The Tories and Liberals have each launched new election sites.
The Liberal site a section for campaign ads, something I compained was missing earlier today, though it is empty. I presume that they will fill that hole shortly.
The NDP launched a new site last week but as of this writing it still has errors and missing information.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
27 comments:
That the usual problem in NB especially when it comes to political leadership. A big empty hole. Oh well who knows. Good times may be ahead.
I was at the NDP site and it seems they only have two candidates listed. The website says they are 'ready to go' with nominations in SEPTEMBER. I think I have to go back to my earlier suggestion that in fact liberals and conservatives control the NDP to make sure they go nowhere. Are they retarded or what?
Dude, they (NDP) are not retarded, they are understaffed. They are not availed of max donations from 30 people named 'Irving'.
You have got to cut them a break - I doubt very much that the effin' website is their number one concern right now.
Maybe its a good thing considering the "soldiers on the streets" ad could have used a big hole or an ommission last winter. Unfortunately, they were not so lucky.lol
The NDP are understaffed but why? It's pretty simple. They have not been able to relate to New Brunswickers minus a small section. If they're okay with 10% vote territory (although I think they'll be lucky to get that this time), that's fine but if they would actually like to win a seat, maybe they have to come up with something which is different yet not so far out in left field that they alienate voters. The NDP is extremely fortunate the media gives them the coverage they do. Let's face it, they have no seats are broke and flirting with the approximate popularity of the COR party in '95. The media could choose to ignore them and why not? The voters do.
Got to go with Spinks on this one. They are the authors of their own misfortune. Allison Brewer will simply not appeal to most new Brunswickers for a host of reasons. I think the NDP will pretty much be decimated in this one, except perhaps for a few protest votes, and the hardcore NDP'ers.
NDP always gets 10% of the vote. They are not authors of their own misfortune as unlike the other parties they are the only ones that have general principles they adhere to.
The simple reality is that New Brunswickers are not politically active in the first place. Just go look at how many vote at party nominations, hardly anybody.
Next, this is Irvingville. If you've never worked for Irving let me enlighten you, they SCREEN for union people. They don't want any such types in there, and Irving has a lot of clout. That means you join the NDP and you can kiss the prospects of a job goodbye.
The public sector unions that do exist already control the government in their fields. You think teachers need the worker protections of the NDP policy? Get real, teachers in NB make double what they make in Maine, and are among the highest paid public sector employees there are. Try finding a news report about a teacher getting fired. Short of outright sexual harassment it is virtually impossible to get a public sector worker out of their position. What do they need the NDP for?
Next, of course is the archaic electoral system. People know damn well that there is simply no point in voting NDP because they CAN"T WIN. Combine that with the 'other party vitriol' style of government that has people dying to get rid of the current government (or didn't support them in the first place) and you have TONS of reasons not to support the NDP.
The NDP is GRASSROOTS driven, unlike the other parties. That means if you join, you have a very vested responsibility. That means you are literally going up against all the big companies in the province, you'd have to be an idiot to do that.
That, I believe, is 'cutting them some slack' because as I've gone over and over, and which nobody has yet refuted, their party platform is FAR closer to what most New Brunswickers actually want, as shown in opinion polls. THAT, is 'the connection'. However, THAT fact doesn't get out there because only one family owns all the media that covers the province.
That brings us to yet another reason, which is the constant 'anti union' theme that is a standby of the Irving papers. So pick your reason, there are half a dozen that show its not 'connection with voters' that is the problem at all, in fact look at media coverage and you will note that these owners and editors are not stupid, it is that the NDP has far too close a connection with the 'average voter'. And by all means that can't get out, and certainly can't be allowed to gain power. These people aren't stupid, the last thing they want to see is another Nova Scotia.
You just wait until that referendum on proportional representation comes along. You will see almost zero coverage of it, and virtually no real attempt to explain it (or the fact that Canada is the least representative country in the democratic world).
But it doesn't take 'staff' to have a nomination meeting. If they are having it in september, one can assume they could have had it last month. If there are NO NDP in the riding, you can of course name a candidate from elsewhere anytime you want.
So being understaffed doesn't explain why you can't have candidates ready, well, years ago. That doesn't take staff, that takes 58 NDPers, one for each riding, to say 'ok I'm running'. That's all you need. Party members are not staffers, for the number of NDPers in most ridings you don't even need to pay for a meeting hall, you can have the meeting at your house to nominate somebody. That costs nothing. Updating your website costs nothing.
So they really are idiots, or else simply tools of members of other partys or interests. Thats not surprising, anybody can join. Hell, in most ridings a manager for Irving could join and simply take over if they are overbearing enough.
Greg Byrne running in Fredericton-Lincoln has dashed Allison Brewer's slim chance of winning that seat... though, do you think Brewer could play spoiler and give that riding to the Tories by siphoning off Liberal votes?
Also, I noticed on the CBC NB Election site that, under the leadership profiles, they listed Brewer as being MLA Fredericton-Lincoln.
...sounds like wishful thinking on the CBC's part William. LOL.
Seriously though I don't see Brwer siphoning off NDP votes. If anything the Liberals will siphon off votes from Brewer. Greg Byrne should take this riding easily. I see Brewer coming in 3rd and that's against a little known Tory candidate.
Blaming the media as anon did at 9:42 and as Allison Brewer did in the Telegraph Journal this morning for the NDP's "misfortune" is shooting the messenger. They need to take the bulk of the blame themselves. If they're not connecting with the voter they have a serious problem as a party. The average voter minus the 10% hardcore NDPers or folks who essentially want to spoil their ballot aren't interested in what the NDP is selling. Anon is right that they can stick with it and continue to sell their same product but if nobody is buying they will go out of business. I don't think it's that desperate a situation yet for them but they're going to be going through soem pretty lean years over the next little while with a number of leaders.
In this province, Allison Brewer wouldn't win an election even if the other candidates were Hannibal Lecter and someone with the mind of a six year old.
Again, repeating something over and over again without facts is not reasoning, its simply stating a very biased opinion. The media is of course a factor, ONE family owns all the papers. There have been EXTENSIVE studies about the anti union bias of Irving papers, and again, if you've ever worked in an Irving company you know how deeply entrenched that is.
You don't have to take my word for it, and you don't have to listen to Spinks. You can be scientific and simply TEST if its true. Start tomorrow with the first paper and measure how much newspaper space the tories get, then measure how much the liberals get. Then have a look at the type of thing they are saying about their policies, and where in the paper they are located. Have a look at who gets the most prominent pictures.
That's all you have to do. If you want to test it further, and not simply listen to some anonymous guy on the net, just go to the NDP website and read their policies. Ask yourself just how 'out of touch' they are with what your beliefs are.
Then go to the liberal and tory websites and ask yourself the same thing. Now, if you are regular human being you aren't going to agree with every party on every item, so make a list. Ask your friends and family to make a list.
Clearly the proof is that in almost every poll almost half of voters simply didn't know who they'd vote for. That's more than the liberals OR the conservatives got. Is that because the liberals or conservatives are 'out of touch'? If it is, then obviously its pretty hypocritical to blame the NDP for something ALL parties suffer from.
In fact, I'd suggest that's why the tories called the election, it wasn't because they were ahead in a poll, it was that so many people are so disconnected with politics that they have no idea who to vote for. That usually means they have little interaction with government, which means they are more likely to support the government.
The media is only one facet, but it is the BIGGEST. Old KC once said that nobody was Premier unless he wanted him to be (except Louis and even he knew he wasn't going to win a third term because of Irving). That's still true and you can look at the out and out bias of Al Hogan, and the increasing bias of the Telegraph since firing their editor. There are many people who don't like attributing such control to outside forces, but reality is reality.
The only place for people to get daily memorable accounts of whats going on is from printed media. Of COURSE its the media, thats a no brainer. Again, you can listen to the party line, or you can conduct that little experiment above. It's a small mind that won't test their beliefs against reality.
Just for fun and discussion I thought I'd get a headstart on that media study. The campaign hasn't started, and this is a general outline, so you'd think it would be pretty 'even handed'. So let's look:
"Cost of Living: Soaring energy costs and gas prices should be key issues. The Conservative government has offered a tax rebate on rising power bills and has regulated gas prices, but future increases appear inevitable. the Liberals and NDP both say they can do better."
This is from the Moncton Paper, which has always been a mouthpiece for the government, and we can see the first bias in that the other parties only get a "say they can do better" line. Here, while the government gets the prod, the liberals and NDP get equal, practically non existent mention.
"Leadership: The political futures of all three party leaders are on the line. Premier Bernard Lord scores highest in personal popularity in opinion polls, but he is not a great campaigner. Federal politics remains a likely option for Lord should he be defeated. Liberal Leader Shawn Graham is beset by questions about his leadership abilities while rookie NDP Leader Allison Brewer - New Brunswick's first openly gay leader - faces an uphill struggle trying to make inroads for the New Democrats."
Here once again is an obvious bias. We can note first that the only mention the NDP leader gets is the gay comment. Some may think this is hugely important, but notice nothing else is said, and no personal information is given of the other two 'leaders'. Graham is 'beset by questions', most of them by the Irving press. The party renominated him and I still haven't heard a single liberal member say anything bad about him.
Notice also that none of their leaderships are really on the line, that's done in nomination meetings. Brewers career is clearly not 'on the line', she was just voted leader. Weir was leader for over a dozen years despite not being able to make inroads other than her own riding. Clearly that is completely false, in the NDP losing is not a 'career ender', in fact its usually par for the course.
But we can return to the government bias always so evident in Moncton. Lord 'ranks highest' in polls for personality polls, but only one company has ever done polls in NB and they are few and far between, so that's hardly a given. The only negative is that he's not a 'good campaigner', which is actually a good thing to many voters, it makes him seem 'less political'. And people generally have a low opinion of politicians. Plus, its also mentioned that 'so what, if you don't vote for him he'll just get a federal job'. That's an odd thing to say, the liberals are just as likely to hire Graham, or the NDP Brewer. I have no idea whether thats supposed to be good or bad.
"Education: New Brunswick schools rank at bottom of class in national tests. The Liberals say the Tories have dropped the ball and promise to make education a top priority."
Remember, this is the initial campaign outline and we see it already, in education there is no mention whatsoever of the NDP at all. Somebody can disagree if they want, but clearly this one favours the liberals, although 'dropping the ball' and 'top priority' is hardly informative. The liberal education platform has been out there for weeks and their policies have been mentioned in the legislature for six years.
"Economic Development: The Tories are prepared to run on their record of job creation, but the Liberals and NDP say nothing is in place to cope with weakening forestry, fishery, manufacturing and call-centre industries. Labour shortages are critical as growing number of young New Brunswickers leave the province for opportunities elsewhere."
That one is pretty even handed, although there is no actual mention of 'their record', and no actual mention of what the liberals and NDP plan to do about it. The government gets first mention, while the liberals and NDP are once again both lumped together as if they say the same thing (which is another sort of bias, after all, if you are a party that says the same thing as the liberals, why wouldn't voters vote liberal?)
"Time for change: Lord's government is looking for a third term but Liberals countering with a time-for-a-change theme to bring in fresh ideas."
Finally, the 'time for change' theme doesn't even mention the NDP party.
I thought I'd do the conclusion here so people don't need to keep scrolling. This is the first initial 'outline' of the election.
Out of five issues the NDP are only mentioned at all in three. This kind of bias isn't even evident federally, its almost like the assumption is that they aren't a real party. Maybe that's true, so we wouldn't expect AS MUCH coverage, but to be objective we can clearly say 'why?'
As said above, the only thing we know about the NDP from the outline is that:
Brewer's leadership is on the line-clearly false, NPD have a tradition of sticking with their leaders
Brewer is gay. (one might think that would at least get coverage during the campaign, some will say her personal life will affect her politics, others not, we'll see how often this is even mentioned during the campaign)
For energy they can 'do better' and for economic development 'there is nothing in place' to deal with declines in resources. Which are IDENTICAL to what is said about the liberals.
No policy initiatives are even MENTIONED here. Although they are light for the liberals as well, but then the whole article is pretty light.
What is interesting about it at this early stage is just how biased it is before the campaign really starts.
While a viable 'political protest' has been known to alter media coverage, I suspect that simply mentioning this stuff at this blog wont matter much to the editors, so we'll be able to study it pretty objectively.
In fact, somebody can even come up with a scale. Let's say five points for front page coverage, three points for a picture. Three points for a second page story, two points for a mention elsewhere, and two points for a picture elsewhere.
There is a probably a scale out there somewhere from, say, FAIR, in the states, I don't know of an equal in Canada. Hey, I think this will be more fun than the campaign. The number of headlines, the number of sentences can even be counted. I think its a given that the NDP will come out on the low end of the totem pole, we'll see by just how much.
Oh I just couldn't resist one more. I'm not sure whether the papers are published on sunday, I haven't bought them for years. On the web it says sunday, but that might be a web update.
The Moncton paper doesn't even have any election coverage on their front page, its trumped by country music. No doubt in Moncton they want people thinking about politics as little as possible.
The other two papers are quite interesting. The Gleaner is divided in half, with Graham and Lord getting equal size pictures, with no picture of Brewer at all (but one of some guy in another article). There is an article inside which I can't read called "Break the mold", so the NDP gets some cursory coverage, but essentially its taken for granted that its a two way race.
The Telegraph has a huge picture of Lord, and a smaller one of Graham, but both are larger than the Gleaner pictures. No picture of Brewer whatsoever, the NDP gets first mention in a front page story, but once again they are lumped in with the liberals in a criticism of the government ("NDP, Grits...").
So the idea that media bias doesn't play a pretty central role is ALREADY starting to sound a bit weak.
I'll sum this up pretty easily. The NDP doesn't get the same media coverage as the PC's and Liberals because they currently are the equivalent of a fringe Party in New Brunswick. They have no MLA's and poll at around 7%. In fairness to the media the NDP probably get more than 7% of the coverage which really means there's a bias TOWARDS the NDP because their support in the media is out of whack with their support among the public. It's up to the NDP to be taken seriously and engage voters not the other way around.
It's interesting that Brewer and other NDP supporters are upset that the media mentions she is a lesbian. Brewer never seemed to have any problem with it being mentioned when she was looking for media coverage on the various gay issues she once fought. I could care less that she's gay. However I do want to know that someone who wants to be premier is a militant gay activist. That has reprecussions galore since she has spoken in the past that churches should lose tax-exemptions and provincially paid folks who marry couples should lose their jobs if they won't marry same-sex couples. Some voters won't care, others will. A voter needs to know where leaders stand to make an informed decision and then decide whether it fits in with their ideals, morals, beliefs, and values.
That's completely crazy and you know it. We are now at the point that you are saying that news coverage should reflect the amount a party gets in poll numbers? Forgive my impertinence but that is, hands down, the DUMBEST thing I've ever heard.
The 'fringe' parties have long complained about this, after all, if nobody talks about your policies, how do you expect to ever get any more? The idea expressed above that 'they are supposed to connect' is impossible if they get no coverage. That's what MEDIA is SUPPOSED to do, because its an election, it's not a publicity stunt.
But Spinks raises another point, so let's look at it from that other point of view, the 'connection'. Again, we won't just shoot our mouths off with an opinion, we'll examine it and see if it fits the facts. If somebody holds onto their opinion despite the facts showing otherwise, well, that says it all. To remind viewers of this blog, I should note that I believe we've had this discussion somewhere before and Spinks still refuses to accept the data, that likewise says a lot.
So let's examine the connection.
First, Spinks raises the point about sexual orientation. We know full well that this has repercussions and SHOULD be mentioned because Premiers hold a lot of power. It was because of Lord's personal beliefs that they refuse to pay for abortions despite a federal supreme court ruling that said they had to.
I doubt Brewer is THAT upset, in fact she's probably acting upset because she knows damn well that that is the only thing that will get the NDP any coverage. She, of course, can't change tax exempt status on churches, that would be overturned in a blink of an eye. Spinks should quote her from somewhere and show the links where she made these supposed statements.
But in fact, in this, there is of course a gay population out there. And there is a certain population whose chief interest, like Charles Leblancs, is minority rights. What percentage this is, we don't know, but polls favouring human and minority rights usually hover around 70%.
What is interesting about this is that NEITHER of the two 'lead' parties have ever mentioned a single reference to minority or human rights yet, and apart from the residential tenants act and a slight cost of living allowance increase in welfare payments the issue of rights has almost never even come up in the house. This helps explain why NB is one of the worst provinces in this regard. So clearly there is at least a good majority who see a real connect with the NDP here, in fact they are the only party that even raises it.
Second, lets look at another NDP statement. On August 4 of this year in a letter to the editor Brewer claims that she is "opposed to any MLA pay raise in the next four years". Now, we know Spinks and some others opinion on that, but even they would have to have their heads way down in the sand to not think that a good percentage, and I'd say clear majority of people would support this. Again, that's a pretty strong connect.
We might also remember that as a woman she is far more representative of the experiences of half the population than are either of the other two party leaders. While nobody is claiming that all women have the same opinions, it has been generally accepted that having more women in politics is a good thing, otherwise who would care?
So that's just three issues and clearly they are more 'connected' with the views of most New Brunswickers on these three issues than are either of the other parties. So to say they need to change them to suit some vague unknown format seems quite bizarre. What policies they should be pushing for seems a great mystery to me, and pushing for what a good majority of New Brunswickers want seems to be a good idea in politics.
Again, thats WHY there is little coverage. This isn't an endorsement of the NDP, this is simply analysis. Like I said, we've had this discussion before and I was just at their website to have a look at their platform for comparitive purposes and they seem to have taken down what little they had.
Again, that doesn't take money,and to my mind it takes a level of stupidity that is quite rare even in politics. When a party has so many policies that so clearly resonate with a majority of New Brunswickers it seems odd that so much energy is maintained to keep them as also rans within the party, and keep them from getting media attention from without.
Again, the only conclusion I can come to is that these people are so idiotic they shouldn't even be in politics, or else they are simply being puppets of members whose allegiances lie elsewhere. Which is true I don't know.
Check out todays newspapers. The Telegraph Journal had the most political coverage. Both parties got headlines, while the NDP barely got a mention.
That, of course, doesn't even amount to the ludicrous 7% that Spinks refers to. At the very least we should use 10% as that at least has been validated somewhere. Polls are notoriously inaccurate and the one referred to didn't even talk to 1000 New Brunswickers. In other words, you might as well go to a coffee shop and ask the people who they voted for and say "well, the NDP should only get X amount of coverage because only two people in the coffee shop said they voted for them".
Of course that doesn't even bring into the picture that even without votes 'fringe' parties are VERY important as they bring in issues that are rarely discussed. Take something as non existent as the marijuana party, that is a huge issue which neither party has even mentioned, and probably won't.
The fact that polls (Spinks gospel) routinely shows the majority, and in many cases the vast majority of canadians favour legalizing it, and almost 100% think medical marijuana should be more easily available, shows just how lopsided it is to only feature two parties.
So far we've seen very few actual policies. Todays feature shows the liberals 'want more day care spaces'. That's not really a policy shift, just a policy enhancement.
So the political discussion continues to become narrower and narrower. The media of course loves this, not just because its easier to cover, but obviously the Irvings like it when nobody mentions, say, forest policy or the environment.
Wow, not-Mike for a guy who says he doesn't respond to me, you're mentioning my name more than Shawn Graham mentions Bernard Lord. LOL.
I still maintain it is up to the parties to win over the voters not the other way around. The NDP has not done a good job at that and they are the authours of their own misfortune. We'll have to agree to disagree.
Who says I don't? I respond to anybody that raises an issue. This is an important issue so all the more reason.
Especially since that is a VERY dangerous line of thinking. The idea you seem to have is that political parties are nothing more than salespeople, the more they lie, mimic and speak appeasingly to people, the more viable they are as political party. This is a personal view, but if Lord weren't so accommodating to Irvings and there was even a remotely objective media in the province, I don't think Lord would have a chance. In Moncton the paper simply outright lies on most of the economic data.
There is no response to 'they are authors of their own misfortune', I don't even know what that means. Politically, the people who lose out are the ten percent of the population, perhaps (probably) more that have no representation.
As I've said, I'm certainly no cheerleader for the NDP, they are too stupid for words and like I said, I am beginning to suspect that there is a reason they are so dumb.
Politically it is New Brunswick that suffers. Massive environmental degradation, massive job losses in resources, population decline, MASSIVE population decline in rural areas, MASSIVE profits to Irvings and McCains who employ a tiny minority. Zero tourism industry, no medical school, the lowest welfare rates in the country, massive police action aimed against the poor, massive increase in drug spending, the lowest per capita drug spending by a government in Canada, one of the most polluted towns in North America, the worst herbicide spray program in the country on crown lands...
The list goes on and on. This is not academic discussions for armchair theorists, this is the reality for the province. NEITHER major party is even talking about ANY of those issues listed above, but I can guarantee you they are on a LOT of people's minds.
Historically it has been the NDP that has brought these issues to the fore in most provinces, so like I said, there is a reason the media ignores them.
In todays paper, the lead article doesn't even mention them. They don't even get that 7% that is strangely tossed out.
Ten percent of the people find their only representation in this party, and as we've already proven, they are far closer to what the majority of New Brunswickers are talking about than either lead party. So the other comments are nonsense.
If there is a policy you think they should adopt, mention it. If the claim is that ten percent of the population should have NO representation all because you don't like the NDP, that's a pretty fascist view, but you're entitled to it. Some of us actually are interested in real analysis of whats going on, not just shooting off our mouths.
So for our study of election coverage, day one, we see eight stories in the main papers, not counting the french one.
In eight articles the NDP aren't even mentioned ONCE. Not even in the "Election Journal" of the Times Transcript.
I should add a caveat, they are in fact mentioned, but only as a byline. As another interesting bit of bias, where they are mentioned, only the candidate's name is mentioned, while at least the liberal or conservative gets an occupation listed. The 'where the leaders are' does give her agenda as much as the others.
So we see we're well below the 10% mark. However, we should note that neither party comes off particularly well. I think its clear that we live in a corporate run society. These people literally act like buffoons, and the reporting on them is sophomoric. There is ZERO policy analysis, in fact in most cases policy isn't even mentioned.
The 'campaign notebook' is simply a description of Lords opening at the airport. Perhaps a copy of Bush's stand on the aircraft carrier or else Ernie Eves in a factory. Neither did much for the campaigns of either, and the Fredericton Airport, which barely functions, seems an odd choice.
It was actually quite funny to read Lord's comments about the liberals bringing in 'outside top dogs' and claiming that that would mean their representatives would have zero power. Geez, what province does he live in? What does he think HE does. I'm sure Tanker was so happy with all the power he had that he just had to sit as an independant.
In fairness the NDP did nada on thw weekend to warrant the paper covering them on Monday anyway. Allison Brewer ate breakfast doesn't really constitute news. They need to get out there and campaigning at the legislature isn't the way to go.
What was said at the campaign? Thats all that matters for news coverage. In YOUR opinion they did nada, they did the same thing at the tories and liberals, which was be available to the media.
She made a very tactical mistake (if what Charles Leblanc says is true) of not talking to reporters when they were bored and waiting for the Premier. Perhaps she thought it would look even worse if she was halfway through a sentence and the Premier came out and everybody took off. However, in my opinion she might have at least gotten some coverage.
She was in Fredericton campaigning, just like the other party leaders were, saying things aobut policy, just like they were. The difference is, there are reporters who follow them around and report on every talk and every issue they mention.
We can add that this adds to our media study as the number of issues mentioned by the two parties are extremely limited, and one almost gets the idea that the press is feeding them the issues since they both seem to discuss the same issues at the same time. Very odd.
But the fact of the matter is that they WERE out there campaigning, you can check the 'election journal' at the Gleaner for that. They've been in Lincoln and downtown Fredericton for the past two days campaigning. Cleary Mr "Spinks" just has an axe to grind against the NDP or else he's working for one of the other parties (or is actually Bernard Lord!) since none of the comments hold up to the remotest scrutiny.
Once again, I am not being partisan. The NDP leaders or members seem a special kind of stupid, which mimics what Spinks said about their 'own misfortune'. That they should adopt different policies and that the media treats them remotely fairly is the chief difference here.
For example, if they can afford a website, they can afford to put a podcast on it. That costs little more.
In fact, what I've just discovered is so obscenely stupid I hate to bring it up, but there are at least 'NDP policies' at their website-just not from their homepage! You have to actually click on the party executive to go to a different page and there is at least a list of party resolutions.
But again, to not KNOW that the NDP are going to get no press and so you need a kickass website is something a tenth grader would know. Every single day there should be a talk and a place to bring up issues, because like I said, the media sure aint gonna do it. Although I haven't been watching the CBC.
Even looking at their executive shows ten people, so surely ten people can sit down and figure out how to do a website that would have daily updates.
This is so embarassingly stupid that again, I suspect the NDP members are not actually that interested in having issues out there to the fore.
But again, they are campaigning, so at that point it becomes the media's responsibility to report on what they are campaigning about. The only people losing out here are New Brunswickers who are having NONE of their big issues even mentioned.
Oh no, I've been found out as Bernard Lord. Are you Allison Brewer anon?
I don't have an axe to grind with the NDP. I just don't care for their quasi-socialism and the NDP's tax and spend theory. Some people don't mind it and suppprt them and that's obviously fine. It's a democracy after all. The thing that bugs me about the NDP is that they tend to blame everyone else, the media, the voters, bad weather, etc. for their low support. They need to start controlling what they can, themselves.
So far I think we've proven just how much the media is at fault. That's no surprise. Even liberals in Moncton are saying the exact same thing about the media. In NB, media means IRVING. Go read David Campbells blog and its pretty much a day by day retort to Al Hogan's blatant tory propaganda.
Apart from the media I've never heard them 'blame' anyone else, I've certainly never heard them 'blame voters', that would be pretty stupid. It is of course not their fault that New Brunswick, like Canada, has an electoral system designed in the 19th century which means that even when they get 10% of votes they get no seats. The NDP, and New Brunswickers in general, SHOULD blame an archaic representational system that every democratic country in the world has rejected. That's got nothing to do with voters, who would reject that outright if they ever HEARD about it, and certainly nothing to do with weather. Of course as far as 'taking responsibility' goes, we're talking politics and if anybody can find a politician who DIDNT blame everybody else for everything, I'd like to see it.
If you don't like their policies, fine, but don't pretend that its some kind of defect on the part of the party. The only criticism so far of the party that is remotely true is that they are idiots. They can't run a campaign, but of course as we've seen from the other two parties, they can't make any claims close to perfection either. That perhaps is due to not being prepared, which is a tough defense when they've had all summer doing nothing and NDP have all the time in the world.
I wouldn't be quite so crude in my analysis. I don't think the NDP are idiots. I think they're out of touch and need to come up with a plan New Brunswickers will embrace. They also need to find some decent candidates to sell that plan.
You keep saying that dude, but repetition doesn't make anything more cogent. I doubt there are people who haven't HEARD of the NDP. They know they are there, so it's not like the NDP can start advertising for salaried people.
The 'plan' at least is somewhat more specific, but not much. A plan needs policy. We've already addressed that and the NDP DOES have policy. We already talked about how they have more policies that are favoured by New Brunswickers than either of the main partys.
In a creepy display yesterday was the second day in a row that both parties talked about the same thing in the same vague way. They are going to 'throw money at rural NB'. That's hardly 'a plan', in fact its the antithesis of it. Where? Who? To municiipal governments? To charities? Farmers? Nobody knows. Its just a byline in the paper.
However, the NDP is far better in that regard, they finally got a story in the paper, and its something that MANY New Brunswickers are very passionate about, and thats equal pay legislation for the private sector. Now, whether somebody agrees or not (I think I can pick which) isn't the point. This is a very concrete explanation of a piece of legislation they will propose.
THAT is policy, not the vague statements about throwing money around that the other parties will quickly say we don't have once budget time comes around.
So in fact the NDP are far superior so far in creating 'a plan for New Brunswickers'.
Post a Comment