04.10.2016 02:48 PM

And here I thought Liberals were vicious

Fifty-two per cent. Wow.

Quick reactions, stream of unconsciousness:

  • Justin Trudeau probably wanted to keep Thomas Mulcair around. The next guy/gal may steal back what Trudeau took from the NDP in 2015. 
  • The Conservatives need the Dippers to have a stronger leader. Maybe they’ll get one, now. 
  • By staying on a bit longer, Mulcair gets his six best years for his pension, no? 
  • So much for that orange breakthrough in Quebec. That’s over. The Bloc will be smiling. 
  • Et tu, Stephen Lewis?
  • The Leap Manifesto is a lengthy suicide note. 
  • Knifed by the very people who defended his every word six months ago. 
  • Wow. 

What do you think, folks?

60 Comments

  1. bluegreenblogger says:

    They’ve been Sipping what Corbyn’s selling. Feeling the Bern. Surely the suffering masses feel it too? ROFL.

  2. Michael Bluth says:

    Just got a text from a friend at the convention. He was expecting a lukewarm 55-60% support for Mulcair with a resignation to follow.

    Mulcair was a great dipper leader for Trudeau. The NDP won opposition due to a number of factors in 2011 that were unlikely to be repeated. Mulcair was going for the brass ring instead of staying true to social democratic principles.

    A stronger NDP leader is to the advantage of the Conservatives at the expense of the Liberals. With the dippers swinging back to the left that will create pressure on the Liberals to move left.

    Leap Manifesto is a nightmare for Rachel Notley. The provincial PCs here must be licking their chops. Ugh.

  3. Matt says:

    It’s funny. I had the exact opposite thoughts for the first and secong points.

    This vote means the NDP have intentionally singed their own execution order. The Leap Manifesto/Youth wing types with their moronic and irrational screams for things like “keep the oil in the ground” have taken control of the party.

    Libs should be thrilled as it pushes more “progressives” to their camp.

    Conservatives should be worried for the same reason you stated. They need a strong NDP. Thd Dippers are now the crazy uncle of Canadian politics.

    Seriously. All the parties “youth wings” should be locked up until they’re 30.

    • Mark says:

      It’s ironic that Stephen Lewis was behind this move toward being “the crazy uncle of Canadian politics”. Stephen Lewis back in his day expelled the radical “Waffle” from the NDP. He now ushers in his son’s Leap Manifesto (which served to undermine the NDP during the election) to now sew division between the Alberta NDP and the soon to be unelectable federal NDP.

    • Alex says:

      I agree with you Matt. As someone who voted Dipper in the last federal election, my view is that this convention was an utter disaster for the NDP. They poleaxed Rachel Notley, turned off pragmatic progressives with their leap nonsense, and made clear to everyone that they are deeply divided with no clear future.

      For the Liberals, in contrast, this is wonderful news. The Conservatives can only win if two things happen: one, the right-wing vote is not divided; and two, there is a strong (but not too strong) NDP. Unfortunately for Team Blue, the Dippers seem hell-bent on returning to their irrelevant status of the 1990s. If an election were held today, I wouldn’t be surprised if the NDP got 10% of the vote. In that context the Liberals would become the clear choice of progressives (who form a majority of the country), thereby defeating the Tories easily.

  4. Neil says:

    More interesting yet is what will happen to the Alberta ND and the Feds given the adoption of the Leap Manifesto.

    It kills the ALBERTA NDP in the next provincial election…Will they have to split as an organization.
    Lots to think about.

    • davie says:

      I am guessing, but I had the idea last fall that the federal NDP held back from the Leap because they wanted to be cautious and not give the Conservatives and Liberals a club to beat them with.

      It sounded to me this weekend as though the Alberta NDPers were arguing the same, don’t give the right a club to beat us with.

  5. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    Warren,

    Jack’s NDP is dead. Think Power above all else. Fighting the good fight means nothing now.

    • Matt says:

      Except the Leap Manifesto guarantees the NDP will never, EVER be anywhere near holding power.

      • Ronald O'Dowd says:

        Matt,

        The Leap is visionary and idealistic but it’s not sensible for a Canada run on fossil fuels. The NDP are right: it is the way forward but not for at least another 30 years.

        • The Doctor says:

          So in 30 years, blatant NIMBYism will be wise public policy. Interesting.

          • doconnor says:

            In 30 year, it will be more clear how many millions of lives and trillions of dollar the world’s lack of action will cost.

          • Ronald O'Dowd says:

            The Doctor,

            The Leap is a means to an end. What ultimately is wise — many, many, decades from now is the transformational nature of the economy away from fossil fuels and focused on renewable clean energy. That day will come, whether we happen to like it or not.

          • The Doctor says:

            So in your LEAPer socialist greenie utopia, raw sewage will go untreated. Fascinating.

      • Vancouverois says:

        The same way the NDP will never, ever get a majority government in Alberta?

  6. I’m still shocked at the magnitude of the vote against Mulcair. I remember John Tory getting 67% approval after that ’07 PC election loss, where the blame for the faith-based schools gaffe fell squarely on him. I called this one very wrong. NDP are ruthless.

    With a 52% vote, this was not just a “grass roots”/youth revolt, you can bet the highest level caucus members and party elders plotted this outcome for weeks.

    As for the Leap Manifesto, where else can the NDP go? Trudeau firmly occupies the centre-left, leaving the NDP some socialist table scraps to cobble together their next platform. Bottom line (and with the CPC in disarray), this is very, very good for the Liberals.

    • Michael Bluth says:

      Why are the Conservatives in disarray?

      They lost the election, but it’s no where near the gong show it was in ’93. Their interim leader has been doing a credible job. They have just begun their leadership race and waiting for potential winners to make their decisions and jump in.

      The honeymoon will end for Trudeau. What causes that will be the first true test of his leadership. No reason for Liberals to get complacent at this point.

      • The Doctor says:

        I agree. Arguably the amazing thing about Tory support is how high a bottom it has — polls clearly show that the Liberals’ high numbers are almost entirely at the expense of the NDP. The Tories are maintaining the support of their core voters with an interim leader that most Canadians couldn’t pick out of a police lineup.

        With his spending habits, Trudeau is already laying the foundation for blue Liberals and Red Tories to eventually conclude that he can’t be trusted with the nation’s finances. It won’t happen overnight, but that’s a likely future scenario. Plus there will come a day where Trudeau is going to have to be more than simply Not Harper. Right now most of his playbook is simply doing the opposite of whatever Harper did or would have done. That will become less and less politically effective over time, partly because at some point, he’ll run out of Harper policies to reverse. There’s a very big political high among his core demographic that comes from JT being the anti-Harper in all things. But that high will eventually wear off and it will be lot more challenging for JT to thrill his current fan base.

        • Ronald O'Dowd says:

          The Doctor,

          This is precisely the time for this Prime Minister to take advice from Butts and his inner circle. Inevitably, later in this mandate will come a time where Justin will have to become his own man and follow his own instincts, for good or ill. The PM will either make or break his chances for a successive mandate. It won’t be the entourage setting the strategy going into the next campaign. It will be the man at the top, himself.

  7. David Bent says:

    Mulcair’s departure is the sad result of the drubbing they received in October, though I’m glad he’s staying on as an MP and interim leader, he’s a great parliamentarian.. Maybe a fresh face in the leadership is necessary, though who that will be is an open question. If they want to remain viable in Quebec they may have no choice but to choose someone from there, as I doubt an outsider will do much to regain or hold support there. Though I doubt the Bloc is too happy they and their project are still mired in the doldrums.

    More troubling (to me), is the flirtation with this “Leap Manifesto.” Given its hostility to fossil fuels, one wonders if the national party deliberately trying to cause a schism with the Alberta government, which (barring a dramatic turn of events in the next week on the Manitoba campaign), will shortly be the only NDP government left standing. I can’t see the Notley government winning reelection unless there is a decisive break with a “Leap” championing federal NDP. Hell, it seems Alberta delegates at the convention moved to oust Mulcair after he refused to refute “Leap.” But it stands to do more damage at the national level.

    This will likely be the defining issue of the pending leadership race. Is the NDP going to be a viable party seeking office, in tune with the concerns of working people, or is it going to go the “Leap” route and become a “social conscious” party that only appeals to downtown/campus socialists and aging hippies? In the provinces where the NDP is a serious contender for government it bills itself a “meat and potatoes” rather than a “kale and quinoa” party. That doesn’t seem to be something many in the party’s youth wing understand.

    If they go the Leap route, I think they’ll drive many center leftists into the welcoming arms of the Trudeau Liberals, and ensure that they will only have to worry about their right flank in the next election. Given the dearth on the Tory leadership front, and the unlikeliness that there will be an overwhelming desire for change in four years time, I imagine the person happiest with the results in Edmonton is Justin Trudeau.

    • Michael S says:

      A whole year without a leader in either major opposition party? If I was the government I’d be shoving their entire legislative agenda down the pipe, especially controversial stuff that gets the base of either party (or, ideally, both) motivated enough to elect a nitwit, or even better, two nitwits.

      Naomi Klein and Avi Lewis are the most dangerous people in Canada, they’re trust fund socialists secure with what they’ve got willing to screw up the lives of others. They’re like the Clintons only far more boring.

      The ideal for the Liberals is that they rile up the Conservative base to get a true hardcore Reformer to win. Legalise pot and other drugs, an assisted dying bill that goes further than legally necessary, some public transit infrastructure. That should get a true Troglodyte. Once that is disposed of a stronger commitment to NATO, something somewhat pro-Israel, and some nice new fighter jets will ensure that the NDP will likely elect a Corbyn like nutter.

  8. doconnor says:

    Those of you who believe in the world’s climate change goals have to realize that much of the world’s discovered oil will have to remain in the ground, and that goes double for oil that burns a lot of fossil fuels just to extract it.

    “Knifed by the very people who defended his every word six months ago.”

    During the election that was a lot of critism of Mulcair from the base.

  9. doris says:

    Now which one the backstabbing bastards will be the first to say “I’m in”?

  10. davie says:

    More often than not, I liked most Bloc MP’s the past 2 decades, because they seemed to me to express social democratic values. I was surprised in 2011 how many NDP were elected in Quebec, but it made sense to me in that I figured a social democratic vote shifted from a sovereignty party to a federal party. We’ll see what happens in Quebec ‘sans’ Mulcair.
    The Leap motion is to send it to local riding associations for discussion. I expect that in 2 years some resolutions springing from these Leap points will come to the convention. (I might have already mentioned that I would that the NDP had seized on at least some of the Leap points when it came out during the election campaign. But, caution seemed to rule in the leadership group.)

    …and you thought the Waffle was history.

  11. doris says:

    meant to read:

    “Now which one of the backstabbing bastards will be the first to say “I’m in”? –

  12. Mark says:

    A few things:

    1) Leap Manifesto will be to the next leader what the Sherbrooke Declaration was to Mulcair; a utter albatross.

    2) Naomi Klein and Avi Lewis have done a great job at unnecessarily splitting the “always united” NDP and pitting ABNDP (the only electorally successful NDP in Canada at the moment) against the aim-less federal NDP. So if you’re an NDP who’s sick of being the conscience of Parliament, your fate has been sealed by this dynamic duo.

    3) I knew Tom was going to lose, I just didn’t think it was going to be this bad. The mood at the convention was evidently agitated and the response to Notley and Lewis versus the response to Mulcair was day and night. It was like every time his name came up the crowd soured a little. I’m stunned that he got such a low response though.

    4) In reality, Mulcair got what he deserved. I don’t understand why he was so desperately seeking redemption. It seemed like he overstayed his welcome with the party and wasn’t getting the message. Instead of departing in grace after the election, he got rejected in humiliation. Additionally, I don’t understand why Mulcair wants to stick around as interim.

    All in all, a surprising turn of events. The NDP is now evidently deconstructing along the lines of realists Dippers and radical lefties Dippers.

    • reader says:

      Like you, I just don’t know why Mulcair stuck around and will continue to. Is he trying for redemption? I don’t know.

      Some think he will change his mind and leave soon, but I don’t see any indication of that. Even when he looks very unhappy, he insists on trying to stay leader as long as he possible can. A mystery.

      • Vancouverois says:

        Well, he prides himself on being a fighter.

        Besides, what else can he do? He re-mortgaged his house eleven times – he has to pay for that somehow…

      • Mark says:

        Like many others, I suspect his adamance on staying on as leader could be driven by his financial circumstances.

        Otherwise, I don’t know why any leader would insist on living through their own self-created humiliation like Mulcair. He’s got quite and ego, but this exceeds the realms of redemption.

  13. Thomas Gallezot says:

    You’re right to believe that many social liberals such as myself are going to think twice about staying with the NDP. Especially if the new leader is a Bernie/Corbyn like angry socialist, Naomi Klein-like Toronto latte sipping revolutionary or, worst, Libbie Davis! But you’re are wrong to assume we’re going to join the Liberals. Personally if I leave the NDP, I would rather join the Conservatives. Hell if they pick a leader like Brad Wall, I might even run for them in my riding of Eglinton Lawrence!

    • Francis says:

      Of course you would.

      Thats precisely why I can’t stand most Dippers. For all rambling you guys do about social justice and progressivism while vehemently voicing your opposition to everything conservative, you guys join them at the drop of the hat.

      I don’t mean this personally.

      But this is why I’m always bemused by that cheesy Dipper tagline: “Liberal, Tory; same old story”. For all the sanctimony, it appears New Democrats have a lot more in common with Conservatives than they’d like to admit. This became pretty obvious during last year’s election too.

      How quickly New Democrats abandon principles and values when it given an opportunity to stick it to Liberals.

      • John B. says:

        You may not have meant your remarks personally, but you should have. While there are some odd souls in the NDP who display a type “Liberal Party Derangement Syndrome” in the belief that the only thing that the party stands for is the pursuit and acquisition of power, I believe that most would never consider jumping to the Conservatives or any other market libertarian alliance with social conservatives.

        Of course, there may be more like Thomas than I am aware of within the NDP and, though I have supported their federal party more often than I have the Liberals, along with many others within their support base I have always been annoyed by that childish and outdated “Liberal, Tory – Same Old Story” tagline and have taken every opportunity that has come my way to browbeat any NDP supporters who use it.

    • Ronald O'Dowd says:

      Thomas Gallezot,

      Yours is by far, the biggest possible leap of the day. Far bigger than my own in years past.

      • George Hampton says:

        Please Ronald, the ‘Leap’ manifesto is political suicide. It resonates well with the downtown Toronto crowd and North Vancouver but that’s pretty much it.

  14. ABB says:

    He should have shaved that f’ing beard off 10 minutes before walking on stage and delivering his convention speech — to symbolize a clean-cut break from the errors of the past. New guy, new horizons, etc.

    • Francis says:

      He could shave his chest if wanted, but that would do little to distance himself from balanced budgets and Margaret Thatcher praising.

  15. Tim White says:

    The one who really took it in the ear was Rachel Notley. I’m not an NDP type usually but I like Rachel Notley very much, I think she is doing a great job for our province under very trying circumstances. By the Lewis clan no less, Canada’s greatest bronze medal political dynasty.

    In Rachel’s own back yard. Pathetic but not really all that surprising.

    I’m still not clear what certain sections of the NDP don’t understand in this argument. It’s not that hard to grasp. Fossil fuel is on the way out, but not tomorrow. Even Elon Musk, who is actively trying to put the oil companies out of business, as opposed to writing manifestos and producing documentaries noone watches, gives it 15 – 20 years. That’s the most optimistic number you will hear. So in the meantime we should be using our own resource to benefit our own country, not buying oil from the Saudis and the Americans to run the Irving’s refineries. (And what the hell is the matter with exporting some while we are at it Christie Clark?)

    Just plain nuts.

    • The Doctor says:

      Though the story got far less prominent display at the time, you could see a similar dynamic at play during the BC NDP convention held a couple of years ago, when it came time to deal with the Northern Gateway pipeline. The building tradespeople and their unions wanted to debate the issue, because they supported the project on the basis of the job and other economic opportunities, particularly in rural and Northern communities. But the party brass completely shut down debate. The blue-collar Joe six-pack versus urban greenie tension within the party is huge. I think a related problem is that our environmental movement is well-organized, media-savvy and makes lots of noise. I’m not sure that the same can be said for ordinary working schmoes who work construction jobs. Is the labour movement really standing up for these people?

  16. Will McClelland says:

    I remember someone from the NDP saying “this party doesn’t eat its leaders” shortly after the election. They did not know the party very well.

  17. Mulletaur says:

    You could run as the merger candidate.

  18. Domenico says:

    Naomi Klein,Avi Lewis, Libbie Davies and their ilk remind me of the Orwell quote: “that dreary tribe of high-minded women and sandal-wearers and bearded fruit-juice drinkers who come flocking towards the smell of ‘progress’ like bluebottles to a dead cat”

  19. lou says:

    They will preach the rebirth of a movement, but don’t kid yourself. By following Avi Lewis and Naomi Klein, the NDP just ceased to become a political party. It just became a group of children destined to get 10%. Jack worked hard to try and get us to trust them. Tom worked hard as well. The result today shows that the dippers are the idiots we thought they were. Avi and Naomi live in luxury while the ask you to live in poverty. Progressive indeed. Regressive in deed.

  20. MississaugaPeter says:

    Mulcair deviated from NDP policy during the election.

    The support staff Mulcair put in place during the election were second and third rate.

    The NDP were ahead and ended up losing more than half their caucus (109 to 44).

    Mulcair didn’t even deserve 52%.

    • MississaugaPeter says:

      Too early in the morning … make that …

      Mulcair didn’t even deserve 48%.

      He should have resigned election night.

  21. Mark says:

    The NDP’s flirtation with the Leap Manifesto reminds me of the Liberal’s flirtation with the “Green Shift” under Dion. Odd. Layton strove to raise the NDP from obscurity into a realistic choice, and Mulcair was trying to continue this. Now, the delegates have voted for a return to obscurity. But unlike the Liberals and their “Green Shift” descent, I’m not confident the NDP will be able to rise from this self-inflicted foray into obscurity.

  22. Aongasha says:

    Federally they are dead in Quebec, same in Alberta – the Lewis family, the kiddies and the unions have just killed the NDP. Great! Now the adults can get on with deciding who will run this country.

  23. davie says:

    Jeezuz, people, they okayed a motion to study and discuss the Leap for 2 years at riding level. What do the rest of you suggest, censor the points in the document altogether?
    I really want you nay sayers to have your parties, Liberal and Conservative, show integrity and come out four square, unequivocally, advocating for getting the stuff out of the ground and burned up into the atmosphere as fast as your (increasingly foreign) fossll fuel board rooms can cart the profits off to Panama.

    It’s okay, climate change will hold off while you win your elections.

    • The Doctor says:

      Yes that’s right, there are two, and only two, possible alternatives: embrace the LEAP manifesto, or let the rapacious villains from Exxon et al. destroy Mother Earth.

  24. Vancouverois says:

    I’ll say it one last time (for now): the NDP is foolish to assume that the Liberal strategy that paid off in 2015 will be equally successful for the NDP in 2019.

    It may well turn out that Mulcair’s 2015 approach could appeal to voters a lot more after we’ve had four years of broken promises and fiscal irresponsibility under the Trudeau Liberals. But now we’ll never know…

  25. Stephanie Powers says:

    I dunno… if the Lewis/Klein wing of the party captures the leadership it makes for an interesting overall dynamic. The Greens will be irrelevant, their entire agenda absorbed by the NDP. The Liberals would be pushed towards the centre, but that’s not where their leader and his handler, Butts, are comfortable. What happens with Horvath, who, if she stays central in Ontario may have a shot of portraying herself and the NDP as an alternative to the imminently defeated Wynne?

  26. Art says:

    We have gone full circle back to the status quo. Crazy right wingers, crazy left wingers and normal middle of the road Liberals. What’s not to like?

  27. Mom says:

    I still think that someone like Nathan Cullen who will keep the Liberals feet to the fire on environmental issues would be the best choice for Canada.

  28. Gord says:

    Everyone is talking about how the federal NDP’s embrace of the Leap Manifesto will cause major political headaches for Rachel Notley and the Alberta NDP. But what’s being completely overlooked is the potential headache for her neighbours to the west, John Horgan and the B.C. NDP.

    Unlike his predecessor Adrian Dix (who blew the 2013 election by an ill-advised and incoherent policy on Kinder Morgan, which allowed the Liberals to paint him as anti-jobs and anti-growth), Horgan is on record as supporting the development of the energy industry in general. It’s the classic dilemma for the B.C. NDP – does the party brass side with the blue collar workers, private sector unions and some First Nations who are pro-resource extraction (because it means jobs) versus environmentalists and other First Nations who are opposed.

    I’m sure the B.C. Liberal War Room is, as we speak, combing through the Leap Manifesto to find material for attack ads in next year’s election. I find it very odd that everyone is so focused on the implications for Rachel Notley and the Alberta NDP when it will probably have just as much of an impact on British Columbia’s political landscape.

  29. davie says:

    My take on Dix and the Kinder Morgan thing varies a bit from yours. The BCLibs had decided to forego the BC environmental assessment of the Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion, and leave the decision to the federal environmental assessment process. Dix criticized the decision to abandon the BC process, and used the Kinder Morgan project as an example. The BC major media and the BC Libs interpreted that as being against the project altogether. I took it to mean he was against abandoning the BC based assessment. If you live here, you know how the media here works.

    You suggest that the L__P Manifesto means loss of jobs. It does for fossil fuel industry workers, and workers in all activities related to a fossil fuel based society, but the shift to renewables means more jobs in that sector. The proponents of the L__P claim the shift would mean more jobs.

    • davie says:

      This was a response to Gord.

      By the by, I agree with your last point about the BC Libs. I would bet the main BC media is doing the same.

    • Danny says:

      The whole Leap Manifesto is trash. It is a half baked (at best) attempt to use Climate Change as a vehicle to replace free markets and capitalism with some Socialist Engineered Utopian nirvana that these kooks have dreamed up. They wave some magic wand and create millions of Green jobs out of thin air. Somebody somewhere needs to call out that this emperor is buck naked. Oy Veh.

      • davie says:

        ‘free markets’ and ‘capitalism’ do not go together. the latter cancels the former.
        As well, capitalism unfettered subverts democracy.

  30. bluegreenblogger says:

    I dunno, I actually read the ‘Leap manifesto’, and it was pretty calm compared to past ideological utterances. Calm, but not terribly appealing. I have seen comparably bad policy adopted by Liberals, Greens, and Conservatives too. But none of that matters, we are 4 years away from an election. The Liberal Party is attempting to change into a mass movement, and they will likely succeed. Could be they will simply absorb the NDP membership piecemeal. Then who will care about Leap?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*