[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[crazy canuck]

The other big difference with basketball is that the kids that are very skilled at young ages are the ones that are probably not going to grow much more.  There are some outliers who grow a number inches even in college and so you get stories of point guards growing into forwards. But that is rare.  It is the young gangly kids that are probably going to be the college and pro stars.

[Josephus]

I just don't think voters care.

No, they don't.

In this day and age, unfortunately, it comes down to image and impressions. Who has the better soundbite? Who projects themselves better? Who appears to speak for the common man/woman?

Elections are nothing more than popularity contests now. I mean, I guess there is a large perecentage who by and large vote along their party lines regardless of who is leader; but probably just as large a percentage who are swayed by the image of the party's leader.

Hasn't that always been the case? Charismatic leaders win. JFK trouncing Nixon because he looked better on tv, Obama outshining McCain, even Trudeau got in because he's more likeable then robotic Harper (Harper might have beaten a less charming opponent).

Hell, Caesar had a whole book and PR campaign to win over the populace

It's just that at this point in time conservatives are better at the messaging on popularity contests. That's partly them being better at new media and having Russian aid, and partly liberals miscalculating and championing things that aren't that popular. It just seems less fair now because our side is losing the popularity contest 

Canadian culture and identity is clearly under attack

Meh, eliminated two years in a row now.  I think we got the message Canadian kids are no longer the only ones who know how to play the game.

Canadian kids are playing too much soccer 

[Josephus]

So you can't sleep too much on Gretzky's athletic ability.  There is the time where he absolutely smoked Pele, Bjorn Borg and Sugar Ray Leonard in a 60 m race.

I'd never heard that before. But it coincides with something my gym teacher used to tell us back in the early 80s. Gretzky was a great hockey player because he was Canadian. That is to say, if he was Italian, he would be a great soccer player. I think he was a great athlete, he just honed his skills towards being a good hockey player.

[HVC]

Gretzky was 21 to peles 42, but still.

[Grey Fox]

Trump is not giving up on the "51st state" nonsense.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-canada-tariffs-51st-state-news-conference-1.7424897

Prior to the election, Trump was talking about using tariffs to get Canadian concessions on border security.  It was still fairly grotesque, but at least border security is a valid issue to talk about.

Now he's saying he will use "economic force" to get Canada to join the US.

What the fuck do you do about that as Canada (putting aside we have a lame duck leader apparently for much of the next year)?

Hope Congress isn't interested into waging an economic war of conquest against Canada or become the biggest state in the Union.

[Sheilbh]

OK, so maybe professionalism is something that politicians are trying to move away from, although I'd argue that it's not so much professionalism as being inauthentic that is their real target.  But surely little playground nicknames isn't the way to do it? 

I totally agree on authenticity.

And I think this is wider than politics. I'm a lawyer but I can't think of the last time I had to wear a suit. This is an age when you should bring your full "authentic self" to work. So I think what is "professional" has and is shifting.

Just yesterday I saw a piece in the Guardian about the artistic producer of various big shows for popstars who noted that fans sniff out and hate "inauthenticity". There's a book I've ordered on the culture of immediacy - both in removing mediating aspects of our culture but also simply showing, recognising and being ourselves with "no filter" via social media (as an old school leftie, I would just note that that is exactly what is being monetised by those companies - so we culturally celebrate and think we'll be fulfilled precisely by becoming monetisable for the companies whose platform we use to express "ourselves").

I don't think people are stupid, so I think we both respond to that immediacy/authenticity, while recognising and admiring the artistry with which its been created.

In terms of politics I think liberals do aspire to a sort of dignity in politics and a form of "professionalism". I think that's admirable but I think that what is professional is a social construct. I think there is a danger of accidentally becoming a bit fuddy duddy and mistaking the form of politics people came up with in the 90s for the substance. Basically ending up a bit like those Edwardian politicians lost in the inter-war years,  or the more formal, starchy politicians faced with the impact of Clinton. I don't know what politics will look or that Trump and the libidinal kicks he gives his fans is the answer, but it's something new and I'll probably hate it. You  might too

Having said all that I think it's in flux and I don't know what it'll settle into. Purely personally I'm fully content with being like a stranded Victorian in the 21st century (but I'm not running for high office)

If 'the way that Trump does things' is going to be the playbook for the Conservative Party of Canada, I'm going to get off the bus.  Mind you, it's not like there are any better options.  The Liberal Party really doesn't align with my values, the NDP doesn't want the votes of people like me, the People's Party are Green Party are both vanity cults of two of the worst leaders in the history of Canadian politics.

As a tribal Tory-hater who couldn't stand and strongly objects to the politics of Jeremy Corbyn, I feel your pain.

I suppose that is because you don't know the narratives surrounding him within Canada.

Absolutely fair.

Quiet you, let the myth live on

Yes! Because the myth matters more than reality. But even in reality there was a big divide between people who listened to the debate on radio v watched it on TV (maybe even significant enough in a really tight election). There wasn't another Presidential debate until 1976 and everywhere in the world it became clear that the skillset of a radio era politician wasn't necessarily the same as for TV.

Personally though - I think "politics" should be seen as a profession like any other.  Something you have to gain experience in, earn your stripes in.  You can't really just come and parachute in to the top job.  The only time I can think of that happening was Brian Mulroney - and I think that is a cautionary tale.  I'll admit though that this is an unpopular opinion, and "career politician" is seen as a negative.

Yeah I think politics is very difficult and like any other area of life experience helps. It's not just about administration or even policy - the skillset of a fantastic civil servant or think tanker are not the same as an effective political leader. In many ways those are the least important elements precisely because politicians can rely on civil servants and policy wonks.

There's nothing more exposing than an election campaign so I think going for someone outside politics is always going to be a risk. Obviously as I say I think what we expect and want from political leaders is shifting - so I'm still not sure what the answer.

[Syt]

Trump is not giving up on the "51st state" nonsense.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-canada-tariffs-51st-state-news-conference-1.7424897

Prior to the election, Trump was talking about using tariffs to get Canadian concessions on border security.  It was still fairly grotesque, but at least border security is a valid issue to talk about.

Now he's saying he will use "economic force" to get Canada to join the US.

What the fuck do you do about that as Canada (putting aside we have a lame duck leader apparently for much of the next year)?

[viper37]

What the fuck do you do about that as Canada (putting aside we have a lame duck leader apparently for much of the next year)?

Oh, I don't know?  Maybe begin by admitting you (as in, "members of the Conservative party") were wrong by singing the praise of Donald Trump and inviting all his friends over for a chit chat, trying to appease him, etc, use the hardline, prepare for (economic) war, brace for impact, gather your allies, prepare for the worst.

It's time to set aside our rivalry with Denmark and ally ourselves.

[viper37]

For many years there were only a couple of countries who were competitive with our kids.  Now, as you point out, we lose to the likes of Latvia. I have heard a lot of theories as to why our kids are no longer elite in the world.  The one that sounds like it is plausible is that only rich kids can make it through all the camps and select teams because only their parents can pay all those additional costs.  And as a result the pool of potential players has become diminished from years past.

I have no idea if that is accurate.  What is your take?

It's one part of the answer.

Canadian diversity is another.  Not all Canadian parents now feel attracted to hockey.  A Punjabi dad may not be as invested in hockey as another Canadian, he might see his boy in another sport.  We may be 41,5 million, but interest in hockey has not grown linearly with that population.  It's just a fact.

Lack of infrastructures.  Our infrastructures are getting old.  It wouldn't be much of a problem in the past, but with global warming, we need excellent cooling system to maintain the ice early & late everywhere.  It costs a lot of $$$ for cities & neighbourhoods that can't all afford it.  Even less opportunities for kids to play.  For example, my nephew plays hockey, he has to travel 20 minutes every week end to practice.  It's a limiting factor: ice availability.  So, he plays for fun, in his case, not because he's going to become a superstar, but maybe he, or others, would have become better if there had been more availability near them when they could start younger so could play more often.  Repeat this scenario everywhere in the country.

Can't play outdoor anymore.  In my youth, I could play on a frozen lake nearby.  Even if that lake still existed, there's no way we could play there anymore, the ice would be way too thin.  Parents I know who are trying to make an outdoor ice are having a hell of a time keeping it frozen for a month & half during winter.  There's not much opportunity to practice your shots.

Meanwhile, my other nephew is still playing soccer in January...  When I was his age, soccer ended by late October and we used to shovel snow on the field sometimes before playing.  By November, we were playing hockey or broom ball.

[Barrister]

So you can't sleep too much on Gretzky's athletic ability.  There is the time where he absolutely smoked Pele, Bjorn Borg and Sugar Ray Leonard in a 60 m race.

I'd never heard that before. But it coincides with something my gym teacher used to tell us back in the early 80s. Gretzky was a great hockey player because he was Canadian. That is to say, if he was Italian, he would be a great soccer player. I think he was a great athlete, he just honed his skills towards being a good hockey player.

So on the one hand if you look at the video HVC provided - Gretzky is just scrawny. His height at 6 foot isn't terribly impressive for an athlete.  He was never known for his athleticism.

But a 60m race almost certainly favours a hockey player.  In hockey you get on the ice, you work really hard for 45 seconds, then you get off.  It's very much a "fast twitch" sport.  Soccer on the other hand is much more an endurance sport - players are out there for most of the game.  Pele (even at his age) would probably have killed Gretzky at an endurance race.  The others - boxing and tennis aren't speed sports at all.

[Josephus]

I'm sure Gretzky would have adapted to being a soccer player though. It's like even in high school, the guys who were good in gym class were normally pretty good at everything. Like me, for example, I sucked at ALL sports.

[crazy canuck]

Steve Nash is an example of that.  Raised playing soccer and started playing basketball in senior high.

Another example is Akeem the Dream.  Started as a soccer goal tender - but being 7' has other advantages. 

[Barrister]

I'm sure Gretzky would have adapted to being a soccer player though. It's like even in high school, the guys who were good in gym class were normally pretty good at everything. Like me, for example, I sucked at ALL sports.

So I'm sure Gretzky would be a good soccer player.

World's best?  No idea.

The thing I wish I had known as a kid though is people get good at sports - by practicing sports.  So it's no surprise a "jock" is good at sports - because they like playing sports.  Or no surprise I sucked at sports - because I didn't play them.

I was never going to be great at hockey, for example, but I quit early because I wasn't any good at it.  If I would have stuck with it I could have been as good as mediocre at it!

[Oexmelin]

If playing soccer would shut Gretzky up, I am all for it.

[crazy canuck]

what has he been saying?