Why is Thomas Mulcair trying to undermine Jagmeet Singh?

135 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
Why is Thomas Mulcair trying to undermine Jagmeet Singh?

Quote:
“I am surprised that Tom Mulcair is engaging in this behaviour,” said MP Charlie Angus in an email. “He was always a classy politician and when he was leader he expected loyalty from his caucus. Attempting to seed doubt on our leader Jagmeet Singh ‎hurts the party and isn’t helpful to our cause.”

 

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/recent-comments-by-thomas-mulcair-has-some-wondering-if-he-is-attempting-to-undermine-jagmeet-singh

Sean in Ottawa

Attempt at proving that he is an unbiased political commentator willing to trash all parties -- including the NDP?

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Because of Singh leads the NDP to even a respectable showing, it proves Mulcair was not indispensable? 

wage zombie

He is petty.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Attempt at proving that he is an unbiased political commentator willing to trash all parties -- including the NDP?

Would you have more respect for him as a media commentator if he criticized every party except the NDP?

NorthReport

What a sad spectacle Mulcair is making of himself

pietro_bcc

Mulcair is the one former politician, current political commentator that criticizes everyone including his own side. He even criticizes the Quebec provincial Liberals, but no one seems to notice that. Shame on him for doing the job he's being paid for.

He's actually a lot more competant as a political commentator than as a campaigner.

NorthReport
alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Thomas Mulcair is a Quebec liberal dyed in the wool. It's the reason why he ran his party into the ground. Mulcair is as progressive as Maggie Thatcher and his platform for the NDP was a collossal failure. Now the NDP can hardly keep their heads up 19 or 20%.

He's now a political commentator. His job is to be unbiased. Sadly most in that business don't play by that rule. If he was somewhat biased in favour of the NDP, it would be unsurprising. He isn't.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

The problem is the job not how he does it. If he was an honorable person he would not have taken a job that would but him in the position of publicly dissing the party he formally lead. If this was in the lead up to the 2023 election I would have no problem but during this election cycle it is a crass and gag inducing spectacle.

JeffWells

All I know is I have more respect for Mulcair as a pundit than I do for the NDP as an institution. Also, I believe he has a more promising future.

NorthReport

Krop tells it like it is but it is par for the course with Canada’s close little media group

 Their go to guys have always been the political losers like Rae, Dosanjh and now Mulcair a guy who engineered the biggest loss in NDP history 

 

Unionist

From the OP:

Quote:

“I have no experience with Tom in which he had any kind of ill will or feeling toward Jagmeet or the party,” Cullen said.

I haven't followed Tom Mulcair's recent comments, so please let me know if he has said anything about Jagmeet Singh or the NDP which is false?

 

Mighty Middle

Unionist wrote:

I haven't followed Tom Mulcair's recent comments, so please let me know if he has said anything about Jagmeet Singh or the NDP which is false?

It seems people want Mulcair to defend Jagmeet on National TV and not try to drag him down.

 

WWWTT

Very odd for Mulcair to take a job as political pundit with the corporate media? Usually, someone of his experience could easily get a much better paying job in the private sector, if he really wanted to work and needs the coin. 

NorthReport

It’s his ego. His ego cost the NDP the election in 2015 and his ego problems have continued ever since

Unionist

I'll try again. Looking for some actual hard facts - not speculation or psychoanalysis:

Has Mulcair said anything about Jagmeet Singh or the NDP which is false?

Is Nathan Cullen mistaken when he said, "I have no experience with Tom in which he had any kind of ill will or feeling toward Jagmeet or the party."

Mighty Middle

Unionist wrote:

I'll try again. Looking for some actual hard facts - not speculation or psychoanalysis:

Has Mulcair said anything about Jagmeet Singh or the NDP which is false?

Is Nathan Cullen mistaken when he said, "I have no experience with Tom in which he had any kind of ill will or feeling toward Jagmeet or the party."

It doesn't matter - NDPers expect Thomas Mulcair to put Jagmeet Singh FIRST. For instance I'm watching CTV Power Play right now. Robin Sears is a long time NDP commentator and now toils among the Bay Street Elite (surrounded by Liberals and Conservatives). No matter what the NDP does, Sears will always defend the NDP and Jagmeet Singh and bash Trudeau as incompetent.

The topic of Venezuela came up and Sears praised Jagmeet statement, saying it is a traditional Canadian posture that you don't support America using force against a Latin American country. Then he went and bashed Justin Trudeau for the Syrian Refugee that was arrested for terror charges, saying Trudeau needs to admit his big mistake on that.

What Sears said above (bashing the Liberals no matter what, while defending Jagmeet) is what people expect Mulcair to do.

cco
Unionist

Very cute, and sorry to be a pest, but please let me know what Mulcair said about Jagmeet Singh or the NDP that is erroneous. And what do you think of Nathan Cullen's statement as quoted earlier?

NorthReport

Typical loser whose ego won’t let him say uncle Unfortunately Mulcair has just turned into another bitter over the hill politician 

cco

Unionist wrote:

Very cute, and sorry to be a pest, but please let me know what Mulcair said about Jagmeet Singh or the NDP that is erroneous. And what do you think of Nathan Cullen's statement as quoted earlier?

I have no particular allegiance to Singh; I ranked him last on my leadership ballot. I had no particular allegiance to Mulcair, either, and in fact voted for a new leadership election in Edmonton. I still tried to get the NDP elected in 2015. And I find the "well, he didn't say anything false" argument a bit tiresome. Would we be doing better under another leader? Probably. I certainly don't buy into the old-school Leninist argument that we all need to shut up and get behind the leader now that the internal contest has been settled. But Mulcair's a smart politician. He knows what he's doing, and what he's doing is shit-disturbing to burnish his own legacy and set himself up as a respected kingmaker during the next leadership race, where he'll undoubtedly quietly endorse (not officially, mind you, just as a thoughtful commentator talking about things he's heard from the membership) a nice, "respectable" conservative who would've immediately called for regime change in Venezuela, so as to win the blessing of CBC panels. He'll decry Svend and Niki as people dragging the party into the dark days of the past when the NDP believed it could meaningfully change the country. Then he'll publish a book.

I'm sure Cullen's correct that Mulcair's never openly said he wants Singh to fail. Mulcair's smarter than that. He's polished and disciplined, and what he believes in his heart is something only he knows. I don't have to be a Singh cheerleader to see Mulcair being a belle-mère. I also don't think giving pundits the power to eject Singh will lead to an Ashton-led return to courageous socialism. Once the editorial writers get to decide who leads the NDP, they're only going to intensify their attacks if we elect a left-winger. For proof, we need only look to British Labour.

wage zombie

Excellent post cco.

Aristotleded24

I also agree with what you said, cco. When you have Charlie Angus, of all people, defending Jagmeet Singh against someone, you know that other person's out of line.

Mighty Middle

NorthReport wrote:

Svend Robinson tears strip off pathetic former NDP leader Thomas Mulcair

https://www.hilltimes.com/2019/01/25/former-ndp-mp-hopes-return-politics-will-help-turn-turn-partys-fortunes-around/185425

Former NDP MP Lorne Nystrom fires back at Svend tweeting

Good for Mulcair for calling it as he sees it! He is hired by CTV as a political pundit, not to do a party spin. His comments on Singh reflect polling numbers. As for my old friend Svend Robinson, concentrate on door knocking.

https://twitter.com/LorneNystrom/status/1089007227439075328

NorthReport

Very well said cco

montgomery

Unionist wrote:

Very cute, and sorry to be a pest, but please let me know what Mulcair said about Jagmeet Singh or the NDP that is erroneous. And what do you think of Nathan Cullen's statement as quoted earlier?

I had the same question Unionist. Can someone provide some information on what Mulcair said about Jagmeet that was offensive or erroneous?

Unionist

montgomery wrote:

Unionist wrote:

Very cute, and sorry to be a pest, but please let me know what Mulcair said about Jagmeet Singh or the NDP that is erroneous. And what do you think of Nathan Cullen's statement as quoted earlier?

I had the same question Unionist. Can someone provide some information on what Mulcair said about Jagmeet that was offensive or erroneous?

I liked cco's thoughtful response at #22 above, though I don't entirely embrace his points. What really makes me puke, though, is attempts to defend Singh just because he's the Leader. I think cco shares my nausea on that point.

BTW I'm glad to see that Singh has modified his "let's do regime change in Venezuela now!" line slightly, after the outspoken statements by Niki, Svend, and Jessa McLean. It shows there's some slight hope. But cco, remember when Mulcair did likewise on the Gaza invasion, after a principled statement by the youth wing? And one of the (many) reasons I held my nose and voted for Mulcair in that 2007 Outremont byelection was his clear call to get Canadian troops out of Afghanistan. Layton was still suffering from the Dawn Black "let's not be so definitive" syndrome at the time. Plus Mulcair's promotion of the Sherbrooke Declaration.

Anyway, having no use for any of these political parties as such, I support movements, classes, individuals, based on their words and deeds. And in that respect, Mulcair trying to undermine Singh, or even the NDP as a whole? I don't care. Tell me "which side is he on" in real life, and I'll judge on that basis.

JKR

Why do so many of the NDP'S former leaders like Mulcair, Ujjal Dosanj, Bob Rae, Glen Clark, Mike Harcourt, Gary Doer, Lorne Calvert, Roy Romanow, Ed Schryer, and Hazen Argue, seem to turn out to be liberals at heart?

montgomery

Unionist wrote:

montgomery wrote:

Unionist wrote:

Very cute, and sorry to be a pest, but please let me know what Mulcair said about Jagmeet Singh or the NDP that is erroneous. And what do you think of Nathan Cullen's statement as quoted earlier?

I had the same question Unionist. Can someone provide some information on what Mulcair said about Jagmeet that was offensive or erroneous?

I liked cco's thoughtful response at #22 above, though I don't entirely embrace his points. What really makes me puke, though, is attempts to defend Singh just because he's the Leader. I think cco shares my nausea on that point.

BTW I'm glad to see that Singh has modified his "let's do regime change in Venezuela now!" line slightly, after the outspoken statements by Niki, Svend, and Jessa McLean. It shows there's some slight hope. But cco, remember when Mulcair did likewise on the Gaza invasion, after a principled statement by the youth wing? And one of the (many) reasons I held my nose and voted for Mulcair in that 2007 Outremont byelection was his clear call to get Canadian troops out of Afghanistan. Layton was still suffering from the Dawn Black "let's not be so definitive" syndrome at the time. Plus Mulcair's promotion of the Sherbrooke Declaration.

Anyway, having no use for any of these political parties as such, I support movements, classes, individuals, based on their words and deeds. And in that respect, Mulcair trying to undermine Singh, or even the NDP as a whole? I don't care. Tell me "which side is he on" in real life, and I'll judge on that basis.

Thanks for your opinion. I have to remain quiet on a lot of my opinions on this board because it's going to take quite a while to build up immunity from 'prosecution by banning'. But as I do, I'm amazed what some of the oldtimers can get away with! Poor Meg, she has my sympathies. 

I'm most likely to get into trouble by being too tolerant of political leaders, regardless of which party they are talking for. That's because I know they have to hold their tongue at times due to the political climate.

A recent example would be McCallam's display of balls on  the Huawei lady having a case to avoid deportation. McCallum would have been able to stick to it if he had got majority support from Canadians. He may even have got support from the Canadian media if they thought that was safe? But he didn't and he had to wimp out again. I don't hold it against him for keeping his powder dry.

Same goes for what Jagmeet has to say or doesn't have to say. So in general, that's how I tick and I can't say much more than that about it because I'm new here.

I guess the biggest problem with our politics in my opinion is that it's way too easy for Conservatives to speak their minds without getting the axe coming down on their necks. With the Huawei example, they can just demand she be sent to the US on the next train out and that will please most Canadians. 

That should tell you where I think the change has to start happening! 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Mulcair's new job requires him to be UNBIASED. He doesn't have to bash the Liberals 24/7. It's refreshing when New Democrats here feel betrayed because holy shit,Mulcair has an opinion. And that opinion goes for ALL parties.i

montgomery

alan smithee wrote:

Mulcair's new job requires him to be UNBIASED. He doesn't have to bash the Liberals 24/7. It's refreshing when New Democrats here feel betrayed because holy shit,Mulcair has an opinion. And that opinion goes for ALL parties.i

He should be able to bash the Conservatives on pretty well everything and be safe and correct. But not so much on the Liberals because sometimes they don't deserve bashing. 

But what would I know? I'm still trying to find out what Mulcair did that was so naughty?

JKR

Would Stephen Harper, Paul Martin, Jean Chrétien, or Brian Mulroney, take a job as a media pundit where they have to criticize the party that they were once the leader of? Does a former national party leader have an ethical obligation not to put themselves in a position that’s necessarily antagonistic to the party that made them a national leader?

Mighty Middle

Quote:
Would Stephen Harper, Paul Martin, Jean Chrétien, or Brian Mulroney, take a job as a media pundit where they have to criticize the party that they were once the leader of?

While not a party leader, there have been a handful of former Liberal MPs and former members of the Liberal party executive that regularly go to media platforms and social media to bash Justin Trudeau 24/7

 

cco

Unionist wrote:

I liked cco's thoughtful response at #22 above, though I don't entirely embrace his points. What really makes me puke, though, is attempts to defend Singh just because he's the Leader. I think cco shares my nausea on that point.

Of course. I don't see any contradiction between rejecting the leader cult and rejecting Mulcair's comments; in fact, my position on both comes from the same place: a deep concern with where power legitimately rests.

Being a party leader has to be a massive ego trip. Being a media figure, it seems to me, has much the same effect, except while a party leader's power comes from (and can be revoked by) a vote, a pundit's power rests solely in the ability to speak a new truth into existence. A strong parallel can be drawn, in my mind, to Trump and Trudeau deciding they can oust Maduro (or Assad, for that matter) just by declaring he's no longer legitimate.

Unionist wrote:

BTW I'm glad to see that Singh has modified his "let's do regime change in Venezuela now!" line slightly, after the outspoken statements by Niki, Svend, and Jessa McLean. It shows there's some slight hope. But cco, remember when Mulcair did likewise on the Gaza invasion, after a principled statement by the youth wing?

I do. I'm much happier to see a politician change his mind based on the feelings of the membership than to do a 180 (or resign) based on the opinions of the pundits who've arrogated to themselves the power to decide the future of the party – even if one of those pundits used to be the leader. If (big if) Singh demonstrates the ability to listen to members that Mulcair never did, instead of describing them as an obstacle, I'll give him a lot of credit.

montgomery

JKR wrote:

Would Stephen Harper, Paul Martin, Jean Chrétien, or Brian Mulroney, take a job as a media pundit where they have to criticize the party that they were once the leader of? Does a former national party leader have an ethical obligation not to put themselves in a position that’s necessarily antagonistic to the party that made them a national leader?

I think that both Martin and Chretien could and would. They would both differ on some of the finer points on Justin's performance. Especially Chretien because he's more left and antiwar.

Harper and Mulroney? Extreme right fascists are just that, so likely not. 

And I'm still trying to find out if Mulcair trashed Jagmeet? The popular opinion seems to be divided so far.

bekayne

montgomery wrote:

 

Harper and Mulroney? Extreme right fascists are just that, so likely not. 

Maybe just a tad over the top.

bekayne

JKR wrote:

Would Stephen Harper, Paul Martin, Jean Chrétien, or Brian Mulroney, take a job as a media pundit where they have to criticize the party that they were once the leader of? Does a former national party leader have an ethical obligation not to put themselves in a position that’s necessarily antagonistic to the party that made them a national leader?

Joe Clark and Kim Campbell haven't pulled any punches regarding the Conservative Party (then again, maybe not technically the same party.)

montgomery

bekayne wrote:

montgomery wrote:

 

Harper and Mulroney? Extreme right fascists are just that, so likely not. 

Maybe just a tad over the top.

Nope! As evil as the US in my opinion.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Mighty Middle wrote:

Quote:
Would Stephen Harper, Paul Martin, Jean Chrétien, or Brian Mulroney, take a job as a media pundit where they have to criticize the party that they were once the leader of?

While not a party leader, there have been a handful of former Liberal MPs and former members of the Liberal party executive that regularly go to media platforms and social media to bash Justin Trudeau 24/7

 

It doesn't look like they are doing well. Pundits excluding right wing commentators do not bash Trudeau 24/7. Former New Democrats  don't even do that.

Mighty Middle

alan smithee wrote:

It doesn't look like they are doing well. Pundits excluding right wing commentators do not bash Trudeau 24/7. Former New Democrats  don't even do that.

Stephen LeDrew (former President of the Liberal Party) is now a regular columnist with the National Post - and every single one of his columns is nothing but a regular bash of Justin Trudeau and his policies.

Do you want more examples?

Sean in Ottawa

Mighty Middle wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

It doesn't look like they are doing well. Pundits excluding right wing commentators do not bash Trudeau 24/7. Former New Democrats  don't even do that.

Stephen LeDrew (former President of the Liberal Party) is now a regular columnist with the National Post - and every single one of his columns is nothing but a regular bash of Justin Trudeau and his policies.

Do you want more examples?

Are you endorsing the tactic? I am not sure what your point is in this context. Sure it happens with ex-politicians who are angry. It is not often and people in those parties never like it. Your point?

Mighty Middle

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Are you endorsing the tactic? I am not sure what your point is in this context. Sure it happens with ex-politicians who are angry. It is not often and people in those parties never like it. Your point?

I'm not endorsing that tactic. I'm just saying there are former members  of the Liberal Party that despise Justin Trudeau and his policies. When Alan Smithee disputed that, I gave him an example and I can come up with even more examples of former Liberals who have a visceral hate for Justin Trudeau. and have taken to both  the airwaves and social media to bash Trudeau 24/7

Sean in Ottawa

Mighty Middle wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Are you endorsing the tactic? I am not sure what your point is in this context. Sure it happens with ex-politicians who are angry. It is not often and people in those parties never like it. Your point?

I'm not endorsing that tactic. I'm just saying there are former members  of the Liberal Party that despise Justin Trudeau and his policies. When Alan Smithee disputed that, I gave him an example and I can come up with even more examples of former Liberals who have a visceral hate for Justin Trudeau. and have taken to both  the airwaves and social media to bash Trudeau 24/7

Could you please provide more examples? -- I am wondering if you have any that were elected and left politics recently. Le Drew was never an MP and left the party role some 16 years ago.

What Mulcair is doing seems to be different -- he is not just a former member, or someone with a position in the party. He is a former elected MP and leader. He is doing this while his seat has not even been filled yet.

I have no examples of this that I can find.

Mighty Middle

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Could you please provide more examples? -- I am wondering if you have any that were elected and left politics recently. Le Drew was never an MP and left the party role some 16 years ago.

Former MP Dan McTeague - He says Justin Trudeau has an unserious mind and is given to "selfies, sock and sobbing" and he bashes Trudeau on a regular basis on social media and on talk radio

montgomery

Truceau gets bashed by the Liberals alright, but it would appear that it's because he's too left of the Liberals nowadays but too right of the Liberals of Chretian's time. 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Mighty Middle wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

It doesn't look like they are doing well. Pundits excluding right wing commentators do not bash Trudeau 24/7. Former New Democrats  don't even do that.

Stephen LeDrew (former President of the Liberal Party) is now a regular columnist with the National Post - and every single one of his columns is nothing but a regular bash of Justin Trudeau and his policies.

Do you want more examples?

Stephen LeDrew has not been an MP since 2003. I'm assuming he hates Trudeau because he's to the left of Chrétien.

He hasn't been relavent for 16 years. Who gives a fuck what LeDrew says?

BTW, he writes for ythe National Post. Not exactly a Trudeau friendly paper.
So please enlighten me of all these Liberals trashing Trudeau. My guess is they have nothing to do with the party anymore and been out of politics for years So as I asked,who gives a fuck besides people like you?

 

Mighty Middle

alan smithee wrote:

Stephen LeDrew has not been an MP since 2003. I'm assuming he hates Trudeau because he's to the left of Chrétien.

He has never been an MP - he was the former President of the Liberal Party

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Mighty Middle wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

Stephen LeDrew has not been an MP since 2003. I'm assuming he hates Trudeau because he's to the left of Chrétien.

He has never been an MP - he was the former President of the Liberal Party

Whatever. The point is he has been out of politics and out of the Liberal Party since 2003. A coward who jumped ship as Harper's Conservatives were gaining in popularity and the Liberals had no answers. I'm sure people remember when during the campaign in 2005, Martin decided to roll through (sorry I don't remeber the town) in a moving sleigh of some sort and a wheel went flat. It was symbolic of his campaign . But I digress

LeDrew is a Paul Martin/Jean Chrétien loyalist. He was President of the party before they veered to the left. He doesn't like the fact that the party is no longer at the centre right. He's just a miserable bastard.

Sean in Ottawa

Mighty Middle wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Could you please provide more examples? -- I am wondering if you have any that were elected and left politics recently. Le Drew was never an MP and left the party role some 16 years ago.

Former MP Dan McTeague - He says Justin Trudeau has an unserious mind and is given to "selfies, sock and sobbing" and he bashes Trudeau on a regular basis on social media and on talk radio

Remember Mulcair was leader and his seat is still warm with no replacement yet elected.

Sean in Ottawa

alan smithee wrote:

Mighty Middle wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

Stephen LeDrew has not been an MP since 2003. I'm assuming he hates Trudeau because he's to the left of Chrétien.

He has never been an MP - he was the former President of the Liberal Party

Whatever. The point is he has been out of politics and out of the Liberal Party since 2003. A coward who jumped ship as Harper's Conservatives were gaining in popularity and the Liberals had no answers. I'm sure people remember when during the campaign in 2005, Martin decided to roll through (sorry I don't remeber the town) in a moving sleigh of some sort and a wheel went flat. It was symbolic of his campaign . But I digress

LeDrew is a Paul Martin/Jean Chrétien loyalist. He was President of the party before they veered to the left. He doesn't like the fact that the party is no longer at the centre right. He's just a miserable bastard.

I thought he was there until 2011 but turns out he was there till 2015. Still he was not leader and criticizing Trudeau is not his only vocation either.

Pages