Mulcair on the campaign trail

174 posts / 0 new
Last post
mark_alfred

terrytowel wrote:

Unless you agree with Mulcair remarks when Trudeau had Martin & Chretchien by his side. That he was with the "oldies" tour.

It was a poor choice of words, especially given the context of Mulcair's announcement.  That said, given that the NDP had been solely attacking the Conservatives and not touching the Liberals (in fact, even openly entertaining the idea of a coalition with the Liberals to get rid of Harper if need be) it was odd how vigorously the Liberals came out to attack the NDP (bringing out Chretien and Martin even to do this).  Do the Liberals not see who the real enemy is?

quizzical

no why would they? they appear to be the same liars as the Conservative.

Ciabatta2

quizzical wrote:

fkn Liberals just fabricate and twist.

if i had continued past the Liberals C51 support to think i was voting Liberal i would never now. the bs rollling out of Liberals mouths and those pretending they're NDP has turned me right the fk around.

could never vote for such lying sacks of shit. and some even note how "honourable" they believe themselves to be while pushing their bs fabrications.

Similar.  Certainly it affects very few voters, but as someone that was open to voting Liberal this time around the conduct of the party's partisans online and in social media has eliminated the Liberals as an option for me.  Particularly those here. Too bad the Greens are led by Elizbeth May.

terrytowel

Misfit wrote:
How you convolute every conversation into something totally different is beyond childish.

quizzical wrote:

fkn Liberals just fabricate and twist.

Deflecting.

If Trudeau said the same thing "Travelling on the oldies tour" about Mulcair campaiging with Ed Broadbent or Roy Romanow, you would have slammed him for being ageist.

It is more conspicuious that none of the NDP stalwarts have been on the campaign trail. Shirley Douglas, Ed Broadbent, Alexa McDonough or Roy Romanow. All four were stumping for Jack Layton in 2011.

2015 they are absent. And now Mulcair can't even bring them out or else the "oldies tour" quote will be thrown back in his face. That is the point. The old guard of the NDP are nowhere to be seen.

Unless they want to promote this as "Not your parents NDP anymore".

Charles

Alexa has been involved at the riding level; Broadbent has also been visible in the campaign. 

mark_alfred
terrytowel

Did I say anything about Stephen Lewis?

Charles wrote:

Alexa has been involved at the riding level; Broadbent has also been visible in the campaign. 

Alexa is supporting a former staffer of hers who is running in PEI

Link of Broadbent campaiging, please.

Stockholm

terrytowel wrote:

But then where is Shirley (Douglas)? She was front and centre in 2011. 

Sorry to break the news to you, but I keep getting fundraising appeals from Shirley Douglas both in the mail and online for the NDP generally and also for Olivia Chow  (I can just hear terrytowel's head explode at the news that Shirley Douglas supports Olivia Chow - the person he hates more than any other human being on earth).

The last few times i have seen Shirley Douglas in public she has been in a wheelchair (she is in her 80s now) and looked quite frail - so I apologize on her behalf if she hasnt been running up to the podium and giving daily bombastic speeches on behalf of the NDP from coast to coast.

terrytowel

Stockholm wrote:

terrytowel wrote:

But then where is Shirley (Douglas)? She was front and centre in 2011. 

Sorry to break the news to you, but I keep getting fundraising appeals from Shirley Douglas both in the mail and online for the NDP generally and also for Olivia Chow  (I can just hear terrytowel's head explode at the news that Shirley Douglas supports Olivia Chow - the person he hates more than any other human being on earth).

The last few times i have seen Shirley Douglas in public she has been in a wheelchair (she is in her 80s now) and looked quite frail - so I apologize on her behalf if she hasnt been running up to the podium and giving daily bombastic speeches on behalf of the NDP from coast to coast.

I can spot the sarcasm dripping off your keyboard. Sorry to hear about Shirley as she is wonderful lady.

nicky

Great speech by Tom on the niquab issue etc.

http://www.cpac.ca/en/programs/leaders-tour/episodes/90005980/

It makes you appreciate just how petty are the posturings of the likes of Terryt...l

Charles

Alexa has been involved in the Halifax riding as much as her health will allow and this week was the guest speaker at a Herb Dickieson event; she was a guest at the NDP debate viewing party Halifax as well. I spoke with her twice while in Halifax recently and she told me she was uniquely excited about NDP prospects in this election and feeling extremely positive; she's not in the kind of health that would allow for serious campaigning. 

Broadbent has spoken out a few times this election and spoken particularly well of Mulcair:

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/stephen-maher-ndp-wont-fade-li...

http://www.nationalobserver.com/2015/07/02/news/mulcair-redeemer - But in an interview with the National Observer, Broadbent said that Mulcair possesses "absolutely terrific skills" as a parliamentarian. “He is, I think, head and shoulders above anyone else in the House of Commons in being able to put accountable questioning to Mr. Harper. He zeros in on important issues.”

Broadbent said Mulcair’s ability in the House of Commons and his “overall intelligence” – not something to be under-estimated in a would-be prime minister – were well-known within Quebec, but have really only come to light in the rest of the country in the last nine months or so. “Canadians do see him as having the kinds of qualities that are necessary for a prime minister, the kind of intelligence,” Broadbent says.

https://ricochet.media/en/474/ed-broadbent-on-how-the-ndp-can-win-this-fall

 

terrytowel wrote:

Did I say anything about Stephen Lewis?

Charles wrote:

Alexa has been involved at the riding level; Broadbent has also been visible in the campaign. 

Alexa is supporting a former staffer of hers who is running in PEI

Link of Broadbent campaiging, please.

terrytowel

Charles wrote:

Alexa has been involved in the Halifax riding as much as her health will allow and this week was the guest speaker at a Herb Dickieson event; she was a guest at the NDP debate viewing party Halifax as well. I spoke with her twice while in Halifax recently and she told me she was uniquely excited about NDP prospects in this election and feeling extremely positive; she's not in the kind of health that would allow for serious campaigning.

Great for Alexa I have been a big fan of hers for many many years. I hope she gets better real soon. If you see Alexa again could you tell her she still has many fans of hers from Toronto.

josh

If Mulcair wants to jump start his campaign, he could zero in on, and attack, Harper for rushing to agree to TPP by selling out farmers and auto workers, among others. But I'm not sure he has it in his neo-liberal soul to do that.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-trans-pacific-partn...

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

I don't want Québec to sign the Constitution. I'd rather Québec act like a nation and draft its own Constitution.First we need to exile Couillard and his minions to Saudi Arabia,of course.

Sean in Ottawa

mark_alfred wrote:

 Do the Liberals not see who the real enemy is?

Isn't the point that they do see who the real enemy is?

If Harper were to win a majority on October 19th the worst that would happen is Trudeau might or might not lose his job.

If the NDP were to win a majority Trudeau would not only lose his party -- I think the Liberal party would probably not be around to contest the next election in any real force.

The Liberals understand that the NDP represents and existential threat to them.

 

nicky

Tom is attending a rally with Linda McQuaig in her riding on Sunday

Sunday, September 27th

 12:00 - 1:30 PM

 Daniels Spectrum 

585 Dundas St E, Toronto 

Linda is in a close fight with a conservative Liberal parachuted in for The Bridle Path to take his rightful place as Justin's finance minister.

If elected Linda will instantly become one of the most knowledgeable, quotable and consequential MPs. Come out and give her a hand if you can.


 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

mark_alfred wrote:

 Do the Liberals not see who the real enemy is?

Isn't the point that they do see who the real enemy is?

If Harper were to win a majority on October 19th the worst that would happen is Trudeau might or might not lose his job.

If the NDP were to win a majority Trudeau would not only lose his party -- I think the Liberal party would probably not be around to contest the next election in any real force.

The Liberals understand that the NDP represents and existential threat to them.

 

I don't see how this could be true. If the NDP wins a majority, they will bring in MMPR, and the Liberals will have their fair share of seats from then on.

Sean in Ottawa

The NDP has often recognized that it has to focus messages because many of the pundits are unfriendly -- if others are going to choose what to highlight it won't be what the NDP needs out there -- so you have to show very careful judgment.

As the campaign winds down Mulcair must exploit the impression that he is the best potential PM -- to do this he will have to show specific styles of leadership. This is the part where there needs to be some indication that he can bring together policies in a minority. He is not going to get help form the others and it is not necessary for him to show particular friendliness to Trudeau. But what he can do is look at the policy positions and provide some idea of how he will get things done. He can speak to how some NDP policies will work with others in a workable NDP plan (connections). He can outline where other party positions are not too far and encourage them to come over. He does not have to compromise on any policy position but he can speak in general terms about how close a couple of the policies are. People see a minority and want to know that the country can be governed. They want to know who can do that.

One format for this could be a sit down interview with someone in the media: where he leaves an impression -- just slightly -- of what the PM Mulcair might look like should the NDP form a minority. There are some journalists who might work for this. He can also observe on the areas where more work must be done to move support where there may not be enough -- and this is the appeal for more NDP seats to achieve these things. It is a sort of assessment of the policy frames we have now; an acknowledgement of where the NDP can show leadership and identification of where the NDP would need to have more support because no other party is there yet. Most of all it is not so much about substance but a reminder of his maturity and capability to pull together resources to get something to happen.

The NDP policy has not hurt the NDP in this campaign anywhere that I can tell. The damage is the noise and uncertainty around the ability of Mulcair to bring in an effective government.

Better judgment is required in terms of what to say and how to say it. Mulcair likes to explain -- I understand this but he over explains and attempts nuances that are not recognized. When I said Trudeau was better at delivering some messages this is what I mean. Too much of the Mulcair message is over-complicated and over explained to the extent that the point is lost in detail. While Trudeau can be vague, simple and unrealistic, at times his message is succeeding because that message is put in a more basic and direct way. The NDP communications should look at the policies and advance very plain simple messages behind them that people can relate to and stop the long complicated rationales that are losing people.

I would also say that the party has to stop defining itself as between the Liberals and Conservatives -- that is not helping. Saying you are the voice of reason is not enough. Mulcair has to point to policies the NDP has that are ground-breaking and remind voters that it is the NDP that offers hope for these. The plan is not the problem but the focus certainly is. The NDP has quite a few solid policies that are not at all compromises between the Liberals and Conservatives but quite bold. Voters are being attracted to much of the fluff we are getting from Trudeau because he is speaking in bold terms to describe vague, ill-defined and less than practical ideas. The NDP has some well-defined policies with specific costing. It needs to match bold, braver statements to those policies.

The problem with the NDP has been it is at moments out of touch -- the example of what happened in my riding is an indication of that; it needs to sharpen communications and take the agenda back (it did better when it was proactive) and it needs to show better judgment on the communications it puts out. Lastly it needs to present Mulcair as a PM and to do this he cannot just present himself as a scrapper. I don't have trouble with the Angry Tom people talk about; I did not like the smiling Tom all that much; I do not like the petty wasted statements (if you must have other NDP candidates put out lower value messages). What we have seen flashes of but not enough is the Leadership Tom -- the PM Mulcair. The NDP communications have to put that out and fast. I would say this is about arranging a couple sit-down interviews to discuss the campaign and what a Mulcair government might look like -- including dealing with a parliament where there is a minority. A couple of these interviews in English and French, relaxed, mature and sober -- without small petty distractions, could move the NDP back to the front of the pack. The NDP is only slightly behind right now (the Ekos Poll I think is an outlier).

This is not a policy problem -- this is about Mulcair contrasting his maturity with Trudeau's and not stopping to the tendency to respond in kind to stuff from Trudeau or to go for the cheap witty comment. Those witty comment are not helping and would be best delivered by others. People need to see Tom the PM not the prosecutor, comedian or entertainer.

In other words, Tom Mulcair can be many things and his comms team has him doing that. They are wrong to continue this. Instead we need a focused PM Mulcair to rise about and break from the pack. This is not going to come from an artful attack. It will come from showing impressive stature.

I find that the NDP communications seem to be unfocused and seem to be missing the target on where they need to be, what messages to deliver and what image of Mulcair's they want to cultivate. They also must avoid the kinds of things that happened in my riding. I am an identified long time NDP party member and they have not called me once in the campaign or returned the communications I have requested. Had they done so I would have been able to help in many ways. Even a five minute call would have resulted in a lawn sign at least and I was prepared to do more. How many other people are there out there wasted?

quizzical

good grief.

NDPP

Have the NDP Missed The Greatest Electoral Opportunity in Their History?

http://www.hilltimes.com/polling/2015/09/25/have-the-ndp-missed-the-grea...

 

Aristotleded24

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
I am an identified long time NDP party member and they have not called me once in the campaign or returned the communications I have requested. Had they done so I would have been able to help in many ways. Even a five minute call would have resulted in a lawn sign at least and I was prepared to do more. How many other people are there out there wasted?

Absolutely communication with identified members and supporters is a must, even in marginal ridings. How many people in marginal ridings can be pooled and asked to work in areas that are tight races where that work will make a difference? That's what this election is going to come down to is a lot of close races.

mark_alfred

Mulcair in Toronto points out that the NDP opposes Bill C-51, the TPP, Keystone XL, and the LibCon corporate tax cuts.  The NDP is the party of change, unlike both the Libs and Cons.

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Politics/ID/2676801429/

mark_alfred

Mulcair in Toronto says Harper was played like a chump in the TPP negotiations.

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Politics/ID/2676792972/

mark_alfred

Mulcair slams Harper's dealings on Nexen and says Stephen Harper hasn't done enough to support Bombardier aerospace.

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Politics/ID/2676792961/

Cody87

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

This is not a policy problem

There's two other boards I've been discussing these campaigns on, and I actually have to disagree with this to an extent. People who are open to either the LPC or NDP like the LPC platform. This isn't surprising, considering the platform is at least 50% derived from ABC/ABH focus groups. We'll see what the NDP platform brings. The LPC accusations about the NDP plan not being being timely/feasable are sticking pretty well too.

Quote:
this is about Mulcair contrasting his maturity with Trudeau's and not stopping to the tendency to respond in kind to stuff from Trudeau or to go for the cheap witty comment.

I do not believe Mulcair is more mature than Trudeau. He's older. He looks more mature because we tend to associate maturity with age. He hasn't been acting it. The only debate I watched was the G&M debate, and I laughed at his marijuana shot in the moment. But it was petty, dishonest (as the NDP supports decriminlization), and also a deflection. He had a great chance to respond to Trudeau's claims his plan is a mirage and wasted it.

That being said, I'm STILL seeing comments about Mulcair's rude conduct toward Trudeau in the English/French Munk debate. I don't know how bad it actually was, but, I do know Mulcair's personal approval ratings have been declining and I suspect this immaturity is a big factor. The majority of the anti-Harper voters do not like bullies (part of why they are anti-Harper, who is a bully).

Lastly, I don't see how you can say Mulcair is "responding in kind" to Trudeau. The closest Trudeau has come to personal attacks against Mulcair that I have seen was on Mulcair's previous support of bulk water exports. Trudeau hasn't attacked him on his libel suit, his dual citizenship, his past with the Quebec Liberals, or his comments about Thatcher. I haven't heard any LPC ads that disparage him for any of the above either. Trudeau's criticisms are entirely plan/policy related, and have been on point. The same cannot be said of Mulcair and the NDP.

mark_alfred

Cody87 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

This is not a policy problem

Trudeau's criticisms are entirely plan/policy related, and have been on point. The same cannot be said of Mulcair and the NDP.

Mulcair criticizes Trudeau's support of TPP, Bill C-51, Keystone XL, and maintaining Harper's corporate tax cuts.  Reasonable criticisms for those who are concerned about these things, I feel.  Trudeau, on the other hand, claims Mulcair "agrees with Harper's cuts" and is going to impose "austerity."  A completely inane criticism, in my opinion.  No one has opposed Harper more fiercely than Mulcair.  While Mulcair was opposing Harper, Trudeau was often absent from the House of Commons doing god knows what.

See the following video to see what Mulcair criticizes Trudeau about:

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Politics/ID/2676801429/

Do you disagree with Mulcair's criticisms?  Do you feel that corporate taxes should not be raised?  Do you not have concerns about the ramifications of TPP especially given how piss poor a negotiator Harper has been?  Do you support Keystone XL?  Do you support Bill C-51?  If so, then go ahead and support Trudeau.  Otherwise, why would you support Trudeau?

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

NAILED IT MARK!

ctrl190

With the party fighting for media attention as it is, why the hell is the NDP announcing its platform the same day as the Cons?

 

mark_alfred

Perhaps it makes discussion of a contrast between the two more evident.  Comments that Mulcair makes on the contrast between his policies and Harper's policies will continue into press questions of Harper.

mark_alfred
kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Tom was in the Comox Valley today. The K'omox First Nations hall was booked but the crowd was too big so they moved out doors. Most of the First Nations on Vancouver Island have come out in support of the NDP. I don't know what is happening in the rest of the country but it sure looks like the NDP are going to beat the incumbent racist John Duncan.  Unfortunately like always Upper and Lower Canada will determine who wins government.

 

KarlL

Showing that the three-month campaign is wearing on everyone.

Hannah Thibedeau (@HannahThibedeau)10/11/15, 5:45 PMMulcair says " let's paint the island green. ...I mean orange. ". #elxn42 pic.twitter.com/gJtdXVdw5w

Debater

"let's paint the island green. ...I mean orange."

Freudian slip?  Does this mean Mulcair has the Greens on his mind and is worried about them winning Victoria?

From looking at the B.C. numbers, it seems that the Greens have lost some of the momentum they had earlier in the year when they were higher.

At the moment the Greens are only projected to win Elizabeth May's own seat in Saanich-Gulf Islands, but perhaps it's possible that with the Liberal candidate being disqualified in Victoria, enough voters may coalesce behind the Greens to win them a 2nd seat.

Since Mulcair was in Victoria, perhaps the riding is indeed close right now.

Although I give the edge to the NDP retaining it.

Sean in Ottawa

KarlL wrote:

Showing that the three-month campaign is wearing on everyone.

Hannah Thibedeau (@HannahThibedeau)10/11/15, 5:45 PMMulcair says " let's paint the island green. ...I mean orange. ". #elxn42 pic.twitter.com/gJtdXVdw5w

He made a good recovery though

Debater

One has to extend some sympathy to all the leaders (except Harper) for having to run such a long campaign.  Exhaustion and fatique does begin to set in at this point, and particularly when our jerk of a PM imposed the longest election in history on the other parties & the public.

As Alice Funke wrote in a piece a few months ago, Harper deliberately called an early election in August so that:

1) He could reduce the impact of the 3rd-party advertising being run against him by unions & veterans against Harper.

2) He could spend additional millions of dollars in advertising over the course of the campaign.

Harper being the manipulative bastard that he is and always wanting to stack the deck against his opponents wanted to drain the resources of the other parties and wear them down over time.

He has never, ever believed in a "Fair Election" despite the b.s. legislation bearing that name.

Rev Pesky

From the CBC:

Mulcair tells how he educated the NDP

Quote:
The NDP's decision to promise four years of balanced budgets if elected stemmed from leader Tom Muclair's own position on fiscal management, Mulcair says in an interview airing later today on CBC News Network's Power & Politics

"When I explained my position to the party — that we have to be good, prudent public administrators if we aspire to form government — the party and the membership agreed with me," Mulcair tells host Rosemary Barton.

The membershiip? I don't remember the membership having a say in this.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Rev Pesky wrote:

The membershiip? I don't remember the membership having a say in this.

Are you new to NDP party politics? Balanced budgets are what all provincial NDP governments have striven for. In the case of BC I can say from personal experience that balancing the budget was done on the backs of disabled people. However the majority of the parties membership continued to support the architects of that strategy including Moe Sihota, of recent Oil and Gas fame. He went almost directly from President of the BC NDP (a Convention elected postion) to shilling for the man.

It is one of the reasons I hold my nose and vote rather than enthusiastically. But when all is said and done I think Mulcair is right and the majority of the card carrying members support people for Executive who believe that one of Tommy's legacies is balanced budgets so that the government is not beholding to financial interests.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Here is a piece on Mulcair that is very interesting and something the NDP should pass on to the electorate.

Quote:

Tom is a policy wonk. He supports progressive ideas when, as is often the case, they make good public policy. And he insists on processes leading to evidence-based decision-making -- courts, commissions, environmental impact assessments, tendered competitions and the soliciting of a broad range of expert advice -- rather than basing his policies on ideology, casual assumptions, focus groups or polls. This approach sometimes works well politically, as it did with Bill C-51.

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/10/12/Understanding-Tom-Mulcair/

 

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Rev Pesky wrote:

The membershiip? I don't remember the membership having a say in this.

Are you new to NDP party politics? Balanced budgets are what all provincial NDP governments have striven for. In the case of BC I can say from personal experience that balancing the budget was done on the backs of disabled people. However the majority of the parties membership continued to support the architects of that strategy including Moe Sihota, of recent Oil and Gas fame. He went almost directly from President of the BC NDP (a Convention elected postion) to shilling for the man.

It is one of the reasons I hold my nose and vote rather than enthusiastically. But when all is said and done I think Mulcair is right and the majority of the card carrying members support people for Executive who believe that one of Tommy's legacies is balanced budgets so that the government is not beholding to financial interests.

So you are saying that Mulcair isn't being truthful when he insinuates he convinced the NDP on the importance of balanced budgets?

josh

Rev Pesky wrote:

From the CBC:

Mulcair tells how he educated the NDP

Quote:
The NDP's decision to promise four years of balanced budgets if elected stemmed from leader Tom Muclair's own position on fiscal management, Mulcair says in an interview airing later today on CBC News Network's Power & Politics

"When I explained my position to the party — that we have to be good, prudent public administrators if we aspire to form government — the party and the membership agreed with me," Mulcair tells host Rosemary Barton.

The membershiip? I don't remember the membership having a say in this.

 

He's being disingenuous. He never presented the choice of four years of balanced budgets and no deficit stimulus to the party members.

Sean in Ottawa

josh wrote:
Rev Pesky wrote:

From the CBC:

Mulcair tells how he educated the NDP

Quote:
The NDP's decision to promise four years of balanced budgets if elected stemmed from leader Tom Muclair's own position on fiscal management, Mulcair says in an interview airing later today on CBC News Network's Power & Politics

"When I explained my position to the party — that we have to be good, prudent public administrators if we aspire to form government — the party and the membership agreed with me," Mulcair tells host Rosemary Barton.

The membershiip? I don't remember the membership having a say in this.

 

He's being disingenuous. He never presented the choice of four years of balanced budgets and no deficit stimulus to the party members.

I think this is operational.

I happen to agree with the policy even though I think it was over-communicated. There is enough money in the economy for the government to function without a deficit. I disagree with the failure to tax the wealthiest more and I disagree wiith the tax cut for small business. I also disagree with how all these things have been emphasized through the campaign. But I do not think Mulcair had to ask members if he can run a balanced budget.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Pondering wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Rev Pesky wrote:

The membershiip? I don't remember the membership having a say in this.

Are you new to NDP party politics? Balanced budgets are what all provincial NDP governments have striven for. In the case of BC I can say from personal experience that balancing the budget was done on the backs of disabled people. However the majority of the parties membership continued to support the architects of that strategy including Moe Sihota, of recent Oil and Gas fame. He went almost directly from President of the BC NDP (a Convention elected postion) to shilling for the man.

It is one of the reasons I hold my nose and vote rather than enthusiastically. But when all is said and done I think Mulcair is right and the majority of the card carrying members support people for Executive who believe that one of Tommy's legacies is balanced budgets so that the government is not beholding to financial interests.

So you are saying that Mulcair isn't being truthful when he insinuates he convinced the NDP on the importance of balanced budgets?

Please try reading for comprehension of what other posters write. I have not said that and a grade school level of reading comprehension would tell you that I said much the opposite. You would flunk a grade school test.

Feel free to spin your own words anyway you want but please stop twisting mine.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Here is a piece on Mulcair that is very interesting and something the NDP should pass on to the electorate.

Quote:

Tom is a policy wonk. He supports progressive ideas when, as is often the case, they make good public policy. And he insists on processes leading to evidence-based decision-making -- courts, commissions, environmental impact assessments, tendered competitions and the soliciting of a broad range of expert advice -- rather than basing his policies on ideology, casual assumptions, focus groups or polls. This approach sometimes works well politically, as it did with Bill C-51.

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/10/12/Understanding-Tom-Mulcair/

 I am reposting this further down in this thread about Mulcair on the campaign trail. Hard to keep in front of the people dedicated to divert every thread.

terrytowel

He is still using the phrase "Only the NDP can defeat Stephen Harper Conservative Party" while campaigning in BC today.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

terrytowel wrote:

He is still using the phrase "Only the NDP can defeat Stephen Harper Conservative Party" while campaigning in BC today.

 I live in a riding that has goneback and forth between the Con/Reform and the NDP. Like the rest of Vancouver Island the Liberal party is not a presense. It got 5.1% of the vote in the last election and I doubt if Trudeau has any coattails here. The only riding of the seven on Vancouver Island that the Liberals are in contention to win is currently held by the NDP.  In BC as a whole, outside of parts of the Lower Mainland, the NDP is the only party that can defeat the Conservative party. I am pleased that Mulcair is speaking to the voters in the region he is in. Or do you think he should tell BC audiences to vote based on the campaign in Central Canada?

terrytowel

kropotkin1951 wrote:

do you think he should tell BC audiences to vote based on the campaign in Central Canada?

he should say "Vote for hope, not out of fear"

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

He should say "vote for the NDP".  That would pretty much get to the nub of it.

mark_alfred

I think it's good that the NDP have stayed focused on winning Conservative ridings.  Mulcair went through a bunch in Ontario raising awareness of the TPP, and now I hear he's in Vancouver campaigning in Conservative held ridings. 

pookie

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Here is a piece on Mulcair that is very interesting and something the NDP should pass on to the electorate.

Quote:

Tom is a policy wonk. He supports progressive ideas when, as is often the case, they make good public policy. And he insists on processes leading to evidence-based decision-making -- courts, commissions, environmental impact assessments, tendered competitions and the soliciting of a broad range of expert advice -- rather than basing his policies on ideology, casual assumptions, focus groups or polls. This approach sometimes works well politically, as it did with Bill C-51.

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/10/12/Understanding-Tom-Mulcair/

 

I agree - this is a very good piece.

Doug Woodard

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Here is a piece on Mulcair that is very interesting and something the NDP should pass on to the electorate.

Quote:

Tom is a policy wonk. He supports progressive ideas when, as is often the case, they make good public policy. And he insists on processes leading to evidence-based decision-making -- courts, commissions, environmental impact assessments, tendered competitions and the soliciting of a broad range of expert advice -- rather than basing his policies on ideology, casual assumptions, focus groups or polls. This approach sometimes works well politically, as it did with Bill C-51.

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/10/12/Understanding-Tom-Mulcair/

It's excellent, and it explains clearly why Mulcair finds it hard to wiggle and posture like Trudeau. Also why we could reasonably expect him to run a much more well-organized, thrifty and effective government than Trudeau.

Pages