Martin Singh just put out an email claiming he's signed up 6,000 supporters and that that represents ~25% of the new memberships, in other words about 24,000 new members in the party.
NDP Leadership # 103
Tue, 2012-02-21 09:28
#52
Tue, 2012-02-21 09:29
#53
The stakes are high for all of us, and whoever we support, and those of us who still do not know who we will support.
But someone it is only dissing on Mulcair that REQUIRES answers from supporters.
Well's guesses are reasonable, but they are a hash.
One big reason, is the Quebec MPs notwithstanding, and even allowing for their collective influence on the voting, I dont think the Mulcair/Topp combination is one of the biggest #1/#2 choice combinations, even though there a few on this board. But even more reason, being #2 to Mulcair does no candidate sweet fuck all. And if you are on the #1 side, thats all that matters [and keeping it that way].
I think there are other reasons that a Topp Mulcair alliance is feasible- like some of the other combinations are.
Tue, 2012-02-21 09:35
#54
Well's guesses are reasonable, but they are a hash.
One big reason, is the Quebec MPs notwithstanding, and even allowing for their collective influence on the voting, I dont think the Mulcair/Topp combination is one of the biggest #1/#2 choice combinations, even though there a few on this board. But even more reason, being #2 to Mulcair does no candidate sweet fuck all. And if you are on the #1 side, thats all that matters [and keeping it that way].
I think there are other reasons that a Topp Mulcair alliance is feasible- like some of the other combinations are.
The only ways I see Topp backing Mulcair on the final ballot is if A) it looks like Dewar will be on the final ballot, Topp's not a fool B) if Quebec MPs press Topp hard and I think this is very likely.
As for the reverse, well lets be honest, we all know it won't be.
Still I think a Cullen Mulcair alliance is more likely.
Tue, 2012-02-21 10:15
#55
http://accidentaldeliberations.blogspot.com/2012/02/on-limited-choices.html
Interesting thoughts by AD on Topps tactics.
Tue, 2012-02-21 10:32
#56
The only 'alliances' between anyone and Mulcair, is with the other one dropping out.
And dont rule out Topp Cullen- perhaps more likely because it could be either of them deferring. Cullen and Mulcair being friendly in the debates is no more determining than Mulcair and Topp being virtually always pointy. But I dont think anyone dropping out to support another candidate is likely. Only possible.
The one exception I might make is that if Paul's campaign comes to agree that winning is impossible, then he might be more likely to decide to throw in his lot with someone. But even there, there are plenty of solid internal arguments against doing that. For one thing, I doubt being on the last ballot will be deemed impossible. And if you can get there.... And a lot of candidates are going to be persuaded that no matter their chances they need to say in, and/or they dont see a single other candidate that stands well above the others to them. I couldnt even guess which of this lot is most likely to be like that. The inclinations against dropping out could be especially high for a particular candidate, without it being outwardly obvious.
Tue, 2012-02-21 10:48
#57
I really don't think there will be anything remotely resembling a formal alliance between any camps (short of a dropping out and endorsement). I think Boivin was simply asserting her own personal preference, which is a completely rational ranking if her priority is Quebec appeal. Topp couldn't get Boivin to say that if she didn't believe it, even if it somehow fit into some grand 12 dimensional chess strategy of his.
Tue, 2012-02-21 10:58
#58
The NDP is much more at risk for serious effects from [continued] intellectual laziness and unwillingness to have contention over alternate visions, than it is at risk for a leadership race sowing the seeds of internal wars.[And various internal consitituencies being quick to spout off over things not going their way does not count as contention over alternate visions. What we lack is contention over articulated visions. What we get is lots of rhetoric that sound like barricades will be going up if we do not get/keep X or Y. Thats not the same thing.]
This is a good observation. Not that the leader sets policy, but the candidates ought to be asking the members which direction we want to go. I agree the differences between the candidates haven't been significant enough to make me say "I need to support X" let alone "I can't support Y". Which is valuable, because we ought to have a choice, and debate allows us to reveal the weaknesses in various ideas.
I also agree there's a lot of people blowing up otherwise small issues. I'm not even going to disagree that there are differences, or even that they're somewhat significant. But it keeps telling me that the differences between the candidates -- and maybe even a lot of the members -- is that of strategy and tone, not substance.
Tue, 2012-02-21 11:05
#59
I don't expect alliances to play a significant role.
What would they be allying for? I don't really see any massive "anti-..." sentiment. There's some dispassionate anti-Dewar sentiment over his French, some dispassionate anti-Cullen sentiment over his strategy, and a passionate but small sentiment against Mulcair over his perceived neoliberalism. And these sentiments haven't really been echoed or amplified by the candidates.
Plus so many people won't be voting at the convention, let alone in real time. It's likely that voters will go where they want to go at the convention. It's even a possibility the votes will have decided the leader before the convention, and we'll just be waiting.
Tue, 2012-02-21 11:10
#60
Steve_Shutt
I was lead to believe that Peggy Nash's campaign has released their poll, but can't find it anywhere. Any ideas where I can find it - sorry if it is easily detectable on a related thread (or, gasp, this one) but I'm home watching a sick little guy so my attention is not undivided.
Tue, 2012-02-21 11:12
#61
The only 'alliances' between anyone and Mulcair, is with the other one dropping out.
And dont rule out Topp Cullen- perhaps more likely because it could be either of them deferring. Cullen and Mulcair being friendly in the debates is no more determining than Mulcair and Topp being virtually always pointy. But I dont think anyone dropping out to support another candidate is likely. Only possible.
The one exception I might make is that if Paul's campaign comes to agree that winning is impossible, then he might be more likely to decide to throw in his lot with someone. But even there, there are plenty of solid internal arguments against doing that. For one thing, I doubt being on the last ballot will be deemed impossible. And if you can get there.... And a lot of candidates are going to be persuaded that no matter their chances they need to say in, and/or they dont see a single other candidate that stands well above the others to them. I couldnt even guess which of this lot is most likely to be like that. The inclinations against dropping out could be especially high for a particular candidate, without it being outwardly obvious.
Paul Dewar is way to stubborn to quite the race, he'll be thier till he's booted off the ballot by the membership come March 24th.
Tue, 2012-02-21 11:14
#62
Good news! Cultural activist Todd Wong, aka "Toddish McWong", the founder of Gung Haggis Fat Choy (a hybrid celebration of Robbie Burns Day and Chinese New Year), is supporting Brian Topp. Good to see that more and more people are standing behind Topp's call to restore tax fairness to make sure the top one percent pay their fair share. The NDP will win by sticking with our principles!
Tue, 2012-02-21 11:16
#63
I have not heard of a released, or 'leaked', Nash poll. It hasnt been mentioned here.
Odds are high this is nothing but rumour [and possible] so far.
Tue, 2012-02-21 11:20
#64
I'm sure Nash has polls but it would be a silly time to release it with the deluge of the membership numbers about to fall, unless the poll will somehow allow her to spin those numbers advantageously, but I haven't heard any rumours to that effect either.
Tue, 2012-02-21 12:55
#65
Stop the presses, Paul Dewar was endorsed by Haleine, La Vie D'Hier (minute 1:20; verbatim translation: "Breath, the life of yesterday"). Yes, Paul Dewar cannot pronounce the name of his francophone endorser and putative 2nd deputy leader.
He did it again (7:38 minute mark).
Tue, 2012-02-21 13:00
#66
I dont think the Mulcair/Topp combination is one of the biggest #1/#2 choice combinations, even though there a few on this board. But even more reason, being #2 to Mulcair does no candidate sweet fuck all. And if you are on the #1 side, thats all that matters [and keeping it that way].
I think there are other reasons that a Topp Mulcair alliance is feasible- like some of the other combinations are.
I think a lot of Topp supporters would (holding their noses perhaps) rank Mulcair ahead of the other candidates because many of them are very strategic minded and don't want to elect a leader who would be lethal to the party in Quebec.
BTW: One thing no one has talked much about is whether some candidates might let it be known who their second choice is and invite their supporters to follow suit. Martin Singh has reported that he has signed up 6,000 members. What if Singh puts out word that he has Mulcair as is second choice? I have to believe that a lot of the people he has signed up in Sikh temples etc....will be heavily influenced by that.
Tue, 2012-02-21 13:31
#67
Aside from his French, one of my major irritants with Dewar is how he interrupts the people he's speaking with, be they fellow candidates at a debate or people on TV shows. It starts out with interjections of "yeah, yeah" and then proceeds to continue to interject before talking right over them.
Tue, 2012-02-21 13:52
#68
BTW: One thing no one has talked much about is whether some candidates might let it be known who their second choice is and invite their supporters to follow suit. Martin Singh has reported that he has signed up 6,000 members. What if Singh puts out word that he has Mulcair as is second choice? I have to believe that a lot of the people he has signed up in Sikh temples etc....will be heavily influenced by that.
I think the new members are the most easily swayed by who their candidate, or their candidates' endorsers, boost as a good second choice. That is because I am presuming these new sign-ups largely did so out of admiration/to support the candidate that they signed up for and they may also have a weaker history of attachment and thus be lesser informed vis à vis the other candidates.
As such, the candidates with the most new signups are probably the ones you want to target for down ballot support (if these candidates drop out though, it may be their supporters would not vote at all).
I think the effect of the Québec MPs saying Topp or Mulcair is an indication to (new) Québec members to rank either one first or second, and I think it will have influence. So in the event Mulcair drops, I would expect a bunch of his Québec support to swing to Topp, and in the event Topp drops probably the same could be said of his Québec support going to Mulcair. I think the main non-benefactor in all this is Peggy Nash, who clearly has some Québec presence.
Tue, 2012-02-21 13:56
#69
Boom Boom
There are only three I see in serious contention for the leadership: Mulcair, Topp, and Nash, and I think they will finish in this order. I must say I'm liking Cullen a whole more than before, and my hostility to Dewar is calming down a bit. As far my preferences go, since Saganash dropped out, it's just Mulcair and Cullen for me. I think after this leadership race, that Niki Ashton will be the next leader, and I wish her well - she's the future of the party.
Tue, 2012-02-21 13:58
#70
Are final membership numbers going to be officially announced by the Party?
Tue, 2012-02-21 14:05
#71
Are final membership numbers going to be officially announced by the Party?
128,351 members eligible to vote in the Leadership contest.
700% increase in Quebec from 1,700 to 12,266.
Tue, 2012-02-21 14:11
#72
Are final membership numbers going to be officially announced by the Party?
128,351 members eligible to vote in the Leadership contest.
Before anyone spins this as "not a big deal," consider this: the Conservatives had 112,000 donors in 2008, the NDP needed big membership gains to even get into the ballpark in terms of competing with the CPC. The NDP is now probably in the ballpark. Can the new leader continue to grow the party and take it to a win? One thing is for sure, they will be starting from a good base.
Tue, 2012-02-21 14:20
#73
The Liberals and Conservatives will try to compare this to the number of members they each had when they last chose leaders - of course there is the slight difference of having half a dozen candidates each spending MILLIONS compared to NDP candidates having a $500k ceiling.
Tue, 2012-02-21 14:47
#74
We'll never raise funds like the other parties. We aren't beholden to huge corporate lobbyists. There's no money in being a New Democrat.
Funny, though. For all the money spent by the conservatives, they only increased their vote total by 1%. The liberals spent a ton and lost money. We spent less and gained more votes.
Fundraising is important, but it's not everything.
Tue, 2012-02-21 14:50
#75
Some points of interest to me:
-Alberta has 8% of the membership or more than 10,000 members. If that's true, then Alberta membership has more than tripled.
-the Québec membership are almost all new and thus would constitute a "clean" list. Eventhough they are only 10% of the total, are Québec members from such a new list more likely to vote?
-Ontario's growth numbers are staggering. Who does this help? Dewar, Cullen, Nash, None of the above?
-BC's members from the BC NDP provincial leadership campaign are eligible to vote for the federal leader, but will they? The BC NDP is an alliance of Federal Liberals and NDPers.
Tue, 2012-02-21 14:57
#76
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/ontario-bc-dr...
44,000 new memberships sold. A over 50% increase in membership, that's certainly awesome.
Of course its just a start. Hopefully when the race is over another membership drive will start.
Target for that drive, 1 million members :)
Tue, 2012-02-21 14:57
#77
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/ontario-bc-dr...
44,000 new memberships sold. A over 50% increase in membership, that's certainly awesome.
Of course its just a start. Hopefully when the race is over another membership drive will start.
Target for that drive, 1 million members :)
Tue, 2012-02-21 15:13
#78
-BC's members from the BC NDP provincial leadership campaign are eligible to vote for the federal leader, but will they? The BC NDP is an alliance of Federal Liberals and NDPers.
Actually that is incorrect. To have voted in the BC NDP leadership contest last year, you had to have joined the party by January 10 (I think), 2011. Your membership would have lapsed and had to have been renewed in order to be part of the 38,000 BC members eligible to vote in this contest.
Tue, 2012-02-21 15:16
#79
Steve_Shutt
Aaron Wherry with MacLeans.ca has the figures by province as well as the numbers as of October. Shamelessly cut and pasted from http://www2.macleans.ca/category/blog-central/beyond-the-commons/ but I am going to cut myself some slack for doing so given that it is, essentially, a chart.
"Provincially, the numbers are as follows (with October 2011 figures in parentheses).
British Columbia 38,735 (30,000)
Alberta 10,249 (9,033)
Saskatchewan 11,264 (8,929)
Manitoba 12,056 (10,307)
Ontario 36,760 (22,225)
Quebec 12,266 (1,695)
New Brunswick 955 (-)
Nova Scotia 3,844 (1,300)
Newfoundland 1,030 (200)
PEI 268 (135)
Territories 924 (-)
I’ve asked the Liberals and Conservatives for their latest numbers. The Liberals were apparently at 60,000as of last May."
Tue, 2012-02-21 15:19
#80
The BC NDP is an alliance of Federal Liberals and NDPers.
Really?? Someone must have forgotten to tell Christy Clark. She is a dyed in the wool federal Liberal and she HATES the NDP with a passion and prefers to work with Harper's people.
Tue, 2012-02-21 15:20
#81
Steve_Shutt
My quick look at the numbers suggests that the Globe's article is correct that the 14,000 new memberships in Ontario and 8000 new memberships in BC are the big engines here, a 10000 gain in Quebec is fantastic. In five short months we went from under two thousand members to more than in Manitoba - where we are the government?! Nicely done people.
Tue, 2012-02-21 15:23
#82
I like to watch what the Liberals and Conservatives think about the race. If only to see what they think our weaknesses are, and only to see what they're afraid of.
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/featured/prime-time/867432237001/ndp-...
You have to take everything Warren Kinsella says with a HUGE grain of salt, because his job is (first and foremost) to get Liberals elected. Even the far right wing ones in BC. But I've found that when he does his Liberal soul searching, he usually raises criticisms I'd agree with as a New Democrat.
He says the thing that creates the biggest problems for Liberals and Conservatives is if we can hold that "beachhead" in Quebec. I definitely felt that Quebec was important for our party. But if it's important for pissing off the other parties, that matters to me too. :)
By that token, he said Mulcair and Topp are the only logical choices. I wouldn't agree: Ashton or Nash have solid French, and even for all the complaints I have about Dewar, his French is improving. But Topp and Mulcair are definitely the only two who have much name recognition in the press *currently*. I've been hoping that anyone else would catch fire, particularly Peggy Nash.
It just hasn't happened yet, and I'm not sure how it could happen. And if it doesn't happen, Mulcair is the biggest beneficiary.
Tue, 2012-02-21 15:25
#83
But if people are wondering whether there are plants here, they would make their surmises based on what they see. And you fit the bill to a tee. I think someone else may have already said that. But it amuses me.
You know the old saying about little things amusing people... ;)
And trust me, some of the things I say I'm sure no campaign would want me pushing their lines on here.
Nice try though, Ken :)
Tue, 2012-02-21 15:40
#84
Steve_Shutt
While Hunky and Ken continue to go at it, I have a question on "legitimacy" of win.
When Jack won the leadership, on the first ballot, it was pretty clearly a solid and overwhelming win. Not that there weren't hurt feelings and bruised egos - there always are in these contests, even the nice-NDP ones - but it was hard to come up with a compelling "but for" narative to nurture an unresolved grievance upon.
I would be very surprised if this one goes in such a clear-cut manner, so the question is how big a win is needed to keep the backbiting to a minimum?
If the front-runner on the first ballot (Mulcair) takes it on the second or third ballot without the other contenders really forming around an ABM candidate then I don't see the legitimacy issue being raised, those that are concerned about Mulcair's perceived "centrist" streak will be on watch for deviation from orthodoxy but I'm not it would be seen as much different from what we normally do.
However, what if Nash or Dewar end up building support through subsequent ballots to pass Mulcair - can it be done WITHOUT it being seen as an ABM, or worse, and anti-Quebec outcome? If only through the eyes of the MSM that seem ready to jump on anthing that suggests we aren't ready for prime-time. If it's Nash as opposed to Dewar - is that better? Or worse? Not from a "best leader" perspective but in terms of pulling the team together once we are done?
Tue, 2012-02-21 15:53
#85
Now that the deadline for voting in the membership is over how do we entice new people to join after the leadership race?
Tue, 2012-02-21 15:54
#86
Steve Shutt has a good point.
I still maintain that the average person, even the average member, has no strong feelings on the race. Most people I talk to like multiple candidates. Outside of the actual volunteers and a few people on Babble, I haven't met anyone who says "it has to be" any candidate. When people raise concerns about other candidates, it's always "can they win?" Not any strong hatred. If they can inspire the confidence of more than half the members, that lends at least a bit of credibility to their "winningness".
It's not who wins, or even how they win. It's how the other candidates lose. If any of the candidates adopt a scorched earth tactic, like "if you vote for my rival, you won't recognize the NDP", or "your attack on me is really an attack on all the members of Quebec", it could inflame the contest and turn soft preferences into hard limits.
I don't see that happening. But you never know with the egos in politics.
Tue, 2012-02-21 16:03
#87
Dewar is my least favourite candidate at this point. Even so, if he won, I would support him. Same goes for all the other candidates.
Tue, 2012-02-21 16:21
#88
Dewar is my least favourite candidate at this point. Even so, if he won, I would support him. Same goes for all the other candidates.
Ditto.
Tue, 2012-02-21 16:23
#89
Has Peggy Nash released a policy on taxation yet? Due to my slow internet connection I'm unable to access some of her postings because she uses some document service called scribd, which takes far too long on my slow connection (the election would be over by the time I'd be able to download documents from this service). Anyway, if she has, could someone here highlight its main points for me?
Tue, 2012-02-21 16:24
#90
Wow, that's almost a 30% increase in BC alone. Amazin'.
Nathan might be having a very good showing.
Tue, 2012-02-21 16:27
#91
Now that the deadline for voting in the membership is over how do we entice new people to join after the leadership race?
Who needs new members once the leadership race is over? What would they do?
Tue, 2012-02-21 16:32
#92
Steve_Shutt
Now that the deadline for voting in the membership is over how do we entice new people to join after the leadership race?Who needs new members once the leadership race is over? What would they do?
LOL.
You are joking, right?
Tue, 2012-02-21 16:33
#93
We need some backup to assist with Toews twitter messages we have been sending out. LOL
Tue, 2012-02-21 16:37
#94
Steve_Shutt
Wow, that's almost a 30% increase in BC alone. Amazin'.
Nathan might be having a very good showing.
I am curious about this too. Are these "lapsed" members coming back to the fold or new to the party members? Nathan to be sure but I wonder how many are brought in by Topp, Nash, Mulcair and Dewar - and Singh's network of supporters. He claims some 6000 new sign-ups, impressive if true.
The next test would be turnout. Membership sales aren't as impressive as votes at the convention. Anyone have a link to the totals from the last conventions in terms of NDP, Liberal and Conservative votes (absolute and % of those who could). Will be telling indicators of NDP enthusiasm.
Tue, 2012-02-21 16:41
#95
Who needs new members once the leadership race is over? What would they do?
LOL.
You are joking, right?
Not really.
I went to the [url=https://secure.ndp.ca/membership_e.php]NDP page to become a member[/url] for guidance (lol). Here's all it said about the reasons for becoming a member:
On March 24, 2012 - thousands of people from across Canada will help choose the next leader of Canada's New Democrats.A leader that will build bridges between Canadians. A leader that will make life better for families from coast to coast to coast. A leader that will move Canada forward.
Be a part of it - become a member today.
Now, leaving aside the small point that "today" expired three days ago - and that engineering feat about building a bridge between three oceans - what conclusions do you draw from this page about attracting people to join the party?
So, if you can tell me why the NDP needs more members, and what important things they can do (that non-members can't), I'd be interested in hearing.
Tue, 2012-02-21 16:50
#96
Some points of interest to me:
-BC's members from the BC NDP provincial leadership campaign are eligible to vote for the federal leader, but will they? The BC NDP is an alliance of Federal Liberals and NDPers.
"The BC NDP is an alliance of Federal Liberals and NDPers."
What!....tell that to Christy Clark! Wow!
Tue, 2012-02-21 17:10
#97
The fact that the BC NDP includes a lot of people who are or would be federal Liberals (Dosangh, anyone?)--"an alliance of Federal Liberals and NDPers"--does not preclude the fact that the BC Liberals are an alliance of federal Liberals (like Christy Clark) and Conservatives.
Tue, 2012-02-21 17:11
#98
I like this headline
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/national/memberships+skyrocket+heading+...
Tue, 2012-02-21 17:16
#99
knownothing
It is happening. NDP next government of Canada
Tue, 2012-02-21 17:19
#100
Fundraising, organizing for elections, voting on internal party positions, nominating candiates, educating the public about issues in concert with other members, maybe focus some more of the riding associotions work on community volunteerism, and socialize/make friendships with other like minded people.
Tue, 2012-02-21 17:30
#101
I think what is getting missed in all the hoopla about membership growth is the 98.5 % growth in PEI. Soon the very soil with have an organish tinge
I signed up some family from PEI :)