Friday, May 15, 2009

The Problem for the BC NDP: Way Too Much Hate

This morning there was a fascinating analysis of the recent BC election. You can hear it by clicking here and tuning to 37:00. Here's the first part of the discussion:

Bill Good: "Vaughn, we had an election on Tuesday. Not much has changed. The Liberals still govern. The NDP is probably trying to figure out what it has to do to remake itself. Your thoughts following the election?"

Vaughn Palmer: "Yeah, it was a status quo outcome with almost exactly the same gap in the popular vote as in 2005: 4 points. Almost exactly the same gap in the number of seats in the House: 13. Very few seats actually changed hands. The two parties sort of emerged from the election where they were going into it. And yeah the challenge for the New Democrats is - 42% is a pretty good showing in the popular vote - in tough economic times when people weren't inclined to change government, but what do you do? How do you get that last bit of the gap closed to form government or do you say, 'Well, we're going to be in opposition forever' ?"

Bill Good: "Keith, Philip asked this morning, 'Is the problem the horse or the jockey?' and I think that's a very good question. I think the horse is tired."

Keith Baldrey: "It is tired. The NDP, I think, has some fundamental problems and challenges. It's not fair at all to blame Carole James for this situation. A senior NDP strategist once told me some time ago, 'It's easy for us to get to 40 points in the public opinion arena. For us to grow after that is hard slogging.' Every vote after they hit that peak of 40% is tough for the NDP to pick up because then they're going after mainstream, middle of the road voters who can be turned off pretty quick by anything that smacks of idealogy, that smacks of something they're not comfortable with. And that's where I think the NDP hit a bump in this particular election campaign. Their relentless negative portrayal of Gordon Campbell, their advertising, I think was a turnoff to the key rump of voters that they needed to attract. I mean, that plays well to people who are going to vote NDP anyway, who hate Gordon Campbell, who hate the Liberals and would never vote for them at all. But when you're trying to attract people who are either undecided, maybe leaning one way or another, that is not the way to attract those voters. So Carole James certainly has responsibility for this outcome but there are a lot of people in the NDP camp who I think have to be held accountable here and I think are going to brought on the carpet presumably by other people in the party for making some pretty bad calls early on."

Bill Good: "Vaughn, the NDP focused on the carbon tax, run-of-river projects, privatization. Did they miss the mark about what the public was really concerned about?"

Vaughn Palmer: "Well, I think the comment many have made is that they were all over the map. They came with a scattershot series. They went after Kinsella for a few days, they went after the carbon tax and then dropped that. They went after run-of-river power. Someone worked out that they had 4 different slogans for the campaign. So there was a lack of focus. But I think Carole James pulled it out for them. With that performance in the debate and a strong finish, they really are in a dilemma. Their problem is, if they go to a 3rd election with the same leader - the last time they did that they lost 3 in a row: Dave Barrett. On the other hand, she did pull it out for them. She deserves a decent interval to think about her own future. But the other thing I think they've got to do - this other thing that Keith just referred to, this relentless negativeness - look, it pains New Democrats to admit it but the most successful politician in modern times in British Columbia is named Gordon Campbell."

Bill Good: "Yes, he's lost one election in 25 years and he lost that by a whisker."

Vaughn Palmer: "Yes, he's won 9 elections! They loathe him. They pander to the people who hate him. They think it's hilarious to run an ad showing him as a drunk. I've been hearing people from the election, 'The media let him off the hook for his drinking & driving'." Face it folks, this guy is your adversary, he's more successful in politics than you are so how do you beat him?"

Keith Baldrey: "Yeah, the NDP, by focusing on Campbell actually helped solidify the Liberals main strength, which is Gordon Campbell."

Bill Good: "Well you know, I thought the most interesting thing, or certainly one of them in the election, and I certainly didn't expect it, he was front and centre in every ad, he was on the posters, they didn't try to hide him. The NDP hid Carole James. She did a really good job, I agree with you, on the radio debate, on the television debate - whenever she was seen - but she was not seen in their advertising, she was not seen in their posters. Gordon Campbell they turned what many would have thought to be a negative into a positive and he was the centrepiece of the campaign. And they won!"

Keith Baldrey: "That wasn't Carole James' idea. This was the brains of the NDP campaign."

Bill Good: "So called."

Keith Baldrey: "[The NDP 'Brains'] who thought they'd come up with a winning strategy. So it's not Carole James. The NDP's campaign missed the mark on so many points and one of the strengths of the NDP is Carole James' positiveness, her warm demeanor, her personality, and they completely sheltered that and kept it from the public and focused entirely on Gordon Campbell. And again, one of the Ipsos-Reid polls before the election found that when it came to Liberal supporters and people who might be considering voting Liberal, Gordon Campbell was a strength for them. So by emphasizing Gordon Campbell I think just simply played into the Liberals hands of focusing on their best asset. NDP'ers are never going to vote for Gordon Campbell but that soft middle ground, they will vote for Gordon Campbell and they did this time."

Bill Good: "So Vaughn, how does the NDP grow? Or is it another party that comes along and says 'we're going to be centre left, we're going to be friendly to small business, we are going to somehow try to attract people who might not be onside with the Liberals but we're tired of the negativity of the NDP' ?"

Vaughn Palmer: "Well, I think they should - a question that arose, that Norman Spector actually raised when I talked to him on the TV show last night was, 'Do New Democrats ever talk up their own leader? Do they really go out there and say, here's what our leader's done for us and here's what's really worked?' They don't take pride in the fact, I don't think, not enough of it, that she's moderated their economic message. On the contrary, they gave her a platform that made it sound more left-wing than she is. She went around for 4 years, giving speeches to the business community, talking about growth, investment, how the NDP made mistakes in the 1990's and the New Democrats never talked that up. You get a New Democrat going and they'll tell you 'oh no, the 90's were great, there were no economic problems, it's all the media'. I think part of the problem is that they have to resolve among themselves to unite behind their leader and let her move them a little closer to the middle. They don't have to move very far, you know. The gap isn't huge between these two parties. It's like 4 points. Keith's right, it takes a bit of effort to get to the middle. The problem in the NDP you've got is that there's a bunch of people in the NDP that think the solution is to move left."

Keith Baldrey: "Yes, that's the problem. There's the class warfare element of the NDP who think that's how to win power in this province because they did it once in '96, where the vote was split big time, where the Reform Party was able to get 9 points. That's a lot of voters and that's what gave Glen Clark the election. It wasn't his assault on banks. But there are class warfare advocates in the NDP who think, 'If we just move hard left then we'll win' but that's just not enough voters."

Vaughn Palmer: "These people are crackpots. Here's their strategy summarized: 'We're going to move to the left and we're going to win - we're going to get our people really happy - we're going to win an election with 39 or 40% of the vote. How we're going to do that? Well, you know what we're going to do, we're going to talk up the Conservative Party because the Conservative Party will split the Liberals and then we get to split the vote in British Columbia and we'll win with 39%. This is a crackpot idea! It depends on the Conservative Party. Look what the Conservative Party did in the election: they took 20% of the vote in one riding, they took 17, 16 - they took a big chunk of the vote - they split the opposition vote. The Liberals won ever riding where the Conservatives did well. James should put the people that make those arguments on Call Block at party headquarters!"

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Michael Coren Show: Tamil Protests, Ruby Dhalla

Gitmo's Jerk House

Ten Reasons Why Canada's Conservative Party isn't very conservative

There's a contest being held at ThePolitic:

Submit your suggestions for the top ten un-conservative things the Conservative Party of Canada has done since their election in 2006.

and win a signed copy of Mark Steyn's book, America Alone.

I thought about it a moment and submitted this list:

  1. Bailing out the automobile manufacturers.

  2. Not doing a thing about the infamous Section 13 of the HRCs.

  3. Not doing much of anything to shrink the federal government and its associated spending.

  4. Not seemingly doing much to reduce the endless grants to most every sector of our society.

  5. Not attempting to either shut down the CBC or even force a people/content change there.

  6. Not pushing for some degree of choice when it comes to health care insurance.

  7. Caving in (at least on the surface) to the Global Warming "religious" fanatics.

  8. Doing nothing to decrease the endless taxes when it comes to airline travel.

  9. Not doing anything substantial to reduce income tax - see #3 above.

  10. Other than Jason Kenney, not doing much to dismantle the destructive & divisive multiculturalist policies of Trudeaupia. We are all Canadians, not hyphenated citizens!

Andrew Steele: Lover of Myths

I just heard Charles Adler interview the Globe & Mail's Andrew Steele. I've never heard someone alter the facts in order to support his own theories. Among the many things he said, here were some gems:

  1. Pierre Trudeau was loved by Western Canadians.

  2. Jean Chretien won because he was arrogant.
Do actual F-A-C-T-S not matter to him?

Barack Obama's Drop in the Bucket

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Prager University: The American Trinity

Susan G. Cole: Free Speech Denier

If every village has an idiot then NOW Magazine's in-house version surely must be Susan G. Cole. In this despicable attack against Ezra Levant and against free speech in Canada, she truly embarrasses herself.

After attacking Rex Murphy, Rick Mercer, Anna Maria Tremonti, and Mark Steyn, she then goes on to say this:

Levant spouts all the near-religious-in-tone rhetoric about how freedom of speech is his inalienable right. Ridiculous. Freedom of speech as an absolute is an American fantasy.

Make absolutely no mistake, it is the apathy of most Canadians that have let the Susan Cole's of our country badly damage it and direct it towards an Orwellian nightmare where Thought Police, controlled by the likes of her decide what is permissible and what is not. We're nowhere near there yet but that is precisely the kind of place where we're devolving into unless enough Canadians wake up and say, "NO MORE!"

I am heartened to see that many people are taking the time to talk back to her, with intelligent, cogent arguments.

Incidentally, the photoshopped image you see of Ezra Levant is the one on the NOW magazine site. Their right to free speech lets them publish such an image but one can not help from comparing it with these.

Think the Weather's Bad Where You Are?

Here's Thompson, Manitoba today:

Dennis Miller Quote of the Day

"Let's face it, Buzz Aldrin was just one karate chop from being the first man to walk on the moon."

Laugh of the Day

I heard a young fellow call up to CKNW this morning, blathering about something that had me both laughing and shaking my head. He was deeply saddened that STV was summarily rejected by the voters of BC yesterday and had convinced himself that it was all the media's fault for not better publicizing it.

Here's the comedy part of his diatribe (paraphrasing) : "I think the CBC did a pretty good job at explaining STV though. But then CBC listeners are generally already highly informed."

Really? REALLY?? R-E-A-L-L-Y?!?

I am confident that if I were given the opportunity to interview typical CBC listeners, I could ask them just a few questions about current news events for which they would have answers. But I submit that at least 90% of these answers would be:

  1. Absolutely and completely FALSE.
  2. Simply a regurgitation of what they had heard on the CBC.
If my hypothesis proves true, does that mean that CBC listeners are "highly informed" or rather that they're the unknowing victims of a massive brainwashing campaign?!

The Federal Liberals & NDP vs. Common Sense

I've long felt that most Canadians support immigration. I certainly do. But there's an implicit quid pro quo connected to this support. Simply put, Canadians fully expect immigrants to work hard, build a future for themselves, respect Canadian values, and obey the law.

When people come to Canada and claim refugee status, there's an established process they go through to determine if their refugee claim is legitimate. If it is not then they are asked to go home and apply to get into Canada through the normal process. Is that too much to ask? All of the federal NDP MPs and all but one of the federal Liberal MPs think so. They're supporting a private member's bill that will introduce another appeal process into the mix, making it even more difficult to remove from the country those claimants that are deemed to be illegitimate.

If you disagree with this bill then please share your thoughts with Canada's Immigration Minister, Jason Kenney.

Dennis Miller on the O'Reilly Factor

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

More Smoke & Mirrors in DC

Peter Schiff cuts through Obama's illusions and expresses some common-sense advice:

A Little Sanity Coming Out of America

Full story here. Perhaps now he will F-I-R-E the Thought Police on the Miss California USA executive board who piled on the Perez Hilton hate bandwagon! For it makes no difference what your views or my views or anyone's views on gay marriage are. Carrie Prejean clearly did NOT espouse anything hateful. She simply expressed her honest opinion and went out of her way to placate those who disagreed with her. Yet that wasn't good enough for gay marriage supporters. They felt it perfectly appropriate to attempt to destroy this young woman's life.


The Left in America really should do a careful self-examination of the incessant hate-mongering that now seems to occupy most every waking moment of their lives. But frankly, I think they're incapable of it.

BC Liberals Defeat the NDP!

Though my political views don't align perfectly with the BC Liberals, they were by FAR the least worst option. It's only 1.5 hours after the polls closed but the people of B.C. have made the right decision. Congratulations to Gordon Campbell and his MLAs!!!


As for the socialist hordes on Vancouver Island who gave the NDP an almost perfect sweep there, clearly public sector union members are living in a very different reality than those of us here on Planet Earth.



Update: Walter Schultz has an interesting synopsis of why the NDP lost.

Letter of Amends from a Recovering Liberal in Berkeley

Dear friends, family, loved ones, conservatives, Republicans, libertarians, my brother in law, Sam, and my cousin Joe: I am sorry and you were right.

These are not easy words for anyone to utter, much less a leftist from Berkeley, or a recovering leftist, that is. Even though I've been in recovery for 14 months, 2 weeks, and 3 days, leftists are always right in your face, in an I-hate-you-if-you-disagree sort of way. Hence, this letter of amends to all the people I've lectured, scolded, ranted and raved at, and otherwise annoyed during my 30 plus years of "progressive" politics.

Full letter here...

Steve Winwood Turns 61

I have few heroes but one of them has long been Steve Winwood, who turned 61 years old today. He was a musical genius at a very young age, co-writing and recording Gimme Some Lovin' and I'm a Man with the Spencer Davis Group. He then went on to be an integral part of both Traffic and Blind Faith.

I first discovered him in the Fall of 1980 on the first day my dad let me drive solo. He had bought a turquoise blue 1967 Buick Special for him & I to share. After dropping him off at work, I drove to school (Grade 11), cranking up the tunes on a 3rd Party Korean AM/FM/Cassette stereo he had added. And one of the two songs to play that morning was While You See a Chance, a song that has been an anthem of sorts for me ever since, especially when I needed a little inspiration!

Besides loving Winwood's music, I was also impressed with the fact that he avoided the drug scene that so many musicians get wrapped up in, and instead just focused on what was most important, the music.

Happy Birthday, Steve, and God Bless You!

Vernon, California: Corruption Central

I bet you never knew that there was a tiny, separate incorporated city just south of downtown Los Angeles. I didn't either!

It's called Vernon and had a population of 91 (ninety one) in 2000.

This article in Forbes is a real eye opener!

Hard to believe that such a place could still exist in America today!

Monday, May 11, 2009