Mr. Speaker, with the greatest of respect to the Honourable Member, that is a proven formula for disaster.
So sayeth Warren Kinsella in response to Michael Den Tandt's suggestion Trudeau get out a bit more (though with a caveat that he not make any more major gaffes).
Kinsella's not wrong on his ten points - they certainly lay out the safest way to play the game. It's a game he knows well. To win at that game, which does seem to be their objective, Trudeau and his team would be well-served by following those commandments to the letter.
Yet Den Tandt makes an excellent point, too:
As in, one who wouldn't play the typical Game of Seats to gain power, but was committed to changing the top-down, message-machine politics culture we have to one that focused on engagement and civic empowerment.
That hasn't been what we've seen so far, with non-open open nominations and the like; my suspicion is the reason for this is that team Trudeau never fully internalized what their narrative meant, and therefore have never gone all-in. They're still playing the same game as everyone else.
It doesn't have to be that way.
Here's where I land on Kinsella's points (and yeah, to read them all you'll have to click on the link above):
1 - Yes. The "middle class" has become to Canadian politics what the "Third World" was to the cold war. Machievelli said you could win the nobility or you could win the people, not both; well, democracies aren't princedoms. Leaders unite nations; leave dividing and conquering to the other guys.
2 - Yes, with a caveat...
3 - ... that they not be small, imposed solutions, like a bag of goodies for the crowd. This decide, sell, defend approach leads to piecemeal funding and fuels our growing structural problems; what's the point in funding hip and knee replacements without addressing diabetes? Or Type II diabetes without addressing transit, or service access, or food deserts?
The real solution here is for team Trudeau to go back to their roots; the biggest idea they should have is how to change the way policy is created and citizens engaged. They could start by reading Discuss, Decide, Do.
4 - a quibble, perhaps, but Trudeau shouldn't try to sound or look more mature; he should become more mature. The same thing applies to the others, especially sweater-vest Harper. Politics has taken "fake if 'til you make it" to extremes, leading to tone-deaf, cognitively dissonant politicians who act, and act badly.
Instead of trying to look or sound like a mature leader, how's about working to become one?
5 - Agree. Obama might be a complete rage horse, but he's also thoughtful, and geeky, and sometimes even witty. By letting these genuine qualities bubble to the surface, those willing to give him a chance saw the human, not the role nor the actor. Whether Trudeau has the right qualities within himself, I don't know, but if he doesn't - the people will find out eventually. And nobody likes being sold a bill of goods.
6 - I disagree with the premise of this point. The frame created revolves around selling the leader as demi-god. It makes for easier, simplified sales, but is deeply anti-democratic. Besides, a good leader sources good ideas anywhere, and fosters collaborations, and focus on supporting the people - never on themselves.
We don't have many of these around.
7 - Probably a good idea, unless it's a helluvan opportunity to pivot.
8 - culture eats strategy for breakfast. Strategy is internal; culture is for everyone. Talk about your culture far and wide; your foes will take it for strategy and drive themselves bonkers as they become conduits for your message and can't figure out how.
9 - same as point 1. It takes all of us; why not get us talking, together?
10 - same as 8. It goes back to Trudeau's far-distant beginning, really, and the discussion around values. What are Trudeau's personal values? What does he stand for/against? If he stands for respectful dialogue and means it, he will consciously bet his words so as not to say things counter to his values (no cheap shots, etc). When you have internalized what you stand for and against, rather than just paying lip-service to it, what you say will only ever represent who you are.
Voila, my 10 bitcoins. Keep in mind Kinsella gets the game-as-usual far better than I do; he gets paid big bucks for his expertise. The people actually calling the shots are equally used to playing that way, although they once promised to think differently.
Do they truly believe change is necessary enough to change themselves? Time will tell.