NDP Furious @ Trudeau - NDP Did All The Work In HOC & Trudeau Is Getting The Reward

64 posts / 0 new
Last post
terrytowel
NDP Furious @ Trudeau - NDP Did All The Work In HOC & Trudeau Is Getting The Reward

===

Regions: 
terrytowel

Party members are not taking the Trudeau win well.

“It sucks; to be honest Trudeau barely showed up to work in the last four years,” said Jenn Jefferys, a prior NDP staffer and volunteer. “If feels like (the NDP caucus) did much of the heavy lifting in the previous parliamentary session, and now the Liberals get to sweep in and benefit from that.”

In a postelection Facebook post, NDP volunteer Robert McCarthy wrote. “I feel like I got punched in the gut. Over and over and over again.”

Charlie Angus, the re-elected MP for Timmins-James Bay, took to Facebook to claim “establishment Canada” had simply parked itself behind a friendlier-looking leader.

“The backroom lobbyists moved over to the Trudeau team,” he wrote. “Corporate Canada is a more content place today.”

Alexandrine Latendresse, an “Orange Wave” MP who didn’t run for in 2015, lamented more than a dozen female NDPers “lost their seats to men, most of them white and middle-aged.”

“Sad to see these amazing women defeated by more of the same,” she wrote in a post to supporters.

The progressive press was similarly ready to call out Justin Trudeau as merely a more stylish incarnation of Stephen Harper.

“In many parts of the country last night, environmentalists, trade unionists, and social justice crusaders were unseated in favour of corporate lawyers and insurance brokers,” wrote Luke Savage in an editorial for Ricochet.

“The thought that the third party would leap over and form government wasn’t anything anyone expected,” said Peggy Nash.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/how-the-ndps-...

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

TT, why is it that almost every thread you start has the feel of a gossip column in one of the magazines you see at the supermarket checkout?

Northern PoV

Harper neutered the HoC.  The leader of the third party was doing his job, building an electoral base.  He did it very well.

We heard all this months ago, it didn't work then...  depressing repetitive thread!!!

eastnoireast

a classic case of the second mouse gets the cheese syndrome.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

The way Harper ran Parliament,the Opposition were castrated. There was no need for anyone to show up. There was no bi-partisan will.

Thank christ that motherfucking tyrant is gone.

Debater

If this is what the NDP is claiming, they have learned nothing from this election.

What happens in the House of Commons doesn't matter very much to voters.

Harper knew that.

It's what happens on the campaign trail.

It's who has the ability to form a Government and beat Harper that matters.

That's why Harper always knew that Trudeau was a threat and not Mulcair, and structured his millions in attack ads accordingly.

The NDP were not capable of beating Harper in the heat of the campaign.  Harper knew that, and he was right.

(Btw, Terry Towel, you like picking inflamatory thread topics, don't you? Wink )

KarlL

Michael Moriarity wrote:

TT, why is it that almost every thread you start has the feel of a gossip column in one of the magazines you see at the supermarket checkout?

NDP hopes (Kar)dashed.

 

 

terrytowel

Debater wrote:

If this is what the NDP is claiming, they have learned nothing from this election.

Even during the election the NDP kept sayingh Trudeau had the worst attendence record in the HOC.

terrytowel

Michael Moriarity wrote:

TT, why is it that almost every thread you start has the feel of a gossip column in one of the magazines you see at the supermarket checkout?

I just created a thread regarding NDP Fave Joy Taylor's opinion about the election

http://rabble.ca/babble/election-2015/ndp-fave-joy-taylors-take-on-election

I wouldn't call Joy Taylor a gossip column or a supermarket checkout. Would you?

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
I wouldn't call Joy Taylor a gossip column or a supermarket checkout. Would you?

"World's Oldest Political Wonk Reveals Mulcair Cheated With Kim Kardashian"

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

KarlL wrote:

Michael Moriarity wrote:

TT, why is it that almost every thread you start has the feel of a gossip column in one of the magazines you see at the supermarket checkout?

NDP hopes (Kar)dashed.

Thanks, Karl, I needed that. Laughing

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Debater wrote:

If this is what the NDP is claiming, they have learned nothing from this election.

What happens in the House of Commons doesn't matter very much to voters.

Harper knew that.

It's what happens on the campaign trail.

It's who has the ability to form a Government and beat Harper that matters.

That's why Harper always knew that Trudeau was a threat and not Mulcair, and structured his millions in attack ads accordingly.

The NDP were not capable of beating Harper in the heat of the campaign.  Harper knew that, and he was right.

(Btw, Terry Towel, you like picking inflamatory thread topics, don't you? Wink )

Bull! If I want to know what you think about the NDP Debater, I'll tell you.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Terrytowel, I'm not furious about what Le Dauphin did or didn't do. Stop projecting what you think New Democrats are thinking. I'm angry that the Libs ran left knowing full well they have NO intention of doing anything other than doing what Bay Street wants, and rewarding their friends. I'm also dissapointed that Canadians didn't figure out that they weren't voting for Canadina idol, while thinking they were voting Harper of the Island. Pathetic!

Debater

terrytowel wrote:

Debater wrote:

If this is what the NDP is claiming, they have learned nothing from this election.

Even during the election the NDP kept sayingh Trudeau had the worst attendence record in the HOC.

Which is a total lie.

JT didn't have a great attendance record (although some of that was justified because he was 3rd-party leader & rebuilding the party) but he sure as heck didn't have the worst attendance record.

Some of the worst attendance records were held by members of the NDP!  (eg. a couple of the Quebec 2011 class).

Pondering

You are going to get a chance to hold him to his platform but if the NDP acts all angry and hostile in the house it will backfire. 

 

nicky

Terryt...l tries to frame the discussion by opening a thread with the loaded and totally untruthful word "furious" in the title. Once again his sole purpose is to denigrate the NDP through lies.

There is a sense of wistful irony in the party, but a long way from fury, that Tom did the heavy lifting in Parliament when Justin was largely absent either literally or figuratively.

Hardly anything Justin did in Parliament damaged Harper or the government. harper's personal numbers tumbled to a large extent from the steady pounding he endured from Tom. As events played out Justin was the beneficiary of the damage wrecked on Harper's image by Tom..

Moderators, can we set a limit on the number of threads Terryt...l opens with idiotic titles?

Ciabatta2

I see nothing inflammatory or inaccurate in terrytowel's post.  Everything stated there is pretty much true.  Really, the best synopsis of the last four years and the current election results.

With one exception - the last quote there from Peggy Nash.

If she truly believed the Liberals weren't in contention to win, despite their lowly seat count, then she and other NDP were awfully naive.

However, the idea that the House of Commons doesn't matter is just silliness from people who don't understand how politics works.  What happens in the House sets the stage for elections.  Both elections and the House matter.  The NDP set the plays, the Liberals run faster to make the catch.

swallow swallow's picture

Not furious at all, personally - I'm mostly happy at the chance for a govenrment that may for oncce be willing to listen to Canadians. But I do think it's worth giving credit to the NDP in parliament for changing some views in the general public. Polls showed strong support for C-51, until the NDP used the parliamentary soapbox to challenge it. Views shifted as the isues became better known. Opinion shifted on the war in the Middle East as the NDP raised fact-based aspects - even the Liebral party was foprced to change its view. The NDP was not good at capitalizing on its work in parliament, but it certainly acted as an efective opposition on that and a number of files. And then, the Liberals out-campaigned the hell out of them, framing issues better, talking better, offering "sunny ways" better. But the political climate for the Liberal win owes something to the NDP's work on issues during the last parliament, which helped shift support away from the Cons and towards those who wanted a change of government. It's the NDP's misfortune that there's little public memory of their work in parliament, just a msssive appetitye for change that the NDP did a lot to foster and of which the Liberals were the main beneficiaries. 

Cody87

nicky wrote:
Justin was largely absent either literally or figuratively

This sentence exactly captures the reason the NDP lost the election.

terrytowel

nicky wrote:
Moderators, can we set a limit on the number of threads Terryt...l opens with idiotic titles?

This from soemone who has been suspended and reprimanded multiple times by the moderators. While I myself have never been suspended or reprimanded. Who do you think the mods will view as the more responsible poster?

nicky wrote:
Terryt...l tries to frame the discussion by opening a thread with the loaded and totally untruthful word "furious" in the title.

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Stop projecting what you think New Democrats are thinking.

Ciabatta2 wrote:

I see nothing inflammatory or inaccurate in terrytowel's post.  Everything stated there is pretty much true.  Really, the best synopsis of the last four years and the current election results.

New Democrats have a visceral dislike of Liberals, whom they consider cynical and smug and untrustworthy opportunists, at the best of times. (A common refrain: “With Tories, at least you know where you stand.”) That’s amplified by anger at the prospect of somehow ranking behind Justin Trudeau, whom they perceive as a lightweight epitome of Liberal entitlement. The lack of respect for Mr. Trudeau has been evident in many of Mr. Mulcair’s public performances, particularly in leaders’ debates, and all the more so in private conversations with some of his officials.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/liberals-and-ndp-might-not-...

As Peggy Nash had said “The thought that the third party would leap over and form government wasn’t anything anyone expected,”

KarlL

swallow wrote:

...even the Liebral party was foprced to change its view. 

So, I keep seeing the term "Liebral" used regularly on this site - not in relationship to some actual Liberal mendacity (which would be fair enough) but just as a general descriptor for Liberals/the Liberal Party.  

Sean had said at one point that it is only an oft-repeated typo but if so, there is quite a bit of muscle memory on here in hitting the keys in that order. And here it is again from Swallow.

I wonder how quickly a Mod would step in if I were to make half of my references to NDPers or the NDP as "lying New Democrats". I don't actually believe that of course, so wouldn't say it but it does strike me that it is an insult and one more in keeping with the comments section of the Sun newspapers.

 

swallow swallow's picture

It's a typo, apologies. Check my posts, they are full of typos. 

swallow swallow's picture

I'll add that I am not a member of the NDP and am not impressed with the party's smothering of internal dissent or lacklustre polciies. Again, you can check my posts. 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

KarlL wrote:

swallow wrote:

...even the Liebral party was foprced to change its view. 

So, I keep seeing the term "Liebral" used regularly on this site - not in relationship to some actual Liberal mendacity (which would be fair enough) but just as a general descriptor for Liberals/the Liberal Party.  

Sean had said at one point that it is only an oft-repeated typo but if so, there is quite a bit of muscle memory on here in hitting the keys in that order. And here it is again from Swallow.

I wonder how quickly a Mod would step in if I were to make half of my references to NDPers or the NDP as "lying New Democrats". I don't actually believe that of course, so wouldn't say it but it does strike me that it is an insult and one more in keeping with the comments section of the Sun newspapers.

 

Okay, I'll make you a deal. Post asking all the Libs go to stop callin New Democratics, "Dippers".  When you call some a "dip", it is derogatory. So stop calling us dippers. Secondly, stop telling us we deserve this or we deserve that. It isn't commentary, its just rubbing our faces in it. And I agre with outhers her, this thread titleis inflamatory. Stop dancing on our graves. I personally am very dissapointed. Trudeau is undeserving of this show of faith. He didn't earn it. He wouldn't have even emearged if he hadn't had his dad's name. This is just plain old fashioned Trudeaumania. NOthing else. It was a perfect storm. Jack (blessed be his memroy) died, Trudeau had his dad's name, and Harper was an assl. If Jack had lived, Trudeau would NEVER have run for the leadership. So let's stop telling others what to do Karl. You guys clean up your house FIRST. Then, we'll talk.

KarlL

swallow wrote:

It's a typo, apologies. Check my posts, they are full of typos. 

Understood, Swallow.  I ceratinly accept your having made a typo.  

But apropos of how often that typo appears, I would remind others that there is an "Edit" function.

KarlL

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Okay, I'll make you a deal. Post asking all the Libs go to stop callin New Democratics, "Dippers".  When you call some a "dip", it is derogatory. So stop calling us dippers. 

I am not sure that I use the term "Dippers" but maybe I have at some point.  I am certainly prepared to refrain from doing so in future.  

I had thought it a non-pejorative term that is also sometimes used internally by NDPers, like "Grits" is among Liberals but I guess I am wrong on that.

But let's face it, "Liebral" (when not a typo) is a fusion of liar and Liberal, so I think you are stretching your point.  

swallow swallow's picture

KarlL wrote:

swallow wrote:

It's a typo, apologies. Check my posts, they are full of typos. 

Understood, Swallow.  I ceratinly accept your having made a typo.  

But apropos of how often that typo appears, I would remind others that there is an "Edit" function.

Didn't even notice, and won't change it now, since it's the topic of conversation. How I love that it's apparently worth more conversation than the content of the actual post.

Thanks for noticing the actual point I was trying to make, Unionist. 

KarlL

Yes sorry for calling you out, Swallow, as you are not the main offender, especially when it was indavertent.

I will give you a sample of reasons as to why it irritates me.

NDP Furious @ Trudeau - NDP Did All The Work In HOC & Trudeau Is Getting The Reward

fact-based aspects - even the Liebral party was foprced to change its view. The NDP was not good at ... ...even the Liebral party was foprced to change its view.  So, I keep seeing the term "Liebral" used regularly on this site - not in relationship to some actual Liberal mendacity (which would be ...

Forum topic - - Oct 26 2015 - 3:47pm - 27 comments

Trudeau's campaign of fear and lies

with that. That seems right -- of course a Liebral could have said the same thing -- the ... specific stateemnt that there would be cuts. The Liebral ad is very poor as people can see the difference ... with that. That seems right -- of course a Liebral could have said the same thing -- the ...

Forum topic - - Oct 26 2015 - 7:32am - 74 comments

NDP finishing ahead of Libs bad for progressive Canada (if no majority)

Liebrals who would be terrified by voter retribution should they fail to remove Harper when they actually ... to govern -- again -- without the cover of the "working with the BQ" argument, theLiebrals ... heavily attacked by the Liberals. Not to forget the key weakness of the Liebrals is not their proximity to ...

Forum topic - - Jun 6 2015 - 11:45am - 28 comments

Why you might consider voting NDP "strategically" in a losing local campaign

Let people vote strategically where the winner is in doubt. But where it is not a vote for theLiebral ... tries again next time. My message is that I understand the strategic voting forLiebrals to get rid ... the policies of Harper. Those Liebrals need to fear the next orange wave or they will govern just like ...

Forum topic - - Oct 6 2015 - 5:19pm - 89 comments

2015 Federal Election = 2014 Ontario Provincial Election

largely obscured the NDP agenda and the Liebrals may well have been beaten by a strong promotion of that ... Liebrals may well have been beaten by a strong promotion of that agenda and a lot fewer well-placed ... obscured the NDP agenda and the Liebrals may well have been beaten by a strong promotion of that agenda and ...

Forum topic - - Sep 22 2015 - 7:43pm - 23 comments

Why do Mulcair and Trudeau dislike each other?

drama. This is a very rapid promotion within the Liebral party and there are good reasons for ... ready not long before the Liebral party pushed him into this out of desperation. Trudeau clearly wanted ... promotion within the Liebral party and there are good reasons for Canadians to question it. They can ...

Forum topic - - Sep 29 2015 - 3:40pm - 94 comments

 

Unionist

* Trying to get past the childish partisan bickering and back to whatever the topic was... *

Unionist

KarlL, do me a personal favour... There's a forum called "rabble reactions" for discussions like the above. Try to stick to the thread topic.

_________________________

 

swallow wrote:

Not furious at all, personally - I'm mostly happy at the chance for a government that may for once be willing to listen to Canadians. But I do think it's worth giving credit to the NDP in parliament for changing some views in the general public. Polls showed strong support for C-51, until the NDP used the parliamentary soapbox to challenge it. Views shifted as the isues became better known. Opinion shifted on the war in the Middle East as the NDP raised fact-based aspects - even the Liberal party was forced to change its view. The NDP was not good at capitalizing on its work in parliament, but it certainly acted as an efective opposition on that and a number of files. And then, the Liberals out-campaigned the hell out of them, framing issues better, talking better, offering "sunny ways" better. But the political climate for the Liberal win owes something to the NDP's work on issues during the last parliament, which helped shift support away from the Cons and towards those who wanted a change of government. It's the NDP's misfortune that there's little public memory of their work in parliament, just a msssive appetitye for change that the NDP did a lot to foster and of which the Liberals were the main beneficiaries. 

I have long considered the House to be a waste of time and money - especially in a system where party leaders dictate how their MPs vote, and even more especially in majority government situations where votes are irrelevant.

But I must say you've made some persuasive points there, swallow. I'm not changing my mind just yet, but you've given me pause. The NDP did do some decent work on some files, and that may well have influenced public opinion, and even the Liberal party, in a positive direction.

 

JKR

Quote:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/liberals-and-ndp-might-not-...

As Peggy Nash had said “The thought that the third party would leap over and form government wasn’t anything anyone expected,”

These kinds of unrealistic statements make me think that the NDP needs a whole new slate of people running the party in order for it to function in a professional manner. Anyone familiar with the opinion polls that have come out during last few years since Trudeau became Liberal leader should have known that the Liberals had a good shot at winning this election if they ran a better campaign than the NDP.

terrytowel

NDP Supporter Robert Wiseman just tweeted

NDP won't lose press coverage as 3rd Party! National media never respected their role as Official Opposition anyway! Treated Liberals as if OO (Official Opposition)!

https://twitter.com/RobertAWiseman/status/659063191788503040

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

terrytowel wrote:

NDP Supporter Robert Wiseman just tweeted

NDP won't lose press coverage as 3rd Party! National media never respected their role as Official Opposition anyway! Treated Liberals as if OO (Official Opposition)!

https://twitter.com/RobertAWiseman/status/659063191788503040

Why does this matter? I've never heard of this guy? Is he a big shot. His tweet didn't seem furious to me. Is this supposed to be an example of ferocity?

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

KarlL wrote:

swallow wrote:

...even the Liebral party was foprced to change its view. 

So, I keep seeing the term "Liebral" used regularly on this site - not in relationship to some actual Liberal mendacity (which would be fair enough) but just as a general descriptor for Liberals/the Liberal Party.  

Sean had said at one point that it is only an oft-repeated typo but if so, there is quite a bit of muscle memory on here in hitting the keys in that order. And here it is again from Swallow.

I wonder how quickly a Mod would step in if I were to make half of my references to NDPers or the NDP as "lying New Democrats". I don't actually believe that of course, so wouldn't say it but it does strike me that it is an insult and one more in keeping with the comments section of the Sun newspapers.

 

I don't believe Liebral is one of the typos I have made (check with Unionist, he keeps a pretty close eye on my misdeeds...), but it doesn't offend me in the least because it is, to my mind, quite accurate. As I stated to everyone who asked me why I wasn't switching my vote to Liberal in order to see Joan Crockatt in Calgary Centre defeated (and the only real challenge was from the Liberals this time around) I replied along the lines of "The Liberal Party is made up of serial liars especially when it comes to election promises. I am old enough to remember the 'no wage and price controls' lie, the 'we will withdraw from NAFTA' lie, the 'we will repeal the GST' lie and, of course the collection of lies that constituted 'the Red Book' - I cannot see myself voting for a party that has, in every important election in my life, lied to the voters like the Liberals have."

I am not saying each and every federal Liberal lies, but the party as a whole has to bear responsibility for their history of lying to the electorate. Listening to a Liberal apologist whine about having this pointed out is, to me, similar to an apologist whining about me having referred to someone as a scab, complaining that the term is hateful and they want to be referred to as a replacement worker. If you don't want an odious label attached to you, stop doing odious things - and stop being an apologist for them.

That any party has changed leaders does not absolve them of their history. The Progressive Conservatives in Alberta deserve contempt for pretending that the party magically changed each time a new leader was selected over their generation in office, the federal Liberals deserve the same level of contempt, they have been lying just as long.

I am quite happy to pre-judge the current Liberal crop... I think the onus is on them to prove me wrong. Until then, I will continue to think of them as the party of serial liars.

Ciabatta2

terrytowel wrote:

New Democrats have a visceral dislike of Liberals, whom they consider cynical and smug and untrustworthy opportunists, at the best of times. (A common refrain: “With Tories, at least you know where you stand.”) That’s amplified by anger at the prospect of somehow ranking behind Justin Trudeau, whom they perceive as a lightweight epitome of Liberal entitlement. The lack of respect for Mr. Trudeau has been evident in many of Mr. Mulcair’s public performances, particularly in leaders’ debates, and all the more so in private conversations with some of his officials.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/liberals-and-ndp-might-not-...

As Peggy Nash had said “The thought that the third party would leap over and form government wasn’t anything anyone expected,”

This is nothing but your opinion and does not respond to my post, respond to the quotes in your original post, or have anything to do with your original thread.  Please try to stay on topic.  Particularly in your own threads

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

bagkitty wrote:

I don't believe Liebral is one of the typos I have made (check with Unionist, he keeps a pretty close eye on my misdeeds...), but it doesn't offend me in the least because it is, to my mind, quite accurate. As I stated to everyone who asked me why I wasn't switching my vote to Liberal in order to see Joan Crockatt in Calgary Centre defeated (and the only real challenge was from the Liberals this time around) I replied along the lines of "The Liberal Party is made up of serial liars especially when it comes to election promises. I am old enough to remember the 'no wage and price controls' lie, the 'we will withdraw from NAFTA' lie, the 'we will repeal the GST' lie and, of course the collection of lies that constituted 'the Red Book' - I cannot see myself voting for a party that has, in every important election in my life, lied to the voters like the Liberals have."

I am not saying each and every federal Liberal lies, but the party as a whole has to bear responsibility for their history of lying to the electorate. Listening to a Liberal apologist whine about having this pointed out is, to me, similar to an apologist whining about me having referred to someone as a scab, complaining that the term is hateful and they want to be referred to as a replacement worker. If you don't want an odious label attached to you, stop doing odious things - and stop being an apologist for them.

That any party has changed leaders does not absolve them of their history. The Progressive Conservatives in Alberta deserve contempt for pretending that the party magically changed each time a new leader was selected over their generation in office, the federal Liberals deserve the same level of contempt, they have been lying just as long.

I am quite happy to pre-judge the current Liberal crop... I think the onus is on them to prove me wrong. Until then, I will continue to think of them as the party of serial liars.

+1

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Ciabatta2 wrote:

This is nothing but your opinion and does not respond to my post, respond to the quotes in your original post, or have anything to do with your original thread.  Please try to stay on topic.  Particularly in your own threads

+1

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Before people call the Liberals liars,keep in mind that the Conservative Senate will be a huge obstacle in getting things done,including amending C-51. It's an obstacle that would handcuff the NDP as well.

Harper might be gone but his cronies in the senate remain with power.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Arthur Cramer wrote:
[

quote=terrytowel]

NDP Supporter Robert Wiseman just tweeted

NDP won't lose press coverage as 3rd Party! National media never respected their role as Official Opposition anyway! Treated Liberals as if OO (Official Opposition)!

https://twitter.com/RobertAWiseman/status/659063191788503040

Why does this matter? I've never heard of this guy? Is he a big shot. His tweet didn't seem furious to me. Is this supposed to be an example of ferocity?

Well Terrytowel? Answer the question. What does quoting some random individual prove? My cat doesn't like maccaroni and cheese. Should I recount that and ask why do Cats hat maccaroni?