NDP Leadership thread FIFTY

Copying from the other thread:

ottawaobserver wrote:

They were also doing voter ID phoning last night out of Montreal. No intro, no pitch, no nuthin' ... just the ask.

Wilf Day wrote:

Sounds like the same one I got. What mystified me was, after I punched 0 for undecided, it didn't even say "thank you," it just hung up. Like "we don't care about the undecided, we're just looking for our supporters." Not cool.

-----

Sorry, are we talking robocall or voter ID calling?

I think there are two robo polls being done from the sounds of it. One in alphabetical order and one with Topp first and Mulcair last. I suspect neither of these are polls but a quick, dirty and inexpensive way to do voter ID.

I had also heard that Mulcair is doing real live voter ID phoning (I hadn't heard that it was out of Montreal, but that would make sense).

Howard wrote:

Of the supposed frontrunners, Mulcair has had the worst run campaign. A frontrunner campaign, with the fitness of an also ran.

Why do think Mulcair's campaign is the worst run? I mean, which aspects?

Some aspects seem pretty good: high membership sales in Quebec, big events, lots of travel, lots of media, lots of endrosements. At this stage, I'm not seen much beyond that from any campaign.

Speaking of membership sales...I wonder the the central party will do another press release before the holidays on where membership numbers stand by province etc...I'll be curious to see if there has been another surge in Quebec over the past month.

The letter from Libby was being distributed at the BC NDP Convention. Speaking of taxes, I read that Mulcair supports a financial transfer tax. Like Cap and Trade, the devil is in the details.

I'm working on the Mulcair campaign in Montreal. Maybe a volunteer missed it on a couple of calls, but we are very much explaining and introducing Tom's candidacy when we make phone calls.

Howard wrote:

AnonymousMouse wrote:

Howard wrote:

Of the supposed frontrunners, Mulcair has had the worst run campaign. A frontrunner campaign, with the fitness of an also ran.

Why do think Mulcair's campaign is the worst run? I mean, which aspects? Some aspects seem pretty good: high membership sales in Quebec, big events, lots of travel, lots of media, lots of endrosements. At this stage, I'm not seen much beyond that from any campaign.

They have been slow to hit the hustings. Most of the other candidates have visited a lot more places (and people) than Mulcair by now. He also doesn't seem to have any campaign materials, particularly at his spartan campaign launch. His campaign manager stepped into the job just recently. His provincial campaign chairs are also people with baggage and limited connections to NDP members and elite alike. His website is arguably the worst one out there, his web presence on things like facebook leave room for improvement. The membership sales in Québec are good, but nowhere near where they need to be, and how can you be so sure they are all for Mulcair?

I completely disagree with you. You're just wrong about him being slow on the hustings. From what I've seen his campaign has been to every province except PEI and Newfoundland and many places mutliple times (Toronto four or five times, BC three). It seems like the most active tour of any campaign to me. From what I've seen and heard his events are bigger than any other campaign. He's the only campaign showing ANY evidence of selling memberships. And, for what it's worth, I like his website better than almost everyone else's. It sounds like you're trying to find fault to me. I'm not saying you're doing that, I just don't think any of the other campaigns remotely meet all the standards you're laying out.

I don't know who most of Mulcair provincial co-chairs are--you might be right there--but he's got tons of endorsers and beyond that what matters is how much work people are doing.

The one thing I do agree with you on materials, haven't seen anything yet, but his campaign launch certainly wasn't spartan. There was a crowd of several hundred people, back drop, podium art and 33 MPs endorsing him. The only campaign launches that compared to his were Dewar's and Nash's. The rest were non-existant.

I was also at the campaign launch.  It was a packed room, filled with enthusiasm.

As for the website knock, I see that almost every day at least one release or news story goes online.  The main page of the site is updated waaaaaay more often than any of them, to be quite honest, indicating a lot of activity.

Hunky_Monkey wrote:

 

Mulcair served as a union delegate and later became Secrétaire de section of the (SPGQ) Syndicat des Professionnels et Professionnelles du Gouvernement du Québec (The Union of Québec Government Professional Employees).

He has also fought, for example, in support of the RCMP to unionize.

AnonymousMouse wrote:

 
Yeah, other than being a labour lawyer, and a shop steward, and Secretaire de Section of the Quebec public service union, and being on the boards of a bunch of charities, and taking on social causes as the president of the Quebec professions board, and fighting two referenda, and representing one of most diverse ridimgs in the country, and running for public offivce six times, and the multiple negotiations and environmental causes he took on as a cabinet minister.

Other than that he has "no track record of being a champion for organized labour, nor as a negotiator and social and political activist."

Yes, he's worked with organized labour, but I still fail to see him as a champion of organized labour, which he even confirmed to a certain extent:

"So that is a defining difference because I want to work with the unions, but I'm never going to be beholden to anybody other than the people who voted me there, which will be the membership of the party," Mr. Mulcair said.

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/mulcair-draws-line-in-ndp-sand-describes-telling-union-boss-no/article2214319/?service=mobile

And what has been cited pales in comparison to Nash's long history within and unrelenting advocacy for various social and political causes. It doesn't help too when Mulcair looks to Gary Doer and Lorne Calvert for inspiration and wants to emulate them, as opposed to obtaining inspiration and wanting to emulate Tommy Douglas. And both the Doer and Calvert governments completely failed to address electoral reform and proportional representation, a crucial NDP plank. Not only is Doer now a proponent of the tar sands, but the current Manitoba NDP government also has no qualms with Harper's Omnibus crime legislation.

Look, I don't want nor intend to bash Mulcair. I like the guy a lot and he brings so much to the NDP. He is brilliant and is very talented. I just don't think he truly comprehends the political culture of the party (yet) and particularly its activist base. I was considering him for a while until Peggy got involved in the race.   

I probably don't get the activist culture/base of the party either. Activism in and of itself isn't super relevent for me, when deciding who should get my vote. We aren't choosing the leader of a fourth party or the 'conscience' of the house anymore. We're choosing the next Prime Minister. I want the Prime Minister/party leader to be way smarter than me, not just compassionate or grounded in social justice causes. I need to know that they're strategically smart and an effective politician. If they have both things, whereas one candidate only has the strategic smarts, I'll choose the candidate with both. But if one has more strategic smarts and the other has more social justice values, then the person with the strategic smarts who is the more effective politician is the one I'd have to go with.

To determine their strategic intelligence, and whom is more effective, I think it's far more important that the next leader can articulate a vision, attract people and carry it out, which I judge based on their statements, performance and historical background. The only thing I'm particularly worried about with Mulcair on the strategic/effective politician basis is his tendency to be overzealous in his attempts to "grow" the base without the party loosing its values. On the one hand he keeps a lot of the talk couched in "bringing the centre to the NDP" as opposed to the NDP to the centre. On the other, he keeps citing sources (like Doer or Calvert) who seemed to bring the NDP to the centre as opposed the centre to the NDP. The latter approach is not helpful in creating a political culture where the NDP can thrive while advocating its values, nor do I think it would be effective in the long run as the political culture and its values will have shifted to the right. The former approach could be very effective in shifting the political culture and its values to the left.

Boom Boom wrote:

I get campaign emails from Mulcair, Topp, Nash, Dewar, Cullen, Saganash, and today, Chisholm. I think I got one from Ashton, but certainly none from Singh. I've posted a few of them since this thread began.

Believe it or not, the only campaign that has personally phoned me (as opposed to robo-calls) so far has been martin Singh!! so go figure!

The candidates can't reach me by phone. I just have a fax machine and computer connected to my line. I haven't used a phone since I retired from the Mob almost ten years ago.

I was on an Ontario telephone townhall last Monday organized by the Nash campaign last Monday. I thought Peggy did quite well and will continue to improve her "soundbites" as time goes by (as they all should). Her answers were short and to the point allowing for at least two dozen people to to ask questions (or so it felt). She also used the technology to try and recruit volunteers and donors. I was impressed although I will admit she is my first choice. Aside from her grasp of a wide range of issues, she has a lot of negotiating experience and is also visible on the Toronto demo scene (as is Chow and as was Layton). 

I was also robo-polled last week with no ID (that would be illegal in an election if I'm not mistaken). First question was whether I was a member of the NDP. Second was to press "__" for candidate of choice. Non-alpha list. I voted for Nash and then hung up so not sure what else might have followed. 

Received the Davies letter for Topp today via email. In fact, I've been receiving quite a few emails from different candidates including Chisholm. 

And another email from the Mulcair team who have planned an organizing meeting for Toronto supporters on the weekend. I did briefly attend Mulcair's first Toronto meet and greet at a pub.  He seemed to already have a solid core of supporters at that point about a month ago. 

Maybe I was asleep at the wheel but I didn't know there was another "debate". I thought the next one was in January. Don't think I got an email about the one at the BC NDP Convention. 

Still haven't heard anything directly from Ashton and Singh but all the others have made contact in one form or more. 

Has Mulcair really cited Calvert as an inspiration or model? Doer I can totally see.

OnTheLeft wrote:

And both the Doer and Calvert governments completely failed to address electoral reform and proportional representation, a crucial NDP plank.

Doer, yes. Calvert did but too late. After a couple of years of study and discussion the Saskatchewan NDP adopted a PR policy and proposed, in Calvert's last campaign, to convene a Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform and put any recommendations from it (which would almost certainly be a PR model) to the voters. Too late; Calvert lost. And the work seems to have gone for nothing; this year's campaign seems to have been silent.

Boom Boom wrote:

I get campaign emails from Mulcair, Topp, Nash, Dewar, Cullen, Saganash, and today, Chisholm. I think I got one from Ashton, but  none that I remember from Singh. I've posted a few of them since this thread began. I still need to see all the debates and speeches as I'm not committed to anyone yet - but my top four are Mulcair, Nash, Topp, and Saganash. It really does come down to whoever impresses me in the debates, as my chances of meeting any of the candidates is zero. If Ashton can drop that 'new politics' meme and do really well in the debates, she will get my vote because she is the future of the party. My predictions aren't worth sh*t but I still think Mulcair will win it. None of the candidates totally turn me off, I think the NDP is in good hands, whoever wins this. 

I like what Boom Boom has written. None of the candidates totally turn me off either, although I do worry about the NDP's ability to hold Québec support if someone with subpar French wins (i.e. Chisholm, Dewar, Singh). Whoever wins though, I am not worried about the (political) direction in which they would take the party. I would also vote for Ashton (currently near the bottom of my preference list) if she dropped the new politics slogan long enough to give us some policy and/or strategy to sink your teeth in to. Her lack of policy/strategy substance and political experience are the things holding her back on my preference ballot (one is easily reparable, the other unfortunately not [this time]). Her self confidence, language abilities, and ability to think on her feet are her most attractive attributes (at least for me). Of course, given that I would be very unlikely to rank Ashton #1 in this talented field, probably her efforts are better spent courting the support of other New Democrats (e.g. people more likely to rank her #1 or #2,3 behind people she can beat).

KenS wrote:

Life was not more interesting when I've been commited and sometimes VERY engaged with past campaigns.

But it was easier.

I'm wrapping my head around the possibility that I'm never going to be even close to sure.

Tell me about it.  Earlier this evening I thought I was very close to making a decision. I even started thinking about what I would say about it on Babble. :)

Then I went to a town hall meeting with Brian Topp, and I have to admit was very impressed. It was not at all what I expected, and now I'm back to stage one.

Sigh.

Interesting... I've heard he's been underwhelming at most of his meet and greets.

Besides "knowing a lot", what impressed you, Stock and Lou?

I've seen him perform in scrums, panels, and during the debate and the forum at the BC conventions. Not very impressive. Did you find him much different?