Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Joe Pantalone is running for Mayor of Toronto | Main | Perhaps, a new approach to America? »

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Liberal attack ads on Proroguing Parliament miss the mark

A few days ago the Liberal Party released two ads taking the Conservative government to task for proroguing Parliament. I am on record saying that I think it is inappropriate to prorogue Parliament. Still, these ads display the incompetence of the Liberal communications team.

As much as the Liberal's tactics seem to have improved, they still lack a good strategy. The attacks on Mr. Dion, calling him "not a leader," worked because they were very plausible. Mr. Ignattieff being a tourist in Canada is slightly less plausible, but still plausible enough to be damaging.

 Looking at this ad I am left wondering what image of the Prime Minister the Liberals are trying to sell. Are they trying to convince Canadians that Mr. Harper is some sort of Emperor Palpatine? Because I doubt many would fine that to be plausible.

It doesn't help that the ad is badly written. The opening few lines are lame and the assertion that all this was done in secret is absurdly untrue. This cuts away at the credibility of the attack and weakens any potential damage that could have been done to Mr. Harper's reputation.

The other ad is not much better:

I don't see proroguing Parliament as a cover up and I don't understand how that accusation can seriously be made. If there really was a scandal then a couple of months shouldn't make a difference. It didn't make a difference for the sponsorship scandal. This whole ad's premise is just fundamentally flawed.

What should the Liberals have done? They should have attacked Mr. Harper for being arrogant, Machiavellian, and untrustworthy. These things may or may not be true but at least they would be plausible.

Posted by Hugh MacIntyre on January 13, 2010 | Permalink

Comments

What should the Liberals have done? They should have attacked Mr. Harper for being arrogant, Machiavellian, and untrustworthy. These things may or may not be true but at least they would be plausible.

Posted by Hugh MacIntyre on January 13, 2010 at 10:39 AM

I really doubt if it would have made a differnce. People are fed up with the lot of them. The general level of interest in what our politicians do seems very low until a election is called and then the less than 60% of electorate will fall into their predetermined camps to put the same bunch back into power. There is no hero waiting in the wings. There is only " I like him/her more than him/her". Harpers biggest strength is that people dont like or trust Iggy And Bob Rae is seen as a waste of time by everyone except the short memoried ontarions. I think Harper will get a majority by default because world economics will continue to make people nervous and he exudes the calm and ability to do what's best for this country. How long it will take to like him or hate him if he does get a majority is anyones guess. Trudeau is a wild card but is still too young. He would bring the kiddies out to vote but would be mistrusted by older voters outside of Ontario. Until Iggy goes home the Liberals are wasting their time with attack ads.

Posted by: peterj | 2010-01-13 7:44:09 PM


Harper could easily be attacked for being mercurial and Nixonian.

They need ultra close-ups of Harpo's beady eyes and mealy mouth.

Harper could be attacked for his dishonesty, lack of likability, and paranoia.

He should be portrayed as the bully and coward that he is.

But to your point: yes, the Libs are USELESS as an opposition to this worst Tory government in Canadian history.

Posted by: JC | 2010-01-13 9:38:46 PM



The comments to this entry are closed.