NDP leadership 55

119 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Mon, 2011-12-19 10:19

Shoon

NDP leadership 55

Continuing from 54 I would say the best one to utilize Brain Topp and others is Mulcair. Mulcair was the House Leader, it was his job to figure out how best to utilize people in cacus and when, so he had to be able to assess a persons strengths and weaknesses and how best to make use of them. Jack choose him as house leader for a reason, Jack had reason to believe he that sort of ability. As to Topp in the last election he had helped Jack get ready for the debates as well, and helped develop Jack's knock out pouch in the debates.

Issues Pages:

NDP

Mon, 2011-12-19 10:44

KenS

The capabilities required for being House Leader are but a fraction of what is required for leading the party. From the last thread:

KenS wrote:

Could Tom Mulciar work with and fully utilize someone like Brian Topp, as Jack Layton did?
You cannot expect so much that at this stage, when the winning candidate embarks on being Leader, that she or he could be a mentor like that... as Jack did at the same time.
But you should be able to expect that they could work with and utilize a Brian Topp if one is available. I think Dewar, Cullen, Nash, and Saganash have all demonstrated they could. I have never bought the line about how abrasive Mulcair is supposed to be. The roles he has had are going to produce that kind of talk in a world filled with big egos. And that talk has to a lesser degree also followed Topp from the roles where he was the guy tasked with saying no. But on the other side, neither have I seen any evidence that Mulcair could make full use of the talents of someone like Brian Topp. [Not expecting he could utilize Topp in particular, that is demanding a lot. But to their credit, I think those others could.]

I suspected I should not have posted in the middle of the night when the thread 54 was soon to be closed. I'm going to repost the last one into this thread.

Mon, 2011-12-19 10:50

KenS

Where Mulcair has achieved the most, in Quebec, lets look at the evidence of all those other aspects of practicing politics that are out of the bright lights.

For one thing, who is being supported by the capable people who led the organizational ground work and developed the Sherbrooke Declaration out of leading a consultative process?

As far as I know, they are with Topp and Nash. I have not heard of any working for Mulcair.

Mon, 2011-12-19 10:52

KenS

Tom Mulcair's impressive accomplishments for the NDP in Quebec remind me of Alexa McDonough building the NDP in Nova Scotia.

Grit, determination, and integrity, glued together with charm and a ferocious work ethic.

But Alexa was not good at the organizational side of being Leader. No matter how good at the other things, she could not have remained if she was actually bad at it. But she was not good. I supported her bid for the federal leadership despit that- figuring there would be people there to take care of that stuff, that did not exist in Nova Scotia.

It was several years after that of watching Alexa and Robert Chisholm that convinced me to never make that mistake again. The Leader does not do the organizational stuff. But if she is not as able to do it, she is hobbled as Leader. When Jack Layton came for his first [small] Nova Scotia meet and greet, my next choice was easy.

AnonymousMouse wrote:

For all we know Topp may be the greatest political strategist who ever lived, but I think it's folly to say "we know he's this good" or "we know he's that good". Unless somebody has some inside information to share, I wouldn't say "we know" much more than that he's a successful party strategist. Period.

Its about much more than being a strategist. And we have seen a lot more than that about Topp. We have the concrete vision he has articulated in the campaign. And for the many who read his Globe columns over the last couple of years- you got a lot of that there, even when it was not completely overt.

But as a general point, this is true. More than that we cannot really "know" about this set of capabilities in the various candidates, the evidence we have to review is not as direct as it is with judging retaill political skills. But saying that we cannot know [for sure] does not mean that we should not judge. All of us actually have to. We do it on the same basis of a lot of other things in life- based on the best available evidence.

Mon, 2011-12-19 11:03

Shoon

Do you have any reason to believe Mulcair's organizational ability? Mulcair is all the things Alexa had that you mentioned, plus a hole lot more and he doesn't have to deal the horrible situation Alexa found herself. The liberals can no longer use the right to pressure people to vote for them, which really hurt her efforts. The NDP is the OP.

As to house leader not being good enough, its still better and more directly related then Nash or Saganash's leadership experience. Negiating for unions is useful as if doing so on behalf of the Cree, but,it simple does not translate as directly as does being house leader or even duty leader/Quebec Lietunant. Topp maybe able to complete in this area, same with Dewar, but thier weaknesses undermine that gains from that, especially Dewar.

Speaking of Dewar his ranking on Accidental delberations my favourite blog, has dropped from 4th to 5th while Niki Ashton has risen to 4th from 5th. Niki is rising through the ranks.

Mon, 2011-12-19 11:57

writer

Running with Romeo

"Romeo Saganash, from Waswanipi, has worked hard to arrive where he is today - the first Quebec Cree MP. Some will say, he's just getting started ..."

A feature on Maamuitaau, CBC North's weekly Cree-language magazine of news and current affairs.

Mon, 2011-12-19 12:09

Gaian

KenS wrote:

The capabilities required for being House Leader are but a fraction of what is required for leading the party. From the last thread:

KenS wrote:

Could Tom Mulciar work with and fully utilize someone like Brian Topp, as Jack Layton did?
You cannot expect so much that at this stage, when the winning candidate embarks on being Leader, that she or he could be a mentor like that... as Jack did at the same time.
But you should be able to expect that they could work with and utilize a Brian Topp if one is available. I think Dewar, Cullen, Nash, and Saganash have all demonstrated they could. I have never bought the line about how abrasive Mulcair is supposed to be. The roles he has had are going to produce that kind of talk in a world filled with big egos. And that talk has to a lesser degree also followed Topp from the roles where he was the guy tasked with saying no. But on the other side, neither have I seen any evidence that Mulcair could make full use of the talents of someone like Brian Topp. [Not expecting he could utilize Topp in particular, that is demanding a lot. But to their credit, I think those others could.]

I suspected I should not have posted in the middle of the night when the thread 54 was soon to be closed. I'm going to repost the last one into this thread.

quote: "I have never bought the line about how abrasive Mulcair is supposed to be. The roles he has had are going to produce that kind of talk in a world filled with big egos."

But you are going to repeat it at every opportunity, Cassius-like.

When you do hear something, please name the source. And if you don't hear anything, please put a sock in it.

Mon, 2011-12-19 12:10

Peter3

The organizational work that was done in Quebec over the last several years was very high level, with the exception of a handful of ridings which the party planned to use as development platforms for the rest of the province. That's why there is almost no ground organization in Quebec to support the 59 MPs.

It is important to put the Quebec sweep into context. It was a surprise that nobody planned for. Not Jack Layton, not Brian Topp, not Brad Lavigne, not Tom Mulcair. Nobody. It was a once in a generation turn of the political wheel that appears to have followed from a desire for something different in Quebec coinciding with a very strong campaign performance by Jack that hit many of the right notes there. It's the kind of gift from the Fates that every politician dreams of and very, very few have the good fortune to receive.

Sure the organizing work set the stage. The result was out of all proportion to what was put into it. It's not a model for how to go about things in the rest of the country, unless anybody really believes that we can crush the Liberals and have all of their support swing our way. I don't see it happening. If you want to see how we're going to win in the rest of the country, you need to look at what was done since 2006 in northern Ontario, Toronto and other places where gains were made based on strong, focussed organizing efforts. There's more to it than that, of course, but we're going nowhere without it.

Mon, 2011-12-19 12:14

KenS

If I did not differentiate what I think about Mulcair's abilities to work with and lead all kinds of egos- people would just say 'oh that's the Mulcair is abrasive meme again'.... which by the way I have repeatedly argued against when it was brought up by others.

Mon, 2011-12-19 12:21

#10

KenS

Agreed: not only did no one see THAT kind of sweep coming, it went way beyond the organizational grounwork being laid.

That said, there was considerable sustained groundwork done over several years. They were equivalent to for example what was done in northern Ontario, and ran back more years. The impressiveness of that before this last election is obscured by the fact that there were very few 'winning campaigns' [those within reach of winning the seat] in Quebec. That mitigates how much depth you can get.

Mon, 2011-12-19 12:23

#11

KenS

House Leader is not leading an organization, or even a chunk of it.

I named the 4 candidates that I see having shown evidence they have the capabilities to do that [here]. As noted, very few have even the opportunity to show that as has Topp, and Jack before he was the Leader or even an MP. So expecting the bar to be cleared at that height would be unreasonable.

Rankings of the candidates is a composite of all the capabilities required.

Even for me with Topp my tentative first choice because of those capabilities- if he does not show adequate retail political skills, he is out. I will be moving down the list. I've got the other 3 who meet my bar of leadership capabilities and 'political vision'- knowing where we are going. I should be able to expect that at least one in that list of 4 will satisfacorily resove what are now obstacles to me supporting them.

Hence the relevance of post # 3: a lot was achieved. Mulcair we know was part of that. And who are the people who built it supporting?

Mon, 2011-12-19 12:47

#12

Wilf Day

Shoon wrote:
Speaking of Dewar his ranking on Accidental delberations my favourite blog, has dropped from 4th to 5th while Niki Ashton has risen to 4th from 5th. Niki is rising through the ranks.

No surprise there. I have great affection and respect for Dewar; I think everyone does. But Niki overtook him with her launch, and hasn't looked back. (Although I wish she had taken a second look at her overuse of her slogan. She IS "New Politics," she doesn't need to repeat the words.)

Mon, 2011-12-19 12:55

#13

Unionist

Wilf Day wrote:

No surprise there. I have great affection and respect for Dewar; I think everyone does.

I don't. Dewar issued a statement praising Harper for being the first state leader to boycott the anti-racist U.N. conference at Geneva. It took Jack months to undo the damage. Dewar's enthusiasm for following U.S. foreign policy went beyond the official stand of the NDP - Libya was another example. Either Dewar's brain, or his heart, stopped functioning long ago. Possibly both. That could explain his robotic public performances. Ap-pauling.

So, you might say, "everyone has great affection and respect for Dewar except Unionist". It wouldn't be true, but at least I wouldn't challenge you on it.

Anyway, I know it was just meant as a polite putdown, now that Niki is kicking him off the ladder on the way up... so it's ok.

Mon, 2011-12-19 13:01

#14

Peter3

KenS wrote:

That said, there was considerable sustained groundwork done over several years. They were equivalent to for example what was done in northern Ontario, and ran back more years. The impressiveness of that before this last election is obscured by the fact that there were very few 'winning campaigns' [those within reach of winning the seat] in Quebec. That mitigates how much depth you can get.

I mostly agree, except perhaps on the comparison with northern Ontario. The organizing that went on in northern Ontario (and elsewhere) was built around existing areas of incumbency and/or organizational strength. That allowed for a more intensive approach that is more directly relevant in most of the country than what was appropriate in Quebec in 2011.

In Quebec there was one federal incumbent (whose local organizing effort was necessarily as much about holding his own seat as building out), and no provincial incumbents. There were good reasons for most of the effort being high level, with pockets of intensive work. The expectation was that new beachheads would be added in the 2011 election from which the party could expand going forward. The beachhead turned out to be a little bigger than planned.

It's all good, but if people want to discuss the organizational competencies of the various candidates, it's important to understand exactly what their experience and/or understanding is. Some may assume that the large result in Quebec means those who made it must have created an organizational masterpiece. All the available evidence suggests that the organizing there had pretty modest objectives for 2011 and a relatively uncomplicated model. Luck, for once, broke our way.

Mon, 2011-12-19 13:05

#15

writer

The candidates' numbers on Facebook:

Nathan Cullen: 5,341

Peggy Nash: 5,214

Paul Dewar: 3,873

Brian Topp: 2,998

Romeo Saganash: 2,768

Thomas Mulcair: 2,155

Robert Chilsholm: 2,085

Niki Ashton: 676

Martin Singh: 625

Mon, 2011-12-19 13:16

#16

Idealistic Prag... Idealistic Pragmatist's picture

Wilf Day wrote:
No surprise there. I have great affection and respect for Dewar; I think everyone does. But Niki overtook him with her launch, and hasn't looked back.

I don't have that impression at all, interestingly. Niki's launch was terrific, but her website took two weeks to appear after that, and it took until December for anyone to answer emails sent to her campaign address (or emails sent to her Ottawa office with the instruction to forward them to her campaign team). Her organization may be formidable now, but man, did it take its own sweet time getting put together. Paul's organization impressed from day one. It may well be that Niki has surpassed Paul now, but if so, that's likely mostly on the basis of their respective performances in the first official debate, not because Niki overtook him at launch time.

Mon, 2011-12-19 13:18

#17

Caissa

Are those friends or candidates page likes?

Mon, 2011-12-19 13:27

#18

writer

Caissa, they are "likes" on the candidates' pages, which most are actively using specifically for the race.

Mon, 2011-12-19 16:32

#19

Wilf Day

Unionist wrote:

Dewar issued a statement praising Harper for being the first state leader to boycott the anti-racist U.N. conference at Geneva.

If I were Jewish, and appalled at the actions and attitudes of a majority of my fellow Jews in Israel, I might judge everyone by their attitudes to Israel and Palestine. If I were Hindu, and appalled at the actions and attitudes of a majority of my fellow Hindus in Kashmir (which has festered just as long as Palestine, with Kashmiri Muslim losses as bad or worse than anything in Palestine driving Islamist jihadism/liberation fighters/terrorism in Pakistan and elsewhere), I might judge everyone by their attitudes to Kashmir. As it is, I pay more attention to what Dewar says and does about Canadian issues. Sorry.

Mon, 2011-12-19 16:37

#20

Wilf Day

Idealistic Pragmatist wrote:

It may well be that Niki has surpassed Paul now, but if so, that's likely mostly on the basis of their respective performances in the first official debate, not because Niki overtook him at launch time.

I didn't literally mean Ashton had shot into the lead overnight. I meant that, from the day of her launch, I could see Dewar being overtaken. Sort of like the Road Runner who has run off the edge of the cliff and hasn't looked down yet, if I may be excused for making a cartoon out of serious concepts like historical inevitability.

Mon, 2011-12-19 16:44

#21

Unionist

Wilf Day wrote:
Unionist wrote:

Dewar issued a statement praising Harper for being the first state leader to boycott the anti-racist U.N. conference at Geneva.

If I were Jewish, and appalled at the actions and attitudes of a majority of my fellow Jews in Israel, I might judge everyone by their attitudes to Israel and Palestine.

You're not Jewish? Geez, sorry Wilf. My mistake. You look Jewish.

But you know what... Dewar was foreign affairs critic. He didn't comment on Israel and Palestine. He praised Stephen Harper for boycotting an anti-racist conference. You don't think that qualifies as a "Canadian issue"? I guess we'll have to part company rather severely on that point.

Or maybe you actually don't know what Dewar did on that occasion? Maybe you think he was just talking about the Middle East, and not parrotting Harper's and Kenney's line on "anti-semitism"? Is that the case? If so, I can try to dredge up his ugly statement which lasted one weekend on the NDP website before being removed after many many protests by members and supporters. But if your comment was made in full knowledge of what he wrote, I'm back to parting company.

Mon, 2011-12-19 16:46

#22

doofy

I read this as an implicit endorsement of Mulcair. Interested to hear the response of those who support other candidates.

"Thomas Mulcair a été l'un des principaux architectes de la victoire néodémocrate québécoise le 2 mai dernier. Depuis qu'il passe ses semaines à faire campagne pour le leadership dans le Canada profond, le NPD perd du galon au Québec. Mal aimé de l'establishment néodémocrate comme des alliés syndicaux de cette formation, il est néanmoins le seul des neuf candidats qui n'aurait pas besoin, s'il était élu chef, soit 1) d'un siège, 2) d'un cours de français, 3) d'une carte pour se retrouver au Québec, 4) d'un manuel d'instruction pour diriger un parti à la période des questions. On verra s'il réussira à garder son tout nouveau sourire au fil des péripéties que lui réserve 2012."

--Chantal Hebert, Le Devoir. http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/canada/338712/a-surveiller-ou-a-oublie...

Mon, 2011-12-19 16:49

#23

The Analyst The Analyst's picture

Harper isn't a stunning charamastic guy, but I can't help but think of what happened in the 1984 US Presidental election every time Topp talks about the possibility of a GST increase. There's probably no tax people hate more than a sales tax. His "retail political skills" thus far don't appear to be that stunning, either.

Mon, 2011-12-19 16:56

#24

Wilf Day

writer wrote:

The candidates' numbers on Facebook:

Nathan Cullen: 5,341

Peggy Nash: 5,214

Paul Dewar: 3,873

Brian Topp: 2,998

Romeo Saganash: 2,768

Thomas Mulcair: 2,155

Robert Chisholm: 2,085

Niki Ashton: 676

Martin Singh: 625

Yes, but I have "liked" them all, all that I can find. Niki Ashton's old personal MP page has 4,966 Friends, and that seems to be where her campaigners and supporters are posting. I can't find the page where she has 676 "likes."

By the way, while Paul Dewar's long-standing personal page has 3,874 Likes, Paul Dewar for NDP Leader has 206. Brian Topp was not a factor before this race, and he already has 3,008 (two more while I typed this).

Mon, 2011-12-19 16:57

#25

Unionist

For Wilf Day's benefit (and anyone else who cares), here was the statement by Paul Dewar and Wayne Marston which had to be removed from the NDP website and then formally retracted four (4) months later on Jack Layton's orders. Tell me, Wilf, what it has to do with "Israel and Palestine" - two words which strangely enough do not even appear in the text. Tell me, Wilf, how it doesn't relate to "Canadian issues". Let me know, Wilf, how you have to be Jewish to really care about this - which was issued immediately after Harper announced that Canada would be the first country to boycott Durban II:

Quote:
January 24, 2008

NDP supports non-participation in flawed UN conference

"Time for Canada to show international leadership on racism" - Dewar

OTTAWA - The NDP is deeply committed to fighting racism and intolerance in Canada and around the world, said NDP Foreign Affairs Critic Paul Dewar (Ottawa Centre) and NDP International Human Rights Critic Wayne Marston (Hamilton-East Stoney Creek).

"We are deeply concerned that the integrity of the UN Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance has been compromised as a result of poor structure and a lack of real anti-racism leadership on the planning committee," said Dewar.

According to the New Democrat MPs, the first UN anti-racism conference, held in Durban in 2001, became little more than a forum for spreading hatred and was a missed opportunity to work multilaterally to fight racism, discrimination and intolerance.

"New Democrats believe that the issue of anti-racism must be led by international voices that are respected throughout the world community," said Marston. "This conference was clearly failing to achieve that."

The NDP MPs also called on the Harper Conservatives to show real leadership on the issue. "Canada should not only cancel its participation in Durban II, but it should also take a role in proposing an alternative," said Dewar. "Canada should take the initiative and host an international forum on the issues of racism, discrimination, xenophobia, and intolerance. Our country can serve as a platform for a world-wide discussion committed to uprooting racism."

"The cancellation of our participation doesn't mean that the Harper government can continue to sit on its hands and ignore the serious problems of racism that still exist in Canada," said Marston. "Mr. Kenney should, without delay, assure the Government of Canada's continued funding for the Anti-Racism Council of Canada."

Mon, 2011-12-19 17:01

#26

The Analyst The Analyst's picture

Idealistic Pragmatist wrote:

Wilf Day wrote:
No surprise there. I have great affection and respect for Dewar; I think everyone does. But Niki overtook him with her launch, and hasn't looked back.

I don't have that impression at all, interestingly. Niki's launch was terrific, but her website took two weeks to appear after that, and it took until December for anyone to answer emails sent to her campaign address (or emails sent to her Ottawa office with the instruction to forward them to her campaign team). Her organization may be formidable now, but man, did it take its own sweet time getting put together. Paul's organization impressed from day one. It may well be that Niki has surpassed Paul now, but if so, that's likely mostly on the basis of their respective performances in the first official debate, not because Niki overtook him at launch time.

Dewar also got a lot of backing from Manitoba NDP MLAs. But Niki Ashton got the backing of Steve Ashton - a man who was pretty good in the 2009 Manitoba NDP Leadership Race at building up party memberships in Manitoba. Since Steve Asthon (who is also Niki's father) endorse her, I'd speculate that we're seeing the effect of some of thos members. However, I guess it really depends on whether the polls really are measuring a proportionate degree of the 10,000 Manitoba New Democrats.

Mon, 2011-12-19 17:12

#27

writer

Wilf, this is the page I was referring to: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Niki-Ashton/186856648056251?ref=ts ... where one doesn't have to "like" to see the info (whereas one has to friend Niki before seeing items on her profile page ... not ideal for those who are simply browsing / curious). Has Facebook raised the 5,000 limit on friends? I'm not up to date on that potential limitation.

I hadn't seen the Dewar page until you flagged it. It's here: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Paul-Dewar-for-NDP-Leader/168328636584304...

Both are illustrations of why it's a good idea for candidates to corral their social media efforts. This kind of splintering risks certain quarters appearing sickly.

Mon, 2011-12-19 17:20

#28

Wilf Day

Unionist wrote:

For Wilf Day's benefit (and anyone else who cares), here was the statement by Paul Dewar and Wayne Marston which had to be removed from the NDP website and then formally retracted four (4) months later on Jack Layton's orders.

Wayne Marston had a long-standing concern with racism. On his election in 2006 he became Assistant Critic for International Human Rights. He then became Assistant Critic for both Human Rights and Steel Policy. In 2008 he became the Critic for Human Rights and remains that Critic today.

His maiden speech in 2006 included:

Quote:

The Speech from the Throne promised more support to Canadian core values of freedom, democracy, the rule of law and human rights around the world. The Prime Minister has pledged that this would be achieved through a bigger diplomatic role, a stronger military and a more effective use of aid money.

As the NDP advocate for human rights, both domestic and international, I intend to hold Mr. Harper and this government to those promises made last week. Promoting human rights at home or abroad is a big part of what makes us Canadian.

Canadian values must be reflected in our actions overseas and we must continue to ensure that we address human rights issues at home. I and my NDP colleagues will not waver in our determination to ensure that Canada's foreign policies reflect our values.

Before my election, I was a member of the Strengthening Hamilton Community Initiative, begun after the events of September 11, to respond to an increase in racially motivated hate crimes in our community. The initiative's goals have been to bring civic and community representatives together to come up with collaborative solutions to ensure that prejudice and exclusion had no place in our community.

Building diversity and inclusive communities needs support and action from all levels of government. I hope that we will see more of this from this government as it promotes diversity.

I hasten to add that he talked of other things too:

Quote:

Approximately 16% of Hamilton families live in poverty and $1,200 will simply not begin to either meet the needs of those families if there are no affordable, accessible child care spaces. We need ongoing sustainable funding for a publicly administered child care program, not another tax credit or moneys given only to be clawed back.

One in five Hamiltonians live below the poverty line. Child poverty is still epidemic in the country. In my riding, the highest incidence of low income is with new Canadians, recent immigrants to our country. Yet in its throne speech, the government did not talk about poverty once, or what we need to do to address social and economic causes of poverty. It was a shameful omission.

We want to talk about ensuring that Canadians can afford the prescription drugs they need, get adequate dental, vision and health care, and have access to better EI programs. The Conservative government talked only about innovation in health care in its throne speech. It did not talk about the need to invest in innovations instead of squandering our money on GST or corporate tax cuts.

Mr. Speaker, I recall that some years ago 85% of the folks who applied for EI got it. With changes that were put together by the Liberal government around 1995, it started robbing the EI fund. Today about 27% of the people who apply get EI. From my perspective, this is insurance for workers. It belongs to workers and should not be used for any other purposes.

I should add that he was President of the Hamilton and District Labour Council for 11 years, a School Trustee for 6 years, Chair of the Worker Education Centre and the McMaster University Labour Studies Advisory Committee, and so on.

http://www.waynemarston.ndp.ca/about

His support for Thomas Mulcair is influential in my mind.

I have no doubt Wayne Marston and Paul Dewar were both sincere in their concerns about Durban II, and I have no doubt they knew far more about it than I do, so I will say nothing more.

Mon, 2011-12-19 18:17

#29

Shoon

So why doesn't pundits guide also link to her personal facebook page?

Still nearly 5000 on one and nearly on the other 700 is good numbers. Niki's campaign I suspect is kicking into high gear in the new year.

She has her campus captians, not sure what that is, or what general niki plans to do with them, but I am curious.

As to Dewar I liked that he at least pushed the cons into giving aid money to Libya. Still didn't find his time as foriegn affairs critic inspiring.
When the race is over I'd stick him in the democract reform critic role, but add general riding assiocation organizing to the role. I'd rename the role Democracy and expand its perview

Saganash in forgien affairs, Helen would be associate critic for forgien affairs for Quebec, Niki I'd stick in international trade and make her the new deputy leader to go with Libby who'd be back to being house leader.
Peggy would go back to finciance, Peter Julian to Healthcare, Linda Duncan back on the eviroment with the job of selling enivormental reform to Alberta, Megan Leslie to international cooperation, Cullen to Northern resouces, Charlie Angus Native, Metis and Inuit affairs, Chisholm altantic delopment agency. Just some ideas.

Mon, 2011-12-19 19:37

#30

vaudree

Peter Julian was the go to guy for the SPP the last few years.

Re Running with Romeo - have to admit that he looks better in shorts than Bill Blaikie did in his video - nicer legs.

Mon, 2011-12-19 19:56

#31

Malcolm

Peter3 wrote:

. . . It is important to put the Quebec sweep into context. It was a surprise that nobody planned for. Not Jack Layton, not Brian Topp, not Brad Lavigne, not Tom Mulcair. Nobody. It was a once in a generation turn of the political wheel that appears to have followed from a desire for something different in Quebec coinciding with a very strong campaign performance by Jack that hit many of the right notes there. It's the kind of gift from the Fates that every politician dreams of and very, very few have the good fortune to receive. Sure the organizing work set the stage. The result was out of all proportion to what was put into it. It's not a model for how to go about things in the rest of the country, unless anybody really believes that we can crush the Liberals and have all of their support swing our way. I don't see it happening. If you want to see how we're going to win in the rest of the country, you need to look at what was done since 2006 in northern Ontario, Toronto and other places where gains were made based on strong, focussed organizing efforts. There's more to it than that, of course, but we're going nowhere without it.

I disagree slightly. I think these "gifts" happen about once a generation. The window opens every 20-30 years to rewrite the political narrative. The political class don't now (can never know) exactly when, where or how that's going to manifest itself.

And when the window opens, one of two things occurs. Either the ascending party capitalizes or they don't. And whether they do or not depends on two things: 1. their organizational and strategic capacity and 2. the organizational and strategic capaity of the pary (or parties) that stand to be displaced.

In Quebec in 2011, the NDP were ready to capitalize - and capitalized beyong their wildest dreams. (Mulcair himself had been predicting 35 seats in his most optimistic moments.) The Quebec section were as organized as they had ever been. And the Liberals and the Bloc were caught completely flatfooted and found to be completely out to lunch.

By contrast, in 1988, the NDP wasn't ready to consolidate the peioodic leads in the polls and the chimeral strength in Quebec. Combined wit the fact that John Turner ran the campaign of his life - even if he only got it right by a combination of desperation and dumb luck.

m2015 will not be that kind of election. While I would expect to see some increbental ebbing of our 2011 strength, effective riding by riding organization will be the key to consolidating it as much as possible, and by extending it slightly into oth3er targeted seats.

Mon, 2011-12-19 20:07

#32

Malcolm

Wilf Day wrote:
writer wrote:

The candidates' numbers on Facebook:

Nathan Cullen: 5,341

Peggy Nash: 5,214

Paul Dewar: 3,873

Brian Topp: 2,998

Romeo Saganash: 2,768

Thomas Mulcair: 2,155

Robert Chisholm: 2,085

Niki Ashton: 676

Martin Singh: 625

Yes, but I have "liked" them all, all that I can find. Niki Ashton's old personal MP page has 4,966 Friends, and that seems to be where her campaigners and supporters are posting. I can't find the page where she has 676 "likes."

By the way, while Paul Dewar's long-standing personal page has 3,874 Likes, Paul Dewar for NDP Leader has 206. Brian Topp was not a factor before this race, and he already has 3,008 (two more while I typed this).

There's a mix here. Some of them are candidate pages created by campaigns for the leadership race. Some are pre-existing politician pages repurposed for the leadership. Some are simply personal pages (IIRC). Some are actually unofficial ages created by fans / supporters.

Mon, 2011-12-19 20:19

#33

Malcolm

The Analyst wrote:

Dewar also got a lot of backing from Manitoba NDP MLAs. But Niki Ashton got the backing of Steve Ashton - a man who was pretty good in the 2009 Manitoba NDP Leadership Race at building up party memberships in Manitoba. Since Steve Asthon (who is also Niki's father) endorse her, I'd speculate that we're seeing the effect of some of thos members. However, I guess it really depends on whether the polls really are measuring a proportionate degree of the 10,000 Manitoba New Democrats.

I think it is fair, in this context, to mention that Steve Ashton is Niki Ashton's father.

However, if one is going to discuss Niki's Manitoba endorsements in terms of Niki's father, it is only fair that we also discuss Paul Dewar's endorsements in the context of his brother Bob, former Chief of Staff to former Premier Dewar and current senior official with the MGEU.

Now, I'm quite certain that few people will endorse a candidate based on their father or their brother, but if Niki's endorsements are to be minimized because of family influence, then fair is fair.

Mon, 2011-12-19 20:52

#34

Brian Glennie

Malcolm wrote:

While I would expect to see some increbental ebbing of our 2011 strength, effective riding by riding organization will be the key to consolidating it as much as possible, and by extending it slightly into oth3er targeted seats.

Help me understand something, Malcolm. With the Tory mandated introduction of 30 new seats to Parliament, how does the NDP even have a prayer of forming Government by extending slightly our 2011 strength?

Mon, 2011-12-19 21:00

#35

Pundits Guide

Shoon wrote:

So why doesn't pundits guide also link to her personal facebook page?

The kind of linking that's available is for public pages only. Moreover, as someone else mentioned, content is not visible for personal profiles unless one establishes a "friend" relationship through Facebook, whereas content on the public politicians' pages is visible either way.

I also did not link to unauthorized leadership pages. Earlier in the leadership race a Thomas Mulcair for Leader page appeared, but was all in english, which seemed suspicious to me. After inquiring with the campaign, it was ascertained that the page was not created by that campaign, and thus I did not link to it at the site.

Similarly with the Dewar for Leader page, which was a "draft the candidate" page. The campaign may or may not have been responsible for that page, but clearly started posting to Mr. Dewar's other page once he announced.

In the interface, I picked the one most public, most used page for each campaign. No campaign has complained to me about the page selected (and they all have my email), so I assume I am using the most desirable public, API-accessible page for each one, containing the best selection of leadership contest-related material from their campaign.

Mon, 2011-12-19 21:06

#36

Unionist

Malcolm wrote:
... it is only fair that we also discuss Paul Dewar's endorsements in the context of his brother Bob, former Chief of Staff to former Premier Dewar and current senior official with the MGEU.

Freud lives.

Mon, 2011-12-19 22:57

#37

Shoon

Malcolm wrote:

Peter3 wrote:

. . . It is important to put the Quebec sweep into context. It was a surprise that nobody planned for. Not Jack Layton, not Brian Topp, not Brad Lavigne, not Tom Mulcair. Nobody. It was a once in a generation turn of the political wheel that appears to have followed from a desire for something different in Quebec coinciding with a very strong campaign performance by Jack that hit many of the right notes there. It's the kind of gift from the Fates that every politician dreams of and very, very few have the good fortune to receive. Sure the organizing work set the stage. The result was out of all proportion to what was put into it. It's not a model for how to go about things in the rest of the country, unless anybody really believes that we can crush the Liberals and have all of their support swing our way. I don't see it happening. If you want to see how we're going to win in the rest of the country, you need to look at what was done since 2006 in northern Ontario, Toronto and other places where gains were made based on strong, focussed organizing efforts. There's more to it than that, of course, but we're going nowhere without it.

I disagree slightly. I think these "gifts" happen about once a generation. The window opens every 20-30 years to rewrite the political narrative. The political class don't now (can never know) exactly when, where or how that's going to manifest itself.

And when the window opens, one of two things occurs. Either the ascending party capitalizes or they don't. And whether they do or not depends on two things: 1. their organizational and strategic capacity and 2. the organizational and strategic capaity of the pary (or parties) that stand to be displaced.

In Quebec in 2011, the NDP were ready to capitalize - and capitalized beyong their wildest dreams. (Mulcair himself had been predicting 35 seats in his most optimistic moments.) The Quebec section were as organized as they had ever been. And the Liberals and the Bloc were caught completely flatfooted and found to be completely out to lunch.

By contrast, in 1988, the NDP wasn't ready to consolidate the peioodic leads in the polls and the chimeral strength in Quebec. Combined wit the fact that John Turner ran the campaign of his life - even if he only got it right by a combination of desperation and dumb luck.

m2015 will not be that kind of election. While I would expect to see some increbental ebbing of our 2011 strength, effective riding by riding organization will be the key to consolidating it as much as possible, and by extending it slightly into oth3er targeted seats.

Also to be taken into account could be a lower bloc turnout, especially if it keeps hemerging memberships. Its a massive sign of disinterest.in the Bloc that could signal lower voter turnout later. Especially since thier is little to motivate thier base to vote, there is no real pay of, they can become government, op status is super unlikely, and soveriegnity is unattentable at the federal level. There is little to no carrot the bloc can offer. They're only hope is that Harper so pisses off Quebec that sovergienty is fashionable again. At best they are looking at minor gains and that will not motivate voters, especially, when the NDP can offer so much more to Quebecs.

Tue, 2011-12-20 00:03

#38

AnonymousMouse

The Analyst wrote:

Idealistic Pragmatist wrote:

Wilf Day wrote:
No surprise there. I have great affection and respect for Dewar; I think everyone does. But Niki overtook him with her launch, and hasn't looked back.

I don't have that impression at all, interestingly. Niki's launch was terrific, but her website took two weeks to appear after that, and it took until December for anyone to answer emails sent to her campaign address (or emails sent to her Ottawa office with the instruction to forward them to her campaign team). Her organization may be formidable now, but man, did it take its own sweet time getting put together. Paul's organization impressed from day one. It may well be that Niki has surpassed Paul now, but if so, that's likely mostly on the basis of their respective performances in the first official debate, not because Niki overtook him at launch time.

Dewar also got a lot of backing from Manitoba NDP MLAs. But Niki Ashton got the backing of Steve Ashton - a man who was pretty good in the 2009 Manitoba NDP Leadership Race at building up party memberships in Manitoba. Since Steve Asthon (who is also Niki's father) endorse her, I'd speculate that we're seeing the effect of some of thos members. However, I guess it really depends on whether the polls really are measuring a proportionate degree of the 10,000 Manitoba New Democrats.

It is interesting that Manitoba endorsements thus far--with the obvious exception of Ed Schreyer--seem to have been dominated in large part by family connections. Niki Ashton would probably get a number of MLAs either way, but her father's support no doubt helps. The only rational explanation for why Paul Dewar is picking up Manitoba support in the manner he is--several somewhat lower profile people at a time, totally out of whack with the endorsements he has in the rest of the country--would be his family connections. The whole thing seems bizarre.

Tue, 2011-12-20 00:07

#39

The Analyst The Analyst's picture

Malcolm wrote:

I think it is fair, in this context, to mention that Steve Ashton is Niki Ashton's father.

However, if one is going to discuss Niki's Manitoba endorsements in terms of Niki's father, it is only fair that we also discuss Paul Dewar's endorsements in the context of his brother Bob, former Chief of Staff to former Premier Dewar and current senior official with the MGEU.

Now, I'm quite certain that few people will endorse a candidate based on their father or their brother, but if Niki's endorsements are to be minimized because of family influence, then fair is fair.

I wasn't "minimizing" so much as "noting" - I thought it would be particularly useful to clarify the relation between the two given that they share the same last name.

But, yes, Doer Chief of Staff Bob Dewar probably did quite a bit of arm-twisting to get various Manitoba NDP cabinet ministers to endorse his borther. However, they seem to have a lot less magnetism on Manitoban party members than Steve Ashton.

Tue, 2011-12-20 00:11

#40

The Analyst The Analyst's picture

AnonymousMouse wrote:
It is interesting that Manitoba endorsements thus far--with the obvious exception of Ed Schreyer--seem to have been dominated in large part by family connections. Niki Ashton would probably get a number of MLAs either way, but her father's support no doubt helps. The only rational explanation for why Paul Dewar is picking up Manitoba support in the manner he is--several somewhat lower profile people at a time, totally out of whack with the endorsements he has in the rest of the country--would be his family connections. The whole thing seems bizarre.

I might be wrong given the paucity of my understanding of other provincial NDP branches and some holes in my knowledge of the Manitoba NDP, but it seems that NDP politics are a lot more "machine-oriented" in Manitoba.

Tue, 2011-12-20 00:12

#41

The Analyst The Analyst's picture

double post

Tue, 2011-12-20 01:19

#42

Wilf Day

Brian Glennie wrote:

Help me understand something, Malcolm. With the Tory mandated introduction of 30 new seats to Parliament, how does the NDP even have a prayer of forming Government by extending slightly our 2011 strength?

Already being discussed here:

http://rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/more-electoral-maps-2

Tue, 2011-12-20 01:40

#43

Malcolm

Brian Glennie wrote:

Malcolm wrote:

While I would expect to see some increbental ebbing of our 2011 strength, effective riding by riding organization will be the key to consolidating it as much as possible, and by extending it slightly into oth3er targeted seats.

Help me understand something, Malcolm. With the Tory mandated introduction of 30 new seats to Parliament, how does the NDP even have a prayer of forming Government by extending slightly our 2011 strength?

I was only referring to Quebec - extending slightly into the (by then) 19 non-incument seats.

I don't think it's realistic to asume that we will net an equal or better number of Quebec seats. I think it's possible. I think we should work very hard to beat the odds. But I think it's whistling past the graveyard to assume - even with Mulcair - that we can match that. It isn't typical.

So, if we assume a new Commons of 338 seats (170 for majority), we need a net gain of 67 seats to form a majority government. (Fewer, probably in the order of 20-40 for a minority). Even if we manage to sweep every seat in Quebec (unlikely even in the rosiest scenario) we need to be targetting something in the order of 80-90 Conservative (and Liberal / Green) held seats in the rest of Canada. (80-90 on the assumption that, even if successful, we are unlikely to win them all.)

I could go on to a much longer answer, but I think you get my point.

Tue, 2011-12-20 02:02

#44

Winston

AnonymousMouse wrote:
Niki Ashton would probably get a number of MLAs either way, but her father's support no doubt helps. The only rational explanation for why Paul Dewar is picking up Manitoba support in the manner he is--several somewhat lower profile people at a time, totally out of whack with the endorsements he has in the rest of the country--would be his family connections. The whole thing seems bizarre.

Are you accusing us in the Manitoba NDP of being nepotistic??? ;)

Actually, there are many who might suggest that the endorsement of her father hinders rather than helps Niki's campaign! :P What is interesting to me is that she's got a fair amount of from people who did not support Steve's bid for the provincial leadership. It's pretty doubtful to me that all of those people are supporting her only to bury the hatchet or curry favour with her father. I do think she has a fair amount of "home team" appeal.

Paul Dewar has a lot of support of the who's who here in the province - it does give off the impression that we are all "expected" to get behind him as "the Prairie candidate". The manufactured zeitgeist definitely soured me somewhat on his candidacy.

Tue, 2011-12-20 02:07

#45

Winston

The Analyst wrote:

...it seems that NDP politics are a lot more "machine-oriented" in Manitoba.

Yes

Tue, 2011-12-20 03:23

#46

Malcolm

I somehow don't think pitching Paul Dewar as "the Prairie candidate" because he went to university there and his brother works there actualy casts Paul Dewar in the best light. I mean, especially since there is a real Prairie candidate. (Shit, Topp has a better claim on being a Prairie candidate.)

Tue, 2011-12-20 03:23

#47

Malcolm

Tue, 2011-12-20 03:41

#48

The Analyst The Analyst's picture

Winston wrote:

Are you accusing us in the Manitoba NDP of being nepotistic??? ;)

Only inner party members are nepotistic. Outer party members like me are stewards of unprejudiced principled rationality when it comes to selecting candidates.

Tue, 2011-12-20 08:46

#49

Idealistic Prag... Idealistic Pragmatist's picture

So which babblers are going to the convention? Which ones are not sure, but are thinking about it? (I would if I could.)

Tue, 2011-12-20 08:49

#50

Boom Boom

Got my invite in the mail today to go to Toronto for the convention, with some discounts on travel and registration. Do the NDP seriously believe they could survive a visit from Boom Boom?

ps: why is HTML turned off? I can't post emoticons or a hotlink.

Tue, 2011-12-20 10:19

#51

Shoon

Niki's dad may have helped her gain support in Manitiba, but he had nothing to do with her Quebec support, that was all Niki, as I believe is her Sask support.

Pages

Topic locked