NDP Leadership # 112

106 posts / 0 new
Last post
KenS
NDP Leadership # 112

V

KenS

From the beginning of the last thread:

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

KenS, I've heard you say a few times that you believe we'll end up getting "a move to the right" under Mulcair. But you don't believe he's promising a move to the right, and you don't think he's concealing a hidden agenda of a move to the right. Having an appreciation for nuance, I wanted to know what the third possibility is. In theory, how does Mulcair end up moving the NDP to the right?

 

I like wage zombie's take on that. I suggest reading [again] his whole response. But I'm going to quote some excerpts before giving my own answer.

KenS

wage zombie wrote:

The move to the right, or, better said, the move to the centre will be a political force, like gravity.  All candidates will experience a push to the centre, as part of the current political realignment and the goal of the OO to form government.  Whether or how much the party moves to the centre will depend in part on how the leader is prepared to address these political forces.

 

Is prepared, and has prepared, is the way I would put it.

 

wage zombie wrote:

 

Topp and Mulcair will both say that they "support party policy" on cannabis, but neither of them will say a fourth word.  And I would not expect any movement while they are in power.  That is an issue they will drop in order to best navigate the political forces pushing them to the centre.

They are just not attached to the issue.  So, it's a prime candidate for an issue that they will drop once in power.  This is how "the move to the right [centre] " works.

KenS

The NDP always spends a great deal of time not straying from the safe centre. So 'getting a (de facto) shift to the centre' actually means whether there are any prospects we will ever do anything else. And the Leader is central to that.

The minimum point I see in those quotes is that "support party policy" means almost nothing when the real question is the range between effectively dropping an issue/initiative [talk about it little, in pro forma ways, and mostly when speaking to the base in a manner that will be out of ear shot of the public].

And its not always as obvious to pick out as the example used here of Mulcair and Topp on cannabis.

A point to add it is that what we will really get from a candidate if they are Leader is not just whether they would do soecific policies in government or shelve them. It may be shunted out of being a visible part of the campaign, which makes it far more likely it will not see the light of day when we govern.

KenS

Jack Layton was a practicing centrist most of the time too. But the exceptions are crucial. Jack made sure we prepared for breaking out of what was already going to be safe.... you work on making safe for you what you are not ready to just go out and 'spill the beans' now.

Rolling back corporate tax cuts was an example of that. And it was an example because it was forward thinking beyond the issue of the corporate taxes themselves: it was the first difficult step out of the straightjacket that we dont talk about taxes, because we'll be puniched for it. Doing it in a way that we would not be punished raised our bar for the future... which Topp and Cullen advocate capitalizing on and moving the next steps.

Our climate change package put together 5 years ago is Jack's ultimate design of smart policy and politics. Jack nener decided that we were really ready to roll it out. But he had the foresigh and did the work to put the elements together. When the time is right and/or the political will is there, its ready to go.

KenS

You here a lot here of people saying what appears to be so obvious: first you have to win power, then you do your policies.

But that's as incomplete as it is obviously true- for as far as it goes.

That was not Jack Layton. It is Darrell Dexter to a T, and a lot of other provincial NDPs who became government: you make people feel safe with you, then you win, you do what you can when you get there.

There are two crucial unspoken assumptions in there. 1- the most expedient way to get more people to feel safe with you- 'to bring the centre to the NDP'- is deemed to be the only way to get that job done. 2 - we just are not going to look at how the range of what we propose to voters is in practice going to limit what we can do as government.

KenS

Jack Layton did lots of the expedient centrist stuff. And he learned from the sucess of the NSNDP with the popular little 'boutiquey policies' [like ATM fees]. That was/is a big part of what the NDP must do to make people feel safe with us.

The question is whether that is all you get from the NDP. Jack did more, and there was more still that he prepared for.

I think it is very unfortunate that there is very little questioning fom the membership- even on a board like babble where you get the biggest junkies- about whether the candidates have the will or the capabilities to do that 'more' that we got with Jack.

KenS

And there is an irony in focusing on 'we have to win first'.... setting aside all those other questions of what it will get us.

Focusing in the simplest and most expediant way on making more voters feel safe can work when you have half-witted bush league opponents like the NS NDP faces.

But the Harper Cons will know how to kick us in the teeth if we do that. We're going to have to go in after them.

Unfortunately, most people think that all depends on a new Leader with confrontational chops. That will do no good if we do not play politics smart- to go after the Cons like they went after the Liberals.... no pit bull stuff or charisma required from the Leader.

DSloth

Sometimes I think there really is an upswell against Mulcair on Rabble, then I remember it's just KenS posting 8 times in a row. 

KenS

Summary to the long answer:

As WZ noted- 'gravity' pushes the NDP towards being pretty much just centrist. If nothing else, that always works in the short term, and the short term does matter. You have to win there to have the opportunity to have more.

But without capable leadership there will never be 'more'. It will be just short term, which is always centrist.

KenS

Its a long post and a lot of words regardless. But the crippled connection I use here can only do 2 or 3 parapraphs in a post. And only a short sentence added by me if I use the quote function.

NorthReport

Anyone receive their ballot/voting material yet?

Lou Arab Lou Arab's picture

'Know Mulcair' attack site emerges.

Of course, there is no word on who is behind the site.  Which should guide us on how much credibility to give it.  Some will suspect other leadership candidates - it could be, but I'd put a few bucks on the Tories being behind it as a means to destablize the NDP.

Brachina

Lou Arab wrote:

'Know Mulcair' attack site emerges.

Of course, there is no word on who is behind the site.  Which should guide us on how much credibility to give it.  Some will suspect other leadership candidates - it could be, but I'd put a few bucks on the Tories being behind it as a means to destablize the NDP.

Agreed, Brian Topp may take some cheap shots, but this is too far even for him, this reaks of Tory fear.

socialdemocrati...

KenS, not trying to play semantics. But wouldn't "more" than what we were promised be considered a push to the left, with the default being the bare minimum (the party policy)? Otherwise, what I'm getting is that you think everyone nominally supports the party policy, but only a few will fight to implement it, with some candidates playing it safe and dropping certain policies after a token effort. "This will have to wait."

NorthReport

Chances are we will not find out before the vote, but it would not surprise me if either Harper or Rae was behind it, as Mulcair winning the NDP Leadership is probably most threatening to both the Harper Cons and the Rae Liberals.

Lou Arab wrote:

'Know Mulcair' attack site emerges.

Of course, there is no word on who is behind the site.  Which should guide us on how much credibility to give it.  Some will suspect other leadership candidates - it could be, but I'd put a few bucks on the Tories being behind it as a means to destablize the NDP.

Brachina

DSloth wrote:

Sometimes I think there really is an upswell against Mulcair on Rabble, then I remember it's just KenS posting 8 times in a row. 

Hahahaha +1. Just teasing Ken. I multi post too sometimes, not a big deal.

Lou Arab Lou Arab's picture

Know Mulcair site looks a little like this site.

Brachina

For the record so far I'm very happy with Tom's platform, although whoever wins, I,hope they take the best ideas of thier rivals, such Niki Ashton on universal justice.

NorthReport

Was Stephen Taylor behind that one?

MegB

DSloth wrote:

Sometimes I think there really is an upswell against Mulcair on Rabble, then I remember it's just KenS posting 8 times in a row. 

DSloth, you are beating a dead horse - it's boring and annoying.

KenS, I know you're passionately engaged in this issue, but please try to dial back a bit on the posting activity.

Unionist

NorthReport wrote:

Anyone receive their ballot/voting material yet?

I got a phone call saying I had to pick mine up at 24 Sussex Drive.

socialdemocrati...

Brachina wrote:
Lou Arab wrote:

'Know Mulcair' attack site emerges.

Of course, there is no word on who is behind the site.  Which should guide us on how much credibility to give it.  Some will suspect other leadership candidates - it could be, but I'd put a few bucks on the Tories being behind it as a means to destablize the NDP.

Agreed, Brian Topp may take some cheap shots, but this is too far even for him, this reaks of Tory fear.

I wouldn't put it passed the Liberals either. My impression is if it were really a "progressive New Democrat", they would have taken a more hands on approach to those issues, akin to what we see on Babble.

NorthReport

Excellent Unionist Laughing

1springgarden

Lou Arab wrote:

'Know Mulcair' attack site emerges.

Of course, there is no word on who is behind the site.  Which should guide us on how much credibility to give it.  Some will suspect other leadership candidates - it could be, but I'd put a few bucks on the Tories being behind it as a means to destablize the NDP.

Could be Quebec Liberals trying to give him one last "send off."  Poor effort though, I do innuendo better than that, jus' sayin'.

MegB

I think they started sending out voters' packages on Monday.

NorthReport

Who could this be?

Thomas Mulcair announces a new endorsement during a stop in Toronto

http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/929613/thomas-mulcair-announces-a-new-en...

Idealistic Prag... Idealistic Pragmatist's picture

Lou Arab wrote:

'Know Mulcair' attack site emerges.

Of course, there is no word on who is behind the site.  Which should guide us on how much credibility to give it.  Some will suspect other leadership candidates - it could be, but I'd put a few bucks on the Tories being behind it as a means to destablize the NDP.

Exactly. Nobody in the party benefits from this sort of thing, but the Tories (or Liberals) just might.

Idealistic Prag... Idealistic Pragmatist's picture

Lou Arab wrote:

Know Mulcair site looks a little like this site.

Nice catch, Lou!

Bärlüer

Lou Arab wrote:

'Know Mulcair' attack site emerges.

Of course, there is no word on who is behind the site.  Which should guide us on how much credibility to give it.  Some will suspect other leadership candidates - it could be, but I'd put a few bucks on the Tories being behind it as a means to destablize the NDP.

The site's main page states: "We are active and long-standing members of the NDP. [...] We disagree with several of his actions as a politician."

... but you deem it more plausible that a site that criticizes Mulcair from the left is a ruse from Tories? Let me look... Why yes, I might have a couple of Occam's razors to sell to you...

socialdemocrati...

From what I've seen, Tories stab you in the front. If they wanted to stop Mulcair they'd start beating the drum on his French citizenship again. My bet is on the Liberals.

Brachina

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2...

This most likely narrows it down to a Toronto MP. So Andrew Cash or Rathika, because I believe the rest are taken or declared neutral like Olvia, or running herself Nash.

Brachina

Damn, looks like I was wrong, but why in TO and not in Nova Scotia?

nicky

If the Cons pereceive Mulcair as their main threat then it makes perfect sense that they might whip up the left to deny him the leadership.

At least we now know that these faceless slanderers do not include ROBERT CHISHOLM. 

Lou Arab Lou Arab's picture
NorthReport

This is significant.

Stockholm

Brachina wrote:
Damn, looks like I was wrong, but why in TO and not in Nova Scotia?

Chisholm was in Toronto to campaign for Craig Scott in the upcoming byelection.

1springgarden

NorthReport wrote:

This is significant.

This is no surprise.  What's next Peter Stoffer likes Mulcair?

knownothing knownothing's picture

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

From what I've seen, Tories stab you in the front. If they wanted to stop Mulcair they'd start beating the drum on his French citizenship again. My bet is on the Liberals.

I am not saying it is for sure but it is probably NDP'ers.There has been a lot of hostility towards Mulcair revving up as he becomes more of the favourite. Probably a supporter of one of the other campaigns. Hopefully untraceable. 

Like I said previously, this rhetoric about Mulcair moving the party to the right is ridiculous since NOT ONE OF THE LEADERSHIP CANDIDATES STOOD UP AT THE CONVENTION AND DEFENDED THE WORD SOCIALIST IN THE CONSTITUTION!

Let's not continue this charade any longer please!

socialdemocrati...

Getting a former candidate to endorse you is somewhat significant. Would have carried more weight if he hadn't dropped out so long ago.

Wasn't Mulcair picking up most of Chisholm's endorsements anyway?

1springgarden

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

Getting a former candidate to endorse you is somewhat significant. Would have carried more weight if he hadn't dropped out so long ago.

Wasn't Mulcair picking up most of Chisholm's endorsements anyway?

Most of Chisholm's endorsements were as the home-town favourite  of various Nova Scotian pols.  Aftre Chisholm dropped out his endorsements scattered in different directions.

Stockholm

Dewar is apperently going to annoucement an endorsement from a "senior" member of caucus. "Senior" I assume means anyone who was elected pre-2011. Who is left from the class of '08 who has not endorsed anyone yet and who is not explicitly neutral?

Jack Harris? Megan Leslie? David Christophershon? Malcolm Allen? Bruce Hyer? Joe Comartin? Dennis Bevington?

 

Brachina

Robert Chisholm, Former OP leader of Nova Scotia, leadership rival, and friends to the Premier of Nova Scotia. I wonder if this is a sign Dexter may endorse Mulcair too?

Idealistic Prag... Idealistic Pragmatist's picture

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

From what I've seen, Tories stab you in the front. If they wanted to stop Mulcair they'd start beating the drum on his French citizenship again. My bet is on the Liberals.

Take it from this Edmonton-Strathcona New Democrat: Tories don't always stab you in the front. They just want you to think that.

socialdemocrati...

Idealistic Pragmatist wrote:

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

From what I've seen, Tories stab you in the front. If they wanted to stop Mulcair they'd start beating the drum on his French citizenship again. My bet is on the Liberals.

Take it from this Edmonton-Strathcona New Democrat: Tories don't always stab you in the front. They just want you to think that.

Point well taken.

Unionist

Bärlüer wrote:

... but you deem it more plausible that a site that criticizes Mulcair from the left is a ruse from Tories? Let me look... Why yes, I might have a couple of Occam's razors to sell to you...

I've always wondered... Is Occam's razor double-edged?

 

Policywonk

KenS wrote:

Jack Layton did lots of the expedient centrist stuff. And he learned from the sucess of the NSNDP with the popular little 'boutiquey policies' [like ATM fees]. That was/is a big part of what the NDP must do to make people feel safe with us.

The question is whether that is all you get from the NDP. Jack did more, and there was more still that he prepared for.

I think it is very unfortunate that there is very little questioning fom the membership- even on a board like babble where you get the biggest junkies- about whether the candidates have the will or the capabilities to do that 'more' that we got with Jack.

There is the question of whether a Party in power will do more than what they have promised in the election campaign. We have seen right wing governments do more than what they campaigned on, and criticized them for it. There is also the question of what the Party in power will do in response to rapidly changing social, environmental, and economic conditions that were not or as much of an issue during the campaign.

flight from kamakura

chisholm is a nice endorsement and should go some way to further solidifying mulcair's lock on the maritime provinces.

for those who missed this one in the last thread, shouldn't be missed: http://www.cyberpresse.ca/le-droit/opinions/editoriaux/pierre-jury/20120...

the conclusion:

Quand des néo-démocrates lui ont, au lendemain du décès de M. Layton, parlé de son rôle dans la succession à la barre du NPD, M. Dewar n'a pas évalué que ses faibles compétences en français représenteraient un obstacle insurmontable à une campagne de sa part. Comme bien des gens d'Ottawa, il a fait l'évaluation que ce n'était pas grave. Qu'il aurait le temps de prendre des leçons accélérées de français. Que son français serait suffisant pour bien du monde. Ce genre d'attitude, souvent constatédans les couloirs d'Ottawa, est répréhensible.

for those who don't read french, the essential is that there's some ottawa thinking that minimizes, in a grand paternalist fashion, the importance of quebec, and that paul dewar's candidacy is a symptom and example of that.  definitely agree with that, and i hope that it filters through to membership in time to see dewar resoundingly defeated at convention, on the first ballot if possible.

KenS

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

But wouldn't "more" than what we were promised be considered a push to the left, with the default being the bare minimum (the party policy)?

"More" being more than just guaranteed safe positioning. I suggest we got both the same old safe positioniong, and developing and implementing of something more than that with Jack as Leader.

Why would you see "just" getting an active push/work on party policy as the 'default bare minimum'?

I guess I think of it as being self evident that in practice lots of our policy is only trotted out in the safest way possible, if not left just plain out of view.

KenS

Rebecca West wrote:

KenS, I know you're passionately engaged in this issue, but please try to dial back a bit on the posting activity.

You arent expected to read all of our drivel here. But if you had looked rather than just read someone saying I did 8 posts, you would have seen it was, as explained, one long post, broken up because my connection only allows 4-5 lines in a post.

NorthReport

This is the first of the original eight candidates to throw their support behind Mulcair.

Let's stop pussy-footing around here - this is a major endorsement, and quite possibly the biggest one so far of the campaign.

1springgarden wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

This is significant.

This is no surprise.  What's next Peter Stoffer likes Mulcair?

Pages

Topic locked