Monday, September 19, 2011

It's bad enough the NDP are letting other candidates run

September 2nd: Thomas Mulcair says he won't run for the leadership of the NDP unless the party agrees to hold its convention in late winter or early spring, because he wouldn't be able to compete in a short race.

September 19th: [Muclair] told reporters on Monday that he has truly not decided if he will throw his hat into the ring because the numbers for a Quebec candidate do not add up well. Although the majority of New Democrat MPs are from Quebec, “Quebec is the only province that does not have a provincial wing of the NDP,” said Mr. Mulcair.

I've spent the last hour wracking my brain to come up with a rationale for how Mulcair's musings might help him in this contest, but can't think of anything.

Labels: ,

12 Comments:

  • Maybe he's just being honest?

    I really don't know why he is so concerned he might lose. Would it hurt his ego that bad? Even looking at the recent history of the Liberal Party, the two losers to Stephane Dion have both gotten to lead the party anyway - so it could be good for Thomas Mulcair to run.

    Perhaps I also don't know enough about Quebec politics, but is now not the perfect time to (re-)start a Quebec NDP wing? I don't think there's much in the way of federalist left-wing parties there, so it could carve its own niche, and counter the growing influence of Francois Legault's non-existent party. Maybe talk is happening and Mulcair wants to lead that party (although he seemed comfortably as a Quebec Liberal cabinet member)?

    Maybe some in the party really don't like him and are discouraging him.

    You're right though, definitely a head-scratcher.

    By Blogger Ian, at 2:34 PM  

  • ...that he has truly not decided if he will throw his hat into the ring because the numbers for a Quebec candidate do not add up well...

    Which is odd since both declared candidates - Topp and Saganash -are from Quebec.

    Mulcair got his preferred timeline. Now this? Okay, we get it. He was looking for a structural out all along knowing he'd always lose in the end on his style and likability.

    But both these events also show he would NOT have been a good leader anyway. Does not have the decisiveness to be PM. Sometimes in politics and perhaps rarely do you control anything. These sort of public musings rarely endear you to voters. They see it a sign of weakness...of being wishy washy.

    By Anonymous Rob C, at 2:38 PM  

  • “Quebec is the only province that does not have a provincial wing of the NDP,” said Mr. Mulcair.

    And he hasn't had since 2007 to organize one.

    By Blogger Ted Betts, at 3:25 PM  

  • "I really don't know why he is so concerned he might lose."

    The NDP leadership contest may be less expensive than was the last Liberal one, but it's still going to leave the losers with a big hole in their pocketbook that the unions can't legally fill.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:27 PM  

  • Odd, Thomas Muclair seems to have forgotten his greatest advantage......Thomas Muclair!!! I read it in something written by Thomas Muclair.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:52 PM  

  • Can't blame him the math isn't great:

    - Party elites hate him

    - Weak organization in QC (directly impacts his chances)

    - Lack of strong NDP network throughout the country (hes relatively new to the party)

    - Hes not the kind of guy whos gonna inspire a lot of new people to join.

    - Leadership races aren't fun

    = Can't blame him for getting cold feet.

    By Anonymous Rick, at 10:25 PM  

  • Isn't the NDP the party that believes that anyone who doesn't get what they want must have been a victim of one thing or another, and should have it given to them?

    By Blogger Robert Vollman, at 10:47 AM  

  • Robert,

    I think you're spot on. It's not enough for a dipper to lose - he must be the victim of something or other.

    But of course once you've identified a victim class, you must create a remedy - perhaps an affirmative action program for MPs from Quebec who are poor organizers and are disliked by both the party elite and the rank and file.

    Perhaps to compensate for his victimization, each vote for Mulcair should count as four?

    Sounds equitable to me.

    By Blogger Brian from Toronto, at 12:35 PM  

  • Are you guys talking about Dippers or Conservatives? Sometimes you just can't tell the difference when it comes to whining about victimhood and passing the buck of responsibility.

    By Blogger Ted Betts, at 1:03 PM  

  • Thanks God for Liberals, Ted! The one group of people that doesn't whine, play the victim, and pass the buck, amiright?

    By Blogger Robert Vollman, at 6:05 PM  

  • I really think Robert's right. Mulcair's posturing as being disadvantaged, presumably so they'll alter the process to make it more "fair" for him.

    By Anonymous Michael F, at 8:14 PM  

  • The NDP had better pray Mulcair runs. Angus-Reid recently tested how Mulcair, Doer and Topp would fare nationally as NDP leader. Across the country they perform similarly, except for in Quebec.

    NDP support in Quebec under...
    Doer: 27% (BQ: 25%, CPC: 24%)
    Topp: 31% (BQ: 23% CPC: 23%)
    Mulcair: 52% (BQ: 15%, CPC: 18%)

    By Anonymous hosertohoosier, at 1:33 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home