way to support your leader Gary Coons, oh wait you didn’t support Carole James, the party is leading in the polls and you can’t even support your leader way to side with Moe and Jenny, two ppl who want to refight the leadership contest while your party has a good chance of winning, oh wait had a good chance thanks to your infighting
You cant be serious. James has no credibility and no leadership skills. She reacts like an immature little schoolgirl to any criticism then gets angry. Careful dont make her mad you might get the angry teacher face. You know the one where she looks really constipated.
She’s had 2 elections to prove her worth and she has done a great job of it. Shes not worth shit. If you want to be a leader maybe you should pull your head out of your ass stop ‘challenging the liberals on issue x,y,z’ and come up with a plan of your own as in what would you do if you were given the opportunity to run this province?
oh you’d challenge the liberals… gotcha. Go live your life and die in obscurity ms james. You are not a leader you’re a backseat driver. ‘Oh I wouldnt have done that’ well what would you do? you dont know? well thats wonderful.
The reason why the NDP under Ms James will lose the next election is because she’s a dud. She doesn’t inspire the support of the electorate.
Even after months of turmoil over the HST, in a poll taken in recent days she was only one point above Gordo in personal popularity, 33% compared to 32%, and the party has slipped to a 5% lead: mustelgroup.com/pdf/20101119.pdf
Don’t be shocked if those numbers are the other way around after the Liberals have a new leader in February while the NDP continues to stumble along under James.
If dissention within the ranks has eroded James’ personal support she has only herself to blame. The caucus didn’t create the controversy over Bob Simpson’s expulsion; she did it all by herself.
You keep bashing Jenny Kwan. Apparently the underlying cause for her dissatisfaction is that James doesn’t address issues she’s concerned about, including urban poverty, safe injection sites etc. Which raises a question.
What is James’ position on anything besides opposition to Gordon Campbell? No doubt that has had some resonance with voters, but unfortunately the one issue that she’s staked her politicial career on is leaving office in three months.
‘Axe the tax’ was lame attempt at proposing something, but that pledge was quietly dropped after the issue slipped out of the headlines. Negative campaigning only goes so far in politics. James has nothing of note to say that doesn’t involve reacting to the Liberals. She doesn’t lead on anything.
She stated some time ago that it is too late to do anything about the HST. Incredibly, even Campbell doesn’t share that view anymore. As is well known, he’s said the HST will be scrapped if it is voted down in next year’s referendum, a position that the Liberal party appears to be sticking to. So even on the biggest issue in recent memory she’s playing catch up, following rather than leading.
The NDP continues to be competitive because it has some pretty good MLAs, including Gary Coons, not because James is the leader. If anything, bashing individual MLAs because they refuse to blindly follow James is more of a threat to the future electability of the NDP than raising uncomfortable truths about James’ uninspiring leadership.
Mustel’s approval rating for Campbell seems on the high side compared to Angus Reid who had him at 12% and then 9%. Still it is James’ approval rating that is the question and she doesn’t do any better here than she did with Angus Reid.
You would think that opposition leaders would be approved by at least the same amount of people as the party. Some disaffected people are prepared to vote NDP but are not convinced that James is up to the job. In fact 22% had no opinion of her, so despite six years as leader and two election campaigns a lot of people still can’t figure what she is doing to approve or disapprove of her.
I am surprised though that someone will be given three chances at winning an election. I don’t know all the provincial histories but I did look up federal elections and provincial elections. I think the only federal leader to run three times and lose was Robert Stanfield. He lost to Trudeaumania in '68, lost to the minority Liberals in '72, and was given another chance in '74. When he lost he was gone. His predecessor, Diefenbaker, lost twice to minority Liberals and he left the party kicking and screaming, but he wouldn’t have beaten Trudeau in '68. I couldn’t see anybody else who was given third chances.
The provincial NDP are a little more forgiving. Robert Strachan lost three elections (badly) to WAC Bennett in the '60’s but I doubt that anybody would have won at that time. Dave Barrett lost in '75, 79, and '83 against Bill Bennett. (I wonder how he would have done against Vander Zalm in '86).
I guess my point here is that three times aint a charm.
Gentlemen, you hit the nail on the head. I’m certain that James will make a fine MLA for her riding. However, she is a failure as a leader. It is time for James to step down.
[quote=“DWhite”]Mustel’s approval rating for Campbell seems on the high side compared to Angus Reid who had him at 12% and then 9%. Still it is James’ approval rating that is the question and she doesn’t do any better here than she did with Angus Reid.
[/quote]
The difference in the polls probably is that the Angus Reid polls were taken before Campbell announced his retirement while the Mustel poll was taken since then. Gordo has evidently won some acclaim for deciding to step down. So we have Ms James at about the same level of popularity as a leader who is leaving office amid great controversy; a rather lacklustre showing for the embattled NDP leader.
It will be interesting to see how Ms James stands in the polls after the Liberals have a new leader, considering that she has dedicated her entire career to being a foil to Campbell, trying to capitalize on the inate dislike that many British Columbians seem to have for the guy. She hasn’t stood for much else other than a vague commitment to do good; a secular but essentially faith-based approach to political leadership that might have worked if she was charismatic, but she clearly lacks those elusive qualities.
All that Bob Simpson pointed out and that Jenny Kwan (their longest serving MLA) and others have expressed more guarded concern about, is that the party under her leadership has been rather thin on details about their policy agenda. There is a nagging concern, perhaps, that some voters would like to hear a few paragraphs from Ms James on occasion that are substantive in nature without eternal reminders that Gordo is her adversary and the biggest single reason for taking her seriously.
One of the sorriest outcomes of yesterday’s gathering of the party council (which does not include the elected caucus by the way) was a vague assurance that work will now begin on fleshing out the party’s program for change, something that one would have thought would only require some minor revisions and updates at this point in Ms James tenure as leader.
Before Ms James squares off against Gordo’s successor (and a third party if that emerges from the ashes of the political conflagration in Victoria) I certainly hope that she does a refresher course with her voice coach. While she will no doubt stick to her pugilistic style that hasn’t worked that well for several years now, she really needs to drop the screeching tone and rapid fire delivery that she uses when hectoring dissidents and fence-sitters in her party. Her delivery has become quite difficult to follow lately.
A session or two with an anger management counsellor might be helpful as well. Her wrathful manner may be effective among party faithful, but I doubt that it encourages anyone else to support her cause, whatever it may be other than her continued tenure as leader and whatever self-satisfaction and perquisites it provides. There isn’t even a hint of ideological division within the party or of competing visions about which direction to take; it is all about Carole as far as I can see.
DWhite’s historical account should make for sobering reading among NDP faithful. There is no third time lucky as NDP leader in this province. Leaders of other parties seem to have the good sense to not test those odds at the polls. Twice unlucky leaders of other parties seem to go for a walk in the snow, take a hard look in the mirror or whatever and do the right thing for their party, the people who have selflessly supported its aims, including as volunteers, and perhaps ultimately themselves. But that high road is one that Ms James prefers not to travel it seems.
[quote=“BTravenn”]
There is no third time lucky as NDP leader in this province. Leaders of other parties seem to have the good sense to not test those odds at the polls. Twice unlucky leaders of other parties seem to go for a walk in the snow,[/quote]
I am always curious about what motivates politicians. As a poker player I try to figure odds and what is the best play under certain situations.
When somebody shoves a huge bet at me, I have to decide whether to call. I might think I have a pretty good chance of winning. But I also know that losing will eliminate from me the tournament. i have to decide not just whether I can win, but whether the win is good enough odds to outweigh a loss.
In James’ case, she could win. And she becomes premier. That’s a big win.
But if she loses, and she could very well lose, she would be regarded as the worst example of oppositional leadership perhaps in the history of parliamentary democracy. (Yeh I’m exaggerating, but you get the drift.)
If this were me, I would look at the two scenarios and decide not just for the party, but for me, that the odds of winning are no where near good enough to chance a loss. I would fold and wait for a better opportunity.
In James’ case the better opportunity is being an excellent cabinet minister in an NDP government. But, back to my first point, what motivates politician’s to put themselves in these situations. Is she the personality type, that cannot not admit to herself that it may be time to go?
[quote=“BTravenn”]
DWhite’s historical account should make for sobering reading among NDP faithful. There is no third time lucky as NDP leader in this province. Leaders of other parties seem to have the good sense to not test those odds at the polls. Twice unlucky leaders of other parties seem to go for a walk in the snow, [/quote]
Perhaps I should have done more research. Besides the scarves …
“There were also buttons with “Doer. Dexter. James.” – a reference to former Manitoba NDP premier Gary Doer, who lost three elections before winning government for 10 years and current Nova Scotia NDP Premier Darrell Dexter, who had two election losses before becoming premier in 2009.”
thetyee.ca/Opinion/2010/11/23/Ye … calDanger/
James will not win the election. If she becomes premier, it is only because the Liberals will not be able to recover enough.
[quote=“DWhite”]
**James will not win the election. ** If she becomes premier, it is only because the Liberals will not be able to recover enough.[/quote]
Agreed. The Liberals had the good sense to dump a very toxic leader, their new leader will have a tough go of it, but, the Liberals have a real shot at winning in 2013 if James is at the helm of the NDP.
In my opinion the NDP executive needs to be pragmatic and hold a leadership convention.
The new leader of the Liberal party wont have as hard of a time as people think in taking over. Lets face it, the overwhelming issue with the Liberal leadership was Gordon himself and, in recent history, the HST. These two issues seem to have been nipped in the butt.
A couple of points:
a)I believe that the NDP have been ruminating about a leadership convention for some time. I am sure I have read some of the columnists in the Vancouver Sun mention it. Gary C. is therefore getting his duck in a row. Can’t fault him for that. Politics is a strange profession.
b) I find it interesting that most of the posters here have blamed the NDP standing on Carole James. This would suggest that the leader is the party. I always believed that the NDP operated more consensually. Curious.
[quote=“Pantagruel”]A couple of points:
b) I find it interesting that most of the posters here have blamed the NDP standing on Carole James. This would suggest that the leader is the party. I always believed that the NDP operated more consensually. Curious.[/quote]
I am not blaming the NDP’s standing on Carol James. I am blaming Carol James’ standing on Carole James. The NDP have an approval rating of 42% but James’ is only 32% which is the same as Gordon Campbell’s (at least according to the latest poll). For whatever reason the public is not supporting her. So either she has to do something to make the public believe she is premier material or she has to step aside and allow somebody else to take a crack.
However, as much as I don’t see her as being a good leader for the party, she may be the best leader for the party. Who else in the NDP can generate more public support. Dave Barrett is over 80 and Tommy Douglas is dead.
The NDP’s standing is 50% james fault and 50% the rest of their fault. She is the face and the voice of the NDP and she has nothing to say and no direction for the party. The rest of the party is responsible because they’re allowing her to stay on as leader.