Central Planning

 

You know the old saying: Polls are for dogs, and the mushy middle is where you'll find roadkill. Or something like that. So a poll came out today claiming to show doom on the horizon for our man in Ottawa thanks to the crusty centre finding a taste for pigeon meat. Should we be worried or not?

. . .

Abacus Data this morning has a new summer survey purporting to show an "uncharted territory" of hostile conditions for the red team and especially the captain of the RMS Tru Grit. It's the latest moneyball release from the Canadian pollster-media complex that always generates headlines when there's negative news for the Liberals and supposed "neutral" or "positive" press for the blue meanies.

But does the poll itself satisfy the catastrophic hype being panicked about at present among the Liberal Twittersphere (and cheered by the Conspiracy Party of Canada)?

 

In short: Not really, no.

I'm certainly one of the "Nervous Nellies" Jean Chrétien used to talk about, but even I've started to come to a more "sober" understanding of what these numbers mean, both for right now and for three whole years in the future. Spoiler: they mean absolutely nothing for three years in the future. They also aren't unequivocally tragic even for the present snapshot in time.

As I pointed out in an extended thread, using data from the actual article (considering how Abacus' tweets buried the lede, focusing on the Canadian version of the U.S. sensationalist media's preferred narrative of "Dems in Disarray"™). The takeaway that they want you to focus on is not that he registers highly with the left-of-centre, oh no. They want you to focus on the fact that the PM's negative approval metrics "in general" keep going up (and that he's more underwater than Skippy). The problem is the soundbite headlines don't say he's disliked by whom.

The answer: Conservatives (who already hate him); Quebec separatists (who don't like him either), and... so-called "centrists" (the Joe Manchin vote, I suppose). The panic seems to be around the latter metric: Liberals losing the "centrists" over to the CPC means it's lights-out for them (and lights-out for Canada). This means of course that Conservatives have an opportunity to "pivot" towards something resembling respectable sanity when more people are paying attention, and, um...

I mean, it's still the same Crazy Party of Canada. The only difference seems to be a forced metric of so-called "Trudeau fatigue" setting in. Which of course seems to be the intent of this scorched-earth campaign to drive up anger against him, make the "shelf life" argument a self-fulfilling prophecy. Or, convince him to leave, thus triggering a Liberal leadership race that would then see whoever became his replacement either getting Hillaryfied or facing the Dion/Iggy treatment as a relative unknown.

 

See what I mean by a self-fulfilling prophecy? Gil's thread goes further into a discussion of the right-wing and their media enablers (which includes pollsters) manufacturing consent by driving what's called "social proof" in their favour and against leaders of the centre, centre-left and left-of-centre. An action that is commonly known as, "rage farming." And of course the feckless media falls for it every time.

 

We don't even really know who these "centrists" are or why they're upset. Perhaps they're "fiscal conservatives" pissed off that the Liberals and NDP have forged a deal to help poor people keep their teeth. Or perhaps they're lying to the pollsters and are just regular old miserable conservatives who hate Justin Trudeau no matter what, but really hate the fact that he's helping the "undesirables" with some help from a brown guy in a turban. (And that they both support mandating vaccines.)

 

Or perhaps it's something more insidious.

 

That 18% of Liberals, that's your mythical "centrists" right there. Talk about "Trudeau fatigue" all you want, but they're not going to vote for Anita Anand either. They're going to couch their discontent behind "muh real estate values" when the underlying truth is that they don't want the likes of Ahmed Hussen moving in. But they'll tell pollsters that they're just "centrists" who are bothered by inflation and the deficit, or who just "don't like" Justin Trudeau (but won't say why). And pollsters and the media don't bother to second-guess. You don't see a blind spot. Only dogs can hear the whistle.

 

Which means, it's a vicious circle: Thanks to Abacus (and countless retweets from insular columnists), the selectively reported findings of the initial survey are going to be regurgitated over and over again over the next week or so (or up until September, when Skippy is crowned pigeon king) in opinion pieces and "hot takes" attempting to push the inevitability of PM Skippy and/or a drive to shove Trudeau out "to save the Liberals, and save Canada from the CPC".

In short: This poll is bait, and the Liberals and PM would be wise to take its conclusions with a considerable heaping of salt. Particularly three years away from an election.

Fortunately, we do have cooler heads in the room, albeit only a few voices in the wilderness outside the manufactured consensus, but nevertheless they do exist.

And that's the rub: Not only is Skippy not bringing anyone new into the blue circus tent, but despite all the hype, all the manufactured "social proof," he's still stalled his big rig in the mud. He's going to end up rolling backwards down a hill once all the mud that he's flung gets flung right back in his punchable face. The "centrists" may have a wandering eye and are white-knuckling their wallets but they'll reluctantly come back into the fold. In terms of geography, the red fortress has some chips in it, but still remains standing, and that's the ballgame were an election held today.

But because an election isn't going to be held today, rather in 2025 after the cost savings of childcare and dental care kick in, there's really nowhere for Skippy to go but down, eventually to learn the lesson of peaking too early, especially once the Big Red Machine starts churning out all the free material he's provided over the past 20 years (and the past six months alone). He may be riding high on "Justinflation" now, but the hot air is soon to come out of his balloon. It's the economy, stupid.

 

So: What's the takeaway here? Same as it ever was: Don't rock the boat, and remember that sunny ways are on the horizon. Campaigns really, honestly, do matter. Our friends in la maison rouge do have some work ahead of them to "define" Skippy for whatever collection of people isn't yet aware of what a crackpot he is, leading a party full of crackpots, but it's not like he hasn't given them ample opportunity (and it's not like they won't take it, having done the same to Scheer and O'Toole). They also have plenty of time ahead of them to get more accomplishments under their belt (and FFS learn how to shout them from the rooftops so that more people are aware!).

What matters today probably won't be the case in three years' time (and it will be three years' time, don't believe the hype either about the "contract" breaking before then). The prime minister isn't going anywhere (why would he give them his head on a platter?). "Centrists" have only just begun leaving the blue circus tent because of all the crazy people going PP inside of it. Some may not yet realize how bad is the stench of PP but it'll come to them. Don't panic, and remember where your towel is.

Hey, don't write yourselves off yet. It's only in your head you feel left out, and looked down on. Just try your best; do everything you can, and don't you worry what their bitter hearts are going to say.

It just takes some time, Liberals, you're in the middle of the ride, but everything, everything will be just fine. Everything, everything will be all right.

 

The Summer Barber-Cue Circuit

If there's one constant in the comedy of the absurd that is Canada's present political scene, it's that Justin Trudeau knows all the tricks in the book guaranteed to make his opponents go wild. Ten years as Liberal leader, and the Conservatives still have no policies other than griping about... hair?

. . .

This week, the famously re-inventive prime minister and unlikely style icon went out on a summer "re-engagement" circuit, connecting with constituents after a grinding winter and spring that saw everything from war in Europe to a would-be insurrection to an unnecessary good-cop/bad-cop soap opera, and a rough economy on top of that.

While at an "outdoor school" talking about science and the environment with some children (who were much better behaved than the juvenile delinquents he faces in Parliament), something else managed to catch the eye of observers — and of course, got everybody talking.

Papa's got a brand new... haircut, and... it's... well, you be the judge (as so many already have).

Now of course, "the Internet" (which is basically where the attention-starved Canadian political class dwells these days, along with all-and-sundry trolls, shitposters and, on the other side, devotees such as yours truly) had... opinions on this new look, and needless to say not all were positive.

Most notable were the comparisons to Jim Carrey's doltish "Lloyd Christmas" character, which was really just an excuse to call Trudeau (and his supporters) Dumb & Dumber. A take that was featured, no surprise, in Britain's shameless tabloid the Daily Mail, in an article rife with errors (the misspelling of "Ottowa" for one, and the incredibly ignorant description of him as the "Canadian president" in a paper from the country that literally birthed the Westminster parliamentary system).

Journalism, not even once.

To make matters worse, the right-wing rag deservedly known as the "Daily Fail" rather prominently lauded the notoriously sloppy and now-disgraced, mop-haired ex-PM Boris Johnson as he lumbered in and out of a military aircraft, likening him to Tom Cruise in the Top Gun series. When actually, as this writer herself pointed out on the birdie app, if Justin put on a pair of Joe Biden's Ray-Bans, he in fact could easily pass for Maverick himself — albeit a good six to eight inches taller.

Needless to say, the reactions overall have been mixed, to say the least. Some asserted that the "Caesar" cut was reminiscent of Facebook's megalomaniacal troll-in-chief Mark Zuckerberg, and cited it as proof of Trudeau's purportedly "dictatorial" tendencies (in the same manner as the "Castro beard," because of course they did). Others were more favourable in their readings of history, like Max Fawcett (and respondents concurring with him), who pointed out the similarities to Pierre Trudeau, prime ministerial patriarch and symbol of stylish Seventies savoir-faire:

Still others name-dropped Gerard Butler and Russell Crowe (variations on the Roman theme), while yours truly noted also that the PM's namesake was, in fact, an emperor: Justinian, who was known as the "last great Roman" (and who even built a temple to Sophia), while his youngest son shares a moniker with the emperor best known for building a bigly wall and making the Anglo-Saxons pay for it. (Although it should be noted that Hadrien "Didi" Trudeau was born a whole year before the usurper known as Donald the Bald announced his intent to sit upon the golden throne.)

So what did the Romans give to us anyway? "Divisive" haircuts, I guess, in addition to roads and the aqueduct. I'll be honest: my preference is New Wave Justin (2014 or so and onward), or Heavy Metal Hippie Justin (mid- to early-2000s?). But I can still see an upside in this, as I noted on Twitter when I made a tongue-in-cheek request of chief-of-staff Katie Telford to let the PM know he kinda resembles Aussie actor Alex O'Loughlin, a/k/a the modern-day Steve McGarrett (and she liked it! Hey Mikey, she liked it! Book 'em, Danno!)

Others were not so nuanced, like the brash and bitingly funny political wunderkind Evan Scrimshaw who continued his tradition of not mincing words:

This was in response to a series of questions from, again, yours truly; for the record, Evan is pro-COVID-scruff (but anti-"pirate goatee"; even Trudeau himself regretted it, telling Daily Show comedian Hasan Minhaj in 2017 "I look like my own evil twin"); and, like me (probably a majority opinion), he prefers the 2014-and-onward mid-length "preppy PM" cut that has become sort of a Trudeau trademark over the course of his tenure, which now encompasses the better part of a decade.

But speaking of tenure, one of the most absurd takes to come out of... what can we even call this particular nontroversy? Barbergate? Hairghazi? L'Affair Coiffure? is one that emerged from the paranoid minds of the Conservatives, has no basis anywhere in Liberal discussions (or anywhere else for that matter), and has now taken off further in similar circles with The Haircut™ as an accelerator, though predates it by... well, about a day or two, three at best.

That's right, The Haircut™, if you, well, split hairs, I guess, is another sign of... (dramatic music)

AN EARLY ELECTION!!!

Except, actually, no, it isn't. I will say, however, that the last time Conservatives ran an election freaking out about Justin Trudeau's hair they lost by a landslide. They sunk bajillions of dollars into a whole-ass ad campaign on this very subject only to get BTFO, and they've been seething to the point of outright psychosis ever since. Flashback to when the now-reigning champ took the piss out of Helmet-Head Harper by poking fun at himself:

As for the "risible nonsense" of an early election this time around, Scrimshaw debunks this latest "chucklefuckery" in his most recent column (though without mention of The Haircut™). In his trademark style reminiscent of Hunter Thompson and Andy Borowitz, he condemns the Conservatives for devolving completely into sputtering incoherence and paranoid fantasy as their natural course of behaviour. The delegitimizing of objective truth has been part-and-parcel of Conservative discourse for some time now, but only seems to have gotten exponentially worse on the heels of (and as a catalyst for) the Free-Dumb Convoy and the impending coronation of Persnickety Pinocchio Poilievre:

Max Fawcett wrote recently that the CPC is now officially the Convoy Party of Canada, and he’s decidedly not wrong, but even that doesn’t properly go far enough. It’s not just that they’re anti-science and anti-vax, but they’re anti-democratic now too. The fact that MPs have called Trudeau a dictator, the way that Conservative MPs have stood with and applauded people who believe Justin Trudeau is guilty of child sex crimes, the way the language of authoritarianism is used so cavalierly … it’s a party whose actions are now starting to bring into question whether or not there is a legitimate form of government that isn’t a Conservative one.

I genuinely want a sensible, reasonable Conservative Party. I genuinely want Poilievre to stop his shitposting persona and become the reasonable, moderate person he shows he can be when he wants to, because loyal opposition in this country is a great act of patriotism. But unfortunately, the Tories seemingly have no interest in that, and it is to the great shame of this country. We need an opposition better than to traffic in clear bullshit, and we need one that won’t lie at every possible moment.

Unfortunately, we’ll be waiting for a long while.

Here's my take on The Haircut™ and how it pertains to The Discourse™: If you recall, at the top of this column I noted the "outdoor school" in which Trudeau debuted his new haircut, while answering science questions from schoolchildren who were more than ecstatic to have him as a teacher. The event gave him the opportunity to talk about something that has, unfortunately, been shoved to the (pun intended) back burner amid everything else, even though it really should be priority number 1 for how literally existentially threatening it is:

Climate change.

More and more "warming warnings" are coming about, like this one from the U.K. forecasting unprecedented summer heat:

It's also spreading throughout Europe, with Venus-like conditions in Iberia and the Med:

And of course it's hitting North America too, at about the worst time politically when a coal-country hillbilly pretty much controls the U.S. government's agenda, and is probably going to be personally responsible for seeing to it that an outright climate-denialist party makes its own "red wave" in the midterm elections:

So just like how Trudeau's hermit beard was a signal to the public that the pandemic, and social distancing, and quarantining, were to be taken seriously, so too is his summer buzzcut an indication that it's long overdue to pay attention to the speedily-warming climate. Because if Justin Trudeau of all people can't take those luxurious locks making sweat on his neck, it must be a scorcher even up in the land of ice hockey.

Evan, mind you, has a more pragmatic take: The barber slipped, and went drastic to "save the cut."

(In other words, he used Occam's razor.)

We still don't know, and will probably never know, the rationale for why the prime minister went as drastic as he did in the barber's chair; as the old saying goes, only his hairdresser knows for sure. One thing is certain: I doubt that he would want people to be talking about his haircut instead of more serious matters, like climate and the rise of violent white supremacism.

The convoy clowns are continuing their campaign of intimidation, managing to create an environment that was unsafe enough for his security team to have to cancel an event later that same evening, thus succeeding little by little in their push to threaten him into seclusion, and possibly even terrifying left-of-centre constituents in the lead up to the numerically-ominous election 45. In more ways than one, these are "scorched earth" tactics being employed by Petulant Petroleum Poilievre and his punks to suppress the vote between now and the next writ-drop.

What's more, the standard-bearer for the climate-averse Conservatives manages to make a contrasting statement with his own coiffure to breezy Trudeau's platform on the environment. Let no one be mistaken, the candidate himself is as greasy and tacky as his pigeon plumage all stuck together with the most unethical of Alberta oil.

But I digress, sort of. The point is that reading the maple tea leaves for symbolism of some sort in the prime minister's ever-changing hairstyle is fun, but ultimately a fool's errand in terms of credible political prognostication. The only sure thing is this: If anything, the new Tru' 'do means the exact opposite of an early election, and not just for all the well-detailed reasons that Evan points out in his piece (seriously, read it; he's had some big misses in the past, but the kid is right now the reigning home-run derby champion of Canadian political analysis).

Why?

The PM knows his new style is "divisive," "polarizing," on the razor's edge of love-it-or-hate it — just like Beard Mode was, but perhaps even more so. So if you don't like the new 'chop, and you don't want an imminent election, you can rest easy, and he knows it.

He's got three years to grow it all back.