NDP campaign run by USW, $600,000 in cash from USA

[The Green Barbarian]

The NDP and their idiotic union masters are thrusting a massive lie upon the public by stating this falsehood over and over.

You could say this about every point in the NDP's dumpster fire of a platform.

[Gone_Fishin]

Horgan said he holds private fundraising dinners and won't stop until the rules are changed.

"I'm not going to unilaterally disarm," he said. "It would be irresponsible of me to do that. I get calls from little old ladies who say, 'You keep sending me emails, John, is it really that dire?' and I say, 'Yes, if you could send another five bucks that would be great.'"

He said that on April 7th. On April 19th, he said: "Horgan insists he’s not worried about a potential coffer shortfall. “I don’t feel dire at all." http://www.news1130.com/2017/04/19/bc-n ... eads-cash/

Which is it, John? Dire when you're fleecing the little old lady for her cat food money, or not dire at all?

[The Green Barbarian]

Horgan said he holds private fundraising dinners and won't stop until the rules are changed.

"I'm not going to unilaterally disarm," he said. "It would be irresponsible of me to do that. I get calls from little old ladies who say, 'You keep sending me emails, John, is it really that dire?' and I say, 'Yes, if you could send another five bucks that would be great.'"

Horgan is stealing money from little old ladies? Disgusting!!!!

[Merry]

People want to see sidewalks in their neighbourhood and they contribute to the candidate who says she'll make sure they're installed.

There is a big difference between someone making a small donation to a Party whose platform they support (as in the case of your hypothetical example), and an individual or company making a massive donation as a way of influencing what action a Party takes when in power. In the first case the donation is a reactive measure, whereas in the second it is decidedly proactive.

If you didn't agree with that statement you wouldn't be so busy criticizing the NDP for accepting union donations (which I agree should be banned, and for the same reasons. It is an attempt to "buy" influence should that Party be elected).

However, as long as it's still legal, expecting the NDP to close off access to that particular cash cow while their opponents continue the practise is unrealistic, and would be virtual political suicide on the NDP's part (given that we live in a climate where money often decides the outcome of elections). So I disagree with you that they should put themselves at such an obvious financial disadvantage, just because they've promised to ban all "deep pocket" political contributions if elected.

Instead, I prefer to give them credit for being the only major Party to admit such donations are a problem that they will eliminate if given the chance. Which is something the LIberals refuse to do.

The Liberals have been in that position because they've won four elections in a row.

Which, it could be argued, is proof positive that the Party with the most money usually wins the election.

The Liberals get far more cash from wealthy individuals and corporations than the NDP get from unions.

And ALL such "deep pocket" type donations should be banned. But so far only the NDP and the Greens have agreed to do so. It's time for Liberal supporters such as yourself, to demand the Liberals also agree to ban such questionable influxes of cash.

You seriously don't think that a union donating $600,000 to the NDP isn't expecting something in return???

No I don't think they expect nothing in return, which is why I want to see such donations banned. But I think it's hypocritical to demand the NDP turn down such donations while giving the Liberals a free pass on their even larger questionable donations.

BOTH Party Platforms should include a ban on this type of influence buying. But so far only the NDP has agreed to do so. Why not the Liberals?

I suspect the answer to that is because the current system has served, and continues to serve the Liberals so well. But that doesn't make it right.

I repeat that when it comes to this outrageous fundraising issue, we ordinary citizens should be united in demanding change - regardless of which political Party we support. Because allowing those with deep pockets to influence Government policies that affect us all is WRONG and needs to STOP.

On that we agree.

Glad to hear it.

[Urbane]

^^ But I DON'T give the Liberals a free pass. Gheeeeesh Merry! How many times do I have to lay out my criticisms of the Liberals? One of those criticisms is the issue of corporate/union donations. And no, the concept of contributing is the same whether it's a sidewalk or something more expensive. And no, I don't think that the NDP have lost four elections in a row because of money. It's their policies that haven't resonated with voters.

[Merry]

But I DON'T give the Liberals a free pass. Gheeeeesh Merry! How many times do I have to lay out my criticisms of the Liberals? One of those criticisms is the issue of corporate/union donations.

I know you have problems with some of the Liberals actions Urbane, but sometimes you let your dislike of the NDP colour your view to the point where you are not entirely reasonable in your criticism of them.

For example, surely you realize that they would be foolish to refuse to accept "deep pocket" donations at a time when their opponents are raking in almost 4 times as much via equally questionable "deep pocket" donations. But at least the NDP have said they'll ban all such donations if elected. So why not give them credit where credit is due, rather than using their honorable intent to try to discredit them?

I believe there are enough problematic NDP policies for you to attack them on, without manufacturing an issue over something like this. And I further believe it damages your credibility when you attack them for something that, if you were in their position, you'd probably do yourself.

Far better to give them credit for agreeing that such donations are an issue, and should be banned, while at the same time trying to persuade your Party of choice to also agree to ban them.

But in the meantime, if you attack the NDP on issues like Site C and Kinder Morgan - I totally agree with you.

[krocky]

Excellent points Merry, a voice of sound reasoning, soooo rare..!!!

[Urbane]

I know you have problems with some of the Liberals actions Urbane, but sometimes you let your dislike of the NDP colour your view to the point where you are not entirely reasonable in your criticism of them.

For example, surely you realize that they would be foolish to refuse to accept "deep pocket" donations at a time when their opponents are raking in almost 4 times as much via equally questionable "deep pocket" donations. But at least the NDP have said they'll ban all such donations if elected. So why not give them credit where credit is due, rather than using their honorable intent to try to discredit them?

I believe there are enough problematic NDP policies for you to attack them on, without manufacturing an issue over something like this. And I further believe it damages your credibility when you attack them for something that, if you were in their position, you'd probably do yourself.

Far better to give them credit for agreeing that such donations are an issue, and should be banned, while at the same time trying to persuade your Party of choice to also agree to ban them.

But in the meantime, if you attack the NDP on issues like Site C and Kinder Morgan - I totally agree with you.

As I've said before, shame on Christy Clark for not banning corporate/union donations, shame on the NDP for telling us that receiving such donations is akin to corruption, and then accepting donations themselves, and good on Dr. Weaver and the Greens for taking the highroad by NOT accepting such donations.

Again, I don't consider campaign contributions "bribes" so I wouldn't find myself in the same position as the NDP but if I truly believed they were bribes I would NOT accept them. Your argument is a variation of "they're all doing it" and in this case it's "one of the other parties is doing so we have to do it too." Not very inspiring!

[krocky]

They know they get less in donations than the Liberals.

I'm confused, in a thread created solely to whine about a large donation to the NDP the OP admits here that the Liberals take bigger donations (read bribes) and yet that's OK.. The hypocrisy on here never ceases to amaze me..

If you think that only one party should be allowed to accept donations, you might be a Liberal...

[Rwede]

They know they get less in donations than the Liberals.

I'm confused, in a thread created solely to whine about a large donation to the NDP the OP admits here that the Liberals take bigger donations (read bribes) and yet that's OK.. The hypocrisy on here never ceases to amaze me..

If you think that only one party should be allowed to accept donations, you might be a Liberal...

Who ever said that?

The hypocrisy is firmly in the NDP, when they say it's bad but they are doing it anyway.

The Liberals say it's okay and are doing it - that's the antithesis of hypocrisy.

The Greens say it is bad and aren't doing it - that's also the antithesis of hypocrisy.

If you can't understand simple logic, you are DEFINITELY an NDPer.

[Urban Cowboy]

They know they get less in donations than the Liberals.

I'm confused, in a thread created solely to whine about a large donation to the NDP the OP admits here that the Liberals take bigger donations (read bribes) and yet that's OK.. The hypocrisy on here never ceases to amaze me..

If you think that only one party should be allowed to accept donations, you might be a Liberal...

If you think it's OK for the NDP to accept donations, but not the Liberals, you are an NDP.

Do as I say not as I do, NDP slogan of 2017.

[Rwede]

Horgan said he holds private fundraising dinners and won't stop until the rules are changed.

"I'm not going to unilaterally disarm," he said. "It would be irresponsible of me to do that. I get calls from little old ladies who say, 'You keep sending me emails, John, is it really that dire?' and I say, 'Yes, if you could send another five bucks that would be great.'"

He said that on April 7th. On April 19th, he said: "Horgan insists he’s not worried about a potential coffer shortfall. “I don’t feel dire at all." http://www.news1130.com/2017/04/19/bc-n ... eads-cash/

Which is it, John? Dire when you're fleecing the little old lady for her cat food money, or not dire at all?

Ha! I hadn't seen the 2nd article, good find.

Same old flip-flop NDP.

[Urbane]

Krocky: If the NDP were to say that they wanted the law changed but until then they would continue to accept those donations that would be one thing. But to call the donations "bribes," to say that accepting such donations is akin to "corruption," and then go ahead and accept such donations is not exactly finding themselves on high moral ground. Far from it!

[krocky]

Again, I don't consider campaign contributions "bribes" so I wouldn't find myself in the same position as the NDP but if I truly believed they were bribes I would NOT accept them. Your argument is a variation of "they're all doing it" and in this case it's "one of the other parties is doing so we have to do it too." Not very inspiring!

So by your logic if you are corrupt like the Liberals and will take bribes from anyone, anywhere, anytime, and flatly refuse to ban them because they know they couldn't win without a war chest and all the "false" adverting and the money they need to buy votes, so be it, we know there're corrupt so its fine.

However, since the NDP want to ban them they should take the "high road" and turn them down NOW, during the campaign. So should the Greens because, you know, they have morals. That way the Liberals would have millions and millions of dollars to campaign with and the others would have pennies in comparison but could at least "say" they took the high road after the Liberals buy all the votes they need to win. Sounds perfectly fair to me, if you're a LIBERAL...

[krocky]

Do as I say not as I do, NDP slogan of 2017.

I totally agree the NDP should adopt that Liberal slogan.. Since you brought up the last election in an earlier post I seem to remember the Liberals refusing to grant ANY increase to BC teachers because there "was no money" for that, then immediately voting themselves a 50% raise right after the election. WHO would do that..

If you think everyone else should eat KD while you gorge on Champaign and Caviar, you might be a Liberal