And I'm not just saying it's interesting because it quotes me.
Yaffe rightly notes all the reasons small "c" conservatives are growing increasingly upset with Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government: the spending, the Emerson affair, pandering to Quebec etc.
But she then argues all this conservative anger is playing into Harper's plans.
He wants conservatives to attack him because, says Yaffe, this makes him more palatable to mainstream voters.
Here's how she puts it:
Maybe Yaffe's right (Although the polls certainly show Harper is not gaining any ground -- despite the fact he is facing a weak opponent in Stephane Dion.)
That those on the right of the party would be fussing about Harper's unconservative record in government serves to assuage prevalent fears more mainstream Canadians have had about Harper being too much a conservative ideologue.
They're bound to see him as more centrist and electorally acceptable now that he is increasingly unacceptable to more doctrinaire segments within his own party.
Maybe the Tory strategy of moving to the left will eventually help boost his poll numbers.
But that would only be a short term success. Over the long term a political party needs a strong base to be successful.
The base is made up of people who contribute money, who hand out brochures, who go canvassing, who put up lawn signs, who help get the vote out on election day, and most importantly who vote.
Who does that kind of stuff? Motivated people. People who believe in what a party stands for, who believe in the vision the party is promoting.
Non-motivated or angry people won't do all these things. They might just stay home.
That's why if the Tories continue to alienate and anger their base it will hurt them, maybe not today or tomorrow, but sooner or later the party will pay a price for betraying its supporters.
Just ask Kim Campbell.