Idealogically speaking

Take racial issues out of the equation. What distinguishes the PLP and the UBP from an idealogical or a goals-focused view?

I raise this after reading Zane DeSilva's comments in the Gazette today where he calls on whites to join the PLP to heal the undercurrent of racial tensions as well as Calvin Smith's featured piece dealing with PLP accomplishments.

For many potential voters, they seem tired of race, race and 'they'e out to get ya if you vote them in' speeches. I think they'd rather hear about how the two parties will improve education, housing, crime, etc. Right now both parties are saying similar things. They'll both increase housing stock. They'll both get St. George's police station refurbished. Both of them are avoiding the gay rights topic. But it's hard to pick out why Party A's plans will work better than Party B's, as it gets shunted aside to be replaced with the bickering.

Why is the PLP's tourism strategy better or worse than the UBP's? Why is the UBP's plan for Bermuda College admissions better or worse than the PLP's?

Why should a person, regardless of race, support the PLP or the UBP?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

You may find it interesting to read through the PLP platforms from 1998 or 2003 - to answer the question "Are politician's promises worth anything?"