The Impact of the 2004 Elections

Abstract

Oh, how different things might have been.In the weeks before the re-election of George W. Bush last November, as the polls suggested the race was a dead heat, Canadians began to entertain the idea of John F. Kerry as the next president of the United States. Indeed, the more the media discussed Kerry's election, the more it seemed like it might actually come to pass. When the votes were counted, of course, it was a fantasy. But if many Canadians were convinced that Kerry would win and even more were surprised when he didn't, it reflected the unpopularity of Bush in Canada.For Canadians, who usually prefer Democrats over Republicans, John Kerry was especially appealing. Kerry represents moderation, intelligence, and familiarity. He skis, plays hockey, and speaks French. He likes the Kyoto accord, the International Criminal Court, and universal healthcare, and opposes capital punishment and drilling in the wildlife refuges of Alaska. A native of New England, which drew waves of French-Canadians in the 19205, he knows where Canada is and he understands its climate, physical and psychological. His is a lettered, curious, cosmopolitan mind. He knows the creases in the map of the world.Given those credentials, Canadians could be forgiven for imagining a tall, lanky head of state, accompanied by his exotic multilingual wife, arriving on Parliament Hill early in 2005. Outside the house of commons the crowds would cheer; inside, no one would protest. Speaking in Canada's official languages, he would celebrate the enduring if exhausted friendship between the two countries and declare that he was there to renew it. He would express his country's gratitude for Canada's contribution to the rebuilding of Afghanistan. He would praise Canada's commitment to multilateralism in general, and to the United Nations in particular.He would talk in clear and impassioned prose, President Kerry would, in the spirit of Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, and Bill Clinton. There would be no swagger or posturing, just an artful acknowledgement of differences over wheat, wood, and beef (but nothing about ballistic missile defence, a program with ebbing support in the Kerry administration.) From the 44th president there would be no cascade of the cliches that drench these occasions like maple syrup. Instead, he would express regret over a relationship that had gone awry, and promise to put things right.That the new president would be more protectionist than his predecessor (owing his victory to organized labour in the big industrial states) would scarcely bother Canadians on that happy day in Ottawa. That he would ask Canada for help in Afghanistan and Iraq, and that he would be harder to turn down than Bush, would not faze them either. No, the Liberals (including a pacified Carolyn Parrish), the Conservatives, the New Democrats, and the Bloc Quebecois would stand and applaud. They would see in John Kerry something they hadn't seen in Washington for the last four years: a soulmate, a kindred spirit, a partner and ally challenging the notion of the great divergence of values between the two nations. Fire and Ice? With Kerry in office, the celebrated continental divide would be little more than ashes and water.Yet instead of realizing its hopes on 2 November 2004, Canada saw its fears. There would be no Democratic restoration. Thus, when George W. Bush finally came calling on Canada at autumn's end, it stirred little enthusiasm among Canadians. After almost four years, Canadians had come to know Bush, and they didn't like him any more now than they had when he was elected. The polls had shown that only about 20 percent would vote for him. The reason wasn't just the war in Iraq; it was something about the man and his manner. The reality of Bush and Canada is that he is a Republican Christian conservative from the southwest, which is about as far from Canada, geographically and metaphysically, as you can get. He wears his region and his religion like a sandwich board. …