Whatever happened to the "momentum"?

56 posts / 0 new
Last post
M. Spector M. Spector's picture
Whatever happened to the "momentum"?
Issues Pages: 
M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Chantal Hébert nails it in [url=http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1093862--hebert-bein...'s Toronto Star[/url]:

Quote:
For two parties supposedly in their death throes, the Liberals and the Bloc Québécois are showing uncommon signs of life these days.

Over the course of a single month, the Bloc has shaved half-a-dozen points off the NDP’s lead in Quebec.

Its former leader is back in favour. If Gilles Duceppe ran for premier, a plurality of voters would reportedly be inclined to support him.

Meanwhile, in Ontario, the Liberals are tied with the ruling Conservatives while the New Democrats have fallen back to third place.
...
By focusing on leaping to government rather than on consolidating its second-place position, the [NDP] may have gotten dangerously ahead of itself.

In hindsight, the party’s strategists made two extraordinarily short-sighted calls on the way to select a successor to Jack Layton.

The first was to maintain Nycole Turmel as interim leader once a summer gig turned into a long-term assignment.
...
The second error was to decline to take the time to rethink the rules by which the next leader will be chosen so that every province including Quebec has a voice proportionate to its weight in the federation.
...
The party then compounded its mistakes by extending the leadership campaign by a couple of months. As a result, it will likely have to endure its current misery beyond the time of the federal budget.

It would not be so bad for the NDP to be momentarily bleeding support in Quebec and under-performing in Parliament if its leadership contest gave it a lift elsewhere and in other ways.

But so far, a line-up that features more plodders than sprinters and precious few clashes of ideas is turning out to be anything but a headline-grabber.

ottawaobserver

If winning media support in the short-term was a predictor of electoral success in the long-term I'd be worried. I want the structural things that will affect support over the longer-term to be addressed by our folks. That means building a frame to support our message over the longer-term, building up our fundraising capacity, getting riding associations in place in Quebec and getting the membership built up there, and building policy depth and organizational capacity.

Those things don't move horse-race polls in the short-term. Ignoring them moves poll results during election campaigns.

Chantal Hébert is a smart woman, but I don't always agree with her. Twitter has made the media focus on now, now, now, and become easily bored. They can sometimes confuse their own insatiable, rapacious demand for something new and stimulating with what's good for electoral politics and the country as a whole. And when they do, they miss other important things going on behind the scenes.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

It's all very well to look after things "behind the scenes", but out on the stage it's showtime, and you've got to get the bums in the seats - and keep them from leaving to go down the street.

The previous thread was all about "can't you feel the momentum" - not "can't you hear the rumble from backstage as they shift the scenery around for the next act".

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I'm surprised that Star article excerpted in MS's post  did not mention taking away the critic's positions of MPs running for the leadership - Nash was an outstanding finance critic, etc...

Caissa

There never was any real momentum.

ottawaobserver

M. Spector, I was not responsible for the title of that other thread you're referring to. All I know is that, before the last election, the Liberals put everything they had into pleasing the national media and trying to move the polls month-to-month, and did not do the hard work needed to rebuild their party. There's every sign they're about to descend into another round of leadership sniping over whether Bob Rae can run for permanent leader, which will suck all the oxygen out of that room as well. Their caucus is mostly composed of an aging group of incumbents, who they will have trouble replacing. They have less than half the party membership the NDP had on September 1 (35,000), and managed to renew 5,000 of them in their online membership drive.

Yes, there is no face on the federal NDP for the time being. That is a temporary state of affairs. I simply refuse to engage in hand-wringing over monthly horse-race polls and mainstream media commentary four years out from an election.

Stockholm

Someone should take a look at what polls were saying in early 2002 when Harper and Day were fighting it out to lead the Canadian Alliance and CA support was literally falling itno single digits in the polls!

Polunatic2

At a meet and greet I attended, Mulclair said that the NDP will take all of the remaining Liberal seats in the next election as part of their strategy to win power. 

vaudree

Turmel was not there because of charisma but because she could keep the party somewhat cohesive - that she could deal with both mavericks and bring the new ones along. 

Of course Bob Rae (aka the naked guy) has more charisma than Turmel - he has leadership aspirations!  However, he also has baggage, which is another reason, besides the obvious, that the NDP has been going after Tory fiscal mismanagement this term.

Turmel has caught on that, even though she is technically leader that she should be letting the other NDP MPs take more beginning questions because promoting their profile is better for the party.  Her mistake was to act like a traditional interim leader.

The period where people announce tends to be low key compared to the debates.  Once the debates start we have an opportunity for momentum.

Also, the new leader has the advantage of missing the worst of the Tory campaign promises being automatically passed.

 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

What did that "momentum" feel like, anyway?

A gentle summer shower?

The fleece of a newborn lamb?

or that special moment when you finally find something long enough to scratch that itchy place in the lower middle of your back?

Marc

Debater

ottawaobserver wrote:

There's every sign they're about to descend into another round of leadership sniping over whether Bob Rae can run for permanent leader, which will suck all the oxygen out of that room as well. Their caucus is mostly composed of an aging group of incumbents, who they will have trouble replacing. They have less than half the party membership the NDP had on September 1 (35,000), and managed to renew 5,000 of them in their online membership drive.

1.  There is no leadership sniping.  Bob Rae is the interim leader and nothing more.  He knows that at his age and with his baggage as Ontario Premier he cannot stay on permanently.  There are some who think he should stay longer, and people have the right to have different opinions - that is not sniping.  The NDP seems to have a had a lot of 'sniping' lately between Mulcair, Topp etc.

2.  Your comment about the age of the Liberal caucus is reflective of your tendency to take digs at the Liberals whenever you can.  You have a hatred for the Liberals and you have displayed it since I first started posting here.  I have also seen lists on other threads listing all the Liberal MP's and their ages and talking about how ancient they are and how little youth there is in the caucus.  The party has several younger MP's like Trudeau, Duncan and others and just elected a couple of new MP's in May like Ted Hsu and Sean Casey.

3.  The Liberal Party just went through its biggest defeat in history.  Do you really think it makes sense to have the party membership back up to a high level only 6 months later?  What is significant though is that the Liberals beat the NDP in fundraising in the last quarter.  That is interesting.

Hunky_Monkey

Debater wrote:

1.  There is no leadership sniping.  Bob Rae is the interim leader and nothing more.  He knows that at his age and with his baggage as Ontario Premier he cannot stay on permanently.  There are some who think he should stay longer, and people have the right to have different opinions - that is not sniping.  The NDP seems to have a had a lot of 'sniping' lately between Mulcair, Topp etc.

If you don't think Rae wants the top job, I got some prime swampland in Florida to sell you.

List the "sniping" between Mulcair and Topp.

Robo

Debater wrote:

ottawaobserver wrote:

There's every sign they're about to descend into another round of leadership sniping over whether Bob Rae can run for permanent leader, which will suck all the oxygen out of that room as well. Their caucus is mostly composed of an aging group of incumbents, who they will have trouble replacing. They have less than half the party membership the NDP had on September 1 (35,000), and managed to renew 5,000 of them in their online membership drive.

1.  There is no leadership sniping.  Bob Rae is the interim leader and nothing more.  He knows that at his age and with his baggage as Ontario Premier he cannot stay on permanently.  There are some who think he should stay longer, and people have the right to have different opinions - that is not sniping.  The NDP seems to have a had a lot of 'sniping' lately between Mulcair, Topp etc.

2.  Your comment about the age of the Liberal caucus is reflective of your tendency to take digs at the Liberals whenever you can.  You have a hatred for the Liberals and you have displayed it since I first started posting here.  I have also seen lists on other threads listing all the Liberal MP's and their ages and talking about how ancient they are and how little youth there is in the caucus.  The party has several younger MP's like Trudeau, Duncan and others and just elected a couple of new MP's in May like Ted Hsu and Sean Casey.

3.  The Liberal Party just went through its biggest defeat in history.  Do you really think it makes sense to have the party membership back up to a high level only 6 months later?  What is significant though is that the Liberals beat the NDP in fundraising in the last quarter.  That is interesting.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

A

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

B

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

C

ottawaobserver

Debater:

 * I bet you anything Bob Rae registers as a leadership candidate for the next contest.
 * I bet you anything that after Hedy Fry and Ralph Goodale retire, the Liberals will not keep their seats.
 * I bet you anything that a year from now the NDP will have a stronger balance sheet than the Liberals.

Now as for leadership sniping, I give you exhibits 1 and 2:

 * Warren Kinsella: "I see. So it's okay for the interim leader to break his promise to not run for the leadership, and to squelch the ambitions of anyone other than himself? Because, make no mistake, he promised not to seek the leadership post. And he said he would encourage, not discourage, others to seek the leadership. He's not telling the truth. And this is one "stupid blogger" who intends to make that point, over and over."

 * The What-Do-I-Know-Grit: "What a turd this guy is turning out to be.

Here's what Bob said then:

"This is a job that needs to be done now ... this is just my chance to serve," Mr. Rae said. "I think there will be a broader chance for renewal in the search for a new leader in a year and a half (or) two years, and I think it's important for the party to look very much to a new generation of leadership. And I'm sure that will happen."

Here's what Bob says now:

"I think the role of the interim leader is to do everything possible to rebuild the party. Beyond that, I don't recall anything in the job description that went beyond that."

Make no mistake folks. Bob is not on a "rebuilding" tour. Bob is on a "leadership" tour. Dear Bob, YOU ARE NOT THE NEW GENERATION OF LEADERSHIP!"

 * As a bonus, here's David McGuinty, Scott Brison and Carolyn Bennett:

Lawrence "Liberal Leaderitis" Martin in iPolitics.ca wrote:

"David, who talks to his brother frequently, gave every indication Dalton might be interested in making the jump. While saying Bob Rae was doing an excellent job as interim leader, he noted that "he gave his pledge that he would not seek the permanent leadership." In his current position, he said Rae should be "out there like Bill Graham was as interim leader soliciting possible new candidates to enter the race for the leadership". ....

Meanwhile, despite his pledge of last spring, Bob Rae has given signs he wants the permanent leadership position. Sheila Copps, the leading candidate for the party presidency - which will be decided at a party convention in January - stirred the pot in saying Rae should be allowed the right to seek it. Even MP Carolyn Bennett, who has supported Rae's bid for the top spot in the past, said yesterday that Copps' statement was "not helpful," adding that the party needed to avoid leadership controversies at this time.

While the caucus is very enthusiastic about Rae's performance, many share the view of Scott Brison that if he runs for the bigger position, he should step down as interim leader out of fairness to other candidates. A case in point is David McGuinty, himself, who relinquished his post as Liberal house leader because of his possible leadership ambitions and has had a lower profile since doing so.

Rae will be 67 at the time of the next federal election. In an apparent reference to the age issue, David McGuinty said a key question will be any leadership candidate's "capacity for growth." He said that "if we're honest here, we're talking about an eight year rebuilding project."

McGuinty said it is up to Bob Rae to make his intentions clear. Rae, however, doesn't wish to be rushed into doing that. He wants to continue to make gains for the party and see where things stand down the line. But with the party convention in January and debate over the Copps' candidacy for president - she is seen as a stalking horse for Rae by many - pressure will grow. Earlier this week, Copps reaffirmed her position of support for Rae's freedom to run for the full time job, saying "it would be up to Rae to defend his reversal."

Yes, no sniping there. Move along folks. One big happy family. What were we thinking, Debater.

Newfoundlander_...

I don't think there's really that much fighting going on within the Liberal Party, yes some members of the party have issues with how some things are going but that doesn't mean they are fighting. Just like Dewar arguing for more leadership debates doesn't mean there's fighting going on, same goes for Topp's supporters critisizing Mulcair.

When you consider what was happening in the early 2000's with the Liberals, debating leadership rules isn't fighting.

Aristotleded24

ottawaobserver wrote:
If winning media support in the short-term was a predictor of electoral success in the long-term I'd be worried. I want the structural things that will affect support over the longer-term to be addressed by our folks. That means building a frame to support our message over the longer-term, building up our fundraising capacity, getting riding associations in place in Quebec and getting the membership built up there, and building policy depth and organizational capacity.

No no, ottawaobserver, don't you know that these trends are always correctly predicted by the pundits a long time before they occur? For a few examples of successful predictions, look at how Mayor Smitherman is doing in Toronto, the newly elected PC Premier of Ontario Tim Hudak, the newly elected PC Premier of Manitoba Hugh McFadyen, and that the Wildrose Alliance is rocketing up the polls in Alberta and is all but certain to form the next government there.

Oh, wait a minute....

I think it should also be pointed out that the Bloc Quebecois will naturally be receiving a bounce from their leadership campaign.

Debater

From what I've been reading in Chantal Hébert's columns, there isn't exactly a lot of interest in the BQ leadership campaign.  The average Quebecer isn't exactly glued to every development, in fact, many of them aren't even aware of it all.

Stil, Chantal Hébert did seem to say on 'At Issue' last night that the NDP is going down in Quebec and that the BQ has the potential to pick up seats in the next election. 

thorin_bane

Hebert also predicted the end of the NDP across the country in March. Ummm nope. She has an axe for the ndp that is down to the handle. Just one of her NDP bash fests. Not credible and on anything ndp.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/948450--hebert-public-opinion...

Over that period, fatigue with the Conservative regime could increase and, with it, the inclination to vote for the Liberals — especially if the NDP spends it propping up the government. New Democrat efforts to play a decisive role in the minority Parliament have done little to shake the widespread popular perception that the Liberals are the alternative to the government.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Chantal Hebert needs to take a vacation.

Winston

thorin_bane wrote:

Hebert also predicted the end of the NDP across the country in March. Ummm nope. She has an axe for the ndp that is down to the handle. Just one of her NDP bash fests. Not credible and on anything ndp.

Actually, I quite like Chantal, and respect what she has to say.  She usually provides very apt and thoughtful analysis (especially as compared to her colleagues).  Sure she is not always right in her predictions, but she is the first to admit when she is wrong.

During the spring, after the CROP poll showing us in first place in Québec exploded like a bombshell on the campaign, when all of the other pundits on CBC were pooh-poohing the results as an aberration, Chantal responded by saying "With hall due respect, Hallan knows nutting habout what is going on in Québec.  I was in Montréal the other day, and there was ha lot of...I'm not going to call it Layton-mania, but hit's like dat." I nearly burst a gut laughing!

Chantal is very typically Québécoise in her outlook and I actually think she is somewhat sympathetic to us.  At the very least, she was clearly very amused by the Orange Crush and how it threw all of the chattering class into a tailspin.  That said, she recognizes that the NDP has not by any stretch closed the deal with Québec.  We have the potential of making Québec the centre of power of a long string of NDP governments much as the Liberals did throughout the 20th Century.  But selecting the wrong leader, or moving away from where Jack took the party in its approach to Québec issues could lead to disaster for us.

Newfoundlander_...

Winston wrote:

thorin_bane wrote:

Hebert also predicted the end of the NDP across the country in March. Ummm nope. She has an axe for the ndp that is down to the handle. Just one of her NDP bash fests. Not credible and on anything ndp.

Actually, I quite like Chantal, and respect what she has to say.  She usually provides very apt and thoughtful analysis (especially as compared to her colleagues).  Sure she is not always right in her predictions, but she is the first to admit when she is wrong.

During the spring, after the CROP poll showing us in first place in Québec exploded like a bombshell on the campaign, when all of the other pundits on CBC were pooh-poohing the results as an aberration, Chantal responded by saying "With hall due respect, Hallan knows nutting habout what is going on in Québec.  I was in Montréal the other day, and there was ha lot of...I'm not going to call it Layton-mania, but hit's like dat." I nearly burst a gut laughing!

Chantal is very typically Québécoise in her outlook and I actually think she is somewhat sympathetic to us.  At the very least, she was clearly very amused by the Orange Crush and how it threw all of the chattering class into a tailspin.  That said, she recognizes that the NDP has not by any stretch closed the deal with Québec.  We have the potential of making Québec the centre of power of a long string of NDP governments much as the Liberals did throughout the 20th Century.  But selecting the wrong leader, or moving away from where Jack took the party in its approach to Québec issues could lead to disaster for us.

I like Chantal as well, and in her defense at the beginning of the campaign NDP support collapsed. 

Debater

Winston wrote:

But selecting the wrong leader, or moving away from where Jack took the party in its approach to Québec issues could lead to disaster for us.

But the NDP has to move away from were Jack took the party in its approach to Quebec issues - that's the dilemma the NDP faces.  If it continues to promote policies that are the same as the BQ's, it will struggle to expand its support outside Quebec.

Debater

Winston wrote:

But selecting the wrong leader, or moving away from where Jack took the party in its approach to Québec issues could lead to disaster for us.

But the NDP has to move away from were Jack took the party in its approach to Quebec issues - that's the dilemma the NDP faces.  If it continues to promote policies that are the same as the BQ's, it will struggle to expand its support outside Quebec.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Why did you just quote your OWN post, Debater?

Debater

mixed up the quotation box, Ken B.  Then fixed it.  Simple as that.  Not everything I do has some sort of evil motive behind it.  Sometimes it's just a goof.  Undecided

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Didn't mean to imply that it did.  You just had me puzzled there for a second was all.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Also, the NDP's policies aren't the same as the BQ's.  There's some similarities, but they aren't the same. 

It goes without saying that the only way to keep Quebec from separating is the acceptance of asymmetrical federalism.  The voters understand this.  There's no support at all in Quebec for Trudeau's old centralized status quo.

Debater

Other than the fact that the NDP wants to stay in Canada, what differences are there between the BQ and the NDP with regard to Quebec policy?

There actually is still support in Quebec for the idea of a strong, centralized federal government if it is presented by an articulate and intelligent spokesman.  Chrétien was a strong federalist and he did well in Quebec.  As Andrew Coyne said recently, a new poll in Quebec shows the majority of Quebecers support Trudeau's patriation of the Constitution, even though the chattering classes try to say otherwise.

And actually, voters outside of Quebec are becoming increasingly tired of 'asymmetrical federalism' getting out of control with regard to Quebec.  If the NDP does not pick up on this, it will benefit the Liberals and Conservatives.

But the point is even when there isn't a lot of support for a 'centralized' government, it is the job of a federalist party to promote it and to point out the positive features of it.  The question is, WHY is the NDP so opposed to a strong central government?

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Debater, your last post is just simply silly. Why do you Libs think you are the only Canadian Nationalists? Who is feeding you your talking points on this? Your commentary is very similiar in its implication to that of a certain MP who in a flyer distributed to his constituents  in late July asserted that the NDP supported the BQ demand that Health Care be funded via tax points, AFTER that same MP had been told the exact opposite by a number of Quebec NDP MPs in the House in early June

And frankly, as a retired military man, who served out of a combination of patriotism, and a sense of national duty, your commentary borders on the insulting. Back off on the smear and innuendo. Obviously, you have nothing else. Anyone who has more expertise in this area want to answer this guy? Seriously Debater, you leave me wondering if you don't uderstand the impact of your words, or if the reality is you are just socially inept. I am beginning to wonder if you are obtuse or just malicous. I can't decide. I wrote earlier on this board that I would try to be more civil. All I asked was you look at the tone of your words. I am now not so sure that those are words that were worth wasting on you.

Debater

AC, what I have said above are not 'talking points'.  You seem to view anyone who disagrees with the NDP's pro-BQ and pro-sovereigntist policies as being a Liberal shill.  There is no smear or innuendo.  The NDP has taken positions that are disturbing to many people.  The point I am making is the same one that many, many people are making - both in the media and in the general public.  I do not make things up out of the blue, my friend.  I express intelligent, articulate, mainstream views.

The media and Canadians are worried that the NDP is "Bloc lite".  You are free to disagree, but it could harm your electoral fortunes.

 

Don't take my word for it - I'll provide some 'proof' since you've asked me to:

 

http://www.cbc.ca/thenational/indepthanalysis/rexmurphy/story/2011/06/02...

 

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/04/29/barbara-kay-ndp-throws-qu...

 

http://www.vigile.net/NDP-is-selling-out-anglos-to-court

 

http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/language+hypocrisy/5642385/story.html

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

The NDP is not "pro-BQ".  If they were pro-BQ, they would simply have ENDORSED the BQ candidates in the last election, rather than doing the whole country a favor by wiping them off the map.  All they are is a party that has recognized the reality that Quebec will never vote for strong centralized government again.  And really, why SHOULD Quebec vote for that?  Centralized government means that Quebec would always end up losing out to Ontario and Alberta.

BTW...are you pushing YOUR party, btw, to give up the "Third Way" austerity mindset, given that moving the Liberals back towards the center-left on economics and social spending is the ONLY chance for them to gain seats at the next election?  You know the Liberals cannot win over anybody by remaining committed to a tight-budget and pro-privatization program.

Debater

Ken B, there is a lot of supposition in those 2 paragraphs (which you have the right to engage in of course as I've pointed out in my own case).

You are parsing phrases.  Whether it is pro-BQ, or BQ-lite, the bottom line is that the NDP agrees with most of the BQ's policies on Quebec, and as some of the above links show, that concerns a lot of people.  And I'm not sure how the NDP has determined for Quebecers what they will never do again.  Using the 'never' word is risky.

As for the Libs, some people would say they have moved too far to the left and will do better once they come back to the centre where most Canadians are.  I am on the left, but the reality is that most Canadians are not.  (which is why the NDP can't form a federal government).  Canadians appear to want a somewhat fiscally conservative party, but one that is liberal socially.  Chretien realized this, and Harper knows it too.  Why do you think they have both been so successful?

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Debater:

 

Rex Murphy, Barabara Kay, and a story about Mulcair from 2009, really? Barbara Kay, the same Barbara Kay who when she is speaking with Charles Adler makes me want to say, get a room you two, that Barbara Kay. Really? Really? Really? Your Gazette Proof:

 

The NDP's language hypocrisy

 

  The Gazette November 2, 2011    

 

The federal opposition parties are protesting the nomination of Michael Ferguson as the next auditor-general because he doesn't speak French. The NDP has even submitted a complaint to Graham Fraser, Canada's official languages commissioner, because the nomination "fails to promote bilingualism."

During the last federal election, NDP posters in Quebec were French-only. During Thomas Mulcair's press conference when he announced he was running for the leadership of the NDP, there was a French-only poster on the dais.

The NDP, champions of bilingualism? What a joke!

Allan Brinson

Beaconsfield

 

Come on!

Look, I know that there is much discussion on this issue of "Assymetrical Federalism". I don't know if you were aroud during the referendum, but we almost lost that. So how does that become a Lib victory, especially given the rise of the BQ? I don't understand where you are coming from at all. Its like you are stuck in the 1970s somewhere and you are like Pricenss Liela saying help us PET, you're our only hope. The bottom line is we saw the rise of the BQ at the hands of you Libs and the Tories, and their demise only came at the hands of the NDP who Quebecers felt could speak for them and for their desire to remain in Canada at the same time.

Frankly, I really wish that someone else would speak to this. I don't know a lot about this but I know enough to know that what you Libs tried to do didnt' work and it almost cost us Canada. That WAS YOUR FAULT. You guys have NEVER accepted responsibility for it.

You know earlier in these threads you tried to use the old the Libs are the only ones who speak for immigrants schtick, and now you are using the old PET "we are the only ones who can perserve Canada", schtick. And that is what is. Its like something out of an old Vaudeville routine, or something you'd see on a Wayne and Shuster special on the CBC.

Again, I am at a loss to figure you out. You are either an old PET, Trudeau mania partisan who was around in the late 60s and 70s, or you are a you kid trying to recycle all the old Lib arguments, all of which frankly are based on playing the fear card. What the heck is the difference in either case between you and the Tories then. And if you don't like me calling you a kid, tough. Stop acting like one.

Man, I am getting sick of you. 

 

 

adma

A Prime Minister Maxime Bernier is more likely to puncture the NDP's Quebec bubble than the federal Grits are.

Newfoundlander_...

adma wrote:

A Prime Minister Maxime Bernier is more likely to puncture the NDP's Quebec bubble than the federal Grits are.

It would be interesting to see how Bernier would do as leader of either the Conservatives or even a provincial party, I believe it had been thought he may run for the ADQ leadership before. While his views seem to be quite different then those of the average Quebec voter he seems to be quite popular in his home province. 

MegB

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Debater:

 

Rex Murphy, Barabara Kay, and a story about Mulcair from 2009, really? Barbara Kay, the same Barbara Kay who when she is speaking with Charles Adler makes me want to say, get a room you two, that Barbara Kay. Really? Really? Really? Your Gazette Proof:

 

The NDP's language hypocrisy

 

  The Gazette November 2, 2011    

 

The federal opposition parties are protesting the nomination of Michael Ferguson as the next auditor-general because he doesn't speak French. The NDP has even submitted a complaint to Graham Fraser, Canada's official languages commissioner, because the nomination "fails to promote bilingualism."

During the last federal election, NDP posters in Quebec were French-only. During Thomas Mulcair's press conference when he announced he was running for the leadership of the NDP, there was a French-only poster on the dais.

The NDP, champions of bilingualism? What a joke!

Allan Brinson

Beaconsfield

 

Come on!

Look, I know that there is much discussion on this issue of "Assymetrical Federalism". I don't know if you were aroud during the referendum, but we almost lost that. So how does that become a Lib victory, especially given the rise of the BQ? I don't understand where you are coming from at all. Its like you are stuck in the 1970s somewhere and you are like Pricenss Liela saying help us PET, you're our only hope. The bottom line is we saw the rise of the BQ at the hands of you Libs and the Tories, and their demise only came at the hands of the NDP who Quebecers felt could speak for them and for their desire to remain in Canada at the same time.

Frankly, I really wish that someone else would speak to this. I don't know a lot about this but I know enough to know that what you Libs tried to do didnt' work and it almost cost us Canada. That WAS YOUR FAULT. You guys have NEVER accepted responsibility for it.

You know earlier in these threads you tried to use the old the Libs are the only ones who speak for immigrants schtick, and now you are using the old PET "we are the only ones who can perserve Canada", schtick. And that is what is. Its like something out of an old Vaudeville routine, or something you'd see on a Wayne and Shuster special on the CBC.

Again, I am at a loss to figure you out. You are either an old PET, Trudeau mania partisan who was around in the late 60s and 70s, or you are a you kid trying to recycle all the old Lib arguments, all of which frankly are based on playing the fear card. What the heck is the difference in either case between you and the Tories then. And if you don't like me calling you a kid, tough. Stop acting like one.

Man, I am getting sick of you. 

And I'm getting sick of telling you to back off from the personal attacks.  Stick to challenging the argument.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Rebecca. Ok.

Gaian

Yeah, best to let the innuendo go unchecked. Not all of the party's weaknesses have been explored yet, all the many openings for attacking a party in its attempts to replace seperatists,and vulnerable now to the likes of Pierre Karl Peladeau, old Quebec money seeking to control the media. It all helps to toughen a party's resolve. Do wish that the need to help the populace adjust to a bilingual, pan-Canadian party would not be confronted in a taunting manner, however. English Canada's moronic, francophobic element should not be encouraged.

Winston

Gaian wrote:
Yeah, best to let the innuendo go unchecked. Not all of the party's weaknesses have been explored yet, all the many openings for attacking a party in its attempts to replace seperatists,and vulnerable now to the likes of Pierre Karl Peladeau, old Quebec money seeking to control the media. It all helps to toughen a party's resolve. Do wish that the need to help the populace adjust to a bilingual, pan-Canadian party would not be confronted in a taunting manner, however. English Canada's moronic, francophobic element should not be encouraged.

Exactly my thoughts!  Thanks - I too am tired of the apologists for the Liberal-led, francophobic narrative that seems to be permeating these discussions, with the tacit support (by omission) of the moderators.

Uncle John

Mr. Prime Minister

I GUESS WE MIGHT AS WELL LET YOU STAND IN FRONT OF THE FLAG YOU LOVE THE MOST, MR. PRIME MINISTER.

wage zombie

Debater wrote:

And actually, voters outside of Quebec are becoming increasingly tired of 'asymmetrical federalism' getting out of control with regard to Quebec.  If the NDP does not pick up on this, it will benefit the Liberals and Conservatives.

Interestingly, when these voters you referred to are asked to explain what it is that is getting out of control, or any details about what it is they're talking about, they struggle to come up with anything.

Do you think asymmetrical federalism is getting out of control?  What's getting out of control?  Can you explain the excess is any special privileges Quebec is receiving?

Uncle John

I would hazard a guess that many people in Canada don't give Quebec a second thought from week to week. We have our own lives to live. On the satellite TV sometimes it lands on Montreal CBC and CTV where you hear some stuff about what is going on there. As far as I know many of the francophones in Toronto are not even from Quebec.

In terms of French, I would bet the average Anglophone Canadian is hearing more about Sarkozy and his pecadillos than anything from Quebec. And sometimes you have to wonder about people who obsess about Quebec, even though they do not live there, and there is almost zero effect on their lives from whatever Quebec did, does, or wants to do.

Debater

wage zombie wrote:

Debater wrote:

And actually, voters outside of Quebec are becoming increasingly tired of 'asymmetrical federalism' getting out of control with regard to Quebec.  If the NDP does not pick up on this, it will benefit the Liberals and Conservatives.

Interestingly, when these voters you referred to are asked to explain what it is that is getting out of control, or any details about what it is they're talking about, they struggle to come up with anything.

Do you think asymmetrical federalism is getting out of control?  What's getting out of control?  Can you explain the excess is any special privileges Quebec is receiving?

It's too late to go into a whole discussion about the complexities of this, but it is never far from the surface in Canada.  It is one of the defining struggles in the country for goodness sakes.  The debate never ends.

Just last night on Goldhawk on CPAC I listened to a woman call in from BC after the NDP leadership debate.  She identified herself as a Nathan Cullen supporter and then told Goldhawk and a couple of the reporters on the panel (eg. Elizabeth Thompson) that she didn't think it was right that anglophone candidates should have to speak French when many of the Quebec politicians do not speak English.

So it is always a debate that risks being ignited.

wage zombie

Debater wrote:

wage zombie wrote:

Debater wrote:

And actually, voters outside of Quebec are becoming increasingly tired of 'asymmetrical federalism' getting out of control with regard to Quebec.  If the NDP does not pick up on this, it will benefit the Liberals and Conservatives.

Interestingly, when these voters you referred to are asked to explain what it is that is getting out of control, or any details about what it is they're talking about, they struggle to come up with anything.

Do you think asymmetrical federalism is getting out of control?  What's getting out of control?  Can you explain the excess is any special privileges Quebec is receiving?

It's too late to go into a whole discussion about the complexities of this, but it is never far from the surface in Canada.  It is one of the defining struggles in the country for goodness sakes.  The debate never ends.

Just last night on Goldhawk on CPAC I listened to a woman call in from BC after the NDP leadership debate.  She identified herself as a Nathan Cullen supporter and then told Goldhawk and a couple of the reporters on the panel (eg. Elizabeth Thompson) that she didn't think it was right that anglophone candidates should have to speak French when many of the Quebec politicians do not speak English.

So it is always a debate that risks being ignited.

Anglophone politicians don't need to speak French.  Leaders of federal parties do.

And what does this have to do with asymmetrical federalism?

Seems to me like "Obfuscator" would be a better handle for you.

Marc

Even the Bloc has elected leaders who spoke English. Duceppe spoke better English than Chretien did!

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Ignited by whom, Debater?

Pages