April 26, 2007

New Liberal Ad Misses the Mark

How could I have liked the first one so much and dislike the second one?

The two ads were similar except in the first one, the ad focused on Dion being a leader, and countering Tory ads quite effectively in the minds of the average Canadian.

L'analyse...

(Cue highlights from good first ad) The second ad takes the better parts of the first ad, (it actually is a little sped up, FASTER DOUBLE FIST PUMP!) and then goes into an attack on Harper’s environmental position.

Harper is pretty vulnerable on the environment, despite actually accomplishing more than us (yes, our record really is that bad). The Tories recent Kyoto smear campaign did not help their cause.

How do the Liberals attack Stephen Harper?

(Cue the icebergs melting) melting ice…the theme is spring…

(Cue the terrified baby) OH NO NOT THE TERRIFIED BABY! TROGDOR IS GOING TO COME BURNINATE THE BABY!

Screw us people! Climate change only affects the children. Don’t like the environment for you. Do it for the children!

(Cue the Liberal Environmental Record) The smokestacks are always ugly, but I would seriously be more worried that it’s Judgment Day because the sky is like totally on fire in the ad…

(Cue Dion speaking coherent English) The message is good, but I will be honest, my neutral viewing panel of my mom and my cousin were totally turned off by the baby. Dion’s message was ok, but that is only if you buy into the theory that

A) the environment is important and
B) no other factor, like jobs, family, or the economy is more pivotal to your vote than an iceberg at the North Pole.

I really liked the first ad more, it was about leadership. This ad is about the environment and we got rid of the positive side of our ads with the terrified baby and red sky.

People get Dion likes the environment…can we seriously move on to more important things…

Labels:

14 Commentaires:

Blogger Debra Drainie a dit...

Leadership doesn't have to mean the tough guy macho persona. In countless cases, that has proven to be a facade for poor judgment and bad decision making. Personally I prefer personal integrity, lots of brain power, courage and a dogged determination.

4/26/2007 5:03 p.m.  
Blogger Kingston a dit...

Debra. Here is my problem with Mr.Dion, Mr. Dion is not offering me any other policy to compare the CPC too, and please do not trot out the Carbon Plan they have posted on their website, it says nothing and all those expenses will be passed on to the consumer. Baird trots out numbers that the Liberal party trys to defend by saying Sir N. Stern say they will be worse if we do not do anything. They admit there will be "short term pain for long term gain" where is the pain going to be, who is going to suffer it, what regions, what industries are going to take the punch to the gut, how many jobs do we lose in the short term, Telling a guy he is losing his way to support his family is only short term doesn't meant alot. Give me some gd numbers, not just the Cons are not doing enough, I am looking at the reaction of the Green plan right now and both sides are peed off, to me,, well that means we might have found that happy medium.

4/26/2007 5:35 p.m.  
Blogger Danick a dit...

Why should the liberals be afraid to attack...???

4/26/2007 8:26 p.m.  
Blogger Antonio a dit...

Im saying we dont need terrified babies to make the point how bad harper and the Tories are...

4/26/2007 8:45 p.m.  
Blogger fatness a dit...

I think by showing terrified kittens, and making Harper look a bit green and scaly would have made for a far more effective attack ad.

And maybe throwing in a shot of soldiers walking in the streets of Saskatoon or something.

4/26/2007 9:07 p.m.  
Blogger UWHabs a dit...

I didn't find it that bad, since at least it was mostly positive, with only the thin remarks against the Conservatives. Maybe putting the baby on it was a bit overblown, but there wasn't anything seriously wrong with anything in it. I liked it better than the first one.

4/26/2007 9:14 p.m.  
Blogger Sheeple a dit...

Kingston,

Pretty brave asking for a liberal policy that can compare to the CPC policy, then add the caveat that you don't want to hear the Carbon Budget.

Well guess what? I'm GONNA talk about the Carbon Budget.

Let's start with some credentials first. The Carbon Budget has been praised by the BEST environmental groups in Canada, including the Pembina Institute, the David Suzuki Foundation, the Sierra Club of Canada, etc.

Now let's talk about expenses. You say that costs will be passed onto consumers. Interesting, yet there isn't really much to back that up. I mean, it isn't at all clear that's what will happen.

You also completely neglect to mention the fact that both Dion and Stern see tackling climate change as THE PRO ECONOMIC GROWTH STRATEGY of the 21 century. Why's that? Business innovation, technological development, being able to compete on internation carbon markets (which the Carbon Budget positions us well for).

So Where is the pain going to be? Where the large industries are located. But guess what? The Carbon Budget creates opportunities for companies to recoup funds they lose to environmental fines if they go over their Carbon Budget. Guess what else? The funds will be reinvested in the province and territory where the money came from in the first place. What does this mean? It means more green jobs and more technological development in those areas.

The question, 'how many jobs are we going to lose in the short term,' is loaded. It completely ignores statistics that show job INCREASES when moving toward a sustainable economy. Why? Because a lot of the infrastructure we currently have needs to be refurbished and replaced, to become as environmentally efficient as possible.

So, to sum up, the Carbon Budget is a credible plan to meet our KYOTO targets, as evidenced by the praise heaped on it by environmental organizations across the country. It is also a pro economic strategy, will increase jobs, and increase technological development. Finally, it WON'T disadvantage one region or province over another, because funds and environmental projects will be kept in those areas.

4/26/2007 9:58 p.m.  
Blogger Sheeple a dit...

Antonio:
"Harper is pretty vulnerable on the environment, despite actually accomplishing more than us (yes, our record really is that bad)."

Really? Where'd you get that credible bit of information, I'd be really interested in finding out. I mean, really. What credible environmental organization thinks that Harper has done a good job on the environmental file? What credible environmental organization has heaped as much praise on Harper as they did back during Project Green and the 2005 Budget.

Back up your assertions

4/26/2007 10:07 p.m.  
Blogger Debra Drainie a dit...

Kingston,
Terence Corcoran is using his bully pulpit to influence the national agenda on behalf of the CPC and big business. That's the plan, if they can make it sound like there's howling on both sides, it must be balanced and therefore ok. "Look everybody we're getting the job done."

4/26/2007 10:39 p.m.  
Blogger Kingston a dit...

Well Sheeple, Interesting reply, food for thought, Now I will base my reply on life experience and the information I have been able to obtain , the Ontario Assoc of Elect Suppliers, The day after the Green Plan was announced, said they well be paying a 1 billion into the fund per year, and yes they have announced they will be in turn charge the consumer, you expect big oil to do any different. We do not have the technology in place at this time to offer the jobs to the people that will be screwed over if we rush to do in four years what was scheduled for 13. If you feel we do, fine list the green companies who are out there screaming for new employees that are paying the same wage level as the big unionized industries. I read what the LPC has to say on their web site and it is more about banking money that you can withdraw after you pass on your cost to consumers and then you can get around to upgrading your plants. Actually, I am totally confused why big industry is not all over this plan, its win win for them. Remember Mr.Dion himself said when asked that he expects big business to be responsible and due whats right. What is right to them is making money for the shareholders.

4/26/2007 11:02 p.m.  
Blogger Sheeple a dit...

Kingston,

We Do have the technology in place. The Stern Review is clear about this. So too are many credible environmental orgs, pembina institute, etc., included.

I'm not too sure what the Green plan is that you are referring to. Is that the Green Party's plan? I haven't read it yet.

I can say that, yes, the Carbon Budget sets strong reductions standards, but is also fair. It is fair by industry sector, and it is fair federally.

The plan creates financial penalties for companies that do not meet their emissions targets. The funds can be accessed by companies for projects that will demonstrably reduce their emissions. However, if the companies have not committed their funds within 2 years time, the funds will be invested into green energy or other environmental projects within the province or territory where the funds came from.

It is right for companies to make money, yes, absolutely. But government and society creates the rules by which the market will work. The Carbon Budget rewrites the rules of profit making for companies, because they will need to factor in the COSTS of Carbon into their bottom line.

Dion is pursuing what is called an ecological modernization, natural capitalist, or environmental capitalist route to creating sustainability in Canada.

4/26/2007 11:26 p.m.  
Blogger Antonio a dit...

Are you referring to the budget that never passed sheeple?

4/26/2007 11:37 p.m.  
Blogger Antonio a dit...

oops
never got implemented

4/26/2007 11:37 p.m.  
Blogger Kingston a dit...

Sheeple, thanks for the reply. I quoted a fact in my previous post concerning just one industry already announcing they will pass on the cost, so Mr.Dion's goal of corp responsibility will not fly in my opinion. I asked you to list up and running green industry in this country that will be home to the misplaced workers that will no doubt be losing their jobs if we rush to accomplish a 15 year project in four years. You answer that Sir N. Stern says, Pembenia say, They say nothing, Have the LPC tell me where these jobs are, you say that these jobs will be created by the revising of infrastructure required to be a green economy, I again ask you to list these industries that are ready to absorb these workers, you cannot build infrastructure for technology that doesn't exist or has yet to be prove.

I stand corrected on my Green Plan reference, it is the Carbon Plan, I again state it says nothing except that industry will contribute to a fund and are entitled to withdraw up to 80%percent back to use in Carbon emission projects, makes me wonder were the other 20% is going since we are talking some serious cash here, 200 million a year from the electricity producers of ON alone. but I digress, Until such time as the LPC release information concerning what actually the short term pain will be, who it will effect in human and industry terms then I will have no choice but to believe the numbers the CPC put forth. A reasoned person as I am sure you understand can only make an informed decision on the facts that they have on hand. If the LPC wants to be at the front of this issue then they should at least produce a forecast of the "short term" pain that even they are predicting.

4/27/2007 8:29 a.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home