Will Vancouver NPA candidate Kirk LaPointe draw upon Malcolm Gladwell's wisdom in mayoral race?

Fans of writer Malcolm Gladwell probably chuckled when former media manager Kirk LaPointe made a production of being the "underdog" in the Vancouver mayoral race.

Gladwell's latest book, David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants, reveals that the underdog often has advantages others don't recognize.

It's apparent when you see how some B.C. success stories beat long odds to rise to the top.

Jimmy Pattison grew up so poor in the Depression that he cleaned the inside of pianos to help put food on the table.

Irving Barber was a high-school dropout who built one of B.C.'s most successful forest companies. Another high-school dropout, Bob Rennie, became B.C.'s condo king.

Wally Oppal was raised by a single mother in Duncan but still became a B.C. Court of Appeal justice and attorney general.

Premiers such as Bill Vander Zalm, Gordon Campbell, and Christy Clark overcame extreme hardship in childhood on their way to political success.

The same is true for Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, who were raised by single mothers.

Similarly, LaPointe came from a hardscrabble background, which has toughened him up for the race to come.

Incumbent mayors rarely lose

On paper, it looks like LaPointe doesn't have a chance.

Incumbent mayors were reelected in every municipality in the Lower Mainland in 2011 with the exception of Langley Township.

In Burnaby, Derek Corrigan captured 76 percent of the votes. In Surrey, Dianne Watts won 80 percent support. Richard Walton in the District of North Vancouver did even better, earning 81.5 percent of the votes.

Vancouver's Gregor Robertson posted one of the poorest performances among incumbent mayors, only winning 53.8 percent of the votes.

The last two-term Vancouver mayor to lose a reelection bid was Jack Volrich, who was defeated by Mike Harcourt in 1980.

So it's legitimate for LaPointe to describe himself as an underdog.

Incumbent mayors do lose from time to time. Witness Barbara Sharpe's defeat in the City of North Vancouver in 2005. Or Doug McCallum's loss in Surrey the same year.

LaPointe's media connections are extensive

LaPointe is an underdog even though his communications are being handled by a former Globe and Mail reporter who's married to a member of the Vancouver Sun editorial board.

There's no indication that this marital connection has conferred undue benefits on LaPointe. But the NPA may have the advantage in this department by hiring someone who does communications full-time over Vision's communications manager, a lobbyist who in the past worked for CBC in Ontario.

LaPointe is also an underdog whose party has B.C.'s head of operations for Glacier Media on its board of directors. Once again, there's no evidence that LaPointe's candidacy has benefited from this connection to the company that owns the Vancouver Courier, the West Ender, and Business in Vancouver.

LaPointe, a former managing editor of the Vancouver Sun, is an underdog who has a good relationship with many journalists going into this election campaign. This includes the Vancouver Sun's Jeff Lee, who praised LaPointe on his Linked-in profile in 2008. Whether that makes Lee tougher on LaPointe remains to be seen.

LaPointe is an underdog with a son who works at the Tyee. Once again, there's no evidence that this has resulted in any preferential treatment for the NPA candidate. But it's safe to assume that LaPointe has a decent knowledge of how that publication operates.

He's an underdog whose wife worked as a reporter and has a PhD.

He's also an underdog with former students working as journalists. And he's an underdog who's been on panels in the community with the editor of the Georgia Straight. (Yes folks, that's me.)

Perhaps most importantly, LaPointe is an underdog who's a talented writer with extensive broadcasting experience and a deep understanding of social media.

He's also a well-read underdog, and I would be shocked if he weren't aware of Gladwell's work.

Getting back to Malcolm Gladwell

So you can see that LaPointe brings some knowledge, connections, and skills to the campaign that his opponent, Robertson, is lacking.

I've commented in the past about how LaPointe writes engaging blog posts, whereas Robertson's office issues wooden statements.

David and Goliath highlights the types of advantages that so-called underdogs bring to a fight that aren't always noticed by the public.

I can see why Vision Vancouver appears to be a bit more concerned about LaPointe than its last mayoral opponent, Suzanne Anton.

Perhaps it's because Vision's backroom operators have read Gladwell's book and know that underdogs are capable of achieving surprising results.

Comments (13) Add New Comment
MD
I am still waiting for LaPointe to defend running a Fraser Institute op-ed that argued for the reinstitution of indentured servitude as a solution to rising tuition costs in British Columbia.



17
21
Rating: -4
Charlie Smith
Actually, former Fraser Institute researcher Fazil Mihlar was the opinion page editor when LaPointe was at the Vancouver Sun, so I'm guessing that it was Mihlar's decision, not LaPointe's.

Charlie Smith
18
12
Rating: +6
MD
Fair enough.

I will just expand the net.

I am still waiting for LaPointe to defend treating the Fraser Institute and its "research" as if it was being produced by a reputable international, multi governmental agency and not an ideologically based "think tank" that is partially funded by foreign interests and is staffed and managed by a revolving door of ideologically conservatives that make their living hiding in the conservative welfare circuit and producing "research" that is often taxpayer subsidized.


22
20
Rating: +2
Oh, Vancouver
Anyone falling for either Vision or the NPA as an underdog is truly clueless. That Geoff Olson cartoon nailed it - their funders are essentially the same - this is all just so much posturing. Imagine what kind of election we'd have if campaign contributions by corporations had a limit - any limit. I mean, the PR industry in Vancouver would lose millions per election cycle.

Imagine a world where Gregor, Meggs, LaPointe and Armstrong *didn't* have basically the same goals and occupy the same societal position. What a revolutionary concept.
14
13
Rating: +1
bruther
Charlie, I enjoy your various disclaimers throughout the article that there's no evidence that LaPointe has gained any benefit from his extensive media connections. It's hard to imagine that he won't benefit, or that all these media friends of his won't be passing a jaundiced eye over Robertson's tenure as mayor come October/November...
11
9
Rating: +2
greensea
And, pray tell, what exactly is this "extreme hardship" Christy Clark went through? Did those meanies in the BCTF not recognize her father's genius and make him their King? Poor little Christy; the psychic scars must haunt her to this day . . .
10
12
Rating: -2
@Charlie Smith
Maybe you could give us a definition of extreme hardship. Clark's parents seem to have remained married and were employed as a teacher and a family counselor.

According to wikipedia:

"Clark was born in Burnaby, British Columbia on October 29, 1965. Her father, Jim, was a teacher and a three-time candidate for the Legislative Assembly, and her mother, Mavis, was a family counsellor. Clark attended Simon Fraser University (SFU), the Sorbonne in France and the University of Edinburgh in Scotland,[5] though never graduated with a degree.[6][7] Thus, she is technically illiterate, as evidenced by her inability to formulate rational arguments."

That's actually in there - I had to share.

But really - working class white people don't undergo "extreme hardship" in this country unless they live in poverty - please don't buy into this classwashing.
13
10
Rating: +3
Charlie Smith
Christy Clark has previously said that her father was an alcoholic. I have no evidence to believe this isn't true. Therefore I included her in my article because I believe that anyone who grew up with an alcoholic parent probably endured more hardship than most of us. It might help explain her resilience.

Charlie Smith
11
8
Rating: +3
greensea
Well, I don't think that is really common knowledge. I admit it would explain a lot.
5
9
Rating: -4
Vancouver Watcher
MD: So you take the bleating's of the The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives as gospel? Poor, unable to think, you! both the CCPA count on people like you. Both start with an ideological answer then build so called "research" to support their ideological answer. Most of us who think have figured this out, too bad you haven't.
4
18
Rating: -14
Duffy's sweet tooth
The bottom line with this "journalist" now, at this point in his life, wanting "to make a difference" in public office, is a wee bit absurd for someone who has spun many a fairy tail web that Cons use to snare voters. A man like this is not a leader and certainly not a visionary. He's a hired gun of the neocon persuasion who would be just as comfortable writing disinformation for Sarah Palin's campaign as for Stephen Harpers.

I agree with the spin doctor. He is an underdog. Harper and his brand of press management is on the way out. LaPointe has chosen to stump for a brand on the way out. His people are the ones hacking away at the CBC, at scientists, at the environment and at Canada's international reputation. Vancouverites are not hard right oil mongering bible thumpers. LaPointe is one of their louder thumpers. And spinners.
8
9
Rating: -1
Dr. Frankentower
Underdog? You gotta be kidding! LaPointe is a Toronto boy who spent his whole career cozying up to right-wing idealogues out east. He was a Conrad Black yes-man for many years. In the few years he's been in the west, at the Vancouver Sun, his greatest distinction was his refusal to print stories related to BC's biggest scandal -- the corruption scandal surrounding the sale of BC Rail. He was the one who put Fazil Milhar in charge of the Op-Ed page, and allowed it to become a Fraser Institute mouthpiece, devoid of balance or integrity.

While Charlie Smith may like his blogs and tweets, LaPointe has yet to write a single word about what HE stands for -- they are all about Vision's failings. While vowing not to indulge in "personal attacks", his two posts about the campaign come off as a thinly disguised negative smear campaign.

A Ryerson Journal profile of Kirk LaPointe quotes a former co-worker who sums up LaPointe perfectly: "a profound bullshitter... with a profoundly shallow view of a newspaper... He's kind of like the Martha Stewart of editors."

... "He's a good talker," he adds. "But everybody's hard-pressed to point out any achievements in his career, other than his personal advancement."

As much as Vision pisses me off, a slick establishment-lackey in an expensive suit from Toronto telling me (in the negative) about "the Vancouver I want" has got to be any self-respecting Vancouverite's worst nightmare.
13
12
Rating: +1
Both Sides
Charlie: You mention the NPA has a full time communications person and imply vision has a part time lobbyist? What about the machine that is the communications department at city hall? There used to be 2 people under the NPA and now the suggestions range from in the 20's to in the 60's. But like anything at the City Hall since Vision has been in power, getting a clear answer is impossible.
6
11
Rating: -5
Add new comment
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.