Warren Kinsella

bio

words

latest musings

top ten

nasty past

contact

sfh

facebook

Books

Speeches

Politics

Extremism

Articles

Talking your way to victory

Originally published in the National Post, Thursday, December 15, 2005

Remember the old adage about art - that everyone is an expert? The same rule applies to political campaigns. As Liberal, Conservative, Bloquiste, NDP and Green strategists know too well, a political campaign can fell boreal forests to print up policy pronouncements, and evoke nary a peep in public opinion. Their leaders can meticulously craft Lincoln-at-Gettysburgian speeches about the future of the country, and elicit not a single paragraph in media coverage.

But political ads? Political debates? On those, everyone is an expert. Failed candidates, youthful volunteers, cab drivers, barbers, reporters who have never stuffed an envelope in their life, even the mailroom guys - nothing gets them as worked up as ads and debates. Everyone has an opinion. And if you're a so-called campaign "strategist," they will make certain you hear it. None of that is to say that their opinions don't matter. They do. But political parties have nevertheless acquired a modest amount of expertise about what works and what doesn't.

What, then, will political types watch for in tonight and tomorrow night's debates? For Stephen, Paul, Jack and Gilles, what will work and what won't? For starters, a single debate is not going to change what voters think about the issues they care about. Nobody's opinion on health care or the war in Iraq will shift on the basis of fiery 20-second exchanges that the media lovingly call "defining moments." Instead, voters are looking for a leader to talk about the issues that said they care about while sounding and looking like a prime minister.

A successful TV debate performance is therefore all about getting your issues broadcast and ratified. It is never, ever, about "winning" a debating point with one's political adversary. If you're on the left, it doesn't matter how smart you sound on taxes and law-and-order issues. The leader on the right will always have more credibility on those issues. Similarly, the guy on the right tends to sound less credible on protecting health care or enhancing social programs.

A good example of this was then-Canadian Alliance leader Stockwell Day's now-infamous decision to hold up a "NO TWO-TIER HEALTHCARE" sign during the 2000 debates. Stockwell Day was talking about the Liberals' issue. He couldn't win.

None of this is to say that pithy, clever attacks don't matter in television debates. They sometimes do - as we all saw in 1984, when Brian Mulroney eviscerated John Turner about Liberal patronage. But much as it's important to respond to an attack promptly and efficiently (something Turner failed to do), leaders should then use whatever time is left to return to their party's issues in as much detail as possible. That's what voters want to see and hear most of all.

In this week's debates, that's where Stephen Harper and Jack Layton have a decided advantage. Whether the punditocracy and chattering classes approve or not, the opposition leaders have been unveiling reams of policy in this two-stage campaign. The Prime Minister, meanwhile, has been content to say little and occasionally emerge from his campaign bubble to hug a child or take a swipe at his opponents.

If Mr. Martin contents himself with simply critiquing Conservative and NDP policy over and over, he'll lose the debates. It won't matter how prime ministerial he looks or sounds - voters want to hear from him on the issues that matter to him and to them.

The armchair experts will ask the usual questions. What about Stephen Harper's new haircut? Jack Layton's taste in neckties? How many glasses of water Paul Martin consumes? Do those things have any impact on tonight's outcome?

Not really. The media grossly overstates the importance of a politician's image, voice and mannerisms. By the time any debate takes place, voters are already reasonably familiar with a particular leader's style and appearance. In the absence of Paul Martin showing up with a beer in one hand and a container of popcorn in the other, most Canadians already know what he looks like and how he expresses himself. Voters are smarter - and fairer - than "image consultants" claim.

To really figure out who wins the debate, the best and simplest way will be to time each leader with a stopwatch. The guy who accumulates the greatest number of minutes talking about his party's issues wins. Simple.

All contents copyright 2006 warrenkinsella.com.
No reproduction whatsoever, in any form, without permission.