Without boring you with the details, I may be returning to the public airwaves soon. 

Horrifying, I know. But when and if it becomes official, I will officially have details to share. 

Lala, too. She’s smarter and better looking than me. 

Comments (13)

 

• We are in Vancouver, heading East soon.  So, as before, here are comments on the Munk Debate from all of you.  For the most part, I personally agree with most of you: the debate was well-organized, the moderator was outstanding, and Trudeau and Harper won for different reasons.  Mulcair lost.  Now, youse guys.
• Ann Jarnet: It was a good debate. I barely cringed. Surprised to see Trudeau do as well as he did; a bit of redemption! I still see Harper as lame, but apparently over 30% want someone that lame to lead us. Mulcair showed meanness which is never good in the long term. 
• Krago:  rudeau and his handlers recognize the truth about modern political debates: the only thing that matters is the clip that makes it onto the news afterward. All his clipworthy moments are scripted and rehearsed in advance, and all his interruptions are intended to specifically ‘step on’ his opponents clips. Mulcair hasn’t learned this yet, and that is how Trudeau keeps ‘winning’ debates.
• Steve: I one of the best parts of the debate was when Justin defended his fathers record. While Trudeau Sr was not perfect he was a good PM. Harper was off his game and it really showed that he did not want to be at this debate. Tommy boy came across as phony with his answers. So if anybody won the debate it would be Trudeau as he came across as a leader and his responses to the questions seemed very sincere.
• Bryan Kelloway:  Was there a debate? I was busy watching the Blue Jay’s game. 
• Michael Clifton:  Performances all good. Lots of good zingers by all.  Neither Mulcair or Trudeau held a candle to Harper for appearing to have a thoughtful perspective on every situation, regardless of whether you agree with him. Harper’s failings are not in this arena. And, the reality is, there is always room for disagreement about what should have been done, and no one can predict with perfection the impact of today’s choices. I have doubts that Mulcair would necessarily do any better. I am certain Trudeau woudl not.  Trudeau is a hollow shell and has no shame. He made a more disgraceful use of his father’s memory than anyone else. He’d obviously been planning that one, because he jumped at the first opportunity, and it wasn’t even a good one.
• Sean Cummings: I think the bigger issue is who lost. And that would be Mulcair. Remember when everyone thought because of his lawyerly background that he would kick ass in the debates? Good times.
• Brent Crofts:  As for the debate, Trudeau and Mulcair beat the tar out of each other and Harper left relatively unscathed. Random observation 1: whoever told Mulcair to take a shot at PET should be fired. Ugly cheap shot that Trudeau reversed nicely.  Random observation 2: the moderator asked Trudeau how he’d deal with Putin and the audience immediately laughed. Ouch.  Random observation 3: Harper and Trudeau received consistent applause and Mulcair received virtually none. Minute resting.  Just my $.02.
• Al in Cranbrook:  Best debate, no contest. Hope everyone else involved in setting up these events took some notes. Harper was the only one to answer questions and speak directly to the topic, and with authority.
• Maps Onburt:  I don’t know how you were watching it but the translator speaking English at volume 10 when the leaders were speaking English at volume 2 behind her drove me to distraction. I was screaming at the tube for her just to STFU. I agree the format was very good.
• George: JT has about as much conviction as his speech-writers can generate for him on a given day. He may win, but if he does it will only be because of two things: 1) an appetite for change and 2) the left lining up behind Trudeau’s new NDP as part of an anybody-but-Harper movement – but traditionally strategic voting has never worked.  Interesting times ahead. I thought JT did alright in the debate, Harper appeared the most knowledgeable and Mulcair was the big loser.
• Jack D.: I was disgusted by Mulcair’s performance tonight.  He was pompous, dismissive, rude and incredibly acrimonious. His snarky quips against Trudeau were witty at first, until he decided to go full-on asshole and call him stupid in front a 3000 member audience and everyone watching on TV. It was cringe-worthy and despicable to see that sort of resentment manifest itself in such an ugly manner. Despite all of the TV ads, I haven’t even heard Harper go so far as to directly insult Trudeau’s intelligence to his face in the way Mulcair did. His attempts to make fun of Trudeau got some laughs but ate up what precious time he had to pitch his plan. His dig at Bob Rae was so ironic that I almost fell over in complete shock at his lack of self-awareness.Everything Tom did or said tonight was tragic. He was supposed to come to this debate and make his case as an agent of change but ended up painting himself and NDP as a party travelling backwards in time. He spent more time on the defensive and looking angry as hell. 

Comments (39)

Who won? Who lost? Personally, I think Rudyard and the Munk people did. Best debate yet. 

Will do a roundup of your views in KCCCC tomorrow. Comment away! 

Comments (104)

What a giant this man was. He is missed.

Comments (14)

  

• We are at the Whitehorse airport, Vancouver-bound. But I keep staring at this Abacus graph about Québec, which more or less reflects what other folks have been reporting in recent days. 

  

• Look at that orange line. Look at that blue line. You can find the full Abacus poll here, but you don’t have to be an expert in survey methodology to see that the NDP are in trouble. Liberals steady, Conservatives moving up. And Tom Mulcair losing ground dramatically. The NDP may be returning to their traditional role: a parking lot between elections. 
• What’s the reason? Some have speculated it is the Niqab thing. Quite a few who watched the French debate suggested as much in comments.
• Personally, I admired what Mulcair has said about the issue. And I’ve said as much, here. It took guts. 
• Some of his Québec candidates likely don’t feel the same way. Don’t be surprised if you see some of them start to pop off about the Niqab issue as their fortunes slide. 
• What do you think? Is it the Niqab, or is it something else? Whatever it is, one thing is clear: what comes in with the Orange tide may now be going out with the Orange tide. 

Comments (46)

Man, this sucks.

  

Comments (6)

• The length, sure. The outcome, of course. All of that is important.
• But Election 42 will be remembered for one thing most of all: the record number of shitty candidates. The ignorant, the bigots, the truthers, the anti-Semites, the drunkards, the scum of the Earth: those are the kinds of losers who were trying to win.
• Don’t believe it? Then read CBC’s list, here. There have been more candidates dumped for insanity/idiocy than ever before, by all the parties. And there many more morons on the ballot who the parties still refuse to dump.
• We’re on our way to Alaska shortly. So I have to go. But, I have one piece of advice for the people who vet candidates: don’t put your role on your CV. Because when history writes this election up, some of you are going to receive the blame for – literally, truly – hurting Canadian democracy. And some of you richly deserve it.

Comments (20)

From Carcross Tagish First Nation, for the work we did for them over the years. Presented to us by Chief Danny Cresswell. Shark transforming into man, by Keith Wolfe-Smarch. 

 

Comments (4)

• Good morning from cold and wet Whitehorse! We have some big things on the agenda today – among them a potlatch out in Carcross – so here’s some bits and pieces about this and that.
• Grumpy Justin: Is this story true? Well, some might say: consider the source(s). But I’ve had dealings with Suzuki and Solomon in the past, and so I tend to believe what they’re claiming.
• Don’t talk about how you makes sausages! Election process stories are bad enough – but cocky staffers claiming credit for digging up sleaze on an opponent? Dumb, dumb, dumb. Do your job, do it well, then hand over the results to a reporter and let them claim credit – not you. Don’t do what this anonymous staffer did. Dumb.
• “They could be talking.” Or, they could not be. And won’t be. And shouldn’t be. Is this being written because these women are talking to each other? Because they’re women? Because…why? From my perch, Messrs. Mulcair and Trudeau energetically detest each other. They see the other guy as their main problem, not Harper. If they haven’t come together before the election, it’s usually pretty damn hard to do so after the election.
• A Mulcair minority? He’s telling the truth here. He is preparing for transition. To wit, I know of two senior folks who have been approached about working for a Mulcair administration. Problem: looks cocky. Looks arrogant. Looks presumptuous. If you believe Greg, here, that ship has sailed.
• Anyway, that’s that. Off to the wilds of the Yukon. And, in that regard, a movie poster that reminded me of both the Yukon and the election!

Comments (44)

Yep.   

Comments (12)