Yes, some are good ideas, like Carney about the economy, and some are stupid ideas, like Poilievre or Trump about just about everything. But good or bad, they may not be able to get what they want. They are dealing with expectations that may or may not be achieved in reality.
Now, good leaders can adjust their ideas to deal with a newly-perceived reality - it is one of the marks of a leader, in fact.
But stupid leaders will try to twist reality around to match the results they want, regardless of the facts, and then they try to get everyone else on board with their nuttiness - as Catherine O'Hara said in Beetlejuice, "If you don't let me do what I want, I'm going to go crazy and I'll take you with me!"
Here's what I'm talking about:
About Carney's speech
Former Liberal party director Jamie Carroll analyzes Carney's immediate problem:
The Line
The Line
Jamie Carroll: Carney has a plan. He also has a major problem
Already frustrated young voters need more than promises that the sacrifices to come will eventually pay off.
...Carney still has a major problem that the speech didn’t address. So we have a 10-year plan. What about right now?
By choosing to speak to students, Carney really highlighted — perhaps more so than he intended — that wedge between building for tomorrow and addressing the issues that need addressing right frickin’ now.
Carney is apparently frustrated by the pace of … everything. While the public service is most often the long pole in the tent, a minority government has — and will increasingly be — a contributor to that frustration.
The Liberals lost their chance at a majority in April because Pierre Poilievre and the Conservative party won over voters in the 905 and 519 on issues of crime, affordability and access to housing.
For Carney and the Liberal party, if there’s any chance of getting those voters back, he needs to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time: to wit, he needs to be able to build for tomorrow while addressing those programs and priorities that meet today’s problems, especially for those specific voters.
That, in my opinion, is going to be the hard part of the Carney government: I believe the PM and his team are absolutely capable of delivering on the big-ticket, future-building stuff. It is the bread and butter of people like Carney and his clerk, Michael Sabia (who just finished delivering the first phase of the Montreal REM ahead of schedule and on budget).
But for right now, Carney’s major challenge is keeping people — like his audience last night — satisfied in the interim that any sacrifices they are being asked to make are reasonable and that the end result will be worth it. They need to see costs for housing, groceries, utilities and everything else come down. They need to have jobs when they graduate. And they need to feel safe when they walk the dog at night.
While even I admit that government spending can’t fix everything, cutting spending in that environment is an exercise fraught with risk. ...
Millennials and younger cohorts have been beaten over and over by global events and their faith in government and the global economy is basically non-existent. The idea of sacrifice for a future benefit is a big ask from these folks.
So, to answer the question asked off the top, does Carney regret being the dog that caught the car? Probably not yet, but the mandate is young.
.jpg)
.jpg)
