What'll take to move the NDP from its current 20% in the polls to 25% in the next election, Part 3

120 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
What'll take to move the NDP from its current 20% in the polls to 25% in the next election, Part 3
NorthReport

Most popular of all the federal leaders, there is no doubt that Layton will be a huge asset for the NDP going into the next election

Quote:
Layton lovefest closes strange month in Ottawa

Now, let me continue with some more Jack Layton back-patting by noting, cancer or not, he's been by far the best leader at advocating Big Ideas.

 

The New Democrats have been at the forefront of almost every major issue, be it cancelling a corporate income tax, demanding pension reform, advocating auto sector bailouts, boosting EI benefits and even writing off the Afghanistan deployment as a lost cause long before it became fashionable.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=2751027[/quote]

NorthReport

As much as I support a change to a more representative voting system, it is not the kind of issue that is going to win elections. It will be the economy, it has always been the economy, and it always will be the economy, that wins or loses elections.

Sask Man

A miracle, nothing short of a miracle.

Everybody loves Jack no question, nobody can stand the NDP!

Jack should be the leader of the Liberals, then the Liberals would have a chance, in some ways he is much better suited than Iggy.

ottawaobserver

Things getting a little boring over on the Blogging Tories and Free Dominion, Sask Man?

NorthReport

Brad, or whatever your name is, how about speaking for yourself. 

melovesproles

Quote:
As much as I support a change to a more representative voting system, it is not the kind of issue that is going to win elections. It will be the economy, it has always been the economy, and it always will be the economy, that wins or loses elections.

No offence, but that's a lazy generalization to make about Canadian politics and you don't have to go back very far to see it disproved.
Martin wasn't given the boot because he was seen as an incompetent economic manager. Corruption, arrogance, and public disgust and embarressment at the state of Canadian politics were far more significant than the economy.
When it looked like we were going to have another election last year I heard the same kind of widespread public embarrasment and disgust with the political class in our country. The reality that our democracy is broken has sunk in for a lot of Canadians. The issue is much larger than just electoral reform but pretending that that isn't a key piece of the puzzle is just feigning ignorance.
Anyways, unfortunately, I think it's too late for the NDP to make much hay on the issue, they are widely perceived as only supporting reform when it helps them and although not as arrogant and status-quo as the Conservatives and Liberals, just as self-interested. The only successful approach would have required an attempt to build a non-partisan alliance and trust that the crediblity reaped by such an effort would be it's own reward in the context of growing public dissatisfaction with the anti-democratic actions of the status-quo parties.

ottawaobserver

melovesproles wrote:

Martin wasn't given the boot because he was seen as an incompetent economic manager. Corruption, arrogance, and public disgust and embarressment at the state of Canadian politics were far more significant than the economy.

I strongly agree with you about this, but I disagree that advocating proportional representation in an election platform would work either for the NDP electorally, or for improving support for electoral reform.

melovesproles wrote:

I think it's too late for the NDP to make much hay on the issue, they are widely perceived as only supporting reform when it helps them and although not as arrogant and status-quo as the Conservatives and Liberals, just as self-interested.

I don't agree it's too late, and I think your characterization could apply equally to anyone in political life.  Admittedly I'm a glass half full kind of girl.

melovesproles wrote:

The only successful approach would have required an attempt to build a non-partisan alliance and trust that the crediblity reaped by such an effort would be it's own reward in the context of growing public dissatisfaction with the anti-democratic actions of the status-quo parties.

Here's the part where I can tell you've never run a national campaign ("and trust that the credibility reaped by such an effort would be it's [sic] own reward").

NorthReport

mls

This is a thread about the NDP so it appears that you're missing the point. The NDP is constantly being attacked by the right-winger Cons and Libs, with their allies in the msp, as not having economic prowess. When it comes to the NDP election campaign it needs to be primarily about economics. Focusing too much on all those other diversions, will not help the NDP win many more seats. The NDP needs to grow its working class vote.

Fidel

Cueball wrote:
For example, using the cipher one might then be able to start talking about Teddy Roosevelt, and get answers on Cheri Dinovo.

And if we want answers on Pinocchio's labour policies in Ontario, we should break into a conversation about the Middle East as an indication of our interest in ... Pinocchio's labour policies or the lack of them regarding a marathon miners strike in Sudbury, Puerto Ontariariario.

RedRover

The party needs to reel in the more radical elements, end the special relationship with labour, and elevate more popular MPs to speak on issues of concern to the general public.

If the party wants to be anything more than mid-to-high teen also ran, then it needs to finds out what matters to people and put some moderate and credible spokespeople out there to push the party position.

Some recommended changes...

- Demote Libby Davies from House Leader and Deputy Leader.  Her positions on Israel, prostitution, and decriminalization of pot are out of line with the majority of the population, and especially those in traditional New Democrat bastions - Saskatchewan and Manitoba in particular.  That being said, she should remain our Critic for Housing and possibly even get another responsibility such as Critic for Infrastructure.  A good parliamentarian with a loyal and narrow following, but she should be given important responsibilities related to urban issues while not speaking for the party beyond those issues.

- Elevate Mulcair to a clear #2 in the caucus.  He is well spoken, flawless bilingually, and has experience working in a big tent party (PLQ).  We need to learn how to build coalitions and win support from moderate voters who are not activists by trade.

- Ending the special relationship with organized would signify that the party stands alone with the people.  Unions are an increasingly spent force, and their members tend to vote for Conservatives more than New Democrats.  I would like to see full repudiation of all special interests - labour, environment, banks, oil companies, religious groups, etc - and the transformation of the party into a true paty of the people.  As it is now, the party is addicted to elite endorsements and on the ground support from powerful union locals.  This is okay, but the membership or the organizations tend to vote for others, and labour activists tend to be a 'closed' group that has never embraced new blood in riding associations - especially business owners, police, and neighbourhood associations (at least that is my experience in a number of ridings around the country).

- Elevate populists - Charlie Angus, Jean Crowder, Nathan Cullen, Chris Charlton, and Peter Stoffer should become the face of the new moderate party.  They shouldn't necessarily be elevated in the hierarchy, but they need to get more play in regional markets.    The party has a history of being stodgy old labourites/activits/hippies and these folks tend to break that mould and are able to hit the right notes with the general public on a number of issues.  Other newer MPs could be given more play in some other areas too like Fin Donnelly, Jim Maloway, and John Rafferty but they are not really ready for prime time like the others.

- The party needs better candidates.  Forgetting the candidate debacles of 2008, which even by our standards was a crazy election, we need Mayors, councillors, trustees, and reeve's to run and bring their organizations with them.  Any Mayor who has been elected in any community in the last 10 years and is under the age of 60 should be approached to gauge interest.  We need help on the ground in ridings outside of our target areas.  New blood = new members = new money = better results.

- This is the last and really important point - come up with new policies that reflect old values.  The country seems to share our values - peace, opportunity, equality, justice, cooperation - but our policies are always ot of step.  We tend to 'give,' 'ensure,' 'provide,' and 'gurantee' things, but the general public - even those without - would rather have it a different way.  It seems that the Canadian public prefers personal 'accountability' and want the government to help provide then with an 'opportunity,' 'advantage,' or 'assistance' when they try to attain their goals against the odds.  Changing our approach on policy to providing opportunities rather than guaranteeing (all but the most basic) goods and services would probably be more in line with what the public wants to support.

Successful left-wing parties have figured out how to make this leap.  It takes some research, but overall a committment to succeed electorally and not just 'represent' ideals.  Take water with wine, offer practical solution that are in line with the sort of policies the public expects to see and that reinforces deeply held values and the party would be on the right track.  Putting out new, friendly, popular, cooperative, and even happy (gasp!) people into the media would signify the transition of a party that was happy to be an also ran to a party that wants to govern in the interests and with the backing of the masses.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

So, you want the NDP  to become Liberals?

adma

Well, I think it's worth learning from the Liberals, to whatever guarded degree.

Speaking of which, when it comes to so-called electoral populism (among the issues Stuart Parker was grappling with in the previous thread), keep in mind that it needn't equate strictly with Reform-ish anti-establishment; in fact, it explains the appeal and success of Jean Chretien's Liberals as much if not more so--the "hell of a guy" factor.

Especially when it comes to Ontario, it's that 93-97-00 Chretien "hell of a guy" electorate that should be treated as a potential pool--particularly as it's the same bloc of voters that led to Ed Broadbent's polling honeymoon in '87, and that Layton does "hell of a guy" better than Iggy...

ottawaobserver

Boom Boom, you beat me to the punch.

Now of course, the financial relationship with our friends in the labour movement has already been ended, although we still benefit from the building they bought us before the rules changed.

As to Libby and Mulcair, they're both Deputy Leaders right now, which is a great way to balance of left and right, east and west, male and female, gay and straight, and Layton has shown a real gift for keeping a diverse group people pulling in the same direction, of which this is a perfect example.  Why would you want to up-end that particular success.  Also, she's the first and only female house leader, and does a great job with it, so honestly I think that suggestion is just dumb.

As to candidate search, it's another major preoccupation of the leader personally as well as everyone else.  If you have good individual suggestions for candidates, you should send them along.

But they are already helping to build up the riding associations between elections: you may have heard of the Local Victories Challenge fundraising program?

Your piece on personal accountability and opportunity and related BS is hooey.  Let's see that for the companies who stuck us in this mess first, like Nortel and Abitibi.  I'm interested in pensions as a right, and anywhere else they've tried anything else, eventually everything has fallen badly apart.

RedRover

Boom Boom wrote:

So, you want the NDP  to become Liberals?

Ah yes...the old..."if you're not old labour, then you're a Liberal" argument.

No. I want the NDP to be successful while being loyal to its values.

Fidel

Ya I agree. The Liberals may not collapse and could shed their Libranos image with a comeback. I don't like our obsolete electoral system for one thing. A relatively slight gain in voter support for either of the two old line parties has the potential to hand either party the phony majority dictatorial power they've been pining for.

RedRover

Well observer...the suggestion was start with every elected Mayor in the last 10 years under the age of 60.  Spitballing it, I think you'd have a list of about 250 or so, and you may actually get 5 to 10 who still feel they still have something to offer.  Work then to MLA's/MPP's, councillors, etc....and well...just make a a run of the mill database.  Surely, the party has someone in charge of candidate search that could construct such database?

On your second point, the party frankly doesn't need balance.  It needs success.  Balance is worth about 18.5% of the vote.  We know this.  If you don't try to articulate and embody the kind of policies and government that the people want, then the won't ask you to enact those policies or govern.  It's pretty simple really.

By the way, you can still be loyal to values and principles of the party without actually having two Deputy Leaders.  Really, is anyone going to call Jack on his gay, environmental, and urban, credentials?  He can represent those interests as well or better than Libby.  We don't need to satisfy the left further - they run the party and have had it idling it in neutral for about three years now. 

As for the gender issue related to demoting Libby, it's true that we would be losing a female Deputy Leader and House Leader, but Jean Crowder still occupies the position of Caucus Chair if memory serve me correctly, and I am sure that Judy Wasylycia-Leis, Charlton, or Olivia are all able to assume a more significant position such as the House Leader role.  They could even benefit from the greater exposure that such a position could bring, and would certainly be a more moderate voice for the party.

Acutally observer, I'm quite impressed with the new local fundraising initiative, but it will take years to make a difference not a few months like it was floated for (if it is the same program I am thinking of).  It was about 10 years overdue and needs a long time to make a difference, but it is a step in the right direction.

As for the personal accountability, etc...observer...you need only look at the results of past elections.  Parties that put an emphasis on individual and familial responsibility have triumphed (hugely) over parties that trumpet a long list of collective rights.  The federal NDP has maxed out where it can go without tweaking it's outdated approach.  Moderating the position of the party - from providing and ensuring to assisting and encouraging - is an absolute necessity since the party is badly out of step with the public on approach and policy.

People who cling to the status quo in the hopes of another party collapsing are also another problem.  Cultural changes are necessary, and anyone who can't recognize that is just dead weight and their continued influence is a barrier to the party acheiving the breakthrough we all seem to seek.

PS - ending the special relationship with labour means revoking their right to a guaranteed percentage of delegates at conventions, especially leadership conventions, as well as position on Federal Council and riding associations.  Union members can buy memberships and win votes or organize around a leadership candidate as every other member must if they want to participate in the process.  The special relationship has run it's course and it's time the membership took control over the party in its entirety.

 

ottawaobserver

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on most of your items then, Red Rover.  Just because you've decided cosmetically that one individual looks more acceptable to moderates than another, you would toss out someone with experience in the middle of a minority parliament?  That's such a dumb idea I don't know why I bother to answer twice.  Libby does a fantastic job as House Leader, and you'd reward her for this by sending her back to the back benches?

Also, what makes you think they aren't working through such a database in terms of candidate search?  Because no-one could have thought of that idea before you did?

There are plenty of people on this board who think I'm a moderate social democrat who's prepared to do anything to win, but that's not the case.  I actually want to be in an actual social democratic party, and what you've described above isn't that any more.  I already left the Liberal party, why would I want to turn the NDP into a carbon copy of it.  But, I guess according to you, I'm just a dead weight.  Fine I guess I can stop sending money then.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

some thoughts....
..our political system is biased and corrupt. to get elected all parties have to play by these corrupt and biased rules. so the parties begin to reshape themselves to fit these rules. after time passes they become what they create. it doesn't matter what their roots are they need to change to be better able to compete within this system.
..in this system the ndp need only get around 40% of the vote to get elected. this is not enough support to take on corporate power. especially knowing that the 40% is not hard core support. yet challenging the corporate model is key.  
..the only way out is electoral reform. to take on corporate power, to make real change the ndp needs to be a part of a much broader coalition that can force and then defend  change. prop rep is one way of bringing people together to do this. in my mind it is much more important to break with the fptp then to try and decided the "best" way to go now. it makes more sense to have discussions on what kind of political system we want when we are under pr.  

adma

If we're speaking in terms of a sexual-orientation stigma, what makes Libby Davies unacceptable for the NDP that doesn't make Kathleen Wynne unacceptable for the Ontario Liberals?

And if it's a matter of "radical leftism", it isn't the queer/left combo that monkey-wrenched Svend Robinson's political crediblility.  It's the klepto/schizo combo.  (Pardon my French.)

ottawaobserver

I would agree with JKR that it's the framing of the democracy issue that's key.  Democratic reform is a good issue to run with, Electoral Reform (ie PR) is too obscure.

Adma, I think it's because Libby represents poor people.  It seems to make middle-class folks uncomfortable for some reason.

RedRover

ottawaobserver wrote:

Also, what makes you think they aren't working through such a database in terms of candidate search?  Because no-one could have thought of that idea before you did?

Nah.  It was the bumper crop the 'system' produced last time.  Whole weeks of the campaign was spent talking about the fuck-up candidates of the fourth party.  I didn't think of it, every other party did.

RedRover

ottawaobserver wrote:

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on most of your items then, Red Rover.  Just because you've decided cosmetically that one individual looks more acceptable to moderates than another, you would toss out someone with experience in the middle of a minority parliament?  That's such a dumb idea I don't know why I bother to answer twice.  Libby does a fantastic job as House Leader, and you'd reward her for this by sending her back to the back benches?

How's that all working out?  We've been polling at or lower than our last election result throughout this parliament.  Despite one of the most popular leaders in the party's history, people still won't vote for people who appear to be radical, beholden to labour, and out of touch with the majority of voters on the issue of the day.

Cosmetically?  It's got nothing to do with appearances, and everything to do with substance.  It is elevating certain people in part because of their more moderate positions, the fact that they are "in touch" with the majority of voters outside of Vancouver, and can communicate more effectively with the masses.

Dumping a House Leader in a minority, as part of a major overhaul of critic areas, makes complete sense when your party is going nowhere in the polls.  Take the people who can't move the party out of the spotlight and move people into the spotlight who understand the average voter. 

It's time for more than a cosmetic change observer.

ottawaobserver

I won't defend the candidate search last time.  But I think it's an unwarranted assumption to believe that no-one would have learned anything from that.

If you're so smart, why don't you go and offer your services to them.  I'm sure with your friendly demeanour you'd have no trouble persuading people of your strategic genius.

remind remind's picture

Never in all my years here, have I ever observed redrover to be pro-NDP.

As such, if he is advocating the NDP "do" anything, I am sure he believes that if we would do that, the Liberals would benefit.

 

And this antipathy towards Libby and "labour" is nasty IMV, the other parties can be filled right up with "business" and no one says a word about getting business the hell out of other party's pockets, even as we know corporations have gotten us into a big mess environmentally and social justice wise.

 

Moreover, if corporations especially in BC, continue the way they are, the NDP labour positive positioning might well bring on a resurrgence of actual you know pro-labour positioning and support.

As those who labour, who have bought into "the company" swill, are going to get a huge awakening, in the not too distant future.

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

Check it Redrover!

A discussion about Cheri Dinovo's positioning on Israeli apartheid is enough for NDP stalwarts to come forth and wax poetic on the issue of the NDP traditional values and its relationship to labour, but nary a peep is heard in the face of a direct attack. Hey folks, bobbing and weaving didn't win Mohamed Ali any championships, he also had to land some punches, just so you know.

Still working on that code!

Wink

Redrover, I know you came blowing in here thinking that you were going to ruffle some feathers here among party "radical" activists, but the smoke your blowing, and what your smoking ain't nothing but a warm breeze on a summer day. Don't expect any disargreements here.

News flash: NDP can't top the Liberals, cause the single issue that motivates the non-conservaitve vote, is who is most likely to beat the Tories, not any distinguishing features that makes the NDP stand out from the Liberals. There are none. Canadians gave up looking for those long ago cause it causes eye strain.

Most Canadians probably have no idea that Unions have a fixed percentage of the delgates at conventions, nor is it likely to bother them much, since realistically speaking if anything, Union influence is as likely to assert the status quo, over any radical ideas you have convinced yourself infest the NDP. Likewise, the membership are as likely to vote Liberal as they are NDP, like the rest of Canadians, for the very same reasons: Renewed perscriptions for eyeglasses are among those things not covered under healthcare. 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..political parties are tools as are unions. we form unions to protect ourselves. at one time we wanted social democratic parties to do the same. this is not happening near to the extent that is needed in canada. the ndp in power is not the same as the ndp in opposition. recent events in europe show that the social democrats in power are supporting capital in it's bid to make the working class pay for the financial crisis. this makes them part of the problem not the solution. democratic reform needs to be more than a campaign slogan the ndp needs to be democratic reform. pr opens things up a crack. i believe it will be enough of a crack to change business as usual. a real possibility for the population as a whole to express it's political voice. a chance to force democratic reform. in bc the first pr referendum won 57% of the vote. it didn't meet the threshold of 60% but the numbers forced another vote. the second referendum was sabotaged by both parties. my belief is that the electorite is more soffisticated then is generally believed. 

RedRover

You don't like my suggestions Remind because they clash with your world-view. 

Who said anything about "companies"  Remind.  In fact if you actually read my first post, then you would see this..." I would like to see full repudiation of all special interests - labour, environment, banks, oil companies, religious groups, etc - and the transformation of the party into a true paty of the people."

And that idea...power to the people and away from special from interests...is what the threatens the NDP elite as much as the status-quo pro-business parties. They just have different clients, and no where is the average person represented.

But hey why read, when you can attack the messenger right? Oh right...it's because I have 'red' in my name, and I must be a shill for the Liberal Party of Canada...because y'know that colour has never been associated with socialism of any kind right?

The problem is combination of a) some people think things are going just swell, b) others think the NDP will simply benefit from the collapse of others, and c) yet more think there is a conspiracy involving the media, business, the electoral system and others against the rise of the fourth party that always precludes a breakthrough.

Not sharing a goal (power), recognizing a problem (failure) and avoiding accountability (regarding said failure) are other reasons why this party is treading water.  Fix those things by getting people to moderate their policies (not abandon their values), commit towards a goal of governing, realizing we are presently failing in our shared goal, and accepting that it may be our fault and then we talk progress and moving ahead of 20%.  But that takes a shocking level of honesty and putting aside our own personal interests for the greater good, and I fear we just aren't ready for that.

PS - I don't get off on agitating cueball.  This is what I believe to be the truth as I see it.  I'm tired of sugar coating things.  People need a wake up call.

Fidel

Cueball wrote:
There are none. Canadians gave up looking for those long ago cause it causes eye strain.

Yes, yes, Canadians have strained to see the theoretical ray of sunshine between the Tories and Liberals over the last half dozen years. And all there is is sameness. They are one Bay Street party appearing as two. Canada's two old line parties - still fooling Canadians after 140 years' worth of elitist dictatorship in the colonial outpost of Ottawa.

[url=[/url]">http://www.ndp.ca/press/7273747576777879-happy-79th-vote-liberals][IMG]h...

RedRover

ottawaobserver wrote:

I won't defend the candidate search last time.  But I think it's an unwarranted assumption to believe that no-one would have learned anything from that.

If you're so smart, why don't you go and offer your services to them.  I'm sure with your friendly demeanour you'd have no trouble persuading people of your strategic genius.

If your faith is properly placed in the brain trust of the party, then they probably read this board since this seems to be a sounding board for the party base among others.  They can read all of our suggestions and enact them as they see fit. 

Cueball Cueball's picture

RedRover wrote:

You don't like my suggestions Remind because they clash with your world-view. 

Damn! Now there is an obeservation worth 13 words in a row! Heaven forbid that someone should have a world view. And should they contest yours, what are they doing? Shooting the messenger of course! Why bother? The messenger has said nothing here other than gripe about some petty points of order on procedure, that allegedly have something to do with something called "radical" and "moderate" policies, without once ezpressly defining what radical "policies'" are acually in question.

That is what happens when a "world-view" becomes entirely composed of abstract nouns, like "radical" and "moderate", I suppose. Hard to contest, really, no reason to shoot either, since there aint nothing there, and that was my point you fit in just fine. No feathers ruffled. Relax.

Let me know when you come up with some concrete reasons that you don't like unions or Libby Davies that amount to something a little more concrete than 2 legs bad 4 legs good... or is that the reverse... its kind of hard to tell what you are standing on, or even if you are standing at all.

Fidel

And so if you vote Liberal, you might as well vote for the Harpers. It's what Iggy and the Liberals do all the time in Canada's Parliament.

The Liberals are a redundant conservative party.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Fidel wrote:

And so if you vote Liberal, you might as well vote for the Harpers. It's what Iggy and the Liberals do all the time in Canada's Parliament.

Thanks for helping out with my code book Fidel.

So far, Cheri Dinovo will get me a conversation about Teddy Roosevelt, 100 years ago, or Labour Unions in the NDP. Now I know that if I talk about Labour Unions or Libby Davies in the NDP, I can get into a conversation about the Liberal voting record. I just hope I can get the book done by election time, so Canadians can be aprised where ya'll stand on the issues.

Now at least I know that the code is not directly associative, so I can not reverse it. A conversation about Cheri Dinovo may get me a discussion about Labour unions in the NDP, but a conversation about labour unions in the NDP wont get me a conversation about Cheri Dinovo.

That will make think harder. Frown

Fidel

Yes-yes, it's a sad day for labour when Pinocchio McGuilty and "Liberals" lose the Teddy Roosevelt labour dispute sweepstakes in Sudbury, Puerto Ontario. DAY-O!

Cueball Cueball's picture

Come on dude... I dare yah to say it: "Having reserved delegates for Labour Unions in the NDP is a good thing."

Fidel

I think striking miners in Sudbury would prolly be back to work with a contract if Teddy the Roughrider was running things in Toronto today. But he's not. All we have is Geppetto's boy with a phony-baloney majority and thumbing his extended nose at ordinary people still out on the picket line. I think Pinocchio hates real people with real families who need to put food on the table and roofs over their heads. That's what I think.

Cueball Cueball's picture

And we have the phoney-baloney party of the "left". Look at it. You can't even stick up for fundamental organization party platforms. Yet you expect Canadians to expect you to stand up for them? No problem exploiting the labour history of the NDP when it comes down to abusing childrens nursery stories to attack Dalton McGuinty, but defending labour in the NDP is just out of the question. If voters were flies the NDP would have a chance of winning an election.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Are you gonna take that abuse, Fidel? C'mon! Rough him up a little, eh?

Just give me a sec to get my popcorn.

KenS

You should be paying Fidel fee for service.

Fidel

Cueball wrote:
If voters were flies the NDP would have a chance of winning an election.

Not flies, slobs. That's what the two Bay Street parties think of ordinary people. We're just stupid slobs, and they only need about a quarter of the slobs to be dumb enough to vote for them. Their opinions of ordinary people in general are quite low.

Vansterdam Kid

Quote:
Come on dude... I dare yah to say it: "Having reserved delegates for Labour Unions in the NDP is a good thing."

I can't speak for Fidel, but I don't think those guaranteed delegates are a force for progressive change, let alone democratic. If anything they're a force for ossification. Frankly, I don't see why Unions should be so special as to have more than one member one vote, just because they did back in the 1960's.

Unions only care about a narrow section of their constituency, that being their full time due paying members. They seem to be willing to throw part time and auxiliary members interests under the bus, if those interests aren't aligned with their full time members, despite the fact that the former need their protection to a greater degree. While individual members of unions often donate time and money to the NDP, and it's clear that the NDP's interests on workers issues are more in line with most Unions than they are Corporations, I don't think Unions are always progressive and I don't think they as institutions offer the NDP very much beyond headaches in environments where there are bans on Union and Corporate donations.

Fidel

Some countries do believe in free labour markets. Not our Bay Street stoogeocrats though. They hate workers and ordinary people in general. Pinocchio and Steve are little more than bribed hirelings of the North American elite.

Cueball Cueball's picture

There you go Rover, nothing to fear, you have even mussed a single hair here. So stop griping like your some kind of outcast misunderstood rebel. You aren't.

VK: Not even going to argue it, though I will note that such a position should run concurrently in principle with opposition to "whipped voting", and any system that guarantees a constituency.

RedRover

Cueball wrote:

RedRover wrote:

Let me know when you come up with some concrete reasons that you don't like unions or Libby Davies that amount to something a little more concrete than 2 legs bad 4 legs good... or is that the reverse... its kind of hard to tell what you are standing on, or even if you are standing at all.

Wow...you folks really don't read postings huh?

I don't dislike Libby Davies or unions.  The thread title (no code needed) asks what it will take to move the party towards 25%.  Fair enough...dump Libby as House Leader (her policies and views on Israel, prostitution, and legalization of drugs are out of step with the general public) and end the special relationship with unions (they are a special interest in the party system) and return the power to the people by rejecting ALL connections to special interests (unions, environmentalist, corporations, religious groups).

Simple enough, or do you need a code breaker Cueball?

RedRover

The general idea, in a nutshell, is to be loyal to our values but be flexible on policy. 

Policy is meant to reinforce values, not the other way around.

If we take our traditional values - peace, opportunity, equality, justice, cooperation - and find new policies to promote them (popular policies), then we would be getting somewhere.

With arguably the most popular federal leader and widely held values,   I think the problem posed in the thread title can be attributed to unpopular policies, perceived influence of a special interest on the party (labour), real influence of a special interest on the party (labour), and weak riding associations and inferior local candidates.

KenS

RedRover wrote:

With arguably the most popular federal leader and widely held values,   I think the problem posed in the thread title can be attributed to unpopular policies, perceived influence of a special interest on the party (labour), real influence of a special interest on the party (labour), and weak riding associations and inferior local candidates.

I think Id call the problem more complex than unpopular policies, and wouldnt even boil it down to that. But its a useful discussion.

Nobody cares about the real influence of labour. And the mythology of the too close connection will love on with positioning we tend to take- irregardless of things like the guaranteed delegate vote share.

Weak riding associations, yes. Part of the general problem with Canadian politics, but no excuse anyway. Quality of local candidates tends strongly to follow party standing, not other way. Though that can be 'goosed' locally when and where possible.

Fidel

Our obsolete electoral system dictates that we run candidates with the best chances of winning a first-past-the-ghost race to the 35 or 40 percent finish line. The stereotypical FPTP winner takes all is usually a white male with education and resume as long as his arm. It doesn't guarantee that the best person for the job wins though. The people in my riding voted for a white male doctor representing the Liberal Party years ago. The locals decided one day to take a bus trip to the capital to see their man in action. And they were disappointed during the surprise visit to see their guy asleep with a newspaper over his head during a debate. His narcoleptic performance that day earned him a nickname at home I won't repeat here.

So I don't think we should kid ourselves that the system we have promotes wide open competition in political contests. It doesn't. We could put Jesus Christ up for election, and in most ridings he would still have to pass the gauntlet of the usual cliquish minority of white people doing the voting and the choosing. I hate to say it but the colour of skin or ethnic majority in a given riding should match the same superficial attributes of the political candidate running for election.

RedRover

Fair enough Fidel...but what does that have do with the thread title? 

Is the argument that we should just pack it in because the system conspires against us, or should we just run white men with great education and long resumes?

Is there any hope, and if so how what would you do to get us closer to 25%?

A_J

I believe that streak was finally broken back in the fall when the NDP stepped up to take over from the Liberals for a while:

Quote:

The Conservatives' financial motion, which includes the popular tax credit for home renovation, passed in a 224-74 vote. The government garnered the promised support of the Bloc Québécois and the NDP.

Commons passes confidence motion: NDP, Bloc support Conservatives

 

NorthReport

What's with the anti-labour comments here?

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Some are advocating the incredibly creative and original idea that IF ONLY the NDP would finally WEAN ITSELF from the dead hand of labour then all would be well in the NDP house and blessedness would flow like water. uh huh. (wink)

Pages

Topic locked