babble-intro-img
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.

Who are u supporting for NDP Leader, how will u mark your ballot, and why? #10

NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

;;


Comments

NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

My ballot looks like this:

 

1 - Singh

2 - Ashton

3 - Mulcair


Mucker
Offline
Joined: Mar 8 2012

I'm curious where we stand right now, in terms of the Babble decision?


CanadaApple
Offline
Joined: Dec 1 2011

I didn't get a reply to this in the last thread, so I'll ask again, does anyone know what the deadline is for voting in-advanced online?


DSloth
Offline
Joined: Apr 26 2011

 

 

Babble Declared Preferences 15.3.12

Final Ballot: Mulcair 48, Cullen 26


1st Ballot: Mulcair 33, Saganash 12, Cullen 12, Ashton 12, Nash 8, Topp 8, Singh 3, Dewar 2.
2nd Ballot: Mulcair 34, Saganash 12, Cullen 13, Ashton 12, Nash 8, Topp 8, Singh 3.
3rd Ballot: Mulcair 34, Saganash 12, Cullen 14, Ashton 13, Nash 8, Topp 8.
4th Ballot: Mulcair 37, Saganash 12, Cullen 19, Ashton 17.
5th Ballot: Mulcair 39, Cullen 19, Ashton 20

Trends: There were only marginal movements in the numbers but sometimes that's all you need to effect a seismic shift in the course of the balloting. Peggy Nash's slow descent has finally knocked her to the lower tier. This can be a real danger for a candidate with a lot of second ballot support like Nash enjoys on Babble, she never gets to profit from Topp or Ashton voters' second choice because she was knocked out too early.  Cullen may be a deeper threat to Mulcair anyway since a lot of Mulcair's second ballot support was locked up with his main competitor in this scenario.


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

CanadaApple wrote:

I didn't get a reply to this in the last thread, so I'll ask again, does anyone know what the deadline is for voting in-advanced online?

 

Voting the day of starts at 5 PM on Friday, March 23rd so it must be then or before that.

Check leadership2012.ca for details I believe


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Mucker wrote:

I'm curious where we stand right now, in terms of the Babble decision?

Huh? What babble decision?


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

The deadline for voting by mail is now March 22nd. We must receive your ballot by then for it to be counted.

Remember, you can also vote:

  1. Online
  2. At Convention
    If you haven't registered for Convention, there's still time to be a part of this historic event in person. Click here to sign up online, but act now - spaces are limited and going fast.

IMPORTANT: Make sure to bring your voter ID and PIN to Convention. You can't vote without them!

Questions?
Call our Voter Hotline at 1-866-525-2555, extension 8001 (english) and 8002 (french),
or email membership@ndp.ca.

Together, we'll choose our new leader - and Canada's next Prime Minister.

Thank you for being a part of it.

Heather Wilson
Director of Membership
Canada’s New Democrats

P.S. For more information, please visit leadership2012.ca


Mucker
Offline
Joined: Mar 8 2012

Boom Boom wrote:

Mucker wrote:

I'm curious where we stand right now, in terms of the Babble decision?

Huh? What babble decision?

The Babble choice for leader, the tally that's being taken of Babbler's ballot by ballot support...

I couldn't think of a better way to describe it.  Sorry.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Oh - okay - thanks!

 


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

Oops


Lard Tunderin Jeezus
Offline
Joined: Aug 27 2001

1. Ashton

2. Nash

Ashton because, although I don't think she can win this time out, she brings renewal and fresh ideas and strong ideals to the party.

Nash because she represents the NDP I want, and she's ready for prime time today.


DSloth
Offline
Joined: Apr 26 2011

Mucker wrote:


I'm curious where we stand right now, in terms of the Babble decision?


Added the update at post #4


Mucker
Offline
Joined: Mar 8 2012

Awesome.  Thanks DSloth.


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

Ditto.


Gaian
Offline
Joined: Aug 5 2011
Mulcair and then Cullen, because from the looks of the change in climate gripping my part of Ontario, records falliing like the hail that hit this morning, Homo sapiens really doesn't have that much time to decide on how to leave a decent legacy for the junior types.

Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Okay, here's how I voted by mail-in ballot (please don't throw rocks at me):

1. Mulcair

2. Nash

3. Ashton

Should I duck and run for cover now?  Laughing


Hoodeet
Offline
Joined: Dec 8 2008

Boom Boom wrote:

Okay, here's how I voted by mail-in ballot (please don't throw rocks at me):

1. Mulcair

2. Nash

3. Ashton

Should I duck and run for cover now?  Laughing

Well,  what do you know?  same three I voted for, just in a different order!  Perhaps I should be running for cover once Mulcair is crowned.

Hoodeet (JW)


Hoodeet
Offline
Joined: Dec 8 2008

Boom Boom wrote:

Okay, here's how I voted by mail-in ballot (please don't throw rocks at me):

1. Mulcair

2. Nash

3. Ashton

Should I duck and run for cover now?  Laughing

/quote-Hoodeet:

Well,  what do you know?  same three I voted for, just in a different order!  Perhaps I should be running for cover once Mulcair is crowned.

 

 


NicHull
Offline
Joined: May 6 2011

My spouse and I just voted online, we have exactly the same ranking:

1 - Mulcair

2 - Ashton

3 - Cullen

4 - Nash

5 - Topp

6 - Singh

7 - Dewar


Tide Waters
Offline
Joined: Mar 15 2012

Been a looooong time since I've written a post on babble, although I have sometimes stopped by to catch up on babbler interests...

This leadership race was interesting from the perspective of someone who hasn't met any of the contenders. I'd only the contestants' debate performances; campaign events and materials; and experience, if any, as MPs to go by.

I ignored media hype. Journalists seem desperate for a firebrand.

Also ignored endorsements. They tend to put me off especially when used, e.g., in campaign material to send me a message not from the candidate but from a member of the party elite. Such 3rd-person tactics create a distance that makes me uncomfortable.

Anyway, I voted yesterday:

1. Cullen; 2. Mulcair; 3. Topp.

Did rank all seven candidates, but I think it's doubtful it'll go more than three ballots.


algomafalcon
Offline
Joined: Oct 14 2011

DSloth wrote:

 

 

Babble Declared Preferences 15.3.12

Final Ballot: Mulcair 48, Cullen 26


1st Ballot: Mulcair 33, Saganash 12, Cullen 12, Ashton 12, Nash 8, Topp 8, Singh 3, Dewar 2.
2nd Ballot: Mulcair 34, Saganash 12, Cullen 13, Ashton 12, Nash 8, Topp 8, Singh 3.
3rd Ballot: Mulcair 34, Saganash 12, Cullen 14, Ashton 13, Nash 8, Topp 8.
4th Ballot: Mulcair 37, Saganash 12, Cullen 19, Ashton 17.
5th Ballot: Mulcair 39, Cullen 19, Ashton 20

Trends: There were only marginal movements in the numbers but sometimes that's all you need to effect a seismic shift in the course of the balloting. Peggy Nash's slow descent has finally knocked her to the lower tier. This can be a real danger for a candidate with a lot of second ballot support like Nash enjoys on Babble, she never gets to profit from Topp or Ashton voters' second choice because she was knocked out too early.  Cullen may be a deeper threat to Mulcair anyway since a lot of Mulcair's second ballot support was locked up with his main competitor in this scenario.

 

My understandingg is that Saganash votes will not be counted at the convention since he withdrew from the race.

While its interesting to note that he still has substantial support here, would it affect the ballot tabulation if you went for next choice on 2nd ballot?


RevolutionPlease
Offline
Joined: Oct 15 2007
Gaian wrote:
Mulcair and then Cullen, because from the looks of the change in climate gripping my part of Ontario, records falliing like the hail that hit this morning, Homo sapiens really doesn't have that much time to decide on how to leave a decent legacy for the junior types.
And you have the nerve to cast wide swaths about the "great whatever"? None of these candidates will do sweet fuck all for the environment. They'll all pay lip service to big business and the only legacy you'll leave is sympathy for you believing that the legacy you desire will come about through modern electoral politics. Sorry to be blunt Gaian, I'll likely lean Mulcair also, due to the unfortunate times we live in but your painting of the picture seems very abstract. I'm with you in spirit but perhaps you'll recognize sometime, that your take of the situation is just as lacking as the unread like myself. We need to find somewhere to meet in the middle.

DSloth
Offline
Joined: Apr 26 2011

algomafalcon wrote:

DSloth wrote:

 

 

Babble Declared Preferences 15.3.12

Final Ballot: Mulcair 48, Cullen 26


1st Ballot: Mulcair 33, Saganash 12, Cullen 12, Ashton 12, Nash 8, Topp 8, Singh 3, Dewar 2.
2nd Ballot: Mulcair 34, Saganash 12, Cullen 13, Ashton 12, Nash 8, Topp 8, Singh 3.
3rd Ballot: Mulcair 34, Saganash 12, Cullen 14, Ashton 13, Nash 8, Topp 8.
4th Ballot: Mulcair 37, Saganash 12, Cullen 19, Ashton 17.
5th Ballot: Mulcair 39, Cullen 19, Ashton 20

Trends: There were only marginal movements in the numbers but sometimes that's all you need to effect a seismic shift in the course of the balloting. Peggy Nash's slow descent has finally knocked her to the lower tier. This can be a real danger for a candidate with a lot of second ballot support like Nash enjoys on Babble, she never gets to profit from Topp or Ashton voters' second choice because she was knocked out too early.  Cullen may be a deeper threat to Mulcair anyway since a lot of Mulcair's second ballot support was locked up with his main competitor in this scenario.

 

My understandingg is that Saganash votes will not be counted at the convention since he withdrew from the race.

While its interesting to note that he still has substantial support here, would it affect the ballot tabulation if you went for next choice on 2nd ballot?

Well it's not going to change the final result. Mulcair has robust support amongst the Saganash voters, but I'll probably try to mimic the actual convention vote as close as possible next time which I believe means dropping Saganash off after the 1st ballot. 


Gaian
Offline
Joined: Aug 5 2011
The "great whatever" would not last here for a moment, RP. You see, one reads all sorts of cricicism about what the average voter buys into, and it reaches a helluva pinnacle of know-nithingness stateside, but for some strange reason, its taboo to give a name to that element among the Great Whatever. "Sorry to be blunt Gaian" No problem, what I am aiming as is bluntness, but it comes up against the pall of PC. And there must be a descriptor outside of sociology. Back in the winter of '75 at the U of T, I read a paper by Taylor on the possibility of our achieving some sort of concensus and moving to curb climate change. Tha's 1975. He said that things will have to get much worse before we all row together on it. Achieve a "spirit of Dunkirk." I had gone to the U of T for graduate studies in the hope of finding economic theory that did not depend on growth. No luck. But in looking at wartime economies, one sees that anything is possible. We will need to be that serious.

RevolutionPlease
Offline
Joined: Oct 15 2007
Well said Gaian, and why I only object to you using this goal as a point of reason for how you will choose the leader. Your good intentions are wasted on those folk. None are even close to that serious. There's good reason to vote Mulcair but carry the environmental struggle further and don't cheapen it by linking it to the choice of NDP leader. That's all I'm asking, if you can stop and see what i'm saying. Real environmental change is bigger than the NDP and can include folkd of all stripes.

mark_alfred
Offline
Joined: Jan 3 2004

Mine are Topp, then Nash, then Cullen.  I like the progressive values that these three stand for, and I think they'd all be able to unite and invigorate the party in a positive winning way.  I am not fond of Cullen's pre-election cooperation plan, but otherwise I like what he stands for -- his policies are very close to Topp's.


Snowd
Offline
Joined: Feb 14 2012

Nathan Cullen

Nathan

Cullen

 


CanadaApple
Offline
Joined: Dec 1 2011

I was thinking about voting in real time during the leadership convention, but the computer hasn't been the most reliable, so perhaps it would be best to do it before hand. I'm only likely to mark 2-4 candidates anyway.


Wilf Day
Offline
Joined: Oct 31 2002

Gaian wrote:
Back in the winter of '75 at the U of T, I read a paper by Taylor on the possibility of our achieving some sort of concensus and moving to curb climate change. Tha's 1975. He said that things will have to get much worse before we all row together on it. Achieve a "spirit of Dunkirk." I had gone to the U of T for graduate studies in the hope of finding economic theory that did not depend on growth. No luck. But in looking at wartime economies, one sees that anything is possible. We will need to be that serious.

Or else we will have to move our cities away from the coast. I have a strong suspicion that China is already planning to do so. They can't stop growing for at least another generation.


A_J
Offline
Joined: Aug 12 2008

Since Singh has all but endorsed Mulcair, I might just cut to the chase and mark him number one on my ballot.

Several nominally Liberal and even Conservative family members have lately been indicating a great deal of interest in a Mulcair-led NDP so I have a feeling that's the way to go forward.  If he can include them in the party, he's doing something right.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments