Paul Dewar and Quebec

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

Pogo wrote:

It is not just about holding onto a cool number of seats.  We also need the voices of the left in Quebec to help us build the party.

Need more of this. A lot of folk outside Quebec really don't understand how much Quebec can share about a just society.

Pogo Pogo's picture

Speaking from BC where our three founding cultures are First Nation, English and Chinese, I cannot vote for anyone who doesn't cut it in Quebec.  The NDP has been around for 50 years and for most of those years we were non-existent in Quebec.  Now we have our foot in the door and we cannot blow it. 

It is not just about holding onto a cool number of seats.  We also need the voices of the left in Quebec to help us build the party.  I also feel that after so many years of putting 'standing up for Quebec' interests aside for short term political gain that we just owe the people of Quebec some of our political capital.  If that means having a leader that  meets Quebec's needs more than BC's, I am okay with that.  However I believe meeting Quebec's needs will help strengthen our voice across the country and it will be a win-win.

Stockholm

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Please show me where I said Dewar's french shouldn't be a consideration?  Seriously.  Yet for suggesting it might not be the ONLY consideration and that there are also some other things members should ALSO be looking at I am insulted and basically called a racist.  What a lovely exercise this leadership campaign is turning out to be. 

BA, I was not implying that about you at all. I recognize that everyone has their strengths and weaknesses and that some metter more to some people than they do to others.

I just wish that SOMEONE supporting Dewar would actually post here and explain to us - either a) why they think everyone has it all wrong and how he will actually be a big hit in Quebec or b) why Quebec doesn't matter and we should just not care if we lose most of our support there.

I get this feeling that his whole campaign strategy vis-avis Quebec is to pretend it doesn't exist and then hope that it goes away. Not good enough.

Lord Palmerston

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Please show me where I said Dewar's french shouldn't be a consideration?  Seriously.  Yet for suggesting it might not be the ONLY consideration and that there are also some other things members should ALSO be looking at I am insulted and basically called a racist.  What a lovely exercise this leadership campaign is turning out to be. 

You said it was no more of a consideration than Nash's rural policy or Topp's lack of electoral experience.  I think French competency really should be among the most basic qualifications.  If Dewar fails that test, maybe he's so exceptional in other areas that we can overlook it.  Really exceptional I mean.  Has Dewar demonstrated this?

Pogo Pogo's picture

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Please show me where I said Dewar's french shouldn't be a consideration?  Seriously.  Yet for suggesting it might not be the ONLY consideration and that there are also some other things members should ALSO be looking at I am insulted and basically called a racist.  What a lovely exercise this leadership campaign is turning out to be. 

Your posts are always thoughtful and insightful.  I also agree that on of our next important breakthroughs needs to be in the agricultural community. 

Stockholm

Imagine if someone was running for leader who was totally incoherent in both French AND English?? Let's say there was some wonderful person running who was Croatian and could barely speak either of our official languages? Would anyone be taking that person seriously as a leadership candidate?

BTW: I agree with putting more emphasis on winning in rural areas and have you noticed there are two fine people running for the leadership - Niki Ashton and nathan Cullen - both from rural ridings and both of whom speak French very well. We can have our cake and eat it too!

Bookish Agrarian

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Please show me where I said Dewar's french shouldn't be a consideration?  Seriously.  Yet for suggesting it might not be the ONLY consideration and that there are also some other things members should ALSO be looking at I am insulted and basically called a racist.  What a lovely exercise this leadership campaign is turning out to be. 

You said it was no more of a consideration than Nash's rural policy or Topp's lack of electoral experience.  I think French competency really should be among the most basic qualifications.  If Dewar fails that test, maybe he's so exceptional in other areas that we can overlook it.  Really exceptional I mean.  Has Dewar demonstrated this?

Thanks Stock

LP you might want to try reading what I said again because you totally minimized what I said.  I was not talking about Nash's rural "policy", but rather her basic understanding of the issues or that there even are issues that aren't framed through an urban lense.  Big, huge difference.  Nor did I say it was the lack of Topp's "electoral experience".  I said he was completely unable to interact with people in a non-backroom way.  Again, big huge difference.  These are things that can't be overcome quickly.  They are deal breakers for anyone running for the leadership of a party wanting to be government in a few years time.  Equal deal breakers.

Vansterdam Kid

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Sorry from personal experience I see no evidence that Peggy can learn about rural issues.

Sorry but agriculture and the rural/urban split is a policy issue that can be improved with greater knowledge and a team of advisors who are well versed on the issue because it isn't a communication skill or an identity. People can identify as a city person, or a country person, but if they can't speak a language then they lack a key skill that isn't common between the two - so I think you're creating a false equivlency (not that you're saying French isn't important or something). Some people never learn or don't learn well enough or quickly enough. I have a lot more confidence in a leader's ability to read policy papers than I do their ability to communicate in a non-native language they struggle in.

Todrick of Chat...

Bookish Agrarian

When are you going to accept the fact that our rural voices and opinions do not matter to the NDP or any other political party?

Bill Davis

Being from Montreal I'm not judging leadership candidates based on how well they can speak french necessarily, but there is a minimum.  Paul doesn't meet it.  Importantly, I think the candidates need to be able to say something while debating in French.  I watched the debate only in french and my impression was Paul couldn't say much of anything, Peggy had some trouble (see Canada health act, and some comments which were pretty hollow), Nathan butchered some of the language but at least managed to say something content wise and made people laugh which is always a nice plus.

 

jjuares

I have heard that Topp is not too effective in small groups and one on one situations. I spoke to him after a forum and found that not to be the case. An acquaitance of mine had a quite different experience with though.  As for Dewar I find him to be the dullest speaker of the lot. And that was in English! I have huge regrets over Cullen's plan. I find him to be the most arresting speaker. I woud love to see him take on Harper but his joint nomination plan destroys any hope of that happening.

flight from kamakura

great comments from pogo and stockholm.  with luck, the rabble consensus will quickly percolate into the broader membership consciousness so that dewar sinks well before people start early voting.  i wonder if a few more bad polls for topp get him to highlighting this one more effectively (for instance, explaining dewar's lack of basic qualifications during a debate) - it really does frighten me that we could end up with a lot of bc, prairie and ontario voters who just don't think the french is an issue, or believe that what dewar mouths is good enough.

Stockholm

Or maybe a lot of NDP members a honestly unaware of Dewar's language problem. No one told them. Ignorance is bliss!

Bookish Agrarian

Vansterdam Kid wrote:

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Sorry from personal experience I see no evidence that Peggy can learn about rural issues.

Sorry but agriculture and the rural/urban split is a policy issue that can be improved with greater knowledge and a team of advisors who are well versed on the issue because it isn't a communication skill or an identity. People can identify as a city person, or a country person, but if they can't speak a language then they lack a key skill that isn't common between the two - so I think you're creating a false equivlency (not that you're saying French isn't important or something). Some people never learn or don't learn well enough or quickly enough. I have a lot more confidence in a leader's ability to read policy papers than I do their ability to communicate in a non-native language they struggle in.

That's where you are totally wrong.  It is a communication skill.  We talk in different ways, because our frame of references are different.  It isn't a different language, but it is different.  Jack excelled at this by the way.  I saw him have a bunch of good ole boy municipal politicians eating out of the palm of his hand on more than one occassion.  In short he spoke to them in their language, his cadence changed, his metaphors changed and so on.  I don't care what anyone says but after a lot of years of experience in this area you can't teach it, you either have it or you don't.  That is one of the things I like about Romeo Saganash- he gets it.  Policy issues are when you think you should be talking about what gets the attention of urban foodies and miss what rural people actually are concerned about.  The NDP has excelled at this over the years.

And Todderick it may come sooner or later, but for now I still hope that if you plough and cultivate the field the rain and heat will come and you might get a decent crop some day.  Totally sensless I know.

Aristotleded24

jjuares wrote:
As for Dewar I find him to be the dullest speaker of the lot. And that was in English!

I agree, I see him speak on TV and I think about deer in the headlights. I think Harper would easily run over Dewar in English and French, and additionally, he would also be run over by whatever incarnation the Bloc Quebecois takes at that time. And if we are going to look at potential leaders, Chisholm is a far superior leader to Dewar because Chisholm has actually led a marginal party to nearly claim the top spot. Yet he himself recognized that his lack of French was a problem. Dewar's French is atrotious, anybody who has passed Grade 7 French can tell you that, and I took Grade 7 French in a part of the country where French is practically non-existent. Dewar, having grown up in Ottawa, has had ample opportunity to learn French, and if it's not acceptable now, there's no way it will be in 3 years.

There are only 2 candidates I can support in all good conscience. Peggy Nash has impressed me a great deal. She gets many issues that are important to me and is not afraid of the Conservative smear machine. As for rural issues? She made one mis-step on the gun registry question, but since when do rural issues begin and end with the gun registry? Why can she not recover from that one mis-step? Niki Ashton is from a part of the country that is deeply Conservative, is representative of a generation that is most in step with NDP values but doesn't vote, and is not afraid to fight passionately for younger voters. She may be young, but politics runs in her family and they know how to win.

Other than that, what a trainwreck this race is turning out to be. I wish Romeo's communication difficulties in English hadn't sank him, that Cullen hadn't proposed breathing life back into the Liberal Party, and that Charlie Angus and Megan Leslie had thrown their hats in the ring.

Oh well. There's always 2019.

Brian Glennie

flight from kamakura wrote:

with luck, the rabble consensus will quickly percolate into the broader membership consciousness so that dewar sinks well before people start early voting. - it really does frighten me that we could end up with a lot of bc, prairie and ontario voters who just don't think the french is an issue, or believe that what dewar mouths is good enough.

For what it's worth, I watched the QC debate via the NDP website and the viewership number, which is shown in real-time, never got higher than about 480. 

 

wage zombie

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

LP you might want to try reading what I said again because you totally minimized what I said.  I was not talking about Nash's rural "policy", but rather her basic understanding of the issues or that there even are issues that aren't framed through an urban lense.  Big, huge difference.  Nor did I say it was the lack of Topp's "electoral experience".  I said he was completely unable to interact with people in a non-backroom way.  Again, big huge difference.  These are things that can't be overcome quickly.  They are deal breakers for anyone running for the leadership of a party wanting to be government in a few years time.  Equal deal breakers.

Why, because he had a bad night at the start of the campaign when he came out to your riding?  So from now on it's a fact forever?

Would you vote someone for leader if they couldn't today maintain a conversation with you?

Bookish Agrarian

Aristotleded24 wrote:

jjuares wrote:
As for Dewar I find him to be the dullest speaker of the lot. And that was in English!

There are only 2 candidates I can support in all good conscience. Peggy Nash has impressed me a great deal. She gets many issues that are important to me and is not afraid of the Conservative smear machine. As for rural issues? She made one mis-step on the gun registry question, but since when do rural issues begin and end with the gun registry? Why can she not recover from that one mis-step? 

Do you seriously believe I would base what I was saying on one answer to one question?  In which, by the way, she was asked how does the NDP reach out to rural voters and she answered by highlighting supporting the long gun registry.   Couldn't it be possible that maybe there might be more to it and that I might have some background to be able to assess such a thing?  

Aristotleded24

wage zombie wrote:
Bookish Agrarian wrote:
LP you might want to try reading what I said again because you totally minimized what I said.  I was not talking about Nash's rural "policy", but rather her basic understanding of the issues or that there even are issues that aren't framed through an urban lense.  Big, huge difference.  Nor did I say it was the lack of Topp's "electoral experience".  I said he was completely unable to interact with people in a non-backroom way.  Again, big huge difference.  These are things that can't be overcome quickly.  They are deal breakers for anyone running for the leadership of a party wanting to be government in a few years time.  Equal deal breakers.
Why, because he had a bad night at the start of the campaign when he came out to your riding?  So from now on it's a fact forever?

Actually, Topp comes across to me as someone who loves hearing himself think about how smart he is. Not the best in a leader.

Bookish Agrarian

wage zombie wrote:

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

LP you might want to try reading what I said again because you totally minimized what I said.  I was not talking about Nash's rural "policy", but rather her basic understanding of the issues or that there even are issues that aren't framed through an urban lense.  Big, huge difference.  Nor did I say it was the lack of Topp's "electoral experience".  I said he was completely unable to interact with people in a non-backroom way.  Again, big huge difference.  These are things that can't be overcome quickly.  They are deal breakers for anyone running for the leadership of a party wanting to be government in a few years time.  Equal deal breakers.

Why, because he had a bad night at the start of the campaign when he came out to your riding?  So from now on it's a fact forever?

Would you vote someone for leader if they couldn't today maintain a conversation with you?

 

It was way more than a bad night.  It was a complete lack of ability.  You can't hide or manufacture that.  

And please, yet again, demonstrate for me where I said Dewar's facility in french was a non-issue.  Didn't do it.  Have repeatedly only said that there are also OTHER issues that are important in whether someone is qualified to be leader.   Yet for that I have been attacked, essentially called racist and so on.  

Stockholm

Brian Glennie wrote:

flight from kamakura wrote:

with luck, the rabble consensus will quickly percolate into the broader membership consciousness so that dewar sinks well before people start early voting. - it really does frighten me that we could end up with a lot of bc, prairie and ontario voters who just don't think the french is an issue, or believe that what dewar mouths is good enough.

For what it's worth, I watched the QC debate via the NDP website and the viewership number, which is shown in real-time, never got higher than about 480. 

 

 

It was carried live and online on CPAC and live on RDI aswell

Stockholm

Brian Glennie wrote:

flight from kamakura wrote:

with luck, the rabble consensus will quickly percolate into the broader membership consciousness so that dewar sinks well before people start early voting. - it really does frighten me that we could end up with a lot of bc, prairie and ontario voters who just don't think the french is an issue, or believe that what dewar mouths is good enough.

For what it's worth, I watched the QC debate via the NDP website and the viewership number, which is shown in real-time, never got higher than about 480. 

 

 

It was carried live and online on CPAC and live on RDI aswell

wage zombie

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

It was way more than a bad night.  It was a complete lack of ability.  You can't hide or manufacture that.  

So do you think he's having this effect on people as he goes acros the country?  I just don't understand how he could be that bad and yet have so much support.

Quote:

And please, yet again, demonstrate for me where I said Dewar's facility in french was a non-issue.  Didn't do it.  Have repeatedly only said that there are also OTHER issues that are important in whether someone is qualified to be leader.   Yet for that I have been attacked, essentially called racist and so on.  

Well I certainly don't think you should be attacked and I don't think you're racist.  It seems like you're trying to add balance to the conversation.

The reason I asked the question is that I suspect, across the board, people wouldn't vote someone for leader who wasn't able to maintain a conversation with them.  I think this is a deal breaker far and wide.  Now granted, many people speak only English and Paul Dewar can speak that.  But I think a lot of English speakers who understood Dion's lack of appeal aren't quite able to make the same connection in this case (and I understand you are able to do so).

For me, Paul Dewar = Stephane Dion

GregbythePond

Well, well the pile-on continues unabated I see. I can see the vehemence showing in posts #45 and #50 etc. and it even spills over to other detractors of Paul Dewar, like the Bookish Agrarian - for daring to say that bad French is not the only issue.

You see BA, either your're with them or your on the side of the ... well you get the idea.

Some people like to frame their own reality and I wish them well. The facts are, there is a lot of support for Paul Dewar. Accross the country and in Quebec - surprise, surprise. Most of the people here seem to have made it a personal mission - and there is no talking to those on that wavelength.

Good luck to you all, looking forward to the closure of this thread and the opening of "Brian Topp and Saskatchewan" ...

 

Lord Palmerston

wage zombie wrote:
For me, Paul Dewar = Stephane Dion

Why?  Dion speaks a heavily accented English but it is much better than Dewar's French.

Aristotleded24

GregbythePond wrote:
The facts are, there is a lot of support for Paul Dewar. Accross the country and in Quebec - surprise, surprise.

That would surprise me. Show me where Dewar has managed to win support in Quebec?

Aristotleded24

wage zombie wrote:
Bookish Agrarian wrote:

It was way more than a bad night.  It was a complete lack of ability.  You can't hide or manufacture that.  

So do you think he's having this effect on people as he goes acros the country?  I just don't understand how he could be that bad and yet have so much support.

Much of Topp's support comes from establishment figures, and people who are more familiar with the backroom aspect of politics and who are sometimes disconnected from the every day life. Roy Romanow and Lorne Calvert sowed the seeds for the disastrous result the NDP experienced in the last Saskatchewan provincial election. I thought Brodabent's endorsement early on was totally inappropriate, it came across as him trying to use his stature in the party to promote a particular candidate before we even had a chance to see how the race would play itself out. Where are Topp's endorsements from grassroots organizers, or people who have demonstrated a capability to reach out to the grassroots?

GregbythePond

Check out the website, I have referenced it before.Laughing

Lord Palmerston

Aristotleded24 wrote:
And if we are going to look at potential leaders, Chisholm is a far superior leader to Dewar because Chisholm has actually led a marginal party to nearly claim the top spot. Yet he himself recognized that his lack of French was a problem.

Very good point.  He certainly comes closer to "we can overlook this" consideration than Dewar does, and yet Chisholm showed some class and got out.  With so much of the NDP bench strength running for leader, it's good to have an experienced leader like Chisholm in the House.  

Brian Glennie

Stockholm wrote:

Brian Glennie wrote:

flight from kamakura wrote:

with luck, the rabble consensus will quickly percolate into the broader membership consciousness so that dewar sinks well before people start early voting. - it really does frighten me that we could end up with a lot of bc, prairie and ontario voters who just don't think the french is an issue, or believe that what dewar mouths is good enough.

For what it's worth, I watched the QC debate via the NDP website and the viewership number, which is shown in real-time, never got higher than about 480. 

 

 

It was carried live and online on CPAC and live on RDI aswell

So how many people watched it, bearing in mind the venue itself was only half-full?

Bookish Agrarian

Stockholm wrote:

Brian Glennie wrote:

flight from kamakura wrote:

with luck, the rabble consensus will quickly percolate into the broader membership consciousness so that dewar sinks well before people start early voting. - it really does frighten me that we could end up with a lot of bc, prairie and ontario voters who just don't think the french is an issue, or believe that what dewar mouths is good enough.

For what it's worth, I watched the QC debate via the NDP website and the viewership number, which is shown in real-time, never got higher than about 480. 

 

 

It was carried live and online on CPAC and live on RDI aswell

Personally I switched over to CPAC because the NDP feed was so bad and I was getting a headache with the stupid twitter feed at the side of the screen

Lord Palmerston

KenS wrote:
Nope. I think he easily outclasses both of them. I'd say there are 3 big things about Paul that contribute to that.

1.] He's a born organizer himself. That always helps.

2.] Ottawa Centre was always going to be tough for the NDP [then]. He worked away at it. He didnt bow down to Ed Broadent. Nor did it appear to phase him when he inevitably lost the nomination. No surprise he did not bow down to Jack Layton's favourite. He beat him. And made no enemies along the way [except Jamie Heath].

3.] He's a networker

Nathan Cullen had to build an impressive local organization to win his seat. Thats no small thing, but a lot of MPs have done that.

And Peggy's contacts and networks are much more diffuse than Paul's.

80+ posts in this thread, and it seems only Ken has seriously answered the "why can we consider overlooking this" question.  

Todrick of Chat...

Bookish Agrarian

You can plough that field for years, but if the field  is only consist of rocks and no soil then there will never be any crops worth harvesting.

Look at the locations of the leadership debates, none of them have occurred in a rural area yet.

None of the leadership hopefuls (my view only) come from a rural background, and they have no interests in rural problems.

GregbythePond

Yup and it wasn't good enough for you, Stock or anyone with the bee in the bonnet. So what is the point of this thread, eh?

Aristotleded24

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:
None of the leadership hopefuls (my view only) come from a rural background, and they have no interests in rural problems.

*Ahem* Niki Ashton, Nathan Cullen

Brachina

Lord Palmerston wrote:

wage zombie wrote:
For me, Paul Dewar = Stephane Dion

Why?  Dion speaks a heavily accented English but it is much better than Dewar's French.

That bad, ouch.

Brachina

This race had not one, but three rural MPs, each of which is bigger then major european nations. Saganash dropped out but that still leaves two.

wage zombie

wage zombie wrote:
For me, Paul Dewar = Stephane Dion

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Why?  Dion speaks a heavily accented English but it is much better than Dewar's French.

Nice guy demeanor, "grassroots candidate", wonky policy ideas, path to leadership involves consolidating late ballot support by being the least objectionable candidate to the most people.

Inability to properly converse in one of the national languages (remember Dion not comprehending a question and wanting to start over).

Tendency to go into "deer in headlights" mode.

Aristotleded24

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

jjuares wrote:
As for Dewar I find him to be the dullest speaker of the lot. And that was in English!

There are only 2 candidates I can support in all good conscience. Peggy Nash has impressed me a great deal. She gets many issues that are important to me and is not afraid of the Conservative smear machine. As for rural issues? She made one mis-step on the gun registry question, but since when do rural issues begin and end with the gun registry? Why can she not recover from that one mis-step?

Do you seriously believe I would base what I was saying on one answer to one question?  In which, by the way, she was asked how does the NDP reach out to rural voters and she answered by highlighting supporting the long gun registry.   Couldn't it be possible that maybe there might be more to it and that I might have some background to be able to assess such a thing?

I'll admit that I haven't seen any reference to Nash's plan to win over rural Canadians, but to me there is a difference between someone who hasn't and someone who can't, and I believe Nash falls into the former category. Plus, as Stockholm says, even if Nash fails on this point, the worst thing that happens is we don't win seats we don't have, but the base remains intact to try again, as opposed to Dewar who would lose us seats all over Canada and we would have to start from scratch.

As for what you have based your opinion on, you have seen different specific things than I have. Not knowing the specifics, I can't comment one way or the other. But overall, I do trust your judgement and your thought processes. We may very well end up "agreeing to disagree" about Peggy Nash.

Lord Palmerston

I was quite disappointed with Charlie Angus when I posed this question to him.  He just trashed the other candidates (including a smear that Peggy Nash doesn't support public healthcare) and lied about Dewar's "very good French."  He has a deserved reputation for honesty and integrity, he should know better.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

God, I'll be glad when this effing thing is over. Frown

Brian Glennie

Boom Boom wrote:

God, I'll be glad when this effing thing is over. Frown

We haven't seen the worst of it yet, Boom Boom. Because the stakes are really high, the meaness is only going to grow.

Todrick of Chat...

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:
None of the leadership hopefuls (my view only) come from a rural background, and they have no interests in rural problems.

*Ahem* Niki Ashton, Nathan Cullen

 

These are general interests, all politicians can say they are for rural issues. When did either one of them worked as a farm hand or did a small town factory jobs.

I do not see them as peers or partners in rural issues, at least BA has a farm and works the land. This is only my personal view.

As far as I can tell Ashton has either been in school or working in Ottawa for the last 12 years. Cullen has spent the last 8 years in Ottawa. Not alot of time spent being in a rural area, not a lot of time being rural for my liking.

 

Howard

John Ivison, The National Post wrote:
One thing NDP members should perhaps think about is who the Conservatives would least like to face in four years time. One senior Conservative said that he is not concerned by Mr. Topp, calling him “wooden” and lacking in charisma. Nor is he worried by the prospect of Mr. Mulcair winning, calling him “very wedge-able.” But Mr. Dewar does make him nervous. “He’s young, bilingual, telegenic and has political genealogy [his mother was mayor of Ottawa]. He has good parliamentary experience and people seem to like him. He’s the closest thing I’ve seen to a young Bob Rae.

Brian Glennie

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:
None of the leadership hopefuls (my view only) come from a rural background, and they have no interests in rural problems.

*Ahem* Niki Ashton, Nathan Cullen

 

These are general interests, all politicians can say they are for rural issues. When did either one of them worked as a farm hand or did a small town factory jobs.

I do not see them as peers or partners in rural issues, at least BA has a farm and works the land. This is only my personal view.

As far as I can tell Ashton has either been in school or working in Ottawa for the last 12 years. Cullen has spent the last 8 years in Ottawa. Not alot of time spent being in a rural area, not a lot of time being rural for my liking.

 

Nathan lives with his wife and children in Smithers, B.C.  No way does he win four elections out there if he's not around.

algomafalcon

Aristotleded24 wrote:

jjuares wrote:
As for Dewar I find him to be the dullest speaker of the lot. And that was in English!

I agree, I see him speak on TV and I think about deer in the headlights. 

Or maybe he is the NDP equivalent of the famous "dramatic chipmunk"... (Solidarity with chipmunks everywhere!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1Y73sPHKxw

I have to admit that I have been totally unimpressed with his public persona. I just can't imagine him as a leader, even if he could speak French...

 

 

Policywonk

Brachina wrote:
This race had not one, but three rural MPs, each of which is bigger then major european nations. Saganash dropped out but that still leaves two.

Their districts are bigger than major European nations, not the MPs themselves. Laughing

Idealistic Prag... Idealistic Pragmatist's picture

jjuares wrote:

I have heard that Topp is not too effective in small groups and one on one situations. I spoke to him after a forum and found that not to be the case. An acquaitance of mine had a quite different experience with though.

From talking to a lot of people about this and getting lots of different stories, I think it's pretty clear that Topp is much better in some situations than others (better in an informal forum where he can tell longer stories to get his point across; less good in a formal debate where sound-byte-size chunks of information are necessary), and that when it comes to more personal encounters, he has good nights and bad nights, but is steadily improving his ability to connect.

Doug

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Yet none of these warrant's the kind of vitriol and pile on we are seeing with Dewar.  It is rather unseemly.

 

Other shortcomings are manageable and there will be time to address them. Not being fluently bilingual on day one of the new leadership isn't, as there will be no time to prevent that from becoming a big big problem. You may remember Preston Manning as opposition leader - a greater degree of incapability in French, of course, but it did really get in his way as he tried to present himself as a potential Prime Minister.

MegB

Closing for length. Oh, and GregbythePond, the "flag as offensive" button is not a toy.  Please use it for its intended purpose.

Pages

Topic locked