NDP Leadership

[Guest Derek L]

What mandate is Mulcair seeking?

A couple of interesting points in this story, well at least for someone without any dog in the race:

He was doing something much bigger this weekend – and has been for a few weeks now, as far as I can tell as an outsider to this race – he’s trying to get a mandate to fundamentally change the NDP. Candidates who are unsure if they’re going to win normally take the approach “a win is a win.” Candidates who are confident of victory have far more luxury to define what their win means. Also, typically in a leadership race or primary battle, you run toward your party’s base (and then tack toward the centre in the general election). Mulcair is running away from his base – or said positively, is proposing to lead his base in a different direction. That speaks to someone who feels pretty good about his standing.

I haven’t been following the race that closely, so to those that have, would this be a fair assessment of Mulcair’s performance as of yet?

Modern language, modern approach. I have no idea what that actually means, but I can guess. In part, it is easiest to define what he is proposing by contrasting it with his main opponents. Peggy Nash and Brian Topp have been carrying a message through this campaign that you can boil down to “the NDP doesn’t need to change, what we’ve been doing is working, we have passed the Liberals, our vote total keeps going up and if we keep doing the same thing, we will win.” They would stay true to NDP orthodoxy as opposed to moving to the centre; they embrace the NDP’s relationship with organized labour as opposed to downplaying it; they celebrate the party’s history at every opportunity, etc.

Mulcair rejects this approach categorically. He put it plainly on Sunday: “We did get 4.5 million votes but we are still far from being able to form a government. The only way we are going to be able to do that is to go beyond our traditional base, refresh our way of approaching these issues. We’re not going to defeat Stephen Harper with a slogan.” Putting aside the fact that “modernize our language, modernize our approach” is little more than a slogan, this strikes me as a pretty significant mandate for change if he is successful. He wants to make the NDP into a party of the centre, not the left. That would be a big change in Canadian politics with potentially far-reaching implications .

The lazy shorthand for what Mulcair is doing would make some reference to Tony Blair and his fight against Labour’s Clause IV and other New Labour steps he took to drag his party to the centre. What’s interesting about Mulcair’s gambit – again, assuming that he’s right and he has the leadership in the bag – is unlike with Blair, there doesn’t appear to be an existential debate ongoing within the NDP. The amazing thing about the change in direction Mulcair is seeking a mandate to implement is how easy it has been for him to (potentially) get a yes. Unlike the Clause IV battles, he’s just winning the leadership and oh ya, may change the party in pretty significant ways.

In what ways are those? Would the NDP caucus and membership support giving up their values and shift toward the mushy Center (Like the CPC and Liberals prior) to obtain power?

What effect would this have on the Greens and Liberals for example, assuming the NDP becomes the “new and improved Liberal Party”?

[Newfoundlander]

I read Rob Silver's article earlier and I tend to agree with a lot of his points.

What I think Mulcair might be trying to do is make sure that the NDP actually don't make the mistakes the Liberals have made. The Liberals have been criticized for living in the past, they've talked about the great things Trudeau did for this country as a reason to vote for them. They never did anything to fundamentally change themselves over the last number of years and therefore have become an old tired party without a modern message.

I think what Mulcair would like to do is forget about these messages the NDP have been giving for the last 50 years, look past their former leaders and look to the future witha new message for Canadians. I think if the NDP don't try and change themselves they could end up even more like the Liberals.

[j44]

The bloc will take back Quebec to become 4th party, , Liberals will win minority government, conservatives opposition, ndp 3rd party

Not that I make it a point to try to predict the future but I can't see the Liberals going from their seat count now to governing. And keep in mind the conservatives have added seats that they are more than likely going to win the next election.

What mandate is Mulcair seeking?

I haven’t been following the race that closely, so to those that have, would this be a fair assessment of Mulcair’s performance as of yet?

In what ways are those? Would the NDP caucus and membership support giving up their values and shift toward the mushy Center (Like the CPC and Liberals prior) to obtain power?

What effect would this have on the Greens and Liberals for example, assuming the NDP becomes the “new and improved Liberal Party”?

I’d say Silver’s article is pretty accurate. Fairly early on (it may have been even before the debates started) Mulcair came out and said he wanted unions to have a much smaller role in the party. That is a pretty bold statement coming out of the block. He also gave an interview to the Toronto Star a month or so ago and said a lot of non-social democratic things. I don’t remember everything but I think he basically threw his support behind the oil sands and said that raising taxes wasn’t a solution. It is one thing for someone from the party to believe those things but it is entirely different for someone to say them and even more out there for one of the front-runners for the leadership to say them at that time.

I would like to see what he does to shore up the NDP base if he does win the leadership. Moving to the left AFTER a leadership contest would be....different. He could throw out some bones to make them happy though. Cut the F-35s and spend that money on social programs. That would appeal to the base and be pretty sensible/centrist.

I think one of the most interesting parts of the article is Silver referring to the casual way he is shifting and would shift the party. There isn’t a lot of talk about that being an issue. I don’t hear NDPers yelling about him being the devil.

I have no idea how the Liberals would react to a more centrist NDP but I would love to hear others thoughts on that. What will Rae do if that happens (do people care what the Greens will do? )? I think it is going to be a very interesting time if Mulcair wins. Mulcair, Rae and Harper are all very skillful operators.

I read Rob Silver's article earlier and I tend to agree with a lot of his points.

What I think Mulcair might be trying to do is make sure that the NDP actually don't make the mistakes the Liberals have made. The Liberals have been criticized for living in the past, they've talked about the great things Trudeau did for this country as a reason to vote for them. They never did anything to fundamentally change themselves over the last number of years and therefore have become an old tired party without a modern message.

I think what Mulcair would like to do is forget about these messages the NDP have been giving for the last 50 years, look past their former leaders and look to the future witha new message for Canadians. I think if the NDP don't try and change themselves they could end up even more like the Liberals.

^Very good point. Mulcair has talked a lot about the 1950s rhetoric and 'boilerplate' coming from the party. And he does have a point. Some of their rhetoric scares people off on top of not making people enthusiastic.

[Evening Star]

I’d say Silver’s article is pretty accurate. Fairly early on (it may have been even before the debates started) Mulcair came out and said he wanted unions to have a much smaller role in the party. That is a pretty bold statement coming out of the block. He also gave an interview to the Toronto Star a month or so ago and said a lot of non-social democratic things. I don’t remember everything but I think he basically threw his support behind the oil sands and said that raising taxes wasn’t a solution. It is one thing for someone from the party to believe those things but it is entirely different for someone to say them and even more out there for one of the front-runners for the leadership to say them at that time.

How has he "thrown his support behind the oil sands"? Because he said he wouldn't shut them down altogether? He's probably the most environmentalist candidate by far. He's a huge supporter of cap and trade and has advocated ending subsidies to the oil and gas industry.

http://www.thomasmulcair.ca/site/2011/11/08/georgia-straight-2/?lang=en

You're right, though, that he has said that advocating higher income taxes will not attract voters. I'm a bit curious why this seems to be taken for granted in Canada when US Democrats, even ones as far right as Bill Clinton, have no problem advocating for higher income taxes on high earners.

This is an area where I actually agree with Topp's views over Mulcair's. I'm not 100% sold on cap and trade but I do think adding another income tax bracket is reasonable. (I would actually prefer this to raising corporate taxes.)

I'm also OK with Mulcair's position on the unions, btw.

I guess, though, that despite these things, I just don't see enough of an ideological gap between the candidates for it to seem like a major issue to me, certainly not on the Tony Blair vs Old Labour scale. The party was not a radical left party by any stretch under Layton. I see Mulcair's and Layton's agendas as fairly similar. (By the way, Topp worked for what may be the most right-wing NDP government ever, who e.g. actually threw out rent controls in Saskatchewan.)

[cybercoma]

Make no mistake about it, Mulcair is a social democrat. What he's not is a democratic socialist. He's absolutely what the party needs though. A strong leader that is going to convince the membership that the only way forward is to court voters that would have never considered voting for the NDP in the past. They did just that in Quebec with their campaign and they can do it in the ROC for the next election. Mulcair is also the best choice for standing up to any of the other leaders in debate. He's not going to move the party into the centre and make it wishy-washy. What he's going to do is clear up all of the misconceptions people have about the NDP.

[Newfoundlander]

Make no mistake about it, Mulcair is a social democrat. What he's not is a democratic socialist. He's absolutely what the party needs though. A strong leader that is going to convince the membership that the only way forward is to court voters that would have never considered voting for the NDP in the past. They did just that in Quebec with their campaign and they can do it in the ROC for the next election. Mulcair is also the best choice for standing up to any of the other leaders in debate. He's not going to move the party into the centre and make it wishy-washy. What he's going to do is clear up all of the misconceptions people have about the NDP.

Didn't he say they need to move to the centre?

[WWWTT]

He was Layton's deputy co-leader. Does anyone really doubt his belief in and support of Layton?

Hey buddy this isn't a "Layton ass kissing competition"!

Peggy Nash hit the freekin nail on the head when she said that the NDP will continue to become successful because of NDP policies!

As far as I'm concerned this race is a two person race,between those that are controlled by their fears and those that are bold enough to grab the bull by the horns!

WWWTT

[Evening Star]

Didn't he say they need to move to the centre?

When has he said that? All he's ever said is they need to move the centre to the NDP, which has the opposite meaning.

Edit:

Asked whether he is trying to move the party more toward the centre, away from the party’s traditional labour roots, Mulcair said, "I am trying to move the centre to us."

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/NDP-would-recreate-CWB-Mulcair-135178133.html

Edited February 27, 2012 by Evening Star

[Newfoundlander]

When has he said that? All he's ever said is they need to move the centre to the NDP, which has the opposite meaning.

I can't remember what has been said now. Brian Topp seems to twist everything people say so maybe I'm just getting mixed up with him accusing Mulcair of being a hated centrist.

[Evening Star]

I can't remember what has been said now. Brian Topp seems to twist everything people say so maybe I'm just getting mixed up with him accusing Mulcair of being a hated centrist.

Yeah, that was what Topp always said about Mulcair. Mulcair never said it himself.

[j44]

Who here is a party member? I'd like to know if anyone is willing to share how they plan on voting.

[Evening Star]

I think I've been clear how I'm voting.

[j44]

What about #2, #3....isn't it a preferential ballot?

[cybercoma]

What about #2, #3....isn't it a preferential ballot?

Only if you're mailing it in.

[j44]

Only if you're mailing it in.

Hmmm...

[Evening Star]

Right now, I think it's Mulcair, Cullen, Dewar, Topp.

[Tilter]

Has anyone volunteered for that deadend job yet?

[cybercoma]

Right now, I think it's Mulcair, Cullen, Dewar, Topp.

I bet the vast majority of party membership is not thrilled with Cullen's proposal.

[Newfoundlander]

Why hasn't anyone mentioned Cullen's idea to Liberals? I've never heard anyone from the party comment on it.

[Evening Star]

I bet the vast majority of party membership is not thrilled with Cullen's proposal.

I just meant that those are my own preferences in order at the moment. Wasn't placing bets on who is likely to win.

Edited February 28, 2012 by Evening Star

[UofGPolitico]

Mulcair is the only one who has shown any semblance of sound leadership in this race. He though is openly admitting he would shift the NDP closer to the centre in order to better place the NDP in their quest for government. Will the unions and labour establishment let that happen? I think Nash has replaced Topp in that camp. Topp appears to have been a non-starter for most. He doesn't have any charisma or aggressiveness needed to take on a slick operator like Harper. Dewar has surprised, but his lack of French is debilitating for him.

I will never vote NDP in my lifetime (well never say never I guess), but I think in terms of competency, the dippers only have one choice, and that is Mulcair.

[Evening Star]

Mulcair is the only one who has shown any semblance of sound leadership in this race. He though is openly admitting he would shift the NDP closer to the centre in order to better place the NDP in their quest for government.

When has he said that? All he's ever said is they need to move the centre to the NDP, which has the opposite meaning.

(Also, he's been endorsed by UFCW, the largest private-sector union btw.)

[j44]

(Also, he's been endorsed by UFCW, the largest private-sector union btw.)

Who thinks that unless it is Mulcair it will be difficult for the NDP to hold on and/or gain seats vis-a-vis the Liberals in the next election?

I think Cullen is the only other one that has a personality and will appeal to more than just NDPers. Anything could happen and one of the under performers in the debates could turn out to be a very good leader but I think there are only 1 or 2 or 3 at most who can maybe hold on and prevent the Liberal from a big push back. Although I'm sure the Liberals will certainly gain seats in the next election.

[punked]

Why hasn't anyone mentioned Cullen's idea to Liberals? I've never heard anyone from the party comment on it.

Mostly because it is a none starter. The NDP has a history of having to fight off outside influences from groups trying to take over the party the last this we need is to welcome the Liberals in to do what the Communist, and waffle could not do. I do not mean this to sound like I would not welcome Liberals into the party of course I would as I welcome anyone into the party. I welcome them as NDP members though and nothing else.

[Newfoundlander]

Who thinks that unless it is Mulcair it will be difficult for the NDP to hold on and/or gain seats vis-a-vis the Liberals in the next election?

I think Cullen is the only other one that has a personality and will appeal to more than just NDPers. Anything could happen and one of the under performers in the debates could turn out to be a very good leader but I think there are only 1 or 2 or 3 at most who can maybe hold on and prevent the Liberal from a big push back. Although I'm sure the Liberals will certainly gain seats in the next election.

Does Mulcair have a personality, many consider him to be cold. He's not to bad but I don't think he'll have the appeal as someone like Nathan Cullen. The biggest benefit with Mulcair I think is that at the moment he's very popular in Quebec and could win a huge majority of the seats, compared to the others who would likely have to work hard to keep the Quebec base.