Jagmeet Singh and Andrew Scheer now working together

101 posts / 0 new
Last post
epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..i agree with kroptkin this is an election year and the attacks on the ndp are going to come hard. just look at what labour is facing these days.

Pogo Pogo's picture

Mighty Middle wrote:
read the comments from NDP supporters at link below and you get tuned in

https://twitter.com/theJagmeetSingh/status/1101575568317771776

It is pretty well standard practice for NDP supporters to find fault with party decisions.

Aristotleded24

Pogo wrote:
A) It is an important issue.

B) The parties both agree on this issue 

C) It puts heat on the Liberals

D) It marginalizes the mini-parties

What was the problem again?

The problem, Pogo, is that the Conservatives are bad by definition, so also working with them or agreeing with them on any issue or giving them credit on a legitimate public policy accomplishment or position is also bad by definition. Anything that goes against the Liberals is bad.

Pondering

Aristotleded24 wrote:
 And if the NDP had, the NDP would still be criticized for even remotely agreeing with the Conservatives on anything. I remember then the NDP alerted the RCMP to possible insider trading during the 2005-2006 election, and it was apparently the NDP's fault then for asking for possible wrondoing by the Liberals to be investigated. No, in the Liberal worldview, the Liberals are entitled to votes just because they are the best party, and criticizing them in this way only helps the evil Conservatives. The Conservatives are evil, therefore ever agreeing with them on anything is wrong and should never happen. 

Uh, no. I am not saying they shouldn't both be against the Liberals. I'm saying the NDP should have its own voice. I'm saying if you believe an entity to  be corrupt you don't sign letters with them. 

Aristotleded24 wrote:
Makes me sick. I've been a member of the NDP off and on since 2004, but if we had ranked choice voting, and the NDP was not in contention, and I had to choose between the Liberals and Conservatives, I would choose the Conservatives. At least they have the guts to defend and articulate principles with which I disagree, no matter how much abuse is thrown their way.   

People suffer under the Liberals but they suffer more under the Conservatives. The Conservatives don't have principles they have dogma. There is nothing to "admire" in the Conservative political machine other than effectiveness. 

I'm voting NDP even though I have mixed feelings. They are absolutely a better choice than the Conservatives or Liberals, but I do have mixed feelings. I'm hoping they will fade when the platform comes out and when I see the new crop of MPs. I am hopeful that younger MPs will change the party and make it more responsive. The younger the person the less respect they have for authority, the more concerned they are over the environment and the affordability of a good place to live with a family. Younger people are more educated and saavy. 

I'm getting off topic. My point is the NDP should avoid linking itself to the Conservative party in any way if they can avoid it and this they could have avoided. The NDP should have written its own letter in its own words.

It's not a huge big deal but it is a mistake. Image and messaging is crucial. If Trudeau overcomes this it will be in part because of his image. Both attorney generals have said the Trudeau government did not break a law. I think they would know. It still stinks to high heaven but if it doesn't make it to a courtroom it will be long forgotten by the time the election rolls around. 

Most people will tune in during the last 2 weeks or even the last few days. They will be listening to each parties main messaging, the top points, no more than three for any party. They will decide which party and leader will serve them best at that time. It is unlikely any of the parties will be talking about SNC-Lavalin. 

WWWTT

A24 wrote

The problem, Pogo, is that the Conservatives are bad by definition

This is false. The conservatives have some policies talking points that we disagree with, just like any other party. How many and how much we disagree varies from person to person and from different conservative sects. Rob Ford Ontario pc government right now has made lots of enemies and has to go. 

Aristotleded24

Pondering wrote:
Aristotleded24 wrote:
 And if the NDP had, the NDP would still be criticized for even remotely agreeing with the Conservatives on anything. I remember then the NDP alerted the RCMP to possible insider trading during the 2005-2006 election, and it was apparently the NDP's fault then for asking for possible wrondoing by the Liberals to be investigated. No, in the Liberal worldview, the Liberals are entitled to votes just because they are the best party, and criticizing them in this way only helps the evil Conservatives. The Conservatives are evil, therefore ever agreeing with them on anything is wrong and should never happen. 

Uh, no. I am not saying they shouldn't both be against the Liberals.

That is the logical outcome of the approach you would take and everything you have said.

Pondering wrote:
Most people will tune in during the last 2 weeks or even the last few days. They will be listening to each parties main messaging, the top points, no more than three for any party. They will decide which party and leader will serve them best at that time. It is unlikely any of the parties will be talking about SNC-Lavalin.

I can guarantee that the Conservatives will be talking about this.

Mighty Middle

I was so excited by the idea of Jagmeet Singh when he won leadership. I now understand him to be the latest in this sorry gaggle of cynical, inept politicians, and the single most disappointing, inarticulate, and unprincipled NDP leader of my lifetime. What a shame.

https://twitter.com/tantojon/status/1102084225212313600

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

WWWTT wrote:

A24 wrote

The problem, Pogo, is that the Conservatives are bad by definition

This is false. The conservatives have some policies talking points that we disagree with, just like any other party. How many and how much we disagree varies from person to person and from different conservative sects. Rob Ford Ontario pc government right now has made lots of enemies and has to go. 

I think you should crank up your irony detector.

Unionist

Michael Moriarity wrote:

WWWTT wrote:

A24 wrote

The problem, Pogo, is that the Conservatives are bad by definition

This is false. The conservatives have some policies talking points that we disagree with, just like any other party. How many and how much we disagree varies from person to person and from different conservative sects. Rob Ford Ontario pc government right now has made lots of enemies and has to go. 

I think you should crank up your irony detector.

There is no place for irony in social media. There are no emojis which unequivocally identify irony. Irony may well be an insidious tool for smuggling in pro-Liberal talking points. IMHO, although IANAL, and by contrast with IRL, I submit that we must maintain a steely resolve to avoid irony here.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Unionist wrote:

There is no place for irony in social media. There are no emojis which unequivocally identify irony. Irony may well be an insidious tool for smuggling in pro-Liberal talking points. IMHO, although IANAL, and by contrast with IRL, I submit that we must maintain a steely resolve to avoid irony here.

LOL. A self-referential statement, along the same lines as "Everything I say is a lie" except much more clever and indirect. Nicely done.

WWWTT

Ah I see. I guess some things better said with vocalization do not translate in writen form. Or I don't get it?

Mighty Middle

Jagmeet Singh just sent out a tweet 20 minutes ago about Income Inequality, tying it to SNC

And already it is filling up with comments, blasting Jagmeet for teaming up with Andrew Scheer (who has ties toRebel Media and Faith Goldy) - see below

https://twitter.com/theJagmeetSingh/status/1102230929702035463

lagatta4

I do vote NDP federally though I'm not particularly fond of the party. Yes, younger people tend to be more progressive but that does remain a generalisation. I'm far from young (alas a few of the babblers older than me have passed away) but very committed to the environment and to social (not just affordable) housing and have worked on both those issues and continue to do so. Also on Indigenous issues.

Pogo Pogo's picture

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Unionist wrote:

There is no place for irony in social media. There are no emojis which unequivocally identify irony. Irony may well be an insidious tool for smuggling in pro-Liberal talking points. IMHO, although IANAL, and by contrast with IRL, I submit that we must maintain a steely resolve to avoid irony here.

LOL. A self-referential statement, along the same lines as "Everything I say is a lie" except much more clever and indirect. Nicely done.

It is a generalization and as you must know, generalizations are generally wrong.

pietro_bcc

Not a fan of Singh, but there's nothing wrong with what he did in this case. Parties that are ideologically different co-signing a letter is standard in politics and is more powerful than each party having their own letter because it sends the message of the parties having a united front on a specific issue.

Its like when the CAQ, PQ, QS and Greens signed an agreement to implement MMP if elected. It doesn't mean that the CAQ and QS are the same party and that they agree on everything. It means that they agree on this issue.

Mighty Middle

pietro_bcc wrote:

 it sends the message of the parties having a united front on a specific issue.

that is the problem - NDP supporters are on twitter blasting Singh for teaming up with someone who counts Rebel Media and Faith Goldy as allies.

NDPP

But he's not 'teamin up' with Rebel Media or Faith Goldy. And for a party who has 'teamed up' to support the destruction of Libya, Apartheid Israel or regime change in Venezuela, it's a bit rich for the NDP to now perform their famous wagon-circling trick and fire in on Singh. Just another loud and clear demonstration to the Canadian public why not to vote for the gang that couldn't shoot straight.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Pondering

So supporting a party means never disagreeing with their actions? Coulda fooled me. I read endless complaints that they are too centrist. I agree, but that is criticism. 

I would not co-sign anything with the KKK even if we were on the same side of a specific issue. That's an exageration of course but the Conservatives are in bed with the corporate world just as much if not more so than the Liberals. The Conservatives broke electoral law and got off because they made a deal. 

Co-signing a letter with the Conservatives confers legitimacy to the Conservatives. If the NDP will sign something with them they can't be that bad right?

This is about optics. I said during the 2015 Campaign that the NDP should avoid seeing the words " NDP and Conservatives" together. That was in the context of refusing debates. 

The Conservatives are on the wrong side so if the NDP agrees with them then they are likely on the wrong side too. 

I think the NDP should have taken a more nuanced position. 

Unionist

Pogo wrote:

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Unionist wrote:

There is no place for irony in social media. There are no emojis which unequivocally identify irony. Irony may well be an insidious tool for smuggling in pro-Liberal talking points. IMHO, although IANAL, and by contrast with IRL, I submit that we must maintain a steely resolve to avoid irony here.

LOL. A self-referential statement, along the same lines as "Everything I say is a lie" except much more clever and indirect. Nicely done.

It is a generalization and as you must know, generalizations are generally wrong.

Generalizations are always wrong. Generally speaking. Except this one. 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

I would not co-sign anything with the KKK even if we were on the same side of a specific issue. That's an exageration of course but the Conservatives are in bed with the corporate world just as much if not more so than the Liberals.

..and the liberals are as racist as the conservatives. they wrote the indian act and spent more time in power inflicting harm than the cons did. as they do today. yet the ndp has worked with them in the past against the cons. this is not about censoring criticism it's about propaganda being heaped on the ndp, and in particular singh in an election year.

NDPP

Coke, Pepsi or Canada Dry?  - No thanks, not good for me. I'll pass.

Which party doesn't support Apartheid Israel? Which party doesn't support Nazi Ukraine? Which party doesn't support NATO? Which party doesn't support regime change in Venezuela? ETC...

Why not?

JKR

But which party supports a federal $15 minimum wage?

pietro_bcc

QS signed with the CAQ a pact to implement MMP if elected, no difference between that and this. This is manufactured outrage, its for the most part people who don't like Singh and will find some way to criticize him, I don't doubt that the same commenters trashing Singh in those Twitter posts would've criticized him if he made a point of refusing to sign onto that letter and writing his own saying some nonsense like "Singh is clearly unable to work with other politicians of different stripes, how will he ever get anything done?". Much like so so called "normal Americans" who asked questions during Bernie Sanders' town hall who ended up being exposed as people working for lobbyists. Just out of curiosity I looked at the twitter posts made by the person who made the top comment in one of those Singh Twitter posts you linked and her feed was exclusively her defending Trudeau and praising him "just an ordinary Canadian"

Pondering

epaulo13 wrote:

I would not co-sign anything with the KKK even if we were on the same side of a specific issue. That's an exageration of course but the Conservatives are in bed with the corporate world just as much if not more so than the Liberals.

..and the liberals are as racist as the conservatives. they wrote the indian act and spent more time in power inflicting harm than the cons did. as they do today. yet the ndp have worked with them in the past against the cons. this is not about censoring criticism it's about propaganda being heaped on the ndp, and in particular singh in an election year.

I don't think they should sign a tagalong letter like this with the Liberals either. They can have the same general opinion and still write their own statement/demand on the topic. They could make it broader by asking for an investigation into corporate influence on government. They could using this as an example of why these "too big to fail" companies harm us. They could acknowledge the economic hardship it could mean for thousands of workers. Just you know, take an independent thoughtful position on the issue instead of me tooing the Conservatives. 

I did read somewhere that the Conservatives would have done the exact same thing and I believe they would. They just would have done it much more smoothly and they would have chosen an AG that wouldn't buck them. Harper was instructing the Senate. Trudeau should have just shifted her shortly after she refused to reconsider. Then there would be no scandal. 

The core problem as I see it is that the executives that committed the crimes got off scott free. They didn't even pay a fine. I just can't shake my conviction that the people who commit crimes should pay the price not the company they used to commit them. 

SNC-Lavalin can be seen as having benefited from their crime, maybe, but maybe had the bribes not been paid SNC-Lavalin would have been doing better business elsewhere. It is the executives and the executives alone that were aware of the crimes being committed. 

This is an opportunity for the NDP to stand up for thousands of Quebec workers. The NDP could demand that SNC-Lavalin be broken up into separate entities so that workers can keep their jobs. Or some other solution I know nothing about. Guy Caron is an economist. Can't he suggest a solution that would get at the core issues? 

There has to be a way to punish the guilty while protecting the workers. The NDP should be suggesting practical solutions. 

I guess it's easier to just me-too the Conservatives. 

WWWTT

Pietro wrote

Just out of curiosity I looked at the twitter posts made by the person who made the top comment in one of those Singh Twitter posts you linked and her feed was exclusively her defending Trudeau and praising him "just an ordinary Canadian"

surprise surprise

Ok are we done now with the “oh just look at the tweets! Oh my goodness the tweets! Ya but the tweets, the tweets the tweets!”?

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..your playing chess on a chessboard pondering. moving pieces around to suit yourself. where are the politics that will tie this to reality?

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:

The core problem as I see it is that the executives that committed the crimes got off scott free. They didn't even pay a fine. I just can't shake my conviction that the people who commit crimes should pay the price not the company they used to commit them. 

SNC-Lavalin can be seen as having benefited from their crime, maybe, but maybe had the bribes not been paid SNC-Lavalin would have been doing better business elsewhere. It is the executives and the executives alone that were aware of the crimes being committed.

It's interesting to me that this whole debacle should involve SNC-Lavalin and the Liberal Party of Canada.

Because even as you're making the "a few bad apples" argument on behalf of the company, it's comfortably assumed here at babble that dishonesty and criminality are simply part of "Liberal" DNA.  Nobody ever says "well, after all, it's only a handful of bad Liberals..."  If it were announced that someone intended to form a "Liberal" municipal party in Vancouver, they would be assumed to be corrupt before the first member even joined.

Mighty Middle

N/A

cco

Nope. He's blasting the person who responded to Singh (if you're serious, you may wish to look up how Twitter works), who, it turns out, may not actually be "an NDP supporter".

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Mighty Middle wrote:

pietro_bcc wrote:

 it sends the message of the parties having a united front on a specific issue.

that is the problem - NDP supporters are on twitter blasting Singh for teaming up with someone who counts Rebel Media and Faith Goldy as allies.

We know the Liberal troll machine works well. So what is your point?

Mighty Middle

Pietro wrote:

Just out of curiosity I looked at the twitter posts made by the person who made the top comment in one of those Singh Twitter posts you linked and her feed was exclusively her defending Trudeau and praising him "just an ordinary Canadian"

WWWTT wrote:

surprise surprise

Ok are we done now with the “oh just look at the tweets! Oh my goodness the tweets! Ya but the tweets, the tweets the tweets!”?

OK WWWTT & Pietro here is a tweet from Richard Underhill - member of the "Shuffle Demons" who performed at Jack Layton's funeral and endorsed Olivia Chow for Mayor

Well if cons were reasonable, sure. But they aren’t. They can never be trusted in their present form. So this is very, very bad and suggests the #NDP value succes as a party over country.

https://twitter.com/RichUnderhill/status/1101942118182998016

and his tweet is a response DIRECTLY from Jagmeet Singh's twitter feed

quizzical

Liberals value success as a party over country is what's actually going on.

JKR

quizzical wrote:

Liberals value success as a party over country is what's actually going on.

Are the Conservatives and/or NDP any different?

Pondering

For me, yes, the NDP is different, if only because they haven't held power federally. Both the Conservatives and the Liberals are neoliberal and are overly influenced by the corporate world to the point of corruption. 

Signing a letter with the Conservatives suggests that the Conservatives are clean rather than hypocritical. 

The NDP should be pointing out that both those parties are corrupted by corporate power. 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Mighty Middle wrote:

Pietro wrote:

Just out of curiosity I looked at the twitter posts made by the person who made the top comment in one of those Singh Twitter posts you linked and her feed was exclusively her defending Trudeau and praising him "just an ordinary Canadian"

WWWTT wrote:

surprise surprise

Ok are we done now with the “oh just look at the tweets! Oh my goodness the tweets! Ya but the tweets, the tweets the tweets!”?

OK WWWTT & Pietro here is a tweet from Richard Underhill - member of the "Shuffle Demons" who performed at Jack Layton's funeral and endorsed Olivia Chow for Mayor

Well if cons were reasonable, sure. But they aren’t. They can never be trusted in their present form. So this is very, very bad and suggests the #NDP value succes as a party over country.

https://twitter.com/RichUnderhill/status/1101942118182998016

and his tweet is a response DIRECTLY from Jagmeet Singh's twitter feed

Thanks for that tweet now I understand the gravity of the situation. After all a musician's view trumps all. Personally I have a lot of reasons for my dislike of the federal NDP, co-signing a letter with the Conservatives is not one of them.

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Thanks for that tweet now I understand the gravity of the situation. After all a musician's view trumps all. Personally I have a lot of reasons for my dislike of the federal NDP, co-signing a letter with the Conservatives is not one of them.

So you are saying Singh made the right decision to sign the letter. You agree with it. 

wage zombie

I think they probably shouldn't have put out a joint letter, and it was a mistake.  Maybe it is good that there is a bit of pushback.  I don't think it will be a very big deal either way.  I think it's true that some of the Singh haters will find reason to fault him no matter what he does.

Sean in Ottawa

voice of the damned wrote:

Why DID they make it a joint statement? Why not just each party issue their own statement?

Good question. Thankfully there is also a good answer.

Parties in opposition rarely agree on anything. When they do it adds gravitas to the accusation. It rasies the accusation to the appearance of something less partisan (although the reality is questionable). The tactic is extremely rare and reserved for truly important issues.

The NDP and the Conservatives, who every reasonable person (meaning non-Liberal) knows cannot agree on much at all would only agree on something very serious. This is the message they attempted to deliver.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

So...is Mighty Middle going to retroactively condemn Tommy Douglas for working with the Liberals to bring down the Diefenbaker government in the 1963 or David Lewis for forming a working arrangement with Trudeau after tbe 1972 election-both of which were arrangements which led to huge amounts of NDP legislation being passed, including the establishment of Medicare?  

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Pondering wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Thanks for that tweet now I understand the gravity of the situation. After all a musician's view trumps all. Personally I have a lot of reasons for my dislike of the federal NDP, co-signing a letter with the Conservatives is not one of them.

So you are saying Singh made the right decision to sign the letter. You agree with it. 

I am saying that this is peanuts.  I remember minority governments in Ottawa. Do you have a short memory or is it merely selective?

Political parties of all stripes vote and stand with each other depending on the issues involved in the vote. More of that cross party line thinking is actually what we need to tackle climate change. While the NDP loves to take the justified credit for instituting health care in Sask it was Emmett Hall a lifelong Tory who wrote the report for Diefenbaker that led to it federally.  We got healthcare federally because it was supported by MP's from all three parties and the Liberals reluctantly implemented it when they took office in '66.

Your views on this joint letter seem to echo the Liberal view from the Harper minority years. Note how all the opposition parties supported somethings but not others?

As expected, a Conservative budget motion sailed through the House of Commons by a vote of 224-74, with the support of the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois.

The Liberals, who have propped up the government on 79 consecutive confidence votes, stood en masse in opposition for the first time since Harper came to power in January 2006.

Liberal MPs have long chafed at swallowing their convictions to avoid an election and fumed over NDP taunts of cowardice. They were elated to finally turn the tables Friday, jeering as grim-faced New Democrats took on the role of chief government stabilizer.

“It feels good to stand up for conviction,” Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said later.

He mocked NDP Leader Jack Layton.

“You know, Jack and Jill have gone up the hill and we know how that little fairy tale ended.”

“Jill” was an apparent reference to the leader of the Bloc Quebecois, Gilles Duceppe, who also supported the government in the vote.

https://toronto.citynews.ca/2009/09/18/harper-government-survives-confid...

 

Sean in Ottawa

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Pondering wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Thanks for that tweet now I understand the gravity of the situation. After all a musician's view trumps all. Personally I have a lot of reasons for my dislike of the federal NDP, co-signing a letter with the Conservatives is not one of them.

So you are saying Singh made the right decision to sign the letter. You agree with it. 

I am saying that this is peanuts.  I remember minority governments in Ottawa. Do you have a short memory or is it merely selective?

Political parties of all stripes vote and stand with each other depending on the issues involved in the vote. More of that cross party line thinking is actually what we need to tackle climate change. While the NDP loves to take the justified credit for instituting health care in Sask it was Emmett Hall a lifelong Tory who wrote the report for Diefenbaker that led to it federally.  We got healthcare federally because it was supported by MP's from all three parties and the Liberals reluctantly implemented it when they took office in '66.

Your views on this joint letter seem to echo the Liberal view from the Harper minority years. Note how all the opposition parties supported somethings but not others?

As expected, a Conservative budget motion sailed through the House of Commons by a vote of 224-74, with the support of the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois.

The Liberals, who have propped up the government on 79 consecutive confidence votes, stood en masse in opposition for the first time since Harper came to power in January 2006.

Liberal MPs have long chafed at swallowing their convictions to avoid an election and fumed over NDP taunts of cowardice. They were elated to finally turn the tables Friday, jeering as grim-faced New Democrats took on the role of chief government stabilizer.

“It feels good to stand up for conviction,” Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said later.

He mocked NDP Leader Jack Layton.

“You know, Jack and Jill have gone up the hill and we know how that little fairy tale ended.”

“Jill” was an apparent reference to the leader of the Bloc Quebecois, Gilles Duceppe, who also supported the government in the vote.

https://toronto.citynews.ca/2009/09/18/harper-government-survives-confid...

 

Very well said.

Excessive exclusive partisan thinking is unhelpful.

The opening post does not seeem to have a good grasp of how this kind of parliamentary sytem works.

Mighty Middle

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Excessive exclusive partisan thinking is unhelpful.

The opening post does not seeem to have a good grasp of how this kind of parliamentary sytem works.

The general public outside of the Ottawa bubble are tone-deaf to the fact this is how the parliamentary sytem works

Because increasingly politics is about optics, and all people see is the NDP aligning themselves with the Conservatives.

Sean in Ottawa

Mighty Middle wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Excessive exclusive partisan thinking is unhelpful.

The opening post does not seeem to have a good grasp of how this kind of parliamentary sytem works.

The general public outside of the Ottawa bubble are tone-deaf to the fact this is how the parliamentary sytem works

Because increasingly politics is about optics, and all people see is the NDP aligning themselves with the Conservatives.

Nah -- the people affected by this are partisan Liberals. The NDP is not losing votes to this BS. It is typical of the Liberal party and they have tried this messaging before. The last time after the next election they were in third place. and the NDP in second.

Mighty Middle

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Nah -- the people affected by this are partisan Liberals. The NDP is not losing votes to this BS. It is typical of the Liberal party and they have tried this messaging before. The last time after the next election they were in third place. and the NDP in second.

Last week many NDP supporters still say they are switching their vote because of this alignment - you can read it all on Jagmeet twitter feed

https://twitter.com/theJagmeetSingh/status/1103668136044158976

And Facebook comments from progressive voters quite alarmed that the NDP would align with Andrew Scheer - so if the NDP thinks this is a great play for those progressive voters on the fence, then more power to them

https://www.facebook.com/NDP.NPD/posts/2094950890541105

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Mighty Middle wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Nah -- the people affected by this are partisan Liberals. The NDP is not losing votes to this BS. It is typical of the Liberal party and they have tried this messaging before. The last time after the next election they were in third place. and the NDP in second.

Last week many NDP supporters still say they are switching their vote because of this alignment - you can read it all on Jagmeet twitter feed

https://twitter.com/theJagmeetSingh/status/1103668136044158976

And Facebook comments from progressive voters quite alarmed that the NDP would align with Andrew Scheer - so if the NDP thinks this is a great play for those progressive voters on the fence, then more power to them

https://www.facebook.com/NDP.NPD/posts/2094950890541105

Anecdotal stories of twitter and facebook posts, in the absence of careful controls and analysis, are about the same level of data as scribblings on the walls of public bathrooms. This post is the biggest nothingburger ever.

Misfit Misfit's picture

This thread is shallow garbage

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

It's designed to create a false narrative that betrayed progressives should switch from the NDP to the Liberals-to a party that has nothing to offer progressives and has never treated them with anything but cynical, derisive contempt. 

The NDP signed a letter with the Cons-they didn't endorse Scheer's platform, for God's sakes.  Its trivial compared to the hundreds of votes on which the Liberals voted to keep the Harper minority government in power between 2006 and 2011, and the Liberal refusal to join the coalition which could have immediately ousted Harper and ended his years of misrule.

jerrym

Mighty Middle is scrambling, as often in the case, to divert attention from a Liberal problem, in this case the SNC Lavalin Trudeau scandal, by blaming the NDP. My suggestion is to stop posting in response to this and let him post away to himself. You (plural) are feeding him.

 

Misfit Misfit's picture

I agree.

Pages