The ideal ABC slogan for a TV ad?


Machjo
#1
What do you think would be a good slogan for an 'anything but conservative' TV campaing?

Some I've come up with that I think would have a good ring to it would be:

Vote against! Vote Liberal!
Vote Strategically! Vote Liberal!
Don't vote for the best! Vote against the worst! Vote Liberal!

Any others?
 
B00Mer
No Party Affiliation
#2
http://anythingbutconservative.ca/

"...promises are only as good as the integrity of the people who make them."
 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
#3
ABC....
It's easy as 1, 2, 3....
I'm singin' it dough, Rae, me
A B C, 1, 2, 3, dough, Rae, me
Vote for ME

I knew there was a use for Micheal....
 
earth_as_one
#4
Machjo, you obviously don't understand the flaws with our "first past the poll" electoral system.

You think you know what's going on, which is why you are judgemental and smug about people like myself who vote against something. But consider for a moment that maybe people who vote against something might know something you haven't considered.

Consider how the "first past the poll" system resulted in the name "Thunder Bay" for the amalgamated city of "Fort William" and "Port Arthur":

Thunder Bay's name is the result of a referendum held on June 23, 1969 to determine the new name of the amalgamated Fort William and Port Arthur. Officials debated over the names to be put on the ballot, taking suggestions from residents including "Lakehead" and "The Lakehead". Predictably, the vote split between the two, and "Thunder Bay" was the victor. The final tally was "Thunder Bay" with 15,870, "Lakehead" with 15,302, and "The Lakehead" with 8,377.[12]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunder...r_Bay.27s_name

If the people who liked the name "Lakehead" or "The Lakehead" were smart they would have taken a poll first and found out which name was more popular of the two and then voted enmasse for one name or the other rather than allowing the people who decided which names got on the ballot to rig the referendum in favor of "Thunder Bay"

I very strongly dislike the idea of "neo-con Stephen Harper" leading Canada on the same path as "neo-con George Bush", "neo-con John Howard", "neo-con Nicolas Sarkozy", "neo-con Angela Merkel", "neo-con Tony Blair" and "neo-con John Brown".

All of these people say the same things and want to take their countries down the same path. Its not a path which represents the best interests of the majority, but one which does represent the best interests of the power elite who pull these leader's strings.

Quote:

The wreckage of Harper-Bush policies

Stephen Harper may not have known that his 2003 speech urging Canada to join the war on Iraq had been plagiarized from then-Aussie Prime Minister John Howard. But he did wholeheartedly agree with its contents.

Like Howard, Harper stood four-square with George W. Bush on Iraq, as he has since on a string of other policies: the assault on Kyoto; the disastrous war on terrorism; the botched war in Afghanistan; the vindictive war of starvation on the Palestinians for electing the wrong party in an election; the failed policy of trying to stop the Iranian nuclear program by demonizing Tehran; and the blind support of Israel.

Canadians have been opposed to many of those policies. But Harper chose to back Bush rather than back Canadians.

At times, Harper has backed Bush more than either Howard or Tony Blair, both of whom have since been driven out of office because they were seen as Bush's poodles. Others who suffered a similar fate for similar reasons include Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan, José Maria Aznar of Spain, Silvio Berlusconi of Italy (who has since made a comeback, after Iraq receded into the background), as well as the leaders of Hungary, Ukraine, Norway, Slovakia and Poland.

On Guantánamo Bay, both Blair and Howard lobbied Bush to get their citizens freed. But Harper wouldn't intervene on behalf of Omar Khadr. In fact, he said he preferred Gitmo's discredited military trials to the Canadian justice system: "Mr. Khadr is accused of very serious things. There's a legal process in the United States. Frankly, we do not have a real alternative to that process."

That wasn't the only time Harper chose to stand with his foreign friends rather than stand up for Canadian citizens.

His government maligned Louise Arbour, head of the United Nations Commission for Human Rights, because she had criticized the United States (for Guantánamo Bay) and Israel (for civilian casualties during its 2006 invasion of Lebanon).

In that war, Canadian Forces Major Paeta Hess-von Kruedener was killed by an Israeli bomb, along with three others at a UN monitoring mission. Harper refused to criticize Israel for that – or for the bombing deaths of a Montreal family of eight.

At times, Harper has been more pro-Israel than Bush. He made Canada the first country to start starving the Palestinians for electing Hamas in January 2006.

On Iraq, it is worth recalling that Harper was in the same league as Mike Harris, Ernie Eves and other right wingers in advocating an invasion. He even went on the American right-wing Fox TV to say, wrongly, that only the Québécois, with their "pacifist tradition," were opposed to invading Iraq. "Outside of Quebec, I believe very strongly the silent majority of Canadians is strongly supportive."

On Afghanistan, Harper's support for Bush's policy of more war and no talk is well-known.
Whether one agrees or disagrees with Harper, there's no denying the disastrous results of the policies he has so wholeheartedly backed.

There's more terrorism now than before Bush began his war on it.
In both Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush snatched defeat out of the jaws of victory. There's no end in sight, despite the expenditure of $1 trillion and tens of thousands of deaths and millions of displaced people.

Today, the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran are stronger than before. Hamid Karzai has just asked Saudi Arabia to help facilitate talks with the Taliban, to help end the seven-year-old conflict. Ehud Olmert has just said that Israel must withdraw from the West Bank as well as East Jerusalem to make peace with the Palestinians, and that it must give up the Golan Heights to make peace with Syria.

Tehran has more nuclear know-how than before Bush set out to stop it from acquiring it.
Relations with Pakistan, ostensibly the West's staunchest ally in West Asia, have deteriorated to the point of military skirmishes.

One cannot recall a time when Canada was on the wrong side of so many global disasters.

http://www.thestar.com/FederalElection/article/509958

So yes I'd rather vote Green or NDP than Liberal. But voting for either of these parties in my riding would not result in either getting elected. The only way my vote can make a difference is to prevent a conservative from edging out the liberal.

Also consider that there is more at stake in this election than color of Stephen Harper's sweater or his "family values". A neo-con war is coming in the middle east. Our next Prime Minister will decide whether we get involved or not. Harper does not represent the best interests of Canadians. Harper represents the same people who caused the US to invade Iraq. Harper's speech was based on the same talking points as Howards. There was no plagiarism, because the same person wrote both speeches. But to cover up the truth a loyal conservative jumped on his sword to protect Harper. But for an instant we saw the man behind the curtain, rather than the Wizard of Oz. We are not in Kansas anymore...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWyCCJ6B2WE
Last edited by earth_as_one; Oct 6th, 2008 at 11:00 PM..
 
scratch
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by Machjo View Post

What do you think would be a good slogan for an 'anything but conservative' TV campaing?

Some I've come up with that I think would have a good ring to it would be:

Vote against! Vote Liberal!
Vote Strategically! Vote Liberal!
Don't vote for the best! Vote against the worst! Vote Liberal!

Any others?

Any ideas as to why there is a growing and obvious negativity toward the Tories/Harper.....on the other hand it doesn't matter.
 
Scott Free
Free Thinker
#6
I'm just trying to figure out who is the least criminal out of this band of thugs. I think it's pretty much a tie.
 
scratch
#7
IMPHO,

The negativism and sometime childish behavior that surrounds this election has become sad and superfluous.

.....sad and unproductive.

And after it is all said and done what will have changed?

Not one thing --- back to same old, same old.




Last edited by scratch; Oct 7th, 2008 at 06:20 AM..
 
scratch
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by Machjo View Post

What do you think would be a good slogan for an 'anything but conservative' TV campaing?

Some I've come up with that I think would have a good ring to it would be:

Vote against! Vote Liberal!
Vote Strategically! Vote Liberal!
Don't vote for the best! Vote against the worst! Vote Liberal!

Any others?

Should be CBC.
Be factual.
Unless you had something else in mind.
.....well, probably....
 
earth_as_one
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by scratch View Post

Any ideas as to why there is a growing and obvious negativity toward the Tories/Harper.....on the other hand it doesn't matter.

Any reason why there is a growing and obvious negativity toward the Republicans/Bush.

Harper should pay for his support for the Iraq war, his description of Israel killing a Canadian peacekeeper and a Canadian family of 8 as "measured". His agenda for less regulation, cuts to social programs and basically his desire to align Canada with neo-conservative interests.

Harper is a dangerous man.
 

Similar Threads

23
Fine threat over T-shirt slogan
by sanctus | Aug 22nd, 2008
1
Ideal A/american...
by CDNBear | Jun 30th, 2008
18