Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

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.”
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BC cannot regulate, redesign, and reinterpret its way to a stable forestry sector. Communities need clear rules, predictable timelines, and accountability for results.

Photo credit:  Atli Resources LP   BC’s Forestry Crisis Continues with Closure of Beaver Cove Chip Facility   As industry leaders, Indigenous partners, and contractors gather this week at the BC Natural Resources Forum in Prince George, the gap between government rhetoric and reality could not be clearer. Just hours after the Eby government once again touted reconciliation, certainty, and economic opportunity under DRIPA, Atli Chip Ltd, a company wholly owned by the ’Na̱mg̱is First Nation, announced it is managing the orderly closure of its Beaver Cove chip facility. The closure comes despite public tax dollars, repeated government announcements, and assurances that new policy frameworks would stabilize forestry employment and create long-term opportunity in rural and coastal British Columbia. “British Columbians are being told one story, while communities are living another,” said Ward Stamer, Critic for Forests. “This closure makes it clear that announcement...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stamer: Hope for Forestry Completely Shattered After Another Provincial Review Driven by DRIPA

IMAGE CREDIT:  Provincial Forestry Advisory Council Conservative Critic for Forests Ward Stamer says the final report from the Provincial Forestry Advisory Council confirms the worst fears of forestry workers and communities; instead of addressing the real issues driving mill closures and job losses, the NDP has produced a report that ignores industry realities and doubles down on governance restructuring. Despite years of warnings from forestry workers, contractors, and industry organizations about permitting delays, regulatory costs, fibre access, and the failure of BC Timber Sales, the PFAC report offers no urgency, no timelines, and no concrete action to stop the ongoing decline of the sector. “ This report completely shatters any remaining hope that the government is serious about saving forestry ,” said Stamer.  “ We didn’t need another study to tell us what industry has been saying for years. While mills close and workers lose their livelihoods, the NDP is focused on re...
Post a Comment
Read more

FORSETH – My question is, ‘How do we decide who is blue enough to be called a Conservative?’

How do we decide who’s blue enough to be a Conservative? AS OF TODAY (Friday January 30 th ), there are now eight individuals who have put their names forward to lead the Conservative Party of British Columbia. Having been involved with BC’s Conservatives since 2010, and having seen MANY ups and downs, having 8 people say “I want to lead the party” is to me, an incredible turn-around from the past. Sadly, however, it seems that our party cannot seem to shake what I, and others, call a purity test of ‘what is a Conservative’. And that seems to have already come to the forefront of the campaign by a couple of candidates. Let me just say as a Conservative Party of BC member, and as someone active in the party, that frustrates me to no end. Conservatives, more than any other political philosophy or belief, at least to me, seems to have the widest and broadest spectrum of ideals.   For the most part, they are anchored by these central thoughts --- smaller and less intru...
1 comment
Read more

Labels

Show more