Husband of the Chief of Staff to PM Justin Trudeau Gives Up His Career To Support Hers

142 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sean in Ottawa

terrytowel wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

You have fought on a lot less important ground.

Then pick what battles you want to fight here and ignore me. Pretty simple.

Sorry pal but a person who thinks it is more important to praise a well connected millionaire for changing jobs than to acknowledge the real issues facing equality in this country is EXACTLY the kind of battle that I will fight here.

Your stupid comments in support of it deserve the responses they are getting.

I will stop if you dial back two things:

1) your contention that this story is at all a sign of progress from the Liberals when they backed away from pension reform and produced a tax change that will favour men over women and the have's over the have nots.

2) your comparison of a millionare earnign a high six figure income with the situation of public servants

It is easy to stop this fight if you want -- just swallow those to things that you simply cannot defend anyway.

Both issues -- labour and women's equality are central to why this site exists and why we come here to battle back Liberals who come here with posts full of shit like yours.

This IS why we are here. And this IS the battle we fight.

terrytowel

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Did you read the article that you posted? In it his salary is mentionned.

Please quote

Sean in Ottawa

terrytowel wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Did you read the article that you posted? In it his salary is mentionned.

Please quote

You are right -- it is not in the article -- I did read it while responding ot this thread though. Now we still know that it was a six figure income as you pointed out.

As well we also know that Rob Silver himself is quoted all over the place as a Liberal strategist. The poor boy is not going to be unemployed.

That mistake aside -- sorry -- but everything else still stands. He is known to be rich and he is a well connected Liberal insider who will have no trouble getting work that will most likely be better than what he had.

You claim sacrifice there is absolutely NO evidence that he is making any sacrifice at all.

There is also NO evidence that he is a public servant comparable with the unionized workers of the public service.

terrytowel

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

terrytowel wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Did you read the article that you posted? In it his salary is mentionned.

Please quote

You are right -- it is not in the article --

Goodnight, godspeed.

swallow swallow's picture

So abou that party: pour out a dram for departed friends. 

Webgear

Smile guys, the weekend is almost here. No need to fight.

Sean in Ottawa

terrytowel wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

terrytowel wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Did you read the article that you posted? In it his salary is mentionned.

Please quote

You are right -- it is not in the article --

Goodnight, godspeed.

Your are taking your win on a very, very, very small and insignificant point ignoring the rest and the bulk of your very offensive statements.

quizzical

Sean the CBC article  at the top annouces it is a work in progress. ya can't expect things to be there at any given time i guess. they're chaging it as they need i guess.

Quote:
« This page is a work in progress. Follow this link to return to the CBCNews.ca you know

Sean in Ottawa

terrytowel wrote:

As I told Arthur last night I respect my elders enough to let them have the last word.

That is insulting and is in violation of your membership here delete it and I'll delete this response.

You don't reference people here by age -- ever.

Sean in Ottawa

quizzical wrote:

Sean the CBC article  at the top annouces it is a work in progress. ya can't expect things to be there at any given time i guess. they're chaging it as they need i guess.

Quote:
« This page is a work in progress. Follow this link to return to the CBCNews.ca you know

Perhaps -- but the point is not central to the rest of the thread. TT is just pretending. The guy is a rich guy with a six figure salary who is himself a Liberal strategist. 

But thanks. On the specific of the salary amount -- the minor point -- I could have been wrong. But TT himself said it was a six figure salary. He is on record all over the place as well-connected and a strategist. A move to Ottawa for a Liberal strategist -- well that's good strategy.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering wrote:

I agree there is not much to talk about here. Normally that results in no one responding to the topic not a pile on against the person who posted for daring to post something others don't find interesting or significant. Every post in this thread has appeared on the front page of rabble elevating the importance of the thread.

So?

Unionist

יְבָרֶכְךָ יהוה, וְיִשְׁמְרֶךָ

יָאֵר יהוה פָּנָיו אֵלֶיךָ, וִיחֻנֶּךָּ

יִשָּׂא יהוה פָּנָיו אֵלֶיךָ, וְיָשֵׂם לְךָ שָׁלוֹם

 

terrytowel

N/A

terrytowel

Sure it has been done.

Sean do you want to rid this place of people that you feel are Liberal hacks? Again I'm an independent with no ties to the Liberals.

However if you want to get rid of all the people that don't share your idealogy, you can start with me. Just say the word and I'll delete my account and leave this place forever.

Once you say GO and I'll be gone. And you can be done with me once and for all.

It is all in your hands. You can get rid off me by letting me know. I'll be gone and you never have to read my posts ever again.

Then it would be one down and several dozen left to go. Then you can purge this entire place and only speak to the converted. And you can start with me.

Well?

Pondering

Don't give him that power terrytowel.

Pondering

oldgoat wrote:

What the heck Pondering, I'm going to take Swallows advice.   Here, have a balloon. 

Thank you for the balloon. Enjoying the thread?  65 posts all about why we shouldn't discuss this.

Here is a thread headed down the same direction as this one.

http://rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/undecided-vote-takes-2nd-place...

I think the poll could prompt an interesting discussion about why the numbers are what they are, not to praise Trudeau, but to figure out what is driving voters which is the first step to changing their minds.

Here is a thread people expressed their disinterest in by not posting rather than by berating the thread starter.

http://rabble.ca/babble/anti-racism-news-and-initiatives/no-justice-tami...

Slumberjack

Pondering wrote:
Don't give him that power terrytowel.

Indeed.

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering and Terry Towel -- clearly neither of you even wants to try honesty here.

The complaint has never been about your right to be here. It is what you say.

I am sick of your endless whining after you provoke a response, get it and then complain that the feedback you get is an attempt to silence you.

I have never ever, ever,ever, ever suggested to you Terry Towel that you should not get to be here or not post. I have only given feedback -- sometimes angry -- at the content of your posts when they are offensive or crap. I have also defended attacks on you when they were not justified. But when you come here and provoke and sling BS -- everyone else has the right to be here. And they have the right to  call you on it.

Liberals here have the supreme arrogance that they argue not be challenged no mattter what they say and then claim to be martyrs when anyone holds them accountable for what they have said.

Pretending I was trying to stop you from posting TT -- that's what lying looks like.

 

terrytowel

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

I have never ever, ever,ever, ever suggested to you Terry Towel that you should not get to be here or not post. I have only given feedback -- sometimes angry -- at the content of your posts when they are offensive or crap. I have also defended attacks on you when they were not justified.But when you come here and provoke and sling BS -- everyone else has the right to be here. And they have the right to  call you on it.

And I appreciate that. I hear what you are saying and will take it to heart. Can we start over? I've read what you have written and will try to follow the advice you have.

Cause despite everything I still respect you and your opinion.

So hoepfully we can wipe the slate clean and start over.

MegB

terrytowel wrote:

Sure it has been done.

Sean do you want to rid this place of people that you feel are Liberal hacks? Again I'm an independent with no ties to the Liberals.

However if you want to get rid of all the people that don't share your idealogy, you can start with me. Just say the word and I'll delete my account and leave this place forever.

Once you say GO and I'll be gone. And you can be done with me once and for all.

It is all in your hands. You can get rid off me by letting me know. I'll be gone and you never have to read my posts ever again.

Then it would be one down and several dozen left to go. Then you can purge this entire place and only speak to the converted. And you can start with me.

Well?

Actually, you can't delete your account. I can ban a user for repeated violations of babble policy, etc. Of course you can choose not to post here anymore but that's the extent of it. At any rate, let's dial back on the bickering.

My personal non-mod opinion is that it is disgusting that a privileged male gets lauded for doing what women have been quietly doing for, like, forever.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

MegB wrote:

My personal non-mod opinion is that it is disgusting that a privileged male gets lauded for doing what women have been quietly doing for, like, forever.

Very well said.

Pondering

I must have missed something. Who is lauding this guy? Certainly hasn't happened in this thread nor in the article cited.

It remains the norm for women to stay home with the kids when they are infants and pre-schoolers and to move where the husband's career takes him. I'm sure the reverse happens a lot more now than it did 30 years ago but it isn't 50/50. The more visible it is the more common it will be.

Two mounties got tons of attention for getting married, something lots of people do everyday. Scott Brison and his husband got attention for becoming fathers to twins. This guy is getting attention for giving up a high-powered job.

None of these people are being lauded for what they did. They are just human interest stories.

So really, please show me where Rob Silver has been lauded for this.

Pondering

Pondering wrote:

oldgoat wrote:

What the heck Pondering, I'm going to take Swallows advice.   Here, have a balloon. 

Thank you for the balloon. Enjoying the thread?  65 posts all about why we shouldn't discuss this.

Here is a thread headed down the same direction as this one.

http://rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/undecided-vote-takes-2nd-place...

I think the poll could prompt an interesting discussion about why the numbers are what they are, not to praise Trudeau, but to figure out what is driving voters which is the first step to changing their minds.

Here is a thread people expressed their disinterest in by not posting rather than by berating the thread starter.

http://rabble.ca/babble/anti-racism-news-and-initiatives/no-justice-tami...

Waving my balloon about as I do the babble jig.

 This is one of the most popular threads on babble. Cool What a terrible man sending out an email that he was leaving his job. He should have kept it a secret to avoid it hitting the news. It's just awful those Liberals getting all this attention! This is a problem that must be addressed. This is likely to continue, for like, 4 years.

Yay!  73rd post! I'm going to try to get the 100th post and get every hundreth post thereafter.

I challenge babble lurkers to play the game with me. That will incentivize them to join! Who could resist the fun?

Unionist

Pondering wrote:

I must have missed something. Who is lauding this guy? Certainly hasn't happened in this thread nor in the article cited.

[...]

So really, please show me where Rob Silver has been lauded for this.

Read the misleading, inaccurate thread title. It's in big letters at the top of the thread. If you don't understand why I'm calling it "misleading" and/or "inaccurate", or if you don't follow why I consider that title as laudatory - just ask, and I'll be pleased to respond.

ETA: By the way, the linked article in the OP does [b]NOT[/b] say what the thread title says. The thread title is obviously deliberately crafted not only to put a spin on what happened (he quit to avoid real or perceived conflict of interest - he did not "give up" any "career" at all, and certainly not to "support" hers) - but also to present it as a supreme act of heroic self-sacrifice. I'm not sure why you're having trouble seeing what everyone else here sees, so I'm taking you at your word and explaining.

Slumberjack

Pondering wrote:
I must have missed something. Who is lauding this guy?

Apparently it doesn't deserve a mention, because to mention is to laud.  It's like the argument that says transgendered celebrities (Cox and Jenner) should go and hide somewhere because there are tons of non-celebrity transgendered people who live their lives in obscurity.  So on it's own the 'press release' is fine as an example of changing times, perhaps, but if the intention is to add fuel to the notion that the Liberal party are 'oh so' progressive in practice, then excuse me while I go and lose my lunch.

swallow swallow's picture

Michael Moriarity wrote:

MegB wrote:

My personal non-mod opinion is that it is disgusting that a privileged male gets lauded for doing what women have been quietly doing for, like, forever.

Very well said.

Yes. 

terrytowel

swallow wrote:

Michael Moriarity wrote:

MegB wrote:

My personal non-mod opinion is that it is disgusting that a privileged male gets lauded for doing what women have been quietly doing for, like, forever.

Very well said.

Yes. 

Yes I agree, but about time men start giving up their careers for their wife career. For so long it has been the other way around. That is my only point. If it seemed I was lauding him, that was not my intension. Maybe this will start a trend were more men start putting their wives ahead of their own interests.

Anyways I'll tone it down a bit.

Pondering

Unionist wrote:

Pondering wrote:

I must have missed something. Who is lauding this guy? Certainly hasn't happened in this thread nor in the article cited.

[...]

So really, please show me where Rob Silver has been lauded for this.

Read the misleading, inaccurate thread title. It's in big letters at the top of the thread. If you don't understand why I'm calling it "misleading" and/or "inaccurate", or if you don't follow why I consider that title as laudatory - just ask, and I'll be pleased to respond.

ETA: By the way, the linked article in the OP does [b]NOT[/b] say what the thread title says. The thread title is obviously deliberately crafted not only to put a spin on what happened (he quit to avoid real or perceived conflict of interest - he did not "give up" any "career" at all, and certainly not to "support" hers) - but also to present it as a supreme act of heroic self-sacrifice. I'm not sure why you're having trouble seeing what everyone else here sees, so I'm taking you at your word and explaining.

I can understand why you would interpret the title of the thread that way. Giving up a career carries a different implication than giving up a job, but the content illustrated that there was no attempt to mislead people in the choice of wording. For now it appears he doesn't have a job and is looking forward to spending more time with his son. When women do that it is often referred to as giving up one's career although I'll assume that Rob Silver is planning on looking for a position in Ottawa.

Terrytowel just as gleefully gave the Liberals the "IT'S OVER" treatment when the NDP was leading in the polls. He says he is an indepedent and I see no reason to disbelieve him. Even if I did, so what? He's harmless and he's courteous. What more do you want? Why should anyone here give him such a hard time over starting a thread. He doesn't start them daily. There are a ton of one post threads on babble. The sex worker forum is full of them. Maysie's thread didn't get any responses. Lets all go tell her that could have gone in an existing thread or wasn't important enough to post as if not getting any responses doesn't send that message already.

Pondering

Slumberjack wrote:

Pondering wrote:
I must have missed something. Who is lauding this guy?

Apparently it doesn't deserve a mention, because to mention is to laud.  It's like the argument that says transgendered celebrities (Cox and Jenner) should go and hide somewhere because there are tons of non-celebrity transgendered people who live their lives in obscurity.  So on it's own the 'press release' is fine as an example of changing times, perhaps, but if the intention is to add fuel to the notion that the Liberal party are 'oh so' progressive in practice, then excuse me while I go and lose my lunch.

Correct, it didn't deserve mention here, or at least not an entire thread, but that happens a lot without the individual getting jumped on. There was no need for it to become a big deal.

Slumberjack wrote:
but if the intention is to add fuel to the notion that the Liberal party are 'oh so' progressive in practice, then excuse me while I go and lose my lunch.

For the sake of argument let's say T&T did see it as that what difference would it make? Are people going to miss the article, read the title, and vote Liberal in 2019 because of it?

It does have a message in the sense that it contributes to the image of the Liberals as a modern party with modern MPs but in isolation it's meaningless which is why it didn't warrant a thread.

terrytowel

Pondering wrote:

Terrytowel just as gleefully gave the Liberals the "IT'S OVER" treatment when the NDP was leading in the polls. He says he is an indepedent and I see no reason to disbelieve him. Even if I did, so what? He's harmless and he's courteous. What more do you want? Why should anyone here give him such a hard time over starting a thread. He doesn't start them daily. There are a ton of one post threads on babble. The sex worker forum is full of them. Maysie's thread didn't get any responses. Lets all go tell her that could have gone in an existing thread or wasn't important enough to post as if not getting any responses doesn't send that message already.

Thanks Pondering nice of you to say.

Unionist

Pondering wrote:

Terrytowel just as gleefully gave the Liberals the "IT'S OVER" treatment when the NDP was leading in the polls. He says he is an indepedent and I see no reason to disbelieve him. Even if I did, so what? He's harmless and he's courteous. What more do you want? Why should anyone here give him such a hard time over starting a thread.

I have no problem at all with terrytowel. I defend and encourage his presence here. I don't care what party he supports, and I don't even care if he lies about it. I oppose all the pile-ons against him and the horrendous namecalling and "othering" of someone just because of an assumption that he doesn't wear the right team jersey. By contrast, he is unfailingly civil, even when facing the most provocative baiting and character assassination. I agree with some of his views and disagree with others.

And I have exactly the same attitude to you. I agree or disagree with views you express, and I feel free to ridicule anyone that tries to "identify" your allegiance and judge you accordingly.

And, I hope I have the same attitude to everyone here. I hope I have never said, "Well, you're just a Liberal/Con/NDP/separatist/federalist/whatever, so we know what you're up to, and your views should be judged accordingly." If I've ever said that, or if I ever say it in the future, I sincerely hope to be slapped back to order.

My problem in this thread is twofold: 1) The speed with which the conversation descends to kindergarten partisan namecalling. 2) The thread topic, which I continue to insist (as Meg has said more eloquently) is a distortion and an attempt to make much ado about nothing.

 

Pondering

Unionist wrote:

I have no problem at all with terrytowel. I defend and encourage his presence here. I don't care what party he supports, and I don't even care if he lies about it. I oppose all the pile-ons against him and the horrendous namecalling and "othering" of someone just because of an assumption that he doesn't wear the right team jersey. By contrast, he is unfailingly civil, even when facing the most provocative baiting and character assassination. I agree with some of his views and disagree with others.

And I have exactly the same attitude to you. I agree or disagree with views you express, and I feel free to ridicule anyone that tries to "identify" your allegiance and judge you accordingly.

And, I hope I have the same attitude to everyone here. I hope I have never said, "Well, you're just a Liberal/Con/NDP/separatist/federalist/whatever, so we know what you're up to, and your views should be judged accordingly." If I've ever said that, or if I ever say it in the future, I sincerely hope to be slapped back to order.

All true although you are a tad sensitive on the union issue. Wink

terrytowel

Thanks Unionist and Pondering for your kind words and support Smile

Sean in Ottawa

terrytowel wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

I have never ever, ever,ever, ever suggested to you Terry Towel that you should not get to be here or not post. I have only given feedback -- sometimes angry -- at the content of your posts when they are offensive or crap. I have also defended attacks on you when they were not justified.But when you come here and provoke and sling BS -- everyone else has the right to be here. And they have the right to  call you on it.

And I appreciate that. I hear what you are saying and will take it to heart. Can we start over? I've read what you have written and will try to follow the advice you have.

Cause despite everything I still respect you and your opinion.

So hoepfully we can wipe the slate clean and start over.

Sure -- I am okay with wiping the slate clean and resetting. I appreciate this post. Thank you. Let's do that.

quizzical

MegB wrote:
My personal non-mod opinion is that it is disgusting that a privileged male gets lauded for doing what women have been quietly doing for, like, forever.

i don't know what happened to the post i put up stating something  close to this, as to me its like the same thing as when men get lauded for looking after their children (often called hubby at home babysitting) or grocery shopping with them, while women doing the same thing are just doing their job.

jjuares

Ahhhh, a thread with a number of kumbaya moments. The fact that the whole thread from the title on down reeks of hypocrisy and dishonesty is held to be irrelevant. And yeah, despite what the Liberal apologists now say, it was meant to be laudatory. You don't really need to go beyond the title to come to that realization. It is amazing how the concept of integrity carries so little meaning here.

Sean in Ottawa

jjuares wrote:
Ahhhh, a thread with a number of kumbaya moments. The fact that the whole thread from the title on down reeks of hypocrisy and dishonesty is held to be irrelevant. And yeah, despite what the Liberal apologists now say, it was meant to be laudatory. You don't really need to go beyond the title to come to that realization. It is amazing how the concept of integrity carries so little meaning here.

I just think that if someone says I thought about what I said and want a rethink to start over -- it is right to welcome them to do so.

It does not mean you do not care about the issues you argued. If you argue a point important to you becuase you want to get someone to change their position, you have to be open to them doing so and welcome that. Otherwise why argue on anything?

terrytowel

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Sure -- I am okay with wiping the slate clean and resetting. I appreciate this post. Thank you. Let's do that.

I'm glad because I still respect your opinion. Great we can start over! Smile

quizzical

i think they use this place to learn if something flies as good propaganda or not. and if they wanna push it anyway they're learning how to reword their presentation.

jjuares

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

jjuares wrote:
Ahhhh, a thread with a number of kumbaya moments. The fact that the whole thread from the title on down reeks of hypocrisy and dishonesty is held to be irrelevant. And yeah, despite what the Liberal apologists now say, it was meant to be laudatory. You don't really need to go beyond the title to come to that realization. It is amazing how the concept of integrity carries so little meaning here.

I just think that if someone says I thought about what I said and want a rethink to start over -- it is right to welcome them to do so.

It does not mean you do not care about the issues you argued. If you argue a point important to you becuase you want to get someone to change their position, you have to be open to them doing so and welcome that. Otherwise why argue on anything?


Well, it is not about arguing as Ihave said it's about integrity and where you place that quality on your hierarchy of values. For me it is not just the most important quality but the one that activates and enables meaningful discussion. As Meg pointed out and what should be painfully obvious to anyone with any cognitive ability, this is a laudatory thread. Now both TT and Pondering deny this and that of course is their right. However, it is impossible for me to pretend that their bullshit is anything but that, bullshit. Pure undiluted bullshit. And the brazen nature of their bullshit is what I find especially objectionable. When someone tells you a falsehood it does matter just how easily discernible that falsehood is. A brazen falsehood carries with it a message of contempt. What the purveyors of the brazen falsehood is saying is " I am going to say something so outrageously false and I expect you to continue to dialog with me because I believe you to be either so stupid that you can't recognize the most obvious forms of bullshit or you are so timid that you will carry on as if I said something reasonable and worthy of debate". That's the message that TT and once again Pondering are delivering. To pretend otherwise is to play their game and operate at a level worthy of their contempt. And that is what they are showing anyone foolish enough to engage them: contempt.

quizzical

i agree jjuares.

pookie

quizzical wrote:

i think they use this place to learn if something flies as good propaganda or not. and if they wanna push it anyway they're learning how to reword their presentation.

Now this is funny.

quizzical

well to me it's perferable than believing they're just stuck on stupid

Pondering

quizzical wrote:

i think they use this place to learn if something flies as good propaganda or not. and if they wanna push it anyway they're learning how to reword their presentation.

ROFLOL

I confess, we got together in IM and planned the whole thing as a test for the 2019 election campaign because this is such a great place to test propaganda.

On the other hand we could just check the reaction to the story in the mainstream press.

I think it might be a bit difficult to work it into campaign literature in 2019 especially if Silver has a high level job in Ottawa by then.

You may not have noticed but this election hung on who voters thought had the best and most credible economic plan. Specifically the spending on infrastructure.

I can't believe you seriously think this story could impact the election in 2019.

 

quizzical

lmaoooooooooooooooooooo i'm not even thinking about an election in 2019, why in hell would anyone be unless they're politically affiliated somehow?

an  asteriod could strike the earth before then or a massive earthquake...i like to live in the now.

from all your comments and concerns about 2019 over the last couple months i guess you are already thinking ahead to the election in 2019 though.

imv the Liberals are breaking every fking election platform they presented and are now trying to build cases to get away from public backlsh and still get elected in 2019.

have you noticed Sophie has stopped playing princess and tagging along after Justin?

Pondering

quizzical wrote:

lmaoooooooooooooooooooo i'm not even thinking about an election in 2019, why in hell would anyone be unless they're politically affiliated somehow?

an  asteriod could strike the earth before then or a massive earthquake...i like to live in the now.

from all your comments and concerns about 2019 over the last couple months i guess you are already thinking ahead to the election in 2019 though.

Of course I am. What do you think all the discussions about Mulcair staying or going are about?

quizzical wrote:

imv the Liberals are breaking every fking election platform they presented and are now trying to build cases to get away from public backlsh and still get elected in 2019.

have you noticed Sophie has stopped playing princess and tagging along after Justin?

If you believe Trudeau  is breaking all his election platform commitments then defeating him should be a breeze in 2019 and nothing I can say will prevent a public backlash now or then.

I saw Catherine Mulcair holding hands with Tom a lot during the campaign but I haven't seen her tagging along at all since the election. If you think Sophie was "playing princess" I should think you would be praising her for not continuing, character growth and all that.

I'm not suprised that you are a Mulcair supporter. You take aim at everything indescriminately hoping something will stick.

quizzical

lolol pondering get real. she stopped because public opinion back lashed against them not out of some gowth in character.

and lololol even harder. i'm not trying to make anything "stick". i'm giving my personal opinions on what i see and perceive from it. nothing more nothing less.

 

swallow swallow's picture

Pondering wrote:

quizzical wrote:

lmaoooooooooooooooooooo i'm not even thinking about an election in 2019, why in hell would anyone be unless they're politically affiliated somehow?

an  asteriod could strike the earth before then or a massive earthquake...i like to live in the now.

from all your comments and concerns about 2019 over the last couple months i guess you are already thinking ahead to the election in 2019 though.

Of course I am. What do you think all the discussions about Mulcair staying or going are about?

The future direction and purpose of the NDP, I think. Not pure electoral politics. Is it really all about elections, not policy and effecting change, for you? That would be startling. 

Pondering

swallow wrote:

Pondering wrote:

quizzical wrote:

lmaoooooooooooooooooooo i'm not even thinking about an election in 2019, why in hell would anyone be unless they're politically affiliated somehow?

an  asteriod could strike the earth before then or a massive earthquake...i like to live in the now.

from all your comments and concerns about 2019 over the last couple months i guess you are already thinking ahead to the election in 2019 though.

Of course I am. What do you think all the discussions about Mulcair staying or going are about?

The future direction and purpose of the NDP, I think. Not pure electoral politics. Is it really all about elections, not policy and effecting change, for you? That would be startling. 

Nobody would be talking about replacing Mulcair if he had won the election and he almost did. Talk about moving left is predicated on having lost the election and some people want to stay centrist as they still believe that is the way to electoral success. NDP strategy is all about winning the next election. Getting elected is the purpose of  mainstream political parties and the NDP is no exception.

Have you had a look at the website recently? It is still blank with the exception of requests for donation and links about Tom and the other elected MPs. The NDP policy book hasn't been replaced and it has been months since the election. During the election they said it came down so people wouldn't confuse it with their election platform.

The NDP appears in complete disarray at the moment. The executive wants to stay centrist because they still think that is the road to power. An unknown portion of membership (in my opinion) wants a plan for the future that will address income inequality and climate change but believes that an election can be won based on fighting those challenges.

Pondering

Yay, I got post 100 in the thread!

Pages