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
That has been the pattern since the NDP was founded. What gets me is we have brainiacs demanding that we merge or form electoral coalitions with the Liberals. In BC that would mean the federal NDP has already seen its high point of seats.
Of course there are daily items in the MSM from one or more of the following "unbiased" sources; the Fraser Institute, the BC Business Council, the Board of Trade, the Chamber of Commerce, the Independent Construction Contractors, the Canadian Taxpayers, Canadian Consumers. Those are just the ones of the top of my head. They mostly share not only an ongoing crusade against the NDP they are also structured so that no one can look at their finances to determine exactly who contributes the real money to this relentless propaganda machine.
The voters in BC seem to buy into the unrelenting MSM meme and the election is always based on; "are you for or against the NDP and its crazy socialist ideas." It seems it is the same way to a large extent in Saskatchewan and Manitoba.
I think what it comes down to is that the NDP has a natural constituency in BC that tops out at somewhere in the 40% range when enough of the swing vote has been brought over (and bottoms out considerably lower when they have fallen out of favour). There is another natural constituency that is clearly contra-NDP, and you see that both in ridings that have always gone either BCLib or Socred provincially, and in federal ridings that have gone Reform and Conservative. It would be incredible if the NDP did pull even further ahead, but as it stands, their terms in government have been won with sub-41% popular vote against a divided opposition.
Perhaps if they do manage to slip through a split vote, their next term in office could be marked by the most squeaky-clean scandal-free well-liked BCNDP government ever. Now that would expand the natural constituency.
In the Cold War era, Liberals would never have seen New Democrats as their natural allies. But in the post-Cold War era, when the NDP is more like the US Democratic Party and liberalism has become an unnecessary concession the forces of capital no longer see any point in making, I think that the shrinking Liberal vote is up for grabs. The realignment of Vancouver municipal politics since 2002 is a prime example of that; we now have Vision Vancouver more closely tied to the Liberal Party of Canada's organization than to the NDP's. This would have been unthinkable in the 80s.
So I think that there is a very real possibility of setting a new high water mark as we have in Manitoba where New Democrats can and do win in a head-to-head right-left contest in BC. If the New Democrats nominated prominent federal Liberals and municipal centrists in key urban constituencies provincially, we could win even if Cummins face-planted. But as long as we narrowly lose Greater Vancouver, we're reliant on a right-wing vote split to pick up enough seats in places like Prince George, the East Kootenays and Kamloops to push us over the top.
If we were to nominate people with solid centrist credentials and feature them as star candidates, we could manage to pick up places like North Van-Lonsdale, Vancouver-False Creek, Oak Bay-Gordon Head, Saanich-North & the Islands, Burnaby-Lougheed, etc.
Well if we can find people with broad-based appeal like Gregor Robertson but who aren't presently occupied being the mayor of Vancouver, then yes, that's quite acheivable.
Back when it was thought that a provincial election could be imminent, there were murmurs of various Vision folks (Kerry Jang I think, notably?) who would be seeking BCNDP nominations and stepping out of the municipal race.
I think Christy Clark will move out of Point Grey next election. David Eby had a very impressive finish but in a general election I think he'd choose a different riding himself. Without a premier-as-incumbent, VPG has a very good chance of finally going back to the NDP.
I wish someone would explain to me why it is that at the federal level we are supposed to assume that there is some sort of a natural affinity between the NDP and the Liberals and they are both "progressive parties" who are united in opposition to "everything" Harper stands for - when in BC ALL FEDERAL LIBERALS are part of the rabidly rightwing Social Credit/BC Liberal alliance to stop in the NDP?
If the NDP and the Liberals really have so much in common - when can we expect to see people like Christy Clark's and her ex-husband Mark Marissen announce that they are supporting the NDP federally to "stop Harper"???
We already have a liberal party running in the election. Your prescription IMO will lead to another drop in the popular vote as more and more people look and see no real choice and choose to take a pass on the sham process that never leads to change.
If politics is not an avenue for changing the solid centrist status quo then it seems to me that as an individual the only point in being involved is too better ones business contacts and the NDP is generally a lousy party for that kind of networking.
I'm with NS on that one Stuart.
I am beginning to wonder if Vision Vancouver might be in for a big shock on election nite. Just saw a poll today saying Robertson had less than 50% support.
If Sam Katz can get re-elected despite his major mis-steps as Mayor of Winnipeg, then anything is possible. Don't count out Gregor yet, at least Gregor doesn't kick children in the face.
Actually said that Robertson had an approval rating of 49% - it didn't say what his DISapproval rating was - but given that on these types of questions there is typically at least 10% no opinion so i presume that more people in vancouver approve of Robertson than disapprove of him. In any case you don't need sky high approvals to win an election - ask Dalton McGuinty. From I can tell Robertson's oppopent Susan Anton (wonder woman?) has been a total flop as a candidate.
His disapproval ratings, along with the percentage of respondents who said they would vote for someone else, both exceed 50%
You seem to have re-read my prescription as something other than it is. I didn't say to run centrists everywhere. I said to run centrists in places only centrists can win. One of the ways in which the right-wing party in BC has consistently outdone the NDP is their capacity to present their party as a coalition, showcasing the ideological diversity of their big tent party. While it has consistently been the right wing of the party that has called the shots, the active showcasing of centrist figures as star candidates has been one of the ways in which they have pulled off squeaker victories in key ridings.
The problem with the NDP is that we function, too often, like a moderate line organization rather than as the unwieldy coalition we actually are. Instead of demonstrating ideological accord, we should be demonstrating ideological diversity.
I strongly oppose any further rightward moves by the party but that's what we keep getting because the feeling seems to be that to move one candidate to the right in a swing riding, we need to move the whole party to the right. This is wrongheaded. Gordon Campbell's victories came consistently from doing a better job than his predecessors and than the NDP at looking like a coalition.
If we want to beat Pat Bell or Shirley Bond, we need to tack left in their districts and run Peter Kormos-style populists. If we want to take Vancouver-False Creek, we need a Vision Vancouver liberal type.
Well,
(a) Nobody who favours strategic voting or mergers ever takes the position you accuse us of taking or describes the Liberals in the terms you accuse us of using.
(b) Polling by our own party has shown that federal liberal voters split fairly evenly between the NDP and BC Liberals even though the major leaders activists and leaders overwhelmingly support the BC Liberals.
(c) The relationship between Liberals and New Democrats has been shifting since the Cold War ended and since election financing has cut out more and more corporate money. What was true twenty years ago is generally a poor guide to what will be true next election.
So your clarification is that we need to run STAR right wingers in many if not most ridings but you oppose the party drifting to the right. I find little logic in that view.
If the NDP recruit and run star centrist candidates who win close races do you really think those centrists are going to want to be marginalized and sidelined while the progressives set the agenda. Personally I think they will not and they will be at the cabinet table setting the agenda. The status quo will prevail and no fundamental change will ever make it to the floor of the legislature.
The issue isn't what a minority in the caucus wants. The issue is what the leader and the caucus majority want. As for attention-seeking centrists having to set the policy agenda or not playing, I offer the counter-example of every Social Credit and and BC Liberal government since 1975.
I'm sorry if a winning strategy that has underpinned every right-wing victory in BC seems so incomprehensible to you. But we're hardly short of examples of it working.
If a minority of vocal cabinet ministers could "set the agenda" against the will of the premier, it would be tough to explain the rightward drift of the party under Harcourt.
I agree your strategy is a good one for electing right wing governments and if used by the BC NDP it will succeed again in that goal.
So you feel that a minority of centrists in a right-wing coalition will have no effect whatsoever on its policies and a minority of centrists in a left-wing coalition will unilaterally decide all of its policies. Why? Is there any reasoning behind this curious position?
No that is not my opinion and serendipitously it seems to be made of straw.
Who cares if Robertson gets elected or not, it's the control of Council that's the issue, and VV may well be in for a rude awakening on the 20th
Not that this has anything to do with provincial politics but since you raised it - VV and Robertson are leagues above Anton and the NPA and the fact of the matter is that there is no alternative to voting for Robertson and VV if you want to prevent the city being ravished by idiocy. The next municipal contract talks are up and chances are that if Anton and the NPA get in they'll be serious cuts in services, even more anti-working/middle class policies in housing (admittedly not much has been done though) and a likely long and arduous civic strike ala Sam's strike in '08. Not to mention that you can bet another False Creek style housing deal gutting social and mix-market housing will come along within any new developments on an NPA/Anton dominated council. Oh and don't forget the whole cynical ploy that Anton is trying to play with the bike lane issue. It's pathetic seeing as she just cycled around Europe not too long ago, but then again if that's the sort of Mayor (a Mitt Romney-esque pro-corporate twit who will flail in the wind) you want, by all means go ahead and boost her.
If it's going to be close to losing its council majority, then the mayor's office is all the more important.
But I agree: I think we're in for a sub-40% turnout, which spells big trouble for the centre and left. Also, as the sign war is playing out, it looks like the NPA's turn to crankish populism from patrician conservatism is paying off in solidifying its base in the southeast quadrant of the city.
The sign war could be misleading. I think the NPA does disproportionately better in homes with lawns, and Vision/COPE prevail in dense apartment buildings that often can't or don't display election signs.
I'm already compensating for that. But the look of SE Marine, 41st and 49th between Ontario and Boundary does not augur well for Vision, nor does the sign distribution in the Dunbar corridor. Those area areas are places where the Left needs to look competitive in order to win. And right now, we don't look competitive.
That's what people said in Toronto last year - who cares if Rob Ford is elected mayor - he's just ONE VOTE on council - he won't be able to do ANYTHING. A year later it turns out that we should have cared!
Check out the new Angus Reid poll in BC. The NDP is now 9% ahead 40 to Bc Libs at 31% and they have the Bc Conservatives up to 18%. Looks like Adrian Dix is making some serious headway vis-vis Christy too.
http://www.angus-reid.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2011.11.03_Politics...
New Angus Reid Strategies poll:
NDP: 40% (-2% from 2009 election)
Lib: 31% (-15%)
Con: 18% (+16%)
Green: 8% (N/C)
Looks like the Cons are bleeding votes from the Libs. But will the Cons actually win 18% on election day or is some vote parking going on here?
The Greens have also polled as high as 18% in BC, but a good chunk of that came back to the NDP. With Lib fear-mongering, a good chunk of the Con vote could also eventually come back to the Libs.
BTW, this is unbelievably the first ARS poll since March and since then Con support has certainly gained traction.
http://www.angus-reid.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2011.11.03_Politics...
The Ipsos poll had BC Con support a lot lower and had the NDP at 45% instead of 40% and the BC Libs at 38% instead of 31%...While its tempting to assume that people flirting with the BC Conservatives will drift back to the BC Liberals - you cannot overestimate just how REPULSIVE a slick federal big "L" Liberal type like Christy Clark is to small "c" conservative Reform Party types in the BC interior.
What I find most interesting about the poll is the flatness of everybody's support across the province. Once you exclude Vancouver Island, the NDP and Liberals are tied in regions throughout the mainland. This is certainly good news for the NDP in the Kootenays, Thompson and North.
The NDP has a bigger lead in Metro Vancouver than on the Island. Even better news.
I agree with Stockholm on this. The mayor of a city matters - alot. He/She gets to lead and comes with their own agenda, and gets to say that they were elected by all the people rather than representing an area of the community of the large. Do not make the same mistake as Toronto.