Maxwell A. Cameron<\/p>\n
Politicians are storytellers. At best, their stories become part of the narrative of the nation. At the least, they offer us reasons to support them\u2014reasons to believe that their cause is ours. <\/p>\n
Stephen Harper offered a compelling narrative to his supporters. The election was not about him, he insisted. It was an unnecessary election, brought on by squabbling politicians, and it threatened to derail the economic recovery that his government had achieved. <\/p>\n
For those who did not support Harper, his attacks on the other leaders for their excessive ambition seemed pretty rich. But that did not matter because Harper framed the election debate so that it was not about him but about the other leaders and their desire to replace the government with a coalition that would be nobody\u2019s first choice. <\/p>\n
The strategy worked against Michael Ignatieff, the target of most of the Tory attack ads. Ignatieff was particularly vulnerable because he had spent his life outside Canadian politics, and could be dismissed as \u201cjust visiting.\u201d Worse, he appeared ambitious without explaining the source of his lust for power.<\/p>\n
Ignatieff failed to provide a competing narrative that would frame the election in a way that people could identify with. Having supported the war in Iraq he could hardly be an avatar of Pearsonian internationalism. As someone who called himself an American, he couldn\u2019t captivate Canadian nationalists. <\/p>\n
Layton benefited from Ignatieff\u2019s weakness. His feisty debate performance reframed the election as a three-way fight. His expressed desire to be the Prime Minister was crucial to making the case that he was a real contender. Ignatieff\u2019s ambition became an embarrassment, but for Layton it was critical to his credibility. <\/p>\n
Layton was able to frame the debate, not in ideological terms, but as a choice between change and more of the same. With a leaf taken from the Obama campaign (\u201cWe can do this\u201d rather than \u201cYes we can\u201d), he argued that Ottawa was broken. His success in Quebec\u2014a long sought prize for the NDP, it must be stressed\u2014eliminated the single biggest barrier to the growth of the NDP elsewhere. This produced a massive realignment. <\/p>\n
As the official opposition, the NDP will be in a good position to develop the narrative of change that has worked so far. It would have been very difficult to be leader of the opposition in a hung parliament. But for New Democrats, victory is bitter sweet. <\/p>\n
A Tory majority means the better part of half a decade more of inaction on the climate crisis, to name but one example of the kinds of issues that will rile the NDP (and part of the Liberal) base. If Liberals and New Democrats think the Conservatives governed undemocratically in a minority government, they can anticipate a much more radical approach from a Conservative majority. <\/p>\n
The big question we are left with is whether Canadian politics will now polarize along left-right lines or will the NDP find a way of working with the Liberals (and, at last, one Green MP) to reclaim the centre? Already there are voices calling for a new liberal democratic party to represent the 60 percent of the electorate that did not want this election result. For this to work, however, the Liberal Party must examine itself and come up with a better message about why it matters and a better messenger to deliver it. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Maxwell A. Cameron Politicians are storytellers. At best, their stories become part of the narrative of the nation. At the least, they offer us reasons to support them\u2014reasons to believe that their cause is ours. Stephen Harper offered a compelling narrative to his supporters. The election was not about him, he insisted. It was an … <\/p>\n