Blue Like You

She and the “At Issue” panel on CBC tried unsuccessfully to make this point last night after attacking a military novice for praising the PM. Staged event, were the accusations.

It was a gaggle of disgruntled press gallery schmucks whining trying to win over the support of the bureaucratic establishment.

Declaration of overthrow “We the disgruntled media establishment call on the Liberal bureaucratic establishment to overthrow the CPC.”

Of course the unelected press is going to advocate for an unelected activist bureaucracy. They are more easily manipulated.

Andrew Coyne was nodding like a plastic bobblehead the whole time.

Absolutely pathetic!

Although Chantal is to be considered the Rex Murphy of TO Star (A fair and balanced columnist in a sea of left wing pushers) on this one, she under estimates the PM and his crew vis-a-vis Canadians overall satisfaction and she over estimates poll results ,often written about in columns asking why they are not breaking majority territory.
It seems to me the best explanations for this are:

1- That lots of Canadians might tend to answer “Liberal” when asked where they would X mark their ballot just because it seems to have become the “safest and non contreversial” answer to give. Kinda like voting anything but Liberal (Especially Conservative) is, somewhat viewed as uncanadian (The psyche result from years of Liberal rule and media backing) and with Canucks reputation as being shy would be the best defense mechanism from potentially further embarassing questions by the surveyor at the other end of the line. Does that make any sense?

2- Between elections Canadians are mostly in a political coma and again, the undecided, non hard partisans will answer ‘Liberal’ by de facto. Thus until the campaign is a few days away from election day, polls are not that reliable.

Unlike the US where elections are prepared months in advance which tends to engage the population, Canada’s political system is somewhat responsible for it’s people disinterest until the crucial last few days.

“I do get the general feeling from the MSM that the Conservatives are an occupation force. I don’t agree with it and believe in to be wholly created by the MSM however the Tories don’t help the issue when you view the parties web site and see mostly slagging of Dion. It gives the impression of a government in opposition and not one in power.”

I think the best explanation for this is that the negative adds against Dion and the Fibs have worked better at improving poll numbers than the actual good CPC accomplishments which are under reported by the MSM anyway. Like I said in my earlier post, Canucks don’t pay attention/read the fine print. They glance at headlines which the MSM will gladly publish and especially if they are negative, the media does’nt care for which side. In a sense, the CPC is more at war with the MSM than of the Liberals themselves.

I think Harper has figured out Canadians: Between elections, run like there’s an election: Attack your opponents/define them before they can = Best chance to maximise ‘free’ messaging from an otherwise hostile MSM AND: (Speculating) Present your initially under reported acheivements DURING an election campaign where MSM will have little choice but to do so. And continue beating your opponent with negative ads which at this time would be financed by the party. Plus you finance positive party acheivement ads during governance too.

Welcome back, Joanne. I hope you enjoyed the brief hiatus.

Ms. Hebert writes:
“… now that the Conservatives are in power, they do not seem to be able to make the psychological transition from opposition to government.”

Which is understandable, given the number of pressure groups, lobbyists, and assorted organizations who are trying to delegitimize the government in the eyes of the public. Coupled as well with the Liberals’ inability to accept the fact THEY are NOT the government.

I can understand the Conservatives’ anger and growing impatience, but I believe the summer recess should be used to give the party a new direction: less angry rhetoric, no more accusations thrown at the Liberals and other adversaries, and LOTS more emphasis on this government’s accomplishments (like Sandy’s list).

C’mon, Conservatives, accentuate the positive - leave the negative stuff to your opponents.

Gabby, read again what Grind a Grit says. He’s got a good analysis of what the CPC is doing, and is likely to do in a campaign, message-wise.

For now the Conservative Party is doing the negative messaging, focusing on Dion. The Conservative Government is doing the positive messaging (for example the immigration ads, the anti-drug ads)

During the election campaign, I expect most of the messaging to be positive. Essentially, I fully expect the campaign will be to run on our record, and Harper’s leadership. IMHO, an incumbent is supposed to run on his record.

You can’t extrapolate from what Harper is doing now to what he will be doing during an election campaign. For example, in 2005, Harper was pretty well all-Sponsorship, all the time, with nary a hint of the many policies he would later introduce. The pundits expected him to campaign that way as well. But Harper surprised everyone by running a campaign of essentially a policy-a-day.

Like his university friend said in the CPAC documentary, Harper likes to surprise people. He plays his cards close to his chest. Another good example of that is when the BLOC were going to introduce their “Quebec is a nation” motion. Most of the pundits, including myself, thought Harper would let that vote come to the House, as it would split the Liberal caucus, cause major problems at their convention, pit Ignatieff against Kennedy/Dion, etc.

But Harper was more worried about the split in HIS caucus, and the difficult position his Quebec MPs were in, maybe even Quebec cabinet ministers voting with the BLOC. And so Harper crafted a resolution that essentially got his Quebec MPs off the hook, and gave them a huge talking point, still very useful to them. Again, Harper was thinking long term.

True to form, the PPG naturally assumed ex-Reformers would be upset with this “Quebec pandering”. But surprise, surprise, Reform icon Myron Thompson gets fingered by Julie van Duesen in a scrum, and says that anything that puts the seperatists on their heels is a good thing.

Harper kept his caucus united and on-message (except for the unfortunate resignation of Minister Michael Chong). The guy is very good leader, in many ways.

Mary T - Thanks for the Cadman tip. I see that Jack has posted the story.

Just catching up on the comments here. I am glad the CPC is planning a policy convention this fall. I think it will go a long way towards focusing on longer-term goals. Who knew such a tenuous minority government could last so long?

Calgary Junkie, while Grind a Grit (love the name) makes some solid points, I cannot help but believe that a constant barrage of 15 second clips of the PM blasting the opposition will hurt his already “angry” image.

It is an unfortunate fact of life that image, the perception people have of a politician, is what sways a large part of the electorate.

Look south for an example. Sen. Obama is probably headed for the White House. Why? Because many people are impressed by the cadence and rhythm of his speeches, the “hope” aspect, rather than whatever specific policies he has put forward so far.

Even political analyst William Johnson, who sounded like a true Harper fan, has begun to criticize him. Those who already support him, like me, will continue to do so, regardless of the tactics used. But the Conservatives’ standing in the polls shows that PM Harper has to convince the undecideds to vote for him. Will the negative approach work? I’m not so sure - but then, I’m no political analyst.