An Ordinary Man

Once upon a time there was an ordinary man who sought not full time work but ran for public office and won.

He attached himself to a leader who vowed to make the country unrecognizable when finished.

After several years the leader fell from power.

During the leaders tenure the ordinary man assumed ordinary roles opposing the working class and voting rights and little else.

Though he did earn a censure from the chief elections officer of the land for a misdemeanour.

Following the leaders defeat he remained quiet as successive elected leaders failed.

In a subsequent party leadership campaign with an unusual runup process he captured the limelight and won.

This launched his campaign, to lead the country..using public funds and party largesse, to employ social media, hire propagandists

and engage a growing army of domestic and foreign trolls and bots to be called upon as needed.

He chose a messaging style that was targeted at..the uninformed, those feeling displaced, overlooked and left behind.

He focussed on the leader of the government of the day and targeted him with many names including epithets but also referred to him as the “dauphin”..as he carried the name of his late father who also led the country years before.

All the while the ordinary man was building his career with antagonistic statements over the dauphins leadership, policies and even results.

He fomented “crises” intended to diminish the dauphins status, though some lacked full credibility..it mattered not.

In the face of a looming global health contagion the ordinary man initially opposed domestic relief for businesses and persons adversely affected economically..then he relented and criticized the plant forward but offered no effective alternative.

His attacks on the dauphin continued unrelenting, no plan or policy of the government escaped criticism.

All the while the ordinary man offered no effective alternatives.

The ordinary man held the dauphin accountable for all issues, whether undertaken, overlooked even successful, including those beyond government control.

An event occurred in which a group of dissatisfied populace occupied the capital city core, demanding an end measures designed to protect general health.

The economy suffered greatly during this event.

The ordinary man saw opportunity to foment further discontent and sided with the occupiers.

Subsequent actions taken by the dauphin ended the standoff but were judicially ruled unreasonable.

Those normally responsible for maintaining public protection were ineffective and not similarly censured.

The dauphins popularity fell.

The ordinary man continued to tour the country drumming up support based on his version of the dauphins errors.

Through misinformation, disinformation, outright lies, he raised the anger of a his followers, with simplistic slogans.

His methods, fuelled by a constant barrage of negativism, achieved results of increased popularity towards a goal of gaining the support of the majority.

All the while, funds flowed into the party treasury in amounts not seen before.

Contributors large and small brought gifts for which a price would likely need be paid.

The ordinary man made no promises beyond three word slogans, ignored causal facts, never held open unscripted town hall meetings or press conferences and if confronted

with an uncomfortable question, abruptly left the gathering.

All the while his statements went unchallenged by the MSM.

The ordinary man had reached heights of popularity unseen by these methods ever.

But he gave glimpses of views that were contradictory, raising eyebrows.

In a labour dispute he sided with the union.(but did he ever walk any picket line?)

In a another his non support reflected his parliamentary voting stance against organized labour.

He championed individual rights and freedoms on many occasions, then on another occasion he announced he might choose to override the constitution.

He chose to challenge the licensing of a medical professional when her views opposed those of his on a health issue.

The prospect of the ordinary man adopting positions of authority that could be perceived as opposing individual rights, rule of law and the constitution is troubling.

In speaking to a gathering of business leaders he stated his opposition to lobbyists.

All the while sitting on his right hand as principal advisor is the owner of a lobbying firm for the largest Canadian food retailer. Is he dog whistling?

His views concerning the environment, child, dental and pharmacy care, street crime, drug abuse, inflation, food bank usage, housing, fair and equitable taxation give little hint of effective solutions.

He has spoken as if uninformed, willing to ignore facts and lines of government accountability and responsibility.

All the while an impression grows that he is not working to improve the cost of or standard of living for everyone..save a select few.

Are the funds being given by donors on or offshore, a growing liability of and down payment for future obligations he must repay?

His ignorance of true causal factors behind the issues he raises increases doubt about his ability to develop lasting solutions.

The spectre appears of an ordinary man supporting the Regan and Thatcher trickle down thinking..with..

..emphasis on lower taxes, smaller government, less red tape that we have seen fail before.. is problematic.

The ordinary man has been silent on the major issue of the ever growing income and wealth gap between the upper quintile and the rest.

He lends support for capitalism, the toxic kind that supports increasing the wealth of the already wealthy....by turning a blind eye to stock options, share buybacks, capital gains exemptions…instead of encouraging those same oligarchs to re-invest in plant , labour and intellectual property.

All the while he rants about declining productivity.

The question arises, would the ordinary man invoke policies to ease the emotional and financial burdens of those below the upper quintile?

The ordinary man constantly champions for change..but shows no tangible vision or plan to bolster the the economy or the metrics of quality of life..with enhancements and initiatives to..healthcare, infrastructure, education, entrepreneurship, upward mobility, productivity or justice.

He never uses the words “corporation” and “labour” not “corporate power” or “corporate greed”. These may well be kryptonite to his ideology.

Beyond silence of effective thought on domestic issues…there are non domestic matters on which he offers little insight..be it foreign or free trade, global trade relations or balances, foreign policy, NATO involvement (except to criticize our contributions), the EU, the UN. He does offer much invective about the WEF.

He leaves too many unanswered questions.

To qualify for the task of leader, the leader must possess sound judgement, impeccable character and integrity and a balanced demeanour.

We are months way from the ultimate test..and left with empty guesses.

It is time for the ordinary man to get serious, show his mettle and dispel the image that he is little more than a vacuous and potentially harmful dictator with odious policies.

It cannot happen soon enough.