Who are u supporting for NDP Leader, how will u mark your ballot, and why? #4

Agree with this.  Megan Leslie is my favorite MP.  And her support is still up for grabs.

DP

I just can't see many of our current MPs uniting around a Dewar leadership. As someone hinted at in the previous thread, there would be a movement to undermine and replace him. If Dewar becomes leader, I doubt he would win many votes of confidence from the caucus. But, we'll see.

Ha. Do you think Dewar will sell here in Quebec? And maybe you could ask the same question of those who oppose Mulcair and have hinted they won't support him if he becomes leader, in previous threads. And I said. "But, we'll see".

 

So, if the NDP elects as leader someone who has never bothered to learn the language of Quebec, the province that gave the NDP 58 new MPs, your answer to me is just to shut the fuck up?

New Democrats may choose (foolishly, in my view) to pick Dewar as their leader.  At least, unlike, the Liberals in the case of Michael Ignatieff, it's the choice of the party membership to make such a choice, not the party brass.  However, the voters of Quebec will almost certainly move their votes elsewhere in response to a leader who can't communicate in French.  Certainly, you'd respect their choice, Life?  

At least with Mulcair as leader, the NDP has a good chance at forming government in 2015. With Dewar as leader, it'll be almost certainly back to third party status.

Boom Boom wrote:

At least with Mulcair as leader, the NDP has a good chance at forming government in 2015. With Dewar as leader, it'll be almost certainly back to third party status.

And I if I am not mistaken you were predicting massive doom and gloom for the NDP in the May election and constantly derided Jack Layton for saying he was running for Prime Minister.  You should come hang out with Wiarton Willie.

Just think how a Dewar leadership will be portrayed in the Canadian and Quebec media. "The NDP elects a leader that can't speak French". If the NDP faithful are dumb enough to elect this guy as leader, what does that say about how they perceive Quebec?

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Somehow I don't think the Orange Crush would have occurred if Jack were unilingual.  

Or had purple skin, size 90 feet and tripped over everything, or was 900 feet tall due to radiation exposure.  What exactly is your point?

I have made as many negative remarks on here about Paul Dewar as anybody (well, since the leadership campaign started...if we count pre-campaign I think Unionist takes it...but I digress), but I would definitely keep supporting the NDP and giving him a shot as leader if somehow he wins (although I really don't see that happening).

If Dewar won I would try to look at the bright side, I think he is someone who is open to discussion and new ideas, and I would hope he progresses with his French, and I would hope that the NDP does whatever it can to compensate for his handicap in Quebec.

Life, the universe, everything wrote:

Or had purple skin, size 90 feet and tripped over everything, or was 900 feet tall due to radiation exposure.  What exactly is your point?

Any of those would be total deal breakers for me, just like inability to effectively converse in French.

Greg -Hate to hurt your fellings, but I'm not supporting Dewar.  I am rather intrigued with Cullen and will likely swing my vote that way now that I am a member.  I just find it passing strange that there are such histrionic comments about Dewar, when I hear lots of people who say they won't vote for Mulcair, or even support the party if he wins, because he isn't left wing enough.  Isn't that an insult to Quebec too?  But somehow it is all about Dewar's french. 

Clearly with the comments about Mulcair different things are motivating different members to support particular candidates.  Those making those kinds of comments about Mulcair are obviously down-playing Quebec and his capacity in french.  Clearly those supporting Dewar are doing similar things in terms of what they are downplaying and focusing on other issues or characteristics they want to see in a leader.  They should have that right, yet they are called stupid and the anti-Mulcair group is treated as paragons of progressivism.  It is a huge double standard, but then again they abound on babble.  But in the end I think everyone's choices should be respected, not demeaned, which is what is happening and it is profoundly anti-democratic.

 

ETA who I was directing my comments to as a bunch showed up inbetween while I was writing.

Boom Boom wrote:

Life, the universe, everything wrote:

And there you go again.  There is no evidence they are one the verge of doing any such thing, but you can't help yourself in insulting others.  Just what is it you hate about democracy?

I'm trying to follow your logic. Are we supposed to embrace and adore Harper because he was 'democratically' elected?

Where did I even suggest such a thing.  If you beleive in democracy you do need to acknowledge that Harper is the democratically elected head of his party and respect the choice those members made.  That doesn't mean you have to respect Harper, his policies, or his choice in sweater-ware, nor not fight to unseat him from government.  You are getting far out ahead of yourself in trying to defend your really anti-democratic word choices.

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Life, the universe, everything wrote:

Or had purple skin, size 90 feet and tripped over everything, or was 900 feet tall due to radiation exposure.  What exactly is your point?

My point is I don't know why you get so outraged over legtimate scrutiny of Dewar's inability to communicate in the language spoken by 25% of Canadians and the primary language in the province where they hold a majority of their seats.

Because the language is way over the top and disrespectful for those who are supporting him for differing reasons.  See the double standard I express above.  I have no problem with someone saying I can't support Dewar because his french isn't good enough.  But look at the comments.  People who are supporting him are called stupid, he is disparaged in compltely histrionic ways.  If this is the way New Democrats eat their own I might as well send my new membership card back. 

Hey life, no problemo. I'm not expecting anyone to convert.

What I was expecting, was decent language and not some of the really over the top stuff - some of which you have noted.

All it takes is a few bad apples to spoil the basket so I have started flagging those I find oppressive.

When I woke up yesterday morning, I was sure I'd vote Mulcair. Then in the afternoon, it was Topp. At night, back to Mulcair. Now I'm just undecided. = P

1. Niki Ashton

2. Brian Topp

3. Tom Mulcair

1. Mulcair

2. Topp

3. Nash

4. Ashton

5. Cullen

I am supporting Mulcair as my first choice, because I think he is more electable than anyone else due to his greater presence. I don't think he's perfect, and have problems with some of his policy statements, but to me he doesn't have as many negatives as the others. I'm having difficulty with ranking anyone after Mulcair, but even if he doesn't win, I doubt my second choice will come into play, as I think it unlikely he will not be on the final count/ballot.

1) Mulcair.

2) Nash.

3) Cullen.

4) Ashton.

5) Topp.

6) Dewar or Singh.

Mulcair is the most "Prime Ministerial" and the best overall communicator. I think he could make mincemeat of the Cons and I think we'd be passing up a big opportunity if we went with someone else. I think he has the most potential to be a reverse Stephen Harper, wherein he understands how to pull the political spectrum to the left by positioning the centre where the NDP is - not so much moving the NDP to the centre, which would obviously make the political ground a lot more fertile for the NDP and take us to the next level. I wouldn't be worried if one of the next three won, I even think Topp could eventually learn - though I think it'd take to long to justify ranking him higher than fifth. I'd vote for an NDP led by Dewar or Singh before just about any other party, but I really don't think they're ready to lead the party now or in the near future and I can't see them facing off against each other, so it doesn't matter where I rank them.

I'm glad to hear that NP. And thanks for saying that.

 

NorthReport wrote:

Met Topp during his West Coast visit. Actually he is quite impressive and knows what he is doing, and is well versed in the game of politics. Although I am supporting Mulcair for Leader, we could do worse than have Topp as our Leader as well. We are quite fortunate to have the calibre of leadership candidates we have and I am filled with confidence we can win the next federal election.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

1. Mulcair
2. Niki Ashton
3. Cullen
4. Top
5. Nash
6. Singh
7. write in name Peter Julian (kidding)
8. Dewar (the checkmark covered in tears)

Before this morning I thought I might only vote for my first two or three choices.

But now , the apalling prospect of Deawr as leader and the Audrey McLaughlin type disaster it portends has caused me to reconsider. I will vote for all the other six and leave Dewar off my ballot altogether. Even Brian Topp looks good to me next to Dewar.

1. mulcair

2. topp

3. nash

4. ashton

i want government.