Well, all I am saying is to me it sounds like a threat. I don't like that. If somene wants to say something say it, or say nothing. That's just how I see it. That is all I was saying.
NDP Leadership 72
Fri, 2012-01-13 08:12
#102
Arthur Cramer
Fri, 2012-01-13 08:19
#103
Why do you have to see it as a threat?
It was a gratuitous dig. Rebecca is just asking, expecting people to not go there.
Fri, 2012-01-13 08:21
#104
Arthur Cramer
Ok, then if it was a dig, I didn't like it. Either we are all equals here or we're not. Its one or the other. I have a feeling its the other.
But I've made my point and I'll back off now.
Fri, 2012-01-13 08:23
#105
And for the record, there is no consensus about how Malcolm should have been dealt with [and it is not just about whether or not he should have been suspended].
The overwhelming majority of people who posted on it agree with you Arthur. But there is definitely no consensus on that.
And if people do not want to deflect this leadership discussion, dont bring that sore point here.
Pretty simple.
Fri, 2012-01-13 08:25
#106
A plea by Rebecca. Agreed.
Fri, 2012-01-13 08:25
#107
Given everything that has transpired, it sounded more like a plea on this end. And I know that we're quite often guilty of this within the medium of the written word, but your reading comprehension in particular can use some serious work Arthur.
Fri, 2012-01-13 08:26
#108
What do you call Topp's smears on Mulcair (e.g. Mulcair=Charest, Mulcair=right wing)? How would you like it if Mulcair started saying Topp=Paul Martin because of Topp's praise for Greek austerity and participation in the Saskatchewan extension of Paul Martin's austerity during the Romanow years?
How would I like it? Don't care, fill your boots.
I would not want to see rounds and rounds of slinging mud back and forth. But people are getting wound up when it happens occasionaly.
Nobody likes the fact we are not seeing real debate. I don't expect people to approve of Topp's barbs... and what that does to your ranking is your personal business.
But not having any real debates is a significant problem. So, no matter how people feel about Topp's methods for trying to have one- it is the only thing on offer, there is no prospect of mud-slinging free for all, and you try to picture getting some debate going without taking some pokes. You have 15 seconds now to get it started. Go.
Frankly, I think the actual negative reactions to Topp [going after Dewar, sounding arrogant?, etc] is prissy inside the NDP stuff.
Again, what that does to who you want and what you want to see is not what I have in mind in calling the reactions prissy. My question / concern is people thinking this stuff is going to have any impact on what the broader public sees in the NDP. [Granted, I don't know that the latter question has anything to do with how people are reacting to these pokes by Topp.]
Fri, 2012-01-13 08:48
#109
Boom Boom
You completely missed my point. Regardless what political stripe a candidate for Prime Minister is, voters look for certain qualities and a level of gravitas. Mulcair has it. I think Nash has it. I think Dewar has it. I don't think Topp has it. If you can't see that, I guess we'll be heading back to the 40 seat range.
I think Topp has more in the way of 'gravitas' (however you measure it) than any of the other candidates. I'd say Mulcair has more in the way of a better speaking presentation based on his performance in the House, and I think Mulcair is a much better attack dog than Topp - which is something we really need in the next leader - but we also need Topp's smarts. While Mulcair is my very strong first choice still, I'm more impressed by Topp than at the beginning of this race, so I'd putt Topp a very close second to Mulcair on my list, separated by a hair's width.
Fri, 2012-01-13 09:08
#110
So that's what Dewar's Friday announcement is:
Charlie Angus is supporting him.
Impressive.
Dewar is making Angus his deputy, putting him in charge of building support for the New Democrats in the 70 additional ridings the party needs to capture to win a majority government.The Ottawa MP says Angus is the perfect person to engage what Dewar calls Canada's "real majority."
Good move. Smart move.
Paul Dewar snags endorsement from Charlie Angus
Fri, 2012-01-13 09:12
#111
Boom Boom
Wow, that really is impressive - Angus is probably my favourite MP.
Fri, 2012-01-13 09:15
#112
So exactly what are the parameters surrounding the manner in which Saganash' candidacy can be discussed?
Fri, 2012-01-13 09:20
#113
Linda Duncan and Charlie Angus are indeed impressive endorsements for Paul.
What gives me pause about him, however, is the paucity of his caucus support. For months no other MP saw fit to support him and now only two. After all, these are the people who work closest with him and who arguably have the best sense of his political abilities.
He still has less caucus support than Mulcair, Nash, Topp, or Ashton and is tied , I believe, with Saganash.
And very significantly he does not have the backing, at least yet, of ANY MP FROM QUEBEC.
Fri, 2012-01-13 09:29
#114
Jack Layton's Caucus support was also very thin. I dont really care about that.
And no support in Quebec is hardly a surprise. In the first place, Mulcair and Topp could between them pretty well be guaranteed to sew up most of what is available.
And that is obviously a reflection of Paul's questionable French. No news or surprise there: we already know that he resolves those questions with his performance to come. Or he doesn't.
Fri, 2012-01-13 09:54
#115
Jack's lack of caucus support may have been because he didn't work with the MPs day after day and they did not know him close up.
Paul's situation is significantly different.
Fri, 2012-01-13 10:15
#116
This isnt some kind of litmus test.
Paul gives plenty of evidence that he works well with colleagues.
I think it is fair to determine that not many of them see him as Leader. Ditto Peggy Nash if I remember correctly.
WHY the Caucus of 2002 thought the same thing about Jack did not and does not matter.
I take into account the opinions and apparent of Caucus members about the leadership candidates. Numbers of them supporting mean virtually nothing to me. Some matter to me a lot more than others. And even there, its something I definitely take into account. But I'll make my own decision.
For example, Libby supporting Topp made me take a harder look. But I was very aware that even though I put a lot of stock in Libby's judgement, and the criteria I think she brings to bear.... that does not mean I will make the same judgement, even on the same criteia. "I'll have to see."
Fri, 2012-01-13 10:47
#117
Catchfire
Long thread.
Pages
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3