Certainly, paul martin, with a spanking-new 27-point lead in the polls, has pulled off the best Lazarus act since Pierre Trudeau quit the leadership of the Liberals, took the job back and led his party to a stunning majority in 1980.

And, certainly, Stephen Harper is on the losing end of the most stunning reversal of fortune since Joe Clark won the May 1979 election, forgot to count heads in a minority government and found himself a former prime minister the following February.
But there were cracks in the Conservative machine months ago that went unnoticed because we were so preoccupied with Martin’s flaws.

So, just as we have looked at Martin’s weaknesses and mistakes, let’s do a pre-election assessment of Harper and his party:

> Kissing babies. Going to barbecues, making insipid speeches to service clubs and kissing babies may be occasions for mockery, but they are also things a professional politician must do.

Harper has to come to terms with this if he is to manage the transition to politician from backroom strategist. Learning to smile (instead of looking like he is in the middle of a rectal exam) would help, as well.

Anyone who has the opportunity to engage Harper in conversation will probably come away impressed with his intellect, sincerity and resolve for a better Canada. This is why Harper has a small coterie of admirers in the Parliamentary Press Gallery Association — in spite of his disdain for the media.

Most Canadians, however, won’t get the opportunity to engage Harper in conversation and will have depend on what they see and hear via the media. This is why a professional politician has to have the discipline not to let petulance show.

What would have happened if Harper had followed up on the gains of the June 2004 election by not disappearing for an entire summer, and had granted a few interviews and flipped a few burgers?

> Belinda. Lyndon Johnson advised keeping friends in politics close — but hugging enemies until they jiggle. It is truly astonishing that Harper and the Calgary cowpokes now occupying the Office of the Leader of the Opposition forgot about that piece of advice when it came to Belinda
Stronach.

Sure, her defection was a staggering example of political opportunism. But Harper and his inner circle did everything to belittle his leadership rival but show her the door.

She was dropped from a leading role in the Ontario election campaign. She was openly mocked by OLO staff to the point at which a photo op her office organized is cited at candidate college as an example of what not to do.

And the last straw was Harper summoning Stronach to his office to bawl her out like an errant schoolgirl for not staying on message — his message, that is.

Harper should have kept his rival busy. This is what jobs with the word “special” in the title are for.

> Belinda and grewal backfires. Regardless of what happens to the Conservatives in the next election, they will have left behind two casebook backfires.

On the morning of the Stronach defection, Harper was as entitled as anyone to look surprised. However, the Conservative leader and his handlers made a mistake that gave the Liberals a free ride. The ungracious reaction from Harper and other Conservatives became the story in the same news cycle.

When your political opponents do something that’s bound to attract criticism, don’t distract the media.

Perhaps Conservative rage over Stronach impaired judgment when Gurmant Grewal informed his political masters he had talked to the Liberals about switching and surreptitiously taped the conversations.
Clearly nobody took the time to do an upside/downside analysis.

Nobody looks good in the Grewal affair. But Harper would have looked a lot better had he simply sent Grewal packing. It is very human to seek revenge. But principle should always take precedence over human nature.

> Negative doesn’t pay in Canada. Sure the Liberals cashed in on the Mulroney government’s ethical failings when they defeated the Conservatives in 1993. But they knew enough not to campaign on sleaze alone.

People forget that, on the eve of the 1993 election, the Liberals and the Conservatives were evenly matched in the polls. The Liberals put together a very impressive election platform in the famous Red Book.

Never mind that many promises were never kept. It worked.

@page_break@Still, a sudden revival of the Liberals in the polls could work to the Conservatives’ advantage if someone on Harper’s team remembers that strategy is as important as tactics.

With the Conservatives so weak, the media will appoint themselves the Opposition and focus on Liberal shortcomings — provided Harper’s team does not distract them.
IE