Two Conventions; One Solution #canpoli #cndpoli #cdnpoli

Naomi Klein on Cooperation

The Federal Liberals and NDP had conventions this weekend and the respective leaders of each party were in the spotlight – Thomas Mulcair as Leader of the government-in-waiting and Justin Trudeau for being elected the Liberal’s new leader in a landslide.

And for all the attention on those two leaders, one of the main things I hope people take away is that there are a *lot* of Canadians who want to see some form of cooperation between the more progressive parties to ensure Stephen Harper and his Conservatives are defeated once and for all in the next election.

In the recent NDP Leadership race, this view was represented by Nathan Cullen who came in third out of seven candidates and captured a quarter of the vote.  In the Liberal Leadership race, although a blowout by Trudeau, it’s still notable that the second place finisher was Joyce Murray who also favoured cooperation.  She came in second out of six candidates and captured ten per cent of the points allocated via the preferential system the Liberals used.

There are a lot of reasons pro and con about cooperation so I’m not going to recap them here (there are also a lot of variations of how cooperation would work which would need to be hammered out that I will touch on below.)

But here’s what it comes ultimately down to for me…

Since 1993, Canada has been led by parties who benefited, at least in part, from splits among parties on the opposite end of the political spectrum – the Reform/Conservative split divided resources and focus on the right for three elections (four if you count 2004 when they finally merged) that they may have otherwise been able to win.   Then the split flipped to the “left” (I know the Liberals are more centrist and also, more culturally distinct from the NDP than the Conservatives/Reform were but work with me here) and now the Conservatives have won three elections in a row.

They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.  Canadians now have TWENTY years of evidence that splits on one side of the political spectrum ensure that the other side will enjoy long runs in government.

NDP supporters who think their recent success and current status as the Official Opposition somehow guarantees a victory in 2015 are being hopeful (which NDP supporters are always good at!) but perhaps also naive (also a popular NDP trait!)

Liberals who see Justin Trudeau as the saviour of the party who will guarantee a return to government are being hopeful (which Liberals supporters are also good at!) but also naive about the current state of the Liberal party in Canada (not a trait that Liberal supporters are used to!)

Most cooperation proposals aren’t suggesting a full merger.  They’re not eliminating democracy – they’re just adding an extra layer in the form of run-off elections between nominees of the Liberal, NDP and Green Parties.  They’re not saying that all ridings would have these extra run-offs – most say that run-offs would only occur in ridings that were close in 2011 (for example, the Conservatives got less than 50% of the vote or they won by less than 1000 votes) .

No one can predict the future – some will claim that the patterns of 2011 won’t repeat in 2015 so cooperation is useless.  Yet, in the next breath, they’ll tell you what current polling show about what *will* happen in 2015 if there was a cooperation agreement so there’s point in doing it! 😉

I really like Joyce Murray’s analogy – she compares cooperation to an Olympic hockey team where the best players from various teams come together one time for a common goal that’s in the best interest of the country then, after that goal is achieved, the players go back to their own teams.

I’d even do her analogy one better – I think this situation is like the 1972 Summit Series where the best players in Canada came together from a limited number of teams to battle a common enemy that’s highly disciplined, arrogant and foreign to Canadian values! 😉

Saturday Snap – Belly Labels

Stole this idea from Pinterest…

20130413-190307.jpg

Friday Fun Link – History of NHL Video Games (1991-2012)

Lots of nostalgia in the video below…

NHL 94 is the obvious classic of the bunch but I probably spent more time playing EA NHL 2000 than any other video game in my life.

Nothing spectacular about that particular game – just came at a time when I had lots of free time (no kids!), had pretty realistic gameplay all things considered, the controls were less complicated than newer games which have a much higher learning curve plus with the Blomann Editor, you could keep the rosters up-to-date which increased the lifespan of the game.  I know I was still playing it in 2005 and perhaps I  need to dig out that old CD-ROM and start playing again!

One Volunteer’s Inventory of the Sask NDP Leadership Race

I drafted this post about a week before the Leadership convention so you have to read it as if the election still hadn’t happened. I could re-write but really like that opening about “pre-emptive nostalgia” so wanted to keep it. Given what I’m writing about and how I ended it, I thought it fitting to post today on April 11 – which is a birthday shared by Ryan and my dad. Happy birthday to both of you!

CraikCommitment

So, as the Sask NDP Leadership Race draws to a close, I’ve been having a bad case of what a colleague calls “pre-emptive nostalgia”.

It’s that same feeling you get when a trip is coming to an end and you start thinking “This is the last time I’ll walk on this beach”, “This is my last chance to use up my pesos”, “This is my last time leaving this hotel room” except in this race, my thoughts are more along the lines of “This is the last time I’ll tweet about one of Ryan’s policies”, “This is the last time we’ll have a Skype conference call to plan our convention showcase”, “This is the last time I’ll reverse the Like of somebody who’s accidentally self-Liked a Facebook post using the official campaign account” 😉

As part of that, I’ve been thinking about exactly what I’ve put into this campaign.

In 2009, I was quite new to politics (still am of course but a wee bit more seasoned) and my involvement was very much on the periphery of Ryan’s campaign – I did some stuff for his web site, I helped editing a few documents, I drafted most of at least one policy (his Arts & Culture policy), I did some phone calling, I did some social media stuff including a lot of writing about the campaign on my own blog and probably a few other odds & ends I can’t remember. I’m sure I donated a bit of money but probably not a very significant amount (although one of my ideas for fundraising ended up generating somewhere around 15-20% of everything Ryan brought in during that race so that makes up for it!) 😉

I can’t claim anything so groundbreaking as the Money Bomb this time (I tried to take credit for his Reddit AMA in December – the first ever by a Saskatchewan politician – but a fellow team member reminded me that he’d suggested it *really* early in the campaign) but I’ve also done and given *way* more than in 2009 so that’s probably more important on balance.

My involvement started as soon as I heard Ryan was running again – as in 2009, the campaign was using Basecamp project management and my memory is that my first contributions of this race were participating in a discussion about potential campaign slogans. As we circled around variation of Ryan’s 2009 slogan, “Our Future Together”, I chimed in that I was a big fan of the word “Together” by itself – both for its shortness (I wasn’t yet the Social Media Director but definitely thinking like one) as well as the fact that as the campaign went on, we could adapt it for different needs: “Workers TOGETHER”, “Healthcare Professionals TOGETHER”, “Farmers TOGETHER” (which was a formulation I’d seen used to great effect by the ALA’s “@thelibrary” campaign which allows libraries to do something similar – “Databases@thelibrary”, “ScienceFiction@thelibrary”, “GardeningPrograms@thelibrary”, etc.)

Of course, the slogan eventually chosen was “Better Together” and this, of course, was better. 😉

After that, the next six months led to all kinds of stuff. Here’s a partial inventory of what I’ve done (and I want to be clear I’m not posting this as a measurement of myself against anyone else – on Ryan’s team or otherwise. Every volunteer gives what they can in the face of competing interests at work, at home, in other volunteer commitments and so on. In fact, at our first “all-hands” meeting in Craik before Ryan officially entered the race, I remember one of the top campaign people saying they were hoping that people would challenge themselves and take on more than they might have in other campaigns or situations in the past. I remember thinking – “My wife is pregnant, I’ve got a five year old son who’s just started kindergarten among lord knows so good luck with that!” Little did I know…)

We finished the day by drawing a picture of a giant circle, filling the inside with what we were willing to do and the outside with what we’re weren’t. As you can see above, I said I was willing to do almost anything – and being a “rover” who does many different things is what I most enjoy in these types of situations – but that I also wanted to give myself permission to say ‘no’ to things I didn’t want to do or didn’t have time to do or whatever.

It wasn’t at that first meeting but at some point fairly early on in Ryan’s campaign, I made a conscious decision to go “all in” on this campaign – partly because I believe so strongly in Ryan’s potential as a political leader, partly because I knew it would be both fun and a great learning experience, and partly with Shea being pregnant, I knew this would likely be my last big volunteer engagement for at least the next year or three.)  Oh, and partly because I’m hoping Ryan appoints me as Library Czar someday when he’s Premier! 😉

So what have I done for the campaign?

  • Once you count money given at “pass the hat” events, tickets bought to events, and silent auction items purchased, I’ve given Ryan’s campaign over $1000 putting me within the top tier of campaign donors. (It sounds like a lot but when you space it out over six months – as I did at the start of the race – it’s only a couple hundred bucks a month. As someone without car payments at the present moment, pretty easy to justify.  And I’m sure my soon-to-be-born child will understand when we can’t afford college!) 😉
  • Attended two full-day face-to-face team meetings in Craik – one just before Ryan officially launched his campaign and one we had as a halfway point check-in. (Skype and Google Hangouts are good to a point but sometimes you *really* need that personal contact.) Side note: that second Craik meeting brought home just how youthful this team was. Partly just because of who was able to make it that day but I had the sad realization at lunch that of the 12 or so people at the table, I was the oldest one – and I wasn’t even 40!
  • Unasked but over-excited, I submitted a draft of a speech that Ryan could use for his launch announcement. Once the professionals got a hold of it, most of it went by the wayside. But they kept a couple of my best lines which made me happy – eg. “Even when we’re competing, we’re better together”.
  • Attended a couple early meetings of the Leadership Convention Committee with representatives from all campaigns since the meetings were in Regina and most of our team’s top people were in Saskatoon (and our main Regina team leader was in Mexico at the time.)
  • Participated in weekly noon-hour Skype conference calls of the Steering Committee
  • Participating in various other conference calls – for everything from the web site development team at the start of the race to the convention planning committee near the end.
  • Beyond conference calls, had various other one-on-one Skype calls or phone calls or e-mail/FB or in-person conversations with different team members throughout the campaign to discuss all manner of topics
  • Signed up over 30 members (which was only good enough to put me in 14th spot in our internal Membership Sales Leaderboard. Think about that – that means everyone ahead of me sold more than 30 and some more than that by a considerable margin – pretty impressive!)
  • On that note, I also created the Membership Leaderboard page using a built-in Nation Builder function, I also worked on various other aspects of Ryan’s web site – from initial development to writing different content to integrating things like Google Analytics and some of other tools (Storify). I also did occasional CSS & layout tweaks, wrote guest posts and posting other important content
  • Did all kinds of Tweeting and Facebooking – both via my own accounts and occasionally posting as Ryan and/or from one of the campaign accounts. (All of that was only good enough to get me 8th spot on our all-time “political capital” leaderboard – a function of NationBuilder that gives you points for various actions team members complete – calling, tweeting, donating, etc.)
  • Was one of the Leads for the writing/editing/compiling the “12 Days/12 Ways To Help” series we did around Christmas.
  • There was another project inspired by the “12 Days” series that never came to fruition but that I did some preliminary work on. On that note, there are lots of half-baked, half-finished, half-assed ideas and projects that I came up with or helped to work on – either with or without official campaign sanction (I mentioned how I wrote most of Ryan’s 2009 Arts & Culture Policy and I had a really innovative idea for how we could do his 2013 version but we never got to it.) I threw out so many ideas that before Christmas someone asked if I felt like my ideas were being rejected. I admitted that yeah, it’s not fun to have an idea shot down but at the same time, I recognize that one of my strengths is being an “ideas guy” and that means that if was throwing out a lot of ideas a lot of ideas would have to be thrown out (er, I wasn’t that clever in my wording at the time.) Put another way, for every money bomb or “12 Days/12 Ways” idea I brought forward that were quite successful, there were probably 5-10 that didn’t catch.
  • Attended three debates in person (Regina x2, Weyburn), watched one livestreamed (Saskatoon #2) and watched parts of all of the eleven other debates online.
  • Wrote our “Meme Team”‘s social media guidelines (then set a team record for breaking those guidelines the most times!) 😉
  • Although I wasn’t as consistent as I should’ve been, wrote weekly updates for the members of the social media team mainly during the mid-part of the race.
  • Provided input and took the lead in registering our iPhone app on Apple’s app store – a pretty interesting experience I never would’ve had otherwise.
  • Although I can’t claim credit for the Reddit AMA (damn!) I did take the lead in booking it, coordinating with the admins over at /r/canadapolitics (loved how the first moderator to write back said that they were from Saskatchewan and had voted for Ryan in 2009!) and finding a team member who was a Saskatoon-based Redditor that could be Ryan’s sherpa into that weird and nerdy world
  • Attended pretty much every Regina social event that happened from candidate “Meet & Greets” to fundraisers to Regina team meetings and training sessions. Donated a prize for a silent auction, bought a prize at the silent auction.
  • Did some phone calling. Was a great joy to call into my home constituency of Indian Head-Milestone one weekend and talk to parents of people I went to school with, friends of my parents or others who I had so much in common with (“Oh, yes, our farm is on the #56 – you drive past it going to Katepwa Lake.”)
  • This post is very much about me but I’ve got to give credit to my family too – Shea promoted Ryan to many of her friends and co-workers (which is somewhat awkward as she works with Trent’s sister!) and of course just been very supportive of my efforts, my being away from home so often, my constantly talking about the campaign and so on. My mom has become a Ryan convert too, talking him up around Indian Head and giving former MLA Lorne Scott shit for supporting Trent instead of Ryan! 😉

Overall, no matter what happens next Saturday, I wouldn’t give up this experience for anything. I’ve learned so much, met so many cool people and been able to do so many things that I’d never do otherwise. And overarching all of that is a spirit of fun that’s made this feel – not like most people perceive politics – serious, dour, boring – but engaging, exciting and inspiring – all of the things the NDP needs if it’s going to be successful again in the future.

I may have told the story of how, when I first started getting more and more involved with the NDP, my dad, who, as far as I know, has always voted for a different political party (he’s in rural Saskatchewan so three guesses which ones that might be?!?), pulled me aside and said “You know, your grandpa always voted for the CCF.”

As I’ve worked on this campaign, I wonder if my grandpa felt that same sense of engagement, excitement and inspiration from Tommy Douglas?  And how, perhaps my dad’s feeling it a bit too? After all, he’s joined the NDP to support Ryan for Leader too!

The Funniest Videos on YouTube

Shea and I are having a dress rehearsal for the baby’s arrival (it’s not coming but showed a couple signs it might be so five hours after coming to the hospital to get checked over, we sit awaiting test results.).

Shea’s resting so I’m surfing around and came across an /r/askreddit question about the funniest YouTube videos.

I’m not watching them but just reading people’s descriptions and reactions are cracking me up so much, I thought I’d pass the link along! 🙂

What Is Politics About? (and Two Things I Want From The Sask NDP’s New Leader)

A couple weeks back, I attended the Federal NDP’s full day workshop on their “Prairie Initiative“.  This is an effort by the federal party to lay the groundwork for a similar breakthrough on the Prairies to the one they had in Quebec during the last election.

The day was filled with speakers, presentations and break-out groups but perhaps the most useful (yet unintended) purpose for the day was in providing a neutral ground for supporters of various candidates in the Sask NDP’s recent leadership race to come together and be reminded that we’re all on the same team in a way that wasn’t really possible at the “Unity Party” after the leadership race with the results still being so fresh and there being at least one dejected face for every smiling one.  (To be fair, I was one of the smiling faces – although that was mostly due to the copious amounts of beer I drank!) 😉

If providing a neutral ground was perhaps the most useful part of the day, the most interesting part was hearing the two afternoon speakers – Aaron Genest from Team Meili and John Tzupa from Team Broten – give insight into their respective campaign strategies and techniques.

Those two presenters reminded me of an article I recently came across on Reddit which contends that all political activity happens along a continuum from “naive” to “cynical”.

The author describes the “naive” approach thusly:

Politics is about policy. Groups of like-minded people coalesce around a set of ideas about how the world should work. This group is called a party. The party puts forth a platform of policies that will put those ideas into action. The role of the party then is to serve as the interface, or point of friction, where ideas become policies. To gain power, the party promotes and sells these policies to the public as better than those of their opponents…The model naïve politician is someone like Pierre Trudeau, or Jack Layton.

…and the “cynical” approach as this:

Politics has nothing to do with policy, it is about power. Joining a political party is not like joining a faculty club, and is more like joining a tribe or a gang. Their overriding function is to gain power and relative status for their group at the expense of people of other tribes and gangs…The model cynical politicians are men like Jean Chrétien, or George W. Bush.

Although I don’t like the negative connotations of either “naive” or “cynical”, I think these two approaches perfectly capture what happened in the Sask NDP leadership race where Broten ended up “winning a tie” with Meili who represented exactly half (minus <1%) of a perfectly divided party (and I mean “divided” in regards to two very different views about how the Sask NDP should *do* politics, not necessarily in regards to literally being split or torn apart…at least so far):

In fact, the most significant political divide in Canada, and perhaps other polities, is not between left and right, but between those who are cynical and those who are naïve about politics.

It was clear from Genest’s presentation that Meili’s campaign wasn’t just about winning but also about so much more – trying new things, being bold and innovative, creating the best, most original policy and so on.  It was equally clear from Tzupa’s presentation that their campaign was very focused on winning as the ultimate goal with the “other stuff” often being a distraction or waste of resources.  For example, Tzupa said that strategic decisions were made by Broten’s campaign to focus only on selling new memberships in areas where they already knew they had profile – Saskatoon and with new immigrants since Broten was Critic for this area – rather than trying to reach people more broadly like Meili did.  Tzupa also said they decided to completely cede the social media arena to Team Meili rather than try their own initiatives and experiments.

(In many ways, this difference of approach is symbolized, at least for me, in the decision by Team Meili to release not one but two smartphone apps.  Did this decision gain us even a single vote?  Maybe or maybe not but I don’t know too many members of Team Meili who would say it was the wrong decision whereas I suspect many members of Team Broten would say “Why are you bothering with that?  How is that going to help you win?”  Again, two very different approaches.)

I also want to be clear that I’m not saying the Meili campaign was 100% “Naive” or that the Broten campaign was 100% “Cynical” (to use the author’s categories).  Each was perhaps 65-35 one way or the other which is also indicated by how close the result was.  Candidates who are close to 100% Naive will never get close to winning no matter how often their purity of principle leads them to try (I think of someone like Dennis Kucinich running for President in the US) and candidates who are 100% Cynical might win the big one but always seem to lose in the end (perhaps epitomized by someone like Richard Nixon?)

In terms of whether it’s better to tilt the balance towards naivete or cynicism, Broten supporters might say that the result proves their approach was the better one.  They won, they have power, they get to lead going forward.  But Meili supporters could say the exact same thing – they won (not in gaining the traditional form of power but in setting a high bar, learning lots about running a modern campaign, and impressing people across the province and beyond with a stylish, innovative campaign that dominated in fundraising, social media and outreach), they have as much (but again different) power than Team Broten in the energy and dedication of their diverse and young base, and they will be able to lead going forward, again in different but equally important ways – more linked to the grassroots than the traditional halls of power.

The biggest question before us is whether these two approaches are at all compatible?  Is there a way for those who are (mostly) focused on winning to mesh with those who are (mostly) focused on putting forward the best ideas?  I think this is possible since, as I said, Cam’s and Ryan’s campaigns were already a blend of both approaches.

But to me, the onus is ultimately on Broten, as the new Leader, to guide how this will (or won’t) happen.

Which leads me to my next points…

No matter who we may have supported in the Leadership race, I think all members of the NDP – whether they joined 50 years ago or 5 months ago – have an interest in seeing Cam Broten succeed.  I know the new Leader is an extremely busy man and I also know he is probably getting advice on how to handle his new responsibilities from a variety of quarters.  But I wanted to add to the chorus by listing two vitally important things I want to see from him and his team, one immediately (like yesterday, immediately!) and one in a few years’ time.

What I Want From Cam Broten As the Sask NDP’s New Leader…

1. Outreach & Legitimate, Humble Recognition of How Close the Result Was (And What That Means For Him and the Party Going Forward)
A couple weeks ago, the party sent out an e-mail saying it had been 12 days since Cam had won the Leadership and could we please donate to help broadcast commercials to help introduce him to the province?  As I write this, it’s been exactly a month since the Leadership Convention and, other than one other letter from the three defeated candidates asking for unity (and again, money!) as far as I’ve seen, there has been no real or significant outreach to members of other teams.  (I’m not just hearing this from people who were on Team Meili either.)  Again, I know Broten and the people around him are busy.  I also admit I’m not sure what I thought that outreach would be.  But I thought it would be…something.  Maybe not a personal phone call (although Tzupa mentioned that they did a call through of the entire membership as early as possible during their leadership race – again, strongly focused on the end goal – to introduce Broten to the membership.  So would it be out of the question to have their team calling supporters of other candidates to start building bridges?)  At the minimum, they could send out an e-mail (and not just one asking for money either!)  Or encourage their high profile supporters to reach out to supporters of other candidates on Facebook and elsewhere.   Maybe the best idea I heard was that they should call a meeting where team members from all camps could come together and brainstorm how our various approaches could be melded together, similar to the “Prairie Initiative” meeting I mentioned at the start of this post.  (That’s not an original idea – I stole it from someone in a different camp who said that was their candidate’s plan if they’d won.)  But yeah, something…

2. Reclaiming Lost Seats
In my final series of ten posts where I listed my #1 reason for supporting Ryan, I mentioned that, by the end of the race, I’d reached the point that I felt like if any of the other candidates won, it might end up being a case of them winning the battle but potentially losing the war as we go into the next election.  This was because I didn’t see any of them with the broad array of attributes that was perfectly suited to what the NDP needs at the current time to have a chance to beat Brad Wall (personal popularity = 60% and holding).   I was talking about this to another NDP member and she pointed out that there’s a very easy way to show whether this observation turns out to be true in terms of whether Cam could get it done or not.  “In the next election, if Cam can get us back to where we were before Dwain Lingenfelter was elected – 20 seats – from the 9 we have now, we know he’s on the right path.  Of course, he’ll say that his goal is to be the next Premier of Saskatchewan but all politicians say that.  Realistically, I’ll be happy if he can just show he’s lifting us out of the hole Link left us in.”  This made a lot of sense and I don’t think it’s an unrealistic goal either – especially for a candidate who stressed how his experience made him ready to lead on day one, it’s a very clear indicator for how Cam performs as Leader.  Especially if he’s as focused on winning as his #skndpldr campaign demonstrated, if we’re even able to get back to 20 seats in the next election, a lot of my misgivings about the party choosing someone else over Ryan will be allayed.  Of course, if we don’t reach that point, then you can expect the mother of all “I told you so!” posts the day after the next provincial election.  I hope it doesn’t come to that! 😉

Music Monday – “Indian Head” by the Eyebats

At the risk of sounding like an old fogey, I can’t really make out any of the words to this song.  So I’ll just put the band name and title of the song as the title of this post instead of relevant lyrical excerpt like I usually do.

But since the title of the song is “Indian Head”, I’m going to assume it’s a poetic ode to the peaceful tranquility that comes from growing up in a small rural community, a place where the kids still play in the streets until their moms call them home for dinner at dusk and dads work in the fields to grow the food that makes punk rock possible.  . 😉

10 Things Wrestling and Religion Have In Common

I don’t watch wrestling as much as I used to but Wrestlemania Sunday is always a special day. I rarely shell out the sixty bucks for the PPV but have watched when I’m with a group of people or at a bar or something. But this year, through the magic of the Internet, I may or may not be watching a grey market Russian livestream of the event. Man, the Internet is awesome!

Anyhow, thought this was a fitting graphic for Wrestlemania Sunday…

10 Things Wrestling and Religion Have In Common

Saturday Snap – I’ll Miss When Shea’s Not Pregnant…

…I asked her to hold my wine and she agreed. 😉

(Can you see that look of longing in her eyes as she glances at my wine? Actually pretty cruel of us to tempt her this way during a birthday supper for my dad earlier this week!)

20130406-195346.jpg

Friday Fun Link – Share Some Unique/Insightful Ways You’ve Heard A Child Verbalize Something That’s Become Part of Your Own Vocabulary

Pace’s portmanteau word “ness” is one of the most upvoted comments on this Reddit question although all of the answers are great (with that said, I’m glad it wasn’t my kid who liked to say “cockporn” instead of “popcorn”!)