NDP Leadership #120

108 posts / 0 new
Last post
mabrouss

Hunky_Monkey wrote:
My partner, mother, grandmother, best friend and his family still haven't received their ballots. Anyone else?

 

Me neither. I sent them off an email asking if they had an ETA

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I'll be civil, but I ain't taking no loyalty pledge.

Brachina

Boom Boom wrote:

I'll be civil, but I ain't taking no loyalty pledge.

How about a blood oath?

Seriously though there's no use bitching about who wins after the fact. Will Paul Dewar lead to disaster if he win, of course, but I will make it my mission to prove myself wrong if he does win. I don't promise to succeed, but for the,sake of Canada I have to try and that starts by not demoralizing everybody.

vaudree

Boom Boom wrote:

Just two weeks to go, then we can start threads denouncing the newly-elected Leader! Smile

I presume that most of us will circle the wagons around the leader - whoever he or she is.

I predict that the next topic of conversation, after the usual 4 days of tears/adjustment, will be who will be who in the Shadow Cabinet.

Peter Julian is holding a Conference (presumably parts will be televised or podcast by rabble.ca) on a topic which fits more with his old portfolio than his present one.

janfromthebruce

oh did I just feel echo of Scotland surge through my veins with the Lady of Bruce meme - thank you & I 'll make you proud.

 

Unionist wrote:

janfromthebruce wrote:

oh unionist, I so am stealing that Kiss

 

No need, Lady Jan of the Bruce - I hereby bestow it upon thee free of any charge, that thou mayest wear it in good health!

 

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

CanadaApple

Skinny Dipper wrote:

Keep on trying.

I will. if I don't hear from anyone by tomorrow, I'll send of another.

NorthReport

The deadline to mail in your ballot is Monday, March 12th.

If you have not received it by now, you might want to consider voting online as mailing in your ballot after Monday may be too late for your vote to be counted.

flight from kamakura wrote:

if people haven't got their voting packages, i believe they can call this number: 1-866-525-2555

NorthReport

Jeffrey Simpson needs to be a little more original rather than just regurgitate Chantel Hebert's columns on the NDP.

 

Will Mulcair beat the NDP's defenders of the faith?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/jeffrey-simpson/will-mulcai...

NorthReport
NorthReport

 

NDP candidates’ messages of change starting to resonate

 

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1143849--hebert-ndp-...

Layton did all that with the blessing of some of the most influential constituencies within the NDP. Without blessings from on high, he might have quickly succumbed to internal opposition forces within the left.

In 2003, tenors of the Canadian labour movement, high-profile activists of the NDP’s left wing and former leader Ed Broadbent all stood around the cradle of Layton’s leadership. Over the decade that followed, those influential godparents consistently had his back.

But today it seems that the genie has outgrown those who initially let it out of the bottle. In the campaign to find a successor to Layton, control of the party has been slipping from their collective grasp.

With two weeks to go to the March 24 leadership convention, the candidates who have most aggressively argued that the NDP needs to go a number of extra miles to reach for the prize of government have the most visible momentum.

Swimming against the establishment tide, Nathan Cullen has been promoting a controversial electoral coalition with the Liberals and Thomas Mulcair has unabashedly advocated a major rebranding of the party.

With some significant help from external forces, their messages have resonated more loudly than many expected.

Bob Rae’s strong performance as interim Liberal leader and a serious slide in NDP support in Quebec have helped shatter any illusion that the NDP’s hold on official Opposition is anything but tenuous.

The fact that Stephen Harper and not some progressive-friendly Liberal prime minister is in power has focused more minds on the urgency of achieving regime-change.

For many New Democrats, fear for the soul of the NDP is taking second place to fear for the soul of Canada under an open-ended Conservative reign.

With only one official debate and a mere fortnight to go in the campaign, there is a consensus that Mulcair is in the lead.

Increasingly, the question is whether he can still be stopped from reaching the top on March 24.

The answer to that is maybe, but only if the influential power brokers who initially backed Layton’s revolution in 2003 are willing to turn the clock back to a less ambitious recent past to keep Mulcair out of the leadership.

nicky

Topp, Mulcair, Cullen seen as top candidates in B.C.

 

Support of province's party members vital, since they make up almost one-third of eligible voters in the leadership race

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Topp+Mulcair+Cullen+seen+candidates/6282468/story.html#ixzz1ohysxnsT

Michelle

Boom Boom wrote:

I'll be civil, but I ain't taking no loyalty pledge.

No frigging kidding.  Geez.  Mulcair hasn't even won yet and already we're being herded into shut-up-and-support-the-dear-leader.

If I don't like what the leader does (or has done in the past), I'm not going to shut up and support him or her (oh, who are we kidding, we all know it's going to be him) for the sake of "party unity".  And I would be quite horrified if the moderators of babble were to take the suggestion upthread that babble should somehow create some sort of rule for after the election about discussing issues only with regards to the NDP, with personalities being off limits.  Politics is all about issues AND personalities.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Understood, Michelle - and I was the one who made that suggestion. It's just that after 120 threads of mostly personality-driven discussions, I was feeling a little burned out, and I would hazard a guess that others may be, too. Regardless, it was a one-off comment, which is why I added a couple of posts afterwards that "I'll be civil, but I ain't taking no loyalty pledge".

If babble does become overrun with threads questioning the new Dear Leader (whoever it is), I probably will take an extended leave of absence, because I just don't have the energy to participate or even read through more personality-driven threads.

ETA: This will be difficult to believe, but this NDP leadership race has been more exhausting for me than the election threads in 2011. I really am getting old. Frown

NorthReport

And not to be outdone by the centre of the universe, the Mulcair team is hosting a 2 PM event this Sunday at a Pub on Robson Street, close to the CBC building, following the 128 seat audience CBC studio debate moderated by none other than BC's very own V Sun columnist Barbara Yaffe (and as Tom said during a small gathering this afternoon, if Mario Dumont can do it, having Barbara Yaffe moderate it deserves no more than a "what the heck" yawn. Laughing 

nicky wrote:

I have checked today with 4 or 5 of my friends who are recent sign-ups. None has yet received a ballot.

Do we have a problem developing here?

On another note:

 

The Toronto Mulcair team is hosting another DEBATE PARTY

This Sunday at 3 pm

At TOBY'S. 411 College St, just east of Bathurst.

Everyone, regardless of leadership preference, is welcome to watch Tom roll up his 6th straight debate win.

 

Rakhmetov

KenS wrote:

Rakhmetov wrote:

 Martin Singh wouldn't think that I'm "slagging" him at all.

Presumptuous of you.

I'm not supporting Martin, but he is a friend, and he is not hear to speak for himself.

You've substantially misrepresented more than once his approach and goals of organizing among Sikhs.

I know Martin too, believe me he does not consider me to be an enemy of his, nor would he think what I'm saying to be a slur at all.  Quite the contrary, I'm pointing out how clever his assault on Topp's tax plan is given the demographic he's targetting, and in general how he's emerged out of nowhere and has positioned himself very well to win a seat in future and it sounds like potentially a cabinet post.  They say Singh is King, and Martin might end up being the kingmaker in this race if can throw enough of his supporters' second-choices to Mulcair.  It could push Mulcair over 50% if the latter is strong enough on the first ballot.  But then again this could cost him if Mulcair doesn't win, and Mulcair is going to need more second-choice support to win than just him.  And it looks like Nash has become the most viable anti-Mulcair so they may have fired at the wrong target therefore strengthening her and helping push Topp out of the way. 

I can't reveal everything I know about this here, but I'll just point out that people on the ground know exactly what's going on with the Singh-Mulcair pact, organizers are joking that "it's not even a secret anyone."  

There's nothing wrong with folks being incredulous about this, but some of you are going to look very foolish for being so arrogant about your ignorance when it comes out.  I might not even accept some of your apologies. Wink

socialdemocrati...

Michelle wrote:
Mulcair hasn't even won yet and already we're being herded into shut-up-and-support-the-dear-leader.

Wow, relax.

  • No one said we *all* have to support the NDP. No one is herding you.
  • Those who plan on supporting the NDP, no one made it conditional on any specific leader. In fact, most of us mentioned leaders we don't even like.
  • Supporters are just as free-thinking as non-supporters. Just that we'll focus on steering the leader, instead of pining for what we wish had happened in the leadership race.
  • Reality: some people think the NDP is doing a good overall job, and there isn't a difference between the candidates strong enough to make us sit out the election.

It's impossible to go a day on here without someone completely distorting the conversation.

KenS

Unfortunately, based on things you've said and claimed before, your credibility about what you observe is not what you obviously think it deeserves to be. Dont worry about having to consider apologies.

We could have some betting pools about how likely there is going to have to be any eating of hats for not believing you.

There are probably very few people who think they are missing anything at all by keeping to yourself that knowledge to which you are privy but which must remain hidden.

socialdemocrati...

There isn't going to be anyone throwing support on the floor. 3/4 of the votes are going to be in ahead of the convention, none of which have been herded into a unified second choice. Of the remainder, I'd be surprised if 10% make up their mind because of what their first choice told them to do. Frankly I'd be surprised if more than 3000 voters are at the convention.

But hey, I guess we'll see who looks foolish.

nicky

 

What is to be done with you, Rakhmetov ?:

 

"I can't reveal everything I know about this here, but I'll just point out that people on the ground know exactly what's going on with the Singh-Mulcair pact, organizers are joking that "it's not even a secret anyone."  

There's nothing wrong with folks being incredulous about this, but some of you are going to look very foolish for being so arrogant about your ignorance when it comes out.  I might not even accept some of your apologies."

You sound like you are plagarizing the immortal first sentence of "Tarzan of the Apes", another work of fiction:

"I had this story from someone who had no business to tell it to me, or to any other."

 

Unionist

Rakhmetov wrote:

I can't reveal everything I know about this here,

Whew.

Quote:
... but I'll just point out that people on the ground

... as opposed to...?

Quote:
... know exactly what's going on with the Singh-Mulcair pact, organizers are joking that "it's not even a secret anyone."

Stale news. It all changed last night in a pretty brusque Skype call between the main organizers. The fine print of the deal said something about "a Maritime candidate", and the legal advisors are saying it's subject to interpretation. In short, Mulcair is now throwing his support to Chisholm.

You heard it first here. Apologies graciously declined - please send flowers.

 

flight from kamakura

yeah, i actually think that it makes a lot of sense for singh to try to run topp down on the charity thing, given that they're both aggressively targeting sikh voters and charity plays a big role in that culture.  but the notion that there's a pact between the two candidates is plain paranoia.  i'm been asked to keep a conversation under my hat by a person connected with one of the campaigns, but i can say that this sort of thinking is pervasive among one of the campaigns, amid collapsed morale and a sense that they're headed for a very bad showing, contrary to some pretty lofty expectations some time back.

socialdemocrati...

I've been asked to keep this conversation a secret, but almost anyone who knows anything about the convention knows there's going to be a waterslide, and anti-imperialist balloon animals.

flight from kamakura

haha, i've been asked to keep it a secret by a very well-placed source that nathan cullen is poised to drop out of the race today, on stage, and endorse thomas mulcair.  oh, and i've been asked not to reveal it to anyone, but nikki ashton is going to publicly declare today that she wants all of her second choice support to flow to mulcair.

Rakhmetov

Well that does it.  I won't be accepting any of your apologies now.

Keep digging guys.  You don't realize what buffoons you look like.

How about you all decide to resign from Babble if I'm right, given how remote the possibility apparently is, why not?

Hoodeet

flight from kamakura wrote:

haha, i've been asked to keep it a secret by a very well-placed source that nathan cullen is poised to drop out of the race today, on stage, and endorse thomas mulcair.  oh, and i've been asked not to reveal it to anyone, but nikki ashton is going to publicly declare today that she wants all of her second choice support to flow to mulcair.

Hoodeet (JW)

Are all these secrets being divulged now because so many people have not received their voting kits?  Putting out all at once the announcements that  these candidates are magically folding in favour of Mulcair will make voting seem pointless and irrelevant, so we need not worry about not getting to cast our votes...   (fill in emoticon. can't find one.  should be wink & grin)

Unionist

Just got off the phone with Mulcair. He'll be announcing shortly that he wants everyone to rank him 3rd on their ballot until further orders.

Don't shoot the messenger, please.

Oh, and consider this information embargoed until the official release. And don't tell anyone where you got it.

Jacob Two-Two

Rakhmetov wrote:

Well that does it.  I won't be accepting any of your apologies now.

Keep digging guys.  You don't realize what buffoons you look like.

How about you all decide to resign from Babble if I'm right, given how remote the possibility apparently is, why not?

The Mulcair/Singh thing seems plausible to me, for the record. Doesn't mean it's true. It also doesn't mean that we can't legitimately mock your conspiratorial if-you-only-knew-what-I-knew tone.

Which reminds me, I wasn't supposed to say anything but I guess the cat will be out of the bag soon enough. My extensive insider knowledge tells me that Mulcair will come out today with a major policy paper supporting bigamy, and revealing that he is taking both Ashton and Singh as his second and third wives. You didn't hear it from me.

Rakhmetov

And of course I'm not going to betray a source to appease a bunch of random nobodies on the internet.  I don't know why I said anything at all given the level of maturity around here.  In the adult world, people disclose information all the time where they can't reveal the source.  But glad to know that any information that you guys have been told in confidence from anyone in any campaign I now have a right to demand the source's home address and birth certificate.

Unionist

Rakhmetov wrote:

 But glad to know that any information that you guys have been told in confidence from anyone in any campaign I now have a right to demand the source's home address and birth certificate.

DSloth

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

There isn't going to be anyone throwing support on the floor. 3/4 of the votes are going to be in ahead of the convention, none of which have been herded into a unified second choice. Of the remainder, I'd be surprised if 10% make up their mind because of what their first choice told them to do. Frankly I'd be surprised if more than 3000 voters are at the convention.

But hey, I guess we'll see who looks foolish.

Oh I definitely think almost every one of the candidates will cross the floor to another camp as they are dropped off, such incidents just won't be as important as they once were because of the advance polling.  Candidates will also  give the usual disclaimer about "releasing" their delgates (as if they had a choice) with varying degrees of suggestion that their previous supporters follow them accross the floor.

Day of the convention it won't matter too much but it could persuade a couple of hundred voters, and I'm by no means confident the result won't be that close. 

Rakhmetov

I want Obama's medium-form birth certificate (notice how he's REFUSED to release it) you Dhimmi.

Rakhmetov

It's not clear how Singh is going to play this out, but it appears he might announce he's throwing his support to Mulcair after seeing how he does on the first ballot, but will have had his organizers turning out Mulcair 2nd choice votes as soon as the voting began.  I don't think it's going to work though, it's more difficult to influence your supporters' other choices.  A lot of them might end up giving their first choice to Singh, second to Topp because of pressure from prominent Indo-Canadian supporters, and then leave the rest blank giving Mulcair nothing.  And it could allow Nash to leapfrog over Topp and beat Mulcair in BC.

I think where Cullen's supporters throw their second-choices is even more critical in BC, and the race.  Cullen said in the first debate that he was leaning Peggy if he wasn't running, but said more recently that he's "re-evaluating" that.  Seems that the Nash campaign might win over a lot of Cullen's folks for second votes with their proportional representation policy.  Leadnow is saying she's the best on this issue apart from Cullen.  And there are a lot of CAW and union members in northern British Columbia that are Cullen #1s cuz he's the favourite son and has been terrific, but will go with Nash and/or Topp after that. 

Rakhmetov

"Nash has the strongest position on campaigning for electoral reform."

http://leadnow.ca/cooperate-report

Wow, and it's in bold purple. Must be important.

DSloth

Rakhmetov wrote:

It's not clear how Singh is going to play this out, but it appears he might announce he's throwing his support to Mulcair after seeing how he does on the first ballot, 

Anyone who takes part in the debate tomorrow is staying in this thing until the convention.  

I also highly doubt anyone will be dropping out at the convention until they are mathematically eliminated at which point they will basically have to make an endorsement.  I've never heard of a candidate getting in their car and taking off after losing, if their in the room they'll be signalling their support for someone. 

flight from kamakura

the issue is that you just joined on here, and your previous posts have provided information of dubious value.  not to say that you're not getting your info from a paranoid insider on one of the campaigns, but that the information itself just isn't that credible.  think about it: do you really think that there's a deal between mulcair and an obscure candidate like singh?  mulcair's in a tight spot and that would help him, but there's just no process for how that would come about.  there was some suggestion that singh is signalling his support for mulcair to supporters at the temples that he's been asking people to visit with their voting packages, well, that's his prerogative, but how could mulcair do anything about that and why would it signal that some sort of deal had been agreed.  what does mulcair get out of it?  and how would a columnist know anything about that unless provided the information by a paranoid rival camp trying to explain away singh's attacks?  attacks that are perfectly consistent with singh's strategy of becoming the voice of small business (and sikh) new democrats on the back of a good showing at convention - a showing threatened pretty much only by brian topp, with his moves with the south asian community - a community specifically susceptible to the precise line of attack singh pursued.  the basic logic of the campaign is far more compelling than the notion that singh - for reasons that could only be ideological - siding with mulcair tout court.

DSloth

Also if Nash's strategy is to hope for support from Cullen she might be in for a surprise. I wouldn't be at all shocked if he has enough first ballot support to stay in this thing until it's over. Right now I'd rank him most likely to get third place on first ballot support with the best chance of scoring an upset. 

Rakhmetov

Cullen is clearly surging, and his fundraising in BC is incredible even if he is the BC candidate, but I think 3rd place on the first ballot is a bit of a long shot, we'll see.

DSloth wrote:

Rakhmetov wrote:

It's not clear how Singh is going to play this out, but it appears he might announce he's throwing his support to Mulcair after seeing how he does on the first ballot, 

Anyone who takes part in the debate tomorrow is staying in this thing until the convention.  

I also highly doubt anyone will be dropping out at the convention until they are mathematically eliminated at which point they will basically have to make an endorsement.  I've never heard of a candidate getting in their car and taking off after losing, if their in the room they'll be signalling their support for someone. 

Yeah, I agree that all the candidates are probably going to convention. Singh is either going to be last or second last on the first ballot, will determine when he throws his support to Mulcair.  If Ashton is eliminated first he could keep going.  Or he may drop out after the first ballot after making a respectable showing.  Svend Robinson famously dropped out when he didn't have to. Or look at the 2006 Liberal leadership race, candidates dropped out when they weren't mathematically eliminated. And didn't a bunch of candidates withdraw in the 2003 BCNDP race after the first ballot as well?

Rakhmetov

flightfromkamakura: Lots of people have speculated about Layton and how he might not have wanted Mulcair to succeed him.  I didn't make this all up and am not the only one discussing this allegedly "dubious information." As I said myself it's simply a theory which is not proven or conclusive at all, but there is a serious case out there for it.

As for the Mulcair-Singh deal, I'm certain of it, and Mulcair is quite right to have seen the value of this in order to make inroads both in BC and the South Asian vote, and to undermine Topp.  It might win him the race.

nicky

I am sure that Rakhmetov's anonymous souce will confirm what my anonymous source tells me - that Pierre Poutine is behind all the anti-Mulcair websites.

Rakhmetov

The Know Mulcair website probably is just a bunch of "active and long-standing New Democrats" as it says.  All these elaborate conspiracy theories about the site are pretty paranoid and don't have a shred of credible evidence.  Shows how out of touch some people are with the NDP base, they can't even comprehend the possiblity that maybe some New Democrats just don't like the guy.  It isn't a vast, vast conspiracy secretly concocted by the hidden hand of Harper himself.  And all this coming from the same people who get hysterically skeptical of any one raising anything without video footage proof and affidavits from all principals referred to.

DSloth

If the attack site was just a band of principled Dippers unaffiliated with another campaign there'd be no need for anonymity and the attacks could actually have credibility. 

It could be a rival campaign but I highly doubt it. It would be incredibly risky if they were found out, and if they won and the details eventually leaked it would be the end of the Party in Quebec.

The Conservatives do this stuff all the time, it's hardly a conspiracy anymore than stopiggy or the robocalls were, which is to say yes it's an everyday, dirty trick conspiracy.  You'd have to be naive to think the Conservative insiders feeding stories to the Press two weeks ago aweren't acting in a coordinated fashion on behalf of the CPC. 

The Liberals have even more motive than the Conservatives to knock out Mulcair but this isn't really their M.O.

vaudree

I doubt that Singh and Mulcair have a formal deal. That said, I would not put it past any of them to make a few "suggestions" or point out a few things etc that Singh etc could either run with or not.

Singh talks with the other candidates and they are trying to get him on side so they are apt to say some reason not to support the other guy. Even one of them saying - you know that charity that is very important to you, so and so's plan will do X to it.

Singh's attack on Topp points up his feminism cred because it labels him pro choice but uses it as a side issue every time they have the fight - which is also something that could come up during a conversation.

Feeling too dizzy to wade through the Nash thing - "sharing resources" may mean for Question Period - and I think would be discussing strategy and sharing information for a specific issue. That said, I am too dizzy right now to make heads or tailes whether that is what Nash meant because son decided to try new shampoo facial numbness.
.

socialdemocrati...

I don't doubt that some people will cross the floor and throw their support. But that late in the game, it's a couple hundred votes at most -- that's why I said I'd be surprised if 10% of any candidate's supporters move to the second choice that their candidate asks them to.

If your candidate's key to victory currently depends on an alliance with another candidate and sharing each other's delegates, that candidate is a loser.

Most of the votes will be in Monday.

nicky

I appreciate that there is a considerable element in the NDP that thinks Tom Mulcair is not leftwing enough. I believe he will be by far the most left-wing PM in our history. As well as the candidate most likely to take the party to power.

I would commend those with concerns about Mulcair's ideological position to consider these recent tweets from James Laxer, the Waffle candidate for leader in the 70s.

 

"Is Mulcair left wing enough: that's wrong question. W him, energy of progressive Quebecois in Ottawa will be felt as never before."

 

"What kind of phony in their right mind wld leave high-profile cabinet post to run for NDP in Montréal in those days?"

"NDP has always been a very traditional party, tied to its elites. The great leap it now needs is the one to Mulcair"

"Alternatively, Mulcair cd be for NDP what Laurier was for the Liberals, the leader who opens door to a long term in office."

"Anonymous attacks on Mulcair tell me there are people out there, I wonder who, who fear that in 2015, he can lead NDP to victory"

"How about Mulcair for leader, Topp for Principal Secretary, Nash for Finance Minister, other candidates in Mulcair's first cabinet"

"Topp's claim Mulcair hasn't been in party long enough to be leader, back handed swipe at whole Quebec caucus. Are they on probation?"

 

socialdemocrati...

While I don't love any of the candidates, I like all of them, and I hope their talents are well-used.

I also want the party to remain a collaborative party, not a centralized party. Jack did a lot of centralizing. But our bench has to look like an all-team. It is in fact, now let's create that perception.

algomafalcon

Unionist wrote:

Rakhmetov wrote:

 But glad to know that any information that you guys have been told in confidence from anyone in any campaign I now have a right to demand the source's home address and birth certificate.

Careful! That is practically an invitation to launch a new wave of "Obama was born in Vancouver, Ontario" hysteria in the Republican primaries and on a certain extremely popular US radio talk show. (LOL)

 

AnonymousMouse

I don't understand what people are in such a tizzy about.

I don't know if Rakhmetov has real, reliable inside information on this or not--and I suspect any information that comes from a rival camp is pure speculation anyway--but it is totally plausible that Singh will support Mulcair as his second choice (whether at convention or by recommending Mulcair to his supporters). Chisholm and Saganash already have. There's been plenty of speculation that Ashton and Cullen eventually will.

But that fact alone wouldn't magically give credibility to the claim that Singh is acting as Mulcair's "attack dog". Even if Singh does plan to support Mulcair in some way at some point, there's no reason he would base his questions to other candidates on serving Mulcair's purposes. The far more plausible explanation is that Topp screwed up in answering Singh's question in Quebec City and did it in a way that was totally dismissive of Singh, so now Singh is going after him.

The real issue here seems to me to be that the camp attacking Mulcair over this is trying to use the reality or perception that Singh will ultimately support Mulcair to give credence to the much less credible claim that there's a conspiracy between Singh and Mulcair. No doubt if Singh does move to Mulcair at some point, Rakhmetov will claim total vindication.

JeffWells

Rakhmetov wrote:

The Know Mulcair website probably is just a bunch of "active and long-standing New Democrats" as it says.  All these elaborate conspiracy theories about the site are pretty paranoid and don't have a shred of credible evidence.  Shows how out of touch some people are with the NDP base, they can't even comprehend the possiblity that maybe some New Democrats just don't like the guy.

Really, suspicion of an anonymous attack site, in Harper's Canada, hardly requires an elaborate conspiracy theory. Particularly since so many New Democrats have been outspoken about their dislike of Mulcair. I don't think any Mulcair supporter here could be so out of touch as to have missed that.

flight from kamakura

from the huffpo article:

One thing Mulcair is clear on is that he’ll go after Liberal supporters, but won’t work with the rival party.

“N.O.,” he told HuffPost. The NDP tried to form a coalition with the Liberals in 2008 and then the Grits “lifted their noses up on it,” Mulcair said.

The coalition experience taught Mulcair everything he needs to know about the Liberals. They’re untrustworthy and he said he’ll never work with them again, whether in a formal or informal coalition.

“The no is categorical, absolute, irrefutable and non-negotiable. It’s no. End of story. Full stop,” he said.

 

exactly!

janfromthebruce

This is the question on the Leadnow site: Do you support co-operating with the Liberals and Greens before the next election to defeat Stephen Harper's government? If so, how?

 

And this is P. Nash response: Nash supports building consensus with Liberals and Greens on key issues, and she is open to “pooling resources” with them to defeat Harper’s government and open to considering other strategies for cooperation between the parties before the election.

 

It appears evasive as if she doesn't want us to really know what that means - "pooling resources" - what does that mean? Unless Peggy can clearly answer what this means, I personally will not be supporting her as a 2nd or 3rd ballot support. I actually find this answer very concerning because it appears to purposefully not be transparent. Well that is the way I see it unless it is "clearly" explained.

Pages