Bob Rae surpasses Nycole Turmel on Leadership Index

Stockholm wrote:

Harper would have had a majority regardless of whether people in Quebec voted BQ or NDP - but in 2015 there will only be one way to get rid of Harper and that will be by voting NDP. 

That is supposition, Stockholm.  I'm not sure how you can state with certainty something that is speculative.  As Andrew Coyne said earlier this year, the Tories almost blew their shot at a majority - it was not there until the final days of the campaign when the 'orange crush' overtook the Liberals and split the vote, particularly in Ontario, and gave the Conservatives the numbers they needed.  Up until that point in time the Cons were only looking at a minority.

The NDP promised that it would stop Harper from winning a majority, and it was not able to do so.  So why should people vote NDP again?  If the most popular and charismatic NDP leader of all time could not stop Harper, why would a less popular NDP leader be able to do so?

Incidentally, as I said recently, voting evidence, particularly in Ontario indicates that the NDP primarily takes from the Liberals, not the Conservatives and that therefore an increase in the NDP vote helps the Cons.  In the recent Ontario election, Andrea Horwarth did not pick up a single Conservative seat.  All 7 were taken from the Liberals.

Now the situation is different in most of Western Canada where the NDP is stronger than the Liberals and where the reverse is often the case.  Out west it is often better to vote NDP than Liberal if you want to defeat a Conservative.  But if you are going to be honest (!) you cannot claim that the NDP is the best-positioned party nationally to defeat the Conservatives when it is only the case in certain regions.

Stockholm,

I think there will be some Liberals who move the party to the centre and stop trying to go so far to the left and compete with the NDP for the progressive vote.  Some people running for new positions in the party are all ready saying we should move away from the left.  I think Zach Paikin, currently running for National Policy Chair, is suggesting something along those lines.

On the other hand, Sheila Copps who is running for Party President (and who I am voting for) might think the Liberals should remain a left-of-centre party.  As you know, she was popular with NDP voters when she was a Hamilton MP, which is why she attracted a lot of voters in that region.

And I agree with you that the Bob Rae baggage (which is still hurting the federal and provincial NDP in Ontario) probably does mean Rae can't be permanent Liberal leader.  Polls in Ontario showed blue liberals abandoning the Liberals and going to the Conservatives in the final days of the federal election, so that appears to indicate the NDP will have trouble doing well there as may Bob Rae if he were to remain Liberal leader.

Incidentally, regardless of the fact that the NDP may have won many more seats than the Liberals in this particular election, it still doesn't change the fact that the 'orange crush' helped the Conservatives.  We do agree that it 'crushed' the Liberals and not the Cons, yes?  Except in Quebec, the orange crush had very little negative effect on the Cons.  In fact, the NDP lost 2 seats outside Quebec to the Cons (Sault Ste. Marie & Elmwood-Transcona).

Anyway, I won't argue the point with you much more since I suspect we won't agree even though IMO the mathematical evidence supports the argument that the NDP took/takes more from the Liberals than it does from the Cons.

Cheers.  

Stockholm wrote:

Actually the NDP prevented a Torynmajority in 2006 and 2008. In both those elections the Librrals ran ridiculously bad campaigns with unspeakably unpopular leaders. If it had been just a two way race the Tories would have had a majority dorbsurensincebPaul Martin and Stephane Dion nauseated people so much. The NDP helped siphon off a lot of the anti-Liberal vote -particularly out west and saved the country from a Conservative majority.

Liberals kept kvetching about the NDP "splitting" their votes, but they ignore thenfactnthat from 2004 to 2011 the Tory vote in Ontario has gone from 32% to 45%. It's about time the Librrals pulled their heads out of their assholes and accepted the fact that they actually lost far more votes to thenTories over the last four elections than they did to the NDP.

It was a similar story in Ontario. Poll after poll showed that about 62% of Ontarians HATED McGuinty and wanted CHANGE. If Andrea Horwath had not been there to give those leftwing McGuinty haters somewhere to go, Hudak would have won the election. We should all get on our hands and knees in gratitude to Andrea Horwath for saving Ontario from Tim Hudak.

Isn't this all supposition?

It sounds like the type of spin Brian Topp engages in.

RevolutionPlease wrote:

Debater wrote:

Stockholm,

I think there will be some Liberals who move the party to the centre and stop trying to go so far to the left and compete with the NDP for the progressive vote.  Some people running for new positions in the party are all ready saying we should move away from the left.  I think Zach Paikin, currently running for National Policy Chair, is suggesting something along those lines.

On the other hand, Sheila Copps who is running for Party President (and who I am voting for) might think the Liberals should remain a left-of-centre party.  As you know, she was popular with NDP voters when she was a Hamilton MP, which is why she attracted a lot of voters in that region.

And I agree with you that the Bob Rae baggage (which is still hurting the federal and provincial NDP in Ontario) probably does mean Rae can't be permanent Liberal leader.  Polls in Ontario showed blue liberals abandoning the Liberals and going to the Conservatives in the final days of the federal election, so that appears to indicate the NDP will have trouble doing well there as may Bob Rae if he were to remain Liberal leader.

Incidentally, regardless of the fact that the NDP may have won many more seats than the Liberals in this particular election, it still doesn't change the fact that the 'orange crush' helped the Conservatives.  We do agree that it 'crushed' the Liberals and not the Cons, yes?  Except in Quebec, the orange crush had very little negative effect on the Cons.  In fact, the NDP lost 2 seats outside Quebec to the Cons (Sault Ste. Marie & Elmwood-Transcona).

Anyway, I won't argue the point with you much more since I suspect we won't agree even though IMO the mathematical evidence supports the argument that the NDP took/takes more from the Liberals than it does from the Cons.

Cheers.  

Do you ever post any links that your analysis has a shred of credibility? No. Didn't think so. And it would be so easy. The Star's your friend.

My analysis was supported by a detailed discussion and quotation of examples, including specific provinces and ridings.  It's also something that other commentators have pointed out too.  Andrew Coyne has said that the NDP split the vote too.

Bob Fife said on CTV on election night that ridings like Vancouver South went Conservative because of the NDP vote.

Just because you don't think I haven't provided evidence, doesn't make it so.  And I don't have to provide 50 links every time I make a post.  I don't have  the time to do a doctoral thesis on every post.  Why don't you back up everything you say with multiple links proving your point of view?

See the double standard?  When you're an NDP supporter here you can say anything without proof.

ottawaobserver wrote:

If that's the kind you can't answer, then I guess it tells us something good about Brian Topp, then, doesn't it.

What does it tell us about Topp?  He's a ruthless backroom manipulator and spin-doctor, if that's what you mean, but many of us see through it.

The weekend after the May 2011 he wrote a spin-piece in The Globe and Mail (with a Conservative!) distorting the election results and saying that there had been no vote-splitting on the part of the NDP, when in reality that was exactly what happened from Moncton to Ajax-Pickering to Winnipeg South Centre to Vancouver South and many more.  All Liberal ridings that went Conservative because of an increase in the NDP vote in those ridings.  But Topp had to hide that so he wrote a piece with the political party that benefits from an increase in the NDP vote (the Conservatives!) to say the exact opposite.

I didn't say there wasn't Liberal incompetence or fault.  We are talking here about the mathematical reality that when the NDP vote goes up nationally, the Conservatives benefit.  Is it just coincidental that the Conservatives won their first majority in 25 years on the same night that the NDP vote surged?  There's a connection.  But I understand where you are coming from.  If I was writing talking points for the NDP I would say the same thing as you.  Obviously when one is a party that causes vote-splitting one has to deny it.  I understand.  It's politics.  I would do the same in your position.