NDP Leadership Race #134
Fair points, But I think his debate performances also helped him.
Without a doubt, CanadaApple!
It won't just affect the targeted ridings. It will be the number one issue of the election campaign. The daily wrapups will be taken up with pinpointing and exploitong the inconsistencies in the two parties' platforms. Harper will present the case that this three-headed monster can't possibly agree on policy, let alone run the country.
I agree with you here, and as I mentioned before, a lot of Liberal voters, if in a riding where it's only the NDP and Conservatives, would likely go Conservative, robbing the NDP of a potential gain (something Topp mentioned as a potential problem).
Meanwhile, the Liberals will be campaigning for government on a lefty-leaning platform with the NDP's imprimatur, and could easily scoop up those voters that went over the side in every election since 2004, while the basketcase NDP tries to define itself using the same terms that hobbled it in the past and that it just spent three election cycles breaking free from. If I were an MP anywhere in Ontario (except maybe Olivia, Charlie, Rafferty and Hyer and a couple others), I'd be gravely concerned about Liberal "poaching" in that scenario.
Not sure I agree with you on this latter point, though. Possibly strategic voting in ridings where it's a battle between the NDP and Liberals could take place. But Cullen's plan would put the emphasis on removing the Tories, and this possibly could reassure people that the ridings that are currently Conservative would now have less "vote splitting", resulting in people being more comfortable to vote with their hearts in ridings where electing a Conservative isn't an issue. Also, I'm guessing that the NDP under Cullen would be markedly more left-wing than the Liberals, because, like Topp, he will tax the wealthiest amongst us to close the gap between the rich and poor (and I doubt the Liberals would). So, under Cullen, there'd be a very obvious distinction between the NDP and Liberals (which would be less obvious under Mulcair or Dewar, increasing the likelihood of strategic voting with these two).
With all the talk about the positioning of the NDP, I'm glad to see Megan Leslie speaking out about the fact that Jack Layton did NOT move the NDP to the centre.
I’m ticked at all the media commentary about Jack moving us to the centre. He never did that. He was radical. He just had a common-sense, folksy way of communicating that brought people to us. I trusted him, absolutely, to do this, and to keep us true to our values, even if (in moments) I was uneasy with a position. And he did it.
I hope that the next leader can be both a dynamic communicator, *and* stay true to our social democratic values. That’s the sweet spot that the new leader has to straddle.
A point that really needs to be made by such an eloquent MP (dare I say a future Prime Minister?). This is always part of what I loved about Jack: that he understood that we could build and renew the party without moving to the centre.
This is very much in contrast to what's been done by supposedly social democratic parties in just about every other industrialized country, where basic social democratic values have been abandoned. And it's part of why I think it's concerning when Thomas Mulcair says that we need to renew in the way that parties in other countries have. The kind of renewal that other parties in other countries have undergone is fundamentally opposed to the kind of renewal Jack Layton led. And if the kind of change that other social democratic parties have undergone is the kind Thomas Mulcair advocates, then as far as I'm concerned, he can keep his change.