Mackin crushes it, while Palmer skates over the disasters that were.
I think Palmer is a very well informed and authoritative pundit. But he has a blind spot a mile wide and the comparison to Mackin puts it in high relief.
Mackin tracks the disastrous policies and announcements of the last while and lets the actions speak for themselves until van Dongen puts the meaning to them. It’s a show not tell piece.
Palmer tracks the politics. It’s all tell and little show. The authoritative voice has lost touch with the actual things that are driving people away from the BC Liberals.
In an odd way Palmer is just like them… The roof, the Telus deal, BC Rail questions about the Premier, an orchestrated confrontation with the teachers, lies about transit and available pots of money – these are all just the normal day to day stuff. No point getting your knickers in a knot.
But the game! It’s all about the game in Palmer’s piece. Who’s saying what. Who’s up, who’s down. What the other BC Liberal politicians are saying about the Premier. The content is far less explicit, the reasons for the politicians’ unease are understated.
There is no anger about what is taking place, just polite observation.
Don’t get me wrong. Palmer hasn’t written a bad piece. Nobody can say he isn’t covering the Premier’s troubles.
It’s just that he isn’t saying what needs to be said.