BC NDP: Who should be the next leader? II

Someone should send this poll to Moe and ask him to step aside from any high profile role in the NDP.  For the good of the party.  93% of the people polled had heard of him and 57% were negative.  Even amongst the 96% of NDP'ers polled who knew him his negative numbers are at 50%.  

This man is the voice of the BC NDP at least once every week on the CBC Early Edition political panel and often as a commentator.  Does no one else see the harm he is doing?

The party president is an elected position. Carole James was instrumental in bringing Moe in as a candidate who received majority approval at last fall's convention. Just look at his high disapproval numbers. The Libs will have a field day if they run against the "Moe Sihota" party.

Furthermore, the whole Bob Simpson dismissal and the ensuing caucus revolt was apparently due to Moe's advice to Carole. Certainly many in the "Gang of 13" have placed the problems at his feet.

Yes, Moe has to go as well.

The President is much more exposed to the displeasure of people in the party than the leader.

Not to mention that his stipend is a ticking time bomb as an issue. And doesnt look good to anyone. You cant say enough about it.

But it should be possible to insulate the labour movement from the criticism. Just treat them as Moe's dupes- by not talking about them. Sideswiping the labour movement is not going to help anyone.

That concern was echoed by former NDP cabinet minister Paul Ramsay, who said the dissidents staged a mutiny under the mistaken belief their perceptions were more important than the wishes of the majority of caucus and the party executive.

"I'm at a loss to explain why this very disparate group of people decided that their individual perceptions were more important than the wishes of caucus and the wishes of their party," he said.

"It really shows to me a … misunderstanding of the role of MLAs in a caucus and in a party and assuming to themselves authority that they really didn't have," he said.

I take the last line the same as 3 letters to the editor of the times colonist today explaining their take on partys and democracy. 
Party power is destroying democracy.
Ramsay can go F*** himself. 
MLA's are the lifeblood of democracy.
The Ramsays of this world have shut them up and shut them down for way too long.
How  dare he say that. 
He is saying that the person that you and I elect has no authority.  He  sees them as almost worthless shitsacks.
If that is what he and his like thinks of the MLA's, imagine how he sees voters.
I would urge people here to hold their noses, join the NDP and work to remove people like Ramsay from the power structure.
There might be one or 2 rightwingers with decent hearts here too.  Do the same thing in the bc libs.
Try to get rid of the scumbags.

I guess what I don't understand is how could the BC NDP have allowed James to go, was it 7 years, as Leader witrhout a leadership review? That is where I question playing by the rules is always the route to take, because it certainly seems that the rules were manipulated to not allow a leadership review.

In the short term that's true, but it looks tacky. For all intents and purposes the NDP has to ask for, and accept, Union donations - especially since Corporate donations are bankrolling the Liberals. All that being said the Moe Sihota thing looks particularly stupid though, since he's literally being paid for by the unions. What would be best is if the NDP wins the next election and bans union and corporate donations altogether. Seeing as the NDP, well at least as of a few years ago, used to get more individual donations than the Liberals it would also give them a strategic advantage.

Vansterdam Kid wrote:

 What would be best is if the NDP wins the next election and bans union and corporate donations altogether. Seeing as the NDP, well at least as of a few years ago, used to get more individual donations than the Liberals it would also give them a strategic advantage.

Having recently looked at the finances of my local Federal NDP constituency, which has 10's of thousands of dollars in the bank, and is ready for the next election, I am thinking of the legislative agenda, and future legacy for the next Provincial NDP government. Do like Jean Chretrien, and reform the electoral laws. Right now the Federal NDP gets paid $1.65 per vote. That is a massive incentive to bring out the vote, and in tandem with election spending limits, a very simple solution to influence buying.

The most popular comment following this article
Jenny Kwan predicts B.C. NDP caucus will unite

David Schreck and Paul Ramsey are like a poison; never heard so much negativity as they try to inflict damage on the NDP. Carole should have stepped down gracefully after losing the second election. Most voters would not support the NDP with Carole leading them. As for David saying they should have waited til Nov.2011 for a leadership review thats way too late; the new BC Liberal may call a snap election in the fall. Why would David also think that most of want another term of those corrupt, self-serving liars dictating to us? 

http://www.straight.com/article-363876/vancouver/kwan-predicts-ndp-caucus-will-unite

NorthReport wrote:

Should the next NDP leader follow in the footsteps of Obama and maintain his or her right-wing predecessor's tax cuts? Or should the NDP revisit this issue in light of all the revenue that could be generated from raising taxes on the wealthy?

Supporters of higher taxes could frame the issue in this way: by boosting the amount of tax that high-income earners pay, the government could return that back to the average person in the form of lower medical-services premiums.

After all, medical-services premiums are a regressive tax in that middle-income and high-income people pay the same amount per month. (There is premium assistance for low-income residents.)

If the NDP promises that, they will win the election on that promise alone.

Maybe it is time to turn the other cheek. The leadership struggle is over apparently. And Kwan has impressive credentials as a social democrat. With someone like Kwan on the point they could take down the Liberals next election.

Stockholm wrote:

YOu're the one who is "poison" since you can't stop pouring fuel on the fire. You won you got your way. Carole James is dead. That's what you wanted all along. Be magnanimous in victory and turn the other cheek. NOTHING is gained by continuing to post incindiary attacks on people who defended Carole James in the past. She's goone. The story is over.

He was in the news yesterday feeding the MSM feeding frenzy and slandering Jenny.  Why are you on this board to defend the people who are in the media dissing elected MLA's?  Do you really think the progressives in this province should just allow Ramsay and the other sycophants to take up all the air time and be unopposed with their venom against the people who were elected to oppose Campbell? 

They are the ones still talking so give your head a shake Stock and stop attacking people who are saying enough already of the attacks on our sitting MLA's by assholes. Ramsay sat two terms and then didn't run after destroying the party name.  He was too chicken to face the people because he knew he would go down in flames and he has the audacity to attack a MLA who revived the party. 

kropotkin1951 wrote:

He was in the news yesterday feeding the MSM feeding frenzy and slandering Jenny.  Why are you on this board to defend the people who are in the media dissing elected MLA's?  Do you really think the progressives in this province should just allow Ramsay and the other sycophants to take up all the air time and be unopposed with their venom against the people who were elected to oppose Campbell? 

You do understand that this exact quote, with the names changed, could have been leveled against Kwan and others last week, right?

Those who live by the sword can't exactly be surprised when their opponents pick up daggers.

No Kwan is an elected MLA and has the right in our system to speak her mind.  Ramsay and Schreck were part of the crowd that reduced the party to two seats.  Jenny, Joy and Carole revived the party not Moe, Paul and David. Ramsay almost destroyed the brand name ten years ago and then ran and hid from the electorate.   He is only getting air time because he is spouting crap that is destructive to the party.  Kwan gets air time because voters keep electing her unlike assholes like Ramsay.  Sycophant is the right term for people like him who rush to the limelight to attack current politicians when they have been retired for over ten years.

He is hurting the party once again and the party "insiders" on this board all want to jump to his defence.  I notice that the people who are insisting the knives will all be out are all carrying knives.   This crowd put the party in the wilderness for a decade and were going to keep it there for the foreseeable future.  But go ahead lets all listen to the wisdom of a retired politician who was a Minister in a government that was reduced from a majority to only Jenny and Joy. 

KenS wrote:

Maybe I missed it, but I didnt see anyone defending Ramsay.

No just attacking people for being pissed at his and others destructive ongoing rants in the MSM.  It is the James supporters who are in the MSM pouring the fuel on the fire and we are being told on babble not to even mention them because it is divisive. And then we are accused of not being able to let it go.  Fuck that is just too weird.  Why are some not outraged at Ramsay and others?  The leader resigned lets all look to a new leader and stop trying to pull Jenny down. What good can come of Ramsay and other assholes trying to destroy her?  So we should all be condemning them.

And one might consider this to be the BC populace's short-term verdict.

A new poll has put the B.C. Liberals and the NDP in a dead heat for voter support with 36 per cent support for each, as the two parties race to replace their leaders.

Support for the Liberals has increased 10 per cent since Premier Gordon Campbell announced his resignation, while support for the NDP has dropped 11 per cent in the past month, according to a poll by Angus Reid Public Opinion.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/12/09/bc-poll-ndp-liberals.html#ixzz17e7dgdfk

"trying to get idiots to talk dirt"

Good point. I'm sure most insiders don't agree with this torched earth tactic. I'm kind of shocked that they don't have the discipline to get the word out to SHUT UP.

I cant speak for others. But I have said that you have to expect people to vent who have lost in a divisive battle. Thats not saying you shouldnt lay into them,  just that people in that position vent.

And as to what VK was saying- part of their venting is bullshit accounts of vents. thats not only predicatbale, but arguing it is endless. Literally. Let them vent- they arent going anywhere with it.

Remember too that the people venting in the MSM and spreading BS are just the tip of the iceberg. There will be plenty more of people who you have at least basic respect fo, and who are equally upset that the leader was not left alone, that loyalty was bismirched, etc. [And yes, their notion of 'loyalty' is at best one sided... but that just shows you how much of this stuff is really rather  talismatic.]

All of this is the inevitable consequence of such a battle. And while it does settle down, I would expect to continue hearing eruptions of it at least through your next Convention- even if that is a year or more away and overshadowed by a leadership race. Expect that to include demands for justice [whatever that means], and for an 'inquiry'. Thats what happened in Nova Scotia, where we are inclined to keep this kind of stuff within limits. I suppose you can hope that in Lotusland it will boil harder but shorter. But I think part of it is that people want and expect a formal airing of their greivances in the highest forums.

KenS this is a recurring theme here in BC not something new.  Members are still wondering what happened to the committee that was supposedly struck after the Ujhal disaster to ensure leadership races were not stalked again.  Rolling of eyes seems to be the most common response from the people in my circle. That and a real desire to get rid of the Liberals

I am wondering what rules they will be playing under this time.  In nominations for the last election I think they used a 90 day cutoff i.e. must be a paid up member 90 days before the nomination meeting. If they wait till January and want a spring vote then I hope all the progressives who want a say make sure they don't procrastinate.  I would hope for a mid to late June vote with about three months for leadership hopefuls to sell memberships to people who want the party to win the next election.  The leadership race IMO will be similar to the general election in that if the BC NDP is too succeed it must reach out to new members and voters.  There are no loose BC Liberal votes to chase.  By the time the people who voted for them get into the voting booth they hold their noses and vote for them again.  With a new leader they will be able to vote for greed with a clear conscious.  The NDP needs to engage the people who don't vote and that needs to start in the leadership campaign.

I have a good idea - that would both open the party up to new members - but prevent the leadership from being captured by someone running a fly-by-night campaign with thousands of "instant New Democrats" packing the process. What about making it illegal for a candidate to pay for anyone's membership and increase the membership fee to $20 so that people who join to support a candidate are truly committed. Also, to even be allowed to run for the leadership - you should have to personally sign up at least 1,000 new party members and have them agree to automatic monthly donations!

Here's Brian Topp

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/brian-topp/2010/12/reconciling-irreconci...

The title of this thread is:

BC NDP: Who should be the next leader? II

is anyone going to start talking about who is going to lead the party not about who said what - who is an idiot - etc

Actually, I think that this posting by Schreck makes a lot of sense - and I find nothing in it that I disagree with.

Stockholm wrote:

Actually, I think that this posting by Schreck makes a lot of sense - and I find nothing in it that I disagree with.

Actually I think that was VanKids point.  Maybe others complaints and a few private phone calls have got him on the moving forward page.  His analysis is just fine and the type of thing all progressives in the province should be turning their heads too.  

Lets show the people of this province we have the talent and ideas to bring our province back from the abyss the Liberals have us poised over.

Thanks, Krop. Well said.