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.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
Continuation? Why? I thought we already agreed on who should be the next leader. It should be
No. Ours was a rather unique situation. Helen did not have a seat in the first place. So once she quit, there was an immediate need for interim leader. Darrell was chosen by Caucus, with no understanding he would be excluded from the leadership. We werent consulted- and it really wouldnt have been a good idea to do so at the time- but this was acceptable all around.
I dont know anything about Farnworth and his ambitions. But that doesnt smell like a neutral 'in the party's best interest' statement. Because its implicit in what he says that the likely contenders for the leadership are 'naturally' going to be the ones most able to go from being 'interim leader' to able to be a solid leader in case of a snap election before the new leader is chosen. I didnt see Farnworth saying he still thought the interim leader should be self ruled out of the leadership race.
I think you should stick with the tradition that the interim leader is explicitly self excluded from the leadership race.
And Darell was definitely not acclaimed. Even after more than a year as leader, it was a 60/40 split in the OMOV race.
Who did Dexter beat to become leader in NS?
Its all very well to say "let's stick with the tradition that the interim leader is explicitly self-excluded from the leadership race", BUT what if the new BC Liberal leader calls a snap election when the NDP only has an interim leader and no permanent leader? Do you have the interim leader campaign across the province on the message of "vote for me so I can be Premier for six weeks and then for the rest of the four year term the premier will be the mystery person who NDP members choose AFTER the election"? How is that supposed to work???
Sure the Liberals can call a snap election. But how likely is it?
Consider the time lines. And a move that blatant, when the other party is in the middle of a race, would have definite risks.
So there is that possibility versus the definite risk of letting someone have the leg up in the race as interim leader.
I would be surprised if the Liberals DON'T call an election once they have their new leader. An election allows them to dodge an HST vote/referendum and let's the new leader seek a mandate, which the voters will expect, before becoming premier.
It would look very undemocratic if the NDP gave one candidate the advantage of interim leader and it would look even more undemocratic if the Liberals called an election in the small window between their choice and the NDP's.
I know there are a couple of constituencies that insist on holding their nomination only after the election has been called. I imagine the technology is available (especially if it is anticipated now) to have a short notice OMOV leadership election. It sure would be a great response to a snap election.
Ken, I think you and most people who are not on the political right - always, always, always, always make the same mistake of underestimating the total audacity and ruthlessness of rightwing politicians. This is the mistake Democrats always make in the US in dealing with the GOP and its the mistake the progressives make in Canada all the time as well. We have to learn that you can put NOTHING past BC Liberals or Tories in any other province. The idea that they will play by Marquess of Queensberry rules is absurd.
If the BC Liberals think its to their advantage to call a snap election - they will do so in a flash - and NO ONE will care of the NDP says "No Fair!"
Do you think that the BC Liberals give a damn about what "looks undemocratic"??? If they think they can knee cap the NDP they will do it - the concept of "fair play" is meaningless to them.
The Libs will have their leadership vote on Feb. 26. We will have our leadership vote about one month later in early April at the latest. Both parties will then have new leaders.
A budget will likely then be brought in and something will be done about the HST. The new Lib leader will then want to seek "a new mandate from the people".
An election on or about May 12, 2011 (or even one month later) is probable based upon the same time frame by the Zalm in October, 1986 and by Glen in ~April, 1996.
And it has been again confirmed by Vaughn Palmer that the current fixed May 12, 2013 date does not prevent an earlier election.
That's how I see things playing out.
Fixed election dates have no actual teeth - they are purely symbolic - as we learned from Stephen Harper in 2008.
That could easily mean simultanenous federal and provincial election campaigns in BC.
Remember the simultaneous May, 1979 BC provincial/federal elections when we could combine resources while the provincial Socreds and the federal Cons and Libs were divided on both fronts?
I didnt say the Liberals wouldnt call a snap election. Just not one before the NDP has also chosen a leader. which is why I asked the timing question.
They will not call an election immediately after having chosen their leader, and while the NDP is still in the middle of their race,
Thats more than 'not fair'... it would look desperate.
Ken, you are right. With the negative political optics, the Libs wouldn't dare call an election prior to the new NDP leader being elected.
And I certainly doubt that they will.
What's more concerning is that the MSM will treat the new Lib leader/premier as a media star/let, which probably will impact voting intentions prior to and during an election. Google up the Zalm's 1986 election and Glen Clark's 1996 election, under similar circumstances, in order to confirm same.
That's the elephant in the room from my perspective.
The difference though is that Zalm became leader some time AFTER the NDP had chosen the lackluster Bob Skelly and Geln Clark took over the NDP after Campbell had been Liberal leader for a few years. In this case, the NDP will get a new leader installed after the BC Liberals - so both parties will have novelty at the same time.
With the leadership elections no more than six weeks apart, it would be the height of stupidity for the Liberals to rush into an election call.
First off, transition of government is not as instantaneous as the transition of party leadership. Lorne Calvert became Premier twelve days after winning the leadership, for example, although apparently Greg Selinger assumed office in two days. To be reasonable, say it will take a week. You're now no more than five weeks away from the NDP leadership vote.
There is no compelling narrative the Liberals could offer that they need to call the election then as opposed to no more than five weeks later. That's on top of a barely dubious narrative about why they need to go to the polls at all more than a year ahead of the "fixed" election date. Without a compelling narrative, they simply look cowardly, dishonourable, cheap and desperate. And frankly, there are limits to how much even that hard core anti-NDP corporate media would be prepared to let that slide.
Realistically, if the Liberals don't want to risk being punished for playing silly and antidemocratic games, the first real window to call an election is a few days (three? five? a week?) AFTER the NDP leadership race.
I think WHO the Liberals elect will be a big factor in the calling of a snap election.
A perceived outsider like Christy Clark, someone not so closely associated with the recent baggage of the Campbell government, might be more inclined to quickly ask for a new mandate. Someone closely associated with Campbell, like insider Kevin Falcon, would probably want more time to distance himself from the Campbell era, and put his brand on being Premier.
I agree with Stock, compelling poll numbers trump everything and the Libs will not feel restrained by any sense of political fair play, or legal obligation around the fixed election date.
The BC Liberals will lose if they call an election between their leadership and the NDP vote. The people are pissed at them for just that kind of shit. It will have traction in BC even if it doesn't where you live.
Draft Libby
Maybe some people at rabble could help a significant other see the joys of moving to Victoria or Vancouver.
John Horgan looks like my kinda guy!
Christie Clark wins leader, there will be an immediate election, and we will have the BC Liberals for another 5 years, at least. Does not matter who wins the BCNDP leadership now.
a. I'm not so sure that Christy Clark will win the BC Liberal leadership - it sounds like her proposal to have a "free vote" in the legislature went over like a lead balloon and I think that all the federal Tory types who make up so much of the BC Liberal rank and file will refuse to support someone with such strong big "L" federal Liberal ties.
b. If she does win the leadership - she may prove to have a lot of liabilities on the campaign trail - not least of which are constant questions about her role in the BC rail scandal...if she is so popular how come she failed to even get nominated to run for mayor of Vancouver??
c. It matters a great deal who the NDP picks as its leader. Some potential new leaders have much more potential to appeal to people than others and some some would be more or less divisive than others.
Christie Clark is hardly the invincible opponent that some on here are making her out to be, I think the BC NDP could do worse than face off against her. That said, I certainly wouldn't underestimate the BC Libs penchant for playing dirty or overestimate the BC public's sense of fair play. There's a lot of evidence over the last twelve years to suggest the strength of the former and the weakness of the latter.
The problem with that political stunt was that she was from Port Moody, over a 1/2 hour drive away. Vancouverites don't take kindly to outside interlopers coming in to take a stab at the mayoral chair. Renting/buying a house just prior to such an announcement doesn't cut it either.
The parallel that can be drawn was Vander Zalm's similar attempt at the Vancouver mayoral chair in 1984 for the NPA that also bombed. He was an outsider from Surrey and rented a house in Van City for that campaign. And he was nominated by none other than Gordon Campbell!
Yet both dim bulbs later went on to seek the premier's chair as outsiders as well.
BTW, Stock, since you also seem to be jumping on board the Horgan bandwagon, his campaign team might have a job lined up for you as John's lead campaign strategist for the Prince George area. I hear that the aroma drifting from the three pulp mills in PG tends to be sweet this time of year.
I'm not "lining up" with anyone and since I'm in Ontario my ability to influence political events in BC is limited to say the least! FRom what I've read - Horgan and Farnworth and Dix seem like credible candidates for the leadership - I don't know much about any of them - but if HOrgan was willing to post that picture of himself on his facebook page - at least it tells me that he's whimsical and has a sense of humour and likes to eat - I tend to like those personality traits in people.
It is advantageous for the Liberals to call an early election for a variety of reasons:
Recall
NDP down in the polls
The NDP will have to start all over again and bring clarity to a party that is in chaos.
Economy is still shaky
Liberals have unity and a election would give their new leader a fresh start.
And of course the NDP will have picked their new leader as if the 13 must already have someone in mind because you don't do in your leader with out having a leader to take their place because the group is convinced it has the power to make or break the NDP leader.
I'm am throughly convinced Carol was let go not because she was going to lose the next election but because she had a good chance of winning and their were those who felt they could do it better like Simpson who is still on the job of telling the NDP what the party needs to do next to come down further in the polls.
Yup Stock only old guard white males need apply. No one else would have any credibility. I think Christy is one of the more beatable opponents no matter who the NDP chooses.
A Farnworth versus Falcon race would be a toss up with Falcon likely winning on the basis of better dirty tricks and media cheerleading. Horgan is not a well know name in the Province. The party again has to choose whether it wants to play the game of get more of what is left of the voting public or try to rebuild democracy by actively choosing a leader who will appeal to the majority of 20 to 35 year olds who don't vote because the parties are all the same. There are risks of losing with either strategy but with one strategy you are building for the future by concentrating on young people. The young people I know would not give one hoot about any of the old guard white guys like Farnworth, Nix or Horgan. If we elect one of those men as leader we are again chasing the middle class old fogey vote.
Clark is the media darling who watched the lackluster leader Campbell win the people over with a personality like a doorknob all thanks to a media who wanted the man on the job. I wouldn't totally discount Clark and neither are the Liberals so it is hard to say.
``BC Liberals for another 5 years.``
BC term of office is 4 years not 5.
I picked this up today that the reason that Carole quit suddenly was that the Unions were willing to pay off the Party`s debt immediately BUT Carole had to resign pronto as they put a time limit on the offer.
Can anyone confirm this bit of news.
And maybe British Columbians want to be taken for a ride by another corrupt Liberal government. There's always that possibility.
As you conveniently forget - I would have preferred if the NDP had stuck with being led by a Metis woman named Carole James.
Now that she's gone - it so happens that virtually all the candidates whose names are being bandied about and who have no explicitly ruled themselves out of the race (i.e. Libby Davies and Dawn BLack) have penises and are not visible minority group members. C'est la vie.