So what are you going to do about it?
Unite the center-left, or Harper will rule until 2025 - 2 - this just makes no sense to think like this
Wed, 2011-05-04 12:08
#52
Wed, 2011-05-04 13:02
#53
Nothing pisses me off more than the "old guard" of the NDP and the Liberal parties.
The ones who have fought these wars, and lost, and given us the situation we have now...a Reform party majority.
The NDP brand does not have the strength in English Canada, and the Liberal brand doesn't have the strength outside of Ontario and Newfoundland. Put them together...you have a shot at a majority.
Leave them apart, and it'll be "Today Prime Minister Rona Ambrose introduced the flying car"
Wed, 2011-05-04 13:14
#54
I think we need a youth caucas of the NPD - and show case those young Canadians who want to make a difference for Canada. And they can become popular speakers on university/college/high school campus clubs in engaging young Canadians in politics. I don't think they are going to be intimidated - they know bull crap when they see it & hear it!
Exactly Jan. I would also like to add to what Vansterdam said about how maybe having more youth elected will shake things up. But there is a stereotype I also want to address. Most people think of "youth" as university students/graduates living in larger urban centres. I find it encouraging to see people like Nikki Ashton elected in northern Manitoba or Ellen Brouseau who is a manager at a pub, and I hope these people will give more visibility to those aspects of the younger demographic (young people in smaller communities, working class young people with or without post-secondary education) that are traditionally invisible to mainstream society.
Wed, 2011-05-04 13:17
#55
That Steele column suffers from the same faulty logic as Walkom's.
"Why do we get vote splits? One reason is simple math. The Conservative vote stays the same, but as the Liberal vote falls, the Conservative candidate can get elected with fewer votes.
. . . .
So on Monday night a few per cent of centre-right Liberals, people who support national daycare programs and same-sex marriage and public health care, voted Conservative to keep the NDP out. (I was certainly not among them.)"
Wait. I thought he said the Con vote stayed the same?
Then there's this:
"Another reason is that NDP member rhetoric about wealth redistribution, and a "working class party" ending neo-liberalism seriously freaks out the middle class. It sounds to some "bourgeois" ears like the NDP is going to come and take away their RRSP nest egg, tax the hell out of them, and blow up the economy.
. . . .
So to get to a majority, the NDP will need to moderate their economic positions further. No rhetoric about class. No plan for soaking the rich. No talk of ending "neo-liberalism"."
So, thousands of middle class suburbanites, most of whom probably have no idea what the term means, are walking around worried about the ending of "neo-liberalism"? Right
Wed, 2011-05-04 13:19
#56
I want a big tent progressive moderate party on the center-left, to protect Canada from the neocons.
the leaders of the NDP and Libs could do it, they could all get together and try it.
But they won't. I have been thinking about why they won't. Many reasons, loyalty, ideology. But also self-interest. Man, if you get elected in a majority, even in opposition, you just made $750,000 for 5 years work, plus very generous expenses. Do it twice and you have a pension. That is a sweet deal.
I think that is why we get lots of talk, and no action. Its human nature. Same as voters who want less tax on their paycheck.
Its not totally the reason, but its part of it. The old guard of these parties, have personally done extremely well for themselves. Just sayin.
Wed, 2011-05-04 13:20
#57
business leftist is obviously just that -- BUSINESS 'leftist'.
reducing canadian parliamentary democracy to two mainstream parties - a la repubs and dems - is anti-progressive, and anti-democratic. you are reduced to 2 choices, both of which represent a corporatist agenda. one has a smile on its face, and you hope that, at least, they won't declare war and invade a foreign country (though the brits didn't even have THAT solace). the other has a sneer on it's face, and you can count on it to demonize, criminalize, and incarcerate the poor. neither gives a real shit about poor and working class people. a two party system is NOT democratic, nor is it capable of generating truly progressive policy. as progressives, we must be committed to radical, REAL democracy, and hence we must facilitate a system within which EVERYONE has a choice that truly reflects their values and beliefs, and everyone has representation within parliament - whether we happen to agree with them or not.
working towards a two party system is MADNESS! well, if you're progressive. if you're main interest is "business," then it makes perfect sense. at the level of the state, vis a vis our parliamentary system, the only progressive attitude to this issue is to work towards PR, and look forward to the day that the ndp/marxist-leninist/green/alberta-populists-for-jesus coalition is governing.
Wed, 2011-05-04 13:22
#58
The BQ elected a child last time named Nicolas Dufour. He was well liked and enrolled at UOttawa (in poli sci I think) while continuing to work as an MP.
The fact of the matter is that even while some of the NPD candidates will turn out to be an embarassment to the country, a lot of the Conservative bankbench MPs are a complete disgrace. So if the media wants to get into the smear game, progressives can start making murals of all the Conservative deadbeats that nap their way through committee meetings, wander cluelessly around Ottawa functions drunk as skunks and etc etc. I mean if that's really where we want to take politics in this country, we can totally do it. Turn the House of Commons into a septuagenarian version of the Jersey Shore. But I don't want to go there. I'd rather just plug my ears and go "lalalalalalala, there are no incompetent people in the house of commons, it was all a dream"
Wed, 2011-05-04 13:25
#59
I can't believe people would support the Vegas pub girl!! My god, she left the riding during an election! That is so far over the line, its a joke. Unpaid volunteers work harder.
So her "election" is a sham, anyone who is honest has to admit that. Its legal of course, but its absurd. She doesn't live there, and doesn't speak french. That frankly shows a serious laziness from the NDP.
They can't find someone who lives there and is french? She might be a nice kid, but is she worth $150K a year for 5 years plus expenses?
That kind of stuff is going to kill the NDP. Wait until the con private detectives go after some of those folks before the next election.
And I support the new NDP!! But I can't believe how lazy the Que NDP is to do that. Did they pick her for her picture? Looks like it. That ain't right.
Wed, 2011-05-04 13:29
#60
I think 2 parties could work better in Canada, unlike the US. But yes, some PR would be nice. But the cons will never agree to it. So how to get it? Someone has to win a majority with that mandate.
Wed, 2011-05-04 13:43
#61
lib/ndp coalition/agreement. smart people inside both parties must communicate with each other - RIGHT NOW, if it hasn't already happened - and agree that PR is necessary and will be implemented.
two parties would be a disaster in canada - a disaster for canadian democracy and progressivism. if you think the merged "left" party would act in any substantive way differently than moderately left dems in the US, you're, to borrow a phrase from another "liberal" poster dreaming in technicolour. the US is not a democracy, and its federal government is incapable of initiating progressive reforms.
Wed, 2011-05-04 13:48
#62
I think we can wait another year or two to see the lay of the land but I believe it unlikely that the Conservatives can be defeated in an election unless there is some accommodation between the NDP, the Liberals, the BLOC and the Greens. I am not in favour of a merger but I can see many advantages to uniting behind one candidate in those ridings where no party can defeat the Conservatives on their own. This would not apply to where I live as I think the NDP can win without Liberal/Green support (though it would make it a guaranteed thing if there was an agreement). The last choice of most non-Conservative voters is the NDP. The advantagesare numerous but the most important one is that we could have a minority government (probably led by the NDP) which could pass legislation for proportional representation. Then, I don't think we'd have to worry about a majority Conservative government for the foreseeable future and there would be no need to have any accommodations thereafter.
The other advantages I see are:
* allow all parties to concentrate their effort in those ridings where they have a chance of winning
* provide an incentive to get new members to all parties thereby causing local activity and fund-raising (the "joint" candidate should be voted on by the joint membership)
* it would enhance cooperation against the Conservatives in the House of Commons after the election
An informal agreement by the NDP and Liberals elect Linda Duncan (and Ralph Goodale).
The NDP has nomination races throughout Canada to determine who candidates are. Here in the Western Arctic we chose Dennis without any input from the National Party. I don't think it fair to blame the Quebec NDP because they could not find a candidate in a riding where there was no significant NDP presence before the election. It is up to the local NDP association to come up with a candidate. Personally, I would resent any interference from the National party in our nomination process. The other two local major parties had interference from their national parties and it helped us re-elect Dennis.
I have helped several NDP candidates earn election. Most of them knew less than I do about running a campaign and all of them listened to suggestions from their campaign team. If there is a need for training our new young MP's, I am sure that the party is up to it. It might even be easier to train young people than older candidates who believe they have more relevant experience.
I don't think the private detectives will find much dirt on these young people. They haven't lived as long as some of the rest of us and I suspect that by itself will make it harder to find anything that can be used against them.
Wed, 2011-05-04 14:36
#63
But it certainly seems that questions can be raised about their legitimacy as candidates! I wonder if one after another each candidate's papers will be looked into and questions raised.
Wed, 2011-05-04 15:25
#64
well, the 19 yr old NDP kid is smart, he talks like a pro in the paper. that kid is legit.
But Vegas girl, that one is really bad. Frankly, it looks like someone chose her for the photo. Whatever, no one thought they could ever win, so it was a fluke. But the trouble continues, just more distractions from the issues.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/vacationing-ndp-candidate-a...
Someone in the NDP there was lazy and sloppy. Its going to hurt them. My local Greens never stood a chance in hell, but they were serious people. find serious people who even though they have no chance, at least walk the riding for gods sakes.
Wed, 2011-05-04 15:29
#65
Other than being a proto-fascist, one of the reasons Harper muzzles everyone, is they know they have many wackos in the Con party who are elected. So they muzzle them to try and avoid scandle. Looks like it worked.
That is the problem with fascism. It works.
Wed, 2011-05-04 15:36
#66
This Vegas girl is turning into a circus, the comments abovr are out of control. Politics is an ugly crazy game. The Con media are going to go berserk with this kind of stuff, and it wipes out serious issues.
That is why I say UNITE the center, and then have only well-vetted people running. Finding 300+ people is not easy.
Wed, 2011-05-04 15:49
#67
yikes, this is looking like a legalistic contagion which will spread through every riding in Que for the NDP, checking all the papers, etc. If some in the NDP made errors or shortcuts, man o man.
Wed, 2011-05-04 15:58
#68
I've flagged posts #59, #63, and #65 as offensive. It's better than just responding the way I'd like to.
Wed, 2011-05-04 15:58
#69
business leftist is obviously just that -- BUSINESS 'leftist'.
reducing canadian parliamentary democracy to two mainstream parties - a la repubs and dems - is anti-progressive, and anti-democratic. you are reduced to 2 choices, both of which represent a corporatist agenda. one has a smile on its face, and you hope that, at least, they won't declare war and invade a foreign country (though the brits didn't even have THAT solace). the other has a sneer on it's face, and you can count on it to demonize, criminalize, and incarcerate the poor. neither gives a real shit about poor and working class people. a two party system is NOT democratic, nor is it capable of generating truly progressive policy. as progressives, we must be committed to radical, REAL democracy, and hence we must facilitate a system within which EVERYONE has a choice that truly reflects their values and beliefs, and everyone has representation within parliament - whether we happen to agree with them or not.
working towards a two party system is MADNESS! well, if you're progressive. if you're main interest is "business," then it makes perfect sense. at the level of the state, vis a vis our parliamentary system, the only progressive attitude to this issue is to work towards PR, and look forward to the day that the ndp/marxist-leninist/green/alberta-populists-for-jesus coalition is governing.
What's wrong with a business person being a leftist? My name is actually a reaction to the misnomer that right wing politics are good for business, commerce, employment and wealth.
They're bad for everybody. And progressive policies are BETTER for economics and BUSINESSES. Don't believe the crap they feed you...
I love the whole logic that since the US has a two party system, if Canada had one, we would devolve into invading Iraq! Nonsense. Tommy Douglas predicted this would happen. What is it with some people and their obsession with the US? Look at Australia. The Labour party there is the main leftist party, but there is one green MP as well. The right wing parties all sit as a coalition. The left is united, and I would not say they are a corporatist party.
The Australian Labour Party is made up of factions like the Labour Unity which is like the Liberals here, and the Socialists. The factions compete for nominations and candidates and also unite for important reasons.
This is a perfect model for progressive Canadians to follow. Unfortunately most of us only follow the Americans, and thus our obsession leaves us only to see things in their model.
I personally think that the NDP old guard has spent so much time in perpetual opposition (unofficial or offical, its still opposition) that they don't have the "killer instinct" and the necessary organization to form government.
The fact is the Liberal Party still has the organizational infrastructure and contacts and experience that would be valuable if a merger could be considered and eventually worked out.
You don't believe that millions of hard core, died in the wool Socialists voted NDP do you? Polls showed that NDP voters, the same soft support the Liberals depended on said they were the most likely to change their minds.
Wed, 2011-05-04 16:13
#70
@business left
there is NOTHING wrong with a business person being a leftist - i appreciate what i assume to be the basics of your position, even if i probably disagree with many of them. indeed, my position entails that you ought to have a party to vote for that truly represents your views and beliefs, and that that party's representation in parliament should be proportionate to the popular vote it received from you and others who share your views, and that that party should be free to enter into coalitions and participate cooperatively in the governance of the country to the extent all parties involved consider the arrangement to be mutually beneficial for their constituencies. i believe that people who do not share your views, or my own, should a) also have a choice that reflects their views, and b) have representation in proportion to their party's popular vote. as i see it, THAT is what a true representational democracy is, and anything less - including obviousely, de jure or de facto 2 party systems - is NOT democratic. and i also believe that a 2 party system can, in the end, never instigate truly progressive reforms.
how to rid ourselves of conservative rule is a separate question, but i would, on principle, and frankly from a practical perspective as well, rule out a merged "left" party.
Wed, 2011-05-04 16:15
#71
(for reference, here is the link to the orginal thread with over 100 posts, not sure why it was closed??)
Unite the center-left, or Harper will rule until 2025
http://rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/unite-center-left-or-harper-wi...
We mods close threads when they exceed 100 posts. When we have time, we create a new thread and link the two, but not this time.
Wed, 2011-05-04 16:23
#72
I can't believe people would support the Vegas pub girl!! My god, she left the riding during an election! That is so far over the line, its a joke. Unpaid volunteers work harder.
So her "election" is a sham, anyone who is honest has to admit that. Its legal of course, but its absurd. She doesn't live there, and doesn't speak french. That frankly shows a serious laziness from the NDP.
They can't find someone who lives there and is french? She might be a nice kid, but is she worth $150K a year for 5 years plus expenses?
That kind of stuff is going to kill the NDP. Wait until the con private detectives go after some of those folks before the next election.
And I support the new NDP!! But I can't believe how lazy the Que NDP is to do that. Did they pick her for her picture? Looks like it. That ain't right.
Your post is sexist and insulting. If you refer to her as Vegas girl or Vegas pub girl again, or imply that the NDP chose here for her looks, you'll be looking forward to a vacation from babble.
Wed, 2011-05-04 16:35
#73
yikes, this is looking like a legalistic contagion which will spread through every riding in Que for the NDP, checking all the papers, etc. If some in the NDP made errors or shortcuts, man o man.
Good luck! At some point such a search would just be declared mischievious.
This whole story was started by the Liberals calling in the media: Francine Gaudet, a distant third in the riding, called in the Media as the same story has appeared on the CBC, in the Globe and Mail, and in the National Post. How did she get her hands on the nomination papers I wonder?
NDP party spokesperson Karl Bélanger said the allegations are “not true.”
“The signatures were collected legitimately by our campaign workers going door to door,” he said. The signatures — 100 are required for a legitimate run at office according to Elections Canada rules — were approved by the election’s returning officer, he added.
“Madame Brosseau is thankful to the people of Berthier-Maskinongé for supporting her and helping her get elected. All the signatures were collected legitimately and if some people don’t remember signing it, well, that will be for them to explain.”
Mulcair also denied this and called the story absurd. It's clearly a smear.
The Liberals are muckrackers who have tried tricks like this before; they tried to challenge Brian Masse's nomination papers when he first ran in 2002, I think it was. Good riddance to them and their dirty tricks. Such behaviour certainly doesn't make me feel like the two parties should merge.
Wed, 2011-05-04 16:50
#74
...We need a single, progressive voice. You may not feel the urgency now, But when we have legislation threatning abortion rights and gay rights and sending our young people into useless wars, then you will....
answer to your first point: there is...it's called the NDP. private message me if you should like to buy a membership. Some folks give $500 and benefit from the 75% tax credit available for political donations at that level, but the minimum is $25 for the waged.
comment on second: you mean abortion legislation that Harper has ruled out, and if he does bring in will be supported by half the Liberal caucus again? and that useless war...you must be referring to Afghanistan right? the one the Liberals got us into first and Harper just continued?
your mistake BL is assuming we buy the idea that there are more national parties on the left than one. The Liberals voting record, policy, and actions since 1993 prove otherwise.
can i offer you a soothing cup of tea? It's Orange Pekoe, and it's delicious!
Wed, 2011-05-04 17:25
#75
Harper's policies under a majority over 5 years will hurt women, children, single mothers, students, LGBT people, working families, immigrants and unions...so how can you celebrate those results if you are progressive???
Totally agree with this.
Wed, 2011-05-04 17:41
#76
Liberal policies under a majority over 13 years hurt women, children, single mothers, students, LGBT people, working families, immigrants and unions...so how can you celebrate those results if you are progressive???
now do you get it? Liberal majority / Conservative majority = the same thing. Liberal minority / Conservative minority = the same thing
don't take my word for it. look at policy and voting record and then the results.
Wed, 2011-05-04 17:48
#77
knownothing
Nothing pisses me off more than the "old guard" of the NDP and the Liberal parties.
The ones who have fought these wars, and lost, and given us the situation we have now...a Reform party majority.
The NDP brand does not have the strength in English Canada, and the Liberal brand doesn't have the strength outside of Ontario and Newfoundland. Put them together...you have a shot at a majority.
Leave them apart, and it'll be "Today Prime Minister Rona Ambrose introduced the flying car"
What would you have preferred? There was going to be an election anyway next year. It probably would have had the same result and or else the Liberals might have held more seats and we would be no closer now to real change. You are not a progressive if you are defending Liberals against the Tories. We need to destroy the Liberals if we are to have a chance of defeating harper which is possible next election. The Libs are bankrupt and dividing fast. Wake up and start campaigning for the NDP instead of complaining!
You are buying in to the two-party illusion!
Wed, 2011-05-04 18:19
#78
If we continue to have FPTP system with Conservative majorities for any length of time, it will naturally progress into a two-party system, one in favour of the Conservatives and one against it. The longer we go without cooperation between the left-of-centre parties, the longer this process will take to happen, the more damage the Conservatives will do to those things that we in the NDP believe are important. I believe that we can take government through some sort of association or agreement and that when we do we can start a proportional representation system. The Conservatives then will not be able to get a majority and the rest of us will be able to vote for who we want (rather than some of us feeling pressure to vote strategically). I am tired of having a significant part of the population voting against a party by making a strategic vote for another party rather than voting for what they believe in. I think this explains in no small part why we have so much negative advertising in elections.
It is true that in much of English Canada, the NDP does not have the strength to defeat Conservatives on its own (and the the Liberals definitely cannot in almost all ridings in the West.) It is also true that the Liberal brand is a detriment in much of Canada outside of Ontario, the west-end of Montreal, Newfoundland and parts of the Maritimes. The same is true for the NDP in other parts of Canada. I know that Conservatives are disliked in most of Quebec.
Wed, 2011-05-04 18:33
#79
Liberal policies under a majority over 13 years hurt women, children, single mothers, students, LGBT people, working families, immigrants and unions...so how can you celebrate those results if you are progressive???
now do you get it? Liberal majority / Conservative majority = the same thing. Liberal minority / Conservative minority = the same thing
don't take my word for it. look at policy and voting record and then the results.
Keep telling yourself that. The Reformers are in charge now and as bad as the Liberals were and as bad as a Con majority propped up by the Libs was, the Reformers are a whole different class of bad. Attitudes towards equal marriage are just one example of the difference.
Wed, 2011-05-04 19:07
#80
Arthur Cramer
@Kara: and all the rest of you.
Farnival didn't make it up. Its the historical record. The Libs run left and govern right. They are not a laft wing party; the historial record simply doesn't bare withness to that. They are a right wing, party that paints itself as centerist to attract "left wing", voters, whatever a left wing Lib is.
Paul Martin cut the size of government 15% IN 1995. It was the largest cut to government in history. That is fact, not fiction.
I don't remember you or any of you mystery rabblers showing up before today. Maybe my recollection is wrong, but I can't recall most of you involved in debate before now. Then all of sudden you guys start showing up. I never heard of businessleftist before this week. Where were you guys? Or observant,521, I have been reading what he has written. I have never heard New Dems that have ever spoken like you, including the young kids involved in the party today.
So, enough of the generalization. You have our attention; what SPECIFICALLY do you want to have done and what SPECIFCALLY do you want to see happen? Lets hear it.
Wed, 2011-05-04 19:26
#81
@ Arthur Kramer
Where did I deny that the Liberals are bad? I did not. But you can keep kidding yourself that the Reformers are not a lot worse. Try reading what I wrote before going on a rant.
I have been a member here for longer than you have and have been an NDP supporter for nearly 40 years so your "you guys start showing up" comment is way out of line (the same as farnival's condescending "now do you get it?" comment). I don't always have the time to participate as much as I want but I do at least read the forums, etc. on a regular basis.
Finally, in case you didn't realize, this is a discussion forum for sharing ideas. Nothing that Business Leftist wrote is offensive (unlike some of what observer521 wrote which was very offensive). Did I miss when it became a requirement that all NDP supporters agree on all issues?
Wed, 2011-05-04 19:31
#82
Malcolm
The left has no media power anymore, its all neo-con.
I'd be interested in visiting this planet you're from, where the left used to have media power.
It certainly never happened here on Earth.
Wed, 2011-05-04 19:36
#83
Arthur Cramer
@Kara:
Ok, I'll apolgoize for my "where were you comments". That is a fair observation you made, and it is a very reasonable point.
But as for the content, this discussion today in this thread, and others like it has had the same theme. We have to work to "unite the left", whatever that means. We can't celebrate a wonderful vitory, and look at the future with optimisim. No, we have to go into total panic overdrive because Harper is PM.
I don't care who the PM is if it isnt' a New Dem. The ONLY diferenee between the Libs and the Tories is that Libs are slightly nicer Tories, who are in less of a hurry. That is all. So, when you tell me that I have to consider working with Libs, I don't understand what it is you want. Fine, lets have a dicussion, but you guys have got to try and make some kind of effort to hear what we are saying back to you. I dont' feel as though any of you "left-uniters" are hearing anything we are saying. All I hear is we are "the old guard". What the hell does that mean? What, I have worked for the NDP as a supporter for 35 years, but becuase I am over 50, I have to get out of the way?
Fine, lets talk, but lets make sure both sides are listening to one another.
Wed, 2011-05-04 19:41
#84
Malcolm
The Con media are going to go berserk with this kind of stuff,
So far, the only people I've seen going berserk on this are the CBC, the Toronto Star, the Liberal Party and a handful of classist mysogynists. And you.
It's one thing to remark on the absurdity of the situation. You are engaged in a wholesale attack on this woman simply because she doesn't fit your bourgeois idea of what a proper middle class MP looks like.
Your behaviour over the past 24 hours has been outrageously sexist and classist and I have flagged several of your posts for offensive content.
The qualifications to be an MP are:
- Canadian citizen - check
- 18 years of age or older - check
- not in jail - check
- got more votes than the other candidates - check
If you think she shouldn't be an MP, you go take it up with the people that elected her.
In the meantime, if you could refrain from conducting your exercise in class warfare here, I for one would appreciate it.
Wed, 2011-05-04 19:55
#85
@ Arthur Cramer
Apology accepted. Except that then you go on to link me with the "left uniters", which I am not and have never been. I agreed with **one** comment Business Lefty made and now I'm somehow one of them? I accept your apology in advance (just kidding).
I want a left wing government and I don't really care what the party is called. I want the more right wing (or centrist) members of the present NDP gone and I want the party to go further back to the left again. Right now, the party is becoming too much of a Liberal Lite (compared of course to the Liberals of decades ago and not the Liberals of today). I also don't like that the party under Layton seems to be more focussed too much on power and not enough on principles.
If people want to get rid of the "old guard", I'm in trouble too, just like you, because I turned 50 this year - 
. It's certainly would not be me that wants to get rid of the "old guard" because that would be getting rid of me (and it would be rather silly for me to push to get rid of me!) I have been involved with the NDP since I was a kid, when my parents took me to conventions and I would help out with other stuff too.
As for your last statement, I agree! Us "old folks" have to stick together!
Wed, 2011-05-04 20:38
#86
I don't remember you or any of you mystery rabblers showing up before today. Maybe my recollection is wrong, but I can't recall most of you involved in debate before now. Then all of sudden you guys start showing up. I never heard of businessleftist before this week. Where were you guys? Or observant,521, I have been reading what he has written. I have never heard New Dems that have ever spoken like you, including the young kids involved in the party today.
You may be interested to know that rabble.ca had more than 300,000 unique visits during the election period. We've many new users joining us (and the occasional troll, but they're easily dealt with). Many other long time members have returned from hiatus because of the election.
Arthur, this isn't a private club, and we encourage new members with diverse points of view. That's what keeps babble interesting.
Wed, 2011-05-04 22:08
#87
"Unite the Left", and Saskatchewan'll be eternally out of reach.
And remember that even in John Turner's 1984 nadir, Grits polling in the 20s handed a Sask seat or two to the NDP.
Wed, 2011-05-04 22:32
#88
The Con media are going to go berserk with this kind of stuff,
So far, the only people I've seen going berserk on this are the CBC, the Toronto Star, the Liberal Party and a handful of classist mysogynists. And you.
It's one thing to remark on the absurdity of the situation. You are engaged in a wholesale attack on this woman simply because she doesn't fit your bourgeois idea of what a proper middle class MP looks like.
Your behaviour over the past 24 hours has been outrageously sexist and classist and I have flagged several of your posts for offensive content.
The qualifications to be an MP are:
- Canadian citizen - check
- 18 years of age or older - check
- not in jail - check
- got more votes than the other candidates - check
If you think she shouldn't be an MP, you go take it up with the people that elected her.
In the meantime, if you could refrain from conducting your exercise in class warfare here, I for one would appreciate it.
What Malcolm said.
Wed, 2011-05-04 22:53
#89
Let's see on the provincial scene in Saskatchewan there are too parties and the NDP is the dominant one. At the federal level it wouldn't work though...why?
Wed, 2011-05-04 23:01
#90
Arthur Cramer
Ken and Malcom:
You guys are so on target on this.
Thu, 2011-05-05 00:00
#91
The Con media are going to go berserk with this kind of stuff,
So far, the only people I've seen going berserk on this are the CBC, the Toronto Star, the Liberal Party and a handful of classist mysogynists. And you.
It's one thing to remark on the absurdity of the situation. You are engaged in a wholesale attack on this woman simply because she doesn't fit your bourgeois idea of what a proper middle class MP looks like.
Your behaviour over the past 24 hours has been outrageously sexist and classist and I have flagged several of your posts for offensive content.
The qualifications to be an MP are:
- Canadian citizen - check
- 18 years of age or older - check
- not in jail - check
- got more votes than the other candidates - check
If you think she shouldn't be an MP, you go take it up with the people that elected her.
In the meantime, if you could refrain from conducting your exercise in class warfare here, I for one would appreciate it.
All I can say is your post = winner.
Thu, 2011-05-05 02:16
#92
yeah
______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!The Con media are going to go berserk with this kind of stuff,
So far, the only people I've seen going berserk on this are the CBC, the Toronto Star, the Liberal Party and a handful of classist mysogynists. And you.
It's one thing to remark on the absurdity of the situation. You are engaged in a wholesale attack on this woman simply because she doesn't fit your bourgeois idea of what a proper middle class MP looks like.
Your behaviour over the past 24 hours has been outrageously sexist and classist and I have flagged several of your posts for offensive content.
The qualifications to be an MP are:
- Canadian citizen - check
- 18 years of age or older - check
- not in jail - check
- got more votes than the other candidates - check
If you think she shouldn't be an MP, you go take it up with the people that elected her.
In the meantime, if you could refrain from conducting your exercise in class warfare here, I for one would appreciate it.
All I can say is your post = winner.
Wed, 2011-09-07 18:02
#93
Boom Boom
Lefties, a little progressive merger wouldn’t hurt 
by Jamey Heath, a former NDP research and communications director
Wed, 2011-09-07 18:41
#94
Northern Shoveler
BC is a perfect example of a place where it is one of two parties. Even with a corrupt arrogant government the NDP has not won an election in a decade. That is the fate of a merged NDP/Liberal party. The Liberals are needed to draw off some of Harpers potential support. It would be nice if they ran from the right next time but as a kinder gentler government. Any left leaning liberal supporters who didn't vote NDP last time will likely make their own migration in the next election. The Liberals have no membership base in places like BC and all their seats might be up for grabs next election. The NDP always does its best in three way races and might lose seats in BC if a merger happened.
Wed, 2011-09-07 18:48
#95
The Globe and Mail are pushing hard on a merger. This is the paper of big Business and the rich.
What they want is for the perfidious Liberals to infect the accendant NDP with corporate infiltrators.
Edited for foul language.
I am most passionately against such an idea.
Wed, 2011-09-07 19:10
#96
Arthur Cramer
This is a surprise. Very old thread.
But, I say ditto Tommy_Paine. If they want a party with Coops as President, they are welcome to it!
Wed, 2011-09-07 22:29
#97
ditto Tommy
______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!The Globe and Mail are pushing hard on a merger. This is the paper of big Business and the rich.
What they want is for the perfidious Liberals to infect the accendant NDP with corporate infiltrators.
Edited for foul language.
I am most passionately against such an idea.
Thu, 2011-09-08 01:47
#98
Malcolm
I used to say that there were two types of people who advocated merger:
* those who are clueless about politics and
* those who are clueless about arithmetic.
I relaize now that I missed a type:
* those who want the HarperCons to stay in power forever unchallenged.
Thu, 2011-09-08 01:47
#99
Malcolm
I used to say that there were two types of people who advocated merger:
* those who are clueless about politics and
* those who are clueless about arithmetic.
I relaize now that I missed a type:
* those who want the HarperCons to stay in power forever unchallenged.
Thu, 2011-09-08 01:47
#100
Malcolm
I used to say that there were two types of people who advocated merger:
* those who are clueless about politics and
* those who are clueless about arithmetic.
I relaize now that I missed a type:
* those who want the HarperCons to stay in power forever unchallenged.
Thu, 2011-09-08 02:40
#101
I used to say that there were two types of people who advocated merger: * those who are clueless about politics and * those who are clueless about arithmetic. I relaize now that I missed a type: * those who want the HarperCons to stay in power forever unchallenged.
You can say that again and again and again.