Where's Layton today?

They didn't win it per se, but formed an inovative coalition with the NHL Players Union and snuck the cup away from the NHL management.  Many complain that they have no right to the cup and it divides along party lines.

.

Judy Rebick wants the NDP to be to Canada like what Ralph Nader is to American politics - a party of valiant losers that revel in being crushed and who have no aspirations to ever winning anything.

Stockholm wrote:

Judy Rebick wants the NDP to be to Canada like what Ralph Nader is to American politics - a party of valiant losers that revel in being crushed and who have no aspirations to ever winning anything.

Yeah, that Judy Rebick, what a joke! She's obviously just a crazy Socialist goon who likes to hear herself talk! God knows she's never contributed anything constructive  to the womens' movement...

Stockholm, I admire a party stalwart more than most (probably because I am one) but, man, do you read yourself sometimes?

I often find Judy Rebick's comments mildly foolish, but I agree with her point about the NDP needing to be open to more ideas from its membership and to be a party that actually fosters and encourages discussion of new ideas as opposed to stifling them. I don't understand why the party would not be more willing to take/hear suggestions for improvement from its membership. If people are members of the NDP, they are already fairly committed to the cause, so there should be no problem there. Some of the most successful left-wing movements have also succeeded through broad-based mass consultations, like the ANC in South Africa's (prior to their banning) wide spread consultations on a new vision for the country. It would be really nice for a change if in the next NDP fundraiser mailing, the party were to ask members how they think the party could be improved. They could use the same letter to ask for money to help them review and implement some of the best ideas submitted. I suspect they would get a lot of good suggestions that they had not thought of before and maybe some people that don't normally donate money (or generally donate less) would do so. That same approach could be adapted to other interactions with the party base and the public- in fact, this is what Layton was briefly doing (whether he realised it or not) at the beginning of his leadership through things like public consultations on the federal budget. One of the problems with the public consultations on the federal budget could potentially be I think (although the idea was still a good and I believe successful one) that the public consultation question might have been too constrained or too specific. A better question might be something like, "what could (we as Canadians or) the Canadian government do to make life better for you and your family?" I would love to hear the answers that most members of the public would give to that question. We would live in a better country if it was asked and acted upon on a daily basis. Now back to my fantasy land of starry eyed idealism...

I guess the issue is that the NDP is a political party and for parties to win seats and win elections, they need to have a certain level of professionalism etc... how do you think people like Gary Doer and Darrel Dexter win elections? (hint: it isn't by mobilizing a "children's crusade" of people wearing mismatched socks who attended an anti-globalization rally 10 years ago).

I listened to the interview and what Dewar was pointing out is that the NDP has in fact done a lot of what Rebick is asking for and that on top of that they have been making all these overtures to the Obama camp to try to learn from them etc... but its always damned if you do and damned if you don't. Listening to Judy Rebick its like she's saying why can't the NDP run a campaign like Obama's campaign - but then  she and her ilk also don't like it when the NDP invites OBama's top stratgeists to help the NDP do exactly that.

There are obviously lessons to be learned from Obama, but he was also very much in the right place at the right time. First of all he had a campaign budget of something like half a billion dollars, he operates in a political culture where you have three networks that bfroadcats political news 24/7 and where politics is an off-shoot of showbiz AND you had a ridiculously unpopular incumbent President, a war that is a disaster, an economic meltdown etc... We just don't have all those factors in Canada. If Obama had run in 2000, there would never have been nearly the same exitement about his candidacy. For all the talk about outreach to youth and minority voters - the turn out among those groups was only slightly higher than it was in 2004 and of course in Canada we don't have nearly as large a minority population as the US has in the first place.

"She mentions that the NDP hasn't looked at the Obama campaign's successes and still doesn't get it when it comes to motivating youth and minority voters."

This is simply false, the NDP has been looking VERY closely at what the Obama campaign did and the fact they are having the artchitects of that campaign  address the convention speaks volumes. With regard to minority and youth voters - it would be a lot easier to motivate them if George W. Bush was running Canada - but unfortunately, most people are just mildly irritated and/or indifferent to Harper - You look at polls that ask people about their attitudes towards him and only about 15% "strongly disapprove" of him - though I guess that if your whole life is lived in some totally unrepresentative far left sub-sub-culture you might assume that EVERYONE hates him.

Where is Layton's NDP on the War in Afghanistan?

http://www.rabble.ca/news/2009/08/where-laytons-ndp-war-afghanistan

'And now we face increasing NATO pressure to extend the mission beyond 2011. From that time when the NDP leader was loudly demanding "troops out now" he has shifted to his current weak stand. It is truly dismaying.'

Quote:

Obama's success was very much about convinicing 'middle America' he represented change in terms of economic policy and by giving them something to believe in.  It was not an appeal to big ideas but to several simple initiatives.

I don't think that is true.  The bailout, the most significant economic issue during the election, was championed by Bush and Obama.  He benefited somewhat by his association with Clinton and nostalgia for the 90s but Obama never would have been the Democratic candidate based on his economic expertise or vision.  He took some principled stands on foreign policy(Out of Iraq, shut down Guantanamo, diplomacy with Cuba and Iran), alot of which he has since jettisoned but to say that this wasn't crucial to his message of 'hope' is revisionist.  Of the Americans I know there was a lot more to their complete disillusionment with their country than simply economic policy.  If Obama had had the same economic policy but parroted Kerry on foreign policy then you would not have seen the same mass movement support. 

There is a serious vaccuum when it comes to a progressive Canadian foreign policy right now and facing off against Harper and Ignatieff should be like shooting fish in a barrel for a competent left of centre party that isn't completely risk averse. 

melovesproles wrote:

Quote:

Obama's success was very much about convinicing 'middle America' he represented change in terms of economic policy and by giving them something to believe in.  It was not an appeal to big ideas but to several simple initiatives.

I don't think that is true.  The bailout, the most significant economic issue during the election, was championed by Bush and Obama.  He benefited somewhat by his association with Clinton and nostalgia for the 90s but Obama never would have been the Democratic candidate based on his economic expertise or vision.  He took some principled stands on foreign policy(Out of Iraq, shut down Guantanamo, diplomacy with Cuba and Iran), alot of which he has since jettisoned but to say that this wasn't crucial to his message of 'hope' is revisionist.  Of the Americans I know there was a lot more to their complete disillusionment with their country than simply economic policy.  If Obama had had the same economic policy but parroted Kerry on foreign policy then you would not have seen the same mass movement support. 

There is a serious vaccuum when it comes to a progressive Canadian foreign policy right now and facing off against Harper and Ignatieff should be like shooting fish in a barrel for a competent left of centre party that isn't completely risk averse. 

 

I was talking about the election, not the primaries and I was basing it on actual exit polling data.

Oppo-Guy wrote:

You can't sell old ideas as new ones.  Yet that's what Rebick and a handful of likeminded people are proposing.  They expect that a party operating on the margins with ideas that can be easily marginalized is all that Canadians need.  They are wrong.  Just ask the Bloc Quebecois.

Last I checked, the BQ was the most popular party and won the most seats in Quebec.

MUN Prof. wrote:

This thread has been thoroughly hijacked,

I agree, but I think an interesting discussion has broken out.  I wonder what you'd think of me changing the thread title for this thread, and starting a new one with your original title, and I'll try to keep a better eye on it so that drift doesn't happen in it?

Would that work for you?  Because I think your original thread subject was interesting, but so is the drift. :)

Where's the NDP today?

Well Jack was in Mahone Bay yesterday, As for today, not sure.

Seniors in dire straits

Recession puts strain on food banks, federal NDP leader told

Mr. Layton said some of the issues he's hearing about as he speaks to seniors across Canada include the protection of pensions, particularly with companies going bankrupt, as well as the need for a revamped Canada Pension Plan and affordable housing for seniors.

The NDP leader had planned to speak Tuesday morning in Hubbards but was told by organizers of a seniors picnic in the community centre that he couldn't give a speech because it was a nonpartisan event. Mr. Layton was, however, allowed to take the microphone for a few minutes to explain why he was there and then chat with seniors.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/NovaScotia/1137081.html

Quote:

Showed leadership as the first party leader to call for an end to Canada's combat role in Afghanistan.

...and for a new one in Sudan.

He still wants troops in Afghanistan. He has said nothing about NATO, about civilian deaths, or about the occupation in general. For him, it's a [i]mission[/i].
No different than the liberal/conservative coalition.

Stockholm wrote:

Judy Rebick wants the NDP to be to Canada like what Ralph Nader is to American politics - a party of valiant losers that revel in being crushed and who have no aspirations to ever winning anything.

I listened to Judy on TVO? talking about how successful and wonderful the Obama campaign was and that the lousy NDP should take notes. She and Basil the Liberal werent very friendly with Nystrom or Ashton at all. I thought "this stinks" and turned it off.

Well I must say that Judy's view of the Obama campaign is or was correct. Apparently they did wonderful things with not only tapping grassroots funding and support by FaceBook et al and the electronic campaign end of things, they motivated Americans to get out and vote. That's not an easy thing to do given the American version of FirstPastThePost and voter turnouts typically worse than Canada's. Full marks to the Obama campaign there.

But I believe Obama's presidential candidacy as well the Democrats general election campaign were also funded by some of the richest people in America and Wall Street. It's been said that even the superrich in America had lost faith in the Bush regime's economic policies and realize themselves that the country was sliding into deep economic trouble. Will billionaire families and Bay Street be funding the NDP's campaign next time around? I highly doubt it. Even though Canada has lost jobs at a faster pace on a per capita basis than the US has since the meltdown began, the rich in Canada, I think, realize that our economic wagon was tied to America's with FTA-NAFTA and was the most poorly thought out bit of colonialism in history. And they know that whatever happens in the US will affect us down the road. The rich in Canada will tend to favour the two oldest political parties who've come through for them time and time again with tax cuts and respecting Canada's blue blood wealth and incomes no matter what the economic conditions. 

I strongly disagree remind.  Here's what I wrote in the specific thread about Larsen who you previously referenced before editing I guess.

Frankly if he was doing that it is a serious breach of ethics in my books.  Imagine what would happen if single issue people on all kinds of issues from abortion to equal marriage starting doing that to try and push their agendas.

I have no problem with someone being striped of credentials if they were subsidizing people based on their support or nonsupport of a particular resolution or issue.

This is one of those times you have to seperate support for an issue or individual with integrity of democracy.

Well I never saw it and if I had I would have definitly commented on it.  It is just so very wrong on so very many levels.

Does the NDP want the side story publicity that revoking Larsen's delegate status is going to get them? All questions of ethics aside for the moment, I think it was a terrible tactical mistake.