Quick trip to Victoria yesterday to buy a jacket for my daughter's pending wedding. I rode the great yellow Beast and, even with end of summer traffic, there was room to get a little adrenalin going.
The province of Vancouver Island has this one highway that runs from Victoria in the extreme south that connects the city to Nanaimo, my town, Courtney/Comox, Campbell River and on all the way to the northern reaches at Port Hardy. One highway, just the one. Which makes it predictable that the highway is the place you'll see who is running for which party and where.
This island has been a bastion of strength for the NDP and, judging by the sheer number of signs, that's not going to change except up. The Greens are out in force, second only to the New Dems in signage. The Liberal presence is desultory at best. The big change is the Conservatives. They had more signage than the Libs but not by much and certainly not nearly what we saw in previous elections.
It was great to see so many Paul Manly campaign signs as I transited through the Nanaimo-Ladysmith riding. He's an island boy by birth from Port Alice way up north. He was raised a New Dem, the son of former NDP MP, Jim Manly. He's a pretty impressive guy and was on his way to being the next NDP MP from his riding until he was denied permission to seek the nomination by Team Mulcair. It seems Paul committed the mortal sin of standing up and speaking out for the Palestinians. Can't be having that, not with the Thatcher-loving, Harper-courting, ex-Liberal, market fundamentalist neoliberal,Likudnik Tom "I'll bend any principle for a vote" Mulcair running the show.
But Manly found a better home. He's running for the Greens and he might just steal the riding from the Dippers. That would make me happy, very happy for Manly and for the Green Party.
One of the main reasons I left the Liberals was their unbalanced support of Israel and Ignatieff's pre-absolution for the atrocities in the last Gaza outrage. Now Mulcair's Latter-Day-Liberals are singing the same hymns out of the very same book. If I left the party I had supported for forty years because of that, I'm certainly not going to be tossing my vote into Mulcair's bucket this time around.
As I was carving corners crossing the Malahat I began rethinking this strategic voting business, giving it a second chance in my mind. The Dippers relentlessly hector Greens that voting for our party is tantamount to supporting Harper's re-election. Bollocks!
I'm voting Green not to make a point. It's not a protest vote. Maybe it won't get the Green candidate elected in my riding. I don't care. I'm voting Green because it's the only party I can vote for. I don't want to vote for Mulcair or for Trudeau and, obviously, I don't want to vote for Harper. A pox on them all and their parties.
The New Dems may have abandoned just about every principle that Tommy Douglas stood for, they don't eat in the kitchen any longer, but there's one thing they still cling to - working over every other party and that includes sniping at the Greens and their leader. And having done that, I'm supposed to vote for Mulcair? After what he did to Paul Manly? I'm supposed to vote Likudnik?
No, I don't think so. My Green Party lawn signs should be up before sundown tomorrow. This election could be far more important to the Green Party than the ABC crowd would like to acknowledge. That's their problem.
Anyong said....this is off topic but wanted to say something about this....the CBC.ca/Ideas program last evening, August 26, 2015 had a wonderful program about Climate Change. It took a positive stance which was refreshing "Climate Hope". Tim Flannery had a few things to say about Canada with his interview with Paul Kennedy. Have a listen MOS. "News about climate change is almost always alarming, depressing, or both. But Tim Flannery believes there is qualified hope that things may get better. Mammalogist, paleontologist and novelist, he's also a world authority on climate: he led Australia's first federal commission on climate change (since disbanded), and now leads an independent climate council. Tim Flannery was in Toronto as part of a wider Spur speaking series, and later joined host Paul Kennedy in conversation.
*This episode originally aired March 16, 2015
Hi, Anyong. I have both of Flannery's key books - "The Weather Makers" and "Here on Earth." I've been a follower for years. Yet, while he envisions optimistic solutions to climate change, he really doesn't tie them into overpopulation and over-consumption. If there's to be any success you have to deal effectively with all of them.
thanks for posting that, were in a quandry on gabe, we have a strong candidate in sheila Malcolmson who was our islands trust rep for years. She is environmental and she is very very smart, its a shame she will be wasted under mulcair as he will silence her.
I had wished that Paul and sheila were able to duke it out for the ndp seat but alas they didnt thanks to mulcair's jackassery.
anyhow with all things norm I would just vote green as my usual federal vote but still was concerned that a vote for green will be a vote for the con rep.
but I will be watching carefully and my gut tells me Paul is going to win the area, and he will serve well under Elizabeth May, and she promised to give Paul a voice.
The Green party could get 10% of the vote and still end up with 2 seats under our barbarous FPTP voting system. NDP will fix it.
Just remember the US Green party made an important breakthrough in 2000, which got W Bush elected. But it's the thought that counts!
Nice try, Anon. What got Bush elected was the fix perpetrated by the US Supreme Court. What's your problem? Political tourettes? You, I suspect, need a Rolodex to organize your bullshit.
so it looks like the con shills have found your site, lol
On Vancouver Island, or in your riding, voting Green is voting ABC.
Mound, tell us, what is your solution for a vast majority of voters who want to affect the change from Cons to a better form of government, but where voting Green directly promote Cons.
My take, A..non is that if you support the New Dems or the Libs, then strategic voting makes more sense. Those parties are largely interchangeable although I think Trudeau is the more honest of the pair.
The other night I pondered where I would stand on October 20 and I had to conclude that, most likely, I would be criticizing the incoming prime minister for many of the same things on which I've condemned Harper repeatedly.
In my gut I think ex-Liberal, Thatcher-worshiping, Harper-courting, market fundamentalist neoliberal, Mulcair is a fraud but a master at opportunism. I wonder how many veteran NDP supporters (those who go back to Lewis and Broadbent) can honestly say their party faithful would have ever accepted a leader like Mulcair before the party had its principles laundered by Layton.
Trudeau may be inexperienced. Then again Harper, like Mulcair, is experienced and what has that gotten Canada? At least I think Trudeau is honest and he's sincere although that won't bring me back into the Liberal fold.
So in essence, you are endorsing strategic voting to drive Cons from office. I was suspicious that you had plan B, ;-)
I also sense sizable dose of opportunism in 'Angry beard", but the bottom line is: vote in a such way that Con candidate in your riding is defeated.
No, sorry, no Plan B, no magic wand. I notice I left something out - it's "ex-Liberal,Thatcher-worshiping, Harper-courting, market fundamentalist neoliberal,'Likudnik' Mulcair." There are so many descriptors that I often fail to include Likudnik.
Post a Comment