Federal election thread -- August 4, 2015

722 posts / 0 new
Last post
terrytowel

Linda McQuaig just made a major gaffe that I think will hurt the NDP in this election.

CBC is already running with it

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/linda-mcquaig-says-oilsands-may-have-to-...

josh

Not extract tar sands without an environmental review? What's the problem with that?

mark_alfred

David Young

josh wrote:

Not extract tar sands without an environmental review? What's the problem with that?

Agreed!

Always remember, if someone from the NDP were to walk on water, the media would scream...'NEW DEMOCRAT CAN'T SWIM!!!'

 

Misfit Misfit's picture

OMG!!! Shut down the campaign!!! According to Terry Towell's CBC article, NDP candidate Linda McQuaig said ,"that there needs to be environmental standards on the oil sands." AND, according to the very same article in post #51, "Peter Lougheed himself has called for a moratorium on the oil sands." Then the CBC article gets even more scandalous...Peter Lougheed further suggests that instead of shipping raw bitumen down pipelines and exporting jobs, the better solution is to refine the oil in Canads and create those jobs domestically. Obviously, Linda McQuaig wants to raise environmental standards in the oil sands and boost the economy at the same time.

terrytowel

I'm surprised Althea Raj hasn't whipped up an article yet.

Judging from the comments on Twitter Linda's comments "oilsands may have to be left in the ground" seem to be quite positive and popular with people.

But start the countdown to Linda McQuaig comments starring in the next CPC ad directed to voters in battleground Saskatchewan and Manitoba.

quizzical

omfg TT...you're proof of the extremes here along with NDPP. ndpp tries to sell us the useless rhetoric of the NDP being no different. then you come along and call Linda McQuaig's being different a gaffe and up for attack ads.

 

NorthReport

+

NorthReport
NorthReport

Why hasn't City TV broadcast the number of viewers for the Aug 6th debate by now? I guess they were so low they are embarassed to publicize them eh! Frown

NDPP

Canada's NDP Praises 'Change' and Continued Austerity

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/08/07/ndpc-a07.html

"Big business has got the message. A Bloomberg article published this week observed that the NDP had moved sharply right under Mulcair's leadership to as to prepare for government.

Senior NDP MP, Charlie Angus made the revealing remark, 'The party used to think its purpose was to be the conscience of the nation rather than to win. Now our base understands it's about forming government..."

NorthReport

May and Mulcair outshine Harper – as it happened

  • Prime Minister Stephen Harper hit for stewardship of economy
  • NDP leader Tom Mulcair: “Sorry. Mr Harper’s plan clearly isn’t working”
  • Green Party leader Elizabeth May impresses as Liberal’s Justin Trudeau stumbles

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2015/aug/06/canada-first-party-lea...

quizzical

NDPP wrote:

Senior NDP MP, Charlie Angus made the revealing remark, 'The party used to think its purpose was to be the conscience of the nation rather than to win. Now our base understands it's about forming government..."

thank gawd, the "base" grew up to the reality smugness means squat

jerrym

According to CBC News, 1.4 million watched the Macleans debate compared to the more than 10 milion who watched the last English consortium debate. 

Brachina

 Wow, this debate will likely have only a minor effect at 1.4 million viewers, although people can still view it, so that number may rise.

mark_alfred

Christina Hopkins Crichton wrote:
Separatism is to Trudeau what terrorism is to Harper: a scare tactic meant to inflame people.

Sean in Ottawa

Brachina wrote:

 Wow, this debate will likely have only a minor effect at 1.4 million viewers, although people can still view it, so that number may rise.

Not so.

But the effect will be different.

The debate is widely reported and will be through the campaign. The media that is very friendly to the Conservatives, somewhat friendly to the Liberals and largely hostile to the NDP will get to interpret the debate to the rest of us.

This is exactly what was intended -- Not that the debate would have no effect but that it would be filtered through media friendly to the establishment.

And of course you have not seen the ads that will come from the selective clips. Those are yet to come.

terrytowel

Because of Linda McQuaig oil in the ground comment. Conservatives are spreading the word on Twitter that the NDP wants to cut 100,000 jobs in Alberta.

On a separate note

Michelle Rempel of the Conservatives was running with that narrative ("oil in the ground comment") while campaiging yesterday

"It came up at the doors three times without me even saying anything about it: 'I saw you on TV last night. Thank you for standing up for the energy industry, what that woman said is very concerning,' so people are very concerned and rightly so about economic stability," Rempel said in an interview.

The Liberals chimed in with their own news release, accusing the New Democrats of saying different things to different people on key issues.

The New Democrats later released a statement from their natural resources critic saying McQuaig was not referring to party policy, but to an international report that said oilsands production might have to be curtailed to meet climate change targets.

"The NDP believes that developing our natural resources and lowering our green house gas emissions can go hand in hand," said Malcolm Allen in an emailed statement.

Alberta's Opposition Leader Brian Jean tried to make it a provincial issue, saying on Saturday that McQuaig's comments were "deeply concerning." He called on New Democrat Premier Rachel Notley to stand up to her federal cousins.

A spokeswoman for Notley said the provincial NDP government remains committed to the sustainability of the energy sector.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/duceppe-wont-predict-many-seats-win-fall-elect...

josh

Yes, you're right. Without McQuaig's comment the Conservatives would be prohibited from attacking the NDP for its "job-killing" environmental policies.

Jacob Two-Two

Goodness knows they would never make that sort of thing up, after all. That's a claim they would only make with hard evidence.

terrytowel

Stephen Harper on the campaign trail this AM told reporters he wanted to address something that had come up over the weekend and that he thought was “pretty important and shouldn’t be ignored.”

A “star” NDP candidate, someone NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair had pledged would be part of his cabinet, said that the way to deal with the crisis in the oil industry is to leave the oil in the ground, Harper asserted.

“That is the NDP’s not-so-hidden agenda on development,” Harper said. “This is a party that has opposed every single one of these projects. This is a party where the leader actually went out of the country to lobby against Canadian projects.”

"The NDP is consistently against the development of our resources and our economy. The NDP would wreck this economy if they ever got in" and [this is] why they must never get into power in this country.”

Meanwhile Michelle Rempel is ramping up the rhetoric

"This isn't just some candidate," Rempel said of McQuaig. "This is a candidate that Mulcair is out on the record calling brilliant and articulate and saying that she'd be on the front bench with him."

Warren Kinsella just tweeted "Toronto #NDP candidate (Linda McQuaig) sinks every #NDP candidate in Alta. and Sask. Film at 11.

Finally Jenni Byrne of the Conservative War Room tweeted this flyer

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

The Tories would do this anyway. This whole is going to be like this. The Libs and the Tories are both going to be doing this. Tom will respond. Its 3 days in to the campaign, it isn't already over. And besides, in Edmonton, this isn't going to help the Tories anyway..

Northern-54

This is also a major concern in the Northwest Territories.  I have heard numerous people bring it up.  The Conservatives are already using it.  They are quoting McQuaig without any mention that she was quoting words from another source.  Mr. Mulcair needs to make some sort of announcement or every seat where resource extraction is a significant part of the economy will not vote NDP.  The message is that you (people who work in energy or resource based industries) will not be able to feed your family if the NDP is elected to government.

Northern-54

This is also a major concern in the Northwest Territories.  I have heard numerous people bring it up.  The Conservatives are already using it.  They are quoting McQuaig without any mention that she was quoting words from another source.  Mr. Mulcair needs to make some sort of announcement or every seat where resource extraction is a significant part of the economy will not vote NDP.  The message is that you (people who work in energy or resource based industries) will not be able to feed your family if the NDP is elected to government.

terrytowel

Northern-54 wrote:

 Mr. Mulcair needs to make some sort of announcement or every seat where resource extraction is a significant part of the economy will not vote NDP.  The message is that you (people who work in energy or resource based industries) will not be able to feed your family if the NDP is elected to government.

The Cons are floating the idea that the NDP will cut 100,000 jobs from the resource sector,

This happened in the Ontario election when the PC party said they were going to cut 100,000 jobs and they lost 9 seats in the process.

Stockholm

There is a huge difference between Hudak himself boasting about firing 100,000 people and one party accusing another of having a secret conspiracy to cut jobs. People are used to parties making hyperbolic claims against each other.

terrytowel

Stockholm wrote:

There is a huge difference between Hudak himself boasting about firing 100,000 people and one party accusing another of having a secret conspiracy to cut jobs. People are used to parties making hyperbolic claims against each other.

Yet it worked for The Martin Liberals to hold on to a minority against the Harper Conservatives in 2004 by fear-mongering.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Here is what Labour thinks of Le Dauphin, the LPC and the working people hating LPC shills that support the LPC, http://criticalperspectives.org/2015/08/09/trudeaus-15-minimum-wage-jabs...

. You clowns aren't fooling Canaidans at all. They know you LPC types stand only for the 1%, and will do ANYTHING your Coproatist, Wealthly elitists bosses you support, tell you to do. Peopl are much smarter then you give them credit for.

terrytowel

The NDP need to take Linda McQuaig comments much more seriously. Because the news media and the other parties are running with it.

Plus all the major networks are running with the story, as there is nothing else going on in the campaign today.

Both Harper and Trudeau have comments on Linda's remarks, but not a peep from Mulcair.

josh
Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

josh wrote:

I guess you need to read or listen closer.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/special/federal-election/some-of-the-ke...

I can't read this; what did it say?

quizzical

i'm glad Harper nd Trudeau are being all pissy pants together and right now. Canadians are going to get pretty  freakin sick of their antics by Oct.

quizzical

josh wrote:
I guess you need to read or listen closer.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/special/federal-election/some-of-the-ke...

yup tt does. good article

scott16

terrytowel wrote:

The NDP need to take Linda McQuaig comments much more seriously. Because the news media and the other parties are running with it.

Plus all the major networks are running with the story, as there is nothing else going on in the campaign today.

Both Harper and Trudeau have comments on Linda's remarks, but not a peep from Mulcair.

In by opinion it is bad journalism. She was quoting the UN and Rosemary Barton twisted words.

Rosemary Barton is the problem not Linda macquaig. She should be ashamed of what she did.

Jacob Two-Two

Par for the course, though. The attacks and distortions from the media have barely begun. As they watch the NDP lead grow rather than shrink over the coming months, they will freak the hell out and start throwing mud like nobody's business.

David Young

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

Par for the course, though. The attacks and distortions from the media have barely begun. As they watch the NDP lead grow rather than shrink over the coming months, they will freak the hell out and start throwing mud like nobody's business.

Exactly!

With the Mike Duffy trial resuming this week, the amount of distraction by the Conservatives will only increase!

 

terrytowel

scott16 wrote:

In by opinion it is bad journalism. She was quoting the UN and Rosemary Barton twisted words.

Rosemary Barton is the problem not Linda macquaig. She should be ashamed of what she did.

Here is the interview in question, babblers should watch for themselves to make their own judgement on Linda McQuaig comments and Rosemary Barton conduct

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-mcquaig-oilsands-re...

Meanwhile launch of Thomas Mulcair book interrupted by environmentalists against Energy East

 

Stockholm

Well gee if environmentalists are protesting against Mulcair, claiming he is too pro-pipeline - i guess that negates the whole Lib/Con argument that the NDP secretely wants to shut down the entire oil patch.

Thank you protesters for giving Tom Mulcair the "sister Souljah moment" he needed!

Brachina

 Damned if you do, damned if you don't, welcome to politics. People hate on politics, but who in they're right mind would want to put up with the over the top bullshit on both sides.

Pondering

Brachina wrote:

 Damned if you do, damned if you don't, welcome to politics. People hate on politics, but who in they're right mind would want to put up with the over the top bullshit on both sides.

Only for a party that proclaims itself to be on the left.

terrytowel

On both political shows today, they devoted entire segments to Linda McQuaig's comments. On Power & Politics they had an MP panel discuss Linda's "oil in the ground" comment. John McCallum for the Liberals said it was outrageous for someone who is a potential Finance Minister to make comments like that.

While on Power Play they booked Sask Premier Brad Wall who had grave concerns over such an NDP Star candidate to muse about keeping oil in the ground.

Just now Harper used a rally in the GTA to raise doubts about the NDP ecomonic agenda when they have such a star candidate like Linda be so anti-resource development.

Mulcair and the NDP need to get a better handle of these comments, because this issue is NOT going away. Particularly in light of the Energy East protest today.

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Perhaps the NDP has decided to take a stand on the issue of sustainable development, even if some people distort their position. After all, is the normal assumption that 100% of the bitumen in the tar sands will be removed in the foreseeable future, down to the last liter? If not, then obviously some will be staying in the ground. The whole foofaraw is just idiotic, as are those who push it.

terrytowel

When you say...

"The normal assumption that 100% of the bitumen in the tar sands will be removed in the foreseeable future, down to the last liter?"

People eyes glaze over. As if you are talking in a foreign language. I'd bet at least 65% of Canada don't even know what Bitumen is.

The problem is "Oil in the ground" is alot easier for people to understand, than a long rebuttal on environmental assessment and climate change. The NDP need a simple catch-phrase on Climate Change to counteract the "Oil in the ground" comment.

quizzical

.....lmao trying to sell being both anti-resource development AND pro-pipe line....it's beyond idiotic.....

terrytowel

Possible that the "oil in the ground" comment will become this elections "100,000 job cut" the PC Party of Ontario advocated last year.

The Liberals took what Hudak said and ran with it. And it looks like the Cons are taking Linda's remarks and running with it as well.

scott16

terrytowel wrote:

Possible that the "oil in the ground" comment will become this elections "100,000 job cut" the PC Party of Ontario advocated last year.

The Liberals took what Hudak said and ran with it. And it looks like the Cons are taking Linda's remarks and running with it as well.

No I think this will be forgotten after Wednesday. It will be forgotten after Nigel Wright's testimony at the Duffy Trial.

josh

A great opportunity for the NDP to take a strong environmental stand. The Conservatives are obviously supporting 100% extraction. I think it's fair to say that a majority would not support that. What resource/fossil fuel has ever been required to be 100% extracted? And whatever votes the NDP loses in Alberta they will be able to take from the Greens in BC, where their additional seat potential is much higher. A strong environmental stand is a winner nationally. The question is whether the NDP is bold enough, and smart enough, to take advantage of this opportunity.

josh

terrytowel wrote:

Possible that the "oil in the ground" comment will become this elections "100,000 job cut" the PC Party of Ontario advocated last year.

The Liberals took what Hudak said and ran with it. And it looks like the Cons are taking Linda's remarks and running with it as well.

Again with this false analogy? If the election were restricted to Alberta, you could be right. But it's not. And it's there that your comparison falls apart.

quizzical

i agree josh. even the AB pipeliners and riggers  i know were to the point of believing it was madness to continue the way it was going. and a great deal had strong environmental concerns. 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

terrytowel wrote:

When you say...

"The normal assumption that 100% of the bitumen in the tar sands will be removed in the foreseeable future, down to the last liter?"

People eyes glaze over. As if you are talking in a foreign language. I'd bet at least 65% of Canada don't even know what Bitumen is.

I have much more faith in normal people's intelligence than you do, tt.

Pages