The Globe is reporting Carole James was re-confirmed as party leader by an over 80 percent vote of party council, and that some caucus members (non-voters) were not wearing the yellow scarves handed out by her supporters.
Is an outside facilitator needed to bring the caucus together, including the excluded, or can they do it themselves?
That was a bullshit vote and none, I repeat, none of the constituencies were ever consulted about that vote. This is supposed to be an example how to get away from sleazy politics. Please give us a break. Try talking to constituency executive members before jumping the gun here. This settles nothing, and probably will hurt James' chances when we actually have a leadership review process in 2011.
The Vancouver Sun and Black Press are reporting that these NDP MLA's sat stone-faced and refused to stand or applaud Carole at the council meeting, representing about 40% of caucus:
1. Doug Routley
2. Katrine Conroy
3. Mike Sather
4. Harry Lali
5. Lana Popham
6. Leonard Krog
7. Claire Trevena
8. Norm Macdonald
9. Robin Austin
10. Gary Coons
11. Jenny Kwan
12. Nicholas Simons
13. Guy Gentner
And of course we have Bob Simpson sitting outside of caucus.
Global News is also reporting that MLA Simons threatened a physical fight with MLA Elmore in the hallway right after the council vote - right in front of the media.
Until yesterday, I assumed that a few malcontents were causing some trouble for Carole. Does anyone know how bad the divisions are within caucus?
I don't think British Columbians have had quite enough of the sky-high child poverty and Liberal government scandals out there by the looks of things. I think they will vote for the next con artist to lead that party of lying liars to another term in phony majority government. Big business is buying governments out there same as here in Puerto Ontariariario. They have to really hit neoliberal rock bottom yet before seeing the light. So my advice to BC NDPers would be this:
Unite under Carole James, she's been dedicated and worked hard for you all. And win the next election by phony majority. Go for it!
I wonder what's up with that. Simons(my current MLA) and Elmore are two of the BCNDP MLA's I have the most respect for.
Assuming those MLAs listed (plus Bob Simpson) oppose Carole James' continued leadership, this morning's vote doesn't really resolve much. Carole and her supporters will point to the ringing endorsement she received from Provincial Council, the governing body of the party between conventions. Her detractors will point to the fact that at least 40% of the caucus has lost confidence in her leadership, which makes her position untenable.
My own personal view is that the leader derives her mandate from the party membership as a whole, not from the caucus. If Carole has the support of the rank-and-file membership, then the caucus should fall into line and respect the views of the members. The problem is I'm not sure that a provincial council vote is tantamount to an endorsement by the membership or carries the same kind of weight. Unfortunately, I don't think this situation will be resolved with anything less than a leadership review vote (preferably OMOV). Carole may find herself in the unfortunate position (a la Joe Clark in 1983) of having to call for a leadership contest (or at least a review) in order to quell dissent.
Well I guess 2017 before we will get rid of liberals. The NDP just kissed the 2013 election away.
I will not be voting for the NDP next election if she is leader. End of story. I will not vote Liberal either. So my vote will go to one of the smaller parties (Green, Marijuana, Communist) or an Independent.
Carole James needs to step down. That is doing the right thing. I do not know anyone that likes her as leader. She is BC's Michael Ignatiuff.
I am so so disappointed.
The more the job of opposition leader in BC seems like a ticket to the job of premier - the more people seem to want to fight for it. I think that the main thing that jeopardizes the chances of the NDP winning the next election is the appearance of being divided. A vote was held - it was 84% in favour of Carol James - so why don't her critics either accept the will of the majority and unite behind the leader or RESIGN from the party.
That's just the problem - I'm not sure that a vote of 120 members of the 'party brass' will be seen by many people as representing the 'will of the majority' of the rank-and-file party members.
Also, I'm not sure that having 40% of the caucus resigning from the party would be doing Carole James a favour either.
One thing I can't for the life of me figure out is what exactly is the nature of the split between people who want James and stay and her enemies. I wondered if it was an interior vs. big city split - but no, she has supporters and detractors in Vancouver and in the interior. I wondered if it was a right/left split - but no the people who supposedly oppose her seem to be a mix of people who are considered to be on the right and the left and the people who support her seem to be a mix of right and left.
So what exactly is it? I guess it boils down to 12 people out of 34 don't like her personally the other other 22 do like her. I would actually have more time for the "anti-Carol James" view if it seemed to be based on anything remotely substantive - like if people wanted to replace her with someone on the far left who wanted to nationalize the forestry industry then I would say - fine - let's have a debate. OR if it was all about the party's relationship with labour or whatever - but no, there is no substance, no ideological argument, no clarity on what anyone wants to see done differently. Nothing. It seems to me that the critique of her seems to boil down to "she's too school-marmish" (whatever that means) or "she's too tough on her critics in caucus" (of course if she were less tough and looked the other way when people in caucus started freelancing and publicly attacking her - the same people would be attacking her for being too weak). You can be sure that if she quit tomorrow - there would be a very bloody, divisive and expensive leadership race and whoever lost would promptly start conspiring against whoever won and we would be going through the same exercise all over again.
I would like someone to come out that point to an individual who would make a better leader and what exactly that person would do differently. If you can convince me that there is anyone who is better and who will have all the answers - I'm all ears. Meanwhile - I don't believe in replacing something with nothing.
Following BC politics over the past 25 years, I would have to say that the past week has been the most intense and bizarre that I've ever witnessed.
Vancouver Sun columnist Vaughn Palmer is now reporting that he spoke with 2 party insiders at the provincial council meeting who now predict that several NDP MLA's will break away and form a new party with Bob Simpson. WTF?
Four independent MLA's now exist and if that happens I could probably see some Lib MLA's joining them as well.
Who knows what the future will hold. We are in unpredicatable and unchartered waters politically in BC right now.
This is starting to remind me of the Canadian Alliance dissidents against Stockwell Day breaking away and forming the Democratic Reform Caucus - only to then rejoin the alliance etc... (that split was kind of similar in that it had no ideological basis at all and seemed totally personaility based).
I wonder what the ideology of a new party would be - given that Carol James is already widely viewed as being on the right within the NDP and is constantly criticized for moving the party to the centre and giving speeches to business people etc... - so does that mean that someone wants to form a party to the left of the NDP? I guess so because you can go very far to the right of the NDP under Carol James without running into the BC Liberal Party....or is it really just a ploy to get her to resign so that all the would be new leaders can go after the brass ring?
but no, there is no substance, no ideological argument, no clarity on what anyone wants to see done differently.
That's exactly the complaint that people have of the BCNDP over the last six years. We've had an extremely unpopular and extremist rightwing government and yet the BCNDP has failed to articulate an alternative vision and lost a very winnable election. People are worried that this will happen yet again and this time the BCNDP may not be facing such a polarizing, unpopular opponent with the obvious weaknesses that they failed to capitalize upon last time out.
As for the internal opposition amongst the NDP's core supporters and members, I thought you knew who they were-first they were extremist environmentalists, then they were democratic reformist extremists, and then they were leftwing extremists, and then they were rightwing extremists, and then they were sexists, and then they were racists, and then they were the fringe one/third of the caucus... Those poor 'centrists' surrounded by fringe 'extremist' elements in the party just keep shrinking and shrinking. Thank God for James and her 'consensus-building' approach!!
This blog by Vaughan Palmer seems to make sense:
http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/viewfromtheledge/archiv...
"The unlucky thirteen as they were immediately dubbed, were an unusual motley.
They included several MLAS who've opposed James or fought with her in the past: Leonard Krog, Harry Lali, Michael Sather. There was the group that broke with her recently over the ouster of MLA Bob Simpson: Lana Popham, Norm Macdonald, Katrine Conroy, Jenny Kwan, Claire Trevena, Gary Coons. And there were several others, that were either mavericks by temperment -- Nicholas Simons, Guy Gentner -- or representativers of riding associations that had broken with James: Robin Austin and Doug Routley.
They are also, in combination, an amateurish and evasive lot, whose clumsy interactions with the news media Friday and Saturday left the impression that either they don't know what they are doing or aren't prepared to share their intentions with anyone other than their own cult-like supporters. Try to imagine a political party run by boggers and you'd have some sense of the challenge of making sense of the group and its agenda -- presuming it is a group and it does have an agenda."
...
Vancouver Sun columnist Vaughn Palmer is now reporting that he spoke with 2 party insiders at the provincial council meeting who now predict that several NDP MLA's will break away and form a new party with Bob Simpson. WTF?Four independent MLA's now exist and if that happens I could probably see some Lib MLA's joining them as well.
Do you have a link?
Anyways, that is interesting. People are fed up with status-quo politicians all over the place. Should this new party form, I could very easily see it gaining traction on a message that the Liberals and the NDP just don't get ordinary people.
Ahhh yes, Vaughan Palmer and Gary Mason, CanWest and Global scribes and longtime allies of Social Democrats and the BCNDP. Let's share a chuckle with these fine fellows and good friends of Carol James at the expense of thirteen longtime democratically elected NDPers and their 'cult-like' behaviour of questioning the leader!
That's exactly the complaint that people have of the BCNDP over the last six years. We've had an extremely unpopular and extremist rightwing government and yet the BCNDP has failed to articulate an alternative vision and lost a very winnable election. People are worried that this will happen yet again and this time the BCNDP may not be facing such a polarizing, unpopular opponent with the obvious weaknesses that they failed to capitalize upon last time out.
Fine, when you have the name of a person who you think would be better and who has a fully thought out "alternate vision" - give me a call. Until then you are just talking about replacing something with nothing.
Ahhh yes, Vaughan Palmer and Gary Mason, CanWest and Global scribes and longtime allies of Social Democrats and the BCNDP. Let's share a chuckle with these fine fellows and good friends of Carol James at the expense of thirteen longtime democratically elected NDPers and their 'cult-like' behaviour of questioning the leader!
What about the 20-odd caucus members who support Carol James - don't their views count for anything as well?
Incidentally, Carol's speech to provincial council was quite good I thought - what exactly do people have a problem with?
This is starting to remind me of the Canadian Alliance dissidents against Stockwell Day breaking away and forming the Democratic Reform Caucus - only to then rejoin the alliance etc... (that split was kind of similar in that it had no ideological basis at all and seemed totally personaility based).
And then Harper came along and the party re-united. Do you remember the general direction that the public standing of the Conservative party took after this point?
Carol's speech to provincial council was quite good I thought - what exactly do people have a problem with?
After having failed to inspire both her own party and the general public after 7 years, making a speech is too little, too late at this point.
James has been ineffective. It's time for a review. Certainly she has the right to let her name stand, at which point her suporters will be able to vote for her, but as things are now, she cannot lead the party.
What about the 20-odd caucus members who support Carol James - don't their views count for anything as well?
It's you and your 'sensible' CanWest pal Palmer(the same "journalist" parked outside Clark's house with cameras rolling during the infamous 'Porchgate') calling 13 NDP MLAs 'cultlike' for questioning the Noble Leader. Labelling and insulting critics of Jame's leadership is the pattern we've seen over and over. I guess that's what passes for 'listening' and 'consensus-building' these days.
And as for who should lead the NDP, like it's been pointed out by many posters over and over again, that's a question that should be answered by the NDP membership in a democratic vote. You might want to look that 'D' word up that's in the party's name, you don't seem to put a lot of stock in it.
Global News is also reporting that MLA Simons threatened a physical fight with MLA Elmore in the hallway right after the council vote - right in front of the media.
I'm having difficulty understanding why Mable Elmore and Nicholas Simons would want to fight each other. I also wonder why Elmore would want to support James after James humiliated her last election (which she still won). Any other information about this Centrist?
That was a bullshit vote and none, I repeat, none of the constituencies were ever consulted about that vote. This is supposed to be an example how to get away from sleazy politics. Please give us a break. Try talking to constituency executive members before jumping the gun here. This settles nothing, and probably will hurt James' chances when we actually have a leadership review process in 2011.
Yeah. That pesky democracy thingy must really tickle when it doesn't do your bidding. If Carol had gotten only say, 40% of the vote would it still be a "bullshit vote" or would it be a ringing endorsement of 'democracy' in action?
Hows about you perennial malcontents give the rest of us a break and focus on party unity instead of group-hugging Jim Sinclair's ass?
Carol now needs to swing a wide sword at caucus malcontents and exterminate the fleas in the party fur.
Ahhh yes, Vaughan Palmer and Gary Mason, CanWest and Global scribes and longtime allies of Social Democrats and the BCNDP. Let's share a chuckle with these fine fellows and good friends of Carol James at the expense of thirteen longtime democratically elected NDPers and their 'cult-like' behaviour of questioning the leader!
What about the 20-odd caucus members who support Carol James - don't their views count for anything as well?
Incidentally, Carol's speech to provincial council was quite good I thought - what exactly do people have a problem with?
1 Carol is not a rabid ideologue
2 She is not a male unionist ideologue
Many party supporters appear to have an issue with democracy when it doesn't support their agenda. Why do Dippers insist on snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?What about the 20-odd caucus members who support Carol James - don't their views count for anything as well?
It's you and your 'sensible' CanWest pal Palmer(the same "journalist" parked outside Clark's house with cameras rolling during the infamous 'Porchgate') calling 13 NDP MLAs 'cultlike' for questioning the Noble Leader. Labelling and insulting critics of Jame's leadership is the pattern we've seen over and over. I guess that's what passes for 'listening' and 'consensus-building' these days.
And as for who should lead the NDP, like it's been pointed out by many posters over and over again, that's a question that should be answered by the NDP membership in a democratic vote. You might want to look that 'D' word up that's in the party's name, you don't seem to put a lot of stock in it.
I'm having difficulty understanding why Mable Elmore and Nicholas Simons would want to fight each other. I also wonder why Elmore would want to support James after James humiliated her last election (which she still won). Any other information about this Centrist?
Frankly, I'm as clueless as you are. And what further bothers me is that Simons is a guy and Mable is a gal. From the MLA list above, it appears that Mable is on the pro-Carole side.
I would suggest that you watch Global NewsHour at 6 pm tonight to see if we can get some more info and try to make some sense out of this bizarreness.
Do you have a link?
http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/viewfromtheledge/archiv...
Ghoris, one point: provincial council delegates are not "party brass." They are ordinary party members elected by their constituency association to attend provincial council and express the will of the constituency association. Any party member can attend a constituency association meeting, vote for a provincial council delegate, and disucss in advance motions or issues that will be going before provincial council. And North Report, every constituency knew these motions were coming up. The elected president of each association was provided with the first of them weeks ago. It sounds to me like the malcontents in the party are not happy that the majority of BC constituency associations voted to keep James on - they're trying to discredit the vote by saying it wasn't democratic. Well, that just won't wash.
That was a bullshit vote and none, I repeat, none of the constituencies were ever consulted about that vote. This is supposed to be an example how to get away from sleazy politics. Please give us a break. Try talking to constituency executive members before jumping the gun here. This settles nothing, and probably will hurt James' chances when we actually have a leadership review process in 2011.
Yeah. That pesky democracy thingy must really tickle when it doesn't do your bidding. If Carol had gotten only say, 40% of the vote would it still be a "bullshit vote" or would it be a ringing endorsement of 'democracy' in action?
Hows about you perennial malcontents give the rest of us a break and focus on party unity instead of group-hugging Jim Sinclair's ass?
Carol now needs to swing a wide sword at caucus malcontents and exterminate the fleas in the party fur.
Because nothing says ``I`m ready for government` like the largest political purge since Stalin.
That was a bullshit vote and none, I repeat, none of the constituencies were ever consulted about that vote. This is supposed to be an example how to get away from sleazy politics. Please give us a break. Try talking to constituency executive members before jumping the gun here. This settles nothing, and probably will hurt James' chances when we actually have a leadership review process in 2011.
Yeah. That pesky democracy thingy must really tickle when it doesn't do your bidding. If Carol had gotten only say, 40% of the vote would it still be a "bullshit vote" or would it be a ringing endorsement of 'democracy' in action?
Hows about you perennial malcontents give the rest of us a break and focus on party unity instead of group-hugging Jim Sinclair's ass?
Carol now needs to swing a wide sword at caucus malcontents and exterminate the fleas in the party fur.
Because nothing says ``I`m ready for government` like the largest political purge since Stalin.
Except for a half-decade putsh that appears to be never ending. Nothing says 'I'm ready for government' like refusing to accept the results of your own vote.
Actually, nothing the NDP has done lately is saying they are ready to govern so how about putting on your big boy pants and changing that sad state of affairs by uniting behind the duly elected leader rather than snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Once again, 'duly elected' means elected by A) the general public or B) by the party membership. I'm sure Stalin had lots of aparatchiks willing to blindly support him to once it became clear what happned to those who didn't.
To the question, this is just the beginning.
Something to chew on.
1. Both Carole James and Gordon Campbell had the exact same 32% approval rating in the latest Mustel poll.
2. Both Carole James and Gordon Campbell had the exact same 84% recent endorsement by party members.
3. A previous Angus Reid Strategies poll states that a majority of Liberal voters want Campbell gone and also states that a majority of NDP voters want James gone.
4. Some Lib caucus members revolt against Campbell. Some NDP caucus members revolt against James.
5. Carole stays and Gordo goes.
Anything wrong with this picture?
Except that you forgot point 6. that every poll shows that the NDP would win an election, while with Gordon Campbell the BC Liberals were over 20 points behind.
Except that you forgot point 6. that every poll shows that the NDP would win an election, while with Gordon Campbell the BC Liberals were over 20 points behind.
Yeah, about that. Mustel pegs the lead at just 5 points. Mustel is a polling company with a Liberal slant, but I'd take a good look at the general voting trendline, and Carole James' approval rating.
beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/01018/Five_Percentage_Po_1018444a.pdf
I think the 13 are the real ndp and that Palmer has them in his sights because James crew are the old reliables "the bruiser losers" who stand for nothing. Easy pickings for whoever replaces Campbell.
The 14 took the fall for principles. Palmer does not know the meaning of the word and neither does James. No wonder they underestimate them.
This blog by Vaughan Palmer seems to make sense:
http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/viewfromtheledge/archiv...
"The unlucky thirteen as they were immediately dubbed, were an unusual motley.
They included several MLAS who've opposed James or fought with her in the past: Leonard Krog, Harry Lali, Michael Sather. There was the group that broke with her recently over the ouster of MLA Bob Simpson: Lana Popham, Norm Macdonald, Katrine Conroy, Jenny Kwan, Claire Trevena, Gary Coons. And there were several others, that were either mavericks by temperment -- Nicholas Simons, Guy Gentner -- or representativers of riding associations that had broken with James: Robin Austin and Doug Routley.
They are also, in combination, an amateurish and evasive lot, whose clumsy interactions with the news media Friday and Saturday left the impression that either they don't know what they are doing or aren't prepared to share their intentions with anyone other than their own cult-like supporters. Try to imagine a political party run by boggers and you'd have some sense of the challenge of making sense of the group and its agenda -- presuming it is a group and it does have an agenda."
...
Makes perfect sense. This was a poll done after Campbell announced he was quitting - so people are so overjoyed that he's gone that they are already fantasizing about the "perfect person" who does not exist who might succeed him. I'm impressed that the NDP is still a solid 5% ahead of the Liberals led by an un0named "perfect person". Imagine who the Liberal numbers will crash when they pick some dead-head from the existing cabinet as the new premier.
Except that you forgot point 6. that every poll shows that the NDP would win an election, while with Gordon Campbell the BC Liberals were over 20 points behind.
Yeah, about that. Mustel pegs the lead at just 5 points. Mustel is a polling company with a Liberal slant, but I'd take a good look at the general voting trendline, and Carole James' approval rating.
beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/01018/Five_Percentage_Po_1018444a.pdf
No, you are not in BC. James had a chance as long as Campbell stayed on. But in February or march, Gordo is gone FOREVER and the BC Libs can remake themselves. My guess is they will shift to the left a little bit and the voters who have voted in fear of the commy ndp all their lives will habitually do exactly the same thing again. (No matter how much James sucks up to them and calls them "stakeholders".)
You see the stakeholders (Investors, well to do, etc) live in mortal fear of the left taking their stakes away. Always have, always will.
So the only thing left for the ndp to do is energise their own voters. Lots of them but soooo lethargic about voting under James.
But hey, that is the LAST thing on James mind. She (newly wealthy herself with the mla salary) wants to get people in her "class" voting for her. And that sure doesn't include many ndp voters.
The more the job of opposition leader in BC seems like a ticket to the job of premier - the more people seem to want to fight for it. I think that the main thing that jeopardizes the chances of the NDP winning the next election is the appearance of being divided. A vote was held - it was 84% in favour of Carol James - so why don't her critics either accept the will of the majority and unite behind the leader or RESIGN from the party.
What do you care - this should be good news for your leader Jane Sterk!
That was a bullshit vote and none, I repeat, none of the constituencies were ever consulted about that vote. This is supposed to be an example how to get away from sleazy politics. Please give us a break. Try talking to constituency executive members before jumping the gun here. This settles nothing, and probably will hurt James' chances when we actually have a leadership review process in 2011.
Yeah. That pesky democracy thingy must really tickle when it doesn't do your bidding. If Carol had gotten only say, 40% of the vote would it still be a "bullshit vote" or would it be a ringing endorsement of 'democracy' in action?
Hows about you perennial malcontents give the rest of us a break and focus on party unity instead of group-hugging Jim Sinclair's ass?
Carol now needs to swing a wide sword at caucus malcontents and exterminate the fleas in the party fur.
Because nothing says ``I`m ready for government` like the largest political purge since Stalin.
Except for a half-decade putsh that appears to be never ending. Nothing says 'I'm ready for government' like refusing to accept the results of your own vote.
Actually, nothing the NDP has done lately is saying they are ready to govern so how about putting on your big boy pants and changing that sad state of affairs by uniting behind the duly elected leader rather than snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Because I'm not a New Democrat? I was a BC Green back in the day (note the handle). Stockholm and I had some good sparring matches a few years back. Yes, Stock, the party is more or less moribund at the moment. I mean, if we can't make gains in THIS kind of political environment... but I digress.
I'm just offering you guys some unsolicited advice. Yes, I was more impressed with James after her speech tonight than at any other time since she's been premier. Yes, she recieved an endorsement from party executives (who I think have some vested interest in not seeing a convention) but the fact is Bob Simpson's ejection has lit your house on fire. You're not going to recover from it under this leader. Let's review.
- Somewhere around 9 of 83 constituency associations have called for a leadership election
- 2 of these constituency associations have asked for her to just quit
- 13 of 33 of your MLA's aren't willing to show support for the leader in public. One has already been ejected from caucus. Something that hasn't been pointed out is that you're only 4 MLAs away from seeing a potential caucus coup no matter what the leadership or membership decide.
- Your caucus whip quit
- Your caucus chairman quit
- 2 of your MLAs nearly broke into fisticuffs (WTF?!)
- There's rumours of a splinter party being formed.
If this was happening to the Liberals or Conservatives federally, we'd be laughing our asses off. 4 days ago, we were already laughing our asses off over one BC Liberal cabinet minister.
In a week where a cabinet minister compared his leader to an abusive husband, the Liberal had a better week than you did.
This is making Ignatieff look good. Hell, this is making Stockwell Day look good.
The Liberals are getting a new leader. Whether they're 5 or 25 points down, they will become much more of a threat than they are now. You can't win with a party this divided. You sure as hell can't win with two parties running against each other with 14 and 20 MLAs respectively. Your problem will not clear up until James regains confidence, or at least a mandate, from her membership. That means a leadership convention. It will not clear up by just demanding discipline. This has become far to large a monster for that.
A leadership convention will be divisive? Your party is already as divided as it could possibly be without literally breaking in two. If you think Carole James is the only person who can lead your party, she should win handily, and then you have your mandate.
No, Stockholm, some people do not need leaders to tell them what is right and wrong. I am not a member of the green party.
I do not know if you have noticed. There is a big moon out there tonight. Maybe it is just for you.
What do you care - this should be good news for your leader Jane Sterk!
I believe you are lying, or at best twisting the truth, so please prove it.
Ghoris, one point: provincial council delegates are not "party brass." They are ordinary party members elected by their constituency association to attend provincial council and express the will of the constituency association. Any party member can attend a constituency association meeting, vote for a provincial council delegate, and disucss in advance motions or issues that will be going before provincial council. And North Report, every constituency knew these motions were coming up. The elected president of each association was provided with the first of them weeks ago. It sounds to me like the malcontents in the party are not happy that the majority of BC constituency associations voted to keep James on - they're trying to discredit the vote by saying it wasn't democratic. Well, that just won't wash.
Makes perfect sense. This was a poll done after Campbell announced he was quitting - so people are so overjoyed that he's gone that they are already fantasizing about the "perfect person" who does not exist who might succeed him. I'm impressed that the NDP is still a solid 5% ahead of the Liberals led by an un0named "perfect person". Imagine who the Liberal numbers will crash when they pick some dead-head from the existing cabinet as the new premier.
Except that you forgot point 6. that every poll shows that the NDP would win an election, while with Gordon Campbell the BC Liberals were over 20 points behind.
Yeah, about that. Mustel pegs the lead at just 5 points. Mustel is a polling company with a Liberal slant, but I'd take a good look at the general voting trendline, and Carole James' approval rating.
beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/01018/Five_Percentage_Po_1018444a.pdf
Possibly. Hell, probably. After Dianne Watts decided not to run the Liberals don't really have any stars outside cabinet. But he/she won't be the 3 ton anchor Campbell was.
So, in the other Carole James thread you imply I am a nazi and call me a "slavish follower" and in this thread I am a liar? It seems to me Northreport, that you like to ask a lot of questions about the NDP, and you like to make a lot of statements, but you don't like it when someone actually answers your questions or challenge your assertions. You've implied you're not affiliated with any political party, so it's unsurprising that you are not familiar with provincial council or the internal workings of the NDP, and are therefore reduced to simply calling me a liar. If you don't believe me, call the NDP and ask them to explain how provincial council and provincial council delegate selection works. You can find their number in the phone book.
And who pray tell are you addressing these comments to?
You have made misleading, if not deceitful statements here, and were asked for proof to back them up. It appears you have no proof, so please apologize for your comments.
So, in the other Carole James thread you imply I am a nazi and call me a "slavish follower" and in this thread I am a liar? It seems to me that you like to ask a lot of questions about the NDP, and you like to make a lot of statements, but you don't like it when someone decides to answer your questions or challenge your assertions. You've implied you're not affiliated with any political party, so it's unsurprising that you are not familiar with provincial council or the internal workings of the NDP, and are therefore reduced to simply calling me a liar. If you don't believe me, call the NDP and ask them to explain how provincial council and provincial council delegate selection works. You can find their number in the phone book.
I apologize for confusing you with Brian White. The rest of the comment stands.
NDP Leader Carole James beats back critics, but can she replicate Gary Doer's Manitoba miracle?
Doer, a political moderate, froze taxes and consistently introduced balanced budgets. In the process, he transformed the Manitoba NDP into a middle-of-the-road party, which seriously eroded support for provincial Liberals in that province.
So is James a B.C. version of Doer? As appealing as Doer's record might appear to her supporters, there are some key differences between B.C. and Manitoba.
First, Doer governed a smaller province with a much larger percentage of aboriginal voters. Doer could count on these votes to help the NDP in closely fought contests.
Secondly, Doer's predecessor, Gary Filmon, did not undermine the public sector to nearly the same degree as B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell. In B.C., part of the NDP base wants to reverse those changes, whereas James seems more inclined to maintain the status quo. She won't even broach the possibility of increasing personal income taxes, for instance, to pay for more public services.
It was okay for Doer to be a status quo politician in a province where the social-safety net hadn't been shredded and where there were no medical-services premiums. There's a far greater risk for B.C. politicians to promote the status quo after Campbell's cuts and the Great Recession of 2008-09.
Thirdly, a significant proportion of B.C. voters care about environmental issues. In provincial elections, enough of them vote Green to thwart the NDP from winning.
James has been unable to stop this from happening in two consecutive elections. So far, there's no compelling evidence that this will change in the next campaign.
The Greens stood at 10 percent in the most recent Mustel Group poll. Even at five or six percent support, the Greens could siphon off enough votes to deny an NDP victory. Doer never had to deal with this issue in Manitoba.
Fourthly, one of the greatest global trends has been the migration of people from rural to urban areas. This is also occurring in B.C. on a significant scale.
Some of James's greatest successes have occurred in rural areas, notably on Vancouver Island, in coastal constituencies, and in the Kootenays. She has failed to do as well in Vancouver's inner and outer suburbs, where the population is increasing more rapidly.
It's shocking that the NDP was unable to win a majority of the seats in Vancouver and Burnaby in the last election when its municipal brothers and sisters won these cities in a landslide in 2008.
Finally, British Columbians have a history of embracing more extreme politicians than Manitobans. Campbell, Bill Bennett, and Bill Vander Zalm were more extreme than Filmon. B.C. New Democratic premiers Dave Barrett and Glen Clark were more extreme than Doer or his mentor, former Manitoba NDP premier Ed Schreyer.
The only real moderate to get elected premier in B.C. in the past 40 years was Mike Harcourt, and that only occurred because of a vote split on the right side of the spectrum.
Can James create a third way, just as Tony Blair did with the British Labour Party? Or will she experience a third defeat?
Today, the B.C. NDP collectively decided to endorse James's belief that Doer's success can be replicated in this province.
It won't sit well with some caucus members, but there's not a lot they can do about it, given that the next election might be just months away.
http://www.straight.com/article-360127/vancouver/ndp-leader-carole-james...
Doer's predecessor, Gary Filmon, did not undermine the public sector to nearly the same degree as B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell. In B.C., part of the NDP base wants to reverse those changes, whereas James seems more inclined to maintain the status quo. She won't even broach the possibility of increasing personal income taxes, for instance, to pay for more public services.It was okay for Doer to be a status quo politician in a province where the social-safety net hadn't been shredded and where there were no medical-services premiums. There's a far greater risk for B.C. politicians to promote the status quo after Campbell's cuts and the Great Recession of 2008-09.
Not true. I live in Manitoba and can assure you that Filmon's right-wing policies are about as vicious as any you could have expected. Had he won a fourth term, we might very well be paying those premiums.
Actually Charlie Smith wrote it. Definitely the part about not producing for the NDP in Vancouver and Burnaby is accurate a huge problem for us.
Regardless, James has now fucked things up big time in the BC NDP, and all of us are now going to pay the price.
Actually Charlie Smith wrote it. Definitely the part about not producing for the NDP in Vancouver and Burnaby is accurate a huge problem for us.
Regardless, James, by her action today, has fucked things up big time in the BC NDP, and all of us are now going to pay the price.
I apologize for confusing you with Brian White. The rest of the comment stands.
Apology accepted.
The provincial NDP IS supposed to be subserviant to the federal ndp. (Which is really good news if the split happens). Layton can be the queen maker. Will he choose the Sihota wing or the sick of James wing?
Provincial ndp Constitution is at http://www.bcndp.ca/files/uploads/Constitution_2009.pdf
I think that
Jim Sinclair, president of the B.C. Federation of Labour, and Darryl Walker, president of the B.C. Government and Service Employees' Union had a block of votes that James is very thankful for. Walker seems to think he is boss.
Below is from the times colonist quoting walker.
"My belief is they're going to come back in," he said. "If they choose not to, perhaps there's another place for them to call home."
Perhaps? But he talks about them like sheep, doesn't he? The hungry sheep will come back if there is no other place for it to go!
What a lovely guy. But I am pretty disgusted that our elected representitives are herded around by some guy in a suit.
Arn't you? I thought we put them there to represent us?
Perhaps he is the power behind the throne? How many votes did walker diliver to James?
I know the constitution "Says" one member one vote but is it fair to say there is a block of votes "controlled" by walker and that block is bigger that the voting power of ALL our elected representitives put together?
Hows about you perennial malcontents give the rest of us a break and focus on party unity instead of group-hugging Jim Sinclair's ass?
Carol now needs to swing a wide sword at caucus malcontents and exterminate the fleas in the party fur.
"James also received public endorsements from labour heavyweight Jim Sinclair" times colonist
So it seems that you are putting James (and yourself) in the group hug position with Sinclair's ass. Enjoy.
Feel the love. (I prefer not to know about the fur or the fleas). Visuals are bad enough already.
Doer's predecessor, Gary Filmon, did not undermine the public sector to nearly the same degree as B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell. In B.C., part of the NDP base wants to reverse those changes, whereas James seems more inclined to maintain the status quo. She won't even broach the possibility of increasing personal income taxes, for instance, to pay for more public services.It was okay for Doer to be a status quo politician in a province where the social-safety net hadn't been shredded and where there were no medical-services premiums. There's a far greater risk for B.C. politicians to promote the status quo after Campbell's cuts and the Great Recession of 2008-09.
Not true. I live in Manitoba and can assure you that Filmon's right-wing policies are about as vicious as any you could have expected. Had he won a fourth term, we might very well be paying those premiums.
Seconded. (I now live in B.C. but I lived in Manitoba until 2001.)
Although, to be fair, Filmon was relatively moderate for about the first few years of his tenure (when he had a minority and then a wafer-thin majority) but then they began to swing to the right around 1993. In retrospect, it's frightening to consider that despite how right-wing the Filmon government became in its last term, and despite the fact that they ran on an extreme-right, Mike Harris-style platform of massive tax cuts in 1999, they held virtually all of their support from 1995. It was only the Liberal vote collapsing to the NDP that allowed Doer's victory.
