I'm not actually blaming the media in that post you've linked to. I'm flabbergasted, actually, that in that Globe article they seem to be tilting towards Harper and away from Martin, which I'm totally not used to.

You'll find plenty of complaints about the press on my blog, but that post isn't one of them.

Oh, I know. My link precision was set on general to point out the grumpy as opposed to picking out exactly.

The "heard about the debate" thing comes from research that shows that people who hear about the debate (summation and 'framing' from the press, along with accounts from friends) are as affected by it as those who actually watch it firsthand. (There's a BJPS article by Blais on this topic that looked at the case of the '88 leaders debate.)

But I swear that there's an article that there's a measurable difference in perceptions of who 'won' the debate between those who just watch the debate versus those who watch the debate AND the 'post-game' show where the press adds its framing to the debate... that is, that people abandon their own impressions once the press shows them what to think. Scary. I just can't find the article I'm thinking of.

I am hoping that people abandon their own impressions on most matters once I show them what to think but that is only for recreational purposes.

ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Wake me up when it's over.

I hesitate to make this observation because it is has generally received sneers in the past, but I still think the main problem is that most Canadians don't like right wing policies because right wing policies are not generally in their interests. It's true that Harper et al. have made several new more or less innocuous proposals this time around, but overall big deficits, no health care, and fewer government services just doesn't appeal to people. It's more or less an open secret that conservative governments deliberately run up deficits so that even if a left leaning party gets in later on they will be unable to spend and will therefore have to make budget cuts to schools, roads, health etc. for years (and this is all stuff that we’ve paid for and aren't getting). So essentially small government is an end in itself for these guys. In fact there's a nice article in one of last year’s New Yorkers (April 12th, I believe) about neo-cons vs. moderate conservatives that deals with some of this. It quotes Newt Gingrich as saying that Reagan was "pretty cheerful about saying that he didn't worry nearly as much about deficits as he worried about cutting taxes and strengthening the military" because big deficits, according to the writer of the article, "take care of themselves by intimidating (in this case) Congress into cutting spending."

Anyway, I think media and other elites in Canada want a conservative government because elites are very susceptible to ideological fashion and the flavour of the decade is right wing libertarianism. But ordinary dullards have more substantive issues to worry about so they’re less impressed by this kind of purity of thought.

Anyway, I have to go wrap presents. I don't think anyone really wants to be having to think about an election right now. Why couldn't they have settled their argument and had us vote in the summer?

Why isn't the NDP proposing mandatory summer elections - results for people!

Another thing - I feel like I'm missing the pulse of THIS country sometimes because I generally don't watch American news, I don't read American papers, and I don't read American commentary/blogs.

Marian says: "...Anyway, I think media and other elites in Canada want a conservative government because elites are very susceptible to ideological fashion...this kind of purity of thought...". Not to "sneer", but can I ask what kind of Bizarro world are you living in Ms.Mxyzptlk?

If only if Marian's observation were true, if only....what a wonderful world it would be...
"I see skies of blue and clouds of white
The bright blessed day, the dark sacred night
And I think to myself, what a wonderful world..."

And I could unhitch the U-Haul.

You're all fluff, SayNay.

I'll have to assume that you write for a newspaper. If not, you should try your hand at it. Or maybe TV is more in your line?

No, again, I'm serious Marian - you must be from another dimension, and how do I get there?

It sounds like a wonderful place esp. if in this "parallel universe" of yours, the bizarro-CBC is a "conservative" mouthpiece - actually run by adults who know the "facts of life" (which we all know are inherently "conservative") rather than by our arrested-development adolescents who only know "irony" - take me there, now!

Manners!

The article cited is from the Globe and Mail, which is one of two conservative national papers. At what point did anyone mention the CBC? Seriously. Do you read at all?

Speaking of cold hard facts: could you refer to something other than fictional television characters to make your point? I mean, what does this television show have to do with real life? And irony? What are you talking about? You sound like a schizophrenic.

That request for manners was aimed both west to Peterborough and east to Budapest.

Referring to me as a schizophrenic, would be considered an insult to schizophrenics, everywhere.

Hi Alan! Nice post! I seem to be getting loads of traffic from the Roundtable, though maybe it is my garrish picture? Oh wait.. Okay, maybe it is the name of my blog? Hmmm...

Anyways, hope you are having a great day today :)