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
I'm hearing some rumours - what about Ken Georgetti?
I have to wonder of blatantly lying is within babble policy. I just ran this quote through Google, and this thread is the only place where it comes up in this form.
Stockholm has a tendancy to stretch things, but I've never seen him blatantly lie like he did on this thread.
http://www.publiceyeonline.com/archives/005615.html
Bingo!
Why are the loyalists continuing to fight against the dissidents?
Those who supported Ms. James are understandably upset about her having to step down - as well as the public airing of dirty laundry which led up to that decision. In part, that's because the methods used to force Ms. James's resignation are seen as being at odds with the party's union-influenced culture of solidarity forever. But what's odd is some of her supporters had earlier privately questioned her leadership - which was never enthusiastically backed by the party's membership base. So it possible their continued infighting is also driven by the threat Ms. James's resignation poses to their personal credibility or position?
- from public eye online website
I'm sorry, if I can't find a direct citation from James Carville and so perhaps i shouldn't have put the paraphrase in quotation marks. But then again, an anonymous posting on a newsgroup does not have the same standards of attribution as an academic thesis. Suffice it to say that Carville made comments on a talk show that i was watching to the effect that thinking you can win by getting people who don't vote to vote almost never works.
I think shrieking "liar!" at me is very over the top.
I guess that's why Naheed Nenshi was recently humiliated in the elections for Calgary mayor?
Cognative dissonance abounds. :D
~
And I see PPO, is learning a few neo-con tricks, in lies as truth kinda way. Considering the slam the BCNDP took in the polls after Carole was forced out, it is the 13 and those who egged them on, who are looking to justify and bolster their actions.
That doesn't mean that it is OK to just make stuff up. Try linking to a source, that's what I do.
__________________________________
One struggle, many fronts.
Beyond the anecdotal stories - what do we actually know about the turnout levels in the Calgary municipal elections and whether there actually was a big surge in the turn-out compared to the last contested municipal election?
I heard it with my ears on a talk show - I am the source.
Voter turnout was 53.24 per cent, up from 32.9 per cent in 2007
CBC
__________________________________
One struggle, many fronts.
Actually, it is difficult to say how much of this poll was a result of the NDP leadership crisis and how much the fact that Gordon Campbell is leaving. Given what I have learned of the history behind this, I'm surprised it took so long for an open caucus revolt.
2007 was not a seriously contested mayoral race in calgary. You have to compare to a hotly contested race. Also, turnout in municipal elections tends to be so low to begin with that its really about getting more people of any kind of vote - more seniors voting is just as likely to explain a rise in turnout as more younger voters. In general the turnout in a municipal election with a sky high turnout - by municipal standards - is still lower than what would be considered an abysmal turnout in a federal or provincial election.
Scott don't try to confuse him with facts. His mind like his facts seems to be made up on this issue.
Caville has been a talking head for 15 years. His last claim to fame electorally was the Clinton (Bill not Hillary) campaign. I am sure he is very knowledgeable about the demographics of who votes in BC and who doesn't and so would be the authority to go too on this issue.
Why do you think turnout is higher in a hotly contested race?
Isn't it obvious?
I found this carville quote on WiKiquote:
Although Stockholm's paraphrase was alittle off, and although maybe he shouldn't have use quotatio nmarks, I think he is owed an apology.
On the one hand, it's nice to take voters away from your main opponent because it inflates your total and deflates their total. This is so obvious it isn't worth mentioning. What people need to also remember is that there are various examples where inflated turnout of one base, or the other, has proven to be decisive in getting one or another side a victory. All that being said, it's not clear cut as to whether or not increased turnout will always help any given side win because there are instances where the left or the right has won with low overall turnout or high overall turnout. That being said, variations in turnout can help any given side win, especially if that change in turnout helps the non--incumbent party. Again, this is a simple truism and we can find many examples to back this up. All that being said, I think Carville's political skills are highly overrated considering the fact that he helped the Democrats to one noted victory where the opposition was highly divided (Clinton '92). Honestly what has he done, other than being a talking head, lately? Help advise Hillary Clinton's loosing campaign?
Alright, then compare it with the turnout of the last Alberta election (40.6%), which was certainly abysmal.
Energize your base speaks to people who vote for you already. If they don't vote they can't possibly have ever been your base.
No where does Caville mention people who never vote. Stockholm was just making it up as he goes along. Nothing new there.
Yes Stockholm nothing but the status quo is ever going to work. How is your strategy doing in Ontario. Are you getting close to second place yet? Strange you can't even win there with the right wing vote split. We need pick a leader to try to convince BC Liberal voters to switch to the NDP . Sure I believe that is a winning strategy. LOL
That was also not a seriously contested election.
Now Rafe Mair weighs in on the Liberal and NDP leadership races:
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2010/12/13/LeadershipRuns/
I've finally (beware of political commentators who say that) boiled it down to three.
In no special order, they are Mike Farnworth, Adrian Dix and John Horgan.
Farnworth is way ahead in experience having been an MLA for much longer and was a cabinet minister. He's likely the person with the fewest enemies in the party, which is the NDP's way of keeping score.
John Horgan, with difficulty, stayed with Carole James. He's the energy critic and has been frustrated in getting his views, especially on private versus public power spelled out as clearly as he would like. He has had health issues.
Adrian Dix is the pit bull. Back in Glen Clark's dark days, over a gaming license, Dix manufactured an exculpatory memo to help his boss out and, worst of all, got caught. He did own up and apologize and considering the serial lying of the current government, Dix's sin pales considerably.
Dix does, however, carry one very big plus. He's just what Carole James was not, a take-no-prisoners alley fighter. Looking ahead to an election campaign, this is just what is needed to deal with whoever the Liberal leader is.
I wouldn't dare try to divine what a sane political party would do, much less try it with the NDP.
That is funny, though it indicates Rafe thinks the Liberals and Conservative actions are sane. which is quite scarey and causes me to think about Rafe in a different light.
....and the NDP took another big hit in tonight's news, someone should do some damage control quickly. Not that they care about damage anyway.
Are you saying that the NDP did not contest the last BC provincial election?
Some of us thought they were trying to lose too.
Figures that Rafe Mair would pick three of the most conservative old guard loyalists. I've learned to respect him but I suppose we can only expect an ex-Socred cabinet minister/CKNW host to go so far. Should be interesting to see what happens when a candidate from the more progressive wing step fwd. Whoever the self described "centrists" hate most will definitely be the one to look at most seriously.
Care to elaborate? I sure didn't see anything on Global BC.
Regarding the leadership race......
Who's Declared Themselves Out:
1. Derek Corrigan
2. Corky Evans
3. Gregor Robertson
4. Nathan Cullen
Who's Expressed Interest and Might Be In:
1. Bruce Ralston
2. Harry Lali
3. John Horgan
4. Mike Farnworth
5. Leonard Krog
6. Peter Julian
7. Adrian Dix
I'm not sure what makes these three "conservative old guard loyalists". Horgan is apparently dismissed by the BC Liberals as a "radical leftwing blow hard" and Adrian Dix is by all accounts the most aggressive NDP opposition critic. I think some people are trying to project things onto the anti-James forces that were never there. It was never a "right/left" split - it was all about personality conflicts. One of the most leftwing members of the caucus - Mabel Elmore - was also one of the most strident defenders of Carole James - while some of the anti-James MLAs are very moderate tyoes mainly from the interior.
If you were thinking that dumping James was the beginning of some re-birth of the Waffle movement - you will be very very dissappointed. There is a reason why none of the 13 dissidents is talked about as a leadership contender - because they tend to be the dim bulbs in the caucus. But that's OK, I don't think most of them turned on James in the first place because they wanted one of their own to take over - they just wanted a leader who was a better communicator - and they will get that with either Farnworth, Horgan or Dix.
He's "retired" from being active in campaigns just to be fair. Also, in addition to the "one noted victory", he won some impressive state races including Harris Wofford's campaign in 1991.
We also tend to forget that Clinton received more of the popular vote in the primaries than Obama... 48% vs. 47.4%.
Seriously, where do you get that the 13 dissident MLAs are dim bulbs? I think I know the answer, I remember a Vaughan Palmer article you posted a while back... It's obvious you know next to nothing about BC politics except for what you glean from the rightwing press, Jenny Kwan is one of the most respected MLAs in the province and one of two NDP MLAs to retain her seat when the party imploded.
Farnworth would be worse than Carol James, his leadership would be a clear indication to progressives that the BCNDP is not their party. Dix has obvious baggage from the Clark era, the NDP wouldn't be turning a new page and they should expect the obvious attacks that will come with that. Horgan is the only one I don't have a firm opinion on but I thought his comments directed at the dissidents showed a disrespect for democracy and dissent and suggested an air of entitlement that wouldn't be attractive in a leader. These don't look like especially strong candidates and while at first I thought it was a joke about Christy Clark being such a strong opponent, if this is all the BCNDP has then maybe they should be scared!