''
Issues Pages:
NDP Leadership #94
Mon, 2012-02-13 20:10
#1
NDP Leadership #94
Mon, 2012-02-13 20:12
#2
Would anyone like to predict how many threads we are going to have on the leadership race before voting day? lol
Mon, 2012-02-13 20:14
#3
Boom Boom
Didn't we do that guessing game earlier? I think it went as high as 300. OMG!!!
Mon, 2012-02-13 20:43
#4
Thread #93 lasted less than 8 hours. Speaking as someone who's been here almost from the beginning, I'd say this is unprecedented. Well over 300 is not unrealistic.
Mon, 2012-02-13 20:45
#5
I have posted this elsewhere as a new forum topic where people can react, but wanted people active here to be sure and see it. Thank-you for your indulgence.
“You can buy us love” is what the banner reads on the rabble.ca site. It is our way of asking for financial support from our readers.
I am babbler 44. I signed up to post on the site when rabble.ca was launched because of my interest in politics, and my desire to see Canada become a better country.
It is not original to me that democracy is first about open debate and discussion. Elections matter, obviously. Without debate and discussion leading to a substantial body of informed opinion, party politics becomes impoverished, and elections, rituals, easily ignored, most here would agree I think.
Over the years babble has contributed to my political education, and I like to imagine that of others. I remember when Stéphane Dion was under attack for his French citizenship. A babbler somehow found, and posted, an English language version of the French citizenship act. No mainstream journalist was quoting the act, and I doubt many had thought they needed it before writing their stories.
We could do better in welcoming others, and restraining our tempers, and I miss those who have departed in anger, or gone off to other places. I want them drawn back as babblers, regular, and recent. So let us by all means raise the level of debate on the boards, challenging ourselves to give a little more, and showing off our better sides (O.K. if, and when the occasion warrants it).
In the meantime, I will laugh, and be surprised, irritated and provoked, and expect all to improve my day, just through you being here on babble.
Overall, not many more than 15 people are paid to work at rabble.ca. I want the budget to double, so hours can be increased. People now work one day, or two, on the site, and volunteer for more.
This is a request for you to contribute, and a thank-you to those who have already contributed, or plan to contribute.
Join up on site, put a monthly amount on a credit card, or sign up for a bank withdrawal. The suggested amounts are here:
https://secure.rabble.ca/membership/signup.php
This is the Valentine’s Day drive. Give babble a valentine.
Thank you for (thinking of) financial support for rabble.ca.
My best wishes to you for Valentines Day, and after.
Duncan Cameron
Mon, 2012-02-13 20:50
#6
Wow...with that e-mail the Dewar campaign put out, it almost seems like they are trying to export their Manitoba tactics to the rest of the country. They had to have planned the release of this poll, knowing in advance that Dewar would bomb the French debates and planned on using it as a diversion. Dewar could have taken his lumps from the debate, and like Chisholm shown some dignity and recognize his limitations. Instead, with the wheels falling off their campaign, they pull this stunt trying to take out the Topp campaign while they were at it. It was a slimy tactic and reeks of scorched earth politics. I have zero respect left for the man or his campaign.
But to top it all off, they have the audacity to send out this e-mail to all the members (I assume that they have the full lists). The e-mail, while not explicit, was very low-brow in my opinion. To wit:
Paul Dewar recognizes the contributions made to this party by thousands of members and activists. He will not alienate or remove the members and staff who have done an excellent job working with Jack, at the Federal Office and in the caucus to help get us where we are today. We must all work together when this leadership campaign is over.
WTF!!! What the hell is this but a veiled threat to all of the staff in the Party? Choose me, or you'll lose your jobs: absolutely despicable! And the tacit implication that other camps are conspiring to purge members from the Party? I can't fathom it. This is so not what the NDP is about, and I wouldn't want to even be a member of a Party that condones this sort of thing.
As an activist in the Party (not staff), I have the luxury of being open with my allegiances, a luxury all too many people in my province do not have. The stifling fear that people here in Manitoba have of coming out "against" Dewar has harmed our Party, and I believe also the democratic process in general.
I had some hope that this was just a Manitoba tactic and that the Dewar camp was not engaging in the same thing in the rest of the country, but this e-mail makes me unsure.
To all my fellow Manitobans who are not supporting Dewar (from all camps), I extend the invite to "come out of the closet": this man is not going to be leader, nor should he be. You are free to vote your conscience.
Mon, 2012-02-13 21:04
#7
that's a pretty clever move - basically following up on the implication that dewar is the best establishment candidate to take on mulcair (who that remark was directed toward). so they release the poll timed to change the subject from his anticipated poor performance in the french debate, and then push the poll in all these different ways. a pretty smart way of using those limited dollars to maximum effect. too bad their strategy is wasted defending such a poor candidate.
Mon, 2012-02-13 21:08
#8
Ironic that the Dewar campaign's attempt to make their candidate part of the "big three" may ultimately result in his downfall.
Mon, 2012-02-13 21:09
#9
Yeah, and I guess Topp was just collateral damage. He was one of two (three if you count Niki) who did well in the Québec debates. Had the results of those debates had time to percolate, there is no way that Topp would still be that low. Even as a Mulcair supporter who has some criticisms of Topp's campaign, I feel really bad for Topp's campaign right now.
There is no bloody way that Dewar will end up on the last ballot, publishing these internals like this is nothing more than scorched-earth.
that's a pretty clever move - basically following up on the implication that dewar is the best establishment candidate to take on mulcair (who that remark was directed toward). so they release the poll timed to change the subject from his anticipated poor performance in the french debate, and then push the poll in all these different ways. a pretty smart way of using those limited dollars to maximum effect. too bad their strategy is wasted defending such a poor candidate.
Mon, 2012-02-13 21:14
#10
Boom Boom
One or two babblers took umbrage with the way I described Dewar earlier, so this time I'll moderate my words somewhat: I think Dewar is an arrogant, haughty, self-centered prick.
Mon, 2012-02-13 21:28
#11
In the previous thread, someone asked if there is evidence Cullen's cooperation plan is attracting a surprising number of Greens and Liberals to the party.
I know of a number. Also, a number who are normally, deliberately, non-partisan progressives in order to work with people from more than one party. It reminds me of 2003 when quite a few Greens tore up their cards in order to join the NDP to vote for Jack. I just hope they stay with the NDP after Cullen doesn't win.
Mon, 2012-02-13 21:31
#12
Dewar has truly lost sight of the shore. I just read his email and the word that comes to mind is despicable. Maybe that is too harsh. So many NDP member readers are not going to get his points because they are too "inside baseball." In fact, I bet most people that read that email will be going, "what is he talking about?"
This was truly poor judgment and I wish the people at his campaign had paused to think before pushing the send button.
Mon, 2012-02-13 21:32
#13
Hear hear!
Dewar has truly lost sight of the shore. I just read his email and the word that comes to mind is despicable. Maybe that is too harsh. So many NDP member readers are not going to get his points because they are too "inside baseball." In fact, I bet most people that read that email will be going, "what is he talking about?"
This was truly poor judgment and I wish the people at his campaign had paused to think before pushing the send button.
Mon, 2012-02-13 21:45
#14
Andrew Coyne make some good points here: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/02/13/andrew-coyne-ndp-could-lo...
On moving to the centre:
The NDP’s whole history is vindication of the principle that a party need not be in power to have an impact. More to the point, it is not so clear that abandoning or watering down its principles would even reap the promised political benefits. The public can sense when a party is not being true to itself. It need not fear the party harbours some secret agenda; rather, it may well be concerned that such a party, lacking either a unifying mission or the confidence to speak of it openly, would be adrift in power, and divided against itself.
On Quebec:
The focus on Quebec strikes me as similarly misplaced. It would make sense if the party could, by its choice of leader, make further gains in the province, or stave off losses. But the party isn’t going to win any more seats in Quebec, and it is going to lose seats at the next election, no matter who it elects as leader, for the simple reason that whoever it elects will not be Jack Layton. It is difficult to argue that the 2011 election represented some permanent shift in Quebec’s affections, against the overwhelming evidence that it was a vote for “un bon Jack.” More to the point, there is a whole lot of the country outside Quebec, where the party has deeper roots and where the prospects for winning seats are greater.
Mon, 2012-02-13 21:46
#15
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Polling+shows+three+race+leadership+Dew...
Mulcair - 31.1%
Nash - 17.5%
Topp - 14.8%
Dewar - 14.8%
Cullen - 14.2%
Ashton - 5.3%
Singh - 0.9%
Mulcair's pollster contacted 1,105 party members from Feb. 6-8, which means the poll is accurate to plus or minus 2.9 per cent, 19 times out of 20.
Mon, 2012-02-13 21:52
#16
[Cross-posted with Howard on the same topic.]
In case it wasnt explicit enough, as FFK noted, that email of Dewar's was 100% directed at taking down Mulcair. Not only that, but I think they must have packed in the top 10 most visceral attaks on Mulcair into one email.
I dont think it's clever. I think its just weird. And I dont mean slimey/weird, I mean just plain weird.
So weird that I can't figure it out enough to suggest that its a sign of desperation. It looks that way, but I think its just as likely to be a product of bubble thinking gone wild and gone way too cutsey.
Notice that some people thought it was an attack on both Mulcair and Topp. Many will find it some language they aren't familiar with.
The one guess I think is safe is that a LOT of their second place votes are behind Mulcair... likely much more so than other camapigns. But what an idotic way to go about trying to turn some of those. And it might be dumb to even try to turn Mulcair choices. Makes more sense to chase after all the second and third choice votes. Even if a lot of your present second choices are behind Mulcair, its still more feasible to round up enough of the rest so that Mulcair cannot grow enough through the ballots to win.
Who knows what cleverness they had in mind. Whatever it is, I doubt they get the results they were looking for.
Mon, 2012-02-13 21:55
#17
For those that didn't receive Dewar's email. Alice Funke of punditsguide.ca has posted it in full here.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:06
#18
Alice referrs to the text as a pitch being made to Topp supporters. I put this on her blog:
"But a lot of us think that narrative of veiled negative contrasts to another candidate[s] is entirely directed at Mulcair. If you know different, then the campaign badly missed its mark on this one, even with the most engaged members."
Be interesting what others have to say. But whatever is 'correct' (?), I think its testimony to the mystifying nature of the diatribe.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:15
#19
I think Ken is more correct than Alice. Part of the whisper campaign against Mulcair's way back was that he would purge many of the existing organizers. I have yet to see anything to confirm that he will do so, but Dewar's message seems lto be an attempt to refloat that old innuendo.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:17
#20
Andrew Coyne make some good points here: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/02/13/andrew-coyne-ndp-could-lo...
I'm glad to know Andrew Coyne believes the NDP's true identity is 'harmless ornament'. On a similar note, why do women feel the need to get elected when we can influence the real decision-makers with our feminine wiles?
You know what will have an impact? Seeing my party's principles & values enshrined in law when we're the government. But thanks for the pat on the head, Andrew! :)
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:17
#21
NR: Your numbers are wrong according to the Vancouver Sun. According to them, these were Mulcair's internals:
Mulcair 31.1
Nash 17.5
Topp 14.8
Cullen 14.2
Dewar 13.8
Ashton 5.3
Singh 0.9
******** Interesting that they show DEWAR in fifth!!! ********
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Polling+shows+three+race+leadership+Dew...
Mulcair - 31.1%
Nash - 17.5%
Topp - 14.8%
Dewar - 14.8%
Cullen - 14.2%
Ashton - 5.3%
Singh - 0.9%
Mulcair's pollster contacted 1,105 party members from Feb. 6-8, which means the poll is accurate to plus or minus 2.9 per cent, 19 times out of 20.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:19
#22
Temagant - welcome indeed!
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:28
#23
Of all the ridiculous over reactions in these threads, the reaction to Paul Dewar's email has to take the cake. "Despicable'. What a joke.
What's that? Oh it's the Fonz calling- he wants his leather jacket back as he is about to line up his bike with the ramp.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:28
#24
One or two babblers took umbrage with the way I described Dewar earlier, so this time I'll moderate my words somewhat: I think Dewar is an arrogant, haughty, self-centered prick.
i don't think this is fair. i think he's a good man who doesn't quite realize what changed and why during the last election. he's not qualified to be leader and i think the vast majority of us here realize that he'd be worse for our electoral prospects than turmel, but i don't think any of us could doubt that he sincerely believes that he could be a decent leader.
also, i think the last person a new democrat should take advice from is andrew coyne, even ezra levant would offer more legit advice, as at least he wants a strong ndp to take out the liberals.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:29
#25
I agree totally. Dewar is more than a decent person.
Campaigning is a very weird mindset. They just seem to be a little more isolated than most campaigns get.
Actually nicky, I think Alice is right, and that I missed something:
The anti-Mulcair swipes are directed at Topp supporters:
1.] Topp's support is too low to have a shot at winning.
2.] We know you dont like that weasel Mulcair, so come over to Dewar to stop him.
Lets see now, if I didnt get it without some big hints....
You could say that this proves me and Stockholm wrong- there IS an anyone but Mulcair campaign.
But in our defense, how could Stock and I know that there are such idiots loose at the top of one of the campaigns?
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:30
#26
Of all the ridiculous over reactions in these threads, the reaction to Paul Dewar's email has to take the cake. "Despicable'. What a joke.
What's that? Oh it's the Fonz calling- he wants his leather jacket back as he is about to line up his bike with the ramp.
I will refrain from commenting on Dewar and leave him to his own good devices.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:32
#27
I'm not supporting him, not supporting anyone at this point with Romeo out, but lets have a wee little bit of perspective here folks.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:34
#28
Andrew Coyne make some good points here: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/02/13/andrew-coyne-ndp-could-lo...
Wow, how nice of Andrew Coyne to finally provide us New Democrats with some excellent advice on how to win the next election. And here I always pegged him for a Tory (or an anti-worker business Liberal at best)! How wrong I was!
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:39
#29
More vitrol on Dewar's campaign for daring to speak, for daring to conduct a poll, for daring to frame a poll, etc.! If he was a member of a visable minority, I'm sure there would have some intervention by now. None-the-less, his campaign continues to thrive beyond the vacumm of the babbleverse.
What is it about "uppity white men" that babblers can't stand anyway - and do they know sarcasm when they see it?
I think there are clearly some well organized campaign "volunteers" on this board and elsewhere. And they are welcome to spin to their hearts content, the members will speak in their own voice with time.
I predict an early ballot exit for Topp and unfortunately Cullen, while Singh and Ashston appear to be ready for a pre-ballot deal for early exits.
Why do I like Dewar in the final three against Nash and Mulcair? He is the guy that is working the hardest!
Dewar has vision, passion and energy to spare. He connects well with regular folk and that will be key to success in future federal NDP governments.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:41
#30
Rene Levesque said after he was elected in 1976 "Everyone take a valium".
They same thing needs to be said here concerning some absurd comments about Dewar's campaign.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:41
#31
Andrew Coyne make some good points here: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/02/13/andrew-coyne-ndp-could-lo...
Wow, how nice of Andrew Coyne to finally provide us New Democrats with some excellent advice on how to win the next election. And here I always pegged him for a Tory (or an anti-worker business Liberal at best)! How wrong I was!
Coyne's condescending attitude aside, I agree with his point on not abandoning party values is accurate, as most conservative pundits tend to believe that the party has to move to the centre to be relevant.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:43
#32
Thanks, FFK, for putting things in perspective. I think both Boom Boom and I needed that!
And you're bang on about Coyne.
i don't think this is fair. i think he's a good man who doesn't quite realize what changed and why during the last election. he's not qualified to be leader and i think the vast majority of us here realize that he'd be worse for our electoral prospects than turmel, but i don't think any of us could doubt that he sincerely believes that he could be a decent leader.
also, i think the last person a new democrat should take advice from is andrew coyne, even ezra levant would offer more legit advice, as at least he wants a strong ndp to take out the liberals.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:44
#33
The objertive here is to win the next election. We're not going to have much say if we don't.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:48
#34
GregbythePond, I'm putting on my moderator hat here.
"visible minority"? "Uppity white men"? If you have something of substance to say in defence of your candidate to counter the perfectly legitimate complaints against him we'd be happy to hear them, but you play this reverse racism besieged white guy crap again and your account will be suspended.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:56
#35
Boom Boom
I think someone wrote earlier there would be a caucus revolt if Dewar won. Wouldn't surprise me at all.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:57
#36
Thanks oldgoat and writer, you saved me the bother of having to respond.
Mon, 2012-02-13 22:57
#37
writer
Why do I like [quack] in the final three against [beep] and [ding-dong]? S/he is the guyal that is working the hardest![Quack] has vision, passion and energy to spare. S/he connects well with regular folk and that will be key to success in future federal NDP governments.
Such a refreshing contrast from the organized campaign "volunteers" seen spinning on this board and elsewhere.
Edited to add: Bless you, oldgoat. The strange anti-Quebec vibe from an earlier post was also quite off-putting. Some supporters aren't really helping their candidates out in their effort to defend ... which makes me wonder if they are, in fact, supporters in the first place. Not meaning to sound conspiratorial, but it's just hard to imagine that it's considered effective by anyone.
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:07
#38
The objertive here is to win the next election. We're not going to have much say if we don't.
The objective is not merely to win the next election. The objective is to build a Canada based on our social democratic values. And in this leadership race, we can't forget that those aren't always the same thing.
I think that of the candidates running, Mulcair is probably the one with the best chance to win in 2015. However, I fear that a Mulcair-led government would be a disaster for the NDP, and would not help but rather hinder in the implementation of our long-term social democratic project.
In 1990, the NDP "won" under Bob Rae, but what were the long-term results? The Rae government failed to implement a social democratic agenda, and then was defeated overwhelmingly in the following election, allowing Mike Harris to form a majority government that inflicted devastating harm on Ontario. The Ontario NDP was set back more than a generation, and still today is burdened by the legacy of the Rae years.
My concern is that if Thomas Mulcair is elected leader, 2015 will be to the Federal NDP what 1990 was to the Ontario NDP: a short-term victory, but a long-term defeat.
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:08
#39
My hunch is that Peggy will be on the final ballot with Tom.
http://www.thewhig.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3470505
“The stakes are much higher: we’re not the fourth party, we’re the Opposition, and people very badly want to take the next step and take government.”
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:08
#40
I think someone wrote earlier there would be a caucus revolt if Dewar won. Wouldn't surprise me at all.
this sounds hyperbolic, but thinking it through, i can't deny that there could be some sort of movement to oust him, if the the polls were showing the ndp in the 15% range or whatever. 50+ mps from a single province facing a near-sure prospect of losing their seats because of poor leadership is poison for caucus solidarity.
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:12
#41
I should add, by the way, that I don't see any candidate in the race who I think both would have a good chance of winning in 2015 and who I would trust to not be the next Bob Rae. I target Mulcair particularly in my comment because I think he's the most dangerous in this regard, as I see him as both the most likely to win in 2015 and the least commited to the values of our social democratic movement.
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:15
#42
[quote=TheArchitect]
[quote=NorthReport]
The objertive here is to win the next election. We're not going to have much say if we don't.
[/quote]
The objective is not merely to win the next election. The objective is to build a Canada based on our social democratic values. And in this leadership race, we can't forget that those aren't always the same thing.
I think that of the candidates running, Mulcair is probably the one with the best chance to win in 2015. However, I fear that a Mulcair-led government would be a disaster for the NDP, and would not help but rather hinder in the implementation of our long-term social democratic project.
In 1990, the NDP "won" under Bob Rae, but what were the long-term results? The Rae government failed to implement a social democratic agenda, and then was defeated overwhelmingly in the following election, allowing Mike Harris to form a majority government that inflicted devastating harm on Ontario. The Ontario NDP was set back more than a generation, and still today is burdened by the legacy of the Rae years.
My concern is that if Thomas Mulcair is elected leader, 2015 will be to the Federal NDP what 1990 was to the Ontario NDP: a short-term victory, but a long-term defeat.
[/quote]
A good point Architect. I didn't join the NDP until the Harris years, well after the Rae debacle, but as a dipper in Oshawa I'm still finding people throwing Bob Rae in my face when I knock on doors.
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:15
#43
Boom Boom
Exactly, FFK. And if Dewar can't communicate effectively with some of those 50+ Quebec NDP MPs, well........... 
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:16
#44
Here we go again and it is so tiresome.
Those are amazin' comments about the principle architect of our last election's success in Quebec.
Don't people realize had it not been for our incredibly good showing last election in Quebec we would not even be the Officiial Opposition?
And we certainly would not be talking about forming government which is the only way progressive policies will be implemented.
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:19
#45
I think someone wrote earlier there would be a caucus revolt if Dewar won. Wouldn't surprise me at all.
this sounds hyperbolic, but thinking it through, i can't deny that there could be some sort of movement to oust him, if the the polls were showing the ndp in the 15% range or whatever. 50+ mps from a single province facing a near-sure prospect of losing their seats because of poor leadership is poison for caucus solidarity.
I think that if Dewar were chosen as leader, there would be a serious movement to oust him due to his poor French, but I don't think Dewar is the only candidate who would face serious internal dissent as leader.
It's clear that Mulcair has enemies within the party, and, whether one thinks it's fair or not, it's clear that he is distrusted if not outright disliked by much of the party. Meanwhile, if anyone else is chosen as leader, there will likely be rumors of plottings to oust that leader in favor of Mulcair which, whether founded or not, will surface in the media every time anything goes wrong for the leader.
Jack regularly received well over 90% support in his leadership reviews at convention. I'm inclined to think that no matter who the new leader is, the days of such unity around a strong, effective leader are likely over.
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:25
#46
Boom Boom
I don't support any of the anti-Mulcair voices here, because I fundamentally disagree with the suggestion that Tom is not progressive enough. I don't see anyone but Mulcair as able to solidify the success of the NDP in Quebec, and I think he'll do quite well in the ROC. As I think Unionist pointed out, several times in fact, most of the NDP candidates - in fact probably all of them with the exception of Mulcair - are mostly unknown in Quebec.
ETA: comparing Tom Mulcair to Bob Rae is laughable.
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:28
#47
I could not disagree more with such a defeatist attitude. Once we choose our new leader 99% of the membership will close ranks behind her or him.
I think that if Dewar were chosen as leader, there would be a serious movement to oust him due to his poor French, but I don't think Dewar is the only candidate who would face serious internal dissent as leader.
It's clear that Mulcair has enemies within the party, and, whether one thinks it's fair or not, it's clear that he is distrusted if not outright disliked by much of the party. Meanwhile, if anyone else is chosen as leader, there will likely be rumors of plottings to oust that leader in favor of Mulcair which, whether founded or not, will surface in the media every time anything goes wrong for the leader.
Jack regularly received well over 90% support in his leadership reviews at convention. I'm inclined to think that no matter who the new leader is, the days of such unity around a strong, effective leader are likely over.
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:29
#48
^ i'd wager than ruth-ellen is more well-known than brian topp.
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:34
#49
I think the Dewar campaign e-mail was pretty clearly attacking Mulcair, both with the references to turning the NDP into the Liberal Party and the reassurance that Dewar won't institute a purge of progressives if he gets in. Funke could be right about it being aimed at attracting Topp supporters, but I don't think so, considering that Topp comes in fifth in his poll for both first and second votes. Edited to add: Although I'm sure that Dewar would be fine with having Topp's supporters' second ballot choices going to him.
I personally think that the e-mail is aimed not necessarily at one particular candidate's supporters, but at those who are leaning towards candidates other than Mulcair OR Dewar. It's not meant to convert Mulcair supporters. The strategy in this e-mail suggests to me that Dewar's camp probably figures that Mulcair is one of those polarizing figures that people will either support strongly (and put first on their ballot) or not support at all or rank low. The e-mail is meant to work on three levels:
- Red meat to the Anybody But Mulcair faction while convincing them that the best person to defeat Mulcair is Dewar, so they should put him first on their ballots;
- For those who are just uneasy about Mulcair as opposed to being decidedly against him, the e-mail tries to nudge them over into deciding against Mulcair and to convince them that Dewar is the guy to beat him, so they should put him first on their ballots;
- For those who are strongly supporting candidates other than Mulcair OR Dewar, it's an appeal to put Dewar second on their ballot.
Since Mulcair is the front-runner, there's no strategic point in going after his supporters, because all of the people who vote for Mulcair first on their ballots will have their ballots counted for Mulcair, so their second choices won't matter. This strategy depends, however, on the assumption that Mulcair will not be the second choice of very many people, and that most of those who aren't supporting him on their first ballot are either actively against him (and therefore can be convinced to vote for anybody but Mulcair), or aren't that interested in him (and could be convinced to put Dewar higher than Mulcair on their ballots).
I guess we'll see if those assumptions prove to be right. radiorahim just made us some popcorn, fittingly. :)
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:35
#50
[snip]
******** Interesting that they show DEWAR in fifth!!! ********
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Polling+shows+three+race+leadership+Dew...
[snip]
Mulcair's pollster contacted 1,105 party members from Feb. 6-8, which means the poll is accurate to plus or minus 2.9 per cent, 19 times out of 20.
Actually, Mulcair's campaign puts what is, statistically, exactly the right spin on these numbers and Dewar's: "Tom is ahead and there's a four-way race for second spot." Given the margins of error, Nash, Topp, Cullen and Dewar are all basically tied -- they're jointly in second-to-fifth place. The interesting things in these polls are:
- the further evidence that Cullen is unambiguously a so-called "top tier" candidate,
- the relative (first ballot) weakness of the front-runner,
- the sheer size of the traffic jam in second-to-fifth, which could lead to some unusual dynamics, and
- the large divergence in second choice responses between the two polls (e.g., Dewar at 21.2 v. 13.7%, a difference well outside either poll's margin of error).
The second choice numbers will, undoubtedly, be the real kickers.
If Topp really does have numbers putting him around 28%, he should release his whole poll (including second choices) for comparison!
Mon, 2012-02-13 23:35
#51
I think that if Dewar were chosen as leader, there would be a serious movement to oust him due to his poor French, but I don't think Dewar is the only candidate who would face serious internal dissent as leader.
It's clear that Mulcair has enemies within the party, and, whether one thinks it's fair or not, it's clear that he is distrusted if not outright disliked by much of the party. Meanwhile, if anyone else is chosen as leader, there will likely be rumors of plottings to oust that leader in favor of Mulcair which, whether founded or not, will surface in the media every time anything goes wrong for the leader.
I don't think Dewar would win but if he did we'd have to live with him straight through the next election and that goes for any leader.
Mulcair is not distrusted or dislike by "much of the Party", he's leading the contest and has the most combined support in his opponent's internal poll. A small cadre of paranoics* think he's Tony Blair reborn because he comes from a different political culture and they never really got on board with thinking of Quebec as a different nation with different political nomenclature. If he wins, they will discover he still supports the Party he took a huge chance to run for in 2007 and the broad sweep of its platfrom, he won't institute a stalinist purge and they'll start to wonder what all the fuss was about.
*There are of course people who prefer other candidates for perfectly legitamate reasons and I'm not meaning to paint everyone with the same brush.