Polygonic

That weren't no DJ, that was hazy cosmic jive

A future Liberal Party may want to consider…

There’s a lot of personal tragedy in elections, and it couldn’t get any worse for Michael Ignatieff. He’s finally succumbed to wounds meted out by the most vile, relentless attack ad machinery Canada’s ever seen. Shamefully, a huge hunk of the electorate swallowed it all hook, line and sinker – so much for our compassionate discourse. Turns out Canada is more Zdeno Chara than Wayne Gretzky after all.

Ignatieff will be wondering why he ever bothered, and the scale of this defeat will haunt him forever and ever, though in most respects, he doesn’t deserve that kind of torturous retirement from politics.

After all, he did resist the Big Blue Sauronic Machine more effectively than Stephane Dion ever did, at least personally. The problems in the recent couple of years were that slowness and confusion in Liberal responses to CPC tactics, or to policy generally, were rooted in a broad lack of clarity across Liberal High Command.

The vagueness of today’s Liberal identity isn’t Ignatieff’s fault, nor was it Dion’s, or Martin’s – it’s perhaps a consequence of a phenomenon known as toomanycooksism. Everyone’s got a bright idea about how the LPC should have created itself in the aftermath of the Martin Meltdown in 2006. The problem has been, maybe, that a thousand flowers blooming inside the Big Red Tent did nothing to carve a clear direction. It mitigated directly against it.

And, take heart, Ignatieff – it doesn’t seem, broadly speaking, that Canadians like ousting incumbent governments very much, whatever they do. Trudeau’s Liberals governed for nigh on 16 years. Mulroney had 9. The Chretien-Martin team had 13. We generally tut when we read about African sham democracies that tolerate strongmen at the helm for a decade and more, but in Canada, hell, it’s the pattern.

Harper’s had five years, and sure, he’ll get his nine. It’s been five abysmal years, yes (and Canadians will one day beg the gods for forgiveness that they did not react against it sooner), but the Liberals, as logic would then dictate, have only been out of power for five years – perhaps it’s not been long enough, or easy enough in minority circumstances, to rebuild as they need to.

How might a future Liberal Party manifest itself? Rather soon to say, I guess. But one thought occurs to me – perhaps all this time trying to imitate the NDP platform has led them (ironically?) into a deeper state of empathy with the erstwhile minor party, at least as regards particular electoral injustices.

For example, in “vote-rich Ontario” this election, the NDP only secured 16,000 more votes than the Liberals, across the province. That’s a close race, really. It meant, however, 22 NDP seats and 11 Liberal seats. Amazing! Traditionally, it’s the NDP (and Greens) on the losing end of such cruel electoral arithmetic.

The potential upshot of this? One hopes (and one is very, very patient) that a serious interest in pursuing electoral reform, once the pet project of the so-called fringe parties, might now take root in some part of the current Liberal necropolis. When the Big Red Phoenix rises in the future, will it do so through having advocated for democratic reforms towards a better system?

They have to start thinking big. Perhaps a silver lining for the party is that they’ve found the time to do it.

Advertisements

Filed under: Canada, Politics, , , , ,

The little blue fortress

It’s a funny way to run a campaign. Stephen Harper is talking up the need for his coveted majority, but his campaign approach – banning, and forcibly kicking out, undecided voters and non-partisan onlookers from his Conservative rallies – seems very strange. What are rallies for, if not to generate new party enthusiasm? And what use is any such enthusiasm if it doesn’t reach contagion in the wider world? Hard-core CPC cheerleaders won’t get to vote twice – how much more excitable do they need to be?

It seems like a dumb approach, but it’s of course a tactical decision. Harper wants his majority, not through bringing new votes onside, but through simply getting his entire existing base out to vote on 2 May. He wants to whip up all the sworn-allies into such a state of anti-Ignatieff frenzy that they’ll simply out-participate the majority of Canadians – you know, non-Conservatives – on election day.

Canny, if only the Canadian arithmetic worked in his favour. Regardless of whether 100% of Harper’s hard-base come to vote, it’s probably not enough. In Facebook speak, Stephen Harper simply doesn’t have enough friends.

This is not, of course, a new thing for the Cons – it’s at the heart of how they communicate and conduct themselves. Last summer, in effort to be a little better informed (about communication styles, if not about actual policy!) I thought I’d subscribe to all the federal parties’ online newsletters (except, to my shame, the Greens. Sorry Elizabeth!).

It’s a simple process – you visit the party website, you register the email address to which you prefer receiving what I call “useful spam,” and rub your eager hands in anticipation of lots of new political bumpf to fill your inbox.

And so it is that I get lots of emails from Michael Ignatieff and team – today, he says:

How Stephen Harper’s Conservatives decide to do a Facebook background check on everyone at their rallies, while ignoring the criminal past of a senior advisor like Bruce Carson is a mystery to me.

But I’ll tell you what. We’ve had thousands and thousands of Canadians show up at Liberal rallies from Vancouver to St. John’s. And all they hear at the door is “Come on in to the Big Red Tent.”

I also get messages from Jack Layton and team. Tons, in fact. Today, he says:

For years, your priorities have been pushed aside in Ottawa.

Your life is getting more expensive. Your health care services are being ignored. And the Liberal-style scandals are pushing your family’s priorities aside.

Ottawa is broken – and it’s time to fix it.

I have a team that’s ready to fight for you.

And yes, I get messages from Gilles Duceppe and company. The Bloc is apparently so excited to communicate with a voter registered at a B.C. postal code, that today, they even bothered to email me about their new campaign theme song:

Le Bloc Québécois a récemment dévoilé la ritournelle de sa campagne électorale. Écrite et interprétée par Jason Hudon, les arrangements musicaux sont l’œuvre de Mike Sawatzky, le guitariste principal du légendaire groupe québécois Les Colocs.

Anyone want to wager a guess how many messages I’ve received from Team Harper?

*crickets* *sagebrush drifting over the arid valley bed*

I always found this odd. Here I am, a Canadian voter, signing up to their website, asking them to spam me with all manner of propaganda, and they never so much as said hello. The only reason I could deduce, given that they cannot be accused of being relaxed and disorganised on the PR front, is that they inferred through running my email address against Facebook and what have you, that I was not a serious Conservative voter. I was an imposter. I might use their newsletters in dark socialist rituals of some kind. In short, they wrote me off.

In a manner, they were right. I am more likely to grow bat wings out of my shoulder blades than support a CPC candidate in the year 2011. But the fact they simply do not give a rat’s ass about seducing new, moderate, curious Canadians into their fold, speaks to me of a single-minded (and, frankly deluded) get-out-the-base strategy, and nothing more.

Have at it, I say. But, as David McGuinty told them so recently: too bad, so sad – you don’t got the numbers.

Filed under: Canada, Politics, , , , , , , , , ,

Battle Royale, Twitter style

I smile when people call this the Twitter Election. It has the air of revolution about it, doesn’t it? As though the normal political condition of the Canadian citizen is ashen-minded apathy – but now, with Twitter, we will magically become transformed into eager and fearless critics of an oppressive double-helix state-media establishment! Just like in Egypt!

Perhaps a blogger should watch his trap when it comes to balking at citizen-generated comment. But, at least for me, it seems difficult to use 140 characters to say anything more useful than “Here’s a link to something much longer and more interesting.”

I can’t guarantee this is more interesting, but it certainly is longer. I’ve decided to draw up a second instalment of an experiment last week, with 140-word reviews of each party’s performance to date. It’s like Twitter, but Mega.

Conservatives: I honestly wonder how often senior Conservatives look each other in the eye, shrug, laugh, and admit: “I have absolutely no idea how we’re staying ahead.” Indeed, enjoying a 14% lead, according to Nanos? It absolutely beggars belief. Harper does himself no favours. Antagonising the press with “five-questions-a-day” is needless and feeds into the control-freak narrative. Criminals in the employ of the PMO should be a scandal: that Harper shrugs it off is just a scandal further. They’ve been reactive and uninspired, trotting out old chestnuts on gun freedom, and dispensing with billions in dubious spending promises. Ontarians seem especially enthusiastic, which may be a consequence of the departure of Day and Strahl, and the pronounced Mike-Harrisification of Harper’s senior team? I’d like to threaten to leave the country if Harper wins a majority, but, dang it, I’m already gone.

Bloc: Duceppe’s biggest problem (if there is such a thing as a problem for the Bloc, who certainly enjoy milking our broken electoral system for every last drop) is deciding how to define the threshold of his outrage. He can turn red and scream bloody murder about Lower Churchill. He can rage that Ottawa is an anti-Quebec, imperialist, nefarious hell-spawned engine of neverending betrayal that shackles the potential of all Quebeckers. But he can not go so far as to get deep into sovereignty talk anymore. That just alienates his soft base. How do you escalate the outrage far enough to suck in wavering federalists, without scaring off wavering nationalists? He doesn’t really know. And maybe he doesn’t care. He could spend the whole campaign peeing in the road and shoplifting from corner shops, and still vacuum up 50-odd seats. Sigh.

Liberals: Still super impressed with the performance, but slightly anxious they’ve peaked too soon. Releasing the platform early is good, but it kind of gets lost in the noise of the fact they had a surprisingly solid week previous, and had introduced the heaviest-hitting policy points already. I’m sensing one of two things: either Canada is drunk, or pollsters are drunk. Why aren’t the Liberals winning? The LPC have reached dizzying highs of 32% but, as a natural consequence of their left-leaning strategy, none of this has hurt the Conservatives. There isn’t much more of the soft-left vote for them to poach, which is where LPC emphasising ethical scandal is important. They need to say “Fraud and contempt are not conservative values. Conservative voters, like all Canadians, need to punish Harper for abusing our trust and taking the country for granted.”

Greens: The biggest coverage the Greens have had so far has been through the Debate Debate, which, however bad the news is for them, it’s been an opportunity for them to feature in a fair amount of press. It’s a great shame that they’re excluded, and also that a broadcast consortium has such power to determine the format of the debate (not that any of the HoC leaders protested very hard). It’s an arbitrary logic – the GPC have no seats in the HoC, but then, the Bloc don’t have any candidates anywhere in the RoC, and have zero capacity to produce a new Prime Minister. The Greens have an opportunity to use this to their advantage. Turn the campaign into one of “the status quo,” implicating every other party as complicit in an Establishment Massive, versus the suppressed, undervalued, solitary change-makers.

NDP: I’m feeling for the NDP. Their policy points have underwhelmed, and it seems the Liberals’ collective verve has taken wind out of their sails. Jack Layton has responded as well as he could to a range of questions, but he’s stuck watching the perennial NDP nightmare unfold – Liberals campaigning like the NDP, but with the added barb of “No one can stop Conservatives but Liberals.” It happens every election, but as Harper is a particularly nasty form of Conservative, perhaps the ABC vote is a bigger factor than normal – and, in more cases, it’s gravitating to the Liberals. Ridings where NDP have been second to CPC, Layton’s employing Liberal approaches: “Only NDP can beat Harper here.” O.K. But it muddles their overall message of “strategic voting is for dupes. Vote with your heart for the Canada you want.” Oh dear.

Filed under: Canada, Politics, , , , , , , , , , ,

Playing politics out loud

This doesn’t quality as a gaffe, perhaps, but the Liberals best avoid being quite this frank.

The Liberals had also worried coming back to the Commons in January that Stephen Harper would cancel the $6-billion tax cuts, deciding the country just couldn’t afford them. It would deny the Liberals their big issue – and the spending envelope for their programs.

Their entire platform would have been in jeopardy had Mr. Harper changed his mind. “Our biggest fear coming back in the New Year was that he would think twice about the corporate tax cuts,” a senior Ignatieff official said Monday. “But he didn’t do that, he is stubborn, he is ideological and he didn’t do that.”

When you say that you feared Harper might roll back the corporate tax giveaways because it would make campaigning against him tougher, you’re pretty much saying that the issue itself is secondary to the competition.

As always, Jane Taber doesn’t reveal her “senior party sources,” but whoever she/he is, please – we get enough hyperpartisan spin from Team Harper. Let’s stick to the bottom line: corporate tax cuts are inappropriate, full stop.

Filed under: Canada, Politics, , , , ,

It’s hard being a swinger

My girlfriend would insist that I elaborate on that.

Elections force decisions. For those in a “base” of any description, it’s not so much the case – and part of me envies it. Loyal partisans can dedicate their considerable energies to converting wavering voters to the cause, to plugging their predetermined messiahs, and they don’t have to spend quite as much time wondering to themselves who it is they want to vote for. It’s called loyalty for a reason.

I’m afraid I’m a fiercely disloyal, oscillating left-wing cruiser, who’s voted for both Labour and the Liberal Democrats in the UK, and for the NDP, Greens, and Liberals in Canada over a range of elections. It’s nice to come into a new campaign with fresh eyes. But there’s a struggle as well – perhaps I’m less disloyal, and more multiloyal. Every potential choice feels like a betrayal to the consequent non-choice. Hence a deep loathing for FPTP!

However addled I may be by indecision at this early stage, I thought I’d like to review the parties and leaders so far. Rather than Twitter’s 140 character shackles, let’s nonetheless be brief – 140 words per party! A few ruminations on how the campaign appears so far…

Greens: A funny place to start, since there’s nothing of import I’ve been able to glean about the Greens so far. Nor am I especially likely to vote for them. I feel for the party’s struggle to be heard on the national stage – a party that can command around 10% support deserves coverage. But, as they command around 0% of the seats, they just don’t get it. I fear for May’s prospects in Saanich – Gulf Islands. The hippyish Gulf Islands part I get, but Saanich? Wealthy retirees with monster homes do not strike me as fertile territory. It’s frankly a disaster of a riding for anyone. I do want to see May in the debates again, though; if she can’t demand the national stage normally, she can at least get the chance to hold her own in front of her rivals.

Liberals: I know I’m living abroad, but what I can tell, Ignatieff is actually doing brilliantly – as is the party write large. No gaffes yet. Quick, sharp rebuttals to dumb Harper policies like a “tax break for families, maybe, in five years.” He’s pouncing on Harper’s reference to “ethnics” as “you people.” He’s drumming away at key ethics slogans, and chipping away at the “prudent economic steward” garbage that Tories try to own. Liberals seem organised, serious, competitive, believeable, innovative and frank. The university grants scheme is smart. Would like to see it promote cross-provincial study, frankly. It blows my freaking mind that they aren’t yet 10 points ahead. Despair a bit at Ignatieff ruling out a coalition, but recognise his rationale. It’s just toxic in poor Canadia. If an election were held in five seconds, I’d vote for Iggy.

NDP: Layton’s the best leader of the lot, and the nicest, classiest, and most natural by far. I’m pleased he’s campaigning in Edmonton and Saskatchewan, and they need to keep it up. Would like to see other prominent NDPers taking up some campaign work too (are they?). Mulcair, Martin, Davies all out there, illustrating the “team” dynamic to contrast against Harper-authoritarianism. I feel “Jack Layton” branding on everything over-eggs his charm, and is slightly offensive to the depth/breadth of the party. Like many, I want NDP to grow, but not at expense of Liberals! Painful. Where’s it likely? Prairie urban centres, the Far North, much of B.C., and Quebec. I want them going whole hog in those areas. “CPC taking prairie voters for granted” is brilliant. Policy so far a bit middling. Credit card limits? What’s this about?

Conservatives: Regardless of Ibbitson’s praise, I honestly find the Harper campaign so far to be an embarrassment. I’m trying to see it from the perspective of loyal, or potential, CPC voters. Does yammering on about coalitions, like some sort of dysfunctional 1970s robot, when Ignatieff has gone so far as to rule it out explicitly, not reek of desperation? It’s not only dishonest, it’s pathetic. They seem to have no Plan B narrative to coalition-fear-mongering. “Ageist” and “you ethnic people” optics are nasty little bumps in the road for them. “Family tax breaks if you’re lucky in 2016” is a joke, and they know it. No convincing defense of their record so far – I thought CPC was a well-oiled machine? Doesn’t seem at ease, and will fail badly in debates, I reckon. What will “real Canadians” think, eh?

Bloc: Sigh. Ballsy and clever to trot out the 2004 coalition letter. Nice way to put Harper on the back foot. Otherwise, what can you say? No sovereigntist talk, just “Quebec is great” talk. Am frankly glad Parizeau emerged from sarcophagus to call for big separate Quebec state, as it flummoxes Duceppe plans to morph BQ into a fuzzy regionalist social democrat party without any serious separation leanings. I think he’s been a useful thorn in Harper’s Quebec ambitions, but that’s perhaps a bit of spiteful glee on my part. What I’d love to see is Duceppe campaigning cross-Canada trying to explain his vision of the universe and, specifically, the Canadian federation. Wouldn’t that be in Quebec’s interests too? To show the softer, gentler, cuddlier side of Quebec nationalism? Oh well, perhaps he is not ballsy after all. Ha ha.

O.K., the “ha ha” may not be the cleverest way to get to 140 words on the Bloc, but anyhoo, it’s no less clever than some of the analysis we’ve seen on the Globe and Mail so far.

Filed under: Canada, Politics, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Beautiful day

Happy Friday, Canada – here’s the soundtrack to a collapsing Conservative government 🙂

Filed under: Canada, Politics, , , , , , ,

A Liberal dream ad?

How fast can Ignatieff speak? If he can say the following in 30 seconds, it’s pretty much exactly the kind of Liberal ad that I’d cheer for.

You can tell a lot about someone by how they talk to you. We have a Prime Minister who has nothing positive to say about his record, and nothing for Canadians to hope for. All he does is talk about the Liberal Party, and he tries to make me out like a monster. Well, I’m not.

If I were him, I’d be scared to talk about the Conservative record too. He gave Canada our biggest deficit in history. He wants to spend billions of dollars on fighter jets that aren’t fit for purpose, dozens of supermax prisons that we don’t need, and huge corporate tax giveaways. Fake lakes and PR. And peanuts for seniors and everyday families across this country.

He has a record of contempt for Parliament, and contempt for Canadians. That’s why he wants to change the subject, and won’t take Canadians’ questions. He takes us for granted.

I’m proud to be a Canadian, and to be a Liberal. We’ve been there to fix big Conservative messes in the past, just like after the Mulroney years. Well, after five years of Harper, we’re ready to do it again.

(Borrowing healthily from Jean Chrétien’s LPC 2009 conference speech in Vancouver – it’s good material, and should be used!).

Recommend this post atProgressive Bloggers

Filed under: Canada, Politics, , , ,

The Liberal ads

After much discussion in recent days and weeks, the Liberal Party have come out with some harder-hitting advertising. We’ve got:

Abuse of power

and Economy

What do you think of them?

Filed under: Canada, Politics, , ,

A wee reminder about 2006

Polling trends across the 2005/06 federal election. Looked pretty rosy for Paul Martin at first.....

See the big image of 2005/06 election campaign polls here.
.

Sooo, today’s polls suggest it would be sheer madness for the Liberals to encourage an election now. Madness! Can we survive on faith alone that the high-level scrutiny of an electoral campaign will somehow reverse Ignatieff’s dreadful fortunes?

We can use more than faith – let’s use an example!

Federal election 2006. When the campaign kicked off, you basically had the inverse of the LPC/CPC numbers today. Martin in low- to mid-thirties, Harper in the high twenties.

What’s more, the Tories success in turning that campaign around wasn’t just through plodding away with those “one policy item a day” releases. Those helped. But the switch in voter intention also happened directly after Christmas Day, running up through New Years. Is there something to that? Many voters were off work, finished with their shopping, and were finally cloistered with family and friends for a few days with little to do but talk, think, watch the news, and talk and think some more.

A population that thinks and talks is always going to threaten the incumbents.

Should a 2011 election campaign span across the Easter break, you never know – Canadians just might find themselves with a bit more free time, and in the middle of few more conversations about the country. I can’t see how that would be good for Harper.

Filed under: Canada, Politics, , , , , , , ,

New poll: should Ignatieff strike back?

It blows the mind. In a month where Stephen Harper has supplanted the name Canada with his own name in official reference to our government; defended (and largely hid away) a minister guilty of fraud; been hit with two separate charges of contempt of parliament; have had economic forecasts for F-35 fighters ridiculed by Kevin Page; Ignatieff is polling lower than ever, and Harper as high as he’s ever been.

One reason for this, and one reason only: Harper’s attack ads, which seem remarkably effective on Canadians. Who’d have thought? Are we more Zdeno Chara than Wayne Gretzky after all?

Michael, if you need a couch to crash on in London as a kind of reprieve from this mass Canadian madness, give me a buzz. In the meantime, I suppose the jury is out on what the next Liberal approach needs to be. Attack back? Keep calm and carry on?

Vote in the little poll here.

Correction: have replaced reference to CF-18 with the more contemporary F-35 jets. What was I thinking??

Filed under: Canada, Politics, , , ,