Great article/post, Gerry. I'll be watching DN tonight fer surrrre. Here's my take on what is rounding out with regards to political positioning (Rae, Trudeau and Iffy excluded):
Because of past baggage, I honestly don't think Harper has a good shot at garnering a majority of "Red Tories" anymore. Which is part of the reason why it has appeared (to many of us "true conservatives") that he has veered further to the left, since entering 24 Sussex, then he had to to gain their centre-right vote. In other words, he is hoping to attract more left-wing Trudeau Liberals who hate the Paul Martin/John Turner faction of the party (and who currently like Ignatieff's positions slightly), rather then waste his time with modern tories in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver as well as Atlantic red tories (who liked Mulroney). And I can see his point since those three cities I mentioned above voted liberal way more often then they voted for tory coalitions.
However, to make things even more complicated and interesting, it would seem that this guy (the second choice), a guy without the past political baggage from the right side of the spectrum (and the 90s factions) is positioning himself as a "red tory" so that he can rekindle the Mulroney coalition which gained prominence in '84 and '88 (as Harper doesn't seem to be able to do it).
Check out his Mulroney-like tax stance on the GST in Halifax last thursday. It really is a possible reverse of ideological fortunes on both sides as we could be seeing Trudeau conservatives (under Harper) going up against Mulroney Liberals (under McKenna). A battle that everyone wanted to see in the 80s, but never happened.
The "Harper Alliance" is the result of the conservative movement failing where the left has won. The grassroots conservative movement will need to establish the support in order for a prime minister to act conservatively.
Gerry Nicholls is a communications consultant and writer who has been called a “political warrior” a “brilliant strategist” and one of the “canniest political observers in Canada.”
He has worked as a consultant in both the United States and Canada and was formerly a senior officer in the National Citizens Coalition.
A regular columnist with the Ottawa Hill Times, his work has also appeared in the Globe and Mail, the National Post and in the Sun Media chain; and he has appeared on countless TV and radio public affairs programs. He is the author of the book, Loyal to the Core, Harper, Me and the NCC.
“Loyal to the Core is a daring and provocative work. It deserves to be read by conservative activists and politicos.” – Western Standard
“This is a very important book.” -- Michael Coren, TV host
“A fascinating read” --- Seamus O'Regan, Canada AM
“I really enjoyed Loyal to the Core. It’s a great book”, - Charles Adler, radio host.
"Loyal to the Core should be required reading for anyone considering or starting a career at a conservative think tank or in electoral politics in general …Consider Loyal to the Core a cautionary tale that’s also a funny, easy read – with a few highly “stealable” ideas for media campaigns thrown in for good measure.”- Kathy Shaidle, author Tyranny of Nice
“Every Canadian remotely interested in politics and the state of the country should have a read of Loyal to the Core. – blogger Wendy Sullivan
"It’s rare to find a politico, however, who is equally passionate about policy and strategy, but columnist, pundit, author and Western Standard blogger Gerry Nicholls is such a person." Matthew Johnson, owner Western Standard
"If you are a conservative who wonders how conservatives can communicate their message in a hostile media climate, Loyal to the Core is a must read." -- At Home in Hespeler
"You HAVE TO read this book!" -- Connie Fournier Free Dominion
7 comments:
Bash Harper, get a call from the CBC.
Support Harper, get an RCMP sponsored call from Elections Canada.
Sounds about right.
Great article/post, Gerry. I'll be watching DN tonight fer surrrre. Here's my take on what is rounding out with regards to political positioning (Rae, Trudeau and Iffy excluded):
Because of past baggage, I honestly don't think Harper has a good shot at garnering a majority of "Red Tories" anymore. Which is part of the reason why it has appeared (to many of us "true conservatives") that he has veered further to the left, since entering 24 Sussex, then he had to to gain their centre-right vote. In other words, he is hoping to attract more left-wing Trudeau Liberals who hate the Paul Martin/John Turner faction of the party (and who currently like Ignatieff's positions slightly), rather then waste his time with modern tories in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver as well as Atlantic red tories (who liked Mulroney). And I can see his point since those three cities I mentioned above voted liberal way more often then they voted for tory coalitions.
However, to make things even more complicated and interesting, it would seem that this guy (the second choice), a guy without the past political baggage from the right side of the spectrum (and the 90s factions) is positioning himself as a "red tory" so that he can rekindle the Mulroney coalition which gained prominence in '84 and '88 (as Harper doesn't seem to be able to do it).
Check out his Mulroney-like tax stance on the GST in Halifax last thursday. It really is a possible reverse of ideological fortunes on both sides as we could be seeing Trudeau conservatives (under Harper) going up against Mulroney Liberals (under McKenna). A battle that everyone wanted to see in the 80s, but never happened.
The "Harper Alliance" is the result of the conservative movement failing where the left has won. The grassroots conservative movement will need to establish the support in order for a prime minister to act conservatively.
Good stuff.
Video is up Gerry:
cue to ~18:00 minutes!
John
John:
Thanks for linking that clip.
Every time I click on the link my internet goes out.
No joke!
Post a Comment