NDP leadership race 4

josh wrote:

NDP will gain some seats in the 905, and add some seats in Vancouver.  And get wiped out everywhere else.  But their leader will be immaculately tailored.

Sore loser?  Seems so.  Pretty douchy as usual.  

I don't for one think the NDP will win the next election.  However, I think Singh has the greatest potential to grow.  I don't think we'll get wiped out everywhere.  Why?  He's a popular candidate.  

I'm a little tired quite frankly of this "Singh isn't one of us" or "Singh is an outsider" line.  It was used by Charlie the most.  And Singh's "supporters" weren't real New Democrats.  And as one "progressive", far left New Democrat said on social media, "an ethnicity took over".  The hard left is just as racist as anyone else it seems.  And that I think is the undercurrent to a lot of anti-Singh sentiment.  Charlie played into that too.  I spoke with a former cabinet minister in NS who supported Caron but almost voted Singh as her first choice because the type of attacks on him made her sick to her stomach.

I think we can make gains in places like Halifax and St. John's for example come the next election with the right candidates.  We can maintain our support in Quebec and gain some seats with the right campaign.  I see a nice chunk of gains in Ontario and BC.  Of course, it's a guessing game but apparently I'm more positive about the future.

R.E.Wood wrote:

Congratulations to Jagmeet Singh and his supporters. His acceptance speech inclusivity of the other candidates was welcome and a good first step as leader.

It is much better than when Wab Kinew, in Manitoba, reached out to supporters of "the other campaign" in his victory speech and never mentioning Steve Ashton's name once.

Hunky_Monkey wrote:

I think we can make gains in places like Halifax and St. John's for example come the next election with the right candidates.  We can maintain our support in Quebec and gain some seats with the right campaign.  I see a nice chunk of gains in Ontario and BC.  Of course, it's a guessing game but apparently I'm more positive about the future.

Are the NDP gains going to come mainly from the Liberals?  Or can the NDP take seats from the Conservatives?

That is going to be the main question I have as we approach 2019.

In 2011 the NDP beat the Bloc Quebecois and the Liberals, but it failed to beat the Conservatives.  The NDP needs to win over moderate conservatives/red tories, etc. if it is going to be successful.

Aristotleded24 wrote:

josh wrote:

An ethno-religious group that joined solely to vote for him.  Not out of any ideological motivation.

I'm going to agree with HM on this one, because this exact accusation was thrown at Steve Ashton in the 2009 Manitoba NDP leadership race. That's essentially what happens during nomination or leadership campaigns is that the candidates attempt to sign up enough people that will vote for them to win. If the party is that weak that a large-scale sign-up of new members is enough to destabilize it and distort the public opinion, then that party needs to find ways of getting more people engaged and involved in the party all the time.

It's beyond sad that people like josh take issue with all the new people Singh brought in.  While they didn't write the NDP Purity Test that josh drafted, I'm sure they'll make a positive addition to the party.   And many weren't from an "ethno-religious" community.   But many were thankfully.  Quite frankly, so sorely needed.  We almost look like a Klan party at conventions where everyone is white.  We need more young people and more POC in this party.  Singh is the one to do it.

And Aristotleded24, should I be worried or should you be worried with all the agreeing you're doing with me?  ;)

Hunky_Monkey wrote:

josh wrote:

NDP will gain some seats in the 905, and add some seats in Vancouver.  And get wiped out everywhere else.  But their leader will be immaculately tailored.

Sore loser?  Seems so.  Pretty douchy as usual.  

I don't for one think the NDP will win the next election.  However, I think Singh has the greatest potential to grow.  I don't think we'll get wiped out everywhere.  Why?  He's a popular candidate.  

I'm a little tired quite frankly of this "Singh isn't one of us" or "Singh is an outsider" line.  It was used by Charlie the most.  And Singh's "supporters" weren't real New Democrats.  And as one "progressive", far left New Democrat said on social media, "an ethnicity took over".  The hard left is just as racist as anyone else it seems.  And that I think is the undercurrent to a lot of anti-Singh sentiment.  Charlie played into that too.  I spoke with a former cabinet minister in NS who supported Caron but almost voted Singh as her first choice because the type of attacks on him made her sick to her stomach.

I think we can make gains in places like Halifax and St. John's for example come the next election with the right candidates.  We can maintain our support in Quebec and gain some seats with the right campaign.  I see a nice chunk of gains in Ontario and BC.  Of course, it's a guessing game but apparently I'm more positive about the future.

I think you've cornered the market on douchebaggery on here.  If stating a fact is racist, then I plead guilty.

Aristotleded24 wrote:

josh wrote:

An ethno-religious group that joined solely to vote for him.  Not out of any ideological motivation.

I'm going to agree with HM on this one, because this exact accusation was thrown at Steve Ashton in the 2009 Manitoba NDP leadership race. That's essentially what happens during nomination or leadership campaigns is that the candidates attempt to sign up enough people that will vote for them to win. If the party is that weak that a large-scale sign-up of new members is enough to destabilize it and distort the public opinion, then that party needs to find ways of getting more people engaged and involved in the party all the time.

Don't disagree.  Nothing against the rules.  And the party was vulnerable to that.  

josh wrote:

Hunky_Monkey wrote:

josh wrote:

NDP will gain some seats in the 905, and add some seats in Vancouver.  And get wiped out everywhere else.  But their leader will be immaculately tailored.

Sore loser?  Seems so.  Pretty douchy as usual.  

I don't for one think the NDP will win the next election.  However, I think Singh has the greatest potential to grow.  I don't think we'll get wiped out everywhere.  Why?  He's a popular candidate.  

I'm a little tired quite frankly of this "Singh isn't one of us" or "Singh is an outsider" line.  It was used by Charlie the most.  And Singh's "supporters" weren't real New Democrats.  And as one "progressive", far left New Democrat said on social media, "an ethnicity took over".  The hard left is just as racist as anyone else it seems.  And that I think is the undercurrent to a lot of anti-Singh sentiment.  Charlie played into that too.  I spoke with a former cabinet minister in NS who supported Caron but almost voted Singh as her first choice because the type of attacks on him made her sick to her stomach.

I think we can make gains in places like Halifax and St. John's for example come the next election with the right candidates.  We can maintain our support in Quebec and gain some seats with the right campaign.  I see a nice chunk of gains in Ontario and BC.  Of course, it's a guessing game but apparently I'm more positive about the future.

I think you've cornered the market on douchebaggery on here.  If stating a fact is racist, then I plead guilty.

Wait... you know the next election results as fact now?  You know the exact breakdown of all Singh's supporters?  Are the "ethno-religious" ones not real voters?  Not real Canadians?  Not real New Democrats?  Those are your facts?  Amazing how bigotry seeps out when your candidate loses.

cco wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Singh understands that he has to address Quebec and if he ever forgot he will be spending time with a caucus that will remind him.

Not until 2019, it seems.

And not if he plans on touring Canada most of the time. Something Trudeau did for two years, which the NDP eviscerated him daily about.

And here are the words of the late Jack Layton "If you don't show up to work, you shouldn't get a promotion"

Mighty Middle wrote:

cco wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Singh understands that he has to address Quebec and if he ever forgot he will be spending time with a caucus that will remind him.

Not until 2019, it seems.

And not if he plans on touring Canada most of the time. Something Trudeau did for two years, which the NDP eviscerated him daily about.

And here are the words of the late Jack Layton "If you don't show up to work, you shouldn't get a promotion"

More twisting from the resident Liberal troll.  Singh will be showing up for work as leader.  He won't be an MP until 2019.  If he doesn't show up for work then, feel free to bring that line up.  You're very... simplistic... when it comes to all this, huh?  Sort of like saying Singh, a POC that worked his way up on his own merit while facing many barriers, is the same life experience as Zoolander with a famous last name who lived a playboy lifestyle and inherited millions from daddy.  Apples and oranges to anyone that isn't simplistic.

Mighty Middle wrote:

And here are the words of the late Jack Layton "If you don't show up to work, you shouldn't get a promotion"

Jack also didn't have a seat when he won the NDP leadership race and somehow managed to do okay.

Mighty Middle wrote:

Hunky_Monkey wrote:

Mighty Middle wrote:

cco wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Singh understands that he has to address Quebec and if he ever forgot he will be spending time with a caucus that will remind him.

Not until 2019, it seems.

And not if he plans on touring Canada most of the time. Something Trudeau did for two years, which the NDP eviscerated him daily about.

And here are the words of the late Jack Layton "If you don't show up to work, you shouldn't get a promotion"

More twisting from the resident Liberal troll.  Singh will be showing up for work as leader.  He won't be an MP until 2019.  If he doesn't show up for work then, feel free to bring that line up.  You're very... simplistic... when it comes to all this, huh?  Sort of like saying Singh, a POC that worked his way up on his own merit while facing many barriers, is the same life experience as Zoolander with a famous last name who lived a playboy lifestyle and inherited millions from daddy.  Apples and oranges to anyone that isn't simplistic.

Except his competitors (all three of them) said it is hard to be leader without a seat.

*YAWN*

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Mighty Middle wrote:

And here are the words of the late Jack Layton "If you don't show up to work, you shouldn't get a promotion"

Jack also didn't have a seat when he won the NDP leadership race and somehow managed to do okay.

Obviously having a seat in the House isn't compulsory for a leader.

But there are advantages & disadvantages to not having one.

It depends on the circumstances and the leader in question.

So we'll have to wait & see how it develops.

Ken Burch wrote:

Congratulations to Jagmeet.  I think he probably won it the day he faced down that heckler.

Hopefully, he'll follow my advice and give the other three candidates the following roles(I'm thinking the term "lieutenant" should probably be phased out).  

Guy Caron:  Quebec national leader

Niki Ashton: Social movement/activist youth/social media leader

Charlie Angus: Rural Canadian/working-class leader.

The three of them each have valuable council to offer, and the best of each of their ideas should be incorporated into whatever happens next.  In particular, I think Singh and Ashton could have a particularly useful working arrangement, since each has some sense of the changes the party needs.

While Jagmeet was never my first choice, it's a good thing that for the first time, a major Canadian political party is led by a person who looks like the global majority and a person of a non-Abrahamic faith tradition.  Those are things to be proud of.

 

Well, I think the thing was won in the membership sign-up.  With numbers like those, Jaggi could have fluffed the heckler exchange badly and still won handily. 

As a Liberal, I am used to strong community loyalties playing out in nominations and leadership races.  But it would be unfair to Jagmeet (who I have met on a policy file and rather liked) to describe him as a one-community or one-trick pony.  Sure he fished where the fish were but he offered more than that.

If there was a moment for him, it was standing up squarely to those who would pander to the more Xenophobic side of the Quebec cultural debates.  On that, he aquitted himself far better than Caron, for whom it was perhaps understandable, and Ashton, who has no such excuse and should have been ashamed of herself.

 

Quote:

I agree that Singh had a built-in advantage. Because of this I think it is unfair to criticize Angus and Caron for coming in so far behind Singh. Caron seems to have been especially disadvantaged because the NDP's membership numbers are so low in Quebec.

Wait, though.  It's a bit hinky if Sikhs in Markham supported Singh because he's Sikh, but it's unfortunate that Quebécers in Québec didn't have sufficient numbers to support Caron because he's a Francophone?

Yes, NDP membership may be low in Québec, but why should that punish Caron any more than any of the other three? 

In other words, if Sikh voters turned up for Singh and that's hinky, why would Francophones turning up for Caron not also be hinky?

KarlL wrote:

Well, I think the thing was won in the membership sign-up.  With numbers like those, Jaggi could have fluffed the heckler exchange badly and still won handily.

According election filings one-third of the money Jagmeet raised came from Brampton. Since he signed up 40K members, and won with 35K votes I'm sure most of those votes came from Brampton. The Conservative race, like it or not, was much fairer because you had to get broad support from across the country. With this one-member, one-vote Jagmeet could just concentrate on shoring up his support base in Brampton to get out an vote.

With the NDP in debt (plus the Satallite office lagging in court) Jagmeet has his work cut for him to fundraise.

R.E.Wood wrote:

Ugh. So utterly depressing. This isn't just about my candidate not winning (been there & done that many times before!) - this is about the entire direction of the party, following on after the frustrating, depressing, & rage-inducing Mulcair alt-liberal years.

One thing I know is I am backing away from the party until I've had a chance to see where Singh takes it, what the party will stand for, and whether or not he grows into the role. I have very little confidence in the NDP's future at this point, and I will not be donating any more money or time, at least in the short term. He has lots of shiny, happy people who can pull the party out of its $5.5 million dollar hole and fill the coffers for the next election; he doesn't need me. Bright side: once I click "unsubscribe" at least I will be free of the endless party emails asking for my money!

Then I can just wait and see... and maybe the party platform (& Singh) will be something I can support in 2019. I'm open to that. Or maybe it won't. After the soul-crushing Mulcair years, I almost don't care anymore. Maybe there will be some new party on the left by 2019. I'd be open to that, too. 

Well said.  The insiders who backed Singh believe that the only thing wrong with Mulcaiarism was Mulcair.  They think a more charismatic candidate selling a one degree to the left of the Liberals program will be an electoral success.  Expect no challenge to the neo-liberal economic order and lots of talk about love and "identity politics."

Mr. Magoo wrote:

In other words, if Sikh voters turned up for Singh and that's hinky, why would Francophones turning up for Caron not also be hinky?

Are we treading the ground of "religon = race = language" again?

ETA:

Ken Burch wrote:

And from what I've heard, David Lewis was basically an athiest.

"Rumoured to have been basically an atheist" isn't the same thing as "openly atheist", now, is it?

josh wrote:

R.E.Wood wrote:

Ugh. So utterly depressing. This isn't just about my candidate not winning (been there & done that many times before!) - this is about the entire direction of the party, following on after the frustrating, depressing, & rage-inducing Mulcair alt-liberal years.

One thing I know is I am backing away from the party until I've had a chance to see where Singh takes it, what the party will stand for, and whether or not he grows into the role. I have very little confidence in the NDP's future at this point, and I will not be donating any more money or time, at least in the short term. He has lots of shiny, happy people who can pull the party out of its $5.5 million dollar hole and fill the coffers for the next election; he doesn't need me. Bright side: once I click "unsubscribe" at least I will be free of the endless party emails asking for my money!

Then I can just wait and see... and maybe the party platform (& Singh) will be something I can support in 2019. I'm open to that. Or maybe it won't. After the soul-crushing Mulcair years, I almost don't care anymore. Maybe there will be some new party on the left by 2019. I'd be open to that, too. 

Well said.  The insiders who backed Singh believe that the only thing wrong with Mulcaiarism was Mulcair.  They think a more charismatic candidate selling a one degree to the left of the Liberals program will be an electoral success.  Expect no challenge to the neo-liberal economic order and lots of talk about love and "identity politics."

Yes I agree with Josh & R.E. Wood. If people think this is the second coming of the late Jack Layton, you are going to be in for a rude awakening.

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:

With this one-member, one-vote Jagmeet could just concentrate on shoring up his support base in Brampton to get out an vote.

Any candidate could mobilize "their" people, though... couldn't they?  What stopped, say, Ashton from mobilizing women?  There' are a lot more women than Sikhs in Canada.  And probably just about as many grey-haired punk rockers.

It's just funny to think that the "real" reason some candidate won was by winning the vote of a visible minority who make up about a percent and a half of the population.

Yes but if you don't a broad support from across the country. Women don't live in one area (Niki Ashton), and all of Jagmeet support has been concentrated in one area. I mean 1/3 of all money he raised came from Bramption. While Charlie Angus was the top fundraiser in the entire GTA!

Ken Burch wrote:

You keep acting as though the NDP refuses to TRY to take Conservative seats.  In truth, they NDP has always put just as much effort into trying to take Conservative seats as it has Liberal seats...it's simply that there have been fewer-some, but fewer-seats the NDP had a chance of taking from the Conservatives.  Most of these were seats the Liberals didn't have much chance of taking seats from the Conservatives, either.

To date, the Liberals have proven more successful at taking Conservative seats than the NDP has.  We have seen that historically, and most recently in 2015.  That's one of the reasons that the Liberals have been able to beat the Conservatives and form national governments.

The Liberals take seats from both the NDP and the Conservatives, whereas the NDP, except for a few places in Western Canada, takes most of its seats from the Liberals (and from the BQ in 2011).  That's why the NDP couldn't get higher than 2nd place in 2011.  The Liberals were able to win in 2015 because they took Conservative seats in Atlantic Canada, Ontario, and in some places in Western Canada.

The Layton Wave was successful in appealing to BQ & Liberal voters, but not Conservative voters.  So if I was an NDP strategist, my next objective would be to determine how to win Conservative seats, because it will be difficult to form a national government without them.

Congratulations to all the candidates including the ones that dropped out before today as it is politically courageous to throw your name out into a leadership race

We now have a new leader who won decisively on the first ballot, and who likes to win. As NDP governments are increasing in number at the provincial level, It is time for the NDP to do well federally and to eventually win a federal election

NorthReport wrote:

We now have a new leader who won decisively on the first ballot, and who likes to win.

Oh. That was the problem previously, wasn't it? We had leaders who didn't like to win. It's all clear to me now.

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Actually no-- you are comparing apples and oranges -- a leadership campaign with an election. Trudeau did not become leader based on precvious experience as a leader. I also think you are not considering the experiences that Singh does have.

Hypocrcy you need to defend you call Apples and Oranges, where as most people would just call it for it is - hypocrcy.

R.E.Wood wrote:

Hunky_Monkey wrote:

Charlies Angus was some hard left socialist with a bust of Marx in his office or something?  

As for the "soul-crushing" Mulcair years as Liberal lite... far more left than Jack Layton's platform of 2011.  Fact.  But I guess running on new national social programs just isn't enough for you.  Must be style?  Interesting.

No - Charlie Angus was someone I believed in, and I had faith he could appeal to people across the country! I don't have a hard-left purity test. I look for someone I find honest, compelling and inspirational, and hope others will as well. 

Where did you see me praising Jack Layton? I was never a big fan of his either, although I progressed over the course of his leadership from strongly disliking him to being a reasonable supporter, so by that evidence there's a chance I can come around on Singh as well. I also wasn't a fan of Alexa, if you want to go farther back. But yes, Mulcair almost single-handedly pretty much killed my enthusiasm for the party... this campaign was bringing it back... and now it remains to be seen where the NDP goes from here.

And you could at least try to temporarily be less of a judgemental a-hole -- you have a very bad habit of continually reading false unintended interpretations into other people's messages to suit your own narrative.

So, again, it's more style... than policy.  Because let's be honest, none of the candidates were that different than the others with Ashton and Caron a little more to the left than the Angus and Singh.  Angus and Singh are pretty similiar.

It seems only 19% of New Democrats caught on to Charlie.  If he was only able to get 19% in the NDP leadership race compared to Singh's 54%, I think the person with the greater chance to connect with voters and grow the party with be the winner today.

I think one of Charlie's mistakes to be honest was going after Singh as being an "outsider" and then twisting the issue of universality.  It made him look petty.  As I mentioned, a former cabinet minister almost put Singh ahead of Caron because she was sickened by the "dog whistle" politics of some of that.