Does having Trudeau as a Prime Minister help Mulcair?

[cybercoma]

Everyone expected Mulcair to resign, but consider this–perhaps having Trudeau as prime minister is a good thing for Tom Mulcair.

The NDP isn't in as bad of a position as it seems. Jack Layton only won 19 seats in 2004. Here we are still more than double that after Monday's results.

I believe Mulcair's biggest failing was noticing the Liberal surge beginning a couple weeks ago and focusing almost all of his efforts on attacking Trudeau. Progressives didn't want that. They were looking for the best person to attack Harper. They were looking for the person who was going to live up to Jack's words in his dying letter. Justin Trudeau did that. I said before that the NDP had the best leader they could ask for, except he was leading the Liberals.

However, Trudeau has the challenge of actually delivering on people's hopes, which Obama has shown is not as easy as promising to. We've seen in the past that the Grits will campaign from the left but lead from the centre-right. A lot of progressives may very well end up disappointed by 2019.

And that's where Mulcair comes in. Depending on how Trudeau governs, progressives may want a different option in 2019. They may be happy to have Mulcair go after Trudeau, despite that tactic being a liability this time. It seems odd Mulcair wouldn't step down, but perhaps Mulcair is the right person to lead the NDP in 2019 after all.

[ToadBrother]

And that's where Mulcair comes in. Depending on how Trudeau governs, progressives may want a different option in 2019. They may be happy to have Mulcair go after Trudeau, despite that tactic being a liability this time. It seems odd Mulcair wouldn't step down, but perhaps Mulcair is the right person to lead the NDP in 2019 after all.

The issue for the NDP is that if Mulcair resigns, they might as well kiss their chances of rebuilding their Quebec caucus good bye. That being said, I think the more left-leaning members of the party may not want him playing a Liberal-in-orange clothing again.

I think the NDP will wait until they've analyzed the losses. If it's just a matter of the Anybody But Harper effect that drove a lot of Quebec voters to the Liberals, then I think you're right, they'll give Mulcair another shot. If they judge that Quebec may be lost, then he's done.

[hitops]

I think the NDP will wait until they've analyzed the losses. If it's just a matter of the Anybody But Harper effect that drove a lot of Quebec voters to the Liberals...

This is what happened. And when other people realized he could not win Quebec, they realized he could not win period. The progressives went to the only other not-Harper choice. Middle-right voters who disliked Harper but supported the CPC out of fear of an NDP government, saw that Mulcair was no longer a threat and Trudeau was clearly ahead. They were now safe to express their anti-Harper vote in a non-NDP fashion, and did so.

Edited October 21, 2015 by hitops

[ToadBrother]

This is what happened. And when other people realized he could not win Quebec, they realized he could not win period. The progressives went to the only other not-Harper choice. Middle-right voters who disliked Harper but supported the CPC out of fear of an NDP government, saw that Mulcair was no longer a threat and Trudeau was clearly ahead. They were now safe to express their anti-Harper vote in a non-NDP fashion, and did so.

Still, Trudeau has four years (and maybe more, if he gets rid of that silly and utterly useless fixed election date legislation) to solidify that support. The incumbent always has some advantage.

[Moonlight Graham]

This is what I said Oct. 5 in the "seat" prediction" thread.

The latest polls are showing a huge turn towards the Liberals at the expense of the NDP. There may be a modest "red crush" coming as people are looking to jump on any winner that will defeat Harper. As we get closer to the election, people are starting to think more strategically in their ridings, and that will mostly favour the Liberals, especially in Ontario. We saw it with the NDP last election, we saw it in Alberta.

I underestimated the effect of the "red crush" (or orange crash) and strategic voting, but I was still right. I have seen so many explanations of what Harper did wrong on his campaign as to why CPC lost, or what Trudeau did right, or what Mulcair did wrong. How each candidate campaigned was not the story here. There are 2 major forces here that led to results of this elections. 1. Everybody but conservative diehards were sick of Harper and his corrupt BS, and they wanted him gone by any means necessary. 2. This led to the "anyone but harper" phenomenon" and strategic voting. Even if people, including myself, preferred Mulcair's NDP, getting rid of Harper was their #1 priority and therefore voters started voting strategically en masse to prevent progressive vote-splitting, which meant the best party to support to oust Harper's CPC was Trudeau's Liberals, since they usually polled 2nd place in conservative-held ridings and swing ridings.

A month ago national polls showed a 3-way dead heat at 30% each. Nothing these candidates did in the last month could shift public so massively to make Trudeau gain 10 points and Mulcair lose 10 points except for strategic voting. The closer we got to the election, the more people were jumping from the NDP and to a winner (Liberals) to take down Harper. Almost all of my friends voted strategically for the Liberals, I voted strategically, tons of people on my Facebook also did so, and it had little to nothing to do with how great Trudeau was or how bad Mulcair was. Just as the "Orange Crush" in 2011 had nothing to do with what Layton/NDP did, since hardly anybody voted for Layton's NDP in 2004, 2006, or 2008.

No Mulcair didn't run a great campaign, people didn't like his fake creepy smiling etc. But Mulcair didn't quite deserve this fate, he was the unfortunate victim of the ABH phenomenon. IMO he's still a good leader, and should stay on.

[Smallc]

I don't know if I agree. Something happened at the end with Trudeau. The lines to see him...the stories in the international press. It's more than just strategic. It may not last.

[Big Guy]

I don't know if I agree. Something happened at the end with Trudeau. The lines to see him...the stories in the international press. It's more than just strategic. It may not last.

I have a new term for that: "Trudeaumania". Although I might have heard that sometime, somewhere.

[Smallc]

I have a new term for that: "Trudeaumania". Although I might have heard that sometime, somewhere.

I don't it was that, as it cheapens it. It wasn't about his dad or anyone else - it was about him, and what he stood for in the eyes of Canadians.

[Moonlight Graham]

I don't know if I agree. Something happened at the end with Trudeau. The lines to see him...the stories in the international press. It's more than just strategic. It may not last.

I don't it was that, as it cheapens it. It wasn't about his dad or anyone else - it was about him, and what he stood for in the eyes of Canadians.

I don't agree. A month ago in the polls people were just as supportive to vote for Mulcair as Trudeau. People know his views are shallow, people know he's not the most informed or competent leader, that never changed. He's not as popular as he thinks, or as his majority shows. There wasn't any crazy "Trudeaumania", and I met Trudeau at a campaign stop in early October. Tell me what he or the Liberals did in the last month of the campaign to go from a federal tie to creating a 20-point gap between the Liberals and NDP? He ran a decent campaign, he didn't make too many major gaffes, his debate performances were mediocre, his ads were good.

What he stood for to Canadians was their best chance to get rid of Harper, not some kind of Obama-saviour nonsense (despite his best Obama impression). This election was a referendum on Harper.

Go back and look at the Orange Crush in 2011 too. It was a bandwagon wave. People didn't like Ignatieff in Quebec, they didn't like Harper, they knew the BQ wasn't going to beat Harper, and one month left before the election there was a slight turn towards the NDP in the polls and then everyone jumped on the bandwagon. Layton did nothing in particular to make this happen. Voters had no idea who their NDP candidates were in QC, a bunch of the winners weren't even bilingual. NDP went from 37 seats and 4th place in 2008 to 103 seats, and the BQ went from 47 seats to 4! With social media, we live in the most connected age in human history by far and social media has changed elections. Look at the Orange Crush in Alberta too.

There was talk of an NDP-Liberal coalition in case of a minority government because of the progressive vote-split. But voters made this decision for them because they made sure there was no vote splitting because they voted strategically. Voters chose a non-CPC winner, everyone jumped on the ABC/ABH bandwagon, and it was an incredible phenomenon.

[Smallc]

I'm sorry but I look at my Facebook and 2 km lines in Vancouver and know that you're wrong about this. Trudeau made Trudeau win.

[WestCoastRunner]

I don't agree that this was entirely an ABC election as MG suggests. There was a dramatic increase in first time young voters who voted for Justin regardless of Harper. Female voters just got tired of harpers anti female policies and environmentalists, scientists as well had very good reason to vote liberal given Trudeau's stand on these issues.

[Canada_First]

This election was a anti Harper election not so much pro Trudeau.

What will the left use to scare voters in 2019 or 2020 I wonder? They won't have Harper around to use as fear bait. Will they simply transfer their hatred and fear to any Tory leader?

[Smallc]

Everyone keeps saying that, but I see a lot of evidence that they're wrong.

[On Guard for Thee]

This election was a anti Harper election not so much pro Trudeau.

What will the left use to scare voters in 2019 or 2020 I wonder? They won't have Harper around to use as fear bait. Will they simply transfer their hatred and fear to any Tory leader?

Maybe if the Tory's pick a better leader they will do better in future. The left didn't have to use Harper as fear bait, most of the country had just had enough of him.

[Moonbox]

Everyone keeps saying that, but I see a lot of evidence that they're wrong.

I'm not sure how you can say that. Just because it was an anti-Harper election doesn't mean that it wasn't also Trudeau's moment to shine.

I don't it was that, as it cheapens it. It wasn't about his dad or anyone else - it was about him, and what he stood for in the eyes of Canadians.

It's incredibly, incredibly naive of you to think that Trudeau's pedigree was not a huge part of his success. It does cheapen the victory, but it doesn't make the victory cheap. The Trudeau name holds huge weight in Central and Atlantic Canada. That really can't be understated. Having said that, it would only take him so far. Harper's childish ad smearing had people extremely wary of Justin's credentials and they were ready to accept him as portrayed by the Conservatives...

Then they heard him speak. His debate performance and his own ads made it abundantly clear that he wasn't an idiot and the election outcome was predetermined from there. You had a young, good-looking "Trudeau" who oozed charisma running against a widely disliked PM seeking his FOURTH term and a smart but grandfatherly guy with zero gravitas leading a party and platform that the overwhelming majority of Canada can't stomach. I made a lot of money Monday night.

Edited October 22, 2015 by Moonbox

[Smallc]

I agree with you. I'm talking about a more...cerebral element of it. As soon as I saw that 5000 people came to see him in Winnipeg and people lined up for 2kms, I knew they were headed for a majority. My argument is this - it was 1 part anti Harper and 1 part pro Justin. Harper was very unpopular. Somehow, Trudeau created a wave at the same time.

[Guest]

Then they heard him speak. His debate performance and his own ads made it abundantly clear that he wasn't an idiot and the election outcome was predetermined from there. You had a young, good-looking "Trudeau" who oozed charisma running against a widely disliked PM seeking his FOURTH term and a smart but grandfatherly guy with zero gravitas leading a party and platform that the overwhelming majority of Canada can't stomach.

Well summarized! Trudeau didn't ooze charisma or confidence on day one, but he managed to fix his communication issues surprisingly quickly. He then managed to appear positive, energetic, on message and confident, even when answering unscripted questions. Something Harper refused to do.

I suspect that if Harper hadn't run an extended campaign in an attempt to outspend the competition, Trudeau wouldn't have had time to build the wave of support necessary for the win.

As for helping Mulcair...maybe. People voted for change and there is much in need of fixing. That takes time and the influx of new and returning voters will no doubt be discouraged by the fact that change takes time. Maybe Tom can step in as the pragmatic and dependable anti-conservative that can actually bring change. When Justin's image is tarnished by reality, progressive voters may be more open to Angry Tom's scathing criticisms.

[cybercoma]

Everyone keeps saying that, but I see a lot of evidence that they're wrong.

Let them think that. Maybe they'll nominate a leader on that thinking and Trudeau will get an even bigger majority in 2019.

[Canada_First]

Maybe if the Tory's pick a better leader they will do better in future. The left didn't have to use Harper as fear bait, most of the country had just had enough of him.

I don't think Trudeau will be beaten in an election by anyone. He will win another majority in 2019 or 2020 then he will a minority in 2024 or 2025. He will then step down as leader sometime during that minority and we will then have a chance at getting a Tory PM.

[On Guard for Thee]

I don't think Trudeau will be beaten in an election by anyone. He will win another majority in 2019 or 2020 then he will a minority in 2024 or 2025. He will then step down as leader sometime during that minority and we will then have a chance at getting a Tory PM.

Well apparently you have a crystal ball that is much more reliable than this murky old one I have. However I will challenge your projection in this way: if Justin makes good on his promise of moving to a PR system of voting, that majority situation you speak of next election is unlikely.

[Moonbox]

I suspect that if Harper hadn't run an extended campaign in an attempt to outspend the competition, Trudeau wouldn't have had time to build the wave of support necessary for the win.

It wouldn't have mattered. Trudeau built his support very quickly. He went from being 3rd to 1st almost instantly. As soon as the debates were done and people saw him speak without making a fool of himself, he was the front runner. The fact that he did a lot more than that gave him the majority.

[-1=e^ipi]

Everyone expected Mulcair to resign

I didn't.

I believe Mulcair's biggest failing

Mulcair made no failings. He's leading the traditionally 3rd placed party and people wanted to get rid of Harper so strategically voted liberal. That's it.

[cybercoma]

I

You.

That's it.

You sure?

[sharkman]

I don't agree that this was entirely an ABC election as MG suggests. There was a dramatic increase in first time young voters who voted for Justin regardless of Harper. Female voters just got tired of harpers anti female policies and environmentalists, scientists as well had very good reason to vote liberal given Trudeau's stand on these issues.

The scientist voting block? I haven't heard that one before.

Let's remember folks, Canada has historically voted in the Liberal party most of the time. It's par for the course here to elect another Liberal PM. That Harper was able to win 3 elections in such a climate puts him up there with the best Tory PMs in history. And what helped him was the revulsion for Chretien's arrogance and idiocy. And he selfishly clung to power instead of allowing for a peaceful transition of power to others in the Liberal team.

That selfish little walk in the snow did more damage to the Liberal brand than anything Paul Martin could do when he finally got into power. Chretien singlehandedly decimated the Liberal party which gave Harper a chance. Young Trudeau? Talk about inexperienced. His knowledge of basic parliamentary procedure and the like will handicap him greatly. He'll need to be spoon fed what he's supposed to do in many areas. Hopefully he doesn't embarrass Canada. But the Canadian media love him, so he'll get softball questions and glowing stories about his wife.

Many Canadians turned to him simply because of his name. Those people are so shallow, but that's the voter today.

Edited October 22, 2015 by sharkman

[-1=e^ipi]

You sure?

I'm never sure. Perhaps the flying spaghetti monster mind controlled large segments of the population.