Canada Federal Election October 21, 2019

NorthReport wrote:

 

Rather abrupt: @AndrewScheer announces the departure of his chief of staff David McArthur. “This decision was mutually agreed upon between myself and Mr. McArthur,” Scheer says in statement. #cdnpoli Departure is effective immediately.

https://twitter.com/davidakin/status/1000094649158168578

"We mutally agreed that he jump out the window"

NorthReport wrote:

The US, effective the end of this week, has just decided to impose sweeping tariffs on Canada's aluminum and steel exports. Great negotiating Trudeau!

How do you negotiate with a lunatic?

I think this is overblown seriously. Yes it is an example of a meltdown that could be a lesson for any party. To suggest that there is that much of a connection between provinical and federal is unrealistic. There are also advantages -- including not having to share talent.

NDPP wrote:

Don't Vote For Israel!

https://twitter.com/CIJAinfo/status/1002173741755961349

So if the words "condemn" was changed to "endorse" and "unacceptable" to "acceptable" how would you feel?

NDPP wrote:

 The NDP is a pro-Zionist party. Always has been. They are also profoundly mendacious. Although their fandom accepts their perpetual cuckoldry, the party will make statements both ways, forked-tongued - so as to deny supporting either or to claim support of both. Only the chumps buy it. But there's a lot of those in the NDP. Eternally hopeful and eternally betrayed. Fuck Singh, the NDP, Israel and all their many friends here. I'm happy to say the world at last begins to see through the make-believe, dirty lies and secrets...

This poster is a good example of what I pointed out in the right wing propaganda thread. I suspect many -- maybe a majority -- in the NDP sympathise with Palestine. What they do not want to do is engage with the issue such that they lose their opportunity to do the other things they want to do. It may be less about a position of support or opposition than a calculation of which battle to fight to be able to have a chance at anything.

The for and against side that comes from the Middle East is so loaded that there are many who avoid discussing it at all becuase every other issue would be sacrificed to that division.

If you ask yourself a clear question: Why with the behaviour of Israel is there not greater opposition to it than there is, you might start to undersand this. Pro Israel groups and the divisiveness of the conflict are silencing to any opposition to Israel held by most who do not consider this their absolute priority. People who want a consensus on anything else are reluctant to split off people who disagree with them on this issue as they know that without those people they cannot get a critical mass needed for power and influence. This is sad but the anger here is the same one I rasied in the other thread discussing the calculations of people who want to do general good and compromise on important positions becuase they feel the need to do so to have any power at all.

You can be angry but to deny this dynamic is to remove any insight that you might be able to bring to overcome it.

The nature of a minority party is that it has to choose its battels carefully in order to gain needed support. Many will want to address social justice at home before risking it to take a stand on an international conflict that likely could not be moved by all of Canada getting on the same side.

Yes it sucks, but in all your anger, you might be better off understanding the dynamic rather than railing on angrily against those who might even be sympathetic.

It is legitimate given the misery of the world for poeple to decide to compomise somewhat in order to make at least some difference in the world rather than remaining rightious without any effect. Where you compromise and how is a practical rather than just a moral question. It is undeniable that either way the result is repugnant -- giving up a chance to make a difference for people you might be able to help or being silent on one of the greatest injustices of our age.

Sometimes it is awful to realize that there is no clean good choice and it is legitimate to disagree. But when you want to advocate this clear thinking may be needed if you want to make a difference. It is also legitimate to just yell into the wind if that is what you want to do. But not everyone will share the same anger as they may not have the same priority.

Quote:

Although their fandom accepts their perpetual cuckoldry

In 2018, what is a "cuck" supposed to mean?  Aside from what right-wingers assert it means (tl;dr:  a man/politician who doesn't appropriately fight for his honour)?

Why would you embrace, and own, a right-wing term like that, NDPP?  I thought you wanted to present yourself as a "real" progressive.

NorthReport wrote:

By their behaviour in the Ontario election Liberals will get little or no support from NDPers in the 2019 federal election and it would not be surprising to see the Conservatives win. Too bad!

Aw shucks...

Toronto Sun took down the story.   At this point, this is tabloid "news."  If the editorial is not fake, the so-called reporter has not come forward to accuse Trudeau.   If it happened, it might have been consensual flirting.    Trump was accused by about a dozen of actual women, not some editorials from 18 years ago, and he still "won" the election.

According to the latest Nanos poll, 10% chose Singh as best PM, which is about 50% of total NDP support.   And he's not exactly Mr. Popularity on this board.  

Will racism affect his chances?  Unfortunately, yes, considering the rise of Trump-related nationalism.      Additionally, Singh is not exactly an experienced leader, and he sounds like a Liberal.

josh wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

I have moved this over to the more appropriate thread to respond.

My hunch is in spite of the CBC-Liberal tag team's significant attempts to take him down, Jagmeet Singh is going to favourably surprise a lot of Canadians. It seems every time Justin opens his mouth these days Canadians are continually and sadly reminded that there is a growing difference in substance between PET and his son. Things can change very quickly in politics - look at the decimation experienced by the Liberals, going from government to loss of party status, last nite in Ontatio. It may well be the Singh-led NDP that will be leading the charge against the Conservatives. So the question might be better stated: will the Liberals jump on board and support Singh to block the Conservatives from taking power? Unfortunately I think we all know the answer to that one.

josh wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

Doesn't look good.

Too bad the alternative to Ford could not coalesce under the Andrea Horwath-led NDP, but we all know the reasons for that. And my hunch is that way too many bridges have been burned between the Liberals and the NDP so we will now see a repeat performance next year in Ottawa. 

Ontario has given Doug Ford carte blanche to do virtually anything he wants

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/06/07/ontario-has-g...

So, should the NDP join up with the Liberals to stop the Conservatives next year?

You didn’t answer my question.

That should be framed as "should the Liberals and the NDP work together with mutual respect and parity of esteem to stop Scheer?" You can't put it ALL on the NDP.

Several things would help:

1) An apology from Justin about not bringing in PR, and a commitment to actually bring it in next time;

2) A "strategic voting" arrangement that was as much about the Liberals getting out of the way in NDP-Con marginal seats as you want it to be about the NDP getting out of the way in Lib-Con marginals.  It's crucial that Justin not pull a Paul Martin and demand that all progressives everywhere vote Liberal(a demand that threw five likely NDP seats in B.C. to the Cons the year Martin did it).

3) An agreement by Justin and Co. to modulate their comments NDP during the campaign and an equivalent agreement by Jagmeet and Co. to modulate their comments about the Liberals.  

It can't just be telling the NDP to "know their place".

I'm not worried about Jagmeet Singh's performance in Brampton.  It's the other areas of the country that concern me.    I've asked some Ford supporters about their vote today, and got some surprisingly racist responses.    It's the Trump effect.

Also, some people don't care about the race, but may be wary of  religious attire.    Would everyone feel comfortable voting for a politician wearing a large cross?   With the rise of Trump/Ford nationalism, it's a very nasty political climate.

Would Singh still win the NDP leadership race if they used a riding-based electoral point system?    One-member-one-vote system can hypothetically allow a couple of ridings to chose for the whole country.

I voted for the NDP in the Ontario election.     We're discussing Jagmeet Singh's support within his party.   If the turn out was low, a few ridings could decide the results of the leadership race.

SocialJustice101 wrote:

 With the rise of Trump/Ford nationalism, it's a very nasty political climate.

Trump represents American nationalism, I assume, but what type of nationalism does Ford represent?

NorthReport wrote:

NDP Leader Singh open to bilateral trade deal with Trump

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/ndp-leader-singh-open-to-bilateral-trade...

Why does there need to be any trade deals.  You’d think there was no trade in the world until 1987.