The NDP responds

New ads from the New Democrats.

The French version is here.

And here is the text of the email that went out to New Democrats today.

Dear Friend,

Last week Stephen Harper launched baseless attack ads against Tom Mulcair. He thinks bullying New Democrats will distract Canadians from his reckless agenda.

But it won’t work. And we’re setting the record straight on what Stephen Harper is really up to.

It’s crucial we reach the millions of Canadians Stephen Harper is targeting with his ads. Help us fight back. Share this on Facebook and spread the word on Twitter.

Too many Canadians are struggling to get by. And after the worst recession of this generation, the Conservatives have another economic downturn on their hands.

What’s Stephen Harper’s solution?

Attack the most vulnerable Canadians when they are most in need.

But you and I know there is a better way.

We’ll make sure Canadians know – we’re standing up for the things they care about most. And we’re standing up to Stephen Harper.

Be a part of it.

Chantal Vallerand
National Director
Canada’s New Democrats




Browse

The NDP responds

  1. “Attack the most vulnerable Canadians…” I dunno. Are people collecting UI, or employed seniors waiting/working until 67 before collecting gov’t funded pensions “the most vulnerable Canadians”? Don’t think so.

    Also, this doesn’t make sense: “With cuts to employment insurance, and cuts to your pension, Stephen Harper has created the worst deficit in Canadian history…”

    Wouldn’t cutting benefits alleviate (reduce) the deficit?

    Anyhoo, nice to see Windows Movie Maker has added some new features. The scrambly letters thing at the beginning is novel to me. So, thanks for that, NDP intern.

    • I think the narration may be a bit too slowly rythmic, and it’s intended
      to be “Stephen Harper has attacked the most vulnerable, with cuts to
      your pension and….”

      • The narration is what kills it. If the same script had been read in “the voice of doom”, instead of by Little Miss Chipper, it would have been reasonably effective.

      • I’ve listened to this a number of times. I see your point.

        But what made me decide with my version was the uptick (or rising inflection) of the second phrase – “and cuts to your pension” ^^…leading into the last part of the sentence.

        In any event, the fact that I am confused should about their message suggests it was not properly , independently, reviewed outside of the group that wrote the script. Or had prior knowledge of what the intended message was.

        Fail grade.

    • It doesn’t have to be true, it just has to be plausible.

  2. What was the banging noise supposed to be?

  3. That was a frighteningly horrible attempt at an attack ad. Step your game up, NDP.

    • Right. Really bad ad. And like – ‘the deficit’? Huh? Isn’t that a Conservative issue?

      And given Harper’s record, it is not even close to his underbelly.

      As someone who wants to see Harper taking up residence back in the redneck boonies of Alberta, this does not bode well…

      • Is it? Conservatives usually do a good job of landing governments in deficit positions.

        • I clearly wasn’t clear. I meant that the ‘the deficit’, as an issue, has been created by the right to rationalize an attack on spending – spending on social support services. In the mind of the public, ‘the deficit’ is a requirement to cut spending.

          If the left is to take on the issue, the corrective is to stimulate the economy through consumption-side inputs, and to increase upper marginal tax rates – which will have little to no downward pressure on consumption.

          However this has not yet seriously entered the public conversation. The job of the NDP is to justify the approach.

          The NDP should not yet be presenting ‘the deficit’ as an indicator of Harper’s failure. Instead we look now at the effects of his policies while incrementally building, in the public conversation, the foundation for the left rationale for their solution.

          For most viewers in Canada, that bad ad suggests that Harper hasn’t slashed spending enough.

          … is what I meant.

          Bad ad! Worse than I thought before you made me think more about it.

  4. While I appreciate the “Grimacing Steve” image, there are too many words being used, and too many messages, for 30 seconds. The scrambley-font words are oddly misused here — they don’t seem serious enough — and given all the stuff there is to beak off on harper about, words like “downturn” mush up their message — sorry NDP, try harder.

  5. Could a more annoying, condescending announcer voice have been picked? Get it together for the sweet love of Moses.

Sign in to comment.