Trudeau’s inner Ronald Reagan
Justin Trudeau seems unstoppable. The prime minister’s new Liberal government is making its share of mistakes. But to the public at least, none of this seems to matter.
A Forum poll released Friday calculates that his approval rating, at 57 per cent, is higher than it was on election day.
A Nanos poll released Tuesday estimates that 72 per cent of Canadians think Trudeau has the qualities of a good leader.
All of this may be the result of a time-limited honeymoon. Canadians like to give new leaders a chance.
It’s worth remembering that even former prime minister Brian Mulroney, who at the end saw his public level of support slide into singledigits, began his tenure on a wave of good feelings (and, indeed, handily won two elections).
If the country’s love affair with Trudeau is a just a crush, the normal disappointments associated with governing will insure that his popularity falls.
But it is also possible that Trudeau has managed to channel his inner Ronald Reagan. If that’s the case, he will remain a formidable political force no matter how many goofs his government makes.
It might seem odd to compare Trudeau to the former U.S. president. Trudeau is a young 43. Reagan was 69 when he first became U.S. president.
Reagan was a conservative Republican. Trudeau is a centrist Liberal.
Yet in style, there are eerie similarities. Like Reagan, Trudeau gives the impression he genuinely likes people. Like Reagan, he exudes an infectious optimism.
“It’s morning again in America,” was Reagan’s 1984 campaign slogan.
“Sunny ways,” has become Trudeau’s mantra.
As a politician, Reagan was notoriously underestimated. His maladroit musings, such as his famous comment that trees cause pollution, were mocked mercilessly. His critics dismissed the former actor as a B-grade movie star who was simply not up to the job.
At times, Reagan appeared to fit the image of a befuddled dummy.
In one instance, he claimed to have been present at the liberation of a Nazi concentration camp. In fact, he had been in the U.S. at the time, working on newsreels about the liberation of Nazi concentration camps.
Yet none of this mattered politically. American voters, including many Democrats, loved Reagan. He could do no wrong. His critics were dismissed as know-it-alls and outof-touch elitists.
Trudeau, too, has been underestimated. In the lead-up to October’s election he was mocked for alleged boners, like talking about the need to understand the root causes of terrorism or speaking of building the economy from the heart outwards.
He was called a lightweight. His critics made sneering references to the fact that he’d once taught drama.
Even now, some commentators make fun of Trudeau’s occasionally mangled syntax.
Meanwhile, his government struggles along, making the mistakes that new governments typically make.
On Friday, for instance, the government had to admit that a crucial money bill passed in the Commons this week was incomplete. There was no damage done (the bill was corrected), but for any other novice prime minister, this might have been an embarrassment.
Trudeau, I expect, will weather it handily, as he is weathering his government’s decision to backtrack from campaign promises having to do with Syrian refugees and fiscal deficits.
More public attention is being lavished on the fact that he and his wife, Sophie Grégoire-Trudeau, are featured in the latest issue of Vogue Magazine.
That, too, is very Ronald Reagan who, with his penchant for black-tie dinners, was praised for bringing glamour back to dour Washington.
Do Canadians want glamorous leaders? On the face of it, the answer should be no. This country is more Walmart than Oscar de la Renta.
But I’d be surprised if Trudeau’s appearance in the bible of high fashion does him any political harm.
Like Reagan in his day, the new prime minister floats effortlessly a few metres above the nitty-gritty of ordinary politics.
He could crash. But there’s a good chance that this feat of miraculous levitation will persist. Speaking of boners, in my last column I referred to a potential Bank of Canada money-expansion technique as “qualitative easing.” Of course, I should have written “quantitative easing.” Thomas Walkom’s column appears Wednesday, Thursday and Sunday.