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
Much todo about nothing here.
As the polls are showing, Rae's Liberals are a distant third, back to their 30 or so seats they got in the last election, Trudeau's upset boxing silliness has Rae looking over his shoulder at the possibility of Trudeau going for the LPC leadership, and Sean you seem to forget the LPC constantly voting for Harper's budgets.
Mulcair is absolutely correct that Rae is fearful, and so he should be.
I am saying it looks like the NDP behaved badly and therefore cannot win this.
The NDP wants the votes of the constituents in ridings held by Liberals -- they need to respect those people better than to waste time so their MP does not get to speak.
Sure fight with the Liberals-- attack them, criticize them of hypocrisy-- but don't use procedural advantage to muzzle them.
The Liberals were responding to the NDP preventing them from speaking and then took some shots at the NDP. When you are wrong it is better to stop fighting press the rest button and come back on something else rather than keep fighting from a bad position. I don't call that turning the other cheek-- perhaps backing down when in the wrong would be a better way to put it.
If you want to beat someone you have to stay on the reasonable side-- and then you can clobber them but when you do something that looks like dirty pool you lose the ability to claim being a victim.
So if the NDP wants hardball then take the shots-- if you don't like hardball play fair. Layton advocated the second approach and I want to see the NDP do that both because it is the right thing and it will also be a better strategy anyway.
North Report-- we don't care if the Liberal's look petty and stupid and disrespectful-- they can fill their boots. I have a problem when the NDP comes off that way. So I don't care that the Liberals said some stupid things-- they would have come off looking stupid if the NDP had not played games with time in the debate. We need to hold ourselves to a higher standard if we want to be respected.
Mulcair is a strong performer-- he should be able to out muscle Rae without this kind of procedural stuff that actually is disrespectful to the people we want to have vote for us.
The issue is this is a response on a budget that is hurting people-- I expect the NDP to not try to prevent the Liberals from expressing that on behalf of their constituents. We can do it better and so we should but that is different from trying to prevent them from having time to do so.
Let's face it -- we lost that tactic-- it backfired predictably-- we gave ammunition to our enemies and made our allies uncomfortable. We need to accept it was a mistake and move on and not aggravate this by further engagement in the tit-for-tat stuff from the Liberals on this. This garbage plays in to the hands of the Cons-- an opposition party claiming to be ready for government does not do this and has to avoid pettiness.
And I am not being disloyal-- I want the NDP to win and this is not how you do that. Therefore I want the NDP to improve and avoid this kind of public relations screw-up.
We need to acknowledge this-- we need to learn from it quickly to be ready to face the government and win.
But this is not how to win-- if we had been reasonable -- Rae might still have looked like an ass and the optics would not be both opposition parties are childish but that one was professional and the other whiney.
Rae can't help himself-- he does not need to be provoked to look bad. If we behave properly, he'll wear it and we will win. If we look as bad as he does people will either stay with the #@$% Cons or not bother to vote.
So sure cut the Liberals down but don't do it in such a way that you hurt yourself more than you hurt them and that is what the NDP did in this.
We won't win by being just a bit better than the Liberals. We will win by being a breath of fresh air. This garbage makes us look weak and scared. Dumb when the Liberals are not even deserving of being dignified with this attention.
ETA Layton knew when to ignore them and not give them a platform-- we should remember how effective that was. By trying to prevent them from speaking we made it look like we were worried about what they might say. Why the heck should we be worried about what that gang says?
Whinging about Parliamentary rules, sorry "conventions", is a tried and true way of losing electoral support and an important Liberal tradition.
Bob Rae could have spent the whole day criticizing the budget if that's all he honestly wanted to do, instead he made his own insecurity the story, better yet the Liberals could have not supported 5 of the last Conservative budgets if they wanted to pretend to hold any integrity on this issue.
is there another article about this that you've been reading?
'cause i dont get that it "looks like" at all from the NP article linked above. Just the opposite that it's Rae behaving badly.
see I read this part:
and what follows it and agree Rae's and the Liberals's asses are sucking wind.
DSloth-- the Liberals looked bad. But we muddied the waters by also looking bad. I am happy letting the Liberals and the Cons continue to look bad but I'd like the NDP to do better. Standing up in a time-limited debate and wasting time is not going to impress anyone. Since I am a member of the NDP I care what the NDP does and want to exploit not avoid the mistakes the Liberals make -- so fine let them be stupid but let's make sure we don't give them PR points by behaving badly ourselves. This has played very badly and won us nothing.
In the Communications strategy thread I started out emphasizing that we should not waste time with the inane or petty. That is what I am talking about. When we talk it should not be tit-for-tat stuff, petty crap or procedural games-- it should be factual, hard-hitting, respectful of the public that may be listening and professional. We did not make the grade on this and I wish there could be acknowledgement of that so we could learn and move on. Boosterism is not an appropriate response if we want to win. We made a mistake. It is not a huge deal. We can learn form it and move on -- but only if we admit it at least to ourselves. This strategy backfired. Thankfully, the Liberals out-stupided us so it did not hurt as much as it could have. Let us be the first of the two to smarten up.
I have read a few stories on this today as well as watched it on twitter.
Yes, the Liberals looked bad but so did we. I follow a lot of journalists and this did not impress people-- some of them important people becuase these are journalists who have recently been speaking well of the NDP.
This is how the article ended-- do you really think the NDP comes out well here? (At best the NDP only looks slightly better than the Cons in a situation where the Liberals could have looked terrible on their own:
****
Rae called Julian's stunt an "ego trip" rather than a "filibuster." He suggested it only served to silence fellow members of Parliament and had no impact on delaying debate, delaying the vote or altering the government's fiscal plan.
He argued turning into a "mini-Harper" was not the right strategy to defeat the Conservatives.
"It's not a strategy that's going to work but it says a lot about the NDP," he said.
Playing on lateleader Jack Layton's now famous final letter to Canadians, Rae suggested the NDP had entered a new era under Mulcair's leadership.
"If there was any doubt in anyone's mind in Canada, let me just say that the era of love and good feeling is clearly over inside the NDP. It's a new regime," he said.
"We've now moved to the world where anger apparently is better than love, arrogance is now better than humility and petulance is much stronger than respect."
What mistake?
I don't get throwing stones when there is no reason to. Yesterday was Tuesday and the Liberals had sfa to say about the budget but we're now supposed to believe they do?
Peter Julian does not strike me as a flake and i think you've just attacked him needlessly and the whole NDP.
Are you denying that the NDP used the House's time with a filibuster-style speech designed to consume time rather than say something new?
Are you saying we look good for that?
I never called him a flake.
But I am saying it was very poor communications strategy on a day that should have gone 100% our way. Our behaviour went a long way to neutralize Rae's own stupidity and that is not good. You get opportunities and you ahve to manage them well.
As for needless-- I explained the need-- we have to do better.
yep i am saying the NDP did not look bad except to Rae and his followers as the NDP consumed their time and i don't think it made anyone look bad.
you've inferred Peter Julian is a flake by condeming his actions of not just rolling over for the Conservatives anti-human budget the way the Liberals did yesterday.
What looks bad to me is Rae and the Liberals having sfa to say about the budget yesterday and whining today. Why are you repeating Liberal propaganda here don't we get enough of it in the anti-NDP media
Some of what was there on Twitter:
RT @gmacofglebe: Doesn't the Peter Julian stunt negate any #NDP criticism of closure, and having their time to debate taken away? #cdnpoli
Elizabeth May MP @ElizabethMay
Interesting stat: in time of Peter Julian's speech 128 MP speeches, Qs and comments could have been made. But he did have the right
kady o'malley @kady
Oh, come on, really? Have we not heard enough from Peter Julian already? Other MPs deserve a chance too! NDP MPs, even. #QP
Sit down Peter Julian..
****
A little less and then it would have been more.
13 hours did not look good.
At 4 hours with the best of what he had it could have been wonderful while still not earning the criticism of being a filibuster. Sharing the views of Canadians is good but there should have been no waste in there.
NDP website I hope has all the stuff there.
Anyway-- I wanted this just to be a learning thing-- pointedly, he went on for a long time before the complaints came up. He could easily have gotten a lot in there.
You have no justification to say this whatsoever.
SiO
I think you are way off base.
Rae is a non-event in Canadian politics now, and you are just playing into his hands. Best thing to do when he yaps is to just ignore him and focus on bringing down Harper. Let's not get side-tracked here by Rae's usual silliness.
Being dismissive does not make your point.
I have not called your opinions silly-- I suggest you rephrase.
i should care what Elizabeth May has to say? and who is Kady O'Malley?
and the anon tweeter labelling Peter Julian's actions as a "stunt" you repeating it doesn't attempt to make Julian look like a flake?
don't take it personally as i respect your right to portray anyone as you see it just as i have a right to challenge that opinion as not being how i see it and I see it as you talking Rae's silly talking points.
the budget sucks and i think the NDP should do whatever it takes to get awareness that they are completely against it and if it takes a fillibuster so what? The Liberals had sfa to say after all.
Oh my god, I hope this wears off soon.
Now you cant say anything the least bit critical- even in the spirit of the NDP performing better- without several people piling on in response.
stating our own opinion is piling on?
Legitimate criticism is fine but repeating the braying of the dying LPC, well that is something else.
I just don't think Sean in Ottawa's assessment of what went down is at all correct. He's buying into the completely false Liberal talking point.
It has been pointed out here already - they HAD the chance to talk, and they only used 11 of their 20 allotted minutes on Tuesday and you cannot deny that. You're responding to Rae's complaints as if they are valid or had any merit whatsover. His attack on Mulcair and invoking Jack's letter is absolutely insulting and he should be being slammed for that.
Unfortunately, New Democrats such as yourself are, in my opinion, way too quick to back down and listen to the Liberals (and the media's) biased, completely desperate steaming pile of spin. We NEED to play hardball on this one, because we are completely and unequivocally on the side of the truth here. We should DEFEND Peter Julian and Mulcair against these baseless attacks. We should express outrage that Mr. Rae has the audacity after the antics of his team to try and invoke Jack's name, when it is him playing games. And, we should be calling out the Liberals for their dishonesty, in supporting so many Conservative budgets, and having nothing of any real value to add to the debate beyond 11 minutes of cursory talking points when given the chance.
Now, the next day, they complain and complain as if they were censured. Attention, and memo to Bob Rae. Your party only has 34 seats. You are the THIRD party. You complain about procedure - well guess what, AS OFFICIAL OPPOSITION, Julian and the NDP have gained the RIGHT to do what they are doing. It comes of as whining, and we come off as strong and principled.
May I also add, that Bob Rae's antics after QP today were despicable - he tried to get in an extra question on the F35's beyond his party's allocation, by invoking 1) a point of privilege followed by 2) a point of order, which were both just further questions in QP. He was trying to get his face on TV, and trying to skew his allotment of questions by playing with procedure. He's doing exactly what Sean in Ottawa was accusing the NDP of doing (which actually they did not because as the OO they have the RIGHT to do exactly what Julian did). I've seen Rae do this a lot in the past few weeks, trying to flout procedure in order to force his face to be on the Parliamentary feed and I find it repulsive.
Also, as an aside, I continued to watch proceedings on CPAC and when the budget came on, it was Turmel and Peggy Nash, continuing like troopers to hold the government to account on this budget. When a Liberal FINALLY decided they wanted to say something, their benches were completely empty. I would have thought, if they REALLY had something to say, they would have piled into the House in droves and made sure they got their two cents in. Unfortunately it looks like they'd mostly all headed down to the pub. Oh well.
Instead of playing into the Liberal talking point, stick up for your guys. They are doing the right thing. I have no problem with NDP'ers criticizing the NDP if they feel the Party is in the wrong. But we aren't. Not on this one. And buying into the Liberal spin and trying to play nice when they hold knives ready to sink into our backs will get us nowhere. Hardball is the game to play at this moment, when we have a 3rd party leader more intent on attacking the OO Leader than a budget that is clearly wrongheaded, bad for Canadians, and we have massive electoral scandals (nice for Harper Robocall seems to be off the agenda), as well as procurement scandals with the F35s. There's too much going on here for Rae to be so short sighted and mean spirited, and we should tell him where to go.
MTM -- I am not buying in to Liberal talking points -- I should not have to quote myself from this very thread for you to read.
I am saying that the comms from this was not well played and it is important that we get that better and not open ourselves to the kind of stuff that came out of this on a day that could have gone 100% our way.
Running out the clock with limited time for everyone else does not look good and there were a lot of better ways to manage this.
You can disagree with me if you like but don't suggest I am repeating Liberal talking points-- I am expressing concern out of how this looked and suggesting the NDP should hold its actions to a higher standard.
We ended up looking almost as bad as the Liberals and that was not necessary.
Some self reflection is useful and can make the party better --
We gained in a lot of ways from our response but lost points on a lead-off speech looking like a filibuster. Our actions looked petty and they could have been managed better-- either communicated better or handled differently.
And yes, I think we should be critical right now and change these things-- you don't get to do this a couple years from now when we are close to an election.
And I disagree- hardball is not how we should be percieved to be playing this. Not at all.
Yes quite true. And recognizing the difference is essential. What I raised was legitimate criticism. I hope that is what you were implying because characterizing what one person expresses here as "braying" would be very out of line and a personal attack. So I'll assume you meant that mine was legitimate, constructive criticism which, whether you agree with it or not, is exactly what it was.
But you WERE buying into the Liberal talking points by even suggesting that their protestations have any merit whatsoever. In your post, you said:
"I am expressing concern out of how this looked"
Well, the only way it looks bad is if you take the Liberals line on its face, without any critical examination of their actual record, position, postures and actions.
It only looks bad because the MSM has become used to taking Liberal talking points for their word, and there's never been a party as galvanized and disciplined to stand up to their revisionist lines and filthy tactics.
There is NOTHING wrong with what the NDP did in this circumstance. It was procedurally valid as the Official Opposition party. It struck a tone that we are not going to take the Tory budget lying down, and that we are going to be the constructive opposition Party. And, it took a stand, tacitly, against the Liberal muddling and dithering that so aptly characterizes their past half-decade as a reluctant opposition party, refusing to admit and acknowledge that they are not in power - and who is now, steadfastly refusing to admit they aren't even the official opposition anymore and is whining for privileges not afforded to them under the parliamentary system. Why should they be afforded it out of the graciousness of the OO Party that they love to malign so much at every opportunity?
Just by saying or implying that it "looks bad", you are making it so and giving the Liberal lines traction, when there is no reason for it. You are saying the optics are bad - but they are only bad from a Liberal point of view. Don't give in.
Considering she was the only MP in the entire HOC to vote against the Libyan excursion, yes
MTM-- I don't agree--
However, I want to consider proportions. I have put out the impression that was there and my contention that it could ahve been handled better. I did not intend for this to be a thread-filling issue-- just an example over how we could do somethings a little better.
I have stated the case and some are not open to any criticism it seems. I'll leave it there.
I will add that I think there is nothing wrong with holding the party that gets my vote to a higher standard than one I do not respect and have never voted for.