BC NDP now 18 points ahead of Liberals

105 posts / 0 new
Last post
BillBC

So why are the NDP 18 points ahead of the current batch of corporate-sponsored stooges clinging to phony-majority power in Victoria? Anyone? Anyone else?

--because they are raising taxes after promising not to, and people don't like being lied to, and they don't like paying taxes.  Also, people tend not to like Gordon Campbell in general. The Olympics also left a sour taste in the mouths of those who are not athletic-groupies.  It's not because people like the NDP any more than they did in the past two elections.  Just my opinion.

Fidel

So from your point of view, the millions of dollars in corporate donations to the slimeballs in power now had nothing to do with winning 3% more of the reg'd vote for the Liberals. In your opinion, the NDP could win if they promises things they could never produce under the top-down neoliberalorama dictating how things are done in this country since Mulroney and Chretien. And we do realize that neoliberalism is a dirty, dirty word in this thread and discussion forums in general. It's one of the great unmentionables. Surely things are the same today as when Tommy Douglas implemented all those progressive changes and new social programs in Saskatchewan. It goes without saying.

I think you're more interested in slagging the NDP than anything else. Sorry, but that's just my opinion.

So why are the NDP 18 points ahead of the current batch of corporate-sponsored stooges clinging to phony-majority power in Victoria? Anyone? Anyone else?

Fidel

But there were almost as many voted NDP as for the lying-liar Liberals. The election was decided by 3% of registered voters, and the corporate-sponsored Liberals enjoyed a much larger campaign fund with which to propagandize the voters that they did. I think that considering campaign expenses, the NDP achieved more bang for the buck than the fat-cat Liberals were able to with the money  advantage. British Columbians will have to reassess their priorities next election and decide if the current batch of fiscal frankensteins steering BC into the rhubarb patch are still worth the trouble at that point. And I wouldnt be too worried about the "Green" Party either. There's a saying that says you can lead a horse to water, but you can't force it to drink. Apparently some 24% of registered voters in  British Columbia will have to decide whether they want to switch horses or not. I think they've chosen badly, and all those uninspired non-voters will have to decide whether to change things using the broken electoral system. Right now it's all they have to work with.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Go NDP Go

Go NDP Go 

Rah Rah 

[this is what I hear of your political analysis]  

Fidel I am truly amazed at your in depth understanding of the politics in a region of the country you know almost nothing about. But I know it is my fault that the NDP brain trust has lost two elections in a row because they refuse to campaign as a social democratic party and insist that only the mushy middle is salable.  Anti-tax anti-tax rah rah rah.  Great political analysis on the part of the Moe, Mike and Bruce show.  

You now have me convinced that selling the NDP as an anti-tax party is obviously the only way to get a population to vote for a progressive alternative. It would be evil incarnate to run on a left platform instead of trying to sell the people a handful of magic beans.

 

 

ReeferMadness

Being up 18 points 3 years away from an election is no reason to break open the champagne.  You could be up 81 points and it still wouldn't mean anything.  In 2013, the economy will probably have turned around and people will have forgotten why they're mad.  Sure there will be people who will remember the lies but they will be too few to make a difference.  Meanwhile, the NDP is confusing its core supporters with these anti-tax campaigns.  And any friends you win will be of the "fair weather" variety.

Tieleman is running a populist, appeal-to-the-lowest-common-denominator smear campaign (just like the STV campaign).  And he's teamed up with a guy who was the most reviled man in BC when he was premier.  They deserve each other.  Does the NDP really want to be hitched to this wagon?

I know it's difficult to be nuanced in politics (and downright impossible for the likes of the two Bills) but it isn't the combined tax that's the problem; it's the implementation.  Combining the taxes is an intelligent thing to do.  Doing it in such a way as to transfer billions from business to individuals is wrong.

What's needed in this province is a progressive leader who can communicate.  And I mean real communication, not the Bill Tieleman variety.

 

Centrist

ReeferMadness wrote:
Being up 18 points 3 years away from an election is no reason to break open the champagne. 

Reminds me of the Mustel poll showing the Libs up 17% just one month before voting day on May 12, 2009. Fortunately that gap closed to 4% on voting day.

http://www.mustelgroup.com/pdf/20090414.pdf

 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Seeing how BC is reknowned for their 'bud' and progressive values...Wouldn't it make sense for BC to legalize their most popular and lucrative product and then scrap the HST and /or GST and cut income taxes?

A progressive party that is smart enough to realize that they can be fiscally responsible without threatening social programs,education or health care makes sense for the beautiful province of BC.

Best of luck in the upcoming elections!

ReeferMadness

alan smithee wrote:

Seeing how BC is reknowned for their 'bud' and progressive values...Wouldn't it make sense for BC to legalize their most popular and lucrative product and then scrap the HST and /or GST and cut income taxes?

A progressive party that is smart enough to realize that they can be fiscally responsible without threatening social programs,education or health care makes sense for the beautiful province of BC.

Best of luck in the upcoming elections!

That would make way too much sense for either the Liberals or the NDP.  I recall listening to a call-in show before last year's election (IIRC, Mike Farnsworth and Kash Heed were on) and the Liberals and NDP were trying to outdo each other in the "tough on crime" department.

In fairness, a provincial government couldn't legalize marijuana because it's a crime under federal statute.  But they do have a lot of control over enforcement and they could put pressure on the federal government.  A recent Ekos poll showed that 50% of Canadians are in favour of decriminalizing simple possession vs only 30% against. (I guess the other 20% were too high to care).

And the upcoming election isn't until 2013.

Fidel

kropotkin1951 wrote:
You now have me convinced that selling the NDP as an anti-tax party is obviously the only way to get a population to vote for a progressive alternative. It would be evil incarnate to run on a left platform instead of trying to sell the people a handful of magic beans.

What do you imagine that party on the receiving end of Bay Street political campagn donations in the millions of dollars will do with the HST tax grab?

Why not raise taxes for rich friends of the B.C. Liberal Party?

Are people in small town BC not struggling enough as far as youre concerned?

Something doesn't pass the smell test here.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

ReeferMadness wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

Seeing how BC is reknowned for their 'bud' and progressive values...Wouldn't it make sense for BC to legalize their most popular and lucrative product and then scrap the HST and /or GST and cut income taxes?

A progressive party that is smart enough to realize that they can be fiscally responsible without threatening social programs,education or health care makes sense for the beautiful province of BC.

Best of luck in the upcoming elections!

That would make way too much sense for either the Liberals or the NDP.  I recall listening to a call-in show before last year's election (IIRC, Mike Farnsworth and Kash Heed were on) and the Liberals and NDP were trying to outdo each other in the "tough on crime" department.

In fairness, a provincial government couldn't legalize marijuana because it's a crime under federal statute.  But they do have a lot of control over enforcement and they could put pressure on the federal government.  A recent Ekos poll showed that 50% of Canadians are in favour of decriminalizing simple possession vs only 30% against. (I guess the other 20% were too high to care).

And the upcoming election isn't until 2013.

 It's pathetic that progressive parties are afraid to be progressive...They have to stop trying to appeal to a portion of the population that wouldn't vote for them even if they cured cancer.

I don't pay attention to polls...In the past 40 + years,whether people will admit it or not,I will go on record to say that a good 70% of the population has atleast tried it.I wouldn't be surprised if the number was higher(pardon the pun)

What makes me laugh about these parties that like to come across as 'tough on crime',is that the irony of their policies actually INCREASES crime AND protects the livelyhoods and beefs up profit margins of organized crime groups.

Ha ha charade they are. 

Fidel

There will never be a free market in illicit drugs. Not while its as profitable as it is and the CIA the biggest dope delivery service on the planet. It's much too lucrative. The war on drugs is like the war on inflation and war on terrorism etc Hey you Whitehouse ha ha charade they are. And our stooges sing along in perfect harmony.

ReeferMadness

I agree, alan.  Prohibition has to be one of the stupidest political policies in history. 

Fidel

[url=http://rt.com/Top_News/2009-08-20/afghanistan-us-drug-trafficking.html]A... drugs alone worth $50 billion for USA[/url]

Wherever there are drugs, weapons dealing, and oil, there goes the vicious empire. They would love to transform Cuba into a conduit for running Colombian drugs to the mainland, like them and their Haitian military pals have done with that island nation.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

If I was a member of the Mafia,Triades,Hell's Angels or any other criminal organization you can name,I'd be a card carrying Tory.

Because nothing...NOTHING would threaten me more than having a government bent on legalizing my bread and butter.And 'tough on crime' policies allow me to increase my profits..They protect my business and true to their pro-business agenda,make me a richer man.

ALL laws that fall under a 'morals' code that doesn't involve rape,child molestation,murder,grand larceny or greivous bodily harm should be SCRAPPED YESTERDAY.

.

Aristotleded24

You know Fidel, at the end of the day it's up to the BC NDP to convince people to vote for them, and if the people don't, they've done something wrong, given how vastly unpopular Gordon Campbell is. You are behaving no differently than a child caught doing something wrong pointing the finger at someone else and taking no responsibility.

And Stockholm, the reason why people in BC aren't nearly as enthusiastic as you are about the NDP being as far ahead of the Liberals is that there is no election happening right now, and even if Heed had to resign his seat and it went to the NDP in a byelection, the Liberals would still have a majority. Aside from all the other points people have made about the Liberals re-branding, the fact that polls go all over the place, and the general inability of the NDP to inspire people during an election which is the only time that public opinion polls actually matter, the next election is not for another 3 years, during which the Liberals can do a great deal of damage on top of what they've already done.

Stockholm

I guess some people just want to be malcontents and sulk about polls showing the NDP way ahead in BC. Why? because it flies in the face of their narrative that the NDP can never win an election unless it either (according to one school of thought) moves even further to the centre, declares war on organized labour and becomes something like the federal Liberals OR (according to another school of thought) moves far far to the left and starts calling for class struggle and for the "workers to own the means of production". Of course, we have to live with the BC Liberals for another three years, but in the meantime, it actually does matter that polls show the government being ridiculously unpopular. It starts to erode Campbell's credibility within his own party, destroy morale, makes his own caucus start to get uneasy, makes opponents of the government feel emboldened and more willing to stand up to the government etc...I wonder why the malcontents dismiss evidence that Campbell is unpopular - but when polls show that other premiers such as Ed Stelmach or Jean Chaest are extremely unpopular - everyone goes on and on about how damages these men are and how they can't survive another six months.

Its easy to dismiss polls showing the NDP way ahead on the grounds that an election is three years away - but I suspect that if polls were showing the BC NDP 18% behind rather than ahead - the same people would suddenly refrain from dismissing the polls and would juse the bad poll results to justify whatever axe they have to grind against the current leadership and strategy of the NDP.

Three years is a long time - for all we know in 2013, half the BC Liberal caucus will be in jail and unemployment will be 18%. The fact is that government defeat themselves. There was nothing particularly ground-breaking about what the BC NDP stood for in 1972 or 1991 when they had their big wins - people just got tired of Social Credit and decided it was time for a change. Back in 1991 a lot of people thought that as soon as VanderZalm quit and was replaced by the wildly popular and charismatic Rita Johnston - Social Credit would win again. Instead they were reduced to 7 seats.

I'd almost be willing to listen to the malcontents - if anyone had anything remotely original or thought provoking to say in terms of advice for the NDP in BC. Instead, its always "You're too centrist", "you're too radical". "you're too pro-unions", "you're not pro-union enough", "you need a leader who looks like a banker who inspires confidence as a bean-counter". "no, you need a populist loud mouth shnook who talks about class struggle" etc...etc...etc...

I can already picture election night 2013 - the NDP wins a solid majority and Carol James becomes premier - and good ole Eeeyor the donkey just grimaces and says "what a failure - there were 10 seats out of 83 that the NDP didn't win".

"And Stockholm, the reason why people in BC aren't nearly as enthusiastic as you are about the NDP being as far ahead of the Liberals"

There are over four million people in BC - have talked to them all to ascertaine that they are all so unenthusiastic?? In any case, in this day and age - apart from a handful of partisan political junkies - who the less is ever "wildly enthusiastic" about any political choice?? I want people to mark their "x" in front of NDP. I really don't care if they are "enthusiastic" about it or not. Do you think people in Ontario were "enthusiastic" about electing Dalton McGuinty in two elections??? Do you think anyone was "enthusiastic" about voting for Harper over Paul Martin in 2006? Right now, there isn't a trace of enthusiasm about Pauline Marois and the PQ and yet they will probably win the next Quebec election. Fans of professional sports teams and rock musicians can be enthusiastic if they want - I just want to win an election and at this stage I'm happy to be 18 points ahead. It sure beats being 18 points behind. I keep wondering, how well does the BC NDP have to do to convive Ee-yor the donkey that the sky isn't falling? Does support have to be over 50%? Over 60%? Over 70%? How much is enough??

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

In the most recent BC election, 50% of elegible voters in BC voted. That's a record LOW turnout.

Why don't the NDP cheerleaders on this thread begin by explaining:

 

a) whether they think their party bears any responsibility for this long term trend; and

b) what they think should be done about it.

Of course, if the NDP doesn't bear any responsibility for this, then just keep doing what you're doing. LOL.

Fidel

Well to answer Beltov's questions:

a) The NDP haven't been the ones in power three terms in a row and punishing all British Columbians whether they voted or not

b) That 3% of registered voters who decided the 2009 election should probably be targeted by the NDP for a good pillowing(Yes, bring out the pillows!)

c) Has anyone observed the corporate dollar amount donated to the BC Liberal Party for 2009? With that kind of advantage in an election campaign, we can only conclude that the Liberals are prolific underachievers having only beaten the NDP by 3% of the reg'd vote. Just imagine if it was a fair election campaign. The NDP would have walked all over Campbell and his cronies.

d) The corporate sponsored Liberals are down by 100,000 votes from 2005 to 2009. They will be down by a lot more votes next election. Their popularity is waning already. 18 percentage points LOL!

Vansterdam Kid

Apparently Bill Bennett and his Socreds were massively unpopular too, but he just resigned, the Socreds picked a "fresh" and "new" leader and the Zalm crushed the NDP. Granted, the Zalm didn't work out too well for the Socreds, but the point remains that things can easily change. Pretty much the same thing happened when Mike Harcourt resigned and was replaced by Glen Clark, who managed to win. While I'd rather have the NDP be up 18 points than down 18 points at this point, they're sure as heck not in late 90's Liberal vs. NDP territory where the Liberals were up in the 60's and 70's and the NDP was in the 10's and 20's, sometimes fighting it out with the Greens for second place.

But even more important than polls is policy. I'm not exactly sure what the NDP would do with power if they got it. Would they be nicer than the Liberals? Cause that's about the only impression they seem to give out, not that it means jack squat. Nice is nice, because mean is mean, but who gives a fuck about that when there's things to do! What's their vision? Do they have one? Maybe they'll be able to ban union and corporate donations. That would actually be a good thing since the NDP gets about 80% of their donations from individuals, vs. the Liberals who get about 80% from corporations. But beyond that I get the impression that they're only going to stop government from moving to the right. I have no impression that they're going to try to move the overton window to the left, much in the way that the Campbell or Harper governments have done. The fact that one even has people like Farnsworth playing to conservative-leaning, BCTV watching, Province reading, suburbanites who are swayed by "law and order" appeals shows that our team is playing on their terms. That's stupid, we should be trying to make them play the game of politics on ours.

Fidel

Neoliberalism is on the wane in Bananada, and Campbell's cronies will be fighting an uphill battle all the way to their Waterloo in 2013. British Columbians will finally give these jokers the old heave-ho.

Stockholm

Vansterdam Kid wrote:

 But beyond that I get the impression that they're only going to stop government from moving to the right. I have no impression that they're going to try to move the overton window to the left, much in the way that the Campbell or Harper governments have done. The fact that one even has people like Farnsworth playing to conservative-leaning, BCTV watching, Province reading, suburbanites who are swayed by "law and order" appeals shows that our team is playing on their terms. That's stupid, we should be trying to make them play the game of politics on ours.

The key to winning an election in BC is get a healthy share of the votes of those people you dismiss as " BCTV watching, Province reading, suburbanites who are swayed by "law and order" appeals". You can't win a BC election by winning east end Vancouver ten times over - you have to win swing seats in places like Surrey and Maple Ridge etc...that is a simple fact. I'd like someone to list all the seats currently held by BC Liberals that you think the NDP would win if it adopted a hard-left, nationalize everything type of platform?

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

OK, my understanding of the replies to my questions is that it's the view of the NDP supporters here that the NDP bears no responsibility for the declining voter turnout.

Carry on, then. lol.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

No the evil lefties straw people are the real problem.  Moe, Mike and Bruce are just what we need.  They don't even need to tell the voters what they intend to do they only need to say Campbell is arrogant and out of touch and we hate liberal taxes and the people will swarm to them in droves.  I know it will work this time because it didn't the last two elections.

 

Fidel

N.Beltov wrote:

OK, my understanding of the replies to my questions is that it's the view of the NDP supporters here that the NDP bears no responsibility for the declining voter turnout.

Carry on, then. lol.

And for the life of us we can't imagine one other single largest province in the country where we have Liberals in phony-majority power and limbo-low voter turnouts. I think the national average turnout is said to rank down around where Fiji and Benin are on a list of voter turnouts for 169 countries.

The questions posed in this thread might be better dealt with [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/neoliberalism-canada-35-ye... here[/url], but I have a feeling interest will be lacking for some reason.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Good grief, Fidel. Are you saying that neo-liberalism is responsible for the declining voter turnout? You'll have to flesh that out a bit more.

Maybe you could use three cups, place an NDpea under one of them, and try to make us guess which cup has the NDpea. lol.

 

Seriously, guys, it's a very, very serious problem. A democratic deficit, as it were. This is the term that NDP Parliamentarians are fond of using, no?

 

RosaL

N.Beltov wrote:

Seriously, guys, it's a very, very serious problem. A democratic deficit, as it were. This is the term that NDP Parliamentarians are fond of using, no?

I'm not sure. Maybe people are beginning to realize it's almost meaningless. There's no real choice. It doesn't make much difference. 

Fidel

N.Beltov wrote:
Good grief, Fidel. Are you saying that neo-liberalism is responsible for the declining voter turnout? You'll have to flesh that out a bit more.

Yes good grief for sure. We began describing the how the glorious neoliberalorama era began in Canada, over here in [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/neoliberalism-canada-35-ye... thread[/url]. It goes some way to explaining the dead rat under our floor boards since Milton Friedman heaped praise on our appointed Bank of Canada governor for his Saskatoon manifesto speech in 1975. I believe it was the doctor and the madman who first realized that Milton Friedman's monetarist monetarism and democracy are incompatible way back in the 1970s. As of 2008, it became apparent that neoliberal ideology doesn't work any better in North America than it did for General Pinochet by 1985. Pinochet's proteges in Alberta and British Columbia and Ontario were only able to seize phony-majority dictatorial powers because of the democratic deficit built in to our obsolete electoral system.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

RosaL wrote:

N.Beltov wrote:

Seriously, guys, it's a very, very serious problem. A democratic deficit, as it were. This is the term that NDP Parliamentarians are fond of using, no?

I'm not sure. Maybe people are beginning to realize it's almost meaningless. There's no real choice. It doesn't make much difference. 

That I believe is the dynamic driving the declining voter participation.  It is also why I rail against the BC NDP. Their response is more of the same regardless that their strategy after two elections has reduced the turnout and lost them the elections.

But go ahead Fidel tell us all we have no understanding about politics and if we only blindly followed Moe, Mike and Bruce we would all find happiness.  I care that we have a group selling out our future and wish we had a party that understood they are on the wrong track when they run as a populist anti-tax party instead of a social democratic alternative to the neo-cons.  

Voters are not stupid they know what the NDP is supposed to be so standing shoulder to shoulder with the Zalm only makes non-committed voters look and say THEY ARE ALL THE SAME NO MATTER WHAT PARTY THEY BELONG TO.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

.

Fidel

Under first-past-le-ghost, it's very clear what the objectives are. And it's that the party on the receiving end of millions of dollars in donations from Bay Street wins the propaganda war. And at the federal level, it doesn't hurt to be an old line party hack part-time while fund raising and lobbying for corporations on the taxpayer's dime. Of  course, I'd have thought that those of us with famous lefty monikers would fully understand how the fascist setup werks by now in this Northern Puerto Rico. Apparently not. Because some of us are wanting Nordic country  socialism in one Canadian province but without the Nordic style advanced democracy implemented at the federal level. They want cake and to be able to eat it, too. Well we're sorry but Bay Street and the two old line parties are still in control of the purse strings in Ottawa going on 15 decades in a row. If we want competitive economies and social democracy, then we'll be needing a more competitive electoral system and to close the democracy gap-canyon in Puerto Rico du Nord. Both Liberal and Tory parties will work hard to prevent it from ever happening.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Fidel wrote:

Of  course, I'd have thought that those of us with famous lefty monikers would fully understand how the fascist setup werks by now in this Northern Puerto Rico. Apparently not. Because some of us are wanting Nordic country  socialism in one Canadian province but without the Nordic style advanced democracy implemented at the federal level. 

 

I guess you've missed all my posts where I proudly support MP's like Bill and Libby.  I have been a part of sending an NDP MP to Ottawa for over 15 years.  I give my support in time and money to make sure that the people of Canada have Bill's voice in the House and before him Svend's. 

The BC NDP on the other hand is what this thread is about.  

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Good. Go ahead and tell us why neoliberalism is responsible for declining voter turnout in BC over many years (including years of NDP regimes). lol.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Mr. Beltov you don't seem to get it.  If you don't like the NDP politicians in your local area then a true socialist from another part of the country has the right to blame you for the imperialist system we are all living under. Makes sense to me, what about you?

Fidel

twaddle @ #81

Fidel

 

N.Beltov wrote:
Good. Go ahead and tell us why neoliberalism is responsible for declining voter turnout in BC over many years (including years of NDP regimes). lol.

Yes, it's only provinces where the NDP have been hung out to dry by Ottawa on transfer payments and repressive neoliberal trade deals, and more than 170 repressive pieces of labour legislations enacted across our Northern Puerto Rico since the NDP tookover Ottawa in 1982. Attacking labour is first and foremost on the fascist agenda, and our two stoogeocratic old line parties passed that test with flying colours decades ago. Beltov? LOL!

 

kropotkin1951 wrote:
Mr. Beltov you don't seem to get it.  If you don't like the NDP politicians in your local area then a true socialist from another part of the country has the right to blame you for the imperialist system we are all living under. Makes sense to me, what about you?

Yes-yes, provincial governments run the show and control federal purse strings not Ottawa. We know. Kropotkin? LOL!

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Fidel wrote:

twaddle @ #81

..you made me laugh. your so cute when your irrational.

Fidel

Pfff!

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Fidel wrote:

Yes-yes, provincial governments run the show and control federal purse strings not Ottawa. We know. Kropotkin? LOL!

see post 82 above

 

 

Fidel
kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Fidel, Fidel you try so hard. [sigh]

Fidel

Can you explain why Campbell's HST will be so good for people struggling in small town British Columbia?

Why not raise taxes on rich friends of the Liberal Party?

I think that if HST is such a good thing, then Campbell and Liberals should stuff it up their arses sideways. A good thing can't hurt in a recession.

[sigh]

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Fidel why must I explain the policies of the thieves that inhabit Howe Street (that is like Bay Street but in BC)

The fact that I don't like the amount of energy going into feeding the right wing mantra of lower taxes doesn't mean I agree with either the HST or its implementation.  I would of course prefer if an NDP government was in power and that is why their losing campaigns piss me off. But what pisses me off more is the arrogant attitude that allows the brain trust of Moe Mike and Bruce to blame their electoral defeats on people they have shunned and marginalized within the party.  They have stolen the soul from a social democratic party and spent two three elections trying to convince voters they are not really socialist but a centrist populist party.  If they had won one of those elections their strategy would have been vindicated but they have lost.  Losing the last election because not enough people bothered to vote for them tells me the strategy is not working.  Shooting the messenger seems to be the only response the cabal in the BC NDP ever takes to criticisms from within.  

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..35-36 years ago i became an activist. i worked in a wallboard plant. there i made friends with a fellow worker and to pass the time we had varied discussions. one such talk was that the place was unionized yet there was zero shop floor presence of the union. one day my friend invited me to a meeting. a left wing anti vanguard group they were. most of the people in the group came from the ndy. some were still a part of the ndp. one of the first action i became involved in was the flyers bus strike. the company was a crown corp. ed schreyer the ndp premier at the time and his government sent in scabs trying to break the strike. when we blockaded the entrance bus loads of police recruits were sent in to pull us apart and allow the scabs to get through.
..so the very early lessons that i learned was that not all opponents to democracy and justice came from the right. some had power within working class organizations and exerted control for their own interests. this included left groups. i learned about conventions and how they could be manipulated. i learned that some people speaking from the left actually supported the capitalist structure of corporate domination and market economy.
..so now i look for policy. i look at behaviour. no free rides. which side are you on? is an important question and needs to be openly discussed and answered.

Fidel

kropotkin1951 wrote:
Fidel why must I explain the policies of the thieves that inhabit Howe Street (that is like Bay Street but in BC)

Because in a way you're arguing for the Liberals' HST not against. When you say the NDP is against raising taxes, you're making false and misleading comments.

kropotkin1951 wrote:
They have stolen the soul from a social democratic party and spent two three elections trying to convince voters they are not really socialist but a centrist populist party.

So it's Moe who's stolen the provincial's NDP's quest for socialism in one province and not Brian Mulroney, Jean Chretien, Paulie Pockets and ongoing today with Steve and the Harpers, is what you're saying. We could have socialism in not one but all ten provinces and two territories if only the NDP would stop complaining about the neoliberalorama emanating from Ottawa for the last 35 years, and get down to business with creating socialism one province at a time.

kropotkin1951 wrote:
If they had won one of those elections their strategy would have been vindicated but they have lost.  Losing the last election because not enough people bothered to vote for them tells me the strategy is not working.  Shooting the messenger seems to be the only response the cabal in the BC NDP ever takes to criticisms from within.

But they're 18 points ahead in opinion polls today. Cambell's Liar Liberals are in budget deficit mode, and it's because the neoliberal ideology is failing. There will be no real recovery in North America anytime soon. I just want you to know that. The Liberals were down 100,000 votes in the 2009 election. The next phony majority government is all uphill for them. Mark my words, this "new" Liberal capitalist setup is fresh out of business cycle up-ticks. There will be a new economic ideology in the western world by end of the decade. Again, mark my words. Campbell and his gaggle of crony Liberals will be long forgotten by then.

Aristotleded24

Stockholm wrote:
I guess some people just want to be malcontents and sulk about polls showing the NDP way ahead in BC.

No rational argument, so this is what you resort to?

Stockholm wrote:
Three years is a long time - for all we know in 2013, half the BC Liberal caucus will be in jail and unemployment will be 18%.

For all I know, in 2013 I could be independently wealthy after having won the lottery enjoying luxury cruises and dining out on kaviar every night. Isn't wild speculation fun? It might happen, it might not. Who's to say?

Stockholm wrote:
The fact is that government defeat themselves. There was nothing particularly ground-breaking about what the BC NDP stood for in 1972 or 1991 when they had their big wins - people just got tired of Social Credit and decided it was time for a change. Back in 1991 a lot of people thought that as soon as VanderZalm quit and was replaced by the wildly popular and charismatic Rita Johnston - Social Credit would win again. Instead they were reduced to 7 seats.

That's true, but the opposition has to have somehow inspired the public, offered them something better. Otherwise, because people have a tendancy to not trust the government and think that "all politicians are corrupt anyways," they tend to tune out politics, and the declining turnout levels reflect that. And the types of meltdowns that took out the Social Credit in BC in 1991 or the federal PCs in 1993 are not that common. You're basically advocating that the BC NDP sit back and let Campbell self-destruct, and the NDP will win. Guess what, that brilliant strategy is not working. And in the last election, the BC NDP held its ground and didn't gain anything, despite the unpopularity of the Campbell government. How is that anything other than a massive failure?

As for oppositions defeating the government, the opposition doesn't have to offer anything groundbreaking, just something that resonates with the electorate. A few examples of government defeats I have witnessed:

Stephen Harper, Canada 2006: Accountability and ethics

Gary Doer, Manitoba 1999: End hallway medicine

Brad Wall, Saskatchewan 2007: Change and fresh thinking

Mike Harris, Ontario, 1995: Simple common sense

Stockholm wrote:
"And Stockholm, the reason why people in BC aren't nearly as enthusiastic as you are about the NDP being as far ahead of the Liberals"

There are over four million people in BC - have talked to them all to ascertaine that they are all so unenthusiastic??

I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. By "people in BC," I meant people in BC who post to this board. You have a tendancy to talk like you know more about what's going on across the country than the people who live there.

Stockholm wrote:
I keep wondering, how well does the BC NDP have to do to convive Ee-yor the donkey that the sky isn't falling? Does support have to be over 50%? Over 60%? Over 70%? How much is enough??

It's cliche, but the only poll that matters is the one on election day, and any number of things could change from that point. I'm sure there was lots of Saskatchewan Party people were happy in 2003 thinking they'd win that fall. How did that one turn out for them?

Mean Moe

Here's an interesting stat, the number of registered voters increased by around 10% for the HST petition compared to the 2009 election.

Don't underestimate the anger in BC. If, and when, the Liberals brush aside a succesful petition. Their will be a few recalls. They don't even have to be successful, just close enough to force some MLAs to resign. I can see a few ridings getting close to the 40% needed for recall on the petition. Also, the strongest ridings for the petition are Liberal strongholds. People are angry and it won't take 3 years to change the government.

 

 

Aristotleded24

Couldn't the government just turn around and undo the recall legislation?

Stockholm

Aristotleded24 wrote:

As for oppositions defeating the government, the opposition doesn't have to offer anything groundbreaking, just something that resonates with the electorate. A few examples of government defeats I have witnessed:

Stephen Harper, Canada 2006: Accountability and ethics

Gary Doer, Manitoba 1999: End hallway medicine

Brad Wall, Saskatchewan 2007: Change and fresh thinking

Mike Harris, Ontario, 1995: Simple common sense

GREAT - so in other words, the BC NDP has the next two and a half years or so to come up with a three or four word long slogan like the ones cited above and then sweep the province. So in other words, all they need is a good ad agency that can give them something as good as "change and fresh thinking"!

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

The BC NDP supports the status quo because they think power will fall into their hands.  The leadership cabal defeated STV because it wasn't good enough for them but hey it is the lefties in the party that are the nay sayers.  The only way in Canada we will ever get real democracy is threw electoral change. The BC NDP is only concerned with getting power and they may get it on those terms it remains to be seen but why would another power hungry group promoting no real changes except the BC NDP is business friendly inspire anyone.

I hope they win the next election then we will see again how progressive they really are.  Defeating STV, implementing BC Benefits, putting tax revenues from legal cases into general revenue instead of to pay for legal aid, freezes on programs for developmentally disabled programs for almost three years. These are just a few of the great things that the leadership that is still in power gave the citizens of BC.  

Oh and lets us not forget this cabal's crowning glory Ujjal Dosanjh.  You know when the Moe, MIke and Bruce crowd were promoting this man as an NDP Premier I was vilified because I vocally said this man is a fucking liberal and is not a social democrat.  Strangely I experienced the same kinds of attacks from the in crowd in the BC NDP as I get when I decry this drift to right wing populism..  Ujjal is gone but the team that used him as a front man is still in charge.

Stockholm

If people wanted STV they could have voted for it in the referendum last year. Instead it went down in flames.

Pages

Topic locked