Crybaby Liberals, Part 2
The previous blog post was seen as a might bit unfair by a couple of folks on twitter. Particularly in my thought that Ms. Murray and Coyne were so off base that their position was quite farcical. Let me explain in more depth the problems with their position.
Firstly, they’ve warped the idea of the open primary. Yes, the goal was supposed to make the party more open to regular Canadians to get a feel for it and to commit themselves as people sympathetic to Liberal principles. But to pull it to an extreme and say that was the only way that supporters were meant to be misses the point entirely.
It was also to open a channel for liberals across Canada to look at the party and see the leaders describe their sense of a greater Liberalism. And then pick that leader to believe in, volunteer for, and contribute to. To have their personal choice counter-acted seems foolhardy and destructive.
The system was also set forth to provide an avenue for engagement, which had been advertised for months and received almost 55,000 supporters from across the country to weigh in on the party and be engaged with.
This forgets about the fundamental organizing requirements for the party. When it was implemented in Alberta on the provincial scene with the provincial Liberals the updated lists were sent out each month and not automatically as soon as a person signed up. Implementing that system, and the arguments put in the party, made it clear that there would be a process where data would be collected, checked, and then released. It was not to be a free for all from the get go, which is important to avoid list-dropping (where thousands of supporters and memberships would be dropped on unsuspecting data-entry volunteers) or abuses of the system.
If they expected immediate and unfettered access to all of the supporters then they were wrong and weren’t listening. There needs to be a functional process in handling the immense amount of data that the party is now handling from the Canadian electorate.
Following this is their quaint expectation that there’d be an instant database of Liberal supporters that they could latch onto to start firing off their messaging to. Well, no. It’s not that easy. You need to make it past the second installment of $25,000 (showing your commitment) and then show that you can attract people to the party. Are these other candidates attracting members to the party? I don’t know. We will know by March 3rd, though.
And then we’ll see how well these candidates, with their marshalled supporters, will do in the leadership race, with the almost two months they’ll have with the fully unrestrained database of supporters at their and every other party’s disposal.
My guess is quite badly if this is how their campaigns operate.
Secondly, we are seeing the hallmarks of the Liberal-loser mentality displayed in broad daylight — where if a person can’t win under a certain set of rules they complain about those rules, and then off and go to the media with those complaints. It’s a joke this time around. Almost. Except the joke isn’t just on the candidates themselves but everyone around them and the party at large.
Coyne and Murray going to the press, labeling the party as anti-democractic and fundamentally at odds with the membership, help nobody and squanders every effort the people in the party spend day in and day out earning the trust of Canadians. It is farcical and down right mind numbing the stunt these two leadership candidates are pulling right now.
Not only is it upsetting to see it done against Liberals it is also deeply disturbing to see this trend in the party attack Canadian democracy at large. Whenever an article like this is released it discourages the voting public from engaging because, guess what, it just confirms their suspicions that they can’t engage because there’s no point. Opinions confirmed and biases matched, and the Liberals and the general status of Canadian democracy is knocked flat onto their back.
What this ultimately does is pushes people away, undermines the process, and keeps the Liberals from building towards the 2015 federal election.
Thirdly, it is patently obvious that when you sign up on a website owned by another candidate that you are signing up to be their supporter. To make the argument that this isn’t the case is beyond laughable and makes me wonder what those two campaigns are thinking.
So I don’t know where they’re coming from this on. It seems down right disingenuous from their camp and thoroughly undermining the process at large. Sadly this’ll hurt the party more than their individual campaigns.