NDP nomination news

OK, now could I ask what needs to be done for a serious run in Lewis' old Scarborough seat ... albeit I realize the demographics have undoubtedly changed significantly in the interim.  Our new 2008 candidate Alamgir Hussain held most of the earlier vote, but the Greens and Conservatives were also up a bit.  It's still our best Scarborough seat, and the newly elected Liberal Michelle Simpson is a party hack who got appointed if I'm not mistaken and is singularly unimpressive (although she has a little mini non-story on Twitter right now about how she is publicly releasing her MPs' expenses).  We hardly spent anything in there ... I wonder if a more serious campaign could pull that vote up from 18-23% into something competitive.

The NDP is going to do better next time in Scarborough SW, if only because the Tamil community was furious over Ignatieff's silence on the bloodletting in Sri Lanka. The NDP needs to leverage this disappointment in moving the seat into a competitive place. The party, which was in touch with the Tamil community throughout the Sri Lankan crisis, would be best positioned to figure out how to do this. It is also worth noting that any Tamil-targetting strategy is a tide that lifts all boats in Scarborough, given the community's prominence and dispersion across the region. I hope the party drops some change on a Scarborough area election hire that can either assist with media or organising and is perfectly erudite in written and spoken Tamil. In general, such an employee could help with shifting some votes in greater Toronto, Montreal, and probably a couple other cities. Anyone know how to find out what the top 10 Tamil ridings in Canada would be?

Also, looks like a contested nomination between Mike Sullivan and Paul Ferreira with both committed to back the winner 100% would be a good shot in the arm for the NDP riding association in York-South Weston. Similsrly a contested nomination in Etobicoke North between Ali Naqvi and Mohamed Boudjenane with the party promising some real support to the winner would be very interesting.

Lord Palmerston wrote:

The best riding for Stephen Lewis might be Beaches-East York and I don't know if he'd be a good fit for Davenport.  I really doubt he has any interest in being a politician again though.

I've been hearing Avi might be interested in running one day.  Avi Lewis and Naomi Klein used to live up the street from me, but they moved out a while ago, I believe to High Park.

Stephen would be incredible, but I'm sure he won't do it.  I'd take Naomi over Avi any day as a candidate - she is a global progressive icon and would be a likely winner in either P-HP or Beaches - EY, not sure about Davenport, but again, she would not likely want to run, unfortunately.  Avi has some currency but not sure he could beat Kennedy or even Minna, he just doesn't have the profile, stature or depth that Naomi does.

ottawaobserver wrote:

Madmax, the issue of first nations turnout in Kenora is the killer.  The ID requirements really hurt in that riding, and although Cameron was successful in at least getting Elections Canada to recognize a letter from the Band Council as proof of residence, you can also imagine that this was hardly a panacea.  That section of the Elections Act truly has to be fixed (and SHAME on the Liberals for supporting it in the first place).

V.Jara, Kamloops was a heartbreak, but Michael Crawford is the right kind of candidate to take it (like Nelson, he's a college teacher).  The Liberal vote there just tanked last time, and usually Kamloops is one of the few pockets of Liberal support in the BC Interior.  I hope Crawford gives it one more go, because that might be the charm.

Can't comment knowledgably on the Surrey-Delta seats you name, but I thought that, given he was nominated at the last minute, Rachid Arab held as much of Penny's vote as you could expect in Surrey North running against Cadman's widow.  Dona hasn't exactly been a strong presence in the House (nor I suspect in BC) since then, though, and might be easier to take on this time.  The other seat to hope for would be Newton-North Delta, and I would have thought we had a strong candidate in Theresa Townsley, the deputy school board chair, but she was the only major candidate who wasn't Sikh, and perhaps that hurt.

I agree with you on Corky.  Boy would he shake up Ottawa.  I could see him as a real east-west north-south tag-team with Charlie Angus.

Anyways, I'm enjoying all this speculation if nothing more ... any other good ideas?

I've long pushed for Corky to run federally, and I don't think it's that big a deal if he runs in a neighbouring seat, Corky is a beloved figure throughout the Kootenays (and most of BC for that matter).  I also was disappointed in Newton North-Delta, not sure why we went down in 2008 compared to 2006 there.  In terms of Surrey NDP MLAs, I can see Sue Hammell and maybe Jagrup Brar going federal at some point.  Hammell has done it all in Victoria and might be up for a new challenge, Brar has enough presence to be competitive in Surrey North.  I think Ralston and Bains are exclusively focused on the provincial scene, same for Getner in Delta North.  Bob Simpson would be another good MP candidate in Cariboo-Prince George if he ever gets tired of BC politics.

Harcourt is like Stephen Lewis - never going to run again for anything.  Jim Green might have been a good candidate for Vancouver Centre at one point but the post-Larry Campbell era has not been kind to Jim, and I think his time has passed.  Heather Deal is a popular Vision Vancouver city councillor with a good green profile - she would be a strong NDP candidate for Vancouver Centre, no idea if she'd be interested.  Kerry Jang is another Vancouver councillor who has long been courted to run federally, I think he was going to run in Kingsway at one point...another one to keep in mind down the road, maybe for when Libby retires from Vancouver East.  Gabriel Yu and Victor Wong are other possibilties for federal candidates, don't know where they would run though.

We absolutely need to get some strong federal NDP candidates from the Indo-Canadian and Chinese-Canadian communities in the Lower Mainland, our current BC caucus is stellar but not at all diverse ethnically, and that needs to change soon.  

Yes, Byers is running again in Centre, I was just speculating broadly on possible fed NDP candidates down the road.  With Vancouver East and Kingsway already NDP and Quadra and Vancouver-South not competitive, Centre is the only remaining Vancouver riding for potential new candidates to run in.  Byers is fine and I hope he wins but somebody like Deal might have a better profile and fit for this riding.  Byers isn't nominated yet so there is always the slim chance of a contested nomination, would likely be healthy for the NDP if it was contested.

Good news about Cadman and Surrey North - but that is not the only riding by any means where the NDP should aggressively recruit Indo-Canadian candidates.  Newton North-Delta, Vancouver South and Fleewood-Port Kells are among the many Lower Mainland ridings where this would be desirable.

West Coast Lefty wrote:

Good news about Cadman and Surrey North - but that is not the only riding by any means where the NDP should aggressively recruit Indo-Canadian candidates.  Newton North-Delta, Vancouver South and Fleewood-Port Kells are among the many Lower Mainland ridings where this would be desirable.

Hear, hear.

Nice work OO. Virtually all of those ridings are middle to low income places where the NDP is completely absent. Interesting.

How does Derek Lee keep Rouge River, the single most ethnically diverse riding in the country?

I don't know about abscent,  as in:

Scarborough - Rouge River, the NDP have increased their votes shares every election since 2000. In fact  by 10% since 2000. You add 14 k worth of former Liberal voters to the NDP, and take that away from the Liberals and the NDP win. And the rest of the Scarboroughs showed increased trends towards the NDP vote share too. Still low but not abscent.

Same too for Markham, it has increased its support for the nDP by over 8% since 2000. However, it would be a 3 way race if the Tamil vote went NDP.

Didn't bother checking the rest as the trend seems pretty clear from 2000, NDP vote shares are going steadily up in most all that I checked.

*tks pundit's guide for the numbers.

ottawaobserver wrote:

How does Derek Lee keep Rouge River, the single most ethnically diverse riding in the country?

What do you mean how does he "keep" it?  It's the safest Liberal seat in Scarborough from what I can tell - I expect that's how.

No - that's not what I was saying, that is your interpretation.  I was saying that the reason he wins it is because it's the safest Liberal seat in the area and therefore because he is the Liberal there, he wins it, regardless of whether he is a strong MP or not.  That's the reality of safe seats for all parties.

It's just like when you are the Conservative nominee in Wild Rose - once you have the nomination, you have the seat.  It's not necessarily fair, but that's just the way it works.

Also given the riding demographics, I wouldn't be surprised if the surname "Lee" has been advantageous, i.e. voters mistaking him for being of Chinese origin.

Though I kinda wonder how the NDP (and the Tories, for that matter) would have done in SRR in 2004 had Raymond Cho not run as an independent...

V. Jara wrote:

I disagree about Avi. He would have an advantage over Naomi in that he would have less in print that could be brought up to paint him as a wild-eyed leftist extremist, which is what I suspect the tack would be if Naomi ran. Avi would also be running in a friendly riding and would start off with more political capital than some of the NDPers that have been able to win in the past- therefore at a slight advantage.

And on top of everything, we mustn't forget Avi's TV career as the cornerstone to what makes him, perhaps, even more of a positively "known" quantity than Naomi.  He truly does have a disarming magic combo of lefty-pleasing grey matter and "common reach"--the kind of stuff that'd easily bring "Adam Vaughan Liberals" on-side--and excuse my boldness, but if Avi were to ultimately replace Jack as federal NDP leader, the effect could be electrifying.  Heck, even now, imagine an Avi versus Steve + Iggy in the throes of an election.

When it comes Avi's present home turf: barring a star like him, who would run against Gerard Kennedy?  (Is Rowena Santos preparing for a federal run?)

Debater wrote:

You think Byers is fine?

I liked his stance on shutting down the tar sands, but his view on Omar Khadr (getting a "Canadian trial") was outrageous and I don't really like how he seemed to be want to "Obama-ify" the party (i.e. saying how the NDP should be renamed the Democratic Party and how there were such similarities between Obama and Layton, etc.  And he did much worse than Svend Robinson even though everyone seemed how Svend was such a bad choice and Byers would be such a star.   Byers probably under-performed more than any other NDP candidate.

Stockholm wrote:

Being leader of a party is not some easy little job where just any reasonably bright person can just "wing it". It takes YEARS of practice in politics at several levels to learn how to campaign, how to handle the media, how to have an encyclopedic knowledge of just about every major area of public policy etc... I could see Avi Lewis leader after the leader after the leader after Jack Layton - once the guy has actually run for something and been elected and been through the political ringer.

I don't know if I'm missing something, but I didn't throw out Avi Lewis as a successor to Layton.  I suggested him running for the position of MP.  The reason I mention Avi Lewis rather than Naomi Klein is because I have read that Avi seems more interested in running for office, while Naomi doesn't seem interested.   Either would be great.

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Stockholm wrote:

Being leader of a party is not some easy little job where just any reasonably bright person can just "wing it". It takes YEARS of practice in politics at several levels to learn how to campaign, how to handle the media, how to have an encyclopedic knowledge of just about every major area of public policy etc... I could see Avi Lewis leader after the leader after the leader after Jack Layton - once the guy has actually run for something and been elected and been through the political ringer.

I don't know if I'm missing something, but I didn't throw out Avi Lewis as a successor to Layton.  I suggested him running for the position of MP.  The reason I mention Avi Lewis rather than Naomi Klein is because I have read that Avi seems more interested in running for office, while Naomi doesn't seem interested.   Either would be great.

I'm the one who implied him as a Layton successor/substitute--but more for the sake of hypothetical argument and against the present LibCon competition, than as something to be imposed right here, right now.  Though yes, for that to "work", it'd make much more sense if Avi ran for federal office and won in 2004, which'd have given him at least a bit of seasoning time...

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Debater wrote:

You think Byers is fine?

I liked his stance on shutting down the tar sands, but his view on Omar Khadr (getting a "Canadian trial") was outrageous and I don't really like how he seemed to be want to "Obama-ify" the party (i.e. saying how the NDP should be renamed the Democratic Party and how there were such similarities between Obama and Layton, etc.  And he did much worse than Svend Robinson even though everyone seemed how Svend was such a bad choice and Byers would be such a star.   Byers probably under-performed more than any other NDP candidate.

Yes, that's why I said above I don't think Byers was a good candidate for the NDP.  He performed less well than Svend Robinson and Kennedy Stewart and had the lowest NDP result in Van Centre since 2000.  Stewart has been the strongest NDP candidate so far in that riding.

Byers also needs to quit while he's ahead.  Even after finishing 3rd in Van Center he still was stirring the pot after the election by saying that Hedy Fry is getting on in years and probably wouldn't be running again so he would have a better chance next time.  Now as far as I know, Hedy Fry has not officially decided what she is doing in the next election yet, but hearing someone imply she will be retiring soon will make it tempting for her to run again!

As adma says though, one thing Byers did have to contend with is the Adrienne Carr effect which did triple Green support in Van Centre and may have taken away from the NDP.

Surprisingly enough, even high spending Green campaigns generally do not run veru serious ground campaigns. Including May's 2 year running ULTRA high spending Central Nova campaign in that NOT category.

But Carr's campaign DID spend substantially on voter contact. I have no idea how effective they were- but regardless, most likely they learned from that effort.

Stockholm wrote:

All that being said, it seems clear that the so-called greens have peaked and are fast sliding into total irrelevance and will be lucky to get 3% of the vote next time. 

Given that polls haven't yet shown that kind of tailspin negative momentum and, in fact, the Greens are so far more or less holding on to their '08 share numbers, I wouldn't jump to that kind of (wishful?) conclusion--yet.

And you may also need an assist from Elizabeth May resigning her leadership on behalf of a no-name and/or the Greens being barred from the next election debates to cinch something like a Mel Hurtig-esque lucky-to-get 3%.  Plus, perhaps, raising the minimum voting age to 30 so that the millennial idealists who've come into political age thinking that it's cool rather than granola-fringy to vote Green will be factored out.

Stockholm wrote:

I agree that Guelph and Vancouver Centre (and Central Nova for that matter) were two particular ridings where very strong Green campaigns probably damaged the NDP more than any other party - though across Canada, the increase in Green support in '08 probably damaged the Liberals most of all.

Hard to tell how much the NDP was un-damaged.  In fact, in Ontario, I wouldn't single out just Guelph: remember how the NDP vote share fell in a whole vast slew of seats which weren't in Northern Ontario or existing "holds"--and that's in spite of Jack's "I'm running for Prime Minister" tack.  I'd chalk much of that up to the Green rise--though not even directly due to eMay; remember how the '07 provincial election was the first absolute tangible demonstration of the "Greens stealing from NDP" dynamic, and the momentum from that probably spilled over federally the next year.

I'm also wondering how much the perceived tussle between NDP and Green might have turned voters off either party, in a "screw you, we're voting Liberal" sense (an early case of that might have been BEY's Minna-Churley-Harris situation in '06).  Which parallels the 93/97/00 Tory/ReformAlliance battles handing the "screw you" vote to the Liberals, or even Ontario's '99 Liberal vs NDP "strategic vote" battles handing a lot of "screw yous" to the Tories...

Sorry adma, when I looked over that comment of mine it sounded a bit uppity, and I know I wrote it in too much haste.  Let me take another try, even though I thought you did a good job of arguing it.

I agree with you that the appearance of electability for the NDP makes people less likely to vote Green, and it's not only provincially, but in certain federal seats as well.

There are spending studies out there that seem to show that the NDP targets its spending a lot more to "winnable" seats.  The seats where the Greens had overtaken the NDP were by and large seats the NDP wasn't targetting, but the Greens either were or they just benefitted from being the latest flavour of the month none-of-the-above party.

You suggest that young people are attracted to voting Green, but I would argue that's based probably more on the party's name than its platform, as they would quickly discover if they read it.  On the other hand, young people aren't repelled from voting NDP either.

The two target seats we discussed (Guelph and Vancouver Centre) are a different matter, but Debater isn't arguing from any knowledge or interest about what's going on in them (and unlike you I don't think he's older ... I think he just sounds like a know-it-all, except that all the 'knowledge' sounds like stuff he read on the web rather than being out across the country working on campaigns).  So that's why I discount what he says pretty well right off the bat.  He gives the NDP advice off the top of his head, but really doesn't want the NDP to do well, so I pretty much ignore it now.

In terms of Guelph, the Greens had the advantage last time of it being a by-election riding, in the way the NDP used to once upon a time, and in fact also did this time in Westmount-Ville Marie and St-Lambert for example.  However, their candidate is not running again, having been a bit burned by E.Me's "strategic voting" communications fiasco.  E.Me has also pretty much indicated that she doesn't want to take out a Liberal, which sends a subliminal signal to the local riding that they're not going to be much of a priority this time around.  I'd guess that in a general election, and without having all those bodies they were able to bring in from across the province last time, they'll have some trouble maintaining that vote.

I also think that for most working folks (never mind unemployed folks, which includes a LOT of young people), economic security issues are a lot more top of mind and will trump environmental consciousness for the next little while.

As for Vancouver Centre, it will continue to be a 4-way fight.  The advantage the NDP has over the Greens (apart from the economy) is that the Greens are constantly inflating expectations for their performance and then falling far short of them.  They can only cry wolf for so long.  On the other hand, there is going to be some continued fallout for the NDP over the last provincial campaign.  But the Greens really underperformed expectations provincially, and there are some wounds that need healing inside the environment movement too, from what I can tell at a distance.

The Green Party's polling results in national polls vary widely depending on whether the particular pollster prompts with the party name or not, and in any event, their vote is so small that it's going to see a lot of variability in the reporting, especially of subsamples.  But BC is famous for another pretty reliably spurious between-election finding, and that's the horse-race numbers for the federal Liberals.  They always wind up underperforming out there by the time the election is held relative to where they were between elections, and so wind up being unable to win many seats outside the City of Vancouver proper.

Finally, if Ignatieff continues to bomb and make Liberals nervous into the fall, then we are looking at a pretty fluid situation going forward.  Fortune favours the bold and the smart.  We'll have to see who is smarter and who is bolder.

But Tom King and Michael Byers were both very strong, very credible candidates, both of whom could be expected to improve their vote share on a second outing.  Hedy may or may not run again, but at age 67 she can't run forever.  Then the race will take on a different complexion, and having running once already may help.

I see the inevitible thread drift is going on!

Let's keep this thread about candidates in particular ridings, and comments about the pseudo-Green Party and policies to other threads, shall we?

How very sensible of you, David.  Perhaps you could bring us up to date on any speculation about candidates for CCMV?

Overall the turnout was down 9 percentage points.  The Conservative raw vote went up a bit, as did the Green vote slightly, but the Libs and NDP were way down.  Without knowing exactly what polls that happened in, or whether it dropped evenly, my bet would be the ID thing on reserve.