PM and Ignatieff 'saved the NDP from itself'

Cueball wrote:

I don't really see the point of attacking people for their presumed political affiliations. As far as I can tell Debater says he is one of those NDP/Liberal swing voters the party is trying to attract to the fold. This thread top to bottom is filled with attacks ad hominem, and its a shame that people can't stick to the issues.

I didn't see anything in the user policy about this being an NDP partisan board, only.

You make some good points, Cueball.

I voted for the NDP as recently as the Paul Martin years.  I disliked what Paul Martin did to the Liberals and the fact that he drove a number of left of centre Liberals such as Sheila Copps and Allan Rock out of the party.  I also worked on Ed Broadbent's comeback campaign around the same time.

I do sometimes vote Liberal when I feel it is the best option or the best way to defeat the Conservatives.  I don't mind some criticism of the Liberals or how they sometimes get too right of centre.  It's important that the Liberals face reality in certain ways in which they are not as progressive as they should be.  I am not that enthusiastic about Michael Ignatieff the way I was about Pierre Trudeau, and Ignatieff also lacks some of the progressive qualities of not just Trudeau, but Pearson and even Chretien.

But right now I do see Ignatieff as possibly the best way to get rid of Stephen Harper, who I feel is the most loathsome PM during my lifetime.  I dislike him even more than Mulroney.  

What I don't like here from certain posters is some of the antipathy and almost hatred towards all things Liberal and some of the snarky and patronising comments I often see.  It just makes me more likely to vote Liberal in the next election which is the way I am leaning these days as the way to get rid of Harper.

Kloch wrote:

I still haven't had my original question answered which was for some one to constructively address Caplan's argument without mentioning how old he is.  I still wait.

I haven't seen anyone mention how old Caplan is. How old is he anyways? i have no idea. Caplan doesn't actually have an argument so there is nothing to address. All his did was right an incoherent stream of consciousness that culminated in saying that the NDP should fire its strategists - with no reason given as to why.

If Caplan actually had an argument in the first place, there might be something to address.

When Layton first became leader, he led the NDP to 19 seats. Now they have 37 - which approach was more effective. Duceppe has seen support for his party steadily drop for several elections in a row - he didn't "destroy" the Tories, they simply destrpyed themselves by adopting policies that were particularly unpopular in Quebec but wildly popular in the rest of the country. Crime may be a strong issue for the Tories in western Canada but it was never a strong issue for them in Quebec in the first place.

Quote:

he didn't "destroy" the Tories, they simply destrpyed themselves by adopting policies that were particularly unpopular in Quebec but wildly popular in the rest of the country.

Bullshit, you should really learn to give credit where its due.  If Duceppe had followed the NDP's lead and ceded crime as an issue that the Cons owned than the backlash in Quebec wouldn't have had the same strength and it wouldn't have hurt the Cons anywhere near as much.  Before Duceppe went on the offensive, almost every pundit in Canada was writing the Bloc's obituary.  We don't know how unpopular Duceppe's approach was in the ROC, I know a lot of people who would have voted for them if they could have.  Hitting your enemy where it hurts might look easy after the fact but its not something the NDP has been very competent at and its a skill they should really work on improving. For a 'left' leaning fourth place party, there is an incredible aversion to taking strong, aggressive and principled stands.

Quote:

When Layton first became leader, he led the NDP to 19 seats. Now they have 37 - which approach was more effective.

Obviously there are multiple variables at play in the different elections but I'm not saying Layton's rookie approach of making bold criticisms and then backing down as soon as the media attacked him was a good strategy.  Duceppe demonstrated how Layton should have handled the elite 'outrage' at his 'impolite' homeless comment.  Canadians actually have a pretty high threshold when it comes to poltiicans that show a bit of fire and arrogance.

Stockholm wrote:

Duceppe has seen support for his party steadily drop for several elections in a row - he didn't "destroy" the Tories, they simply destrpyed themselves by adopting policies that were particularly unpopular in Quebec 

Stockholm is correct - Duceppe and the BQ benefit when the 2 big parties destroy themselves with big scandals in Quebec, otherwise things don't go so well for the BQ.

After the 1993 election in which the BQ swept in with 54 seats, they dropped down to 44 seats in 1997 in Duceppe first election.  In Duceppe's second election in 2000, the BQ dropped further to 38 seats and was beaten by Chretien in the popular vote.  In both of these elections there was no issue threatening Quebec culture and no scandal for Duceppe to use.

However, when the Sponsorship Scandal exploded on the Liberals in 2004, Duceppe was able to move back up to 54 seats, and was able to retain 51 seats in 2006 when the Sponorship Scandal continued.  Had the scandal not happened, the BQ would have lost a huge amount of seats to Martin as polls pre-Sponsorship were predicting.

Then in 2008 when the BQ was at risk of losing a lot of seats to the Conservatives, the BQ was saved by Harper's inflammatory remarks about artists and crime.  This allowed the BQ to retain their seats and end up with 49.  (Their popular vote dropped again though as Stockholm said - they went from 49% in 2004, to 42% in 2006 to 38% in 2008.)

Now the BQ is back to the same situation  again in the next election, this time they risk losing seats to the Liberals as they did in 1997 and 2000 (and to a small extent in 2008).  In order for the BQ to prevent losing seats to the Liberals, they will need the Liberals to destroy themselves with another scandal involving the party or Ignatieff.  If not, Duceppe will probably lose ground again.

Stockholm wrote:

Kloch wrote:

I still haven't had my original question answered which was for some one to constructively address Caplan's argument without mentioning how old he is.  I still wait.

 

I haven't seen anyone mention how old Caplan is. How old is he anyways? i have no idea. Caplan doesn't actually have an argument so there is nothing to address. All his did was right an incoherent stream of consciousness that culminated in saying that the NDP should fire its strategists - with no reason given as to why.

If Caplan actually had an argument in the first place, there might be something to address.

You called him a dinosaur in an earlier post.  I assume by that you mean that he is very old.  If you don't, please feel free to clarify. 

Caplan's piece stated that the NDP was bereft of ideas.  If the NDP has new ideas that will dramatically alter Canadian society for the benefit of working people that we will implement when elected, then this should be pretty easy to prove.

As I mentioned earlier, the federal party does have a policy section, but it is a little bit light on details, compared to the Liberal women's caucus page. 

Kloch wrote:

I still haven't had my original question answered which was for some one to constructively address Caplan's argument... 

Caplan's piece stated that the NDP was bereft of ideas.  If the NDP has new ideas that will dramatically alter Canadian society for the benefit of working people that we will implement when elected, then this should be pretty easy to prove.

This has been said before, but Caplan doesn't have an argument.

'The NDP is short of ideas' is a statement, and not an illuminating one.

The Liberals are short of ideas too. Big deal.

That's not the stuff of a column/blog that is a running commentary on party strategies... and which you do get from the other 2 commentators.

In keeping with what is expected he could have said something like: why I think the NDPs shortage of ideas is holding it back, and where they could start doing something about it.