"We Can Do Better"

[capricorn]

"We can do better" has nothing to do with Canadians. It is a code. Decoded, it means "We are Liberals and we are better than Conservatives". It is about how Liberals think of themselves. There's nothing wrong with that. All political parties think they are better than the next.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

"We can do better" has nothing to do with Canadians. It is a code. Decoded, it means "We are Liberals and we are better than Conservatives". It is about how Liberals think of themselves. There's nothing wrong with that. All political parties think they are better than the next.

A code? Its a little early in the morning for conspiracy theories in my book. Is this sort of like the accusation of hidden agendas?

[GostHacked]

All this over a slogan? Does Ignatieffs actions not speak louder than his words?? Because those actions should. And people should take note of them (whatever his accomplishments are ... if any).

What has Ingatieff done for Canada lately?

[Jerry J. Fortin]

All this over a slogan? Does Ignatieffs actions not speak louder than his words?? Because those actions should. And people should take note of them (whatever his accomplishments are ... if any).

What has Ingatieff done for Canada lately?

Words and actions? I am not sure that Harper would approve of an election based on that because he is a little ways from clean in that respect himself.

[August1991]

First Liberal: So what do you think of our leader?

Second Liberal: Well, um, actually I think we can do better. Can we bring back Jean Chretien?

Gerry Nichols

[M.Dancer]

A better slogan would be:

We will do Better.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

A better slogan would be:

We will do Better.

Good point. However it would also be an arrogant statement, and that concept is something they want to avoid.

[August1991]

That was some convoluted logic you used to get to that conclusion. The we in this case, is the Government of Canada.

Sez who? You?

"Yes We Can" was a wonderful slogan, but not because of any specific meaning or promise. Precisely the opposite, in fact. "Yes We Can" works because of a feeling it invokes. It is unabashedly positive, it is a defiant answer to any of a million admonishments that start with "You can't..."

The "Yes we can" slogan worked as part of Obama's speeches, like a children's nursery rhyme or a calling song. He could set it up and then the crowd would answer.

"We can do better" is designed to be the repeated punch line in a political speech.

Anyway, I just think that it's dumb because it implicitly insults voters and reminds them that Ignatieff is a teacher. If we have an election, the Liberals will either drop it or change it.

-----

As political slogans go, I always liked Thatcher's "Labour doesn't work" and Trudeau's "Parle fort Québec". Both were successful.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Sez who? You?

The "Yes we can" slogan worked as part of Obama's speeches, like a children's nursery rhyme or a calling song. He could set it up and then the crowd would answer.

"We can do better" is designed to be the repeated punch line in a political speech.

Anyway, I just think that it's dumb because it implicitly insults voters and reminds them that Ignatieff is a teacher. If we have an election, the Liberals will either drop it or change it.

-----

As political slogans go, I always liked Thatcher's "Labour doesn't work" and Trudeau's "Parle fort Québec". Both were successful.

Argus the time for those slogans has past. What the party needs is something they can use in many ways. I think you are right about it being a punch line instead of a cheer line. Even so, they need something to separate them from the government and this does it for them.

[M.Dancer]

Good point. However it would also be an arrogant statement, and that concept is something they want to avoid.

Possibly...but I would rather someone be sure that they can do better than someone who only thinks they might do better.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Possibly...but I would rather someone be sure that they can do better than someone who only thinks they might do better.

The slogan is definitive, "We can do better". It is not "We think we can do better".

[Michael Hardner]

I don't think the slogan is bad at all, it's positive for the future and not entirely negative about the past:

"We have done 'ok' but we can do better."

And, more importantly, it's an accurate reflection of our current state. We have a prosperous nation and with a few changes we can launch ourselves to the status of best nation on earth.

[GostHacked]

Words and actions? I am not sure that Harper would approve of an election based on that because he is a little ways from clean in that respect himself.

True. It's kind of what a politician does. They can throw out slogans all over the place, but their actions for the most part go against what politicans tell us and promise. I want someone realistic in office, not a dreamer.

Argus the time for those slogans has past. What the party needs is something they can use in many ways. I think you are right about it being a punch line instead of a cheer line. Even so, they need something to separate them from the government and this does it for them.

Let me get this straight. So, the time for slogans has past, but yet that is the one thing that they can use in many ways to separate them from the rest of government?

I like this slogan better

"Our government needs an enima!"

[capricorn]

The thing about "We can do better", is that it works in the context of the ad set in the woods. But using the the slogan outside the ad doesn't make that connection that Ignatieff's narrative makes in the ad. So the slogan will be interpreted in various ways and misses the consistency that a slogan is supposed to establish. Obama's "Yes We Can" was not associated to any specific scenario and was uplifting. As others have pointed out, "We can do better" comes across as an indictment that we as individuals have failed in what we have strived for.

I'm a failure.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

True. It's kind of what a politician does. They can throw out slogans all over the place, but their actions for the most part go against what politicans tell us and promise. I want someone realistic in office, not a dreamer.

I actually want the dreamer! Of course I want some practical application of that vision espoused by the dreamer, but nonetheless I want the dreamer. Dare to dream!

Let me get this straight. So, the time for slogans has past, but yet that is the one thing that they can use in many ways to separate them from the rest of government?

You have it bent, I said the time was past for those slogans not any slogan.

I like this slogan better

"Our government needs an enima!"

To get rid of bureaucracies and antiquated systems.

[GostHacked]

I actually want the dreamer! Of course I want some practical application of that vision espoused by the dreamer, but nonetheless I want the dreamer. Dare to dream!

Yes do dream. I still do it as well.

You have it bent, I said the time was past for those slogans not any slogan.

Gotcha. I recall when we voted on a platform, not a slogan.

To get rid of bureaucracies and antiquated systems.

I am with you on this 100%.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Yes do dream. I still do it as well.

Gotcha. I recall when we voted on a platform, not a slogan.

I am with you on this 100%.

I remember when platforms were relevant too. I also remember when those platforms were considered a bond between the government and the people. Times have changed, and the only real constant is indeed change. Its time to shrink government. Its time to make government more accountable. Its time to start making the public accountable as well.

Part of our problems are social and part of our problems are administrative. The government can deal with the administrative issues and the public can deal with the social issues, but it means change for all. Just simply finding a group of elected representatives to get down to business and do their jobs properly is the 5 ton elephant in the room.

[nicky10013]

This statement shows the gull of some Liberals. The PMO's office is something you get by having the backing of the Canadian people. The Liberals don't just get their "turn" because someone else has been in office for a set amount of time. If Mr. Ignatieff wants it he better prove he deserves it becuase the slogan "We are Liberals come on it is our turn now!" Wont fly.

I didn't mean it like that. Do I think he deserves a turn? Yes because I think he's the best out of the 4. Does that imply I think he deserves a turn flat out just simply because he's a Liberal? No way. He has to win an election fair and square. My point was simply that you can't judge whether he can't change government until he's actually in a position to do so.

[nicky10013]

I'll ignore many of the incongruities of that comment and Ignatieff's situation and instead note that Kennedy won the 1960 election by a very slim margin.

If I were picking a winning slogan, I wouldn't use a Kennedy 1960 slogan.

And if you were an American, this "Yes we can" slogan seems to have worked - to a degree.

But Nicky, Ignatieff is a candidate in Canada, not America. And the slogan is destined to English Canadians - not Americans.

If you would have quoted me a little further, I too questioned whether that would work here. Nice spin. Just like this thread.

"Gee guys, aren't Liberals dumb?" This complete discussion is a joke.

[nicky10013]

To get rid of bureaucracies and antiquated systems.

You can dream about getting rid of them, but it can't happen. You can update them (like paperless records etc.) to make them more efficient but you can't get rid of them. Like kicking immigrants out of Canada? Need a bureaucracy for that. Like the military? Need a bureaucracy for that. Like putting people in prison? Heck, you need a bureaucracy for that, too. People just think that the government open offices all over the country just for people to sit around to do nothing. It's hilarious. My going line is, if you want to live in a country with as little government and bureaucracy as possible, move to Somalia. They'd love to have you.

[August1991]

Also, get a new slogan. Surely you can do better than "We can do better."

Gerry Nichols

I don't know who Gerry Nichols is but he and I agree on this one.

[Goat Boy©]

No, it doesn't. It speaks to the country as a whole being able to do better as a whole, whether it's on foreign affairs, job creation, or social programming. Ignatieff believes that a government under him could do better for this country than one under Harper. You don't have to believe that he can, but it doesn't really strike me as a reason to say that the slogan is stupid.

Where do these ideas that the government is responsible or capable creating jobs, or that social engineering polices can control a system with an infinite number of interactions come from?

This is exactly what I don't want them to try and do.

[Goat Boy©]

People just think that the government open offices all over the country just for people to sit around to do nothing. It's hilarious.

My late Uncle used to work in a government cartography office. Very comfortable salary, alternated between 5 and 4 day work weeks, and enough work to last just one person the whole week, or the five people working there, one day.

My sister in law works for a provincial government ministry, doing self-admittedly, next to nothing. A government job is the next best thing to winning the lottery.

Come on, there is a lot of fat that needs trimming.

Edited September 20, 2009 by Goat Boy©

[Goat Boy©]

Good point. However it would also be an arrogant statement, and that concept is something they want to avoid.

I thought they were coming across very well on that idea, almost catching old Stevie.

[Goat Boy©]

Gerry Nichols

I don't know who Gerry Nichols is but he and I agree on this one.

Brilliant writing!