Who are u supporting for NDP Leader, how will u mark your ballot, and why? #10

73 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
Who are u supporting for NDP Leader, how will u mark your ballot, and why? #10

;;

NorthReport

My ballot looks like this:

 

1 - Singh

2 - Ashton

3 - Mulcair

Mucker

I'm curious where we stand right now, in terms of the Babble decision?

CanadaApple

I didn't get a reply to this in the last thread, so I'll ask again, does anyone know what the deadline is for voting in-advanced online?

NorthReport

CanadaApple wrote:

I didn't get a reply to this in the last thread, so I'll ask again, does anyone know what the deadline is for voting in-advanced online?

 

Voting the day of starts at 5 PM on Friday, March 23rd so it must be then or before that.

Check leadership2012.ca for details I believe

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Mucker wrote:

I'm curious where we stand right now, in terms of the Babble decision?

Huh? What babble decision?

NorthReport

The deadline for voting by mail is now March 22nd. We must receive your ballot by then for it to be counted.

Remember, you can also vote:

  1. Online
  2. At Convention
    If you haven't registered for Convention, there's still time to be a part of this historic event in person. Click here to sign up online, but act now - spaces are limited and going fast.

IMPORTANT: Make sure to bring your voter ID and PIN to Convention. You can't vote without them!

Questions?
Call our Voter Hotline at 1-866-525-2555, extension 8001 (english) and 8002 (french),
or email membership@ndp.ca.

Together, we'll choose our new leader - and Canada's next Prime Minister.

Thank you for being a part of it.

Heather Wilson
Director of Membership
Canada’s New Democrats

P.S. For more information, please visit leadership2012.ca

Mucker

Boom Boom wrote:

Mucker wrote:

I'm curious where we stand right now, in terms of the Babble decision?

Huh? What babble decision?

The Babble choice for leader, the tally that's being taken of Babbler's ballot by ballot support...

I couldn't think of a better way to describe it.  Sorry.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Oh - okay - thanks!

 

NorthReport

Oops

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

1. Ashton

2. Nash

Ashton because, although I don't think she can win this time out, she brings renewal and fresh ideas and strong ideals to the party.

Nash because she represents the NDP I want, and she's ready for prime time today.

DSloth

Mucker wrote:

I'm curious where we stand right now, in terms of the Babble decision?

Added the update at post #4

DSloth

 

 

[url=http://www.mediafire.com/?lo7wxook50ea4j3]Babble Declared Preferences 15.3.12[/url]

Final Ballot: Mulcair 48, Cullen 26

1st Ballot: Mulcair 33, Saganash 12, Cullen 12, Ashton 12, Nash 8, Topp 8, Singh 3, Dewar 2.
2nd Ballot: Mulcair 34, Saganash 12, Cullen 13, Ashton 12, Nash 8, Topp 8, Singh 3.
3rd Ballot: Mulcair 34, Saganash 12, Cullen 14, Ashton 13, Nash 8, Topp 8.
4th Ballot: Mulcair 37, Saganash 12, Cullen 19, Ashton 17.
5th Ballot: Mulcair 39, Cullen 19, Ashton 20

Trends: There were only marginal movements in the numbers but sometimes that's all you need to effect a seismic shift in the course of the balloting. Peggy Nash's slow descent has finally knocked her to the lower tier. This can be a real danger for a candidate with a lot of second ballot support like Nash enjoys on Babble, she never gets to profit from Topp or Ashton voters' second choice because she was knocked out too early.  Cullen may be a deeper threat to Mulcair anyway since a lot of Mulcair's second ballot support was locked up with his main competitor in this scenario.

Mucker

Awesome.  Thanks DSloth.

NorthReport

Ditto.

Gaian

Mulcair and then Cullen, because from the looks of the change in climate gripping my part of Ontario, records falliing like the hail that hit this morning, Homo sapiens really doesn't have that much time to decide on how to leave a decent legacy for the junior types.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Okay, here's how I voted by mail-in ballot (please don't throw rocks at me):

1. Mulcair

2. Nash

3. Ashton

Should I duck and run for cover now?  Laughing

Hoodeet

Boom Boom wrote:

Okay, here's how I voted by mail-in ballot (please don't throw rocks at me):

1. Mulcair

2. Nash

3. Ashton

Should I duck and run for cover now?  Laughing

Well,  what do you know?  same three I voted for, just in a different order!  Perhaps I should be running for cover once Mulcair is crowned.

Hoodeet (JW)

Hoodeet

Boom Boom wrote:

Okay, here's how I voted by mail-in ballot (please don't throw rocks at me):

1. Mulcair

2. Nash

3. Ashton

Should I duck and run for cover now?  Laughing

/quote-Hoodeet:

Well,  what do you know?  same three I voted for, just in a different order!  Perhaps I should be running for cover once Mulcair is crowned.

 

 

NicHull

My spouse and I just voted online, we have exactly the same ranking:

1 - Mulcair

2 - Ashton

3 - Cullen

4 - Nash

5 - Topp

6 - Singh

7 - Dewar

Tide Waters

Been a looooong time since I've written a post on babble, although I have sometimes stopped by to catch up on babbler interests...

This leadership race was interesting from the perspective of someone who hasn't met any of the contenders. I'd only the contestants' debate performances; campaign events and materials; and experience, if any, as MPs to go by.

I ignored media hype. Journalists seem desperate for a firebrand.

Also ignored endorsements. They tend to put me off especially when used, e.g., in campaign material to send me a message not from the candidate but from a member of the party elite. Such 3rd-person tactics create a distance that makes me uncomfortable.

Anyway, I voted yesterday:

1. Cullen; 2. Mulcair; 3. Topp.

Did rank all seven candidates, but I think it's doubtful it'll go more than three ballots.

algomafalcon

DSloth wrote:

 

 

[url=http://www.mediafire.com/?lo7wxook50ea4j3]Babble Declared Preferences 15.3.12[/url]

Final Ballot: Mulcair 48, Cullen 26

1st Ballot: Mulcair 33, Saganash 12, Cullen 12, Ashton 12, Nash 8, Topp 8, Singh 3, Dewar 2.
2nd Ballot: Mulcair 34, Saganash 12, Cullen 13, Ashton 12, Nash 8, Topp 8, Singh 3.
3rd Ballot: Mulcair 34, Saganash 12, Cullen 14, Ashton 13, Nash 8, Topp 8.
4th Ballot: Mulcair 37, Saganash 12, Cullen 19, Ashton 17.
5th Ballot: Mulcair 39, Cullen 19, Ashton 20

Trends: There were only marginal movements in the numbers but sometimes that's all you need to effect a seismic shift in the course of the balloting. Peggy Nash's slow descent has finally knocked her to the lower tier. This can be a real danger for a candidate with a lot of second ballot support like Nash enjoys on Babble, she never gets to profit from Topp or Ashton voters' second choice because she was knocked out too early.  Cullen may be a deeper threat to Mulcair anyway since a lot of Mulcair's second ballot support was locked up with his main competitor in this scenario.

 

My understandingg is that Saganash votes will not be counted at the convention since he withdrew from the race.

While its interesting to note that he still has substantial support here, would it affect the ballot tabulation if you went for next choice on 2nd ballot?

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Gaian wrote:

Mulcair and then Cullen, because from the looks of the change in climate gripping my part of Ontario, records falliing like the hail that hit this morning, Homo sapiens really doesn't have that much time to decide on how to leave a decent legacy for the junior types.

And you have the nerve to cast wide swaths about the "great whatever"?

None of these candidates will do sweet fuck all for the environment. They'll all pay lip service to big business and the only legacy you'll leave is sympathy for you believing that the legacy you desire will come about through modern electoral politics. Sorry to be blunt Gaian, I'll likely lean Mulcair also, due to the unfortunate times we live in but your painting of the picture seems very abstract.

I'm with you in spirit but perhaps you'll recognize sometime, that your take of the situation is just as lacking as the unread like myself. We need to find somewhere to meet in the middle.

DSloth

algomafalcon wrote:

DSloth wrote:

 

 

[url=http://www.mediafire.com/?lo7wxook50ea4j3]Babble Declared Preferences 15.3.12[/url]

Final Ballot: Mulcair 48, Cullen 26

1st Ballot: Mulcair 33, Saganash 12, Cullen 12, Ashton 12, Nash 8, Topp 8, Singh 3, Dewar 2.
2nd Ballot: Mulcair 34, Saganash 12, Cullen 13, Ashton 12, Nash 8, Topp 8, Singh 3.
3rd Ballot: Mulcair 34, Saganash 12, Cullen 14, Ashton 13, Nash 8, Topp 8.
4th Ballot: Mulcair 37, Saganash 12, Cullen 19, Ashton 17.
5th Ballot: Mulcair 39, Cullen 19, Ashton 20

Trends: There were only marginal movements in the numbers but sometimes that's all you need to effect a seismic shift in the course of the balloting. Peggy Nash's slow descent has finally knocked her to the lower tier. This can be a real danger for a candidate with a lot of second ballot support like Nash enjoys on Babble, she never gets to profit from Topp or Ashton voters' second choice because she was knocked out too early.  Cullen may be a deeper threat to Mulcair anyway since a lot of Mulcair's second ballot support was locked up with his main competitor in this scenario.

 

My understandingg is that Saganash votes will not be counted at the convention since he withdrew from the race.

While its interesting to note that he still has substantial support here, would it affect the ballot tabulation if you went for next choice on 2nd ballot?

Well it's not going to change the final result. Mulcair has robust support amongst the Saganash voters, but I'll probably try to mimic the actual convention vote as close as possible next time which I believe means dropping Saganash off after the 1st ballot. 

Gaian

The "great whatever" would not last here for a moment, RP. You see, one reads all sorts of cricicism about what the average voter buys into, and it reaches a helluva pinnacle of know-nithingness stateside, but for some strange reason, its taboo to give a name to that element among the Great Whatever.

"Sorry to be blunt Gaian" No problem, what I am aiming as is bluntness, but it comes up against the pall of PC. And there must be a descriptor outside of sociology.

Back in the winter of '75 at the U of T, I read a paper by Taylor on the possibility of our achieving some sort of concensus and moving to curb climate change. Tha's 1975. He said that things will have to get much worse before we all row together on it. Achieve a "spirit of Dunkirk."

I had gone to the U of T for graduate studies in the hope of finding economic theory that did not depend on growth. No luck. But in looking at wartime economies, one sees that anything is possible.

We will need to be that serious.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Well said Gaian, and why I only object to you using this goal as a point of reason for how you will choose the leader. Your good intentions are wasted on those folk.

None are even close to that serious. There's good reason to vote Mulcair but carry the environmental struggle further and don't cheapen it by linking it to the choice of NDP leader. That's all I'm asking, if you can stop and see what i'm saying. Real environmental change is bigger than the NDP and can include folkd of all stripes.

mark_alfred

Mine are Topp, then Nash, then Cullen.  I like the progressive values that these three stand for, and I think they'd all be able to unite and invigorate the party in a positive winning way.  I am not fond of Cullen's pre-election cooperation plan, but otherwise I like what he stands for -- his policies are very close to Topp's.

Snowd

Nathan Cullen

Nathan

Cullen

 

CanadaApple

I was thinking about voting in real time during the leadership convention, but the computer hasn't been the most reliable, so perhaps it would be best to do it before hand. I'm only likely to mark 2-4 candidates anyway.

Wilf Day

Gaian wrote:
Back in the winter of '75 at the U of T, I read a paper by Taylor on the possibility of our achieving some sort of concensus and moving to curb climate change. Tha's 1975. He said that things will have to get much worse before we all row together on it. Achieve a "spirit of Dunkirk." I had gone to the U of T for graduate studies in the hope of finding economic theory that did not depend on growth. No luck. But in looking at wartime economies, one sees that anything is possible. We will need to be that serious.

Or else we will have to move our cities away from the coast. I have a strong suspicion that China is already planning to do so. They can't stop growing for at least another generation.

A_J

Since Singh has all but endorsed Mulcair, I might just cut to the chase and mark him number one on my ballot.

Several nominally Liberal and even Conservative family members have lately been indicating a great deal of interest in a Mulcair-led NDP so I have a feeling that's the way to go forward.  If he can include them in the party, he's doing something right.

Skinny Dipper

Still waiting for my ballot.  I will be emailing membership@ndp.ca to send my ballot package/PIN by email. If you are in the same situation, include home address.

Gaian

Wilf Day wrote:

Gaian wrote:
Back in the winter of '75 at the U of T, I read a paper by Taylor on the possibility of our achieving some sort of concensus and moving to curb climate change. Tha's 1975. He said that things will have to get much worse before we all row together on it. Achieve a "spirit of Dunkirk." I had gone to the U of T for graduate studies in the hope of finding economic theory that did not depend on growth. No luck. But in looking at wartime economies, one sees that anything is possible. We will need to be that serious.

Or else we will have to move our cities away from the coast. I have a strong suspicion that China is already planning to do so. They can't stop growing for at least another generation.

Gosh, yes. You'll recall how successful the early post-war dependence on number of unemployed as opposed to threat of inflation, that moved monetary theory and fiscal action? Before "concern" for the increasing numbers of voter-investors shifted the focus to pure monetary theory, and the wage slave turned on the TV to see how his portfolio was doing at day's end?

Move the cities. And the private sector could not move in with 3P. Marvelous.

p.s. The Yangtze and Yellow Rivers will have dried up long before then, anyways, and they will not have to worry about flooding during the spring runoffs.

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

In regards to Mr. Mulcair, I'm with Ed.

 

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

I voted yesterday.

1. Saganash (I know it's only symbolic.)

2. Mulcair

3. Cullen

4. Nash

5. Ashton

 

Northern-54

Just voted:

 

1. Mulclair

2. Cullen

3. Ashton

4. Dewar

 

Spouse voted:

 

1. Cullen

2. Ashton

3. Mulclair

4. Dewar

 

 

 

CanadaApple

Does anyone know how voting online in real time during the convention will actually work? Do I have to spend all day on the computer? Do I have to be watching the convention online? Or is their some sort of instant messaging system that tells you the results of each round and when to vote?

anyone? please? = D

Erik Redburn

Final decision. 

1- Cullen.  Didn't like his multiparty nomination idea, but doubt it would go anywhere with Liberals anyhow, and otherwise best performer among progressive wing. Best performer period.

2- Nash.  Did nothing to hurt hersef but not much to impress either, aside from improving somewhat in front of cameras. Could have taken a few more chances but otherwise solid.

3- Ashton.  Passion for progressive causes shined through but still rather scripted.  Next time could be frontrunner.

4- Topp.  Never convinced me he truly represented party's leftwing, given his earlier record, and last minute Broadbent kerfuffle dropped him a peg. Did say some of what needed to be said re taxes, indicating some integrity, performance improved over campaign, and unlike some others could claim some credit for Jack's breakthrough in Quebec.

5- Mulcair. He does have gravitas and has deflected criticism well.  Not sure thats good enough in front of a media that would turn hostile moment he was elected.  Too many rightwing statements to accept his line about 'moving centre to NDP'.  Ripoff of what party progressives have been telling centrists since Layton shifted towards centre. His anti-progressive tax comments kept him below Topp for me.

6- Dewar.  Said a few progressive things, but prior record on ME and poor public speaking ability in either official language ruled him out early.

7- Singh. One small issue candidate and never improved much.

 

If youre attnding convention, just remember you can still shift your preferences.

vaudree

1. Saganash

2. Nash

3. Ashton

4. Mulcair

5. Dewar

6. Topp

7. Singh

8. Cullen

6-7 are for those with no seats and can't reward Cullen for the cooperation idea - did tell him on his webpage that, though I could not reward him, that he did quite well. 

Saganash, the interconnection of all things and his negotiation skills.  Nash, her negotiating skills and ability to handle strong personalities while remaining a unifyer.  Ashton over Mulcair just because she mentioned Gaza and because, if Mulcair wins, I want him a bit humbled - which will make him more likely to keep his sheep skin on in caucas. 

jimp

Nash 1

Topp 2

North Star

1. Nash

2. Ashton

3. Cullen

4. Topp

5. Dewar

Rabble_Incognito

1. Nash 2. Topp 3. Mulcair - her program for day care for children is forward looking, she's trilingual, smart, and she can beat Harper.

flight from kamakura

1. mulcair 2. topp 3. cullen 4. igg-nashieff

DSloth

CanadaApple wrote:

Does anyone know how voting online in real time during the convention will actually work? Do I have to spend all day on the computer? Do I have to be watching the convention online? Or is their some sort of instant messaging system that tells you the results of each round and when to vote?

anyone? please? = D

You have to spend all day on the computer. Voting will only be open for each round of balloting for you the same amount of time it is for people at the convention, something like 45 minutes. If you don't cast a vote in a round your vote doesn't count that round, even if the person you voted for last round is still on the ballot. 

jjuares

I voted Mulcair,Nash, Topp. I strongly feel that the leader should be able to speak French proficently. I believe Mulcair will win against Cullen in th final ballot.

In the last thirty years or so I have made predictions on about a dozen or so federal and provincial leadership races. I have a perfect record. I have never had even  one of my predictions come true. Quite an accomplishment in a perverse way. But maybe I due one now.

Wilf Day

CanadaApple wrote:

Do I have to spend all day on the computer? Do I have to be watching the convention online?

I assume the convention will be on CPAC, for those who do not have a comfortable chair at their desktop. Does anyone know for sure?

Ippurigakko

I m still same before.

When saganash was dropout he was my first choice and now Ashton is my top.

1 - Ashton - youth, woman, support aboriginal, new politics and there could be more

2 - Dewar - support disablities/aboriginal

3 - Cullen - i surprise he want youth who r 16 over can vote!

4 - Mulcair - i know quebeckers want him so badly and he can beat harpo pinocchio.

 

CanadaApple

DSloth wrote:

You have to spend all day on the computer. Voting will only be open for each round of balloting for you the same amount of time it is for people at the convention, something like 45 minutes. If you don't cast a vote in a round your vote doesn't count that round, even if the person you voted for last round is still on the ballot. 

Okay, lets say for some reason I miss a round. Can I still vote in the second?

And didn't the moderator of the last debate mention that CPAC would have live coverage the weekend of the convention?

NorthReport

Didn't the CBC cover the 3rd party's most recent convention?

Wilf Day wrote:

CanadaApple wrote:

Do I have to spend all day on the computer? Do I have to be watching the convention online?

I assume the convention will be on CPAC, for those who do not have a comfortable chair at their desktop. Does anyone know for sure?

algomafalcon

Wilf Day wrote:

CanadaApple wrote:

Do I have to spend all day on the computer? Do I have to be watching the convention online?

I assume the convention will be on CPAC, for those who do not have a comfortable chair at their desktop. Does anyone know for sure?

 

I think that the CTV and CBC news channels will also be broadcasting live, although I'm not sure if their coverage will be continuos. (Just the ballots and I guess they'll show the speeches on Saturday.

 

Wilf Day

algomafalcon wrote:

I think that the CTV and CBC news channels will also be broadcasting live, although I'm not sure if their coverage will be continuos. (Just the ballots and I guess they'll show the speeches on Saturday.

Unless breaking news interrupts. So I wouldn't count on them to tell me when to vote. CPAC would be safer.

Pages