NDP Leadership Part 7

Bill Davis wrote:

..I don't think Libby would be a very good leader.  She's great and all, but not a leader.

I've seen a lot of this, mostly from the media, but a little from NDP circles too.

The only thing Libby lacks to become leader is French. Admittedly, that is a crucial trait.  But in a hypothetical situation where she was fluent in both languages, Libby would be a great leader.  I lived in her riding for a few years in my BC days, and I was struck with the support and respect she had from New Democrats from across the spectrum.  She's from the left, but I always saw an ability to work within the rather big tent that is the BC NDP.

She has experience, political smarts, strong speaking skills, and an ability to build consensus.  People who meet her, like her.

What else do you need to be leader?

Other than French that is. 

Apologies I haven't read through all the threads.  Not surprising that Olivia's not running though.  Quiet foolish for the media to just assume Jack's wife was a candidate.  I wouldn't be surprised if Mike ran in Jack's old riding though. 

I see Megan Leslie as the left's best option now (I don't know how her french is) but I don't think Libby would be a very good leader.  She's great and all, but not a leader.  As far as Mulcair goes, there would definitely be an anti-Mulcair crowd from the left as he is to the right of the party.  I would expect him to be a terrible PM, we would be fighting him from day one in the labour movement and social movements.  I'll definitely be in the anti-Mulcair crowd.  I don't see any other potential candidate having an anti-crowd.  A Mulcair bid makes me think of a Gerard Kennedy bid for the Liberal Parties (with less resistance from the party establishment).

Seems like Topp is Layton and the establishment's pick if I'm not mistaken?  I'd give him pretty good odds as I don't see anyone else capable of getting above the fray.  But it's still plenty early and things can change.

ottawaobserver wrote:

And, honestly, I thought part of Mulcair's comments *were* about needing time to talk to the rest of the country.

That is what I heard too.

Bingo, Catchfire.

WTF with the posting system???

Bill Davis wrote:

As far as Mulcair goes, there would definitely be an anti-Mulcair crowd from the left as he is to the right of the party.

Care to give us a list of positions that makes Mulcair to the right of the party?

During the Outremont by-election I spoke with a law student from McGill who was campaigning for the Liberals. I asked him about the prospects and he predicted Mulciar's victory long before the polls indicated he would win. He gave a number of reasons as I remember:

1. Mulcair was very respected as a provincial cabinet minister, particularly when he resigned on a matter of principle when Charest was pushing a condo develoment in a provincial park.

2. The team he had assembled. Mulcair had great support amongst my friend's classmates at McGill. He said "they love him and will do anything for him."

3. "He is a real thoroughbred." Very smart and presents himself very well in the media. 

4. "His opponents are afraid of him."

After Mulcair's impressive win I paid closer attention to him and all these assessments have been born out. Look at some of his clips on Youtube. There was a half hour interview on more personal matters that Catherine Clark did on CPAC ( I can't find it now) but it shows a warmth and charm completely out of sync with the recent smears against his character. He can be magnificent in question period. You can see the Cons run for cover.

Two more anecdotes. I spent some time in Outremont in the last week of the spring campaign. I wore a Jack Layton button into a cafe in Mile End. People in tables to either side saw it and engaged me in discussions about the election. They all loved Jack but they revered Mulcair at least as much. 

I also visited Mulcair's campaign office twice. I didn't meet him but the loyalty of his team was palpable. I met a young woman who turned out to be a candidate in one of the suburban ridings. She is now an MP. I asked her why she wasn't campaigning in her own riding. This was at the point when the party was soaring in the Quebec polls and when she had obviously had a chance to win. It was also when a local poll showed Mulcair 22 points ahead with no prospects of losing. She said, "It is so much more important to elect Thomas than to elect me."

I agree with Jan and Stockholm and others that the smears are really indicative of the concern his opponents in the media and other parties have for the prospect of his leadership. (Indeed I started the thread "Kneecapping the next leader" a month ago in response to this media campaign) They see what we should see beyond their swiftboating. That he is the NDP's best hope of taking power.

At this point, the English-language media will never admit that Mulcair has charm or charisma, so people will have to make their  mind up on that count for themselves.  In the early days of his leadership, and even as time went on, the media often slammed Jack as well (too urban, too slick, too much like a used car salesman; he was also attacked for his lack of clarity on the Clarity Act, and for his "homeless" comment on Paul Martin). For a long time, many in the media wouldn't admit that he had charisma or strength as a leader (especially in contrast to various lackluster Liberal leaders). 

DaveW wrote:

... every profile/article has some aside about his temper/ abrasiveness/ lack of Jack's charm, etc.

This last point will be a convenient stick to beat many a leadership candidate with, and eventually the leader.  No one will ever be seen as having it and any lack of success will be explained as being the result of a lack of it.

I haven't made my mind up about the leadership question or Mulcair, (or any of the candidates, in fact, since the leadership race is not yet underway), but there is no evidence so far that Mulcair lacks the ability to connect with people or that he is an unpleasant person.  This is all media spin.

For instance, some people have implied that it was "arrogant" of Mulcair to suggest that he had anything to do with the NDP's success in Quebec, which was apparently all Jack and Jack's personality.  I don't think so;  I think Mulcair shares some of the credit for raising the party's profile, enabling them to attract some good candidates and being the public face and voice of the NDP in Quebec in the years since he was elected. 

That doesn't mean that there aren't good leadership candidates out there aside from Mulcair.  But it's wrong to dismiss one of the strongest contenders before the race has even begun. It's especially troubling that the English media has begun doing just that.   I don't even think that this is entirely intentional; it's just that journalists and spin-doctors are always looking for a narrative (and, in some cases, one that is unfavourable to the NDP), and raising complications or problems about Mulcair's potential leadership (since he is a strong contender) will provide just that opportunity. 

nicky, thanks for the CPAC tip... Here are links to interviews of many current leadership contenders with Catherine Clark on Beyond Politics. Most of the interviews are about their family life growing up, nice to get to the know the MPs better.

Thomas Mulcair: http://www.cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3&pagetype=vod&hl=e&clipID=2690

Meagan Leslie: http://www.cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3&pagetype=vod&h...

Peter Julian: http://www.cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3&pagetype=vod&h...

Paul Dewar: http://www.cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3&pagetype=vod&h...

Charlie Angus: http://www.cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3&pagetype=vod&h...

and a wonderful interview with Jack from 2008: http://www.cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3&pagetype=vod&h...

Perhaps as "Tom", Mulcair can become as popular as "Jack". I'm looking forward to news out of Quebec that shows support for him from other MPs there. And I hope to hear from Northern Ontario's Charlie Angus (note, it's not "Charles") on that very question. Because the fellow is selfless.

I wish the leadership race would officially get started - I'm tired of it already.

josh wrote:

Glad to see Mulcair's effort to "de-unionize" the NDP garnering so much support here at babble.

NOT.

meades wrote:

Doesn't Mulcair usually go by "Tom"?

Not like Harper is "Steve", I suppose.

Dacckon, you could try and look up his speeches in the House of Commons and watch them on ParlVU. He has very good credentials, but obviously would probably have preferred more time as an MP first.

But I would really encourage you not to think defensively about Conservative attacks, or be deterred by what you imagine them to be. We can't let that dictate our choices, though we must deal with them if and when they come.

I think my membership renewal cost me all of $5.00.   Does that entitle me to a vote?

I have to disagree there. Being fluently bilingual on day one is essential. The NDP has too much to lose in francophone Quebec for it to be otherwise.

Besides being fluently bilingual and fully knowledgeable about NDP policy, the next leader will have to be someone who (like Jack Layton) can stand up to Harper and his bullies (especially John Baird) in the House of Commons in fierce debate - and stand up to insults and slurs and not wither away. It's a tough environment. I think Mulcair is the one MP the Cons think twice about trying to provoke because I've seen him give as well as he gets.

Rebecca West wrote:

 As far as being bilingual goes, the French language can be learned.

I've seen people make this assertion before but the answer in this context is a great, big NO. You don't at the age of 60 just wake up one morning and say "oh gee, i think I'll become totally fluent in French and by this time next year, you won't even be able to tll that my mother tongue is actually English". It does not work that way. Children under the age of 7 can pick up a language very quickly. For adults it involves a commitment of YEARS of study and immersion where learning French is your full-time job 24 hours a day, seven days a week - and even then you will probably never achieve real fluency. In the case of Libby Davies, she has been an MP since 1997 and all those years she has had access to free state of the art French lessons. If she didn't manage to achieve total, perfect, flawless French after 14 years of having access to those lessons - we have to assume that she isn't going to do it in the next few months because a few people think she shoudl become leader.

The next leader of the NDP will have to as close as possible to being PERFECTLY bilingual from the day they announce their candidacy. On the job training is not an option.

At best, if you were an anglophone who already spoke French quite well, you MIGHT be able to argue that you would some some immersion programs to raise the level of your French - but if your French can't be described as "fluent" to begin with then you really cannot be considered a serious leadership candidate. The same would go for anyone French speaking who didn't speak English.

Good point - with such a huge Quebec caucus, it would be foolish to elect a new leader that is barely competent in French!

Awesome videos Sara Mayo.

I agree with some of what stockholm has said, bilingualism is required, especially with such a large QC caucus. There are still seats we can win in QC as well as in other provinces with francophone communities. Alot of NDP support comes from populism, and that has to be communicated properly.

(Edit: I smell sarcasm below me)

Not in time she can't, unless the Telefrancais magic pineapple casts a spell on her or something.

Doug wrote:

I have to disagree there. Being fluently bilingual on day one is essential. The NDP has too much to lose in francophone Quebec for it to be otherwise.

That of course would have meant Jack was not a possible leadership choice.  He did travel for quite some time with a French coach while he got up to speed.  

I find it hilarious that Jack is the gold medal standard and he would not make the grade in this new universe.  

Thanks to Sara Mayo for posting the video links. Really worth watching. I was impressed with Mulcair and his background.

Everyone has to remember that the NDP leader is someone who has to represent the party and its values across the whole country, but if she or he is succesful in doing so, there will be many opportunities for others to have a huge impact within government. Just as an example, Libby Davis would obviously be a Cabinet Minister and have great influence in her own portfolio as well as around the Cabinet table. Consequently I am more concerned about who can best do the job of representing the NDP and continuing to build the party - and maybe win the next election. I suppose what I am saying is that I would rather have a left wing Cabinet Minister and an MOR NDP PM then a left wing leader of a (once again) third party. Not that I would identify Mulcair as on the 'right' of the NDP necessarily. He did resign from a Cabinet position over a a matter of principle and that is no small matter.  

Northern Shoveler wrote:

I find it hilarious that Jack is the gold medal standard and he would not make the grade in this new universe.  

It's Jack's success that raised the bar, so that 2003 French isn't good enough for our leader in 2011. I think that should be obvious.