Why the NDP will lose the next election

[cybercoma]

Ultimately, my point is that Trudeau is doing social democracy better than Mulcair and I believe that's why Mulcair is suffering. It's difficult for him to hold onto the progressive vote when there's another leader doing it better.

[Evening Star]

whilst also showing that he's willing to work with others and build bridges.

How has JT shown this?

[angrypenguin]

How has JT shown this?

By saying he's open and honest with Canadians and he's not playing politics.

[cybercoma]

By being amenable to the TPP, discussing reforming C-51 instead of abolishing it, talking about appropriate assessments for pipelines rather than being set against them or set for them. The Liberals are a brokerage party. Their entire MO is to govern by the polls. Though Trudeau has broken somewhat from that by taking passionate stands when it's necessary. He's struck a necessary balance for the progressive vote in this country that Mulcair couldn't do.

Edited October 7, 2015 by cybercoma

[Evening Star]

I think the balanced budget pledge was possibly the NDP's/Mulcair's biggest mistake. They thought it would help to make them seem like the more fiscally responsible party in comparison to the Conservatives. Then the Tories said the budget was balanced, the Liberals said balancing the budget isn't that important, and the NDP was in the awkward position of advocating for social programmes and increased spending but also making a big deal about balancing the budget, which raised questions. I actually think their tax policy is quite sensible, and much better than the Grits', but buying into the obsession with budget-balancing and pointlessly slamming the Tories for running deficits during a recession, put them in a tight spot.

[angrypenguin]

passionate stands when it's necessary.

Especially when people are talking about his dad

[cybercoma]

I'm not particularly interested in your snide 1-liners.

[Evening Star]

By being amenable to the TPP, discussing reforming C-51 instead of abolishing it, talking about appropriate assessments for pipelines rather than being set against them or set for them. The Liberals are a brokerage party. Their entire MO is to govern by the polls. Though Trudeau has broken somewhat from that by taking passionate stands when it's necessary. He's struck a necessary balance for the progressive vote in this country that Mulcair couldn't do.

Oh, if 'working with others and building bridges' means being wishy-washy centrists without strong principles, the Liberals totally own that, yeah.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Evening Star

[cybercoma]

You can call it "wishy washy power brokering" all you want. It's a fundamental tenet of social democracy to work with others and have a co-operative government.

[Evening Star]

But I think that Mulcair IS somewhat flexible on a lot of those things. Their positions on the TPP and pipelines show some openness and flexibility.

[angrypenguin]

But I think that Mulcair IS somewhat flexible on a lot of those things. Their positions on the TPP and pipelines show some openness and flexibility.

You're joking right? They have staunchly opposed both.

[cybercoma]

This is an important quality in our federal leadership that has been sorely lacking during Harper's tenure. There's numerous examples, but take Harper's refusal to meet with the premiers as a prime example.

[cybercoma]

But I think that Mulcair IS somewhat flexible on a lot of those things. Their positions on the TPP and pipelines show some openness and flexibility.

I do too, but he didn't present it as well as Trudeau. That's the problem.

[cybercoma]

You're joking right? They have staunchly opposed both.

Opposed to the TPP, but not pipelines. It was the NDP that pushed Energy East a number of years ago. Saying we should keep resources here and increase their value by refining oil, for example. The NDP argued that because they want those refining jobs here in Canada, not elsewhere.

[Evening Star]

You can call it "wishy washy power brokering" all you want. It's a fundamental tenet of social democracy to work with others and have a co-operative government.

Really? Did Tommy Douglas really demonstrate this kind of 'openness' on socialized health insurance? Was Clement Attlee really as 'flexible' as the current Liberal Party when it came to nationalizations and decolonization?

[cybercoma]

You can rationalize it all you want. Trudeau is doing social democracy better than the NDP.

[ToadBrother]

I do too, but he didn't present it as well as Trudeau. That's the problem.

Mulcair really screwed up the NDP's TPP position. I get that he was trying to cozy up to autoworkers, but to put all this work into being centrist only to wipe that out over TPP seemed odd to me. I will concede that TPP may be an identifiable point where the NDP willfully threw away the key, but frankly, I never thought they had a significant chance. The NDP have found themselves to be the Liberals' whipping boy for half a century now, and it doesn't look like that's going to change.

[eyeball]

This election is over for the NDP and it's exactly because the best New Democrat in the country is the leader of the Liberal Party.

Ironic how many figure Mulcair would have made a better Liberal.

Why these two parties don't just get over themselves already and merge into one party. Stupid is as stupid does?

[cybercoma]

Mulcair should have handled the TPP issue by saying that a caretake government has no authority to sign such an agreement for Canada and that the NDP will review the details of the agreement in full before deciding whether or not to support it.

[ToadBrother]

By being amenable to the TPP, discussing reforming C-51 instead of abolishing it, talking about appropriate assessments for pipelines rather than being set against them or set for them. The Liberals are a brokerage party. Their entire MO is to govern by the polls. Though Trudeau has broken somewhat from that by taking passionate stands when it's necessary. He's struck a necessary balance for the progressive vote in this country that Mulcair couldn't do.

You have nailed it perfectly. This has been the way the Liberals have functioned since Wilfred Laurier's time. He created the mold for electoral success that Liberal governments have used ever since.

[ToadBrother]

Ironic how many figure Mulcair would have made a better Liberal.

Why these two parties don't just get over themselves already and merge into one party. Stupid is as stupid does?

That was the point of Mulcair's coronation. The NDP knew he was a Liberal, and they knew he was a darned fine campaigner (witness the Orange Crush in Quebec, which Layton got the credit for, but was really belonged to Mulcair). They assumed, as the Tories did, that the Liberals were a spent force, that the electorate, after a century, had turned their back permanently on the Liberal Party. So, to win over the Liberals, they elected a Liberal leader, and assumed that all the Liberals, and maybe even some Red Tories, would just march on to the new Jerusalem.

Except Trudeau has proven to be smarter than either the NDP or Tories could ever have imagined. And when you remove the centrist skin from the new NDP, you still have a party dominated by trade unions, social justice types and various activists, and why would the Liberals ever want to saddle themselves with that?

The problem here is that no matter what the Tories may say, and what it appears many NDPers have believed since the 2008 coalition attempt, the Liberals are not a left wing party. They never have been. As Cybercoma has so brilliantly observed, the Liberals are a brokerage party, a party that governs by the polls. There's a reason it's one of the last successful Liberal parties left in the world.

[overthere]

Mulcair should have handled the TPP issue by saying that a caretake government has no authority to sign such an agreement for Canada and that the NDP will review the details of the agreement in full before deciding whether or not to support it.

Well no. The other signatories would not wait for Ottawa to dick around indefinitely. The government of Canada is elected to govern, and voters expect them to do that no matter what their party affiliation.

It is not a caretaker government, it is THE government until the electorate changes that situation. The NDP can review all they like if and when they get elected, prior to ratification votes on the TPP.

Big blunder by Mulcair to reject this deal offhand. It plays well to some union people, but he must know he needs far more than that to form a government..

[ToadBrother]

Well no. The other signatories would not wait for Ottawa to dick around indefinitely. The government of Canada is elected to govern, and voters expect them to do that no matter what their party affiliation.

It is not a caretaker government, it is THE government until the electorate changes that situation. The NDP can review all they like if and when they get elected, prior to ratification votes on the TPP.

Big blunder by Mulcair to reject this deal offhand. It plays well to some union people, but he must know he needs far more than that to form a government..

You're very wrong here. After dissolution, a government becomes a caretaker government. Period. That's the way our constitution works.

That being said, you are right that the urgency over TPP would allow it to fit into that area of responsibility where even a caretaker government would have to act.

[angrypenguin]

You guys do realize a lot of the stuff Harper is proposing is affordable as it's part of the budget for the Feds already? I'm at work but can dig this up later

[ToadBrother]

You guys do realize a lot of the stuff Harper is proposing is affordable as it's part of the budget for the Feds already? I'm at work but can dig this up later

We don't even know yet if the budget is affordable.