

monty1 wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

Your comment is typical of a partisan. Explain what the NDP would be doing right now if they were the government? I'll tell you one thing for sure,Mulcair would not be disappointing his NATO colleagues and they'd be using this new session to 'balance the books' AKA austerity.

You're right, and it's too bad the NDP supporters can't lay their Liberal bashing politics aside for a while and come to the support of the Liberals on at least that. There's little doubt that's in line with the agenda of the NDP supporters on this board! 

But no, they're more concerned with Trudeau's good looks and mannerisms and Sophie's singing to even try to support their own interests.

As was always the case in parliament, the NDP licked Conservative hands like puppies in order to try to find a position contrary to the Liberals. That turned my stomach to the point of maybe never being able to support them again, and many of the NDP's supporters were sickened by it too. 

The NDP is going to have to find it's way in some position that the Liberals don't already own and that doesn't seem possible. That's why they are hoping for the Liberals under Trudeau to go right. And judging from this event where Canada is being snubbed by Nato allies, it's just not happening. 

The Conservatives will again benefit from the NDP's lack of commitment to it's traditional leftist agenda. Same old shit.

So what exactly is the NDP supposed to applaud? The return home of the Jets you mean? Well that has not happened and there is no date for it.

Sorry but here you are sounding like one of the many ex-NDP supporters we hear from who maybe or maybe not ever considered voting something other than Liberal.

Most of the former NDP supporters who actually once voted NDP wished that the NDP bashed the Liberals a little harder and more effecitvely. Those suggesting they did not line up fast enough to kiss justin's ring, I figure are mostly Liberals messing with us.

I agree some of the criticisms made by the NDP against the Liberals have been petty but I say this becuase there were more important reasons to challenge the Liberals.

I don't buy this concern for the NDP wishing it would earn support by supporting the Liberals.

Frankly the NDP should be slamming the Liberals daily on the so called middle class tax cut and demanding they deliver on the promise they made for the jets.

Praising Liberal rhetoric when it is unmatched by action is hardly what I think the party should do now.

ETA -- your comment dismissing the issues with Martin Luther King Day are disgusting in my opinion even if you don't give a crap that the event publicity went to a white woman of privelege instead of civil rights.

monty1

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

So what exactly is the NDP supposed to applaud? The return home of the Jets you mean? Well that has not happened and there is no date for it.[/quote

No on the jets. the NDP needs to scream bloody murder if the 6 bombers don't come hom on schedule. And show their support for bringing them home in the loudest possible manner right now. Otherwise, what has been mentioned above needs NDP support.

Quote:
Sorry but here you are sounding like one of the many ex-NDP supporters we hear from who maybe or maybe not ever considered voting something other than Liberal.

In fact I've never voted Liberal. In the last election I voted NDP strategically but I could have easily voted Liberal to defeat the Cons. My riding of Nanaimo was a solid win for the NDP and nearly always has been. 

Quote:
Most of the former NDP supporters who actually once voted NDP wished that the NDP bashed the Liberals a little harder and more effecitvely. Those suggesting they did not line up fast enough to kiss justin's ring, I figure are mostly Liberals messing with us.

My Liberal bashing will come when it's due criticism of the Liberals. It's a lot more nuanced than thinking that NDP'ers kiss Justin's ring. I'm giveing them a chance so tell me what I should be bashing? Seriously? No, I'm not ready to bash them on the 6 bombers situation yet and neither should you be. You should be showing overwhelming support for bringing them home. 

Quote:
I agree some of the criticisms made by the NDP against the Liberals have been petty but I say this becuase there were more important reasons to challenge the Liberals.

Thanks for your honesty. I don't know of any NDP'ers who try to lie about that fact.

Quote:
I don't buy this concern for the NDP wishing it would earn support by supporting the Liberals.
 

The NDP only needs to support that which it's always seen as deserving of their support. It they don't do that then they become hypocrites and losers and will disintegrate even more. They have to do the best with what is left for them as an agenda. They may find some breathing room on child care for now but it's only a diversion tactic. If the Liberals fail to address it in a reasonable time frame then the NDP will have a bone in it's teeth!

Quote:
Frankly the NDP should be slamming the Liberals daily on the so called middle class tax cut and demanding they deliver on the promise they made for the jets.

I'm with the Liberals on the middle class tax cut. The 6 bombers, I've already addressed. I think you are repeating it because you're at a loss for anything else?

Quote:
Praising Liberal rhetoric when it is unmatched by action is hardly what I think the party should do now.

I can't argue with the intent of that statement. And I'm not even asking for NDP praise as much as the NDP getting behind Liberal action. (action as mentioned above)

Quote:
ETA -- your comment dismissing the issues with Martin Luther King Day are disgusting in my opinion even if you don't give a crap that the event publicity went to a white woman of privelege instead of civil rights.

I've been completely honest with you but on that one, I consider it bullshit. So much so that it's only going to damage those who keep spouting it. The NDP needs something better than that to work with. How about making a louder noise on the 6 bombers coming home on the promised date? That would be constructive criticism of the sort I would support!

I'm with you pal, and I've always been with the NDP. But right now they are nothing to be with and the Liberals are. We both know we have a common enemy, no need to mention it again.

Sean in Ottawa

monty1 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

So what exactly is the NDP supposed to applaud? The return home of the Jets you mean? Well that has not happened and there is no date for it.[/quote

No on the jets. the NDP needs to scream bloody murder if the 6 bombers don't come hom on schedule. And show their support for bringing them home in the loudest possible manner right now. Otherwise, what has been mentioned above needs NDP support.

Quote:
Sorry but here you are sounding like one of the many ex-NDP supporters we hear from who maybe or maybe not ever considered voting something other than Liberal.

In fact I've never voted Liberal. In the last election I voted NDP strategically but I could have easily voted Liberal to defeat the Cons. My riding of Nanaimo was a solid win for the NDP and nearly always has been. 

Quote:
Most of the former NDP supporters who actually once voted NDP wished that the NDP bashed the Liberals a little harder and more effecitvely. Those suggesting they did not line up fast enough to kiss justin's ring, I figure are mostly Liberals messing with us.

My Liberal bashing will come when it's due criticism of the Liberals. It's a lot more nuanced than thinking that NDP'ers kiss Justin's ring. I'm giveing them a chance so tell me what I should be bashing? Seriously? No, I'm not ready to bash them on the 6 bombers situation yet and neither should you be. You should be showing overwhelming support for bringing them home. 

Quote:
I agree some of the criticisms made by the NDP against the Liberals have been petty but I say this becuase there were more important reasons to challenge the Liberals.

Thanks for your honesty. I don't know of any NDP'ers who try to lie about that fact.

Quote:
I don't buy this concern for the NDP wishing it would earn support by supporting the Liberals.
 

The NDP only needs to support that which it's always seen as deserving of their support. It they don't do that then they become hypocrites and losers and will disintegrate even more. They have to do the best with what is left for them as an agenda. They may find some breathing room on child care for now but it's only a diversion tactic. If the Liberals fail to address it in a reasonable time frame then the NDP will have a bone in it's teeth!

Quote:
Frankly the NDP should be slamming the Liberals daily on the so called middle class tax cut and demanding they deliver on the promise they made for the jets.

I'm with the Liberals on the middle class tax cut. The 6 bombers, I've already addressed. I think you are repeating it because you're at a loss for anything else?

Quote:
Praising Liberal rhetoric when it is unmatched by action is hardly what I think the party should do now.

I can't argue with the intent of that statement. And I'm not even asking for NDP praise as much as the NDP getting behind Liberal action. (action as mentioned above)

Quote:
ETA -- your comment dismissing the issues with Martin Luther King Day are disgusting in my opinion even if you don't give a crap that the event publicity went to a white woman of privelege instead of civil rights.

I've been completely honest with you but on that one, I consider it bullshit. So much so that it's only going to damage those who keep spouting it. The NDP needs something better than that to work with. How about making a louder noise on the 6 bombers coming home on the promised date? That would be constructive criticism of the sort I would support!

I'm with you pal, and I've always been with the NDP. But right now they are nothing to be with and the Liberals are. We both know we have a common enemy, no need to mention it again.

Clearly I am not your pal. I have no idea what you think is the common enemy.

I do not appreciate what you tell me I should be supporting. I support what I want to support.

The Liberal Middle class tax cut is utter bullshit and no progressive would support it -- max money goes to $90k- $200k range. Your suport for that says more about you than you might seem willing to admit. Clearly you are not in the same political space as I am.

Pretty much you dismiss just about everything that is progressive here. So why not call it a day and call yoursdelf a Liberal.

Then dial back the advice to the NDP -- you are not one of "us" given your responses here. My trouble with the NDP is a fight among progressives. You are clearly not one as far as I can tell.

The promise on the jets was to pull tham back right away. Is three months after the election too early? I think not.

The tax policy is absolutely fucking disgusting. The NDP vote for it in the ways and means motion caused me to terminate at least for now my association with the NDP. I have no idea how you could say you are a progressive and support that bait and switch. In name it is middle class, but in policy it is a benefit to the wealthy after advertising that this was to the middle. I posted a lot of detail on this already. Had the Conservatives pulled this the Liberals would have criticized it heavily.

BTW your quoting is messed up.

monty1

SEan in Ottawa said:

Quote:
The tax policy is absolutely fucking disgusting. The NDP vote for it in the ways and means motion caused me to terminate at least for now my association with the NDP.

Sometimes when you find yourself standing alone with no party to support, it's best to just call it a day Sean. 

I know that NDP dogma runs deep because I've been one all my life. But we really do have to make a start by accepting crumbs of the birthday cake instead of nothing. It's always been that way with my union activities too. We never did win a clear victory but we kept it together all the way up until the Harper years, when the Cons started to dismantle it all.

 

edit: and ya know what Sean, we only have ourselves to blame. Just listen to all those MacD workers voicing their hate for unions because they make 7 bucks and the union guys make 25 bucks.

quizzical

"let thm eat cake"

wage zombie

monty1 wrote:

As was always the case in parliament, the NDP licked Conservative hands like puppies in order to try to find a position contrary to the Liberals. That turned my stomach to the point of maybe never being able to support them again, and many of the NDP's supporters were sickened by it too. 

What are you talking about?

Sean in Ottawa

monty1 wrote:

SEan in Ottawa said:

Quote:
The tax policy is absolutely fucking disgusting. The NDP vote for it in the ways and means motion caused me to terminate at least for now my association with the NDP.

Sometimes when you find yourself standing alone with no party to support, it's best to just call it a day Sean. 

I know that NDP dogma runs deep because I've been one all my life. But we really do have to make a start by accepting crumbs of the birthday cake instead of nothing. It's always been that way with my union activities too. We never did win a clear victory but we kept it together all the way up until the Harper years, when the Cons started to dismantle it all.

 

edit: and ya know what Sean, we only have ourselves to blame. Just listen to all those MacD workers voicing their hate for unions because they make 7 bucks and the union guys make 25 bucks.

Screw your suggestion that I am on the same team as you. I am not on any team that would endorse a tax gift to the some of the wealthiest earners since that is what the Liberal tax cut is. And since the tax increase on the top half of one percent (which is what the Liberal tax increase applies to) does not pay for the cut it is all other Canadians who will pay in other tax increases or service cuts.

Stuff your suggestion that you were once an NDP supporter -- I don't believe you. If you were, it was only becuase you got lost -- you espouse right wing views and your comments about MPs being boolickers of the Conservatives defines you as a troll.

Enjoy your stay here. I predict it will be very short.

BTW: As I said in the other thread -- we don't do your kind of sexist language here.

Aristotleded24

Sean, when I was at NDP MP Daniel Blaikie's election night get together, most in the room were cheering the red wave that swept over Winnipeg (with the obvious exception of losing Pat Martin in Winnipeg Centre). These were NDP supporters cheering Conservative losses at the hands of the Liberals. What do you make of this in light of the subject of this thread?

Unionist

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Sean, when I was at NDP MP Daniel Blaikie's election night get together, most in the room were cheering the red wave that swept over Winnipeg (with the obvious exception of losing Pat Martin in Winnipeg Centre). These were NDP supporters cheering Conservative losses at the hands of the Liberals. What do you make of this in light of the subject of this thread?

That's amazing. Thanks for that report, A24. What conclusions did you draw from that?

 

monty1

wage zombie wrote:

monty1 wrote:

As was always the case in parliament, the NDP licked Conservative hands like puppies in order to try to find a position contrary to the Liberals. That turned my stomach to the point of maybe never being able to support them again, and many of the NDP's supporters were sickened by it too. 

What are you talking about?

Ask NDPP, he'll tell you, because he's already told me.

jjuares

quizzical wrote:

"let thm eat cake"


Well actually Monty is suggesting we should be happy with "crumbs" of the cake. Which is even worse that Marie Antoinette.

monty1

jjuares wrote:
quizzical wrote:

"let thm eat cake"

Well actually Monty is suggesting we should be happy with "crumbs" of the cake. He is even worse that Marie Antoinette.

o.k. then, let's wait for the NDP to be elected and not accept anything less. I can wait a little longer and I've only been waiting about 55 years since I started voting. That's if, you count the years where I voted CCF.

Sean in Ottawa

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Sean, when I was at NDP MP Daniel Blaikie's election night get together, most in the room were cheering the red wave that swept over Winnipeg (with the obvious exception of losing Pat Martin in Winnipeg Centre). These were NDP supporters cheering Conservative losses at the hands of the Liberals. What do you make of this in light of the subject of this thread?

I see no contradiction in celebrating the loss of the Conservatives with what I said.

Pondering

You won't beat Trudeau while you continue to underestimate him and misread the reasons for his win as well as misreading voters.

More people follow sports than they do politics. Only the headlines are breaking through and even they get little attention. Those are the people that decide the election. The people who tune in during the last two weeks and are disrespected by people who do follow politics, at least those on the left. That's really short-sighted because they will decide the next election too.

Looking at the history of elections in Canada a PM need not be a "dragon slayer" to win a second term, or even better than the competition. Adequate is sufficient to win a second term. Second term is often simply a vote for stability. To not win a second term the government must be facing huge discontent or be up against a dragon slayer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_federal_general_elections

Harper was within reach of winning another election based on adequacy. It is true that governments defeat themselves in Canada. Had he been a little more generous with refugees, a bit more personable, he would still be leading Canada. From the latest Nanos poll around 40% of Canadians would still consider voting Conservative. That's almost half and even those who wouldn't consider voting Conservative don't necessarily think of them as evil. Many of them still don't understand that this is not the Conservative party they are thinking of it is the reformers in sheeps clothing. If you try to explain the severe cuts that have been made people will try to change the conversation and some will be thinking you are an ideologue and you are just saying what you are saying because you're NDP. If you try presenting an economic argument people will back away saying it's too complex.

Context matters. Harper won because he was a cold stereotypical accountant type and he lost for the very same reason. What changed was the context. He won because the big story was the sponsorship scandal and corruption. Boring accountant type seemed like a good idea. Someone who would rein in expenses so millions of dollars wouldn't go missing without anyone noticing. He promised transparency.

Given that his became the most secretive government Canada has had in modern history and had case after case of corruption and abuse of power one would think he wouldn't have lasted more than one term. Context matters. The Liberals were in disarray after the sponsorship scandal and the preceding battle between Chretien and Martin which was followed by the subsequent leadership debacles. (As an aside there should be a "none of these" tick box for party leaderships if the executive doesn't present someone the membership can support).

The Harper Party is only 13 years old but by taking the Conservative name voters felt like they were voting for the PCs. Meanwhile the NDP which is now the second most estalished party in Canada, was still hobbled by never having won federally. Changing the name of the party is a bad idea. Do that and all of the NDP's history vanishes with the name. Despite the drop to third place the NDP has established itself as a credible choice federally.

Leaping on "broken promises" and brandishing them as proof of Liberal failing maybe satisfying but it won't change anyone's mind about voting Liberal. Harper broke plenty of promises. The previous Liberal governments broke promises and still got re-elected. Canadians want to be happy about what we are doing for refugees and optimistic over the infrastructure projects coming.

People are tired of the doom and gloom and fear that the Conservatives counted on for re-election. People are enjoying the change in atmosphere and loving all the postive press. Putting down the Vogue shoot might as well be putting down all the women who read it and other women's magazines. Putting down selfies is putting down all the people who want selfies with him.

Trying to end Trudeau's honeymoon is raining on the parade and you will not be thanked for it. The more negative the NDP is about Trudeau now the more difficult it will be to win against him in 2019. By then the NDP will just be percieved as a negative background drone.

Polls since the election have shown growing support for Trudeau and dropping support for the NDP which belies the claim that people were just voting "not Harper" rather than for Trudeau. If that had been true polls would show people swarming back to the NDP eager to show that their vote had been strategic not an endorsement of Trudeau. Trudeau's mandate does not rest in his having been elected but in his increased support and now majority support as favored PM because he is so much better than what the opposition tried to convince Canadians of.

Next election Trudeau will be the most experienced leader in contention, the only one who has run a federal government. He will have reopened offices and coast guard stations and overturned many of the changes made by Harper including overturning anti-union legislation. They are reviewing all of Harper's changes so there will be many moves that will make many people happy especially women.

Trudeau has the same ability to reach people as Trump and Ford but without the obnoxiousness. Some posters here will insist that they find him obnoxious but that doesn't put him in Trump and Ford's company on that score. He is their polar opposite. Where they are crass he is polished. Where they are cruel, Trudeau is compassionate. Trudeau's and Sophie's so-called "gaffes" are a strength not a weakness because they are insignificant things that anyone might do or say so they make them more relatable, like Ford and Trump but without the nasty edge.

Pundits condemned Trudeau's crack about whipping out CF-18s but Canadians didn't. They agreed and that was reflected in polls. The "unlike my predecessor" comment is the same deal. Trudeau is riding high on the international scene so it seems like looking for an excuse to complain. Mulcair made some silly comment suggesting Trudeau should have made a pension announcement at Davos because Harper did. Mulcair looks like he is eating sour grapes. The NDP is trying to play it like they took Harper down then Trudeau reaped the rewards. Nobody took Harper down. Harper defeated himself so people looked elsewhere and compared what was available.

Trudeau doesn't have to be a dragon slayer to win the next election because he is Puff the magic dragon. People don't want him to be slain. He doesn't have to be great he only has to be adequate. To slay him the opposition has to be way better than adequate. They would have to be inspiring.

I have no crystal ball but I was certain he would win against Harper and Mulcair not because Trudeau is all that and more but because of his strengths within the context of the times and the weaknesses of his opponents. He will win again in 2019 not because he is so great but again because of the context of the times (including 2nd term position) and the weaknesses of his opponents.

I have no crystal ball but since losing the election the NDP has made mistake after mistake, not just Mulcair. You're going to say "well you don't know that" but the polls support my position. 

In 2015 the NDP had a 1 in three shot with all three parties on the same ground. The Conservatives were weakened by their long stint in power and Harper's nature. The Liberals were weakened by their long stint out of power and inexperienced leader. The NDP was strengthened by their time as the official opposition and (at the time) credible leader in Mulcair.

The Liberals won based on fundamentals that stood by them during the campaign. That was what I began to see when Trudeau first became leader and in the time that followed. The fundamentals that would lead them to power once the campaign started.

Way back when Mulcair failed to come out strongly against the soccer hijab ban and dissed Canada in the states I knew he was tone deaf and he is still illustrating that trait. Nevertheless hanging this defeat on his shoulders misses the mark because the platform also failed to inspire. When voters went looking for a reason to stick with the NDP they didn't find one. They did not deem the NDP's plans for balanced budgets coupled with national daycare and improved medicare and pharmachare all on a 2% corporate tax increase credible or a solution to our problems or inspiring.

In 2019 the playing field will not be even. Trudeau will be the only experienced leader yet just finished his first term so he will have the full incumbent boost. The NDP will have either Mulcair or a new leader. The Liberals will have spent four years showering money on cities for high impact infrastructure like improved transit and overturning many of Harper's irritant changes that were made to please his base. He will have significantly improved gender parity in high level positions. His team will be as savvy as ever if not more so therefore he will have a strong campaign ready.

Obviously either the NDP or the Conservatives could still win in 2019 but I wouldn't bet on it. The odds strongly favor Trudeau and the fundamentals of the two parties opposing him are weak.

quizzical

what a painful 5 mins of my life......

it's da little things which made people start hating Harper enough for a ABC or ABH. and they weren't necessarily in the news.

things like the RCMP behaving badly

things like calling protesters terrorists

behaving arrogantly

being delusional and out of touch with Canadians

people pay attention to their income tax rates......

it's already adding up quickly against Justin and the Liberals only 3 months in. 

Harper only had the last 4 years as a majority...and it's all it took....lolol

 

 

quizzical

oh i didn't add the shit ass NEB hearings Burnaby are pissing thousands of BCers off.

Sean in Ottawa

quizzical wrote:

what a painful 5 mins of my life......

it's da little things which made people start hating Harper enough for a ABC or ABH. and they weren't necessarily in the news.

things like the RCMP behaving badly

things like calling protesters terrorists

behaving arrogantly

being delusional and out of touch with Canadians

people pay attention to their income tax rates......

it's already adding up quickly against Justin and the Liberals only 3 months in. 

Harper only had the last 4 years as a majority...and it's all it took....lolol

 

 

Anything I should know? I am not reading that post. I can probably imagine the refrain and I don't like the tune.

quizzical

Sean condensed verson:

Justin is 'puff the magic dragon' and he can be below mediocre and still get elected as look how bad Harper was and still could've won. he will be the incumbant don't cha know....

i'd say the Liberals are puffing a bit too much on something not marijuana related......

Sean in Ottawa

quizzical wrote:

Sean condensed verson:

Justin is 'puff the magic dragon' and he can be below mediocre and still get elected as look how bad Harper was and still could've won. he will be the incumbant don't cha know....

i'd say the Liberals are puffing a bit too much on something not marijuana related......

Thanks for the summary. Sorry you had to wade through all that to get it.

monty1

Pondering, I read your long post and I think you did a pretty good job of analyzing the situation. Thanks for the effort and it's not wasted.

I'll say something for Mulcair though. He blew it and he knows how he blew it and he's even spoken about it. That took gumption.

quizzical

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
quizzical wrote:

Sean condensed verson:

Justin is 'puff the magic dragon' and he can be below mediocre and still get elected as look how bad Harper was and still could've won. he will be the incumbant don't cha know....

i'd say the Liberals are puffing a bit too much on something not marijuana related......

Thanks for the summary. Sorry you had to wade through all that to get it.

i don't mind wading through the shallows. and someone put effort in to write all of it. thought someone should read it anyway

they could've put in less and said the same bs though.

monty1

quizzical wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
quizzical wrote:

Sean condensed verson:

Justin is 'puff the magic dragon' and he can be below mediocre and still get elected as look how bad Harper was and still could've won. he will be the incumbant don't cha know....

i'd say the Liberals are puffing a bit too much on something not marijuana related......

Thanks for the summary. Sorry you had to wade through all that to get it.

i don't mind wading through the shallows. and someone put effort in to write all of it. thought someone should read it anyway

they could've put in less and said the same bs though.

I'm assuming that Pondering wrote it because it doesn't appear it came from Wikipedia and he didn't include any quotes. Could be wrong though?

monty1

quizzical wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
quizzical wrote:

Sean condensed verson:

Justin is 'puff the magic dragon' and he can be below mediocre and still get elected as look how bad Harper was and still could've won. he will be the incumbant don't cha know....

i'd say the Liberals are puffing a bit too much on something not marijuana related......

Thanks for the summary. Sorry you had to wade through all that to get it.

i don't mind wading through the shallows. and someone put effort in to write all of it. thought someone should read it anyway

they could've put in less and said the same bs though.

I'm assuming that Pondering wrote it because it doesn't appear it came from Wikipedia and he didn't include any quotes. Could be wrong though?

quizzical

Aristotleded24 wrote:
Sean, when I was at NDP MP Daniel Blaikie's election night get together, most in the room were cheering the red wave that swept over Winnipeg (with the obvious exception of losing Pat Martin in Winnipeg Centre). These were NDP supporters cheering Conservative losses at the hands of the Liberals. What do you make of this in light of the subject of this thread?

i was smiling watching returns come in watching Conservative losses. didn't care who it was at  the end of it all. was hopeful even.

it lasted about 5 days though when i started hearing back tracking by the Liberals and realized everything i've heard my whole life was true about them. can't trust them for a minute.

Rev Pesky

I'm with monty1 on the issue of Pondering's post. I think you should read it Sean, you might learn something.

As far as the Liberals breaking election promises, all I can tell you is that the NDP does that as well. I lived with three separate NDP governments in BC, and they all broke promises (to say nothing of the promises they should have broken, but didn't).

Yes the NDP needs to rebuild, but rebuild to what? They have a choice. Stick to left principles, and damn the elections, or try to out-liberal the Liberals in hopes the voters will grant them a majority. All other methods will fail. New leader, new advisors, new strategies, all those are useless in creating a future for the NDP.

Debater

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Trudeau did not manage to win a particularly strong percentage of regular voters, his victory remained below 40% even after benefitting from a significant pool of people who do not normally vote, but who came out to drive a stake in the cold heart of the Harper government. That done, it remains to be seen if this support remains engaged in politics, nevermind glued to the Liberal party.

Sean, you make some valid points, but I've extracted this one paragraph from your long narrative to point out a few of the flaws in your thesis that I think political scientists and historians would counter you on.

You seem to be overlooking the fact that Trudeau had to rebuild the Liberal Party from virtually nothing.  It had fallen below 20% in 2011 for the first time in its history, fallen to 3rd place for the first time, and hardly had any incumbents or regional advantages left.  It was written off as dead by Peter C. Newman and many other political commentators.

No Liberal leader has ever had to come from so far back in seats & popular vote, or have to reverse such a dramatic collapse in support.  It's true that Trudeau didn't hit 40%, but so what?  The Liberals weren't even expected to win this election or maybe even win Official Opposition, let alone win a MAJORITY government with MORE than DOUBLE the support received in 2011.  This was the largest increase of seats in history, even surpassing Mulroney's 1984 seat pickup.

You are also focusing too much on the election itself, and not enough on the 2 or 3 years BEFORE the election.  It's not just that Trudeau won the election, it's that he re-built the party before the election -- rebuilding the riding associations, bringing in in new members, modernizing the fundraising appartus, attracting star candidates, winning by-elections, bringing in younger voters, rebuilding the ground lost by previous Liberal leaders in the multicultural ridings . . . the list goes on & on.  Trudeau also did a better job than Mulcair of choosing competent & talented advisers & managers such as Gerald Butts and Katie Telford, who are both brilliant at what they do and who bested their NDP counterparts.  That's also a sign of strong leadership.

Although I may have had a falling out with Justin Trudeau & his team in my own riding association when they imposed a star candidate over the local Liberal who had the support of the members, I can still recognize Trudeau's formidable organizational & leadership capabilities, even when I & the other members in my association received the negative brunt of it.

And as Paul Wells said in his piece on Leadership in Maclean's last week, Justin Trudeau, Stephen Harper, Jéan Chrétien and several others have all been underestimated over the years because their opponents didn't see their strengths until it was too late.

Pondering

monty1 wrote:
The NDP is going to have to find it's way in some position that the Liberals don't already own and that doesn't seem possible.

It's more than possible, it's both easy and obvious. ISDS. Investor State Dispute Settlement.

The NDP sort of went there a while back on TPP but then they dropped it.

There is a huge movement against it in Europe because it is also in CETA. Trans Canada is suing the States over Keystone and there are more suits against Canada so there are examples right now on how corporations can can force taxpayers to pay penalties to corporations just for exercising our democratic rights.

If many Europeans are against the ISDS, including leading politicians in multiple countries, enough that it is threatening the deal, and Canada doesn't want it, why can't we just drop it? The answer is we can just drop it. Those saying we can't are not backing up their claim.

On February 4th the Liberals are attending a TPP signing ceremony. It has no legal standing because it still has to be ratified and Trudeau has promised debates prior to that. The signing was a last minute plan and I think it is to help Obama push it through. If Obama succeeds the debates will lead to ratification based on the argument that we can't afford to be left out.

If we can stop ISDS in CETA, then it strengthens the argument against it in TPP. The argument that negotiations can't be reopened on TPP is that there are too many countries involved and we don't have a veto so the deal will just go ahead without us.

That isn't true of CETA. CETA has only two partners, Canada and the EU. There is no reason for either party to refuse the deal without that section. It can just be dropped.

Maude Barlow went to Europe to fight it because the movement against CETA is stronger there, maybe because it has the support of some political parties.

What are the two primary concerns of modern progressives? Climate change and income inequality. If there is a third it is the undermining of democracy. All three are made more difficult to fight by trade deals written to benefit corporations.

Progressives are looking for political leadership and not finding it. Taking this path would not have won this election, and probably not 2019 either, but it could set the stage for a return to opposition status and maybe even a win in 2023.

 

 

Aristotleded24

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
Aristotleded24 wrote:
Sean, when I was at NDP MP Daniel Blaikie's election night get together, most in the room were cheering the red wave that swept over Winnipeg (with the obvious exception of losing Pat Martin in Winnipeg Centre). These were NDP supporters cheering Conservative losses at the hands of the Liberals. What do you make of this in light of the subject of this thread?

I see no contradiction in celebrating the loss of the Conservatives with what I said.

I'm confused by how you responded to what I said. To me, your post, plus what I witnessed, speaks to a problem that not only have many NDP supporters bought into the whole left-right mythology and overlooking Liberal transgressions because of this, but it speaks to a galling lack of confidence in the party and the program, especially following an election that the NDP should have won.

Sean in Ottawa

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
Aristotleded24 wrote:
Sean, when I was at NDP MP Daniel Blaikie's election night get together, most in the room were cheering the red wave that swept over Winnipeg (with the obvious exception of losing Pat Martin in Winnipeg Centre). These were NDP supporters cheering Conservative losses at the hands of the Liberals. What do you make of this in light of the subject of this thread?

I see no contradiction in celebrating the loss of the Conservatives with what I said.

I'm confused by how you responded to what I said. To me, your post, plus what I witnessed, speaks to a problem that not only have many NDP supporters bought into the whole left-right mythology and overlooking Liberal transgressions because of this, but it speaks to a galling lack of confidence in the party and the program, especially following an election that the NDP should have won.

I don't understand the confusion.

I think we had an extreme government that made unprecedented moves against our democratic process and unprecedented attacks on knowledge and institutions together with a extreme rhetoric and tone. The racist positions of the government during the election were seen with some shock to many Canadians who in many respects could not recognize their country.

I do not see it as surprising that non CPC supporting Canadians saw all the opposition parties as closer together in the context of these extremes blurring the significant differences between the other parties. This dynamic is still in force and will be for months -- if not years. It will take time for Canadians to see the problems with a government that could be still objectionable on a number of points -- just because it is different from the extreme nastiness of the Conservatives. The population was polarized.

Non-Conservative Canadians took delight in seeing the Harper government removed.

This polarization left many people wanting to find a way to remove Harper no matter what -- it is the root of the ABC campaign which created the pool of voters willing to support whatever opposition party was best positioned to defeat the Conservatives.

Had their relative positions been only slightly different that pool would have gone to the NDP.

I actually predicted this long before the election when the NDP was in first place. I stated that the bulk of opposition support was ABC; that the NDP had a hold of it due to their huge lead in Quebec. I also said that the greatest risk of the BQ was that they might eat into NDP support just enough that with any other stumble they might create the momentum that would allow ABC voters to see the Liberals as the more likely option to bring down the Harper government. I warned then -- when the NDP was in first place -- that with this momentum the party would find the distance between first place and a struggle for party status to be a short trip.

I don't actually agree that the public were the ones to show a lack of confidence in the party positions-- this I feel was Mulcair's message and his telegraphing his lack of confidence that was at the start of the collapse of NDP support. I knew that the support was large for the NDP but uncommitted.

The public largely did not lack confidence in the NDP in terms of the platform because most did not care about the platform -- they wanted anything but Harper. The change in support was actually quite small but a tipping point since the original support was never as committed. The BQ gain in Quebec was not huge but it was enough with the Mulcair bad performance in the first debate and a couple stupid statements to reverse the momentum. The lack of confidence was in the NDP's ability to win. This changed the dynamic just enough that the ABC support left the NDP and went Liberal and the NDP support went into free-fall.

Sean in Ottawa

The NDP campaign position was more fragile than the NDP recognized and the NDP mistakes individually may not have meant as much in a campaign where the partyies were individually on all competing for party loyalty. But they made all the difference to this campaign.

In this campaign the Conservatives had something in the order of 35% and the NDP and the Liberals each had something close to 20%. Then there was an ABC bonus of nearly 20%, many of whom not even regular voters that went to the party that was most likely to defeat Harper. the Trudeau Liberals got most of that due to having the momentum and having the confidence that they would be the most likely to take down Harper.

Trudeau was personally very mixed as an asset: he was not considered the most experienced and he was considered gaffe-prone. But he also seemed to be the most unlike Harper of the two and that factor also played a role. The move to the Liberals also had a lot of support from the media which preferred them and gorged on Trudeau's celebrity. But the key difference was the momentum. Had the BQ leader not come back and increased the BQ polling numbers by 5% in Quebec, it is possible that the whole momentum change may not have had so much fuel. Then if Mulcair had not said the stupid things about the F-35 pullout -- which appealed to the ABC people, a further loss of support would not have happened. Lastly the Liberals proposed the misnamed "Middle Class" Tax cut and this, with Mulcair's stupid balance or but comments on the deficit largely sealed the deal for a critical move of ABC voters from the NDP to the Liberals. The four big NDP mistakes were therefore:

1) the BQ leaders rise and the NDP not taking that seriously to understand the risk they posed in terms of momentum change and how to respond (Mulcair was busy not bothering with the Women's debate thinking he was in solid first place).

2) A stupid concentration on whatever he could criticize on the Liberals -- even though issues like the F-35, he was on the wrong side of.

3) An inability to respond to the Liberal "Middle Class" tax cut with strength -- even though the information and arguments were there -- he never made enough of a deal about them or ran an ad attacking them for being falsely advertised.

4) The Balance or bust misread the public's fears about the economy and the need to stimulate.

These four things together likely lost the NDP around 10% of the vote when the NDP was riding very high. The ABC momentum shifted and it became a rout.

Sean in Ottawa

Now Liberals here are loving the myth of the Dragon Slayer Trudeau and are as you can see in this thread pretending that it was all about Trudeau. They are rushing to defend the myth with a great deal of arrogance in some cases. Trudeau was a factor as I acknowledged but the dynamics of the campaign were bigger; the election was actually closer than the results suggested and without the four things I mentionned, it could have been Mulcair in office.

Liberals want to see the world as being just about them. They also want to see Trudeau as some mythical leader that did great things. The election itself shows in the details how little of this was true. The Conservatives only lost a sliver of support. what the Liberals did was to gather the ABC support to them -- and most of that from non-voters and strategic voters. Liberlas point to some mythical rebuild of the Liberal party when the Liberals, by election day did not have that strong a lead among regular voters (or vote change from 2011). What they had was just enough with negative momentum from the NDP to sweep the ABC wave which is not a strongly committed group and may not even vote in 2019. This has fed into the dragon slayer myth to create overconfidence for the Liberals today and under confidence of the NDP to the point that they hang on to a failed leader for fear that they have no options and cannot win next time anyway.

Liberals at this site are numerous now -- I think for the first time in the history of this site they outnumber NDP supporters, perhaps even including former NDP supporters like myself who have to walk from the NDP in disgust. These Liberals are trying to build the mythology of Trudeau, perhaps as the first step to the next campaign. You can see that as they reference the next election and invincibility of Trudeau constantly.

Others should not swallow this.

terrytowel

"Most New Democrats did not get into politics with visions of electoral success top of the list. Social democrats believe we can build a better country."

NDP Robin MacLachlan

http://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2682222357

go 52 minutes into video.

Sean in Ottawa

terrytowel wrote:

"Most New Democrats did not get into politics with visions of electoral success top of the list. Social democrats believe we can build a better country."

NDP Robin MacLachlan

http://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2682222357

go 52 minutes into video.

Terry Towel -- explain why this post has anything to do with the thread at all. It is an attempt to derail rather than discuss. It has nothing to do with the thread and you have not even made an attempt at a connection. Further it would fit better in any number of other threads. It is not a drift either since you are not connecting it to anything here in the derail -- you are attempting to turn this thread into a carbon copy of a number of other threads -- many of which you started.

At this point you are using a spam tactic -- insert your brain fart into the most active thread regardless of context or content. Not cool.

Pages