# Federal NDP



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

All of our Federal parties are 'leadered up' now and planning towards an Oct 2019 election I imagine.

The Federal NDP have a new leader, Jagmeet Singh. It remains to be seen whether they will have any traction but I've started this thread to capture all things 'Federal NDP'.

While I've been surprised by Rachel Notley's somewhat more 'centralist' approach to the NDP governing in Alberta, I haven't read (or is it red?) anything to suggest the Federal NDP is anything but typical in their views.

For example: Jagmeet Singh talks wealth distribution, housing, and health care _"I believe in social democratic values, universal social programs like health care, but expanding them into more universal services like pharmacare and dental care," Singh said. "Universal medical care should include services that are currently excluded. I want to expand single-tier medical services. I want to expand daycare, a national housing plan. I strongly believe in wealth redistribution."_ 

and _"I oppose the development of Kinder Morgan, Energy East, and Keystone XL pipelines."_

Additional insight into the new NDP leader's views were provided in a post-win interview with Terry Mileski (CBC Power & Politics). 
A disturbing part of the interview occurred when Milesky points out that Jagmeet strongly condemns historic actions by the Indian government against Sikhs and then asks if he similarly condemns the actions of a Canadian terrorist from the past. 
Specifically, he asks Jagmeet if he will speak out against holding up Talwinder Singh Parmar as a martyr.
Those of you around in 1985 will remember the bombing of flight Air India 182. The plane blew up in mid-air killing 329, including 268 Canadians. It remains the most lethal Canadian terrorist act on record. An inquiry concluded that Parmar was the terrorist leader behind the bombing. Some continue to celebrate him as a Canadian martyr because of that. He was killed in India in 1992 and was never convicted of the bombing.

At 4:57 in the clip below, Milesky asks Jagmeet no less than 5 times if he will condemn the glorification of Parmar. He refuses in no uncertain terms. Instead he talks about the injustices of the Indian governent, condems terrorism, etc, etc. 

That is when I realized that this guy is clearly a politician, but perhaps one with some very deeply imbedded biases?
I don't want this thread to devolve into racist mud-slinging - that was not the intent. 
But I found his overt refusal to answer Milesy's very clear question disturbing. Hopefully the next two years will reveal more of the horse that the party has tied its wagon to.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> But I found his overt refusal to answer Milesy's very clear question disturbing. Hopefully the next two years will reveal more of the horse that the party has tied its wagon to.


Read this article, with an open mind, for the complete opposite view.
https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/8x8wap/jagmeet-singh-called-out-the-cbc-for-racist-questions

I'd say the Vice article is more accurate. Milewski almost sounded like Basil Fawlty when he went on his (amusing) tirade against the german family in his restaurant for starting the war. "Yes you did! You invaded Poland!"

By pressing him on this issue, Milewski (unintentionally) is trying to make Singh and Indian and Sikh first rather than a Canadian, as Singh has fought hard to portray over his campaign.

I'm no fan of the federal NDP, but this guy has all the right qualities to be a leader. Ashame about the party.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

nobleea said:


> Read this article, with an open mind, for the complete opposite view.
> https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/8x8wap/jagmeet-singh-called-out-the-cbc-for-racist-questions
> 
> I'd say the Vice article is more accurate. Milewski almost sounded like Basil Fawlty when he went on his (amusing) tirade against the german family in his restaurant for starting the war. "Yes you did! You invaded Poland!"
> ...


but the end of the article you cite does a very good job of clarifying why mileski’s line of questioning was appropriate and it seems clear to me that singh is dodging the issue ... 

which means he is shaping up to be a damn fine politican though as i said to my friend who enthusiastically voted for singh in the ndp leadership contest, i think he would be ok with the turban and he would be ok with the beard but i do think the combination of turban and beard might be a dealkiller 

the question of his appeal as a future pm aside, the politics of the federal ndp are so awful, i don’t think even the resurrected jack layton could carry the day ... please god


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Any good ideas the NDP have...........the Liberals will be happy to borrow for the next election.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

I had been mainly ambivalent about whoever the NDP decided to chose as its leader; no way I would ever vote for them anyway. I did kinda like Charlie Angus because he was the only politician who came out of the Parliament building to address a group of people who were holding a rally for Net Neutrality.

In any case, it appears that a single incident propelled Mr Singh into the spotlight that greatly helped his campaign: an ignorant heckler ranting about Sharia Law and the Muslim Brotherhood. On its face, a very disturbing incident for Canada; but after watching it a few times, it occurred to me to be somewhat unbelievable, and perhaps even staged. While this woman is being a total racist a-hole, not knowing there's a difference between a Sikh and a Muslim, Mr Singh is doing a microphone check and ignoring her. Then he utters a couple of magic words "love and courage"; the crowd cheers, and the racist bigot is suddenly and instantly converted, applauding him, smiling, and giving him a thumbs up. She even shouts "diversity". Then it seems she remembers why she's there and continues the rant.

Really? All we need to do to end racism and bigotry is sing Kumbaya? Why didn't anybody think of this before?

I wonder if any "investigative journalist", if there's still any such thing, took the time to look into any connection between the heckler and the campaign, or even if maybe she was a professional actor for hire. If this incident was staged, I'd be more concerned by that than by a real racist heckler. A nobody racist can be easily dismissed and forgotten; not so a political party leader, and potential PM who would stoop to such tactics to get political traction.

Watch, and see what you think. Be objective....
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...ies-are-deterred-from-politics-prof-says.html


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Guess I might be sitting out the next election. Don't really like the direction of any party at the moment.

Agree with this though


> "I believe in social democratic values, universal social programs like health care, but expanding them into more universal services like pharmacare and dental care,"


Always struck me as wrong how most higher paying jobs include dental, but lower paying jobs -- the people who need it most -- get shafted.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

nathan79 said:


> Always struck me as wrong how most higher paying jobs include dental, but lower paying jobs -- the people who need it most -- get shafted.


If you're talking about the employee benefit of private insurance coverage for things not covered by government plans ( dental & vision )....

1. Some people would rather just get the additional cash. It's all (a mandatory) part of the compensation package supposedly to attract new hires to 'higher paying' i.e. skilled jobs. I've heard younger employees complain about why they're paying for their co-workers 4 kids' braces and glasses. For insurance to work, you need to have a large contributor pool. The insurance companies will not let the coverage be voluntary - it's everybody or nobody.
2. It's a taxable benefit. Nobody's getting anything for free.
3. It's usually capped. Once you hit the limit, it's out-of-pocket till next year. Could you imagine the outcry if a government provided plan was like that?
4. The insurance is very picky about what's allowed. If the dentist charges you more than what they determine is appropriate, you pay the difference. Once again, Imagine a government plan that does that.

So, no, it's not the great social injustice you may believe it is. It's like you're saying it's wrong that higher paying jobs pay more money than the low paying jobs that poorer people have. That's NDP logic!


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

I believe that the Federal NDP are out of touch....most especially the likes of Avi Lewis.

I supported the new NDP Government in Alberta. I would never consider supporting the federal NDP. While they may have some good ideas, they are, in my view, completely out to lunch on some of the fundamentals.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Userkare said:


> If you're talking about the employee benefit of private insurance coverage for things not covered by government plans ( dental & vision )....
> 
> ...
> 
> So, no, it's not the great social injustice you may believe it is. It's like you're saying it's wrong that higher paying jobs pay more money than the low paying jobs that poorer people have. That's NDP logic!


Really? I'm curious what kind of logic holds dental health as separate from general health? Poor oral health has been linked to complications like diabetes and stroke, which we all end up paying for.

I'm sure those people would rather also get extra cash instead of their taxes going to medicare, but that doesn't make it a good idea. If you're unhappy with your benefits, you could easily find a job that doesn't offer any.

The point is not for it to be "free" but to treat it like general healthcare.

Not every procedure should be covered, and it's fine if there's a co-pay for more expensive procedures. I'm mainly thinking of basic services like extractions, filings, and annual cleanings.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

nathan79 said:


> Really? I'm curious what kind of logic holds dental health as separate from general health? Poor oral health has been linked to complications like diabetes and stroke, which we all end up paying for.


Well, I actually agree. It seems strange to me that if I had an infection on my hand, it would be covered under the government health care, but if I had the infection under a tooth, then it isn't. Mind you, in severe cases, if you were to show up in an ER with an abscessed tooth, and sepsis, you probably wouldn't be turned away. 



> I'm sure those people would rather also get extra cash instead of their taxes going to medicare, but that doesn't make it a good idea. If you're unhappy with your benefits, you could easily find a job that doesn't offer any.


By that logic, if you're not happy with a job that doesn't offer health benefits, you could easily find one that does. It's not a matter of 'priveledge' or who's 'less fortunate' bullcrap. Some people are paid more than others; it's a fact. If that pay is in the form of cash or benefits, it's still part of overall compensation. You're basically saying it's wrong that some people are paid more than others. Well, what's the alternative?




> Not every procedure should be covered, and it's fine if there's a co-pay for more expensive procedures. I'm mainly thinking of basic services like extractions, filings, and annual cleanings.


Sure it would be nice if I could get those services and not have be on welfare to qualify ( they do ). I'm retired now, and have no company provided benefits. I pay for those things as they occur because I have looked at the cost of insurance and deemed it more expensive that way. 

Touch wood, my wife and I are healthy and spend very little on medical expenses. I have no issue that a part of my taxes goes to health care that I'm not fully availing myself of. I still don't think it's 'wrong' that people who are working at good paying jobs have that extra insurance, which is what I understood was your point.


----------



## Koogie (Dec 15, 2014)

ian said:


> I believe that the Federal NDP are out of touch....most especially the likes of Avi Lewis.


cough... LEAP MANIFESTO...cough


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Userkare said:


> ... Some people are paid more than others; it's a fact. If that pay is in the form of cash or benefits, it's still part of overall compensation. You're basically saying it's wrong that some people are paid more than others. *Well, what's the alternative?*...


Yikes, don't ask the NDP to answer that one! 
Jagmeet has already told us, _"I strongly believe in wealth redistribution." _
Problem solved :eek2: :cower:


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

It depends on what basic dental and pharmacare programs might look like, and how they would be paid for. Anyone today can go to Blue Cross, Sun Life or Manulife and purchase such programs at various levels of coverage, if indeed one's employer does not pay partially (of wholly) for these coverages under EHB (Extended Health Benefits). The issue is really about who pays for it. We are probably talking about $800-1000/person per year for a very basic dental and pharmacare plan. That is about $30-35 Billion per year (without backing out company contributions, or provinces who already provide various levels of support for seniors). That is a fair chunk of change.... say, $25 Billion for round numbers. 

Ultimately taxpayers have to pay that (and likely more due to government bureaucracy). Clearly those that pay little, to no, income tax currently would be all for it. Not so much for the working class person who will end up footing the bill. Still, there are certain positives that better dental and medical health would result in (as already mentioned).

One thing a national pharmacare program would do is, as a result of national purchasing power, result in much lower prices for drugs. New Zealand pays a whole lot less for drugs than does Canada. I wouldn't be susprised if something basic comes along within the next 10 years.


----------



## steve41 (Apr 18, 2009)

Koogie said:


> cough... LEAP MANIFESTO...cough


I Suggest that the official NDP mascot should be the Lemming.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

sags said:


> Any good ideas the NDP have...........the Liberals will be happy to borrow for the next election.


To be fair, they’ll also borrow any good Conservative or Green Party ideas for the next election. They are equal opportunity opportunists. It’s what I love about them.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Notley says federal NDP pipeline opposition is irrelevant

Jagmeet Singh...reiterated that he is against both the expansion of Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain line to the Pacific Coast and TransCanada’s recently shelved Energy East project.

Notley - whose Alberta NDP government has backed both pipelines - noted Trans Mountain has already been approved by the federal government and suggested she wouldn’t lose much sleep over Singh’s position.

“I’m not going to get too wrapped up in what people who are not in government are doing in other parts of the country, in hypothetical conversations, over which they have no agency”... “I’m going to continue to promote the fact … this is not just good for Alberta, it is good for all of Canada.”

Notley said Singh is also “absolutely wrong” to oppose pipelines over climate change issues, since Alberta initiatives such as a carbon levy and oilsands greenhouse gas emissions are addressing those concerns.


----------



## Joe Black (Aug 3, 2015)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> Yikes, don't ask the NDP to answer that one!
> Jagmeet has already told us, _"I strongly believe in wealth redistribution." _
> Problem solved :eek2: :cower:


I've always thought that "wealth distribution" is the wrong way to phrase it. That makes it sound like you simply stealing from wealthier people, regardless of whether their money came from working much harder than the people it is being "distributed" to.

What I could support is a "sharing the burden of random misfortune", so that instead of there being winners and losers in the "life lottery", society as whole absorbs the random tragedies that can hit people through no fault of their own. For example, if you have a severely handicapped child, instead of the cost going entirely to the parents, everyone who _doesn't_ have such a problem contributes a little to those that do.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Userkare said:


> I still don't think it's 'wrong' that people who are working at good paying jobs have that extra insurance, which is what I understood was your point.


Had to go back and re-read exactly what I said... okay, maybe I could have phrased it better.

What's wrong is that it's necessary in the first place. The reason companies offer those benefits is because the system is deeply flawed. If it was not deeply flawed, few people would care enough to worry about benefits, and no company would bother offering them. So I don't blame companies for offering them, or employees for accepting them. "Don't hate the player, hate the game."

I also understand you're saying that if companies didn't offer the benefits, they'd just offer higher wages instead. Probably true, but doesn't really impact my point of view on the matter.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

Joe Black said:


> I've always thought that "wealth distribution" is the wrong way to phrase it. That makes it sound like you simply stealing from wealthier people, regardless of whether their money came from working much harder than the people it is being "distributed" to.
> 
> What I could support is a "sharing the burden of random misfortune", so that instead of there being winners and losers in the "life lottery", society as whole absorbs the random tragedies that can hit people through no fault of their own. For example, if you have a severely handicapped child, instead of the cost going entirely to the parents, everyone who _doesn't_ have such a problem contributes a little to those that do.


Well, from your example, who but the most sociopathic among us could disagree. The problem comes when a bureaucracy is in control of deciding who's worth helping and who isn't. The abuse becomes rampant because the cost of policing it is prohibitive, and raises all kinds of allegations of bias and privacy when it is. At the same time, those who are truly in need get ground under the wheels because they don't tick the right boxes.

I used to live in Hastings County, On. It seemed that the major source of income there was social assistance. I've heard people refer to their children as "meal tickets", and it was a great celebration when a child reached the age where they could now get their own personal welfare cheque. Couples downright lied about living together so that the woman could claim to be a single mom and get more benefits; the guy would use the address of a friend as his mailing address. Men did services like snow clearing, excavating, and selling firewood cash-only so as not to lower their benefit entitlement, or God forbid, actually pay taxes. Fraud was commonplace, just the way it works, not even seen as wrong - and I'm sure there are examples of this across the country.

So while sharing the burden of random misfortune may be a noble cause, sharing the fake burden of manufactured misfortune not so much. Who decides who is worthy , and how do we weed out the unworthy?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The welfare benefit for a single person is $700 a month. For a woman and child it is $1000 a month.

If people want to live on that.......good luck to them. Our rent is more than that.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Sorry Jagger, you and your party and not distributing anything from me. Instead of coveting your neighbors success, you can go work for like I did. I know thats a novel concept for all the dippers out there.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Singh's song:

_Its a different way of looking at it. You don't look at it as something that's being taken away from you, as taxes that are being taken away from you, it's something that's being given back to everybody... Taxes, he said, are investments. And investments are good. You make investments because you want your home to be better. You invest in your home, you invest in your local park to make it a prettier park, and you invest in society to make it better._

OK, but we already pay a shitload of taxes for the good of society. You aren't really talking about me making investments, you are talking about an NDP gov't taking more money and deciding how you want to spend it.

_A Nanos Research rolling poll... suggested that the New Democrats under Mr. Singh had the support of 18.5 per cent of Canadians. That is well behind both the Liberals and the Conservatives and it is not far from where the NDP stood at the end of the 2015 election._

I hope this polling number will drop dramtically as Singh's song is played between now and election time.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/singh-says-taxes-are-an-investment-in-the-future/article38018829/


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

The only place they are going is down. They have the same problem that Harper's Conservatives had. A rump group within the part that wants to force policy decisions that are out of sync with a good number of their supporters.

Just how does the Federal NDP part fit in with the likes of Notley. I know numerous NDP supporters who have los of time for Notley but no time for Singh....especially as long as The Avi Zlewis camp is active and influencing policy.

In Quebec, they are yesterday's' news, today fish and chip wrappers.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

*NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh says Canada should declare that anti-Sikh violence that took place in India more than three decades ago was a genocide*.
Jagmeet has been getting some heat lately for his refusal to give clear answers. Now, as the leader of a Federal party, this is his priority? This is what he comes out with?
This guy doesn't even have a seat in parliament. He is bellied up to the trough that taxpayers fill, and this is what he comes up with. How about we let some pigs at the trough that actually have some ideas for improving Canada. Or actually, all of you move over, I think I'm going to throw up.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jagmeet-singh-declare-genocide-1.4580528


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Jagmeet is de-constructing his credibility and his party with his dogged tribal obsessions. And no one saw this coming?


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

This can only be good news for the Liberals. Less votes splitting in the next election. 

This party, known for eating it's young, may indeed eat Mr Singh for lunch even before he gets a seat in the House. It is over for him, IMHO. The fat lady has sung. He just has not heard her rendition of Goodbye, So long, Adios, Have a good life....

These are the dopes that bounced Mulclair down the road! They are like the Ontario Conservatives...the gang that cannot shoot straight.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

This is great. Now one of canadas parties is associated with a group with terrorist overtones. I hope NDP are destroyed for a generation because of this.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/cana...h-is-really-coming-from/ar-BBKdWoF?li=AAggNb9


----------



## twa2w (Mar 5, 2016)

Well lets start a CMF poll. Any guesses as to how many seats the Federal NDP will win in the next election?
It is early and things can swing dramatically with a poorly worded quip but just for fun....
Other than Brampton and Surrey, I see the NDP reduced to no more than 10 seats in the rest of the country.


----------



## Spidey (May 11, 2009)

I would be surprised if they get any in Quebec.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

twa2w said:


> Well lets start a CMF poll. Any guesses as to how many seats the Federal NDP will win in the next election?
> It is early and things can swing dramatically with a poorly worded quip but just for fun....
> Other than Brampton and Surrey, I see the NDP reduced to no more than 10 seats in the rest of the country.


My guess is 18 seats total. 

Only because Jagmeet Singh may be aided by the lack of attention to his self inflicted wounds and the anticipated slugfest between the Libs and the Cons.


----------



## Koogie (Dec 15, 2014)

twa2w said:


> Well lets start a CMF poll. Any guesses as to how many seats the Federal NDP will win in the next election?
> It is early and things can swing dramatically with a poorly worded quip but just for fun....
> Other than Brampton and Surrey, I see the NDP reduced to no more than 10 seats in the rest of the country.


A friend of mine is a non observant Sikh. He says that sadly Jagmeet will probably get the majority of Sikh votes, regardless of his policies. They just want to see a local boy make good. Sikhs organize well so they will probably influence votes in other places besides their traditional "ghettos" in Brampton and Surrey. 

My friend. like me, is a small C conservative. He says we haven't yet seen the full extent of Jagmeets loony policies either.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

I chuckled at Rex Murphy's column today: Jagmeet Singh's natty yet ineffectual failure to launch

I can hear his acerbic, accented voice as I read: 
_"Just this week, Rachel Notley administered a scalding anathema to the natty Mr. Singh. *Outside of Road Runner cartoons it is not often you get to see an anvil dropped from such a height*: “I am a New Democrat that comes from the part of the party that understands that you don’t bring about equality and fairness without focusing on jobs for regular working people … To forget that and to throw them under the bus as collateral damage in pursuit of some other high-level policy objective is a recipe for failure and it’s also very elitist." (Police are advising that traffic is still being detoured from the scene.) _


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> I chuckled at Rex Murphy's column today: Jagmeet Singh's natty yet ineffectual failure to launch
> 
> I can hear his acerbic, accented voice as I read:
> _"Just this week, Rachel Notley administered a scalding anathema to the natty Mr. Singh. *Outside of Road Runner cartoons it is not often you get to see an anvil dropped from such a height*: “I am a New Democrat that comes from the part of the party that understands that you don’t bring about equality and fairness without focusing on jobs for regular working people … To forget that and to throw them under the bus as collateral damage in pursuit of some other high-level policy objective is a recipe for failure and it’s also very elitist." (Police are advising that traffic is still being detoured from the scene.) _


so true ... as always i admire the ndp for wanting to bring about a better and more just world but i remain terrified that they might, one day, actually be put in a position to try and bring that world about ... god knows what they would do


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

You only have to look to BC to see the NDP nearly destroyed this province twice... the 2 times they were in power. The current 'deer in the headlights' probably can't do a lot of damage with a minority gov't propped up by something no one can decipher.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

I have no doubt that there are groups within the federal NDP who are, at this very moment, discussing ways to rid the Party of his leadership. Dippers are well known for eating their young. 

This guy is a disaster for the Party. The longer he remains, the more damage he will do. 

If he looses Burnaby South the knives will be out big time. My guess is also that there are many dippers who are hoping that he does loose.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

ian said:


> I have no doubt that there are groups within the federal NDP who are, at this very moment, discussing ways to rid the Party of his leadership. Dippers are well known for eating their young.
> 
> This guy is a disaster for the Party. The longer he remains, the more damage he will do.
> 
> If he looses Burnaby South the knives will be out big time. My guess is also that there are many dippers who are hoping that he does loose.


NDP is always disaster


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

The federal Conservatives are not that far behind the federal NDP when it comes to eating their young. It is going on right now in Halifax.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Even though Bernier is right, the thought police disagree. Maybe JT can call him racist as well to score some more cookies.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Eder said:


> Even though Bernier is right, the thought police disagree. Maybe JT can call him racist as well to score some more cookies.


And what was your opinion of Harper, who generally was quite polite and didn't spew overtly racist thoughts?

Was Harper "too weak" in your eyes? Was he not an extreme enough conservative for your liking?


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

james4beach said:


> And what was your opinion of Harper, who generally was quite polite and didn't spew overtly racist thoughts?
> 
> Was Harper "too weak" in your eyes? Was he not an extreme enough conservative for your liking?


Bernier feels that the French Canadian culture in Quebec has a right to exist-I guess that makes Bernier overtly racist according to you.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Big Kahuna said:


> Bernier feels that the French Canadian culture in Quebec has a right to exist-I guess that makes Bernier overtly racist according to you.


Do you have trouble reading or something? I made no comment on Bernier.


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

james4beach said:


> Do you have trouble reading or something? I made no comment on Bernier.


I just looked at your comment again-what public figure were you referred to when you said "made overtly racist comments"? It looks like Bernier. The other thing is-you are getting very emotional-constantly insulting rather than discussing.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Big Kahuna said:


> I just looked at your comment again-what public figure were you referred to when you said "made overtly racist comments"? It looks like Bernier.


I wrote that Harper was polite and didn't say racist comments. This is a comment on Harper, not anyone else. I was asking if you approved of Harper's style.



> The other thing is-you are getting very emotional-constantly insulting rather than discussing.


It's your posts that are very emotional. Pretty much every topic triggers you and causes you to whine about immigration and Trudeau.


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

james4beach said:


> I wrote that Harper was polite and didn't say racist comments. This is a comment on Harper, not anyone else. I was asking if you approved of Harper's style.
> 
> 
> 
> It's your posts that are very emotional. Pretty much every topic triggers you and causes you to whine about immigration and Trudeau.


Great-neither one of us is emotionally invested in this stuff-glad we cleared that up.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Federal NDP are toast. And they know it. Now it will be interesting to see what they do about it. If they go the Avi Lewis route the downward spiral will simply increase.

Todays new reports seem to indicate that a larger number of NDP MP's have decide not to run in the next election. No surprise.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

No party goin' on with this party:

_The party ended 2016 with about $2.5 million in cash in the bank. By the end of 2017, that had dropped by $2.1 million to just $378,000. At the same time, the NDP dipped into its line of credit to the tune of $1.45 million. the New Democrats have taken steps to reduce their expenses to make up for the shortfall in revenues. The party reduced its salaries and benefits by about 21 per cent, dropping them by $646,000 to $2.4 million. That's the least the party has paid for staff since 2002, when $2.3 million was spent on "administration" (and that does not take into account inflation over the last 15 years). The party also decreased its travel and hospitality expenses by about 38 per cent to $628,000. _

Some of us will have larger assets and budgets than this party. Even Elizabeth May has more cash in the bank (which is hard to fathom)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-annual-return-1.4809775


----------



## Koogie (Dec 15, 2014)

^^ No surprise. Without someone elses money to prop them up, lefties always spend until exhaustion.

The Federal Dippers have long since lost the plot. Instead of being the party of the working blue collar Canadian, they have been co-opted by a small silver spoon socialist set that is the cream of the Toronto and Vancouver sneering elite. The Leap Manifesto crowd.

Jagmeet coming out against the TM pipeline is just the logical conclusion of that particular line of thought. I bet Dipper turnout in the next Federal election hits all time lows because of this. Of course, a lot of the usual commenters here will blame it on *RACISM !!!!!!!!!!!!! *instead of mere political incompetency.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

gosh, did anybody on here say *RACISM !!!!!!!!!!!!! * in connection with the NDP

nope, only one cmffer said *RACISM !!!!!!!!!!!!! * in that connection

.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

It is not about racism. It is about leadership and about public policy. NO leadership that I can see. Let alone a seat in the House. I do not agree with their policy and it appears that many others do not-including some of the NDP'ers that I know. They believe that the party has lost it's way. And, IMHO, should they turn toward LEAP and the Avi Lewis crowd the demise of the party will be hastened. 

Just take a few moments to compare Mulcair's persona, performance, and leadership with that of Singh's. It becomes apparent that his is indeed about performance and policy. And the lack of leadership. There is zero political capital here. What was banked is quickly running dry.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Well Svend Robinson re-enters the political arena. Interesting. 
I foresee a goodbye card in Jagmeet's mailbox after the election. 
"Thanks for your short and completely ineffective leadership."


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Well I wouldn't run for office wearing cowboy boots in some countries. No idea why NDP doesn't grovel back to Mulcair.


----------



## robfordlives (Sep 18, 2014)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> Well Svend Robinson re-enters the political arena. Interesting.
> I foresee a goodbye card in Jagmeet's mailbox after the election.
> "Thanks for your short and completely ineffective leadership."


Sure if you think the LEAP Manefesto will come back to life. He advocates for COMPLETE abolishment of all O&G activity for Canada


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

robfordlives said:


> Sure if you think the LEAP Manefesto will come back to life. He advocates for COMPLETE abolishment of all O&G activity for Canada


Only saying that I think a poor election performance by the NDP will have them eating Jagmeet and looking to Svend as their saviour. Outside of greater Burnaby the NDP is dead meat with either of J or S.


----------

