|
Author
|
Topic:
|
Michael Tripper
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10103
|
posted 09 January 2006 12:11 AM
[ 11 January 2006: Message edited by: Michael Tripper ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Tripper
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10103
|
posted 09 January 2006 12:36 AM
You know aristotle, that sounds really boring and dull and easily dismissed by the news clones on CTV Newsnet/Question Period/Mike Duffy who are always trying to disappear the NDP from their coverage.We need fire so they cannot ignore the nDP, but yeah not so much that the corporate media can paint Layton as screaming loon a la Howard Dean in the states....
From: Vancouver | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
fern hill
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3582
|
posted 09 January 2006 12:48 AM
Have a look a Salutin's column. NDP values are Canadian values. Tommy Douglas, Ed Broadbent. What Jack should say is that the NDP holds feet to the fire. More NDP members means more people-power, more action on issues, less corporate/crony backsheesh.edited to add link Salutin [ 09 January 2006: Message edited by: fern hill ]
From: away | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052
|
posted 09 January 2006 12:56 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Tripper:
Well, here it is...what about the spectre of the Cons and Libs passing a budget? How about that fear-factor?
There are a couple of problems with that.First, most people won't belive that's even possible, when they see the way the Libs and Cons are at each others' throats. (Of course, they are wrong and it IS possible: witness draft 1 of the last budget). Secondly, even if the Liberals collapsed down to 3rd or 4th party status and the NDP surged up to be the Official Opposition -- a highly improbable scenario -- even then the Liberals would probably have enough seats to put a minority Con government over the 155 vote mark to get a budget passed.
From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Michael Tripper
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10103
|
posted 09 January 2006 12:58 AM
I disagree with the harper thing - he was stagnant until the crime issue reared it's head (I even had a comment in the Globe about it) but I am hoping that we are too bored with that now, that everyone will actually focus on the Cons 'values" and see them for what they are...You can release reams of policies, but they have to connect and Harper wasn't until the crime thing happened and frankly it is too late to play catch up on the policy a day thing, which I think layton is doing already....I want him to do something, take the enemies tactics, go negative, is this a good idea...?
From: Vancouver | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
a lonely worker
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9893
|
posted 09 January 2006 01:02 AM
He has to paint the Libs and Tories as from being of the same brush. Tax cuts don't build a nation and only lead to downloading of costs. Both Martin and Harpie have; - done everything to destabilise a strong federal government, either through funding cuts, scandal or caving in to Republicans. _ One party gave us FTA the other NAFTA - Both oppose increased EI benefits - Both are spending billions in a naked attempt to buy your vote - Neither care about any new money for foreign aid or the environmnet. - Neither are willing to deal with proportional representation. Jack should also say that whoever wins the election, the number one priority of the NDP will be to bring forward PR so that voters would never have to hold their nose and vote "strategically" again. He should go right after Hargrove and say that until we get PR we will just go from one bad election to another. Also, I hope he mentions what Ed's ethics package points are instead of simply saying his name a dozen times and stops ending every question with "elect more New Democrats".
From: Anywhere that annoys neo-lib tools | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Michael Tripper
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10103
|
posted 09 January 2006 01:03 AM
Albireo, I do not understand you seem to be saying it is not possible then saying it is likely that the libs and cons could provide cover for each other....
Layton could be and should be PM, no question....if we're lucky this next parliament will just show he should be next time, if he doesn't this time....I thnk Layton could be PM with the right marketing this time, but certainly next time, esp, if the libs and cons collude and they do something stupid like Iraq vers. 2.0
From: Vancouver | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
fern hill
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3582
|
posted 09 January 2006 01:21 AM
Over here is another reminder of what makes the NDP different from the Cons and the Libs. Signing a Workers' Rights thingy. OK, Duceppe signed it too, but would/will the Cons or the Libs?What Jack needs to do is emphasize how the NDP is not Con/Lib and will, especially with increased numbers of MPs, keep things real and honest.
From: away | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Michael Tripper
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10103
|
posted 09 January 2006 01:54 AM
I guess if I needed to be a bit more concise, what I wanted was forJack to point out forcefully that the Libs and Cons are the same....Albireo you're saying people won't believe it, right? But that's the message he needs to sell....Harper leader of a party with a tainted past - mackay betrayal of PC party/Harper is a double dealer...Martin well the same w/other items....those two parties will say and do anything for favours and when push comes to shove, they will work together and say see, we're not working with the separatists... He needs to sell that idea, that they are both mealy-mouthed opportunists who both have hidden agendas [ 09 January 2006: Message edited by: Michael Tripper ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
JKR
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7904
|
posted 09 January 2006 02:04 AM
And Jack should come out strongly against Quebec separation. He should stop limiting his attacks to just the Liberals. He should attack Duceppe and Harper as strongly as he attacks Martin.The NDP's strategy of limiting their attacks on just the Liberals has failed. This strategy has allowed the Liberals to take on the roles of defender against right-wing extremism and defender of Canadian unity. And if the Conservatives become government the NDP will have allowed the Liberals to seem like the only real opposition to the Conservatives. This is just setting up the NDP for more failure in the next election if the Conservatives form government.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Radioactive Westerner
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4432
|
posted 09 January 2006 05:51 PM
Jack needs to present policy and ideas instead of stating that the answer to every problem is to just elect more New Democrats.Declaring the Liberals as being too corrupt and offering the left leaning voter a principled home with the NDP would help too. Should be interesting.
From: Edmonton | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052
|
posted 09 January 2006 05:54 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Tripper:
I guess if I needed to be a bit more concise, what I wanted was forJack to point out forcefully that the Libs and Cons are the same....Albireo you're saying people won't believe it, right? But that's the message he needs to sell....Harper leader of a party with a tainted past - mackay betrayal of PC party/Harper is a double dealer...Martin well the same w/other items....those two parties will say and do anything for favours and when push comes to shove, they will work together and say see, we're not working with the separatists... He needs to sell that idea, that they are both mealy-mouthed opportunists who both have hidden agendas
OK, I agree with what you are saying, as far as NDP strategy goes. My earlier response had to do with the idea of a Con-Lib budget, or even a Con-Lib deal to govern.
From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
donf
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11615
|
posted 09 January 2006 06:15 PM
It will matter what the leader says in this debate, certainly, But to resurect a Tommy Douglas saying, If I can lead you to victory then someone else can lead you to defeat just as easily.Well, he did not, and sure enough everyone else has. But what his point was is that ordinary voters need to be brought into the party, need to take part in defining its policies, selecting its leadership, choosing its candidates. This has to be many thousands of voters in each and every riding. Waiting until election time and hoping that an advertising campaign and a slick leader might turn the tide for us, over and over again is putting far too much dependence on a few spinmeisters in party central. that dependence has not been working for us. and if it does some day 'work' for us, the party elected to Ottawa will again be a party of the spin-meisters, glib sound byte artists that have very little to do with the average voter.
From: Middlesex Ontario Canada | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Michael Tripper
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10103
|
posted 09 January 2006 08:13 PM
donf - well that sounds nice but being politcially correct ain't gonna do it n 2006. I would suggest yes having more members is necessary, but to harken back to yesteryear and Tommy D is what I would call a failure of imagination.What you are saying - the more members the better the vote is so clearly obvious as to be inane. Not to be rude but perhaps that sort of thinking is exactly what is wrong with the NDP. Vision is not something that "has" to come from the "ordinary" voter. The "ordinary" voter is NO SUCH THING. Everyone has interests, it's a matter of matching interests to voters so that they vote for you. Your advertising-bashing comments - oh look let's bash marketing, that's make me feel so righterous - is 100% what is wrong with the NDP's dinosaurs - every party has them. You can be effective authentically without being glib. You can have the greatest platform in the world but if no one hears because you adhere to quaint notions of the old "advertising is evil" paradigm you have lost the market. And the election Sorry donf, I don't think that is helping right now. Excellence is something worth believing in - making everyone average ("ordinary") and calling that success, as you imply is simply outrageous and will only convince others that the NDP wants to bring people down, not elevate them. [ 09 January 2006: Message edited by: Michael Tripper ] [ 09 January 2006: Message edited by: Michael Tripper ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534
|
posted 11 January 2006 01:34 PM
(a somewhat lost and slightly tipsy recent-rabble-rouser of the male persuasion ambles into the barcar, singing this old bluesy number by the Animals, after hearing the comment about the NDP bringing everyone down.
When you complain and criticise
I feel I'm nothing in your eyes
It makes me feel like giving up
Because my best just ain't good enough
Girl, I want to provide for you
And do all the things that you want me to, but...
Oh! Oh no Don't bring me down
I'm beggin' you darlin'
Oh! Oh no Don't bring me down Sacrifices, I will make
I'm ready to give as well as take
One thing I need is your respect
One thing I can't take is your neglect
More than anything, I need your love
Then troubles are easy to rise above Oh! Oh no Don't bring me down
Oh, no no no no no
Oh! Oh no Don't bring me down You complain and criticise
I feel I'm nothing in your eyes
It makes me feel like giving up
Because my best just ain't good enough
Girl, I want to provide for you
Do all the things that you want me to, but... Oh! Oh no Don't bring me down
No no no no no no no
I'm beggin' Oh no Don't bring me down
Oh no no Baby
Please! Oh no no Don't bring me down
I need your tender lovin'
So please don't bring me down
Oh, baby baby baby don't hurt me
Don't bring me down
Oh no, please don't hurt me
{fade} Meanwhile, a cool, collected babbler of the female persuasion, chatting with some grils, eyes him coldly and orders another bottle of Pinot gris with a selection of tapas... [ 11 January 2006: Message edited by: lagatta ]
From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
