Quote:
Originally Posted by Freethinker  You guys are missing the point. I'm not making judgements on whether the FPM or others are extremists or moderates (at least not in this particular post!). I am simply stating that there is a large segment of the population that is not committed and not even sure they are voting and I don't hear anyone trying to appeal to them. |
We were not criticizing the premise of your thread. We are just contesting some of the terminology you used so it's clear to everyone what we are debating. "Moderate" is totally out of place in what you intended for us to debate. I still insist that, based on its history and actions, FPM is the most moderate party in Lebanon, at least in how I perceive moderation. FPM is the most moderate party while at the same time it might be one of the most polarized parties.
For the sake of clarity, let's call the group of people that you want to try to woo the "undecided" or the "uncommitted".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freethinker Everybody's behaving like those supporters they have now are it and now we just wait to see if their supporters outnumber the others' supporters. That's not how you win a close election. You need to appeal to those sitting on the fence. |
Most parties are not ignoring those sitting on the fence. They can't afford to ignore them. I know, at least, that FPM isn't ignoring them but you might not agree with the approach FPM is taking to lure them.
There are 2 ways you can try to lure the undecided. You can try to deceive them by claiming that you stand for certain policies they like and support while in reality you don't. Or, you can try to convince them gradually that what you stand for is what is right and in the best interest of Lebanon and the Lebanese even if you know that your positions might not be very popular with the undecided. You're betting that with time, results and as events unravel, they will be convinced to shift toward your positions.
FPM is taking the second approach. Most other parties take the first approach.
Let's face it. Most voters want practically the same things. And no party leader is dumb enough to "declare" policies or an agenda in contradiction with what the voters want. If I strike out the party's name from an electoral platform, you would have a hard time guessing whose program it is. Even on the most controversial issues like HA's weapons, most voters (including HA's supporters) would want to see all weapons under the control of the State... voters' opinions start diverging when it comes to approach and timing rather than the ultimate outcome.
Most undecided voters will end up basing their decision not on your published electoral program but rather on their perception of your character, history, past performance and present approach.
Since most voters want the same things and most platforms are almost indistinguishable, many undecided voters will try to rely on their perception of whether your present approach to the common goals will bear fruit. But most will remain uncertain and undecided because they will realize that they're trying to predict the unpredictable and at the 11th hour will revert back to nothing else than a party's character, history, past performance and the degree of success of their
past approaches.
This is why I feel that FPM is in the driver's seat when it comes to wooing the undecided voters. FPM gets a lot of flack from these undecided voters... but only because they expect more and better things out of FPM. Come the 11th hour though, they will have flashbacks of the degree of success of FPM's
past approaches... especially on some of the thorniest issues.
Let's take the Syrian occupation issue as an example. People are not dumb. They realize that Lebanon is today free of Syrian occupation thanks to the efforts, steadfastness and right approach of one single party, FPM. And I insist on "single party"... it wasn't FM, Hariri (or his assassination), Junblat, LF, Kataeb, Batrak, Mufti, Chirac or the US administration... I am naming all of these because today every one of them falsely claims that they somehow were working to get the Syrians out while in reality I personally had the pleasure of hearing every one of them labeling FPM of extremism and rebellion against the State for the approach it took in trying to free Lebanon from the Syrian occupation.
FPM, and only FPM, freed Lebanon and the Lebanese from the Syrian occupation. They can all claim otherwise but, again, people are not dumb and they know who condoned and even supported the occupation and whose approach succeeded in getting the Syrians out. Sure, it took 15 years and many events, local and international, had to happen in a timely fashion... but had it not been for FPM's relentless work and sacrifices during those 15 years to get all its ducks in a row, Syria would still be occupying Lebanon today and all the ones I named above would still be either praising the Syrians or telling us they're a necessary evil.
FPM proved that its approach to dealing with the Syrian occupation was the "right" approach. From 89 until 2004, FPM couldn't find a single politician or party to acquiesce to our right to fight the Syrian occupation, let alone help us in our struggle. Look at all of them today. They all want to outdo us and carry the fight to the extreme... the extreme of fighting the Syrian ghosts, now that they can no longer find the Syrians... while in FPM, realizing that we attained our common goal and that this mission has been accomplished, we are now saying let's pursue other interests our landlocked country has.
Don't you think the undecided voters "see" these facts? Whose approach do you think they will end up endorsing in the ballot box? I won't make a guess but I will tell you that I am not worried.
(Not to diverge from the subject but, like FPM's right to claim freeing Lebanon from the Syrian occupation, HA can claim the same as far as the Israeli occupation is concerned... And I admit that I used to be opposed to their approach and I had severe doubts that it could be successful).
Today, we have other thorny or critical issues at hand. HA's arms, settlement of Palestinians, national debt, sectarianism, feudalism, corruption, controlled judiciary, pollution, women's rights, you name it...
Other than where it claims it stands and the present short (but very productive) stint in government, FPM has yet to be materially tested on most of these issues. In most cases, undecided voters will be guessing what will the performance of FPM be in these areas.
However, if you are an undecided voter concerned about all these issues or any of them, and your hand is shaking right above the ballot box trying to decide between an FPM candidate and another from LF, Kataeb, PSP, FM or Feb 14 in general, on whom do you think you will end up taking a chance? I won't make a guess here either but I will tell you again that I am not worried.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freethinker And as for the FPM's reform agenda, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt that their heart is in the right place. The proof, however, is in the pudding. |
You don't get to taste the pudding until after it's cooked to know whether it's tasty or not. Unfortunately, you're going to have to decide based on what you know about the cook.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freethinker Let's see if they are willing to take on their "ally's allies" who everyone knows survive on patronage and have the biggest network of sleazy corrupt bureaucrats in every ministry, siphoning off millions from the treasury every year. |
Like in everything else, our intentions are well-known but there are no guaranties in life. Whether we succeed or not, or when might we succeed, depends on if and when we can get our ducks in a row.
But again, on the issue of fighting corruption, are you going to take your chances on Hariri, Junblat, Geagea, Gemayel or Aoun? Don't tell me... I can guess this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freethinker I really hope we don't hear Aoun, a year or two from now, making a speech explaining why little has changed in terms of corruption and patronage by saying something like "We tried but this is the Lebanese formula, the whole system works against us, we made some progress but we cannot change decades of corruption in a short time"... |
You might hear Aoun say that 2 years from now. He kept saying he's going to liberate Lebanon from the Syrian occupation for 15 years... and many people gave up on him and jumped into the laps of the Syrians at one time or another during those 15 years. But the perseverance of those who didn't give up got us to where we are now, free of Syrian occupation.
Would you rather vote for those you already know for sure they won't even try to fix things or for someone whose past shows that he, at a minimum, might try to fix things?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freethinker But let's not prejudge, although I'm not holding my breath! |
But voting cannot but entail prejudging how one might perform in the future... based, maybe, on how he had performed in the past.
---------------------
Why doesn't anyone campaign for the moderate vote in this election? -
2nd May 2009
