NDP Leadership #120

108 posts / 0 new
Last post
Brachina

AnonymousMouse wrote:
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.

+1

American Leftis...

nicky wrote:

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?"

 

Any front bench of his better have Libby Davies on the front bench with him, knowing how he treated her over the whole Israeli-Palestinian thing.  And I hope he keeps her as deputy leader.  

Howard

-

Gaian

Your attempt to bring rationality to the question was appreciated Howard. Doomed to failure hereabouts, of course, but much appreciated.

Unionist

American Leftist Nerd wrote:

RAny front bench of his better have Libby Davies on the front bench with him, knowing how he treated her over the whole Israeli-Palestinian thing.  And I hope he keeps her as deputy leader.  

What does a deputy leader actually do? Anyone?

 

Jacob Two-Two

Unionist wrote:

What does a deputy leader actually do? Anyone?

 

I assume they do the leader's duties whenever they're indisposed, which is probably often, given the many responsibilities of the leader.

Unionist

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

Unionist wrote:

What does a deputy leader actually do? Anyone?

 

I assume they do the leader's duties whenever they're indisposed, which is probably often, given the many responsibilities of the leader.

If that's true, how can they be: 1. Unelected? 2. Unilingual?

 

Pages