Mulcair isn't an unknown in Quebec, when Liberals point to certain perceived traits that will undermine his leadership, that analysis tends to gloss over a politician who has a track record in his home province. Mulcair is a Quebecer, his political bent is also squarely in the pocket of the mainstream, there is every opportunity for this leader to shore up the gains made in the last election. This isn't to say Mulcair will succeed, only that he is well placed to do so. For the Liberals, some sort of resurgence in Quebec is an electoral must, Mulcair represents a stiff headwind, a considerable challenge, no doubt about it.
I would have preferred a "dyed in the wool" Dipper to emerge out of the convention. A Nash, a Topp, someone holding the traditional lines, because this stance speaks to a perceived limited base. However, Mulcair very much moves the NDP- whether a positive remains to be seen given reservations from certain NDP quarters- but there is potential with an updated philosophical presentation. The question becomes, will a Mulcair led NDP further "squeeze" the Liberals on the political spectrum.
Mulcair is a force in many respects, and we can make reasonable assumptions he will be a strong performer in Parliament. Not a question of ultimate resonance, because I do see real challenges, but with Mulcair, his strength will serve the NDP well in bubble Ottawa, as the NDP fight to change old mentalities and receive their electoral due.
Mulcair brings a potential rock solid regional base from which to grow. The Conservatives have a dependable geographic base, Mulcair offers the NDP a chance to solidify one of their own and if that occurs, it works to the Liberals disadvantage. Not pessimism, but perhaps a dose of realism, the gradient for the Liberals today seems slightly steeper in my view.
19 comments:
While I have some reservations about him, I do think that Mulcair will perform very well in the House of Commons, something much needed to combat the virulent demagoguery of Harper and his clan.
He's Harper with a beard and Hitler haircut. Bob Rae is looking better and better all the time.
True, harder for the Liberals. And it seems as though he presents a problem for Conservatives because this attack is lame. (Really, they could have written this for any of them. It's lazy.)
The only problem with a regional base is being too strongly associated with it. Reform had problems growing outside of the West because it was perceived in Ontario and Quebec as a Western party. If the NDP sticks too firmly to Quebec, they leave themselves open to attack as the "new Bloc."
As for moving the party to the centre.... If the party's going to do a radical makeover to get into power, they might have skipped ten years of Conservative rule and joined the Liberals. Okau, I'll admit I'm highly biased in that opinion. ;)
Still, it will be interesting how far Mulcair will be able to move the party. Watching the coverage, Stephen Lewis and Olivia Chow discussed how policy is created at the conventions by members.(As a Liberal, I find this of course novel. We're used to the party taring up policy as soon as it's generated.) Anyway, Mulcair can't act unilaterally in changing the party. He'll have to convince the members of what he's doing. Layton managed change the party, but at the same time he had the backing of the party elders, and over 50% support from the party on the first ballot -- things Mulcair doesn't have. (The fact that Topp didn't drop off after the third ballot, when he was unlike to win may show some resistance in the party to Mulcair ... or that Topp's a bit of a jerk.) Mulcair will have challenges in this regard and will have to use every ounce of leadership and political handling he has to accomplish this.
It's going to be an interesting couple of months for political watchers.
Those are great points you make. Nothing I present is conclusive, challenges can always be met and this guy could fall flat on his face. His speech last night was bland and deadpan I should note.
No question I think the road for Grits is more rocky, but I'm guessing that failing some damning revilation in ROBOCON the Dear Leader's life has become that much more easy.
sharonapple88:
You said "(The fact that Topp didn't drop off after the third ballot, when he was unlike to win may show some resistance in the party to Mulcair ... or that Topp's a bit of a jerk.) "
Whether it shows he is a jerk or not what I found interesting about that fourth ballot result was that his support increase from the third ballot in raw numbers was nearly identical to Mulcair (even though the percentage split was higher, in no small part to another 3000 voters not coming in to that last ballot compared to the prior two ballots) in that both took between 6-7 thousand between the third and fourth ballots. Given that it was all but mathematically impossible for Topp to win given the results of the third ballot I had said to my wife that if Topp grows by more than 3-5 percent despite this that would show there is clearly a significant element not comfortable with Mulcair's leadership within the party and that Mulcair needed to be aware and respectful of it from the moment he wins (which he clearly was not given the perfunctory acknowledgment of Topp he gave in that atrocity of a victory speech). I was not expecting a percentage increase of almost another 50 percent and a numerical increase of almost a third again from the third ballot numbers.
I think this illustrated a significant discomfort from the old school NDPers in the party who were already a little uncomfortable with how far Layton had centralized them in the pursuit of power and replacing the Liberals. Worse for Mulcair, I think he made a serious mistake in treating his victory moment/speech as almost a perfunctory event for him and something that only he should be spotlighted for. At most party leadership conventions I've seen in multiple parties usually the second place finisher gets a few words prior to the winner's victory speech to gracefully accept the result, call for unity once again, and then introduce the newly elected leader. I was shocked to not see that this time. That Mulcair only acknowledged Topp in a list along with the other candidates despite his strong showing was also a bit problematic I think and sends the wrong message to Mulcair's opponents within the party. Whether this is an early indicator or an outlier about how he is going to treat that element of the party time will tell, but it was not the smartest way to start his leadership off IMHO.
He was ignoring basic political dynamics with this, things that have been shown to be sensible in multiple parties including his own. I would find it most ironic if Mulcair in his continued pursuit of power and centrist policies replicated the old PCPC/Reform split on the left from centrist Dippers versus old school and labour Dippers. Still a ways from that yet but Mulcair did nothing last night to make it less likely and possibly did make it more likely. We shall see.
Scotian, Interesting observation, it just points out what a D-Bag Mulcair is. I wonder how long before the pyjama-hideen in the dear leader's basement start picking at that scab? One knows they likely have something in the can right now. TM will no sooner be PM than Liz May.
sharonapple88 said...
True, harder for the Liberals. And it seems as though he presents a problem for Conservatives because this attack is lame.
I almost hesitate to mention this, but no...the choice of Mulcair is quite all right with Conservatives.
(if we couldn't have Libby Davies, of course...)
Might not be great for the Liberals, but it works very well for us.
Steve, Have you read this? Speaks to Scotian's point:
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/judes/2012/03/understanding-victory-thomas-mulcair
He's an a-hole. But I'm not a NDP voter anyways.
I did read the Rebick piece, that's some tough stuff. One point I was going to make in a subsequent post, there is a difference between seeing a challenge and thinking Mulcair is going to become PM. If we're playing the probability game, I see another Harper mandate, don't see Mulcair mania sweeping the nation at all.
Scotian, very interesting analysis on the situation.
Impolitical notes some staffing changes which are linked to some comments Broadbent made earlier about Mulcair as leader.
I almost hesitate to mention this, but no...the choice of Mulcair is quite all right with Conservatives.
Yeah, it didn't feel like the Conservatives had their heart in it.
If we're playing the probability game, I see another Harper mandate, don't see Mulcair mania sweeping the nation at all.
Sadly, I agree. Things aren't great for the Liberals (and probably won't be for some time), but if the NDP want to take power, they need to steal seats from the Conservatives. In the upcoming election, the Conservatives may have the advantage since out of the 30 largest ridings, 26 are currently held by the Conservatives. Up-hill battle, and we're all wearing rollerblades. :P
Fred from BC said...
I almost hesitate to mention this, but no...the choice of Mulcair is quite all right with Conservatives.
Someone better check if Hell froze over, because I'm going to agree with Fred from BC.
I don't see Mulcair being a problem for the the Conservatives. For proof, party attacks were out before Harper's official congratulations were uttered, and their framing has already begun emphasizing the word "opportunist".
Watch for them to start carpet-bombing Mulcair with "opportunist" over the next short while. And the Dippers had better have a robust response ready to go.
Interesting Mulcair interview with Mansbridge, his response to opportunistic was a reminder that he ran in a Liberal stronghold for a party with little chance. That's a good counter, if he was really an opportunistic, he would have ran for the governing party, not some fringe outfit with no presence in the province. I actually think the Cons need a new line, that seems weak from here.
I agree that the "opportunistic" line is really weak. One generally doesn't stand as a candidate for a fringe party in a part of the country where they have almost no presence if one is an "opportunist."
As for the Conservatives' line about Mulcair's "divisive personality"....I feel like something about glass houses and stones should be mentioned here.
And if the Conservatives aren't even a *little* bit afraid of Mulcair, then which candidate *would* they have been afraid of? A dull, uncharismatic, far-left backroom boy like Topp? A union fossil like Nash? An also-ran like Dewar, Singh, or Ashton? Perhaps Cullen might have given the Conservatives a bit of a stir, but I hardly think they were overcome with glee at the prospect of facing Mulcair.
And although Mulcair might not send the Harperites immediately fleeing for the hills, he still poses a serious problem for the Liberals...particularly if they make the wrong choice of leader next year. Mulcair's looking to eat their lunch. His leading the NDP almost guarantees that there will be no significant Liberal comeback in Quebec anytime soon, and a pivot toward the centre by the NDP may further split the vote in Ontario and allow the Conservatives to continue to dominate it.
In short, Mulcair will likely firmly ensconce the NDP as Canada's second party for the foreseeable future. But something severely damaging will have to happen to Harper in order for Mulcair to become PM in 2015. That is, unless the Libs and Dippers decide to start cooperating somehow...but neither party seems particularly interested in entertaining that idea.
"Mulcair brings a potential rock solid regional base from which to grow."? Really?
The NDP base in Quebec is anything but solid. Choosing Mulcair as party leader doesn't change that.
It's far too early to be making solid predictions about the next election. Nonetheless, I feel pretty confident in saying that next time, the NDP is going to be hard pressed to keep a Quebec seat count in the double digits.
Really? I used the word "potential" for a reason you know. Geez.
Speaking of attacks, I await Pat Martin and Peter Stoffer to take issue on Mulcair's dual citizenship.... or was it something they just didn't like Dion having. (Maybe apologises are in order.) ;)
daniel said...
And if the Conservatives aren't even a *little* bit afraid of Mulcair, then which candidate *would* they have been afraid of? A dull, uncharismatic, far-left backroom boy like Topp? A union fossil like Nash? An also-ran like Dewar, Singh, or Ashton? Perhaps Cullen might have given the Conservatives a bit of a stir, but I hardly think they were overcome with glee at the prospect of facing Mulcair.
None of the above (although your point about Cullen was not without some merit...the "Cullen Plan" would probably have done some damage. Some...). Mulcair and Davies were the two best possible outcomes for us.
As for the Conservatives' line about Mulcair's "divisive personality"....I feel like something about glass houses and stones should be mentioned here.
Fair enough, but the real point is that Mulcair has the potential to split the NDP right down the middle in the same way that the Liberal Party is now divided; the few 'defections' you are now seeing are nothing compared to the rift just under the surface. Mulcair has neither the personality nor the temperament to heal that rift, in my opinion.
And yes, Bob Rae would be my choice for Liberal leader for the same reason...IF I didn't have such a personal dislike for the NDP. If you guys are smart, you won't make the same mistake for the *fourth* time...
(please knock the NDP back to where they belong, okay?)
Post a Comment