A smaller public sector. More training for skilled trades (unless, perhaps, you're in the music industry?). More affordable hydro rates. Lower taxes. No more budget deficits (notwithstanding those lower taxes).
Hudak clearly has a straighforward, sensible plan. It's as simple as, say, subways, subways, subways.
Who can argue with paying less but getting more? Sounds great, sign me up!
Until you start asking questions. Messaging, of course, isn't about answering questions - that's why we don't call it Answer Period. So long as you stick your message, you don't need to answer troubling questions. If really pushed, why, you can simple revert to attacking your opponent.
The problem with this politics-by-numbers scheme is that when policy makers don't answer questions, they're also not thinking through implications. The reason we have debate isn't to make others look bad, it's to kick the tires of a given policy and make sure there are no gaping holes.
Which there clearly are in Hudak's Million Jobs plan (but hey it sounds great, doesn't it?). He's not alone on this front - there's holes in each of the platforms. This is in no small part because we don't do debate in our Parliaments any more. There's too much messiness in that process. It's far better to simplify one's message, spend the period between campaigns undermining opponents and then really hammer them over election time.
If you win a majority, after all, you can almost do what you want, no questions asked.
Is it any wonder people are crying foul about the function of our democratic system these days? That stench they're reacting to is the sickening form of civic engagement.