June 4, 2004

choose your poison - canadian election 2004

All the parties have slogans for the election (though for the life of me I can't recall what they are). I've come up with my own - Choose Your Poison.

As usual, we've got another election that sort of works like negative opt-in. We'll be voting for what we don't want, rather than what we do. In other words, we'll be voting against something.

What are our choices? With the three major English Canadian parties they seem to be corruption, incompetence or the tooth fairy.

Personally, I wouldn't have a problem voting for Paul Martin. I wouldn't be enthusiastic about it, but I could do it. Unfortunately for Mr. Martin he leads a party that makes Enron executives look like choir boys. They are so morally bankrupt Machiavelli would be proud.

While Steven Harper might not be so bad, you can't really tell. He always gives me the impression of a guy who's doing handstands trying not to say anything but the prerecorded message that has been implanted in him. He also looks like a dentist, so there are some negative associations. And again ... the leader is one thing, the party another. To put it kindly, the Conservatives don't inspire confidence. They also eat their own. All parties do, of course, but they do it publicly and with glee and relish.

With Jack Layton, I still think he looks like a used car salesman urging people to come down to the "Weekend Blowout! Everything must go!" As for the party, they still think it's 1975. It's wonder they know how to use computers.

So where's that leave us? Bored and disgruntled and wondering if there could be a third option. You know, like some award giving organizations have: "We chose not to give an award this year as no one was deserving of it."

You also have to wonder if the anti-monarchists are wrong-headed. Given what we get to choose from in elections, would rule by a foreign king or queen really be so bad? At the very least, could it possibly be worse? You have to wonder.

No comments: