Ya I know you and probably every liberal wants Mulcair to stay, but you’re going to have to get used to the fact he’s gone now and is never coming back.
Jagmeet Singh needs to get his ass into Parliament post haste
Mon, 2017-10-09 21:02
#52
Tue, 2017-10-10 00:45
#53
The decision to let Mulcair hang on as interim leader for eighteen months after he was decisively voted out as leader will eventually be reckoned as one of the worst decisions, if not the worst decision, in party history.
Can anybody here, with anything close to a clear conscience, defend that decision, and defend the decision to delay the leadership vote until a moment in which it was essentially too late for a new leader to do anything that could possibly make a decisive difference in the party's showing in the next election?
What can Jagmeet Singh do now(and what could any of the non-elected leadership candidates do that), at this late date, with most of the time gone before the next election, that could change any voters' minds?
The next leadership vote should have been within six months after Mulcair's removal, when it was still possible for a new leader to make an impression on the voters.
Nothing can make any difference during the last year before the election, or during the campaign itself.
It will be a miracle if the existing Quebec caucus survives, and if there are any significant losses there, no gains anywhere else can possibly matter. There simply aren't that many seats that are winnable in Vancouver or the Toronto 'burbs.
Tue, 2017-10-10 09:24
#54
Ya I know you and probably every liberal wants Mulcair to stay, but you’re going to have to get used to the fact he’s gone now and is never coming back.
The decision to let Mulcair hang on as interim leader for eighteen months after he was decisively voted out as leader will eventually be reckoned as one of the worst decisions, if not the worst decision, in party history.
Can anybody here, with anything close to a clear conscience, defend that decision, and defend the decision to delay the leadership vote until a moment in which it was essentially too late for a new leader to do anything that could possibly make a decisive difference in the party's showing in the next election?
Exactly notice how WWWTT doesn't defend that decision, but just deflects. It was the NDP caucus who decided to let Mulcair stay, so they wear that decison no matter how WWWTT tries to spin it.
Tue, 2017-10-10 09:23
#55
Seriously, we're already making excuses for why Singh will lose. He's been leader for like a week and of course the reason is Mulcair, leave the damn guy alone, its over we won he lost.
If Singh loses there is one person to blame, Singh. Just like the reason Mulcair lost was Mulcair.
2 years is plenty of time, Trudeau was only the leader of the Liberals 2 and a half years before the election and he won a majority from 3rd party status.
Tue, 2017-10-10 09:28
#56
2 years is plenty of time, Trudeau was only the leader of the Liberals 2 and a half years before the election and he won a majority from 3rd party status.
And in 2015 Jagmeet alluded that voting for the then 3rd Party (Liberals) was a wasted vote because "Only the NDP can STOP Harper" and realistically form government. Liberals need over 100 seats, while the NDP is only 35 seats from victory.
So does Jagmeet wear that statement since it came out of his own mouth?
Tue, 2017-10-10 09:49
#57
Ya I know you and probably every liberal wants Mulcair to stay, but you’re going to have to get used to the fact he’s gone now and is never coming back.
Exactly notice how WWWTT doesn't defend that decision, but just deflects. It was the NDP caucus who decided to let Mulcair stay, so they wear that decison no matter how WWWTT tries to spin it.
What's the point????
It's history, we can go on about it until the cows come home but that would just be an exercise in futility.
But like I said before, liberals want to keep harping about Mulcair because he helped the liberals win a majority.
But I will say one thing, the perspective of history does change, depending on future events. If Jagmeet does win a huge amount of extra seats, this 18 extra months of Mulcair may be perceived as a good decision. If he does poorly or lower than anticipated, it may be reexamined and used to contribute to fault? But everyone already knows this! So what's the point of debating something that's perceived as that can easily change?(if that makes sence?)
Tue, 2017-10-10 10:13
#58
But like I said before, liberals want to keep harping about Mulcair because he helped the liberals win a majority.
The NDP membership & grassroots are the ones that elected him leader. But the way WWWTT wants to frame things is that no one from the NDP is responsible for the last few years, except former NDP (in name only) leader Tom Mulcair. He is to blame for every single thing that went wrong, and no one from the NDP. Not the council, not the policy people, not the staff, not the election chairs. It is all Tom Mulcair fault and no one else.
Denial is not just a river in Egypt
Tue, 2017-10-10 10:17
#59
I actually think that keeping Mulcair as leader during that period was the right choice. Right after the election, you may forget that the NDP was at low tens to single digits in polling support. Mulcair helped stop the bleeding and helped stablize the party's support at mid to high teens. Having no leader during that time would've made such a feat more unlikely. Mulcair helped to keep the party together when some MPs could've presumably crossed the floor in reaction to the NDP's poor prospects and he succeeded in doing so. I didn't support Mulcair, but the degree of hate he gets from some people is just mind boggling.
2 years is plenty of time, Trudeau was only the leader of the Liberals 2 and a half years before the election and he won a majority from 3rd party status.
And in 2015 Jagmeet alluded that voting for the then 3rd Party (Liberals) was a wasted vote because "Only the NDP can STOP Harper" and realistically form government. Liberals need over 100 seats, while the NDP is only 35 seats from victory.
So does Jagmeet wear that statement since it came out of his own mouth?
No one cares what someone said during the last election, especially considering he was proven factually wrong.
Tue, 2017-10-10 10:19
#60
No one cares what someone said during the last election, especially considering he was proven factually wrong.
Yes expecially he now says he will take the NDP from 3rd to 1st, which is switch from what he said two years ago.
Tue, 2017-10-10 10:57
#61
No one cares what someone said during the last election, especially considering he was proven factually wrong.
Yes expecially he now says he will take the NDP from 3rd to 1st, which is switch from what he said two years ago.
No one's ever going to ask this, but if someone did he has a perfect answer.
"Well Justin Trudeau did it last election, so clearly I was wrong about that."
That pretty much ends it and any possible follow up someone can have. This idea that people have to remain consistent in regards to electoral slogans they repeated is ludicrous. That was all political nonsense that no one cares about. People care about healthcare and education, not whether Jagmeet Singh is acting consistently with regards to the electoral slogans of his predecessor.
Tue, 2017-10-10 11:20
#62
Yet NDP MPs continued to use this Jack Layton quip from 2011 towards Trudeau
"If you want to be prime minister, you'd better learn how to be a member of Parliament first. You know, most Canadians, if they don't show up for work, they don't get a promotion."
But as pietro_bcc says
This idea that people have to remain consistent in regards to electoral slogans they repeated is ludicrous.
Unfortunately the NDP didn't take pietro_bcc advice on that talking point from Jack Layton.
Tue, 2017-10-10 19:46
#63
2 years is plenty of time, Trudeau was only the leader of the Liberals 2 and a half years before the election and he won a majority from 3rd party status.
It's true that the Liberals went from 3rd to 1st in 2015, but that is extremely unusual. It had only happened once before in Canadian history.
Part of the reason may be that the Liberals already had a history of forming government and so it was easier for voters to see them back in the government role. The NDP hasn't won a federal election yet, so it may be harder for the NDP to pull off the same feat of going from 3rd to 1st.
Anything is possible, but 3rd party leaders should not automatically assume that because Justin Trudeau & the Liberals achieved it in 2015 that it will be a regular occurrence.
Tue, 2017-10-10 20:02
#64
What can Jagmeet Singh do now(and what could any of the non-elected leadership candidates do that), at this late date, with most of the time gone before the next election, that could change any voters' minds?
Huh? Voters' minds regularly change literally DURING the election period.
3rd party leaders should not automatically assume that because Justin Trudeau & the Liberals achieved it in 2015 that it will be a regular occurrence.
I agree that they shouldn't simply assume that it will happen to them too. But as some-or-other neuroscientist once said, "All it takes is one talking pig to prove that pigs can talk." And anyway, what's a leader supposed to say, one week in? "Don't worry, everyone, I've got my eye on that silver medal!"?
Thu, 2017-10-12 17:10
#65
Mulcair showed up for work every day holding Harper to account and a lot of good that did him and the party. I would have thought one lesson we'd have all learned from 2015 is that what happens in the House is entirely irrelevent to most Canadian voters. I'm not saying that's a good thing. In fact, I think it's terrible. But that's just how it is. And 2019 isn't so far off now. It's smart for Singh to not rise to the bait of a by-election. There's very little return on that, and a loss would be a catastrophe.
I reckon that Mulcair holding Harper's feet to the fire in the House was what gave the NDP a fighting chance. They blew it with a few bad moves in the election, *and* the voters played the odds and went with the Liberals to throw Harper out - something which was always in the cards. But Mulcair's hard and effective work in the House really mattered. Similarly if Singh could perform well in the House and let the voters get to know him better, and inspire some measure of confidence in how he would perform as Prime Minister, it would make a big difference in the next election.
Thu, 2017-10-12 18:11
#66
The Alberta NDP victory had a lot more to do with the NDP's momentum going into the 2015 federal election. People believed they could win and were more likely to beat Harper, so they supported them.
Fri, 2017-10-13 19:20
#67
From Sean in Ottawa:
Uhuh.
Let's be clear about how poliics works: one Liberal writes it and another retweets or reposts it. This is a Liberal story.
But the question is, did the NDP lambast the Liberals and Conservatives when their leaders were not in the house?
Yes
“If you want to be prime minister, you’d better learn to be a member of Parliament first,” Layton said at the time. “You know, if most Canadians, if they don’t show up for work, they don’t get a promotion.”
- Jack Layton
"Leaders should be there. Ignatieff ignored his work in Parliament and it cost him and Liberals during the election because Canadians do care,”
- Peter Julian
Amazing how you continue to keep your posts fact free. Isn't it supposed to be fat free?
I have pointed out that you are comparing people elected and being paid by the people of Canada as MPs with a person who is not elected and not be paid by the people of Canada but rather by his party.
You can scream from the rooftops all you want but this fact is still going to be relevant.
Sat, 2017-10-14 10:48
#68
Amazing how you continue to keep your posts fact free. Isn't it supposed to be fat free?
I have pointed out that you are comparing people elected and being paid by the people of Canada as MPs with a person who is not elected and not be paid by the people of Canada but rather by his party.
You can scream from the rooftops all you want but this fact is still going to be relevant.
You do realize that if NDP pays Jagmeet a salary, that is paid for by donations from donors. And donors can get up to a 75% refund on their donations at the end of the year which is paid for by taxpayers!
So in a round-about way if NDP gave Jagmeet a salary it is eventually paid by taxpayers.
In addition, he never resigned his MPP seat (and still hasn't, though he says he will). So while on the public dime he
1) Campaigned for the federal leadership
2) Held his first Federal caucus meeting as NDP Federal Leader
3) Campaigned & went door-knocking in the Quebec by-election.
All while still on the Ontario public dime. So to be clear I DO NOT have any problem with him doing all this stuff on the public dime. But it is disengenous to say he isn't being paid by taxpayers while doing NDP Party work.
Sat, 2017-10-14 13:55
#69
progressive17
The Alberta NDP victory had a lot more to do with the NDP's momentum going into the 2015 federal election. People believed they could win and were more likely to beat Harper, so they supported them.
The NDP won because the PC Party and the Wild Rose split the right-wing vote. Now they are back together again under the execrable You See Pee, they are running at 51%, which would give them virtually all the seats in the Alberta parliament.
In 2015, progressive voters in Alberta saw an opportunity in the NDP and a great leader in Notley. Given the right-wing split, the NDP got a false majority government. For the NDP to repeat this victory in the face of You See Pee, their support has to go well north of 40%.
Sat, 2017-10-14 16:36
#70
Amazing how you continue to keep your posts fact free. Isn't it supposed to be fat free?
I have pointed out that you are comparing people elected and being paid by the people of Canada as MPs with a person who is not elected and not be paid by the people of Canada but rather by his party.
You can scream from the rooftops all you want but this fact is still going to be relevant.
You do realize that if NDP pays Jagmeet a salary, that is paid for by donations from donors. And donors can get up to a 75% refund on their donations at the end of the year which is paid for by taxpayers!
So in a round-about way if NDP gave Jagmeet a salary it is eventually paid by taxpayers.
In addition, he never resigned his MPP seat (and still hasn't, though he says he will). So while on the public dime he
1) Campaigned for the federal leadership
2) Held his first Federal caucus meeting as NDP Federal Leader
3) Campaigned & went door-knocking in the Quebec by-election.
All while still on the Ontario public dime. So to be clear I DO NOT have any problem with him doing all this stuff on the public dime. But it is disengenous to say he isn't being paid by taxpayers while doing NDP Party work.
I'd be a little more convinced of your sincerity on this point, were it not for the suspicion that you'd like to see Jagmeet pressure a sitting MP to stand down so he could stand in the byelection for the MPs riding...and that half the reason you'd want to see that scenario was the hope that Jagmeet might be defeated in the byelection, which would most likely force him to resign as leader and force ANOTHER NDP leadership campaign before the next election-a situation that could have no other consequences other than guaranteeing Justin a second majority.
Sat, 2017-10-14 16:53
#71
There's an empty Federal seat in Jagmeet's birthplace right now. I'm not saying that the best strategy for him and the party is for him to contest that seat though.
However I do think it is unacceptable for the leader of a Federal party to sit as an MPP and he should resign forthwith. I know someone in Quebec is doing the same thing, but that's a Quebec issue and this isn't.
Sat, 2017-10-14 17:07
#72
but that's a Quebec issue and this isn't.
Other than "... because it's happening in Quebec", what makes it a "Quebec issue"?
Shouldn't it be an issue of principle, if anything?
Sat, 2017-10-14 17:33
#73
There's an empty Federal seat in Jagmeet's birthplace right now. I'm not saying that the best strategy for him and the party is for him to contest that seat though.
However I do think it is unacceptable for the leader of a Federal party to sit as an MPP and he should resign forthwith. I know someone in Quebec is doing the same thing, but that's a Quebec issue and this isn't.
Its not really a Quebec issue, its the exact same situation.
Martine Ouellette is the leader of a federal party (Bloc) and is still drawing a provincial MNA salary, Jagmeet Singh is the leader of a federal party (NDP) and is still drawing a provincial MLA salary.
Sat, 2017-10-14 17:58
#74
I'd be a little more convinced of your sincerity on this point, were it not for the suspicion that you'd like to see Jagmeet pressure a sitting MP to stand down so he could stand in the byelection for the MPs riding...and that half the reason you'd want to see that scenario was the hope that Jagmeet might be defeated in the byelection, which would most likely force him to resign as leader and force ANOTHER NDP leadership campaign before the next election-a situation that could have no other consequences other than guaranteeing Justin a second majority.
Actually I think that Jagmeet should take a page from Bloc leader Martine Oulette who kept her provincial seat. I see no reason why Jagmeet shouldn’t keep his MPP seat. The Ontario election is only 9 months away, and why leave that riding in a lurch with no representation. If Jagmeet can be an MPP and run for the federal leadership, I see no reason why he couldn’t finish out his term and lead the federal party outside Parliament.
After the 2018 Ontario election, there is plenty of time to look for a seat, if that is what he wants to do. I never said Jagmeet should rush and get a seat. My only issue is the NDP blasting Trudeau for traveling Canada to build the Liberal brand. Now two years later they have thrown that out the window and are now saying Jagmeet should do exactly what Trudeau did in traveling across Canada to build the NDP brand!
Nathan Cullen
Cullen noted that New Democrats were sharply critical of Trudeau, then leader of the third place party, for not "being as present or as strong in the House" as they thought he should have been.
"Voters in the end determined that they had a relationship and understood his policies better than they did ours. So, he's prime minister," Cullen said.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/09/20/nathan-cullen-backs-jagmeet-sing...
So this is one of a very long list of items where the NDP was sharply critical of Trudeau in 2015, but two years later has done a 180 and instead are taking a page from the Trudeau playbook. That is my only issue.
Sat, 2017-10-14 18:20
#75
My only issue is the NDP blasting Trudeau for traveling Canada to build the Liberal brand. Now two years later they have thrown that out the window and are now saying Jagmeet should do exactly what Trudeau did in traveling across Canada to build the NDP brand!
What is it that makes that such a problem for you, though?
I'm not asking for vaguenesses and platitudes like "it shows insincerity" or whatever, since I think we all agree that Parties, their leaders, and their members are inconsistent all the time. They're complex.
But you seem quite determined to insist that this is some kind of huge new thing until -- and perhaps even after -- the next election.
Can you at least please just tell us plainly why this is a huge new thing??
Sat, 2017-10-14 18:29
#76
Mighty Middle going for the ridiculous again. Otherwise he would observe that any other expense of a party including every other paid party employee is in the same situation. Plus he would not be so supremely ignorant of the purpose of support for parties-- since the parties get tehri tax breaks to do party work which Singh would be doing.
Mighty middle you are so partisan in these criticisms that you have left all logic behind and look extremely foolish. So if you want to look foolish then you are going about it the right way.
Sat, 2017-10-14 19:23
#77
Amazing how you continue to keep your posts fact free. Isn't it supposed to be fat free?
I have pointed out that you are comparing people elected and being paid by the people of Canada as MPs with a person who is not elected and not be paid by the people of Canada but rather by his party.
You can scream from the rooftops all you want but this fact is still going to be relevant.
You do realize that if NDP pays Jagmeet a salary, that is paid for by donations from donors. And donors can get up to a 75% refund on their donations at the end of the year which is paid for by taxpayers!
So in a round-about way if NDP gave Jagmeet a salary it is eventually paid by taxpayers.
In addition, he never resigned his MPP seat (and still hasn't, though he says he will). So while on the public dime he
1) Campaigned for the federal leadership
2) Held his first Federal caucus meeting as NDP Federal Leader
3) Campaigned & went door-knocking in the Quebec by-election.
All while still on the Ontario public dime. So to be clear I DO NOT have any problem with him doing all this stuff on the public dime. But it is disengenous to say he isn't being paid by taxpayers while doing NDP Party work.
Yes you are absolutely right! I have even touched on these issues durring the leadership.
Ya but who cares now? Nobody gave a freekin ratts ass when past liberals and conservatives did it? Oh but now everyone is supposed to stand up and now hold the NDP to some holier than holier higher standard that the conservatives and liberals are never held to?
Ya good luck with that one.
Sat, 2017-10-14 20:45
#78
Mighty Middle going for the ridiculous again. Otherwise he would observe that any other expense of a party including every other paid party employee is in the same situation. Plus he would not be so supremely ignorant of the purpose of support for parties-- since the parties get tehri tax breaks to do party work which Singh would be doing.
Mighty middle you are so partisan in these criticisms that you have left all logic behind and look extremely foolish. So if you want to look foolish then you are going about it the right way.
The saying "Denial ain't just a river in Egypt" perfectly sums up Sean in Ottawa
Sat, 2017-10-14 20:32
#79
Someone should tell Provincial payroll to sending Jagmeet Singh him checks
I think Mighty Middle might have just had a stroke.
Sat, 2017-10-14 20:51
#80
Oh but now everyone is supposed to stand up and now hold the NDP to some holier than holier higher standard that the conservatives and liberals are never held to?
Ya good luck with that one.
NDP has always held other to a higher standard. Sorry but it is true. So now that the shoe is on the other foot, they need to wear their past mistakes.
I'm not asking for vaguenesses and platitudes like "it shows insincerity" or whatever, since I think we all agree that Parties, their leaders, and their members are inconsistent all the time. They're complex.
As Rachel Notley says you can't just talk the talk, you need to walk the walk. The NDP cannot hold others to such a unbelievable high standard on one hand. But then when the shoe is on the other foot just try to pretend it never happened.
Sat, 2017-10-14 21:02
#81
NDP has always held other to a higher standard.
Which parties have not?
Sat, 2017-10-14 21:04
#82
Ndp never held anyone to s higher standard. That’s a load of garbage mighty middle. What the NDP are finally realizing now is that the liberal corporate media has brainwashed Canadian voters so well, that it’s a better strategy to play them like a fiddle instead of running a campaign with actual substance that appeals to only some intellectuals on the same page. I think this is what the liberals are actually worried about, that Jagmeet is going to actually out simpleton the liberals!
Sat, 2017-10-14 21:16
#83
Ndp never held anyone to s higher standard.
Then explain their opposition to floor crossing.
Their outrage over Glenn Thibeault moving over to the provincial Liberals. The federal party even unleashed resources and got involved in a provincial by-election.
Then there was the robocalls they unleashed on Lise St. Denis who crossed the floor, and they had NDP MPs act as the "real" MP in the riding and not her.
Then when Eve Adams crossed the floor from the Conservatives to the Liberals, NDP MPs stuck their nose in that making member statements denouncing the move. And it is not even affecting their own party!
And then Rachel Notley accepted a floor crosser last year in Alberta. Not a peep from the federal NDP MPs
So you tell me, that is not holding others to a higher standard?
Sat, 2017-10-14 21:42
#84
Ya I’m not going to comment anymore about this because I think I’m going into troll mode now.
I hope the voters get overwhelmed by simpleton political campaigns 2019.
Maybe an overwhelming nausea of Canadian politics is what’s needed to give electoral reform a sincere look
Sat, 2017-10-14 21:53
#85
Ya I’m not going to comment anymore about this because I think I’m going into troll mode now.
Translation can't dispute NDP floor crossing policy is holier than thou
Sat, 2017-10-14 23:47
#86
The NDP didn't hold other parties to a higher standard in regards to floor crossings. They condemned others when they did it and refused to allow Maria Mourani to cross the floor from the Bloc to the NDP before the last election. Entirely consistent.
Sat, 2017-10-14 23:52
#87
Ya I’m not going to comment anymore about this because I think I’m going into troll mode now.
Translation can't dispute NDP floor crossing policy is holier than thou
Here is an idea MM -- google the word "federal" and the word "provincial." Maybe this will help.
Sure you can agree with one point of view or the other but to suggest that they are the same is ridiculous as each has its own structure. Perhaps you may want to google the word demoracy as well. There you will notice the provincial party is not owned by the federal party even though there is an association between the two. The members in Alberta decide the provincial Alberta NDP's choices.
Oh and here is a newsflash -- they are not responsible to Liberals like you.
So some NDP parties in Canada have good policies and some like the Liberal party has bad policies. It sucks that some are like the Liberals in any respect. It really does because the Liberal position, as you rightly point out stinks.
Sun, 2017-10-15 00:00
#88
and the NDP also blasted Justin Trudeau for smoking pot when he was an MP, saying he was breaking the law.
That is not being holier than thou?
Sun, 2017-10-15 00:24
#89
and the NDP also blasted Justin Trudeau for smoking pot when he was an MP, saying he was breaking the law.
That is not being holier than thou?
Mighty Middle as you seek to make every person that identifies as an NDP voter account for every quibble you have with the party, I trust you will now, as a Liberal supporter, take responsibility for, and to explain, every issue, every misstep, evey inconsistency, we notice with the Liberal party. After all, not to do so would be, to use your word of the week, absolute hypocrisy.
So let us accept that the NDP is guilty, at least to some degree, on some of these points, of having inconsistencies between federal and provincial wings and inconsistencies between what has been said in the past and now. The NDP is particularly guilty of learning from the past and having leaders say things different than previous leaders.
So let us turn to the differences between Liberal provincial and federal positions and between what Liberals have said and done in the past and are doing now. Surely, since you are not a raving hypocrite, you are willing to go down that road?
Sun, 2017-10-15 07:59
#90
and the NDP also blasted Justin Trudeau for smoking pot when he was an MP, saying he was breaking the law.
That is not being holier than thou?
It`s a little bit more nuanced than that, MM. Recall that the NDP policy in the 2015 election was immediate decriminalization followed by legalization. After the Liberals were elected, Trudeau refused to decriminalize possession of pot. The NDP asked for amnesty on charges relating to pot possession, and called Trudeau a hypocrite since he smoked/smokes pot with impunity while others have criminal records. http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/tom-mulcair-criticizes-trudeau-fo...
Sun, 2017-10-15 09:20
#91
Double post
Sun, 2017-10-15 09:25
#92
and the NDP also blasted Justin Trudeau for smoking pot when he was an MP, saying he was breaking the law.
That is not being holier than thou?
It`s a little bit more nuanced than that, MM. Recall that the NDP policy in the 2015 election was immediate decriminalization followed by legalization. After the Liberals were elected, Trudeau refused to decriminalize possession of pot. The NDP asked for amnesty on charges relating to pot possession, and called Trudeau a hypocrite since he smoked/smokes pot with impunity while others have criminal records. http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/tom-mulcair-criticizes-trudeau-fo...
Except that was in 2013 and Harper was PM, not Trudeau. Instead of going after Harper for immediate decriminalization, they didn't mention that at all. And instead turned their guns on Trudeau on how can someone want to be PM of a G8 country and break the law! That it shows a lack of judgement for someone who wants to be PM. Not one word about immediate decriminalization of pot.
So instead of of using it as a failure of Harper laws on drugs, and start a conversation on decriminalization, they instead decried on how Justin Trudeau broke the law as a sitting MP. If the roles were reversed and it was Jack Layton who said he took a puff as an MP, I don't think the NDP would wringing their hands about an elected a official breaking the law. Instead talking about how decrimilization was needed now,
Just another example of the NDP being holier than thou. To hold people to such high standards. To be clear I favor the full decriminalization of all drugs. Back in the day I wasn't even bothered by Rob Ford using crack cocaine. Because no one is perfect, you can't hold elected officials to such high standards of perfection. But it is the NDP that does, and now that the NDP has to climb down a bit after being held to same standards. But instead of using it as a learning lesson, everyone says "Oh let's just ignore that, wipe from the slate" and continue the same road of being holier than thou. As if they have learned nothing.
Life is complicated, things happen, nobody is perfect. But seems everyone here expects pefection, except the NDP. And instead of learning from their past mistakes, its brushed off as the former leaders fault. The caucus and the party needs to look deeper into that. If they think just a change in leadership will fix the problems, they are in for a rude awakening.
Sun, 2017-10-15 19:47
#93
What you're really pushing for, MM, is for NDP supporters to say "ok, the NDP cuts moral corners to, so it might as well just give up and merge into the Liberals".
This isn't about calling out double standards, it's about the same old LPC sense that your party is simply entitled to the votes of everybody who doesn't vote Conservative, and entitled to those votes without making any concessions to those who want more than the LPC establishment is willing to do.
You most likely still think there was a meaningful difference between Mulroney and Chretien and that everyone who wanted Mulroney out should have been content with simply electing a government with a different party color to carry out essentially the same policies...when it wasn't doing things to Mulroney's RIGHT.
Just admit it already.
Sun, 2017-10-15 20:04
#94
As I said before I don't think Jagmeet should resign as an MPP. I think he can be federal leader of the NDP and still finish out his term as an MPP as it is only 9 months. And I have no problem with him doing that on the Ontario dime.
Having said that he will be embarking on a cross Canada tour starting Monday, and he has yet to resign as an MPP. Even though he said he had every intension of doing so ASAP (his words).
I have no problem with him still being an MPP and touring the country on the Ontario's taxpayers dime. But do any NDPers mind?
Sun, 2017-10-15 20:49
#95
I hope the voters get overwhelmed by simpleton political campaigns 2019.
Maybe an overwhelming nausea of Canadian politics is what’s needed to give electoral reform a sincere look
There is no new spectacular reason for Canadians to be sickened by politics. It didn't happen under Harper. As long as all the parties are embracing neoliberalism there is not that dramatic a difference between them. The decision on who to vote for is simple. Which leader is best prepared to handle the economy? Everything else is secondary, even corruption.
I am hopeful that the NDP will come up with a solid economic plan. They really need to get off the fixation over Trudeau's lies thinking if only they can prove he is of bad character it will make a difference.
Sun, 2017-10-15 21:16
#96
I hope the voters get overwhelmed by simpleton political campaigns 2019.
Maybe an overwhelming nausea of Canadian politics is what’s needed to give electoral reform a sincere look
There is no new spectacular reason for Canadians to be sickened by politics. It didn't happen under Harper. As long as all the parties are embracing neoliberalism there is not that dramatic a difference between them. The decision on who to vote for is simple. Which leader is best prepared to handle the economy? Everything else is secondary, even corruption.
I am hopeful that the NDP will come up with a solid economic plan. They really need to get off the fixation over Trudeau's lies thinking if only they can prove he is of bad character it will make a difference.
No new spectacular reason?!?!?!?!
Ok let me step back a bit. Harper to me was a better PM than Justin will ever be hands down! Justin is all media fluff for crying out loud! Every corporate news article about that guy is getting harder and harder to read. This guys only been around for 2 years and I wouldn’t doubt it that there’s a huge legion of Canadian voters ready to vote for anyone but Justin!
i can’t be the only one that freekin cringes whenever there’s another bs media fluff job for Justin popping up on the computer screen! Google Justin Trudeau and Ivanka Trump and watch the corporate media circus freek side show hit you in the face until you wonder what the hell has this come to????
Sun, 2017-10-15 21:20
#97
I am hopeful that the NDP will come up with a solid economic plan. They really need to get off the fixation over Trudeau's lies thinking if only they can prove he is of bad character it will make a difference.
Well as Charlie Angus said "electing a leader who is going to run Justin Trudeau 2015 campaign for 2019" that doesn't seem likely.
Sun, 2017-10-15 21:20
#98
As I said before I don't think Jagmeet should resign as an MPP. I think he can be federal leader of the NDP and still finish out his term as an MPP as it is only 9 months. And I have no problem with him doing that on the Ontario dime.
Having said that he will be embarking on a cross Canada tour starting Monday, and he has yet to resign as an MPP. Even though he said he had every intension of doing so ASAP (his words).
I have no problem with him still being an MPP and touring the country on the Ontario's taxpayers dime. But do any NDPers mind?
Everything EVERY elected politician does is done on "the taxpayer's dime". There's no crime here, there's no betrayal here.
Sun, 2017-10-15 21:27
#99
Everything EVERY elected politician does is done on "the taxpayer's dime". There's no crime here, there's no betrayal here.
It is one thing to be a federal party leader and do campaiging on the federal dime. But an elected Ontario MPP doing federal work on the provincial dime? I personally don't have a problem with it, but I think some NDPers would disgree. I mean they did have a problem with Trudeau doing it and it wasn't even at this provincial/federal construct that Jagmeet is in.
Sun, 2017-10-15 21:36
#100
Ndp never held anyone to s higher standard. That’s a load of garbage mighty middle.
Maybe not but many posters here consider themselves automatically morally superior if they vote NDP. Some have stated point black that only people voting NDP and left of are progressive or should be posting here. So far I see no evidence of the NDP party being more moral than the Liberal party.
What the NDP are finally realizing now is that the liberal corporate media has brainwashed Canadian voters so well, that it’s a better strategy to play them like a fiddle instead of running a campaign with actual substance that appeals to only some intellectuals on the same page.
Is that how you would define the NDP campaign in 2015? I did not see a campaign with substance. The NDP tried to run what you refer to as a simpleton campaign they just failed. They made that big announcement the year before saying they would put out five major planks because voters deserved time to study them. That was when they were taking the angle that the Liberals had no policy. Then they announced them one at a time and they were for the most part lame. Nothing that needed a years discussion, for example, electoral reform. The NDPs first budget was criticized by the former parliamentary budget officer as financially unfeasible.
I think this is what the liberals are actually worried about, that Jagmeet is going to actually out simpleton the liberals!
I don't think the Liberals are the least bit nervous. I think this whole closing of tax loopholes is deliberate political drama to prove he is going after the 1%, not that he is. By the time the next election comes around there will be construction happening all over the place. Cannabis will be legal, or legalish. He will have a lot to brag about. I hope that CETA will not be radified by all the countries needed in Europe so it will fail but he may have that to brag about too. He will brag about saving NAFTA which is sure to survive. This too is mainly political theatre at least where Canada is concerned but probably Mexico too. I have reluctant faith in the multinational corporations' ability to protect their interests not to mention all the state economies that would crash if NAFTA were ripped up. They were designed to be virtually impossible to rip up. Wall Street would crash. The answer to trade deals will not be to get out of them but to make them genuinely progressive by getting unions and other interested parties to the table.
Jagmeet Singh coincidentally shares some obvious shallow characteristics with Justin Trudeau but that does not mean that is why people supported him. I have been watching a special on his rise and he is an impressive person. He is both very intelligent and very likeable whereas during Trudeau's early days he was only very likeable. Jagmeet Singh also has great political instincts and unlike Trudeau has risen purely on his own merits. I think it makes perfect sense for Jagmeet to travel Canada gathering support for the NDP while he and his team work on an election platform.
[/quote]
Sun, 2017-10-15 21:38
#101
Everything EVERY elected politician does is done on "the taxpayer's dime". There's no crime here, there's no betrayal here.
It is one thing to be a federal party leader and do campaiging on the federal dime. But an elected Ontario MPP doing federal work on the provincial dime? I personally don't have a problem with it, but I think some NDPers would disgree. I mean they did have a problem with Trudeau doing it and it wasn't even at this provincial/federal construct that Jagmeet is in.
So far I haven't heard any complaints from his constituents.