AdC, we may need to start a separate thread about this, but yes, absolutely Mulroney was inspirational. The fact that he was also a bag of shit is irrelevant.

He spoke in terms of big national projects and national visions. He wanted to remake Canada, not just manage. And on free trade, though I was opposed at the time, he was right. And he persuaded a reluctant country to go along with him. He has his flaws, but he has enormous gifts, too.

I would actually argue that we have only had three insporational leaders since WWI - Dief, PET and Mulroney. The fact that these were arguably three of our worst PMs in that stretch is probably not coincidence: Canada is not built for inspiration. If we can get people who can focus on two or three tasks per term and do them well, they look like geniuses. Which is why Chretien, who is so deeply unappealing in so many ways, is still going to go down in history as one of our two or three best-ever PMs.

Anyone seen Hillary's nauseating "Scranton" ad? "I was raised on pinochle and the American dream."

Get me a bucket.

I liked her better when she was Emma Thompson.

He spoke in terms of big national projects and national visions.

Yeah but does that make him inspirational? Surely you have to actually galvanize a few people too, and I don't remember ever coming across anyone who found Lyin' Brian's ingratiating blarney and bluster anything but repulsive.

But you're right this is a whole other thread (with maybe three participants.)

QUOTE:
I don't remember ever coming across anyone who found Lyin' Brian's ingratiating blarney and bluster anything but repulsive

.

Not many PMs in our history have received back-to-back majorities. And I believe he and Dief remain the only two PMs ever to crack 50% of the popular vote in an election. So he must have inspired some people.

Hillary is about as Scrantonian as the Queen.

AdC, when was Hillary governor of a border state? That's news to me.

If Brian Mulroney counts as inspirational than you all are suffering on the wrong end of a wide inspiration gap. Then again, what counts as inspirational speech in Canada? "Ok boys, let's get'em, Gordy, Lorny, Mikey, Johnny. Let's go. Short shifts, now. Dat's da way, boys!!!"

Obama wrote his books at the start of his campaign. It's standard campaign practice to start a campaign with the soft focus, "let me introduce myself" sort of stuff. Establish the brand, as it were. Besides, he's still running against Hillary and the substantive differences in their platforms are relatively small, so the only way to persuade voters is to appeal to their emotions and gut instincts.

Once it gets into the general election, the substantive differences will be greater so there will be more opportunity to talk about that.

Even though I live in a solid blue state, I think I'd still vote for Hillary if she gets the nomination. I'm not seeing anything from the Greens that would make me feel good about voting for them.

Any thoughts from the Canadians on OTF as to Canadians apparently overwhelming preference for Obama over Clinton and McCain?


Yeah, we tend to like the liberal best. I think we're also pretty good at spotting insincerity at about 100 paces. Hillary's just reeks of talking out of both sides of her mouth and has done so ever since she was the one at the podium. She's a chronic liar, and not a very good one. And during the campaign, I've become accustomed to hearing "the Clintons are calling in old favours in 'such and such' a state to win the nomination", which simply leads me to think that her Presidency would be rife with political payback, old-boy horse-trading and bullshit-as-usual. I think she carries too much baggage that we already know about. Just imagine how much of that iceberg is below the surface.

Obama offers at least the vague hope of a new way of doing things.

WOM, AdC and AG,

Thanks for the responses about Canadian polling love for Obama. I have to admit that I am embarrassingly ignorant of Canadian politics (and, really, Canada in general. . . my trip to Nova Scotia last fall was my first time north of the border. . . truly worth shaming me for), so I apologize for how stupid this may sound. Anyway, does the political left and right in Canada match up to to the US spectrum, is it more similar to Europe, or something else entirely?

Besides my general interest, I'm asking because I would imagine that Harper is at least somewhat right of Hillary, and so wonder why it is that Canadians historically prefer the more liberal candidate in America when they don't, necessarily, do so at home (besides the fact that the American right is, currently, a terrifying animal).

Harper's government is not very far to the right of Hillary, if at all. Theymight like to be, but they have a minority government and are playing their conservative instincts very carefully. The Canadian centre is probably to the left of both the Democratic candidates.

The thing to understand about Canadian politics is that we are instintively lefty but also incredibly miserly. It's an interesting combination. It's why we have are so very, very few public buildings of any architectural distinction (Vancouver's public library and Toronto's City Hall being the only real exceptions I can think of off the top of my head.).

AdC, when was Hillary governor of a border state?

My bad, I meant senator of course.

I think we're also pretty good at spotting insincerity at about 100 paces.

Yet still elected Mulroney?

Canadians applaud fiscal conservatism but most are very uncomfortable with social conservatives. As AG says the Harper government certainly contains a fair few members with those leanings, but if any hint of them shows publicly a media/parliamentary show-trial is convened immediately.

Hillary Clinton is currently a senator of a border state.

Bloody hell, looking at that map, I'm surprised by how many of the names of random, small-ass places in NY State I actually know.

Roughkeepsie is such a great name for a town.

Yeah, but it's Poughkeepsie on that map, isn't it?