Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

Nostalgia

by Paul Wells on Thursday, October 15, 2009 11:23am - 109 Comments

From May: Exclusive: The Liberal Plan to Respond to the Harper Ads. A highlight:

The Conservative advertising campaign against Michael Ignatieff has spurred the federal Liberals to sharply accelerate their fundraising activity so they can pay for a “focused response to the personal attacks” on the new leader, Maclean’s has learned. The Liberals are rushing ahead with a major change to the party’s organization, which only two weeks ago they had planned for the autumn, so they can be ready for a much more robust summer of activity. Emergency meetings of the Liberals’ various governing bodies are underway, with more planned for next week. The goal: a $25 million annual war chest and a vastly expanded grassroots organization to pay for it.

All this excitement was designed to allow a “focused response” to the Conservative “Just Visiting” ad campaign, then 10 days old, and a “much more robust summer of activity.” The average of public election polls in April put the Liberals two points up on the Conservatives. Since then there has been about a 17-point swing to the Conservatives.

Done messing yet?

Tags: Michael Ignatieff

More by Paul Wells

Foreigner

Yup. To paraphrase…well, myself: "How do you explain complex problems and propose complex solutions in the form of media friendly soundites, attack ads, ten-percenters and walk-ons at gala performances?"

Working with what you have forces you do what you don't *want* to do.

In any case, people aren't just bitching about the news media. They're also refusing to pay for it.

kcm

I take your point. It's depressing to think just how successful the dumbing down of our culture has been. Neo-cons have played on this for all they're worth. Yet somehow Obama won out. I still can't figure out how he pulled t offf.

Mulletaur

Because what the media says doesn't actually matter a friggin bit when people mark their ballots. People make up their own minds regardless. But bitter, self-delusional losers can never admit that. It can never be their fault, always somebody else's.

kcm

Ignatieff is [hopeefully] looking at this bad patch as an opportunity and not, as you say, blaming everything on externals. At least see what you may be doing wrong before you blame others. Either way we'll get to see how much character he's got.

Officerfarva

Sorry, but the Con attack machine is vile.
Mr "Smith" also battled the separatists on their hometurf and got so reviled by them he required police protection, and he still didn't fail at that job. He wasn't incompetent then, but I admit he wasn't leadership material, not in the real world of smears and attacks. He could not lower himself to Harper's gutter level.
Dion is considered principled and honest, and those are two adjectives I would not give to Harper, and when I think of moral virtue, I don't think of Harper either. So Dion isn't perfect, did he deserve two years of character assassination?
He did more for Canada than most politicians do in their lifetime. Integrity is not something I would attribute to the potted plants of the Cons.
Foreigner

We just don't deserve Paul Wells. What can we do to earn his respect and his love?
knick

For months now the vast majority of journalists and pundits have been making dire predictions about the future of the Leader of the Official Opposition if he didn't start making statements about his proposed policies (I thought he had in general terms from time to time, but that's neither here nor there). So two days ago he laid out what I thought was a pretty comprehensive policy statement in Vancouver. The reaction from journalists and pundits was underwhelming, there didn't seem to be much if any coverage of what he had to say. Given that I haven't the grasp of political policy that I think some journalists do, I would have been interested in some help in deciding whether or not his policies are good for the country.
It was also not helpful today when 3 pundits with Tom Clark, one of whom was at Ignatieff's policy statement in Vancouver had nothing of substance to offer. Carole Taylor's comment on Ignatieff's address was that there was no reaction from the audience, period; nothing whatever about the substance of his remarks, good, bad or indifferent. Then Clark asked the panel if Ignatieff's Vancouver policy statement was nothing more than an attempt to change the channel from the problems in the Liberal party. Peter Donolo did say that the more the media is focussed on Ignatieff, the more Harper gets a free ride. But then he made the totally false comment that only one Conservative MP has made the 'mistake' of producing a pretend cheque for stimulus money showing the Conservative logo. No one corrected him. A few days ago a prominent journalist from The Star (can't remember her name) was one of Clark's guests, and offered the insight that journalists are attracted to 'bright shiny things' (gossip, gotchas, and polls), and that it's up to politicians to capture the attention of journalists. Neither Clark nor the other guest, Greg Weston, disagreed with her. It almost seems like these people get together and decide on their views ahead of time so it won't appear that they haven't a clue about what's going on.
. . .rant over
http://www.TennisVagabond.com Big Dave S

"I admit he wasn't leadership material"- Officer Farva

"Stephane Dion… not a leader"- The Vile Con Attack Machine

Compare and contrast. Is it character assassination to say someone is not qualified for the job they are applying for, which their strongest supporters agree with?

officerfarva

He was not leadership material in that he could not be as ruthless and low as a political leader needs to be in these times. He was too honest and let the herd run roughshod over him, but I believe he would have been a better leader than Harper ever will be. I wish Dion had been ruthless and cold, but then I probably would not have liked him. I was frustrated when he thought the public would see through such blatant lies, but reality and political reality are mutually exclusive. In the end, he was no match for such a heartless machine fueled on anger and opponent destruction and that is that, he tried the high road, but there is no room for integrity in the upper echelons of Canadian politics, not in this day and age.
The Con attack machine started attacking him right away, to hell with the truth or basic decency. Dion would have been qualified in an adult and mature atmosphere, but Harper and his potted plants have lowered the discourse so much that intellectualism is a negative.
Harper's mean-spiritedness and the vile Con attack machine were effective in denigrating and smearing someone so unlike them, but history will not be kind to them.

http://intensedebate.com/people/tigerinexil1428 tigerinexile

Don't go for love. Go for grudging respect and/or amusement.
kcm

Yeah. I was disappointed in the coverage of Ignatieff's address inVancouver. Given the slagging he's received from every quarter [ me too...gulp! ] you'd think he deserves some praise for this effort. It's going to be difficult for him to shift the negative narrative, much of which he deserves. So come on media, how bout some constructive criticism for those you've helped to humble?

knick

I don't have a problem with honest criticism of a politician, but constantly moving the goalposts with no explanation as the media are doing makes it really hard to keep up. Sometimes I wonder if most are even aware of the concept of constructive criticism.

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Good God, people! 100-ish comments debating the partisan-tainted motives of a journalist stating the obvious?

Orson Bean

Chalk it up to a slow news day — Balloon Boy was on Wolf Blitzer last night.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Lord_Bob Lord Bob

I think the commentators whining about Paul being a stool pigeon for the Conservative Party are missing an essential truth. After all, Wells attacks Harper and defends Ignatieff when he feels the facts support it as well.

The most obvious conclusion is that Paul is a hired flack for every political party.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

The money is awesome.
Mr. Irrelevant

Sigh. A lot of wasted time trying to figure out the motives of someone most of us have never met. So let me take my shot.
Paul would very much like the Liberals to beat Stephen Harper, or at least DESERVE to beat Stephen Harper, and he gets cranky with them when they aren't getting it done.