New Democrat hopeful quits to support Harper

[CHIMO]

An NDP candidate in Mississauga-Erindale who placed third in the 2008 election and was planning to try again has instead packed it in and is supporting the Conservatives.

The New Democrats had to scramble to find a new candidate after Mustafa Rizvi indicated he was switching allegiances.

“I’ve resigned from the party as a member and a candidate,” Rizvi told the Mississauga News. “I want to support the Prime Minister in his efforts to get a majority.”

In 2008, Rizvi ran a distant third to the Conservative and Liberal candidates, garnering less than 9 per cent of the vote.

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/967164--new-democrat-hopeful-quits-to-support-harper?bn=1

Seems to be something going on. Tony Genco and now Rizvi?

[DRex]

1. What a goon.

How could you possibly have pretended to hold NDP values and then suddenly want more of what Harper has given us?

Something going on indeed. Certainly makes you wonder.

Oh well, he's either a sell-out or a moron. Either way, fuck him.

[CHIMO]

2. It Is

Not only the NDP. It is also the Liberal candidate that nearly won in the 2010 byelection. Two of these in a week. Something is going on!

[DRex]

3. Interesting quote at the end of the article too...

from Michelle Bilek, expected to be the replacement candidate on the NDP ticket:

....

Bilek said she doesn’t think Rizvi’s defection will have lasting negative consequences.

“I don’t think it hurts me personally and I don’t think it hurts the party. I think it looks bad on the candidate really, that they would switch allegiance. Switching over to another party I think is just wrong.”

Bilek said she has supported the NDP since she reached voting age.

“I would feel guilty and would have a bad conscience if I voted any other way. I wouldn’t do it personally, let’s put it that way.”

....

Now, I agreed that it looks bad on the candidate, but not for leaving his party. This comment of Bilek's seems to reveal an attitude that allegiance to party is more important than principle and the good of the country. I'm sure it's shared by many.

I just thought that was interesting. I guess it's an issue we deal with on DU all the time, what with it being "Democratic" Underground and all, and you're supposed to support the dems here, but of course the dems violate the principles of many posters here and conflict arises.

I find political parties fascinating because I've never ever felt like I could or should be a member of one, even if there was a party that matched my philosophies consistently. I find Bilek's allegiance strange, but I guess the party has been a big part of her life I just fear love of party could so easily subvert love of country, and justice.

[CHIMO]

4. Well

You may have your ideals and a way to achieve it, but how would you achieve it in politics if you don't have a consensus?

Todays ideas may be out of date tomorrow. Nice to have ideals.

But look at what some have done. For example Martha Hall Findlay stepped aside to let a former Con run for the Liberals in her riding.

If you want to consider things consider Paul Heller.

Interesting item that I came upon searching for Heller's name is:
http://coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/issue43/articles/john_diefenbaker.htm

[iverglas]

6. give me a break

“I would feel guilty and would have a bad conscience if I voted any other way. I wouldn’t do it personally, let’s put it that way.”

This comment of Bilek's seems to reveal an attitude that allegiance to party is more important than principle and the good of the country.

Do you actually think you can read words visible to everyone and then pretend they mean something completely different from what they mean?

Do you genuinely believe that someone saying she would have a bad conscience if she voted for the Liberals or Conservatives means that she is blindly loyal to a party? Or are you just pretending?

I'd have a bad conscience if I shopped at WalMart. Is that because I'm blindly loyal to Zellers? (Let's not over-analyze the analogy, now.) Or is it maybe because I have principles that I would be betraying, and believe there are people I would be hurting, if I did that?


of course the dems violate the principles of many posters here and conflict arises.

Yup. And then it's a matter of conscience whether a USAmerican votes for them in spite of that violation, or holds their nose and votes for them as the lesser of the evils. Many condemn them for it, many others condemn those who don't do it. I find it hard to condemn anyone for acting on genuine and relatively unassailable principles, that I share, overall. People of goodwill can disagree.

The salient concept is people of goodwill. That's what I don't consider some of the Liberal hacks and shills (and the Liberal Party as an entity) to be. Strategic voting where necessary is one thing; vote Liberal or else ... is another.

Showing NDP voters the courtesy of respecting their choice and recognizing that it is made in good faith, and not because they are closet Harperites ... well, wouldn't that just be a refreshing change.

[DRex]

8. Talk about taking out of context....

Take it easy. I never said anything about NDP voters or their motivations, certainly not that they are closet Harperites. Just didn't say anything like that. I'll probably vote NDP myself, truth be told.

I think that someone should be able to switch their political party, because parties can switch their platforms and candidates. I don't think it's "just plain wrong" to switch parties as Bilek does; I think it depends on the circumstances.

So no I don't "genuinely believe" that Bilek is blindly loyal to her party, I don't know her thoughts; I just think her comment is silly. If I have, like you, principles that I don't want to betray, then I have to be open to the idea of voting for someone who isn't a member of the party I am a member of, or the party I voted for last time.

[iverglas]

9. right ... well ...

I think that someone should be able to switch their political party, because parties can switch their platforms and candidates. I don't think it's "just plain wrong" to switch parties as Bilek does; I think it depends on the circumstances.

Well, I imagine maybe even Bilek does think that.

What she was commenting on was an NDP candidate joining the Harper Conservatives. That's really the context. ;)

There's been no switch of platforms or candidates in this case -- same old Harper, if not worsening by the day, same old Conservative Party, ditto.

At this conjuncture, I can't think of a situation in which a former NDP candidate defecting to any party would not be doing something "just wrong". Stragetic voting, as I said, is one thing. Even recommending strategic voting. Publicly embracing the Conservative Party and candidate, or the Liberal Party and candidate, is really another. And if you adhere to the policies and values represented by the NDP, you can't do it, period. Not "may not" do it; cannot do it.

I don't think her comment was silly, I think it was an unscripted reaction to an immediate event. A very particular event in very particular circumstances. To comment on it as if it were a blanket pronouncement applicable to every imaginable event, I'd still say that's just wrong.

In case you haven't seen my other recent posts, I'm a former NDP candidate and I have voted strategically for both major non-NDP parties (and this time around, if I were in Quebec, I'd very probably vote Bloc, as the most effective anti-Conservative vote to cast). I'm not especially comfortable telling other people how to vote. And I'm certainly never, ever, ever going to tell them to vote Conservative, as long as that party and its candidates are what they are now.

[DRex]

10. I agree on most points...

I think in this case the switching of parties looks very wrong, because there is no apparent crossover in the Harper policy Rizvi now supports and the NDP platform he used to run on. In this case it makes very little sense.

However, Bilek's quote is "Switching over to another party I think is just wrong.” It's that sentiment that I disagree with. It makes it sound like the problem with Rizvi's actions is not the emptyness of principle that it betrays, but that he left his party.

I disagree with that sentiment, and I don't think I'm taking her quote out of context at all. It's in very plain language. Maybe she doesn't really think that, and it's just a knee-jerk quote. I don't know, but I disagree with it either way.

[JBoy]

5. Wadda douche.

I can't believe there are many NDP supporters that will say "Oh. Well, I guess I should vote Conservative, then".

Those who would have voted for this guy will either vote Liberal or stay home.

[iverglas]

7. delicate issues

The riding I was associated with for several years almost suffered a takeover a couple of decades ago.

A close associate of the Liberal MP in a neighbouring riding decided to go for the NDP nomination. The MP and the would-be candidate belonged to a particular ethnic group. The would-be candidate signed up a couple of hundred new members from his ethnic community and another in particular that shared the same religion. Where the nomination meeting in the riding would ordinarily have had maybe 25 riding association stalwarts at it (a no-hope riding for the NDP), it had a couple of hundred people.

The would-be candidate had in fact signed up people very illegally: we knew for a fact (from a close contact of my own in one of the communities in question) that he had directed people to change their driver's licence to show an address in our riding, when they did not live there, and that some had done it. This isn't just fraud on the democratic electoral system, it's a whole lot of other fraud.

The would-be candidate came within two votes of taking the nomination.

I also had a close contact in the Liberal Party in another neighbouring riding, who happened to hate the MP in question, and was also a big wig in the provincial party. Knowing of the would-be candidate's previous political associations, I got him to check party membership lists. The person's Liberal party membership had lapsed when he joined the NDP. (Dual membership, unlike dual citizenship, ain't allowed. ;) )

Next federal election rolled around, and guess who was seeking the Liberal nomination in yet another neighbouring riding? Yup. And yes, I returned the favour -- by then, his NDP membership had lapsed.

The moral of the story? Difficult to formulate without sounding you know what.

Communities composed largely of recent newcomers are vulnerable to political exploitation. The fact that the exploitation is often by people from the same community is unfortunate. The fact that a few such unscrupulous individuals with access to a body of people who are more easily manipulated than some other groups or the general population would engage in such conduct is despicable.

Opportunists will seek the nomination of whatever party they think looks like it can be had. They will use whatever tactics they think fit. Every party potentially has this problem.

Also, local riding associations sometimes have trouble getting candidates, especially in ridings that look like no-hopers. Look at the doorknobs that got elected in Quebec when Mulroney unexpectedly swept the country in 1984. Nobody expected them to win; they were just the only ones who agreed to stand.

Opportunists abound. They have no allegiance at all, as well as having no principles.

[iverglas]

11. Rizvi speaks

http://www.mississauga.com/news/article/974661--prol

Mustafa Rizvi, who ran in the 2008 election and collected 8.6 per cent of the vote, told The News today that he informed the party he could not be its candidate after the election was called.

"I want to support the prime minister in his efforts to get a majority," said Rizvi. "I've resigned from the party (the NDP) as a member and a candidate."

Asked how he could switch from the NDP on the left of the political spectrum to the Conservative Party on the right, Rizvi said, "That's how I am. When I like something, I just go for it."

... Rizvi said he changed his mind about being an NDP candidate because he did not want to see "a reckless coalition" among the NDP, Bloc Québecois and the Liberals. "That's the sort of agenda you will see if Michael Ignatieff becomes prime minister," he said.

And the NDP riding association president sums Rizvi up:

http://www.mississauga.com/news/article/974917--tory-smiling-over-ndp-defection

Abbas Khawaja, the NDP riding president, told The Globe & Mail that Rizvi told him he was resigning to spend more time on his job and with his family.

"He's quite an ambitious young guy," Khawaja told The Globe. "He just wanted a stepping-stone."

... rather too politely.