BC NDP now 18 points ahead of Liberals

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

[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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

.

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.  

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?

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!

Pfff!

see [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/western-provinces/bc-ndp-now-18-points-ahead... post[/url]

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]

..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.

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?

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

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.