tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11282727.post3158062449915759949..comments2024-03-09T04:13:53.858-06:00Comments on Accidental Deliberations: On best-case scenariosUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11282727.post-52962360870484389242012-03-09T02:34:46.937-06:002012-03-09T02:34:46.937-06:00Of all the candidates, I think Brian Topp is the o...Of all the candidates, I think Brian Topp is the only one who has released a policy paper that actually mentions working with party members to help craft party policy. Policy Paper 7 I think it was.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11282727.post-10237619338209444802012-03-08T07:39:55.119-06:002012-03-08T07:39:55.119-06:00Since the request has been made, I'll indeed c...Since the request has been made, I'll indeed check in with the campaigns - and keep you posted on what I hear back.juristnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11282727.post-90123505733661207462012-03-07T19:03:11.803-06:002012-03-07T19:03:11.803-06:00I join the chorus that says, "get answers now...I join the chorus that says, "get answers now." This also models the transparent, respectful way that we'd like to see politics done. So, to the question.<br /><br />Dear jurist, will you solicit a response from these two, maybe all seven candidates, about how they intend to work with existing party institutions in terms of charting the course forward? As I've stated before, maybe we're just afraid of change as New Democrats. Maybe at a deeper level, we're more concerned about the nature of the changes being sought, and how any changes will be carried out. But somebody has to ask the question... and why not a respected progressive blogger.<br /><br />I'm glad to hear that Cullen is may be moving towards an interest about partisan collaboration rather than a position (and I still need to take time to listen to the radio clip.) I suspect the fears about Mulcair's stated intention to make change have more to do with his past political ties than any explicit plan he has espoused.<br /><br />How power is shared and exercised in an institution has been a matter of interest as long as civilizations have been around. And we certainly see enough examples of "the end justifies the means." (Witness the robocall scandal.) This is an important question.DougL - Guest from Cullen's ridingnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11282727.post-83516881033897551212012-03-07T16:57:05.149-06:002012-03-07T16:57:05.149-06:00Agreed that there's limited means to discuss i...Agreed that there's limited means to discuss inter-candidate arrangements at the convention itself - and while I've pointed to Topp as the most likely to work something out with the limited number of voters who might be available to choose at the convention, he now seems to be saying he isn't pursuing that (at least with Nash). But if enough people set up a signal vote in advance, it should carry the intended message - even if it doesn't result in any formal negotiation between voter and candidate.<br /><br />That said, I agree that getting satisfactory answers from the candidates would be a far better outcome. (Again, that's part of the reason why I've reserved judgment and suggested that readers wait before voting.) But if we don't get them, then we need to start talking now about how to send a message beyond merely accepting the candidate brands as presented.juristnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11282727.post-70706601356973525152012-03-07T14:36:05.148-06:002012-03-07T14:36:05.148-06:00<span>Romeo Saganash has just endorsed Mulca...<span>Romeo Saganash has just <a href="http://www.canada.com/Romeo+Saganash+backs+Thomas+Mulcair+leadership/6265731/story.html" rel="nofollow">endorsed</a> Mulcair for leader. I suppose his name will still remain on the ballot though. <br /> <br />You've brought up this "vote symbolically to extract concessions" strategy before. And <a href="http://accidentaldeliberations.blogspot.com/2012/03/leadership-2012-preliminary-endorsement.html" rel="nofollow">I disagreed</a> with its effectiveness before. <br /> <br />Something new that just crossed my mind is...What you're suggesting is totally impractical. It only works in a delegate style election where the leadership candidate CARRIES his voters with him. That allows for bargaining on policy...and opens the door the type of compromise you're seeking. <br /> <br />During an NDP election, the leadership candidates have zero control over their voters. That alone cuts off a direct line of communication between leaders...since someone like Ashton can't entice Cullen/Mulcair with her supporters. If that wasn't enough, the disperate & anonymous votes ensure Mulcair/Cullen have no way of interpreting the "signals" you intend to send them about policy. <br /> <br />In your previous post, you instructed folks to use Brian Topp as vessel for this sort of protest vote. Of course, I argued, that might just give him an outright victory. So I'm glad you re-directed readers to use Romeo as this vessel. While I still believe it's a fruitless strategy, it will cause less harm in the end. <br /> <br />But I still hope you'd reconsider using the actual election to make such a point. We should either solicit a response from a candidate directly...or actually consider endorsing a different REALISTIC leader who is more receptive to these concerns.</span>Dan Tannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11282727.post-8692675921336697732012-03-07T14:34:15.984-06:002012-03-07T14:34:15.984-06:00Romeo Saganash has just endorsed Mulcair for leade...Romeo Saganash has just <a href="http://www.canada.com/Romeo+Saganash+backs+Thomas+Mulcair+leadership/6265731/story.html" rel="nofollow">endorsed</a> Mulcair for leader. I suppose his name will still remain on the ballot though.<br /><br />You've brought up this "vote symbolically to extract concessions" strategy before. And <a href="http://accidentaldeliberations.blogspot.com/2012/03/leadership-2012-preliminary-endorsement.html" rel="nofollow">I disagreed</a> with its effectiveness before.<br /><br />Something new that just crossed my mind is...What you're suggesting is totally impractical. It only works in a delegate style election where the leadership candidate CARRIES his voters with him. That allows for bargaining on policy...and opens the door the type of compromise you're seeking.<br /><br />During an NDP election, the leadership candidates have zero control over their voters. That alone cuts off a direct line of communication between leaders...since someone like Ashton can't entice Cullen/Mulcair with her supporters. If that wasn't enough, the disperate & anonymous votes ensure Mulcair/Cullen have no way of interpreting the "signals" you intend to send them about policy.<br /><br />In your previous post, you instructed folks to use Brian Topp as vessel for this sort of protest vote. Of course, I argued, that might just give him an outright victory. So I'm glad you re-directed readers to use Romeo as this vessel. While I still believe it's a fruitless strategy, it will cause less harm in the end.<br /><br />But I still hope you'd reconsider using the actual election to make such a point. We should either solicit a response from a candidate directly...or actually consider endorsing a different REALISTIC leader who is more receptive to these concerns.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11282727.post-19750887842693942152012-03-07T10:58:03.989-06:002012-03-07T10:58:03.989-06:00It is fair to say:
Mulcair is seeking what amounts...It is fair to say:<br /><i>Mulcair is seeking what amounts to a blank cheque to “modernize” the party in unspecified ways – creating both uncertainty as to what he’d ultimately do...</i><br /><i>Cullen has generally stated that he sees the leadership as a mandate to pursue a multi-party joint nomination proposal...</i><br /><br />But it is totally unfair to conclude:<br /><i>both perceive their success as being tied to a brand which must be preserved at all costs. And so neither has been willing to move off of his controversial stance in public...</i><br /><br />When it comes to Cullen, just yesterday you were the one who noticed the rhetorical "softening" in his position. I've been commenting for weeks that this has always been the case.<br /><br />When it comes to Mulcair, since we have no idea what his stance is on "modernizing"...how can you even accuse him of being "unwilling to move off his controversial stance"?<br /><br />Before you reach any conclusion, you should contact their campaigns with your concerns.<br />Keep your readers updated on any response...& especially non-response.<br />In that scenario, we can truly reach a conclusion.Dan Tannoreply@blogger.com