Ex-mayor Nenshi loathes partisan politics. He may run for NDP leader anyway - CBC.ca | Canada News Media
Connect with us

Politics

Ex-mayor Nenshi loathes partisan politics. He may run for NDP leader anyway – CBC.ca

Published

 on


Former Alberta justice minister Kathleen Ganley kicked off her bid Monday to lead the NDP, stressing her Calgary roots. By this time next week, Edmonton caucus mates Rakhi Pancholi, Sarah Hoffman and David Shepherd will likely have joined her in the race to replace the departing Rachel Notley.

That lineup of leadership candidates has been reported publicly for some time now, and campaign teams have been quietly jostling for support since at least last autumn. With no clear front-runner, it’s shaping up to be one of the most unpredictable and interesting NDP leadership contests anywhere in Canada in some time (they tend to be relatively sleepy affairs with little competition or none at all).

But the intrigue that seems to have gripped NDP-land and parts beyond is whether another figure jumps into the fray and injects even more excitement — one who just delivered his own head-turner of a political speech without formally saying a thing about whether he wants this job.

‘We will fight!’

Naheed Nenshi, arguably Alberta’s most compelling political speaker in recent memory, delivered the address that got folks talking at a Calgary rally against the Danielle Smith government’s newly proposed restrictions affecting transgender people. 

The former Calgary mayor’s voice began with disappointment in the compassionate tone the premier used in her announcement, then he elevated it to a roar as he seethed at her promise to bolster child protection services in case parents react abusively to their outed teens.

“Let me tell you what that means — what that means is ‘we’ll deal with y’all later,'” he told some 1,000 protesters. “Later after you’ve been beaten up. Later after you’ve been kicked out of your house … later after you’ve died by suicide. Later is not good enough. We protect everyone, we protect every kid, and we protect them right now.” 

He closed his nine minutes by leading rally-goers in a chant: “We will fight! We will win!”

No less a figure than Nenshi’s own sister suggested it should serve as prelude to an NDP leadership bid.

Around 1,000 Calgarians were on hand for Nenshi and other speakers at a rally to protect trans youth from new Alberta government policies on Saturday outside of Nenshi’s old mayoral office at Calgary City Hall. (Helen Pike/CBC)

He publicly states he’s thinking about it, and that appears true. Nenshi and politicos from his municipal life have for weeks done meetings and phone calls with New Democrats and other progressives, gauging their interest in the idea of the politician with the purple trademark seeking the orange crown.

The rally could have galvanized his own interest in three more years of more rabble-rousing speeches full of Smith critiques, before the 2027 Alberta election. Then, if this leadership contest is as focused as it appears to be on setting the NDP on track to win that election, why wouldn’t progressives flock behind a three-term mayor who would take on the job with instant name recognition and debating chops to take on Smith?

But behind the scenes, the questions determining if he runs will likely have two varieties: does the party want him, and does he want the party?

Nenshi’s nonpartisan or post-partisan philosophy has embodied his purple branding, a mixture of Liberal red and Conservative blue (little thought was given to orange). Even when he endorsed Notley’s party in the last election, it was a “loan” vote, and he offered praise mixed with much criticism of past NDP positions.

“I need to engage with politics and elections fluidly and based on the context of the moment, as well as who is running,” he wrote last May in an endorsement column.

He revelled in the fluidity of city politics. As mayor, he wasn’t leader of the 14 other councillors, and could variously appeal to the conservative members or liberal members for votes to ensure passage of his initiatives. (Or, sometimes, he wasn’t persuasive or crafty a politician enough to win those votes.)

Were he to run and become NDP leader, he’d suddenly find himself at the helm of a 38-member caucus of elected partisans — some not much newer to the system than he would be, but many who are longtime and loyal New Democrats.

It’s grown from the union-oriented party it used to be. The 2014 leadership race allotted 25 per cent of its votes to organized labour, but this spring’s contest won’t. There’s still an unabashedly and consistently left-of-centre tradition that Nenshi would likely have to abide by.

Alberta NDP Leader Rachel Notley celebrated Nenshi’s endorsement at a campaign event three days before last spring’s election. (Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press)

There’s policy consistency and message discipline a party leader must instill (and enforce) in his team, and he’s previously enjoyed not even having that rigidity himself, sometimes on council arguing around both sides of an issue before eventually landing somewhere.

Four years ago, while he was still mayor and I wasn’t at CBC, I asked Nenshi how he’d manage the expectations of a partisan political system at the federal or provincial level. He suggested he didn’t need to change to fit that mould — maybe the combative system itself needed to change, and he could help forge a “new model” of politics.

“You’re working out of a paradigm of the way it works now. Maybe it could work differently in the future,” he said in that interview.

Nenshi had chafed against partisanship and ideological rigidity at city hall, and he couldn’t fix that. Inserting himself into an established UCP-vs.-NDP slugfest and trying to transform it on the fly is a big ask. But would asking him to conform to it be equally daunting?

The former mayor would have to revive a political network that last sought votes and donations in 2017 — and features many moderate conservatives who might blanch at buying an Alberta NDP membership that includes a stake in Jagmeet Singh’s federal party. He’d have to build an organization in Edmonton and elsewhere; and he’d have to get assurances that the MLAs would be comfortable with him as leader, whether or not they’ve already chosen another hopeful to support.

Nenshi would need special permission from the NDP to run for leadership if he has not been a card-carrying member for six months, but insiders expect that to be a formality, a rule more designed to keep out rogues who are further astray from the party’s political core. 

He might also want some guarantees that he’d be able to overtake Ganley as the ranking Calgary candidate, as well as Shepherd, Pancholi. Getting in this� contest to risk losing in June’s vote may be a disappointing political return.

Thinking, thinking

There’s no indication from Nenshi’s camp that he’s racing into this decision, and almost definitely wouldn’t launch anything this week.

As recently as Thursday, he was promoting an apolitical event in support of CBC’s Canada Reads on Feb. 18, and has given no indication he’s dropping that book debate series set in early March for a different sort of debate. The deadline to sell memberships for the leadership race is April 22 ahead of a June 22 vote, so waiting too long would dampen his chances.

Speaking of dampen, the party faces a dilemma on par with Nenshi’s own: what if this outsider doesn’t run?

While that decision may come down to his own personal considerations and comfort level, if the most high-profile potential candidate bows out, it might signal to the public that the NDP leadership isn’t seen as an exciting political vehicle, or that the party isn’t all too welcoming to outsiders.

If he bows out, the contest stands to appear as an all-MLA affair, a hunt for the most viable member of caucus whose name doesn’t rhyme with Motley. If Nenshi’s entry would bring some national-level sizzle to this race, his absence after much speculation could make it more lukewarm.

Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi says city politics largely non-partisan

2 years ago

Duration 2:02

Nenshi says contrary to popular belief, the vast majority of motions that come to council are passed unanimously.

Adblock test (Why?)



Source link

News

Beyoncé channels Pamela Anderson in ‘Baywatch’ for Halloween video asking viewers to vote

Published

 on

 

NEW YORK (AP) — In a new video posted early Election Day, Beyoncé channels Pamela Anderson in the television program “Baywatch” – red one-piece swimsuit and all – and asks viewers to vote.

In the two-and-a-half-minute clip, set to most of “Bodyguard,” a four-minute cut from her 2024 country album “Cowboy Carter,” Beyoncé cosplays as Anderson’s character before concluding with a simple message, written in white text: “Happy Beylloween,” followed by “Vote.”

At a rally for Donald Trump in Pittsburgh on Monday night, the former president spoke dismissively about Beyoncé’s appearance at a Kamala Harris rally in Houston in October, drawing boos for the megastar from his supporters.

“Beyoncé would come in. Everyone’s expecting a couple of songs. There were no songs. There was no happiness,” Trump said.

She did not perform — unlike in 2016, when she performed at a presidential campaign rally for Hillary Clinton in Cleveland – but she endorsed Harris and gave a moving speech, initially joined onstage by her Destiny’s Child bandmate Kelly Rowland.

“I’m not here as a celebrity, I’m not here as a politician. I’m here as a mother,” Beyoncé said.

“A mother who cares deeply about the world my children and all of our children live in, a world where we have the freedom to control our bodies, a world where we’re not divided,” she said at the rally in Houston, her hometown.

“Imagine our daughters growing up seeing what’s possible with no ceilings, no limitations,” she continued. “We must vote, and we need you.”

The Harris campaign has taken on Beyonce’s track “Freedom,” a cut from her landmark 2016 album “Lemonade,” as its anthem.

Harris used the song in July during her first official public appearance as a presidential candidate at her campaign headquarters in Delaware. That same month, Beyoncé’s mother, Tina Knowles, publicly endorsed Harris for president.

Beyoncé gave permission to Harris to use the song, a campaign official who was granted anonymity to discuss private campaign operations confirmed to The Associated Press.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Justin Trudeau’s Announcing Cuts to Immigration Could Facilitate a Trump Win

Published

 on

Outside of sports and a “Cold front coming down from Canada,” American news media only report on Canadian events that they believe are, or will be, influential to the US. Therefore, when Justin Trudeau’s announcement, having finally read the room, that Canada will be reducing the number of permanent residents admitted by more than 20 percent and temporary residents like skilled workers and college students will be cut by more than half made news south of the border, I knew the American media felt Trudeau’s about-face on immigration was newsworthy because many Americans would relate to Trudeau realizing Canada was accepting more immigrants than it could manage and are hoping their next POTUS will follow Trudeau’s playbook.

Canada, with lots of space and lacking convenient geographical ways for illegal immigrants to enter the country, though still many do, has a global reputation for being incredibly accepting of immigrants. On the surface, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver appear to be multicultural havens. However, as the saying goes, “Too much of a good thing is never good,” resulting in a sharp rise in anti-immigrant sentiment, which you can almost taste in the air. A growing number of Canadians, regardless of their political affiliation, are blaming recent immigrants for causing the housing affordability crises, inflation, rise in crime and unemployment/stagnant wages.

Throughout history, populations have engulfed themselves in a tribal frenzy, a psychological state where people identify strongly with their own group, often leading to a ‘us versus them’ mentality. This has led to quick shifts from complacency to panic and finger-pointing at groups outside their tribe, a phenomenon that is not unique to any particular culture or time period.

My take on why the American news media found Trudeau’s blatantly obvious attempt to save his political career, balancing appeasement between the pitchfork crowd, who want a halt to immigration until Canada gets its house in order, and immigrant voters, who traditionally vote Liberal, newsworthy; the American news media, as do I, believe immigration fatigue is why Kamala Harris is going to lose on November 5th.

Because they frequently get the outcome wrong, I don’t take polls seriously. According to polls in 2014, Tim Hudak’s Progressive Conservatives and Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals were in a dead heat in Ontario, yet Wynne won with more than twice as many seats. In the 2018 Quebec election, most polls had the Coalition Avenir Québec with a 1-to-5-point lead over the governing Liberals. The result: The Coalition Avenir Québec enjoyed a landslide victory, winning 74 of 125 seats. Then there’s how the 2016 US election polls showing Donald Trump didn’t have a chance of winning against Hillary Clinton were ridiculously way off, highlighting the importance of the election day poll and, applicable in this election as it was in 2016, not to discount ‘shy Trump supporters;’ voters who support Trump but are hesitant to express their views publicly due to social or political pressure.

My distrust in polls aside, polls indicate Harris is leading by a few points. One would think that Trump’s many over-the-top shenanigans, which would be entertaining were he not the POTUS or again seeking the Oval Office, would have him far down in the polls. Trump is toe-to-toe with Harris in the polls because his approach to the economy—middle-class Americans are nostalgic for the relatively strong economic performance during Trump’s first three years in office—and immigration, which Americans are hyper-focused on right now, appeals to many Americans. In his quest to win votes, Trump is doing what anyone seeking political office needs to do: telling the people what they want to hear, strategically using populism—populism that serves your best interests is good populism—to evoke emotional responses. Harris isn’t doing herself any favours, nor moving voters, by going the “But, but… the orange man is bad!” route, while Trump cultivates support from “weird” marginal voting groups.

To Harris’s credit, things could have fallen apart when Biden abruptly stepped aside. Instead, Harris quickly clinched the nomination and had a strong first few weeks, erasing the deficit Biden had given her. The Democratic convention was a success, as was her acceptance speech. Her performance at the September 10th debate with Donald Trump was first-rate.

Harris’ Achilles heel is she’s now making promises she could have made and implemented while VP, making immigration and the economy Harris’ liabilities, especially since she’s been sitting next to Biden, watching the US turn into the circus it has become. These liabilities, basically her only liabilities, negate her stance on abortion, democracy, healthcare, a long-winning issue for Democrats, and Trump’s character. All Harris has offered voters is “feel-good vibes” over substance. In contrast, Trump offers the tangible political tornado (read: steamroll the problems Americans are facing) many Americans seek. With Trump, there’s no doubt that change, admittedly in a messy fashion, will happen. If enough Americans believe the changes he’ll implement will benefit them and their country…

The case against Harris on immigration, at a time when there’s a huge global backlash to immigration, even as the American news media are pointing out, in famously immigrant-friendly Canada, is relatively straightforward: During the first three years of the Biden-Harris administration, illegal Southern border crossings increased significantly.

The words illegal immigration, to put it mildly, irks most Americans. On the legal immigration front, according to Forbes, most billion-dollar startups were founded by immigrants. Google, Microsoft, and Oracle, to name three, have immigrants as CEOs. Immigrants, with tech skills and an entrepreneurial thirst, have kept America leading the world. I like to think that Americans and Canadians understand the best immigration policy is to strategically let enough of these immigrants in who’ll increase GDP and tax base and not rely on social programs. In other words, Americans and Canadians, and arguably citizens of European countries, expect their governments to be more strategic about immigration.

The days of the words on a bronze plaque mounted inside the Statue of Liberty pedestal’s lower level, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…” are no longer tolerated. Americans only want immigrants who’ll benefit America.

Does Trump demagogue the immigration issue with xenophobic and racist tropes, many of which are outright lies, such as claiming Haitian immigrants in Ohio are abducting and eating pets? Absolutely. However, such unhinged talk signals to Americans who are worried about the steady influx of illegal immigrants into their country that Trump can handle immigration so that it’s beneficial to the country as opposed to being an issue of economic stress.

In many ways, if polls are to be believed, Harris is paying the price for Biden and her lax policies early in their term. Yes, stimulus spending quickly rebuilt the job market, but at the cost of higher inflation. Loosen border policies at a time when anti-immigrant sentiment was increasing was a gross miscalculation, much like Trudeau’s immigration quota increase, and Biden indulging himself in running for re-election should never have happened.

If Trump wins, Democrats will proclaim that everyone is sexist, racist and misogynous, not to mention a likely White Supremacist, and for good measure, they’ll beat the “voter suppression” button. If Harris wins, Trump supporters will repeat voter fraud—since July, Elon Musk has tweeted on Twitter at least 22 times about voters being “imported” from abroad—being widespread.

Regardless of who wins tomorrow, Americans need to cool down; and give the divisive rhetoric a long overdue break. The right to an opinion belongs to everyone. Someone whose opinion differs from yours is not by default sexist, racist, a fascist or anything else; they simply disagree with you. Americans adopting the respectful mindset to agree to disagree would be the best thing they could do for the United States of America.

______________________________________________________________

 

Nick Kossovan, a self-described connoisseur of human psychology, writes about what’s

on his mind from Toronto. You can follow Nick on Twitter and Instagram @NKossovan.

Continue Reading

Politics

RFK Jr. says Trump would push to remove fluoride from drinking water. ‘It’s possible,’ Trump says

Published

 on

 

PHOENIX (AP) — Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a prominent proponent of debunked public health claims whom Donald Trump has promised to put in charge of health initiatives, said Saturday that Trump would push to remove fluoride from drinking water on his first day in office if elected president.

Fluoride strengthens teeth and reduces cavities by replacing minerals lost during normal wear and tear, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The addition of low levels of fluoride to drinking water has long been considered one of the greatest public health achievements of the last century.

Kennedy made the declaration Saturday on the social media platform X alongside a variety of claims about the heath effects of fluoride.

“On January 20, the Trump White House will advise all U.S​. water systems to remove fluoride from public water,” Kennedy wrote. Trump and his wife, Melania Trump, “want to Make America Healthy Again,” he added, repeating a phrase Trump often uses and links to Kennedy.

Trump told NBC News on Sunday that he had not spoken to Kennedy about fluoride yet, “but it sounds OK to me. You know it’s possible.”

The former president declined to say whether he would seek a Cabinet role for Kennedy, a job that would require Senate confirmation, but added, “He’s going to have a big role in the administration.”

Asked whether banning certain vaccines would be on the table, Trump said he would talk to Kennedy and others about that. Trump described Kennedy as “a very talented guy and has strong views.”

The sudden and unexpected weekend social media post evoked the chaotic policymaking that defined Trump’s White House tenure, when he would issue policy declarations on Twitter at virtually all hours. It also underscored the concerns many experts have about Kennedy, who has long promoted debunked theories about vaccine safety, having influence over U.S. public health.

In 1950, federal officials endorsed water fluoridation to prevent tooth decay, and continued to promote it even after fluoride toothpaste brands hit the market several years later. Though fluoride can come from a number of sources, drinking water is the main source for Americans, researchers say.

Officials lowered their recommendation for drinking water fluoride levels in 2015 to address a tooth condition called fluorosis, that can cause splotches on teeth and was becoming more common in U.S. kids.

In August, a federal agency determined “with moderate confidence” that there is a link between higher levels of fluoride exposure and lower IQ in kids. The National Toxicology Program based its conclusion on studies involving fluoride levels at about twice the recommended limit for drinking water.

A federal judge later cited that study in ordering the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to further regulate fluoride in drinking water. U.S. District Judge Edward Chen cautioned that it’s not certain that the amount of fluoride typically added to water is causing lower IQ in kids, but he concluded that mounting research points to an unreasonable risk that it could be. He ordered the EPA to take steps to lower that risk, but didn’t say what those measures should be.

In his X post Saturday, Kennedy tagged Michael Connett, the lead attorney representing the plaintiff in that lawsuit, the environmental advocacy group Food & Water Watch.

Kennedy’s anti-vaccine organization has a lawsuit pending against news organizations including The Associated Press, accusing them of violating antitrust laws by taking action to identify misinformation, including about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines. Kennedy is on leave from the group but is listed as one of its attorneys in the lawsuit.

What role Kennedy might hold if Trump wins on Tuesday remains unclear. Kennedy recently told NewsNation that Trump asked him to “reorganize” agencies including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and some agencies under the Department of Agriculture.

But for now, the former independent presidential candidate has become one of Trump’s top surrogates. Trump frequently mentions having the support of Kennedy, a scion of a Democratic dynasty and the son of former Attorney General Robert Kennedy and nephew of President John F. Kennedy.

Kennedy traveled with Trump Friday and spoke at his rallies in Michigan and Wisconsin.

Trump said Saturday that he told Kennedy: “You can work on food, you can work on anything you want” except oil policy.

“He wants health, he wants women’s health, he wants men’s health, he wants kids, he wants everything,” Trump added.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version