Here?
Issues Pages:
NDP Leadership #142
Sat, 2012-03-24 15:59
#1
NDP Leadership #142
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:02
#2
Boom Boom
Another delay. Third ballot results to be announced around 6pm. Fourth ballot results maybe after HNIC - midnight?? 
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:02
#3
Ahah! It's my fault. I kept trying to log on. I was my own denial of service attack! So they have shut me out, so the convention delegates can vote first!
Seriously???
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:03
#4
I love unity.
I'll bet Mulcair takes most of Nash's 16%, just barely, with Cullen and Topp taking their fair share.
"Anybody but Mulcair" was stillborn.
Voted Ashton 1st round, Cullen 2nd round (Nash didn't stand a chance), Topp 3rd round (Cullen doesn't stand a chance).
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:03
#5
Boom Boom
God, what a frigging embarrassment this is.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:04
#6
Arthur Cramer
So why should the NDP be embaraassed by the fact it is taking longer to vote? I don't see why the NDP should be not wanting to resist the frame that somehow this is bad for the NDP. And why should we be embarassed by admitting the volume exceeded expectations? If anything that is postivie.
If Pat Martin can't better represent using a postivie frame, find someone else for G-d sakes. And would someone please tell Mansbridge to shut the hell up with "this doesn't look good for the NDP", BULLSHIT!!!!!
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:04
#7
Democracy is never pretty!
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:06
#8
Arthur Cramer
Come on people, fight the frame! I don't care what Mansbridge thinks. Someone tell him to shut the hell up! All this shows is engagement. What's the problem? Dexter is on the CBC right now making this point. Push back!
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:06
#9
Arthur Cramer
Boom Boom, this is in no way an embarassment unless we allow it to be framed this way.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:06
#10
We're talking about a few thousand online votes, though. If we ever needed an argument against online voting, we have it now.
I got my vote in. But it's been a gruesome pain.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:07
#11
What a disaster ! Some one help me with the numbers ....65000 voted on the second ballot ...55000 people used the advanced polls ..supposedly 5000 at the convention that leaves 5000 outside online?? Are you telling me they cannot handle 5000 online voters??
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:07
#12
Boom Boom
The technical problems caused the delays in the first place, Arthur. The NDP seems to have anticipated everything except those.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:08
#13
why should we be embarassed by admitting the volume exceeded expectations?
It didn't. They should have been ready for 25,000 people voting from home. They only got 5,000. No excuse.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:08
#14
Fourth ballot results maybe after HNIC - midnight??
Before the Federal Budget, at least
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:11
#15
Peggy supporter Anne Minh-Thu Quach supporting Mulcair.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:11
#16
1st round: not open to mobile voters at all and had to find a desktop machine in order to cast my ballot.
2nd round: was able to vote while mobile although it was incredibly slow. Because it was slow the time was extended.
3rd round: was able to cast my ballot at 2:29 and got confirmation but the site crashed immediately afterwards at 2:30 and has remained pretty much inaccessible to all since then. Has been shut down completely until 4:30 to allow voters at convention to cast their ballot and will reopen at 4:40 to allow outside voters access.
This is not being hosted by the party. They are paying a commercial online voting firm to manage this process. As a paying party member, I hope the party gets their money back and a good penalty back for the trouble.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:12
#17
Arthur Cramer
Look gang, even if what you say is true, we shouldn't be allowing any frame other then the one we want to permeate people's conciousness. I learned that during my military PR training, Never let the other side set what people see as true. The Libs and Tories are experts at this. We really need to learn how to do this.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:13
#18
The turnout is very low, and yet the explanation for the technical problem is that the vote has exceeded expectations.
That "explanation" for the problem is as embarrassing as the problem itself.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:13
#19
M. Spector
Lucky they didn't get more than 15% voter turnout among those who didn't send in advance ballots!
Can you imagine Pastor Mansbridge saying this about a Liberal or Conservative convention: "Not a good situation for the Tories. They look bad on this one....This does not augur well for the party." ?
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:13
#20
If wariness of Mulcair's "centricism" encourages NDP members to form better social democratic policies, Mulcair's election will turn out to be a good thing.
Mulcair wants to win power so he's not about to create a civil war within the only party that can get him to 24 Sussex. At the end of the day, Mulcair or any NDP leader has to abide by the policies set at NDP conventions. So it's up to NDP members to establish the policies that the party will run on in 2015. Party member only have themselves to blame if their policies allow their leadership too much leeway to act against the wishes of the grassroots.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:13
#21
blairz
This is a lot less embarrassing than the way Liberals had their last leader imposed upon them.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:14
#22
I don't understand how "higher than anticipated demand" makes sense as an excuse, when we're seeing so many fewer votes than expected. Unless, that is, that there are a lot of members being denied their right to vote, which is a disaster far greater than running late. (Something nearly every convention of every party does.)
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:16
#23
Look gang, even if what you say is true, we shouldn't be allowing any frame other then the one we want to permeate people's conciousness. I learned that during my military PR training, Never let the other side set what people see as true. The Libs and Tories are experts at this. We really need to learn how to do this.
Bang on , AC
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:17
#24
Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet has gone over to Topp!
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:18
#25
In my opinion, Mansbridge is throwing a hissy fit over having to work later.
Things happen. I agree with Arthur Cramer. Reframe it and move on.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:19
#26
Could I just repeat this reply to your idea of workers waiting while you create a new universe and repeal NAFTA? K? and Sprung Garden
"1springgarden wrote:
Gaian wrote:
Kinetix wrote:
As a labour supporter in a labour party, I find the labour support within the party for a candidate with dubious labour credentials to be deeply unsettling. I don't mean that he's not from a labour background; Jack wasn't either. I just mean that Mulcair has frequently and actively taken anti-labour positions for years. To see him be welcomed with open arms is just... I don't know. I'm not sure how I feel really.
Try to imagine your average UFCW workers, putting your groceries through the checkout, and not sure how long her/his employer is going to be able to support union pay rates and benefits in the face of encroachment by those others moving in from south of the border. Somehow, just reciting "solidarity", the mantra of the old guard, does not seem sustaining enough. Some way of gturning back the economic tide, making the commercial/industrial sector viable again, makes sense. At least, that would seem a good reason for the UFCW to support Tom Mulcair.
Huh? Mulcair has no interest in repealing NAFTA so I don't see how Mulcair will help grocery stores compete against US grocery corporations moving into Canada.
http://rabble.ca/columnists/2011/10/tom-mulcair-plays-terrible-hand-trad...
As you put it, HUH? You expect the workers at the checkout to survive while you fulfill your damp dream of doing away with NAFTA?
Right.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:20
#27
The party needs to take responsibility for this, tell people they will try their best to correct it, do test runs of whatever system they select and ask those who failed to register their vote or had great difficulty in doing so to provide info on their experience in order to avoid this problem in the future. Failure to address this will cost the party memberships and credibility. Don't be surprised if the Cons comment is: If they can't run an election, how do expect them to run a country? (I didn't say it would be fair.)
Alice Funke on CTV said the problem could have been aggravated by hackers trying to crash the system by overwhelming it. This could be for their own political interests or for the sheer fun of hacking the system. The security of the future system needs to be checked in the future.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:20
#28
Look gang, even if what you say is true, we shouldn't be allowing any frame other then the one we want to permeate people's conciousness. I learned that during my military PR training, Never let the other side set what people see as true. The Libs and Tories are experts at this. We really need to learn how to do this.
+1
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:24
#29
Well I mean, if you want to reframe this whole thing, blame the company that is running the voting system, not the NDP (who isn't).
I hope your voting issues don't worsen, you almost definately have another round to get through.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:24
#30
oh yeah, and don't forget that we're likely to find out that thousands of dippers didn't receive their balloting package and didn't know/have time/have interest to do what i did - multiple calls and emails - to get that taken care of.
so before we even went to convention, it's likely that thousands of members were disenfranchised. THEN add to that the utter incompetence we've seen today. not good, ndp, not good.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:25
#31
The turnout is very low, and yet the explanation for the technical problem is that the vote has exceeded expectations.
That "explanation" for the problem is as embarrassing as the problem itself.
No kidding.
"We were only expecting 20% turnout and we got 50% and that's why our system was overwhelmed!" I don't know, it doesn't have that great a ring.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:26
#32
Arthur Cramer wrote:
Look gang, even if what you say is true, we shouldn't be allowing any frame other then the one we want to permeate people's conciousness. I learned that during my military PR training, Never let the other side set what people see as true. The Libs and Tories are experts at this. We really need to learn how to do this.
Denying there is a problem only works when people cannot see there is a problem. When it is evident, the best avenue is to take responsibility for correcting it; otherwise, it appears that you do not plan to do anything about the problem, which is the worst possible position to be in. People know problems happen and will forgive mistakes; they do not forgive denying the problem when they know it occurred.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:27
#33
I agree it's not a good look. I was pretty angry when it looked like I almost wouldn't get my vote in. I persevered. But I can only imagine how other people would feel annoyed, or just plain disengaged.
Put on a brave face and soldier on, I guess.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:30
#34
I bailed from the lineup and the convention and went back to my kid's place where I'm staying in Toronto. Got online and voted with no problem at all. I'll probably head back to the 'Shwa and continue voting from there in the comfort of an armchair.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:33
#35
Bob Fife on CTV asks a really good question: is this company a union shop? If not, why did we choose a non-union shop? He says his own techies, union members, are asking.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:33
#36
Obviously the party should have allowed preferential balloting until 2 p.m. and then announced the final results at 3 p.m. eastern. There is no need with a prefernetial ballot to have voting 'between' ballots. If people are hell bent on 'stopping' someone they can simply put that candidate last. It's that simple.
Yes, you get excitement with the faux 'who's going to who' dialogue but that is made up by these kind of unforseen disasters.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:34
#37
Catchfire
I bailed from the lineup and the convention and went back to my kid's place where I'm staying in Toronto. Got online and voted with no problem at all. I'll probably head back to the 'Shwa and continue voting from there in the comfort of an armchair.
Does this mean I can stop looking for you putting up devil's horns behind Evan Solomon's head, oldgoat?
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:34
#38
evan solomon is saying that senior dippers are worried that there could be some sort of external attack on the voting system.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:34
#39
There is now speculation on CBC that 'some outside group' is trying to flood the system to make this voting problem happen. Reflection on Blakie's repeated comments of 'your vote is secure'.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:35
#40
peterjcassidy
according to CBC There is now an investigation going on as to a possible attack on the NDP voting -possibly the "high volume" is coming from those not entitled to vote.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:35
#41
Evan Solomon on CBC is now also saying (as well as Alice Funke on CTV) that people are trying to penetrate the voting system causing these delays. This must be thoroughly investigated both for the security of the vote and the ability of people to vote.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:37
#42
oh yeah, and don't forget that we're likely to find out that thousands of dippers didn't receive their balloting package and didn't know/have time/have interest to do what i did - multiple calls and emails - to get that taken care of.
so before we even went to convention, it's likely that thousands of members were disenfranchised. THEN add to that the utter incompetence we've seen today. not good, ndp, not good.
I have 2 good friends here in Windsor who that happened to ...they called and sent e-mails to no avail , they had no record of them .
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:38
#43
Bob Fife on CTV asks a really good question: is this company a union shop? If not, why did we choose a non-union shop? He says his own techies, union members, are asking.
It's a Spanish company. Don't think they are but could be wrong. I also think they were picked over a Canadian company...
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:39
#44
It's also possible that people who are seeing on the news or on TV that the NDP voting site is crashing are going online out of curiosity just to see. Which would be an unintentional DOS.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:40
#45
Boom Boom
Mansbridge and Solomon said an investigation is underway to see if the system has been breached from the outside of the 130,000 voters.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:41
#46
Bob Fife on CTV asks a really good question: is this company a union shop? If not, why did we choose a non-union shop? He says his own techies, union members, are asking.
It's a Spanish company. Don't think they are but could be wrong. I also think they were picked over a Canadian company...
Even worse !!!! So much for procurement of Canadian companies !
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:41
#47
Arthur Cramer
Arthur Cramer wrote:
Look gang, even if what you say is true, we shouldn't be allowing any frame other then the one we want to permeate people's conciousness. I learned that during my military PR training, Never let the other side set what people see as true. The Libs and Tories are experts at this. We really need to learn how to do this.
Denying there is a problem only works when people cannot see there is a problem. When it is evident, the best avenue is to take responsibility for correcting it; otherwise, it appears that you do not plan to do anything about the problem, which is the worst possible position to be in. People know problems happen and will forgive mistakes; they do not forgive denying the problem when they know it occurred.
There is some truth to this, but we shouldn't let Mansbridge (certainly no NDP supporter) from getting away with framing it like he has. You could say, yes there is delay in voting, but this is simply a result of technical issues that couldn't have been expected. Simply things break, and you can't prepare for everything. As well, not withstanding, I feel no embarasment at all in saying that we are experieincing a higher turnout. I would think if anything you would be happy to see this kind of an increase in voter turnout. This is entirely in keeping with our belief as a party that our message is resonating with Canadians, and that we will simply see more of this as it translates in polls to come and at the next election when we elect a NDP Prime Minister.
My point is, you take the negative, acknowledge what is going on and then reframe it. You don't have to avoid taking responsibility. But they are making a big mistake cowering away from challenging Mansbrige. He is going to bring this up again an again. Even Stephen Lewis using words like "worry". The PR guys should have spoken to our so called spokes people and told them how to react.
Again, we are letting the frame get away from us. It isn't about the truth. Its about accuracy. Facts are facts.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:42
#48
I see now, that when Rebecca Blaikie reported there was "higher than expected volume" she did not necessarily mean that there was a higher than expected number of voters. It sounded like spin, but I guess it wasn't. The implication being that there is possible sort of denial of service attack.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:43
#49
Arthur Cramer
I am so happy to see Moist endorse Mulcair. He has consistently come down on the right side of many issues. I always thought he was a fine man.
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:44
#50
How can they tell what the 'outside sources' are?
Sat, 2012-03-24 16:44
#51
So now the voting goes until 5:40 Eastern, at least.