Skip to main content

December 25 2018

Source

Dr David Hinds

Though signalling that the Working People’s Alliance (WPA) is willing to toe the line for the good of the country, political scientist, Dr. David Hinds yesterday said that the party wants a say in the selection process for the APNU+AFC presidential candidate.

The WPA is a member of the APNU faction of the coalition government.

“WPA will not be part of a process where decisions are made without our input and passed down to us. In that regard, yes, we definitely would want to participate in deciding on the mechanism to be used to determine who is the presidential candidate and if necessary, participate in choosing the candidate,” Hinds, a WPA Executive Member told Stabroek News when contacted yesterday.

Since Friday’s shock vote, there has been much speculation about who the coalition will choose to be its next presidential candidate. Questions had also been raised about the strength of the coalition given what has happened.

Stabroek News reached out to Minister of State and APNU’s General Secretary, Joseph Harmon but he said that he was in a meeting. Calls made to him subsequently went unanswered.

Sources close to the party however are adamant that President David Granger will be the presidential candidate. One high-ranking official acknowledged that the campaign may be too grueling given his illness but said that supporters will have it no other way. The official insisted that choosing someone else will make the return of the PPP to office a certainty.

Granger returns to Cuba today for additional chemotherapy treatment for Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, a form of cancer. Prior to his diagnosis he was visibly unwell and had lost a considerable amount of weight in a short period of time. It is expected that the presidential candidate will be on the campaign trail soon but with Granger scheduled to visit Cuba on several occasions until May, 2019 it does not seem possible. Chemotherapy can leave patients severely weak.

No exit

Hinds stressed that the WPA is not contemplating an exit from the coalition. “As the public knows, we have not been happy about the way in which the top governmental leadership has related to the party since 2015, but as a responsible party we have decided to be guided by the larger good and the national interest,” he said while adding that if there is consensus among the existing partners that “we should contest as a Coalition, the WPA would participate.”

He said though that the party will have conditions and at the moment these are being discussed by the WPA Executive. “We would prefer to engage our partners on these conditions before we release them to the media. But I can say that we would be adamant that there is consultation and joint decision making at every step of the process”, he stressed.

Hinds told Stabroek News that as a political analyst, he believes that the Coalition should face the electorate together rather than as separate entities. He said that first off parties returning to the electorate after stints in office invariably run on their record as government. “So, since they were in government together, it would be more effective to sell that record jointly rather than separately. If they go separately, there would be a fight over ownership of the record and in the end none of them would benefit from it,” he said.

Undisputed

He pointed out too that none of the Coalition parties could win an election individually. “That is, I think, an undisputed assessment. The PNC, which is the electoral machine, have at its best garnered just over 40% of the popular vote and at its worst could only muster 34%. These are known statistics. As we saw at the recent Local Government Election, the AFC has drastically declined as an electoral force. The WPA on its own has never been embraced as an electoral force. But as we saw in 2011 and 2015, when these parties participate as a joint entity, their collective electoral value increases”, he stressed.

Hinds added that the electorate views that joint entity as something more effective than the individual parties and, importantly, the joint entity is seen as a “probable winner.”

“It is also important to note that the winner is not a winner if it does not win the presidency. So, as we saw in 2011 when the APNU and AFC contested separately and together got more votes than the PPP, the latter still won the presidency,” he reminded.

Additionally, he said that when the two ran together in 2015, they retained their majority vote but also won the presidency.

Another reason they should contest together, he said is that the joint entity stands a better chance of attracting independent voters. “These include young voters of all ethnicities who are not drawn to the PNC and PPP and are now disillusioned with the AFC. But I do believe that a reinvigorated Coalition is the best mechanism to attract these voters,” he said.

According to Hinds, the big downside of contesting together is “trust” among the partners.

“The PNC government faction has demonstrated that despite the formal embrace of coalition politics, that party’s top leadership is still driven by the politics of domination—that they cannot be trusted to keep even written promises. In other words, the smaller parties have good reason to believe that the PNC will use them to get power and then abuse and discard them once power is won,” he said.

Hinds added that on the other hand, given the defection by Persaud, the other parties, particularly the PNC would be wary of the AFC. These are real concerns, he said before opining that pursuit of the greater good should render these concerns relatively insignificant.

“Whatever happens, I think the Coalition would have a tough but not impossible job ahead. It does not have a sterling record to show, it has internal difficulties. It does not have enough time to build an effective electoral machinery and there is uncertainty about who leads the ticket. And all of that is compounded by a partly alienated and party demoralized base,” he said.

Hinds insisted though that “all is not lost if the leadership shows maturity and facilitates some healing among the partners, level with their supporters and find that sweet spot in the minds of the voters they may well still pull it off.”

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Django posted:
ksazma posted:

Hinds has a real conundrum.

Why is that ? he is one of the talking heads in the local media.

I was thinking that he is seeking a lot of guarantees from the main PNC faction in the Coalition when the PNC has already shown that their guarantees are not guaranteed. Exhibit A is their agreement with the AFC.

FM

The coalition got bigger fish to fry.  They are already assuming that their support among the voters has not diminished. If they don't get the votes, seat count will make PPP boss again. The best course of action that Lilly and Djangy can convey to their bosses in the AFC is to break away so they can pick and choose in parliament which motions to support, back to their role of 2011 thru 2015.   Unless of course they prefer the high life and being yes men to the pnc. 

FM
Drugb posted:

The coalition got bigger fish to fry.  They are already assuming that their support among the voters has not diminished. If they don't get the votes, seat count will make PPP boss again. The best course of action that Lilly and Djangy can convey to their bosses in the AFC is to break away so they can pick and choose in parliament which motions to support, back to their role of 2011 thru 2015.   Unless of course they prefer the high life and being yes men to the pnc. 

The AFC is probably left with basically only its PNC leaning segment. Why then vote for the AFC when they can outright vote for the PNC. The previously PPP dissenters have already determined that a vote for the AFC is a vote for the PNC so that support for the AFC is gone. Hinds must know already that what he is looking for doesn't exist.

FM
ksazma posted:
Django posted:
ksazma posted:

Hinds has a real conundrum.

Why is that ? he is one of the talking heads in the local media.

I was thinking that he is seeking a lot of guarantees from the main PNC faction in the Coalition when the PNC has already shown that their guarantees are not guaranteed. Exhibit A is their agreement with the AFC.

PNC will have to learn to be in government,they will have shed the politics of domination and to be trusted. If they don't they will be sitting in the opposition benches for a very long time.

Django
Drugb posted:

The coalition got bigger fish to fry.  They are already assuming that their support among the voters has not diminished. If they don't get the votes, seat count will make PPP boss again. The best course of action that Lilly and Djangy can convey to their bosses in the AFC is to break away so they can pick and choose in parliament which motions to support, back to their role of 2011 thru 2015.   Unless of course they prefer the high life and being yes men to the pnc. 

Banna, the coalition have to stay together if they want to be in government. If they break away they can't win. Read the last two paragraphs in Hinds article.

Django
Last edited by Django
Django posted:
ksazma posted:
Django posted:
ksazma posted:

Hinds has a real conundrum.

Why is that ? he is one of the talking heads in the local media.

I was thinking that he is seeking a lot of guarantees from the main PNC faction in the Coalition when the PNC has already shown that their guarantees are not guaranteed. Exhibit A is their agreement with the AFC.

PNC will have to learn to be in government,they will have shed the politics of domination and to be trusted. If they don't they will be sitting in the opposition benches for a very long time.

Dem head hard. You are talking past tense here. Only rigging and frigging will put them back in office. Remember what you guys preached that the younger generation doesn't care because they never experienced the sufferings of the PNC? Well, the chickens have come home to roost. They know what it is like to suffer under the PNC. They know nepotism under the PNC. THEY HAVE LEARNED THEIR LESSONS in only three years...

FM
Prashad posted:

The WPA has no other option but to remain in the collation. They cannot win any seats alone

 

 

 

Exactly. They are in no position to bargain. The AFC and WPA have no other choice since they have to hide under Granger’s skirt for survival. 

They will remain yes men for life. 

FM
skeldon_man posted:
Django posted:
ksazma posted:
Django posted:
ksazma posted:

Hinds has a real conundrum.

Why is that ? he is one of the talking heads in the local media.

I was thinking that he is seeking a lot of guarantees from the main PNC faction in the Coalition when the PNC has already shown that their guarantees are not guaranteed. Exhibit A is their agreement with the AFC.

PNC will have to learn to be in government,they will have shed the politics of domination and to be trusted. If they don't they will be sitting in the opposition benches for a very long time.

Dem head hard. You are talking past tense here. Only rigging and frigging will put them back in office. Remember what you guys preached that the younger generation doesn't care because they never experienced the sufferings of the PNC? Well, the chickens have come home to roost. They know what it is like to suffer under the PNC. They know nepotism under the PNC. THEY HAVE LEARNED THEIR LESSONS in only three years...

You are right Skelly. Granger told young people that they should go to stabroek market to sell plantain chips and cook up rice after they complete their  degrees. 

Real progress AFC PNC style. 

Guess what, PNC just announced that Granger will be their presidential candidate. This is another Chrismuss gift for the PPP.

Thank you PNC.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Prashad posted:

The firing of Hinds is one of the reasons why Chandradass switch his vote.

Hinds was fired years ago, so why did Charran only just vote against his party.

Judas money, that's why.

FM
ksazma posted:
Drugb posted:

The coalition got bigger fish to fry.  They are already assuming that their support among the voters has not diminished. If they don't get the votes, seat count will make PPP boss again. The best course of action that Lilly and Djangy can convey to their bosses in the AFC is to break away so they can pick and choose in parliament which motions to support, back to their role of 2011 thru 2015.   Unless of course they prefer the high life and being yes men to the pnc. 

The AFC is probably left with basically only its PNC leaning segment. Why then vote for the AFC when they can outright vote for the PNC. The previously PPP dissenters have already determined that a vote for the AFC is a vote for the PNC so that support for the AFC is gone. Hinds must know already that what he is looking for doesn't exist.

It will quite interesting to see the election results by March 2019.

Changes and dynamics in action.

FM
caribny posted:
Prashad posted:

The firing of Hinds is one of the reasons why Chandradass switch his vote.

Hinds was fired years ago, so why did Charran only just vote against his party.

Judas money, that's why.

It was Moses himself who did the firing on behalf of the H.Greene supporters in the APNU.  If Chandradass had open his mouth then Moses would have crushed him like a shell on the beach.  It was not the right time for the man to act. 

Prashad
Django posted:
ksazma posted:
Django posted:
ksazma posted:

Hinds has a real conundrum.

Why is that ? he is one of the talking heads in the local media.

I was thinking that he is seeking a lot of guarantees from the main PNC faction in the Coalition when the PNC has already shown that their guarantees are not guaranteed. Exhibit A is their agreement with the AFC.

PNC will have to learn to be in government,they will have shed the politics of domination and to be trusted. If they don't they will be sitting in the opposition benches for a very long time.

In all of the PNC history, they have never shown any signs of anything other than dominance. Even when they lose, they seek to dominate through slo fiah mo fiah.

FM
yuji22 posted:
Prashad posted:

The WPA has no other option but to remain in the collation. They cannot win any seats alone

 

Exactly. They are in no position to bargain. The AFC and WPA have no other choice since they have to hide under Granger’s skirt for survival. 

They will remain yes men for life. 

According to Carib, they don't bring any measurable value to the PNC.

FM
caribny posted:
Prashad posted:

The firing of Hinds is one of the reasons why Chandradass switch his vote.

Hinds was fired years ago, so why did Charran only just vote against his party.

Judas money, that's why.

Any no vote before Friday night was a wasted vote. Plus since we gat aile now the payoff as probably better this time.

FM

PPP started oil exploration and PPP will govern with the find. Fair enough. All the PNC did was to build a stadium that is already falling apart and stole about $ 700 MILLION while building it and sporting and wine down. 

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Prashad posted:
caribny posted:
Prashad posted:

The firing of Hinds is one of the reasons why Chandradass switch his vote.

Hinds was fired years ago, so why did Charran only just vote against his party.

Judas money, that's why.

It was Moses himself who did the firing on behalf of the H.Greene supporters in the APNU.  If Chandradass had open his mouth then Moses would have crushed him like a shell on the beach.  It was not the right time for the man to act. 

Smart move by Charandass. 

What is interesting is that Moses kicked Hinds in the Balls and yet he skin his legs for Moses to kick him more time.

None of these clowns will have balls like Charandass.

FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×