|
Author
|
Topic: When your local NDP candidate just sucks...
|
|
|
Privateer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3446
|
posted 10 December 2005 02:24 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Euhemeros:
This question is directed towards party members and supporters; I'd like to hear your perspective on this.If your local NDP candidate just sucks or doesn't deserve to be elected due to x, y or z, would you still vote for that candidate to show your support for the NDP or would you vote for a more deserving candidate?
I think I have been in this situation once in a provincial election. Thankfully, the candidate had no chance of being elected. I decided to vote NDP anyhow since, in the big picture, I think our party's media credibility is affected by our share of the vote. OTOH what if I were in a situation where the candidate was really worrisome, even downright embarrassing, but for some reason had a decent chance of being elected. In that case, the damage of electing a moron/nutcase/bigot, for both the NDP and the country, might make it worth looking at my options.
From: Haligonia | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594
|
posted 10 December 2005 04:52 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Euhemeros:
If your local NDP candidate just sucks or doesn't deserve to be elected due to x, y or z, would you still vote for that candidate to show your support for the NDP or would you vote for a more deserving candidate?
It's simple. If you're rich and lead a life of leisure and want to inequality in Canada to increase even moreso0, then vote for either of the two old line parties that have run this country into the ground between the two of them over the last 100 years. If you've found yourself rubbing elbows with very rich people at several thousand dollar a plate political campaign fund raisers, then you should probably vote for either of the two parties who cater to corporate and banking interests in Canada. But if you're one of the millions of poor Canadian's carrying a lunch pail or brown paper bag to work every day on up to small business person struggling to survive against an increasingly large and concentrated corporate dominance of our economy, then you should vote for the NDP candidate. Vote for him or her regardless of their ethnicity or outward appearance or lack of experience in government due to monopolies on power had by the two old line, big banking, corporate-sponsored political parties who've shared power in Canada for far too long for Canada to be considered a true democracy. Because those ppl who can afford to drop twenty-five thousand dollars on a cocktail party for the betterment of rich people wouldn't spit on you if you were on fire.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Euhemeros
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11067
|
posted 10 December 2005 09:09 PM
quote:
Depends on what you mean by sucks and what you think would make someone deserving or not. No one is perfect so I'd have to see, on the whole, wherther or not I'd like them to be elected.
Well, the person I had in mind when forming this question isn't even going to work for my or any one elses vote by campaigning hard (I don't see how one could win an election with less than 20 days of campaigning when all your other candidates have a little less than 2 months). The other problem is that said candidate is quite arrogant and politically incapable. I suppose, then, the choice would be voting for the lesser of three evils and voting for an undeserving NDPer would be much better than voting for two neo-cons.
From: Surrey | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a lonely worker
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9893
|
posted 11 December 2005 01:10 AM
I' ve had two bad experiences. Once the NDP candidate provincially was a student and was "away on vacation at his parent's in Florida" for most of the election. Our local paper had this comment next to his name whenever it interviewed the candidates for their views on the issue of the week. I couldn't vote for him because no one deserves a vote for that. I held my nose and voted "strategically" that time (it was Mike Harris' second term). We now live in a redneck town with a Conservative mp. The "strategic" thing would be to vote Liberal, but I refuse to ever do this again. I know my NDP vote was "wasted" in the last contest but I felt good about making a statement. Later that week the NDP candidate issued a statement saying how pleased the NDP vote defeated the Liberal and we are a non-Liberal riding. It's great the Liberal got the boot, but it wasn't something to pop champagne over a right wingnut's victory. I kinda felt dirty after his remarks. Will still vote NDP again but his remarks really pissed me off. edited to add: examples like this are proof that we need prop rep. so we aren't throwing votes away in one sided ridings. [ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: a lonely worker ]
From: Anywhere that annoys neo-lib tools | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
chrisrkw
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11036
|
posted 11 December 2005 02:49 AM
Paul Summerville isn't just there to assuage people's fears about the NDP's economic policies, but is sure helps.Where he is there to do is to speak eloquently about leaving behind the politics of the past being willing to embrace innovative solutions. He's saying we should accept that globalisation, free trade etc. are facts of life and we should think about how we can use them to achieve prosperity for all. I for one am quite happy to see someone like him in the party, and he'll help push us in the right direction. Not only will ideas like his be those that get us elected, they are actually just better ideas than old-school socialism. And I don't think that this should be looked upon as simply a resignation to the ways of the world. I wouldn't want some old-line socialist party to run the country, and thankfully they never will. The best thing a government can do is participate in the economy to make capitalism work for more people, and support an array of strong social services that help people lead happy, healthy, and prosperous lives.
From: Kitchener-Waterloo, Ont. | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
a lonely worker
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9893
|
posted 11 December 2005 12:07 PM
chrisrkw wrote: quote:
I for one am quite happy to see someone like him in the party, and he'll help push us in the right direction.
chris that's the problem, we don't need another right leaning party in Canada. If this "right" direction continues, I think many will start wishing for a Left Party like in Germany which did incredibly well, considering it was their first ever campaign. This is the first time in over 10 years I've been excited about the NDP. I'm officially back in the tent, but if this "right" direction continues I will go back outside.
People want a REAL choice not just Liberal-lite or "third way" shite.
From: Anywhere that annoys neo-lib tools | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
babbler 8
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8
|
posted 11 December 2005 01:43 PM
quote:
Originally posted by BleedingHeart:
Otherwise hold your nose and think about the $1.75 your vote is worth.Worked for me with Azania.
Consider that if you vote for anyone but the NDP you are giving that party money. The candidate in question doesn't sound like we have to worry about them winning. If they are that arrogant and politically incapable perhaps they are better off going to as few doors as possible  I'm not sure about this... but I think the $1.75 is an annual thing and could go up.... so a vote could be worth as much as $10.
From: take a break, we've been on this site too long | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718
|
posted 11 December 2005 01:45 PM
quote:
Originally posted by babbler 8:
I'm not sure about this... but I think the $1.75 is an annual thing and could go up.... so a vote could be worth as much as $10.
I think it's a buck-a-year, except in election years. So I guess the maximum is 6.25 per vote, but these days only $1.75.
From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
abnormal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1245
|
posted 11 December 2005 01:53 PM
posted by Cougyr:
quote:
I have, on occassion, been faced with an election when I felt that all candidates were unworthy of office. My response has been to vote for a fringe candidate, who hadn't any hope of winning, as a protest.
The problem with voting for a fringe candidate is there is no way of telling whether you really support that individual or are simply protesting. There is another risk - if enough people feel the way you do that individual may be elected (remember the Rae NDP victory?) You do have another option. You can decline your ballot. This is not the same as not voting - you simply turn up at your polling station and, after they've checked of your name, tell them that you want to decline your ballot. This is an official statement that you feel it is important to vote but that none of the candidates deserve your support. Unfortunately nobody publishes the figures for declined ballots (note that spoiling your ballot is not the same thing).
From: far, far away | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336
|
posted 11 December 2005 02:06 PM
quote:
Originally posted by abnormal:
The problem with voting for a fringe candidate is there is no way of telling whether you really support that individual or are simply protesting.
Does it matter? The mainstream candidates know that someone did not vote for them. Your declined ballot sounds like a good idea, though it would be better if there was a "decline" box on the ballot; thus exposing it to the number crunchers.
From: over the mountain | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
abnormal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1245
|
posted 11 December 2005 08:08 PM
Cougyr,I think it matters. There is a big difference between someone not voting for you because they believe someone else is better and not voting for you because they think you're an idiot. If someone votes for a fringe candidate there is no way for the mainstream parties to tell. After all, maybe you really do support whatever the fringe guy is selling.  At least declining your ballot makes a statement.
From: far, far away | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaitlin Stocks
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3766
|
posted 14 December 2005 05:49 PM
Last election, I had an extremely hard time voting for my NDP candidate. He blew all of the riding assocaitions money on salary for his friends that did very little for the campaign, thus screwing us for this campaign. And he was walking around Regina with a cardboard cut out of Ralph Goodale. He also put lawn signs on people's lawns after he was told, NO. We don't want your lawn sign. The sign was taken down, and a new one was put up over night. Rediculous. He even asked non-supporters if he could put up a lawn sign on their property. Duh.I bit the bullet and voted for him, though. I decided that supporting the NDP with my buck seventy five, and supporting the Party I have stood behind for so long, I walked into that church, marked in my X, held my nose and shoved that ballot into the box. Not b'coz my candidate was worthy of my vote, but b'coz the NDP was worthy of my vote. I'm fortunate enough to have an extremely good candidate this time around. Hopefully we'll be able to turf Goodale for once and for all!!! 
From: The City That Rhymes With Fun... | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Critical Mass2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10908
|
posted 15 December 2005 01:29 PM
If the candidate of your normal party is bad, choose the best local candidate. The idea of "loyalty" to a political party is foolish in my view. It's like admitting you don't have a mind of your own. A goofball is a goofball. A good local MP can do many things for constituents on a day-to-day basis. A goofball from your regular party will screw up even the local everyday work. So choose the person best suited to help your riding. Unless they are cabinet material, most MPs make little difference in Ottawa, but they can make a slight or sometimes even significant difference locally[ 15 December 2005: Message edited by: Critical Mass2 ]
From: AKA Critical Mass or Critical Mass3 - Undecided in Ottawa/Montreal | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
radiorahim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2777
|
posted 16 December 2005 02:30 AM
Most election campaigns I do some volunteer work.So what I do if my candidate is a "turkey" is yeah...I'll vote for them, usually put a sign up but that's it. I won't work form them or donate money. I'll usually go to a neighbouring riding where they have a good candidate and volunteer my time/money there.
From: a Micro$oft-free computer | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
the grey
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3604
|
posted 16 December 2005 12:44 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Garth Brasseur:
For example, I suspect I'd not vote NDP if Buzz Hargrove were nominated in the riding where I lived...
What?!? I'd be even more determined to vote NDP to make sure that Buzz lost . . .
What was that?
Oh, you were assuming that Buzz would actually run for the NDP? Never mind then.
From: London, Ontario | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ceti
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7851
|
posted 16 December 2005 01:12 PM
The local candidate here in Laprairie Brossard for the Conservatives is a Tibetan political activist with good credentials. Aagh! I'd vote for him if he was in any other party.The NDP candidate was the Conservative candidate last time around. What the f***? The Liberal, Jacques Saada is one of those useless MPs, who in fact is also way too pro-Israel. The Bloc candidate seems like an interesting fellow who has tried to make inroads in the minority communities which have a large presence in the riding. Not sure about the Greens, but there was a Marxist Leninist candidate last time which would have been my choice. Thank god this is my parents' riding who are abstaining from voting for the third straight time. Im voting for Olivia Chow in my riding.
From: various musings before the revolution | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308
|
posted 16 December 2005 08:09 PM
quote:
Originally posted by chrisrkw:
He's saying we should accept that globalisation, free trade etc. are facts of life and we should think about how we can use them to achieve prosperity for all.
Hrrmm. To be fair to Summerville, I haven't actually seen anything he's said that sounds like that. He's stayed off the question of trade, by and large, which is probably a good thing.
The question of, say, taxation policy and whether it's a good thing to do some taxing and invest in infrastructure, education and social programs, is a completely different one from the question of trade, globalization etc. Both are utterly distinct from the kinds of questions that define whether you're a "socialist". He's on the good guys' side on social programs and infrastructure. That's good and I'll take it for this election because that's the major current battleground.
If he's all pro "free trade" and globalization and considers them some inevitable fact of life, he's wrong, wrong, wrong. Even the Americans often know better than that in real life--and it's the areas where they've forgotten that are hollowing out their economy. Meanwhile, the Chinese, Koreans, Japanese etc. for sure know better. You need enough control over trade and investment to be able to run an effective industrial policy. Canada doesn't have that.
I'm sure he's nothing even resembling socialist or anarchist or any of that. But even though I am something resembling socialist or anarchist, I really don't expect that of NDP politicians at the moment. The pendulum's way to the right just now; if a candidate is far enough left on relevant issues that he's helping pull it back, I'm not gonna yell too hard unless he's, like, anti- some kind of civil rights (gay, race, gender, whatnot) or something.
If we ever get to a point where politics in this country are halfway sane, especially if we get PR, then I'll be interested in getting a bit more hardline in terms of how left I want the candidates.
From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718
|
posted 16 December 2005 08:39 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Rufus Polson:
He's on the good guys' side on social programs and infrastructure. That's good and I'll take it for this election because that's the major current battleground.
If he's all pro "free trade" and globalization and considers them some inevitable fact of life, he's wrong, wrong, wrong.
And if he is, he's still a better option than Bennett or Kent.
From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TemporalHominid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6535
|
posted 16 December 2005 09:04 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Euhemeros:
This question is directed towards party members and supporters; I'd like to hear your perspective on this.If your local NDP candidate just sucks or doesn't deserve to be elected due to x, y or z, would you still vote for that candidate to show your support for the NDP or would you vote for a more deserving candidate?
vote for a more deserving candidate
From: Under a bridge, in Foot Muck | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
radiorahim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2777
|
posted 18 December 2005 01:47 PM
quote:
I am not qualified to even generalize, but I suspect the Tibetan exile is reacting against the Chinese communists.
Yeah...the Chinese Communist Party isn't the least bit "communist" these days...its a corporatist party along the lines of Mussolini's fascists IMHO. quote:
The NDP candidate was the Conservative candidate last time around. What the f***?
I expect its because the local riding association is very small and weak and that anyone with any degree of organization can take it over and become the candidate. Perhaps the candidate was one of the old "Progressive" Conservatives and now can no longer support them. quote:
He's on the good guys' side on social programs and infrastructure. That's good and I'll take it for this election because that's the major current battleground.
If he's all pro "free trade" and globalization and considers them some inevitable fact of life, he's wrong, wrong, wrong
Summerville is a "class traitor"  from the point of view of the ruling class. So yeah welcome him aboard. [ 18 December 2005: Message edited by: radiorahim ]
From: a Micro$oft-free computer | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
the bard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8375
|
posted 18 December 2005 08:31 PM
quote:
Originally posted by lonewolf2:
When your local NDP candidate just sucks... ... suck it up and vote NDP anyway. It'll be a vote for the future and may encourage better candidates next time.
I say abstain or vote for another left candidate. I don't think we should be on the terrain of lesser evil politics
From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
abnormal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1245
|
posted 18 December 2005 08:55 PM
quote:
When your local NDP candidate just sucks...
... suck it up and vote NDP anyway. It'll be a vote for the future and may encourage better candidates next time.
How does this encourage better candidates in the future? If nothing else you've demonstrated to the riding association and the party that this guy can get your vote. Why would they replace someone that can draw some percentage of the popular vote. I think you've got a couple of choices, none of which involve voting for the individual in question: (1) vote for someone else simply as a protest
(2) decline your ballot
(3) vote for the candidate that you think will do the best job of representing your riding, regardless of party
(4) don't vote. I think (4)is the worst of all choices. The first option isn't really attractive for two reasons (i) there is no way your local candidate can differentiate between a vote for the fringe candidate and a vote against him and (ii) the fringe candidate might just win as a result of protest votes. Also not a good thing. Declining your ballot is a good approach, the only difficulty is that the figures aren't published so no-one really knows what happened. The remaining category, item (3), vote for the candidate that you think will represent your riding best regardless of party, is actually not as unpleasant as some would think. Clearly if you think someone's views are repugnant, he can't represent you well, so you can't vote for him.
From: far, far away | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Kaitlin Stocks
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3766
|
posted 20 December 2005 06:17 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Don Fanucci:
Wasn't that the same candidate you lost the nomination to? Sounds like sour grapes to me [ 18 December 2005: Message edited by: Don Fanucci ]
My personal feelings for the guy can't fix the financial situation of the riding association. He was a bad candidate, which is why I sought the nomination in the first place (which is sort of like what Scott just said... no one else came forward, so I tried to not let him be our candidate. I failed, but at least I can say I tried.). End of story. [ 20 December 2005: Message edited by: Kaitlin Stocks ]
From: The City That Rhymes With Fun... | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372
|
posted 20 December 2005 07:48 PM
I am pretty lucky - Libby Davies would get my vote whether I was a dipper or not.Last election was a bit more of a challenge, but I voted against Dosanjh more than for Meslo. When all else fails, vote for a party and its leader. Individual candidates will have to toe the line on most things that matter, and the leader will have more influence with more candidates.
From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
