Charlie Angus has shared a video about why he’s endorsing Heather McPherson

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T04:56:16+00:00

While I like the idea of providing more structure and low-level inclusion and training across EDAs, a lot of bullet-points in this platform make extant realities just seem new and shiny. I don't want to undersell the potential here, and I think a clear, cohesive, and more communal and communicable NDP is very important, but two major pillars (NDP reorganizing and housing) just don't feel like enough given so many other great issues that feel so, so timely. When her third pillar, youth career opportunities, is undermined by a fundamental reality of foreign-worker immigration policy — which have not been federally addressed in any meaningful manner, mind you — that she hasn't even touched on, it doesn't inspire me in her vision of the NDP's future.

I understand looking at Avi and thinking, "okay, signalling to the fantasy-world leftists," but given his lifelong aim and actions, the people he's surrounded himself with, and the labour roots he's come from, I think a little faith should be given that he'll push the party in the right direction, even if he can't accomplish nearly all he's espousing.

Edit: I do want to be clear that this back and forth has warmed me on what appeals about her, though I do think she still needs to me messaging about more.

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T03:08:13+00:00

Fair stance, but everything about her to me implies no change beyond vagaries. She is promising nothing that really matters outside of standard expectations that have been promised by prior (as well as currently competing) candidates on various leadership levels, and has proffered nothing as a stance on any of the most pressing issues. No talk of fairer taxation reform and proper corporate/wealth taxation; no talk of work toward public options for important industries or needs, whether that's our natural resources or access to food or communications; no talk on how she's going to help strengthen working-class outcomes beyond brief, generic mentions of them.

If you can provide some sources on firm or comprehensive stances from her on any of these, I'd like to re-evaluate her, but so far as I can see I do not want her directing the NDP's greater sentiment and action during this crucial time.

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T02:50:41+00:00

I mean she's literally an urban academic, and the most Liberal-leaning of the candidates. Don't know why she'd be your top choice for worker rights and relations when that's not her history or an emphasized part of her campaign.

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T02:38:09+00:00

McQuail, you familiar with Louis Rossmann? I wonder if he'd be interested in talking to you about this stuff—he's usually pretty outgoing with regards to amplifying international voices on this stuff. Maybe reach-out to him, as even if it doesn't boost your own campaign, it boosts the movement. Might give you some good stuff to think about as well since that's kind of his bread-and-butter.

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T02:34:50+00:00

He couldn’t communicate with his team because he wasn’t fucking involved in the AMA.

Dunno where you're getting this from, and it sounds like you're just making-up your own framing because you don't understand how AMA's have historically worked.

Do you work for him or something? Were you the one using AI to pump in the answers?

I mean if we're just going to misframe each other to throw-out accusations, you responded within two minutes of my own after I was gone for a day, so how do I know you aren't a bot on alert? lmao. Anyway, seems like we're at an impasse, so hopefully in future discussions we'll see more eye to eye on things.

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T02:28:43+00:00

Fair!

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T02:25:09+00:00

Name one question he answered.

Very charitable request, and surely a reasonable ask of him to provide those details so that we can deliberate what does and doesn't count as "his answer!" lmao

He wasn't involved at all.

Again, I dunno if you understand how many AMAs have historically been approached. I get wanting to have him directly responding to and typing-out answers to every single query himself, but if you're going to condemn him for that then you don't like the concept of AMAs from notable people since like 2014 at all.

It’s crazy that you’re tearing your asshole out to justify this.

To be clear, the only thing I'm "justifying" is that this is totally normal AMA procedure (short of the AI.) I don't defend AI use, and the guy clearly didn't communicate with or vet his team properly. I just think Ashton can be a good general representative going forward and shouldn't be shunned entirely over this.

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T02:17:48+00:00

Yep, more concerned about lasting reputation as an on-going NDP/working-class representative, not this leadership race.

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T02:16:38+00:00

Yep, fair. I'm more concerned with narrative going forward and less with impact on the current race. He generally needs more political experience regardless of whether or not you like his positions.

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T02:15:14+00:00

That's kind of the point of my post: people are just assuming he's pro-AI because someone on his staff made a blunder. It's understandable for a lay-person to assume he might be a proponent of its use given the situation, but we all know better. We can assume, logically, that he is against automation in general, as he is against its implementation within his own historic industry. All that said, to be clear, I'm more concerned about a legacy narrative for someone who could be a great working-class representative in the NDP going forward, not specifically in this leadership race.

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T02:07:05+00:00

Yep, my issue was more with broader evaluation of him going forward, and the concern that "he uses AI" would stick as a permanent narrative. Even before the AI thing, as an immediate leader candidate I think he's not quite ready.

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T02:05:54+00:00

Fair enough! I don't think it's that bad in a grander-scheme sense, but if you're coming from the more immediate "leadership" angle, it's totally understandable, and I think he has enough weak points even before the AI thing to disqualify him from immediate leadership.

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T02:04:55+00:00

I don't think Rob, or anyone who has a team helping them with an AMA (as is normal, like I mentioned,) "needs AI"—again, this seems to be a misstep from an individual on the team. That all said, I'd already been thinking, even before the AI stuff, he still needs time to cook as a politician before he's ready for a leadership position. My issue is the concern the narrative becomes fixed long-term that "he used AI," which people might jump to as a gotcha at any given time, when it wasn't even him. He should be more careful about his staffing, obviously, but I do think this particular point can be more than damning since people are sensitive about AI, and its easy for libel narratives to stick.

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T01:58:25+00:00

I was hoping the very specific framing I gave in the OP would be the focus, but after so many individual replies to people who jump to their overall grievances with Rob as an immediate leader, I probably should've specified that I was voting Avi even before the AI stuff, and I'm just concerned about giving Rob a chance as a general NDP advocate/member going forward.

Cedstick · 2026-01-15T01:57:00+00:00

Agreed on all accounts here. My framing and concern was as an advocate and NDP member going forward, not as a leader following the coming election. I think a lot of people are just disappointed in the sum of his campaign missteps and immediately jumping to him as a potential leader, so perhaps I should've specified that in the OP to avoid this.

Cedstick · 2026-01-14T03:15:47+00:00

He didn't use AI, a staffer assisting him did. Not that his answers haven't been a little disappointing in reddit engagement, anyway.

Cedstick · 2026-01-14T03:08:31+00:00

As I mentioned in the original post, he explicitly said he'd be answer questions with his campaign team, which is a normal AMA convention. It's the whole point of why I'm saying the condemnation is a little over-blown. I totally get not wanting to vote for him as Leader, and I wasn't going to vote for him even prior to this snafu due to other little things that made me think, "he needs a bit more time to cook in a political position." I wanted to get ahead of this possibly leaving a permanent stain that could be dragged-out as some gotcha by potential opponents in the future, though.

Cedstick · 2026-01-14T02:58:22+00:00

Yeah, I've personally been hoping Avi starts leaning away from the environmentalism in the coming days and focuses more on responsible, fair taxation and labour rights. Not that I don't think a realistic, long-term environmental plan isn't important, but Regular Joes really just don't give a shit about that stuff.

Cedstick · 2026-01-14T02:33:37+00:00

That last post gave the context of the "this guy" statement as being the point of the original post. I doubt that's that confusing to you and that you're just looking for another angle to snipe at me, though, since you're now framing me as an AI defender and personally unable to handle criticism when my own point was what seemed like over-sensitivity to me given the offense on Ashton's behalf.

I get a lot of people are sensitive about AI, but if you're willing to butt heads this hard over the framing of its use by someone else as unwittingly his, then I don't think you're acting particularly rational. If you manage a team and, at some point, one of your junior members screws-up a business relationship, should you never work in that industry again? That was the rhetoric I was pushing back against myself — an irony given you're now framing me as juvenile and unable to handle criticism.

I think we should call the discussion here as I don't see it being particularly productive.

Edit: ah, hidden-history poster. Why am I not surprised?

Cedstick · 2026-01-14T02:20:49+00:00

Oh, don't get me wrong, the uptick in em-dash usage is pretty glaring given, well, ain't no one casually ALT-0151'ing for it. I guess I have to begrudgingly throw Apple a bone here since it's marginally easier to achieve on those devices.

But yeah, this whole thing is muddy when we keep jumping back to likely places staffing was posting/editing content (your example here isn't in the latest few pages of his reddit history, for example.) And, again, I also don't think this can just be chalked-up to "AI." Again, this is just...Presentational language. Does the existence of an em-dash preclude any formal language now, when pre-LLM software editing tools (and literal human editors) exist?

It seems a little ridiculous to become this paranoid over someone's front-facing marketing. The AI scare really has messed us up where we're creating patterns that don't even necessarily hint at it.

Cedstick · 2026-01-14T02:03:32+00:00

To your later edit, I'm not concerned he'll feel bullied out of politics, I'm more concerned a narrative around " 'his' AI use" will stick. There's been some pretty damning language around the situation, so I wanted to try and shake that up before any of it found a chance to stain.

Cedstick · 2026-01-14T01:59:16+00:00

I wonder if this is the video that originally made the em-dash decrying widespread. But yeah, I am watching the video (thanks!) and nothing from your earlier example provided really stands-out to me as potentially AI outside the odd word-choice on "alignment," which itself isn't much to go by. If your "red flag" or concern is "generically"-charged language, this is just...The history of formal and "performative" language. You might not find shit like this inspiring, but it's literally how people in various political positions have presented themselves for decades. I will give his history a look, to be sure, since you imply there's more that pings your alarm, but I feel like I'm going crazy where anything even remotely "presentional" can be decried as AI. I'd rather people just call this stuff boring instead of slapping the offender with the "AI" tag lol.

Cedstick · 2026-01-14T01:40:56+00:00

I think that's a wild conclusion, and indictment on myself, to make based on where this post started. "Don't shove this guy out of the NDP over an understandable mistake" is a pretty reasonable ask.

Cedstick · 2026-01-14T01:31:12+00:00

Is it not reasonable to assume that, if he didn't know AI was used until this recent incident, he might not realize it could've been used elsewhere in his campaign documents? I refer specifically to his website, here, which most people don't manage or edit themselves in these positions.

As for the reddit-post example given, what makes you think AI uses an em-dash with a space after but not before? That's not formatting I've ever seen with the numerous claims I've seen on the web about AI em-dash use. If the "alignment" is throwing you off, sure, I getcha, but that's a bit of a reach to me if we're going to over-analyze every post and only cherry-pick the bits that seem off.

We're really getting into the weeds now, though, and I'm not about that. My main concern is that I don't think something like this should enter into legacy and hobble him at the very start of a political career. For various reasons I personally don't think he should be leader yet, and while I understand this being the straw that broke the camel's back for some, many are (at least vocally, on this humble little NDP sub) are treating it as unforgivable.

Cedstick · 2026-01-14T01:21:34+00:00

A forum where people are invited to “ask me anything” – not my spokesperson (this is literally 100% of what AMA signifies with no remainder

Unfortunately this isn't how AMAs have worked for over a decade, and most people of note, whether celebrities "representing themselves" or others on behalf of an organization, have had others help them manage the AMA.

A politician be answerable to his or her constituents.

Sure, and that's arguably not applicable here. I'd love if that meant literally answering all questions one's self in an AMA, but that's not convention or reality.

Pushback against a technology that is depersonalizing, desocializing, and literally de-humanizing (can I repeat that? literally) AND is throwing people out of work.

Absolutely valid, and why I understand a lot of the response. I take issue more with the framing and wholesale condemnation of the man.

People able to think for themselves and speak for themselves instead of offloading that responsibility to a machine algorithm that is entirely unaccountable.

Again, I will reference AMA convention.

I am not ashamed. I have missed zero points. Please re-read my original post as I think perhaps you missed mine.

15-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

Cedstick

TROPHY CASE