Recently in Elections Category

I'm on vacation, really I am, but Kevin Mayall of AG Research has created some geographic maps to display election related data that are interesting.

That's all from me. Back to my book.

Close the book on this one. No-one could read it apparently, and it's essentially un-changed.

I think it's safe to say people on all sides are a little surprised that there was very little movement away from the PLP. Nothing at all really.

Accountability and government reform in Bermuda politics is officially dead.

Faith based everything man and Dr. Brown's campaign manager Andre Curtis proves that he really is a man of faith:

I've done my homework and I predict 28 seats.

28? That's about 27 more seats than tourists he produced.

Meanwhile, back on Earth, Dr. Brown has trimmed his 30 seat prediction down to 'a respectable margin'.

Tonight's counts will be interesting.

Spinning to the very end.

Astute readers will notice that Derrick Burgess came out today in the Gazette and at the last minute now puts Permanent Resident Certificate holders at 1,700, down from the ridiculous 8,000 number and then the 4,000 number, and any other inflated number they could come up with.

But that hasn't stopped them from running their full page newspaper ad again today with 8,000.

Turnout was pretty high in Constituency 9 this morning at 8AM, slow moving through the polling station though with only two tables set up (A-M) and (N-Z).

For some reason the second half of the alphabet seemed to be sleeping in so there were about 30 (A-M)'s people in line.

Stay tuned this evening for results.

I'll be offline during the day on Tuesday, and hopefully there won't be anything to comment on anyway as voting is conducted uneventfully.

During the evening I'll try and post updates as they come through, but I can't make any promises on my connectivity during the evening and would direct you to the TV stations, radio stations, and online at The Royal Gazette and the Bermuda Sun.

I also have 400 words to fill for the Gazette in Wednesday's paper (why did I agree to that?) which will have to come together before midnight.

I won't make any predictions for tomorrow, other than that I'm cautiously optimistic. Saying that, I would like to say that the UBP candidates ran a campaign they can be proud of.

I'm sure it was difficult not to respond in kind to what was being thrown at them on a daily basis, but they stayed true to their word and kept it clean. My hope is that the weight of the arguments and respectful tone of their campaign contrasted sharply with the lack of policy arguments and disrepectful approach by Dr. Brown's side will give the public a clear choice.

I am getting the sense that there is a desire for change in the community, which when combined with a palpable dissatisfaction with Dr. Brown's style of leadership, scandals and the PLP's negative campaign could give the UBP what they need to take 5 more seats and hold their current ones.

There's a lot of unknowns however, with seats which have only been tested once, new candidates and 3,000 new voters.

Tomorrow will be interesting and for many can't come fast enough so we can put the vitriol behind us and look towards the holidays.

The PLP tonight put up a piece which is a truly, truly, pathetic demonstration of their complete and utter rejection of honesty and decency during this campaign.

They lied, distorted, misrepresented, insulted and slurred from day 1 to day 49.

It's childish, school boy stupidity, and something no self-respecting political party should associate themselves with. I'm not sure why they chose this course. They didn't have to. They did themselves, Bermuda, but mostly their party, a disservice.

I'm actually embarrassed for them.

What a disgrace Dr. Brown's entire campaign was. They did nothing to further Bermuda and Bermudians, discuss issues or bring us together.

This isn't high school.

Two final videos from the UBP. These will air tonight on TV.

I ended up posting more official material than I'd anticipated during the past 7 weeks, but Dr. Brown's strategy was to create so much background noise that any real discussion was impossible. So I felt the need to try and assist in cutting through that noise.

Thanks for bearing with me.

Final Press Conference

We are Team UBP

Several people have filled me in on an individual standing in the driving rain and wind this morning at the bottom of Collector's Hill, brandishing a sign that read:

"Low Cost Housing", complete with an arrow pointing towards Dr. Brown's house on AP Owen Road.

What a nutty election this has been.

Hopefully tomorrow Bermudians vote for change tomorrow and we can return to sanity and tolerance.

A reader writes on the PLP's misleading over new Bermudians:

One thing that seems to be missing from the PLP's comments on potentially granting status to PRC's is the impact that independence would have on that same group. Granted the PLP's numbers are completely erroneous [when the concept of PRC was first introduced there were, according to the government's own figures, approximately 1,900 potential PRC's on the island]. If Bermuda were to become independent all PRC's, and probably their children, would end up with citizenship. In the past the UK has insisted that a condition of independence for former colonies is that they grant citizenship to anyone that has been resident more than six years (hence the six year term limits). This should result in far more new Bermudians than simply granting status to PRC's.

A reader writes on Dr. Brown's final speech:

It seems to me that he spent a lot of time talking about what a PLP government "will be" instead of what it "has been" -- which is a bit odd for an incumbent with any significant track record. A bit like saying "ignore our actions, and trust our words."

The United Bermuda Party have responded to the Premier's last ditch plea for support:

Tonight, Ewart Brown went on television and once again tried to mislead the voters.

• That he could say the negative character of the election has been the responsibility of others is a joke. The Premier set the tone on Day 1 and Day 2 of this campaign with extreme rhetoric. His operatives have followed his lead with personal attack ads, distortion, fear mongering and lies. Dr. Brown must take personal responsibility for the deeply negative quality of this election. No one else. He is the leader of the PLP. He set the direction and has approved everything that has gone on.

• Dr, Brown’s disagreement with us on a tax cut speaks to the gap that has grown between the PLP Government and ordinary hard-working Bermudians, who clearly need relief from Bermuda’s high cost of living. No issue shows the difference between the two parties more than this one.

• Dr. Brown’s attempt to mislead and spread fear among voters on an immigration issue is simply a desperate attempt to cling to power. To say that the UBP plans to grant status to 8,000 people is a totally over-the-top distortion of our position. We have said we will study the issue of long-term residents in the name of family unity. Nothing, we repeat nothing that comes out of this study would happen without full approval of the Legislature.

• Finally, that Dr. Brown would hide behind the words of a UK Government minister to say that the BHC scandal has been thoroughly investigated is deeply ironic. All Bermudians know that the BHC scandal, with its allegations of public funds being used for private gain, remains a huge cloud over the heads of Dr. Brown and many of his colleagues. No one should cast a vote on Tuesday without thinking of the BHC scandal, where it appears that public money allocated to house the needy went missing, and that Dr. Brown has done everything in his power to stop people from knowing the truth of the matter.

The old joke about how do you know when a politician is lying is no longer a joke after this election campaign. (Answer: his lips are moving...now watch Dr. Brown's closing speech).

The closing rally cry from the PLP is nothing but a big, really big and easily debunked lie.

The latest lie and scare tactic is to grossly distort a minor UBP agenda item and twist it into a threat to give status to up to 8,000 foreigners and dilute "Bermudians'" vote (codeword alert for "Bermudians").

Essentially the UBP have promised to review the specifics of Permanent Residency for a very small number of people, and the PLP predictably blew that into a complete and utter lie of the UBP trying to create 8,000 new Bermudians and play to a xenophobic element.

Patricia Gordon-Pamplin released a statement yesterday addressing the lie.

Let's dispel the 'up to 8,000' lie with some basic math that begins with there being about 9,000 work permits in force:

A few general numbers:

Bermuda's population = approx. 65,000
Bermudian adults = approx. 42,000 (number of reg. voters)
Bermudian children = approx 10,500 (est. of 25% of reg. voters)
Work permit holders = approx 9,000
Dependents of work permit holders = approx 3,500 (diff b/w Bdian adults, children and work permit holders).

So maximum there are about 12,500 non-Bermudians in total, including children and spouses - those who arrived decades ago and those who arrived yesterday.

The UBP suggested conditions would be as follows:

Accordingly, the United Bermuda Party supports the granting of Bermuda Status to long-term residents who were here prior to the moratorium imposed in 1989, who have had 20 years continuous qualifying residency subject to certain conditions.

So of my estimated 12,500 non-Bermudians, you'd have to have been here before 1989 with 20 years continuous residency.

Now, Government's own argument in defence of 6 year term limits was that so few expats make it to 6 years, let alone 20, that term limits would have no impact.

Now they're busy suggesting that about 2/3rds of non-Bermudians have been here pre-1989.

How do you know when a politician is lying?

Reason isn't going to deter them spreading this lie for the next 24 hours. One hopes that the press don't help spread yet another campaign lie.

The headlines on this should read: "PLP grossly distort minor UBP agenda item".

I'm not sure why the UBP Agenda for Change even mentioned immigration at all. Whatever they said would be turned into a xenophobic rallying cry anyway.

But I think that the PLP have run such a shrill campaign for 7 weeks that most people have simply shut it out now. And they've distorted and dissembled so much that I doubt that many voters actually take their statements seriously anymore.

I think this is a desperate last gasp.

Tuesday is going to be close, but there seems to be a growing vocalization that it's time for a change and a move to send a strong message of displeasure with Dr. Brown's nasty election campaign and confrontational style.

Tonight's "Special Address" from the PLP's leader was special alright.

It was unabashed and unapologetic political BS. An insult to every Bermudian's intelligence.

The music throughout was, well, it was the most fluffy "aren't I just sweetness and light" new age nonsense one can imagine. It was absurd and distracting, because it was in stark contrast to the entire negative tone of the PLP's campaign and Dr. Brown's personal combative style of governance every Bermudian is familiar with.

The music was too conspicuous and drew attention to how inappropriate it was for the man delivering the speech.

And then there was the message.

A recycling of campaign talking points, this time delivered in a non-aggressive style by the Premier himself.

The content? Completely defensive and reactionary. 36 hours before an election and the incumbent party uses their final speech for a point by point rebuttal of the other side's proposals (with the big 8,000 lie) and also a rebuttal of the Reality on Independence Group and the continuing BHC fallout? Not a confident move.

Few reasons on why you should vote for Dr. Brown's party, and they got passing mention. No focus on Dr. Brown's platform issues, just a direct rebuttal of key planks of the UBP's Agenda for Change that the PLP oppose, tax cuts and tougher stances on crime in particular, independence and corruption reform.

And then, if they hadn't already jumped the shark with the choice of music, another attempt to suggest that the negative campaigning came from others, not his campaign.

"Negative spaces"? What type of bizarre term is that? The campaign didn't "venture into negative spaces", it was driven there by Dr. Brown's campaign daily, reaching a deafening crescendo with the puppet ad and drug dealer slur, a new low in Bermuda politics.

A very un-Bermudian move by Dr. Brown's campaign that disgusted many Bermudians.

The close was a call for unity that came across as insincere, disingenuous and shallow after 7 weeks of carefully calculated and orchestrated attempts to divide.

This was a plea from a party that is worried that Bermudians are ready to vote against them, not one from a party confident people will vote for them.

With only a few days to go, it's not hard to summarize the PLP's strategy, which they followed with religious zeal, as:

1) Hide Dr. Brown
2) Hype minor policy intiatives
3) Destroy Michael Dunkley
4) Race, race, race

Conversely the UBP focused on:

1) Team
2) We will deliver/targeted policy initiatives vs 9 years of empty promises
3) Change
4) Hope not hate/trust/respect

The UBP team's has refused to get dragged down into the gutter which amplified the PLP's negativity, combativeness and exploiting of the past. The UBP comes across as issue driven, collaborative and future focused.

No amount of screaming 'they fought dirty' by Dr. Brown's troops can overcome that. They didn't.

The UBP ran what will go down as one of the most high road campaigns ever conducted. It was a smart choice to not respond in kind to the PLP's non-stop assault.

I believe that the public has noticed.

The Bermuda Sun columnists were firing on all cylinders today:

Stuart Hayward

Is civility to be abandoned in the interest of scoring political points, no matter the damage that barbaric language and symbolism might have on our children and our community in general?

Are we to have racial tensions further exploited from finger-pointing and hints of vengeance under the guise of "conversation"? Are threats and payback to be the way power is wielded? It's time to see whether the UBP has learned the lesson we taught them in 1998.

They now know, and we know, that we can take them out again if need be.

It's time also to remind the PLP that we don't want to spend the coming years in racial or diplomatic intimidation and turmoil.

Violence and vengeance, whether in words, deeds or spirit, are not what Bermuda is about.

Tom Vesey

The PLP leadership is forcing Bermudians back into traditional racial camps, from which no progress can be made. The UBP, meanwhile, has a detailed agenda for promoting equality and opportunity, while speaking with the respect and tolerance that a modern, diverse society requires. These are strange and disturbing times we live in, where the "progressives" are reactionary, and the "conservatives" are progressive.

But our only choice next Tuesday is between the UBP and the PLP as we currently find them - not as they once were, and not as we wish they would be.

And that's why I'm going to vote this year for the UBP.

Larry Burchall

Those old tactics of scare and scatter that worked so well from 1963 to 1998 are now unlikely to work as they once did. Now they might even work in reverse. This new electorate is more discriminating, more thoughtful, more knowledgeable, and far less fearful.

...

In 2007, every voter knows that on December 19, 2007, that " lucky ol' sun" will simply rise on another new Bermuda day with another set of Bermudian faces newly responsible for ongoing Bermuda government. In this election, despite strong efforts to paint black majority Bermudians as victims in their own society, despite strenuous efforts to conjure up new 'boogeymen', most intelligent people know that 'boogeymen' are not real.

Bumper day in the Bermuda Sun today.

They have a number of excellent Opinions, as well as a revealing article which interviewed a number of observors. The verdict? The climate is for change and against Dr. Brown and the status quo.

Barclay Carmichael, a former BIU shop steward, really gets to the core of what this election is about: Values.

Barclay Carmichael, former shop steward of the BIU, and one time staunch PLP supporter, said: "This country needs a change and it needs one now. The Government's performance over a nine-year period has been simply unsatisfactory.

"Whether they [Government figures] have acted unethically, or unwisely, or simply unacceptably, there are just too many questions regarding their conduct, both professionally and personally.

"We need to reshape the politics of Bermuda to fit an evolving world. We are living in yesterday, and it's time to move forward. This has gone beyond parties, and beyond any solid issues, it's now about values.

"Bermudians have to ask themselves: 'What are my core values? Can I endorse some of the things and the attitudes that have gone on?' All the rest - the speeches, the manifestos - that's all window dressing. People now have to ask what kind of core values they want for Bermuda's future."

It all starts to take shape:

Larry Smith, the former narcotics chief accused of smearing Opposition Leader Michael Dunkley, has applied to be the next Police Deputy Commissioner. It's understood Mr. Smith, who retired last year, has put in an application to replace Roseanda Young who leaves at the end of the month — even though the post has yet to be advertised.

The Royal Gazette understands the application has generated derision within the force.

The conspiracy theorists would say the arrangement was: smear Michael Dunkley and in return ....well, there's a job vacancy.

There's the pesky problem of the Governor making the appointment, and that no-one in their right mind would hire someone who has just blown all sorts of professional ethical standards, but those are minor details.

And if you thought recruitment and officer retention was difficult now, let's just say... it would get worse, much, much worse.

The UBP are running a pretty powerful new ad, with 5 of their candidates going directly at the racial attacks that have marred this campaign.

A reader writes:

The two letters between Premier and Opposition are very telling.

Dunkley initiated it with an open proposal to "appeal to supporters of all parties to tone down the rhetoric and commit to conducting the rest of this election campaign in a respectful and tolerant manner". Fullstop.

Brown's response was to agree and follow up with requesting Dunkley publicly condemn a specific special interest group whose interest is against independence and contrary to Brown's intentions. Otherwise Brown will not play.

So Brown took an open gesture of good will and fair play and saw an opportunity to paint his political opponent into a corner on a specific issue. What makes it worse is his choice of vehicle for this request is an ultimatum - "if we can agree on this point in your advocated 'spirit of goodwill', I think we can move forward...".

I think that speaks volumes on what you can expect from the two would-be leaders in how they will conduct business with you.

A reader expresses what is a very widely held sentiment (I've cleaned up the language):

I can't take it anymore.

I just want my chance to have my say. I don't want to see any of the negative ads anymore - they're un-Bermudian.

Play tough, but fair.

Yet Dr. Brown responds to Michael Dunkley's call for him to renounce his negative campaign and his party's incendiary tactics by posturing with a cynical redirection; attempting to shift the focus to random individuals on the Internet and the independent (yet unhelpful in my view) Reality on Independence group - not his party's official campaign.

Sad.

The PLP's official campaign has produced:

- push polls
- racially incendiary ads about flogging and hanging
- the racially stereotyping Puppet Show segment
- ran radio (and Google) ads that "Michael Dunkley is out to get you"
- knowingly misrepresented the 3 strikes proposal as life sentences
- has trotted out candidates to accuse the UBP of wanting to enslave people and lock everyone up

And that's just a start.

December 18th can't come fast enough. Bermuda needs tolerance and collaboration, not intolerance and brinkmanship.

The United Bermuda Party today laid out their hit list for the first 100 days.

Watch it below, read the statement here, or I've bulleted the list below:

Within the first 100 days in office, the United Bermuda Party Government will

- We will eliminate the payroll tax for people earning less than $42,000 per year. That will happen on April 1st.

- Break ground on the first homes for affordable rent.

- We will immediately start recruiting Police to get manpower numbers to put more Police on the streets.

- The St. George’s Police Station will open April 1st. Ground will be broken on a Warwick Police Station, and community policing will start with a minimum of one Constable per parish.

- During the first 100 days, we will immediately set up the Office of Economic Empowerment.

- We will restore open tendering for government contracts. There will be no more secret tendering. The process will be open to all.

- We will start allocating 20% of all Government contracts in construction and supplies to small businesses. This is a massive commitment that can put into the hands of small businessmen and women up to $70 million a year.

- We will reopen the free Medical Clinic in January, making it possible for people most in need of assistance to once again get the care they need.

- We will take steps for the appointment of a non-political Attorney General.

- We will release reports kept secret from the public.

- We will introduce Freedom of Information legislation, to guarantee public access to public information.

- We will strengthen the Office of the Auditor General to ensure it has the resources and the mandate to effectively oversee government spending.

- In the first sitting of the House of Assembly, we will repeal immigration legislation that discriminates against Bermudians married to non-Bermudians.

- We will make GPS optional for taxi drivers. By April 1st, they will have fuel rebates.

- We will begin education reform.

- During the next school term, we will institute free bus and ferry passes for all school children.

The Google policy geek over at Vexed Bermoothes has been tackling some of the parties platform positions - and notable omissions - in a series of posts.

Watch how this:

"I'm happy to answer any questions anybody has at any time because I realise that as a public official I can't hide behind things."

Michael Dunkley (UBP Leader)

Gets twisted into this:

Progressive Labour Party chairman David Burt has described Mr. Dunkley as "a desperate politician who is now visibly in a state of panic" over allegations contained in the video on YouTube.

....

"It is now the UBP Leader's signature modus operandi to use smear as a first resort when faced with an inconvenient truth."

David Burt (PLP Chairman)

The spurious allegations by the former officer have been swiftly discredited by the Gazette yesterday and ZBM news on Monday evening.

Not to be deterred, the smear campaign continues unabated.

The UBP are absolutely right to call on Dr. Brown to put an end to his party's negative campaign.

The PLP must be trying to turn around their record on the environment through recycling; recycling tired old election slurs that is.

Last night's rally had more hyperbole, to go with their Southampton candidate's 'they're neo-fascists who want to lock everyone up' nonsense.

Evidently it's contagious. This time the PLP's St. David's candidate is at it.

I don't know what's more worrying. That they actually believe this, or that they say it knowing it's patently untrue:

Earlier that night, Lovitta Foggo, PLP candidate for St. David's said a vote for the UBP was a vote for slavery and a return to the plantation.

"We must hasten to employ measures which ensure that our people and our children know that a UBP vote is a vote back to the plantation. It is a vote that will return the shackles to our feet!

Yeah. That's right. All those black UBP candidates want to enslave themselves. What nonsense. Shouldn't this immediately disqualify someone from holding public office?

Perpetuating this nonsense for future generations is extremely destructive for Bermuda. It's time for politicians grounded in the present not the past.

Both platforms (I won't say Manifesto, I hate that word) are out now.

The UBP's is here.

The PLP's is here.

My first reaction?

The UBP's is more ambitious. And considering that the PLP are so vocal about how screwed up the UBP left Bermuda, they don't want to change much.

Dr. Brown said as much in his introduction:

We make no grandiose promises in this platform.

But comparatively, both offer a lot of new government services. There are some similarities (bearing in mind the UBP rolled out the core of theirs 6 weeks ago) and the PLP appear to have done a "me-too Plus".

The main differences? Well, there are three that I find significant.

Firstly, the UBP have spoken to cutting Government spending and waste to fund these new intitiatives while Dr. Brown said they have no idea about what some of these things will cost.

Asked how much it would cost, Dr. Brown said: “We do not have a figure but guess what? Whatever it costs we will do it.”

Secondly, the UBP's is far more comprehensive and targeted to tackle crime and couple that with rehabilitation.

Thirdly, and glaringly, the UBP has a comprehensive plan for Government reform to make it more open, transparent and accountable. That's about the only area that the PLP haven't tried to mimic.

A reader hits the obvious fatal flaws of the drug dealer smear:

First point, he's [Larry Smith] effectively making allegations that Dunkley interfered with a narcotics investigation. Is this his way of going on the record?! It would be useful if he went to the police or used a more public forum. Actually stating his name and rank within the police force may help. Oh, right, he can't go to the police because their actions have lead him to believe that senior people are in on some Dunkley cover-up conspiracy! Apparently it's no use going to the recognized media on the island either because of course they would never investigate or report on such an allegation!

Beyond that, he's trying to lead people to believe that Dunkley hangs out with drug dealers, may have actually profited from shipments that MAY have occurred although no evidence is available to say that shipments actually did occur or who if any beyond those convicted may have been involved.

Most bizarre was his comment where it was HIS decision not to investigate Dunkley but to investigate AROUND him!? There is nothing here to say that Dunkley at any point in time was seriously considered as a suspect in the Bermuda illegal narcotics trade but he sure leads you on to make that connection.

Not that much of a surprise, pretty predictable actually, but Dr. Brown's gutter campaign is having another shot at the Dunkley's dairy drug case.

This time they appear to have rolled out a former Police Officer involved in the drug case of two Dunkley's Dairy employees in a highly produced YouTube video (no link here as it's probably defamatory) with the intention to spread rumour and innuendo that the now Leader of the Opposition was involved in a crime that occurred at his dairy; a case which he assisted in and where two individuals were successfully prosecuted in court.

It's a weak attempt to immunize the scandal plagued Premier and distract the public. The PLP campaign is hyper-focused on Michael Dunkley, because their leader is scandal plagued, they need to make the UBP team look exclusively white and they must be stressed about his prospects for taking that seat.

But could they get their smear straight? The PLP really need to decide if Michael Dunkley wants to lock up drug dealers forever, or is a drug dealer himself. At least be consistent.

Last week he was a neo-fascist law and order nut? Which one is it?

Brace yourselves. It's throw everything and hope something sticks time, but this is really, really weak...and desperate.

The video actually raises more questions about Larry Smith's meandering memory and why he didn't speak up at the time in a case which he thought was being interfered with than anything else. Surely he should have spoken up then, not years later.

Dr. Brown's campaign is completely hollow. This is sheer desperation.

In a campaign that has been saturated with polls, the Bermuda Sun ran another on Friday, conducted by a Canadian firm.

This one has the race in a dead heat, which is in line with the two polls that the UBP has released, and shows a markedly different situation than the poll that Gazette ran last week.

It's hard to make sense of things when you have had 5 polls conducted by 5 different firms at five different times, but the RG's poll is clearly an outlier.

Why? I'm not sure. But it shows a markedly different situation than every other poll and also something that social scientists would hate - what things feel like on the ground.

Dr. Brown's nasty un-Bermudian campaign continues to plumb new depths, as evidenced by his party's Puppet slur advertisement against UBP candidate Wayne Scott.

Negativity in political campaigns is nothing new, but what has been surprising in this campaign is that a party itself is so proudly producing such Americanized gutter material. The big difference is that in US campaigns you normally try to put some distance between the official candidate/party and their attack ads. Dr. Brown's campaign is proudly smearing.

For a party to run that puppet show ad on TV, with "paid for by the Progressive Labour Party" proudly appended to it is shocking, it runs a serious risk of alienating voters. It's speaks only to hard core fanatics. There was no point to the ad, other than to feed into stereotypes and racism.

That shouldn't be surprising during this campaign. What was surprising was how easy it was to create a rebuttal, which someone has posted on YouTube today, actually, the rebuttal is a better ad, shorter and ties in accountability as an issue.

I really wish that these nasty YouTube/Photoshop ads etc. would stop, but when an party is actually creating them themselves, it's hard to blame freelance individuals from responding in kind.

But back to the Puppet slur: The UBP's Bob Richards and John Barritt pointed out the hypocrisy and divisiveness of the PLP's attack on a black UBP member, when one of their own candidates had the exact scenario occur:

UBP candidate E.T. (Bob) Richards, who is running in Devonshire East, said the ad was an example of "gutter politics.

"It is offensive," he said. "It uses racial stereotyping as a political weapon."

And MP John Barritt said: "It is time to call them out for ads like this. On the PLP website there is a video of Wayne Caines, another new candidate, and you can see him struggle for the words to use, he struggles not once but twice and he is helped by a colleague on his right. No one called him a puppet.

"My black colleagues have to endure this type of criticism and it is offensive — that they are something less because they are black and support the UBP."

The situations are exactly the same, a first time candidate struggled in front of the mic (nerves) and was assisted by a colleague with a one-word prompt. Dr. Brown's campaign spins it into a slur for the UBP, but it's laughed off when his Chief of Staff does it.

The Puppet Show Rebuttal

The PLP's Attack Ad

Tom Vesey absolutely nails it with his column in the Bermuda Sun today.

No matter which way you plan to vote this year, I urge you not to believe or even tolerate the destructive lie that is at the heart to this year's PLP election campaign.

That's the notion that a desperate white right-wing conspiracy (headed by Opposition Leader Michael Dunkley, of course) is out to take over Bermuda, destroy black hope and opportunity and culture, and grab every Government contract it can get its hands on.

The only thing that can save Bermuda from this horrible fate is the superhero Dr. Ewart Brown.

You've read this kind of stuff before, mostly in comic books. But you can read the same fantasy on the PLP web site, hear it at their rallies and see it on their TV and YouTube commercials.

The inappropriate deal signing continues during the election period, with an announcement that the Caretaker Government has signed a $75M contract to build the new police station and courthouse, and a promise that a deal is about to be reached with St. Regis.

That's in addition to:

- a tax treaty being signed several days ago
- an offer to purchase the Bermuda Cement Company assets
- a ten year cruise ship contract

No respect for sensible precedents, process, Parliament or the people.

The Hyperbole of the Day award goes to PLP candidate Marc Bean, for this ridiculous statement:

Southampton West Central candidate Mr. Bean said the Opposition United Bermuda Party had a "neo-fascist agenda".

"If they have the opportunity they will lock all of us up. It's true," he said.

Hyperbole anyone?

May I suggest he look up fascism.

Fascists seek to forge a type of national unity, usually based on (but not limited to) ethnic, cultural, racial, and religious attributes.

It certainly isn't about implementing a platform of Good Governance, as the UBP have proposed, which involves fixed term elections, a Freedom of Information act, Whistleblower legislation, a non-political Attorney General, referendums if 20% of the electorate petition etc..

Engage brain before opening mouth.

There's been lots of talk today about the poll which ran in the Gazette, a poll conducted by a firm not previously used, and which produced results which are clearly an outlier from every other poll over the past few years, far outside of the PLP's suspect planted poll and the UBP's more recent one.

On a related note, as we approach complete and utter poll exhaustion, the UBP tonight sent out the results of a poll conducted last night. This poll again shows them to have a small lead, essentially a dead heat (and that's before we get into how inappropriate a national poll is when this will come down to a tiny number of votes in a handful of areas. I think there's the real chance of a party taking the popular vote but not getting the majority of seats.)

And the Bermuda Sun is also conducting a poll (through Corporate Research Associates) that will be run in Friday's paper from what I understand.

TOO MANY POLLS. TOO MUCH FOCUS ON THE HORSERACE BY THE MEDIA AND NOT ENOUGH ON THE ISSUES AND DEBUNKING LIES AND SPIN.

I've said it a few times but I truly believe that Bermuda is polled out, and I also think that the attention that the Push Poll (which the PLP are still pounding away at by the way - party's don't 'test messages' 2 weeks before an election) has drawn has made people highly suspicious of polls.

The main difference between this poll and the others, from what I can tell, is that the call centre was local. My contacts in polling say that in small communities which have been heavily polled there is a strong suspicion of being identified by a local caller so the results get skewed. And in Bermuda, if in doubt, say you're PLP, that comes with far less grief.

So the results today from Profiles of Bermuda make little sense particularly when you bear in mind that the PLP's poll gave them a small lead, and the UBP's a dead heat.

Ultimately, it's just all too close to predict in the key areas. Both parties know that, whether they'll say so publicly or not. How you get out your vote is a huge element to this campaign. And don't forget, this is only the second time these constituencies have been used.

But everyone in Bermuda today knows that this election is competitive, and the PLP wouldn't be engaging in such an extraordinarily negative campaign if they were way ahead. Their tactics are that of a party which knows it's got problems.

They've got a few things working against them, including a normal erosion of support for incumbent parties, a scandal plagued leadership, and internal disunity.

That's why today's poll showing a big lead isn't credible. Does anyone believe that the UBP's white support had reduced to 76%? Ewart Brown's racial tirades have been driving white voters to the UBP not away. He hasn't quite been engaging in outreach.

And the 9% who refused to answer etc. are likely UBP leaning 'won't says'.

But the PLP's tactics appear to be geared around the constant problem of having to try and shore up the base of their party, who as Alex Scott and others have laid out, are disillusioned with the party's leadership. Every time someone in the party restates that fact, they have to repair that damage.

The outcome however is that when a party campaigns in such a nasty and shrill manner to solidify the hardcore element, and they avoid the issues entirely and engage in vicious demagogary, they will likely turn off swing voters. It will also likely drive down turnout as voters become disillusioned with politics.

The PLP's strategy reminds me of Karl Rove's strategy for re-electing Bush, which was bring out the base and hope it carries you through. In that case it did - barely.

I must admit that I always thought that I had a high tolerance for political BS, but the PLP's tactics of constant smearing, holier than thou website tone and blatant misrepresentations in this campaign have left me very disillusioned and disgusted with this campaign.

I truly am disgusted. There are no boundaries for some, and as John Barritt pointed out in today's press conference about the violations of the Broadcasting Rules, there are one set of rules for the PLP, and others for everyone else. Their Chairman can attack the UBP for some individual's offensive cartoons, but refuse comment when it's in the other direction.

The UBP have posted today's press conference, where they responded to the disgusting ad placed in the papers today, and the scare-mongering about their plans to tackle crime.

While their outrage is clearly sincere, it doesn't hold a candle to the PLP's faux version:

The snearing continues over at the PLP website, with the resumption of the demeaning of the UBP's black candidates.

A reader summarizes the complaint:

First the UBP were too white, now they're too black.

If Michael Dunkley walked across Hamilton Harbour, the PLP headline would read "Dunkley can't swim".

Still off the meds.

The PLP today attack the UBP for being too hard on crime, and then say they want to bring in Guiliani's firm.

Do they have a clue? Let's just say that Rudy wasn't known for his focus on rehabilitation.

As we enter the final two weeks of the campaign, it is clear that the PLP has shifted into Demonize Dunkley mode, otherwise known as the downward desperation spiral.

In the past week, the PLP have generated an impressive amount of hyper-focused Michael Dunkley material, either radio ads, dopey blog posts or press statements.

The radio ad is pretty shameful, with the opening line of "Michael Dunkley is out to get you".

Boo!

And, at the same time, there's been a sudden increase in the use of the word 'deception', with Wayne Caines using it in a weekend statement and a new piece today entitled "Dunkley's Deceptions", recycling the easily debunked lies allegation.

I'd ignore this stuff if The Royal Gazette (you know, the biased one?) wasn't filling their paper with the nonsense that fits exactly into the critique of the press that I posted last night.

This is pretty obviously an attempt to transfer the attention off of the very low profile Dr. Brown (who since the election was called only likes scripted press conferences and gentle questions of a partisan town hall meeting) and try and share the wealth of his 'deception' liability.

I think it's too late for that. "We misled you because we had to" is Dr. Brown's albatross.

We keep hearing about how this will be the internet election (I don't think so - retail politics should reign supreme again in small constituencied Bermuda) but Vexed Bermoothes has picked up on some more rather dirty tactics from the PLP, with a novel take on Google Bombing.

They appear to have paid for negative sponsored links (mostly articles written by the PLP) to appear when you Google UBP related keywords and nice rosy pro-PLP propaganda to appear next to keyword searches related to them.

That level of online minutiae is impressive, but probably a waste of time and money.

Evidently the 20-something internet geeks running the PLP's campaign are tech-wise but not street-wise and have forgotten what grass-roots politics is, something that counts in Bermuda's tiny constituencies.

I doubt this obscure tactic will generate one swing in a vote. It's the kind of move that is going to reach voters like, well, me. It ain't going to reach the undecided that's for sure. They're not sitting at home googling away to find out about the PLP or UBP.

But it does display an unhealthy obsession with negative campaigning to compliment their push polls.

I'll make it a habit to regularly click on those sponsored links and take a few dollars out of their pockets and transfer them into the coffers of Google. Every little bit helps the share price.

The PLP were busy again this weekend with their push poll.

Apparently they "abhor the practice", but they won't stop it.

Oh, I'm sorry. They're 'testing messages'. that's right. Two weeks before the election they're still 'testing messages'. Right.

A few days ago I commented on that sort of weird Research.bm poll question about who leaked the BHC files.

Well, today they issued a press release and detailed breakdown on the results of the poll, which evidently was trying to measure how effective Dr. Brown's spin about the leakers has been (with former PLP supporter/ member being the correct answer).

In spite of the admission by former PLP supporter Harold Darrell that he was the one responsible for the leaked Bermuda Housing Corporation files (BHC), a recent survey conducted by Research.bm found that 47% of residents aged 18+ and who are registered to vote in the forthcoming election, were unsure who had leaked the Bermuda Housing Corporation files.

While just under half were unsure, a further 12% thought the UBP were responsible and 7% felt that it was the Auditor General. 31% of respondents thought that the files had been leaked by a former PLP supporter/ member.

Personally, I think the correct answer was a little too nuanced, but I get the point of the exercise. It's identical to a poll held in the US recently which showed that Fox News watchers had a much higher likelihood to believe that Iraq and al Qaeda were connected.

Misinformation is a powerful thing.

The poll did reveal another interesting finding:

Additionally, PLP supporters (i.e. those who are registered voters who intend to vote for the PLP in the next election) were asked “Would you like to see the PLP move forward without Dr Brown as their leader” 69% said no and 25% said yes. 6% were unsure. PLP supporters who are aged between 18-34 years are more likely than average to say that they would like to see the PLP move forward without Dr Brown as their party leader. (36%).

Interesting that younger PLP supporters are less enamored with their leader. I'm not surprised. His politics are very 1960s.

You've got to love the desperate attempt Dr. Brown is making to pretend he's being smeared, not smearing.

Let me abbreviate his complaint:

"Those 'vile', 'vicious', 'morally bankrupt', 'demented deviant', 'criminal abettor', 'vigilante', 'morally bankrupt', 'lying', 'morally bankrupt', 'white privileged', 'pious', 'self-serving', did I say 'morally bankrupt', 'forked-tongued', 'snide', 'nasty', 'relentless', 'morally bankrupt', 'savage', 'malicious'...and 'morally bankrupt', 'Filthy McNasty' Opposition and media are going to smear mild mannered me...at some point...it hasn't happened yet...but don't believe what you don't hear them say...believe what I tell you they're doing... not what I and my push pollers are doing to them...because I'm taking the high road."

Please. He desperately wants to be smeared, and is responsible for 100% of the smearing thus far. He wants to make this election about him and Michael Dunkley. He's openly begging for it. But it hasn't happened, no matter how hard he tries to manage perception. Has it?

The UBP - in the face of constant verbal attacks - have signed a Code of Conduct, condemned Dr. Brown's own smearing and condemned those who PLP candidate Jane Correia has complained about .

The smearing is coming from one side only.

Paula Cox telegraphed the intention 2 weeks ago:

"If anything the Premier has almost come a martyr-like figure — it seems to me it has coalesced his support."

The Deputy Premier said the critics had merely stirred up the sympathy vote for Dr. Brown.

Reminds me of that old joke, that I've used here before but it is so appropriate:

The Masochist (Dr. Brown) says to the Sadist: "Hurt me."
Sadist (UBP) replies: "No."

Mark Halperin, editor at large and senior political analyst for Time magazine, wrote an interesting piece, or confessional perhaps, on how the US media traditional covers elections:

Voters are bombarded with information about which contender has “what it takes” to be the best candidate. Who can deliver the most stirring rhetoric? Who can build the most attractive facade? Who can mount the wiliest counterattack? Whose life makes for the neatest story? Our political and media culture reflects and drives an obsession with who is going to win, rather than who should win.

For most of my time covering presidential elections, I shared the view that there was a direct correlation between the skills needed to be a great candidate and a great president. The chaotic and demanding requirements of running for president, I felt, were a perfect test for the toughest job in the world.

But now I think I was wrong. The “campaigner equals leader” formula that inspired me and so many others in the news media is flawed.

I found his penultimate paragraph quite appropriate, when discussing how campaigns should be covered:

Well, we pause, take a deep breath and resist. At least sometimes. In the face of polls and horse-race maneuvering, we can try to keep from getting sucked in by it all. We should examine a candidate’s public record and full life as opposed to his or her campaign performance. But what might appear simple to a voter can, I know, seem hard for a journalist.

With thanks to a reader for pointing this column out to me.

The UBP today released some details from a poll conducted for them, and not by a candidate.

I'm not into this party poll results game at all, but I suppose it's only reasonable considering the PLP's planted poll.

The poll results put them ahead, but in a statistical dead heat:

Research.bm, the Bermuda-based market research company, today revealed the results of its recent national poll in anticipation of the upcoming election.

The poll was of 408 Bermuda residents over the age of 18 years, who are eligible and indicated a probability of voting. The poll was conducted during the middle of November, 2007.

The poll showed that if the election was held tomorrow, 39% of voters would vote for the UBP, 37% would vote for the PLP, 17% were undecided and 6% refused to answer.

United Bermuda Party Chairman Shawn Crockwell said: “We’re pleased with these results because they reflect growing support for our team and our plans for change. Over the next three weeks, we will continue to talk about real solutions with voters who more and more are telling us it’s time for a change.”

Additionally, the poll indicated that Michael Dunkley was viewed favourably by 62% of Bermudian.

Ewart Brown was viewed favorably by 53% of Bermudians.
67% of voters in this poll opposed independence, with 22% supporting independence and 11% uncertain.

Someone has posted the push poll on YouTube.

It's a longer than your usual push poll, and starts off with normal questions before veering off into advocacy.

Hmm. I wonder what Harold "I'll hold back on further dossier disclosures...for now" Darrell will think of being included in this push poll.

"While I say that, I will use the police dossier to defend any attempt to soil my character and any legal action brought against me. Bermudians have been informed about the good and the bad of their elected officials and can now go to the polls knowing which personalities they are voting in or out.

"More importantly, they know that if the PLP is voted back in under Premier's Brown's leadership on December 18, they can no longer complain about his style of leadership. A PLP victory in this election will sanction Premier Brown's leadership."

And from another target of the push poll. Sounds like Dr. Brown's going scorched earth and blanketing the island:

Well I just (after 5 times of saying no to 5 different callers) answered that totally "brainwashing" poll....Each time was a different person calling so now that I have taken it I HOPE that they will not call back...another "fact" disguised as a question was that Harold Darrell STOLE (they said stole twice) and leaked the BHC files to get back at the PLP for not awarding him contracts. They also called us the UBP "the UPB" several times...

Ok, the dirty tricks have begun. I expect to have more info in the morning, and I'm going to work this tonight, but Dr. Brown is using a Group called The Parker Group to conduct a push poll (ie. negative campaigning disguised as a poll).

Two readers, both whom I know well sent in the following details:

Recipient 1

It was interesting that there were some of the negative polling techniques you had described in an earlier blog.

Such as “the UBP has been very divisive in the past will this affect the way you vote”. Also questions were about the number of hotels being built, massive increase in tourism last year and a very high standard of living under the PLP government do you view this as favorable not so favorable etc etc.

The more leading questions where the one talking about what a great job the PLP had done, BDA GDP vs US, # of hotels being built and last years increase in tourism - who is best party to "take Bermuda to the next level" then a leading question about Ewart (fast ferries and improved bus service and number of new hotels being built). A question regarding lack of experience of UBP candidates versus experience of PLP candidates. Then they had usual questions about race age and income.

Recipient 2

We just endured a spectacularly ridiculous PLP poll (from the Parker Group in Alabama) following their 4th attempt of repetitive calling.

Some of the questions were do you agree-disagree (typical spectrum of answering options)

- That the UBP is a white elitist party?

- Does the PLP look out for the average Bermudian?

- Did Harold Darrell release the documents as revenge for not receiving a government contract?

- That Bermuda has one of the highest per capita incomes in the world (50% greater than the U.S.)?

... very nasty stuff but unfortunately not unexpected from this Presidential style government.

Slimy. And Desperate.

There's been a lot of polling going on lately, to the point where I think Bermuda is just about polled out.

It's one thing to poll in populations in the millions, but it's another to have had two parties and The Royal Gazette intensely banging away with polls in a population of tens of thousands (with far less actual households) for the better part of 18 months.

I know from feedback I receive from poll recipients that they're playing games in how they answer the poll based on who they think is conducting it, because they get polled so frequently.

For that reason I'm highly skeptical of recent polls.

Four days ago a reader sent in the questions of a poll they'd just responded to.

I've included the whole poll below, and from what I've been able to find out it appears that this poll wasn't commissioned by a party or someone in the media but that research.bm tacked some questions onto a banking poll.

The questions were very direct, but one really jumped out to me:

5. Do you feel the BHC documents were leaked to the media by:

a) the UBP;
b) a PLP member;
c) the auditor general; or
d) other

Huh? We know who leaked the documents: Harold Darrell, yet he wasn't included as a response. So unless this question is attempting to measure the success of the PLP's campaign to portray the leaks as orchestrated by the UBP, I don't get the point.

It's the equivalent of polling the following question:

Q: Who was responsible for the September 11 attacks?

a) Saddam Hussein
b) A member of a terrorist organisation
c) The US Government
d) Other

or

Q: Which weapons of Mass Destruction were found in Iraq?

a) A nuke
b) Sarin gas
c) A dirty bomb
d) Other

Surely the right answer should be in there (ie. Al Qaeda and None respectively)?

Anyway, here is the whole poll:

1. Are you registered to vote;

2. Will you vote;

3. Which party will you vote for;

4. On a scale from 1 (very poor) to 7 (excellent) in ten years time what is the likelihood the island will have better:

a) Education:
b) Affordable Housing;
c) one more I can't remember

5. Do you feel the BHC documents were leaked to the media by:

a) the UBP;
b) a PLP member;
c) the auditor general; or
d) other

6. Will the PLP be better off without Dr. Brown as their leader.

These are some of the most direct polling questions I've ever received.

Man, this is one schizophrenic campaign the PLP are running.

They say they're for the people but are against tax relief. They've historically been firmly against a referendum, then are suddenly for one, now it appears to be no comment.

They refused to open the St. George's Police Station. Now they're all over it.

Today the UBP is right wing and cutting 'essential Government services', yesterday Paula Cox said they're creating a welfare state.

Someone pass the meds.

The UBP appear to have locked up just about all the prime online ad space early, with Bermynet, BlackandCoke.com and now The Royal Gazette, with what I think is the best ad yet.

Hilarious:

[UPDATE: Ok. Evidently a lot of people didn't get the joke. Well, actually it wasn't a joke, but the ad headline of "We will never deceive you" is a direct poke at Dr. Brown's "We had to deceive you" line after the 2003. Well, actually it was "We had to mislead you...", but somehow "deceive" took hold as well. Anyway, maybe I just have an odd sense of humour, but I thought it was pretty damn funny to see an ad with that headline, evidently too subtle a reference for some and other just don't find humour in the whole thing.]

Today's Thursday, which means both parties will be out in full force trying to catch the weekend paper headlines.

The Gazette today profiled a large and apparently disgruntled voting block.

A reader, a taxi driver, rants [edited only for grammar]:

Transportation Initiatives from PLP Keep Bermuda Moving Forward

How in hell could the PLP claim success with out right lies claiming to be working closely with the taxi industry, and that they have implemented a modern digital taxi dispatch system which get the taxis quickly to the customers while adding in augmenting drivers income. Lies,Lies,Lies.

First of all two out of the three company are not using the new system.

The system has failed to deliver what it had promise to do.

The PSVLB has failed to deliver regulations any new system.

Customers are still waiting across this country for a taxi.

All they did was make taxis buy a ornament for their dash board at great expense.

The only success this government can claim is that along with a few taxi operators they have near destroyed the taxi industry.

New mini buses, limousines and they have not finished yet: “Free Transportation”.

One should look for a physically challenged passengers taxi.

Who disbanded the Taxi Advisory Board?

The question is “Why can other services have a government board made up from their profession looking at and making recommendations as to their industry and not the taxi men & women of this country, WHY NOT!

How could one support the PLP? When they continue to drive a knife in the heart of 600 men & women's livelihood.

Remember the taxi fare increase and how it was handled. As I am a business person and taxi owner driver operator, you were powerless to negotiate a fare and just increase do to rising cost.

If you support what the PLP GOVERNMENT has done to the taxi industry then vote for them.

However if you don’t SEND THEM A MESSAGE Vote against them and save your business.

Dispatch. We have a problem

Judging by the rapid response to the UBP challenging Dr. Brown on Independence and what he really intends, the PLP are aware that this is a real weakness.

Add a referendum to the list of campaign flip-flops for the PLP (St. Georges Police, Southlands, taxi fare hike).

But, there's another tidbit, that for wonks like me who actually care about protocols and conventions, shows yet another crossing of a boundary.

The Premier's Press Secretary position is a quasi-political position, not appointed through the Public Service Commission but one that is not intended for outright partisan political work.

So I was a little surprised that Glenn Jones was out today shilling unabashedly for the PLP, when his is a taxpayer funded position that represents the Premier as his capacity as the leader of the Government, not party:

"The Progressive Labour Party is a party that believes nationhood is in Bermuda's future. And when that day comes, the PLP will be the right choice for leadership.

The press secretary position walks a fine line, but that statement is too much. The taxpayers aren't paying him to spin a party's campaign.

The Bermuda Cabinet Office isn't the White House, full of political appointees, although the consultant racket is the way that has been circumvented. But throughout this campaign Glenn should not be doing party work on the taxpayers dime, or in his capacity as Press Secretary.

That's why I was also a little surprised to see him interviewed in the Bermuda Sun as one of the campaign's spin doctors. Glenn should be speaking on Government matters, and should absolutely not be working - at least during regular business hours - on outright party related statements, such as today's.

That kind of statement should have come from the party PR officer. This creeping politicisation of all things Government needs to be halted.

I know his job depends on the result of the election, but he can always go and write for the PLP Times on December 19th if those taxi drivers exact their revenge.

For any aspiring politicians out there, here are two case studies in how not to canvass:

1) Per a Letter to the Editor on November the 10th:

I was sitting in my dining room today when GP13 pulled into my driveway. As I have had some construction work on my property I figured it might have something to do with that. Then I noticed it was my MP Wayne Perinchief. So while I waited to find out what Government business he wanted to talk about, as he was in a Government vehicle, I noticed a girl run from the car and drop something in my mailbox, then jumped back in the car and they drove off. So I went down to investigate and found a PLP/Wayne Perinchief pamphlet in my mailbox.

2) Per an East end reader:

This morning Dame Jennifer Smith was standing at the airport roundabout waving to cars as they passed by.

That's not the way it's done. The way it's done, is the way the candidates in Constituency 25 are doing it.

"Gina just needs to keep on doing what she's doing and keep on being who she is," Ms Smith said. "Gina is a hard worker and I hope people would vote based on her integrity and that's it. Gina has been out canvassing every week religiously; sometimes I wonder how she can keep up.

"I also speak well on Dale's behalf, he has been out there and working very hard so, it's going to be close."

Almost a month ago to the day I noted the obvious attempts by the PLP to minimise some significant liabilities in advance of the December election window:

Even the most casual observor would have probably noticed that there's been a flurry of activity over the past few weeks of unexpected developments and renewed talk of an election as the next logical window approaches (December).

Most notably there's been developments around moving the Southlands development to Morgan's Point; supplementing the Bermuda Police with some nebulous imported force; importing a foreign consultant to cool down the economy (or just advise on tourism development if you believe the latest shifting justification); and the draft racial quota law.

Well, you can see that they're still at it, with the Premier attempting to head off early a major liability for he and his colleagues: his party's constant push for independence in the face of a combination of overwhelming opposition and complete apathy.

In the Bermuda Sun on Friday Dr. Brown gave a rather slippery response:

But he told us yesterday that he has no intention of "springing it on people" if the PLP wins the December 18 general election.

He said: "My position is that the historical pro-independence position of the PLP has not changed. But when we go to the people to see if they wish to pursue independence, [our course of action] will be determined by the likelihood of a victory... There's no plan to spring it on people."

The same way he told Alex Scott that he wouldn't spring a leadership challenge on him, only to spring one a few short months later?

I think what rightly distresses many people is that there are two different postures on independence for the PLP; one when they're on island and another when they're off.

When speaking to locals they downplay it and say it's on the back-burner, but as soon as he's talking to an overseas crowd it seems to be right back on the front as a priority.

Bermudians should rightly be concerned that right now the PLP aren't just promising to do things immediately that they've refused to do for years (re-open St. George's Police station for example), but they're now also promising not to do things that they've always said they will do (Independence, Southlands).

Granted, Dr. Brown didn't say it was off the table, but he's being coy, and also telegraphing that he's more interested in gaming the outcome rather than just putting it to the people.

So the UBP today called Dr. Brown out on his comments to the Sun and pointed out the lack of clarity in his response. Bermudians need an answer here, because with all of the talk about the parties being the same (which I don't accept), this is a big difference:

I urge Dr. Brown and the PLP to come clean with the people of Bermuda. Will they push for independence, yes or no?

Would Dr. Brown claim an election victory gives him a mandate for independence? That’s a very real possibility. People should demand clarity.

I think the answer is that right now they'll say anything, but the real plan remains unchanged.

A reader, no doubt spurred on by a distressed wife, wrote in at 8:07PM:

Ooh! The UBP just blocked out the Oprah's Favorite Things Christmas special...

There goes the women's vote...

Then a few minutes later:

Crisis averted...looks like they just pushed it late. Domestic harmony back on track - looked pretty bad for a few minutes there...bet they had every woman in Bermuda watching (albeit swearing at their TV's)...

Poor Oprah. She's been sandwiched between opposing political ads lately. Any guesses who the swing vote is?

The UBP's Kenny Bascome in St. George's did pretty well tonight putting the lie to the damage control press conference that occurred at St. George's Police Station today, although he needs to learn to deliver a backhanded compliment better.

What was most damning was that he pointed out that as Deputy Mayor of St. George's the Corporation wrote to the Government four months ago inquiring about the Police station for the old town.

They never received a response. So you can imagine their surprise to see Mr. Burch running interference on the steps of the vacant station today.

You've gotta love the shenanigan's going on in St. George's.

The day after the UBP held an event in St. George's laying out their plan, and predicted that the PLP would announce that Club Med was about to be redeveloped - again - the Premier obliged and went straight out there the next day with a press conference devoid of any real content other than a poster board sketch of the east end.

Then today, after the UBP announced that they'll reopen the St. George's Police Station after it's been closed and ignored for several years, Minister Burch says he's sending the HUSTLE truck crew out to clean it out and that it would be put out to tender soon.

Translation: Uh oh. Look busy!

This is shameless stuff, and St. Georgians will see right through it I'm sure. Suddenly, they're being asked for the political equivalent of a one night stand. Much the same as the last minute taxi fare increase.

Considering that the PLP controlled the timing of the calling of the election (unless of course it was called in self-defense), they're getting beaten to the punch in St. George's, a key battleground.

It's a sure sign that the UBP are strong in the east end, with 3 seats that they have to take and which they very well should considering how neglected the east end has been, and how tight it was in 2003.

Michael Dunkley yesterday:

The UBP predict Premier Ewart Brown will spring another press conference promising exciting plans for the old Club Med site in the election campaign. But Mr. Dunkley said none of Dr. Brown's previous promises had been kept while his party would seek to get things moving.

From the PLP website today:

Earlier today, it was announced that the PLP Government is in the final stages of negotiations to bring a new luxury hotel to the old Club Med Site in St. George's.

But it's all moot anyway. See my post below. These negotiations are not valid. The Ministers are in caretaker mode.

A reader reads my mind:

Good evening Christian, wondering what your thoughts are about our Government signing long term (10 years for a cruise ship) commitments, leasing Bermuda property for a potential St Georges hotel, etc. etc. after the government has been dissolved and election called. Last minute attempt to tie up loose ends with the real polls looking bad?

Well, there's that. But there's actually a couple of issues here. Let's start with the political one.

One of the weapons in an incumbent party's arsenal that the challenger doesn't have is the ability to use the prestige of their Ministerial offices to profile and preen during an election campaign. They can tour Government projects and stage photo-ops and press conferences of official announcements to keep a high profile as the office holders.

That's just an inherent advantage that incumbent parties have.

I think what we're seeing lately, particularly with today's latest re-issuing of the standard fare "We're bringing a hotel to St. George's" announcement is the old "it's business as usual" act; act like an election win is just a formality, or as my reader said:

"Do the Donald" (as in Trump) - act like nothing is wrong even in the face of bankrupcy.

This only goes so far however.

Once an election is called, Parliament is dissolved and the writ is filed, all Ministers become caretaker Ministers. The Cabinet is a caretaker Cabinet that is there to provide continuity of the routine executive functions during the election period until the next Government is elected.

The Permanent Secretaries and the civil service essentially run the day to day business of Government as no major decisions can be taken during the campaigning period.

What they absolutely should not do - and this is long-standing custom and practice - is to commit the next government to significant new agreements in the final days of their term.

The PLP appear to be ignoring custom and practice. The challenger party - in this case the UBP - is entirely within their rights to state that they will review all agreements after taking over, particularly any decisions taken by caretaker Ministers.

In the past few days there have been some signigicant commitments announced, all since the election writ was dropped.

- The 10 year cruise ship deal just agreed.

- The extension of the Mirrors program.

- The eviction (and de facto Government forced termination of a private business) of the Bermuda Cement Company (which needs to be addressed by itself in a separate post) which was on the evening news broadcasts tonight.

- Today's St. George's non-announcement announcement (to counter the UBP's St. George's press event yesterday) that the PLP Caretaker Government is in the final stages of negotiations with a hotel developer for the old Club Med (and giving away the public St. George's golf course).

Any negotiations which were going on essentially ended the day the election was called, to be resumed by the next Government - whoever they are - after they're sworn in.

So don't be misled, these 'deals' are not done; this is politics pure and simple. I learned a long time ago not to expect Dr. Brown's Government to respect established custom and practice in these things, but the UBP is under no way committed to these 'agreements' which are being - and will continue to be - announced over the coming weeks.

I'm not intending to do a week in review as we proceed through this seven week campaign, but I did think that the first week and a half has been interesting for a number of reasons.

There's been a fair amount of debate about why the election was called when it was, whether it was planned or an act of self-defense by Dr. Brown as his party prepared to try and take him out. I suppose that we'll never really know, but judging by the lack of organisation which the PLP exhibited during the 10 days it seems to me like it was a survival tactic.

If you saw Gary Moreno on ZBM news a few nights ago ask David Burch whether the rumour that the Premier had been asked to resign the night before he called the election was true, you would have noted that Mr. Burch could only hold a straight face during his denial for a few moments before he walked away with a twinkle in his eye and a wicked laugh. (I'm having video editing problems or I'd load it up on YouTube it's so good).

Whether the UBP expected the election to be called or not, sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. I think that the first 10 days of the campaign, while relatively low key, were very positive for the UBP.

They rolled right into campaign mode, with a half hour broadcast the night before the Throne Speech and day the election was called, had their Agenda for Change newspaper insert in The Royal Gazette on the Monday, produced their Code of Conduct and rolled out more of their TV and radio ads online early in the week.

The PLP on the other hand, considering that they theoretically held the upper hand in knowing the timing of the election and could cue up a strong first week while the Opposition scrambled, seemed surprised and disorganised.

They started the campaign with a speech by Dr. Brown at the PLP Banquet which left many Bermudians shaking their heads over the intensity of its dishonesty, vitriol and racial attacks, before spending the rest of the week trying to look busy by taking potshots at the UBP's Code of Conduct, TV ads and three days of faux outrage on their radio station over a photo on the front of the UBP's Agenda for Change.

The first week's strategy for the PLP appeared to be to undermine the UBP's PR in the absence of their own.

Most revealingly to me at the state of unpreparedness they seemed to be in after calling the election was the Housing insert which appeared in The Royal Gazette on the Thursday.

The insert was notable for two reasons:

1) It was devoid of any real content, with the pages filled with 3/4 page photos and very little substance and;

2) What little content existed was full of errors and photos of housing projects which either weren't houses (a school) or were UBP projects from pre-1998.

The insert was incredibly amateurish and rushed, and while I don't think that the PLP can make much of a case for having delivered on housing in their 9 years, they could have made a better one that that. The flyer appeared to be little more than an effort to counter the UBP's rather timely Agenda for Change insert.

Only today did the PLP get their TV ads online and start looking like they were getting organised.

Seven weeks is a pretty long campaign so clearly both parties need to pace themselves and build momentum for a strong finish, but the Premier played some cards early that would usually be reserved for the final weeks: race and religion.

What that suggests to me is that the PLP are looking at numbers or are receiving feedback that shows that their core support is weak and that they needed to try and shore that up quickly, hence the Premier's Banquet rant.

It's also why they planted parts of a questionable poll in the Gazette, so that they could send a message to their supporters that they could actually win this thing despite their unpopular leader.

I think it's safe to say that the PLP didn't expect to be facing the very real prospects of a defeat 12 months ago when Dr. Brown knocked off Alex Scott.

It's still early, and both parties will have their good weeks and make some mistakes along the way, but I'd say that the early days of the campaign were positive for the UBP, who must be feeling pretty good right now about their prospects.

With all of the election anticipation of the past year the Parliamentary Registrar has been keeping a high profile with advertising encouraging people to vote.

I meant to post this months ago, but this TV election ad they're running is appalling:

Who decided to use the theme music from The Omen in a Register to Vote campaign? The movement, O Fortuna, is a classical masterpiece; but it has also become an iconic horror movie track because it is one of the most powerfully ominous and sinister compositions ever written. The music is Satanic.

This ad strikes completely the wrong tone. It feels incredibly political and tries to scare the hell out of you rather than inspire. It's very carefully crafted to send some strong political messages using music which conjures up Satanic images while you listen.

The exact same ad, paired with a very uplifting audio track, could have been more appropriate and effective; encouraging participation rather than suggesting that the Anti-Christ will arrive if you don't vote.

If you're going to do a register to vote ad with the 'Our democracy has come a long way' theme, it absolutely should have been positive, not a trailer for a horror movie.

Everyone I've asked about the ad has been either stunned or appalled. Someone said to me they felt like Bermuda was about to be invaded by Orc's unless they voted. What's even funnier is that the first related video that was associated with the ad when I loaded it up was a clip from The Lord of the Rings.

What is the Registrar thinking? That ad isn't something that they should be running.