"the NDP caucus is in the middle of a fierce battle over whether or not to support the government through the winter. The Mulcair people are pushing back hard against Laytons team, and other NDP MPs are opposing the current tactics on principle and fear of losing credibility in their constituencies."
In all seriousness, the above isn't exactly hard to believe, given the circumstances. Cue the denials....
40 comments:
100% twaddle.
The federal NDP has no history or disposition towards leadership scheming. None. (Liberals always have the WORST time understanding this based on their own party's experience).
There is no desire in the party to do any more than get the $1 billion for the unemployed that the party came from. It Mulcair who announced the party position on Wednesday, afterall.
Any other empty rumours you want to float here? How 'bout this: Glen Clark is going to run for the Liberals??
Believe what you want, you guys have been in denial for two weeks. 100% whatever.
Gee, I heard a rumour that Rae and Ignatieff got into a fist fight at the last Liberal caucus meeting. Evidently, they yelled obscenities at each other and Rae threatened to leave the party and rejoin the NDP!
I so don't care.
You obviously DO care otherwise you wouldn't devote an entire blog post to some fictitious gossip cooked up at Liberal HQ. You clearly WANT to provoke people into a Liberal vs. NDP pissing match - and then you try to be dismissive when people give you want you want.
It's true. We can't hide it anymore.
Everybody in the NDP knows about the conflict between the right-wing Layton and the left-wing Mulcair.
Who will win? The mustache of Layton or the full-facial hair of Mulcair? Stay tuned.
In this scenario, who is the hawk and who is the dove between Mulcair and Layton?
Honestly, if Liberals are going to make up these stories - at least make some effort to be credible. Anyone with even most casual awareness of dynamics within the NDP knows that Layton and Mulcair and very close allies and are practically joined at the hip. If you are going to make up a story like this - I have some advice. It might be more plausible if you made up a story that pitted people who are known to represent different ideological currents in the party (ie: a fictitious rumour about a Libby Davies -led leftwing faction against a Layton-Mulcair pragmatic faction would be a more believable than what is being peddled here)
Mulcair is the hawk as he knows he'll replace Jack after the next election. What you are seeing are knives aimed at Jack. For the better I might add. I'd actually consider voting for Muscular.
Key word is consider.
You may even see a liberal-democrat single party on the centre-left once Jack's personal project is taken out of his hands.
Okay let me clarify, I so don't care if YOU believe it or not. Same goes for all the other dippers with their head buried in the sand. Whatever.
I mean, my word, it's really hard to believe that completely contradicting yourself would lead to some infighting as to how to proceed. Shocking, this outlandish rumor!! And, nope nobody has thought Mulclair a successor, nor did he UNILATERALLY go on tv and declare the NDP's new position before Layton.
I note, Kinsella just brought up caucus divisions and Lavigne offered NOTHING in retort.
I SO don't care.
You DO care, because you keep talking about it!
oh please - anonymous sources are so 2008.
Well, it's interesting to see the Red Conservatives embrace the approach of their Blue Conservative cousin Tom Flannigan and his approach:
“It doesn't have to be true. It just has to be plausible and it strikes me as plausible”
Wow, isn't this post just a prime example of that. Except that the New Democrats don't have a history of the backstabbing and such that the Red Conservatives have. Oh well, there goes that whole plausibility thing
Truth hurts fellas, truth hurts.
Do you want a hug, like Kinsella gave the hapless Lavigne??
The funny part, I actually think you guys believe you're putting up a credible retort. Part of me wants to think its just a front, because I do respect a couple of you, but I'm really starting to wonder. Biggest laugh, without a doubt since I've blogged, watching the sideshow.
DL
Then get lost, and I promise to never even notice :)
When it is the truth it does hurt this however is bold face lie. Those don't hurt they just make you want to work harder for the truth. So I just gave 25 dollar donation to the NDP, keep firing up the NDP base Steve with the misinformation and lies.
Keep lying to yourself Robert. I'm sure the party appreciated the money, there's another rumor that you're BROKE, so good on ya.
Don't shoot the messenger :)
I am surprised that the NDP have lasted this long with Layton...did not seem to be able to make inroads in Quebec and that was one of his primary goals.
This latest shifting on his part will most definitely not help matters. Too late to get a new leader before an election though...have to stick it out with him.
I don't know why people seem to think Layton is on his way out. He's led the party to their best result since Ed Broadbent, and he won a seat in Quebec in a general election. Those are two huge achievements.
It wasn't long ago that the NDP had nine seats in the HoC.
And now we see why Steve posted this. There is an actual Liberal Caucus Split going on between the Rea camp and the Iggy camp.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/09/08/liberals-mutter-darkly-over-ignatieff-election-bravado.aspx
Someone is deflecting.
And here that link on the Liberal Caucus Split!
Wow.. you're coming up with a John Ivison article a week old?
Very unimpressive.
So much changed in a week eh? Wait no it didn't Iggy still doesn't have the support of the party.
Here is the wacky, wacky thing. Dippers don't stay with the party when things get crazy or complex because Dippers are at heart Tories.
The reason there has never been an NDP leadership rivalry is simply because NDP & Leadership is an oxymoron - at best!
Now that the latest cycle of Dipper sanctimonious clap-trap is over, perhaps the adults can get on with ridding the nation of the bad taste that is the present PM.
Otherwise Dippers, keep supporting your fellow traveler, the present PM.
Steve... It's official, you've gone way off the partisan deep-end and what a sad day it is. RIP Objective Steve V; you will be missed.
I suggest that you take some advice from something that Mr. Lavigne said to Red Conservative strategist Susan Smith on TV the other night: "You shouldn't talk about things that you have no clue about". This would be one of those things, but you know that and that's not your concern. You're acting like deciple of Tom Flannigan and if that's how you think you guys will do better, then by all means lie to the people and continue to show that kind of contempt for their intelligence.
Thankfully I and many others know the truth about what is going on inside my own party and it's financial situation but if the only way you guys think you can win is to spread lies about others, then so be it. That bad karma will come back and get you in the end. But when that happens, you'll probably tell us it's all someone else's fault; that's the true Red Conservative way
Okay, so the Dipper's want you to believe a "spinner" - Brad Lavigne.
Like he's going to tell all. LOL
One question - are the NDP's human? It is human nature to have differences of opinion. Otherwise, you're a puppet with no brains.
Get over yourselves - differences of opinion are a natural way of life.
Not much interested in these kinds of discussion, just wanted to say though, that I know and like Jack, but he's no Ed Broadbent. I've NDP many times, but unless I actually lived in an NDP riding, I wouldn't vote NDP again. I come from a labour/union family, and am happy to defend labour, but I preferred the CCF. Cooperative Commonwealth says it all for me: it suggests a form of democracy beyond a Cromwellian Parliament. I have no idea why they NDP has never come up with a full bore democratic reform policy. Anyway...the best thing Jack did as leader was force Harper to apologize to native Canadians before the commission reports. As for Liberal leadership infighting, it's actually a fairly recent thing, all in all, that's why they've won more majorities than the Cons, who are a quarrellsme lot. MostlyI vote Green now because they are the only party not wedded to the corporate economy (where would unions be without corporations: we wouldn't need them.) Anyway, I have to agree in tone with this anti-Dipper motif, it just seems un-necessary. If Ignatieff has a vision, it's time to hear it. The need is to get rid of Harper, if Iggy can't do, then bring on Justin Trudeau.
"Steve... It's official, you've gone way off the partisan deep-end and what a sad day it is. RIP Objective Steve V"
Cam, that's hilarious coming from you, it really is.
BTW, I really could care less what a bunch of NDP hacks think. Not one of you has the BALLS to admit your strategy. It's useless.
Dippers have found their new savior, JOHN IVISON. What next, quotes from the Charles Adler show attacking Ignatieff? Weak tea.
Cam
Why don't you and I both print all our post from the last two weeks, and take them to 20 political scientists. Ask them who has gone over the deep end, and who is giving a more objective take of reality. If more than 1 sides with YOU, I'll quit blogging. Wanna???
"Cue the denials...."
Yup, and it did not take very long either.
Anyway, there is a pattern in Canada where the NDP steals votes from the Liberals when voters get tired of a Liberal government, handing the government to a conservative style party.
Then, when voters get tired of that conservative government all of those voters come back to the Liberals.
In short, they ebb and flow, gaining a bunch of seats only to lose them all again, and then some, until their status as a party is threatened.
We have been seeing that since the inception of the CCF. Nothing Jack Layton has done will cause a change in that dynamic.
That should concern NDP partisans more than what is currently happening in the NDP caucus.
Incidentally, Outrement will be targeted by the Liberals, hard, and the NDP is fading in Quebec. Mr. Mulclair may not survive to replace Jack Layton.
And to begin another rumour, because I am feeling mischievious on this Saturday morning, Mr. Mulclair probably made those statements before Jack Layton a few weeks ago because he is setting up a defection to the Liberls. He objected to Stephane Dion, not the Liberals. He has stated he actually likes Mr. Ignatieff, he knows that he will probably lose his seat in the next election and he is a Quebec Liberal. The NDP was never a natural fit for him.
Even Jack's partnersw aren't buying:
He said the only reason the NDP is voting to avoid an election is because the party knows it will lose seats. “They are scared of having an election, period,” Mr. Duceppe said. “Look at the polls.”
Liberals have re-discovered their old savior: OUTRIGHT LIES based on zero evidence.
Weak tea, indeed.
Anything to paper over the very real fisures that now exist in full view of the Liberal ranks over Ignatieff's purile election posturing: http://blogginghorse.blogspot.com/2009/09/exposed-rift-grows-over-ignatieffs.html
It's not your fault, Steve. But you'll know better than to agree to Warren's half-baked schemes next time.
Methinks thou doth protest too much.
We all know that dogs come out growling and baring their teeth when they feel weak and threatened - go ahead NDP'rs, keep growling.
The reaction actually validates the reality.
Dl, I would advise you to quit repeating rumors because that's all rumors are. They mean absolutely nothing and nothing more that spreading stories you tend to believe yourself even if they are made up.. Please quit believing rumors because truth is more important than fiction in my world. And quit blaming others of spreading rumors when your just as guilty as they are.
Wow leftdog, the the rumor spread by a Reform/supporter Nationalpost. An opinion writer just like the rest of us {including you} who happens to work for the worst Reform/Alliance Party and the most Harper bias paper in Canada.And yes, someone is definitely defecting and its not hard to see who it is.
Its plain Steve that your hitting sore spots, maybe even hitting on some truth. Keep it up.
Hahahah
marie "It is bad when Conservative spread false rumours about the Liberals, but great when steve does it about the NDP."
Ohhhh man you guys are so never leading the country again if this is how you act and what you think.
It's not false. I'll say it again, because the ignorance is astounding- really OUT THERE to know that the NDP caucus is split over this blatant hypocritical 180 turn? And, is it really hard to believe that Mulclair may be leading this charge? People might note WHICH NDP MP came to announce the prop up?? You might also recall WHO came out first with the olive branch to the government?
I couldn't care less what a bunch of in denial hacks think, fact of the matter, the only reason I posted this, is because it's entirely and utterly BELIEVABLE.
There is internal division in the NDP, if there isn't then I've lost a lot of respect for certain MP's.
I note a reference to a "split" today in the Toronto Star :)
Post a Comment