hold on a second here

1) No side of STV
2) Axe the Tax
3) Tough on Crime

Three strikes your out Bill!
:)

Wilf, dear one

I highly recommend reading "Slow Death by Rubber Duck". It outlines some of the nasty symptoms you may be experiencing.

Who Are the Real Losers

The public are the losers as the NDP still have their seats. No its the Province I see as the biggest loser and all the people who consider this beautiful place their home. Thats who is the real loser and now its just a question of how much and how many? Something that can't be kept from the public forever or can it as Campbell's Liberal take public and make it private? And its a given that I truly hope the Liberals are all that voters believe they are and more. Because its sure going to take someone special to clean up the mess the Liberals are leaving behind.
And its also said you can be the biggest, drunken loser out there and if the media wanted to make a hero of you they could? Thats the media bragging again about its power to influence it's audiences and it's why media is used to get at targeted audiences.

Who blew who?

"NDP Blew the Campaign"

While I am not sure about the headline; I am sure someone got blown during this campaign!

That is why downtown prostitutes are getting media lessons!

War Propaganda and the Media

In times of war what is said on the enemy’s front is always propaganda, and what is said on the other front is truth and righteousness, the cause of humanity and a crusade for peace.

— Walter Lippmann

Probably every conflict is fought on at least two grounds: the battlefield and the minds of the people via propaganda.

http://www.globalissues.org/article/761/democracy#Thedangersofapathyinademocracy

Aristotle’s ancient warning against concentrated power and wealth—in which democracy can be perverted into oligarchy—is applicable today. The more excessive this power, the more this oligarchy will tend towards monarchy and rule by individuals not laws:

http://www.globalissues.org/article/761/democracy#Lowvoterturnouts

Garth...

Address the message and not the messenger. Hate doesn't work, as was witnessed by your campaign. But you'll never get it. As you are more intelligent than 80% of the population by your own estimation, I would assume you have all the answers already.

I might add, Garth

This article was about why your party lost the election. Take some time to read it. As yourself this:

"What can we do to form a government next time?"

I think people are pretty creative. I also think you party can be creative enough to form a government based on its principles. The problem is that it does not get enough votes, ergo your party is doing something wrong.

And Garth, sounding like an angry young man isn't doing your cause any good.

Indeed

Mr Bill was doing plenty of shilling of "Axe the Tax" over the various media to which he contributes. Very successful, wasn't it?

Did Voters Pick A Responsible Government?

No they did not.

A simple comparison on procuring a service may help highlight this: Railgated? Olympic Village and all other endeavors that are kept from prying eyes?

A responsible government may request a tender for contract. An open process to document these and how/why a final choice was made is important so that there is openness, understanding, and accountability to the people.
For example, the media, and citizenry can use this to determine whether or not decisions have been made with the best interests in mind. Some of the higher profile issue may require sustained public discourse and expensive media coverage, too.

http://www.globalissues.org/article/761/democracy#Pillarsofafunctioningdemocracy

Well, WilFRED

Because the party I support has principles and values and the one you support has none; I think, WilFRED, that I'll forgo wasting any of my valuable time listing to a troll who pretends it has anything but its own selfish interests at heart.

I don't want either your support or your advice WilFRED, I'm doing just fine without them.

Unlike you, I support democratic candidates who actually believe in cooperation and consultation - as for hate, it's your modus operandi so if you think it doesn't work, why is it the central motif of everything you post?

I fact, I don't even hate Gordon Campbell - I truly pity the man.

erratum

That should be 'listening'!

Sticks and Stones, Garth

"I'll forgo wasting any of my valuable time listing to a troll who pretends it has anything but its own selfish interests at heart."

Then do what you say above.

Garth, the message, not the messenger. Reply to the article rather than your hates. The article was about how the NDP could better present itself to win elections. How about some input on how to do that? You have been ranting and hating the Premier here for years. To what avail?

BS meter

Yes, thanks for that, Frank. I don't want to sit around and think up winning slogans or strategies: would rather understand what drives the lack of interest in politics and the disdain for all politicians...and why people aren't voting.

VivianLea

Thanks, there's something wrong with reducing discussions about how to run and improve our society to the equivalent of an ad campaign on the merits of New Coke.

If that's all there is to it then let's all just hire McDonalds or PepsiCo to decide what we need and run the ads required to win.

WilFRED

You're the Troll. I read the article, not much of it I agree with.

I try not to read your trollish offerings - there's nothing about them I agree with.

Tieleman thinks he's a genius just now because he believes he torpedoed the STV...I think he's wrong about his role in that little bun toss either.

Still, I have a small amount of respect for Tieleman despite the fact I agree with him less and less as time goes on.

I guess he's just 'too old' too.

Now, try and read that post again, this time for comprehension.

Erratum

Third sentence should end with 'too' and not 'either'.

Garth.....

You said you were going to ignore me. Please do so. I am just as entitled to my opinion as you are.

Can't take the heat WilFRED?

I'll ignore you when you stop posting things to my attention and bugger off.

Until then, this is a public forum - when I see nonsense I'll point it out..

And no, I don't think stupid opinions are as worthwhile as intelligent ones.

Try posting something intelligent, learn how to spell the name of your avatar and we'll see.

Other than that, if you're going to behav3e like a troll here, be prepared to be treated like one.

Percentage, Garth?

"I guess he's just 'too old' too."

So, Garth, according to you 80% of British Columbians are "stupid." How many are 'too old' and at what age does 'to old' kick in?

Just curious and in need of continued enlightenment.

Contradiction time, Folks....

"WilFRED, that I'll forgo wasting any of my valuable time listing to a troll"

"I'll ignore you when you stop posting things to my attention and bugger off."

LOL.

You contradicted yourself, Garth. Even if you don't agree with them, I am just as entitled to my opinions as you are. I am not going to stop posting. Your come back are way too funny.

No I didn't

Please read the comments again.
I said I wouldn't 'listen' to what you were saying.
I only listen to people who have something reasonable and intelligent to say...you are right about one thing though - you are in need of enlightenment.

As for comment about age...I guess you forgot you started that too when you called me 'an angry young man.'

Or did you forget that bit of stupidity as well.

You don't really have opinions WilFRED, you just have prejudices.

But that's enough from me - last fulminating word to you old dude - over and out.

Come on Garth

Don't blow a gasket. Curmudgeons like you can be stimulus for us old folk looking for guidance. We need your daily sermons to keep us the path to truth and amusement. I'm sure that I somewhere read that laughing is good for you and without the pastor's daily creed some of us would be nothing more than lonely lost wanderers in this cruel speck of the planet.

The election is over. Who was it again that said, "the people are always right"?

What?

"I think you can stop beating up on the NDP and start patting them on the back. They're weary and besides, they did a darn good job."

Herein is one of the main NDP problems: calling a defeat victory. Are you really content with losing? With never having an NDP Premier reelected? Don't you want to win to put your good works into action?

Someone like you R/man

Or maybe, perchance, it was someone in 1933 Germany!

Hey, G West

Did you see the latest pithy comment by OilbertaRedTory?

It'll make ya laugh, friend.

The Campbell Choir.

That's you R/man, Wilfred Laurier ....

VivianLea

Yep, I saw it - great comment and great link.

I don't often look at GQ...but that stuff about how Rumsfeld used scripture to finesse Bush was priceless.

And disgusting. At the same time they're demonizing Islamic extremism, they're using Christian apocalyptic fundamentalism to similar ends.

There was an OpEd in the Times today that made the case for Dan Brown's best sellers as a catharsis against religious belief as.

Brown believes, the author suggests, that every religion can be worthwhile and wonderful, just as long as everyone remembers that none of them have a corner on the truth market.

Luke

You're right.

BC is NOT an NDP province.

That's what we've been trying to tell you for months.

More people here care more about their own bank accounts than they do about poor children, decent care for the old and homelessness.

That's the problem - not any shortcomings on behalf of Ms James - someone who ran a principled and honourable campaign.

Something Gordon Campbell doesn't know a thing about...remember?
Like pollsters and pundits, he only cares about lies and power.

Someone like you G/est?

"When I lost an election in New Zealand on election night, I said the people are always right. Even when they are wrong, they are right."

http://tiny.cc/4ZTMC

He didn't accuse the electorate of stupidity. He accepted defeat graciously, as a good man does.

He has been extensively recognized.

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

Mike Moore, After leaving school he first worked as a labourer and then a printer. He became an active trade unionist and at the age of 17 was elected to the Auckland Trades Council. He became the first youth representative on the Labour Party executive and was Vice-president of the International Union of Socialist Youth for two consecutive terms.

Luke

"1. Gordo - a very negative lightning rod upon voters, esp. female voters driving the anti-Gordo vote to the NDP - not a pro-NDP vote by any means;"

And you know that because you've been travelling the province talking to all of the women? The turnout suggests that Liberal voters who didn't like Campbell didn't force themselves to vote NDP, they just didn't vote.

"2. Opinion polls - With Mustel and Ipsos showing a big Lib lead, Lib voters stayed home. 8 out of the top 10 lowest voter turnouts were in Lib strongholds."

Mustel has proven itself to be about as effective as ink blots at predicting anything.

"And someone who can also cross that urban/rural divide considering that she's a suburbanite."

People in the Kootenays and the North will find the mayor of Surrey a non-urbanite?

pithy, G West, pithy

Well as one who is an acolyte of the goddess, I never thought I would qote Christian scripture...but there's a first for everything.

Same brand of fundamentalism that is being promoted by those who profess BC is "The Best Place on Earth". Fundamentalism, because they do believe they have a corner on the truth...

Just to make you laugh,GQ is required "reading" among a certain set of women...if ya get what I mean :0

Frank, but Evi was so cute

on CBC don't ya think? The way she talked about what those inkblots meant was pretty big words and all, and gosh, a girl's gotta work, after all.

VivianLea

I think Evi expects us to believe that the NDP went from 17% back to 4% back while, according to pundits and many commenters here, they ran a horrible campaign and Gord ran a good one.

Either Mustel was wrong or James ran one of the best campaigns in modern political history. I know which answer I lean toward.

Don't agree R/Man

I tend to follow Kant. People are ends in themselves - not meant to be used as means to others' pleasures and solipsistic desires.

So don't ask me to say the people are right when they are, to my lights and the lights of my own philosophy, clearly WRONG.

I prefer to call them stupid or uneducated; naive and selfish; deluded and under the thrall of false news...or, as you like it, just plain wrong.

That too, is a human right - I extend it even to my enemies.

But please don't try to make the case for the Campbell government, CEO government, being 'good' for the people of British Columbia. Liars and criminals are never good leaders...and the record of this government is irredeemably bad for the people.

No government, however elected, that cares for the few at the expense of the many can be a good government.

Period.

They're not worthy

Tieleman is correct, the NDP ran a campaign that kept most people in their chairs, watching the tv rather than giving a damn. Why should anyone get up and take notice, there was nothing compelling to see or hear.

After 4 years, a snoozing NDP awoke to do battle with the BC Liberal Hydra. What does it take to get this party moving? If 8 years of Campbell privatization policies cannot produce a winning issue for the NDP, they should simply go back to their own warm chairs, which seems to be enough for them.

Maybe you NDP supporters should look elsewhere. This group is clueless and unworthy. The no-vote party won in 2009, and they earned it.

Is this guy for real?

"So don't ask me to say the people are right when they are, to my lights and the lights of my own philosophy, clearly WRONG."

Narcissistic disorder anyone?

"I prefer to call them stupid or uneducated; naive and selfish; deluded and under the thrall of false news...or, as you like it, just plain wrong."

Garth, are you taking your medication?

Not really

The best "democracy" money can buy. Isn't that fascism?

But it is crony capitalism. Give them credit though- they are transparent about it. The Canwest/Global crowd not only supports the Campbell government in its editorials, and its "reporting", it actually donates money to the party. But they get it all back with interest in the ads that the Public Affairs Bureau places with them.

The NDP's problem is the NDP

The NDP needs a leader that cleans house.

It doesn't matter who it is as long as they axe the flacks and lackies who do not support the NDP succeeding.

There are many and they are involved at all levels. Elected and non-elected.

The challenge will be difficult but a no nonsense leader that gives British Columbians what they want will win.

Could be Carole but probably won't be.

Although she has a great opportunity before her right now to grab the bull by the horns, purge the moles and start campaigning to lead this province from the opposition benches.

The CBC is reporting Carole

The CBC is reporting Carole James will announce tomorrow she is staying on...

In 2005 yes she did increase the NDP seats from 2 to 33 but Glen Clarkis why they got only 2 and you or I would of won 33 for the NDP in 2005. The NDP just got their base back. She has tried twice and lost twice so i think she should step down.

I hate to be doom and gloom and i am sure Carole James is a nice person but if she stays on for 2013 the NDP can kiss that election good bye too. She should do the right thing and step aside for the sake of the party and province.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/brit

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/05/19/bc-carole-james-future.html

sorry forgot the link.

What's The Hurry?

I expect the liberals and ndp will have new leadership in 2013. Remember that a week is an eternity in politics; why should there be a rush for the ndp to stage a leadership race?

Before the knives appear for Carole James, her critics should note that she did attain a higher popular vote share for the ndp than Harcourt or Clark did in their wins. The party must be careful in how to proceed; a return to past dogma isn't going to get non voters to the polls.

Incoherent strategy and slogans ???

That pretty much sums up the NDP party, and if you notice the vast majority of Canadians have known this for a long time.

jimor sheryl

Still no reaction to that list of NDP achievements?

How come?

I could provide a list of what CEO government has done for the province for you - but what's the point.

Some people just can't be helped.

Samuel Johnson had a thought for folks like you and WilFRED.

I will provide it for you, free of charge:

"Ignorance, when it is voluntary, is criminal; and he may be properly charged with evil who refused to learn how he might prevent it."

To Carole.

Please, please go!

"Only spokesmodels can win"

seth
In speaking with my non political working class buddies, they refused to vote for James with names for her like shrill, just can't stand her, harpy, witch, bitch, ugly and ball breaker.

Given the utter idiocy of those comments, sadly the NDP must realize that it is impossible to get working class male or female voters to get out and vote for a woman unless she is a spokesmodel Sarah Palin type babe. George Bush was elected and reelected by working class types, who were the major recipients of the Bush crime family shaft.

Actually, Palin became a subject of humour and a major drag on the Republican ticket, after a brief flash of instant popularity.

But it is true that for the past several years numerous pre-election polls showed the Liberals with a twenty point or more lead among men, and a small lead or tied among women.

Politically correct morons in the NDP responded to these figures by saying this proves how weak Premier Gordon M. Campbell is with women voters. Any reasonable person would have seen these figures for what they are, a red alert emergency requiring a serious examination of the reasons for the disastrous situation among male voters, and then a plan to get it fixed before the election. None of that was done, and none of it will be as long as the NDP gets most of its strategic advice from Liberal pundits, who write their columns based on briefings from Liberal spin doctors.

BC Election a mess

The NDP was insane to propose another post secondary tuition freeze. As a retired administrator I know that the earlier one had incredibly negative effects on our colleges and universities.

As for the Greens, since no one has a clue how they might manage a significant economy, it would be far better for those whose main priority is the environment, to join a well-established party proven capable of governing - pick either - and influence it from within.

No one worried about the provincial economy will cast anything other than a protest or frustration vote for the Greens, as I did this past go-round.

reading the entrails

Hey, Rod...the split between male and female voters has been happening for a while, in the US as well as Canada. However, as equally as it might be seen as a "disastrous situation among male voters", it could be seen as an opportunity to cultivate the female voter and thereby create gains.

But whether the NDP took strategic advice from Liberal pundits or the chicken entrails doesn't matter so much as what the candidate stands for...as we saw in the case of Palin.

After all the struggles and gains

...that women have made for a normal and unbiased place in society, is this NDP now about to demonstrate 19th century, or Taliban-like prejudice and eject Carole James as their leader because she is - a woman?

I wonder how that bodes for the next campaign. Will all the voters just simply forget?

@Dave Thompson: What's going to become of the carbon tax???

Dave Thompson
The ND's "axe the tax" campaign certainly cost them some key constituencies, and probably cost them the election.

With few exceptions, environmentalists hated that campaign.

And red progressives hated the anti-tax framing.
...
The Liberal carbon tax needs to be fixed - made more environmentally effective and more progressive.

Fix the tax.

Don't axe the tax.

What exactly is an "environmentalist"? Is that someone who is employed for pay or profit by a self-proclaimed environmental organization? Who has the right to advertise themselves to the public as an environmentalist or environmental expert, and how does being an environmentalist make one an expert in tax policy?

Isn't it atall curious that the UBC economics professor who organized a petition to Finance Minister Carol Taylor advocating a carbon tax has written on labour economics issues, but not on environmental economics or fiscal policy?

http://www.econ.ubc.ca/green/cv_2007.pdf
http://www.econ.ubc.ca/green/open_let.htm

What is a "red progressive"? Is that like a Red Tory? Are these people political centrists, interesting in seeing the NDP do better electorally, or are they just verbose, ideologically rigid "radicals" with only a passing attachment to parliamentary politics and elections?

If it's true that the Liberal carbon tax needed fixing, why were ENGOs and academic economists so vehmently in favour of it? Could it be that they had purposes which run contrary to your own? For example, could it be that some people see a revenue neutral carbon tax as a means of making the overall tax system more regressive by shifting the tax burden from income taxes to transactions taxes?

Could it be that this is what Mark Jaccard and David Suzuki really want to achieve, and that all the environmental rhetoric, and all the cowardly and cheesy op-ed pieces smearing Carole James and Jack Layton as "dishonest" for not supporting the carbon tax, are just a clever cover story?

http://www.sfu.ca/sfunews/Stories/sfunews02290801.shtml

Finally, Dave, what is the future of carbon taxes in Canada given that Michael Ignatieff has totally repudiated the idea? Could it be that this BC provincial election was the last major outing for this policy idea, and that it will be quietly dropped in the next year or two?

And why haven't the academics who wrote dirty little op-ed pieces smearing Layton and James for not supporting the carbon tax also written identical pieces denouncing Ignatieff? Is that because Ignatieff is an academic too, and that for these supposedly dedicated climate scientists and their economist allies all the talk about carbon taxes was really just a way of venting politically against a party and leaders they feel personal disrespect and contempt for? Could it be that they are all simply Liberal partisans?

Not just Michael Ignatieff, Rod

Paul Krugman too. And they're not the only ones.

y'see

I don't believe that the NDP blew anything.
Bill Tieleman and others to the contrary.

They ran a decent, fact-based and honourable political campaign.

They did not get down into the gutter with their BCLiberal opponents and they did try to propose specific alternatives and policy directions that would address the real problems (including ones exacerbated by 8 years of Liberal mismanagement).

Much of the problem here has to be laid at the feet of the bought and paid for MSM in this country and this province. And, as Frank and I frequently point out to Tyee readers, BC is a right wing sort of place.

The best progressives can expect is about 1 in 4 or 5 victories against the forces of darkness that actually pull the strings here.

Given their power and influence Carole James did very well - she came within less than 5000 votes of winning in a very unfair and crooked game.

Things are going to be a lot worse in this province during the next few years - I think I prefer to have the responsibility for the coming disintegration rest exactly where it belongs............

Carole is Staying

And there is much rejoicing in the Liberal ranks today. Diane Watts will beat the tar out of her in 2013.

As politically inept as keeping Carole on is, it is not at all surprising. Barrett had to lose three times before he got dumped. The NDP is wedded to losing elections and somehow sees it as victory.

Mike Harcourt, OTOH, WON and election and got dumped for insufficient leftiness.

Garth....

"she came within less than 5000 votes of winning in a very unfair and crooked game."

Have a look at the text of the article and see how many votes the NDP lost by:

"The NDP dropped 80,949 votes in 2009 compared to 2005 and this election had just 26,375 more votes than its winning total in 1996. The Liberals won with just 63,000 more total votes than the NDP province-wide."

The Liberals won by 2500 votes in 2005. I might add the NDP lost a couple of key ridings via the Green split, the Premier's for one.

BC is NOT a Liberal province

His replacement will most likely be Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts - again with that 86% support in the '08 mayoral race and the support of many centre-left New Democrats.

She's the slam dunk for any new Lib leader IMHO.

No more concern about close electoral contests after she is crowned. Very likeable, very astute, very intelligent, and a helluva vote getter.

And someone who can also cross that urban/rural divide considering that she's a suburbanite.

Now who's gonna take the NDP crown to face-off the Watts factor... if it's even worth it? ;)

Sounds like the kind of chatter we used to get from Liberals about all the glorious majorities they were going to win once Paul Martin became Prime Minister.

I am sure some aren't

Dan the socialist
I hate to be doom and gloom and i am sure Carole James is a nice person but if she stays on for 2013 the NDP can kiss that election good bye too. She should do the right thing and step aside for the sake of the party and province.

And I am sure some aren't, ... nice people that is. They're the ones who should depart the scene for the good of the nation. It's revolting to have to put up with them. They look bad, they smell bad, and they are bad, ... bad news for everyone but themselves.

What's behind this "analysis"?

My question is what's in this for Bill? He runs a strategy consulting firm and here he is in the media critcizing the NDP's strategy? Was he involved in the NDP strategy? If yes, he's criticizing himself. If not, is this his way of punishing them for not sending business his way?

Bill has opened himself up to the perception that he's working both sides of the street. And the Tyee ought to be more discriminating about which of his submissions they publish.

???

"The Liberals won with just 63,000 more total votes than the NDP province-wide.
The Liberals won by 2500 votes in 2005."

No, they won by 75,000 votes in 2005.

So winning by 63,000 votes this time is a slightly narrower victory.

realisticman

Carole James isn't being "dumped".

Unlike Kim Campbell.

Luke isn't here

But if he was I know he'd want to say Gary Doer in Manitoba lost 3 elections before being elected too.

Again, WilFRED - you aren't a very good reader, are You?

"Key to victory: 4,126 votes

The NDP, which won 36 of 85 seats in Tuesday's election, needed 4,126 more votes to secure a majority.

But, don't take my word for it, you can read about it yourself at the bottom (so you don't have to waste an of your valuable time reading the whole article) of this story in the Globe and Mail:

http://tiny.cc/KXVow

What do you expect from a 2 party system

If in fact the difference of 4,126 votes brought us another Liberal government, it would therefore be apparent that the Green Party proved a significant factor.

Now, I can hear NDP zealots gnashing their teeth. Here comes another round of Green bashing.

In a 2 party system, it is often the rise of smaller parties on the cusp that influence the results significantly. Major parties become alarmed and try hard to marginalize them, and as is the case with the NDP, they generally fail. Then they blame them for their own failure.

If people in Canada can just get over their phobia of coalition government long enough to realize the benefits that would accrue, there might be an outside chance of cooperation among parties with shared goals.

But as long as the NDP wants all the power, it will be doomed to forming government only once in a great while.

It also follows that if people continue to support corporate business with their dollars and personal spending habits, corporate business will be running the government, no matter which party is in power. Starbucks, Wallmart, or Canwest anybody?

Politicsasusual

The leader of the Greens has never voted NDP and chances are if the Green party hadn't existed in 2009 she would have voted Liberal or not at all.

There is no more reason for the NDP to chase Green voters than there is to chase Liberal voters.

Politicsasusual

Umm, Where does this come from?

I'd say that construction exactly turns reality on its head...perhaps you've forgotten the minority governments in Ottawa and you have certainly forgotten the December coalition which would have brought down Stephen Harper if he actually cared about democracy and wasn't a dictator at heart.

The PAB

I've mentioned several times the cheesy, op-ed pieces that were offered up in the commercial media on the carbon tax and apparently authored by academic experts.

I wonder, could thiese pieces have actually been written by professionals in the Public Affairs Bureau, and then simply signed off by the professor in question?

It comes from here

Are we talking provincial or federal here? I assumed that the original article was about the current election. Did I miss something Mr. West?

Please tell me about the coalitions in BC. While you're at it, maybe you can explain why the provincial NDP pleads for voters to vote strategically while Jack Layton does just the opposite at the federal level.

Despite protestations to the contrary, the provincial NDP has been grateful to hold power every 20 years. They simply wait in comfortable opposition until the other party implodes.

The rise of Greens has made this strategy even more difficult. And I suspect that rather than vote for these 2 parties, most Greens would simply not vote.

Garth

I thought you were ignoring me. Am I really worth you time. I know I am not worthy of The Garth.

What are you talking about?

The NDP in BC (and the CCF before it) held power for 13 years since 1900.

There certainly have been coalitions formed to keep the NDP (or the CCF) out of power but the suggestion that democratic socialists get a chance at government once every 20 years is nonsense.

The coalition point was a general point about the NDP - in response to your allegation that NDP governments don't like coalitions.

I think your view of the NDP is overly influenced by a guy like Tieleman...I'm not sure he's still a member and I know that he has next to no influence in the party these days.

I think your analysis of the federal NDP position is way off base too.

In fact, I can recall several times when Layton reached out to Green voters with offers to vote strategically in the last federal election. Furthermore, the NDP is also open to any BCLiberals who wake up and discover they're in bed with a thug like Campbell.

I think the suggestion that the NDP would do anything in return for power is just plain wrong headed and ignores the history of the party in this province and across the country.

As for the Greens, my view is that they're mostly elitist conservatives and I'm not particularly interested in their support.

BTW, unlike Tieleman, I supported STV and I've voted for it twice.

I didn't like it much, and I know it's covered with warts - but it's head and shoulders better than FPTP.

In fact, I'm all in favour of any party that can muster more than, say 5% of the popular vote, getting seats in the legislature...and I think the vast majority of NDP voters have NO PROBLEM with that.

Tieleman and Plecas and Schreck are political insiders - they don't really relish having the actual appeal of popular democracy extended to more citizens - in my view.

WilFRED

Read again Wilf - you addressed me, remember - I just provided the information you clearly didn't have.

All part of my campaign to educate you.

James is lucky

Carole James is lucky she lost the election because I don't think she could stop, in the short term, the destruction to the economy and this province that Campbell is causing. The forest industry is in the tank and we are importing lumber from the US.
The ROR's are going to cost BC Hydro ratepayers an arm and a leg for the contracts Campbell entered into. And who knows how much environmental damage they will cost as no analysis has been done, or at least made public.
Our deficit is much greater than Campbell said it is. We'll be closer to the truth on that in the fall.
The children in the province are in crisis with the worst record for children in danger in Canada. And education is underfunded. As is health care.
And then there is the BC Rail sale.
If James was in power, she would get blamed for all those problems (except perhaps BCR) the same as the NDP were blamed for all the problems in the 90's even though they inherited them from the BC Liberals (nee Socreds) and the Asian meltdown.
I assume these problems and many others will be blamed on Campbell the BC Liberals as they caused them. I don't want to hear from any one that is is not their fault, it is as they are in power and they can't run a lemonade stand.
James will serve for a couple of years or so and then have a leadership race.

What is strategic voting?

Politicsasusual
Are we talking provincial or federal here? ...

... maybe you can explain why the provincial NDP pleads for voters to vote strategically while Jack Layton does just the opposite at the federal level.

For most New Democrats the federal and provincial levels are two sides of the same coin, not two distinct worlds of political theatre as it is for Grit and Tory strategists and tacticians. In particular, I don't accept the familiar line that the BC Liberals and the Federal Liberals are two completely unrelated organizations. On the contrary, I think it's clear that the two parties do a lot of joing strategizing and tactical work and share many of the same operatives.

But I guess for someone who views it all as politics as usual attitude, federal provincial buck-passing is an accepted part of the game.

I don't recall hearing Jack Layton telling anyone not to vote strategically. Do you? But why would people listen to Liberal hacks telling them to vote Liberal even in ridings where the NDP has the better chance of beating the Conservatives? Similarly, Carole James made her appeal to Greens in ridings where the NDP clearly had the best chance of taking a seat away from Gordon Campbell's backbench or Cabinet.

On the other hand.......

The BC Liberals Blew The Province of BC.

Strategic voting

The NDP makes the same pitch every election, imploring Green voters not to waste their vote. They use the standard fear of Campbell, as they did so emphatically in this election, as their primary weapon. Come on, I have so many "green" friends who couldn't vote Green because they had to stop the Liberals. And this was in an overwhelmingly safe NDP riding.

For your information, here is the info you lack. Jack knows the pain of a 2 party system. Enjoy.

Last Updated: Tuesday, January 3, 2006 | 6:04 PM ET
CBC News
The idea that Canadians can only choose between the Liberals and Conservatives is "frankly offensive," said NDP Leader Jack Layton on Tuesday.

As the federal election campaign heads into its final three weeks, Layton is focusing his attention on strategic voting, hoping to convince voters not to switch from the NDP to the Liberals to block a Conservative victory.

"It is frankly offensive for [Liberal Leader Paul] Martin to tell Canadians they are limited to two choices, that they are limited to a choice between corruption and conservatives," he said.

"Canadians are, I believe, looking for a change, and they're not going to respond to that kind of arrogant statement by Mr. Martin."

Layton was in Oshawa on Tuesday morning, as he and his party swing through southern Ontario, where the New Democrats hope to pick up some seats.
Oshawa, Layton said, is one place where strategic voting backfired. Conservative Colin Carrie beat the NDP's Sid Ryan by 463 votes in 2004. Ryan is running again, hoping to take the seat away from Carrie.
"
The fact that voting Liberal helps elect Conservatives in places like Oshawa is not the only reason to not vote Liberal," he said. "In this election the Liberals simply don't deserve your vote. They just haven't earned it."

Layton has been railing against strategic voting all campaign, insisting that electing New Democrats gives his party more power to influence policy from the opposition benches.

Layton also said that voters can't trust Martin's campaign promises, accusing the Liberal leader of saying anything to get elected.
"He is not being honest about what he stands for," Layton said.

"Canada has an out-of-touch, corruption-ridden Liberal government. They'll say anything, promise anything, knowing full well that they'll ignore their promises the day after the election's over."

This is what I am talking about

Dear Mr. West, I spoke of NDP sponsored coalitions, not coalitions against the NDP. I stand by my statement that the NDP is not interested in cooperating with other parties. You have no real knowledge of this in BC so I doubt you have any grounds to comment.

If you were to follow the statements and actions of the provincial NDP, you would understand that they are simply trying to absorb the Green Party. The last thing they want is competition from the left. Those who suggest, like you, that the Green Party is a right wing party have simply not read their platform and would rather misrepresent their positions.

Because Greens are not Union based, people from all sides of the political spectrum are attracted to them, but obviously not enough people to elect an MLA in the FPTP system.

You are also quite mistaken about Jack Layton reaching out to Greens federally, unless you can provide me concrete examples; that doesn't include reaching out and asking them to vote NDP. Are you forgetting that Jack, and his buddy Steven Harper were the two leaders who tried to exclude Elizabeth May from the leaders debate? Oops.

Like you I voted for STV, but I consider it a flawed system. Bill Tieleman does not deserve the credit some give him for STV's demise. The more people learned about it, the more trouble it was in. Defeating it was like shooting fish in a barrel.

If we're going to speculate...

It was an incomprehensible campaign. Way beyond incompetent, with no very good evidence of incompetent people to blame.

OK, there are several reasons no sane person would want to inherit the province in it's current state, with the looting going so well and the NAFTA crowd so powerful.

And OK, the NDP ran an honourable campaign, on the high path the whole way, unwilling to stoop, good for them. It shows character, and also I believe the Green vote represents citizens who simply refuse to compromise honour for political expediency, Which also shows character, so both of those things represent in my mind a cause for hope.

Not everyone is completely disheartened by current levels of corruption in the halls of power. Still... there were several perfectly honourable directions one might have gone.

In particular, one might have demanded far more of Mr Kinsella and the premier by way of explanation and disclosure, and exposed a very secret place in the public service by doing it.

One might have demanded to see the books, too, that would have been interesting, and quite doable.

But they didn't, and I can't tell why. They should have been all over that with all guns blazing. I can't help wondering

The biggest reasons to want the scoundrels out all are connected somehow to the police raids on the Legislature. Remember the policeman then who stated that organized crime had made it's way into the highest levels of our government? Then disappeared without a ripple?

What if that's the invisible hand whose influence we are defining by its shadow? What if somebody is going around making offers that cannot be refused?

It's not beyond possibility. I think it would explain the observed anomalies.

What do we think about that?

And I spoke of coalitions the NDP played a part in

Rod's observation about the common identity of the NDP in Federal/Provincial spheres echoes my experience exactly.

You haven't got a clue who I am or what experience or knowledge I have - so let's get THAT out of the road right now.

Layton was quite clear about his position relative to Elizabeth May and green candidates in the federal election - but I'm not going to do your homework for you.

I agree that Layton's initial position about the debate was wrong - and the party told him so in no uncertain terms so he changed it.

I agree that STV is flawed, but even so, not as flawed as FPTP.

If you think I'm an apologist for Tieleman you're mistaken and you can confirm that by looking at his blog.

Another small point, Tieleman has little if any sway in the party at this point - believe me, I know that's a fact - he certainly had nothing to do with structuring the campaign so if you're relying on his aversion to coalitions, you're backing the wrong horse.

BTW, I also disagreed with Carole’s directive to the troops not to get down and dirty with Campbell - we should have used everything we had, mud and all on the man.

When the BC Liberals put Campbell’s name on every piece of campaign literature and at the bottom of every ad, that meant to me that it was time to attack his centralizing, corrupt, CEO government with everything we had on the man.

Holding back was the only mistake James made, in my view. But, even so, I’m not sure it cost her the election – in this province, with the sold media and the pervasive lobbying by business, the job of beating back the right wing is never going to be easy.

As for the Greens. I looked at their literature, scanned their program and listened to their candidates. Nice people, but as potential government they were a joke.

There was only one way to defeat Gordon Campbell on May 12 and that was by voting NDP.

Getting rid of Campbell was job one.

The citizens have, respectfully, screwed themselves by not getting it done.

Ahhh, Garth....

"I think your view of the NDP is overly influenced by a guy like Tieleman...I'm not sure he's still a member and I know that he has next to no influence in the party these days."

Garth, he ran Mel Lehmans's campaign.

NDP- The Truth Hurts

Post election political, defeat analysis from someone as partisan as Bill Tieleman is as useful as another NDP rally. The NDP has to realize what the previous poster said: "That BC is no longer a pro-NDP province". Moreover, that the economy and social structure of BC has changed such that the NDP has to move centre left in order to win.

This will involve a purge and bloodlettiing of the very people and elements in the NDP that are associated with pro-union sloganeering, leftwing nut ideas and pro-welfare policy making. The NDP is going to have to embrace private sector economic development and take a pro-business stance in order to create real jobs.

The stink of Glenn Clark's disasterous administration still scares many voters. You NDP diehards may quote all the statistics you want to say that times weren't so bad under Clark, but many people think otherwise and that is what counts. And you have to purge your ranks of streetfighting, tough union thugs like Clark- they may sound good in the union hall, but as Clark proved they are incapable of governing a province. Same goes for his former chief of staff Adrian Dix. Many say Dix was a disasterous manager- he would be an even more dangerous Premier.

And stop with the personal attacks on Campbell. It stinks of desperation- and desperation is one cheap smelling cologne. You're not going to win elections because you say Campbell is arrogant.

Simply put, people aren't going to throw Campbell out of office until the NDP can come up with an attractive alternative. And this doesn't mean a charismatic leader. Few people want to take a chance with an NDP govt in BC now. Your people are too politically polarized. This means policies that attract the middle class, not policies that your socialist friends love to hear at Starbucks. And although the middle class care about the environment, they care about their jobs, standard of living and the economy much more. No one wants to lose their job to save trees.

BC never was a pro-NDP province Bobby

Don't you know anything?

Personal attacks?

What are you talking about? - The man's is a convicted criminal.

Furthermore, this is the man that turned the justice system upside down to try and make a facile case against Glen Clark, remember?

He has lied, cheated and helped his friends, ruined the legislature as a democratic institution and diluted or ruined several British Columbia institutions.

His appointees are on trial for influence peddling and officials from his party are involved.

How about a little allegiance to the truth my friend?

As for jobs and trees, in another year of Campbell neglect we may not have any of either left.

If the NDP has to be attractive to you Bobby, I want nothing to do with it.

Stick to movie reviewing.

You think I didn't know that WilFRED

Tieleman has no influene in party circles, trust me.

I suspect that's why he's so bitter.

erratum

that's 'influence'

Then why Garth.....

Was he paid from party coffer's to run a campaign?

Anyway, it doesn't matter. You are proof the NDP can't win elections. It is all a moot point.

STV and the common person

Slim: "The pro-STV campaign reminded me of a group who unoffically represented the people of BC."

Does that include Gordon Gibson, the guy that set the framework for the group that decided STV was the best choice for BC. A guy coming from The FRASER INSTITUTE! Speaking for the people of BC ... give your head a shake!

Go after the vote you can get!

Booby Peru is right it one sense; the NDP needs to convince the middle class that they would be better of with them than the Liberals. You could easily have portrayed the NDP as the party that cared about jobs. The NDP shouldn`t be scared about focusing on the economy. The middle class must be made to realize that the social policies that the NDP would enact are in their best personal interests. This election made it clear that people just don`t care about accountability and honesty from their politicians. People are going to vote in the own interests ... period.

Bill Tieleman replies

A few comments about postings here.

First, the point about slogans remains central - a party that can't even get its message straight for 28 days is confused about what it is saying to voters.

They never had a clear message or strategy.

Second, the carbon tax was not a mistake - read Marc Jaccard in Wednesday's Vancouver Sun - his remarks that the BC Liberals won in spite of the carbon tax, not because of it - come from a big fan of the tax, not me.

Third, on the carbon tax again - if it was such a mistake, why did the Green vote percentage go down and the NDP vote percentage go up, albeit only slightly?

Those who believe in the carbon tax must prove their point better than to just say the NDP lost.

And remember - the NDP did not run a single ad on the carbon tax, nor did it return fire when the small minority of environmentalists criticizing them attacked in the first week.

Fourth, it is nothing short of pathetic to say "the NDP never had a chance"! They were within just a few thousand votes of an historic victory and they lost 81,000 votes they had in 2005.

Blame the media, blame the Greens but the blame primarily rests with the NDP and there will be no back-patting from me on that score. I appreciate the efforts of all involved but it didn't do the job.

Fifth, give it up about STV. The pro-STV side had more volunteers, more money, more high-profile endorsers, more ads and they lost - badly. No STV, the group I headed, reversed the results of the last referendum and early polls showing STV ahead but the NDP loss has nothing to do with STV, period.

Politicsasusual: READ YOUR OWN POST!!!

Politicsasusual
For your information, here is the info you lack. Jack knows the pain of a 2 party system. Enjoy.

Last Updated: Tuesday, January 3, 2006 | 6:04 PM ET
CBC News
The idea that Canadians can only choose between the Liberals and Conservatives is "frankly offensive," said NDP Leader Jack Layton on Tuesday....

Oshawa, Layton said, is one place where strategic voting backfired. Conservative Colin Carrie beat the NDP's Sid Ryan by 463 votes in 2004. Ryan is running again, hoping to take the seat away from Carrie.
"The fact that voting Liberal helps elect Conservatives in places like Oshawa is not the only reason to not vote Liberal," he said. "In this election the Liberals simply don't deserve your vote. They just haven't earned it."

Layton is clearly saying watch the riding your in and read the vote figures from the previous election. Don't be seduced by generalized claims that have no real foundation. That's exactly what I said. If strategic voting is to be valuable, it has to be done on a district by district basis. Consistent with that, Carole James made her appeal to Green voters in Vancouver Island districts that were lost narrowly to the Liberals, not in some eastern Fraser Valley seat or in the Peace country where the Liberals have safe margins no matter what.

to quote Mordecai Richler...

"In Canada, nobody is ever overthrown because nobody gives a damn".

strategic voting

Rod, I believe you started your statement with:

" I don't recall hearing Jack Layton telling anyone not to vote strategically. Do you?"

I proved you dead wrong. Jack is very clearly saying, don't vote strategically, period. You should read it again. Why would he endorse this intellectual aberration, it only harms him. The fact that strategic voting can influence a competitive riding race is no mystery.

You are also clearly mistaken about Carole James. Her strategic voting theme was carried throughout the province by NDP supporters. No matter where she spoke the words and no matter that it was of no consequence in some ridings. I repeat, I personally know dozens of "green" people and party members in 2 very safe NDP ridings who refused to vote Green because they were afraid of a BC Liberal government. Both ridings had NDP landslides. Yet these people were spreading the strategic voting theme to all who would listen and in many cases were frightened.

The BC NDP lives on a diet of strategic voting in order to poach Green voters. It simply serves them right that they get burned by it at the federal level.

Politicsasusual: I find that very difficult to believe

Politicsasusual
I proved you dead wrong. Jack is very clearly saying, don't vote strategically, period. You should read it again. Why would he endorse this intellectual aberration, it only harms him. The fact that strategic voting can influence a competitive riding race is no mystery.

Jack Layton told people in Oshawa, where the NDP were running second to the Conservatives, not to be tricked by a Liberal "strategic voting" scam. The purpose of that scam, as you and everyone else knows, is to defeat NDPers and elect more Conservatives, so that the Liberal "scarey Harper" meme will have something bigger to point at.

... I repeat, I personally know dozens of "green" people and party members in 2 very safe NDP ridings who refused to vote Green because they were afraid of a BC Liberal government. Both ridings had NDP landslides. Yet these people were spreading the strategic voting theme to all who would listen and in many cases were frightened.

You personally know dozens of people who tell you how they vote, and why. Pardon me for saying that I find that very difficult to believe.

How about this, for apathy?

In the 2005 election those who came out early where mostly NDP voters eager for change. In 2009 election record numbers go to the early polls to cast their ballads for the NDP once again. What happened? Can we blame it on the NDP? And the loss of hope you could hear it from residents as polls pointed towards a Liberal win?
What do the polls do?
Polls help the undecided as they look to see whats popular?
Polls deter voters from voting especially if they say their party hopefull doesn't stand a chance. So why bother? Because there is no winning around here when you have Can west and Campbell working the news. Yesterday's big news how James and party where Hippocrates for donating a considerable sum to charity and for wanting workers to receive a livable wage. And Can west and Campbell which are one in the same as they turn a good deed into a soap as they fail to mention how the NDP helped children who suffer from sexual abuse get that long awaited treatment. Treatment they would most likely go without as many still do as mothers are beaten back by gatekeepers. And I say Can west and Campbell someone needs to take you both out to the trash.
http://thetyee.ca/Views/2009/04/29/PayRaises/
Its children who suffer the most in this province and whats CanWest got to say about starving children in this province? "Bring down you cans of Campbell's and don't be afraid if they are to old or dented its only the poor kids we are feeding the crap to so no worry, be happy we are.
As the working poor are mostly single mom's trying to keep their children alive and find treatment for them besides long waiting lists and gate keepers.
And one can not help notice the NDP did not fair as well as the Liberals did with wages as Campbell cries the poor don't need to eat as he takes the biggest piece of the pie, 58%.

Just Looking At The Big Story Teller

http://www.canwestwatch.org/debate/

And Campbell's raise was 48% and not 58% although costs for MLA's has risen astronomically since the Liberals took power but thats another story Can wests not telling.

And James has put in the time getting to know voters and what was important to them. Something the Liberals were not to big on especially Campbell as more into having his picture taken. Did you know his mug is on more covers than any other politician in BC history? And I don't know if you have noticed Campbell is not coming through as a happy camper in his pictures. I hope thats not bad news for voters. But you'll just have to wait and see what happens because you sure aren't going to read it in the news. All you read it hype, hype, hype as BC is one big commercial and the people that live there my as well be invisible or at least thats how they feel. Apathy.

taking on David Suzuki was really not a good idea

and for more on the carbon tax vs. cap & trade see below:
http://www.carbontax.org/issues/carbon-taxes-vs-cap-and-trade/