Q. and A. on Mr. Gerald Butts

One of the many puzzles in life is: (i) journalist contacts you, asking about something (ii) you’re busy, but you make time (iii) journalist makes no use whatsoever about what you said to him/her.

Thus this morning’s story about Gerald Butts in the National Post.  Asked for comment; gave comment; said comments vanish.  Sigh.

So, as a public service, what I said about Trudeau strategist Gerald Butts, in helpful question and answer format.  I believe in reusing and recycling.

Reporter: I’m trying to find out his age – small but important detail I always like to double check.

Me: I was at his 30th birthday party. Trudeau was too. Can’t remember what year.

Reporter: How do you think his time at Queen’s Park will or has influenced his work with the federal party?

Me: He was highly respected at Queens Park. Fair, friendly, fun. He had both a strong policy background, and a great strategic mind. He helped make McGuinty a huge success.

Reporter: What role do you see him playing in a Trudeau government?

Me: Titles don’t matter, at the level of the relationship between he and Trudeau. Chief of Staff, principal secretary, whatever. He will have to move to Ottawa for much of the week, however.

Reporter: Are there specific policy areas you expect he will bring a certain focus to or knowledge of?

Me: He had a broad policy background. He did not bring pet projects to the table. He provided advice without fear or favour, and it was almost always the right advice. He was excellent at debate prep, platform development, and communications.

Reporter: At Queen’s Park, he has a reputation of both being tough but super smart and hardworking. He’s said to push the public service but also respects them – is this true?

Me: Yes. And let me give you a personal example. I wanted to run for the LPC in a Toronto riding. But instead of dispatching someone else, Gerald told me personally – to my face – that they wanted a woman to address the obvious gender imbalance in Parliament. I was upset, initially, but I came to realize he was right.

He gave it to me straight, and he was honest. That’s the kind of person we need advising Prime Ministers. They’re rare.

Reporter: Anything else you might want to add?

Me: I’ve been critical of some of the decisions Trudeau has made – the ISIS position, for example. I still disagree. But Gerald received my criticism with good humour and equanimity. Unlike some previous senior PMO folks, Gerald knows that the Liberal Party is a big tent party – and that it has to reach out to many points of view to survive and prosper.


The morning after, measured in tweets





As the polls start to close, here is the prediction I made in February 2015

I wavered on it, at various stops along the way, but this is what I thought then. It may just happen tonight, too: Liberals 140, Conservatives 134, NDP 61, with the remainder going Green.

So, now you can make fun of me if I get it really wrong.  I like climbing out on limbs, what can I say?

(Oh, and the other columns include predictions from three smarter-than-me political folks. Names withheld to protect the guilty, etc.)

2015ElectionBets-1024x639

 

My predictions, made months ago.  I’ve been wrong many times before – so why stop now?


Did you vote? Who did you vote for?

Uncharacteristically for me, here’s a serious attempt to do an online exit poll – with the party names in alphabetical order, plus didn’t vote and buzz off and spoiled it options.

If you voted, I’d love to know which door you picked.  And, if you have comments to add, about why you voted a certain way, feel free to comment away in the appropriate space.  And thanks in advance!

[polldaddy poll=9134496]


KCCCC Day 77: the last day!

This week’s Hill times column, below. Now go vote!

And so it ends, with a whimper and not a bang.

Well, sort of. The whimpers are emanating from us, the electorate, having been forced to endure nearly 80 days of electioneering. If there is a bang, however, it will come a bit later, in the form of leadership changes. Stephen Harper and Thomas Mulcair are almost certainly going to move on (because neither met expectations). And Justin Trudeau is sticking around for the foreseeable future, however (because he greatly exceeded everyone’s expectations – mine included).

It all began, a long time ago and in a galaxy far away, with Harper’s flawless launch, in which he looked “relaxed, forceful and confident,” as one media report put it. The guy had done a few of these things, and it showed.

Justin Trudeau, however, had a Day One that was a bit of a debacle – instead of being where the media were, Trudeau was in a plane four miles up, eating pretzels. Being AWOL for the first part of the news cycle on the campaign’s most important day was ill-advised – and going all the way out for Pride was not particularly strategic, either, given that Hedy Fry had owned Vancouver Centre for two decades, and was in no danger of losing it, ever.

Portentously, Angry Tom had the worst start of all. No questions from the media? No debate after agreeing to debate? No events for five days straight, and “conspicuous by his absence,” as CTV put it? At first, Dipper partisans defended the no-questions idiocy – and then, when they realized they were in trouble, they fibbed, and claimed Mulcair had to rush out to attend Flora MacDonald’s funeral (the funeral was hours later, and within walking distance of the NDP campaign launch event).

At first, the Dips defended the no-events-for-five days thing, too – until it dawned on them that it looked arrogant, and suggested that NDP senior staff were worried about Angry Tom getting Angry, and making a mistake. So they hurriedly threw a Montreal event on the sked.

All told, it foretold what was to come: it suggested that the NDP leader, after arrogantly declaring that he would “wipe the floor” with his opponents, wouldn’t. And he didn’t. His opponents – Trudeau in particular – would end up wiping the floor with him.

In the days that followed, there was plenty in Election 42 about which the electorate could be unenthusiastic – the niqab ugliness, the Duffy trial, the resignation of the Liberal co-chair, the length of the thing, the truly pathetic effort all the parties put into vetting their candidates.

Ah, yes, the candidates: so many were so nutty. Nuttier than a fruit cake. Nuttier than a Tim’s Maple Log. Nuttier than a port-a-potty at a peanut festival. Nuttier than a Trump-Palin ticket. NUTTY. That’s how nutty Election 42 was.

It wasn’t the fault of social media. Social media simply provides a platform for crazy people to say crazy things – and for campaign war rooms, or the media, to thereafter publicize the craziness. (It’s been nutty in past campaigns, believe me.) But the sheer volume of insanity and inanity in this year’s model simply dwarfs everything that has gone before it: truthers. Hitler comparisons. Racists. Anti-Semites. Threats. Stalkers. And even a guy who peed in a cup when he thought no one was looking. It was appalling.

The Mike Duffy trial, as some of us predicted, was a great big deal to those who live and toil North of the Queensway – but not out in the Real World. Headlines suggesting that politicians abuse expense accounts may still be news in the Nation’s Capital, but not anywhere else in Canuckistan. No one really cared. It didn’t matter.

What did matter, however, was that Conservative Party “just not ready” ad. It was brilliant, it was deadly. And it proved to be effective – too effective.

Let us explain. That ad – which the Tories paid untold millions to place everywhere (including even this Liberal’s web site, presumably because it attracts 3.5 million politically-inclined visitors a year!) – was endlessly analyzed and repeatedly seen. And it worked: it helped drag Justin Trudeau from the lofty polling heights he’d been occupying for two years. It hurt him.

But, paradoxically, it also helped him. As a certain former Prime Minister told me: “It lowered expectations too far. When Justin showed up the debates, he had nowhere to go but up.”

And go up he did. Expertly assisted by his personal pocket computer, Gerald Butts, Trudeau started to win. He didn’t win every debate in which he participated, mind you. But “Just Not Ready” had persuaded everyone that he would certainly lose every debate, that he would be an unmitigated disaster. And he didn’t lose every debate – and he wasn’t a disaster.

The hijacking of the campaign with a piece of fabric – the niqab – was, as noted, ugly. It had the desired effect, too: it changed the channel to a “values” proposition, and conservatives always do better talking about values than we progressives. Case in point: the now-lifeless form of Tom Mulcair. He courageously voiced his support for the niqab in citizenship ceremonies, even when he knew it would cost him dearly in his base, his home province.

When it did, Trudeau was the beneficiary, not Harper. The niqab precipitated Mulcair plummeting in the polls. In a cruel twist of fate, the niqab rendered Justin Trudeau the Anybody But Harper candidate, not Mulcair. Moral of the story: be careful, conservatives, when you let an ugly dog loose in the yard. It may bite your opponent, sure. But it may end up biting you, too.

And that’s what Election 42 was, in the end: too long, too nutty, too ugly. Here’s hoping Election 43 will be better.

Because Election 43 – I am sad to report – is likely coming our way in months, not years!

 


KCCCC Day 77: look who is in the Sun!

  

  • Packing up the cabin, so I don’t have much time. Will try and post later. 
  • But in the meantime, I agree with this:  “To his credit, Trudeau accepted Gagnier’s resignation, and has condemned what his former confidant did. But reporters keep peppering Trudeau about who knew what, and when they knew it. Until now, Trudeau has enjoyed a pretty decent reputation for integrity. He’s not perfect, but he looks better than Stephen Harper and Tom Mulcair. Trudeau has also turned out to be a solid candidate — and way more ready than all those slick ads would have you believe. But Dan Gagnier has changed all that. And we — the voters — are entitled to know who knew what, and when they knew it.”
  • Check out who wrote it: Right here!