The NDP embodies a lot of what I like in politicians. But they need to get back to their Jack Layton roots.
It’s still a crying shame that Layton passed away when he did. He would’ve been an awesome PM.
The NDP embodies a lot of what I like in politicians. But they need to get back to their Jack Layton roots.
It’s still a crying shame that Layton passed away when he did. He would’ve been an awesome PM.
All the NDP text messages I'm getting spammed eith rn I've responded by saying I'm not voting in any NDP leader who won't dare to say the word Socialism as I don't need a pointless alt Liberal party. Put it back in the party constitution like it used to be.
Good first impression here, time to look into Bianca.
Sorry but there is no way hick Canada, who votes in droves, will vote for a woman of color, they won't even vote for a woman.
NDP never wins anyways, I fully expect us to fall to fascism the next time we flip flop back to the conservatives federally. I don't think the USA needs to bother invading, we'll hand ourselves over on a platter.
Let alone one that looks so young.
I'm all for getting rid of 60+ year old politicians but someone who looks 30 has no chance.
I feel like this leadership entrant embodies exactly the philosophy that is making the NDP irrelevant lately. She is catering to the base the same way Pierre Poilievre does. It's not an election winning strategy.
Her husband gets veto'd from the running, so the wife goes in as a candidate. Sorry, the optics on that alone looks really bad for neutral voters. She wasn't the movements first choice of leader, it was her husband, and it's reasonable to think that even if she's now in the running, she's overtly a puppet for other interests that are obscured. Add in a seemingly staunch adherence to what appears to be the tired old left-leaning minority demographic approach -- where they target different minority groups with perks/benefits/funding promises that benefit those minorities exclusively, while ignoring and throwing shit at the majority interests of the voters -- isn't a winning strategy overall. One of the keys to the appeal of a leader like Jack Layton, was that he appealed to the interests of most people.
Just because Canadians rejected PP last time, doesn't mean they want to go to the complete opposite side of that spectrum. Electing this lady would likely end as tragically as the Green party electing Annamie Paul.
What kind of "interests" do you imagine she is a "puppet" for, and what led you to that conclusion?
If someone comes forward as a leader of a movement, and gets quashed, and the organiser's of that movement's response is to then put forward the spouse as the candidate -- it's not a stretch to say many folks will be suspicious of the integrity, intentions and autonomy of the new person. Chances are she'll march to the drum of her husband/whatever group of people control that movements interests. It's also fairly clear that she wouldnt've run, if it weren't for her husbands disqualification -- which makes her commitment to the role a bit dubious.
In theory, the NDP caucus / membership should be the ones unquestionably in control of the party's future and direction -- not a small subset of unknown people/groups controlling a candidate. It's not that different in scope to the issues on the right-wing -- where a smaller contingent of extreme right-wing nuts have essentially managed to assume authority over the whole party, and steer its direction to their whims. Like if PP were turfed from the cons leadership, and the hard right faction then just stuck in the wife as a candidate/leader, it'd raise questions as to who's actually leading that party/movement -- cause clearly the leader is totally disposable, and there's some more opaque group with significant sway / control. The voting process would help to eventually normalise/mitigate some of the optics, in that you could argue she has the support of most of the party if she does end up winning -- but there'd still be some questions about a smaller subset group of unelected folks influencing her decisions.
And yes, I know, I've already been told recently that we shouldn't hold politicians to higher standards than normal folks. But I say fuck that, if someone wants me to follow them, they gotta actually lead/inspire. I'm way too lazy to deviate from my norm for more of the same old shit in politics.
You have it completely backward. The scenario you describe (small unaccountable groups controlling who can lead) is exactly what this candidate objects to. Yves Engler was prevented from running for NDP leader ("quashed") by a 3-person, unelected group of party officials. I find those people's motivations much more questionable.
"Mark Carney has radically militarized Canadian society and handed the bill to working people. The former investment banker has gutted climate protections, trampled Indigenous rights, and overseen a sharp erosion of democratic priorities. Meanwhile, it has been painful to watch him defer to the fascistic U.S. president on border policy, policing, and the taxation of big tech. "
If she is going to try and run a national party with statements like this, the NDP will dissappear. We don't need a left version of the wild Rose party.
all 23 comments