Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboy89
1) I have worked on a campaign actually. I wasn't insinuating that the UCP wasn't investigating NDP candidates online past, just that clearly there was one party that decided to make this their battleground and define what's acceptable on their own terms. They benefit greatly from this advantage.
2) I'm not going to defend white nationalism period.
|
1) Perhaps the UCP isn't making this a battleground because they are having trouble finding people who make racist, misogynistic, and homophobic comments in the other parties. Also, I don't the NDP are deciding what is or isn't appropriate, only pointing out objective facts. Specifically, that some candidates have made some pretty inflammatory comments/posts.
So far it's been a case of more than one candidate having some horrible statements/posts that they have made pointed out, and those people dropping out of a race. No attempt to show they have changed their views, simply dropping out. That doesn't exactly bode well for the "That's not what I meant, or currently feel". Especially when one of them has explicitly doubled down saying she isn't going to change her beliefs.
2) Good, I can think of a few people recently who should have followed that advice.
So then I would assume you agree that it is appropriate for any source to point out that a candidate in an election is the kind of person who would defend white nationalism.
So what exactly is your issue with people bringing up/pointing out these kinds of posts/statements that were made by candidates?