Quick Search

... by Riding
... by Candidate

2015 (42nd General Election) Nomination Lists

Click here to see a list of all candidates, or click below to see the list by party:

* Lib


* Grn

* BQ

* Cons

* PC

* Ind

* Oth

Home: Blog--Guide to the Pundits' Guide

BLOG -- Guide to the Pundits' Guide

Friday, January 15, 2010

Peggy Nash to Run Again

[Welcome readers!]

Party president and former NDP M.P. Peggy Nash announced this morning that she will run again in the next election and try to reclaim her Toronto seat of Parkdale – High Park from Liberal M.P. and former leadership candidate Gerard Kennedy, the Pundits' Guide can exclusively report.

The NDP riding association had recently announced its nomination for Thursday, January 28, but no candidate names were included with that announcement.

Other party members have until Thursday, January 21 to announce their candidacy. Should no-one do so, Nash is expected to be acclaimed on the 28th.

The riding has been a Liberal-NDP contest for the last three elections, being settled by margins of less than 10%. To date, only the Green Party's Sarah Newton has been formally nominated, although Kennedy's nomination is protected as a Liberal incumbent.

Nash has been working for the Canadian Auto Workers' union since her defeat, and was elected Federal NDP Party President at the August convention in Halifax.

Thanks to a reader for sending along this tip. If you have nomination news to share, why not drop us a line, and then follow along on Twitter.

Labels: ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nash should run in a Tory-held riding.
This splitting of the left is counter-productive in the struggle to remove the ahrper/Harrisites.

January 15, 2010 7:17 AM  
Blogger The Pundits' Guide said...

Hi Anon,

I wouldn't want to get into that kind of a debate on an informational site, but it is interesting that no such comments were made when Liberal Christine Innis announced her run against the NDP's Olivia Chow last fall.

Any empirical work I'm aware of that has looked at vote switching suggests that what looks intuitively as though it might work to accomplish your objective, can often have the opposite effect. I looked at 20 years of data in BC and found Lib-Cons switching and Reform/Cdn Alliance-NDP switching had a much bigger impact.

It's an empirical question, and the only other data we have to go on are the 4 cases from the last election, some deliberate, some accidental, where party candidates were removed from the competition, with no resulting impact in the end. Think of Central Nova, Portneuf-Jacques Cartier, Kildonan St-Paul, and Saanich-Gulf Islands.

In Parkdale-High Park, it's less a concern of whether the Conservatives might win, than which of the other two did. Given your stated objective, that shouldn't matter, then, should it?

Or are you arguing it on a resources issue?

Thanks for taking the time to comment, Anon.

January 15, 2010 7:42 AM  
Anonymous Liblogger said...

I fund Pundits' Guide's comments very interesting given a recent analysis showed that if the Liberals and NDP worked together (ie not opposing in each other in select ridings) in the last 2 elections, Canada would be rid of Harper & Co.
See the following for a 2006 discussion -

January 15, 2010 8:46 AM  
Blogger The Pundits' Guide said...

Hi Liblogger, and thanks for the comment.

First of all, here's a clickable version of that link.

If one assumes that *all* the votes from either party would seamlessly move to the other one, it might be possible to produce that outcome. In practice, it hasn't worked out the same way. I'll look up the data from the Canadian Election Study when I get home tonight, but many people would choose to support a different party, or just stay home.

Another factor I find these studies overlook are the campaign effects of taking such a decision. To ensure maximal effect, one assumes that the two parties would both have to actively endorse it and campaign for it. But that could in turn create other splinter groups, and it would certainly engender an equal and opposite response from the Conservatives and Bloc Quebecois.

You have me curious about the assumptions in that Decima study though, which predated my starting this site, so I'll write to Bruce Anderson and see if I can get my hands on a copy.

Thank you for the interesting clipping, Liblogger. If I get a copy of the study, I'll post something further.

January 15, 2010 9:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am another Anon. If the Lib or the Green run an excellent candidate against Olivia Chow, it would indeed be a shame. I do not know Christine Innis (and do not suggest that she is not an excellent candidate or anything negative about her in any way). However, Innis is not, in my opinion, the proven quantities that you have in both Peggy Nash and Gerard Kennedy. I will stand corrected on this. My point is that one of these two candidates will not be in the House and it would be a shame. It should not be a matter of political pride, payback, comeback or whatever.

The NDP and the Lib should focus on getting rid of Harper first. Then they can battle each other for public support for their respective policies. United Canada wins, divided Harper rules (for his narrow base of Canadians).

With the polls the way they have been for the past 3 years, I simply do not understand how both NDP and Lib have failed, or willfully failed, to recognize this. Are they serious about getting rid of Harper or not? If they are, fight Harper, not each other.

January 15, 2010 12:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Geez, did Peggy Nash lose her well paying cushy union exec job when the financial crisis hit?

January 15, 2010 1:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

another anon here , going to add my thoughs . the ndp have chosen to target parkdale highpark i'm going to assume cause its one of the few ridings in ontario where there really competitive and have won a few times at federal and provincial levels . as the reality is the ndp isn't competive in the rest of toronto and other than maybe oshawa isn't a true force or have any history of winning in any of the conservative ridings . but it be tough to take the seat back from the liberals now that gerard kennedy is mp . another motivation may be to take some heat off olivia chow in trinity spadina and force the liberals to use some resources in parkdale as well .as they say the best defence is an offence .

and i think one thing the left or anti harper crowd doesn't get in some of these ridings is you can't combind all these votes and they don't put into account the mp's personal popularity . like look at Bev Oda in durham where the ndp candidate dropped out last election due to fb comments yet the liberals didn't make much of any gains and Bev Oda got re-elected in a landslide and seems to be fairly popular there. i don't know but people seem to be more motivated to vote for someone they like than against them .

January 15, 2010 2:02 PM  
Blogger janfromthebruce said...

reading the posts with interests. It appears that some lib posters think Nash shouldn't run against Liberal Kennedy for false reasons, eg. voting splitting, wasting resources and should go after the Cons.
Too bad, the lib supporters didn't say the same things when Nash held the riding last time and Kennedy took it.

So what's good for the goose is good for the gander. That said, and one could suggest that under Iggy the Liberals are very unprogressive so Nash is just providing a "progressive candidate" opportunity for those voters.

Go Nash!

January 16, 2010 12:06 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home