Winning By Losing
In Montreal, he said Canadians must choose the best man to lose the country
While many people may feel this is not the wisest thing to say, I for one am 100% behind this strategy. That's because, after watching him for the past dozen years, there is no doubt in my mind that Paul Martin is the best man to lose the country. After seeing him be against the Clarity Act before he was for it, after seeing him claim that a yes vote would cost a million jobs, after seeing him bring Jean Lapierre in as his Quebec lieutenant, after seeing him mis-manage the sponsorship scandal, after seeing him call this an "election referendum"...after seeing all these things, I tend to think most Canadians will agree that Paul is the best man to lose the country.
In some respects, this is simply a play on Kinsella's "winning by losing" strategy. Nationalists in Quebec may be saying to themselves "perhaps Gilles Duceppe isn't the best man to lose the country." So by reminding them that he, Paul Martin, is the best man to lose the country, he is reminding them that, if elected, they'll be fighting the next referendum against a Martin/Lapierre tag team.
If that doesn't win over the nationalists in Quebec, I don't know what will.