As someone who served in elected office (city council) for two terms, until the voters liberated me, this phrase by Paul Wells summarizes almost any elected group anywhere, "...and it is not a country that takes its advice from 30 dilettantes in Ottawa, to the eternal frustration of the 30 dilettantes."
In defense of the kids, there have been an explosion of lists over the past twenty years. Some of us are from the vintage where there were 10 commandments and 1 golden rule. Which as I type that, it would be interesting to read a column about why the wisdom of humanity is one rule and God needed 10.
But my point is that the kids have to worry about the 10 best books on travel, the 17 essential pop songs and so on.
Lots of podcasts lately where you interview someone or a panel. I value your written analysis. Lots going on right now. Hope to see some more and more frequent columns from you.
Thanks for the part of this that's a compliment. I have an odd belief that sometimes my opinion of something is the least important part of a story. So when there's a lot going on, I often want to bring subscribers other people's insights. But I'll work on bringing you more of my own thoughts in the next few days and after.
I'd be curious to hear about anyone in the country who's writing more than I am. I'd like to hire younger journalists to join me during a campaign, but I'm reluctant to ask my subscribers for more money to facilitate that.
I generally agree with these, but I do wonder about Rule 3. The mood in many countries (and their politics) have become so negative in recent years, and populist politicians have run on that. "The country is broken..." was certainly Trump's refrain, and Poilievre's. I'm not sure Donald Trump was ever in a "good mood" during the election campaign; I sincerely thought the positive energy that Kamala Harris brought to the campaign (and the contrast to Trump) might have turned more people around, but that might have been wishful thinking on my part. It remains to be seen what message will resonate here. Do we need to re-think Rule 3?
Good points - a pithy little sentence can never capture all the nuances. (Though it is true that in the '90s and '00s, "the candidate in the better mood" pretty much always won.)
I think the spirit of the thing is, the candidate setting the tone of the debate tends to win. Trump comes in saying, "I'm a billionaire business genius and there are a hundred problems with society and I'm the only one who can solve them"; his opponents come back with, "You guys, this billionaire business genius is right about these hundred problems and is right that he's the only one who can solve them, but you guys, he's *slightly uncouth*!" - Trump wins, because people are accepting his premises. He's not in a "good mood". He's as joyless a human as I'm aware of. But he's setting the terms.
Another example (maybe more relevant to point #4 than to point #3) is Erin O'Toole's campaign in 2021. I remember him getting up every day and saying things like, "I'm concerned about the direction Justin Trudeau is leading the country in!" And it's, like...prime ministers have a vision. They aren't "concerned". O'Toole is a happy, smiley, cheerful guy. He's generally in a pretty "good mood". But he wasn't positive, in the sense that he wasn't positing things.
I do also agree with Stephen Harper - this whole thing is iterative. Winning puts you in a good mood which helps you win which puts you in a good mood.
By the time we build the high-speed rail, public transportation will have moved on to something else. (1: For any given situation, Canadian politics will tend toward the least exciting possible outcome.)
Carney will be the shortest PM in office since Kim Campbell perhaps? But she actually had a seat, so this is a new low potentially. (2: If everyone in Ottawa knows something, it’s not true. Of course, I'm not in Ottawa, so I may be missing this one entirely.)
Pierre Polievre is going to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Doug Ford will get re-elected. (3. The candidate in the best mood wins.)
Pierre Polievre will continue to be the leader of the opposition. Although he IS trying. Jagmeet who? (4. The candidate who auditions for the role of opposition leader will get the job.)
I've notice since Tony Blair that some politicians put on the happy face no matter how grave the situation. On the spur of the moment I can only recall some Ottawa school board trustee, and Andrew Scheer.
This re-butt-al is a classic: "Second, what I usually manage to refrain from saying out loud is: You’re debating a typist over some stupid rules he pulled out of his ass half a lifetime ago? Congratulations, debating-club captain! You totally win!"
As someone who served in elected office (city council) for two terms, until the voters liberated me, this phrase by Paul Wells summarizes almost any elected group anywhere, "...and it is not a country that takes its advice from 30 dilettantes in Ottawa, to the eternal frustration of the 30 dilettantes."
Hopefully the liberation involves more cycling.
Cycling safely is a profound act of liberation.
As a former Green (the guy from Richmond) I remember your consistent cycling.
Also, thought you were a good councillor along David Cadman.
The smart money bets on anyone who can summarize Canadian politics in 4 rules.
5. If you don’t control the agenda, the agenda will control you.
Today I learned a new word, thanks Paul! Now to go devise an apercu or two to show off with!
In defense of the kids, there have been an explosion of lists over the past twenty years. Some of us are from the vintage where there were 10 commandments and 1 golden rule. Which as I type that, it would be interesting to read a column about why the wisdom of humanity is one rule and God needed 10.
But my point is that the kids have to worry about the 10 best books on travel, the 17 essential pop songs and so on.
Lots of podcasts lately where you interview someone or a panel. I value your written analysis. Lots going on right now. Hope to see some more and more frequent columns from you.
Thanks for the part of this that's a compliment. I have an odd belief that sometimes my opinion of something is the least important part of a story. So when there's a lot going on, I often want to bring subscribers other people's insights. But I'll work on bringing you more of my own thoughts in the next few days and after.
I enjoy reading your columns. Canadian politics is busy these days. Will you be writing more during the Federal election?
I'd be curious to hear about anyone in the country who's writing more than I am. I'd like to hire younger journalists to join me during a campaign, but I'm reluctant to ask my subscribers for more money to facilitate that.
It's not the quantity but the quality which we surely all appreciate.
Yup! But we all know rules are made to be broken. If the past decade teaches us nothing else it is that.
The Four Keys to the Prime Ministership. We don’t need 13.
Re Rule 1 from Henry Farrell. “I’m going to be quoting Kneese’s Dictum a lot “You don’t want the infrastructure to stop being boring”
https://bsky.app/profile/himself.bsky.social/post/3liisgdsr4s2h
I generally agree with these, but I do wonder about Rule 3. The mood in many countries (and their politics) have become so negative in recent years, and populist politicians have run on that. "The country is broken..." was certainly Trump's refrain, and Poilievre's. I'm not sure Donald Trump was ever in a "good mood" during the election campaign; I sincerely thought the positive energy that Kamala Harris brought to the campaign (and the contrast to Trump) might have turned more people around, but that might have been wishful thinking on my part. It remains to be seen what message will resonate here. Do we need to re-think Rule 3?
Good points - a pithy little sentence can never capture all the nuances. (Though it is true that in the '90s and '00s, "the candidate in the better mood" pretty much always won.)
I think the spirit of the thing is, the candidate setting the tone of the debate tends to win. Trump comes in saying, "I'm a billionaire business genius and there are a hundred problems with society and I'm the only one who can solve them"; his opponents come back with, "You guys, this billionaire business genius is right about these hundred problems and is right that he's the only one who can solve them, but you guys, he's *slightly uncouth*!" - Trump wins, because people are accepting his premises. He's not in a "good mood". He's as joyless a human as I'm aware of. But he's setting the terms.
Another example (maybe more relevant to point #4 than to point #3) is Erin O'Toole's campaign in 2021. I remember him getting up every day and saying things like, "I'm concerned about the direction Justin Trudeau is leading the country in!" And it's, like...prime ministers have a vision. They aren't "concerned". O'Toole is a happy, smiley, cheerful guy. He's generally in a pretty "good mood". But he wasn't positive, in the sense that he wasn't positing things.
I do also agree with Stephen Harper - this whole thing is iterative. Winning puts you in a good mood which helps you win which puts you in a good mood.
So applicable to this moment!
By the time we build the high-speed rail, public transportation will have moved on to something else. (1: For any given situation, Canadian politics will tend toward the least exciting possible outcome.)
Carney will be the shortest PM in office since Kim Campbell perhaps? But she actually had a seat, so this is a new low potentially. (2: If everyone in Ottawa knows something, it’s not true. Of course, I'm not in Ottawa, so I may be missing this one entirely.)
Pierre Polievre is going to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Doug Ford will get re-elected. (3. The candidate in the best mood wins.)
Pierre Polievre will continue to be the leader of the opposition. Although he IS trying. Jagmeet who? (4. The candidate who auditions for the role of opposition leader will get the job.)
"Carney will be the shortest PM in office since Kim Campbell perhaps?"
Unless Poilievre wins!
Your "bring it home" line made me laugh out loud. As usual, your writing not only informs, but also entertains me.
Re: Rule 3
I've notice since Tony Blair that some politicians put on the happy face no matter how grave the situation. On the spur of the moment I can only recall some Ottawa school board trustee, and Andrew Scheer.
What about "Events dear boy, events"? For every set of rules, there has to be a wild card in there somewhere. :) Love your stuff Paul.
This re-butt-al is a classic: "Second, what I usually manage to refrain from saying out loud is: You’re debating a typist over some stupid rules he pulled out of his ass half a lifetime ago? Congratulations, debating-club captain! You totally win!"
Awesome Paul. I remember reading those so thanks for the repost!
Happy moods make fun happy people.