« I remember when people weren't insane. And I'm not even 30. | Main | Howler of the day »
November 08, 2005
Principles, schminciples
[Preston] Manning did to Conservatism in Canada exactly what [former Prime Minister Margaret] Thatcher did to Conservatism in Britain — and [former President] Ronald Reagan to Conservatism in the U.S.
A minor quibble. More importantly, though it's hardly surprising to hear it coming from Jackson I am consistently amazed by ideas such as his about how Harper should go about becoming Prime Minister:
Mr. Justice John Gomery's AdScam inquiry alone contains enough sleaze to collapse the Martin government.
So that's what Harper's Conservatives must do — follow a a [sic] no-holds-barred strategy similar to the Republicans.
Promote their stands and point to new directions for the nation — and roll out an entire convoy of trucks overflowing with the garbage of the Chretien/Martin regimes.
Yeah, see, that's just not going to work. Harper's Federal Accountability Act, though apparently strong, isn't going to work. No strategy currently being employed by the Conservative Party of Canada is going to work. Quite simply, Harper needs to hire some people whose sole job is to convince Ontarians to vote for him, at any costs. If that means holding hands with Jack!, so be it. Enough is enough.
Ontarians have clearly demonstrated that they don't much care about government sleaze. They believe (pretty much correctly) that all governments are corrupt to a degree indistinguishable to them from what Gomery represents. Put simply, Ontarians love non-disastrous incumbents. Harper needs to set about becoming one. Hopefully he can gradually effect real change once he's installed at 24 Sussex, but he's certainly not going to do it from 541 Acacia. The choice is his.
Posted by Chris Selley at November 8, 2005 09:16 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.tartcider.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/131
Comments
"So that's what Harper's Conservatives must do — follow a a [sic] no-holds-barred strategy similar to the Republicans."
Did a shiver just run down anyone else's spine? The possibility that they might actually emulate the pathetic Republicans has crossed my mind several times, and that's exactly what makes me highly doubtful of the utility of them actually winning an election for the sake of winning. If the only way they can win is by tossing their own principles by the wayside, then what on earth is the point?
I will fully grant that the current CPC strategy is uninspiring to say the least, but this is more due to their failure to enunciate their own platform and sell it enthusiastically to the country. What percentage of voters who aren't card-carrying Conservatives do you think could state at least three Conservative Party policy positions that have nothing to do with government corruption? I'd wager not many, and that is the CPC's problem.
But frankly, you could replace Stephen Harper with a pineapple and I'd still vote CPC for the sole purpose of sending a message to the Liberal party. All governments tend to corruption, but only insofar as they're allowed to. If Ontarian voters are too bone-idle to realize that the Liberal party needs to be punished on principle, then that isn't the CPC's problem, it's our problem.
Posted by: Matt McIntosh at November 9, 2005 11:15 AM
Of course it's the CPC's problem, Matt. Those bone-idle Ontarians are standing between them and government. Would the CPC rather lose honourably than win? Their watered-down policy statements tell me otherwise, as does common sense about politics and politicians. They've already sacrificed most of their principles — I'm only suggesting they do so more strategically.
Posted by: Chris Selley at November 9, 2005 11:58 AM
Chris,
You're right, of course -- it is the CPC's problem if all they want to do is win an election. But gaining power at the price of abandoning any semblance of principles looks a lot like a Pyrrhic victory to me. (Again, cf. the current Republican party.) I'll still vote for them purely out of spite, but it would be nice if I had some other reason.
Posted by: Matt McIntosh at November 9, 2005 01:43 PM