Tories release first attack ad against Mulcair

[mentalfloss]

Tories release first attack ad against NDP leader Thomas Mulcair

OTTAWA — The Conservatives have released their first attack ads against NDP Leader Tom Mulcair.
But compared to the ferocious pit-bull attacks the Tories unleashed against past Liberal leaders, the latest effort is more like an attack puppy.

The ruling party has uploaded two free ads on YouTube, one English, one French, apparently content to rely on mainstream and social media to spread the word.

The ads come three months after Mulcair was chosen to lead the NDP — a crucial lag time in which Mulcair has managed to boost his party into a slim lead over the Tories in opinion polls and burnish his own credentials as a would-be prime minister.

By contrast, the Tories gave Stephane Dion and Michael Ignatieff virtually no time to introduce themselves on their own terms to Canadians when they were elected to lead the Liberals.

The Tories mounted immediate, expensive, prime-time television advertisements that denigrated Dion and Ignatieff, respectively, as “not a leader” and “just visiting.”

The Conservatives refuse to say whether they eventually intend to pay to broadcast the relatively tame anti-Mulcair ads on TV.

The delay in going after the NDP leader suggests the Tories have no interest in demolishing Mulcair as thoroughly as they did Dion and Ignatieff. Indeed, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s reputed long-term goal of obliterating the Liberals depends on the NDP continuing to consolidate support among centre-left voters.

Nevertheless, with the NDP now edging into the lead in polls, the Tories appear to have decided it’s time to take some air out of Mulcair’s honeymoon balloon.

The English YouTube ad accuses the NDP of indulging in “risky theories, dangerous economic experiments” such as supporting imposition of a carbon tax “that will raise the price of everything including gas, groceries and hydro.”

It concludes with the tag line: “We can’t afford Mulcair’s NDP.”

The French ad pushes a similar message but contrasts Mulcair’s carbon tax agenda with Harper’s record of job creation.

In fact, Mulcair advocates putting a price on carbon through implementation of a cap and trade system — a model favoured by the Harper government itself until recently.

Tories release first attack ad against NDP leader Thomas Mulcair | News | National Post

 

[Cabbagesandking]

Has the CPC gone soft. The new ads will elicit a big yawn and are so easily rebutted that one has to wonder if Harper is not afraid of waking the tiger in Mulcair.

 

[mentalfloss]

Good op-ed on this.

Essentially this proves that the CPC are just going after the stupid people vote.

Chris Selley: Can Mulcair survive the Conservatives’ dumb ads?

The Conservatives rolled out their long-awaited inaugural attack ad against Tom Mulcair on Monday. It seems to adhere to the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” principle. Dreary, misrepresentative hyperbole having been correlated with every recent federal election win, now is apparently the time to produce more dreary, misrepresentative hyperbole.

To wit:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/lz6KaYRdt6w?version=3

On the bright side, sort of, it’s mostly policy-related. If they have a “not a leader” or “just visiting”-style tag for Mr. Mulcair, they don’t unveil it here. But torquing policy matters into incoherence isn’t much better than torquing personality matters into incoherence. Aaron Wherry at Macleans.ca raises a question:

Isn’t it somewhat ridiculous for the Conservatives to go after Mr. Mulcair for supporting cap-and-trade when they themselves did so very recently? Yes, yes it is. Indeed, you could probably string Stephen Harper’s and his ministers’ past statements on cap-and-trade, combined with their current ones attacking the NDP’s position, into a pretty nice little ad lampooning the Tories’ style of governance. “They say whatever they want, whenever they want. Because they think you’re stupid.”

Subject matter aside, though, the tone here is traditional Tory-sneer. It’s like it came out of a template. And hey: Attack ads saw off two great Liberal hopes, or so liberal-minded pundits enjoy telling us. So they might as well give it a try with Mr. Mulcair.

Here’s the thing, though. Let’s say a Martian political scientist touched down in your backyard, and you provided him with a written history of the Dion and Ignatieff eras that was objective and complete in every respect except that it didn’t mention political advertising. When he was done reading, would you expect the Martian to be confused (a) as to why the Liberals didn’t win the 2008 and 2011 elections? or (b) as to why they thought they might? I’m thinking (b). “Please to explain, earthling. Why Michael Ignatieff?”

Whatever effect the attack ads had on Mr. Dion and Mr. Ignatieff, the fact is that neither was particularly good at returning fire and their party was weak. Mr. Mulcair, by contrast, leads a party at its electoral high point and doing just fine in the polls, despite what seemed to be a much-too-aggressive approach on Western Canadian resource extraction. He faces high-temperature political conflict with a grin, and with considerable skill on his feet — more than Mr. Harper, that’s for sure. Especially since he’s being attacked, nominally anyway, on the issues, it will be most interesting to see how he responds. Political attack ads are inherently dumb; the question is whether you can make people see them as dumb. Mr. Mulcair is in far better position to do so than the targets that came before him — not just because he’s a stronger leader of a stronger party, but because the government, let’s face it, has never actually been dumber.

Chris Selley: Can Mulcair survive the Conservatives’ dumb ads? | Full Comment | National Post

 

[Machjo]

If you have nothing good to say about yourself, tear down the competition, right?

 

[captain morgan]

If you have nothing good to say about yourself, tear down the competition, right?

Mulcair is his own worst enemy; he's introduced himself to Canadians by playing the roll of the fool and court jester... I'll wager that this is the reason that the CPC deferred their response and let Mulcair damage himself with poorly thought ideas and actions.

 

[mentalfloss]

If you have nothing good to say about yourself, tear down the competition, right?

I'm surprised NP isn't trying to spin this in the Cons favour... Oh wait...

Dan Arnold: Conservative attacks ad target policy, not personality, for a change

The much-anticipated Thomas Mulcair attack ads have arrived.

Other than changing the off-grey colours from red to orange, this doesn’t look to be much more than a recycled anti-Liberal TV spot – torqued policy positions, lots of talk about “risks”, and a cameo by the scary carbon tax.

But while the style is reminiscent of attack ads of yore, there is one striking difference between this and the “Just Visiting“/”Not a Leader” campaigns. Simply put, the Tories have adopted a far more policy-based strategy when it comes to defining this leader of the opposition. Dion was branded as wimpy and weak, Ignatieff as an intellectual snob. This ad doesn’t even contain so much as a gratuitous “he’s out of touch” pot shot, despite plenty of opportunities to slide something of the sort in.

Rather, the focus is squarely on NDP policies (or “theories” as the ad mischievously calls them) – both real and, in the case of the carbon tax, imagined. That’s likely the best strategy, given the NDP’s vulnerability on economic issues, and Harper’s never-ending mantra about maintaining our “strong, stable, economic recovery”.

But it’s also possible the Tories have yet to come up with an attack on Mulcair’s personality and leadership skills they feel will leave a mark.

Thomas Mulcair Attack Ads: Conservatives attack policy, not personality, for a change | Full Comment | National Post

 

[captain morgan]

Thomas Mulcair Attack Ads: Conservatives attack policy, not personality, for a change | Full Comment | National Post

I really nicked a nerve with you on this, didn't I Flossy?

Mark my words, the CPC is playing rope-a-dope with the novice dippers. Expect Harper to tear apart the weak platform that dippers have hobbled together and follow-up later with some select reminders of Mulcair's foolish commentary, Pat Martin's childish outbursts (that may bankrupt him altogether) and the dipper scandal in Winnipeg.

Face facts here; Harper doesn't need attack ads - the dippers are self destructing all on their lonesome.

 

[mentalfloss]

Face facts here; Harper doesn't need attack ads - the dippers are self destructing all on their lonesome.

 

[captain morgan]

We've been through this so many times Flossy.... There's only one poll that counts, and Harper gets to determine when it gets taken.

Sheesh!

 

[Redmonton_Rebel]

Indeed, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s reputed long-term goal of obliterating the Liberals depends on the NDP continuing to consolidate support among centre-left voters.

Leaving us with what, effectively a one party state if the same approach is taken against the NDP eventually.

By attacking the democratic system that he's supposed to be a steward of, Steven Harper consistently reveals his true nature which is destructive not constructive.

A responsible PM wouldn't need to endlessly attack the opposition and carry out undemocratic campaigns of political erradication on opponents reducing the choices and freedoms of voters. He would implement his own policies and let the voters decide if they approved during the next visit to the polls.

The only reason the Conservatives are forced to go so negative all the time is they lack any real positive policies to implement in this nation.

 

[DurkaDurka]

Leaving us with what, effectively a one party state if the same approach is taken against the NDP eventually.

By attacking the demcratic system that he's supposed to be a steward of Steven Harper consistently reveals his true nature which is destructive not constructive.

A responsible PM wouldn't need to endlessly attack the opposition and carry out undemocratic campings of polititcan erradication of opponents reducing the choices and freedoms of voters. He would implement his own policies and let the voters decide if they approved during the next visit to the polls.

The only reason the Conservatives are forced to go so negative all teh time is they lack any real positive policies to implement in this nation.

You can start complaining about a "one party state" after the cons have been in office longer then the previous Liberal government.

He's a politician, you don't seem to get that, it's a dirty game and Harper plays it well.

 

[mentalfloss]

We've been through this so many times Flossy.... There's only one poll that counts, and Harper gets to determine when it gets taken.

You mean like those privacy rights polls that were taken just before the CPC dropped their pedobear legislation?

Oh right.. I forgot..

You're wrong.

 

[damngrumpy]

Actually its the second add, the first one lasted a few day and called him
an opportunist and the NDP attacked back with a positive message about
finishing the job Jack Layton started.
I would suspect Mulcair will go to the media again with a rebuttal and the
Tories can suffer another hit in the poll numbers. The latest poll out last
week showed the NDP at 38% the Tories 35% and the Liberals at 18% so
the attack adds don't work well when the public likes the person you are
attacking.
I Have been watching Mulcair with interest since he became leader of the
NDP. Harper has done much of what he promised not to do if he got a
majority so his word is shot with me for a while. The Liberals are a shadow
of their former selves, the Greens are not even of shadow of what they might
become. The only alternative for me is becoming you guessed it Thomas
Mulcair.
Harper has added so much new debt he is using layoffs in the service to hide
it so we know we can't afford to much of him. Nope the Tories are slowly
convincing me to support Mulcair.

 

[Durry]

The only alternative for me is becoming you guessed it Thomas
Mulcair.
Harper has added so much new debt he is using layoffs in the service to hide
i.

if you think Harper has added debt, just what do you think Mulcair will do?
It was the NDs that were asking for more expenditure..

Besides, the civil service is too fat and too highly paid, a correction is neccessary.

 

[Locutus]

It's a non-story as Durka implied.

The nature of the beast. But sure makes for easy whining from mad people, no matter who has the keys.

 

[mentalfloss]

if you think Harper has added debt, just what do you think Mulcair will do?
It was the NDs that were asking for more expenditure.

$10 Billion in hidden costs for the F-35 and billions more in a bogus crime agenda are just pennies, right?

Oh, and all that money spent lobbying for the pipeline in 2011, only for it to get delayed again. But Harper's a libertarian conservative. That's why he won't decriminalize marijuana and compromises our position in the Trans Pacific Partnership by defiantly defending supply management.

 

[captain morgan]

You mean like those privacy rights polls that were taken just before the CPC dropped their pedobear legislation?

Oh right.. I forgot..

​

 

[Machjo]

Mulcair is his own worst enemy; he's introduced himself to Canadians by playing the roll of the fool and court jester... I'll wager that this is the reason that the CPC deferred their response and let Mulcair damage himself with poorly thought ideas and actions.

Well obviously he hasn't damaged himself enough if the Conservatives perceive him as a threat, eh?

 

[earth_as_one]

if you think Harper has added debt, just what do you think Mulcair will do?
It was the NDs that were asking for more expenditure..

Besides, the civil service is too fat and too highly paid, a correction is neccessary.

Be fiscally responsible like Tommy Douglas I would hope.

As MF pointed out, fiscal responsibility isn't a political ideology. Conservatives have not demonstrated that they are more fiscally responsible. Look at the mess G.W. Bush left Barrack Obama... over a trillion $US to bail out corporations and banks.... That's like setting the house on fire, just before transferring ownership and then criticizing the new owner for not being a responsible homeowner.

Tommy Douglas encouraged wealth creation. Increased wealth, meant increased taxes in order to pay for social programs like public health care, public schools, police, firefighters, the military... if its paid with tax dollars for the benefit of society, its socialism

If socialist polices are enacted in a fiscally responsible way, the result is a safer, healthier environment where better educated workers are more productive, generating increased wealth.

I used to be a civil servant, and the low pay was why I left. As soon as I went to private industry, I made 25% more money with the same skill set. I would agree that room for improvement still exists, but pay and benefits makes up about 5% of the government budget. Cutting 5% off of 5% of the budget would make 0.25% a difference.

 

[Redmonton_Rebel]

It's a non-story as Durka implied.

The nature of the beast. But sure makes for easy whining from mad people, no matter who has the keys.

Like hell it is, it goes to the very nature of the current government and how instead of actually providing good government instead prevents anyone else from doing so.