Wednesday, October 7, 2009

By the numbers

Thanks Curtis for taking me out of my misery. I've been trying to do this unsuccessfully for some time.

Ashton has picked up 68 of the MYND delegates, while Selinger has picked up the remaining 40.

Current delegate breakdown:
Selinger 741
Ashton 624
Swan 72
Independent 55

Delegates left:
Labour 430
Super Delegates 214

Total delegates 2136
Delegates to win 1068

Selinger needs another 327 to win
Ashton needs another 444 to win

I have 32 Super Delegates (MPs/City Councillors/MLAs) already locked in to Selinger and 7 with Ashton.

To win, Selinger would need to pick up half of labour’s delegates and half of the remaining Super Delegates.

To win, Ashton would need slightly more than half of Labour’s delegates, half of the remaining Super Delegates, all of Swan’s delegates and all of the independent delegates.

Which scenario seems more likely?


  1. re: Selinger and Ashton imperatives for victory and your closing comment "Which scenario seems more likely?" ... Are you suggesting the outcome of this race is self-evident?

  2. It all happened in Inkster. Ashton would have been neck-and-neck with Selinger until some clever fellow came up with the idea of telling a few dozen voters to vote for the wrong number of delegates, thus spoining their ballots.

    Or did it all happen at MYND? Ashton would have walked away with all 108 delegates if MYND had the power to select their own delegates by the same type of process everyone else used. Except that the Swan and Selinger camps were able to convince the party brass to go with proprtionate representation. [Of COURSE they said that, it was clearly in their own interests to say so.]

    Sour grapes? Not really -- it is what it is. Ashton should be proud he's made it this far. People who think the process was rigged against him, well, let's just say that it's only paranoia if it has no factual basis.

  3. @ Fat Arse


    @ Tractor

    I know nothing about the conspiracies in Inkster.

    As for MYND, you are correct that Ashton would have won all 108 had it been winner take all but I will quote Devin Johnston on how it came about. Looks like MYND made that determination (or at least made the decision to let someone else make the decision).

    There was a proposal by two of the campaigns that the MYND elect members on a proportional basis, rather than as a full block supporting just 1 candidate. The MYND executive voted on this proposal and it ended in a deadlock: 8 votes for, 8 against. As a result, they are referring the matter to the rules committee for determination.

  4. I had read Devin's post. I still have a HUGE problem with the decision. It takes a majority to pass a motion; they didn't have a majority. The request came from the two campaigns (Swan and Selinger) who stood to gain at the third campaign's expense. The rules committee is hardly an independent disinterested body; it is co-chaired by Rosanne Wowchuk, and was filled with Selinger and Swan supporters. The rationale provided for the decision was not compelling -- they had an entirely flimsy basis on which to change the process away from the default IN THE MIDDLE OF THE RACE. Now, the race may be close enough that that decision alone could have handed the race to Selinger.

    That's the ethical stance of the NDP brass. I'm underwhelmed.

  5. The anonymous imprecations and accusations that Tractor &co are spreading across the blogosphere are but one symptom of just how nasty the last week of the campaign is likely to get. Ashton has all but lost his bid, but it appears that he's going to fight to the end, and the strategies that remain to him are potentially very damaging.

    Ashton's campaign was always predicated on a first ballot win. His strategy was to run-up the delegate counts in about eight Winnipeg constituencies and the MYND, to consolidate his base in the North, and to leave the other forty constituencies on the table. There was no second ballot strategy because there simply couldn't be one; he burned his bridges a long time ago.

    To his campaign's credit, they almost pulled it off. However, between Selinger's large and well organized campaign and Swan's collapse and early departure, he missed the mark, and there's really no way he can make-up the numbers now. Rather than using the authority within the party that his run might have conferred to challenge Selinger to adopt elements of his platform, however, he is taking the faint hope approach by continuing to run to win. To do so, he must turn as many pledged Selinger delegates as possible in the lead-up to convention.

    His tactic, however, is not to persuade the Selinger delegates to come to him, but rather to drive them away from Greg by sowing doubt and discord and by allowing shills and proxies like Tracto' to smear Selinger and his supporters with veiled accusations of racism and conspiracy on blogs, at the CBC and WFP Web sites, Rabble, etc. These accusations may be absurd, but they are also unanswerable. Selinger can protest that he is not a racist, and the party can assert that there is no conspiracy to deny Ashton delegates, but once such accusations have been made, the seeds of doubt have been sown, and the whispering campaign has begun. It's just plain destructive, and it's going to leave the party polarized and suspicious, with a lot of hurt feelings on both sides.

    The problem, at his point, is that Steve has a dream that he can't let go of, and it seems to have clouded his judgement. Add to that a loose cannon with his own agenda as a campaign manager, and you've got a recipe for destructive behaviour. I hope that Ashton calls off his dogs, but I suspect that's the road we are on.

  6. "Shills and proxies"? For the sake of credibility, try attacking the argument, not the person.

    I've got four main concerns out of this process. Whatever else is out there just hasn't caught my interest: (1) The handling of the MYND delegate selection process, (2) the allegations of impropriety from Inkster, (3) the general process mess created by the party in 2007, and (4) the impugning of Ashton's "ethnic politics."

    I've got no evidence that Selinger is responsible for any of these issues. I think he's a decent guy. I've got no interest in discord, and buddy, I ain't veilin' nothin'!

    I believe (1) and (2) are entirely answerable if the party is brave enough to be transparent about it. Both candidates have said they think that (3) is a real issue and worth addressing before another leadership contest, and as I've said elsewhere it affected Swan more than either of the surviving candidates. With respect to (4) I don't, haven't and won't accuse Selinger or his campaign of having made it an issue. The media and a few random Swan/Selinger supporters surely did, and I do think we should ALL defend Ashton's supporters against that.

    Whispering campaign? Smears? Absurd accusations? Relax, dude, you doth protest too much. I haven't anywhere suggested the ludicrous argument that there is a grand conspiracy against Steve Ashton, or that Selinger is racist. I don't believe either to be true.

    We've all seen remarks from certain Ashton and Selinger supporters that are disrespectful and cringe-worthy. (Let me add one: I think Russ Wyatt IS a bit of a jackass...) But I don't believe I've crossed the civility line just yet. Just because you disagree with me, it doesn't make me evil.

    P.S. I think the union vote will put Selinger over, regardless. The NDP could do worse. I believe he and Ashton will work together just fine after all this if they want to be. Like Gary Doer said, "It's a com-pe-ti-tion!"