A little over a week ago, two American candidates from bitterly opposed political parties took to the stage and faced one another in vice-presidential debate. Republican J.D. Vance and Democrat Tim Walz were going to square off, both having made previous statements of “I can’t wait to debate that guy!”
As the American television audience (and Canadian) of some 43 million tuned in, everyone was a little nervous, in that these things in recent years have devolved into a theatre of the absurd, almost exclusively due to the participation of one Donald J. Trump, America’s 21st-century iteration of a snake oil salesman. To put it mildly, expectations were low for things like propriety, respect, and a constructive, polite discussion of issues and opposing approaches to dealing with them.
And then it happened.
These two men shook hands, took their podiums, and for 90 minutes heard each other out, disagreeing almost universally on just about everything, yet still throwing out their ideas and
‘prepared” lines uninterrupted by the other candidate. Both stuck to their allotted time, nobody attempted to talk over the other, no personal insults were thrown in to the mix. By God, they even commiserated with one another over tragedies experienced, both national and personal.
Afterwards, I did my regular after-action analysis, by myself, and in my head. I searched for that smart thing I was going to say in case anyone asked me what I thought about the encounter. Not surprising, since I’ve been involved in the political theatre in one form or another for over forty years of my life. And after all that post-debate reflection, I finally arrived at the best I could come up with.
Like, what the hell was that?
Whether you watched it on television or not, I don’t know of a single person who wasn’t expecting some sort of Sideshow Bob political bare-knuckle bloodbath. Instead, peace broke out on stage. The two politicians even shook hands afterwards, both giving the old arm-smack to the shoulder of the other, a gesture of some degree of friendliness.
Can you win a Nobel Prize for Peace by having a civilized debate? Just when we thought things would spiral into a shouting match, these two guys start behaving in a way that we thought was long gone. It’s like, what the hell am I supposed to do with that?
We’ve seen the disgusting depths politicians are willing to sink to in order to appeal to their base of support and capture the political ring of elected office. In fact, we’ve been conditioned by it, allowing it to become the new normal.
As I made my way about town the next day, I did manage to drop into those hotbeds of political discussion, namely Metro, Canadian Tire, and the parking lot at Walmart. And in every single case, every single one mind you, the reaction was the same.
“Wasn’t it nice to see politicians actually acting like adults?”
In fact, the consensus of those I encountered was that the hyper-partisan reckless name-calling, denigration, and personal attacks on opponents was the very thing they despised about politicians and politics. Make no mistake, politics is a dirty sport, a blood sport, and not for the faint of heart. That said, there did once exist, for the most part, a sort of respect and off-camera camaraderie among politicians, sort of like athletes who beat the crap out of one another before going out for a beer after the game.
I’ve had political opponents who I respected and even became friends with. While I liked them and respected them personally, I may have disagreed profoundly with their political philosophy or their approach to the issues of the day. And so I fought them tooth and nail, both in election campaigns and in the local and regional media. And at the end of the day, after having almost invariably lost the contest to them, these people were still my friends.
They’re good people. They care about other people, whether those people voted for them or not. Of course, there’s always the exception, and that would be my local and perpetual federal member, who spits fire and razor blades into the wind, beset as she is with the heavy weight of horrible ideas backed by a horrible personality. Which only shows us that botox can work for your face, but not for your overall persona. And, all due respect, the jury’s still out on the face. But I guess that would be an example of me demonstrating the very low bar that I’m talking about in this piece. And I’d be happy to stop, if she would, but with a really mature qualifier. As in “you first.”
Back to happier things. Back to the notable example provided by Vance and Walz, to the idea that we can have opposing ideas while still respecting one another. That’s a noble goal I can get behind, even if it means I have to walk away from playing hardball with politics. Being critical and negative is hard work for me, and it also invites counter-attack that can be uncomfortable. On top of all that is the certainty that most people hate the tone of it.
So, if people were encouraged by what they saw in the vice-presidential debate, and if people are truly looking for a better, more positive tone from politicians, why would such people support a person like Pierre Poilievre?
I’ll not get into an itemization of the the traits that Poilievre exhibits, and has always exhibited since I first became aware of him. A recent article by Susan Delacourt of the Toronto Star (FAKE NEWS!!!!) nicely and fairly sums up his most recent antics in the House of Commons, so I’ll not tread there.
What I want to know is why I’m seemingly always presented with false choices politically. As in, to remove Justin Trudeau, I have to support the likes of a Poilievre? Like, there’s no ground in the middle that I can go to? The NDP are irrelevant beyond their ability to leverage the Liberals into granting social benefits to disadvantaged Canadians, something I agree with. Call me a socialist, call me a commie, throw all the words at me, I’m good with my beliefs, and will only take note of those hurling the names for personal reference. Helping others who need it, regardless of circumstance, is something I’ve always been able to get behind. It’s what governments are supposed to do. Think about that as you recall the CERB deposits going into your bank account during the pandemic. That is, if you believe there was a pandemic.
Government of the people, by the people, for the people. I think someone somewhere said that before.
Beyond their yeoman efforts in this regard, the NDP is no place for me to park my support, since it takes away from the Liberals by splitting the vote, allowing Conservatives to come up the middle and win ridings without garnering the majority support one would find on a ranked ballot, something Liberals promised then walked away from. And there’s no way I’m going to allow my vote to contribute to a Conservative victory, not as they’re presently constituted, not that it matters in my riding anyway. After that I’ve got the Greens, aka the hamsters on a wheel, and the Peoples’ Party of Canada, who froth at the mouth even more than the Tories do.
So, it looks like moving on from Trudeau, if it’s to be done with certainty, is to vote for Poilievre, and that’s not cool for me. As I said, respect is a big part of what’s missing here, me for him and he for others, and he doesn’t appear capable or willing to face such a challenge. And in fairness, neither am I. So long as he continues to berate and belittle others, he’ll have an opponent in me, and yes, I’m fully aware that he doesn’t care one whit what a guy like me might think. Don’t think he’s done a lot of that in his life. You know, giving whits of caring.
In order to get rid of the woke, pretty, arrogant, coloured-sock-wearing dandy that people feel Trudeau is (and I would agree with some of that, those socks are tough to take), I have to put up with a person who behaves in a manner that would have him suspended from school on a regular basis. Can’t get along, always picking on others, a name-caller, a bully, and a boor. And those are on his good days.
What about a Joe Biden swap-out for Kamala Harris kind of thing right here in Canada? Well, Liberals can dream all they want about that kind of thing, but I don’t know if they have the winning horse in the stable, and even if they did, that horse would still be a Liberal, and therefore virtually unelectable in the short term
So, where can I find a centrist party to slide in between the Conservatives and Liberals? You know, the kind of party that has no extremists in it one way or the other. A party of the people, by the people, for the people. A party that represents a realistic choice, a party not taken over ideologically by fringe elements of their respective extremes, one way or the other, left or right. No fascists, no commies. Just normal folks, living their lives, respecting their neighbours, fellow workers, and the people they encounter along the way. Decent people not prone to loud argument who are offended by what they hear out there today. People who were taught to respect others and be polite and then incorporated those attributes into their personal lives. People who were taught to tell the truth, and it stuck.
A party like that.
NEWSMAGRENFREW 