babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Syndicate
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Comment policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001- the authors
Hopefully we can continue with the latest speculation off of twitter
http://rabble.ca/comment/1597816#comment-1597816
That rumour has problems. The seat is Beaches -- the NDP has many people who would want to represent it. The NDP also has a policy that makes it hard for a party to bolt to them and those who cross the floor are often not appreciated by the public. The jump would require a byelection with the NDP accepting him as a Candidate.
It is not impossible but that is a big deal.
It is also possible the Liberal member is doing what his consitutents want and has no intention of leaving the Liberals. He has good reason to be worried. If the Liberals lose support in the next election due to broken promises this is one of the seats they would have at risk.
He has little to lose but whatever he does (stay or try to go to the NDP) will be difficult and risky.
With the floor crossing of Sandra Jansen in Alberta, that policy has gone out the window. If you remember in that thread many people here justified floor crossing. If this were to happen I'm sure those same people would justify it given Trudeau betrayal of Electoral Reform. Because Nate took such a stand, I doubt there would be blowback if a floor crossing took place.
agree with mm on this.
i would hope all those Liberal sucked in candidates who believed the Liberal bs and got them to run on it for them would walk away in disgust to the NDP.
I am not so sure. The NDP leadership is very unhappy with the concept of floor crossing and so I think they would want some kind of a process.The ones I have had contact with felt really strongly about this.
I suspect the compromise would be that they would agree to accept them without challenge as candidates but they likely would want them to run before joining.
In the meantime they could have other options like a joint caucus with MPs who are independent and even giving them some questions. They might offer them a number of things but I doubt they would let them call themselves New Democrats before a byelection.
The federal NDP is different on this than the provincial NDP and I suspect they woudl continue with the view they have had for some time. No doubt they could speak to a Liberal rebel and work out what the arrangement would be but I am betting it would not be a simple quick floor crossing even if they do their best to support that MP.
Also if there are several the NDP could work something out with a caucus of them.
I also think a rebel Liberal may want to be independent for some time to wait for the NDP leadership to be settled.
These are of course details -- the NDP will produce soem sort of soft landing for Liberals who feel they did not sign up for what that party has become (or returned to).
That happened with the Canadian Alliance "dissendent" group that formed a coalition with the PC Party and called themselves DRC - Progressive Conservative - Democratic Reform Coalition Caucus
i care little about "floor crossings". to me if the party you ran for and got elected under is a party of lying liars and is doing contrary then you're obligated to walking away.
imv you got eleted for the things the party said they were going to do and if it was a lie i as a voter for you would expect you to walk asap.
The Alberta example is different because that is the provincial NDP. The Federal NDP appears to have a stricter policy against floor crossing.
If Nate were to cross the floor, he might be expected to sit as an Independent like Maria Mourani did before running for the NDP.
I get the leaving part and I agree, but the NDP has been vocal about the coming in part. I think the NDP will design some process (better than purgatory) for those leaving another party and coming in to the NDP. I don't think they will want to just call a Liberal of yesterday a New Democrat of Tommorrow. The NDP has thought about this for some time so it would not suprise me to see some creative process that will respect the voters, other possible candidates and an elected MP who feels the need to make a change.
Nothing stops the NDP from a joint caucus with dissidents of another party planning to run as NDP in the next election. Nor is there anything preventing them from giving the opportunity to ask questions.
seeing as how the Liberals appealed to both the voters and the people running for them by bsing them on long held NDP policies and platforms think it would be a great statement to the lying Liberals and Canadians at large. it would tell Canadians the DP are not 'Liberal light' and there's a difference and indiate to voters what liars the Liberals are. if it's as pondering contends most voters are switch voters then they'll get the message not to waste time voting for the Liberals.
weak brew. a strong statement against Justin's lying liars is better imv
I think being correct, consistent and not hypocritical is the stronger message. I think they will do that. Not to would invite a predictable response. The NDP will probably find a protocol for how this should be done and I think the federal party is motivated to do so and it will be an example to others of how this should be done.
correct? it's a subjective reality.
consistent as long as it's not masquerading and is just resistent to change.
hypocritical maybe it's a position they wee wrong on in the first place and need to re-think.
I don't think anyone here has ever questioned that.
The question is always "walk away into the waiting arms of another party? Or into the waiting arms of a byelection under a different party banner, to ensure that those electors who chose you under one party continue to want you under another?"
Nate just retweeted a picture of him and NDP MP Finn Donnelly making a media appearance to discuss banning shark fins
https://twitter.com/alannealottawa/status/829102852610076672
NDP policy page 21 5.3 e
http://xfer.ndp.ca/2016/documents/2016_PolicyBook_EN_WEB.pdf
You have a lot of people to argue with. This is not just a campaign position or opinion of a person but party policy. Affirmed within the last year.
I understand thread drift happens, I'm often a participant, but the first 16 posts on a thread called NDP leadership race 3 have zero to do with the NDP leadership race.
I'm not saying the conversation shouldn't happen, just that it should happen in a different thread.
Getting back to the NDP Leadership Race . . .
Chantal Hébert said this week that Charlie Angus will need to spend time in French immersion if he becomes NDP Leader:
It sounds like @CharlieAngusNDP will be spending time in French immersion if he becomes NDP leader...#notquitedebateready
https://twitter.com/ChantalHbert/status/828683796056768513
So how about Carol Hughes?
Bilingual, been in caucus for 9 years, demonstrated committment to Indigenous peoples, good experience on Health care, as DS has better than average knowledge of the House workings, has worked in labour, has developed positive relations with members of all parties. She is a principled MP.
Never heard of her to tell you the truth but I like her profile including her connections to the CLC. The real question is will she play in TO and Montreal. The West Coast Liberal seats are ripe for the taking and who is leader will not overly affect that dynamic. To at least get back to the OO the NDP needs to win many seats in Ontario and retake a few seats in Quebec. I think that she would appeal to the same constituency as Charlie Angus. Coming from Val Caron she was from a Francophone/bilingual area of Greater Sudbury so it is good to see her French is passible.
Her French is excellent.
We were talking about the rumors of Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith jumping ship and running for the NDP leadership. Then conversation dissolved into the practicality of resigning and then running in a by-election. Or sitting outside of caucus as an independent in a "coalition"
I think you must have made up the second part of the rumour. Only a Liberal or someone with a similar distain for the party would imply that a floorcrosser could actually try and run for the NDP leadership.
i know we weren't talking about a floor crossser to run for leader.
there was no mention of leader whatsoever.
??? Huh what?
Which is discussing a fantasy because he hasn't left the Liberal Party in disgust or otherwise. Although he is deeply disappointed in Trudeau ditching electoral reform there are other areas in which he remains pleased with the party's accomplishments.
MM, I understand you were continuing a conversation from the other thread and I am guilty too. It's just confusing for anyone coming to the board to read about or discuss the NDP leadership race. If such a person wants to discuss the leadership race should they start a new thread?
I my post here
My apologizes. The reason I had posted in this thread is that several twitter posters were urging Nate to not only join the NDP but run for leader! I had thought I had indicated that in the thread above. Upon re-reading that I realized I forgot to add that. Which is why I had posted this in this thread in the first place.
If you want I can post the tweets from NDP posters on twitter urging Nate to run for NDP leader. Just let me know.
Please don't post tweets. We should not encourage Twitter, as it encourages people like Donald Trump