NDP polling third In Burnaby South ahead of by-election set for February

Already being discussed in the polling thread.

So, does mainstreet research have a good rep for accurate polling?

Seems he's having trouble raising money in Burnaby as well. Quote:

Last week, Singh, who is seeking to run in a yet-to-be-called Burnaby South byelection, sent a fundraising email to local supporters stating that just $1,918 had been raised for his campaign office, and $4,000 was needed in order to be able to keep it open.

His campaign manager told CTVNews.ca at the time that the figures were an accurate depiction of the MP-hopeful's war chest, but the send-out was successful and Singh won't have to close the door on his campaign office before the race even begins.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trailing-rivals-ndp-tries-new-fundraiser...

Pondering wrote:

(polling while naming the candidates) tells us the party is more popular than Horgan.

Horgan is not the candidate in Nanaimo. Sheila Malcolmson, who happens to be the sitting MP, is.

Quote:

I recall reading that the NDP wasn't the kind of party that ditched their leader just because they lost an election.

Every federal NDP leader who presided over a substantial loss of seats has stepped down, except Tom Mulcair.

Quote:

In my opinion the NDP just needs to settle down and await the next election and platform before declaring Singh a success or failure.

Singh will not face a leadership review until after the federal election. Individuals with their own views are not the NDP.

I guess what I'd have to ask you, Pondering, is why you feel the loyalty you seem to feel to Singh, given the conditions and the situation?  What, in your view, is to like?

Mighty Middle wrote:

During those two years she did face a leadership review where she received 84% in confidence vote

That was not a leadership review or confidence vote. That was an actual leadership vote which the challenger could have won. For a sitting leader to get less than 90% in a leadership vote against someone from the Socialist Caucus, no less, was unprecendented - the contested vote was unusual in itself.

I feel zero loyalty to Singh. If someone better shows up I will flip in an instant. I am encouraged by his position on decriminalizing all drug use and his condemnation of precarious work as something people have to get used to. He is keeping Guy Caron close and it seems he has won over Angus. He has been more condemning of Israeli violence against Palestinians. Small clues. The difference is that I understand the strategic necessity of playing his cards close to the chest and staying out of the line of fire.

Right now I think he is way better than Trudeau and Scheer. Those are my choices. I choose Singh. I don't see anyone better than Singh waiting in the NDP wings. I think the NDP missed their chance in 2015 and it could be many years before they get another one through no real fault of their own.

Canadians are a fairly conventional lot. Most are quite comfortable flipping between the Conservatives and Liberals as long as they have credible leaders. Mulcair didn't almost win because he was so great he almost won because Harper was so long in the tooth and Trudeau looked like a dud. As soon as Trudeau pulled his rabbit out of his hat the NDP was done.

Polls right now have zero depth. They are popularity in the moment on a whim and if it is the people who determine the election, the ones who tune in during the last week, then they have little clue who Singh is or what anyone has been doing including Trudeau.

What the NDP platform will be like is extremely speculative at the moment. I don't expect anything too radical but I expect the most progressive platform that has been seen in recent history which isn't saying a lot.

Any NDP leader has a difficult balancing act to do. Canadians are centrists and the Conservatives were forced to move to the centre to win. Life is easier for the Conservatives because their hardcore base is uneducated whereas the NDP's hardcore base is the opposite.

It all rides on the platform. If Singh disappoints me and the Liberals have a better platform then I would change my tune but I don't believe that will happen. I think Singh now has the support of both Caron and Angus. I'm guessing that Caron is devising the NDP economic plan.  Maybe Singh has "given" Angus something in the sense that there is some political action Angus wants taken that Singh supports.

For NDP leadership right now it is either Singh or no one. I pick Singh.

Federally my choices are Scheer, Trudeau and Singh. I pick Singh.

Put someone else into the mix and I could change my mind. For example I would be in an agony of indecision if Mulcair were to return as leader.

Pondering wrote:

I feel zero loyalty to Singh. If someone better shows up I will flip in an instant. I am encouraged by his position on decriminalizing all drug use and his condemnation of precarious work as something people have to get used to. He is keeping Guy Caron close and it seems he has won over Angus. He has been more condemning of Israeli violence against Palestinians. Small clues. The difference is that I understand the strategic necessity of playing his cards close to the chest and staying out of the line of fire.

Right now I think he is way better than Trudeau and Scheer. Those are my choices. I choose Singh. I don't see anyone better than Singh waiting in the NDP wings. I think the NDP missed their chance in 2015 and it could be many years before they get another one through no real fault of their own.

Canadians are a fairly conventional lot. Most are quite comfortable flipping between the Conservatives and Liberals as long as they have credible leaders. Mulcair didn't almost win because he was so great he almost won because Harper was so long in the tooth and Trudeau looked like a dud. As soon as Trudeau pulled his rabbit out of his hat the NDP was done.

Polls right now have zero depth. They are popularity in the moment on a whim and if it is the people who determine the election, the ones who tune in during the last week, then they have little clue who Singh is or what anyone has been doing including Trudeau.

What the NDP platform will be like is extremely speculative at the moment. I don't expect anything too radical but I expect the most progressive platform that has been seen in recent history which isn't saying a lot.

Any NDP leader has a difficult balancing act to do. Canadians are centrists and the Conservatives were forced to move to the centre to win. Life is easier for the Conservatives because their hardcore base is uneducated whereas the NDP's hardcore base is the opposite.

It all rides on the platform. If Singh disappoints me and the Liberals have a better platform then I would change my tune but I don't believe that will happen. I think Singh now has the support of both Caron and Angus. I'm guessing that Caron is devising the NDP economic plan.  Maybe Singh has "given" Angus something in the sense that there is some political action Angus wants taken that Singh supports.

For NDP leadership right now it is either Singh or no one. I pick Singh.

Federally my choices are Scheer, Trudeau and Singh. I pick Singh.

Put someone else into the mix and I could change my mind. For example I would be in an agony of indecision if Mulcair were to return as leader.

Interesting points here.

I am intrigued by the last point about Mulcair.

I have come to see the last election differently over time: I think the NDP platform was good but the leader made wrong guesses about what the messaging should have been.

The answers lie in two places -- first greater engagement with membership. But this is not enough becuase the members are not representative enough of voters.

We are in a new age of data colleciton. The Liberals invested in the last election in extremely valuable data collection -- canvassers all had ipads and recorded the opinions of voters and this information guided the last campaign. With this information, it is possible that Mulcair might have got it right.

The NDP needs this knowledge.

It also needs leadership to be confident enough that even without it that it default to a much more energetic defence of what it is that makes the NDP waht it is supposed to be (rather than what it sometimes is).

I believe the problems with the NDP run so much deeper than the leadership and this is why I am so fearful for the party that it engages in concentration on the leadership position rather than an understanding about what is really changing in politics.

Singh has not done what he needs to do but this does not mean he cannot. It does mean that he ought to have the very best of advice over the next while. I worry that he may not be getting it and that he may be blamed for the misfortune that is coming rather than what is really need which is a look at how the party is doing politics.

As a lifelong New Democrat, it gives me no pleasure to say the NDP will suffer catastrophic losses in the next election if Jagmeet Singh continues to lead the Party.  I can well believe that his byelection campaign is flagging, even if the Mainstreet poll does not provide reliable evidence of the real state of the parties in Burnaby South. 

I've long maintained that Canadian voters, not just Quebeckers, will not accept a national leader who makes religion the dominant feature of his identity by wearing ostentatious religious garb.  This point is not fully captured by polls, signed letters to the editor, or the public comments that most people are prepared to make.  After all, Canadians like to think themselves open-minded, even cosmopolitan. In any case, few are willing to risk being branded as racist for questioning the suitability of a party leader who so conspicuously embraces his religion. 

But the comments people are prepared to make anonymously on mainstream social media sites tell a different story. The recent Huff Post article about Singh is telling.  

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/11/19/jagmeet-singh-polls_a_23594137/

Look at the number of comments by readers who consider Singh to represent a threat to the separation of church and state, many of the posters claiming to be veteran NDP supporters. Similar comments can be seen on CBC discussion boards and elsewhere. One can question the fairness of these claims, but they undoubtedly reflect a widespread perception--one that spells bad news for the NDP. 

I respectfully disagree with those who say Singh can turn things around by changing his message or making more public appearances. As long as he is the messager, it will be immensely difficult to get through to a large number of voters to whom a social democratic message could and should be resonating.  Why? Because everytime Singh appears on TV, or his picture is prominently displayed as part of a news posting or article, many readers are transfixed by his turban--what colour is it today?--his unruly beard, and, to a lesser extent, his ubiquitous kirpan shoulder strap.  In an age of image politics, the NDP has created a monumental distraction that undermines its own message. 

Something needs to be done, and soon. 

voice of the damned wrote:

A: I just don't understand why we can't sing Silent Night at school Christmas pageants anymore. If the non-Christians don't like it, they shouldn't have moved here to begin with.

B: I really don't like seeing a federal party leader walking around with a turban and a beard. Not to mention those kirpans they carry.

I'd be willing to be that there is a pretty huge Venn overlap between the people who would make a statement like A, and the people who would make a statement like B. 

You may  be right. Maybe the thousands of social media posts are all made by social conservatives (and White Supremacists) who are fibbing about their NDP affiliation and are not at all representative of those voters who are deserting the NDP in droves.  The latter must be deserting for other reasons. And yet the misgiving expressed online about religion and politics are also expressed privately by fellow New Democrats of long standing whom I know.  Maybe they're outliers too.  Well, that settles that. Onward to victory. 

cco wrote:

I'm an atheist and a wall-of-separation purist who wants no religion in government whatsoever, and the turban's about 500th on the list of things that bother me about Singh. I've seen no evidence whatsoever that, if he becomes prime minister, he'll legislate Sikh beliefs into law. Harper, on the other hand, did his best to make government more Christian.

Not to mention that Canada doesn't actually have separation of church and state. I wish it did. We can start with defunding religious schools, taking the "supremacy of God" bit out of the Charter, getting the crucifix out of the National Assembly, eliminating the legal deference given to religious rights above all others, and so forth before worrying about his turban.

I agree with all of this, but I don't think Coldwell's "fellow New Democrats of long standing" do. They seem to have a less rational and a more, shall we say, emotional approach to the issue.

Personally, although an atheist myself, I have absolutely no problem with anyone's religion or beliefs unless it involves practices, foreign entanglements or allegiances which distract or compromise their suitability to represent Canadians and their issues. I see no evidence of this in Singh. Unlike some Liberals like Michael Levitt where an allegiance to Israeli concerns and priorities unduly predominates and clearly conflicts.

Coldwell wrote:

You may  be right. Maybe the thousands of social media posts are all made by social conservatives (and White Supremacists) who are fibbing about their NDP affiliation and are not at all representative of those voters who are deserting the NDP in droves.  

So, just to be clear...

These "thousands" of social media posts that you've examined all state that a) the poster is a New Democrat, who is b) leaving the NDP, and c) doing so specifically because Singh's sartorial expression of his faith offend their concept of church/state separation(or some equivalent phrasing that means "church/state separation")?

Even if all that is the case, you might want to consider that, in the year 2018, racism is disreputable enough that at least some people will use things like "church/state separation" as a front opinion for "I just don't like seeing these weirdo immigrants all over the place with their turbans and beards".  Sorta like how "ALL lives matter!!" gets used as a front for "Any ghetto trash who gets mowed down by the cops probably has it coming."

brookmere wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

BTW, if David Lewis had habitually worn a yarmulke when HE led the NDP

Then it would have been a different David Lewis. Let's get away from dress and look at principles. The real life Lewis was opposed to Zionism. If the imaginary Lewis' political career had been based on supporting this cause, and he had talked about Israel as though it were his own homeland, would this have affected your view of him?

The yarmulke is a cultural and religious symbol-it is connected to Judaism, not Zionism. 

R.E.Wood wrote:

Liberals confirm they're running against Singh as byelections planned for February

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/byelections-jagmeet-singh-liberals-1.49...

Interesting news. I was particularly struck by these 2 paragraphs.

Éric Grenier wrote:

The only opposition party leader that did not criticize the Liberal decision to hold off on calling the three byelections until next year was Maxime Bernier of the People's Party of Canada. As a newly-formed party, the PPC was not eligible to run candidates in any byelection called within 60 days of his application for registration with Elections Canada in October.

Once the byelections are called and the PPC nominates candidates — as Bernier has said he will do in all three ridings — his party will fulfill the final step to become an officially registered party, allowing the PPC to award tax receipts to its donors.

So, perhaps the reason for the delay was simply to give the PPC (Is there a nickname for these yahoos? The Peeps?) help in splitting as much right wing vote from the Cons as possible, and thus assuring the Libs of victory, just like the good old days in the 1990s.

WWWTT wrote:

@ MM

sounds like reasonable speculation. 

These bi elections will give Bernier’s newparty an opportunity to get some campaigning experience under its belt. This should theoretically help them in the next general election in less than a year!

not entirely sure that this is a good move on the part of the liberals??? I think it’s somewhat risky

Why?

the Liberals WANT the PP to do better than where they are polling. They WANT Bernier to eat into a little support for the Conservative leader. They WANT Bernier to even be in the debate at election time so he can bash away at the CPC leader. this is their best strategy.

The Liberals best hope is the NDP low as possible and Bernier's party high as possible.

Pondering wrote:

Put someone else into the mix and I could change my mind. For example I would be in an agony of indecision if Mulcair were to return as leader.  

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

  I am intrigued by the last point about Mulcair. 

I got what I wanted most from Trudeau, cannabis legalization, and Harper is gone. I don’t fear a Scheer majority. I actively support Singh because I think he is a good combination between progressive and pragmatic. I think he listens to Angus and Caron. I don’t think either would make successful leaders but they are both men I respect, Angus for social justice, Caron for the economy.

If Mulcair returned it isn’t so clear cut. Mulcair is a nice man, I like him, but he is out of touch. He has terrible political instincts. Trudeau will promise something progressive in 2019. I still wouldn’t want to vote Trudeau this time around but I think Mulcair did and would do damage to the NDP. I want the NDP to be a successful progressive party so I wouldn’t want to vote for Mulcair.

The ship of state does not turn easily. I think Singh (and Caron) will have policies that help workers and encourage the transition away from fossil fuels. I am hoping for the kind of policy renewal that will lead to being well-placed for 2023.

When I say "in touch" I am speakig in terms of political instincts. Mulcair should have known that Energy East would not play well in Quebec. He should have spoken to Quebec about that first not the States. Pot/oregano was out of touch with modern life. Not saying he had to support legalization to be in touch. At the time Trudeau declared himself the majority was in favor of decriminalization not legalization. Mulcair's comments came across as granddad comments. I agree his advisors were no better given the evidence of the ice bucket challenge. You can bet that Singh would not have worn a suit without at least making fun of the fact he was wearing a suit.

Singh took off his turban on TV and showed his hair. He supports LGBTQ rights. He married a well-educated successful working woman. He has no accent. He dances. If nothing else he will educate many people.

What the NDP has to do is prove to Canadians that the Conservatives and Liberals are the rotten economic managers wrecking the economy and that the NDP can turn it around. That will be very difficult to do as per mainstream media the eonomy is booming and the only problem is a shortage of workers.