Iggy: An election if necessary, but not necessarily an election.
Harper: Queen to queen's level three.
Layton: Hey! Over here! Look at us, we passed another motion!
Duceppe: Yes, I am still here. Get over it.
Our national "leaders" don't seem to care about running the country. It's all about the game, all day, every day. Well, I am sick of the game. The game is stupid.
Recommend this Post
Showing posts with label Politics As A Spectator Sport. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics As A Spectator Sport. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Don't Talk Principles To Me, The Game Is On
The pundit party of Canada has a problem. The media is confused by the NDP's attitude toward and election. They just can't understand why a party with no hope of forming a government and not great poll numbers would want an election. I watched Newman's show this week and two exchanges illustrate this narrative being played out.
The first was on Wednesday, in this conversation between Newman and Peggy Nash (start at 17:45). Nash explains that the NDP is not overly anxious for an election but is voting in the House according to party principles and if that brings an election, so be it. Newman sweeps by this assertion pretty quickly, but at least he sort of acknowledges it.
Fine thinks I, that pretty much clear clears that up, but on Friday, on the round table discussion, comes this display of group think at its finest (start at 46:21). Not once did you hear them discussing Nash's stated reason for the NDP voting the way they are (in fact, Newman begins the segment by completely misrepresenting what Nash actually said). Gone was Nash's argument for principled voting and with it missing, the media talking heads fell back on the "Why are the NDP acting so strangely?" narrative.
The pundits in this country have their minds made up about what politics are supposed to be. It is a sporting event where the players are constantly jockeying for advantage and the polls act as the final arbiters of the team standings. That is the dominant narrative of our political chatting class. Any counter narrative, like the one Nash tried to introduce, hasn't a hope of penetrating the psychic armor brandished by our media betters. What a sad state of affairs. Recommend this Post
The first was on Wednesday, in this conversation between Newman and Peggy Nash (start at 17:45). Nash explains that the NDP is not overly anxious for an election but is voting in the House according to party principles and if that brings an election, so be it. Newman sweeps by this assertion pretty quickly, but at least he sort of acknowledges it.
Fine thinks I, that pretty much clear clears that up, but on Friday, on the round table discussion, comes this display of group think at its finest (start at 46:21). Not once did you hear them discussing Nash's stated reason for the NDP voting the way they are (in fact, Newman begins the segment by completely misrepresenting what Nash actually said). Gone was Nash's argument for principled voting and with it missing, the media talking heads fell back on the "Why are the NDP acting so strangely?" narrative.
The pundits in this country have their minds made up about what politics are supposed to be. It is a sporting event where the players are constantly jockeying for advantage and the polls act as the final arbiters of the team standings. That is the dominant narrative of our political chatting class. Any counter narrative, like the one Nash tried to introduce, hasn't a hope of penetrating the psychic armor brandished by our media betters. What a sad state of affairs. Recommend this Post
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)