10.01.2015 11:53 AM

Advice to New Democrats, free of charge

Researching next week’s Hill Times column, it occurred to me that I should look at one of my old books, The War Room. I think I found a passage there that the play-it-safe Mulcair NDP should have heeded, but didn’t.

 To the meek goes no reward. 

“God gave us all necks so we can stick them out. Voters — and consumers, and citizens, and the news media, and just about any sentient being — are astute. They know when you are playing it safe. They know when you are being timid. When they sense you are being deliberately boring, they tune you out, sometimes permanently. Or, even worse, they will conclude that you are hiding something, that you have the much-feared “hidden agenda,” and that you are accordingly dishonest. In politics, at least, it’s a paradox: taking no risks is in itself risky. So, in your campaign for votes or sales or support, it’s okay to occasionally take a few risks. Be a bit louder, be a bit faster, be a bit funny, be a bit more aggressive. Most of all, be more creative. You won’t always win, but one thing is for sure. You’ll never win if you don’t try.”

56 Comments

  1. Christian Giles says:

    Yep. I tried e-mailing that exact message to the NDP campaign a while back. Nothing. Nada. Zip. But why should I be surprised? Modern campaigns are all about sealing the leader in a bubble. Cutting him/her off from all influences beyond a select group of advisors who are equally inaccessible to all but the best connected. It’s beyond stupid. It’s self destruction thru ‘groupthink’. Also, the chance any leader will vary from a chosen strategy is pretty well nil. Can’t be seen to be admitting a mistake by changing course! Stupid, stupid, stupid. Although that being said the Conservatives did exactly that by sending Byrne back to Ottawa. Maybe they aren’t as inflexible as they’re made out to be. ‘Progressives’ can learn a lot from those guys.

  2. Alex says:

    Good quote from The War Room. So what do the NDP do now? A pessimist would say that they are f*#@d because they boxed themselves in. An optimist could counter that in the 2011 election the NDP was polling in the high-teens three weeks before the election, so things can still change.

    My sense is that they are in deep trouble, and could potentially collapse in Quebec like Mario Dumont’s ADQ did in 2008. What is less clear to me is where those NDP voters go. I have a sinking suspicion that the big surprise of this election will be how well the Tories do in Quebec. What do others think?

    • MississaugaPeter says:

      1. Focus on something the majority of Canadians agree with them and don’t with the Liberals and CONS. In particular C-51. Own the crowd who fears 1984, which is the majority of Canadians. Explain it in simple terms. Images of 1984. Make it your nijab.

      2. Make the nijab and the taking away of Canadian citizenship a free vote once elected prime minister, and even allow Mulcair ministers to vote their view. Eliminate it immediately as a millstone.

      3. Focus on Deficits. Two prongs:

      A. Draw attention to Trudeau Senior’s debt. Explain how from 1867 to 1968, over 100 years, Canada’s accumulated debt was $14B. Trudeau Sr. grew that debt over 8X (800%) in the period he was prime minster, from $14B to $129B, a total of over $115B. And 31 years later, we still have not paid the Father’s debt. But we have paid (estimated, get actual) over $250B in interest, and still no dent on that debt. And now the son wants to leave his legacy for the next generation, with over $145B of new debt, all so he and his half-wits (sorry, couldn’t help myself), get elected.

      B. Draw attention to Harper’s debt. How it went from $492B to $612B, an increase of $120B, more than $10B/year.

      4. Fire their communications director, because they are not getting my vote or many other Catholics until it happens. Emails flying all over about this, and their intensity will increase the closer to the election. Trudeau will lose a few points as well in the last weekend for his dictatorial attitude towards issues of conscience including euthanasia and abortion. Harper has not done anything on euthanasia and abortion, but he at least allows MPs to have a conscience.

      • MississaugaPeter says:

        Don’t get me wrong. I was a fan, and worked on campaigns for both Liberals Pierre Trudeau and Nick Taylor in Alberta. Trudeau’s nationalization of the oil industry, if it had not been dismantled, would have paid off all his debt, and Canada would be with Norway one of the richest per capita countries in the world (with probably a $500B surplus for us, our children, and our grandchildren, instead of the over $600B we are ignoring and just pushing forward).

        • Michael Bluth says:

          How would keeping the NEP in place have grown a pool of money the size of Norway’s $820 Billion Government Pension Fund?

          The Norweigans grew their fund while they consciously let their manufacturing sector die. Be wary of what you wish for?

          • MississaugaPeter says:

            A little history for the young guns … the Smarter Trudeau envisioned Canada and Canadians owning the oil companies that took oil out of the ground. Petro-Canada was a crown corporation at one time, and it was the major player in Alberta’s tar sands and Newfoundland’s offshore. It was a symbol of pride for most non-Albertans. Then, like all utilities which were almost all at one time built on the public dime, was sold off, and there went all the profits and royalties forever. Norway never sold their Crown corporation, and thus, are extremely well off. The less Smart Trudeau only envisions spending as much of our, our children’s, and our grandchildren’s money, required to buy enough votes to become prime minister. There is no promise he will not make nor group he will not pander to in his quest.

        • Curt says:

          Hey Pete,
          Bit of a stetch there isn’t it. How much was invested by private and public companies in the energy industry in the last 30 years?

        • KBab says:

          This is what really gets me.

          http://behindthenumbers.ca/2011/04/27/harpers-attack-on-democracy-itemized-by-lawrence-martin/#comments

          That is the FOREST.

          The rest, unless you prefer an authoritarian police state with limited democracy, is TREES.

          Pundits can posit theories focusing on each parties playbook and say they are winning because of this or they are losing because of that etc., but the truth of the matter, unfortunately, is that we currently have a PM that uses power for the sole purpose of securing that power. That is the aim of his governance, that is what drives him and what is behind every single move he makes. If all that is fine and good by you, if you want to live in a Northern Banana Republic, then you had better vote Conservative because neither Trudeau nor Mulcair will deliver on that.

      • Alex says:

        These are pretty good suggestions. I am not sure if the NDP will follow them (especially firing their communications director) but they need to do something or they will be crushed. People tolerated Mulcair as long as they thought he could win. But now that he is apparently tanking in Quebec, their foundation of support could very well crack.

    • Jack D says:

      Well that optimist’s counter point would be inapplicable in this election then.

      2011 was a completely different story for the NDP. Layton was out-orating Ignatieff at every turn, he had more charisma than Iggy did and he caught the attention of Quebecois voters looking to ditch Duceppe. All those specific factors that were present were unique to that election.

      At this juncture in the 2011 election, the NDP had no where to go but up. This time though, the election was there’s to lose. Comparing the two elections makes no sense when the NDP was firmly a front runner this time around as opposed to an underdog like 2011. Saying that the NDP surprised everyone in 2011 and suggesting they have yet to do so in this election ignored the fact that they’ve plunged nationally from a pretty big lead to third place.

      • Alex says:

        I agree with you. I am not an optimist; I think the NDP is nowhere near rock bottom. What I suspect (fear?) is that Dipper misfortune will not translate into Gritted votes as some may think.

  3. Scott says:

    Sounds a lot like one the current party Leaders 🙂

  4. RogerX says:

    IOW….. maintain a positive, upward momentum, otherwise you will instantly collapse into a negative, downward momentum that cannot be reversed.

    I think it may have something to do with Chaos Theory, or: Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future.

    Mulcair? >–)))*>

  5. The Observer says:

    Nanos: Harper now up by 6, Angus Reid: up by 7. Advocating for terrorists’ rights may be fine for hired gun defence attorney, not so much for role of Prime Minister of the country the terrorists are vowing to destroy.

  6. Jim Curran says:

    “Be a bit louder, be a bit faster, be a bit funny, be a bit more aggressive ”

    Unless you Scream – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6i-gYRAwM0

    Or, Rise Up – http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rise-up-plea-no-change-in-strategy-ignatieff-1.1034498

  7. Ron Waller says:

    Agree that Mulcair blew the campaign by playing it too safe. He watered down NDP policies so much they are difficult to distinguish from what the Liberals are running on (unless one compares platforms, which few voters actually do.) It allowed the Liberals to run on the “left of the NDP” nonsense meme that got Wynne her 38% majority in 2014. But then again, Mulcair is a Liberal. Perhaps he couldn’t help himself walking into the same buzz saw that killed Horwath’s campaign.

    If Justin doesn’t win a majority on Oct 19 (my bet is that he will,) maybe you should help the NDP stop Trudeau’s majority bid in 2017. Get some payback for getting blackballed in Trudeau’s new “open nomination” process. After all, Junior stands for everything his father was against: a combination of Joe Clark’s “headwaiter” federalism and Mulroney’s failed neoclassical reforms. Doesn’t deserve to ride his daddy’s coattails to power.

    Hopefully the NDP will not throw good money after bad and ditch Mulcair. Thatcher-loving Blue Liberals are not even in the same universe as the NDP.

    • Mike says:

      As much as I agreed with PET and am a Liberal because of him, times change, and politicians better change with them or risk getting steamrolled.

  8. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    Warren,

    My neck is so stretched, I can see Sarah Palin from my house.

  9. fan590 says:

    I think Tom was the wrong choice for NDP leader.

    Imagine if they had someone aggressively Left acting loud and demanding change instead of Mr. Bland.

    • Greyapple says:

      They’d be mired further in third as the Trudeau Liberals would have adopted a standard, “safe,” centrist platform to go after middle of the road voters and attacked the NDP for being wide eyed, tax and spend, socialists (as would the Tories). Mulcair and NDP were damned is they did and damned if they didn’t. The unforeseen consequence for the Grits, if recent polls are to be believed, is that in going hard left to compete with the NDP they seem to have sent the Blue Liberals and Red Tories scampering back to the Tories. Irony’s a bitch.

      • Vancouverois says:

        I’m sure the Liberals find that acceptable, as long as they end up as the second party when the dust clears.

  10. Jack D says:

    Question is, what could the NDP possibly do to redirect the ship without the help of some unforeseen miracle of luck?

    Policies and platforms are formed months in advance; campaign strategies are developed based on platforms and a narrative is nurtured by the leader in preparation for those policy layouts. They can’t just throw it all out the window with less that 20 days to go to e-day or turn on a dime without tripping all over themselves. They chose to have Mulcair come out as “Captain Love and Optimism” then he decides to full 1990’s Thomas and get aggressively spiteful in his demeanour. Now voters don’t know who the hell this guy is. Is Mulcair the prosecutor of QP or the maniacally smiling Tommy from the campaign?

    The interestingly ironic aspect of all this is that Mulcair might be making the best case for Harper’s reelection even better than the Conservatives have. Everything Mulcair is campaigning on is a version of Harper’s vision –almost Harper-lite, if you will. During the Munk debate it almost sounded as if the answer to all of Mulcair’s rhetorical questions could have been “Stephen Harper”. Mulcair is essentially campaigning for change, without any meaningful change.

    If the NDP doesn’t start attacking the credibility and ethical integrity of Stephen Harper, they really have no other case to make to voters based on their own platform.

  11. Matt says:

    Guess he looked at how Andrea Horwath ran the NDP’s 2014 Ontario campaign and thought to himself “That’s what I’ll do!!”

  12. reader says:

    I think Mulcair’s blown it too by being timid, balanced budgets, blah, blah. And who’s idea was it to tell people that the NDP was going to launch a bunch of direct attack ads at Trudeau to “lower his likability quotient” (whatever that is)?? Why announce that? NDPers like to have idealistic goals, not lowering someone’s likability quotient.

    I also think Trudeau’s going to win even though the polls now say otherwise. Not exactly sure why I think it. Just he’s been doing a lot of things right this campaign. He’s got a lot of people who have been working very, very hard even in ridings where they shouldn’t stand a chance. And he’s not telling anyone he’s out to lower someone’s likability quotient. No, he’s aiming higher, more positive, even as he takes some shots of his own.

    • ottlib says:

      Look back at the Liberal campaign.

      At any point have they been put off their main message? At any point have they made a significant error? Have they run the campaign they wanted to run?

      Now ask those questions about the Conservatives and the NDP campaigns.

      I know many Conservative and NDP supporters on this website will vehemently disagree but the Liberals have run the best campaign of the three main contenders and it is showing in the fact that Mr. Trudeau personal popularity is slowly rising along with the popularity of the Liberal Party.

      They have run a very good, well planned campaign for the last two months. It is probably safe to assume that they have the last two weeks planned out as well. If that plan is as well thought out as the first two months and they can implement it as effectively they are going to put themselves in a very good position.

  13. Montréalaise says:

    I think Mulcair has tried so hard to shed the Angry Tom image that he’s turned into Milquetoast Tom.

  14. ottlib says:

    Let’s see what were the errors of the NDP campaign up to now?

    – running a front runner campaign when they were not really the front runner,
    – believing the hype that they could actually win this thing,
    – that lead to pursuing a campaign where they attempted to say as little as possible without realizing that before Canadians would hand them the keys to government for the first time they would have to give Canadians a reason to vote for them as opposed to just giving Canadians reasons not to vote for the other guys,
    – banking on maintaining the support of the most volatile voters in the country for 10 weeks,
    – not letting Mr. Mulcair be himself. Yes sometimes he comes off as Angry Tom but when he is able to channel that more constructively Mr. Mulcair comes off with much more gravitas. And that smile. Ugh, my non-political wife saw it a few days ago and she said it creeped her out,
    – focusing more on the Liberals instead of the Conservatives. It might seem counter intuitive but if the NDP would have ignored and dismissed the Liberals early on they would probably be in second and shooting for the win. By attacking the Liberals they validated them as a potential alternative to the Conservatives and the Liberals took full advantage, and last but not least,
    – not doing enough to make themselves stand out in a very crowded federal election field. As our host stated, not taking the risks necessary to achieve this last point.

    Can they turn it around? It is rather late in the game but it is possible. We will have to see.

    • Jack D says:

      Very true.

      The truth is nobody actually even knew who Thomas Mulcair was back when they were polling so high. Which is why the NDP made such an effort to introduce Mulcair to Canadians with those ads back during the summer with Mulcair’s newly pasted artificial smile with the light of god behind him. Which was all peachy when the NDP was soaring and their leader has such high positives in preferability polls.

      The problem though, is that they didn’t put in any work that was needed to buttress their new messaging. Instead they underestimated the campaigning efforts of the Liberals, over expected sustainability in their support and miscalculated the ability of their leader to sell the re-branded NDP. Now attacking the Liberals, and tell everyone they’re attacking the Liberals, only shows how ill-prepared the NDP is with their current reality.

      You can’t suck and blow at the same time and the NDP seems to want to drink water while trying it.

      • Scotian says:

        There is one point both you and Ottlib missed in your otherwise quite good points on what happened to the NDP to date. That point being they thought that the way C51 took them to dominate over Trudeau and the Libs for the change vote in the first half of the year was enough to immunize them from any other moves they made to entice those centrists to their side to form government with. I recall saying many times to triumphant Dipper partisans a few months ago that they would need more than just C51 to get through the campaign with in terms of keeping Trudeau and the Libs out of contention, but no, they were convinced this was a fatal wound already and nothing more to worry about.

        I think that arrogance on this issue might have held true if they ran a good campaign and didn’t open up reasons to question Mulcair’s dedication to progressive values and democracy in general, but that isn’t what happened. Starting with Mulcair’s indecently fast surrender to Harper on the issue of the Consortium and then all debates in general prior to the election and then with the many points in the election already made by others enabling not just Trudeau to look like an agent of change but to also cast Mulcair and by extension the NDP as not. The decision to claim to run a balanced budget in the first year combined with using the Harper budget numbers to base their costing on despite those numbers having been massively discredited many times over the last few months was a major turning point, especially when Trudeau followed it with the deficit financing infrastructure jobs program. Mulcair and company essentially threw away the advantage C51 had given them.

        Part of the arrogance that led them to this frontrunner’s campaign was their complete faith in the way C51 turned it all around for them and hurt Trudeau so badly, and that was an unforced error in my books. I saw this coming for months and tried to warn Dippers they were making a major mistake, but noooo, they knew better about all this and how Trudeau had made himself unacceptable and unelectable as the change alternative to Harper. Well, we are now in the last couple of weeks and Trudeau is looking like a very viable change alternative to a lot of people, and unless the NDP can make itself look like the superior agent of change again in this short period this may be one of the better examples of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory in the modern Canadian political experience.

        We still have a couple of weeks left, and in an election that can be a lifetime, but the overall trends haven’t looked good for Mulcair and the NDP. Ottlib has made the point I think in another thread about how only the Libs appear relaxed and confident and not thrown off their message and platform, whereas the NDP clearly have, and the CPC are throwing blatantly xenophobic messages after a decade of trying to do the opposite in their immigrant voter outreach program. Mulcair is switching his styles and Harper is looking a lot like he doesn’t want to be there/tired, except when he feels comfortable spreading FUD (fear uncertainty, doubt) and mockery, and the latter almost always aimed at Trudeau.

        The NDP made another mistake in going after Trudeau and the Libs, not just because they spent the last year or more saying stopping Harper is all that counts but also in the way they did it. For the most part when Trudeau and the Libs have been attacking Mulcair and the NDP it has been on their ideas and policies, not on Mulcair’s personal characteristics (calling him out for old statements does not qualify anymore than it does in reverse) whereas the NDP and Mulcair have mostly been attacking Trudeau on the personal level and for things that sound a lot like the same nasty personal smear attacks as the Harper CPC to the ears of the non-partisan change voters, not least the “not ready” theme because of his age, mocking his work history prior to politics, etc. If they were going to go after Trudeau they needed to do so without this tinge of personal contempt, I think it may have been a critical error in judgment that when combined with all the other factors seriously undercut the credibility of the NDP as an alternative to the Harper government for those whose main motive this time out is to make sure Harper is done.

        When a party goes into the election campaign with the lead it had that the NDP did, and is now either losing or at best still in a tie situation with all three parties but usually on the bottom end of said tie, something clearly has gone wrong for them. More than anything else, I believe it was the arrogance that they had already sealed the deal for the change vote among progressives and thus could worry only about the Harper CPC. Clearly a major error, possibly the key strategic one and could well prove to be the basis for a serious loss by the NDP instead of the not so long ago expected incoming NDP government wi5h the only question being minority or majority.

        At this point going bold could well be seen as an act pf desperation, yet what other choice do they have? At this point Mulcair needs Trudeau to really flop badly publicly, and given how well he has managed so far in this campaign I would not give that high odds, especially after the way he held his own in the Monk debate without any supports/notes. That was to be the debate that truly showed him as an empty suit sock puppet walking teleprompter that so many of his opponents clearly believe him to be, well the reality has been shown to be that he is no such thing whatever you thin of him and his positions, and that is truly dangerous for the NDP. Trudeau doesn’t have to look as prepared as Mulcair, he just has to look capable ENOUGH, and this campaign has gone a long way to creating that impression in the electorate.

  15. Al in Cranbrook says:

    Angus Reid…

    CPC – 34%
    NDP – 27%
    Libs – 27%

    http://angusreid.org/election-2015-october/

    CPC at 40% in Ontario, and 2nd in Quebec.

    • Al in Cranbrook says:

      Oops! Read that wrong – BLOC second in Quebec…???

      Hmmm…

      • Maps Onburt says:

        I had to go back and look at that… The Bloc is at 22 and the Conservatives are at 19… within the MOE for Quebec so you are almost right. That’s almost unbelievable. I’m guessing that their little block of ridings around Quebec city has a fairly substantial moat around it now. To be fair, Trudeau’s Liberals have picked up 3 points since August from the NDP but as we know that will only really help them in the Montreal ridings for the most part. Basically, NDP lost 16%, Bloc picked up 4 of it, Liberals 3 and Conservatives 8. Hard to believe that Harper is getting two NDP votes for every Liberal but that’s what the numbers say… (granted on a small sample size). It will be interesting to see what CROP comes out with. I’m not popping Champagne just yet but then neither should Trudeau and his Liberals.

    • Maps Onburt says:

      Actually, the most interesting thing in that poll was their segment on Who would make the best Prime Minister:

      “As for who voters think would make the best Prime Minister, Harper has made a significant comeback over the mid-stretch of the campaign — and is now back in top spot on this key measure. Mulcair has declined a few points and now trails the incumbent. Trudeau has inched up but still trails (indeed, THE LIBERAL LEADER IS SURPASSED BY “NOT SURE” IN THIS WAVE OF POLLING)”

    • Scott says:

      Nanos
      Lib 34
      Con. 32
      Dip 26

  16. Joe says:

    Don’t know if this is foretelling but I think I just saw Tom Mulcair dong adverts for walk in tubs for seniors.

  17. Al in Cranbrook says:

    Frankly, if anything is hurting the Libs in Ontario, it’s the Wynne government…

    http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/wynnes-losing-performance-how-ontarios-growth-killing-policies-are-sinking-the-economy

    They’ve been a disaster, and both Mulcair’s and Trudeau’s lame attempts to hang a decade’s worth of Ontario Libs screwing the province’s economy into the dirt on Harper isn’t fooling very many.

    Couple of the best things Harper has going for him in this election is Wynne in Ontario, and Notley in Alberta.

    • Scott says:

      Disaster my ass. You Cons have been calling her a disaster since the day she kicked your butt. All the right wing business journals can say what they want. It’s b.s.

  18. Kelly says:

    It doesn’t matter what the NDP does anymore because today the Conservatives just lost the election. How?

    1, Jason Kenney has picked a fight with Naheed Nenshi, the most popular Mayor in Canada (Even is not everyone in Calgary likes him, LOTS of people all over the rest of the country do. Nenshi called out the conservative dog whistle BS stating it was disgusting incredibly dangerous. well, today, right on cue, a woman in Quebec was attacked by racist bigots who knocked her down and tore off her veil. This issue had calmed down in Quebec and Harper has directly inflamed it, leading to this violent assault. This is what Harper’s Canada has come to. People being physically attacked in the streets because of their beliefs. There is no way for Harper to wriggle out of this one.

    2. Pipsqueak today said that the federal government would ban the wearing of veils in the public service. This is the same policy that got Marois’ turfed. The cons have overplayed their hand on this, I’m pretty sure.

    3. I have a friend with a senior consular posting in Asia. He reports that leaks like those we’ve seen in the last week are just barely getting started. It’s no coincidence Harper is trying to play all nicey nice and promising there won’t be any more civil service cuts. Well the civil service ain’t buying it and they are going to take him down. Just wait.

    I think we will see a significant shift to Trudeau by the end of next week.

    • Al in Cranbrook says:

      You’re dreamin’, Kelly.

      Jason Kenny is very popular in Calgary. And depending which poll you want to look at, about 80% on average agree with him on the niqab issue.

      Get this straight: Canadian values are NOT dictated by elites and/or intellectual snots preaching from their little red books. And neither are they defined by courts, or for that matter, charters. They are held in the hearts and minds of the people, full stop!

      The niqab has become symbolic of a growing contempt amongst Canadians, fed up with being told what their values are, and are not. And the ballot box thus becomes a means by which they can express their contempt for those who persist in doing exactly that, all the while talking over Canadians heads as if they were mindless sheep.

      Harper, nor Kenny, created this issue; it was always there, simmering away and waiting for the right place to be aired when it counts. It damn well matters to people! Both Trudeau and Mulcair rail against this at their own political peril.

      And believe it, the more the usual suspects in the MSM berate and belittle Canadians and their deeply held sense of values, the more they encourage voters to show ’em who has the final say in the ballot box.

      As all too usual, most on the left have it all backwards.

      • Kelly says:

        Well the charter will smack down the niqab ban, as well as the two tier citizenship law and Harper knows it. That’s why this is disgusting. The government that set up the office of religious freedom to protect religious minorities abroad is persecuting them at home. It’s dangerous because Harpers election strategy is leading directly to violence on our streets. As for Jason Kenney, he is not popular outside of his riding and a few others. Most people think he is a pompous twit who uses ten dollar words to mask the fact that he’s a college drop out. Most laughable, he as a conservative catholic (he dropped out of a small American catholic college) presumes to tell Nenshi (a Muslim) what the Niqab is and isn’t and what Islam is. It’s just unbelievable. This anti Muslim strategy bit Marois in the ass and its going to bite Harper in the ass, as well. Whatch what happens in the debate, tonight.

    • Maps Onburt says:

      Except Trudeau’s numbers are headed down… so they could just as easily go to Mulclair. If you think Nenshi is important how do you think Trudeau using the daughter and offices of a corrupt Chinese businessmen plays? Harper has weathered lots of storms that were far bigger than this… the MSM has been dumping crap on him for months and 99% of it just bounces because NOBODY but us pays attention… I doubt he’s too concerned about this one.

    • Vancouverois says:

      On your point 2, it wasn’t the so-called “Charter of Quebec Values” that lost the election for Marois. She and the PQ had actually pegged it as a winning issue. And at the beginning of the last Quebec provincial election, it was… until Pierre Karl Peladeau derailed the PQ message by emphasizing his commitment to separatism. After that, the election became a referendum on holding another Referendum.

  19. JonT says:

    Conversely, what will it take to boost the Liberal vote to defeat both the Cons and Dips? Where can Justin find the extra votes to sail to victory?

    I believe that in the last 2 weeks of the election campaign, the Liberals, tasting victory, will try to energize the ‘youth’ (18-28 y.o.) vote and telling them that the defeat of Harper is in their hands…. and I think such an anarchic call to arms may well mobilize the mindless youthful masses to GOTV.

    COME ON KIDS… KICK OUT HARPER… VOTE FOR JUSTIN…! Ya think?… the Red Bull Youth Wave …?

  20. Maps Onburt says:

    Here’s my advice to Tom… forget about chasing Harper’s votes… he’s got his base 30% locked up and the additional 5-7% that might go his away are much harder to get at than the 27-30% Trudeau is sitting on. Everyone knows you hate him and disagree with everything he stands for so trying to advertise that is silly at this stage. The people you are going after already believe it. You are dead if Trudeau wins official opposition and/or if you can’t hang on to a strong base in Quebec. While the NDP has always been very forgiving of their party leaders in the past, they did that with people who identified with them. You took them right and they almost tasted power this time so beware the knives if you fail to at least win Opposition Leader. Double down on taking out Trudeau. If you can get enough of his voters to show you are likely to win significantly more seats (and remember you have a 4-5% advantage just because of where your core votes are compared to the Liberals), you might even pick enough of the ABC votes to start to swing your way to deny Harper his majority and give yourself a stronger chance in front of David Johnson after the election. Trudeau could be Even Stephen with Harper on percentages but he still won’t have close to the same number of seats because Harper has the west and rural Ontario locked up. The odds are against him. Do not forget that! Do not let the MSM annoint him as the ABC candidate under any circumstance. They do that and you lose – guaranteed.

    It looks like at the very minimum you are looking at a Harper minority no matter how this goes, so Job 1 is to get to be official opposition leader so you can led the coalition that will try to take him down. To do that, you need to knock Trudeau back down to your vote percentage just to be safe… the upside is you might catch the momentum of the ABC. If you come out with something like the number of seats you went in with, you will be safe while the Liberals bring out their knives for Trudeau and you move the NDP to the logical centre.

  21. MississaugaPeter says:

    Dykstra is an idiot, but how legal is Trudeau’s pot smoking while hosting a pool party at his home?

    • Scott says:

      How would you like Dykstra partying with your 16 year old daughter Peter? Try not to let your TDS blind you to proper morals.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*