Sunday, November 27, 2005

Why You should vote for the NDP.

Well, its all over except for putting up the signs and pressing the flesh. By bedtime tomorrow, we will be into a new federal election.

This one is going to be a dead heat, despite some rather rosy polls from yesterday.

So, why should you vote for the NDP? In no particular order, here are some reasons:

1. Fiscal Responsibility - despite the propoganda, the NDP has been recognized as the most fiscally responsible federal party, by the government itself. In Saskatchewan, the provincial NDP government is taking a sensible approach to tax cuts - measured analysis rather than the 'hack and slash' style of the CPC and the Liberals. Tax cuts that take into account the reality of government finance rather than ideology. Imagine a fiscally responsible government that cuts taxes in a careful fashion, while maintaining its mandate.

2. Integrity - we stand by our principles and do what we say we will do. Ed Broadbent's 7 point ethics plan is merely the latest example (and dovetails nicely with the Conservative one). Rather than stoop to the immature name calling that infected Parliament, the NDP used compromise and negotiation to make Parliament work last spring. The result was the passing of a popular, better balanced budget (look, more fiscal responsiblitity!) that was better for regular Canadians, by getting rid of corporate tax breaks that even the TD Bank said were unneeded. And in the fall, we tried to do the same for healthcare, but to no avail. When that happened, the NDP and Jack Layton showed again the spirit of compromise and leadership when we worked with the opposition parties (some of whom considered the same compromise and negotiation spirit to be unprincipled in the spring) to present a reasonable alternative to a Christmas election, which the government has ignored.

This shows that while the NDP will stick by its principles, we are not blind ideologues and will work pragmatically with other parties in order to meet our objectives and to make things better for Canadians. We will work for consensus rather than use ideological driven partisan attacks as a method of change.

3. A Real vote for Change - The NDP is the only genuinely principled progressive party. The Liberals like to paint themselves as progressive at election time, but never seem to deliver. Fiscally, the Liberals have been more Conservative than the Conservatives. The only party that has consistently stood up for progressive issues has been the NDP. And considering that the idea of a CPC minority isn't nearly as scary as it once was, "strategic voting" does not mean much anymore. I join with guys like Greg at Sinister Thoughts ("Time for a Change"), who says that a strong NDP is the true progressive counterpoint to a possible Conservative minority and all Liberal supporters that are scared of the Conservatives should vote for th NDP.


Of course, I'm biased in this, but these are just a few of the main reasons for people to vote for the NDP. If changing the government is what is needed, a strong progressive voice without the taint of scandal is what is needed to counter the Conservatives. That voice belongs to jack Layton and the NDP, not the Liberals.

But whatever you decide, just vote. Vote your conscience, not to counter your fear. Vote based on policies and platforms, not name calling and mudslinging. If you are having trouble deciding which way to vote, always vote with your heart, - it’s on the left.

But vote.

27 Comments:

At 11:44 AM, Blogger Nastyboy said...

Linda Duncan is my NDP candidate. I always make a point of meeting the candidates in my riding before I make up my mind. She obviouly has a deep commitment to the environment which is very important to me along with defence and forein aid.

I'm dreading this election. It's going to be dirty as hell and I fear it's going to regionalize the country even worse than it is now.

 
At 6:32 PM, Anonymous Jeff said...

"In Saskatchewan, the provincial NDP government is taking a sensible approach to tax cuts - measured analysis rather than the 'hack and slash' style of the CPC and the Liberals."

http://taxpayersfederation.blogspot.com/2005/11/sask-i-really-wish-i-caught-this-one.html

 
At 7:29 PM, Blogger Mike said...

Uhm, ok jeff, that's a very interesting post. I'm not sure what it has to do with the Vicq committee. That is an entirely differnent issue altogether.

I would have thought that a conservative such as yourself would have been happy to hear about proposed tax cuts. Are tax cuts only good when done by the Conservatives?

Ah well....

 
At 2:59 PM, Anonymous Martin B. said...

I'm quite tempted this year. I've always dissaproved of the NDP as I've disliked most social democrats as aberrations of a purer philosophy. But they seem like the party who comes closest to my social vision. My only issue is with Jack, who I feel is a terrible leader and is juvenile in his actions. Ed will be sorely missed on my part.

 
At 4:17 PM, Anonymous Martin said...

These are fine reasons to vote NDP but you get the same and more by voting Green. You would also have a government who is dedicated to meeting our committments of the Kyoto Accord plus a government dedicated to finding cheaper and alternative energy sources. If you want change isn't it time to put people into government who have never been there. Voting NDP means voting for a small change...we are at a point where we need a big change.

 
At 7:43 PM, Blogger Mike said...

"If you want change isn't it time to put people into government who have never been there."

Well, that would rule out the Greens too. And change, by definiting, is trying something new.

Liberal, Tory, same old story.

So feel free to vote Green (since you are a Green I see ;) ) and if these are also reasons to vote Green then vote. Frankly, if I had to live with the Green Party running things, it would still be better than the Libs or the Cons.

Just not as good as the NDP, the only party to have part of their platform implemented in the budget without being in power. Pretty good I'd say.

;)

But then, I'm biased.

 
At 9:21 PM, Blogger ALW said...

I agree with most of what you say. Mike. And I think that partisanship aside, a Tory minority kept in check by a sizeable NDP caucus is in the best interests of the country right now!

 
At 10:21 PM, Blogger Mike said...

alw,

Yeah, I've said that same thing over at the Blogging Party of Canada.

Despite some fundemental differences, the two parties share some common ground that could make for a productive minority situation. I think the Liberals just can't paint you guys as scary any more

Just as long as Pierre Poilievre isn't re-elected in my riding.

Laurel Gibbons is my choice here.

 
At 9:58 PM, Blogger DazzlinDino said...

Holy crap, an NDP site doing an NDP story....lol. Nice change from the Blahg, good post Mike. And who better to keep tabs on the right than the NDP, not sure that Layton and Harper will be so lovey-dovey after the election though....lol

 
At 3:36 AM, Blogger Nastyboy said...

But whatever you decide, just vote. Vote your conscience, not to counter your fear. Vote based on policies and platforms, not name calling and mudslinging. If you are having trouble deciding which way to vote, always vote with your heart, - it’s on the left.

Very sound advise Mike.

 
At 2:45 PM, Anonymous Jeff said...

I'm still pissed off that Layton would not and will not allow a free vote on ssm. Doesn't seem very democratic to me when even the Supreme Court told the Libs that parliament must decide. So much for addressing the democratic deficiency in this country.....

 
At 6:28 PM, Blogger Mike said...

Well jeff, that issue has been decided. It was voted on and passed by the majority of the Members of Parliament, in the same matter that almosta ALL our laws are and have been passed since Confederation.

The Surpreme Court said it was up to Parliament to decide and the have.

Game over.

I'm sorry you didn't agree with HOW it was decided, but I suspect if you look at how the vote went, a free vote would have been the same. I mean, party discipline didn't stop Bev Desjarlais. Everyone else in the NDP caucus was in favour. Only Liberal Cabinet Ministers had to vote with the government, and most of them were also in favour without party discipline. Everyone else had the free vote. The measure passed with far more votes in favour.

In other words, its over, like capital punishment and abortion.

Lets move on to fixing our military and our healthcare system rather than opening that old can of worms again. There are more important things than ssm.

 
At 9:28 PM, Anonymous Jeff said...

"I'm sorry you didn't agree with HOW it was decided, but I suspect if you look at how the vote went, a free vote would have been the same."

Excellent. Then you won't mind if there is a free vote as there should have been in the first place. I mean let's think about this logically and 'rationally'. How democratic is it to be coerced or forced to vote with your party whether you agree with the policy or not? From what I heard, there were about 10-12 Libs that didn't want ssm but had to vote for it or else. If abortion and the death penalty were not allowed a free vote, they should be revisited as well and allow the people to decide.

 
At 9:41 PM, Blogger Mike said...

Jeff,

Except for perhaps a few Cabinet Ministers, everyone voted without coercion. Not 10 to 12. Even if it were, the measure passed by 27 votes I believe. It hardly matters, since it has been legally passed through Parliament, just like very other law is.

Abortion has never had a vote because the MPs couldn't even agree on a resolution, but no one has minded for close to 20 years.

Capital Punishment has had 2 free votes - one in 1976 and again in 1987. So, it has been decided.

And need I remind you, free vote or not, both abortion and SSM would require the invoking of the Nothwithstanding Clause to change the status quo - both former laws had been deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. In fact, SSM was the Law in 9 of 12 jusridiction in Canada even before the Parliamentary vote last June.

Thus, a free vote to change the current law is an admission that you are prepared to knowingly and purposefully violate the rights of a minority. Today its the Gays and Lesbians. Tomorrow its the Muslims. If it can be used against those groups it can be used against anyone, including Christians and Jews.

Sorry that't not the country I want to live in. This has been dealt with let move on. Bringing up SSM is a loser for the CPc and simply plays into the Liberals hands.

That's not what you want is it?

"How democratic is it to be coerced or forced to vote with your party whether you agree with the policy or not?"

Well its how Parliament has worked for 138 years, in Canada and longer elsewhere. I hope youhold this same opinion when Stphen Harper enforces party discipline, like on voting down Liberal party policy adding new sections to the criminal code fighting child pronography and exploitation. Click 'How'd they vote' above and see.

 
At 10:50 PM, Anonymous Jeff said...

Again, SSM is not a right. Civil unions are a right and would allow all of the same benefits and protections as marriage. Why do we need to redefine the definition of marriage because a minority doesn't like it? This is communal tyranny, my friend.

And btw, this IS a big deal. It sets a HUGE precedence for the continuance of the democratic dissolution that we are currently experiencing. My point is simply: The people must have more say in the policies of this government. I only hear Harper echoing this sentiment. None of the other leaders seem to care what the people want. That is not the country that I want to live in.
Why should I even vote for any special virtues in my MP if all he is, is another number for the party?

 
At 11:31 PM, Blogger Mike said...

Jeff,

We've been down that road - SSM redefines CIVIL Marriage only - not religious marriage. It has no effect on any religion, except for the United Church and some Anglican and Lutheran Churches that wish to perform them. Its about equal treatment before the law, not about relgious marriage.

You may not consider an SSM a marriage, but for the sake of civil law (property rights, benefits etc) it is. You are free to go on conidering it NOT a marriage. So is the Catholic Church and Tristan Emmanuel.

Now, will Harper have a free vote for everything? If not, than he is doing exactly what every party leader before him has alsways done - pick so-called "free votes" out of political expediency, but continuing to enforce party discipline when he wants it.

 
At 11:46 PM, Blogger Polly Jones said...

I saw a link to an article about some new economist guy who has joined the NDP. Does anybody know this article? I can't find it anymore, and I want to use it for a paper I'm writing. Thanks, PJ

 
At 11:48 PM, Blogger Mike said...

Polly,

http://paulsummerville.ca/

 
At 12:11 AM, Blogger Polly Jones said...

Thanks. The article is "The All New Pro-Growth NDP." Someone on PBs posted about it. (They must subscribe to the Post.) If anyone knows who is linking to it, that would be great. Thanks...sorry I know it seems like a strange question.

 
At 9:06 AM, Anonymous Jeff said...

Now, will Harper have a free vote for everything? If not, than he is doing exactly what every party leader before him has alsways done - pick so-called "free votes" out of political expediency, but continuing to enforce party discipline when he wants it.

Unlike the Grits who have a proven track record of not allowing free votes, we have Harper declaring the need for it. We know how Layton and Duceppe feel. They didn't want a free vote either. So, I guess the 'rational' person is left with one choice if they wish to have a greater say in the democratic process. Vote Democracy-Vote Harper. If he proves to be just like the rest, then we can punish him at election time. Until then, we have no reason to believe he won't allow free votes on all policy decisions.

 
At 2:23 PM, Blogger Kevin said...

I think the value of free votes can be overstated. Yes, on the one hand, free votes can allow MPs to vote their conscience and, perhaps, better represent their constituencies.

On the other hand, free votes can lead to huge amounts of pork being doled out in exchange for an MPs vote. Free votes can easily morph into votes for hire, and we'd be left with a parliament that would look a whole lot like the quagmire that it the US legislative branch of gov't.

kgp

 
At 8:53 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mike said "if I had to live with the Green Party running things, it would still be better than the Libs or the Cons." Don't be so sure. If they ran the government like they run their party, you'd be screaming in short order.

"Just not as good as the NDP, the only party to have part of their platform implemented in the budget without being in power. Pretty good I'd say." Actually the Greens do very well on that score. They have had far more success in getting the Liberals to put "green" stuff in budgets, much larger amounts too than the $5B the NDP swung in 2005.

 
At 3:36 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would NEVER vote for the commie scum that call themselves the NDP (new dhimmi party?)

I have to much self respect to allow these slime any control over my life.

If they love socialism so much, I will pitch in for there oneway trip to Cuba.

FREE

 
At 10:51 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous above me is rather rude...

I won't vote NPD simply because the conservatives are doing such a great job at the moment, it would be self-destructive to vote them out, if anything, I hope they get a majority, at least untill they fix the mess the Liberals made.

Oh, and to Mike, cheers for the next election! You're my opposition, I work at Peirre's camp.

And to everyone, Volunteer!

Cheers,
Peter

 
At 10:55 PM, Blogger Mike said...

Peter,

Answering a post that is almost a year old? I see focusing is still difficult for Cons.

 
At 5:39 PM, Blogger TORONTO AIRPORT TAXI/LIMO said...

VOTE NDP Jack Layton:
Ok guys this is my perspective. If you get sick and get another chance in this world wouldnt you wanna do something special for this world , make a mark or be remembered. Mr. jack Layton deserves this chance as a Prime Minister. He will do better than the conservatives or the Liberals.
VOTE NDP. I think Since he's back now This is his time....

www.limotorontoservice.com

 
At 5:29 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How can you people actually say that the NDP is the most fiscally responsible party? Yes, we are facing a deficit, but Harper has done an incredible job of managing our finances during these tough economic time. He's done this with a minority government where he's forced to implement more tax and spend policies than he would otherwise like to in order to please the opposition.

The NDP is a tax and spend party. Always has been and always will be. They are a socialist party that nearly destroyed British Columbia and Ontario. What is beyond me, is why the people of British Columbia, one of the few "have provinces" would vote in an NDP party that will continue to pander to Quebec. Do they not realize that we are already subsidizing them with $2billion dollars in transfer payments?

Trust me, I do not love Stephen Harper, but he's definitely the only candidate that will save our country from a downward spiral.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home