NDP LEADERSHIP #99

117 posts / 0 new
Last post
JKR

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Topp's left turn comes across as insincere and he can't beat Mulcair.

Libby Davies and Ed Broadbent seems to think Topp is the real deal.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

From the previous thread:

nicky wrote:

 

"Tom should be in our party a little longer before he wants to lead us." This is an exact quote from Brian Topp a couple minutes ago on Power and Politics. 

 

I'm still pondering those words by Topp. What does he want - does he want the presumed front-runner (Mulcair) to drop out of the race with five weeks to go? Undecided

nicky

Tom has repeatedly said he took out his first NDP membership card in 1974. Pressumably that isn't long enough ago to run for leader according to Topp. I first signed up in 1971, shortly after and largely because of the War Measures Act. I wonder if Topp would let me run for leader or should I wait a few more years.

Topp has said some ill-considered things in this race but I think this one is the most repulsive.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Topp is not endearing himself to me.

GregbythePond

Hey BB, I think what Topp wants - is to avoid having to pack it in "for the good of the party". Faced with the reality of Mr. Mulcair firmly in the lead (with a few undecideds), the only way to avoid the apparently inevidable is to either mobilize the "anyone but" forces and/or gain some further support for his struggling ground campaign (worth noting that there is nothing wrong with his endorsement/donation campaign - except that it hasn't apparently translated to actual member votes).

Given Mr. Topp's clear devotion to the NDP back room, I would guess he is pretty big on polling and probably has good internal numbers that show which way this thing is headed. If he thinks Mulcair is getting it, I predict he will do the "honourable thing" and probably pull out to back Nash. Timing on that would be critical of course, since it needs to happen well before members start voting.

Some on this thread seem to feel that the campaign still has five weeks left. I would disagree and say that as soon as those ballots get distributed, its's over. The "convention" will be a good party and provide some theatre I'm sure, but the leadership will have been decided in the preferential ballots, before the first (final) speech is given.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I would guess Mulcair and Dewar will take the high road and not respond to Topp.

janfromthebruce

I disagree about the sincerity and suggesting the "left" is moving to Nash. And I thought that Brian's interview on CBC was honest and sincere.

Lord Palmerston wrote:

I agree that Topp's attacks on Mulcair are stupid and even hypocritical.  Mulcair has demonstrated his loyalty to the party and this has to stop.  My issue with him has nothing to do with whether he's "really" a New Democrat or his QLP past but rather what he's saying now.

Topp's left turn comes across as insincere and he can't beat Mulcair.  The left in the party seems to be consolidating behind Peggy Nash.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

janfromthebruce

 

yes, and I so trust their judgment. And Libby is about as left as one can get.

JKR wrote:

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Topp's left turn comes across as insincere and he can't beat Mulcair.

Libby Davies and Ed Broadbent seems to think Topp is the real deal.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

If this keeps up, Topp / Mulcair could be the next Martin / Chretien sideshow. Not good.

janfromthebruce

Topp prefeixed his commment with good things to say about Mulcair. Topp is suggesting and quoted Mulcair who wants to take the NDP to the centre, and thus tying those 2 thoughts together, one can suggest that the longer Tom is in the NPD, the more he will understand that the NDP needs to be the NDP based on social demos principles and values.

And I would so be upset that at the end of the race that key people in the NDP are put to the roadside so to speak. That is sure not the outcome Jack would want. I'm just saying, and this includes our team both on the front benches and our staff!

 

Boom Boom wrote:

From the previous thread:

nicky wrote:

 

"Tom should be in our party a little longer before he wants to lead us." This is an exact quote from Brian Topp a couple minutes ago on Power and Politics. 

 

I'm still pondering those words by Topp. What does he want - does he want the presumed front-runner (Mulcair) to drop out of the race with five weeks to go? Undecided

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

janfromthebruce

There are tons of threads here on "strategic voting" and those groups who support it. They are by all intent run and back roomed by Libs. Spare me the mostly NDP member stuff.

 

marciam wrote:

Winston wrote:

If you want the NDP to be the ideologically pure pre-Jack rump you imagine it to have been in the 90s just say so and be done with it. Otherwise, push your candidates and their strengths, highlight the weaknesses of others, sure, but cut out the 2nd-class New Democrat arguments!

Hear, hear!

janfromthebruce wrote:

When I previewed the previously thread I noted the reference of Avaaz and groaned - the trogan horse of the Liberals and BA is right, they did actively work against the NDP. FYI, I didn't ignore it at all.

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

I find these comments about Mulcair odd.  Nathan Cullen is playing footsie with Avaaz and other strategic voting groups that actively worked against the NDP in the last election.  His route could only lead to a major watering down of social democratic values in the party, but nary a peep.  Seems like double standards abound in what people will pick at and what they choose to ignore.

I beg to differ about Avaaz. They and other strategic voting efforts were focused on defeating the Conservatives by any means necessary, within the FPTP system we're stuck with.

In the last election, Leadnow put out pretty clear summaries of the parties' positions, with no evidence of dismissal of the NDP. It's not Leadnow's fault that the Liberals and the NDP campaigned on very similar platforms.

http://www.leadnow.ca/party-positions

I also think these kinds of statements show very little respect for Canadians who are committed to improving the country, but are not necessarily sold on the NDP.  They're the ones we need to work on convincing.

All the Avaaz members I know personally vote NDP (or occassionally Green). I've also been calling Leadnow's list of my neighbours who supported the cooperation campaign, and they're certainly not die-hard Liberals; they're very concerned people who want to work with like-minded folks to make Canada a better country. One of the more engaged members had joined the NDP last year to influence the BC leadership race and echoed some Babblers' concerns about Mulcair's position on the Middle East (and particularly the attacks on Libby Davies). On the other hand, she was devastated when Ujjal Dosanjh (a great Minister of Health in her opinion) lost to a Conservative when the Liberals and NDP split the vote in Vancouver South.  Should the NDP reject this new member for not being pure enough?

[edited to correct my confusion between Avaaz and Leadnow]

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

josh

Funny how a lot of people seem to be exorcised by a "personal" attack during the heat of a campaign.  I guess no one is supposed to say anything critical about anyone else.  But when it comes to remarks of substance, like a desire to "renew" the party, they tend to minimize them.

Howard

I think the reason people like Topp is because he is a good kisser. Right, M. Spector?

Unionist
Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

janfromthebruce wrote:

Topp prefeixed his commment with good things to say about Mulcair. Topp is suggesting and quoted Mulcair who wants to take the NDP to the centre, and thus tying those 2 thoughts together, one can suggest that the longer Tom is in the NPD, the more he will understand that the NDP needs to be the NDP based on social demos principles and values.

Except he's mis-quoting Tom! Tom said he wants to bring the centre to the NDP - a totally different situation.

Brachina

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

I don't think there's anything basing my support for Peggy Nash on the level of trust I have for her, and her level of consistency. Topp and Mulcair are welcome to run, and I think they'd make great leaders and great Prime Ministers. I'm not disqualifying them based on their lack of public record. I'm supporting a candidate I feel more comfortable with. That being said, she's shown a lack of charisma in this campaign, even less than Topp. And even if I trust that her French is competent, she hasn't really inspired me in either language -- except on her record, which only appeals to the rank-and-file unfortunately. So I guess you could say I'm giving her conditional support, in the hope that she'll improve, but open to supporting someone else if she doesn't.

See this I can respect, its not a cheap shot against Mulcair being not dipper enough, its about respect for Nash.

Me personally I'm supporting Mulcair, I like his record as enivorment minister and I feel his cap and trade, Pharmacare, childcare, and value added economics will radically transform Canada back into the country its was always meant to be. And yes he's the one most likely to beat Harper.

My money is Mulcair makes an alliance with Cullen and maybe Ashton for the win.

Howard

Anyone notice how in Western Canada the media think a certain candidate's name is pronounced Dee-Wawr?

nicky

If my French does not deceive me Le Devoir is reporting two Quebec MPS will endorse Paul Dewar today. But then my French cd be better and the correct translation is "chickens endorse Col. Sanders"

samuelolivier

nicky wrote:

If my French does not deceive me Le Devoir is reporting two Quebec MPS will endorse Paul Dewar today. But then my French cd be better and the correct translation is "chickens endorse Col. Sanders"

My local MP, Hélène Laverdiere is one of them. She wrote to all the members of my riding association yesterday explaining her choice. Still haven't made my mind yet on this yet. She said Paul is the best one to unify us and that she shares his vision. I know they got close over the past few months be causeof her role in the shadow cabinet. More details to come. My guess is that Hoang Mai is the other Québec MP.

TheArchitect

BREAKING NEWS: Hélène Laverdière and Hoang Mai are both endorsing Paul Dewar.

Those are arguably the two biggest Quebec endorsements that were remaining (other than perhaps Saganash).

http://pauldewar.ca/content/h%C3%A9l%C3%A8ne-laverdi%C3%A8re-and-hoang-m...

Laverdière said Dewar's French is "improving quickly" and added, "A language can be improved, but Paul’s qualities, his leadership, his unifying spirit, his vision, his understanding of heart and mind, that is something that cannot be learned."

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

"chickens endorse Col. Sanders" Laughing

Stockholm

Indeed, Dewar has been endorsed by Helene Laverdiere and By Hoang Mai. Good for him. They are two of the best Quebec MPs. In Laverdiere's case this comes as no surprise at all. She worked with him a lot on the foreign affairs file and she took over from him as foreign affairs critic when he ran for leader. I suspect that her support was probably locked in months ago and they were just waiting for the right moment to announce it.

Its better than nothing, but "L'elephant est toujours dans la salle". Trop peu trop tard!

Unionist

I had a lot of respect for Hélène Laverdière, until they named her Foreign Affairs Critic, and she started spewing the U.S. line - even condemning the Russian and Chinese vetoes and demanding Harper act faster to take sides in the civil war in Syria:

[url=http://www.ndp.ca/press/statement-by-official-opposition-foreign-affairs... by Official Opposition Foreign Affairs Critic Hélène Laverdière on Syria[/url]

I'll bet it was written by Dewar. It's got his toxic stamp all over it.

 

Brachina

Just call me baffled. The only thing I can think of is that Helen has been out of the country for too long.

Seriously they could not have wasted there endorsements more if they had endorsed Singh.

Is thier something about Paul Dewar I'm just not getting?

NorthReport
Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

"In a statement released Friday, NDP MP Hélène Laverdière, who defeated former Bloc Québécois leader Gilles Duceppe on May 2, said Mr. Dewar's French is improving quickly."

 

My guess is that she did not watch the Quebec City debate. Laughing

JeffWells

Brachina wrote:
Just call me baffled. The only thing I can think of is that Helen has been out of the country for too long. Seriously they could not have wasted there endorsements more if they had endorsed Singh. Is thier something about Paul Dewar I'm just not getting?

 

We've heard for so long that Dewar is a nice guy, so I'm not surprised that that's an especially valued attribute among colleagues. (Though his campaign has certainly shown an unpleasant side.) But his appeal in either French or English has always been lost on me.

algomafalcon

CanadaApple wrote:

I Watched the At Issue panel tonight on the National, and I was surprised the NDP Leadership Race didn't come up. I mean, you would think that given the recent polls, the Quebec City Debate, the Nash vs. Dewar incident, and Topp attacking both Dewar and Mulcair it would get at least a section, but nothing. 

No, It didn't come up. But they had enough time to wring their hands over Justin Trudeau's "attention grabbing" comments on Harper and separatism. Yawn.... Has anyone else been wondering if Justin is trying to emulate (act out) the Pierre Trudeau "arrogant, pissed off" attitude when anyone questions his "loyalty to Canada" (and he is SUCH a poor actor at that - LOL)

 

flight from kamakura

astonishing, just baffling.  i wonder what these two can be thinking.  if they get their wish and dewar ends up as leader, they're virtually guaranteed to lose their seats.

nicky

In the Quebec City debate Dewar was asked whether his appointmtent of Angus as deputy leader complicated the appointment of a  Quebecer or a woman. I think he replied something like, "just wait."

Laverdière fits both bills. Dewar had no qualms about promising Angus and Duncan jobs in advance so maybe this expalins her puzzling decision to back a candidate who looks like an electoral disaster in her province.

This also means that Mulcair will not be a deputy leader, notwithstanding his overwhelmong support in Quebec, even in Dewar's poll.

It is interesting to think where Topp's support may go if Dewar faces Mulcair on the first ballot. On P and P yesterday Topp said very clearly that Dewar's lack of French made him unacceptble.

algomafalcon

Hunky_Monkey wrote:
Lord Palmerston wrote:

Topp's left turn comes across as insincere and he can't beat Mulcair.  The left in the party seems to be consolidating behind Peggy Nash.

Interesting to note that some volunteers for Tom in Nova Scotia would be considered on the left of the party. I also know a "Romanow New Democrat" supporting Peggy. And some of our most left MPs such as Philip Toone are supporting Tom. Your comments may be based on the babble bubble?

Probably because it will make absolutely no difference to the "directions" the NDP takes (which will almost certainly be similar to Doer, Romanow, Dexter, Clark, Harcourt... should they ever be elected).

I actually think that the leader needs to be:

1) a great communicator able to speak and be understood in both official languages

2) a good "team builder" - someone who has a natural ability to motivate and inspire his or her caucus colleagues

I really very much doubt that the leader can or will have any huge impact on the "ideological direction" of the NDP as that is probably determined by many factors beyond the control of the leader.

 

socialdemocrati...

TheArchitect wrote:

BREAKING NEWS: Hélène Laverdière and Hoang Mai are both endorsing Paul Dewar.

Those are arguably the two biggest Quebec endorsements that were remaining (other than perhaps Saganash).

http://pauldewar.ca/content/h%C3%A9l%C3%A8ne-laverdi%C3%A8re-and-hoang-m...

Laverdière said Dewar's French is "improving quickly" and added, "A language can be improved, but Paul’s qualities, his leadership, his unifying spirit, his vision, his understanding of heart and mind, that is something that cannot be learned."

This does a little bit to ease my concerns about Dewar, and maybe you won't hear me panicking that he could legitimately win the leadership race.

But of all the candidates, I *still* think he's the most likely to fold up like a cheap accordion in a debate with Harper or Rae.

Stockholm

nicky wrote:

In the Quebec City debate Dewar was asked whether his appointmtent of Angus as deputy leader complicated the appointment of a  Quebecer or a woman. I think he replied something like, "just wait."

Laverdière fits both bills. Dewar had no qualms about promising Angus and Duncan jobs in advance so maybe this expalins her puzzling decision to back a candidate who looks like an electoral disaster in her province.

This also means that Mulcair will not be a deputy leader, notwithstanding his overwhelmong support in Quebec, even in Dewar's poll.

With regard to who may or may not be "deputy leader" let me remind people for the umpteenth time that the position is totaly meaningless and has no powers associated with it. Its purely an honorary title. If I were Tom Mulcair I would say - give the fancy meaningless title to whoever you want...i want a REAL job like House Leader or Finance Critic!

socialdemocrati...

Brachina wrote:
socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

I don't think there's anything basing my support for Peggy Nash on the level of trust I have for her, and her level of consistency. Topp and Mulcair are welcome to run, and I think they'd make great leaders and great Prime Ministers. I'm not disqualifying them based on their lack of public record. I'm supporting a candidate I feel more comfortable with. That being said, she's shown a lack of charisma in this campaign, even less than Topp. And even if I trust that her French is competent, she hasn't really inspired me in either language -- except on her record, which only appeals to the rank-and-file unfortunately. So I guess you could say I'm giving her conditional support, in the hope that she'll improve, but open to supporting someone else if she doesn't.

See this I can respect, its not a cheap shot against Mulcair being not dipper enough, its about respect for Nash. Me personally I'm supporting Mulcair, I like his record as enivorment minister and I feel his cap and trade, Pharmacare, childcare, and value added economics will radically transform Canada back into the country its was always meant to be. And yes he's the one most likely to beat Harper. My money is Mulcair makes an alliance with Cullen and maybe Ashton for the win.

The most important thing is for all of us to come together behind the eventual leader, whoever it is. I think the frustrating thing about a few loud voices on Mulcair is that they're basically saying there won't be a point in voting for the NDP anymore, and some even say that a better progressive bet is to vote for Bob Rae. Even with policy positions and public record to the contrary. It borders on deranged.

GregbythePond

Oops - surprise.Surprised

Well I guess "haters gonna hate", but at least no one can say that Paul Dewar doesn't have some more "support" in Quebec.

To those that are baffled, perhaps the observation can be made that hard work, effective dialogue with members and more than a little "history" within the NDP and the teachers federation - goes along way.

For the record, in my opinion there are at least two candidates whose raison d'etre in this leadership race is lost on me. Neither one goes by the name Paul Dewar. Good luck to all, seriously!

flight from kamakura

i think, greg, that you're living on a different planet.  of all the candidates with serious backing, only dewar actually instills me with the certainty that the bq will return and that the ndp will likely sink back into 4th party status.  "hard work, effective dialogue with members and more than a little "history" within the NDP and the teachers federation" - i'm sure opposition leader bob rae will savoring that line over a nice scotch a mid-may afternoon in stornaway.

NorthReport

I know Topp has said he will run in Quebec, and if he wins the Leadership I think it would be wise for him to run in Quebe,c however if he does not win the Leadership I would love to see him run against Bob Rae in Toronto as I think Topp could well beat him. It's time to retire Rae permanently and put him out of his misery once and for all.

flight from kamakura

the thing is that if topp doesn't win the leadership, he'll likely be out of the house until 2015, by which time he'll be a star candidate for an ndp nomination, but not a star candidate in the general election.

depending on who's not running and how we're doing in quebec in 2015, i'd guess that topp would run in a montreal-area seat.  if he decides to run, after all.  3 years is a long time, he could have some great job, by then, have health problems, etc.

Termagant

GregbythePond wrote:

Well I guess "haters gonna hate", but at least no one can say that Paul Dewar doesn't have some more "support" in Quebec.

To those that are baffled, perhaps the observation can be made that hard work, effective dialogue with members and more than a little "history" within the NDP and the teachers federation - goes along way.

Nice flounce, Greg. :) "Effective dialogue" is kinda the whole point, though. These endorsements simply confirm that at least two Quebec MPs are willing to argue that being bilingual isn't a big deal. I think they're nuts, frankly! But that's their perogative. It doesn't change the fact that Paul Dewar can't speak French.

nicky

Greg, I could give you a dozen reasons, most of them blindingly obvious, why Dewar equals electoral death for the NDP. I will limit myself to one.

A few days before the Halifax debate, Dewar mischaracterized Mulcair's stand years ago on bulk water exports. Then he tackled him on this question in the debate. Any intelligent politician would have known Mulcair would be ready for him but Dewar blithely waded right into it and got his head taken off as a result. Instead of effectively counter -punching, all Dewar could do was bleat apologetically " I was just asking for clarification."

I was embarassed for Dewar. Greg, it is scarcely a materr of "hating" Dewar. he is too insubstantail for that. Your man simply has no judgement.

 

 

Bookish Agrarian

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Topp's left turn comes across as insincere and he can't beat Mulcair.  The left in the party seems to be consolidating behind Peggy Nash.

By which I suspect you really mean "the small group of people I know in Toronto...seem to be consolidating behind Peggy Nash.

And really what is the left of the party- how do you determine that?  Could you send me the Cosmo quiz version I'd love to know where I stand and whether my relationship with the NDP is healthy and left enough.  Maybe we could get Oprah to do a show on her new network "Are you left enough to stay with your NDP partner" or something like that.

dacckon dacckon's picture

I think that one of his mp supporters from Quebec would do it.

 

I like NorthReport's comment about making Rae retire :D 10/10!

Bookish Agrarian

Re-reading this thread I can only think of one thing over and over. 

We need Romeo Saganash more than ever. 

JeffWells

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Re-reading this thread I can only think of one thing over and over. 

We need Romeo Saganash more than ever. 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Totally agree - Romeo was my first choice starting in December I think.

 

JeffWells

I don't know if Topp could beat Rae in Toronto Centre. I'm hoping that maybe Brent Hawkes will be looking to make a career change.

socialdemocrati...

NorthReport wrote:

I know Topp has said he will run in Quebec, and if he wins the Leadership I think it would be wise for him to run in Quebe,c however if he does not win the Leadership I would love to see him run against Bob Rae in Toronto as I think Topp could well beat him. It's time to retire Rae permanently and put him out of his misery once and for all.

I think you underestimate the popularity of Bob Rae in Toronto. He peels off a lot of NDP votes who don't take his party switching personally. His campaign office borders a poor area and a middle class area, and he's well connected there. I'm not confident that Brian Topp could make inroads with the various cultural communities there, and get New Democrats to "come home". Plus, I'm pretty sure his riding includes Rosedale, which is pretty much the richest neighborhood in the country. Lots of Pink Tories and Blue Liberals who easily vote Rae, and would never vote NDP.

In fact, I think a lot of people have their eye on Harper and want a candidate who can beat him, when what we need is a candidate who can beat Rae (or whatever Francophone they pick instead). A lot of the ridings we need, we have to pass the Liberals (or both parties) to win.

Caissa

Time to resuurect #100 which oldgoat closed. Can 125 be far behind?

GregbythePond

Well aside from being blind and living on my own planet, I pass the time reading these threads and thinking about variations of the NDP purity testing we could do.Laughing

As for judgement, it seems more than one candidate may have "occassionaly" lost it in this campaign. I like the passion of the supporters (?) on this thread - it is often more obvious than that of the candidates themselves.

We all have our opinions and we all cherish them equally, right?

In the end, we'll all be on the same page on March 25, whether we like it or not.

josh

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Topp's left turn comes across as insincere and he can't beat Mulcair.  The left in the party seems to be consolidating behind Peggy Nash.

By which I suspect you really mean "the small group of people I know in Toronto...seem to be consolidating behind Peggy Nash.

And really what is the left of the party- how do you determine that?  Could you send me the Cosmo quiz version I'd love to know where I stand and whether my relationship with the NDP is healthy and left enough.  Maybe we could get Oprah to do a show on her new network "Are you left enough to stay with your NDP partner" or something like that.

Or you could simply ask them whether they are for or against "renewing" the party along the lines of the British Labour Party, Greece's PASOK and the German SDP?

Pages