In today’s Gazette, L. Ian Macdonald previews the Liberal attack ads on Stephen Harper and runs down why he thinks they’re not only a bad idea, but poorly researched:
In suggesting Harper is proposing “U.S.-style health care,” the Liberals are resorting to U.S.-style attack ads. For the Liberals, the great danger is that Harper might not turn out to be so dangerous. Harper must prove that he’s no more dangerous than he looks, which is to say not dangerous at all.
The Liberal attack ads are intended to scare the daylights out of voters in the great Canadian middle who might be considering a vote for the Conservatives, or the Conservative-Alliance, as the Liberals style them as part of their scare tactics. Their problem is that Harper doesn’t look, or sound, scary.
I’m not endorsing the Conservatives. I don’t agree with their positions on a myriad of issues. But I also am disgusted by the apparent intentions of the Liberals to play dirty politics. Paul Martin would be well to remember that if you wrestle down in the mud, your clothes are bound to get dirty.
I’ve often wondered how Americans felt about how the phrase “US-style” represents all that is viewed as bad in Canadian politics.If I were American, I’d certainly find it a bit off-putting.
I have to admit, the budget was pushing me to vote Liberal, but if those ads get aired… I’ll probably change my mind.
But, until they get aired, I don’t have a problem with them, since they were just part of the slew made up by the ad company.
They were leaked on purpose. That’s political strategy, it was no accident.
Wait, what was it you were just saying about Mr. Moore?
🙂