NDP leadership race 2

Cheri DiNovo for Leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada

Support Cheri DiNovo for NDP Leader

Yeah I know, I know, she withdrew for "health reasons", but she withdrew before anyone else even entered the race. From being 1) an unofficial candidate; to 2) a wannabe official candidate; to 3) a withdrawn candidate (although I'm not sure whether she withdrew from 1 or 2 or both); she surely has lots of time yet to decide whether her health will be good enough to start over?

And hopefully, she isn't getting those death threats any more for voting to shut down Israeli Apartheid Week. 

I have no concerns about the current lack of declared candidates.  I wouldn't mind if things are like this for the next 6 months, although I'm expecting we'll see people entering the race in the next few months.

wage zombie wrote:

I have no concerns about the current lack of declared candidates.  I wouldn't mind if things are like this for the next 6 months, although I'm expecting we'll see people entering the race in the next few months.

I'm surprised no one wants to enter the race in time to collect donations for both this year and next. However, I, too, am not losing sleep over the lack of candidates...yet.

mark_alfred wrote:

I wonder, when some candidates are in the race, if it will make this thread into the all out fight-fest that the last leadership thread was.  I recall myself and Jan were the only Topp supporters, and we were regularly ganged up on by a coalition of Mulcair, Ashton, and Saganash supporters (since Topp was the establishment candidate).  Fun times.

Comartin suggests Julian, Ashton, and maybe Angus will run. Julian sounds like he might have the most MP support.

Jagmeet Singh is another potential candidate.  He was on Sook Yin-Lee's CBC Radio show Sleepover, and he did hint that he might be interested in it.  http://www.cbc.ca/radio/sleepover/episode-nine-jagmeet-s-disarming-style...

R.E.Wood wrote:

Avi Lewis has ruled himself out of running, but hints that the Leap might morph into a political party of its own:

Lewis ... said the Leap Manifesto is inching towards political party territory, with talks of publishing a national platform.

"We're talking about some crazy stuff like a national convention a year from now and a platform that actually brings a deeper analysis than those 1,400 words in the Leap Manifesto…. We're considering all kinds of things and this is not the last you will hear," he said.

Lewis compared the Leap movement to Indignados, Spain's anti-austerity movement that became a political party.... 

 "It's a critical question... I think the social forces in Canada need to be more than movements but less than parties," Lewis said. "We have to careful to not denigrate the power of grassroots action."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/avi-lewis-ndp-leap-manifesto-1.3763855

 

The NDP should not be upset. It has earned this.

Fair warning and the NDP can decide to ignore and let it be or continue.

If we had PR this would be a good thing -- we would have more choice to vote for and could review this at each election. In FPTP it could be deadly for both. The NDP has made a case for not being a reliable enough option. It now can either embrace some competition or work towards presenting clear principled and significant life-changing policies.

The Greens should also be concerned.

If a new party eclipsed both we might have something interesting.

One thing LEAP has to consider if it is to be successful -- how it approaches energy-producing areas of Canada. To assume those areas should just suck it up and give up what they have without a national investment to build alternatives locally in those places would be a mistake and unjust. People have settled in various parts of the country and built lives and industries, some on fossil fuels -- fuels we all wanted. If we are to back away and look to something new the greatest investments should be, where possible, with and where those energy producing areas are. No I am not saying tidal should be in Alberta. But replacements of equal value looking forward should be a national investment so that those parts of the country do not come out losing.

This does not mean that Alberta, for example, will lead the country over and above everything else, because its oil right now cannot do that. But it does mean that we invest to make sure it is a very strong and healthy part of the country economically. The idea that we would say to Alberta thanks for the last few decades of oil now screw off is an affront. What I found lacking in Leap was the engagement to build Alberta to a new strong economy -- with national investment. The second thing is that the winding down of fossil fuels is not instant.

Support from the rest of the country to use what oil we do burn as much as possible from Canadian sources is an important consideration. Saying we don't like fossil fuels on the one hand shutting down the Canadian oil producers while buying foreign oil is hypocritical and insulting. As the oil dependence declines it should be speeded up but at the same time Canada should be winding up any off-shore purchases of fossil fuels as a priority. I do not see this from LEAP so far. We are not going to go to 0 purchases of fossil fuels overnight. Where and how we make these purchases ought to be managed with respect to Canadian regions who have historically produced.

I admit that I am quite surprised that the NDP internally has not figured out some policy along this line. It suggests to me that the NDP's national conversation is not working well. The LEAP is one side of that and the concern about LEAP is that they will create a new party in place of having this essential national conversation.

I think Lewis is just talking out of his hat.  The actual midterm targets of Leap aren't significantly different from what all the parties (Green, NDP, Libs, Cons) talk of.  For Libs and Cons it's 30% reduction of GHG below 2005 levels by 2030, the other two are a bit more ambitious, but not hugely so.  Leap makes various dramatic declarations like "The latest research shows it is feasible for Canada to get 100% of its electricity from renewable resources within two decades; by 2050 we could have a 100% clean economy", but within their backgrounder the actual GHG reduction target isn't far off from any of the parties:

Quote:

This makes it possible, in turn, to adopt a long-term target of at least an 80 % reduction in emissions by mid-century, consistent with Canada’s international climate mitigation responsibility. In the short-term, we believe that Canada, in keeping with its historical position of aligning with US targets, could adopt a 2025 target of a 26-28 % reduction in GHG emissions relative to our 2005 levels.

So the actual targets are very similar to the NDP's targets (in fact, the last version of the Climate Change Accountability Act that I've seen had an even more ambitious midway target).  The difference is the aspirational rhetoric.

In fact, it's also similar to the Liberal's and Cons' midway target, though I don't know what the Lib's long term target is yet.  So really, the Leap, in actual targets, isn't hugely different from any of the parties, particularly the NDP which had both the midterm and long term target that matched Leaps.  So, what was the point of Lewis and company coming out mid-campaign to declare that the NDP (and others -- but declarations from guys like Lewis affects the NDP far more than other parties) are just taking "small steps" when a "leap" is needed?

Consider too that the Liberals had no national plan to achieve these targets (and still don't) and had no plan to make the targets binding and enshrined into law as the NDP did.  Consider that the NDP had languished in the polls as soon as Trudeau was chosen in 2013 and clearly the NDP was the do-gooder underdog with an actual plan for the environment and GHG reduction.  Consider, briefly, that people in June felt doubt about the Libs and began to grow sour on the Cons, and the NDP began to rise in the polls.

So what does Lewis and Co. choose to do?  Does he help the NDP?  The party with the same targets as Leap and a concrete plan to get us there?

No.  He becomes Gerald Butts' wet dream instead!  Now we have Liberal charlatans running the place who simply have corporate empowerment as their main objective.  Good call Lewis!

Grr.

Hmm.  I should now add that I feel it's a good idea for the NDP to adopt some of the similar aspirational rhetoric of Lewis and Co. to appease disgruntled urban progressives.  So, good for Fox and the rest of the NDP for taking this on.  Hopefully it will lead to better results for the NDP and for social democracy / democratic socialism in Canada.

Let's not be naive. The Liberals will not be bringing in any legislation that will diminish Liberal chances.  

Avi Lewis has ruled himself out of running, but hints that the Leap might morph into a political party of its own

Rather ironic that his own father and grandfather were instrumental in drumming a group of members out of the party for less, as they didn't propose a new party until the NDP had booted them out.

This is going to be a thorn in the side for the NDP for some time, and the Edmonton convention ought to have known better than to give it their half-endorsement.

Michael Den Tandt:

"Should Thomas Mulcair immediately step down as leader of the federal NDP? Certainly. He should have done so last April, shortly after his party stuck a blade in his back and left him for dead....Meanwhile, Avi Lewis and Naomi Klein, the champagne-socialist power duo who’d seized the Edmonton convention agenda with such panache with their Leap Manifesto, had by then vanished back into the mist."

Quote:

Avi Lewis has ruled himself out of running, but hints that the Leap might morph into a political party of its own

And look how well being associated with just one thing has worked out for the Greens, or the Marijuana Party, or the Pirate Party.

Angus talks about a possible run for leadership.

https://www.tbnewswatch.com/local-news/angus-not-saying-whether-or-not-h...

mark_alfred wrote:

Update on the Facebook fansites (see post 351).  Niki Ashton is showing strength, and has pulled out of last place and ahead of Angus and Leslie.  Angus and Ryan and Lewis have stayed static.  Mulcair's support is slowing down, but still growing -- he remains at top.  Singh likewise has some additional support, and remains comfortably in second.  It's difficult to accurately gauge Lewis and Brosseau, since these fansites are group fansites, so it's members rather than likes.  Anyway, see below for results of currently known fansites:

1. Bring Back Tom Mulcair (now 2614, up from 2511 likes) --> Mulcair has said he's not running.
2. Draft Jagmeet Singh for NDP Leader (now 1372, up from 1329 likes) --> seems open to the idea of running.
3. Ruth Ellen Brosseau: NDP Leader (unchanged:  group page with 293 members) --> hasn't ruled out running.
4. Recruit Sid Ryan for NDP Leader (now 149, up from 143 likes) --> unknown if he's interested (or if he speaks French)
5. Avi Lewis: run for NDP leader! (unchanged:  group page with 148 members; contains a petition with 58 signatures) --> Lewis says he's not running.
6. Draft Niki Ashton for NDP leader (now 107, up from 55 likes) --> hasn't ruled out running.
7. Draft Megan Leslie for NDP Leader (unchanged at 94 likes) --> Leslie says she's not running.
8. Draft Charlie Angus (now 78, up from 77 likes) --> hasn't ruled out running.

I also searched for Mike Layton, Paul Dewar, Rebecca Blaikie, Tracey Ramsey, Barry Weisleder, and Martin Singh (and also the same people that I searched for previously in post #351), but no fansites have been set up so far.  If anyone knows of any fansites, do share.

What on Earth is the point of quoting this, mark-alfred? Is it scientific? Is there any rational statistical basis that these numbers mean anything at all? Other than, presumably, to show all the anti-Mulcair heathens that they're wrong, and there are no successors anywhere near his popularity?

It's a false argument -- Mulcair's not running to replace himself, and no-one else has entered the race yet. Check back once they have, and I'm sure you'll find radically different numbers of people supporting them. 

I've not seen anyone here on Babble trying to drum up supporters for any possible "draft" pages on Facebook (other than the Mulcair thread). Maybe if they were actively promoting the pages, they'd have higher numbers... I'm open and available as a supporter (was keen on Boulerice, actually), but I'm not out scouting for Facebook "Draft XYZ" pages.

Anyway, I suspect your ongoing posts about this are rather negative attempts to bolster Mulcair as the lone savior of the party, while simultaneously trying to diminish any prospective successors as paling in his shadow,...  Frankly, I don't buy it.

R.E.Wood wrote:

What on Earth is the point of quoting this, mark-alfred? Is it scientific? Is there any rational statistical basis that these numbers mean anything at all? Other than, presumably, to show all the anti-Mulcair heathens that they're wrong, and there are no successors anywhere near his popularity?

I find it mildly interesting what is happening on facebook even though it is totally unscientific. I don't expect Mulcair to run again, and I wouldn't support him if he did, but I see no need to chastise those babblers who still think it was a mistake not to give him another chance.

I dunno what Mr./Ms Wood's issue is.  The FB info is just presented as is.  I've not suggested any conclusion to draw from it.

mark_alfred wrote:

I dunno what Mr./Ms Wood's issue is.  The FB info is just presented as is.  I've not suggested any conclusion to draw from it.

Don't sweat it, m_a. Social media is a legitimate forum / medium of political engagement and I find what you are reporting to be interesting without being manipulative or conspiratorial.

And it should surprise no one that the incumbent - as the best known individual - (even if somewhat discredited by past performance) rides at the top of the "polls" if only on name recognition. Its happening here with Mulcair, and in the UK with Corbyn. Pretty much peas in a pod. 

Sorry, I didn't mean to "chastise" mark_alfred about the Facebook stats, and certainly don't mean to be rude or offensive on any personal level.

I'm just completely at a loss as to the point of repeatedly updating those stats, which - as far as I can tell - have no basis as a statistical judgement of anyone's legitimate popularity as possible leadership candidates for the party. (And I haven't heard an answer, either, but nevermind.)

Quote:

I'm just completely at a loss as to the point of repeatedly updating those stats, which - as far as I can tell - have no basis as a statistical judgement of anyone's legitimate popularity as possible leadership candidates for the party. (And I haven't heard an answer, either, but nevermind.)

It is a social media trend surrounding the leadership race that is presented as is without analysis.  Thus, I feel it is on topic for this thread.  People here are free to view it, assess it, discuss it, or ignore it at will.  There was a change in the placement of the stats, showing the fansite for Ashton gaining.  Thus, the update.

R.E.Wood wrote:

Good article in The Hill Times, which mentions Angus, Brousseau, and Julian as specific potential candidates. It also has interesting comments from Davies and Weir. 

Mr. Angus told The Hill Times that he hasn’t sat down to fully consider it yet, and is currently focused on connecting with the grassroots in his role as caucus chair for the time being. He did not say he was opposed to running, only that he hasn’t given it enough thought. 

Ms. Brosseau told The Hill Times that she is still having discussions with her family, and weighing her options. She is the single mother of a “very active” 15-year-old boy, who she said is her biggest consideration. 

Mr. Julian told the CBC during the NDP’s caucus meeting that he has “opened the door” to running, but is still having those discussions within his party and within his riding.

Mr. Davies said the public shouldn’t expect anyone to formally announce for another three to six months. But, he did confirm that discussions within caucus about who is considering running are happening, and that excitement is building.

... NDP MP Erin Weir (Regina-Lewvan, Sask.) said articulating a “progressive vision” that will distinguish the NDP from the Liberals will be “essential” for their future.

Really - three to six more months before anyone announces? Can we stand the suspense?  That said, I really hope we see more diversity than a bunch of straight white men and only one woman.

http://www.hilltimes.com/2016/09/21/mulcair-to-take-a-back-seat-pave-way...

 

Two women, if you include Niki Ashton, and I don't think she should be excluded. She's holding meetings across the country to 'test the waters'.

josh wrote:

Why big names may be sitting it out,

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/grenier-leadership-races-waiting-1.3769322

It seems to be taken as given that Trudeau will win the 2019 election, which is too bad, because if that is the case, by 2023, he will have committed us to

1. a new Cold War with Russia,

2. a series of trade deals that will undermine the rights of workers as well as whatever is left of Canada's sovereignty, and

3. Bill C-51, with so few changes, it essentially will still be Harper's bill.

"Sunny ways" will be a distant memory.

Charlie Angus continues to play coy about leadership aspirations, and suspects no-one will enter the "very, very, very long" race until December or January.

http://globalnews.ca/news/2961328/plane-talk-charlie-angus-on-music-lead...

These facebook likes counts really have no meaning. They are so small overall that they reflect the extent of the site administrators' social media reach more than anything else -- not even the social reach of the non-candidate. I laughed when I saw the words "the big story" -- there is no "big story" here. Not even a story at all except in the minds of those who look for shapes in the clouds to predict the future.

Facebook likes might be slightly relevant among candidates who are declared but for undeclared non-candidates I suggest they have absolutely no meaning at all.

The real story is that this is just waste of time / resources by people looking for amusement before the news really appears.

This time would be better spent identifying potential candidates and even reaching out to them to encourage them. Having an extended list of possible candidates the community contributed to and messages to them would be a way to let them know there could be interest for them. Frankly I find the facebook snail race rather an irritating waste of time to read never mind produce. Sorry.

Anyone here interested in reaching out and encouraging some potential candidates? How might we do that ? Is there a role for this site in that endeavour?

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:

The real story is that this is just waste of time / resources by people looking for amusement before the news really appears.

Like polling voters 3 years before the next election.  But are we just supposed to swap recipes until this all matters again?

My last post answered that question but I guess you wanted to say something cute so ignored all that.

Why high-profile candidates may be sitting out Conservative, NDP leadership races

I'm hearing it may already be a wrap for Peter Julian