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.
Mulcair-led NDP (thread #8)
April 23, 2012 - 10:58am
;;
How sweet it is!
NDP's 'Vegas' MP one year later: She's speaking French and planning to run againhttp://thechronicleherald.ca/canada/89438-ndps-vegas-mp-one-year-later-s...
No 'Mulcair Mania' thread yet? Must be a conspiracy.
Bravo to Ruth-Ellen for announcing this far ahead that she wants to stay and fight the next election campaign.
I'm waiting to see which candidates step forward sooner rather than later because they think Mulcair is going to become the next P.M., and we can just imagine what contested nominations there are going to be in the ridings where there isn't an incumbent New Democrat, or if one decides not to contest in 2015.
jacques come lately's?
Sorry to drift away from Ruth-Ellen Brosseau, but this was from the last thread:
See, throughout the horrendous destructive leadership race, I pointed out that at the bottom of such a spectacle was the notion that the party needs a leader who is an all-powerful tin-pot dictator, the face, the mind, the voice, the sole decision-maker. Otherwise, why would any progressive people have tolerated such a mud-slinging beauty pageant?
In this quote above, we see that reflected. A leader who creates policy out of thin air, and a follower who earnestly tries to justify it after the fact. It has to be after the fact, because the Glorious Leader has no need to share his Divine Infallible Thought with any mere mortal before spewing it into the nearest media microphone.
So much for the form. As for the substance, to think we have people on this board trying to rationalize that possession of marijuana should remain a criminal offence while we carefully research modern marijuana - just because the latest newly-elected Chief Bullshitter has said so - speaks far more to the slavish nature of the membership than to any defect on the leader's part.
I like Mulcair for all kinds of reasons (just as I despise him for some others). But it's the members who have created and who perpetuate the Leader monster. That's why I found it amusing that people were terrified or elated at the potential outcome of a leadership race. It makes almost no difference.
CBC is reporting that Bruce Hyer (MP - Thunder Bay-Superior North) is leaving caucus to sit as an independent.
ETA: discussion in this thread
He didn't like the bite of the Whip.
He voted with the Tories to defeat long run registry. I don't like his chances for re-election as an independent. Nobody votes for independents.
This will be old news shortly.
Hmmm... one Liberal gone, one Conservative gone. Good riddance.
It means the preferences of the people of that northern Ontario riding mean absolutely nothing to the Mulcair faction. The promise of a whipped vote over the issue only underscores the extent to which these people matter to the Mulcairites politically.
Northern Ontarians are used to being ignored by Toronto and Ottawa. Same old same old.
And yet you think that come next election the citizens of Thunder Bay-Superior North will reject one MP who didn't ignore them.
What about Charlie Angus, Carole Hughes, Glenn Thibeault and Claude Gravelle?
All NDP MPs from NORTHEN Ontario. All voted to SAVE the gun registry. All were RE-ELECTED by whopping margins last May. Don't you think that maybe they speak for northern Ontario just as much as Bruce Hyer does (or claims to)?
...and what about John Rafferty who had opposed the LGR to the bitter end but has now rallied behind Mulcair's leadership and his a plum post in the shadow cabinet and seems to be as happy as a clam.
The gun registry issue did seem to knock off Tony Martin in Sault Ste. Marie though...why it mattered there and not elsewhere in northern Ontario I don't know.
The Soo is the most urban riding in northern Ontario. I think Tony Martin lost because maybe he wasn't as hard-working as the other northern MPs and let his local organization atrophy. I don't think the gun registry was the issue. Correlation does not mean causation.
The NDP was once considered a pariah party here in the Soo. When I was a kid it seemed every election was a tossup between Tories and Liberals. I was actually surprised that Tony won this riding three times federally, 2004-2011 and provincially in 1990 and again in 1995. The increase in NDP support in Northern Ontario was established during Bob Rae's government.
The Sault has a large ethnic Italian and Catholic contingent. Tony is well respected for his anti-poverty work. I think it was Jake and Elwood Blues who said that Tony is on a mission from God.
Yeah, Tony Martin was very good on poverty issues, and I think he was one of the finest NDP MPs. His defeat was disappointing indeed and I'd be surprised to hear that he was "lazy." The other defeated MP in 2011 Jim Malloway is another story.
(And Sault Ste Marie does have a very large Italian population, going back over 100 years. The west side of the city historically was predominantly Italian. I believe around 25% of its population is of Italian ancestry.)
Yes the James Street West area to about Brown and Gore Streets I think. My family lived below the hill for a long time. My great grandfather was a land agent for the feds and school teacher way back when. My father's side are all Franco-Canadiens while ma's side are from England. Some of us are married into Italian families here in the Soo. Another big wedding soon actually. There is no East-West divide anymore. At least I don't think so.
Tony never got above 41% of the vote in the Soo. The Conservatives did in 2011. It's a risk you run as an incumbent in a swing riding like that. I do feel like Tony became more and more focused on poverty as his tenure went on. In the end, he announced his political retirement (after the loss), inviting the NDP to find new blood for the seat. I'm excited to see who the NDP finds to run for that seat in 2015. That seat represents a great opportunity for the party.
I think the Cons ran a well funded campaign in 2011. Our current MP should be easy to beat in 2015.
Although Mulcair has handled the situation well and Hyer has handled it like a fool this could have all been avoided if Turmel had let them vote independently like Jack did. They should never have whipped them for a position that was not official party policy.
Here is an interesting article:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/lawrence-martin/the-ndp-mus...
Martin says the NDP should get an independent but NDP initiative to show how the party would remake the democratic structure in Ottawa.
He is absolutely right. This would be an extremely smart initiative as it would set a new direction, keep the party on track, keep in the spotlight and give focus to the Conservative attacks on parliament and promote the number one reason party switchers could leave the Cons.
Is that true that former Alberta Premier Peter Lougheed let his caucus overrule cabinet decisions? Regardless, it is worthy of consideration by Tom.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/lawrence-martin/the-ndp-mus...
I'm going to agree not for the principle reason most might but on a practicality.
The vote was hopeless as the Cons had a majority. The registry was not going to be saved. As such whipping a vote was foolish.
I don't see that as a very interesting feature-- a good leader gets majority support for a proposal before bringing it to the table and would never lose a vote.
It is the other things that would make this so important.
I have mixed feelings about this, because don't forget the optics of not whipping the vote on this issue.
That works both ways, with the difference that, as Sean said, everyone knew how that vote was going to end. And when Layton managed to convince his caucus to support the registry - when the outcome was not so sure - the sky did not fall, even though that vote was not whipped.
And tell me. How many people in a year would remember if the NDP failed to whip a vote- a dim concept to most- that was always known to have only one conclusion?