Weak-kneed James drops winning "Axe the Tax" strategy

My antipathy to Carole James, is that I see her as a tool of her political advisors. Getting to the truth involves taking risks which is not something any "political consultant" will ever advise. It involves seeing "opportunity where most politicians see only risk".    The spectacular failure of the NDP 2009 campaign was a bad case of "playing it safe" in my opinion.
 
Obama is taking up where Corky Evans left off: "trying to restore to our politics a discourse that's sophisticated and even in many ways difficult".
 
======================================================
 
Comments on Obama's Cairo speech (Tomasky, Guardian online):
 
We've seen several of these big speeches by Barack Obama now – the race speech, the stadium-rock convention address, several others. And now, today's historic address in Cairo. Can we ascribe any common characteristics to them by now?
 
We can, and I think the main fact of these speeches – certainly the main fact of this speech – is that Obama sees opportunity where most politicians see only risk. And, whether you like him or not, no one can accuse the guy of taking the easy way out. He seeks that opportunity by trying to restore to our politics a discourse that's sophisticated and even in many ways difficult.
 
Here's what I mean. Think of the risks involved in even giving this speech from the perspective of, say, a typical political consultant. Any modern-day political advisor, in America or Britain or anywhere in the west, would say that going to the Muslim world and delivering a speech including the tough sentences this speech did about Palestinian violence was evidence of a political death-wish ("It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered").

Quote:

I agree -- going to the Middle East and making that speech is brave and a good comparison with Carole James opposition to the carbon tax.  Sometimes you have to tell the ideologues in your own party "No, I know it is a tax and I know we like taxes but this one is unfair and hurts people and does nothing for the environment so we can't support it."

=========================

Carole James opposition to the carbon tax was not "brave and good". It was a poll readers/politicial consultant's attempt at scavenging a few votes.  Going into the 2009 campaign the Carbon Tax was a non-issue, and trying to make it an issue was a major distraction from the major issues of voter concern. "Axe the Tax", and the predictable negative reactions, wasted the first week of the campaign and put the NDP on the back foot. It was a craven attempt at buying votes that damaged the integrity of the NDP. INTEGRITY and trust, not policy details, are the main issue for most voters. Promoting Axe the Tax was seen as opportunistic, not a brave alternative vision of how to manage carbon consumption. 

Carole James flip flop on the Carbon Tax is one of a few "flip-flops" going back to the MLA pension scandal in 2005. For some it may be disappointing. I see it as consistent with her dismal record as leader of the NDP.

What will be effective for the environment?  What replacement for the carbon tax do you have in mind? Also, what is a regressive tax?  If everyone gets 100 bux back, doesn't that mean that those who use more pay more?  So for poor people who use little carbon, it will be revinue positive and for rich people who heat 10,000 sq ft houses, it will be revinue negative.   How is that regressive?

Big Daddy wrote:

 Carole's flip flop on the carbon tax is a disappointment because the Carbon Tax will do didly shit to help the environment.  Even a "fair" Carbon Tax (whatever that is because it is by its very nature a regressive tax -- hey aren't lefties opposed to those?!) is no good because people in BC get nailed for natural gas, gasoline, and electricity consumptionb but our neighbours to the south buying our energy don't.  Sometimes, you have to tell the ideologues to shut up, in a diplomatic way of course, which is what Obama has learned in the US.

Apparently "Big Daddy" thinks Carole James is actually too radical, not too conservative, and Glen Clark was a big winner.  Hmm, where have we heard that before...? 

Also, "Daddy", the left supports taxing the rich to pay for the social needs of society.  The left doesn't tax because it "likes taxes".

I wonder which cubicle at Canwest Big Daddy is sitting in when he posts this stuff?

The election is over. I think you'd have to be a churlish fool not to recognize when its time to admit defeat. I agreed with opposing the carbon tax because I honestly think that its a bad inneffective policy, but I also recognize that four years from now it will have been in place for so long that no one will care that much about getting rid of it and the government will be used to the revenue stream.

Similarly, the opposition parties in Ontario fought hard against the amalgamation of Toronto, but no one seriously thinks that the Ontario NDP should now advocate re-creating the six borough and dissolving Toronto. I realize that this is an overused metaphor, but you can't put toothpaste back in a toothpaste tube.

Ken Burch wrote:

Usually, that used to lead into a smug, gloating taunt about the good old days of the "welfare-hating, poor-bashing ass-kicking NDP", or something like that, as if it was an inspired bit of strategy for a left-of-center party to attack and betray those who were most likely to vote for it(or the "left wing activists" who did all the real work during election campaigns), or that it made sense for a left-of-center party to create a pointless division between working class people and the poor, even though doing that always drove the NDP vote total down.

And the truth is, Dave Barrett was on the side of the poor, and DIDN'T bash them.

Hi Ken Burch, no you're right about that, the BC NDP is definietly being led in the wrong direction by the James gang and the small self protecting clique leading her on. (danger with newleaders with few roots in the provincial party)  I, as usual, get caught in the middle between those who attack the party on "principle" and those who'd rather see the NDP turned into Liberal lite, screw the consequences.  To save time I'll just say here that your idea on another thread Re attracting more voters out and Trying to change minds is much better than constantly sucking up to those who'd probably never vote NDP anyhow. I should have made it clear at the time. The good news is that the "centre" in BC is actuially no larger segment of voters than the general left, which is one thing that could be exploited in getting the party at least a couple steps back to its more activist roots.

Brian White wrote:

People will attack me for saying it but james female only candidacy policy pisses off the male activists that go to peoples doors and engage them.  If you lose your activists, you have nothing.  The guys will not feel too happy if they are just thought of as drones that serve the queen.  Thats fine for insects.  James seems to think the way forward is to have servile female mla's and servile male activists. And the servile voting public will vote for that?  Seems that they do not. There can only be one queen bee and the rest must honour her!  Not how politics works.  By all means have a female leader of the provincial ndp.

Just not Carole James.

You right you will get called out for your sexist BS. And really who gives a shit what the male activists think about equity measures, if there are any even. The only men I have heard speak against it are sexist male supremists.

If it was not carole james, but another woman, you and others like oyu, would saying the same goddamned thing about the other woman leader.

And BTW more WOMEN than men support the NDP, so in fact your advocacy would alienate women activists, and spell the demise of the BCNDP yet again, but seeing as how you are a Green Party  supporter perhaps that is what you are going for?

if Adriane Dix, or another like him get in as leader, after ousting James, I would not be voting NDP. In fact, I might actually campaign and vote for Gordo, as I would be so pissed.

I voted for Denice Savoe and am very happy with her as mp. Oliva Chow asked James to support pro rep.  I do not think James even acknoweleged the asking.

Which is, to put it mildly, ignorant.  She is no friend of women,.  She treated Chow like shit. Imagine how she treats women who are lower on here social ladder than she is.

And how could you think of ever voting for gordo?  Are you moving to vancouver?

remind wrote:

Brian White wrote:

People will attack me for saying it but james female only candidacy policy pisses off the male activists that go to peoples doors and engage them.  If you lose your activists, you have nothing.  The guys will not feel too happy if they are just thought of as drones that serve the queen.  Thats fine for insects.  James seems to think the way forward is to have servile female mla's and servile male activists. And the servile voting public will vote for that?  Seems that they do not. There can only be one queen bee and the rest must honour her!  Not how politics works.  By all means have a female leader of the provincial ndp.

Just not Carole James.

You right you will get called out for your sexist BS. And really who gives a shit what the male activists think about equity measures, if there are any even. The only men I have heard speak against it are sexist male supremists.

If it was not carole james, but another woman, you and others like oyu, would saying the same goddamned thing about the other woman leader.

And BTW more WOMEN than men support the NDP, so in fact your advocacy would alienate women activists, and spell the demise of the BCNDP yet again, but seeing as how you are a Green Party  supporter perhaps that is what you are going for?

if Adriane Dix, or another like him get in as leader, after ousting James, I would not be voting NDP. In fact, I might actually campaign and vote for Gordo, as I would be so pissed.

 

Brian White wrote:

I voted for Denice Savoe and am very happy with her as mp. Oliva Chow asked James to support pro rep.  I do not think James even acknoweleged the asking.

And she should not have acknowleged it either,  I lost a lot of respect for Chow over that.

Quote:

Which is, to put it mildly, ignorant. 

BS, Chow had no business doing what she did.

Quote:

She is no friend of women,. 

Oh... and you as a woman would know this? FFS, get a grip, who are you, as a man, to say such sexist shit?

Quote:

She treated Chow like shit.

Quote:

Imagine how she treats women who are lower on here social ladder than she is.

Really, you are moving into the area of defamation here. And your comments as a white male are really ignorant and sexist.

Quote:

And how could you think of ever voting for gordo?  Are you moving to vancouver?

Pffft, and I suppose you think you were clever with that one!

Quote:

And really who gives a shit what the male activists think about equity measures, if there are any even. The only men I have heard speak against it are sexist male supremists.

Wow, that is a broad statement. So any man who disagrees with you on this policy issue is a "sexist male supremist."

What about the many women who also opposed this policy? In my riding we had virtually unanimous opposition to this policy, from members of both sexes. Are the women who oppose this policy also sexist male supremacists?

This policy had opposition, and support, from both sexes. The idea that everyone who opposes it is a sexist male supremacist is as unfair as saying that everyone who supports it is a man-hating feminazi. Neither statement is true.

From what I have seen, both those who support this policy, and those who oppose, are generally fair-minded people who simply have different views on how best to achieve a more balanced gender representation among candidates.

I was at the convention when this resolution was debated and passed, and it had about 60-65% support. So are you saying that 35-40% of the BC NDP are sexist male supremacists?

I think it is unfortunate that we have to resort to name-calling and attacks against the personal integrity of our New Democrat sisters and brothers simply because we disagree on an internal policy issue.

Perhaps speak to Mike Farnsworth about  pushing tough on crime eh!

And I hear you about Sustainable BC, but why those within the NDP who created it, not pushing James toward it?

Why was it not linked to here during the election so it could be pushed?

"And really who gives a shit what the male activists think about equity measures, if there are any even."

Wow, just wow.

"if Adriane Dix, or another like him get in as leader, after ousting James, I would not be voting NDP. In fact, I might actually campaign and vote for Gordo, as I would be so pissed."

While this would be a good thing, I call BS.

Having bumped into a climatogist who went to BC to campaign for the Carbon Tax on behalf of the Liberal Government and had also done so for the Federal Liberals. I asked him, why he supported the Campbell/Dion Carbon Tax.  He talked all about "Climate Change" and increased floods, bigger hurricanes, numerous increases in Tornados and small islands disappearing.  So I asked, "why has protecting the environment" been degraded to a simplistic tax policy scheme. His answer was that he wasn't an economist but, they said it was the best way. I suggested to him, that Economists are not Climatoligists, and if this is the solution to global warming, then put a fork in it, the world is cooked, bend over and kiss your ass goodbye.  

genstrike wrote:

Perhaps I'm a little more cynical than you, but I think the decision has already been made to be the status quo/kindler, gentler Liberal Party.  The only issue is that they need to put up just barely enough of a progressive front to keep people thinking they are different and keep the progressive/leftie activists on board.  Of course, they don't need to put in too much of an effort as they can always appeal to being the lesser evil and electorally-minded lefties and disgruntled social democrats don't have anywhere else to go, at least not anywhere that is electorally successful.

I wouldn't say it's a progressive front.  In provinces where they form governments from time to time, they are more of a 'big tent' party than a progressive party.  They have a lot of interests to keep happy and that isn't easy.  That's one of the reasons I like PR.  Small parties can be in tune with particular constituencies and still elect members.

What I find truly asinine is the ridiculous extent to which certain NDP supporters go in order to demonize the Green Party.  (Did you know that Jane Sterk's cousin's brother-in-law's uncle once acquired a Liberal membership when he was drunk and thought he was being recruited to be a freemason?  There.  That PROVES that the Green Party and all their supporters are closet neoconservatives plotting to patent photosynthesis and license the air we breathe).