Operation 2015: Where can the NDP grow and win?!

115 posts / 0 new
Last post
Malcolm Malcolm's picture

I suppose it is possible that you may not understand the difference between a coalition and a merger.

But I don't believe that for a second.

One would have to be completely ignorant about politics not to grasp the difference.

So, having ruled out the possibility you were a clueless idiot, I was left with one conclusion.

Lou Arab Lou Arab's picture

Debater wrote:

When people like Broadbent and Topp have been asked this fall what they think of some sort of a merger or coalition with the Liberals, they have basically said they are not interested.  I heard Broadbent say this in a CPAC interview earlier this year.

Uh, Topp wrote a whole book on his opinion (favorable) to coalitions.  Broadbent played a role in that book and the events it is about.

Wilf Day

Malcolm wrote:
the NDP are in a strong position to win up to six seats in Saskatchewan and possibly seven should Liberal Ralph Goodale choose to retire. That assumes three competitive, predominantly urban seats in Regina and in Saskatoon, and a notionally winnable seat in the North.

Ralph Goodale has run in almost every election since he was 24. He's only 62; he will be only 66 at the next election; when he hears the bell ring, will he keep running until he's 75? Why not? Isn't it a conditioned reflex by now?

Idealistic Prag... Idealistic Pragmatist's picture

Debater wrote:

I wasn't lying.  I was assuming people meant more or less the same thing in this case regarding a merger vs. a coalition.  If we want to distinguish between the two, please say so and I will also try to do so.  Perhaps I could have been clearer in what I was trying to say as well.

When people like Broadbent and Topp have been asked this fall what they think of some sort of a merger or coalition with the Liberals, they have basically said they are not interested.

If you actually think this--and again I have great doubts that you're not just trying to obfuscate--then you've been doing a piss-poor job of paying attention. Topp in particular was asked many, many times early in his candidacy whether he was interested in cooperation with the Liberals, and his answer always amounted to "merger no, post-election coalition yes if the numbers work out that way." Again and again and again he said that. It's completely obvious to anyone who's actually listening that there is no way he means the same thing, since he always brought them up in the same sentence and said absolutely opposite things about them.

Nathan Cullen, too (who is in favour of a pre-election non-compete agreement on a riding-by-riding basis), has always distinguished between his plan and a merger. No one is confused about this.

When you lump all of the candidates together and say "only Pat Martin blah blah blah," when everyone here knows better, you again just make the case for not taking anything you say seriously.

Winston

Unionist wrote:

What happened to [url=http://rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/mission-2015-convert-conservat... 15[/url]? And what's with all the military jargon?

A little late in responding but if we were truly using military jargon, it would be Operation Tory Bloodbath or the more positive sounding Operation Canadian Freedom. 

Newfoundlander_...

What will the NDP have to do to maintain and grow support in Quebec while growing support in other areas, particularly the west? Off the top of my head Brian Mulroney was the last Prime Minister, and the only one in recent memory, to be able to win Quebec and the west, and look how that ended. 

clambake

Wilf Day wrote:
Newfoundlander_Labradorian wrote:

The NDP gets 6 of the 8 seats in Mississauga and Brampton. 

A nice thought, but they're always a distant third at around the 15-20% range here. Though Jagmeet Singh's showing in the Federal and Provincial elections for Bramalea-Gore-Malton are a good sign for the Halton-Peel area

Wilf Day

clambake wrote:

Wilf Day wrote:

The NDP gets 6 of the 8 seats in Mississauga and Brampton. 

A nice thought, but they're always a distant third at around the 15-20% range here. Though Jagmeet Singh's showing in the Federal and Provincial elections for Bramalea-Gore-Malton are a good sign for the Halton-Peel area

Jagmeet Singh can lead the way, but the potential is the substantial Liberal vote ready, because of less deeply-rooted Liberal habits, to switch, plus the non-voters. In the 8 Mississauga-Brampton ridings, in this year's election the total was Conservative 43.7%, Liberal 34.0%, NDP 19.2%. The turnout was an average of 57.3% compared with the Ontario average of 61.5%. Now that the NDP is in contention in that heavily-South Asian community, the potential for better turnout and Liberal switches is far better than in the majority of Ontario ridings. And the recent Conservative voters are not deeply-rooted either.

Orangutan

Debater wrote:

I don't mind intelligent and polite disagreement with one another's views, what is considered out of bounds is to say "You lie like a Liberal" and to tar every Liberal with that statement.  Is that not considered name-calling, amongst other things?  That should be kept out of discussions.  I don't use those phrases towards others.

While I don't like partisanship and sweeping statements, you have to understand that this is our experience (and the experience of many others who might belong to other parties or are non-voters) - Liberal Party leaders (with a few exceptions) have lied through their teeth.  The poor of Ontario are still waiting for McGuinty to restore welfare and ODSP rates like he promised.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1092299--goar-queen-s-park-offers-crumbs-to-ontario-s-poor

Orangutan

I'll do Alberta next:

Alberta - 1 (current) + up to 4 additional seats    Total: 1-4/34

(Alberta currently has 28 seats, but will have 34 seats next election)

I don't see the NDP being able to win outside of the core of Edmonton (and perhaps Calgary).  We have held a few rural Alberta ridings in the distant past, but I don't see conditions changing there anytime soon.  Perhaps Lethbridge might become winnable in the future as it becomes more urban. 

We currently have Edmonton-Strathcona.  Like others have suggested, with a strong candidate we can win Edmonton Centre and Edmonton East. 

I think we could also pull off winning a seat in downtown Calgary under the right circumstances, if the suburban parts of Calgary North Centre and Calgary South Centre are shaved off, creating a riding combining downtown Calgary and the University of Calgary.  

 

TOTALS:

Current seats: 1/28 (34)

Potential extra seats: 3  (27 current Conservative ridings, 1 NDP riding, 6 new ridings)

Total: 1-4/34

 

Newfoundlander_...

Orangutan wrote:

Debater wrote:

I don't mind intelligent and polite disagreement with one another's views, what is considered out of bounds is to say "You lie like a Liberal" and to tar every Liberal with that statement.  Is that not considered name-calling, amongst other things?  That should be kept out of discussions.  I don't use those phrases towards others.

While I don't like partisanship and sweeping statements, you have to understand that this is our experience (and the experience of many others who might belong to other parties or are non-voters) - Liberal Party leaders (with a few exceptions) have lied through their teeth.  The poor of Ontario are still waiting for McGuinty to restore welfare and ODSP rates like he promised.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1092299--goar-queen-s-park-offers-crumbs-to-ontario-s-poor

Should all members of the NDP be called socialists then, or be called liars because NDP premiers have lied? While people may not agree with the Liberals, or agree with Debater, it's quite ignorant to say he's a liar like all Liberals. 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Well, I don't have trouble with either. I am not a liar, and I am a Socialist. Next.

Malcolm Malcolm's picture

Wilf Day wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
the NDP are in a strong position to win up to six seats in Saskatchewan and possibly seven should Liberal Ralph Goodale choose to retire. That assumes three competitive, predominantly urban seats in Regina and in Saskatoon, and a notionally winnable seat in the North.

Ralph Goodale has run in almost every election since he was 24. He's only 62; he will be only 66 at the next election; when he hears the bell ring, will he keep running until he's 75? Why not? Isn't it a conditioned reflex by now?

 

I have no idea if Ralph intends to run again or not.  He could pull a Diefenbaker and run until he dies.  But Pam will be retiring soon, the prospect of a return to the treasury benches seems more than a little remote.  I'd guess it's 60/40 that he'd run in 2015 (at age 66) and 40/60 that he'd run in 2019 (at age 70), declining rapidly after that.

Malcolm Malcolm's picture

Now, now.  The entire Liberal modus operandi is to campaign like New Democrats and govern like Conservatives.  In advertising, it's called a pitch and switch and is generally considered dishonest.

Given that no Liberal campaign in the past 75 years has followed any other strategy . . .

Newfoundlander_...

Malcolm wrote:

Wilf Day wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
the NDP are in a strong position to win up to six seats in Saskatchewan and possibly seven should Liberal Ralph Goodale choose to retire. That assumes three competitive, predominantly urban seats in Regina and in Saskatoon, and a notionally winnable seat in the North.

Ralph Goodale has run in almost every election since he was 24. He's only 62; he will be only 66 at the next election; when he hears the bell ring, will he keep running until he's 75? Why not? Isn't it a conditioned reflex by now?

 

I have no idea if Ralph intends to run again or not.  He could pull a Diefenbaker and run until he dies.  But Pam will be retiring soon, the prospect of a return to the treasury benches seems more than a little remote.  I'd guess it's 60/40 that he'd run in 2015 (at age 66) and 40/60 that he'd run in 2019 (at age 70), declining rapidly after that.

I think him staying on will depend on how the Liberal Party as a whole are doing. If they have improved in polling and are destined to win new seats he will probably retire, if the party is still struggling he may run for re-election. There are many within their party who are older however and may not run for re-election, this may be bad for them or good.

Malcolm wrote:

Now, now.  The entire Liberal modus operandi is to campaign like New Democrats and govern like Conservatives.  In advertising, it's called a pitch and switch and is generally considered dishonest.

Given that no Liberal campaign in the past 75 years has followed any other strategy . . .

What about Trudeau?

Malcolm Malcolm's picture

Trudeau?  The only Prime Minister to decalre martial law in peacetime?  The Prime Minister who tried to impose property rights in his initia draft of the Charter?  The Prime Minister who condemned Saskatchewan and Prince Edward Island for trying to protect farmland / ocean front from foreign profiteers?

Yeah, Trudeau.  Just another right wing sonofabitch.

ottawaobserver

lil.Tommy wrote:

ottawaobserver wrote:

"Easy stuff" like online voting?

Not a single easy thing about that, unless you either accept that candidates will be unable to scrutineer the vote, or that balloting will be unable to remain secret.

Easy stuff as in it wont invovle any constitutional work like Senate reform does... Also, Estonia has been using Online voting since.... 2005 or 2007? and now its not perfect since i don't agree you should be able to change your vote over a 7 day period BUT if a country like Estonia can get online voting rolling, surely Canada can... but i might be giving the Tories too much credit here.

By 2015, i think the Liberals will have been able to claw back some of that middle-centre right vote that bolted to the tories cause they fearied the raving commies in the NDP would win :P ... so with that, i think More ridings in Ontario will be races the NDP can win in three way races, same in BC.

Estonia has a system whereby they've solved the problem of authenticating who is voting because they have electronic identities with their government for every single service, and every interaction with the government is stored and linkable to each other. This would violate fundamental principles of Canadian privacy law, and would be wholly unacceptable to me as even a very modest libertarian social democrat.

Please read up on that system before you advocate it here.

Orangutan

Newfoundlander_Labradorian wrote:

Orangutan wrote:

Debater wrote:

I don't mind intelligent and polite disagreement with one another's views, what is considered out of bounds is to say "You lie like a Liberal" and to tar every Liberal with that statement.  Is that not considered name-calling, amongst other things?  That should be kept out of discussions.  I don't use those phrases towards others.

While I don't like partisanship and sweeping statements, you have to understand that this is our experience (and the experience of many others who might belong to other parties or are non-voters) - Liberal Party leaders (with a few exceptions) have lied through their teeth.  The poor of Ontario are still waiting for McGuinty to restore welfare and ODSP rates like he promised.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1092299--goar-queen-s-park-offers-crumbs-to-ontario-s-poor

Should all members of the NDP be called socialists then, or be called liars because NDP premiers have lied? While people may not agree with the Liberals, or agree with Debater, it's quite ignorant to say he's a liar like all Liberals. 

 

I am not defending the statement, I am explaining why so many New Democrats feel this way.  

Newfoundlander_...

Orangutan wrote:

Newfoundlander_Labradorian wrote:

Orangutan wrote:

Debater wrote:

I don't mind intelligent and polite disagreement with one another's views, what is considered out of bounds is to say "You lie like a Liberal" and to tar every Liberal with that statement.  Is that not considered name-calling, amongst other things?  That should be kept out of discussions.  I don't use those phrases towards others.

While I don't like partisanship and sweeping statements, you have to understand that this is our experience (and the experience of many others who might belong to other parties or are non-voters) - Liberal Party leaders (with a few exceptions) have lied through their teeth.  The poor of Ontario are still waiting for McGuinty to restore welfare and ODSP rates like he promised.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1092299--goar-queen-s-park-offers-crumbs-to-ontario-s-poor

Should all members of the NDP be called socialists then, or be called liars because NDP premiers have lied? While people may not agree with the Liberals, or agree with Debater, it's quite ignorant to say he's a liar like all Liberals. 

 

I am not defending the statement, I am explaining why so many New Democrats feel this way.  

All politicans lie, I had a MHA tell me he doesn't trust politicians.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

I think you Lib sympathisizers ought to start showing a little respect for what we are stating here and as just documented above by Orangutan. As Malcom put less delicately, we have watched the Libs always run left and govern right. That, is the HISTORICAL record. It isn't something we New Dems made up, it is FACT. Get it? FACT. Ok? FACT!

We didn't implement the Martin Budget.  We didn't implement wage and price controls that only controlled wages. We didn't implement the deal with the Bronfmans that saw 700 million leave Canada, UNTAXED. We didn't cause a referendum that almost cost us Canada. You guys DID ALL OF THAT. GET IT? GET IT? YOU DID THAT!

Any time you guys post on here, you ignore ANY factual statements made documenting the Lib record. Then you guys have the unbrideled audactiy to say what is the diff between you and the New Dems? Please.

Look, I don't mind debate. But stop treating us like we are all stupid! And on top of that, you also insult the memory of people like my mom and dad who gave their all to the NDP. Stop insulting us, and stop treating us like we are stupid! Ok?

OK: added to this post after I posted it. I should have said, stop treating me like this. I shouldn't persume to speak for anyoe else. Maybe they can just ignore it better then I can. I don't carry a grudge generally in life, but when I comes to politics, I can't resist it. It seems to me we are begining to see the pattern of attack against the NDP by the Libs for the next election, say we were a fluke, and that we are all NewDemBlocAntiCanadaCrats. I'm just sayin'.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Well, all politicians may indeed lie. But it is another thing to lie about what the real effects of your policies were when it can be shown imperically their assertions are facually, irrefutably, false. What, ignore the past, hope for a better result, and re-elect the same guys?

You know what the definition of insanity is, right?

Orangutan

Manitoba - 2 (current) + up to 6 additional seats

Churchill and Winnipeg Centre are solid NDP seats.  Winnipeg North has actually been the safest NDP/CCF/Labour seat in the country, so we will easily win in back.  Elmwood Transcona can also easily be won back if the NDP runs a stronger candidate.  

Historically, we have held Selkirk-Interlake and Dauphin Swan River (we also hold much of these ridings provincially) - given the right circumstances, these seats could be won.  

Within Winnipeg itself, we have almost all the seats provincially.  We ought to be able to transalate this into winning seats such as St. Boniface and Kildonan St. Paul.  The three seats in the south-west of Winnipeg would need to be realigned for us to win any of them.  I would suggest petitioning for the area north of the Assiniboia to be separated from the area to the south, and having the core area of Winnipeg South attached to the area directly along the Red River (including the University of Manitoba).  This would create two ridings we would be more competive in, and one solidly Conservative.  If enough of us file submissions with Elections Canada, this might actually happen: http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=cir/red&document=in....

 

TOTALS:

Current seats: 2/14

Potential extra seats: 6  (1 current Liberal ridings, 5 current Conservative ridings)

Total: 4-8/14 

 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

I sure would love to see Winnipeg North come back to us. Regarless of what others have posted here, Winnipeg North DOES NOT now have a real working persons representative. A working persons rep doesn't belong to a party who worships at the fiscsl feet of St. Paul at Martin

Newfoundlander_...

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Well, all politicians may indeed lie. But it is another thing to lie about what the real effects of your policies were when it can be shown imperically their assertions are facually, irrefutably, false. What, ignore the past, hope for a better result, and re-elect the same guys?

You know what the definition of insanity is, right?

Premier Dexter has done it, I bet you still think Nova Scotians should vote for him though. 

People may have the best intentions to live up to their promises but they get elected and realize they can't do everything they promised. Few politiciians run saying that they may not do everything they outline in their platform. 

Newfoundlander_...

Arthur Cramer wrote:

I sure would love to see Winnipeg North come back to us. Regarless of what others have posted here, Winnipeg North DOES NOT now have a real working persons representative. A working persons rep doesn't belong to a party who worships at the fiscsl feet of St. Paul at Martin

I guess you're referring to me. All I meant by my comment a while ago was that people, including real working people (whatever that means), voted for Lamoureux to be their voice. 

adma

Orangutan wrote:
Within Winnipeg itself, we have almost all the seats provincially.  We ought to be able to transalate this into winning seats such as St. Boniface and Kildonan St. Paul.  The three seats in the south-west of Winnipeg would need to be realigned for us to win any of them. 

I'm not sure if Winnipeg South Centre needs geographic alignment so much as a political alignment away from the Liberals--though at least unlike Wascana, they're no longer incumbent there...

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Newfoundlander:

Not only you, but I didn't name anyone, so I don't know why you went out of your way to name yourself. And you are right. There were working people who voted for Lamoureux.

My long departed Grandfather, who was old end of the 19th century English Labour, told my dad when he my dad was a kid, that given the opportunity, working people instinctively vote against their own intersets. I think that is easily demonstartable here in Canada, and certainly recently, the US. Where Liberal candidates are concerned, it is very easy to assume that any of them today or in the futher would have voted for the Martin budgets. Our current MP is always talking about "fiscal responsibility" and controlling spending. His idea of dealing with the rising price of fuel is to boycott distributors, but there hasn't been word out of him in support of a financial traansctions tax for instance, or the need to reform taxation so that corporations basically stealing our natural resources, pay for the privillege we gave them. And I would put it to you that is "typically Liberal". When it comes to putting up or shutting up, the Libs have always come down on the wrong side. So, with any luck, we'll be done with him after the next election and he'll have to go looking for a job in the private economy with the depressed wages that Lib fiscal and monetary directly created. By the way, Manitoba Hansard recorded his saying that he supported unions but not their leadership. What does that mean?

I will admit I haven't asked what he meant. I am still waiting for him to respond to previous correspondence I have had with him. His first attempt to respond to my most recent correspondence sent him was to try and prove a negative by asking me questions. Who does that? It would be my opinion that without any other resources on which to draw, that the asking of a question in response to a question appears to suggest the "questionee" doesn't want to truly answer the "questioner".

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

By the way, this is a thread about NDP pickups, and Winnipeg North will definitiely be a pickup in 2015.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

2013? What do you mean? You mean 2010. I wasn't one of those.

On another note, I am not going to comment any more on this thread I just don't want to play anymore. I have tired to apologize to you for whatever it is you thought I did, and it doesn't seem to be enough. Ok, you win or whatever. I'm taking my ball and going home.

Newfoundlander_...

Arthur Cramer wrote:

By the way, this is a thread about NDP pickups, and Winnipeg North will definitiely be a pickup in 2015.

Possibly, though I think everyone thought it would be in 2011 as well.

Newfoundlander_...

Arthur Cramer wrote:

2013? What do you mean? You mean 2010. I wasn't one of those.

On another note, I am not going to comment any more on this thread I just don't want to play anymore. I have tired to apologize to you for whatever it is you thought I did, and it doesn't seem to be enough. Ok, you win or whatever. I'm taking my ball and going home.

2011, don't know why I had 2013. 

And what are you talking about? Why would you apologize for anything?

Newfoundlander_...

Double post. 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

I thought you were mad at me. It was based on a post you made. I thought I had offended you. Guess I had't. I apologize for getting that wrong.

Newfoundlander_...

Arthur Cramer wrote:

I thought you were mad at me. It was based on a post you made. I thought I had offended you. Guess I had't. I apologize for getting that wrong.

I was the one who mentioned Lamoureux before so I was just commenting. I think I was just confused with what you were saying about Winnipeg North's representation and my stuff was confusing but who cares about it. 

Malcolm Malcolm's picture

Newfoundlander_Labradorian wrote:

People may have the best intentions to live up to their promises but they get elected and realize they can't do everything they promised. Few politiciians run saying that they may not do everything they outline in their platform. 

 

Come now. It's one thing to say "we want to do x, y, z" and then to defer action on y and z due to fiscal realities.

What Liberals do is say "we want to do x, y, z" and then proceed to do a, b and c instead because they never had any intention of doing x, y or z.

I remember lying Libeals telling me that I should support them to defeat Mulroney. 

  • They promised they'd tear up (or at least renegotiate) the FTA.  
  • They promised they'd kill the GST.
  • They promised they'd protect Medicare.
  • They promised they'd bring in a national child care program.

Every one of those promises - like every other promise the Liberal Party has made in the past 75 years - was a lie from start to finish.

  • They extended the FTA into NAFTA with no meaningful changes.
  • They kept the GST.
  • They slashed health care transfers farther than Brian Mulroney ever dared and deeper than Stephen Harper could ever have dreamed.
  • They kept fobbing off brainless fools with the promise of a national childcare program that was never intoduced.  And when they were looking defeat square in the face, they sent some superanuated goalie skating around the country with blank chaeques and called that a national childcare program.

If you can't see the difference between a government having to alter its plans in response to events and a government elected on a string of empty promises it never intended to keep in a million years, then I simply can't take your political analysis very seriously.

Wilf Day

Orangutan wrote:

Manitoba - 2 (current) + up to 6 additional seats

Churchill and Winnipeg Centre are solid NDP seats. Winnipeg North has actually been the safest NDP/CCF/Labour seat in the country, so we will easily win in back. Elmwood Transcona can also easily be won back if the NDP runs a stronger candidate.

Historically, we have held Selkirk--Interlake and Dauphin--Swan River (we also hold much of these ridings provincially) - given the right circumstances, these seats could be won.

Within Winnipeg itself, we have almost all the seats provincially. We ought to be able to transalate this into winning seats such as St. Boniface and Kildonan St. Paul. The three seats in the south-west of Winnipeg would need to be realigned for us to win any of them. I would suggest petitioning for the area north of the Assiniboia to be separated from the area to the south, and having the core area of Winnipeg South attached to the area directly along the Red River (including the University of Manitoba). This would create two ridings we would be more competive in, and one solidly Conservative. If enough of us file submissions with Elections Canada, this might actually happen: http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=cir/red&document=in....

TOTALS:

Current seats: 2/14

Potential extra seats: 6 (1 current Liberal riding, 5 current Conservative ridings)

Total: 4-8/14

Oddly, the present eight ridings for Winnipeg plus East St. Paul, West St. Paul and Headingly look to be just about the right new total too.

Saint Boniface and Winnipeg South are a little large, Winnipeg North and Winnipeg Centre are a little small, and so on. So you might be able to tinker with the boundaries, but whether it will help the NDP might be doubtful. Winning Kildonan-St. Paul might be optimistic enough.

As for Dauphin--Swan River, Churchill will likely have to add a slice from Swan River, and Dauphin will have to shift even further south, making it even less winnable. Selkirk--Interlake needs to lose 10% of its population, but I don't know how that will be done: shift northern Interlake to Dauphin? Shift Rosser and Woodlands to Portage--Lisgar to make up for it losing some to Dauphin? Either way, Selkirk looks even harder to win than Kildonan-St. Paul. I'd love to see 8 NDP seats, but 5 looks more plausible to me. What am I missing?

Winston

Wilf Day wrote:
Orangutan wrote:

Manitoba - 2 (current) + up to 6 additional seats

Churchill and Winnipeg Centre are solid NDP seats. Winnipeg North has actually been the safest NDP/CCF/Labour seat in the country, so we will easily win in back. Elmwood Transcona can also easily be won back if the NDP runs a stronger candidate.

Historically, we have held Selkirk--Interlake and Dauphin--Swan River (we also hold much of these ridings provincially) - given the right circumstances, these seats could be won.

Within Winnipeg itself, we have almost all the seats provincially. We ought to be able to transalate this into winning seats such as St. Boniface and Kildonan St. Paul. The three seats in the south-west of Winnipeg would need to be realigned for us to win any of them. I would suggest petitioning for the area north of the Assiniboia to be separated from the area to the south, and having the core area of Winnipeg South attached to the area directly along the Red River (including the University of Manitoba). This would create two ridings we would be more competive in, and one solidly Conservative. If enough of us file submissions with Elections Canada, this might actually happen: http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=cir/red&document=in....

TOTALS:

Current seats: 2/14

Potential extra seats: 6 (1 current Liberal riding, 5 current Conservative ridings)

Total: 4-8/14

Oddly, the present eight ridings for Winnipeg plus East St. Paul, West St. Paul and Headingly look to be just about the right new total too.

Saint Boniface and Winnipeg South are a little large, Winnipeg North and Winnipeg Centre are a little small, and so on. So you might be able to tinker with the boundaries, but whether it will help the NDP might be doubtful. Winning Kildonan-St. Paul might be optimistic enough.

As for Dauphin--Swan River, Churchill will likely have to add a slice from Swan River, and Dauphin will have to shift even further south, making it even less winnable. Selkirk--Interlake needs to lose 10% of its population, but I don't know how that will be done: shift northern Interlake to Dauphin? Shift Rosser and Woodlands to Portage--Lisgar to make up for it losing some to Dauphin? Either way, Selkirk looks even harder to win than Kildonan-St. Paul. I'd love to see 8 NDP seats, but 5 looks more plausible to me. What am I missing?

Those of you thinking that Dauphin-Swan River-Marquette could be winnable are on glue.  That riding (and the provincial ones contained therein) seem to be aligning much the same way as Yorkton-Melville (which used to be called "Red Square").  Long NDP history, but increasingly yellow-dog Conservative and off-limits.  The situation in Selkirk-Interlake is better, but may be trending similarly.

All of the 8 ridings in Winnipeg, on the other hand, should be winnable if (and that's a very big "if") we obliterate the Liberal vote.  Letting the Liberals have a presence anywhere in the city works to elevate their vote totals elsewhere, and in most of the city we only win (at the municipal, provincial and federal levels) if the "progressive vote" is united.  That's why, in my mind, we should be running strong, credible campaigns in every riding in the city, even ones which at first glance seem hopeless (e.g. Charleswood-St James-Assiniboia).

I disagree with most of the posters here in that, after Wpg-North and Elmwood-Transcona, I think the lowest-hanging fruit is Winnipeg South Centre.  We hold 3 of the 4 provincial seats here by super-majorities (the Liberals hold the last), we have more than 700 members, and the demographics are good - many young people, large concentration of LGBT, strong environmentalist undercurrent.  If I was to compare to other ridings in Canada, it is most similar to Edmonton-Strathcona.  Now that we have a Tory incumbent, she will be far easier to knock off than a faux-progressive Liberal.

After Winnipeg-South-Centre, our priorities should be, in order, St-Boniface, Kildonan-St-Paul, Winnipeg South and Charles.-St-J-Assiniboia.  Of all of them, I think only the last is likely to remain Tory if we were serious contenders for government (as long as we don't let the Liberals show themselves).

Newfoundlander_...

If Conservative Peter Goldring resigns as MP his seat might be an NDP pickup in 2012. 

ottawaobserver

I was just thinking the same thing. That would be a very convenient by-election to have first.

Newfoundlander_...

ottawaobserver wrote:

I was just thinking the same thing. That would be a very convenient by-election to have first.

First?

Threads

I assume that by first ottawaobserver means "before the next federal election", since her (if I remember a passing comment correctly) hobbyhorse of late has been "Um, guys, remember that the riding boundaries are going to be redrawn by the time 2015 rolls around!".

Wilf Day

ottawaobserver wrote:

I was just thinking the same thing. That would be a very convenient by-election to have first.

As in, the first by-election under the new leader?

adma

Winston wrote:
Those of you thinking that Dauphin-Swan River-Marquette could be winnable are on glue.  That riding (and the provincial ones contained therein) seem to be aligning much the same way as Yorkton-Melville (which used to be called "Red Square").  Long NDP history, but increasingly yellow-dog Conservative and off-limits.  The situation in Selkirk-Interlake is better, but may be trending similarly.

And if one were to invoke DSRM and SI as "targetable", you might as well toss Brandon-Souris into the mix--not as much federal history; but Brandon proper can make a difference.  (And once that's taken under consideration, feel free to veto on Yorkton-Melville grounds)

ottawaobserver

Wilf Day wrote:
ottawaobserver wrote:

I was just thinking the same thing. That would be a very convenient by-election to have first.

As in, the first by-election under the new leader?

Sorry, head was somewhere else. That will be a very convenient by-election to have alongside Toronto-Danforth. I plead having my head inside something else. (smacks head)

Debater

Winston wrote:

All of the 8 ridings in Winnipeg, on the other hand, should be winnable if (and that's a very big "if") we obliterate the Liberal vote.  Letting the Liberals have a presence anywhere in the city works to elevate their vote totals elsewhere, and in most of the city we only win (at the municipal, provincial and federal levels) if the "progressive vote" is united. 

These are the sorts of phrases I find somewhat disturbing.

Debater

Newfoundlander_Labradorian wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

By the way, this is a thread about NDP pickups, and Winnipeg North will definitiely be a pickup in 2015.

Possibly, though I think everyone thought it would be in 2011 as well.

Exactly.  Glad to see you can be objective, NL.  I realize many people such as AC don't like the Liberals, but it's important to engage in some objective commentary.  If Lamoreux could win the by-election, and then survive the disasterous Liberal election of 2011, one assumes he has a good shot at getting re-elected next time if the Liberal vote goes up even a little bit since he will have an incumbency advantage.

I also don't get why AC dislikes Lamoreux so much.  I've never met him, but is he the most evil MP in Canada or something?  Why such a strong desire to see him defeated?  He must be considered a good guy to his community to win in an NDP stronghold like Winnipeg North.  He must attract NDP voters as well as Liberals.

Debater

adma wrote:

I'm not sure if Winnipeg South Centre needs geographic alignment so much as a political alignment away from the Liberals--though at least unlike Wascana, they're no longer incumbent there...

I'm hoping Winnipeg South Centre will come back to the Liberals.  Aren't you?  The Liberals are the only party that can beat the Cons there.  It was one of the longest-running Liberal seats in Western Canada until the orange crush split the vote and caused the seat to go to the Conservatives.

Hopefully the Liberals who voted NDP in 2011 were just voting NDP once because of their love of Jack and will come behind the Liberals again in order to defeat the Conservatives. 

Debater

Malcolm wrote:

Trudeau?  The only Prime Minister to decalre martial law in peacetime?  The Prime Minister who tried to impose property rights in his initia draft of the Charter?  The Prime Minister who condemned Saskatchewan and Prince Edward Island for trying to protect farmland / ocean front from foreign profiteers?

Yeah, Trudeau.  Just another right wing sonofabitch.

I'm not going to even bother debating this one in any detail.  If you think the most left-wing Prime Minister in history was a right-winger, it shows why there is such a huge gulf between us.  Trudeau was attacked as a communist and a socialist for goodness sakes!  He was put under surveillance by the Americans they thought he was so left-wing!

You only have to go to places like Free Dominion where they are still calling him a socialist and a communist.

Malcolm Malcolm's picture

Right. So far right lunatics call him a socialist and that's supposed to convince me?

Can you actually deny anything I said in that post Debater?

No, you can't, because every single word of it was an indisputable fact.

He declared martial law in peace time and is the only Prime Minister to do so.

His original draft of the Charter asserted the rights of capital and the rights of property.

He actually used the land protection legislation in Saskatchewan and Prince Edward Island as examples of the sort of legislation that would be banned had his original Charter gone through unaltered.

These are facts, Debater - however much they disturb the fantasies you have about this odious hack.

Ippurigakko

Edmonton East (2011) reminded me of Edmonton-Strathcona in 2006

Peter Goldring resgined just recently, so i guess next by election would be NDP, Ray Martin or someone will be electing in next year and 2015?

Pages

Topic locked