It's a good problem to have.
NDP Leadership -round 8
Sat, 2011-09-10 00:10
#52
Sat, 2011-09-10 00:24
#53
Not to cheer for Pat Martin, but it's noteworthy how Quebec Liberals -- Justin Trudeau as well as Denis Coderre -- are the ones talking about how much Liberals and New Democrats have in common. They know that the Quebec public wanted the December 2008 coalition to take power, and that formed the background to how they voted on May 2nd. This is why the NDP leadership has been careful not to slam the door on co-operation, without encouraging it: Quebec voters want co-operation to oust Harper, and Quebec Liberals understand this only too well.
http://fr.canoe.ca/infos/quebeccanada/archives/2011/08/20110829-214309.html
Sat, 2011-09-10 00:34
#54
Very important point, Wilf. Openness to cooperation of all kinds in order to defeat Harper was one of the NDP's most attractive perceived features - as opposed to Ignatieff, who got trapped into writing off coalition possibilities at the very start of the campaign.
Sat, 2011-09-10 00:38
#55
I suspect we're going to be moving off the beauty contest preliminary phase of the race and into some announcements next week, probably timed for before or after the Caucus meeting in Quebec City. Folks are going to have to decide pretty soon.
Sat, 2011-09-10 00:47
#56
. This is why the NDP leadership has been careful not to slam the door on co-operation, without encouraging it: Quebec voters want co-operation to oust Harper, and Quebec Liberals understand this only too well.
Well said.
I think an actual merger would be disastrous - why would anyone want to invite their fighting neighbours to move in, especially knowing ahead of time that they would act like they owned the place?
But I I am sure the writing is on the wall for those who see the need for some kind of shift.And there must be common ground for some sort of cooperation short of a merger.
If that is heresy, it is my kind of heresy.
Sat, 2011-09-10 01:00
#57
Radio-Canada is pretty definitive: Chisholm does not speak French, Megan Leslie does.
http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/Politique/2011/08/31/002-chisholm-l...
Sat, 2011-09-10 10:40
#58
Charlie Angus Statement on the NDP Leadership Race
It has only been a few short weeks since the tragic death of Jack Layton. Jack wasn’t just the leader of our party he was like a member of our family. And as we grieve, we find ourselves thrust into the media glare of a leadership race. It is a race that will have profound consequences for Canada’s political landscape. The next leader will need the vision and political “chops” to carry out Jack’s mission to form a social democratic government in the next election.
The papers have been rife with names of potential leadership candidates. Amidst the growing speculation, people have been calling and e-mailing asking me to run. It is a request that I haven’t taken lightly. In fact, a key group of political organizers – people for whom I have always had the greatest respect -- have come forward to put a team in place.
Nonetheless, after much deliberation, I have decided not to participate in this upcoming race.
The process of choosing a replacement for Jack Layton will come during our first term as official opposition. Canadians are looking to us to continue our work of holding the Stephen Harper government to account. We are facing the most militant and divisive government in Canadian history. They have no intention of giving us time to grieve or rebuild. We will need experienced MPs willing to take the fight to the right wing agenda. This will free up other MPs to participate in the leadership race.
To this end, I have pledged my full support to interim leader Nycole Turmel and her team to play whatever role is needed to support the caucus through this upcoming session of Parliament.
One more thought: the leadership campaign is taking place amidst an unprecedented level of media scrutiny on the New Democratic Party. When a new leader is chosen, they will no doubt be judged by some as not being “Jack” – a mere mortal filling the political giant’s shoes.
Filling Jack’s shoes is certainly a mighty tall order. And yet, Jack would be the first to tell you how much growing he did in order to be able to fill those shoes. The difference between the party that Jack Layton took command of in 2003 and the party that will be handed over in March 2012 is a difference of immense magnitude. Jack spent his years as leader building the foundation for today’s success. He encouraged people to get involved in the party as candidates, activists and staff. It was a faith well-founded. None of us are going to let Jack down.
Jack Layton trusted Canadians. He knew they would choose the politics of hope over the politics of division and smear. The result was the great Orange Crush of April 2011. Canadians sent an even stronger message when they took to the streets in their tens of thousands to bid farewell to Jack.
We all have a job to do. Canadians are looking to us to show unity, determination, practicality and optimism. If we carry on the path that Jack laid out, Canadians will respond by voting in the first social democratic federal government in Canadian history.
This is the house that Jack built.
Sat, 2011-09-10 18:13
#59
Thank you for including Charlie Angus's statement on this thread. I am disappointed that he is not running just the same. I would have voted for him.
Sat, 2011-09-10 19:43
#60
chisholm is, of course, welcome to run, but i think most people will understand that it would be suicidal for the ndp to elect him - or anyone else not perfectly comfortable in french - as leader.
which touches on the inane debate a few posts back: seriously, who cares that the french requirement is a barrier for the working class to ascending to the leadership of the ndp? that's an insane argument to make at this juncture, when the party is for all intents and purposes the federal representation of quebec. the fact that any leader from this point forward needs excellent to near perfect is obvious - without it, we might as well just hand the keys to stornaway back to the liberals, as the bq WILL take those seats back.
so seriously, let's get real and think this through, rather than picking favorites purely on affinity. when we have people like nathan cullen or robert chisholm and that coming out of the woodwork as potential candidates, it's about their egos and not the good of the party. they could potentially win, but it would not be in the best interests of the movement, party and country. you take a charlie angus and he knows this.
Sat, 2011-09-10 20:01
#61
the french requirement is a barrier for the working class to ascending to the leadership of the ndp
Like working class bilingual MPs like Yvon Godin (learned English as an MP really), Claude Gravelle, Carol Hughes, and who knows how many of Québec NDP MPs. Riiiiiiiight.
Also, a lot of the would-be candidates that would purportedly be excluded by such a requirement don't seem all that "working class" at first glance. Roughly 1/3rd of Canada speaks French. Is it really that much to ask that the Prime Minister speak it too?
Sat, 2011-09-10 20:25
#62
well, at any rate, my point wasn't at all that, it was that there's no reasonable argument against the necessity that the new leader speak french.
this is a good attitude:One MP who won't be in the running is St. John's South-Mount Pearl Ryan Cleary, but only because he doesn't speak French.
"If I was bilingual, I would have my name in the hat," Cleary said. "Because I'd have every opportunity to put all of Newfoundland and Labrador's issues front and centre on the national agenda."
With more than half of the NDP caucus hailing from Quebec, fluent French is seen as an absolute necessity for any aspiring candidate.
Out of the gate, the immediate frontrunners seem to be party president Brian Topp and deputy leader and Quebec lieutenant Thomas Mulcair, both of whom have said they're thinking about it.
Neither Cleary nor St. John's East MP Jack Harris wanted to speak about specific candidates, but both said Layton will be a tough act to follow.
"It's a tricky time, right, because obviously anybody who puts their name out there as a leadership contender is going to be compared to Jack Layton, and there will be no living up to that legacy," Cleary said.
Harris said aside from French, the major qualification for the new leader will be to simultaneously mentor the many junior members of the NDP caucus and still command the respect of long-serving members.
Sat, 2011-09-10 20:57
#63
I agree that fluent French is a must. In that case, what does the list or potential candidates look like? It seems like there are really only a handful of possibilities. There seems to be some debate as to whether Paul Dewar and Megan Leslie's French is good enough?
Sat, 2011-09-10 21:18
#64
I know that wasn't your intention flight from kamakura, I just wanted to jump on what I thought was a straw man of an argument. I don't think fluent French is a must, but the French must be good enough to scrum or stay afloat in a debate with- two things bound to happen in the leadership race. Beyond that there is *some* time for on the job training, but what there isn't really time for is someone who has zero French saying...well, I'll study it. Also, in my mind, anyone really wanting to work for this country would have thought/wanted to learn French long ago, not as some sort of an afterthought now that a shot at the job of Prime Minister has opened up.
ETA: I've heard both Paul Dewar and Megan Leslie speak French, and while their French is not strong, it is likely sufficient to get involved in the race. Of course, if they do join the race, they will be receive some feedback that their French requires improvement, as may other candidates.
Sat, 2011-09-10 21:56
#65
when we have people like nathan cullen or robert chisholm and that coming out of the woodwork as potential candidates, it's about their egos and not the good of the party. they could potentially win, but it would not be in the best interests of the movement, party and country. you take a charlie angus and he knows this.
I have to disagree with you here. First of all Nathan Cullen actually speaks pretty good French. Second of all, I actually WANT as many good MPs as possible to throw their hates in the ring - for the good of the party. Its a great way to showcase to Canadians the depth of talent in the NDP caucus and also I think its important to have candidates from different parts of the country running to at least represent points of view from their regions. If Chisholm is in the race - it will raise interest in Nova Scotia. If Cullen is in the race then it will be good to have someone running from a remote and heavily Aboriginal western riding - the more the merrier. The more people run the more members get signd up, the more interest in the race and the more Canadians get to see what an NDP cabinet might look like.
Sat, 2011-09-10 22:06
#66
Another benefit of Cullen is that his riding is one of those with a lot of Conservative-NDP swing voters, so he knows what it's like to take votes from the Conservatives.
Sat, 2011-09-10 22:28
#67
An excellent point, Howard.
Sat, 2011-09-10 22:49
#68
Here's a message during the month of Christmas that some of Cullen's opponents in the riding sent him one year.
Sat, 2011-09-10 23:18
#69
M. Spector
I actually WANT as many good MPs as possible to throw their hates [sic!] in the ring - for the good of the party.
Obviously the party disagrees with you, given the ridiculously high financial barriers it has raised to anyone who really has no expectation of winning. They clearly want to limit the range of debate as much as possible.
Sun, 2011-09-11 00:06
#70
I actually WANT as many good MPs as possible to throw their hates [sic!] in the ring - for the good of the party.
Obviously the party disagrees with you, given the ridiculously high financial barriers it has raised to anyone who really has no expectation of winning. They clearly want to limit the range of debate as much as possible.
anyone who really has no expectation of winning = vanity candidate
good riddance
Sun, 2011-09-11 00:33
#71
like dennis kucinich?
Sun, 2011-09-11 01:03
#72
Malcolm
A Dennis Kucinich type candidate who has something real to contribute would have no difficulty raised $15K.
Sun, 2011-09-11 02:01
#73
Neither Cleary nor St. John's East MP Jack Harris wanted to speak about specific candidates, but both said Layton will be a tough act to follow.
"It's a tricky time, right, because obviously anybody who puts their name out there as a leadership contender is going to be compared to Jack Layton, and there will be no living up to that legacy," Cleary said.
I loved Olivia's line on TV recently, something like "Even the Jack Layton who won the leadership in 2003 couldn't replace Jack Layton today, because he grew so much in those eight years. The next leader will grow too."
Sun, 2011-09-11 02:39
#74
M. Spector
anyone who really has no expectation of winning = vanity candidate
anyone who really has no expectation of winning = anybody other than Mulcair
I guess you strongly disagree with Stockholm's desire to see many candidates enter the race ("for the good of the party") even if they don't expect to win. You would just dismiss them as "vanity candidates", and good riddance to them.
Sun, 2011-09-11 02:45
#75
M. Spector
A Dennis Kucinich type candidate who has something real to contribute would have no difficulty raised $15K.
That half a million bucks in order to be competitive might present some difficulty, however, even for someone who has something "real" (whatever that means) to contribute.
The only Kucinich-type candidate I can think of is Weisleder, and he doesn't have anywhere near that kind of financial backing.
Sun, 2011-09-11 02:53
#76
Its an insult to Dennis Kucinich to compare him to a tedious drudge like Weisleder.
Half a million is the LIMIT on what anyone is allowed to spend. People can spend less if they want. When the Liberals last had a contest in 2006 several of the top candidates spent over 3 million dollars!
Sun, 2011-09-11 03:17
#77
Malcolm
I think Stockholm is far too kind in his assessment of Brother Weisleder.
And MSpector is being disingenuous when he pretends not to be able to tell the difference between an entry fee and a spending limit.
Frankly, a candidate who cannot raise the $15K entry fee is a candidate who has nothing to contribute to the process or the outcome. A national "money bomb" from a worthwhile candidate with any kind of base could easily generate $15K in just over a week. We ae electing the leader of a political party that is currently the government in waiting. This is not an election for the president of the Sanctimonious Sideline Debate Seminar.
Sun, 2011-09-11 03:30
#78
I'm pretty sure Barry Weisleder could come up with $15,000 if he wanted to run. I doubt $15,000 will be too onerous for the Socialist Caucus to put a candidate forth.
I think anyone wanting to run who has a compelling message (ie. an alternative to the candidates who are out there) should be able to raise that much. For those that can't, I would question either their organizational capacity (they are running for leader after all) or the appeal of their issues/messages.
As an example, I think if someone like Dana Larsen was interested in running, he wouldn't let $15,000 get in the way--he would find a way to raise the money. I would put Weisleder in that category as well.
Sun, 2011-09-11 09:04
#79
The leadership candidates will also have to pass the same vetting process as riding candidates. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that anyone who has been "de-vetted" once, is not going to pass a second time.
The signature requirements are also pretty strict - 500 signatures, but with certain minimums from each region, etc., as I understand it. The full rules are coming out on Thursday.
Sun, 2011-09-11 09:32
#80
For those who want to know about Mulciar's motivations for joining the NDP here is an interview he gave before winning the Outremont by-election in 2007. He was also quite prescient about the future of politics in Quebec.
http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20070627_140515_6120
Sun, 2011-09-11 09:44
#81
Sun, 2011-09-11 09:52
#82
Back on August 31 neither Alexandre Boulerice nor Guy Caron had ruled out running. I have not heard of any change on that point.
http://www.journalmetro.com/linfo/article/957193--leadership-les-quebecois-du-npd-preoccupes--page0
I never heard this before: while Guy Caron was getting elected in his home town of Rimouski (while still living in Gatineau), he was also communications officer for Nycole Turmel's local campaign in Hull-Aylmer.
Mme Turmel sera donc appelée à travailler étroitement avec MM. Mulcair et Layton, ainsi qu'avec le président du caucus du Québec, Guy Caron, un homme qu'elle connaît très bien puisqu'il a agi à titre de responsable des communications au sein de son équipe de campagne.
Sun, 2011-09-11 12:37
#83
I have heard through the grapevine that Caron is not running. Boulerice I have heard is still in the consideration stage.
Sun, 2011-09-11 12:57
#84
To put it in perspective, $15,000 is about what it costs to buy a car. There are 20 million cars in Canada. There are between 1.5-2 million new cars purchased by Canadians every year. Should we expect a couple million NDP leadership candidates? Lol.
Sun, 2011-09-11 13:02
#85
knownothing
For those who want to know about Mulciar's motivations for joining the NDP here is an interview he gave before winning the Outremont by-election in 2007. He was also quite prescient about the future of politics in Quebec.
http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20070627_140515_6120
This is great stuff. He is very likeable.
Sun, 2011-09-11 13:56
#86
anyone who really has no expectation of winning = vanity candidate
anyone who really has no expectation of winning = anybody other than Mulcair
It's going to take charisma to win this race and potentially also some very strong policy ideas, if not basic ideas about where the party moves philosophically as it hopes to make its way to 24 Sussex. Given Layton's strategic drive, the next leader will probably be someone that can test drive a "plan" to win. How? What would that mean? How would that change the NDP? What would it mean for the country? People will care about these issues. Candidates will care about these issues. If you look at the last race, I think Ducasse and Blaikie, despite not winning, really shook it up. Some of their ideas became Jack's ideas and Jack also incorporated them into his plan for developing the party afterward. Blaikie was named House Leader, given organisational responsibilities, put forward as a successful NDP candidate for the Deputy Speaker's chair, employed/and fêted on policy issues as the dean of the House. Ducasse was named Québec deputy, given policy writing responsibilities [in addition to his communications lease], given employment, and supported in his election campaigns, among other things. Joe Comartin has been an outstanding Justice critic and would be a shoe-in for cabinet, perhaps Layton had him in mind as part of the coalition deal? Lorne Nystrom was not re-elected. Bev Meslo received the nomination to run twice for the NDP in Vancouver South, almost finishing 2nd in 2004 to MP elect Ujjal Dosanjh.
Sun, 2011-09-11 17:03
#87
see the thing is that cullen's french sounds awful in that christmas message. really, i think that what some folks are missing is a familiarity with quebec. it's an underreported feature of the quebec success that jack's background as a quebecois was widely reported in the french press. like everyone knew that about him during this last election, and it definitely contributed to the sense that he could be trusted by quebecers. it's impossible to understate the importance of this, and it's impossible to understate the extent to which an ndp leader without that relationship to the quebec people would cede an affective space to the bq. it's just fundamental to electoral competition here. he might be a great leader, but picking a cullen would be very very dangerous to consolidation of ndp gains in quebec, and - given that we have others who don't present that risk - foolhardy.
that said, i'm happy to have a bunch of these guys run, it'll be great for interest, like you say. i'm definitely not looking forward to the wince-inducing french debate to come, but it should be a good conversation. i just hope that, in the end, the membership comes to understand that the quebec ridings are nothing like what the ndp has dealt with before, and that there's a big disconnect between this province and the rest of canada, such that a roberst chisholm leadership would almost certainly engender electoral ruin for the good guys. it's just the way it is.
Sun, 2011-09-11 17:17
#88
M. Spector
I think Stockholm is far too kind in his assessment of Brother Weisleder.
He's going out of his way to be insulting, but that's par for the course.
Maybe you'd like to tell us who in the NDP you were thinking of when you talked about a Dennis Kucinich-type candidate for leadership? What is a Dennis Kucinich-type candidate anyway? Somebody old? Somebody rich? Somebody left-wing? Somebody with no chance of winning?
And MSpector is being disingenuous when he pretends not to be able to tell the difference between an entry fee and a spending limit.
I pretend nothing of the sort. You, however, pretend that a serious campaign for leadership costs no more than the entry fee, when in fact that's just a drop in the bucket. The real cost of a serious leadership campaign is well into six figures (else why would the party set the spending limit so high?) and you can be sure that the eventual winner will have spent close to the half-a-mil limit.
This is a high-stakes game. The ante is $15,000 but that's just money thrown away unless you have at least 10 times that much to back it up.
Frankly, a candidate who cannot raise the $15K entry fee is a candidate who has nothing to contribute to the process or the outcome.
Yeah, it's not as if the NDP is a party of the working class. Only the petit-bourgeois need apply.
Sun, 2011-09-11 17:22
#89
M. Spector
I have heard through the grapevine that Caron is not running. Boulerice I have heard is still in the consideration stage.
If he runs, Boulerice has no chance of winning. He supported the Canadian Boat to Gaza campaign.
And everybody knows the next NDP leader has to be vetted by the Zionist lobby, the right-wing mass media, and the blogosphere. After all, it just wouldn't do to rub some right-wingnuts the wrong way!
Sun, 2011-09-11 19:01
#90
On a realistic and positive note...
Just think about who will likely be candidates... Mulcair... Julian... Nash... Chisholm... Saganash... Boivin... what a field to showcase to the country!
Sun, 2011-09-11 19:55
#91
see the thing is that cullen's french sounds awful in that christmas message. really, i think that what some folks are missing is a familiarity with quebec. it's an underreported feature of the quebec success that jack's background as a quebecois was widely reported in the french press. like everyone knew that about him during this last election, and it definitely contributed to the sense that he could be trusted by quebecers. it's impossible to understate the importance of this, and it's impossible to understate the extent to which an ndp leader without that relationship to the quebec people would cede an affective space to the bq. it's just fundamental to electoral competition here. he might be a great leader, but picking a cullen would be very very dangerous to consolidation of ndp gains in quebec, and - given that we have others who don't present that risk - foolhardy.
I agree that Quebec is critical, but I am troubled by this idea that Quebeckers are so parochial and inward-looking that they will judge people based on whether or not they live in Quebec and the merits of the candidate are not important. The fact is, Cullen is a great spokesperson for the party and could make a great leader if elected. And if his (or anyone else's) French isn't 100% perfect, so what? Remember that the current NDP leader is not perfectly fluent in the majority first language, but she is still a good leader, and as I am confident that she can improve her communication skills in English, why couldn't Cullen or anyone else improve their French? If a leader demonstrates an ability to improve his or her second language, couldn't that be useful in winning people over?
Besides, remember that for all the focus Jack had on Quebec and his roots there, he was effectively a Toronto politician by the time he became leader.
Sun, 2011-09-11 20:06
#92
anyone who really has no expectation of winning = anybody other than Mulcair
That is far from a foregone conclusion at this point. Since Jack died there have been articles in the media casting doubt on whether or not he would be a good leader, from the same outlets that said Jack would do badly in the next election and that Mulcair was going to pick up the pieces for sure. Someone could come up and surprise the field.
And I think it's a bit ironic for someone on the left to use the right-wing media as some sort of authoritiative voice.
Sun, 2011-09-11 21:58
#93
Sun, 2011-09-11 22:36
#94
VW61
C'mon official candidates, declare your intentions already!
Sun, 2011-09-11 22:45
#95
I hope those who don't want Mulcair coalesce behind a left candidate soon.
The more he thinks his victory would be a coronation, the more confident Mulcair would be about the notion that he had a mandate to be rabidly anti-left and anti-internal democracy(I.e., "moderate")and the greater the danger would be that Mulcair would make an NDP victory meaningless by moving the party even further right. It would be worth no one's effort to elect a federal government that was like the Manitoba NDP government, or Bob Rae's Ontario regime AFTER he surrendered to Bay Street-especially if Mulcair was to try to "out hawk the hawks" on foreign policy, as his natural inclinations would lead him to do.
To me, the logical choice of a anti-Mulcair coalition would be Saganash. Saganash represents First Nations voters, francophones, the poor, the dispossessed, the outsiders and the idea of treating social movements and social activists with respect-Mulcair represents the suburbs, the uptight, and what the MSM wants the NDP to stand for...obedience and deference to the powers-that-be. And Mulcair is the sort that would probably argue that electing an NDP government, on a platform dictated solely by him(i.e., a platform that would automatically stand for nothing)was the only valid form of politics and that movements and activists were just annoyances to be treated with scorn. And who the hell would want an NDP leader that represents THAT? Nothing could ever be worth having an NDP prime minister invoke the War Measures Act, or to sic the cops on protesters.
Saganash just seems real to me in a way that Mulcair doesn't. Mulcair simply represents the establishment notion of what the NDP should limit itself to if it must be in contention for power...an agreement not to use government as a means to transform life, and an acceptance of the idea that politics should ONLY include the political elite itself.
In any case...whether you like Saganash or not...stop Mulcair(or Topp or Dewar)...it's the only way to make an NDP government matter. Centrism equals irrelevance.
Sun, 2011-09-11 22:47
#96
I think bilingualism is now ( or should be) an absolute requirement for federal leaders in every party - by the way, how is E. May's French? I have no idea.
If E May speaks in French and nobody listens...does she make a sound?
Sun, 2011-09-11 22:58
#97
I hope those who don't want Mulcair coalesce behind a left candidate soon.
My impression is that the people who don't want Mulcair are not objecting to him for ideological reasons - its invariably issues about his personality. It sounds to me like the people who have issues with Mulcair will coalesce behind Brian Topp - and there is ZERO ideological difference between Topp and Mulcair - Topp is simply reputed to be a somewhat nicer person with more roots in the party and more knowledge of Canada outside Quebec.
Sun, 2011-09-11 23:21
#98
Yes, really. Have people ever met the people they're trashing, or listened to them closely?
Now, as it happens, I think a Saganash candidacy could be quite exciting. There is a Facebook group up already, encouraging him to run:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Romeo-Saganash-For-NDP-Leadership/192438304157779
Sun, 2011-09-11 23:23
#99
it's an underreported feature of the quebec success that jack's background as a quebecois was widely reported in the french press. like everyone knew that about him during this last election, and it definitely contributed to the sense that he could be trusted by quebecers. it's impossible to understate the importance of this.remember that for all the focus Jack had on Quebec and his roots there, he was effectively a Toronto politician by the time he became leader.
In English-speaking Canada, yes (apart from the few who paid attention when he said "I'm not from Toronto, I'm from Montreal.") However, any Quebecois who wanted to know would know that the Layton's have been in Quebec since before the founding of Layton Brothers piano manufacturers in 1887. Jack's great-grandfather was a blind activist (and musician) who who founded the Montreal Association for the Blind in 1908 and led a campaign for disability pensions in the 1930s.
[img]http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/9h8t9ei5dskj0jh/images/4-60a14de37d/000...
Sun, 2011-09-11 23:30
#100
I think a Saganash candidacy could be quite exciting. There is a Facebook group up already, encouraging him to run:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Romeo-Saganash-For-NDP-Leadership/192438304157779
And now there's one for Megan Leslie:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Megan-Leslie-for-Leader-of-the-NDP-Megan-L...
As well as people saying "Run" on her own page:
Mon, 2011-09-12 00:15
#101
I hope those who don't want Mulcair coalesce behind a left candidate soon.The more he thinks his victory would be a coronation, the more confident Mulcair would be about the notion that he had a mandate to be rabidly anti-left and anti-internal democracy(I.e., "moderate")and the greater the danger would be that Mulcair would make an NDP victory meaningless by moving the party even further right. It would be worth no one's effort to elect a federal government that was like the Manitoba NDP government, or Bob Rae's Ontario regime AFTER he surrendered to Bay Street-especially if Mulcair was to try to "out hawk the hawks" on foreign policy, as his natural inclinations would lead him to do.
To me, the logical choice of a anti-Mulcair coalition would be Saganash. Saganash represents First Nations voters, francophones, the poor, the dispossessed, the outsiders and the idea of treating social movements and social activists with respect-Mulcair represents the suburbs, the uptight, and what the MSM wants the NDP to stand for...obedience and deference to the powers-that-be. And Mulcair is the sort that would probably argue that electing an NDP government, on a platform dictated solely by him(i.e., a platform that would automatically stand for nothing)was the only valid form of politics and that movements and activists were just annoyances to be treated with scorn. And who the hell would want an NDP leader that represents THAT? Nothing could ever be worth having an NDP prime minister invoke the War Measures Act, or to sic the cops on protesters.
Saganash just seems real to me in a way that Mulcair doesn't. Mulcair simply represents the establishment notion of what the NDP should limit itself to if it must be in contention for power...an agreement not to use government as a means to transform life, and an acceptance of the idea that politics should ONLY include the political elite itself.
In any case...whether you like Saganash or not...stop Mulcair(or Topp or Dewar)...it's the only way to make an NDP government matter. Centrism equals irrelevance.
I would assume that those who are convinced that a Mulcair victory would unleash all sorts of evil on the world plan to [url=https://secure.ndp.ca/membership_e.php]take out an NDP membership[/url], have their say, and put their money where their mouths are and step up to the plate?
Make no mistake about it, I have expressed concerns about a Mulcair-led NDP many times. But seriously, this talk about Mulcair or about the Blairite monster hiding under the bed is starting to sound like a witch hunt. It's quite ridiculous. Yes, there are valid concerns about the direction of the NDP, but there are more constructive approaches. And I'm sure I will have my differences with many on these boards in the coming months, but disagreement is okay, I'm prepared to work with those disagreements and find common ground and solutions. How about the rest of you?