We've abandoned the middle, might as well go for the wackos

Say Bill - Does Canseco have any numbers on how Christy Clark would do against a Harry Lali?

Bill...

What's to be gained by another column like this?

Your article does nothing to address how the party is going rebuild the trust that was shattered when James was removed. Lingering questions about what this will mean for future leaders needs to be addressed so the party can move forward.

There is no trust left in the political class

Which about says it all.

The gulf between people's real lives and the esoteric issues chosen by politicans to run campaigns on and, worse, to govern by has led to a vast gulf between what our representatives do and what the citizens want and need.

Yes, the NDP and Carole James blew a wonderful chance to unseat the Campbell crowd in 2009 by running a highly negative and disconnected campaign and never saying what the NDP would do if elected to govern.

I'm not concerned, as such, with James having reached out to business because, after all, if she had the chance to sit in the Premier's office she'd have to deal with these people. What concerned me was the vast silences from her, as leader, punctutated by out and out negativity.

It's sad because I think she could have made a decent premier but she would never explain what she stood for only what she was against.

In the end her inability to connect with the province's citizens doomed her.

Even sadder is that I don't think potential leaders of either party, or the Greens for that matter, have learned anything at all from this.

It's politics as usual in BC. Just what we don't want. Exactly what we don't need.

Catch-22

Carole James was elected leader of the NDP on November 23, 2003. Eight months later during July, 2004 James had a personal approval rating of 28% - around the same level that she just had.

More importantly, in July, 2004 54% of respondents were undecided because they didn't know much about James.

http://www.mustelgroup.com/pr/20040708.htm

Fast forward to today and a similar co-relation between approval ratings can be made with the positive scores in the recent Ipsos poll:

Farnworth - 31%
Evans - 27%
Dix - 23%

http://www.ipsos-na.com/images/news-polls/media/5068-lg.jpg

Since Corky has ruled himself out of the picture, that leaves Farnworth with a slightly higher "approval" rating than James with Dix lower than James.

The rest of the potential NDP leadership contenders were off the radar screen.

It takes years for the leader of the opposition to make a name for himself/herself and the likelihood of an election one month after the NDP selects its leader now seems quite high.

Furthermore, that NDP leadership race will be overshadowed by the coronation of the new Lib leader/premier à la Vander Zalm in '86 and Glen Clark in '96 with all of the glowing/fawning MSM attention thereto.

At the end of the day, leading into the next election likely in May/June, the next NDP leader will probably have the same approval rating as James.

In that Catch-22 scenario, was the NDP internal civil war worth it with the NDP numbers collapsing as a result of that public putsch?

Hmm

So now you're relying upon the 'opinion' of the guy who collects the numbers which actually show what's happened to NDP support?

Let's forget what Canseco says Bill and look at what the poll shows about NDP support.

Maybe we could also talk about a 16% decline in support fot eh NDP among women between the November poll and the December one.

Why not pay at least some nominal attention to these observations from the poll?

The BC NDP, which is also going through a leadership change following the resignation of Carole James, dropped from 47 per cent among decided voters and leaners in November to 36 per cent this month. The NDP’s retention rate fell from 87 per cent to 76 per cent.
While the NDP was ahead of the BC Liberals in virtually every demographic a month ago, the political scene is now much closer. The BC Liberals are now ahead among men (41% to 35%) and voters aged 18 to 34 (39% to 35%).

And, on page 5 of the same poll you'll find - if you compare data from November with the December results - that the NDP has gone from being supported by 53% of women voters to a level of only 37% - you can check the comparative figures for yourselves - there are embedded links in the pdf.

You don't suppose THAT has anything to do with the fact that Carole James is a woman and she's just been snookered by a group of people who apparently don't know the rules the party runs by?

What a joke!

Oh, but you wouldn't be trying to 'spin' us would you Bill?

In fact, there is all kinds of evidence, when one compares Angus Reid's numbers for November, (pre-the Kwan blow up) and the December results (after the conspirators blew the party up), that the proximate cause for the party's DECLINE in popularity is precisely the event you'd like to forget.

Namely, the 'assassination' of the leader.

In fact, you and your group of co-consirators are the ones responsible for the decline in popularity of the NDP...no matter what spin you and super-Mario put on it.

The facts are clear.

I only hope, if what seems now inevitable comes to pass and the Liberals manage to form another government (and they very well may do since they've got the hammer when it comes to calling an election) that you and your gang of 13 incoherent conspirators will step and take the credit.

Because, it's all yours.

There'll be a big propaganda

There'll be a big propaganda campaign against Farnworth by various religions.

Ed Deak.

Daunting Poll Numbers

How long are you going to go trying to justify the fact that you and a group of pariahs within the NDP undermined Carole James. Half of the bums who revolted against Carole took their stand because they disagreed with the way she dealt with Bob Simpson. What did Simpson do the day after Carole stepped down? He tore up his NDP membership! Now that's the kind of guy you should really go to bat for.
Are you honestly telling me that Carole James couldn't beat Christie Clark, who is showing that she has absolutely no answer on her role inteh B.C.Rail fiasco? Or Kevin Falcon, who is publicly saying that we should do away with the ALR? Come on Bill, get real.

Bob didn't tear up his

Bob didn't tear up his membership card the day after, but called himself an Independent NDP MLA and dissuaded others from tearing up theirs.

He didn't leave the NDP until a week, or two ago, a few weeks after he was fired from the caucus and is now an independent.

Perhaps he had good reasons for his actions, as we have asked Corky Evans whether he was pushed out, or left, on his own accord and he only smiled.

The real number of rebels wasn't 14, but may have been 18 or 20. A few didn't come out into the open, but were known, which was the main cause for the resignation.

Is there a chance that such a large number may have had some reasons ?

Ed Deak.

Clutching for straws

Yes, James wasn't charismatic, but 42 per cent of the electorate voted NDP under her leadership, just four points (a two point swing) behind the Liberals. We will never know whether she could have made up that small gap in the next election, of course, but I think it was highly likely. More likely than the NDP winning now, with party support dropping from 47 to 36 per cent. And, in a parliamentary system, it's party support that matters...

Bill's right

He's only telling you what most people on the street have been saying for more than a year. So rather than repeat the same discussion let me predict that for the liberals it won't be Christy Clark and for the NDP I'll wait till the names are in. I'm betting Farnworth won't run.

The real problem for the NDP

The real problem for the NDP is no viable third party to split the vote so they can sneak up and win. Elections the NDP lose (under a two party race) they get more popular vote than the 3 they won with the vote splitting.

No matter who is leader, if no viable 3rd party to split the vote, the NDP does not win.

Dan....I had a few times

Dan....I had a few times when the guy who fired the last shot survived and I'm still here.

The NDP can win if the leadership forgets about whining and complaining and dares to stand up on their hind legs to tell the electorate, openly and without holding anything back, about the biggest crime wave colonizing the world, who they are, and what they're doing to enslave everybody?

In strict academic language: Stop wallowing in chickenshit and become fighters for human rights and democracy.

Ed Deak.

"stand up on their hind legs"

Hear, hear!

This is a duplication of post made on Rafe's recent article, but relevant here as well. DNA is wrong, not 42% ..that is just of the people who actually voted.....that is the whole problem, regular people are disillusioned with both Campbell and James. Look at the voter turnout.

Get Corky in there now, no waiting. He can motivate the electorate. He is able to be a leader and still have the likes of Dix, Farnworth, Lali and for sure Horgan stand right next to him at every opportunity and voice a unified plan to put an immediate end to destructive Liberal policies (not the least of which is draining alpine lakes for private profit profit). He is able to say he has the people to do the job and the electorate will believe him. Dan the socialist is also wrong......BC'ers care big time. They did not trust either Campbell or James to do a job. Both parties are underestimating the unrest of the general public. Corky has what it takes to step in and stand right next to any individual from any party that shares in all of our passion to look after BC. Jump on it now, no waiting. Hold the present government accountable with strong commentary by strong speakers standing side by side. How refreshing it would be to see a TV interview where Corky says "Good question......hey Horgan, tell them what we think about that". The MSM will soon be playing catch up, sort of a Mark Twain whitewashing the fence situation. Stuck on the HST issue? Forget about it, it is just a piece of paper that can be re-written....or made to go away with a simple reduction in the overall rate.....it is a tactic to reduce public awareness of our resource give aways and privatization of services that need to remain public.

Balance is a big word and Corky knows how to spell it. The general public no longer really cares if it is NDP, Liberal, Green or whatever.....they just want some good people to co-operate and start looking after things in a commmonsense and respectful manner, not in a manner dictated by backroom inside deals. Betcha there are even members of the current ruling party that are willing to learn how to spell balance....and integrity.

There Is No Trust Left In The Political Class...

"It's politics as usual in BC. Just what we don't want. Exactly what we don't need."
TtfnJohn

Now ain't this the truth.

There is indeed a near empty tank of trust left for the political class of all stripes (and trade union leadership) in BC... indeed all Canada. I also note, because I think it is a related item, an article in the Globe & Mail titled A Twist of Faith, Dec. 11, which religious authors of claim more Canadians are now describing themselves as non-religious than religious.

Both claims of which parallel my own experiences and conversations with my fellow working class people. Certainly most of whom may or may not vote, but near all will say about voting, for example, "What's the point? They're all really the same. It won't do any good anyway."

As for the subject of religion, it is conspicuous for its absence from working class conversation. (Unlike when I was a kid.)

Which suggests to me, on both the subject of religion and politics, that there is a new reality settling in upon and taking hold of the attitudes and actions of working class folk. There is no trust of either institution, religion or politics, and both of which rely heavily on "faith" for support and success.

Which I think is a good and potentially positive thing, certainly for the future, and certainly for the prospectts of popular readiness for deep and serious structural changes to society... its governance and economic structures. The scales are falling away from their eyes and understanding.

Which is about what one would expect from the experiences we have all had with both religion and capitalism, especially since the late 1970s.

Bring it on, you mofos. :-)TtfnJohn

Spin vs facts

Fact : According to ARS the NDP dropped from 47% to 36% in one month. In that month Campbell resigned and James was forced out.

Fact : The Mustel poll for November showed NDP support at 42%, exactly the same as Mustel showed it in September. Mustel's poll was taken after Campbell resigned but before James was ousted.

The Mustel poll showed the Liberals climbing by 4% but there was no decline in NDP numbers. The Liberal rise was coming from other parties.

Assuming the ARS and Mustel polls are reasonably accurate the only conclusion anyone can reasonably draw is that Campbell's resignation didn't hurt the NDP, it was CJ being dumped and the way that happened that caused the decline in support for the NDP.

For those saying that NDP declines in support wouldn't happen if everybody put on a happy face and supported the party unconditionally, well, you have no data on which to draw that conclusion.

And that's because its likely that those who didn't support James but supported the NDP aren't going anywhere else. They were probably already solid NDP supporters. Its those who approved of CJ but who weren't the biggest fans of the NDP that the party has lost.

This would be the opposite of Campbell's approval numbers, his numbers probably reflect Liberal die-hards.

The funny thing about

The funny thing about religions is that they all urge their followers to vote for capitalism, as the "Will of God", and against social services by governments, as they "prevent and interfere with charity" .

We have about 300 people in this small, unorganized community, with two fundamentalist sects fighting each other.

At one election the NDP received 17 votes, because of the faithful following their preachers' orders.

Ed Deak.

Frank

Tieleman isn't interested in facts - he's into the spin cycle - and, I believe, for good reason.

Bill has been invested in this coup from the beginning - he's simply trying to protect his crediblity from the obvious hit it has taken when one looks at what's happened to NDP support since James was forced out.

As for the claims that the 'man on the street' didn't support James - I suppose there's some truth to that - but the women on the street sure as hell did...and party support from women has gone into the tank since James resigned.

Maybe we could deal with that statistic too Bill - or doesn't it suit your argument.

In the end, NDP supporters have always been less concerned with the leader than they have with the party, that is the only thing that might save it from a complete collapse in the next election. But, all the same, resulte of Ujjal Dosanjh proportions wouldn't be a surprise now.

Please stop the infighting

As much as Bill Tieleman possibly deserves some blame for what happened to Carole - is this really constructive? We're going to have an election next year so we need to suck it up and get organized.

We also need to get behind the one candidate for leader who the general public has actually heard of and LIKES (Mike Farnworth):

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/pages/Draft-Mike-Farnworth-for-BC-NDP-Leader/112215175513449

I for one am going to put aside my feelings and let bygones be bygones next year, and start helping out to make sure we win government. How about the rest of you?

It would've been cool if...

Carole was elected premier because 1) first female elected 2) first Metis elected in BC. This was to be the shining moment for the women vote in this country, instead we got the Shining - the movie.

dipper chic...

No.

We are not gong to put aside our feelings because it isn't 'bygones' we are talking about, it is integrity. As I have said numerous times, I did not vote for Carole James as leader. Under no circumstances will I now compromise my inner instincts of 'democratic', 'fair', or 'principled', as an example.

When I smell shit coming down the pipe, I am compelled to remark upon it.

dipper chic

If you can get the gang of 13 to admit they played fast and loose with the rules for their own personal aggrandizement; get them to acknowledge that the Party is more important than their little side project(s) AND that the main job was and always should have been fighting Liberals and not shooting their own fellow New Democrats then I'll stand down.

Until then, no way, you can't build support by turning on your own.

Oh. One other thing, they also need to tell me and the rest of the party how they plan to get elected without the support of the old guard which has been carrying this political enterprise since 2001. That support is no longer going to be something that can be taken for granted.

And, they need to address Spiritlifter's concerns too.

Women's support and old guard

I think there a lot of women disenchanted with James and her old guard, and there are a lot of men disenchanted with Campbell and his old guard. Leaders are changing, how about changing of the guards?

Here we go again.

To spiritlifter I really have to say that that is the silliest reason I have ever heard to keep someone in a particular job.reason. I might add it is as silly as wanting the first Premier from an ethnic minority. Who cares we want the best person and we damn well didn't have it.

And, GWest you are a little off base. The old guard was what left and that is why we are in the present. Making history for the sake of doing something first is not what drives the old guard. That is what the new guard was preoccupied with and it did not resonate. As for dipperchic, you might give blaming Bill Tielemann a rest because he was only saying what everyone else was.

I sometime get the impression that the new guard, these people who think Carole is the NDP, wouldn't dream of getting out to actually talk to people other than a few NDP members in their circle.

Ironically motorcycle guy is right. You could also hear it from women.

Taliban

The NDP seems to have a small but vocal group here led by David Shreck - lets call them the Taliban - who having lost the fight seem to want to burn down the countryside.

Having come close to burning down the province with their dismal failures in two elections ceding government to the dark forces of the empire, this misguided group just wants to keep burning.

Our Taliban love to cite party rules as example of how the 'gang of 13" - actually 14 patriots - overthrew democracy, when the delegates that kept voting with Moe Sohita and his puppet Carole James were themselves never selected by one man one vote and were for the most part themselves puppets of the ruling hierarchy. Their fellow travelers at Pravda used to proclaim the same system a great example of democracy. In neither case - the Soviet union or the BC NDP were the Talibani willing to submit to one man one vote. They'd rather burn.

When the 14 patriots, stood up for the majority of caucus members and the vast majority of their constituents and party members and said enough, they were shouted down by our Taliban and their supporters at the MSM.

It fact it was the maturity the BCLiberals showed in removing the Gordo that drove voters back to the BCLiberals, while at the same time the Taliban inspired despicable and continuing abuse of four very capable women who quietly but firmly stood as patriots and tried to end Taliban rule in the NDP, drove voters away from the NDP to the BCLibs.

Our Taliban friends seem have no understanding of women voters - they hate people who can't stop shouting.

CJ's resignation speech was

CJ's resignation speech was the best example of why she had to go. The caucus must have been listening to similar words for years and simply couldn't take it any longer.

Ed Deak.

I'm pleased yet puzzled

Pleased that some of the posters are now considering the methods the NDP uses in situations like leadership change. A caucus minority whose wishes were thwarted by a provincial council meeting (by 84%) then goes on to ignore that body's position & does a hissy fit when invited to meet with the leader & rest of caucus.

And puzzled that so many observers seem so fixated on polling numbers. Sort of like a group of yobs in a sports bar who only pay attention to the TV when Don Cherry explains what's happening. Maybe he's right about us 'pinkos';)

Don't think so skywalker

A lot of the old guard NDP are WOMEN and women are pissed at the way Carole's been treated.

You need to get out more dude.

This isn't an ideological battle - it's a simple power struggle and the expression of narcissistic selfishness and inward turning.

It's also about people who don't give a shit for either democracy OR the rules.

And that's why Schreck called the dissidents anarchists.

Because anarchy reigns when the rules go out the window.

I’m actually pretty convinced that the only reason the party management turned to labour in these circumstances was because the party is still (and will continually be) broke.

That’s what happens to a political movement that can’t gain power in this cultural environment.

Sadly, Tieleman and the gang of 13 prefer playing ‘I’ll take my ball and go home’….rather than working cooperatively to elect a government.

But don’t worry, if the NDP fails to win the next election I’m not going to let you forget it.

The truth is more complex.......

I've followed the situation in Burma for quite a long time now. And strangely... or not, though of course the situation is more extreme, it shares some of the same complexities as the current political situation in BC....and the divisions in their democratic opposition movement is analogous to the current schism in the NDP (no, I haven't put too much rum in the eggnog). What is revealed is the same weakness of democratic opposition (happening round the world actually) .....and how a more creative, dynamic, more 'active', democratic opposition is seen as threatening the status quo within its own movement.

In Burma we have the Generals. Tyrants. Fiberalish Bullies. Definitely the Bad Guys.

The world watches....but how can they be taken down?...when the pro-democracy opposition is so weak?

As Virginia Moncrieff in the HP writes in one of the best articles I've read in a long time that defines not only the plight of Burma but the complexities of movements fighting for democracy round the world. In it she reveals the complicated nature of the democratic movement - exemplified, in this case by the NLD, The National League for Democracy - where she highlights the differences between the popular, more radical, more gutsy, Aung San Suu-Kyi ...and the NLD's "Uncles" who did not support the protesting pro-democracy demonstrators, in fact, criticized them.

(Sound familiar?)

She writes:

Quote: "While many outside Burma perpetuate the impression of Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) party as a large movement with massive support waiting to take the Parliamentary seats they won in the 1990 election, the reality is quite different. Without a doubt, Aung San Suu Kyi remains a popular and beloved figure of the Burman majority, but this status is not enjoyed by her party.

Already frustrated with the sclerotic leadership of the elderly NLD "Uncles", the party lost even more credibility within the pro-democracy movement when its leaders refused to support the demonstrators last September, and even publicly criticized them. The way the Uncles run the NLD indicates the party is not the last great hope for democracy and Burma. The Party is strictly hierarchical, new ideas are not solicited or encouraged from younger members, and the Uncles regularly expel members they believe are "too active." NLD youth repeatedly complain to us they are frustrated with the party leaders.....lack of unity among the pro-democracy opposition remains one of the biggest obstacles to democratic change in Burma."

The truth is more complex.......contd.

Quote contd:

"The "Uncles" have repeatedly rebuffed the most dynamic and creative members of the pro-democracy opposition, who reinvigorated the pro-democracy movement throughout 2006 and 2007 by strategically working to promote change through grass-roots human rights and political awareness and highlighting the regime's economic mismanagement.

....the party (has not) made any effort to join forces with the technically sophisticated bloggers and young, internet-savvy activists, who have been so clever at getting out the images which repeatedly damaged the regime and undermined its international credibility. Instead, the Uncles spend endless hours discussing their entitlements from the 1990 elections and abstract policy which they are in no position to enact. Additionally, most MPs-elect show little concern for the social and economic plight of most Burmese, and therefore, most Burmese regard them as irrelevant." End of Quote

Moncrieff continues:

"Burma has for so long been blighted by "uninformed analysis and wishful thinking of the exiles and outside observers" and the bone headed notion that NLD = good, Generals = bad. The truth is more complex and unless those complexities are understood and embraced the country remains doomed." End of quote

Hey, Toto.... We ARE in Kansas.

aahhhh...black and white...

it is not. Skywalker, it simply is not as cut and dried as the 'old guard' is gone and the 'new guard' remains. That is not really how the line of demarcation is drawn.

In any event, I am on neither side of the line. There is no political party that survive without hope, and vision, and dreams of a better society, and no matter what you may believe, these don't come from a leader. They arise from the members of a party who bake cookies, and make phone calls, and all the myriad tasks in between, and they do this because they believe that their candidates represent something other than opportunism. It would be hard to carry that idea forward just at the present.

post script

I would just add that I agree with Skywalker, that it is in fact, the old guard in the BC NDP that would like to see a radical return to its socialist roots. And that here in BC, unlike in Burma, ironically, it is the new guard that is more interested in a conciliatory centrist group hug with business interests.

Not this member of the Old Guard Lynn

I want a government; I want to see the tail end of the Liberal hegemony and we won't see that without more support than the NDP drew last time (about 42%)...a level the party had achieved before it split into factions and stopped following its own democratic rules.

I'm not interested in conciliatory hugs with anyone - I am interested in beating the Liberals and now we're going into the next election like Monty Python's Black Knight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eMkth8FWno

My last word on this - I know this has gone on too long.....

And even more ironically, it was the old guard that was saying the NDP was no longer dynamic, no longer alive with its original purpose and vision.

There was too much worrying of how this would look to business... and how that would poll....and on and on....

Instead of opposing from their strengths they waffled, bowed and curtsied out of insecurity.

That's why people liked Barrett, even when he lost elections - because we always felt he was willing to take the risk to speak up for our concerns - he was as upset and mad as we were. So maybe not so much about leadership - but about how human beings determine if someone is genuine or not....which then determines if others will openly take a stand along side of them.

You feel this with Alexandra Morton as well. No one doubts her passion and concern for the wild salmon. So it is not a gender issue.

Alexandra Morton is genuinely and deeply moved by the plight of the salmon....

And we feel that...and that is what moves others to action.

again, not so black & white...

For after 33 years that began with my street theatre with the Waffles, I must surely be construed as one of the 'old guard'....

What we 'feel' can sometimes be manipulated. In the end, we must judge people on their actions. The end does not justify the means. No doubt I could roll out a few more cliches: I will settle for saying that asking people to move on and 'unite' is pointless until we can be clear what we are uniting behind. If we have to wait for the next 'leader' to accomplish that for us,that does not bode well for the NDP.

Bill Tielemann has it right.

In the article he points out that there was cause to worry and a lot of people did. All the rest is sour grapes by people who can not face the reality. You can try to hang on to a dream that was never going to be but it doesn't change the facts.

You may have a vision but if you can not articulate it to the voter your vision means nothing to anyone except yourself.

I get out a lot by the way and what I heard was everything members of the NDP Caucus were saying privately. O.K there were a few but to assume everyone not part of the 13 is not relieved at this point is false.

I will also make a confession. I care about the NDP winning the next election a hell of a lot more than the notion of the "practice" of democracy in a political party like the NDP. If anyone thinks that party politics ever adheres to strict rules of a democracy they are dreaming in technicolor or have never been anywhere near the party inside..

There's more to the party than the caucus

Of course, don't try telling THEM that.

In fact, if the only people who vote for the party are the caucus, their family and a small circle of friends then we're REALLY in trouble. Bill Tielemann(sic) and all the province's 'Skywalkers' to the contrary.

Sadly, that seems to be where we're heading.

Unless the Campbell Liberals manage to make more fatal mistakes that is...

You may think the rule of law is a worthless affectation - I assure you it isn't.

Throw the rules out the window and what have you got?

THE CAMPBELL LIBERALS. If we have to sink that low we don't deserve power because we'd mishandle it as badly as they have.

I'm still not hearing anyone

I'm still not hearing anyone who supports CJ take any responsibility for this situation. One can hardly cite the % of caucus who you say supported her as an argument for following that said caucus, when it wasn't a secret ballot. And, on and on.

Women I know in the mainstream are not annoyed with this. I have very strong women friends who are not paying the slightest attention right now. They are preparing for the holiday. There is no hue and cry. And, others like myself approve of this decision albeit sorry it had to come to this.

Anyway, I'm wondering, are those of you who are members of the NDP still at the stage of legitimately working through your feelings, or is this it and you going to stick around the party and exact revenge with your integrity? Just asking.

CJ is still receiving a leaders salary as far as I know and thus, I expect her to do her job and start mending some fences where she can.

Otherwise, she should be receiving a basic MLA pay packet.

Here's hoping you are still processing your feelings. Fair enough if so.

I've got some bad news for you, VivianLea Doubt

VivianLea Doubt ~ There is no political party that survive without hope, and vision, and dreams of a better society, and no matter what you may believe, these don't come from a leader. They arise from the members of a party who bake cookies, and make phone calls, and all the myriad tasks in between, and they do this because they believe that their candidates represent something other than opportunism. It would be hard to carry that idea forward just at the present.

The folks cooking brownies and (wo)man-ing the phones are the Party Army, all right. And just like the Army of young soldiers off to bring the world freedom, they are all just pawns in the power structure's game. They can banter amongst themselves their ideals and progressive talking points, but the Party heeds its paymaster. They are the Party's boots on the ground propagandists, full of noble intentions and righteousness, but in the process they are leading the herd for further servitude to the elite.

BREAKING NEWS: The elite own the Party ship; its membership simply donate for its maintenance.

When GWest makes statements like "the main job was and always should have been fighting Liberals", you have to question the thinking of what the Party is trying to accomplish.

Fighting Liberals??

Shite, if the Party actually was representing people in earnest, you'd have to say it is now officially grossly incompetent.

Wouldn't fighting for a people's democracy bring the NDP into power in a snap? Yet it would rather fight the Liberals, and it shows.

Democracy is not the Party's concern. This much is obvious to anyone paying attention. To suggest the Party core was democratically disingenuous by in-fighting is oxymoronic. The NDP Party does not champion democracy. It has had a few shots in office and could have entrenched democratic safeguards for the people at any time. A Free Vote in the House on all issues being the obvious one. So why didn't it?

Vote Independent and give the people in your district a chance at being heard and represented.

As long as the LIBERALS have the conch

They have the power to make the changes - or refrain from making the kinds of changes - that the people of the province need to have changed.

The point is, and frankly I'm surprised you don't know it, to win an election and take power.

Sitting around the legislature pasting self-assigned gold stars in one's copybook may be what turns on 'independents' - to me, it sounds more like narcissism.

Democracy IS the party's concern - that's why it has rules and procedures - or at least it did....

The fact a handful of the current batch of caucus midgets have convinced themselves that rules don't mean anything to them and that they can ignore them as they please is not something to cheer. And it certainly does nothing for effective representation - what exactly have you or anyone heard from these people since they took over the party?

I haven't heard a word.

Are you dizzy yet?

You can keep on spinning and spinning and spinning Bill, but nothing is going to undo the damage you've done.

Something to think about IF you seriously support change

"...Those who made change possible were those who had discarded all notions of the practical. They did not try to reform the Communist Party. They did not attempt to work within the system. They did not even know what, if anything, their protests would accomplish. But through it all they held fast to moral imperatives. They did so because these values were right and just. They expected no reward for their virtue; indeed they got none. They were marginalized and persecuted. And yet these poets, playwrights, actors, singers and writers finally triumphed over state and military power. They drew the good to the good. They triumphed because, however cowed and broken the masses around them appeared, their message of defiance did not go unheard. It did not go unseen. The steady drumbeat of rebellion constantly exposed the dead hand of authority and the rot and corruption of the state. ..."

Hedges: Every Act of Rebellion Helps Tear Down Our Corrupt System

James brought downfall herself

The 13 NDP MLA's who were critical of James, spoke to her in private. They were outed for doing so at the NDP caucus meeting when they were not given the uniform, the other delegates were given. In doing this James broke a major rule of MLA confidentially. James brought her downfall upon herself.

Just one more thing

For all those who still think the Gang of 13 are heroes.

Every New Democrat member signs the following statement when they become a member:

"I declare that I accept and will abide by the Constitution, principles and policies of the NDP of B.C. and of Canada. I am not a member nor supporter of any other political party."

I think that's pretty plain...and I think you have to look at what's happened here in that context.

by and large...

I don't disagree with you, samuidave.
"...if the Party actually was representing people in earnest, you'd have to say it is now officially grossly incompetent." Why yes, you would.

bottom line

Many people in this province really feel that the Socred/Liberals are so corrupt and destructive to the environment that they are willing to put a great deal of effort to get rid of them.

The last election proved the NDP under CJ just couldn't cut it.

So here we have the spector of the Liberals under a new leader and all that wonderful press they are getting from the MSM, winning yet again; something had to be done.

CJ had to go, maybe some ''rules'' were broken, frankly many people just don't give a damn; it's likely some more ''rules''will be broken before the NDP is thrust into power.

Many former NDP voters either sit at home on voting day or vote Green, which ammounts to the same thing.They should be inspired by a new dynamic leader. Keep in mind we don't need all that many votes to win, and win we must.

I, and many others, think this is the last chance for the NDP, there is quite a bit of talk about a third party.

If a third party is launched that would put an end to any chance the progressives in BC would form a government in our lifetime.

So, many of the pieces are in place to win the next election.

We have a very easy target with all the corruption and the land rape stuff.

We don't have to depend on the MSM to get the word out, we have The Tyee and other on line outlets, as well as a few newspapers.

Now we need a dynamic leader we can unite behind. That person should have an environmental background because the NDP is very weak in that area.

We have to get our voters to the polls and win our voters back from the Greens.

And let's win this one;it's important for many reasons.

Forgot one thing

The HST should be exposed for what it is; it's a tax on the middle class and the poor.

Canada need to go back to to getting it's revenue from income tax, that the one where the ones who can afford it pay more.

The GST doubled my tax load, the HST is worse.

The NDP needs to say if they are elected the tax is gone; many people hate the damn thing

Polls

I see the only criticism of the polling facts is that polls don't matter.

Well they do if you want to get elected. If that's not the point, if the point is instead to simply voice concerns on different issues then you don't need a political party you could simply start an advocacy group and probably bring more attention to those issues than a political party would.

But if we're trying to win an election and gain power then polls matter and supporters of Jenny Kwan and the other 12 need to address the fact the NDP just lost about a quarter of its support.

Because I can only hope that losing support wasn't the goal of ousting Carole James.

About losing support:

Anyone familiar with gardening will reconize that there are times when a plant or a tree needs pruning!
That process removes dead wood or branches that go in the wrong direction, and in the end you get a better result.

Yes Frank, there are losses incurred when you have to prune, so the question is: should we continue to see the NDP heading in the wrong direction lead by dead wood?

Polls do matter

The S/L and the NDP each have support of about %40+ of the population.

Been that way for years

%50 of the voters won't vote.

Two month old polling numbers matter as much as two year old or 20 year numbers, which is to say they just don't matter.

CJ was dumped because she couldn't the necessary voters to the only polls that matter.

The Crisis of Politics Manifest I...

"I would just add that I agree with Skywalker, that it is in fact, the old guard in the BC NDP that would like to see a radical return to its socialist roots. And that here in BC, unlike in Burma, ironically, it is the new guard that is more interested in a conciliatory centrist group hug with business interests." Lynn's quote re Burma.

It is indeed more complex than the Guard around Carole would have us believe too. However one characterizes that crew. Very astute analysis, Lynn.

And samuidave above.

And you know the issues re the NDP are deep running here, and deeply felt on both liberal and reformist sides, when you consider the legs this discussion has had here. It is serious, perhaps the continued existence of the Party... and it involves more than winning the next election in a stacked deck process anyway, or perhaps, even the one after that.

(And Old Guard, GW? Like Frank, as much as I respect you, I don't think so... observing the ideological and policy positions you have taken over the years. (At least it is open to dispute "whose" Old Guard we might be talking about.) But then, I'll leave it at that, because I think most folks here who have read you near as long as I have, know exactly what I mean. And it has become most obvious over this fratricidal fight within the NDP.)

It is really all about "direction" and "principles", whether even these reputed "dissidents" who unseated Carole even realize that or not. And make no mistake, Carole was set to launch the Party on an even further "Right" trajectory than it has long enough been already. And principles she, like most of her supporters here, really had none save winning the next election... preferably by default (sneaking into power) and with no clear or serious mandate seeking policy positions whatsoever.

Not that I am convinced "the dissidents" are any better from this standpoint either, this early into it, but certainly Carole epitomized the most rank and shallow "narrow opportunism" tendency of the NDP... for which it is near as renowned actually, as the Liberal Party.

Indeed it is all this, and watching the still relative shallowness of the debate within the NDP as much as the Liberals (aka conservatives etc) that helps make clear the full depths of the crises of the political system here in BC and all Canada. (Though methinks Layton must also be reading Tyee of late, because he is suddenly demonstrating around Afghanistan at least, some new found backbone.)

continued next post...

The Crisis of Politics Manifest II...

from previous post...

In the end however, like samuidave, I think this crisis is rooted in the "opportunist", real ruling class serving nature of the Party system itself, as it has more and more evolved, ohhhh, even from the 50s and the collapse of the radicalism of the last Great Depression and WW2. (But especially launched by the Cold War McCarthyism events, in the US and here, which did more than anything to "homogenize" politics, again here and the US. We aways follow, as we are now Obama, especially the NDP, and before him Blair in the UK, with our nose up the butt of, most typically, Amerika.)

All politics in this country, as the economic crisis deepens especially, presuming, is about to enter into a deep crisis as well. Indeed, is already doing so. The evidence of which is all around us... and nowhere more in BC, than in this ideological divide, if it yet really is that, within the NDP. (But if not yet "ideological" at the level of conscious awareness... soon to be so.)

I am not prepared to invest my energies or even vote into it... nor I suspect will "the mass". For more important than it or how it goes is, how "the people" go or do not. Which is where the attention of radicals especially, really needs to be. (As tempting and nice it would be to see all parties to capitalism shatter into a thousand shards.) And they, the people, in their majority, I don't think, give much of a rat's ass either about the machinations and divides within Parties. They face an even more grim set of emerging realities.

that rat's ass

You're right, not too many people care about the machinations inside the NDP.

What they do care deeply about is getting the bloodsuckers in the Socred/Liberals and their backers away from the jugular of the people of BC.

We shall see...

"What they do care deeply about is getting the bloodsuckers in the Socred/Liberals and their backers away from the jugular of the people of BC." Lawrence.

Which might indeed be a more accurate putting of the case. We shall see.

In any case, a deepening desire for change is emerging... whether or not there is agreement yet as to in what direction or how. Capitalist ideology still has its hold, even if weakening... but also has an uneasy dissatisfaction with the status quo taken root. A contradiction that could finally be positive or reactinary in its result. Depending...

hey G West, i am one of those, 'women on the street,'

Hey, G West, as one of the so-called, 'women on the street,' that are supposedly, 'sure as hell supporting James,' you don't speak for me. and i think it is a little sweeping on your part to claim to speak for all women who vote new democrat.
quite a few of the people that were brave enough to speak out for change a few weeks ago were also women.
as for these poll results, we shouldn't always put too much stock in polls. but it is smart pay some attention to the better ones such as the angus reid.

Lawrence

Two month old polling numbers matter just as two year old polling numbers matter. What you want to find looking over old polling numbers is what is the trend.

Immediately after the last election the NDP and Liberals went in opposite directions, the NDP were trending upwards and the Liberals were trending downwards. That went for a year and a half.

Campbell's resignation became a must for the Liberals because otherwise there was no way to reverse the trend. The ousting of James was taken not because of bad polling numbers but because many felt the high 40s was not as high as the party should have been and because CJ was not getting high approval ratings from the NDPs staunchest supporters.

Presumably the NDP with a new leader will poll higher than 47%. If not, one would have to question what the point of the ouster was unless it had nothing to do with levels of party support and everything to do with ideology.

Dear editingfool

I don't 'speak' for anyone but myself.

If you'd care to actually deal with the polling results I referred to, you can find them here:

http://www.angus-reid.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/2010.12.09_Politics_BC.pdf

Open the pdf - go to page 5 and look at the results for women who said they'd vote NDP in December.

Now open this pdf:
http://www.angus-reid.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/2010.11.05_Politics_BC.pdf

Scoll down to page 5 and compare the same result for the November poll.

You will then see that, among women, support for the NDP dropped from 53% in November to 37% in December.

I absolutely agree that we should pay attention to some polls like Angus Reid and, when support for my party among women drops 16% in one month I think I'm entirely justificed in pointing it out to anyone who's interested - including you.

Cheers.