IAN C. MacLeod -- If lying and undeliverable promises are what the voters will reward, the politicians will deliver!

Expecting reason and balance in an election campaign would be nice, but on the long-established record, amounts to wishful thinking, in the highest degree of naivety.

Without indicating any preference, I am reposting some of my previous thoughts on how voters make choices. Before I start, a couple of comments:

First ... a vote for the “least bad” is still a choice. Or, as the French philosopher, Voltaire (1694-1778) said, almost 250 years ago, "the perfect is the enemy of the good".

Second ... based on the record of most of the “winners”, we can be assured that the leaders are lying about their plans on one or more major campaign issues. But then, we have to anticipate which direction the “winners” are likely to move in (as in party philosophy or to whom they owe their election – monied interests, business, labour, seniors, youth, wealthy, poor, churches, etc) when “the rubber hits the road”.

I have observed at least 15 motivators (some overlaps) to voting. Namely, they are (in no order of priority):

• the support by relationship (family, union, etc.) 
•  the historical vote (I have always been a (__ pick your party __) 
• who is promising the most to me 
• “looks” (as in “tall dark and handsome”, “nice smile”, “nice hair”, etc.) 
• the “all powerful” negative or “anyone but....” vote 
• “least bad” (as in, “I don’t like any of them, but should choose someone”) 
•  to whom the party owes its success (as in money, business, union, seniors, youth, etc.) 
• the philosophy of the party 
•  the experience and qualities of the person / candidate (including, competence, honesty and integrity) 
• the platform, policies and issues of the day 
• the competency of the party 
• the track record of the candidates, particularly the incumbents 
• the one you most trust too follow through on their promises 
• the strategic (as in, I don’t really like him or her, but my preferred choice doesn’t have a chance and I want to block someone I like even less) 
•  the demographic choice (as in the ethnicity, religion, race or gender of the candidate]

My Dad, who was well educated and informed on political issues, always said that he looked first to the quality of the person, then to the platform of the day, then the party (a “P3”, if you will). Those align with my motivators #9, 10 and 8 above.

I prefer to consider a combination of items 8 through 13, with emphasis on item 9 (personal qualities and experience).

Unfortunately, political campaigns seem to be run on items 3 (biggest promises) and 5 (anybody but...) - and much of the media coverage buys into that mush.

Whatever else one might say about politicians; on this they are not stupid. Like Pavlov’s dogs they do that for which they get rewarded by the voters. If lying and promises that can't be delivered are what the voters will reward, the politicians will deliver!

Having said that, for all the flaws in our systems and with our political parties and candidates, we are still free to vote. We must make a choice. Otherwise, we have no right to complain about the outcomes.

Or as Winston Churchill said “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”