598 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Yup, that's absolutely right. The question is will they get with the program and acknowledge that killing major infrastructure projects and increasing corporate taxes isn't the answer to the province's woes, but unfortunately most of their supporters want those things (and then most of those don't really know why they want those things but they still want them).

[LJ]

I really doubt it.

Did moving to the centre fracture the federal Conservatives? The federal NDP are moving to the centre under Mulclair in an effort to become more electable. Is the federal party becoming fractured?

The federal NDP party thought they could edge the liberal party out to become the de-facto only alternative to the conservatives. With the emergence of JT the liberal party has revived itself and will wipe the NDP off the map in the next election. The orange revolution will be become a sad puddle of disgruntled socialists who will get rid of Mulcair and return to their roots.

[E-P-G]

Thanks to everyone for the interesting comments.

I find it fascinating how many of you think the BC NDP is still as left wing and more of a social movement than a party as in its past. Perhaps this default impression is indeed what holds them back, but my observation is that they have certainly been moving to the center over the years. I'll grant you perhaps not enough to appeal to the average British Columbian, especially if on the mean BC's political comfort level is indeed center-right; but the NDP hasn't been about "hardcore socialist principles" for awhile now (much to the dismay of their more senior-citizen or perhaps top-level union longtime members).

Part of it is just changing times of course, people freaked with how many changes and their seemingly radical nature NDP premier Dave Barrett brought in his tenure, yet most of those institutions still exist today. And the level of "nationalizing" done by the original Social Credit regime before then wouldn't be dreamt of by any of the parties truly contending for seats in the legislature in this era. And I suspect many of the more "left wing principled" NDP supporters probably weren't too happy with their government getting the ball rolling on the Olympics and the LNG endeavors in the Nineties that are naturally more associated with the 21st century Liberals.

I guess you might get the impression the NDP is still as they were from the fact they do seemingly set "policy" from their membership consisting of the kind of social advocates you speak of (not necessarily a bad thing, kinda democratic really) but at the end of the day I see their elected politicians (government or opposition) do differently if it behooves them per the same drivers as other parties' politicians.

From what I've seen (even with the smaller sample set of NDP governments ;->) administrations of all stripes have varied from "going too far" in policies favouring their 'base' to doing the pragmatic necessities called for. Harcourt was more a centrist than a socialist, surely! I'd suggest maybe Glen Clark and Bill Vander Zalm were two opposite sides of a coin (but probably not so much too left/right wing as "arrogance and egos"). From my understanding of Christy Clark's actual views (or perhaps I'm confusing hers with her ex-husbands), they are actually to the left of the classic Bill Bennett/Gordon Campbell governments and now that she finally has a true mandate she might pleasantly surprise us, but I suspect even if she'd like to forces won't let it be so.

[Sparky]

Excellent post E-P-G.

[jonny]

I find it fascinating how many of you think the BC NDP is still as left wing and more of a social movement than a party as in its past. Perhaps this default impression is indeed what holds them back, but my observation is that they have certainly been moving to the center over the years. I'll grant you perhaps not enough to appeal to the average British Columbian, especially if on the mean BC's political comfort level is indeed center-right; but the NDP hasn't been about "hardcore socialist principles" for awhile now (much to the dismay of their more senior-citizen or perhaps top-level union longtime members).

Well, the NDP's whole campaign slogan was "Change for the Better", afterall. The only changes they really ever spoke about was how government should redistribute wealth differently.

One example where the BC NDP appeared to be more of a social movement to me was their blanket opposition to the Enbridge pipeline and the twinning of the Trans Mountain pipeline. Dix's stance was that he was basically unwilling to consider these as Premier. His opposition to the oil industry and the pipelines was touted as a principled, preemptive stance against climate change and the worldwide use of petroleum products.

[E-P-G]

As for James she had her chance and lost. Bringing her back will just look like the party is trying to pit female vs. female and cross their fingers it resonates a little more with voters.

Meant to reply to this one... no doubt you're right Mike, they wouldn't try to bring her back now (and I don't believe she'd want to anyway, both for the headache and the fact many of the same 'knives' got re-elected). My thinking was more along the line of if she'd been allowed to see it through to this election. Might have lost as well, in which case she would have definitely been done (probably even of her own choice) having lost three in a row.

On the other hand it would have been interesting to see how she did without the baggage or targets Dix had, yet more experience campaigning. Neat thing is, probably wouldn't have been seen as a cynical 'female vs. female' since Carole was already there (was there much thought of that was 'why' the Liberals chose Christy?... not to my recollection), but would have been certain the first election of a female premier would occur.

Would other of the reasons/mistakes that led to the NDP losing have still happened? Possibly, but we'll never know.

[E-P-G]

Well, the NDP's whole campaign slogan was "Change for the Better", afterall. The only changes they really ever spoke about was how government should redistribute wealth differently.

Well, indeed that's one way to look at it, but of course every party (at least the main two) had to come up with a theory of 'how do we pay for things', and many people think the Liberals' long-term theory of revenues on that front is even more tenuous.

The other half of the NDP slogan was "One practical step at a time", which wasn't just made up for the election; Dix ran for the party leadership on the premise there wasn't enough money to fix everything in one term, so an NDP government under him would start by doing "just 5 major things" in a first mandate depending on where the need was greatest. Natch, once into the campaign kinda sounded like more than 5 with the daily announcements he was making at the start... :-)

One example where the BC NDP appeared to be more of a social movement to me was their blanket opposition to the Enbridge pipeline and the twinning of the Trans Mountain pipeline. Dix's stance was that he was basically unwilling to consider these as Premier. His opposition to the oil industry and the pipelines was touted as a principled, preemptive stance against climate change and the worldwide use of petroleum products.

You've definitely pegged one of the issues being identified (even by Dix, by the sound of it) as a reason for the loss. Not presumably the Enbridge stance, that was well known and long term and even 'average' British Columbians had concerns on that front. But apparently the Kinder Morgan announcement surprised even half their own party/supporters.

On the other hand, it's almost certain LNG would have proceeded under an NDP government to a degree that wouldn't have sat well with many of those same 'social movement' members.

[Mike K.]

Today is Sam Sullivan's lucky day. Clark has announced she'll run a by-election in Kelowna Westside where Liberal Ben Stewart got 58% of the vote.

[HB]

Adrian Dix's last day as NDP leader is about 2 weeks away

[Sparky]

^ It might also be Moe Sihota's last day as president of the NDP.

[Bingo]

Dix steps down.

http://www.theglobea...rticle14396110/

[Mike K.]

Took long enough.

[VicHockeyFan]

Took long enough.

No kidding. So next leader will be Farnworth or Horgan. No NDP win at the next election with either of those guys in.

[AllseeingEye]

No kidding. So next leader will be Farnworth or Horgan. No NDP win at the next election with either of those guys in.

My understanding was always that Farnworth wasn't terribly interested in the top job; Horgan OTOH....but not sure if he has a high enough profile "off island". It will indeed be interesting to see who succeeds Dix.

[bluefox]

No kidding. So next leader will be Farnworth or Horgan. No NDP win at the next election with either of those guys in.

Horgan could win an election, he's got the personality the NDP needed in this last election. But other than him, as much as I like Farnworth, they need to pull from outside the provincial party to give the perception and the headstart toward renewal the party truly needs.

But we all know true renewal won't happen with Sihota and O'Brien still around, so they need to go ASAP along with Dix. If they stay, it'll be the same old, same old for the NDP in four years.

[VicHockeyFan]

Horgan could win an election, he's got the personality the NDP needed in this last election. But other than him, as much as I like Farnworth, they need to pull from outside the provincial party to give the perception and the headstart toward renewal the party truly needs.

But we all know true renewal won't happen with Sihota and O'Brien still around, so they need to go ASAP along with Dix. If they stay, it'll be the same old, same old for the NDP in four years.

I agree. I almost like Horgan but something grinds me every time he speaks. Not his personality, but his pandering.

I loved how Andrew Weaver at least comes on air and says smart-meter objectors have no basis in science. Horgan holds up the possibility they might be right.

[Sparky]

The bottleneck is always at the top of the bottle.

The party needs to rebuild....by tearing down.

The party needs a new president.

[spanky123]

My imprression over the past few years is that the NDP has been its own worst enemy. There appears to be so much infighting and backstabbing that any leader has an uphill battle.

I said it here during the last election that it was clear to me that some NDP members were actively trying to undermine DIX so that they would lose and they could force him out. The NDPers were better at it then the Liberals!

[VicHockeyFan]

Gotta agree with this:

My first conscious awareness of anything political...at least the first I can recall...came during the 1960's. No it wasn't Trudeaumania.

It was the night of a B-C election result...might well have been the last one that WAC Bennett won. I don't recall who was the NDP leader at that time...Berger perhaps? Whoever it was, came on the t-v to give a half hearted concession speech and congratulate the re-elected Premier...and make the ringing proclamation that the campaign for the next election begins right now!

I was years away from voting age, didn't know anything about politics, hadn't thought or cared about it particularly, but that night I found myself resenting what I heard from that NDP leader. Good grief. We've just come out of an election campaign. And you want to start another one right now? You guys are about nothing but power. I may have got the wrong impression, but it's stuck with me.,

If my conclusion was simplistic I forgive myself. I was a kid. My observation was valid...and it's been a recurring theme, through every NDP election loss since. I don't want to listen to 2017 campaign rhetoric today. Public office should be about public service first, and getting elected second...at least for three quarters of the term.

This is Frank Stanford

http://www.cfax1070....ay-Sept-19-2013

[Mike K.]

+1 for Stanford.

Of course once politicians are elected many of them think in only 3 or 4 year terms, whatever their term is. If a goal can't be accomplished within a short time frame it's very likely to never see the light of day. And that's probably why so few local politicians will openly support amalgamation. Why stick your neck out if the process will take a good decade or so?