Tom Mulcair will be Prime minister - Thread #4

112 posts / 0 new
Last post
KenS

Oh my god, I hope this wears off soon.

Now you cant say anything the least bit critical- even in the spirit of the NDP performing better- without several people piling on in response.

quizzical

stating our own opinion is piling on?

NorthReport

Legitimate criticism is fine but repeating the braying of the dying LPC, well that is something else.

mtm

I just don't think Sean in Ottawa's assessment of what went down is at all correct.  He's buying into the completely false Liberal talking point.

It has been pointed out here already - they HAD the chance to talk, and they only used 11 of their 20 allotted minutes on Tuesday and you cannot deny that.  You're responding to Rae's complaints as if they are valid or had any merit whatsover.  His attack on Mulcair and invoking Jack's letter is absolutely insulting and he should be being slammed for that.

Unfortunately, New Democrats such as yourself are, in my opinion, way too quick to back down and listen to the Liberals (and the media's) biased, completely desperate steaming pile of spin.  We NEED to play hardball on this one, because we are completely and unequivocally on the side of the truth here.  We should DEFEND Peter Julian and Mulcair against these baseless attacks.  We should express outrage that Mr. Rae has the audacity after the antics of his team to try and invoke Jack's name, when it is him playing games.  And, we should be calling out the Liberals for their dishonesty, in supporting so many Conservative budgets, and having nothing of any real value to add to the debate beyond 11 minutes of cursory talking points when given the chance.

Now, the next day, they complain and complain as if they were censured.  Attention, and memo to Bob Rae.  Your party only has 34 seats.  You are the THIRD party.  You complain about procedure - well guess what, AS OFFICIAL OPPOSITION, Julian and the NDP have gained the RIGHT to do what they are doing.  It comes of as whining, and we come off as strong and principled.

May I also add, that Bob Rae's antics after QP today were despicable - he tried to get in an extra question on the F35's beyond his party's allocation, by invoking 1) a point of privilege followed by 2) a point of order, which were both just further questions in QP.  He was trying to get his face on TV, and trying to skew his allotment of questions by playing with procedure.  He's doing exactly what Sean in Ottawa was accusing the NDP of doing (which actually they did not because as the OO they have the RIGHT to do exactly what Julian did).  I've seen Rae do this a lot in the past few weeks, trying to flout procedure in order to force his face to be on the Parliamentary feed and I find it repulsive.

Also, as an aside, I continued to watch proceedings on CPAC and when the budget came on, it was Turmel and Peggy Nash, continuing like troopers to hold the government to account on this budget.  When a Liberal FINALLY decided they wanted to say something, their benches were completely empty.  I would have thought, if they REALLY had something to say, they would have piled into the House in droves and made sure they got their two cents in.  Unfortunately it looks like they'd mostly all headed down to the pub.  Oh well.

Instead of playing into the Liberal talking point, stick up for your guys.  They are doing the right thing.  I have no problem with NDP'ers criticizing the NDP if they feel the Party is in the wrong.  But we aren't.  Not on this one.  And buying into the Liberal spin and trying to play nice when they hold knives ready to sink into our backs will get us nowhere.  Hardball is the game to play at this moment, when we have a 3rd party leader more intent on attacking the OO Leader than a budget that is clearly wrongheaded, bad for Canadians, and we have massive electoral scandals (nice for Harper Robocall seems to be off the agenda), as well as procurement scandals with the F35s.  There's too much going on here for Rae to be so short sighted and mean spirited, and we should tell him where to go.

 

Sean in Ottawa

MTM -- I am not buying in to Liberal talking points -- I should not have to quote myself from this very thread for you to read.

I am saying that the comms from this was not well played and it is important that we get that better and not open ourselves to the kind of stuff that came out of this on a day that could have gone 100% our way.

Running out the clock with limited time for everyone else does not look good and there were a lot of better ways to manage this.

You can disagree with me if you like but don't suggest I am repeating Liberal talking points-- I am expressing concern out of how this looked and suggesting the NDP should hold its actions to a higher standard.

We ended up looking almost as bad as the Liberals and that was not necessary.

Some self reflection is useful and can make the party better --

We gained in a lot of ways from our response but lost points on a lead-off speech looking like a filibuster. Our actions looked petty and they could have been managed better-- either communicated better or handled differently.

And yes, I think we should be critical right now and change these things-- you don't get to do this a couple years from now when we are close to an election.

 

Sean in Ottawa

And I disagree- hardball is not how we should be percieved to be playing this. Not at all.

 

Sean in Ottawa

NorthReport wrote:

Legitimate criticism is fine but repeating the braying of the dying LPC, well that is something else.

Yes quite true. And recognizing the difference is essential. What I raised was legitimate criticism. I hope that is what you were implying because characterizing what one person expresses here as "braying" would be very out of line and a personal attack. So I'll assume you meant that mine was legitimate, constructive criticism which, whether you agree with it or not, is exactly what it was.

mtm

But you WERE buying into the Liberal talking points by even suggesting that their protestations have any merit whatsoever.  In your post, you said:

 "I am expressing concern out of how this looked"

Well, the only way it looks bad is if you take the Liberals line on its face, without any critical examination of their actual record, position, postures and actions.

It only looks bad because the MSM has become used to taking Liberal talking points for their word, and there's never been a party as galvanized and disciplined to stand up to their revisionist lines and filthy tactics.

There is NOTHING wrong with what the NDP did in this circumstance. It was procedurally valid as the Official Opposition party. It struck a tone that we are not going to take the Tory budget lying down, and that we are going to be the constructive opposition Party.  And, it took a stand, tacitly, against the Liberal muddling and dithering that so aptly characterizes their past half-decade as a reluctant opposition party, refusing to admit and acknowledge that they are not in power - and who is now, steadfastly refusing to admit they aren't even the official opposition anymore and is whining for privileges not afforded to them under the parliamentary system.  Why should they be afforded it out of the graciousness of the OO Party that they love to malign so much at every opportunity?

Just by saying or implying that it "looks bad", you are making it so and giving the Liberal lines traction, when there is no reason for it.  You are saying the optics are bad - but they are only bad from a Liberal point of view.  Don't give in.

bekayne

quizzical wrote:

i should care what Elizabeth May has to say?

Considering she was the only MP in the entire HOC  to vote against the Libyan excursion, yes

Sean in Ottawa

MTM-- I don't agree--

However, I want to consider proportions. I have put out the impression that was there and my contention that it could ahve been handled better. I did not intend for this to be a thread-filling issue-- just an example over how we could do somethings a little better.

I have stated the case and some are not open to any criticism it seems. I'll leave it there.

I will add that I think there is nothing wrong with holding the party that gets my vote to a higher standard than one I do not respect and have never voted for.

Brachina

This was no accident, Mulcair knew this would piss off the liberals and some might percieve it as mean. What ever blow back it might have Mulcair decided it was would be worth it. This is just a small part of a bigger stragety, one I wish I could see fully. This wasn't about ego (if it was Mulcair would have done the 14 hours himself instead of Peter Julian) or how full of shit the Liberals are or even about the budget. This was about getting under Bob Ray skin and it worked, big time and the Trudeau shot makes it sink deeper. He's stirring the pot. Sewwing the seeds of division and chaos in the Liberal Party. Yet Mulcair is keeping his cool. This is psychological warfare Quebec Politics style.

I having to admit I was worried people would see it as a jerk move, even though I agree with the NDP arguements, but then I read Ray's response and Mulcair's Trudeau comment. Its interesting to see where Mulcair goes with this.

mtm

Yeah, I get it.  You want us to operate to a higher standard.

I happen to believe in a more bare-knuckles approach, so long as it respects the rules of the game.  We're dealing with a mean, miserable, corrupt government that not only has no respect for the rules of the game, it has open hostility for them.  It disgusts me that the Liberals in their infinite wisdom can in good conscience attack the rightfully elected opposition for doing its job, within the rules of the game.  They need to take their May 2nd defeat with humility and dignity, accept their lessened role in Parliament, and get to work, rather than engage in superficial displays of pomp, bluster, and arrogance - that is exactly what got them in this position.  But wait, what am I doing giving Liberals advice. Not that they'd ever take it - it involves checking their egos...which is the reason most Liberals get into politics in the first place.

Anyway Sean, I get what you're saying. You don't agree with the tactics rather than the underlying reasons behind the action.  The thing about tactics is that they are framed by reaction. Sometimes when you do one thing, you expect a certain reaction, but you get something totally different.  I don't know if the NDP anticipated Rae's outburst or not.  I certainly don't think they were baiting him into a blow-up (Liberals may suspect this), I think that is something you pretty much can guarantee from Rae anyway.  Rae making an ass of himself is assured, its just the unknown as to what will set him off.

The issue here is that the response to the tactical decisions of the NDP were (perhaps predictably) negative. Given that the underlying actions were 1) not wrong, and 2) completely justifiable under parliamentary rules, I find it very easy to defend the NDP in this circumstance.  Even if (and I stress if) I felt that the tactical decisions were not the best ones that could have been used, I feel that unless rules were broken or morality/ethics were compromised or misinformation was stated, it is our duty as supporters to vigorously defend the Party from an unfair attack from our opponents.

I want to see an NDP government more than anything else.  While I may have quibbles about tactics or strategies (which I actually don't in this case) from time to time, I feel it is in the Party's best interest, in Canadians' best interest to be disciplined and stand in solidarity with our Parliamentary caucus.

As NDP'ers we often suffer from an abundance of self-criticism and often in our navel-gazing we don't realize the damage it does to our credibility as a potential governing party.  I will admit it has taken me a long time to come to this realization myself, and it largely has to do with dealing intimately with these kinds of disputes in person through my various roles with the party, but I really hope that under Mulcair we can continue to do as has been the case under Layton, where we show confidence in our tacticians and staff to an ever-increasing degree.

 

Doug

It was a bit petty and I hope it doesn't continue, but the Liberals and the media really did need to be reminded at this point that NDP and its new leader are the official opposition.

Brachina

Doug wrote:

It was a bit petty and I hope it doesn't continue, but the Liberals and the media really did need to be reminded at this point that NDP and its new leader are the official opposition.

I agree. We need to be careful not to take it too far, after all if some of our MPs are made uncomfortable by this, and they were, its not something we consistantly want to do, but our points have been made, and we've gotten under the Liberal's skin.

mark_alfred

CanadaApple wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

How did Mulcair do? Who did better?

see for yourself.

If speaking in a dull robotic monotone is prime ministerial, then Mulcair certainly was prime ministerial.  I found Rae more engaging in this clip.

ravenj

The federal NDP does not look like the boy scouts we used to be?  Good.

mtm

mark_alfred wrote:

CanadaApple wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

How did Mulcair do? Who did better?

see for yourself.

If speaking in a dull robotic monotone is prime ministerial, then Mulcair certainly was prime ministerial.  I found Rae more engaging in this clip.

Screaming like a lunatic about something you don't have answers for is what the NDP used to do, and be ridiculed for.  

Being Prime Ministerial shows that you are able to keep your cool (ironic given Mulcair's reputation), something that Rae doesn't seem to be able to get.  His artificial rage will get old and tired.

Meanwhile, Mulcair's calm, reasoned but sincere and relentless attack on the Conservatives will resonate with Canadians and project confidence, competence and, most importantly demonstrate restraint on the part of the NDP - a party that in the eyes of a ever-decreasing number of Canadians is reactionary, hysterical, well-meaning but idealistic.

Watching QP these past few days, it has struck me.  Mulcair, by projecting a quiet confidence in the face of Conservative scandal after scandal is doing much to dispel the myths about the NDP that have kept us out of power for so long.  And Rae, looking for media to pay attention to him in a desperate plea for airtime, goes into traditional NDP-style hysterics and hyperbole, blowing the image the Liberals had built up over their centuries in politics as pragmatic, middle of the road, boring administrators.

I have been incredibly impressed with how tough Mulcair has been on the Conservatives, and how relentless he's been over the F35 fiasco.  But I've been even more impressed how he won't be drawn in.  For example, Evan Solomon tried to get Mulcair to commit to rejecting the budget before even seeing it - something the NDP would have had no trouble doing in times past.  Also, he wouldn't commit to asking for a resignation from anyone over the F35s until they'd been questioned in QP, and the Minister had a fair chance to explain himself (knowing full well he wouldn't avail himself of that opportunity).  Meanwhile Rae was off spinning in all directions asking for the Prime Minister to fire himself, apparently, 

One thing about asking a PM to resign: No matter how warranted such a call is, you need to use it sparingly...and, it makes you look crazy.  Even if it is Harper and there is 1000 reasons why he's unfit to govern, those 999 other reasons are the reasons you sound stupid.  Because if he's still in there after those 999, whats #1000?

Overall, its been an amazing week in the HOC for Tom Mulcair, and a dismal one for the flailing, reactionary, unrealistic, attention-seeking Liberals.

One week does not change much in the eyes of the public, however.  It is going to take a sustained attack of fair, reasoned, measured, but pointed criticism of Harper and his agenda to help put Mulcair and the NDP over the top.  But the main thing here we need to remember - it does the NDP no good to go out as the official opposition and government in waiting, and scream and rant like Bob Rae, and call for the resignation of everyone under the sun...as good as that may make us feel for a few minutes or so.  Call it boring, but we have more to lose than Rae by appearing mentally unhinged - as angry as we may be at all the crap the government is pulling these days.

Competence is displayed over the next 5 years, as Canadians get more comfortable with the idea of the NDP being the next government.  And hell, we're starting from a pretty good position in the polls already!  The conservative record will speak for itself.  Rigging elections, mismanaging the economy, fixing procurement bids.  Canadians know the score already - they just need to be reminded...and when they go to the polls, we need to be that credible alternative choice that is staring them in the face.

Brachina

Hopefully Mulcair attacks the Tories for this offensive idea.

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/employers-will-decide-who-com...

It one thing to talk to business about what they need and taking that into account along with all the other issues, its another thing to let Businesses decide who comes to Canada.

They've just turned our immigrantion system into just another resource for corporations to pillage.

And screwing over more then a 100,000 people, the Tories deserve to be sued.

I just want to puke.

This, This! is the enemy Ladies and Gentlemen and why we need a Quebec City style street fighter.

janfromthebruce

Screaming like a lunatic about something you don't have answers for is what the NDP used to do, and be ridiculed for. 

 

Well I don't remember Jack doing that and I am going to agree with Sean - I do hold the NDP to higher standard and it is about constituents we would like to support an NDP future candidate in their ridings, and so not allowing their MP too speak isn't showing good will to them.

I don't remember NDP acting like boy scouts but used the tactic of "going straight them". And how we got to OP was through rising up to occasions and not dumbing down. We don't need to get in a set-to with the libs, since it's the Cons who are the problem here.

It just makes both our parties look petty.

Brachina

http://www.canada.com/news/Coyne+debacle+demonstrates+system+government+...

If a Tory like Coyne is spanking the Tories like this, things are really bad for them and Good for us.

mtm

No Jan, you're actually quite wrong there.

If you look, Jack did a TON of this over-the-top reactionary stuff back in 04-08.  I think 08 is where the marked change happened.  That was the first campaign that we actually said "I'm running for Prime Minister".  Of course, everyone laughed at the thought of an NDP'er saying that, but if Jack hadn't set in motion that state-of-mind change we wouldn't have ever won the official opposition mandate we now find ourselves in.

Jack took a lot of the heat in the transition period, where we started modernizing our message and our outlook, and started to talk about working constructively to get results. He wore the "Taliban Jack" slurs.  He took the brunt of the "used car salesman" slights, and the full on attacks of those who called him a socialist, a radical, a communist.  It is very hard to change the image of a Party overnight, but he did it: he set a course to change the party.  And we have him to thank for that dedication, and for setting us down that path.  It was simply amazing.

But it belies the fact that even when he was leader, when we were the 4th party with 29 seats early in his tenure, we acted like the 4th party with 29 seats.  And when you are the 4th party with 29 seats sometimes you have to say some over the top crazy bluster to get media attention - ESPECIALLY when you're the NDP.  So we played into this narrative a little bit.  

Now, in 2012, we are in a much different reality.  We cannot act like we are the 3rd or 4th party any more.  We have to take ourselves more seriously.  We cannot compare ourselves to what Jack did or didn't do at any point in his term as Leader, because for other than that brief couple of months before he passed away, he was always working with a 4th-placed party sized caucus, and that shaped the way in which he did things.  Would I be advocating for Mulcair to be taking the same tack as he is now if he had a Rae-sized caucus?  God no.  And that's where you fail in your analysis.  

I have to say Jan, I find your posts in these threads tedious and threadbare, and rife with revisionism and introspective Jack-reverence and deference to traditions that you don't even seem to understand.  The strategic considerations I'm sharing here is not so much to do with Mulcair, or Jack, or Rae, or anyone else.  It is largely situational - and I only wish that you can start to realize that just because people advocate for doing things differently than Jack did in the past, it doesn't mean they think that Jack was wrong. 

Please, accept that if Jack were still alive, it is likely (or certainly not beyond reason) that he'd be doing a very similar thing to what Mulcair is doing in this situation - being above the fray, being constructive, oppositional, but reasonable, reflective, and non-reactionary, and let Bob Rae be chicken little.

We've never been Official Opposition before.  It is Jack's legacy that got us here.  But acting as Jack would have as the leader of a 4th place party now that we're in OO, even he would have said that is madness.  

Next stop: Government.

CanadaApple

janfromthebruce wrote:

Gaian wrote:
Some New Democrats would perhaps more appreciate RIM products made by the workers of Waterloo Region, where the factory buildings are not surrounded by nets to protect despairing workers. Keeping in mind the Mulcair campaign to support manufacturing in central Canada.

yes, I have a blackberry so it would be nice if we support Canadian companies

I like the idea of the app, but yeah, it's not much use for those of us who don't use Apple porducts.

and now that I think of it, it's a bit ironic that I don't. Tongue out

Jacob Two-Two

mtm wrote:

if Jack were still alive, it is likely (or certainly not beyond reason) that he'd be doing a very similar thing to what Mulcair is doing in this situation - being above the fray, being constructive, oppositional, but reasonable, reflective, and non-reactionary, and let Bob Rae be chicken little.

Totally agree.

Just want to throw out there that the party still needs lots of debate and criticism. In fact, the very reason that I supported Mulcair with little concern about the party drifting to the right was because I expect a strong left-wing critique to be ongoing within the party, as well as a strong strategic debate. We can't be a party of the people if we don't listen to concerns of all shapes and sizes. I think the question of whether the NDP's parliamentary decisions are good or bad is a perfectly legitimate topic of discussion.

howeird beale

Telling Harper and the nation that there's a new (NDP) sheriff in town was the entree. Irritating the hell out of Rae was the dessert.

A 14 hour filibuster is an important way of saying that the NDP will do whatever it can to stall, frustrate and hold up the neoCon agenda. It also instantly differentiates the party from the typical lack of effort of the useless, tepid, passionless, rudderless Grits.

Mulcair sounds fantastic in those interviews. Gentle without sounding weak. Reasonable. Intellectual without being arcane. Dryly funny. Prime Ministerial.

 

Gaian

Brachina wrote:
http://www.canada.com/news/Coyne+debacle+demonstrates+system+government+...

If a Tory like Coyne is spanking the Tories like this, things are really bad for them and Good for us.

Yes, we have to go to bat for the marginalized and jobless, the hungry and worried senior and the future of our young people with at least the vigour and fixed intensity that the bastards now in control have brought to the job of walking all over those people.

Anyone who has ever come close to losing hope, as so many have in this country lately, will realize that this is not the time to play footsie with the jackals. That is a new expression for me, but after finding myself accused of elitism because of the use of another expression, perhaps I should begin using the colloquialisms that are not challenged hereabouts. After coming close to losing hope a couple of years back, coming to learn what that really means, I will never again overlook how legislation impacts so many people. In particular the very old and the young.

Winston

mtm wrote:

Screaming like a lunatic about something you don't have answers for is what the NDP used to do, and be ridiculed for.  

Being Prime Ministerial shows that you are able to keep your cool (ironic given Mulcair's reputation), something that Rae doesn't seem to be able to get.  His artificial rage will get old and tired.

Meanwhile, Mulcair's calm, reasoned but sincere and relentless attack on the Conservatives will resonate with Canadians and project confidence, competence and, most importantly demonstrate restraint on the part of the NDP - a party that in the eyes of a ever-decreasing number of Canadians is reactionary, hysterical, well-meaning but idealistic.

Watching QP these past few days, it has struck me.  Mulcair, by projecting a quiet confidence in the face of Conservative scandal after scandal is doing much to dispel the myths about the NDP that have kept us out of power for so long.  And Rae, looking for media to pay attention to him in a desperate plea for airtime, goes into traditional NDP-style hysterics and hyperbole, blowing the image the Liberals had built up over their centuries in politics as pragmatic, middle of the road, boring administrators.

I have been incredibly impressed with how tough Mulcair has been on the Conservatives, and how relentless he's been over the F35 fiasco.  But I've been even more impressed how he won't be drawn in.  For example, Evan Solomon tried to get Mulcair to commit to rejecting the budget before even seeing it - something the NDP would have had no trouble doing in times past.  Also, he wouldn't commit to asking for a resignation from anyone over the F35s until they'd been questioned in QP, and the Minister had a fair chance to explain himself (knowing full well he wouldn't avail himself of that opportunity).  Meanwhile Rae was off spinning in all directions asking for the Prime Minister to fire himself, apparently, 

One thing about asking a PM to resign: No matter how warranted such a call is, you need to use it sparingly...and, it makes you look crazy.  Even if it is Harper and there is 1000 reasons why he's unfit to govern, those 999 other reasons are the reasons you sound stupid.  Because if he's still in there after those 999, whats #1000?

Overall, its been an amazing week in the HOC for Tom Mulcair, and a dismal one for the flailing, reactionary, unrealistic, attention-seeking Liberals.

One week does not change much in the eyes of the public, however.  It is going to take a sustained attack of fair, reasoned, measured, but pointed criticism of Harper and his agenda to help put Mulcair and the NDP over the top.  But the main thing here we need to remember - it does the NDP no good to go out as the official opposition and government in waiting, and scream and rant like Bob Rae, and call for the resignation of everyone under the sun...as good as that may make us feel for a few minutes or so.  Call it boring, but we have more to lose than Rae by appearing mentally unhinged - as angry as we may be at all the crap the government is pulling these days.

Competence is displayed over the next 5 years, as Canadians get more comfortable with the idea of the NDP being the next government.  And hell, we're starting from a pretty good position in the polls already!  The conservative record will speak for itself.  Rigging elections, mismanaging the economy, fixing procurement bids.  Canadians know the score already - they just need to be reminded...and when they go to the polls, we need to be that credible alternative choice that is staring them in the face.

+1

Kudos to Mulcair and Julian for throwing Bob Rae into hysterics as well - he looked and sounded completely unhinged.  There are many things that have to happen if we are going to win in 2015.  One of the key pre-requisites is that we have to keep the Liberals to a very distant third place position in the polls.  Some of the tactics that will need to be employed between now and then, such as the Julian filibuster, may leave some of us Dudley Do-Rights with a sour taste, but we have to remember that we are playing with slimeballs.

While a lot of ink (and bytes) have been spent talking about what a creep Harper is, we mustn't forget that the Liberal Party of Canada is also every bit as corrupt, slimy and cynical as the Tories are (perhaps even moreso, even if their policies aren't as draconian).

I am not shedding any tears over Bob Rae.

 

Interested Observer Interested Observer's picture

Partisan blinders are out in full force, I see. The NDP may attract more of the grumpy old man vote by trending towards pettiness, which could be helpful as they do consistantly vote. However, it better not be a real trend if they want the young, disillusioned, or non-partisan voters out there to help create another Crush in 2015. Wink 

vaudree

NorthReport wrote:

Much todo about nothing here.

As the polls are showing, Rae's Liberals are a distant third, back to their 30 or so seats they got in the last election, Trudeau's upset boxing silliness has Rae looking over his shoulder at the possibility of Trudeau going for the LPC leadership, and Sean you seem to forget the LPC constantly voting for Harper's budgets.

Mulcair is absolutely correct that Rae is fearful, and so he should be.

Before Trudeau's fight.  Rae seems to have developed a stammering problem ever since Mulcair became leader and everyone left the podium where Rae was standing to go after Mulcair.  Instead of accepting that the media may be curious about the new NDP leader and biding his time, Rae seemed almost frightened of losing the spotlight even for a moment.

Mulcair seems to have some smarts to him as to when to play cool and when to go on the attack.

vaudree

 

mtm wrote:
Jack" slurs.  He took the brunt of the "used car salesman" slights,

There is a bit of truth to that in that, in the early years of his leadership, Jack always looked more genuine in person than he did on TV.  Jack became popular when he became comfortable in his own skin and stopped trying so hard to please everybody.

The media is interested in Mulcair because they see him as mercurial - that they don't know if they will get the teddy bear or the grizzly bear - and Mulcair knows it and it and is using it.  Mulcair's down side is that he appears to love politics and plays the game well.  What he needs to do is show that he really genuinely cares about something in a way where you see his heart stripped of calculation - because that was part of Jack's attraction, the feeling like he just saw something as horrible.

So far Mulcair seems to be working to heal rifts - today's Holocaust speech seemed a bit more measured than the sort Mulcair would have given even a year or two ago.

janfromthebruce

geez, I believe if you reread my post I am saying that ranting and such is not the way to win hearts and minds, and basically I find it "interesting" that you feel you have the right to make judgment on my opinions in a "demeaning way". I also note that Sean also found he was devalued and demeaned by NP.

I think it is important that behaviour of political tactics/strategy will be viewed differently through different "view lens" and to dismiss some because one doesn't like the view doesn't make it anymore illegimate as the other - just different.

Personally demeaning the liberals is a waste of time in my view, and may have the opposite effect.

 

Let the pile on begin but don't worry soon I will go away because I personally find this such a waste of time and energy.

Michelle

Brachina wrote:
I having to admit I was worried people would see it as a jerk move, even though I agree with the NDP arguements, but then I read Ray's response and Mulcair's Trudeau comment. Its interesting to see where Mulcair goes with this.

Well, my first reaction is to see it as a jerk move, because I'm trying to imagine what the NDP, or their supporters here, would have said had the tables been turned. 

Then I wondered, have the tables been turned before?  Have the Liberals ever done this to the NDP before when they were the official opposition?  Does anyone know?  And if so, how did the NDP react?

That said, it's also relevant that when the Liberal Party did get the chance to comment, they only used up half of their allotted 20 minutes.  But then, that could be spun too - all the Liberals needed was 11 minutes to get their point of view across, and the NDP couldn't even give them that?

autoworker autoworker's picture

13 hours! That's almost as long as 'Berlin AlexanderPlatz'.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

I have to admit that even if this makes sense, I am not comfortable with it. I think that we need to show we aren't like the Libs, and have humility and empathy. This is an important part of how you win the electorate, and I think at least in some significant part, why Jack (blessed be his memory), was so effective. I think Tom needs to learn this quickly. I don't think this is a natural part of him.

I kind of wondered the same that Michelle pointed out; I would guess the Libs have never done something specifically like this, but I think is pretty safe to assume they have done things that were probably just as bad if not worse. However, two wrongs still don't make a right. As Michelle has asked, anyone able to shed some light on this.

I have been reading this thread, but I still don't understand why the NDP decided to do what it did. Does anyone have a real insight speculative or otherwise behind the strategy? I really would like to understand this. I want to give the NDP the benefit of the doubt, but not without having at least some idea of the why. Thanks.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

With the current 'anti-bullying' sentiment around the world, I'd advise the NDP to be careful.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Boom Boom, any thoughts on why the NDP conducted itself this way on this debate? One thing is for sure, there is plenty of really, really, really bad blood between the Libs and the NDP. I think Jack (blessed be his memory) and Rae would likely have gotten along ok, but I don't think it would have made a difference for the rest of the caucus on either side. I hate to admit it, but I didn't consider this a possibility after the election. I guess when you are accustomed to things being a certain way, it is hard to deal with really radical change. This is true for most of us I would guess. Beats me how I missed thinking of that.

Brachina

vaudree wrote:

 

mtm wrote:
Jack" slurs.  He took the brunt of the "used car salesman" slights,

There is a bit of truth to that in that, in the early years of his leadership, Jack always looked more genuine in person than he did on TV.  Jack became popular when he became comfortable in his own skin and stopped trying so hard to please everybody.

The media is interested in Mulcair because they see him as mercurial - that they don't know if they will get the teddy bear or the grizzly bear - and Mulcair knows it and it and is using it.  Mulcair's down side is that he appears to love politics and plays the game well.  What he needs to do is show that he really genuinely cares about something in a way where you see his heart stripped of calculation - because that was part of Jack's attraction, the feeling like he just saw something as horrible.

So far Mulcair seems to be working to heal rifts - today's Holocaust speech seemed a bit more measured than the sort Mulcair would have given even a year or two ago.

Also read on Accidental Deliberations that Mulcair defended the no war position on Iran in cbc radio, which I think would have made many of the NDP left proud.

jerrym

I think Rae is worried that his assumption that he was on the gold-paved road to the permanent Liberal throne is now under threat because of the rising NDP and falling Liberal poll numbers. Even when the Liberals were on the rise there were always some Liberals who questioned picking him as leader because he was too much of a failure as Premier of Ontario, too old, too left-wing (for right-wing Liberals), and too much of an opportunistic turncoat [in much the same way that some in the NDP see Mulcair (I'm not one of those) no matter what he does]. To see his dream possibly ending when many pundits were saying it was all but guaranteed to happen has rattled him. The implications of having to deal with the reality of third party status and the limited opportunities it provides to shine now that the NDP has an effective permanent leader are getting to him.

Sean in Ottawa

The latest results on the poll is accompanied by a headline that the NDP and Liberal leaders are trading insults. To me this suggests that the NDP has let the Liberals on the stage with them. And that is what happens when you engage with the third party. Otherwise it would have been NDP closes on government while Liberals fade to black.

I'm not a fan of cheer-leading. I'll do that during an election because I don't think that is a time for disunity. The rest of the time-- we should be sharpening and improving the party not defending it no matter what.

In other news the NDP has released an ad in Quebec. I think it takes the right tone and has the right visuals

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/04/05/we-continue-ndp-ad-mulcair_n_140...

For those who have not seen it the ad shows a person wearing a shirt that used to be of a colour Layton wore a lot, rolling up his sleeves in the way Layton did and then the camera backs out and you see it is Mulcair saying we continue. The message itself is simple and to the point and the existence of the ad is also a point. Have not seen the English ad but thumbs up for that one.

writer writer's picture

The ad: Publicité télé du NPD - On continue

Sean, the English version comes out after the Easter weekend.

JeffWells

I wasn't sure what to make of the rolling up of the sleeves, until I got the connection to Jack. Then I liked it. 

And I find myself agreeing with both the pro and con assessments of recent tactics. I think it would be a mistake to continue needling the Liberals by paying them further attention. Better, and just as likely to get under Rae's skin, to ignore them. (Except for appropriate reminders of Chretien/Martin/Harper continuity.)

Rae has never looked less prime ministerial than he has this week, and that's Mulcair's doing. And now it's time to ignore him.

Stockholm

Actually as I recall Rae and Jack Layton hated each other (actually I don't think Jack had it in him to hate anyone, let's say disliked intensely). Remember that in the '08 and '11 campaigns Rae was given the role of being the Liberal designated attack dog against Jack Layton and Rae was busy giving hysterical speeches across the country filled with personal attacks and innuendo against Jack.

Don't be fooled by Rae's "witty patrician" acting performance as some "do-gooder" who plays by Marquess of Queensberry rules. He's a very bitter, unpleasant petty little man who is incredibly mean-spirited when the cameras are not rolling. I think he's having these temper tantrums now because he realizes that the rug is being pulled out from under him yet again and that he will never become PM and that means he will never resolve all those personal issues he has that really out to be between him and his psychoanalyst

Stockholm

Yup, I agree 100% with the NDP tactic of using as much time as possible to denounce the budget and if that shuts out the Liberals - so be it.

That being said, I think that Mulcair as leader should avoid making caustic remarks about Rae (as tempting as it is). let other surrrogates do that. Mulcair should spend 100% of his time attacking the Tories and when asked to comment on what Rae is saying or doing he should say that he has no comment to make on the third party or its leader - end of story. Sometimes its best to say NOTHING.

Gaian

Stockholm wrote:

Yup, I agree 100% with the NDP tactic of using as much time as possible to denounce the budget and if that shuts out the Liberals - so be it.

That being said, I think that Mulcair as leader should avoid making caustic remarks about Rae (as tempting as it is). let other surrrogates do that. Mulcair should spend 100% of his time attacking the Tories and when asked to comment on what Rae is saying or doing he should say that he has no comment to make on the third party or its leader - end of story. Sometimes its best to say NOTHING.

I believe, as Brachina observed upthread, "This is psychological warfare Quebec Politics style."

After that marvelously reassuring ad aimed at Quebeckers, I look forward to the English version with great anticipation of a similar ,NON-ATTACK piece. The contrast with Steve's handiwork is going to be huge. Heck, the contrast with general expectations hereabouts is huge.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

By the way I finally saw the CBC news story on Mulcair's first day as Opposition Leader and the Press Scrum after Question Period. Watching everyone bail out on Rae when Mulcair showed up was hilarious! Do you think Mulcair may have done that on purpose expecting the Press reaction to be what it was?

I have never seen anything like that in my life. Wow!

Sean in Ottawa

Arthur is that on a video somewhere?

JeffWells

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Arthur is that on a video somewhere?

Maybe this? There's a shot near the end showing Rae's and Mulcair's scrums.

http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/1221258968/ID=2215571887

Doug

Interesting that the first Mulcair ad out is for Quebec. Ooooh! Hairy arms!

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Is it just Rae or does it also reflect "the upset" the Libs may be feeling as the third party? I know in my riding, my MP Kevin Lamoureux is very ambtious, and I am guessing he probably thought he would be at least a Parlimentary Secretary in a Lib governemtn, though given his documented ego, he probably figured he was going to be a cabinet minister. The guy is insufferable. I heard that when Ralph Goodale was asked to move after the election, his attitude was basically, I can't believe you are making me move, I am Ralph Goodale.

Life, the unive...

No Arthur it was the other way around.  According to media reports I read that day the NDP announced Mulcair would be coming out in 1 minute.  Rae then came strolling out to try to upstage him.  Since Mulcair was already on his way out to the hall he just moved to a different area.  Anyway then all the reporters bailed on Rae and went over to Mulcair, leaving Rae looking foolish and wondering what to do with his petard with his pettiness and super-sized ego on public display.

 

Rae has never looked so out of touch as this week.  Usually in situations like the one everyone is talking about the non-official opposition parties would support whatever the OO was doing to bring attention to the bad things in a budget.  Live as long as I have and you will have seen it many times.  The NDP has done it many, many times in the past and never made a fuss about it.  But Rae can't stand being out of the limelight.  There was nothing petty or bullying about the NDP actions.  The only pettiness was his high horseness throwing a temper tantrum because someone else was getting attention.  Rae has been ever thus.

Doug

Bob Rae and Ujjal Dosanjh have to be feeling at least a little silly now. They thought they were headed to at least cabinet minister's offices and yet they'd be far closer now if they'd stayed where they were. Tongue out

Pages

Topic locked