NDP leadership thread #117

122 posts / 0 new
Last post
Wilf Day
NDP leadership thread #117

My turn?

josh

Quote:

According to one theory making the rounds, Tom Mulcair won’t win the NDP leadership on March 24 because the Quebec MP isn’t anybody’s second choice. But that doesn’t take into account the Nathan Cullen factor.

Although the odds do not favour Mr. Cullen winning the leadership, the British Columbia MP does have a substantial number of supporters that he could deliver to another candidate, and the logical choice is Mr. Mulcair. That just might be the frontrunner’s path to victory.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/john-ibbitson/will-cullen-b...

Stockholm

The theory itself is bullshit. From what i have seen, there simply is no "anyone but Mulcair" movement among the 131,000 members. It may be true that the inner circle of people running the Dewar campaign or the Topp campaign don't like Mulcair...but that's a far cry from being able to influence tens of thousands of "low information" NDP members filling out there ballots at a kitchen table. For example, a lot of members voting for Topp see bilingualism and holding Quebec as a major priority. You can be sure that those people would almost all rank Dewar dead last behind Mulcair. Then there are a lot of people voting for Dewar who find Nash a dullard and will preference Mulcair ahead of her. On top of that I think to a large extent many people really only feel strongly about who they are ranking as number one and will fill out their "down ballot" choices in a semi-random manner.

I still remember the 2009 Ontario leadership contest when there was a lot of bad blood between the Prue and Tabuns camps. People were posting here on babble about how NO ONE who voted for Prue would ever dream of making Tabuns their second choice because, well because Prue's campaign mgr and Tabuns' campaign mgr. apparently didn't like each other. These inside the bubble stories are meaningless to the voters. As it happens Prue got dropped after the first ballot and when his preferences were distributed it was clear that a good 40% of Prue voters had Tabuns as their number 2 - and didn't give a hoot about the internal machinations.  

Wilf Day

Common attacks against Mulcair:

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/actualites/quebec-canada/politique-canadienne/201203/04/01-4502339-course-a-la-direction-du-npd-attaques-communes-contre-mulcair.php

Quote:
The Quebec MP Thomas Mulcair was the main target of attacks from his opponents . . . There was no verbal escalation and Mr. Mulcair, who has been asked the most questions by his opponents, did not seem destabilized and responded calmly.

Taking on the Grizzly:

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/chroniqueurs/lysiane-gagnon/201203/05/01-4502644-la-prise-du-grizzli.php

Quote:
Thomas Mulcair has not had it easy, since he resigned from the Charest government! In less than five years, he has attained three objectives that the average person would have considered unattainable . . . 2011 the harvest reaped by Layton but planted by Mulcair, beyond comprehension. . . The grizzly bear is a dangerous beast: with exceptional strength, it appears unexpectedly before attacking, and attacks without mercy. . . Even the smile of Thomas Mulcair has something of the carnivore: long teeth, jaw clenched, eyes which, from one moment to another, can go from jovial to aggressive. . . Thomas Mulcair, by his will to lead the party to the center and to relax its links with the labour movement, is the sworn enemy of the proponents of the New Democratic orthodoxy. And he is the man that the Conservatives do not want to see as Leader of the Opposition because he is the only one, of all the leadership candidates, who would be of the size to cope with Stephen Harper.

Pierre-Paul Noreau

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/le-soleil/opinions/editoriaux/201203/05/01-450...

Quote:
In some ways, the last debate between the candidates, held in Montreal last weekend, looked like a confrontation between old and modern. Brian Topp, Peggy Nash and Paul Dewar know that their chance of winning the race is to rally the defenders of tradition, even sacrifice, even if only momentarily, the support of the 10% of new Quebec members necessarily more open to change.

Since the second and third choice of members of the NDP are important in the compilation of voting results for Jack Layton's successor, Thomas Mulcair needs to widen the gap as much as possible between himself and his pursuers by March 24. A tightly bunched race would hurt his cause, showing that the traditionalists are the most numerous and regional loyalties have had weight.

In contrast, the victory of a great communicator like Thomas Mulcair would certainly help to consolidate the fragile gains in Quebec.

Chajusong

My favourite Nathalie Rochefort factoid is that she ran municipally in 2009 in the Plateau for Louise Harel's Vision Montréal, going up against left-wing darlings Projet Montréal. That makes her the only politician I'm aware of who has run for parties associated with the PLQ/right, the sovereigntist movement, and the left. 

Wilf Day

The picture of a bicycle race, and someone pulling away from the pack, does help focus the mind on how to cast a first-round ballot. While a strong case can be made for a sympathy vote for the party's possible future, Niki Ashton, a strong case can also be made for a first-round vote for Topp, even by Mulcair supporters. A choice on the last round between Topp and Mulcair would serve the party well. Any other last round combination raises the stakes and creates unknown risks. 

R.E.Wood

Wilf Day wrote:

 a strong case can also be made for a first-round vote for Topp, even by Mulcair supporters. A choice on the last round between Topp and Mulcair would serve the party well. Any other last round combination raises the stakes and creates unknown risks. 

 

I don't understand that.Why would a Topp-Mulcair showdown create less "unknown risks" than (for example) a Nash-Mulcair showdown? Is Peggy Nash riskier than Brian Topp?

I happen to think that Brian Topp would be one of the riskiest choices we could make, at least in terms of our ability to communicate and connect effectively with Canadians across the country - he does not seem to me to have virtually any retail skills. He certainly has great networking skills, however, as judged by his list of endorsements. But even the repeated pleas from Ed Broadbent to try and sway members to vote for Brian are starting to feel a bit desperate, aren't they?

NorthReport

Interesting to note that inspite of the small but vocal noise about how unacceptable Mulcair will be as Leader, Mulcair is the only candidate, at least so far, to have the blessing of another candidate.

Mulcair may come a lot closer to a first ballot victory than many realize.

NorthReport

What a lot of of unsubstantiated nonsense.

 

josh wrote:
Quote:
According to one theory making the rounds, Tom Mulcair won’t win the NDP leadership on March 24 because the Quebec MP isn’t anybody’s second choice. But that doesn’t take into account the Nathan Cullen factor. Although the odds do not favour Mr. Cullen winning the leadership, the British Columbia MP does have a substantial number of supporters that he could deliver to another candidate, and the logical choice is Mr. Mulcair. That just might be the frontrunner’s path to victory.
">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/john-ibbitson/will-cullen-b...

Lou Arab Lou Arab's picture

I wonder if any candidates are going to clearly announce their second choices soon.

It seems to me that the people voting early are the members most sure of their choices, and therefore most loyal to their candidates.  As such, the time to influence their second ballot is now, not at the convention when most/many of the results will be in the box already.

Thoughts?

NorthReport

Good point Lou but if a candidate announces their second choice now would that not that encourage some of their supporters to by-pass them all together which I don't think they want to have happen.

socialdemocrati...

Stockholm wrote:

The theory itself is bullshit. From what i have seen, there simply is no "anyone but Mulcair" movement among the 131,000 members. It may be true that the inner circle of people running the Dewar campaign or the Topp campaign don't like Mulcair...but that's a far cry from being able to influence tens of thousands of "low information" NDP members filling out there ballots at a kitchen table. For example, a lot of members voting for Topp see bilingualism and holding Quebec as a major priority. You can be sure that those people would almost all rank Dewar dead last behind Mulcair. Then there are a lot of people voting for Dewar who find Nash a dullard and will preference Mulcair ahead of her. On top of that I think to a large extent many people really only feel strongly about who they are ranking as number one and will fill out their "down ballot" choices in a semi-random manner.

I still remember the 2009 Ontario leadership contest when there was a lot of bad blood between the Prue and Tabuns camps. People were posting here on babble about how NO ONE who voted for Prue would ever dream of making Tabuns their second choice because, well because Prue's campaign mgr and Tabuns' campaign mgr. apparently didn't like each other. These inside the bubble stories are meaningless to the voters. As it happens Prue got dropped after the first ballot and when his preferences were distributed it was clear that a good 40% of Prue voters had Tabuns as their number 2 - and didn't give a hoot about the internal machinations.  

A lot of truth right here.

If there's going to be a strategic "anyone but..." vote in the last couple rounds, it's going to be over someone's inability to speak French, or some other perceived issue of electability.

I don't think there's much antipathy towards any candidate in mainstream circles. ... yet. If people want to coalesce around an "anyone but Mulcair" candidate, they still haven't done the first part of the equation: other than just prefering another candidate, what is it about Mulcair that needs to be stopped?

KnowMulcair is the best try at answering that and getting the word out to the mainstream. And it's pretty pathetic. The basis is really weak.

Mulcair isn't my first choice, but he's a good candidate, and I see no reason not to put him in my top three.

Brachina

Actually I think the irony is is that Tom maybe best suited of the candaites to win in other parts of the country.

See unlike other Mulcairites, I believe there are others that can keep most of our seats in Quebec (read not Dewar). The problem is is that it'll take them three times or more to do so.

Mulcair starts off from day one popular and with a stronger language ability and a greater understanding of Quebec which gives him a much greater level of freedom to win say other parts of Canada.

An example of this is the Mulcair dominated the Quebec debate so much he was free to address Western Alienation in French.

He also didn't over compensate the way Nash did in an earlier French debate on healthcare and he had no problem siding against Quebec over hydro, because he has a comfort and understanding with Quebec that he knows what he can get away with, which is more then the other would be leaders because of his popularity.

doofy

Had Topp run a stronger and more positive campaign, I would agree: a Topp-Mulcair final ballot would have been good for the NDP.

Considering the way Topp has behaved, I am afraid it will be hard for him to unite the party, should he win. He is still by 2nd choice (simply b/c the others have even greater problems) but I am more strongly in favour of Mulcair, now,  than I was at the begining of the campaign. My ideal final ballot would therefore include Mulcair and Dewar. Mulcair would be sure to win with at least 60%. (I considered waiting  until convetion day to vote live, so as to give Dewar a leg-up at the right timeWink. Since one never knows when the internet can crash, however, I  promise to play fair and vote in advance...)

***

On another note, here is a key passage from Mulcair's interview with "Le Devoir" editorial board. He clearly explains, based on what happened in QC, that "his move to the centre" is about "style & presentation" not substance.

"La critique la plus récurrente concerne sa vision plus centriste. Et s'il assume pleinement sa volonté d'élargir la base militante du NPD et de moderniser le langage du parti, il réfute que ses propositions représentent un changement idéologique majeur. «Il n'y a rien eu de radical dans ce qui s'est fait au Québec lors de la dernière élection par rapport au reste du Canada. On n'a pas jeté par-dessus bord les idées du NPD. Mais on les exprime différemment.»

http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/canada/344404/course-a-la-direction-du...

I would remind people that as QC lieutenant, Mulcair staked out strong "left-wing" positions on a whole range of issues: Afghanistan & asbestos, just to name two. The other day, he also criticized the Charest gov't tuition fee increases.

http://www.985fm.ca/audioplayer.php?mp3=125848

Wilf Day

doofy wrote:

On another note, here is a key passage from Mulcair's interview with "Le Devoir" editorial board. He clearly explains, based on what happened in QC, that "his move to the centre" is about "style & presentation" not substance.

"La critique la plus récurrente concerne sa vision plus centriste. Et s'il assume pleinement sa volonté d'élargir la base militante du NPD et de moderniser le langage du parti, il réfute que ses propositions représentent un changement idéologique majeur. «Il n'y a rien eu de radical dans ce qui s'est fait au Québec lors de la dernière élection par rapport au reste du Canada. On n'a pas jeté par-dessus bord les idées du NPD. Mais on les exprime différemment.»

http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/canada/344404/course-a-la-direction-du...

"So many arrows that give the impression an "anybody but Mulcair" movement is being organized to counter his candidacy." (Note that the phrase "anybody but Mulcair" is in English in the original: an anglo movement, no doubt.) "And if he rejects Brian Topp's proposal of announcing a tax increase for those earning more than $250,000 per year, it's because he believes 'that as a good public manager, the first thing to do is drop a priori decisions like that. We must look at the books before proposing that'." (Mulcair has said this before: he's not against it, he says it's premature to be so specific three years before the next election.)

KenS

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

Mulcair isn't my first choice, but he's a good candidate, and I see no reason not to put him in my top three.

Just to add to what Stock said that you know very little after people's #1 choice [if/when you know that much]....

I'm still anti-Mulcair, and will have to just get used to it if he is Leader.... but he's in my top 3.

KenS

Brachina wrote:
Actually I think the irony is is that Tom maybe best suited of the candaites to win in other parts of the country.

That's one of the problems: I seriously doubt that to be the case.

But after my first two choices, the rest look as bad or worse on that front, so Mulcair gets my 3rd choice.

Jacob Two-Two

Really? I think Mulcair will play very well in Western Canada. People love gruff, no-nonsense leaders out here. That's why they keep voting Conservative.

Hunky_Monkey

Got a recorded call by Paul Dewar today. I live in Halifax. His message was mostly in French :)

KenS

Whether Mulcair works well in the West is a question of overall politics. Its not just a question of what kind of personalities people "like".

And anyway, if you think they vote for Harper because he's gruff and no-nonsense, you're missing something.

Hunky_Monkey

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

Really? I think Mulcair will play very well in Western Canada. People love gruff, no-nonsense leaders out here. That's why they keep voting Conservative.

I get the sense he'll sell well in Ontario... one province most aren't talking about yet has basically a third of the seats in the House of Commons.

Idealistic Prag... Idealistic Pragmatist's picture

Everyone here is talking about filling in paper ballots. Does this mean that there isn't a way of voting online in advance?

Idealistic Prag... Idealistic Pragmatist's picture

DSloth wrote:

You can do either online or by mail in advance with a preferential ballot. 

Otherwise you can vote online (or by telephone *I think*) on the day of the covention, if you aren't attending in person. If you vote day of though you'll have to be ready to vote along with the convention in every round.  

Glad to know there is a way of voting online in advance. I would love to vote along with the convention in every round, but unless the convention magically ends up on Central European time, I honestly don't see myself being awake for each of the votes. :(

DSloth

Idealistic Pragmatist wrote:

Everyone here is talking about filling in paper ballots. Does this mean that there isn't a way of voting online in advance?

You can do either online or by mail in advance with a preferential ballot. 

Otherwise you can vote online (or by telephone *I think*) on the day of the convention, if you aren't attending in person. If you vote day of though you'll have to be ready to vote along with the convention in every round.  

algomafalcon

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

Really? I think Mulcair will play very well in Western Canada. People love gruff, no-nonsense leaders out here. That's why they keep voting Conservative.

 

I think that Mulcair will probably be quite competitive against Harper, much more so than say dreary and dull Nash, or the rather low key Topp (if he actually wins his seat).

 

socialdemocrati...

Most of the criticisms people have against Mulcair are actually pretty nuanced. The harsher criticisms target problems that could easily be lobbed against Jack Layton, or the other candidates. (And those criticisms sometimes do.)

Mitt Romney... now THERE'S a candidate people hate. He actually has a record of policy positions on major issues, blatently going against what the broad base of Republican voters care about. Pro-choice, pro-healthcare, pro-immigration. That's enough to get Republican voters to say "anybody but Romeny" en masse. And they have: Palin, Trump, Bachman, Perry, Cain, Gingrich, Santorum. You'll even hear some Republicans say they'll vote Obama, because at least he cut taxes.

For Mulcair to garner that kind of antipathy, there would need to be a bombshell. At least ONE of the Romney trifecta: Mulcair was formerly anti-choice, anti-immigration, anti-healthcare. But based on everything I've seen, that smoking gun doesn't exist. He's undeniably a New Democrat.

You'll know if there's a real "anybody but Mulcair" sentiment when you see a rival candidate produce that smoking gun as evidence, and when babblers start saying "I'm so pissed, I may as well vote for Bob Rae". (Or Anna DiCarlo for that matter.)

nicky

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1141899--walkom-cullen-surge-in-ndp-leadership-race-could-aid-front-runner-mulcair

 

A lawyer himself, Mulcair is also said to be making gains among members of the criminal bar, helped in part by the support of James Lockyer, a high-profile defender of the wrongfully convicted.

Some rank-and-file Toronto New Democrat activists who were fierce Layton supporters also show up on the Mulcair donor list.

Winston

Hunky_Monkey wrote:
Got a recorded call by Paul Dewar today. I live in Halifax. His message was mostly in French :)

I got the call yesterday here in the 'Peg.  His message was mostly in something, but I'm not sure I would call it French.

Winston

??? THERE WERE 1000 PEOPLE AT THE MONTREAL DEBATE ???  Holy smokes!  The place looked packed, but I had no idea with how many people.  That's probably the most well-attended one to date (perhaps even including the unofficial Toronto one)?

AnonymousMouse

DSloth wrote:

Idealistic Pragmatist wrote:

Everyone here is talking about filling in paper ballots. Does this mean that there isn't a way of voting online in advance?

You can do either online or by mail in advance with a preferential ballot. 

Otherwise you can vote online (or by telephone *I think*) on the day of the convention, if you aren't attending in person. If you vote day of though you'll have to be ready to vote along with the convention in every round.  

No telephone voting. The rest is correct, so far as I know.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Niki Ashton was just interviewed on P&P - a good interview, although she tripped herself up on the tar sands and pipeleines a bit. And she needs to slow down a bit - maybe cut down on the caffeine level.

algomafalcon

Winston wrote:

Forum Research polled Canadians (n=1675, 5 Mar) with different putative NDP leaders at the helm.  They seem to indicate that with Topp or Nash, we're back in 4th place in Québec.  The results are:

 

Leader/Cons/Lib/NDP/Green/Other/Undec

Mulcair/29/21/27/7/4/3/9

Topp/31/23/21/7/6/3/9

Nash/30/22/22/8/6/3/8

Unspecified/33/22/25/4/5/1/11

 

In Québec, the NDP's numbers would be:

Leader/NDP numbers in Québec

Mulcair/37

Topp/19

Nash/16

 

Don't have a link, just a facebook photo of the press release.

While Mulcair might well have a significant edge in appealing to Quebecers, I think these sort of polls need to be treated with a grain of salt, simply because Topp and Nash (and the other candidates) are not well known in Quebec. But I think the bigger danger with Topp lies in the risk that he loses in his first run for a House of Commons seat. I think after the race we need a leader who is in the house. I'm pretty sure we'll see NDP support plummet if we do not have a leader in the house and this additional "loss in momentum" could be very damaging to the NDPs future prospects for building on its rather spectacular results from the last election.

 

Winston

algomafalcon wrote:

While Mulcair might well have a significant edge in appealing to Quebecers, I think these sort of polls need to be treated with a grain of salt, simply because Topp and Nash (and the other candidates) are not well known in Quebec...I'm pretty sure we'll see NDP support plummet if we do not have a leader in the house and this additional "loss in momentum" could be very damaging to the NDPs future prospects for building on its rather spectacular results from the last election.

He has a significant edge over the others amongst ALL Canadians.  This poll indicates pretty strongly that our support will plummet if either of Topp or Nash wins.  Does that mean there is no way for us to recover after plummeting?  No, but our numbers will go very significantly down.

The fact that both of them underpoll "unspecified" indicates that the voters with us right now are parking their votes with us to see what we do.

Winston

Forum Research polled Canadians (n=1675, 5 Mar) with different putative NDP leaders at the helm.  They seem to indicate that with Topp or Nash, we're back in 4th place in Québec.  The results are:

 

Leader/Cons/Lib/NDP/Green/BQ/Other/Undec

Mulcair/29/21/27/7/4/3/9

Topp/31/23/21/7/6/3/9

Nash/30/22/22/8/6/3/8

Unspecified/33/22/25/4/5/1/11

 

In Québec, the NDP's numbers would be:

Leader/NDP numbers in Québec

Mulcair/37

Topp/19

Nash/16

 

Don't have a link, just a facebook photo of the press release.

(Edited to add BQ in legend)

Doug

Stockholm wrote:

The theory itself is bullshit. From what i have seen, there simply is no "anyone but Mulcair" movement among the 131,000 members. It may be true that the inner circle of people running the Dewar campaign or the Topp campaign don't like Mulcair...but that's a far cry from being able to influence tens of thousands of "low information" NDP members filling out there ballots at a kitchen table.

 

To the extent there is an Anyone But Mulcair movement, it's not immediately obvious who that anyone should be. It's hard to say definitely whether Nash or Topp is running second so that makes it hard for people who want that outcome to choose the correct ranking.

josh

Winston wrote:

Here's a link

More NDP numbers (not repartitioning undecided):

Leader/BC/AB/PRA/ON/QC/ATL/CANADA/MALE/FEMALE

Mulcair/25/12/26/25/37/30/27/25/29

Topp/20/12/30/24/19/27/21/18/24

Nash/20/12/25/27/16/27/22/18/26

Apparently Mulcair is the only one that can hold Québec AND is the best-placed to gain in the rest of Canada, among men AND women.

The only region where either of the other two is competitive is Peggy Nash in Ontario

I guess the Praries doesn't count.

If the election were in 2012, your argument might have some validity. Since it's not until 2015, it's meaningless.

socialdemocrati...

Forum Research was the first pollster to put the NDP in third in Quebec. Since then, other pollsters have been mixed on where we stand in Quebec. I take it with a huge grain of salt.

The interesting question isn't so much where we stand, or even where the candidates stand in comparison to each other. (Mulcair has the highest name recognition, period.) The real interesting question that polls might be able to answer is where the candidates stand in comparison to where we are now. That is, how does Topp compare to "generic leaderless NDP" (I guess I'm talking about Turmel).

Wilf Day

Winston wrote:

Here's a link

More NDP numbers (not repartitioning undecided):

Leader/BC/AB/PRA/ON/QC/ATL/CANADA/MALE/FEMALE

Mulcair/25/12/26/25/37/30/27/25/29

Topp/20/12/30/24/19/27/21/18/24

Nash/20/12/25/27/16/27/22/18/26

Apparently Mulcair is the only one that can hold Québec AND is the best-placed to gain in the rest of Canada, among men AND women.

The only region where either of the other two is competitive is Peggy Nash in Ontario.

Topp is best in the Prairies, tied in Alberta, and the margin of error makes him tied in Ontario, and likely in Atlantic Canada and BC too. The real question is, will Brian Topp as leader after the convention be able to get on TV in Quebec and quickly become as popular as Mulcair? We may soon find out. Or not.

Hunky_Monkey wrote:
Jacob Two-Two wrote:
I think Mulcair will play very well in Western Canada.
I get the sense he'll sell well in Ontario... one province most aren't talking about yet has basically a third of the seats in the House of Commons.

Actually 35.8% in 2015: 121 out of 338.

Winston

josh wrote:

Winston wrote:

Apparently Mulcair is the only one that can hold Québec AND is the best-placed to gain in the rest of Canada, among men AND women.

The only region where either of the other two is competitive is Peggy Nash in Ontario

I guess the Praries doesn't count.

My apologies Josh, I missed one.  Brian Topp holds a slight edge over Mulcair when it comes to competing for Saskatchewan and Manitoba's 28 seats.

That should more than make up for his deficits in BC, Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada's 249 seats.

Winston

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

The interesting question isn't so much where we stand, or even where the candidates stand in comparison to each other. (Mulcair has the highest name recognition, period.) The real interesting question that polls might be able to answer is where the candidates stand in comparison to where we are now. That is, how does Topp compare to "generic leaderless NDP" (I guess I'm talking about Turmel).

Actually, the Forum poll tested that.  Topp and Nash both poll LESS than a leaderless NDP:

No Leader/Nash/Topp/Mulcair (NDP numbers)

25/22/21/27

NorthReport

Mulcair may have a bigger lead than we realize even without any of this.

Cullen surge in NDP leadership race could aid front-runner Mulcair

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1141899--walkom-cull...

Winston

Wilf Day wrote:

Topp is best in the Prairies, tied in Alberta, and the margin of error makes him tied in Ontario, and likely in Atlantic Canada and BC too. The real question is, will Brian Topp as leader after the convention be able to get on TV in Quebec and quickly become as popular as Mulcair? We may soon find out. Or not.

That depends on whether Québec sees the defeat of someone who is perceived as "their" candidate for the leadership as a rejection of Québec itself.  That may not necessarily be the case, but I was wondering early on in the race what the optics would be if members from Québec overwhelmingly went one way and members in English Canada went another.

It is clear that Mulcair and Toppl have significant levels of support in all of the regions of English Canada.  Nash, Dewar and Cullen have very significant strength in many of English Canada's regions, but I wonder whether anyone other than Mulcair has significant support within Québec (a smattering of endorsements aside).

At this stage, I will be extremely shocked if Mulcair gets anything less than 2/3 of the first-ballot support in Québec.  Unless all of the remaining first-ballot support belongs to just one of the remaining candidates, we may see some serious resentment in Québec, particular if it is peceived that our leader was selected entirely by English Canada.

josh

NorthReport wrote:

Mulcair may have a bigger lead than we realize even without any of this.

Cullen surge in NDP leadership race could aid front-runner Mulcair

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1141899--walkom-cull...

That's sort of a companion piece to the column at the top of the thread. And not a surprise. Both Cullen and Mulcair believe the party needs to change. Cullen has just been more upfront about it.

Howard

The Forum poll numbers are only good for one party: the Liberals. They are the only ones up since the last election.

In general, any choice other than Mulcair indicates a major short term plunge in the polls. In Quebec, this leads to a resurgence of the Bloc Quebecois.

Hunky_Monkey

Howard wrote:

The Forum poll numbers are only good for one party: the Liberals. They are the only ones up since the last election.

In general, any choice other than Mulcair indicates a major short term plunge in the polls. In Quebec, this leads to a major resurgence of the Bloc Quebecois.

Issue with the Liberal Party and polling before an election... big wishy washy parking lot for people not paying attention to national politics. Every election I can think of, the Liberals go down once people focus on the race.

socialdemocrati...

Winston wrote:

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

The interesting question isn't so much where we stand, or even where the candidates stand in comparison to each other. (Mulcair has the highest name recognition, period.) The real interesting question that polls might be able to answer is where the candidates stand in comparison to where we are now. That is, how does Topp compare to "generic leaderless NDP" (I guess I'm talking about Turmel).

Actually, the Forum poll tested that.  Topp and Nash both poll LESS than a leaderless NDP:

No Leader/Nash/Topp/Mulcair (NDP numbers)

25/22/21/27

Thanks! I can't see the poll from the link you provided. That's very interesting, and startling at the same time.

Do they have the leaderless poll numbers by region too? I'm interested to see where candidates get boosts, where we get hurt, and where we tread water.

Brachina

josh wrote:

Winston wrote:

Here's a link

More NDP numbers (not repartitioning undecided):

Leader/BC/AB/PRA/ON/QC/ATL/CANADA/MALE/FEMALE

Mulcair/25/12/26/25/37/30/27/25/29

Topp/20/12/30/24/19/27/21/18/24

Nash/20/12/25/27/16/27/22/18/26

Apparently Mulcair is the only one that can hold Québec AND is the best-placed to gain in the rest of Canada, among men AND women.

The only region where either of the other two is competitive is Peggy Nash in Ontario

I guess the Praries doesn't count.

If the election were in 2012, your argument might have some validity. Since it's not until 2015, it's meaningless.

What makes you think we can wait till 2015? With roboscandal we could be in a bunch of bielections long before that. Plus Harper has no problem holding an early election if hr thinks it gives him an edge or the opposition is unprepared. He's a slimy bastard with no honour. Plus the job of building support doesn't start in 2015 it starts March 25th, and it's going to take alot of time and treasure, alot more of which will be diverted to Quebec just to regain what we've lost by 2015, while Mulcair would beable to focus more on winning other parts of the country.

Yes Mulcair is four points lower Topp on the praires, exect Aberta which is a three way tie, but that's most likely within the margin of error. Quebec on the other hand Mulcait has a lead of 17 percent over Topp, the lead being greater then Nash's support in Quebec period. Compare that to 4 percent on the two smaller Praire proviences. He also have a five point lead in BC and three point lead in Altantic Canada (probably within margin of error, compared to Nash's two points in Ontario, again Margin of error). The only place with a huge difference is Quebec, the rest is probably within the margin of error, accept maybe BC, not sure about that.

skip2 skip2's picture

Wilf Day wrote:

Taking on the Grizzly:

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/chroniqueurs/lysiane-gagnon/201203/05/01-4502644-la-prise-du-grizzli.php

Quote:

(...) The grizzly bear is a dangerous beast: with exceptional strength, it appears unexpectedly before attacking, and attacks without mercy. . . Even the smile of Thomas Mulcair has something of the carnivore: long teeth, jaw clenched, eyes which, from one moment to another, can go from jovial to aggressive. . . Thomas Mulcair, by his will to lead the party to the center and to relax its links with the labour movement, is the sworn enemy of the proponents of the New Democratic orthodoxy. And he is the man that the Conservatives do not want to see as Leader of the Opposition because he is the only one, of all the leadership candidates, who would be of the size to cope with Stephen Harper.

 

"to cope with Stephen Harper" - 'coping' is something many wives have attempted, over the centuries, with their unreasonably demanding and brutally ill-tempered (and/or patently insane) husbands... who did still manage to get their way...

 

Winston

Here's a link

More NDP numbers (not repartitioning undecided):

 

Leader/BC/AB/PRA/ON/QC/ATL/CANADA/MALE/FEMALE

Mulcair/25/12/26/25/37/30/27/25/29

Topp/20/12/30/24/19/27/21/18/24

Nash/20/12/25/27/16/27/22/18/26

 

Apparently Mulcair is the only one that can hold Québec AND is the best-placed to gain in the rest of Canada, among men AND women.

The only region where either of the other two is competitive is Peggy Nash in Ontario

(Edited to fix link)

Winston

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

Thanks! I can't see the poll from the link you provided. That's very interesting, and startling at the same time.

Do they have the leaderless poll numbers by region too? I'm interested to see where candidates get boosts, where we get hurt, and where we tread water.

Thanks, SDM, I hadn't realized my link was screwed up.  Have fixed it in previous message, here it is again:

Forum Poll

You will need to create an account with Forum (it's free). Once you confirm your account, you will be able to access the poll.

I have "printed" a 30-page PDF of the complete results - if anyone doesn't want to create an account of Forum, just PM me your e-mail address and I'll send it.

vaudree

Niki Ashton's Rabble.ca interview:

Quote:
We must speak out as a force for peace in the Middle East, including supporting Palestinian statehood as part of a two-state solution as well as opposing illegal settlements and the killing of civilians.

Quote:
For myself, I will make it clear that I intend to make decisions based on solid evidence about what works and what doesn't. And I will put forward a vision of a new kind of leadership -- one where leaders have the confidence to allow others to show leadership, too.

The latter may appeal to Saganash.

 

Pages

Topic locked