Carole James is confirmed as leader by vote of party council. What needs to happen next?

Stockholm wrote:

Vansterdam Kid wrote:

2) No one has said that either. They've said that she shouldn't be playing the meta game of how we need to "talk to business" to "look responsible" and how we need to "build consensus" to "look like we're ready for government." No, people have said she should be talking about relevant issues to the average person. Period. Obviously the platform won't be fleshed out until closer to the election. The sorts of people who would vote NDP are tired and angry with their lot in life. Hows about we start a serious discussion, including debating the controversial issues we may need to present to come across as credible (i.e. raising taxes on high incomes), on issues they give a shit about?

So what's the alternative? "We refuse to ever talk to business - they are the enemy!!", "we need to look crazy and irresponsible" and "we reject any consensus, its our way or the highway - we promise to govern as rigid ideologues!!" and "bte: no we aren't ready for government".

1) That's basically the attitude that the business lobby in any jurisdiction has towards left-wing politics.

2) That's also basically how guys like Mike Harris, Ralph Klein, and Gordon Campbell treat left-wing interest groups. How has that worked out for those guys? Can you point to any major policy decision these guys made that was turned around by their successors?

3) You never addressed the following situation. You're an MLA, and your leader hasn't informed you about a particluar policy. A reporter asks you a general question about party policy on that issue. How do you respond?

4) Is Carole James a relative or close friend of yours? You seem to have a strong vested interest in defending her, and you're not from BC. That's about the only reason I can think of.

Stockholm wrote:

...and yet - if you look at the list of MLAs who seem to be attacking Carol James - most seem to be from blue collar ridings in the interior where the "Axe the Tax" campaign paid the biggest dividends against Campbell's Carbon Tax fraud.

1) Considering the fact that almost all of those areas were safe/historical NDP seats anyways, I'm not sure what impact it had.

2) James went about it the wrong way, as was demonstrated. The environmentalists were able to play off the carbon tax to say that the long term result of a carbon tax was basically worth any financial price they had to pay (not that the tax as Campbell proposed would have done anything but that's beside the point). In short, James came across as being opposed to the carbon tax for the sake of being opposed to taxes (which if you read public discussion forms, the NDP has a reputation as a party that raises taxes, and no amount of PR or spin will change that). Layton also campaigned against the carbon tax, but he was able to frame it to say, "this is why we don't like the carbon tax, we have a different idea that works because...."

3) Some time after the election, James came out in favour of the carbon tax.

Stockholm wrote:

I actually don't think that the 2009 election was all that "winnable"

And many more people on this board from BC think that it was. How does one Torontonian's opinion trump the opinions of several people who live in BC?

Stockholm wrote:

I hate to say it but having a high poverty rate has never been enough to defeat a government - since the vast majority of people are not poor and tend to assume that those who are just need to get a job.

1) Were the working class and working poor even motivated to bother voting? Given the low turn-out, I'd guess that answer to be "no."

2) I've [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/if-ndp-repudiated-even-ide... out in detail right here[/url] why it is important that the NDP get the working class and working poor behind it while not trying to pander to the mythical middle class, using Winnipeg as an example.

3) If society at large is that unconcerned about the plight of people less fortunate (which they must be, since the fact that people giving to the United Way shows that they aren't concerned) then left-wing politics truly is a waste of time and energy, because left-wing politics is all about the public interest and especially those less fortunate.

Lou Arab wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

 

1) Doer and Dexter had actually increased the seat counts for the NDP in each province over the course of several elections. James has not

 

BC NDP seats

2001 - 2
2005 - 33 (+31)
2009 - 35 (+33)

 

BC NDP vote

2001 - 21.56%
2005 - 41.52% (+ 19.96%)
2009 - 42.06% (+ 0.54%)

Looking at these numbers I can see where Carole has driven up the seat count from 2005 to 2009. The count did jump from 33 seats to 35 seats!!  Fantastic results for only 4 years of attracting new voters.  Ahh, but let's not forget that the BC leg increased the total seats between 2005 and 2009 by 5 seats and given the traditional 40% of popular vaote one would anticipate that the NDP would receive 40% of the new seats.  Surprise.... they did!!  Gosh I guess it wasn't the clear and precise policy statement she campaigned on. We can take a huge measure of comfort on the fact that she ingreased the popular vote by well over one-half of one percent !!!

ho louie. No comment below, just a more realistic portrayl of your numbers

BC NDP seats

1991 - 51

1996 - 39

2001 - 2
2005 - 33 (+31)
2009 - 35 (+33)    * BC LEG seats increased by 5

BC NDP vote

1991 - 41%

1996 - 39.5%

2001 - 21.56%
2005 - 41.52% (+ 19.96%)
2009 - 42.06% (+ 0.54%)

Aristotleded24 wrote:

1) Were the working class and working poor even motivated to bother voting? Given the low turn-out, I'd guess that answer to be "no."

2) I've [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/if-ndp-repudiated-even-ide... out in detail right here[/url] why it is important that the NDP get the working class and working poor behind it while not trying to pander to the mythical middle class, using Winnipeg as an example.

 

One of the consequences of our first past the post system is that everything revolves around winning seats in swing areas. The really poor ridings where average incomes are lowest (ieL vancouver-Mount Pleasant, Vancouver Hastings, Surrey-Whalley etc...) are already super-safe NDP seats and getting more of the working poor to turn out might mean winning those seats by 6,000 votes instead of by 5,000 - but so what? To win an election in BC and get 43 seats in the legislature - a party has to do soething that you obviously find distasteful - find a way to win middle class swing ridings like Oak Bay-Gordon Head, Saanich North, Maple Ridge-Mission, Burquitlam etc...