Not one of our Prime Minister's finer moments and those suckered by the Trudeau name are now paying the price.

You’re right NR. In fact Jagmeet is so brilliant I expect Trudeau to resign immediately to allow Jagmeet to take over as PM, and MPs from all parties will cross the floor to support his new government, giving the NDP an unprecedented majority of 337 - 1 (Weir). That must be what’s going on.

There doesn't have to be just one reason. By declining to run a candidate the Liberals can:

• Support the political lifetime of Singh, whom the Liberals and many in the NDP itself consider a drag on his party.
• Eliminate the possibility of finishing behind the Conservatives.
• Make the Conservatives look churlish if they run a candidate themselves, which is likely.
• Put the focus on humiliating the NDP in Outremont, which is key to their Quebec strategy.

blairz wrote:

All of his partisan trolling between liberals and NDP is really pointless, the election will be fought on the lines of multi culturalism vs. nativism. Trudeau will point to the most neaderthal elements of the Conservative Party as the spectre of Trumpism and argue that he is the only bulwark against. The NDP will marginalised as a luxury progressives can't afford. 

 

I gather that you know little about the demographics and political culture of Burnaby. It is a city of immigrants. When my son graduated from high school in 2006 his white face was not the majority. There is no "nativism" for the Cons to milk in Burnaby. The Conservatives can win with the right candidate from the immigrant business community but certainly not by running a white supremist so your scenario will not play out in that community

Provincially in the ridings that overlap this one the NDP have elected a South Asian immigrant who started out as a Farmworkers organizer and a Doctor from the Korean immigrant community. Parts of this riding are the old Burnaby Douglas riding where openly gay Sven and Bill held off either the Conservatives or the Liberals depending on the election. Burnaby is never a gimmie riding but is always the NDP's to win.

I spent over 15 years electing NDP MP's from Burnaby but never did we let the central office anywhere near our campaign. We also never used the its campaign literature and always developed our own messaging. If the NDP federal office arrives in Burnaby and thinks it can win the riding without understanding that the Ontario perspective does not resonate with its voters then a local Conservative candidate with a business and charitable volunterism resume will embarass them.

Misfit wrote:

Josh wrote,

"I think Singh should have waited and run in Regina-Lewvan instead."

Yuk yuk yuk!

Good one!

Yup!!

Unionist wrote:

Misfit wrote:

Josh wrote,

"I think Singh should have waited and run in Regina-Lewvan instead."

Yuk yuk yuk!

Good one!

Yup!!

Weir has obviously been lobbying for months to be reinstated. Jagmeet’s latest statements seem to suggest that was never a real possibility once Weir had been expelled.  But he waited until Sept. to fully lower the boom. Seriously, do you think maybe Jagmeet was afraid Weir would resign to precipitate a byelection and then challenge Jagmeet to come run against him in Regina? So Jagmeet wanted to lock down the nomination in Burnaby South first?

brookmere wrote:

For some time Conservatives have been using dog whistles such as "crime" and "illegal refugees" to exploit antipathy against blacks and Muslims from Chinese, as well as from their traditional base. Doug Ford is the latest example. I fully expect this to continue in Burnaby South, the only question being how blatant it will be.

The standard problem people for who do not know the Lower Mainland well is thinking "Chinese" actually defines anything here. There is no single Chinese community to lump everyone together like that is actually a very racist take on the population. If the NDP starts to see race and not ethnicity when it tries to hold Burnaby South it will have problems.

First of all most people forget that many if not most Chinese people on the West Coast were born and raised and grew up as Canadians. Secondly there are distinct immigrant communities from Taiwan, Hong Kong, Mainland China plus Overseas Chinese who have immigrated from various Chinese diaspora communities in Asia.

Burnaby has a small group of the right wing Xian Chinese who take the bible seriously and have tried running municipally but they have primarily provided a great foil for the ruling BCA party while failing to garner many votes.

Go fuck yourself troll.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_(abbreviation)

I totally disagree with the notion that the Liberals are not running a candidate becuase they could not win.

If you consider the race itself, the Liberals actually have little to lose. If they ran the NDP would have to spend. Since the NDP is broke and they are not, the spending is a victory one year out from a national campaign. With so much at stake the NDP would spend -- not just money but time and effort as the leadership would understand that a loss is a disaster. A lose for another party to a national leader is never a disaster -- it is what is expected. I do not think that it is about the individual campaign or tactics. It is possible that with the right candidate and the right amount of money that the Liberals could give the NDP a run for the money.

But still it is not a good idea.

Consider the value of the win? A seat they do not need  for a few months at the cost of an impression of being nice and civil -- even if you think it is phony (which I do) it is their brand. Even having the NDP spend more to keep the seat or at worst lose is not worth that.

Others argue that the Liberals don't want to defeat Singh since he is weak enough that he is no threat when another leader could be a threat. We can debate the underlying facts -- it is possible that they think this. The calculation is not beyond any party. I would want to leave weak political enemies in place. Still, I think if the Liberals were smart, they would see Singh is really still an unknown quantity. It is possible that he might turn into a better campaigner that we think. I am not dismissing this possibility but I don't think it alone would lead to the Liberals standing down.

The Liberals may also see Singh as not weak but defeating him now would make the NDP so weak that the anti Trudeau vote would all go the same way and defeat them. In other words they may not want to hurt the NDP so gravely, even if Singh is not weak in a general election.

It is also possible that if the Liberals do not run, they can assert that he is beatable in a general election when if they ran now they would not be able to say that.

As well, and more important, Liberals know that many of their supporters are conflicted and woudl consider the NDP. Being ruthless with the NDP could drive support away from the Liberals. Being kind to the NDP in this one way may be justification for a later strategy of asking for NDP votes to beat Conservatives.

Also, running against the NDP would also highlight the whole first-past-the-post system the Liberals have broken a promise on.

Anyway -- I think the calculation to run or not is much more sophisticated. I suspect that those supporting this decision may not all agree on why. Some may consider it a waste of resources as Singh would win; others might not want to bring Singh down now; others may be unhappy about the reflection on themselves and relations with their voters who have in the past voted NDP. They do not have to agree on why -- just on the fact that they should not do this.

I think the NDP should be less smug and more grateful if the Liberals determine that it is not in their interest to run since it is definitely not in the NDPs interest to have a difficult, must-win campaign now.

Of course theree is another possibility: The Liberals might be able to offer not to run becuase it has no meaning. They might intend not to have a byelection prior to a general election. It is possible that the NDP will spend on a byelection that will only get folded into a general election. The Liberals get to have their cake (look generous) and eat it (not give anything) since they woudl run a candidate in the general election anyway. They could even keep the option open and look at polling in the pre-byelection period and if it looks good for Singh not hold the byelection or if Singh looks to have difficulty with others running then call it.

I personally think the real issue here is that there will be no byelection.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

I totally disagree with the notion that the Liberals are not running a candidate becuase they could not win.

You have the right to your opinion although I believe you are out to lunch in your assesment of this particular riding and the Liberal's hopes of retaining it. The Liberal's are poised to lose all the seats in BC they gained in the last election and likely will lose some of the ones they have held before. From the heights of the Hill the perspective is far different. For one thing no matter how hard you try, from Ottawa you can't see over the Great Divide. The Liberals trying to run in BC on building the piepline because of a "national interest" will be recieved as well as a Conservative government ramming a pipeline trhough Quebec. in the "national interest.'

I do agree that there is a large likelyhood that a by-election will not happen.  The Liberal's and Conservatives will fight in out in the Centre of the Universe ridings and the NDP and Cons will fight it out in BC and on the Prairies. Given demographics the NDP can never win while the people of Ontario are satisfied with the status quo options of tweedle dee and tweedle dumb.

kropotkin - the most recent poll data doesn't support your version of BC electoral reality. Rather, it shows the NDP firmly in third place, well behind the Liberals and Cons. It shows approval high for the federal government, and for Trudeau. And it shows Singh to be quite unpopular. Are you making up your own version of reality, or do you have any statistics to back up your version of BC electoral reality?

http://abacusdata.ca/election-2015-started-as-a-three-party-race-countdo...

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

I totally disagree with the notion that the Liberals are not running a candidate becuase they could not win.

You have the right to your opinion although I believe you are out to lunch in your assesment of this particular riding and the Liberal's hopes of retaining it. The Liberal's are poised to lose all the seats in BC they gained in the last election and likely will lose some of the ones they have held before. From the heights of the Hill the perspective is far different. For one thing no matter how hard you try, from Ottawa you can't see over the Great Divide. The Liberals trying to run in BC on building the piepline because of a "national interest" will be recieved as well as a Conservative government ramming a pipeline trhough Quebec. in the "national interest.'

I do agree that there is a large likelyhood that a by-election will not happen.  The Liberal's and Conservatives will fight in out in the Centre of the Universe ridings and the NDP and Cons will fight it out in BC and on the Prairies. Given demographics the NDP can never win while the people of Ontario are satisfied with the status quo options of tweedle dee and tweedle dumb.

Don't read my posts. Piss off with your attack on any opinion that is not coming from your region. I do not trust your opinion on anything since your reading comprehension of my posts is so poor I assume that this is a general problem you have.

I made NO ASSUMPTIONS about the Liberal's chances in the riding but listed a number of factors and said that I doubted that this was the most important factor as there are other reasons they would not run a candidate. You pompous ass, we are talking about an opinion that the Liberals have. My opinion and your opinion have nothing to do with it. I did not even start to entertain a personal opinion on the riding's chances since the decision to run or not is not based on my opinion or yours-- but on theirs. Apparently your logice is for the birds as well.

I know you try really really hard to be a jerk and that's your thing but I was very clear that the Liberals could have an argument just to have the NDP spend money and energy even if they could not win. Winning or not is not the main consideration on whether to run.

As I said, my considered opinion is that they do not intend this byelection to even happen -- it will fold into the general. This means that the actual potential result does not even matter.

So really I don't give a shit what you think of my posts becuase the feeling is entirely mutual.

I wonder if there are lessons to be learned for the federal NDP from the election result in NB. While the NDP's failure to elect a single member is no big surprise, as they have come up empty for several elections. However, it appears the Greens are now scooping up the NDP vote, to the point thewre they have elected a record three members in NB.

Perhaps the federal NDP ought be looking over its shoulder to see whether or not the federal Greens are eating whatever is left of the NDP's lunch.

Could Justin actually get away with NOT calling the by-election there at all?

Who takes six months to formalize a resignation?

Constitutionally, resignation from Parliament is official when you tell the Speaker.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Consider the value of the win? A seat they do not need  for a few months at the cost of an impression of being nice and civil

Sorry Sean I reacted to this wonderful little gem from your perch at the Centre of the Universe. A seat in an city that the NDP has sent MP's from for decades is a seat they do not need? You don't think that statement is arrogant and dismissive of Burnaby voters?  In  your "well reasoned post" you told me that my decades of trying top send NDP MP's from Burnaby was stupid and useless because its not a seat that the NDP needs.

Oh and by the way that was your response to a post where I carefully and thoughtfully set out some of the real demographics and communities that will be in play.

Your post saying that the seat is not worth fighting over deserved a fuck you instead of the more nuanced response I gave it. How many seats in Ottawa have the NDP won over the decades? Are any of those seats worth fighting over or would they all be important?

Ok since this is a seat the Liberals do not need -- even if they could win it -- becuase it would be up for election in a matter of weeks does not deserve that much defence so instead I will return the fuck you to you unwrapped.

I am not insulting Burnaby -- I'm saying that the Liberals do not have any calculated need to put their all into trying to win a seat from an opposition party just before a general election when they already have a majority.

I think your nastiness is actually playing havoc with your faculties. There is nothing regionally insensitive about saying a byelection anywhere in the country is not very meaningful when there is a general election coming right behind it.

And that is a big friggen maybe as Trudeau does not even need to call the byelection before the general -- or can AS I SAID -- let people fight it out and then at the last second kill the byelection for the general.

Stop being an asshole. I don't really think that you are so stupid as to not figure what was being said.

robbie_dee wrote:

Trudeau could rag the puck on calling the byelection then set the date way off in the future, effectively mooting the byelection if a general election occurs on or before the next scheduled date on October 21, 2019.

I think its more likely that Trudeau is just waiting for Nicola Di Iorio to formalize the resignation he announced back in April, and then he will call by-elections for all vacant seats (Burnaby South, Leeds-Grenville-Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, Outremont, Saint Leonard-Saint Michel, York-Simcoe) all at once, probably sometime in December. N.B. the Leeds-Grenville by-election has to be called by October 30, 2019 and must be held no earlier than 36 days after its called, although it can be held later than that. I predict that Trudeau will run out the clock on Leeds-Grenville and then call a vote on December 6 for all seats that are vacant as of Oct. 30.

This is what I was saying -- and even if the byelection were held it would soon after be up again in the general so what is the value of winning that seat when the House probably won't even sit between the byelection day and the general election -- even if Trudeau calls it before the general.

Interesting.

Liberal MP said he'd quit, but now might try to stick around (Globe & Mail)

Quote:

Liberal MP Nicola Di Iorio seems to want to come out of retirement, even though he has not exactly retired yet.

In April, the MP for Saint-Léonard-Saint-Michel stunned many of his colleagues by announcing that he would be leaving the House of Commons for personal reasons. He even had a farewell speech in the House. He returned to a legal career and took on a position as a partner at Montreal firm BCF Business Law.

But he never formally resigned his seat.

Now, according to media reports, he might try to do both jobs. Mr. Di Iorio told La Presse he plans to be an MP and a lawyer simultaneously, saying he does not need much sleep to operate effectively.

Still, it’s not clear the Liberals want to keep him in caucus.

“He is stepping back from political life and we have heard nothing else,” said Liberal whip Mark Holland. “We wish him the best in his future endeavours.”

I don't buy the speculation by some others in this thread that Trudeau will try to avoid calling the Burnaby South byelection or even try to delay it unnecessarily. Kennedy Stewart's resignation only became official a couple of weeks ago. There are several other byelections pending, including Leeds-Grenville that *must* be called within a month. I think that the Liberals have been waiting for Van Loan's resignation in York-Simcoe to become official as of the end of September, and for Di Iorio to make good on his stated intention to resign. Now that Di Iorio is waffling, I could see Trudeau just going ahead and calling the rest of the byelections without waiting for him.

I think the Liberals have a very good chance of picking up Outremont in a byelection and would not want to let that opportunity pass by. It's a great way for the Liberals to build momentum in Quebec heading into the general election, where I think they are expecting to do very well. The Liberals have obviously concluded they do not have a strong prospect of, or potentially even interest in, winning Burnaby South otherwise they would not be floating this idea of giving Jagmeet a "leader's courtesy." But they can't very well call the Outremont byelection while letting Burnaby South sit unrepresented. That would look terrible. That's why I think the Liberals will call Burnaby South, Outremont, and all other open seats at the same time and likely by early December.

All the other seats (except for Di Iorio's, if he does in fact decide to go) are safe Conservative holds. In the absence of serious Liberal or Green candidates, Burnaby South looks like it will be an NDP-Conservative grudge match.

R.E.Wood wrote:

robbie_dee wrote:

The Liberals have obviously concluded they do not have a strong prospect of, or potentially even interest in, winning Burnaby South otherwise they would not be floating this idea of giving Jagmeet a "leader's courtesy."

This is very far from an obvious conclusion. It is one possibility, yes. But no more likely than the alternative: that the Liberals are allowing Singh to win because they gleefully want him to lead the NDP to failure in the next election, and they believe that he is a weaker leader than virtually any other likely replacement the NDP could come up with at the last minute.

I agree with you and said as much up-thread. I meant the "or" to potentially include two alternative explanations - either (1) the Liberals concluded that they weren't going to win Burnaby South, which is possible, or (2) the Liberals have decided that regardless of whether or not they had a chance to win Burnaby South, they were at least indifferent to the prospect of winning it and may have in fact concluded that they were better off not winning it, e.g. if they thought that Jagmeet was a particularly weak leader and they didn't want to give the NDP any excuse to dump him before the next election.

If it is indeed the latter, imo the Liberals are making a tactical mistake. Even though Jagmeet is an exceptionally weak leader I think its always better to punch your political opponent in the nose when you have a chance to do so. If Jagmeet loses Burnaby South and is forced to resign that would throw the NDP into utter chaos potentially just months before a federal election. This is not the same scenario as the Ontario Conservatives who were polling far ahead in first place when they dumped Patrick Brown. The subsequent leadership election was damaging and the long-term effect of that party being saddled with Doug Ford remains to be seen. But they were so far ahead they could afford to do a stupid thing like knife their leader and still win the election. Conversely, here the NDP is already drifting near irrelevance. If the NDP ultimately end up leaderless just months before the election things are more likely to get worse for the Party than better. 

Conversely if Jagmeet loses Burnaby South and hangs on to the leadership anyways, the NDP would be in the worst position of all. Given that Saskatchewan is already up in arms, I would expect a scenario where Jagmeet clings to power after a setback like losing Burnaby South would provoke outright civil war. The NDP really needs him to win this and it would be foolish for the Liberals to help him in any way towards that objective.

That being said, even without a Liberal candidate its not entirely clear that Jagmeet will win. The last election was really a three-way race and I have to imagine there is a lot of latent Conservative support anywhere where a detached home sells for $1.7M on average. I would have to defer to people on the ground there whether, in the absence of a Liberal candidate Jagmeet might reasonably expect to pick up votes from erstwhile Liberal supporters, if it would basically be a wash, or if the vote might even break in the other direction.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Here are some stats for Burnaby Douglas from the last few elections before the 2015 NDP melt down and Liberal surge.  Bill Siskay and Kennedy Stewart both won in three way races. In 2011 and 2008 the Conservatives came close when they ran Ronald Leung.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnaby%E2%80%94Douglas

Here are stats for the Burnaby New West since Burnaby South is a new riding made up of parts of those two old ridings.

Peter Julian in 2011 and 2008 beat Conservative candidates not Liberal ones.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnaby%E2%80%94New_Westminster

In Burnaby South in 2015 Stewart had to fend off a Liberal candidate.  If the Liberals do not contend the riding then there is a good chance that the Conservatives will win because the federal NDP in Burnaby needs three way races with the Libs and Cons. I am not sure why the Liberals would want to hand the Conservatives momentum in BC prior to the next election. 

Tommy won once in Burnaby when he parachuted in but couldn't win a redistributed riding the next time.