NDP leadership race #135

that what i called them globe n mail is "Uneducated" and ignorant lol i know they r not fans NDP supporter. but they will shocking if NDP beat tories and grits in next elections. look at toronto-danforth polls, they want ndp stay and cons lose only 5% is proof they reject harper recent environics ndp and cons are tied.

Tom Mulcair absolutely dominates Quebec politial scene according to today's CROP poll. Is anyione going to still claim it is just a matter of "name recognition"?

CROP: Thomas Mulcair reigns supreme

By Raymond Giroux 
The Sun 
The March 22, 2012

Ottawa - Two days before the election of a new leader for the New Democratic Party (NDP), Thomas Mulcair is the almost unanimous choice of Quebecers in a position to comment on the subject.

According to a CROP-La Presse, Le Soleil directed by the Internet with 1,000 respondents between 15 and 19 March, the member for Outremont is supported by 45% of Quebecers, followed by Brian Topp with 6% of planned vote.

Follow Nathan Cullen 2%, Peggy Nash and Paul Dewar 1% each, while Niki Ashton Martin and Singh do not get any support.

Note that 6% of respondents say they support any candidate, while 41% do not know which of them would make the best leader for the NDP.

The domination of Mr. Mulcair is more evident among voters of his party, where he leads with 54% against 5% of support to Mr. Topp, 1% for Dewar and nothing for others. Surprisingly, 38% of NDP supporters do not express any preference.

These results tell the pollster Yuri Rivest, "Without Mr. Mulcair, the NDP is faced with a blank page in Quebec." The new leader finds the counter "to zero, he said, and must first make themselves known quickly voters."

NorthReport wrote:

Is this for real? I know a lot of the stuff in the Globe is a waste of time but this crap takes the cake. How long has this trash talking person been writing for them?

The New Democrats have no shot, kumbaya

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/margaret-wente/the-new-demo...

The All-Seeing One strikes again...

just bookmark and file for review in 2015.

she reminds me of several British columnists at The Telegraph and The Times, always explaining why things are what they are, and nothing can be reformed without severe consequences ...

NorthReport wrote:

Is this for real? I know a lot of the stuff in the Globe is a waste of time but this crap takes the cake. How long has this trash talking person been writing for them?

The New Democrats have no shot, kumbaya

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/margaret-wente/the-new-demo...

Oh, Margaret Wente's been around for a looooong time. And everything she writes is crap, it's almost astounding. She even had her own debunking blog for a while (google 'Wente Watch'). Her stuff is definitely not worth the paper it's printed on.

There was an announcement that she had become Atlantic Canada "bureau chief". So I thought they had exiled her- keeping her being our contrebution to sanity in Canada.

But apparently not, that was months ago. Nor do I see her name on any stories from here.

http://accidentaldeliberations.blogspot.ca/2012/03/on-warning-signs.html

worth reading for those who are considering voting during the convention online.

Will be interesting to hear Judy Rebick on The Current when it comes online.  Is there a link yet?  She said she was planning to outline her case why Mulcair can't be trusted.  With tens of thousands of members yet to cast their vote, these sorts of pronouncements can have an impact.  Was thinking more folks would have voted by now.  There could be a significant amount of votes to play around with at convention after all.  Given the margin of victory will probably just be a couple thousand votes, what happens at convention may be critical for the winner.

that lagacé article, while substantively correct and definitely pro-mulcair (as virtually everyone in the quebec media is, right or left), is annoying.  the quebec media is really teeing this up so that if mulcair doesn't win, the ndp is going to sink.  broadbent is a loser and, by extension, the ndp are losers if they heed his remarks on mulcair and select a different person as leader, it's not a good meme, even if mulcair wins.

Its not comparable to the US primary. Nat at all.

The Republicans have absolutely ripped each other to shreds. And since they spend BILLIONS in a PRIMARY, its wall to wall ads repeating 100s of times in every household how Santorum, Gingrich and Romney are hopeless losers.

THAT can only have a lasting effect. But we arent even on a continuum of that.

KenS wrote:

Its not comparable to the US primary. Nat at all.

The Republicans have absolutely ripped each other to shreds. And since they spend BILLIONS in a PRIMARY, its wall to wall ads repeating 100s of times in every household how Santorum, Gingrich and Romney are hopeless losers.

THAT can only have a lasting effect. But we arent even on a continuum of that.

Well, we're certainly on the continuum, but I would agree that the campaign has been quite civil comparatively speaking.  The spirit of my argument isn't compromised by the degree of civility (or lackthereof).  I still think that Topp's attacks against Mulcair, while potentially devastating to Mulcair's campaign for leadership, will have a negative impact on the NDP with Topp at the helm.  They will have to argue that they're pragmatic and mainstream after spending significant time and energy developing arguments the Tories can use to imply they are anything but.

Dave W used the delightful phrase "without severe consequences" to signify what change means to the status quo columnist defending improperly gained ground.

The debate about what happens if Mulcair does not win reminds me of the Quebec debate about Meech Lake. Those who argued that severe consquences would ensue, did not necessarily support the accord. If it had passed the accord itself would have been denounced, instead of its non-passage.

How many severe consequences columnists will be delighted to report either the NDP commited suicide and created winning conditions for Marois in the referendum now just around the corner; or that Tom Mulcair is the foe every sovereignist wanted ... he is the perfect target for their ire because he always responds in kind, reviving debate.

If Mulcair loses, the man who delivered Quebec as the Member for Outrement can presumably do it again, this time helped by 57 colleagues.

If Mulcair wins he has to prove himself outside Quebec just lke every other candidate. The Tories won their majority in Ont. (75 seats) and B.C. is important to them as well. Those are the two battlegrounds in the next election. 

The Quebec tale is fun, but the main story?

quebec is the main story, in that, mulcair is the only candidate who has no work to do in quebec AND still holds everything.  he's a household name in quebec and the most popular politician in the procinve, quebec is in his dna (literally, he comes from a very long line of quebec politicians) so that all he has to do is focus on the rest of the country, something all the other candidates have to do to.  the quebec media's line is certainly valid, and if the ndp establishment - after such a remarkable showing - is determined to prevent him from ascending to the purple, and they manage to convince the membership, quebecois can't but reflect on that.  but i still don't like the sort of line that we're seeing here, it's as ignorant of the ndp's history and internal dynamics as many ndp members seem to be of quebec's history and internal dynamics.

There's also the reasonable question: Why not have a leader from Quebec? The NDP has already had leaders from the West, Ontario and the Atlantic. Isn't it about time?

JoshD wrote:

If Mulcair does win I think that it will have proved that he can bring in voters in BC and Ontario, he won't be able to win leadership without bringing in those voters as QC voters only account for about 10% of those eligible to vote.

 And if Mulcair loses, what does that prove?

 It proves he miscalculated in his positioning vis a vis the party members. Topp did not define Mulcair as a candidate in this contest, Mulcair is wholly responsible for his campaign. The NDP leadership has long been Mulcair's to lose.  If he fails to win on Saturday he can blame himself, not Topp, Broadbent, the NDP establishment, members from Ontario and BC, the unions, Babble, or anyone else.

Hunky_Monkey wrote:

1springgarden wrote:

 And if Mulcair loses, what does that prove?

That the NDP isn't ready to be a governing party but continue to wag it's finger from the opposition benches :)

Exactly.

I'm really uneasy about the fact that Mulcair is going to have ~80-90% of the support in Quebec.

That means that if he loses, Quebec in essence had no part in selecting the leader.

this is true, but realistically, it would take a household name like mulcair to reproduce the insane - and demographically inconsistent - levels of ndp support.  a good ndp leader would be very happy just to turn in the natural dozen ndp seats in the province of quebec.  think about the difference between alexa's huge breakthrough in the maritimes and what we have there with subsequent leaders.  basically, mulcair would be like alexa - able to maintain the support - and unlike her - having a strong national appeal.  all the other (including topp) would be happy just to get the demographically consistent seats, or the seats with unusually popular mps (brosseau, for example).

this is a major consideration when we think about our next leader.  as turmel mentioned - all policy has to be approved by the federal council, so it's not like mulcair could radically change things.  we're electing a figurehead.  fair enough to disagree on the direction of the party, but if you're winning-oriented, everyone but mulcair is a huge risk.

A Toronto MP from Québec, who understood Québec.  It is certainly possible for a non-Québecois(e) to understand the nuanced relationship between Québec and Canada, but so far in this race I have seen nothing from most of the contenders to indicate anything other than tone-deafness on the province.

It seems that the members and supporters in Québec agree - according to CROP, Mulcair has 90% among them, and Topp the remainder.

If Tom loses, I certainly hope I'm wrong, but I can't help but see how it would be perceived as anything other than a rejection.  That's not a Québec thing: when Dave Barrett lost after BC delivered half of the caucus to the Party, BC felt rejected.  And Barrett was nowhere near to winning 90% of BC members' support in that race.

Simply put, Tom is the ONLY candidate with significant support in EVERY region of the country.

Hoodeet wrote:

duncan cameron wrote:

The Quebec media will do their homework. If the next leader is not Tom, they will cover the leader of the official opposition. The NDP did alright in Quebec led by a Toronto MP, and another one could do as well. No one can predict how the public will react to the next leader based on a one member one vote contest withon the party.

Hoodeet (JW)

That Toronto M.P. was born a Quebecker (if not quite a québécois), his father was a Québec politician, he himself was quite bilingual, AND he reached out to Quebec in an extraordinary way when there was only one MP from that province.  Any elected leader who is from outside Quebec will have a hell of lot to prove to the voters who left the Bloc largely because  of Jack the Pied Piper and Tom his deputy.

 

Hoodeet wrote:

That Toronto M.P. was born a Quebecker (if not quite a québécois), his father was a Québec politician,AND he reached out to Quebec in an extraordinary way when there was only one MP from that province.  Any elected leader who is from outside Quebec will have a hell of lot to prove to the voters who left the Bloc largely because  of Jack the Pied Piper and Tom his deputy.

And it took 8 years for Québec to warm up to him.  Is the Party (or Canada, for that matter) willing to wait until 2020 for Peggy Nash or Brian Topp to kick Stephen Harper out?

Winston wrote:

when Dave Barrett lost after BC delivered half of the caucus to the Party, BC felt rejected.  And Barrett was nowhere near to winning 90% of BC members' support in that race.

Simply put, Tom is the ONLY candidate with significant support in EVERY region of the country.

my mom was carrying on about this today earlier and I didn't know what she was really talking about.

Somethin' about 'centre of the universe' after getting an email from Brian Topps campaign saying he was first amongst Ontario voters and that they screwed  BC over before and not again. And "their" not going to do it to Quebec again either. I have learned so much this leadership campaign about the NDP members it hurts my miind.