Who are u supporting for NDP Leader, how will u mark your ballot, and why? #5

102 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
Who are u supporting for NDP Leader, how will u mark your ballot, and why? #5

;;

Issues Pages: 
NorthReport

Just over a month away so the next few weeks are going to be incredibly exciting as we approach V-Day on March 24th.

So at this point in time, a bit of a change and my first three choices for Leader surprisingly are:

1 - Ashton

2 - Mulcair

3 - Topp

 

flight from kamakura

ah, didn't see this new thread.  to repeat:

1) mulcair

2) topp

3) nash

4) ashton

JeffWells

1. Mulcair - Because of Quebec and his performance in the House

2. Topp - Second-most likely to connect with Quebec

3. Nash - Strong progressive record, solid French

4. Ashton - Positive messaging, intelligent, strong French

No one else remains in consideration for me.

GregbythePond

1) Dewar

2) Cullen

3) Nash

4) Mulcair

5) Topp

Good luck to all the candidates!

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Laughing

Bookish Agrarian

Now that American Idol is down to its top 40, well 42 I guess actually, I'm getting closer to having a favourite, although there are a few I really like.  Oh wait wrong site.  Sorry

Brachina

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Now that American Idol is down to its top 40, well 42 I guess actually, I'm getting closer to having a favourite, although there are a few I really like.  Oh wait wrong site.  Sorry

If the candiates start singing I joining another party;p

DSloth

[url=http://www.mediafire.com/?at6ye220nfjw2zn]Babble Declared Preferences[/url]: Final Ballot Mulcair 27, Nash 14, Cullen 10

1st Ballot: Mulcair 24, Nash 9, Cullen 8, Topp 5, Ashton 4, Dewar 2, Singh 2.

2nd Ballot: Mulcair 25, Nash 9, Cullen 9, Topp 6, Ashton 4

3rd Ballot: Mulcair 26, Nash 11, Cullen 9, Topp 7

 

*First run without Saganash, (does anyone know if his name will be on the ballots that go out in March?) Unionist, laine lowe, stevebrown, peterjcassidy, and GOD had no secondary preferences listed after Romeo, everyone else's list was just shifted over. CanadaApple's vote was removed because he professed to be truly undecided between Topp/Mulcair and I can't ballot that. 

 

Gary Shaul Gary Shaul's picture

Duplicate

Ippurigakko

for me -

 

1) Ashton

2) Cullen

3) Dewar

4) Mulcair

algomafalcon

Brachina wrote:
Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Now that American Idol is down to its top 40, well 42 I guess actually, I'm getting closer to having a favourite, although there are a few I really like.  Oh wait wrong site.  Sorry

If the candiates start singing I joining another party;p

 

It may be off topic, but isn't it true that Jack used his singing and piano playing to charm the press on all those long campiagn tours? So maybe we should have an "NDP Idol" audition to determine the candidate best prepared to entertain the press and make guest appearances on Entertainment Tonight?

 

Ciabatta2

Saganash was my top candidate, though I'd be happy with either Mulcair or Nash.  There's something intabgible about Mulcair that strikes me as effective as leader and in the house and in person, though I personally love Peggy Nash.

Beyond that for me the stack up:

Topp (some interesting ideas, good French, but I get a sense of entitlement, doesn't strike me as leadership electable)

Ashton (I want to like her but find her grating, not leadership electable, well spoken but when I hear her I turn off the sound)

Singh (not serious)

Dewar (not serious)

Cullen (as an individual he's tops, would be my third preference as leader if not for disastrous candidate-co-ordination policy which would hand Cons majorities for the next two decades)

gregcbu

So I just joined the NDP two days ago! I've been lurking on the babble threads here for the last while and, as of this moment, my vote will be going to:

1. Nathan Cullen

2. Tom Mulcair

Or possibly vice versa.

I think Mulcair is the best leader for the party if it wants to form government. I actually think he's the only candidate who can lead the NDP to government in the next election.

I like that Cullen brought forth a controversial plan (regardless of what I think of it), was attacked/criticized by every other candidate and many grassroots NDP supporters for it, but continued to advocate for and defend his plan. Many times, politicians immediately back track on things like that. They don't have the guts to stick by their principles so I was impressed that he did. 

Romeo Saganash was my other fave and would have been ranked had he stayed in.

I can't wait to see who wins!

NicHull

Watched 2 debates (Ottawa and Quebec City) and here is my list for now:

 

1. Mulcair (best opponent to Harper in a debate or in the House, knows his files, best chance to form the government)

2. Nash (not firm yet, looks good on paper but haven't been impressed by her performance in debates)

3. Ashton (moved up a lot, impressed by her energy during debates)

4. Either Topp or Cullen (not too sure yet, will need to watch the debate in Montreal before. Topp has better French but Cullen is more likeable.)

6. Either Dewar or Singh

Charles

I've decided to only rank four of the candidates:

1. Mulcair

2. Ashton

3. Cullen

4. Nash

 

Ashton and Cullen have moved steadily up for me, Nash down. The rest won't rank as I don't want to see any of them leader under any circumstances...

JeffWells

JeffWells wrote:

1. Mulcair - Because of Quebec and his performance in the House

2. Topp - Second-most likely to connect with Quebec

3. Nash - Strong progressive record, solid French

4. Ashton - Positive messaging, intelligent, strong French

No one else remains in consideration for me.

 

A small revision: because of the Topp campaign's misrepsentations and general nastiness, and what an untested leader's protracted absence from the House would mean, I'm bumping him to third, and raising Nash to second.

oldgoat

The close we get to the day, the less firm I've become in what was once a pretty firm ranking.  I'll be the guy at the convention you don't want to be in the lineup behind at the voting booth.

Caissa

My top 3 in alphabetical order are  Mulcair, Nash and Topp. I haven't decided on their relative order yet.

Brachina

1. Mulcair (might bump up Ashton because I didn't see her winning)
2. Ashton
3. Cullen
4. Nash
5. Singh
6. Brian Topp
7. Paul Dewar

You may have noticed Brian Topp dropping on my list and that is a side effect of his massively broken promise of not going negative. Mixing it up was fine, lying about your rivals is not.

Stockholm

Brachina wrote:
You may have noticed Brian Topp dropping on my list and that is a side effect of his massively broken promise of not going negative. Mixing it up was fine, lying about your rivals is not.

When has Topp personally "lied" about his rivals? I have heard him criticize Dewar for his inability to communicate effectively in French. I suppose some may debate just how bad his French is, but it is certainly not a "lie" to say that. He has also criticized Mulcair for wanting to move the party to the centre. OK, its true that Mulcair has not explicitly said "I want to move the NDP to the centre" and has instead said "I want to move the centre to us", but it is fair to say that the broad themes of Topp's campiagn with his emphasis on income inequality and more progressive taxation sounds more "left" to my ears than the themes that Mulcair is stressing. I don't think Top is "lying" by saying he thinks Mulcair is more centrist than he is...he is expressing his opinion. Nothing wrong with that. I agree that saying Saganash could not speak French was totallly untrue, but I think its been clearly established that this was an isolated incident with one rogue volunteer.

Frankly, I thought the e-mail from Dewar's campaign with the veiled implication that if anyone other than Dewar was elected leader, there would be some sort of "purge" at party HQ to be much more negative than what I've heard from Topp.

I think candidates can and should contrast themselves with one another - that's part of the process, as long as it doesn't veer into ad hominem personal attacks.

janfromthebruce

Actually, I don't know if what people suggest as "hearsay" is true. I would dislike if what is put up as "fact" is in fact "strategy" to discredit a candidate. I have had no bad calls with any of the candidate's teams and nor have those in my circle of NDP friends stated that either. Interesting about that....

Brachina

Maybe its just Rogue callers, and I did not recieve them myself so maybe its an over reaction on my part, but I would like to see Topp distance himself from this conduct. Although I've seen zero evidence of Mulcair moving towards the centre.

Stockholm

I don't think its a "lie" for someone to say that they think Mulcair is more of a "centrist" in the race. Its a matter of opinion. The media are certainly depicting him as wanting to move more to the centre - whether that is true or not.

janfromthebruce

Actually Brachina, he has already come onto this cite once and done so but more to the point, by doing so also than becomes an appearance that someone in his team is doing this. I just so find that hard to believe.

And incidently, he is the only candidate who has ever come to babble and actually engaged in conversation and thanked us for our support during campaigns. I also find it interesting that it was someone from the Mulcair camp who responded to my post and yet I did not mention any particular candidate or camp. Interesting that is.

I really hope that no candidate's camp of phoners or any individuals is purposefully misrepresenting themselves and pretending to be from another camp as a way to depress another candidates' support. That would be so unethical.

 

nicky

Topp has repeated a number of times that Mulcair has said he wants to move the party to the centre and purports to be quoting him verbatim. Would "mendacity" describe this blatant misquotation better for you Stockhom?

Brachina

nicky wrote:

Topp has repeated a number of times that Mulcair has said he wants to move the party to the centre and purports to be quoting him verbatim. Would "mendacity" describe this blatant misquotation better for you Stockhom?

He keeps saying he's not planning on moving the party towards the centre many times, his platform supports this, and yet Brian Topp keeps saying this, that Tom is moving the party to the centre. What's his justificatian that Mulcair hasn't promised to increase income taxes, something Jack wouldn't offer?

KenS

1.] Topp

2.] Cullen

If neither is on the last ballot, there is little point me guessing now who would come next on March 24 if I have to go there. I'll change my mind by then even if nothing new were to come up.

Howard

KenS wrote:

1.] Topp

2.] Cullen

If neither is on the last ballot, there is little point me guessing now who would come next on March 24 if I have to go there. I'll change my mind by then even if nothing new were to come up.

Feel free not to answer, but do you like Cullen in part because of the charisma factor? I am getting that impression from some of the NDPers I've talked to.

Winston

janfromthebruce wrote:

Actually, I don't know if what people suggest as "hearsay" is true. I would dislike if what is put up as "fact" is in fact "strategy" to discredit a candidate. I have had no bad calls with any of the candidate's teams and nor have those in my circle of NDP friends stated that either. Interesting about that....

Me either, although I have only been called by Topp's and Mulcair's teams.  The guy from Topp's camp was very friendly when I said I was supporting Mulcair.  He asked me why and then aked if brian could have my second-ballot support.

My dad's call with Topp's team was a little less friendly - the caller engaged my dad in a bit of argument about whether Mulcair was left enough for the NDP.

I think it comes down to the caller.

KenS

When Romeo dropped out I really only had one choice. And much as I obviously do not trust Mulcair, and Peggy was an early top choice for me, if it comes down t those two, I'm not sure what I'll do.

Having another choice doesnt solve that particular conundrum. But really only having one I guess made me uneasy. Which got me to thinking more.

I've always known that Nathan is a sharp and attentive cookie. I worked with him a bit when he was the Environment Critic and the NDP's climate change policy was being pretty rigorously developed. He was still a fairly new MP then.

KenS

Things he has done and said in the leadership race made me really wonder. It was his defence of his knuckle-bran plan as much as the proposing it. It made me wonder about his political judgement.

His personability and ability to connect and complete comfort on stage was a complete surprise. I only knew him as a fairly intense policy wonk and very astute political animal. Quite aside from not liking Mulcair's politics, I'm not the kind to be enaormed with the stuffed suit 'gravitas'. Its OK. It works. But its highly overated and does not at all work on everyone. [What any of them are like one on one is not very relevant in my opinion.] Anyway, I think Nathan's style will be much more effective with young people and women. I'm sure of that much.

KenS

But thats an assesment of him I came to when I still would not vote for him on any ballot. Period. "Political judgement is way too suspect." But since then I've decided he's really pretty saavy. Saavy enough that he'll have the sense to polish off his own rough edges. [And his bone head plan isnt going to be much of a challenge since it has little chance of going anywhere.] I still rate Topp easily in first, because I'm not 100% confident about Nathan on that score. But I think he is far ahead of all the rest, except Dewar... who is disqualified barring some amazing last minute miraculous performances in both languages.

Lord Palmerston

Stockholm wrote:

I don't think its a "lie" for someone to say that they think Mulcair is more of a "centrist" in the race. Its a matter of opinion. The media are certainly depicting him as wanting to move more to the centre - whether that is true or not.

As josh pointed out in another thread: Every social democratic party that "renewed" itself over the past 20 years moved to the right.  Mulcair says the NDP is the only social democratic party that hasn't "renewed."

mark_alfred

Mine are:

  1. Topp
  2. Nash
  3. Cullen
  4. Mulcair

I saw Cullen's recently released tax proposal, and I liked it, so he's moved up (in spite of his ridiculous open nomination proposal).  Mulcair's tax proposal was pragmatic but too vague for me.  Topp's is the most thoroughly laid out.  Nash is very competent, and has very good knowledge of running an economy efficiently from a left wing egalitarian perspective.  I had previously put Singh on my list because I like his focus on pharmacare, but realistically I don't think he's leadership material at this point.  The four I've listed are.

Brachina

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Stockholm wrote:

I don't think its a "lie" for someone to say that they think Mulcair is more of a "centrist" in the race. Its a matter of opinion. The media are certainly depicting him as wanting to move more to the centre - whether that is true or not.

As josh pointed out in another thread: Every social democratic party that "renewed" itself over the past 20 years moved to the right.  Mulcair says the NDP is the only social democratic party that hasn't "renewed."

More evidence free character assassination. You don't think the Scandenvian parties have renewed themselves?

Look at the policies and ideas that Mulcair supports, it clear he's to ths left of most of the provincial NDP leaders, including including both Premiers.

He made it clear he was refering organizational and language. By hey don't let little things like the truth or facts get in the way of your evidence free conspiracy theory.

josh

Evidence free?  LP just gave you the evidence.  From the horse's mouth.

Rabble_Incognito

I like Mulcair - you know, he's fought the right fights - experienced - knows the law...he's my front runner. Dewar and Topp are a close 2nd - I'm open minded about all the candidates - the one at the convention that gets my vote is the one that intellectually gives the most coherent and in my view, needed, dog and pony show. I want to hear about support for unions and the collective bargaining process, support for workers and worker rights, I want to hear that outsourcing has sucked for much of Canada and that corporate rapes like Nortel won't be happening on the Canadian landscape when our person is in office. I want to hear them defend the public health care system, OAS, CPP and other public institutions, and protect public funds generally. Most of all I don't want a centrist poseur - I prefer someone whose sentiments are clearly about the 99% and working people - left of centre and proud of it is best.

DSloth

josh wrote:

Evidence free?  LP just gave you the evidence.  From the horse's mouth.

The only thing you guys ever get from Mulcair's mouth is that he once used the word "renew", which in itself has no centrist/conservative/rightist connotations until you imagine them there. 

josh

Renew is not all there was to it.  It was tied to other social democratic parties.  Since I am unaware of any social democratic party in the last 20 years that has "renewed" itself by moving left, the implication is clear.  But the Mulcair supporters on here are determined to deny the obvious.

KenS

In positioning Jack Layton was a practicing centrist most of the time. But that qualifier at the end means everything. And Jack Layton didn't just mouth words about moving people towards us- in fact he never SAID it that I remember. He put the rubber on the road so it could happen.

Jack Layton knew where he wanted the NDP to go. And it was not only simplisticly to win more. One of the ways you would win more was by working away with a strategy to create and 'stretch' openings. Four big examples right off the top: actually WORK on a Quebec startegy even against the wishes of colleagues, Afghanistan, agrresive and politicaly smart climate change package, corporate taxes.

The last one was almost brilliant in an understated way. Looked like a no brainer for the NDP. But brilliant in its effects: not the substance of what was proposed, but an important start in breaking the evil charm of never talk of raising taxes. It is the credibility and political capital we got with that which Topp and Cullen are confident we can build on and win with.

Brachina

josh wrote:

Renew is not all there was to it.  It was tied to other social democratic parties.  Since I am unaware of any social democratic party in the last 20 years that has "renewed" itself by moving left, the implication is clear.  But the Mulcair supporters on here are determined to deny the obvious.

Again show some evidence, show me some rightwing policies that Mulcair is supporting? Oh wait, got nothing? I thought so.

Mulcair supports such great right wing policies such as Childcare, Pharmacare, Healthcare, Peace Keeping (in the proper Lester sense of the word), fair trade, cap and trade, helping seniors, a fincial transaction tax, more money for tranportation, digital inforstructure, green tech, legal safe injections site, a much greater role for women in positions of power, and legalization of pot, and a focus on value added production, and the rebuilding of the manufacturing sector.

The truth is is that a Prime Minister Thomas Mulcair government would be the most radically left wing government, since the NDP backed Trudeu minority governments.

As for well over social democractic parties turned to the right,when they talked renewal, here's the thing about parties and renewal.

They have always talked about renewal, every single political party, from the beginining of political parties as a way to energize thier membership and recruit. All this long before third way. Thier is problem few less meaningful statements in politics. Its just shit politicians say. You read waaay to much into it.

Brachina

DSloth wrote:

josh wrote:

Evidence free?  LP just gave you the evidence.  From the horse's mouth.

The only thing you guys ever get from Mulcair's mouth is that he once used the word "renew", which in itself has no centrist/conservative/rightist connotations until you imagine them there. 

Exactly, on the other hand I have tons I can point to showing Mulcair as progressive left winger.

Brachina

DSloth wrote:

josh wrote:

Evidence free?  LP just gave you the evidence.  From the horse's mouth.

The only thing you guys ever get from Mulcair's mouth is that he once used the word "renew", which in itself has no centrist/conservative/rightist connotations until you imagine them there. 

Exactly, on the other hand I have tons I can point to showing Mulcair as progressive left winger.

janfromthebruce

yes can and it's where I want to go with the NDP. Thanks for writing it out. tah

 

KenS wrote:

In positioning Jack Layton was a practicing centrist most of the time. But that qualifier at the end means everything. And Jack Layton didn't just mouth words about moving people towards us- in fact he never SAID it that I remember. He put the rubber on the road so it could happen.

Jack Layton knew where he wanted the NDP to go. And it was not only simplisticly to win more. One of the ways you would win more was by working away with a strategy to create and 'stretch' openings. Four big examples right off the top: actually WORK on a Quebec startegy even against the wishes of colleagues, Afghanistan, agrresive and politicaly smart climate change package, corporate taxes.

The last one was almost brilliant in an understated way. Looked like a no brainer for the NDP. But brilliant in its effects: not the substance of what was proposed, but an important start in breaking the evil charm of never talk of raising taxes. It is the credibility and political capital we got with that which Topp and Cullen are confident we can build on and win with.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

CanadaApple

If the vote were held today, I'd vote for Topp. I suspect that's who I'll end up voting for in the first round during the convention (over the internet), but I guess I could change my mind again.

edit-wouldn't you know it, I've changed my mind again already. = P

Wilf Day

oldgoat wrote:
The close we get to the day, the less firm I've become in what was once a pretty firm ranking.  I'll be the guy at the convention you don't want to be in the lineup behind at the voting booth.

Peggy Nash:

Quote:
Starting Friday, March 23rd at 5:30pm, you can vote either in person at the convention or online at home. The voting process could go as high as six (6) ballots with the target of an hour per ballot

http://peggynash.ca/2012/vote/

Idealistic Prag... Idealistic Pragmatist's picture

CanadaApple wrote:

If the vote were held today, I'd vote for Topp. I suspect that's who I'll end up voting for in the first round during the convention (over the internet), but I guess I could change my mind again.

edit-wouldn't you know it, I've changed my mind again already. = P

Welcome to the club. :P

janfromthebruce

Well I didn't change my mind and go Topp!

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I remain conflicted. Mulcair has more negatives than any of the other candidates, but I don't see anyone else that can do really well in Quebec and take on Harper as well as Mulcair can (and lead the NDP to a win in 2015). Talk about compromise! Frown

Caissa

Victory for the NDP will not necessarily take us to the Promised Land. One just needs to remember Ontario.

Pages

Topic locked