Après moi, le déluge.
Attributed to French King Louis XV, the statement is generally taken to mean that, once Louis and his acolytes are gone and swept away, then the stink is really gonna hit the fan. The biblical reference to a flood is a nice touch, but I don’t think Louis had the flood as a cleansing event, but rather as a drowning event, but I suppose that’s up for debate and dependant upon perspective.
Today is the day I do something I ought not to do, not because it would be wrong or improper, but because it will be ridiculed and dismissed as completely out of touch. But then again, imagine me being completely out of touch, yet correct in the end? The first part happens more than often, the second I can only hope for, although it’s another one of those cases where I desperately don’t want to be right.
I never voted for Pierre Trudeau but recognized his merits despite everyone at the time being in hate with him. I did vote for Brian Mulroney, twice in fact, and maintained that he was a good prime minister when he was the Political Bandito #1 at the end of his two terms. Historians now view both men, despite their weaknesses, perceived or real, to be among the best of our prime ministers. It took me thirty years to be right on one of them, and forty to be right on the other, but lets’s face it, the present lasts for a second, while the past stretches back forever. As they say, hindsight has 20/20 vision, but in my case it took decades for that vision to become more acceptable.
I don’t feel I have another thirty or forty years to play with, although there might be an outside chance at the former, so I don’t have the luxury of hanging around and being vindicated by the passage of time and history. So I’ll make my remarks right now, and predictably take dump trucks worth of scorn from all the people in the world smarter than me, which is apparently everyone. I may even lose readers because of this, but there it is. The guy in Nigeria has seemingly left me, so all is lost anyways.
Prior to yesterday, if there were to be a federal election held in Canada, I would vote for Justin Trudeau.
Not that it would matter, because I live in Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke, so no seismic sea-changes there. It’ll be You-Know-Who of the Farmers’ Party winning once again, to once again take her seat back by the curtains in the House of Commons, much to the chagrin of the parliamentary pages and Commons custodial staff. All this despite winning several consecutive elections and with her own party in power. I wouldn’t be surprised if Prime Minister Poilievre had the Commons carpentry staff cobble out a small enclosed cubicle just for her, sort of like what you see at libraries. You could still see her and record her votes, but the glass enclosure means nobody would have to hear her. At least among the 338 federal MPs, we can make the claim that ours is something special.
Back to Trudeau.
First, I do have problems with him. Second, if the Conservatives had a leader I could support in good conscience, I’d likely vote for them. In fact, the number one reason I’d have for supporting Trudeau today is that, among those on offer, I feel he is the best of the lot. I don’t have to like him to say that. It’s not an attractive field to choose from.
In my opinion, more than anyone else, Pierre Poilievre is everything that is wrong and could go wrong in our society right now. He is, in a word chosen by me, repugnant. I’m going to leave that right there, other than to say that if I won a prize (what a prize!) to have dinner with one or the other, Trudeau or Poilievre, there would be no choice at all, it’s just that simple. But I have to remind myself that I’m not as smart as everyone else, so there’s that.
I won’t get into all the reasons I think Poilievre is bad nor all the reasons why I think Trudeau is good. At the end of the day, both have traits that I don’t really get behind.
Both are arrogant. Both think they’re right. Both centralize their political power. Both have a mean streak. One thinks he’s the smartest guy in the room, that is when the dog’s outside, while the other actually might be, depending on who else is present.
One has a track record, the other has slogans and little else.
One is himself. The other makes his hay by not being the other guy.
One says Canada is broken. The depth of that brokenness is astounding. Looked at the numbers.
The Canadian economy grew by 41% in the past eight years. Per capita income grew by 23% over the same time period, according to IMF — International Monetary Fund — figures, although many of you may think that organization is a left-wing polyglot of conspiratorial cabals. According to Statistics Canada — another Communist haven for people wearing socks in their sandals — the median net worth of Canadians grew 66% in the past eight years.
We’re literally falling apart, broken everywhere, shattered into a thousand forlorn pieces. But we’re actually richer than we think, to borrow a bank tagline.
What about the spending? Oh Lord, the spending.
Yes, Trudeau did spend, and I’m not counting on the latest inflation cheque that he recently got pilloried for, by a lot of people who will be cashing their cheques from Doug Ford with no criticism. Both, to me, are political acts, and unacceptable.
But spend he did. Yet after all that spending, Canada’s debt to GDP ratio increased to 50% from 43%, as compared to the Americans, who went from 86% to 112%. In fact, Canada ranked better than every G-7 country not named Germany. Inconvenient facts that get swept under the carpet.
How about the hated Carbon Tax, which actually put money in your pocket, that is unless you were a gas-gulping, carbon-belching individual who refuses to pay a premium for your own personal climate choices, to the detriment of the rest of us.
The GST killed Mulroney, yet we still have it after Conservative governments have been in power. And we’ll continue to have it still with Pierre. The Carbon Tax will be one of the nails in Trudeau’s political coffin. Yet it will be around in some shape or form long after he’s gone.
That’s because both were good government policy, although that fact is too inconvenient to contemplate. I mean, how can a tax be good?
There are other things, but listing them would have me as a Trudeau apologist, and I’m not fitting myself out for that hat. I’m just reading the numbers of other people who make it their profession to analyze these sorts of things. The same thing I’m going to do after Poilievre takes power. They’re simply numbers, not political statements. My point is that we’re not as broken as some out there would attempt to have us believe.
Trudeau in blackface was bad. Dressing himself and his family in traditional Indian costumes on a trip to that country was bad again, both because of how it was received by the host country, and also because it just looked really bad. Jody Wilson-Raybould was bad. Getting into bed with the Me-To-We Free The Children crowd was bad. Chrystia Freeland was bad.
He was arrogant, centred power upon himself and his PMO staffers and advisors, and viewed himself as the only guy who could save Canada from the likes of Poilievre, and that’s all bad.
And those socks, they were really bad. I hated those socks. I still hate those socks. It was tough for me to overlook those socks. But those socks are gone now.
I understand the fatigue with Trudeau, and the Liberals generally. I get that absolutely. And I agree. I feel it too.
I would vote for an Erin O’Toole right now. I would vote for a Jean Charest right now. But I will not vote for a Pierre Poilievre, somebody who was repugnant the first time I noticed him over a decade ago and remains to be so.
We get what we pay for, or so the saying goes. I have no choice but to see what Poilievre does. Perhaps he’ll govern better than the guy who was the Leader of the Opposition. Perhaps I’ll be pleasantly surprised and support him in the future. I mean I really do hope so.
I voted for Doug Ford last time out, so anything’s possible, although it helped that I had an MPP like John Yakabuski to support.
So Louis XV notwithstanding, I truly hope to see good governance out of Poilievre. But if he governs the way he talks, it might get uncomfortable for us, and that includes those of you marching to the ballot box to mark your X beside his name.
In a way, II sort of feel good for Nigeria guy. I’m thinking he’ll have some company later this morning.
NEWSMAGRENFREW 