Thursday, August 17, 2006

Reduce the ration line: Vote Freedom Party

Gerard Kennedy, former Education Minister of Ontario, is munching grass in redder pastures. Consequently, a by-election has been called in the vacated riding of Parkdale-High Park.

The Freedom Party provides a handy chart comparing the candidates' positions on matters of importance to Ontarians.

Silvio Ursomarzo is the candidate for the Freedom Party of Ontario. To view the Freedom Party's platform, go here.


Pietr said...

Dare I say it? FP is going for too many things at once;it may be right and it may be policy, but idiot media-voter complexes only handle one issue at a time.

Scott said...

Too many things at once????

So are you suggesting FP just try to implement one capitalist policy at a time and advocate socialist policies along with it?

Pietr said...

No Scott.
I'm saying that the FP would punch above its weight if they stressed one issue and only mentioned the others when asked.
This is how pressure groups work.
Possibly they could set up a couple of front organisations to attack on the other issues;on the basis of "if it goes wrong, FP will deny any connection(except sympathy)".

Little Big Man said...

A party that offers only one policy is immediately excluding itself from consideration as anything other than a "pressure group". The public, and the media, expect a legitimate political party to express itself on all of the key issues facing the province. FPO does that, and does it quite tightly compared to other parties: FPO deals with about 6 key proposals, whereas the Liberals dealt with literally hundreds of proposals in a five-volume election platform in 2003 (it was absolutely absurd, and the Liberals, who won the election, have broken hundreds of the promises that they made). FPO's challenge is not policy, or style, or party name etc: the biggest problem any new party is not that people do/don't like its policies, but that nobody has even HEARD of most of the small parties before. In fact, many voting-eligible Ontarians do not even know the party colours of the three parties having seats in the legislature and will never once in their life ever pick up and read an election platform. Folks, in Ontario, do not vote for policy. They don't even vote for party, for the most part. Rather, they ask themselves "Am I so ticked off with this government that I want to get rid of it?". Few if any who answer that question in the negative will bother looking any further: they'll just vote for the governing party's candidate. Of the rest, who are unhappy with the government, most still will not do any research at all into (a) what other parties exist, or (b) what their policies are. Instead, most of those voters will work on the following principle: "I wouldn't have the first idea who to vote for but, according to my friend, who tends to read about politics, the newspapers are saying that most of the anti-government vote is going to the XXXX party. Those people must know something I don't. There's safety in numbers/consensus. Therefore, the best way to get rid of the governing party is to vote for XXXX's party. That's what I'll do. Anyone else's party is a wasted vote". Anyone who thinks that it gets more elaborate than that should give up politics and take up psycho-analysis. Freedom Party's job - every party's job, if it does not form the government - quite simply, is to ensure that it is party XXXX when a sufficient number of people are prepared to eject the governing party. That means ensuring that folks have reasons not to consider any other party worthy of being party XXXX.

It's not policy. It's the direction of the's "safety in numbers" and the quest for the hammer which will most effectively remove the governing party from power.

Ian Scott said...

The Freedom Party forgot something on that little comparison chart: Support some nations in invading others because we think we're more moral: Check