babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

New Conservative attacks ads against 'Mulcair's NDP'

derrick
Offline
Joined: May 8 2008

Here's a new TV ad by the Conservatives attacking Mulcair "radical" economic ideas, which include: putting a price on carbon, expressing concern about the observable and proven phenomenon of 'Dutch Disease,' and opposing corporate trade deals... 


Comments

derrick
Offline
Joined: May 8 2008

Also, here is the French version. The main difference seems to be no mention of 'Dutch Disease'...


derrick
Offline
Joined: May 8 2008

Sorry, slight correction: they don't say his ideas are "radical," only "scary" and "dangerous"... 


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

This will play well with the Conservative base.  I just hope that they want to go into the next election waving the corporate flag.  I think that message has little room to grow and resonate with anyone that isn't already a Conservative hard liner.  I don't even think that it will shore up the soft supporters they are shedding.


Doug
Offline
Joined: Apr 17 2001

I'm not sure how this ad will be effective with anyone who was even considering voting NDP.


socialdemocrati...
Offline
Joined: Jan 10 2012

Wow. It's about policy.

I'm excited and disappointed.

I'm disappointed because I expected a character attack. "Mulcair is a secret separatist from France" or some other bullshit. I thought that kind of smear would backfire so horrendously, and would rally ex-Liberals to our cause out of frustration with the attack ads. It's almost a shame they decided to make this about economics.

And I'm excited that this is it. The showdown between the left and right on the economy we've been waiting for. I've always thought Canada was fundamentally a progressive left-ward country that celebrated legacies of NDP provincial governments and NDP-Liberal coalitions. 2015 will be a referendum on the economy, and we can win it.

Or maybe I'm disappointed... because progressives ARE divided, and Conservatives DID win a majority. It's possible that this country HAS bought the Washington consensus that slashing social security to pay for the tax giveaways to corporations will be good for the economy. Maybe liberals hate us "wild eyed radicals" and "dirty fucking hippies" enough to ignore the economic damage from big oil, big lobbyists, and big media.

Or maybe I'm excited that the Conservatives are imploding at the exact moment that the NDP is rising, and people are about to finally try something different.

In other words... this is a challenge of global importance.


Caissa
Online
Joined: Jun 14 2006

They are watering the seed of the NDP being unable to manage the economy. The personal attacks will come later.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

The Cons are on a permanent war footing - war against the Opposition, Canadians, the environment, etc.....


clambake
Offline
Joined: Apr 21 2011

How should the NDP counter the notion that a carbon tax = higher consumer tax? I think this will resonate the most with soft-NDP voters


clambake
Offline
Joined: Apr 21 2011

Also, I love the scary synth music in the French version


clambake
Offline
Joined: Apr 21 2011

edit: double post


Doug
Offline
Joined: Apr 17 2001

clambake wrote:

How should the NDP counter the notion that a carbon tax = higher consumer tax? I think this will resonate the most with soft-NDP voters

 

The NDP isn't proposing a carbon tax - which is one way of honestly responding. Secondly, any carbon tax or cap-and-trade system can be designed so that government doesn't keep any of the money it generates. I'm not entirely sold on this idea since there are public costs associated with emissions reduction and adaptation to climate change. The NDP could say that it's open to cap-and-dividend as an approach so long as we are putting a price on carbon dioxide.


Brachina
Online
Joined: Feb 15 2012
Pollunter pay is how you sell it, the idea of polluters paying for thier own mess appeals to the Canadian public and it comes off as fair. Also Cap and Trade isn't a consumer sales tax. Also Dion lost on the Carbon Tax because he lacked crediblity on the issue and wasn't able to successful tie it into the economy the way Mulcair is. Also Dion had terrible charisma, wasn't effective in english, and who knows what other issues the public had with him.

Stockholm
Online
Joined: Sep 29 2002

Maybe Harper's close ally Christy Clark can put in her two cents worth about the evils or a carbon tax...or on second thought.


Brachina
Online
Joined: Feb 15 2012
Okay I've watched and it doesn't concerning, its weak and lame and its doubtful it will bother NDP voters. I just don't get why they bothered putting it together. Kind of anticlimatic. Its starting to occur to me that the Tory attack machine maybe be majorly over inflated. The attacks only worked at all on Dion and Iggy because they were bad leaders. In fact I'm starting to question wheather the attacks ads were thier down fall at all. Iggy didn't crash until the debates, can we be certain of how much the attack ads had an effect?

socialdemocrati...
Offline
Joined: Jan 10 2012

Keep in mind that attack ads seldom go unanswered. Even if the candidates don't say anything, the media does.

The problem with Ignatieff is that he did call Canada's reputation for peacekeeping "bogus". That we were "disgusting" on human rights, and would rather "bitch" about America. When you add that to his reputation on Iraq and Afghanistan, it's not surprising a lot of Liberals came to the NDP. The attack was based in reality.

The problem with Dion is that he actually was proposing a huge tax overhaul (as opposed to cap-and-trade -- advocated by Jack Layton, Thomas Mulcair, and at one time, Steven Harper). When you add that to the fact that Dion was the environmental minister when the Liberals did nothing about Kyoto, it's not surprising that the Liberals lost support left AND right. The attack was based in reality.

And it's the same for Mulcair. There *IS* a kernal of truth to them: Mulcair said big oil is overheating our economy, and should pay. But we already saw the "dutch disease" play out over the past few weeks, and the consensus is (hate him or love him) Mulcair stood his ground and kept on target. The defense was based in reality.

I don't want to put too much faith in Mulcair being "right". But he's right. And he's been consistent about the environment. And he's eerily good at avoiding mistakes. The "dutch disease" is a stronger thing to pin your career to than Dion's "green shift" or Ignatieff's "Lesser Evil".

Being "right" isn't everything, but it's a good place to start. The other keys are:

  1. The MPs need to have his back. I don't want to hear Pat Martin saying "...actually I think criticizing the oil companies that fuel this economy is divisive, and poor leadership."
  2. Our supporters need to have his back. The contentious part of the ad won't be the Conservative attacks about the oilsands. It will be the Conservative attacks about NDP being anti-trade. Mulcair might have to do his dance on "I'm for trade as long as it's fair trade" / "I support NAFTA but we need to look at Chapter 11", which has made some anti-globalists angry, and others such as myself at least slightly nervous.

Stockholm
Online
Joined: Sep 29 2002

Rightwing pundit Gerry Nicholls thinks the new Tory attack is very weak and rates it 4 out 10.

http://gerrynicholls.blogspot.ca/2012/06/rating-new-tory-attack-ad.html

"

But the messaging in the ad is vague and confusing; meaning people just won't get it.
What I mean is every political ad should start from scratch and basically assume the voter knows nothing
Yet this attack spot more or less assumes voters know what “Dutch Disease” means; it assumes they know what a carbon tax is; it assumes they know about trade policy.
And those are all massive assumptions.
Plus, it’s just plain confusing when the words, “Make them pay now for what they are doing” flash on the screen. What the heck does that mean? Did Mulcair say that? If he did, so what? Who are “they” and what exactly are they “doing?"
How does all this lead viewers to conclude that Mulcair has “risky theories” and “dangerous economic experiments.”

It doesn’t."


knownothing
Offline
Joined: Mar 24 2011

I like Gerry Nicholls


Jacob Two-Two
Online
Joined: Jan 16 2002

Well, well. I guess the Cons decided they couldn't afford to wait any longer, despite having failed to find their magic bullet to wound Mulcair, but seriously? They're blowing their money on this? If this were a backyard basketball game, I'd be telling them to take that weak shit off the court so some real ballers could play.

God, I am loving this.


mark_alfred
Offline
Joined: Jan 3 2004

Brachina wrote:
In fact I'm starting to question wheather the attacks ads were thier down fall at all. Iggy didn't crash until the debates, can we be certain of how much the attack ads had an effect?

That's a very good observation.  However, one thing the attack ads did was to raise everyone's expectations of Ignatieff to unachievably high levels, given that he was portrayed as the elite internationalist who was just visiting.  So, when he turned out to be rather ordinary and unspectacular in the debates, he was doubly hurt due to people's high expectations of this just visiting superstar. 

Some people who don't pay too much attention to politics said after the ads ran, "Well, forget voting for this American."  Not everyone is particularly well informed.  So, when something is repeated ad nausiem, it will have an affect.  I think the ads on Mulcair could be effective for the Conservatives.  Its theme of "We can't afford Mulcair's NDP" is similar to the pocketbook themes that were used against Dion (though character attacks were also used against Dion).

Have these been put on TV?  Or are they just on the internet?  I had predicted that they wouldn't start a serious campaign against the NDP (aka putting ads on TV) until after the Libs chose their leader, since I felt that they wanted to gauge who the most dangerous opposition would be first.  However, perhaps I'm wrong.  If so, it means that the NDP has graduated for now to being the biggest perceived threat to the Conservatives.  Makes sense given that Rae is out of the picture now (the remaining Libs, Trudeau included, really are not a threat to the Conservatives.)


Caissa
Online
Joined: Jun 14 2006

Mulcair was discussing polluter pay on Sunday Morning.


janfromthebruce
Offline
Joined: Apr 24 2007

And Caissa, a friend of mine said he sounded excellent and he was very impressed. He won over a new supporter in a very solidifying way.


Caissa
Online
Joined: Jun 14 2006

I heard most of the interview and thought he sounded quite good; an absolute contrast to Stephen Harper.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

CTV had the MP for Veteran's Affairs (Blaney? he looks like death warmed over...) talking about Harper's appearance in Quebec, and he tried to be optimistic and cheerful, but fell flat, in my opinion. Smile


knownothing
Offline
Joined: Mar 24 2011

Boom Boom wrote:

CTV had the MP for Veteran's Affairs (Blaney? he looks like death warmed over...) talking about Harper's appearance in Quebec, and he tried to be optimistic and cheerful, but fell flat, in my opinion. Smile

West Block with Tom (Hi-there!) Clark had a special on Peter Stoffer

http://www.globalnews.ca/video/index.html?v=HJmBA4hamee4svHPwHDFKw79F_ZM...

 


quizzical
Offline
Joined: Dec 8 2011

ads were on TV here last night on Global. i'll change the channel  now every time they come on.  freakin sickening the American style politics they're attempting to play IMV.

 

why don't the ND's have some ads pointing out Conservatives are trying to change the channel on their dirty deeds and fiscal mismanagement?


love is free
Offline
Joined: May 21 2012

that french spot is incredibly unconvincing, almost to the point of reinforcing mulcair's popularity.  low production values, a straight-up political smear style to it, information that just seems basically uncredible, and all from a source that virtually all francophones distrust basically.  like when it cuts to steve harper, he looks worse than mulcair.  i doubt the tories are going to go out like suckers, but this augers ill for the quebec side of the campaign, that's for sure.

as a personal aside, i can't even stand the look of harper, that shit-eating smirk, that idiotic hair, the knowledge of what he stands for.  for people who can speak french, these ones are old but fantastic: 

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xo6r6_laflaque-anti-harper-anti-feminis...


Brachina
Online
Joined: Feb 15 2012
http://bigcitylib.blogspot.ca/2012/06/ndp-prepares-counterstrike.html?m=1 Oddly this information comes from a Liberal, but it appears that the NDP does plan to fight back and has began a fundraising drive to help do that. I doubt they'll wait for the money to come rolling in to fire back of course, but lots of donations will allow for a longer and bigger response. I look forward to it.

Aristotleded24
Online
Joined: May 24 2005

Brachina wrote:
The attacks only worked at all on Dion and Iggy because they were bad leaders. In fact I'm starting to question wheather the attacks ads were thier down fall at all. Iggy didn't crash until the debates, can we be certain of how much the attack ads had an effect?

I think the irony in Iggy saying "you gotta show up" really helped sink his career as leader.


alan smithee
Offline
Joined: Jan 7 2010

The only consulation is that regardless of these attack ads,those who hate Harper will continue to hate Harper..No amount of attack ads will change this.

His half-hearted attempt to 'woo' Quebec confirms it.

If Harper wants people to warm to his party and even consider to support him and it,it's pretty simple.

Scrap the omnibus bills,become moderate,compromise and work with the opposition....This is never going to happen and this is why Harper's latest desperate acts are all in vain.

If I was Mulcair,I wouldn't change a thing and I wouldn't be losing any sleep.


Caissa
Online
Joined: Jun 14 2006

What is really starting to piss me off is that every time the Tories launch an attack I receive an email from the NDP looking for a donation. The  latest one was from rebecca Blaikie.

On another note, on Monday Ms. C. and I each received a letter from the NB PC party requesting donations. Cheeky bastards! 


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments