Issues Pages:
Regions:
NDP Leadership #144
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:21
#1
Catchfire
NDP Leadership #144
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:25
#2
Fin Donnelly endorses Mulcair.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:25
#3
I keep hearing how Mulcair is a "gamble". Isn't it a bigger gamble to reject the candidate of your geographic base? Doesn't choosing Mulcair allow the NDP to do a better job of keeping the support they already have?
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:26
#4
Alls well that ends well.
No one dropped out and endorsed the "not Mulcair" candidate.
I hope that Topp and Mulcair can shake hands and bro hug when this is all over.
We have a lot of work to do if we're going to fix this country. Some things that have been wrong since Harper came into power. Some things that have been wrong since the beginning.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:27
#5
Boom Boom
IP address has been identified of whoever caused the DDOS attacks. Price-Waterhouse (auditors) confirm the system is 100% secure. I guess charges are coming - Pierre Poutine, your jig is up!
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:28
#6
Arthur Cramer
Boom Boom, if they managed to do that, that would be amazing. Makes me think it was't done by a real "pro". Do you have a link?
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:28
#7
To those who say that Topp should just give up... as unlikely as his victory has become, he still has a shot. Yes, he would require 80% of Cullen's votes to win, which is unlikely, but possible. It would be an insult to voters not to get the votes counted, and it would open the possibility of anti-Mulcair voters of arguing that maybe Mulcair would not have won had all votes been counted. Letting Mulcair win by reaching a majority is the best thing for party unity.
I just wish that Topp would calm down a bit his rhetoric against Mulcair. Yes, he wants to "modernize" the party and likely drag it closer to the center, and Topp opposes that. But Mulcair is likely the next leader, you don't want to say too many things against him.
When he officially loses, Topp MUST go to Mulcair and congratulate him, to heal the possible wounds of the race. If he doesn't, he will lose all my respect.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:30
#8
That quite frankly is probably my biggest reason for supporting Tom. Well I also think he can defeat Harper so that 1-2 punch is what the party needs to win the next election.
I keep hearing how Mulcair is a "gamble". Isn't it a bigger gamble to reject the candidate of your geographic base? Doesn't choosing Mulcair allow the NDP to do a better job of keeping the support they already have?
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:31
#9
Boom Boom
I can't see how Topp will bother to stick around if he indeed loses, after his own attacks on Mulcair, not to mention Broadbent's. Joe Comartin last night on CBC said the NDP called a meeting to tell Broadbent the party wants unity, not division.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:32
#10
I just voted for Mulcair.
I do think that Thomas Mulcair ran a very good campaign. I hope that New Democrats will keep up the pressure to support social democratic values of equality and fairness for all Canadians. When the leadership MPs return to Parliament, the NDP will be a major force in the House of Commons.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:32
#11
I've been deeply impressed by the public statements from all camps and candidates today, with the single exception of Topp. He has been absolutely graceless.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:33
#12
I keep hearing how Mulcair is a "gamble". Isn't it a bigger gamble to reject the candidate of your geographic base? Doesn't choosing Mulcair allow the NDP to do a better job of keeping the support they already have?
The party of principle has become the party of geopolitics.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:34
#13
Oh my God, no Canadian flags in the convention hall. 
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:34
#14
Boom Boom
Boom Boom, if they managed to do that, that would be amazing. Makes me think it was't done by a real "pro". Do you have a link?
That comes from the person being interviewed by Mark Kelley.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:36
#15
I did like how Bob (?) Fife mentioned that while Bob Rae has been very good for the Liberal Party, the NDP MPs have worked better than the Liberal MPs throughout Parliament such as doing committee work.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:37
#16
M. Spector
My theory is that Topp and the party "establishment" have decided that it is better for the party to establish exactly the degree of support for Mulcair. Rather than walking away from the convention with a leader who got 43.8% of the vote, it would be better to be able to say he got the support of 65% of the membership. It would not surprise me if Mulcair agrees with this also.
[ETA: I see simonvallee agrees with me]
Another (not inconsiderable) side benefit is that it establishes a baseline for future leadership review votes and internal party polling, to see just how far up or down Mulcair has slid since the convention.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:37
#17
Boom Boom
That is interesting, MS. I hope you're right.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:38
#18
The party of principle has become the party of geopolitics.I keep hearing how Mulcair is a "gamble". Isn't it a bigger gamble to reject the candidate of your geographic base? Doesn't choosing Mulcair allow the NDP to do a better job of keeping the support they already have?
Can you name the NDP/CCF leader elected without any regard to their electoral potential?
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:38
#19
That makes me feel a lot better, even if it is untrue - thanks for that M Spector
My theory is that Topp and the party "establishment" have decided that it is better for the party to establish exactly the degree of support for Mulcair. Rather than walking away from the convention with a leader who got 43.8% of the vote, it would be better to be able to say he got the support of 65% of the membership. It would not surprise me if Mulcair agrees with this also.
[ETA: I see simonvallee agrees with me]
Another (not inconsiderable) side benefit is that it establishes a baseline for future leadership review votes and internal party polling, to see just how far up or down Mulcair has slid since the convention.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:40
#20
The party of principle has become the party of geopolitics.I keep hearing how Mulcair is a "gamble". Isn't it a bigger gamble to reject the candidate of your geographic base? Doesn't choosing Mulcair allow the NDP to do a better job of keeping the support they already have?
Can you name the NDP/CCF leader elected without any regard to their electoral potential?
Electoral potential is not necessarily restricted to a particular geographical area.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:41
#21
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/john-ibbitson/despite-topps...
Most analysts, including this correspondent, have long expected that Mr. Cullen’s supporters would lean instead to Mr. Mulcair, since both are identified as voices for change within the party.
And remember: Most of the ballots have already been cast in advance through a preferential ballot.
Mr. Topp cannot win, despite his protestations that he can't abide where Mr. Mulcair will take the party.
And everyone in this rooms knows it.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:42
#22
josh
I am wondering how much you know about Quebec.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:42
#23
That makes me feel a lot better, even if it is untrue - thanks for that M Spector
My theory is that Topp and the party "establishment" have decided that it is better for the party to establish exactly the degree of support for Mulcair. Rather than walking away from the convention with a leader who got 43.8% of the vote, it would be better to be able to say he got the support of 65% of the membership. It would not surprise me if Mulcair agrees with this also.
[ETA: I see simonvallee agrees with me]
Another (not inconsiderable) side benefit is that it establishes a baseline for future leadership review votes and internal party polling, to see just how far up or down Mulcair has slid since the convention.
I'm not sure that the party establisment have had any say in this. But I for one think its much better to see the new leader come in with a real "elected" mandate (and probably with a fairly solid majority).
I'm pretty sure that Tom Mulcair will have a very solid lead over Brian Topp in the 4th ballot. Its rather obvious that this is the direction of convention.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:42
#24
I think that people are too harsh on Topp here. Most candidates made the same argument he made about Mulcair, for one. Secondly, I think it reveals how he has a sound political mind. He knew Mulcair was the frontrunner, but that people had doubts about his commitment to social-democratic principles. He played that card to define himself as the candidate to beat Mulcair by those who fear him being too moderate. Yet he couldn't go all out, he had to be careful not to go overboard, because Mulcair could win. And look where that got him... he's in the final round with Mulcair.
Furthermore, I think that the criticism is also deserved. Mulcair does seem to want the party to "modernize", a loaded word in left-wing parties that frequently meant going to the center... even the center-right on economic issues while still maintaining center-left positions on social issues (environment, gender, racial issues, etc...). In other words, going from social-democratic to social-liberal. Does Mulcair mean it that way? To be honest, I never saw him clearly distancing himself from that, which is why I was torn between Mulcair and Topp. I voted for Mulcair hoping that the party would be strong enough to force Mulcair to keep left.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:44
#25
After half an hour I finally got in. Now it won't register my vote!
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:45
#26
Oh my God, no Canadian flags in the convention hall.
I'm not sure what is stranger - that there are no Canadian flags or that I never noticed!!!
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:46
#27
Arthur Cramer
As Alan Grayson said Wilf, courage!
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:46
#28
my fellow Bruce County boy and I hope my MP come 2015 Grant Robertson posted this on facebook. I think it is a real truth.
with the performances of Niki Ashton, Nathan Cullen and a long list of Quebec MPs I feel pretty darn good about the long term future of progressive politics in Canada.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:49
#29
My theory is that Topp and the party "establishment" have decided that it is better for the party to establish exactly the degree of support for Mulcair. Rather than walking away from the convention with a leader who got 43.8% of the vote, it would be better to be able to say he got the support of 65% of the membership. It would not surprise me if Mulcair agrees with this also.
[ETA: I see simonvallee agrees with me]
Another (not inconsiderable) side benefit is that it establishes a baseline for future leadership review votes and internal party polling, to see just how far up or down Mulcair has slid since the convention.
That's exactly what Evan Solomon said.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:51
#30
dacckon
Perhaps plagiarism is indeed the greatest form of flatt-
lol.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:53
#31
M. Spector
That's exactly what Evan Solomon said.
Great minds thin-
Oh, never mind!
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:54
#32
There are lots of maple leaf emblems decorating the hall, so I think that's enough patriotism for one hall. :)
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:54
#33
The party of principle has become the party of geopolitics.I keep hearing how Mulcair is a "gamble". Isn't it a bigger gamble to reject the candidate of your geographic base? Doesn't choosing Mulcair allow the NDP to do a better job of keeping the support they already have?
Actually there are good reasons for wanting to unite social democrats in Quebec and the rest of Canada who have too often been divided because of the federalist/sovereigntist issue. There is no necessary contradiction between thinking about regions and thinking about principles, and in our present circumstances I think that combining the two concerns is in fact a principled, progressive approach.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:55
#34
Oooh, Coach's Corner is on the main CBC network! ;) And Don Cherry's in a shade of mauve that looks almost...wait for it...PINK!
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:55
#35
Boom Boom
I didn't hear that bit from Evan Solomon, so I'm glad you posted it, MS.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:58
#36
Still not voted.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:58
#37
James Moore is an observer, and he has been interviewed a few times already... you got to credit the man, he knows how to repeat the Harper-vetted message.
"They're all the same. Bigger taxes, bigger government and central control."
"Hard left. Hard, hard left."
Why do they even bother? He's been saying the exact same thing all day, no matter what questions they ask him.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:59
#38
My understanding is that Topp is also from Quebec, isn't he?
Anyhow, NorthReport is right - of course regional considerations affect electability in Quebec. I don't think it's the only consideration, but it certainly does have an effect.
Sat, 2012-03-24 19:59
#39
Catchfire
Actually, Evan Solomon said he heard it from the Conservative strategists he was talking too. Was he talking to M. Spector?
Sat, 2012-03-24 20:01
#40
M. Spector
I'm not sure that the party establisment have had any say in this.
I thought it was pretty much conventional wisdom that Topp was the party establishment candidate (support from Broadbent, Layton's probable favourite, etc.). But I could be wrong.
In any event, I can't imagine Topp staying in for a futile fourth ballot if the party establishment thought that doing so would be bad for the party. Topp's career and future employment is highly dependent on the goodwill of those folks.
He's also no fool and clearly must know he can't win.
Sat, 2012-03-24 20:02
#41
Boom Boom
Mansbridge just said a Mulcair victory before the results are in! He's taking it for granted that Tom has won.
Sat, 2012-03-24 20:05
#42
Mansbridge just said a Mulcair victory before the results are in! He's taking it for granted that Tom has won.
Because he has.
Sat, 2012-03-24 20:05
#43
Well, who hasn't?
Oh Christ. Voting has been extended ANOTHER HOUR.
Sat, 2012-03-24 20:05
#44
Boom Boom, everyone is taking that for granted. :)
Sat, 2012-03-24 20:06
#45
dacckon
He has won. There's no doubt.
Sat, 2012-03-24 20:07
#46
Boom Boom
Yeah, but to say it on air - that is an unforgiveable journalistic error.
Sat, 2012-03-24 20:07
#47
and the winner is .... an hour extension
Sat, 2012-03-24 20:08
#48
Boom Boom
Another hour??? Oh, Christ. Mansbridge just said the hockey game will be over before this is over.
Sat, 2012-03-24 20:09
#49
Got in twice. Twice it wouldn't register my vote. WTF?
Sat, 2012-03-24 20:10
#50
Boom Boom
Another hour??? Oh, Christ. Mansbridge just said the hockey game will be over before this is over.
Sat, 2012-03-24 20:10
#51
Why an hour? Oh well at least I didn't have to walk 5 miles to town to vote.