Anne McGrath wants to know my priorities, and she's given me a list to choose from

281 posts / 0 new
Last post
Unionist
Anne McGrath wants to know my priorities, and she's given me a list to choose from

*

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

So...what's ON that list?

Unionist

[url=http://www.ndp.ca/election-survey]NDP election survey[/url]

I made the mistake of giving money (and time) to the NDP yet again, so I get this personal email from Anne McGrath. She wants to know what priorities the NDP should uphold going forward - but she tells me what they are in advance. And I have till Thursday midnight to reply.

Any idea how I can tell the NDP:

1. Stop banning candidates who defend human rights (Wheeldon, Manly, Natanine, Jonasson, etc.)?

2. Fire Anne McGrath, like, yesterday?

Those would be my two priorities.

What are yours?

 

Aristotleded24

Unionist wrote:
I have till Thursday midnight to reply.

Why the hurry to have it done? Could it be that tomorrow is a holiday in much of the country and people will be preoccupied with other things?

Wow. Distasteful for them to use Remembrance Day as a means to cover and close down any discussion of what went wrong.

Thanks for posting this unionist. You can bet that the party will be hearing from me on this!

Pondering

There is a spot for feedback.

Debater

That's hardly any time at all.

I'm surprised at how little time for feedback they are giving their members.

Geoff

I filled out the survey over a week ago, and I found that most of the questions are begging for a confirmation of the policies they put forward during the campaign. The only section of the survey that matters is the feedback question at the end of the survey.

What they'll do with the responses is another matter. Will they act on any of the feedback and criticism they receive, or will they offer the standard reply, which is "We have heard your frustration and will try to do better"? I fear the second outcome is more likely, as they haven't gone out of their way to address internal criticism before. I wonder what other plans are in the works to get feedback from the membership. If this is it, then they can't be very interested in what we have to say.

Finally, what will happen at Convention? The drill there is, hold a carefully staged debate, call closure, the appartchiks win, and can then go home satisfied that the they can carry on doing whatever they intended to do in the first place.

I would be thrilled to be proven wrong. However, we face a huge challenge, which is re-think the party from the ground up. I don't know if the party's vested interests have the stomach for such a re-think. 

Unionist

Geoff wrote:

I would be thrilled to be proven wrong. However, we face a huge challenge, which is re-think the party from the ground up. I don't know if the party's vested interests have the stomach for such a re-think. 

I agree with everything you said. But I would add: I don't know if the party's members have the stomach for such a re-think. They have shown precious few signs of independent life or thought for many years now.

So, your statement is very insightful, I think. Even a re-think "from the ground up" would require a green light from the heavens down.

Geoff

Unionist wrote:

Geoff wrote:

I would be thrilled to be proven wrong. However, we face a huge challenge, which is re-think the party from the ground up. I don't know if the party's vested interests have the stomach for such a re-think. 

I agree with everything you said. But I would add: I don't know if the party's members have the stomach for such a re-think. They have shown precious few signs of independent life or thought for many years now.

So, your statement is very insightful, I think. Even a re-think "from the ground up" would require a green light from the heavens down.

Good point about the membership. We've become very accepting of the "offical line", so we chug along, making donations and working to increase our membership. After all, the next election will undoubtedly be "the most important in our history" (I think that's how the story goes).

JKR

With very convenient modern day Internet communication capabilities it would probably be easy to open up many of the NDP's proceedings to the entire membership. This would include the vote on whether to have a leadership convention. Maybe entire NDP policy conventions could be put on the internet where all members could participate? This would allow many people to participate who cannot currently afford to or just don't have the available time.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

I got this email as well. After reading the survey, I agree with Geoff's description, that "most of the questions are begging for a confirmation of the policies they put forward during the campaign. The only section of the survey that matters is the feedback question at the end of the survey."

I decided that it would be a waste of time and effort to write a little essay about my opinions because it would simply be disregarded insofar as it conflicted with the beliefs of McGrath and her fellow incompetent failures in the party establishment, so I didn't bother.

JKR

I was also annoyed by the survey as it almost forces one to mostly agree with the status quo.

JeffWells

I submitted a response without checking any of the boxes. I wrote that the NDP's campaign made a balanced budget the party's top priority, at the expense of all its social promises and without the consent (HA!) of its members.

For all the good it will do....

 

JKR

I think the NDP could have won the election if they'd run on providing many good jobs and growing the economy. I think the NDP lost the election when Mulcair chose to run instead on maintaining balanced and even surplus budgets. That got in the way of being able to make a strong case for providing many good jobs and growing the economy.

swallow swallow's picture

You've all made the mistake of thinking this is a survey. Perhaps you were fooled by the word "survey" being at the top of the page. This is, in fact, a new type of fundraising and recruitment letter. Think of it as "What Sort of NDP Loyalist Are YOU? Number 7 will Blow Your Mind!" 

Unionist

Thanks for confirming the irony I was attempting to capture in the thread title.

And yes - the word "DONATE" is hard to miss.

I think swallow has nailed it. This "survey" is just click-bait.

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

swallow wrote:

You've all made the mistake of thinking this is a survey. Perhaps you were fooled by the word "survey" being at the top of the page. This is, in fact, a new type of fundraising and recruitment letter. Think of it as "What Sort of NDP Loyalist Are YOU? Number 7 will Blow Your Mind!" 

This is a brilliant analogy, thanks.

quizzical

well i feel left out. my mom got one and she said she gave them scathing reviews and the survey an even worse one.

Unionist

quizzical wrote:

well i feel left out. my mom got one and she said she gave them scathing reviews and the survey an even worse one.

You probably didn't give them enough money.

quizzical

lol i never gave them any.

Unionist

quizzical wrote:

lol i never gave them any.

Wise move. Keeps your inbox cleaner.

Debater

Michael Moriarity wrote:

I decided that it would be a waste of time and effort to write a little essay about my opinions because it would simply be disregarded insofar as it conflicted with the beliefs of McGrath and her fellow incompetent failures in the party establishment, so I didn't bother.

Why was Anne McGrath (& Brad Lavigne) allowed to have so much influence over everything?

Does Mulcair not ever step in and wonder what they are doing?

Perhaps McGrath, Lavigne & Co. should check out today's post-election Poll.  Granted it's a honeymoon poll and these numbers won't stay this way for the Liberals forever, but it still shows the risk for the NDP if they don't demand some changes at the top.

--

Trudeau approval soars

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s approval has soared to 6-in-10 approval (60%) and a net favourable score (approve minus disapprove) at an unprecedentedly high +40.  If an election were held today, the Liberals would take well more than half the vote (55%), to one quarter for the Conservatives (25%) and just more than one tenth for the NDP (12%).

Tom Mulcair has the approval of one third of voters (34%), down considerably from one half on October 7 (49%). His net favourable score is down 20 points, to -5 from +15.

---

http://poll.forumresearch.com/data/95187c50-8143-4ff2-ab57-0af551fe3875F...

robbie_dee

With those numbers I recommend Trudeau visit the Governor General and request he dissolve Parliament and call a snap election. He can't lose! Debater please pass my suggestion along to your Liberal bosses.

Unionist

Debater wrote:

Michael Moriarity wrote:

I decided that it would be a waste of time and effort to write a little essay about my opinions because it would simply be disregarded insofar as it conflicted with the beliefs of McGrath and her fellow incompetent failures in the party establishment, so I didn't bother.

Why was Anne McGrath (& Brad Lavigne) allowed to have so much influence over everything?

Does Mulcair not ever step in and wonder what they are doing?

Disingenuous?

Here, let me Google that for you...

 

Debater

robbie_dee wrote:

With those numbers I recommend Trudeau visit the Governor General and request he dissolve Parliament and call a snap election. He can't lose! Debater please pass my suggestion along to your Liberal bosses.

I don't have any "Liberal bosses".

I'm not even a member of the party at present.

I meant what I said this Spring.

My disagreements with the Liberals over C-51 and the Star Candidate Nominations led me to quit my Liberal riding association.

I also voted Green in the Election.

I was certainly very happy that the Liberals beat Harper and I give Justin Trudeau credit for putting the dagger into the Vampire, since Mulcair was not up to the job.

Sean in Ottawa

I did not get the survey because I got so sick of the multiple daily donate messages that I aked to be taken off their list. I suspect that was the best message I could send anyway. I am not even sure when my membership will lapse.

Stockholm

Debater wrote:

Why was Anne McGrath (& Brad Lavigne) allowed to have so much influence over everything?

Well, where to begin - they were both extremely close confidantes and strategists behind Jack Layton and they were both hailed as geniuses after the 2011 election (but in politics - you are only ever as good as your last election). They were also both very popular and had the confidence of caucus and staff. Also, its worth noting that when Mulcair won the leadership it was without any help from either of those individuals both of whom were thought to be quietly (or not so quietly) supporting Brian Topp. When Mulcair became leader he initially sidelined the insiders around Layton - such as Lavigne and McGrath - and installed his own people...the consensus was that those people were not competent and people in the party pressured and convinced Mulcair to bring back the "dream team" of people who were seen as having done a great job in building up the party during the Layton years.

terrytowel

Stockholm wrote:

Debater wrote:

Why was Anne McGrath (& Brad Lavigne) allowed to have so much influence over everything?

Well, where to begin - they were both extremely close confidantes and strategists behind Jack Layton and they were both hailed as geniuses after the 2011 election

If you exclude the Quebec results from the 2011 results, the NDP only increased there seat count by 8. From 36 seats to 44 seats.

jjuares

terrytowel wrote:

Stockholm wrote:

Debater wrote:

Why was Anne McGrath (& Brad Lavigne) allowed to have so much influence over everything?

Well, where to begin - they were both extremely close confidantes and strategists behind Jack Layton and they were both hailed as geniuses after the 2011 election

If you exclude the Quebec results from the 2011 results, the NDP only increased there seat count by 8. From 36 seats to 44 seats.


Yeah but they came second in every province in terms of popular vote except for PEI. Thats why they were considered such geniuses.

jjuares

I was very annoyed by this survey for all the reasons mentioned above, principally because it is designed not to get honest feedback. I wish everyone who is as angry as I am would at least fill the open ended part in and leave the rest blank. I want this whole cabal, Brad, Anne gone gone gone. I am going to try to be a delegate in the spring. We need a whole rethink for the party. Hey, if we are going to be another Liberal Party I may as well save myself some blood, sweat, and tears as well as money and vote Liberal. We need to focus on the under- priveledeged, the environment and social democratic goals in general. And finally why is it that they insist on dumping candidates because they are mildly critical of another nation's ( ie Israel) foreign policy? It's just bizaare.

Aristotleded24

Here was my feedback:

Quote:
The way this post-election survey has been done does not instill a great deal of confidence in the NDP's ability to respond to the last election results. Too often, I feel as if the communication is a one-way street in that Central Office expects members to carry its lines to the voters while not being able to hear or respond to things that are happening on the ground. Members and activists often sacrifice a great deal to help out campaigns, including taking time off work in some cases, or even taking time away from non-political interests and can sense when something is going wrong, and yet are frustrated at not being able to turn it around. One particular issue of concern is vetting candidates, and deciding who gets the nod and who doesn't. For example, why does someone who posts a pro-Palestinian post on a remote blog removed from the campaign, while someone who advocates removing same-sex marriage and lying about there being support from that within the NDP Caucus allowed to keep running? I understand that there are confidentiality issues at stake, but there must be a very clear, transparent process involved. Why not, for instance, have everyone who wants to run under the NDP banner submit their candidacy to a central committee which will then alert the local riding to any potential concerns, and then the members themselves have the information they need to make their decision?

Lastly, the timing and method of doing this survey is of concern as well. Two days on an e-mail survey is not enough for one, and I find it highly distasteful that this survey was done over the course of Remembrance Day. I feel that was not only disrespectful to veterans but the fact that it was done over what in many provinces is a holiday makes it less likely that people will respond. I am not sure why quick answers were needed. I think a better approach would have been to approach local members and supporters, current and past, in their home communities, and have them give feedback to the party. As for my support of the NDP, while I have supported it in the past, my support cannot be taken for granted, and should I feel the NDP is not responsive to my concerns, I will support a different party in the next federal election.

Unionist

Excellent, A24.

Question: Who advocated removing same-sex marriage?

Unionist

Ok folks, I'm in deep trouble now - I didn't send in the survey - so I just got this second email:

Quote:

Hi [me],

We’ll be spending the next few weeks planning for the work ahead, and we’d love to get your opinion first.

Can you take just five minutes to fill out this survey and let us know before midnight tonight?

Anne

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Anne McGrath
Subject: Have five minutes for this survey?
Date: November 10, 2015

Friend,

Since just last week, more than 10,000 Canadians have taken this survey on the election and what to focus on moving forward.

Before we finalize our next steps, I’d like to know what you think.

Can you take five minutes to share your thoughts before Thursday at midnight?

3.5 million Canadians voted NDP this election, and now they’re counting on us to stand up for their priorities in Ottawa. I’m looking to you, and supporters like you, to share your insight and help get the job done.

The more we know about your priorities, the better we can help bring the change you want after a decade of Stephen Harper’s Conservatives.

We need all responses by Thursday at midnight to incorporate your feedback in our plans for the coming months.

Five minutes of your time is all it takes to tell us what you think. Just click here to get started:

http://www.ndp.ca/election-survey

Thanks,

Anne

Anne McGrath
National Campaign Director
Canada’s New Democrats

Donate

Facebook  Twitter

New Democratic Party of Canada
300-279 Laurier West, Ottawa ON K1P 5J9
1-866-525-2555
cope:225/jg

Am I gonna be blacklisted if I don't reply?

Will they stop asking me for money?

Help, please!

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
There’s a lot to do in the coming months. How would you like to be involved?

[ ] I would like to volunteer with my local NDP riding association

[ ] I would like to sign up for a monthly donation

[ ] I would like to become an online activist

[ ] I would like to participate in more surveys like this one

[ ] I would like to stay connected on social media

[ ] Other:

That could be fun.

Quote:
SuddenNewBabbler58 wrote:

Hey, fellow progressive Canadians on a website!  Do you have a moment to discuss the awesomeness of the New Democratic Party?  I apologize for starting 18 new threads on this very important topic, but as I'm sure you all know, the upcoming 2019 Federal Election will be here before we know it...

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Unionist wrote:

Am I gonna be blacklisted if I don't reply?

Will they stop asking me for money?

Help, please!

You will be blacklisted if you don't reply but it will not show up until you try to seek a nomination and then it will be an issue..

They will never stop asking you for money. I suggest that you change any and all the contact information you shared with the NDP and hope they don't find you.

Aristotleded24

Unionist wrote:
Who advocated removing same-sex marriage?

[url=http://rabble.ca/babble/election-2015/ndp-standing-toronto-candidate-rev... don't remember?[/url]

Unionist

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Unionist wrote:
Who advocated removing same-sex marriage?

[url=http://rabble.ca/babble/election-2015/ndp-standing-toronto-candidate-rev... don't remember?[/url]

OMG, that was like 6 weeks ago - and of course I remember everything once I look back at the thread. But why did I need a reminder?

I've been having some memory issues lately - struggling to remember a name from the past that would have come easily a couple years ago - forgetting how some movie or episode ends a day or two after watching it - etc. Nothing signficant. Yet. I'm sure what I'm saying comes as no surprise to some babblers of a certain age. But it sure surprises you when it happens to you.

Ok, enough about my journey of self-discovery. Back to the topic. Here's what I said then:

Unionist, on Sept. 24, 2015 wrote:

I'll continue to support Anne Lagacé Dowson, Alexandre Boulerice, and other progressive candidates any way I can. But unless the NDP turfs this misogynist homophobic "Christian" dinosaur, I don't see how I can keep voting NDP in my own riding.

Pretty bombastic stuff - which I still stand by. But guess what? They kept the dinosaur, and I voted NDP.

Time to schedule an appointment.

Caissa

My priority is Mulcair's resignation. Once we have that in hand the discussion of the next forur years can begin.

Sean in Ottawa

Caissa wrote:

My priority is Mulcair's resignation. Once we have that in hand the discussion of the next forur years can begin.

Agreed.

terrytowel

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Caissa wrote:

My priority is Mulcair's resignation. Once we have that in hand the discussion of the next forur years can begin.

Agreed.

And if NDP members vote to have Mulcair remain as leader in April, will disenfrachised NDP members stay home come the next election, or will they form another NPI party?

jjuares

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Caissa wrote:

My priority is Mulcair's resignation. Once we have that in hand the discussion of the next forur years can begin.

Agreed.


I want a change in leadership but I worry if we focus on that too much other needed changes will be missed. I believe we need to introduce democracy into the NDP. Now don't get me wrong I feel that the party is at least as democratic as the other three. However, that is indeed damning with faint praise. Candidate selection (and more importantly )deselection, platform development, communication strategy are just a few areas this party is woeful.

jjuares

terrytowel wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Caissa wrote:

My priority is Mulcair's resignation. Once we have that in hand the discussion of the next forur years can begin.

Agreed.

And if NDP members vote to have Mulcair remain as leader in April, will disenfrachised NDP members stay home come the next election, or will they form another NPI party?


Good question. I see almost no support for him to remain though.

Caissa

I don't think another NPI is in the works.  I'll simply withhold my donations and my vote until we get a new leader. It's not like the NDP has a hope of winning in our riding anyway.

Unionist

jjuares wrote:
I believe we need to introduce democracy into the NDP.

That was one of the three reasons I left the NDP when I was a mere kid - ignoring convention decisions; banning internal dissent (e.g. Waffle back in the day); and opposing Québec's right to self-determination (which Sherbrooke mostly cured, for the first time in CCF/NDP history).

I keep voting for them (usually) and giving money, but mostly based on individual candidates, and on negative voting - e.g. used to be trying to unseat the Liberal dynasty in my riding (Outremont), and more recently, trying to oust Harper. I held my nose and closed my eyes.

But "introduce democracy into the NDP"? Let me know when that's done. I'll be back in full dress colours. This business of changing leaders, or picking different platform promises... that's blowin' in the wind. Give control to the members, and I'll show you a hurricane.

 

JeffWells

In 2008 or so I entered a restaurant on the Danforth just as Layton, McGrath and Lavigne were leaving. All I heard of their conversation was Layton remarking "That's why we're a party." Granted, Mulcair to a large extent simply carried on Layton's legacy of "modernization," but his performance during the campaign demonstrated he lacks Layton's intuitive understanding of what distinguishes the NDP, even in the most tepid sense.

I'm not a Liberal, and I have no interest in supporting an ersatz Liberal Party sat at the kids' table.

Aristotleded24

JeffWells wrote:
In 2008 or so I entered a restaurant on the Danforth just as Layton, McGrath and Lavigne were leaving. All I heard of their conversation was Layton remarking "That's why we're a party." Granted, Mulcair to a large extent simply carried on Layton's legacy of "modernization," but his performance during the campaign demonstrated he lacks Layton's intuitive understanding of what distinguishes the NDP, even in the most tepid sense.

Even the tone of communication was different. I looked back at some old videos, and while both would claim that the NDP was the best party, Layton was always inviting voters to take a close look, whereas Mulcair seemed to suggest that people would naturally vote for the NDP once they see how good and righteous the party is.

Sean in Ottawa

Unionist wrote:

jjuares wrote:
I believe we need to introduce democracy into the NDP.

That was one of the three reasons I left the NDP when I was a mere kid - ignoring convention decisions; banning internal dissent (e.g. Waffle back in the day); and opposing Québec's right to self-determination (which Sherbrooke mostly cured, for the first time in CCF/NDP history).

I keep voting for them (usually) and giving money, but mostly based on individual candidates, and on negative voting - e.g. used to be trying to unseat the Liberal dynasty in my riding (Outremont), and more recently, trying to oust Harper. I held my nose and closed my eyes.

But "introduce democracy into the NDP"? Let me know when that's done. I'll be back in full dress colours. This business of changing leaders, or picking different platform promises... that's blowin' in the wind. Give control to the members, and I'll show you a hurricane.

 

Won't happen with Mulcair as leader. That is clear now.

Might happen with someone else. On that alone it is worth a shot.

Debater

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Even the tone of communication was different. I looked back at some old videos, and while both would claim that the NDP was the best party, Layton was always inviting voters to take a close look, whereas Mulcair seemed to suggest that people would naturally vote for the NDP once they see how good and righteous the party is.

True.

As I've said before, Mulcair doesn't have an anger problem.

He has an ego problem.

He has an exaggerated sense of his own skills, while underestimating the strength of his opponents.

He boasted that he was going to mop the floor with Trudeau.  Instead, Trudeau mopped the floor with him.

And Harper outmaneuvered Mulcair, too.

DaveW

jjuares wrote:
terrytowel wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Caissa wrote:

My priority is Mulcair's resignation. Once we have that in hand the discussion of the next forur years can begin.

Agreed.

And if NDP members vote to have Mulcair remain as leader in April, will disenfrachised NDP members stay home come the next election, or will they form another NPI party?

Good question. I see almost no support for him to remain though.

in Saturday 14th Star and Globe both Chantal Hebert and Adam Radwanski point out that the NDP has no plans for a thorough election review or leadership assesment

Carry on, Tom... the curtains to reality have been drawn at NDP HQ

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

jjuares wrote:

I want a change in leadership but I worry if we focus on that too much other needed changes will be missed. I believe we need to introduce democracy into the NDP. Now don't get me wrong I feel that the party is at least as democratic as the other three. However, that is indeed damning with faint praise. Candidate selection (and more importantly )deselection, platform development, communication strategy are just a few areas this party is woeful.

Imagine a party with the word democratic in its name actaually being a grass roots democratic organization. The NDP has never been a grass roots party. I have seen the party up close and personal in three provinces and the insiders control everywhere.  The string of elections I worked in Burnaby were a constant battle over messaging but our sitting MP's were strong enough to get to run an independent local campaign. We always had boxes of unused shit from the central campaign because the messaging was always meant to appeal to Ontario voters. The irony is that the federal party has never had a major breakthrough in Ontario.

If our Quebec MP's had been allowed to act like the community activists they were before being elected, like Svend and Libby used to in the '90's and '00's, I think the party would have held onto their seats. Instead the caucus got muzzled and told to look like a staid government in waiting.

I think we need regional campaigns with a broad central theme and we need to empower riding associations.  I think vetting needs to be done at the regional level and all facts presented to riding associations' executives and they should then get to decide whether a candidate is suitable to seek a nomination. All facts obtained during the vetting process should be made available to the membership for the nomination battle.

I know that the odds of this happening are in the remote possibility range. Sigh.

Unionist

kropotkin1951 wrote:

jjuares wrote:

I want a change in leadership but I worry if we focus on that too much other needed changes will be missed. I believe we need to introduce democracy into the NDP. Now don't get me wrong I feel that the party is at least as democratic as the other three. However, that is indeed damning with faint praise. Candidate selection (and more importantly )deselection, platform development, communication strategy are just a few areas this party is woeful.

Imagine a party with the word democratic in its name actaually being a grass roots democratic organization. The NDP has never been a grass roots party. I have seen the party up close and personal in three provinces and the insiders control everywhere.  The string of elections I worked in Burnaby were a constant battle over messaging but our sitting MP's were strong enough to get to run an independent local campaign. We always had boxes of unused shit from the central campaign because the messaging was always meant to appeal to Ontario voters. The irony is that the federal party has never had a major breakthrough in Ontario.

If our Quebec MP's had been allowed to act like the community activists they were before being elected, like Svend and Libby used to in the '90's and '00's, I think the party would have held onto their seats. Instead the caucus got muzzled and told to look like a staid government in waiting.

I think we need regional campaigns with a broad central theme and we need to empower riding associations.  I think vetting needs to be done at the regional level and all facts presented to riding associations' executives and they should then get to decide whether a candidate is suitable to seek a nomination. All facts obtained during the vetting process should be made available to the membership for the nomination battle.

I know that the odds of this happening are in the remote possibility range. Sigh.

Thanks (both of you) for these comments. I am absolutely convinced that a change of leadership will change absolutely nothing.

Just think what it says about the nature of a party, when it can significantly change course just by changing someone at the helm - a leader, moreover, who is given no dictatorial powers by the party constitution. It is the apathy and frustration and illusions of the members which confer that dictatorial power - and the same apathy and frustration which guarantee that the party can never fundamentally correct its course.

So either do what krop says above... at the riding level... or waste the next few years looking for another perfect little leader.

Pages