What's the idea?
Well essentially Kinsella argues the Liberals and NDP should appeal to Canadian nationalism by opposing a trade agreement the Harper government is apparently negotiating with the United States.
Writes Kinsella: "leak of the entire agreement, a few days ago, suggests strongly that Harper is giddily hitching our wagon to a declining U.S. economy, and — in exchange for a few paltry trade changes — we are going to see our policies related to immigration, refugees and national security decided by the aforementioned (Secretary of State Hilary) Clinton. In Washington. To whisk a few trucks across the border in two hours instead of three, we are going to lose control over some of the very things that distinguish us from our neighbours to the south."
Harper is "erasing the border", says Kinsella, which will enrage Canadians from coast to coast.
Basically, this is a suggestion to replay the 1988 Liberal campaign which opposed freer trade.
But the Liberals lost in 1988. And I sincerely doubt the Liberals would gain much from embracing this particular issue in the next federal election.
In the first place, Canadians in 2010 aren't as spooked by free trade as they were 25 years ago. But more importantly, Kinsella's "secret" agreement is a complicated issue, an issue that would first need to be explained to voters before it could be attacked.
And that's a serious weakness. In politics any communication process that requires a two step process is not likely to succeed.
Still, although Kinsella's tactical idea is flawed his overall strategic concept is correct: the Liberals desperately need to latch onto some issue to mobilize their moribund base.
And they need one fast because it looks more and more like we will have a federal election in the Spring.
In short, if Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff doesn't come up with way to rally his troops, Harper and the Tories could stomp him bad.
Still, although Kinsella's tactical idea is flawed his overall strategic concept is correct: the Liberals desperately need to latch onto some issue to mobilize their moribund base.
And they need one fast because it looks more and more like we will have a federal election in the Spring.
In short, if Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff doesn't come up with way to rally his troops, Harper and the Tories could stomp him bad.
9 comments:
Yea but...but...daisies...remember the daisies?
If you can't trade with your next door neighbour then how the hell are you supposed to trade well with the guy across town?? Only the looney left would get that logic?? Besides I despise the 'leftric' term of declining power put on the US. I'd say the US is in a period of readjustment and renewal so no one should count them out just yet. First we need to get rid of Obama and get a 'business' president in there. I'm still willing to bet on the US above most of the rest of the world any day. (real conservative)
Advice from Kinsella? This is a guy who can't order furniture without advice from his divorce lawyer.
So maybe Catsmeat is advising Iggy to beat that dead horse a little more to hasten his electoral loss so the libs can turf him for yet another ineffective leader?
the opinions of this self-aggrandizing buffoon, who believes he speaks to a rejuvenation of the Liberal party, are predictable. A tyrant when the lieberals ruled with no opposition, a pontificating idiot when they are out - the last time he appeared on CBC, he called PM Harper a liar - and it is time CBC was defunded as well
If These leftards had their way there would be no free trade agreement or NAFTA as you pointed out. We have perhaps more energy than any other jurisdiction on Earth. Trading is essential.
Free of charge idea for him;Quit. Chretien is yesterdays man and we must move on to a new century. The world has changed. His last campaign was a disaster for Rossi. Da proof is da proof.
Kinsella is a baffoon. Once Obama is gone and the next president starts to straight out the mess Obama has created. Our trading partner the states will be back better than ever.
Post a Comment