More Politics a la Gideon
Politicians usually criticize the wrong thing about their opponents.
For example, I once read an insightful and cogent argument against privatizing electricity by Howard Hampton of the NDP. Unfortunately, I also noted that it was printed as a pamphlet, basically an 8.5x11" sheet of paper that was folded and densely covered in small writing, and that the only people that would likely actually READ it are those that already supported him.
Hampton probably would have done far better with "Ernie Eves cheated on his wife. Wouldn't you prefer someone with *real* family values?" in big letters.
The point is that if you're a left wing candidate, you're not trying to convert left-wing voters. Shoot down your opponent from a centrist and right-wing perspective. If they're gay, make sure everyone knows. If they advocate more spending on social programs, criticize the economics. If they're anti-war, harangue them for not supporting the troops. But DO NOT babble on about how they want to keep gay marriage illegal, reduce welfare benefits, or kill untold thousands in a war predicated on lies and executed largely for personal gain. Their voters may just want them to do those things, so you won't win any votes that way. Well, maybe that last one.
Note: Like many fundamental problems with our political system, this one could be mostly solved by a different voting system that encourages more parties and proportional representation. Then it would be cheaper to advocate yourself than to attack the 6 other candidates that actually had a shot at winning.
For example, I once read an insightful and cogent argument against privatizing electricity by Howard Hampton of the NDP. Unfortunately, I also noted that it was printed as a pamphlet, basically an 8.5x11" sheet of paper that was folded and densely covered in small writing, and that the only people that would likely actually READ it are those that already supported him.
Hampton probably would have done far better with "Ernie Eves cheated on his wife. Wouldn't you prefer someone with *real* family values?" in big letters.
The point is that if you're a left wing candidate, you're not trying to convert left-wing voters. Shoot down your opponent from a centrist and right-wing perspective. If they're gay, make sure everyone knows. If they advocate more spending on social programs, criticize the economics. If they're anti-war, harangue them for not supporting the troops. But DO NOT babble on about how they want to keep gay marriage illegal, reduce welfare benefits, or kill untold thousands in a war predicated on lies and executed largely for personal gain. Their voters may just want them to do those things, so you won't win any votes that way. Well, maybe that last one.
Note: Like many fundamental problems with our political system, this one could be mostly solved by a different voting system that encourages more parties and proportional representation. Then it would be cheaper to advocate yourself than to attack the 6 other candidates that actually had a shot at winning.
posted by Gideon Humphrey at 4:55 PM
2 Comments:
But then we might easily end up with a system in which there's no majority, leading to either an even more inefficient mess whenever a government tries to get things done, or a history of odd coalitions, forged out of a necessity to have things actually happen in government. I mean, do we really want to turn out like Denmark?
Actually, Scandinavian countries generally tend to rank among the best places on the planet to live. So, I'm gonna say yes.
Post a Comment
<< Home