Federal Liberal Candidates

619 posts / 0 new
Last post
Debater

Well, as explained above, all that's likely to happen is that the former lefty Libs that went to Layton and have come back to Trudeau would go to Mulcair.

The righty Libs would then go back to Harper and he would probably win again.

It still wouldn't likely result in a Mulcair/NDP win.

bekayne

terrytowel wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

How do you think Ujjal became Premier of BC?

Wasn't it because Glen Clark resigned, and there was no one else to take his place but Ujjal?

Corky Evans wanted it too

Jacob Two-Two

No, as I explained, the lefty Libs who stayed with the party didn't expect it to sink so low. Like most people they didn't think it was possible. Now they know it is possible. If right wing Liberals start abandoning the party, then lefty Liberals will see the writing on the wall and realize that if they don't switch to the NDP they will hand Harper another majority like they did last time. They couldn't see it coming before and now they can.

janfromthebruce

Jacob Two-Two wrote:
But that collapse was a surprise. If the same thing starts happening again, people will see it beforehand, leaving the so-called "red" Liberals a choice. They can switch to the NDP to head Harper off at the pass, or stick with the Libs and give Harper another majority. Nobody thought that the Libs could possibly fall so low last time, but now they know what's possible. If it looks like Justin can't deliver the goods, they'll know what to do to stop Harper. Switch to the NDP. Polls show clearly that this is a valid choice for them now where it wasn't before.

Referring to the same pundit's guide post, the Liberals lost 17 seats to the NDP, general election over general election. Hence by definition no "vote-splitting" occurred. Outright vote-switching, more like.

Also of interest is that Liberals did not win any seats from Conservatives but NDP did so, so the idea that only Liberals can take seats from Conservatives, actually shows NDP can but Liberals can't.

The Liberals have been losing vote share for the past 10 years, hence why they have so few seats out west and starting in northern Ontario. Liberals have become holed up in the Toronto area, a few seats in Quebec and in the east.

Considering that most races going out west are straight up NDP and Con races, I unlike Sean don't see Liberals getting a majority or minority. Those are a lot of seats to try to get  starting with 33 seats.

 

janfromthebruce

Also looking at the stats page from pundit's guide, it reveals that in some situations it was liberals who "split" the vote and allowed the con to win when it should have gone to the NDP. Brampton comes to mind. Of course, those Liberal strategic voting sites were calling it wrong and one could say contributed to a Con win.

But I do remember going into the 2011 where Hebert was writing about how she was unsure if the Layton NDP would even end up with a enough seats to be recognized as a party in the House. Funny how that turned out for them.

The difference this time is that the NDP has been the official opposition with a leader who is considered the best ever and regularly takes on Harper and a young inexperienced Liberal leader who rarely shows up in the House and thus hasn't developed any debating skills necessary for the thrust and jab of a campaign.

A leader who has a back bencher never put grit to the helm and made a mark of himself. His weakness is glaring and it's that achiles heel that will show itself as we grind towards the election and finally the campaign trail.

Sean in Ottawa

I think the strategic voting sites have been discredited. There are very few people so involved as to be able to create such a site who would not also have a political preference and these sites are meant to forward those preferences.

 

sherpa-finn

This is awkward ...

Brawl mars Brampton Liberal nomination

Business lawyer Raj Grewal won the federal Liberal nomination for the riding of Brampton East Sunday night after a vote that party officials say was marred by a brawl.  An official of the local Liberal riding association said at least 750 people were denied participation in the nomination meeting, in which 2,910 voted....

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/09/21/brawl_mars_brampton_liberal_nomination.html

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

sherpa-finn wrote:

This is awkward ...

Brawl mars Brampton Liberal nomination

Business lawyer Raj Grewal won the federal Liberal nomination for the riding of Brampton East Sunday night after a vote that party officials say was marred by a brawl.  An official of the local Liberal riding association said at least 750 people were denied participation in the nomination meeting, in which 2,910 voted....

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/09/21/brawl_mars_brampton_liberal_nomination.html

These Libs obviously beleive that Trudeau is their meal-ticket to a lifetime pension. Its almost like they were fighting over the winning lottery ticket.

Pondering

sherpa-finn wrote:

This is awkward ...

Brawl mars Brampton Liberal nomination

Business lawyer Raj Grewal won the federal Liberal nomination for the riding of Brampton East Sunday night after a vote that party officials say was marred by a brawl.  An official of the local Liberal riding association said at least 750 people were denied participation in the nomination meeting, in which 2,910 voted....

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/09/21/brawl_mars_brampton_liberal_nomination.html

Should be easy enough to straighten this one out. Either they registered to vote which means at least some of them must have some sort of proof or they didn't register and they interpreted the invitation to mean that they were.

Sean in Ottawa

Actually it looks like a lot of people invested a lot of effort only to be unable to vote. Sad.

I wonder if this could have been caused by a loss of a chunk of membership records leaving people shut out. If that is the case then the party should fix this by holding a new vote. Otherwise it looks like one very big explanation would be owed.

Let's follow this one up in a few days and see if there has been an investigation into how so many people could lose their voting rights and what they intend to do about it. This story should not be over.

It goes beyond the Liberal party -- when people get involved in politics like this you don't want them feeling that there is no point -- far too much apathy already.

jjuares

So if one side wins the brawl while the other side gets the most votes, who gets the nomination? Does anyone know what the Liberal Party's constitution says on this matter?

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Actually it looks like a lot of people invested a lot of effort only to be unable to vote. Sad.

I wonder if this could have been caused by a loss of a chunk of membership records leaving people shut out. If that is the case then the party should fix this by holding a new vote. Otherwise it looks like one very big explanation would be owed.

Let's follow this one up in a few days and see if there has been an investigation into how so many people could lose their voting rights and what they intend to do about it. This story should not be over.

It goes beyond the Liberal party -- when people get involved in politics like this you don't want them feeling that there is no point -- far too much apathy already.

It seems to me that Trudeau needs to step up here and call for another vote. What you are seeing in this is people think he will be PM, and that they can ride the Liberal Gravy Train to power, prestige, and pension. That is ALL, this is about. Somebody wants to be a MP and get that nice, big, fat MP's pension. Prestige, power, and money, that is all this is to Liberals. Nothing, else!

Debater

Seamus O'Regan nominated as Liberal candidate tonight for St. John's South-Mount Pearl

https://twitter.com/liberal_party

Debater

Here's a link that shows all the Liberal candidates for each riding.  100 candidates have now been nominated.

As Katie Telford said the other day, a larger percentage of women have been nominated under Trudeau than the party had under Ignatieff.  Good start.

http://www.liberal.ca/teamtrudeau/

Webgear

David MacLeod has been select as the Liberal candidate for Central Nova. 

Sean in Ottawa

Debater wrote:

Here's a link that shows all the Liberal candidates for each riding.  100 candidates have now been nominated.

As Katie Telford said the other day, a larger percentage of women have been nominated under Trudeau than the party had under Ignatieff.  Good start.

http://www.liberal.ca/teamtrudeau/

Two things I can see: 1/3 women and more people of colour than in the past. Both worth noting. I observed that the NDP -- so far --  are not doing as well in either regard. Obviously we will see what the final candidates are. As well there are always questions about diversity in ridings where the chances of winning are greater.

Debater

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Debater wrote:

Here's a link that shows all the Liberal candidates for each riding.  100 candidates have now been nominated.

As Katie Telford said the other day, a larger percentage of women have been nominated under Trudeau than the party had under Ignatieff.  Good start.

http://www.liberal.ca/teamtrudeau/

Two things I can see: 1/3 women and more people of colour than in the past. Both worth noting. I observed that the NDP -- so far --  are not doing as well in either regard. Obviously we will see what the final candidates are. As well there are always questions about diversity in ridings where the chances of winning are greater.

Yes, Sean, there are more women & minorities running for Trudeau's Liberals.

One of the things that was wrong with the Liberal Party over the previous decade was that most of the Liberal ridings were held by older white men, including in the GTA, where there should have been more diversity.  Until the 2011 Iggy wipeout, many of the GTA seats had been safe Liberal, and so many incumbents had refused to give them up to new Liberal blood.  So MP's like Roy Cullen, John Cannis, Joe Volpe, etc. were fixed in place year after year

One of the good things that came out of the Iggy wipeout in 2011 is that a lot of the old, dead wood was defeated, and now we are seeing more women & minorities running for the Liberals in ridings that were dominated by the old Liberal guys above.

Debater

Head of aboriginal women's group stepping down to seek Liberal nomination

Monday, September 29, 2014

OTTAWA - The president of the Native Women's Association of Canada will relinquish her post later this year as she seeks to run for the federal Liberals in the next election.

Michele Audette says the Liberals have given her the green light to seek the nomination in the Quebec riding of Manicouagan, which is now held by the NDP.

She says her decision to run for the Liberal nomination won't put her organization into any more of a conflict with the Conservatives that it is already in.

"The conflict was already there," Audette said Monday.

-----

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/head-of-aboriginal-womens-group-...

terrytowel

Andy Fillmore has announced he is ready to run under the Liberal banner take on Megan Leslie for the riding of Halifax in 2015!

http://www.andyfillmore.ca/

 

swallow swallow's picture

Debater wrote:

Michele Audette says the Liberals have given her the green light to seek the nomination in the Quebec riding of Manicouagan, which is now held by the NDP.

Held, in fact, by one of only two First Nations MPs from Quebec. 

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

Yes, let us run a diverse and multicultural array of candidates who will fight tirelessly against workers' rights and social reforms, and let us live in a marijuana-fuelled haze of delusion about what a great country this is.

I am happy that people with ancestors all over the world, and people with any kind of self-defined sexuality, have opportunity in this country. But bragging about the diversity of your candidates does nothing for the homeless people on the street, who are so because Chretien and Martin cancelled the public housing program.

Let's see how you are going to world a better place. Your emperor wears no clothes.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

So, less personalities and polls, and more meaningful policy which will make Canada a better place to live for the unfortunate. Otherwise, Liberals, you are no alternative to the Conservatives.

Debater

Thanks for the daily lecture on how Liberals are like the Conservatives, montrealer58.

I'm sure that compliment will motivate Liberals to move towards the NDP.

wage zombie

What would it take to move you to the NDP, Debater?

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

There are still no words about how the Liberals are going to improve conditions in our society, considering they did much during the Chretien/Martin regime to make them worse. People can talk cynically about voting shifts, but it is irrelevant to the problems that the poor in this society are facing every day.

When there is news about how the Liberals are going to transfer money from the 1% to the poorest 15% or 20%. Blustering about polls, personalities, and social liberalism is nothing but empty talk.

Liberals have the whole Canadian media to project their attempts to be the Red Conservative Party. They also have the support of lawyers, business executives, stock brokers, and other corrupt individuals in the Canadian natural resources industry. Go to your cocktail parties and drink your champagne. The richest people in Canada vote Liberal. They will give you all the support you want. We will not.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

wage zombie wrote:

What would it take to move you to the NDP, Debater?

A good chance of a patronage appointment.

sherpa-finn

Just for the record, I am prepared to shift from NDP to Lib in exchange for a Senate appointment.

C'mon - admit it, we all have our price... the rest is just haggling over details.

Debater

Actually, not everyone can be bought.  There are people who stick to their principles, rare as they may be.

For example, I give credit to Brent Rathgeber for being the one Conservative MP who's had the guts to walk out of the Conservative caucus this session and become an Independent.  He got sick of the people in the PMO controlling him, and he has even written a book about the lack of accountability in government and the centralization of power in the PMO.

Debater

Former Liberal MP Larry Bagnell was nominated in YUKON this weekend.

This was one the ridings that was very narrowly won by the Conservatives in 2011 (like Etobicoke Centre, Elmwood-Transcona) etc. and that was involved in the Council of Canadians lawsuit against the CPC in the illegal robocalls case before the Federal Court.

----

CBC North

https://www.facebook.com/CBCNorth/posts/10154860591180413

David Young

The same 'blue-Liberals' were responsible for Gerald Keddy getting re-elected in South Shore-St. Margaret's in 2011.

 

 

Pondering

David Young wrote:

The same 'blue-Liberals' were responsible for Gerald Keddy getting re-elected in South Shore-St. Margaret's in 2011.

Gerald Keddy has held the seat since 1997 when he deposed Derek Wells. It would be great if the NDP could take it in 2015.

"The western portion of the riding is heavily Conservative and Gerald Keddy lost votes from this side of the riding in the 2006 election when he was only one of a handful of Conservative MP's to support same-sex marriage. The Region of Queens Municipality is leaning NDP as they won this part of the riding in 2008 by a slim margin. The eastern portion of the riding is slightly leaning Conservative."

It's an interesting riding, 2011 vote results were:

Conservative 19,709 41.98  

New Democratic 16,939 36.08  

Liberal 8,431 17.96  

Green 1,875 3.99

But the riding has been Conservative since 1968 with the exception of Derek Wells from 93-97.

It seems as though the NDP is best placed to take this riding from the Conservatives, but Blue Liberals will never go NDP and the riding as a whole seems strongly Conservative. With the Liberals are sweeping the Atlantic provinces it's possible they could take it back. I'd love a current poll breakdown for that particular riding.

Debater

David Young wrote:

The same 'blue-Liberals' were responsible for Gerald Keddy getting re-elected in South Shore-St. Margaret's in 2011.

This is why the NDP can't win government federally.  The NDP can't win over blue liberals & red tories (except perhaps in a few Western ridings).

But in Ontario & the Maritimes, these voters alternate between the Conservatives & the Liberals

This is why the NDP can't win in 2015 and why only the Trudeau Liberals can beat Harper.  Swing conservatives find the NDP too left-wing.

Look at how angry some of them are this week with the Liberals for not supporting Harper's Iraq mission.  Andrew Coyne and others of his ilk are attacking Justin Trudeau this weekend as being too pacifist for not signing off on Harper's Iraq mission.  And he dislikes the NDP even more.  Coyne wrote a piece in the National Post yesterday denouncing the Opposition parties for not endorsing Harper's Iraq motion.

It's people like this we have to deal with in the next election.  They are the ones who often determine elections.  I get tired of having to kiss their butts, but there are a lot of them in Canada, unfortunately.

wage zombie

Breaking fucking news!  Andrew Coyne doesn't like the NDP.  Too bad we have to kiss his butt (for some unknown reason).

Debater

The reason is because it's voters like him that determine elections.  These are the voters that the Liberals have to get from the Conservatives in order to win back places in Ontario and elsewhere that went to Harper in 2011.

They are the Canadian equivalent of the 'Independents' in the U.S. that switch between Democrat & Repubilcan.  In Canada they switch between Liberal & Conservative.  They have to be coaxed into voting Liberal in order to get them away from the Conservatives.  Justin Trudeau has been attracting them away from Harper for the past 2 years.  That's why he's ahead of Harper in the polls.  Mulcair hasn't been wooing them successfully which is why the NDP is in 3rd, particularly in Ontario.

Voters like this are saying they are mad that the Liberals are opposing the Harper Iraq mission and that they may go back to Harper even though they aren't that happy with him.  So Justin took a bigger risk than Mulcair in opposing the Iraq mission.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

I'd be surprised if Justin had the slightest input into the Liberal decision not to support Harper's mideast adventure. The people in the Liberal hierarchy who are in charge of these things decided that the minimal risk move was to oppose Harper, and Justin followed their advice, as he always must, lacking any knowledge or judgment of his own, and being far too intellectually lazy to study up. The people who made the decision most likely decided that public support for this military escapade, although fairly strong now, will be gone by election day. To be fair, this is probably the same calculation that the NDP brain trust made, although I suspect Mulcair had much more input into the decision than Trudeau did on the Liberal side.

Debater

Michael, your post really isn't worth responding to in much detail.  Justin makes all final decisions in the Liberal Party.  If you're going to portray him as some mindless puppet who just does what he is told, there's not much point in discussing such a silly argument.  Justin has always been a bold risk taker who has the courage to do things that go against conventional wisdom or the wishes of the party elders.

Look at his decisions on expelling the Liberal Senators, banning the anti-abortion candidates & endorsing the legalization of marijuana.  No other Liberal leader had ever had the guts to do those things before.  Those were things he decided (after consultation with trusted advisers & taking into account the wishes of the Liberal membership that voted on these matters at prior conventions).  He wasn't told to do them.

The other interesting thing about this theory that Justin is a mindless zombie that takes orders from some man behind the curtain is that it conflicts with the other argument made against him -- that he's a dictatorial overlord that doesn't allow anyone any freedom to disagree with him and that he personally dictates what happens in every riding and with every candidate and issue.

Which is it?  Is Justin a puppet controlled by masters behind the curtain, or is he a power-mad dictator who doesn't allow anyone else any input?

I don't think NDP partisans like yourself have even noticed these 2 contradictory narratives you're trying to make about Justin.

Debater

Anyway, getting back on track to the actual topic of this thread . . . here is an updated CBC article on the YUKON Liberal nomination:

Former MP Larry Bagnell wins Liberal nomination in Yukon

Oct 05, 2014

Members of the Liberal Party in Yukon have elected their candidate for the next federal election. 

Larry Bagnell was declared the winner Saturday night, after the first ballot count. He garnered more than 50 per cent of the 1,432 votes cast.

It was a record-high turnout for the Yukon Liberal Party, which now has more than 2,100 members, the most since 1997.

The surge in membership has a lot to do with this campaign race, which set up Bagnell, a former Yukon MP, against Ben Sanders, Tamara Goepell and Gurdeep Pandher.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/former-mp-larry-bagnell-wins-liberal...

 

sherpa-finn

Some more weird shenanigans going on around Liberal nominations, - this time its Ruby "Champion of Immigrant Workers" Dhalla's on-again-off-again campaign to retake her old Brampton seat. 

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/former-liberal-mp-says-she-won-t-run-in-2015-one-day-after-promoting-political-comeback-1.2040446#ixzz3FJmy3cqH

She invited people to a public event to make an important announcement - but when everyone got there the Liberal Party logo and name had been blacked out on all the banners. And she announced she was not running. Too bizarre.

Sean in Ottawa

sherpa-finn wrote:

Some more weird shenanigans going on around Liberal nominations, - this time its Ruby "Champion of Immigrant Workers" Dhalla's on-again-off-again campaign to retake her old Brampton seat. 

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/former-liberal-mp-says-she-won-t-run-in-2015-one-day-after-promoting-political-comeback-1.2040446#ixzz3FJmy3cqH

She invited people to a public event to make an important announcement - but when everyone got there the Liberal Party logo and name had been blacked out on all the banners. And she announced she was not running. Too bizarre.

It is possible that the decision not to run and the blacking out of the party name may be seperate issues. I gather that she did not have the right to use the party name without having secured the nomination so that could explain the party name being blacked out. I would not read much into that.

The reason for not running may or may not be sourced in the Liberal party. I would want to avoid saying it is just on the strength of what we have heard. It sounds like something was said to a reporter in a way that could be understood both ways. There may be a political story there or there may not be.

I am not in a rush to celebrate a candidate bowing out of the race who is a woman of colour. We don't have enough of them to celebrate losing any no matter what party it is.

Debater

Ruby Dhalla lost in 2011 by quite a large margin, so I don't know if she was planning to run again.

And she wouldn't be the first person to tease people into thinking she was running only to announce she wasn't.

And sometimes you have politicians who do the opposite -- hint that they might be retiring and then end up announcing they are running again.

Remember Peter Stoffer's stunt last month?

sherpa-finn

Debater wrote: Remember Peter Stoffer's stunt last month?

Yup. He sent out a press release saying he had an announcement, then stood beside his Party Leader in the corridor at the House of Commons and announced that he would be re-offering in the upcoming election.  Everyone called him a big kidder, and he went back to his office, secure in his perennial status as Best Parliamentarian / Best Liked MP and the creator of the multi-partisan “All-Party Party,” an annual bash to bring parliamentarians together and raise money for charity. 

For her part, Ms Dhalla sent out a glossy invite to all and sundry inviting them to head out to a Toronto Convention Centre, where a ballroom was festooned with huge Ruby Dhalla / Liberal Party banners. For reasons unclear, the Liberal Party logos were blacked out before everyone arrived and Ms Dhalla announced that she would not in fact be running. When asked whether the Liberal Party had stepped in at the last minute, Dhalla replied in an email to CTV’s Richard Madan: “Yes to convince me not to do it!” No doubt, everyone walked away wondering what that the hell was all about. (And probably thinking "Makes you wonder about those Filipina domestic workers who had filed a complaint against her when she was an MP.... Or that issue with her parliamentary expenses.")

So, yeah, Debater two pretty much identical individuals and contexts.  (Snorts with derision.)

 

Debater

CTV Power Play

Liberals didn't block a bid for her to run, says @DhallaRuby. She says she never filed any nomination papers. #cdnpoli

https://twitter.com/CTV_PowerPlay/status/519241381345099776

Robo

Debater wrote:

This is why the NDP can't win government federally.  The NDP can't win over blue liberals & red tories (except perhaps in a few Western ridings).

But in Ontario & the Maritimes, these voters alternate between the Conservatives & the Liberals

This is why the NDP can't win in 2015 and why only the Trudeau Liberals can beat Harper.  ...

Using this rationale, it was impossible for the NDP to win provincially in Nova Scotia in 2009, in Ontario in 1990, or in Manitoba in 1969.  If it has not happened before, it cannot happen in the future.  This is a message I expect to hear from Liberals in the next federal campaign --"Only Justin can win, because he's a Liberal" -- don't scratch too far beneath that veneer though.

Let's look at this another way: if this rationale is true, how was it possible for the NDP to elect over 100 New Democrats in the 2011 election?  New voters had to be won over.  (Just to cut this one off before it starts, please do not claim this was based solely on Quebec -- in TROC in 2011, more New Democrat MPs were elected than Liberals.)

As one example, the NDP never held any federal seat in the Niagara Region.  The long term decline of the Liberals saw their incumbent in Welland Riding fall to third in the 2008 campaign, and redcued that same incumbent to 14% in the 2011 campaign.  I don't claim that this is what will necessaarily happen, but neither would I claim this was an impossibility.

Again, this is the narrative that Debater wants to promote, so all facts will be squeezed through that sieve.  One thing that elections in the past decade have taught me is that there is no certainty upon which to rely.  There are predictions and guesses to be made, but anyone who makes absolute statements about the next federal election is living in a fantasy world.   

 

Pondering

Robo wrote:

Debater wrote:

This is why the NDP can't win government federally.  The NDP can't win over blue liberals & red tories (except perhaps in a few Western ridings).

But in Ontario & the Maritimes, these voters alternate between the Conservatives & the Liberals

This is why the NDP can't win in 2015 and why only the Trudeau Liberals can beat Harper.  ...

Using this rationale, it was impossible for the NDP to win provincially in Nova Scotia in 2009, in Ontario in 1990, or in Manitoba in 1969.  If it has not happened before, it cannot happen in the future.  This is a message I expect to hear from Liberals in the next federal campaign --"Only Justin can win, because he's a Liberal" -- don't scratch too far beneath that veneer though.

Let's look at this another way: if this rationale is true, how was it possible for the NDP to elect over 100 New Democrats in the 2011 election?  New voters had to be won over.  (Just to cut this one off before it starts, please do not claim this was based solely on Quebec -- in TROC in 2011, more New Democrat MPs were elected than Liberals.)

As one example, the NDP never held any federal seat in the Niagara Region.  The long term decline of the Liberals saw their incumbent in Welland Riding fall to third in the 2008 campaign, and redcued that same incumbent to 14% in the 2011 campaign.  I don't claim that this is what will necessaarily happen, but neither would I claim this was an impossibility.

Again, this is the narrative that Debater wants to promote, so all facts will be squeezed through that sieve.  One thing that elections in the past decade have taught me is that there is no certainty upon which to rely.  There are predictions and guesses to be made, but anyone who makes absolute statements about the next federal election is living in a fantasy world.

He isn't saying that the NDP can't gain new voters. He is saying that blue Liberals will never go NDP and they shifted to the Conservatives when they thought the NDP might actually win.

While the NDP does have support cross Canada the majority of it is in Quebec coming from former Bloc voters who are nationalistic so require Mulcair to keep a very delicate balance to avoid offending the ROC.

Sometimes voters prefer opposing governments provincially and federally but in my opinion, currently, there is a strong desire for federal and provincial governments to work together. Provincial Liberal wins are going to add to Trudeau's momentum.

Robo

Pondering wrote:

He isn't saying that the NDP can't gain new voters. He is saying that blue Liberals will never go NDP and they shifted to the Conservatives when they thought the NDP might actually win.

While the NDP does have support cross Canada the majority of it is in Quebec coming from former Bloc voters who are nationalistic so require Mulcair to keep a very delicate balance to avoid offending the ROC. ...

Again, I say that the facts are listed to be forced through the sieve.  "Blue Liberals will only vote Conservative, therefore New Democrats should give up."  There is no objective basis to so predict -- just to confirm this, neither an Andrew Coyne column nor citing an earlier quote from Debater is objective, IMHO.  Yet the statements made by Debater and Pondering are unequivocal -- only the Liberal Party can beat the Conservative Party. 

And with respect to Quebec, Pondering, I doubt that you are familiar with Quebec if you make the statement above.  There have been Liberal operatives claiming that Mulcair is a sovereignist sympathiser since shortly after Mulcair was elected  NDP Leader; it seems to have wheels in TROC, but goes absolutely nowhere in Quebec.  That liekly comes from Quebecois who recall Mulcair being front and centre on the No side oin the last referendum.  At the time, the No side regularly said that voting No was not a rejection of Quebec idenitity (e.g. "Mon non est Quebecois", being a homonym for "Mon nom est Quebecois"), but the Liberals (mostly, although I have heard it once or twice from Quebec Tories too) seem to suffer from Alzheimers with respect to that part of Quebec referendum history. 

In short: Quebec "nationalists" can be federalists; Quebec MPs who claim to be federalists but not nationalists can be successful only on the West Island.  Look at the number of unanimous resolutions adopted in the National Assembly directed to the House of Commons for proof that this is true (unless one believes that Jean Charest and Phillipe Couillard are "closet separatists").  If Justin Trudeau tries to sell his own Party in Qubec by claiming that the NDP is too favourable to Quebec nationalism, he will flop.

Sean in Ottawa

Liberals should realize that so called Blue Liberals voted Conservative not to stop the NDP so much as because the Liberals ran a crap campaign.

I am not a fan of this concept of paying so much attention to notions like blue Liberals etc. Canada has enough people without fixed ideology to elect any party that found a majical moment.

This is the US-- we don't have high percentages of people attached to parties so much that any party could be declared unelectable.

Further many studies have shown that the NDP potential voter base is easily big enough now to elect a government if the party provided a great campaign and convinced them to do so.

Pondering

I replied to the following here: http://rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/federal-election-2015?page=54#...

post 549 because we are getting off topic here.

Robo wrote:

Pondering wrote:

He isn't saying that the NDP can't gain new voters. He is saying that blue Liberals will never go NDP and they shifted to the Conservatives when they thought the NDP might actually win.

While the NDP does have support cross Canada the majority of it is in Quebec coming from former Bloc voters who are nationalistic so require Mulcair to keep a very delicate balance to avoid offending the ROC. ...

Again, I say that the facts are listed to be forced through the sieve.  "Blue Liberals will only vote Conservative, therefore New Democrats should give up."  There is no objective basis to so predict -- just to confirm this, neither an Andrew Coyne column nor citing an earlier quote from Debater is objective, IMHO.  Yet the statements made by Debater and Pondering are unequivocal -- only the Liberal Party can beat the Conservative Party. 

And with respect to Quebec, Pondering, I doubt that you are familiar with Quebec if you make the statement above.  There have been Liberal operatives claiming that Mulcair is a sovereignist sympathiser since shortly after Mulcair was elected  NDP Leader; it seems to have wheels in TROC, but goes absolutely nowhere in Quebec.  That liekly comes from Quebecois who recall Mulcair being front and centre on the No side oin the last referendum.  At the time, the No side regularly said that voting No was not a rejection of Quebec idenitity (e.g. "Mon non est Quebecois", being a homonym for "Mon nom est Quebecois"), but the Liberals (mostly, although I have heard it once or twice from Quebec Tories too) seem to suffer from Alzheimers with respect to that part of Quebec referendum history. 

In short: Quebec "nationalists" can be federalists; Quebec MPs who claim to be federalists but not nationalists can be successful only on the West Island.  Look at the number of unanimous resolutions adopted in the National Assembly directed to the House of Commons for proof that this is true (unless one believes that Jean Charest and Phillipe Couillard are "closet separatists").  If Justin Trudeau tries to sell his own Party in Qubec by claiming that the NDP is too favourable to Quebec nationalism, he will flop.

Pondering

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
Liberals should realize that so called Blue Liberals voted Conservative not to stop the NDP so much as because the Liberals ran a crap campaign.

When referring to red or blue Liberals I am not referring to party members I am referring to the different types of people who have usually voted Liberal in the past. Many are fiscally conservative which means when the Liberals disappoint them they tend to vote conservative rather than NDP. Left leaning Liberal voters are more likely to move to the NDP.

"Red Conservatives" is just a tag for voters who usually vote Conservative but consider voting Liberal. "Blue Liberals" is just a tag for people who usually vote Liberal but consider voting Conservative. For some reason we say "left leaning Liberals" rather than "orange Liberals". There is no term for NDPers who consider voting Liberal or Conservative.

Circling back to the topic of Federal Liberal Candidates Trudeau is building an impressively cross-ideological group of candidates.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/10/05/david-macleod-peter-mackay_n_593...

HALIFAX - There was a time when David MacLeod could have been a shoo-in candidate for the federal Conservative party.

The former military man was a card-carrying Tory whose 27 years of service in the Canadian Forces would have been a strong political asset in the rural Nova Scotia riding where he grew up.

But late last month the plain-spoken veterans rights advocate was elected to become the Liberal candidate in Central Nova, the Conservative stronghold where he will take on Justice Minister Peter MacKay in the next federal election, scheduled for October 2015.

MacLeod, 49, says his political transformation started around 2006, soon after Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper was first elected to govern with a minority.

"As the party started moving farther and farther right, I started to get more worried as time went on," he said in a recent telephone interview from his home in Antigonish.

It makes sense to run a former conservative in a heavily Conservative riding. In a sense it is like proportional representation but within a party.

swallow swallow's picture

Pondering wrote:

While the NDP does have support cross Canada the majority of it is in Quebec coming from former Bloc voters who are nationalistic so require Mulcair to keep a very delicate balance to avoid offending the ROC.

This is high;y debateable. The NDP won 4.5-million votes in 2011; about 2.88 million in Quebec and 2.63-million in the rest of Canada. Yes, that is a slim majority from Quebec, but it's hardly accurate to say that a majority of the NDP's national votes came from former Bloc voters. There were switchers from all parties and the NDP had existing support in Quebec. This sort of posting-by-caricature often leads to odd conclusions. You appear to start from the viewpoint of the tiny minority of Quebec residents who oppose Quebec natrionalism, and draw your conclusions based on that and not on actual information. Perceptions are powerful, sure, but it's lecturing to otehrs on how things "are," when the evidence for your arguments is so often lacking, that is in my humble opinion a problem.

This is on topic to the extent that anti-nationalist policies still appear to inform the Canadain Liberal party's approach to Quebec. I can find almost no one whose first langauge is not English, out here in "the regions of Quebec," who has the slightest sympathy for the sort of centralist Canadain nationalism that domiantes Liberal party thinking. Yes, many may vote Liberal in any case, if the Liberals are seen as the only way to get rid of the vile Harper government with its chokehold on much of Ontario. But to me it's evfidence that "two solitudes" exist, and many Liberal Canada-first nationalists like yourself are speaking from a different universe from the majority of Quebec. 

Sean in Ottawa

I think the suggestion that the NDP has inherited BQ sensitivities is a political statement that lies somewher between pig manure and bull manure.

First there was a change in Quebec that was profound. It is not as if people that wanted the BQ were sudeenly forced to pick the NDP. The BQ ran in 2011 and got trounced and they did so with the same leader they had previously.

There was no expectation in the minds of people voting for the NDP that the party would be expected to think and act like the BQ. Rather, there was a desire for people in Quebec to move to positve influence at the federal level ratehr than vote for a party that could never form a government or even be accepted as participating in one. The BQ worked in may respects to advance social democratic ideas and I think some of that work may well have led people to realize that there was asecond social democratic opion in Quebec worth taking a look at.

Certainly, the NDP would be expected to be very respectful of Quebec and its status as a distinct nation. The NDP would have to be careful not to irritate the sensibilities of Quebec given that the results to the party would be catastrophic.

Certainly, the Liberal party would be expected to be very respectful of Quebec and its status as a distinct nation. The Liberal party would have to be careful not to irritate the sensibilities of Quebec given that the results to the party would be catastrophic.

Only the Conservatives can have the luxury of believing they do not have to worry about Quebec nationalists from an electoral point of view. However, even they are starting to realize that their anti-Quebec agenda is causing them a problem.

Pages

Topic locked