Posts Tagged ‘Just Visiting’

Not with a bang, but with (an opponent's) whimper

By Paul Wells - Sunday, September 12, 2010 - 0 Comments

This excerpt from Tony Blair’s memoirs, quoted in the New Yorker review of that book, stood out for obvious reasons:

So I defined Major as weak; Hague as better at jokes than judgment; Howard as an opportunist; Cameron as a flip-flop, not knowing where he wanted to go. . . . Expressed like that, these attacks seem flat, rather mundane almost, and not exactly inspiring—but that’s their appeal. Any one of those charges, if it comes to be believed, is actually fatal. Yes, it’s not like calling your opponent a liar, or a fraud, or a villain or a hypocrite, but the middle-ground floating voter kind of shrugs their shoulders at those claims. They don’t chime. They’re too over the top, too heavy, and they represent an insult, not an argument. Whereas the lesser charge, because it’s more accurate and precisely because it’s more low-key, can stick. And if it does, that’s that. Because in each case, it means they’re not a good leader. So game over.

Sound familiar? Open discussion in the comments.

  • A new twist on Just Visiting: Remember, CPC lawyers, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

    By kadyomalley - Friday, September 11, 2009 at 3:46 PM - 21 Comments

    As its creator Environmental Defence points out, “everyone else is making attack ads, so …”

    Now, why does watching this make ITQ think of certain Republicans for Ignatieff?


  • Just visiting: Afghanistan edition

    By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 4:19 PM - 14 Comments

    Afghanistan appears to have made great strides in its pursuit of Western democracy.

    Ghani came back to Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban having co-written a book called Fixing Failed States and having co-founded an institute to study them. His reputation as an academic, technocrat, and reformer is close to sterling, but his international appeal plays to a narrative Afghans are programmed to reject. In a country that has been a stepping stone for empires and a chessboard for foreign interests, politicians with external ties are to be watched closely. On the streets of Kabul, I have variously heard Ghani dismissed as “not Afghan”; “a foreigner”; and, most charitably, “an intellectual, yes, but not presidential.”

    … Unlike other exiled politicians who have returned to their native lands and been greeted by welcoming crowds, Ghani wasn’t forced out of Afghanistan, so he doesn’t have the hero’s privilege of a public that either obligingly forgets the reason he left or celebrates it. Ghani’s campaign must constantly prove that his loyalties lie with Afghanistan—Afghans expect him to leave if things really heat up. Ghani represents everything Afghanistan needs, but he’s also precisely what its people can’t stomach. A vote for Ghani is a concession of pride.

    … it plays to Karzai’s strengths. His Afghan-ness is harder to question, and that’s critical to an electorate whose most frequent expression of nationalism is collective resentment for other countries’ meddling. Karzai has convinced most of the Afghans I’ve talked to that he has rebuked the West when they’ve overstepped their boundaries, but Ghani has no record to prove that he has or will.

  • More on the Angus Reid/Toronto Star poll on Those Ads!(tm)

    By kadyomalley - Monday, June 1, 2009 at 11:44 AM - 24 Comments

    Hey, remember how ITQ was wondering just how Angus Reid was able to come up with those numbers on the reaction to the  ”Just Visiting” campaign and Ignatieff’s Youtube response?

    After disclosing their voting intention, respondents to this survey were divided into three groups. The first group observed one of the television ads that the Conservative Party has launched targeting Ignatieff, the second group was shown the same ad and the response that Ignatieff posted on YouTube, and the third group was not exposed to any ads or videos.

    The momentum score for Harper among respondents who saw the ad is -40 (10% improved, 50% worsened), and the prime minister posts similar numbers among those who saw the ad and the video (9% improved, 52% worsened) and those who were not exposed directly to either the ad or the video (7% improved, 49% worsened).


    The momentum score for Ignatieff among respondents who saw the ad is -18 (24% improved, 42% worsened). However, the opposition leader bridges the gap with those who also saw his YouTube video (29% improved, 31% worsened) and is even among those who did not see the ad or the video (28% improved, 28% worsened). [...]

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BVoT-1B3Os – English Ad
     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbbS0Py_1lU – French Ad
     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGifqWMeZIA – English Video
     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJwUTscVtqk – French Video

    Anyway, now that ITQ  has been almost thoroughly decrankified thanks to the subsequent release of the full results by both Angus Reid and Ekos — which, by the way, really is “massive”, not to mention fascinating in its own right, and probably deserves a post of its own (hint, hint, Colleague Wells) — our thoughts, as promised, after the jump:

    Continue…

  • Exclusive: The Liberal plan to respond to the Harper ads

    By Paul Wells - Friday, May 22, 2009 at 1:43 PM - 327 Comments

    Exclusive: The Liberal plan to respond to the Harper adsThe 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. Continue…

From Macleans