Sorry but I am super paranoid of the party executive ruining the NDP and if they are going to try and demonize Mulcair I will be throwing my support behind him even more!
NDP Leadership Thread - Part 3
Mon, 2011-08-29 22:30
#52
knownothing
Mon, 2011-08-29 22:39
#53
Boom Boom
Back to the pundits on P&P tonight - one of them characterized the NDP as being divided in two - for or against something, can't remember what the dividing issue was. Anyone? Since it was on the CBC and possibly seen by dozens or maybe even hundreds of viewers, it should be rebuffed.
Mon, 2011-08-29 22:46
#54
knownothing
Capstick said it was divided into two camps those who think it is too soon and some that think it is time to get going on leadership aspirations.
Mon, 2011-08-29 22:48
#55
Boom Boom
Yeah - that's it. I thought it was something more sinister - my memory is failing me. 
Mon, 2011-08-29 22:50
#56
knownothing
Yeah - that's it. I thought it was something more sinister - my memory is failing me.
Rob Silver said the party was divided into Mulcair and Layton-people camps.
Mon, 2011-08-29 22:54
#57
Boom Boom
Rob Silver said the party was divided into Mulcair and Layton-people camps.
Didn't someone say the NDP was divided into Brian Topp and Thomas Mulcair camps? Or maybe that was Rob Silver again? 
Mon, 2011-08-29 22:54
#58
Here is something that is a total mystery to me...I have seen a few Liberals (i.e. people who know less than nothing about goings on in the NDP) over the past couple of years pedal this narrative about The Mulcair "camp" before. The only problem is that I have never ever seen a single solitary name mentioned of anyone in this so-called "Mulcair camp" apart from - one would assume - Mulcair himself. Who exactly are his acolytes? who supports him? what high profile MPs are in his so-called camp? Does he even have a camp?
Mon, 2011-08-29 22:56
#59
Boom Boom
The more I see of Evan Solomon, the more I miss Don Newman.
Mon, 2011-08-29 23:00
#60
I don't put much stock in what Silver or Watt has to say about the NDP leadership that has barely started. And taking Watt's suggestion that the party needs either Topp or Chow to stay together is just plain foolish.
He's saying that MP's outside of Quebec won't accept someone like Mulcair or that MP's in Quebec won't accept someone like Julian. Nonsense.
Mon, 2011-08-29 23:02
#61
knownothing
Watt is just trying to keep up his narrative that people voted for Layton and not for left-wing policies.
Silver wants a merger.
Mon, 2011-08-29 23:04
#62
Here is something that is a total mystery to me...I have seen a few Liberals (i.e. people who know less than nothing about goings on in the NDP) over the past couple of years pedal this narrative about The Mulcair "camp" before. The only problem is that I have never ever seen a single solitary name mentioned of anyone in this so-called "Mulcair camp" apart from - one would assume - Mulcair himself. Who exactly are his acolytes? who supports him? what high profile MPs are in his so-called camp? Does he even have a camp?
Probably because the Liberal Party is always divided into camps... Turner's camp... Chretien's camp... Martin's camp... etc. They don't get that in the NDP, we're one camp and not a bunch of backstabbers seeking power.
Mon, 2011-08-29 23:07
#63
Boom Boom
Neither Silver nor Watt have the NDP's best interests at heart - that's obvious, isn't it?
It's a politics show, and I guess the more outrageous it gets, the higher the ratings go. Susan Bonner would have been much better than Evan Solomon as a host - she wouldn't stand for the nonsense that Solomon tolerates.
Mon, 2011-08-29 23:08
#64
Watt is just trying to keep up his narrative that people voted for Layton and not for left-wing policies.
Silver wants a merger.
I think that analysis is somewhat correct. In Quebec, people liked Jack and voted for Jack... but to me, he was the vehicle that brought social democratic Quebec to it's natural "home" in the NDP.
If Jack had been a right-wing Tory with the same "talents", I doubt Quebec would have voted gone down that road.
Mon, 2011-08-29 23:09
#65
Probably because the Liberal Party is always divided into camps... Turner's camp... Chretien's camp... Martin's camp... etc. They don't get that in the NDP, we're one camp and not a bunch of backstabbers seeking power.Here is something that is a total mystery to me...I have seen a few Liberals (i.e. people who know less than nothing about goings on in the NDP) over the past couple of years pedal this narrative about The Mulcair "camp" before. The only problem is that I have never ever seen a single solitary name mentioned of anyone in this so-called "Mulcair camp" apart from - one would assume - Mulcair himself. Who exactly are his acolytes? who supports him? what high profile MPs are in his so-called camp? Does he even have a camp?
That was actually demonstrated very well by the NDP in Jack's first election as leader. Yes the candidates campaigned quite vigourously for the top spot, but once that race was finished each one focused their energies on the wider picture. It's noteworthy that every leadership candidate in 2003 sought a seat in the House of Commons in 2004, although unfortunately some were not successful.
Mon, 2011-08-29 23:10
#66
Watt is just trying to keep up his narrative that people voted for Layton and not for left-wing policies.Silver wants a merger.
Why does the media keep floating this merger idea when it's clear from key people in both the Liberals and the NDP that such an idea is not on?
Mon, 2011-08-29 23:26
#67
Boom Boom
CBC poll: Is It Time For The Liberals and NDP To Unite?
Yes 32.55% (180 votes)
No 62.03% (343 votes)
Not sure 5.42% (30 votes)
Total Votes: 553
Mon, 2011-08-29 23:58
#68
Comartin has ruled himself out, Tim Naumetz is reporting in the Hill Times Online.
Tue, 2011-08-30 01:26
#69
What Rob Silver meant to say was there is a Chretien camp and a Martin camp in the NDP, each camp is arguing about which of the two leaders is most culpable for the Liberals' disastrous 13 years in government.
Tue, 2011-08-30 01:35
#70
This list is horribly incomplete, but I think the race is stacking up like this at the moment, ranking candiates from most to least likely to win. I'd say the lead Topp and Mulcair have on the rest of the field is comparable to the one Ignatieff and Mulcair had on the rest of the Liberals in 2006.
Frontrunners:
Brian Topp
Age: 51
Fluently bilingual Quebec native
NDP President (2011-), NDP campaign advisor (2011), NDP National campaign director (2006, 2008), Advisor to David Miller's victorious 2003 mayoral campaign, Chief of Staff to Premier Roy Romanow (1993-2000)
Political Traits: Moderate, described as being from the "winning" camp of the NDP for his remarkable electoral record as a backroom strategist.
Writes a column for the Globe and Mail: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/brian-topp
Thomas Mulcair
Age: 56
Fluently bilingual Quebec native
MP for Outremont, Deputy Leader of the NDP, Quebec lieutenant (2007-)
MNA for Chomedey (1994-2007), Quebec Minister of the Environment (2003-2006)
Political Traits: Moderate
Second Tier:
Peggy Nash
Age: 60
Considered bilingual
MP for Parkdale-High Park (2006-2008; 2011-), Industry Critic (2006-2008), Finance Critic (2011-)
NDP President (2009-2011)
Assistant to the President of the Canadian Autoworkers Union (1985 - 2005?)
Paul Dewar
Age: 48
Fluently bilingual
MP for Ottawa Centre (2006-)
Peter Julian
Age: 49
Fluently bilingual
MP for Burnaby-New Westminster (2004-)
Tue, 2011-08-30 01:41
#71
This list is horribly incomplete, but I think the race is stacking up like this at the moment, ranking candiates from most to least likely to win. I'd say the lead Topp and Mulcair have on the rest of the field is comparable to the one Ignatieff and Mulcair had on the rest of the Liberals in 2006.
Frontrunners:
Brian Topp
Age: 51
Fluently bilingual Quebec native
NDP President (2011-), NDP campaign advisor (2011), NDP National campaign director (2006, 2008), Advisor to David Miller's victorious 2003 mayoral campaign, Chief of Staff to Premier Roy Romanow (1993-2000)
Political Traits: Moderate, described as being from the "winning" camp of the NDP for his remarkable electoral record as a backroom strategist.
Writes a column for the Globe and Mail: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/brian-toppThomas Mulcair
Age: 56
Fluently bilingual Quebec native
MP for Outremont, Deputy Leader of the NDP, Quebec lieutenant (2007-)
MNA for Chomedey (1994-2007), Quebec Minister of the Environment (2003-2006)
Political Traits: ModerateSecond Tier:
Peggy Nash
Age: 60
Considered bilingual
MP for Parkdale-High Park (2006-2008; 2011-), Industry Critic (2006-2008), Finance Critic (2011-)
NDP President (2009-2011)
Assistant to the President of the Canadian Autoworkers Union (1985 - 2005?)Paul Dewar
Age: 48
Fluently bilingual
MP for Ottawa Centre (2006-)Peter Julian
Age: 49
Fluently bilingual
MP for Burnaby-New Westminster (2004-)
Ignatieff and Rae? Of course we remember that neither of them won.
Tue, 2011-08-30 01:48
#72
I loved Evan Solomon on earlier shows but agree that the women do a better job than he does.
Figure that there will be a few serious about the job and a couple who are trying to increase their profile.
Would love to see Avi Lewis too but he just took a leave of absence from Al Jazeera English to work on a new film project. Naomi Klein has basically ruled herself out on previous occassions.
They were mentioning Gary Doer not Paul Dewar on Politics.
Nathan Cullin just had twins - but Harper banked on Jack not wanting an election because he just had hip surgery.
Wished that both Olivia and Libby were fully bilingual.
Some of the newbies might consider it if they had a full term under their belt and were into their second term.
Tue, 2011-08-30 01:51
#73
Oh dear, I like Paul Dewar a lot, but he lacks in the charisma (and sometimes grooming) department. If he could change this in a campaign, I would give him a second look. What about Megan Leslie? Is she expected to take a pass?
Tue, 2011-08-30 01:57
#74
This list is horribly incomplete, but I think the race is stacking up like this at the moment, ranking candiates from most to least likely to win. I'd say the lead Topp and Mulcair have on the rest of the field is comparable to the one Ignatieff and Mulcair had on the rest of the Liberals in 2006.
Frontrunners:
Brian Topp
Age: 51
Fluently bilingual Quebec native
NDP President (2011-), NDP campaign advisor (2011), NDP National campaign director (2006, 2008), Advisor to David Miller's victorious 2003 mayoral campaign, Chief of Staff to Premier Roy Romanow (1993-2000)
Political Traits: Moderate, described as being from the "winning" camp of the NDP for his remarkable electoral record as a backroom strategist.
Writes a column for the Globe and Mail: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/brian-toppThomas Mulcair
Age: 56
Fluently bilingual Quebec native
MP for Outremont, Deputy Leader of the NDP, Quebec lieutenant (2007-)
MNA for Chomedey (1994-2007), Quebec Minister of the Environment (2003-2006)
Political Traits: ModerateSecond Tier:
Peggy Nash
Age: 60
Considered bilingual
MP for Parkdale-High Park (2006-2008; 2011-), Industry Critic (2006-2008), Finance Critic (2011-)
NDP President (2009-2011)
Assistant to the President of the Canadian Autoworkers Union (1985 - 2005?)Paul Dewar
Age: 48
Fluently bilingual
MP for Ottawa Centre (2006-)Peter Julian
Age: 49
Fluently bilingual
MP for Burnaby-New Westminster (2004-)Ignatieff and Rae? Of course we remember that neither of them won.
I'm subtlely making a point here. 
Tue, 2011-08-30 03:30
#75
well, a few more thoughts on the leadership race here.
1) on mulcair's quebec profile, and why he's such an obvious leader. i'm not sure what's going on with the anti-mulcair campaign popping up, but my guess is that it has a lot to do with the culture of the ndp itself. we tend to be our own breed and it's not at all clear that mulcair has put in his time, or that his style of politics is the same as ours. he's tough and clever and he's not really coming out of the social justice background. that said, this guy is really famous in quebec, his french is perfectly quebec anglophone, and he's just the sort of polished go-for-the-throat progressive that could finally bring it home. personally, i think it would be crazy - just crazy - for us new democrats to listen to any media types at all in what concerns this guy because, all things equal, this race should probably end up as a question of whether we think he can bring us to government through ontario and the prairies. holding quebec like mulcair would is so incredibly important to the ndp route to government that the only real question is whether we trust that mulcair can bring the rest of the country along.
2) topp. nothing against the guy, met him and he seems really really partisan (in the best way i know), but i'm not at all sure that we would roll the dice unnecessarily at this point, when we have a mulcair in the wings. like really, does this smack of a vanity candidacy, our version of count iggsley, a creation of the media/insider nexus? is the layton team uncomfortable about ceding the reins pushing a topp candidacy without the best interests of progressive canada in mind? he could be a great leader and i trust his heart, but he's unproven as a public figure and it would be an unnecessary risk, if you ask me.
3) nash/cullen/dewar/chow/chrisholm/anyone else along these lines = their poor french and seeming lack of familiarity with the issues in quebec disqualify them instantly, lest we hop the express train to annihilation in la belle province.
4) david miller/gary doer/etc. i don't know how good their french is, but these would be the sort of candidates that would tend to lose ndp leadership elections. the ndp doesn't tend to reward those who've held office for any length of time, and these guys, by virtue of being the most successful leftist office-holders in the country, have essentially forfeited the most interesting ndp electoral advantage: the promise of novelty and real, massive change.
5) finally, the dark horse. peter julian's french is actually very good, and i think that he could actually become a very credible candidate, especially if topp does enter the race. in a situation where the decision becomes one of mulcair/topp, where both represent different aspects of the ndp's march to destiny, julian could well become the traditionalists' guy. probably the west's strongest and most obvious candidate.
beyond these, it's hard to see how the timeline allows for anything else. i'm guessing that it'll be 5-7 candidates, and that we'll have at least 2 ontario candidates. but my expectation is that the critical importance of quebec to the new ndp math will quickly push the narrative into a choice between mulcair and some broadly-supported alternative, which could be topp, some mono-lingual, julian, miller or someone else. don't see any women, non-whites, or french-canadians having a shot this time around, that's for sure.
one guy's opinion.
Tue, 2011-08-30 03:41
#76
Boom Boom
This list is horribly incomplete, but I think the race is stacking up like this at the moment, ranking candiates from most to least likely to win. I'd say the lead Topp and Mulcair have on the rest of the field is comparable to the one Ignatieff and Mulcair had on the rest of the Liberals in 2006.
You're buying into the media narrative with this stuff.
Tue, 2011-08-30 04:58
#77
I think Flight from Kamakura's (what the hell is Kamakura?) observations are quite shrewd. The party may be taking an enormous risk in rejecting Mulcair, especially if the recent petty slanders are perceived as a reason.
Shortly after Jack's announcemnet I started the thread "Kneecapping the next leader" because I perceived that the MSM and the other parties were propagating the narrative that Mulcair was divisive, arrogant, etc. What I saw in him as forcefulnss and passion was being turned against him.
I can expect this from his political enemies but for it to come from those who should have been his friends is unforgivable. The NDP has always had an establishment that is worried about ceding influence. I saw how the party establishment rallied around Audrey McLaughlin in 89 to keep out Dave Barrett whom they saw as a threat to their influence. We all know how that turned out.
I pray for the party that this is not true. I hope that it is just a "junior staffer" as Ottawa Observor speculates (a junior staffer who should be fired forthwith) but there are uneasy indications it is more widespread.
I can forsee a nightmair scenario if this is not nipped in the bud. Mulcair has the support of maybe 50 MPs from Quebec as well as near unanimous backing in his home province. The establishment closes ranks against him and he is defeated because of the peculiar electoral geography of the NDP as well as the whisper campaign. Where will that leave the party? It will be like the last scene in Aguirre the Wrath of God.
The personal attacks on Mulcair must cease immediately. Anyone associated with them is unworthy of exercising any influence in the party.
Tue, 2011-08-30 05:53
#78
West Coast Greeny....
Thomas Mulcair is not a Quebec native.
He was born in Ottawa.
Tue, 2011-08-30 07:44
#79
dacckon
Mulcair has stated repeatedly that he doesn't want the top job. I think Ian Capstick said this. I prefer to see voices from QC like Karl Belanger or Guy Caron.
The party has to remember, party elitism can produce horrific electoral results.
Tue, 2011-08-30 08:18
#80
When has Mulcair said he doesn't want the job? I have not seen that anywhere. I tend to agree with what la Akita and Nicky have said. I will form my own opinion of Mulcair and I really don't care what some Tory and Librral pundits tell us to think of him. It will be interesting to see just where the Quebec MPs line up. Topp has a lot of connections in Quebec and not all the Quebec MPs are all that crazy about Mulcair so the Quebec caucus may be more split than people expect.
Tue, 2011-08-30 09:13
#81
knownothing
When has Mulcair said he doesn't want the job? I have not seen that anywhere. I tend to agree with what la Akita and Nicky have said. I will form my own opinion of Mulcair and I really don't care what some Tory and Librral pundits tell us to think of him. It will be interesting to see just where the Quebec MPs line up. Topp has a lot of connections in Quebec and not all the Quebec MPs are all that crazy about Mulcair so the Quebec caucus may be more split than people expect.
Agreed. People are questioning Mulcair's beliefs and stances but he did take a chance and run for the NDP in Outremont so that should stand for something no?
Tue, 2011-08-30 09:45
#82
Mulcair has stated repeatedly that he doesn't want the top job.
What Mulcair repeatedly said in the past is that he was not gunning for Jack's job. While Jack was in it, in other words. That he was, was a horrible nasty rumour started by Liberals and Conservatives, and picked up by the media from them as gospel.
Not one journalist has ever reported a single incident or comment on the record to prove this, yet they've repeatedly reported it as fact. The height of fucking irresponsibility, and we should not give it one iota of credibility.
I have seen some flashes of anger from Mulcair myself in the House and the foyer, in situations that Jack might have handled differently, but they were two different men, occupying two completely different roles. I agree with Stockholm and Nicky that I would like to hear more from him, and whether I ultimately support him or not, it's now become pretty clear to me that it's very important he run for the leadership in order to cement his own impression with Canadians, apart from the narrative that's been allowed to take hold about him.
Tue, 2011-08-30 09:55
#83
Robert Chisholm is quoted by Postmedia as saying he is "seriously thinking about running" as well. We'll see how well he can bring up his french in a short time, but what he would bring to the table is previous leadership experience, and Jack's sunny optimism and ability to connect with people.
Top New Democrats test leadership waters: Topp, Chisholm may run to replace Layton
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:02
#84
I hope Brian Topp doesn't run. For one, he will lose. Second, most Canadians will see him as a backroom hack that through a combination of connections and arrogance thought he deserved to have leader of the opposition and prime minister in waiting handed to him on a silver platter (harsh yes, but true). Third, he has never served in elected office and there is a big difference between when you expose yourself to that kind of public accountability and when you pull levers in the back room. Fourth, he doesn't have what it takes: he doesn't have the charisma, stage presence, discretion (read his political columns or comments on babble), tact (see his "high-profile" "NDP insiders"[CBC's words, not mine] leaking his candidacy during the week of mourning for Layton when NDPers were either asked or volunteered to hold their tongues), or street cred to win over the party's base. Royalty be damned.
If the point of Topp running is to take out Mulcair, it will probably succeed; but if it is for Topp to win, then he will fail. In a race that pits Topp against Mulcair with a very nasty undercurrent, the membership will turn left and seek someone out like Julian (or Nash), as a less polarising figure. Julian and Nash are already a big threat to anyone running because the former truly understands the culture of the base and speaks its left-wing language, and Nash is a woman and NDPers will always root for them until gender equity is actually realised in Canadian politics.
To be blunt, the party insiders and royalty are deluding themselves a-la-Peter-Tabuns if they think they can push Topp through. Let Topp run for the nomination in Toronto Danforth and win it fair and square if he wishes, but the leadership is beyond his reach.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:19
#85
I'm probably being foolish or too naive, but is there a chance that Topp threw his name out early (since the rabid media speculation began the day after Jack's death) in order to prevent the media narrative of Mulcair as the heir apparent from taking shape? Ignatieff's handlers badly mishandled his introduction to the party as an heir apparent, the next Trudeau, etc, and the party base rebelled initially. It would be bad for the party if a narrative developed where there was only one real candidate and no choice. I suppose we'll have to see if he actually steps forward, and how the timeline of the vote takes shape.
I agree that Topp doesn't really have the presence to be persuasive in the public arena. The things that he has written will probably be used against him as well, but that would happen with any candidate.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:19
#86
What do New Democrats make of Chisholm's interest in running? My sense of Chisholm is that he is a very impressive former NS NDP leader that blew it big time in the 1999 provincial election. For those unfamiliar with the history, the NDP was leading in the polls (they had won a majority in NS in the 1997 federal election and tied for the highest number of seats, 19, with the Liberals in 1998) and had a handsome, clever, and charismatic leader named Robert Chisholm. Late in the campaign it was alleged that he had been convicted of a DUI in 1978. He tried to dodge the issue for a few days but then admitted it was true.
During that election another key turning point was considered to be the leaders' debate where Robert Chisholm and Liberal Leader Russell MacLellan spent the whole night essentially yelling at eachother. PC leader John Hamm kept his cool and was very civil. On election night, John Hamm won a surprising 30 seat majority government (up from 13 seats) while the NDP and Liberals lost 8 and 9 seats respectively. Robert Chisholm resigned.
Let's assume Robert Chisholm could enter the leadership campaign with good French. Would babblers support a contender with that kind of baggage?
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:23
#87
Why don't we wait and see how any of these candidates rise to the occasion during the leadership race itself? Not to sound like a broken record, but I don't want anyone to be ruled out before it starts. I want to see how they could grow into the role, over the course of the campaign.
ETA: Now that I see Anonymouse's question about Chisholm, I'd only emphasize that point further. He would have had a lot of experience under his belt to learn from. Why do you assume no-one can grow? Layton didn't start off in politics the way he finished in it. It's a metier that has to be learned, and someone who has already banked a lot of that learning could be an asset.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:27
#88
I'm probably being foolish or too naive, but is there a chance that Topp threw his name out early (since the rabid media speculation began the day after Jack's death) in order to prevent the media narrative of Mulcair as the heir apparent from taking shape? Ignatieff's handlers badly mishandled his introduction to the party as an heir apparent, the next Trudeau, etc, and the party base rebelled initially. It would be bad for the party if a narrative developed where there was only one real candidate and no choice. I suppose we'll have to see if he actually steps forward, and how the timeline of the vote takes shape.
I agree that Topp doesn't really have the presence to be persuasive in the public arena. The things that he has written will probably be used against him as well, but that would happen with any candidate.
Mulcair has his dirty laundry too. It came out that while Environment Minister he personally intervened with Premier Charest's office to scrap a climate change grant because the funds were to go to a research institute that included prominent sovereigntists. The whole email exchange was published in the media and made him look quite petty. He has stuck his foot in his mouth before on TV by saying he didn't believe photos of a dead Osama bin Laden existed and called Andrew Coyne a "crap journalist" for instance (Svend Robinson would agree 
). He was also allegedly recruited by the Tories but opted for the NDP. I'm sure there are several other intemperate remarks that I have not noted or am aware of. That being said, I would be surprised if there are many/any? more scandals lingering in Mulcair's past because he has been under intense media scrutiny for the last four years as the heir presumptive to Layton.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:28
#89
he doesn't have ... tact (see his "high-profile" "NDP insiders"[CBC's words, not mine] leaking his candidacy during the week of mourning for Layton when NDPers were either asked or volunteered to hold their tongues
An "insider", from the perspective of the media, could be any party member. They have no idea how well-informed the individual is, but now they've got a quote, and in a competitive media industry, they're going to sell that quote as much as they can.
Also, you've presented no evidence that (a) they were "his" insiders, or that (b) they did so at his request.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:29
#90
Why don't we wait and see how any of these candidates rise to the occasion during the leadership race itself? Not to sound like a broken record, but I don't want anyone to be ruled out before it starts. I want to see how they could grow into the role, over the course of the campaign.
ETA: Now that I see Anonymouse's question about Chisholm, I'd only emphasize that point further. He would have had a lot of experience under his belt to learn from. Why do you assume no-one can grow? Layton didn't start off in politics the way he finished in it. It's a metier that has to be learned, and someone who has already banked a lot of that learning could be an asset.
This is exactly what I wanted to hear. We need a fulsome consideration of all the candidates.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:35
#91
Just to build on what OO wrote - when Jack ran for the NDP leadership in 2002 - one of the the knocks against him was that he was a bit of a loser (ran for mayor in 1991 and was trounced, ran for Parliament in 1993 and came in fourth, ran again in 1997 and came in a distant second etc...)...at the time a lot of people also claimed that it would be a big mistake for the NDP to have a leader from Toronto because supposedly "everybody hates Toronto".
I hope that there are a good half a dozen or more strong candidates for the leadership including someone like Chisholm - at the very least it will be a great chance to introduce Canadians to a wide range of NDP luminaries and showcase what an NDP cabinet might look like after 2015.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:36
#92
Mulcair has his dirty laundry too. It came out that while Environment Minister he personally intervened with Premier Charest's office to scrap a climate change grant because the funds were to go to a research institute that included prominent sovereigntists. The whole email exchange was published in the media and made him look quite petty. He has stuck his foot in his mouth before on TV by saying he didn't believe photos of a dead Osama bin Laden existed and called Andrew Coyne a "crap journalist" for instance (Svend Robinson would agree
1. Most people who voted in the CBC poll about it felt that Mulcair had won the exchange with Coyne.
2. Mulcair was "approached" by the Conservatives, not recruited by them. He has said he's been a federal New Democrat. Hell, if the Tories called me to run for them, I'd be really interested in learning as much as I could about where their machine was at, as well.
3. The Osama Bin Laden story was silly, everyone was tired, and there's a question whether the question was even properly understood. Evan Solomon is a moron, and is always looking to cook up ridiculous controversies to drive hits to their website.
Anonymouse, I'm starting to ask myself about your own creds. There is a hint of concern trolling here, that's become a convenient opening to smear various candidates with.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:37
#93
I have an idea for the NDP's leadership electoral process. I think the 25% affiliate carve-out is a bit of an anachronism and should be eliminated altogether. But we still have this problem of a caucus that is 58% Quebec and a membership that is about 2% Quebec, PLUS the reality that the leader is the leader of the parliamentary caucus. So why not do this - ditch the 25% affiliate vote and instead give the NDP caucus in the House of Commons a 25% weighted vote in the process. That way not only do we recognize the fact that caucus should have a role in picking their own leader, but we would also instantly be giving Quebec about 14% of the total vote just from their share of the 25% caucus carve out and that would help counter balance the lag in NDP membership in Quebec.
That's a very good idea but I think the best is still to change the rule to give time for the recruitment of Quebec members who will be able to vote in the leadership process. It will be a historical opportunity to engage Quebecers and consolidate the bew base. If Quebecers feel left out despite giving the NDP the majority of its seats, the party will be doomed in the next elections. The Conservatives have a solid base in the West and grew from there. The NDP needs to strengthen its QC base to be able to expand elsewhere. As a Quebecer, my choice would not necessarily be for a Quebecer, anyone with a good French and who can bridge English Canada and Quebec is a good candidate.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:38
#94
he doesn't have ... tact (see his "high-profile" "NDP insiders"[CBC's words, not mine] leaking his candidacy during the week of mourning for Layton when NDPers were either asked or volunteered to hold their tongues
An "insider", from the perspective of the media, could be any party member. They have no idea how well-informed the individual is, but now they've got a quote, and in a competitive media industry, they're going to sell that quote as much as they can.
Also, you've presented no evidence that (a) they were "his" insiders, or that (b) they did so at his request.
Very true. The way that sensationalist Evan Solomon was going on about it, he had me thinking it was people like Brad Lavigne and Anne McGrath who had said it, having a strong incentive to see Topp as leader as it would assure their jobs/continue the status quo.
In all this speculation, the branch of the party I most feel sorry for is the BC NDP. They had hired Topp on as their BC campaign chair, with an election expected early this Fall. Last election the BC NDP had a lot of logistical problems and the federal party had to bail them out, so the addition of Topp was widely hailed, despite or perhaps because of, his role as NDP president. If Topp does run, and he ought to do what is best for him, the BC NDP would be an unfortunate case of collateral damage (although I'm sure the provincial party can recover, but you can't shade the fact that they would lose a star performer).
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:39
#95
Just to build on what OO wrote - when Jack ran for the NDP leadership in 2002 - one of the the knocks against him was that he was a bit of a loser (ran for mayor in 1991 and was trounced, ran for Parliament in 1993 and came in fourth, ran again in 1997 and came in a distant second etc...)...at the time a lot of people also claimed that it would be a big mistake for the NDP to have a leader from Toronto because supposedly "everybody hates Toronto".
I hope that there are a good half a dozen or more strong candidates for the leadership including someone like Chisholm - at the very least it will be a great chance to introduce Canadians to a wide range of NDP luminaries and showcase what an NDP cabinet might look like after 2015.
Amen.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:41
#96
knownothing
Mulcair has his dirty laundry too. It came out that while Environment Minister he personally intervened with Premier Charest's office to scrap a climate change grant because the funds were to go to a research institute that included prominent sovereigntists. The whole email exchange was published in the media and made him look quite petty. He has stuck his foot in his mouth before on TV by saying he didn't believe photos of a dead Osama bin Laden existed and called Andrew Coyne a "crap journalist" for instance (Svend Robinson would agree
1. Most people who voted in the CBC poll about it felt that Mulcair had won the exchange with Coyne.
2. Mulcair was "approached" by the Conservatives, not recruited by them. He has said he's been a federal New Democrat. Hell, if the Tories called me to run for them, I'd be really interested in learning as much as I could about where their machine was at, as well.
3. The Osama Bin Laden story was silly, everyone was tired, and there's a question whether the question was even properly understood. Evan Solomon is a moron, and is always looking to cook up ridiculous controversies to drive hits to their website.
Anonymouse, I'm starting to ask myself about your own creds. There is a hint of concern trolling here, that's become a convenient opening to smear various candidates with.
3. I don't want to start anything but Anonymouse brought it up. Many people think bin Laden died in 2001 or 2002 of kidney disease. Do you actually believe the US dumped his body in the ocean?
I sure as hell don't. They have lied before and they will again. Mulcair won me over with that slip of the tongue.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:41
#97
The rules don't actually need to be "changed" to allow more members to be signed up in Quebec. Its just a question of what timelines the party sets for the contest. Let's say that they go for a 30-day cut-off on membership sign-ups (ie: you have to have become a member no less than 30 days before the leadership vote) and let's say that they set the leadership vote for early February - it would mean that membership drives in Quebec (and elsewhere) could happen all thorugh the fall and all through the Christmas holidays. That strikes me as ample time to "prime the pump" for a membership surge in Quebec.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:45
#98
I'm on the fence about Topp. I wrote in another thread that if he has been maneuvering behind the scenes in the wake of Jack's death to push his name forward, while everyone else was maintaining a respectful silence, then I wouldn't support someone capable of those kind of graceless tactics. But then another more charitable explanation occurred to me, so now I am just waiting to see what transpires before I make my mind up about him.
On the whole, though, I would prefer an elected member to run for leader, I think. Someone who has been elected has faced the public and convinced people to vote for him/her on the local level.
As for Mulcair, this developing media narrative about how difficult he is etc gets my back up for some reason. It seems like it's based largely on hearsay and gossip. There used to be a narrative that he was ambitious as well, which seemed silly to me given that he chose to run for the NDP when they were the fourth party. I think that says a lot, and it was quite a coup that Jack convinced him to come over to us.
Mulcair has his dirty laundry too.
The things you mentioned seem quite minor; at the very least that e-mail exchange reveals that Mulcair is a committed federalist, which people outside of Quebec seem to want to hear.
Every potential leader is going to have baggage: even Jack had that subsidized housing smear from his days as city councillor, and then the smear that emerged in the most recent election. I think each candidate should be considered on his or her own merits, and the baggage that they have can usually be managed.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:48
#99
double post
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:50
#100
Anonymouse, I'm starting to ask myself about your own creds. There is a hint of concern trolling here, that's become a convenient opening to smear various candidates with.
How is this: I won't comment on any rumours or unnamed sources? Hopefully others will follow suit and it will help to promote a clean campaign. That being said, I want to go in to the race with my eyes wide open, knowing exactly what candidates' liabilities are and being prepared to make my own judgments about what I am comfortable with before voting.
Tue, 2011-08-30 10:50
#101
Anonymouse, I'm starting to ask myself about your own creds. There is a hint of concern trolling here, that's become a convenient opening to smear various candidates with.
How is this: I won't comment on any rumours or unnamed sources? Hopefully others will follow suit and it will help to ensure a clean campaign. That being said, I want to go in to the race with my eyes wide open, knowing exactly what candidates' liabilities are and being prepared to make my own judgments about what I am comfortable with before voting.
That sounds good. The media are going to get up to their own busy-work, and we shouldn't be led around by the nose by them. Let's keep our eyes on the prize.