The measure of the race - Macleans.ca
 

The measure of the race


 

According to the latest figures, Thomas Mulcair leads all other NDP candidates in fundraising.

According to the reports, which cover all expenses from the start of the campaign up until Feb. 25, Mulcair has raised nearly $206,000 from some 1,347 contributors. That’s nearly $60,000 more than his campaign reported for the previous period ending Dec. 31.

He’s also pulled ahead of competitor Brian Topp who has raised about $183,000 from some 984 contributors. Topp, who was the first to enter the race with major endorsements from the likes of party stalwart Ed Broadbent, ended the year in the top spot but has since added just $14,000 to his coffers.

Meanwhile, Paul Dewar has edged out Peggy Nash in terms of fundraising to claim the No. 3 spot. According to the figures filed with Elections Canada, he’s raised more than $144,000 from 782 contributors. Nash has raised $139,449 from 727 contributors, while Nathan Cullen has raised $129,555 from 1,123 contributors.


 

The measure of the race

  1. I wonder if Elections Canada will give the NDP leadership candidates a pass on paying back leadership loans, like they’ve done with the Liberals. It really does seem that Elections Canada only exists to target CPC politicians, and to provide cover for any other parties.

    • Party above country forever and always, CPC supporters! 

      • Steve Uber Alles seems to be the CPC motto.

      • Can you explain why Liberal leadership candidates get a pass on the rules? If anybody is putting party above country, it’s Elections Canada.

    •  The constant Cons as victims posture is unbecoming and unconvincing. Give it up.

      • Please explain to me why the LPC gets a pass on the rules. And on multiple occasions. Thanks for your contribution.

        • Can you produce persuasive evidence that everybody but the Cons (or, indeed, anybody at all) “gets a pass on the rules” by EC? 

          In other contexts, the CPC seems to positively radiate in its self-adulation over its dominant fundraising, campaigning and electoral prowess. To claim, at the same time, that it is a victim of discriminatory practices by EC is simply disingenuous.

          You’re welcome.

          • The LPC gets a pass (twice) on it’s leadership contenders outstanding debt. There’s a date when that was supposed to have been paid back by. Many contenders have gotten not one but two “extensions” of this limit.

            Not to mention that EC never even bothered looking into how AdScam was used to manipulate Quebec votes.

          • What did you expect EC to do? Put Dion in jail? What else could they have done?

            As for your last. Non sequitur… There was no electoral issue associated with that scandal. Try sticking to actual facts if possible.

          • @kcm2:disqus  I don’t expect them to throw Dion in jail. But fines absolutely, some kind of punishment would be in order, don’t you think? Or are you arguing that EC rules should only be enforced in regard to CPC candidates? Because that seems to be the consensus amongst the Left right now.
            And suggesting that AdScam had nothing to do with manipulating Quebec votes is an absolute lie. The sponsorship program was initially started to quell separatist sentiments in Quebec, and evolved into a scam where Liberal friendly ad firms were given money for next to no work, and in exchange said ad firms donated money back to LPC, and supplied “volunteers”. In every single way imaginable, that scam was about voter manipulation, and heck, even voter suppression.

          • If EC needs to look at AdScam, I think they should look into the Gerda Munsinger Affair and the CP Scandal while they’re at it.

            All you MacDonald apologists have some ‘splainin’ to do.

  2. Wow, that’s a lot of donors for Nathan Cullen!  Looks like he has a significant base.