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.
Saganash's leadership prospects
December 30, 2011 - 1:17am
Because Canadians are too racist to vote for him. Even better to be my first choice for leader of the NDP.
Quote:
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world.
That seems like spurious logic, RP. Canadians obviously weren't "too racist" to vote for him for the House of Commons. Given that NDP leadership election voters would presumably be less racist than the population as a whole, it seems silly to think that race would play much of a factor.
Although it's obviously generalizing, I'm comfortable presuming that America is more "racist" than Canada, generally. But Americans obviously weren't "too racist" to elect a black man president.
Not trying to pick a fight with you, RP. Just wondering what you're basing this notion that Canadians are "too racist" to vote for him on.
How many card carrying NDP members who would not vote for someone based on skin colour do you think there are out there?
Yes, he doesn't get mentioned much because the media tends to focus on the perceived frontrunners and he's not one of them. The NDP leadership race is incredibly crowded nd the media focuses on those who they think have the best shot. In the Republican presidential race down south, Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman get less media attention than Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich because they're considered longshot candidates, not cause of skin colour.
No, I haven't considered him as a PM (though my mind may change before the end of the race). But me not supporting him has nothing to do with his skin colour and more to do with the fact that I really don't know him, given that he was just recently elected and represents a province I don't live in. My vote isn't firm but if the election were held today, I'd vote for Peggy Nash because I like her experience and I'm more familiar with her, given that I live in Toronto.
I haven't refuted the premise because you've offered no evidence to suggest that the premise is true in the first place.
That a person of colour isn't leading in the polls is not evidence, in and of itself, that it's because voters are racist. The reason Herman Cain isn't going to be the Republican presidential nominee isn't because he's black.
I think he doesn't get media attention because of racism.
I think he might have a lot more support from NDP members if his English debate performance hadn't been so poor. Hopefully he can be more impressive when healthy in future debates.
It's not just one debate performance. At the federal convention in Vancouver this summer, on the televised debate, and at the BCNDP convention all-candidates forum - in each venue Saganash seemed hesitant and physically uncomfortable talking to a big crowd in English. I love what he has to say, I find him charming for sure, and I want to like him more, but I just don't thing that he is prepared - today - to lead the Official Opposition into an election. I would be similarly hesitant to send Dewar into that role based on how he comes across in French.
I never said it disqualified him.
Currently I have Saganash #6, which might seem low, and it is last out of the candidates I view as top tier or credible.
But I am certainly open to ranking him higher, and potentially I would rank him #1.
But he needs to show more comfort and confidence in an English debate setting first.
In the first debate it seemed to me he was mumbling into his chest the whole time. If he was sick, then that's understandable. If you're sick the day of the exam, you get to write it another day, but you don't get an automatic A.
Heading into the BC Town Hall I had Saganash #5 and Cullen 6. I thought Saganash performed better here than at the first debate, but Cullen shined, and so Saganash got bumped down to #6.
If Saganash can show that he in comfortable and confident in this kind of debate format in English, then he will move up in my list very quickly.
But don't expect that a poor (IMO, very poor) performance in the first debate is going to be anything but a negative for a candidate.
I read his blogs and Facebook posts, and I don't seen any difficulty in his English whatsoever. He did a one-on-one interview with Evan Solomon on P&P and his English was perfect.
Well, Saganash is known to be comfortable in the media spotlight, so perhaps he's fine one-on-one with an interviewer or a small group. He seems to get shakier with a big audience and some competition, which worries me because this is friendly competition - how much worse would it be with hostile competition? But if I see clear evidence that his spontaneous debate skills are improving, he could move several spots up my ballot. Until then I consider him to be a valuable member of the team nonetheless, and he would be great in cabinet.
Maybe. But that would be just a modicum of support, until hitting the glass ceiling... because he is Cree.
I'm rooting for him. Let him win or lose by his own merits, not "Well, I'd support him, but I know OTHER people wouldn't, so I won't..."
My remark might be interpreted a number of ways.
It was mostly the expression of an objection to the previous post, and it would be more fully expressed as:
"Maybe. But if that were true, then it would be just a modicum of support, until hitting the glass ceiling... because he is Cree."
Romeo running for the top spot is a challenge in more ways than I can count.
Because he is not your conventional candidate for the leadership of the Opposition, period. [WAY beyond the challenging in itself fact that he is Cree.]
I'll agree with that.
If Romeo were to win, what would Harper be able to use against him to frame Conservative attack ads? Is he more or less vulnerable than the other candidates in this respect? I find this to be a very interesting question.
Unfortunately writer, I think it would be all too easy to use racism against Romeo, even without ever doing anything overt.
Especially, just about anywhere in the West.
I'm not so sure about that, Ken. For one thing, a racist campaign would confirm people's worst fears about Harper. A racist campagin may also motivate the First Nations to vote in larger numbers, and they certainly wouldn't vote for the Conservatives in that scenario.
If it ever happened, there would be nothing overt. Nothing like the ugly Reform anti-Quebec ads of 1997.
First Nations people would see it of course, as would a lot of people. But we dont vote for them anyway, and I'm sure they wouldtake the ugly benefits as a trade-off for a few more FN coming out to vote.... including the sacrifice of the tipping point in a few close seats in the hinterlands of the West.
I'm not going to get into it, but suffice to say I can see the ads.
If you have lived anywhere in the West where there is a sizeable FN population close by- which is a LOT of plces- you should be able to get the idea.
Unlike RP, I do not think that means Romeo cannot win. In fact, there are ways that being FN, the adversity faced, etc, could be a convincing narrative with a lot of people who I would describe as 'comfortably racist' about First Nations people... who would vote for someone like Romeo in spite of that.
But let's not fool ourselves about what is out there and can be used.
For myself, If Romeo does not win... I hope very much that the new Leader sees how compellingly we need Romeo to be in every Candians living room on a regular basis.
He is smart, articulate, charming, very knowledgable... and after the leadership race no one will be able to think he was elevated to the front of the front benches because he is Cree and the NDP are a bunch of sappy liberals.
Romeo's presence in living rooms will go a long way to the healing we need.
Aristotleded24, it would also turn off a whole lot of the Conservatives' new support. There goes the 905, for example. Conservatives paid a high price for their ad making fun of Chretien's mouth. I don't think this kind of mistake is something they are eager to repeat.
They'd *want* to use it. But they'd know enough to not use it. At least not overtly. And it would really, really bug them.
The Ontario Conservatives had no problem running a racist campaign in October 2011. One could even argue, given their increase in seats, that they were successful.
Aboriginal people over 18 are less than 5% of Canada's population.
The Conservatives are very good at learning from past campaigns.
One thing they are good at is learning from total failure- adapting to pursue the same end in a better way.
There will never again be anything like the Chreiten ads [and they were amateurs then].... but that leaves PLENTY of other territory for them to play ugly.
And the ads would go right over the heads of everyone in Ontario except people who hate them. Even if it were pointed out to swing voters in the 905 how it was being done, they still wouldnt get it. Just think us paranoid... another reason to vote Conservative.
Check my location line. I've lived in the Prairies for almost all my life, I know full well how bad anti-First Nations racism can be. It is also the case that the participation rates of Aboriginal voters is very low (whether we are talking urban aboriginals or First Nations), but if they come out in large enough numbers, changes will happen. Even a slight increase in First Nations turn-out costs the Conservatives Churchill River, Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar, and Palliser off the hop.
And they were willing to write off more seats than that in Quebec as a tradeoff for generalized benefits.
Definite benefits versus costs that are 'reasonable' even IF there is a large ramp-up of aboriginal votes in reaction.
Polarization works for the Conservatives. Of course not, if they go about it clumsily. But clumsy is not the only way, and if it results in 'controlled polarization'... works for them.