punked Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 While the Liberals have been dumb to not have more grassroots input on policy I also do not agree with the NDPs stance whereby the leader doesn't appear to have much say in policy. A leader should be trusted enough to be able to decide some of the policies themselves. Nope the party as a whole decides on policy, there have been votes in the past to give the leader power to make policy on things but those are votes to flesh out policy the party already decided on. This is why the NDP grassroots is so strong it is because they actually get a say. Here is my point. The Liberals voted on a Marijuana policy. I will tell you right now that is the last we will hear of that whoever is the new leader is going to bury so far under the ground that we will only hear about it when the Liberals need the youth vote. Then if they do ever win just like national daycare it will never get done. That is the way the Liberals operate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 Here is my point. The Liberals voted on a Marijuana policy. I will tell you right now that is the last we will hear of that whoever is the new leader is going to bury so far under the ground that we will only hear about it when the Liberals need the youth vote. Then if they do ever win just like national daycare it will never get done. That is the way the Liberals operate. Rae didn't really agree with the marijuana legalization but I'm pretty sure Trudeau spoke out in support. The policy on legalizing marijuana is exactly the thing I think the Liberals should have to run on in elections until the party decide to abandon policy at a convention or until it's implemented. It should be up to the grassroots to decide things like whether the party should implement a cap and trade system, a carbon tax or neither. Electoral reform and senate reform should be decided by the grassroots and any major policy ideas. The leader should be responsible in exactly how those policies should be executed and should also be able to add some of their own ideas to a platform without say from the grassroots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 Wouldn't that depend on the leader and their views on certain polices? It seems to me, that no matter what party it is, the leader seems to governor the way they want to, compared to what the party has stood for and that's why when we vote in a election, we have to take into consideration who the leader of the party is first. That's not supposedly how the NDP operate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 Rae didn't really agree with the marijuana legalization but I'm pretty sure Trudeau spoke out in support. The policy on legalizing marijuana is exactly the thing I think the Liberals should have to run on in elections until the party decide to abandon policy at a convention or until it's implemented. It should be up to the grassroots to decide things like whether the party should implement a cap and trade system, a carbon tax or neither. Electoral reform and senate reform should be decided by the grassroots and any major policy ideas. The leader should be responsible in exactly how those policies should be executed and should also be able to add some of their own ideas to a platform without say from the grassroots. History tells us it doesn't matter what the grassroots pass, or even what their platform is. Once the Liberals win an election all those promises are out the window. We will see if this changes but I still hold the redbook against them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 History tells us it doesn't matter what the grassroots pass, or even what their platform is. Once the Liberals win an election all those promises are out the window. We will see if this changes but I still hold the redbook against them. I think Chretien did a great job governing in the 1990's even if he didn't follow through on on getting rid of the GST and implementing national childcare, both which I don't agree with. However it doesn't always look great to not follow through on policy, even if it's not necessarily the party's fault. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 I think Chretien did a great job governing in the 1990's even if he didn't follow through on on getting rid of the GST and implementing national childcare, both which I don't agree with. However it doesn't always look great to not follow through on policy, even if it's not necessarily the party's fault. Sure but what that means is when the Liberals come out with policy we really can't trust them. Doesn't it? So now why should I vote for a party whose plans I know will not be followed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 As far as implying that the NDP not accepting Justin into the fold would be at par as belittling the poor,I disagree with this.WWWTT You're not following me. It's not about Justin Trudeau himself. It's about not being accepting of the wealthy and "privileged" for no other reason than the fact that they're wealthy and privileged. I'm just saying that I personally disagree with these kinds of conflict approaches to politics. It's the same as Neo-Conservatives (Liberals in the European sense) turning their nose up at the poor and telling them to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, imo. I believe the NDP's position is similar to mine, which is why I brought up their early struggles to flush Communism out of the party. Communists believe that history is about the violent conflict between the bourgeois and proletariat. They believe the only way change will come is through a violent and bloody revolution, not cooperation through democratic means. This kind of class-antagonism that I believe you were hinting at with your post about Trudeau is not the way forward, imo. I also don't believe it's representative of social democratic values. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 So what you want is the US system where systematic change will never happen because both parties will govern pretty much the same way. I personally don't think of that as a healthy democracy but 300 million to the south seem to so it is a way to go. This is an aside, so I don't want to drift the thread too far, but I disagree that 300 million to the south seem agree with that system. There are plenty of people critical of the two-party system because it has no room for differing opinions and funnels everyone into two points of view. That's not indicative of reality and it leaves very legitimate grievances and view points unaddressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 While the Liberals have been dumb to not have more grassroots input on policy I also do not agree with the NDPs stance whereby the leader doesn't appear to have much say in policy. A leader should be trusted enough to be able to decide some of the policies themselves.The NDP is based on its membership agreeing on policy. The leader doesn't make policy. Rather, the leader may come up with and suggest policy at convention, but has to convince the membership that it's the right course of action. The membership always has the final say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 Why would Justin Trudeau cross the floor? Makes no sense to me. He likely wouldn't get a shot at the leadership there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 You're not following me. It's not about Justin Trudeau himself. It's about not being accepting of the wealthy and "privileged" for no other reason than the fact that they're wealthy and privileged. I'm just saying that I personally disagree with these kinds of conflict approaches to politics. It's the same as Neo-Conservatives (Liberals in the European sense) turning their nose up at the poor and telling them to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, imo. I believe the NDP's position is similar to mine, which is why I brought up their early struggles to flush Communism out of the party. Communists believe that history is about the violent conflict between the bourgeois and proletariat. They believe the only way change will come is through a violent and bloody revolution, not cooperation through democratic means. This kind of class-antagonism that I believe you were hinting at with your post about Trudeau is not the way forward, imo. I also don't believe it's representative of social democratic values. How much more privileged was Justin Trudeau's upbringing then say Jack Layton's? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 The NDP is based on its membership agreeing on policy. The leader doesn't make policy. Rather, the leader may come up with and suggest policy at convention, but has to convince the membership that it's the right course of action. The membership always has the final say. Yes I understand that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 How much more privileged was Justin Trudeau's upbringing then say Jack Layton's? None I would say. I have never bought into the us or them argument. I don't want the rich to be poor, or know what it is like to be poor. I want everyone in Canada to be as well off as they can be. That is all I want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 You're not following me. It's not about Justin Trudeau himself. It's about not being accepting of the wealthy and "privileged" for no other reason than the fact that they're wealthy and privileged. I'm just saying that I personally disagree with these kinds of conflict approaches to politics. I can easily blame you for not understanding the point(misunderstanding) I was trying to make too. But let me clarify my thoughts here. Justin may bring to big/easy of a target to the NDP that the conservatives would be salivating for. As well it is in my opinion that Justin is way over-rated,just as Ignatieff was! In the NDP he will have to earn his position and he may not be able to cut it Keep in mind that the Canadian voters in the last election believed Jack Layton's NDP sincerity. Bringing Justin into the fold may jeopardize the trust that has been built between the NDP and Canadian voters! Is it really worth risking our growing foundation? It can be even argued that individuals as Justin or Ignatief were the cause of the demise of the liberals an I would not be so welcoming to a cancer into the party. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 None I would say. I have never bought into the us or them argument. I don't want the rich to be poor, or know what it is like to be poor. I want everyone in Canada to be as well off as they can be. That is all I want. I agree. One problem I have with some in the NDP is that they tend to leave the impression that if someone has been successful in say business and are wealthy then they are somehow currupt and must be conservative. I've seen comments from New Democrats about potential candidate George Takach and how he'd be the perfect candidate because he's a Bay Street lawyer and therefor all the progressives and left leanings Liberals would support the NDP and he'd only take votes away from the Conservatives. This because of his resume and nothing that he has said and done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 How much more privileged was Justin Trudeau's upbringing then say Jack Layton's? Why the ? at the end of your sentence? Justin grew up in 24 Sussex. I am not sure of Jacks family when he was growing up,but I know for a fact that Jack never had the notoriety that Justin has. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 How much more privileged was Justin Trudeau's upbringing then say Jack Layton's? It doesn't matter. That's my point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 [some in the NDP] tend to leave the impression that if someone has been successful in say business and are wealthy then they are somehow curruptI think that's a mischaracterization of the NDP and their positions that has been perpetuated by their opponents. The NDP is a social democratic party. That in itself is defined by cooperation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 Why the ? at the end of your sentence? Justin grew up in 24 Sussex. I am not sure of Jacks family when he was growing up,but I know for a fact that Jack never had the notoriety that Justin has. WWWTT Come on man. Layton's Father was a Federal cabinet minster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 I agree. One problem I have with some in the NDP is that they tend to leave the impression that if someone has been successful in say business and are wealthy then they are somehow currupt and must be conservative. I've seen comments from New Democrats about potential candidate George Takach and how he'd be the perfect candidate because he's a Bay Street lawyer and therefor all the progressives and left leanings Liberals would support the NDP and he'd only take votes away from the Conservatives. This because of his resume and nothing that he has said and done. No offense but no one is talking about Takach. The guy is an unknown, I've seen his name kicking around with that other "I guess there is no one else really" candidates but the Liberals aren't going to reach out and put an unknown in the leadership role. He is doing the grass roots work that needs to be done not just by those running for the leadership but all senior Liberal members but no one in their right mind is drooling over him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 Come on man. Layton's Father was a Federal cabinet minster. Oh ya that's right! A conservative one to right? But he still did not have the same stigma attachment. Don't believe me?Do a snap quiz and ask how many people who Jacks father is,then ask who was Justins. Still this gives me some food for thought. Yesterday I was at the NDP Chinese committee advisory. I had the opportunity to talk with several MP's. Olivia Chow, Peggy Nash and the last one I forget.She is the MP for Scarborough Rouge River and she is Tamil/young. However this was a tight nit meeting and I will not disclose any more then that. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 Oh ya that's right! A conservative one to right? But he still did not have the same stigma attachment. Don't believe me?Do a snap quiz and ask how many people who Jacks father is,then ask who was Justins. Still this gives me some food for thought. Yesterday I was at the NDP Chinese committee advisory. I had the opportunity to talk with several MP's. Olivia Chow, Peggy Nash and the last one I forget.She is the MP for Scarborough Rouge River and she is Tamil/young. However this was a tight nit meeting and I will not disclose any more then that. WWWTT It is because Layton made his own name and his own history. Which is really what Justin should be doing right now. Layton went out and did some pretty incredible things which shaped his story outside of being the son of another politician. He lived his life his way and had a story to tell about it. Justin will be the same way if he runs in 10-15 years but right now he only really has half a story to tell outside of his Dads story which is why you think that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 Justin will be the same way if he runs in 10-15 years but right now he only really has half a story to tell outside of his Dads story which is why you think that. I disagree! The Trudeau shadow extends too far for him to sneak out. And the NDP will not be his testing ground to see if he can be PM one day. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 It is because Layton made his own name and his own history. Which is really what Justin should be doing right now. Layton went out and did some pretty incredible things which shaped his story outside of being the son of another politician. He lived his life his way and had a story to tell about it. Justin will be the same way if he runs in 10-15 years but right now he only really has half a story to tell outside of his Dads story which is why you think that. Justin did beat the snot out of a Tory Senator. So he has that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 It is because Layton made his own name and his own history. Well when you have an opposing view in politics as your father had then he would have to go out and prove himself. Has Justin done anything remotely similar? WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.