What’s the most annoying thing about Canadian federal elections? Some might say voting in them, an exercise we’re not supposed to take for granted, but that many of us still do (just over 30 per cent of us in 2015, according to Elections Canada).

But nothing is more annoying, in my mind, when it comes to our sacred democratic process, than the period that precedes it: the months-long election campaign, when, despite the fact that our leaders are running to win extraordinary power and effect change on an extraordinary scale, they seem to waste so much time trying to convince us that they themselves, are completely ordinary.

“I’m just like you,” the campaigning politician likes to say, standing in front of a charter bus plastered with a gigantic image of his own head. “I know what it’s like for a family to struggle to put food on the table.”

Perhaps at one time he did, but such a statement loses meaning when it’s given between bites at a catered lunch.

Such a statement loses meaning, furthermore, coming from federal Conservative leader Andrew Scheer, the candidate for Prime Minister who despite a lucrative career in politics, is leaning hard into the role of ordinary guy.

Last week, for example, Scheer told The Province, a paper in British Columbia, “My mom and dad worked hard and had to make tough decisions. We didn’t have a car growing up. We took the bus everywhere. I know what it’s like when families feel anxious that they won’t make it to the end of the month. Someone who’s never had to worry about that can’t possibly relate to it on a personal level.”

Read more:

Analysis | What kind of Conservative is Andrew Scheer?

Trudeau’s Stampede stops highlight low Alberta support for federal Liberals

Opinion | Heather Scoffield: By attacking clean fuel standards, Andrew Scheer has boxed himself in on climate change

A possible translation of Scheer’s words: My opponent, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, a child of enormous privilege, doesn’t know what it’s like to struggle. Therefore, he is incapable of alleviating your struggle.

This is rich coming from Scheer, a person who, Paul Willcocks writes in the Tyee (an independent online Canadian news magazine) this week, “surely hasn’t worried about paying the bills for a long time …. At 25, Scheer hit the jackpot; he was elected MP for Regina-Qu’Appelle, and started collecting about $140,000 a year — about $195,000 in current dollars.”

But playing the regular guy and hinting at his opponent’s wealth is a smart strategy on Scheer’s part, because in doing so, he distracts voters from what actually matters (Trudeau’s policies, which might arguably better serve lower income Canadians than Scheer’s) and points our attention to something that matters not a bit: Trudeau’s cushy upbringing.

Was Trudeau born with a silver spoon in his mouth? Absolutely. Does it show? Absolutely. Does this affect his ability to enact policy that benefits those trying to make ends meet? Absolutely not.

A leader doesn’t have to have first-hand experience with a problem to solve it.

We don’t demand that politicians be victims of crime before they crack down on it. We don’t demand that they be victims of conversion therapy before they outlaw it. We don’t demand that they go to war before they improve life for veterans.

Why then do we demand that they experience poverty or financial hardship before they write policies that will benefit people who do?

It’s tempting to focus on person over platform, because people are easier to judge than political policy. But most of the time, focusing on a leader’s upbringing is a waste of time and a distraction from the practical issues that will affect voters directly.

This is why — okay, it may pose a problem where free speech is concerned — it’s fun to think of a future where politicians are banned from sharing folksy anecdotes about their childhoods.

Or, for that matter, a future in which they are banned from sharing folksy anecdotes altogether.

Would our democracy not be better off if we never had to hear variations on the following stump speech statement ever again? “I was talking with moms and dads in North Bay about how hard things are these days.”

(It would be fun if journalists started fact-checking these vague regional anecdotes. Imagine the headlines: “Moms and Dads of North Bay are unanimous: “We don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.”)

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Folksy anecdotes on the campaign trail serve no purpose besides diverting voter attention away from what truly matters: policy.

It’s true that without them, our politics would be more boring (if such a thing is possible). But our democracy would be stronger.

Take it from me: an ordinary person just like you.

Read more about: