Who are u supporting for NDP Leader, how will u mark your ballot, and why? #6

Caissa wrote:

My current top 3 is Topp, Nash, Mulcair. That being said my ranking and choices is very fluid.

That's exactly where I'm at.  But I'm fairly solid on the ranking.

oldgoat wrote:

 I'd only vote for Mulcair if it came down to Mulcair/Dewar, because I think Mulcair would cause less irreperable damage.

Wow, OG, you turning into a regular old softie on us! I shudder to think what your next post will be.  

1. Nash

2. Dewar

3. Cullen

Boom Boom wrote:

I really hate to go against Quebec as I live here, but I'm leaning more to Cullen now.

Cullen - isn't he the dude who said we should unite with "progressives", but not with separatists? Yeah, that'll go over great here. Do you have any idea how many of my union colleagues, who describe themselves as sovereignist and vote "yes" in the referenda, voted NDP? I guess Cullen will be telling them they're voting for the wrong party.

1. Ashton (right now she has my optimism is better than despair vote)

2. Mulcair (his consistency impresses)

3. Topp (he's improved a great deal in my estimation)

4. Nash (I like her, but the more I hear from her the further she drops)

That's subject to slight revision, but Cullen, Dewar and Singh have no chance of making my final four.

LOL

After the Winnipeg debate:

1 - Cullen.

2 - Topp.

3 - Mulcair.

4 - Ashton.

5 - Nash.

6 - Dewar.

7 - Singh.

If the above Globe article is accurate, whoever you choose  to be first on your first vote or ballot, that person remains first until they win or drop off.

That`s correct NR, at least that is how the Ontario ballot worked.

My 1rst ballot is something like this right now

1. Ashton, Nash, Dewar 

2. Cullen, Mulcair

3. Singh, Topp

Where the top 5 will end up is anyone`s guess.

Unionist wrote:

Cullen - isn't he the dude who said we should unite with "progressives", but not with separatists? Yeah, that'll go over great here. Do you have any idea how many of my union colleagues, who describe themselves as sovereignist and vote "yes" in the referenda, voted NDP? I guess Cullen will be telling them they're voting for the wrong party.

Heh, I forgot about that post. Right after Sunday's (yesterday) debate, I dropped Cullen from my list entirely, because his co-operation plan is such a dead weight.

Now I'm not sure who I'll vote for - I guess it'll be Mulcair, Topp or Nash now. Maybe Niki Ashton, because she's far behind the three I just listed, but I think she'll be a dynamite leader in the future.

ETA: despite his faults, Cullen is still the best-humoured of the bunch, and that's what attracted me to him in the first place, along with the good work he's doing at the riding level - and against Northern Gateway.

1. Mulcair

2. Cullen

3. Ashton

IP, regarding Ashton's presentation, I think she is trying to project gravitas. I think she feels she needs to do that to make up for any percieve issues related to "age or experience". I am guessing she is pretty exciting when uleashed, and I am certain she will  only get better as progresses. Certainly, either she or Cullen will be both very formidable with more "seasoning". Notwithstanding, I still rank them 2 and 3 respectively as leadership choices after attending the Sunday debate. I have to admit though, I feel quite surprised by my ranking considering where I was on Sunday. I have given up on Nash. I think she is likely to be just too wishy-washy sounding as leader. I can't see her being able to frame effectively.

Oh, Ashton is totally exciting when unleashed. I have met her a number of times and think she's fantastic. It's just her debate presentation I'm not too sure about.

Welcome to the club on not declaring your intentions.

1) mulcair

2) topp

3) cullen

4) nash

5) ashton

i totally agree that ashton sounds robotic, i find it really grating, though she has risen in my estimation over the course of the campaign - a contrast wish nash who i rate lower and lower each time i see her in action.  just sort of boring.  cullen has a certain tenacity and spunk, and while i don't think he's ready, i think he's our third best candidate.  topp is getting more fiery, and i actually like that he's firing all guns at tom: though it is effective in raising doubts about tom's sincerity as a social democrat (which i think is crazy), it shows he has the right sort of instincts to fight harper.  and, of course, to me mulcair is the best we have, by far, and likely the only one who could become pm.

Ok, so what about if the Libs pick Trudeau? Does it matter then? Is Trudeau a real threat, or is he just hype "cuz he's Trudeau's kid"?

Probably not, but does Haper manage to project "Gravitas"? Does it matter? Again, what if the Libs get a really charismatic leader? What happens then?

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Arthur Cramer wrote:

I hear people talking about Topp. I wonder what I am missing. Does anyone else find him uninspiringly boring? Does anyone think I am wrong and can you tell me how he will develop the needed "leadership presence"? I am serious in asking. I just don't see it.

I'll repeat what I said about this, because it was more threads back than I would have thought (man, are we ever verbose 'round these parts), and it might have been before you joined in the fray.

I had two experiences with Topp in person during this campaign before I took off to Tulips-and-PR-Land. The first time was at the very beginning of the campaign, at a very informal, stand-around-and-chat-with-hors d'oeuvres meet-and-greet. He was awkward and clearly not at all comfortable in his own skin, and a lot of people were really taken aback by this, especially since the event also included several of the other candidates who were working the room much, much more effectively. The second time was at a local riding event that I helped organize, a few months later, that was structured around a short intro speech followed by a long, long Q&A and then a short informal chat-with-members time. It was like he was a different guy: when he spoke, his points were always wrapped in a compelling narrative that made you stop and listen, and he was funny and warm and yes, even charismatic. Even in the informal chat part afterward, where he clearly wasn't as much in his element, he was good--I watched him trade jokes with our discussion moderator with ease and listen carefully and say thoughtful things to a local First Nations activist. There was a real magic in the room that night--many people who started off opposed to him ended up liking him despite themselves, and many who started off open to him but undecided ended up thinking he was the cat's pajamas.

My take on this at the time was that he was improving, and fast. I've since realized from talking to a lot of people in different places, though, that it's not that simple. Like I said earlier this morning in another thread, I think it's pretty clear that Topp is much better in some situations than others (he has the best chance to shine in an informal forum where he can tell longer stories to get his point across), and that when it comes to more personal encounters, he has good nights and bad nights. As for his debate performances, I think they're nowhere near as good as many other candidates' (and nowhere near as good as Topp himself can be in another format), but steadily improving.

Where should that leave you? Only you can decide that. I am really encouraged by that one "magic" evening event, because it suggests that he really can connect with people in a real human way, but I admit I would be even more encouraged if he were better able to translate that to other formats.

I'll also add to this that I am also encouraged by his last debate performance, which I thought was better than both his early debate performances (cringeworthy) and his more recent ones other than Winnipeg (just okay).

For me, the choices were Saganash, Nash, and Ashton. Saganash would have been my first choice if not for concerns about his ability to debate in English. I had a tough time deciding between Nash and Ashton. Ashton has risen and she is now by far my first choice. I have been impressed with how she has conducted herself over the campaign. When I asked her the same question I've asked of all the candidates, only Ashton asked what my personal situation is. The big issue for me, however, is that Ashton gets Western Canada, while Peggy came across as completely tone deaf. With the possible exception of First Nations issues, I didn't hear Nash give even token mention to any Western Canadian issues. Where does she stand on the Wheat Board? I haven't heard anything. Agriculture? Resources? I also thought she did very poorly by lashing out at Dewar in the debate about her record. It's quite possible that Nash may even fall off my ballot at this stage.

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Ok, so what about if the Libs pick Trudeau? Does it matter then? Is Trudeau a real threat, or is he just hype "cuz he's Trudeau's kid"?

Justin self-destriucted a couple of weeks ago...it will take about a decade for him to rehabilitate himself as a potential leadership contender...he is the least of my concerns.

Arthur Cramer wrote:

I hear people talking about Topp. I wonder what I am missing. Does anyone else find him uninspiringly boring? Does anyone think I am wrong and can you tell me how he will develop the needed "leadership presence"? I am serious in asking. I just don't see it.

Same here, Arthur. I also don't like how his campaign is playing fast and loose with the truth. I want my politicians to be a bit more honourable.

I also don't trust him. I think he's running a classic campaign. He's a strategist. He knows his shift to the left to appeal to the base will get him votes in the race. People say his tax plan is bold. Really? Election after election we ran on "tax the rich". How is it bold now? Jack dropped that plank and rhetoric... and he was advised by Topp... the same Topp who takes credit for writing the 2011 election platform. Was "tax the rich" in there?

AC

Now that the NDP is in serious contention to form government in Ottawa we need to be attracting a more complete cross-section of Canadian voters.

We need small business people, first nations people, visible minorities, and women voting for the NDP as well. We need to bring a lot of these folks off the back pages and onto the front pages. We need these talented people in positions of leadership within the NDP and we need to do it now. What better opportunity do the rank and file members have to push for this than during the current NDP Leadership Race?