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.

Tom Mulcair will be Prime minister - Thread #4

111 replies [Last post]

Comments

Brachina
Offline
Joined: Feb 15 2012
This was no accident, Mulcair knew this would piss off the liberals and some might percieve it as mean. What ever blow back it might have Mulcair decided it was would be worth it. This is just a small part of a bigger stragety, one I wish I could see fully. This wasn't about ego (if it was Mulcair would have done the 14 hours himself instead of Peter Julian) or how full of shit the Liberals are or even about the budget. This was about getting under Bob Ray skin and it worked, big time and the Trudeau shot makes it sink deeper. He's stirring the pot. Sewwing the seeds of division and chaos in the Liberal Party. Yet Mulcair is keeping his cool. This is psychological warfare Quebec Politics style. I having to admit I was worried people would see it as a jerk move, even though I agree with the NDP arguements, but then I read Ray's response and Mulcair's Trudeau comment. Its interesting to see where Mulcair goes with this.

mtm
Offline
Joined: Oct 16 2008

Yeah, I get it.  You want us to operate to a higher standard.

I happen to believe in a more bare-knuckles approach, so long as it respects the rules of the game.  We're dealing with a mean, miserable, corrupt government that not only has no respect for the rules of the game, it has open hostility for them.  It disgusts me that the Liberals in their infinite wisdom can in good conscience attack the rightfully elected opposition for doing its job, within the rules of the game.  They need to take their May 2nd defeat with humility and dignity, accept their lessened role in Parliament, and get to work, rather than engage in superficial displays of pomp, bluster, and arrogance - that is exactly what got them in this position.  But wait, what am I doing giving Liberals advice. Not that they'd ever take it - it involves checking their egos...which is the reason most Liberals get into politics in the first place.

Anyway Sean, I get what you're saying. You don't agree with the tactics rather than the underlying reasons behind the action.  The thing about tactics is that they are framed by reaction. Sometimes when you do one thing, you expect a certain reaction, but you get something totally different.  I don't know if the NDP anticipated Rae's outburst or not.  I certainly don't think they were baiting him into a blow-up (Liberals may suspect this), I think that is something you pretty much can guarantee from Rae anyway.  Rae making an ass of himself is assured, its just the unknown as to what will set him off.

The issue here is that the response to the tactical decisions of the NDP were (perhaps predictably) negative. Given that the underlying actions were 1) not wrong, and 2) completely justifiable under parliamentary rules, I find it very easy to defend the NDP in this circumstance.  Even if (and I stress if) I felt that the tactical decisions were not the best ones that could have been used, I feel that unless rules were broken or morality/ethics were compromised or misinformation was stated, it is our duty as supporters to vigorously defend the Party from an unfair attack from our opponents.

I want to see an NDP government more than anything else.  While I may have quibbles about tactics or strategies (which I actually don't in this case) from time to time, I feel it is in the Party's best interest, in Canadians' best interest to be disciplined and stand in solidarity with our Parliamentary caucus.

As NDP'ers we often suffer from an abundance of self-criticism and often in our navel-gazing we don't realize the damage it does to our credibility as a potential governing party.  I will admit it has taken me a long time to come to this realization myself, and it largely has to do with dealing intimately with these kinds of disputes in person through my various roles with the party, but I really hope that under Mulcair we can continue to do as has been the case under Layton, where we show confidence in our tacticians and staff to an ever-increasing degree.

 


Doug
Offline
Joined: Apr 17 2001

It was a bit petty and I hope it doesn't continue, but the Liberals and the media really did need to be reminded at this point that NDP and its new leader are the official opposition.


Brachina
Offline
Joined: Feb 15 2012

Doug wrote:

It was a bit petty and I hope it doesn't continue, but the Liberals and the media really did need to be reminded at this point that NDP and its new leader are the official opposition.

I agree. We need to be careful not to take it too far, after all if some of our MPs are made uncomfortable by this, and they were, its not something we consistantly want to do, but our points have been made, and we've gotten under the Liberal's skin.

mark_alfred
Offline
Joined: Jan 3 2004

CanadaApple wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

How did Mulcair do? Who did better?

see for yourself.

If speaking in a dull robotic monotone is prime ministerial, then Mulcair certainly was prime ministerial.  I found Rae more engaging in this clip.


ravenj
Offline
Joined: Apr 1 2004

The federal NDP does not look like the boy scouts we used to be?  Good.


mtm
Offline
Joined: Oct 16 2008

mark_alfred wrote:

CanadaApple wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

How did Mulcair do? Who did better?

see for yourself.

If speaking in a dull robotic monotone is prime ministerial, then Mulcair certainly was prime ministerial.  I found Rae more engaging in this clip.

Screaming like a lunatic about something you don't have answers for is what the NDP used to do, and be ridiculed for.  

Being Prime Ministerial shows that you are able to keep your cool (ironic given Mulcair's reputation), something that Rae doesn't seem to be able to get.  His artificial rage will get old and tired.

Meanwhile, Mulcair's calm, reasoned but sincere and relentless attack on the Conservatives will resonate with Canadians and project confidence, competence and, most importantly demonstrate restraint on the part of the NDP - a party that in the eyes of a ever-decreasing number of Canadians is reactionary, hysterical, well-meaning but idealistic.

Watching QP these past few days, it has struck me.  Mulcair, by projecting a quiet confidence in the face of Conservative scandal after scandal is doing much to dispel the myths about the NDP that have kept us out of power for so long.  And Rae, looking for media to pay attention to him in a desperate plea for airtime, goes into traditional NDP-style hysterics and hyperbole, blowing the image the Liberals had built up over their centuries in politics as pragmatic, middle of the road, boring administrators.

I have been incredibly impressed with how tough Mulcair has been on the Conservatives, and how relentless he's been over the F35 fiasco.  But I've been even more impressed how he won't be drawn in.  For example, Evan Solomon tried to get Mulcair to commit to rejecting the budget before even seeing it - something the NDP would have had no trouble doing in times past.  Also, he wouldn't commit to asking for a resignation from anyone over the F35s until they'd been questioned in QP, and the Minister had a fair chance to explain himself (knowing full well he wouldn't avail himself of that opportunity).  Meanwhile Rae was off spinning in all directions asking for the Prime Minister to fire himself, apparently, 

One thing about asking a PM to resign: No matter how warranted such a call is, you need to use it sparingly...and, it makes you look crazy.  Even if it is Harper and there is 1000 reasons why he's unfit to govern, those 999 other reasons are the reasons you sound stupid.  Because if he's still in there after those 999, whats #1000?

Overall, its been an amazing week in the HOC for Tom Mulcair, and a dismal one for the flailing, reactionary, unrealistic, attention-seeking Liberals.

One week does not change much in the eyes of the public, however.  It is going to take a sustained attack of fair, reasoned, measured, but pointed criticism of Harper and his agenda to help put Mulcair and the NDP over the top.  But the main thing here we need to remember - it does the NDP no good to go out as the official opposition and government in waiting, and scream and rant like Bob Rae, and call for the resignation of everyone under the sun...as good as that may make us feel for a few minutes or so.  Call it boring, but we have more to lose than Rae by appearing mentally unhinged - as angry as we may be at all the crap the government is pulling these days.

Competence is displayed over the next 5 years, as Canadians get more comfortable with the idea of the NDP being the next government.  And hell, we're starting from a pretty good position in the polls already!  The conservative record will speak for itself.  Rigging elections, mismanaging the economy, fixing procurement bids.  Canadians know the score already - they just need to be reminded...and when they go to the polls, we need to be that credible alternative choice that is staring them in the face.


Brachina
Offline
Joined: Feb 15 2012
Hopefully Mulcair attacks the Tories for this offensive idea. http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/employers-will-decide-who-com... It one thing to talk to business about what they need and taking that into account along with all the other issues, its another thing to let Businesses decide who comes to Canada. They've just turned our immigrantion system into just another resource for corporations to pillage. And screwing over more then a 100,000 people, the Tories deserve to be sued. I just want to puke. This, This! is the enemy Ladies and Gentlemen and why we need a Quebec City style street fighter.

janfromthebruce
Offline
Joined: Apr 24 2007

Screaming like a lunatic about something you don't have answers for is what the NDP used to do, and be ridiculed for. 

 

Well I don't remember Jack doing that and I am going to agree with Sean - I do hold the NDP to higher standard and it is about constituents we would like to support an NDP future candidate in their ridings, and so not allowing their MP too speak isn't showing good will to them.

I don't remember NDP acting like boy scouts but used the tactic of "going straight them". And how we got to OP was through rising up to occasions and not dumbing down. We don't need to get in a set-to with the libs, since it's the Cons who are the problem here.

It just makes both our parties look petty.


Brachina
Offline
Joined: Feb 15 2012
http://www.canada.com/news/Coyne+debacle+demonstrates+system+government+... If a Tory like Coyne is spanking the Tories like this, things are really bad for them and Good for us.

mtm
Offline
Joined: Oct 16 2008

No Jan, you're actually quite wrong there.

If you look, Jack did a TON of this over-the-top reactionary stuff back in 04-08.  I think 08 is where the marked change happened.  That was the first campaign that we actually said "I'm running for Prime Minister".  Of course, everyone laughed at the thought of an NDP'er saying that, but if Jack hadn't set in motion that state-of-mind change we wouldn't have ever won the official opposition mandate we now find ourselves in.

Jack took a lot of the heat in the transition period, where we started modernizing our message and our outlook, and started to talk about working constructively to get results. He wore the "Taliban Jack" slurs.  He took the brunt of the "used car salesman" slights, and the full on attacks of those who called him a socialist, a radical, a communist.  It is very hard to change the image of a Party overnight, but he did it: he set a course to change the party.  And we have him to thank for that dedication, and for setting us down that path.  It was simply amazing.

But it belies the fact that even when he was leader, when we were the 4th party with 29 seats early in his tenure, we acted like the 4th party with 29 seats.  And when you are the 4th party with 29 seats sometimes you have to say some over the top crazy bluster to get media attention - ESPECIALLY when you're the NDP.  So we played into this narrative a little bit.  

Now, in 2012, we are in a much different reality.  We cannot act like we are the 3rd or 4th party any more.  We have to take ourselves more seriously.  We cannot compare ourselves to what Jack did or didn't do at any point in his term as Leader, because for other than that brief couple of months before he passed away, he was always working with a 4th-placed party sized caucus, and that shaped the way in which he did things.  Would I be advocating for Mulcair to be taking the same tack as he is now if he had a Rae-sized caucus?  God no.  And that's where you fail in your analysis.  

I have to say Jan, I find your posts in these threads tedious and threadbare, and rife with revisionism and introspective Jack-reverence and deference to traditions that you don't even seem to understand.  The strategic considerations I'm sharing here is not so much to do with Mulcair, or Jack, or Rae, or anyone else.  It is largely situational - and I only wish that you can start to realize that just because people advocate for doing things differently than Jack did in the past, it doesn't mean they think that Jack was wrong. 

Please, accept that if Jack were still alive, it is likely (or certainly not beyond reason) that he'd be doing a very similar thing to what Mulcair is doing in this situation - being above the fray, being constructive, oppositional, but reasonable, reflective, and non-reactionary, and let Bob Rae be chicken little.

We've never been Official Opposition before.  It is Jack's legacy that got us here.  But acting as Jack would have as the leader of a 4th place party now that we're in OO, even he would have said that is madness.  

Next stop: Government.


Gaian
Offline
Joined: Aug 5 2011
Brachina wrote:
http://www.canada.com/news/Coyne+debacle+demonstrates+system+government+collapse/6412407/story.html If a Tory like Coyne is spanking the Tories like this, things are really bad for them and Good for us.
Yes, we have to go to bat for the marginalized and jobless, the hungry and worried senior and the future of our young people with at least the vigour and fixed intensity that the bastards now in control have brought to the job of walking all over those people. Anyone who has ever come close to losing hope, as so many have in this country lately, will realize that this is not the time to play footsie with the jackals. That is a new expression for me, but after finding myself accused of elitism because of the use of another expression, perhaps I should begin using the colloquialisms that are not challenged hereabouts. After coming close to losing hope a couple of years back, coming to learn what that really means, I will never again overlook how legislation impacts so many people. In particular the very old and the young.

CanadaApple
Offline
Joined: Dec 1 2011

janfromthebruce wrote:

Gaian wrote:
Some New Democrats would perhaps more appreciate RIM products made by the workers of Waterloo Region, where the factory buildings are not surrounded by nets to protect despairing workers. Keeping in mind the Mulcair campaign to support manufacturing in central Canada.

yes, I have a blackberry so it would be nice if we support Canadian companies

I like the idea of the app, but yeah, it's not much use for those of us who don't use Apple porducts.

and now that I think of it, it's a bit ironic that I don't. Tongue out


howeird beale
Offline
Joined: Jan 14 2011

Telling Harper and the nation that there's a new (NDP) sheriff in town was the entree. Irritating the hell out of Rae was the dessert.

A 14 hour filibuster is an important way of saying that the NDP will do whatever it can to stall, frustrate and hold up the neoCon agenda. It also instantly differentiates the party from the typical lack of effort of the useless, tepid, passionless, rudderless Grits.

Mulcair sounds fantastic in those interviews. Gentle without sounding weak. Reasonable. Intellectual without being arcane. Dryly funny. Prime Ministerial.

 


Jacob Two-Two
Offline
Joined: Jan 16 2002

mtm wrote:

if Jack were still alive, it is likely (or certainly not beyond reason) that he'd be doing a very similar thing to what Mulcair is doing in this situation - being above the fray, being constructive, oppositional, but reasonable, reflective, and non-reactionary, and let Bob Rae be chicken little.

Totally agree.

Just want to throw out there that the party still needs lots of debate and criticism. In fact, the very reason that I supported Mulcair with little concern about the party drifting to the right was because I expect a strong left-wing critique to be ongoing within the party, as well as a strong strategic debate. We can't be a party of the people if we don't listen to concerns of all shapes and sizes. I think the question of whether the NDP's parliamentary decisions are good or bad is a perfectly legitimate topic of discussion.


Winston
Offline
Joined: Feb 17 2007

mtm wrote:

Screaming like a lunatic about something you don't have answers for is what the NDP used to do, and be ridiculed for.  

Being Prime Ministerial shows that you are able to keep your cool (ironic given Mulcair's reputation), something that Rae doesn't seem to be able to get.  His artificial rage will get old and tired.

Meanwhile, Mulcair's calm, reasoned but sincere and relentless attack on the Conservatives will resonate with Canadians and project confidence, competence and, most importantly demonstrate restraint on the part of the NDP - a party that in the eyes of a ever-decreasing number of Canadians is reactionary, hysterical, well-meaning but idealistic.

Watching QP these past few days, it has struck me.  Mulcair, by projecting a quiet confidence in the face of Conservative scandal after scandal is doing much to dispel the myths about the NDP that have kept us out of power for so long.  And Rae, looking for media to pay attention to him in a desperate plea for airtime, goes into traditional NDP-style hysterics and hyperbole, blowing the image the Liberals had built up over their centuries in politics as pragmatic, middle of the road, boring administrators.

I have been incredibly impressed with how tough Mulcair has been on the Conservatives, and how relentless he's been over the F35 fiasco.  But I've been even more impressed how he won't be drawn in.  For example, Evan Solomon tried to get Mulcair to commit to rejecting the budget before even seeing it - something the NDP would have had no trouble doing in times past.  Also, he wouldn't commit to asking for a resignation from anyone over the F35s until they'd been questioned in QP, and the Minister had a fair chance to explain himself (knowing full well he wouldn't avail himself of that opportunity).  Meanwhile Rae was off spinning in all directions asking for the Prime Minister to fire himself, apparently, 

One thing about asking a PM to resign: No matter how warranted such a call is, you need to use it sparingly...and, it makes you look crazy.  Even if it is Harper and there is 1000 reasons why he's unfit to govern, those 999 other reasons are the reasons you sound stupid.  Because if he's still in there after those 999, whats #1000?

Overall, its been an amazing week in the HOC for Tom Mulcair, and a dismal one for the flailing, reactionary, unrealistic, attention-seeking Liberals.

One week does not change much in the eyes of the public, however.  It is going to take a sustained attack of fair, reasoned, measured, but pointed criticism of Harper and his agenda to help put Mulcair and the NDP over the top.  But the main thing here we need to remember - it does the NDP no good to go out as the official opposition and government in waiting, and scream and rant like Bob Rae, and call for the resignation of everyone under the sun...as good as that may make us feel for a few minutes or so.  Call it boring, but we have more to lose than Rae by appearing mentally unhinged - as angry as we may be at all the crap the government is pulling these days.

Competence is displayed over the next 5 years, as Canadians get more comfortable with the idea of the NDP being the next government.  And hell, we're starting from a pretty good position in the polls already!  The conservative record will speak for itself.  Rigging elections, mismanaging the economy, fixing procurement bids.  Canadians know the score already - they just need to be reminded...and when they go to the polls, we need to be that credible alternative choice that is staring them in the face.

+1

Kudos to Mulcair and Julian for throwing Bob Rae into hysterics as well - he looked and sounded completely unhinged.  There are many things that have to happen if we are going to win in 2015.  One of the key pre-requisites is that we have to keep the Liberals to a very distant third place position in the polls.  Some of the tactics that will need to be employed between now and then, such as the Julian filibuster, may leave some of us Dudley Do-Rights with a sour taste, but we have to remember that we are playing with slimeballs.

While a lot of ink (and bytes) have been spent talking about what a creep Harper is, we mustn't forget that the Liberal Party of Canada is also every bit as corrupt, slimy and cynical as the Tories are (perhaps even moreso, even if their policies aren't as draconian).

I am not shedding any tears over Bob Rae.

 


Interested Observer
Offline
Joined: Sep 25 2008

Partisan blinders are out in full force, I see. The NDP may attract more of the grumpy old man vote by trending towards pettiness, which could be helpful as they do consistantly vote. However, it better not be a real trend if they want the young, disillusioned, or non-partisan voters out there to help create another Crush in 2015. Wink 


vaudree
Offline
Joined: Sep 7 2001

NorthReport wrote:

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.



Before Trudeau's fight.  Rae seems to have developed a stammering problem ever since Mulcair became leader and everyone left the podium where Rae was standing to go after Mulcair.  Instead of accepting that the media may be curious about the new NDP leader and biding his time, Rae seemed almost frightened of losing the spotlight even for a moment.

Mulcair seems to have some smarts to him as to when to play cool and when to go on the attack.


vaudree
Offline
Joined: Sep 7 2001

 

mtm wrote:
Jack" slurs.  He took the brunt of the "used car salesman" slights,


There is a bit of truth to that in that, in the early years of his leadership, Jack always looked more genuine in person than he did on TV.  Jack became popular when he became comfortable in his own skin and stopped trying so hard to please everybody.

The media is interested in Mulcair because they see him as mercurial - that they don't know if they will get the teddy bear or the grizzly bear - and Mulcair knows it and it and is using it.  Mulcair's down side is that he appears to love politics and plays the game well.  What he needs to do is show that he really genuinely cares about something in a way where you see his heart stripped of calculation - because that was part of Jack's attraction, the feeling like he just saw something as horrible.

So far Mulcair seems to be working to heal rifts - today's Holocaust speech seemed a bit more measured than the sort Mulcair would have given even a year or two ago.


janfromthebruce
Offline
Joined: Apr 24 2007

geez, I believe if you reread my post I am saying that ranting and such is not the way to win hearts and minds, and basically I find it "interesting" that you feel you have the right to make judgment on my opinions in a "demeaning way". I also note that Sean also found he was devalued and demeaned by NP.

I think it is important that behaviour of political tactics/strategy will be viewed differently through different "view lens" and to dismiss some because one doesn't like the view doesn't make it anymore illegimate as the other - just different.

Personally demeaning the liberals is a waste of time in my view, and may have the opposite effect.

 

Let the pile on begin but don't worry soon I will go away because I personally find this such a waste of time and energy.


Michelle
Offline
Joined: May 10 2001

Brachina wrote:
I having to admit I was worried people would see it as a jerk move, even though I agree with the NDP arguements, but then I read Ray's response and Mulcair's Trudeau comment. Its interesting to see where Mulcair goes with this.

Well, my first reaction is to see it as a jerk move, because I'm trying to imagine what the NDP, or their supporters here, would have said had the tables been turned. 

Then I wondered, have the tables been turned before?  Have the Liberals ever done this to the NDP before when they were the official opposition?  Does anyone know?  And if so, how did the NDP react?

That said, it's also relevant that when the Liberal Party did get the chance to comment, they only used up half of their allotted 20 minutes.  But then, that could be spun too - all the Liberals needed was 11 minutes to get their point of view across, and the NDP couldn't even give them that?


autoworker
Offline
Joined: Dec 21 2008

13 hours! That's almost as long as 'Berlin AlexanderPlatz'.


Arthur Cramer
Offline
Joined: Nov 30 2010

I have to admit that even if this makes sense, I am not comfortable with it. I think that we need to show we aren't like the Libs, and have humility and empathy. This is an important part of how you win the electorate, and I think at least in some significant part, why Jack (blessed be his memory), was so effective. I think Tom needs to learn this quickly. I don't think this is a natural part of him.

I kind of wondered the same that Michelle pointed out; I would guess the Libs have never done something specifically like this, but I think is pretty safe to assume they have done things that were probably just as bad if not worse. However, two wrongs still don't make a right. As Michelle has asked, anyone able to shed some light on this.

I have been reading this thread, but I still don't understand why the NDP decided to do what it did. Does anyone have a real insight speculative or otherwise behind the strategy? I really would like to understand this. I want to give the NDP the benefit of the doubt, but not without having at least some idea of the why. Thanks.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

With the current 'anti-bullying' sentiment around the world, I'd advise the NDP to be careful.


Arthur Cramer
Offline
Joined: Nov 30 2010

Boom Boom, any thoughts on why the NDP conducted itself this way on this debate? One thing is for sure, there is plenty of really, really, really bad blood between the Libs and the NDP. I think Jack (blessed be his memory) and Rae would likely have gotten along ok, but I don't think it would have made a difference for the rest of the caucus on either side. I hate to admit it, but I didn't consider this a possibility after the election. I guess when you are accustomed to things being a certain way, it is hard to deal with really radical change. This is true for most of us I would guess. Beats me how I missed thinking of that.


Brachina
Offline
Joined: Feb 15 2012

vaudree wrote:

 

mtm wrote:
Jack" slurs.  He took the brunt of the "used car salesman" slights,


There is a bit of truth to that in that, in the early years of his leadership, Jack always looked more genuine in person than he did on TV.  Jack became popular when he became comfortable in his own skin and stopped trying so hard to please everybody.

The media is interested in Mulcair because they see him as mercurial - that they don't know if they will get the teddy bear or the grizzly bear - and Mulcair knows it and it and is using it.  Mulcair's down side is that he appears to love politics and plays the game well.  What he needs to do is show that he really genuinely cares about something in a way where you see his heart stripped of calculation - because that was part of Jack's attraction, the feeling like he just saw something as horrible.

So far Mulcair seems to be working to heal rifts - today's Holocaust speech seemed a bit more measured than the sort Mulcair would have given even a year or two ago.

Also read on Accidental Deliberations that Mulcair defended the no war position on Iran in cbc radio, which I think would have made many of the NDP left proud.

Stockholm
Online
Joined: Sep 29 2002

Actually as I recall Rae and Jack Layton hated each other (actually I don't think Jack had it in him to hate anyone, let's say disliked intensely). Remember that in the '08 and '11 campaigns Rae was given the role of being the Liberal designated attack dog against Jack Layton and Rae was busy giving hysterical speeches across the country filled with personal attacks and innuendo against Jack.

Don't be fooled by Rae's "witty patrician" acting performance as some "do-gooder" who plays by Marquess of Queensberry rules. He's a very bitter, unpleasant petty little man who is incredibly mean-spirited when the cameras are not rolling. I think he's having these temper tantrums now because he realizes that the rug is being pulled out from under him yet again and that he will never become PM and that means he will never resolve all those personal issues he has that really out to be between him and his psychoanalyst


jerrym
Offline
Joined: May 30 2009

I think Rae is worried that his assumption that he was on the gold-paved road to the permanent Liberal throne is now under threat because of the rising NDP and falling Liberal poll numbers. Even when the Liberals were on the rise there were always some Liberals who questioned picking him as leader because he was too much of a failure as Premier of Ontario, too old, too left-wing (for right-wing Liberals), and too much of an opportunistic turncoat [in much the same way that some in the NDP see Mulcair (I'm not one of those) no matter what he does]. To see his dream possibly ending when many pundits were saying it was all but guaranteed to happen has rattled him. The implications of having to deal with the reality of third party status and the limited opportunities it provides to shine now that the NDP has an effective permanent leader are getting to him.


Sean in Ottawa
Offline
Joined: Jun 3 2003

The latest results on the poll is accompanied by a headline that the NDP and Liberal leaders are trading insults. To me this suggests that the NDP has let the Liberals on the stage with them. And that is what happens when you engage with the third party. Otherwise it would have been NDP closes on government while Liberals fade to black.

I'm not a fan of cheer-leading. I'll do that during an election because I don't think that is a time for disunity. The rest of the time-- we should be sharpening and improving the party not defending it no matter what.

In other news the NDP has released an ad in Quebec. I think it takes the right tone and has the right visuals

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/04/05/we-continue-ndp-ad-mulcair_n_140...

For those who have not seen it the ad shows a person wearing a shirt that used to be of a colour Layton wore a lot, rolling up his sleeves in the way Layton did and then the camera backs out and you see it is Mulcair saying we continue. The message itself is simple and to the point and the existence of the ad is also a point. Have not seen the English ad but thumbs up for that one.


writer
Offline
Joined: Apr 11 2002

The ad: Publicité télé du NPD - On continue

Sean, the English version comes out after the Easter weekend.


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