babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
"But I want to really leave it to the members. I really need to have a mandate given to me by New Democrats to say that they're willing to get out of the bunkers, shake hands on some agreements together and make sure that we don't have a Conservative government again ... It would have to be driven from the grassroots. If they're into it, then I'm into it. If they're not, then we'll do it the old traditional way ... The real sticking point with the Bloc is that their fundamental purpose is to destroy the country. So to work with them in such an intimate way would be harmful to my view of Canada. I mean, they individually and many of their voters are progressive . Many of their voters came to us in the last election. But if the primary reason that the party exists is to dissolve Canada, then I can't count on sitting down with them for something like this."
... And that's all I need to know about Mr. Cullen.
kinda thought that way at first myself then i thought about contextual meaning
t'anks for the link duncan cameron in the last topic thread, i understand she was to say more on this from that opening document but io haven't heard anymore about it and what i see there does not go far enough for me in creating a manufacturing sector based upon our natural resources.
this thread is in the wrong section, could someone please move it?
anyway, i finally have to agree north report: dredging up layton's mother just seems desperate. i mean, this is it, the final 3 days, so go for anything you can, but still, this is something else. everything seems to be oriented toward smothering media mentions of nash and dewar by drawing the media into a topp vs mulcair frame. my guess is actually that it works better than we think it might, especially since the central office's screw-up on ballot packages means that many folks will be voting very close to convention (if at all, grrr).
You should see the vetting form that MP candidates have to fill out. We know that some stuff appears later, but it tends to be not top tier candidates and/or things it is hard to ask about.
And there is a vetting process for the leadership candidates. I dont know what the questions look like, but you can bet they are thorough, and are checked out... plus looking for things that candidates might 'forget'. At a bare mnimum things like debts, business connections, arrests, etc are all in there.
Here's an example, even a number of Dippers outside of Nova Scotia know of Robert Chisholm's 18 year old drunk driving convictuion that bit us hard at the end of a campaign. He disclosed that long before the campaign. It was known.
I'm sure one of the reasons they can't give you your voting id and password right away is they must do some kind of a vote screen/check to ensure you don't vote twice the way former Montreal City Councillor Frank Hanley used to encourage his supporters to do. Oh, for the good ole days.
I have a lot of respect for Carol but I think she has it wrong. I think the race will eventually boil down to should we work with the Liberals to bring down Harper, or go it alone, and although the idea of working together has a lot of merit, I don't think the majority of NDPers are quite ready for that step. But NDP voters do want to grow the Orange Wave that happened in Quebec.
Orange wave in Quebec: NDP breakthrough or passing fancy?
"New Democrat insiders are 'almost shocked' at the state of NDP leadership Brian Topp's campaign as the party heads into its leadership vote this weekend..."
The history of establishment-assisted leadership contenders who are less politically adept and/or less popular than the runner-up they defeated is hardly a happy one. Think of John Turner, Kim Campbell or Stéphane Dion.
If a Broadbent-led anybody-but-Mulcair movement determines the outcome of next week’s vote, owing victory to a threatened establishment won’t do much to bolster the winner’s moral authority. That will be particularly true in Quebec, where not a single independent observer buys Broadbent’s analysis that Mulcair was the beneficiary of a stroke of central command genius, 50 years in the making, rather than a major protagonist of the NDP’s surge in the province.
Repeating over and over again that Mulcair is not the prime NDP figure in Quebec and a central piece of its electoral future will not make it true. The same approach certainly did not work for Liberals at the time of Denis Coderre’s 2009 resignation as Michael Ignatieff’s Quebec lieutenant.
Even at their peak, the leadership wars of the federal Liberals and the Conservatives have not featured retired or retiring leaders stepping in front of the parade at the 11th hour to stab the leading contender in the front.
In 1990, Pierre Trudeau had no time for pro-Meech candidates such as Paul Martin but the former prime minister did not need to spell that out. He let their deep policy differences speak for themselves.
But then Broadbent did not really have the luxury to stay above the fray and fight his battle on the field of principles. Over the course of a series of media interviews last week, the former NDP leader could not come up with a single major policy transgression to sustain his blanket condemnation of Mulcair.
The dual task of keeping Quebec in the fold and the NDP together was always going to be a major challenge for Layton’s successor. Broadbent has just made that task more daunting for whoever is chosen on Saturday.
oh, N.R., I think in 1990 Trudeau made it plenty clear where he stood -- sitting with the pro-Chretien Meech killer Clyde Wells very visibly at the Liberal convention
kinda thought that way at first myself then i thought about contextual meaning
t'anks for the link duncan cameron in the last topic thread, i understand she was to say more on this from that opening document but io haven't heard anymore about it and what i see there does not go far enough for me in creating a manufacturing sector based upon our natural resources.
That was my impression as well q
Every pronouncement now coming from Topp's campaign seems to be one of desperation.
NDPers don't want the status quo, they want to move forward and win the next election.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/jack-laytons-mother-calls-on-ndp...
I might even vote for Topp in my top tier, but ICK That's just wrong on every level.
this thread is in the wrong section, could someone please move it?
anyway, i finally have to agree north report: dredging up layton's mother just seems desperate. i mean, this is it, the final 3 days, so go for anything you can, but still, this is something else. everything seems to be oriented toward smothering media mentions of nash and dewar by drawing the media into a topp vs mulcair frame. my guess is actually that it works better than we think it might, especially since the central office's screw-up on ballot packages means that many folks will be voting very close to convention (if at all, grrr).
As to vetting.
You should see the vetting form that MP candidates have to fill out. We know that some stuff appears later, but it tends to be not top tier candidates and/or things it is hard to ask about.
And there is a vetting process for the leadership candidates. I dont know what the questions look like, but you can bet they are thorough, and are checked out... plus looking for things that candidates might 'forget'. At a bare mnimum things like debts, business connections, arrests, etc are all in there.
Here's an example, even a number of Dippers outside of Nova Scotia know of Robert Chisholm's 18 year old drunk driving convictuion that bit us hard at the end of a campaign. He disclosed that long before the campaign. It was known.
I'm sure one of the reasons they can't give you your voting id and password right away is they must do some kind of a vote screen/check to ensure you don't vote twice the way former Montreal City Councillor Frank Hanley used to encourage his supporters to do. Oh, for the good ole days.
This #134 was opened first, and is longer than its imitator. Someone please close the other one.
Long live "NDP leadership race #134"!
Down with "NDP Leadership Race #134"!
That's what this leadership race needs! A good splinter movement!
will the real 134 please stand up?
NDP Leadership: A guide to the race to replace Jack Layton
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1149418--ndp-leaders...
this thread is in the wrong section, it's too much work to change sections, ergo, this thread is irrelevant.
I have a lot of respect for Carol but I think she has it wrong. I think the race will eventually boil down to should we work with the Liberals to bring down Harper, or go it alone, and although the idea of working together has a lot of merit, I don't think the majority of NDPers are quite ready for that step. But NDP voters do want to grow the Orange Wave that happened in Quebec.
Orange wave in Quebec: NDP breakthrough or passing fancy?http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1149445--orange-...
Sweet!
In Harper decade, a big jump left
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/03/20/in-harper-decade-a-big-jump-left
Topp's NDP Leadership Campaign 'Not Nearly As Well Organized' As Mulcair's Says NDP Insider
http://www.hilltimes.com/news/politics/2012/03/20/topps-ndp-leadership-c...
"New Democrat insiders are 'almost shocked' at the state of NDP leadership Brian Topp's campaign as the party heads into its leadership vote this weekend..."
Thank you Mr Topp. Talk about a scorched earth policy against one of our own. How stupid can some people be
Broadbent poisons well for next NDP leader
http://thechronicleherald.ca/opinion/75902-broadbent-poisons-well-next-n...
The history of establishment-assisted leadership contenders who are less politically adept and/or less popular than the runner-up they defeated is hardly a happy one. Think of John Turner, Kim Campbell or Stéphane Dion.
If a Broadbent-led anybody-but-Mulcair movement determines the outcome of next week’s vote, owing victory to a threatened establishment won’t do much to bolster the winner’s moral authority. That will be particularly true in Quebec, where not a single independent observer buys Broadbent’s analysis that Mulcair was the beneficiary of a stroke of central command genius, 50 years in the making, rather than a major protagonist of the NDP’s surge in the province.
Repeating over and over again that Mulcair is not the prime NDP figure in Quebec and a central piece of its electoral future will not make it true. The same approach certainly did not work for Liberals at the time of Denis Coderre’s 2009 resignation as Michael Ignatieff’s Quebec lieutenant.
Even at their peak, the leadership wars of the federal Liberals and the Conservatives have not featured retired or retiring leaders stepping in front of the parade at the 11th hour to stab the leading contender in the front.
In 1990, Pierre Trudeau had no time for pro-Meech candidates such as Paul Martin but the former prime minister did not need to spell that out. He let their deep policy differences speak for themselves.
But then Broadbent did not really have the luxury to stay above the fray and fight his battle on the field of principles. Over the course of a series of media interviews last week, the former NDP leader could not come up with a single major policy transgression to sustain his blanket condemnation of Mulcair.
The dual task of keeping Quebec in the fold and the NDP together was always going to be a major challenge for Layton’s successor. Broadbent has just made that task more daunting for whoever is chosen on Saturday.
Even in PEI - sweet!
NDP spirits soar
http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/News/Local/2012-03-21/article-2935113/NDP-s...
oh, N.R., I think in 1990 Trudeau made it plenty clear where he stood -- sitting with the pro-Chretien Meech killer Clyde Wells very visibly at the Liberal convention
http://www.thomasmulcair.ca/site/2012/03/21/as-convention-draws-near-mulcair-picks-up-more-nova-scotia-support/?lang=en
6 more Nova Scotia MLAs for Tom. I think this brings him up to 12
What nonsense.
http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/03/21/mr-irrelevant-vs-mr-angry/
Let's move the rest of this conversation over here.