NDP Leadership #108

136 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Sun, 2012-02-26 13:22

DSloth

mabrouss wrote:

I just got a robocall for a poll asking for my top 3 choices. Interesting that they wanted three instead of the usual two. Guess we might have another flawed poll coming from one of the camps soon

I don't see why that added metric would render the poll any more flawed than usual. I'd say it's very unlikely we won't make it to a 4th or 5th ballot.

That said of course all the polls you hear reported in the media are flawed. The campaigns have access to far more polls then they release so even if they're conducted in a wholly scientific and neutral manner there would still be a selection bias. No neutral third party has access to the NDP membership list for obvious reasons so the only source for polls is interested candidates.

Sun, 2012-02-26 13:23

#53

Brachina

Boom Boom wrote:

Catchfire wrote:

Yeah, I agree too KenS. The only reason I'm not voting for Mulcair is because I believe he has a destructve and divisive political style antithetical to what I consider the spirit of the NDP. I think the party would be crazy to elect such a politician as its leader, even if he was guaranteed to win the next election.

If Mulcair were to win the leadership, and then the next federal election, he'd be a hell of a lot better for the country than Harper, and don't forget he'd be surrounded by a progressive NDP caucus that will keep him in check. Plus, he'd be governed by NDP policy - I don't see how he could possibly deviate from it. So, what's to worry about? Whatever his real personality is, he'd still be better than having Harper as PM.

This is Mulcair's real personallity, he's an honest guy, perhaps to honest at times.

Sun, 2012-02-26 13:35

#54

Catchfire

Boom Boom wrote:
If Mulcair were to win the leadership, and then the next federal election, he'd be a hell of a lot better for the country than Harper, and don't forget he'd be surrounded by a progressive NDP caucus that will keep him in check. Plus, he'd be governed by NDP policy - I don't see how he could possibly deviate from it. So, what's to worry about? Whatever his real personality is, he'd still be better than having Harper as PM.

That's possibly true, Boom Boom. But if the next leader of the NDP is divisive rather than unifying, if they alienate or divorce the party from its roots, you could have four years of power followed by 30 in which the Canadian public becomes utterly intolerant to left-leaning politics in general.

Sun, 2012-02-26 13:44

#55

nicky

By any measure, Prime Minister Mulcair will lead the most left-wing government in Canadian history. By far.

I have little patience with those who would prefer to stay in opposition with some unelectable leader because that leader might be ever so slightly further to the left of Mulcair.

Those people have had 24 moral victories in every election since 1935. It's time to win a real victory.

Sun, 2012-02-26 14:02

#56

Catchfire

Yes. Because politics should be about who's in power, not what they are doing there.

ETA.

DSloth wrote:
But the left in Quebec is not inherently more centrist than the left in the rest of the country

What does this mean?

Sun, 2012-02-26 14:08

#57

mabrouss

DSloth wrote:

mabrouss wrote:

I just got a robocall for a poll asking for my top 3 choices. Interesting that they wanted three instead of the usual two. Guess we might have another flawed poll coming from one of the camps soon

I don't see why that added metric would render the poll any more flawed than usual. I'd say it's very unlikely we won't make it to a 4th or 5th ballot.

That said of course all the polls you hear reported in the media are flawed. The campaigns have access to far more polls then they release so even if they're conducted in a wholly scientific and neutral manner there would still be a selection bias. No neutral third party has access to the NDP membership list for obvious reasons so the only source for polls is interested candidates.

You misunderstand me. I don't believe that the other variable changes the reliability of the poll. I simply thought it an interesting piece of information. I simply think that it will be flawed for the same reason as all of the others and that is because the one releasing it is doing so with an agenda

Sun, 2012-02-26 14:12

#58

DSloth

I wouldn't concede that Thomas Mulcair is any less left than any of the other candidates. I think it's more of him coming from a different culture with different cultural expectations of what being on the left means. He doesn't speak to the CCF traditions as naturally as some of the others because that tradition had little caché in Quebec politics.

But the left in Quebec is not inherently more centrist than the left in the rest of the country just because they literally and figuratively speak a different language, compare the record of the National Assembly to any other Provincial legislature.

Sun, 2012-02-26 14:18

#59

Howard

Skinny Dipper wrote:

Hoodeet wrote:

"pro-Israel donars"= donairs?

Greek take-out?

Just some humour: I thought a donair was a donor to the Mulcair campaign--a don-air.

I thought a donair was just another name for a shawarma. It could be Turkish or Arabic.

That would be "doner."

Sun, 2012-02-26 14:29

#60

DSloth

mabrouss wrote:

You misunderstand me. I don't believe that the other variable changes the reliability of the poll. I simply thought it an interesting piece of information. I simply think that it will be flawed for the same reason as all of the others and that is because the one releasing it is doing so with an agenda

Oops my mistake. Fully agree with you that all the campaign's polls are flawed, though I still love a good internal "leak" since there is nothing else to stats geek out over. Just have to take them with a huuuuuge grain of salt.

ETA: Just got the same call myself, tested to see if they'd accept me picking the same name in 1st and 3rd round, they do. Also same order in every round Topp, Nash, Mulcair etc... if anyone else gets it I'd be curious if the order changes between calls.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:01

#61

Howard

Winnipeg debate is starting.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:12

#62

Catchfire

Who's the moderator? He's a bit of an idiot. Why is he interrupting them with meaningless interventions? (I'm talking about the NDP Leader debate, not babble).

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:18

#63

wage zombie

If you win four in a row, isn't that back-to-back-to-back? Paul Dewar keeps adding an extra back (back-to-back-to-back-to-back). Geez that guy likes to hear himself talk. What a tool.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:20

#64

Hunky_Monkey

Awesome... Cullen hits Topp :)

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:22

#65

Howard

Cullen slammed Topp about negative campaigning, what Cullen called Topp's "wedge politics," in the NDP race. Topp struggled to find a soundbite answer.

Cullen is having a good debate.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:25

#66

wage zombie

I agree that Cullen's having a good debate but I wouldn't call any of that stuff wedge politics.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:27

#67

Howard

Lol. Cullen is winning in a 3-person pile on. Dewar & co. should cut it short, they are making Cullen look good!

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:37

#68

Howard

This is a much better debate. A lot of good-natured (and worthwhile) clashes.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:40

#69

Idealistic Prag... Idealistic Pragmatist's picture

Howard wrote:

This is a much better debate. A lot of good-natured (and worthwhile) clashes.

Yes!

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:40

#70

Howard

Peggy is floundering...having trouble directly addressing policy questions. Bobbing and weaving.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:41

#71

Interested Observer Interested Observer's picture

answer the question peggy!

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:43

#72

Howard

Topp just landed a great critique Singh. All very politely. Much better debate.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:43

#73

Howard

Idealistic Pragmatist wrote:

Howard wrote:

This is a much better debate. A lot of good-natured (and worthwhile) clashes.

Yes!

Most of the candidates have landed some good punches. Mulcair for instance, had trouble convincingly answering Cullen's questions about his absence at certain debates.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:46

#74

Bärlüer

I think Topp handled Singh's questions about capital gains imposition very well.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:47

#75

josh

Good job by Ashton and Nash.

Mulcair disses the Layton years.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:49

#76

Hunky_Monkey

josh wrote:
Good job by Ashton and Nash.

Mulcair disses the Layton years.

No... Mulcair said we need to continue the work Jack started.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:49

#77

Howard

This is the first debate I've watched where people have managed to land some punches on Tom. Not bad. He is clearly facing the frontrunner scrutiny now.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:50

#78

KenS

When does old goat's dog get his 15 seconds?

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:51

#79

josh

Nice spin.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:54

#80

KenS

The dog was spinning?

I miss all the best stuff.

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:59

#81

Howard

KenS wrote:

When does old goat's dog get his 15 seconds?

Blatant species-ism

Sun, 2012-02-26 15:59

#82

Hunky_Monkey

josh wrote:
Nice spin.

I'd suggest you take off the tinted goggles :)

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:00

#83

UWSofty

I have to agree with Mulcair that we need to move beyond slogans. I've always hated the overuse of "ordinary Canadians" and "working families".

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:04

#84

Howard

Much better debate.

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:04

#85

Idealistic Prag... Idealistic Pragmatist's picture

Howard wrote:

Topp just landed a great critique Singh. All very politely. Much better debate.

I am loving that they're landing punches on each other but still being respectful.

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:05

#86

Bärlüer

Good answer by Mulcair on the registry. (Up there with Topp's on capital gains as far as direct, principled answers go.) Nash has been one of the least effective in that regard.

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:08

#87

Howard

Peggy Nash is all over the map on her messaging re:tax policies.

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:09

#88

Hunky_Monkey

Seems Peggy is dodging the tax issue a bit. Just said she won't throw out speculative numbers for the Tory attack machine to use.

OH MY GOD! Peggy is a BLAIRITE! THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN! :)

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:14

#89

Howard

The NDP.ca online feed just went down I think. They are on the CPAC feed. The NDP one was better.

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:14

#90

josh

Yes, her answer on the tax question was disappointing. And Topp is the only one hammering on the inequality issue.

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:15

#91

algomafalcon

UWSofty wrote:

I have to agree with Mulcair that we need to move beyond slogans. I've always hated the overuse of "ordinary Canadians" and "working families".

I think Tom made a great point and Niki Ashton's "new politics" rhetoric seems to be a doctrinaire insistence on endlessly repeating and recycling the old slogans from the past.

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:15

#92

Hunky_Monkey

Did Peggy just repeat a joke used earlier??

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:23

#93

Hunky_Monkey

josh wrote:
Yes, her answer on the tax question was disappointing. And Topp is the only one hammering on the inequality issue.

And his tax plan won't solve it. Do you find it funny though that he keeps using the moderate, Third Way Romanow Saskatchewan NDP as a model and in the same breath attacks other candidates for, in his mind, wanting to move the NDP to the centre?

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:24

#94

Lou Arab

Uh oh, Mulcair wants a social democratic government, (not a democratic socialist one). Clearly a sell out!

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:33

#95

Howard

Peggy Nash, Paul Dewar, and Thomas Mulcair had weak debates. This is not to say they didn't all have their moments. Mulcair is still my choice.

Cullen, Topp, Singh, and Ashton were good. I think Cullen had the best debate. Followed by Topp, Singh, Ashton.

Mulcair will need to pick up his performance in the Montréal. Both he and Peggy are struggling with the vagueness in some of their responses.

Lots of good exchanges. Polite disagreement. Few candidates escaped scrutiny (Ashton got off a little easy as did [less so] Dewar)

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:33

#96

DSloth

Personally I don't think "ordinary Canadians" even sounds all that good in English (and I understand it's downright insulting in French).

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:34

#97

Brachina

Hunky_Monkey wrote:
Seems Peggy is dodging the tax issue a bit. Just said she won't throw out speculative numbers for the Tory attack machine to use.

OH MY GOD! Peggy is a BLAIRITE! THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN! :)

Hahahaha, I wish I could watch the debate, but at the moment it isn't possible, I'd be thankful for any details.

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:35

#98

dacckon

I disagree that Cullen did as well as people portrayed him as doing in this debate. I found him annoying, and that Topp handled him pretty well on the joint nomination issue.

Dewar's french was blehblah. Had some great moments here and there in English.

Topp has greatly improved, but he would be better without the hand motions. He needs to now work on developing effective knockout punches.

Nash DID NOT ANSWER ANYTHING STRAIGHT.

Ashton had a rocking outro! Everything else was ok.

Mulcair was ok, no suprises from him. Same old Mulcair.

I found Singh very irritating.

I liked how the moderator intervened to get to the point.

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:42

#99

Hoodeet

Howard wrote:

Skinny Dipper wrote:

Hoodeet wrote:

"pro-Israel donars"= donairs?

Greek take-out?

Just some humour: I thought a donair was a donor to the Mulcair campaign--a don-air.

I thought a donair was just another name for a shawarma. It could be Turkish or Arabic.

That would be "doner."

Hoodeet (JW)

Could you explain that pun, please. It went right over my head.

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:44

#100

Boom Boom

Cullen was on the defensive over his joint nomination thing - I bet he regrets ever bringing it up. Good debate. Topp was better today than I've seen him in a while. No clear winner for me, but I guess I have to drop Cullen now - no one else in the field supports his plan. So I guess I'm back to picking Mulcair or Topp again.

Sun, 2012-02-26 16:45

#101

Brachina

What's a bonhomie?

Pages

Topic locked