NDP leadership race 2

711 posts / 0 new
Last post
cco

The motion to extend the leadership convention deadline was presented after Mulcair had lost the review and as many as half the delegates had filed out. I was quite conflicted on it at the time. Nevertheless, I voted yes, so our convention wouldn't coincide with the Tory one. Perhaps, in hindsight, it wasn't a wise decision.

Stockholm

cco wrote:

The motion to extend the leadership convention deadline was presented after Mulcair had lost the review and as many as half the delegates had filed out. I was quite conflicted on it at the time. Nevertheless, I voted yes, so our convention wouldn't coincide with the Tory one. Perhaps, in hindsight, it wasn't a wise decision.

I'm afraid you're mistaken about that. The party constitution says that if the convention votes for a leadership contest it is supposed to happen within 12 months and federal council is supposed to set the actual date. The motion to extend the deadline at the convention from 12 months to 24 months was just a perfectly sensible (IMHO) move to give federal council the flexibility to set the date for picking a new leader up to two year down the road just in case if there was a really good reason to have the vote later. It didn't say that the new leader to be picked two years later it just said that it could be UP TO two years later.

The NDP federal council met two months later in June 2016 to decide on the rules and timetable for picking a new leader. By then it was clear that Mulcair was going to stay as lameduck leader for as long as it took to pick a new leader. there was debate - some wanted the leader to be picked quickly in Nov 2016 and other people wanted to punt the ball a year to fall 2017. Federal council voted narrowly for the Fall 2017 date. To this day i have no idea what those nut bars were thinking.

 

aka Mycroft

Stockholm wrote:
 Federal council voted narrowly for the Fall 2017 date. To this day i have no idea what those nut bars were thinking.

 

 

It's certainly bizarre. Not only does a longer campaign period mean that candidates potentially have to spend and raise much more money, which is one reason candidates may be delaying their announcements, but not having a permanent leader makes it much more difficult for the party to raise money both because it is competing with leadership campaigns for funds (particularly due to federal donation limits) and because there's no central figure who can either move people to donate or is particularly motivated to do so. 

lagatta4

How is Charlie Angus's French? He lives in a part of Ontario where there are many francophones (and also, of course, many Indigenous people)

Alexandre Boulerice could makes mincemeat of Trudeau in a debate, but he doesn't want to stand for the leadership and I'm sure he'd be castigated as not federalist enough or too critical.

Oh, I was so rude and thoughtless! (Tired and depressed from the deep cold). Welcome back, Mycroft, and I hope you are well!

CanadaApple

Maybe it would have been better if the NDP picked a new leader sooner but I don't think it'll make that much difference in the long-run. The next leader will still have two years to prepare for the 2019 election. Anyway I think it's better to take time and think things through than rush. I do wish some people would start declaring their intentions to run soon though. 

wage zombie

Fall 2016 was too soon.  Spring 2017 is BC provincial election.  So I'm happy with Fall 17, and voted for the extension at the convention (thanks Stockholm for clarifying that it was ultimately up to federal council).

I'm also happy that the extra period allows us to choose after the Conservatives and have a better read on how Trudeau's term is going.  Additionally, I think the Trump win has major implications for how we need to do politics.  Had we chosen in Fall 2016 it could well have been before the Trump win.

I'm not too fussed that we're languishing in the polls right now.  Maybe it's a BC thing but people here don't have much time for the Federal NDP right now.  I think we're just happy to have a break.  While I've always thought Mulcair was not the right person for leader I think he's doing an acceptable job for now.  If Mulcair wanted to leave and/or the caucus wanted to choose somebody else, I'm cool with that too.

R.E.Wood

I don't recall seeing this November 24 article on Charlie Angus on here before, so I'm sharing it. 

"Charlie Angus Could Be The Bernie Sanders Of Canada"

Angus, however, is a more serious, less sculpted version of authenticity. Even more than Jack Layton, Angus seems sincere about his concerns for the plight of poor people, especially indigenous communities who have seen countless leaders pucker up during campaigns, only to be left with nothing but lip service once the votes have long been tallied. Like Bernie Sanders, it would be hard to imagine Angus dithering on the issues he speaks so passionately about, and that's why he will likely win his party's nomination in a cakewalk...

Most importantly, Sanders and Angus both sound honest when they speak, a kind of credibility that, even if you disagree with them, protects them from having their characters assassinated. Trudeau doesn't have that, he has charm, and whomever the conservatives elect as leader probably won't have either trait. It is an invaluable asset in politics -- to be seen as an honest-to-god straight shooter while having a personal backstory that plays to the populace's new thirst to buck the system -- all while sporting a personality that would surely end in Parliament getting punk'd in the best way possible.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/james-di-fiore/charlie-angus-ndp-leadership...

 

CanadaApple

My predictions for who will run:

-Charlie Angus

-Peter Julian

-Niki Ashton

-Guy Caron

-Romeo Saganash

-Jagmeet Singh

-Peggy Nash

 

Sean in Ottawa

R.E.Wood wrote:

I don't recall seeing this November 24 article on Charlie Angus on here before, so I'm sharing it. 

"Charlie Angus Could Be The Bernie Sanders Of Canada"

Angus, however, is a more serious, less sculpted version of authenticity. Even more than Jack Layton, Angus seems sincere about his concerns for the plight of poor people, especially indigenous communities who have seen countless leaders pucker up during campaigns, only to be left with nothing but lip service once the votes have long been tallied. Like Bernie Sanders, it would be hard to imagine Angus dithering on the issues he speaks so passionately about, and that's why he will likely win his party's nomination in a cakewalk...

Most importantly, Sanders and Angus both sound honest when they speak, a kind of credibility that, even if you disagree with them, protects them from having their characters assassinated. Trudeau doesn't have that, he has charm, and whomever the conservatives elect as leader probably won't have either trait. It is an invaluable asset in politics -- to be seen as an honest-to-god straight shooter while having a personal backstory that plays to the populace's new thirst to buck the system -- all while sporting a personality that would surely end in Parliament getting punk'd in the best way possible.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/james-di-fiore/charlie-angus-ndp-leadership...

 

Quite interesting. I wonder how his French is coming as I presume if he has any interest he is working on that. Also -- how is Mike Layton's French? He comes across as authentic as well.

One person I liked very much is Joanne Liu, although she was elected to a second three-year term as president of Médecins sans frontières just a few months ago. It would have been great to see someone from outside come in like her.

My support went to Romeo Saganash as long as he was running in the last leadership race. I would easily support him again. BTW, those paying attention may notice that his English accent has improved in the last five years. He always spoke well but his accent was a little awkward. Now it is not.

Pamela Palmater remains another person I would like to watch. I have no idea of the quality of her French but her passion and communication in English is impressive. She is knowledgeableand would certainly be a great option.

Wab Kinew is a wonderful communicator. I know he is elected in Manitoba but I think he also could represent some hope nationally.

I wonder if any of these people will step forward.  I like Charlie Angus -- but I think some facility in French is important. If we were to consider those who do not yet speak French he could be an option but then why not Pamela Palmeter even if her French is not there?

I would love to see a race where we heard from a few of these people and could make an informed choice from them.

I do not want the need for French to be tied to a presumption that this is needed to get seats in Quebec. I would prefer it to be a sign of a respect for the highest office in the country that an NDP leader should aspire to occupy. Even if the NDP had no chance of seats in Quebec, I would want that person to be able to communicate in French.

I would consider an exception to have an Indigenous leader but it would be difficult to go beyond that. If Romeo Saganash were a possible leader, he already speaks both official languages and more.

Stockholm

I very much doubt that Saganash would run. He had a very shortlived campaign in 2012 and then he dropped out - and later on he made headlines when he had to go in to recovery for some substance abuse issues after boarding a plane drunk out of his mind.

I would add that there is also zero chance that Peggy Nash would run for leader again. Her campaign last time was a bit of a flop and she is now 5 years older. If she still has any political aspirations at all, I think she is more likely to run provincially in Parkdale High Park in 2018 since DiNovo has said she wont run again.

nicky

R.E. Wood, who has never had a good or even an objective word to say about Tom, writes :

"Wow - that's an excellent discussion about the lazy-ass job Mulcair's been doing as leader during the interim until he's replaced."

He may have missed that Tom was just voted by his fellow MPs as Parliamentarian of the Year for 2016.

 

wage zombie

From what I've heard, Saganash was overcome with grief at Jack's passing, and that was a big contributor to his alcohol abuse.  If he ran again he would immediately be my top choice.  I agree that his english has gotten much better, and that was my major reservation last time.

Unfortunately, I don't expect him to run.  Maybe if there was a Draft Romeo Saganash page like the others have he'd be more likely to consider it.  But I haven't seen any signalling that it's even a possibility.

I also don't expect to see Peggy Nash run again.  I didn't think she had much to offer last time, mostly running on her credentials and reputation.  But I have been more impressed with some of her words actions since the election.  If she ran again and offered a bold policy vision this time, I think she'd be worthy of consideration.

Ken Burch

Romeo Saganash, as long as he remains in a good place personally, would still be the dream candidate

First Nations.

From Quebec(still crucial...a leader from ANYPLACE ELSE probably guarantees a Quebec wipeout at the next election) and with excellent French as well as credible English.

Has connections with the activists, yet seems to be acceptable to all wings of the party.

 

kropotkin1951

Ken Burch wrote:

Romeo Saganash, as long as he remains in a good place personally, would still be the dream candidate

First Nations.

From Quebec(still crucial...a leader from ANYPLACE ELSE probably guarantees a Quebec wipeout at the next election) and with excellent French as well as credible English.

Has connections with the activists, yet seems to be acceptable to all wings of the party.

I thought he was an excellent candidate last time however I have to disagree with the above on a number of fronts.

First his personal problems would ensure that if he became a real contender the right wing press would bury him under an avalanche of biased and racist reporting.

Second I don't believe that the next leader needs to be from Quebec to retain the NDP's seats or even to grow some. I don't think that was the defining issue when Jack won his record number of seats nor a factor in Mulcair's inability to retain most of them. I suspect that as a factor for deciding between parties that is not top of the list for many people in Quebec.

What the NDP needs is a credible and articulate candidate who appeals to the core of left leaning voters in all provinces and who is capable of attracting the activists in our society and the disillusioned youth. Also the shine needs to come off of Trudeau the Lesser.  I think that Justin might become as hated as his father in many quarters in very short order. Enough of emphasizing the middle class instead the new leader needs to be advocating for equality and justice and indigenous rights and local empowerment through federal support to implement a plan to transform our economy. 

Stockholm

The NDP doesn't necessarily need to be led by an MP from Quebec, but it does need to be led by someone who speaks French fluently and has a profound understanding of Quebec society, history and politics.

AS for Romeo Saganash...I get the impression he's beena bit of a disappointment as an MP. When he was first elected he was supposed to be one of a handful of Quebec MPs who could be considered "stars"...and yet never really got much of a profile and was demoted from being Natural Resources critics to lower level shadow cabinet positions. We don't seem to hear from him very much at all. Perhaps he does good things in his own riding, but he has hardly become a household name.

Geoff

Looks like the potential candidates, by not entering the race before the end of the year, have chosen to pass on the opportunity to fundraise for two years, instead of one. Consequently, I guess there's no reason for anyone to declare for at least a couple of months. I hope there's something of a party left to run for by the time they throw their hats into the ring.

Sean in Ottawa

I don't think the NDP has much to worry about when it comes to being how much left to run. The Liberals have taken care of that by breaking enough promises and tilting right enough that the purpose for the NDP is still very real. This is taking time to dawn on the public but it will. This purpose can only be realized if the party attracts a decent leader who will support and promote policies that are distinct and principled. The party is unlikely to decline much from where it is now and the potential to regrow is certainly there with the right leadership (by this I do not mean just the party leader but the entire leadership).

I also don't think the candidates have that much of an incentive to rush in. A longer more expensive campaign cannot be sustained as there is not that much money waiting to be raised. More time for fund-rasing won't change that much. To take advantage of the two years the leaders would not just need to straddle the calendar but also ramp up a campaign of inspiration before the end of the first year. There was not enough time for that.

A strategy of waiting till closer to the election and letting the Conservatives go first may actually be a workable one.

 

Sean in Ottawa

French is a major consideration so those thinking that it does not matter are of course wrong. However, being domiciled in Quebec is not essential and it never was -- to suggest otherwise is quite insulting to Quebec. Compatible with Quebec values is more important. An understanding of Quebec is more important than living there and there have been always a history of people living there who do not understand Quebec that well.

I do not think the standard requires absolute fluency either. Instead I would say a requirement to speak to the population in French is essential -- even if it is not perfectly fluent. Obviously, the more fluent the better but a person who struggles a bit is not a non-starter -- provided there is understanding of Quebec, a willingness to listen, enthusiasm for the language and the people and shared values. There should be some ability to express in both official languages certainly, we should not expect less from a national leader.

I think we have all heard the story of REB who earned respect as she improved her French and connections to community.The genuineness of her enthusiasm and willingness to work won people over. She had a foundation in French that is essential but lacked fluency at the start.

Please make no mistake, I believe a perfectly bilingual leader is a very valuable asset but we should not lose sight of the other priorities when it comes to Quebec.

I say this becuase fluency should not disqualify candidates who may have other strong positives. This does not mean that we can be comfortable with those who ahve no working foundation. Accents , lack of practice and even some vocabulary can be improved but you do need a decent foundation as a person will not learn a language from scratch in a short time while leading a party.

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..i thought the qs idea of dual leadership you pushed a while back has considerable merit sean. to bad it's not an option.

Mobo2000

 

Sean says:

"I also don't think the candidates have that much of an incentive to rush in. A longer more expensive campaign cannot be sustained as there is not that much money waiting to be raised. More time for fund-rasing won't change that much."

This is painfully 100% true.   I've done my share of fundraising for the NDP over the years, and the last year and a half have been brutal.   I'm also hopeful the luster coming off the Liberals, and the rightward swing they are taking will make more room for an NDP comeback. 

 

swallow swallow's picture

epaulo13 wrote:

..i thought the qs idea of dual leadership you pushed a while back has considerable merit sean. to bad it's not an option.

Why is it not an option?

Stockholm

swallow wrote:

epaulo13 wrote:

..i thought the qs idea of dual leadership you pushed a while back has considerable merit sean. to bad it's not an option.

Why is it not an option?

 

Its not an option because in Canada we have one Prime Minister not two co-PMs - one for English Canada and one for Quebec. If a party tried to get away with having two leaders one to speak English and one to speak French it would be ridiculed and that party would quickly cease to be taken seriously.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

swallow wrote:

epaulo13 wrote:

..i thought the qs idea of dual leadership you pushed a while back has considerable merit sean. to bad it's not an option.

Why is it not an option?

..i don't see it as an option because no one in the party is promoting it. if there was strong support i believe this could happen. what are your thoughts on this swallow?

swallow swallow's picture

I believe if the party membership wants, it can create a dual leadership structure. Quebec Solidaire, as often, provides one possible model. Some mock, but mostly it works OK. And the fear of mockery is no reason no to try things. People have always mocked the NDP and always will, so may as well try more collective forms of leadership. Unionist started a thread on that a while back, I think. 

But yes, no one in the party seems to be promoting anything other than business as usual yet. Hopefully that will change. 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..yes i remember unionist raising the issue several times. and i'm not worried about mockery either. collective leadership opens up various options that are not just limited to french/english. gender for instance. 

Sean in Ottawa

epaulo13 wrote:

..i thought the qs idea of dual leadership you pushed a while back has considerable merit sean. to bad it's not an option.

In all fairness I am not the one to bring the idea here. Certainly Unionist and perhaps Lagatta maybe? Since it was a very worthy and interesting idea, I cannot take credit for it since it was not my initiative.

In any case it is an idea based on solid principles. I am not sure how it would be accepted but it might actually go over well and serve well to represent more than a single demographic in government at a time. It moves us away from the cult of personality and restores the focus on a plan and a team and principles each party has.

The focus of an individual over a team is the fashion but it has not always been that way even when there was a single leader.

I remember thinking about it many years ago and discarding it but then later QS brought it in and people from Quebec who post here have spoken highly of it. Something perhaps the NDP could consider.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..i apologize for giving the impression that i was giving sean credit for bringing the idea here. my intention was to respond to his posts which were directly above my post. i am very aware that dual leadership notion came to babble from que and in particular unionist. others as well have mentioned it on occasion though i can't recall who.

swallow swallow's picture

I don't think Unionist's suggestions were limited to "dual leadership" but rather rethinking the idea of leadership. But I won't try to speak for him. 

De facto dual leadership has existed. MacDonald-Cartier, King-Lapointe, and other teams can be considered dual leaderships in some ways, though only one person got to be PM (Cartier was premier of Canada, then later MacDonald was PM of Canada). Like multi-member ridings, it's an idea with some forgotten history behind it, and of relatively innovative thinking that's been lost in our unimaginative times.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..your right swallow. it was not dual leadership

..here's the thread that unionist started.

 

Wilf Day

mark_alfred wrote:
Still, of the possible contenders, my preference is Guy Caron.  He seems smart and sincere.

I have the impression that Guy Caron is more engaging in French than in English. He has been functionally bilingual for 25 years, and yet, I feel he needs to polish his English skills -- which is hard if someone thinks he is more bilingual than he appears to be. I'm not suggesting Caron's English is as halting as Stéphane Dion's, yet it may be the same phenomenon, he thinks he is more bilingual than he appears to be.

However, I may be mistaken. Can someone more fluent in French than me tell me if I am right?

 

Sean in Ottawa

epaulo13 wrote:

..your right swallow. it was not dual leadership

..here's the thread that unionist started.

 

Unionist over the years has brought many good ideas related to leadership, political organization and process here. I have not always agreed but he has been a fairly steady source for interesting models to consider. Laggatta has also made considerable contributions. I have also tried to make mine -- but dual leadership was not one of mine.... ;-)

Some of these conversations have been of the most interesting here. Others also have added to a good many of these more structural conversations....

mark_alfred

Wilf Day wrote:

mark_alfred wrote:
Still, of the possible contenders, my preference is Guy Caron.  He seems smart and sincere.

I have the impression that Guy Caron is more engaging in French than in English. He has been functionally bilingual for 25 years, and yet, I feel he needs to polish his English skills -- which is hard if someone thinks he is more bilingual than he appears to be. I'm not suggesting Caron's English is as halting as Stéphane Dion's, yet it may be the same phenomenon, he thinks he is more bilingual than he appears to be.

However, I may be mistaken. Can someone more fluent in French than me tell me if I am right?

Yeah, I agree.  I like that he focuses on tax havens and on the Libs' privatization scheme, but I do agree that his accent may be a tough sell in English Canada. 

Apparently Peter Julian has officially registered as a prospective candidate, pending his getting the required signatures and fee together.

http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=pol&document=ndp16&dir=lea/...

swallow swallow's picture

If Caron's accent is a turn-off in English Canada, that's a pretty sad comment on how insular English Canada is. 

But I guess we already knew that from Stephane Dion's leadership tenure. 

 

Stockholm

If some Quebecers can be turned off by anglo politicians who speaks French with a heavy English accent - why should it surprise us that some English Canadians would be turned off by a politician who English with a heavy French accent?

Mind you, Jean Chretien spoke English with a horrific and almost incomprehensible accent and yet he was very popular and won almost every single seat in Ontario in three straight elections.

mark_alfred

Given the ads mocking Chretien's face (from John Tory, I believe), his partial facial paralysis became a focus and he attained hero-underdog status.  This happened with Layton with the cane, and happened with Trudeau given all the negative ads against him (IE, declaring he'd be lucky to show up with his pants on during the debate allowed Trudeau a lotta room to impress).  Dion never achieved the hero-underdog status, and likely Caron wouldn't either.  Still, I like the issues Caron talks about.  But Julian is a very good pick, I feel.

kropotkin1951

Mighty Middle wrote:

NB NDP Leader Dominic Cardy has resigned as Party Leader. In his exit statement he says about the federal NDP

https://twitter.com/NickMooreCTV/status/815609977591177216

You opened that up in its own thread. I guess it is not only Ikosmos who is guilty of spamming the board. 

 

Mighty Middle

N/A

 

Mighty Middle

kropotkin1951 wrote:

You opened that up in its own thread. I guess it is not only Ikosmos who is guilty of spamming the board. 

Sorry about that, just deleted the previous post. Thought about it and thought a discussion on NDP role in Syria deserved its own thread.

kropotkin1951

swallow wrote:

If Caron's accent is a turn-off in English Canada, that's a pretty sad comment on how insular English Canada is. 

But I guess we already knew that from Stephane Dion's leadership tenure. 

There is no monolithic "English Canada."  Mr. Dion walked away from the coalition deal that is why I have disdain for him not his flipping accent.

I looked but could not find any clips of Caron in English.  I do remember that Jack traveled with a French language coach who gave him immediate feedback. I am told his French improved greatly in the process. I 

kropotkin1951

Mighty Middle wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

You opened that up in its own thread. I guess it is not only Ikosmos who is guilty of spamming the board. 

Sorry about that, just deleted the previous post. Thought about it and thought a discussion on NDP role in Syria deserved its own thread.

Thanks

Stockholm

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Mr. Dion walked away from the coalition deal that is why I have disdain for him not his flipping accent.

No, it was Ignatieff who walked away from the 2008 coalition deal after Dion signed it in the first place and then got forced to resign by his own party

Ken Burch

Stockholm wrote:

swallow wrote:

epaulo13 wrote:

..i thought the qs idea of dual leadership you pushed a while back has considerable merit sean. to bad it's not an option.

Why is it not an option?

 

Its not an option because in Canada we have one Prime Minister not two co-PMs - one for English Canada and one for Quebec. If a party tried to get away with having two leaders one to speak English and one to speak French it would be ridiculed and that party would quickly cease to be taken seriously.

You could accomodate dual or multiple leadership in a governing party by having a rotating prime ministership...for example,Niki Ashton for three months, Charlie Angus for three, Ruth Ellen Brousseau for three, Nathan Cullen or somebody else from B.C. for three(with, in each case, the others as a kind of leadership advisory council when it's not their months) .  It could be a direct challenge to the arrogance and distortions of personality-based politics and restore issues and policy ideas to the place they should hold in public debate.

mark_alfred

Quote:

I looked but could not find any clips of Caron in English. 

http://www.cpac.ca/en/programs/beyond-politics/episodes/21828270

CanadaApple
kropotkin1951

mark_alfred wrote:

Quote:

I looked but could not find any clips of Caron in English. 

http://www.cpac.ca/en/programs/beyond-politics/episodes/21828270

Well after listening to that I wonder why you think his accent would be any problem at all. It is obvious that his first language is French but his enunciation is good and he is not in anyway difficult to understand.

My understanding is that Chrétien had speech problems in both official languages so it was likely mostly as a result of his medical condition. I could always understand him though. Dion had a heavier accent and I found him far harder to understand than the clip of Caron.

mark_alfred

It was something Wilf mentioned, and I thought perhaps it could be an issue.  I think he's good in that he seems smart and sincere.  But, in politics today, that doesn't seem to hold much weight.  Seems celebrity appeal rather than sincerity is the ticket, as shown by the victories of JT here and DT down there.

brookmere

I think the NDP did so badly largely because Mulcair came across as insincere and I'm not the only one who does.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

brookmere wrote:

I think the NDP did so badly largely because Mulcair came across as insincere and I'm not the only one who does.

I agree, and the same applies to Clinton.

mark_alfred

Hmm.  Presumably Trump's appearance of sincerity is what won it for him over Clinton.  And when Trudeau breaks his electoral reform promise, that will presumably break it for him.  If you were to ask people whether they trusted more that Mulcair over Trudeau would keep his promise of electoral reform, I'm guessing more would pick Mulcair.  Or bringing in 10,000 refugees by years end rather than Trudeau's promised 25,000.  Or decriminalizing marijuana -- people are still wondering if Trudeau will legalize -- but even though they're wondering, it hasn't affected his popularity.  As I said, rather than sincerity, people care more about celebrity.  I'm betting that a lot of people (particularly his strongest Liberal supporters) are counting on Trudeau to break his electoral reform promise.

kropotkin1951

Yes indeed people seem to want Political Idol instead of policy debates. The NDP needs to decide whether it is trying to represent the 25% to 35% of the voters who are open to real social democratic change including reigning in the corporations or the 35% to 55% of the voters who think that the system is working just fine, the I'm all right Jack crowd. All numbers above are my personal conjecture of the electorate in general across Canada. It does not add up but then in no scenario do I envision turnouts increasing above 80%.  

The NDP needs a well spoken person to speak to the core and who can reach out to the young, the poor and the marginalized.  It needs to stop presenting itself as the party of the middle class with voters.  The NDP base that is middle class votes for it because of its social policies and would not be turned off by an appeal to a Better World. If the last election has shown the party anything it should be that chasing Liberal/Tory swing voters is not a viable way to gain power. Once again the Red Tories and Blue Liberals voted for the status quo party that had been out of office long enough to have stopped smelling. If Trudeau bleeds support to the NDP it will be from the new voters he attracted with his looks and phoney promises not from older people who have voted either Liberal or Tory in every election.

Pages

Topic locked