Thursday, July 23, 2015

New column day

Here, taking a look at the voter pools the NDP will be looking to win over in order to come out ahead in if this fall's federal election turns into a two-party race. And I'll note that while Alberta may serve as the most recent precedent, similar patterns can be found in the NDP's previous rises to power in other provinces.

For further reading...
- Both Nanos and EKOS have polled as to the federal parties' accessible and second-choice support, with the NDP currently leading the pack on both fronts.
- And for more about the business groups who have reason to want to see a change from the Cons, Dean Beeby discusses the problems facing Canada's manufacturing sector. Daniel Tencer reported on tech industry opposition to Bill C-51. And Karen Briere reports on how the Trans-Pacific Partnership is creating uncertainty in supply-managed agricultural sectors, while Michael Geist highlighted some of the other obvious costs of the deal.


  1. To hell with "key business supporters". Let's be clear here: Modern business will produce more and create jobs in Canada if they have to, but it's not something they're particularly interested in. If anything, of late years it's something they have to be dragged into kicking and screaming. So if Mulcair seems likely to revive Canadian manufacturing, improve growth by employing more people, building infrastructure etc., one might imagine that some "key business supporters" would consider that a Good Thing and come around, but they won't. If anything, they make higher profits when the economy's crap for the rest of us.

    Mulcair should concentrate on building a sound economy for Canadians, which among other things is one where "key business supporters" pay their fair share of taxes so that important public goods can be funded. Letting business into the tent means letting their interests into the tent, which in turn means pandering to their interests by pushing real people out of the tent. Down with it. We've come too far in that direction already, and that is not how we got high in the polls.

    I'm surprised and disappointed by this article. You, someone who talks about the social determinants of health and backs a guaranteed income, suddenly flirting with going Full Blair in hopes it will be a vote-winner.

  2. To be clear, my emphasis is on connecting the NDP's well-established values and policies to the interests of those potential supporters - not going Full (or even Partial) Blair. The goal is a more powerful magnet for voters, not a shift in where it's positioned.

    But at the same time, I don't think we can abandon the cause of demonstrating how a sound economy for everybody is better for business as well as the public. And while dogmatic corporate lobby groups will never accept it (and I'd never suggest trying to appease them), one of the tests of our success in making that case will be the response among less-hostile businesses.