Conservative ads

You can find all the latest Conservative video ads here on their YouTube channel.

Since they were released the other day, there has been tonne of analysis done on them.  My opinion is that the ads aren't meant to gain support, but to reinvigorate and solidify existing hard and soft support, and because of that, they are effective.  I know it got me riled up again.

Some have said that attacking the Liberal/NDP/Bloc coalition doesn't rile up feelings.  I say B.S. Explain why in December 2008, when the Liberal/NDP/Bloc coalition agreement was at it's peak that Canadians flocked to supporting the Conservative government (support well above 40%)?  It's smart strategy.

These ads are in response to the heightened election speculation over the upcoming budget, where the political lines seem to be drawn over corporate tax cuts.  Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff has embarked on another tour and hit the ice (he can skate you know, and a young girl in the video kept addressing Iggy as 'Mr. Prime Minister' -- sneaky how the Liberals kept that subtlety in multiple times).

Now back to the Conservatives ads... Liberal-leaning pundits have swathed that the Conservative ads are senseless attacks, yet their hypocrisy is abound with past ads touting "soldiers with guns in the streets", and guns pointed and fired at you dear TV viewer.  Sure it draws up feelings, and supposedly, according to those pundits, that it's effective.  Yet I don't know about you, but Liberal ads like that, as opposed to the recent Conservative ones, make me feel angry back at Liberals.

I'd be interested to see what, if any, Liberal ads come out in response soon, or whether they feel Iggy on Ice will suffice.

Somehow I doubt that though.

Time IS right for Grits

Globe and Mail and Metro columnist Lawrence Martin says the "time is right for Grits" to force an election.

I would have to agree. The economy and unemployment have likely reached their lowest point. The Conservatives have been mired in a mostly currently ineffective ad campaign against "duly elected" Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff. The deficit misreads by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, massive bailouts for GM, and the very recent misteps by Natural Resources Minister Lisa Raitt--including the secret documents left behind at CTV news by her assistant, and her tape recorded conversation left behind, again, by her assistant, the possible lack of radioactive isotopes for cancer patients, AND the loss of gold at the Mint, could the news get any worse for the Conservatives. Perhaps.

Don't forget that the polls show the Conservatives in 4th place in Quebec and trailing the Liberals in Ontario. With opposition calls for dramatic EI reform and the Conservatives seemingly slightly compromising, while it's an issue no doubt, it's not an election issue.

But here's why an election isn't going to happen as Lawrence Martin speculates...

1. The economy. The last thing I think most people want, especially investors and bankers, during this time is instability.

2. Liberals need the NDP and Bloc to get enough votes in the House of Commons to force an election. The NDP have indicated they don't want to go to the polls, especially with them badly trailing the Liberals, they'd likely lose seats. The Liberals also lead the Bloc in parts of Quebec so the Bloc probably won't do any better than they are now.

3. No one wants a July or August election. In fact, this would favour the incumbant as many are away on holidays.

My bet is by October, when the House resumes, the Liberals and Bloc will assess the polling data, and if the Conservatives don't have a big enough scandal to lose confidence, we might not see an election until Spring 2010.

But by that time, the economy will likely have recovered, and the main reason to go to the polls will no longer be the issue.

Also, Michael Ignatieff will have flip flopped on so many issues that more and more people will want to know what he really stands for. And I bet that will be the next salvo of Conservative Party attack ads.

And the Liberals will have missed their chance.

More liberal spin on the IggyAds

In the MSM and blogosphere, Liberal pundits are trying to spin the IggyAds as personal, and aren't doing to badly of a job either, but they tried to do the same thing with Dion, and well, we know how that worked out.

So let's clear up some of that spin, shall we?

What the Liberals are spinning but what ads DON'T say is that if a Canadian lives outside the country for any given period of time, he or she is "less Canadian". I certainly wouldn't say Wayne Gretzky is less Canadian than the next person and the ads don't depict this.

The ads don't necessarily speak for themselves, but they let Michael Ignatieff do that on his own.

I don't know any Canadian currently living or having lived abroad, myself included, ever say that the country I was in, especially the U.S.A., was "my" country. It would be very arrogant for me to do so.

The ads are only backfiring mostly upon Liberals themselves? Why? Because it's simply true that Ignatieff was out of the country for 34 years and now wants to lead it. It's simply true that he said if he doesn't become prime minister that he hopes "Harvard will take him back".

So in this sense, what the Liberals are trying to deflect, Ignatieff included, is not what the ad says, but simply what HE says, and so in effect, they're not spinning the ads, but the truth about Ignatieff himself.

And I bet, it won't be the last time.

Iggy's spin on the ads

I watched Michael Ignatieff's reply to the Conservative attack ads.

He basically asked, "At any given time, there may be two million Canadian citizens living and working overseas. Is the Conservative party saying these people are less Canadian?"

Good question Mike! Well, I'm a Canadian who's worked abroad in the U.S. many times. And no, I'm certainly not less Canadian than any of my fellow citizens.

But I'd NEVER say, "What kind of an America do YOU want. ... This is your country just as much as it is mine."

And THAT'S the difference folks.