Every thread seems to talk about the same thins ;do the candidates speak french, where are they from, and do they support Blair third way. I, for one, have, know very little about what if any policy and/or social vision differences exist between them. Would any one care to write about them?
D'oh!
You mean, instead of those 30 other threads we could have had just this one?
Of course, you're absolutely right.
The candidates themselves have put out very little in the way of policy identification yet.
You could call what we have seen so far as the preliminary positioning, setting the stage etc. To the degree policy questions have emerged they have been discussed in those threads- and what discussion there has been entails some substantial seizing on what people think is implicit in the little specific the candidates have said SO FAR.
It will happen. If you launched right into debates right away without getting yourself around and familiarized- you would be sunk.
Starting a seperate thread will not work. Because what you want is in that running discussion. If what 80% of it is about bores you- sorry.
The last thread or so have actually been more than earlier about those things you arent interested in. My read is thta is because we are still very early on, but there have been a few weeks now of sussing out the basics of the candidates So now babblers who have been following it are essentially comparing notes.
I want a triple e debate: economy, equality and environment.
LOL@ M. Spector
The Tripoli debate is in another thread...oh, never mind...
I, for one, an tired of discussions that are, essentially form over content.
I, for one, an tired of discussions that are, essentially form over content.
Patience.
Bored
Bored
If they were able to hash out all their policy differences by now, we'd have the vote now rather than in March, no?
The deadline for entering the race should have been placed much earlier.
I don't know if I agree with that Caissa. Think about it from the party's perspective. What if enough of the leading contenders are clearly flopping. It gives folks enough time to try and recruit someone else. Look at the pace at which the Republican candidates are surging and fizzling.
This part of the race was always going to be slow, because of the importance of the provincial elections. A lack of attention to those would have been far costlier in the long-term.
It's not the party's job to keep shartal stimulated every second of every day, but to act to preserve and advance the long-term best interests of social democratic electoral politics in this country. As we've been seeing lately, they are not the only kind of politics of importance or interest, but they are the kind that a political party has to take care of primarily.
Georgia Straight article on how the writer perceives the candidates' environmental policies.
That's a useless article. It only mentions two candidates - Topp and Mulcair - and one issue - the tar sands. And even then it hardly makes clear how the two candidates differ on the issue.
That's a useless article. It only mentions two candidates - Topp and Mulcair - and one issue - the tar sands. And even then it hardly makes clear how the two candidates differ on the issue.
Yeah, one says it's a provincial jurisdiction and the other says whoa, the condition of the river downstream is very much in the federal bailiwick, it's only that the Cons choose ignore it...and pass legislation against the controls over navigable rivers etc. , showing evidence of past experience with the legislative divide and an unwillingness to fold.
Imagine us poor older folks who in the days before the internet weren't able to focus on every burp of every candidate the moment the air passed their lips. Isn't it the job of these people to entertain our every whim?
Why not do some work yourself if the media isn't focusing on the things that interest you and, I don't know, use some of this technology all around us and contact the candidates yourself? I am willing to bet the good ones will themselves, or have someone get back to you fairly quickly.
My posting was a tongue in cheek response to the idea of a useless article comparing Topp and Mulcair and illustrated the depth of knowledge of one. This septuagenarian just got given a new computer and went broadband three months ago. Jiggety, those videos are amaznly' revealing. Puts you right in the elector's seat, popcorn and all.
I read it that LTU was responding to shartal, not you Gaian. I must say I agree about the value of video now. It also means we can get our information unfiltered by the media, and at much greater length. I like that, because I like to formulate my own impressions.
That's right OO. Not meaning to pour water on anyone, but we seem to have become so accustomed to being spoon fed all this information (some of it amazing in quality, quantity and 'unmainstreaminess' compared to even a decade ago let alone my youth) that we sort of have given up doing some of the leg work ourselves. So I was simply trying to suggest, that with all this technology, if you aren't seeing what you want in the media- for heaven's sake engage the candidate(s) directly. I expect they would love it.
In the spirit of the original post, I think there have been two big ideas announced in the leadership campaign.
One I like - Brian Topp's proposal to campaign on a platform loudly and proudly calling for an increase in taxes on 'the rich.'
And one I don't like - Nathan Cullen's desire to hold joint nomination meetings with Liberals and Greens in ridings where the membership approve the idea.
I'm not aware of any other big proposals yet, but I could have easily missed them if they came out.
The Tripoli debate is in another thread...oh, never mind...
I just can't beliebe ya sometimes.
Oh shit.
I really think I should get that joke. But it alludes me.
Unionist is just trying to a Sirte his credentials as a punster.
hmmmm...
black hole?
The issue is not amusement. The issue is that in order to interest people in the NDP, particularly younger activist involved in the Occupy movement we need to be saying interesting things. The political dialogs being sparked by the occupy movement are moving very rapidly. I participate in some of those discussions but rarely hear or see anyone who is clearly identified as an NDP activist participating nor have I heard issues raised by the occupiers being championed aloud by anyone in the campaigns or in any official office. I have met official liberals who came to " listen to the occupiers" . I have no idea if it was organized.
The issue is that in order to interest people in the NDP, particularly younger activist involved in the Occupy movement we need to be saying interesting things.
Oh, I think that's only partly correct - and it's the smaller part. The more important issue is what we [b]do[/b]. You started this thread talking about "ideas" and "vision", and I'm a bit skeptical about those buzzwords. Why should someone have to tell us what their "vision" is - why wouldn't we already know, especially if they've been politically active for many years?
The political dialogs being sparked by the occupy movement are moving very rapidly. I participate in some of those discussions but rarely hear or see anyone who is clearly identified as an NDP activist participating nor have I heard issues raised by the occupiers being championed aloud by anyone in the campaigns or in any official office. I have met official liberals who came to " listen to the occupiers" . I have no idea if it was organized.
Now you're talking. Participating. Which real-life movements are these candidates for leadership participating in - or other identifiable NDP activists, as you point out? And what ideas are they promoting in the course of that participation? That would make for an interesting conversation.
In the spirit of the original post, I think there have been two big ideas announced in the leadership campaign.
One I like - Brian Topp's proposal to campaign on a platform loudly and proudly calling for an increase in taxes on 'the rich.'
And one I don't like - Nathan Cullen's desire to hold joint nomination meetings with Liberals and Greens in ridings where the membership approve the idea.
I'm not aware of any other big proposals yet, but I could have easily missed them if they came out.
Dewar announced his urban policy at the Toronto town hall, basically a seat at the first ministers table for cities, and a one-cent increase in the gas-tax transfer (possibly earmarked for public transit; I'd have to look that up). He has another announcement in Vancouver today on his jobs plan.
Singh is running on a plan to bring national pharmacare into effect, and a few other policies targetted at small business.
Those are all I'm aware of at the moment.
In the spirit of the original post, I think there have been two big ideas announced in the leadership campaign.
One I like - Brian Topp's proposal to campaign on a platform loudly and proudly calling for an increase in taxes on 'the rich.'
And one I don't like - Nathan Cullen's desire to hold joint nomination meetings with Liberals and Greens in ridings where the membership approve the idea.
I'm not aware of any other big proposals yet, but I could have easily missed them if they came out.
Dewar announced his urban policy at the Toronto town hall, basically a seat at the first ministers table for cities, and a one-cent increase in the gas-tax transfer (possibly earmarked for public transit; I'd have to look that up). He has another announcement in Vancouver today on his jobs plan.
Singh is running on a plan to bring national pharmacare into effect, and a few other policies targetted at small business.
Those are all I'm aware of at the moment.
National Pharmacare is hardly a new idea within the federal NDP, and Mulcair has been pointing to the small business tax rate in Manitoba approvingly (whether you agree with him or not). I don't think Dewar is particularly original with his gas tax transfer proposal, and I want to hear what else Topp would stress beyond increasing taxes on the rich.
I agree. I don't think anybody has matched Topp and Cullen for courageously staking-out positions. It's early days yet and, unfortunately, the race is in the shadow of a beloved dead leader and so there's a strong incentive to simply say "I'll carry on Jack's vision."
Singh is running on a plan to bring national pharmacare into effect, and a few other policies targetted at small business.
You've forgotten [url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2011/09/29/ns-martin-sin...
"This campaign that will start on Oct. 2, and this campaign that will travel right across this great nation will teach Canadians about who we are and that our values, Sikh values, are the same as Canadian values and that Canadian values are the same as Sikh values and that we care so very deeply for this country and we want to play a part. This, this is what I want to bring to this election race," he told the crowd.
I'm quite confident he's the only candidate so far that has taken up that cause.
Good point, Unionist.
And, PW, I guess I wasn't trying to rate the ideas for how "big" they were, just to list them all. I'm happy to outsource that scrutiny to you. :-)
