Lets all agree to agree!

[WWWTT]

Ok so the first debate of the NDP leadership race is done,whats everyones take on this?

I personaly am pleased to see the tone this race is taking!

The NDP are surfacing as the real alternative party to the conservatives I believe!Solidifying their role as the official opposition!

This approach should come as tangible relief to many Canadian voters tired of the bickering/hypocrocy of the conservatives/liberals.

I expect this theme to resonate nationwide and its about time someone steped up!

WWWTT

[wyly]

Ok so the first debate of the NDP leadership race is done,whats everyones take on this?

I personaly am pleased to see the tone this race is taking!

The NDP are surfacing as the real alternative party to the conservatives I believe!Solidifying their role as the official opposition!

This approach should come as tangible relief to many Canadian voters tired of the bickering/hypocrocy of the conservatives/liberals.

I expect this theme to resonate nationwide and its about time someone steped up!

WWWTT

i agree...i don't expect them to play nice that was layton's mo...fair but firm and above all honest, right now my pick for leader is mulcair...but that could change as the debates progress... Edited December 7, 2011 by wyly

[Guest Derek L]

Was the debate televised? I heard them talking about it briefly on P & P yesterday.

[wyly]

Was the debate televised? I heard them talking about it briefly on P & P yesterday.

if it was I missed it...I figure it must be available somewhere on the web, youtube?...

[Guest Derek L]

if it was I missed it...I figure it must be available somewhere on the web, youtube?...

Maybe they might put them on CPAC????

[cybercoma]

I didn't catch all of it, but a few things I noticed from the parts I did watch:

1) Brian Topp seemed solid, as I expected

2) Thomas Mulcair pleasantly surprised me. He didn't seem as arrogant as the critics claim.

3) Paul Dewar annoyed the hell out of me. He seemed crazy nervous.

4) Peggy Nash mentioned the Conservatives way too many times, it was pretty obnoxious and made her seem like a one-trick pony.

5) I was also impressed with Martin Singh.

6) Ashton just seemed robotic and inexperienced.

7) Chisholm has no place being there. The winner is going to be the leader of the opposition and the next Prime Minister of Canada. You need to be bilingual. Sorry.

8) Saganash really sounded nervous, which is too bad because he seems to have good points.

9) I thought Nathan Cullen was forgettable, but I've heard others say he exceeded their expectations.

[cybercoma]

Oh... I think the race at this point is between Topp and Mulcair, but I went in with that opinion. I might be just looking to reinforce what I already believe.

[g_bambino]

I thought Nathan Cullen was forgettable, but I've heard others say he exceeded their expectations.

His democratic reform ideas seem, well, nuts. He appears to have little concept of how our parliamentary system works and, worse, forgotten Canada is a large federation.

[ed.: link]

Edited December 7, 2011 by g_bambino

[wyly]

Oh... I think the race at this point is between Topp and Mulcair, but I went in with that opinion. I might be just looking to reinforce what I already believe.

that would be my guess right now, both fluently bilingual, both from quebec...the others could jockeying key cabinet positions if they attain government...but things could change just look at the rise and fall of republican presidential candidates in the US...

[na85]

The NDP will not be winning the next federal election. Without a charismatic leader like Jack Layton we're going to see a big drop in support, particularly outside Quebec.

[cybercoma]

Without a doubt. I'm keeping my eye on Mulcair. He's a wild card. He could implode at any minute with his attitude. We'll see if he has a handle on that throughout the debates. There's many more to come.

[wyly]

The NDP will not be winning the next federal election. Without a charismatic leader like Jack Layton we're going to see a big drop in support, particularly outside Quebec.

keep that delusion going it's going to hurt like biotch when it happens....layton was the most popular leader before and it didn't translate into seats in the HoC from english speaking canada, it was when mulcair ran in quebec that the ndp made the gains...

[Evening Star]

I did catch the whole English 'debate'. (I streamed it the day after from the CBC site. You may be still able to find it there.) I'm feeling even more sure that Mulcair is my pick. I really enjoyed Cullen, actually. He had some good ideas and was generally just entertaining. He's not going to lead the party, obviously. I thought Ashton did quite well but I'll freely admit that hormones may be clouding my judgment. I agree with you about Chisholm and Nash. I don't know what you see in Singh, honestly. As far as I could tell, he mostly seemed to talk about his own business. Definitely didn't strike me as a serious candidate for leader of the Official Opposition.

I actually thought it was a little obnoxious when Topp started pestering Dewar about how he would pay for his green energy plans. The question that had been asked was about the environment and it was fair for Dewar to want to stick to that topic. There were other times to discuss taxes. Still, it was maybe the only real moment of actual debate.

I didn't catch all of it, but a few things I noticed from the parts I did watch:

1) Brian Topp seemed solid, as I expected

2) Thomas Mulcair pleasantly surprised me. He didn't seem as arrogant as the critics claim.

3) Paul Dewar annoyed the hell out of me. He seemed crazy nervous.

4) Peggy Nash mentioned the Conservatives way too many times, it was pretty obnoxious and made her seem like a one-trick pony.

5) I was also impressed with Martin Singh.

6) Ashton just seemed robotic and inexperienced.

7) Chisholm has no place being there. The winner is going to be the leader of the opposition and the next Prime Minister of Canada. You need to be bilingual. Sorry.

8) Saganash really sounded nervous, which is too bad because he seems to have good points.

9) I thought Nathan Cullen was forgettable, but I've heard others say he exceeded their expectations.

[Evening Star]

His democratic reform ideas seem, well, nuts. He appears to have little concept of how our parliamentary system works and, worse, forgotten Canada is a large federation.

[ed.: link]

Are they any different from standard federal NDP policy?

[cybercoma]

You see, Topp talking about how Dewar is going to pay for the idea sets him apart. He was the only one that tried to show that he had fiscal consciousness. It's nice to rattle off all these ideas, but as soon as the next leader is chosen, he/she will be the leader of the opposition. I would even knock Mulcair for trying to change the topic about money. It's something the NDP is wrongly criticized for, so I think it's important to have a leader that has a fiscal consciousness and makes it a point to show that he/she can run the economy.

[Bryan]

I don't mean this in a confrontational way, just as a word of serious advice:

The Conservatives would love it if Mulcair won.

By that, I mean the smear campaign is already cued up in much the same way it was for Ignatieff and Dion. Mulcair is the guy they WANT to campaign against because they firmly believe he'll be the easiest to discredit in the public's mind.

Topp is the guy they aren't quite sure what to make of yet, he has the best chance of defining himself.

[WWWTT]

I don't believe this first public debate was intended to showcase any one particular person(or 3-4 for that matter).

But to show the depth of the party as a whole.

And this has always bein the brand of the NDP

It seems that a couple of candidates were jockying for a pole position(Topp Mulcair) and going on that I would say Topp is ahead.

And the fact that he does not have a seat is a + and gives him a clean canvass to work with which makes him more juicy!

WWWTT

[Michael Hardner]

Topp was/is (?) executive director of ACTRA, which means he has to fight big battles with agents, Hollywood, and various government groups. This is an interesting resume point for someone who wants to be PM. He could be the toughest and most pugnacious NDP leader we've had.

[cybercoma]

Topp was/is (?) executive director of ACTRA, which means he has to fight big battles with agents, Hollywood, and various government groups. This is an interesting resume point for someone who wants to be PM. He could be the toughest and most pugnacious NDP leader we've had.

And again, he was responsible for Layton's last campaign.

[Wild Bill]

Are they any different from standard federal NDP policy?

It's those policies that have kept me from ever even considering voting NDP, Star!

When Iran has just nuked Israel, our electricity grid is experiencing frequent blackouts and gasoline costs so much people are taking rikshaws to work, the NDP seems to always have some MP who will introduce a bill making bike lanes mandatory in all Canadian cities.

I've never denied that most of them have big hearts! They can make very good friends, as I well know myself. They just never seem to be the most practical of leaders, with down to earth ideas that might actually work!

They just keep shouting that we can all be very comfortable if we just tax the crap out of those evil rich folks, taking it for granted those rich folks will stick around and provide jobs.

They seem to take their dreams not as inspiration but as blueprints!

A bridge built by the NDP might be the prettiest and the most ecological friendly but I would never feel comfortable and safe driving across it!

Edited December 7, 2011 by Wild Bill

[Evening Star]

Dion and Ignatieff are both academics who were uncomfortable, uncharismatic, and awkward as politicians and who both seemed a bit ambivalent and unsure on policy. Mulcair is the opposite of all of those things. He has the political speaking skills and intellectual combativeness of a Trudeau or young Mulroney. That said, considering that people voted for Harper and McGuinty, maybe awkward and uncharismatic is the way to the heart of the Canadian public these days!

Anyway, the posts here are swaying me about Topp a little. I've enjoyed his writing in the Globe. If American Democrats can talk about raising upper-income tax rates, there's not really a reason why a left-leaning Canadian politician should not, considering our high-end marginal rates are lower. He could point to his background in SK as proof of his fiscal responsibility. I could vote for a party led by either him or Mulcair.

I don't mean this in a confrontational way, just as a word of serious advice:

The Conservatives would love it if Mulcair won.

By that, I mean the smear campaign is already cued up in much the same way it was for Ignatieff and Dion. Mulcair is the guy they WANT to campaign against because they firmly believe he'll be the easiest to discredit in the public's mind.

Topp is the guy they aren't quite sure what to make of yet, he has the best chance of defining himself.

[Evening Star]

I actually agree that the NDP can be bit flighty this way at times. While they were far more effective as an opposition than the Liberals were in the last Parliament, the Grits have been outperforming them in this one so far.

I'm not even all that crazy about their ideas on democratic reform. I just thought it was odd for g_bambino to single Cullen out when his policies in that area are not that different from the rest of the party's.

(That said, 'taxing rich folks' is certainly a much more substantial policy proposal than 'making bike lanes mandatory'.)

It's those policies that have kept me from ever even considering voting NDP, Star!

When Iran has just nuked Israel, our electricity grid is experiencing frequent blackouts and gasoline costs so much people are taking rikshaws to work, the NDP seems to always have some MP who will introduce a bill making bike lanes mandatory in all Canadian cities.

I've never denied that most of them have big hearts! They can make very good friends, as I well know myself. They just never seem to be the most practical of leaders, with down to earth ideas that might actually work!

They just keep shouting that we can all be very comfortable if we just tax the crap out of those evil rich folks, taking it for granted those rich folks will stick around and provide jobs.

They seem to take their dreams not as inspiration but as blueprints!

A bridge built by the NDP might be the prettiest and the most ecological friendly but I would never feel comfortable and safe driving across it!

Edited December 7, 2011 by Evening Star

[Wild Bill]

I actually agree that the NDP can be bit flighty this way at times. While they were far more effective as an opposition than the Liberals were in the last Parliament, the Grits have been outperforming them in this one so far.

I'm not even all that crazy about their ideas on democratic reform. I just thought it was odd for g_bambino to single Cullen out when his policies in that area are not that different from the rest of the party's.

(That said, 'taxing rich folks' is certainly a much more substantial policy proposal than 'making bike lanes mandatory'.)

To be fair Star, there's hope for the NDP! When they were in the position of never expecting to govern it was easy to adopt all the impractical "granola" causes they could find. It was support that was easy to take from the other parties and they could make all the demands and promises necessary for that support without ever having to actually deliver.

This was the problem for Bob Rae with his NDP government in Ontario. He won by a fluke that was totally unexpected! They had all those outstanding promises and almost no practical and experienced MPs! That's why they made so many mistakes. Andrea Horvath has inherited much of that damage even today.

With Layton, it was different. He had seemed to be slowly dragging his party into the real world almost from the first day he took over. I had some sympathy for him as at times he looked like a young boy trying to control a 100 lb dog on a walk but he managed surprisingly well! I don't think he ever expected the massive out of the blue Quebec support last election but he was confident of making some good gains and had positioned his party to look much more mature and responsible than they ever had before!

Now Jack has gone and it is desperately important for his party to elect a leader who has the same clear vision. While it is doubtful they will win power in the foreseeable futur, they could become the usual Opposition for many more terms, perhaps delivering the death blow to the Liberals. Or they could return to their old ways, at which point the gains won by Jack would be squandered.

Canadian politics are rapidly changing. Hard rightwing politics may be anathema to winning an election but so are hard socialist ones. Few voters seriously believe that hard socialism actually WORKS! The Canadian way is more like that practiced on the west coast, where they alternate between NDP and Liberals while the people joke that "one party brings the pork and the other one then pays for it!"

I suspect the next election will bring even more changes! Things may change but at this point it looks like it is the Liberals who are adapting the most poorly...

[cybercoma]

The NDP aren't hard socialists by any stretch of the imagination.

When hard socialists had gotten into the party in NB (The NB Waffle movement... tasty), the federal leadership disbanded the party in NB because they were TOO socialist.

edit to add: Surprsingly, there's actually a Wiki page. And I forgot to mention that this was in the late 60s, early 70s. If ever there was a time where the NDP would have supported socialism... it was then.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Waffle

Edited December 7, 2011 by cybercoma

[wyly]

The NDP aren't hard socialists by any stretch of the imagination.

When hard socialists had gotten into the party in NB (The NB Waffle movement... tasty), the federal leadership disbanded the party in NB because they were TOO socialist.

edit to add: Surprsingly, there's actually a Wiki page. And I forgot to mention that this was in the late 60s, early 70s. If ever there was a time where the NDP would have supported socialism... it was then.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Waffle

in the euro political scene the NDP would be right of center...in the netherlands that "socialist" haven of legal prostitution and drug tolerance a right-wing coalition holds power, a right of center government that is now considering mobile euthanasia teams to assist people aiding them with their end of life requests....