Roundup: Endorsing a unicorn

Posted on by

It was newspaper endorsement time yesterday, and it was a pretty baffling scene all around. Postmedia’s papers had a centrally-dictated series of endorsements for Harper – in spite of all of his myriad of woes and abuses – because economy. Never mind that I’ve written pieces talking to economics professors who’ve said that the Liberals are probably the better party when it comes to the markets because of the lacklustre performance of the Conservatives and their willingness to engage in protectionist behaviours and shut down foreign acquisitions and the like while preferring regulation to carbon pricing – but the management decision of the chain is this reflexive nonsense that the Conservatives are best for the economy. As if that weren’t enough, we got a baffling incompetent endorsement from the Globe and Mail that the Conservatives deserve re-election, but not Harper, so by all means elect them but he should step down immediately after. Because that will totally happen. It’s as incompetent as the time that there was an endorsement for a minority government – because Canadians can totally choose that option on their ballots. What’s also mystifying about the Globe endorsement is that it seems to be endorsing the Progressive Conservative party of yore rather than the modern party, which is neither progressive nor even really conservative, but rather is more of a right-flavoured populist party. It is also wholly the creation of Harper and shaped to his vision. He has so marginalised and pushed out the majority of leadership contenders that it becomes an exercise in futility to promote the party minus him because he is the glue holding the party together. And does the Globe have a successor in mind that they would prefer? Would they prefer an equally divisive figure like Jason Kenney instead? It’s sad that instead of engaging in a reasoned analysis, we got that instead. Way to go. Elsewhere, former Globe and Mail editor William Thorsell pens the editorial he would have written if he were still in the business, and Robert Hiltz offers some thoughts on the endorsement game.

On the campaign:

  • Stephen Harper kept up his Price is Right shtick.
  • Thomas Mulcair railed about Liberal “corruption,” but mysteriously didn’t name the Energy East connection while in Edmonton with Rachel Notley.
  • Justin Trudeau continued his tour of ridings he hopes to win while taking questions on Dan Gangier.

Good reads:

  • A number of NDP incumbents could lose their severance pay if they lose thanks to their outstanding satellite office debts.
  • Here’s a look at millennial voters and their issues.
  • Harper, according to some, is at peace with the election result, whatever it may be. Party operatives, however, are feeling pretty bleak.
  • That move to double the number of civil servants processing Syrian refugee claims hasn’t happened yet.
  • The government has been lapsing millions of dollars allocated to crime prevention. Try to look surprised!
  • It looks like the TPP is unlikely to raise the cost of prescription drugs, despite what the NDP insists.
  • Tristin Hopper writes about the wisdom of the crowds as the mechanism that makes democracy actually work in Canada.
  • Scott Reid writes about what it’s like for staffers whose parties have lost the election.
  • Susan Delacourt praises the extra-long election campaign for raising the country’s “voter IQ.”

Odds and ends:

Kady O’Malley and Mark Kennedy discuss the long campaign (video).

Richard Nixon predicted that Justin Trudeau would become prime minister…when Justin was four months old.

The election could determine the fate of the Victims of Communism Memorial.