|
Wednesday January 25, 2006
Sympathy for the devil
Yesterday's column from the Martin HQ on election night wasn't really about the Martin HQ on election night, because there wasn't a hell of a lot going on there. But perhaps it'll help explain why it was that even most diehard Liberals couldn't be bothered to come out to support their leader's last hurrah.
I have to say, as someone who came up against the Martin machine during my time in the Liberals (and was largely motivated to leave the party because of it), it was a bit jarring to see what it had been reduced to on Monday night. A sad, defeated 67-year-old talking to a half-full room, then heading out into the night; the guys for whom he was the meal ticket for 15 years standing around shell-shocked, wondering what was next. When there's that much pathos, schadenfreude seems inappropriate.
>> Send your comments to
Adam Radwanski
The difference-maker
I remember writing, during the federal NDP's last leadership campaign, that Jack Layton was a risk the party - then barely on the radar - needed to take. It's pretty clear at this point, I think, that the risk has paid off.
I've neglected to comment on the NDP lately, for some reason, and that seems unfair. It's hard to believe the presence that the New Democrats have now compared to three years ago. And it's equally hard to believe what a profound impact they've had under Layton on the political landscape.
There's a perception out there that Canadians have turned from the Liberals to the Conservatives. That's flat-out wrong. Even with 36.25%, the Tories still came out more than 2% below the combined Canadian Alliance and PC share of the popular vote in 2000. The Liberal drop by more than 10% over that period can be attributed almost entirely (outside Quebec, at least) to voters shifting to the NDP - which has more than doubled its share from 8.5% to 17.5%.
There's obviously a complex array of reasons why the Liberals have lost power. But if I'm the next leader trying to pick up the pieces, I'd be a lot more concerned about winning back left-of-centre voters than those on the right.
>> Send your comments to
Adam Radwanski
Tuesday January 24, 2006
Scattered, sleep-deprived thoughts
Well, that was weirdly anticlimactic. More on this in tomorrow's
Post, maybe. Or else you'll just have to satisfy yourself with what's
in there today. In the meanwhile, a few questions coming out of last
night:
Has anyone ever looked bad delivering a concession/resignation speech?
Not to take anything away from Martin's, which seemed fairly genuine, but
every time this happens there's a chorus of "Wow, he actually seemed really
likeable there. If only he'd been like that through the campaign..."
Why did Harper wait until 2:00 a.m. EST to give his victory speech?
That free vote on gay marriage...it's coming soon, right? As in, before
the Tories have their winning conditions...
Was anyone else worried that Martin would announce a coalition with
Layton, or at least leave the door open to such, thereby rendering their
copy totally useless?
As I've made clear many times before, it's always best to defer to the
wisdom of Noel Gallagher. So honestly, wouldn't this have made the best possible
entrance music for Paul Martin last night? (Next question: If he'd kept the
receipts for the friends he bought, could demand a refund after they didn't
bother showing up at his darkest hour last night?)
If you're Tony Clement, and you've lost four straight elections, and now
you've won by twenty votes, how the hell do you sleep until the
recount is done?
>> Send your comments to
Adam Radwanski
Monday January 23, 2006
Note to self: bring appropriate clothes for a wake
I'm off to Montreal today to cover the Martin, er, victory party in Montreal. Should be an interesting 24 hours...the Global panel I've been doing on Mondays first thing this morning...flight to Montreal...frenetic filing from Montreal...more Global panel first thing Tuesday, possibly without sleep. So if I look a little punchy on there, you'll know why.
Blogging might be plentiful or non-existent, depending. But I promise to return with some good stories. >> Send your comments to
Adam Radwanski
Post I'm most likely to surreptitously delete tomorrow morning...
I suck at predictions, so if you're the sort of person who bets heavily on election results, don't quote me on this. Also, if you're the sort of person who bets heavily on election results, get yourself a hobby.
Anyway, here goes: Conservatives 142; Liberals 78; BQ 62; NDP 26. Note that one of my Tory MPs will likely wind up an independent, since Harper has said he wants no part of that guy with the smuggling charges.
>> Send your comments to
Adam Radwanski
Proof of my liberal bias
I picked on Peter Kent a bit for his method of trying to convince Torontonians to go blue in Friday's column. But much as I generally like Kent as a candidate, I probably could have found more fodder in his gripes about media bias, which seems to be a pet issue of his.
The idea that the Tories are in an uphill battle against a hostile liberal media has been a recurring since Stockwell Day blew up, and sporadically well before that. It's a great theory, except the last two elections have disproven it.
No, that's not a typo - I'm including '04 in there. Why? Because if you remember the first three weeks of that campaign, instead of just the last two, you'll recall that it was Martin who couldn't catch a break. Everything from photo selection in newspapers to the clips used by the nightly news gave the impression that he was a hopeless loser; it was only once the Conservatives started serving up fodder (child porn press releases, overconfident majority predictions, Randy White, etc.) that the media started bashing Harper instead of Martin.
This isn't to say that the media isn't biased. It is. But outside a few outlets, news coverage (not to be confused with editorials and commentary, which are of course inherently biased) isn't influenced by ideological bias so much as bias toward the narrative.
If there's anything to resent the media for, it's not liberal or conservative leanings - it's the unfailing pack mentality. If the received wisdom is that the Conservatives are running a bad campaign, every minor gaffe will be jumped on as proof; same goes for the Liberals. When the pack smells blood, it's relentless.
Hence in this campaign, when the storyline is that Martin is a hapless loser, every minor Liberal foible is major news. The Tories, meanwhile, are getting away with stuff that they would've gotten killed for last time (see Defaria, Carl, among others). That's not because the media has suddenly gone conservative; it's because we like our narratives neat and tidy.
>> Send your comments to
Adam Radwanski
Radwanski's Ramblings from January 13-19, 2006
Radwanski's Ramblings from December 30, 2005-January 12, 2006
Radwanski's Ramblings from December 16-29, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from December 2-15, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from November 18-December 1, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from November 4-17, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from October 28-November 3, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from October 21-27, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from October 7-20, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from September 23-October 6, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from September 9-22, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from September 2-8, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from August 19-September 1, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from August 5-18, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from July 22-August 4, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from July 15-21, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from July 8-14, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from July 1-7, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from June 24-30, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from June 16-23, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from June 10-16, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from June 3-9, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from May 20-June 2, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from May 13-19, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from April 29-May 12, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from April 22-28, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from April 8-21, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from April 1-7, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from March 25-31, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from March 18-24, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from March 11-17, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from February 25-March 10, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from February 11-24, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from January 28-February 10, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from January 14-27, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from December 31, 2004-January 13, 2005
Radwanski's Ramblings from December 17-30, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from December 3-16, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from November 19-December 2, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from November 5-18, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from October 22-November 4, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from October 8-21, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from September 24-October 7, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from September 17-23, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from September 3-16, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from August 20-September 2, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from August 6-19, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from July 23-August 5, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from July 16-22, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from July 9-15, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from June 25-July 8, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from June 18-24, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from June 11-17, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from June 4-10, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from May 28-June 3, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from May 21-27, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from May 14-20, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from May 7-13, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from April 23-May 6, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from April 16-22, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from April 9-15, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from April 2-8, 2004
Radwanski's Ramblings from March 26-April 1, 2004
Site best viewed using Internet Explorer
Reproduction of material from any AdamRadwanski.com page without prior explicit permission is strictly prohibited.
© Design and Content 2004
All rights reserved.
|
