The point he makes in today's article in the Ottawa Citizen is that there are two Canada's.
One is centred around Parliament Hill and has about a one mile radius.
It is in that Canada that the Jaffer-Guergis bullsh*t counts and the Afghan cover-up does too.
In the other world, the world that 98 per cent of Canucks live in, Jaffer-Guergis are irrelevant and, as L.I.M. writes "... in the world of Tim Hortons, the Taliban are seen as the guys killing our guys. If some of them get roughed up by their own countrymen, how is that our problem? Again, outside Ottawa, no one cares about the paper trail."
That is why "The latest Nanos poll shows a four-point spread, 37-33 for the Conservatives over the Liberals, with the Tories up two points from the previous month. On the question of who would be the best prime minister, Stephen Harper leads Michael Ignatieff by 30 to 17 per cent." A vote from a Tim Horton's muffin muncher counts the same as those from the chattering classes.
WFDS
The folks in the Canada outside Ottawa don't know squat.
ReplyDeleteAnon @9:09
ReplyDelete"The folks in the Canada outside Ottawa don't know squat"
I'd like to see that slogan on the Liberal campaign bus.
I disagree with MacDonald. If anything, he's talking about himself within that bubble; Canadians care about these things, it just ends up being that they don't ever care that much. I really hate it when people like MacDonald, who are in truth nothing but holier-than-though elitists, try to describe what they think Canadians are: simpletons. It's shameful.
ReplyDeleteMr. Volkov:
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, thanks for your thoughts.
I agree with you and disagree with you.
I don't think Mr. MacDonald was calling Canucks simpletons; I think he was saying what you are saying. To with: "...they don't ever care that much."
People on the canape and cocktail circuit in Ottawa don't grasp that simple concept.
WFDS
1) Mr. MacDonald is a well known Conservative supporter. He would spin a 20 point Liberal lead as being good for the Conservatives.
ReplyDelete2) Four points between the government and the official opposition is not a bad place to be for the opposition.
3) Mr. Harper's approval ratings are not very good for a sitting head of government and being a known quantity he will have difficulties improving them.
4) Mr. Ignatieff's approval rating is worse but being an unknown quantity he has more room to improve them. As well, it should be noted that just months before the 2006 election Stephen Harper was sitting at about the same approval rating. Then there is Jean Chretien sitting at those same levels through most of the year leading up to 1993.
All things being considered I would rather be in Mr. Ignatieff's shoes than Mr. Harper's.
Didn't John Manley say the same thing, more eloquently, in the paper last week?
ReplyDeleteLiberals need to get the pulse of the people. That is hard to do when your leader has no pulse himself.
The more Canadians get to know him....
ReplyDeleteMarch 2009 45+/26-
The Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey ....
Ignatieff got a favourable rating from 45 per cent, but only 26 per cent held a negative view.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090327/ignatieff_harper_090327/20090327?hub=Canada
today: 26+/52-
Only 26 per cent of Canadians had a positive impression of the Liberal leader, according to The Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey.
Twice that number, 52 per cent, had a negative impression, leaving Ignatieff with a net score of minus 26.
Harper is in much better shape then Ignatieff
ReplyDelete