Norm MacDonald

Norm MacDonald could replace Carole James.

He's a likeable, stand up, smart, straight arrow guy. Demonstrates his principles.

Creative...dynamic...honest...

with the courage to stand up and fight back. These are the qualities that are needed in a new leader of NDP. If there is not a new leader...the NDP will lose again...

If Moe remains as president, or makes a play for leadership.....

....I will vote Green. He is "old guard", Carole is not.

according to the CBC website

according to the CBC website this morning, Gordo's replacement will be picked mid February. So James and the gang will have to decide really soon if she is going to hang around and hope the disgust in the Liberals is strong enough to get her the job, or remind themselves that she has lost two now, and are going for three.
I recall when taking a course in the Military on leadership, over forty years ago. The quote was. leadership is an intangible ART. Maybe she has it, maybe not, but the bet is that she hasn't.

Carole James & The NDP

Well, the media annouced that the BC Liberals will be choosing a new leader on Feb 26, 2011. The Liberals will most likely hold an election a little sonner than the current fixed date in 2013. The new leader will clearly understand that is the only way to seek a term or a mandate to from the people to govern, yes I agree with you on that part Bill but the NDP has some issues that need resolving as soon as possible. For example, what is the plan from the NDP (Do they even have one?)Outside of the HST BC has many challenges and the NDP remain very quiet. If Carole James runs again it's unlikely that they will win. A new leader would allow new ideas etc to move forward and face the new BC Liberal leader either in government or in opposition. I think that that both parties will offer all of us the moon with promises. No matter who leads BC in the future, after Campbell is gone it will take a few years to fix or undo this crap and we all pay for it no matter who is in power. Oh, it would be nice to have a 3rd choice at the ballot box in this province wouldn't it?

Political Landscape Shift

Current Polling

The ARS poll (taken before Campbell stepped down) does indeed show the NDP at a 47% "party preference" level right now. But the more ominous question in the ARS poll was the 2013 "government preference" question:

1. 32% NDP
2. 34% Liberal

So the Liberals are the preferred government in 2013. Imagine that. Current vote parking with the NDP is anti-Campbell and obviously very soft.

And with Campbell now going, I'd wager that the NDP party preference number today has already shrunk back to ~42%.

Carole James/NDP

Not since Glen Clark's days have I seen the NDP airing its dirty laundry in public over Carole James leadership. Her 25% approval rating is going to drag the NDP's fortunes down over time. Why is her public approval rating low? Because she's seen as a scolding school marm and quite frankly also as a flake.

These NDP constituencies have called for an immediate leadership convention:

1. Cariboo North;
2. Penticton;
3. Fraser Nicola;
4. Nanaimo-North Cowichan;
5. West Kootenay-Boundary;
6. Powell River-Sunshine Coast;
7. Kamloops North Thompson;
8. Kamloops South Thompson;

And at least another 5 MLA's from other constituencies have also offered only lukewarm support for James.

But next weekend the power brokers at the NDP provincial council will endorse James.

And those lingering questions about James will continue until there is an internal NDP bloodbath. One ballot box question will be: "If the NDP doesn't believe that Carole James is premier material, why should the public believe so and vote NDP?

Liberals

On the other side of he ledger, we have the Liberal leadership convention changing the entire political narrative and dynamic.

IMHO, the three Liberal candidates that would represent change and a fresh start with positive approval ratings are:

1. Carole Taylor;
2. Dianne Watts;
3. Blair Lekstrom;

Dianne Watts is out of the race. Carole Taylor is out of the race (unless someone twists her arm, which is highly doubtful.)

And that leaves Blair Lekstrom who has stated and appears likely to enter the race. Lekstrom, a former cabinet minister, is also considered as an "outsider" who is both affable and likable and is a moderate centrist.

He was the lone guy to oppose the HEU contract tear-ups, left caucus because of the HST and is a former union member to boot.

At the end of the day, Liberal party members will vote for the guy that they figure can win and that's Lekstrom, from rural BC, who is also a centrist that can appeal to urban voters.

In fact, an online-poll today shows Lekstrom leading at ~50% to replace Campbell.

Even Bill Tieleman last week stated on CKNW that either Watts or Lekstrom were the two candidates that the NDP should be most worried about.

In about six months, I'd wager that we will see a new Premier Lekstrom and the Liberals again leading in public opinion polls.

other questions

"The only question that is dividing New Democrats is simple -- can Carole James win the next provincial election?"

It's also troubling to wonder how Bob Simpson can be expelled from caucus without any consultation with the caucus, and why the decision to pay Moe Sihota a stipend was taken without the knowledge of most of the caucus. (see http://www.publiceyeonline.com/archives/005452.html#more)

What happened to the "democratic" part of "NDP"?

Most of all I wonder who writes the boring, politically correct speeches and other material for the NDP? Where's the vision and passion?

A memo to the NDP

See, this article just shows you that the higher-ups in the NDP are friggin clueless. Boys and girls, it's not the NDP membership that you have to convince that Carole James can do the job, it's us, that's right you stupid bozo's, the voters.

Carole: the right woman for the job

Carole James is a GREAT leader. But in a country where we have only once before seen a female Premier (thank you PEI), it's just not the type of leadership style we're used to...even from other women politicians who tend more towards the stereotyped aggressive male practices.

Through collaboration, building teams of experts, listening to people (novel concept for a leader, I know), Carole has taken the NDP from a horrific 2 seats to it's current position...the highest approval ratings ever. I hardly think of that record as one of losing.

It took Gary Doer (MB) 4 tries, and Darrell Dexter (NS) 3 before they achieved office. But they did it with perseverance, continued work and the support of people.

It's time we stand behind the leader we selected, thank her for all the work she's done, and move together as a singular united team to defeat the crumbling, corrupt Liberals.

If Manitoba or Nova Scotia

If Manitoba or Nova Scotia followed this 'logic' Doer and Dexter would never have been Premiers.

James took the party from nothing to the highest vote and highest numbers seen in 26 years. She'd be premier now if Campbell hadn't lied last election.

She's a moderate, smart woman who campaigns like crazy. She's unflappable and sharp in her attacks.

And if a few, less than stellar performers are successful in their rear guard actions the disunity will be never ending. If anyone here thinks a new leader will magically unite the party after it dumps the only woman with a real chance of becoming Premier, you need to give your head a shake.

It's time to get on with it, quit the navel gazing and make sure BC has a new government with the people's interest at heart. That's a James government.

Bill should take stats 101

Bill is one of the few "reporters" who doesn't understand that you can't directly compare the "leader approval" number with the "vote today" number. It is apples and oranges - the "leader approval" number includes undecided whereas the "vote today" is exclusively decided and leaners. The government preference number is a more likely comparator, as it includes a not sure response, but come on Bill, either you're unable to read polls, or intentionally misleading the reader.

Cool Hand simply changes the numbers to fit his spin. The real numbers for the government preference question with Campbell out of the picture were:

NDP: 32
Liberal: 28

The Polls are a better indicator than the Pundits

The BCNDP is 22 pts ahead of the BC Liberals, despite Carole's standing in the polls. Carole James is the only person that deserves credit for her parties standing in the polls.

Can Carole James Win the

Can Carole James Win the Next Election?
========

No.

I seriously have my doubts

I seriously have my doubts but it depends who replaces Gordo and if there is a viable 3rd party to split the centre/centre right/far right vote like when Barrett, Harcourt and Clark won.

Can Carol Win?

Simple answer is yes. She outperformed Campbell in both campaigns that she has fought against him and was severely hampered by a terrible campaign strategy in 2009.
Enough with the fire and brimstone crap. Instead of trying to stir up trouble, you should get on board Bill. But, of course, that's not your style. You were up to your neck in the coup to oust Harcourt, along with your mate Clark. Look where that ended up.
It's people like you who will lose the next election for the NDP, not Carol James

P. Markunas

It's obvious that people have difficulty reading opinion polls.

Again, the ARS "government preference" question:

1. 32% NDP;
2. 34% Liberal; (6% with Campbell/28% without)

So you think that those 6% preferring a Campbell Liberal government in 2013 won't prefer a Liberal government otherwise? Don't be silly.

And yes a Blair Lekstrom government running against a Carol James/Moe Sihota combo is the political gift that keeps on giving. That's why I'm also rooting for Carole James to remain just like you. ;)

Who Bill?

Come on Bill. Just who do you support? Quit playing this game where you act like you are providing disinterested commentary. No one believes that you don't have someone in mind and you lose credibility with every disingenuous rant on this topic. Who is it? Who is your chosen one?

If Carole loses the next election, no one will be more to blame than the self-promoting ideologues in the NDP who take every opportunity to call her down (like you).

If she loses, you can hold your head up high and proud, knowing you helped defeat her. That'll feel good, won't it.

Layton out, too

And by this logic, Layton would be toast. His numbers are lower, much lower. He's lost three in a row and has no chance winning the next. He's a worse speaker and gets little traction on issues.

We get it Bill. You're not

We get it Bill. You're not in James' inner circle and you don't like her style of leadership. You backed Krog... the guy who has put his foot in his mouth almost as much as Bill Bennett.

Why don't you just come out and say who you would like to replace James. A labour boss? A hack from the 90s? What makes any of those people more electable than James... a leader who has been in place to see the NDP achieve unprecedented levels of support.

Can Carole Win? No.

I can't believe we are even having this conversation. The right thing for her to do would have been to announce her resignation on election night (or shortly thereafter).

I have never met anybody, man or woman, young or old, who is confident in or excited about Carole James as a leader, and almost everybody I know is left or left-leaning (i.e., either votes for the NDP or would consider it).

I personally became disillusioned with her after she flip-flopped on Gateway then opposed the carbon tax.

A sure sign that Carole James is a threat to the BC Liberals.

All this attention being heaped on her is not because her opponents outside the BCNDP want a better leader. Clearly, it is because she has such strong support as the BCNDP leader that those on the other side of the spectrum want her gone.

Keep it up Bill!

This is a contest between political novices in the NDP backing a lacklustre leader and those who are tired of James' style which is best described as "being nice". Thanks Bill for calling it like it is. Cool Hand keeps advocating that the NDP keep James and for good reason anyone else presents a threat to the Liberals whichever fence post they chose.

The NDP today is made up of a lot of folks who have no roots in the Social Democratic movement. They are a rag tag coalition of has been greens and disenchanted liberals with a few Social Democrats in the mix. James is a liberal-light and the last thing the party needs.

Lose the next election Carole and the NDP will be irrelevant and you will carry that yourself. No excuse this time.

Carole has taken the NDP

Carole has taken the NDP from a horrific 2 seats to it's current position...
=========

My grandma would of won all the usual seats back.It was nothing to do with Carole.

@Cool Hand

Yup, went back and looked and you are right.

Bill Tieleman is wrong.

leaderless in bc

carole james is not popular, nor seen as leadership material from within and outside the party.

the lieberals are totally in disarray, begging for a messiah that does not exist.

federally, the same sort of mess.

obviously, following the fearless leader politics is not working.

leaders are being chosen and groomed by backroom controllers and then are being blindly followed by the party faithful simply because they think this person can get votes.

not because they can lead, but because they can follow orders, and bully subordinates into doing the actual dirty work.

time to dump the big parties.

vote for an independent who does not have a party, a leader, or an executive to tell him what to do.
he has the voters for that.

if he keeps them happy, he may make it to a pension.

otherwise you get the likes of gordo, carole,, harpo, chretien, lyin brian, and their handlers and enablers.

why does anybody think the liberal party of bc is under the influence of a vampire, and when he goes, they will become real people again?

and that they should not be held personally responsible for anything they have said or done for the last 10 years?

even their name is a lie.

recall them all.

My predictions

Blair Lekstrom will win the BC Liberal leadership race -why? Aside from other qualities - he was the only one principled enough to resign and leave the BC Liberal caucus due to the HST debacle, ergo, not tainted on that issue leading into the election...and that won him brownie points with the electorate.

If Blair wins, I don't see a snap election but rather see him initiating discussions with the Feds to end the HST and also press some of his ideas into legislation- that may dampen the Recall effort. If the BC Liberals significantly rise in the polls, and I predict they will, then an election will be called, and unlike the BCNDP whose fiscal and membership "house" is in poor shape - the BC Liberals have the loot, membership and corporate media onside.

As for Carole- whilst she may have support from the majority at Provincial Council and in the NDP Caucus - the evidentiary proof is in the pudding: Two defeats in elections and polls persistently showing a very low (25%) level of support -and trending even lower- amongst the electorate---and those are unalterable Facts.

Personally, I just don't think she has the moxie to win the election, and IMO the dramatic rise in seats in the Legislature has very little to do with her and more to do with the public dislike of GC and Fiberals. As someone said "their grandma" could have got similar results. As to who would be a better replacement, a full-out Leadership Convention would reveal that, caucus contenders that come to mind include Norm McDonald, Jenny Kwan, John Horgan, Guy Gentner, Nancy Corrigan. Dubious that persons outside caucus would run successfully.

On Changing Course...

The issue of Carole or not Carole is really irrelevant to me. It is clear that without the NDP Convention "forcing" specific relevant programmatic/mandate seeking commitments on itself and its legislative leadership, along lines we have discussed here often, there will be no "progressive" change in the course of the province, regardless of who or which Party. The same essential course of rightward capitalism development will continue. And the heart of this "programmatic commitment" of the NDP, leading to their securing of a "mandate for change", needs to centre around not only slowing or stopping, but reversing the course of right wing capitalist development and its destruction of the achievements of the Social Democratic State, regardless of who gave what elements of it to us.

Which I appreciate, raises complex issues of the future course and development direction of the economy and democracy. Which, in my view, calls for the linking of the issues of democracy and the economy, within the context of what it is possible for the provincial State level to deliver... in the direction of "public resources" and "public corporations" control. In short, though I would expect this go 'round, even IF the NDP can find the courage wherewithal for a programmatic/mandate commitment, there will be more than a little timidity around a call for outright "democratization" of the economy, they should at least, instead of a bullshit call for "balance", outright strengthen working class organizing and trade union rights. This in itself can set the stage for further strengthening and emboldening trade unions, their's and all workers to make and demand further democratization gains. For at the heart of further democratizing the economy is challenging current presumed and contractual "Management Rights". (For whether we know it or not, all the major issues of power and democracy are tied to our economic well-being, and that of our ability to individually AND collectively effect our living and natural environments. None of these things should be wisely left to the control of, especially, greedy and self-serving, but also however well-meaning "elite" even "ruling class" others.)

All too "radical" stuff for the current NDP, I concede :-), but the journey of a thousand miles always begins with the first step. And there was a time when the NDP was comparatively, a lot more radical and courageous than it is now. And its ever more rightward line of development of many years now, can certainly be reversed as well, be there the will and the courage within it. In any case, I will watch it with some ongoing interest... if with a dubious eye as well. :-)

It was my observation, as a prairie boy at sea, that some bigger ships simply take more room within which to turn about. :-)

Carole James

She will not win the next election. I don't like the liberals and many of my friends don't like them either but we all dislike Carole James as a premier also. if the next liberal leader is an acceptable one, she will loose the election again. She had two changes and could not win, so why the NDP is keeping her? She is not a leader, never was and never will be. She is very boring, have no fire on her and this "new way" of doing politics that she brands herself with, is very tiring and useless.

"It's not about the old

"It's not about the old guard against the new"

Hmm ... I guess we'll have to see which names just happen to pop up in the ensuing leadership contest. I suspect that there will be at least one or two that we recognize from the Glen Clark days.

Is it possible that the mysterious people who are pushing to get rid of Carole are the same not so mysterious people who, for no good reason, pushed BC's last decent premier (Mike Harcourt) out?

The last time party insiders pushed out a perfectly good leader we eventually ended up with 2 seats and almost 10 years of Gordon Campbell. Isn't that a good enough reason not to go down this road again?

Can Carl James Win The Next Election?

Methinks the article begs the question.....

Moe, another lead weight

I've been reluctantly supporting Carole James since she became our leader and will reluctantly support her as our leader in the next election too.

I'd rather have the NDP running our province than the Liberals any day of week. As Gordon Campbell, Steven Harper and even George Bush have shown us, it's not the leader of the party we need be afraid of, its the agenda of their supporting orgainization.

Dispite Carole's short comings there is one thing she can do immediately to improve her image; get rid of Moe Sihota. He isn't trusted by the public and his recent admission of accepting money for his unpaid position as Party President reinforces that misturst.

Moe, you have to go, the sooner the better!

One thing is certain...

If Cool Hand wants Carole to stay, she should most definity go! It is that simple. Anyone fixated on Sihota's continued support of the NDP (he puts his energy where his mouth is) has no interest in seeing the last of an arrogant Liberal cabal.

History

Anyone wanting to get rid of James must be hoping for a return to the old days between 1952 and 1991 where the NDP lost every election except one in spite of having leaders that were well liked and full of fire.

With a return to the days when the NDP lost elections by 10% of the vote we could declare ourselves as left-wing as we want without having to worry about actually ever assuming power.

As for someone's "grandma", fact is your grandma sat on her ass cutting her toenails when the NDP was at two seats and left the work of rebuilding the party to Carole James.

James has a little thing called work ethic, your grandma didn't.

History?

James didn't rebuild the NDP, Gordon Campbell did!

The Realists and the Dreamers

"Is Carole James ready to be B.C.'s next premier?"

Yes - 21% - 1,061 votes

No - 79% - 4,093 votes

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/carole-james-faces-growing-questions-about-her-leadership/article1789155/

And yet we still have the dreamers.

Skywalker

So Campbell is the first right-wing politician to ever be in power in BC?

I guess if the Bennetts or Vander Zalm had been right-wing the NDP would have had the same levels of support back in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's as they get now under James?

Its a Gender Issue

Ok. I'm going to say it explicitly.

You know, ever since this NDP leadership thing reared its head in public, I can't help having the very strong feeling that if Carol James were of the male persuasion, the party insiders would have rallied around her and would be bound to form the next government.

I've heard all the tortured explanations and twisted justifications; but frankly, it seems like, now that power is once again within grasp, the progressive voice ain't so progressive.

rstillwell

Its a Globe poll, the only people voting were Globe readers.

Why not ask who Globe readers think the NDP should elect as leader? I'll bet its Gordon Campbell.

the question is?

According to Bill: "The only question that is dividing New Democrats is simple -- can Carole James win the next provincial election?"

I fear this is only partially right, though. From my perspective, the question that has always divided New Democrats is this: should the party maintain its single-minded focus on winning elections, or should it focus on being a relevant social movement? (This is, of course, a bit simplistic.) The divide has never gone away: when the party was government and Joy McPhail led the drive to cut welfare rates, many in the party were stunned and disillusioned, and many of those members have left, and many of them have never gone back. In any event, I could put forward many arguments about why this is a false dichotomy, but one thing is certainly true; if you become government and betray the very principles that you (at least ostensibly) stood for, you are toast. Surely Gordon Campbell has taught us that?

The question is emphatically not whether Carole James can win the next election or not, and respectfully, you do a disservice by framing it thusly Bill. The question in this place and at this time and given our current structures, is how can we engage voters to participate in, at the very least, the act of voting. That democracy requires an engagement on the part of its citizens is a given; it simply does not function otherwise. I can see why the Liberals (or any other right-leaning ideologies) would not care to embrace this question, they are the people who still believe in mass marketing as a way to win power. But that the NDP should ignore and dismiss and relegate to the back of the room those very people that some would say are its natural constituency?

Reinvigorating a politic begins in constituencies, and by engaging and inviting to the political conversation those who have opted out, those who are left out, and those who are just out. The suggestion that the party's fortunes live and die with its leader smacks of old, tired, and unimaginative to me...and it is so very disheartening.

And Right-Wing CBC Readers

CBC - "Should Carole James stay on as leader of the B.C. NDP?"

Yes - 23.28% - 1,137 votes

No - 76.72% - 3,746 votes

And right-wing listeners from Victoria:

CFAX - "Personal politics aside, do you think Carole James is the right person to lead the provincial NDP?"

Yes - 14% - 115 votes

No - 86% - 718 votes

Again, the backroom cabal are just a bunch of dreamers.

Movin up the date

is a good call and this weekends PC should do exactly that however it seems that they will just crush the complainers instead and roll out disciplinary tactics for all those who see the writing on the wall.

Move up the leadership review convention or lost the next election. Choice seems pretty simple.

Risk democracy you guys and if Carole overcomes the challenge she will be a stronger leader.

If you clamp down on members and cling to leadership you look weak and you will lose the election.

rstillwell

Looking at past polls I see 38% of Globe readers also declared they supported private healthcare.

That seems pretty high a number to me in a country where public healthcare is supposedly one of the things that define us as Canadians!

Jeff Simpson, Marcus Gee, Rex Murphy, Gary Mason... by all means tell me which one draws all those "left-wingers" to the site.

Bill asks, "Can Carole James

Bill asks, "Can Carole James win the next election?" Wrong question. More to the point, can the NDP win it? The answer is, yes, provided the elelction is held early enough (before the "renewed" liberals have managed to take advantage of short public memories. Lekstrom, if he becomes leader, will be absolutely formidable). The NDP has to pull a finger and push some attractive ideas. For starters, how about insisting the next election coincide with the HST referendum -- and have that happen before Sept 2011? This would minimise the opportunity for the new Liberal Leader to establish a new vision and program while scoring points against an opposition squabbling about its leader. Carole James lacks Obama-like charisma --but who has it? Let's stop trashing ourselves and push for an early election. Mobilise the constituencies to raise memberships and funds to defeat the government, not fight among ourselves.

This justin today (16 Nov):

Blair Lekstrom has indicated an interest in running for the BC Liberal leadership. This spells much difficulty for the NDP, and here is the reason why:

By resigning from the Liberal caucus, he has effectively washed away ANY tint of corruption or malfeasance from himself. He has become "squeaky clean" - whether he is or not.

In fact, he is about the only logical candidate for the premier's job, without recruiting from the outside - so much so in fact, that this writer cannot help but wonder whether this move was "in the works" from the get go. Nothing can be put beyond Campbell's ability to manoeuvre.

How about it, Blair? Did you "take one for the gipper", with the HST being a convenient false flag?

The "polls that count" category

In 2009 there was an election in BC. Parties with leaders to the Left of Carole James didn't do very well.

The NDP under Ms James got 691,564 votes
The Communists got 419 votes
The People's Front got 397
Work Less got 304

For comparison purposes the separatist party, Refederation, got a whopping 3,748 votes. More than all the very left-wing parties combined.

If there's some huge groundswell of support for the Left out there its well hidden.

Frank

You were the one who wrote that Carole rebuilt the party after 2001. I said that it was Gordon Campbell who showed the NDP voters who left in 2001 that they had made a mistake. Anyone could have done what Carole did. Carole didn't even arrive untill close to 2005 by which time the party had been rebuilt by the loyal New Democrats left in each riding. It is highly presumptuous for her and her followers to claim the credit for the work of the rank and file.

It was Gordon's actions in his first term that brought most of them back.

Skywalker

No one knows exactly what the 2005 election results would have been if a 21st century version of Che Geuvara had ran for the NDP instead of James.

Anyone could have ran for the leadership including Canadian Latitude's grandma, they didn't.

We're told now that there's lots of better leaders available and we should dump the current one. Well if they were such great leaders why didn't they want the job before the NDP started getting over 40% of the vote?

Carole won the last election's debate hands down. Even the MSM thought so.

If someone further to the Left wants to be premier let them start their own party, if they're as great as they think they are they'll be premier in 2013.

Blair Will Win

Doesn't matter how much money one has or how much organization at the outset.

Between now and the February leadership date, many public opinion polls will be released showing how the contenders will stack up against the NDP.

We already know from Ipsos that Falcon, Abbott, and Coleman have huge negative ratings. That will do them in.

85 ridings - 100 votes/points per riding and the Liberal delegates will look at who has the best shot at defeating the NDP. That's the nature of the beast for every political party.

And those public opinion polls will continue to show Lekstrom wayyyyy out in front. Money and organization will then naturally flow to Lekstrom.

It has already started today:

Lekstrom: 51%
Abbott: 17%
Falcon: 16%
De Jong: 9%
Coleman: 7%

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/bc-liberal-leadership-contenders/article1800182/

Just like with Taylor or Watts. Game over.

Lekstrom?

"He removes any taint of corruption"? Do the words BC Rail Corruption ever come out of your mouth? Blair Lekstrom was there for every decision until the HST and that one he said was about the way it was made, not the decision itself. Too far in, for too long I say. Bring him on.

Unless James' detractors

Unless James' detractors have an actual person step forward as a candidate to replace the leader, they do disservice to their party to talk publicly about the issue.

Bill is accused in these comments of being disingenuous. I don't second the imputation but I thought it strange that, as one of the "reasons" to keep James, he mentions that at least 15% (?!) of riding associations support her. Talk about faint praise.

I suggest that the onus is on James' detractors. They should put-up or shut-up. Lay down the knives, put your candidate into the open and have an honest debate. Otherwise, leave the party or get back in line.

Vivian Wants Real Political Nutrition...

Vivian Lea actually nails it best, on this issue of the importance or not of winning elections in the prevailing system. She wants to see the NDP actually advance programmatic social content. Unlike Frank and the NDP leadership at least, who thinks winning elections is what it is ALL about, and manipulating vacuous positions if necessary to get there. (Called "sneaking into power" and "winning by default".)

Vivian is correct, in my view. Sneaking into power at any price, as one's raison d'etre, as is the NDP tactic of choice, serves no useful social purpose whatsoever. And is why the NDP has been socially so creepy irrelevant for so long... and in my view, is likely to remain so.

In it's "seeming" absence of any ideology or programme set, it actually speaks for an icky ideology of rank/crass opportunism, unabashed and stark naked.

coyote

What serves no purpose is not being in politics to win.

There is no law that says the NDP or any other party has to exist. People are free to have any number of "movements" about anything they choose.

But if you're going to enter a political vehicle in the contest to see who should run the province you should be there to win.

You'd prefer a political movement that has no power over a party that can actually form government, I don't.

Is Carol James a reasonable alternative to the Liberals - Yes

I am so surprised how few people understand how elections in a parliamentary democracy work. Opposition parties don't win elections; government parties lose them. People elect a government and give it a mandate to govern until they screw up. The Liberals screwed up with the HST so voters will go for the alternative. The only alternative is the NDP. It doesn't matter who is leader; the NDP can and will win with any leader, provided voters feel the NDP leader is credible; the NDP with James won 42 per cent of the vote in 2009, so that many think she is credible, and that many will certainly vote NDP again; the party needs only a few more percentage points to go over the top.
How could the NDP snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? Primarily by destroying her credibility, which those who loudly are calling for her replacement have begun to do; by replacing her with anyone else, against her will, and pissing off a goodly portion of the party, who would likely sit out the next election; presenting the electorate with a divided party. This is not the time to change leaders! The time was just after the last election; that time has passed.
Now I like Carol personally, though I have disagreed with some of her policy decisions (opposing the carbon tax, for instance). But she is decent and competent, she knows the province and the provincial government from her years as the Opposition leader, she is from the Interior which after Greater Vancouver centered leadership from Campbell and company is welcome - the Interior has the big problems in this province; she is female, and it about time we had an elected female premier.
The question should not be, can she be elected? - for Opposition Leaders are not elected, in the positive sense. The question should be, Does she have the credibility that she would make a good premier?... and I think the answer is yes. So for goodness sake stop trying to shoot her down and let her get elected!

Frank

Just once more. DNA is dead on. I like many others gave Carole the 2005 attempt as a learning experience but not 2009. That one she owns and frankly if she steps down there will be some very good people to step into the breech. No one will be first as that kills any chance they have. All you Carole fans would dump all over anyone who "belled the cat". Everyone is waiting for her to recognize her limits and step down for th good of the party but no she wants to make history. The rest of us can risk getting screwed.

As for Cool Hand you really need to get a reality check. Lekstrom is a dud.

Skywalker

I think DNA is on Carole James' side. Is he not agreeing that she's electable?

As for what would happen if someone decides to run against James, well, let's put it this way, what would you do if in 2013 their percentage of the popular vote was lower than what Carole got in 2009?

Remember New Labour?

The New NDP is doing exactly the same thing as Tony Blair did in Britain, in its attempt to appeal to the centrist voter.

"New Labour" was first termed as an alternative branding for the Labour Party, dating from a conference slogan first used by the Labour Party in 1994."

Blair did go on to win the 1997 election.

Frank, G West et al., like this idea of moving the party to the centre in order to gain power. Ideology must be tempered, at the very least, in order to seize control.

It will be interesting to see if the people believe the 'New' party line that they are no longer what they used to be but have now evolved into centrists.

On the importance of winning...

Oh, winning... in the end... is important Frank. Just not the way or for the ends the likes of yourself do it. Sorry-, for you that is.

Blair did go to win...

...and today his term in office is viewed as a failure. All the aspirations people had were frustrated. Blair got a visit from Rupert Murdoch and in exchange for good press he sold out and left much of Maggie Thatcher's policies in place.

Keep voting for the namebrand parties, folks

...and handing over your democratic right to accountable representation in the process.

These political organizations are embedded with the corporate business sector, and if you cannot understand how your interests are vetoed the moment you give them support with your vote, then you simply do not grasp democracy.

The only workable and peaceful solution is to vote independent and keep the individuals elected on a tight leash. A vote for the NDP or the Liberals (or its reincarnate) is a wasted vote. If we do not heed this warning, I guarantee we will get more of the same poor governance without leadership for the people.

Blair

Yes, Blair stood steadfast with George W. Bush and the Iraq campaign, to say the least. After leaving the New Labour party it went on to loose the 2010 election. He has now been succeeded by the son of a Marxist intellectual.

And

Skywalker:

Lekstrom is seen as the "change" that the Liberal party and voters want from the "outside". While not a Taylor or Watts, he's a total opposite from Campbell.

Been in politics for 17 years, two-term mayor, former union guy, very likable and affable, down to earth, centrist, grass roots populist. Heck the guy even rides a Harley. What's not to like?

Frank:

I would wait until May, 2011 or thereabouts before you make up your mind on James when firm public opinion polling will likely show the Liberals in the lead.

Heck, you don't want the NDP wearing the "Carole James/Moe Sihota Party" label going into the next election. Really.

realisticman:

The BC NDP is not New Labour. Gary Doer in Manitoba was New Labour:

1. Doer supported the Afghan mission;
2. Doer removed the corporate capital tax;
3. Doer reduced corporate income taxes;
4. Doer approved of big dam building project by Manitoba Hydro for U.S. export;
5. Doer approved private IPP's to sell power to Manitoba Hydro.
etc.

All of these positions are anathema to the BC NDP.

Frank ~ You'd prefer a

Frank ~ You'd prefer a political movement that has no power over a party that can actually form government, I don't.

As long as you are on the winning team, hey Frank, even if it does not have your or the rest of the citizens' interests at heart? And we wonder why things are deteriorating faster than ever in BC and Canada. Until we change what we demand from democracy, from our government and from our district representatives, the corporate-business sector will remain the only body with accountable representation.

Meanwhile we carry doing the same thing in the voting booth and expecting different results. Yes, we are idiots.

Cool Hand

Where was he the whole time Campbell was selling off the province to his buddies. Lekstrom is just another Campbell Liberal. Dream on MG.

G West

I agree Lekstrom is a dud. But he will be built up to be an-anti Campbell (heck, he's already there) by the MSM. And he's "anti-HST".

And right now shit doesn't stick to him. Nobody remembers his pre-HST past. He will be the one to lead the Liberals, if not through the next election, at least up to it.

In the 2+ years until voting day, as interim leader he will guarantee the poll numbers become a little more even. About the only places that the scandals in this province are kept current are at the Tyee, at Vive le Canada, at BC Mary's, and assorted "alternative" media. But not the MSM.

Carole's electability?

When you own members are worried about your leadership, it is time to step down. Every day I hear the same thing from people who still support the NDP. They don't have you confidence Frank and my guess is that the fact that she is determined to hang on and cannot recognize the revolt in her own ranks is proof that she cares little about the future of the province. Hanging on for the sake of looking strong.

Coyote

Winning is important to me, but I fail to see how it is for non-voters.

Cool Hand

"The BC NDP is not New Labour. Gary Doer in Manitoba was New Labour:"

I hope that the public are quite clear about the points you mention. One cozy meeting titled "Night in the City: An Evening with Carole James and the BC NDP Team.", September 24, 2010 (NDP web site) is hardly sufficient to convince the citizenry that the NDP is now 'New' and is now business friendly and centrist.

Party Support and Stepping Down

If every NDP leader stepped down when a few constituencies yapped, the NDP would be in a constant election cycle. The NDP is an activist, grass-roots party that lacks the clarity of purpose of the BC Liberals (taking from the middle class and giving to the rich) and lacks the corresponding discipline.

The NDP will always have a few loud yappers who are never content with their leader. And they yap, whether they disagree on policy, on tactics, or on personality. I see a group of about 50 activists who keep repeating their own mantra as though its a growing movement. Its not.

Carole has the majority of support of the party and that will be shown clearly this coming weekend.

Bill, as someone who once worked with a Premier, I hope you will have the good sense to understand how damaging it is when people of your stature throw knives in aid of their own ambition. It landed your chosen premier in a world of trouble.

When Carole wins the vote next week Bill, please get on with the real progressive work of helping the NDP win the next election.

Mark G

Yes - and there were even some "misguided folks" who (GASP!)disliked Tommy Douglas......

Pardon ME???

I'm in favour of moving the party to the centre?

You must be off your meds.

As for NEW LABOUR and Bullshit Tony Blair - no one, I repeat no one, here at Tyee has been more critical of that asshole and what he did to Britain not to mention the Labour party. In fact, CEO Campbell is now doing exactly the same sort of wrecking job on the neo liberal BC Liberals – if you haven’t noticed.

Sadly, the people of that 'small island' of shopkeepers are now reaping the whirlwind he sowed...a has been leader of a has been country.

BTW R/man, how are things going for the Celtic Tiger these days my friend?

Voting day???

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if voting day got moved up a couple of years...They're going to have to have a spring session of the legislature because there has to be a budget delivered on the 3rd Tuesday in February. (Section 6 of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act.)

They'll have a short session, change that stupid law about fixed election dates and then take it to the people...

If they decide to hang on, there won't be a BC Liberal left in the province in 2013.

G West

The NDP is trying to convince the electorate, and the business community, that it is moving to the centre. You support Carole James. How would you categorize her leanings, if not centrist?

Bet you won't say.

RickW

Frankly Rick, you are making me glad I'm not part of a party that labels any dissent as a bunch of yappers. Seems to me that the pro Carole forces are a bunch of yappers living in a dream.

There are, what is it now, 15 mebers of the NDP caucus with reservation about carole. Just a bunch of yappers eh?

r'man

I disagree, Carole is not trying to convince the business community to support her. She knows they never will. She's simply trying to convince workers their jobs are safe.

The question is...

The question is not whether she can lead the NDP to power or not. The real question is this: Does Carole James resign prior to the next election, or does she resign on the night following the next election defeat?

It's unfortunate that the party's members feel compelled to go to such unprecedented lengths in airing their dirty New Democrat laundry for all to see and smell. James should heed this harbinger; if she fails to do now what she should have done last election night, the NDP under her lost-in-the-clouds leadership will be sending the new Liberal leader and his friends back to Victoria for a 4th round.

Isn't it also interesting that the NDP's traditional ally, labour, has been noticeably absent from this debate - at least in the public forum. Not a peep from Sinclair that I've heard of late.

Every BC Liberal strategist I've ever overheard at a bar is praying for Carole to stay. They say that if they can't coax Watts or Taylor to run, their next best hope rests with Carole James.

Luke

Geez, you switched from Taylor to Watts to Liekstrom pretty fast and you have the same belief in all 3 that they could take the Liberals from 25% to 50% overnight.

That's the great thing about you guys on the Right, you don't care what the policies are that the leader supports (unlike the NDP), all you care about is that they're not NDP.

warbler

Do you really come across that many Liberal strategists in bars?

I wonder?

Are there any grown ups in the ndp party power brokers? continually trotting out this same old utterly uninspiring leader is just not going to work. For heavens sake! she could`nt even beat campbell in 09. he was almost as hated then as now, certainly mistrusted! the ndp better get it together and soon because lekstrom will wipe the floor with her. and for crisakes get rid of this quota system, it`s an affront to both genders.

When there is something worth it...

"Winning is important to me, but I fail to see how it is for non-voters." Frank.

Oh, I think you know better than that Frank. It is but a question of what am I winning, at what price, and for what good purpose? Questions beyond the ken of at least the "official level NDP, it would seem.

Everything, including a win, in good time, with a mandate and the necessary support to actually do something... besides occupy a seat, to go through the motions, and be the new boss who is pretty much like the old boss.

But yourself, and the NDP leadership really know and understand this. You're just not interested in really doing anything substantial anymore, other than "creating and holding onto careers," just like Liberals and conservatives.

Except folks here and elsewhere, and increasingly amongst the NDP's own membership are catching onto you... and Moe, and Carol etc. It's obviously not good enough for them anymore either.

In this case, as it is, an NDP wouldn't achieve diddle-squat.

You've got to show me the beef, Frank. I'm not so easily conned as some.

I'll vote when there is something out there worth voting for and winning.

skywalker

The term "bandwagon" comes to mind......

Let's look at the other side of this.

Who will the NDP face? Watts has never bothered to indicate her willingness to run because her campaign machine municipally was Kevin Falcon's machine provincially. Even if she had any designs on provincial leadership, I'm sure Kevin let her know that she would have no support from his electoral machine, and she hasn't even started to raise money for such a wasteful exercise.

Which puts Kevin Falcon front and centre in the race. He'll do anything to get out of Health, which is a no-win no-credit job as bad as Social Services. Lots of money, lots of hard-right support.

Rich Coleman - probably the sharpest elbows in cabinet, now that Rick Thorpe has left. (Got a couple of very good stories about how Rick Thorpe elbowed a couple of young-and-comers out of the way in 2005 to his and Barisoff's benefit - and after these boys had spent their wad on organizing a huge crowd to bring the party back to its roots)

Colin Hansen? Good connections, lots of money, but unelectable.

George Abbott? Most likeable of the bunch. Would be a compromise candidate if enough fo the other egos could be persuaded to lay down their weapons.

You can add some others to the list - Kevin Kruger, John Les, perhaps even Bill Bennett, Gordon Hogg, Linda Reid, Ida Chong.... but pick out the one problem with everyobody on the list, if you can.

Not one candidate from the East or the North. There's not one person that 80% of the provincial land mass can turn to and say "What have you done for me lately?" You can't even put Blair Lekstrom on that list - not even voters' memories are that short.

If the Fiberals can't manage to rejig their voting rights to select a new leader based on ridings (just as it was before Gordo rejigged them based on population in order to take power), then the East and the North will stay home on election day. That's twenty ridings that are the NDP's to lose.

Even if the doctrinaire left stays home as well in a sympathy vote.

Cool hound

Did you forget Ann Coulter? She'd make a good Fiberal. Why don't you give her a call? You're already batting .000

The NDP, intelligently

The NDP, intelligently, is staying the hell out of the way while the crime family coalition that Campbell brought together to hold his coat after he knifed Gordon Wilson and mugged Glen Clark lets him now destroy his own creation.

coyote

Show you the beef?

I think you should first explain why the NDP should take political advice from people that don't want to see the NDP in power. That's some beef I'd like to see.

Stories on Thrope...

I would love to hear those stories, Zalm. Any chance on putting them on the comments?

the 'price' is the erosion of democracy

Jerry Munro ~ ... It is but a question of what am I winning, at what price, and for what good purpose?

Politics is all about power, this I can accept. But what's truly insulting are the words of the party advocate who perpetuates the shtick that the party cares about the people in any substantive way.

Is it so obscured by propaganda that we cannot see the obvious? -- these political organizations do not care about the voters nearly as much as they care about stooping down to grasp the reigns of power, however fleetingly. And without the controling reigns, it cannot repay its gratitude to larger donators funding it existence.

Complaining about politics while voting the scoundrels in over and over, regardless of their party stripes, is absurd. The brainwashing involved in convincing the people to accept this paradigm is beyond epidemic.

Pick a new master. Select a new ring-leader. Nothing can possibly change with our collective thinking completely unaware of how we enslave ourselves despite some good 'schooling' supporting it.

The 'price', coyoteman, of electing in any contending political party cannot be considered. It has been removed from the table. It is off the radar of our mainstream political theorizing.

For the moment the 'price' is looked at, it becomes abundantly clear that the party machine no longer works for the voting people but for its investors. The 'price' (i.e., the cost we voters pay by not being represented in an accountable fashion) immediately brings democracy into disrepute.

For this reason the 'price' is, and has long been, whitewashed by the state propaganda machine (the schools, media, election campaigns, etc). As usual, 'up is down' for one only truly wastes his or her vote by supporting a political party and its baggage of endebtedness to its financiers.

samuidave

I have a problem believing there's umpteen levels of conspiracy going on that drives "brainwashed" people into changing approved "ringmasters" now and then only so as to legitimize the "brainwashing" of their children and the further indoctrination of the citizenry into supporting the corporate state.

That's just a little too far over in bizarro world for me.

Sometimes an election is just an election. Nothing more.

And maybe people vote the way they do isn't because they're brainwashed its because they're generally happy with how society functions. They vote different ways because they have real differences of opinion on issues they want to see addressed.

Whether people worry about the loss of species and habitat, or what to do if they're sick or even about whether the poor have a right to dignity and food, there are sincere differences of opinions out there and that is what motivates people to vote for different parties.

Its not brainwashing. Carole James is not a "ringmaster" nor is she a "puppet for the financial elite" any more than the Queen is a giant alien lizard.

She's not...

A giant alien lizard?

News to me Frank.

I take it you've seen John Oliver's satirical take on the Royal Family from time to time on the 'Daily Show'.

Frank

There seems to be a present need for the NDP to declare a new manifesto that conforms with its distinct shift to the centre of the political spectrum.

Carole James is obviously about to be confirmed as leader yet there is a substantial contingent of supporters that perceive that the party is abandoning core beliefs and they are not happy.

r'man

I don't follow you, a "manifesto"?

James has been leader for most of the past decade, its not like she's on the verge of winning a 2-year long presidential nominee campaign.

Her movement to the centre is both pragmatic and I think reflects the reality that provincially the NDP is a coalition of socialists, progressives and moderates and that a large portion of the support she needs to win an election comes from federal Liberal voters.

Why The NDP Should Take Some Advice...

"... I think you should first explain why the NDP should take political advice from people that don't want to see the NDP in power. That's some beef I'd like to see." Frank.

While samuidave above actually does a pretty good job of stating the case for non-voting (at the current time), it need only be said, first, that I don't see any real substantive difference, at present, between the Liberals and the NDP. What differences do exist are mostly minutia issues of personalities , narrow partisan rhetoric and vague "tweaking choices". No beef.

On the other hand, if you gave me and other non-voters real, concrete programmatic reasons, which "programme issues" you continue to constantly evade Frank, that serve my interests as a working class person, I/we might actually vote for the NDP again... despite serious and ongoing misgivings.

But then you have no programme... other than vague assurances and calls for faith and loyalty, such as we can sink our teeth into. And are refusing.... making no firm, concrete "social change" commitments that would sufficiently excite me and others to get out of bed and go down and vote for you dips.

I have observed the NDP, and voted for them, now nigh on these many years... to nada, zip, zero good effect. It is not even the same capitalism we started out from the Social Democratic State period with, but much worse, more to the right, and all the "Parties" to capitalism, including the NDP, likewise more conservative and to the right.

You're soft-shoe-shuffling and efforts to be cute and evasive Frank, are not impressing me, nor does it sound like many rank and file NDPers here... with few exceptions of the ever old faithful. I'm a "potential" voter for your Party Frank, along with others here, and all you do is dis us.

Nope, you shits do not get my vote. Voting for the NDP would be about the same as voting for the Liberals or the Conservatives... near as I can tell in the absence of any examinable commitments and programme content. Which other Parties to capitalism I am not about to vote for either. All the self-claimed differences, even perceptual differences of some of the masses, between the "liberals" of the NDP and the Conservatives, and those of the BC Liberals, is overwhelmingly an illusion. You are, when push comes to shove, and the respect you show concretely to the electorate, no different from any of the other right wing parties to capitalism.

You may even just be called to task for that this provincial election cycle. Carole and Moe's sickly apple pie sweetness lacks any real flavour heft, and isn't impressing many here.

Jery Munro

I think you nailed it.

Frank

Ahhhh.... but that's where the paradox begins. The most centrist quasi-"federal Liberal" MLA's eg. Bob Simpson, Norm Macdonald, and Lana Popham are questioning James' leadership.

In fact, Lana Popham, the NDP's agricultural critic, was supposed to have attended a Kelowna agricultural party function a few weeks back but she bailed when Moe Sihota was her co-emcee. Instead, Popham went to a meeting in Revelstoke with Macdonald instead.

The same Moe Sihota that was recruited by Carole James. Pragmatic positioning by the most centrist NDP MLA's. Get the picture?

coyote

If you and samuidave choose not to vote then I don't care what you think of the NDP. Its that simple.

When people don't vote they remove themselves from the debate.

However, I think samuidave has said in the past that he does in fact vote. He just doesn't support any of the major parties. I'm fine with that, it means his opinion gets recorded.

As for giving you a reason to vote, why bother? You'd never be happy with anything the NDP did unless they started shooting bankers and CEO's in the back of the head.

Fact is, the NDP loses more votes than they gain if they get your support.

You can always take a page from the Right and go start a more left-wing party. And you can take your fellow travelers with you.

Cool Hand

The thing is Brad, even the right-wing Gary Mason thinks Bob Simpson is more interested in the elevation of Bob Simpson to party leader than anything else.

He's not fighting with James because he's a centrist and she's a communist, he's fighting with her because he thinks he'd be a better leader.

Centrist Spin

The bosses want power, with no discussion of policy and anyone who doesn't like that can take a hike.

Good stuff VivianLeaDoubt and Jerry Munro

"The question in this place and at this time and given our current structures, is how can we engage voters to participate in, at the very least, the act of voting. That democracy requires an engagement on the part of its citizens is a given; it simply does not function otherwise."

Exactly well put VivianLea Doubt, and seconded by Jerry. As for moi, I have written so frequently on the Tyee and elsewhere: the system is dysfunctional, people don't participate because of that and also due other matters, we need a new 'political meme' - Look out in the new year for my forthcoming writings/book on this matter - it contains ideas that put the citizen back in the driver's seat of democracy, not political parties, leaders, lobbyists, corporate media, etc. Believe me when I say it will be a radical proposal for transformative change that will amp the debating temperature up - it neither favours the left nor the right - rather it empowers citizen electorate who frankly, under the current colonial meme have never experienced anything but elitist authoritarianism.
To expect such transformation from any political party currently in existence, such as the NDP, Liberals, others -is crazy- they are the benefiaries of monopoly power. Consider, less than 13, 000 NDP members, less than 30,000 BC Liberals, out of voting population of 2.9 million - and they get to decide what does down - nuts to that meme!

Peter

Good luck with that.

The Leftees here think political reform is a right-wing plot. So if you get even one right-winger to agree with you you can kiss their support good-bye.

There's only one thing they will support. Dictatorial rule by the vanguard of the proletariat.

Luke

So what you're saying then is that Bob Simpson is not a left-winger at all. You may want to convince all the Leftees here, including Ed Deak, that take his side over the NDP leadership's.

Perhaps all those who claim James isn't left-wing enough are actually claiming she's not right-wing enough?

As for Simpson believing he's leadership material, that didn't come from me. Gary Mason said it on Bill Good this morning while I was in my car.

You told me a few years ago your name was Brad. You said it directly to me in a post.

I believe you when you say it isn't but I have to wonder why you'd ever have claimed it was.

Frank

I'm sure that Ed would agree that Simpson's not left wing. In fact, why would Simpson muse about joining a new centrist "Vision BC" akin to a "Vision Vancouver", which itself is comprised mostly of federal Liberals both on its front bench and back rooms.

The left-wing option, at the Vancouver civic level, is COPE.

James is a social worker who really only talks about social issues, education issues, and health issues. Those are typical NDP issues aimed at its base.

I never hear anything from James about development issues, infrastructure issues, or business/economic issues. You know, the same issues that Manitoba's NDP Gary Doer put into place that the BC NDP finds anathema?

Such as Site C Dam, highway/freeway upgrades, mine development, corporate tax reduction, IPP's, etc. except that James is against same and on the flip side of Doer's positions.

Ahhhh, never told ya that Frank. It seems that you drink too much of this lunatic fella's kool-aid: LOL

http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.com/2010/11/quality-of-saviour-cadidates-for-bc.html

http://briangough.blogspot.com/

Luke

Ed doesn't believe in using terms like "left-wing" and "right-wing" so that's a safe bet. However, he did say that he's listened to Simpson and been very pleased. So if Bob isn't what I would call left-wing then perhaps Ed isn't either?

As for James being a social worker and her priorities resonating with true Dippers, I agree. Its one of the reasons why I support her against those that support former Liberal Bob Simpson.

On the subject of economic issues, the NDP has a pretty clear record. It was in power for a decade during the 1990s after all. The economy did fine, unlike how its done since. The NDP created less debt, more jobs, had higher population growth and poverty was lower. I can't wait to see what those that call it a dismal decade call the Campbell decade.

As for Gary Doer, we've been over this. I've listed all the "lefty" things Gary did while in office and you never replied. Instead you post over and over again the few things he did differently than the BC NDP. That's your prerogative but I also noticed you turtled when I listed all the differences in policy between provincial Liberal parties across Canada.

As for the name thing, my memory is pretty good and I remember you posting it. I have been calling you Brad long before Grant ever started his blog and you never corrected me until now. Methinks you may want to look far back in the archives before you start claiming my memory is faulty.

Nuts To That Meme....

"The bosses want power, with no discussion of policy and anyone who doesn't like that can take a hike." realisticman

You've got that right. And all the parties that serve them, and that is currently ALL of the Parties, are stepped into line in dumbing down and shutting down that discussion of policy. Read Frank above.

"To expect such transformation from any political party currently in existence, such as the NDP, Liberals, others -is crazy- they are the benefiaries of monopoly power. Consider, less than 13, 000 NDP members, less than 30,000 BC Liberals, out of voting population of 2.9 million - and they get to decide what does down - nuts to that meme!" Peter Dimitrov.

Very much in agreement with this above, Peter. And I will be looking forward to reading what sounds like a very interesting and challenging to the entire status quo book.

Frank has never spoken for me, Peter. :-) lol

Nuts to that meme indeed! :-)

coyote

Agreeing with r'man now eh? That was a quick journey from anti-Dipper to right-winger.

Neither, nor.

Frank, if I look out the window and say that it's raining, when indeed little water drops are falling from the sky, is that a right-wing statement? I'm just calling 'em as I see 'em.

r'man

Oh were you talking about the NDP? I thought you were talking about the BC Liberals or the federal Conservatives.

F'ank

In the past I've agreed with Jerry on some things. Where does that position me on your political spectrum?

Are you developing a list of the unpure?

r'man

I position you where I believe your often stated support for the federal Conservatives and BC Liberals would put you.

If you don't want to be viewed as a member of the Right perhaps you should clarify where you stand and why you support the parties you do?

r''n

You may also find this link instructive

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum

good idea Frank!

"You can always take a page from the Right and go start a more left-wing party. And you can take your fellow travelers with you."

That is of course assuming that you represent the NDP?

Sounds to me like you represent you and few others!
personally I hope that the NDP will move back where it belongs.

In any event I am all for more parties, more choices, because too many people can find NO party the represents them as they would like it.

alive

There's a very simple solution to that problem. If you don't like the leader of the NDP and don't like what the party stands for then you're kind of like in the same position as Preston Manning and his relationship with the Progressive Conservatives aren't you?

Of course what Manning did required lots of work and appealing to actual voters, so there's going to be a bit of a hurdle there for you guys to overcome.

"Sounds to me like you represent you and few others!"

Just me for sure. Just like you represent just you, coyote represents just him and r'man just himself. Fascinating how that works eh?

"personally I hope that the NDP will move back where it belongs."

To that quiet place in the corner that the federal NDP inhabits? Yes wouldn't that be great. Why would anyone want to actually do anything for workers and the poor when its so much easier to just go on a rant now and then.

not, 'fine, happy or thrilled'

this new democrat is NOT, 'thrilled, happy or fine,' with ms james.
and i am also really tired of being referred to as a dinosaur by the likes of baldry and palmer. i am not too crazy about the term, 'old guard,' either, but will wear it.
if my party is currently relying on bequests from the dead, it is time to take stock.
ms james has served admirably. she should have walked away after the last election. now it is time to energize the party again. to hear some political pundits speak, you would think there is no one out there to take james' place. rubbish!
very few folks knew ms james before she became leader.
micheal moore on bill maher's show the other night revealed that the only democrats to maintain their seats in this recent election where the ones that maintained their left of centre roots. sliding to the middle ground will not do new democrats any good.
call me a dinosaur.

You Can't Win All The Time....

"coyote
Agreeing with r'man now eh? That was a quick journey from anti-Dipper to right-winger." Frank

lol. I've even been known to agree and work with NDPers, Frank. (On a Recall campaign for example.) I've even agreed with you, once or twice... Which makes you what? Somebody who is going to put a bullet in the back of a banker's head?

Nahhh, I don't think so Frank. It just means that you're bitter about how these discussions seem to have gone... and you're stuck with the short end of the stick. You can't win all the time. :-) lol

Suck it up boy. It aint so bad out here in the political wilderness. :-) Even we win once in awhile. lol

I didn't take part in this

I didn't take part in this debate, for the obvious, endlessly repeated reasons used by everybody.

As I wrote many times, I've lived under every form of ideology and don't believe in right, or left wings, or even in ideologies, any more, because the words have been misused so much, and for so long, that they don't mean a damn thing any more.

There are only the predators, who operate under every ideology and flag of convenience, licensed by faiths that can be twisted into pretzels to become legalized mass thievery, and mass murder, and their inevitable multitude of victims.

We're now living under the forced on theories of the biggest crime wave in history, killing, destituting and destroying more than any ideology before , called neoclassical market capitalism.

So, who and what can be done to stop this incredible, faith based , destruction and who can do it ?

Is the opposition to any crime supposed to be opposed by tagging it with the idiocy of with right, or left wing flags ?

My belief is that the world and humanity can only be saved through the application of long known physical laws into economics, like the real law of efficiency and not the crap of what is now called "economic efficiency" and "competitiveness" destroying everything in the sacred name of "wealth creation" ,into the pockets of criminals, while billions go hungry and cold.

So, what wing is this?

I've asked Bob Simpson, a former Liberal, whether he's interested in running for the leadership. His answer was : "It is not my cup of tea, I rather stay with local issues, and work for local people"

It is obvious that Carole James' days as the leader of the NDP are over, but, although I am a long time member of the party, I have no idea who would be the best replacement?

Apart from Corky Evans and I also liked what Peter Dimitrov was saying, when he was running.

Unless people forget the idiocies of faiths, theories and ideologies, and return to physical realities and human rights based economic systems, humanity can kiss their collective asses goodbye.

And I've been writing on this for 25 years and own the 1991 copyright on the only scientifically correct definition of economic efficiency, that can not be misused for daylight robbery and colonization

Ed Deak.

As Energy Minister Bennett wipes the Premier's spittle...

Energy Minister Bill Bennett had some interesting things to say after Campbell (don't believe that bullshit about it being the Cabinet) booted him from his little club.

I hope all the folks who've spent the last couple of days bad-mouthing Carole James will have taken close note of Bennett's description of Gordon Campbell and his 'abusive' style of management.

Someone who knows about consultation and conciliation might actually be able to run this province's business without treating colleagues (and the competition) like pond scum. After ten years of abusive and dictatorial government at the hands of the CEO it really IS time for a change.

You can say one thing.

At least they didn't boot Bennett out of caucus....yet. Unlike Carole who created a tempest and didn't contain it to the teapot. Campbell may be a jerk but taking comfort that this exonerates James is really grasping at straws. Better to just let the liberals do their thing and maybe the NDP membership will do its thing in time.

@ editing fool

I read a piece by Vaughn Palmer telling the NDP they should keep their leader. It occurred to me that Palmer does not like any politician as smart or smarter than he is. In fact if you hold some of these corporate media shills in contempt, you will feel their wrath. They just don't tolerate anyone with more political savvy than they lay claim to. But what it did for me was make it clear that an endorsement by the likes of Palmer is a death blow for anyone in the NDP and it should be. It shows that you have compromised far too much.

coyote

Au contraire, I've been arguing with anti-NDPers since very early days here on the Tyee as you know since you and lynn were here too.

Today has been no different.

As for losing and being in the political wilderness, that hasn't happened yet although its a possibility.

But if you win and the NDP becomes an irrelevant third-rate political vehicle with no hope of ever being more than a home for those that claim to represent those who support other parties you can count on me to be outside the tent peeing in.

Where is the superior leader?

Carole James has my support for the following reasons:

1)18 months after a campaign that failed in so many critical areas, why haven't top party insiders owned-up to mistakes? James did the right thing accepting blame for the defeat without hesitation or conditions in statement addressing not only supporters but all voters.
I'm mad as hell she's the only one defending her job.
2)James has proven she can attract more voters. It's time to stop looking for a win with 38% in a divided right of centre.

Makes little difference

Makes little difference which party, or leader, wins the government.

The strings politicians have to dance on are pulled by the multinational corporate mafia and if the politicians are not following their instructions to the letter, they ruin the economy and blame the government.

The blundering idiot politicians let the genie out of the bottle with deregulated money creation , unlimited conglomeration to allow them to be "more competitive" , tax cuts and free raping powers.

So, what is the solution and which party, or leader has it, or can do it ?

Ed Deak.

there is no party, and no leader

that can provide the solution, Ed. It is up to us, the people of a democratic nation to do so - to direct our politicians as to their role in governing us. In fact, Carole has been saying something of the same for many years: that it is time for the ridiculous polarization of politics to end, and to get on with the job of governance. A leader - unless they are of the nature of the man Benett describes Gordon Campbell as being - cannot be everything, do everything, and know everything, and the very best leaders are keen to consult and to listen and to ponder many opposing viewpoints. This is not a message many people would like to hear: they would prefer pie in the sky (and preferably before they die). And it is most assuredly not a message that business or the party of business would like to hear: they are still in the business of mass persuasion. (I mean, the Globe & Mail keeps telling us that what people are most concerned about is the economy, so it must be true, right? And the media are busily engaged in telling us Ms. James has to go - do you think the likes of Vaugh Palmer would hold any brief for the consultative style of leadership?)
When I talk about the work that needs to be done in costituencies, I talk of developing people's personal leadership qualities. That welfare moms and struggling students and small business owners and working stiffs alike bring their perspectives to the table and are actually heard, and policy is developed around their needs. There is nothing else that will re-invigorate democracy in my view...and it doesn't require a new leader. It requires us to take back the party from its power brokers.

Fiat lux

A few years ago I may have dismissed your view of politicians, corporate power and the global economy as radical leftist propaganda.
It is with a sense of irony that precisely because of my 28 year career in private industry, I see the same bleak scenario you describe.

We ate early into it I..

"Unless people forget the idiocies of faiths, theories and ideologies, and return to physical realities and human rights based economic systems, humanity can kiss their collective asses goodbye." Fait Lux

Amen. Now, I can agree with that 100%, brother.

As this thread has wound down, on what I think has been a really good and useful discussion, in addition to my friend Peter Dimitrov, yourself Fait, and Vivianleadoubt have come on strong with some powerful insights and observations.

"When I talk about the work that needs to be done in constituencies, I talk of developing people's personal leadership qualities. That welfare moms and struggling students and small business owners and working stiffs alike bring their perspectives to the table and are actually heard, and policy is developed around their needs. There is nothing else that will re-invigorate democracy in my view...and it doesn't require a new leader. It requires us to take back the party from its power brokers." VivianLeaDoubt.

See, we do, most of us, individually and collectively know... if we are open and honest with each other, reach out and are inclusive, rather than being lost in just our own ideas, however we think of them. And when one speaks of being "inclusive", it has often been a very useful term that has been stripped of any real power by taking it to mean the necessity of a lack of principles, sense of concrete direction, or any action that will actually lead to the transformation of society. Being inclusive, in my view, does not mean that at all. If anything, to have any value or usefulness to the human cause, to be inclusive has to mean around a collectively determined set of values, and a vision of where we are going and what we want/intend to do when we get there.

Otherwise, what's the friggin' point? Is it just to fill seats and occupy positions by mere default, sneaking into power so that we can say we did it, we won... and then not use it for the fulfilment of any collectively and democratically arrived at agenda.

I don't think so. There is a need for a spelt out, arrived at inclusively agenda... a damned list of things that we intend to do, that leads in the direction of the kind of a democratic society along all the major socio-economic fronts, that we would actually really like to live in.

continued next post...

We are early into it II :-)

from previous post...

And it isn't going to be a unanimous consent. Nothing ever is, of such broad and socially sweeping complexity as we are talking here. Vested elite and other interests are not going to be one damned bit happy. So they will just have to get used to it... as we had to for a very, very long time. :-)

But you know what?

A shared vision and agreement on what to do and how to get there is emerging, amongst at least a great many of us of more or less like mind. (Inside and outside of the NDP and quite possibly, other Parties and groups, and others like myself, non-aligned. Which doesn't mean that I don't have any ideas. :-) And nothing is ever perfect. :-) lol

Still though, there is a ways to go, and we are early into it.

Interesting development.

Apparently there are others who feel that she can't win either:

http://richardhughes.ca/page/2/

"Instead the membership saw BC NDP Leader Carole James simply declare that she would stay on and lead the party in the 2013 election.

The membership was shortchanged no matter how you cut it.

Carole lost two elections to Gordon Campbell and now we face a four to ten percent spread against an unknow BC Liberal leader. The writing is on the wall.

Carole James showed us a callous disregard for democratic process when booting Cariboo MLA Bob Simpson out of Caucus.

That poorly thought out decision was exacerbated because she did not even discuss it with Caucus Chair Norm McDonald, to say nothing of the mushroom treatment afforded the under appreciated caucus members.

MLA Norm McDonald showed class and dignity when he resigned his Caucus Chairmanship position and walked away from the $22000 perk that came with it.

It was at the same 2009 NDP Convention where the popular Sustainable BC policy was unamiously supported for the second time.

It is remarkable that this very green and very relevant policy has been ignored and given the heave ho by Carole and her advisors.

Rumours have it that it will surface at the upcoming Nov 20-21st Provincial Council meeting.

Embracing it now following over two years of benign neglect will be seen as too little-too late by most seasoned observers.

Carole James had a good run, but her time is over now."

http://www.gopetition.com/petition/40585.html

Carole James

Enough is enough. She had two chances and could not win so resign and let somebody else try it. She will not win the next election, she is boring and has nothing new to say. She repeats the same thing over and over again. Get rid of her as soon as possible. Find a charismatic leader to put some fire back into the NDP. If she continues as a leader, I can guarantee that the NDP will loose the next election. I will not vote leberal but I will not vote for Carole James either.

Potential conflict of interest

There was an article a short while back which stated that Carole James' husband is now the chief of the Burns Lake Indian Band. If Carole James becomes the next Premier, how can she deal at arms length with any issue that may occur between the provincial government and this band?

I think this would be an untenable position for both of them. In my opinion this alone should be reason enough for her to stand down.

Have you ever investigated the workings of propaganda, Frank?

I have a problem believing there's umpteen levels of conspiracy going on that drives "brainwashed" people into changing approved "ringmasters" now and then only so as to legitimize the "brainwashing" of their children and the further indoctrination of the citizenry into supporting the corporate state.

That's just a little too far over in bizarro world for me.

Sometimes an election is just an election. Nothing more.

And maybe people vote the way they do isn't because they're brainwashed its because they're generally happy with how society functions.

A rhetorical question because obviously you have not after reading your comment, above.

It is not a conspiracy, Frank. It is in the open if you care to look and are willing to question WHY you have formed the opinions you have. You do not see it; and the people around you, teaching you, leading you, often do not see it either. We ALL are fed a steady and relentless diet of it. The only antidote known to me is to learn about it so you can recognize it and see what is truly happening in our world this last 90-odd years.

There is a BBC series in video called THE CENTURY OF THE SELF which is a great primer.

The topic effectively starts off with Freud but gets full attention in the 1920s with Walter Lippmann's Public Opinion(1922) and Ed Bernays' Propaganda(1928). Other well-known reads are:

Brave New World Revisited(1958) by Aldous Huxley;

Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent(1988);

Simulacra and Simulation(1994) by Jean Baudrillard;

Stuart Ewens' PR! A Social History of Spin (1996);

Information War: American Propaganda, Free Speech and Opinion Control since 9-11(2003) by Nancy Snow;

The New Media Monopoly(2004) by Ben Bagdikian; and

Tyee contributor and SFU professor, Donald Gutstein's Not A Conspiracy Theory(2009).

War in Peace, Frank. We are truly living in the Brave New World.

samuidave

I think you are living in Plato's cave and have assumed the shadows on the wall are reality.

You're claiming everyone but you has been duped.

That's right, Frank

...all the leading scholars and thinkers of, and employers in, the subject of propaganda are wrong, and the masses are truly a free-thinking lot. We are ALL bombarded with it, Frank:

"One must become aware of propaganda, its limitations, its strengths, its influence, and its persuasive qualities, if one is to master it. To say that one is free of the influence of propaganda is a sure sign of its pervasive existence in society." ~ Nancy Snow

Are you suggesting it does not exist? Or it exists but it has no effect? Or it has an effect, but it is a truly poisitive one on the whole?

Seriously, Frank, I am unequivocally stating they try to dupe us all, and that we need to question the world around us. I cannot open your head and pour sense into it; you have to do it yourself. History clearly illustrates the clobbering effect of the propaganda campaign raged against us.

"The public must be put in its place...so that each of us can live free of the trampling and the roar of a bewildered herd." ~ Walter Lippmann, 1922

"In a controlled society, propaganda is obvious and reluctantly tolerated for fear of the negative consequences. In an open society, such as the United States, the hidden and integrated nature of the propaganda best convinces people that they are not being manipulated." ~ Nancy Snow, 2003

Propaganda is buried in our cultural roots, Frank, and though it has been a topic of inspection for 90-odd years, it has been with us much longer.

"All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit." Because of The Age of Reason, Thomas Paine lost his standing among the pantheon of Founding Fathers ~ Neil Postman, 1985

We may be the Aristotelian reasoning man, but "It's harder to overcome cultural Imperialism than it is political Imperialism" ~ Bertrand Russell, 1945

Frank, clearly you are far more comfortable with authority than I. You like the Party line; that's your decision. But don't pretend it is anything more than an exploitive system from which you, by sheer birth luck, reap unjust rewards.

I do not ever claim to have a lock on anything, Frank, but I still can follow my ethical compass to know whether I am headed generally in the right direction.

of interest, Frank

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=5869

or this on our blindness made intentionally

http://www.zcommunications.org/wikileaks-and-coverage-in-press-by-noam-chomsky

You're a 'fan' of Lippmann?

Curious.

I always thought of him as the quintissential elitist - a guy who believed that ordinary people weren't capable of governing themselves - not very different, come to think of it, from Leo Strauss.

I'd have thought, in contrast, you'd be a fan of Lippmann's critic John Dewey

I hope the NDP gets it

I hope the NDP gets it together. I am a traditional supporter, but I am not an excited one.
I want some fresh ideas and fresh leadership.
That is all.

Not unless...

The NDP under Carole James will win if the Liberals completely self destruct, which looks like a real possibility, but not because people like or trust her. I'll tell you what the people I know don't like about her: 1. She has a repetitive manner of speaking, mainly using old cliches, "What British Columbians want is..., They want..., that's what British Columbians want. 2. No-one I know refers to themselves as a "British Columbian", ever. 3. No-one seems to know what the NDP stands for, other than the fact that they are not Liberals. What would the NDP do about the HST? I don't know. What would they do to improve healthcare and education? I don't know. The same applies to the minimum wage, welfare benefits and most really important issues. It isn't enough just to be a different party than the one in power. People still remember the political patronage and reckless spending of past NDP governments, and they won't trust the party until they hear that the old ways of governing are over and that the NDP has some actual ideas.