![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Observations on the Ontario Election
May. 26th, 2014 09:57 amMilitary history is full of cases where one side of a war is trying to fight the last one: the Maginot Line is one of the more recent standard examples.
In this election, the PCs and the NDP seem to have taken lessons away from the last election, but they may very well be the wrong lessons. (The Liberals have avoided this effect, this time, as much of their platform and dynamics have been shaped not so much by the last election as by the leadership convention. It's worth remembering that Wynne was not the party establishment candidate (that would have been more Pupatello). Sometimes leadership campaigns are coronations which involve a simple handing on of a baton; this one was far more a swing between very different factions (for values of "very" compatible with the context) and much of the ensuing year and a half have been more a reaction to that process rather than to the prior election of McGuinty.)
1) The PCs came under criticism for being purely on the attack, positioning as opposition rather than being ready to form a government. They clearly took this to heart and worked out a full platform to run on this time.
The problem was that they ignored the other lesson: that strong ideological neo-conservative, small-government policies were not very popular with the population at large. Instead, they doubled down and crafted a platform which put all the strongest ideological traits on show. Worse, the scale and very definitiveness of the platform has made them less than nimble, less able to respond dynamically to shifts in the campaign.
The history of the province over the last few decades suggests that it's not that hard to govern for a long time from a small-c conservative position. You stress good management and competence and pragmatism. If you take a smaller government line you stress examining programmes for cost effectiveness. This is the sort of position which David Soknacki is taking at the civic level. Backing LRT is in this mode a classically small-c conservative position: maximize bang for the buck (Hudak would rip up plans for LRTs to build subways.)
Instead, the PCs are making themselves look like the agents of violent change, which is not endearing to small-c conservatives, or the middle-of-the-road voters the PCs have to capture to form a government. Their only real hope is that enough people are tired enough with the Liberals, and see continuity rather than change in the McGuinty-Wynne changeover, to boost them into government. (Even then, it's hard to see what a minority PC government would be like, since many of their major planks are anathema to both the parties they'd have to call on for support. They'd have to focus on doing what they could by regulation.)
2) The NDP saw gains running in a more moderate populist vein against an unpopular government and a flawed Official Opposition. Horwath decided - against the judgement of many in her party - to move further down that path. Much further.
The problem is that the landscape shifted in the meantime. Instead of essentially owning the whole left of centre, against a premier who was about as far right as he could be without leaving the Liberal Party, they are running against the first Liberal premier in a very long time who represented the left of the Liberal Party (the predecessor would be Mitch Hepburn). So middle-of-the-road populism no longer works very well as a left-of-centre position. It's a sufficient indication to note that their most expensive pledge is a regressive tax rebate onnatural gas energy. They have picked up neither the budget's pension initiative nor its raising of taxes in a progressive manner by introducing new higher brackets.
And now they have their more progressive wing in revolt during a campaign, to boot, while large blocks of organized labour are directly supporting the Liberals. That can't be good for them, especially coming on top of polls which, while disagreeing wildly about the leading party, have been broadly consistent in showing the NDP with a declining share of the vote.
It's still possible for any number of outcomes in the campaign, but it's looking as though if there is a Conservative win it will be in spite of, not because of, their platform, and the NDP may be looking at a career-ending debacle for Horwath.
(Edited to correct the detail of the NDP HST promise, although the thrust remains exactly the same.)
In this election, the PCs and the NDP seem to have taken lessons away from the last election, but they may very well be the wrong lessons. (The Liberals have avoided this effect, this time, as much of their platform and dynamics have been shaped not so much by the last election as by the leadership convention. It's worth remembering that Wynne was not the party establishment candidate (that would have been more Pupatello). Sometimes leadership campaigns are coronations which involve a simple handing on of a baton; this one was far more a swing between very different factions (for values of "very" compatible with the context) and much of the ensuing year and a half have been more a reaction to that process rather than to the prior election of McGuinty.)
1) The PCs came under criticism for being purely on the attack, positioning as opposition rather than being ready to form a government. They clearly took this to heart and worked out a full platform to run on this time.
The problem was that they ignored the other lesson: that strong ideological neo-conservative, small-government policies were not very popular with the population at large. Instead, they doubled down and crafted a platform which put all the strongest ideological traits on show. Worse, the scale and very definitiveness of the platform has made them less than nimble, less able to respond dynamically to shifts in the campaign.
The history of the province over the last few decades suggests that it's not that hard to govern for a long time from a small-c conservative position. You stress good management and competence and pragmatism. If you take a smaller government line you stress examining programmes for cost effectiveness. This is the sort of position which David Soknacki is taking at the civic level. Backing LRT is in this mode a classically small-c conservative position: maximize bang for the buck (Hudak would rip up plans for LRTs to build subways.)
Instead, the PCs are making themselves look like the agents of violent change, which is not endearing to small-c conservatives, or the middle-of-the-road voters the PCs have to capture to form a government. Their only real hope is that enough people are tired enough with the Liberals, and see continuity rather than change in the McGuinty-Wynne changeover, to boost them into government. (Even then, it's hard to see what a minority PC government would be like, since many of their major planks are anathema to both the parties they'd have to call on for support. They'd have to focus on doing what they could by regulation.)
2) The NDP saw gains running in a more moderate populist vein against an unpopular government and a flawed Official Opposition. Horwath decided - against the judgement of many in her party - to move further down that path. Much further.
The problem is that the landscape shifted in the meantime. Instead of essentially owning the whole left of centre, against a premier who was about as far right as he could be without leaving the Liberal Party, they are running against the first Liberal premier in a very long time who represented the left of the Liberal Party (the predecessor would be Mitch Hepburn). So middle-of-the-road populism no longer works very well as a left-of-centre position. It's a sufficient indication to note that their most expensive pledge is a regressive tax rebate on
And now they have their more progressive wing in revolt during a campaign, to boot, while large blocks of organized labour are directly supporting the Liberals. That can't be good for them, especially coming on top of polls which, while disagreeing wildly about the leading party, have been broadly consistent in showing the NDP with a declining share of the vote.
It's still possible for any number of outcomes in the campaign, but it's looking as though if there is a Conservative win it will be in spite of, not because of, their platform, and the NDP may be looking at a career-ending debacle for Horwath.
(Edited to correct the detail of the NDP HST promise, although the thrust remains exactly the same.)
