;;
Mulcair-led NDP (thread #12)
Sun, 2012-05-20 13:15
#1
Mulcair-led NDP (thread #12)
Sun, 2012-05-20 13:20
#2
Sun, 2012-05-20 13:29
#3
I don't know why they had to include the word "contentious" but whatever
Mulcair stands behind contentious oilsands view
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20120520/mulcair-oilsands-dutch-disease/
"Look at anything I've ever written, or anything I've ever said to find an attack on what the provinces are doing -- you won't find any. Certainly nothing specific about the West," Mulcair told CTV's Craig Oliver.
Mulcair says his party believes in sustainable development based on the principles of polluter pay, internalizations of costs and user pay.
Failure to hold companies responsible for the full cost of resource development not only causes environmental problems, but economic problems as well, said Mulcair. And environmental negligence now only leads to serious challenges in the future, he warned.
"We're leaving the largest ecological, economic and social debt in our history in the backpacks of young people and we're telling them they'll pay for it," he said.
"We're going to be the first generation in Canadian history to leaves less to the next generation than what we ourselves received if we continue this way."
Sun, 2012-05-20 13:54
#4
Again, defending is losing. If the conversation keeps going on about whether Mulcair hates the West, it doesn't matter how well he explains it away. It goes away when the conversation shifts back to Harper's handling of the economy, period. Hopefully the visit to the oil sands will cleanse the media pallate long enough to get back to the real debate.
Sun, 2012-05-20 14:20
#5
;;
Sun, 2012-05-20 14:22
#6
Thomas Mulcair ira en Alberta
http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/quebec-canada/201205/19/01-4526951-tho...
Sondages en faveur du NPD
En privé, les stratèges néo-démocrates voient dans les attaques musclées des conservateurs une tentative de stopper la hausse des appuis au NPD dans les sondages depuis quelques semaines.
Un sondage réalisé par Environnics et publié hier démontre que le NPD recueille 36% des appuis au pays contre 32% au Parti conservateur et 19% au Parti libéral. L'enquête a été menée du 7 au 9 mai auprès de 1000 personnes et comporte une marge d'erreur de plus ou moins 3,5 points de pourcentage.
Les stratèges se disent aussi convaincus que même les Albertains sont d'accord avec les propos de M. Mulcair. Ils citent en exemple un sondage mené par l'Institut Pembina en 2010 qui a démontré que 96% des Albertains sont d'avis que l'industrie doit payer pour les dommages causés à l'environnement.
«De toute évidence, les conservateurs tentent de faire pâlir l'étoile de Thomas Mulcair. Ils sont un peu désespérés et s'accrochent à des propos qu'ils déforment», a affirmé un stratège du NPD.
Sun, 2012-05-20 14:24
#7
I'm glad to see Mulcair finding a more conciliatory way to get passed the Premiers and focus on Harper's legislation.
But I think it's a mistake to keep focusing on clean-up costs as the big contrast between him and Harper. Yeah, paying for clean-up nicely brings together enviornmental and economic issues. But imposing "new" costs brings back the old frame "our pocketbooks vs. our conscience". It doesn't play well in a recession. (Even if we're talking about making companies pay costs now to avoid a larger public cost later.)
A much easier target are the tax credits and subsidies to the oil companies. That's a stronger place to plant our feet, IMO. Fighting against oil subsidies puts us on the side of fairness first and foremost (why are those guys getting free money?!), and still brings in the environmental aspect. And once you have people's attention, you complete the argument: giving bonuses to foreign oil tycoons isn't just unfair, it's also driving up our dollar and killing our manufacturing. (And then we can still talk about environmental policy at the end of it, which everyone already knows the Conservatives suck at.)
But hey, I'm not running a national campaign.
Sun, 2012-05-20 15:04
#8
Energy McCartyism - I like that term.
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/djclimenhaga/2012/05/add-dutch-disease-c...
Sun, 2012-05-20 15:12
#9
There seems to be a lot of desperation in other parties these days
http://warrenkinsella.com/2012/05/in-todays-sun-mulcair-is-a-disgrace/
Sun, 2012-05-20 15:47
#10
"The question about Mulcair's wisdom is how he chose to enter it, at what paricular entry point."
I don't think it was Mulcair's choice. He's been saying the same thing since the leadership race started in late 2011. People ask him about the oilsands or the economy, and it comes up. He's been repeating it ever since.Frankly, I'm surprised the Conservatives started running with it only now.
They didnt.
In the first place, its not like it wasnt his choice during the campaign. But he launched it 2 weeks ago, by giving it pride of place on his extended interview on The House.
So he had time to re-consider and come in at it another way.
Sun, 2012-05-20 19:33
#11
The channel was totally on the Incompetent Harper government and his Ministers of Entitlement.
When a government is Screwing up publicly and the public is fully aware of the floundering of the Prime Minister... let them continue.
Instead, Muclair has changed the channel.
I think he needs to refocus, get off the defensive and get back to what he is good at, which is holding the government to account. This is what was scoring him points.
He has since pulled a Dion out of his hat.
Sun, 2012-05-20 19:38
#12
Sun, 2012-05-20 19:56
#13
I definitely think we were scoring more points when Conservatives were hanging themselves on social security (just as one example). But do you really expect Conservatives to stay on a topic that they're getting hammered on?
Like I said, I don't think Mulcair changed the channel so much as the Conservatives and their strategists. Mulcair is singing the same tune from before he was chosen as leader. But Conservatives have finally seized on it. (Whether he should have said it in the first place is a whole other discussion). They want to stop talking about Harper, and they want to keep talking about whether Mulcair secretly hates the West.
As tempting as it might be to change the channel to something else... trying to force it has a way of seeming evasive. (Which, ironically, is what the Conservatives are doing by targeting Mulcair.) Nothing would demonstrate a lack of confidence on the Nation's economy than for Mulcair to back down completely.
On that note... maybe a better strategy than pivoting back to Harper's management of the oilsands would be a pivot to Harper's economic management in general.
"Look, Harper's mismanagement of the oilsands has destroyed manufactuing jobs across the country. But also look at his mismanagemnet of the F-15 purchase, or his broken promises on social security... He's given a blank check to special interests like U.S. oil companies and defense contractors. He promised this would somehow come back to benefit all Canadians, and now we're seeing his policies have achieved the opposite."
Sun, 2012-05-20 19:58
#14
We will never bury the Cons unless we bury the Liberals first. So far so good.
Sun, 2012-05-20 20:24
#15
Arthur Cramer
There seems to be a lot of desperation in other parties these days
http://warrenkinsella.com/2012/05/in-todays-sun-mulcair-is-a-disgrace/
Well, i think this is true. The Libs aren't doing anything other then really siding with the Tories. I hate Kinsella, what a dick.
But, this thread really has me depressed. I am beginning feel more and more that Mulcair is onto something here. I think how well this plays out is simply what the NDP does with this and how they message it.
I hate to say it, but I am beginning to feel reading this thread and others, that people are starting to panic. How do we know how Jack (blessed be his memory), would have handled this. At least Mulcair is still singing the same time with which he started. I find that reassuring. Let the others guys flounder all they want. As for the Libs, ditto Kinsella, what a bunch of dicks!
Sun, 2012-05-20 21:41
#16
Daniel I would try to avoid taking that poster's comments very seriously. Just a bit of advice for newbies.
Sun, 2012-05-20 22:00
#17
"The question about Mulcair's wisdom is how he chose to enter it, at what paricular entry point."
I don't think it was Mulcair's choice. He's been saying the same thing since the leadership race started in late 2011. People ask him about the oilsands or the economy, and it comes up. He's been repeating it ever since.Frankly, I'm surprised the Conservatives started running with it only now.
They didnt.
In the first place, its not like it wasnt his choice during the campaign. But he launched it 2 weeks ago, by giving it pride of place on his extended interview on The House.
So he had time to re-consider and come in at it another way.
That's not true. Mulcair has brought this up and been asked about it consistently since he became leader. It flared up publicly when Brad Wall attacked Mulcair the next morning claiming Mulcair "called our resources a disease".
Mon, 2012-05-21 00:47
#18
So much negativity, so little time.
Ever since he was elected leader Mulcair has had the NDP on the front pages of the msp.
Probably best to disregard the armchair quarterbacking from some people who are never going to get over the fact their horse in the recent NDP leadership race didn't win, or whatever issue they can find to make themselves unhappy. Oh well.
Nothing's ever going to be perfect but actually as a Leftie I'm feeling quite encouraged these days. Looks like Labour will be elected in the next election in the UK, right-wing Merkel recently has been throughly trashed in the German elections, France has a new left-of-centre President for the nwext 5 years, the Left is expected to do very well in the French legislative elections coming up next month, the Left is in good shape for the upcoming election next month in Greece, we have NDP governments in NS and Manitoba, things are looking very good for the Dix-led NDP in the upcoming BC elections next year, and the Mulcair-led NDP federally is leading with 36% in the polls, 4% ahead of their next closest rivals, the Cons, while the right-wing Liberals and Greens have both fallen off the political map in Canada.
And many of the columnists here at rabble.ca are great writers and tell it like it is much more than most of the stuff in the msp - read their columns for encouragement as well.
Mon, 2012-05-21 01:03
#19
Love their choice of vocabulary - mired, controversy
Why are the Harper Cons hiding this report as well?
As far as Mulcair having to visit the tar sands that is like saying you have to have suffered a heart attack to be a good heart surgeon.
Sweet!
Alberta NDP MP defends party leader mired in oilsands controversy
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/Alberta+defends+party+leader+mir...
She pointed to a federally funded report written by three academics about to be published that concluded a third or more of job losses in Canada’s manufacturing sector can be attributed to currency appreciation driven by the resource boom. She also said other leaders’ critiques of Mulcair’s call for tougher polluter-pay principles make her wonder if they are really committed to proper environmental regulation and monitoring.
“I’m deeply concerned about what I see happening here and I’m deeply concerned the government isn’t stepping up and regulating this sector with a long-term view,” Duncan said.
Duncan called it a specious argument to say that someone must have visited the oilsands to comment on its environmental challenges. On Thursday, Redford told reporters she has no interest in meeting Mulcair until he’s visited Fort McMurray and educated himself on the industry.
“Thomas Mulcair used to be environment minister in Quebec. You don’t have to go to see the oilsands to understand the complex nature of the industry,” Duncan said, adding she has recommended Mulcair include a visit to Fort Chipewyan on any tour to learn more about the industry.
Mon, 2012-05-21 01:35
#20
That's not true. Mulcair has brought this up and been asked about it consistently since he became leader. It flared up publicly when Brad Wall attacked Mulcair the next morning claiming Mulcair "called our resources a disease".
Show us where. Because I have been watching- having pointed it out when he first brought it up during the leadership campaign.
And it was by the way picked up in the print media, before Wall said a word. They would not have picked it so quickly if he had been saying it all along.
Mon, 2012-05-21 01:43
#21
There seems to be a lot of desperation in other parties these days
http://warrenkinsella.com/2012/05/in-todays-sun-mulcair-is-a-disgrace/
Well, i think this is true. The Libs aren't doing anything other then really siding with the Tories. I hate Kinsella, what a dick.
But, this thread really has me depressed. I am beginning feel more and more that Mulcair is onto something here. I think how well this plays out is simply what the NDP does with this and how they message it.
I hate to say it, but I am beginning to feel reading this thread and others, that people are starting to panic. How do we know how Jack (blessed be his memory), would have handled this. At least Mulcair is still singing the same time with which he started. I find that reassuring. Let the others guys flounder all they want. As for the Libs, ditto Kinsella, what a bunch of dicks!
Maybe some people are in a bit of a panic. But this seems like Mulcair's first real test as leader, so I think it's normal that some people may be nervous about how it will play out. We don't really know yet, so we'll have to see.
I will say though, that I'm liking how tough Mulcair is seeming. I might be paraphrasing this, but I really liked it in one of the scrums the other day he said, "They've picked the wrong guy if they think they can bully me." I find that very encouraging, and I hope it shows Canadians that he's a person they can take seriously as a leader.
Mon, 2012-05-21 03:35
#22
Yeah, this is something the NDP has been lacking for a long time, and also failed to understand. People respect you if you stick to your guns even if they weren't onside with your intitial position. Right-wingers benefit from this all the time. For good reason people are wary of leaders who seem too easy to push around.
I think this is all quite deliberate on Mulcair's part. He's not getting caught in anything he didn't expect. He wants to be the proactive one creating the narrative, even if it takes him into dangerous territory. The "Conservative corruption" angle will atrophy if overplayed, and you know the Conservatives were poised to try and disrupt it somehow. It might have been the smartest thing to shift it ourselves before they get the chance to act, and keep controlling the media cycle. However it plays out for the party, I like the fact that people are talking about this issue.
Mon, 2012-05-21 05:12
#23
I'm sure its true that the attack on the Conservatives that focuses on the omnibus bill would atrophy eventually.
But the NDP planned and launched a national tour because of it.
The 'this was all planned' thesis does not wash with blowing that right out of the water.
I'm sure he did have a basic idea of how this was going to unfold, including being attacked for it. But displacing immediately what they have been working on, and at the very least was not played out yet, shows there was at least some underestimation. How it started and the effects is water under the bridge now, we'll see where it goes from here.
Mon, 2012-05-21 08:57
#24
Tories train their intellectual big guns on Tom Mulcair: if Rex Murphy fails, there's always Don Cherry! 
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/djclimenhaga/2012/05/tories-train-their-...
Mon, 2012-05-21 09:38
#25
That's not true. Mulcair has brought this up and been asked about it consistently since he became leader. It flared up publicly when Brad Wall attacked Mulcair the next morning claiming Mulcair "called our resources a disease".
Show us where. Because I have been watching- having pointed it out when he first brought it up during the leadership campaign.
And it was by the way picked up in the print media, before Wall said a word. They would not have picked it so quickly if he had been saying it all along.
Here are just two examples. I did a Google search for coverage of Mulcair's comment on the House and it seens there was one Post Media story about that was picked by the Regina Leader Post before Wall's comments--that's it it seems.
http://www.cbc.ca/asithappens/weekly/2012/03/27/featured-audio-thomas-mu...
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/04/05/pol-mulcair-speech-econ...
Mon, 2012-05-21 11:49
#26
Brian Topp
Raw resources: remembering history in order not to repeat it
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/brian-topp/r...
Sovereignty issues: A growing proportion of Canada's natural resources are owned by foreign corporations or, directly or indirectly, by foreign governments. China is seeking to secure its energy security. Brazil is pursuing a global effort to dominate the mining industry (once the preserve of Canadian companies, when there were Canadian companies). The United States wants cheap raw materials for its highly diversified industrial and post-industrial economy. These are our key trading partners -- and also our competitors. Their governments are aggressive stewards of their economies and of their economic development. Canada has no energy strategy, no industrial strategy, and no trade strategy other than to invite countries that do have these policies to come and help themselves to our raw, unprocessed resources, to the benefit of themselves.
Opportunity cost: And so, we have constructed an economy increasingly dependent on the export of raw unprocessed resources. We've had a look in recent weeks at what a remarkable monoculture English-Canada's media have become on this issue. In one voice, editorial boards and conservative columnists across the land have celebrated our dependence on raw resources exports, and have demanded that this not be questioned by anyone, even in Parliament. But it should be, given the enormous opportunity cost we are paying. As measured, for example, in the grotesque growing inequality in Canada, a country blessed by some of the greatest wealth available on the planet.
A once-in-history lost fiscal opportunity: Meanwhile, the contrast between how responsible, well-governed countries have managed the fiscal consequences of resource development, and how we have managed this in Canada, does our country little credit. Norway has banked almost $600 billion in its Oljefondef (oil fund). Peter Lougheed and Allan Blakeney proposed similar funds for western Canada. Instead, conservative successors threw away a once-in-history opportunity to capitalize an advanced, diversified economy, in order to pretend we have an "advantage". When discussing these issues in recent months, I have had fingers wagged at me by analysts who point out that a modern, efficient, relatively less polluting petroleum refinery can cost up to $7 billion to build. With their fund, the Norwegians can afford to make investments like that (or to develop other parts of their economy instead, if that is their choice). Instead, we're busy dismantling our environmental regulations so that we can ship raw unprocessed resources to Texas and to China.
And an environmental day of reckoning that lies before us:Sometime, somehow, we are going to have to recognize and deal with the true, lifecycle environmental costs of resource development. Like, as just one topical example, energy in all of its current forms -- nuclear, carbon, and hydro-electricity, all of which have been developed in Canada and sold domestically and abroad without regard to the lifecycle costs imposed on our water, land and air. Climate change will make this an increasingly urgent issue. Key players in the petroleum industry are 20 years ahead of Canadian governments in understanding this. Exxon Mobile, for example, favours a carbon tax as part of a global strategy to address climate change (they have many interesting things to say about this here).
These fundamental issues about our sovereignty, economic future, public finance, and environmental challenges require a national meeting of the minds -- and concerted national action by all of our governments.
So they're going to have to start talking again, after a 30-year silence.
It is also true that we are going to have to find a way to address these issues that understands that western Canadians would probably respond to a repeat of Mr. Trudeau's rhetoric and tactics with a repeat of their response to those tactics -- which would only help the climate-deniers, the fiscal drunkards, and the quick-buck operators who have already dominated too much of this debate for far too long.
Mon, 2012-05-21 12:09
#27
Must be a slow-news day for the Toronto Star - they only have 3 articles on their website today attacking Tom. Talk about a whitchhunt!
Mon, 2012-05-21 12:21
#28
Are the tar sands something like this?
Mon, 2012-05-21 12:36
#29
Low-lying Harper usually signals major policy shift
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/john-ibbitson/low-lying-har...
Mon, 2012-05-21 12:56
#30
Apart from the global warming aspects, what is the extent of the ground-water contamanation in the tar-sands region?
Mon, 2012-05-21 13:32
#31
Ya gotta know Mulcair must be doing something right when he has the right-wing yahoos at the Sun foaming at the mouth!
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/05/21/goldstein-ndp-plan-bad-for-taxpayers
Mon, 2012-05-21 16:20
#32
"Rainbow coalition"? Perhaps Kinsella is colour-blind. Mulcair's western critics are dark blue, light blue and reddish-blue. Why pander to the right-wing western premiers? They will never send votes the NDP's way. Let them discredit themselves as Big Oil shills.
Pandering (not that I'm saying anyone in this thread is saying Mulcair should pander) would be a much bigger mistake (if indeed he has made a "mistake". The more the NDP are attacked by the Cons and the right-wing media, the better they seem to do in the polls even creeping toward phony majority territory.
Mon, 2012-05-21 18:20
#33
I find it interesting in reading the comment section to Topps' article that most support his writing and critque. That's a good beginning point - this is what we are talking about and setting the frame. He who has worked in lived in the West understands the frame and how to set it.
Mon, 2012-05-21 19:08
#34
westerners responding didn't think so. i don't know wth NEP is and am goin to survey friends my age to see if they know. some even work in the oil patch. i'm betting none do. a golden oldie thing?
some of the responders are brain washed beyond belief. taxpayers can bailout corporations and banks but the minute we want some of our own money back in services they scream "socialism". wankers.
Mon, 2012-05-21 19:27
#35
[url=http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/Mulcair+says+putting+together+extr... says he's putting together an 'extraordinary' team for 2015[/url]
"They're already coming to us. The names would surprise you," Mulcair said in an exclusive interview in his Parliament Hill office.
"We've got extraordinary people who are talking to us now, people who share our values, share our goals, but who have never expressed the desire to go into politics."
...
He confirmed that prominent Montreal lawyer Julius Grey already has committed to run, and said the prospect of "safe" NDP seats is enticing other prospective politicians.
"That's the type of people — senior businesspeople, well-known names, and people with backgrounds in diplomacy, the highest government level — this is for us new territory and it's exciting."
...
"We don't like being lectured to by folks who haven't even been to the oilsands," [James] Moore said. "It smacks of astonishing arrogance and I think the NDP is going to pay for it."
Political analysts aren't so sure, given that the NDP only has 15 seats in the West — a dozen in B.C., where there is a large constituency for anti-oilsands rhetoric, and only a single seat in Alberta-Saskatchewan.
"Last time I checked, there were a lot of voters living east of Winnipeg, many of them with an axe to grind against Harper," said Antonia Maioni, of McGill University's Institute for the Study of Canada.
"Maybe Mulcair's doing the math as he throws his grenades."
...
And University of B.C. academic Michael Byers, Mulcair's leadership campaign co-chairman on the West Coast, said the oilsands gambit is a very intentional step early in his mandate to set markers on a key policy issue.
"It's three years before the next election and if you want to change the channel and force a serious discussion on sustainable development, now's the time to do it," said Byers of Mulcair's proposals to toughen enforcement of environmental laws and introduce a cap-and-trade system to put a price on carbon emissions.
"He doesn't want to leave this discussion to the election campaign, as Stephane Dion (the Liberal leader who unsuccessfully pitched a "Green Shift" plan in 2008) had to, or as previous politicians in other countries have had to.
"He wants to have the discussion now."
Mon, 2012-05-21 20:30
#36
I could be persuaded that it works as a very long term strategy.
I'm still very skeptical about Dutch Disease / economics as the entry point [taking on the Premeirs obvioulsy wasnt part of the plan, so in many ways it isnt part of the strategic questioning].
But even if it isnt the best entry point, there is a lot to be said for it being the one Mulcair wanted- he is the one that has to make this work and lead the way.
And given a long time, you could be [net] losing on this in the West for a year if need be... and there only has to be an outline of how you are going to turn it around. If it has momentum in the rest of the country- that's a start.
The NDP has had all the elements of a politicaly as well as policy astute climate change package of 5 years. And Jack never really figured out how to crack the whip on it. [People with good memories might remember me noting that periodically.] It wasn't easy- still isn't. And the NDP has more resources and credibility than Jack ever had for putting into play. Still, Jack never even made a start on breaking out of just floating the easy bits and pieces.
I still can't buy taking the most risky way in- and despite what many here have said, with no greater benefits for those greater risks. But here we are.
Mon, 2012-05-21 20:50
#37
What is the expected time or time ranges for the election in BC?
Mon, 2012-05-21 21:23
#38
We have fixed election dates: Tues, May 14, 2013
Mon, 2012-05-21 21:24
#39
I'm really liking what I'm seeing from Mulcair.
Mon, 2012-05-21 21:43
#40
Keep those comments and those letters to the editor coming as people actually do read them. They do make a difference. And I know it's painful but if you can even call into the talk shows as there is always somebody listening.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/05/18/what-the-is-the-dutch-disease-ex...
Fact is oil makes more profit for corporations, which is why Harper had to cheat to win. he never had a plan for us, only for his business partners. I was apprehensive about Mulcair at first I thought he was a wack job till he explained what he was talking about. now, well He's our last hope to stop this. The Lib's are just as bad as Harper when it comes to this. the only difference they know how to balance a budget. Mulcair and the Ndp haven't had the chance to. I think they should have at least a chance to put up or shut up. couldn't get any worse. Windsor was the first victim because we had Unions to protect us. people thought we were just being greedy and self serving. some have but that's just a small percentage. (no ones perfect) now that they are trying to remove all our rights (Quebec protests) people are starting to wake up to it. Please Everyone Don't listen to the lies anymore! Harper, the Con's, the Lib's. why do you think the Ndp doesn't want to merge, they know! This is much bigger and worse then people realize, and when the people find out at first most won''t believe it. (I didn't) but when they do..............Well!
Mon, 2012-05-21 21:50
#41
So, if Christy Clark had pulled the plug as expected last year, she would have been doing the same thing as Harper: earlier than the fixed date if you feel like it. (?)
If nothing else we get out of fixed dates: governments can obviously get away with going a year early, but with the date fixed no one could survive going 3 months early because there is an advantage in it.
Mon, 2012-05-21 22:23
#42
It was pretty obvious why Harper was letting this creep back into Canada, although this will only help Mulcair and the NDP.
Screw the CBC though for even thinking of giving this guy an audience - but he just wanted to bash the NDP, and so, of course, that's kosher for them.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/conrad-black-blasts-mulcair...
Tue, 2012-05-22 08:48
#43
Visions of elections future: a nightmare for the Liberals?
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/touch/news/story.html?id=6655870
Tue, 2012-05-22 09:28
#44
A lot of the commentary I'm reading now suggests Mulcair has not only weathered the storm but won the day. Even among those who disagree with the Dutch Disease premise, there's a respect that he's stood up and stood his ground, while sounding like someone who knows what he's talking about. (Unlike the hyperbolic Conservative/Liberal attacks.) These are always attractive traits in a leader. Mulcair's displayed remarkable poise, even when making missteps (the "Harper's messengers" comment), and has shown he's not a Dion or Ignatieff, or anyone Harper has yet faced. The anti-Conservative voters will like this, and even some Conservative voters will respect this. And respect can be translated into support.
Tue, 2012-05-22 09:35
#45
Boom Boom
I'm waiting for Harper or one of his cabinet thugs to do something really, really dumb that boosts the NDP higher in the polls. Another bad misstep from Oda would be nice. Why is she still in cabinet, again??? 
Tue, 2012-05-22 10:33
#46
There's something to be said to sticking to your guns. Especially when your critics haven't really proven you wrong, and they're just using cheap attacks to distract from your real argument. Mulcair called bullshit on his critics (maybe a little too brazenly), and so people aren't *really* buying that he hates the West. Even in just trying to persevere, he comes off as courageous, strong, and smart. Contrast with Dalton McGuinty.
Not that he's succeeded yet, or even that he's recognizable to the whole of Canada. But I feel cautiously optimistic.
Tue, 2012-05-22 11:43
#47
I'm waiting for Harper or one of his cabinet thugs to do something really, really dumb that boosts the NDP higher in the polls. Another bad misstep from Oda would be nice. Why is she still in cabinet, again???
Harper is waiting untill the summer recess, when he'll either dump (Oda) or re-assign (MacKay) ministers who haven't performed up to Harper's standards. That way their successors have all summer to get up to speed on their new portfolios, without the bother of Question Period to show how badly they've been doing their jobs.
We should expect no more than 10 cabinet members dropped or re-assigned. Anything more than that would be an admission by Harper that those he picked after the 2011 election weren't worthy, and Harper's ego won't ever let something like that happen.
Now, how many Senate vacancies are there???
Tue, 2012-05-22 12:03
#48
I was apprehensive about Mulcair at first I thought he was a wack job till he explained what he was talking about.
You were apprehensive about Mulcair at some point? You? Really? Must have been a very long time ago.
Tue, 2012-05-22 14:38
#49
There's something to be said to sticking to your guns. Especially when your critics haven't really proven you wrong, and they're just using cheap attacks to distract from your real argument. Mulcair called bullshit on his critics (maybe a little too brazenly), and so people aren't *really* buying that he hates the West. Even in just trying to persevere, he comes off as courageous, strong, and smart. Contrast with Dalton McGuinty.
Not that he's succeeded yet, or even that he's recognizable to the whole of Canada. But I feel cautiously optimistic.
Agreed. Also, I feel it's a good way to frame the argument for having a stronger approach to environmental regulation (IE, rather than merely framing it as a responsibility or burden that must be undertaken to save the planet for future generations, but also pointing out that it now helps the economy as a whole too). It'll be interesting to see if this is saleable, given that most past efforts by leaders running on environmental platforms fell flat (Dion in particular).
<later edit> PS, admittedly, Mulcair as yet has not rolled out an actual environmental platform as Dion had. Rather, from what I've heard, he's simply said the current gov't has not lived up to current regulations regarding resource extraction which has inflated the dollar hurting the manufacturing industry. Still, this possibly sets the stage for rolling out some new policy toward the environment in the future.
Tue, 2012-05-22 16:47
#50
Now that the noise has died down.
Thank Mulcair for vital debate
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/Thank+Mulcair+vital+debate/66570...
As an environmental engineer who has been involved in reviewing and approving oilsands projects, and also in developing policy, I know first-hand that oilsands companies should be doing much more to protect and manage the environment.
What we all want is to maximize the oilsands benefits for Albertans and Canadians.
So let's get on with developing the Canadian energy strategy that Premier Redford advocates and ensure the oilsands are developed in an orderly and responsible way.
This will allow the oilsands sector to shed its currently deserved "dirtyoil" reputation.
David Spink, St. Albert
Wed, 2012-05-23 00:40
#51
This is an interesting teaser.