ONDP Leadership IV

Scarberian wrote:

Paul Miller, the rookie from Hamilton, has endorsed Prue. It seems the race is now between Prue and Tabuns, and people who might have once been leaning towards one of the other candidates are now more likely to pick one of those two.

http://www.thespec.com/article/480272

Scarberian wrote:

Paul Miller, the rookie from Hamilton, has endorsed Prue. It seems the race is now between Prue and Tabuns, and people who might have once been leaning towards one of the other candidates are now more likely to pick one of those two.

 

With respect there is zero evidence that this is the case.  So far I personally know more people supporting Howrath, a bunch supporting Bisson, and some Prue.  I have yet to come across anyone in my circle of friends and contacts in the NDP supporting Tabuns.  I expect his support is highly concentrated to one part of Ontario and is virtually nonexsistant outside of it.  The largest group has no idea who to support at this point.

This is a one member, one vote leadership contest.  An NDP member from Punkydoodles Corners is as important as someone from the Beaches.  So how anybody can say they know where the most support lies for any of the candidates is beyond me.  At this point the broadest base of support is likely Horwath and Prue (thanks to a long list of built up contacts).  Bisson, while concentrated comes from an area with a lot of NDP members and is the sentimental favourite of a lot of those members. 

If my friends and my partner are any indication they went to all candidates meetings with a generally open mind and came away impressed with Andrea Horwath, were surprised that Micheal Prue was less boring than they expected, enjoyed Gilles Bisson and decidedly turned off by Peter Tabuns.  If they are anywhere close to typical reactions I expect the race is something like this at this point

1.  more than 50% undecided

2.  Horwath

3.  Prue

4.  Bisson

5.  Tabuns

 

My guess would be that 2 and 3 are fairly close and that 4 and 5 are close but a fair ways behind 2 and 3.

Oh Mojo... the only thing I ever hear about Tabuns is that he's a good organizer. His entire sales pitch is that he's a good organizer and I don't doubt that it's true. I've met loads of people from the GTA that are supporting Tabuns and when asked why they say it's because he's a good organizer. And look, they're physical proof that it's true. It's like the story about stone soup - only it's Tabuns claiming that he can organize the NDP and the only thing that he asks is for you to join him. So you join him and ta-daaa - Tabuns has a crowd of followers so he must be a good organizer. He's the Jeff Skilling of the NDP selling us absolutely nothing. So what happens when people wake up and realize the shallow emptiness in their faith in Tabuns? Well you get your current situation with the ONDP - people disbanding from the party, alarmingly low levels of membership, people feeling alienated and fed up with investing in a party that doesn't appear to stay true to its socialist (and I'll emphasize labour) principles. And why do I believe this moment will come when people lose faith in Tabuns - because his despicable labour reputation will always be there to haunt him. And don't kid yourself that the media, Lib.s and Con's won't be more than eager to pick his 2004 past use it against the NDP every chance they can get. If we're serious about getting labour back on good terms with the NDP it's going to take more than Tabuns good organizing skills; it's going to take someone who is credible and Mr. T ain't that kind of man...

As far as I can tell there's little difference between the candidates on policy except that Prue wants to address the separate school issue and the others want to avoid it like the plague.

Even tepid support for maybe, maybe actually debating the question drives the party brass crazy.  Too bad. 

It's interesting how those of us who actually think this is an important issue have been accused of being "one-issue voters" who don't care about pressing issues like the economy, child poverty, etc. - I can't tell any difference between any of the candidates on this issue.  The separate school issue is the only one that really distinguishes them. 

One thing New Democrats are starting to learn is that OMOV (One Member One Vote) does little to build the party and can do a lot to harm it.  OMOV leadership races by themselves do not attract much media or public interest and do little to build popular support.  People don't  flock to join a party just because they can vote for a leader of that party.  Those who are signed up by a leadership campaign (a task that costs time and money) may not even bother casting a ballot and the current wisdom is few of these new members wlil renew their membeship or do much for the party, regarlesss of who is leader. More bang for a buck reaching out to current members with mailings and phonings.

  Add upwards of half a million dollars  to the current party debt for this flawed exercise. 

 

 

We in the Socialist Caucus spent a lot of time and effort trying to persuade Kormos to run.  When it was clear that wasn''t going to happen, we decided to give critical support to Michael Prue.  Pruel has demonstrated he is willing to see the party have debate on issues at convention, including debate on many issues the Socialiat Caucus considers important for the party to debate.  Of course Michael does not support the Socialist Caucus position on many issues, but we  like to see debate on issues at convention and like to see our party following policy decided at convention and council..

I am in the minority in the Socialist Caucus,  as I support our party positon on full funding for Catholic schools,   Yet, I recognize that there are sisters and brothers in our party who wish to argue for a change in that position. I have come to accept their right to a debate on the issue at convention, without giving up any of my rights to be on the other side. 

Micheal Prue has persuaded me and the Socialist Caucus that we accepts and will work to have debate in this party on a lot of issues. I and the Socialist Caucus give him critical support.

aka Mycroft wrote:

I'm also curious about the Socialist Caucus' stated opposition to the "coalition" which is at odds with the arguments both peterjcassidy and janfromthebruce have been making in favour of it. How could the Socialist Caucus take a position that's at odds with what many (most?) of its steering committee are saying?

The Socialsit Caucus is not monolithic. Most in the SC are against  funding Catholic Schools.  I am in a minoirty there, Jan in the majority.  Most in the SC are opposed to the coalition., Jan and I are in the minority thre.

However the Socialst Caucus agrees there should be debate in the party on issues and the party should decide policy,not the caucus.  . Thats why most of us agree there should be a debate at convention on issues like school funding to determine the party position and why we think there should be a NDP Federal Council before the January 27th budget to see where the party stand on the coalition. Both are doable and democratic.

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

I haven't seen much evidence of outreach beyond bits of Toronto. 

I got a "voice broadcast" message last week from Michael Prue.  That is it so far in terms of contacts made to me as a member (outside what I got by attending a meeting to hear the leadership candidates).  There has been no printed material mailed or emailed to me.

I have no idea how many new members each Candidate has signed up, and I doubt no one does except the Candidates teams. Also, leadership meetings (and the subsequent press) seems to be the real golden egg for new members. As for being an organizer as Tabuns only strength, I would argue that that is far from true.

What I am looking for in a leader is not only the "inside baseball" of party restructuring (while very important). But an actual vision for the province and policy to back it up, while also evaluating who walks talks and acts like a premiere in waiting, while keeping the core values that Dippers have at heart. Not to mention that the former head of Greenpeace will get back our progressive grass roots Green party friends into the fold. Tabuns has more green street cred than Emay. I believe this is VERY important.

Now don't get me wrong, I think all 4 of the candidates are great, and have different strengths to bring to the table. To me, Andrea, being young(er) and female is greatly appealing, she's smart and funny but my experience suggests it is her that is pressing the  "Community Organizer" angle. That's her sales pitch.

Michael is a wonderful guy, & I like where he's coming from and have defended him many times in the Star. However, he has, - IMO- brought into play issues that while I might agree with,  don't pass the mustard when there are more important priorities , and the media is already all over him for it.

Gilles, whom again is wonderful- not to mention hilarious- and my sentimental favourite talks alot about the "inside baseball" stuff of the party, and quite frankly has the Rae legacy to deal with, which makes me a little cautious.

All in all, any of the four has the potential to be a great leader. My experience though is that Tabus listens, walks the walk and talks the talk.

As for outreach outside of Toronto, I would have to plain disagree.

I suggest everybody check out the candidates websites. I noted that only Tabuns has put forward anything like a "platform" (at least the last time I checked). 

I think the OMOV is a great thing for the democracy of the party. Don't forget, there still will be a convention, with all the hoopla, and the potentiality for a run off with delegates there to ensure it will be an "event". 

 

 

Mojoroad1 wrote:

Not to mention that the former head of Greenpeace will get back our progressive grass roots Green party friends into the fold. Tabuns has more green street cred than Emay. I believe this is VERY important.

Yikes - Greenpeace is exactly the past that Tabuns needs to keep on the down low - Mojo you must know, as a Tabuns insider, that in 2004 Tabuns locked out his Greenpeace foot canvassers. aka Mycroft, I think this fact alone places Tabuns furthest on the right, let alone furthest "on the right of the NDP". Tabus' past jeopardizes NDP's credibility with labour - a relationship our party is struggling to rekindle after our breakup with Buzz. Mojo I have to question your reasoning that Tabuns' past as ED of Greenpeace suggests that he is the greenest of them all - Gerard Kennedy was head of the Daily Bread Food Bank and I don't think we'll be qualifying him as a bleeding heart socialist any time soon. At the end of the day actions will speak louder than words. Tabuns past will come back to haunt him and I really don't want it haunting the entire party were he to become leader. aka Mycroft, you say that Prue has right wing policy on the economy - Prue also has a "proven track record" were he has demonstrated that by installing fiscally responsible policies during his time as mayor of East York in the 90's recession, he was able to achieve socialist priorities such as building childcare centers, recreation centers, social housing, and bring in new, good paying jobs. Of course red Tories liked Prue too because he was able to achieve these left wing ends while substantially paying down the deficit. Tabuns' past is like the inverse of Prue's, he was able to take a left wing position and achieve right wing ends... and you want this guy as leader of the ONDP?

Frankly, a left/right devide between the Candidates IMHO is basically non existant. They all share the same core beliefs, with different emphasis as far as I can tell.  Prue being labelled by some as "right wing" yet endorsed by the Socialist Caucus kinda says it all!

LIBC, there are different accounts about the 2004 thing.... & I am not an "official spokesman" for any candidate, BTW.

BA, your last post is very interesting, it is quite contrary from what I've seen, but interesting. BTW though Tabuns has a great deal of female support (and quite frankly they make up the bulk of his campaign team as far as I can tell), including some very prominent, & respected women from within the party. Also, youth is another very important demographic in our "universe" and ONDY endorsed Tabuns.  As a final note, I've seen the diversity of Tabuns supporters first hand.

 

 

Wow, in less than a paragraph you  dismiss the outcome of the ONDY AGM and still manage to squeeze in two cheap shots at a candidate you clearly don't like.Good grief!

Thanks for being objective about the diversity LP. I fully expect the 'well he is from Toronto y'know so whaddya exepct' contingent to start complaining about the diversity factor and how meaningless it really is.

spincycle wrote:

Wow, in less than a paragraph you  dismiss the outcome of the ONDY AGM and still manage to squeeze in two cheap shots at a candidate you clearly don't like.Good grief!

"Don't like" is strong. He's a very nice person with a lot of nice qualities. I just think he'll bore the pants off Ontario as a party Leader and, for a party that is on the margins, dull and predictable is not good.

I was impressed with the ONDY endorsement until someone pointed to the attendance numbers.

You clearly implied that anyone who thought diversity was not important was some kind of Toronto hater.  And played on the old hick stereotype.

Suck it up.  You made an idiotic statement.  Get over it.  The only thing rude is being defensive and not realizing what the rest of the province looks like and thinks like.  Oh and when you are being an ass.  Frankly it is that kind of arrogance that WILL turn people off Tabuns.

This is a big old province.  Having a bigger perspective might help you rather than lecturing those who do.

I don't give a rats ass about you.  However if you are going to make an idiotic and derogetory comment don't be so surprised if someone challenges you on it.

Please

NDP LEADERSHIP DEBATE
January 17, 2009
Hamilton Convention Centre
Albion Room
2pm to 4pm

Though some of that "rubbing the wrong way" was evident even pre-Greenpeace:  whether through anti-smoking crusades or boycotting Harvey's due to Mike Harris connections, Tabuns tended to be among the more doctrinaire NDPers on Toronto Council...

Peggy Nash is still crushing all the "official" "organised" campaigns in facebook support despite the fact that virtually no one has joined that facebook group since late October. How many people are expected at the ONDP convention?

joshmanicau:

"Someone in the thread asked what it was about Tabuns that rubs people the wrong way...

For me, it's the Greenpeace connection.  I reailze that his Greenpeace street cred is a big attraction point for some people, but to me, it's a liability.  In my mind, the best way for Tabuns to get my support is for him to distance himself from the Greenpeace gig. "

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For me, it's his aging ideological stance against nuclear power.  Perhaps all New Democrats are  agin' it. But it seems central to Peter and his past.

As it stands, the other parties are for nuclear, precisely because it is still the best chance at keeping electricity affordable and industry competitive (if the petro dollar is history) without another base load supplier.

And if the party of the worker is hoping to sell pure alternative energy to that worker, I hope it can do a better job than in the past in explaining the economics and physics involved in  maintenance of a base electrical load with only alternative in play.